David Bentley Hart on Hell

East of Eden said:

You mean He who said, "Where the worm does not die, and the fire is not quenched?"

Click to expand...

East of Eden said:

"And these will go away into eternal punishment, but the righteous into eternal life.”Matt. 25:46

Click to expand...

East of Eden said:

Which will be simply a prison or quarantine for those who have chosen to be separated from God. As CS Lewis said, in the end, there will by two categories of people, those who say to God, "Thy will be done", and those to whom God says, "Thy will be done."

Click to expand...

Der Alte said:

Here is the pertinent part of the definition of adelphos from BDAG one of, if not, the most highly accredited Greek lexicon currently available.

ἀδελφός, οῦ, ὁ (Hom. [ἀδελφεός]+; accord. to B-D-F §13; Schwyzer I 555; Mlt-H. II 58; PKatz, TLZ 83, ’58, 315f vocative ἄδελφε should be accented on the antepenult in Ac 9:17; 21:20 contrary to the practice of the editions; also GPt 2:5.)
① a male from the same womb as the reference pers., brother, Mt 1:2, 11; 4:18, 21 al.; τὸν ἀ. τ. ἴδιον J 1:41 (s. Jos., Ant. 11, 300). Of Jesus’ brothers (passages like Gen 13:8; 14:14; 24:48; 29:12; Lev 10:4; 1 Ch 9:6 do not establish the mng. ‘cousin’ for ἀ.; they only show that in rendering the Hebr. אָח ἀ. is used loosely in isolated cases to designate masc. relatives of various degrees. The case of ἀδελφή [q.v. 1] is similar Gen 24:59f; Tob 8:4, 7 [cp. 7:15]; Jos., Ant. 1, 211 [ἀδελφή = ἀδελφοῦ παῖς]. Sim. M. Ant., who [1, 14, 1] uses ἀ. for his brother-in-law Severus; the same use is found occas. in the pap: JCollins, TS 5, ’44, 484–94; s. VTscherikover HTR ’42, 25–44) Mt 12:46f; 13:55; Mk 3:31f; J 2:12; 7:3, 5; Ac 1:14; 1 Cor 9:5. James ὁ ἀδελφὸς τοῦ κυρίου Gal 1:19. The pl. can also mean brothers and sisters (Eur., El. 536; Andoc. 1, 47 ἡ μήτηρ ἡ ἐκείνου κ. ὁ πατὴρ ὁ ἐμὸς ἀδελφοί; Anton. Diog. 3 [Erot. Gr. I 233, 23; 26 Hercher]; POxy 713, 21f [97 a.d.] ἀδελφοῖς μου Διοδώρῳ κ. Θαΐδι; schol. on Nicander, Ther. 11 [p. 5, 9] δύο ἐγένοντο ἀδελφοί, Φάλαγξ μὲν ἄρσην, θήλεια δὲ Ἀράχνη τοὔνομα. The θεοὶ Ἀδελφοί, a married couple consisting of brother and sister on the throne of the Ptolemies: OGI 50, 2 [III b.c.] and pap [Mitt-Wilck. I/1, 99; I/2, 103–7, III b.c.]). In all these cases only one brother and one sister are involved. Yet there are also passages in which ἀδελφοί means brothers and sisters, and in whatever sequence the writer chooses (Polyb. 10, 18, 15 ποιήσεσθαι πρόνοιαν ὡς ἰδίων ἀδελφῶν καὶ τέκνων; Epict. 1, 12, 20 ἀδ. beside γονεῖς, τέκνα, γείτονες; 1, 22, 10; 4, 1, 111; Artem. 3, 31; Ptolem., Apotel. 3, 6; Diog. L. 7, 108; 120; 10, 18. In PMich 214, 12 [296 a.d.] οἱ ἀδελφοί σου seems to be even more general=‘your relatives’). Hence there is no doubt that in Lk 21:16 ἀδελφοί=brothers and sisters, but there is some room for uncertainty in the case of the ἀδελφοί of Jesus in Mt 12:46f; Mk 3:31; J 2:12; 7:3, 5; Ac 1:14.
② a pers. viewed as a brother in terms of a close affinity, brother, fellow member, member, associate fig. ext. of 1.
ⓐ one who shares beliefs (for an associated duality, …
ⓑ a compatriot…
ⓒ without ref. to a common nationality or faith neighbor (of an intimate friend …
ⓓ Form of address used by a king to persons in very high position …​

The 1950 edition of BDAG can be reviewed at this link.
A Greek-English Lexicon Gingrich & Danker

Click to expand...

Der Alte said:

Nice! You start out by insulting me. No it is how Greek works. Check any Greek grammar or lexicon. The primary definition of a word takes precedence unless the context shows otherwise e.g. the case of Lot and Abram.
Unfortunately lots of folks will not accept it since it contradicts their assumptions/presuppositions.
Brother in English often functions the same way. I served in the military there were many I called brother and we were not related. Many churches men call each other brother although they are not related. But all those other uses does not change the primary meaning i.e. brother is a male relative who has the same mother and father as another person.

Click to expand...

Valletta said:

Do you think the authors of the Biblical text saying Lot and Abram are brothers should be scolded for not using the primary meaning?

Click to expand...

Der Alte said:

Did you bother to read what I posted or maybe check out the BAGD I linked to?
I gave some examples from our time about military members calling other military "brothers" or church members calling other male members "brother." Such usage does not change the inherent meaning nor is anyone who does such committing a grammatical faux pas.
I repeat, the primary meaning takes precedence unless the context requires otherwise.

Click to expand...

Valletta said:

Actually she was already betrothed to Joseph, although they had not yet lived together.
As to Jesus and his "brothers" Genesis makes it clear that Lot was Abram's nephew, yet Lot is called Abrams "brother.'" Thus the Bible itself makes it clear "brother" can be used to describe a relative.

Click to expand...

MMXX said:

It can be, but in the case of Matthew 13:55 and Mark 6:3 a family unit of father, mother and siblings is being described. .

Click to expand...

Valletta said:

Absolutely not, Mary had no other children. The Bible says no such thing about a family unit--please don't try and add to the Bible.

Click to expand...

MMXX said:

Reading Matthew 13:55 and Mark 6:3 as father, mother and brothers as in siblings is not adding to the Bible. It's reading the text literally, rather than figuratively .

It seems to me that insisting all the times brother(s) of Jesus being mentioned and in the context they're mentioned in Matthew 12:46-50, Matthew 13:55, Mark 3:31-35, Mark 6:3, Luke 8:19-21, John 2:12, John 7:3-5, Acts of the Apostles 1:14, 12:17, 15:13, Galatians 1:18-19, doesn't really mean brother(s), is going outside of what's in the actual text.

Click to expand...

MMXX said:

Genesis 11:27 makes it clear Lot was Abram's nephew before Lot was called Abram's relative/brother in Genesis 14:14.

"Is this not the carpenter’s son? Is not His mother called Mary? And His brothers James, Joses, Simon, and Judas?" Matthew 13:55 That seems to be clearly referring to a nuclear family. Unless there's some other passage that makes it clear that James (especially), Joses, Simon and Judas were relatives rather than siblings.

Click to expand...

a-lily-in-the-valley said:

Now Israel loved Joseph more than all his children, because he was the son of his old age. Also he made him a tunic of many colors. But when his brothers saw that their father loved him more than all his brothers, they hated him and could not speak peaceably to him.
Now Joseph had a dream, and he told it to his brothers; and they hated him even more. So he said to them, “Please hear this dream which I have dreamed: There we were, binding sheaves in the field. Then behold, my sheaf arose and also stood upright; and indeed your sheaves stood all around and bowed down to my sheaf.”
And his brothers said to him, “Shall you indeed reign over us? Or shall you indeed have dominion over us?” So they hated him even more for his dreams and for his words.
Then he dreamed still another dream and told it to his brothers, and said, “Look, I have dreamed another dream. And this time, the sun, the moon, and the eleven stars bowed down to me.”
So he told it to his father and his brothers; and his father rebuked him and said to him, “What is this dream that you have dreamed? Shall your mother and I and your brothers indeed come to bow down to the earth before you?” And his brothers envied him, but his father kept the matter in mind.
(Genesis 37:3-11, NKJV)

This only has one father, one mother, and eleven brothers listed, but they did not all have the same mother. It only lists the mother of Joseph, not the mother of his brothers.

Also in the passage you quoted, the fact that they ask if he is “the carpenter’s son” means that saying those are his brothers is on the assumption that his father is Joseph, and then they go on to say that “his” mother is Mary, not that “their” mother is Mary, to include his brothers as Mary’s sons.

I lean toward believing that Mary had no other sons by birth because of the way the Lord adopted John to her, to not leave her alone in the world, but at the very least I can say that there is nothing in scripture that explicitly says one way or another.

Click to expand...

a-lily-in-the-valley said:

I lean toward believing that Mary had no other sons by birth because of the way the Lord adopted John to her, to not leave her alone in the world, but at the very least I can say that there is nothing in scripture that explicitly says one way or another.

Click to expand...

Saint Steven said:

That is a very interesting point on the subject.

Why did Jesus give his mother to John? (as if she was about to be childless) But perhaps it had nothing to do with that. ???

Click to expand...

MMXX said:

I'd say because John was there and the brothers weren't.

Click to expand...

Saint Steven said:

It seems that there would have to be more to it than that. (if Jesus' siblings were still alive, but not present) Why would Jesus assign a son to Mary? Or, imagine if John was standing to one side of Mary, and James on the other side.

I remember my own father giving me the charge to take care of my mother before he died.

Click to expand...

MMXX said:

48 So when they saw Him, they were amazed; and His mother said to Him, “Son, why have You done this to us? Look, Your father and I have sought You anxiously.” Luke 2:48

Mary called Joseph Jesus' father.

The home town folk were talking about Jesus asking who does he think he is? We know who he is, he's the son of Joseph and Mary and his brothers are James, Joses, Simon and Judas. I really just don't see any other way to read that other than how it's presented. That along with the other verses I posted regarding the brothers of Jesus and the context in which they are delivered. Every indication to me is that Joseph and Mary became husband and wife and had children the same as any other couple.

Click to expand...

MMXX said:

I don't see how Jesus could tell James that since James wasn't there or even a believer/follower at the time. John was the apostle whom Jesus loved and he was there with Jesus and Mary when Jesus was dying. The strongest impression I got is that Jesus was comforting both of them.

Click to expand...

Saint Steven said:

Do we know that only John was there?

And we are still left with the question as to why Jesus assigned John as a son if Jesus had other siblings. A curious thing.

Click to expand...