Christian Universalism. What's not to like?

[ozso]

"'Hell' is too theologically and emotionally loaded a word to be of any use to anyone." We are all entitled to our own opinions even if they contradict the Bible and Jesus, Himself.

Both scripture and Jesus never said "Hell". In all cases except for "Hell" replacing "Gehenna", the word used was "Sheol" which in most (if not all) cases should have been translated as "grave" or similar (see post #2660).

"The Lake of Fire, being a manifestation of Godfire, is the agent of "post-mortem corrective punishment." Assumption any scripture which directly supports this rather than assumptions?
" It is for burning away dross, tares, chaff, wood, hay and stubble - anything keeping us back from entering the Kingdom." More assumption, any scripture which directly supports this.
By this I mean a scripture which states directly that "The LOF is for burning away...etc."

That reminds me of someone asking for a scripture which states directly that the Trinity exists.

 

[Der Alte]

***

This is what I found wrong with it, which I spoke a wile ago:
Are these three references the only sources in existence regarding what Jews in Israel, before and during the time of Jesus, believed about hell?

As I said if you can find any counter evidence as credible as these bring it . Why should I look for more when those who disagree, for the most part, will not even read what I post. Everything I posted is from the three sources I linked to. Jewish Encyclopedia, Encyclopedia Judaica, and the Talmud most of the non-Biblical sources are from the Talmud, links provided.

All of the references here (except for the ones in blue) are not readily identifiable. So an extrabiblical hodgepodge of snippets from so far unknown sources wrapped around Isaiah 14:9-10, Isaiah 33:11 and the apocryphal Enoch and Judith.

More info at the links. That is why I include links. The apocryphal quotes were included by the Jewish scholars so they must have thought they were relevant. You opinion is not!

If this hasn't been refuted, probably the main reason for that is because it's mostly jumbled snippets from several indefinable sources in a format that's difficult to read.

More info at the links. That is why I include links.

That's all well known by those familiar with the subject.

Apparently not. Because many of the Hell No! crowd still claim that when Jesus said Gehenna, He was supposedly talking about an imaginary constantly burning trash dump in the valley of Gehinnom More at the link. That is why I include links.

Okay, who came up with that part and when?

See the link

Since this refers to the followers of Jesus, it was obviously written either during the three years of Jesus' ministry or more likely after. So it wouldn't have been anything Jesus was referencing when he talked about Gehenna or anything the Jews would be all that familiar with when Jesus was teaching since it would have been so new.

Not according to the NT. All the Jewish leaders during and immediately after Jesus' ministry knew about it thus their followers would have.

So in conclusion: Source 1 is pretty much indefinable.

See the links!

Source 2 is the well known Biblical history of the valley of Hinnom with an attached conclusion from an undefined undated source.

See the link. Not interested in your biased speculation.

Source 3 seems most likely a distorted view by Jews who rejected Jesus, written after his ministry.

More of your biased speculation. Can you provide any counter evidence of any kind or only guesses and speculation? References are included so readers can readily find additional information. I guess I could make my posts 3-4 pages longer to satisfy people like you.

 

[Lazarus Short]

Riddle me this please. If I want accurate information about the beliefs, practices and history of, let us say the LDS, whom should I consult Methodists, Presbyterians, Baptist etc. or the LDS themselves? I first began discussions with LDS missionaries in the early 80s when an acquaintance began associating with them. When I mentioned this to the acquaintance he asked "What's wrong with them?" I really didn't know so I began collecting their writings. I began reading the Book of Mormon it wasn't long before I noticed contradictions both with the Bible and within the BOM itself.
.....Now if you can point me to some credible, verifiable historical evidence about the faith and practices of the Jews from the time of Jesus forward by all means do so. If not why not? Speak now or forever hold your peace.

All through the OT, God complained to Israel and Judah about their tendency to worship other gods, comparing it to adultery. Rightly so, because He had married the twelve tribes at His mountain in Midian. Later, He did describe Himself as the husband of two sisters: backsliding Israel and treacherous Judah. In time, He sent both sisters packing, and I took a lot of time tracking down the decrees of divorce. A lot of text is spent on God's complaints about their idolatry.

Now, do you suppose the faith and practice of the twelve tribes was unaffected by all this? Do you suppose that the faith and practice of the twelve tribes was unaffected by contact with surrounding nations, the Greeks in particular, or the Babylonians? We do know that the tribe of Judah was in Babylon for 70 years, and most of them did NOT return to their homeland. Much has been written, and not by me, of the Babylonian impact on the Jew's faith & practice. They left Judah as an unfaithful, rebellious people...and returned with the "Tradition of the Elders" which Jesus the Christ spoke against. Was it not this very tradition which got written down as various Talmuds? I did not originate this, but read of it in the writings of others. The Bible paints the picture with a broad brush, but I believe it is in agreement.

 

[ozso]

As I said if you can find any counter evidence as credible as these bring it . Why should I look for more when those who disagree, for the most part, will not even read what I post. Everything I posted is from the three sources I linked to. Jewish Encyclopedia, Encyclopedia Judaica, and the Talmud most of the non-Biblical sources are from the Talmud, links provided.

Just wondering how broad your knowledge of it is and wondering of course if cherry picking is involved.

More info at the links. That is why I include links. The apocryphal quotes were included by the Jewish scholars so they must have thought they were relevant. You opinion is not!

You complain that people don't review your posts and sources, so when I do you the favor, you tell me my opinion is irrelevant.

More info at the links. That is why I include links.

Your posts shouldn't require additional work on the part of the reader to decipher them. Really it's because you basically said yourself that you don't feel like putting the effort into it. So you expect others to do the footwork.

Apparently not. Because many of the Hell No! crowd still claim that when Jesus said Gehenna, He was supposedly talking about an imaginary constantly burning trash dump in the valley of Gehinnom More at the link. That is why I include links.

When I looked into UR they were associating it with the place were sacrificial burnings were made to Molech.

See the link

How many links does that make now? How many hours of homework is it supposed to take for your essays to be comprehensible?

Not according to the NT. All the Jewish leaders during and immediately after Jesus' ministry knew about it thus their followers would have.

The point is, it wasn't some past belief system Jesus would have been referencing. Remember, your claim is these beliefs of hell were well established by the time Jesus started his ministry.

See the links!

See the link. Not interested in your biased speculation.

Here we go again. "see the links" aka "go fish" reads as "I don't really know".

More of your biased speculation. Can you provide any counter evidence of any kind or only guesses and speculation? References are included so readers can readily find additional information. I guess I could make my posts 3-4 pages longer to satisfy people like you

Your essays require a lot of speculation because they're unclear and full of gaps. You could make your posts comprehensive without making them verbose. But it seems you don't want to go much further than pasting chunks of digital text.

 

[ozso]

All through the OT, God complained to Israel and Judah about their tendency to worship other gods, comparing it to adultery. Rightly so, because He had married the twelve tribes at His mountain in Midian. Later, He did describe Himself as the husband of two sisters: backsliding Israel and treacherous Judah. In time, He sent both sisters packing, and I took a lot of time tracking down the decrees of divorce. A lot of text is spent on God's complaints about their idolatry.

Now, do you suppose the faith and practice of the twelve tribes was unaffected by all this? Do you suppose that the faith and practice of the twelve tribes was unaffected by contact with surrounding nations, the Greeks in particular, or the Babylonians? We do know that the tribe of Judah was in Babylon for 70 years, and most of them did NOT return to their homeland. Much has been written, and not by me, of the Babylonian impact on the Jew's faith & practice. They left Judah as an unfaithful, rebellious people...and returned with the "Tradition of the Elders" which Jesus the Christ spoke against. Was it not this very tradition which got written down as various Talmuds? I did not originate this, but read of it in the writings of others. The Bible paints the picture with a broad brush, but I believe it is in agreement.

"When people speak of 'the Talmud,' they are usually referring to the Talmud Bavli (Babylonian Talmud), composed in Babylonia."
https://www.myjewishlearning.com/article/tale-of-two-talmuds/

 

[Der Alte]

All through the OT, God complained to Israel and Judah about their tendency to worship other gods, comparing it to adultery. Rightly so, because He had married the twelve tribes at His mountain in Midian. Later, He did describe Himself as the husband of two sisters: backsliding Israel and treacherous Judah. In time, He sent both sisters packing, and I took a lot of time tracking down the decrees of divorce. A lot of text is spent on God's complaints about their idolatry.
Now, do you suppose the faith and practice of the twelve tribes was unaffected by all this? Do you suppose that the faith and practice of the twelve tribes was unaffected by contact with surrounding nations, the Greeks in particular, or the Babylonians? We do know that the tribe of Judah was in Babylon for 70 years, and most of them did NOT return to their homeland. Much has been written, and not by me, of the Babylonian impact on the Jew's faith & practice. They left Judah as an unfaithful, rebellious people...and returned with the "Tradition of the Elders" which Jesus the Christ spoke against. Was it not this very tradition which got written down as various Talmuds? I did not originate this, but read of it in the writings of others. The Bible paints the picture with a broad brush, but I believe it is in agreement.

No argument from me but I addressed this at the beginning of my post. Thus,

"There were different factions within Judaism; Sadducees, Pharisees, Essenes etc. and different beliefs about resurrection, hell etc. These differing beliefs do not refute anything in the following post."​

Jesus attended Temple and synagogues for approximately 25 years +/- He undoubtedly knew what the Jews believed about virtually everything, including the fate of the unrighteous. Before and during the time of Jesus there was a significant belief in a place of fiery, eternal punishment which they called both "sheol" and "Ge Hinnom." Jesus knowing that would, He say something like "and these go away into eternal punishment," to people who already believed in such a place if it was not true? And I can't find where Jesus, Himself, unequivocally says that all mankind will be saved, righteous and unrighteous alike, even after death or words to that affect. Jesus confronted the Jews on a number of things but He never contradicted their belief in a fiery place of eternal punishment.

 

[ozso]

No argument from me but I addressed this at the beginning of my post. Thus,

"There were different factions within Judaism; Sadducees, Pharisees, Essenes etc. and different beliefs about resurrection, hell etc. These differing beliefs do not refute anything in the following post."​

Jesus attended Temple and synagogues for approximately 25 years +/- He undoubtedly knew what the Jews believed about virtually everything, including the fate of the unrighteous. Before and during the time of Jesus there was a significant belief in a place of fiery, eternal punishment which they called both "sheol" and "Ge Hinnom." Jesus knowing that would, He say something like "and these go away into eternal punishment," to people who already believed in such a place if it was not true? And I can't find where Jesus, Himself, unequivocally says that all mankind will be saved, righteous and unrighteous alike, even after death or words to that affect. Jesus confronted the Jews on a number of things but He never contradicted their belief in a fiery place of eternal punishment.

The thing is your theory that Jesus was teaching from Talmudic beliefs is kinda like the idea that Jesus would teach from the book of mormon.

 

[Der Alte]

***

The thing is your theory that Jesus was teaching from Talmudic beliefs is kinda like the idea that Jesus would teach from the book of mormon.

I don't know about you guys but I have always found it helpful to actually read a post before trying to respond. I neither said nor implied any such thing. Care to try again? Some veracity this time.

 

[Der Alte]

"When people speak of 'the Talmud,' they are usually referring to the Talmud Bavli (Babylonian Talmud), composed in Babylonia."
https://www.myjewishlearning.com/article/tale-of-two-talmuds/

And your point is? When I quote Jewish Sources, which I did, and they mention the Talmud it is the version of the Talmud they consider most authoritative. I assume you are implying one version is more authoritative than the other.

 

[Saint Steven]

Is there post-mortem corrective punishment?

I'm not sure if "punishment" is the right word. But "post-mortem" and "corrective" work for me. Perhaps post-mortem corrective restoration? As if done by a loving doctor, rather than a dungeon torturer.

 

[Der Alte]

***

I'm not sure if "punishment" is the right word. But "post-mortem" and "corrective" work for me. Perhaps post-mortem corrective restoration? As if done by a loving doctor, rather than a dungeon torturer.

"Punishment" is the correct word. There is no word for "correction" ever used in reference to the final fate of mankind.
Greek has been the language of the Eastern Greek Orthodox Church for at least 2000 years +/-. Who is more qualified to know the correct translation the Greek words in the NT than the native Greek speaking scholars who translated the EOB?

Matthew 25:45 Then he will answer them, saying: ‘Amen, I tell you: as much as you did not do it to one of the least of these, you did not do it to me.’ 46 These [ones on the left] will go away into eternal punishment, [kolasis] but the righteous into eternal life.”
Cleenewerck, L. (Ed.). (2011). The Eastern/Greek Orthodox Bible: EOB New Testament (Mt 25:45–46). Laurent A. Cleenewerck.​

Kolasis the Greek word translated "punishment" in Matt 25:46 [45 in the EOB] occurs one other time in the NT 1 Jn 4:18

1 John 4:18 There is no fear in love, but perfect love casts out fear, because fear is connected with punishment.[kolasis]
Cleenewerck, L. (Ed.). (2011). The Eastern/Greek Orthodox Bible: New Testament (1 Jn 4:18). Laurent A. Cleenewerck.​

The one who has "kolasis" is not perfect, no correction.
According to the the Hell No! crowd Jesus is either a liar or He does not know the meaning of the word "aionios."

John 3:15
(15) That whosoever believeth in him should not perish, but have eternal [aionion] life.
John 3:16
(16) For God so loved the world, that he gave his only begotten Son, that whosoever believeth in him should not perish, but have everlasting [aionion] life.​

In these two verses Jesus parallels “aionion” with “should not perish.” Believers could eventually perish in a finite period, thus by definition, “aionion life” here means eternal or everlasting life.

John 10:28
(28) I give them eternal [aionios] life, and they shall never [aion] perish; no one will snatch them out of my hand.​

In this verse Jesus parallels “aionios” and “aion” with “[not] snatch them out of my hand”, “never perish.” If “aion/aionios” means “age(s), a finite period,” that is not the opposite of “[not] snatch them out of my hand’/never perish” “Aionios life” by definition here means “eternal life.”

 

[ozso]

I don't know about you guys but I have always found it helpful to actually read a post before trying to respond. I neither said nor implied any such thing. Care to try again? Some veracity this time.

You wrote: "according to these sources, among the Jews in Israel, before and during the time of Jesus, there was a significant belief in a place of everlasting torment of the wicked and they called it both sheol and gehinnom".

To which I said: The thing is your theory that Jesus was teaching from Talmudic beliefs is kinda like the idea that Jesus would teach from the book of mormon.

 

[ozso]

And your point is? When I quote Jewish Sources, which I did, and they mention the Talmud it is the version of the Talmud they consider most authoritative. I assume you are implying one version is more authoritative than the other.

I was adding to another post about how the Jews beliefs had likely been corrupted by Babylonian (and other) paganism. That whatever view they may have had of a "hell" after the temple was destroyed and they were taken captive, didn't come from God, but rather from man. And therefore it seems unlikely that Jesus was teaching from it.

It seems more likely to me that Jesus was passing national judgements on the heels of the Temple and Jerusalem being destroyed by Rome, that were similar to the national judgement passed by the Prophets, on the heels of the Temple and Jerusalem being destroyed by Babylon.

 

[Fervent]

I was adding to another post about how the Jews beliefs had likely been corrupted by Babylonian (and other) paganism. That whatever view they may have had of a "hell" after the temple was destroyed and they were taken captive, didn't come from God, but rather from man. And therefore it seems unlikely that Jesus was teaching from it.

It seems more likely to me that Jesus was passing national judgements on the heels of the Temple and Jerusalem being destroyed by Rome, that were similar to the national judgement passed by the Prophets, on the heels of the Temple and Jerusalem being destroyed by Babylon.

This seems like a scapegoating rather than something based on research. What basis do you have for claiming Babylonians taught eternal conscious torment or anything even approaching it?

 

[ozso]

This seems like a scapegoating rather than something based on research. What basis do you have for claiming Babylonians taught eternal conscious torment or anything even approaching it?

Well since it doesn't appear to have come from any Old Testament scripture, it's a forgone conclusion it came from other sources. Therefor it's a matter of deducing what those other sources likely were.

Now in my opinion, someone who's being objective would look into that, rather than automatically eschewing the idea.

 

[Der Alte]

* * *

<QUOTE="MMXX">I was adding to another post about how the Jews beliefs had likely been corrupted by Babylonian (and other) paganism. That whatever view they may have had of a "hell" after the temple was destroyed and they were taken captive, didn't come from God, but rather from man. And therefore it seems unlikely that Jesus was teaching from it.
It seems more likely to me that Jesus was passing national judgements on the heels of the Temple and Jerusalem being destroyed by Rome, that were similar to the national judgement passed by the Prophets, on the heels of the Temple and Jerusalem being destroyed by Babylon.</QUOTE>​

Can you truly not see what you are doing here? 6-six speculative comments with no, zero, none credible evidence of any kind.
If it is in the Bible or apocryphal documents the Jews considered meaningful and Jesus did not specifically comment on them and you have no evidence, guess what they are scriptural.

 

[Fervent]

Well since it doesn't appear to have come from any Old Testament scripture, it's a forgone conclusion it came from other sources. Therefor it's a matter of deducing what those other sources likely were.

Now in my opinion, someone who's being objective would look into that, rather than automatically eschewing the idea.

Oh? I was unaware we had determined it doesn't come from Old Testament Scripture. Could have fooled me. While it may be worth tracking and checking the beliefs of the Babylonians against it, speculating as if a case has been made is pretty much a worthless misdirection with no basis in fact.

 

[Der Alte]

You wrote: "according to these sources, among the Jews in Israel, before and during the time of Jesus, there was a significant belief in a place of everlasting torment of the wicked and they called it both sheol and gehinnom".
To which I said: The thing is your theory that Jesus was teaching from Talmudic beliefs is kinda like the idea that Jesus would teach from the book of mormon.

Repeating complete rubbish after I stated I neither said nor implied any such thing is about a low as one can get. Please show me where I said or implied any such thing.
You might want to go back and reread what I actually, instead of imagining what I said.. Once again I never said anything which could by the wildest stretch of imagination could mean that.

 

[ozso]

Oh? I was unaware we had determined it doesn't come from Old Testament Scripture. Could have fooled me. While it may be worth tracking and checking the beliefs of the Babylonians against it, speculating as if a case has been made is pretty much a worthless misdirection with no basis in fact.

Since it's impossible for me to show what's not in Old Testament Scripture, you'll have to show where it is. And if it's not there, then we'll have to look elsewhere.

 

[ozso]

Can you truly not see what you are doing here? 6-six speculative comments with no, zero, none credible evidence of any kind.
If it is in the Bible or apocryphal documents the Jews considered meaningful and Jesus did not specifically comment on them and you have no evidence, guess what they are scriptural.

That doesn't really make any sense.

And I really wish you would use the forum's format as is, like everyone else does, instead of customizing it into a mess.