Christian Universalism. What's not to like?

[2PhiloVoid]

I tend to lean towards the idea that Jesus is taking about the upcoming destruction of Jerusalem, using apocalyptic language like the OT prophets did regarding Jerusalem being destroyed by Babylon. Go back to Isaiah where he says "Their worm does not die And the fire is not quenched" and see what's being talked about there. It seems reasonable to speculate that Jesus was taking about whatever Isaiah was talking about.

In my unqualified, anonymous opinion, I think you're right on this point ...

 

[ozso]

What about a reference to "the realm of the dead" (Hades) in the NT that is not an OT quote? Shouldn't the Greek term be used in that case?

I don't care what word is used, just as long as it conveys the correct description, meaning and image of what's behind talked about. Most people are going to see flames and pitchforks when the see the world hell or hades.

 

[Saint Steven]

I don't care what word is used, just as long as it conveys the correct description, meaning and image of what's behind talked about. Most people are going to see flames and pitchforks when the see the world hell or hades.

How do you feel about the NIV translation's use of the term "the realm of the dead"? (appears 29 times) Does that carry the same negative connotation as Hades? (hell)

 

[ozso]

How do you feel about the NIV translation's use of the term "the realm of the dead"? (appears 29 times) Does that carry the same negative connotation as Hades? (hell)

I don't think so.

 

[Saint Steven]

I don't think so.

It makes for a quick research study. (29 references)

- One is in the oldest book. (Job)
- 27 references are in the OT.
- Two are in the NT. Both in Acts chapter 2.
- The first two in the search refer to a test Moses did to prove his calling. The earth opened to receive the offending family and all their possessions.
- Later the kings of history resting in the realm of the dead are speaking to one another. Actually mocking a new arrival. (the king of Babylon, or Satan?)
- In another passage the trees of Eden are mentioned as being there.
- The reference in Jonah is used by Jesus to describe his three days before the resurrection from THE grave. (he was laid in an above ground tomb) He refers to the realm of the dead as the "heart of the earth".

Crazy stuff.

BibleGateway - Keyword Search: realm of dead

 

[John Mullally]

There it is.
I'm not sure how a person's eternal destiny is presented in that talk. You'll have to inform me. But hell (ECT) is certainly inferred whether mentioned or not. Obviously, hell fire and brimstone preaching is the worst form of this. But here's the point...

Is an altar call decision made on the basis of fear a genuine conversion? Or is it more like a confession extracted under threat? (an offer you can't refuse - gangster style)

Its starts with talking about eternity, your readiness to meet your maker, and proceeds to asking that people make a decision to set Jesus as the Lord of their life. An everybody repeat after me commitment prayer is offered and a rendezvous point after church service is specified for people to talk to counsellors about this decision and/or get any other help.

 

[Fervent]

That's why I think maybe there's more of a middle ground. It seems like for the most part the view is either one extreme or the other. Either A: 100% go to heaven or B: 1% go to heaven, and 99% go to a place of eternal torment. I think there's a sufficient amount of scripture to conclude that B seems unlikely for those who feel lead to see it as such. But in my opinion that doesn't automatically mean all that's left is A. I'm willing to settle for the idea that many or perhaps even most who aren't/weren't disciples of Christ will be saved. And also that those who are aren't saved won't end up in an furnace screaming in pain for all eternity. But I also know that I'm a pea-brained human trying to prognosticate what God's ultimate plan is regarding all of mankind.

Yes, there is definitely a wide swath of possibilities that don't call for us to hold tight to either extreme. I do believe there is ground to entertain possibilities such as the notion that people are judged based on the revelation available to them which allows for people who are not explicitly Christians to be saved. And in a sense universalism is the Biblical stance if it is held to be a hope for all of humanity. Where it becomes a problem is when the theologies make God's glory dependent upon saving all of humanity and place demands upon God as if He owes human beings salvation. That position spoils the grace of the cross since it makes it a duty of God's rather than an act of pure love.

 

[ozso]

Yes, there is definitely a wide swath of possibilities that don't call for us to hold tight to either extreme. I do believe there is ground to entertain possibilities such as the notion that people are judged based on the revelation available to them which allows for people who are not explicitly Christians to be saved. And in a sense universalism is the Biblical stance if it is held to be a hope for all of humanity. Where it becomes a problem is when the theologies make God's glory dependent upon saving all of humanity and place demands upon God as if He owes human beings salvation. That position spoils the grace of the cross since it makes it a duty of God's rather than an act of pure love.

It's not supposed to be about us, but about Him. His victory, not ours. It's about Him regaining the lost sheep, the lost coin and etc. In addition to that I believe that we are but a small part of God's overall glory. A small piece of His overall creation. Why did God create us, and what does He want regarding us? It's not about what we deserve, it's about what God deserves.

 

[Der Alte]

I don't really see much continuity in jumping from 1 Peter to 2 Peter. I was expecting you do something more along the lines of continuing with the rest of 1 Peter 4. I'm also not seeing how 2 Peter undoes what he said in 1 Peter 4:6. But maybe I'll see it differently later on.​

Of course you don't see any continuity because you didn't even look. You saw what you wanted to see only what lines up with you UR assumptions/presuppositions.

1 Peter 4:6
6 For for this cause was the gospel preached also to them that are dead, [NIV, now dead] that they might be judged according to men in the flesh, but live according to God in the spirit.​

This seems to be straight forward when read in isolation. It seems to be saying the dead will be saved but…. How could the dead be judged according to men in the flesh when they were dead?
Let’s read further in Peter and see what else Peter says about the fate of the unsaved.

2 Peter 2:1
But there were also false prophets among the people, just as there will be false teachers among you. They will secretly introduce destructive heresies, even denying the sovereign Lord who bought them—bringing swift destruction on themselves.​

When Peter wrote his second book did he forget what he wrote in the 1st book? “bringing swift destruction on themselves” doesn’t sound like being saved by Jesus’ preaching to me.

2 Peter 2:4-5
4 For if God did not spare angels when they sinned, but sent them to hell, putting them in chains of darkness to be held for judgment;
5 if he did not spare the ancient world when he brought the flood on its ungodly people, but protected Noah, a preacher of righteousness, and seven others;​

Here is what Jesus said about this.

Matthew 25:41
41 Then shall he say also unto them on the left hand, Depart from me, ye cursed, into everlasting fire, prepared for the devil and his angels:​

Like the angels, vs. 4, the unrighteous will be sent to hell to be held for judgment. Also see 2 Pet 2:9 below.

2 Peter 2:9
9 if this is so, then the Lord knows how to rescue the godly from trials and to hold the unrighteous for punishment on the day of judgment.​

“rescue the godly from trials” and “hold the righteous for punishment” A distinction between two groups does not sound like being saved by Jesus’ preaching.

2 Peter 2:12
12 But these people blaspheme in matters they do not understand. They are like unreasoning animals, creatures of instinct, born only to be caught and destroyed, and like animals they too will perish.​

“will perish like animals” not saved by Jesus’ preaching

2 Peter 2:17
17 These people are springs without water and mists driven by a storm. Blackest darkness is reserved for them.​

“Blackest darkness is reserved for them,” not being saved by Jesus’ preaching.

2 Peter 2:20
20 If they have escaped the corruption of the world by knowing our Lord and Savior Jesus Christ and are again entangled in it and are overcome, they are worse off at the end than they were at the beginning.​

“worse off … than they were at the beginning “ not being saved by Jesus’ preaching.
Hope this helps.

 

[Der Alte]

* * *
In my long read-through of the KJV, I did not come across anything to tip me off to any tweaking in the wording of the Food Laws. They stood to most as “Jewish” stuff, “Old Testament” stuff, “no relevance to New Testament faith & practice,” etc. There is however, another issue which cannot be dismissed that way.
How was the church to promote the up-and-coming doctrine of ECT, which they found to be so good at filling pews and offering plates, by means of the fear it involved? Dismissal, as with the fairly compact and text-limited Food Laws, would not work. Rewriting would serve as their tool. Thus,
“judgment” became “condemnation”
“condemnation” became “damnation”
various words referring to periods of time became “eternal” and/or “forever and ever”
“sheol,” “hades,” “gehenna” and “tartarus” got rendered as “hell” whenever they could get away with it
the fires so closely associated with God in the Bible got tagged as “hellfire”
the Lake of Fire” – nowhere called “hell” in the text – got tagged as “hell.”

Do you have an advanced degree with emphasis on koine Greek which would enable one to determine how Greek words in the NT should/should not be translated? You obviously do not thus you lack the education necessary to criticize how words were translated in the NT.

 

[Der Alte]

* * *
After Dante and Milton added their epic poetry (fiction), Jonathan Edwards and a host of others had frighened the masses with sermons to convince them that Satan could drag them down to “hell” at any time and after authors like Mary K. Baxter added their own (often conflicting) accounts of “hell” – again, fiction – God versus Satan, good versus evil and heaven versus hell were firmly entrenched in the minds of almost everyone. I have posted in this thread and elsewhere why this whole paradigm is wrong, but no one that has not already seen through the illusion can see it, any more than they can read the Food Laws and realize the principles behind what may look on the surface like arbitrary prohibitions. However, God created men and pigs, so He knows why. He never created “hell” at all, and I dare anyone to show that He did.

The endless repetition of the long since discredited reference to "Dante." One can stick their head in the sand, ignore my posts and deny the truth that only means I will keep posting my quotes from the the 1917 Jewish Encyclopedia [JE], 1971 Encyclopedia Judaica and the pre-Christian Talmud. These 3 sources all document that in Israel 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. "Sheol" and "Ge hinnom" were written as hades and Gehenna, respectively in the 225 BC LXX and the NT. In the J.E., sheol and Ge hinnom are equated with "hell."
The J.E. documents a Jewish belief in hell, in Israel, 16 centuries before Dante. I can change the font size if you still can't see what I post.

 

[Der Alte]

I don't care what word is used, just as long as it conveys the correct description, meaning and image of what's behind talked about. Most people are going to see flames and pitchforks when the see the world hell or hades.

How about this? Criticize all your want but you cannot disprove anything in this post.
…..According to these three sources, among the יהודים/Yehudim/ιουδαιων/Youdaion/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, which are translated Hades and Gehenna, respectively, in both the 225 BC LXX and the NT.
…..There were different factions within Judaism; Sadducees, Pharisees, Essenes etc. and different beliefs about resurrection, hell etc. These differing beliefs do not disprove anything in this post.

[1]1917 Jewish Encyclopedia, Gehenna
The place where children were sacrificed to the god Moloch … in the "valley of the son of Hinnom," to the south of Jerusalem (Josh. xv. 8, passim; II Kings xxiii. 10; Jer. ii. 23; vii. 31-32; xix. 6, 13-14). … the valley was deemed to be accursed, and "Gehenna" therefore soon became a figurative equivalent for "hell." Hell, like paradise, was created by God (Sotah 22a);[“Soon” in this paragraph would be about 700 BC +/-, DA]​

[Note: This is according to the ancient Jews, long before the Christian era, NOT any assumed/alleged bias of “modern” Christian translators. DA]

”(I)n general …sinners go to hell immediately after their death. The famous teacher Johanan b. Zakkai [30 BC-90 AD] wept before his death because he did not know whether he would go to paradise or to hell (Ber. 28b). The pious go to paradise, and sinners to hell(B.M. 83b).
“But as regards the heretics, etc., and Jeroboam, Nebat's son, hell shall pass away, but they shall not pass away" (R. H. 17a; comp. Shab [Talmud]. 33b). All that descend into Gehenna shall come up again, with the exception of three classes of men: those who have committed adultery, or shamed their neighbors, or vilified them (B. M. 58b).[/i]
“… heretics and the Roman oppressors go to Gehenna, and the same fate awaits the Persians, the oppressors of the Babylonian Jews (Ber. 8b).[Talmud] “When Nebuchadnezzar descended into hell, [שאול/Sheol] all its inhabitants were afraid that he was coming to rule over them (Shab. 149a; [Talmud] comp. Isa. xiv. 9-10). The Book of Enoch [x. 6, xci. 9, etal] also says that it is chiefly the heathen who are to be cast into the fiery pool on the Day of Judgment (x. 6, xci. 9, et al). "The Lord, the Almighty, will punish them on the Day of Judgment by putting fire and worms into their flesh, so that they cry out with pain unto all eternity" (Judith xvi. 17). The sinners in Gehenna will be filled with pain when God puts back the souls into the dead bodies on the Day of Judgment, according toIsa. xxxiii. 11 (Sanh. 108b)[Talmud].
Link: Jewish Encyclopedia Online
Note, scripture references are highlighted in blue.
= = = = = = = = = =
[2]1972 Encyclopedia Judaica:
Gehinnom (Heb. גֵּי בֶן־הִנֹּם, גֵּי בְנֵי הִנֹּם, גֵּיא בֶן־הִנֹּם, גֵּיא הִנֹּם; Gr. Γέεννα; "Valley of Ben-Hinnom, Valley of [the Son (s) of] Hinnom," Gehenna), a valley south of Jerusalem on one of the borders between the territories of Judah and Benjamin, between the Valley of *Rephaim and *En-Rogel (Josh. 15:8; 18:16). It is identified with Wadi er-Rababi.
…..During the time of the Monarchy, Gehinnom, at a place called Topheth, was the site of a cult which involved the burning of children (II Kings 23:10; Jer. 7:31; 32:35 et al.; ). Jeremiah repeatedly condemned this cult and predicted that on its account Topheth and the Valley of the Son of Hinnom would be called the Valley of the "Slaughter" (Jer. 19:5–6).
In Judaism the name Gehinnom is generally used as an appellation of the place of torment reserved for the wicked after death. The New Testament used the Greek form Gehenna in the same sense.
Link:
Gehinnom
http://www.jevzajcg.me/enciklopedia/Encyclopaedia Judaica, v. 07 (Fey-Gor).pdf
= = = = = = = = = =
[3]pre-Christianity Talmud -Tractate Rosh Hashanah Chapter 1.
The school of Hillel says: . . . but as for Minim, [i.e. followers of Jesus] informers and disbelievers, who deny the Torah, or Resurrection, or separate themselves from the congregation, or who inspire their fellowmen with dread of them, or who sin and cause others to sin, as did Jeroboam the son of Nebat and his followers, they all descend to Gehenna, and are judged there from generation to generation, as it is said [Isa. lxvi. 24]:
"And they shall go forth and look upon the carcases of the men who have transgressed against Me; for their worm shall not die, neither shall their fire be quenched." Even when Gehenna will be destroyed, they will not be consumed, as it is written[Psalms, xlix. 15]: "And their forms wasteth away in the nether world," which the sages comment upon to mean that their forms shall endure even when the grave is no more.
Concerning them Hannah says [I Sam. ii. 10]: "The adversaries of the Lord shall be broken to pieces."
Link: Tract Rosh Hashana: Chapter I.​

 

[Fervent]

It's not supposed to be about us, but about Him. His victory, not ours. It's about Him regaining the lost sheep, the lost coin and etc. In addition to that I believe that we are but a small part of God's overall glory. A small piece of His overall creation. Why did God create us, and what does He want regarding us? It's not about what we deserve, it's about what God deserves.

It seems more about us when it's built upon the notion that ECT is somehow immoral. Beyond that, God's victory is not lessened if those who choose to reject Him are condemned rather than saved. In both cases all of creation is brought in line with His nature, and in a sense redeemed based on the restoration of true justice. God's glory in no way depends on creation, humans have no part of it except to be invited in by God's graciousness. Salvation is entirely about our needs, which is why I'm open to a conditional universalism based on free will acceptance but I don't see any reason logically or Biblically to believe that all will freely turn to God in repentance.

 

[Der Alte]

Translating hell has been an issue because there are three different Greek words with slightly different meaning: Gehenna, Hades, and Tartarus. Translations vary in how they handle them. I believe KJV translates them all as hell. NRSV translates Gehenna and Tartarus as hell, and leaves Hades as Hades.
The OT uses other terms. Again, how to translate them is a question. Sheol isn't really hell in our sense, as it is neutral (i.e. not punitive) but KJV often translates it as such.
Here's a summary: https://wrongabouthell.com/Words Translated As Hell.pdf
Translating it differently doesn't necessarily imply a difference in theology, but it might tend to lead to difference ideas.

I took a quick look at your link. It repeats information about Gehenna which recent archaeological activities have proven to be false.

The traditional explanation that a burning rubbish heap in the Valley of Hinnom south of Jerusalem gave rise to the idea of a fiery Gehenna of judgment is attributed to Rabbi David Kimhi's commentary on Psalm 27:13 (ca. A.D. 1200). He maintained that in this loathsome valley fires were kept burning perpetually to consume the filth and cadavers thrown into it. However, Strack and Billerbeck state that there is neither archaeological nor literary evidence in support of this claim, in either the earlier intertestamental or the later rabbinic sources (Hermann L. Strack and Paul Billerbeck, Kommentar zum Neuen Testament aus Talmud and Midrasch, 5 vols. [Munich: Beck, 1922-56], 4:2:1030). Also a more recent author holds a similar view (Lloyd R. Bailey, "Gehenna: The Topography of Hell," Biblical Archeologist 49 [1986]: 189.
Source, Bibliotheca Sacra / July–September 1992
http://faculty.gordon.edu/hu/bi/ted...Articles/BSac-NT/Scharen-GenenaSyn-Pt1-BS.htm​

…..Note there is no “archaeological nor literary evidence in support of this claim, [that Gehenna was ever used as a garbage dump] in either the earlier intertestamental or the later rabbinic sources” If Gehenna was ever used as a garbage dump there should be broken pottery, tools, utensils, bones, etc. but there is no such evidence.
= = = = =

Miqweh of Second Temple Period. ......Jerusalem City-Dump in the Late Second Temple Period, ZDPV, 119/1 (2003),
The chance discovery of an Early Roman city dump (1st century CE) in Jerusalem has yielded for the first time ever quantitative data on garbage components that introduce us to the mundane daily life Jerusalemites led and the kind of animals that were featured in their diet. Most of the garbage consists of pottery shards, all common tableware, while prestige objects are entirely absent. Other significant garbage components include numerous fragments of cooking ovens, wall plaster, animal bones and plant remains. Of the pottery vessels, cooking pots are the most abundant type.
…..Most of the refuse turns out to be “household garbage” originating in the domestic areas of the city, while large numbers of cooking pots may point to the presence of pilgrims. Significantly, the faunal assemblage, which is dominated by kosher species and the clear absence of pigs, set Jerusalem during its peak historical period apart from all other contemporaneous Roman urban centers.
...
Recently, the contemporaneous city-dump was identified on the eastern slope of the south-eastern hill of Jerusalem in the form of a thick mantle (up to 10 m, 200,000 m3 ) (Reich and Shukron 2003). The dump is located roughly 100 m outside and south-east of the Temple Mount on the eastern slope of the Kidron Valley (fig. 1), and extends at least 400 m and is 50–70 m wide. Large amounts of pottery and coins date the dump to the Early Roman period (the 1st century BCE and the 1st century CE up to the destruction of the city by the Romans in 70 CE). A preliminary study of the garbage (Bouchnik, Bar-Oz and Reich 2004; Bouchnik et al. 2005) showed the presence of animal bones.
https://www.researchgate.net/public...udy_of_the_City-Dump_of_Early_Roman_Jerusalem
Jerusalem’s Garbage​

 

[hedrick]

Thank you Hedrick for your URL.
Starting with your URL reference, does anyone have any issues? My first comment would be on HADES being translated as GRAVE 1 time out of 12 verses. That strikes me as a big red flag.

hades is in the KJV NT.........11 times. 10 times it is HELL and 1 time it is GRAVE.
The first word "death" in translations below is thanatos in the Greek, and every translation translates the same thing.

KJV 1CO 15:55 O death, where is thy sting? O grave , where is thy victory?
RSV 1CO 15:55 "O death, where is thy victory? O death , where is thy sting?"
NAS 1CO 15:55 "O DEATH, WHERE IS YOUR VICTORY? O DEATH WHERE IS YOUR STING?"
NIV 1CO 15:55 "Where, O death, is your victory? Where, O death, is your sting?"
YLT 1CO 15:55 where, O Death, thy sting? where, O Hades, thy victory?'

Strons Ref # 2288 thanatos (properly an adjective used as a noun) death (literally or figuratively)

So, here we have RSV, NAS, NIV translations all saying hades is "death".
KJV saying "grave"
YLT saying "hades"

The three most modern translations are deceptive IMO. They make no distinction between the two 'death's in the verse. That leads to a novice thinker believing they are the same Greek words IMO.

The next two verses show that even CHRISTIAN'S experience the STING of death because we sin just like unbelievers.

1Co 15:56 The sting of death is sin, and the power of sin is the law.
57 But thanks be to God, who gives us the victory through our Lord Jesus Christ.

but what victory does the GRAVE HADES HELL over believers or unbelievers? NONE. Both are resurrected. The punishment of damnation is not the opposite of "life". "DEATH" would be the opposite. And "damnation" is the Greek word Krisis which means "a decision" period.

JOH 5:28 Marvel not at this: for the hour is coming, in the which all that are in the graves shall hear his voice, 29 And shall come forth; they that have done good, unto the resurrection of life; and they that have done evil, unto the resurrection of damnation/a decision.

DOES anyone see ETERNAL HELL in any of these verses using HADES? Or is a GRAVE acceptable?

If you look at Lexicons and any study in the development of ideas, you'll find that in the oldest parts of the OT the afterlife is neutral. It applies to everyone. Sheol in that context is properly translated "the grave." However ideas developed. By the end of the OT, and most clearly the NT, people believed that there were rewards and punishments. By NT times, the evidence is pretty clear the Gehenna actually did mean a realm with torments. It seems to have been considered eternal, though many people didn't stay in it eternally.

So references to Gehenna in Matthew almost certainly refer to an eternal realm of punishment, in which at least a few people were punished eternally, even if most got out after a year. Eternal fire and eternal punishment almost certainly refer to this.

To me the variety of ways Jesus spoke of accountability, as well as the context of hyperbole involved in references to Gehenna, leave some question whether he really expected unfruitful followers to end up in eternal suffering. But I think it's quite reasonable to translate Gehenna as hell.

Hades probably not. Jews didn't agree on the afterlife. There's no real description in the Torah. It's pretty obvious that the discussions in the Talmud are speculation, on which teachers varied. So Hades is probably not as uniform as Gehenna. But it was common to consider it a holding place for people after death until the final resurrection, but where punishment was given at least to some. (The best-known reference is Lazarus and the Rich Man.) Hell is probably a misleading translation for that, which is why the NRSV leaves it "Hades".

I just looked at all the references to Hades. In many cases "death" would be a good translation, sometmes death viewed as a hostlle power as in Paul. In Luke 13:23 it is clearly a realm where people are punished.

 

[Der Alte]

I did not call you or call anyone else "Son of Hell." But I apologize to you on behalf of the person who did.
There has been a bug introduced in this thread of people flaunting their resumes, even though others with greater resumes have not done this. But putting people down and flaunting resumes is not appealing from a follower of Christ:
Mat 23:12 Whoever exalts himself will be humbled, and whoever humbles himself will be exalted.

When one who has some advanced education responds to criticism about his ability to correctly interpret either Biblical language responds with e.g. "I studied both biblical languages at the graduate level at such and such a time" that is not necessarily "flaunting their resume." Just sayin'.

 

[Hillsage]

Here's my version from a while back

"Hades" appears 11 times in the NT. The Aramaic Bible in Plain English translates them all as "Sheol".

I find it unlikely that when Jesus was speaking he suddenly went from Aramaic to Greek and said "Hades" instead of "Sheol" in Matthew 11:23, Matthew 16:18, Luke 10:15 and Luke 16:23.

"Hades" appears twice in Acts of the Apostles 2:27 and Acts of the Apostles 2:31, but that's Peter quoting Psalms 16:8-11 so that's definitely "Sheol".

"Hades" appears in 1 Corinthians 15:55 but many translations say "death". The KJB says "grave".

"Hades" appears in Revelation 1:18, Revelation 6:8 and Revelation 20:13-14. And in all of those it appears alongside "death" so it seems likely those should all be "Sheol" as well.

Therefore I'm going to conclude that neither "Hell" nor "Hades" belongs anywhere in the Bible.

19 messages behind already. This thread is moving faster than I can keep up with so let me just share this; I agree you are repeating what I just shared. I'm sure that in the last 4,000 posts everything has 'pretty much' been shared. But we are obviously in agreement so far anyway.

 

[hedrick]

I took a quick look at your link. It repeats information about Gehenna which recent archaeological activities have proven to be false.

The traditional explanation that a burning rubbish heap in the Valley of Hinnom south of Jerusalem gave rise to the idea of a fiery Gehenna of judgment is attributed to Rabbi David Kimhi's commentary on Psalm 27:13 (ca. A.D. 1200). He maintained that in this loathsome valley fires were kept burning perpetually to consume the filth and cadavers thrown into it. However, Strack and Billerbeck state that there is neither archaeological nor literary evidence in support of this claim, in either the earlier intertestamental or the later rabbinic sources (Hermann L. Strack and Paul Billerbeck, Kommentar zum Neuen Testament aus Talmud and Midrasch, 5 vols. [Munich: Beck, 1922-56], 4:2:1030). Also a more recent author holds a similar view (Lloyd R. Bailey, "Gehenna: The Topography of Hell," Biblical Archeologist 49 [1986]: 189.
Source, Bibliotheca Sacra / July–September 1992
http://faculty.gordon.edu/hu/bi/ted...Articles/BSac-NT/Scharen-GenenaSyn-Pt1-BS.htm​

…..Note there is no “archaeological nor literary evidence in support of this claim, [that Gehenna was ever used as a garbage dump] in either the earlier intertestamental or the later rabbinic sources” If Gehenna was ever used as a garbage dump there should be broken pottery, tools, utensils, bones, etc. but there is no such evidence.
= = = = =

Miqweh of Second Temple Period. ......Jerusalem City-Dump in the Late Second Temple Period, ZDPV, 119/1 (2003),
The chance discovery of an Early Roman city dump (1st century CE) in Jerusalem has yielded for the first time ever quantitative data on garbage components that introduce us to the mundane daily life Jerusalemites led and the kind of animals that were featured in their diet. Most of the garbage consists of pottery shards, all common tableware, while prestige objects are entirely absent. Other significant garbage components include numerous fragments of cooking ovens, wall plaster, animal bones and plant remains. Of the pottery vessels, cooking pots are the most abundant type.
…..Most of the refuse turns out to be “household garbage” originating in the domestic areas of the city, while large numbers of cooking pots may point to the presence of pilgrims. Significantly, the faunal assemblage, which is dominated by kosher species and the clear absence of pigs, set Jerusalem during its peak historical period apart from all other contemporaneous Roman urban centers.
...
Recently, the contemporaneous city-dump was identified on the eastern slope of the south-eastern hill of Jerusalem in the form of a thick mantle (up to 10 m, 200,000 m3 ) (Reich and Shukron 2003). The dump is located roughly 100 m outside and south-east of the Temple Mount on the eastern slope of the Kidron Valley (fig. 1), and extends at least 400 m and is 50–70 m wide. Large amounts of pottery and coins date the dump to the Early Roman period (the 1st century BCE and the 1st century CE up to the destruction of the city by the Romans in 70 CE). A preliminary study of the garbage (Bouchnik, Bar-Oz and Reich 2004; Bouchnik et al. 2005) showed the presence of animal bones.
https://www.researchgate.net/public...udy_of_the_City-Dump_of_Early_Roman_Jerusalem
Jerusalem’s Garbage​

I did not intend that reference to support any particular exegesis, and certainly not one that rejected the idea of Gehenna as punishment. I cited it in a discussion of translations, as a summary of what the original terms were and how how translations handle them. I've said clearly that Gehenna in the NT does not mean a garbage dump.

 

[Der Alte]

I did not intend that reference to support any particular exegesis, and certainly not one that rejected the idea of Gehenna as punishment. I cited it in a discussion of translations, as a summary of what the original terms were an how how translations handle them.

Others could have understood it as a correct understanding. I have seen many references to "Gehenna" as the valley outside Jerusalem which was constantly burning trash, bodies etc.

 

[Lazarus Short]

Do you have an advanced degree with emphasis on koine Greek which would enable one to determine how Greek words in the NT should/should not be translated? You obviously do not thus you lack the education necessary to criticize how words were translated in the NT.

The endless repetition of the long since discredited reference to "Dante." One can stick their head in the sand, ignore my posts and deny the truth that only means I will keep posting my quotes from the the 1917 Jewish Encyclopedia [JE], 1971 Encyclopedia Judaica and the pre-Christian Talmud. These 3 sources all document that in Israel 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. "Sheol" and "Ge hinnom" were written as hades and Gehenna, respectively in the 225 BC LXX and the NT. In the J.E. sheol and Ge hinnom are equated with "hell."
The J.E. documents a Jewish belief in hell, i Israel, 16 centuries before Dante. I can change the font size if you still can't see what I post.

Correct, but you miss the point. I did understand the principles behind the Food Laws, given the knowledge of nutrition I received in the SDA church...which most folks miss. I did see a problem with what was done with the text of the Bible in regard to the establishment of ECT, although I do indeed lack the credentials to fully articulate my position. I also reject the authority of your "three irrefutable Jewish sources." I don't care what the Jews believed about the afterlife anymore than I care what the bulk of Christians care. Carefully explain to me over and over, but I don't think that it's my head in the sand.