Der Alte

This is me about 1 yr. old.
Supporter
Aug 21, 2003
28,576
6,063
EST
✟992,249.00
Country
United States
Faith
Baptist
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Others
OK, I think we're on the same page now. To answer you, what I have been doing is trying to determine if Hell, word and concept, is in the Bible, or if Hell, word and concept, came from some other source. My study of pagan European mythology, brief as it was, was enough to tell me where the word came from. A study of the KJV showed that the concept did not come from there, but we all know that every (or nearly every) pagan religion had something like Hell. Further, knowing of the syncretism in Christianity as it came into contact with pagan culture after pagan culture, I think it's a safe bet that it came from an external source. It's just like the pagan holiday of Samhain becoming "Christian" by it being given a new name like "All Hallows Eve," or "All Saints' Eve" or just "Halloween." My pagan daughter gleefully tells me that "Christianity has pagan DNA." She is correct, but I am trying to rid my understanding of Christianity of any "pagan DNA."
All that "study" you have been doing, evidently you didn't study anything about the Jews in Israel at the time of Jesus. Here is the true source of the Christian belief in hell. The Jews, in Israel before and during the time of Jesus believed in a place of eternal, unending, fiery torment and they called it both Gehinnom/Gehenna and Sheol. When Jesus taught about,
• "Eternal punishment, Mt 25:46"
• "the fire of hell where the fire is not quenched and the worm does not die, Mk 9:43-48" and
• "cast into a fiery furnace where there will be wailing and gnashing of teeth,” Mt 13:42, 50
• “better for him [a person who offends a little one] that a millstone were hanged about his neck, and that he were drowned in the depth of the sea. Mt 18:6
• “it had been good for him [the one who betrays Jesus] if he had not been born.” Mat 26:24
These teachings reaffirmed and sanctioned the existing Jewish view of eternal hell. In Matt. 18:6, 26:24, see above, Jesus teaches that there is a fate worse than death or nonexistence. A fate worse than death is also mentioned in Heb 10:28-31.
Heb 10:28 He that despised Moses' law died without mercy
under two or three witnesses:
29 Of how much sorer punishment, suppose ye, shall he be thought worthy, who hath trodden under foot the Son of God, and hath counted the blood of the covenant, wherewith he was sanctified, an unholy thing, and hath done despite unto the Spirit of grace?
30 For we know him that hath said, Vengeance belongeth unto me, I will recompense, saith the Lord. And again, The Lord shall judge his people.
31 It is a fearful thing to fall into the hands of the living God.
Jesus used the word death 17 times in the gospels and if He wanted to say eternal death in Matt 25:46, that is what He would have said but He said “eternal punishment.” The Sadducees did not believe in the resurrection, they knew that everybody died, young, old, good, bad, and knew that it was permanent. When Jesus taught “eternal punishment” they would not have understood it as death, it would have meant something worse to them.
…..Jesus knew what the Jews, believed about hell. If the Jews were wrong, when Jesus taught about man’s eternal fate, such as eternal punishment, He would have corrected them. Jesus did not correct them, thus their teaching on hell was correct. Here is historical evidence to support this.

Jewish Encyclopedia, Gehenna
The place where children were sacrificed to the god Moloch was originally 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). For this reason 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); [Note, this is according to the ancient Jews, long before the Christian era, NOT the bias of Christian translators.]
It is assumed in general that
sinners go to hell immediately after their death. The famous teacher Johanan b. Zakkai 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. 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]
As mentioned above, heretics and the Roman oppressors go to Gehenna, and the same fate awaits the Persians, the oppressors of the Babylonian Jews (Ber. 8b).
When Nebuchadnezzar descended into hell, [Sheol] all its inhabitants were afraid that he was coming to rule over them (Shab. 149a; comp. Isa. xiv. 9-10). The Book of Enoch 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 to Isa. xxxiii. 11 (Sanh. 108b).
Link:
Jewish Encyclopedia Online
= = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = =
Talmud -Tractate Rosh Hashanah Chapter 1.
The school of Hillel [one of two major rabbinical schools in Israel at the time of Jesus] says: . . . but as for Minim, [follower 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.

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.
“Gehenna is presented as diametrically opposed to ‘life’: it is better to enter life than to go to Gehenna. . .It is common practice, both in scholarly and less technical works, to associate the description of Gehenna with the supposedly contemporary garbage dump in the valley of Hinnom. This association often leads scholars to emphasize the destructive aspects of the judgment here depicted: fire burns until the object is completely consumed. Two particular problems may be noted in connection with this approach. First,
there is no convincing evidence in the primary sources for the existence of a fiery rubbish dump in this location (in any case, a thorough investigation would be appreciated). Secondly, the significant background to this passage more probably lies in Jesus’ allusion to Isaiah 66:24.”
(“The Duration of Divine Judgment in the New Testament” in
The Reader Must Understand edited by K. Brower and M. W. Ellion, p. 223, emphasis mine)
G. R. Beasley-Murray in
Jesus and the Kingdom of God:
“Ge-Hinnom (Aramaic Ge-hinnam, hence the Greek Geenna), ‘The Valley of Hinnom,’ lay south of Jerusalem, immediately outside its walls. The notion, still referred to by some commentators,
that the city’s rubbish was burned in this valley, has no further basis than a statement by the Jewish scholar Kimchi (sic) made about A.D. 1200; it is not attested in any ancient source.” (p. 376n.92)
http://www.btdf.org/forums/topic/20113-the-burning-garbage-dump-of-gehenna-is-a-myth/
 
Upvote 0

Butch5

Newbie
Supporter
Apr 7, 2012
8,932
767
62
Homer Georgia
Visit site
✟308,497.00
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
All total nonsense! The Christian observance of the birth of Jesus has nothing to do with anything pagan!

None of it's nonsense. If you study the early faith you'll see that. You'll see that no one celebrated Christ's birth until the Roman Catholic church started doing it. They co-oped winter festivals. As more and more pagans became Christian they brought their festivals with them. Rather than the church forbidding them the celebration the church simply renamed them, and you have Christmas. Look at the celebration itself. The giving of gifts was a pagan practice. The Tree, the decorations, the Yule log, etc. they all come from pagan traditions. The early Christians celebrated Christ's resurrection, not His birth.

As for early Christianity being very different than what we have today, a review of the early faith should reveal that rather quickly.
 
Upvote 0

Lazarus Short

Well-Known Member
Apr 6, 2016
2,934
3,009
74
Independence, Missouri, USA
✟294,142.00
Faith
Non-Denom
Marital Status
Married
Der Alter, Butch5 is much closer to the truth than you. You would do well to put aside the Jewish Encyclopedia and the Talmud, and study the history/doctrines/practices of early Christianity instead. Just reading the Book of Acts should make you wonder what went wrong. You seem to think that Christmas is just fine, but have you ever considered pagan idol of Santa Claus? Being set in your beliefs means cognitive dissonance every time some differing idea pops up, and you react with "Nonsense!" and the same, tired quotes from the same, tired sources. However, don't believe Laz - believe Jesus, Who said if it was not so, He would have told us.

In case you thought the same quotes from the same sources would be the charm the third time around, they are not...

BTW, quoting Butch5 and inserting your own words into the quote is a major breach of conduct, IMHO. Please don't do that again.
 
Upvote 0

Der Alte

This is me about 1 yr. old.
Supporter
Aug 21, 2003
28,576
6,063
EST
✟992,249.00
Country
United States
Faith
Baptist
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Others
None of it's nonsense. If you study the early faith you'll see that. You'll see that no one celebrated Christ's birth until the Roman Catholic church started doing it. They co-oped winter festivals. As more and more pagans became Christian they brought their festivals with them. Rather than the church forbidding them the celebration the church simply renamed them, and you have Christmas. Look at the celebration itself. The giving of gifts was a pagan practice. The Tree, the decorations, the Yule log, etc. they all come from pagan traditions. The early Christians celebrated Christ's resurrection, not His birth.
As for early Christianity being very different than what we have today, a review of the early faith should reveal that rather quickly.
I have been at this forum for more than 15 years and I have heard all this "pagan this,""pagan that" rubbish many, many times but what I have not seen is credible, verifiable, historical evidence for any of it. Seems like all the antis will read and believe anything that attacks the church all kinds of pagan stuff about Babylon, Egypt, Rome, Greece, etc. but they adamantly refuse to even read the history of the Jews right there in Israel. Jesus was a 1st century Jew in Israel, all the first Christian were 1st century Jews in Israel, they lived the history I have been quoting.
.....So please explain to me why the pagan myths of Babylon, Egypt, Rome and Greece are considered valid evidence but the history of the Jews in Israel is rejected outright? Saying, "Neener, neener, neener I'm right and you're wrong! Am too! Nuh Huh!" does not make it so. How about some credible, verifiable, historical evidence? I seem to be the only one providing that.

Der Alter, Butch5 is much closer to the truth than you. You would do well to put aside the Jewish Encyclopedia and the Talmud, and study the history/doctrines/practices of early Christianity instead. Just reading the Book of Acts should make you wonder what went wrong. You seem to think that Christmas is just fine, but have you ever considered pagan idol of Santa Claus? Being set in your beliefs means cognitive dissonance every time some differing idea pops up, and you react with "Nonsense!" and the same, tired quotes from the same, tired sources. However, don't believe Laz - believe Jesus, Who said if it was not so, He would have told us.
In case you thought the same quotes from the same sources would be the charm the third time around, they are not...
BTW, quoting Butch5 and inserting your own words into the quote is a major breach of conduct, IMHO. Please don't do that again
.
Do not lecture about breach of conduct you are not a moderator. If you think I have done something wrong report me or keep quiet. I am not aware that I have inserted my words into anyone's quote.
.....See my response to Butch above. You seem to be another one who thinks the pagan myths of Babylon, Egypt, Rome and Greece are somehow valid evidence of something but adamantly refuse to even consider that the concept of hell came from the Jews right there in Israel not from pagan myths.
.....Saying Christmas is pagan over and over does not make it so. There was no pagan anything on December 25. Perhaps you should try reading Christian history about Natus Christus instead of pagan myths.
.....Santa Claus is irrelevant, as are Christmas trees, wreaths, etc. none of that has ever been any part of the church's observance of the birth of Jesus birth. Christians are not responsible for secular society commercializing and perverting Christmas or any other Christian observance.

 
Upvote 0

Der Alte

This is me about 1 yr. old.
Supporter
Aug 21, 2003
28,576
6,063
EST
✟992,249.00
Country
United States
Faith
Baptist
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Others
This word conjures up a variety of scenarios and has been used as a club wielded by the clergy for hundreds of years to keep funds coming in and in return, the clergy would attempt to keep the faithful from the clutches of hell.
Now, let's get down to it. The English word "Hell" does not have its origin in the Hebrew or Greek. It originates in an old anglo-saxon word with two variations in spelling: Helle and Helan Its original definition is a hidden place.
Translators took this word and substituted it in place of four other words in the original text, and these are as follows:
Sheol = Hebrew- meaning the grave.
Hades = Greek - meaning a hidden place
Gehenna = Greek - the garbage pit where fires consumed refuse tossed into it.
Tartarus = Homer, who used this word as the underground prison for the giants. This word is only found once where it was substituted for Hell. The early revisers changed the phrase "Thrown down to tartarus" and switched it to hell.
Each and every time the reader comes across the word hell it is one of these other terms.
Now, if one takes all these words and meanings and lumps them together you get a scene of a hidden place, where the dead go, an underground pit where fires burn unceasingly. Frightful picture is it not? That was their aim. I hate to think of how many church goers lived their whole lives in fear of going to a place which does not exist.
Hell is not the lake of fire, which will be a one time event at the end of the millennium.
Those who go into that will be utterly consumed - a final death. Satan will also go into this lake. He is the son of perdition. Perdition means to turn to ash from within and without - to perish.
Now I know that there are people that wish there was a hell, for we all want evil doers, murderers, rapists, kidnappers etc. to burn in hell for eternity as just reward for their evil.....I am with you. But since it is not real, then what?
The rich man could see Lazarus with Christ across a gulf that could not be crossed.
Being held in that state was torture of a kind and there are a great many metaphors and figures of speech and idioms one can sort through.....feeling as one's mouth and tongue are on fire and so forth. A self realization that the rich man as well as countless others are there until the millennium. Those from before were freed by Christ when he rose, but all the rest must remain for now. For the student interested in more information about the millennial period, read the last 8 or 9 chapters of the book of Ezekiel.
Now after the lake of fire event, it will be sealed over and done away with along with all and any memory of those who went into it.
Heaven is where God is and since the full Godhead defacto will be here on earth, you cannot have an open burning lake and thoughts of screaming tortured souls in it and have peace and no more tears. It would not be Heaven.
A fantastic tale with a little bit of truth and a lot of innuendo and speculation. If I say "truck" what do you think of, a large wheeled vehicle with a big flat bed or compartment for carrying large heavy loads? The original meaning of the word was "commercial goods" or "vegetables." So what a word might have meant long, long ago in a country far, far away may be totally irrelevant. What is relevant is what does the word mean to the average person now. "Perdition" means "utter destruction."
The Jews, in Israel before and during the time of Jesus believed in a place of eternal, unending, fiery torment and they called it both Gehinnom/Gehenna and Sheol. When Jesus taught about,

• "Eternal punishment, Matthew 25:46"
• "the fire of hell where the fire is not quenched and the worm does not die, Mark 9:43-48" and
• "cast into a fiery furnace where there will be wailing and gnashing of teeth,” Matthew 13:42, 50
• “better for him [a person who offends a little one] that a millstone were hanged about his neck, and that he were drowned in the depth of the sea. Matthew 18:6
• “it had been good for him [the one who betrays Jesus] if he had not been born.” Matthew 26:24
These teachings reaffirmed and sanctioned the existing Jewish view of eternal hell. In Matt. 18:6, 26:24, see above, Jesus teaches that there is a fate worse than death or nonexistence. A fate worse than death is also mentioned in Hebrews 10:28-31.
Hebrews 10:28-31
28.He that despised Moses' law died without mercy
under two or three witnesses:
29 Of how much sorer punishment, suppose ye, shall he be thought worthy, who hath trodden under foot the Son of God, and hath counted the blood of the covenant, wherewith he was sanctified, an unholy thing, and hath done despite unto the Spirit of grace?
30 For we know him that hath said, Vengeance belongeth unto me, I will recompense, saith the Lord. And again, The Lord shall judge his people.
31 It is a fearful thing to fall into the hands of the living God.
Jesus used the word death 17 times in the gospels and if He wanted to say eternal death in Matt 25:46, that is what He would have said but He said “eternal punishment.” The Sadducees did not believe in the resurrection, they knew that everybody died, young, old, good, bad etc. and knew that it was permanent. When Jesus taught “eternal punishment” they would not have understood it as death, it would have meant something worse to them.
…..Jesus knew what the Jews, believed about hell. If the Jews were wrong, when Jesus taught about man’s eternal fate, such as eternal punishment, He would have corrected them. Jesus did not correct them, thus their teaching on hell was correct. Here is historical evidence to support this.

Jewish Encyclopedia, Gehenna
The place where children were sacrificed to the god Moloch was originally in the "valley of the son of Hinnom," to the south of Jerusalem (Josh. xv. 8, passim; II Kings 23:10; Jeremiah 2:23; vii. 31-32; xix. 6, 13-14). For this reason 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); [Note, this is according to the ancient Jews, long before the Christian era, NOT the bias of Christian translators.]
It is assumed in general that sinners go to hell immediately after their death. The famous teacher Johanan b. Zakkai 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. 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]
As mentioned above, heretics and the Roman oppressors go to Gehenna, and the same fate awaits the Persians, the oppressors of the Babylonian Jews (Ber. 8b). When Nebuchadnezzar descended into hell, [Sheol] all its inhabitants were afraid that he was coming to rule over them (Shab. 149a; comp. Isaiah 14:9-10). The Book of Enoch 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 to Isaiah 33:11 (Sanh. 108b).
Link:Jewish Encyclopedia Online
= = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = =
Talmud -Tractate Rosh Hashanah Chapter 1.
The school of Hillel[one of the major rabbinical schools in Israel at the time of Jesus] says: . . . but as for Minim, [follower 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 [Isaiah 64:24]: "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 49:15]: "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 [1 Samuel 2:10]: "The adversaries of the Lord shall be broken to pieces."
Link:Tract Rosh Hashana: Chapter I.
.....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.
“Gehenna is presented as diametrically opposed to ‘life’: it is better to enter life than to go to Gehenna. . .It is common practice, both in scholarly and less technical works, to associate the description of Gehenna with the supposedly contemporary garbage dump in the valley of Hinnom. This association often leads scholars to emphasize the destructive aspects of the judgment here depicted: fire burns until the object is completely consumed. Two particular problems may be noted in connection with this approach. First, there is no convincing evidence in the primary sources for the existence of a fiery rubbish dump in this location (in any case, a thorough investigation would be appreciated). Secondly, the significant background to this passage more probably lies in Jesus’ allusion to Isaiah 66:24.”
(“The Duration of Divine Judgment in the New Testament” in The Reader Must Understand edited by K. Brower and M. W. Ellion, p. 223, emphasis mine)
G. R. Beasley-Murray in Jesus and the Kingdom of God:
“Ge-Hinnom (Aramaic Ge-hinnam, hence the Greek Geenna), ‘The Valley of Hinnom,’ lay south of Jerusalem, immediately outside its walls. The notion, still referred to by some commentators, that the city’s rubbish was burned in this valley, has no further basis than a statement by the Jewish scholar Kimchi (sic) made about A.D. 1200; it is not attested in any ancient source.” (p. 376n.92)
http://www.btdf.org/forums/topic/20113-the-burning-garbage-dump-of-gehenna-is-a-myth/
 
Upvote 0

Butch5

Newbie
Supporter
Apr 7, 2012
8,932
767
62
Homer Georgia
Visit site
✟308,497.00
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
I have been at this forum for more than 15 years and I have heard all this "pagan this,""pagan that" rubbish many, many times but what I have not seen is credible, verifiable, historical evidence for any of it. Seems like all the antis will read and believe anything that attacks the church all kinds of pagan stuff about Babylon, Egypt, Rome, Greece, etc. but they adamantly refuse to even read the history of the Jews right there in Israel. Jesus was a 1st century Jew in Israel, all the first Christian were 1st century Jews in Israel, they lived the history I have been quoting.
.....So please explain to me why the pagan myths of Babylon, Egypt, Rome and Greece are considered valid evidence but the history of the Jews in Israel is rejected outright? Saying, "Neener, neener, neener I'm right and you're wrong! Am too! Nuh Huh!" does not make it so. How about some credible, verifiable, historical evidence? I seem to be the only one providing that.


Do not lecture about breach of conduct you are not a moderator. If you think I have done something wrong report me or keep quiet. I am not aware that I have inserted my words into anyone's quote.
.....See my response to Butch above. You seem to be another one who thinks the pagan myths of Babylon, Egypt, Rome and Greece are somehow valid evidence of something but adamantly refuse to even consider that the concept of hell came from the Jews right there in Israel not from pagan myths.
.....Saying Christmas is pagan over and over does not make it so. There was no pagan anything on December 25. Perhaps you should try reading Christian history about Natus Christus instead of pagan myths.
.....Santa Claus is irrelevant, as are Christmas trees, wreaths, etc. none of that has ever been any part of the church's observance of the birth of Jesus birth. Christians are not responsible for secular society commercializing and perverting Christmas or any other Christian observance.
Well, show where the first century Christians celebrated Christmas. They didn't. The celebrated Jewish festivals. The celebrated Passover, but they didn't celebrate Christmas.

Christians today celebrate Christmas by decorating their houses with lights and wreaths and other decorations. They give gifts to celebrate Christmas etc. If you look at the pagan festivals they did the same. God told the Israelites that they were not to worship Him the way the pagans worship their Gods
 
Upvote 0

Der Alte

This is me about 1 yr. old.
Supporter
Aug 21, 2003
28,576
6,063
EST
✟992,249.00
Country
United States
Faith
Baptist
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Others
Well, show where the first century Christians celebrated Christmas. They didn't. The celebrated Jewish festivals. The celebrated Passover, but they didn't celebrate Christmas.
The disciples who were Jews continued to observe the Jewish feasts and festivals but there is no scriptural record that former pagan gentile Christians did so. In fact Acts of the Apostles 15:20, Acts of the Apostles 15:24, Acts of the Apostles 15:29 and Acts of the Apostles 21:24-25 states that gentiles were not required to circumcise and keep the law. Not one verse in the NT commands gentile Christians to observe Passover or any other festival or feast.
Christians today celebrate Christmas by decorating their houses with lights and wreaths and other decorations. They give gifts to celebrate Christmas etc. If you look at the pagan festivals they did the same. God told the Israelites that they were not to worship Him the way the pagans worship their Gods
An extremely flimsy reason to condemn Christians. Pagans also prayed to their gods do we condemn Christians for praying? Do we also condemn the Jews? Pagans had priests, temples, sacrifices etc. so did the Jews.
 
Upvote 0

Lazarus Short

Well-Known Member
Apr 6, 2016
2,934
3,009
74
Independence, Missouri, USA
✟294,142.00
Faith
Non-Denom
Marital Status
Married
If I say "truck" what do you think of, a large wheeled vehicle with a big flat bed or compartment for carrying large heavy loads? The original meaning of the word was "commercial goods" or "vegetables." So what a word might have meant long, long ago in a country far, far away may be totally irrelevant. What is relevant is what does the word mean to the average person now. "Perdition" means "utter destruction."

Ah, word and language drift. Since this thread is about Hell, I took another long look in my authoritative OED to see again what it said about the word "Hell." I gather that in its oldest sense, it meant (as a noun) a coverer or hider. In the sense of a verb, it meant to cover or hide. In fact, my father told me (and I suppose it is not well known today) that in the old days, if you lacked a root cellar, and had fruits and/or veggies to store over the winter, you might do the following. First, dig a trench to below the local frost line. Place a layer of straw on the bottom. Place the items, say potatoes, on the straw. Layer more straw on the spuds. Lastly, shovel the dug-out dirt on top of it all. It was called "Helling the potatoes."

Nowadays, Hell means something very different. My own search to find an answer to my Question: Where did our ideas of Hell come from? has been answered. Combine pagan influences, altered theology, altered translation, altered teaching, and we get altered belief in an eternal Hell in which sinners suffer conscious torment. There is a flaw in that idea most have never considered, but that will be the subject of a later post. Stay tuned.
 
Upvote 0

Der Alte

This is me about 1 yr. old.
Supporter
Aug 21, 2003
28,576
6,063
EST
✟992,249.00
Country
United States
Faith
Baptist
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Others
Ah, word and language drift. Since this thread is about Hell, I took another long look in my authoritative OED to see again what it said about the word "Hell." I gather that in its oldest sense, it meant (as a noun) a coverer or hider. In the sense of a verb, it meant to cover or hide. In fact, my father told me (and I suppose it is not well known today) that in the old days, if you lacked a root cellar, and had fruits and/or veggies to store over the winter, you might do the following. First, dig a trench to below the local frost line. Place a layer of straw on the bottom. Place the items, say potatoes, on the straw. Layer more straw on the spuds. Lastly, shovel the dug-out dirt on top of it all. It was called "Helling the potatoes."
This would be a somewhat interesting exercise in etymology for a High school or college English class but totally irrelevant to the majority of English speaking Christians. I imagine if 100 random people were asked what hell means, none would give any part of the answer above. Here is the definition of "hell" from the Merriam-Webster dictionary most people are familiar with these definitions.
Full Definition of hell
1a (1) : a nether world in which the dead continue to exist : hades (2) : the nether realm of the devil and the demons in which the damned suffer everlasting punishment —often used in curses <go to hell> or as a generalized term of abuse <the hell with it>b Christian Science : error 2b, sin
2a : a place or state of misery, torment, or wickedness <war is hell — W. T. Sherman>b : a place or state of turmoil or destruction <all hell broke loose>c : a severe scolding; also : flak, grief <gave me hell for coming in late>d : unrestrained fun or sportiveness <the kids were full of hell> —often used in the phrase for the hell of it especially to suggest action on impulse or without a serious motive<decided to go for the hell of it>e : an extremely unpleasant and often inescapable situation <rush-hour hell>
I doubt that more than 1-2 out of a thousand random people would know the meaning of "hel" or "hell" in some ancient Scandinavian, or whatever, language. So all of that is a meaningless smokescreen.
Nowadays, Hell means something very different. My own search to find an answer to my Question: Where did our ideas of Hell come from? has been answered. Combine pagan influences, [Nonsense!] altered theology, [Nonsense!] altered translation, [Nonsense!] altered teaching, [Nonsense!] and we get altered belief [Nonsense!]in an eternal Hell in which sinners suffer conscious torment. There is a flaw in that idea most have never considered, but that will be the subject of a later post. Stay tuned.
Just so much baloney, balderdash, bloviation etc. The Hell, no! crowd will search high and low, under any rock for some pagan myth or legend which they can accuse Christianity of copying but adamantly refuse to read the documented history of the Jews in Israel, what they believed about hell.
 
Last edited:
Upvote 0

Lazarus Short

Well-Known Member
Apr 6, 2016
2,934
3,009
74
Independence, Missouri, USA
✟294,142.00
Faith
Non-Denom
Marital Status
Married
You brought a Merriam-Webster to an Oxford English Dictionary fight? Really??

Just because most people would not know terms from obscure, semi-ancient, north European languages does not mean that I am wrong. How many average folks even know what the Talmud is? Tell me. On the other hand, you give a lot of credence to the opinions of first-century Jews, none of whom can speak up for their beliefs or answer questions.

You continue to belittle me, and call my posts [Nonsense!], baloney, balderdash, and suchlike. Why not engage me in a reasoned discussion? Is name-calling the best you've got? So far, it seems so.

At the end of the day (or forum thread) I am writing to those with ears to hear. Keep that in mind.
 
Upvote 0
This site stays free and accessible to all because of donations from people like you.
Consider making a one-time or monthly donation. We appreciate your support!
- Dan Doughty and Team Christian Forums

Lazarus Short

Well-Known Member
Apr 6, 2016
2,934
3,009
74
Independence, Missouri, USA
✟294,142.00
Faith
Non-Denom
Marital Status
Married
DUST, BODY, SPIRIT, SOUL – and the utter impossibility of being sent to Hell


What are we, anyway? What happens to us when we die? Versions of “you’ll have pie in the sky when you die” are common, and mourners are consoled with the idea that their lost loved one is in a “better place.” Just like the harp-on-a-cloud version of Heaven, the Bible says nothing like this, but holds out the Promise of the Resurrection. I propose that before we consider the afterlife, we need a proper understanding of body, soul, and spirit – how we were made.


It's easy to miss what's going on in Genesis when God made Adam, so let's look at those few, meaningful words: “And the LORD God formed man of the dust of the ground and breathed into his nostrils the breath of life. And man became a living soul.” (Genesis 2:7 KJV II)


First, God took some dirt (in fact, the Miao people refer to Adam as the "Patriarch Dirt"):


dirt --> [God transforms it into] --> a lifeless body.


OK, we've got a body, and we can’t even call it dead, as it has not yet lived, but:


lifeless body --> [God breathes into it the Breath/Spirit of Life] --> Adam, a living soul, a living person with breath.


Simplified, we have:


body + breath/spirit = soul


Now we've got a soul, which by the implied Biblical definition, is the living, breathing person, not some ineffable, ethereal thing. Also implied, is that you do not HAVE a soul, but you ARE a soul. This is widely misunderstood.


Still with me? I tell you, it's hard to make people understand this! It's a mindset, a stronghold, but we need to understand it in the way God sets it out, not the way the world does. I believe the rest of the Bible uses this understanding of "soul" consistently, and this understanding makes some passages of the Bible plain, which otherwise are confusing.


To deepen your understanding, let's reverse the process. When you die, you stop breathing. Now, a lot of things happen at and after death, but the Biblical view equates life with having breath, so I'm going to stick with that. We have lots of indicators of death these days, such as the heart stopping, lack of pulse, lack of brain activity, but ultimately decomposition, the returning to dust, is the final marker. Lack of breathing meets Biblical criteria, and points to death.


Made simple: soul - breath = body.


Expanded a bit, we get:


living person (soul) - life (breath) = dead/lifeless body.


It's just the making of Adam in reverse, and what do we end up with? One thing implied by the proper Biblical understanding of body, spirit, and soul may surprise you.


The Breath/Spirit returns to God, who gave it. It belongs to Him, and since it is most certainly one of the seven Spirits of God, it is part of Him. That being so, it doesn't go to Hell if it's part of God, does it? To say so is close to blasphemy, in my opinion.


The body begins to decay, and one way or the other, returns to the ground, which gave it. That being so, it doesn't go to "Hell," except in the sense of being in the grave - there's no point in sending lifeless bodies to an eternity in Hell, is there? The idea seems absurd to me.


Oops! What happened to the soul? Gone, gone! It no longer exists, just as the living person no longer exists. It doesn't return to anything - it's just like a chemical molecule when it is broken up into its component atoms. Poof! Consider a water molecule undergoing electrolysis - the hydrogen bubbles off the cathode, and oxygen bubbles off the anode. Asking where the soul went is as pointless as asking where the water went. For the Soul to be sent to Hell, it must be remade by putting Breath/Spirit back into a body - but then you’ve got that part of God in Hell again, absurd and blasphemous. I suspect that those who preach and teach Hell have not thought the matter through to the end.


So there you are - neither Spirit, Body, or Soul can be sent to Hell. For those who insist that God can resurrect people and send them to Hell, I can only reply on two levels. First, advocates of Eternal Torment have misunderstood the character of a loving God. The God of the Bible is a God of the living, not the dead. At some point, as written in the Revelation, both Death and Hell (the Grave, actually) are cast into the Lake of Fire (Revelation 20:14). Further, we are told that Death is the last enemy to be destroyed (I Corinthians 15:26). Two verses later, we are told that God will become All in all.


This leads us to two questions:


How can anyone be dead and/or in Hell after Death has been destroyed?


If anyone is still dead and/or in Hell, how can God become All in all?


The only conclusion this writer can come to is in the taunt of I Corinthians 15:54-55: “Death is swallow up in victory. O death, where is thy sting? O grave, where is thy victory?”


It’s really that simple. Note that I am not saying people will escape responsibility for their evil works, or be punished for them. I am saying that a loving God punishes for a purpose, and for a time, not for torment’s sake and not for eternity. Keep in mind the principle of the Law of the Jubilee, which states that at a set time, all debts are cancelled, and everyone in bondage goes home free to their lands and homes. God instituted the Jubilee for an ancient society, but it points to a future where everyone will have their sins forgiven, and they will go free of bondage and the debt of sin to enjoy their inheritance, as co-heirs with Jesus the Christ. This will certainly involve the New Earth, and possibly the New Heavens as well.


Secondly, Hell, as most people think of it, is a concept but not a reality. Let me explain. For the first few centuries AD, the doctrine of universal salvation was orthodox, especially in the eastern churches. However, with many pagans coming into the body of believers, pagan mindsets and ideas came in as baggage with them. Former ideas and concepts were hard to get rid of, and began to color Christian theology and Biblical understanding. Little by little, Sheol became thought of more and more as being like Hel, Hades or Infernum. The Greek concept of the Immortality of the Soul, began to replace the Biblical concept of death and resurrection. Immortality of the soul also made eternal life in a place of fire possible in the minds of men. Oddly, lots of Christians today subscribe to both the idea of the Immortal Soul, and death and resurrection at the same time. Most never see the contradiction. In time, these concepts also affected Bible translations, so that we see words translated as “Hell” which mean no such thing. There are good translations which do not contain the word at all. I have found that, in the centuries since the concept of Hell entered Christianity, that all the literature on the subject has been theological (I prefer “theo-illogical”) speculation or fiction. Yes, fiction, from the epic poetry of Dante and Milton, to the prose of Mary K. Baxter and many, many movies and “Ewetoob” videos.




Here's how reconciliation goes:


dirt --> [God makes it into] --> a body


body --> [God gives it a bit of His Spirit/Breath] --> a soul


soul --> [God gives it more Spirit (the Earnest)] --> a justified soul


justified soul --> [God gives it the fullness of the Seven Spirits after death & resurrection] --> a Glorified Soul


Job done, rest and eternity ensue.
 
Upvote 0

Der Alte

This is me about 1 yr. old.
Supporter
Aug 21, 2003
28,576
6,063
EST
✟992,249.00
Country
United States
Faith
Baptist
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Others
You brought a Merriam-Webster to an Oxford English Dictionary fight? Really??
You brought OED to a discussion by primarily by Americans in a primarily American forum? There are many differences between British and American English.
Just because most people would not know terms from obscure, semi-ancient, north European languages does not mean that I am wrong. How many average folks even know what the Talmud is? Tell me. On the other hand, you give a lot of credence to the opinions of first-century Jews, none of whom can speak up for their beliefs or answer questions.
As you said most people would not know "terms from obscure, semi-ancient, north European languages" therefore those terms are irrelevant to those "most people." Those "most people" would only know the common current meaning of e.g. "hell."
....This made me laugh! Most of those in the "Hell, no!" camp blindly accept anything that says this or that Christian doctrine comes from pagan religions. And I might add with no, zero, none, credible, verifiable, historical evidence. Pagan myths from Egypt, Babylon, Rome, Greece are accepted without question as absolute truth but they adamantly reject the documented history of the Jewish people. I accept the Jewish Encyclopedia and Talmud for what they are, the only valid history of Jewish faith and practice.

You continue to belittle me, and call my posts [Nonsense!], baloney, balderdash, and suchlike. Why not engage me in a reasoned discussion? Is name-calling the best you've got? So far, it seems so.
I have not belittled you, personally, in any way. That is a violation of forum rules. I have always addressed your arguments and evidence, if any, you have posted.
......I find it hilarious you complaining that I called your accusations "nonsense" after you had just attacked Christianity saying it "combines pagan influences, altered theology, altered translation, altered teaching, and altered belief." If me calling those false accusations nonsense is name calling then what you said is equally name calling and you started it. If you can't stand the heat get out of the kitchen.

At the end of the day (or forum thread) I am writing to those with ears to hear. Keep that in mind.
That is exactly my position. I decided more than a decade ago that it is next to impossible to reach hard core heterodox posters, so my primary goal is to reveal the truth and reach those who are undecided thinking about joining or leaving a heterodox group.
 
Upvote 0

Der Alte

This is me about 1 yr. old.
Supporter
Aug 21, 2003
28,576
6,063
EST
✟992,249.00
Country
United States
Faith
Baptist
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Others
I'm ignoring most of this diatribe.
Secondly, Hell, as most people think of it, is a concept but not a reality. Let me explain. For the first few centuries AD, the doctrine of universal salvation was orthodox, especially in the eastern churches.
NO, ZERO, NONE credible, verifiable, historical evidence. This is something that is posted as truth at tentmaker and other "Hell, no!" websites. And accepted without question by those who quote it.
However, with many pagans coming into the body of believers, pagan mindsets and ideas came in as baggage with them. Former ideas and concepts were hard to get rid of, and began to color Christian theology and Biblical understanding. Little by little, Sheol became thought of more and more as being like Hel, Hades or Infernum. The Greek concept of the Immortality of the Soul, began to replace the Biblical concept of death and resurrection. Immortality of the soul also made eternal life in a place of fire possible in the minds of men. Oddly, lots of Christians today subscribe to both the idea of the Immortal Soul, and death and resurrection at the same time. Most never see the contradiction. In time, these concepts also affected Bible translations, so that we see words translated as “Hell” which mean no such thing. There are good translations which do not contain the word at all. I have found that, in the centuries since the concept of Hell entered Christianity, that all the literature on the subject has been theological (I prefer “theo-illogical”) speculation or fiction. Yes, fiction, from the epic poetry of Dante and Milton, to the prose of Mary K. Baxter and many, many movies and “Ewetoob” videos.
Totally ignores the fact that many Jews in Israel before and at the time of Jesus believed in a place of fiery, eternal, unending, everlasting punishment for the wicked and they called that place both sheol and gehinnom. These words were transliterated as hades and Gehenna in the 225 BC LXX. And that is why they are translated as hell in English Bibles NOT Greek or Roman fairy tales! For documented evidence see my [post #61] this thread.
 
Upvote 0

Der Alte

This is me about 1 yr. old.
Supporter
Aug 21, 2003
28,576
6,063
EST
✟992,249.00
Country
United States
Faith
Baptist
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Others
Pretty much the responses I could have predicted...
Good! Exactly the usual nonresponsive heterodox reply I would expect, can't deal with the evidence so "Neener, neener, neener I'm right and you're wrong! Am too! Nuh huh."
 
Upvote 0
This site stays free and accessible to all because of donations from people like you.
Consider making a one-time or monthly donation. We appreciate your support!
- Dan Doughty and Team Christian Forums

Lazarus Short

Well-Known Member
Apr 6, 2016
2,934
3,009
74
Independence, Missouri, USA
✟294,142.00
Faith
Non-Denom
Marital Status
Married
Oh well, that game works both ways. In previous posts, maybe on another thread, you demanded more scholarship from me, but when I referred to the very authoritative OED, you complained that it was not American enough. No matter what I say or demonstrate, you will find fault with it. There is no satisfying you, and you will not discuss what I say in any intelligent way, saying over and over, "NO, ZERO, NONE credible, verifiable, historical evidence." I happen to know that in matters of theology, history, linguistics, and scholarship, there is never zero evidence. In my book, I freely admit when a section of Biblical text falls to the favor of the damnationists or the annihilationists - but then I am honest. You are just sandbagging me.

It is you, Der Alter who cannot deal with the evidence, as evidenced by your repeated mantra: NO, ZERO, NONE credible, verifiable, historical evidence. I suppose I will be waiting a long time for an intelligent answer to my reasoned (and non-historical) thesis on the utter impossibility of sending anyone to Hell, based on the way God made us.
 
Upvote 0

Der Alte

This is me about 1 yr. old.
Supporter
Aug 21, 2003
28,576
6,063
EST
✟992,249.00
Country
United States
Faith
Baptist
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Others
Oh well, that game works both ways. In previous posts, maybe on another thread, you demanded more scholarship from me, but when I referred to the very authoritative OED, you complained that it was not American enough. No matter what I say or demonstrate, you will find fault with it. There is no satisfying you, and you will not discuss what I say in any intelligent way, saying over and over, "NO, ZERO, NONE credible, verifiable, historical evidence."
And you don't criticize everything I post? Let's get real here. You criticize what I post just as vigorously as I do yours. Remember posting this to me"pagan influences, altered theology, altered translation, altered teaching, and ...altered belief about hell?" As I said if you can't stand the heat, get out of the kitchen.
I happen to know that in matters of theology, history, linguistics, and scholarship, there is never zero evidence. In my book, I freely admit when a section of Biblical text falls to the favor of the damnationists or the annihilationists - but then I am honest. You are just sandbagging me.
Do you know what constitutes credible, verifiable, historical evidence? If you have any of that, bring it and I will give it a fair review. Has your book been peer reviewed by Biblical scholars with graduate level knowledge of Hebrew and Greek?
It is you, Der Alter who cannot deal with the evidence, as evidenced by your repeated mantra: NO, ZERO, NONE credible, verifiable, historical evidence. I suppose I will be waiting a long time for an intelligent answer to my reasoned (and non-historical) thesis on the utter impossibility of sending anyone to Hell, based on the way God made us.
Has your "reasoned (and non-historical) thesis on the utter impossibility of sending anyone to Hell" been peer reviewed by Biblical scholars with graduate level knowledge of Hebrew and Greek?
 
Upvote 0

Lazarus Short

Well-Known Member
Apr 6, 2016
2,934
3,009
74
Independence, Missouri, USA
✟294,142.00
Faith
Non-Denom
Marital Status
Married
No, it has not, and once again you sidestep reasoned discussion, throwing up yet another hurdle: peer review. You and I both know peer review only reinforces orthodoxy. You and I both know that "Biblical scholars with graduate level knowledge of Hebrew and Greek," know only what they have been taught - I just happen to see them as limited as well as enlightened. My peers are over at the Tent, where I am well respected. Were Luther's 95 Theses peer reviewed? No. The Bible we both read was not peer reviewed. I read it, derive concepts and take them to logical conclusions. If you have a problem with that, find another hurdle for me - I'm sure you have a limitless supply to keep you from thinking about what I say.
 
Upvote 0

Der Alte

This is me about 1 yr. old.
Supporter
Aug 21, 2003
28,576
6,063
EST
✟992,249.00
Country
United States
Faith
Baptist
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Others
No, it has not, and once again you sidestep reasoned discussion, throwing up yet another hurdle: peer review. You and I both know peer review only reinforces orthodoxy. You and I both know that "Biblical scholars with graduate level knowledge of Hebrew and Greek," know only what they have been taught - I just happen to see them as limited as well as enlightened.
Just for your information most English language Bibles, the translation was peer reviewed. I happened to have studied under one of the NIV translators. He talked about how the translation committees discussed and disagreed with many translations. No translator translated anything without it being reviewed by other scholars. Peer review prevents rubbish from being published by reputable publishers.
.....Just because something is in a book does not make it true. Anybody with enough money can publish a book about any subject, at certain publishers, even if they have zero knowledge of the subject. A good example is "Our Fossilized Customs" by Lew White. I had a discussion with White on another forum a few years ago, and pointed out lies in his book. It is in its 15th printing and the lies are still there. One such lie is White claims that the transliteration Jesus of Yeshua was supposedly chosen to honor the Greek deity Zeus.

My peers are over at the Tent, where I am well respected. Were Luther's 95 Theses peer reviewed? No. The Bible we both read was not peer reviewed. I read it, derive concepts and take them to logical conclusions. If you have a problem with that, find another hurdle for me - I'm sure you have a limitless supply to keep you from thinking about what I say.
I do think about what you say, that is why I am able to refute almost everything. Luther's 95 theses were a polemic against practices of the Catholic church, they were not posted as a book to present "truth" about the Bible to multitudes. As I said above the English Bible you are reading was almost certainly peer reviewed. And just so you know the Bible was reviewed by its author, God. Books written about the Bible, unless they are peer reviewed, only present the opinions of one person. And probably in your case by a writer who could not locate a Hebrew verb or parse a Greek verb if your life depended on it.
 
Upvote 0
This site stays free and accessible to all because of donations from people like you.
Consider making a one-time or monthly donation. We appreciate your support!
- Dan Doughty and Team Christian Forums

Lazarus Short

Well-Known Member
Apr 6, 2016
2,934
3,009
74
Independence, Missouri, USA
✟294,142.00
Faith
Non-Denom
Marital Status
Married
And probably in your case by a writer who could not locate a Hebrew verb or parse a Greek verb if your life depended on it.

You deny any wrongdoing, but you continue to put me down, even though you know little about me. I do pick up your elitist attitude, however. I am a layman writing for laymen, and I have used just enough tools to cast serious doubt on just one rather wobbly doctrine. It was not difficult as an intellectual exercise, as Hell is an unworthy opponent.
 
Upvote 0