What hell is like.

[MagusAlbertus]

Luk 23:43 And Jesus said unto him, Verily I say unto thee, To day shalt thou be with me in paradise.

Luk 23:43 Kai eiren autw o IehsouV amhn legw soi, shmeron met emon esh en tw paradeisw.

Why is their one more comma in the first than second? and i can only presume that you intended 'today';

Pronunciation: t&-'dA
Function: adverb
1 : on or for this day
2 : at the present time

I believe if you look at number 2 you'll realize that the timeless function of eternity may well be applied to this.

but then i don't speak greak, you seem to, so what's the full definition of the word in greek?

 

[Der Alte]

Why is their one more comma in the first than second? and i can only presume that you intended 'today';

Pronunciation: t&-'dA
Function: adverb
1 : on or for this day
2 : at the present time

I believe if you look at number 2 you'll realize that the timeless function of eternity may well be applied to this.

but then i don't speak greak, you seem to, so what's the full definition of the word in greek?

I quoted from the KJV, which has "To day." The comma after "him", was evidently added for clarity, it does not change the meaning.

"the timeless function of eternity may well be applied to this." The definition of the Greek word is more relevant than the English word.

My point which appears to have been overlooked. All the manuscript evidence supports, Jesus said, "Today you will be with me in paradise." No manuscript evidence supports any other translation. Here is the word translated today.

G4594 shmeron sēmeron say'-mer-on
Neuter (as adverb) of a presumed compound of the article G3588 (“tau” changed to “sigma”) and G2250; on the (that is, this) day (or night current or just passed); genitively now (that is, at present, hitherto): - this (to-) day.​

​

 

[MagusAlbertus]

can you link me to a websight with that der?

 

[Michael Mc]

I already did. A few half baked distortions about Luke 23:43 have been posted but no factual evidence of any kind. As I have posted there is absolutely no manuscript evidence to support a comma except between, thee and today. And yes the Greeks had commas, they invented them.

Perhaps you could provide a scripture other than the one in question for proof of Jesus being in paradise that day with the theif. Which would be 3 days before His ressurection.(Matt. 12:40) And about 43 days before His ascention to Heaven.

Also, you haven't addressed your comments that God used words that have no meaning in the Bible.

First God and Jesus exist outside of time. In God's kingdom terms like first and last, before and after, have no meaning.

God used words and sayings that have no meaning?

 

[MagusAlbertus]

In God's kingdom terms like first and last, before and after, have no meaning.

actually they don't, but they can be understood by them.

Not to say they don't have some meaning to us.

 

[Der Alte]

Perhaps you could provide a scripture other than the one in question for proof of Jesus being in paradise that day with the theif. Which would be 3 days before His ressurection.(Matt. 12:40) And about 43 days before His ascention to Heaven.

I have provided you a scripture. You have not addressed it. There are a few ways you can do this. Quote from authorities on the manuscript evidence, because I know you are not an authority. And a second way would be to review the evidence of the early church. People like Polycarp and Ignatius, who were disciples of John, and Irenaeus, who was a disciple of Polycarp. And just so you are aware, I think I know where you are going with this. I wonder if it is possible for Jesus to have been in Paradise without ascending to the Father?

Also, you haven't addressed your comments that God used words that have no meaning in the Bible.

God used words and sayings that have no meaning?

And once again you are misquoting me and putting words in my mouth. Maybe if you take off your cult glasses and actually read what I say you might be able to think of a way to address my post without deliberately misrepresenting it. Until you do, zip it.

 

[Der Alte]

can you link me to a websight with that der?

I used E-Sword, a free online Bible program, with an add-on from www.dnspad.com, but I think it can be found at these two links.

http://www.blueletterbible.org/

http://bible.crosswalk.com/

 

[Michael Mc]

I have provided you a scripture. You have not addressed it. There are a few ways you can do this. Quote from authorities on the manuscript evidence, because I know you are not an authority. And a second way would be to review the evidence of the early church. People like Polycarp and Ignatius, who were disciples of John, and Irenaeus, who was a disciple of Polycarp. And just so you are aware, I think I know where you are going with this. I wonder if it is possible for Jesus to have been in Paradise without ascending to the Father?

I have addressed your scripture, Luke 23:43, in fact I addressed it before you did. It does not make sense to use the verse in question as further proof for that verse. Do you know what I mean?


Hey, maybe that comma is supposed to be there, and if it is, we should see how it was that Jesus was in paradise that day before His ressurection. Maybe it would shed some more light on other scriptures as we continue to look for truth. I'm not wanting to be badgering you on this, I'm really only asking you a simple question, hoping for more of your thoughts on this Jesus in paradise thing.

I don't like to quote from the 'authorities' (although I could if need be), for I much prefer to let scripture interpret scripture. This is the only way to understand God's word. Otherwise, all I would be doing is appealing to the teaching of men on the word of God. And while it can be helpfull, it is not the best way to a fuller understanding of God's word.

And once again you are misquoting me and putting words in my mouth. Maybe if you take off your cult glasses and actually read what I say you might be able to think of a way to address my post without deliberately misrepresenting it. Until you do, zip it.

Again it is not a misquote, it was a question, a question you seem to be avoiding. Instead of trying to attack my character, try answering to posts with a christ like manner, or even a nice manner. You only disgrace yourself when you respond like this.

 

[Michael Mc]

actually they don't, but they can be understood by them.

Not to say they don't have some meaning to us.

I agree they are most assuredly understood by both God, Jesus and the rest of those who have ears to hear. So then the words of Jesus must of had some meaning when He said that "No man ascendeth up to heaven, except He who descendth from heaven".

Or that Christ is the firstfruit, the first to be raised from the dead.

 

[josyau]

I will confess that I am guilty of posting in haste concerning the famous passage in Luke. I made a statement of fact as if I had done a true investigative/prayerful research on the matter. I truly only have heard of such spoken by different people in regards to the manuscripts. I will retract my statement concerning the "comma" issue until I examine the issue further.

I will readjust my statement for the moment (until my research is concluded) by saying this. IMO I believe the comma was misplaced from where it originally was in the hand-penned version of the scriptures. I believe this not because I have seen physical evidence but because in my perspective (that I know others see as erroneous) the overall witness of scripture concerning death does not agree with the idea of immediately being conscious in heaven, hell, paradise or any other place. I agree that another scripture besides Luke is needed to prove that either Messiah or the thief was in Paradise that day.

I sincerely believe that if one studies/reviews each passage that deals with "death", "die", "dead", "sleep", "Sheol", "Hades", "Gehenna", "Lake of Fire", and "Tartarus" that the overall witness will be that the dead are dead in the grave til the awakening that will occur in the Ressurection either of the just or wicked.

I will now take the time here as well to restate something I said elsewhere to Der Alter. I truly enjoy your post as they are very informative and challenging to my view. They help me in the area of "why" I believe what I believe. By having my views challenged I can begin to see the areas that are weak, not a good point, in need of more research/study/prayer, and others that are fine.

Of course this is not according to your judgment as I am sure that you see my whole view as erroneous and that's fine with me. I again state that I am willing to respond to your post and not ignore you if you can restrain yourself from the demeaning attitude you seem to post with. If you can't because you choose not to then let it be known to all that I will not respond because I choose not to be spoken to in such manners and it has nothing to do with the inability to respond.

I would like to read your post (sometimes I read the ones not directed at me, but even those sometimes I must decide to not bother with due to that attitude). So in summary, I stand corrected on my statement for the moment as I head to research of that issue and I hope I made my stance clear concerning you Der Alter.

 

[AMMON]

Hell is more a state of mind than a physical place, and it is not a good state of mind either.

 

[MagusAlbertus]

I agree they are most assuredly understood by both God, Jesus and the rest of those who have ears to hear. So then the words of Jesus must of had some meaning when He said that "No man ascendeth up to heaven, except He who descendth from heaven".

Or that Christ is the firstfruit, the first to be raised from the dead.

actually that's why we go into the marriage with Christ

 

[Der Alte]

I have addressed your scripture, Luke 23:43, in fact I addressed it before you did. It does not make sense to use the verse in question as further proof for that verse. Do you know what I mean?

No you have not! I have just reread every one of your posts post on this thread you have not addressed Luke 23:43. You have yet to prove anything about the verse. So until you decide to address what I post, this is the only verse you get.

Hey, maybe that comma is supposed to be there, and if it is, we should see how it was that Jesus was in paradise that day before His ressurection. Maybe it would shed some more light on other scriptures as we continue to look for truth. I'm not wanting to be badgering you on this, I'm really only asking you a simple question, hoping for more of your thoughts on this Jesus in paradise thing.

As I said all, as in 100%, of the manuscript evidence shows the comma to be exactly where all the major versions show it. Regardless how much heterodox groups want to rewrite the Bible.

I don't like to quote from the 'authorities' (although I could if need be), for I much prefer to let scripture interpret scripture. This is the only way to understand God's word. Otherwise, all I would be doing is appealing to the teaching of men on the word of God. And while it can be helpfull, it is not the best way to a fuller understanding of God's word.

Unless you read the Biblical languages you are relying on the teaching of men. Just like the comma, unless you can show some kind of evidence. The best way for a fuller understanding is to compare your sects teaching against the teaching of the early church. Only groups with something to hide refuse to do it. I am sure that John taught his disciples correctly but am just as sure that sects which began in the 19th century are wrong unless they align with the early church. I don't care how often they repeat "Let scripture interpet scripture."

Again it is not a misquote, it was a question, a question you seem to be avoiding. Instead of trying to attack my character, try answering to posts with a christ like manner, or even a nice manner. You only disgrace yourself when you respond like this.

It most certainly is a misquote or misrepresentation. Here are your exact words, "Also, you haven't addressed your comments that God used words that have no meaning in the Bible." That is not a question, it is a statement, and a blatantly false one at that. I did not state or imply any such thing. Anyone who would post a bare faced falsehood like this only disgraces himself. If you have a question about something I said quote the exact words and I will give you an explanation in words of 1-2 syllables. Do not push your mental filth off on me.

 

[Der Alte]

I agree they are most assuredly understood by both God, Jesus and the rest of those who have ears to hear. So then the words of Jesus must of had some meaning when He said that "No man ascendeth up to heaven, except He who descendth from heaven".

Or that Christ is the firstfruit, the first to be raised from the dead.

You keep repeating this verse as if it is some kind of magic mantra that proves everything. The word translated "ascendeth" is in the active voice. Which means the subject is the doer of the action. In other words, the verse more correctly reads "No man, (acting on himself or through his own will), has ascended up to heaven except he who, (acting on himself or through his own will), descended from heaven." And I agree with that 100%.

But I know the hererodox groups want to claim they interpret scripture with scripture, when what they are actually doing is ignoring scripture and basing new false doctrines on the twisting of English translations. "Don't want to quote authorities because they're wrong, but our leaders are right." "Koolaid, anyone?"

 

[Der Alte]

Michael, I’m going to give you another chance to respond to this

Again it is not a misquote, it was a question, a question you seem to be avoiding. Instead of trying to attack my character, try answering to posts with a christ like manner, or even a nice manner. You only disgrace yourself when you respond like this.

It most certainly is a misquote or misrepresentation. Here are your exact words, "Also, you haven't addressed your comments that God used words that have no meaning in the Bible." That is not a question, it is a statement, and a blatantly false one at that. I did not state or imply any such thing. Anyone who would post a bare faced falsehood like this only disgraces himself. If you have a question about something I said, quote the exact words and I will give you an explanation in words of 1-2 syllables. Do not push your mental filth off on me.

Here is the post I think you were referring to. Notice I did not say God used words that have no meaning. I said, “First God and Jesus exist outside of time. In God's kingdom terms like first and last, before and after, have no meaning.”

Do you want to discuss this in a truthful manner or not?

Or we could just ignore everything that has been posted, addresses nothing, respond to nothing and throw a few verses and arguments at the board.

First God and Jesus exist outside of time. In God's kingdom terms like first and last, before and after, have no meaning.

About judgement. When was the criminal on the cross judged? Jesus told him that he would be with Him, Jesus, in paradise that day. Jesus had not been resurrected that day. And before you give me the old knee jerk response, heaven and paradise are intechangeable terms in the N.T. See how Paul uses them.

http://www.christianforums.co.uk/showthread.php?p=1796577&postcount=27

 

[Michael Mc]

Here is the post I think you were referring to. Notice I did not say God used words that have no meaning. I said, “First God and Jesus exist outside of time. In God's kingdom terms like first and last, before and after, have no meaning.”

Do you want to discuss this in a truthful manner or not?

I would like to discuss this in a truthful manner. Now here's how I understand your response. I post this:

If this be a literal story, then it presents another problem in relation to the scriptures. How could Lazarus be in Heaven while our Lord was still here on earth?

"Yet now Christ has been roused from among the dead, the firstfruit of those who are reposing." (I Cor. 15:20).

Jesus is the the fristfruit, or first to be roused from the dead. Not even David had been roused, no not anyone:

"NO MAN has ascended up to heaven, but he that came down from heaven."(John 3:13).

How can it be that while our Lord was here on earth that Lazarus and Abraham are both in heaven, when Jesus plainly says that: "...no man has ascended up to heaven..."?

What I was trying to illustrate is this: no one should be in heaven before Our Lord was to get there. Jesus was to be the first, as Paul states in 1 Cor 15:20. It was to this post that you made your statement :

“First God and Jesus exist outside of time. In God's kingdom terms like first and last, before and after, have no meaning.”

I understood this statement to be in relation to my post since you quoted from it. Now if you are telling me that In God's Kingdom the terms first and last have no meaning, then how does that address the statements in the Bible that were written for us in this dispensation of time?

And if I may address your statement more directly then, as you seem to be addressing God's Kingdom, I disagree to it in this context as well. For in God's Kingdom Jesus is head, Kind and ruler, those who are blessed enough to join Him are not above Him in any way. So In God's Kingdom Jesus was the first, making Him our Lord, therefore being first has a meaning even in God's Kingdom.

Come to think of it, I don't know if it possible for words to have no meaning, after all, that is what words are for, to communicate a message, or meaning. Every word must have a meaning otherwise that word would not exist. Just thinking out loud here.

 

[Michael Mc]

Now it also does not make sense that anyone should be enjoying heaven or suffering hell before the day of Judgment. Now I have not heard an orthodox Christian explain this to me so I would enjoy your thoughts on this Der Alter.

Mat 10:15 and Mat 12:41 both indicate a future day of judging as spoken by our Lord. Simply put, why are people in heaven and hell now before the judging?

I am fully aware that God exists outside of time, maybe more so than you are, for if I believed in eternal torment, I would not be using this approach to solidify my arguments. Perhaps we will delve into that a bit later though, one thing at a time.

Looking forward to your thoughts,

Michael

 

[9Harmony]

As a Baha'i, I do not believe heaven and hell are physical places, rather they are conditions. Heaven is nearness to God and Hell is remoteness from Him. So we can in effect be in heaven (or hell) on earth.

Loving Greetings, Harmony

 

[Der Alte]

If this be a literal story, then it presents another problem in relation to the scriptures. How could Lazarus be in Heaven while our Lord was still here on earth?

"Yet now Christ has been roused from among the dead, the firstfruit of those who are reposing." (I Cor. 15:20).

Jesus is the the fristfruit, or first to be roused from the dead. Not even David had been roused, no not anyone:

"NO MAN has ascended up to heaven, but he that came down from heaven."(John 3:13).

How can it be that while our Lord was here on earth that Lazarus and Abraham are both in heaven, when Jesus plainly says that: "...no man has ascended up to heaven..."?

I have already addressed John 3:13. You have chosen to ignore it. The word translated “ascended” is in the active voice, in Greek. That means the subject, i.e. “no man,” acting though his own efforts or will, ascended into heaven. The exception is “He” who, acting though his own efforts or will, first descended into heaven. This verse does not say that no man ever ascended into heaven.

“Jesus is the the fristfruit, or first to be roused from the dead. Not even David had been roused, no not anyone:” Another out-of-context “proof text,” and another, blinders on, follow the leader, misinterpretation of the Bible. Since Jesus raised at least three people from the dead, Lazarus, the widow’s son, and the Synagogue ruler’s daughter, and prophets in the O.T. raised the dead, this verse must have a deeper spiritual meaning. But to understand this would require actually reading the Bible, the entire Bible, and not just a handful of out-of-context, “proof texts,” which you evidently have not done.

Jesus was Jewish and His disciples, including Paul, were Jewish so let’s look at how they understood terms such as “first born” and “first fruits.” Here God is speaking to Moses and says, “Israel is my first born son.” Adam was called God’s son. Israel was not the first born man that God chose. Neither was Israel, the first born son, within his own family. Esau was physically the first born and Jacob, Israel, cheated him out of his blessing.

Exo 4:22 And thou shalt say unto Pharaoh, Thus saith the LORD, Israel is my son, even my firstborn:​

I will address the other points later as I have time. Before we proceed however, I would prefer that you actually read your Bible, instead of throwing isolated out-of-context “proof texts” at me. I have heard them all before and they have all been addressed, somewhere, by someone. If you would get outside your group, whatever that is, you would know that.

 

[Der Alte]

Now it also does not make sense that anyone should be enjoying heaven or suffering hell before the day of Judgment. Now I have not heard an orthodox Christian explain this to me so I would enjoy your thoughts on this Der Alter.

Mat 10:15 and Mat 12:41 both indicate a future day of judging as spoken by our Lord. Simply put, why are people in heaven and hell now before the judging?

I am fully aware that God exists outside of time, maybe more so than you are, for if I believed in eternal torment, I would not be using this approach to solidify my arguments. Perhaps we will delve into that a bit later though, one thing at a time.

Looking forward to your thoughts,

Michael

I think part of the problem is God is infinite, as I said before He exists outside of time. Jesus exists outside of time, "Before Abraham was, I am" And you keep talking about eternity from the limited point of view (POV) of a finite man. Based on Lk 16:22, 23:43, 2 Cor 5:8, Acts 7:59, and others, when people die they cease to exist in the finite but instantly move into the eternal. From our limited, finite POV there are things future and things past but from God's POV what is future for us could have already occurred. God is omnipotent. God is not a man bound by time.