• Starting today August 7th, 2024, in order to post in the Married Couples, Courting Couples, or Singles forums, you will not be allowed to post if you have your Marital status designated as private. Announcements will be made in the respective forums as well but please note that if yours is currently listed as Private, you will need to submit a ticket in the Support Area to have yours changed.

Why can't God send us all to Heaven?

Der Alte

This is me about 1 yr. old. when FDR was president
Site Supporter
Aug 21, 2003
29,117
6,148
EST
✟1,123,613.00
Country
United States
Gender
Male
Faith
Baptist
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Others
Nonsequitur! I don't have to believe anything else because I accept what Jewish scholars say about their beliefs according to scripture. "The four different Jewish levels of interpreting Torah known as Parde" are NOT part of scripture so they are irrelevant. The belief in hell as a place of eternal punishment of the wicked is based on what is written in scripture. Read the article I posted instead of just rejecting it outright!

Just as you have been misinformed on many other things you are misinformed on this as well. This is a logical fallacy, argument from silence! Jesus did NOT teach or do anything which contradicts the prevalent Jewish teaching. Philo used the word "aionian" to mean eternal, unending, everlasting. Here are links to a two part post citing nine (9) Greek language sources which show the meaning of aionian/aion to be eternal, everlasting, unending, etc. including quotes from Philo and other pre-Christian Greek writers.

Nine sources cited: Total of 14 references. 1. NAS Hebrew-Aramaic and Greek Dictionaries, 2. Thayer’s Lexicon, 3. Vine’s Expository of Biblical Words, 3 references, 4. Louw-Nida Greek English Lexicon of the NT based on Semantic Domains, 2 references, 5. Theological Dictionary of the New Testament, 6. Abridged Greek lexicon, Liddell-Scott, 7. Enhanced Strong’s Lexicon, 3 references, 8. Bauer, Arndt, Gingrich, Danker Greek English Lexicon of the NT and other Early Christian Literature, 9. Concise Greek-English Dictionary of the NT.

http://www.christianforums.com/t7505735-17/#post55904003

http://www.christianforums.com/t7505735-18/#post55904050

I am aware of all this but it does not change the fact that both sides of a parable were factual actual, not mysterious metaphors which had to be explained. If you can show me any other parable. For example the parable of the lost sheep. The lord rejoices over one lost sheep (person) being found just as a shepherd rejoices of finding one lost sheep. No supposedly hidden references to Pharisees, or gentiles and Jews.

I am well aware of the meaning of parable. But you seemed to have ignored what you, yourself, posted. That a parable is "A fable or allegorical relation or representation of something real in life or nature, from which a moral is drawn for instruction;" The audience had to understand the first part of a parable. "Something real in life and nature" NOT a hidden reference to the priesthood, Pharisees, Jews vs. gentiles, etc. And the moral is NOT a fable, a legend, some mysterious hidden reference to the Jewish priesthood, etc. and certainly not something which was supposedly a later development in pagan thought, i.e. hades being a place of torment in fire, Luke 16:19-31.

And while you are quoting this at me you are ignoring 16:1 and 17:1 where it clearly identifies Jesus' intended audience was the disciples. As I said, in vs. 14 the Pharisees happened to overhear what Jesus was saying, took offense and started criticizing him. Where does Jesus ever identify Luke 16:19-31 as a parable and explain it to his disciples? Answer: NEVER!

I'm not going to allow you to bully me with your stand over tactics into defending myself, Mr Der Alter.

What bullying? You have posted one dictionary definition, quoted 3-4 verses and virtually ignored everything I posted. I quoted the Jewish Encyclopedia showing what they believed about about hell, centuries before Christianity. If, for example, I want to discuss what Jehovah Witnesses, believe should I read random stuff posted on the internet or read what they themselves say about their beliefs? Here, for example, more historical evidence from Jewish writings, the Talmud, what the two religious schools in Israel at the time of Christ believed about Hell.

You are free to believe what other people say, with no evidence, or believe what the Jews themselves say about their historical beliefs.
Talmud -Tractate Rosh Hashanah Chapter 1.

R. Kruspedai said in the name of R. Johanan: Three books are opened on New Year's Day: one for the utterly wicked, one for the wholly good, and one for the average class of people. The wholly righteous are at once inscribed, and life is decreed for them; the entirely wicked are at once inscribed, and destruction destined for them; the average class are held in the balance from New Year's Day till the Day of Atonement; if they prove themselves worthy they are inscribed for life, if not they are inscribed for destruction. Said R. Abhin: Whence this teaching? From the passage [Psalms, lxix. 29]: "Let them be blotted out of the book of the living, and they shall not be written down with the righteous."

We have learned in a Boraitha: The school of Shammai said: There are three divisions of mankind at the Resurrection: the wholly righteous, the utterly wicked, and the average class. The wholly righteous are at once inscribed, and life is decreed for them; the utterly wicked are at once inscribed, and destined for Gehenna, as we read [Dan. xii. 2]: "And many of them that sleep in the dust shall awake, some to everlasting life, and some to shame and everlasting contempt." The third class, the men between the former two, descend to Gehenna, but they weep and come up again, in accordance with the passage [Zech. xiii. 9]: "And I will bring the third part through the fire, and I will refine them as silver is refined, and will try them as gold is tried; and he shall call on My name, and I will answer him." p. 27 [paragraph continues] Concerning this last class of men Hannah says [I Sam. ii. 6]: "The Lord causeth to die and maketh alive, He bringeth down to the grave and bringeth up again." The school of Hillel says: The Merciful One inclines (the scale of justice) to the side of mercy, and of this third class of men David says [Psalms, cxvi. 1]: "It is lovely to me that the Lord heareth my voice"; in fact, David applies to them the Psalm mentioned down to the words, "Thou hast delivered my soul from death" [ibid. 8].

Transgressors of Jewish birth and also of non-Jewish birth, who sin with their body descend to Gehenna, and are judged there for twelve months; after that time their bodies are destroyed and burnt, and the winds scatter their ashes under the soles of the feet of the righteous, as we read [Mal. iii. 23]: "And ye shall tread down the wicked, for they shall be as ashes under the soles of your feet"; but as for Minim, [followers of Christ] 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." R. Itz'hac b. Abhin says: "Their faces are black like the sides of a caldron"; while Rabha remarked: "Those who are now the handsomest of the people of Me'huzza will yet be called the children of Gehenna."

Tract Rosh Hashana: Chapter I.

Schools of Hillel and Shammai

In the first century BCE, Babylonian born Hillel (later known as Hillel the Elder) migrated to the Land of Israel to study and worked as a woodcutter, eventually becoming the most influential force in Jewish life. Hillel is said to have lived in such great poverty that he was sometimes unable to pay the admission fee to study Torah, and because of him that fee was abolished. He was known for his kindness, gentleness, concern for humanity. One of his most famous sayings, recorded in Pirkei Avot (Ethics of the Fathers, a tractate of the Mishnah), is "If I am not for myself, then who will be for me? And if I am only for myself, then what am I? And if not now, when?" The Hillel organization, a network of Jewish college student organizations, is named for him. Hillel and his descendants established academies of learning and were the leaders of the Jewish community in the Land of Israel for several centuries. The Hillel dynasty ended with the death of Hillel II in 365 CE.

Hillel the Elder’s friendly adversary was Shammai, a native of the Land of Israel about whom little is known except that he was a builder, known for the strictness of his views. He was reputed to be dour, quick-tempered and impatient. Both lived during the reign of King Herod (37-4 BCE), an oppressive period in Jewish history because of the Roman occupation of the Land of Israel. Shammai was concerned that if Jews had too much contact with the Romans, the Jewish community would be weakened, and this attitude was reflected in his strict interpretation of Jewish law. Hillel did not share Shammai's fear and therefore was more liberal in his view of law.

Hillel was the more popular of the two scholars, and he was chosen by the Sanhedrin, the supreme Jewish court, to serve as its president. While Hillel and Shammai themselves did not differ on a great many basic issues of Jewish law, their disciples were often in conflict.

Jewish Virtuallibrary.org
 
Last edited:
Upvote 0

Mikecpking

Senior Member
Aug 29, 2005
2,389
69
60
Telford,Shropshire,England
Visit site
✟25,599.00
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
Politics
UK-Liberal-Democrats
what I'm curious about is how "hades", "Abrahams bosom" and "hell" with it's fire and brimstone and gnashing of teeth, differ from one another in scripture and our understanding of them? You have eplained Hades and abrahams bosom from a scriptural standpoint, but said nothing of hell or how each differs according to scripture, which was my point of interest being that I already studied them.

The truth about 'gnashing of teeth, fire and brimstone etc is what those who are not found in the book of life after the resurrection and judgement will suffer after being thrown into the lake of fire.

Interestingly, 'hell' in the KJV is translated as 'grave' in many places so the idea of a 'hell' for eternal torments was coming into Jewish thought with Persian and Greek philosophy.
 
Upvote 0

Mikecpking

Senior Member
Aug 29, 2005
2,389
69
60
Telford,Shropshire,England
Visit site
✟25,599.00
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
Politics
UK-Liberal-Democrats
If Hades/hell is borrowed from Greek mythology how/why did the ancient Jews, before the time of Christ, believe in it? Note the scripture is highlighted in blue.
Jewish Encyclopedia, GEHENNA


From the Jewish encyclopedia:

The belief in the immortality of the soul came to the Jews from contact with Greek thought and chiefly through the philosophy of Plato, its principal exponent, who was led to it through Orphic and Eleusinian mysteries in which Babylonian and Egyptian views were strangely blended

Read more: JewishEncyclopedia.com - IMMORTALITY OF THE SOUL


Seems to me there was Greek and Persian influence.

At what stage will you reject pagan influences and embrace pure Hebrew scripture rather than relying on the book of Enoch?
 
Upvote 0

Der Alte

This is me about 1 yr. old. when FDR was president
Site Supporter
Aug 21, 2003
29,117
6,148
EST
✟1,123,613.00
Country
United States
Gender
Male
Faith
Baptist
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Others
From the Jewish encyclopedia:

The belief in the immortality of the soul came to the Jews from contact with Greek thought and chiefly through the philosophy of Plato, its principal exponent, who was led to it through Orphic and Eleusinian mysteries in which Babylonian and Egyptian views were strangely blended

Read more: JewishEncyclopedia.com - IMMORTALITY OF THE SOUL


Seems to me there was Greek and Persian influence.

At what stage will you reject pagan influences and embrace pure Hebrew scripture rather than relying on the book of Enoch?

What we got is is a failure to communicate! Two false accusations in one! Where have I ever accepted pagan influences as you accuse? Where have I ever relied on the book of Enoch as you accuse? Answer: NEVER! You are willing to accept the one out-of-context sentence from the JE but you haven't even read the article I posted. In the article there is NO, ZERO, NONE reference to pagan influence. Isaiah 14:9-10 is quoted in one paragraph showing the dead in "hell" afraid that Nebuchadnezzar was coming to rule over them. Was that verse copied from paganism?

If you had read the article you would not keep misrepresenting it! There are at least twenty (20) scripture excluding the references to Enoch, all highlighted in blue. Is that enough pure Hebrew scripture for you? Your uninformed opinion about Enoch is irrelevant. Enoch was cited by the Jewish scholars as historical evidence of the scriptural beliefs, after the last book of the OT was written. The evidence clearly shows that the OT belief in hell did NOT originate in Enoch.

And you, as virtually everyone who argues about this article, misunderstand and misrepresent my point. I quote the Jewish Encyclopedia to show that the belief in Hell was NOT copied from pagan Greek sources by early Christians but was a belief held by the Jews long before Christianity.
 
Upvote 0

Mikecpking

Senior Member
Aug 29, 2005
2,389
69
60
Telford,Shropshire,England
Visit site
✟25,599.00
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
Politics
UK-Liberal-Democrats
What we got is is a failure to communicate! Two false accusations in one! Where have I ever accepted pagan influences as you accuse? Where have I ever relied on the book of Enoch as you accuse? Answer: NEVER! You are willing to accept the one out-of-context sentence from the JE but you haven't even read the article I posted. In the article there is NO, ZERO, NONE reference to pagan influence. Isaiah 14:9-10 is quoted in one paragraph showing the dead in "hell" afraid that Nebuchadnezzar was coming to rule over them. Was that verse copied from paganism?


The word is 'sheol', not Hell and did you notice taht is a Persian king???
If you had read the article you would not keep misrepresenting it! There are at least twenty (20) scripture excluding the references to Enoch, all highlighted in blue. Is that enough pure Hebrew scripture for you? Your uninformed opinion about Enoch is irrelevant. Enoch was cited by the Jewish scholars as historical evidence of the scriptural beliefs, after the last book of the OT was written. The evidence clearly shows that the OT belief in hell did NOT originate in Enoch.

I did not state the view originated from the book of Enoch, but it is interesting to note that book is not canonised in my bible.
And you, as virtually everyone who argues about this article, misunderstand and misrepresent my point. I quote the Jewish Encyclopedia to show that the belief in Hell was NOT copied from pagan Greek sources by early Christians but was a belief held by the Jews long before Christianity.

Sincethe invasion by Greece by Alexander the Great and the Persian (Babylonian exile) was before the time of Christ, its not hard to see how these ideas came along.
I also quote from the same JE, but you ignore the parts when I show that Jewish thought was clearly influenced by pagan Greek and Persian ideas.
 
Upvote 0

Der Alte

This is me about 1 yr. old. when FDR was president
Site Supporter
Aug 21, 2003
29,117
6,148
EST
✟1,123,613.00
Country
United States
Gender
Male
Faith
Baptist
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Others
The word is 'sheol', not Hell and did you notice taht is a Persian king???

Nebuchadnezzar was the king of Babylon, NOT Persia! I am aware what the word is in Hebrew had you bothered to actually read my citation from the Jewish Encyclopedia the Jewish scholars translated it hell! Last paragraph second sentence!

I did not state the view originated from the book of Enoch, but it is interesting to note that book is not canonised in my bible.

You implied that the doctrine originated in Enoch. And you think the fact the Enoch is not canonized in your Bible is relevant how? Did you even read what I said about the Jewish scholars and Enoch?

Sincethe invasion by Greece by Alexander the Great and the Persian (Babylonian exile) was before the time of Christ, its not hard to see how these ideas came along.

What you think is not hard to see is NOT evidence! Please show me any Persian or other extrabiblical influence in the article I quoted? The belief in hell was supported by, at least, 20 OT scripture. Are those scripture the word of God or not? What "Persian" influence exists in any scripture?

also quote from the same JE, but you ignore the parts when I show that Jewish thought was clearly influenced by pagan Greek and Persian ideas.

There may have been some Greek and/or Persian influence on Jewish thought but the article you posted does NOT show any specific influence re: the belief in hell, which I have repeatedly shown and which you have repeatedly ignored. There is NO reference to Persian/Greek influence in the article I posted.
 
Upvote 0

Mikecpking

Senior Member
Aug 29, 2005
2,389
69
60
Telford,Shropshire,England
Visit site
✟25,599.00
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
Politics
UK-Liberal-Democrats
Nebuchadnezzar was the king of Babylon, NOT Persia! I am aware what the word is in Hebrew had you bothered to actually read my citation from the Jewish Encyclopedia the Jewish scholars translated it hell! Last paragraph second sentence!


Babylonia is Persia!

You implied that the doctrine originated in Enoch. And you think the fact the Enoch is not canonized in your Bible is relevant how? Did you even read what I said about the Jewish scholars and Enoch?

Are you a catholic? Then I can understand..

What you think is not hard to see is NOT evidence! Please show me any Persian or other extrabiblical influence in the article I quoted? The belief in hell was supported by, at least, 20 OT scripture. Are those scripture the word of God or not? What "Persian" influence exists in any scripture?

Its not your evidence, its the evidence that belief in the immortality of teh soul, Hell etc came from contact with the Greeks and Persians! There is no influence on scripture from these cultures, except the apochrypha.
There may have been some Greek and/or Persian influence on Jewish thought but the article you posted does NOT show any specific influence re: the belief in hell, which I have repeatedly shown and which you have repeatedly ignored. There is NO reference to Persian/Greek influence in the article I posted.

Only some? Come on! The book of Enoch!

Read the article!

http://www.biblicalstudies.org.uk/pdf/bs/period-2_bruce.pdf
 
Upvote 0

Mikecpking

Senior Member
Aug 29, 2005
2,389
69
60
Telford,Shropshire,England
Visit site
✟25,599.00
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
Politics
UK-Liberal-Democrats
Here is a good article on the origins on the belief in hell coming from contact with Persian thought:

Gehenna - New World Encyclopedia


Hebrew Bible

Gehenna is mentioned in the Tanak in several places, notably Josh. 15: 8, 18: 16; Neh. 11:. 30, 2 Chronicles 28:3; 33:6; 2 Kings; and Jeremiah 7:31, 19:2-6, 32:35.
According to the Hebrew Bible, pagans once sacrificed their children to the idol Moloch in the fires in Gehenna. It is said that priests would bang on their drums (תופים) so that the fathers would not hear the groans of their offspring while they were consumed by fire. The Prophets condemned such horrid practices of child sacrifice toward Moloch, which was an abomination (2 Kings, 23:10), and they predicted the destruction of Jerusalem as a result:
And you shall go out to the Ben-Hinnom Valley which is at the entrance of the Harsith Gate, and you shall call there the words that I will speak to you.And you shall say; Hearken to the word of the Lord, O kings of Judah and inhabitants of Jerusalem; so said the Lord of Hosts, the God of Israel; Behold I am bringing evil upon this place, which whoever hears, his ears will tingle.Because they forsook Me and they estranged this place and burnt incense therein to other gods, which they had not known, they, their forefathers, and the kings of Judah, and they filled this place with the blood of innocent people.And they built the high places of Baal to burn their children with fire as burnt offerings to Baal, which I did not command, neither did I speak nor did it enter My mind.Therefore, behold days are coming, says the Lord, when this place will no longer be called Topheth or Ben-Hinnom Valley, but the Valley of Slaughter." (Book of Jeremiah 19:2-6)
Rabbinic tradition

The rabbinic tradition draws a distinction between Sheol and Gehenna or "Gehinnom." Originally, Judaism described life after death as a bleak underworld named Sheol, which was known as the common pit or grave of humanity. However, with the influence of Persian thought and the passing of time, the notion of "hell" crept into Jewish tradition and became associated with the Biblical word Gehinnom or Gei Hinnom (the valley of Hinnom (Joshua 15:8, 18:16; II Kings 23:10; Jeremiah 7:31; Nehemiah 11:30). This view of hell was allegedly imported into Judaism from Zoroastrianism, and it appears to have supplanted the earlier concept of Sheol (mentioned in Isaiah 38:18, Psalms 6:5 and Job 7:7-10).
Jews who embraced this view of hell included the group known as the Pharisees. The larger, dogmatically conservative Sadducees maintained their belief in Sheol. While it was the Sadducees that represented the Jewish religious majority it was the Pharisees who best weathered Roman occupation, and their belief in Zoroaster's heaven and hell was passed on to both Christianity and Islam (in which heaven is referred to as Jannah).
In subsequent centuries, rabbinic literature expounded on Gehenna as a place (or state) where the wicked are temporarily punished after death. The godly, meanwhile, await Judgment Day in the bosom of Abraham. “Gehenna” is sometimes translated as "hell," but the Christian view of hell differs from the Jewish view of Gehenna. Most sinners are said to suffer in Gehenna no longer than twelve months, but those who commit certain sins are punished forever.[1]

New Testament

Gehenna is often mentioned in the New Testament of the Christian Bible as the place of condemnation of unrepentant sinners. For example, in the Book of Matthew, 23:33, Jesus observes,
"Ye serpents, ye generation of vipers, how can ye escape the damnation of hell?”Jesus used the word gehenna, not hell, and his audience understood gehenna was an allegorical phrase likening the fate of the "generation of vipers" to that of garbage; the Revised Standard Version of the Bible has a footnote after the word hell reading:
w Greek GehennaThe King James Version of the Bible speaks of “hellfire” and of being “cast into hell, into the fire that shall never be quenched." The original Greek scriptures of the New Testament actually used the word gehenna, which tended to become hell in English.
It is said that the garbage dump of Gehenna was full of rotting garbage, which sent up a stench that could be smelled for miles. There are stories of fires that were kept burning via the adding of brimstone (sulfur). Hackett explains, "It became the common lay-stall garbage dump of the city, where the dead bodies of criminals, and the carcasses of animals, and every other kind of filth was cast."
 
Upvote 0

Der Alte

This is me about 1 yr. old. when FDR was president
Site Supporter
Aug 21, 2003
29,117
6,148
EST
✟1,123,613.00
Country
United States
Gender
Male
Faith
Baptist
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Others
Babylonia is Persia!

Could have fooled me. I thought Persia was Turkey and Babylon was Iraq and Iran.
Babylon, (Greek Βαβυλών, from Akkadian: Babili, Babilla) the capital of Babylonia, an ancient empire of Mesopotamia, was a city on the Euphrates River, in what is now southern Iraq. Historically, Babylonia refers to the First Dynasty of Babylon established by Hammurabi and to the Neo-Babylonian Period after the fall of the Assyrian Empire. Babylon became one of the most important cities of the ancient Middle East when Hammurabi (1792-1750 BC) made it the capital of his kingdom of Babylonia.

Archaeological Sites

By 554 BC, Cyrus had conquered all of Persia and defeated the Medes for control of the region. He soon conquered Lydia in Asia Minor, Babylon in 539 BC and, by the time he died in 529 BC, he had conquered a vast territory—in fact, he probably was the greatest conqueror in human history.

As one aspect of the religious eclecticism of Zoroastrianism and Cyrus's intentions, the conquest of Babylon led to the immediate freeing of the Hebrews who had been exiled in Babylon by Nebuchadnezzar.

The Persians
Are you a catholic? Then I can understand..

Irrelevant, deal with the topic and leave personality out of it.

Its not your evidence, its the evidence that belief in the immortality of teh soul, Hell etc came from contact with the Greeks and Persians! There is no influence on scripture from these cultures, except the apochrypha.

You insist that I read what you post when you will not read what I have posted. In the article I posted I counted at least twenty scripture, excluding Enoch.

Only some? Come on! The book of Enoch!

Read the article!

http://www.biblicalstudies.org.uk/pdf/bs/period-2_bruce.pdf

Lets read what your link says about Enoch?
much of the eschatological imagery in the so-called book of Enoch, can without difficulty be traced back to Persian conceptions.​
"much eschatological imagery" That's it all of it.
 
Upvote 0

Der Alte

This is me about 1 yr. old. when FDR was president
Site Supporter
Aug 21, 2003
29,117
6,148
EST
✟1,123,613.00
Country
United States
Gender
Male
Faith
Baptist
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Others
Here is a good article on the origins on the belief in hell coming from contact with Persian thought:

Let me get this straight. You think that a modern secular American encylopedia is more reliable, authoritative, etc. re: Jewish belief about hell than a Jewish Encyclopedia written/edited by 30+ Jewish rabbis and scholars, is that correct?

Gehenna - New World Encyclopedia

Hebrew Bible

Gehenna is mentioned in the Tanak in several places, notably Josh. 15: 8, 18: 16; Neh. 11:. 30, 2 Chronicles 28:3; 33:6; 2 Kings; and Jeremiah 7:31, 19:2-6, 32:35.

So far so good, but. . .

Rabbinic tradition

The rabbinic tradition draws a distinction between Sheol and Gehenna or "Gehinnom." Originally, Judaism described life after death as a bleak underworld named Sheol, which was known as the common pit or grave of humanity.

Not correct according the the Jewish Encyclopedia. Who is more reliable re: Jewish belief and practice, Jewish rabbis/scholars or a modern American encyclopedia?

However, with the influence of Persian thought and the passing of time, the notion of "hell" crept into Jewish tradition and became associated with the Biblical word Gehinnom or Gei Hinnom (the valley of Hinnom (Joshua 15:8, 18:16; II Kings 23:10; Jeremiah 7:31; Nehemiah 11:30). This view of hell was allegedly imported into Judaism from Zoroastrianism, and it appears to have supplanted the earlier concept of Sheol (mentioned in Isaiah 38:18, Psalms 6:5 and Job 7:7-10).

According to this modern American encyclopedia the Hebrew scriptures, Joshua 15:8, 18:16; II Kings 23:10; Jeremiah 7:31; Nehemiah 11:30, etc. were supposedly corrupted by Persian thought.

In subsequent centuries, rabbinic literature expounded on Gehenna as a place (or state) where the wicked are temporarily punished after death. The godly, meanwhile, await Judgment Day in the bosom of Abraham. “Gehenna” is sometimes translated as "hell," but the Christian view of hell differs from the Jewish view of Gehenna. Most sinners are said to suffer in Gehenna no longer than twelve months, but those who commit certain sins are punished forever.[1]

This modern American encyclopedia contradicts the Jewish Encyclopedia and Talmud quoted above. And note, unlike the JE, it does not cite any sources for its assertions.

Jesus used the word gehenna, not hell, and his audience understood gehenna was an allegorical phrase likening the fate of the "generation of vipers" to that of garbage; [ . . . ]
It is said that the garbage dump of Gehenna was full of rotting garbage, which sent up a stench that could be smelled for miles. There are stories of fires that were kept burning via the adding of brimstone (sulfur). Hackett explains, "It became the common lay-stall garbage dump of the city, where the dead bodies of criminals, and the carcasses of animals, and every other kind of filth was cast."

And yet another error in this secular encyclopedia. Other than the one reference in 1200 AD, there is no other reference before or after in Jewish writings and there is no archaeological evidence. If Gehenna was ever a garbage dump there should be broken pottery, bones, tools, utensils, etc. There is none!
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.​
 
Upvote 0
Oct 25, 2010
168
0
✟15,303.00
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Single
I'm a Christian but this has bothered me all my life. If God loves us all and wants us all to go to Heaven and to be saved, and if He is all powerful why did he make Hell? Why did he have to make his son suffer?

Don't get offended by this question. I don't know how else to put it into words. Thanks

Can you imagine a man in love with sin and the world at large being in the courts of heaven with everyone around him worshipping a holy God? I sure can't.
 
Upvote 0
Oct 25, 2010
168
0
✟15,303.00
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Single
The truth about 'gnashing of teeth, fire and brimstone etc is what those who are not found in the book of life after the resurrection and judgement will suffer after being thrown into the lake of fire.

Interestingly, 'hell' in the KJV is translated as 'grave' in many places so the idea of a 'hell' for eternal torments was coming into Jewish thought with Persian and Greek philosophy.

This is largely nonsense. Christ Himself affirms the reality of Gehenna and reveals to us its nature, it has nothing to do with Persian or Greek philosophy. Also, hell translating as grave makes no sense, as hell does not exist in the original Hewbrew/Greek manuscripts, its an advent of the english language and a generic/ambiguous one at best.
 
Upvote 0
Oct 25, 2010
168
0
✟15,303.00
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Single
what I'm curious about is how "hades", "Abrahams bosom" and "hell" with it's fire and brimstone and gnashing of teeth, differ from one another in scripture and our understanding of them? You have eplained Hades and abrahams bosom from a scriptural standpoint, but said nothing of hell or how each differs according to scripture, which was my point of interest being that I already studied them.

If you want to understand the difference, you need to let go of the word "hell". The translations of hell/sheoul/hades/grave have been completely mangled.

Scripture speaks of the "grave" where the body is placed at death, where it is no longer conscious. In hebrew it is "kever", in Greek it is "mneema". In both cases, the words "sheoul" and "hades" are always used in completely separate contexts (in Hewbrew/Greek respectively) and consistently affirms the conscious existence of the dead, meaning life beyond the grave. However, Sheol is much more specific and reveals more unique details in regards to the state of the dead (I can provide the evidence if requested, it is there in the OT). And then we have "gehenna", which is the lake of fire and brimstone, the second death where both "body and soul" is destroyed i.e. given up to eternal torment. This is the only context where you would use the word "hell" I guess, simply an english equivalent of Gehenna (it either does not exist yet or exists and is empty). As a disclaimer, eternal torment in Gehenna is a Biblical certainty, this is not a mere opinion of mine.
 
Upvote 0

razzelflabben

Contributor
Nov 8, 2003
25,818
2,503
64
Ohio
✟129,793.00
Faith
Non-Denom
Marital Status
Married
If you want to understand the difference, you need to let go of the word "hell". The translations of hell/sheoul/hades/grave have been completely mangled.
Personally, I don't care what you call it, you can call it kids tv for all I care. There is in scripture a distinct difference and that is what I am asking you about.
Scripture speaks of the "grave" where the body is placed at death, where it is no longer conscious. In hebrew it is "kever", in Greek it is "mneema". In both cases, the words "sheoul" and "hades" are always used in completely separate contexts (in Hewbrew/Greek respectively) and consistently affirms the conscious existence of the dead, meaning life beyond the grave. However, Sheol is much more specific and reveals more unique details in regards to the state of the dead (I can provide the evidence if requested, it is there in the OT). And then we have "gehenna", which is the lake of fire and brimstone, the second death where both "body and soul" is destroyed i.e. given up to eternal torment. This is the only context where you would use the word "hell" I guess, simply an english equivalent of Gehenna (it either does not exist yet or exists and is empty). As a disclaimer, eternal torment in Gehenna is a Biblical certainty, this is not a mere opinion of mine.
which is what I asked about. I don't really need all the other stuff you provided, though I appreciate the effort, I alluded to the differences when I first mentioned "hell" what I asked however is how "hell" could be without "pain" if there are different "hells" mentioned in scripture and why the difference in discussion if they are all the same. The only response to the question I got was that they are different but some seem to think that the difference. though it exists doesn't exist.

IOW's I'm asking the "hell" is not fire and brinstone and gnashing of teeth crowd, why there are different discriptions of "hell" and why it would describe fire, brinstone and gnashing of teeth if it was nothing more than "the grave".

You make it sound like I don't know there is a difference even though the premise of my question is that there is a difference.
 
Upvote 0
Oct 25, 2010
168
0
✟15,303.00
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Single
Personally, I don't care what you call it, you can call it kids tv for all I care. There is in scripture a distinct difference and that is what I am asking you about.which is what I asked about. I don't really need all the other stuff you provided, though I appreciate the effort, I alluded to the differences when I first mentioned "hell" what I asked however is how "hell" could be without "pain" if there are different "hells" mentioned in scripture and why the difference in discussion if they are all the same. The only response to the question I got was that they are different but some seem to think that the difference. though it exists doesn't exist.

IOW's I'm asking the "hell" is not fire and brinstone and gnashing of teeth crowd, why there are different discriptions of "hell" and why it would describe fire, brinstone and gnashing of teeth if it was nothing more than "the grave".

Jesus Himself answers your question clearly, and I touched on it in my post. It would seem you both ask the question yet don't want it answered? Christ speaks of Gehenna in the NT and tells us quite a bit of what it entails. It is separate and distinct from the "grave", they are not one in the same, not even in any of the original Hebrew/Greek texts. There is always a distinction between the unconscious state of the grave (dead body) and conscious state of the after life (persistence of the soul). There is clear Biblical evidence.

You make it sound like I don't know there is a difference even though the premise of my question is that there is a difference.

You clearly do not know the differences between anything if you are alluding to "different hells", there are no "different" hells in the scriptures, this is my point.

Like I said, you need to let go of the word "hell" because it is an advent of the English language and is applied poorly in the translation of the original texts. The rich man and lazarus is a rabbinical parable meant to convey the ultimate truth of eternity, bliss of the righteous and torment of the wicked/unbeliever. This is not to be taken into account when considering the proper exegesis of the word in question.

There are not several "hells", there is one. This is Gehenna. All "descriptions" of hell apply to Gehenna.
 
Upvote 0
Oct 25, 2010
168
0
✟15,303.00
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Single
You might like this study.

Interesting study, though points I disagree on. From what I got from your study, you advocate a non-literal, existing "hell" and universal reconciliation, correct? Clearly these are both non-Biblical (Revelations 20:15). You also make much use of the word "hell" which is pointless, as it is but a generic/ambiguous term that makes a mess of the meaning of the original texts.

I'd have to also point out you would seemingly be misinformed when you stated "Yeshua never used the word hell or any words like it" despite the fact he did speak of Gehenna several times in the gospels and detailed fairly graphically the state of this place.

I also find it odd that you both acknowledge the error in the NKJ when it comes to these translations, yet you use it as a reference point for your study?

The best way to crack this enigma is to stick with the original texts. Kever/mneema which is "grave" (hebrew/greek respectively) never equate to Sheol/hades in any of the contexts. The OT is clear that Sheol is not the grave, but the conscious state of the dead, it is all over the OT, specifically in Isaiah (Ch.14). And the clinch --> Hades is found 71 times in the Septuagint and is the equivalent for Sheol 64 times, it is unanimous. Gehenna is not the grave nor is it hades/sheol, this is also clear of the original texts. Heck, you can even see the clear distinction between Gehenna/Sheol by reading the NKJ itself.

Grave = unconscious state of the deceased physical body = kever/mneema
Sheol/Hades = conscious state of the soul after death

Then we have eternity which will only follow Judgment, you are either a part of the first resurrection as detailed by John in revelations and will be an heir of the New Jerusalem (new heaven and new earth) or thrown into Gehenna which is the second death --> the "only" hell in scripture.
 
Upvote 0

razzelflabben

Contributor
Nov 8, 2003
25,818
2,503
64
Ohio
✟129,793.00
Faith
Non-Denom
Marital Status
Married
Jesus Himself answers your question clearly, and I touched on it in my post. It would seem you both ask the question yet don't want it answered? Christ speaks of Gehenna in the NT and tells us quite a bit of what it entails. It is separate and distinct from the "grave", they are not one in the same, not even in any of the original Hebrew/Greek texts. There is always a distinction between the unconscious state of the grave (dead body) and conscious state of the after life (persistence of the soul). There is clear Biblical evidence.
exactly the point.
You clearly do not know the differences between anything if you are alluding to "different hells", there are no "different" hells in the scriptures, this is my point.

Like I said, you need to let go of the word "hell" because it is an advent of the English language and is applied poorly in the translation of the original texts. The rich man and lazarus is a rabbinical parable meant to convey the ultimate truth of eternity, bliss of the righteous and torment of the wicked/unbeliever. This is not to be taken into account when considering the proper exegesis of the word in question.

There are not several "hells", there is one. This is Gehenna. All "descriptions" of hell apply to Gehenna.
nice way to miss the point yet again...no matter, you provided the purpose of the question and it has not be refuted since, so I guess that means we're done with it.
 
Upvote 0
Oct 25, 2010
168
0
✟15,303.00
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Single
nice way to miss the point yet again...no matter, you provided the purpose of the question and it has not be refuted since, so I guess that means we're done with it.

LOL
Ok now I get it, my apologies. It wasn't perfectly clear, I had to reread an old post of yours to get the gist of it.
 
Upvote 0