simonpeter Posted July 22, 2005 Share Posted July 22, 2005 Uh, this verse isn’t a metaphor. Your interpretation isn’t even similar, i.e., it’s your gibberish mumbo jumbo! Uh, where is the similarity between what you said and this: “have their part in the lake which burneth with fire and brimstone” or here: 5:22 But I say unto you, That whosoever is angry with his brother without a cause shall be in danger of the judgment: and whosoever shall say to his brother, Raca, shall be in danger of the council: but whosoever shall say, Thou fool, shall be in danger of hell fire. Simple rhetorical question: Is it possible when Jesus spoke the translation from his Aramaic "Sheol" (land of the dead; i.e., a lifeless holding tank) became the Greek "Hades" and then to the English "hell?" Jesus is addressing a group who obviously believed in Hades -- a river or lake of fire owned and operated by the Greek nasty god Hades. This has been addressed before. I would surmise Jesus could debate the Shoel and Hades issue all day with them or simply use their beliefs to inform them their is a price to be paid for evil behavior. This is where many come up with the concept of mankind creating their own hell on earth. What is the metaphor for “furnace of fire” and “wailing and gnashing of teeth”? Wailing ... again could be a reference to being with people who are godless and mean. Whether here on earth or in the mystical Hades. That's enough. And why did you skirt the Old Testament laws? How does this fit with the character of Jesus?/quote] Sorry John. I don't remember your question about O.T. laws. Let me say this: Most of the arguments Jesus was involved in concerned the Talmud. However, he did address some law. I though his corrections were quite good. One popular phrases found is, "And the Lord said to Moses ..." There is a large body of O.T. scholars who believe that it didn't quite happen that way. Most suspect the writers added this phrase to substantiate these laws. Obviously, many of these laws do not fit the character of Jesus. I don't believe Jesus approved of stoning a man who carries wood on the Sabbath. He definately didn't concur in stoning a woman caught in adultery. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
simonpeter Posted July 22, 2005 Share Posted July 22, 2005 Wow! 16 pages and 7(?) different topics in one thread! I have thoughts on some of the tangents, but I have about 40 seconds and want to address the original question... Does it matter WHO created hell? Let's say a judge finds a person guilty and SENTENCES them to soak in an acid bath made by some commercial manufacturer for doing engine overhauls. It is IRRELIVANT who made the device-- the important part is that someone decided to punish another using that device. Who cares who made hell (although it was God if they both actually existed), the evil part is that God would actually send people there. (Okay, that took longer than I hoped) <{POST_SNAPBACK}> Thanks for hitting the issue head on. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
simonpeter Posted July 22, 2005 Share Posted July 22, 2005 Now I know you're pulling a funny cause witches have nothing to do with mysticism. Of course, a mystic is a person who believe they have intimate knowledge of God (usually through visions). <{POST_SNAPBACK}> so witches don't have intimate knowledge of god. hmmm? <{POST_SNAPBACK}> Don't know all of them. My first wife didn't. Let me change saying I have already used. "Only the witches know there are none." Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
John Posted July 22, 2005 Share Posted July 22, 2005 Simple rhetorical question: Is it possible when Jesus spoke the translation from his Aramaic "Sheol" (land of the dead; i.e., a lifeless holding tank) became the Greek "Hades" and then to the English "hell?" Jesus is addressing a group who obviously believed in Hades -- a river or lake of fire owned and operated by the Greek nasty god Hades. This has been addressed before. I would surmise Jesus could debate the Shoel and Hades issue all day with them or simply use their beliefs to inform them their is a price to be paid for evil behavior. This is where many come up with the concept of mankind creating their own hell on earth. You are definitely making everything more discombobulating. Ok, here is a good read: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sheol Where in scripture does it say Hell is only temporary, and there is no torture? Here is another verse: 25:41 Then shall he say also unto them on the left hand, Depart from me, ye cursed, into everlasting fire, prepared for the devil and his angels: Why does it say everlasting? Wailing ... again could be a reference to being with people who are godless and mean. Whether here on earth or in the mystical Hades. That's enough. Gnashing teeth . . . Most suspect the writers added this phrase to substantiate these laws. I thought His word was preserved? Obviously, many of these laws do not fit the character of Jesus. I don't believe Jesus approved of stoning a man who carries wood on the Sabbath. He definately didn't concur in stoning a woman caught in adultery. Then who did? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
simonpeter Posted July 23, 2005 Share Posted July 23, 2005 You are definitely making everything more discombobulating. Ok, here is a good read:http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sheol J Where in scripture does it say Hell is only temporary, and there is no torture? Here is another verse: 25:41 Then shall he say also unto them on the left hand, Depart from me, ye cursed, into everlasting fire, prepared for the devil and his angels: Why does it say everlasting? Gnashing teeth . . . I thought His word was preserved? Then who did? <{POST_SNAPBACK}> John ... you're not keeping up with the responses and you're asking questions that have already been addressed. You're twisting my words and taking out of context. One last time: Sheol is a Jewish concept. Bible doesn't explain it. Jewish belief (not biblical) and not endorsed by all Jews but some believe it is only temporary; that, you could earn your way out into the kingdom of God. I never said hell is temporary. It is not known who or when many of the old Testament books were written. Many Jewish scholars, far more smarter and learned than me, believe many of the texts were tamper with by other scholars. Word is preserved. Not what is written down. Almost forgot. Thanks for the site on Sheol. It explains it as I described. However, it fails to mention that some Jews, the Pharisees, for example, believed they would either avoid Sheol or could earn credits (somehow, no one sure) and enter the Kingdom of God. "What must I do to enter the Kingdom of God ..." was one of the questions asked of Jesus. No doubt this guy wanted to avoid the void. John ... I'm not trying to change your mind. Just giving other theories. If you take comfort in believing in Hell, then do so. If you believe in Hell, I suggest you do what you can to avoid it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Checkmate Posted July 23, 2005 Share Posted July 23, 2005 Simon, have your debate here in this forum. [My apologies if this has already been mentioned, but I'm waaaayyyy too lazy to plough through all the responses and rabbit trails in this thread.] The original question was, "Did God create hell?" Bible answer: Matthew 25:41-- "Then He will also say to those on the left hand, 'Depart from Me, you cursed, into the everlasting fire prepared for the devil and his angels To my simple mind this tells us that "GOD DID CREATE HELL". (Fictional bullshit that it is.) So...what's to debate? And what's with all the "what if God DIDN'T" postulations? "God" IS guilty of creating sinful man, and damning us to a hell of his creation. BTW, What a loving god you Xians have there. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dogmatically_challenged Posted July 23, 2005 Share Posted July 23, 2005 [My apologies if this has already been mentioned, but I'm waaaayyyy too lazy to plough through all the responses and rabbit trails in this thread.] The original question was, "Did God create hell?" Bible answer: Matthew 25:41-- "Then He will also say to those on the left hand, 'Depart from Me, you cursed, into the everlasting fire prepared for the devil and his angels To my simple mind this tells us that "GOD DID CREATE HELL". (Fictional bullshit that it is.) So...what's to debate? And what's with all the "what if God DIDN'T" postulations? "God" IS guilty of creating sinful man, and damning us to a hell of his creation. BTW, What a loving god you Xians have there. <{POST_SNAPBACK}> cognitive dissonance NOUN: Psychology 1. A condition of conflict or anxiety resulting from inconsistency between one's beliefs and one's actions, such as opposing the slaughter of animals and eating meat. 2 A condition of conflict or anxiety resulting from inconsistency between an xer's beliefs and what scripture says. Adding to or subtacting from scripture and 'what if's' is also very common in the xer who suffers this condition. See also: Theologians disease. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
simonpeter Posted July 23, 2005 Share Posted July 23, 2005 cognitive dissonance NOUN: Psychology 1. A condition of conflict or anxiety resulting from inconsistency between one's beliefs and one's actions, such as opposing the slaughter of animals and eating meat. 2 A condition of conflict or anxiety resulting from inconsistency between an xer's beliefs and what scripture says. Adding to or subtacting from scripture and 'what if's' is also very common in the xer who suffers this condition. See also: Theologians disease. <{POST_SNAPBACK}> We have come full circle. It is obvious by some of the responses hell can produce a very heated discussion. I thank each and every one of you for your participation. And now, allow me to recite a few words of a song that has become a prayer: "May the bird of paradise fly up your nose, May an elephant caress you with his toes . . . " Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dogmatically_challenged Posted July 23, 2005 Share Posted July 23, 2005 "May the bird of paradise fly up your nose, May an elephant caress you with his toes . OMG! I LOVE THAT SONG! Have a good weekend simon! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
John Posted July 23, 2005 Share Posted July 23, 2005 John ... you're not keeping up with the responses and you're asking questions that have already been addressed. You're twisting my words and taking out of context.One last time: Sheol is a Jewish concept. Bible doesn't explain it. Jewish belief (not biblical) and not endorsed by all Jews but some believe it is only temporary; that, you could earn your way out into the kingdom of God. Ok, I understand now, i.e., ideas can start out with a simple meaning such as “grave”, and can change into another construct that is a place of endless torture. Here is a website, which explains the problem: http://www.godstruthfortoday.org/Library/priddy/ibi_4_2.htm The religious and secular man's nightmarish ideas of HELL (that is, of a Christ-managed hothouse where sinners get burned forever) come to them compliments of ... careless translating ... the practice of ignoring separate Greek words. In 2 Pet. 2:4, God chose the Greek word "Tartaroo" (????????; English transliteration, "Tartarus") to identify the temporary abode of sinning angels. Tartarus holds spirit beings, not humans. and there is not a flame on the premises. The KJV and NIV translators (neither of whose versions have any influence in the expression of Eastern Orthodox doctrine) gave this specific Greek word the English equivalent, "hell". In Matthew 5:22 (and in several other places), God chose a different Greek word, "Geenna," (English transliteration: "Gehenna") to name a valley on the southwest corner of Jerusalem where the corpses of criminals will be disposed of during the thousand-year kingdom. There are flames here, yes, but the flames cremate the dead (Is. 66:24), they don't torture the living. Most of humanity is not even alive to see Gehenna (Rev. 20:5), let alone be tormented there. The KJV and NIV translators gave this specific Greek word the English equivalent, "hell". In Luke 16:23 (and in other places), God chose the Greek word, "hades", to describe the state of invisibility; in Greek, the word means "unseen". God uses this word often to describe a person's nonexistence in death: unless spoken of figuratively, a dead person doesn't see anything, hear anything, feel anything, know anything, do anything: hades. Flames, screams, pointy tails and pitchforks are conspicuously absent. All the dead "go" here, not just the wicked. The KJV and NIV translators gave this specific Greek word the English equivalent, "hell". I never said hell is temporary. Annihilationism . . . It is not known who or when many of the old Testament books were written. Many Jewish scholars, far more smarter and learned than me, believe many of the texts were tamper with by other scholars. Word is preserved. Not what is written down. 3:16 All scripture is given by inspiration of God, and is profitable for doctrine, for reproof, for correction, for instruction in righteousness: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Checkmate Posted July 23, 2005 Share Posted July 23, 2005 3:16 All scripture is given by inspiration of God, and is profitable for doctrine, for reproof, for correction, for instruction in righteousness: Ah yes. But WHAT SCRIPTURE? Was Paul including the New Testament (as some Xians claim)? How COULD he include his OWN WRITINGS, when they had NOT YET been assembled, NOR considered canonical? (Esp. NOT by Paul himself. I wouldn't think Paul capable of such arrogance as to consider his words "scripture".) I submit to you that "Paul" was writing of the Hebrew scriptures. Most PROBABLY the LXX (Septuagint). The Greek translation that Xians today reject. So...what does that do to your reliance upon 2 Tim 3:16? Since it appears that the New Testament does NOT qualify as "inspired" by god? (At least NOT by the mighty apostle.) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ouroboros Posted July 23, 2005 Share Posted July 23, 2005 Ah yes. But WHAT SCRIPTURE? Was Paul including the New Testament (as some Xians claim)? How COULD he include his OWN WRITINGS, when they had NOT YET been assembled, NOR considered canonical? (Esp. NOT by Paul himself. I wouldn't think Paul capable of such arrogance as to consider his words "scripture".) I submit to you that "Paul" was writing of the Hebrew scriptures. Most PROBABLY the LXX (Septuagint). The Greek translation that Xians today reject. So...what does that do to your reliance upon 2 Tim 3:16? Since it appears that the New Testament does NOT qualify as "inspired" by god? (At least NOT by the mighty apostle.) Hehehe! That's a very good one. Let's do some logic here: - Paul say "All scripture is given by inspiration of God" - Since Pauls writings hasn't been canonised to scripture yet, or any other NT writing, he was obviously referring to OT only - Then the saying by Paul "All scripture is given by inspiration of God" is not necessarely inspired by God, since Pauls writings is not included. So who told us that Paul's writings are inspired by God and should be considered good? The answer is a bunch of bishops in 350 CE, through majority voting. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts