Hades is Sheol

[Butch5]

if sheol is nothing but a grave then what does the bible mean by this?

and I will go the Masoretic text or ylt.




hmm sheol Isnt a grave nor can it be.

or that the depths of sheol as david said.

or this.
proverbs

Sheol and destruction are not satisfied, And the eyes of man are not satisfied.

a grave is never satisified?

I would suggest that Jonah is using hyperbole.

jews don't do that like that. if he wanted to use grave its the word queber not sheol.

jews don't call the graves sheol, but queber. sorry he was in sheol.that is why I don't bother much with gentile commentaries on jewish thought unless they have learned or demonstrated to me and understanding jewish culture. only one has past that test

and that adam Clarke.you are gentile. a gentile wont be told what the Hebrew words mean.im not a jew who practices Judaism. so neither will I. my family doesn't talk to me much on the torah and I will them. telling the gentiles about the torah is considered a no-no unless he wants to convert.if you are Christian then they really don't like to talk.HOWEVER I HAVE gotten some info from my dad and few jews.

Wasn't he in a fish?

 

[jasoncran]

thanks, I forgot about that verse.

for the record I don't believe in neither purgatory as the jew teach, but to say that they thought sheol was a grave ere Christ isn't really biblical.

I do , however, use that concept to show and if I can find it where the sages say the messiah or great rabbi will enter into sheol and take those with him to heaven as he is clothes with righteousness.that is what is recorded in the gospel.

and it dosnt call Samuel a familiar spirit.

 

[jasoncran]

I would suggest that Jonah is using hyperbole.

jews don't do that like that. if he wanted to use grave its the word queber not sheol.

jews don't call the graves sheol, but queber. sorry he was in sheol.that is why I don't bother much with gentile commentaries on jewish thought unless they have learned or demonstrated to me and understanding jewish culture. only one has past that test

and that adam Clarke.you are gentile. a gentile wont be told what the Hebrew words mean.im not a jew who practices Judaism. so neither will I. my family doesn't talk to me much on the torah and I will them. telling the gentiles about the torah is considered a no-no unless he wants to convert.if you are Christian then they really don't like to talk.HOWEVER I HAVE gotten some info from my dad and few jews.

Wasn't he in a fish?

the jewish the concept of sheol is a Hebrew metaphor like any other they use
it means a place of punishment for sins.

thus its not a grave.

the Name of God is a jewish metaphor.that is why I say I only read up from those that do study jewry enough to know that

literally YHWH means the being. yet it has depths to it., its an attempt to describe something ifinite beyond men.It doesn't mean that God doesn't have a name or is to be revered for that name. sheol is as such as well. limited definition to define a much bigger concept.

 

[Doulos Iesou]

Jesus names real people.

Please prove this, Lazarus in this parable is not mentioned anywhere else. It is not the same Lazarus that he raised from the dead.

Jesus names a real place. Hades.

In a way that is described like nowhere else, he described a familiar place. The abode of the dead.

Hades has torment and fire.

Here is a quest for you.. find one other text in ALL the Bible that describes Hades or Sheol as a place of fire and torment... to save you some time.. you won't find ANY.

Please tell us what these things mean.

What is the lesson that Jesus wants us to learn from His teaching.

See here:

Luke 16 is given in the context of several parables.. see Luke 15-16, these are given in the presence of the disciples and the Pharisees. This story is indeed a parable representing the rejection of the unbelieving Jews and the inclusion of the Gentiles.

1. Lazarus was outside the gate.. a picture of the separation for the Gentiles from the Covenant promises.. the commonwealth of Israel.
2. Lazarus longed to be fed from the crumbs that fell from the rich man's table... an allusion to what the Gentile woman said in Matthew 15:27.. "even the dogs eat the crumbs that fall from the masters table..
3. Lazarus was numbered among the dogs, who came and licked his sores, a common reference to Gentiles.
4. Lazarus comes from the name Eliezer which may perhaps be a reference to Abraham's former heir to the inheritance (Genesis 15:2) he was a non-Jew (obviously) from Damascus.
5. It is Lazarus who is brought to be with Abraham, and now the NT teaches us that is those of the faith of Abraham who are the children of Abraham rather than those through physical descent.
6. The Rich man is a Jew.. this is demonstrated by a few things.
a. He was dressed in purple and fine linen denoting a status of royalty, this is an allusion to Exodus 19:6, that Israel is a Royal Priesthood.
b. He was inside the gate, he was no stranger to blessing and comfort, the gate may be in reference to the temple gates.
c. Called Abraham "Father Abraham"
d. A chasm separated them, I believe represents the present hardness and blindness that has befallen unbelieving Israel.. see Romans 11
e. Has 5 brothers.. Judah had 5 full blooded brothers.
f. Was told that his brothers have Moses and the Prophets, only the Jews had Moses and the prophets.
7. Was told that they wouldn't believe even if SOMEONE WERE TO RISE FROM THE DEAD, if they would not hear the prophets. Because they rejected the testimony of God through the OT Scriptures they would not accept Jesus and thus have a veil over their eyes so that they are prevented when reading the Law to come to the Messiah Jesus.

I could go more in depth, but these are just some basic observations that support my thesis and makes it a coherent passage as it would be a unique portrayal of the after-life against contradictory accounts.

Those Pharisee's who thought themselves to be monetarily and spiritually rich, are actually destitute and cut off from the blessings of God, and it is the poor man who rather goes to Abraham.

 

[Butch5]

and moses got the story of job and genesis orally then was told by God to write them down.

Hi Jason,

One cannot make an argument from Scripture for the existence of a spirit in man that lives on after death. One may be able to read that into certain passages, however, the concept cannot be developed from the Scriptures.

12 When the woman saw Samuel, she cried out with a loud voice. And the woman spoke to Saul, saying, "Why have you deceived me? For you are Saul!" 13 And the king said to her, "Do not be afraid. What did you see?" And the woman said to Saul, "I saw a spirit ascending out of the earth." 14 So he said to her, "What is his form?" And she said, "An old man is coming up, and he is covered with a mantle." And Saul perceived that it was Samuel, and he stooped with his face to the ground and bowed down. 15 Now Samuel said to Saul, "Why have you disturbed me by bringing me up?" And Saul answered, "I am deeply distressed; for the Philistines make war against me, and God has departed from me and does not answer me anymore, neither by prophets nor by dreams. Therefore I have called you, that you may reveal to me what I should do." 1 Samuel 28:12 -15

Samuel, like the rich man and Lazarus are clear and direct scriptures that reveal a person speaking and having knowledge after they were dead.


JLB

Hi JBL,

I can address these passages but you will need to have an open mind. What I said was that one cannot make an argument from Scripture of a spirit in man that exists after death. What I mean by that is this. You cannot go to the Scriptures and show where man has been given this spirit or where he has acquired it. If we look at the creation account we see that God made Adam out of the dust of the earth and breathed into him the breath/spirit (same word) of life and Adam became a living soul. From this we can deduce that a living soul consists of a body and God's breath/spirit, and nothing more. We only find two elements in the creation of man, there is no other spirit mentioned. Job said, If God retrieves His spirit/breath all flesh will die.

14 If he set his heart upon man, if he gather unto himself his spirit and his breath;
15 All flesh shall perish together, and man shall turn again unto dust. (Job 34:14-15 KJV)

Notice the result, man again turns to dust. There is no mention of any other spirit here. Then Solomon said,

18 I said in mine heart concerning the estate of the sons of men, that God might manifest them, and that they might see that they themselves are beasts.
19 For that which befalleth the sons of men befalleth beasts; even one thing befalleth them: as the one dieth, so dieth the other; yea, they have all one breath; so that a man hath no preeminence above a beast: for all is vanity.
20 All go unto one place; all are of the dust, and all turn to dust again.
21 Who knoweth the spirit of man that goeth upward, and the spirit of the beast that goeth downward to the earth?
22 Wherefore I perceive that there is nothing better, than that a man should rejoice in his own works; for that is his portion: for who shall bring him to see what shall be after him? (Ecc 3:18-22 KJV)


Notice he said they all have one breath. The Greek has the word spirit. They all, animals and humans, have one spirit and that is God's spirit that we saw in the creation account.

Regarding the passage from 1st Samuel I would look at other translations. The woman says, "I saw a spirit ascending out of the earth." That is not correct, it actually says, I saw gods. If you look in the OT and the NT for that matter you'll see gods as a reference to demons. It's likely that the woman saw a demon that appeared as Samuel. Another thing to consider is this, why would the man of God obey a medium who was not only practicing witch craft but also doing Saul's will who God had abandoned? Regarding Luke 16, that will take more discussion but let me suggest that Jesus was addressing an issue with the Pharisees. This passage comes in the middle of Jesus dealing with the Pharisees. It seems odd that He would stop right in the middle of His rebuke and suddenly give a lesson on the after life and them return to His rebuke of the Pharisees. I would suggest that the rich man symbolizes the leadership of Israel and Lazarus those probably the believing Jews/Gentiles. In this parable Jesus said that Lazarus was in Abraham's bosom and the rich man was far off. According to the parable the rich man can see Lazarus being comforted. Remember what Jesus said?

11 And I say unto you, That many shall come from the east and west, and shall sit down with Abraham, and Isaac, and Jacob, in the kingdom of heaven.
12 But the children of the kingdom shall be cast out into outer darkness: there shall be weeping and gnashing of teeth.
(Mat 8:11-12 KJV)

Isn't this the picture we see in Luke 16? The rich man was a Jew, he was one of the children of the kingdom and yet he is watching from afar. This is just a brief summary, there is more that can be said, but, I hope this at least introduces the idea that Luke 16 can be understood differently than many understand it.

 

[Doulos Iesou]

uhm reconcile this with that idea

out of the belly of the grave, did I cry out.

sheol if it implies death an NO conscience then reconcile Jonah's statement then?

he wasn't dead in the fish at all. yet he says out of sheol I cried.that implies being able to be quite alive.

You have such a tendency to read Scripture literally without recognizing literary genre shifts. Jonah shifts in chapter to recount the story of his deliverance poetically. Note in v.6 he says, "I went down to the foundations of the mountains; the underworld- its bars were around me forever." Did Jonah literally go down to the foundations of the mountains in the belly of the fish? No. Did Jonah literally go down into the underworld? No. Was he surrounded by bars forever? No.

This is all dramatic imagery to point to the certainty of his impending death in the depths of the sea and the belly of the fish, illustrating his hopelessness and utter doom in a hyperbole to then accentuate the magnitude of his praise and adoration of God for his salvation. For God rescuing him from the "pit" which was not Sheol itself, but was the belly of the fish, which seemed to him the abode of the dead as he believed himself as good as dead.

Thus the "belly of Sheol" is actually the belly of fish, which illustrated his belief of certain death in this place, that he was at the core of Sheol.. there was no hope of escape.. yet.. GOD rescued him!

predating Christ.

http://www.myjewishlearning.com/life.../History.shtml

the kaddish is that old. not in its full length but its there.

After 300 BC you'll find all sorts of different views among Jews, but that was after the Selucid Empire invaded and Hellenism began to infiltrate Jewish Culture.

its from the Babylonian Talmud which is old and predates the messiah coming
the Talmud wasn't written until after the temple destruction.

the kaddish is implies the idea of sheol having punishment. why would a jew who was murdered or hated by Christians adopt their idea of death?

good luck with that one.

Let's note a few things.

1. Many of the Jews had capitulated to Hellenistic influences prior to Jesus' arrival on the scene, this lead to a syncretism that then developed into all kinds of Jewish views of the after-life.
2. Scripture is the ultimate guide to truth, not Jewish views that have been poisoned by Greco-Roman Influences.
3. Where is Sheol mentioned in the Kaddish, are you confusing Gehenna with Sheol.. they are NOT the same thing.
4. In the OT both the wicked and righteous went to Sheol, why would God who abhors injustice proscribe the same punishment for the just and unjust?

 

[Doulos Iesou]

understand that oral law is equal to written law.

oral traditions of jewry is found in the bible as well. I can show them

how did paul know the names of the magicians whom withstood the men moses and aaron?
when its not shown in the tanach? or that moses knew of the book of life? or that Martha spoke of the resurrection of the just and unjust? when neither are mentioned in the tanach?

Do you believe the Talmud to be authoritative? That it really is the Oral tradition from Moses and ought to influence our doctrine? If so we have larger and more serious disagreements as the Talmud is not to influence Scripture.

 

[Butch5]

I would suggest that Jonah is using hyperbole.

jews don't do that like that. if he wanted to use grave its the word queber not sheol.

jews don't call the graves sheol, but queber. sorry he was in sheol.that is why I don't bother much with gentile commentaries on jewish thought unless they have learned or demonstrated to me and understanding jewish culture. only one has past that test

and that adam Clarke.you are gentile. a gentile wont be told what the Hebrew words mean.im not a jew who practices Judaism. so neither will I. my family doesn't talk to me much on the torah and I will them. telling the gentiles about the torah is considered a no-no unless he wants to convert.if you are Christian then they really don't like to talk.HOWEVER I HAVE gotten some info from my dad and few jews.

Wasn't he in a fish?

the jewish the concept of sheol is a Hebrew metaphor like any other they use
it means a place of punishment for sins.

thus its not a grave.

the Name of God is a jewish metaphor.that is why I say I only read up from those that do study jewry enough to know that

literally YHWH means the being. yet it has depths to it., its an attempt to describe something ifinite beyond men.It doesn't mean that God doesn't have a name or is to be revered for that name. sheol is as such as well. limited definition to define a much bigger concept.

Wasn't Jonah in a fish?

 

[Doulos Iesou]

the jewish the concept of sheol is a Hebrew metaphor like any other they use
it means a place of punishment for sins.

This is extremely wrong.

Please cite one text in the OT where Sheol is referenced as a place of the punishment of sins. Death is the punishment for sins, and the dead go to sheol, there is no picture in all the OT of people being punished actively in sheol.

the Name of God is a jewish metaphor.that is why I say I only read up from those that do study jewry enough to know that

literally YHWH means the being. yet it has depths to it., its an attempt to describe something ifinite beyond men.It doesn't mean that God doesn't have a name or is to be revered for that name. sheol is as such as well. limited definition to define a much bigger concept.

What do scholarly support do you offer to base such opinions on? I see no expertise in ancient Judaism here, you're claiming something with no basis. Like attempting to build a house with no foundation.. the wind blows... flop! It crashes to the ground without ever really standing up to anything.

 

[Guest]

Here is a quest for you.. find one other text in ALL the Bible that describes Hades or Sheol as a place of fire and torment... to save you some time.. you won't find ANY.

What do you think hell, the lake of fire, worm doesn't die, fire is not quenched, everlasting fire, everlasting punishment, smoke of their torment ascends forever and ever, and they will be tormented day and night forever and ever is referring too? It doesn't matter what you wanna call it. This place exists brother. Mr. Strawman.

 

[Doulos Iesou]

What do you think hell, the lake of fire, worm doesn't die, fire is not quenched, everlasting fire, everlasting punishment, smoke of their torment ascends forever and ever, and they will be tormented day and night forever and ever is referring too? It doesn't matter what you wanna call it. This place exists brother. Mr. Strawman.

Those are referring to Gehenna or the lake of fire, which are the terms employed in the NT to refer to the place of final punishment. You're falsely equating Hades or Sheol to be referring to the same thing.. I debunked such an understanding in my OP which you have still yet to address any of those arguments given there.

It does matter what words are used, because specific words have SPECIFIC meaning.

 

[Guest]

Therefore, Hades cannot be referring to the final punishment as from early on in the OT people currently were dwelling and going to Hades.

Then explain to me in Luke 16 why it says the begger and the rich man had died, why the rich man opened his eyes in Hades, why he was in torment because he begged for water. and why the KJV version states Luke 16 as hell and not Hades. Could it be that, the bible uses the word Hades in different terms. Grave/sleep and hell/torment? Is it safe to say it's up to God's people to discern truth inside the chapters of the Bible.

 

[jasoncran]

uhm reconcile this with that idea

out of the belly of the grave, did I cry out.

sheol if it implies death an NO conscience then reconcile Jonah's statement then?

he wasn't dead in the fish at all. yet he says out of sheol I cried.that implies being able to be quite alive.

You have such a tendency to read Scripture literally without recognizing literary genre shifts. Jonah shifts in chapter to recount the story of his deliverance poetically. Note in v.6 he says, "I went down to the foundations of the mountains; the underworld- its bars were around me forever." Did Jonah literally go down to the foundations of the mountains in the belly of the fish? No. Did Jonah literally go down into the underworld? No. Was he surrounded by bars forever? No.

This is all dramatic imagery to point to the certainty of his impending death in the depths of the sea and the belly of the fish, illustrating his hopelessness and utter doom in a hyperbole to then accentuate the magnitude of his praise and adoration of God for his salvation. For God rescuing him from the "pit" which was not Sheol itself, but was the belly of the fish, which seemed to him the abode of the dead as he believed himself as good as dead.

Thus the "belly of Sheol" is actually the belly of fish, which illustrated his belief of certain death in this place, that he was at the core of Sheol.. there was no hope of escape.. yet.. GOD rescued him!

predating Christ.

http://www.myjewishlearning.com/life.../History.shtml

the kaddish is that old. not in its full length but its there.

After 300 BC you'll find all sorts of different views among Jews, but that was after the Selucid Empire invaded and Hellenism began to infiltrate Jewish Culture.

its from the Babylonian Talmud which is old and predates the messiah coming
the Talmud wasn't written until after the temple destruction.

the kaddish is implies the idea of sheol having punishment. why would a jew who was murdered or hated by Christians adopt their idea of death?

good luck with that one.

Let's note a few things.

1. Many of the Jews had capitulated to Hellenistic influences prior to Jesus' arrival on the scene, this lead to a syncretism that then developed into all kinds of Jewish views of the after-life.
2. Scripture is the ultimate guide to truth, not Jewish views that have been poisoned by Greco-Roman Influences.
3. Where is Sheol mentioned in the Kaddish, are you confusing Gehenna with Sheol.. they are NOT the same thing.
4. In the OT both the wicked and righteous went to Sheol, why would God who abhors injustice proscribe the same punishment for the just and unjust?

ah yes without them god fearing greeks to , the lxx which only the rcc and orthodox use for the translations for the tanach.

there would be no lxx! what was the word grave in ancient greek then? and why didn't the jews translate sheol to grave then if that is all it is?

http://www.perseus.tufts.edu/hopper/definitionlookup?type=begin&q=grave&target=greek

that is the koine greek word for grave when I inputted it in.

http://www.perseus.tufts.edu/hopper/definitionlookup?type=begin&q=hell&target=greek

for hell.

surely the greeks would have the idea of a grave. they did bury their dead or burn them.why then would the devout 72 jews who reluctantly( I have inquired) translate the tanach into greek and call it about an act of idolatry and a sad day of jewry use the words hades then?

jews today and since the lxx don't like that translation.

 

[jasoncran]

and funny you cant answer where is enoch? if enoch is dead then where is he then? and Elijah?

 

[jasoncran]

understand that oral law is equal to written law.

oral traditions of jewry is found in the bible as well. I can show them

how did paul know the names of the magicians whom withstood the men moses and aaron?
when its not shown in the tanach? or that moses knew of the book of life? or that Martha spoke of the resurrection of the just and unjust? when neither are mentioned in the tanach?

Do you believe the Talmud to be authoritative? That it really is the Oral tradition from Moses and ought to influence our doctrine? If so we have larger and more serious disagreements as the Talmud is not to influence Scripture.

not all of it but if we eliminate the idea of oral transmission then the very lineage of Christ is negated since there is no records of it. genesis was orally transmitted to moses and the other Hebrews learned from their teachers.

let me ask you this. why did God center a called out group men around him and call them to be that cultural identified in him.

since you complained abou koin greek influence. then why ever actually study the tanach for its names of God in Hebrew?

ah yes they choose kurious.

Lord. yet well that is part of his character but its limited since well slaves call their masters Lord and that isn't really all that God is.

The Hebrew name "Jehovah" is generally translated in the Authorized Version (and the Revised Version has not departed from this rule) by the word LORD printed in small capitals, to distinguish it from the rendering of the Hebrew Adonai and the Greek Kurios, which are also rendered Lord, but printed in the usual type. The Hebrew word is translated "Jehovah" only in <a href="http://www.blb.org/Bible.cfm?b=Exd&c=6#3">Ex. 6:3; <a href="http://www.blb.org/Bible.cfm?b=Psa&c=83#18">Psa 83:18; <a href="http://www.blb.org/Bible.cfm?b=Isa&c=12#2">Isa 12:2; 26:4, and in the compound names mentioned below.

http://www.blueletterbible.org/sear...ic.cfm?type=getTopic&topic=Jehovah&DictList=2

sorry why then did the jews knowingly jews a concept to the greeks that means other then a grave if grave is all that there is?

 

[stovebolts]

I'll give a feeble response

Sheol in the OT is often represented as Hades in the NT. Why? I would think that the Hellenization of Jews who didn't know how to read, write let alone speak Hebrew who were fluent in the LXX.

From what we know of Greek mythology, Hades was the brother of Zeus and was ruler of the "underworld" respectfully named Hades or Hades abode. In other words, when a person died, their body went to the grave and their soul went to the realm of Hades. This concept carries over nicely from the Jewish idea of Sheol.

When the NT was translated by the Germans, they translated Hades into the word Hell, which came from Norse mythology which was well known in Europe at the time. I would add that Hell carried many of the attributes that Hades carried over, however, Norse mythology was a little "darker" if that word expresses my intent adequately than that of Hades.

Moving back into the Greek notion of Hades, everyone went to Hades when they died. However, there were different levels of Hades, and the deepest darkest pit within Hades was reserved for the worst of the worst human beings. This was called Tartarus. BTW, we also see this word Tartarus translated into english as the word Hell. Regardless, Jesus tells a story of the rich man and Lazarus. This is symbolic of "Abraham's Bosom" aka Sheol. Clearly we see a great divide between the rich man and Lazarus much in the same way we see the divide between Hades and Tartarus even though they are within the same realm.

The only other addition to add is Gehiniom which has it's very own history nd is well documented within the OT. It really has an unsettling history. It is from Gehiniom that the Jews believe every soul goes after they die for no more than 12 months. It is also believed that a righteous man can pass through Gehiniom and its fire is transformed into living waters. A righteous man can also take souls out of Gehiniom.

. What happens to the soul during the dunking is dependent on each one's level. In regards to this verse (apparently Daniel 7:10), that when a completely righteous person from the highest caliber passes through the river, needless to say he is not damaged in any way, so much so that he wouldn't feel the heat from those burning flames. Rather on the contrary, for him the river is transformed into a flowing spring of living waters, from which this righteous person derives pleasure. This is what is meant by the verse "They who pass in the valley of weeping" (Psalms 84:7), the valley refers to the river or even to Gehinom itself. "Into a spring they shall transform it" (ibid.). Not only that, but even, "Also the blessings shall be encloaked by the 'moreh'" (ibid.). That is understood to mean that the blessings and gifts will enclothe one that passes through if he is a "moreh", an instructor of the Torah laws. From this we can understand a statement of the Sages that stipulates that a righteous person passing through Gehinom can take out some souls with himself. After the righteous person enclothes himself with these souls, then "they shall go from strength to strength" (ibid.), the numerical value of which equals "Etz HaChaim" [Hebrew for "Tree of Life" = 233]. To the Tree of Life goes the soul of the righteous with these clothes.

http://www.chabad.org/kabbalah/article_cdo/aid/380844/jewish/Straight-Path-to-Heaven-123.htm

 

[Doulos Iesou]

I'll give a feeble response

Sheol in the OT is often represented as Hades in the NT. Why? I would think that the Hellenization of Jews who didn't know how to read, write let alone speak Hebrew who were fluent in the LXX.

Do you recognize the difference in lexicography from Ancient Greek and Koine Greek? Koine Greek was a semitic variation developed in Israel during the Hellenization of the Mesopotamian region, as Greek became the Lingua Franca.

They then translated the OT texts which were in Hebrew, into Koine Greek.. not Ancient Greek. These Jews mind you believed that God alone was God, and apart from him there was no other, there was no Hades god of the underworld. However, I do believe they took the concept of Hades being the underworld and used that concept, as it was likely the ones who interpreted believed Hades was literally the world, perhaps under the ocean, where the dead slept. Getting ahead of myself here..

From what we know of Greek mythology, Hades was the brother of Zeus and was ruler of the "underworld" respectfully named Hades or Hades abode. In other words, when a person died, their body went to the grave and their soul went to the realm of Hades. This concept carries over nicely from the Jewish idea of Sheol.

This is exactly what one should NOT do, when interpreting Scripture.

1. Do you think Hebraic or Jewish thought should inform Jesus and the Apostles' thought when it comes to their word usage.
2. Was Homer their Bible, or was the LXX their Bible?
3. If you notice, Hades is only used to describe a place people go to when they die within the context of Jesus' preaching ministry to the JEWS. Never does Paul reference it in all of his ministry to the Gentiles (Greeks).

When the NT was translated by the Germans, they translated Hades into the word Hell, which came from Norse mythology which was well known in Europe at the time. I would add that Hell carried many of the attributes that Hades carried over, however, Norse mythology was a little "darker" if that word expresses my intent adequately than that of Hades.

So we should simply have all of these contrary religious influences infiltrate Judeo-Christian concepts and completely take over the original Hebraic thought to these things. Hell, which shouldn't be used in Bible translations, is from the Greek word Gehenna, which means Valley of the sons of Hinnom, which draws directly from the imagery of the pagan worshipers who sacrificed children to Moloch. God then cursed the land in Jeremiah and said it would no longer be known as the Valley of BenHinnom, but the Valley of Slaughter.

This imagery draws directly from the OT, NOT Norse mythology.

Also, Hades and Gehenna are references to totally different things. Hades is not pictured as a place of burning associated with the final punishment, but rather the place where all the dead go immediately when they die.

Moving back into the Greek notion of Hades, everyone went to Hades when they died. However, there were different levels of Hades, and the deepest darkest pit within Hades was reserved for the worst of the worst human beings. This was called Tartarus. BTW, we also see this word Tartarus translated into english as the word Hell. Regardless, Jesus tells a story of the rich man and Lazarus. This is symbolic of "Abraham's Bosom" aka Sheol. Clearly we see a great divide between the rich man and Lazarus much in the same way we see the divide between Hades and Tartarus even though they are within the same realm.

First of it's not a story.. it's a parable. There are some problems if you interpret it literally..

1. Rich men go to Hades to be tormented for being rich.
2. Poor men go to Abraham's bosom for being poor.
3. When the righteous die they aren't buried like rich men but are carried by angels to Abraham's side.
4. The rich man has physical attributes.
- Is experiencing physical torment (the Greek word for torment determines this)
- Has a tongue, disembodied spirits don't have tongues.
- Has eyes, disembodied spirits don't have eyes.
- Thrists, disembodied spirits don't thirst.
5. This would be a completely unique text on Hades that has not been seen in any other passage on Sheol or Hades in the whole Biblical Canon, in fact contradictory.

It's rather representing the Levitical Priesthood as the Rich Man and it's being done away with in the fiery destruction of Jerusalem and being replaced by the superiority of Jesus who represents Lazarus and his High Priesthood of Melchizedek.

This deserves a thread or two to explain fully, but the point is that there is a clearly Hebraic and superior way to view this text that isn't just some random teaching from Jesus on the intermediate state that automatically contradicts and does away with all previous revelation for pagan religion.

The only other addition to add is Gehiniom which has it's very own history nd is well documented within the OT. It really has an unsettling history. It is from Gehiniom that the Jews believe every soul goes after they die for no more than 12 months. It is also believed that a righteous man can pass through Gehiniom and its fire is transformed into living waters. A righteous man can also take souls out of Gehiniom.

Do you know how much Jewish thought has changed on the afterlife? Do you know what the people present with Jesus in Luke 16 for example believed? What did the Pharisee's believe about the afterlife? It certainly wasn't a Greek concept of a disembodied Hades and Heaven that one goes to.

God forbid we mix pagan beliefs with the Bible!

 

[Guest]

1. Rich men go to Hades to be tormented for being rich.

No, they go to Hades to be tormented because they were never saved to begin with. They chose money over God's salvation. I believe Luke 16 is a prophecy that occurs after judgement day. Maybe they meant eyes as in, your soul. Did the poor man seek salvation before he died?

 

[stovebolts]

Do you recognize the difference in lexicography from Ancient Greek and Koine Greek? Koine Greek was a semitic variation developed in Israel during the Hellenization of the Mesopotamian region, as Greek became the Lingua Franca.

They then translated the OT texts which were in Hebrew, into Koine Greek.. not Ancient Greek. These Jews mind you believed that God alone was God, and apart from him there was no other, there was no Hades god of the underworld. However, I do believe they took the concept of Hades being the underworld and used that concept, as it was likely the ones who interpreted believed Hades was literally the world, perhaps under the ocean, where the dead slept. Getting ahead of myself here..

I'm sure you can articulate the differences between Koine Greek and Ancient Greek better than I, but yes, I am aware that they are different. As far as the LXX, I am also aware that it was translated into Kione Greek.

As far as God being the Only God, that was understood back in the days of Moses and is cited to this day by good Jews siting the Shema. That being said, Solomon still sacraficed to Molech... but you knew that. I'm sure you also knew that the writer of Hebrews quotes out of the LXX. But what we both know is that Hellenistic Jews were very familiar with Greek culture. Furthermore, there were patron gods in every major greek city so to think the Hellenistic Jews were unfamiliar with Greek Mythology just isnt' the case. Even Paul is aware of Greek Mythology.

As such, there is a reason why the translators of the LXX chose to translate the idea behind Sheol to the greek word Hades and it is a very simple reason. You translate one foreign word into a word that most closest resembles it in your current language. This in itself shows us that the Hellenistic Jews undertood the concept of Hades. Had they not the original word Sheol would have been used dont you think?

From what we know of Greek mythology, Hades was the brother of Zeus and was ruler of the "underworld" respectfully named Hades or Hades abode. In other words, when a person died, their body went to the grave and their soul went to the realm of Hades. This concept carries over nicely from the Jewish idea of Sheol.

This is exactly what one should NOT do, when interpreting Scripture.

1. Do you think Hebraic or Jewish thought should inform Jesus and the Apostles' thought when it comes to their word usage.
2. Was Homer their Bible, or was the LXX their Bible?
3. If you notice, Hades is only used to describe a place people go to when they die within the context of Jesus' preaching ministry to the JEWS. Never does Paul reference it in all of his ministry to the Gentiles (Greeks).

1. Could you explain yourself a bit on this one?
2. The LXX was their Bible, but Homar was part of their culture. A proper exegesis always includes culture.
3. Odd, I did a quick search on hades (Strongs 86) and it came up 11 times. 4 in Revelation, 1 in Pauls first letter to the Corinthians and the remainder in the four gospels.

On that note, I've always found it interesting the dialog between Jesus and Peter in Caesarea Philippi. You are aware that they were in the area that worshipped Pan... and you know in Caesarea Philippi there is a rock with a crack that goes way down deep. Ironically, I've been told that this crack was called the gates of hades. I'll have to dig that information up for my own good... it's been awhile since I've dabbled in this topic.

So we should simply have all of these contrary religious influences infiltrate Judeo-Christian concepts and completely take over the original Hebraic thought to these things. Hell, which shouldn't be used in Bible translations, is from the Greek word Gehenna, which means Valley of the sons of Hinnom, which draws directly from the imagery of the pagan worshipers who sacrificed children to Moloch. God then cursed the land in Jeremiah and said it would no longer be known as the Valley of BenHinnom, but the Valley of Slaughter.

This imagery draws directly from the OT, NOT Norse mythology.

Also, Hades and Gehenna are references to totally different things. Hades is not pictured as a place of burning associated with the final punishment, but rather the place where all the dead go immediately when they die.

I"m simply saying that culture does that... Why do you think most associate Hell with Dante's inferno? Most don't know about Solomon, let alone what he did... and what happened in the valley of Hinnom. But they can sure draw their imaginations from Dante's inferno now can't they? Tell me, why is that?

First of it's not a story.. it's a parable. There are some problems if you interpret it literally..

Parables are based in Greek. The Hebrew word is Mashal. Parables extend beyond the purpose of a Mashal. Regardless, Parables are "Stories with intent". I see that you view this parable more as an allagory. That's too bad because it has such a basic message to convey.

Do you know how much Jewish thought has changed on the afterlife? Do you know what the people present with Jesus in Luke 16 for example believed? What did the Pharisee's believe about the afterlife? It certainly wasn't a Greek concept of a disembodied Hades and Heaven that one goes to.

YEah, about as many ideas as us Protestants LOL! It's a never ending discussion for sure!

God forbid we mix pagan beliefs with the Bible!

And through that lense, you can begin to see why the Jews in Israel dispised the LXX so badly.

 

[Free]

Here is a quest for you.. find one other text in ALL the Bible that describes Hades or Sheol as a place of fire and torment... to save you some time.. you won't find ANY.

What do you think hell, the lake of fire, worm doesn't die, fire is not quenched, everlasting fire, everlasting punishment, smoke of their torment ascends forever and ever, and they will be tormented day and night forever and ever is referring too? It doesn't matter what you wanna call it. This place exists brother. Mr. Strawman.

Gehenna, not Hades.