Hell

[th1b.taylor]

In the past 20+ years I have encountered an incredible number of positions on the matter of Hell. The Jehova´s Witness deny it´s existence even though it is found in the text of their misinterpretation, known as the New World Translation, makes a great deal of mention about it. The Universalists deny it´s eternal nature because it is their position, as explained to me, that everyone goes to Heaven... we just use different routes to get there. Then there are a group of New Testament Christians (oxymoron) that teach that God is love (this is true) and a loving God will never send anyone to eternal suffering in Hell. There are a whole catalog of other positions, none of them based on the Bible, so let´s look at scripture for a moment.


Luk 16:15 And he said unto them, Ye are they which justify yourselves before men; but God knoweth your hearts: for that which is highly esteemed among men is abomination in the sight of God.
Luk 16:16The law and the prophetswereuntil John: since that time the kingdom of God is preached, and every man presseth into it.
Luk 16:17And it is easier for heaven and earth to pass, than one tittle of the law to fail.
Luk 16:18Whosoever putteth away his wife, and marrieth another, committeth adultery: and whosoever marrieth her that is put away fromherhusband committeth adultery.
Luk 16:19There was a certain rich man, which was clothed in purple and fine linen, and fared sumptuously every day:
Luk 16:20And there was a certain beggar named Lazarus, which was laid at his gate, full of sores,
Luk 16:21And desiring to be fed with the crumbs which fell from the rich man's table: moreover the dogs came and licked his sores.
Luk 16:22And it came to pass, that the beggar died, and was carried by the angels into Abraham's bosom: the rich man also died, and was buried;
Luk 16:23And in hell he lift up his eyes, being in torments, and seeth Abraham afar off, and Lazarus in his bosom.
Luk 16:24And he cried and said, Father Abraham, have mercy on me, and send Lazarus, that he may dip the tip of his finger in water, and cool my tongue; for I am tormented in this flame.
Luk 16:25But Abraham said, Son, remember that thou in thy lifetime receivedst thy good things, and likewise Lazarus evil things: but now he is comforted, and thou art tormented.
Luk 16:26And beside all this, between us and you there is a great gulf fixed: so that they which would pass from hence to you cannot; neither can they pass to us, thatwould comefrom thence.
Luk 16:27Then he said, I pray thee therefore, father, that thou wouldest send him to my father's house:
Luk 16:28For I have five brethren; that he may testify unto them, lest they also come into this place of torment.
Luk 16:29Abraham saith unto him, They have Moses and the prophets; let them hear them.
Luk 16:30And he said, Nay, father Abraham: but if one went unto them from the dead, they will repent.
Luk 16:31And he said unto him, If they hear not Moses and the prophets, neither will they be persuaded, though one rose from the dead.


In verse fifteen we find Jesus making a remarkable and very note worthy statement that, when meditated on, has some very serious and note worthy points to consider. The Pharisees are the people being addressed in these remarks, so Jesus is speaking to and of the very religious Church Leaders of that day. Just like the most noticeable Christians of today these men are content with their position and seem to have grown some rather long pointed noses to look down as they examine folks of less stature. In verse fifteen Jesus delivers a blow, right to the mid-section.

 

[th1b.taylor]

Hell pt2

These rulers had taken on the air of self righteousness as do a, far to, large portion of the Church Families today. Much to often, in today´s church, the average member has never read his or her Bible through the first time but instead have latched on to this or to that verse and use that, single, verse for their Justification. The Christian Adulterer (oxymoron) often will devote a good deal of effort to condemning the Homosexual, the Rapist, the Thief or some other class of sinner to make him or herself feel good about their ¨lessor¨ sin!


Now, there is a great deal more to be learned from this passage of scripture but for the moment, at least, let´s move into what some call a Parable and others, like myself, view as a literal story told to us by Jesus. It matters not, one´s position on this story being literal or parable, there is a lesson to be learned and in this story, several lessons.


Hell is a touchy subject and one that receives far to little attention in today´s, much more, liberal assemblies. The first thing I seek to do when I hear Hell mentioned is to figure out the speaking individual´s definition of Hell. Most of the Christian Church will admit that it exists but will not teach on it because it is divisive and does not seem to build numbers in the attendance column.


My understanding of Hell is from the scriptures and more often than not I am told that I´m all wet. My view on the passage above has a very large bearing on my definition of Hell. We find here that Lazarus has gone to Abraham´s Bosom, also known as Paradise from the account of the Thief on the cross, and the Rich Man we see in Hell. We know that Paradise has been emptied out (Matt. 27:52, 53) and we know that the people in Hell are there until the Second Resurrection, coming after the Millennial Reign of the Christ. (Rev. 20:1-14)


What I hope all can see here is that Hell will end up in the Lake of Fire, a.k.a. The Abyss, but Hell is not there now. For this reason, when I speak of Hell, I am not speaking of the final destination of the unforgiven. Actually, this, for the sake of P.R. and unity in the Church, where it is important, is for every Christian to agree on. The childish, sporadic debates that take place in public discussions and public forums does great damage to the Witness of today´s Christian. When we attack one another, because we do not understand the other´s position we look very foolish and under educated.


One more of the parallels I´m famous for. When I landed in the 229^th ASH Bn. Before I could get my feet on the ground there was a nineteen year old WO I trying to get me to commit to flying with him and noone else. Before I landed he had already checked me out, records and reputation. (The men in the U.S. Army´s Aviation wing are very tight knit.) This one of the kids that knew better than to trust anybody over thirty, I´m already twenty-four but he saw that I was to be the Senior Huey Crewchief and he wanted only the best.


He questioned me for over twenty minutes about the aircraft to find out if I was for real and all of my answers were spot on. If we, the Christians, do not appear to know what it is we speak of, would you want to follow us?

 

[jasoncran]

you do realise that jewish version of hell aka sheol is translated to the greek concept of hades we call hell.

the word for torture is tartoroo which is related to tarturus where the wicked(only the real wicked are cursed there). and in hades there is the elosian fields where the righteuos are.

that should sound familiar to a parable of the lord. sheol has two places.judaism still in some temples teaches that. and i hear that the talmud prior to christ did teach that.

 

[th1b.taylor]

you do realise that jewish version of hell aka sheol is translated to the greek concept of hades we call hell.

What I do realize is that you did not think before posting and as a result you have proven the need for Christians, world wide, to consider the point I had sought to make. The OP was primarily about not making a skeptical of oneś self and the passage I used was purely for the purpose of illustrating that our arguments should always be taught by the Holy Spirit from the Bible.

 

[SkyKing 51]

Fire and brimstone preachs You go to hell no matter what and says gods hates you,

There way too much talk about hell , Hell is negitive part of life.

 

[Vic C.]

What I do realize is that you did not think before posting and as a result you have proven the need for Christians, world wide, to consider the point I had sought to make. The OP was primarily about not making a skeptical of oneś self and the passage I used was purely for the purpose of illustrating that our arguments should always be taught by the Holy Spirit from the Bible.

I believe Jason did think before he posted. :yes ... and I will say you did take the most controversial passage in the Bible on this subject to make your point.

One more thing; this is apologetic in nature and related to theology, So I will move it. :yes

 

[a wretch like me]

Skyking, I'm not disagreeing with the gist of your point. Hell is definitely negative. However, is it not our duty to bring those we can to God? If so, then we must reveal the truth, that souls are in jeopardy here. In jeopardy of what? That burning lake of fire.

I've lived all over this magnificent country and trust me, at my age I've been around the block so many times I've worn ruts in the pavement. And I have had the chance to seek out that fire and brimstone preacher in many places.

I seem to hear you saying that this type of preaching is getting old to you. If I'm correct, I would agree to the point that I don't want that as a steady diet. However there is nothing like it to get me energized. I absolutely love those old camp meetings and revivals. I love to see the Spirit working through so many people.

I will say that in all my travels I have never heard any preacher say God hates you, just the opposite. Nor for that matter that you're going to hell no matter what. They believe their calling is to save souls and to do that they must point out the consequences of denying God. The truth can be scary and painful, but it's still the truth.

You may find more comfort in a quiet, calm, middle of the road church, and that's perfectly fine. But as for me... Gimme that old time religion.

 

[jasoncran]

What I do realize is that you did not think before posting and as a result you have proven the need for Christians, world wide, to consider the point I had sought to make. The OP was primarily about not making a skeptical of oneś self and the passage I used was purely for the purpose of illustrating that our arguments should always be taught by the Holy Spirit from the Bible.

perhaps you need to understand the book of hebrews writer uses something that is used from and found in the talmudic tradition. when jesus went to hell and preached to the dead and they were raised with him. did you know that talmud prior to christ taught such a thing was possible? in fact one of the 9 words for soul include a word for garment. a super righteous rabbi could die and enter into sheol and reach the wicked by teaching them the torah and his righteous would pull them from the wicker part of sheol and place them in abrahams boosom

sound familiar!!!!!!!!! it should! keep in mind the hellinistic jews that couldnt read hebrew used the septiguant lxx and the writings of hebrews mirror that book in style and in the original greek!

if you were a jew who didnt know what sheol was but knew greek and understood hades then can you tell me why in the lxx hades was used and with a such mirror to it?

oh btw i used not to believe in hell as i WAS A JW AND THEY TEACH THAT HELL IS A FIGURE OF SPEECH.
so i guess learning what the talmud says prior to christ is bad? interesting and careful with the response as jesus honored a talmudic tradition that no christians or very few do honor. something called channuhak yet these christians will celebrate christmas which if you look at that holiday and its origins is condemned by name in jeremaiah 10.

 

[SkyKing 51]

Skyking, I'm not disagreeing with the gist of your point. Hell is definitely negative. However, is it not our duty to bring those we can to God? If so, then we must reveal the truth, that souls are in jeopardy here. In jeopardy of what? That burning lake of fire.

I've lived all over this magnificent country and trust me, at my age I've been around the block so many times I've worn ruts in the pavement. And I have had the chance to seek out that fire and brimstone preacher in many places.

I seem to hear you saying that this type of preaching is getting old to you. If I'm correct, I would agree to the point that I don't want that as a steady diet. However there is nothing like it to get me energized. I absolutely love those old camp meetings and revivals. I love to see the Spirit working through so many people.

I will say that in all my travels I have never heard any preacher say God hates you, just the opposite. Nor for that matter that you're going to hell no matter what. They believe their calling is to save souls and to do that they must point out the consequences of denying God. The truth can be scary and painful, but it's still the truth.

You may find more comfort in a quiet, calm, middle of the road church, and that's perfectly fine. But as for me... Gimme that old time religion.

As the old song goes I never promised a rose garden
Fire and brimstone brings hell in to the church, the yelling and screaming is the sounds of demonic voices . most of living hell raising in fire and brimstone preaching is no wonder matter what you do if being kind to others helping the poor, giving more in tiding if you don't have christ your going stright hell.
and the screaming and yelling starts and than throwing the bible at bible comes,
Old time religion. ? More old time Hell raising

CALL THE ROIT SQUAD QUICK!!! THIER WRECKING THE PLACE IN THE NAME GOD>

 

[Webb]

It was said: "We know that Paradise has been emptied out (Matt.27:52,53)---"

The above does not teach paradise to be empty, nor does any scripture so teach. The context indicates only the local graves of saints were emptied for they entered the "holy citiy".

 

[TRUTH over TRADITION]

This link Is There a Burning Hell? gives some pretty good insight on the concept of Hell.

 

[SkyKing 51]

So help me, If your going to active vocano thinking that's hell and you want to go there, than your going to the wrong church.

 

[th1b.taylor]

Fire and brimstone preachs You go to hell no matter what and says gods hates you,

There way too much talk about hell , Hell is negitive part of life.

Now, see, neither did you read and understand what was posted. To argue that Hell is not real is to elevate yourself to a station above God and to call Him a liar.

Had you read the post in context you would have seen that although I am a believer in every word of God and although I did firmly and from the scriptures, establish the reality of Hell, the post was really about silly and Satan inspired arguments like the one you are attempting to begin here to glorify yourself and to make Christians look stupid.

Perhaps youĺl go back and read more than the title this time.

 

[Drew]

In verse fifteen we find Jesus making a remarkable and very note worthy statement that, when meditated on, has some very serious and note worthy points to consider. The Pharisees are the people being addressed in these remarks, so Jesus is speaking to and of the very religious Church Leaders of that day. Just like the most noticeable Christians of today these men are content with their position and seem to have grown some rather long pointed noses to look down as they examine folks of less stature. In verse fifteen Jesus delivers a blow, right to the mid-section.

I am not sure where you are going (I have only read this one post of yours), but I will assert that one cannot simply assume that this teaching is a teaching on the nature of the afterlife.

In fact, I am prepared to argue from context is that Jesus is not talking about the nature of the after-life, but is instead using a widely-held "model" of the after-life as a metaphor to make an entirely different point about Israel failing to live up to her covenant obligations.

More on this later, hopefully.

 

[Drew]

The words of theologian NT Wright on the meaning of the Luke 16 account at issue:

"The parable is not, as often supposed, a description of the afterlife, warning people to be sure of their ultimate destination. If that were its point, it would not be a parable: a story about someone getting lost in London would not be a parable if addressed to people attempting to find their way through that city without a map. We have perhaps been misled, not for the first time, by the too-ready assumption, in the teeth of the evidence, that Jesus 'must really' have been primarily concerned to teach people 'how to go to heaven after death'. The reality is uncomfortably different.

"The welcome of Lazarus by Abraham evokes the welcome of the prodigal by the father, and with much the same point. The heavenly reality, in which the poor and outcast would be welcomed into Abraham's bosom (as everyone would know from the folk-tale), was coming true in flesh and blood as Jesus welcomed the outcasts, just as the father's welcome to the returning son was a story about what Jesus was actually doing then and there. The theme of 'rich and poor', not unimportant in Luke, is here thrown into stark prominence, as recent studies have stressed. But the point of this, when the story is seen as a traditional tale with a new ending, was not so much what would happen to both in the end, nor yet simply a statement on the abstract 'ethical' issue of wealth and poverty, but rather what was happening to both rich and poor in the present time. Jesus' welcome of the poor and outcast was a sign that the real return from exile, the new age, the 'resurrection', was coming into being; and if the new age was dawning, those who wanted to belong to it would (as in Deuteronomy and Jeremiah) have to repent. The story points up the true significance of what Jesus was doing, and the urgent need of those who were at present grumbling to recognize this significance. The five brothers at home correspond quite closely to the older brother in the prodigal son. 'Resurrection' is happening, but they cannot see it. The story takes for granted that the poor and outcast were rightly being welcomed into the kingdom, and it turns the spotlight on to the rich, the Pharisees, the grumblers: they, too, now needed to repent if they were to inherit the new day that would shortly dawn. They were refused the extra revelation of someone ongoing to them from the dead; the message of repentance was clear enough in Moses and the prophets.

"The parable is therefore further strong evidence that 'repentance', in the senses already discussed, formed a central element in Jesus' proclamation. The basic story he was telling invited his hearers to see themselves as the true Israel, returning at last from exile, and turning back to their god as an essential part of the process."

 

[TRUTH over TRADITION]

This link Is There a Burning Hell? gives some pretty good insight on the concept of Hell.

The Hebrew word that is often translated as Hell is Sheol. And in the King James Bible, for instance, Sheol is translated variously as Hell, the grave, and the pit, but none of those words accurately translate Sheol, for it too is simply the place where the dead go to await judgment.
The reason why these three different and conflicting terms were used is because the translators believed in a burning Hell, but too many of the Bible references simply disprove the common concept of Hell Fire. So, in the many instances where the word obviously couldn't mean a place of torture, Sheol is usually translated as grave, which isn't truly accurate, but it works. For example, at Job 14:13 the faithful man Job prayed, 'O how I wish that You would put me in [my] grave (Heb. Sheol) until Your rage has passed, and that You would set a time to remember me.'
Because of this and other simular texts, most Bible scholars admit that the ancient Hebrews (and the 'Old Testament†in general) had no concept of a burning Hell.
So, did that idea come along with Jesus and the Greek 'New Testament? Accually when Jesus came along, the typical Jewish use of the word Hades didn't mean an underworld place of torture, it was a synonym for Sheol, and it still just meant The Place of the Dead.
Jesus used the word Hades in his story of 'the Rich Man and Lazarus,' which many claim was a description of a burning Hell… but was it? Not if you look at what Jesus was describing when he told the story. Notice the circumstances at Luke 16:14-16: 'Now, the Pharisees (who loved silver) were listening to these things and were looking at him with contempt. So he said to them, You are the ones who claim to be righteous in front of men, but God knows your hearts. Things that are considered important by men are disgusting in God's eyes.'
Then he went on to make the following two points:
First, (at Luke 16:16-18) he condemned the Pharisees by saying that 'anyone who divorces his wife and marries another is guilty of adultery' – so much for righteousness, because divorce was common among them.
Then (at Luke 16:19-31) Jesus tells the story of a 'rich man' (like the Pharisees) and a 'beggar' (like the common people) who both 'died,' and of the outcome for each of them.
Were the Pharisees rich? Not necessarily (although many were), but because they were educated, they were considered 'spiritually rich' by the common people. However with the death of Jesus, this condition would be changed. They would no longer be the spiritual leaders of God's people. Remember the words, 'Things that are considered important by men are disgusting in God's eyes.'
Jesus also spoke of a 'poor man' class, called Lazarus (a common Jewish name at the time). This man also 'died.' Notice that Lazarus hadn't really done anything righteous; his only virtue was that he was extremely poor. However, he was 'carried off into the favor of Abraham.'
Was that heaven? It couldn't have been, because Jesus said (at John 3:13), 'Nobody has gone to heaven other than he who came from heaven, the Son of Man.' So Abraham hadn't been resurrected yet.
Then, what was Jesus talking about? Well, this lowly, begging condition is similar to what the common people of Israel (such as Jesus' disciples) were in spiritually, prior to that time. And Jesus was going to change all that and offer common people the opportunity to be favored in the eyes of their common faithful ancestor Abraham, when he is resurrected.
So the second point that Jesus was making (and which the Pharisees doubtlessly, at least partially understood) is that; because they had failed to learn from the Law and the Prophets, their high position was being taken away and given to common people.
As you can see, this isn't a tale that describes the torture of Hell Fire; it was an allegory or parable that Jesus told as a warning to the Pharisees, that, because of their pride, they were soon to lose their elevated position as religious leaders (those in the favored position of Abraham).

 

[th1b.taylor]

perhaps you need to understand the book of hebrews writer uses something that is used from and found in the talmudic tradition. when jesus went to hell and preached to the dead and they were raised with him.

Since you are refusing to act like a Christian and are seeking to drag me down you thorny Rabbit Trail, I´ll respond once more since even the Moderator missed the point and went with the title instead of the content.

First point: It is a common mistake to state that Jesus descended into Hell but repeating an error made in one or more of the Creeds does not make it true. Jesus, descended into the Grave (sometimes known as Hell) in His body but He 9in His Spirit) descended into Paradise, a.k.a. Abraham´s bosom, and emptied Paradise of the Saints. (The ungodly, on the other side of that Great Gulf are still there, in Hell!) If you will read the Matthew 27 passage carefully you will see that you have, completely, misstated your assertion.

And the second point: Tradition, of the Jews or of the Catholics never and I repeat, never, trumps the Word of God. Traditions are man made and every man is a sinner. (Rom. 10 & 23)

did you know that talmud prior to christ taught such a thing was possible? in fact one of the 9 words for soul include a word for garment. a super righteous rabbi could die and enter into sheol and reach the wicked by teaching them the torah and his righteous would pull them from the wicker part of sheol and place them in abrahams boosom

sound familiar!!!!!!!!! it should! keep in mind the hellinistic jews that couldnt read hebrew used the septiguant lxx and the writings of hebrews mirror that book in style and in the original greek!

Do you know that what you have just asserted is heresy? The Talmud is not of Great concern to any God earing Christian for anything more than a Historical Perspective.

if you were a jew who didnt know what sheol was but knew greek and understood hades then can you tell me why in the lxx hades was used and with a such mirror to it?

I am not a Jew because the only Jewish connection in my Pedigree is through my Mother and one more time, the Talmud has nothing to do with Christianity.

oh btw i used not to believe in hell as i WAS A JW AND THEY TEACH THAT HELL IS A FIGURE OF SPEECH.
so i guess learning what the talmud says prior to christ is bad? interesting and careful with the response as jesus honored a talmudic tradition that no christians or very few do honor. something called channuhak yet these christians will celebrate christmas which if you look at that holiday and its origins is condemned by name in jeremaiah 10.

What I see is that you have carried the Legalism of the cult with you and that is one point you will need to work on right away.

Now, this is my last response to you, save you discuss the contextual topic of the OP.

 

[jasoncran]

Since you are refusing to act like a Christian and are seeking to drag me down you thorny Rabbit Trail, I´ll respond once more since even the Moderator missed the point and went with the title instead of the content.

First point: It is a common mistake to state that Jesus descended into Hell but repeating an error made in one or more of the Creeds does not make it true. Jesus, descended into the Grave (sometimes known as Hell) in His body but He 9in His Spirit) descended into Paradise, a.k.a. Abraham´s bosom, and emptied Paradise of the Saints. (The ungodly, on the other side of that Great Gulf are still there, in Hell!) If you will read the Matthew 27 passage carefully you will see that you have, completely, misstated your assertion.

And the second point: Tradition, of the Jews or of the Catholics never and I repeat, never, trumps the Word of God. Traditions are man made and every man is a sinner. (Rom. 10 & 23)



Do you know that what you have just asserted is heresy? The Talmud is not of Great concern to any God earing Christian for anything more than a Historical Perspective.



I am not a Jew because the only Jewish connection in my Pedigree is through my Mother and one more time, the Talmud has nothing to do with Christianity.



What I see is that you have carried the Legalism of the cult with you and that is one point you will need to work on right away.

Now, this is my last response to you, save you discuss the contextual topic of the OP.

really so the talmud prior to christ is irrevant? so why did christ sin? he partook in the feast of dedication a talmudic holiday.

DID I SAY THAT THE JEWS HAD IT RIGHT? OR THAT THE SINNERS WERE SAVED THAT DIDNT BELEIVE IN THE DAYS OF MOSES. DONT PUT WORDS THAT WERENT THERE.

and uh the catholics in general did place the idea of hell as we know except the idea of dantes inferno into the christian concept.

when you get into hell and gehanna per revalation its destroyed, so how does the word hell/hades which is eternal be destroyed.

revalation 20
14And death and hell were cast into the lake of fire. This is the second death.
15And whosoever was not found written in the book of life was cast into the lake of fire.

so if hell as you say is the lake of fire then what is the lake of fire here?

and its here that only the sinner in the torment . or so called.

revalation 21
8But the fearful, and unbelieving, and the abominable, and murderers, and whoremongers, and sorcerers, and idolaters, and all liars, shall have their part in the lake which burneth with fire and brimstone: which is the second death.

and this.

revalation 20:10

10And the devil that deceived them was cast into the lake of fire and brimstone, where the beast and the false prophet are, and shall be tormented day and night for ever and ever

ok so how does a system of goverment(the beast or ac depending ones eschatology) and the false prophet (if literal a spirit) be tormented?


this is revalant to what hell/ gehanna to which i agree with means. so what does it entail? a literal fire that burns a spirit? or is it symbolic of eternal destruction as in burned up as in a metaphor. can you reconcile that to the christian who dont buy your view. as vic said you did pick a contraversial topic. i wasnt raised to buy into hell and from time to time i have to look at these and wonder. i dont know.

 

[Elijah674]

No 'spirits' And Immortal at that, you say??

 

[jasoncran]

men in hell would have to given a body to be tormented. as that is stated ressurected to eternal damnation. but satan and demons. they are spirits so what will they be given? what will torment them? that is the question. it can be a literal fire as given most that were into the ouijas would know that the demons can stop or start a fire at will.its hard to burn one of them if they have been used. almost impossible. so that makes it hard for me to thinks its a fire unless these demons are made like us for torture.