The word Hell in scriptures.

[CherubRam]

In the original bible text the word (Hell) never accrues. Hell was put in place of the words Sheol and Gehenna. Yahshua came speaking in parables and used the word Gehenna, not Hell.

The word (sheol) never ever translates as Hell.
The word Gehenna never ever translates as Hell.

 

[David]

In the original bible text the word (Hell) never accrues. Hell was put in place of the words Sheol and Gehenna. Yahshua came speaking in parables and used the word Gehenna, not Hell.

The word (sheol) never ever translates as Hell.
The word Gehenna never ever translates as Hell.

Actually, you’re correct on one point. The Bible was never written in English. Hebrew Scriptures use the word Sheol and Greek Scriptures use Gehenna. However, clinging to the word “hell” is missing the point. The point is what Scripture actually says.

When Jesus spoke about judgment, He warned about Gehenna in the strongest terms. He said, “Fear him which is able to destroy both soul and body in hell” ~Matthew 10:28. He described it as the place “where their worm dieth not, and the fire is not quenched” ~Mark 9:48. That is not a mild picture. That is a warning from the lips of Christ Himself.

Now step back and think about that. Jesus was not giving a vocabulary lesson. He was sounding an alarm. The language may be Hebrew, Greek, or English, but the warning is the same. There is a real judgment for sin.

The same pattern shows up in the Old Testament. Sheol refers to the realm of the dead, but Scripture still shows a division between the righteous and the wicked after death. In the account Jesus gave, “the rich man also died, and was buried; And in hell he lift up his eyes, being in torments” ~Luke 16:22-23. Christ did not describe unconscious sleep. He described awareness and torment.

So the question is not whether the English word “hell” appears in the earliest manuscripts. The real question is this. What did Jesus actually teach about the fate of the wicked?

And when you read the passages plainly, the message is unmistakable. Sin brings judgment. God is holy. And Christ warned repeatedly about the place of punishment prepared for those who reject God.

A lot of people today want to soften that message. They want to debate vocabulary instead of facing the warning. But Jesus did not soften it. He spoke about it more than anyone else in Scripture.

That is why the focus here stays simple. Not tradition. Not history arguments. Not word games. What do the Scriptures say? When Christ speaks about judgment, wise people listen.

 

[Emmaus]

In the original bible text the word (Hell) never accrues. Hell was put in place of the words Sheol and Gehenna. Yahshua came speaking in parables and used the word Gehenna, not Hell.

The word (sheol) never ever translates as Hell.
The word Gehenna never ever translates as Hell.

I go with you. The word "hell" is not warranted. But I also understand why the translators used it. When the King James was written there was quite some Roman pressure applied. They also got the word "Ekklesia" translated "Church". It really means "assembly" but that would have devastated the Roman misinformation that God lives in a building made by hands. But now, centuries later, I wonder why no one has corrected that.

In Matthew 13 the Lord turns to parables to explain the mysteries of the Kingdom of Heaven. In one parable he said that leaven would enter the Kingdom. If we interpret scripture with scripture, leaven is two things; 1. Grievous sin (1. Cor.5) and 2. Corrupted teachings. The Lord Himself said that the Kingdom would be "wholly" leavened. Leaven has another effect. It makes healthy bread more palatable - but it is corrupted nonetheless.

Is it a wonder that we have such things to contend with with?

 

[Emmaus]

The same pattern shows up in the Old Testament. Sheol refers to the realm of the dead, but Scripture still shows a division between the righteous and the wicked after death. In the account Jesus gave, “the rich man also died, and was buried; And in hell he lift up his eyes, being in torments” ~Luke 16:22-23. Christ did not describe unconscious sleep. He described awareness and torment.

This has puzzled many a student. All judgment is given to Jesus. The Bema, the Throne of His glory and the White Throne are all still future. Who was judge, and at what assize was the rich man judged? All men are judged alive. Why is this man an exception? And mysterious of all is why had Lazarus to be "comforted"? His ailing body was left behind on earth at death.

 

[David]

I go with you. The word "hell" is not warranted. But I also understand why the translators used it. When the King James was written there was quite some Roman pressure applied. They also got the word "Ekklesia" translated "Church". It really means "assembly" but that would have devastated the Roman misinformation that God lives in a building made by hands. But now, centuries later, I wonder why no one has corrected that.

In Matthew 13 the Lord turns to parables to explain the mysteries of the Kingdom of Heaven. In one parable he said that leaven would enter the Kingdom. If we interpret scripture with scripture, leaven is two things; 1. Grievous sin (1. Cor.5) and 2. Corrupted teachings. The Lord Himself said that the Kingdom would be "wholly" leavened. Leaven has another effect. It makes healthy bread more palatable - but it is corrupted nonetheless.

Is it a wonder that we have such things to contend with with?

You’re aiming your concern in the wrong direction. It’s not theories about translators that have authority. The Word of God has authority. Jesus didn’t leave judgment up in the air. He said plainly, “Fear him which is able to destroy both soul and body in hell” ~Matthew 10:28. It doesn’t matter what English word a translator chooses. Christ still gives that warning. Later Scripture reveals the end result of that judgment: “And death and hell were cast into the lake of fire. This is the second death” ~Revelation 20:14. It’s not about semantics. It’s about God judging sin.

Ekklesia is no different. The Word of God already addressed whether or not God resides in a building. Stephen said, “The most High dwelleth not in temples made with hands” ~Acts 7:48. Paul said virtually the same words: “God that made the world and all things therein… dwelleth not in temples made with hands” ~Acts 17:24. God’s people are His gathering, not His building. The Bible itself refutes that.

There is a much larger problem with the leaven passage though. Jesus didn’t teach His kingdom would be leavened until it went bad. Right after that passage He likens the kingdom to a mustard seed that grows from small to great. “The kingdom of heaven is like to a grain of mustard seed… which indeed is the least of all seeds: but when it is grown, it is the greatest among herbs” ~Matthew 13:31-32. Jesus is saying the kingdom will grow from little to large.

Building doctrine then forcing passages to match it is what causes contradictions. The Bible does the exact opposite of that. It defines itself. When you let the text speak for itself, the smoke and mirrors disappear and truth remains.

 

[David]

This has puzzled many a student. All judgment is given to Jesus. The Bema, the Throne of His glory and the White Throne are all still future. Who was judge, and at what assize was the rich man judged? All men are judged alive. Why is this man an exception? And mysterious of all is why had Lazarus to be "comforted"? His ailing body was left behind on earth at death.

I think the puzzle goes away when you allow the passage to say exactly what it says. Jesus is not talking about the final judgment in Luke 16. Jesus is talking about the intermediate state people go after death and before the resurrection and final judgment. The Lord plainly says “The rich man also died, and was buried; And in hell he lift up his eyes, being in torments” ~Luke 16:22-23. Take notice to what order these events occurred in. Death came. Burial took place. After that the man was conscious and in torment. There is no court room described there at all.

In fact scripture tells us the order it happens. “It is appointed unto men once to die, but after this the judgment” ~Hebrews 9:27. Death is first. Then comes the judgment.

What Luke 16 describes is what takes place in between.

As for Lazarus being comforted, again it isn’t mysterious if you let the text speak for itself. Lazarus broken body remained in the grave, but Lazarus the man was no longer in pain. Abraham says, “Now he is comforted, and thou art tormented” ~Luke 16:25.

Paul tells us in similar words that when we die we will be “absent from the body, and to be present with the Lord” ~2 Corinthians 5:8. Death does not wipe us out of existence. Instead it takes us away from this world to wait for our resurrection.

Jesus wasn’t attempting to field every question about the afterlife. He was uttering a warning that crash lands into its listeners. When a man dies his situation is made. He can neither use money nor wise up on how to live for God. The rich man begs for relief but Abraham answers “Between us and you there is a great gulf fixed” ~Luke 16:26.

There you have it. This life is where you decide your eternal fate. Once you are dead there is no opportunity to cross over. You simply await the day Christ returns to judge the world with perfect justice. That is why this warning is so relevant to us today. While you can still breathe.

 

[Yesua888]

I'm jumping in a bit late here, maybe : )

In the original bible text the word (Hell) never accrues. Hell was put in place of the words Sheol and Gehenna. Yahshua came speaking in parables and used the word Gehenna, not Hell.

The word (sheol) never ever translates as Hell.
The word Gehenna never ever translates as Hell.

"I go with you. The word "hell" is not warranted. But I also understand why the translators used it. When the King James was written there was quite some Roman pressure applied. They also got the word "Ekklesia" translated "Church". It really means "assembly" but that would have devastated the Roman misinformation that God lives in a building made by hands. But now, centuries later, I wonder why no one has corrected that"

Not sure whether you are actually addressing CherubRam's quoted text (above)?

The Bible does not state that the Romans spread misinformation about God living in man-made buildings. Instead, the idea that God does not dwell in temples made by human hands is taught by early Christian leaders to correct pagan Greek beliefs, not Roman doctrine.

I am not sure what the connection is to "Hell" this example of "Ekkelesia", "church" and "Assemply", unless you are indicating that "Hell never accurs" because "shoel or "Gehenna" were used instead? According to CherubRam, none of these words translate as "Hell"? So I am not sure what you are portraying here?

In Matthew 13 the Lord turns to parables to explain the mysteries of the Kingdom of Heaven. In one parable he said that leaven would enter the Kingdom. If we interpret scripture with scripture, leaven is two things; 1. Grievous sin (1. Cor.5) and 2. Corrupted teachings. The Lord Himself said that the Kingdom would be "wholly" leavened. Leaven has another effect. It makes healthy bread more palatable - but it is corrupted nonetheless.

Is it a wonder that we have such things to contend with with

Does this mean that scripture is not clear because there are many meanings / translations?

 

[Yesua888]

This has puzzled many a student. All judgment is given to Jesus. The Bema, the Throne of His glory and the White Throne are all still future. Who was judge, and at what assize was the rich man judged? All men are judged alive. Why is this man an exception? And mysterious of all is why had Lazarus to be "comforted"? His ailing body was left behind on earth at death.

Again, I see no relation to what David said, and what you are quoting?
Forgive me if I am wrong, I am trying to keep up ...

 

[Emmaus]

I think the puzzle goes away when you allow the passage to say exactly what it says. Jesus is not talking about the final judgment in Luke 16. Jesus is talking about the intermediate state people go after death and before the resurrection and final judgment. The Lord plainly says “The rich man also died, and was buried; And in hell he lift up his eyes, being in torments” ~Luke 16:22-23. Take notice to what order these events occurred in. Death came. Burial took place. After that the man was conscious and in torment. There is no court room described there at all.

In fact scripture tells us the order it happens. “It is appointed unto men once to die, but after this the judgment” ~Hebrews 9:27. Death is first. Then comes the judgment.

What Luke 16 describes is what takes place in between.

As for Lazarus being comforted, again it isn’t mysterious if you let the text speak for itself. Lazarus broken body remained in the grave, but Lazarus the man was no longer in pain. Abraham says, “Now he is comforted, and thou art tormented” ~Luke 16:25.

Paul tells us in similar words that when we die we will be “absent from the body, and to be present with the Lord” ~2 Corinthians 5:8. Death does not wipe us out of existence. Instead it takes us away from this world to wait for our resurrection.

Jesus wasn’t attempting to field every question about the afterlife. He was uttering a warning that crash lands into its listeners. When a man dies his situation is made. He can neither use money nor wise up on how to live for God. The rich man begs for relief but Abraham answers “Between us and you there is a great gulf fixed” ~Luke 16:26.

There you have it. This life is where you decide your eternal fate. Once you are dead there is no opportunity to cross over. You simply await the day Christ returns to judge the world with perfect justice. That is why this warning is so relevant to us today. While you can still breathe.

Thank you for the reply. I observe that, concerning the "final judgment" that the word "final" implies that there are others that are not final. If the rich man is tormented, somebody with power to administer torment made a decision. My question is Who and When?

You quoted 2nd Corinthians 5. In that very text scripture says that we "groan" in our earthly bodies and that we also "groan" being naked in death. Lazarus might be relieved of his aching body, but a new source of groaning is at hand. You don't think that this would need comforting. The Lord Jesus called it Abraham's Bosom in Luke 16, but calls it "Paradise" after His death. Now, while we observe that there is a Paradise of God in heaven, and now a "Paradise of men" in Hades, there is no such Paradise on earth. Has not our Lord revealed that the "groaning dead" have a source of "comfort" while they are disembodied souls?

As to the the word "hell" being used, is not not a blatant untruth and more than a matter of Semantics. Hades is the place of the dead, but the Lake of Fire is the place of the living. And the word "Tartaroo", which you allow to also be called "hell" in 2nd Peter 2:4, is not a place of torment but a Prison for angels whose true destiny and torment is in the Lake of Fire. Should we not encourage one another to be as accurate as possible with God's Word. Your Forum here is adamant of sola scripture. A wrong or misleading word can only have a mislead ending.

Let us then examine the mustard seed. No private interpretation is allowed. Scripture must explain scripture. So we immediately observe Genesis 1:11-12 where God sets forth the Law of Kinds. This Law is so important because it dictates our rebirth, our new nature in Christ, and even the Deity of Christ - Him being born of the Holy Spirit (Lk.1:35). So the question is; Does a mustard seed produce a huge Tree like that used to depict Nebuchadnezzar in Daniel 4? No! It does not. It produces a bush containing a piquant fruit. The resulting Nebuchadnezzar Tree of Matthew 13 bears no resemblance to the Mustard Bush. And then, if we observe what Christianity has become, is not Rome with all it wealth and splendor, and its control over 1.3 billion adherents, with its pagan feats and Masonic-like buildings with the "grand master" - a man-invented order of priests, sitting in the east under a sunburst.

And then again, these men-ordained priests have made rule like "no marriage" which 1st Timothy 4 says is a "doctrine of demons". I think brother that you and I should pool our resources to correct every deviation in God's Word that has been placed there by such an entity. The word "hell" is a Roman invention and does not belong in the Bible. In Psalm 138 the Lord declares that He has put His WORD ABOVE His Name. Let us insist on accuracy of that elevated Word.

We are on the same side brother. Let's pool our resources.

 

[Emmaus]

I'm jumping in a bit late here, maybe : )

"I go with you. The word "hell" is not warranted. But I also understand why the translators used it. When the King James was written there was quite some Roman pressure applied. They also got the word "Ekklesia" translated "Church". It really means "assembly" but that would have devastated the Roman misinformation that God lives in a building made by hands. But now, centuries later, I wonder why no one has corrected that"

Not sure whether you are actually addressing CherubRam's quoted text (above)?

The Bible does not state that the Romans spread misinformation about God living in man-made buildings. Instead, the idea that God does not dwell in temples made by human hands is taught by early Christian leaders to correct pagan Greek beliefs, not Roman doctrine.

I am not sure what the connection is to "Hell" this example of "Ekkelesia", "church" and "Assemply", unless you are indicating that "Hell never accurs" because "shoel or "Gehenna" were used instead? According to CherubRam, none of these words translate as "Hell"? So I am not sure what you are portraying here?

Does this mean that scripture is not clear because there are many meanings / translations?

Thank you for your reply. My initial posting was to agree with our brother/sister who said that "hell" is an incorrect translation. The word in the original text is either "Hades" the place of the souls of dead men, "Gehenna" the Valley on the south side of Jerusalem where the cities trash is burned, "Tartaroo" the prison of fallen angels who misbehaved during Noah's time. But hell is a Roam catholic concept depicted in their art of a place where men have their bodies and some great symbol of suffering is at work. Some of us have defended this translation - which is their right. You have to decide if you will allow a word in the English Bible that everybody knows is wrong, or not. Both sides agree that it is not in the original.

 

[Emmaus]

Again, I see no relation to what David said, and what you are quoting?
Forgive me if I am wrong, I am trying to keep up ...

You are right. My posting was a musing. It put forward something for discussion. Consider this.
1. For the rich man to suffer torment, somebody had to decide this.
2. Since all judgment is give to Jesus, when did Jesus judge the man that he is now in torment?
3. The Lake of Fire, not Hades, is the place of suffering
4. Why did Lazarus need to be comforted if he was released from his body

These are just some interesting points for the student of scripture. But here is one more. Is the good part of Hades for good men or believers? I'll tell you why. Abraham is a man of Faith and this section of Hades is called "Abraham's Bosom". But Abraham is reported by scripture to have come from idol worshipers. But God promised Abraham that he would be "gathered to his fathers" at death. If so, Abraham was gathered to idol worshipers - which kinda burdens any argument that where Abraham is has any good men in it. I'm not building a doctrine about Hades. I'm saying that it has some puzzling connotations.

God bless

 

[David]

Does this mean that scripture is not clear because there are many meanings / translations?

No, multiple translations does not equal multiple meanings for Scripture. God didn’t give His Word as a fog. He gave us light. “The entrance of thy words giveth light; it giveth understanding unto the simple” ~Psalm 119:130. God’s Word brings LIGHT when it enters our lives. It is not obscured by some spiritual riddle that only scholars can figure out.

In fact, Scripture identifies the problem, not as confusion on the surface of the text, but as hard-heartedness within. Peter cautioned how some will contort what God has said to suit their own agenda. They “wrest… the scriptures, unto their own destruction” ~2 Peter 3:16. Where does this problem happen? Not in the Word, but in the person interpreting it.

Jesus spoke in parables, but the TRUTH did not become unclear. The parables reveal who wants the truth and who doesn’t. “Who hath ears to hear, let him hear” ~Matthew 13:9. Everyone heard the same message, but only some were willing.

Multiple languages or translation do not create multiple truths. It says Sheol in one verse and Gehenna in another. Where does Scripture turn to understand the meaning? The WORD itself. Scripture interprets Scripture.

There is not some moving target when we read the Bible. God has given His WORD, and it is LIGHT. Will people receive what it says, or will they try to manipulate it to say something else?

 

[bobinfaith]

Actually, you’re correct on one point. The Bible was never written in English. Hebrew Scriptures use the word Sheol and Greek Scriptures use Gehenna. However, clinging to the word “hell” is missing the point. The point is what Scripture actually says.

Hello David;

I have a comment and question. First, suppose the Bible had been written back then, solely in English would in my opinion eliminate the Hebrew Aramaic (OT) the Koine Greek (NT) and all the languages that only complicate our understanding of the Scripture.

Sure, there are certain words in the Hebrew and Greek that gave their Scriptural meaning long before English even existed. I also understand back then the Old and New Testaments were authored by Jews and Gentile Christians and would require their specific meanings when translating later to English.

My reason is God knew the English would later be an acceptable translation of the Bible. In defense to the English, it also has multiple meanings to words that have benefitted the Christian student or anyone studying God's Word.

What are your thought?

God bless you and thank you.

Bob

 

[David]

And then again, these men-ordained priests have made rule like "no marriage" which 1st Timothy 4 says is a "doctrine of demons". I think brother that you and I should pool our resources to correct every deviation in God's Word that has been placed there by such an entity. The word "hell" is a Roman invention and does not belong in the Bible. In Psalm 138 the Lord declares that He has put His WORD ABOVE His Name. Let us insist on accuracy of that elevated Word.

We are on the same side brother. Let's pool our resources.

I can’t “pool resources” like you asked. I take my stance on what Scripture DOES say, not on men’s opinions about what they think it should say. The standard is straightforward: “Let God be true, but every man a liar” ~Romans 3:4.

The debate about the English word hell does not remove the reality Jesus warned about. Christ told us there would be “where their worm dieth not, and the fire is not quenched” ~Mark 9:48. And Scripture plainly declares, “death and hell were cast into the lake of fire. This is the second death” ~Revelation 20:14.

Multiple paradises is another concept taken beyond the text. Jesus said to the thief, “Today shalt thou be with me in paradise” ~Luke 23: 43 then Paul told us he was “caught up into paradise” ~2 Corinthians 12:2-4 in the presence of God. Scripture merely shows the righteous with God in comfort.

I don’t need to know if the mustard seed theory happened historically. Jesus Himself tells us it simply starts small and grows big ~Matthew 13:32. Making that into a prophecy about Rome inserts something the text never claimed.

We are warned about that in Scripture. “No prophecy of the scripture is of any private interpretation” ~2 Peter 1:20. Adding ideas that the text itself does not state should not be done. God’s Word is not ours to reshape. It must be allowed to stand exactly as it is written.

 

[David]

As to the the word "hell" being used, is not not a blatant untruth and more than a matter of Semantics. Hades is the place of the dead, but the Lake of Fire is the place of the living. And the word "Tartaroo", which you allow to also be called "hell" in 2nd Peter 2:4, is not a place of torment but a Prison for angels whose true destiny and torment is in the Lake of Fire. Should we not encourage one another to be as accurate as possible with God's Word. Your Forum here is adamant of sola scripture. A wrong or misleading word can only have a mislead ending.

What you are presenting here is not simply letting Scripture speak. It is an interpretive system built from speculation about translations, layered theories about the afterlife, and historical ideas that the passages themselves never state.

That approach will not be taught on this message board.

This forum stands on Scripture itself, not on theories about Roman conspiracies, hidden prophetic systems in parables, or reconstructed vocabulary arguments. The standard here is simple: we teach what the text actually says in its context.

Jesus warned plainly about judgment. He spoke of a place “where their worm

 

[David]

Thank you for your reply. My initial posting was to agree with our brother/sister who said that "hell" is an incorrect translation. The word in the original text is either "Hades" the place of the souls of dead men, "Gehenna" the Valley on the south side of Jerusalem where the cities trash is burned, "Tartaroo" the prison of fallen angels who misbehaved during Noah's time. But hell is a Roam catholic concept depicted in their art of a place where men have their bodies and some great symbol of suffering is at work. Some of us have defended this translation - which is their right. You have to decide if you will allow a word in the English Bible that everybody knows is wrong, or not. Both sides agree that it is not in the original.

You said you were agreeing with CherubRam. That is not a good thing. CherubRam was removed from this forum because he was teaching false doctrine and would not submit to what Scripture actually says.

Your argument about the word hell misses the point. The issue is not the English word but the reality Jesus warned about. Christ spoke of a place “where their worm dieth not, and the fire is not quenched” ~Mark 9:48, and Scripture says, “This is the second death, the lake of fire” ~Revelation 20:14.

This board teaches the Word of God as written. We do not promote theories about corrupted translations or interpretive systems built around them. “Add thou not unto his words” ~Proverbs 30:6.

So to be clear: that line of teaching will not be taught here.

 

[David]

You are right. My posting was a musing. It put forward something for discussion. Consider this.
1. For the rich man to suffer torment, somebody had to decide this.
2. Since all judgment is give to Jesus, when did Jesus judge the man that he is now in torment?
3. The Lake of Fire, not Hades, is the place of suffering
4. Why did Lazarus need to be comforted if he was released from his body

These are just some interesting points for the student of scripture. But here is one more. Is the good part of Hades for good men or believers? I'll tell you why. Abraham is a man of Faith and this section of Hades is called "Abraham's Bosom". But Abraham is reported by scripture to have come from idol worshipers. But God promised Abraham that he would be "gathered to his fathers" at death. If so, Abraham was gathered to idol worshipers - which kinda burdens any argument that where Abraham is has any good men in it. I'm not building a doctrine about Hades. I'm saying that it has some puzzling connotations.

I see what you are doing. You frame it as “musings” and “puzzling questions,” but the pattern is obvious. You keep introducing speculative questions to chip away at the plain reading of the passage.

That approach will not go anywhere here.

This forum is not a place for slowly building alternative systems by raising endless hypotheticals. The standard here is the written Word of God itself, taken in its context. Speculation that tries to undermine what the text plainly states will not be entertained or taught here.

If you want to participate, stay with the actual teaching of Scripture. If your approach is going to be continuing to introduce theories and puzzles around the text, then you will need to take that somewhere else.

 

[David]

Hello David;

I have a comment and question. First, suppose the Bible had been written back then, solely in English would in my opinion eliminate the Hebrew Aramaic (OT) the Koine Greek (NT) and all the languages that only complicate our understanding of the Scripture.

Sure, there are certain words in the Hebrew and Greek that gave their Scriptural meaning long before English even existed. I also understand back then the Old and New Testaments were authored by Jews and Gentile Christians and would require their specific meanings when translating later to English.

My reason is God knew the English would later be an acceptable translation of the Bible. In defense to the English, it also has multiple meanings to words that have benefitted the Christian student or anyone studying God's Word.

What are your thought?

God bless you and thank you.

Bob

That is a very good question. The quick answer is no; it would not have been better had Scripture originally been written in English. God never intended His message to belong to one language or one nation.

The gospel was designed from the beginning to reach all people. That is why when the Spirit came upon the people at Pentecost, they exclaimed “every man heard them speak in his own language.”~Acts 2:6. Even then God was revealing that His truth would be proclaimed in many tongues.

So instead of English making things easier, the broader perspective is that God planned for His Word to be translated into every language so that people everywhere could know the truth of Christ.

 

[Yesua888]

Thank you for the reply. I observe that, concerning the "final judgment" that the word "final" implies that there are others that are not final. If the rich man is tormented, somebody with power to administer torment made a decision. My question is Who and When?

You quoted 2nd Corinthians 5. In that very text scripture says that we "groan" in our earthly bodies and that we also "groan" being naked in death. Lazarus might be relieved of his aching body, but a new source of groaning is at hand. You don't think that this would need comforting. The Lord Jesus called it Abraham's Bosom in Luke 16, but calls it "Paradise" after His death. Now, while we observe that there is a Paradise of God in heaven, and now a "Paradise of men" in Hades, there is no such Paradise on earth. Has not our Lord revealed that the "groaning dead" have a source of "comfort" while they are disembodied souls?

As to the the word "hell" being used, is not not a blatant untruth and more than a matter of Semantics. Hades is the place of the dead, but the Lake of Fire is the place of the living. And the word "Tartaroo", which you allow to also be called "hell" in 2nd Peter 2:4, is not a place of torment but a Prison for angels whose true destiny and torment is in the Lake of Fire. Should we not encourage one another to be as accurate as possible with God's Word. Your Forum here is adamant of sola scripture. A wrong or misleading word can only have a mislead ending.

Let us then examine the mustard seed. No private interpretation is allowed. Scripture must explain scripture. So we immediately observe Genesis 1:11-12 where God sets forth the Law of Kinds. This Law is so important because it dictates our rebirth, our new nature in Christ, and even the Deity of Christ - Him being born of the Holy Spirit (Lk.1:35). So the question is; Does a mustard seed produce a huge Tree like that used to depict Nebuchadnezzar in Daniel 4? No! It does not. It produces a bush containing a piquant fruit. The resulting Nebuchadnezzar Tree of Matthew 13 bears no resemblance to the Mustard Bush. And then, if we observe what Christianity has become, is not Rome with all it wealth and splendor, and its control over 1.3 billion adherents, with its pagan feats and Masonic-like buildings with the "grand master" - a man-invented order of priests, sitting in the east under a sunburst.

And then again, these men-ordained priests have made rule like "no marriage" which 1st Timothy 4 says is a "doctrine of demons". I think brother that you and I should pool our resources to correct every deviation in God's Word that has been placed there by such an entity. The word "hell" is a Roman invention and does not belong in the Bible. In Psalm 138 the Lord declares that He has put His WORD ABOVE His Name. Let us insist on accuracy of that elevated Word.

We are on the same side brother. Let's pool our resources.

Wow! you have a lot of information here, but no bible verses, that we can refer to. There are many of us here, who are new to the Word. It would be so good if you could bear this in mind, so that it does not become a huge endeavour to verify what you are saying eg. bible verses relating to what you are teaching. Hope you will take into consideration those of us, that are here to learn, and do not know the bible as well as some of you do. Many thanks : )

 

[Yesua888]

Thank you for your reply. My initial posting was to agree with our brother/sister who said that "hell" is an incorrect translation. The word in the original text is either "Hades" the place of the souls of dead men, "Gehenna" the Valley on the south side of Jerusalem where the cities trash is burned, "Tartaroo" the prison of fallen angels who misbehaved during Noah's time. But hell is a Roam catholic concept depicted in their art of a place where men have their bodies and some great symbol of suffering is at work. Some of us have defended this translation - which is their right. You have to decide if you will allow a word in the English Bible that everybody knows is wrong, or not. Both sides agree that it is not in the original.

where can I find more on this ... my enquiring mind needs to know : )

 

[Yesua888]

You are right. My posting was a musing. It put forward something for discussion. Consider this.
1. For the rich man to suffer torment, somebody had to decide this.
2. Since all judgment is give to Jesus, when did Jesus judge the man that he is now in torment?
3. The Lake of Fire, not Hades, is the place of suffering
4. Why did Lazarus need to be comforted if he was released from his body

These are just some interesting points for the student of scripture. But here is one more. Is the good part of Hades for good men or believers? I'll tell you why. Abraham is a man of Faith and this section of Hades is called "Abraham's Bosom". But Abraham is reported by scripture to have come from idol worshipers. But God promised Abraham that he would be "gathered to his fathers" at death. If so, Abraham was gathered to idol worshipers - which kinda burdens any argument that where Abraham is has any good men in it. I'm not building a doctrine about Hades. I'm saying that it has some puzzling connotations.

God bless

You obviously know your bible, and do not need to look up the verses ... not the same for me I am afraid, and my nature questions everything ... therefore what you say, I have to research : )

 

[David]

where can I find more on this ... my enquiring mind needs to know : )

Curiosity is not a bad thing, but curiosity without grounding in the Word can pull a person into confusion. Sometimes people pile up questions, theories, and “interesting musings,” and before long the plain teaching of Scripture gets buried under a mountain of speculation. Scripture actually warns about that. Paul said not to give attention to things that “minister questions, rather than godly edifying which is in faith” ~1 Timothy 1:4.

Think about how Jesus taught. When He spoke about the rich man and Lazarus, He was not creating a riddle for scholars to untangle. He was sounding an alarm for sinners to hear. The Lord said the rich man was “in hell… being in torments” ~Luke 16:23, and Abraham said, “now he is comforted, and thou art tormented” ~Luke 16:25. That is not foggy language. That is a clear warning.

The enemy loves to turn clear truth into a maze of questions. But God did not give His Word as a maze. He gave it as light. “The entrance of thy words giveth light; it giveth understanding unto the simple” ~Psalm 119:130.

So here is the safe path. Do what the Bereans did. They did not chase every theory. They “searched the scriptures daily, whether those things were so” ~Acts 17:11. Stay anchored in what is written. When the Word speaks plainly, we do not need a new system, a new puzzle, or a new theory. We just need to believe what God already said.

 

[bobinfaith]

That is a very good question. The quick answer is no; it would not have been better had Scripture originally been written in English. God never intended His message to belong to one language or one nation.

The gospel was designed from the beginning to reach all people. That is why when the Spirit came upon the people at Pentecost, they exclaimed “every man heard them speak in his own language.”~Acts 2:6. Even then God was revealing that His truth would be proclaimed in many tongues.

So instead of English making things easier, the broader perspective is that God planned for His Word to be translated into every language so that people everywhere could know the truth of Christ.

Good morning, David;

For a time it was wishful thinking on my part. Of course I wasn't around back then. The English translation was not introduced until centuries later.

The languages are all God led for intelligible words whether speaking, listening and reading God's Word reference 1 Corinthians 14.

I've noticed preachers will reference a Hebrew or Greek word during a sermon. (I still take notes when listening to the preacher.) A Hebrew word such as Qara, "to call out, proclaim, or read aloud," or the Greek word Euangelizo, "announce the Good News or evangelize" to help explain a cultural nuance, for example, but keeping the message in the language of most English congregations.

I had the privilege to preach in Romania, Ukraine, North Macedonia, Chinese (Mandarin and Cantonese) each with an interpreter. I rarely used other languages for reference but only English, for the interpreter a word may have multiple meanings but are capable of adjusting to the core of the message.

God bless everyone.

Bob

 

[David]

Bob, that’s awesome to hear. When we witness God’s message in Christ transcending language and culture, it helps us realize that it is not the language that matters…but the Truth that is being spoken.

The Bible teaches us that God has always wanted His Word to go to all nations. Jesus told us, “This gospel of the kingdom shall be preached in all the world for a witness unto all nations” ~Matthew 24:14. The Gospel remains the same even when translated.

What else encourages me is that God has promised His Word will not return void, but will accomplish what He pleases when it is faithfully preached. Isaiah 55: 11 says, “So shall my word be that goeth forth out of my mouth: it shall not return unto me void, but it shall accomplish that which I please.”

Whether through an interpreter or directly from the pulpit, what matters most is that Christ and the Gospel are clearly being proclaimed. When that takes place, God is working.

 

[Yesua888]

Curiosity is not a bad thing, but curiosity without grounding in the Word can pull a person into confusion. Sometimes people pile up questions, theories, and “interesting musings,” and before long the plain teaching of Scripture gets buried under a mountain of speculation. Scripture actually warns about that. Paul said not to give attention to things that “minister questions, rather than godly edifying which is in faith” ~1 Timothy 1:4.

Think about how Jesus taught. When He spoke about the rich man and Lazarus, He was not creating a riddle for scholars to untangle. He was sounding an alarm for sinners to hear. The Lord said the rich man was “in hell… being in torments” ~Luke 16:23, and Abraham said, “now he is comforted, and thou art tormented” ~Luke 16:25. That is not foggy language. That is a clear warning.

The enemy loves to turn clear truth into a maze of questions. But God did not give His Word as a maze. He gave it as light. “The entrance of thy words giveth light; it giveth understanding unto the simple” ~Psalm 119:130.

So here is the safe path. Do what the Bereans did. They did not chase every theory. They “searched the scriptures daily, whether those things were so” ~Acts 17:11. Stay anchored in what is written. When the Word speaks plainly, we do not need a new system, a new puzzle, or a new theory. We just need to believe what God already said.

That is why I am asking, hoping for some Scriptural backing : )

 

[brad45]

Luke chapter 16, richman and Lazarus. 16:23. And in hell he lift up his eyes , being in torment and see Abraham far off, and Lazarus in his bosom.

E w bullinger note in companion King James bible, has hell in Greek for - Hades.

There is gulf that separated both sides, paradise and hades. Neither side can cross over.

16:26

Great Gulf is fixed, they can see one another, but no way to pass to the other side. 2 Esdras chapter 7:78-87 is cross reference.

The spiritually dead, and wicked are in Hades, and the saints in paradise.

 

[David]

2 Esdras chapter 7:78-87 is cross reference.

2 Esdras 7:78–87 is not Scripture.

It is part of what is commonly called the Apocrypha. Those writings were never given as God-breathed Scripture, and they are not recognized as such within the Bible itself.

The standard is clear: “All scripture is given by inspiration of God” ~2 Timothy 3:16. That applies to what God actually gave, not later writings added by men.

Jesus also settled where authority rests: “The scripture cannot be broken” ~John 10:35. He consistently pointed to the recognized Scriptures, not to extra books.

And Scripture warns directly, “Learn… not to think of men above that which is written” ~1 Corinthians 4:6. If a writing cannot be established as part of the God-given Scriptures, it has no authority over doctrine.

So here’s the bottom line:

Luke chapter 16, richman and Lazarus. 16:23. And in hell he lift up his eyes , being in torment and see Abraham far off, and Lazarus in his bosom.

E w bullinger note in companion King James bible, has hell in Greek for - Hades.

There is gulf that separated both sides, paradise and hades. Neither side can cross over.

16:26

Great Gulf is fixed, they can see one another, but no way to pass to the other side. 2 Esdras chapter 7:78-87 is cross reference.

The spiritually dead, and wicked are in Hades, and the saints in paradise.

You were doing fine until you brought in 2 Esdras. That’s not Scripture, so it doesn’t prove anything.

Stick with what Jesus actually said.

Luke 16:23 shows the rich man in torment in Hades. Verse 26 says there’s a great gulf fixed. No crossing. No second chances. That part is clear.

But don’t stop there.

Before the cross, you see Abraham’s bosom. After the cross, Jesus says, “Today shalt thou be with me in paradise” ~Luke 23:43. Then Paul makes it plain, “to be absent from the body… present with the Lord” ~2 Corinthians 5:8.

That’s the difference people miss.

Believers aren’t sitting across a gulf somewhere now. They are with Christ.

And Hades itself isn’t the end. “Death and hell were cast into the lake of fire” ~Revelation 20:14.

So let’s keep it simple and biblical:

Yes, there is separation.
Yes, there is no crossing.
No, 2 Esdras isn’t authority.

And the believer’s hope is being with the Lord, not in a compartment.

You can read 2 Esdras as historical or religious literature, but it does not carry the authority of Scripture and cannot be used to establish doctrine.

 

[brad45]

2 Esdras 7:78–87 is not Scripture.

It is part of what is commonly called the Apocrypha. Those writings were never given as God-breathed Scripture, and they are not recognized as such within the Bible itself.

The standard is clear: “All scripture is given by inspiration of God” ~2 Timothy 3:16. That applies to what God actually gave, not later writings added by men.

Jesus also settled where authority rests: “The scripture cannot be broken” ~John 10:35. He consistently pointed to the recognized Scriptures, not to extra books.

And Scripture warns directly, “Learn… not to think of men above that which is written” ~1 Corinthians 4:6. If a writing cannot be established as part of the God-given Scriptures, it has no authority over doctrine.

So here’s the bottom line:

You were doing fine until you brought in 2 Esdras. That’s not Scripture, so it doesn’t prove anything.

Stick with what Jesus actually said.

Luke 16:23 shows the rich man in torment in Hades. Verse 26 says there’s a great gulf fixed. No crossing. No second chances. That part is clear.

But don’t stop there.

Before the cross, you see Abraham’s bosom. After the cross, Jesus says, “Today shalt thou be with me in paradise” ~Luke 23:43. Then Paul makes it plain, “to be absent from the body… present with the Lord” ~2 Corinthians 5:8.

That’s the difference people miss.

Believers aren’t sitting across a gulf somewhere now. They are with Christ.

And Hades itself isn’t the end. “Death and hell were cast into the lake of fire” ~Revelation 20:14.

So let’s keep it simple and biblical:

Yes, there is separation.
Yes, there is no crossing.
No, 2 Esdras isn’t authority.

And the believer’s hope is being with the Lord, not in a compartment.

You can read 2 Esdras as historical or religious literature, but it does not carry the authority of Scripture and cannot be used to establish doctrine

We disagree. I don't trust the Maccabees in the apocypha, but Esdras is credible. I did just fine sir. Your entitled to believe what you want.

And there are two sides of the gulf. We disagree.

Thank you for your honesty. I did just fine. Take care.

 

[OceanLilly]

In the original bible text the word (Hell) never accrues. Hell was put in place of the words Sheol and Gehenna. Yahshua came speaking in parables and used the word Gehenna, not Hell.

The word (sheol) never ever translates as Hell.
The word Gehenna never ever translates as Hell.

There is a video you might search out on You Tube. A priest tells us the church invented Hell.

Entirely plausible when,as you observed, the Old Testament Hebrews did not know of such a place.
And that's reasonable.
Imagine suffering eternally for finite mistakes.

Mistakes made because we were created imperfect in the beginning. By God's will and plan.

When you read the Old Testament of the Hebrews faith,you learn what it says of our destiny when we die.
Our body returns go dust from which it sprang. Remember,Adam was made from the dust of Earth.
And our soul returns to God who gave it.
Remember, God breathed into Adams nostrils and Adam became a living soul.

 

[David]

We disagree. I don't trust the Maccabees in the apocypha, but Esdras is credible. I did just fine sir. Your entitled to believe what you want.

And there are two sides of the gulf. We disagree.

Thank you for your honesty. I did just fine. Take care.

This isn’t about “two sides” or personal preference. Truth in Scripture is not a pick-and-choose matter. “Sanctify them through thy truth: thy word is truth” ~John 17:17.

You’re appealing to Esdras, which is not Scripture, to support a doctrine that cannot be shown from the Bible itself. That’s the issue.

Doctrine must come from what is written. “All scripture is given by inspiration of God” ~2 Timothy 3:16. If it’s not grounded in Scripture, it does not carry God’s authority.

And saying “we disagree” does not resolve whether something is true. The question is still the same:

Where does the Bible actually teach a first earth age?

If it’s not in the text, it’s not sound doctrine.

 

[brad45]

This isn’t about “two sides” or personal preference. Truth in Scripture is not a pick-and-choose matter. “Sanctify them through thy truth: thy word is truth” ~John 17:17.

You’re appealing to Esdras, which is not Scripture, to support a doctrine that cannot be shown from the Bible itself. That’s the issue.

Doctrine must come from what is written. “All scripture is given by inspiration of God” ~2 Timothy 3:16. If it’s not grounded in Scripture, it does not carry God’s authority.

And saying “we disagree” does not resolve whether something is true. The question is still the same:

Where does the Bible actually teach a first earth age?

If it’s not in the text, it’s not sound doctrine.

Titus chapter 3.911

But avoid foolish controversy and genealogy and arguments and quarels about the law, because these are unprofitable and useless. Warn a divisive person once, and then warn them second time. After that have nothing to do with them. You may be sure that such people are warped and sinful, they are self condemned.

All your interested in is sowing discord and using subversion. I don't want nothing to do with you. Your Apostate and fake.

Don't waste my time. Good bye.

 

[David]

There is a video you might search out on You Tube. A priest tells us the church invented Hell.

Entirely plausible when,as you observed, the Old Testament Hebrews did not know of such a place.
And that's reasonable.
Imagine suffering eternally for finite mistakes.

Mistakes made because we were created imperfect in the beginning. By God's will and plan.

When you read the Old Testament of the Hebrews faith,you learn what it says of our destiny when we die.
Our body returns go dust from which it sprang. Remember,Adam was made from the dust of Earth.
And our soul returns to God who gave it.
Remember, God breathed into Adams nostrils and Adam became a living soul.

That claim doesn’t hold up when you actually read the text.

Jesus didn’t stay vague about this. He said, “these shall go away into everlasting punishment: but the righteous into life eternal” ~Matthew 25:46. Same duration for both. If one is eternal, so is the other.

He also warned, “to be cast into hell fire… where their worm dieth not, and the fire is not quenched” ~Mark 9:43–44. That is not describing something temporary or imaginary.

Yes, the Old Testament uses Sheol, and the New Testament uses Gehenna. But arguing over the English word “hell” misses the point. Scripture defines the reality, not the label.

Daniel 12:2 already shows this before the New Testament: “some to everlasting life, and some to shame and everlasting contempt.”

And Revelation is as direct as it gets: “they shall be tormented day and night for ever and ever” ~Revelation 20:10.

So no, this isn’t something the church invented. It’s taught plainly in Scripture.

The issue isn’t the word “hell.” The issue is whether we accept what God actually said about judgment.

Also, a priest has no authority over anything as they teach falsely. Jesus is our Priest not any man.

 

[David]

Titus chapter 3.911

But avoid foolish controversy and genealogy and arguments and quarels about the law, because these are unprofitable and useless. Warn a divisive person once, and then warn them second time. After that have nothing to do with them. You may be sure that such people are warped and sinful, they are self condemned.

All your interested in is sowing discord and using subversion. I don't want nothing to do with you. Your Apostate and fake.

Don't waste my time. Good bye.

Quoting Titus 3 doesn’t help your case when you’re the one avoiding the question and inserting doctrine that isn’t in the text.

You were asked plainly: where does the Bible say there is a first earth age?

You haven’t shown it. Instead, you’ve turned to accusations and misapplied Scripture. That’s not contending for truth. That’s deflecting from it. “If any man speak, let him speak as the oracles of God” ~1 Peter 4:11.

Calling someone “apostate” doesn’t make your teaching biblical. Doctrine has to come from what is written, not from men or extra books. “Not to think… above that which is written” ~1 Corinthians 4:6.

And this needs to be said clearly. You are following men and their system instead of the God of the Bible. “Thus saith the LORD; Cursed be the man that trusteth in man… and whose heart departeth from the LORD” ~Jeremiah 17:5.

Again, If it’s not in Scripture, it’s not truth. So the question remains, whether you choose to answer it or not:

Where does the Bible actually teach a first earth age?

 

[OceanLilly]

That claim doesn’t hold up when you actually read the text.

Jesus didn’t stay vague about this. He said, “these shall go away into everlasting punishment: but the righteous into life eternal” ~Matthew 25:46. Same duration for both. If one is eternal, so is the other.

He also warned, “to be cast into hell fire… where their worm dieth not, and the fire is not quenched” ~Mark 9:43–44. That is not describing something temporary or imaginary.

Yes, the Old Testament uses Sheol, and the New Testament uses Gehenna. But arguing over the English word “hell” misses the point. Scripture defines the reality, not the label.

Daniel 12:2 already shows this before the New Testament: “some to everlasting life, and some to shame and everlasting contempt.”

And Revelation is as direct as it gets: “they shall be tormented day and night for ever and ever” ~Revelation 20:10.

So no, this isn’t something the church invented. It’s taught plainly in Scripture.

The issue isn’t the word “hell.” The issue is whether we accept what God actually said about judgment.

Also, a priest has no authority over anything as they teach falsely. Jesus is our Priest not any man.

I appreciate your point of view. Thank you.

 

[David]

I appreciate your point of view.

Once again, if what’s being said is drawn straight from Scripture in context, it’s not just a POV. It’s what God has said.

 

[bobinfaith]

Titus chapter 3.911

But avoid foolish controversy and genealogy and arguments and quarels about the law, because these are unprofitable and useless. Warn a divisive person once, and then warn them second time. After that have nothing to do with them. You may be sure that such people are warped and sinful, they are self condemned.

All your interested in is sowing discord and using subversion. I don't want nothing to do with you. Your Apostate and fake.

Don't waste my time. Good bye.

Dear brothers and sisters;

This gentleman's loyalty to his doctrine is emotional and in the flesh. I have tried to have a cup of coffee with these men and women and as they share with me what they believe, I would respond constructively and civil, and unfortunately they would walk out on me with no room for discussion and learning from their view.

Seriously, as followers and disciples for Christ, our aim is to know the Bible and distinguish from "myths and theories" to the True Word of God. Know the Bible. This is healthy for the growing believer.

Though Esdra is interesting reading in the Apocrypha regarding the seven stages of the soul after death, this falls in the teachings of Purgatory and Limbo. These three are not divinely inspired or God breathed anywhere in the Old or New Testaments.

God bless everyone.

Bob

 

[Yesua888]

We disagree. I don't trust the Maccabees in the apocypha, but Esdras is credible. I did just fine sir. Your entitled to believe what you want.

And there are two sides of the gulf. We disagree.

Thank you for your honesty. I did just fine. Take care.

Hi Brad,

I believe that what David is pointing out is that 2Esdras is not part of the Bible that we follow on BTF. In the beginning we read the mission statement ("rules" if you will) of BTF, and agree to respect this.

Many of us come into this forum to learn more about the Bible, and some of us also have many questions to ask, in finding find out the Truth, God's Truth (God the Father, God the Son, and God the Holy Spirit).

It is sometimes difficult to accept that what we have followed or believed for a long time, may not be backed by Scripture.

Be that as it may, and I will speak for myself (and perhaps other brothers and sisters on this forum will agree), that we are here to learn God's Word, and that especially includes Jesus' teachings.

So far (as members of BTF), we have been very fortunate to have agreement in this respect, and we DO respect each other. BTF is unique, and differs from most "Christian forums" elsewhere.
For exmple, the forums that I have been exposed to in the past, members slander, blame, shame, manipulate and just plainly do not respect each other.
Here on BTF we have the opportunity to learn how to interact appropriately.

Thanks to David, he keeps us focussed on what is written in Scriipture.

David also makes sure that this forum is SAFE for those of us who regard BTF as Our Santuary
This is where we can safely share, without being belittled, or shamed. We do not use harse words with each other, and hopefully this will continue to be the standard, going forward.

It is always good to hear other points of view, to have healthy dialogue, and to be open to receiving corrections for beliefs that may not stand up to Scripture (man's interpretation).

The other thing I wish to mention is that we are Not David's "puppets", or "are brainwashed" ... many of us are here to Enjoy clean and Godly fellowship, and to Learn the Truth.

All the best