PDA

View Full Version : Popular View of Hell Unknown in the OT


crakjak
09-18-2007, 05:40 PM
The Popular Concept of Hell Unknown to the Old Testament

Before we move to the gospel's teaching on hell, we want to think further concerning that the word gehenna (popularly mistranslated hell, as we'll see) didn't occur in the Greek Old Testament, the Septuagint. Let's take a few paragraphs to let the significance of that fact soak in. In previous editions of this material, I merely remarked that prominent Old Testament characters like David and Abraham never heard the term or its equivalent. They were never threatened with eternal torment in hell or heard anything like our popular concept now. However, Gehenna's absence in the Old Testament is a much more serious omission than that. (The concepts in this section are suggested by Thomas B. Thayer in his 1855 Edition of Origin and History of the Doctrine of Endless Punishment.)
Before the Mosaic Law

Adam and Eve in the Garden

When God placed Adam and Eve in the Garden of Eden, he never mentioned the concept of eternal torment to them. Read for yourself-it's just not there. Don't you think it strange that as human history began on this planet, while God explained which tree they could not eat of, that he didn't give the parents of all mankind some kind of warning about eternal punishment, if there was potential for it to be in their future, and the future of all their posterity?

Most of us think eternal torment will engulf the vast majority of mankind, nearly all of Adam and Eve's descendents, yet here's a father, God, who didn't warn his children of the potential of what might befall them. What would you think of a father who told his young child not to ride his bike in the street, and if he did, he would get a spanking. Suppose he also planned to roast him over a roaring fire for fifty years? After he spanked him, would you think him a just father for not warning his child? Can you think of an apology or a defense for him? Yet to Adam and Eve, the father of all mankind failed to mention a much greater punishment than the death they would die the day they ate of the forbidden tree. Was this just a slip of the mind on God's part, to not mention at all the interminable terrible woes that lay ahead for the vast majority of their descendants? No, God announced to them a tangible present punishment the very day they committed the sin: “In the day thou eatest thereof thou shalt surely die.” They found that the wages of sin was death.

Cain and Abel

The same is true with Cain and Abel, a case of murder of a brother. Surely, we would think that God might roll out the threat of eternal torment that Cain was to receive as a warning to all future generations. In the whole account, there's not a hint, not a single word on the subject. Instead, Cain is told, “And now art thou cursed from the earth...When thou tillest the ground, it shall not henceforth yield unto thee her strength; a fugitive and a vagabond shalt thou be in the earth.” Again, Cain received an immediate, tangible physical punishment administered, with absolutely no warning of future eternal torment. Like Adam, Cain heard none of the dire warnings preached from pulpits of the fiery wrath of God, tormenting his soul throughout eternity.

Now, if Cain were to receive such punishment from God without warning, would God be a just lawgiver and judge to impose additional, infinitely greater punishment with no word of caution whatsoever? In Gen. 4.15, God said, “Therefore, whosoever slayeth Cain, vengeance shall be taken on him seven-fold.” If, with no warning, Cain was going to receive eternal fiery torment, would those who killed him receive seven times endless fiery torment?

I'm not making light of endless torment, I'm just pointing out that it's remarkable that God hadn't said a word about it thus far in the Bible story.

Noah and the Flood

When we come to Noah and the flood, God noted that “every thought of man's heart was only evil continually,” and that “the earth was filled with violence, and all flesh had corrupted his way upon the earth.” If not before, wouldn't this be the ideal time to reveal eternal torment ahead for nearly all inhabitants of the earth? If any circumstances warranted such punishment, this would be the time, would it not? However, Noah, “a preacher of righteousness,” didn't threaten endless punishment to evildoers. If warnings of such punishment serve to turn man aside from his evil way, surely this would have been the time to have revealed it, but there's nary a whisper of it. Instead, they were destroyed by the flood, a physical, tangible punishment for their sin, with absolutely no warning of endless torment. Nor was there such a warning when mankind inhabited the earth again after the flood. One word from God might have set the world on an entirely different course. Surprisingly no such word was given.

Sodom and Gomorrah

We could go on with the story of Sodom and Gomorrah, the physical destruction of the cities and their inhabitants, with not even a rumor of endless future torment that we probably think they unknowingly faced. What would we think if our government passed a new law with a huge fine as the punishment, but when a guilty party was found, he paid the fine, but also had to serve endless torment that the citizens had no warning of? What kind of judge explains the law and known penalty, while carefully concealing a much more awful penalty? What would the penalty of a few thousand dollars matter in a case where he was also going to be tormented horribly and endlessly? Yet the popular concept is that the Sodomites were sent into such a judgment.

We could go through the accounts of the builders of the tower of Babel, the destruction of Pharaoh and his armies, and Lot's wife, yet we would notice the same thing. All these received a temporal physical punishment, with no mention of an infinitely greater torturous punishment awaiting them in the future.

Was this teaching deliberately excluded from the record, or did it never belong? We know that it isn't there. Neither the word gehenna nor the concept of endless torment was given in the millennia before the giving of the Law of Moses. From the creation to Mt. Sinai, there was simply no insinuation of it in the entirety of human history up to that time. By the conclusion of this study, we'll see that God never had a plan of inflicting such dreadful torment on the people of his own creation.

Excerpts from Samuel Dawson's: "Jesus Teaching on Hell"

mfblume
09-18-2007, 06:14 PM
Bro, even if UR was correct, everything does not surround it, you know. ;)

crakjak
09-18-2007, 09:33 PM
Bro, even if UR was correct, everything does not surround it, you know. ;)

You are correct. But we have to make up time for all the hell fire and brimestone preaching over the years. Some folks need to get over the fear so that they can see God as He really is, our loving Heavenly Father that will take away all the sin of the whole world.

mfblume
09-18-2007, 09:40 PM
He is so loving that he takes away the sin of the world, but one has to come to Him for that. Otherwise, it is unrighteous to demand it of anyone, and, really, a waste of His and our time in mentioning it. :)

crakjak
09-18-2007, 09:46 PM
He is so loving that he takes away the sin of the world, but one has to come to Him for that. Otherwise, it is unrighteous to demand it of anyone, and, really, a waste of His and our time in mentioning it. :)

We already gone down this path before, any comments on the original post?
Don't you think Dawson's point is worthy of consideration?

Raven
09-18-2007, 09:56 PM
crakjack
Greetings my friend. It takes a long time to turn a ship or an ideaology. Only those who were not afraid to launch out into the deep discovered that the Earth was not flat. Those who were fearful remained safely on the shore with their ancient maps that declared: "Here be monsters!"
Raven

mfblume
09-18-2007, 10:00 PM
We already gone down this path before, any comments on the original post?
Don't you think Dawson's point is worthy of consideration?

Since UR underlies the entire reason you posted this issue, that association is integral to any response. :) And Dawson's point is really quite "old hat". That idea has been trodden before as well. :)

crakjak
09-18-2007, 11:11 PM
Since UR underlies the entire reason you posted this issue, that association is integral to any response. :) And Dawson's point is really quite "old hat". That idea has been trodden before as well. :)

Of course, UR underlies my post. None the less, why don't we discuss the lack of presentation of eternal damnation or annihilation in the OT.

I will try all kinds of approaches to draw discussion, because this is a very important subject.

crakjak
09-18-2007, 11:21 PM
crakjack
Greetings my friend. It takes a long time to turn a ship or an ideaology. Only those who were not afraid to launch out into the deep discovered that the Earth was not flat. Those who were fearful remained safely on the shore with their ancient maps that declared: "Here be monsters!"
Raven

That is a great analogy. My fear disappeared when I caught a glimpse of my God's ultimate intentions. Some think UR is a license to lawlessness, to the contrary it is empowerment to full stature of sonship.
Blessings to you, friend.

crakjak
08-09-2008, 11:02 AM
The Popular Concept of Hell Unknown to the Old Testament
Before we move to the gospel's teaching on hell, we want to think further concerning that the word gehenna (popularly mistranslated hell, as we'll see) didn't occur in the Greek Old Testament, the Septuagint. Let's take a few paragraphs to let the significance of that fact soak in. In previous editions of this material, I merely remarked that prominent Old Testament characters like David and Abraham never heard the term or its equivalent. They were never threatened with eternal torment in hell or heard anything like our popular concept now. However, Gehenna's absence in the Old Testament is a much more serious omission than that. (The concepts in this section are suggested by Thomas B. Thayer in his 1855 Edition of Origin and History of the Doctrine of Endless Punishment.)
Before the Mosaic Law

Adam and Eve in the Garden
When God placed Adam and Eve in the Garden of Eden, he never mentioned the concept of eternal torment to them. Read for yourself-it's just not there. Don't you think it strange that as human history began on this planet, while God explained which tree they could not eat of, that he didn't give the parents of all mankind some kind of warning about eternal punishment, if there was potential for it to be in their future, and the future of all their posterity?

Most of us think eternal torment will engulf the vast majority of mankind, nearly all of Adam and Eve's descendents, yet here's a father, God, who didn't warn his children of the potential of what might befall them. What would you think of a father who told his young child not to ride his bike in the street, and if he did, he would get a spanking. Suppose he also planned to roast him over a roaring fire for fifty years? After he spanked him, would you think him a just father for not warning his child? Can you think of an apology or a defense for him? Yet to Adam and Eve, the father of all mankind failed to mention a much greater punishment than the death they would die the day they ate of the forbidden tree. Was this just a slip of the mind on God's part, to not mention at all the interminable terrible woes that lay ahead for the vast majority of their descendants? No, God announced to them a tangible present punishment the very day they committed the sin: “In the day thou eatest thereof thou shalt surely die.” They found that the wages of sin was death.

Cain and Abel
The same is true with Cain and Abel, a case of murder of a brother. Surely, we would think that God might roll out the threat of eternal torment that Cain was to receive as a warning to all future generations. In the whole account, there's not a hint, not a single word on the subject. Instead, Cain is told, “And now art thou cursed from the earth...When thou tillest the ground, it shall not henceforth yield unto thee her strength; a fugitive and a vagabond shalt thou be in the earth.” Again, Cain received an immediate, tangible physical punishment administered, with absolutely no warning of future eternal torment. Like Adam, Cain heard none of the dire warnings preached from pulpits of the fiery wrath of God, tormenting his soul throughout eternity.

Now, if Cain were to receive such punishment from God without warning, would God be a just lawgiver and judge to impose additional, infinitely greater punishment with no word of caution whatsoever? In Gen. 4.15, God said, “Therefore, whosoever slayeth Cain, vengeance shall be taken on him seven-fold.” If, with no warning, Cain was going to receive eternal fiery torment, would those who killed him receive seven times endless fiery torment?

I'm not making light of endless torment, I'm just pointing out that it's remarkable that God hadn't said a word about it thus far in the Bible story.

Noah and the Flood
When we come to Noah and the flood, God noted that “every thought of man's heart was only evil continually,” and that “the earth was filled with violence, and all flesh had corrupted his way upon the earth.” If not before, wouldn't this be the ideal time to reveal eternal torment ahead for nearly all inhabitants of the earth? If any circumstances warranted such punishment, this would be the time, would it not? However, Noah, “a preacher of righteousness,” didn't threaten endless punishment to evildoers. If warnings of such punishment serve to turn man aside from his evil way, surely this would have been the time to have revealed it, but there's nary a whisper of it. Instead, they were destroyed by the flood, a physical, tangible punishment for their sin, with absolutely no warning of endless torment. Nor was there such a warning when mankind inhabited the earth again after the flood. One word from God might have set the world on an entirely different course. Surprisingly no such word was given.

Sodom and Gomorrah
We could go on with the story of Sodom and Gomorrah, the physical destruction of the cities and their inhabitants, with not even a rumor of endless future torment that we probably think they unknowingly faced. What would we think if our government passed a new law with a huge fine as the punishment, but when a guilty party was found, he paid the fine, but also had to serve endless torment that the citizens had no warning of? What kind of judge explains the law and known penalty, while carefully concealing a much more awful penalty? What would the penalty of a few thousand dollars matter in a case where he was also going to be tormented horribly and endlessly? Yet the popular concept is that the Sodomites were sent into such a judgment.

We could go through the accounts of the builders of the tower of Babel, the destruction of Pharaoh and his armies, and Lot's wife, yet we would notice the same thing. All these received a temporal physical punishment, with no mention of an infinitely greater torturous punishment awaiting them in the future.

Was this teaching deliberately excluded from the record, or did it never belong? We know that it isn't there. Neither the word gehenna nor the concept of endless torment was given in the millennia before the giving of the Law of Moses. From the creation to Mt. Sinai, there was simply no insinuation of it in the entirety of human history up to that time. By the conclusion of this study, we'll see that God never had a plan of inflicting such dreadful torment on the people of his own creation.

Excerpts from Samuel Dawson's: "Jesus Teaching on Hell"

Any one up to this discussion, can you rectify the lack of scripture for the traditional teaching of a burning eternal hell in the OT, seems if this doctrine were true it would truly be glaringly clear throughout ALL the scriptures?

A_PoMo
08-09-2008, 02:19 PM
If you don't have knee jerk reaction to reading stuff by emergent thinkers then Brian McLaren wrote a book on this subject three or four years ago. He doesn't take a dogmatic position on the subject, just presents the biblical evidence and poses the question. The book is "The Last Word and the Word After That", it's the last of a trilogy on post-modern church stuff.

crakjak
08-09-2008, 02:26 PM
If you don't have knee jerk reaction to reading stuff by emergent thinkers then Brian McLaren wrote a book on this subject three or four years ago. He doesn't take a dogmatic position on the subject, just presents the biblical evidence and poses the question. The book is "The Last Word and the Word After That", it's the last of a trilogy on post-modern church stuff.

I have read some of McLaren writing, and I am not afraid to read and consider. I have not read this book, I will check it out.

What are your thoughts on the subject?:tease

A_PoMo
08-09-2008, 06:00 PM
I have read some of McLaren writing, and I am not afraid to read and consider. I have not read this book, I will check it out.

What are your thoughts on the subject?:tease

Yeah, McLaren is cool for the most part. Unfortunately all the conservative writers have demonized him and made him the boogey man of the emerging church movement. Everybody needs a Darth Vadar I guess. I've met McLaren and he's a very warm, gentle, kind person.

I dunno about hell. I haven't had the chance to really look into it. However, based on what I've read and on some things I've learned in seminary I don't think the conventional doctrine of hell is entirely accurate. I wonder if it's based more on Dante's Inferno than the Bible. The fact that the concept of hell is so conspicuously absent from the OT and rabbinical writings is notable. It's something I hope to study more in the coming months.

Lafon
08-09-2008, 08:47 PM
As I read the responses to this matter I am mindful of the fact that the entirety of the Bible's contents represent a condensed version of the works of God, therefore simply because one perhaps finds no mention of hell within the things recorded therein concerning the events which transpired within the lives of such individuals as theose referenced DOES NOT imply/infer that God never informed them about the consequences of their sins, that is to say eternal punishment in hell (a lake of fire). Because we are informed of this matter in later portions of the Scriptures then IMO one must conclude that those individuals mentioned surely must have been made aware of the existence of hell. To suggest/infer/imply otherwise is to accuse God of a deliberate act of unrighteousness, and that is an accusation which I would be extremely hesitant to do.

A_PoMo
08-09-2008, 10:52 PM
As I read the responses to this matter I am mindful of the fact that the entirety of the Bible's contents represent a condensed version of the works of God, therefore simply because one perhaps finds no mention of hell within the things recorded therein concerning the events which transpired within the lives of such individuals as theose referenced DOES NOT imply/infer that God never informed them about the consequences of their sins, that is to say eternal punishment in hell (a lake of fire). Because we are informed of this matter in later portions of the Scriptures then IMO one must conclude that those individuals mentioned surely must have been made aware of the existence of hell. To suggest/infer/imply otherwise is to accuse God of a deliberate act of unrighteousness, and that is an accusation which I would be extremely hesitant to do.

Is that kinda an argument from silence? Sorta like trying to prove a negative. Surely something as elemental as hell would have a corresponding concept in the OT if it were what we've been taught it is. But nada, zip. It aint there. That's gotta make you wonder.

Lafon
08-10-2008, 07:31 AM
Is that kinda an argument from silence? Sorta like trying to prove a negative. Surely something as elemental as hell would have a corresponding concept in the OT if it were what we've been taught it is. But nada, zip. It aint there. That's gotta make you wonder.

Is it found in the writings of Genesis (prior to God's pronouncement of the death upon Adam's physical body) that he was given an explanation of all that death entails? Of course not! The knowledge of such are found in subsequent portions of the scriptures, however, thereby giving us an example of the mysterious manner in which the sacred written "oracles of God" are revealed.

My response to this matter simply reflects a personal view that for one to suggest, or even imagine, that God would act in a manner which indicates deceit on His part, is not only foolishness but displays one's unwitting failure to "rightly divide the word of truth."

Is not hell and eternal punishment in the lake of fire a central element of the judgment of death?

Did not John (in the closing portions of his gospel) inform us that even the world could not contain the books that should be written if ALL of the actions of God were made known? For this reason I am persuaded that the biblical record is an extremely condensed narrative which contains only the essentials elements of that which we must know concerning God an His righteous deeds, and that we will only know the fulness thereof at some point in the future (as explicitly stated in the words of Revelation 10:7).

I respectfully submit these statements, not with the intent of being argumentive, but for your consideration of their scriptural merits.

crakjak
08-10-2008, 08:30 AM
Is it found in the writings of Genesis (prior to God's pronouncement of the death upon Adam's physical body) that he was given an explanation of all that death entails? Of course not! The knowledge of such are found in subsequent portions of the scriptures, however, thereby giving us an example of the mysterious manner in which the sacred written "oracles of God" are revealed.

My response to this matter simply reflects a personal view that for one to suggest, or even imagine, that God would act in a manner which indicates deceit on His part, is not only foolishness but displays one's unwitting failure to "rightly divide the word of truth."

Is not hell and eternal punishment in the lake of fire a central element of the judgment of death?

Did not John (in the closing portions of his gospel) inform us that even the world could not contain the books that should be written if ALL of the actions of God were made known? For this reason I am persuaded that the biblical record is an extremely condensed narrative which contains only the essentials elements of that which we must know concerning God an His righteous deeds, and that we will only know the fulness thereof at some point in the future (as explicitly stated in the words of Revelation 10:7).

I respectfully submit these statements, not with the intent of being argumentive, but for your consideration of their scriptural merits.

I have submitted the opposite view in the same manner, that from the silence of the OT, which is for our "en-samples", that it is very possible that the common understanding is a misunderstanding. The possibility that God never intended such a thing as "endless torment" of His highest order of creation.

Have you read God's response to Israel when they were offering their children in fire to the heathen god Molech, He said that He hate it, that He never intended such a thing. Could He then do the same thing to His children???

pastorrick1959
08-10-2008, 09:33 PM
i wonder if god has the power to bring man to his will .. its not his will that any should [persih but all come to repentace. but now how would he come about doin that??hhmm.hell?i think he gave us a sneak peak in the garden of what he has wanted in his whole plan a perfect man in a perfect land!

Lafon
08-11-2008, 05:13 AM
I have submitted the opposite view in the same manner, that from the silence of the OT, which is for our "en-samples", that it is very possible that the common understanding is a misunderstanding. The possibility that God never intended such a thing as "endless torment" of His highest order of creation.

Have you read God's response to Israel when they were offering their children in fire to the heathen god Molech, He said that He hate it, that He never intended such a thing. Could He then do the same thing to His children???


I would certainly be quick to agree that, even from the very moment of His creation of mankind, God never intended that "endless torment" would be the ultimate destiny of any man. This is not to say, however, that such would not be the fate of those who would elect, of their own volition, to willfully disregard, and disobey, the commandment which He issued concerning the forbidden fruit from the "tree of the knowledge of good and evil."

The only point that I desire my comments about this matter might portray is simply thus - the context of the Bible represents only an extremely condensed accounting of God's many actions (and, indeed, its contents constitutes the barest essential elements of truth which we need to know, heed, and obey so that we might be reconciled to Him), therefore I am hesitant to conclude that because of this important factor of the judgment of death has not been disclosed in every event we find recorded concerning it within the writings of the OT, then such ommission should not be construed as evidence that God concealed all that might, or should be known about that matter. Surely if eternal punishment in a lake of fire was to be the central element of the judgment of death, then the righteousness of God would demand that He also make this important factor known, although such integral details might not be included in every place that death is mentioned.

Are we to conclude that God deliberately withheld such a crucial element of the judgment of death from Adam when He pronounced this penalty upon his physical body as a consequence of his willful disobedience? I, for one, think not, albeit such is not found contained within any of the things written about this matter.

crakjak
08-11-2008, 08:23 AM
i wonder if god has the power to bring man to his will .. its not his will that any should [persih but all come to repentace. but now how would he come about doin that??hhmm.hell?i think he gave us a sneak peak in the garden of what he has wanted in his whole plan a perfect man in a perfect land!

God brought Saul (Paul) to His will in a nano second on the road to Damascus, I have no doubt that He is well able to bring all to His will.

God has a plan to redeem the whole creation, the earth and mankind is front and center in this redemption.

Lafon
08-11-2008, 09:10 AM
God brought Saul (Paul) to His will in a nano second on the road to Damascus, I have no doubt that He is well able to bring all to His will.

God has a plan to redeem the whole creation, the earth and mankind is front and center in this redemption.


Am I remiss in my assumption that you are asserting ALL mankind will be redeemed, and that NONE will be lost, that is, experience eternal punishment in the lake of fire together with Satan and the angelic beings who joined him in rebellion against God?

Perhaps I am wrong in this conclusion which I have gleaned from the statements you have rendered here, and indeed, I hope that I am.

If ALL mankind is to be redeemed (as your statements seem to infer/imply), then would not the trials one experiences in this life in the efforts they exert to heed and obey His commandments seem akin to an exercise in futility?

Are you implying there will be NO punishment rendered for that man who elects to willfully disregard righteous living? If so, then why strive to live godly, when those who choose not to do so will ultimately receive the same rewards as those who do?

Your statements concerning this important matter are frightening, at least to me!

pastorrick1959
08-11-2008, 02:57 PM
yep .. the story of wheat and tares makes for good conversation also. what was removed? ps. 37; is a good chapter the wicked cut off the righteous inherit . god has a way of breaking our will to be his will and he will win ..sin shall be put down which is the last enemy .. eze, states when iniquity shall have an end.

crakjak
08-11-2008, 06:28 PM
Am I remiss in my assumption that you are asserting ALL mankind will be redeemed, and that NONE will be lost, that is, experience eternal punishment in the lake of fire together with Satan and the angelic beings who joined him in rebellion against God?

Perhaps I am wrong in this conclusion which I have gleaned from the statements you have rendered here, and indeed, I hope that I am.

If ALL mankind is to be redeemed (as your statements seem to infer/imply), then would not the trials one experiences in this life in the efforts they exert to heed and obey His commandments seem akin to an exercise in futility?

Are you implying there will be NO punishment rendered for that man who elects to willfully disregard righteous living? If so, then why strive to live godly, when those who choose not to do so will ultimately receive the same rewards as those who do?

Your statements concerning this important matter are frightening, at least to me!

I have answered these questions at length in other threads and posts, you can easily reference those on this forum. The answer to your first question is, no you are not remiss. The answer to the second question is: no it is not an exercise in futility. As Jesus spoke to Thomas, "...more blessed are those that have not seen and yet believe" these I believe to be God's elect.

Thirdly, I am not at all suggesting that there is no punishment for the wicked, however, said punishment will be corrective rather than punitive. This punishment it to be avoided, to be God's elect and also to avoid the pain of the chastisement of the Lord.

crakjak
08-12-2008, 08:16 AM
I have answered these questions at length in other threads and posts, you can easily reference those on this forum. The answer to your first question is, no you are not remiss. The answer to the second question is: no it is not an exercise in futility. As Jesus spoke to Thomas, "...more blessed are those that have not seen and yet believe" these I believe to be God's elect.

Thirdly, I am not at all suggesting that there is no punishment for the wicked, however, said punishment will be corrective rather than punitive. This punishment it to be avoided, to be God's elect and also to avoid the pain of the chastisement of the Lord.

bump for Lafon

Jack Shephard
08-12-2008, 08:21 AM
Question: How can something be popular and yet unknow at the sametime?

LOL

Lafon
08-12-2008, 09:15 AM
I pray that my position/view regarding this matter has been clearly stated, therefore I see no need for further input.

Perhaps the only exception might be thus: I am well aware that it is possible for one (including myself) to excerpt a particular scriptural verse, or part thereof, from its original context, then use it in a manner not intended to support an opinion/view which stands in direct contradiction to the sound principles of the Bible.

For this reason I deem it essential that I not allow myself to accept and embrace a particular assertion made by others, unless of course, such can be indisputably, and unquestionably supported by a multiplicity of sound scriptural passages pertaining to the particular issue(s) being addressed.

This is the primary reasoning behind my rejection of the suggestion/assertion that God failed to warn of punishment in the eternal flames of the lake of fire for those who would willfully disobey any element of His commandments.

Based exclusively upon this understanding and personal view of the matter, I am irrevocably persuaded that righteousness (which is the fundamental/elementary principle upon which ALL of God's relationship with each entity of His creation is based/founded - see Psalms 89:14 & 97:2), then it was DEMANDED of Him to inform Adam, and others, of the eventual consequences of their willful disobedience of His commandments.

crakjak
08-14-2008, 06:19 PM
:ursofunnyQuestion: How can something be popular and yet unknow at the sametime?

LOL

:ursofunny

BrotherEastman
08-18-2008, 02:13 PM
Any one up to this discussion, can you rectify the lack of scripture for the traditional teaching of a burning eternal hell in the OT, seems if this doctrine were true it would truly be glaringly clear throughout ALL the scriptures?
Do you believe in a resurrection? If you do, can you rectify the lack of a resurrection in those same eras that you have mentioned?

crakjak
08-19-2008, 08:19 AM
Do you believe in a resurrection? If you do, can you rectify the lack of a resurrection in those same eras that you have mentioned?

Yes, Jesus had not died, man had not yet been reconciled to God, when Jesus died rescued those who had gone on before. The grave now has no power to hold those that die, all who die now are not held by the grave.

BrotherEastman
08-19-2008, 10:12 AM
Yes, Jesus had not died, man had not yet been reconciled to God, when Jesus died rescued those who had gone on before. The grave now has no power to hold those that die, all who die now are not held by the grave.
Thank you for the answer, now I must ask another question (or two). Do you think that because there was no resurrection, and thus no proof, that the sadducees were justified to believe that there was no ressurection since they had no proof before the NT? How come the Pharisees believed in a resurrection without prior proof? The reason I ask my questions is because one could just as easily surmise that hell as we know it exists even though we have not been to the other side of death.

crakjak
08-20-2008, 10:25 AM
Thank you for the answer, now I must ask another question (or two). Do you think that because there was no resurrection, and thus no proof, that the sadducees were justified to believe that there was no ressurection since they had no proof before the NT? How come the Pharisees believed in a resurrection without prior proof? The reason I ask my questions is because one could just as easily surmise that hell as we know it exists even though we have not been to the other side of death.

Well, the resurrection is in line with the character and nature of God, the majority of God's highest order of creation lost in an inferno without hope defies the character and nature of God.

BrotherEastman
08-21-2008, 11:42 AM
Well, the resurrection is in line with the character and nature of God, the majority of God's highest order of creation lost in an inferno without hope defies the character and nature of God.
Crak, this takes us back to square one. Who can truly know the "complete" nature of God when the capacity of a man's brain is limited to the things of this earth?

Truthseeker
08-25-2008, 02:19 AM
Crak, this takes us back to square one. Who can truly know the "complete" nature of God when the capacity of a man's brain is limited to the things of this earth?


The spiritual man.

BrotherEastman
08-25-2008, 06:44 AM
The spiritual man.
Even the spiritual man cannot know "everything" about an omnipotent, omniscient, and an omnipresent God my friend.

ApostolicTexas
09-06-2008, 10:55 PM
The Popular Concept of Hell Unknown to the Old Testament

Before we move to the gospel's teaching on hell, we want to think further concerning that the word gehenna (popularly mistranslated hell, as we'll see) didn't occur in the Greek Old Testament, the Septuagint. Let's take a few paragraphs to let the significance of that fact soak in. In previous editions of this material, I merely remarked that prominent Old Testament characters like David and Abraham never heard the term or its equivalent. They were never threatened with eternal torment in hell or heard anything like our popular concept now. However, Gehenna's absence in the Old Testament is a much more serious omission than that. (The concepts in this section are suggested by Thomas B. Thayer in his 1855 Edition of Origin and History of the Doctrine of Endless Punishment.)
Before the Mosaic Law

Adam and Eve in the Garden

When God placed Adam and Eve in the Garden of Eden, he never mentioned the concept of eternal torment to them. Read for yourself-it's just not there. Don't you think it strange that as human history began on this planet, while God explained which tree they could not eat of, that he didn't give the parents of all mankind some kind of warning about eternal punishment, if there was potential for it to be in their future, and the future of all their posterity?

Most of us think eternal torment will engulf the vast majority of mankind, nearly all of Adam and Eve's descendents, yet here's a father, God, who didn't warn his children of the potential of what might befall them. What would you think of a father who told his young child not to ride his bike in the street, and if he did, he would get a spanking. Suppose he also planned to roast him over a roaring fire for fifty years? After he spanked him, would you think him a just father for not warning his child? Can you think of an apology or a defense for him? Yet to Adam and Eve, the father of all mankind failed to mention a much greater punishment than the death they would die the day they ate of the forbidden tree. Was this just a slip of the mind on God's part, to not mention at all the interminable terrible woes that lay ahead for the vast majority of their descendants? No, God announced to them a tangible present punishment the very day they committed the sin: “In the day thou eatest thereof thou shalt surely die.” They found that the wages of sin was death.

Cain and Abel

The same is true with Cain and Abel, a case of murder of a brother. Surely, we would think that God might roll out the threat of eternal torment that Cain was to receive as a warning to all future generations. In the whole account, there's not a hint, not a single word on the subject. Instead, Cain is told, “And now art thou cursed from the earth...When thou tillest the ground, it shall not henceforth yield unto thee her strength; a fugitive and a vagabond shalt thou be in the earth.” Again, Cain received an immediate, tangible physical punishment administered, with absolutely no warning of future eternal torment. Like Adam, Cain heard none of the dire warnings preached from pulpits of the fiery wrath of God, tormenting his soul throughout eternity.

Now, if Cain were to receive such punishment from God without warning, would God be a just lawgiver and judge to impose additional, infinitely greater punishment with no word of caution whatsoever? In Gen. 4.15, God said, “Therefore, whosoever slayeth Cain, vengeance shall be taken on him seven-fold.” If, with no warning, Cain was going to receive eternal fiery torment, would those who killed him receive seven times endless fiery torment?

I'm not making light of endless torment, I'm just pointing out that it's remarkable that God hadn't said a word about it thus far in the Bible story.

Noah and the Flood

When we come to Noah and the flood, God noted that “every thought of man's heart was only evil continually,” and that “the earth was filled with violence, and all flesh had corrupted his way upon the earth.” If not before, wouldn't this be the ideal time to reveal eternal torment ahead for nearly all inhabitants of the earth? If any circumstances warranted such punishment, this would be the time, would it not? However, Noah, “a preacher of righteousness,” didn't threaten endless punishment to evildoers. If warnings of such punishment serve to turn man aside from his evil way, surely this would have been the time to have revealed it, but there's nary a whisper of it. Instead, they were destroyed by the flood, a physical, tangible punishment for their sin, with absolutely no warning of endless torment. Nor was there such a warning when mankind inhabited the earth again after the flood. One word from God might have set the world on an entirely different course. Surprisingly no such word was given.

Sodom and Gomorrah

We could go on with the story of Sodom and Gomorrah, the physical destruction of the cities and their inhabitants, with not even a rumor of endless future torment that we probably think they unknowingly faced. What would we think if our government passed a new law with a huge fine as the punishment, but when a guilty party was found, he paid the fine, but also had to serve endless torment that the citizens had no warning of? What kind of judge explains the law and known penalty, while carefully concealing a much more awful penalty? What would the penalty of a few thousand dollars matter in a case where he was also going to be tormented horribly and endlessly? Yet the popular concept is that the Sodomites were sent into such a judgment.

We could go through the accounts of the builders of the tower of Babel, the destruction of Pharaoh and his armies, and Lot's wife, yet we would notice the same thing. All these received a temporal physical punishment, with no mention of an infinitely greater torturous punishment awaiting them in the future.

Was this teaching deliberately excluded from the record, or did it never belong? We know that it isn't there. Neither the word gehenna nor the concept of endless torment was given in the millennia before the giving of the Law of Moses. From the creation to Mt. Sinai, there was simply no insinuation of it in the entirety of human history up to that time. By the conclusion of this study, we'll see that God never had a plan of inflicting such dreadful torment on the people of his own creation.

Excerpts from Samuel Dawson's: "Jesus Teaching on Hell"

If a believer is promised eternal life..what is does a sinner who dies without God have?..

crakjak
09-06-2008, 11:02 PM
If a believer is promised eternal life..what is does a sinner who dies without God have?..

"Age abiding" correction.

mfblume
09-07-2008, 02:33 PM
CJ and I have discussed this before and we each know the others' opinions. He has fantastic prophecy understanding. ;) But I just want to comment on making a doctrine out of what we think God's nature is and is not. In short, we cannot make a doctrine that way. The Bible must plainly state or plainly imply (without question) something. And it is certainly no way to determine doctrine correctly when we ascertain what we think His nature could and could not allow Him to do. And it is compounded error to continue to dwell on it with such faulty foundation as opinion of God's nature.

God bless!

crakjak
09-07-2008, 11:12 PM
CJ and I have discussed this before and we each know the others' opinions. He has fantastic prophecy understanding. ;) But I just want to comment on making a doctrine out of what we think God's nature is and is not. In short, we cannot make a doctrine that way. The Bible must plainly state or plainly imply (without question) something. And it is certainly no way to determine doctrine correctly when we ascertain what we think His nature could and could not allow Him to do. And it is compounded error to continue to dwell on it with such faulty foundation as opinion of God's nature.

God bless!

Hello Michael,

It is great that believers can disagree on some points, but yet celebrate on what they do agree. :)

You must be kidding, we ascertain the nature of God in all that we believe. I fundamentally believe God accomplished with the sacrifice of Christ just as the scriptures declare. 2 Cor. 5:16-212 Corinthians 5:16-21

English Standard Version (ESV)


16From now on, therefore, we regard no one according to the flesh. Even though we once regarded Christ according to the flesh, we regard him thus no longer. 17Therefore, if anyone is in Christ, he is a new creation. The old has passed away; behold, the new has come. 18All this is from God, who through Christ reconciled us to himself and gave us the ministry of reconciliation; 19that is, in Christ God was reconciling the world to himself, not counting their trespasses against them, and entrusting to us the message of reconciliation. 20Therefore, we are ambassadors for Christ, God making his appeal through us. We implore you on behalf of Christ, be reconciled to God. 21 For our sake he made him to be sin who knew no sin, so that in him we might become the righteousness of God.

There is plenty of obedience for us to accomplish in our walk with God, however it because of our salvation rather than to accomplish our salvation. We need to talk more and more about what God has done, so that folks will believe and enter into His life. God has already reconciled the whole world to Himself, "...that is, in Christ God WAS reconciling the world to himself, NOT COUNTING THEIR SINS AGAINST THEM..." "Was" is past tense, the job is finished, God is at peace with man, He is sending AMBASSADORS to declare that He is not angry with man. We don't have to save ourselves we just need to embrace what God has accomplished, when this dawns on folks they will turn to God and obey, because to know Him is to love Him and follow Him with all our hearts.

The popular view of hell was created by man, certainly not by God!!!

crakjak
09-09-2008, 08:06 AM
May His name be glorified in all the earth, that none will say, "know the Lord" all will know Him from the least to the greatest. His glory will cover the earth as the waters cover the seas!!! A NEW EARTH IS COMING HERE! ALL THAT WE SEE WILL BE MADE NEW, AND CHRIST WILL REIGN!

mfblume
09-09-2008, 01:16 PM
Hello Michael,

It is great that believers can disagree on some points, but yet celebrate on what they do agree. :)

You must be kidding, we ascertain the nature of God in all that we believe. I fundamentally believe God accomplished with the sacrifice of Christ just as the scriptures declare. 2 Cor. 5:16-212 Corinthians 5:16-21

I am not kidding by any means. :) We can never ascertain God's potential for anything and make a doctrine out of the ramifications, since His nature is unfathomable. As caring and loving as He is, He hates the least sin more than we hate the greatest sin, if they can measured. He has more love than anyone can imagine but he also has more anger than anyone can imagine.

ronharvey
09-09-2008, 04:31 PM
The Popular Concept of Hell Unknown to the Old Testament

Before we move to the gospel's teaching on hell, we want to think further concerning that the word gehenna (popularly mistranslated hell, as we'll see) didn't occur in the Greek Old Testament, the Septuagint. Let's take a few paragraphs to let the significance of that fact soak in. In previous editions of this material, I merely remarked that prominent Old Testament characters like David and Abraham never heard the term or its equivalent. They were never threatened with eternal torment in hell or heard anything like our popular concept now. However, Gehenna's absence in the Old Testament is a much more serious omission than that. (The concepts in this section are suggested by Thomas B. Thayer in his 1855 Edition of Origin and History of the Doctrine of Endless Punishment.)
Before the Mosaic Law

Adam and Eve in the Garden

When God placed Adam and Eve in the Garden of Eden, he never mentioned the concept of eternal torment to them. Read for yourself-it's just not there. Don't you think it strange that as human history began on this planet, while God explained which tree they could not eat of, that he didn't give the parents of all mankind some kind of warning about eternal punishment, if there was potential for it to be in their future, and the future of all their posterity?

Most of us think eternal torment will engulf the vast majority of mankind, nearly all of Adam and Eve's descendents, yet here's a father, God, who didn't warn his children of the potential of what might befall them. What would you think of a father who told his young child not to ride his bike in the street, and if he did, he would get a spanking. Suppose he also planned to roast him over a roaring fire for fifty years? After he spanked him, would you think him a just father for not warning his child? Can you think of an apology or a defense for him? Yet to Adam and Eve, the father of all mankind failed to mention a much greater punishment than the death they would die the day they ate of the forbidden tree. Was this just a slip of the mind on God's part, to not mention at all the interminable terrible woes that lay ahead for the vast majority of their descendants? No, God announced to them a tangible present punishment the very day they committed the sin: “In the day thou eatest thereof thou shalt surely die.” They found that the wages of sin was death.

Cain and Abel

The same is true with Cain and Abel, a case of murder of a brother. Surely, we would think that God might roll out the threat of eternal torment that Cain was to receive as a warning to all future generations. In the whole account, there's not a hint, not a single word on the subject. Instead, Cain is told, “And now art thou cursed from the earth...When thou tillest the ground, it shall not henceforth yield unto thee her strength; a fugitive and a vagabond shalt thou be in the earth.” Again, Cain received an immediate, tangible physical punishment administered, with absolutely no warning of future eternal torment. Like Adam, Cain heard none of the dire warnings preached from pulpits of the fiery wrath of God, tormenting his soul throughout eternity.

Now, if Cain were to receive such punishment from God without warning, would God be a just lawgiver and judge to impose additional, infinitely greater punishment with no word of caution whatsoever? In Gen. 4.15, God said, “Therefore, whosoever slayeth Cain, vengeance shall be taken on him seven-fold.” If, with no warning, Cain was going to receive eternal fiery torment, would those who killed him receive seven times endless fiery torment?

I'm not making light of endless torment, I'm just pointing out that it's remarkable that God hadn't said a word about it thus far in the Bible story.

Noah and the Flood

When we come to Noah and the flood, God noted that “every thought of man's heart was only evil continually,” and that “the earth was filled with violence, and all flesh had corrupted his way upon the earth.” If not before, wouldn't this be the ideal time to reveal eternal torment ahead for nearly all inhabitants of the earth? If any circumstances warranted such punishment, this would be the time, would it not? However, Noah, “a preacher of righteousness,” didn't threaten endless punishment to evildoers. If warnings of such punishment serve to turn man aside from his evil way, surely this would have been the time to have revealed it, but there's nary a whisper of it. Instead, they were destroyed by the flood, a physical, tangible punishment for their sin, with absolutely no warning of endless torment. Nor was there such a warning when mankind inhabited the earth again after the flood. One word from God might have set the world on an entirely different course. Surprisingly no such word was given.

Sodom and Gomorrah

We could go on with the story of Sodom and Gomorrah, the physical destruction of the cities and their inhabitants, with not even a rumor of endless future torment that we probably think they unknowingly faced. What would we think if our government passed a new law with a huge fine as the punishment, but when a guilty party was found, he paid the fine, but also had to serve endless torment that the citizens had no warning of? What kind of judge explains the law and known penalty, while carefully concealing a much more awful penalty? What would the penalty of a few thousand dollars matter in a case where he was also going to be tormented horribly and endlessly? Yet the popular concept is that the Sodomites were sent into such a judgment.

We could go through the accounts of the builders of the tower of Babel, the destruction of Pharaoh and his armies, and Lot's wife, yet we would notice the same thing. All these received a temporal physical punishment, with no mention of an infinitely greater torturous punishment awaiting them in the future.

Was this teaching deliberately excluded from the record, or did it never belong? We know that it isn't there. Neither the word gehenna nor the concept of endless torment was given in the millennia before the giving of the Law of Moses. From the creation to Mt. Sinai, there was simply no insinuation of it in the entirety of human history up to that time. By the conclusion of this study, we'll see that God never had a plan of inflicting such dreadful torment on the people of his own creation.

Excerpts from Samuel Dawson's: "Jesus Teaching on Hell"


I cannot say I completely understand your position on the subject but would be glad to give a synopsis of what I understand.

NOTE: I will need to look it up again but I believe the Septuagint does use the word Hades where Sheol appears in Hebrew.

Jesus did refer to Gehenna in the NT, one can cross reference that to Tophet in the OT (See my thread on "What Hell do you mean")

1. The OT was plain that the punishment of the wicked is death.
2. The world outside those of the covenant has no promise of a resurrection.
3. The resurrection would produce two types of expectations: those who will die again (After their Judgment) and those who will inherit eternal life.
4. The wicked will be cast into a lake burning with fire and brimstone and annihilated from existence (The second death).
5. Those outside of the covenant never rise again: they remain dead.

This is my brief take on the subject.

Ron

crakjak
09-09-2008, 04:58 PM
I am not kidding by any means. :) We can never ascertain God's potential for anything and make a doctrine out of the ramifications, since His nature is unfathomable. As caring and loving as He is, He hates the least sin more than we hate the greatest sin, if they can measured. He has more love than anyone can imagine but he also has more anger than anyone can imagine.

Where in scripture do we understand that God hates sin more than he loves? God created us in His image, as a born again Spirit-filled believer I can not fathom casting away one of my children, or ever giving up on them. If I am created in His image and am filled with His Spirit, should I be able to ascertain something of his nature? Is it possible that I could be more loving than God?

crakjak
09-09-2008, 05:10 PM
I cannot say I completely understand your position on the subject but would be glad to give a synopsis of what I understand.

NOTE: I will need to look it up again but I believe the Septuagint does use the word Hades where Sheol appears in Hebrew.

Jesus did refer to Gehenna in the NT, one can cross reference that to Tophet in the OT (See my thread on "What Hell do you mean")

1. The OT was plain that the punishment of the wicked is death.
2. The world outside those of the covenant has no promise of a resurrection.
3. The resurrection would produce two types of expectations: those who will die again (After their Judgment) and those who will inherit eternal life.
4. The wicked will be cast into a lake burning with fire and brimstone and annihilated from existence (The second death).
5. Those outside of the covenant never rise again: they remain dead.

This is my brief take on the subject.

Ron

Maybe this can expand your take on the subject:

"Hell" Is Not an Old Testament doctrine:

Popular myth : Hell is an established Biblical doctrine that is in the Bible from start to finish. This is not true! Two thirds of the Bible (the Old Testament) does not mention Hell at all. ("Sheol," the Old Testament word that is sometimes translated as Hell, only means "grave" by definition, and it is where everyone in the Old Testament went when they died--good or evil, Jew or Gentile). Thus the Old Testament does not contain the concept of Hell!

Think about it...

If Hell is real, why didn't God make that warning plain right at the beginning of the Bible? God said the penalty for eating of the tree of Knowledge of Good and Evil was death- -not "eternal life" in fire and brimstone.

If Hell is real, why wasn't Cain warned about it, or Sodom and Gomorrah , or any of those who committed the earliest recorded "sins?"

If Hell is real why didn't Moses warn about this fate in the Ten Commandments or the Mosaic Covenant consisting of over 600 laws, ordinances, and warnings? The Mosaic Law simply stated blessings and cursings in this lifetime.

If Hell is real, why are its roots in paganism, rather than the Bible? Many nations surrounding Israel in the Old Testament believed in Hell-like punishment in the afterlife, for they served bloodthirsty and evil "gods," while Israel simply taught the grave (sheol) and a hope of a resurrection. If Hell is real, why was the revelation of it first given to pagan nations, instead of God's covenant people? Did God expect Israel to learn about the afterlife from the Pagan Gentiles? If so, why did He repeatedly warn Israel to not learn of their ways?

If Hell is real, why did God tell the Jews that burning their children alive in the fire to the false god Molech, (in the valley of Gehenna ) was so detestable to Him? God said that such a thing "never even entered His mind" (Jer. 32:35). How could God say such a thing to Israel , if He has plans to burn alive a good majority of His own creation in a spiritual and eternal Gehenna of His own making?

**FACT: The King James Bible erroneously translates the word "Sheol" as Hell a total of 31 times in the Old Testament, thus setting a foundation for that doctrine in the New Testament as well as the majority of Bible translations to follow the KJV. Even so, most new translations have completely eliminated Hell from the Old Testament, as honest and better scholarship has demanded. The Jewish version of the Old Testament (the Tanakh) has no concept of Hell in it. The importance of this fact cannot be over-emphasized. If a doctrine does not appear as seed form in the books of the Law, the Prophets and the Psalms, it cannot fairly be taught as a major biblical doctrine, if indeed it can be taught as biblical at all!

Aiken

ronharvey
09-09-2008, 05:35 PM
Maybe this can expand your take on the subject:

"Hell" Is Not an Old Testament doctrine:

Popular myth : Hell is an established Biblical doctrine that is in the Bible from start to finish. This is not true! Two thirds of the Bible (the Old Testament) does not mention Hell at all. ("Sheol," the Old Testament word that is sometimes translated as Hell, only means "grave" by definition, and it is where everyone in the Old Testament went when they died--good or evil, Jew or Gentile). Thus the Old Testament does not contain the concept of Hell!

Think about it...

If Hell is real, why didn't God make that warning plain right at the beginning of the Bible? God said the penalty for eating of the tree of Knowledge of Good and Evil was death- -not "eternal life" in fire and brimstone.

If Hell is real, why wasn't Cain warned about it, or Sodom and Gomorrah , or any of those who committed the earliest recorded "sins?"

If Hell is real why didn't Moses warn about this fate in the Ten Commandments or the Mosaic Covenant consisting of over 600 laws, ordinances, and warnings? The Mosaic Law simply stated blessings and cursings in this lifetime.

If Hell is real, why are its roots in paganism, rather than the Bible? Many nations surrounding Israel in the Old Testament believed in Hell-like punishment in the afterlife, for they served bloodthirsty and evil "gods," while Israel simply taught the grave (sheol) and a hope of a resurrection. If Hell is real, why was the revelation of it first given to pagan nations, instead of God's covenant people? Did God expect Israel to learn about the afterlife from the Pagan Gentiles? If so, why did He repeatedly warn Israel to not learn of their ways?

If Hell is real, why did God tell the Jews that burning their children alive in the fire to the false god Molech, (in the valley of Gehenna ) was so detestable to Him? God said that such a thing "never even entered His mind" (Jer. 32:35). How could God say such a thing to Israel , if He has plans to burn alive a good majority of His own creation in a spiritual and eternal Gehenna of His own making?

**FACT: The King James Bible erroneously translates the word "Sheol" as Hell a total of 31 times in the Old Testament, thus setting a foundation for that doctrine in the New Testament as well as the majority of Bible translations to follow the KJV. Even so, most new translations have completely eliminated Hell from the Old Testament, as honest and better scholarship has demanded. The Jewish version of the Old Testament (the Tanakh) has no concept of Hell in it. The importance of this fact cannot be over-emphasized. If a doctrine does not appear as seed form in the books of the Law, the Prophets and the Psalms, it cannot fairly be taught as a major biblical doctrine, if indeed it can be taught as biblical at all!

Aiken

Actually, translating Hades and Sheol Hell is not erroneous.

The Old English word "hell" meant to BURY something e.g. "helling potatoes."

Ron

mfblume
09-09-2008, 07:40 PM
Where in scripture do we understand that God hates sin more than he loves?

I never said He does. But where in scripture does it say he hates sin less than he loves?

God created us in His image, as a born again Spirit-filled believer I can not fathom casting away one of my children, or ever giving up on them.

Jesus called people children of the devil and not God. The fact is that sinners are not his children. So he is not casting any of His children away, but neither is he sending anybody else to hell. They are going there of their own accord and He is bidding them to use their free will (not focring them) to stop going there.

If I am created in His image and am filled with His Spirit, should I be able to ascertain something of his nature? Is it possible that I could be more loving than God?

It has nothing to do with that sort of assuming. It has to do with God being so great that we are in actuality kidding ourselves if we think we can put Him beneath a microscope and claim to know His nature.

That is the reason the Jews simply never ever delved into studying His nature. They felt it was an insult to analyze God. Just let Him be God and let Him do what He chooses, and let's not try to predict anything that is not plainly stated in scripture. If He wanted us to know about it, He would have plainly stated it and not left it to conjecture.

We can imagine the possibilities, but that is all. Leave it with imagination and hope for the best as best as we can imagine correctly (which we will find is so lacking we will be embarrassed one day), and let things work out the way God will work them out. There is far too much truth plainly written in scripture to delve into and spend our time with than to try to imagine what He may or may not due according to what we think His nature is.

I say these things because for a few years I did what I now consider was wasting my time studying and thinking and proposing things the scriptures simply NEVER emphasized.

I was actually bored at the thought of the cross. I mean, I thought, how much can a guy learn about the cross? Jesus died for our sins and rose again. Okay. Got that one down. Other topic, please? But then revelation understanding hit my Spirit and the works of the cross so captivated everything I thought about that even prophecy came to fall under the canopy of the work of the cross! From then on I vowed to never delve into things the bible did not emphasize. So then I looked for what Christ and the apostles stressed. Walking after the Spirit, Spirit leading, Christ and Him crucified -- and not surmisings about that cross but what the in-depth teachings actually said about it.

The fate of people's eternity was nowhere near as emphasized in every possible scenario as much as simply learning to deny self now and let His Spirit lead. Everything else falls into the shadows.

crakjak
09-09-2008, 11:14 PM
I never said He does. But where in scripture does it say he hates sin less than he loves?



Jesus called people children of the devil and not God. The fact is that sinners are not his children. So he is not casting any of His children away, but neither is he sending anybody else to hell. They are going there of their own accord and He is bidding them to use their free will (not focring them) to stop going there.



It has nothing to do with that sort of assuming. It has to do with God being so great that we are in actuality kidding ourselves if we think we can put Him beneath a microscope and claim to know His nature.

That is the reason the Jews simply never ever delved into studying His nature. They felt it was an insult to analyze God. Just let Him be God and let Him do what He chooses, and let's not try to predict anything that is not plainly stated in scripture. If He wanted us to know about it, He would have plainly stated it and not left it to conjecture.

We can imagine the possibilities, but that is all. Leave it with imagination and hope for the best as best as we can imagine correctly (which we will find is so lacking we will be embarrassed one day), and let things work out the way God will work them out. There is far too much truth plainly written in scripture to delve into and spend our time with than to try to imagine what He may or may not due according to what we think His nature is.

I say these things because for a few years I did what I now consider was wasting my time studying and thinking and proposing things the scriptures simply NEVER emphasized.

I was actually bored at the thought of the cross. I mean, I thought, how much can a guy learn about the cross? Jesus died for our sins and rose again. Okay. Got that one down. Other topic, please? But then revelation understanding hit my Spirit and the works of the cross so captivated everything I thought about that even prophecy came to fall under the canopy of the work of the cross! From then on I vowed to never delve into things the bible did not emphasize. So then I looked for what Christ and the apostles stressed. Walking after the Spirit, Spirit leading, Christ and Him crucified -- and not surmisings about that cross but what the in-depth teachings actually said about it.

The fate of people's eternity was nowhere near as emphasized in every possible scenario as much as simply learning to deny self now and let His Spirit lead. Everything else falls into the shadows.

I actually appreicate this post, Michael, though we may disagree on what is "..actually said", I do believe simplicity is a virtue.

crakjak
09-09-2008, 11:16 PM
Actually, translating Hades and Sheol Hell is not erroneous.

The Old English word "hell" meant to BURY something e.g. "helling potatoes."

Ron

Correct: as in burying in the grave, yes Hades and Sheol is certainly properly translated as the grave as you described from the Old English. Yet, not hell as in the traditional sense.