Sure, lets start there. You have stated that the differences among the translations do not contradict the actual meanings, so I submit the King James version:
So we have “vengance”, and “eternal”, and “fire” and we have your assertion that the translations do not contain material differences. So let’s just stick with the King James version.
I’ll ask again, would you like to investigate the texts to see if the bible makes a case for a burning hell where conscious people suffer eternally? You’ve already told us you were quite knowledgeable.
Ready?
You misread the original text. I did not say I was quite knowledgeable, I said I know more than the average religious person.
What about apocrypha and pseudepigraph? If someone uses something from them in a debate, is that still using the Bible as the authoritative source? Or does discussing the Bible also mean accepting the divine guidance of the Luther/Trent decisions as to what to include? ISTR that there are books that were not included in their alternate sections (note I lack the terminology to describe apocyphal apocrypha).
Also, what about lost books? The only one I can remember off the top of my head is the Book of the Wars of the Lord". If a dated text is found in the Red Sea Scroll Depository, would that count as well?
Sure, lets start there. You have stated that the differences among the translations do not contradict the actual meanings, so I submit the King James version:
So we have “vengance”, and “eternal”, and “fire” and we have your assertion that the translations do not contain material differences. So let’s just stick with the King James version.
ETA: And we have “suffering” too, which I assert is not possible if one is not sentinent.
The Bible states clearly that Hell is a place where people suffer eternally in a fire that never goes out. The King James Bible states:
Pay particular attention to the bolded & italicised verses. The Lord addresses the uncharitable and orders they “Depart” into “everlasting fire”. In verse 46, Jesus concludes his sermon by stating that those very same uncharitable souls shall “go away into everlasting punishment”. Since he is referring to the same sinners, we know that the everlasting punishment will take place in the fire as per verse 41. Thus, the Bible teaches that those who sin will suffer eternally in a fire that never goes out.
Great! We’ll start there.
Now what was the example that those in Sodom & Gomorrah left us? What exaxtly happemed to them, that serves as an example for us?
The KJV says at Ge 24:19 KJV: *“24Then the LORD rained upon Sodom and upon Gomorrah brimstone and fire from the LORD out of heaven;” *.
In fact when the destruction of Sodom & Gomorrah was being discussed with Abraham, God only discussed destroying the city and it’s inhabitants. There is no talk of sending any of them to a burning hell. KJV Ge Chapter 18. God ultimately destroyed the cities with fire and brimstone, and the inhabitants were never said to be sent to a burning hell. Isn’t that right?
In fact, can you please cite one instance in the OT where anyone was sent to a burning hell? Jude, and the first century Christians didn’t perceive themselves as Christians, but Jew; Jews who had found and accepted the Messiah.
So…unless this new Messiah was letting them know that there was some new form of punishment for evildoers, the reality was they were Jews and the OT is stunning in it’s silence on the matter of a burning hell. The Jews were quite familiar with their history, and this wasn’t the first time that they held out examples of people who were destroyed for wrongdoing. 1 Cor 10:11 KJV Throughout the OT, the Jews understood that the punishment for wrongdoing was death, not a burning hell.
So the example that Jude uses of a “eternal fire” speaks of the fire that destroyed Sodom & Gomorrah. Peter makes the same case at [2 Pet 2: 6 KJV](6And turning the cities of Sodom and Gomorrha into ashes condemned them with an overthrow, making them an ensample unto those that after should live ungodly;), when he says “6And turning the cities of Sodom and Gomorrha into ashes condemned them with an overthrow, making them an ensample unto those that after should live ungodly;”
Now there are many other texts that show examples of fire, and eternal burning fire and they show not just the origin of the use, but clearly show them as metaphor. I’d be pleased to discuss them with you, but I’m loathe to do the research if there is a “I read it cover to cover to college”, or “That’s just your interpretation!”, or some other comment on the way.
What say you? Why do you suppose that Jude did not----and could not----point to examples that actually show someone going to a burning hell?
Cite the Texts please.
No problem. I quoted Matthew Ch.25 v31-46, KJV.
So you are saying that the cities “suffered” eternally? The use of the term suffer makes no sense in any context other than the people of Sodom and Gomorrah. Neither does vengeance make sense as applied to an inanimate object. Clearly the passage states that *people *suffered in an eternal fire as vengeance for their deeds.
The quotes from Matthew refer to Gehenna, which was not an anotherworldly, eternal burning hell, but a valley outside of Jerusalem used as a garbage dump. In Jewish eschatological imagery, it was a site for annihilation, not eternal, conscious torment. The fire was “eternal,” not the suffering.
The Greek word used for “punishment” in Mt. 21:46 is kolasin, which does not actually mean “punishment,” but is from a verb meaning to “cut off,” or to “prune” like a tree. Figuatively, it could carry a meaning of “correction” (as in correcting or guiding the growth of a tree by pruning), but a strictly accurate translation is that the person is being eternally “cut off,” i.e. annihilated, which accurately reflects Jewish eschatological beliefs of the time while an eternal, conscious Hell does not.
…
The Greek word for “suffering” there is ὑπέχουσαι, which does not mean “suffer” as in endure torment or pain, but to be “put under,” or to “undergo.” To be “subjected to.”
The Greek figurative language in the verse is just saying that the cities were completely destroyed (by “age-enduring fire”), not that the people were going to Hell.
Thanks
I’m not quite sure where to start, because a MB is not a venue that lends itself to a comprehensive discussion, but I’ll try.
Throughout the bible it talks of two kinds of hell. The first, and most common, is Sheol, and in the Greek, Hades. In the source languages they simply mean, “pit” or “grave.” Its for this reason that it can be said that Job prayed to be sent to hell, because hell was a form of relief to him. Jesus too, was said to be in “hell.”
This most common form of hell is simply non-sentient death. Its your grave, plain and simple. But the Jews believed in a resurrection of the dead, to a “day of judgment” of sorts. So when the grieving Martha encountered Jesus after her brother died, she could say to Jesus 24Martha saith unto him, I know that he shall rise again in the resurrection at the last day. John 11:24 KJV
But the bible speaks of another death, from which there is no redemption. This hell, often referred to “Gehenna” (and other spelling variations) is a *permanent *destruction.
If you look at the context of how they perceived not just death, but how any afterlife presented itself, you’ll see that they saw 2 kids of hell; one from which you are raised and judged, and one from which you are permanently destroyed. So DtC ic exactly correct when he says the punishment----the destruction----is permanent, not the suffering. Given the biblical use of fire representing a permanent and irredeemable form of destruction/punishment, and the pertinent and practical analogy of the Valley of Hinnom, that type of hell was understood to mean the no-deposit-no-return hell.
ETA
The bible is consistent in using certain numbers to represent certain outcomes, and certain animals to represent certain qualities.
Fire is often represented to be a complete form of destruction or punishment. In many of these instances it is represented as a symbol for the destruction and/or punishment.
This is not high level interpretation. But its not going to be understood through Google or what you remembered from Sunday School either.
Really? Wow, I’ve been having discussions on the meaning of the Hebrew word “virgin” for twenty years and seldom find agreement on whether it means “cherry intact” or not.
Your biblical discussions on translations and mine have apparently been with people less nitpicky.
His discussions have been with real scholars, of course.
The bible differs from Mary Shelley in so many ways it’s hard to know where to start.
No one really knows, how many people penned it, or who they were, how many revisions it’s been through, how accurate the translations are that were made, possibly centuries ago. No one knows for certain if it’s fiction, allegory or history. It was preserved several hundreds of years as an oral transmission even before it was written down. Are the people and events real? No one knows for sure. And there are several versions of it, to boot.
It seems somewhat disingenuous to complain it’s not held in the respect you deem it should have. It isn’t a final authority on anything, even on what it contains, or what a given word means today vs then, etc, etc, on endlessly.
Another argument for abject ignorance, which for some strange reason doesn’t prevent much of the posters from claiming to have read it cover to cover.
Quite strange…
And, of course, my scholars can beat up your scholars.