Hell - A misunderstood word

[MissKate13]

The English word hell appears twenty-three times in the King James Version of the New Testament. “Hell” actually represents three different terms in the Greek New Testament.

The first is “ade.” It is translated hell ten times in the KJV. Many new versions use the word Hades instead of hell. There are several ways Hades is used in the NT. The best way to determine its use is by context. In some places Hades is defined as the abode of departed spirits.

Gehenna (geennan), on the other hand, seems to be a place of torment, one to be avoided. Gehenna originates from two Hebrew words meaning “Valley of Hinnom.” The Valley of Hinnom, in the mind of the Jews, was detestable, disgusting, sickening, entirely unpleasant, and a place to be avoided. That was exactly what Jesus wanted to get across each time he used the term geennan.

Tartarus occurs only one in the New Testament (2 Peter 2:4). Here, it is used of the abode of evil angels prior to their banishment to Gehenna, their ultimate destiny (Mt. 25:41). It denotes that area of Hades in which both rebel men and angels are punished prior to the day of judgment. 2 Peter 2:9 supports this: “the Lord knows how to deliver the godly out of temptation, and to keep the unrighteous under punishment unto the day of judgment”

“Hell” is not the grave. In the New Testament there are three words that refer to the grave. They are taphos, mnema, and mnemeion. Taphos is used seven times and is translated sepulcher six times and tomb once.
Mnema is translated as tomb twice, grave once, and sepulcher four times.
Mnemeion is used five times as tomb, twenty-nine times as sepulcher, and eight times as grave.

Mt 5:22 geennan
Mt 5:29 geennan
Mt 5:30 geennan
Mt 10:28 geenne
Mt 11:23 adou
Mt 16:18 adou
Mt 18:9 geennan
Mt 23:15 geennes
My 23:33 geennes
Mark 9:43 geennan
Mark 9:47 geennan
Mark 9:47 geennan
Luke 10:15 adou
Luke 12:5 geennan
Luke 16:23 ade
Acts 2:27 aden
Acts 2:31 aden
James 3:6 geennes
2 Peter 2:4 tartarōsas
Rev 1:18 adou
Rev 6:8 ades
Rev 20:13 ades
Rev 20:14 ades

Your thoughts?

[William]

Understanding the mind behind creation which is commonly referred to as "God"
I think of these images as representing a very real and supportive Team.
Like being pushed out from a stinky hole, can have one develop a bad self-complex

I've often pondered whether Christianity is a test, but the rights answer is to reject it. The right answer is that nobody, even God, is good by definition, and that you can't take somebody else's life to pay for your own sins.

I also have this innate aversion to saying it right-out, as if somebody doesn't want me to. But it seems you're on a similar track.

Possibly your own conscience is at work there. In any case, I do believe there is no good reason to reject Christianity if done "right".



JEHOVAH'S WITNESS

"Rejecting Christianity" is a laborious process of sorting but I do not think that is what is occurring - but rather - rejection of provably false teachings that pop up with every new church invented.
It is the provably false teachings which are actually being rejected.
To add to that, the provably false teachings are not only situated within theistic-based social structures, so rejection of those false teachings which occur outside of theism, are also part of the process...

One's own conscience is a vital aspect of that process too...

[Purple Knight]

"Rejecting Christianity" is a laborious process of sorting but I do not think that is what is occurring - but rather - rejection of provably false teachings that pop up with every new church invented.
It is the provably false teachings which are actually being rejected.
To add to that, the provably false teachings are not only situated within theistic-based social structures, so rejection of those are also part of the process...

It's like this. Let's say I have two bags of chocolate: One I made myself, and one that is full of an assortment of chocolates, each made by somebody else.

How many times am I going to have to bite into a chocolate from the second bag and discover a maggot before I say, "To heck with this!" and only eat from the first bag?

And would a fair god really punish me because there was a viable chocolate in the second bag and I threw it out because I found a dozen maggots before I got to it?

JWs and Mormons score high marks for knowing their own lore and having logically consistent ways to explain apparently contradictory or objectionable parts of the Bible in ways that are at least logically non-contradictory. But I can take that reasoning and apply it to, "What if a fair god exists," because if I'm not mistaken their claim is a fair god anyway. I can look at them making chocolate and keeping the flies off of it, and use that to help me make my own chocolate and eat that.

...Because the fact that sometimes you won't trust the one person you should is simply a rational consequence of living in a generally untrustworthy world.

Pascal's Wager is invalid, but the Purple Wager is valid. The only thing the Purple Wager tweaks is to eliminate the possibility of an unfair god who wants you to worship him and get his name right despite that name being used for atrocities. We eliminate this possibility because if there's an unfair god, it's pointless to worry about whether he punishes you and why, because he just goes on whims and he always might. He might punish me for picking my scabs or holding my cat like a baby, and it's pointless to wonder about it because an unfair will is unknowable.

Now we have either a fair god, or no god. If I try to live as righteously as I can, a fair god will not punish me. And I ought to want to do that anyway because that really just involves not hurting people. So we get a sort of reduction to deism.

I don't think any god is particularly likely to exist, but since I ought to try not to hurt people anyway I don't see a loss in trying to live righteously and giving the back half of a rat for others. I still won't give a fig for them though, because figs are bad and have wasp maggots in them.

[MissKate13]

William wrote: Yes - and it appears that no one has posted disagreement about that. The disagreement is in whether there is a literal hell that individual personalities can experience as a real thing.

You appear to take the side which believes hell is a literal place, because the authors re biblical Jesus have it that Jesus was serious and not at all being figurative - figurative - as Timothy is arguing.

You appear to think that Jesus was also being literal about folk cutting off their limbs and plucking out their eyes, if it meant they could avoid such places of eternal torment.

Agreed?

Kate’s response: Yes, I believe geennan is a real place. I see no point in Jesus mentioning it if it were not true. And I don’t believe Jesus is a liar.

What Jesus was teaching is that man would be better off to cut off their limbs and pluck out their eyes (things which cause us to sin) rather than to suffer eternal torment.

None of us can truly know what geennan will be like anymore than we can know what heaven will be like. As for me, heaven seems much more desirable, and to live there eternally is my hope.

[OneWay]

Your thoughts?

Hell hath no fury like the wrath of God.

[Miles]

Understanding the mind behind creation which is commonly referred to as "God"
I think of these images as representing a very real and supportive Team.
Like being pushed out from a stinky hole, can have one develop a bad self-complex

I've often pondered whether Christianity is a test, but the rights answer is to reject it. The right answer is that nobody, even God, is good by definition, and that you can't take somebody else's life to pay for your own sins.

I also have this innate aversion to saying it right-out, as if somebody doesn't want me to. But it seems you're on a similar track.

Possibly your own conscience is at work there. In any case, I do believe there is no good reason to reject Christianity if done "right".

Doing "right" consisting of assigning to god the peace, comfort, and sense of security one derives from accepting the theology of one of the world's competing 45,000 Christian denominations,* I suspect.

* source

.

[Checkpoint]

Your thoughts?

Hell hath no fury like the wrath of God.

Just how will that wrath be expressed and experienced at the final Judgment?

[OneWay]

Your thoughts?

Hell hath no fury like the wrath of God.

Just how will that wrath be expressed and experienced at the final Judgment?

Hell shall be cast into the lake of fire.

[Checkpoint]

Your thoughts?

Hell hath no fury like the wrath of God.

Just how will that wrath be expressed and experienced at the final Judgment?

Hell shall be cast into the lake of fire.

What is that "hell"?

What is "the lake of fire"? Is it literal or figurative?

[OneWay]

Your thoughts?

Hell hath no fury like the wrath of God.

Just how will that wrath be expressed and experienced at the final Judgment?

Hell shall be cast into the lake of fire.

What is that "hell"?

What is "the lake of fire"? Is it literal or figurative?

If the sun is a lake of fire then hell must be just as real.

[William]

[Replying to Purple Knight in post #62]

Let me ask you this then.

Is it possibly a provably false teaching that an unfair God exists?

Also.

Is it possibly a provably false teaching that hellish alternate experiences can and do happen where such a God places personalities into such circumstances?