Heaven, Yes...Hell, No

[WhiteWings]

I agree JB. Heaven isn't mentioned in most verses either. Does that mean heaven isn't Biblical?
To debunk hell every verse that supports hell in the ET mind has to be debunked.
I think it's possible to convince certain verses aren't translated correctly, but eventually the debate moves toward the verses that 'clearly' show heaven an hell. Verses with fire, smoke, torment and judgement. And of course their fav verse; sheep and goat.

[Lazarus Short]

JBerton and WhiteWings, you are both entirely correct.  However, what I am doing at present is only one aspect of the book I envision.  I have already written a short essay (you may have seen it somewhere in the Tentmaker forums) in which I kick out the "props of Hell."  I will probably expand on that, and have other things to say, also.  Actually, what I am posting about "no mention of Hell" will surely be attacked as a logical fallacy.  I'm just trying to cover all the bases and leave no "out" for Hell believers.

[WhiteWings]

You know what the thing is LS. ALL info is in the Scriptures. Many translators messed up (on purpose). That means you basically have to re-translate the whole Bible and explain/prove what I translate it that way.
An atheist sees nothing but contradictions in the Bible. 
Catholics sees all sorts of Catholic stuff while a Protestant sees not even a Catholic hint in the Bible.
An UR sees God laying out a salvation plan in every verse while the ET only sees God shoveling more coals into the fires of hell.
A Messianic like me believes non-Messianics will never understand the Bible while the anti-Messianics believe I'm putting the Law before Jesus or something along that line of thought.

So your book, like all books on the topic, will only be of use to those who are already doubting. Or the rare person with an open mind.

[RonnyTX]

JBerton:
(snip)"The simple fact is, hell is not mentioned in any passage of any correctly translated bible.

Ronny to JBerton:
I agree.

JBerton:
The real issue isn't simply that hell isn't mentioned in a correctly translated bible.
The real issue is that there is no reason to believe anything that's not in a correctly translated bible.

Ronny to JBerton:
I disagree. Example? "And we have known and believed the love that God hath to us. God is love and and he that dwelleth in love dwelleth in God and God in him." 1 John 4:16 King James Version. Now the KJV is not a perfect version,yet it quite correctly says,that God is love. :-)

JBerton:
To complicate the issue, almost all Christians believe mainstream bible translations are perfect because they are protected by God.

Ronny to JBerton:
I was taught in the local church and used to believe,that only the King James Version was a 100% correctly translated Bible. And I believed to read in another translation,was sin or the next thing to sin. And why would I  want to read in such anyway,when I already had,the one and only true Bible?! :-) Or so I was taught to believe,in the local church I grew up in. But then,God showed/taught me better. :-) And it took me at least 2 trips to the local library,to actually pick up and take home,a non KJV  of the Bible,that they were giving away. And when I got it home,I let no one see it or see me reading in it! And lo and behold,as I read in it,I saw that it also contained the gospel of Jesus Christ and many other truths of
God. Was it a perfect translation? I'm sure it wasn't. But God used it,to help and teach me. So,God uses even nonperfect translations of the Bible,both in saving a lost person and in continueing to teach them.

JBerton:
Frankly, their bibles speak of eternal hell, and their leaders confirm it by teaching that sinners will be tormented there forever." (snip)

Ronny to JBerton:
Yes,some Bible translations do speak of hell and a hell,that is eternal. And yes,many preachers and teachers teach that. And many of us sit in the pews and believe that,because we have also been taught in church to believe,that to hear our preacher/teachers words,is the same as hearing directly from God. That's not true;but then many are brought up in local churches and taught to believe that such is true.

Just thinking,I need to get back over to my own house and pick up that translation of the Bible,that I found years ago,at our local library. The one,that they were giving away for free. As best I remember,it has writings in the margins sometimes,that shows a different way a word could be translated. The first cope of a Bible,that I remember seeing,that did that.

[jbertonbounds]

JBerton:
(snip)"The simple fact is, hell is not mentioned in any passage of any correctly translated bible.

Ronny to JBerton:
I agree.

JBerton:
The real issue isn't simply that hell isn't mentioned in a correctly translated bible.
The real issue is that there is no reason to believe anything that's not in a correctly translated bible.

Ronny to JBerton:
I disagree. Example? "And we have known and believed the love that God hath to us. God is love and and he that dwelleth in love dwelleth in God and God in him." 1 John 4:16 King James Version. Now the KJV is not a perfect version,yet it quite correctly says,that God is love. :-)

Fine is you disagree, but I don't understand what you disagree with.

JBerton:
To complicate the issue, almost all Christians believe mainstream bible translations are perfect because they are protected by God.

Ronny to JBerton:
I was taught in the local church and used to believe,that only the King James Version was a 100% correctly translated Bible. And I believed to read in another translation,was sin or the next thing to sin. And why would I  want to read in such anyway,when I already had,the one and only true Bible?! :-) Or so I was taught to believe,in the local church I grew up in. But then,God showed/taught me better. :-) And it took me at least 2 trips to the local library,to actually pick up and take home,a non KJV  of the Bible,that they were giving away. And when I got it home,I let no one see it or see me reading in it! And lo and behold,as I read in it,I saw that it also contained the gospel of Jesus Christ and many other truths of
God. Was it a perfect translation? I'm sure it wasn't. But God used it,to help and teach me. So,God uses even nonperfect translations of the Bible,both in saving a lost person and in continueing to teach them.

JBerton:
Frankly, their bibles speak of eternal hell, and their leaders confirm it by teaching that sinners will be tormented there forever." (snip)

Ronny to JBerton:
Yes,some Bible translations do speak of hell and a hell,that is eternal. And yes,many preachers and teachers teach that. And many of us sit in the pews and believe that,because we have also been taught in church to believe,that to hear our preacher/teachers words,is the same as hearing directly from God. That's not true;but then many are brought up in local churches and taught to believe that such is true.

Excellent point. I hadn't thought of that, but I clearly remember that they do teach that very thing. Maybe it's true sometimes if a preacher/teacher is teaching from a correctly translated bible and is teaching directly from what he has received from God (consider Paul). However, that is not what's happening in most Christian churches these days.

[jbertonbounds]

JBerton and WhiteWings, you are both entirely correct.  However, what I am doing at present is only one aspect of the book I envision.  I have already written a short essay (you may have seen it somewhere in the Tentmaker forums) in which I kick out the "props of Hell."  I will probably expand on that, and have other things to say, also.  Actually, what I am posting about "no mention of Hell" will surely be attacked as a logical fallacy.  I'm just trying to cover all the bases and leave no "out" for Hell believers.

If this is only one aspect of your book, then what I stated really doesn't apply. Thanks for clarifying that. However, if you are aware that naysayers will attack the method as fallacy, then why give them ammunition?

[Lazarus Short]

If this is only one aspect of your book, then what I stated really doesn't apply. Thanks for clarifying that. However, if you are aware that naysayers will attack the method as fallacy, then why give them ammunition?

Well, I'm leaning toward making what I've posted so far in this thread into a lengthy appendix.  You and WhiteWings are showing me that maybe it should not be the core of my argument.

[marie glen]

I hate to bring up page one here on page six, showing how far behind I am.. :smile:

In most matters of great importance, it is best to go back to Genesis, and check what it has to say to us.  Sometimes, it has surprises.

Genesis, chapter 1
This records God making the Cosmos, the Heavens, and the Earth.  Those who believe in the Powers of
Darkness (so called) should note that God made darkness too, and it is simply where Light has not penetrated.  The rest is superstition reinforced by dangerous animals lurking in the dark.  We see, if we read the text correctly, that the cosmos is a hierarchy – God and His creation - not a dualistic Heaven versus Hell, with the creation as a prey between them.

.."with the creation as a prey between them" - wow! (very nice line!) and you are very right!! :o

There is no mention of God making Hell, quite a lapse if Hell actually exists.

   :thumbsup: :thumbsup: :thumbsup: :o absolutely!

Chapter 2
God makes Adam and Eve, and an interesting detail is that Adam calls Eve "bone of his bone and flesh of his flesh," instead of the way it would probably be said today:  she is my own flesh and blood.  I wonder if blood, as we know it today, existed before the Fall.  God tells them not to eat of the fruit of the Tree of the Knowledge of Good & Evil, lest they die.  God failed to mention the risk of them also going to Hell, that is, if Hell existed.  Should He not have brought up such a horrible possibility?  Maybe death was the only risk they were taking...

Chapter 3
The fruit is eaten, the fall happens, and the curse is placed on the serpent, Adam, Eve, in fact on the whole creation - still no mention of Hell or the risk of anybody going there, not even the serpent.

      :Chinscratch:  :Chinscratch: really does make ya think doesn't it?  :dsunny:

Chapter 4
God upbraids Cain for his anger, cautioning him that sin could take him if he does not master his emotions, but fails to mention the possibility of Hell if he does wrong.

Chapters 5 – 9
These chapters record the story of the Great Flood, in which millions of sinful people died.  However, there is no mention of anything happening to them except simple death.

ah well, here's where they have the idea, "Christ went to hell and visited those who perished in the flood" but what it says it "Christ via the Spirit preached to those awaiting judgment (the flood) while the ark was being prepared" (paraphrased.. and where is that verse? 2 Peter?) this goes good with the other one which is read as "He descended in to the lower part of the earth" as hades, place of the dead, or hell.. But the place of the dead, and the lower part of the earth is still the dust of the grave..

Chapters 10 – 19
Sodom and Gomorrah are destroyed, along with several smaller towns around them.  All the people in them, except Lot and two daughters, are killed.  The text is silent on their ultimate fate, and Hell is not mentioned.  Please note that what fell on those cities was literal fire, not Hellfire.

That's right! and it's used as "an example of 'eternal' (as they say) hellfire.. no fire there now..

Chapter 20
Abimelek  takes  Sarah  from Abraham, and God then
threatens him with death.  Now, many people believe sinners go directly to Hell if their sins are not repented of, but God, always righteous and honest, fails to mention this risk.  Abimelek protests his innocence, and God makes things right, instructing Abimelek to give her back, which he does.

I can't believe how disorganized God was..

[/quote]

Chapters 21 – 38
Judah loses a couple of sons, killed by God for their wickedness - still no mention of them going to Hell.

Chapters 39 – 40
A baker gets hung, but there is no mention of him going to Hell.

Chapters 41 – 42
Jacob/Israel orders his sons to go to Egypt to buy grain, so that they would not die – again, there is no mention of any risk of them also going to Hell.

Chapters 43 – 45
At the very end of chapter 45, Jacob/Israel rejoices that Joseph was not dead, but fails to express thanks that he was not also in Hell.  He was also happy that he would see Joseph before he died, but it is just a simple fact:  death, not Hell.

Chapters 46 – 50
Jacob/Israel dies, and later Joseph, but there is no mention of Hell.

There is no mention of Hell, then, in the book of Genesis.

    :banana: :thumbsup:

[marie glen]

Chapters 15 - 31
The Song of Moses is sung, without mention of Hell for the Egyptians.  The Amalekites are defeated, and there is no mention of Hell for them either, even though God speaks of blotting out any memory of them.  The Ten Commandments are given, without mention of Hell.  In fact, the whole Law given to Moses (in Exodus) specifies no punishment worse than death.

     :Chinscratch: or better yet, aha!

Chapter 32
The golden calf is made and worshipped.  God states that He will destroy all Israel for it, and raise up a new nation out of Moses.  Moses talks Him out of it, and Hell is not mentioned.  Yet, back at the camp, Moses commands the slaying of 3,000 men after saving the whole nation from destruction.  Later, Moses begs God to strike his name from God's Book, but God tells him that the nation, or parts of it, are struck from His Book instead.  The record here is silent on whether being struck from the Book means being sent to Hell.

Chapters 33 – 40
There is nothing of interest to our quest in these chapters.

      :thumbsup:  :thumbsup:

[marie glen]

Yes, I believe that any Greek speaking person reading from the Greek would separate the mythical aspects given to those words and stick with the base meaning of each. I was only pointing out what I did for the benefit of any reading who might look up Tartarus and mistakenly come away thinking that the myth associated with it had any connection with the reality of the semitic thoughtform of the writer Peter.

    :Chinscratch:  :Chinscratch: very good! thank you!

---------------------------

other misconceptions, "better you throw your hand into the city dump to be burned than you molest or assualt someone and your whole body (when you've been stoned or what not) to be burned there..

..backslidden are like sticks and briers, which are good for nothing but to be burned.. the sticks, because they are so dry

..and interesting on the Lazarus parable.. the use of phrases.. Interesting thread..

[marie glen]

ET doctrine has its origins in Greek and Roman myths, and the translations, using those mythological names, were done that way on purpose(imo) to promote those false doctrines of the reigning orthodoxies of the time. Same thing with the King James Version. It was eternal torment in Hades(Greek) but also
the doctrine was eternal torment in Inferno(Latin for Hades).

..and they wanted to grow and be a more powerful force in their world (whether for good or evil, i suppose there would be some persons of both) so they mixed the pagan in with the new faith-which had conquered those old 'gods' - instead of a 'god' of travel, there was now a saint.. 'gods' for this and that became saints and angels.. even feasts/holidays were blended.. and the same horn became antichrist in its day and persecuted (inquisitioned) the faith.. geesh! (tho they were somewhat carried out on both sides of the conflict..)

[marie glen]

I think don't think the Greek translators were teaching mythology. I think they were subject to Greek philosophy and culture and it came through their theology into the translation. But really, the Latin mythology is the most potent one in regards to contemporary "hell" and eternal torment.

Hades was a place of darkness.

Inferno was a place of active torments and flames of agony.


We look to the Greek translations because we feel that we can gain an insight passing through the prejudices and errors of the KJV. We don't pay much attention to the Latin Vulgate, because most of us have protestant backgrounds, but most of the pervasive theology of today may have been Greek in origin- but it was LATIN in development and enforcement upon the world.

Thats why i teach that we have to reach back into Hebrew thought in order to pass through the prejudices and errors of the Greeks, and even moreso, the Romans, because while the prevailing common language of translation may be Greek, the prevailing theology is Roman/Latin.

The Vulgate is a late fourth-century Latin translation of the Bible that became, during the 16th century, the Catholic Church's officially promulgated Latin version of the Bible.
The translation was largely the work of St. Jerome, who, in 382, was commissioned by Pope Damasus I to revise the Vetus Latina ("Old Latin") collection of Biblical texts in Latin then in use by the Church. Once published, it was widely adopted and eventually eclipsed the Vetus Latina and, by the 13th century, was known as the "versio vulgata" (the "version commonly-used") or, more simply, in Latin as vulgata or in Greek as βουλγάτα ("Vulgate").
It was made the Catholic Church's official Latin Bible as a consequence of the Council of Trent

I shudder to think how many replies I've posted here in a row, so i'll have to truly force myself not to write any more.. but I just hAd to "quote" and comment on this post, as it is VERY interesting!! I'm sure there will be plenty more but I am determined to ignore them! :laughing7:

[marie glen]

Perhaps Rome ruined Christianity. But I would suggest that it was pre-destined to be that way. It was necessary for God's purpose to be served.

:2c:

I think it's a bit of a paradox. I think God knows the natural progression of all things.. in all possibilities.. I think He has assigned all their role.. yet also the best way for truth to be proven, is to let things run their course.. so, for instance, where I do not think He designed WW2, He, as the only source of life, brought it to pass.. and He also as to goodness, stepped back. He steps back to allow things to roll out in their natural course.. even tho He is interfering.. by the cross! by the flood.. by the Commandments.. the confusing the languages.. by leading Israel.. This life I think is an unavoidable journey and lesson (if we're to be rational creatures as opposed to robots).. I think judgment day is an age, that immediately follows the age of the millenium..

[marie glen]

Just thinking of the scripture that says,God is a consuming fire. Then comparing that,to when God saved me. God let me know I was lost-not in a right relationship with God. And God let me see,that I was in the presence of God. And I knew,it was holy God. I knew God was holy. And God let me see my sinfullness,my sinful selfrighteousness. God let me see the both of those and in contrast, God and God's holiness and me and my sinful selfrighteousness.

..imagine that - as one unsaved, and has been resurrected still in their sins.. And standing before the Holy God (in all His Purity, and in all His love and tenderness..) with full consciousness of all their flaws and wrong doings.. and some pretty horrific things have been done through history.. no lack of weeping and wailing on that day, even some gnashing of teeth i would gather.. We're not told a lot about judgment day.. I think there is some confusing of it with judgments which occur in history and on the earth, much like "day of the LORD" is confused with Jesus' return/arrival when it is said the day of the LORD comes like a thief in the night does.. God bless.

And that was the goodness of God,that brought me to repentance. That is,I saw,understood and agreed with everything God showed to me,both about God and myself. And it was painful,very painful,to see and understand,my own sinful selfrighteousness. To me,this is God,our God who is a consuming fire, burning out of me,that which needed to be burnt out,burnt up. So in my being born of God,God quite literally,cast me into fire. No,not one that could be seen with the human eye;but certainly one,that I could feel. And that was not meaness on God's part;but instead,it was because of the love of God for me and at that particular time,God expressing God's love for me,in the exact way I needed. And this is what I see,that God will do for every person,be it in this age or the ages to come. That is,when God,the goodnes of God, decides to bring a particular person to repentance towards God,then God will give to that particular person,
exactly what they need,for that to come about. And then,when God,the goodness of God has brought that person to repentance towards God-agreement with what God is showing them about both God and themself,when God brings that particular person to see and agree with such and they do see and agree with God,then at that time,the love of God will began flowing out upon that person. :-) And when God does that for the person,God will also show them,that it was Jesus Christ on the cross for them,taking their sins,upon himself! :-)

This is beautifully expressed,in a verse from that old song,Amazing Grace. "Twas grace that caused my heart to fear and grace my fears relieved. How precious did that grace appear,the hour I first believed."
:-)

[eaglesway]

This is speculative but, there are some verses that are very interesting. The scripture says when he appears..... evey eye will see him even those who pierced him......The veil in the heavens will be rolled back like a scroll..... Many will say to the rocks and the caves, "Fall on us and hide us from the face of the one who is in the throne".....


I think one reason why the Day of the Lord comes like a thief in the night is that the thief surprises you when it is dark out, takes all you have, leaves you with nothing......

But you are not children of darkness that it should take you like a thief.....

Walk in the day, as children of the light and the thief will not surprise you.

I think the thief is death. I think everyone who dies awakens at their appointed resurrection- mostly at the Great White Throne, in the presence of the one whose face shines like the sun in its strength- His face will be the mirror in which they see who they really are and some will hide and recoil and some will rejoice.

It could all take place in a momnet, or a twinkling of an eye, or it could take a 1000 years(with the Lord a thousand years is as a day)...

[Dandelion]

I think the thief is death. I think everyone who dies awakens at their appointed resurrection- mostly at the Great White Throne, in the presence of the one whose face shines like the sun in its strength- His face will be the mirror in which they see who they really are and some will hide and recoil and some will rejoice.

It could all take place in a momnet, or a twinkling of an eye, or it could take a 1000 years(with the Lord a thousand years is as a day)...
[/quote]  eaglesway

I so agree. When we finally come face to face with God, we will see ourselves through his eyes. And, I cannot image that we will be able to have any more deceptions or lies about who we are, and what is holy, at that meeting.  :iagree:

Our private curtains of the temple of who we are will be torn, and there will be no separation between us and God, any longer.

"For now we see in a mirror dimly, but then face to face; now I know in part, but then I will know fully just as I also have been fully known." 1 Corinthians 13:12

[Tom]

I think "every eye" will see him maybe due to modern technology that provides real time global video communication. I think the thing with the "thief in the night" is it's a matter of sudden surprise. I think believers will be manifested in front of the dais of Christ and get wages for our good works, but our bad works will be burned up. I think only unbelievers will be judged at the great white throne before they go into the second death-the lake of fire, and they won't be vivified until the consummation of the eons when death is abolished. Regarding the original post, I think "heaven" and "hell" are both real but misunderstood due to mistranslation and misinterpretation through church doctrine. I think the important thing to know is that "hell" is simply the unseen state of dead souls, not torture in fire forever.

[Lazarus Short]

I think "heaven" and "hell" are both real but misunderstood due to mistranslation and misinterpretation through church doctrine. I think the important thing to know is that "hell" is simply the unseen state of dead souls, not torture in fire forever.

Yes, but if you admit that "Hell is real," the fire-forever crowd will just say, "Well, there you go, he admits that Hell is real," and you've gained nothing.  It it so hard to get through to them as it is, and I sometimes think it would be easier to convince them of almost anything else.  It's an uphill fight, given that we are heretics from the get-go.  I feel very divergent in other areas as well, so much so that all I have left in common with other Christians is Jesus the Christ, but that is enough...

Tom, this is why I spend hours striving to NOT find Hell in the text of the Bible, for the fire-forever folks do respect that (the Bible, I mean, not my feeble efforts).

[Tom]

I hear ya, bro, and even their perception of Jesus Christ is distorted. I think, when we talk about "hell," we have to make sure hellfire folks know we're talking about something different, which like you say is hard to get across to them because of their programming, but I think it's necessary to expose the lie of their common misconception by telling it like it is about what the Old English word actually represents despite the crazy horror story that's been attached to it by the church. It would also help if those who are still trapped by the deception traded in their King James for a more accurate translation.

https://youtu.be/7nuumICiIjM

[Cardinal]

 :cloud9: If  you look up the word for lake as in lake of fire, it has a connected meaning of "haven" as in a safe haven or port in a storm. Moses saw fire that didn't destroy, and so did the 3000 on the day of Pentecost.

So why it's such a stretch to believe that it's a refiner's fire, that only removes the dross, I don't know. And the dross isn't even us in the first place. It's all the parasitic spirits we were both born with (generational curses) and picked up in the course of living in this realm.

Luckily, while we're still here walking around, we were told to both shake this "dust" off our feet, and also to wash it off ie. we're washing it off HIS FEET (those walking Him around in them).

Once we are not "here" anymore, then a more stringent method  is needed to do what we did not while alive, to dislodge our "stowaways", who cling to our souls so as not to fall into their ultimate abode, which WILL hurt them because the fire only destroys what is not like God (we were made in His image and likeness). My  :2c: Blessings....

[Lazarus Short]

:cloud9: If  you look up the word for lake as in lake of fire, it has a connected meaning of "haven" as in a safe haven or port in a storm. Moses saw fire that didn't destroy, and so did the 3000 on the day of Pentecost.

So why it's such a stretch to believe that it's a refiner's fire, that only removes the dross, I don't know. And the dross isn't even us in the first place. It's all the parasitic spirits we were both born with (generational curses) and picked up in the course of living in this realm.

Luckily, while we're still here walking around, we were told to both shake this "dust" off our feet, and also to wash it off ie. we're washing it off HIS FEET (those walking Him around in them).

Once we are not "here" anymore, then a more stringent method  is needed to do what we did not while alive, to dislodge our "stowaways", who cling to our souls so as not to fall into their ultimate abode, which WILL hurt them because the fire only destroys what is not like God (we were made in His image and likeness). My  :2c: Blessings....

Well said!  :iagree:

[sheila]

 EXACTLY!!!

[Tom]

..."look up the word for lake" where, sis? I'm familiar with "haven," but I don't see the connection anywhere.

http://concordant.org/expohtml/DeathAndJudgment/TheLakeOfFire.html

[Cardinal]

 :cloud9: It's been so long I don't remember if it's in the Hebrew or the Greek, but it's in there.....

[rosered]

:cloud9: It's been so long I don't remember if it's in the Hebrew or the Greek, but it's in there.....

:thumbsup:

  this was a study done years ago with Graham  ,  I remember   it well   :HeartThrob:

  strong's Lake Probably from λιμήν (G3040) (through the idea of nearness of shore)


Lexicon :: Strong's G3040 - limēn
λιμήν
Transliteration
limēn
Pronunciation
lē-mā'n (Key) 
Part of Speech
masculine noun
Root Word (Etymology)
Apparently a root word
Dictionary Aids
Vine's Expository Dictionary: View Entry
Outline of Biblical Usage
a harbour, haven
KJV Translation Count — Total: 3x
The KJV translates Strongs G3040 in the following manner: haven (2x), the fair havens (with G2570) (1x).
Thayer's Greek Lexicon
G3040
Word / Phrase / Strong's Search