Heaven, Yes...Hell, No

[Cardinal]

 :cloud9: Aww....I miss him SO much..... :sigh: :HeartThrob:

[rosered]

:cloud9: Aww....I miss him SO much..... :sigh: :HeartThrob:

Me too, more than you know sis  :icon_flower:  His flower  ,    He is with us as a witness to Gods Glory though  the veil ,    through the SPIRIT OF TRUTH AND LIFE  :HeartThrob:

   that is to say Christ Flesh


Hebrews 9:8
The Holy Spirit was showing by this that the way into the Most Holy Place had not yet been disclosed as long as the first tabernacle was still functioning.

[Tom]

I'm not a fan of Strong's because it's the concordance of the King James, but I check it out once in awhile. What I got from "lake" was H3220 and G3041, but I didn't see anything about "haven" even though I know a port at sea is considered a "haven," and "sea" and "lake" seem to be kind of interchangeable in the Hebrew scriptures. I see H2348 for "haven" which I think indicates that it's a port in a "sea" or "lake." I think the confusion comes in with Acts 27:12 that uses G3040 which looks like it could be "harbor" or "lake" and is translated "haven" in the King James. It's actually a different but similarly looking word than the one right after it which means "lake," G3040 "limen" and G3041 "limne." So I see how that happened.

[attachment deleted by admin]

[Cardinal]

:cloud9: Aww....I miss him SO much..... :sigh: :HeartThrob:

Me too, more than you know sis  :icon_flower:  His flower  ,    He is with us as a witness to Gods Glory though  the veil ,    through the SPIRIT OF TRUTH AND LIFE  :HeartThrob:

   that is to say Christ Flesh


Hebrews 9:8
The Holy Spirit was showing by this that the way into the Most Holy Place had not yet been disclosed as long as the first tabernacle was still functioning.

:cloud9: I know. It's so hard to lose a true friend in the Spirit because they are so few, ya know? He was like a literal brother to me. I'll never understand why God didn't heal him.  :sigh: :HeartThrob:

[Cardinal]

 :cloud9: @ Tom....I have a Strong's that's 30 years old and I wouldn't trade it for 100 of the new ones. They have "improved" it and taken out or "tweaked" so many meanings that were in the older one, that it is astounding.

And maybe it's just me, but I've stumbled over many a pattern by looking at related words. Most of the Hebrew are made from 3 root letters, and seeing how God's thoughts flowed from one person, place or thing from those roots, is eye-opening to say the least, sometimes. Blessings....

[Tom]

I understand, sis, and I use Strong's for comparison once in a blue moon just as I use the King James for comparison on the Interlinear Scripture Analyzer. I just think we need to be mindful of what we're looking at when we do because that version of scripture is not only considered to be the infallible word of God by a lot of folks, but it's played a big part in propagating church doctrine about "hell." I realize there's no perfect translation, but that's why I don't really rely on the King James or Strong's for the truth, just mostly as the perspective of church doctrine occasionally. I don't mean to offend folks when I say that because I know some consider their King James to be sacred. I used to be a die hard King James fan, but I had to give it up when I became aware of the inaccuracies.Then I read Young's Literal Translation until I became aware of a few things it shares with the King James. I think that's because of the Textus Receptus manuscript. I became aware of the Concordant Version and have been using it since even though it isn't popular for a few reasons, but I think it's the most accurate I've seen. Even the Interlinear Scripture Analyzer uses the Textus Receptus exclusively now, but that's a result of the threat of litigation for copyright violation from another manuscript that was used. You just have to know why you're looking at what you're looking at so you don't get carried away with a misconception due to some mistranslation, some which is intentional, and I would even call forgery. But I know we need to be somewhat skeptical about everything we read. It took me awhile to believe universal reconciliation after I first became aware of it. I had to do a lot of reading online before I really became convinced by the overwhelming evidence supported by an accurate translation of scripture. That's why I think it's so important to only use as accurate a translation as you can get hold of so you really know the truth. Anyway, I want you to know I wasn't trying to mess with you about that word study. I just needed to find out what's up because I'd never heard that particular association before. I think it's always good to learn something new and see different perspectives.

[Cardinal]

 :cloud9: I agree with you, I think some of it is intentional and there's a lot to be recommended in looking into other versions for comparison. I just got one of those versions and was surprised at how much I like it. I've always read KJV because of Strongs. Just shows it's not really ever too late to teach an old dog new tricks.  :winkgrin:  :laugh:

[Lazarus Short]

I was also a die-hard KJV fan for a long time.  Then along came the Ferrar Fenton Version, which I liked, except that Hell was prominent.  The NAS and the NIV were a disappointment, as was the NKJV and the KJV II (done by computer, no less).  In time I acquired a Strong's, and later a Young's, and not so long ago a YLT.  I'm considering a Concordant.

[Tom]

I was an "old dog," sis, when I became aware of universal reconciliation and the Concordant Version. I recommend it to you both. You don't even have to buy it. Here's the link, and there's a concordance at the end of the New Testament.

http://concordant.org/online/index.html

Here are links to the Interlinear Scripture Analyzer and Commentary Browser that synchronize.

http://www.scripture4all.org/

http://www.scripture4all.org/cbrowser/cbrowser.htm

[Cardinal]

 :cloud9: Thanks  :thumbsup:

[Pig]

Maybe we can make it easy on you... or not  ;)

The word for hell in the OT is שאול sheol. Those letters in that order occur 477 times with various prefixes and suffixes.  The problem is that when they occur, they are not translated the same way each time. But without modern vowels, which were added around 600 AD, two hundred year after the Jews were nudged out of the church, there was no way to tell them apart. They are all שאול.

Strong reduces them to roots, which also hides the fact that they are identical morphology.  You can reference his numbers 7585, 7586, 7587, 7592 but need to reference that against a Hebrew text. because the other roots also take other forms.  Since I don't consider Strong an apostle, his Hebrew in not necessarily inspired  ;)

So you get שאול translated as grave, hell, pit, Saul, Shaul, desired, ask, enquire, require, borrow, salute, etc.

But it is an easy thing to find 477 mentions of hell  שאול   ;)

Consider Saul, how many times did Saul chase David and attempt to kill him? How many times did hell pursue David?  and as a type of Christ did Hell pursue Christ? 

I throw these out just as considerations if you are attempting an exhaustive consideration of hell in the OT.   

The real question is what is the objective reality of שאול. But it is all over the OT.

[Cardinal]

 :cloud9: 2 :thumbsup: :thumbsup:

[rosered]

 

The real question is what is the objective reality of שאול. But it is all over the OT.

   Hi Bob  ,,       For me ...Death reigned  in the old because  everyone   is  very  dark/ ignorant   of God
fear of the unknown   , unseen , a low place , the pits

  Death  swallowed up the lives 
  Because Life is "  a presence  thing "  it is all around us ,but  mostly unnoticed or more of," taken for granted ."

Your quality of Life , I recall when very small child how a death  effected me  personally and how it got into my head   , by a thought that had never entered  my mind before that...
And how grief and pain become apart of "life " from that point on  .... and how life is fleeting

And than the   questions , the  thousands of  questions
Who is God ..   etc.

[eaglesway]

The first consideration in an exhaustive examination of "hell" is to realize that hell does not really exist in the scriptures when properly translated.

Considering what the words mean- sheol and hell do not mean the same thing, and what "hell" means was never in scripture.

When the average person hears the word "hell" they think of eternal torment in a burning place of torture.

When a person comes to understand sheol- there is no such meaning involved.

To list all the verses in which "hell" occurs (KJV primary exercise I guess) would be fruitless.

To list all the verses in which sheol occurs, having a proper definition of sheol in the foreground- would be immensely useful, because it clarifies this issue of the non-existence of hell(wrong translation of sheol)

Then you can deal with gehenna, and the lake of fire, and aionian pyr from a foundation at least moderately free from this overiding deception that hell is in the Bible 500 times. gehenna is in the bible, I think 8 or ten times includng several duplications in the gospels. The lake of fire is mentioned maybe 3 times, and Jesus mentions aionian pyr(olam esh or fire of the age to come or fire of the world to come) a half dozen times, also including duplications in the gospels.

:2c:

[Lazarus Short]

I Kings, chapters 1 – 2
The dying David instructs Solomon to not let the aged Joab die a natural death, but to have him killed:  "...let not his hoar head go down to the grave in peace." (2:6)  Solomon extends mercy to Shimei, but he disobeys instructions, and is put to death.  Nothing, as usual, is said about their fate after death except burial and the grave, which is always a limit beyond which no more punishment or suffering is possible

Chapers 3 – 22
Compared with the books of Samuel, the narrative stretches out here, and points us forward to the Books of Chronicles.  We see the usual accounts of battles, death, and burial, but nothing relevant to our thesis. 

Hell is not to be found in the book of I Kings.

II Kings, chapter 1
King Ahaziah sent 102 men to summon Elijah, but the prophet called fire down from heaven to consume them.  As I pointed out in an earlier instance of fire from heaven, this cannot be Hell-fire, and should not be used by the fire-forever advocates.

Hell is not to be found, then, in the book of II Kings.

I Chronicles and II Chronicles
The books of Chronicles cover much the same history as the books of Samuel and Kings.  We see kings following kings, the kingdom of Israel producing not a single good king, and the kingdom of Judah being blessed with a few.  Perhaps as a result of those few good kings, the Judah kingdom is carried off into exile much later than ten-tribed Israel.  We see death and the grave, but nothing beyond – therefore,

Hell is not to be found in the books of Chronicles.

Ezra
This book is concerned with the return of a few thousand of Judah and Benjamin from exile.  They were charged to rebuild the temple in Jerusalem, on orders of the Persian king Cyrus, who was probably a Zoroastrian.  Nothing relevant to our thesis is present in the book, so,

Hell is not to be found in the book of Ezra.

[Lazarus Short]

Job, chapters 1 - 2
Now, this is unexpected – Satan shows up among the "sons of God" in both chapters, and tells God that he has come before God, not from Hell, but from running around on the earth.  This happens twice, so it's not an isolated incident.  We see two things here – one is that, as we saw in Genesis, the creation is not a prey between God and Satan, but a hierarchy of God, the cosmos, the heavens, the earth, man, etc.  Also, note that Satan did NOT ask God if he could just drag Job down to Hell.  Now what kind of lapse is that?  Lots of folks would tell you that that is what Satan wants to do all the time with everyone.  Oh, maybe there was no Hell to drag Job down to?  Maybe Satan is only the Prince of Heck...

For his part, after his wife tells him to "curse God, and die," Job upbraids her:  "What? shall we receive good at the hand of God, and shall we not receive evil?"  (Job 2:9 – 10)  Satan is evil, but we see him here conferring with God, the Author of both Good and Evil.  Is it just possible that Satan is a servant of God, of the "Evil Division"?   

Chapter 3
Job laments that he is not dead, but depicts death as simple rest from woe, not a place of fiery suffering.  He is speaking of Sheol, where all go:  the grave.

Chapters 4 – 5
Job 5:20 states, "In famine he shall redeem thee from death..."  God redeems from death, not Hell or even Purgatory.  Job 5:26 says, "Thou shalt come to thy grave in a full age..."  Again, as before, the grave is depicted as man's final destination, the resurrection seeming not to be much in people's awareness in those days.

Chapters 6 - 10
Looking further on the theory of man's final place, we see in Job 7:9  "...he that goeth down to the grave shall come up no more."  Also see Job 10:21  "...I go whence I shall not return, even to the land of darkness and the shadow of death..."

Chapters 11 – 18
Job 11:8 contains the word "Hell" in the KJV, but again, it should have been translated as Sheol, the grave, or the unseen.

Job 18:15 mentions "...brimstone shall be scattered upon his habitation," and the Helliolater is grasping at straws if he thinks this indicates Hellfire – in Job's time and place, sulfur (brimstone) was used to purify, either scattered like salt or burned.  No Hell here.

Chapter 19
Key verse here:  "And though after my skin worms destroy this body, yet in my flesh shall I see God."  We can rejoice here to see that Job foresaw a new life beyond the grave, even though he had earlier said that he would not return from it.  This is surely one of the earliest hints of the resurrection of the dead.

Chapters 20 – 37
Job shows us the ultimate outcome of God's dealings with us:  "...he knoweth the way that I take:  when he hath tried me, I shall come forth as gold."  (23:10)

"Hell is naked before him, and destruction hath no covering."  (26:6) "Hell" here should be translated as the grave, sheol, the unseen.

Chapters 38 - 42
God speaks at last and mentions the gates of death and the shadow of death in verse 17, but there is no mention of conscious torment in fire – just death, as He had Adam, Eve, and many others of.

Hell is not to be found in the book of Job.

[micah7:9]

Amen and Amen! :dsunny:

[Patinak]

Laz,
Job was especially good !  :thumbsup:
Pat

[Lazarus Short]

Thank you, and thank you.  :URWelcome:

The book of Job was tiresome - I think I got as tired of what Job's friends had to say as God did... :footmouth:

[joeteekay]

A portion from the post of Laz:

Chapter 19
Key verse here:  "And though after my skin worms destroy this body, yet in my flesh shall I see God."  We can rejoice here to see that Job foresaw a new life beyond the grave, even though he had earlier said that he would not return from it.  This is surely one of the earliest hints of the resurrection of the dead.

I have a thought regarding what Job said in verse 19:26.  He said in his flesh he shall see God.

Job 19:26 

KJV And though after my skin worms destroy this body, yet in my flesh shall I see God:

CLV And behind my skin I will stand erect, And from my flesh I shall perceive Eloah,


The only way I can understand this is to think he was refering to the second resurrection and him being there. 

This suggests that he will not be in the first resurrection.  Job, although he was righteous,  did not have Christ living in him and thus was not one of the Elect IMO. However he did know that Christ would come as Saviour of the world as mentioned in verse 25. Some have speculated that King David will be in the first resurrection, but I disagree for this same reason as well as other reasons.

Joh 3:5  Jesus answered, Verily, verily, I say unto thee, Except a man be born of water and of the Spirit, he cannot enter into the kingdom of God.
Joh 3:6  That which is born of the flesh is flesh; and that which is born of the Spirit is spirit.

1Co_15:50  Now this I say, brethren, that flesh and blood cannot inherit the kingdom of God; neither doth corruption inherit incorruption.

If Job knew he would be resurrected in the flesh, he also knew he would not be imortal as a spiritual Son of God until sometime after his fleshly resurrection.   So this could mean that he will be in the second resurrection,  the White Throne Judgment, also refered to as the resurrection to judgment. So would he be resurrected along with billions of others, even with the evil doers and wicked who died in their sins?  All to be chastized by the purifying Lake of Fire.  Some with few strips, some with many.

Mat_12:42  The queen of the south shall rise up in the judgment with this generation, and shall condemn it: for she came from the uttermost parts of the earth to hear the wisdom of Solomon; and, behold, a greater than Solomon is here.

So can we speculate that the White Throne Judgment period will be on earth and those in the second resurrection will be raised as mortal beings, in the flesh.  All will be purged in the Lake of Fire before being chaged into spiritual Sons of God.  Also tying into this is the valley of dry bones in Ezekel 37. Also, no one in this eon can see God and live Exodus 33:20.  This may not be so in the White Throne Judgment period.

Or do we need to take much of this as metaphorical or figurative, which I do not like to do, since I lean more to the literal side in studying scripture?

Rev 20:11  And I saw a great white throne, and him that sat on it, from whose face the earth and the heaven fled away; and there was found no place for them.
Rev 20:12  And I saw the dead, small and great, stand before God; and the books were opened: and another book was opened, which is the book of life: and the dead were judged out of those things which were written in the books, according to their works.
Rev 20:13  And the sea gave up the dead which were in it; and death and hell delivered up the dead which were in them: and they were judged every man according to their works.

[micah7:9]

I agree with this part.....For by Grace.....Grace came with Jesus Christ.

"I have a thought regarding what Job said in verse 19:26.  He said in his flesh he shall see God.

Job 19:26 

KJV And though after my skin worms destroy this body, yet in my flesh shall I see God:

CLV And behind my skin I will stand erect, And from my flesh I shall perceive Eloah,


The only way I can understand this is to think he was refering to the second resurrection and him being there. 

This suggests that he will not be in the first resurrection.  Job, although he was righteous,  did not have Christ living in him and thus was not one of the Elect IMO. However he did know that Christ would come as Saviour of the world as mentioned in verse 25. Some have speculated that King David will be in the first resurrection, but I disagree for this same reason as well as other reasons."

The rest of your statement I am not able to speak on. But I appreciate your thoughts. :dsunny:

[eaglesway]

Dont want to hijack the thread, but I have wondered about this....

39These were all commended for their faith, yet none of them received what had been promised, 40since God had planned something better for us so that only together with us would they be made perfect.

Mt 8:10 "Truly I say to you, I have not found such great faith with anyone in Israel. 11 I say to you that many will come from east and west, and recline at the table with Abraham, Isaac and Jacob in the kingdom of heaven;

Matthew 22:32 'I am the God of Abraham, and the God of Isaac, and the God of Jacob'? He is not the God of the dead but of the living."


Makes me think the overcomers from all the ages will participate in the first rez, but I am not sure about it.

[gregoryfl]

Dont want to hijack the thread, but I have wondered about this....

39These were all commended for their faith, yet none of them received what had been promised, 40since God had planned something better for us so that only together with us would they be made perfect.

Mt 8:10 "Truly I say to you, I have not found such great faith with anyone in Israel. 11 I say to you that many will come from east and west, and recline at the table with Abraham, Isaac and Jacob in the kingdom of heaven;

Matthew 22:32 'I am the God of Abraham, and the God of Isaac, and the God of Jacob'? He is not the God of the dead but of the living."


Makes me think the overcomers from all the ages will participate in the first rez, but I am not sure about it.

Hmm...the Aramaic reads a bit different:

מֵטֻל דַּאלָהָא קַדֵּם חָר בּעוּדרָנַן דִּילַן דּלָא בֵּלעָדַין נֵתגַּמרוּן

Because of Alaha honing in our help before that they would not be polished without us. My literal translation.

In other words, God decided beforehand (honed in) to polish (make perfect) them by means of us (the ones he is writing to). It appears as though believers would be used as part of the process of polishing. This would easily take place with those in the first resurrection for those who are not part of it.

If this is indeed a hijack, perhaps move it to another thread?

Ronen

[joeteekay]

Dont want to hijack the thread, but I have wondered about this....

39These were all commended for their faith, yet none of them received what had been promised, 40since God had planned something better for us so that only together with us would they be made perfect.

Mt 8:10 "Truly I say to you, I have not found such great faith with anyone in Israel. 11 I say to you that many will come from east and west, and recline at the table with Abraham, Isaac and Jacob in the kingdom of heaven;

Matthew 22:32 'I am the God of Abraham, and the God of Isaac, and the God of Jacob'? He is not the God of the dead but of the living."


Makes me think the overcomers from all the ages will participate in the first rez, but I am not sure about it.

Hmm...the Aramaic reads a bit different:

מֵטֻל דַּאלָהָא קַדֵּם חָר בּעוּדרָנַן דִּילַן דּלָא בֵּלעָדַין נֵתגַּמרוּן

Because of Alaha honing in our help before that they would not be polished without us. My literal translation.

In other words, God decided beforehand (honed in) to polish (make perfect) them by means of us (the ones he is writing to). It appears as though believers would be used as part of the process of polishing. This would easily take place with those in the first resurrection for those who are not part of it.

If this is indeed a hijack, perhaps move it to another thread?

Ronen

I suppose I am guilty of the hijack. I took a scripture in Laz's post #165 and built an idea on it.  I really should have started a new thread and perhaps titled i "Who will be in the first resurrection".

:dontknow:  SORRY 

[Lazarus Short]

Makes me think the overcomers from all the ages will participate in the first rez, but I am not sure about it.

That is how I see it, and don't worry about the thread hijack.