Question regarding Gehenna

[fullarmor2]

  I just asked this question on Answers.   Why was the Greek word Geheena translated as hell in certain bibles when it doesn't mean hell? I got some tough answers and I was wondering if anyone would care to see them and perhaps include an answer also. Thank you.
http://answers.yahoo.com/question/index;_ylt=AhYo2OncN3sc7LFq7.tp2hDsy6IX;_ylv=3?qid=20111226081254AATTYFH

[fullarmor2]

Here is one tough answer I got.
Greek was the language used to write down the New Testament, so we find the Greek counterpart for the Hebrew 'hell' being used. Psalm 16:10 is quoted in the New Testament in Acts 2:27: "Because thou wilt not leave my soul in hell (Hades), neither wilt thou suffer thine Holy One to see corruption." These two passages demonstrate that the Old Testament term "Sheol" is equivalent to the New Testament term "Hades." The Greek Gehenna is NOT the equivalent of the Hebrew sheol (hell). Hades is the counterpart for sheol.

We need to sort out why the Bible uses different words to describe different states for the dead. There is the grave where dead bodies go to (Hebrew 'queber'), and then there is another place where the conscious part of the human ends up in, to await the Day of Judgement when resurrection bodies will be created. This other place is called in Hebrew 'Sheol', and in Greek it is 'Hades'

Sometimes the words "Sheol" and "Hades" are translated by the English word "hell." This can be confusing because usually we think of HELL as being a place of punishment. At this point it is better to think of Sheol or Hades as referring simply to the place where the soul goes at death. As will be seen, Sheol/Hades is also the place where the souls of righteous people go, and punishment would not be appropriate for these people. Psalm 16:10 (as well as Acts 2:27) is Messianic and refers to the place where Christ's soul went between His death and resurrection. Certainly Christ did not go to a place of punishment (compare Luke 23:43).

But the Hebrew word for the grave is Queber, not Sheol! If Sheol meant "grave" we would expect it to be used in the plural. For example, "And they said unto Moses, because there were no graves [plural of queber] in Egypt" (Exodus 14:11). But the word Sheol is never used in this way. Queber is used in the plural 29 times. If Sheol meant "grave" we would expect that it would be associated with a dead body or carcass or bones. Example: "And the bones of Saul and Jonathan his son buried they...in the sepulchre [queber] of Kish his father" (2 Sam. 21:14). The body is said to go to queber 37 times. The body is never said to go to Sheol. If Sheol meant "grave" then we would expect it to be described as being located on or near the surface of the earth. Example: "In my grave [queber] which I have digged for me in the land of Canaan, there shalt thou bury me." (Gen. 50:5) Queber is located on or near the face of the earth 32 times. Sheol is never used in this way! If Sheol meant "grave" then we would expect it to refer to an individual's grave, as in this made up sentence, "There is Joseph's grave." But the word is never so used whilst Queber is used in this way often: "The sepulcher (queber) of Kish" (2 Sam. 21:14). The O.T. would never say, "The Sheol of Kish." Queber is used of an individual's grave 44 times; Sheol is never so used. If Sheol meant "grave" then we would expect that there would be verses describing a dead person being put into Sheol, but we do not find this. A dead body is put in queber 33 times as in this example: "He laid his carcass (the carcass of the man of God) in his own grave (queber)" (1 Kings 13:30). If Sheol meant "grave" then we would expect to find verses which speak of man digging a Sheol, but we do not find this. Queber is used in this way six times: "In my grave [queber] which I have digged for me in the land of Canaan, there shalt thou bury me" (Genesis 50:5). The Old Testament never speaks of a Sheol being dug. Twenty-two times the Bible speaks of going down or descending into Sheol, but it never speaks of going down or descending into the grave [queber].

I have laboured the Hebrew meaning of Sheol, comparing it with the Hebrew for the grave. Once we grasp the distinctions in the Old Testament (which was the Bible Jesus used), we can then see what he was getting at in Luke 16 - the rich man dying and going to hell (Hades), whilst Lazarus died and went to Abraham's Bosom (paradise). The dead bodies of both men went to the grave, but they themselves went to Hades. One ended up in the hellish compartment; the other went to the paradise compartment. This is what the Judaic schools of Hillel and Shammai taught, before, during and after Jesus' lifetime. He addressed those who knew and believed those teachings in his account of the rich man and Lazarus dying.

NOW we can understand what Jesus was on about! The body dies and goes to the grave, until the day of resurrection, but the conscious, soulical part of humans go to Hades – either to the hell compartment or the paradise compartment, awaiting the Day of Judgement when souls will be 'clothed' with their resurrection bodies in order to stand before Christ and either go to heaven, or the lake of fire. Going on about Gehenna is a red herring. The Valley of Hinnom illustrated continuous flames and maggots. But it is the Greek word Hades we need to examine!

[Doug]

The use of "hell" in place of "gehenna" seems to be a feature of most English translations. The Bibles of other languages usually use the word that corresponds to "gehenna" in that language, and it is generally something that sounds a lot like "gehenna.". Examples that show this is true for Matthew 5:29 are given here.

If you were to ask, "why is it only done for English translations?" the answers might be interesting.

Doug

[eaglesway]

A variety of reasons are presented on this site, along with the history and morphology of the word "hell" in both the English language and bible translations, including also cultural developments that led to its common use in place of Sheol and Gehenna.


http://www.hell-is-a-myth.webs.com/

[jabcat]

Good answers.   :thumbsup:

[fullarmor2]

Here is one tough answer I got.
Greek was the language used to write down the New Testament, so we find the Greek counterpart for the Hebrew 'hell' being used. Psalm 16:10 is quoted in the New Testament in Acts 2:27: "Because thou wilt not leave my soul in hell (Hades), neither wilt thou suffer thine Holy One to see corruption." These two passages demonstrate that the Old Testament term "Sheol" is equivalent to the New Testament term "Hades." The Greek Gehenna is NOT the equivalent of the Hebrew sheol (hell). Hades is the counterpart for sheol.

We need to sort out why the Bible uses different words to describe different states for the dead. There is the grave where dead bodies go to (Hebrew 'queber'), and then there is another place where the conscious part of the human ends up in, to await the Day of Judgement when resurrection bodies will be created. This other place is called in Hebrew 'Sheol', and in Greek it is 'Hades'

Sometimes the words "Sheol" and "Hades" are translated by the English word "hell." This can be confusing because usually we think of HELL as being a place of punishment. At this point it is better to think of Sheol or Hades as referring simply to the place where the soul goes at death. As will be seen, Sheol/Hades is also the place where the souls of righteous people go, and punishment would not be appropriate for these people. Psalm 16:10 (as well as Acts 2:27) is Messianic and refers to the place where Christ's soul went between His death and resurrection. Certainly Christ did not go to a place of punishment (compare Luke 23:43).

But the Hebrew word for the grave is Queber, not Sheol! If Sheol meant "grave" we would expect it to be used in the plural. For example, "And they said unto Moses, because there were no graves [plural of queber] in Egypt" (Exodus 14:11). But the word Sheol is never used in this way. Queber is used in the plural 29 times. If Sheol meant "grave" we would expect that it would be associated with a dead body or carcass or bones. Example: "And the bones of Saul and Jonathan his son buried they...in the sepulchre [queber] of Kish his father" (2 Sam. 21:14). The body is said to go to queber 37 times. The body is never said to go to Sheol. If Sheol meant "grave" then we would expect it to be described as being located on or near the surface of the earth. Example: "In my grave [queber] which I have digged for me in the land of Canaan, there shalt thou bury me." (Gen. 50:5) Queber is located on or near the face of the earth 32 times. Sheol is never used in this way! If Sheol meant "grave" then we would expect it to refer to an individual's grave, as in this made up sentence, "There is Joseph's grave." But the word is never so used whilst Queber is used in this way often: "The sepulcher (queber) of Kish" (2 Sam. 21:14). The O.T. would never say, "The Sheol of Kish." Queber is used of an individual's grave 44 times; Sheol is never so used. If Sheol meant "grave" then we would expect that there would be verses describing a dead person being put into Sheol, but we do not find this. A dead body is put in queber 33 times as in this example: "He laid his carcass (the carcass of the man of God) in his own grave (queber)" (1 Kings 13:30). If Sheol meant "grave" then we would expect to find verses which speak of man digging a Sheol, but we do not find this. Queber is used in this way six times: "In my grave [queber] which I have digged for me in the land of Canaan, there shalt thou bury me" (Genesis 50:5). The Old Testament never speaks of a Sheol being dug. Twenty-two times the Bible speaks of going down or descending into Sheol, but it never speaks of going down or descending into the grave [queber].

I have laboured the Hebrew meaning of Sheol, comparing it with the Hebrew for the grave. Once we grasp the distinctions in the Old Testament (which was the Bible Jesus used), we can then see what he was getting at in Luke 16 - the rich man dying and going to hell (Hades), whilst Lazarus died and went to Abraham's Bosom (paradise). The dead bodies of both men went to the grave, but they themselves went to Hades. One ended up in the hellish compartment; the other went to the paradise compartment. This is what the Judaic schools of Hillel and Shammai taught, before, during and after Jesus' lifetime. He addressed those who knew and believed those teachings in his account of the rich man and Lazarus dying.

NOW we can understand what Jesus was on about! The body dies and goes to the grave, until the day of resurrection, but the conscious, soulical part of humans go to Hades – either to the hell compartment or the paradise compartment, awaiting the Day of Judgement when souls will be 'clothed' with their resurrection bodies in order to stand before Christ and either go to heaven, or the lake of fire. Going on about Gehenna is a red herring. The Valley of Hinnom illustrated continuous flames and maggots. But it is the Greek word Hades we need to examine!

     I just found out that this answer was chosen as the #1 answer or the best answer to my question on Yahoo Answers.   I forgot to go back and choose a best answer so they picked it for me.  How would anybody here respond to this position in this answer to my question?

[eaglesway]

It is a little off in the particulars, although circling in on the right meaning overall.

"Sheol" never meant "the grave" in direct translation. "Queder" is the word for a physical grave. "Sheol" meant, "unseen",  "beyond the horizon",  "unknown/unknowable". It became a euphemism for , "the grave", as a symbolic mystical expression meaning the state after death. A symbol for "whatever that is" being beyond the veil and unknown, or at least unclear, to living men. This word, being used to express a mystical ideal, was not a clear physical definition like "queder/grave" in the minds of the original speakers.

The Greeks used "Hades" as their translation for "Sheol"(Septuagint, 132 BC).  "Hades" had a definite, clear place in the "cosmology" of the Greeks, and was also the name of the "god" who ruled Hades, their underworld. This brought new meaning the word and began to distance it from "sheol". Now a reader saw what a believer in the Greek cosmology (their mythical pantheon) believed, not what the original Hebrew speaker believed.

Next, the Romans came along and translated "Hades" to "Inferno"(Latin Vulgate, 4th cent AD). Their cosmology was similar to the Greeks but they added fire aspect, Inferno being a place of fiery torment in its lower regions, ruled by the "god", Pluto.

When the English translators came along, much, much later(1600s) they had "Hades" and "Inferno" to work with and already had this corrupted view of what the words represented(over 1000 years of false teaching). They(at least the majority of them) could not see the word "sheol" outside of that Greco/Roman context and they were also under pressure from King James' cronies not to divert from the teaching of the church, "when in doubt go with the teaching of the church". The Anglican church at that time varied very little from the Romans, having been created a "state church"(16th century), primarily as a way to exit politically and economically from the influence of the Church of Rome.

The English were heavily influenced, in their language and its historic etymology and morphology by the Danes and the Jutes and the varied Norsemen who had invaded Briton eventually settling among them and becoming a big part of their heritage. Their cosmology was also similar to the Greeks and the Romans(multitheistic). Their underworld was called "hel" and it was ruled by the goddess "Hel", or Hella. To die, for a Norseman, was to "go to hel"(Poetic Edda) and there you have the true meaning of the English insult "go to hell"(it means "DIE").

The English used the word "Hell" in the King James bible and now the fix was in. Hell was never used in any way before the English translations. It is a product of the last 6-700 years. When discussing the languages of "antiquity" (meaning say, 3rd or 4th century and back)- it doesn't even qualify for discussion- it is "non-existent" in relation to the scriptures, previous to the rise of English theological interpretations rising out of the early British empire. To underestimate the negative effect of this "Britishism" over the last 6 centuries is equal to negating the effect of Greek philosophy and Roman theology in the previous  centuries.

[Molly]

Now a reader saw what a believer in the Greek cosmology (their mythical pantheon) believed, not what the original Hebrew speaker believed.

There are those who say the ancient Hebrews did believe in a pantheon of gods, as did all their neighbors.  They also believed their God was the Most High God.

[WhiteWings]

 

1984a (qeber) grave, sepulcher.

1984b (q) (q) grave, burial.

The verb q is translated with unusual uniformity as KJV and other versions. It is not used figuratively of concealing or of causing horror. It is seldom used in poetry, only once in the Pss (79:3) where it is used of burial after a battle at Jerusalem.

qeber. Grave, sepulcher. This word also is mostly used just for the literal tomb. It is used only three times in Pss (out of sixty-seven) and not often in poetry elsewhere. It is used for the cave of Machpelah, the graves of Egypt and the sepulchers of the kings as mentioned in Chr. The phrase [/color]qeberPs 5:9 [H 10]. Its usage in Ps 88 is interesting. The Ps concerns those approaching sh (q.v.) (v. 3 [H 4]), those who go down to the pit b (q.v.) (v. 4 [H 5]), the dead m (v. 5 [H 6]), the pit beneath b (v. 6 [H 7]), the dead r (v. 10 [H 11]), destruction (v. 11 [H 12]), the place of darkness and the land of oblivion (v. 12 [H 13]). It seems that qeber is used both in v. 5 and v. 11 [H 6 and 12] as a synonym needed to give a parallel to the other words more often used in poetry. It serves, however, to suggest the meaning of the other words. A similar usage with these same synonyms is found in Ezk 32 (given in some detail under sh). Isa 14:19, like Ezk has sh in parallel with b which is parallel with qeber and q. qeber appears to be the prose equivalent of these other words, which are used more in poetry.

[eaglesway]

Shema Yisrael Adonai Eloheinu Adonai Eḥad - Hear, O Israel: the Lord is our God, the Lord is One

I wouldn t know who "those" are :o).

Abraham was the first "Hebrew". The nation was born from his fatherhood on the basis of his friendship with the God who is One.

Perhaps, during their backslidings, when they worshipped the gods of the surrounding nations, they became for periods, "multi-theistic". They were severely disciplined by YHWH for it, being taken from their land as we all know.

This is the "candlestick" they carried through their eon, in the "administration of the fulness of times, the summing up of all things in Christ".

They labored and we have entered into their labors, in our eon declaring the one true God and the Lord Jesus Christ. We are the one new man, in Abraham's seed, who is Christ, also sons of Abraham.

In the "eons to come", the rest of the cosmos will be brought under the Lordship of Jesus and the YHWH will become, "ALL IN ALL". YAAYYYYYY......HOORAYYYYY!!!!

[eaglesway]

1984a (qeber) grave, sepulcher.

1984b (q) (q) grave, burial.

The verb q is translated with unusual uniformity as KJV and other versions. It is not used figuratively of concealing or of causing horror. It is seldom used in poetry, only once in the Pss (79:3) where it is used of burial after a battle at Jerusalem.

qeber. Grave, sepulcher. This word also is mostly used just for the literal tomb. It is used only three times in Pss (out of sixty-seven) and not often in poetry elsewhere. It is used for the cave of Machpelah, the graves of Egypt and the sepulchers of the kings as mentioned in Chr. The phrase [/color]qeberPs 5:9 [H 10]. Its usage in Ps 88 is interesting. The Ps concerns those approaching sh (q.v.) (v. 3 [H 4]), those who go down to the pit b (q.v.) (v. 4 [H 5]), the dead m (v. 5 [H 6]), the pit beneath b (v. 6 [H 7]), the dead r (v. 10 [H 11]), destruction (v. 11 [H 12]), the place of darkness and the land of oblivion (v. 12 [H 13]). It seems that qeber is used both in v. 5 and v. 11 [H 6 and 12] as a synonym needed to give a parallel to the other words more often used in poetry. It serves, however, to suggest the meaning of the other words. A similar usage with these same synonyms is found in Ezk 32 (given in some detail under sh). Isa 14:19, like Ezk has sh in parallel with b which is parallel with qeber and q. qeber appears to be the prose equivalent of these other words, which are used more in poetry.

Awesome dude.

H6900
קברה    קבוּרה
qebûrâh  qebûrâh
keb-oo-raw', keb-oo-raw'
Feminine passive participle of H6912; sepulture; (concretely) a sepulchre: - burial, burying place, grave, sepulchre.

Used 13 times in the OT, each time meaning a physical burial place, sepulchre.

H6913
קברה    קבר
qeber  qibrâh
keh'-ber, kib-raw'
From H6912; a sepulchre: - burying place, grave, sepulchre.

Used 62 times, also sepulchre, physical burial place

H7585
שׁאל    שׁאול
she'ôl  she'ôl
sheh-ole', sheh-ole'
From H7592; hades or the world of the dead (as if a subterranian retreat), including its accessories and inmates: - grave, hell, pit.

Used 63 times in OT(KJV) as "grave", "hell" or "pit" -a few pits , the rest pretty much split between grave and hell- never translated as sepulchre of burial place, which indicates to me poetic, or symbolic usage.

[Molly]

Shema Yisrael Adonai Eloheinu Adonai Eḥad - Hear, O Israel: the Lord is our God, the Lord is One

I wouldn t know who "those" are :o).

Abraham was the first "Hebrew". The nation was born from his fatherhood on the basis of his friendship with the God who is One.

Perhaps, during their backslidings, when they worshipped the gods of the surrounding nations, they became for periods, "multi-theistic". They were severely disciplined by YHWH for it, being taken from their land as we all know.

This is the "candlestick" they carried through their eon, in the "administration of the fulness of times, the summing up of all things in Christ".

They labored and we have entered into their labors, in our eon declaring the one true God and the Lord Jesus Christ. We are the one new man, in Abraham's seed, who is Christ, also sons of Abraham.

In the "eons to come", the rest of the cosmos will be brought under the Lordship of Jesus and the YHWH will become, "ALL IN ALL". YAAYYYYYY......HOORAYYYYY!!!!

You can still be monotheisistic and believe there are other gods.

1God [elohiym] standeth in the congregation of the mighty [el]; he judgeth among the gods [elohiym] [Psa 82]

[redhotmagma]

Shema Yisrael Adonai Eloheinu Adonai Eḥad - Hear, O Israel: the Lord is our God, the Lord is One

I wouldn t know who "those" are :o).

Abraham was the first "Hebrew". The nation was born from his fatherhood on the basis of his friendship with the God who is One.

Perhaps, during their backslidings, when they worshipped the gods of the surrounding nations, they became for periods, "multi-theistic". They were severely disciplined by YHWH for it, being taken from their land as we all know.

This is the "candlestick" they carried through their eon, in the "administration of the fulness of times, the summing up of all things in Christ".

They labored and we have entered into their labors, in our eon declaring the one true God and the Lord Jesus Christ. We are the one new man, in Abraham's seed, who is Christ, also sons of Abraham.

In the "eons to come", the rest of the cosmos will be brought under the Lordship of Jesus and the YHWH will become, "ALL IN ALL". YAAYYYYYY......HOORAYYYYY!!!!

You can still be monotheisistic and believe there are other gods.

1God [elohiym] standeth in the congregation of the mighty [el]; he judgeth among the gods [elohiym] [Psa 82]

Moses is also called elohim

[WhiteWings]

http://www.tentmaker.org/forum/bible_threatenings_explained/hades_according_first_century_jewish_priest_10191.msg134433.html#new

[Molly]

Shema Yisrael Adonai Eloheinu Adonai Eḥad - Hear, O Israel: the Lord is our God, the Lord is One

I wouldn t know who "those" are :o).

Abraham was the first "Hebrew". The nation was born from his fatherhood on the basis of his friendship with the God who is One.

Perhaps, during their backslidings, when they worshipped the gods of the surrounding nations, they became for periods, "multi-theistic". They were severely disciplined by YHWH for it, being taken from their land as we all know.

This is the "candlestick" they carried through their eon, in the "administration of the fulness of times, the summing up of all things in Christ".

They labored and we have entered into their labors, in our eon declaring the one true God and the Lord Jesus Christ. We are the one new man, in Abraham's seed, who is Christ, also sons of Abraham.

In the "eons to come", the rest of the cosmos will be brought under the Lordship of Jesus and the YHWH will become, "ALL IN ALL". YAAYYYYYY......HOORAYYYYY!!!!

You can still be monotheisistic and believe there are other gods.

1God [elohiym] standeth in the congregation of the mighty [el]; he judgeth among the gods [elohiym] [Psa 82]

Moses is also called elohim

As you will be.


5For though there be that are called gods, whether in heaven or in earth, (as there be gods many, and lords many,)

6But to us there is but one God, the Father, of whom are all things, and we in him; and one Lord Jesus Christ, by whom are all things, and we by him.

--1 Cor 8

[WhiteWings]

(Num 33:4) while the Egyptians were entombing those whom Yahweh had smitten among them, every firstborn, when Yahweh had executed judgments on their elohim.

אלהים
'ĕlôhı̂ym
BDB Definition:
1) (plural)
1a) rulers, judges
1b) divine ones
1c) angels
1d) gods
2) (plural intensive - singular meaning)
2a) god, goddess
2b) godlike one
2c) works or special possessions of God
2d) the (true) God
2e) God
Part of Speech: noun masculine plural
A Related Word by BDB/Strong's Number: plural of H433
Same Word by TWOT Number: 93c

[jabcat]

Well, I thought it was cool in Eaglesway's post about fire not being attached to "hell" until hundreds of years after Jesus' earthly ministry.

The link you just posted though Tony, the info from Josephus in the first century, says it was present even then  :sigh:   :dontknow:

"to the lovers of wicked works eternal punishment. To these
belong the unquenchable fire, and that without end, and a certain fiery worm, never dying, and not destroying the
body, but continuing its eruption out of the body with never-ceasing grief: neither will sleep give ease to these men,
nor will the night afford them comfort; death will not free them from their punishment, nor will the interceding
prayers of their kindred profit them; for the just are no longer seen by them, nor are they thought worthy of
remembrance.

In this region there is a certain place set apart, as a lake of unquenchable fire, whereinto we suppose no one hath
hitherto been cast; ...the unjust, and those that have been disobedient to God, and have given
honor to such idols as have been the vain operations of the hands of men as to God himself, shall be adjudged to
this everlasting punishment"

[Molly]

(Num 33:4) while the Egyptians were entombing those whom Yahweh had smitten among them, every firstborn, when Yahweh had executed judgments on their elohim.

אלהים
'ĕlôhı̂ym
BDB Definition:
1) (plural)
1a) rulers, judges
1b) divine ones
1c) angels
1d) gods
2) (plural intensive - singular meaning)
2a) god, goddess
2b) godlike one
2c) works or special possessions of God
2d) the (true) God
2e) God
Part of Speech: noun masculine plural
A Related Word by BDB/Strong's Number: plural of H433
Same Word by TWOT Number: 93c

upon their gods also the LORD executed judgments [KJV] Num 33:4


The literal meaning---God was punishing the gods of the Egyptians, and the people suffered for it.

[WhiteWings]

Well, I thought it was cool in Eaglesway's post about fire not being attached to "hell" until hundreds of years after Jesus' earthly ministry.

The link you just posted though Tony, the info from Josephus in the first century, says it was present even then  :sigh:   :dontknow:

Mythbusters :laughing7:

It's just a translation. So forever can mean age.

The NT was already completed when Josephus wrote that. I wonder if he has read the NT because how else he knows about LoF?
The parables Jesus taught were nothing new. Most of them were taught by the priests long before Jesus was born.
So I'm wondering if there also was a LoF teaching before Jesus?

[jabcat]

Well, I thought it was cool in Eaglesway's post about fire not being attached to "hell" until hundreds of years after Jesus' earthly ministry.

The link you just posted though Tony, the info from Josephus in the first century, says it was present even then  :sigh:   :dontknow:

"to the lovers of wicked works eternal punishment. To these
belong the unquenchable fire, and that without end, and a certain fiery worm, never dying, and not destroying the
body, but continuing its eruption out of the body with never-ceasing grief: neither will sleep give ease to these men,
nor will the night afford them comfort; death will not free them from their punishment, nor will the interceding
prayers of their kindred profit them; for the just are no longer seen by them, nor are they thought worthy of
remembrance.

In this region there is a certain place set apart, as a lake of unquenchable fire, whereinto we suppose no one hath
hitherto been cast; ...the unjust, and those that have been disobedient to God, and have given
honor to such idols as have been the vain operations of the hands of men as to God himself, shall be adjudged to
this everlasting punishment"

I thought the Greeks had no concept of eternal/everlasting.  Is it possible this is an English interpretation  of what Josephus actually said - with the idea/word eternal added?

Also, what was Josephus' perspective?  I got the idea he was more of an "outside" historical observer/reporter.  Maybe not.  However, some of this info isn't fitting together...

[jabcat]

Haha, wrote the above before seeing your post...  :Oops:

[eaglesway]

Deu 4:39  Therefore know this day, and consider it in your heart, that the LORD Himself is God in heaven above and on the earth beneath; there is no other.

Psa 82:1   

A Psalm of Asaph.


God(Elohyim) stands in the congregation of the mighty(el);
    He judges among the gods(elohyim).
How long shall you rule unjustly.........

It is important that one know there are no other "gods". There are "elohyim"..... "mighty ones"..... God who is YHWH and the greatest Eloyhim, who created all the el, is the "ONLY WISE GOD"

Moses was an elohyim because of his appointment by the creator. As Jesus put it,

Joh 17:3  "This is eternal life, that they may know You, the only true God, and Jesus Christ whom You have sent.

and,

Mar 15:34  At the ninth hour Jesus cried out with a loud voice, "ELOI, ELOI, LAMA SABACHTHANI?" which is translated, "MY GOD, MY GOD, WHY HAVE YOU FORSAKEN ME?"

as well as,

John 20:17  Jesus said to her, "Stop clinging to Me, for I have not yet ascended to the Father; but go to My brethren and say to them, 'I ascend to My Father and your Father, and My God and your God.'"



He also said, after his resurrection and glorification

Rev 3:2  'Wake up, and strengthen the things that remain, which were about to die; for I have not found your deeds completed in the sight of My God.


Rev 3:12  'He who overcomes, I will make him a pillar in the temple of My God, and he will not go out from it anymore; and I will write on him the name of My God, and the name of the city of My God, the new Jerusalem, which comes down out of heaven from My God, and My new name.

And it was prophesied of him,

Heb 1:9  "YOU HAVE LOVED RIGHTEOUSNESS AND HATED LAWLESSNESS; THEREFORE GOD, YOUR GOD, HAS ANOINTED YOU WITH THE OIL OF GLADNESS ABOVE YOUR COMPANIONS."

Jesus knew there was only one God, one ALMIGHTY. YWHW. The Father..... who said to Moses, "There is No Other"...... cuz there isn't ;o)

[WhiteWings]

A few quotes from pastor/rev. who was converted from Judaism later in his life.
Most of it is not a direct answer to this topic but it will show how the Jews used the word. That in itself may show what Gehenna is in the (ancient) Jewish mind.
I'm quoting from 2300+ pages so if things are to much out of context just ask.


As on most other subjects, the Rabbis were accurate and keen observers of the laws of
health, and their regulations are often far in advance of modern practice. From many
allusions in the Old Testament we infer that the science of medicine, which was carried
to comparatively great perfection in Egypt, where every disease had its own physician,
was also cultivated in Israel. Thus the sin of Asia, in trusting too much to earthly
physicians, is specially reproved (2 Chron 16:12). In New Testament times we read of the
woman who had spent all her substance, and suffered so much at the hands of
physicians (Mark 5:26); while the use of certain remedies, such as oil and wine, in the
treatment of wounds (Luke 10:34), seems to have been popularly known. St. Luke was a
"physician" (Col 4:14); and among the regular Temple officials there was a medical man,
whose duty it was to attend to the priesthood who, from ministering barefoot, must have
been specially liable to certain diseases. The Rabbis ordained that every town must
have at least one physician, who was also to be qualified to practise surgery, or else a
physician and a surgeon. Some of the Rabbis themselves engaged in medical pursuits:
and, in theory at least, every practitioner ought to have had their licence. To employ a
heretic or a Hebrew Christian was specially prohibited, though a heathen might, if
needful, be called in. But, despite their patronage of the science, caustic sayings also
occur. "Physician, heal thyself," is really a Jewish proverb; "Live not in a city whose
chief is a medical man"—he will attend to public business and neglect his patients; "The
best among doctors deserves Gehenna"—for his bad treatment of some, and for his
neglect of others. It were invidious to enter into a discussion of the remedies prescribed
in those times, although, to judge from what is advised in such cases, we can scarcely
wonder that the poor woman in the gospel was nowise benefited, but rather the worse of
them (Mark 5:26). The means recommended were either generally hygienic—and in this
respect the Hebrews contrast favourably even with ourselves—or purely medicinal, or
else sympathetic, or even magical. The prescriptions consisted of simples or of
compounds, vegetables being far more used than minerals. Cold-water compresses, the
external and internal use of oil and of wine, baths (medicated and other), and a certain
diet, were carefully indicated in special diseases. Goats'-milk and barley-porridge were
recommended in all diseases attended by wasting. Jewish surgeons seem even to have
known how to operate for cataract.
..........

and the Talmud goes even so [size=78%]far as to assert, that whoever visits the sick shall deliver his soul from [/size][size=78%]Gehenna[/size][size=78%] (Ned. 40-[/size][size=78%]a).[/size]
[size=78%].............[/size]
[size=78%]
Nor was the
service of love to stop here; for, as we have seen, the burial of the dead was quite as
urgent a duty as the visitation of the sick. As the funeral procession passed, every one
was expected, if possible, to join the convoy. The Rabbis applied to the observance of
this direction Proverbs 14:32, and 19:17; and to its neglect Proverbs 17:5 (Ber. 18 a).
Similarly, all reverence was shown towards the remains of the dead, and burying-places
were kept free from every kind of profanation, and even from light conversation.
Burial followed generally as soon as possible after death (Matt 9:23; Acts 5:6,10, 8:2), no
doubt partly on sanitary grounds. For special reasons, however (Acts 9:37,39), or in the
case of parents, there might be a delay even of days. The preparations for the burial of
our Lord, mentioned in the gospels—the ointment against His burial (Matt 26:12), the
spices and ointments (Luke 23:56), the mixture of myrrh and aloes—find their literal
confirmation in what the Rabbis tell us of the customs of the period (Ber. 53 a). At one
time the wasteful expenditure connected with funerals was so great as to involve in
serious difficulties the poor, who would not be outdone by their neighbours.



before the world was made, God created the Law and Gehenna, and the
Garden of Eden. He made the Garden of Eden for the righteous, that they might eat of
the fruits thereof, and delight themselves in them, because in this world they had kept
the commandments of the law. But for the wicked He prepared Gehenna, which is like a
sharp two-edged destroying sword. He put within it sparks of fire and burning coals, to
punish the wicked in the world to come, because they had not observed the
commandments of the law in this world. For the law is the tree of life. Whosoever
observeth it shall live and subsist as the tree of life.



Paradise and hell were supposed to be contiguous, only separated—it was said,
perhaps allegorically—by an handbreadth. But although we may here find some slight
resemblance to the localisation of the history of the rich man and Lazarus (Luke
16:25,26), only those acquainted with the theological thinking of the time can fully judge
what infinite difference there is between the story in the Gospel and the pictures drawn
in contemporary literature. Witness here the 22nd chapter of the book of Enoch, which,
as so many other passages from pseudo-epigraphic and Rabbinical writings, has been
mangled and misquoted by modern writers, for purposes hostile to Christianity. The
Rabbis seem to have believed in a multitude of heavens—most of them holding that
there were seven, as there were also seven departments in paradise, and as many in hell.
The pre-existence of the souls of all mankind before their actual appearance upon earth,



In view of this there is, strictly speaking, logical inconsistency in the earnestness with
which the Rabbis insist on universal and immediate repentance, and the need of
confession of sin, and of preparation for another world. For, a paradise which might be
entered by all on their own merits, and which yet is to be sought by all through
repentance and similar means, or else can only be obtained after passing through a kind
of purgatory, constitutes no mean moral charge against the religion of Rabbinism.



[/size]

[WhiteWings]

The former arranged all mankind into three classes: the
perfectly righteous, who are 'immediately written and sealed to eternal life;' the perfectly
wicked, who are 'immediately written and sealed to Gehenna;' and an intermediate class.
'who go down to Gehinnom, and moan, and come up again,' according to Zech. xiii. 9,
and which seemed also indicated in certain words in the Song of Hannah (1 Sam. ii. 6).
The careful reader will notice that this statement implies belief in Eternal Punishment on
the part of the School of Shammai.

..........

Substantially the same, as regards Eternity of Punishment, is the view of the School of
Hillel (u. s. 17 a). In regard to sinners of Israel and of the Gentiles it teaches, indeed, that
they are tormented in Gehenna for twelve months, after which their bodies and souls are
burnt up and scattered as dust under the feet of the righteous; but it significantly excepts
from this number certain classes of transgressors 'who go down to Gehinnom and are
punished there to ages of ages.' That the Niphal form of the verb used, Nynwdyn; must
mean 'punished' and not 'judged,' appears, not only from the context, but from the use of
the same word and form in the same tractate (Rosh haSh. 12 a, lines 7 &c. from top),
when it is said of the generation of the Flood that 'they were punished' surely not 'judged'
- by 'hot water.' However, therefore the School of Hillel might accentuate the mercy of
God, or limit the number of those who would suffer Eternal Punishment, it did teach
Eternal Punishment in the case of some. And this is the point in question.

...............

But, since the Schools of Shammai and Hillel represented the theological teaching in the
time of Christ and His Apostles, it follows, that the doctrine of Eternal Punishment was
that held in the days of our Lord,

.............

The doctrine of the Eternity of Punishments seems to have been held by the Synagogue
throughout the whole first century of our era.

....In the second century of our era, we mark a decided difference in Rabbinic opinion.
Although it was said that, after the death of Rabbi Meir, the ascent of smoke from the
grave of his apostate teacher had indicated that the Rabbi's prayers for the deliverance of
his matter from Gehenna had been answered (Chag. 15 b), most of the eminent teachers
of that period propounded the idea, that in the last day the sheath would be removed
which now covered the sun, when its fiery heat would burn up the wicked (Ber. R. 6).
Nay, one Rabbi maintained that there was no hell at all, but that that day would consume
the wicked, and yet another, that even this was not so, but that the wicked would be
consumed by a sort of internal conflagration.
In the third century of our era we have once more a reaction, and a return to the former
views.

[WhiteWings]

But there are points of view which may be gained from Rabbinic writings, helpful to the understanding of the 'Sermon on the Mount,' although not of its spirit.
.........
In regard to St. Matt. v. 22, we
remember that the term 'brother' applied only to Jews, while the Rabbis used to designate
the ignorant65 - or those who did not believe such exaggerations, as that in the future God
would build up the gates of Jerusalem with gems thirty cubits high and broad - as
Reyqa,66 with this additional remark, that on one such occasion the look of a Rabbi had
immediately turned the unbeliever into a heap of bones!

....
Again, the opprobrious term 'fool' was by no means of uncommon occurrence among the
sages;67 and yet they themselves state, that to give an opprobrious by-name, or to put
another openly to shame, was one of the three things which deserved Gehenna.

.....
The 'Sermon on the Mount' closes with a parabolic illustration, which in similar form
occurs in Rabbinic writings. Thus,82 the man whose wisdom exceeds his works is
compared to a tree whose branches are many, but its roots few, and which is thus easily
upturned by the wind; while he whose works exceed his wisdom is likened to a tree,
whose branches are few, and its roots many, against which all the winds in the world
would strive in vain. A sill more close parallel is that83 in which the man who has good
works, and learns much in the Law, is likened to one, who in building his house lays
stones first, and on them bricks, so that when the flood cometh the house is not destroyed;
while he who has not good work, yet busies himself much with the Law, is like one who
puts bricks below, and stones above which are swept away by the waters. Or else the
former is like one who puts mortar between the bricks, fastening them one to the other;
and the other to one who merely puts mortar outside, which the rain dissolves and washes
away.

..............

But to return. Believing, that Jesus spoke to Peter in the Aramic, we can now understand
how the words Petros and Petra would be purposely used by Christ to mark the
difference, which their choice would suggest. Perhaps it might be expressed in this
somewhat clumsy paraphrase: 'Thou art Peter (Petros) - a Stone or Rock - and upon this
Petra - the Rock, the Petrine - will I found My Church.' If, therefore, we would not
certainly apply them to the words of Peter's confession, we would certainly apply them to
that which was the Petrine in Peter: the heaven-given faith which manifested itself in his
confession.41 And we can further understand how, just as Christ's contemporaries may
have regarded the world as reared on the rock of faithful Abraham, so Christ promised,
that He would build His Church on the Petrine in Peter - on his faith and confession. Nor
would the term 'Church' sound strange in Jewish ears. The same Greek word
(ekklhsia), as the equivalent of the Hebrew Qahal, 'convocation,' 'the called,'42 occurs
in the LXX. rendering of the Old Testament, and in 'the Wisdom of the Son of Sirach'43
and was apparently in familiar use at the time.44 In Hebrew use it referred to Israel, not in
their national but in their religious unity. As here employed, it would convey the
prophecy, that His disciples would in the future be joined together in a religious unity;
that this religious unity or 'Church' would be a building of which Chr ist was the Builder;
that it would be founded on 'the Petrine' of heaven-taught faith and confession; and that
this religious unity, this Church, was not only intended for a time, like a school of
thought, but would last beyond death and the disembodied state: that, alike as regarded
Christ and His Church - 'the gates of Hades'45 shall not prevail against it.

45. It is important to notice that the word is Hades, and not Gehenna. Dean Plumptre
calls attention to the wonderful character of such a prophecy at a time when all around
seemed to foreshadow only failure.



'For every one shall be salted for the fire'54
54. The rendering 'Salted for the fire,' viz., as a sacrifice, has been adopted by other critics.

To this explanation of the words of Christ it may, perhaps, be added that, from their
form, they must have conveyed a special meaning to the disciples. It is well-known law,
that every sacrifice burned on the Altar must be salted with salt.57 Indeed, according to
the Talmud, not only every such offering, but even the wood with which the sacrificial
fire was kindled, was sprinkled with salt.58 Salt symbolised to the Jews of that time the
incorruptible and the higher. Thus, the soul was compared to the salt, and it was said
concerning the dead: 'Shake off the salt, and throw the flesh to the dogs.'59 The Bible
was compared to salt; so was acuteness of intellect.60 Lastly, the question: 'If the salt
have lost its savour, wherewith will ye season it?' seems to have been proverbial, and
occurs in exactly the same words in the Talmud, apparently to denote a thing that is
impossible.61 62

Then the final Judgment would commence. We must here once more make distinction
between Israel and the Gentiles, with whom, nay, as more punishable than they, certain
notorious sinners, heretics, and all apostates, were to be ranked. Whereas to Israel the
Gehenna, to which all but the perfectly righteous had been consigned at death, had
proved a kind of purgatory, from which they were all ultimately delivered by Abraham,67
or, according to some of the later Midrashim, by the Messiah, no such deliverance was
in prospect for the heathen nor for sinners of Israel.68 The question whether the fiery
torments suffered (which are very realistically described) would at last end in
annihilation, is one which at different times received different answers, as fully explained
in another place.69 At the time of Christ the punishment of the wicked was certainly
regarded as of eternal duration. Rabbi José, a teacher of the second century, and a
representative of the more rationalistic school, says expressly, 'The fire of Gehinnom is
never quenched.'70 And even the passage, so often (although only partially) quoted, to
the effect, that the final torments of Gehenna would last for twelve months, after which
body and soul would be annihilated, excepts from this a number of Jewish sinners,
specially mentioned, such as heretics, Epicureans, apostates, and persecutors, who are
designated as 'children of Gehenna' (ledorey doroth, to 'ages of ages').71 And with this
other statements agree,72 so that at most it would follow that, while annihilation would
await the less guilty, the most guilty were to be reserved for eternal punishment.