Ben57
Well-Known Member
What is the original meaning of the english word 'Hell' as used in the King James Bible, and many others? Does the original meaning have any gearing the how we should view the word 'Hell'?
What is the meaning of 'Hell'
- Thread starter Ben57
- Start date
Mus Zibii
QUID EST VERITAS
- Messages
- 469
- Reaction score
- 0
- Points
- 0
Heck yeah! First of all thanks for coming back. I felt guilty for our disagreement. I was hoping you hadn't got fed up and left. You're the only person who posts here.
Anyway, hell didn't seem to come about until the Vulgate when virtually any negative reference to death, misfortune, places in Greek mythology, or even territory of ill repute was translated as 'infernum'. There's no conflict, debate or anything on this in the writings of the early church fathers so why they all came to this conclusion is unknown. The conception and translation of heaven has a similiar dynamic. The funny thing, especially in the sections believed to have been worked on by Jerome, is that there are so many idioms related in Latin and yet on Sheol, Gehenna, Hades, etc they all get wiped away.
Another funny thing: in Islam Jehenna, is the catch-all term for hell, the authors probably never realizing this netherworld of fire would later be a grassy patch in Israel-land of the infidels.
Anyway, hell didn't seem to come about until the Vulgate when virtually any negative reference to death, misfortune, places in Greek mythology, or even territory of ill repute was translated as 'infernum'. There's no conflict, debate or anything on this in the writings of the early church fathers so why they all came to this conclusion is unknown. The conception and translation of heaven has a similiar dynamic. The funny thing, especially in the sections believed to have been worked on by Jerome, is that there are so many idioms related in Latin and yet on Sheol, Gehenna, Hades, etc they all get wiped away.
Another funny thing: in Islam Jehenna, is the catch-all term for hell, the authors probably never realizing this netherworld of fire would later be a grassy patch in Israel-land of the infidels.
Hi Ben - this covers a somewhat provocative interpretation. 
http://www.comparative-religion.com/articles/jesus_hell.php
http://www.comparative-religion.com/articles/jesus_hell.php
Ben57
Well-Known Member
Hello I Brian,
I was hopping to start a discution on this topic, but you beat me to it with your pre prepared answer. . I agree with 90% of your answer on the fact that hell is not a real place of torment, but just the grave.
I guess I'll have to start a new thread or wait for someone else to come up with somthing interesting
I was hopping to start a discution on this topic, but you beat me to it with your pre prepared answer.
. I agree with 90% of your answer on the fact that hell is not a real place of torment, but just the grave.I guess I'll have to start a new thread or wait for someone else to come up with somthing interesting
I said:Hi Ben - this covers a somewhat provocative interpretation.
http://www.comparative-religion.com/articles/jesus_hell.php
to me, when i was younger, because of my fathers shallow understanding(atleast how i understand it) i was always fearful of hell, but at the same time curious. i remember, i asked him..hey, what does hell look like? then of course my brother and sister chime in with the, yea, yea tell us! he said something like, why would you want to think about it? just focus on god..or something or other
case in point i wasnt happy with the answer. regardless, as i grew up in the church, i began to think that hell, regardless of what it could or would mean, regardless of the variables, inevitably meant the end of ME. this to me is the most important aspect of "hell" not the suffering and all that, because regardless of all the nightmarish ideas we can scheme up, the most important thing is that the soul is extinguished.
i remember pastor murray(shepherds chapel) said that "the inferno" wasnt some place where people are constantly burning and suffering etc, he said, it was more or less instantaneous, like extinguishing a candle..that is "going to hell" or "the pit of fire" etc etc wasnt eternal, moreso the effect is eternal
this to me makes more sense, espcially since ive been influenced by buddhist and taoist philosophys respectively, in that the soul is found in buddhist teachings and such, aswell as taoism, but the soul isnt eternal in that the ego of the soul isnt eternal, cause thats what were talking about the ego of the soul. the soul, if you want to get technical..spiritual energy or otherwise, is still energy. therefore, the ego of the soul is extinguished, while the energy is simply transferred to another vessel(reincarnation)
anyhow, this post is long enough that i should end the rant
amitabha
case in point i wasnt happy with the answer. regardless, as i grew up in the church, i began to think that hell, regardless of what it could or would mean, regardless of the variables, inevitably meant the end of ME. this to me is the most important aspect of "hell" not the suffering and all that, because regardless of all the nightmarish ideas we can scheme up, the most important thing is that the soul is extinguished.
i remember pastor murray(shepherds chapel) said that "the inferno" wasnt some place where people are constantly burning and suffering etc, he said, it was more or less instantaneous, like extinguishing a candle..that is "going to hell" or "the pit of fire" etc etc wasnt eternal, moreso the effect is eternal
this to me makes more sense, espcially since ive been influenced by buddhist and taoist philosophys respectively, in that the soul is found in buddhist teachings and such, aswell as taoism, but the soul isnt eternal in that the ego of the soul isnt eternal, cause thats what were talking about the ego of the soul. the soul, if you want to get technical..spiritual energy or otherwise, is still energy. therefore, the ego of the soul is extinguished, while the energy is simply transferred to another vessel(reincarnation)
anyhow, this post is long enough that i should end the rant
amitabha
Ben57
Well-Known Member
Hi Brian
You made emntion that hell represented a cutting of from YHWY. I agree, but I think your use there was of Gehenna
I am going to cheat here and cut and past from a JW book to save typing.
START QUOTE
(Ge·hen´na) [Gr. form of the Heb. Geh Hin·nom´, "Valley of Hinnom"].
This name appears 12 times in the Christian Greek Scriptures, and whereas many translators take the liberty to render it by the word "hell," a number of modern translations transliterate the word from the Greek ge´en·na.—Mt 5:22, Ro, Mo, ED, NW, BC (Spanish), NC (Spanish), also the footnotes of Da and RS.
The deep, narrow Valley of Hinnom, later known by this Greek name, lay to the S and SW of ancient Jerusalem and is the modern-day Wadi er-Rababi (Ge Ben Hinnom). (Jos 15:8; 18:16; Jer 19:2, 6;) Judean Kings Ahaz and Manasseh engaged in idolatrous worship there, which included the making of human sacrifices by fire to Baal. (2Ch 28:1, 3; 33:1, 6; Jer 7:31, 32; 32:35) Later, to prevent such activities there in the future, faithful King Josiah had the place of idolatrous worship polluted, particularly the section called Topheth.—2Ki 23:10.
No Symbol of Everlasting Torment.
Jesus Christ associated fire with Gehenna (Mt 5:22; 18:9; Mr 9:47, 48), as did the disciple James, the only Biblical writer besides Matthew, Mark, and Luke to use the word. (Jas 3:6) Some commentators endeavor to link such fiery characteristic of Gehenna with the burning of human sacrifices that was carried on prior to Josiah’s reign and, on this basis, hold that Gehenna was used by Jesus as a symbol of everlasting torment. However, since Jehovah God expressed repugnance for such practice, saying that it was "a thing that I had not commanded and that had not come up into my heart" (Jer 7:31; 32:35), it seems most unlikely that God’s Son, in discussing divine judgment, would make such idolatrous practice the basis for the symbolic meaning of Gehenna. It may be noted that God prophetically decreed that the Valley of Hinnom would serve as a place for mass disposal of dead bodies rather than for the torture of live victims. (Jer 7:32, 33; 19:2, 6, 7, 10, 11) Thus, at Jeremiah 31:40 the reference to "the low plain of the carcasses and of the fatty ashes" is generally accepted as designating the Valley of Hinnom, and a gate known as "the Gate of the Ash-heaps" evidently opened out onto the eastern extremity of the valley at its juncture with the ravine of the Kidron. (Ne 3:13, 14) It seems obvious that such "carcasses" and "fatty ashes" are not related to the human sacrifices made there under Ahaz and Manasseh, since any bodies so offered would doubtless be viewed by the idolaters as "sacred" and would not be left lying in the valley.
Therefore, the Biblical evidence concerning Gehenna generally parallels the traditional view presented by rabbinic and other sources. That view is that the Valley of Hinnom was used as a place for the disposal of waste matter from the city of Jerusalem. (At Mt 5:30 Ph renders ge´en·na as "rubbish heap.") Concerning "Gehinnom," the Jewish commentator David Kimhi (1160-1235?), in his comment on Psalm 27:13, gives the following historical information: "And it is a place in the land adjoining Jerusalem, and it is a loathsome place, and they throw there unclean things and carcasses. Also there was a continual fire there to burn the unclean things and the bones of the carcasses. Hence, the judgment of the wicked ones is called parabolically Gehinnom."
Symbolic of Complete Destruction.
It is evident that Jesus used Gehenna as representative of utter destruction resulting from adverse judgment by God, hence with no resurrection to life as a soul being possible. (Mt 10:28; Lu 12:4, 5) The scribes and Pharisees as a wicked class were denounced as ‘subjects for Gehenna.’ (Mt 23:13-15, 33) To avoid such destruction, Jesus’ followers were to get rid of anything causing spiritual stumbling, the ‘cutting off of a hand or foot’ and the ‘tearing out of an eye’ figuratively representing their deadening of these body members with reference to sin.—Mt 18:9; Mr 9:43-47; Col 3:5; compare Mt 5:27-30.
Jesus also apparently alluded to Isaiah 66:24 in describing Gehenna as a place "where their maggot does not die and the fire is not put out." (Mr 9:47, 48) That the symbolic picture here is not one of torture but, rather, of complete destruction is evident from the fact that the Isaiah text dealt, not with persons who were alive, but with "the carcasses of the men that were transgressing" against God. If, as the available evidence indicates, the Valley of Hinnom was a place for the disposal of garbage and carcasses, fire, perhaps increased in intensity by the addition of sulfur (compare Isa 30:33), would be the only suitable means to eliminate such refuse. Where the fire did not reach, worms, or maggots, would breed, consuming anything not destroyed by the fire. On this basis, Jesus’ words would mean that the destructive effect of God’s adverse judgment would not cease until complete destruction was attained.
Figurative Use.
The disciple James’ use of the word "Gehenna" shows that an unruly tongue is itself a world of unrighteousness and that one’s whole round of living can be affected by fiery words that defile the speaker’s body. The tongue of such a one, "full of death-dealing poison" and so giving evidence of a bad heart condition, can cause the user to be sentenced by God to go to the symbolic Gehenna.—Jas 3:6, 8; compare Mt 12:37; Ps 5:9; 140:3; Ro 3:13.
The Biblical use of Gehenna as a symbol corresponds to that of "the lake of fire" in the book of Revelation.—Re 20:14, 15; see LAKE OF FIRE.
__________________________________________________________________
This expression occurs only in the book of Revelation and is clearly symbolic. The Bible gives its own explanation and definition of the symbol by stating: "This means the second death, the lake of fire."—Re 20:14; 21:8.
The symbolic quality of the lake of fire is further evident from the context of references to it in the book of Revelation. Death is said to be hurled into this lake of fire. (Re 20:14, 20) Death obviously cannot be literally burned. Moreover, the Devil, an invisible spirit creature, is thrown into the lake. Being spirit, he cannot be hurt by literal fire.—Re 20:10; compare Ex 3:2 and Jg 13:20.
Since the lake of fire represents "the second death" and since Revelation 20:14 says that both "death and Hades" are to be cast into it, it is evident that the lake cannot represent the death man has inherited from Adam (Ro 5:12), nor does it refer to Hades (Sheol). It must, therefore, be symbolic of another kind of death, one that is without reversal, for the record nowhere speaks of the "lake" as giving up those in it, as do Adamic death and Hades (Sheol). (Re 20:13) Thus, those not found written in "the book of life," unrepentant opposers of God’s sovereignty, are hurled into the lake of fire, meaning eternal destruction, or the second death.—Re 20:15.
While the foregoing texts make evident the symbolic quality of the lake of fire, it has been used by some persons to support belief in a literal place of fire and torment. Revelation 20:10 has been appealed to, because it speaks of the Devil, the wild beast, and the false prophet as being "tormented day and night forever and ever" in the lake of fire. However, this cannot refer to actual conscious torment. Those thrown into the lake of fire undergo "the second death." (Re 20:14) In death there is no consciousness and, hence, no feeling of pain or suffering.—Ec 9:5.
In the Scriptures fiery torment is associated with destruction and death. For example, in the Greek Septuagint translation of the Hebrew Scriptures the word for torment (ba´sa·nos) is several times used with reference to punishment by death. (Eze 3:20; 32:24, 30) Similarly, concerning Babylon the Great, the book of Revelation says, "the kings of the earth . . . will weep and beat themselves in grief over her, when they look at the smoke from the burning of her, while they stand at a distance because of their fear of her torment [Gr., ba·sa·ni·smou´]." (Re 18:9, 10) As to the meaning of the torment, an angel later explains: "Thus with a swift pitch will Babylon the great city be hurled down, and she will never be found again." (Re 18:21) So, fiery torment here is parallel with destruction, and in the case of Babylon the Great, it is everlasting destruction.—Compare Re 17:16; 18:8, 15-17, 19.
Therefore, those who are ‘tormented forever’ (from Gr., ba·sa·ni´zo) in the lake of fire undergo "second death" from which there is no resurrection. The related Greek word ba·sa·ni·stes´ is translated ‘jailer’ in Matthew 18:34. (RS, NW, ED; compare vs 30.) Thus those hurled into the lake of fire will be held under restraint, or "jailed," in death throughout eternity
END QUOTE
I agree with your information on hades and sheol. You touched a little bit od gehenna..
Let's discuss the other 10% you don't agree with, and make a constructive discussion from that.
You made emntion that hell represented a cutting of from YHWY. I agree, but I think your use there was of Gehenna
I am going to cheat here and cut and past from a JW book to save typing.
START QUOTE
GEHENNA
(Ge·hen´na) [Gr. form of the Heb. Geh Hin·nom´, "Valley of Hinnom"].
This name appears 12 times in the Christian Greek Scriptures, and whereas many translators take the liberty to render it by the word "hell," a number of modern translations transliterate the word from the Greek ge´en·na.—Mt 5:22, Ro, Mo, ED, NW, BC (Spanish), NC (Spanish), also the footnotes of Da and RS.
The deep, narrow Valley of Hinnom, later known by this Greek name, lay to the S and SW of ancient Jerusalem and is the modern-day Wadi er-Rababi (Ge Ben Hinnom). (Jos 15:8; 18:16; Jer 19:2, 6;) Judean Kings Ahaz and Manasseh engaged in idolatrous worship there, which included the making of human sacrifices by fire to Baal. (2Ch 28:1, 3; 33:1, 6; Jer 7:31, 32; 32:35) Later, to prevent such activities there in the future, faithful King Josiah had the place of idolatrous worship polluted, particularly the section called Topheth.—2Ki 23:10.
No Symbol of Everlasting Torment.
Jesus Christ associated fire with Gehenna (Mt 5:22; 18:9; Mr 9:47, 48), as did the disciple James, the only Biblical writer besides Matthew, Mark, and Luke to use the word. (Jas 3:6) Some commentators endeavor to link such fiery characteristic of Gehenna with the burning of human sacrifices that was carried on prior to Josiah’s reign and, on this basis, hold that Gehenna was used by Jesus as a symbol of everlasting torment. However, since Jehovah God expressed repugnance for such practice, saying that it was "a thing that I had not commanded and that had not come up into my heart" (Jer 7:31; 32:35), it seems most unlikely that God’s Son, in discussing divine judgment, would make such idolatrous practice the basis for the symbolic meaning of Gehenna. It may be noted that God prophetically decreed that the Valley of Hinnom would serve as a place for mass disposal of dead bodies rather than for the torture of live victims. (Jer 7:32, 33; 19:2, 6, 7, 10, 11) Thus, at Jeremiah 31:40 the reference to "the low plain of the carcasses and of the fatty ashes" is generally accepted as designating the Valley of Hinnom, and a gate known as "the Gate of the Ash-heaps" evidently opened out onto the eastern extremity of the valley at its juncture with the ravine of the Kidron. (Ne 3:13, 14) It seems obvious that such "carcasses" and "fatty ashes" are not related to the human sacrifices made there under Ahaz and Manasseh, since any bodies so offered would doubtless be viewed by the idolaters as "sacred" and would not be left lying in the valley.
Therefore, the Biblical evidence concerning Gehenna generally parallels the traditional view presented by rabbinic and other sources. That view is that the Valley of Hinnom was used as a place for the disposal of waste matter from the city of Jerusalem. (At Mt 5:30 Ph renders ge´en·na as "rubbish heap.") Concerning "Gehinnom," the Jewish commentator David Kimhi (1160-1235?), in his comment on Psalm 27:13, gives the following historical information: "And it is a place in the land adjoining Jerusalem, and it is a loathsome place, and they throw there unclean things and carcasses. Also there was a continual fire there to burn the unclean things and the bones of the carcasses. Hence, the judgment of the wicked ones is called parabolically Gehinnom."
Symbolic of Complete Destruction.
It is evident that Jesus used Gehenna as representative of utter destruction resulting from adverse judgment by God, hence with no resurrection to life as a soul being possible. (Mt 10:28; Lu 12:4, 5) The scribes and Pharisees as a wicked class were denounced as ‘subjects for Gehenna.’ (Mt 23:13-15, 33) To avoid such destruction, Jesus’ followers were to get rid of anything causing spiritual stumbling, the ‘cutting off of a hand or foot’ and the ‘tearing out of an eye’ figuratively representing their deadening of these body members with reference to sin.—Mt 18:9; Mr 9:43-47; Col 3:5; compare Mt 5:27-30.
Jesus also apparently alluded to Isaiah 66:24 in describing Gehenna as a place "where their maggot does not die and the fire is not put out." (Mr 9:47, 48) That the symbolic picture here is not one of torture but, rather, of complete destruction is evident from the fact that the Isaiah text dealt, not with persons who were alive, but with "the carcasses of the men that were transgressing" against God. If, as the available evidence indicates, the Valley of Hinnom was a place for the disposal of garbage and carcasses, fire, perhaps increased in intensity by the addition of sulfur (compare Isa 30:33), would be the only suitable means to eliminate such refuse. Where the fire did not reach, worms, or maggots, would breed, consuming anything not destroyed by the fire. On this basis, Jesus’ words would mean that the destructive effect of God’s adverse judgment would not cease until complete destruction was attained.
Figurative Use.
The disciple James’ use of the word "Gehenna" shows that an unruly tongue is itself a world of unrighteousness and that one’s whole round of living can be affected by fiery words that defile the speaker’s body. The tongue of such a one, "full of death-dealing poison" and so giving evidence of a bad heart condition, can cause the user to be sentenced by God to go to the symbolic Gehenna.—Jas 3:6, 8; compare Mt 12:37; Ps 5:9; 140:3; Ro 3:13.
The Biblical use of Gehenna as a symbol corresponds to that of "the lake of fire" in the book of Revelation.—Re 20:14, 15; see LAKE OF FIRE.
__________________________________________________________________
LAKE OF FIRE
This expression occurs only in the book of Revelation and is clearly symbolic. The Bible gives its own explanation and definition of the symbol by stating: "This means the second death, the lake of fire."—Re 20:14; 21:8.
The symbolic quality of the lake of fire is further evident from the context of references to it in the book of Revelation. Death is said to be hurled into this lake of fire. (Re 20:14, 20) Death obviously cannot be literally burned. Moreover, the Devil, an invisible spirit creature, is thrown into the lake. Being spirit, he cannot be hurt by literal fire.—Re 20:10; compare Ex 3:2 and Jg 13:20.
Since the lake of fire represents "the second death" and since Revelation 20:14 says that both "death and Hades" are to be cast into it, it is evident that the lake cannot represent the death man has inherited from Adam (Ro 5:12), nor does it refer to Hades (Sheol). It must, therefore, be symbolic of another kind of death, one that is without reversal, for the record nowhere speaks of the "lake" as giving up those in it, as do Adamic death and Hades (Sheol). (Re 20:13) Thus, those not found written in "the book of life," unrepentant opposers of God’s sovereignty, are hurled into the lake of fire, meaning eternal destruction, or the second death.—Re 20:15.
While the foregoing texts make evident the symbolic quality of the lake of fire, it has been used by some persons to support belief in a literal place of fire and torment. Revelation 20:10 has been appealed to, because it speaks of the Devil, the wild beast, and the false prophet as being "tormented day and night forever and ever" in the lake of fire. However, this cannot refer to actual conscious torment. Those thrown into the lake of fire undergo "the second death." (Re 20:14) In death there is no consciousness and, hence, no feeling of pain or suffering.—Ec 9:5.
In the Scriptures fiery torment is associated with destruction and death. For example, in the Greek Septuagint translation of the Hebrew Scriptures the word for torment (ba´sa·nos) is several times used with reference to punishment by death. (Eze 3:20; 32:24, 30) Similarly, concerning Babylon the Great, the book of Revelation says, "the kings of the earth . . . will weep and beat themselves in grief over her, when they look at the smoke from the burning of her, while they stand at a distance because of their fear of her torment [Gr., ba·sa·ni·smou´]." (Re 18:9, 10) As to the meaning of the torment, an angel later explains: "Thus with a swift pitch will Babylon the great city be hurled down, and she will never be found again." (Re 18:21) So, fiery torment here is parallel with destruction, and in the case of Babylon the Great, it is everlasting destruction.—Compare Re 17:16; 18:8, 15-17, 19.
Therefore, those who are ‘tormented forever’ (from Gr., ba·sa·ni´zo) in the lake of fire undergo "second death" from which there is no resurrection. The related Greek word ba·sa·ni·stes´ is translated ‘jailer’ in Matthew 18:34. (RS, NW, ED; compare vs 30.) Thus those hurled into the lake of fire will be held under restraint, or "jailed," in death throughout eternity
END QUOTE
Hmmm, remember the conversation Abraham had with the fat man, who stood apart from him because of a "chasm that could not be crossed"? Abraham, if I recall correctly, was in "paradise", while the fat man (rich man) was in a tormented place. Anyway the fat man asked Abraham to quench his thirst, then asked him to warn the fat man's relatives of what could await them if they did not turn...Mus Zibii said:
Though the word wasn't used, I think fat man was standing in hell. Neither was asleep in a "grave". They could talk to eachother, but there was a barrier keeping them from coming together, and fat man was very much afraid (day late and dollar short), for his relatives.
Maybe hell is the ultimate remorse. (IF ONLY I HAD DONE THIS...).
The thirst the fat man asked to be quenched could be the thirst for "living waters", aka God's presense, which of course Abraham can not provide.
For those of us who have gone without food and water for more than a few days, the "burn" felt within the body is nearly unbearable, and for good reason. We are literally buring our selves up inside, just to stay alive.
Could be metaphors of reality to picture the afterlife for a people back then.
v/r
Q
Ben57
Well-Known Member
This is a long reply sorry about that but I wanted to present a lot of information as I personaly feel that this is an important topic as it has a lesson for us all, and I really think it is worth reading as it might start other threadsQuahom1 said:
I think you are refering to the time Jesus spoke of a rich man and Lazarus at Lu 16:19-31. Some conclude that Jesus was showing a distinction between being rich of poor, and / or, he was telling us something about an after life. Teachers of hellfire eagerly point to this account as definite proof that there is indeed a hell of torment that awaits the wicked. With out at this time discussing an after life (I personally do not believe in an immortal soul) I want to explore what meaning these words might have had or meant to the listeners.
I would like to try to demonstrate that these words were just an illustration or a parable and that the rich man was used to stand for a particular class of people and that the poor man Lazarus also represents a class of people.
The context and the wording of the story suggest to me that it is a parable and not an actual historical account. Poverty is not being extolled, nor are riches being condemned. Rather, conduct, final rewards, and a reversal in the spiritual status, or condition, of those represented by Lazarus and by the rich man are evidently indicated.
Just to review some point from my earlier post. Hades is just the common grave of dead mankind.. Or those that teach a fiery hell, they disregard such clear and repeated Biblical statements as: “The soul that is sinning—it itself will die.” (Ezekiel 18:4, 20) And: “As for the dead, they are conscious of nothing at all.” (Ecclesiastes 9:5) Clearly these statements do not support the idea of torment for “lost souls” in a fiery hell. So why does the Bible speak of a rich man as undergoing torments in the fire of Hades? Does this show that Hades, or at least a part of it, is a place of fiery torment?
Note what is said about the rich man. Why was he tormented in Hades? What had he done? Jesus did not say that the rich man led a degraded life, did he? All that Jesus said was that the man was rich, dressed well and feasted sumptuously. Does such conduct of itself merit punishment by torment? True, a serious failing is implied in the attitude of the rich man toward the beggar Lazarus. The rich man lacked compassion for him. But did that failing distinguish him sufficiently from Lazarus?
So is it logical to conclude that all sickly beggars will receive divine blessings at death, whereas all rich men will go to a place of conscious torment? Not at all. Begging is of itself no mark of God’s favor. To the contrary, the Bible contains the prayerful expression: “Give me neither poverty nor riches.” (Proverbs 30:8) And of his time, King David wrote: “I have not seen anyone righteous left entirely, nor his offspring looking for bread.”—Psalm 37:25.
If we take Jesus’ words literally, we would have to draw still other conclusions that would make the illustration strange indeed. These include: That those enjoying celestial happiness are in position to see and speak to those suffering torment in Hades. That the water adhering to one’s fingertip is not evaporated by the fire of Hades. And, that, although the torment of Hades is great, a mere drop of water would bring relief to the sufferer.
Taken literally, do these things sound reasonable to you? Or, do you feel, instead, that what Jesus said was not meant to be taken literally? Is there any way to be sure?
Examine the context. To whom was Jesus talking? At Luke 16:14 we are told: “Now the Pharisees, who were money lovers, were listening to all these things, and they began to sneer at him.”
Since Jesus spoke in the hearing of the Pharisees, was he relating an actual case or was he simply using an illustration? Concerning Jesus’ method of teaching the crowds, we read: “Indeed, without an illustration he would not speak to them.” (Matthew 13:34) Accordingly, the account about the rich man and Lazarus must be an illustration.
This illustration was evidently directed to the Pharisees. As a class they were like the rich man. They loved money, as well as prominence and flattering titles. Jesus said of them: “All the works they do they do to be viewed by men; for they broaden the scripture-containing cases that they wear as safeguards, and enlarge the fringes of their garments. They like the most prominent place at evening meals and the front seats in the synagogues, and the greetings in the marketplaces and to be called Rabbi by men.”—Matthew 23:5-7.
The Pharisees looked down on others, especially on tax collectors, harlots and others having the reputation of being sinners. (Luke 18:11, 12) On one occasion when officers, sent to arrest Jesus, came back empty-handed because of having been impressed by his teaching, the Pharisees spoke up: “You have not been misled also, have you? Not one of the rulers or of the Pharisees has put faith in him, has he? But this crowd that does not know the Law are accursed people.”—John 7:47-49.
Hence, in the parable the beggar Lazarus well represents those humble persons whom the Pharisees despised but who repented and became followers of Jesus Christ. Jesus showed that these despised sinners, upon repenting, would gain a position of divine favor, whereas the Pharisees and other prominent religious leaders as a class would lose out. He said: “Truly I say to you that the tax collectors and the harlots are going ahead of you into the kingdom of God. For John came to you in a way of righteousness, but you did not believe him. However, the tax collectors and the harlots believed him, and you, although you saw this, did not feel regret afterwards so as to believe him.”—Matthew 21:31, 32.
So, what then, is signified by the death of the “rich man” and of “Lazarus”? We do not need to conclude that it refers to actual death. As used in the Bible, death can also represent a great change in the condition of individuals. For example: Persons pursuing a course of life contrary to God’s will are spoken of as being ‘dead in trespasses and sins.’ But when they come into an approved standing before God as disciples of Jesus Christ they are referred to as coming “alive.” (Ephesians 2:1, 5; Colossians 2:13) At the same time such living persons become “dead” to sin. We read: “Reckon yourselves to be dead indeed with reference to sin but living with reference to God by Christ Jesus.”—Romans 6:11.
Since both the “rich man” and “Lazarus” of Jesus’ parable are clearly symbolic, logically their deaths are also symbolic. But in what sense do they die?
The key to answering this question lies in what Jesus said just before introducing the illustration: “Everyone that divorces his wife and marries another commits adultery, and he that marries a woman divorced from a husband commits adultery.” (Luke 16:18) This statement may appear to be completely unrelated to the illustration. But this is not the case.
By reason of the Mosaic law the nation of Israel was in a covenant relationship with God and therefore could be spoken of as being a wife to him. At Jeremiah 3:14, for example, God refers to the nation as an unfaithful wife: “‘Return, O you renegade sons,’ is the utterance of Jehovah. ‘For I myself have become the husbandly owner of you people.’” Then, with the coming of Jesus, an opportunity was extended to the Jews to become part of his “bride.” That is why John the Baptist said to his disciples: “You yourselves bear me witness that I said, I am not the Christ, but, I have been sent forth in advance of that one. He that has the bride is the bridegroom. However, the friend of the bridegroom, when he stands and hears him, has a great deal of joy on account of the voice of the bridegroom. Therefore this joy of mine has been made full. That one [Jesus] must go on increasing, but I must go on decreasing.”—John 3:28-30.
In order to become part of Christ’s “bride,” the Jews had to be released from the Law that made them, figuratively speaking, a wife to God. Without such release, they could not come into a wifely relationship with Christ, as that would be an adulterous relationship. The words of Romans 7:1-6 confirm this:
“Can it be that you do not know, brothers, (for I am speaking to those who know law,) that the Law is master over a man as long as he lives? For instance, a married woman is bound by law to her husband while he is alive; but if her husband dies, she is discharged from the law of her husband. So, then, while her husband is living, she would be styled an adulteress if she became another man’s. But if her husband dies, she is free from his law, so that she is not an adulteress if she becomes another man’s.
“So, my brothers, you also were made dead to the Law through the body of the Christ, that you might become another’s, the one’s who was raised up from the dead, that we should bear fruit to God. . . . Now we have been discharged from the Law, because we have died to that by which we were being held fast, that we might be slaves in a new sense by the spirit, and not in the old sense by the written code.”
While the death of Jesus Christ was the basis for releasing the Jews from the Law, even before his death repentant ones could come into a favored position with God as disciples of his Son. The message and work of John the Baptist and of Jesus Christ opened the door for the Jews to seize the opportunity to gain divine favor and put themselves in line for a heavenly inheritance as members of Christ’s bride. As Jesus himself expressed it: “From the days of John the Baptist until now the kingdom of the heavens is the goal toward which men press, and those pressing forward are seizing it.”—Matthew 11:12.
Hence, the work and message of John the Baptist and of Jesus Christ began to lead toward a complete change in the condition of the symbolic “rich man” and “Lazarus.” Both classes died to their former condition. The repentant “Lazarus” class came into a position of divine favor, whereas the “rich man” class came under divine disfavor because of persisting in unrepentance. At one time the “Lazarus” class had looked to the Pharisees and other religious leaders of Judaism for spiritual “crumbs.” But Jesus’ imparting the truth to them filled their spiritual needs. Contrasting the spiritual feeding provided by Jesus with that of the religious leaders, the Bible reports: “The crowds were astounded at his way of teaching; for he was teaching them as a person having authority, and not as their scribes.” (Matthew 7:28, 29) Truly a complete reversal had taken place. The religious leaders of Judaism were shown up as having nothing to offer to the “Lazarus” class.
On the day of Pentecost of the year 33 C.E. the change in conditions was accomplished. At that time the new covenant replaced the old Law covenant. Those who had repented and accepted Jesus were then fully released from the old Law covenant. They died to it. On that day of Pentecost there was also unmistakable evidence that the disciples of Jesus Christ had been exalted far above the Pharisees and other prominent religious leaders. Not the religious leaders of Judaism, but these disciples received God’s spirit, enabling them to speak about “the magnificent things of God” in the native languages of people from widely scattered places. (Acts 2:5-11) What a marvelous manifestation this was of their having God’s blessing and approval! The “Lazarus” class had indeed come into the favored situation by becoming the spiritual seed of the Greater Abraham, our Lord God. This was pictured as the “bosom position.”—Compare John 1:18.
CONTINUED NEXT POST AS I WAS UNABL TO POST IT ALL AT ONE TIME
.
.
Ben57
Well-Known Member
CONTINUED FROM PREVIOUS POST
As for the unrepentant Pharisees and other prominent religious leaders, they were dead to their former position of seeming favor. They were in “Hades.” Remaining unrepentant, they were separated from the faithful disciples of Jesus as if by a “great chasm.” This was a “chasm” of God’s unchangeable, righteous judgment. Of this, we read in Scripture: “Your judicial decision is a vast watery deep.”—Psalm 36:6.
The “rich man” class was also tormented. How? By the fiery judgment messages of God being proclaimed by Jesus’ disciples.—Compare Revelation 14:10.
That the religious leaders were tormented by the message proclaimed by Jesus’ disciples there can be no question. They tried desperately to stop the proclamation. When the apostles of Jesus Christ made their defense before the Jewish supreme court composed of prominent religious men, the judges “felt deeply cut and were wanting to do away with them.” (Acts 5:33) Later, the disciple Stephen’s defense had a like tormenting effect upon the members of that court. “They felt cut to their hearts and began to gnash their teeth at him.”—Acts 7:54.
These religious leaders wanted the disciples of Jesus to come and ‘cool their tongue.’ They wanted the “Lazarus” class to leave the “bosom position” of God’s favor and present his message in such a way as not to cause them discomfort. Similarly, they wanted the “Lazarus” class to water down God’s message so as not to put their “five brothers,” their religious allies, in a “place of torment.” Yes, they did not want any of their associates to be tormented by judgment messages.
But, as indicated by Jesus’ illustration, neither the “rich man” class nor his religious allies would be freed from the tormenting effects of the message proclaimed by the “Lazarus” class. The apostles of the Lord Jesus Christ refused to water down the message. They refused to stop teaching on the basis of Jesus’ name. Their reply to the Jewish supreme court was: “We must obey God as ruler rather than men.”—Acts 5:29.
If the religious allies of the “rich man” wanted to escape that torment, they could do so. They had “Moses and the Prophets,” that is, they had the inspired Holy Scriptures written by Moses and other ancient prophets. Not once did those inspired Scriptures point to any literal place of torment after death, but they did contain all that was necessary to identify Jesus as the promised Messiah or Christ. (Deuteronomy 18:15, 18, 19; 1 Peter 1:10, 11) Hence, if the “rich man” class and his “five brothers” had paid attention to “Moses and the Prophets,” they would have accepted Jesus as the Messiah. That would have brought them in line for divine favor and shielded them from the tormenting effects of God’s judgment message.
A leading Protestant commentary, The Interpreter’s Bible, calls attention to a similar explanation. It points out that many interpreters believe Jesus’ words to be “an allegorical appendix that presupposes the conflict between early Christianity and orthodox Judaism. The rich man and his brothers represent the unbelieving Jews. Jesus is made to assert that they have stubbornly refused to repent in spite of the obvious testimony to himself in Scripture and to predict that they will fail to be impressed by his resurrection. It is conceivable that Luke and his readers imposed some such interpretation on these verses.” And, in a footnote on Luke chapter 16, the Catholic Jerusalem Bible acknowledges that this is a “parable in story form without reference to any historical personage.”
The illustration of the rich man and Lazarus contains vital lessons for us today. Are we paying attention to the inspired Word of God? Do we desire to follow it as devoted disciples of Jesus Christ? Those who refuse to do so, like the Jewish Pharisees, will not escape the tormenting effects of God’s judgment message against them. His loyal servants will keep right on declaring the truth, fearlessly exposing religious error.
Where do you stand in this matter? Do you believe there should be a letup on such an exposure, feeling that there is good in all religions? Or, do you feel indignant about Christendom’s misrepresenting God by its false doctrines about the dead? Do you want to see God’s name cleared of the reproach brought upon it through the teaching of false doctrines? Do you desire to see no effort spared in freeing honest-hearted ones from bondage to religious falsehoods? If you do, you will find God’s purpose concerning the dead and the living most comforting.
As for the unrepentant Pharisees and other prominent religious leaders, they were dead to their former position of seeming favor. They were in “Hades.” Remaining unrepentant, they were separated from the faithful disciples of Jesus as if by a “great chasm.” This was a “chasm” of God’s unchangeable, righteous judgment. Of this, we read in Scripture: “Your judicial decision is a vast watery deep.”—Psalm 36:6.
The “rich man” class was also tormented. How? By the fiery judgment messages of God being proclaimed by Jesus’ disciples.—Compare Revelation 14:10.
That the religious leaders were tormented by the message proclaimed by Jesus’ disciples there can be no question. They tried desperately to stop the proclamation. When the apostles of Jesus Christ made their defense before the Jewish supreme court composed of prominent religious men, the judges “felt deeply cut and were wanting to do away with them.” (Acts 5:33) Later, the disciple Stephen’s defense had a like tormenting effect upon the members of that court. “They felt cut to their hearts and began to gnash their teeth at him.”—Acts 7:54.
These religious leaders wanted the disciples of Jesus to come and ‘cool their tongue.’ They wanted the “Lazarus” class to leave the “bosom position” of God’s favor and present his message in such a way as not to cause them discomfort. Similarly, they wanted the “Lazarus” class to water down God’s message so as not to put their “five brothers,” their religious allies, in a “place of torment.” Yes, they did not want any of their associates to be tormented by judgment messages.
But, as indicated by Jesus’ illustration, neither the “rich man” class nor his religious allies would be freed from the tormenting effects of the message proclaimed by the “Lazarus” class. The apostles of the Lord Jesus Christ refused to water down the message. They refused to stop teaching on the basis of Jesus’ name. Their reply to the Jewish supreme court was: “We must obey God as ruler rather than men.”—Acts 5:29.
If the religious allies of the “rich man” wanted to escape that torment, they could do so. They had “Moses and the Prophets,” that is, they had the inspired Holy Scriptures written by Moses and other ancient prophets. Not once did those inspired Scriptures point to any literal place of torment after death, but they did contain all that was necessary to identify Jesus as the promised Messiah or Christ. (Deuteronomy 18:15, 18, 19; 1 Peter 1:10, 11) Hence, if the “rich man” class and his “five brothers” had paid attention to “Moses and the Prophets,” they would have accepted Jesus as the Messiah. That would have brought them in line for divine favor and shielded them from the tormenting effects of God’s judgment message.
A leading Protestant commentary, The Interpreter’s Bible, calls attention to a similar explanation. It points out that many interpreters believe Jesus’ words to be “an allegorical appendix that presupposes the conflict between early Christianity and orthodox Judaism. The rich man and his brothers represent the unbelieving Jews. Jesus is made to assert that they have stubbornly refused to repent in spite of the obvious testimony to himself in Scripture and to predict that they will fail to be impressed by his resurrection. It is conceivable that Luke and his readers imposed some such interpretation on these verses.” And, in a footnote on Luke chapter 16, the Catholic Jerusalem Bible acknowledges that this is a “parable in story form without reference to any historical personage.”
The illustration of the rich man and Lazarus contains vital lessons for us today. Are we paying attention to the inspired Word of God? Do we desire to follow it as devoted disciples of Jesus Christ? Those who refuse to do so, like the Jewish Pharisees, will not escape the tormenting effects of God’s judgment message against them. His loyal servants will keep right on declaring the truth, fearlessly exposing religious error.
Where do you stand in this matter? Do you believe there should be a letup on such an exposure, feeling that there is good in all religions? Or, do you feel indignant about Christendom’s misrepresenting God by its false doctrines about the dead? Do you want to see God’s name cleared of the reproach brought upon it through the teaching of false doctrines? Do you desire to see no effort spared in freeing honest-hearted ones from bondage to religious falsehoods? If you do, you will find God’s purpose concerning the dead and the living most comforting.
57,
I have read your post.
What a powerful case you could have in court, except for one small detail. You do not believe in an immortal soul. This would make your case irrelevant, because after you die, there is nothing. Based on your own declaration of not believing in immortal souls, your entire arguement is mute.
How do I dare state this? If your soul is mortal, then when you die, there is nothing. Hence anything important to you no longer matters to you (once you are dead).
There is no heaven and no hell (not to you anyway), because once you stop breathing, you no longer exist.
It is impossible for a finite thought, to debate infinite thought, no matter how refined, comprehensive or persuasive it might be.
Because you declared your finiteness my friend, you have made it impossible for me to debate with you. And it was your choice.
Now 57, tell me you have an immortal soul, but many many questions and arguements, and I will be happy to debate with you all day long.
Otherwise, I just have to outlive you. Read the second paragraph of your first post. You set the rules, I am abiding by them.
Personally, I think you are wrong about immortal souls. So I look forward to meeting you in the afterlife...;-)
v/r
Q
I have read your post.
What a powerful case you could have in court, except for one small detail. You do not believe in an immortal soul. This would make your case irrelevant, because after you die, there is nothing. Based on your own declaration of not believing in immortal souls, your entire arguement is mute.
How do I dare state this? If your soul is mortal, then when you die, there is nothing. Hence anything important to you no longer matters to you (once you are dead).
There is no heaven and no hell (not to you anyway), because once you stop breathing, you no longer exist.
It is impossible for a finite thought, to debate infinite thought, no matter how refined, comprehensive or persuasive it might be.
Because you declared your finiteness my friend, you have made it impossible for me to debate with you. And it was your choice.
Now 57, tell me you have an immortal soul, but many many questions and arguements, and I will be happy to debate with you all day long.
Otherwise, I just have to outlive you. Read the second paragraph of your first post. You set the rules, I am abiding by them.
Personally, I think you are wrong about immortal souls. So I look forward to meeting you in the afterlife...;-)
v/r
Q
Mus Zibii
QUID EST VERITAS
- Messages
- 469
- Reaction score
- 0
- Points
- 0
Well, I'm out of my place here, but don't JW believe that the 'end' will involve the faithful living immortally...
Okay, I'm not even going to bother. But I think if the soul issue were laid aside its a solid argument for the 'Bosom of Abraham' being a metaphor.
Okay, I'm not even going to bother. But I think if the soul issue were laid aside its a solid argument for the 'Bosom of Abraham' being a metaphor.
Ben, please go easy on the copy/pastes - most people here answer posts and individual comments by other posters with their *own* individual comments.
Simply referring to an outside source and pasting up information from it in reply is cheating the process of discussion - you would be effectively stating that you cannot think or articulate your own opinions on the matter, which defeats the purpose of trying to hold a discussion in the first place.
People give their time to make personal answers - please do the same.
Simply referring to an outside source and pasting up information from it in reply is cheating the process of discussion - you would be effectively stating that you cannot think or articulate your own opinions on the matter, which defeats the purpose of trying to hold a discussion in the first place.
People give their time to make personal answers - please do the same.
Mus, I agree about the arguement for the story being a metaphor. As I admitted, 57's case would be well defended in court. However, the soul issue is the issue for those of us that believe it being immortal now, because Hell, is potentially one of two (or three if the potential of nothingness is considered) stops it could make...in the end ;-).Mus Zibii said:
Whether it is true or not, I believe in it strong enough to try to be a good little boy while I'm on this 'playground', just in case it is true. And if it isn't, nothing was lost or wasted anyway.
In any event, being "nice" tends to gather friendship around one, and not being nice tends to gather loneliness, which is a hellish state to be surrounded by, at least to most people. How's that for a metaphor? ;-)))
v/r
Q
Ben57
Well-Known Member
Hello Quahom,
I am unsure as to just how not belirvung in an imortal soul makes my opinon mute. For me it adds weight to no hell fire.
Again I do not understand what your reasonoings are
Why do you think my view on no immortal soul is wrong?
Ben57
Well-Known Member
Hi Mus
No JWs do not belive that the faithfull will be living immortally. For me the term immortal means never being able to die eg God. Jws belive that the faithfull will be able to live forever as long as they remain faithfull.Mus Zibii said:
Ben57
Well-Known Member
Hello Brian,
I will take your council and try hard to avoid long posts.
I will take your council and try hard to avoid long posts.
I appreciate every one taking their time to make personal declaration of thei belief system, and everything I have posted has been my personal beleif system even though I have thought others (by using quotes) have said things bettere than I could, I will endevour to put my thoughts in my own words.I said: