johntheapostate

Thank you mods. I believe I have been properly enlightened

Sign Related

MT 5:39 But I say unto you, That ye resist not evil: but whosoever shall smite thee on thy right cheek, turn to him the other also.

^^^That means eye for eye. How can that not be seen clear as day?
Jesus stood out from who is being spoken unto because the master of the house is speaking through Jesus. The master of the house is telling you ITSELF and telling you the devils. Point blank within the written gospels of kjv.

Sign Related

I know what that parable from the kjv is implicating. Sum it up: The parable is about a hypcrite...all those depicted in that parable (10 in all) are one in the same...The man who was rich is now the poor begger, begging within himself in those torments. To help you understand this 100% you have to know that astral projection is real and it's something the true hyporites (the devils) can do. Then you'll understand how a person can seem so divided within themself. Before the poor begger (the astral body) came into his bosom he was rich as a man who could inflict evil things with his astral body (which in this particular parable is named Laz).

Concerning the devils, the rise from the dead is when they are "to" death, basically standing from death in how born so. But in a time coming the very astral body the devils (the hypocrites) use will turn against them and make them live and die in the same time (it's apart of the torments) for ever more. So it's how come it is very funny how the man being tormented in that parable mentioned something like: but if one rose from the dead they will repent. How it's funny is because he had been rose from the dead, obviously, when he lived upon the earth as a rich man using his other half (the astral body) to do evil things. But in torments he is mingled in a living and dieing state.

It's also funny he wanted Laz sent "to" his fathers house. Tell me you get that? Because "to" would mean not "into" his father's house. Which would mean if it did happen of what it seemed like he begged for then that guy wouldnt be in torments, and would only live "to" do more evil things.

A key thing you have to notice in the parable is that father Ab is speaking from inside the torments the man is in. Or else, how could he listen? That there exposed what the parable is revealing about the hypocrites.

Jagella

Maybe it is wrong, but I doubt it. Most of the research I’ve done on this topic so far must lead me to conclude that the “hell� spoken of in the New Testament is indeed an eternal punishment in which sinners are forever tortured or “tormented.� You may insist that my research findings are wrong, but I must rely on the preponderance of the evidence which strongly indicates that your idea that Christian dogma tells us that people who don’t make it to heaven are simply done away with is incorrect.

You mean Encarta gets it wrong too? Let’s try Webster.com:

Again, the word Gehenna is defined as a synonym for hell.

So far all the works I’ve tried and cited agree with the definition Of Gehenna as a synonym for hell. Nevertheless, you may be right, but to make a convincing case you’ll need to provide better evidence than simply insisting that all these sources of mine are wrong. Agreed?

You’ve educated me to the fact that some people don’t accept the Bible scholarship available. You have a minority opinion on this issue which I’m not totally unfamiliar with. Jehovah’s Witnesses also believe that souls are “annihilated� in hell. Are you a Jehovah’s Witness?

I don’t feel bad about learning what most scholars have concluded.

I would hope you know what you’re talking about, and I’m ready to read any good evidence you may provide. Please cite some reputable sources that might inform us that the traditional concept of hell (eternal torture for the damned) cannot be found in the New Testament.

Finally, I really don’t mind your insults. They are a source of amusement for me, and they appear to be the last refuge for a faltering argument.

Jagella

Jagella

I understand quite well that the word Gehenna was used with a different meaning in the New Testament than what it originally meant. I’m not disputing that as I’ve already posted in this thread. What I am saying is that when the word was used in the New Testament, then it was referring to a life-after-death punishment for unbelievers. This punishment is, according to the New Testament writers, eternal and is consciously experienced by the damned with no end. (Wonderful belief, is it not?)

I can use a later “rendering� or a change of definition in a word if I indicate that I’m aware that the meaning of the word changed, can I not? Also, I’m not attempting to change the “original meaning� as I’ve already explained. I'm making the case that when Gehenna is used in the New Testament, and is translated as "hell," then it refers to that abode of the dead in which people consciously experience torment for eternity.

Jagella

Diogenes the Cynic

Your "research" is incorrect, and I notice you haven't bothered to cite any of it except for a couple of internet definitions which conflate Gehenna with a modern definition of Hell.
An in the modern English lexicon the terms have become conflated enough that it's accurate to say that in MODERN ENGLISH usage, Gehenna is used to refer to Hell. That's not what it meant in 1st Century Palestine, however.
I have already provided the evidence and so have your own definitions. Every definition cited for Gehenna states that it meant the Valley of Hinnon. There was no concept of Christian Hell in ancient Judaism (or modern Judaism, for that matter). I also provided the Wikipedia link which showed the Rabbinic commentary on Gehenna which explicitly denies that Gehenna was Hell.

YOU are the one who is making an assertion for something which is not supported by any historical evidence. Show me any evidence that a concept of eternal Hell ever existed in 1st century Palestine (good luck. It doesn't exist).
This simply isn't true. Frankly, it's not even an opinion. It's an established historical fact that Gehenna was the Valley of Hinnon and that Jews at the alleged time of Jesus did not have a concept of eternal hell. If you want to assert that they did then pony up the evidence.
I'm an atheist. I don't believe in "souls," I'm just telling you what ancient Jews believed. (And to be precise, it wasn't "souls" they believed were being annihilated but physical bodies. Ancient Jews believed that there was going to be a literal, physical resurrection of the dead on the day of judgement. "Eternal life" was viewed not as a spiritual existence in Heaven bur as literal immortality in a physical body)
You have frankly not evidenced any awareness of what most scholars have concluded but feel free to cite these "scholars." You can start by citing one who believes that ancient Jews believed in Hell. Take your time (and Christian apologists don't count).
I've already done so. It is you who continues to make unsupported assertions. I can and have explained the context of every reference which you have mistakenly interpreted as referring to "Hell."

The burden is on you. Show me a shred of evidence that 1st century Jews believed in eternal hell. Feel free cite reputable scholars.
I mind my insults and I apologize. Your constant and unwarranted declarations of victory, notwithstanding.

Diogenes the Cynic

You haven't offered any support for an assertion that the NT writers intended any different definition for Gehenna than the standard Jewish conception.

Show me something in the NT which contradicts the Jewish conception of Gehenna as the Valley of burning garbage and carcasses into which sinners would be cast for annihilation on the last day.

Also, it sounds like you are now backtracking from making any assertions about HJ and just trying to argue for a NT knowledge of "Hell." Are you conceding that HJ, if he existed, could not have known or spoken of eternal hell himself?

Jagella

You have a problem with “internet definitions�? And here I always thought that the “web� was a useful source of information.

I’m assuming that the folks at Webster know their etymology.

That’s what the word meant originally. However, the New Testament writers changed the meaning of the word to mean an eternal torment for unrepentant unbelievers.

What you’re saying here is irrelevant. I’m not denying that Jews don’t buy the Christian version of hell. I’m saying that the early Christians changed the word to mean something different, and this difference appears in the passages in the New Testament that refer to “hell.� How many times must I explain this?

How about the New Testament for evidence that the concept of an eternal hell existed in Palestine in the first century?

Most Jews no doubt did not have a concept of an eternal hell, but the Jews that wrote the New Testament obviously did.

Again, what “ancient Jews� believed is irrelevant. What did the early Christians believe? Let’s take another look:

Granted, the duration of this punishment is and has been disputed, but most scholars, Christian and otherwise, agree that many of the early Christians believed it to be eternal.

Take my time? It just took me a few minutes to find a scholar that agrees with me. Let’s take a look at what Miriam Van Scott has to say:

See pages 133 and 20 of Encyclopedia of Hell at http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/AS...ternetinfidels

See the material above.

Jagella

Jagella

See the Bible passages in my earlier posts.

“HJ�?

Jagella

Diogenes the Cynic

Live and learn.
They do know their etymology and they correctly point out that Gehenna refers to Valley of Hinnon. They are also giving a modern English definition of the word, not an ancient Jewish or Greek one.
You have provided no evidence for this. You have failed to identify anything in the NT which refers to a concept of eternal hell.
You can say it as many times as you want and you will still be wrong. The NT does not refer to such a concept. Feel free to offer a passage that you think does. I'll explain the context once again.
WHAT New Testament evidence? It doesn't exist. The NT refers to no such thing.
1. With the arguable exception of Paul, The NT was not written by Jews.
2. The NT was not written at the time of Jesus.
3. The NT says nothing about a concept of eternal hell.
Look carefully. Your citation refers to "early Christian writers," not to the Bible. There were indeed Christian writers within the first few centuries who believed in a concept of eternal hell, but none of them were authors of the NT.
Sure they did....just not the ones who wrote the NT.
Your first scholar did not support your assertion.

Who is Miriam Van Scott? What are her credentials as a scholar? What is the basis for her conclusions?


Just because someone has written a book doesn't mean they are a credentialed scholar. At least summarize the basis of her argument.
I hope this is not the best you can do for citing scholarship. You said you had done research. Your research apparently consists of googling for definitions and books on Amazon. We are accustomed to a more sophisticated level of debate here. Can you actually make a linguistic or historical case for "Gehenna" meaning eternal hell in the NT or can you at least summarize the argument of a recognized scholar?