Jagella

Here's a little more from Carrier on this topic:

Granted, Carrier is speaking of the Jews translating Sheol as "Hades," rather than explaining why Gehenna is translated as "hell," but he still backs me up on the role of hell in Jewish beliefs. By the time the New Testament was written, the early Christians had already redefined theses older concepts as their own beliefs about the afterlife.

I hope this helps.

Jagella

Diogenes the Cynic

Sheol and Gehenna are two different things. Gehenna comes after Sheol. Sheol is not eternal. So, no, the translation of Sheol as Hades does not back you up on Jewish beliefs since even if there was a late developing conception of temporary punishment in Sheol/Hades, it would not last forever and there would still be annihilation in Gehenna on judgement day.

I'm suprised that Carrier (whose opinion I respect) would read an interpretation of eternal hell into something as ordinary as a translation of Sheol as Hades. Luke did the same thing, but he also refered to the Bosom of Abraham which indicates that it was the temporary Jewish underworld, not an eternal one.


I also don't see anything to support a notion of eternal hell in the referenced passages from Enoch, on the contrary, they speak of destruction. I wonder if RIC is clear that it is the ETERNAL part that I object to, not the flames or a temporary punishment.

Jagella

Then you disagree with Carrier because as you can see he stated above: “That Jews already re-imagined Sheol as Hades, an actual place of eternal consciousness for the souls of the dead…�

Carrier and I both recognize that language and the meaning of words evolve. Moreover, religious beliefs evolve.

Again, Carrier informs us that Hades was a place of eternal consciousness for the dead. The Rabbis that translated the Septuagint, according to Carrier, translated Sheol into Hades thus revealing that they believed in a place of eternal consciousness for the dead. This belief is indicative of the evolution of Jewish thought regarding death. This thought later developed into the belief in hell as written in the New Testament, or at least virtually all the research I’ve done on this issue points in that direction.

I look forward to any correspondence you may have with Carrier that you decide to share on this thread.

Jagella

Diogenes the Cynic

In the absense of any better argument than a translation of Sheol into Hades in the LXX, then yes, I diagree with Carrier (if he indeed explicitly stated that he thought Sheol was eternal, which you did not quote him as saying)
Sure. The meaning of the Gehenna passages in the NT was reinterpretd by later Christians. There is no argument in that regard.
This is hardly a convincing argument that they intended to confer a comlete reimagining of Sheol and a jettsioning of the expected resurrection of the dead. That would be a radical chamge in Jewish eschatology. The Gospels themselves indicate that the resurrection was still a popular expectation and is one which Jesus does not contradict.A simple translation of Sheol into the Greek word for the underworld proves nothing whatever. The Septuagint DOES contain other inexact translations, including the infamous almah/parthenos mistake. It may be Carrier's opinion that the use of the word Hades in the LXX is proof that the Jews believed in an eternal Hell, but I think this is a reaching conclusion at best.

Since you have not quoted RC as saying anything was "eternal," I'm not ready to say I necessarily disagree with him. It may be that he is saying that the concept of punishment in Sheol had crept into Jewish afterworld beliefs (which I have already stipulated to earlier in this thread). But I still have seen no textual evidence that they thought this punishment would be eternal.

Amaleq13

My first thought was "What other choice did the translators have?". What was the point of translating Jewish Scripture into Greek? Was it to clarify their beliefs or try to convey them to the larger, Greek-speaking world?

In other words, how can we tell if "Hades" was chosen to reflect an actual change in belief as opposed to it being the closest word in Greek to convey a reference to the afterlife?

The quote has him referring to "eternal consciousness".

It would be great if you would share some of the evidence you discovered in your research rather than just the conclusions of scholars who agree with you. That you have finally found a scholar who seems to agree with you despite not being a conservative Christian certainly eliminates the possibility that faith is the reason for the conclusion but the actual basis for the conclusion is still unknown and that is what is most important in making the claim credible.

Jagella

I sure did quote Carrier as saying the Jew’s conceived that Sheol was eternal as anybody can verify by reading my post above.

Yes, Christians are always reinterpreting the Bible. However, this reinterpretation is evident in the New Testament in which the concept of Gehenna was changed. Reinterpretation did not start after the New Testament was written; it started with the New Testament.

I wouldn’t say that the concept of Sheol was completely reimagined by the authors of the New Testament. We can see remnants of the earlier concept of Sheol when the Bible speaks of a resurrection of the dead prior to the final judgment. I always thought that the two Christian beliefs, that of consciousness immediately after death and that of a resurrection of the dead to be judged, were confusing and contradictory.

And Jewish eschatology can change radically like any other belief.

Jagella

Jagella

I posted quite a bit of evidence, but it was dismissed.

I’ve found that the large majority of the people who study these questions are Christians, and many of these Christians might be described as conservative. I believe that a scholar being a conservative Christian does not necessarily disqualify him or her as being credible. When we refer to authorities we must judge for ourselves if the opinions of these authorities are well founded.

I’m sorry if you have the impression that my position is based on “faith.� I feel it is based on reason.

Jagella

Diogenes the Cynic

Well then, if Carrier has no greater argument than the translation of Sheol as Hades, I would just have to say that I find his argument less than compelling.
You have yet to provide a shred of evidence to this effect.No you have not provided evidence and had it dismissed. You have produced fundies who believe in hell without explaining why. You have produced one atheist scholar who cites nothing more than the LXX translation of a Hebrew word for the underworld into a Greek word. The passages cited from Enoch actually support what I've said about Gehenna being a place of annihilation.

As it stands, you have still not given us a single reason to read Gehenna as "eternal hell."
Me either.
That is, in fact, the ONLY concept of Sheol depicted in the NT.
There were two different kinds of "consciousness" in Jewish afterlife beliefs. There was first, the temporary stay in Gehenna and then the physical resurrection of the dead (not of souls, but of physical bodies), some of which would be given eternal life in a restored Eden on earth, others who would be annihilated in Gehenna. Those are the beliefs reflected in the Gehenna and Hades passages of the synoptic gospels (and Enoch as well).
So what? We are talking only about a known eschatological belief system during a known part of Jewish history. You have not demonstrated the NT passages in question diverge in any way from that belief system.

Diogenes the Cynic

You keep saying this but I don't remember seeing any evidence.
Which is why I keep asking you to present arguments rather than bare conclusions.
You have based your assertion of Jewish authorship for Mark on nothing but an a priori faith in discredited fundy tradition. You have based your assertions for Gehenna as hell on fundy tradition as well. You have demurred from actually trying to make a reasoned argument for any of your positions, choosing instead to google for definitions of words, cite your youth pastor and a Christian evangelist as alleged Greek readers who believe in Hell and finally you found an actual non-Christian scholar who is respected on this board who supports your position (I think with less than convincing arguments but he supports your position). Your belief in a Biblical hell, though, preceded your correspondence with Mr. Carrier and was based on nothing but faith in fundy tradition.

Amaleq13

You posted English translations of the text and the opinions of several conservative scholars without the basis for those opinions. That isn't evidence.

I agree and that is why I am more interested in the basis for the conclusions and the choice of translation than the conclusion and choices, themselves. It is the basis for those conclusions that will contain the evidence.

I was referring to the conclusions of the conservative scholars. Absent a basis for their conclusion, it appeared they were simply reading their own beliefs into the texts. As for your acceptance of their conclusion, I have yet to see any reasoning you applied except to assume that the traditional belief is true until proven otherwise.