Doesnt mean if its greco its not true. Plato i think or Socrates both spoke of the soul. One of them said it is eternal. The bible several years later affirmed it. They also spoke of one God.
That makes sense. I have said that as grateful as I am for a Christian education, I think that can sometimes make it harder to study the Bible because I went in with a lot of systematic assumptions I’d picked up before I was even old enough to study. I would like to study this topic more, but I have also had to reckon with other places where we, in an attempt to give a simple “plain reading” of the text, imposed our own assumptions onto it that the original audiences would not have had. It’s been eye opening, so I’m taking baby steps.
2 Likes
In all seriousness and gravity, have you ever talked much with unbelievers that are delighted to live for the moment? Those that I have talked with believe annihilation to be an absolute panacea… “so long as I never have anything to answer for, so long as I can be happy and live how I want to in this life with no consequence beyond my own extinction, then I have nothing to worry about. That is certainly the perspective of many, many unbelievers with whom I have spoken. Annihilation is what most people I talk with are delighted to look forward to… especially those who delight in various abusive or sinful or aggressive attitudes… knowing they can live and take advantage of others and have no accountability. I’m not making this up, this is what I hear in my conversations.
2 Likes
Randy, first, it has been a while… and I’m honored to speak with you again. I’m healing from my bike accident, nice to talk with you again,
Quick question for clarification…l do you believe that
-
Jesus did not speak about these things, that he did not in fact speak about “torment” that was “eternal”, “eternal punishment,” “being in anguish in this fire”l “unquenchable fire,” or “eternal fire”, but these were all words falsely put into His mouth by the early apostles/church?
-
Jesus spoke these words because he was erroneously informed by his culture, and absorbed the erroneous beliefs about an avenging God… I.e., he in fact spoke of these things, but was entirely mistaken?
-
Jesus used those words, but meant them so entirely metaphorical and analogically that they meant nearly the opposite of what his words literally meant? He in fact was communicating either universalism or annihilationism, it for some reason these were the words he utilized?
Or another alternative that I’m missing?
Thanks. Will try to stay in touch now that I can type freely again.
2 Likes
I don’t doubt you. At the same time, your earlier reference to “eat, drink, and be merry” comes straight from the book of Ecclesiastes, so this isn’t some new or pagan idea. When I look at history I see a whole litany of powerful people who were desperately chasing immortality, and in that mindset, being forgotten is a huge fear – I wonder if that had something to do with the development of ancestor worship – that terror that death will be the only end.
Anyway, we could probably cite examples of all kinds of things, but I ultimately have to trust that God will judge fairly, and acknowledge that I am still quite ignorant of what the judgment/afterlife will look like.
2 Likes
I suppose for me these threads end in a dead end. With everyone here including me of course holding to their views. But in the end they are just that views. I know one thing,that i dont know nothing
Socrates
1 Like
I certainly respect those who simply claim ignorance… that I find a respectable position. But I take serious issue with those who positively promise annihilation… especially to those who would want nothing more than such an escape from accountability.
Wait … what?!! 
Did I miss something about this? I’m glad you’re okay (or well enough to be back at’em here at any rate.)
1 Like
This is an interesting thread, and some good points have been raised.
Just to stir the pot a bit more, there’s an interesting collection that’s free to read for a short time on The Biblical Archeology Society Library site. The collection is called “Satan” and one of the articles, called The Harrowing of Hell, goes through the history of the phrase “He decended into Hell” in the Apostles’ Creed, and explains that there’s almost no biblical support at all for this doctrine. Nowhere in the New Testament does it explicitly say that Jesus descended into Hell. However, two slim passages in 1 Peter (1 Peter 3:19 and 4:6) were assumed by later writers such as Ignatius to mean that Jesus must have descended into Hell since he’s described as preaching to the dead.
The other articles in the “Satan” collection are equally interesting.
2 Likes
Glad to hear you’re recovering. I didn’t realize you’d been injured. Just what you need on top of everything else that’s going on, eh?
1 Like
Actually it’s hades destroyed in the lake of fire. It’s hades destroyed in hell. The grave is destroyed, not hell.
Yes this another important point in the discussion.
The NT uses 3 different words Hades (usually translated as hell in gospels), Tartarus (translated as hell in 2 Peter), and gehena, which is liekly the same or similar concept as Lake of Fire to refer to 3 distinct concept, yet they are all generally interpreted as the same thing (ie hell), and the confusion is exacerbated by he translators actually translating all these words as hell.
Hades is Greek word used to translate the Hebrew word sheoll and is just a general word for the underworld or realm of the dead. It’s not usually translated as hell in the Old Testament, and numerous examples (ie Jonah 2:2) show that’s not what it refers to so shouldn’t be translated as such in the NT.
Tartarus is a dungeon for the Titans in Greek mythology and Peter seems to borrow the term to refer to the prison that the angels that had intercourse with men and created demon-men hyprids in Gen 6 are said to be locked up (with the backstory coming from the book of Enoch). Again this is very different from the English word hell and distinct from Hades/Sheol so shouldn’t be translated by the same word.
The Lake of fire seems to be a places where all wickedeness and death itself get destroyed. You could argue for Eternal concious torment from the imagery there, but I agree with the other commentor who mentioned it is more consistent with War imagery elsewhere in the Old Testament and seems to more likely refer to annihilation, and if you take eternal concious torment then like mentioned early what do you do about death and the underworld being eternally tormented.
1 Like
You are too kind @abstraction
And my apologies for my totally failed mind reading. Something I despair of in others.
And your come back with Paul is superb.
But…
He was objectively reporting an experience. As objectively as he could. A modern person of his calibre having the same experience would interpret it differently. More objectively. Clinically. But, assuming he did experience third heaven as it is, it isn’t analogous to anything Jesus said, it is in a completely different category and He never made any such claim.
The encounter on the mountain was a symbolic, allegoric vision; of the law - Moses - and prophets - Elijah - pointing to, subservient to, Jesus. And I do want to prescribe what Jesus could and could not know. None of His sayings describe the afterlife as it is. Whether He knew or not. We can do this. Rationally. Faithfully.
“He decended into Hell” in the Apostles’ Creed, and explains that there’s almost no biblical support at all for this doctrine.
This is a translation issue not an issue with the Apostles Creed. Jesus ascended in ‘Hades’. not into the Lake of Fire.
Hades is just the underworld/realm of the dead.
The Bible has no concept of people “going to heaven when they die”, as modern evangelical does. It teaches we go to the realm of the dead, and the hope is not that we can instead go to heaven ibnstead but a more radical one instead that death is actually temporary and we will one day be resurrected. Jesus’ resurrection is supposed to be a historical proof testifying to this claim, and an example of what will happen to us (I believe in the resurrection of the dead)/
Saying Jesus’ descended into ‘Hades’, is merely stating “He Actually Died”, and this is definitely an orthodox Christian pillar.
The verse in 2 Peter is talking about the demons who lead a rebellion by making demon-men hybrids from Genesis 6/book of Enoch and nothing to do with taking people out of hell into heaven.
1 Like
I’m not sure what you’re getting at.
I stated hell is the same as the lake of fire, and that it’s war language concerning punishment when all of it actually leads into hell ( the lake of fire ) is where all are destroyed. Hades, the realm of the dead is destroyed because there is no longer the dead, only those with eternal life. The rest are destroyed , the second death, and never coming back.
I’m not sure what you’re getting at.
Yes I was agreeing with you. Merely elaborating on some of the transnational issues that add to the confusion.
1 Like
Hi Timothy,
The Apostles’ Creed is pretty clear that “he actually died” isn’t the same thing (doctrinally, that is) as decending into hell:
I believe in God, the Father almighty,
creator of heaven and earth.
I believe in Jesus Christ, his only Son, our Lord.
He was conceived by the power of the Holy Spirit
and born of the virgin Mary.
He suffered under Pontius Pilate,
was crucified, died, and was buried.
He descended to the dead.
On the third day he rose again.
He ascended into heaven,
and is seated at the right hand of the Father.
He will come again to judge the living and the dead.
I believe in the Holy Spirit,
the holy catholic Church,
the communion of the saints,
the forgiveness of sins,
the resurrection of the body,
and the life everlasting. Amen.
All the lines in this Creed can be found explicitly in the Bible – spelled right out in various biblical verses the way they’re found in the Apostles’ Creed – except for the line about Jesus descending to the dead. The descending bit isn’t explicitly stated in the New Testament. There seems no question that this particular belief was quite quickly adopted as a doctrinal statement. But it isn’t actually in the Bible.
As you know, a lot of beliefs about heaven and hell are found in popularJewish and Christian extrabiblical sources from the late Second Temple and early Christian period. But most of these sources didn’t make it into the final canon. (Thank goodness we’re not trying to deal with the Book of Enoch as scripture!) But by the 1st century CE, we have abundant treatises that deal with themes of heaven and hell, including the dualistic good-versus-evil, light-versus-dark teachings found in many of the Dead Sea Scrolls.
While there’s every reason to accept the historical fact of apocalypticism as a major thread throughout Christianity (and throughout all other major world religions, as well), I don’t believe we’re under any obligation to accept apocalypticism as the only way to interpret our relationship with God – nor indeed is it the only way to interpret what Jesus himself said on the matter. There are other much more positive, healing, uplifting theological strands that we can turn to instead as we try to grasp what Jesus was really telling us.
To start with, we could ask what Jesus meant when he taught us about forgiveness.
Is the idea of eternal suffering in hell consistent – even a tiny little bit – with the mystery of forgiveness that Jesus speaks of? Is it consistent with Divine love and healing?
Is it possible we’ve been swayed by an idea of hell that Jesus never endorsed – and never would have endorsed – despite what his eager apostles claimed?
2 Likes
Makes more sense lol.
I saw the quote and thought you were disagreeing on some way. I was thinking it seems like we agree. I thought somehow the extra info was supposed to be issued of contention.
All the lines in this Creed can be found explicitly in the Bible – spelled right out in various biblical verses the way they’re found in the Apostles’ Creed – except for the line about Jesus descending to the dead. The descending bit isn’t explicitly stated in the New Testament.
There’s most definately a Bible verse to go with this one:
“When it says, “He ascended,” what does it mean but that he had also descended into the lower parts of the earth?” (Ephesians 4:9)
The “lower parts of the earth” is a reference to the ANE conceptual that the underworld where the dead lived was literally under the earth just as heaven (God’s space) was literaly above the firmament.
Is the idea of eternal suffering in hell consistent – even a tiny little bit – with the mystery of forgiveness that Jesus speaks of?
I concur. I don’t think Hades/underworld has anything to do with the modern Christian concept of hell
Yep, had a spill from my bicycle and broke numerous bones in my hand… made it rather difficult to type for a bit…! Thanks for the well wishes!
I’m genuinely not trying to be obtuse… I still genuinely don’t understand what you’re trying to claim… these specific words and phrases, and hence those specific ideas, aren’t something anyone is or has imported into the gospels, into Jesus teachings. They are his words.
Let me ask this way, just so I understand accurately… and you can correct what I’m missing…
Jesus taught, affirmed, and warned people about:
-
“Eternal punishment” (where the “goats”, I.e., those who did not love neighbor, would be sent after the final judgment by the son of man)
-
a “Place of torment” (where the rich man went after his death, and described it as “in anguish in these flames.”)
-
a “fiery furnace” (where there is weeping and gnashing of teeth, specifically described by Jesus as the place that “lawbreakers” would be thrown “at the end of the age”)…
-
“eternal fire” (that is bad enough it would be worth cutting your hand off if it helped you avoid it)
-
and in this place there will be “weeping and gnashing of teeth.”
However…
If I were to say I believe in an “eternal punishment” that takes place in a “place of torment” that might be described as a “fiery furnace” with “eternal fire” where there will be “weeping and gnashing of teeth”… And that I connect these ideas somehow with an “end times” or “final judgment” or “end of the age” scenario, (say, like the son of man returning in glory, sitting on his throne and separating the sheep from the goats?), you would say I am somehow “importing” Greek philosophical concepts into Scripture, not deriving my ideas from Jesus‘s own words?
Is this what you are essentially claiming? Or do I misunderstand?
2 Likes
In acient egyptian religion The “Lake of Fire” is frequently mentioned in the Book of the Dead, around 1200 BC.
2 Likes