Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
That verse isn't referring to God destroying anyone; the "him" being referred to is each person having the potential to destroy themselves, not in some mythical afterlife torture chamber, but in the here and now. (And the word someone translated as "hell" there is actually "Gehenna", a literal valley used as a garbage dump in that time period.)
Of course. The person you should fear (according to the passage) is not the ruler who can torture or kill you, but the person who damages your faith so you fail to make heaven. The message is clear - put up with torture and death, rather than give up your faith.
Gehenna was a real place but was a symbolic metaphor for what would be done with those who failed to make the cut after judgement.
Quote:
Originally Posted by jeffbase40
I think you could make a scriptural case for both sides of the argument, but I have taken a non-traditional view. I think the authors were just trying to describe in terms relatable to their physical world or culture at the time, much like they refer to God sitting on a throne. If I had to convey visual the most horrible place imaginable, it would be burning alive forever. I believe hell is either physical or spiritual time realm where God wipes out the unsaved from existence. There is no coming back from that death. It is eternal in that you will never be created again. I based this on Matthew 10:28
"Do not fear those who kill the body, but are unable to kill the soul; but rather fear Him who is able to destroy both soul and body in Hell.”
Jesus clearly says that everything about us, body and soul will be destroyed. Plus, it just doesn't make logical sense for God to keep people alive forever to torment them. This would mean God would have to create a new physical body with nerve endings that will experience the fire pain but the body does not get consumed. This is a great article that covers it in more depth
At any rate, the thought of being told you will no longer exist anymore while knowing others go on to eternal life would be terrifying and horrible enough.
As a matter of fact 'wiping' is what I'd opt for rather than eternal life. Have you ever imagined what eternal life would be like? You's be insane before a trilion years had passed - and you'd still be at the start.
For this, and other reasons, the heaven -concept only works if God 'wipes' your mind and turns you into some mindless Thing that isn't you at all.
Then 'hell' is actually the lake of fire while sheol was just a holding place for the dead who were later tossed into this lake of fire which is now thought of as Hell. Yes?
It depends. Some believed you were tortured in Gehenna for a year or two, so presumably they would then go to Sheol. Other Jews believed your soul was destroyed in Gehenna. The author of Matthew appears to have believed this.
But other Jews believed differently, they believed you just went Sheol until the end of time. Some of these Jews believed if you lived a bad life you were punished in Sheol, or treated in a nice way if you had been good.
Like the ideas about the messiah, different Jews had different beliefs.
Of course. The person you should fear (according to the passage) is not the ruler who can torture or kill you, but the person who damages your faith so you fail to make heaven. The message is clear - put up with torture and death, rather than give up your faith.
Gehenna was a real place but was a symbolic metaphor for what would be done with those who failed to make the cut after judgement.
Bible passages can all be interpreted in a variety of ways and since it’s neither a repository of unadulterated truth nor a book of cohesive doctrine, both the authors and those who interpret it are just offering their ideas. But you and Jeff are trying to force a concept of the afterlife into a passage that doesn’t mention one. And, given the context of the passage in which the author assures that God is not to be feared because God loves people, dragging the idea of an eternal torture chamber into it from one’s own imagination doesn’t make any sense, IMO.
Bible passages can all be interpreted in a variety of ways and since it’s neither a repository of unadulterated truth nor a book of cohesive doctrine, both the authors and those who interpret it are just offering their ideas.
But you and Jeff are trying to force a concept of the afterlife into a passage that doesn’t mention one. And, given the context of the passage in which the author assures that God is not to be feared because God loves people, dragging the idea of an eternal torture chamber into it from one’s own imagination doesn’t make any sense, IMO.
Um, I wasted a rep on another post of yours...dammit!
This makes you look very smart, Pleroo...as in, someone that graduated at the top of your class!
Very impressed.
As a matter of fact 'wiping' is what I'd opt for rather than eternal life. Have you ever imagined what eternal life would be like? You's be insane before a trilion years had passed - and you'd still be at the start.
.
I do think you are right. There are reasons to fear an eternal life.
I think you could make a scriptural case for both sides of the argument, but I have taken a non-traditional view. I think the authors were just trying to describe in terms relatable to their physical world or culture at the time, much like they refer to God sitting on a throne. If I had to convey visual the most horrible place imaginable, it would be burning alive forever. I believe hell is either physical or spiritual time realm where God wipes out the unsaved from existence. There is no coming back from that death. It is eternal in that you will never be created again. I based this on Matthew 10:28
"Do not fear those who kill the body, but are unable to kill the soul; but rather fear Him who is able to destroy both soul and body in Hell.”
Jesus clearly says that everything about us, body and soul will be destroyed. Plus, it just doesn't make logical sense for God to keep people alive forever to torment them. This would mean God would have to create a new physical body with nerve endings that will experience the fire pain but the body does not get consumed. This is a great article that covers it in more depth
Bible passages can all be interpreted in a variety of ways and since it’s neither a repository of unadulterated truth nor a book of cohesive doctrine, both the authors and those who interpret it are just offering their ideas. But you and Jeff are trying to force a concept of the afterlife into a passage that doesn’t mention one. And, given the context of the passage in which the author assures that God is not to be feared because God loves people, dragging the idea of an eternal torture chamber into it from one’s own imagination doesn’t make any sense, IMO.
How about that ... pops in with a few post and gives us a year worth of insight.
She's been mulling for a while. Broadening her horizons - hanging with atheists and pagans and liberal Christians.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
