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.
You may have quoted Daniel 12:1-3 correctly, but your interpretation is, to say the least, suspect. "Shame and everlasting contempt" means exactly that; it does not infer anything like hell. You, evidently, seem to feel otherwise. But you have a strange way of reading meanings into things that nobody else here seems to do.
I guess you didn't see it:
There are 162 mentions of hell in the new testament, 70 of them by Jesus himself.
For thousands of years witchcraft was a mortal sin and hundreds of thousands of innocent young women were tortured and put to death for being a witch. After folks realized that there's no such thing as a witch the torture and killings stopped and the old facts are ignored. The scripture is still there but the church won't cost itself donations in any way.
For a thousand years infant baptism was required. The congregations began to protest and so they modified their stand to make it optional. All the scripture is still there but they won't do anything which interferes with their attendance and consequently, their income.
Slavery was tolerated and often accomodated by the church from it's beginning until a few years ago. When political changes were made in most of the world which made it illegal the church took sides with the general populus and never mentions it. All the scripture concerning slavery is still there but is ignored by preachers when they do their forty five minutes of work each week preparing a sermon for the big hour on Sunday morning.
Now it's all about hell. After preachers all over the world prepared and preached hundreds of billions of hell fire and brimstone sermons the idea of eternal flame as punishment has become a "no brainer." Anyone with one eye and half sense knows that a loving god would never subject his own creatures to such a miserable existance for their mistakes. Now the church is driving a campaign to convince everyone in the world that the millenimums of conduct was simply errors in translation. All the scripture is still there but guess what?? There are no more hell fire and brimstone sermons...by anyone.
As far as it being real flames Jesus and his gang were talking about:
"And in hell he lifted up his eyes, being in torments, and saw Abraham afar off, and Lazarus in his bosom. And he cried and said, Father Abraham, have mercy on me and send Lazarus so that he may dip the tip of his finger in water and cool my tongue, for I am tormented in this flame."
~Luke 16:23-24~
You may have quoted Daniel 12:1-3 correctly, but your interpretation is, to say the least, suspect. "Shame and everlasting contempt" means exactly that; it does not infer anything like hell. You, evidently, seem to feel otherwise. But you have a strange way of reading meanings into things that nobody else here seems to do.
There should be nothing suspect about what is stated in Daniel. It is an obvious read. Clearly, the Old Testament speaks of a future human resurrection. And those who's names are found in a Book, are granted (EVERLASTING LIFE).
Others, who's names do not appear in this Book, find themselves in a position, (OF EVERLASTING SHAME AND CONTEMPT).
It should be pretty obvious, that everyone would want to see their name in this Book. I believe you have a problem with this Biblical passage, because it mirrors to closely with the New Testament.
Also, in the Old Testament, we find the word Sheol, which is a place of spiritual purification, or, (PUNISHMENT FOR THE WICKED DEAD). The fact that the Old Testament speaks of a place called SHEOL where the wicked go. And Daniel speaks of wicked people spending their future everlasting life in shame and contempt. Well, Sheol may be the place where these people would live their life of everlasting shame and contempt. It does not require a great leap of logic, to reach such a conclusion.
There should be nothing suspect about what is stated in Daniel. It is an obvious read. Clearly, the Old Testament speaks of a future human resurrection. And those who's names are found in a Book, are granted (EVERLASTING LIFE).
Others, who's names do not appear in this Book, find themselves in a position, (OF EVERLASTING SHAME AND CONTEMPT).
It should be pretty obvious, that everyone would want to see their name in this Book. I believe you have a problem with this Biblical passage, because it mirrors to closely with the New Testament.
Also, in the Old Testament, we find the word Sheol, which is a place of spiritual purification, or, (PUNISHMENT FOR THE WICKED DEAD). The fact that the Old Testament speaks of a place called SHEOL where the wicked go. And Daniel speaks of wicked people spending their future everlasting life in shame and contempt. Well, Sheol may be the place where these people would live their life of everlasting shame and contempt. It does not require a great leap of logic, to reach such a conclusion.
LOL!
You people have no shame. Keep on covering up what you don't want others to see. It's what the church has done for 2000 years.
Oh please. It's true the word Hell does not appear in the Old Testament. Yet the concept of eternal punishment will be found there.
That's as maybe old fruit but the OP was asking about a fiery place called Hell. As you correctly pointed out, there is no mention of such a place in the OT....thus, a fiery Hell was invented by the NT authors.
That's as maybe old fruit but the OP was asking about a fiery place called Hell. As you correctly pointed out, there is no mention of such a place in the OT....thus, a fiery Hell was invented by the NT authors.
Well, both the Old and New Testaments speak of a place of Everlasting punishment for evil men. Now one could make an arguement that the New Testament speaks of fire, whereas the Old Testament does not. However, I believe anyone who really considers punishment for eternity, should not be so worried about which details were, or were not fully disclosed in either Book. The end results, will be equally horrible.
Over the years, I have discovered that the Old and New Testaments compliment each other. Some details on prophecy will be found in the Old Testament, and other greater details of the same event will be revealed in the New Testament. The prophecies that speak of Jesus Christ will be found in the Old Testament, then we see those prophecies being fulfilled in the New Testament. Some details of a place of punishment spoken of in the Old Testament, are then uncovered in greater detail in the New Testament. It's not so much an invention, than a greater understanding of knowledge that is being exposed.
Over the years, I have discovered that the Old and New Testaments compliment each other. Some details on prophecy will be found in the Old Testament, and other greater details of the same event will be revealed in the New Testament.
That's because the NT authors were well aware of the prophecies in the OT and they wrote the NT so that it seemed the prophecies had been fulfilled. Really old beast, you can't be so daft that you can't see the problem in 'the Bible' giving a prophecy and 'the Bible' claiming that the prophecy came true...or can you???
Quote:
The prophecies that speak of Jesus Christ will be found in the Old Testament, then we see those prophecies being fulfilled in the New Testament.
Well...as a courtesy tell us what you gleened from the information. Are you just another Christian with a cause?
It was a discussion I was having with a friend, and I wanted to get other imputs.
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.