The sick concept of Eternal hell suffering.

[Imagist]

Is it that you just don't comprehend the Holiness of God and his eternal justice system, thinking God should act in accordance with your finite mind.

If this were true, then you couldn't claim to comprehend it either because your mind is also finite. So how do you know he isn't going to fry you? Maybe in his infinite knowledge the wisest thing is to cruelly torture everyone, good and bad, for the rest of eternity.

Our finite minds are all we have to go on. And if you used your finite mind you would see that the finite evidence we have shows god to be cruel, sadistic, and evil. Your "infinite evidence" is not useful.

In your ingnorance and very finite mind, you make such a claim
It will be interesting if on the day you stand before him and attempt to justify yourself, only to become as speechlessness as will many people be when they behold his glory and his Holiness and are cut to the heart with their guilt and regret and will see the justice ,mercy ,grace and patience that God offered through their meager 70 -80 yrs on this earth.

According to your own religion, if I stand before god as an unbeliever, it's already too late for me. So why would I feel guilt and regret? It would be far too late for that.

If I ever stand face to face with the Christian god, I will have my chance to tell him exactly what an evil being he is. Just because he has power doesn't make it right for him to create disease, Hitler, Stalin, Mao Zhedong, etc. Even if he had offered justice, mercy, grace, and patience, are worthless compared to the immense suffering he has created.

It's kind of like this, I give you continual warning and opportunity to abstain from certain actions, but you give no heed to them or the one who issues them.
There is no recourse but that you be subject to and succumb to the consequences, but all the while pointing the accusing finger at the one who warns through your conscious, others and circumstances.

If you are omnipotent, there is always recourse. This omnipotent god has the ability to remove suffering (both present and eternal) from existence as if it had never existed.

If a person warns you that he's going to kill you if you do something he doesn't like, you do it, and he kills you, that person definitely had recourse, and you are entirely justified in blaming (pointing the finger at) that person.

I have seen the atrocities in other countries of the world, done not by God but by selfish, greedy violent men who strive for power, wealth and status, shall there be no responsibility on their part.

That's it .....just put it all on God and make men out to be mindless androids,without volition

Of course the greedy violent men are responsible. But god could stop them, and he chooses not to, so he is also responsible.

Men are not mindless androids. But if I see another man committing a crime, and I can stop him safely, I feel that it is my duty to stop him. God is not exempt from this duty. In fact, given that he has the power to stop ALL crimes, it is responsibility to stop ALL crimes.

blameshifting and wilful ignorance and illogical views will avail no gain for you.

Note that I have not made any personal attacks on you, but you are now making personal attacks on me. But you are going to accuse me of blameshifting, willful ignorance, and illogical views, listen up:

You are shifting the blame for god's actions onto man. It is true that man does wrong. However, god could prevent these wrongs, so god is also responsible indirectly. It is also true that god does wrong directly: the creation of smallpox, ebola, or bubonic plague, for example.

I am no scholar and i never said i was. What translations did i put my stamp on?

You put your stamp on these translations:

The original hebrew and greek do not say everlasting, its aoinan and eonian which means age or ages. Hades, tartarus, and gehenna does not mean hell, Hades equivalent to the hebrew word sheol which means the imperceptible, the unseen.

By saying this you are disagreeing with the large group of translation experts and scholars. This implies that you feel that you are qualified to disagree with them. You are not qualified, therefore your argument that my point was incorrect because my translation is incorrect is invalid, since you cannot prove that my translation is incorrect.

The lake of fire isnt mistranslated, its misinterpreted by the scholars and most of the churches out there.

How so? Do you have an alternate interpretation?

I dont know them that well but all you have to do is a simple word study. Pick a word i dare you!! Dont be afraid of the Truth!!! Start with hades, then go to eternal/everlasting/for ever and ever--those three they claim come the same word, which these so called scholars say it also means world,age and so on.

The problem with this is that you can only give a word meaning in context, so taking a word out of context isn't useful. For example, "bad place" could mean a ghetto, a toxic dump, or my kitchen. But in the context of the sentence "If you do good, you'll go to the good place, and if you do bad, you'll go to the bad place", it's clear that "bad place" refers to hell.

With a few years study of a language you can understand this kind of implication a little, but to fully understand these kind of contextual connotations you need to be truly fluent.

Its just like anything else, when you want to know if your government is telling the truth you research to find out if they're lying, now do the same about these scholars/pharisees/scribes/theologians.

Have you done the same for the leaders of your religion, or for the bible? How do you know they aren't lying?

Any god who would torture his creatures for eternity is not good and therefore not God, but an impostor created by human beings.

So we're agreed, the Christian god is an impostor created by human beings.

People should ask themselves why they are enjoying hell so much right now.

Because it's not hell. It's all we get.

Guess how many times the word "HELL" occured in the bible, the answer is a big fat "ZERO"

BibleGateway - Quick search: hell

Are you even trying to argue within reality?

 

[herushura]

Quote:
Originally Posted by heneni
Guess how many times the word "HELL" occured in the bible, the answer is a big fat "ZERO"


Compare Jonah 2:2 from various translations:

• Original King James Version: 1611
  And said, I cried by reason of mine affliction vnto the LORD, and hee heard mee; out of the belly of hell cried I, and thou heardest my voyce.
  ​
  The spelling is exactly as in the original. English has changed much since 1611. The original has a note in the margins about the word "hell." It says "or, the grave." Later editions took the marginal readings out to conform to the mythical standard of an "inerrant Bible." Marginal alternative renderings showed that translators were uncertain of the meaning. This did not conform to the "inerrant" idea so the marginal readings, which sometimes were more correct than the text, were taken out in later editions. Please note if Jonah was in "hell," as the KJV has it, then Jonah escaped from a place where, according to modern theologians, there is no escape.
  
• The New American Standard Bible: 1977
  and he said, "I called out of my distress to the LORD, And He answered me. I cried for help from the depth of Sheol; Thou didst hear my voice."
  ​
• The New International Version: 1973
  He said: "In my distress I called to the Lord, and he answered me. From the depthes of the grave I called for help, and you listened to my cry.
  ​
• The Living Bible: 1971
  "In my great trouble I cried to the Lord and he answerd me; from the depths of death I called, and Lord, you heard me!"
  ​
• The Holy Bible from Ancient Eastern Manuscripts (Lamsa): 1957
  I cried to the Lord in my distress and he answered me; out of the depths of Sheol cried I, and thou heardest my voice.
  ​
• Good News Bible: 1976
  "In my distress, O Lord, I called to you, and you answered me. From deep in the world of the dead I cried for help, and you heard me."
  ​
• The Holy Bible an American Translation: 1976
  ...and said: "In my distress I called to the Lord, and He answered me. From the belly of the underworld I cried, and You heard my voice."
  ​
• New Catholic Liturgical Bible: 1963
  Jona 2:3 Out of my distress I called to the Lord, and he answered me; from the midst of the nether world I cried for help, and you heard my voice.
  ​
• New Revised Standard Version: 1989
  ...saying, "I called to the Lord out of my distress, and he answered me; out of the belly of Sheol I cried, and you heard my voice."
  ​
• The Amplified Bible: 1965
  And said, I cried out of my distress to the Lord, and He heard me; out of the belly of Sheol cried I, and You heard my voice.
  ​
• The New King James Version: 1985
  And he said: "I cried out to the Lord because of my affliction, And He answered me. Out of the belly of Sheol I cried, and You heard my voice.
  ​

You see the word is SHEOL

Hell and Sheol are not the same.

If you bible has HELL in it, its a poor translation

 

[AK4]

Quote:
Originally Posted by heneni
Guess how many times the word "HELL" occured in the bible, the answer is a big fat "ZERO"


Compare Jonah 2:2 from various translations:

• Original King James Version: 1611
  
  And said, I cried by reason of mine affliction vnto the LORD, and hee heard mee; out of the belly of hell cried I, and thou heardest my voyce.
  
  ​
  The spelling is exactly as in the original. English has changed much since 1611. The original has a note in the margins about the word "hell." It says "or, the grave." Later editions took the marginal readings out to conform to the mythical standard of an "inerrant Bible." Marginal alternative renderings showed that translators were uncertain of the meaning. This did not conform to the "inerrant" idea so the marginal readings, which sometimes were more correct than the text, were taken out in later editions. Please note if Jonah was in "hell," as the KJV has it, then Jonah escaped from a place where, according to modern theologians, there is no escape.
  
• The New American Standard Bible: 1977
  
  and he said, "I called out of my distress to the LORD, And He answered me. I cried for help from the depth of Sheol; Thou didst hear my voice."
  
  ​
• The New International Version: 1973
  
  He said: "In my distress I called to the Lord, and he answered me. From the depthes of the grave I called for help, and you listened to my cry.
  
  ​
• The Living Bible: 1971
  
  "In my great trouble I cried to the Lord and he answerd me; from the depths of death I called, and Lord, you heard me!"
  
  ​
• The Holy Bible from Ancient Eastern Manuscripts (Lamsa): 1957
  
  I cried to the Lord in my distress and he answered me; out of the depths of Sheol cried I, and thou heardest my voice.
  
  ​
• Good News Bible: 1976
  
  "In my distress, O Lord, I called to you, and you answered me. From deep in the world of the dead I cried for help, and you heard me."
  
  ​
• The Holy Bible an American Translation: 1976
  
  ...and said: "In my distress I called to the Lord, and He answered me. From the belly of the underworld I cried, and You heard my voice."
  
  ​
• New Catholic Liturgical Bible: 1963
  
  Jona 2:3 Out of my distress I called to the Lord, and he answered me; from the midst of the nether world I cried for help, and you heard my voice.
  
  ​
• New Revised Standard Version: 1989
  
  ...saying, "I called to the Lord out of my distress, and he answered me; out of the belly of Sheol I cried, and you heard my voice."
  
  ​
• The Amplified Bible: 1965
  
  And said, I cried out of my distress to the Lord, and He heard me; out of the belly of Sheol cried I, and You heard my voice.
  
  ​
• The New King James Version: 1985
  
  And he said: "I cried out to the Lord because of my affliction, And He answered me. Out of the belly of Sheol I cried, and You heard my voice.
  ​

You see the word is SHEOL

Hell and Sheol are not the same.

If you bible has HELL in it, its a poor translation

Exactly:clap:clap

 

[AK4]

Quote:


All quote are from imagist

You put your stamp on these translations:

Which ones did i? None

By saying this you are disagreeing with the large group of translation experts and scholars. This implies that you feel that you are qualified to disagree with them. You are not qualified, therefore your argument that my point was incorrect because my translation is incorrect is invalid, since you cannot prove that my translation is incorrect.

Your right i am disagreeing. Their biased views for their own religion are put into their work or they think the KJV is infallible when it is full of errors. Im not qualified? Come on your an atheist and you make that statement. Who put a chain around mankind that they cant question those who are "in charge". You question them and dont believe them too. Thats why your are an atheist. I question them and thats why i dont fall in their brand of "traditional christainity". Peter wasnt qualified either--he was just a fisherman. John the baptist wasnt qualified and look at how he challenge the theologians of his time. I could prove your translation is incorrect but im not going to do the work for you. Do it yourself.


Quote:

How so? Do you have an alternate interpretation?

I dont have an interpretation, i have the Word of God that interpret it for me and says to compare spiritual with spiritual, and that no prophesy is of its own interpretation, that Jesus and Gods words are spirit so that alot of the words that comes out of His mouth is not to be taken literally, so when i tell you that the lake of fire is the consuming fire that is God which brings about the second death which the death of the carnal mind--when you read that you still wont see it unless God grants you the gift of spiritual eyes. CAN YOU SEE WHAT I JUST PUT?

The problem with this is that you can only give a word meaning in context, so taking a word out of context isn't useful. For example, "bad place" could mean a ghetto, a toxic dump, or my kitchen. But in the context of the sentence "If you do good, you'll go to the good place, and if you do bad, you'll go to the bad place", it's clear that "bad place" refers to hell.

With a few years study of a language you can understand this kind of implication a little, but to fully understand these kind of contextual connotations you need to be truly fluent.

Oh really!! lets see you the take a proper noun out of context.

Bobby did bad and goes to hades. Now how can/do they (theologians) take hades out of context when the definiton of it is the unseen and imperceptible? No Bobby goes to the grave. No Bobby goes to tatarus. No Bobby goes to Gehenna. NO BOBBY GOES TO HELL. Give me a break.

Yeah right. The late Dr. James Kennedy had like 6 or 7 degrees and was flent in greek and maybe hebrew and he still believed there was a hell and that it was justice and it was fair.

Have you done the same for the leaders of your religion, or for the bible? How do you know they aren't lying?

Yes, yes, yes i have and i dont have a "leader". I meet with fellow believers of like mind. The guy who probably has his eyes opened the furthest by God, I questioned and did my homework on what he says. I wouldnt per se say i have a religion, I HAVE FAITH GIVEN BY GOD THROUGH JESUS. And for my bible, im searching for that precious pearl, that hidden treasure which is Truth. I put no stamp on any one translation.


How else do you know when someone is lying? You do your homework. Now do yours.

PS. Here is my motto: Question everything. Question everything tell you come the Truth. When you come the Truth, question that Truth. By doing this you will only confirm your Truth. ---(or find out it was a lie in the first place)--- this last part is not part of it but its also true.

 

[Imagist]

You put your stamp on these translations:

The original hebrew and greek do not say everlasting, its aoinan and eonian which means age or ages. Hades, tartarus, and gehenna does not mean hell, Hades equivalent to the hebrew word sheol which means the imperceptible, the unseen.

Which ones did i? None

So you're saying that you didn't translate aoinan and eonian to age or ages, you didn't translate hades, tartarus, and gehenna to sheol, and sheol to imperceptable and unseen? You're really going to deny this when I just quoted your to yourself?

Their biased views for their own religion are put into their work or they think the KJV is infallible when it is full of errors.

The reason that the NIV was written was to fix the errors in the KJV, so your statement is obviously false.

I could prove your translation is incorrect but im not going to do the work for you. Do it yourself.

The "I could prove you wrong" argument doesn't work. I could equally say "I could prove that my translation is correct, but I'm not going to do the work for you. Do it yourself."

Neither one of us is qualified to say whether or not the translation is accurate. Nor can I become qualified without abandoning my career to become a translator. But this is why specialization exists in our society; I can only trust the translations most trusted by translators, just as a translator can only trust the computer programs most trusted by people of my profession (I'm a computer scientist).

So unless you have some basis for your argument that the translation is wrong, your argument is invalid.

I dont have an interpretation, i have the Word of God that interpret it for me and says to compare spiritual with spiritual, and that no prophesy is of its own interpretation, that Jesus and Gods words are spirit so that alot of the words that comes out of His mouth is not to be taken literally, so when i tell you that the lake of fire is the consuming fire that is God which brings about the second death which the death of the carnal mind--when you read that you still wont see it unless God grants you the gift of spiritual eyes. CAN YOU SEE WHAT I JUST PUT?

So what you're saying is that you DO have an interpretation: "the lake of fire is the consuming fire that is God which brings about the second death which the death of the carnal mind". This interpretation was supposedly granted to you by your "spiritual eyes" which "God grants".

This is about equivalent to me saying "God gave me superpowers, therefore you are wrong". Sure, I can't prove that you don't have spiritual eyes. But you can't prove that I don't have superpowers that make me right, either. Obviously, you still have yet to provide a valid argument for your position.

Bobby did bad and goes to hades. Now how can/do they (theologians) take hades out of context when the definiton of it is the unseen and imperceptible? No Bobby goes to the grave. No Bobby goes to tatarus. No Bobby goes to Gehenna. NO BOBBY GOES TO HELL. Give me a break.

Call it "the imperceptable", "the grave", or anything else you want, but if it refers to a place where people burn in eternal fire, it's hell.

However, you can try to explain how "hell" was a mistranslation in this context if you wish:

22"The time came when the beggar died and the angels carried him to Abraham's side. The rich man also died and was buried. 23In hell,[a] where he was in torment, he looked up and saw Abraham far away, with Lazarus by his side. 24So he called to him, 'Father Abraham, have pity on me and send Lazarus to dip the tip of his finger in water and cool my tongue, because I am in agony in this fire.'

25"But Abraham replied, 'Son, remember that in your lifetime you received your good things, while Lazarus received bad things, but now he is comforted here and you are in agony. 26And besides all this, between us and you a great chasm has been fixed, so that those who want to go from here to you cannot, nor can anyone cross over from there to us.'

If you want to say "in the imperceptable, where he was in torment", or "in the grave, where he was in torment", it doesn't matter. Either way, it's obviously referring to the place where people get tormented for doing things like this guy did, which we generally refer to as hell.

The late Dr. James Kennedy had like 6 or 7 degrees and was flent in greek and maybe hebrew and he still believed there was a hell and that it was justice and it was fair.

I'm not sure what you're trying to say here, because this quote supports my position, not yours.

Yes, yes, yes i have and i dont have a "leader".

You may not have a personal leader, but your religion does have leaders, and like it or not, a lot of your ideas come from those leaders (directly or indirectly through other people).

Question everything. Question everything tell you come the Truth. When you come the Truth, question that Truth. By doing this you will only confirm your Truth. ---(or find out it was a lie in the first place)--- this last part is not part of it but its also true.

We only have 70-80 years, and there are a practically infinite number of truths to question. So at some point we have to accept something as true, unless more evidence comes up to prove it false.

My experience (and yours too, I think) shows us that people who are experts in a field such as translation are the best sources of information on that field short of becoming an expert yourself. Since we cannot become experts in every field, we have no choice but to trust the experts.

You trust experts too, you've just selectively chosen not to believe these ones because their translation doesn't fit what you want to believe.

 

[Imagist]

<quotes from:

• Original King James Version
• The New American Standard Bible
• The New International Version
• The Living Bible
• The Holy Bible from Ancient Eastern Manuscripts (Lamsa)
• Good News Bible
• The Holy Bible an American Translation
• New Catholic Liturgical Bible
• New Revised Standard Version
• The Amplified Bible
• The New King James Version

>

You see the word is SHEOL

Hell and Sheol are not the same.

If you bible has HELL in it, its a poor translation

I am putting a lot of time and effort into responding to each of your posts. Please take at least a few seconds to make sure that you're saying something reasonable before posting.

This argument is an attempt to create the illusion that you did your homework. However, it took me about five minutes to look this up:

• Original King James Version: BibleGateway - Quick search: hell
• The New American Standard Bible: BibleGateway - Quick search: hell
• The New International Version: BibleGateway - Quick search: hell
• The Amplified Bible: BibleGateway - Quick search: hell
• The New King James Version: BibleGateway - Quick search: hell

Before you say that I didn't look in all versions, the reason is that bible gateway doesn't have the following, so I can't do a full-text search, but I would guess they also use the word "hell".

• The Living Bible
• The Holy Bible from Ancient Eastern Manuscripts (Lamsa)
• Good News Bible
• The Holy Bible an American Translation
• New Catholic Liturgical Bible
• New Revised Standard Version

 

[herushura]

The modern English word Hell is derived from Old English hel, helle (about 725 AD to refer to a nether world of the dead) reaching into the Anglo-Saxon pagan period, and ultimately from Proto-Germanic *halja, meaning "one who covers up or hides something". WIKI.

"http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hel_(location)" or "http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hel_(being)"

How did a Pagan Underworld and pagan god(hel) Make its way in the Bible

 

[Heneni]

Ahhhh now that explains soooo much now. Well you cant truly believe the Word because....

Heb 9:27 - Show Context Just as man is destined to die once, and after that to face judgment,

Reincarnation contradicts that verse and any other one that mentions resurrection.

Yes well you are assuming the context means that a man will only die once. The scripture means...a man wil not die more than once before he faces judgement.

And so everytime you die, you are judged and when you come back, and how you come back, and what sort of life you will have when you come back has much to do with what you got up to in your previous life.

 

[Heneni]

Quote:
Originally Posted by heneni
Guess how many times the word "HELL" occured in the bible, the answer is a big fat "ZERO"


Compare Jonah 2:2 from various translations:

• Original King James Version: 1611
  
  And said, I cried by reason of mine affliction vnto the LORD, and hee heard mee; out of the belly of hell cried I, and thou heardest my voyce.
  
  ​
  The spelling is exactly as in the original. English has changed much since 1611. The original has a note in the margins about the word "hell." It says "or, the grave." Later editions took the marginal readings out to conform to the mythical standard of an "inerrant Bible." Marginal alternative renderings showed that translators were uncertain of the meaning. This did not conform to the "inerrant" idea so the marginal readings, which sometimes were more correct than the text, were taken out in later editions. Please note if Jonah was in "hell," as the KJV has it, then Jonah escaped from a place where, according to modern theologians, there is no escape.
  
• The New American Standard Bible: 1977
  
  and he said, "I called out of my distress to the LORD, And He answered me. I cried for help from the depth of Sheol; Thou didst hear my voice."
  
  ​
• The New International Version: 1973
  
  He said: "In my distress I called to the Lord, and he answered me. From the depthes of the grave I called for help, and you listened to my cry.
  
  ​
• The Living Bible: 1971
  
  "In my great trouble I cried to the Lord and he answerd me; from the depths of death I called, and Lord, you heard me!"
  
  ​
• The Holy Bible from Ancient Eastern Manuscripts (Lamsa): 1957
  
  I cried to the Lord in my distress and he answered me; out of the depths of Sheol cried I, and thou heardest my voice.
  
  ​
• Good News Bible: 1976
  
  "In my distress, O Lord, I called to you, and you answered me. From deep in the world of the dead I cried for help, and you heard me."
  
  ​
• The Holy Bible an American Translation: 1976
  
  ...and said: "In my distress I called to the Lord, and He answered me. From the belly of the underworld I cried, and You heard my voice."
  
  ​
• New Catholic Liturgical Bible: 1963
  
  Jona 2:3 Out of my distress I called to the Lord, and he answered me; from the midst of the nether world I cried for help, and you heard my voice.
  
  ​
• New Revised Standard Version: 1989
  
  ...saying, "I called to the Lord out of my distress, and he answered me; out of the belly of Sheol I cried, and you heard my voice."
  
  ​
• The Amplified Bible: 1965
  
  And said, I cried out of my distress to the Lord, and He heard me; out of the belly of Sheol cried I, and You heard my voice.
  
  ​
• The New King James Version: 1985
  
  And he said: "I cried out to the Lord because of my affliction, And He answered me. Out of the belly of Sheol I cried, and You heard my voice.
  ​

You see the word is SHEOL

Hell and Sheol are not the same.

If you bible has HELL in it, its a poor translation

Im sorry but I DID NOT post this....! Would you mind learning how to quote people properly.

 

[AK4]

Yes well you are assuming the context means that a man will only die once. The scripture means...a man wil not die more than once before he faces judgement.

And so everytime you die, you are judged and when you come back, and how you come back, and what sort of life you will have when you come back has much to do with what you got up to in your previous life.

Yeah right!!! where is your scriptures to back this up?

The scripture means...a man wil not die more than once before he faces judgement.

Wow talk about adding words to scripture.

 

[Heneni]

(you say) It is appointed for man to die ONCE and then judgement. So it will be equally right to say....

It is NOT appointed for a man to die MORE THAN ONCE before judgement. It is not the amount of dying that is the issue here, it is how many times he dies before he faces judgement. So everytime he dies he is judged.

The jews believe in re-incarnation and so do many other religions. Christianity is not the only religion that has answers. It doesnt have all the answers. The truth is scattered all over the world, in many different religions.

 

[AK4]

So you're saying that you didn't translate aoinan and eonian to age or ages, you didn't translate hades, tartarus, and gehenna to sheol, and sheol to imperceptable and unseen? You're really going to deny this when I just quoted your to yourself?

Oh boy, Did i translate it? NO i looked up the definitions of them. Good grief.

The reason that the NIV was written was to fix the errors in the KJV, so your statement is obviously false.

Yes that was the reason, but the outcome is different. Good intentions not so good results. In my opinion the NIV is just an updated KJV. And like them both though.

The "I could prove you wrong" argument doesn't work. I could equally say "I could prove that my translation is correct, but I'm not going to do the work for you. Do it yourself."

:ignore: And no you couldnt if you go to the original hebrew and greek. Yes with these translations though.

Neither one of us is qualified to say whether or not the translation is accurate. Nor can I become qualified without abandoning my career to become a translator. But this is why specialization exists in our society; I can only trust the translations most trusted by translators, just as a translator can only trust the computer programs most trusted by people of my profession (I'm a computer scientist).

Trust that the catholic church added and omitted things in the bible. Trust those politicians to do right in government with your money because afterall they are "the specialists" on the law and constitution. For a cpu scientist, you are being real naive.

So unless you have some basis for your argument that the translation is wrong, your argument is invalid.

I already gave them to you. Look at the posts.

So what you're saying is that you DO have an interpretation: "the lake of fire is the consuming fire that is God which brings about the second death which the death of the carnal mind". This interpretation was supposedly granted to you by your "spiritual eyes" which "God grants".

This is about equivalent to me saying "God gave me superpowers, therefore you are wrong". Sure, I can't prove that you don't have spiritual eyes. But you can't prove that I don't have superpowers that make me right, either. Obviously, you still have yet to provide a valid argument for your position.

My proof is with the scriptures i quote. Look at what i put and find the scriptures and then see how they stay in context of the whole Word of God which is Love and how they dont contradict the original Word of God, not these biased translations. Remember and add this to the list i gave you in the last post.

Isa 28:10 - For precept must be upon precept, precept upon precept; line upon line, line upon line; here a little, and there a little:
Isa 28:13 -But the word of the LORD was unto them precept upon precept, precept upon precept; line upon line, line upon line; here a little, and there a little; that they might go, and fall backward, and be broken, and snared, and taken.

Call it "the imperceptable", "the grave", or anything else you want, but if it refers to a place where people burn in eternal fire, it's hell.

However, you can try to explain how "hell" was a mistranslation in this context if you wish:

If you want to say "in the imperceptable, where he was in torment", or "in the grave, where he was in torment", it doesn't matter. Either way, it's obviously referring to the place where people get tormented for doing things like this guy did, which we generally refer to as hell.

Its a PARABLE so its not literal. Jesus only talked to the multitudes in PARABLES. Look up the definition of parable and see what it means. Lazarus and the rich man is a parable and is not literal.

Mt 13:34 - All these things spake Jesus unto the multitude in parables; and without a parable spake he not unto them:

Mr 4:34 - But without a parable spake he not unto them: and when they were alone, he expounded all things to his disciples.
And heres an excerpt from a paper a friend wrote on this paper...

In verse 23 we have the word "torments" In verses 24 and 25 we have the word "tormented." These three words are not translated from the same Greek word, however. And there is a great reason why. This one point alone will demolish any such theory that this Rich man is actually and literally having his flesh burned by real fire.
Let us now see if Jesus gives us any indication whether or not this Rich man will ever come out of this place of torments and what these torments really are:

The Greek word translated "torments" in verse 23 is basanos.
From Friberg’s Analytical Lexicon of the Greek New Testament, we are told that basanois which is a form of the noun basanos, means, "strictly, a touchstone for testing the genuineness of metals by rubbing against it..."
In secular Greek literature this word (basanois) was used figuratively to extract information from a person by torture or punishment.
From the Greek-English Keyword Concordance we read this, torment, literally a touchstone, used to test metals for alloys, [and] then the examination of persons by torture (Page 307).
​

Though the Rich man may, indeed, be suffering discomfort or pain, it is not from fire burning his flesh, but rather from being tested and proved through chastisement. .
It is an interesting fact of Scripture that except for Paul "punishing" the church, there is only ONE SCRIPTURE in the whole new testament that uses the word "punishment." All others use the word "chastisement" which always carries the connotation of correction and bringing things back to what is right again. Chastisement by it’s very definition CANNOT be eternal. There is always a purpose and goal in mind with the use of the word chastise.

You may not have a personal leader, but your religion does have leaders, and like it or not, a lot of your ideas come from those leaders (directly or indirectly through other people).

Yeah but im smart enough to know not to just trust what one person says, I DO MY HOMEWORK TOO.

We only have 70-80 years, and there are a practically infinite number of truths to question. So at some point we have to accept something as true, unless more evidence comes up to prove it false.

Okay so i accept that you will stay in your naiveness not do the work yourself. I have myself and probably countless others given you some key clues to work with, but you refuse to do anything with them.

My experience (and yours too, I think) shows us that people who are experts in a field such as translation are the best sources of information on that field short of becoming an expert yourself. Since we cannot become experts in every field, we have no choice but to trust the experts.

You trust experts too, you've just selectively chosen not to believe these ones because their translation doesn't fit what you want to believe.

Now you are a cpu scientists, maybe this will help you-- Tell the competitors of Microsoft to just trust whatever Microsoft puts out because after all they are the leaders in that industry.

 

[AK4]

(you say) It is appointed for man to die ONCE and then judgement. So it will be equally right to say....

It is NOT appointed for a man to die MORE THAN ONCE before judgement. It is not the amount of dying that is the issue here, it is how many times he dies before he faces judgement. So everytime he dies he is judged.

The jews believe in re-incarnation and so do many other religions. Christianity is not the only religion that has answers. It doesnt have all the answers. The truth is scattered all over the world, in many different religions.

Yes and there are soooooo many ways to God the Father besides Jesus

1Co 8:6 - But to us there is but one God, the Father, of whom are all things, and we in him; and one Lord Jesus Christ, by whom are all things, and we by him.
Php 2:9 Wherefore God also hath highly exalted him, and given him a name which is above every name: 10 That at the name of Jesus every knee should bow, of things in heaven, and things in earth, and things under the earth; 11 And that every tongue should confess that Jesus Christ is Lord, to the glory of God the Father.

Pick one, no two or three. Because it all leads to the God right? Come on now :slap:

It is NOT appointed for a man to die MORE THAN ONCE before judgement. It is not the amount of dying that is the issue here, it is how many times he dies before he faces judgement. So everytime he dies he is judged.

Cant you see the contradiction in your own statement?

 

[want to be hindu]

Yes and there are soooooo many ways to God the Father besides Jesus

Pick one, no two or three. Because it all leads to the God right? Come on now :slap:
Cant you see the contradiction in your own statement?

If this is what you want to believe thats fine with me but this is what some of your great christian thinkers has to say.

Newsweek Interview with Billy Graham August 13, 2006


When asked whether he believes heaven will be closed to good Jews, Muslims, Buddhists, Hindus or secular people, though, Graham says: “Those are decisions only the Lord will make. It would be foolish for me to speculate on who will be there and who won’t … I don’t want to speculate about all that. I believe the love of God is absolute. He said he gave his son for the whole world, and I think he loves everybody regardless of what label they have.” Such an ecumenical spirit may upset some Christian hard-liners, but in Graham’s view, only God knows who is going to be saved.

C.S. Lewis says in Mere Christianity

Some heathen may belong to God without knowing it. "There are people in other religions who are being led by God's secret influence to concentrate on those parts of their religion which are in agreement with Christianity, and who thus belong to Christ without knowing it. For example a Buddhist of good will may be led to concentrate more and more on the Buddhist teaching about mercy and to leave in the background (though he might still say he believed) the Buddhist teaching on certain points. Many of the good Pagans long before Christ's birth may have been in this position."



There are two orthodox christian views on this subject.


-Christianity is the most complete truth.


-Christianity is the only truth.


The Christians who ran around the world killing and converting by the sword all believed in the later view. Like the Lord Jesus says you will know them by there fruits.


To me it seems that both views are a bit closed minded. The followers of the last view dont at least start lots of problems.

 

[AK4]

Newsweek Interview with Billy Graham August 13, 2006


When asked whether he believes heaven will be closed to good Jews, Muslims, Buddhists, Hindus or secular people, though, Graham says: “Those are decisions only the Lord will make. It would be foolish for me to speculate on who will be there and who won’t … I don’t want to speculate about all that. I believe the love of God is absolute. He said he gave his son for the whole world, and I think he loves everybody regardless of what label they have.” Such an ecumenical spirit may upset some Christian hard-liners, but in Graham’s view, only God knows who is going to be saved.

God isn’t the only one who knows. He has plainly stated it over and over and over and over and over again in scripture that He will save ALL men--but in the first resurrection it will be those who believe. So Graham is either just blind or naïve (with all due respect). I got a list of about 75 verses were God plainly states this. And that isn’t even close to half of how many times it is stated rather plainly or by indication.

C.S. Lewis says in Mere Christianity

Some heathen may belong to God without knowing it. "There are people in other religions who are being led by God's secret influence to concentrate on those parts of their religion which are in agreement with Christianity, and who thus belong to Christ without knowing it. For example a Buddhist of good will may be led to concentrate more and more on the Buddhist teaching about mercy and to leave in the background (though he might still say he believed) the Buddhist teaching on certain points. Many of the good Pagans long before Christ's birth may have been in this position."

That’s just speculation. God did use some Gentiles back in the OT to due His Will though, but too many places in scripture state He is the only God and His name will be honored and such and such. I am a jealous God etc etc

There are two orthodox christian views on this subject.


-Christianity is the most complete truth.


-Christianity is the only truth.


The Christians who ran around the world killing and converting by the sword all believed in the later view. Like the Lord Jesus says you will know them by there fruits.


To me it seems that both views are a bit closed minded. The followers of the last view dont at least start lots of problems.

I agree with you. “Traditional Christianity” has a lot of problems with it. Too many man-made doctrines like free will, trinity, and especially the hell doctrine have infiltrated it and so it really is just like what happen to Israel in the OT. They prostituted themselves out to other gods, and so is how todays “traditional christainity” is. The orthodox Christians thru time couldn’t even follow the commandment of love thy enemies.

 

[Heneni]

Yes and there are soooooo many ways to God the Father besides Jesus

1Co 8:6 - But to us there is but one God, the Father, of whom are all things, and we in him; and one Lord Jesus Christ, by whom are all things, and we by him.
Php 2:9 Wherefore God also hath highly exalted him, and given him a name which is above every name: 10 That at the name of Jesus every knee should bow, of things in heaven, and things in earth, and things under the earth; 11 And that every tongue should confess that Jesus Christ is Lord, to the glory of God the Father.

Pick one, no two or three. Because it all leads to the God right? Come on now :slap:



Cant you see the contradiction in your own statement?

No, I cant . God has revealed himself in many ways, to many people, in many forms, through many books, and many civilizations.

You are the one that says that everyone will be saved, yet you struggle to believe that god has revealed himself to many other nations(everyone), not only the 'christians'. I dont know why. But im not gonna ask either.

 

[AK4]

No, I cant . God has revealed himself in many ways, to many people, in many forms, through many books, and many civilizations.

You are the one that says that everyone will be saved, yet you struggle to believe that god has revealed himself to many other nations(everyone), not only the 'christians'. I dont know why. But im not gonna ask either.

Yes He has and is still doing, revealed Himself to everyone around the world, but many tend to put doctrines over Truth.

Ro 16:26 - but now revealed and made known through the prophetic writings by the command of the eternal God, so that all nations might believe and obey him--

 

[SpiritualBeing]

Herushura, I know I am not a member of staff, but could you please stop being so defensive when you make your points. You've wrongly accused a friend of mine, Heneni, of posting things she did not post.

I would be obliged if you could calm your jets and post a bit less 'in your face'.

Many thanks,

CB :cross:

P.S. I also wanted to say. Quoting from the Bible won't change peoples individual views on Hell. I believe in Hell, and no quotes will change that belief.

 

[SpiritualBeing]

Matthew 5:29 (New International Version)

If your right eye causes you to sin, gouge it out and throw it away. It is better for you to lose one part of your body than for your whole body to be thrown into hell.


Matthew 10:28 (NIV)

Do not be afraid of those who kill the body but cannot kill the soul. Rather, be afraid of the One who can destroy both soul and body in hell.


Luke 16:23 (NIV)

In hell, where he was in torment, he looked up and saw Abraham far away, with Lazarus by his side.


James 3:6 (NIV)

The tongue also is a fire, a world of evil among the parts of the body. It corrupts the whole person, sets the whole course of his life on fire, and is itself set on fire by hell.

Here are a few quick quotes from the New International Version of the New Testament. As you can see, they all contain Hell in some form of context. This, I would say, is sound information.

Love and regards,

CB :cross:

 

[AK4]

Herushura, I know I am not a member of staff, but could you please stop being so defensive when you make your points. You've wrongly accused a friend of mine, Heneni, of posting things she did not post.

I would be obliged if you could calm your jets and post a bit less 'in your face'.

Many thanks,

CB :cross:

P.S. I also wanted to say. Quoting from the Bible won't change peoples individual views on Hell. I believe in Hell, and no quotes will change that belief.

Well if scripture wont change your mind why should we say anything at all to you? (in all due respect)