Search Members

[Brian]

<span style=”text-decoration: underline;”>A correction (or addition) to my statement about digging deeper using Strong’s Greek and Hebrew Lexicon</span>

(I’m not getting pulled back into this conversation, but I did want to correct a statement I made and make a couple more comments since I just saw an incorrect statement or two as the final posts of this thread)

I was just looking up the word “fear” in the Hebrew lexicon: (I use http://www.eliyah.com/lexicon.html) I noticed that even the lexicon is incorrect, which means you need to dig a lot deeper than the lexicon. I’ll explain…

One must look to the actual Hebrew word meanings in the Ancient Hebrew culture if they’re to understand what a word in the Old Testament means, and that’s not found in Strong’s Lexicon, I’m sad to say. It’s a good start, but it can be very misleading.

Fear, in the Ancient Hebrew, means “The stirrings of the stomach.” The stomach is a major emotional center housing the most nerves in the entire body. It’s why we feel “butterflies” if we’re in love, or awe if we’re meeting someone important, or fear if we’re in a daunting situation. The Ancient Hebrews used “the stirrings of the stomach” (what we exclusively translate to mean “fear” or “respect”) to describe any of the strong emotions a person can have. In a broad sense, the word means strong emotions and isn’t specific to one. So when a translator translates that word, he’s speculating on its meaning if he translates it to mean “fear” or “respect,” which means his own personal beliefs about God come into play while translating. So whatever he believes, he’s about to unknowingly push that believe on the reader if the reader is unaware of that fact. Example:

“The fear of the Lord is the beginning of wisdom.”

I’ve already explained that the grammar of how that verse is written indicates that the fear is God’s fear, not ours because it’s written in a specific way that denotes ownership, just like “the hand of God” or “the face of God,” etc. And as I’ve explained, fear is passionate/strong emotions in the stomach. So had the translator known that and had he not been unknowingly pushing his views on the readers, he would’ve understood the verse should be translated as such:

“The strong emotions of the Lord are the beginning of wisdom.”

So the verse is not saying to fear the Lord to gain wisdom because that would go against 1 John 4:18: There is no fear in love, but perfect love drives out fear, because fear has to do with punishment. The one who fears punishment has not been perfected in love.

The verse is saying that we must connect with God’s emotions and understand them. The only way to do that is to get in touch with our own emotions and process them while seeking God’s presence in order to feel His emotions. One cannot feel God’s emotions when his own emotions are in the way.

 

Terrarica,

There are no verses, when correctly translated, that say the second death is actually permanent, and therefore, that’s speculation. I know you think you know that for sure and you think the translations are correct because they support your doctrines, but it’s truly only speculation on your part and the part of the translators and scholars. You’d understand that if you studied translation with an open mind. It would serve Christians well to take a very humble approach by learning about translation and not assuming they’re correct. As I said a few times in this thread, I’m not saying I’m correct–I’m just pointing out that the Bible doesn’t say what you think it says. Dig deeper. Check out Jeff Benner’s research since he’s pulling from the most up-to-date translation research and he’s a scholar in his own right.

 

Marty,

I never said that digging deeper specifically shows that the second death in the Bible is said to be for correcting those who reject God. If I said the Bible explicitly say says that, then I misspoke (but I don’t think I said what you’re claiming I said). What I was conveying is that when hell is described, if one digs deeper, they find that it’s described as correctional and just, not everlasting and vengeful. And when someone puts that together with the other verses I’ve mentioned about God and His will, nature, and power, then one will logically come to the conclusion that the second death must be the final Refiner’s Fire, getting the final residents of hell saved, eventually.

You said, “If there is no more sacrifice for sins, how are those who have not been saved during their lifetime going to have their sins forgiven?” You’re trying to use the Hebrews 10 against me here, but you’re missing the point of that verse. That verse is saying that a person who doesn’t accept the one sacrifice that covers all sin, then there is no additional sacrifice for sin they can take to be purified…because they’re rejecting the one and only sacrifice for sin–Jesus. But that’s shortsighted if you’re using that to defend hell doctrine. You added “in their lifetime” to that verse. But that verse doesn’t say “in their lifetime.” So in not digging deeper, you’ve added to God’s word to help your doctrine. What I keep trying to get you to do is to read exactly what the verses in the Bible say and stop adding to them like you just did. The Bible doesn’t say we’re restricted to salvation only in this lifetime. In fact, it says quite the opposite. It says Jesus saved those in prison from the time of the Flood. Those people were stuck in the afterlife and had not accepted Jesus, and yet Jesus saved them after death. So to assume that salvation is strictly for the living is shortsighted and not in the Bible. It could possibly be in certain translations, but not that I’m aware of. Read Young’s Literal Translation of 1862 sometime–you can’t find hell or the idea of eternal punishment anywhere in it from cover to cover. Why? Because it’s a literal translation, and when it’s literal to the original language, hell being eternal doesn’t exist and punishment is corrective after death. There are several translations that have no mention of hell or eternal punishment because the translators are more well studied in Ancient Hebrew and Greek than those who translated the majority of our modern translations. If you saw the inept training that our translators get, you’d feel gypped. It’s sad how little and insufficient the training is for translators. At least scholars have some decent training when they do translations, but they’re still lacking quite a bit more training and they can’t get away from their worldview biases or the prophesors’ biases. It’s impossible. Everyone translates with a bias, even those putting out translations like Young Literal Translation. It’s impossible to get away from bias (aka brainwashing). Everyone is brainwashed with biases due to how they’re raised, me included. When you understand human development, you understand that. We’re only as good as the information we’ve learned and experienced growing up…and we’re completely restricted by the information we don’t know. And because of that, no one is going to have all of the truth in this life. But people sure like to think they do.

Once again, what I’m conveying is that the Bible translations you’re reading don’t say what you think they say, and if you’d dig deeper instead of blindly trusting the translations and preachers, then you’d see what I’m talking about. Well, if I’m being honest here, psychology and human behavior say you wouldn’t see what I’m talking about because it’s one of the hardest things to change a person’s beliefs and for a person to say, “I was wrong.” Brianwashing is extremely difficult to correct and often takes a lot of humility which usually comes from a lot of pain in life. And if not in life, in the afterlife (no, I’m not saying you’re going to hell). I’m saying that Jesus says everyone will be salted with fire, including you and me. And when we’ve had enough of just the right emotional pain in this life or the next, we’ll be humbled and see just how arrogant we were. It’s arrogant of me to even have this conversation with you, even though I’m saying, “I’m not saying I’m right,” and “I could be wrong.” Sure, those are humble words, but I guarantee you if I were actually humble, I wouldn’t be talking to you right now at all or trying to convince you of anything. And that’s why I ask God every day to humble me no matter how much it hurts…it’s about the most productive thing a person can pray, and I speak from experience when I say it really does hurt like hell. lol

When it comes down to it, the difference between what I’m saying and everyone else in this thread is saying amounts to the following:

I’m saying God is unconditionally loving, infinitely wise, infinitely powerful, and completely just

You’re saying that God is not unconditionally loving and not wise and powerful enough to get everyone saved and not just, so He created a reality where a whole hell of a lot of people (created against their will) would suffer forever in hell for no good reason except maybe to scare the crap out of others so they’ll accept Jesus (which explicitly goes against what the Bible says about not fearing).

That’s what this boils down to and a hard heart cannot see that reality. I know because I was once like that myself, and until I’d been humbled enough by emotional pain through emotional work (and partly due to a lot of research), I couldn’t see that reality. I’m still not humble, but I’m at least more humble than I used to be, so that’s good. Open-mindedness is a byproduct of humbleness, which is why it changed me.

I’m not trying to convince anyone of anything. That’s not my place because I could be wrong just like anyone could be wrong about what they believe. I’m just sharing information so that maybe someone will come across it and say, “You know, that sounds interesting. Maybe I should dig deeper.” If anything, I’m attempting to influence people to dig deeper to find answers, especially when it comes to their emotions. Like the verse says, that’s the beginning of wisdom.

As I said before, don’t take it personally if I don’t respond because I don’t plan to post on this thread again and I’m not getting email alerts when someone posts in it. Good luck with your studies.

[Brian]

Marty,

You do realize you’re trying to teach me basic Christian doctrine as if I don’t already know it, right? lol It doesn’t help your case, though. None of it disproves hell being temporary.

You see, Hebrews 10:26 doesn’t help your case because it doesn’t speak of the timespan of hell being eternal. Also, it says “judgment,” which is something that helps a person. Let’s say I’m a criminal and a judge level’s a “judgment” against me which sends me to jail. The point of jail is to cause me to suffer so that it will deter me from wanting to do wrong again. That’s a helpful thing, not a hurtful thing. It’s corrective. In the Ancient Hebrew, judgment meant to find a problem and remove it so the person, or people, could grow. That’s what the judges of the OT did. They were to remove the problems from the people so the people could flourish. It’s a very simple concept. When hell is described in the NT, it’s generally with the word punishment (the corrective version) or judgment (which is also corrective).

Same thing goes for the other verses you used: 2 Thes 1:7-9. They don’t help your case. “Vengeance” in verse 8 in the Greek means to vindicate someone by removing their persecutor. So in this context, it’s talking about these people being taken out of the way of the followers of God. Pretty simple concept here. But that doesn’t speak anything about hell’s duration or purpose or type of punishment.

And when it says “punished with everlasting destruction,” let’s break down all those words into the Greek, as well.

Punished, in this instance, is “dike” in the Greek, which means to have a judgment leveled against you in court.

Everlasting, in this instance, is the word “aionios,” which means “of the age,” or “age-bound,” or “a duration of time.” The only times it means “eternal” or “everlasting” is when it’s paired with something we know lasts forever. Hell/judgment doesn’t last forever since it’s corrective according to the words used to describe it. Therefore, “aionios” in this instance has to mean what it normally means, which is “age-bound” or “of the age,” of “a duration of time.”

Destruction, in this instance, is the Greek word “olethros.” Now pay close attention to the meaning of this one. In the Greek, it means, “For the destruction of the flesh, said of the external ills and troubles by which the lusts of the flesh are subdued and destroyed.” That’s quoted right from the Strongs and the Greek Lexicon. It’s talking about specifically removing the problem, which is the flesh and its desires. It’s not talking about removing the person, because the person is not the problem. The problem is the lusts of the flesh (the person’s ego, that’s the problem). This is talking about the destruction of the lusts of the flesh. It in no way refers to a person and their destruction.

In other words, when you put that all together, you get: 2 Thess 1:9 – “…who shall have judgment leveled against them by way of age-bound destruction of the lusts of their flesh.” This is describing exactly what the words “judgment” and “punishment” mean–corrective punishment. This is talking about casting these people into hell so the lusts of their flesh can be corrected.

So the verses you posted actually help my case quite a bit, and hurt yours quite a bit. The problem is that the translators are wording hell in such a way that it sounds like people will be there forever, but that’s not the case at all.

Like I said before, it does no good to discuss this with you because you refuse to dig deeper than a Strong’s Concordance, because on the surface, with Strong’s, it appears you’re correct and that’s all you wanted–to prove that you were right. All one has to do is dig deeper into a Lexicon and get full Greek explanations for each word and they’ll quickly see that hell is temporary. Since you’re unwilling to do that, there’s no sense in talking to you because it shows you have no interest in discovering the truth. All you care about is being right, so you skip over any information that disproves you. If I had recognized it was you I was talking to, I wouldn’t have even bothered responding to you. And I won’t respond after this post.

Good luck, Marty.

Actually, I think I’m done posting on this topic in this forum. So if I don’t respond from here on out, don’t take it personally. I’ve just unsubscribed from the thread.

[Brian]

Terraricca,

I understand where you’re coming from and I respect that. I’ll explain how I view God’s nature, because your last message expresses your view of God’s nature.

The Bible says, “God is Love.” It never says, “God is Justice.” It does say God is “just,” but that’s describing a component of His nature, not His nature itself. So He is primarily love, and a component of that is justice. So His unconditional love always overrules His justice. This is shown by Jesus dying on the cross to save the entire world. If God were primarily Just in nature and secondarily loving, then He could never have sent Jesus to die on the cross, because that would circumvent justice. Also, God would never have had Paul make the statement twice in the Bible, “All things are permissible, but not all things are beneficial,” if He were primarily a Just God. He would’ve made justice paramount and law paramount above all other things, and there would be no escape from punishment.

So, because God is unconditionally-loving primarily, according to scripture, there’s no way He would ever let justice override love. It’s not possible if we go off of what the Bible says about His nature.

Since God is primarily Love, there’s no way He would create us and make us go into this world, against our will, knowing that tons of us will suffer in hell for eternity. That is an incredibly inconsiderate, hateful act with no rhyme or reason except to cause people pain.

However, if we step back and start taking some pieces of the Bible that tell us about God’s nature, we can start to build an understanding of God that makes more sense.

1. God’s Will: Peter says that it is God’s will that none perish and that all repent. So we know God’s will.
2. God’s Desire: The Bible says God does all His pleasure.
3. God’s Abilities: The Bible says with God, all things are possible.

So God’s desire is that none perish and all repent (turn from their sinful ways). In other words, that would please Him. And He says He does ALL His pleasure. So that means He’s going to make sure His will/desires are accomplish if possible. And He says ALL THINGS are possible with Him. Therefore, He admitted that He can do anything and everything…which means make His desires/pleasure come true.

The only logical conclusion one can come to from putting those three statements together is that God must have built the system in which we live to get everyone saved, whether before or after death, through any means necessary. If He does not go to that extreme to save everyone when He said He can do anything and everything, then it means He is not loving. And in fact, it means He’s horribly unloving and hateful and vengeful and inconsiderate. Anyone who has the power to make sure people don’t suffer in hell forever and yet lets them anyway is extremely unloving. Once you understand the psychology of what causes us to sin, you very quickly see how easy it would be for God to use hell to resolve our issues that cause us to sin. I mean, it’s really simple.

So, if I were God, I’d create the system like that. I’d make sure hell is designed to resolve people’s issues that keep them from accepting God’s help and getting into heaven. Because everyone has free will so I can’t force them to do anything. But if I know exactly how their heart works and exactly how to manipulate their situation to cause their heart to break so they’ll accept me, then I can make sure their issues that cause them to sin get resolved. And that’d mean I did it without ever infringing on their free will. And since the result is that everyone ends up in heaven, then what I’ve done is loving. The Bible says God will restore all of creation. ALL of it. We are created, so we’re part of the creation, which means all of us will be restored. Several verses point to this or say it outright. So if I’m God and I can do anything, I get everyone saved, plain and simple. I’m not as loving as God, and yet I would do that for humanity. So how much more would He do it being that He is far more loving than me? If He lets people suffer hell forever, then I’m more loving than Him, so I don’t think that’s possible.

That’s the last I’ll post on this subject with you, because that describes enough for you to get an idea of what I’m pretty sure God has done with the creation. I’m sharing this information. I don’t want to push this view on you or anyone else, because I could be wrong. Heck, you could be right–I don’t know. All I know is that there’s a whole lot of logic and common sense and evidence backing the views I just expressed…so they’re worth considering.

Good talking to you and good luck with your studies. Don’t take it personally if I don’t respond to any more of your posts. It’s nothing against you personally, I just don’t have the time and I feel I’ve sufficiently discussed this topic with you. Also, I don’t like getting sucked into a debate (debates occur when anyone is trying to convince someone else they’re correct and the other side feels they need to defend their beliefs). I don’t care for debates…I just like to discuss things openly with a spirit of learning from everyone involved and no agendas being pushed.

–Brian

[Brian]

Terraricca,

Thanks for answering my questions. Very few hold your belief on this matter, but I’m aware of your view. I learned it years ago. But one cannot discuss a redemptive hell with someone that has your belief. There’s no point since your view is so far out there. I’m fine discussing this subject with people who hold one of the more traditional views.

I simply don’t share your view and there’s no way to really discuss this with you. And I’m not interested in trying to disprove your view because you’re entitled to your own views, and it would be inconsiderate of me. I hope your view isn’t correct, because it would mean God is very unloving and cannot get His own will accomplished. That would just be sad. I would not serve a god like that. But hey, I can’t tell you what to believe or what’s correct. There’s very little we know for certain in this life.

Have a good day.

–Brian

[Brian]

Terraricca,

When you answer my questions, I’ll respond.

–Brian

[Brian]

Terraricca,

Then anytime I mention hell, especially in my questions to you, I want you to assume I’m talking about the hell that comes after the second resurrection and judgment, okay?

So now, go back to my questions I asked you about Jesus’ parable about the king who threw the man in the dungeon for not forgiving others their debt. Answer those questions again, but when they mention hell, assume I’m talking about the hell that comes after the second resurrection and judgment. If you’ll do that, then I can respond again.

–Brian

[Brian]

Terraricca,

Thank you for answering my questions. Now I understand your belief better.

So, if a person goes to the wait position and then is resurrected and judged, where will he go from there? If he’s saved, he goes into the millennial kingdom? If he’s not saved, he goes to hell? I’m asking so I can better understand your belief on hell.

–Brian

[Brian]

Terraricca,

I said that I would not respond to you unless you answered my questions, which you did not. When you’re ready to answer the questions from my last post, then I’ll respond to your post. It’s called respect for one another rather than dodging questions because you have no good answers to support your doctrines. I didn’t ask you if you believed everyone would go to heaven. I asked you very specific questions with very easy answers.

–Brian

[Brian]

Terraricca,

Excellent question. Jesus answers that question with the parable of the man whose debt is forgiven by the king. When the man doesn’t forgive his debtors like the king forgave his debt, the king puts him in the dungeon until the last cent of his debt is paid. In other words, there is an end to his imprisonment. If Jesus were describing a hell that is eternal, his parable would’ve had the king say that the man would never get out of the dungeon. So it seems that the wicked pay for their sins in hell for a period of time, and this humbles them enough so that they accept Jesus and move on to heaven. They’re let out of the dungeon, so to speak. So falling into the hands of the living God would definitely be terrifying if a person must suffer hell for a while after they die. Is that not payment enough?

Wouldn’t you agree that suffering in hell, even for a little while, is terrifying and is sufficient payment?

Also, the Bible says that God is just. The Law shows this by having fair punishments for the crimes committed.

So, tell me this, if a man sins for 80 years then dies, is it more just for him to have to endure an eternity of punishment or 80 years of punishment?

I’m curious if you even read my other posts completely because it sounds like you think I don’t believe people go to hell at all. But I clearly stated, many times, that people go to hell temporarily and suffer judgment which purifies them and gets them to heaven eventually. Your English isn’t really good, so I suppose it’s possible you’re misunderstanding my posts.

If you do not answer my questions which are in bold letters, then I will not respond to you.

-Brian

[Brian]

1 Timothy 4:10 “Jesus Christ, savior of ALL men, ESPECIALLY those who believe.”

Why would Timothy say that Jesus is the savior of all men, but especially of those who believe? That means he actually saved everyone, but those who believe are even more blessed than those who don’t believe. So those who don’t believe are still saved. If those who don’t believe aren’t saved, Timothy never would’ve wrote that. He would’ve wrote, “Jesus Christ, savior of all men who believe.”

By the way, there are several translations of the Bible that don’t once mention hell or eternal punishment from cover to cover. Young’s Literal Translation, 1891, is one of those and it’s pretty old. Notice it’s a “literal” translation. When you translate the Bible literally, it takes a lot of our own doctrinal influence out of it. That’s why Young’sLiterall Translation never mentions hell or eternal punishment or even the idea of it. Because it literally is not in the Bible, in more than one way.

The following are translations that don’t mention hell or the concept of eternal punishment in them at all, just like Young’s Literal Translation:

The Scarlet’s New Testament in 1798, The New Testament in Greek and English, 1823, 20th Century New Testament, Ravaham’s Emphasized (sp?), Fenton’s Holy Bible in Modern English, Weymouth’s New Testament in Modern Speech, The Jewish Publication Society Bible 1917. That’s just part of the list. There are more. Check out Tentmaker.org for more. You can also find the Church Father’s statements about hell being temporary on that website. It’s also important to note that the Augustine, who insisted that the ruler of the empire snuff out all belief in a redemptive hell, is likely responsible for the Dark Ages, because that was the beginning of the government burning writings that went against its religious beliefs. Also, the idea of hell admittedly came from the Egyptian leaders and the Roman leaders, all of whom wanted to control their subjects through fear. We know this because the sophists (the famous Western philosophers) tell us where those beliefs originated. So we have tons of proof showing us where the idea of a fiery hell came from. And unfortunately, Christians don’t like to study really deep (as was just shown through Marty’s example), so they stay stuck in their beliefs which have no foundation. The Bible does not teach an eternal hell in its original manuscripts or their copies.

There’s a good reason that the only people Jesus spoke out against were the religious. That’s something to really think about. Mainstream Christianity are the new Pharisees most likely. It always happens that way. Give mankind a few hundred years and they’ll screw up what God gave them. The Hebrews did it a few times and Christians in the past 1600 years are no different. Why do you think the Catholics killed millions upon millions of Christians and Jews? It’s because fear-induced religion causes crazy things like that to happen. There’s no love in fear. God tells us not to fear and that love is the opposite of fear. Therefore, He does not want us to fear Him or hell. And no verse that’s properly translated will say anything opposing that. God doesn’t need hell to get people saved. He uses love and love alone. You, like the Pharisees, are willingly turning a blind eye to what the Bible says. Again, I’m not saying I’m correct or universalism is correct. I’m strictly saying that the Bible doesn’t teach an eternal hell, but rather a temporary redemptive hell. I wouldn’t have any clue if my beliefs are correct or not. There’s little we can know for sure in this life. But if you guys claim to get your beliefs from the Bible, you’re sorely mistaken. You’ll want to dig deeper. Good luck.

[Brian]

It took me all of a few minutes to look up the two different words translated as punishment in the NT in an online lexicon. And like I said…the one used with hell is corrective punishment, and the one Paul uses to describe what he did to the Christians was the vengeful punishment. Very simple. Very quick to research.

Jesus is the one who uses the word for correctional punishment to describe hell rather than the word Paul used to describe vengeful punishment. Do you believe Jesus didn’t know Greek very well and used the wrong word to describe hell? Would Jesus have made such a careless mistake?

It sounds like you’re perfectly fine looking up just the bare minimum to confirm your beliefs, but you’re scared to look deeper and find out you’re wrong. It would’ve taken you all of about 10 minutes to research loosely and maybe 30 minutes to an hour to do a more thorough search. But you were unwilling to do so. So no, you do not dig deep like you claimed. It’s behavior like that which causes people to not like Christians. It means some Christians can’t be trusted to actually do good research if it means it could disprove there beliefs (Christians like you, I mean). Have some integrity. Do what you said you’d do. Research it deep. Either hell is corrective or its vengeful. All you have to do is look up the words in the lexicon. That’s it. Just do it. If you won’t, I’ll gladly post it in here to show what research you refused to do.

[Brian]

Marty,

So you don’t want to dig deeper to learn the truth about the Greek words that will tell you what hell really is?

 

[Brian]

Marty,

I have a suggestion to speed up your study and make it more objective. Forget everything you know for right now and just study as if you think he’ll could very well be eternal. The reason for this is to keep your mind from constantly trying to disprove it. Until you learn this view and it’s foundational components and it’s arguments, you have no way to debate it properly. By learning it as if it were true, you gain the advantage of being open-minded and objective while you study. It makes study a lot quicker and easier. After you learn the view well, then you put on your Christianity lenses and view it again to see if it fits into Christianity and the Bible.

The way you’re studying now isn’t objective. You’re not digging really deep by going into a Lexicon. You’re stopping at the Strong’s definition because it validates your belief. You must go deeper, because Strong’s isn’t showing the actual definition of the word. Lexicon give actual definitions and understandings of the words within the culture, including sayings.

The only other thing you can do is research the history and origin of the fiery hell belief, and how it was made the prominent view. Don’t stop at what validates your beliefs like most people do. Most people just want to confirm that they’re right. Dig deeper than them. Take no one’s word for it. Decide on your own, but only after you’ve truly dug deep.

–Brian

[Brian]

Marty,

You’re missing vital steps to this process. That’s what causes false doctrines. Research needs to be extremely thorough and objective.

You never looked at a Greek Lexicon to get the real definition of the words. As I explained before, the Strong’s is merely giving what the different translations have defined the word as, including our best guess at what the word means. But those are not necessarily the definitions of the word. The only way to understand what the word really means is to use a Lexicon. But there’s even more that needs to be done.

You must also understand how the word works grammatically in the language.

As I said before, the word “aion” means age. The only time it means eternal is when it’s paired with something that’s eternal. The problem is that we don’t know if judgment is eternal, but translators assume it is, and then translate the word to mean eternal.

What we do know is that the word for vengeful punishment is used only once in the NT to describe Saul’s persecution of the Christians. All other uses of punishment are the word that means corrective punishment. But you aren’t aware of that because you didn’t use a Lexicon to look up the actual meanings of the two different “punishment” words in the NT.

You are correct that there are 3 different names for hell in the NT, but again, none of those are important. All that’s important are the adjectives that describe hell, because we’re only interested in hell’s nature.

 

[Brian]

Marty,

I appreciate your desire to dig and find the truth. Revelation basically is saying that the Lake of Fire is the second death. Unfortunately, that doesn’t give us any indication of whether hell is eternal nor not. All of this studying comes down to a few simple things:

1. Is the punishment spoken of in the NT correctional or not?
2. What do the words aion, aionian, and aionios mean?

That’s really all we need to know. Either hell is correctional or it is not. No need to take your study further than that. The Lake of Fire has the same definition as eternal punishment or eternal judgment. They’re all “eternal.” The question is whether eternal is actually eternal or if it’s temporary. The only other issues are whether the Lake of Fire is eternal or not and if it’s corrective or not since it is a state that happens to people after hell.

To determine this, I look at a couple of statements in the Bible. Paul speaks of a final state of all things where Jesus takes everything under heaven and earth and gives it to the Father. This happens, according to Paul’s prophecy, after judgment has happened. This is like a final step of it all. And so Jesus was given everything and He’s said to be in all and through all. It’s all his. That includes hell and the Lake of Fire. All of it is his.

The next statement the Bible makes that helps out is how it says that every knee will bow and every tongue confess that Jesus Christ is Lord of all. So I look at it like this–unconditional love doesn’t force anyone to do anything, and yet everyone is bowing the knee to Jesus and confessing him as Lord of all. Therefore, whatever happens in the Lake of Fire must end up purifying everyone, because they’re all worshiping Jesus willingly at that point.

But if you want to go further than that, there’s really no way. Hope Beyond Hell is a good book to read for all of the mechanics of this stuff. At the End of the Ages is a good one, too. Both can be obtained very cheap from Hope Beyond Hell’s website.

I’ll also point out that if hell is eternal, it would not be thrown into the Lake of Fire…because that would mean it ends and becomes the Lake of Fire. So hell, itself, cannot be eternal. The Lake of Fire could possibly be eternal, but we have no indication of that in the Bible since the terminology for it is unclear. All we have are the beliefs of the Ancient Hebrews to go off of, and we only get those from the Bedouins and from the Jews today. The Bedouins have a much more pure form of those beliefs. The Jews beliefs have been tainted over the years due to being captive in different countries at times. Either way, both groups believe hell is temporary because God forgives. They believe hell is a kindness to break people’s resistance which is calling all of their pain.

Let me know when you find the NT word in the Koine Greek lexicon for “punishment” used in the NT. That one is very important. When you see that it’s correctional, you’ll realize that hell cannot be eternal. And this makes a ton of sense, because God love unconditionally, and our human wills are not more powerful than God’s will. If God can do all things and is all powerful and all wise and His will is that all repent, then He can build a system to make that possible. If He didn’t build our existence that way, then He’s openly going against His own will, which makes no sense.

–Brian

[Brian]

Marty,

Don’t forget how “owlam” and “aion/aionios” are used. “Aion,” in Greek, means “age.” But when you put “aion” next to a word we know is eternal (like God), then “aion” means “eternity.” So even though “aion,” which means “age,” means a period of time, it means eternity when paired with something like “God,” because we know God is eternal. We know life is eternal, as well, so when “aion” is paired with life, it means “eternal life.” But judgment/punishment are correctional according to their Greek words, which means they have to be temporary. Therefore, when “age” is used next to judgment or punishment, it really means “age” or “future” or “age-bound” judgment/punishment.

I’m not sure if you’ll find that in the Greek lexicon or not, but definitely look for it.

By the way, I’m impressed. Most people just immediately discount this stuff and won’t study it. You’re going further than most do.

–Brian

[Brian]

Marty,

Yeah, I’ve researched all of those words and more. 🙂 This is a good start, but you can’t go off of the Strong’s alone because Strong’s gives you all the different ways our translations have translated those words. It does not give the actual meaning of the word, often times, though. That’s why I mentioned going to a Hebrew lexicon online and a Koine Greek lexicon online, as well. A lexicon gives you the actual meaning with background of the word within the culture.I’ll give you the meaning of “hell” real quick. In the OT,

I’ll give you the meaning of “hell” real quick. In the OT, hell always refers to “the grave,” and more accurately translated, means “the unseen” or “below.” It’s talking about the figurative place below the ground. It really does just mean “the grave” in Hebrew, for the most part. There’s really nothing special about that word in the OT. They believed in soul sleep. A person dies and their spirit sleeps until a future time of resurrection. In the NT, hell comes from the word Hades, usually, which is used because it’s the word the Greeks use to describe their version of hell. They got that belief from the other Pagan religions prior to them a few hundred years before. There is one or two other words used for it in the NT, but I forget what they are at the moment. None of them help define hell, though. In the NT, anything described by “fire” is a metaphor for refinement. It’s all referncing the Refiner’s Fire. When they refined gold back then, they would melt it down, scoop the impurities off the top, then let it cool. That would purify it. So that’s what all passages about “fire” mean in the NT. That’s why Jesus says “all will be salted with fire.” In other words, everyone will be purified in one way or another according to Jesus.

I apologize that I didn’t give you better direction when looking up the words eternal, judgment, and punishment. I forgot to mention that when you do a search, you have to search different translations in order to get all of the different verses about hell. What you’re looking for when searching the OT is “eternal punishment” and “everlasting contempt.” If you’ll search for “eternal judgment verses” and “everlasting contempt verse” in google, you’ll find the two OT verses that refer to hell. Then you can look up everlasting judgment, everlasting fire, eternal judgment, and eternal punishment in the NT to find the verses about hell. The King James is usually a good one to use to search for all of the verses.

Anytime hell is talked about in the OT, the word used to describe it is either owlam or…I’m blanking on the other word, but it has owlam in it and I can give you its meaning. Owlam, in Ancient Hebrew, literally means, “Over the horizon.” They were nomads, so whatever was over the horizon was “the future,” because they couldn’t see it yet and didn’t know what awaited them there. So “owlam” means “future.” Notice how Strong’s gave you several translations. Only one or two of those are accurate. The rest are ways that our translations have translated that word which are incorrect. So a Hebrew lexicon would give you the definition I just gave you, which is the accurate definition. So, when you see everlasting, or everlasting to everlasting, or eternal in the OT, it’s always owlam or that other word I’m blanking on. That other word litearlly means, “Over the horizon and back again,” which means WAY into the future. This is important, because it describes which age in which punishment is happening. In the OT, it appears there’s future punishment, and then punishment that’s even farther in the future. That could mean that there’s hell and then there’s the lake of fire later. Both are described as correctional, though…so that’s important to note. The book Hope Beyond Hell explains all of this in more detail.

The NT is sourcing off of those words when it’s describing hell. And it’s having to do so using words from the Greek language that aren’t truly sufficient to describe things in an Ancient Hebrew way. So they do the best they can with the language they’re existing in. lol That’s how it always is with translation. We can never get a perfect translation because we can never truly understand a culture 100% and our words are never exactly like their words.

You’ver got a good start there, Marty. Keep digging deeper.

–Brian

[Brian]

Marty,

Sounds good. Did you get a chance to read through my original post? It explains that anywhere you see the word “eternal” in the Old Testament, it means “future,” and when you see “eternal” in the New Testament, that means “age.” “Everlasting” is the same…it means “future” or “distant future” in the Old Testament and “age” or “age of ages” in the New Testament. It’s basically saying “a time,” “a time in the future”, or “a long time.” So, pick any verse you like that talks about hell. It’s always described as “eternal judgment” or “eternal punishment” or “eternal destruction.” Just do a search for verses that have those terms in it and you’ll find plenty of verses to look at. Every one of them uses the same Greek words, so pick any or all of them if you like. Biblegateway.com is an easy one to use.

Once you do that, make sure you look up each of those verses in a Strong’s Concordance to confirm the Greek or Hebrew word they’re sourcing off of. In the Hebrew, it will be “Owlam” (may be spelled differently depending on which resource you use, because it’s transliterated). In Greek it’ll be Aion or Aioniosa or Aionian (spelling varies). Then look up those words in a lexican for each language so you can get the true meaning in the original language.

One last thing to keep in mind is that when the word “age” is paired with something we know is eternal, that’s the only time “age” means “eternal” or “ageless.” So if it says “aionios life” or “aionios God,” then it means eternal/ageless. But when it’s paired with something that isn’t ageless/eternal, then it just means “age” or “age-bound”…a period of time. And the fact that it’s paired with the Greek word for corrective punishment means it’s temporary rather than eternal. One cannot be corrected for eternity because that’s not corrective. It’s vengeful with no corrective end in sight. And the fact that “judgment” in the Hebrew means to locate a problem and remove it from a person so the person can grow and mature tells us the nature of hell’s judgment. Judgment means pruning, basically, and so does the word punishment in the Hebrew. And when Jesus or others in the New Testament are using those words, they’re sourcing them from the Old Testament, so they have the same meaning. Which makes sense when you realize the punishment mentioned in the New Testament is defined as corrective punishment.

Have at it, man. Don’t tak emy word for it. Research it and see what conclusion you come to. Maybe you’ll come to a better conclusion than me.

If you wanna find truth, you gotta dig deep. I’m not saying I’ve found truth, but I do dig deep

–Brian

[Brian]

Marty,

I don’t mean this in a bad way, but you’re being a hypocrit and you don’t realize it. I’m not calling you a hypocrit, I’m just saying that what you said is hypocritical. I’ll explain.

You said that you don’t trust what I’m saying and you believe hell is eternal because you believe what the Bible says. And yet I showed you what the Bible says when translated correctly. It clearly says that hell is corrective instead of vengeful and age-bound rather than eternal. That’s what the Bible says when you look at both the original Hebrew and original Koine Greek. The Church Father’s confirm it, as well, in their writings, and most of them were native Greek speakers who understood their language much better than our scholars today do. Therefore, if you actually trust what the Bible says, you’d have to believe hell is temporary and corrective. Near-death experiences show this to be true, as well, AND Jews also confirm this. So we have the Bible, Jews, and real, confirmed experiences to show us the truth here. It’s hypocritical to say you believe hell is eternal because you believe what the Bible says…because that’s not what the Bible says. That’s merely what our inaccurate translations say. Many scholars also confirm that the Greek and Hebrew state that hell is temporary and corrective.

My point is not to insult you or disrespect you, of course. I just like to point out inaccuracies, and your statement was inaccurate and hypocritical. You don’t believe the Bible…you believe doctrines that have been ingrained in you from a very young age. That’s anot accurate statement that I’ve just proved. Psychologists say it’s extremely difficult for someone to change their beliefs they grew up with, except for little things here and there.

I’m not saying you need to believe hell is temporary. I’m just saying that if you’re claiming the Bible is your source of truth, then you’re not listening to it, because it clearly teaches that hell is temporary and corrective. Either you believe what it says or you don’t. It’s that simple.

But you have to decide what you believe on your own. I can’t tell you what the truth is. All I can do is tell you what the Bible says in the original language. No one says you have to believe it. You can believe doctrines instead of the Bible if you like. Most people do. There’s nothing wrong with that. Personally, though, I go with the Bible over doctrines…but that’s just me.

[Brian]

t8,

Thanks for the post.

You’re gonna make me break out the more literal Greek on you. lol

John 3:16
For God so loved the world that he gave his one and only Son, that whoever believes in him shall not perish but have eternal life.

In that verse, the more literal translation is, “…that whoever be believing in him shall not be perishing but shall be having eternal life.” So when a scholar goes to translate it, he tries to make it more palettable for English readers…and translates it the way that fits his doctrinal beliefs. But what I just gave you is very accurate. And as you can see, it says that whoever believes in him will not be perishing, present tense, but will be having eternal life, present tense. That’s what the Kingdom of Heaven is. It’s a state of being where a person is experiencing eternal life. I won’t go into the extremely deep mechanics of what makes it eternal life and why one experiences it, because that’s unnecessary for the conversation (but it’s really cool, though, I must admit). When Paul says murderers and theives and liars, etc, will not “enter” the Kingdom of Heaven, he’s talking about them entering a state of being. No, not transcendence…just a way of being connected to your child-of-God self, experiencing peace and joy at all times. It’s being connected with your child-of-God self’s eternal life.

But also, understand that the verse above doesn’t say “perish eternally.” It just says “perish.” So it doesn’t say they’ll go to hell forever. However, if it did say “forever,” it would still be the word “aeonian” in the Greek, which means “age,” not “eternal.” And no, scripture does not clearly say that some will perish and never receive eternal life. It simply says some will perish. It is after death that people will eventually accept Jesus and have eternal life. If you believe there are verses that clearly say a person will perish and never receive eternal life, feel free to list them so I can take a look at them in the Greek.

The other verses you posted say that the people “will be perishing” not “will perish” in the original Greek. It’s a present-tense thing. Now, sometimes it does say they will perish, when it talks about what happens to them at death. But again, you must understand that Jesus never says we have to accept him while we’re alive. Not once is that stated in the Bible. If it were required, he would’ve stated it like that. Also, hell isn’t talked about a whole lot in the New Testament. Paul only talked about it once, and only said that it had no power now. If it were so important, I’d think Paul would’ve been talking about it quite a bit. And yet he didn’t.

You quoted 2 Thess 1:8. Notice that it says God will punish them. In my post, I stated that in the Greek, the word “punish” actually means “correctional punishment.” The only time the Greek term for “vengeful punishment” is used is when Paul tells what he did to the Christians when he was Saul. So if Paul wanted to convey a type of punishment God has waiting for people that is not correctional but actually vengeful, he would’ve used that specific word in the Koine Greek. But he doesn’t. He specifically uses the word for correctional punishment. The only way hell is eternal is if it’s described with the word for vengeful punishment. Eternal punishment, when stated in the OT, is the same. It means pruning, which is correctional and helpful, not vengeful. So every description of hell in the Bible is correctional. That should tell us something important about its nature.

Also, the Church Fathers said it was correctional, as well, to get people to heaven. They changed their views on it eventually, except for Origen. But the fact that they used the same Koine Greek term to describe hell as the Bible used and then said hell was temporary to purify people and get them to heaven proves that we have translated “eternal hell” incorrectly. The Church Fathers were mostly native Koine Greek speakers, so they knew their language well…much better than any translator.

Oh, and 2 Thess 1:9 says that God will punish them with everlasting destruction…

Here’s what “destruction” means in that verse:

1. ruin, destroy, death

a. for the destruction of the flesh, said of the external ills and troubles by which the lusts of the flesh are subdued and destroyed

Therefore, that verse is either talking about “age-bound death” (aka temporary) or “age-bound destruction of the lusts of the flesh.”

So let’s put together “correctional punishment” and “age-bound destruction of the lusts of the flesh.” The verse says, “God will correct them with temporary destruction of the lusts of their flesh.” In other words, He will correct their sins.

Just pull out the strongs concordance and start researching. You’ll want a Greek lexicon, too, so you can see the full meaning in the Greek and all the different meanings. You can find that stuff online. Some words are a little trickier than others to get down to the real meaning of them. You can’t just take what the Strong’s concordance says, because it doesn’t just give the original Greek meaning of the words. It gives all of the different ways the word has been translated by different translations. That makes it hard to tell which is the real meaning in the Greek…so the lexicon helps narrow that down.

Thanks again for the post. I appreciate it. You might want to read my entire first post before responding again because it’ll probably answer most of your questions and keep me from having to restate things I’ve already stated in that post. I’m not saying that in a condescending way, of course…just as a friendly suggestion to save you and me some time posting on here. 🙂

[Author]

Posts