OFFICIAL: Biblical/Theology Discussion thread

[muffler dragon]

You make an important point in that the law and the prophets do not use the word hell.
What is mentioned is the abode of the dead, sometimes referred to as Sheol in Hebrew, Hades in Greek. Some scholars think it refers to the grave solely and others believe it was a subterannean place for the souls of the dead to gather. Saul had a necromancer bring up the spirit uf Samuel in I Samuel 28. Whether this was actually the spirit of Samuel caused some problems for the early teachers. It also contributed to a major split among Rabbis who divided into the Pharisees who believed in eternal life, and the Saducees who did not (that is why they were sad u see).

Sheol in the Old Testament is a dark and gloomy place, but no thought of punishment is connected with it until the prophet Daniel uses a brief reference to Gehenna--the place reserved for the wicked Jews.

What passage in Daniel are you referring to?

By the time Jesus came, the idea of Sheol had been developed at least among Pharisees that it was a real abode for the souls of the dead. Sheol was a place of both reward and punishment (some believe heat, others believed cold). The concept of hell is rooted in justice, if evil people prosper on earth and die without judgment will they ever get the punishment they deserve?

I'd like to know what your root material is for this. I'm aware of the Jewish doctrine concerning the afterlife and suffering, but I'm not aware of the development.

Jesus used a parable of the Rich man and Lazarus in Luke 16 to clarify eternal justice. It is usually not a good idea to construct theology from Jesus' parables, however, I believe if Jesus was omniscient, he would not intentionally teach a truth by using fictional or mythological imagery.

To me, eternal justice on a temporal existence just doesn't connect any more.

His parable teaches that Lazarus lived right, died and went to reside in a place called Abraham's bosom or Paradise. The rich man ignored justice, died and went to a place called torment. There was a physical chasm between these two places but somehow the existence and activities in both were known. Lazarus experienced contentment, the rich man was suffering severe agony.

This place of dead as described by Jesus is divided into two separate sections,
Abraham's bosom-paradise and
the place of torment.
Jesus promised the thief on the cross, today he would be with Him in paradise.
After His death, many Bible scholars believed Jesus descended into Hades, preached to those in torment, and led those captive in paradise to heaven, the place where God dwells.
IOW Jesus emptied paradise portion of Hades.

I'm aware of the emboldened, but even it makes no sense to me any more. Why would there have been people present in an area that had no clue about it's existence? Just a thought.

This is not the first mention of heaven in the Bible, but I believe it is a real place as well as Hell (the place of torment).

Cool.

 

[Jake]

2) The first article definitely lays out one underlying motive that is rarely discussed so openly (IMO): financial.

It should be discussed openly more often. Religion is big business whether anyone likes to acknowledge it or not. In America alone it's a multi-billion dollar industry. In Europe, The Vatican alone is a multi-billion dollar industry. There is a helluva lot of financial incentive to keep the concept of eternal damnation alive and well. I suspect if the bible truly is the "word of God" that isn't exactly what the big guy had in mind. It's one of the many reasons why I don't believe the bible is the "word" of any supernatural, omniscient, omnipresent being. The same rationale applies to other gods and their (alleged) texts.

Personally, I no longer believe in the Christian concept of an eternal hell/damnation. I believe that there COULD be a transitional phase (a type of cleansing) or a World to Come. I also have no problem with the concept of what's now is now and after that... nada. ​

I believe the concept of life after death is entirely man made. Consciousness comes from the brain. No brain = no consciousness. Things like souls, gods, heavens, and hells are purely the products of human imagination. All of the evidence we have of religions and gods - all of them - points in that direction. To believe anything else is just wishful thinking and superstition, but it's an easy sell so billions are more than willing to buy it. It makes life, and ultimately death, easier to face those who practice it. But it doesn't make any of it real.

 

[buckeyegrad]

After His death, many Bible scholars believed Jesus descended into Hades, preached to those in torment, and led those captive in paradise to heaven, the place where God dwells. IOW Jesus emptied paradise portion of Hades.

This is a doctrine for many Christians that just doesn't make sense to me anymore...or maybe better stated, the whole concept of the afterlife for the Christian as being in heaven with God doesn't make sense.

For those of us who die, if our expectation should be the resurrection to new life, and the New Testament is quite clear on that being our expectation, why would we expect that our spirit, whether in the place of torment or in Abraham's bosom, to be taken to heaven? Or likewise, when I die, why would I expect my spirit to be taken immediately to heaven?

Neither Scripture nor reason can get me to the idea that when I die my spirit will go to heaven, only to have it leave heaven and return to my body in the resurrection of the dead. Not having faced the White Thrown Judgment, which I believe all Christians will have to go through unless they are part of the martyrs who are in the first resurrection, how could it be possible for me to enter into God's presence in heaven?

The alternative for me is that the spirit will rest in Sheol, whether in the paradise or the torment parts, waiting for the resurrection of the dead unto new life. As a Christian, I believe this resurrection will either be in the first with the martyrs who will reign under Jesus in the messianic kingdom and then pass into the New Jerusalem (i.e. Eden reestablished on Earth in which man dwells once again in the presence of God); or in the second, of whom will have to face the White Thrown Judgment, and then pass into the New Jerusalem.

 

[buckeyegrad]

I believe the concept of life after death is entirely man made. Consciousness comes from the brain. No brain = no consciousness.

Actually, the latest research out of the field of cognitive science suggests that consciousness and the mind is something separate from the brain. I'm not read up on this myself, but this is what the professors in the field whom I know at CWRU have told me.

 

[muffler dragon]

It should be discussed openly more often. Religion is big business whether anyone likes to acknowledge it or not. In America alone it's a multi-billion dollar industry. In Europe, The Vatican alone is a multi-billion dollar industry. There is a helluva lot of financial incentive to keep the concept of eternal damnation alive and well.

It's also a governmental financial interest aside from the soteriological aspect. In Germany, if you declare a denomination, then a portion of your pay goes to that church.

I suspect if the bible truly is the "word of God" that isn't exactly what the big guy had in mind. It's one of the many reasons why I don't believe the bible is the "word" of any supernatural, omniscient, omnipresent being. The same rationale applies to other gods and their (alleged) texts.

For me, eternal soteriology and the topics that arise from it have nothing to do with my belief structure any longer. I'm all about living my life today (and for what I consider to be my temporal existence on this earth). I'm really not concerned at all with what happens after my death. I'm fine with whatever there may or may not be.

I believe the concept of life after death is entirely man made.

It's definitely a possibility.

Consciousness comes from the brain. No brain = no consciousness. Things like souls, gods, heavens, and hells are purely the products of human imagination. All of the evidence we have of religions and gods - all of them - points in that direction. To believe anything else is just wishful thinking and superstition,

I don't entirely agree, and this is simply a matter of opinion. But for me, it's difficult to dismiss imagination, thought processes, emotions, and other mental experiences of humanity as simply just neurons firing. I believe (yes, believe) that there is more to it. Furthermore, I don't consider it wishful thinking. I find it to be simply thinking and philosophizing.

but it's an easy sell so billions are more than willing to buy it. It makes life, and ultimately death, easier to face those who practice it. But it doesn't make any of it real.

I don't equate the financial with the reality of it, because I'm not ready to lay that accusation at the feet of those who believe it. I'm fine with people believing other than me (and I can say that truthfully after years of giving a huge rat's ass on what others believe). My belief system is my own, and if it makes me feel better about myself or my life, then great. I allow others the same.

 

[t_BuckeyeScott]

This is a doctrine for many Christians that just doesn't make sense to me anymore...or maybe better stated, the whole concept of the afterlife for the Christian as being in heaven with God doesn't make sense.

For those of us who die, if our expectation should be the resurrection to new life, and the New Testament is quite clear on that being our expectation, why would we expect that our spirit, whether in the place of torment or in Abraham's bosom, to be taken to heaven? Or likewise, when I die, why would I expect my spirit to be taken immediately to heaven?

Neither Scripture nor reason can get me to the idea that when I die my spirit will go to heaven, only to have it leave heaven and return to my body in the resurrection of the dead. Not having faced the White Thrown Judgment, which I believe all Christians will have to go through unless they are part of the martyrs who are in the first resurrection, how could it be possible for me to enter into God's presence in heaven?

The alternative for me is that the spirit will rest in Sheol, whether in the paradise or the torment parts, waiting for the resurrection of the dead unto new life. As a Christian, I believe this resurrection will either be in the first with the martyrs who will reign under Jesus in the messianic kingdom and then pass into the New Jerusalem (i.e. Eden reestablished on Earth in which man dwells once again in the presence of God); or in the second, of whom will have to face the White Thrown Judgment, and then pass into the New Jerusalem.

I have a different take.

We are confident, yes, well pleased rather to be absent from the body and to be present with the Lord.

I don't know where else we would be besides heaven if we are present with the Lord. I do think though the difference is the way we will experience eternity. I don't understand eternity to be measured by time because time is a part of creation. I think experientially those of us who die before the rapture will experience eternity as if they have been raptured. As described in 2nd Corinthians 5 I don't believe this is the body I'll be taking with me to heaven. As I read it sounds like a completely better new one. I would guess it would be like Jesus's glorified body. I actually do believe that we will return with Him in his 2nd coming to rule in His millennial reign as we are the army that returns with Him in Revelation 19.

 

[Jake]

Actually, the latest research out of the field of cognitive science suggests that consciousness and the mind is something separate from the brain. I'm not read up on this myself, but this is what the professors in the field whom I know at CWRU have told me.

Interesting...but how exactly does the mind retain consciousness inside of a dead body? It seems cognitive science is at odds with medical science. By chance, are these professors Christians?

 

[muffler dragon]

Interesting...but how exactly does the mind retain consciousness inside of a dead body? It seems cognitive science is at odds with medical science. By chance, are these professors Christians?

I'm sure you could ask them: http://www.case.edu/artsci/cogs/people.html

I've actually scanned articles in publications before that resemble grad's statements. I don't recall them ever being religiously affilitated.

 

[Jake]

Religion is big business whether anyone likes to acknowledge it or not. In America alone it's a multi-billion dollar industry. In Europe, The Vatican alone is a multi-billion dollar industry. There is a helluva lot of financial incentive to keep the concept of eternal damnation alive and well.

It's also a governmental financial interest aside from the soteriological aspect. In Germany, if you declare a denomination, then a portion of your pay goes to that church.

Good point. It seems some things have scarcely changed in the 1700 years that have passed since the Council of Nicaea, where politics threatened to tear apart the early Christian church. The Council decided what God's relationship was with his Son (among other things), as if they were actually in a position to know.

it's an easy sell so billions are more than willing to buy it. It makes life, and ultimately death, easier to face those who practice it. But it doesn't make any of it real.

I don't equate the financial with the reality of it, because I'm not ready to lay that accusation at the feet of those who believe it.

My choices of the words "sell" and "buy" in that case weren't the best. I wasn't referring to anything financial there. I was talking about how it is easy for Christianity (and other revealed religions) to thrive for thousands of years because it is common for people to fear their own mortality, and look for strength outside of their own. Such strong motivations will often make the believer uninterested in the origins of the faith and the plausibility of its claims. They like what they hear/read, it makes them feel better, and they accept it unconditionally. Again, however, it doesn't necessarily make any of it real. As humans we're capable of convincing ourselves of all sorts of things, evidence or no evidence.

 

[muffler dragon]

Good point. It seems some things have scarcely changed in the 1700 years that have passed since the Council of Nicaea, where politics threatened to tear apart the early Christian church. The Council decided what God's relationship was with his Son (among other things), as if they were actually in a position to know.

I actually find that religious beliefs (of all sorts) have been used politically for a much longer time than that (both good and bad). The nature of both beasts, I believe. Interestingly enough, this is a facet strongly held in the neo-calvinist denomination. The religious belief system is to become a part of all of the member's life.

My choice of the word "sell" in that case wasn't the best. I wasn't referring to anything financial there. I was talking about how it is easy for Christianity (and other revealed religions) to thrive for thousands of years because it is common for people to fear their own mortality, and look for strength outside of their own. Such strong motivations will often make the believer uninterested in the origins of the faith and the plausibility of its claims. They like what they hear/read, it makes them feel better, and they accept it unconditionally. Again, however, it doesn't necessarily make any of it real. As humans we're capable of convincing ourselves of all sorts of things, evidence or no evidence.

That's very true. Faith is faith.

One thing that I find quite intriguing about the Jewish Bible and the adherents is the familial aspect. It's a family history, and the traditions aren't just something concocted for fun. Once again, it doesn't necessarily make it "real" to you or me; however, I do believe that it adds an element of "truth". If you know what I mean.

 

[Gatorubet]

IOW Jesus emptied paradise portion of Hades.
This is not the first mention of heaven in the Bible, but I believe it is a real place as well as Hell (the place of torment).

OK. TULIP time again - briefly. :p

If God devised a system in which he knew in advance when He created us of the outcome of the issue of Heaven or Hell as to millions of folks - then he essentially doomed lots of people who only acted in accordance with his Will - and at his direction - to eternal torment.

WTF????

One has to wonder at that Thought Process. It - to me - requires some serious denial to get through the day - or some change from Double Presdestination, i.e., that some are elect from the beginning of time, and others are left to their free will and actions to decide their fate, some to Hell and some to Heaven. Take away Free Will from the mix in Hell avoidance and you have no reason not to act sinfully in life - unless it is because one recognizes the advantages of ethical and moral living and we want to live the Golden Rule before we get sent to our eternity in Hell per God's Plan before we were born.

At least Karma provides a reason not to act like a douche. Calvinism is more like living right in the hope that things turn out OK in the end.

 

[muffler dragon]

OK. TULIP time again - briefly. :p

If God devised a system in which he knew in advance when He created us of the outcome of the issue of Heaven or Hell as to millions of folks - then he essentially doomed lots of people who only acted in accordance with his Will - and at his direction - to eternal torment.

WTF????

One has to wonder at that Thought Process. It - to me - requires some serious denial to get through the day - or some change from Double Presdestination, i.e., that some are elect from the beginning of time, and others are left to their free will and actions to decide their fate, some to Hell and some to Heaven. Take away Free Will from the mix in Hell avoidance and you have no reason not to act sinfully in life - unless it is because one recognizes the advantages of ethical and moral living and we want to live the Golden Rule before we get sent to our eternity in Hell per God's Plan before we were born.

At least Karma provides a reason not to act like a douche. Calvinism is more like living right in the hope that things turn out OK in the end.

And all this time I thought you were a proponent.

 

[gracelhink]

What passage in Daniel are you referring to?

Daniel 12:2
See also Isaiah 66:24.


I'd like to know what your root material is for this. I'm aware of the Jewish doctrine concerning the afterlife and suffering, but I'm not aware of the development.

It is actually something I remember from Seminary, but don't have the source material. It may be that the dead sea scrolls have some of this development in the wisdom literature.
The Pharisees and Essene community especially shaped some of the popular teachings after the close of the prophets.

To me, eternal justice on a temporal existence just doesn't connect any more.

I hear what you are saying, a lot of people don't get excited about the doctrine of theodicy, but others really care.

I'm aware of the emboldened, but even it makes no sense to me any more. Why would there have been people present in an area that had no clue about it's existence? Just a thought.

Can I explore that with you, is this area where people are present, a reference to the soul/spirit in paradise, torment, or heaven?
I think the idea is that persons who end up in torment are ones who either don't have a clue it exists, or they believe a good God would mercifully provide at death an instant annihilation of their soul, or they know but just are having too good a time in the present that they don't care.

Cool.

I believe the imagio dei, human life created in the image of God, as described in Genesis, can be explained in several ways. My preferred interpretation is: Humans are created with a soul, spirit and body.
When the body expires it returns to the earth.
I believe the Bible teaches pretty clearly that something of human life is eternal-- the soul and spirit are the best candidates to survive bodily death.
Thank you Buckeyegrad for sharing that research info. on cognitive activity even after brain activity ceases.

 

[gracelhink]

OK. TULIP time again - briefly. :p

If God devised a system in which he knew in advance when He created us of the outcome of the issue of Heaven or Hell as to millions of folks - then he essentially doomed lots of people who only acted in accordance with his Will - and at his direction - to eternal torment.

WTF????

One has to wonder at that Thought Process. It - to me - requires some serious denial to get through the day - or some change from Double Presdestination, i.e., that some are elect from the beginning of time, and others are left to their free will and actions to decide their fate, some to Hell and some to Heaven. Take away Free Will from the mix in Hell avoidance and you have no reason not to act sinfully in life - unless it is because one recognizes the advantages of ethical and moral living and we want to live the Golden Rule before we get sent to our eternity in Hell per God's Plan before we were born.

At least Karma provides a reason not to act like a douche. Calvinism is more like living right in the hope that things turn out OK in the end.

So are you saying that virtue may be its own reward?:)

I am not a TULIP Calvinist either,
I won't get into the T--Total depravity of man, unfortunately women I know believe they are exempt, total depravity tis only a man condition and no sense arguing about it.

The teaching of Calvinism that bothers me most is the L point--limited atonement.
This collides heavily with the issue you take Gator--double predestinationism is not consistent with a loving God.
Many neoCalvinists do not accept this doctrine either for the same reason, think they call themselves 4 point Calvinists.
I also believe that the I (Irresistible grace) of the TULIP doctrines has some flaws, i.e. grace is compelling but can be resisted.
I have some doubts also about the P tenet of "perseverance" sometimes referred to as eternal security.
About the Perseverance, most Calvinists teach that Since salvation is not earned by good works, it can not be lost by bad works,
I believe, however that just as it is received by grace through faith, it may also be unreceived through loss or rejection of faith, I don't know why anyone would reject such great salvation but it is possible.
For Calvin the basic tenets of TULIP derived from the belief that God was sovereign, omnscient and omnipotent creator.
As He created each life because He is omniscient, would have to know their eternal destiny.
What if, however the omnipotent and omniscient sovereign creator chose to not know the eternal destiny and gave free will to his children? Instead he gave either a nonintrusive permission to accept and receive a relationship of love with their creator or to reject the same.
It is only an omnipotent and omniscient sovereign God that could limit his knowledge in such a way.
Just a thought to share at the next presbytery meeting.

 

[muffler dragon]

Daniel 12:2

2. And many who sleep in the dust of the earth will awaken-these for eternal life, and those for disgrace, for eternal abhorrence.

Thank you for referencing this. I attempted to look for Rashi's commentary on the verse; however, I can't get it to show on the computer, and my Tanach is silent. I took the liberty of searching through the archives of some people I am familiar with. Admittedly, it's an anti-missionary website, but the people behind the quotes are very knowledgeable.

From this link:
http://messiahtruth.yuku.com/forum/viewtopic/id/1261

The Hebrew expression used in Daniel 12:2 is - dir'on olam, which means everlasting dreadful contempt, disgrace, and shame.

The verse is talking the resurrection of the dead.
The resurrection is a part of the culmination of THIS world and is not a part of the afterlife. Interpreting an 'everlasting' anything of this verse as relevant to the afterlife seems out of place.

Furthermore, the word for 'everlasting'- olam- is also used regarding the indentured servant who is definately not a slave forever but only to the Jubilee year.

Lastly, since the resurrection is the last living phase of this world, describing it with 'everlasting' is acceptable when 'everlasting' is synonymous with "till the end of human history" or "till the end of time."

Another thought just dropped in. The verse starts with "Many."
Not "All."
Again the verse can not be speaking of eternal judgment because too many people have been left out of the equation.

So even without yet knowing what eternal abhorrence is, we certainly do know what it isn't.

BTW, the word olam is often translated as "world" so one could translate Daniel 12:2 as say "waking to a world of contempt."

I see, now, how my words may have been confusing, especial when the end of the sentence is disconnected from the start.

Instead of "afterlife" I should have said "next world" or "World to Come."

"The resurrection is a part of the culmination of THIS world and is not a part of the next world."

I'll defer to the considerations above since I don't speak nor understand the gross majority of Hebrew.

See also Isaiah 66:24.

24. "And they shall go out and see the corpses of the people who rebelled against Me, for their worm shall not die, and their fire shall not be quenched, and they shall be an abhorring for all flesh."

Here's some info from the same site, and it delves into both passages.

http://messiahtruth.yuku.com/reply/46367/Re-Daniel-12-2-and-Isaiah-66-24

Daniel 12:2 says:

Quote: 2 Multitudes who sleep in the dust of the earth will awake: some to everlasting life, others to shame and everlasting contempt​

Most who are dead will be resurrected to eternal life ( l'chayai olam).

Others will have to recognize the shame of their actions in their lives and the contempt may well be self-inflicted. Isaiah 66:24 is speaking of corpses -- not souls. It says:

Quote:And they will go out and see the corpses of the men who rebelled against Me, for their decay will not cease and their fire will not be extinguished -- and they will lie in disgrace before all of mankind.​

You have asked about the only two passages where the word deira'on (abhorrence) is used.

The Jewish bible is relatively silent on what exactly happens after death. גהנום (Gehinnom) is discussed in Judaism as a place of purification where those who need to learn a few more lessons before entering heaven spend time being purified. This purification is not meant so much as a punishment as a place to learn -- but learning of our failings can be a very painful process. The "real" valley of Gehenna was a place where garbage was burned -- including dead animal bodies and possibly the bodies of criminals. The Tanach does not speak of Gehenom as anything more than the burning valley where sacrifices were made to the false god Mol-loch.

In aggadah the sages envisioned it as a place where the wicked are faced with their own sins. The burning shame they feel is self inflicted. It comes from standing in front of G-d with your soul bared naked -- and G-d who knows all in front of you. (Nishmat Chaim 1:13). This is disgrace and shame indeed. But it is not the Xian hell.

Imagine a teenager who takes out the car after being told he can't. The teen wrecks the car -- totals it -- and then has to stand in front of his father in shame knowing he did wrong. It is THAT kind of shame.

Now picture yourself standing before G-d the Judge. You can remember everything you ever did -- good or bad. There is no way to escape because we can't escape ourselves. The Talmud goes on to tell us that there will be no Gehenna once the messiah comes.

She also goes on to reference askmoses. Here's the http://www.askmoses.com/en/article/215,164/Does-Judaism-believe-in-Heaven-and-Hell.html

It is actually something I remember from Seminary, but don't have the source material. It may be that the dead sea scrolls have some of this development in the wisdom literature.
The Pharisees and Essene community especially shaped some of the popular teachings after the close of the prophets.

Do you recall if they talked about all the different considerations? Reincarnation? Resurrection? Etc?

I hear what you are saying, a lot of people don't get excited about the doctrine of theodicy, but others really care.

Indeed. The Bell and Driscoll articles show that much.

Can I explore that with you, is this area where people are present, a reference to the soul/spirit in paradise, torment, or heaven?

I don't know. I'm not an adherent of the Christian viewpoint any more and I'm not certain that I have formulated my opinion on the afterlife yet.

I think the idea is that persons who end up in torment are ones who either don't have a clue it exists, or they believe a good God would mercifully provide at death an instant annihilation of their soul, or they know but just are having too good a time in the present that they don't care.

Interesting.

I believe the imagio dei, human life created in the image of God, as described in Genesis, can be explained in several ways. My preferred interpretation is: Humans are created with a soul, spirit and body.

Whereas, I take it as the opportunity to choose and gain counsel.

When the body expires it returns to the earth.
I believe the Bible teaches pretty clearly that something of human life is eternal-- the soul and spirit are the best candidates to survive bodily death.

I understand.