Conference lgp30::christian-perspective

    Very good synopsis on Hell Greg.  I believe Hell is a sobering fact and
    is worthy of our deepest consideration.
    
    In your example from the Pentatuch, is the same translation for Hell
    similar to Jonah's cry, "Out of the belly of Hell I cried"?  I know
    there is some speculation regarding the word Sheol as not being a
    literal Hell, but actually the grave.
    
    -Jack

    Hell is an emotional zone on earth.
    
    It is a state of being separated from ourselves, others, and our God.
    
    Hell is like being on the outside of our lifes, looking in.  Hell is a
    state of being controlled by our addictions whether they be alcohol,
    relations, sex, work, compulsive ritualistic behavoirs, Bible reading,
    or  materialism.
    
    It is a state of never being able to get enough of whatever we seek to
    feel that we are accepted, that we are OK, that we are enough.
    
    Salvation is the  release from this hell which comes when we recognize that
    a power greater than ourselves can restore us to Sanity.  When we let
    go of our own need to control our destiny and let that power greater
    than ourselves restore us to wholeness.
    
    Patricia
    

      The fire of God's love will consume anyone in who's heart
      is sin.
    
                                               Tony

    Patricia:
    
    I realize the Book of Revelation is probably a ghastly monument of
    fire and brimstone to you.  However,
    
    I believe throughout the scriptures the picture is painted very clearly 
    on the realities of Hell.  Since you and I are totally opposite on this
    spiritual matter, I would only venture to briefly outline my concept of
    hell.
    
    1. Hell is a literal place, not a state of mind.  It was initially
    prepared for the devil and his angels.  Under the Mosaic law Patricia,
    if your definition of Hell is correct, then Isaiah, Ezekiel, Daniel,
    John, Joel, Jesus, Paul, Jude, James, John the Baptist, and probably
    many others I am unaware of ARE false prophets.  Hence prophetically,
    the Bible is invalid.  
    
    2. If Hell is not a separation from God, then there is nothing to be
       saved from, hence Jesus died and rose from the dead in vain.  
    
    3. Hell is our wage to God for our right to sin.  Sin must be atoned
    for.  If we don't allow Jesus to do it, then we have no choice but to
    pay for it ourselves.
    
    -Jack

    >Since you and I are totally opposite on this
    >spiritual matter.
    
    We both agree here.
    
    >Hell is a literal place, not a state of mind.
    
    Here we obviously disagree.
    
    >It was initially prepared for the devil and his angels.
    Again, we both realize that the devil is literal for you and a metaphor
    for me.
    >
    >if your definition of Hell is correct, then Isaiah, Ezekiel, Daniel,
    >John, Joel, Jesus, Paul, Jude, James, John the Baptist, and probably
    >many others I am unaware of ARE false prophets.  Hence prophetically,
    >the Bible is invalid.  
    
    Perhaps according to your definition of what makes a false prophet,
    perhaps.  
    
    I accept that a literal devil and a literal place called hell are part of
    the Mythical World view of ancient peoples.  There is much that is
    prophetic within all these writings that do not require a mythological
    worldview to be valid.
    
    It all has to do with how we use the Bible as a source of inspiration.
    
    
    >If Hell is not a separation from God, then there is nothing to be
    >   saved from, hence Jesus died and rose from the dead in vain.  
    
    I agreed that Hell is a separation from God.  It is also a separation
    from oneself and from other relationships.
    
    > Hell is our wage to God for our right to sin.  Sin must be atoned
    for.  If we don't allow Jesus to do it, then we have no choice but to
    pay for it ourselves.
    
    I understand but do not fully comprehend  this fully .  I recognize
    and accept it as part of the religous world view of some Christians.  
    
    Jack The differing assumptions we start with have ramifications
    throughout our religious outlook. 
    
    
    Patricia
    

    Patricia, calling Bible reading a Hell that separates us from God is an 
    oxymoron, not to mention downright offensive and blasphemous.  Your New
    Age philosophy calls for unity in all things and I think you could've
    made your point without including God's Word as a Hell.
    
    thanks,
    Mike

    Patricia:
    
    Just to reenforce the notion, there is a precept in the Book of Joshua
    which is a measuring stick for me...something I don't necessarily
    always measure up to.  
    
    "This Book of the law shall not depart mouth but I shall meditate on
    it therein day and night and be careful to do everything written in it.  
    Then I shall be prosperous and have success."  
    
    In a way, Joshua was promoting a healthy obsession with the Word of
    God.  You may recall he also said, "Choose whom you shall serve this 
    day.  As for me and my house, we shall serve the Lord."
    Patricia, were you referring to people who know the Word but have no
    balance in their lives?  People who put the study of the Word as sooo
    important that they neglect other parts of their earthly ministry?  
    Things like their work, their marriage, etc.  I have in fact seen this 
    practice.  I believe there needs to be application, not just study.  
    Needless to say this to me isn't hell, this is just a mismanagement
    of priorities.  
    
    For over a year now I have been attempting to bring forth a balance in
    this conference.  The discussion of hell and judgement do fall within
    the realm of God's Holiness.  Jesus himself spoke of Hell over 70 times
    in the New Testament, mainly to the pharisees.  I know this is a hard 
    concept to fathom but consider this.
    
    Our God is so Holy...So Perfect...so righteous, it is impossible to
    allow any sin before Him.  Sin must be paid for.  There are two ways it
    can be paid for:
    
    1. Eternal seperation from God (I believe in Hell)
    2. Accepting the payment for your sins, i.e. Jesus death and 
       resurrection on the cross.  
    
    This is why Revelation is so important.  Revelation isn't a reflection
    of us toting the line or else...Revelation gives us a picture of just
    how decreped the human spirit is.  What a wonderful opportunity 
    to get a glimpse of what we can or cannot avoid.  It is like knowing an
    earthquake is going to hit...before it hits.  Maybe thats why in 1st
    Peter it says to be watchful and pray....
    
    -Jack  

    Also see Note 350, which bears the same title as this string.
    
    Shalom,
    Richard
    

re Note 974.0 by YIELD::GRIFFIS:

        Hell is what we discuss when we want a heated argument that
        has little or no practical significance?

        Bob

re: Note 974.8 by Jack

>    Our God is so Holy...So Perfect...so righteous, it is impossible to
>    allow any sin before Him.  
    
Well, Jesus was God, and he saw Much sin, living as he did and hanging out 
with the people he did.  I would accept that God the Father does not allow 
the presence of sin.  The Son paid the price for us to stand before the 
Father.

Peace,

Jim

 >>    The Son paid the price for us to stand before the
 >>    Father.
    
    Right!  To clarify, God the Father in His glorified state cannot look
    upon sin.  Or better yet, we as sinners cannot even stand in the
    presence of a Holy Perfect Father!!  
    
    Jesus did stand before the Father while on the cross.."My God My
    God...Why Hast thou Forsaken Me?!"  We now have an advocate with the
    Father and a mediator.  
    
    -Jack

    My inclusion of Bible reading in the string of potential addictions is
    not saying that Bible reading in itself is separation from God.
    
    Anyone who tries to earn the salvation through Bible reading, Bible
    sprouting, may be  involved in an addictive, non redemptive kind of
    behavoir. 
    
    As you will surely agree, we cannot earn our own salvation no matter
    what we do.  It is a free gift.  A person can never read the Bible
    enough to earn salvation and therefore could be involved in a futile
    addictive effort.  The same with work.  Work is good unless someone
    feels that working themselves to death is the only way to prove there
    worth.
    
    I hope this helps clarify.
    
    Patricia 

    Hell is a place in the inner depths of our souls.  It is very real.  It
    just is not physical.
    
    
    
    Jack,  you have some of what I mean in spending all one's time in
    reading the Bible and neglecting other things in life.
    
    But the real emphasis is that in doing anything to attempt to earn our
    salvation and control our destiny's rather than relying on the free
    gift from God, is in fact separations from God's redeeming love and
    therefore Sin. 
    
     I believe all you Bible believers should find this
    concept very Biblical and intrinsic to both Jesus and Paul.
    
    
    Patricia
    
    Patricia
    
    
    
    
    Hey, by the way not all controversy is bad.

   >>     Jack,  you have some of what I mean in spending all one's time in
   >>     reading the Bible and neglecting other things in life.
    
    I scratched my head while reading this because it sounded like you were
    saying I have this problem.  Then I realized you were saying that I
    understood where you were initially coming from (if you follow what I'm
    saying!! :-))
    
    Patricia, be honest.  You just said some very true and sound things
    about grace, earning salvation, etc.  Would you have said that a year
    and a half ago?  
    
    -Jack

    Jack no I wouldn't,
    
    I scratched my head after I wrote my response and recognized the
    traditional main line protestant theology there.
    
    But then I have found some good main line protestant liberal
    theologians.   The Theology of God's Grace, Redeeming Love, and
    Salvation remain similiar whether one accepts the Bible as Literal, or
    Literary, or Metaphorical.
    
    Patricia

    Well, I for one was really happy to see you write that.  It is so
    important for me to understand that my eternal inheritance is based 
    on the free gift of God.  
    
    Now that we have this as a basis, let me pose this question.  If hell
    is not a literal place, then where do we all end up!?  Is heaven a
    literal place or is it a myth?
    
    -Jack

    I don't know what happens to us after we die.
    
    I count on only this one life.  Anything more is a surprise gift.
    
    
    Patricia 

RE:         <<< Note 974.19 by POWDML::FLANAGAN "I feel therefore I am" >>>

       
   > I count on only this one life.  Anything more is a surprise gift.
    

     Or an eternal nightmare.

    
    

    I believe this is crucial.  Would you agree that we are made in the
    image of God, i.e. we are a spiritual being?  If so, then remember that 
    God is infinite, therefore, so are we.  We are made in God's image AND
    likeness.
    
    If that be the case, then it stands to very good reason that we don't
    just disappear after we leave the earth.  I believe our spirit goes
    someplace and I believe as many do that Jesus was a credible teacher
    in this area.  He told the world that Heaven exists, but that also hell 
    exists.  
    
    Therefore, we need to be very aware that a surprise gift may not be the
    gift we want.  
    
    -Jack

Re: .21

>    I believe this is crucial.  Would you agree that we are made in the
>    image of God, i.e. we are a spiritual being?  If so, then remember that 
>    God is infinite, therefore, so are we.  We are made in God's image AND
>    likeness.

This doesn't necessarily follow, Jack.  According to mainstream Christian
belief God is omnipotent, omniscient and omnipresent but we are not.

				-- Bob

    What I meant to communicate is that our spiritual existence is eternal.  
    We are certainly not, as you stated, any of the omnis.
    
    -Jack

    Greg:
    
    The concept of Hell to somebody is foreign unless there is a basic
    understanding of why hell exists and what condition exists in man to
    bring us there.  
    
    -Sir Jack

    re .26
    
    Sort of reminds me of Ghost Story.
    
    
    
    My real message.  It is just as legitimate to read the Bible as
    inspirational literature as to believe that real ghosts were walking
    around Jerusalem or that Jesus floated through closed doors.
    
    To call oneself Christian does not mean one has to believe in Ghost
    stories.  
    
    There is a deeper meaning to these stories than the mythological
    meaning.
    
    
    Patricia

    Patricia, thanks for entering the clarification.

    Mike,
    
    I am glad the clarification helped.
    
                         Patricia

Part of my reply in note 342.289 to Steve, may help this discussion.

;If God prevented the sin, then Adam would not have free will at all in fact
;people might argue that God was domineering.

>	I would argue that God is domineering anyway! You either do things His
>	way or you fry in hell for eternity. This seems pretty domineering to
>	me.

    Does God fry people in hell for eternity?, well the Scriptures tell
    us such a thought as never entered into his mind (Jeremiah 7:31).
    Also part of my arguement is that God keeps in the framework of his
    own Laws and standards. In Exodus 21:24 we learn that proper 
    retribution should be "Eye for eye, tooth for tooth", with this mind
    if a fiery hell did exist that those going there would have had to
    have caused eternal torment to others. Now man certainly has caused 
    suffering to others but not to the degree of eternal torment as pictured
    by a fiery hell. Hell is the common graveyard of mankind, were both
    the righteous and unrighteous go upon death. It is a place of inactivity 
    (opposite to life eg animation) for the Bible tells us that those who are 
    dead are conscious of nothing at all (Ecclesiastes 9:5). In the Lazarus 
    account  Jesus likened death as someone asleep (John 11). To me it's a 
    comfort that a persons suffering ends at death. Another thing to note is 
    that scriptures indicate that man was not created with an immortal soul,
    Ezekiel 18:4,20 clearly states "The soul that is sinning - it itself 
    will die." 

    btw, there is an old English word "helling" which refered to burying
    patatoes under soil in a cellar so as they would keep fresh. If you
    mentioned the word today, no doubt people would get the wrong idea
    of roasting the patatoes.

    Many who argue that there is a fiery hell point to Revelation 20:10
    and the "lake of fire", but in context (right use of the word this
    time Bob - thanks for pointing it out), they fail to see that it is
    symbolic for verse 14b NWT "This means the second death, the lake
    of fire." Those that die, have the hope of a resurrection (Acts 24:15)
    not so those who face the second death. So in answer to question 2
    in reply .286 Satan will be destroyed for ever, for the lake of fire
    will never release it's captives (Also compare Ezekiel 18:4,20 as
    mentioned earlier). Also thrown into the lake of fire is death (which 
    Satan introduced to mankind), so death will be done away with forever. 
    As Revelation 21:3,4 NWT "With that I heard a loud voice from the thrown 
    say: 'Look! The tent of God is with mankind and he will reside with them, 
    and they will be his peoples. And God himself will be with them. And he 
    will wipe out every tear from their eyes, and death will be no more, 
    neither will mourning nor outcry be anymore. The former things have passed 
    away." Hence, seeing that God promises to bring an end to death, the 
    throwing of death into the lake of fire symbolises that death will ceast 
    to exist. Also, Revelation 21:3,4 shows that God has a timetable for 
    bringing an end to suffering that we see today, would it not be wise to 
    inquire about God's purposes so as to see how we as individuals might be 
    part of those purposes.


    Phil. 

    >                       -< another Trinitarian conundrum >-
>Well, Jesus was God, and he saw Much sin, living as he did and hanging out 
>with the people he did.  I would accept that God the Father does not allow 
>the presence of sin.  The Son paid the price for us to stand before the 
>Father.

Jim, why did Immanuel, God with Us (Jesus) come to Earth?  You have to
    balance the doctrine of the Trinity in the context of the Word with the
    Sovereignty of God and Man's Responsibility.  God came to save man of
    his sin so that man could be presented the option of no longer being
    separated from God.  There is NOTHING man can do to earn his way to
    heaven and God's presence.  God had to pave the way since we're so
    hopelessly lost in our sin.

    Mike

re: Note 974.32 by Mike "Grace changes everything" 

It appears to me that you agree with what I wrote.  The answer to your 
question (at least one facet of the answer) you have already quoted from my 
note.

Peace,

Jim

>It appears to me that you agree with what I wrote.  The answer to your 
>question (at least one facet of the answer) you have already quoted from my 
>note.
    
    correct, but it was the slam at Trinitarians I was addressing.
    
    Mike

    re: .20
    
    Maybe we could send Stephen King a copy of the appropriate references.
    
    
    
                                     Patricia
    
                                          

re: Note 974.35 by Mike "Grace changes everything" 

>    correct, but it was the slam at Trinitarians I was addressing.
    
Slam?  Please point out exactly where in note 974.32 I "slammed" Trinitarians.

Thank you.

Peace,

Jim

    >                       -< another Trinitarian conundrum >-
    
    This is what I was reading in your notes.  The Bible is quite clear on
    the Trinity.

re: Note 974.42 by Mike "Grace changes everything" 

>                              -< It's no riddle >-

But it is a mystery.  Or do you fathom all of God's plan?

"Where were you when I laid the earth's foundation?
	Tell me if you understand.
Who marked off it's dimensions?  Surely you know."

God asking of Job, chapter 38.

Do you really believe you understand all of the Trinity?
I believe you read quite a bit into what I wrote.

Peace,

Jim

re Note 974.43 by TFH::KIRK:

> re: Note 974.42 by Mike "Grace changes everything" 
> 
> >                              -< It's no riddle >-
> 
> But it is a mystery.  Or do you fathom all of God's plan?
  
        It's another example of Conservative Political Correctness
        (CPC) -- you used the word "Trinity" with a descriptive term
        not traditionally used with it.

        Bob

I Timothy 3:16
And without controversy great is the mystery of godliness: God was manifest in
the flesh, justified in the Spirit, seen of angels, preached unto the Gentiles,
believed on in the world, received up into glory.

    

    Some Christians can be Trinitarians and yet not insist on imposing
    the doctrine upon others who are otherwise convinced.  Others apparently
    cannot.
    
    Shalom,
    Richard
    
    PS  Are we still dealing with Hell here?
    

Re: .46  Richard

>    PS  Are we still dealing with Hell here?
    
Yes.  Hell will consist of endless arguments about theology...

				-- Bob

    .47  Gotcha. ;-)
    
    Shalom,
    Richard
    

    IMHO,
    
    hell is suffering and where is suffering there is hell.
    
    But suffering is due to our attachments, desires. So there is a direct
    link between hell and desires.
    
    We create our hell. Every moment.
    
    	Peace
    
    		Agostino

re .33

	Greg,

	It's Mr Burnett-Yerkess but you weren't to know that. But please
	call me Phil.

	The "Rich Man and Lazarus" account was an illustrion or parable.
	However, some say that because a name was used that this is not
	one of Jesus' parables. But note Matthew 13:34,35 NWT "All these
	things Jesus spoke to the crowds by illustrations. Indeed, without
	an illustration he would not speak to them; that there might be
	fulfilled what was spoken through the prophet who said: 'I will
	open my mouth and with illustrations, I will publish things
	hidden since the founding.'"

	If we take this account as literal then we would have to accept 
	that upon death only poor persons go to a privileged place and 
	rich ones to hell. Yet we know God does not judge us on what we
	own, rather our hearts. 

	How can a drop of water help in a literal blazing fire?.

	Is it true, those in heaven can witness those being tormented in 
	hellfire ?.

	Consistently, in the Bible fire is not literal. For example, 
	Jeremiah 23:29 NWT "'Is not my word correspondingly like a
	fire?' is the utterance of Jehovah."

	The parable was for the intended audience, the Pharisees pictured
	the "Rich Man". Luke 16:14,15,19 NWT "Now the Parisees, who were 
	money lovers, were listening to all these things, and they began 
	to snear at him. Consequently he said to them: 'YOU are those who
	declare yourselves righteous before men, but God knows your hearts;
	because what is lofty among men is a disgusting thing in God's sight.
	But a certain man was rich, and he used to deck himself with purple
	and fine linen, enjoying himself from day to day with magnificience.'"
	Also compare Matthew 21:43-45.

	Jesus teachings caused the religious leaders torments and though not
	physically dead, they were dead in God's eyes (Compare Matthew 23:13,33;
	Luke 19:47).

	Lazarus pictured those who had formerly been despised by the religious
	leaders. These ones had been starved of spiritual nourishment by their
	religious leaders. But now they were being favoured because of Jesus'
	ministry. Having repented they were listening Jesus and were now in
	the favoured position in God's eyes. Luke 16:25 NWT reads "Abraham said
	[to the rich man], Child remember that you received in full your
	good things in your lifetime, but Lazarus correspondingly the
	injurious things. Now, however, he is having comfort here but you are
	in anguish.'" (Also compare Matthew 21:23,31,32; Luke 18:9-14, 
	Luke 5:30-32).

	This parable helps us to understand what was happening between the
	religous leaders and the common people (including harlots and tax
	collectors) and why Jesus' ministry was so important. Whatever, one
	has done in the past by being repentent, listening and applying Jesus'
	teachings one can have a favoured position before God.


	Phil.

	BTW I used the book "Make Sure of All Things Hold Fast To What is Fine"
	as reference material, published by the Watchtower Bible & Tract Soceity.

    re; .47
    
    >Yes.  Hell will consist of endless arguments about theology
    
    Bob,
    
    How come I immediately think of the UU cartoon when I read that.  
    
    The one with the signs pointing in two directions.
    
      -  One sign pointing to Heaven,
    
      -  The other signs pointing to "discussion about Heaven"
    
    And all the UU's heading toward the discussion group!!
    
    
    So this is the CP version.  "discussion about hell"
                     
                         Patricia

>    Some Christians can be Trinitarians and yet not insist on imposing
>    the doctrine upon others who are otherwise convinced.  Others apparently
>    cannot.
    
    ...and others are shortchanging their walk with God in ignoring the
    Deity of Christ.

    >               -< It's a parable and not to be taken literally >-
>	If we take this account as literal then we would have to accept 
>	that upon death only poor persons go to a privileged place and 
>	rich ones to hell. Yet we know God does not judge us on what we
>	own, rather our hearts. 
    
    You can't isolate a passage from the rest of the Bible and then take it
    literally.  This is how false doctrines and denominations are born.  If
    you take a passage literally, you have to do it in light or context of
    the *ENTIRE* Bible.  
    
    From other passages, we know that rich people can make it to heaven,
    but it is difficult.  We also know that the subjects in parables do not
    have names.  This is not a parable and should be taken literally, but
    in CONTEXT OF THE ENTIRE BIBLE.
    
    thanks,
    Mike

    You can't squash the whole Bible into a consistent whole and ignore the
    demominational issues that were always a part of Judaism and
    Christianity.
    
    Jesus was a Jewish teacher, criticizing some strains of Judaism and
    attempting to reform it.  Peter, and others apostles attempted to
    reform the Jewish religion in light of Jesus' teaching.
    
    Paul separated from Jewish Christianity and formed a Gentile Church. 
    The Romans squashed Jerusalem and wiped out Jewish Christianity.
    
    Through 4 centuries of successive accomodation and persecution, the
    Christian Churches evolved.  Many different styles of Christian
    churches evolved.  Each of the 4 Gospels provides different insight to
    a particularly community of people. Paul provided insights different
    than the gospel writers.  Latter authors such as the author of Timothy
    and Titus were perhaps the first fundementalist Christians, who tried
    to pull scripture together as a unified whole.  Reading Scripture as a
    consistent unified whole is a false reading of scriptures.  It leads to
    conclusions that are eroneous.  For many it leads to the persecution of
    others based on these false readings of scriptures.
    
    I 100% support every person reading scriptures as they wish and gaining
    whatever personal edification they want from scripture.  I object to a
    way of reading scripture that insists on the harrasment of others who
    read scriptures differently.
    
    Patricia
    

.54
        
>    ...and others are shortchanging their walk with God in ignoring the
>    Deity of Christ.

Perhaps.

Doubtlessly, non-Trinitarians are convinced that there's strong enough
evidence to believe it is not them who are so shortchanged.

I see it as nothing but a hindrance to dialogue to never get past the
Trinity doctrine.  Surely there's more to Christianity than what can be
eclipsed by disagreement on this notion.

Shalom,
Richard

    Hey, /Greg,
    
    	Why doncha' take a moment sometime and tell us something about
    yourself in Topic 3?
    
    Richard
    

| Because.... I like to keep people guessing...!


	Could that be one reason why people so often say you're something you
really aren't? One of many I'm sure, but one that could be eliminated.....

    Greg,
    
    	I figure if people aren't willing to form any kind of relationship
    with the readers here, they're only here to wage some sort of campaign.
    
    	An enormous amount of Jesus' life and ministry revolved around
    relationships.  I expect as much from his truest followers.
    
    	So, keep us guessing.  But be aware, it'll also keep us not caring.
    
    Shalom,
    Richard
    

re: .33    

>    				It seems to me that Lazarus' counterpart,
>    		the rich man in Luke 16, was quite conscious.  
    
>    				Conscious of his torment.  Conscious
>    		of his need for water.  Conscious of his 5 brothers who 
>    		needed to repent.  Your explanation?
 
Scott Hahn, the Protestant and now Catholic Bible Scholar, interperts 
this teaching to refer to Purgatory, not Hell, for the very reasons that
you pointed out here.

The Rich Man was concerned [charitable] towards his brothers and he was
conscious of their fate. He actually pleads with Moses on their behalf.
He also called out, "Father Abraham, have pity on me". Those who choose 
Hell are considered to scorn all that is of God through their pride and
they do not repent or seek mercy even in Hell.

Abraham answers which could not happen if this were Hell; furthermore, 
Abraham calls the rich man, "My child", which would say that there was some 
commonality yet between them; this would not be the case if the rich man 
had be permanently cast from God for all time.

Finally, it is quite interesting that Jesus *did* raise one man from the
dead, and that man's name was Lazarus. It is also true that thse who
were hard of heart still did not repent even when he was raised from the
dead!

[Other scriptural basis for purgatory are seen in the passages concerning
the 'purifying fire' which we must undergo before we can come into the
presence of God; for those on earth who cooperate with the Holy Spirit 
this sanctification occurs through our lifetime; what is not yet perfected
when we leave this life, if we leave in God's grace, is accomplished 
in this purgatoral fire.]

Peace of Jesus,

Mary

    .67  Well, hey, that's a start!  ;-}
    
    Richard
    

    Re: Lazarus & Purgatory
    
    Actually he was in Sheol which is consistent with OT saints prior to
    Christ's atonement.  I believe it is Matthew that records the saints
    leaving their graves sometime after the crucifixion.
    
    Mike

RE .55

Mike, 

I mainly agree with your reply, one does need to look
at other scriptures. But I find that "subjects not having 
names in other parables" just an observation and irrelevant, 
especially when we read in Matthew 13:34,35 that Jesus would 
only speak to the crowds by use of parables or illustrations. 
This was mentioned in my reply.

Phil.

This notestring shows that there is much confusion regarding
the true meaning of hell. Note the following comment from
"The Enclyclopedia Americana Vol 14 P81":

"Much confusion and misunderstanding has been caused through
the early tranlators of the Bible persistently rendering
the Hebrew Sheol and the Greek Hades and Gehenna by the word
hell. The simple transliteration of these words by the translators
of the revised editions of the Bible has not sufficed to
appreciably clear up this confusion and misconception."


Through a study of the Bible we can see that:

 Sheol is the equivalent of the Greek Hades
 Psalms 16:10 & Acts 2:25-27

 There is no moral distinction as to who goes to Sheol,
 both good and bad go there when they die.
 Genesis 37:34,35 "Jacob expected to go there"
 Acts 2:31 "Jesus was in there"
 Psalm 9:17;Job 24:19 & Matthew 11:23 "Unrighteous in Sheol"
 Isaiah 14:4,9 "Even Heathens in Sheol"


 Dead cannot release themselves from Sheol
 Job 7:8,9

 Deliverance from Sheol-Hades is by resurrection
 Job 14:13

 Gates of Hades do not overpower Christ's congregation;
 for he resurrects them. 
 Matthew 16:18 NWT reads "I say to you, You are Peter, and
 on this rock-mass I will build my congregation, and the 
 gates of Hades will not over power it."
 Also compare John 6:39; Rev 1:1,17,18; 1 Cor 15:44,54,55.

 All in Sheol-Hades are to be resurrected and when emptied
 it is completely destroyed. 
 Revelation 20:12-14.

 There is more, but this should be sufficient to show that
 Hades or Sheol is the "common grave of all mankind". Not
 heaven and certainly not hellfire.

 Gehenna and the "lake of fire" are not the same as 
 Sheol/Hades.

 Phil.

re. 51

Greg,

; Jesus said in Matthew 25:46   "Inasmuch as ye did
; it not to one of the least of these, ye did it not to me.
; And these shall go away into everlasting punishment: but
; the righteous into life eternal."
    
; What do you think that Jesus meant when he said
; the words "everlasting punishment"?
    
  Another translation renders this as "everlasting cutting off",
  that is the opposite of "everlasting life" which is the
  reward the righteous receive. Jude 7 RSV helps us to see what
  is meant by punishment through everlasting fire, it reads
  "just as Sodom and Gomorrah and the surrounding cities, which
  likewise acted immorally and indulged in unnatural lust, serve
  as an example by undergoing a punishment of eternal fire."
  Now, what is it that we know about these cities today?. Well know
  one knows for sure where they are situated or if anything remains 
  of the cities. It's as though they have been totally destroyed 
  without trace. However the Bible does tell us that they existed 
  at one time or another. This is what "everlasting punishment"
  means, persons receiving it will be blotted out forever, with
  no reprieve. This is unlike those who have died and who will
  receive a resurrection(John 5:28,29), for God stills holds them
  in his memory (Job 14:13). Also note that Revelation 20:14 tells 
  us that the "lake of fire" is symbolic and means the "second death",
  those who receive the second death have no hope of a resurrection
  for unlike Hades there are no keys associated with the "Lake of fire".


  Phil.
  

| <<< Note 974.64 by YIELD::GRIFFIS >>>


| -< Why should I care what they think? >-


	You're right that you should not care, but by your constant posting of
bearing false witness shows that you do care. Like I said, it would probably
help clear up things about you, helping to keep bearing false witness down, but
it's your choice. 


Glen

re: Note 974.52 by Patricia  "I feel therefore I am" 

>    How come I immediately think of the UU cartoon when I read that.  
>    The one with the signs pointing in two directions.
>      -  One sign pointing to Heaven,
>      -  The other signs pointing to "discussion about Heaven"
>    And all the UU's heading toward the discussion group!!
    
This reminds me of an episode of Rod Serling's _Night Gallery_  (the same guy 
who brought the world _The Twilight Zone_.)

As I recall it there was a motorcycle/car crash between a "biker dude" kind of 
guy and a milquetoast.  After the fatal accident they both end up in the same
room, where the milquetoast presents an eternal slide show of his vacation
snapshots.   This is heaven to the milquetoast, while it is hell to the biker.

There's also a song by Laurie Anderson with a line that goes 
"Paradise is exactly like where you are right now, only much, MUCH better."
Conversely, hell might be like where we are right now, only much, MUCH worse.
That is, if we are currently in communion with God, it will be so much better
in heaven, and if we are currently isolated from God, the isolation will be so
much worse in hell.  (However, I do not believe in eternal suffering.  I 
believe that isolation from God sorta means non-existence.) 

Yes, to certain folks, I know this is not scriptural, but I like the imagery 
anyway.

Peace,

Jim

    Yes Jim,
    
    It is good imagery.
    
    AS I have experienced depression, I "know" what it feels like to be
    separated from myself, others, and God.  I have learned that turning my
    life over to God is the only way out of depression and that the joy of
    relatedness truly is salvation.
    
    Hell is depression.
    
    Heaven is eternal relatedness to all that is Holy.
    
    Patricia

    re: .69
    
    Hi Greg,
    
        I don't know if the rich man has a chance of getting out of where
    he's at; might be, after a long time! I'm just noting the points that
    seem inconsistant with calling this place the eternal hell.
    
        Mary

| <<< Note 974.76 by YIELD::GRIFFIS >>>


RE: Would I believe?

	Greg, I have no reason to believe you would lie, so if you said these
things happened, and were serious about it, then I would believe that you saw
these things. 

| Will people believe what I am saying? I tell you the truth, I was persecuted 
| in YUKON for preaching these truths by people who were IGNORANT, DECEIVED, AND
| RUDE.  

	Greg, I saw what happened to you in there. Try to understand something.
Do you have the same beliefs as the others in there? Is everyone at the same
level of knowing, loving God? Are people called to do different things than
others? I think you know where I am going with this. The things you have
mentioned in that file are things, even you will have to admit, that are out of
the ordinary. I can understand the sceptisism of people over what you write. I
don't condone rudeness, not on their part or on your own. Remember, you are the
one that wants to keep people guessing. Should they believe everything you
write with this knowledge? To be honest with you, how can anyone be expected to
believe it based on the guessing game? You know your ideas, your visions, are
different than the majority of the people who write in there. To speak up as
you have shows to me, anyway, that you stand by what you believe, even at the
expense of being ridiculed. But something I wish you would take into
consideration is it does not really matter if they believe you, as their
beliefs may be different. Your walk is with Jesus. That's where you should stay
focused. He will use you, in many ways. But for you to say that they are
deceived, kind of bothers me. Each person has their own walk with Christ, and
He could have led others down a seperate road. BTW, when you mentioned
ignorant, did you mean that in a negative way?

| Some there persecuted me, and were actually being used by demonic spirits. And
| some of those who persecuted me, are Christians. 

	Greg, I'm sure many thought you were being used by demonic spirits. Who
is right? Don't worry so much about what they think, let Christ handle it. If
they do bear false witness, by all means correct them, but don't let it get to
you so bad.

Glen

> There is no moral distinction as to who goes to Sheol,
> both good and bad go there when they die.
> Genesis 37:34,35 "Jacob expected to go there"
> Acts 2:31 "Jesus was in there"
> Psalm 9:17;Job 24:19 & Matthew 11:23 "Unrighteous in Sheol"
> Isaiah 14:4,9 "Even Heathens in Sheol"

    Phil, going by the rich man and Lazarus, there are obviously 2
    compartments in Sheol separated by a great abyss (Luke 16) - one for the
    righteous, one for the wicked.
    
    I Peter 3:18-21, 4:6 refers to the spirits in prison that Christ freed
    from Sheol.  Matthew 27:52-53 speaks about the dead saints resurrecting
    when Christ died.  
    
    Mike

    re: .81
    
    Greg,
    
        Many non-Catholics might also find themselves quite surprised to
    be living a near-term afterlife that exists outside their theology!
    
    		:^)
    		   Mary

re .82

Mike,

Thanks for your reply,

;Phil, going by the rich man and Lazarus, there are obviously 2
;compartments in Sheol separated by a great abyss (Luke 16) - one for the
;righteous, one for the wicked.

Problem is Mike, the characters in Jesus' parable pictured those 
who were listening to Jesus. The "Rich Man" the Pharisees (verse 14,15,19) 
and the beggar Lazarus common people who had repented. The Pharisees were 
dead spiritually, that is in God's eyes. These one who had repented were 
now in a favoured position unlike the Pharisees. So this parable doesn't 
give us an insight to the condition of the physical dead.

Similiarly, 2 Peter 3:18-21 is talking about the fallen angels spiritual 
condition. Revelation 12 tells us that fallen angels where still inhabiting
heaven at this time, that is until the birth of God's kingdom.

Matthew 27:52-53 indicates that the bodies of the holy ones were raised.
Now I can understand why you feel that this was a resurrection, however
the scripture just says that these bodies were visible to many people.
When earthquakes occur, sometimes graves can be opened and the dead
bodies become visible. I don't think that someone should read anything
more into this scripture, than what was reported (compare 2 Timothy 2:18).

Time to go home here in the UK, have a good weekend.

Phil. 

    Whaddya say we not take swipes at Catholicism, eh?
    
    (No, I'm not Catholic)
    
    Shalom,
    Richard
    

    >              -< The rich man or Pharisees were spiritually dead >-
    
    we're all spiritually dead until we accept Christ as Savior and are
    born again.  I don't know what your NWT says in these passages, but the
    KJV is very different, not to mention a more accurate translation.
    
>Problem is Mike, the characters in Jesus' parable pictured those 
>who were listening to Jesus. The "Rich Man" the Pharisees (verse 14,15,19) 
>and the beggar Lazarus common people who had repented. The Pharisees were 
>dead spiritually, that is in God's eyes. These one who had repented were 
>now in a favoured position unlike the Pharisees. So this parable doesn't 
>give us an insight to the condition of the physical dead.
    
    Lazarus was taken to Abraham's bosom.  Knowing who Abraham was to
    Almighty God, Abraham's bosom wouldn't be a place for the wicked - only
    for the righteous.  Jesus was impressing upon the Pharisees the
    seriousness of the punishment in store for them.  The Pharisees were
    not righteous.

>Similiarly, 2 Peter 3:18-21 is talking about the fallen angels spiritual 
>condition. 
    
    Huh?  Let's take a look:
    
I Peter 3:18
For Christ also hath once suffered for sins, the just for the unjust, that he
might bring us to God, being put to death in the flesh, but quickened by the
Spirit:

I Peter 3:19
By which also he went and preached unto the spirits in prison;

I Peter 3:20
Which sometime were disobedient, when once the longsuffering of God waited in
the days of Noah, while the ark was a preparing, wherein few, that is, eight
souls were saved by water.

I Peter 3:21
The like figure whereunto even baptism doth also now save us (not the putting
away of the filth of the flesh, but the answer of a good conscience toward
God,) by the resurrection of Jesus Christ:

    >Revelation 12 tells us that fallen angels where still inhabiting
>heaven at this time, that is until the birth of God's kingdom.
    
    The above passage and Revelation 12 are completely separate events.

>Matthew 27:52-53 indicates that the bodies of the holy ones were raised.
>Now I can understand why you feel that this was a resurrection, however
>the scripture just says that these bodies were visible to many people.
>When earthquakes occur, sometimes graves can be opened and the dead
>bodies become visible. I don't think that someone should read anything
>more into this scripture, than what was reported (compare 2 Timothy 2:18).

    Phil, I think you're twisting this passage.  It doesn't relate that at
    all:
    
Matthew 27:52
And the graves were opened; and many bodies of the saints which slept arose,

Matthew 27:53
And came out of the graves after his resurrection, and went into the holy city,
and appeared unto many.

    How do we know the saints were freed during the resurrection?  This is
    how we know:
    
Revelation 1:17
And when I saw him, I fell at his feet as dead. And he laid his right hand upon
me, saying unto me, Fear not; I am the first and the last;

Revelation 1:18
I am he that liveth, and was dead; and, behold, I am alive for evermore. Amen;
and have the keys of hell and of death.

Revelation 2:8
And unto the angel of the church in Smyrna write; These things saith the first
and the last, which was dead, and is alive;

    Jesus Christ, God incarnate, freed them from Hades, personally!  Both 
    spiritually and physically!
    
    Mike

 Mike & Greg,

 Regarding 2 Peter 2:4 and how the translators in many Bibles
 chose to translate Tartarus as Hell. This leads to confusion
 which I mentioned in a previous reply. Why? ,well as you have
 said Mike you need to look to other scripture to intrepret
 correctly. The fallen angels are shown in the book of Job and
 Revelation as being active in heaven long after the flood also
 Jesus' miracles involved expelling demons from people. So the
 angels were not chained in this underworld. Prior to being 
 rebellious, they would have been in Jehovah's "spiritual light", 
 now they through judgment they were to find themselves in darkness 
 spiritually as it were. Jehovah God, would no longer shine his
 spiritual light on them, but has them in "chains of darkness".

 Tartarus is the dark condition that the fallen angels find themselves
 in. Previously, they would have enjoyed Jehovah's spiritual light.

 Question, do any of you know why the translators chose to translate
 Tartarus as hell ? (see RSV footnote). 

 Phil.

re .89

;Abraham's bosom is not for spiritually dead

Mike,

I never said it was, but that those in Abraham's bosom
depicted those who were now in a favoured position. Previously
the common people (Lazarus the beggar) had to beg for spiritual
crumbs from the Pharisees (Rich Man's) table (Luke 16:21).
But the Pharisees looked down on the common people and despised
them calling them an "accursed people" (John 7:49), in the Pharisees 
eyes such ones could never be viewed as righteous. Rather than giving
them refreshment (even a crumb) they would burden the common people 
with heavy loads not lifting a finger to help. Now there is a change 
for the common people have Jesus, and they are being fed spiritually 
and Jesus' message is one of comfort to them (verse 25). Not so for the 
Pharisees they are tormented by Jesus' teachings so much so they want 
to kill him. The Rich man pleads in verse 27 for his five brothers. In 
reply, he is told "They have Moses and the prophets; let them hear them" 
(verse 29). If the Pharisees had been paying attention to Moses and the 
prophets they would have known that Jesus was the Messiah. In fact, 
their hearts are so hard that even if someone should be resurrected from 
the dead they still would not recognise or accept Jesus as Jehovah's 
Anointed One (verse 31). However the repent tax collectors, harlots and 
other common people who have recognised Jesus and repented are now in a 
favoured position.

This probably will be my last note in this string for some time. However,
It's been good to see how others view hell. I didn't realise that persons
had this different compartments interpretation. 

Phil. 

      Hi,
    
        Sort of related...
    
        I've been doing word studies such as looking at verses which
        refer to _water_ and those which refer to _light_ or _fire_.
    
        The conclusion I have found is that these refer to revelation.
        The fire that burns the unsaved is the same water that floods
        them, i.e. it will be like Noah and the flood and Lot and the
        raining of fire and brimstone.
    
        The spiritual application is that a revelation of the kindness
        and love of our Savior will destroy anyone in whose heart is
        sin for light makes manifest the destructive force of sin.
    
        Regarding the ultimate plight of the unsaved in terms of physical
        fire is missing the mark by a country mile.  The Bible's word
        is spirit and not flesh and blood.
    
                                                   Tony

      Hi Greg,
    
        Well, I suppose part of what I said would certainly have
        to imply that God sometimes uses two things as being symbols
        of the same thing.  An obvious example is sword and water.
        Ephesians and Hebrews says the sword is the word.  Ephesians
        (5:26) refers to water as the word, i.e. sword = water.
    
        If one has sin in his heart, he cannot behold a full revelation
        of the love of God for that will manifest a full revelation of
        the sinfulness of his heart.  As Ephesians explains, light makes
        manifest.  Or as Romans says, the LAW (which is a revelation of 
        the character of God) gives sin its strength.  The law of liberty
        is the mirror in James 1.  It reveals the character and the unsaved
        when confronted by the mirror (dimly) turn away and shove that
        revelation in the subconscious.
    
        When God fully unveils His presence, the unsaved will have the
        total reality of their evil characters made known to them.  This
        will cause the lie of sin which is that God has rejected them.  They
        will give in to this intense feeling of alienation and will
        despair.
    
        The despair will be so consuming that it will crush out their
        lives.
    
        Kind of like an Isaiah 6 experience except the recipients of that
        revelation will have no faith and the revelation will be far more
        than what Isaiah received at the same time.
    
        Greg, read Hebrews 12.  The remnant pass through the same fire.
        Also read the fiery furnace vision in Daniel.  Its spiritual,
        apocalyptic meaning is clear.  A fire that destroys Babylon is
        one that the remnant can survive.
    
        And yes Greg...God loves them.  God is love.
                                                    
                                                      Tony

re .93

Greg,

;Before you leave think about this...

To clarify, I was just talking about this notes string.

;Check it out, Phil.   JESUS IS JEHOVAH.

This is a different subject to hell, but I can ensure
that I have checked this out. As Jehovah's chief agent,
ofcourse one could take this view apart from the fact
that Jesus did not take credit for the things you
mentioned but gave the credit to his Father Jehovah
God. It was Jehovah God who gave Jesus the authority
to perform these miracles. As the one sent forth, it
was Jesus who represented his Father (John 5:19,30).
The worship and honour should go to the one who sent
the Messiah, which means "Anointed One". Even Jesus
directed peoples attention to this one (John 17:6,26),
should we not imitate him?. For if we direct peoples
attention solely to Jesus, would we miss the point of 
Jesus' ministry? If you want to discuss this then lets
do so in an appropriate note, but in all honesty do
you think this will lead to a fruitful discussion?.
Especially seeing that this opposing viewpoint is
likely to offend those who do believe that Jesus is
God.

BTW I did some more reading on the Rich Man & Lazarus
account. It seems, that not just Jehovah's Witnesses,
who believe this is a parable. The Jerusalem Bible 
footnote to Luke 16 states "parable in story form
without reference to any historical personage." The
Interpreter's Bible which is a leading Prostestant 
publication points "an allegorical appendix that
presupposes the conflict between early Christianity
and orthodox Judaism. The rich man and his brothers
represent the unbelieving Jews. Jesus is made to assert
that they have stubbornly refused to repent in spite
of the obvious testimony to himself in Scripture and
to predict that they will fail to be impressed by his
resurrection. It is conceivable that Luke and his
readers imposed some such interpretation on these
verses."

I know I said my last reply probabally would be my last
one in this string but I thought the above was important
enough to mention. For valueable lessons can be learnt
from Jesus' parable, not so if one discounts this as
a parable so as to promote ones teachings of hellfire.

Phil.

re .98

	Greg,

	Again the Scripture you have quoted has shown the confusion
	that has come from Bible translators having rendered
	different words as hell. In the RSV, in the footnote to
	the Scripture you quoted Mark 9:43-47 hell is translated
	from the Greek word Gehenna. Gehenna would have been readily
	understood by Jesus' listeners, for it existed then as a
	rubbish dump in Jerusalem. The fire on the tip was kept 
	constantly burning as rubbish was put on it. Also thrown onto 
	the tip were the bodies of executed criminals for it was felt 
	that such ones were not worthy of a decent burial. 

	Gehenna is different to Sheol and Hades.

	The Scriptures tell us that both good and bad go to Sheol
	or Hades (hell). Gehenna and the "lake of fire" are something
	totally different and symbolise eternal destruction, there is
	no coming back (resurrection) for those being thrown in. Those
	thrown in are destroyed as if by fire, which is a fitting symbol.

	Phil.	

    Greg:
    
    Yes, I had heard of that account but didn't know who it was.  I also
    understand that there were utterances coming out of hell.  They were
    tongues that although were not understandable by mere humans, they were
    utterances that were so vile and blasphemous that we couldn't bear to
    hear them in our humanness.
    
    -Jack

    I noticed a lot of passages in the RSV strip Christ of His Divinity as
    well.  It more than explains the attraction from those that uphold the
    NWT.
    
    Mike

Re: .103 Greg

>    			You are thinking about something different.
>    		There was a report published, ( I have not checked 
>    		it out ), that scientists from Russia dug  miles 
>    		into the earth and using ultrasensitive electronic
>    		equipment, were able to hear voices wailing, and
>    		screaming down yonder.

I believe the report was published in the Weekly World News.  See note
967.10 for other examples of WWN stories.

Don't believe everything you read, Greg!

				-- Bob

Re: .102 Mike

>    I noticed a lot of passages in the RSV strip Christ of His Divinity as
>    well.  It more than explains the attraction from those that uphold the
>    NWT.
    
The RSV translators were attempting to translate the most reliable
manuscripts available as accurately as possible.  If this "stripped Christ
of His Divinity" that's the fault of the manuscripts, not the translators.

				-- Bob

      Hi,
    
        No doubt that Satan will confuse and deceive many by taking
        advantage of the false belief that man has life before the
        resurrection.
    
                                                Tony

>The RSV translators were attempting to translate the most reliable
>manuscripts available as accurately as possible.  If this "stripped Christ
>of His Divinity" that's the fault of the manuscripts, not the translators.
    
    Try reading a Hebrew & Greek Interlinear Bible some time (*DIRECT* from
    the manuscripts) and tell me it's not the fault of the translators!
    
    Mike

To avoid ratholing this topic I've entered the last few notes about the
Revised Standard Version as 51.83.

				-- Bob

	Holy Michael Archangel, defend us in the day of battle;
	be our safeguard against the wickedness and snares of the
	devil.  May God rebuke him, we humbly pray; and do thou,
	Prince of the heavenly host, by the power of God, thrust
	down to hell Satan and all wicked spirits who wander through
	the world for the ruin of souls.  Amen.

    reminds me of "This Present Darkness" by Frank Peretti.  

    When did I say "This Present Darkness" was fiction?

    that's the beauty of Peretti's books.  You find them in the fiction
    section, but their contents happen in cities around the world on a
    daily basis.  

    Tom Clancy is to government espionage as Frank Peretti is to spiritual 
    warfare.

    Mike