As you can see in the charts above, the King James version is the most inconsistent with its translations. The NIV is slightly less inconsistent. Young's Literal Translation and the Concordant Literal Versions are the most consistent.
Welcome to Christian Forums, a Christian Forum that recognizes that all Christians are a work in progress.
You will need to register to be able to join in fellowship with Christians all over the world.
We hope to see you as a part of our community soon and God Bless!
Wow. Only one appearance. And not about humankind. The lowest Hades.Translation of the word "Tartarus" in the New Testament
1611 KJV KJV, NKJV Geneva NIV NRSV YLT & CLT Roth Vulgate 2Pt. 2:4*1 hell hell hell hell *2 hell *3 Tartarus lowest hades tartarum
Thanks for your post.Maybe Hell is different for different people. The Bible talks of the lowest hell as if there are many layers of hell.
Except that doesn't jive with the Biblical usage. I suggest you explore this.I knew somebody would make this claim, but it's erroneous. Dead is dead. You can not change the definition of it, to say that dead means you're in hell. That's not dead. Dead means you have no consciousness, no breath, no life. Just like a door knob. Death is the absence of life, just like dark is the absence of light. There is no version of light that is dark, and there is no version of life that is death. You have to be one or the other.
I think the motivation of the King James translators was to scare people into the church. This is the only reason I can imagine to explain why they would choose to not be accurate, because they could've been more accurate if they'd wanted to.I have no idea why the words haides, geena and tartaróō are all translated as "hell" in the KJV, aside from the fact that all three words are characterized by a state of separation from God.
I don't see it that way, regarding your deduction of it having a population the way a physical place would. Rather, I liken it to, for example, "going to sleep". The language there also implies that you're going to a place (a place called "sleep") but in reality we know we're simply moving into a different state of being, not a different location. I think that's the same thing happening with the words sheol and hades. They're described as places, but they're actually just a state of being, specifically, the state of being dead.The many examples where sheol / hades is spoken of as the abode of the dead (or the abode of departed souls or spirits) implies that sheol / hades is a very real, rather than a mythical place - and if sheol / hades exists, it has a "population" (because it's the population of sheol / hades that causes it to exist), and if it has a population, then it means that the soul, or at least the self-awareness of the person, continues after physical death.
Can you give me an example?Except that doesn't jive with the Biblical usage. I suggest you explore this.
Much love!
That may be true, which is why I used the word 'place' in quotations, but as a matter of interest for me I would like to ask you, do you see those "in hades" as being consciously or at least subconsciously (like we are when we are in a dream state) aware of themselves and of whatever they "see and hear" around them?I don't see it that way, regarding your deduction of it having a population the way a physical place would. Rather, I liken it to, for example, "going to sleep". The language there also implies that you're going to a place (a place called "sleep") but in reality we know we're simply moving into a different state of being, not a different location. I think that's the same thing happening with the words sheol and hades. They're described as places, but they're actually just a state of being, specifically, the state of being dead.
1) What's your definition of hell?
2) How do you see the final judgment playing out?
3) Will everyone be saved in the end?
4) Will the Lord who taught us to love our enemies incinerate his?
/
Seperation from G_d's presence and a hot time in the city tonight.
Gregg actually presented all three views of the final judgement. (three hells)@St. SteVen I agree with what Steve Gregg says in the above video about fire and brimstone being a symbol of the destruction of the ungodly, which is borrowed by the prophets, and in the Revelation from the destruction of Sodom and Gomorrah. It also appears in Ezekiel 38:22 talking about the destruction of Gog and his armies.
Indeed.It's difficult to come to a conclusion (actually I believe it's impossible to come to a conclusion) because if Jesus did state these things plainly, it's not recorded.
I don't know. I think it says more about us than about God if we only want to know about His love and mercy, but not about His justice. God's character is both love AND justice.For me it comes down to what each view says about the character of God.
Two of the views make God into something less than loving. (way less)
I think the hell doctrine clouds our understanding of God's justice.I don't know. I think it says more about us than about God if we only want to know about His love and mercy, but not about His justice. God's character is both love AND justice.
If our penal system was perfect it would punish the murderer by putting him in jail but it would let him out if the system could somehow know if he truly was remorseful and repentant and sought forgiveness from all those he had harmed.
God's love provided the mercy and forgiveness we need. What about His justice?
No, but do we hold God to a lower standard regarding His justice than He holds Himself?I think the hell doctrine clouds our understanding of God's justice.
Was it justice, or mercy that Christ paid our death penalty for sin?
We are told that revenge is a sin and that we are to love our enemies.
Does God hold us to a higher standard than he holds himself?
/ @Hillsage
Not sure how to answer that question. - LOLNo, but do we hold God to a lower standard regarding His justice than He holds Himself?
Not sure how to answer that question. - LOL
Could you restate it? (if need be)
My point was that it would be hypocritical to hold anyone to a higher standard than you hold yourself.
Does God require us to love our enemies while he plans to incinerate his own?
Just to be clear, I don't think anyone should think there will not be consequences for our deeds.
We need to be held accountable. Everyone will answer. But correction should have the purpose of restoration,
not pointless eternal punishment with no hope of escape. Does that make sense?
/ cc; @Hillsage
Does God require us to love our enemies while he plans to incinerate his own?
/ cc; @Hillsage