A Closer Look at the Genesis Creation Account

[DuckieLady]

Since I have no belief in Hell, all the dead sleep in their graves awaiting a resurrection. (Ecclesiastes 9:5, 10; John 5:28-29)

Okay.

So, there's 162 references to hell in the New Testament and 70 of those are from Jesus himself.

So I'm curious, how do you interpret those?

For example, I'll give an easy one so its not too confusing...

Matthew 25:41

“Then he will say to those on his left, ‘Depart from me, you who are cursed, into the eternal fire prepared for the devil and his angels."

 

[APAK]

Jesus was 100% man, 100% God. The Trinity have always existed. The Trinity are coexistent, coequal. They each have a role.

Right, the same parroted lines I get from those that do not know the word of God, only the traditions of men. And they dare not go beyond that point.

You know that Christ literally died on the cross and his Father brought him back to life? Now I would like to know how his impossible other 100% God nature did not kick in at that moment on the Cross, when his 100% human nature died, and he could not save himself? He needed his God to deliver him, his Father, the only source of 100% divinity? Now I if you give me a role playing answer or some mysterious non-biblical nonesense contrived answer then I know you know nothing about divinity and the Father, and his power.

Can I get a decent thoughtful answer this time to my question instead of a knee-jerk or parroted response?

Thanks.

 

[APAK]

No it is definitely not a pagan concept. Rather the pagans may have gotten their idea from the Bible. It does not matter either way, since Scripture is very clear. All Christians must be baptized in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost, since there are three that bear record in Heaven, the Father, the Word, and the Holy Ghost, and these three are One (Mt 28:19; 1 John 5:7).

This is where we will always part ways Enoch. I used to think as you and really not rely on these things told and learned and taught to me by priests and pastors, as their sources I found out were flawed and deliberately flawed.

As in a other places of scripture, especially in the NT, like the one you just quoted, they have been altered to support the political-religious concept of the Trinity - a variant of modalism. The earlier manuscripts of 1 John 5:7 has been ALTERED for this purpose. Ask your pastor, minister or priest, in fact ask a few of them, this very serious question...It is that important to know this truth...and other truths about other altered scripture that has divided many people and Christians.

 

[Jay Ross]

That is not Biblical. Suggestions are not facts. The book of Jasher is associated with Rosicrucianism, which is not compatible with Christianity. Whereas Christianity is most exclusive, Rosicrucianism is one of the most eclectic movements, teachings or fraternal organizations on earth. It has borrowed and appropriated to itself from the widest variety of beliefs and practices. Nothing like Christ taught.

Aunty Jane, it would be nice if you had checked your facts before you ran your rant.

The Book of Jasher is found mentioned twice in the Old Testament.

Joshua 10:13: - 13 And the sun stood still, and the moon stayed, until the people had avenged themselves upon their enemies. Is not this written in the book of Jasher? So the sun stood still in the midst of heaven, and hasted not to go down about a whole day.

KJV​

2 Samuel 1:18: - 18 (Also he bade them teach the children of Judah the use of the bow: behold, it is written in the book of Jasher.)​

KJV​

Your claim that the Book of Jasher is associated with Rosicrucianism needs more citations to back up your claim.


Link: - Rosicrucianism - Wikipedia

The Book of Jasher was referenced in Joshua 10:13 around 1350 BC.

This book fills in many gaps in the Book of Jasher, how ever, it should be read carefully and its content judged prudently by us today.

Shalom

 

[Jay Ross]

I disagree with this statement bolded in the above quote. The passing of time in the first five chapters of Genesis, from the time of Adam's creation up and until the beginning of the Six Chapter, is of the order of 1,000 plus years. I would suggest that God rested for a 1,000 plus years before he went searching how His creation was working, and He was disappointed that the majority of the hearts of mankind was wicked and initially he decided to shorten the timespan for mankind's life from nearly 1,000 plus year down to 120 years.

Did you make that up?

Where will I find confirmation in the Bible for this idea?

Actually, I used the Bible data to establish the facts that I posted. Have you not also used the Genesis account data to establish a timeline as to when God decided to reduce the age which the patriarchs would live for. Does not this timeline suggest that God visited the earth around 1,000 plus years or so after the creation of Adam to see how mankind was fairing?

It seems that you were blowing a lot of hot air when you made your statement that I was quoting.

Shalom

 

[Brakelite]

Correct. How do people calling themselves Christian go off the rails so completely and deny the very basis of the Bible -- the book of Genesis?

They fail to realize that nearly every major doctrine of Christianity finds it's foundation in Genesis.
But the idea that God established the entire existence of life predicated on death and experimental evolutionary processes... Theistic evolution... Whereby death was a necessary adjunct to life, prior to sin, destroys the gospel.

 

[Ronald David Bruno]

When God created the heavens and the Earth, He brought everything into existence in one almighty act of power......but we Earthlings have no way to know how he did it, or how long it took him in earth time. To an infinite God, time is not relevant

Are you are trying to push Theistic Evolution, an old earth theory which distorts the Genesis account?
It was an order of creative events listed within each earthly day period. And btw, time is part if our physical dimension, Einstein proved that. It cam be altered by gravity or speed.
You can't get around the scripture that describes how long a day is:
"And God said, " Let there be light, and there was light. And God saw that the light was good. And God separated the light from darkness. God called the light day and the darkness He called night. There was evening and morning, the first day." Gen. 1:3-5
Did you get that? Morning + evening = 1 day
On the 4th day He made the moon which sheds light during the evening and the sun during the day.
There is a difference between spiritual light which exists in the spiritual dimension, light radiates from God in heaven and physical light which God created in our physical universe. Light has particles and waves. Now on the first day, this light did not come from stars, the sun or moon since they were not yet created until the 4th day. This light was from God, which transcended from the spiritual into the physical. Man has seen this Light from the skekinah glory, Jesus transfiguration or any other theophany appearance, or angels.
This physical light is complex and not fully understood, nor is the universe because it is missing some key unknown spiritual forces responsible for it's construction. Scientists try desperately to figure it out, creating theories like quantom mechanics or even machines that have identified what they call the God particle ( Higgs boson). I guess they claim that is the smallest particle? Have you seen that machine they created just to locate this particle - and they jump for joy, as if it is some kind of achievement.
But God confounds them. The most intelligent, like Stephen Hawkings, who died an atheist, could not figure cause of the universe.

Bacteria and vegetation were apparently early forms of life,

Vegetation was created on day 3.
Good bacteria must have been created with animals and man. Harmful bacteria, viruses and diseases all came about as a result of sin that distorted and corrupted not only man but the entire creation.

Don't be duped by the theories of fools.

 

[Aunty Jane]

I somewhat disagree with this comment:

Perspective...being EVERYTHING God Created, God immediately then ... MADE "something" unique about the Thing He Created.
Created man...Made man alive.
Two different things.

Our Saving Grace of God "HIS MAKING"...
Continues IN His "every individual" Created thing.

Gen 2:
[3] And God blessed the seventh day, and sanctified it: because that in it he had rested from all his work which God created and made.

Ummm, not sure what it is you are disagreeing with specifically @Taken ?

I was referring to Genesis 1:1 as that almighty act of creation....the bringing forth of the Universe...not what God did thereafter in preparation for human and animal habitation.
Did you misunderstand? Or am I misunderstanding you?

 

[Taken]

Ummm, not sure what it is you are disagreeing with specifically @Taken ?

I was referring to Genesis 1:1 as that almighty act of creation....the bringing forth of the Universe...not what God did thereafter in preparation for human and animal habitation.
Did you misunderstand? Or am I misunderstanding you?

Just being more specific.
Pointing out the difference between Created and Made.
The Created thing, by forming a lump of dust, called man, did nothing, until it was Made living.

 

[Aunty Jane]

Are you are trying to push Theistic Evolution, an old earth theory which distorts the Genesis account?

No way! What I am doing is showing how science and the Bible are compatible...not at odds in some of these things.
I am not a proponent of theistic evolution. Far from it.
However I do understand the difference between “adaptation” (proven by science to take place within a single “kind” of creature) and "organic evolution"....All adaptation does is create variety within a species, which we know the Creator loves.
Darwin, for example saw many varieties of finches which had adapted to island life. These were not becoming new kinds of birds, but adapted varieties of the same kind of bird. Every creature has the ability to adapt to new environments and food sources....even humans.

You can't get around the scripture that describes how long a day is:
"And God said, " Let there be light, and there was light. And God saw that the light was good. And God separated the light from darkness. God called the light day and the darkness He called night. There was evening and morning, the first day." Gen. 1:3-5
Did you get that? Morning + evening = 1 day

Actually you have read right over a very important point.....it wasn’t “morning + evening”....."there was evening and morning”.....the Jewish “day” began at sundown and continued to sundown the next day......so how long is it between evening and morning? Not 24 hours, is it? So when we say that an era has ended and a new one has begun, isn’t it appropriate to say that the sun went down on that era and rose again in a new one...the “dawn of a new era”......

Qualifying what a "day" is on earth, in no way alters how long a Genesis "day" was.

The Genesis “days” do not argue with established science.....They have to be compatible because God created what science studies. What it can’t establish by any real proof is how life began, and thereafter evolved into all the life forms that have ever existed, with no intervention by an intelligent Creator.....that is where the nonsense lies...not with the Creation account itself....or with what science knows and can prove. These are not incompatible at all. A careful reading of Genesis with a good Concordance removes all doubt. YEC’s have it all wrong and sticking to that ridiculous notion that flies in the face of provable science, has caused many to lose faith.

On the 4th day He made the moon which sheds light during the evening and the sun during the day.
There is a difference between spiritual light which exists in the spiritual dimension, light radiates from God in heaven and physical light which God created in our physical universe. Light has particles and waves. Now on the first day, this light did not come from stars, the sun or moon since they were not yet created until the 4th day. This light was from God, which transcended from the spiritual into the physical. Man has seen this Light from the skekinah glory, Jesus transfiguration or any other theophany appearance, or angels.

How much of that is pure speculation? You have spun that out to say what you want it to, but that is not what scripture says. “The heavens and the earth” were all created together....in one action (according to Genesis 1:1). The sun, moon and stars were already in existence, but not visible from earth’s surface as Job explained...the earth was covered by thick clouds that would have allowed enough light for photosynthesis, but it didn’t allow the heavenly bodies that were already there, to be seen. God removed the cloud cover.

This physical light is complex and not fully understood, nor is the universe because it is missing some key unknown spiritual forces responsible for it's construction. Scientists try desperately to figure it out, creating theories like quantom mechanics or even machines that have identified what they call the God particle ( Higgs boson). I guess they claim that is the smallest particle? Have you seen that machine they created just to locate this particle - and they jump for joy, as if it is some kind of achievement.
But God confounds them. The most intelligent, like Stephen Hawkings, who died an atheist, could not figure cause of the universe.

1 Corinthians 1:19. 1 Corinthians 2:6. Matthew 11:15.
Man was never going to use his intelligence to know what God knows.

Vegetation was created on day 3.
Good bacteria must have been created with animals and man. Harmful bacteria, viruses and diseases all came about as a result of sin that distorted and corrupted not only man but the entire creation.

Since bacteria is necessary for conditioning the soil by breaking down the dead vegetation, those good bacteria must have been present along with the vegetation. It was sentient creatures that were created on the 5th and 6th “days”. There were no animals to eat the vegetation for quite some time, because the “days” were not 24 hour periods. It is ridiculous to think so....and against what science can actually prove. God is a Creator not a magician. He is not constrained by earth time. Like all artists, he takes his time over his works in order to perfect them. Why else would he end each “day” with a declaration as to his satisfaction thus far? There was no "poofing".

The bad bacteria were probably always there too, but the human immune system would not have allowed them to harm humans. We were created perfect, remember? No defects until sin entered into the world. This is what brought sickness, ageing and death. And human behavior since has increased the rate and severity of our fallen state. I believe that our interference with the earth’s natural cycles, and the introduction of poisonous chemicals into our lives from many sources, especially from the 20th century, has also altered the health of animals.
We hardly live a healthy lifestyle in this day and age....with less excuse not to.

Don't be duped by the theories of fools.

Can I give you the same advice....?
Can you tell me what part of that explanation was arguing with scripture?

 

[Aunty Jane]

Actually, I used the Bible data to establish the facts that I posted. Have you not also used the Genesis account data to establish a timeline as to when God decided to reduce the age which the patriarchs would live for. Does not this timeline suggest that God visited the earth around 1,000 plus years or so after the creation of Adam to see how mankind was fairing?

No, I don't believe so.....there is no mention of 'a visitation by God a thousand plus years after Adam'.... That would be incompatible with the whole Bible narrative.

The reason for the age reduction of the human race was more an after effect of the flood, according to my research. God used the water that was above the earth as well as water from under the earth's surface to create the volume of water necessary to flood the world. If you remember the creation account, God made a division between the waters, so that there was water above the earth's atmosphere and also below it.
The earth was completely covered in water in the beginning. In order for dry land to appear, God had to eliminate a certain volume of water in order to facilitate his purpose here. So when the flood was necessary to bring about an end to escalating wickedness caused by rebellious angels and wicked humans, God used the waters above the atmosphere to flood the world again.
2 Peter 3:5-6...
"For this they willfully forget that there were heavens from of old, and an earth formed out of water and amid water by the word of God, 6 by which means the world that existed then, being overflowed with water, perished." (WEB)

So what happened then? Dramatic climate change would have occurred. The waters above the earth would have acted as a barrier or shield to the sun's damaging rays, and it would also have facilitated a more uniform climate on the whole planet. They have dug up palm trees under the permafrost in Siberia, proving that the earth wasn't always frozen in that region.
Increased radiation ages things more rapidly. So, like taking the roof off a hot house, God used that water to fulfill his purpose at that time with success......so where did the water go?
It is obvious that he didn't put it back. The rapid decline in the human lifespan is proof of that.

Today, we are talking about climate change again, because the increase in Co2 emissions has caused a rise in the temperature of the earth and its oceans, leading to record high temperatures, causing droughts and floods and all manner of climate related troubles in this 21st century.

What is the one thing that scientists are warning about? The melting of the polar ice caps. Where would God store all that water from the flood?
I believe that it was magnetically drawn up and snap frozen in the polar ice caps. Think about it. The climate change cause by the removal of the water canopy was a catastrophic event, changing forever the way the earth's climate was meant to be. Harsh weather events have been the result since then....all manner of them.
The warning is there....if the polar ice caps melt, earth will again be inundated with water.

It seems that you were blowing a lot of hot air when you made your statement that I was quoting.

Just because someone has a different opinion to your own, doesn't necessarily mean that they are blowing hot air......it might just be coming from your direction.....

 

[Aunty Jane]

Aunty Jane, it would be nice if you had checked your facts before you ran your rant.

The Book of Jasher is found mentioned twice in the Old Testament.

Joshua 10:13: - 13 And the sun stood still, and the moon stayed, until the people had avenged themselves upon their enemies. Is not this written in the book of Jasher? So the sun stood still in the midst of heaven, and hasted not to go down about a whole day.

KJV​

2 Samuel 1:18: - 18 (Also he bade them teach the children of Judah the use of the bow: behold, it is written in the book of Jasher.)​

KJV​

Your claim that the Book of Jasher is associated with Rosicrucianism needs more citations to back up your claim.

View attachment 18343
Link: - Rosicrucianism - Wikipedia

The Book of Jasher was referenced in Joshua 10:13 around 1350 BC.

This book fills in many gaps in the Book of Jasher, how ever, it should be read carefully and its content judged prudently by us today.

If the book of Jashar was meant to be included in God's instruction manual, it would be found in the Hebrew canon.
Yes, the book is mentioned at Joshua 10:13 in connection with the sun standing still.....and in 2 Samuel 1:18, with reference to a poem called “The Bow”—a song of grief about King Saul of Israel and his son Jonathan. The book was probably a collection of songs and poems on epics or historical subjects and was likely well-known among the Hebrews. But it is not part of God's word.

 

[Jay Ross]

No, I don't believe so.....there is no mention of 'a visitation by God a thousand plus years after Adam'.... That would be incompatible with the whole Bible narrative.

Really, that is hard to prove.

The reason for the age reduction of the human race was more an after effect of the flood, according to my research.

Really, the diagram below disproves that assumption and explanation as Shen only lived to 600 years of age and he was born before the flood.

<snip irrelevant to the discussion at hand>

So what happened then? Dramatic climate change would have occurred. The waters above the earth would have acted as a barrier or shield to the sun's damaging rays, and it would also have facilitated a more uniform climate on the whole planet. They have dug up palm trees under the permafrost in Siberia, proving that the earth wasn't always frozen in that region.
Increased radiation ages things more rapidly. So, like taking the roof off a hot house, God used that water to fulfil his purpose at that time with success......so where did the water go?
It is obvious that he didn't put it back. The rapid decline in the human lifespan is proof of that.

This is an argument out of the silence of the scriptures.

Today, we are talking about climate change again, because the increase in Co2 emissions has caused a rise in the temperature of the earth and its oceans, leading to record high temperatures, causing droughts and floods and all manner of climate related troubles in this 21st century.

What is the one thing that scientists are warning about? The melting of the polar ice caps. Where would God store all that water from the flood?
I believe that it was magnetically drawn up and snap frozen in the polar ice caps. Think about it. The climate change cause by the removal of the water canopy was a catastrophic event, changing forever the way the earth's climate was meant to be. Harsh weather events have been the result since then....all manner of them.
The warning is there....if the polar ice caps melt, earth will again be inundated with water.

Aunty Jane, from scripture, what is the primary cause of the climate change that is occurring on the earth today? The answer is written plainly for you to see if you look.

The nations acting God like to overcome the Climate Change is the outcome of the primary reason.

Just because someone has a different opinion to your own, doesn't necessarily mean that they are blowing hot air......it might just be coming from your direction.....

Aunty Jane, is your opinion worth considering when you cannot see an approximate time period when God began reviewing His Creation in the story during the first 1,500 or so years after He created Adam.

What you are presenting as your opinion is nothing more than smoke and mirrors which quickly discredits what you are posting. Perhaps you should consider what the Bible tells you more than what others have taught you to believe. The rabbit warren you are exploring will collapse soon and you will become trapped in the intrigues it has borrowed around you.

 

[Jay Ross]

If the book of Jashar was meant to be included in God's instruction manual, it would be found in the Hebrew canon.
Yes, the book is mentioned at Joshua 10:13 in connection with the sun standing still.....and in 2 Samuel 1:18, with reference to a poem called “The Bow”—a song of grief about King Saul of Israel and his son Jonathan. The book was probably a collection of songs and poems on epics or historical subjects and was likely well-known among the Hebrews. But it is not part of God's word.

So, then you read no other books to help you understand the scriptures then?

 

[Aunty Jane]

Okay.

So, there's 162 references to hell in the New Testament and 70 of those are from Jesus himself.

So I'm curious, how do you interpret those?

For example, I'll give an easy one so its not too confusing...

Matthew 25:41

“Then he will say to those on his left, ‘Depart from me, you who are cursed, into the eternal fire prepared for the devil and his angels."

Thank you, I have done a lot of research on this topic....

How many words are translated into "Hell" in English Bibles? I can count four ......"hades"....Gehenna"...."the lake of fire"...and "Tartarus".
What do you believe these words mean? Do they all mean the same place?

A decent study of the scriptures will reveal that they do not all refer to the same place.

The scripture in Matthew that you quoted does not mention "hell" but alludes to the "eternal fire prepared for the devil and his angels".
This would be "the lake of fire" into which those who have sinned gravely and incorrigibly are cast. Is there another name for this "lake of fire"? The answer is yes...."Gehenna"....so what was Gehenna to a Jew? Remember that Jesus only preached to a Jewish audience.

"Gehenna" was a rubbish dump for the city of Jerusalem where the carcasses of dead animals and sometimes the bodies of executed criminals were thrown for disposal along with the city's refuse. Fires were kept burning day and night to consume the rubbish. What the flames missed, the maggots finished off. Nothing alive ever went into "Gehenna".

So what was behind the idea that the Jews would have understood back then, but that we wouldn't? The Jews were very pedantic about their burial tombs. Go to any Jewish cemetery and see what I mean. To be disposed of like garbage meant no burial tomb with your name and family lineage inscribed. That to a Jew, conveyed no resurrection, because God was going to call the dead from their tombs and restore their lives. No tomb meant not being remembered by God. (John 5:28-29)

What about Jesus' words in Matthew 10:28?
"Don’t be afraid of those who kill the body, but are not able to kill the soul. Rather, fear him who is able to destroy both soul and body in Gehenna."
So in "Gehenna", both body and soul are "destroyed"....not tortured.

What about "hades"...is that a hell of torture with no escape?
Revelation 20:13-14..."
"The sea gave up the dead who were in it. Death and Hades gave up the dead who were in them. They were judged, each one according to his works. 14 Death and Hades were thrown into the lake of fire. This is the second death, the lake of fire."

Two things mentioned there are interesting.....that the dead in hades are called out of there to be judged.....and the then "death and hades" are thrown into "the lake of fire". Can you throw death and the grave into a literal place? Or is this destination more symbolic? What did the angel call it? "The second death"....what do you think that means?

In Ecclesiastes 9:5, 10 Solomon wrote...
"For the living know that they will die, but the dead don’t know anything, neither do they have any more a reward; for their memory is forgotten. . . . Whatever your hand finds to do, do it with your might; for there is no work, nor plan, nor knowledge, nor wisdom, in Sheol, where you are going."

So, there is no consciousness in death. The dead are not capable of any further contact or connection to this world. There was no belief in an afterlife in original Jewish teachings.
The dead were actually dead....not alive in another form, somewhere else. The idea of an immortal soul originated form Greek Platonism and later infiltrated Jewish thought as it did eventually in Christianity....but it is a pagan idea, not a scriptural one. (Genesis 3;19)
Adam was not "given" a soul, but "became' one when God started him breathing. (Genesis 2:7) Souls are living, breathing creatures...both human and animal....all die the same death. (Ecclesiastes 3:19-20)

According to the Greek Septuagint (Hebrew Bible translated into Greek) "Sheol" is the Hebrew equivalent to "hades" in Greek. To the Jews, this meant the common grave...the place where 'we are all going'. The ancient Jews had no belief in an afterlife of any description so those who were thrown into "Gehenna" were as Jesus said..."destroyed"...completely eliminated from existence.

Webster’s Third New International Dictionary, unabridged, under “Hell” says: “fr[om] . . . helan to conceal.” The word “hell” thus originally conveyed no thought of heat or torment, but simply of a ‘covered over or concealed place.’

In the old English dialect the expression “helling potatoes” meant, not to roast them, but simply to place the potatoes in the ground or in a cellar.

What then is "Tartarus"? (2 Peter 2:4) It is mentioned only once as a place or condition of restraint for satan and his demons.....no humans are in there. These are "the spirits in prison", to who Jesus went after his resurrection to hand down their judgment.

"Hell" is a very interesting topic if you would like to explore it further....?

 

[Cassandra]

Really, the diagram below disproves that assumption and explanation as Shen only lived to 600 years of age and he was born before the flood.

Actually, it shows that life was longer for the folks who were born pre-flood.Look at the drop off in age for folk who were born after. (Someone needs to correct the word to Patriarch in the graph.)

 

[Aunty Jane]

So, then you read no other books to help you understand the scriptures then?

I have plenty of other books that help me understand the scriptures......the book of Jashar isn't one of them.....if I want psalms and songs...they are in the Bible......it contains all we need.

 

[DuckieLady]

Thank you, I have done a lot of research on this topic....

How many words are translated into "Hell" in English Bibles? I can count four ......"hades"....Gehenna"...."the lake of fire"...and "Tartarus".
What do you believe these words mean? Do they all mean the same place?

A decent study of the scriptures will reveal that they do not all refer to the same place.

The scripture in Matthew that you quoted does not mention "hell" but alludes to the "eternal fire prepared for the devil and his angels".
This would be "the lake of fire" into which those who have sinned gravely and incorrigibly are cast. Is there another name for this "lake of fire"? The answer is yes...."Gehenna"....so what was Gehenna to a Jew? Remember that Jesus only preached to a Jewish audience.

"Gehenna" was a rubbish dump for the city of Jerusalem where the carcasses of dead animals and sometimes the bodies of executed criminals were thrown for disposal along with the city's refuse. Fires were kept burning day and night to consume the rubbish. What the flames missed, the maggots finished off. Nothing alive ever went into "Gehenna".

So what was behind the idea that the Jews would have understood back then, but that we wouldn't? The Jews were very pedantic about their burial tombs. Go to any Jewish cemetery and see what I mean. To be disposed of like garbage meant no burial tomb with your name and family lineage inscribed. That to a Jew, conveyed no resurrection, because God was going to call the dead from their tombs and restore their lives. No tomb meant not being remembered by God. (John 5:28-29)

What about Jesus' words in Matthew 10:28?
"Don’t be afraid of those who kill the body, but are not able to kill the soul. Rather, fear him who is able to destroy both soul and body in Gehenna."
So in "Gehenna", both body and soul are "destroyed"....not tortured.

What about "hades"...is that a hell of torture with no escape?
Revelation 20:13-14..."
"The sea gave up the dead who were in it. Death and Hades gave up the dead who were in them. They were judged, each one according to his works. 14 Death and Hades were thrown into the lake of fire. This is the second death, the lake of fire."

Two things mentioned there are interesting.....that the dead in hades are called out of there to be judged.....and the then "death and hades" are thrown into "the lake of fire". Can you throw death and the grave into a literal place? Or is this destination more symbolic? What did the angel call it? "The second death"....what do you think that means?

In Ecclesiastes 9:5, 10 Solomon wrote...
"For the living know that they will die, but the dead don’t know anything, neither do they have any more a reward; for their memory is forgotten. . . . Whatever your hand finds to do, do it with your might; for there is no work, nor plan, nor knowledge, nor wisdom, in Sheol, where you are going."

So, there is no consciousness in death. The dead are not capable of any further contact or connection to this world. There was no belief in an afterlife in original Jewish teachings.
The dead were actually dead....not alive in another form, somewhere else. The idea of an immortal soul originated form Greek Platonism and later infiltrated Jewish thought as it did eventually in Christianity....but it is a pagan idea, not a scriptural one. (Genesis 3;19)
Adam was not "given" a soul, but "became' one when God started him breathing. (Genesis 2:7) Souls are living, breathing creatures...both human and animal....all die the same death. (Ecclesiastes 3:19-20)

According to the Greek Septuagint (Hebrew Bible translated into Greek) "Sheol" is the Hebrew equivalent to "hades" in Greek. To the Jews, this meant the common grave...the place where 'we are all going'. The ancient Jews had no belief in an afterlife of any description so those who were thrown into "Gehenna" were as Jesus said..."destroyed"...completely eliminated from existence.

Webster’s Third New International Dictionary, unabridged, under “Hell” says: “fr[om] . . . helan to conceal.” The word “hell” thus originally conveyed no thought of heat or torment, but simply of a ‘covered over or concealed place.’

In the old English dialect the expression “helling potatoes” meant, not to roast them, but simply to place the potatoes in the ground or in a cellar.

What then is "Tartarus"? (2 Peter 2:4) It is mentioned only once as a place or condition of restraint for satan and his demons.....no humans are in there. These are "the spirits in prison", to who Jesus went after his resurrection to hand down their judgment.

"Hell" is a very interesting topic if you would like to explore it further....?

Now why would you go through all of this trouble on history and semantics, as opposed to taking the Bible at face value?

Whatever you choose to call it or whatever the words came from, it seems irrelevant when the Bible clearly gives its own explanation of what it is talking about.

"But as for the cowardly, the faithless, the detestable, as for murderers, the sexually immoral, sorcerers, idolaters, and all liars, their portion will be in the lake that burns with fire and sulfur, which is the second death.” Revelation 21:8

The reason you are facing a terrible amount of backlash, from pretty much everyone, is because you are actually teaching falsely and that is very dangerous.

It isn't about cultures or definitions or words. It is about what the Bible is telling us. It is the Word ITSELF that matters and that we listen to - God's Word.

 

[Aunty Jane]

Now why would you go through all of this trouble on history and semantics, as opposed to taking the Bible at face value?

Whatever you choose to call it or whatever the words came from, it seems irrelevant when the Bible clearly gives its own explanation of what it is talking about.

"But as for the cowardly, the faithless, the detestable, as for murderers, the sexually immoral, sorcerers, idolaters, and all liars, their portion will be in the lake that burns with fire and sulfur, which is the second death.” Revelation 21:8

The reason you are facing a terrible amount of backlash, from pretty much everyone, is because you are actually teaching falsely and that is very dangerous.

It isn't about cultures or definitions or words. It is about what the Bible is telling us. It is the Word ITSELF that matters and that we listen to - God's Word.

Well, that was disappointing....If you do not understand the words of the original languages and how they were used and understood by the original listeners, you will fall into the hole of taking everything at someone else's face value and miss the true meaning....
Satan loves people with blind faith...he can lead them anywhere.

The truth is, I am not facing a terrible amount of backlash.....only from those who cannot defend their beliefs from scripture.....when you start making excuses and mumbling about why you can't back up what you believe...its time to wonder why.
2 Peter 3:15....
"But sanctify the Lord God in your hearts. Always be ready to give an answer to everyone who asks you a reason concerning the hope that is in you, with humility and fear".

You gave me a scripture...if you didn't want the answer, then why ask?

 

[Ronald David Bruno]

I am not a proponent of theistic evolution. Far from it.
However I do understand the difference between “adaptation” (proven by science to take place within a single “kind” of creature) and "organic evolution"....All adaptation does is create variety within a species, which we know the Creator loves.

Good. I am aware that adaptive mechanisms are designed into the kinds. The term Micro-Evolution is used for that.

So when we say that an era has ended and a new one has begun, isn’t it appropriate to say that the sun went down on that era and rose again in a new one...the “dawn of a new era”......

Evening + morning does not = era. It is very simple a child can get it. The moon gives light for the evening and the sun, light for the day. 1 DAY - not millions of years.

The Genesis “days” do not argue with established science.....They have to be compatible because God created what science studies.

Man's flawed science is arguing with Genesis. Genesis does not have to argue with or comply with flawed science.

YEC’s have it all wrong and sticking to that ridiculous notion that flies in the face of provable science, has caused many to lose faith.

A literal interpretation of Genesis is fundamental to the entire Bible. Start messing with that, symbolizing it and thatbcan leadntondoingbthe same thing with any other doctrine in the Bible. People do it with Revelation. They distort who God is, what Jesus did or did not do. Faith can really be fragile if you just symbolize whatever doesn't fit into your world view.

The sun, moon and stars were already in existence, but not visible from earth’s surface as Job explained.

Created on Day 4.

Since bacteria is necessary for conditioning the soil by breaking down the dead vegetation,

Death did not exist yet
Oops, I guess your science missed that one?