re Hell

[chav]

hi all

I need some clarification regarding the words used by Jesus when he talked about Hell. I know he preceded the Anglo Saxon word Hell. But as the NT scriptures are in Greek, presumably he never used the word Hades either,although that area  was pretty well Hellenized at that time following the invasion of Alexander the Great .Speaking in his native tongue Aramaic what words would he have used .

thanks
Dave UK

[M_Oliver]

hi all

I need some clarification regarding the words used by Jesus when he talked about Hell. I know he preceded the Anglo Saxon word Hell. But as the NT scriptures are in Greek, presumably he never used the word Hades either,although that area  was pretty well Hellenized at that time following the invasion of Alexander the Great .Speaking in his native tongue Aramaic what words would he have used .

thanks
Dave UK

I happen to like wolves, the physical creation that is.  Spiritual wolves are very annoying.  What do you seek to prove Dave?  The greek is what God chose to have the NT recorded in.  I suspect that you aim to prove hell {as taught by men rather than the Scriptures} is real...

Don't waste your time.

M

[iris]

What scriptures are you referring to? 
Can you give some scriptures? 


Iris

[Firefly]

Hi Everyone...as you read this question you will see how completely ignorant I am in this area. Also Dave I don't know if this has anything to do with your question..I was debating whether to start a new thread but I thought this may be the same type question...or maybe not...

Ok...I always assumed (we all know what happens when one assumes!  ) that the original NT was written in Greek. But if the disciples were Jewish (I thought they spoke Hebrew but after reading this post I now see they spoke Aramaic) why would they write it in Greek...or did they write it in Aramaic and it was translated into Greek?

The second part of my question is whatever original language the scriptures were written in I would assume (oh there I go again!!  ) would have a really good understanding of what was written...at least get the hades/aionion part right.

Ok now I am going to think outloud...this could be scary...  ...so if the NT was written in Aramaic then only the Jewish would really understand it...but if it was or ginally written in Greek then I don't understand why Greek Christians believe in everlasting or hell.

I thought I remembered something Ray wrote on the original NT but I can't remember where i read it.

This is one of those things that doesn't really matter but I have a bunch of these questions mulling around in my head that you will all see now and again.

Thanks..
Lori

[Robin]

I happen to like wolves, the physical creation that is.  Spiritual wolves are very annoying.  What do you seek to prove Dave?  The greek is what God chose to have the NT recorded in.  I suspect that you aim to prove hell {as taught by men rather than the Scriptures} is real...

Don't waste your time.

M

http://forums.bible-truths.com/index.php/topic,3938.msg30129.html#msg30129

[andrevan]

The fact of the matter is that whatever words (hades/gehenna) Jesus used in whatever language (Greek/Aramaic) He spoke, He most certainly was not referring to a future time and place where He would insanely torture and literally burn human beings in real fire for trillions of years into infinity!

What does it matter what "words" He would have used?? It doesn't change the one final destiny of the entire human race.

Andrevan.

[CDJ]

Here's how I see it...

There's 2 ways to see it 1) Eternal Punishment 2) Chastisement for a defined period

Between those 2 is a big difference, and we need to weigh up which one it is, because there can be only 1 Truth. I've been brought up with the notion of eternal damnation, and what that basically means, is that once we die, it's all over - good people go to heaven and bad ones go to hell - both of these forever.

With the 1st way to see it, is when people start accusing God of contradiction - How can Jesus say "Love your enemies", when they're going to burn in hell anyway - why don't we just hate them now? How can a God of Love do these things? Well, I believe it's us. We are guilty of accepting the 1st way to see it - I'm sorry, but I feel that Christians just want blood, confusion and vigilante justice.

I spoke to a Jewish friend of mine, and in the conversation, I asked him a question. Most around the table was Christian believing in the eternal hell. I asked him, seeing as the 2 faiths are linked, that he should explain to everyone around the table about this eternal hell, according to the Jews. He couldn't. I didn't ask him a trick question, as we are all very good friends, but I wanted to hear a Jew explain to me this eternal hell. He said it's not the way he was taught.

If you see hell as eternal, why do we get statements like these in Bibles "...forever and ever..."? Why do some translate it as "...the age of the age...". Why didn't some Apostels even talk about it? Another thing - we always talk about action and reaction. Throwing people in hell is an action. What is the reaction? Well, people "burn". What is the reaction on that? Well, more "burning". And on that? Well, again more "burning". People are put in heaven - action. What is the reaction? Well, green grass with feet in water. And this reaction? Well, green grass with feet in water. And on that? Well, more green grass with feet in water. Now, God's consuming fire is the action. What is the reaction? Purifying. Cleansing. There's a result.

Once you start asking yourself, that maybe this "eternal"-thing has been translated wrong, and you start seeing that the Bible talks actually about ages, the Scriptures start falling into place like never before. That is why there is so much confusion inside Christianity, because learned folk study for years and years to try and make sense of the words which they cannot understand. That's why Christians almost shy away of things like these, because it's left to the learned, who in their turn confuse people even more. Take all the sermons of hell in the world, and matc it up to Scriptures, and if the NT really spoke about an eternal hell, at least one of those sermons has to tie up with a section in Scriptures - they don't, because each sermon is either based around Luke 16:19-31, or on human assumption.

If you believe in an eternal hell, one could say that those people are questioning God's sovereignity, because if Jesus only had to come to keep people out of hell, it actually says that Satan got the better of God, in making God do something to "fix" things. Creation didn't spiral out of control - God is in control, now, yesterday and tomorrow...

[chav]

Hi all

I'm rather surprised at your response to my question which was genuine incidentlly  I was only trying seek a clearer understanding for myself. Some of you have got the wrong end of the stick.I'm afraid.

Dave UK

[Falconn003]

Dave

Fact is Jesus the Christ never did spoke of hell in any language. And how dose one know this, FACT ::: there was NOT a word in the Greek and Hebrew text equivalent to the word hell and the ideals it holds.

Jesus made refrences to Gehenna, this is not in references to hell, but something spiritually symbolic.

Equating Gehenna or any other Greek or Hebrew text to hell, would be like equalizing whales too fish,, God's truth too TBN,, humans too apes,, Brillance too a crimminal act,, Heroism too a coward,,  anything of importance too the Queen of England......etc

Rodger

[andrevan]

hi all

I need some clarification regarding the words used by Jesus when he talked about Hell. I know he preceded the Anglo Saxon word Hell. But as the NT scriptures are in Greek, presumably he never used the word Hades either,although that area  was pretty well Hellenized at that time following the invasion of Alexander the Great .Speaking in his native tongue Aramaic what words would he have used .

thanks
Dave UK

Hi all

I'm rather surprised at your response to my question which was genuine incidentlly  I was only trying seek a clearer understanding for myself. Some of you have got the wrong end of the stick.I'm afraid.

Dave UK

Hi Dave 

I apologise if I did not respond the way you expected. Ray has spend hundreds of hours explaining these things regarding what Jesus said and in what language, Hebrew, Aramaic or Greek it was said. All we have are the Greek (NT) manuscripts, this is what God has given us. How can anyone know for sure what language Jesus spoke? If you have congruent evidence as to what language(s) He spoke to His disciples and the people then present it.

I just don't see the point of this topic, as Ray has covered this already in his material, other than to quibble over words and to speculate.

Ray has given us the clarification on the word 'hell', and is continuing to do so in detail.

God's peace to you  .
Andrevan.

[Kat]

Hi Lori,

This is email of Ray's that explains something about the languages used at Jesus' time.

Dave, I have also brought up an excerpt from Ray's Lake of Fire series, HELL: part A. 
I would also like to say to watch for his next installment, HELL: D3, due out this week.  Ray should explanation what the meaning of Gehenna fire is in this one.

http://www.forums.bible-truths.com/index.php/topic,2902.0.html -----

Ray;

I know you must be busy, your site has given me a lot to think about. I oftentimes read scripture and find myself not agreeing with the doctrines that came out of the 4th and 5th century Church, who of course still felt that the world was FLAT and the Earth revolved around the Sun!
But anyway, what about the origins of scripture? The attached document says (too) much about it, but it does not make sense that Jesus did not speak and teach in Aramaic ( a language rich in Mystic thought patterns) not to mention his local boys, the Disciples, were all from the surrondind Aramaic speaking towns.
I am looking into some translations that are more accurate, WHY SPEND ALL THIS TIME DEBATING GREEK WHEN JESUS NEVER TAUGHT IN GREEK?? Just because some of Pauls letters were tranlated into Greek 200 years later??

I know you do  not have the time to reply, but I link to any answer might be nice, if possible.

Meanwhile I will pray for a  direct revelation, for that will be true.

Alan 


Dear Alan:
Actually it would have made sense for Jesus to teach in Greek, seeing that the whole Mediterranean area including Palestine officially spoke Greek for hundreds of years.  There is no proof that the actual manuscripts were written in Hebrew, Aramaic, or Syriac. I hear a lot of talk, but I have seen NO PROOF.  I hear about this 1st century Aramaic manuscript of the New Testament, but I haven't seen it proved, just argued. The sign that was fastened to Christ's cross was written in Hebrew, Latin, and Greek, NOT ARAMAIC.  So if this sign was for the benefit of the Jews "This is Jesus the King of the Jews," then Aramaic was not even considered in the TOP THREE!  How do you explain that, if Jesus, His followers, and the general populace of Jerusalem were speaking Aramaic?  If you have an aswer for this, I would be glad to hear it. I am not presently interested in hearing all of the other hundreds of pages of arguments, however.
God be with you,
Ray

http://bible-truths.com/lake16-A.html ----------------------

WHAT IS "HELL" TRANSLATED FROM?

I think most of my readers realize that Jesus did not speak Archaic King James English. And most also realize that the King James Bible is not the one that the Apostles used. There were no "bibles" during Christ's ministry; there were only the Hebrew Scriptures, and a popular Greek translation of those Hebrew Scriptures called the Septuagint. What we call the New Testament was not even written until near the end of the first century, and was not put into book form untill much later, and was not printed until many centuries later.

The word "hell" is an Old English word that was used to translate several words found in the Hebrew and Greek manuscripts. What words? And why did they choose to use the Old English word "hell" as a translation? We shall see that it had absolutely nothing to do with scholarship, but everything to do with forcing pagan religion into the teachings of Jesus Christ. You don't have to take my word for it; you will be able to judge for yourself as we go through it.

Here are the words for which "hell" was inserted as a "translation" into English:

The Hebrew word sheol (31 times)

The Greek word gehenna (12 times)

The Greek word hades (10 times)

The Greek word tartarus (1 time)

That's it.

Every time the word "hell" is found in the King James Bible it is translated from one of these four words. We find the word "hell" 31 times in the KJV Old Testament and 23 times in the KJV New Testament for a total of 54 times. Later we will look at all 54 verses containing the word "hell," plus the 31 times that sheol is translated as "grave."

ONE OF THE MOST IMPORTANT POINTS OF THIS WHOLE SERIES

Listen to what I am about to say very very carefully: If the word "hell" is the most accurate and correct English word available to translate, the Hebrew word sheol, and the Greek words gehenna, hades, and tartartus, then these four words must all have the same meaning. But in reality only two of these four words have the same meaning.

The Hebrew word sheol and the Greek word hades are synonymous in meaning.

And here is the proof from the Scriptures and the inspiration of the Holy Spirit that the Hebrew sheol and the Greek hades are identical in meaning:

Acts 2:27: "Because You will not leave My soul in hell [Gk: hades], neither will You suffer your Holy One to see corruption" is quoted from:

Psalm 16:10: "For You will not leave My soul in hell [Heb: sheol]; neither will You suffer your Holy One to see corruption."

And so the inspiration of the Spirit of God proves that the Greek word hades is the right and proper translation of the Hebrew word sheol.

Whatever "hades" means, "sheol" means the same, and whatever "sheol" means, "hades" also means the same.

We know for a fact that the Hebrew word sheol is translated "hell" 31 times in the KJV of the Bible. But... BUT, we also know for a fact that the same Hebrew word sheol is translated "grave" 31 times in the KJV Bible.

Why is this? Why should this be? Why is there a 50/50 split on the translation of this word? Ask any theologian or your pastor if the words "grave" and "hell" mean the very same thing in the Bible, and see what they will say. They will tell you, NO, that they are NOT the same, that they are very much different. Then I have a childish question for them all: "Why, oh, why then are both "hell" and "grave" translations of the very same Hebrew word, "sheol"? Which should it be?

And let me frankly state that neither will their "context, context, context" theory solve this dilemma for them. It will take wholesale lying and deception to extricate them out of this theological box---or maybe I should say, "can of worms." Not only is there absolutely no justifiable reason to translate sheol 31 times as "hell," but there is no justifiable reason to translate this word as hell, not even once!

As we go through the 31 Scriptures in which the KJV uses the word "grave," it will become abundantly clear that "grave" is the proper translation. But when we come to the 31 times that KJV uses the word "hell" to translate this same Hebrew word, it will also become abundantly clear that word, "GRAVE" should have been used in all of those 31 verses as well. Yes, the "context" will show that "grave" or its literal meaning of "the UNSEEN" can be consistently used in all 62 verses without jeopardizing or violating the context.

While it is true that a number of verses use sheol—the unseen, the grave, in a poetic or figurative sense, absolutely nowhere is sheol used to represent a place of life, consciousness, fire, or torture—nowhere, absolutely nowhere.

About once a year I find something useful in a Bible Dictionary. Well here's one of them. After discussing numerous problems with translating sheol as both "grave" and "hell," my Wycliffe Bible Dictionary says on page 1573:

"Sheol is much used in poetry and often parallels 'death' or the 'grave.' A uniform translation 'grave' would solve several problems of interpretation."

Those "several problems," however, are not to be thought of as minor. They are in reality, the most major problems in all theology.

Recently I pointed out to one of my detractors, numerous contradictions between what he said and what the Scriptures say. He retorted: "They don't contradict; they COMPLEMENT." Translating sheol 31 times "grave" and 31 times "hell" is not a contradiction to theologians; it is a complement. How can one even talk with people like that? How? You DON'T! Admitting to this contradiction would destroy their damnable doctrine of eternal torture, and I don't believe the powers that be in today's Church will allow that to ever happen.
-------------------------------------------------------------

mercy, peace, and love
Kat

[Kat]

Hi Lori,

This is email of Ray's that explains something about the languages used at Jesus' time.

Dave, I have also brought up an excerpt from Ray's Lake of Fire series, HELL: part A. 
I would also like to say to watch for his next installment, HELL: D3, due out this week.  Ray should explanation what the meaning of Gehenna fire is in this one.

http://www.forums.bible-truths.com/index.php/topic,2902.0.html -----

Ray;

I know you must be busy, your site has given me a lot to think about. I oftentimes read scripture and find myself not agreeing with the doctrines that came out of the 4th and 5th century Church, who of course still felt that the world was FLAT and the Earth revolved around the Sun!
But anyway, what about the origins of scripture? The attached document says (too) much about it, but it does not make sense that Jesus did not speak and teach in Aramaic ( a language rich in Mystic thought patterns) not to mention his local boys, the Disciples, were all from the surrondind Aramaic speaking towns.
I am looking into some translations that are more accurate, WHY SPEND ALL THIS TIME DEBATING GREEK WHEN JESUS NEVER TAUGHT IN GREEK?? Just because some of Pauls letters were tranlated into Greek 200 years later??

I know you do  not have the time to reply, but I link to any answer might be nice, if possible.

Meanwhile I will pray for a  direct revelation, for that will be true.

Alan 


Dear Alan:
Actually it would have made sense for Jesus to teach in Greek, seeing that the whole Mediterranean area including Palestine officially spoke Greek for hundreds of years.  There is no proof that the actual manuscripts were written in Hebrew, Aramaic, or Syriac. I hear a lot of talk, but I have seen NO PROOF.  I hear about this 1st century Aramaic manuscript of the New Testament, but I haven't seen it proved, just argued. The sign that was fastened to Christ's cross was written in Hebrew, Latin, and Greek, NOT ARAMAIC.  So if this sign was for the benefit of the Jews "This is Jesus the King of the Jews," then Aramaic was not even considered in the TOP THREE!  How do you explain that, if Jesus, His followers, and the general populace of Jerusalem were speaking Aramaic?  If you have an aswer for this, I would be glad to hear it. I am not presently interested in hearing all of the other hundreds of pages of arguments, however.
God be with you,
Ray

http://bible-truths.com/lake16-A.html ----------------------

WHAT IS "HELL" TRANSLATED FROM?

I think most of my readers realize that Jesus did not speak Archaic King James English. And most also realize that the King James Bible is not the one that the Apostles used. There were no "bibles" during Christ's ministry; there were only the Hebrew Scriptures, and a popular Greek translation of those Hebrew Scriptures called the Septuagint. What we call the New Testament was not even written until near the end of the first century, and was not put into book form untill much later, and was not printed until many centuries later.

The word "hell" is an Old English word that was used to translate several words found in the Hebrew and Greek manuscripts. What words? And why did they choose to use the Old English word "hell" as a translation? We shall see that it had absolutely nothing to do with scholarship, but everything to do with forcing pagan religion into the teachings of Jesus Christ. You don't have to take my word for it; you will be able to judge for yourself as we go through it.

Here are the words for which "hell" was inserted as a "translation" into English:

The Hebrew word sheol (31 times)

The Greek word gehenna (12 times)

The Greek word hades (10 times)

The Greek word tartarus (1 time)

That's it.

Every time the word "hell" is found in the King James Bible it is translated from one of these four words. We find the word "hell" 31 times in the KJV Old Testament and 23 times in the KJV New Testament for a total of 54 times. Later we will look at all 54 verses containing the word "hell," plus the 31 times that sheol is translated as "grave."

ONE OF THE MOST IMPORTANT POINTS OF THIS WHOLE SERIES

Listen to what I am about to say very very carefully: If the word "hell" is the most accurate and correct English word available to translate, the Hebrew word sheol, and the Greek words gehenna, hades, and tartartus, then these four words must all have the same meaning. But in reality only two of these four words have the same meaning.

The Hebrew word sheol and the Greek word hades are synonymous in meaning.

And here is the proof from the Scriptures and the inspiration of the Holy Spirit that the Hebrew sheol and the Greek hades are identical in meaning:

Acts 2:27: "Because You will not leave My soul in hell [Gk: hades], neither will You suffer your Holy One to see corruption" is quoted from:

Psalm 16:10: "For You will not leave My soul in hell [Heb: sheol]; neither will You suffer your Holy One to see corruption."

And so the inspiration of the Spirit of God proves that the Greek word hades is the right and proper translation of the Hebrew word sheol.

Whatever "hades" means, "sheol" means the same, and whatever "sheol" means, "hades" also means the same.

We know for a fact that the Hebrew word sheol is translated "hell" 31 times in the KJV of the Bible. But... BUT, we also know for a fact that the same Hebrew word sheol is translated "grave" 31 times in the KJV Bible.

Why is this? Why should this be? Why is there a 50/50 split on the translation of this word? Ask any theologian or your pastor if the words "grave" and "hell" mean the very same thing in the Bible, and see what they will say. They will tell you, NO, that they are NOT the same, that they are very much different. Then I have a childish question for them all: "Why, oh, why then are both "hell" and "grave" translations of the very same Hebrew word, "sheol"? Which should it be?

And let me frankly state that neither will their "context, context, context" theory solve this dilemma for them. It will take wholesale lying and deception to extricate them out of this theological box---or maybe I should say, "can of worms." Not only is there absolutely no justifiable reason to translate sheol 31 times as "hell," but there is no justifiable reason to translate this word as hell, not even once!

As we go through the 31 Scriptures in which the KJV uses the word "grave," it will become abundantly clear that "grave" is the proper translation. But when we come to the 31 times that KJV uses the word "hell" to translate this same Hebrew word, it will also become abundantly clear that word, "GRAVE" should have been used in all of those 31 verses as well. Yes, the "context" will show that "grave" or its literal meaning of "the UNSEEN" can be consistently used in all 62 verses without jeopardizing or violating the context.

While it is true that a number of verses use sheol—the unseen, the grave, in a poetic or figurative sense, absolutely nowhere is sheol used to represent a place of life, consciousness, fire, or torture—nowhere, absolutely nowhere.

About once a year I find something useful in a Bible Dictionary. Well here's one of them. After discussing numerous problems with translating sheol as both "grave" and "hell," my Wycliffe Bible Dictionary says on page 1573:

"Sheol is much used in poetry and often parallels 'death' or the 'grave.' A uniform translation 'grave' would solve several problems of interpretation."

Those "several problems," however, are not to be thought of as minor. They are in reality, the most major problems in all theology.

Recently I pointed out to one of my detractors, numerous contradictions between what he said and what the Scriptures say. He retorted: "They don't contradict; they COMPLEMENT." Translating sheol 31 times "grave" and 31 times "hell" is not a contradiction to theologians; it is a complement. How can one even talk with people like that? How? You DON'T! Admitting to this contradiction would destroy their damnable doctrine of eternal torture, and I don't believe the powers that be in today's Church will allow that to ever happen.
-------------------------------------------------------------

mercy, peace, and love
Kat

[Firefly]

Wow Dave...an hour in front of your community...How did that go??? My heart was pounding and I was literally shaking in a confrontation with one! I would love to hear your story if you would like to share it.

Kat...thanks for that quote. I think that may have been the one I was looking for. I know for me personally I feel like I have been stripped of all knowledge I thought I had and am relearning EVERYTHING. So when I read Ray's material and the scriptures I get some things but then as my mind thinks about the new truths I come up with new questions. Some I file back in my memory for later and others I start to look into right away. My mind can only handle so much new info at once. I also feel as if some of the questions I have don't really matter all that much, but I still am curious and end up at different times looking into them. I never would have imagined that Jesus and his disciples all spoke Greek. That is really interesting to me. Kat..why do you think that Greek Christians believe the hell/everlasting doctrines. I would think there would be at least a higher percentage of them that see these truths. I know that God has blinded people so maybe that is one answer. Anyway...any thoughts you might have would be appreciated.

Thanks...
Lori 

[chav]

well Lorimarie

I had a sleepless night for a start, and I said to God please  not now , let me have an easier message but I knew i had to do it. I was sat at home Saturday feeling somewhat desperate when my wife who was sat beside me reading the local evening paper started laughing. In the paper was an article entitled Where the Hell did damnation go basically it was an article about whether some believed in hell and others didn't. So I kinda got the message and knew i was on the right track.
Anyway I turned it around in my message Where the hell did damnation come from it got the people thinking, although it did get a bit tricky at one point . However  I am fortunate enough to belong to a community that is open to new things, as God has been already begun showing us how we have been influenced by the Babylonian Christian system. So I wasn't stoned or excommunicated  , and I know we will be looking at this subject more. Only the little issues regarding the salvation of all ,trinity,tithing etc left to deal with now, we ditched the rapture ages ago.
cheers
Dave UK

[Kat]

Hi Dave,

It's so easy to have a post misunderstood, it happens to us all 
You stood before your community for an hour, ok not sure I could have done that, good for you 

About Matt. 16:18, here is a excerpt from Ray article no. 8.

http://bible-truths.com/lake8.html -----------------------------

Jesus Christ said,

"I will build MY CHURCH and the gates of hell [hades/ unseen/ grave] shall not prevail [be prevailing] against it" (Matt. 16:18).

Prevail means to be of greater strength, to overcome, or to win out. So clearly from this statement, our Lord is telling us that His church will be under GREAT ATTACK AND ADVERSITY, however these evil forces will not prevail or be victorious in totally defeating His Church or bringing it to naught.
------------------------------------------------------------------

Hi Lori,

why do you think that Greek Christians believe the hell/everlasting doctrines.

Well this is a very well entrenched doctrine of the church, that started before the NT church, it goes way back.  It is so entwined in the beliefs of so many religions that it is easily excepted as truth 

Here is an excerpt from Ray's Lake of Fire series HELL: C.

http://bible-truths.com/lake16-C.html ------------------------

NEW TESTAMENT JEWS BELIEVED OLD PAGAN DOCTRINES

The pagan teaching of an "immortal soul," was believed by all nations immediately following the flood, even though there is not a word concerning immortal souls or suffering in death in all of the Hebrew Scriptures.

Here are some of the things New Testament Jews believed long before there was a single New Testament Greek Scripture written:

THE SIN OF A MAN BORN BLIND:

"And as Jesus passed by, He saw a man which was blind from his birth. And His disciples asked Him, saying, Master, who did sin, this man, or his parents, that he was born blind?" (John 9:1-2)

What? How, pray tell, could this blind man be responsible for his own blindness when we are plainly told that he was born blind? Not only did the disciples believe the pagan doctrine that the soul is immortal, but they believed that souls could transmigrate from one body to another body.

The idea that the disciples are presenting to Jesus is the pagan doctrine known today as "The transmigration of souls." This doctrine teaches that souls do not just live on, as in "immortal" after death, in some fabled hellhole of eternal torture, or some heaven on a rock in outer space, but rather that at death, the immortal soul migrates to inhabit the body of another person about to born into the world.

Many in the world today continue to believe in reincarnation and the transmigration of souls. There are some pagans who believe that the souls of the dead can also reappear in the life of a pig, snake, nor some other animal.

Seriously, why would Christ's disciples believe that a man could have sinned before he was ever born?

But what is even more remarkable is the fact that Jesus did not correct them, but rather went along with and acquiesced to their pagan notions. Jesus did not demean their foolish statement or their foolish belief, but countered with:

"Neither has this man sinned, nor his parents..." (John 9:3).

Jesus spoke the truth, for truly this man had not sinned (however, Jesus did not inform them that it would have been impossible for him to sin before he was born). But Jesus did not expose this pagan heresy to His disciples at this time. For what possible reason would Jesus want to keep His own disciples deceived?
-----------------------------------------------------------

mercy, peace, and love
Kat

[Firefly]

Thanks for sharing that Dave..I like the way you changed the message to where did the doctrine come from...great idea!

Kat...I had read that before, but like I said only so much sinks in each time. There is so much to unlearn and then learn. I see now even the disciples must have struggled with this. Thank you for all your help. I can always count on you to help point me in the right direction.

Lori 

[Kat]

Hi Lori,

I benefit just as must, when I try to help out.  Every time I go look up something for someone, I learn more about it myself.
It is a continue learning process for sure 

mercy, peace, and love
Kat

[andrevan]

Hi all
Thanks for your replies ,having  looked back at my original post I probably didn't make myself sufficiently clear  So just so that everyone knows for sure I hate the doctrine of Hell.

Ah, that makes things much clearer  . Well done on speaking out against this damnable doctrine, may God give you the right words to say on the day.

God's peace to you Dave.
Andrevan.

[gmik]

Dave thanks for your original question.  I didn't even think it could be "wolfish" in nature.

As a teacher, I need to teach little 10 minute mini-lessons just to review a topic already taught.  Kat, that is what you do for me. Thanks for keeping Ray's teachings in the forefront.  Yes, I have read all his works, but it is SO MUCH for my brain to keep it all in.  So these types of threads, w/ your links to Ray, keep it alive for me and I "re digest" it!

[CDJ]

had a sleepless night for a start, and I said to God please  not now , let me have an easier message but I knew i had to do it. I was sat at home Saturday feeling somewhat desperate when my wife who was sat beside me reading the local evening paper started laughing. In the paper was an article entitled Where the Hell did damnation go basically it was an article about whether some believed in hell and others didn't. So I kinda got the message and knew i was on the right track.
Anyway I turned it around in my message Where the hell did damnation come from it got the people thinking, although it did get a bit tricky at one point . However  I am fortunate enough to belong to a community that is open to new things, as God has been already begun showing us how we have been influenced by the Babylonian Christian system. So I wasn't stoned or excommunicated  , and I know we will be looking at this subject more. Only the little issues regarding the salvation of all ,trinity,tithing etc left to deal with now, we ditched the rapture ages ago.
cheers

...Apologies, Dave, but sometimes I can answer stuff totally off point, and looking at what you had to do, more thought should've have gone into answering your questions, and providing a bit more support.

May God keep guiding you.
Carl D.J. Strydom