> General Discussions

Difinition of "Hell"

(1/5) > >>

Brett:
Hello!

I have not been in post for while. My hard drive wore out. I was very discourage, but I am okay. Not very easy, thought!

Anyway, I was ready Lake of Fire Series "B. Hell: Sheol Translated Sheol", Ray showed of two different dictionary books of "Hell", one is 4 centuries ago and other is 21 century. See below then I will ask one question:

There is NO Scriptural or rational reason for translating the Hebrew word sheol into the English word "hell" at all—NONE! And there surely is no reason to use the word hell in light of the fact that the Old English meaning of this word has been grossly perverted by the Christian church beyond recognition over the past four centuries. Let’s look at our definitions once more:

The "hell" as the English used it in everyday life in the 1600’s:

Webster’s Twentieth Century Dictionary: "hell, n. [ME, helle; AS, hell, hell, from helan, to cover, conceal.]"

The "hell" of the 21st Century:

The American Heritage Collegiate Dictionary: "The abode of condemned souls and devils...the place of eternal punishment for the wicked after death, presided over by Satan…a state of separation from God…a place of evil, misery, discord, or destruction …torment, anguish."

Does anyone believe that these two definitions of "hell" have anything whatsoever in common with each other? Then how is it even in the realm of possibility that the Christian definition of hell today can be a translation for a word that is also to this day, translated three times as "pit," and thirty-one times as "grave." Am I going to fast for anyone? [Caps are mine]


I am curious, King James wrote "Hell" in the Bible, did he believe that Hell mean cover or conceal but not like today people say that Hell is pain in fire eternal? I am just wondering what did King James believe about Hell meaning. Do you know?

Thanks!

Brett

seminole:
I guess you might combine them to be a covering over the fiery pit???? I don't know what King James thought.

mari_et_pere:
You guys aren't considering that King James actually made the King James Bible right?

Matt

Kat:

Hi Brett,

Here is an excerpt from the first part(A) in the Hell series.  I think it shows the deception used by scholars to bring in the teaching of a place called hell, where people will be tormented for eternity.

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

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."

 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.
-----------------------------------------------------

mercy, peace, and love
Kat

Brett:
Hi Kat,

Thanks for the share. I was thinking that King James never believe Hell mean literal fire torture alive like today's Christendom, but he believed is 'cover' or 'conceal', it is similar as 'unseen' because he wrote 'Hell' 31 times in O.T. You know, if King James did believe 'Hell' mean literal fire torture alive, then why would he dare to write about Job who said made bed in Hell himself and David said that when he is in Hell, he asked God not to abandoned him. Know what I mean? In 4 centuries, 'Hell' meaning is big different than our day of Hell meaning. I am not saying I am right about King Jame, but I was observation of King Jame's writing in O.T. and N.T. where wicked and righteous in 'Hell', that to me, it is obviously that it is impossible KJ believe Hell is literal fire alive because of that. But the idea of Hell belong to literal fire alive was from Christendom, not KJ. That is how I observed. Just interesting. In NIV, ASV, ESV, etc. never write 'Hell' in O.T. Why? Because Job, David, and whoever in O.T. said that themselves and everyone (include wicked and righteous) would go to 'Hell' until God raise them from dead, so the NIV, ASV, etc. thought that it would never make sense if they want to write 'Hell' in O.T. because they believe 'Hell' is literal fire alive. Of course, Sheol and hades belong to 'unseen' as 'dead', but the synonym of 'unseen' is 'cover/conceal'.

I am wondering KJ wrote 'eternal', in 4 centuries, was same meaning as today 'endless'? Or did 4 centuries, their definition of 'eternal' is period of time or age? Just curious, if you know any? I remember 'gay' meaning 'happy' in many years ago (I don't know what year or century), but now day, 'gay' mean 'homosexual'. I notice some or many words of meaning in Old English but no longer meaning now day like 'gay'.

Thanks!

Brett



Matt, I am not sure what your question mean? Can you explain little bit more?

Brett

Navigation

[0] Message Index

[#] Next page