Did Jesus burn in hell for three days?

[Claire Rousseau]

View attachment 23263

Are you fluent in Greek, Red?

 

[Red Sky at Morning]

Are you fluent in Greek, Red?

I would love to say yes*, but in truth I look things up in the concordance ;-) (*maybe one day?)

τετέλεσται ►
Englishman's Concordance
τετέλεσται (tetelestai) — 2 Occurrences
John 19:28 V-RIM/P-3S
GRK: ἤδη πάντα τετέλεσται ἵνα τελειωθῇ
NAS: had already been accomplished, to fulfill
KJV: now accomplished, that
INT: now all things have been finished that might be fulfilled

John 19:30 V-RIM/P-3S
GRK: Ἰησοῦς εἶπεν Τετέλεσται καὶ κλίνας
NAS: He said, It is finished! And He bowed
KJV: he said, It is finished: and
INT: Jesus he said It has been finished and having bowed

 

[Claire Rousseau]

I see. It was clear enough to me that she hadn't said he burned, but I did not realize that your thread title involved somebody named Anderson. I should have read the other thread in its entirety.


I leave the argument of whether or not the Apostles' Creed is based on the Bible, but, apart from the difference between Tartarus and hell, and we could probably also add Hades and Sheol, the Creed, though there are different versions, does not say that "Jesus spent three days in hell for our sins" and neither did I. Technically, it says only that he descended into hell as part of his overall experience:

"... And in Jesus Christ his only son our Lord; who was conceived by the Holy Ghost, born of the Virgin Mary, suffered under Pontius Pilate, was crucified, dead, and buried; he descended into hell; the third day he rose again from the dead; he ascended into heaven, and sitteth on the right hand of God the Father Almighty; from thence he shall come to judge the quick and the dead."​

Anyway, I am out of this thread as a participant, though not necessarily a reader. Thank you for clarifying.

I do not think Jesus actually burned in Hell, though, because of these verses:

“He seeing this before spake of the resurrection of Christ, that his soul was not left in hell, neither his flesh did see corruption.”....Acts 2:31 KJB

“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 1:18 KJB

I think He descended into Hell to conquer it on our behalf and to gain the keys thereof, as His bodily resurrection was to conquer & gain the keys of death.

That is how we know that through His death, burial & resurrection, we will be saved from Hell when we die & when Christ returns, our body will be resurrected to life, glorified (so our flesh will not cause us to sin ever again) to reunite with our spirit (which was in Heaven) and we will never be subject to sin ever again.

 

[Claire Rousseau]

I would love to say yes*, but in truth I look things up in the concordance ;-) (*maybe one day?)

τετέλεσται ►
Englishman's Concordance
τετέλεσται (tetelestai) — 2 Occurrences
John 19:28 V-RIM/P-3S
GRK: ἤδη πάντα τετέλεσται ἵνα τελειωθῇ
NAS: had already been accomplished, to fulfill
KJV: now accomplished, that
INT: now all things have been finished that might be fulfilled

John 19:30 V-RIM/P-3S
GRK: Ἰησοῦς εἶπεν Τετέλεσται καὶ κλίνας
NAS: He said, It is finished! And He bowed
KJV: he said, It is finished: and
INT: Jesus he said It has been finished and having bowed

Thank you, Red.....I appreciate your honesty!

No worries, I am not fluent in Greek, either.

That said, when you think about it, since neither of us speak Greek, does it even make sense for us to use that language to “better” understand Scripture?

Neither of us are fluent in it, and for that reason, neither of us can truly understand it in order to confirm beyond doubt, the authenticity of it.

I do not think I am smarter than the 54 saved, multilingual translators that translated the KJB into English, moved by the Holy Spirit.....it took them 7 years to translate it, and they were fully fluent in more languages than I can count on both hands.

So, while we may not have the lingual credentials that they had, we are saved, so we DO have the Holy Spirit (that we know will lead us into only truth) as well as a fluency in English that we can trust.

And of all the different English Bible versions I have read, ONLY the KJB has stood out as being bold, without contradiction, self-defining, inerrant, supernaturally powerful, packed with page upon page of profound TRUTH that sounds like the voice of Jesus Christ Himself, whose voice we will recognize because we are His sheep & His voice we will hear.

I don’t know about you, but all the other versions sound like a stranger’s voice.

I can trust the KJB, and so can you.

 

[Red Sky at Morning]

Thank you, Red.....I appreciate your honesty!

No worries, I am not fluent in Greek, either.

That said, when you think about it, since neither of us speak Greek, does it even make sense for us to use that language to “better” understand Scripture?

Neither of us are fluent in it, and for that reason, neither of us can truly understand it in order to confirm beyond doubt, the authenticity of it.

I do not think I am smarter than the 54 saved, multilingual translators that translated the KJB into English, moved by the Holy Spirit.....it took them 7 years to translate it, and they were fully fluent in more languages than I can count on both hands.

So, while we may not have the lingual credentials that they had, we are saved, so we DO have the Holy Spirit (that we know will lead us into only truth) as well as a fluency in English that we can trust.

And of all the different English Bible versions I have read, ONLY the KJB has stood out as being bold, without contradiction, self-defining, inerrant, supernaturally powerful, packed with page upon page of profound TRUTH that sounds like the voice of Jesus Christ Himself, whose voice we will recognize because we are His sheep & His voice we will hear.

I don’t know about you, but all the other versions sound like a stranger’s voice.

I can trust the KJB, and so can you.

I like the KJV and I’m quite fond of the NKJV as well. I think I take in more when I listen to the Bible, so my “Go to” version in “Word of Promise”. You can get the Gospel of John on the App Store for free...

 

[AspiringSoul]

In the old testament, Sheol/the grave, was not Hell. Abaddon was hell.

Proverbs 27:20
Sheol and Abaddon will not be satisfied, and the eyes of a person will not be satisfied either.
Proverbs 15:11
Sheol and Abaddon are before Yahweh, how much more the hearts of the children of men!
Job 31:12
Indeed, that is a fire that will consume up to Abaddon, and it would uproot all my crop.

During the hellenistic era, Sheol was referred to as Hades/the underworld.

The understanding I have is that our carnal attachments to this world, which is temporal, are what bind us to the 'grave'. in islam everyone is going to barzakh until the day of judgement, except those who already died in the way of Allah...ie put their carnal desires to DEATH in God's cause. That's why in islam it says the slain/martyrs are 'alive not dead'.
in that sense, Jesus killed his flesh before the cross could kill it. the cross only symbolised his victory over the flesh..and in that sense, he may have gone to sheol but he wasn't confined to it. like a martyr, he was living.
That's why Peter said "for death had no hold on him".

 

[Daciple]

That said, when you think about it, since neither of us speak Greek, does it even make sense for us to use that language to “better” understand Scripture?

I 100% know that using a concordance and learning the different meanings behind words that come from the Greek allows us to understand the Scripture more deeply. I would say it is straight up willful ignorance not to use a tool that can help you better understand or bring a deeper more meaningful understanding of Gods Word. Its completely dogmatic in a negative sense to refuse to use concordances.

If you tell me that a Book I am reading was translated from Spanish, and it is brought to my attention that a word or phrase used in this book has a deeper meaning if I take 5 min to look up the Spanish word that it is translated from, then I am going to take that small amount of time and energy to learn what that word means in the original language so I can get a deeper, richer understanding of what is being told to me.

Just like if someone translates from English to a different language, are you going to tell me that every single phrase and word that was translated is going to 100% be exactly faithful to the understanding as it is known in English? You would be lying if you said it was, perfect example is the phrase raining cats and dogs. To translate that into a different language such as Japanese and have them read it they more than likely wouldnt understand what on earth you are conveying. However if they were to use a Concordance ect they can look the phrase up in English were they can learn what the meaning behind that is.

It is of course your choice to ignore the fact that in the Original Scriptures Sheol and Tartarus and Gehenna and Hades have different meanings and a different thought that was being conveyed to the original reader. The idea of Grave and the Lake of Fire are completely different and the aspect of the Grave was further revealed by Jesus Himself to be compromised of Abrahams Bosom and then a gulf that separated that from the place in the grave that was for the Lost.

It is a misconception to think that Hell is just the Lake of Fire which is what most people think when you say Hell, and I believe Jesus went to Abrahams Bosom and pulled the believers who died prior to His coming to Heaven. At that time I believe is also when He preached the Gospel to those trapped in the other part along with the Fallen Angels as Scripture states.

Regardless of the semantics I agree with you that all one needs to believe in terms of Salvation would be that Christ died spent 3 days dead physically and then Resurrected Physically.

Beyond that, while I am 100% a KJV support as the Best English Translation and almost exclusively use that and if I teach or ever would preach would only preach from it, I also 100% support using Concordences and whatever other means and tools we have available to us that will help us to better understand Gods Word. I am assured with no doubts that I have learned a much deeper and more meaningful understanding of Gods Word when I have taken the time to study out the things God lays on my heart and use the Concordance to grasp the Original Intent of the authors choice of words in the Greek or Hebrew...

However it is to each their own and I dont judge someone on their standing with God based on what version of the Bible they choose to use or their use or lack of other resources, for me its KJV and Concordances all the way. In fact I used it this Sunday as I taught my class about Reflection, how we are the Reflection of God as we are made in His image. I showed them the Hebrew Word translated image in those verses in Genesis.

Then I explained how we are not a perfect reflection because of Sin, then I began to quote in the New Testament these verses:

Heb 1:1 God, who at sundry times and in divers manners spake in time past unto the fathers by the prophets,
2 Hath in these last days spoken unto us by his Son, whom he hath appointed heir of all things, by whom also he made the worlds;
3 Who being the brightness of his glory, and the express image of his person, and upholding all things by the word of his power, when he had by himself purged our sins, sat down on the right hand of the Majesty on high:

And I had them look up the Word that is translated express image (it is ONE word in the Greek) and here is what it means:

charaktér: a tool for engraving
Original Word: χαρακτήρ, ῆρος, ὁ
Part of Speech: Noun, Masculine
Transliteration: charaktér
Phonetic Spelling: (khar-ak-tare')
Definition: a tool for engraving
Usage: an impression, representation, exact reproduction; a graving-tool.

Then I had them read further down:

5481 xaraktḗr – properly, an engraving; (figuratively) an exact impression (likeness) which also reflects inner character.

So the word that is translated as express image means in the Greek the exact impression. So I went on to teach that while we are a Reflection of God, we are not the exact Reflection, but if we want to better Reflect God we need to look at Jesus Christ who is the exact perfect Image of God.

So by using the Concordance and going to the Original Greek I was able to learn and teach a deeper more meaningful understanding of the phrase express image. Now I as an adult and much study already knew what was meant by that, but the teenagers I taught definitely did not.

So I will stand 100% behind using the Concordance and learning what words mean in the Original Language..

 

[Thunderian]

“Tartarus”??

That is found nowhere in the Bible, that is some Greek pagan mythological nonsense, Thunderian.

Tartarus is a Greek concept, an abode for the wicked dead, and for the Titans, who represented, mythologically, the offspring of gods and humans. The exact same concept exists in the Bible, and that means that the Greeks were aware of ancient tales of nephilim and fallen angels.

Gen 6:4​

There were giants in the earth in those days; and also after that, when the sons of God came in unto the daughters of men, and they bare children to them, the same became mighty men which were of old, men of renown.​

Crazy, I know, but there is it. Angels and humans creating humans with incredible strength and abilities.

Peter uses the term for Tartarus when he writes about the angels who sinned against God.

2 Pe 2:4​

For if God spared not the angels that sinned, but cast them down to hell, and delivered them into chains of darkness, to be reserved unto judgment;​

I trust the KJB translation in English is accurate & complete....no need to go “back to the Greek”. God created the languages, so you don’t think He can translate perfectly between them?

I am as loathe to go to the Greek as almost anyone. Don't you think I know it's usually an excuse to pervert doctrine? But the perfect translation of the Greek word that God told Peter to write is Tartarus. Do you think that God doesn't know Greek? The word means the same as Hell, so I'm not sure what your opposition is to it, or to Greek in general.

God used Greek to give us his word. It's an amazing language, and any time I have looked at the full translation of certain Greek words it's only deepened my appreciation for God's word. I know that people misuse it, but that's not what I am doing here.

Anderson promotes learning Greek to study the Bible, so I am very confused by your stance on it.

Like I said, the reason I believe Jesus went to Hell for those 3 days is because THAT is what the BIBLE says:

Ephesians 4: (KJB)
9 (Now that he ascended, what is it but that he also descended first into the lower parts of the earth?
10 He that descended is the same also that ascended up far above all heavens, that he might fill all things.)

&

Therefore being a prophet, and knowing that God had sworn with an oath to him, that of the fruit of his loins, according to the flesh, he would raise up Christ to sit on his throne;

He seeing this before spake of the resurrection of Christ, that his soul was not left in hell, neither his flesh did see corruption.

This Jesus hath God raised up, whereof we all are witnesses.
......Acts 2:30-32 KJB

It’s clear as day.....He descended into Hell deep within the earth, but His soul was not left in Hell, God raised Him up.

Where do any of those verses say that Jesus spent three days burning in Hell with fallen angels and the wicked dead? Where do you find a verse that says the penalty that Jesus Christ paid for our sins included burning for them?

The thief on the Cross did NOT descend into Hell with Jesus; the thief went directly to Heaven (paradise).

(Every soul who was ever saved from the beginning of human life went straight to Heaven upon death, and are alive today & remain in Heaven. Only their body remains dead in the ground, until Christ returns to resurrect their glorified bodies.)

How is that possible, you ask?

Because—remember: Jesus is the Word of God made flesh, & God is OMNIPRESENT.

Observe :

“The same shall drink of the wine of the wrath of God, which is poured out without mixture into the cup of his indignation; and he shall be tormented with fire and brimstone in the presence of the holy angels, and in the presence of the Lamb”.......Revelation 14:10 KJB

^^^People claim that Hell is separation from God, but it clearly is not. After all....God created Hell.


“And no man hath ascended up to heaven, but he that came down from heaven, even the Son of man which is in heaven.”...........John 3:13 KJB

^^^^Jesus spoke these words Himself, while He was here on earth.......HOW could He be on earth stating that He is IN (present tense) Heaven?

BECAUSE HE IS OMNIPRESENT.

Your answer to the question of how Jesus could have burned in Hell for three days and also have been in Paradise with the thief is that God is omnipresent?

Jhn 20:17​

Jesus saith unto her, Touch me not; for I am not yet ascended to my Father: but go to my brethren, and say unto them, I ascend unto my Father, and your Father; and to my God, and your God.​

Jesus Christ did go to Paradise for three days. After he was buried, he went to Abraham's Bosom, where the souls of the righteous dead reposed, awaiting the redemption of his blood and his resurrection. From the story of Lazarus and the rich man, we know that the souls who are in Abraham's Bosom can converse with the souls of the wicked dead who are in Hell.

Lk 16:22​

And it came to pass, that the beggar died, and was carried by the angels into Abraham's bosom: the rich man also died, and was buried;​

​

Lk 16:23​

And in hell he lift up his eyes, being in torments, and seeth Abraham afar off, and Lazarus in his bosom.​

​

Lk 16:24​

And he cried and said, Father Abraham, have mercy on me, and send Lazarus, that he may dip the tip of his finger in water, and cool my tongue; for I am tormented in this flame.​

A lot of people make that story out to be a parable, but Jesus never told parables about real people, and he certainly wouldn't have made up a fanciful afterlife to illustrate a point. There is a place in the center of the earth that is divided into at least two parts -- Hell, and Paradise. Paradise has been empty since Jesus Christ ascended to Heaven with the souls of the righteous.

Eph 4:8​

Wherefore he saith, When he ascended up on high, he led captivity captive, and gave gifts unto men.​

While Jesus was in Paradise, he preached to the spirits that were imprisoned along with the souls of the wicked dead, but he didn't get into Hell with them.

1Pe 3:19​

By which also he went and preached unto the spirits in prison;​

​

1Pe 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.​

Jesus was preaching to the angels who sinned by procreating with humans, just as we read about in Genesis 6, who are now in chains, awaiting their final judgement.

There you go. Book, chapter and verse.

The Bible never says that Jesus burned in Hell for three days to pay for our sins. It says he went to Paradise for three days, where he preached to the spirits in Hell, and then ascended with the souls of the righteous dead. That's what the Bible says.

 

[Claire Rousseau]

I 100% know that using a concordance and learning the different meanings behind words that come from the Greek allows us to understand the Scripture more deeply. I would say it is straight up willful ignorance not to use a tool that can help you better understand or bring a deeper more meaningful understanding of Gods Word. Its completely dogmatic in a negative sense to refuse to use concordances.

If you tell me that a Book I am reading was translated from Spanish, and it is brought to my attention that a word or phrase used in this book has a deeper meaning if I take 5 min to look up the Spanish word that it is translated from, then I am going to take that small amount of time and energy to learn what that word means in the original language so I can get a deeper, richer understanding of what is being told to me.

Just like if someone translates from English to a different language, are you going to tell me that every single phrase and word that was translated is going to 100% be exactly faithful to the understanding as it is known in English? You would be lying if you said it was, perfect example is the phrase raining cats and dogs. To translate that into a different language such as Japanese and have them read it they more than likely wouldnt understand what on earth you are conveying. However if they were to use a Concordance ect they can look the phrase up in English were they can learn what the meaning behind that is.

It is of course your choice to ignore the fact that in the Original Scriptures Sheol and Tartarus and Gehenna and Hades have different meanings and a different thought that was being conveyed to the original reader. The idea of Grave and the Lake of Fire are completely different and the aspect of the Grave was further revealed by Jesus Himself to be compromised of Abrahams Bosom and then a gulf that separated that from the place in the grave that was for the Lost.

It is a misconception to think that Hell is just the Lake of Fire which is what most people think when you say Hell, and I believe Jesus went to Abrahams Bosom and pulled the believers who died prior to His coming to Heaven. At that time I believe is also when He preached the Gospel to those trapped in the other part along with the Fallen Angels as Scripture states.

Regardless of the semantics I agree with you that all one needs to believe in terms of Salvation would be that Christ died spent 3 days dead physically and then Resurrected Physically.

Beyond that, while I am 100% a KJV support as the Best English Translation and almost exclusively use that and if I teach or ever would preach would only preach from it, I also 100% support using Concordences and whatever other means and tools we have available to us that will help us to better understand Gods Word. I am assured with no doubts that I have learned a much deeper and more meaningful understanding of Gods Word when I have taken the time to study out the things God lays on my heart and use the Concordance to grasp the Original Intent of the authors choice of words in the Greek or Hebrew...

However it is to each their own and I dont judge someone on their standing with God based on what version of the Bible they choose to use or their use or lack of other resources, for me its KJV and Concordances all the way. In fact I used it this Sunday as I taught my class about Reflection, how we are the Reflection of God as we are made in His image. I showed them the Hebrew Word translated image in those verses in Genesis.

Then I explained how we are not a perfect reflection because of Sin, then I began to quote in the New Testament these verses:

Heb 1:1 God, who at sundry times and in divers manners spake in time past unto the fathers by the prophets,
2 Hath in these last days spoken unto us by his Son, whom he hath appointed heir of all things, by whom also he made the worlds;
3 Who being the brightness of his glory, and the express image of his person, and upholding all things by the word of his power, when he had by himself purged our sins, sat down on the right hand of the Majesty on high:

And I had them look up the Word that is translated express image (it is ONE word in the Greek) and here is what it means:

charaktér: a tool for engraving
Original Word: χαρακτήρ, ῆρος, ὁ
Part of Speech: Noun, Masculine
Transliteration: charaktér
Phonetic Spelling: (khar-ak-tare')
Definition: a tool for engraving
Usage: an impression, representation, exact reproduction; a graving-tool.

Then I had them read further down:

5481 xaraktḗr – properly, an engraving; (figuratively) an exact impression (likeness) which also reflects inner character.

So the word that is translated as express image means in the Greek the exact impression. So I went on to teach that while we are a Reflection of God, we are not the exact Reflection, but if we want to better Reflect God we need to look at Jesus Christ who is the exact perfect Image of God.

So by using the Concordance and going to the Original Greek I was able to learn and teach a deeper more meaningful understanding of the phrase express image. Now I as an adult and much study already knew what was meant by that, but the teenagers I taught definitely did not.

So I will stand 100% behind using the Concordance and learning what words mean in the Original Language..

I don’t judge others for using other versions, or even using a Concordance. I do not think anything is wrong with using a Concordance.

If one believes that offers them a deeper understanding for their own use, then go for it.

What bothers me is when Person A uses other languages to “clarify” Scripture, knowing Person B (Who ONLY speaks English) has no understanding of that language Person A is using. It makes no sense, especially when Person A doesn’t even speak/understand that language.

Do you see what I am getting at?

That will only cast doubt in Person B’s mind that the Bible is accurately translated in English, and they might erroneously believe that they MUST learn Greek to fully understand the NT (I am not discouraging learning new languages, only saying it is not necessary to fully understand the Bible).

Anything CAN be correctly translated into any other language without losing anything. To take your example of raining cats & dogs, which is a phrase exclusive to English, I actually have taught my mom, who is Japanese, and her English is still “broken” that exact phrase by translating the English words “raining like cats & dogs” into Japanese. She immediately understood the meaning, that it describes the rain (drops) as large & heavy, and found the phrase interesting & amusingly peculiar, but funny nonetheless.

And that really strengthens my point....the reason I could explain that in the language she understands best, is because we BOTH speak Japanese. If someone tried to translate that for her into Russian, she would just be confused, as would I, because we don’t speak Russian. It wouldn’t help her better understand it at all, because it just sounds foreign.

That is my point: unless you are both completely fluent in Greek AND English, going back to the Greek does not help non-Greek, English-only speakers understand something BETTER than they would in plain English.

Hopefully that makes sense.

The Abraham’s Bosom doctrine seems strange to me. From my understanding of the story of the rich man & Lazarus, the rich man was in Hell (not the Lake of Fire, which I agree is different from Hell), and lifted up his eyes& saw Lazarus in Heaven, leaning into Abraham’s bosom(chest), as Lazarus was being comforted. Abraham was embracing Lazarus.

This fits perfectly with John 13:


“Now there was leaning on Jesus' bosom one of his disciples, whom Jesus loved.”....John 13:23 KJB


If Abraham’s bosom was an actual place, why isn’t this mentioned in the Bible? If Jesus freed souls from a place called “Abraham’s Bosom”, that sounds like a pretty big deal that would be expounded on somewhere in the Bible, yet it is not.

 

[Daciple]

If Abraham’s bosom was an actual place, why isn’t this mentioned in the Bible? If Jesus freed souls from a place called “Abraham’s Bosom”, that sounds like a pretty big deal that would be expounded on somewhere in the Bible, yet it is not.

Well you can interpret it however you wish, I will accept what Jesus taught as how it is, there was a place in the Grave that held the souls of the Lost and Saved until the time came that Jesus came and brought them to Heaven.

Just as other Scripture teaches which is quoted above no one ascended into Heaven until Christ did, either Jesus is lying or there was a different place where the Saved Souls resided until Christ died and then took them into Heaven.

And you say if Abrahams bosom is an actual place, why isnt it mentioned? Thunder quoted it directly, it is clearly mentioned.

Luke 16:22 And it came to pass, that the beggar died, and was carried by the angels into Abraham's bosom: the rich man also died, and was buried;

It doesnt say that the angles carried him into Heaven, and it doesnt say that Abraham was comforting him, it says specifically that the man was taken into Abrahams bosom, which was then described clearly in the Scriptures.

I will agree with what the Word says and take the text for what it states, there was a place called Abrahams bosom that dead people went to that is near or next to a place where the Lost were. I do not believe that Heaven and Hell are directly next to each other or is Heaven in the lower part of the Earth.

To me when I take all the teachings of Scripture it is readily apparent that the Grave, the Lower part of the Earth consisted of a place that held believers that is called Abrahams Bosom and that right next to it, in the same general place, the lower part of the Earth, is a place where the Lost are. I believe that is where Jesus went and then He took them into Heaven because as Scripture says, no one went into Heaven before Jesus Christ...

What bothers me is when Person A uses other languages to “clarify” Scripture, knowing Person B (Who ONLY speaks English) has no understanding of that language Person A is using. It makes no sense, especially when Person A doesn’t even speak/understand that language.

Do you see what I am getting at?

Not really, when in context of all of these discussions it is us, me you and the rest of the Forum, who all speak English (primarily) and we all have the exact same ability to turn to the Concordance to clarify the intent and meaning of the authors in their Original Language.

No one is casting doubt on the Word of God, and we can all agree 100% that everything needed for Salvation can easily be understood by those who have the Holy Spirit working in or on them when reading the English Version.

However there are many different Non Salvation Doctrine that can be clarified by the use of Concordances and learning the Original Languages and the meanings and intents of the Authors in the Original Language and the way words or phrases were used.

Such as the discussion we are having now about Hell. Thunder is expanding upon the Doctrine using the words that were used in the Original Language to help you and I and everyone else understand more deeply the intent and purpose that the Author meant when he used those words.

Saying Hell doesnt convey the same imagery or understanding as Tartarus. The fact is the Holy Spirit used that specific word, and it does us well to understand why, what is it that God meant if God Himself is choosing different words that have the same general but not the same exact meaning?

Thunder clarified it for you, it wasnt just a generic Hell that is being spoken of, it is the place in which the Fallen Angels/their Offspring were held which of course as Thunder has shown agrees with the account as laid out in Genesis.

So do you need to understand the Greek Original Language to understand Scripture, no. Is there a deeper meaning that can be revealed when we study the Greek/Hebrew? Yes.

That will only cast doubt in Person B’s mind that the Bible is accurately translated in English, and they might erroneously believe that they MUST learn Greek to fully understand the NT (I am not discouraging learning new languages, only saying it is not necessary to fully understand the Bible).

I have met literally zero people that in anyway think they need to learn Greek to understand the Bible. I have met and I myself would love to learn Greek to BETTER understand the Bible but never once has any doubt ever been created in me or any person I know because of the issue of using a Concordance as to the veracity of the Scripture itself.

If there are people then they probably have little to no Faith in God or the Word of God, what person can believe that God can raise the dead but can not get His Word to us in English? I fully believe that the Bible is 100% the Word of God and I believe 100% that the KJV is the best translation.

However can you tell me WHY you believe that the KJV is the best?

Could it possibly be because you took time to study WHICH text the KJV translators used as the base of the Original Greek/Hebrew?

For me THAT is the main reason I trust the KJV above the other translations, because they derive from a truer more adherent underlying Greek/Hebrew Text. The actual people who translated it are not nearly as important to me as the underlying Greek/Hebrew Text...

Anything CAN be correctly translated into any other language without losing anything. To take your example of raining cats & dogs, which is a phrase exclusive to English, I actually have taught my mom, who is Japanese, and her English is still “broken” that exact phrase by translating the English words “raining like cats & dogs” into Japanese. She immediately understood the meaning, that it describes the rain (drops) as large & heavy, and found the phrase interesting & amusingly peculiar, but funny nonetheless.

And that really strengthens my point....the reason I could explain that in the language she understands best, is because we BOTH speak Japanese. If someone tried to translate that for her into Russian, she would just be confused, as would I, because we don’t speak Russian. It wouldn’t help her better understand it at all, because it just sounds foreign.

That is my point: unless you are both completely fluent in Greek AND English, going back to the Greek does not help non-Greek, English-only speakers understand something BETTER than they would in plain English.

Hopefully that makes sense.

Well I disagree, and I have seen plenty of people trying to learn English have many problems understanding our words and euphemisms because they do NOT translate well into their Language and need further explanations.

The fact is a better understanding would be found in the Original Language not in the translated Language, and I really do not understand your continual rejection of this basic concept. However there is no need to continue to argue or debate about it, if you dont want to look to the Original Language then so be it, but I wouldnt deride others when they bring the intent of the Original Words and Language into discussions...

 

[Claire Rousseau]

Tartarus is a Greek concept, an abode for the wicked dead, and for the Titans, who represented, mythologically, the offspring of gods and humans. The exact same concept exists in the Bible, and that means that the Greeks were aware of ancient tales of nephilim and fallen angels.

Gen 6:4​

There were giants in the earth in those days; and also after that, when the sons of God came in unto the daughters of men, and they bare children to them, the same became mighty men which were of old, men of renown.​

Crazy, I know, but there is it. Angels and humans creating humans with incredible strength and abilities.

Peter uses the term for Tartarus when he writes about the angels who sinned against God.

2 Pe 2:4​

For if God spared not the angels that sinned, but cast them down to hell, and delivered them into chains of darkness, to be reserved unto judgment;​

I am as loathe to go to the Greek as almost anyone. Don't you think I know it's usually an excuse to pervert doctrine? But the perfect translation of the Greek word that God told Peter to write is Tartarus. Do you think that God doesn't know Greek? The word means the same as Hell, so I'm not sure what your opposition is to it, or to Greek in general.

God used Greek to give us his word. It's an amazing language, and any time I have looked at the full translation of certain Greek words it's only deepened my appreciation for God's word. I know that people misuse it, but that's not what I am doing here.

Anderson promotes learning Greek to study the Bible, so I am very confused by your stance on it.



Where do any of those verses say that Jesus spent three days burning in Hell with fallen angels and the wicked dead? Where do you find a verse that says the penalty that Jesus Christ paid for our sins included burning for them?



Your answer to the question of how Jesus could have burned in Hell for three days and also have been in Paradise with the thief is that God is omnipresent?

Jhn 20:17​

Jesus saith unto her, Touch me not; for I am not yet ascended to my Father: but go to my brethren, and say unto them, I ascend unto my Father, and your Father; and to my God, and your God.​

Jesus Christ did go to Paradise for three days. After he was buried, he went to Abraham's Bosom, where the souls of the righteous dead reposed, awaiting the redemption of his blood and his resurrection. From the story of Lazarus and the rich man, we know that the souls who are in Abraham's Bosom can converse with the souls of the wicked dead who are in Hell.

Lk 16:22​

And it came to pass, that the beggar died, and was carried by the angels into Abraham's bosom: the rich man also died, and was buried;​

​

Lk 16:23​

And in hell he lift up his eyes, being in torments, and seeth Abraham afar off, and Lazarus in his bosom.​

​

Lk 16:24​

And he cried and said, Father Abraham, have mercy on me, and send Lazarus, that he may dip the tip of his finger in water, and cool my tongue; for I am tormented in this flame.​

A lot of people make that story out to be a parable, but Jesus never told parables about real people, and he certainly wouldn't have made up a fanciful afterlife to illustrate a point. There is a place in the center of the earth that is divided into at least two parts -- Hell, and Paradise. Paradise has been empty since Jesus Christ ascended to Heaven with the souls of the righteous.

Eph 4:8​

Wherefore he saith, When he ascended up on high, he led captivity captive, and gave gifts unto men.​

While Jesus was in Paradise, he preached to the spirits that were imprisoned along with the souls of the wicked dead, but he didn't get into Hell with them.

1Pe 3:19​

By which also he went and preached unto the spirits in prison;​

​

1Pe 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.​

Jesus was preaching to the angels who sinned by procreating with humans, just as we read about in Genesis 6, who are now in chains, awaiting their final judgement.

There you go. Book, chapter and verse.

The Bible never says that Jesus burned in Hell for three days to pay for our sins. It says he went to Paradise for three days, where he preached to the spirits in Hell, and then ascended with the souls of the righteous dead. That's what the Bible says.

Just to clarify, I don’t think you, or anyone else who has participated in this thread are purposely misusing the Greek.

I do not believe ANY saved person would intentionally seek to deceive anyone with God’s Word.

I do think it is possible that saved people can be misled on minor doctrines (not the major ones, though, like salvation by grace through faith, eternal security, deity of Christ, Trinity, etc., which we all agree on), and I am not excluding myself.

So, hopefully we can figure this out together.

Here’s the thing: I trust every word of the KJB to be true. When the Bible says “Hell”, I believe it means Hell....the literal place of fire & brimstone located at the center of the earth, created by God for the devil & his fallen angels, where the spirit of the unsaved go immediately upon death, and will remain until Christ returns & casts Hell into the Lake of Fire.

I do not believe ANY other supernatural place exists within the earth, & certainly NOT Heaven, which is the same as “paradise”. The reason I believe this is because for one, it makes NO sense for a place called “paradise” to dwell in the bowels of the earth. Also, the Bible states that the tree of life is in the middle of paradise:

“He that hath an ear, let him hear what the Spirit saith unto the churches; To him that overcometh will I give to eat of the tree of life, which is in the midst of the paradise of God.”.....Revelation 2:7 KJB

&

“And he shewed me a pure river of water of life, clear as crystal, proceeding out of the throne of God and of the Lamb.
In the midst of the street of it, and on either side of the river, was there the tree of life, which bare twelve manner of fruits, and yielded her fruit every month: and the leaves of the tree were for the healing of the nations.”...... Revelation 22:1-2 KJB


&

2 Corinthians 12: KJB
2 I knew a man in Christ above fourteen years ago, (whether in the body, I cannot tell; or whether out of the body, I cannot tell: God knoweth ) such an one caught up to the third heaven.
3 And I knew such a man, (whether in the body, or out of the body, I cannot tell: God knoweth )
4 How that he was caught up into paradise, and heard unspeakable words, which it is not lawful for a man to utter.


^^^HOW can paradise be in the center of the earth if it is up in the heavens and one is caught UP into paradise?

 

[TokiEl]

^^^HOW can paradise be in the center of the earth if it is up in the heavens and one is caught UP into paradise?

How can God speak life into being ? How can angels eat meat ? How can Adam live for about a 1000 years ? How can etc etc...


The tree of life was in the garden of Eden... so is that Paradise ? Well why not ?

Who knows where it was and where it is now ?


Let's try to focus on what's important shall we ?

 

[Thunderian]

The Biblical concept of Paradise is that of a pleasant garden or park, like Eden would have been. Paradise for the righteous dead in the Old Testament was not the same place as paradise is for those believers who die in this age, or the same as paradise will be in eternity, but the basic concept is the same.

The word is only used three times in scripture, all in the New Testament, but it's Hebrew equivalent is used in the Old Testament.

Luk 23:43​

And Jesus said unto him, Verily I say unto thee, To day shalt thou be with me in paradise.​

​

2Co 12:4​

How that he was caught up into paradise, and heard unspeakable words, which it is not lawful for a man to utter.​

​

Rev 2:7​

He that hath an ear, let him hear what the Spirit saith unto the churches; To him that overcometh will I give to eat of the tree of life, which is in the midst of the paradise of God.​

In Hebrew, the word is pardes, and it's used three times in the Old Testament, translated once in the King James as "forest", and twice as "orchard".

Neh 2:8​

And a letter unto Asaph the keeper of the king's forest, that he may give me timber to make beams for the gates of the palace which appertained to the house, and for the wall of the city, and for the house that I shall enter into. And the king granted me, according to the good hand of my God upon me.​

​

Ecc 2:5​

I made me gardens and orchards, and I planted trees in them of all kind of fruits:​

​

Sng 4:13​

Thy plants are an orchard of pomegranates, with pleasant fruits; camphire, with spikenard,​

I don't think it's at all a stretch to consider Paradise as a very pleasant garden that God has created for the use and enjoyment of his saints. Eden was paradise, a part of Hades was paradise, part of Heaven is now paradise, and there is a future paradise where the tree of life will be available to believers.

 

[Claire Rousseau]

The Biblical concept of Paradise is that of a pleasant garden or park, like Eden would have been. Paradise for the righteous dead in the Old Testament was not the same place as paradise is for those believers who die in this age, or the same as paradise will be in eternity, but the basic concept is the same.

The word is only used three times in scripture, all in the New Testament, but it's Hebrew equivalent is used in the Old Testament.

Luk 23:43​

And Jesus said unto him, Verily I say unto thee, To day shalt thou be with me in paradise.​

​

2Co 12:4​

How that he was caught up into paradise, and heard unspeakable words, which it is not lawful for a man to utter.​

​

Rev 2:7​

He that hath an ear, let him hear what the Spirit saith unto the churches; To him that overcometh will I give to eat of the tree of life, which is in the midst of the paradise of God.​

In Hebrew, the word is pardes, and it's used three times in the Old Testament, translated once in the King James as "forest", and twice as "orchard".

Neh 2:8​

And a letter unto Asaph the keeper of the king's forest, that he may give me timber to make beams for the gates of the palace which appertained to the house, and for the wall of the city, and for the house that I shall enter into. And the king granted me, according to the good hand of my God upon me.​

​

Ecc 2:5​

I made me gardens and orchards, and I planted trees in them of all kind of fruits:​

​

Sng 4:13​

Thy plants are an orchard of pomegranates, with pleasant fruits; camphire, with spikenard,​

I don't think it's at all a stretch to consider Paradise as a very pleasant garden that God has created for the use and enjoyment of his saints. Eden was paradise, a part of Hades was paradise, part of Heaven is now paradise, and there is a future paradise where the tree of life will be available to believers.

Like you said, the word “paradise” never occurs in the OT.

Now you have to go back to Biblical Hebrew to translate the “correct” meaning?

Also, of the 54 mentions of the word Hell, NONE of them are remotely positive, which doesn’t lend credence to the idea that a “paradise” exists alongside Hell.

 

[Glad 2 know]

Jesus could not have burned in hell for 3 days.

1. Ecclesiastes 9:5 says "the dead know nothing at all". Death is like being in a deep sleep, there's no conscience no thoughts, nothing going on expect decomposition.
2. 1 Kings 11:33 The people that burned their children in sacrifice to false Gods were obviously the ones that had waled away from Yahweh and decided to establish their own forms of wicked worship.
3. Leviticus 18:21 God had NEVER commanded anyone to burn their children as an offering.
4. Leviticus 20:2-5 Deuteronomy 12:31 God detests evil acts. When wicked people in ancient times offered their children to false God Moloch by burning them in fire, Yahweh commanded that any parent/one doing so should be put to death.
5. Jesus is Yahweh's first creation, the one whom he is specially fond of so how could he have his son burn when he disapproved of children burning?
6. Jesus paid the ransom with his death there was nothing more for him to do. Just pay a perfect life with a perfect life. (except him becoming king and receiving his reward from his Father)
7. Genesis 3:19 When Adam died, he returned to the dust from where he was taken. God didn't say to him "you will burn in hell for your transgression". All humans return to dust.
8. Hell is the grave. It is Not a place of fiery torment. Like I said God hated children burning, why are adults any different? The concept of hell being a place of fiery torment is human.

 

[Daciple]

^^^HOW can paradise be in the center of the earth if it is up in the heavens and one is caught UP into paradise?

Because this was AFTER Jesus Christ Resurrected, prior to Christ everyone went into Abrahams Bosom, after Christ Resurrected the saved go UP into Paradise which is in Heaven.

 

[Claire Rousseau]

Because this was AFTER Jesus Christ Resurrected, prior to Christ everyone went into Abrahams Bosom, after Christ Resurrected the saved go UP into Paradise which is in Heaven.

Even before Christ died & resurrected, the OT saints were still saved by faith, and went up to Heaven when they died....for example:

Enoch:
“And Enoch walked with God: and he was not; for God took him.”......Genesis 5:24 KJB

^^^Compare that with:

“By faith Enoch was translated that he should not see death; and was not found, because God had translated him: for before his translation he had this testimony, that he pleased God.”.......Hebrews 11:5 KJB

&

“Who knoweth the spirit of man that goeth upward, and the spirit of the beast that goeth downward to the earth?”.....Ecclesiastes 3:21 KJB

&

“And it came to pass, as they still went on, and talked, that, behold, there appeared a chariot of fire, and horses of fire, and parted them both asunder; and Elijah went up by a whirlwind into heaven.”..........2 Kings 2:11 KJB


So these are both OT saints—Enoch & Elijah. It clearly says the spirit of man goes UPWARD; Elijah went UP INTO HEAVEN.

How can that be if they supposedly went DOWN into someplace called Abraham’s Bosom or Paradise which are supposedly DOWN in the center of the earth?

 

[Thunderian]

Like you said, the word “paradise” never occurs in the OT.

Now you have to go back to Biblical Hebrew to translate the “correct” meaning?

Also, of the 54 mentions of the word Hell, NONE of them are remotely positive, which doesn’t lend credence to the idea that a “paradise” exists alongside Hell.

In the King James, the word Heaven is used 582 times. Does it always mean the same thing?

 

[Claire Rousseau]

In the King James, the word Heaven is used 582 times. Does it always mean the same thing?

The common denominator is that Heaven is “UP”, never down or in the center of the earth.

 

[Thunderian]

The common denominator is that Heaven is “UP”, never down or in the center of the earth.

That's not my point, but it doesn't matter.