[creation] Re: thanks

  • From: Percival Tanierla <percy_tan@xxxxxxxxx>
  • To: creation@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
  • Date: Fri, 4 Feb 2005 19:30:27 -0800 (PST)


   Thanks a lot for the short artcle about hell. God
bless you.


--- "Dr. Neville Jones" <ntj005@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:

> This is very interesting indeed. One minute we are
> all sailing along quite merrily, the next minute all
> hell breaks loose, if you'll excuse the pun.
> Philip (Snow)'s posting, entitled "HELL!!," covered
> a number of fundamental, doctrinal issues. Should we
> here discuss our disagreements, just as Peter and
> Paul had to reason out theirs? Well, we could do, as
> long as we realize that we are not going to reach a
> concensus.
> You see, on this forum, we have unitarians and
> trinitarians, Catholics and non-Catholics, Jews and
> Gentiles. There is only one thing that unites us all
> - we all accept that the cosmos was created by God.
> In addition to this, I am under an obligation to
> maintain, as our main priority, a technical slant to
> this forum. This is because freelists.org provide
> the service I use, specifically with this proviso.
> I therefore have to decree the following:
> 1. Our discussions are to be primarily concerning
> the scientific, technical and logical aspects of the
> Creation/evolution debate.
> 2. I will allow the discussion of doctrine on the
> forum, as long as it is tolerant and as long as all
> contributors are fully and constantly aware that
> they are not here to convert anyone. (Please do not,
> for example, attack anyone just because they are
> Catholic. If you disagree with a Catholic doctrine -
> as, indeed, I do - then feel free to politely say so
> and give your reasons. Once the point has been made,
> and defended, then we need to move on again with
> those matters that unite us.)
> 3. It is up to the individual as to whether they
> choose to inform the group of their position on
> Scriptural teachings.
> 4. I will, under no circumstances, allow remarks or
> postings that are anti-Jewish.
> Within the context of the above, I am prepared to
> instigate a discussion of the word, "hell," based
> upon my understanding of Scripture:
> The word "hell," used in the King James version of
> the Bible to represent three original Hebrew and
> Greek words, conjures up images of a big, horned,
> tailed, red bloke with something like a pitch fork,
> tormenting people. This is a popular depiction and
> should, of course, be kept separate from any meaning
> that the word itself, which dates from before 1150
> AD (or CE), has.
> The Hebrew word translated as 'hell' is sheol,
> which, as far as I understand it (we do have a
> native Hebrew speaker on this forum who could
> correct me), means the common grave of mankind, that
> is always reaching out for more.
> The two Greek words are hades, which means a grave,
> and gehenna, which means a dump where rubbish is
> burnt.
> Hell, then, is simply the grave. It can be a
> memorial grave, in which case the occupier will be
> resurrected back into a physical body at the last
> day; or not, in which case the spirit tossed into it
> is destroyed, never to return. There is no torture
> chamber (much to Rumsfeld's disgust, no doubt). That
> it is eternal, simply means that the fire is never
> quenched, not that spirits are forever punished.
> Jesus' spirit was in a memorial grave for three
> days, and his first physical body was (temporarily,
> until God removed it) placed in a physical grave. He
> was never dominated and tormented for three days,
> nor even for three nanoseconds, in a fiery "hell" by
> some sort of "devil." Indeed, such an idea is
> unthinkable to me.
> I hope that this mail is received by all in the
> spirit in which it was written.
> Neville.
> ---------------------------------
>  ALL-NEW Yahoo! Messenger - all new features - even
> more fun!  

Do You Yahoo!?
Tired of spam?  Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around 

Other related posts: