Originally posted by peejayd
* you got some twisted ideas..."The wicked shall be turned into [B]hell
, and all the nations that forget God."
Psalms 9:17* hell existed even on the Old Testament... 😉 [/B]
Actually she's right on that one. The word translated as hell is sheol. It's also translated as death. righteous and wicked are refered as going there.
My guess is that hell itself was always there, but the ancient israelites didn't have a perfect understanding of the afterlife.
Originally posted by debbiejo
You didn't look it up in your concordance did you? 🙄Hell only means death. No fire, no torment.
* you did not looked it up yourself...
1) sheol, underworld, grave, hell, pit
a) the underworld
b) Sheol - the OT designation for the abode of the dead
1) place of no return
2) without praise of God
3) wicked sent there for punishment
4) righteous not abandoned to it
5) of the place of exile (fig)
6) of extreme degradation in sin
* there really is hell in the Old Testament... 😉
Originally posted by Janus Marius
And really, why doesn't anyone cross reference the Bible with another work of the same time period? Any reasonable historian won't just pick up a copy of Julius Caesar's works and use that to paint a picture of the entire era; they'd use every available source, and work to isolate and eliminate inconsistancies and clear misinformation. People write books. People are fallible. I don't get how the Bible is suddenly infallible. Is Christianity faith in Christ, or faith in the Bible?
So you believe Julius Caesar existed right???
I believe he existed as well but there are only 16 historical documents from the time to confirm his existence. Jesus (for example) had over 25,000 pieces of text from people all over and outside Israel from around his lifetime to confirm his existence. Yet a lot more believe Caesar existed.
I know Caesar is an easier figure to believe in than someone who claims to be the Son of God, but that's not my point. My point is today numerous historians and scientists throughout the world try to learn more and make more discoveries relating to historical events of thousands of years ago and, when they start, one of the first historical documents they refer to is the Bible. Even taken at its face value, many people who don't believe in its ethical content, approve of its historical reliability.
Originally posted by willRules
I believe he existed as well but there are only 16 historical documents from the time to confirm his existence.
Evidence? For that matter,
Jesus (for example) had over 25,000 pieces of text from people all over and outside Israel from around his lifetime to confirm his existence.
is definitely false. We don't have any texts from "around his lifetime." Even Paul was about two decades later.
Originally posted by Gregory
is definitely false. We don't have any texts from "around his lifetime." Even Paul was about two decades later.
It was believed that everything Luke wrote was many years later. Many people also believe that Luke wrote many of his texts around the actual time. It varies with opinion. 🙂
No. Luke and Acts can't be comtemporary, because they are intended to correct earlier gospels and give a history of the early Church, respectively. That means that the first was written after a great many people had already written their Gospels--and keep in mind that the earliest Gospel we have is dated to about 70CE--and the second was written after the early Church was already well-developed. In other words, not when Jesus was around.
Originally posted by Gregory
No. Luke and Acts can't be comtemporary, because they are intended to correct earlier gospels and give a history of the early Church, respectively. That means that the first was written after a great many people had already written their Gospels--and keep in mind that the earliest Gospel we have is dated to about 70CE--and the second was written after the early Church was already well-developed. In other words, not when Jesus was around.
Oh don't get me wrong I'm inclined to agree with you that it was written a fair few years after Jesus. ✅ I was stating something my friend had said to me. She said that herself and many others believe that Dr Luke wrote some of his texts a while after Jesus but a lot more of it than originally thought is now believed to be (by herself and others) written around the time of Jesus.
Personally I think that if some of the text was written during or after is irrelevant, its the message they are trying to convey that is of importance at the end of the day 🙂
Originally posted by Gregory
No. Luke and Acts can't be comtemporary, because they are intended to correct earlier gospels and give a history of the early Church, respectively. That means that the first was written after a great many people had already written their Gospels--and keep in mind that the earliest Gospel we have is dated to about 70CE--and the second was written after the early Church was already well-developed. In other words, not when Jesus was around.
hmm... I understood the Gospel of mark to have been written around 65 AD. And the earliest epistle of Paul around 50. That's well within the life span of the average person (who died of natural causes anyways). These are contemporary documents (contemporary means written in the same generation as the events concerned.)
For example, if I were to write about the hippies in the 60's. My work would be considered contemporary by historians. It would be secondhand testimony since I wasn't actually there, but still contemporary. Now, if I wrote about the Revolutionary war - not contemporary.
Mark was contemporary and probably a firsthand account. Mathew as well. Luke probably secondhand, but still contemporary. John... well, assuming John wrote it at the ripe old age of 90something - firsthand, but maybe not contemporary.
65 CE is an early dating; most scholars put it around the destruction of the second temple, at 70 CE. Matthew is dated to around 80, usually, which is pushing it for "contemporary"; if Jesus hadn't been crucified, he probably still would have died naturally by the time that Gospel was written.
Even if you choose to call Paul and and the synoptics "around his lifetime," that's a long way from "over 25,000 pieces of text from people all over and outside Israel from around his lifetime," which was the original point.
Originally posted by Gregory
65 CE is an early dating; most scholars put it around the destruction of the second temple, at 70 CE. Matthew is dated to around 80, usually, which is pushing it for "contemporary"; if Jesus hadn't been crucified, he probably still would have died naturally by the time that Gospel was written.Even if you choose to call Paul and and the synoptics "around his lifetime," that's a long way from "over 25,000 pieces of text from people all over and outside Israel from around his lifetime," which was the original point.
Yeah, I don't know where he got the 25,000 number from either.
Outside the bible the only references I've heard of are the 2 from josephus, Contemporary anywas, the number explodes after about 150 AD.
I have heard rumors of a small roman one line reference to him, but haven't been able to verify it.
Originally posted by peejaydAnd where's the part about Satan and demons torturing you and fire and never ending torment.....????
* you did not looked it up yourself...1) sheol, underworld, grave, hell, pit
a) the underworld
b) Sheol - the OT designation for the abode of the dead1) place of no return
2) without praise of God
3) wicked sent there for punishment
4) righteous not abandoned to it
5) of the place of exile (fig)
6) of extreme degradation in sin* there really is hell in the Old Testament... 😉
Hell only mean death as I have said......
Originally posted by debbiejo
And where's the part about Satan and demons torturing you and fire and never ending torment.....????Hell only mean death as I have said......
* so, you conceded on the part where "hell" does not exist in the Old Testament... 😉
HELL -
1) sheol, underworld, grave, hell, pit
a) the underworld
b) Sheol - the OT designation for the abode of the dead
1) place of no return
2) without praise of God
3) wicked sent there for punishment
4) righteous not abandoned to it
5) of the place of exile (fig)
6) of extreme degradation in sin
* it is a place... and it exists... 😉