"Hell" Etymology & Thoughts

[Marathoner]

I'm of the opinion that hell/Gehenna are synonymous with the lake of fire. "Hades" (likely the Hebrew Sheol) is where the dead are contained which, as we read in the book of Revelation, is emptied of the dead who are then judged by the Lord. Note how Hades is cast into the lake of fire (hell/Gehenna) along with Death after His judgment is complete. 

Just my thoughts. 

[Marilyn C]

On 11/10/2023 at 5:37 AM, Vine Abider said:

It's interesting how we as Christians use words that aren't actually in the bible . . . some I think are useful and some I think are not.  And while the King James bible translation was remarkable, certain Old English words were substituted like "church" (a pet peeve of mine) and "hell" which I don't think are very good translations.  Yet we continue to use these words today, 400 years later.

 

 

Hi VA,

I agree with you and your wife that words are very important for they convey meaning otherwise we end up `woke.` (If you know what I mean, pun intended) 

That is why I use the phrase `the Body of Christ` which is scriptural and conveys the truth of a body of believers in Christ. The word `church` now means a building where any religion practices their `worship.` 

As to the word `hell,` hadn`t thought of it before. So I believe spiritual death in the state of the natural or unregenerate man as still in their sins, (Eph. 2: 1) alienated from the life of God (Eph. 4: 18 & 19) and destitute of the Spirit. Prolonged beyond the death of the body, spiritual death is a state of eternal separation from God in conscious suffering. This is called `the second death.` (Rev. 2: 11,  20: 6, 14,   21: 8) 

(ref. Notes from my Bible.)

Thus, I will be more explicit when speaking of eternal separation from God, (from life, from all things beautiful and meaningful.)

Thank you for the topic.

[FJK]

1 hour ago, Vine Abider said:

What are your thoughts on this?

Only two ways to go, up to heaven or down to hell.

No in between, no limbo, just up or down.

What those two places are actually like is unknown to me, like a baby in the womb does not know what the outside world will be like till it is born into it, but it can be assumed one is to be desired and the other not.

After death we are dead, no consciousness of anything till we are resurrected, no existence at all till then.  We shut our eyes, become nothing, then open them to find ourselves alive again at the resurrection and the judgment with no sense of time having passed.

The dead know nothing, as the Bible would put it.

[Vine Abider]

53 minutes ago, Marathoner said:

I'm of the opinion that hell/Gehenna are synonymous with the lake of fire. "Hades" (likely the Hebrew Sheol) is where the dead are contained which, as we read in the book of Revelation, is emptied of the dead who are then judged by the Lord. Note how Hades is cast into the lake of fire (hell/Gehenna) along with Death after His judgment is complete. 

Just my thoughts. 

I don't think of them as exactly synonymous - perhaps more of a "waiting room" prior to judgement (then the LOF).

Must admit that though I have read books and several things on the topic, I still have, at best, just a vague notion. And I keep asking the question, if this was such a critically important topic (which it certainly seems to be), why are Paul and Peter are totally silent on it - at least from what I remember!?  (John does relate the seeing of the final solution - the lake of fire)

Although I suspect that because the NT overwhelmingly focuses on the exceedingly positive inheritance we receive in Christ, that it is sovereign of God to accentuate that instead of the negative consequences . . .

[Still Alive]

On 11/9/2023 at 1:37 PM, Vine Abider said:

It's interesting how we as Christians use words that aren't actually in the bible . . . some I think are useful and some I think are not.  And while the King James bible translation was remarkable, certain Old English words were substituted like "church" (a pet peeve of mine) and "hell" which I don't think are very good translations.  Yet we continue to use these words today, 400 years later.

The word hell is not actually found in the bible, but is rather substituted in the KJV for these words: 

Sheol: used in 65 times in OT - considered the place or state of all the dead

Hades:  used 11 times in NT - same basic meaning as Sheol (literally means "not to see")

Tartaurus: used 1 time in NT - is stated only as applying to fallen angels

Gehenna*: used 12 times in NT - an actual place of burning trash and condemned people's corpses . . . a valley near Jerusalem.  THIS IS THE TERM THAT MOST CLOSELY RESEMBLES "HELL" IN MODERN THEOLOGY.

* Gehenna, of these four words, is the term that most closely conveys eternal, conscious torment.  Yet it is only used 11 times in three gospels (Mathew, Mark & Luke) and once, metaphorically in James 3:6.  (If this is such an important doctrinal concept of the New Testament, why does Paul, Peter and John not mention it in any of their writings?) 

Where did the word "hell" actually come from, if it is not a biblical word?  It actually is derived from old German and Norse mythology from around the 6th or 7th century BC.  It referred to a place of torment for the dead and had a goddess over it by the same name. But "hell" also had they meaning of "concealing - to cover over," which also typified the dead being buried.  And it appears that eventually, the Catholic Church used imagery from Dante's Inferno (14th century) to convey much of how we in modern times think of this place.

Therefore it seems by using the term "hell" we are not being very accurate to scripture.  First of all, it doesn't appear in the Bible.  Secondly, it appears that is may have been derived from pagan mythology.  And thirdly, the traditional idea of hell most closely resembles Gehenna, which was an actual place near Jerusalem, but this word is only used in limited places in the New Testament. 

So I am reevaluating my use of this word . . . your thoughts?

Some interesting resources I found

Paper about the words translated as hell: https://wrongabouthell.com/Words Translated As Hell.pdf

 An article - "What the Hell: Finding Out “Hell” Isn’t in the Bible" - https://medium.com/christianish/what-the-hell-finding-out-hell-isnt-in-the-bible-7028acb3ecee

 

Yeah, and how would a person alive hearing Jesus use the word, "Gehenna" have interpreted his meaning, especially when juxtaposed against scripture like John 3:16 (among others). When people really want to dig into it, I just refer them to the link in my tag line.

No need for me to reinvent the wheel...

Edited November 10, 2023 by Still Alive

[AnOrangeCat]

On 11/9/2023 at 12:37 PM, Vine Abider said:

It's interesting how we as Christians use words that aren't actually in the bible . . . some I think are useful and some I think are not.  And while the King James bible translation was remarkable, certain Old English words were substituted like "church" (a pet peeve of mine) and "hell" which I don't think are very good translations.  Yet we continue to use these words today, 400 years later.

Like yourself I have mixed feelings about this, and "church" is also a pet peeve for me. Sometimes these words are things that just weren't named as such in the Bible, yet the concepts are clearly discussed (Trinity and rapture are two such cases). Hell specifically, though...

I think maybe it made sense at the time. When Christian missionaries first came across the Germanic and Norse people I could see Hell being used as a starting point and a point of comparison. "Yes, we have this terrible afterlife place too, but this is how it's different and how you avoid going there." being the gist of it. Whatever the term used to mean has pretty much been subsumed by the Christian usage of the word. This kind of thing happens as languages age. Words mutate, meanings change, some become more socially acceptable or less. It's a natural thing but it's probably happening at an accelerated rate now. Both Tartarus and Hades are of Greek pagan origin, yet were used by Jesus and the apostles in a manner similar to the way I imagine Hell was used for the Germanic peoples.

At the end of the day I think the most important thing is to understand what was being conveyed and to convey that to our audience.

[AnOrangeCat]

On 11/9/2023 at 12:37 PM, Vine Abider said:

* Gehenna, of these four words, is the term that most closely conveys eternal, conscious torment.  Yet it is only used 11 times in three gospels (Mathew, Mark & Luke) and once, metaphorically in James 3:6.  (If this is such an important doctrinal concept of the New Testament, why does Paul, Peter and John not mention it in any of their writings?) 

This I think is a body of Christ thing. Different people with different purposes and points of emphasis.

[Dennis1209]

On 11/9/2023 at 12:37 PM, Vine Abider said:

It's interesting how we as Christians use words that aren't actually in the bible . . . some I think are useful and some I think are not.  And while the King James bible translation was remarkable, certain Old English words were substituted like "church" (a pet peeve of mine) and "hell" which I don't think are very good translations.  Yet we continue to use these words today, 400 years later.

The word hell is not actually found in the bible, but is rather substituted in the KJV for these words: 

Sheol: used in 65 times in OT - considered the place or state of all the dead

Hades:  used 11 times in NT - same basic meaning as Sheol (literally means "not to see")

Tartaurus: used 1 time in NT - is stated only as applying to fallen angels

Gehenna*: used 12 times in NT - an actual place of burning trash and condemned people's corpses . . . a valley near Jerusalem.  THIS IS THE TERM THAT MOST CLOSELY RESEMBLES "HELL" IN MODERN THEOLOGY.

* Gehenna, of these four words, is the term that most closely conveys eternal, conscious torment.  Yet it is only used 11 times in three gospels (Mathew, Mark & Luke) and once, metaphorically in James 3:6.  (If this is such an important doctrinal concept of the New Testament, why does Paul, Peter and John not mention it in any of their writings?) 

Where did the word "hell" actually come from, if it is not a biblical word?  It actually is derived from old German and Norse mythology from around the 6th or 7th century BC.  It referred to a place of torment for the dead and had a goddess over it by the same name. But "hell" also had they meaning of "concealing - to cover over," which also typified the dead being buried.  And it appears that eventually, the Catholic Church used imagery from Dante's Inferno (14th century) to convey much of how we in modern times think of this place.

Therefore it seems by using the term "hell" we are not being very accurate to scripture.  First of all, it doesn't appear in the Bible.  Secondly, it appears that is may have been derived from pagan mythology.  And thirdly, the traditional idea of hell most closely resembles Gehenna, which was an actual place near Jerusalem, but this word is only used in limited places in the New Testament. 

So I am reevaluating my use of this word . . . your thoughts?

Some interesting resources I found

Paper about the words translated as hell: https://wrongabouthell.com/Words Translated As Hell.pdf

 An article - "What the Hell: Finding Out “Hell” Isn’t in the Bible" - https://medium.com/christianish/what-the-hell-finding-out-hell-isnt-in-the-bible-7028acb3ecee

 

Would you lump the words Rapture, Trinity, and the word Bible into the same category? They are not in the “Book-Word-Logos” either, yet it is a concept and we doctrinally use them.

Not that we needed it, but the Dead Sea Scrolls verify the accuracy of the KJV, YLT, Geneva, and a couple of other translations. Which existing manuscripts that were used were also a factor in determining translation into English.

Other considerations are: which Bible did Jesus and the apostles quote OT scripture from? There is a 100-year discrepancy between the LXX and Masoretic Text in longevity from Arphaxad through Terah. The KJV translators thought that could not be correct, so they changed it.

Hades. One of the NT terms rendered “hell.” Like the OT “sheol,” it is comprehensive and has a quite similar significance. It refers to the underworld, or region of the departed, the intermediate state between death and the resurrection. It occurs several times in the NT, namely: Matt. 11:23; 16:18; Luke 10:15; 16:23; Acts 2:27, 31; Rev. 1:18; 6:8; 20:13–14. The KJV renders this word “hell” in every case, with the exception of 1 Cor. 15:55 in the KJV only, where it gives “grave” (the NASB and NIV at this point read “death,” from thanatos, not hadēs). The NIV usually renders “depths,” or “grave,” for hades. The distinction thus recognized between “hades” and “hell” as a place of misery is a valid one. Nevertheless it is equally plain that our Lord, certain of His words, associated judgment and suffering with the condition of some of the inhabitants of “hades” (e.g., Matt. 11:23–24; Luke 16:23–27). See Hades.

Gehenna. The valley of Hinnom. A place where the Jewish apostasy, the rites of Molech, were celebrated (1 Kings 11:7). It was converted by King Josiah into a place of abomination, where dead bodies were thrown and burned (2 Kings 23:13–14). Hence the place served as a symbol, and the name was appropriated to designate the abode of lost spirits. In this way the term was used by our Lord.

The word occurs in the NT, and in every case it is properly translated “hell,” denoting the eternal state of the lost after resurrection. That is, the meaning of the English word is particularly the meaning of Gehenna (Matt. 5:22, 29–30; 10:28; 18:9; 23:15, 33; Mark 9:43, 45, 47; Luke 12:5; James 3:6).

The distinction between hades (the intermediate state) and Gehenna (eternal hell) is of importance, not only because it is necessary to the understanding of quite a large number of passages in the NT, but it may also prevent misconstruction and remove uncertainty as to Christ’s teaching with regard to the future state of the wicked. It also has important bearing upon the doctrine of “Christ’s descent into hell” (hades) and that of the intermediate state.^[1]

 

 

---

^[1] Unger, M. F., Harrison, R. K., Vos, H. F., Barber, C. J., & Unger, M. F. (1988). In The new Unger’s Bible dictionary (Rev. and updated ed.). Moody Press.

[Still Alive]

2 hours ago, Dennis1209 said:

The distinction between hades (the intermediate state) and Gehenna (eternal hell) is of importance, not only because it is necessary to the understanding of quite a large number of passages in the NT, but it may also prevent misconstruction and remove uncertainty as to Christ’s teaching with regard to the future state of the wicked. It also has important bearing upon the doctrine of “Christ’s descent into hell” (hades) and that of the intermediate state.^[1]

The interesting part of this, for me is that Jesus use of Gehenna is why I believe the lost are annihilated. After all, He compares their fate to bodies being thrown into this burning pit, where stuff is partially consumed by worms and partially burned, except he clarifies that the worms don't "die" and the fire cannot be "quenched*". i.e. the fire and worms completely consume those thrown into them. They are gone, no longer to exist, except as "ashes" or "worm poop". 

I believe he uses that analogy to clarify that the lost are "thrown out to be utterly destroyed and extinguished."

*An unquenchable fire is not a fire that never goes out. It is a fire you cannot PUT OUT. But an unquenchable fire can go out on its own when it runs out of fuel. Think of a burning building with no fire hydrants around. You can't quench it, but it does go out, eventually - and the building is gone.

Edited November 11, 2023 by Still Alive

[AnOrangeCat]

1 hour ago, Still Alive said:

I believe he uses that analogy to clarify that the lost are "thrown out to be utterly destroyed and extinguished."

I've come to believe similarly, though I admittedly don't place a lot of weight on it. It's enough for me to know that I don't want to be there, and that when God finally does let us understand Hell's nature and duration it'll make sense to us.