Aldrnari
Active Member
I find there are two (2) hell teachings:
One is the non-biblical hell of forever burning but just taught as being Scripture
The other hell is the Bible's hell: The temporary stone-cold grave for the sleeping dead.
Can we think of anyone righteous who went to hell?______
The day righteous Jesus died according to Acts of the Apostles 2:27, 31-33 Jesus went to hell the day he died.
If biblical hell was a permanent place then Jesus would still be in hell.
Jesus and the old Hebrew Scriptures teach: sleep in death (Not pain )
Such as found at John 11:11-14; Psalms 115:17; Psalms 146:4; Ecclesiastes 9:5
According to Genesis 3:19 Adam ' returned ' to where he started from the dust of the ground.
So, there was NO post-mortem penalty or punishment for dead Adam just going back to dust.
A person can Not ' return ' to a place he never was before, so Adam simply went back to where he started.
The ' dust ' of the ground is Not a forever burning place.
When the King James Bible translated the word Gehenna into English as hell fire, then Christendom ( Not Scripture ) spread that 'religious-myth literal hell fire forever' teaching, and it spread like ' wild fire ' so to speak, and that is why even in today's Christendom ( so-called Christian world ) still teaches that non-biblical hell as being Scripture.
I suppose the point I was trying to make is that the two concepts cannot be compared. One is a very real world issue that we face from day to day, while the other is a threat that cannot be seen or measured.
There's plenty of studies that show mass shootings are on the rise in the US, which should be alarming and taken seriously by everyone, imo. On the other hand, hell is just the same old regurgitated threat without anything tangible to back it up as it always has been.
If there was no religious text telling us what we are suppose to fear, we wouldn't be the wiser, as far as hell is concerned. As far as I can tell, the concept of hell isn't even a natural aspect of reality, while the other is at least comprehensible in a real way, even if one disagrees with my views on the subject of gun control itself.