Where did Jesus go when he died, hell burning with fire or paradise?

[Jim_Alaska]

1 hour ago, DaChaser said:

Cults and others have read that use of Hell as being the standard meaning of place of judgement, but the real meaning was the grave!

There are certain areas where it should be!

The perfect recipe for yet another modern "version".

No thanks, it was good enough to save me from the fire of "the grave".

[Pastor Scott Markle]

1 hour ago, DaChaser said:

Cults and others have read that use of Hell as being the standard meaning of place of judgement, but the real meaning was the grave!

Actually, this is not true.  The most basic meaning for the word "hell" is "the place of the dead."  This can include the grave, wherein the dead body is place, as well as the place of God's outpoured, unmixed wrath against sinful beings.  As far as I am aware, however, it is never used in Scripture concerning "heaven."  Although heaven is the place wherein the believing dead go, heaven itself is NOT the place of the DEAD.  Rather, heaven is the place of the "LIVING."  

Even so, I would contend that whenever we encounter the word "hell" in Scripture, we must discern from the context whether it is used in reference to the grave or in reference to the place of divine judgment.

[DaChaser]

5 hours ago, Jim_Alaska said:

The perfect recipe for yet another modern "version".

No thanks, it was good enough to save me from the fire of "the grave".

It is indeed a very good translation, but not perfect, as areas can be improved upon!

5 hours ago, Pastor Scott Markle said:

Actually, this is not true.  The most basic meaning for the word "hell" is "the place of the dead."  This can include the grave, wherein the dead body is place, as well as the place of God's outpoured, unmixed wrath against sinful beings.  As far as I am aware, however, it is never used in Scripture concerning "heaven."  Although heaven is the place wherein the believing dead go, heaven itself is NOT the place of the DEAD.  Rather, heaven is the place of the "LIVING."  

Even so, I would contend that whenever we encounter the word "hell" in Scripture, we must discern from the context whether it is used in reference to the grave or in reference to the place of divine judgment.

That was my main point, that there were instances when the Kjv team chose Hell and should have been for the grave...

[Pastor Scott Markle]

4 hours ago, DaChaser said:

It is indeed a very good translation, but not perfect, as areas can be improved upon!

That was my main point, that there were instances when the Kjv team chose Hell and should have been for the grave...

I understand your point, but do not agree. I believe that it was better for the translators to choose an English word (since one was available) which would encompass both meanings, even as the Greek and Hebrews words respectively encompass both meanings.  In this manner they could stay closer to the Holy Spirit inspired original, and would allow the reader the opportunity to discern the meaning through the context, even as would have been required in the original.  By employing the word "hell" for most of the translational cases, they accomplished just this objective.  Thank you for your integrity, translators.

[Pastor Scott Markle]

So, a question that relates to the original subject matter of the thread -- Can those in heaven observe the torment of those in hell?

Revelation 14:10 -- "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."

[Jim_Alaska]

1 hour ago, Pastor Scott Markle said:

he shall be tormented with fire and brimstone in the presence of the holy angels, and in the presence of the Lamb."

Oh, but surely that must mean in the grave, as to the location it happens in.    

[Pastor Scott Markle]

20 hours ago, OlBrotherDC said:

I see no problem with the KJV saying Hell, let the Bible say what it says. The problem to me is when we attribute OUR understanding of what Hell is. We do know that people who died before the cross went there. Luke 16 says...

¹⁹ There was a certain rich man, which was clothed in purple and fine linen, and fared sumptuously every day:

²⁰ And there was a certain beggar named Lazarus, which was laid at his gate, full of sores,

²¹ And desiring to be fed with the crumbs which fell from the rich man's table: moreover the dogs came and licked his sores.

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;

²³ And in hell he lift up his eyes, being in torments, and seeth Abraham afar off, and Lazarus in his bosom.

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.

²⁵ But Abraham said, Son, remember that thou in thy lifetime receivedst thy good things, and likewise Lazarus evil things: but now he is comforted, and thou art tormented.

²⁶ And beside all this, between us and you there is a great gulf fixed: so that they which would pass from hence to you cannot; neither can they pass to us, that would come from thence.

²⁷ Then he said, I pray thee therefore, father, that thou wouldest send him to my father's house:

²⁸ For I have five brethren; that he may testify unto them, lest they also come into this place of torment.

²⁹ Abraham saith unto him, They have Moses and the prophets; let them hear them.

³⁰ And he said, Nay, father Abraham: but if one went unto them from the dead, they will repent.

³¹ And he said unto him, If they hear not Moses and the prophets, neither will they be persuaded, though one rose from the dead.

 

We know Lazarus died(verse 22), we know he went to Abraham's Bosom (Verse 22),

the rich man died(verse 22) and went to hell, where he was in torment (verse 23)

But, where he was he could see Abraham and  Lazarus, (Verse 23) who were not in torment  (unless one thinks Abraham was not justified which is nonsense) The two sides of this place were separated and one could not physically travel from one to the other (verse 26) 

Brother DC, in your explanation you speak concerning "two sides" of "this place" (in the singular), as if the Scriptural passage presents the rich man and Lazarus as going after death to the same place, just a different side of that same place.  However, the Scriptural passage NEVER indicates that they went to the same place.  It ONLY indicates that the rich man went to hell, and that Lazarus went "into Abraham's bosom."  In fact, the passage clearly indicates that these two places are separate and different places, and never equates the one with the other.

Now, at the beginning of your above posting you stated that we should let the Bible say what it says.  Why then do you indicate something different than what it says?  Why then did you not indicate that these two dead men went to two different places, for that is all that the passage actually says?  They went to two different places, and those two different places were divided by a "great gulf."

Furthermore, I would ask whether you have considered that "Abraham's bosom" is not a reference unto some "place," but is actually a reference to Abraham's personal bosom/chest, wherein Lazarus was brought to literally lie in/on Abraham's personal bosom/chest?  (Note: There is a goodly amount of Scripture wherein the prepositions "in" or "into" are used with "bosom" as the object of those prepositions.)

 

20 hours ago, OlBrotherDC said:

I think sometimes we think of the lake of fire mentioned in Revelation 20:14 as "Hell". The lake of fire is the eternal place of torment for the unsaved, and since death and hell were cast into it(Revelation 20:14), the place in mention with Lazarus and the rich man cannot be this final place. 

Revelation 20:13 -- "And the sea gave up the dead which were in it; and death and hell delivered up the dead which were in them: and they were judged every man according to their works."  

So, the saved dead are now in the place called "heaven;" and the unsaved dead are now in the place called "death and hell."  What dead are then in the place called "the sea?"

Edited July 3, 2020 by Pastor Scott Markle

[OlBrotherDC]

1 hour ago, Pastor Scott Markle said:

Brother DC, in your explanation you speak concerning "two sides" of "this place" (in the singular), as if the Scriptural passage presents the rich man and Lazarus as going after death to the same place, just a different side of that same place.  However, the Scriptural passage NEVER indicates that they went to the same place.  It ONLY indicates that the rich man went to hell, and that Lazarus went "into Abraham's bosom."  In fact, the passage clearly indicates that these two places are separate and different places, and never equates the one with the other.

Now, at the beginning of your above posting you stated that we should let the Bible say what it says.  Why then do you indicate something different than what it says?  Why then did you not indicate that these two dead men went to two different places, for that is all that the passage actually says?  They went to two different places, and those two different places were divided by a "great gulf."

Furthermore, I would ask whether you have considered that "Abraham's bosom" is not a reference unto some "place," but is actually a reference to Abraham's personal bosom/chest, wherein Lazarus was brought to literally lie in/on Abraham's personal bosom/chest?  (Note: There is a goodly amount of Scripture wherein the prepositions "in" or "into" are used with "bosom" as the object of those prepositions.)

 

Revelation 20:13 -- "And the sea gave up the dead which were in it; and death and hell delivered up the dead which were in them: and they were judged every man according to their works."  

So, the saved dead are now in the place called "heaven;" and the unsaved dead are now in the place called "death and hell."  What dead are then in the place called "the sea?"

The reason I consider them two sides of one place is because they can see each other and communicate back and forth, but can’t cross to the other side. I suppose I am ok with saying two different places? Right next to each other.. 

Edited July 3, 2020 by OlBrotherDC

[John Young]

16 minutes ago, OlBrotherDC said:

 they can see each other and communicate back and forth

Not really sure this is pertinent to the discussion but I wonder if sound and site work differently in the spirit world (no physical body) than in the Physical world. A few examples would be when on earth, Paul, John, Peter, The 70 elders of Israel on Mount Sinai, etc., were given temporary spiritual sight into heaven.

Edited July 3, 2020 by John Young

[OlBrotherDC]

10 minutes ago, John Young said:

Not really sure this is pertinent to the discussion but I wonder if sound and site work differently in the spirit world (no physical body) than in the Physical world. A few examples would be when on earth, Paul, John, Peter, The 70 elders of Israel on Mount Sinai, etc., were given temporary spiritual sight into heaven.

That’s an interesting thought. I’m not sure! 

[DoctorDaveT]

According to the following OT verses translating the Hebrew word sheol, sheol is not just the place for the departed wicked, but the righteous will also be there.  Sheol, then, is the place for all of the departed dead.

Jacob went to sheol - Gen 37:35 -- And all his sons and all his daughters rose up to comfort him; but he refused to be comforted; and he said, For I will go down into the grave (sheol) unto my son mourning. Thus his father wept for him.

Sons of Korah (the godly ones whom God used to give us Ps 49) went to sheol - Ps 49:15 -- But God will redeem my soul from the power of the grave (sheol) for he shall receive me. Selah.

Jonah in type, inside the belly of the great fish, went to sheol - Jon 2:2 -- And said, I cried by reason of mine affliction unto the LORD, and he heard me; out of the belly of hell (sheol) cried I, and thou heardest my voice. [NOTE: this reference is important because it has typological implications for the Lord Jesus.]

King David would go to sheol - Ps 16:10 -- For thou wilt not leave my soul in hell (sheol); neither wilt thou suffer thine Holy One to see corruption.

Since sheol is the place for all of the departed dead, it can be said that both Lazarus and the Rich man were there [NOTE: hades, translated "hell" in Luke 16:23, is the NT Greek equivalent of the OT Hebrew sheol]. Luke 16 describes the place large enough that they were "afar off" from one another, that the Rich man had to shout ("cry") to be heard, that Abraham would have to "send" Lazarus to get to the Rich man, and that there was a "great gulf fixed" between them. While one might infer that they are in two separate places because of the distance between them, the OT teaching of sheol suggests otherwise.

With this understanding, the conclusion can be drawn that there are two parts (compartments, rooms, areas, etc.) to sheol: a place for the departed wicked, and a place for the departed righteous. Immediately following His crucifixion, Jesus took the righteous out of sheol and lead them to heaven [Eph 4:8-10 (while neither the words "hell" nor "hades" are mentioned in Eph 4:8-10, since Jesus "ascended up far above all heavens," He must have "descended..." for below the opposite of heaven: hell/hades/sheol)]. The only people now in sheol are the departed wicked.

[Pastor Scott Markle]

9 hours ago, OlBrotherDC said:

The reason I consider them two sides of one place is because they can see each other and communicate back and forth, but can’t cross to the other side. I suppose I am ok with saying two different places? Right next to each other.. 

Certainly I understand this conclusion on your part, since I was actually raised up through churches and schools that held the same viewpoint as you do.  However, the conclusion that you have presented is the very reason that I asked the following question earlier in the thread discusion --

13 hours ago, Pastor Scott Markle said:

So, a question that relates to the original subject matter of the thread -- Can those in heaven observe the torment of those in hell?

Revelation 14:10 -- "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."

1.  The holy angels and the Lamb (Christ) are residents of heaven.
2.  Those under God's wrath are "tormented with fire and brimstone" in the very presence of those heavenly residents.
3.  Yet those under God wrath are not themselves in heaven itself.
4.  Thus the conclusion seems valid that the torment of those in hell can be observed by the residents of heaven.

How would this impact your view of the account in Luke 16:19-31 that they could "see each other" and could "communicate back and forth," but could not "cross to" one another?  

From my own perspective this seems to allow that they were indeed in two different places, the rich man being in hell and Lazarus resting in/on Abraham's bosom/chest in heaven.

[SureWord]

50 minutes ago, DoctorDaveT said:

According to the following OT verses translating the Hebrew word sheol, sheol is not just the place for the departed wicked, but the righteous will also be there.  Sheol, then, is the place for all of the departed dead.

Jacob went to sheol - Gen 37:35 -- And all his sons and all his daughters rose up to comfort him; but he refused to be comforted; and he said, For I will go down into the grave (sheol) unto my son mourning. Thus his father wept for him.

Sons of Korah (the godly ones whom God used to give us Ps 49) went to sheol - Ps 49:15 -- But God will redeem my soul from the power of the grave (sheol) for he shall receive me. Selah.

Jonah in type, inside the belly of the great fish, went to sheol - Jon 2:2 -- And said, I cried by reason of mine affliction unto the LORD, and he heard me; out of the belly of hell (sheol) cried I, and thou heardest my voice. [NOTE: this reference is important because it has typological implications for the Lord Jesus.]

King David would go to sheol - Ps 16:10 -- For thou wilt not leave my soul in hell (sheol); neither wilt thou suffer thine Holy One to see corruption.

Since sheol is the place for all of the departed dead, it can be said that both Lazarus and the Rich man were there [NOTE: hades, translated "hell" in Luke 16:23, is the NT Greek equivalent of the OT Hebrew sheol]. Luke 16 describes the place large enough that they were "afar off" from one another, that the Rich man had to shout ("cry") to be heard, that Abraham would have to "send" Lazarus to get to the Rich man, and that there was a "great gulf fixed" between them. While one might infer that they are in two separate places because of the distance between them, the OT teaching of sheol suggests otherwise.

With this understanding, the conclusion can be drawn that there are two parts (compartments, rooms, areas, etc.) to sheol: a place for the departed wicked, and a place for the departed righteous. Immediately following His crucifixion, Jesus took the righteous out of sheol and lead them to heaven [Eph 4:8-10 (while neither the words "hell" nor "hades" are mentioned in Eph 4:8-10, since Jesus "ascended up far above all heavens," He must have "descended..." for below the opposite of heaven: hell/hades/sheol)]. The only people now in sheol are the departed wicked.

This begs the question: Why did the KJV translators use the word "grave" in many cases in the OT? Were they wrong? Is it an "translation error"? The word "grave" in English means "a pit" or "carved out hole". When we think of the word we make no association with hell or Abraham's Bosom but rather a cemetary or graveyard.

I wonder if words in Hebrew can have multiple meanings just like in English and scholars are too strict in defining them a certain way. The word "grave" itself used as a noun  can mean either "the death of person" (as in "from cradle to grave" or "she's gonna put me in an early grave") or "a hole or place a person is buried".

 

[Pastor Scott Markle]

1 hour ago, DoctorDaveT said:

According to the following OT verses translating the Hebrew word sheol, sheol is not just the place for the departed wicked, but the righteous will also be there.  Sheol, then, is the place for all of the departed dead.

Jacob went to sheol - Gen 37:35 -- And all his sons and all his daughters rose up to comfort him; but he refused to be comforted; and he said, For I will go down into the grave (sheol) unto my son mourning. Thus his father wept for him.

Sons of Korah (the godly ones whom God used to give us Ps 49) went to sheol - Ps 49:15 -- But God will redeem my soul from the power of the grave (sheol) for he shall receive me. Selah.

Jonah in type, inside the belly of the great fish, went to sheol - Jon 2:2 -- And said, I cried by reason of mine affliction unto the LORD, and he heard me; out of the belly of hell (sheol) cried I, and thou heardest my voice. [NOTE: this reference is important because it has typological implications for the Lord Jesus.]

King David would go to sheol - Ps 16:10 -- For thou wilt not leave my soul in hell (sheol); neither wilt thou suffer thine Holy One to see corruption.

Since sheol is the place for all of the departed dead, it can be said that both Lazarus and the Rich man were there [NOTE: hades, translated "hell" in Luke 16:23, is the NT Greek equivalent of the OT Hebrew sheol]. Luke 16 describes the place large enough that they were "afar off" from one another, that the Rich man had to shout ("cry") to be heard, that Abraham would have to "send" Lazarus to get to the Rich man, and that there was a "great gulf fixed" between them. While one might infer that they are in two separate places because of the distance between them, the OT teaching of sheol suggests otherwise.

With this understanding, the conclusion can be drawn that there are two parts (compartments, rooms, areas, etc.) to sheol: a place for the departed wicked, and a place for the departed righteous. Immediately following His crucifixion, Jesus took the righteous out of sheol and lead them to heaven [Eph 4:8-10 (while neither the words "hell" nor "hades" are mentioned in Eph 4:8-10, since Jesus "ascended up far above all heavens," He must have "descended..." for below the opposite of heaven: hell/hades/sheol)]. The only people now in sheol are the departed wicked.

Brother Dave, as you indicated in your above posting, the most basic meaning for the Hebrew word "sheol" (as well as the Greek word "hades") is "the place of the dead."  As such, "sheol" can contextually mean one of two things:

1.  The grave itself, wherein the dead body is placed. (Even as the King James translators translated it in two of the passages that you referenced above, Genesis 37:35 & Psalm 49:15)
2.  The place of God's judgment against the wicked dead.

For this reason the translators chose most of the time to translate the Hebrew word "sheol" with the English word "hell" because it is an English that can also carry either meaning.  Even so, it is necessary for us to consider the context of each case wherein we find the word "hell" in order to discern whether it means the grave or the place of judgment in each given context.  As for me, I believe that every context which you have referenced above concerns the grave.  In both Genesis 37:35 and Psalm 49:15 it is specifically translated as such.  Furthermore, in Jonah 2:2 Jonah referred to the "belly" of hell, which in context is easily understood as the "belly" of the whale as his "grave-place."  Finally, in Psalm 16:10 it appears to me that David was praying, not for some resurrection after his death, but for the Lord to prevent him from dying by means of trouble that he was experiencing at the time.  Thus I believe that David was simply referring to the grave as a symbol of death, which is the reason why he employed the idea of "corruption," since the body deteriorates with "corruption" in the grave over time.

Now, the passage of Psalm 16:8-11 is also of significant interest since Peter quoted it in Acts 2:25-28 on the Day of Pentecost as a support for the resurrection and exaltation of our Lord Jesus Christ.  When he did so, he implied in Acts 2:29 that the passage was not completely fulfilled in the life of David, saying, "Men and brethren, let me freely speak unto you of the patriarch David, that he is both dead and buried, and his sepulchre is with us unto this day."  Herein we notice that Peter referenced David's death, burial, and sepulchre as evidential contradictives to David's prayer in Psalm 16:10.  David did indeed experience "hell" (the grave) as per his death and burial, and his body did indeed experience "corruption" as per his supulchre.  On the other hand, Peter then applied Psalm 16:10 as a form of prophetic utterance by David concerning Jesus the Christ's resurrection, saying in Acts 2:31, "He [David] seeing this before spake of the resurrection of Christ, that his soul was not left in hell, neither his flesh did see corruption."  Now, let us specifically notice that Peter added the word "flesh" in the phrase, "neither his flesh did see corruption."  As such, Peter under the inspiration of God the Holy Spirit revealed that this passage referred to the body/flesh of the Lord, which would have experience corruption in the grave if it had continued therein, but did not because he was resurrected therefrom.

Let us then consider the parallelism of Hebrew poetry.  In Psalm 16:10 David presented the following parallelism:

"For thou wilt not . . . leave my soul . . . . . . . . . . in hell"
"neither wilt thou . . . suffer thine Holy One . . . to see corruption"

According to the parallelism of Hebrew poetry in Psalm 16:10, "hell" and "corruption" are parallel references, such that the "corruption" would have occurred "in hell."

Now let us consider the same parallelism in Peter's explanation within Acts 2:31:

"that his soul . . . . . . was not left in hell"
"neither his flesh . . . did see corruption"

According to this explanation of the parallelism, the "corruption" of "hell" relates to Christ Jesus' "flesh."  Thus I would conclude that the word "hell" simply references the grave in both of these contexts.

1 hour ago, DoctorDaveT said:

With this understanding, the conclusion can be drawn that there are two parts (compartments, rooms, areas, etc.) to sheol: a place for the departed wicked, and a place for the departed righteous. Immediately following His crucifixion, Jesus took the righteous out of sheol and lead them to heaven [Eph 4:8-10 (while neither the words "hell" nor "hades" are mentioned in Eph 4:8-10, since Jesus "ascended up far above all heavens," He must have "descended..." for below the opposite of heaven: hell/hades/sheol)]. The only people now in sheol are the departed wicked.

First, Ephesians 4:8 does NOT say that our Lord Jesus Christ took "the righteous out of 'sheol' and led them to heaven."  Rather, it says that "he led captivity [itself] captive."  Death is a form of "captivity;" and with his resurrection out of the dead, our Lord Jesus Christ acquired "captive" power over death.

Second, the claim that "since Jesus 'ascended up far above all heavens', he must have 'descended...' far below the opposite of heaven" is simply a conjectural addition to God's Own Word.  Since God's Own Word does not say it, you lack absolute authority to claim it.  Even so, by using such a word as "must" in your claim, you are implying absolute authority for your own conjectural claim, and thus are placing your conjecture on equal level of authority with God's Own Word.  That in itself is simply falsehood and offensive.  My counsel is that when you engage in some form of human conjecture, admit it.  Do NOT claim or imply absolute authority for your human conjecture.

Third, there is actually no logical (conjectural) requirement that ascending "far above all heavens" requires a descending far below the opposite.  In the first place, "far above all heavens" is further explained by the phrase "that he might fill all things;" and that phrase has been earlier defined in Ephesians 1:20-28 as a reference to our Lord Jesus Christ's ultimate exaltation of authority "above all."  In the second place, if the ascending "far above all heavens" logically requires a descending unto equal depth, then our Lord Jesus Christ would have had to descend unto the very deepest level of "hell's" outer darkness of fiery judgment.  This does not seem logical to me at all, but seems quite absurd.  In the third place, God's Own Word in Ephesians 4:9 actually tells us the place unto which our Lord Jesus Christ descended, so that we have no need for human conjecture at all.  Therein we learn that He descended "into the lower parts of the earth."  Since this references the earth itself, I myself conclude that this is a reference to the grave, wherein the upper parts of the earth is the ground upon which we walk, and wherein the lower parts of the earth is the grave under the ground.  (Note: I obviously do not hold that the judgment place "hell" is in the center of the earth, as so many who hold your viewpoint do.)

Edited July 3, 2020 by Pastor Scott Markle
grammar and spelling

[Pastor Scott Markle]

Now for a moment let us consider the word "paradise" as it is employed in the title of this thread.  Within the King James translation, the English word "paradise" is found a total of three times:

Luke 23:43 -- "And Jesus said unto him [the believing thief on the cross], Verily I say unto thee, To day shalt thou be with me in paradise."

2 Corinthians 12:4 -- "How that he [the one who was 'caught up to the third heaven' according to verse 2] was caught up into paradise, and heard unspeakable words, which it is not lawful for a man to utter."

Revelation 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."

So then, what do these passage Biblically teach us about the place called "paradise?"

1.  According to Luke 23:43 "paradise" was the place unto which our Lord Jesus Christ was going immediately after His death.

2.  According to 2 Corinthians 12:4 "paradise" is a place unto which one must be "caught UP."

3.  According to 2 Corinthians 12:2 in context with 2 Corinthians 12:4, "paradise" IS "the third heaven."

4.  According to Revelation 2:7 "paradise" is the place wherein "the tree of life" presently resides.

Seems to me from the actual teaching of God's Own Word on the matter that "paradise" IS heaven.