Open Debate Challenge on My Defending the KJV as the Perfect Word for Today in English

[MatthewG]

Top 5 Heresies Among American Evangelicals
It’s 2022, but Arianism and Pelagianism are steadily making a comeback, according to the State of Theology report.
STEFANI MCDADE
|

Top 5 Heresies Among American Evangelicals
Image: Edits by Christianity Today / Source Image: Getty
American evangelicals’ grasp on theology is slipping, and more than half affirmed heretical views of God in this year’s State of Theology survey, released Monday by Ligonier Ministries and Lifeway Research.

The report references Ligonier founder R. C. Sproul’s teaching that everyone’s a theologian. “However, Dr. Sproul would be quick to add that not everyone is a good theologian,” it read. That caveat applies to Americans in general and evangelicals too.

Overall, adults in the US are moving away from orthodox understandings of God and his Word year after year. More than half of the country (53%) now believes Scripture “is not literally true,” up from 41 percent when the biannual survey began in 2014.


EXPAND GRAPH
Researchers called the rejection of the divine authorship of the Bible the “clearest and most consistent trend” over the eight years of data.

“This view makes it easy for individuals to accept biblical teaching that they resonate with while simultaneously rejecting any biblical teaching that is out of step with their own personal views or broader cultural values,” the researchers wrote.

It’s clear that US evangelicals (defined by belief and church affiliation) share some core faith convictions. Well over 90 percent agree that God is perfect, God exists in three persons, Jesus’ bodily resurrection is real, and people are made righteous not through works but through faith in him.

But in some areas, even evangelicals responded with significant misunderstandings and were not far off from the trends in society overall.

In the 2022 survey, around a quarter of evangelicals (26%) said the Bible is not literally true, up from 15 percent in 2020. They also became more likely to consider religious belief “a matter of personal opinion” and “not about objective truth”; 38 percent said so in 2022, compared to 23 percent in 2020.

Here are five of the most common mistaken beliefs held by evangelicals in this year’s survey:

1. Jesus isn’t the only way to God.
More than half—56 percent—of evangelical respondents affirmed that “God accepts the worship of all religions, including Christianity, Judaism and Islam,” up from 42 percent in 2020. And while the question doesn’t include all religions, it indicates a bent toward universalism—believing there are ways to bypass Jesus in our approach to and acceptance by God.




EXPAND GRAPH
2. Jesus was created by God.
A surprising 73 percent agreed with the statement that “Jesus is the first and greatest being created by God.”

This is a form of Arianism, a popular heresy that arose in the early fourth century. Those believing it caused such a stir that it led to the gathering of the very first ecumenical council of church leaders. They discussed and denounced these and other unorthodox beliefs as heretical for being contrary to Scripture.

Out of the Council of Nicea came the Nicene Creed, which states in part that Jesus was “not made” but “eternally begotten” and “one in being with the Father,” as found in passages including John 3:16 and John 14:9.


EXPAND GRAPH
3. Jesus is not God.
Given the above beliefs on Jesus as a created being, it’s not too surprising that 43 percent affirmed that “Jesus was a great teacher, but he was not God,” which is another form of Arian heresy.

This effectively denies the divinity of Christ and his unity with God the Father as an equal member in the Trinity, who is one God in three persons. This has been considered classic orthodox belief since the early church, and is based on many biblical passages—like where Jesus says “I and the Father are one” (John 10:30). For this, he gets accused of blasphemy (and threatened with stoning) by religious leaders for claiming to be God.


EXPAND GRAPH
4. The Holy Spirit is not a personal being.
Speaking of the Trinity, 60 percent of the evangelical survey respondents had some confusion about its third member, believing that “The Holy Spirit is a force but is not a personal being.”

To be fair, the Spirit of God is often described as an impersonal force throughout the Bible (sometimes as a dove, a cloud, fire, wind, or water), but these are all just metaphors for the Spirit’s personal presence. The Scriptures clearly affirm that the Spirit is fully God—just like Jesus and the Father, who sent us the Spirit—including the time when Ananias was described as simultaneously lying to the Holy Spirit and to God (Acts 5:3–4).

5. Humans aren’t sinful by nature.
Interestingly, 57 percent also agreed to the statement that “Everyone sins a little, but most people are good by nature.” In other words, humans might be capable of committing individual sins, but we do not have sinful natures.

Article continues below
This response indicates that many American evangelicals believe humans are born essentially good, which leans toward a heresy known as Pelagianism. This denies the doctrine of “original sin,” which is based on a number of biblical passages, such as Romans 5:12. Even David acknowledged in the Old Testament that humans were born in sin, saying “Surely I was sinful at birth, sinful from the time my mother conceived me” (Ps. 51:5).


EXPAND GRAPH
Respondents were considered evangelical by belief if they strongly agreed in the Bible as the highest authority; the importance of encouraging non-Christians to trust Jesus as their savior; that his death removed the penalty of sin; and that trust in him alone brings salvation. This four-part definition was adopted by Lifeway and the National Association of Evangelicals in 2015.

While evangelicals were found to be moving away from orthodox beliefs in several of the questions about God, they’ve grown more assured in their stances on cultural and ethical issues.

Among evangelicals, 94 percent believe “sex outside of traditional marriage is a sin” and 91 percent believe abortion is a sin, both the highest levels since the survey began.

Top 5 Heresies Among American Evangelicals - Christianity Today

It’s 2022, but Arianism and Pelagianism are steadily making a comeback, according to the State of Theology report.

www.christianitytoday.com

I am not an evangelical person. Having answers to questions doesn't give a full understanding of the Gospel of Jesus Christ. In my opinion, Johann.

I'll tell you this, abuse can run rampant in any church, that is secretive, and abuse as far as someone behind a pulpit can justify a polyamorous lifestyle but that doesn't mean it's right for us to go and marry another person. It's just as much as being like an adulterer and leaving one wife for another, leaving faith, to faithlessness.

There is no telling how many people have intruded and invaded the personal spaces of others, it's amazing how humans will try to kill each other over things. Christanity is a "culture" for the most part, and one has to cut themselves away from the culture, in order to be alone with Yahweh.

 

[Rockerduck]

I grew up reading the KJB, When I was 16, My father purchased me a NKJB which I have used for the last 43 years. When my mother passed away, I took her old KJB she loved, I picked it up one day to try to read it. Even though I spent 10 year using it as my only bible. I found it hard to understand, I could not really grasp some of the things that were said. I would not give that bible to anyone who did not know the word of God or who are new to christianity, i would be setting them up for failure..

For 350yrs., Children were taught the bible from the King James Bible. I'll make us all feel dumb, google a 7 grade school primer (school book) from the 1700"s. Children were smarter back then, without TV, radio, movies, etc.

 

[MatthewG]

For 350yrs., Children were taught the bible from the King James Bible. I'll make us all feel dumb, google a 7 grade school primer (school book) from the 1700"s. Children were smarter back then, without TV, radio, movies, etc.

Does smarts get us into the kingdom of heaven? That is a very good question to ask as well. Ill admit if you get rid of your computer, and your tv, and your radio, and just live for 30 days without them. Your whole entire actions and sets are going to change. But even without those things in my life, does it make look better in front of God?

That is where a lot of people mess up at and forget. That it's faith, which makes them right with God. Not some book, they have read, be it any version of the bible. People are not saved by the bible. They are saved by a living and real relationship with God, by the holy Spirit of God given to them. However it's doubtful many people find that even attractive enough, and therefore dismiss it. As though - perhaps you gotta be smart, maybe you got to be the right health weight to get into heaven type of thing, otherwise, you are just known as a failure to God.

YIKES! I wouldn't desire to be there at all. It's faith that pleases God. Faithlessness is not pleasing to God, but that doesn't mean he does not continue to reach out to those in the darkness.

 

[Rockerduck]

Does smarts get us into the kingdom of heaven? However, that is a very good question to ask as well. Ill admit if you get rid of your computer, and your tv, and your radio, and just live for 30 days without them. Your whole entire actions and sets are going to change. But even without those things in my life, does it make look better in front of God?

That is where a lot of people mess up at and forget. That it's faith, which makes them right with God. Not some book, they have read, be it any version of the bible. People are not saved by the bible. They are saved by a living and real relationship with God, by the holy Spirit of God given to them. However it's doubtful many people find that even attractive enough, and therefore dismiss it. As though - perhaps you gotta be smart, maybe you got to be the right health weight to get into heaven type of thing, otherwise, you are just known as a failure to God.

YIKES! I wouldn't desire to be there at all. It's faith that pleases God. Faithlessness is not pleasing to God, but that doesn't mean he does not continue to reach out to those in the darkness.

They were not smart. We are the dumb ones, using distractions. Kids didn't rebel, elderly were respected, etc. It was a different world in the family unit. More people were saved in revival of the 1700's and even more saved in the 1800's. Imagine learning a trade with no distractions and learning the bible by candlelight.

 

[MatthewG]

They were not smart. We are the dumb ones, using distractions. Kids didn't rebel, elderly were respected, etc. It was a different world in the family unit. More people were saved in revival of the 1700's and even more saved in the 1800's. Imagine learning a trade with no distractions and learning the bible by candlelight.

Oh. Israel didn't use distractions by making a golden calf. I don't believe I am part of your "we are the dumb ones" take. Some people are stupid, and make foolish decisions, that doesn't mean they do not learn from their mistakes and make better decisions becoming a bit "smarter" than one was before.

I doubt revival saved very many people. Revivals do not save people. A living relationship with God, in faith, is what saves people.

 

[Rockerduck]

Oh. Israel didn't use distractions by making a golden calf. I don't believe I am part of your "we are the dumb ones" take. Some people are stupid, and make foolish decisions, that doesn't mean they do not learn from their mistakes and make better decisions becoming a bit "smarter" than one was before.

I doubt revival saved very many people. Revivals do not save people. A living relationship with God, in faith, is what saves people.

True revivals are God sent, not church revival. You should read testimonies from Johnathan Edwards. He would preach and people would jump up and start praising the lord. Revivals breakout from God.

 

[MatthewG]

True revivals are God sent, not church revival. You should read testimonies from Johnathan Edwards. He would preach and people would jump up and start praising the lord. Revivals breakout from God.

A true living faith, is one lived in front of God, not men just to be seen by them. I am not saying that a few people may have come away changed and then seek for God, but it was the Spirit that lead them to that path. Not some Revival, and putting hands on people and tipping them over. I am smart enough not to be manipulated by a facade. That is why I do not care about "Revivals" or "deem them needed or important."

Men love the praise of men, and traditions and revivals, but that doesn't mean a heart condition is gonna be changed by merit of just showing up "as 100% standing in faith towards God" especially things regarded too, in lying of a "fake health repairs" and all of that jazzy, flashy, not of God, faithlessness. Just give me money money money, pulls are most of the scams. Extraordinary.


Faith is not, living by the rules of a book. Let alone the King James, which I have no problems with using. It's believing in a true and living God who gives his holy spirit to you in your heart.

 

[Bible Highlighter]

And you are saying it is ok for men to add words and verses to the Word of God….so they read the words of men instead. Men have been messing with the scriptures for a long time. They took God the Father’s name out of the Old Testament and then replaced with other words 6,800 times.

Modern translators try to get to the truth….ever heard of Sacred Name Bibles….What you try to push on Christians is a Bible full of errors that is hard to read and understand.

The only way you can say that the TR / KJV was an addition to God’s words is if you believe that the shorter readings of the Vaticanus and Sinaiticus are the two primary manuscripts uplifted by the juggernaut machine or the Bible Industrial Complex (Which began initially with Westcott and Hort). No doubt you want to deny these two Alexandrian manuscripts are the foundation of the Modern Bible Movement because we can see that they are corrupt. Corrections are all over them. Even Erasmus was aware of Vaticanus and he rejected it. He was the top Greek scholar of his day and he clearly had more manuscripts in his time vs. Today. Textual Critic Dan Wallace said we have lost 1 million manuscripts in world war 2. But we also know the Vaticanus and Sinaiticus are false because they teach Catholic ideas and other false doctrines. That should raise an alarm bell but you refuse to look at my points that I brought up on the changed doctrine and you just keep espousing a false narrative like the Leftist machine in politics.

 

[Bible Highlighter]

I disagree with you. While yeah the Bible is useful it can also be deadly. The Bible doesn’t change a person it’s God by giving the Holy Spirit.

I’m done talking about it.

Even Peter said to Jesus, “you have the words of eternal life.” (John 6:68). Men were inspired by God to write the words in Scripture (2 Timothy 3:16). Jesus said, “…the words that I speak unto you, they are spirit, and they are life.” (John 6:63). Yes, the Holy Spirit brings life but so do the words of God, as well. Romans 10:17 says faith comes by hearing, and hearing the Word of God. If you have no faith, then you are not saved. You get faith by hearing the words of the Bible. If you have no Bible ever in history, there would be no salvation. God saves by His Word. That is what Romans 10:17 says.

No offense, but I would say you are either liberal or unknowledgeable about the Scriptures if you do not believe the words of the Bible cannot save a person. Scripture clearly teaches this. I can give more examples if you needed but we do live in the digital Information age whereby you can find this out for yourself within seconds (either by Google, ChatGPT, etc.).

 

[Bible Highlighter]

God gave us the scriptures and man corrupted them and it ended up in the KJV.
Modern translatons try to recover that truth. Not that anything is perfect but they try to stick to the truth rather than carry on the corruption in later translations.

Notice how you did not address any of the points I brought up. You just side stepped them. You are also not proving your case about how the KJV had the corrupted words of God and only Westcott and Hort were our true heroes in this story. You have not given me any reason to trust how the Modern Bibles or their underlying text is superior to the KJV. You have not given me any Bible verses to show how the Modern Bible Movement and their Textual Criticism is valid or true.

All you have are the words of scholars. I have the Bible. In it, Jesus says Heaven and Earth shall pass away but my words shall not pass away. You want me to not believe the words of Jesus. You want me to believe that Jesus’ precise words passed away for 1,500 years between the mid 4th century and 1881. No thank you. You can believe the lies of scholars if that makes you sleep better at night. I will trust the Bible instead.

 

[MatthewG]

@Bible Highlighter

No offense, but I would say you are either liberal or unknowledgeable about the Scriptures if you do not believe the words of the Bible cannot save a person. Scripture clearly teaches this. I can give more examples if you needed but we do live in the digital Information age whereby you can find this out for yourself within seconds (either by Google, ChatGPT, etc.).


The Bible doesn’t save a person. The Holy Spirit of God does, that is where your assumption of me being knowledgeable of scriptures is wrong, be you think I know a lot or a little, none of the Bible was ever written to “us” specifically. You can show no proof of it being so other than quoting the Bible to make it seem so.

Therefore yes I stand on that a book doesn’t save a person. It’s a faithful relationship with God and fellowship with His Son,Jesus where a person is made whole and healed, by the spiritual means of seeking Yahweh in faith.

 

[Bible Highlighter]

You have to be able to read and understand the KJB first off.

Most people today would have to take a college course in old english to understand.

I would ask what truth we can NOT get from new bibles like the NKJ or the NASB or others that they could also get from the KJB if they could understand it

The issue is not the archaic words. If Rick said to Bob that he would give him a million dollars for learning all the archaic words in the KJV, would that not be a sufficient motivator to learn the Bible quickly? He probably would have it done in a week or two. The issue is that the Modern Translations clearly teach blatant false doctrines, and the KJV does not. So I would rather have archaic and correct, vs. Modern and incorrect any day of the week. Besides, God wants us to study to shew ourselves approved unto God. Like in any trade or craft (like somebody being an airline mechanic), they would have to learn a new set of words or lingo in their job to do it properly. The same is true if you want to be a doctor, or lawyer, etcetera. But people are lazy today, and so they pander to that laziness.

Also, you do not need to spend money in taking class to learn 1600s English. There are tons of free resources on the internet to learn the 1600s English in the Bible. We even have free online AI software to help, as well (Giving us more quicker and faster answers than places like Google). Granted, we do have to double check those sources when using AI online software.

 

[Bible Highlighter]

The Bible doesn’t save a person. The Holy Spirit of God does, that is where your assumption of me being knowledgeable of scriptures is wrong, none of the Bible was ever written to “us” specifically. You can show no proof of it being so other than quoting the Bible to make it seem so.

You do not appear to be listening properly. I am saying that both the Holy Spirit and the inspired words of God save a person. They both save. I provided clear verses that show that the words of God also play a part in salvation, as well. It is also Jesus that saves, too. It is also the Father that saves, as well. All three persons of the Godhead had a role in our salvation. The words of God from the Bible are life giving words to us. How do you know of the gospel that saves if it is not from the Bible? If you reject the saving gospel, then you are not saved. So again, where did you get the gospel? I get it from 1 Corinthians 15:1-4. This is from the Bible. When Peter basically preached this gospel to Cornelius and his house, the Holy Spirit fell upon them and they were saved. They were saved by hearing the words of God from Peter. No words spoken to them and they would not have had faith to believe in order to be saved. This is basic Christianity 101 stuff, my friend.

 

[MatthewG]

A book doesn’t save anything. Sorry, it’s only the Holy Spirit coming into a person life. Yes any Bible one can use and read is beneficial and helps renew the mind but it doesn’t save people. What saves people is and only the Holy Spirit being given to believers and being made new creation in Christ. Jesus saves, because of him we get to have the Holy Spirit which we have peace with God.

Faithful relationship with the living Yahweh, and the fellowship with his Son, is how people are saved, snatched up from the darkness into the light of the Kingdom. Regardless of ever even picking up and reading a book.

So I believe you’re wrong. And defending the KJV doesn’t mean anything at all. It’s gonna be around by the time we die and leave this world.

 

[Bible Highlighter]

A book doesn’t save anything. Sorry, it’s only the Holy Spirit coming into a person life. Yes any Bible one can use and read is beneficial and helps renew the mind but it doesn’t save people. What saves people is and only the Holy Spirit being given to believers and being made new creation in Christ. Jesus saves, because of him we get to have the Holy Spirit which we have peace with God.

Faithful relationship with the living Yahweh, and the fellowship with his Son, is how people are saved, snatched up from the darkness into the light of the Kingdom. Regardless of ever even picking up and reading a book.

So I believe you’re wrong. And defending the KJV doesn’t mean anything at all. It’s gonna be around by the time we die and leave this world.

So Peter lied when he said that Jesus had the words of eternal life?
Did Jesus lie when He said His words are life?
Does not the gospel save us?
Where do you get the gospel?
Do you get the gospel out of thin air?
No, you get it from the Bible. So yes. The Bible saves.
This is in harmony with God saving us.
God the Father sent the Son to save us, and the Holy Spirit renews our hearts.
How do I know this if not from the Bible?

 

[MatthewG]

So Peter lied when he said that Jesus had the words of eternal life?
Did Jesus lie when He said His words are life?
Does not the gospel save us?
Where do you get the gospel?
Do you get the gospel out of thin air?
No, you get it from the Bible. So yes. The Bible saves.
This is in harmony with God saving us.
God the Father sent the Son to save us, and the Holy Spirit renews our hearts.
How do I know this if not from the Bible?

The Bible can’t save my life. It’s the faith. How can you equate a book saving your life? Wasn’t it Jesus when he came in to you? And you now had the Spirit of Christ? The Holy Spirit reminds you of what you learn from the Bible in order to share the message, but it’s not the Bible that is doing the saving…

It’s God, by his Spirit and by his “New Testimony” which he writes his laws and statues on the minds of those which are his who are given the Holy Spirit.”

Do you see Jesus as a character in a book or a real person? If you consider him to be real, faithfully believing in his resurrection? Then Jesus is not just a mere character in a book…

He was the everlasting image of Yahweh, whom is still alive and with his Father now today…

While the book “helps” it doesn’t “save” a person has to make a “decision” today do “I” serve myself or do “I” seek to please God and look towards his ways and not the ways of my flesh…. The Bible helps knows these things and the Holy Spirit helps in remembering them…

Do you suggest I’m saying the Bible is completely useless? Cause that’s not the case. However the case being made is it is people deciding for themselves to believe… just as Adam and Eve could have talked to God about the observer in the Garden but did not…

I’m just saying it’s the Holy Spirit and the Spirit of Christ in a person that enables them to have love. So I do believe you suggesting a Bible “saves peoples lives” is just no true. It helps “people understand “ but it doesn’t “save.”

Jesus Christ of Nazareth comes to heal and save people from darkness and evil.

 

[Pyreaux]

I love my KJV, in spite of its many errors, it's the key text by which I orient my study with the Strong's, I'm familiar with its unique vocabulary, making it easy to remember and mark in foot notes the errors. It's not perfect at all. With the tampering of the Deuteronomists, Masoretic Jews, Roman and Protestant Christians, the only one who thinks it's perfect the way it is is only, after this tampering, they have this weird self-important 'argument from providence' that whatever Bible you are holding, one of the many Bibles, is somehow designed and sustained by God for the benefit of you. Well, aren't you special, and the Ethiopian or Coptic Christians are not, because... Pure bias.

I say the Spirit can testify of the truths and clarify the flaws in the KJV, the KJV can still be a medium, making you feel comfortable using it, with a vague feeling its generally true, but the KJV Comma Johanneum was not scripture, and its still not scripture just because of its mere presence in the KJV you are holding by lucky happenstance.

 

[Eternally Grateful]

The issue is not the archaic words. If Rick said to Bob that he would give him a million dollars for learning all the archaic words in the KJV, would that not be a sufficient motivator to learn the Bible quickly? He probably would have it done in a week or two. The issue is that the Modern Translations clearly teach blatant false doctrines, and the KJV does not. So I would rather have archaic and correct, vs. Modern and incorrect any day of the week. Besides, God wants us to study to shew ourselves approved unto God. Like in any trade or craft (like somebody being an airline mechanic), they would have to learn a new set of words or lingo in their job to do it properly. The same is true if you want to be a doctor, or lawyer, etcetera. But people are lazy today, and so they pander to that laziness.

Also, you do not need to spend money in taking class to learn 1600s English. There are tons of free resources on the internet to learn the 1600s English in the Bible. We even have free online AI software to help, as well (Giving us more quicker and faster answers than places like Google). Granted, we do have to double check those sources when using AI online software.

Dude your idolatry is severe

I
Can get saved using any modern bible. I may be confused in some
Doctrines. But I can be just as confused reading the kin which is not perfect.

God did not tell the church to get people to
Take classes in old English so they could get saved. God did not even inspire an English bible. So lay off your idolatry and fine another battle. This one makes you look bad

 

[Grailhunter]

@ReChoired Hell
I am sure they did the best they could. In a way this is the story of the difficulties of translating the language from one culture to a language of another culture. And a lot of this applies to the process of translating as a whole.

So we have Jews translating Hebrew scriptures into the Greek called the Septuagint ….Matching two languages, but there was no Greek word that was the equivalent for the word Sheol. The Hebrew understanding of Sheol was that it was where all people went to when they died as in “….And as for you, you shall go to your fathers in peace; you shall be buried at a good old age or Abraham breathed his last and died in a ripe old age, an old man and satisfied with life; and he was gathered to his people.. There is no example of people being judged to Sheol for being bad. But still Sheol is not well defined. ….Are they conscience or not? Well in the New Testament Christ spoke with Moses and Elijah. So does this mean they are conscience? (Or were they already in Heaven?)

And some believe that Christ went to Sheol to preach the Gospel to the Jews after the cross. So what does all that mean? I am going to say that it is not all that well defined. Even modern Jewish scholars have different opinions on Sheol. And Sheol is a topic that I have discussed with professors at Hebrew University in Jerusalem. So back then when the Jews were translating the Hebrew to Greek they were faced with the fact that the Greek did not have a word that included the meaning of Sheol. So why did the translators of the Septuagint pick the word Hades?

What does Hades mean? Hades was a Greco-Roman god that reigned over a spiritual place of the dead of the same name. The Greeks and Romans had a lot of stories about the place called Hades. You can read about them here … Hades - Wikipedia

In Greek mythology, all mortals went to the realm of Hades, also known as Erebus, after they died. Three judges, Rhadamanthus, Minos, and Aeacus, would decide where each person would go based on their life. Three distinct areas of Hades, for example, people who lived normal lives would go to the Fields of Asphodel, while heroes would go to the Fields of Elysium. Tartarus was a black pit for the bad and where the gods imprisoned their enemies after they died. Very few living persons could enter or leave Hades once they entered, with the exceptions of Hercules and Theseus.

(It is an important point to understand that for the Greco-Romans.....Hades was more or less Heaven and Sheol and Hell.)

The Ancient Greeks didn’t really have a concept of “damnation” or even sin. Going to Hades was just the natural consequence of death. The concept of Hades did evolve over time, so that it had stories of several realms:

So the Jews were looking for an equivalent Greek word for Sheol but there was none. Although Hades like Sheol was where all the dead went, Hades had good levels and bad levels where the environment was similar to the physical earth. And sometimes people that were still living went to Hades to rescue people there. So why did the Jews pick Hades to represent Sheol?….It was the only spiritual place in the afterlife that was represented in the Greek language?

Regardless of the differences between the two places the Jewish translators chose Hades to represent Sheol. So a lot of the information and storylines in the Old Testament about Sheol replaced the Greek definition and information regarding Hades.

The meanings of the two places became confusing. For example if a Jew would say Hades to a Roman, the Roman would be thinking something different than what the Jew meant.

The Apostles ran into the same problems….even more, they were dealing with two definitions of Hades. The Apostles were dealing with Sheol and Hades and a eternal fiery place of punishment and none of them had the same description. In addition the New Testament includes the concept of a battle between good and evil and the Devil.

But in the Christian version of the Greek word Hades it was a fiery place of eternal punishment. Christ and the Apostles were talking about and warning about this horrific place of eternal punishment by fire and a Judgment Day where all would be judged and sent to Heaven or "Hell." But none of this fit the actual descriptions of Sheol or Hades. And the Greek did not have words for Heaven or Hell.

In their words the punishment was eternal. When they were talking about this eternal place of punishment they described it as fire or a furnace, always burning and associated with pain. This association with fire and burning is repeated over and over again throughout the New Testament. Still there had to be problems with redefining a well known word. For example, when they started converting the Pagans and told them that they would go to Hades if they did not believe in Christ.
How many shrugged their shoulders and a replied, So what everybody goes to Hades.

This fiery place of punishment was actually a new concept that was not represented in Judaism or in Greek Mythology. The only other religion besides Christianity that had such a fiery place of punishment was Zoroastrianism.

The word Hell was not an option in the biblical period because the word 'Hell' is derived from an Anglo-Saxon word hellia (derived from the Old English, Old Norse, Old High German, hel, helle, circa. 725 AD)

So what was the alternative? Rather than defining a new word or changing the meaning of a word, the God Yeshua used the illustration of Gehenna for the fiery place of eternal punishment. Gehenna....which comes from the Hebrew phrase gey' hinnom, which means "valley of wailing.” Gehenna refers to the valley south of Jerusalem where corrupt Israelite kings sacrificed children to other gods as burnt offerings. And at the time of Christ’s ministry the Romans dumped trash and dead bodies into the flames of Gehenna. A form of sanitation.

But the Apostles decided to adopt the Greek word Hades and include it in the Christian Greek whereby they adopted Greek words but changed the meanings and context. Like the Greek word sin that had nothing to do with morality and simply meant that a Roman missed his target. So they took the Greek word Hades and redefined it as a place where Christ would judge “bad people” to and they would be punished with fire for eternity. Which again…does not agree with the Greek definition of Hades or the Jewish definition of Sheol.

So this outlines the difficulty of translating one language into another when they do not have similar words or concepts.

So now a days most of this does not apply, we have the word Hell and understand its meaning. And we have the word Sheol and understand what it means, so there is no justifiable reason to insert Hades, a mythological place into the Old Testament scriptures. The god of Hades nor the place called Hades ever existed. The Old Testament scriptures meant Sheol and more actuate translations use the word Sheol and that is why I say if you have a Bible with the word Hades in the Old Testament you should find a more accurate Bible because there are a lot more errors in that Bible. The Jews did not and do not believe in Hell and Christians do not believe in Hades. For Christians the New Testament defines an eternal place of fiery torment that we call Hell.

 

[Grailhunter]

A topic that never is talked about properly, in my opinion.

See post 519