I need to back up some here.
I wasn't talking about how we witness and things like that....Steve wrote:I do not waste time worrying whether it would be most accurate for me to say to an unbeliever, "If you don't become a Christian you will be condemned to go to a place of judgment and punishment that is described as a place that has fire and other terrible things in it," or to simply say, "If you don't become a Christian you will go to hell." I am not likely to make either statement to an unbeliever. The apostles never raised such an issue when evangelizing unbelievers, and (unless I am prepared to equate "hades" and/or "gehenna" with what we commonly call hell) it would appear that Jesus did not do so either.
The two sentences were illustrations about what terminology will we use on the thread? To to clear up what I meant, I'll restate it (underline for emphasis only):
It wouldn't be impossible to post stuff like "Someone who becomes a Christian won't be condemned to go to a place of judgment and punishment that is described as a place that has fire and other terrible things in it" or we could post "Christians won't go to [the place people call] hell."
We could post the original Greek or Hebrew word or both each time, and define it each time. By New Year's we could have, maybe, hades partially covered (if you see what I'm saying). Other than this, with this new board (or folder)...it's probably going to be hard to stop people from discussing the last word in my above paragraph (if you see what I'm saying, some more).....
Steve also wrote:1. The apostles never raised such an issue when evangelizing unbelievers, ...
2. ....and (unless I am prepared to equate "hades" and/or "gehenna" with what we commonly call hell) it would appear that Jesus did not do so either.
1. Apostles and Jesus in context.
When Paul spoke to the Jews and/or the 'God-fearing' Gentiles who attended the synagogues he had no need explain Jewish beliefs in the resurrection of the dead and judgment of the just and the unjust. Even the Sadducess, who didn't believe in a resurrection or a life hereafter, understood what these beliefs meant. The same can be said about Jesus throughout his ministry. Though he had very limited contact with Gentiles, even they seemed to understand that "salvation is of the Jews" and knew what Jews believed. That there was this 'understanding' among both Jews and Gentiles is amply illustrated throughout the Gospels and Acts.
Among the pagans.
From Paul's speech to the pagan philosophers in Athens, Acts 17:22-34.
Acts 17 (NASB)
30"Therefore having overlooked the times of ignorance, God is now declaring to men that all people everywhere should repent,
31because He has fixed a day in which He will judge the world in righteousness through a Man whom He has appointed, having furnished proof to all men by raising Him from the dead."
32Now when they heard of the resurrection of the dead, some began to sneer, but others said, "We shall hear you again concerning this."
Note how the philosophers didn't think a day of judgment or a god {God} executing it to be a strange concept. Some in the crowd probably didn't believe in a life hereafter and, by extension, a day of judgement by any god. But like their Jewish counterparts, the Sadducees, they seem to have comprehended what Paul was saying about repentence and judgment.
---------------------
2. Re: gehenna (one of several words translated as hell in English).
Without discussing it now, Steve; are you still a partial preterist?
Re: the English word hell.
The etymological meaning of hell (from the word's origin) is the essentially same as sheol/hades: "the abode or realm of the dead".
General comments.
The more I study it, the more I feel hell is an adequate word for: gehenna and hades. At the same time, I agree that Christians should get to know what these words mean separately.
Why I think 'hell' is sufficient can be illustrated with the Greek word: aionion. Universalists admit that that while the word can mean "an age that could last a very long time" it doesn't mean "eternal" or forever and ever without end. (I think Plato sometimes used the word to mean "eternal" and the NT uses it in this way too but that's beside the point).
In English we have have the word "aeon" meaning: "a long period of time; an endless or immeasurable period of time." This definition would fit into universalist beliefs if "endless" were dropped (and not to go into the fact that this might mean the "immeasurasble after life" could potentially come to an end). In any event, the word 'aeon' or the words 'aionion life' seem to be basically unknown to English-speakers when it comes to life after death. That is, with the exception of universalists. So they have a big problm on their hands. Some literal translations of the Bible don't use "eternal" and have various renderings of aioion. But it remains that, as a rule, the average person has no idea what an "aionion life" or "age-during life" is or might be: People just haven't heard of it.....
This brings me back to 'hell' in English. A fair amount of regular folks {average non-Christian persons} know what 'hades' means. When they say it, they usually use it synonymously with hell with hell's common meaning. Here in Ohio while working in the factories I've heard non-Christians say to one another in jest, "You go to hades."
Other than this: What Bob posted.
Thanks,
Rick
)