Is Hell the same as the Lake of Fire?

Hades and Sheol are synonymous. Hades is the Greek word for Sheol. Hades is not found in the Hebrew OT, and Sheol is not found in the Greek NT.

The NIV translates the word "Hades" with as "Hades" or "the depths", depending on the context of the verse. In Luke 16:23, it is translated "hell" with a lowercase "H", and contains the footnote saying "Hades".

Revelation 20:14 says "death and Hades were thrown into the lake of fire". This is a correct interpretation, since the prior verse reads "The sea gave up the dead that were in it".

 

Yes and no.

Yes they must have thought them interchangeable and I am not familiar with their theology on this matter. It could have been a particular bias or interpretation that there was no difference.

I am still more comfortable when translations consistently draw distinctions where God did... even if the words mean the same thing.

I would be interested to know if the Latin Vulgate uses one word or two. The LV is sometimes an indirect origin for KJV choices. Wycliffe's Bible was translated from the Vulgate. The KJV translators borrowed from earlier versions including the Wycliffe.

No. Sheol is not always hell in the OT. It sometimes means and is translated "grave".

There is definitely a difference between "Hades" as translated hell in Rev 20.

How so? At worst, you still have Hades being a different place than the Lake of Fire with Gehenna being one or the other- but not both.

It doesn't "induce" an interpretation. The words are simply left in a transliteration of the words that God Himself used... two different words.

If any version "induces" an interpretation, it is the KJV that assumes without scriptural support that that Gehenna and Hades are the same place.

The bottom line is that God drew a distinction that the KJV translators obscured.

 

God used different words. That's really good enough for me to categorically state that using two words is more accurate than using only one. I don't know how you could argue with this fact no matter how you interpret the rest.

Can you cite these passages? I am not satisfied that either of your options is biblically consistent so there might be others.

"A" suggest a place like purgatory. "B" contradicts scriptures concerning a believer's security in Christ.

I have never ran across anyone who didn't make this distinction. To deny a distinction between Hades and the Lake of Fire in Rev 20 would be a strain at best.

So do versions that use Hades there.

We have given some evidence that it does. You may not be able to have a definitive answer. Some things by God's providence are left to the uncertainty of human interpretation.

Either way there is an inconsistency in the KJV. God used two words. Two words should be used in English translations if possible... and it is possible in this case.

 

ScottJ: “I would be interested to know if the Latin Vulgate uses one word or two”

Clementine Vulgate uses (with differing case endings) “gehenna” 12x, “infernum” 9x. There might be more, but this was from a quick electronic scan.

 

The Hebrew says sheol...the Greek says hades, tartarus, gehenna. The KJV blurs these distinctions by calling'em all HELL.

Where is gehenna? Wherever God placed it. Some say it's in the center of earth. But it could be as close as THE NEXT DIMENSION. I mean, God has ALL INFINITY to choose from.

As for the false doctrine of Annihilationism, the theory that the wicked are COMPLETELY DESTROYED in gehenna...this was started over the interpretation of the Greek 'aionios aionios' generally rendered "for ever and ever" in most English Bibles. The Annihilationists claim that since aionious means "ages", and ages are definite periods, that gehenna isn't eternal, that certain witnesses use this 'tale' to frighten people into accepting Christ. However, other Scriptures show it IS eternal! Repeatedly, Scripture speaks of the flames that are never quenched & the worm that never dies. Why would it matter whether the flames and worms perished or not if the wicked are simply destroyed? And why does Scripture say Satan is cast into the LOF where the antichrist and his false prophet ARE?

Yes, sheol, hades, tartarus, & gehenna are all different places.

 

All different? Please explain. Who do you think goes to each?

 

Yes I can.

Did you intend to be offensive for no reason?

This is basically what I suggested earlier.

I agree. They will be given up from "Hades" according to Rev.

Our discussion has basically been about drawing a distinction between Hades and Gehenna. I am saying that there is a clear distinction. I think James is questioning that.

Do you have scripture references for this? I am not disagreeing and have heard it many times before. Just interested in the biblical proof that some will suffer more than others.

Actually the MV's help clarify the situation while the KJV clouds it. The MV's show the two words as two words, just like God inspired them. The KJV shows them as one word, contrary to the way God inspired them. </font>[/QUOTE]I'm sorry I did not discern your level of pride before i quoted you and i will refrain from dealing with you on your level any further.

I know the difference from the KJB, why don't you? Are you confused by the multiple versions coupled with your understanding of the Greek? I'm not.

Suggestion: Learn what the Lord has to say, by reading the KJB, and praying for the Lord to give you knowledge, and you WON'T stay confused!

 

Yes I can.

Did you intend to be offensive for no reason?

This is basically what I suggested earlier.

I agree. They will be given up from "Hades" according to Rev.

Our discussion has basically been about drawing a distinction between Hades and Gehenna. I am saying that there is a clear distinction. I think James is questioning that.

Do you have scripture references for this? I am not disagreeing and have heard it many times before. Just interested in the biblical proof that some will suffer more than others.

Actually the MV's help clarify the situation while the KJV clouds it. The MV's show the two words as two words, just like God inspired them. The KJV shows them as one word, contrary to the way God inspired them. </font>[/QUOTE]I appreciate your zeal there ralph, but Scott doesn't deserve that any more than you do.

You are correct, Scott. I intend to show that the lake of fire is not gehenna. Not being a greek scholar, I am relying on a little help from you guys to help me do it

I do see that there may be some distinction between hades and gehenna, although I don't think that is evidenced simply from the fact that the words are different. The KJV translators obviously thought they were interchangeable enough to warrant translating them both into hell, as well as sheol in the old testament. But there is definitely a difference between hell and the lake of fire. I think that rendering the word hades in the new versions blurs the distinction between hell and the lake of fire, and induces the interpretation that gehenna IS the lake of fire without any scriptural support for this assumption. </font>[/QUOTE]Uh, "deserve" what?

Is it the norm for the ranks here to consistently write something into another's post that is at best presumed? Yes, let me answer that for you.

Yall are FAMOUS for that behaviour, but you too can changed, repentence is NEVER a bad thing, ask God about that one, OK?

 

I think rather he is practiced in the art of arguementation, taking the side-winder approach in his attempt to denigrate those whom he disagrees.

 

Think nothing further of it Brother Newman, I take none offence, even at the best of them, but i do have my wit.

 

What is this supposed to mean? My pride?

Go ahead and tell me that you would not consider it offensive if someone start a comment "What's wrong, POR, you can't discern..." then went on to query a very basic fundamental doctrine?

Please show how my asking whether you were trying to be offensive is showing my "pride". If you weren't trying to be offensive, you could have simply answered "no" and I would have accepted it.

My level? Please do deal with me on my level.

As far as I know, I have dealt with you without resorting to insulting your intelligence and/or basic biblical knowledge- directly or by innuendo. I have given my honest opinions, backed them with evidence, and acknowledged (not necessarily to you personally) when I have been shown an error in one of my statements.

Really? You know the difference between hell when it translates the word Gehenna and hell when it translates the word Hades without any other outside sources? How do you manage that?

Nope. I have understood and applied the scripture much better since I stopped being limited by the KJVO belief.

Are you saying that if the KJV translators used one word to translate two Greek words all someone has to do is pray for knowledge and God will reveal a difference?

BTW, I am not confused because of MV's. I am learning something that was obscured in the KJV but that God revealed in the originals by comparing scripture to scripture. If the characteristics of Gehenna are more a reflection of the Lake of Fire than of Hades then I am satisfied. If Gehenna is equal to Hades and the Lake of Fire is different then I am satisfied.

Whether you like it or not, God used two words and He did so for a reason. It could be simply two words for the same place as the KJV translators apparently thought- Perhaps one word was more meaningful to the Jews while the other was more meaningful to the Gentiles. Or, it could be two words for two places.

The bottom line is that neither possibility given by God in the original is obscured by a version that uses two different words. One possibility is obscured by the KJV.

 

Thanks.

Was John a Christian at this point? I don't think so. Jesus had not yet died for his sins.

I also think this has to with people who allow something to prevent them from following Christ rather than a suggestion that one who belongs to Him would go to hell.

 

I have been guilty of being abrasive but I am trying to work on it. It is difficult sometimes to be direct but not cutting.

Its easier to be reasonable when someone actually attempts to reason with you. I do get a little frustrated when people repeat the same old stuff but refuse to back up their claims. I also consider double standards a breach of biblical principle and a sin.