Immortality or Resurrection (Updated) by William West (ereader with dictionary .txt) π
Excerpt from the book:
What is a man? Is a person born with an immortal soul, or do the saved put on immortality at the resurrection? Is a person a three part being, an animal body with both a soul and a spirit that will live without the body? This is one of the most important questions of all time. It has more influence on our conception of our nature, our view of life in this world and life after death than any other question.
Read free book Β«Immortality or Resurrection (Updated) by William West (ereader with dictionary .txt) πΒ» - read online or download for free at americanlibrarybooks.com
Download in Format:
- Author: William West
Read book online Β«Immortality or Resurrection (Updated) by William West (ereader with dictionary .txt) πΒ». Author - William West
Then how could any of
them be hell if all three are metaphors? How could he say Hell-Gehenna is a real place
when he has just said it is a metaphor? His problem is that he knew Gehenna was the city
dump (a real place), but needed to make it into another real place, namely Hell. He has
the both the lake of fire and the second death being a metaphor of Gehenna-Jerusalem's
trash dump. He says Hell is called the second death, and the lake of fire on page 385; but
he did not give one verse where either one is called Hell. He did not for there is not one.
This is one of the biggest adding to the word of God that can be found anywhere by
anyone. When was Gehenna changed into Hell? When was one place changed into
another place? When did a place of destruction of unwanted trash become a place of
eternal torment and damnation? The second death is not a metaphor of anything. If the
second death is only a metaphor then the first death would also have to be only a
metaphor; or there would not be the first and the second, but two different and unlike
things. The second death is a real death, just as real as is the first death. He changed
Gehenna into Hell and used it over and over as if it were a Bible name for a real place
(but not the name of the city dump). He has done what many do, He has taken the name
of a particular place [the city dump] and made it into another particular place, which does
not exist in the Bible; and then made the second death into a metaphor of the place he has
made. He has taken a thing [death-the second death] and then made this thing into a place
and calls this place he had made out of death "Hell."
How could he know Gehenna is a metaphor of Hell? If it is, then he would have to
know about Hell from some other place, for he could never know Gehenna was a
metaphor of a place called Hell if the Bible said nothing about that place. We would
never be able to understand a metaphor if it were about somewhere far out in space which
we know nothing about if we are not told by revelation that there is such a place. This is
just what he is doing if he does not know there is a Hell from another part of the Bible.
From where did he learn of Hell? From where did he learn it name? Maybe from the very
badly mistranslated King James Version, and the theology he has heard all his life, but
not from any revelation from God for there is not a word in the Bible that has the
meaning of today's English word hell. He says in one breath that Gehenna is a metaphor
of Hell and in the next breath it is not a metaphor, but that it is Hell. He and most others
that believe in Hell say Gehenna is a metaphor of Hell. But if Gehenna, the city dump,
is a metaphor of Hell why is this metaphor of Hell translated into Hell? If it is a
metaphor of Hell, in what passage is "Hell" to be found? Without changing
Gehenna into Hell, there is nowhere that Hell can be found in the Bible. They seem
to be between a rock and a hard place. They know Gehenna is a metaphor, but if it is then
they have no place to get the name of Hell. Yet, they tell us it is a metaphor and then tell
253
us it is not a metaphor but that they know it is an actual real place of eternal torment even
if they cannot tell us what passage they know this from.
Here is a strange statement for one who believes Hell is found in revelation from God. Hamilton
quotes Henry Thayer who says, "Gehenna, the name of a valley on the S. and E. of
Jerusalem...which was so called from the cries of little children who were thrown into the fiery
arms of Moloch...an idol having the form of a bull. The Jews so abhorred the place after these
horrible sacrifices had been abolished by King Josiah...that they cast into it not only all manner or
refuse, but even the dead bodies of animals and of unburied criminals who had been executed.
And since fires were always needed to consume the dead bodies, that the air might not become
tainted by the putrefaction, it came to pass that the place was called Gehenna tou puros" A
Greek-English lexicon of the New Testament, Page 111. THAYER SAID GEHENNA IS A VALLEY. IF
IT IS A VALLEY ON THIS EARTH, IT COULD NOT BE HELL THAT IS NOT ON THIS EARTH.
Hamilton says the concept of hell is derived from a valley south and east of Jerusalem.
Truth Commentaries, 1 Peter, Page 385. Who does he think had this "concept," man or
God? Is he saying God or man had this concept from the misuses of a valley on this
earth? When was this "concept"? A big part of the Old Testament was past history before
the Jews so abhorred the place, Page 385. Was it just a late afterthought with God, which
he derived from man's misuse of a valley? He overlooked the fact that "Hell" is in the
King James Version before the "Jews so abhorred the place after these horrible
sacrifices." He said (1) Hell was unknown in much of the Old Testament and (2) "the
concept of Hell is derived" by man. Do you see what he has done? He has taken what
Thayer said about the origin of the name of a real valley that is "S. and E. of
Jerusalem" then he changed the name of this real valley from Gehenna to Hell, and
then applied what was said in the lexicon about the valley of Gehenna to the origin
to his Hell, which he says is a place not on this earth. He completely changed what
Thayer said about the name of a valley on this earth to make it be proof of what he
needed, but did not have. If the lake of fire were prepared for the Devil and his angels
(Matthew 25:41), how did it become a metaphor of Gehenna, a place that did not exist
unto long after the creation of man, and very long after the fall of Satan and his angles?
According to Hamilton, it did not exist unto after the Jews so abhorred the place.
THAYER SAYS WHERE THE NAME OF A VALLEY NEAR JERUSALEM
(Gehenna) IS DERIVED FROM, BUT WHERE IS HELL (as we use the word
today) DERIVED FROM? EITHER THE NAME OR THE PLACE? The answer is
clear that it came from pagan philosophy and was brought into the church by the socalled
church fathers.
If Gehenna were a metaphor of Hell, a place of eternal torment, it would be a very
poor one, for GEHENNA THE CITY DUMP WAS A PLACE OF DESTRUCTION
WITH NO TORMENT; BUT HELL AS IT IS USED TODAY IS A PLACE OF
TORMENT WITH NO DESTRUCTION. IN THE TIME OF CHRIST GEHENNA WAS
A PLACE OF DESTRUCTION, NOT A PLACE OF TORMENT.
STEP AFTER STEP AFTER STEP
β’ First step: Many teach and believe that Gehenna was the valley outside of
Jerusalem [the city dump].
β’ Second step: The name is changed to the name of another place, but not a place
near Jerusalem. Changed from "Gehenna" near Jerusalem to "Hell" who knows
where it is but not near Jerusalem, not on this earth.
254
β’ Third step: Then the place of destruction which is near Jerusalem named Gehenna
is changed into a place of torment which is not on this earth and renamed Hell,
and the very words (mistranslated words) of Christ are used to make Him be
speaking of their Hell. Christ is made to be speaking of a place not of this earth,
and not the Gehenna near Jerusalem. With this kind of reasoning anything can be
proved. THE PLACE CALLED "GEHENNA" BY CHRIST IS NOT THE
PLACE THAT IS CALLED "HELL" TODAY.
Summary: Major changes must be made to the Bible to teach a person now has an
immortal immaterial, invisible part of a person that will be tormented in Hell.
1. Destroy what? Soul [psukee - a living creature] MUST BE CHANGED TO A
FORMLESS, NO SUBSTANCE BEING THAT CANNOT DIE. A mortal living
being (psukee) must be changed to an immortal being. How did the translators
know when it was one and when it was the other? The same word is used four
times in Matthew 10:28-39 and is translated soul two times and life two times,
and in Matthew 16:25-39 it is used four times and in the King James Version it is
also translated soul two times and life two times, but life all four times in the
American Standard Version. In verse 39 Christ says, "He that finds his life
[psukee-life or soul] shall lose it; and he that loses his life [psukee-life or soul] for
my sake shall find it." Although the translators have tried to make it sometimes
refer to one part of a person and sometimes to another part of a person, it always
refers to the whole person, not just a part of him. When it refers to God, it is
referring to all of God, not just an immortal inter part of Him. When both
nehphesh in the Old Testament and psukee in the New Testament are used with
reference to God, angels, man, or animals, it is always a living being, not just a
part of a living being.
2. Destroy where? They were destroyed in Gehenna, not Hell. The twelve apostles
were told to fear God who was able to destroy in Gehenna. A place where there
was destruction but no torment must be changed to a place where there is torment
but no destruction. CHRIST SAID DESTROY IN GEHENNA, BUT THIS
MUST BE CHANGED TO TORMENT IN HELL.
3. The name Gehenna must be changed to another name, Hell. The name of the city
dump of Jerusalem, a real place, must be changed to the name of another place
which those who have made the change say is a place that is not on this earth.
Many who say they speak where the Bible speaks and are silent where the Bible is
silent make all these changes. IF THEY DID NOT CHANGE THE NAME
"GEHENNA" TO "HELL" THEY WOULD HAVE NOTHING ABOUT "HELL"
IN THE BIBLE.
4. The fire of Gehenna must be changed to the fire of "Hell" Our earthly bodies
cannot be burned forever in a literal fire. Both our bodies and the fire would have
to be changed in such a way that it would be something other than the bodies we
now have, and it could not literal fire as we know it. Would it not mean God
would make something new, then forever burn this new something as if it were
our bodies in place of our bodies?
5. Death must be changed to life for the lost to have eternal life in Hell. "The
wages of sin is death" [Romans 6:23]. "But for the fearful...their part shall be in
255
the lake that burns with fire and brimstone; which is the second death"
[Revelation 21:8].
Nowhere does the Bible say there is such a place as Hell, and it is up to those who
teach it to prove there is a place in the Bible. This they have not, and cannot prove.
1. Not one passage that says most of mankind will be given to Satan to forever
torment for his pleasure.
2. Not one passage that says most of mankind
them be hell if all three are metaphors? How could he say Hell-Gehenna is a real place
when he has just said it is a metaphor? His problem is that he knew Gehenna was the city
dump (a real place), but needed to make it into another real place, namely Hell. He has
the both the lake of fire and the second death being a metaphor of Gehenna-Jerusalem's
trash dump. He says Hell is called the second death, and the lake of fire on page 385; but
he did not give one verse where either one is called Hell. He did not for there is not one.
This is one of the biggest adding to the word of God that can be found anywhere by
anyone. When was Gehenna changed into Hell? When was one place changed into
another place? When did a place of destruction of unwanted trash become a place of
eternal torment and damnation? The second death is not a metaphor of anything. If the
second death is only a metaphor then the first death would also have to be only a
metaphor; or there would not be the first and the second, but two different and unlike
things. The second death is a real death, just as real as is the first death. He changed
Gehenna into Hell and used it over and over as if it were a Bible name for a real place
(but not the name of the city dump). He has done what many do, He has taken the name
of a particular place [the city dump] and made it into another particular place, which does
not exist in the Bible; and then made the second death into a metaphor of the place he has
made. He has taken a thing [death-the second death] and then made this thing into a place
and calls this place he had made out of death "Hell."
How could he know Gehenna is a metaphor of Hell? If it is, then he would have to
know about Hell from some other place, for he could never know Gehenna was a
metaphor of a place called Hell if the Bible said nothing about that place. We would
never be able to understand a metaphor if it were about somewhere far out in space which
we know nothing about if we are not told by revelation that there is such a place. This is
just what he is doing if he does not know there is a Hell from another part of the Bible.
From where did he learn of Hell? From where did he learn it name? Maybe from the very
badly mistranslated King James Version, and the theology he has heard all his life, but
not from any revelation from God for there is not a word in the Bible that has the
meaning of today's English word hell. He says in one breath that Gehenna is a metaphor
of Hell and in the next breath it is not a metaphor, but that it is Hell. He and most others
that believe in Hell say Gehenna is a metaphor of Hell. But if Gehenna, the city dump,
is a metaphor of Hell why is this metaphor of Hell translated into Hell? If it is a
metaphor of Hell, in what passage is "Hell" to be found? Without changing
Gehenna into Hell, there is nowhere that Hell can be found in the Bible. They seem
to be between a rock and a hard place. They know Gehenna is a metaphor, but if it is then
they have no place to get the name of Hell. Yet, they tell us it is a metaphor and then tell
253
us it is not a metaphor but that they know it is an actual real place of eternal torment even
if they cannot tell us what passage they know this from.
Here is a strange statement for one who believes Hell is found in revelation from God. Hamilton
quotes Henry Thayer who says, "Gehenna, the name of a valley on the S. and E. of
Jerusalem...which was so called from the cries of little children who were thrown into the fiery
arms of Moloch...an idol having the form of a bull. The Jews so abhorred the place after these
horrible sacrifices had been abolished by King Josiah...that they cast into it not only all manner or
refuse, but even the dead bodies of animals and of unburied criminals who had been executed.
And since fires were always needed to consume the dead bodies, that the air might not become
tainted by the putrefaction, it came to pass that the place was called Gehenna tou puros" A
Greek-English lexicon of the New Testament, Page 111. THAYER SAID GEHENNA IS A VALLEY. IF
IT IS A VALLEY ON THIS EARTH, IT COULD NOT BE HELL THAT IS NOT ON THIS EARTH.
Hamilton says the concept of hell is derived from a valley south and east of Jerusalem.
Truth Commentaries, 1 Peter, Page 385. Who does he think had this "concept," man or
God? Is he saying God or man had this concept from the misuses of a valley on this
earth? When was this "concept"? A big part of the Old Testament was past history before
the Jews so abhorred the place, Page 385. Was it just a late afterthought with God, which
he derived from man's misuse of a valley? He overlooked the fact that "Hell" is in the
King James Version before the "Jews so abhorred the place after these horrible
sacrifices." He said (1) Hell was unknown in much of the Old Testament and (2) "the
concept of Hell is derived" by man. Do you see what he has done? He has taken what
Thayer said about the origin of the name of a real valley that is "S. and E. of
Jerusalem" then he changed the name of this real valley from Gehenna to Hell, and
then applied what was said in the lexicon about the valley of Gehenna to the origin
to his Hell, which he says is a place not on this earth. He completely changed what
Thayer said about the name of a valley on this earth to make it be proof of what he
needed, but did not have. If the lake of fire were prepared for the Devil and his angels
(Matthew 25:41), how did it become a metaphor of Gehenna, a place that did not exist
unto long after the creation of man, and very long after the fall of Satan and his angles?
According to Hamilton, it did not exist unto after the Jews so abhorred the place.
THAYER SAYS WHERE THE NAME OF A VALLEY NEAR JERUSALEM
(Gehenna) IS DERIVED FROM, BUT WHERE IS HELL (as we use the word
today) DERIVED FROM? EITHER THE NAME OR THE PLACE? The answer is
clear that it came from pagan philosophy and was brought into the church by the socalled
church fathers.
If Gehenna were a metaphor of Hell, a place of eternal torment, it would be a very
poor one, for GEHENNA THE CITY DUMP WAS A PLACE OF DESTRUCTION
WITH NO TORMENT; BUT HELL AS IT IS USED TODAY IS A PLACE OF
TORMENT WITH NO DESTRUCTION. IN THE TIME OF CHRIST GEHENNA WAS
A PLACE OF DESTRUCTION, NOT A PLACE OF TORMENT.
STEP AFTER STEP AFTER STEP
β’ First step: Many teach and believe that Gehenna was the valley outside of
Jerusalem [the city dump].
β’ Second step: The name is changed to the name of another place, but not a place
near Jerusalem. Changed from "Gehenna" near Jerusalem to "Hell" who knows
where it is but not near Jerusalem, not on this earth.
254
β’ Third step: Then the place of destruction which is near Jerusalem named Gehenna
is changed into a place of torment which is not on this earth and renamed Hell,
and the very words (mistranslated words) of Christ are used to make Him be
speaking of their Hell. Christ is made to be speaking of a place not of this earth,
and not the Gehenna near Jerusalem. With this kind of reasoning anything can be
proved. THE PLACE CALLED "GEHENNA" BY CHRIST IS NOT THE
PLACE THAT IS CALLED "HELL" TODAY.
Summary: Major changes must be made to the Bible to teach a person now has an
immortal immaterial, invisible part of a person that will be tormented in Hell.
1. Destroy what? Soul [psukee - a living creature] MUST BE CHANGED TO A
FORMLESS, NO SUBSTANCE BEING THAT CANNOT DIE. A mortal living
being (psukee) must be changed to an immortal being. How did the translators
know when it was one and when it was the other? The same word is used four
times in Matthew 10:28-39 and is translated soul two times and life two times,
and in Matthew 16:25-39 it is used four times and in the King James Version it is
also translated soul two times and life two times, but life all four times in the
American Standard Version. In verse 39 Christ says, "He that finds his life
[psukee-life or soul] shall lose it; and he that loses his life [psukee-life or soul] for
my sake shall find it." Although the translators have tried to make it sometimes
refer to one part of a person and sometimes to another part of a person, it always
refers to the whole person, not just a part of him. When it refers to God, it is
referring to all of God, not just an immortal inter part of Him. When both
nehphesh in the Old Testament and psukee in the New Testament are used with
reference to God, angels, man, or animals, it is always a living being, not just a
part of a living being.
2. Destroy where? They were destroyed in Gehenna, not Hell. The twelve apostles
were told to fear God who was able to destroy in Gehenna. A place where there
was destruction but no torment must be changed to a place where there is torment
but no destruction. CHRIST SAID DESTROY IN GEHENNA, BUT THIS
MUST BE CHANGED TO TORMENT IN HELL.
3. The name Gehenna must be changed to another name, Hell. The name of the city
dump of Jerusalem, a real place, must be changed to the name of another place
which those who have made the change say is a place that is not on this earth.
Many who say they speak where the Bible speaks and are silent where the Bible is
silent make all these changes. IF THEY DID NOT CHANGE THE NAME
"GEHENNA" TO "HELL" THEY WOULD HAVE NOTHING ABOUT "HELL"
IN THE BIBLE.
4. The fire of Gehenna must be changed to the fire of "Hell" Our earthly bodies
cannot be burned forever in a literal fire. Both our bodies and the fire would have
to be changed in such a way that it would be something other than the bodies we
now have, and it could not literal fire as we know it. Would it not mean God
would make something new, then forever burn this new something as if it were
our bodies in place of our bodies?
5. Death must be changed to life for the lost to have eternal life in Hell. "The
wages of sin is death" [Romans 6:23]. "But for the fearful...their part shall be in
255
the lake that burns with fire and brimstone; which is the second death"
[Revelation 21:8].
Nowhere does the Bible say there is such a place as Hell, and it is up to those who
teach it to prove there is a place in the Bible. This they have not, and cannot prove.
1. Not one passage that says most of mankind will be given to Satan to forever
torment for his pleasure.
2. Not one passage that says most of mankind
Free e-book: Β«Immortality or Resurrection (Updated) by William West (ereader with dictionary .txt) πΒ» - read online now on website american library books (americanlibrarybooks.com)
Add a comment
Comments (0)