Here is a thread started by Sir Gabe on 07/31/2008 and some findings therein maybe useful for future lurkers so I share them (In fact, if that question is ever asked again here on that new forum, it may save us hours writing again and rephrasing past and forgotten replies...) Hey Gabriel, if you accept that I quote your posts, questions and replies, please tell me so or do it, please feel free to do it !!! ------------------------------------- Historical background and more. I hope this will help you. Couldn't find Encyclopaedia Judaica online in order to know what they think about it. Hypothesis about Tartarus : Maybe Peter was using a symbolic name of place, commonly known in those times, although non unscriptural, to identify where would be kept in bounds the wicked ones, namely Satan and his demons. Some kind of prison, a very dark place within sheol, (excerpt from below...for the deepest region of the world, the lower of the two parts of the underworld, where the gods locked up their enemies.) I've found another example of a very ancient symbolic item, or namely a beast taken up by a prophecy to illustrate what was then commonly known as the incarnation of evil or maybe his seed, a seven headed dragon. I've found a photography in the ISBE Revised Edition of an Ougaritic seal showing a canaanite god fighting against a seven headed dragon, the incarnation of evil, Mout, "death" in cananean if I can recall it exactly. I talked about it with a elder of my congregation who reads english but I didn't insist because it was too much a question for him. I never found someone able to answer me, I'm sure you all will. I don"t want to spoil Gabriel's subject, so I won"t go on about it. I have the picture on hand, so if you want to know more about it, please start a new topic. Gabriel, I hope these excerpts will help you. If you want more information, please ask for it. My pleasure is to help my brothers just as they helped me when I needed it most. Regarding what you said about Satan being hurled down to the earth and the link of it with Tartarus, I'll do more research tomorrow morning unless someone else gives you what you want. ISBE Revised Edition HELL [Gk. géenna, tartaróœ — 'hold captive in Tartarus']. On Gk. géenna, see GEHENNA . In the NT Gk. tartaróœ occurs only in 2 Peter 2:4, where the angels who sinned were "cast ... into hell" (cf. RSV mg. and NAB). The verb tartaróœ is derived from the noun Tartaros (cf. LXX Job 40:20 Job 40:20; 41:24 [Eng. 32]; Prov 30:16), which in Greek mythology was the locale below Hades where the Titan were imprisoned (Homer Il. xiv.279; Josephus CAp ii.33 [240]). Homer also located it at the "undermost limits of earth and sea" (Il. viii.481). His description of it as murky (viii.13) apparently carried over to Sib. Or. 4:186 and perhaps to 2 Peter 2:4, since Peter described Tartarus as having "pits of nether gloom." ------------------------------------------------------ MCCLINTOCK AND STRONG ENCYCLOPEDIA, Hades Two or three points stand prominently out in the views entertained by the ancients respecting hades: first, that it was the common receptacle of departed spirits, of good as well as bad; second, that it was divided into two compartments, the one containing an Elysium of bliss for the good, the other a Tartarus of sorrow and punishment for the wicked; and, thirdly, that in respect to its locality, it lay under ground, in the mid-regions of the earth. So far as these points are concerned, there is no material difference between the Greek hades and the Hebrew sheol. This, too, was viewed as the common receptacle of the departed: patriarchs and righteous men spoke of going into it at their decease, and the most ungodly and worthless characters are represented as finding in it their proper home (Gen 42:38; Ps 139:8; Hos 13:14; Isa 14:9, etc.). A twofold division also in the state of the departed, corresponding to the different positions they occupied, and the courses they pursued on earth, is clearly implied in the revelations of Scripture on the subject, though with the Hebrews less prominently exhibited, and without any of the fantastic and puerile inventions of heathen mythology. Yet the fact of a real distinction in the state of the departed, corresponding to their spiritual conditions on earth, is in various passages not obscurely indicated. --------------------------------------------- Encyclopedia britannica 2007, ancient Greeks... Tartarus The infernal regions of ancient Greek mythology. The name was originally used for the deepest region of the world, the lower of the two parts of the underworld, where the gods locked up their enemies. It gradually came to mean the entire underworld. As such it was the opposite of Elysium, where happy souls lived after death. In some accounts Tartarus was one of the personified elements of the world, along with Gaea (Earth) and others. According to those accounts, Tartarus and Gaea produced the monster Typhon. Compare Hades. Hell The concept of a state of being or place that separates the good from the evil or the living from the dead is found in most religions of the world. In religions of ancient and primitive peoples, the dwelling place of the dead as the destiny of the soul might be a gloomy subterranean realm or a distant island (e.g., the Greek Hades); a deep abyss in the lower world in which the souls of persons are punished (e.g., the Greek Tartarus); a dark region in the lower world in which both good and evil souls continue to exist as shades in constant thirst (e.g., the ancient Israelite Sheol); an underworld of cold and darkness (e.g., the Norse Niflheimr, also called Hel); a celestial dwelling place in which the souls of the departed reside (as with the Pueblo Indians, who upon death become clouds and, thus, bringers of rain); or a nebulous existence in which the soul might eventually fade into nonexistence (as with the North American Indian hunting tribes). Cronus …After his defeat by Zeus, Cronus became, according to different versions of his story, either a prisoner in Tartarus or king of the Golden Age.
Hi Gabriel, Ok, my brother, you're the boss ! ;-) If you're ok for me to talk further about it, I'll do it as soon as possible. Your question was about my belief regarding Tartarus nature. As Jinn's comment, I think that it is some kind of interelated spirit realm form, location and condition. I partly believe in the definition of the WT. I have two reasons for this. They read at times the Bible with modern and "occidental" eyes. The way people lived 3000 years ago and above all what they thought (religion, morality, etc.) is at hundreds of light years from our occidental point of view mainly, I think, because of greek philosophy and science progress between us and them. What was in David's mind when he wrote a sentence and the way we read it now may be totally different. At times, words don't mean the same. Secondly, the WT usually compose the definitions of biblical subjects with "positive" excerpts, omiting the whole definition because it doesn't match their views. I have in mind what they say about egyptian medecine. If we read their topic, it's only excrements and obscure witchcraft. Egyptian medecine was the most far advanced in the world in those times, with surgery, trepanation, etc. Yes, their medecine had large flaws, but the way the WT talk about it is not fair. I don't believe hebrew medecine was any better than that just because they buried their faeces in the desert. Did they throw the scalpel in boiling water, or in very salted water to sterilize it ? It was better because there was no magic, no spiritistic incantations. The WT didn't have to diabolize egyptian medecine so as to put the Israelites' up ! Well, it's just a example, not another topic... ;-) I'll do more researches about Tartarus tonight, I have to go to work. Your brother, PS: I just come back of the obama subject of my former post destined to you because the whole topic made me think of a book intitulated "Foucault' pendulum" (Le pendule de Foucault) written by Umberto Eco. Very interesting story illustrating how faith is just sometimes what we want to believe in, not reality...
Salut Gabriel and James ! Oh yes ! Internet is really an Eldorado for those looking for information. It's sad how humans can turn a wonderful tool into perversion and filthness. I draw the same conclusion as you from the excerpts I took this morning. In fact, I know a little more about it because I've read many books and magazines on daily life, religion, psalm poetry, war and ostraca in ancient times, especially mesopotamia and Israel (How many pearls (Matthieu 13:44) did I find in those books, I couldn't tell... What is the origin of burying dead ones ? (Some Asiatics people burn them or let them decay in roofless buildings open to the sun (Persians... Iranians)) Ancient people thought we went downwards once dead, but the soul couldn't pass alone through the surface of the ground. It was like a frontier. The living ones had to help the defunt to pass this frontier through; inhumation was at first to help them tread the first step of the symbolic stairs, down to the underworld... That's why people of then didn't like strolling near battlefields because of the ghosts they feared to encounter in those areas, so many dead enemy corpses never inhumated...) The way Greeks viewed Tartarus looks quite similar to the description found in the Bible, something utterly down below, thick clouds and darkness ('I won't retrieve and use the same verses you quoted in your former message' because you did it well), like a prison somewhat; 1 Peter 3:19 says : " In this [state] also he went his way and preached to the spirits in prison ". Who are those spirits? What is meant by the word prison ? Interestingly, Jesus didn't come and preach to those spirits. CHRIST Jesus did, maybe because his baptism (anointed by Holy Spirit..?) and death gave him authority ((Jude 9, datation of Jesus' deeds implied in Jude's narration ?), after his death I think...) that he didn't want to exercise before being wholly appointed to (If I'm telling something wrong, feel free to correct me.) What I think about Peter's use of the NOTION (concept, idea, connotation......) about Tartarus is that he used commonly known concepts found in daily (Greek influenced culture) life to illustrate what was the symbolic underworld prison, eternal bonds under dense darkness. If Peter used the word tartarus, I'm sure it's because it was then considered non-contrary to the scriptures. Is Hades even now viewed different from sheol, according to the WT ? Isn't Sheol in the old testament somewhat viewed as underworld, down below, (although symbolic) ? Isn't it a location NOT where we suffer but where we thirst... (couldn't find the meaning of ancient times for the word "thirst"..., thirst for what?) Is Tartarus is a special area of hades/sheol, symbolic location of prison/bounds for the wicked ones. What is the meaning of prison...? lack of freedom of action, of initiative...? Are Satan and his demons free to do what they want? Of course not ! Are they able to materialize ? What is the extent of Satan's influence over the world? Why does Satan bring woe to Earth only after being hurled down ? He knows what awaits him... He's not stupid ! Why doesn't he try to thwart God's plans following one way or another? He can't. (If I was Satan, I would act perfectly according to the way Jehovah wants us to follow it (WT?), then our obedience would "prove" Jehovah a liar because prophecies about rebellion, persecutions, restoration wouldn't be accomplished... pervert but how efficient ?) Satan's free will and actions will only be granted once hurled on earth? He's like a newbie playing chess against a master mind, once the newbie is caught by the game through strategies only known by champions, planned actions from of old as it were, the unique actions that will be left for him will be... to flee until checkmate (Ez38:4). Christians of old could evangelize the whole known world while using seemingly pagan terms because these terms had correspondancy with biblical notions (greek hades/hebrew sheol.) That's what I think about Tartarus. The same I do about the seven headed dragon shown in the ISBE Revised Edition under the entry DRAGON. Commonly known concepts, taken out from cultural background, symbolics notions (the snake was commonly viewed as evil, death, woe..., I have several examples of it). I'll try tomorrow to display the picture of the seven headed dragon. I have it on hand. I'm not saying the Bible is mythology, the apostles used then the concepts that fitted most what they wanted to develop, according to the standards COMMONLY known nearly 2 000 years ago. (Hopefully, help from their love for the truth and from the Holy Spirit kept them to go beyond what they had to write.) If the apostles used these words, they felt free to do it. What would you use today to symbolize evil, this system of things, the numerous governments that preceded us, ... unless we used what's in our cultural background (necessarily conform to the scriptures... that's a sine qua non condition.) Just think how hard a French brother desperately tries to make himself understood whereas we're contemporaneous. So try to understand if I had to make myself understood by brothers 2 000 years away in the future from now.... I can't even imagine... Please, I beg you ! Tell me I'm wrong. I just want to partake what I've found about the Bible and the conclusions I drew about it. I just want to express MY views, and understand YOUR views. An article I read from the French version of the Scientific America told that the feeling of truth and satisfaction comes only from discussing with persons that think otherwise (Preaching work...?). That's why I'm teasing you about Obama/Mc Cain antichrist/area 51/roswell-like novels. I don't have the truth. Do you ? I just want you to help each one of us here to feel what is truth. Holy spirit will help when needed. James, I'd like to answer your question, but it is already half past midnight here. I'd like to preach tomorrow morning. I can't go on any further. Maybe tomorrow. Gabriel, I'm looking forward reading from you. You can't realize how much you help and encourage me, thanks again. Your brother,
Dear Gabe, sorry, I had to quote your post otherwise it would have been impossible to understand the context of my reply... ---------------------------------------------- Dear Gabriel, When you were finishing this post, the alarm of my clock (07h30) was ringing... GET UP ! Argh ! I hate mornings but they keep on coming back every day ! You know, when I was 18, I used to listen to the talks of some elders from my ancient congregation, the "dream team" I called them. They used to say that it is hard to understand the Bible, the prophecies, etc. That's right that by the way they talked about all of it, we didn't understand anything either ! lol Later, I left for a bigger town for my studies. There, I got acquainted with an elder that later became a true friend. He had a huge knowledge, very clever, but humble. I spent many hours with him talking about the truth, my teen problems, how to deal with congregationnal bad events. What a difference with the "dream team", acting like cow-boys, some kind of know-it-all supermen that rushed into your life, firing biblical verses like a machine gun, and going out of your home prouds and ready for another adventure like Zorro on his black horse, fluttering his whip in the air. We only knew what was wrong with us at the end of the visit, they were "the all-seeing eye", they knew what was on our mind even better than ourselves. In fact, they didn't even ask for it, they didn't care, they were right, you were wrong. Stories such as "The way you looked at this married sister is shocking, be careful !" In fact, I was in love with another young sister of my age, noboby knew about it except my parents. I don't even know either how was my look towards this married sister that day. Their visit at home made me lose one hour of my life... I could tell tons of stories like this, my stories and those of my friends of then. Not upbuilding. Anyway ! I go back to my friend elder. One day, he presented a talk on Daniel's prophecies, 607BC - 1914AD and so on. Through the way he presented things, it was all clear and new. So easy ! I nearly died of sadness when he finished his talk, but once at home, there was only one thing on my mind. I wanted to learn more, to study the Bible a way I had never done before. I was born in the truth, but I was hungry and thirsty about spiritual food. The Bible and what's inside has always been the same, but the ways the "dream team" presented things (Isaiah 28:8), how they applied it in their daily life, and the consequences in our daily life, were boring, harsh, invasive. I have the conviction that if an elder is a good shepherd, a good teacher who handles the word of the truth aright (2Tim 2:17), he won't need to tell others what to do or not. They will understand it by their own. If they don't understand, keep on teaching using other methods (I'm not talking about situations necessitating specific actions, like gross sin). The Bible is powerful, can change lives, turn wolves into sheep. Why don't we let it do the job for us? For sure the job will be better done than through our poor means (See Moses before and after his stay in the desert). Has the "dream team" ever understood this? (A few mature friends of mine told me that one reason, among others, the "dream team" didn't trust me was that they felt I was a threat for them, some kind of jealousy. My friends exhorted me not to lose heart.) My friend elder involuntarily taught me something priceless, love for God's Word. (How many young ones don't have such a friend reaching a helping hand at the right time and at the right moment?) His talk showed me this valuable pearl, and each time I give a talk, I just want my fellow believers to run outside once the meeting is over to keenly study more and more about God's Word. The Bible is fascinating, I think it is our christian duty to "shout" it aloud, to help others understand what a treasure it is. Is there any reason to spend plentyful of hours in the preaching work if we're not able to keep Jehovah's sheep in the fold ? In my ancient congregation, so many young ones gone outside the fold, for so few new ones... debit/credit balance ? My leitmotiv is to upbuild my brothers just as they upbuild me, that's what I've tried to explain so many times on this forum. Make you crave for God's word. The way you react to my posts shows me I'm not totally wrong. You think you are not the sharpest tool in the box ? You surely know things I don't. You'll teach them to me, and I'll teach you what I know, with the help from others too. You enjoy pondering over spiritual things ? Motivation is 50% of the job. A blunt tool can be sharpened ("By iron, iron itself is sharpened. So one man sharpens the face of another." - Prov 27:17) You just need self-confidence and time to become soon as sharp as a japanese katana... I'm counting as well on you to make me taste your local food !! ;-) Don't forget french bellies are larger than yours.... lol I'm off now for a 15 mn nap ! I'll come back later for james' question and the seven headed dragon. Your brother,
Hello, I come back just a few seconds to correct ENNOORRRMMOOUUSS errors I made. I still have much progress to do. At times, when I re-read my text, my face blushes, lol. 1 Cor 15:33 says we must be careful about bad compagnies, that is, "false friends". That's the french way to name english words that look like french ones, but that don't mean the same. lol "You know, when I was 18, I used to listen to the talks of some elders from my ancient (please read "former") congregation,..." "(A few mature friends of mine told me that one reason, among others, the "dream team" didn't trust me was that they felt I was a threat for us (please read "them"), some kind of jealousy..." Errare humanum est, lol
At last, here is the picture I talked about in the post #2 ---------------------------------------------- Since then, I've made some research about it all, bought books about the Ugaritic mythology and have marveled on how Jehovah plays with mythological figures (Rahab, Leviathan, etc.) in order to illustrate how he'll thwart Satan's purpose and tricks. I'll take one day off, one day, in order to write down a short synthesis of it all.
Sir Tsaphah had started a great thread about Leviathan but as I don't know if he'll copy and paste it on the new forum, here are some connate research that had been done. --------------------------------------------- Dear Tsaphah, Thanks a lot again for your interesting thoughts. I just read your answer a few minutes ago. I hadn't seen you had answered me before then. We both don't use the same tools when we do research into a subject. Beside the obvious spiritual value of your posts, that's also why I always appreciate them. Here is what I found with my own tools... RAHAB 2. [Hebr. rahab] (Job 9:13; 26:12; Ps 87:4; 89:10 [MT :11 ]; Isa 30:7; 51:9); AV also "(the) proud," "strength"; NEB also EGYPT . An OT poetic name for a powerful enemy of Yahweh; in some passages it refers to a historical empire hostile to Israel, in others to a demonic monster of some kind. In three passages (Ps 87:4; Isa 30:7; 51:9) Rahab refers to Egypt, one of Israel's traditional enemies. Although the reference is not explicit in Ps 87:4, Egypt is the most likely candidate in the light of the clear identification in the Isaiah passages; also, since the psalm mentions the less well-known Ethiopia (Hebr.kûš) as well as Babylon, Philistia, and Tyre, it would seem strange for Egypt to be omitted. In Isa 30:7 Egypt's bankruptcy as a political ally (cf. vv. 1-5) occasions Yahweh's characterization of the country as "the silenced Rahab" (reading rahab hammošbat for MT rahab hem šabet [RSV "Rahab who sits still"]; see Day, p. 89). The allusion to the Exodus in Isa 51:10 — Yahweh's drying up the sea and making in its depths a way for the redeemed to pass through — makes the identification of Rahab with Egypt unmistakable in v. 9. Elsewhere the term indicates a demonic monster. Even in Isa 51:9, where a historical entity is in view, Rahab seems to be more than an epithet for a foreign nation, since rahab here parallels tannîn (RSV "dragon"), a sea creature of such extraordinary capability that Yahweh's victory over it is noteworthy. Likewise, in Ps 89:10 [MT :11 ]) Rahab (LXX hyperephanon, "arrogant one") appears to be a beast that is subdued in the creative process (cf. Gen 1:2) along with other "natural" forces like the sea (yam; cf. Isa 51:10 where both yam and mê t'hôm rabbâ ["waters of the great deep"] appear). In Job 9:13 Yahweh's quelling of the helpers of Rahab (LXX ketos, "sea monster") underscores His absolute sovereignty (cf. vv. 1-13). Similarly, 26:12 emphasizes Yahweh's power by noting His subjugation of Rahab (LXX ketos). Here again rahab parallels yam ("sea") and, in v. 13, nahaš barî[a]h (RSV "fleeing serpent"; for the possible translation "twisting serpent," see Day, p. 5 n. 8). Based on these descriptions, scholars have concluded that Rahab is another name for the better-known monster LEVIATHAN ; but others think that separate beings are involved. Scholars once tended to view Rahab, Leviathan, Behemoth, and personified natural forces as deities that Yahweh had to overcome to bring about the created order, analagous to the role played by such deities in certain Mesopotamian creation myths (see Gunkel). More recently scholars have concluded that if indeed these creatures reflect extrabiblical sources, the parallels are to be sought in Canaanite (Ugaritic) literature. Attempts to view these creatures as ordinary animals have been less than convincing, primarily because that theory would blunt the contention that only Yahweh can conquer them (see Day, pp. 62-87). The name Rahab has not been attested with certainty in any extrabiblical source. But even if it does have its conceptual roots in Canaanite mythology, the OT has completely "demythologized" it, for it always refers either to a historical enemy or to a demonic being that Yahweh easily overcomes. Never is Rahab a full-fledged deity on a par with Yahweh. See also DRAGON ; SEA MONSTER . (from International Standard Bible Encyclopedia, revised edition, Copyright © 1979 by Wm. B. Eerdmans Publishing Co. All rights reserved.) -------------------------------------------------- RAHAB II. .../...* ( Ps 89:10; omits Isa 51:9). A poetical name signifying "sea monster," which is applied as an appellation to Egypt in Ps 74:13,14; 87:4; 89:10; Isa 51:9 (and sometimes to its king, Ezek 29:3; 32:2; comp. Ps 68:31) — which metaphorical designation probably involves an allusion to the crocodiles, hippopotami, and other aquatic creatures of the Nile (q.v.). As the word, if Hebrew, radically denotes "fierceness, insolence, pride," when applied to Egypt, it would indicate the national character of the inhabitants. Gesenius thinks it was probably of Egyptian origin. but accommodated to Hebrew, although no likely equivalent has been found in Coptic, or, we may add, in ancient Egyptian (Thesaur. s.v.). That the Hebrew meaning is alluded to in connection with the proper name does not seem to prove that the latter is Hebrew, but this is rendered very probable by its apposite character and its sole use in poetical books. See BEHEMOTH. The same word occurs in a passage in Job, where it is usually translated, as in the A. V., instead of being treated as a proper name. Yet many interpreters, comparing this passage with parallel ones, insist that it refers to the Exodus: "He divideth the sea with his power, and by his understanding he smiteth through the proud" [or "Rahab"] (26:12). The prophet Isaiah calls on the arm of the Lord, "[Art] not thou it that hath cut Rahab, [and] wounded the dragon? [Art] not thou. it which hath dried the sea, the waters of the great deep; that hath made the depths of the sea a wayn for the ransomed to pass over?" (51:9,10; comp. 15). In Ps 74 the division of the sea is mentioned in connection with breaking the heads of the dragons and the heads of Leviathan (ver. 13, 14). So, too, in Ps 89 God's power to subdue the sea is spoken of immediately before a mention of his having "broken Rahab in pieces" (ver. 9, 10). Rahab, as a name of Egypt, occurs once only without reference to the Exodus: this is in Ps 87, where Rahab, Babylon, Philistia, Tyre, and Cush are compared with Zion (ver. 4, 5). In one other passage the name is alluded to with reference to its Hebrew signification, where it is prophesied that the aid of the Egyptians should not avail those who sought it. and this sentence follows: XXXXX*, "Insolence (i. c. 'the insolent'), they sit still" (Isa 30:7), as Gesenius reads. considering it to be undoubtedly a proverbial expression. See CROCODILE. (from McClintock and Strong Encyclopedia, Copyright © 2000, 2003, 2005, 2006) *Hebrew or Greek alphabet not displayed properly. Tsaphah, interestingly, I don't know if you've seen the picture of the seven headed dragon I posted last week but it was taken from the article entry dragon of the ISBE RE. Please read Jr51:34. Here the English word "snake" can also be translated by "dragon"... “Neb·u·chad·rez´zar the king of Babylon has eaten me up; he has thrown me into confusion. He has set me as an empty vessel. He has swallowed me down like a big snake; he has filled his abdomen with my pleasant things. He has rinsed me away." Please compare with Rv 16:12: "And the sixth one poured out his bowl upon the great river Eu·phra´tes, and its water was dried up, that the way might be prepared for the kings from the rising of the sun."
Here are other pieces of research from another related thread : In ancient Israel, the North was the usual way by which invaders from the East would come because the eastern armies didn't go across the desert but would follow the rivers and then go South. On the other hand, regarding what you said about Satan, Baal was said to be on Mt Saphon, located North of Israel.... -------------------------------------------------- (Edit : Mt Saphon ==> please, make research about it, that's the famous "mountain of meeting") : "“O how you have fallen from heaven, you shining one, son of the dawn! How you have been cut down to the earth, you who were disabling the nations! As for you, you have said in your heart, ‘To the heavens I shall go up. Above the stars of God I shall lift up my throne, and I shall sit down upon the mountain of meeting, in the remotest parts of the north. I shall go up above the high places of the clouds; I shall make myself resemble the Most High.’" - Is14:12-14
Another post related to the Ugaritic mythology and the Bible using it : Hi Elihu, Yes, they are! Nevertheless, I step back and keep the arguments used for what they are! They're interesting but I won't develop a whole theology from them... if you see what I mean. We must remember that in ancient times, planets and stars were considered as gods. Venus was Ishtar. There are many similarities between the Ugaritic (Cananean) mythology and some prophecies of the Bible, Isaiah's particularly (sea, stars, Leviathan, mountain of meeting, etc). So-called scholars say that Isaiah (or others) used that older pagan substrate as a basis for his own prophecies. Too simplistic! I've read other books where the explanation is somewhat different and more sensible. Well, I guess you know the concern of the Israelites regarding what's written. Words are very important and the order in which said words were written in God's Word is very important too. They developed later that reasoning to such an extent that they invented the Kabbala. Of course, Isaiah never went that far but he was immersed in that culture about the meaning of written materials. Mythologies, cosmogonies and oracles were considered as utterly sacred and were to be read in the exact way and shape with which it had been written, like magic words. Words and names were considered as the things itself or as the person himself. Not using them properly was a serious sacrilege. You can have an example of this with how Jehovah treated the gods of the Egyptians or later with Baal-zebub: Insight books, entry Baal-zebub (Ba´al-ze´bub) [Owner of the Flies]. The Baal worshiped by the Philistines at Ekron. There are indications that it was a common practice among the Hebrews to change the names of false gods to something similar but degrading. Hence, the ending “zebub†may be an alteration of one of the titles of Baal shown in the Ras Shamra texts as “Zebul†(“Princeâ€). Some scholars, however, suggest that the name was given to the god by his worshipers because of his being viewed as the producer of flies and therefore able to control this common pest of the Middle East. Since the giving of oracles was associated with Baal-zebub, others favor the view that Baal-zebub was a god who was regarded as giving oracles by the flight or buzzing of a fly.—2Ki 1:2. Ahaziah the king of Israel sent messengers to inquire of Baal-zebub as to whether he would recover from his serious injury or not. Through his prophet Elijah, Jehovah rebuked Ahaziah, saying: “Is it because there is no God at all in Israel that you are sending to inquire of Baal-zebub the god of Ekron? Therefore, as regards the couch upon which you have gone up, you will not come down off it, because you will positively die.â€â€”2Ki 1:2-8; see BEELZEBUB. Sacred texts were thought to have magical or prophetical properties. As a consequence, taking up pagan prophecies or cosmogonies and altering, degrading them was a symbolic way to reverse the magical effect their first authors believed in and to put an opposite spell on the god or goddess thus profaned. Then, a blessing could become a curse or good omens could turn out badly, etc. In reality, Jehovah, through Isaiah, might use old parts of the Baal mythology (Satan's old show-offs or phoney exploits recorded in mythology?) in order to tell him (Edit: that is Satan) about his future fate... Satan's boasting won't impede God's judgments to befall on him. He hasn't the power to influence the way things will turn out for him. That might be symbolized by the alteration of those old epics written to his glory. I hope it helps! ---------------------------------------------------- Edit: Elihu, I miss you, my friend !!!!! I often think about you !!!
Dear Frank, I had to quote your question... Sorry, you might think that I'm lazy... but I don't feel like spending again 4-5 hours in the future writing down replies to questions already answered years ago... Interestingly, I don't remember half of what is written below. I remember the "spirit" of it all, the main line, but most of what is written here had fallen into oblivion... lol (dated 10/19/2009) Dear uglyandthin, My opinion is between what's written in the text put in bold types above, which will be repeated here: "As regards the identity of the “morning-star†(so translated) of Isaiah 14:12: if indeed it is correctly identified as Satan addressed through the person of the king of Babylon (whoever that historic individual was), it is no legitimate objection that the term “morning-star†is also a title of Christ (as indeed it is, Revelation 22:16). It is to be noted that the term “lion†is one also applied in Scripture to both Satan (I Peter 5:8) and Jesus (Revelation 5:5). As with “lion,†so with “morning star,†the terms are metaphors used to characterize the individuals in question, and it is not unsuitable to use both descriptive metaphors for radically differing individuals." and those other interesting thoughts quoted below. Either way, IMO, Isa14:12 isn't about Jesus. ---------------------------------------- Isaiah 14:12-14 In Canaanite mythology from Ugarit, the god Athtar seems to be connected with the morning star. At one point, the gods attempted to replace Baal with Athtar, but he declined, as he found that he was unsuited for the position. The throne was too large for him. Athtar was the son of the Ugaritic god El and his wife Asherah. Athtar was the chief god in the South Arabic pantheon, known there as an astral deity, the planet Venus. In the Ugaritic world he was known as "the terrible, awesome one" or as "the lion." Some have translated the first epithet as "a flash [of lightning]." The Ugaritic text 49, column 1, tells how his greed for power caused him to ascend the vacant throne of Baal, who had been dealt a death blow by the god of death, Mot. Assisted by his mother, he attempted to fill the vacuum left by Baal, but he was unable to do so. His feet did not reach the footstool, and his head did not clear the top of the throne. So he descended from the throne of Baal, stepping down so that "he might rule over the grand earth." Like Isaiah's Lucifer, he had aspired to ascend to a throne above the heavens but suffered a fall. While there are a number of similarities between the Ugaritic myth and Isaiah's account, no great interpretive advantage seems to be gained by following this lead. "The mount of assembly" is parallel with Mount Zaphon or Mount Cassius in North Syria, where the gods assembled. Whether the story Isaiah tells came first or the Ugaritic myth cannot be decided from this text. Normally one would expect the real event to have been told before the mythmakers took up the tale and made secondary applications of it. So is the story referring to the king of Babylon in hyperbolic terms, or does it refer to Satan? Normally the rules of sound interpretation demand that we assign only one interpretation to every passage; otherwise the text just fosters confusion. In this situation, however, the prophet uses a device that is found often in prophetic texts: he links near and distant prophecies together under a single sense, or meaning, since the two entities, though separated in space and time, are actually part and parcel of each other. Isaiah saw the king of Babylon as possessing an enormous amount of disgusting pride and arrogance. In cultivating aspirations that exceeded his stature and ability, he paralleled the ultimate ruler with an exaggerated sense of his own accomplishments: Satan. Just as there was a long messianic line in the Old Testament, and everyone who belonged to that line was a partial manifestation of the One to come and yet not that One, so there was an antimessianic line of kings in the line of antichrist and Satan. The king of Babylon was one in a long line of earthly kings who stood opposed to God and all that he stood for. This would explain the hyperbolic language, which while true in a limited sense of the king of Babylon, applied ultimately to the one who would culminate this line of evil, arrogant kings. In this sense, the meaning of the passage is single, not multiple or even double. Since the parts belonged to the whole and shared the marks of the whole, they were all of one piece. Just as the king of Babylon wanted equality with God, Satan's desire to match God's authority had precipitated his fall. All this served as a model for the antichrist, who would imitate Satan, and this most recent dupe in history, the king of Babylon, in the craving for power. A similar linking of the near and the distant occurs in Ezek 28, where a prophecy against the king of Tyre uses the same hyperbolic language (Ezek 28:11-19). In a similar fashion the prophet Daniel predicted the coming of Antiochus Epiphanes (Dan 11:29-35); in the midst of the passage, however, he leaps over the centuries in verse 35 to link Antiochus Epiphanes to the antichrist of the final day, since they shared so much as members of the line of the antimessiah. Thus this prophetic device is well attested in the Old Testament and should not cause us special concern. (from Hard Sayings of the Bible, Copyright © 1996) ---------------------------------- Isaiah 14:12-15 -The Jews address him again as a fallen once-bright star. The language is so framed as to apply to the Babylonian king primarily, and at the same time to shallow forth, through him, the great final enemy, the man of sin of Paul, the Antichrist of John, and the little horn and blasphemous self-willed king of Daniel. He alone shall fulfill exhaustively all the lineaments here given. Verse 12. How art thou fallen from heaven, O Lucifer - day- star. A title truly belonging to Christ: Rev 22:16, "the bright and morning star," and therefore hereafter to be assumed by Antichrist, of whom Babylon is a type; also applied to the angelic "sons of God," "the morning stars" (Job 38:7). Gesenius, however, renders the Hebrew [heeyleel, imperative Hiphil of yaalal], here as in Ezek 21:12; Zech 11:2, "howl." So Syriac. But the Septuagint, Vulgate, Chaldaic, and Arabic, as the English version (from the Hebrew, haalal, to shine), which is preferable because of the parallelism. The fall of Babylon as a self-idolizing power, the type of mystical Babylon in the Apocalypse (Rev 17:4-5), before the providence of God, is described in language drawn from the fall of Satan himself, the spirit that energized the pagan world-power, and now energizes the apostate Church, and shall hereafter energize the last secular Antichrist. Thus Lucifer has naturally come to be applied to Satan (Luke 10:18; Rev 12:8-9; Jude 6). (from Jamieson, Fausset, and Brown Commentary, Electronic Database. Copyright © 1997, 2003, 2005, 2006)
their is a book called the book of enoch which was removed from the bible cannon. Yet this book was analyzed useing a scientific algorythm and it was concluded that the author was the same author who wrote genisis! this book describes tarturus, the prison of the bad angels in detail. why was this book removed from the original bible and reduced in importance to an apochrapha? when bible scholars know it is an authentic bible book? in my opinion they just could not bare the thought that their is a place of extreame punishment desighned for wicked spirits because the new testament says that wicked men also go their. that book wich gives such a graphic description of a penal planet with 7 suns that was desighned for wicked angels just gives far too much suport to that bad place that many says does not exist.. but again that book was analized useing the same method used to detect acts of human fraud and that book passed the test with flying colors.I have to ask why? so I say tarturus with all its hot nasty atmosephere is real..now as to who gets the sentance to that place,I leave that up to jehovah..
Utuna, feel free to quote me anytime my dear brother. You certainly got me smiling going down "memory lane" . Those were the good ol'days. If it be Jehovahs will, I certainly look forward to meeting you as well as all my cyber brothers and sisters on the otherside.
Thanks for re-posting this thread, Utuna. (We have a "dream team" brand of elders in some of our congregations here in Aussie Land also.)
Hi Gabriel Just simply wanted to say what a beautiful pic that is. You and your wife make a lovely couple!
After doing much reading into the veiwpoints of hell,tartarus ,ghena pergatoty etc. I think more than ever that their is a place that will be unpleasent to go to for wicked persons. I will not say that this means torture forever in flames, however the many differant words mentioned biblicaly denote various degrees of punishment with tartarus being the worst place to be. hell (sheol) can symbolize both the unconscious grave and allso can be the place that has fire sulpur and lots of weeping. the bible simply states that dead is unconsciousness.. the bible also states that the dead will all be resurected to either life or to go into the lake of fire.. now just how long before a persons spirit is destroyed by the lake of fire is indefinate.we do not know how long it will take for the ceasation of all thought.. but the bible does make it abundantly clear with these words..fear not those who can kill the body,but fear him who can after you have been killed send you to hell! remember that the death that man can give you sends you to sheol(unconsciousnes) therefore this hell that god can send you to is quite obviously not unconsciousness because any man can do that! and to stay that way brings no fear because you are unconscious.. rather I say fear him that after you are killed can send you to? SOMEplace you wont be likeing! their are those that will say a loveing god simply wouldent do such a thing! but their are onley two places your spirit can go the first is to be with god either on earth or in heaven.. the second is to be without god in the lake of fire! god does not choose for you! he onley resurects you to what you have chosen! its high time that the gospel we preach be made clear! jesus gives eternal life but you choose were you will be spending it.. Personaly I would rather be a janitor in christs kingdom than a governor or king in hell,the abysis or tarturus! what more can I say? I simply dont agree with lucifurs statement that its better to be a king inside the abis rather than to be a slave in heaven!
I like it! have you read the book of enoch? you know the apochrapha book that was in the bible until they revised the cannon? acording to text algorythim analisis(very darned acurate by the way) genisis and enoch are both the same author.. book of enoch describes the penal world for the wicked angels..if its almost 99% certain that the book is authenticly part of the original bible books. why was it removed? this seem to be the one thing that modern religeion can agree upon,to remove the one bible book that speaks of the hot place and say oh its just an added book!
Jehovahisgod, if Tartarus was this hot place of torture that the demons were confined to since their rebellion against God’s natural order of things, why then did they in Jesus’ day ask Him if He had come to torment them? They obviously were not in torment at that time, otherwise they would not have asked that question.
the book does not say that they are already confined their.. it says this is the place prepared for them...as the writer records its not a pleasent place haveing 7 suns in the sky however its obviously not molton acording to that book,,and if i was a demon I would plead not to go their. as for the duration of the punishment that also is in that book, and Again I have to ask why was a book that was tested useing text algorythm analisis and found to be written by the same author as genisis taken from the cannon? men of today may agree or disagree on what tartaro is but. the book says what it says. and unless the writter of genisis ate some magic mushrooms and dreamed up the book of enoch while stoned. that book would be just as real as genisis..its a short book available in any old dewya catholic bible or on the net. read it and see what you think.