If your hand causes you to sin, cut it off.
It is better for you to enter into life maimed
than with two hands to go into Gehenna,
into the unquenchable fire.
And if your foot causes you to sin, cut if off.
It is better for you to enter into life crippled
than with two feet to be thrown into Gehenna.
And if your eye causes you to sin, pluck it out.
Better for you to enter into the kingdom of God with one eye
than with two eyes to be thrown into Gehenna,
where 'their worm does not die, and the fire is not quenched.'-- Mark 9: 42 - 49
WORD STUDY
Hell (9:43)
Geenna (Gk.): "Gehenna", the valley directly southwest of Jerusalem. Jesus refers to it 11 times in the Gospels as a dreadful symbol of hell. Two associations are made with Gehenna, on drawn from the OT and the other from Jesus' contemporary setting. (1) Gehenna is a Greek rendering of the Hebrew place-name "Valley of the sons of Hinnom". It was the site of a frightful Canaanite cult that worshipped the idols of Molech and Baal by burning children in sacrifice (Jer 7:30-32; 19:1-6;32:35). (2) In the NT period, Gehenna served as a smoldering garbage dump where refuse burned continually. Jesus evokes these associations to teach us that hell is not a place of purgation or purification, but one of fiery punishment, (Mt 5:22; 18;9; 23:33). In the afterlife, the bodies and souls of the wicked will suffer in hell for eternity (Mt 10:28; 25:41, 46). Other biblical passages corroborate this horrifying prospect (Is 33:14; 66:24; Jude 7: Rev 20:10).-- The Gospel of Mark, Ignatius Catholic Study Bible
Heard in a 'parish basement' in the Archdiocese of Cincinnati, 2003:
"When Jesus speaks today about 'Gehenna' he's really talking about a place where Israelites threw out their trash, a dump."
"Well, hold on a second. He's using an image His audience would recognize to describe hell."
"No, Gehenna was a place. It was a dump."
"If you read the rest of the passage, you can see He's talking about hell. The entire passage is about judgment and how important it is to avoid sin."
"That's not necessarily the whole story."
"The 'story' in the passage is that hell is real."
Posts
4 comments:
This reminds me of a story I recently heard about bishop Bruskewitz telling archbishop Weekland he could go to hell.
Bruskewitz,then msgr Bruskewitz, of the archdiocese of Milwaukee had archbishop Weekland join him ,after a confirmation at his church,for dinner with all the recently confirmed teenagers. Bruskewitz wanted to give one last lesson to the kids so he explained hell and what it is. He also wanted the kids to be sure to try to avoid it. So he says that hell is a place you CAN end up in. He says, "You can go there." pointing to all the kids. "I can go there." pointing to himself. "And even the archbishop." pointing to the archbishop and pausing for effect. "Archbishop Weekland... can go to hell."
Of course this is tradition with a small "t" so you don't have to believe it.
*Sigh.*
That's a case where, in my opinion, it sounds as though the person was more impressed with the commentary s/he read, than with the sacred text.
Or, to put it another way: a little knowledge can be a dangerous thing.
All it takes is a little imagination to resolve this "conflict":
Take the two data offered -- "Gehenna" is somehow connected to a garbage dump, and the message in the text about hell and damnation -- and add these:
The text presupposes the listeners know what the Lord was talking about; and:
We don't necessarily know how a term for a garbage dump came to be associated with hell.
Now, add thought...
Hmmm, is it possible that Gehenna primarily meant what the Lord said, and someone nicknamed the pit of garbage, "Gehenna"? (Gee, I can't imagine anyone calling any dirty, smelly place "hell.")
Or, is it possible the opposite move took place; the term that originated for a garbage dump came to become a well-known term for hell; and the Lord used it, and then added some information about hell: "the fire is not quenched," etc.?
This is also yet another place to apply my "they weren't morons" rule: why would the Lord's listeners take seriously a threat to be cast into...a garbage dump? Wouldn't intelligent people scratch their heads and say, um, okay . . . on to the next itinerant preacher...?
So -- unless you presuppose either the listeners, the Lord, and/or the Gospel writer to be morons, why would they come up with that?
Chris,
Great anecdote.
Fr. Fox,
Yes, I had the impression that an unspecified commentary was leading the discussion more than the Gospel. An orthodox commentary certainly can add clarifying context to the readings, but in this case it resulted in a gooey, ambiguous mess. The presenter was a visiting speaker, and to their credit no one raised more of a hugh and cry than our candidates.
Thanks for your explanation.
The image of getting left, for eternity, on a trash fire outside the walls of the New Jerusalem -- is pretty scary, actually.
Post a Comment