The word "ghost" in Matthew 27:50 is taken from the Greek word pneuma, pronounced pnyoo'-mah, meaning; a current of air, i.e. breath (blast) or a breeze; by analogy or figuratively, a spirit. Therefore, it would be logical to state that the "ghost" that leaves the body of the deceased is a spirit of that person. Thus, a ghost is a dead spirit, as is generally understood in the paranormal world. Claiming this is invalid is implying these verses are not correct.

* It is difficult to imagine that this description of an anomalous entity that Job encountered was anything but a "ghost":

"Fear came upon me, and trembling, which made all my bones to shake. Then a spirit passed before my face; the hair of my flesh stood up: It stood still, but I could not discern the form thereof: an image was before mine eyes, there was silence, and I heard a voice, saying, Shall mortal man be more just than God? shall a man be more pure than his maker?" (Job 4:14-17) If not a ghost, what was Job describing?

* It is presumed, that by stating the facts presented on ghosts are "negated", all reports by persons claiming to have had a near-death experience, NDE, are, therefore, false.

* "The days of our years are threescore years and ten; and if by reason of strength they be fourscore years, yet is their strength labour and sorrow; for it is soon cut off, and we fly away." (Psalms 90:10), does not mean what it says.

* The encounter Saul had with the dead spirit, AKA, a ghost, of Samuel did not happen, as the Bible described and, therefore was not a sin that the scholar claimed resulted in Saul's death. By implying ghosts do not exist; he is contradicting his own rebuttal.

Stephen Yulish states:

"The issue that I had the most difficulty with was the discussion of hell. He tried to convince the reader that it was mostly a result of an overbearing Church trying to control its people with threats of eternal punishment. He was correct that the Catholic Church in particular used this technique in the Inquisition, and it was also used by various other denominations to put fear and trembling into their flock and therefore have control over them. This did happen and unfortunately still continues to happen today but it does not negate the concept of hell in Scripture. Jesus himself spoke more about the ravages of a fiery hell than He did about heaven. See Matthew 5:22 where Jesus talks of fiery hell also Matthew 5:29, 30, 10:28, 16:18 (Gates of Hades), 18:9, 23:33. Also Mark 9:43, 45, 47 Luke 16:19-31 tells of Lazarus and the Rich Man. Lazarus was in Abraham's bosom (heaven) and the rich man was in the fires of Hades. No matter that the church used threats of hell to control and even torture and kill its flock, it does not negate the reality of Hell. It only demonstrates to me that many of the persecutors will be there not the persecuted. God will not be mocked!"

My response:

To completely cover the doctrine of how "Hell" became a place of eternal and fiery torment in Christian doctrine, in a proper manner, would require an entire book. Many theological works have been presented over the ages, which contradict the concept of Hell as a place of eternal suffering, since this concept was formally introduced to the Christian world by Justinian, in 530AD. (William Barclay, J.W. Hanson, John A.T. Robinson, Lightfoot, Westcott, F.W. Farrar, Marvin Vincent, etc.) Claiming that Hell is a place of eternal suffering is a doctrine with a solid foundation, is to ignore theological reality, and, in fact, is to discount simple logic. Here are just a few points of logic that give strong evidence that the Hell of the Bible and the Hell of Christian doctrine are two completely different concepts: