- This topic is empty.
- Posts
Hi,
Rev 20.13f
“And the sea gave up the dead which were in it, and death and Hades gave up the dead which were in them; and they were judged, everyone of them according to their deeds. then death and hades were thrown into the lake of fire. And if someone's name was not found written in the book of life, he was thrown into the lake of fire”
Rev 21.4
” ..and there will no longer be any death;there will no longer be any mouring, or crying, or pain; the first things have pased away”
And He who site on the throne said” behold, I am making all things new…. but for the cowardly and unbelieving and abominable and murderers and immoral persons and sorcerers and idolaters and all liars, their part will be in the lake that burns with fire and brimstone, which is the second death”Rev 22.15
” Outside are the dogs and the sorcerers and immoral persons and the murderers and idolaters and everyone who loves and practices lying”What is plain is that though verything is made new the presence of the lake of fire is shown right to the end of Revelation and within it remain those who are an abomination to our God. No evidence can be shown that the second death is an instant event but rather a continuing one. The bodies and hades and the place called death will vanish but the souls within those bodies will not.
Hi david,
So the story of the rich man and Lazarus is an allegory? That is fine. There are plenty of allegorical stories in the gospel of Jesus Christ.He used parables to expound deeper matters by using simple everyday common knowledge. He was speaking to fishermen and farmers and housewives so the stories related to things they were familiar with.
They are generally short and pithy. Like children's bedtime stories such as the emperor with no clothes on they used simplicity, contrast and irony to show truth. They bypassed the lies and intellectual vanity of men and used simple imagination instead to reach the heart.
But every word spoken is necessary. God wastes no words or inflections. Everything has allegorical significance.
If you are correct then you cannot say the parable is an allegory about this or that or such and such. As with any parable you should be able to point to every word and expound it's meaning. This parable is different. It is long and full of detail.
So I ask you then, in the spirit of consistency, to expound to us the allegorical significance of the the apparent detailed description of the nether world shown here. The two sides, the chasm between them, the tongue, the finger tip, the water, the brothers, hearing and seeing, the communication with Abraham and inability to communicate with the five brothers.
Tell us if the message about learning from Moses and the prophets is allegorical as well and if not why not.
To simply dismiss these words as allegorical without expounding that allegory is to denigrate the words of Jesus surely.
OK, glad you're back. I have the answers to all your questions above. I've been gone for the weekend and somewhat sidetracked lately though.
What would it mean if all of those pieces of his story made sence in parable form? What would that mean to you?
Since there are so many things that disagree with it being literal, if there was some Biblical explanation for everything in the parable, how would you take that?dave
Quote “So the story of the rich man and Lazarus is an allegory? That is fine. There are plenty of allegorical stories in the gospel of Jesus Christ……To simply dismiss these words as allegorical without expounding that allegory is to denigrate the words of Jesus surely.”
Teachers of hellfire quickly point to this account as definite proof that there is indeed a hell of torment that awaits the wicked. But, in so doing, they disregard such clear and repeated Biblical statements as: “The soul that is sinning—it itself will die.” (Ezekiel 18:4, 20; Compare Rom 6:7,23) And: “As for the dead, they are conscious of nothing at all.” (Ecclesiastes 9:5) Clearly these statements do not support the idea of torment for lost souls in a fiery hell.
If the story of the rich man and lazarus is to be taken literally, then it would contradict many other parts of the Bible. (Please see the 10 points I made earlier for example.) But the Bible does not contradict itself. So what does this parable given by Jesus mean? (Mat 13:34,35)Actually, let’s make clear what it doesn’t mean first:
THE STORY ISN’T LITERAL (Mt 13:34,35)
Note what is said about the rich man. Think about this: Why was he tormented in Hades? What had he done? Jesus did not say that the rich man led a degraded life, did he? All that Jesus said was that the man was rich, dressed well and feasted sumptuously. Does such conduct of itself merit punishment by torment? True, a serious failing is implied in the attitude of the rich man toward the beggar Lazarus. The rich man lacked compassion for him. But did that failing distinguish him sufficiently from Lazarus?
Think about what Jesus said concerning Lazarus. Is there anything in the account to lead us to conclude that, if the situation had been reversed, Lazarus would have been a compassionate man? Do we read that Lazarus built up a record of fine works with God, leading to his coming into the “bosom position of Abraham,” that is, a position of divine favor? Jesus did not say that. He merely described Lazarus as a sickly beggar.
So is it logical to conclude that all sickly beggars will receive divine blessings at death, whereas all rich men will go to a place of conscious torment? Not at all. Begging is of itself no mark of God’s favor. To the contrary, the Bible contains the prayerful expression: “Give me neither poverty nor riches.” (Proverbs 30:8)
If we take Jesus’ words literally, we would have to draw still other conclusions that would make the illustration strange indeed. These include: That those enjoying celestial happiness are in position to see and speak to those suffering torment in Hades despite the “great chasm” between them; that there is water down in Hades into which a person can dip the finger; that the water on one’s fingertip would not be evaporated by the fire of Hades; that, although the torment of Hades is great, a mere drop of water would bring relief to the sufferer; that those enjoying divine favor could all fit at the bosom of one man, Abraham.
Taken literally, do these things sound reasonable to you? Is this story given by Jesus meant to be taken literally? (Mt 13:34,35)
If it were literal, it would conflict with other parts of the Bible. It would contradict with things we are very clearly told about Jehovah and Jehovah's attributes of love and justice. If the Bible were thus contradictory, would a lover of truth use it as a basis for his faith?But the Bible does not contradict itself.
I'll explain what every part of this parable means the next time I'm on here.
david
Hey Nick.
You should probably be resting. But, since you're here…Once again, the Bible does NOT ALLOW us to take this story as literal. You may argue against the meaning of the parable, but to argue that it is literal is to go against many many other clear Bible passages.
“Indeed, without an illustration he would not speak to them.” (Matthew 13:34)WHAT THE PARABLE MEANS–(FIRST, WITHOUT A LOT OF EXPLANATION)
The “rich man” represented the self-important religious leaders who are favored with spiritual privileges and opportunities, and who rejected Jesus. (See verse 14.) The beggar Lazarus represented the common Jewish people who were despised by the Pharisees but who hunger for spiritual nourishment. (See Luke 18:11; John 7:49; Matthew 21:31, 32.) Their deaths were also symbolic, representing a change in circumstances or condition, (as death is sometimes figuratively used in the Bible). This change took place when Jesus spiritually fed the formerly despised ones, the neglected Lazarus-like people, so that they die to their former spiritually deprived condition and were brought into the bosom, or favored position of divine favor with the Greater Abraham, Jehovah God. (In the Bible, Abraham sometimes pictures Jehovah.) Whereas they had earlier looked to the religious leaders for what little dropped from the spiritual table, now the Scriptural truths imparted by Jesus are filling their needs. At the same time, the formerly seemingly favored ones (the false religious leaders) were rejected by God or “died” with respect to having God’s favor. Jesus has just finished pointing to a change in circumstances by saying that ‘the Law and the Prophets were until John the Baptizer, but from then on the kingdom of God is being declared.’ Hence, it is with the preaching of John and Jesus Christ that both the rich man and Lazarus die to their former circumstances, or condition. The change in conditions is accomplished a few months later at Pentecost 33 C.E., when the old Law covenant is replaced by the new covenant. It then becomes unmistakably clear that the disciples are favored by God, not the Pharisees and other religious leaders. Being cast off, they suffered torments when Christ’s followers exposed their evil works. They were tormented by God’s fiery judgement messages delivered by the ones whom they had despised. (Acts 5:33; 7:51-57) The “great chasm” that separates the symbolic rich man from Jesus’ disciples therefore represents God’s unchangeable, righteous judgment. (Read Ps 36:6) The rich man next requests “father Abraham” to send Lazarus “to the house of my father, for I have five brothers.” The rich man thus confesses he has a closer relationship to another father, who is actually Satan the Devil. (See John 8:44) Why five brothers? Why not another number? The five brothers (with the rich man making six, a symbol of the Devil’s organization) represented all the admirers and supporters of the religious rulers, and manifesting the same spirit. The rich man requests that Lazarus water down God’s judgment messages so as not to put his “five brothers,” his religious allies, in “this place of torment.” “But Abraham said, ‘They have Moses and the Prophets; let them listen to these.’” Yes, if the “five brothers” would escape torment, all they have to do is heed the writings of Moses and the Prophets that identify Jesus as the Messiah and then become his disciples. But the rich man objects: “‘No, indeed, father Abraham, but if someone from the dead goes to them they will repent.’ More than once the Pharisees and others asked Jesus to “display to them a sign from heaven.” ” (Matt. 16:1-4; 12:38-41) Going on, “Father Abraham” said to him, ‘If they do not listen to Moses and the Prophets, neither will they be persuaded if someone rises from the dead.’” (Compare John 5:39,46,47) God will not provide special signs or miracles to convince such. People must read and apply the Scriptures if they would obtain his favor. (See Luke 16:16) For example, Peter’s stirring message on the day of Pentecost was based entirely on quotations from the Hebrew Scriptures, from Moses (the Law) and the Prophets and the Psalms. The fact that three thousand immediately responded and were baptized proved that the Hebrew Scriptures in themselves were a sufficient warning and guide to those willing to listen, many of whom were formerly adherents of Judaism.—Acts 2:41.Of course, I have a 7 page lengthy description with many scriptures explaining in detail the illustration. But I thought it would be better to give you the gist of it and let you say it's wrong. Then, I could give you the scriptural details.
david
Hi david,
Your argument that scripture from the mouth of Jesus about Hades in Lk 16 is with him, not us. Of course there are other parallels too but they do not deny the simple reading of truth. He knew. Do you ?So you stick with Luke 16 being literal despite the fact that “without an illustration he would not speak to them,” and YOU deny several other scriptures to suit your beliefs. Sad.
Either Luke 16 is a parable, or many many other parts of the Bible either don't make sence or are somehow not to be taken literally.
Nick, I'm not arguing with Jesus. I'm agreeing with Matthew 13:34. I've explained what Jesus said, as being an illustration. I've never said, “Jesus is wrong,” despite you frequently implying that.
Nick this is really simple. We have a choice:
–We can choose to believe that Jesus story there was literal and that many other parts of the Bible that contradict it as being literal are wrong. The Bible wrong?
–Or we can realize, as the Bible says: “Indeed,without an illustration he would not speak to them.” (Matthew 13:34)Apparently, what I said about the parable must make some sense to you, otherwise you would have attacked it. Instead, you say I'm arguing with Jesus, which you know I'm not. And you try to sidestep what the Bible as a whole has to say about such things, all to cling to your Greek Babylonian belief. And for what?
Everyone else has been quite silent on this. Anyone other than Nick believe that Jehovah tortures people ongoingly in fire for the sins of a few years on earth?
What do other people think of this story?
What do other people think of the teaching of hellfire, as it is commonly believed?Hi david,
If this sort of thing was decided on a democratic vote you could guarantee heavy polling in your favour. God is in charge though and he has given us all written warning.Really, I got the idea I was the only one on here who doesn't believe God tortures people forever in fire. I really don't know what others on here think. You seem to be the only one who touches this topic (other than that one post by that new guy)
I don't fear the lake of fire (a symbol of complete destruction), or at least not in the way you try to imply.
Actually, I suppose we should fear it, even as we have godly fear. It is a wholesome respect for God, not a morbid fear.We can have complete confidence in God, for he is completely just. He would never let anything unjust happen. He is completely loving. More than that. “God is love.” He is lover personified.
Sometimes, it is loving to put someone to death–to put them out of their suffering. Sometimes it is just to find someone unworthy of life. But to sentence someone to everlasting torture is something that would never come up into Jehovah's heart. (Jer 7:31) It goes against justice. It goes against God's justice and everything we know about God's justice. It goes against what any loving person would do. “God is love.” It goes against what the rest of the Bible says about the soul.
Slandering Jehovah is wrong. Picturing him as unloving, unjust, as a cruel God who tortures his enemies despite his word telling us to love our enemies is wrong.It is because of such reproach being cast upon His name that we are told to pray for the sanctification of His great and holy name.
Nick: What does it mean when someone holds onto a belief that goes against so many clear scriptural principals? What does it mean that there is a completely rational explanation of the story if it is a parable, whereas if literal it conflicts with the Bible, and yet, you hold onto the conflicting belief that paints God in such a bad light? What does that mean?
david.
Hi david,
When God said in Jeremiah 7.31 that such a thing had not come into His heart He was saying;He had not told the people to do what they were doing.
He had not given them written instructions to do what they were doing
He had not intimated to the people they should do such things.It was not part of his instructions or intent.
They had rebelled.
They had presumed His will.
Their actions were evil.Such thoughts had not even entered His heart.
It does not define or restrict in any moralistic way the thoughts or actions of the Potter with His clay.
We do not define or judge or God in any human terms of justice.
Jer. 7:31: “They [apostate Judeans] have built the high places of Topheth, which is in the valley of the son of Hinnom, [outside the south wall of Jerusalem] in order to burn their sons and their daughters in the fire, a thing that I had not commanded and that had not come up into my heart.”
(If it never came into God’s heart, surely he does not have and use such a thing on a larger scale.)Really Nick, how could such a devilish thing as burning someone alive forever come up into Jehovah's heart? Jehovah is holy. He is just. He is loving. Such a think would never enter his heart.
Burning their sons and daughters in the fire alive was, according to the follwing Bible translations:
“something [God] did not command, nor did it enter [His] mind,”
“a shocking perversion of all that I am and all I command,”
“I have never commanded such a horrible deed; it never even crossed my mind to command such a thing!”
“I would never think of telling you to do this.”
“a thing I did not command; I never entertained the thought.”
“It did not even enter my mind.”If the idea of doing something like this had never entered God’s mind, if he had never “entertained the thought,” or “would never think of telling [them] to do this,” if it had “never even crossed [God’s] mind to command such a thing,” then does it seem reasonable that he had earlier created such a place of torment on a much larger scale? Does that make sense?
Jeremiah 7:31 (New International Version)
They have built the high places of Topheth in the Valley of Ben Hinnom to burn their sons and daughters in the fire—something I did not command, nor did it enter my mind.Jeremiah 7:31 (The Message)
They've constructed Topheth altars for burning babies in prominent places all through the valley of Ben-hinnom, altars for burning their sons and daughters alive in the fire–a shocking perversion of all that I am and all I command.Jeremiah 7:31 (Amplified Bible)
And they have built the high places of Topheth, which is in the Valley of Ben-hinnom [son of Hinnom], to burn their sons and their daughters in the fire [in honor of Molech, the fire god]–which I did not command, nor did it come into My mind or heart.Jeremiah 7:31 (New Living Translation)
They have built the pagan shrines of Topheth in the valley of the son of Hinnom, where they sacrifice their little sons and daughters in the fire. I have never commanded such a horrible deed; it never even crossed my mind to command such a thing!Jeremiah 7:31 (King James Version)
And they have built the high places of Tophet, which is in the valley of the son of Hinnom, to burn their sons and their daughters in the fire; which I commanded them not, neither came it into my heart.Jeremiah 7:31 (Contemporary English Version)
At Topheth in Hinnom Valley you have built altars where you kill your children and burn them as sacrifices to other gods. I would never think of telling you to do this.Jeremiah 7:31 (Young's Literal Translation)
And have built the high places of Tophet, That [are] in the valley of the son of Hinnom, To burn their sons and their daughters with fire, Which I did not command, Nor did it come up on My heart.Jeremiah 7:31 (Holman Christian Standard Bible)
They have built the high places of Topheth (A) [a] in the Valley of Hinnom (B) in order to burn their sons and daughters in the fire, a thing I did not command; I never entertained the thought.Jeremiah 7:31 (New International Reader's Version)
The people have built the high places of Topheth in the Valley of Ben Hinnom. There they worship other gods. And there they sacrifice their children in the fire. That is something I did not command. It did not even enter my mind.–What does the Bible say the penalty for sin is?
Rom. 6:23: “The wages sin pays is death.”–After one’s death, is he still subject to further punishment for his sins?
Rom. 6:7: “He who has died has been acquitted from his sin.”So, if the wages (or we could call it punishment) for sin is death, and a person that has died has been acquitted from his sin, WHAT DOES THAT MEAN?
Death is the punishment.Again david,
You continue to apply human standards to God. Why? Why not just learn from His revelation?OK, let's look at GOD'S standards. Let's look at GOD'S ideas on punishment, justice and love.
GOD tells us that we are to love our ENEMIES. (1 John 4:8-10)
So would the same God who tell us this wish to torture his enemies for all time?GOD'S word tells us that: “God is love.”
Maybe all the dictionaries of the world and all the consciences of men are wrong, but punishing someone by torturing them is not loving. Having someone who is not fit for life removed from existence, is loving. It's loving to those who are deserving of life–they need not put up with those who slander Jehovah. The thought of living forever while people are being tortured forever somewhere is not a peaceful one.GOD'S word tells us that: “all” Jehovah's “ways are justice,” (Deut 32:4) and that He is a “lover of justice,” (Ps 37:28-29),
So we would expect his judgemnets to be fair, or just, wouldn't we?
Is tormenting a person eternally because he did wrong on earth for a few years contrary to justice? The math seems indicates yes.
If a law of exact retribution was given to Israel BY GOD (eye for eye, tooth for tooth, Ex 21:24) what conclusion can we reach about the doctrine of hellfire–Eternal torment for eternal torment?Considering that JESUS' TEACHINGS moderated the idea of retaliation, how can you see justness in eternal torment? (Mt 5:38, 39; Ro 12:17)
Even if someone was guilty of extreme wickedness all his life of 70 or 80 years, would everlasting torment be a just punishment?
Gods word.
Hi david,
You still feel you are equipped to judge God and apply standards to Him? Do you not fear Him at all?Nick, Your Greek philosphy borrowed from Babylon will not save you Nick.
Why must you ignore so many scriptures to hold on to the belief that Luke 16 isn't a parable (mat 13:34)? While you have shed some babylonian customs and beliefs, you cling to others and at the same time ignore the Bible as a whole. Why?
Get out of her my people…
Hi david,
I have never said it is not a parable. It is though an unusual one. And like all parables it shows truth by comparison with known simple truths. We do not know much about the basic truths the Son of God speaks of here such as the nature of Hades and the 'bosom of Abraham'.Perhaps we should learn from him as he does know about these things? It seems wiser than calling him deluded.
OK. All this time I thought you were taking it completely literally–Due to the fact that I kept arguing that it couldn't be taken literally and you kept disagreeing with me.
I am genuinely interested to know what your interpretation of this “parable” is then.
If you like, I could help you out with what the 'bosom of Abraham' means.
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.
