- This topic is empty.
- Posts
Hi david,
I have no disagreement with your parallelisms and teachings drawn from the story.
I do object to it being said by you to be untrue in substance because Jesus did not say that it was so.WHERE did I EVER say any part of Jesus story was untrue?
Where?
Where exactly?
Could I get a page or something?
Anything?All of his parables teach a truth, without having to be literally true. If it is a parable, as I am now shocked that you are agreeing to, and even more shocking to me: 'You have no diagreement with my parallelisms' then what is the problem exactly?
What exactly are you disagreeing with? 'To it being untrue in substance.' What does that mean? “because Jesus did not say that it was so.” Did Jesus introduced all his parables by saying: This is a parable, an illustration. Some of them he did. Most, I don't think so. Lot's of them, the writing says: And another illustration Jesus gave….
But it doesn't seem Jesus himself said: This is an illustration. It was just understood to be so. For many of them obviously were, because if taken literally, that would lead to inconsistencies in the Bible, contradictions, illogical things. And the Bible doesn't contradict itself. So too with the rich man and lazarus.
It bothers me that you so often say that I'm saying Jesus was wrong, or “deluded.” I never ever ever ever said anything remotely to that effect.I have said repeatedly that this story can't be literal, because then it would conflict with other parts of theBible that definitely are to be taken literally. And now, (and perhaps then, without telling me) you agree that it is a parable. And you even don't disagree with the parallelisms. OK.
Perhaps you could narrow down what you disagree with.
Would you like me to tell you what the Bible indicates is meant by the 'bosom of Abraham'? Would you like some scriptural backing?
david.
A parable helps with understanding. It compares two things so we get the picture.
Hi david,
Both the rich man and Lararus died. The rich man went to Hades and was in torment or in agony in the flame suffering thirst, pain and severe regrets. He could see and speak with Abraham who was quoted by God here as speaking. The' bosom of Abraham' is separated from Hades and a great chasm exists between them. It is not possible to cross between the places nor possible to let the information about the terrifying place the rich man was in to any others still on earth.That being the case is it not wonderful that Jesus goes beyond what had previously been revealed in scripture on these matters to give us new and special information to seriously warn us. We now have no excuse for disobedience and more reason to take what is revealed in scripture including the words of Jesus more seriously.
But some prefer to not even listen to him even though he rose from the dead. What the rich man asked that Lazarus do for his brothers on earth-tell them more so they would listen to God-Jesus in fact did for us. He gave us a more detailed and a written warning.
So we have less excuse on the basis on ignorance too.
Hi david,
What do you make of this scripture?
Matt18.34f
“And his lord, moved with anger, handed him over to the torturers until he should repay all that was owed him. My heavenly Father will also do the same to you, if each of you does not forgive his brother from your heart”In the first century, the Greek word for “torment” had a special connotation. Since prisoners were sometimes tortured (ALTHOUGH THIS WAS CONTRARY TO GOD'S LAW), jailers became known as tormentors. That's right, jailers became known as tormentors.
Commenting on scripturs such as Matthew 18:34, The International Standard Bible Encyclopedia says: “Probably the imprisonment itself was regarded as ‘torment’ (as it doubtless was), and the ‘tormentors’ need mean nothing more than jailers.”
Please go back and check in this thread under, I believe “torment.” There is quite a bit written about how this word was used when it was written.
We can thus see that by comparing scriptures and taking into consideration their meaning in the languages in which the Bible was written, it is possible to arrive at an interpretation that agrees with the rest of the Bible. Yes, we must not forget the rest of the Bible Nick.
I must say, after you put down that second to last post here, on Nov 19, I wasn't sure what to say. Apparently, we don't disagree about as much on this as I thought. What I now believe we disagree on is this, and correct me if I'm wrong:
You believe that although it is a parable, how Jesus described hades is to be taken literally, whereas I don't. Why would Jesus describe it that way, if that is now how it literally is?–That's what you are asking, right?Hi david,
I have no reason to disbelieve Hades is not as described in Lk 16 by the Son of God. Why should I prefer your view as you have never been there or involved in it's creation? He has. It is unwise to start from the premise that what is described is not true but let us draw some other teachings from it surely?I didn't start with the premise that Luke 16 wasn't true.
I started with 2 premises:
1. that all those other scriptures that talk about hades were true.
2. that luke 16 is a parable and not literal.Both premises are strong and have many good reasons for being true.
So which of my ideas are you disagreeing with?
–#1 that the rest of the Bible is true?
–#2 or that Luke 16 is a parable and not literal (as you've already agreed with)?Hi david,
Lk 10 30
” A man was going from Jerusalem to Jericho, and fell among robbers, and they stripped him and beat him and went away leaving him haldf dead. And by chance a priest was going down that road, and when he saw him, he passed by on the other side. Likewise a Levite also, when he came to the place and saw him, passed by on the other side. But a Samaritan, who was on a journey, came upon him; and when he saw him, he felt compassion, and came to him and bandaged up his wounds, pouring oil and wine on them; and he put him on his own beast, and brought him to an inn and took care of him. On the next day he took out two denarii and gave them to the innkeeper and said
'Take care of him; and whatever more you spend, when I return I will repay you”So here is a parable . Do you agree?
So is there such a road? Yes
Are there thieves and robbers? Yes
Do they attack and injure travellers? Yes
Are there priests, levites and Samaritans? Yes
Could they all travel on that road? Yes
Are there inns and innkeepers? Yes
Are denarii real? YesSo do you approach this parable and that of Lk 16 with the same pen?
This is the first thing that popped into my head when you asked this:
REVELATION 12:9
“So down the great dragon was hurled, the original serpent, the one called Devil and Satan, who is misleading the entire inhabited earth; he was hurled down to the earth, and his angels were hurled down with him.”Why is Satan compared to a dragon? Are dragons real? Now, if it wasn't pointed out what was meant by the dragon: “the once called Devil and Satan,” would we be forced to believe that dragons are real?
'To speculate would be wrong,' you say. So I guess we'd have to believe in dragons.
Dragons don't literally exist. Yet, we all have a picture of dragon in our mind. What does this mean?That it cannot be concluded from this parable that Hades itself is a place of blazing fire is made clear at Revelation 20:14, where death and Hades are described as being hurled into “the lake of fire.”
The death of the rich man and his being in Hades are therefore also figurative, figurative death being mentioned elsewhere in the Scriptures. (Lu 9:60; Col 2:13; 1Ti 5:6) So the fiery torment was experienced while he was figuratively dead but actually alive as a human. Fire is used in God’s Word to describe his fiery judgment messages (Jer 5:14; 23:29), and the work done by God’s prophets in declaring his judgments is said to ‘torment’ those who oppose God and his servants.—Re 11:7, 10.Hi david,
You are confusing parables with symbols. I showed you a similar parable full of truth and you have sidetracked onto another topic.Yes, revelation was presented “in signs,” we are told. The dragon was a symbol.
But isn't a parable a comparison between two things where one thing symbolizes or represents another?
I really think we should take a closer look at the difference between illustrations, parables, and allegories at some point.My point was a simple one: Satan is not a dragon and dragons aren't real, but the image of a dragon helps us to understand, hence it's use.
Hades is real, but it was used in a parable and wasn't used literally. We know hades itself isn't a place of blazing fire because Rev 20:14 tells us that Hades is hurled into “the lake of fire.”
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.”If someone is acquitted (to discharge completely, as from an obligation or accusation) from their sin, then they are not subject to further punishment for those sins are they? This is what the scripture says, isn't it? This scripture cannot be nullified can it? Jesus would never contradict this or any other part of the Bible would he?
Death is the punishment for sin. Both death AND HADES will be hurled into the lake of fire. If hades is a place of blazing torment, what effect would hurling it in the lake of fire have?
I AM NOT DISAGREEING WITH JESUS, as you are about to imply again. I'm just pointing out that Jesus didn't disagree with the rest of the Bible. So what conclusion can we draw from Jesus parable? Answer: That it is not to be taken literally at all. Everything in there represented something else.It's true that cutting off in death is sometimes symbolized by fire. (Mat 25:41,46; 13:30) That makes sense, since fire is very good at DESTROYING things. Hence, the comparisons. Hence, the symbolism.
david.
Hi david,
Interesting translation of Rom 6.7
NASB
“.for he who has died is FREED from sin”
Acquittal is forgiveness so according to the JW bible if you die then all is well. Sin was just a nuisance that bothers us while we live and we incur no guilt from being involved with it! Nothing else can happen to us! There is no punishment for sin! Suicide seems a fine option then.Nonsense david. You confuse sin action with sin influence. We are no longer influenced by the activity of evil after our death. We no longer can sin after our death. But the effects of sin in our lives till then as guilt remain with us till the judgement. And because of that we face retribution from a just God at the judgement unless we can find forgiveness and avoid judgement in the Son of God.
What other wierd doctrines do you have hidden away?.
Hi david,
We commit sin. We sin. we are convicted of sin. We can be entangled by and become slaves of sin.But Sin as an active force attempting to influence us while we live is shown in verses such as Rom 7.9-10f
“I was once alive apart from the Law; but when the commandment came, sin became alive and I died…So now, no longer am I the one doing it but sin which dwells in me…I find that the principle that evil is present in me, the one who wants to do good”
Do you accuse Paul of sinful behaviour? No. He is showing that sin is an alive and active force that drives us through our bodies to rebel against God. This is the sin from which we are freed at death when our bodies die, not incurred guilt.
That is shown in Rev 20.13
“…and death and Hades gave up the dead who were in them, and they were judged, EVERY ONE OF THEM ACCORDING TO THEIR DEEDS”
and
Matt 16.27
” For the Son of Man is going to come in the glory of his Father, with His angels, and will repay every man according to his deeds”
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.
