Yes, and the truth is that it is teaching about idolatry. Verse 13 through 15 here is only four verses before the parable. How ironic..... Luke 16:13-15 “No one can serve two masters. Either you will hate the one and love the other, or you will be devoted to the one and despise the other. You cannot serve both God and money.” 14The Pharisees, who loved money, heard all this and were sneering at Jesus. 15He said to them, “You are the ones who justify yourselves in the eyes of others, but God knows your hearts. What people value highly is detestable in God’s sight.
Christian Forums
This is a sample guest message. Register a free account today to become a member! Once signed in, you'll be able to participate on this site by adding your own topics and posts, as well as connect with other members through your own private inbox!
-
Desire to be a vessel of honor unto the Lord Jesus Christ?
Join For His Glory for a discussion on how
https://christianforums.net/threads/a-vessel-of-honor.110278/
-
Taking the time to pray? Christ is the answer in times of need
https://christianforums.net/threads/psalm-70-1-save-me-o-god-lord-help-me-now.108509/
-
-
Depending upon the Holy Spirit for all you do?
Read through the following study by Tenchi for more on this topic
https://christianforums.net/threads/without-the-holy-spirit-we-can-do-nothing.109419/
-
-
How are famous preachers sometimes effected by sin?
Join Sola Scriptura for a discussion on the subject
https://christianforums.net/threads/anointed-preaching-teaching.109331/#post-1912042
-
IS HELL FOREVER?
- Thread starter DRS81
- Start date
Yes, and the truth is that it is teaching about idolatry. Verse 13 through 15 here is only four verses before the parable. How ironic..... Luke 16:13-15 “No one can serve two masters. Either you will hate the one and love the other, or you will be devoted to the one and despise the other. You cannot serve both God and money.” 14The Pharisees, who loved money, heard all this and were sneering at Jesus. 15He said to them, “You are the ones who justify yourselves in the eyes of others, but God knows your hearts. What people value highly is detestable in God’s sight.
That is from the HISTORICAL RECORD of the rich man and Lazarus.
Have you ever heard the term 'Idiomatic language'. http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/idiom
That is what Isaiah is using in his passage. Mark 9:43-48 however is the real deal and speaks of Gehenna, the afterlife.
Jer 31:38-40 38 "Behold, the days are coming, says the LORD, that the city shall be built for the LORD from the Tower of Hananel to the Corner Gate. 39 The surveyor's line shall again extend straight forward over the hill Gareb; then it shall turn toward Goath. 40 And the whole valley of the dead bodies and of the ashes, and all the fields as far as the Brook Kidron, to the corner of the Horse Gate toward the east, shall be holy to the LORD. It shall not be plucked up or thrown down anymore forever."
Isa. 66:22-24 "For as the new heavens and the new earth that I make shall remain before me, says the LORD, so shall your offspring and your name remain. 23 From new moon to new moon, and from Sabbath to Sabbath, all flesh shall come to worship before me, declares the LORD. 24 "And they shall go out and look on the dead bodies of the men who have rebelled against me. For their worm shall not die, their fire shall not be quenched, and they shall be an abhorrence to all flesh."
Both of those passages are referencing the millennial period. Isa 66 isn't talking about the new heavens and new earth. Isaiah is comparing the perpetuity of the new heavens and new earth with the perpetuity of Israel's future offspring. Read verse 22 carefully it is only making a comparison. There will be no moon in the new heavens and new earth so v. 23 cannot reference that eternal time period.
Isa 66:24 - This is not Gehenna. Evidently, after the war of Armageddon, they will simply burn the bodies in the field where they lay. There is no call for this to be an example of Gehenna. If that were the intent the author would have told us so. You need to let the Bible speak for itself rather than attempting to assign values to the text. The text is using a bit of hyperbole to make the point that the fire is going to burn a long time, well into the milennium and people will be able to see the carcasses and it will serve as a reminder of what happened to those who rebelled against the Lord. There is no connection here to Gehenna/Hell.
that is sheol, how can hades/sheol be when after the judgement its in the lake of fire?
turnorburn
Member
Whoa! by vivid description i meant what he was going through what he had to look forward to for the rest of eternity he was alive with all of his faculties the thought of his family coming to that place was tormenting him all the more, why do you think its called hell. That's why Jesus was/is so descriptive so that those with ears to hear would/will believe on him and eliminate any chance of going there..
tob
tob
Yes,it was sheol where the rich man was because they is what they refered to
:yes
I see luke 16 is more of a parable then a historical event. ie are ALL THE parables based on real events? no.
The issue at hand is the NT usage of the word, especially in Revelation
An idiom is a figure of speech, a few words that are meant to convey a different, and larger meaning. e.g. "I slept like a log." or "I slept like a baby" By definition is not extended such as you allege, and certainly an idiom is never extended into the length of a parable. You would need to demonstrate that literary event happening in another parable before you could extend it to the rich man and Lazarus. Also you would also need to demonstrate any other parable of Jesus where Jesus used the name of an actual person Jesus names the protagonist.
One thing in the snip from TDNT I did not highlight was this: The notion of a soul-sleep is just as foreign to the NT as to Judaism; the image of the sleep is introduced (Mk. 5:39 and par.; 1 Th. 5:10; Jn. 11:11–12 etc. → -κοιμάω) simply as an euphemistic description of death. But what really confounds me is the fact that no one cited any part of the theological dictionary as supporting their view, OR refuting the view of another.
Can you please explain to me why no one used that material? I will not be upset, no matter what is said, OK?
I do not know what to say, except that this English Language translation of an abstract from a 2008 academic paper says differently
Diglossia in history of legal Greek language
Karolina Gortych
Instytut Językoznawstwa,
Uniwersytet im. Adama Mickiewicza
A diglossia is a typical phenomen for Greek language from the beginning of existence the
modern Greek state (1830). The Greeks spoke “two languages” which were attributed to
definited social activities. Language of Law was very archaic type of language which lied on
the idea of purification of the language which exactly was idea of “katharevousa” – an
artificial language system. This situation lasted till the year 1976. In the same time,
simultaneously a natural, living language – “dimotiki” developed. It was a language which
was spoken by the Greeks out of public institutions and it developed and existed
independently of official language of Greek State what was exactly “katharevousa”. For
about 150 years two antithetic linguistic ideas (“katharevousa”and “dimotiki”) were in
struggle for primacy and for recognition as an official language in Greek state.
That contradiction which was language question (”glossiko zitima”) was terminated by the
Constitution of 1976 according to which “katharevousa” stopped being official language of
the state and of the law. The mentioned Constitution as a main statutory act and a basis of all
rights in the State was written in a language lied on “dimotiki”. In these circumstances the
language of law changed too. This presentation has an aim to point some demotic solutions
which were used in the process of metaglossy of statutory texts. Presented here examples base
on unified text of the Constitution of 1976 with its later changes and on the text of the last
constitution written in “katharevousa” i.e. Constitution of 1968. Summary of presented ideas
and estimation to what degree Greek language of law based on “katharevousa” differed from
the present Greek language of Law, makes up the conclusion of the paper and simultaneously
it will underline profile of two mentioned types of language which coexisted in the period of
diglossy.
No, I am NOT calling you ugly or your mother dresses you funny, or stupid, OK?
It is just that your comment sparked curiosity for me to look further.
I'm simply proving that Isa 66:22-24 has nothing to do with the afterlife, but Mark 9:43-48 does.
ancient greek for being a lawyer in America. she is Italian and has some greek in her. she choose that as an elective along with latin. greek is very concise language. that is what she said. she said when you are going to jail someone the wording for do that must be concise and clear.
The issue at hand is the NT usage of the word, especially in Revelation
An idiom is a figure of speech, a few words that are meant to convey a different, and larger meaning. e.g. "I slept like a log." or "I slept like a baby" By definition is not extended such as you allege, and certainly an idiom is never extended into the length of a parable. You would need to demonstrate that literary event happening in another parable before you could extend it to the rich man and Lazarus. Also you would also need to demonstrate any other parable of Jesus where Jesus used the name of an actual person Jesus names the protagonist.
One thing in the snip from TDNT I did not highlight was this: The notion of a soul-sleep is just as foreign to the NT as to Judaism; the image of the sleep is introduced (Mk. 5:39 and par.; 1 Th. 5:10; Jn. 11:11–12 etc. → -κοιμάω) simply as an euphemistic description of death. But what really confounds me is the fact that no one cited any part of the theological dictionary as supporting their view, OR refuting the view of another.
You see, what REALLY baffles me is that Free the moderator posted:
. and then I published things from the TDNT, one of the most advanced dictionaries of Koine and Classical Greek on the market, but you utterly ignore it, and then some go off onto rabbittrails in the OT which have no relation to the subject at hand. It seems that some are posting AT other posters in order to bolster a pet theological position instead of attempting to foster understanding by looking at what Scripture in the original languages states.
drs81,the jews don't believe in soul sleep. they believe In a type of purgatory these days. sheol and gehenna being that. the person in those can be most alert of the punishment for his sins. google the mourners kaddish. I have prayed that over my relatives. its old and it goes back to the time of christ
its revalent to his, sheol and hades must be studied with the original tounges that used them , I have read up on both. both aren't just graves , queber is the Hebrew for grave. the greeks have two words for that. seldom is hades seen as a grave. I don't try to make doctrines off my bias, I try to fit my view to what the bible does say. doesn't mean I get it right.
I kinda figured that from the way you were posting. I am not here to tell you that you are wrong, HOWEVER, I can tell you in complete honesty that that idea is foreign to both the OT and NT.
Please read this, from the article I quoted elsewhere in this thread:
The notion of a soul-sleep is just as foreign to the NT as to Judaism; the image of the sleep is introduced (Mk. 5:39 and par.; 1 Th. 5:10; Jn. 11:11–12 etc. → -κοιμάω) simply as an euphemistic description of death.
The soul is certainly separated from the body in death, but it experiences temporary retribution in the time between death and the resurrection. When the NT refers to Hades, the reference is to the abode of souls loosed from their bodies (cf. Ac. 2:26 f., 31). b. The NT is also in agreement that Hades lies at the heart of the earth. In contrast to heaven as the highest height it signifies the deepest depth (Mt. 11:23; Lk. 10:15); it is the heart of the earth (Mt. 12:40); one goes down into it (Mt. 11:23; Lk. 10:15; cf. R. 10:7); it is called φυλακή as the underground (cf. Rev. 20:7 and 20:2 f.) prison of the souls of the ungodly (1 Pt. 3:19). The image of the πύλαι ᾅδου (Mt. 16:18; cf. Is. 38:10; Ps. Sol. 16:2; Wis. 16:13; 3 Macc. 5:51; and cf. also the “keys of Hades” in Rev. 1:18 → κλείς) is to be understood in terms of the ancient oriental and biblical cosmology according to which the underworld, located in the hollow earth, is enclosed by sacred cliffs. circa c. Finally, the NT agrees that the stay in Hades is limited, as may be seen from the sharp distinction between ᾅδης and γέεννα. Throughout the NT Hades serves only an interim purpose. It receives souls after death,14 and delivers them up again at the resurrection (Rev. 20:13). The resurrection constitutes its end (20:14), and it is replaced by γέεννα (19:20; 20:10, 14 f.: λίμνη τοῦ πυρός) as the final place of punishment.
Kittel, G., Bromiley, G. W., & Friedrich, G. (Eds.). (1964–). Theological dictionary of the New Testament. Grand Rapids, MI: Eerdmans.
But I can say that Ellen got it wrong.
Please create a new thread for soul sleep. Let's not derail this one.
Oh no
not soul sleep again.
TimothyW
Member