Bible Study The Parable of the Rich Man and Lazarus -Luke 16:19-31

[guibox]

This text more than any other in the Bible has given rise to the current thought of eternal torment and consciousness at death. What we find is this text contradicts much of the plain verse we find in the scriptures on many areas. Obviously, this text needs closer biblical and contextual scrutiny. So here we go!

This is the only reference in the Bible that gives the impression that ‘hell’ as most Christians view it, occurs at death. Some will say that this is not a parable because Jesus uses names and doesn’t anywhere else in his parables. This is an extremely weak argument considering the structure of the book of Luke itself. Surrounding this chapter, we have Christ speaking in many parables. He even starts the verse of Luke 16 the way he has started off many other parables. Also, like other parables, the story of the rich man and Lazarus is different from the rest of the chapter in style and prose, almost like it was inserted. This is the normal structure of how Christ used and presented parables to the people. There is no other evidence to take this literally when all the other surrounding stories are parables. We have some textual contradictions if we try to interpret this parable literally.

1. The word for ‘hell’ used here is Hades and not Gehenna. Gehenna is the tormenting fires that we’ve seen occur at the end of time. Therefore, the torment we’ve seen in Revelation cannot be the same thing in this chapter.
2. No other reference to Hades in the NT (10 besides this one) gives the impression that souls are conscious there.
3. If we are to take this verse as proof of immortal souls going to torment at death, we must get past the fact that in this parable there are not bodiless "souls" in Hades. References to "tongue" and "finger" imply physical bodies.

As we’ve previously seen, Hades is the equivalent of Sheol – the grave. To try and interpret Hades as conscious is to put into the text what cannot be supported by any other part of scripture. To take this literally (as some insist it should be) we have other beliefs that cannot be supported by scripture:

1. That paradise is located in Hades along with the place of the wicked. (The bible makes it plain that paradise is in heaven where the tree of life is located)
2. Heaven and hell are separated by an actual gulf where sinners and saints can talk to each other
3. All the saints are gathered in Abraham’s seemingly large bosom
4. A simple drop of water can cool the fires of hell and the righteous can attend to the wicked (vs. 24)

Obviously, then, Christ wasn’t trying to prove any sort of afterlife through this parable. What was the purpose of parables? Parables were used to give object lessons about something removed from the actual content of the parable. For example, the parable of the 10 talents wasn’t really a lesson on proper money management but on using the gifts that God gave us rather than hiding them.

During the inter-testamental period, many Greek and other pagan beliefs infiltrated current Jewish thinking. The pagan concept of Hades and the immortality of the soul became a belief of Hellenistic Jews. It is most likely assumed that with references to ‘Abraham’s Bosom’ and paradise being located in Hades, that these were common beliefs circulating at the time. Why would Christ use false theology to put a point home? Jesus meets us where we are at without condoning our actions or negating them. By using a common held belief by some does not mean that Christ was supporting it. Rather, he was using it to reach the people with the importance of what he was trying to show in a way that they would understand.

Jesus wanted to reach the Pharisees. The Pharisees took great pride in their lineage from Abraham. They actually used this against those they felt weren’t worthy of God’s blessing. What a better way than to use the belief of Abraham’s bosom to hammer the point home. That begs the question: What point was Jesus trying to make to the Pharisees?

If you read the verses previous, you will see that the issues were poor stewardship of the Jews towards the Gentiles. Jesus was emphasizing that your lineage means nothing if you do not minister to God’s children. Notice what Abraham’s final message is:

And he said unto him, ‘If they hear not Moses and the prophets, neither will they be persuaded though one rose from the dead– vs 31

If one is honestly in heaven or hell, they are not dead, but alive. Neither does the grave hold any sway over them. If they returned to earth, it wouldn’t be ‘rising from the dead’. Only those in the earth that are dead can rise from it. Therefore, we see a correlation between Hades and death. By all accounts, both the rich man and Lazarus were dead. Jesus would have had to give them personified existence to make the parable happen. The rich man didn’t wish for Lazarus to leaven paradise, but that he should come back from the dead to go to his house. The fact they have bodies and are not 'spirits' or 'souls' also gives credibility to this.

In the OT there are references to people being alive in Sheol. Obviously this is a contradiction as the OT makes it quite plain that there is no consciousness in Sheol. The use of it was metaphorical and symbolic using personification to make a point. The usage of Hades in this context is no different. It is allegorical, symbolic and metaphorical to show that the Jews had a responsibility to the Gentiles, not that Christ wanted to prove any sort of afterlife. To take it as such is to miss the point of the parable.

 

[Free]

References to "tongue" and "finger" imply physical bodies.

Right. Much like "the right-hand of God" implies that God has a literal right hand. :-?

1. That paradise is located in Hades along with the place of the wicked. (The bible makes it plain that paradise is in heaven where the tree of life is located)

Please give even one verse that clearly states that the righteous dead go to heaven when they die.

 

[evanman]

The second death occurs after the second ressurrection, which comes after the millenial reign of Christ!

 

[Adams son]

This text more than any other in the Bible has given rise to the current thought of eternal torment and consciousness at death. What we find is this text contradicts much of the plain verse we find in the scriptures on many areas. Obviously, this text needs closer biblical and contextual scrutiny. So here we go!
.

Well I reckon ya need tah explain what fingers and tongues are doing there in Hades and also explain what all that talk about resurrecting from the dead is about in response to the Rich Man trying to get someone to warn his living brothers.

 

[serapha]

Please give even one verse that clearly states that the righteous dead go to heaven when they die.

Re 6:9
And when he had opened the fifth seal, I saw under the altar the souls of them that were slain for the word of God, and for the testimony which they held:




~serapha~

 

[serapha]

This text more than any other in the Bible has given rise to the current thought of eternal torment and consciousness at death. What we find is this text contradicts much of the plain verse we find in the scriptures on many areas. Obviously, this text needs closer biblical and contextual scrutiny. So here we go!

This is the only reference in the Bible that gives the impression that ‘hell’ as most Christians view it, occurs at death. Some will say that this is not a parable because Jesus uses names and doesn’t anywhere else in his parables. This is an extremely weak argument considering the structure of the book of Luke itself.

Hi there!

There are other considerations for taking the passage in a literal sense than just the use of personal names, therefore, it is only a "weak" argument for one who is critical of the overall context of the passage.

Surrounding this chapter, we have Christ speaking in many parables. He even starts the verse of Luke 16 the way he has started off many other parables. Also, like other parables, the story of the rich man and Lazarus is different from the rest of the chapter in style and prose, almost like it was inserted. This is the normal structure of how Christ used and presented parables to the people. There is no other evidence to take this literally when all the other surrounding stories are parables. We have some textual contradictions if we try to interpret this parable literally.

No, we don't have textual contradictions if we try to interpret this passage literally. It aligns with other teachings in the Bible. The terminology of the Luke passage is not consistent with the parables of Christ, and identifying that "surrounding this chapter"... is a "weak" argument, for there were no chapter or verse separations in the original manuscripts.

1. The word for ‘hell’ used here is Hades and not Gehenna. Gehenna is the tormenting fires that we’ve seen occur at the end of time. Therefore, the torment we’ve seen in Revelation cannot be the same thing in this chapter.

It depends on where you are looking in Revelation. When you look at what goes into the lake of fire, we are talking about the same "hell"

2. No other reference to Hades in the NT (10 besides this one) gives the impression that souls are conscious there.

And so, because it is only in the Bible one time, it isn't truth?


The wise men visited Jesus.... true or false?
Herod killed all the babies under two years of age... true or false?
The first miracle was in ancient Cana... true or false?
Jesus went to Caesarea Philippi... true or false?

3. If we are to take this verse as proof of immortal souls going to torment at death, we must get past the fact that in this parable there are not bodiless "souls" in Hades. References to "tongue" and "finger" imply physical bodies.

The trichotomy of man and the immortality of the soul tell us that at the physical death of man, the immortal soul must be somewhere. Every occurrence of "sleep" in the Word of God pertaining to "soul" concerns the physical death and not the immortal soul of man.

As we’ve previously seen, Hades is the equivalent of Sheol – the grave. To try and interpret Hades as conscious is to put into the text what cannot be supported by any other part of scripture. To take this literally (as some insist it should be) we have other beliefs that cannot be supported by scripture:

What beliefs cannot be supported by scripture?

1. That paradise is located in Hades along with the place of the wicked. (The bible makes it plain that paradise is in heaven where the tree of life is located)

Then all the Judaic teachings concerning Abraham's bosom are wrong?

2. Heaven and hell are separated by an actual gulf where sinners and saints can talk to each other

What passage in the Bible states that those in Abraham's bosom may see what is in Hades? Part of the torment of Hades/hell/the lake of fire is that the evil can see the holy places, not that those in the holy places may see the torment in the evil places.

3. All the saints are gathered in Abraham’s seemingly large bosom

Actually, doesn't your Bible tell you that Christ set the captives free?

4. A simple drop of water can cool the fires of hell and the righteous can attend to the wicked (vs. 24)

16:24
And he cried and said, Father Abraham, have mercy on me, and send Lazarus, that he may dip the tip of his finger in water, and cool my tongue; for I am tormented in this flame.



ooops.... keep reading and you will see that the answer (in context) is given that NO, a simple drop of water will not cool the fires of hell.


25 But Abraham said, Son, remember that thou in thy lifetime receivedst thy good things, and likewise Lazarus evil things: but now he is comforted, and thou art tormented.

Obviously, then, Christ wasn’t trying to prove any sort of afterlife through this parable. What was the purpose of parables? Parables were used to give object lessons about something removed from the actual content of the parable. For example, the parable of the 10 talents wasn’t really a lesson on proper money management but on using the gifts that God gave us rather than hiding them.

That would be your opinion concerning parables, but since this passage is not a parable....

During the inter-testamental period, many Greek and other pagan beliefs infiltrated current Jewish thinking. The pagan concept of Hades and the immortality of the soul became a belief of Hellenistic Jews.

And Luke 16 is a perfect example of Christ setting the record straight.

It is most likely assumed that with references to ‘Abraham’s Bosom’ and paradise being located in Hades, that these were common beliefs circulating at the time.

assumed? by whom?

Why would Christ use false theology to put a point home? Jesus meets us where we are at without condoning our actions or negating them. By using a common held belief by some does not mean that Christ was supporting it. Rather, he was using it to reach the people with the importance of what he was trying to show in a way that they would understand.

Well.... he used the same type of "false theology" throughout the New Testament... setting the Pharisees straight... and the Sadducees... and the Gentiles.

Jesus wanted to reach the Pharisees. The Pharisees took great pride in their lineage from Abraham. They actually used this against those they felt weren’t worthy of God’s blessing. What a better way than to use the belief of Abraham’s bosom to hammer the point home. That begs the question: What point was Jesus trying to make to the Pharisees?

At this point of Christ's ministry he was past the point of reaching just the Jew, but instead was reaching out to the Gentiles and the whole world.

If you read the verses previous, you will see that the issues were poor stewardship of the Jews towards the Gentiles. Jesus was emphasizing that your lineage means nothing if you do not minister to God’s children. Notice what Abraham’s final message is:

And he said unto him, ‘If they hear not Moses and the prophets, neither will they be persuaded though one rose from the dead– vs 31

I disagree. Christ is verifying the literal afterlife, the immortality of the soul.

If one is honestly in heaven or hell, they are not dead, but alive. Neither does the grave hold any sway over them.

The soul IS immortal, and it never dies, but lives eternally in the presence of God or NOT in the presence of God aka... hell... and eternal separation from the love of God.

If they returned to earth, it wouldn’t be ‘rising from the dead’. Only those in the earth that are dead can rise from it. Therefore, we see a correlation between Hades and death. By all accounts, both the rich man and Lazarus were dead. Jesus would have had to give them personified existence to make the parable happen. The rich man didn’t wish for Lazarus to leaven paradise, but that he should come back from the dead to go to his house. The fact they have bodies and are not 'spirits' or 'souls' also gives credibility to this.

You confuse the resurrection of the physical body with the immortal soul which is not "sleeping" but already in the presence of God or eternally separated from God.

In the OT there are references to people being alive in Sheol. Obviously this is a contradiction as the OT makes it quite plain that there is no consciousness in Sheol. The use of it was metaphorical and symbolic using personification to make a point. The usage of Hades in this context is no different. It is allegorical, symbolic and metaphorical to show that the Jews had a responsibility to the Gentiles, not that Christ wanted to prove any sort of afterlife. To take it as such is to miss the point of the parable.

Perhaps it would be better to return to the drawing board and discuss the contradictions which you have cited. You are continuing to confuse the physical death of the body with the immortality of the soul.


~fundamentally yours~

 

[guibox]

No, we don't have textual contradictions if we try to interpret this passage literally. It aligns with other teachings in the Bible. The terminology of the Luke passage is not consistent with the parables of Christ, and identifying that "surrounding this chapter"... is a "weak" argument, for there were no chapter or verse separations in the original manuscripts.

That still doesn't negate the structure of the surrounding passages. To take this parable as literal is to completely remove it from its parabalic structure of the passage and the other passages surrounding it.

It depends on where you are looking in Revelation. When you look at what goes into the lake of fire, we are talking about the same "hell"

Revelation says that the death and Hades is cast into the lake of fire. Hades IS death. It is the grave. If the wicked were conscious in Hades, they would not be considered 'dead'. The Bible makes a clear distinction between the living and the dead according to consciousness.

2. No other reference to Hades in the NT (10 besides this one) gives the impression that souls are conscious there.

And so, because it is only in the Bible one time, it isn't truth?

Ummm...yes. When the word means the 'grave' and is used 90 percent of the time elsewhere, it cannot mean anything else. It is man's interpretation that is faulty. Hence, one of the few reasons why Luke 16 is not meant to be taken literally.

The trichotomy of man and the immortality of the soul tell us that at the physical death of man, the immortal soul must be somewhere. Every occurrence of "sleep" in the Word of God pertaining to "soul" concerns the physical death and not the immortal soul of man.

Your problem is your assumption that man does have an immortal soul. This is not a biblical concept, but a Greek one that infiltrated it's way into the Christian church. Even Martin Luther and William Tyndale recognized this doctrine as false and a Catholic invention. Nowhere in the bible is the 'soul/body' split supported. Rather all the texts that speak of resurrection are interpreted as 'soul/body' split because of the pre-conceived notion that the soul is immortal. The Bible does not teach it. Rather, the Bible teaches that the resurrection is the hope of eternal life.

What beliefs cannot be supported by scripture?

1) Abraham's bosom
2) Consciousness in Hades
3) Tormenting fires in Hades
4) A great gulf between the saved and lost
5) Punishment of the wicked at death

What passage in the Bible states that those in Abraham's bosom may see what is in Hades? Part of the torment of Hades/hell/the lake of fire is that the evil can see the holy places, not that those in the holy places may see the torment in the evil places.

The question should be, what passage in the Bible shows that there is such a thing as Abraham's bosom AT ALL, nevermind that the wicked can see the righteous while they suffer. Find both references to Abraham's bosom and the wicked looking at the righteous while they suffer, please.

If you read the verses previous, you will see that the issues were poor stewardship of the Jews towards the Gentiles. Jesus was emphasizing that your lineage means nothing if you do not minister to God’s children. Notice what Abraham’s final message is:

And he said unto him, ‘If they hear not Moses and the prophets, neither will they be persuaded though one rose from the dead– vs 31

I disagree. Christ is verifying the literal afterlife, the immortality of the soul.

You can disagree all you want, but it is biblical support that determines our truths, and the facts and the surrounding context say otherwise. Surrounding verses 19-31 is verses 1-14 whic talk about proper stewardship. Jesus gives the parable of the shrewd manager. Then he changes focus in verse 16:

The Law and the Prophets were proclaimed until John. Since that time, the good news of the kingdom of God is being preached and everone is forcing his way into it.

The Pharisees not only claimed the Law as their own, but they treated the Gentiles as unworthy of receiving the gospel. The use of the rich man (Pharisee) and Lazarus (the Gentile) was tailor made to address this issue. Christ then forms the parable around this using language the Pharisees were familiar with. The last two lines wrap up the message. Even if one rose from the dead, they (the Pharisees) wouldn't listen because they hardened their hearts. To try and make this a lesson on the afterlife is to completely miss the point.

The soul IS immortal, and it never dies, but lives eternally in the presence of God or NOT in the presence of God aka... hell... and eternal separation from the love of God.

Again, this is an assumption not supported linguistically or textually from the Bible. Rather, the Bible teaches opposite: that man is a wholistic being who goes 'asleep' wen they die awaiting the resurrection call of 1 Thessalonians 4:13-16 and 1 Corinthians 15:51-56. It is a gratuitous assumption to read an immortal soul into these texts. I strongly encourage you to look at the link at the end of this thread, as well as the one "The Spirit in the Bible".

You confuse the resurrection of the physical body with the immortal soul which is not "sleeping" but already in the presence of God or eternally separated from God...Perhaps it would be better to return to the drawing board and discuss the contradictions which you have cited. You are continuing to confuse the physical death of the body with the immortality of the soul.

Unfortunately, it is you who is confused as the the immortality of the soul cannot be proven biblically but is a Greek dualism concept of man. Nowhere in the Bible can the immortality of the soul be proven. Rather, the soul is the 'whole' of man. The 'life' of man. Any biblical scholar worth their salt will not say that the soul is inherently immortal. The language and use of the scriptures do NOT support it. I encourage you to look here:

http://www.christianforums.net/viewtopic.php?t=12211

 

[serapha]

Hi there!

Don't you feel somewhat undermined by posting a reference to a thread where your statement was fairly successfully refuted?

If you had won the discussion it would be a different story, but you didn't win the debate on your posting. It appears to me that you lost the discussion.


~serapha~

 

[serapha]

No, we don't have textual contradictions if we try to interpret this passage literally. It aligns with other teachings in the Bible. The terminology of the Luke passage is not consistent with the parables of Christ, and identifying that "surrounding this chapter"... is a "weak" argument, for there were no chapter or verse separations in the original manuscripts.

That still doesn't negate the structure of the surrounding passages. To take this parable as literal is to completely remove it from its parabalic structure of the passage and the other passages surrounding it.



Nor can the passage be determined to be a parable when the terminology of the text is not consistent with other parables, particularly the other parables in the gospel of Luke

It depends on where you are looking in Revelation. When you look at what goes into the lake of fire, we are talking about the same "hell"

Revelation says that the death and Hades is cast into the lake of fire. Hades IS death. It is the grave. If the wicked were conscious in Hades, they would not be considered 'dead'. The Bible makes a clear distinction between the living and the dead according to consciousness.



No, in Greek the word is "kai" or and... that means it is a conjunction... putting together two nouns. Therefore, not the same word, nor the same meaning.

2. No other reference to Hades in the NT (10 besides this one) gives the impression that souls are conscious there.

And so, because it is only in the Bible one time, it isn't truth?

Ummm...yes. When the word means the 'grave' and is used 90 percent of the time elsewhere, it cannot mean anything else. It is man's interpretation that is faulty. Hence, one of the few reasons why Luke 16 is not meant to be taken literally.


Ah, the ol' "pick and chose" method. Works every time...

The trichotomy of man and the immortality of the soul tell us that at the physical death of man, the immortal soul must be somewhere. Every occurrence of "sleep" in the Word of God pertaining to "soul" concerns the physical death and not the immortal soul of man.

Your problem is your assumption that man does have an immortal soul. This is not a biblical concept, but a Greek one that infiltrated it's way into the Christian church. Even Martin Luther and William Tyndale recognized this doctrine as false and a Catholic invention. Nowhere in the bible is the 'soul/body' split supported. Rather all the texts that speak of resurrection are interpreted as 'soul/body' split because of the pre-conceived notion that the soul is immortal. The Bible does not teach it. Rather, the Bible teaches that the resurrection is the hope of eternal life.


Of course it is a biblical text... look at the Hebrew meaning of soul, spirit, and the physical body... the inner man versus the outer man... the same in Greek.

What beliefs cannot be supported by scripture?

1) Abraham's bosom (http://bible1.crosswalk.com/Commentarie ... 6&verse=23)
2) Consciousness in Hades (http://bible1.crosswalk.com/Concordance ... umber=T464)
3) Tormenting fires in Hades (Matthew 13:42)
4) A great gulf between the saved and lost (always... heaven and hell are separated)
5) Punishment of the wicked at death (flames and tormen aren't punishment?)

What passage in the Bible states that those in Abraham's bosom may see what is in Hades? Part of the torment of Hades/hell/the lake of fire is that the evil can see the holy places, not that those in the holy places may see the torment in the evil places.

The question should be, what passage in the Bible shows that there is such a thing as Abraham's bosom AT ALL, nevermind that the wicked can see the righteous while they suffer. Find both references to Abraham's bosom and the wicked looking at the righteous while they suffer, please.


see above.

[quote:d049f]If you read the verses previous, you will see that the issues were poor stewardship of the Jews towards the Gentiles. Jesus was emphasizing that your lineage means nothing if you do not minister to God’s children. Notice what Abraham’s final message is:

And he said unto him, ‘If they hear not Moses and the prophets, neither will they be persuaded though one rose from the dead– vs 31

I disagree. Christ is verifying the literal afterlife, the immortality of the soul.

You can disagree all you want, but it is biblical support that determines our truths, and the facts and the surrounding context say otherwise. Surrounding verses 19-31 is verses 1-14 whic talk about proper stewardship. Jesus gives the parable of the shrewd manager. Then he changes focus in verse 16:

The Law and the Prophets were proclaimed until John. Since that time, the good news of the kingdom of God is being preached and everone is forcing his way into it.

The Pharisees not only claimed the Law as their own, but they treated the Gentiles as unworthy of receiving the gospel. The use of the rich man (Pharisee) and Lazarus (the Gentile) was tailor made to address this issue. Christ then forms the parable around this using language the Pharisees were familiar with. The last two lines wrap up the message. Even if one rose from the dead, they (the Pharisees) wouldn't listen because they hardened their hearts. To try and make this a lesson on the afterlife is to completely miss the point.


If Jesus were stating another parable, then he would have used the parable terminology that is used in all the parables. This is not a parable.

The soul IS immortal, and it never dies, but lives eternally in the presence of God or NOT in the presence of God aka... hell... and eternal separation from the love of God.

Again, this is an assumption not supported linguistically or textually from the Bible. Rather, the Bible teaches opposite: that man is a wholistic being who goes 'asleep' wen they die awaiting the resurrection call of 1 Thessalonians 4:13-16 and 1 Corinthians 15:51-56. It is a gratuitous assumption to read an immortal soul into these texts. I strongly encourage you to look at the link at the end of this thread, as well as the one "The Spirit in the Bible".


I looked at the link. I personally never reference a link where my response has been refuted.

The Greek terms for soul and spirit, as well as the Hebrew terms identify the trichotomy of man.

You confuse the resurrection of the physical body with the immortal soul which is not "sleeping" but already in the presence of God or eternally separated from God...Perhaps it would be better to return to the drawing board and discuss the contradictions which you have cited. You are continuing to confuse the physical death of the body with the immortality of the soul.

Unfortunately, it is you who is confused as the the immortality of the soul cannot be proven biblically but is a Greek dualism concept of man. Nowhere in the Bible can the immortality of the soul be proven. Rather, the soul is the 'whole' of man. The 'life' of man. Any biblical scholar worth their salt will not say that the soul is inherently immortal. The language and use of the scriptures do NOT support it. I encourage you to look here:



Interesting, Jesus promises eternal life... yet, in Revelation tells us that the "souls" of the martyred are in heaven already. Those aren't immortal souls?

www.christianforums.net/viewtopic.php?t=12211

[/quote:d049f]


YOu might want to refute your argument before using that link again.


~serapha~

 

[guibox]

Nor can the passage be determined to be a parable when the terminology of the text is not consistent with other parables, particularly the other parables in the gospel of Luke

Oh well, I guess you can't be convinced. However the evidence that this is a parable is more in favor then not.

No, in Greek the word is "kai" or and... that means it is a conjunction... putting together two nouns. Therefore, not the same word, nor the same meaning. [/color]

The issue here is parallelism which the bible continually uses. Death is equated with Hades. Hades is the grave, death is it's nature. All shall be cast in and the 'enemy that shall be destroyed is death' which includes the grave.

2. No other reference to Hades in the NT (10 besides this one) gives the impression that souls are conscious there.

And so, because it is only in the Bible one time, it isn't truth?...

Ah, the ol' "pick and chose" method. Works every time...

No it is not the ol 'pick and choose' method. It is the exegetical heurmenutic method. It is cross referencing. It is the logical and appropriate way to study the scriptures. Rather, we end up with incorrect interpretation of words by the 'pick and choose' method, which is how the doctrine of the immortal soul has come about.

When the evidence and the language weighs in a certain way, the rest should be interpreted the same. That's like me saying, 'cat', 'cat', 'cat', 'cat' oh, no wait, here 'cat' actually means 'dog'.

Of course it is a biblical text... look at the Hebrew meaning of soul, spirit, and the physical body... the inner man versus the outer man... the same in Greek.

I'm not sure which concordance you are using but I would like to know how 'nephesh' (soul), and 'ruach (spirit) are ever used in the scriptures to mean 'an immortal essence'. Rather you will NOT find it in the scriptures. The words by their very nature cannot mean, nor are used to mean 'immortal'. You will not find it and any lexicon or concordance will tell you the same thing. 'nephesh' (soul) means 'life'. The 'soul' who sins shall die. 'Man became a living soul'.

The scrptures do not promote a dichotomy, never mind a trichotomy. You obviously didn't look at the links because linguistically, you have no leg to stand on. Do you not really care about the linguistic facts of Hebrew usage and OT views on man?

What beliefs cannot be supported by scripture?

1) Abraham's bosom (http://bible1.crosswalk.com/Commentarie ... 6&verse=23)[/quote]

This link shows nothing about the explanation of Abraham's bosom. Rather this link wrongly equates 'gehenna' with 'hades'. They are completely different places with completely different functions.

2) Consciousness in Hades (http://bible1.crosswalk.com/Concordance ... umber=T464)

Again, this link has nothing to do with number 2). Rather it merely states the fate of man explained different ways in the bible.

3) Tormenting fires in Hades (Matthew 13:42)

This verse is not talking about 'hades' or rewards at death, but the fires at the end of time as spoken of in Revelation 20. Perhaps you should have looked at vs 40 first:

"as the tares are gathered and burned in the fire, so shall it be AT THE END OF TIME'

4) A great gulf between the saved and lost (always... heaven and hell are separated)
5) Punishment of the wicked at death (flames and tormen aren't punishment?)

4) Of course heaven and hell are in different places but heaven is out of this dimension and hell will be on this earth. Far from a 'gulf' where each can see each other.

5) The torment and flames do not happen at death but at the end of time

I looked at the link. I personally never reference a link where my response has been refuted.

Your links have not only not proven what you linked them for, but didn't even address the issue.

The Greek terms for soul and spirit, as well as the Hebrew terms identify the trichotomy of man.

Again, please show me how. The original language and my concordance says completely otherwise.

Interesting, Jesus promises eternal life... yet, in Revelation tells us that the "souls" of the martyred are in heaven already. Those aren't immortal souls?

You completely ignore the metaphorical use of the words 'altar' and 'souls crying out'. In the Hebrew, the blood was considered the 'life force' (which is translated 'nephesh'. When the bulls were sacrificed, the blood collected under the altar. When Cain killed Abel God said 'the blood of thy brother Abel cries out to me from the ground'. This merely meant that a wrong was committed and vengeance was called for. The 'souls' under the altar in Revelation is the same thing. The martyrs for Christ demand justice.

Do you honestly think that there are millions of disembodied spirits crammed under a physical altar, added their daily? Were dealing with Revelation here. A highly metaphorical and symbolic book. You miss the point of the text.

Really, serapha. Do you want me to take you through a study on this subject before you spout off what you don't seem to understand? You are claiming the Bible is saying things which they are not. You obviously haven't even looked at the original Hebrew and Greek and their meanings. You don't understand the belief in the wholism of man that the Hebrews believed and that permeates througout the OT and the NT.

Maybe we should start at the beginning. If you are open minded enough, I think you will see what the bible really teaches on this subject.

 

[Vic C.]

Maybe we should start at the beginning. If you are open minded enough, I think you will see what the bible really teaches on this subject.

Yes, maybe we should start at the beginning because I have lots of questions I'd like to see answered. :-D

I have been digging deep into Luke 16:19-31. Actually, I have read and reread from Lk. 15:3 to Lk. 16:31. It starts off like this:

And he spake this parable unto them, saying,

So I kept reading and reading, looking for where this 'parable' ends. I realized this passage is actually a discourse. As we know, a discourse is a series of ideas relating to a thought or teaching. This 'parable' is broken up into five parts:

Luke 15:4- Story of the lost sheep... Luke 15:8- Story of the missing silver... Luke 15:11- The story of the prodigal son... Luke 16:1- Story of a rich man and his steward.

Jesus is conveying two things to us if we read these properly; repentance and stewardship. Which brings us to the fifth story of this 'parable'... Luke 16:19.

Did Jesus suddenly shift the focus of attention to the state on man after death? If we really read this story objectively and in light of the previous four, we see Jesus does an excellent job at combining both repentance and stewardship into the meaning of the story.

Lets try and remember who He was talking to when telling these five stories. He wasn't talking to His disciples, that's for sure. At the end of the fifth story, Scripture says:

Luke 17:1 Then said he unto the disciples,...


Oh, I said I had some questions. :-D Concerning the story of the rich man and Lazarus, who is the rich man? He's not given a name, but he does have a title. We know this by the clothes he was wearing. What else do we know about this rich man?

Who is this Lazarus person? Better yet, what does the name Lazarus mean? What do we know about this Lazarus?

What does the term "Abraham's bosom" mean?

If this is really the state we're in after we die, Is there really a "great gulf" between Heaven and hell? Are we really 'confined' in Heaven by this gulf? Why would God even want to 'confine' us? That sort of sounds like prison, no? What's to stop our spirits, which are not subject to physical boundaries, from passing over this gulf? Will we really be able to see 'souls' being tormented in this 'hell'?

Many of these questions must be answered if one is to read this story literally.

"Houston, we have a problem." :wink:

 

[SputnikBoy]

Oh, I said I had some questions. :-D Concerning the story of the rich man and Lazarus, who is the rich man? He's not given a name, but he does have a title. We know this by the clothes he was wearing. What else do we know about this rich man?

Sputnik: Just a couple of points to make. There's also a 'rich man' named in the Parable of the Shrewd Manager (Luke 16). I'm not sure whether or not there's any significance behind Jesus' using a rich man as a particular character in His parables.
[quote:76d99] Vic: Who is this Lazarus person? Better yet, what does the name Lazarus mean? What do we know about this Lazarus?

[/quote:76d99]

Sputnik: This is what Strong's Concordance has to say and PLEASE TAKE NOTE: Lazarus - the name of two Israelites - one IMAGINARY. Does that not indicate once and for all that The Rich Man and Lazarus is CLEARLY a parable? :lying:

 

[Ormly]

This text more than any other in the Bible has given rise to the current thought of eternal torment and consciousness at death. What we find is this text contradicts much of the plain verse we find in the scriptures on many areas. Obviously, this text needs closer biblical and contextual scrutiny. So here we go!

First off, it's an account of something that happened; a story told by Jesus about two people. Parables don't mention names.


Orm

 

[Vic C.]

...First off, it's an account of something that happened; a story told by Jesus about two people. Parables don't mention names.


Orm

Oh, ok. :-?

Sputnik: Just a couple of points to make. There's also a 'rich man' named in the Parable of the Shrewd Manager (Luke 16). I'm not sure whether or not there's any significance behind Jesus' using a rich man as a particular character in His parables.

Notice this particular "rich man" in 16:19 was wearing a purple robe and fine linen. That's significant. This was no run of the mill rich man. A purple robe was a sign of royalty and a purple robe with fine linen is what God instructed His Priests wear way back in Exodus and all throughout the OT.

Exo 28:4 And these are the garments which they shall make; a breastplate, and an ephod, and a robe, and a broidered coat, a mitre, and a girdle: and they shall make holy garments for Aaron thy brother, and his sons, that he may minister unto me in the priest's office.
Exo 28:5 And they shall take gold, and blue, and purple, and scarlet, and fine linen.
Exo 28:6 And they shall make the ephod of gold, of blue, and of purple, of scarlet, and fine twined linen, with cunning work.

So, this rich man in the story must have been a priest.

[quote:1c343] Vic: Who is this Lazarus person? Better yet, what does the name Lazarus mean? What do we know about this Lazarus?

Sputnik: This is what Strong's Concordance has to say and PLEASE TAKE NOTE: Lazarus - the name of two Israelites - one IMAGINARY. Does that not indicate once and for all that The Rich Man and Lazarus is CLEARLY a parable? :lying:[/quote:1c343]
;) I already showed this story is part of one, large, five part parable. The name Lazarus has a meaning relating to the morals of this story. It means "One whom God helps" or "God hath helped".

LOL, I'm answering my own questions here. :D

 

[SputnikBoy]

This text more than any other in the Bible has given rise to the current thought of eternal torment and consciousness at death. What we find is this text contradicts much of the plain verse we find in the scriptures on many areas. Obviously, this text needs closer biblical and contextual scrutiny. So here we go!

First off, it's an account of something that happened; a story told by Jesus about two people. Parables don't mention names.


Orm

Sputnik: Orm, please read my above post. The Lazarus used in the PARABLE of The Rich Man & Lazarus is IMAGINARY. You say Jesus didn't mention names in parables as if this somehow negates everything else that the Bible has to say on the topic of hell. The fact is that Jesus DID use an actual name in this parable and why not? And, besides all else that indicates that this IS a parable, Jesus never spoke theology UNLESS it was a parable (Matthew 13:34).

 

[Ormly]

This text more than any other in the Bible has given rise to the current thought of eternal torment and consciousness at death. What we find is this text contradicts much of the plain verse we find in the scriptures on many areas. Obviously, this text needs closer biblical and contextual scrutiny. So here we go!

First off, it's an account of something that happened; a story told by Jesus about two people. Parables don't mention names.


Orm

Sputnik: Orm, please read my above post. The Lazarus used in the PARABLE of The Rich Man & Lazarus is IMAGINARY. You say Jesus didn't mention names in parables as if this somehow negates everything else that the Bible has to say on the topic of hell. The fact is that Jesus DID use an actual name in this parable and why not? And, besides all else that indicates that this IS a parable, Jesus never spoke theology UNLESS it was a parable (Matthew 13:34).

The issue of Hell, or heaven, was never spoken by Him as metaphor or parable. You will notice the disciples never asked Him to explain this one, did they? They didn't have to, Moses and Abraham, as well as the the poor man's name, were also mentioned. So your declaration that He ALWAYS spoke in parables is wrong. This time He didn't have to for reasons you should understand. The STORY of THE ACCOUNT was sufficient.

I'm curious as to why you insist it must a parable and not an actual account? Is there some reason it must be accepted as one?

 

[Vic C.]

The issue of Hell, or heaven, was never spoken by Him as metaphor or parable. You will notice the disciples never asked Him to explain this one, did they? They didn't have to, Moses and Abraham, as well as the the poor man's name, were also mentioned. So your declaration that He ALWAYS spoke in parables is wrong. This time He didn't have to for reasons you should understand. The STORY of THE ACCOUNT was sufficient.

His disciples didn't question Him because He wasn't talking to them at this time. If you had actually read the passage in it's context, you would have realized He was talking to the Pharisees. This is why the Rich man dressed in a purple robe and line linen was mentioned in the story.

Luke 16:14 And the Pharisees also, who were covetous, heard all these things: and they derided him.
Luke 16:15 And he said unto them, Ye are they which justify yourselves before men; but God knoweth your hearts: for that which is highly esteemed among men is abomination in the sight of God.
Luke 16:16 The law and the prophets were until John: since that time the kingdom of God is preached, and every man presseth into it.
Luke 16:17 And it is easier for heaven and earth to pass, than one tittle of the law to fail.
Luke 16:18 Whosoever putteth away his wife, and marrieth another, committeth adultery: and whosoever marrieth her that is put away from her husband committeth adultery.
Luke 16:19 There was a certain rich man, which was clothed in purple and fine linen, and fared sumptuously every day:...

They knew EXACTLY what He was talking about... and it wasn't their state of being after their death either. Read... He was even clarifying the Law to them just before He started the fifth story of this parable. This whole story is centered aroung the Pharisees' and Priest's lack of faith, repentance, stewardship and mercy.

You asked Sputnik:

I'm curious as to why you insist it must a parable and not an actual account? Is there some reason it must be accepted as one?

I'd like to know the same thing... why does this passage have to be about Heaven, Hell and the state of one's soul? Is it because a doctrine was preformulated and now one must try and make this passage fit that doctrine? True, when it is taken out the whole of the lesson Jesus was teaching, it sure does look as if He IS teaching Heaven, Hell and an immortal soul. But when you read from 15:1-16:31, this passage takes on it's true meaning.

I'd still like to know if anyone knows what the term "Abraham's bosom" mean?

Plus the rest of my unanswered questions. I'm not asking to be a wiseguy, I am really curious about these things.

If this is really the state we're in after we die, Is there really a "great gulf" between Heaven and hell? Are we really 'confined' in Heaven by this gulf? Why would God even want to 'confine' us? That sort of sounds like prison, no? What's to stop our spirits, which are not subject to physical boundaries, from passing over this gulf? Will we really be able to see 'souls' being tormented in this 'hell'?

 

[Abiyah]

Rich in is in Paradise, but he is on the "OTHER SIDE&qu

Please give even one verse that clearly states that the righteous dead go to heaven when they die.

Hello !
Hmmmm; the righteous dead ? What is that ? Is that even Biblical, what are you talking about ? Is not Heaven wherever God is ? And Is not Heaven Paradise ? And who is the Judge of all ? And who do all the souls of men belong to ? So doesn't EVERYONE HAVE to go to God, for Judgement ? If the answer is yes, then doesn't it just make sense that they have to go to God for their Judgement ? Therefore, they are not in the "Lake of Fire" at this time for we have not yet had the White Throne Judgement, which is God's Judgement, for there is only One Judge, that being our Heavenly Father. This parable shows us the very state of mind of the Rich Man, he is on the "other" side of Paradise, as it is written that he is, and there is a great gulf or gap between those which are on the "right" side of Paradise and/or Heaven (that being Lazarus, and Abraham, and many, many more, which are not mentioned here) and those which are on the "other" side of Paradise, that being the Rich Man as he wallows in overwhelming grief, which is to say his torment. In the Rich Man's torment, he desires NOW, after the fact, NOW he desires that Living Water, which is Christ Jesus our Lord ! The unrighteous rich Man could SEE & TALK with those that were on the "right" side of the gulf or gap, or divider. This parable is written in metaphors and figures of speech; his soul is not literally burning. As we know that the Lake of Fire is not until the end of the Millinium, at the White Throne judgement [ Revelation 20:11-15] I don't understand WHY this parable is so difficult for some to understand; however, it is written that our Father has put the spirit of slumber on many.

Abiyah

 

[Ormly]

The issue of Hell, or heaven, was never spoken by Him as metaphor or parable. You will notice the disciples never asked Him to explain this one, did they? They didn't have to, Moses and Abraham, as well as the the poor man's name, were also mentioned. So your declaration that He ALWAYS spoke in parables is wrong. This time He didn't have to for reasons you should understand. The STORY of THE ACCOUNT was sufficient.

His disciples didn't question Him because He wasn't talking to them at this time. If you had actually read the passage in it's context, you would have realized He was talking to the Pharisees. This is why the Rich man dressed in a purple robe and line linen was mentioned in the story.

Luke 16:14 And the Pharisees also, who were covetous, heard all these things: and they derided him.
Luke 16:15 And he said unto them, Ye are they which justify yourselves before men; but God knoweth your hearts: for that which is highly esteemed among men is abomination in the sight of God.
Luke 16:16 The law and the prophets were until John: since that time the kingdom of God is preached, and every man presseth into it.
Luke 16:17 And it is easier for heaven and earth to pass, than one tittle of the law to fail.
Luke 16:18 Whosoever putteth away his wife, and marrieth another, committeth adultery: and whosoever marrieth her that is put away from her husband committeth adultery.
Luke 16:19 There was a certain rich man, which was clothed in purple and fine linen, and fared sumptuously every day:...

They knew EXACTLY what He was talking about... and it wasn't their state of being after their death either. Read... He was even clarifying the Law to them just before He started the fifth story of this parable. This whole story is centered aroung the Pharisees' and Priest's lack of faith, repentance, stewardship and mercy.

You asked Sputnik:

I'm curious as to why you insist it must a parable and not an actual account? Is there some reason it must be accepted as one?

I'd like to know the same thing... why does this passage have to be about Heaven, Hell and the state of one's soul? Is it because a doctrine was preformulated and now one must try and make this passage fit that doctrine? True, when it is taken out the whole of the lesson Jesus was teaching, it sure does look as if He IS teaching Heaven, Hell and an immortal soul. But when you read from 15:1-16:31, this passage takes on it's true meaning.

I'd still like to know if anyone knows what the term "Abraham's bosom" mean?

Plus the rest of my unanswered questions. I'm not asking to be a wiseguy, I am really curious about these things.

If this is really the state we're in after we die, Is there really a "great gulf" between Heaven and hell? Are we really 'confined' in Heaven by this gulf? Why would God even want to 'confine' us? That sort of sounds like prison, no? What's to stop our spirits, which are not subject to physical boundaries, from passing over this gulf? Will we really be able to see 'souls' being tormented in this 'hell'?

Oh My Goodness! Are you saying that this is one time the disciples weren't with Him ---and you know for sure?? And the record is clear they asked Jesus about many things He didn't address to them. I think you are being a little selective here just to deny it being actual fact Jesus recalling. What's more I'd like to know where you believe the righteous went, when they died before the cross. They certainly couldn't enter into the Holy presence of God?

 

[Vic C.]

Oh My Goodness! Are you saying that this is one time the disciples weren't with Him ---and you know for sure??

I never said that. Please read what I said.

"His disciples didn't question Him because He wasn't talking to them at this time. If you had actually read the passage in it's context, you would have realized He was talking to the Pharisees. This is why the Rich man dressed in a purple robe and line linen was mentioned in the story."

Where in that quote did I say they weren't with him?

What's more I'd like to know where you believe the righteous went, when they died before the cross. They certainly couldn't enter into the Holy presence of God?

They went to their graves to await resurrection... or to "sleep" as Jesus was fond of saying. We could debate who the ones in Matthew 27:52 were or how many resurrections there are, but that may be for a different thread.