"The rich man And Lazarus..."

[FreeGrace2]

Just to be clear those are your words, not mine.

Jesus often quoted unnamed people in His parables. Saying an unnamed person said something they didn’t really say is bearing false witness even if they are just using a scenario as a teaching tool, according to you.

Don’t forget, all Jesus said He didn’t say on His own authority, but rather said what the Father told Him to say.

Yeah, Adam tried to shift the blame as well.

 

[GRACE_ambassador]

Why do people demand specific words that would satisfy them?

Either they are still immature (as we ALL [Saved] once were), or they are
still "the natural man" (1Co 2:14); these Literally Specific Words Of God
should satisfy the critics seeking "Literal Specific Words," no? Critics?:

"...the rich man also died, and was buried; And​

in hell he lift up his eyes, being in torments..."​

Since when is "died, and was buried" not literal? Figurative for what, pray tell?
Compare:

"But I [Jesus] Say...whosoever shall say, Thou fool,​

shall be in danger of hell fire." (Mat 5:22)​

​

"And fear not them which kill the body, but are not​

able to kill the soul: but rather Fear Him Which is​

Able to Destroy both soul and body in hell." (Mat 10:28)​

Any wonder, then, that annihilation religionists have "NO fear of God"?:

"Then shall they also answer Him, Saying, Lord, when​

saw we Thee an hungered, or athirst, or a stranger, or​

naked, or sick, or in prison, and did not minister unto​

Thee?​

​

Then Shall He Answer them, Saying, Verily I say unto​

you, Inasmuch as ye did it not to one of the least of​

these, ye did it not to Me. And these shall go away​

into everlasting punishment..." (Mat 25:44-46)​

​

Surely then, this is just figurative, although it is a specific match
to "the Literal story of the rich man [NO "faith/works"] and Literal
"Lazarus [with faith]," eh?

"Then Shall He Say also unto them on the Left Hand,​

Depart From Me, ye cursed, into everlasting fire,​

Prepared for the devil and his angels" (Mat 25:41)​

​

Specific Literal Words, or just another Figurative part of our imagination?

Why all the Dire Warnings of Jesus about hell, if it is only figurative?

Mat_5:22 "But I say unto you, That whosoever is angry with his brother
without a cause shall be in danger of the judgment: and whosoever shall
say to his brother, Raca, shall be in danger of the council: but whosoever
shall say, Thou fool, shall be in danger of hell fire." TRIPLE Dangerous???

Mat_5:29 "And if thy right eye offend thee, pluck it out, and cast it from
thee: for it is profitable for thee that one of thy members should perish,
and not that thy whole body should be cast into hell."

Not Literally "dangerous," but safely Figurative, Correct?

Mat_5:30 "And if thy right hand offend thee, cut it off, and cast it
from thee: for it is profitable for thee that one of thy members
should perish, and not that thy whole body should be cast into hell."

If God Speaks ONCE, we should listen, right?
But What about TWICE In TWO Consecutive Verses?

Mat_10:28 "And fear not them which kill the body, but
are not able to kill the soul: but rather Fear Him Which
Is Able To destroy both soul and body in hell."

Mat_11:23
"And thou, Capernaum, which art exalted unto heaven,
shalt be brought down to hell: for if the mighty works,
which have been done in thee, had been done in Sodom,
it would have remained until this day."

(cp Luk_10:15 And thou, Capernaum, which art exalted to
heaven, shalt be thrust down to hell.)

Please, Critics, please tell us WHY "heaven IS LITERAL," but hell is not?

Mat_16:18 "And I say also unto thee, That thou art
Peter, and upon this rock I will build My church;
and the gates of hell shall not prevail against it."

HOW does something Figurative Do This?

Mat_18:9 "And if thine eye offend thee, pluck it out, and cast
it from thee: it is better for thee to enter into life with one
eye, rather than having two eyes to be cast into hell fire."

Specifically Literal "enter life with one eye," but Figuratively
"with two eyes cast into hell fire" Correct? Makes no sense!

So, the rich man, "in hell he lift up his eyes" means something Else,
and, pray tell WHERE Did "Jesus Explain WHAT that ↑ ↑ ↑ ↑ ↑ ↑ ↑ ↑ ↑ was"?
Or, should we "just Make something Up," what we think it means?

Little wonder, then, why there is So Much Confusion. We continue:

Mat_23:15 "Woe unto you, scribes and Pharisees, hypocrites! for ye
compass sea and land to make one proselyte, and when he is made,
ye make him twofold more the child of hell than yourselves."

Mat_23:33 "Ye serpents, ye generation of vipers, how can ye
escape the damnation of hell?" Easy Figurative escape, Correct?

Mar_9:43 "And if thy hand offend thee, cut it off: it is
better for thee to enter into life maimed, than having
two hands to go into hell, into the fire that never shall
be quenched:" Figurative???

Mar_9:45 "And if thy foot offend thee, cut it off: it is better
for thee to enter halt into life, than having two feet to be
cast into hell, into the fire that never shall be quenched"

Mar_9:47 "And if thine eye offend thee, pluck it out: it is
better for thee to enter into the kingdom of God with one
eye, than having two eyes to be cast into hell fire:"

Luk_12:5 "But I Will Forewarn you whom ye shall fear:
Fear Him, Which after He hath killed Hath Power To
Cast into hell; yea, I Say unto you, Fear Him."

Wait! God Repeats Himself?

Luk_16:23 "And in hell he lift up his eyes, being in torments,
and seeth Abraham afar off, and Lazarus in his bosom."

So, Figurative "speaks, saying 'With God, this is impossible'" Forgetting
Scripture [Actually] Declares: "With God ALL things Are Possible!" Amen?

15 times in 4 gospels!

Might as well Deny this as figurative also?:

Rev 20:13 And the sea gave up the dead which were in it; and death
and hell delivered up the dead [rich man?] which were in them:

So, Critics, the dead souls in hell are Not "resurrected, being United with
their bodies" from the sea and death (ground/dirt/rock), To Be Judged
By Jesus, Who Is God, At The [Literal] Great White Throne (Rev 20:11-15)?

↑ ↑ ↑ ↑ ↑ ↑ ↑ ↑ ↑ ↑ ↑ ↑ ↑ ↑ ↑ ↑ ↑ ↑ ↑ ↑ ↑ ↑ ↑ ↑​

Or, is that figurative, too?​

​

Finally, how about The Literal "Soul Of Jesus"? Did He "Go To a figurative hell"?:

Act_2:27 "Because Thou Wilt not leave My Soul in hell,
neither Wilt Thou Suffer Thine Holy One to see corruption."

Act_2:31 "He seeing this before spake of the Resurrection of Christ,
that His Soul Was not left in hell, neither His Flesh [in the tomb]
did see corruption." (cp Psa 16:10; 1Pet 3:19)
--------------------------------
Conclusion, Scripture is out of harmony IF Luke 16:19-31 is figurative,
and ALL The Rest Of God's Passages "Teaching hell" Are Literal, Correct?

@Runningman, and all Critics?

Also, there Is Infinite/Undiluted Wrath Of God!
Therefore, let us pray Unto our JUST God, That we may have:

GRACE, Peace, And JOY!...

 

[Webers.Home]

.
• Luke 16:22 . . And it came to pass, that the beggar died, and was carried by
the angels into Abraham's bosom:

My first question is: Were Abraham and Lazarus buried together, i.e. in the same grave?

• Luke 16:22 . . And it came to pass . . . the rich man also died, and was buried

• Gen 25:8-9 . . Then Abraham gave up the ghost, and died . . . and his sons Isaac and
Ishmael buried him

• Luke 16:24 . . And he cried and said: Father Abraham

My second question is: How does somebody's corpse in their grave communicate with
somebody else's corpse over in another grave? Do the dead have access to some sort
of afterlife intercom system for that?

• Luke 16:23 . . . he seeth Abraham afar off

My third quesion is: How are the dead and buried able to see each other in the dark
through solid ground?
_

 

[Mem]

Right. All believers in the Messiah from Adam forward are there as well.


Can you explain what would be misleading if it is a real account of real people, having real conversations?

If Jesus is utilizing Lazarus and Abraham allegorically to represent someone "God has helped" in spite of his poverty that couldn't buy him even a scrap of food, and the "exalted father," who is then self-explanatory as having the last word on any matter, and the rich man to represent the lost in spite of the riches that might otherwise buy him whatever he wants, and the drop of water to represent even a little bit of living water that he'd otherwise had opportunity to enjoy if he'd only listened to Moses and the prophets...

then, the only thing left to need it to be an actual event is to be able to use it as proof of eternal torment, though you cannot prove it was not more than a parable with everything in it representing a deeper reality. Also, that it is speaking of a deeper reality the needs to be understood would be closer in consistency to the teachings of Jesus than any superficial reading of, once upon a time Jane ran with Spot sort of story.

 

[Jackson123]

Rev 20: 14-15
14Then Death and Hades were thrown into the lake of fire. This is the second death—the lake of fire. 15And if anyone was found whose name was not written in the Book of Life, he was thrown into the lake of fire.

and Rev 21:4
4‘ He will wipe away every tear from their eyes,’ and there will be no more death or mourning or crying or pain, for the former things have passed away.”

passed away, i.e., are gone, that is 'diasppeared'

rev 14:11

And the smoke of their torment ascendeth up for ever and ever: and they have no rest day nor night, who worship the beast and his image, and whosoever receiveth the mark of his name.”

lof is not gone, but torment days and night forever

 

[Runningman]

Jesus spoke in parables to those who weren’t His disciples. Given that there were Pharisees present, always looking for ways to catch Jesus on some sort of logical fallacy, the context the rich man and Lazarus parable includes people who weren’t His followers.

Now all of the doubters about this being a parable are in a corner and have a choice:

1. Accept that Jesus was speaking in a parable.
2. Reject that using real names and assigning quotes to those people doesn’t mean something isn’t a parable.
3. Stop saying Jesus is a liar if this is a parable.
4. All of the above

Pssttt… the correct answer is 4.

 

[The_Watchers_2017]

I'm not following what you mean. Care to explain? Thanks.

this teaching is directly to the Disciples themselves but none of them record it. the one who records it was not in the picture. this is clearly an add in to the Word of God by the RCC

 

[Mem]

rev 14:11

And the smoke of their torment ascendeth up for ever and ever: and they have no rest day nor night, who worship the beast and his image, and whosoever receiveth the mark of his name.”

lof is not gone, but torment days and night forever

"the smoke of" is the subject of the action "going up forever and ever," not their torment.
and who has rest while worshipping the beast or receives the mark of his name, even though they'll take for exactly that purpose, to be left alone from the beast's torment>?

 

[The_Watchers_2017]

OK, sure. Just "explain away" what doesn't agree with you. All Scripture is God breathed AND is profitable for doctrinal teaching, rebuke, correction and instruction in righteousness.


Dr Luke wrote what the Holy Spirit inspired him to write.


Your opinion.

if this actually happened the DISCIPLES WOULD HAVE WRITTEN ABOUT IT!

 

[JTB]

"He did not love his neighbor as himself."

Who told you that?

The laughing until I cry emoji is a form of mocking and does not belong in a Christians repertoire. It shows a lack of the love and empathy of Christ. Correction is ok, debate is ok, but mocking another for their understanding is not.

 

[Runningman]

.



Abraham's response was specifically directed to the man's five brothers;
only his five brothers: none else.

Here’s my point:


Luke 16:27-31
27“He answered, ‘Then I beg you, father, send Lazarus to my family, 28for I have five brothers. Let him warn them, so that they will not also come to this place of torment.’

29“Abraham replied, ‘They have Moses and the Prophets; let them listen to them.’

30“ ‘No, father Abraham,’ he said, ‘but if someone from the dead goes to them, they will repent.’

31“He said to him, ‘If they do not listen to Moses and the Prophets, they will not be convinced even if someone rises from the dead.’ ”

This is the thing: there’s no mention of any place of torment in the Law (Moses) or the Prophets. The Law and Prophets repeatedly say those that are wicked are destroyed, put to death, reduced to ash, etc. What verse would they have possibly known about there being a place of torment in the OT? There isn’t one. That’s just more proof this is a parable.

 

[Snacks]

Just to be clear those are your words, not mine.

Jesus often quoted unnamed people in His parables. Saying an unnamed person said something they didn’t really say is bearing false witness even if they are just using a scenario as a teaching tool, according to you.

Don’t forget, all Jesus said He didn’t say on His own authority, but rather said what the Father told Him to say.

How do you bear false witness against a story character that doesn’t exist? You don’t. But with regards to a real human, you do.

 

[Jackson123]

"the smoke of" is the subject of the action "going up forever and ever," not their torment.
and who has rest while worshipping the beast or receives the mark of his name, even though they'll take for exactly that purpose, to be left alone from the beast's torment>?

The punishment for all goat or unbeliever is eternal

Matt 25
46 “Then they will go away to eternal punishment, but the righteous to eternal life.”

 

[Runningman]

How do you bear false witness against a story character that doesn’t exist? You don’t. But with regards to a real human, you do.

Here’s my point:

In the parable of the Shrewd Manager starting at Luke 16:1, Jesus says there is a rich man, quotes him, and doesn’t say what the rich man’s name is. So the unnamed rich man is just a story character?

Then in the rich man and Lazarus the rich man also is unnamed and quoted. Why suddenly is the rich man not a story character, but rather a real person?

 

[Snacks]

Jesus spoke in parables to those who weren’t His disciples. Given that there were Pharisees present, always looking for ways to catch Jesus on some sort of logical fallacy, the context the rich man and Lazarus parable includes people who weren’t His followers.

Now all of the doubters about this being a parable are in a corner and have a choice:

1. Accept that Jesus was speaking in a parable.
2. Reject that using real names and assigning quotes to those people doesn’t mean something isn’t a parable.
3. Stop saying Jesus is a liar if this is a parable.
4. All of the above

Pssttt… the correct answer is 4.

In Luke 7 Jesus forgives a sinful woman then immediately afterwards talks to a Pharisee about His forgiveness towards her. Jesus used a parable at first but then spoke plainly, comparing the Pharisee to the woman, thus Jesus taught using parables as well as actual people and factual historical events.

 

[Snacks]

Here’s my point:

In the parable of the Shrewd Manager starting at Luke 16:1, Jesus says there is a rich man, quotes him, and doesn’t say what the rich man’s name is. So the unnamed rich man is just a story character?

Then in the rich man and Lazarus the rich man also is unnamed and quoted. Why suddenly is the rich man not a story character, but rather a real person?

Because the real person Abraham is involved.

 

[Webers.Home]

.
Jonah's nautical experiences serve to show that people in the netherworld
are not only in conscious existence, but also in contact with God.

Now, Jonah was in two places simultaneously: the belly of a big fish and the
belly of sheol. We have a record of him praying from both places.

His prayer from the belly of the big fish is obvioius whereas his prayer while
in sheol not so much; but it's there if you know what to look for.

• Jonah 2:2 . . Out of the belly of sheol I cried, and You heard my voice.

• Jonah 2:6 . . I went down to the moorings of the mountains; the earth with
its bars closed behind me forever; yet You have brought up my life from the
pit

(Mountains aren't moored in the tummy of a fish, they're moored deep in the earth,
both in the ocean and on dry land.)

The Hebrew word translated "pit" speaks of putrefaction, and is so employed
by Psalm 16:10 where it says:

"You will not leave my soul in sheol, nor will You allow your holy one to see
corruption."

Acts 2:25-32 verifies that Psalm 16:10 is speaking of Christ's dead body.

In my opinion, Jesus couldn't have picked a better parallel to his own
afterlife experiences than Jonah. Both men were dead for the space of three
days and three nights; both men were interred, both men were kept in
sheol, both men's dead bodies were spared decomposition, and both men's
dead bodies were restored to life.

* There are certain well-known religious folks at large going door to door
preaching that human existence is entirely physical, i.e. it is their position
that when Jesus' body passed away on the cross, the man ceased to exist,
viz: for the space of three days and three nights there was no Jesus; he was
extinct.
_

 

[The_Watchers_2017]

Look at Luke's Gospel. It reflects the other 3 Gospels because the other 3 are FIRST HAND WITNESSED ACCOUNTS.

This Story you cannot find from the Disciples themselves. They never wrote such an account because it NEVER HAPPENED!

LUKE follows the Disciples Account in everything but ALL OF A SUDDEN HE JUST TOSSES THIS INTO THE MIX?

IMPOSSIBLE!

We know how it got there. The Demonic RCC added it. When you were the ONLY PEOPLE WHO COULD READ in the 2nd Century you can make things up that no one can hold you responsible for.

 

[Snacks]

Look at Luke's Gospel. It reflects the other 3 Gospels because the other 3 are FIRST HAND WITNESSED ACCOUNTS.

This Story you cannot find from the Disciples themselves. They never wrote such an account because it NEVER HAPPENED!

LUKE follows the Disciples Account in everything but ALL OF A SUDDEN HE JUST TOSSES THIS INTO THE MIX?

IMPOSSIBLE!

We know how it got there. The Demonic RCC added it. When you were the ONLY PEOPLE WHO COULD READ in the 2nd Century you can make things up that no one can hold you responsible for.

My brother, what you are saying then is that the Bible in its entirety is not the Word of God but rather only most of it is the Word of God.

 

[XavierJesusLovesIndia]

RCC is not demonic. St. Paul quotes from the Gospel of St. Luke. Luke is also the author of Acts to Theophilus, probably Theophilus ben Ananus: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Theophilus_ben_Ananus See also: https://onepeterfive.com/matthew-first-dates-gospels/ From very early in Church History, as Bishop Irenaeus writes, Gospel of Luke was considered Canonical:

2nd Century Bp. Irenaeus on the Four Gospels: "Matthew also issued a written Gospel among the Hebrews in their own dialect, while Peter and Paul were preaching at Rome, and laying the foundations of the Church. After their departure, Mark, the disciple and interpreter of Peter, did also hand down to us in writing what had been preached by Peter. Luke also, the companion of Paul, recorded in a book the Gospel preached by him. Afterwards, John, the disciple of the Lord, who also had leaned upon His breast, did himself publish a Gospel during his residence at Ephesus in Asia."

Source: https://www.newadvent.org/fathers/0103301.htm

From the 1P5 article: "Oxford-educated archaeologist Sir William Ramsay, embarking on a journey to investigate the historicity of the Gospel records and Acts, was skeptical. Taught by liberals and having adopted prevalent errors on the alleged late origin and supposed non-historicity of the Gospels and Acts, Sir William fully expected his own work to corroborate those liberal theories. Instead, to his utter amazement, after lifelong study on the Book of Acts, he wrote later, “Further study … showed that the book could bear the most minute scrutiny as an authority for the facts of the Aegean world, and that it was written with such judgment, skill, art and perception of truth as to be a model of historical statement ...

Sir William said about Saint Luke in particular, author of Luke and the Acts to Theophilus (who may have been the high priest Theophilus ben Ananas), “You may press the words of Luke in a degree beyond any other historian and they meet the keenest scrutiny and the hardest treatment.” Other scholars commenting on his work have agreed: “Ramsay, after a lifetime of research, ranks Luke as the greatest of all historians, ancient or modern. The Gospel stands the same test that the Acts has undergone. It is not only the most beautiful book in the world, but it is written with the utmost care and skill.” The Gospels are early historical records ...

Gospel of St. Luke: 48 A.D. (most likely). Possible range: 48–52 A.D., with ample time for distribution, so that what St. Paul says in 2 Cor. 8:18 in 55 A.D. could have come about by then.

Since, in the Council of Jerusalem, the apostles began to lay greater emphasis on the preaching of the Gospel to the Gentiles also, it is likely that St. Paul, the Apostle to the Gentiles, with the other apostles, would have seen to it that this Gospel, written by his disciple, would be released then."

Luke is the "brother who is praised by all the Churches" of whom Paul writes in 2 Cor 8:18, which was written around 55 A.D: "And we are sending along with him the brother who is praised by all the churches for his service to the Gospel. "

God Bless.