Hades / The Grave

[SoulWeaver]

To be 100% honest, this story doesn't sound to me like the other things Jesus taught. The vibe always struck me like those little inspirational stories people tell. There's a certain power in the way Jesus told all his parables, and this story seems an odd one. That being said, if it's in the Bible I will not doubt that there's a reason it's in the Bible, if it's there then it is true, and it was God's plan to put it there. Maybe it's in the way in which it was recounted. If you look at different Bible translations, one can easily see how much the style itself influences the text. So I would not rely just on how something "sounds" because that can be very deceptive. But this is a really good conversation and questions, that makes me want to look for answers with you. If we want quality apologetics we must allow this type of questions. As to your question, why did the man not request more water, that one is not hard to guess. He apparently felt guilty and thought he did not deserve it. I think you are obsessing too much about the barrier as an object, it is simply the way God sees things and uses objects to illustrate spiritual concepts. Even humans do it all the time. We say things like, I am in a rut, even though you are not actually in one. It's spiritual. We are made in God's image and the ability to understand analogy or parable is how we are able to understand God even though it surpasses our brains. As to the nature of the barrier, I'd bet it has to do something with the "high fences" mentioned in the Bible when God talks about the proud people who raise these "fences", which is their rejection and disobedience of God. I am going to study it again maybe I get blessed with more clarity...

 

[Ahwatukee]

To be 100% honest, this story doesn't sound to me like the other things Jesus taught. The vibe always struck me like those little inspirational stories people tell. There's a certain power in the way Jesus told all his parables, and this story seems an odd one. That being said, if it's in the Bible I will not doubt that there's a reason it's in the Bible, if it's there then it is true, and it was God's plan to put it there. Maybe it's in the way in which it was recounted. If you look at different Bible translations, one can easily see how much the style itself influences the text.

Good day SoulWeaver,

The reason that the event of the rich man and Lazarus is not read like a parable, is because it is not. Parables use symbolism to represent what is literal, e.g. Sower=the Son of Man, field=the world, Wheat=Sons of the kingdom, Weeds=the wicked, harvesters=the angels, etc. In opposition to this, the rich man and Lazarus uses the real names of Abraham, Lazarus, Moses, mentions the rich man's five brothers, the prophets, as well as the real place of the Abyss. Regarding the Abyss, this is the same place that the demons collectively called Legion begged Jesus not to send them into, as revealed in Luke 8:30. It is also the current abode of that angel/beast who is going to come up out of the Abyss, called abaddon/Apollyon. The Abyss is also the place where Satan and his angels will be locked up in when the Lord returns to the earth to end the age. Point being is that it is a real place which the rich man and Lazarus is referring to.

The conclusion then is that the rich man and Lazarus was a real event that the Lord is revealing to us, giving us a glimpse of what takes place at the time of death for both the righteous and the wicked. Of course we know from scripture that those in Christ who die no longer go down into Sheol/Hades to that place of comfort, but at immediately go to be in the presence of the Lord. However, when the wicked die, their spirits still depart and go down to that place of torment in Sheol/Hades.

As to your question, why did the man not request more water, that one is not hard to guess. He apparently felt guilty and thought he did not deserve it. I think you are obsessing too much about the barrier as an object, it is simply the way God sees things and uses objects to illustrate spiritual concepts. Even humans do it all the time. We say things like, I am in a rut, even though you are not actually in one. It's spiritual. We are made in God's image and the ability to understand analogy or parable is how we are able to understand God even though it surpasses our brains. As to the nature of the barrier, I'd bet it has to do something with the "high fences" mentioned in the Bible when God talks about the proud people who raise these "fences", which is their rejection and disobedience of God. I am going to study it again maybe I get blessed with more clarity...

Regarding the water, the rich man asked once and was denied by Abraham saying to him "Son, remember that in your lifetime you received your good things, while Lazarus received bad things, but now he is comforted here and you are in agony." Therefore, if he was denied at his first request, why would he ask for more water?

In regards to "the barrier" the scriptures states that it was a chasm separating the two areas in Sheol/Hades, so that those in the place of comfort could not pass over to the side of torment and neither could those in the area of torment in flame pass over to the side of comfort. Point being that, chasm was a literal impassible trench, gaping opening, ravine, wide opening, gulf, etc., that no one from either side could pass over.

If the literal plain sense makes good sense, then don't seek any other sense. That said, since the rich man and Lazarus makes good plain sense just as it is written, then don't interpret it as a parable or as being symbolic. For if this is done, then the word of God is distorted from its original meaning.

 

[SoulWeaver]

Also might have to do with the "chasm":

Psalms 103:12 As far as the east is from the west, so far hath he removed our transgressions from us.
2 Corinthians 6:14 Be ye not unequally yoked together with unbelievers: for what fellowship hath righteousness with unrighteousness? and what communion hath light with darkness?
Lamentations 2:13 What thing shall I take to witness for thee? what thing shall I liken to thee, O daughter of Jerusalem? what shall I equal to thee, that I may comfort thee, O virgin daughter of Zion? for thy breach is great like the sea: who can heal thee?
Isaiah 30:13 Therefore this iniquity shall be to you as a breach ready to fall, swelling out in a high wall, whose breaking cometh suddenly at an instant.

The realm of sin and evil is very far from the realm of love and righteousness. It's indeed a huge chasm.

 

[SoulWeaver]

If the literal plain sense makes good sense, then don't seek any other sense. That said, since the rich man and Lazarus makes good plain sense just as it is written, then don't interpret it as a parable or as being symbolic.

It's not at all how I understand it. I am taking the people involved as literal people who existed.
This "chasm" is not an actual physical chasm on Earth though. It has to do with the spiritual standing of these two people with God in the spiritual realm, after they died.

 

[Ahwatukee]

It's not at all how I understand it. I am taking the people involved as literal people who existed.
This "chasm" is not an actual physical chasm on Earth though. It has to do with the spiritual standing of these two people with God in the spiritual realm, after they died.

You are correct in that it is their spirits that are there in Sheol/Hades. However, since the people are real and the Abyss is real, so then is the chasm real. Scripture even tells us why the chasm is there. Obviously it was a wide gap to keep either side from crossing over.

I'll go with the scriptures plain literal meaning of the chasm:

"And besides all this, between us and you a great chasm has been set in place, so that those who want to go from here to you cannot, nor can anyone cross over from there to us.’"

 

[SoulWeaver]

You are correct in that it is their spirits that are there in Sheol/Hades. However, since the people are real and the Abyss is real, so then is the chasm real. Scripture even tells us why the chasm is there. Obviously it was a wide gap to keep either side from crossing over.

Yes, the chasm is real. I am just using other Bible references to explain the nature of that chasm, or I'd prefer to call it separation, the workings of the chasm is separation, since it cannot be crossed from either side.
The chasm does exist in the spiritual, invisible realm, it is just described to us with the language from the physical realm.
It's about relationship with God. Like when you have a bad relationship with someone, you choose to be very far from them.
For those who love God it is impossible to leave His side, and it's impossible for those who hate Him to draw closer to God.
That's what I believe is the nature of this chasm.

P.S. My bad for saying parable earlier, brought some misunderstanding, I'm absolutely taking the people in the story as actual people.

 

[Ahwatukee]

Yes, the chasm is real. I am just using other Bible references to explain the nature of that chasm, or I'd prefer to call it separation, the workings of the chasm is separation, since it cannot be crossed from either side.
The chasm does exist in the spiritual, invisible realm, it is just described to us with the language from the physical realm.
It's about relationship with God. Like when you have a bad relationship with someone, you choose to be very far from them.
For those who love God it is impossible to leave His side, and it's impossible for those who hate Him to draw closer to God.
That's what I believe is the nature of this chasm.

P.S. My bad for saying parable earlier, brought some misunderstanding, I'm absolutely taking the people in the story as actual people.

But I am saying that it is a literal chasm. It is not symbolic representing a gap between God and people, but was an actual chasm to keep either side from crossing over to one another. The rich man asked Abraham to have Lazarus go and dip his finger in the water and touch his tongue with it because he was in torment in the flame. However, even if Abraham was willing to do that, he said that the chasm would prevent Lazarus from being able to cross over to touch his tongue.

The entire event, its characters and related information, should all be interpreted in the literal sense.

 

[garee]

.
● Luke 16:23-25 . . He cried out and said: Father Abraham, have mercy on
me, and send Lazarus, that he may dip the tip of his finger in water and cool
off my tongue; for I am in agony in this flame.

The Greek word for "flame" is phlox (flox) which basically means a blaze.

Well; apparently the rich man wasn't engulfed in the blaze. I assume so
because his view wasn't obscured to the point wherein conditions prevented
him from seeing clearly enough to spy Abraham and Lazarus at some
distance. (There may in fact have been other people in the area too but the
Bible left them out of the story; likely because they're not relevant.)

Did the rich man actually think that Lazarus would agree to walk thru fire to
bring him water? That part of the story is very curious.

The blaze is curious too. Was it not so hot that moisture on a wet fingertip
could survive evaporation long enough for Lazarus to reach the man and
apply it to his tongue?

Why did the rich man request such a small amount of water? Why not a
mug, or better yet; a whole bucket?
_

The metaphor, walking though fire reperesents being under the judgement of God and overcoming as with Christ working with like that of Daniel three walking with one as the Son of man. . the gospel

The fresh or living water speaks of the gospel . In another parable another metaphor is used that also speaks of the unseen work of the spirit using blood, (blood or water.) Used three again to represent the end of the matter. Three were moved by the Holy Spirit to relieve suffering David was offered a cold drink of water .He is shown having the understanding of the parable... poured it "water" out as if it was spirit . A picture of Christ giving spirt life in jeopardy of his own spirit.

While the Jehovah Witnesses take blood literally they are missing the unseen spiritual application .Catholic turn bread into actual literal blood also missing the unseen spiritual application. walk by faith (the unseen eternal)

Beautiful parable in 2 Samuel 23 and as a second witness 1 Chronicles 11:19 it puts to rest both that of Catholicism and Jehovah Witnesses .

2 Samuel 23: 15- King James Version (KJV) And David was then in an hold, and the garrison of the Philistines was then in Bethlehem.
And David longed, and said, Oh that one would give me drink of the water of the well of Bethlehem, which is by the gate! And the three mighty men brake through the host of the Philistines, and drew water out of the well of Bethlehem, that was by the gate, and took it, and brought it to David: nevertheless he would not drink thereof, but poured it out unto the Lord.And he said, Be it far from me, O Lord, that I should do this: is not this the blood of the men that went in jeopardy of their lives? therefore he would not drink it. These things did these three mighty men.

 

[garee]

But I am saying that it is a literal chasm. It is not symbolic representing a gap between God and people, but was an actual chasm to keep either side from crossing over to one another. The rich man asked Abraham to have Lazarus go and dip his finger in the water and touch his tongue with it because he was in torment in the flame. However, even if Abraham was willing to do that, he said that the chasm would prevent Lazarus from being able to cross over to touch his tongue.

The entire event, its characters and related information, should all be interpreted in the literal sense.

Hot tongue. How hot?

As that which should be interpreted literally make the unseen hidden understanding without effect? Should all be interpreted in the literal sense to include a series of five parables in a row to represent all things written in the law and prophets. And if they have no faith they would not believe Christ when he rises from the dead and appears to his faithless brother. . The understanding comes as a the series parables. .. Why try and trick the disciples by slipping in a literal interpretation seeing without parable he spoke not?

What would that teach them about walking by faith the eternal not seen.?

 

[SoulWeaver]

There is no need to pit the literal against the spiritual in God's word. They are really not at war.
Jesus might have also used a historical, tangible situation of real people to deliver us a parable, a spiritual situation. It's what the Bible does all the time. We have the historical, tangible nation of Israel and literal events that happened to them, that are constantly used to hint us about and illustrate "spiritual Israel" and spiritual events. The literal story of Ruth and the kinsman redeemer is spiritually about the redemption of Jesus coming for the Gentiles. This doesn't make the story of Ruth non historical or "imaginary". There's nothing to defend because nothing is actually under attack.

What is the criterion that determines what to take literally and what not? Jesus was not a literal shepherd of cattle, He was a carpenter. Yet Jesus is the good shepherd, and he has fulfilled the prophecy of the Old testament about the good shepherd that was to come. Does this mean Jesus' fulfillment of the prophecy was inadequate, or imaginary? Insisting on literal at all times can become a problem, and in fact it is partially what kept the majority of Jews from accepting Jesus to this day. Insisting on spiritual at the cost of literal at all times can get equally problematic. I don't believe in turning to the right side or to the left. I try to take literally everything that reasonably seems possible to be literal, except when the literal meaning is beyond doubt impossible, and I also look if there's something spiritual to learn, packed in it. I try not to lose or discard either truth. That's the criterion that I've come to use, and I do not claim my interpretations as absolute truths, I just explain what is my reasoning and how I've come to that conclusion. (If someone has more to say about what criteria to use in this regard or want to discuss or share what they learned feel free to pm me, I'm always open to hear good insight.)

Let's see.
Revelation 11:8 And their dead bodies shall lie in the street of the great city (Babylon, which is referred to in this whole chapter), which spiritually is called Sodom and Egypt, where also our Lord was crucified (obviously Jerusalem).

That verse is a really good example that God indeed can and does use physical locality language in order to explain spiritual situations to us, even throwing Sodom and Egypt in to further drive the point. But in most cases it is not given to us explicitly expounded like this.

The events described in the Bible about physical historical Egypt, which we can see, help us understand what is the nature of spiritual Egypt, that we cannot see with physical eyes. Like physical Egypt was filled with physical bondage, so is spiritual Egypt filled with spiritual bondage or being bound to sin. The spiritual layer does not make the historical one untrue. The spiritual bondage is not something imaginary, or nonexistent, either. It is very real, it is just not materially visible or tangible. We also know it is real since it works a consequence in our world, as spiritual realm permeates the physical realm.

Why confuse "real" with "tangible"? Things don't have to be visible or tangible to be real or true! If something is not visible or tangible, it does not mean it's imaginary. Holy Spirit is not tangible but He is real, per example. In the same way, the barrier or chasm described in this story might not be something physically visible or tangible, but is 100% real and 100% of consequence. So it is really there. It's just not likely made of geographical landmass. I mean, I might concede to not exclude the possibility, let's say my reasoning could be wrong or limited, and it could be made of actual physical space. But one must admit that it does not seem very likely. On what planet would that be? How many miles is the width? Etc.

It does not seem as impossible that Lazarus and the rich man were physical, actual people who died. Since I cannot determine with certainty what happened, for now, unless someone expounds a more convincing alternative, I take it to be likely a story about two literal people that is being used as an example to also render us a parable. There's definitely a parable packed as with every story in the Bible. If Jesus is the Word of God, and if without parable He spoke not, since the Bible is the Word of God and God is never changing, one must logically conclude that no story told in the Bible is spoken without a parable. But this doesn't render the Biblical stories non historical or imaginary. It just means these stories are pregnant with spiritual messages.

 

[Nehemiah6]

There's definitely a parable packed as with every story in the Bible.

Parables are earthly stories with heavenly or spiritual meanings (a good way to understand them). But the narrative of the Rich Man and Lazarus lifted the veil from the afterlife and Christ told us exactly what happened immediately after death. Sheol/Hades was the abode of all departed souls and spirits until the resurrection of Christ. Now only the unsaved and unrighteous go to Hades. So it would not be parabolic of something else. This is the REALITY of the afterlife.

 

[SoulWeaver]

Parables are earthly stories with heavenly or spiritual meanings (a good way to understand them). But the narrative of the Rich Man and Lazarus lifted the veil from the afterlife and Christ told us exactly what happened immediately after death. Sheol/Hades was the abode of all departed souls and spirits until the resurrection of Christ. Now only the unsaved and unrighteous go to Hades. So it would not be parabolic of something else. This is the REALITY of the afterlife.

I completely agree with you.
I think language is causing the confusion.
I probably keep saying parable because I don't have the good equivalent word for "spiritual truth".

 

[kneemailer]

Luke 16:19-31.

Luke 16 (ie 'Rich man' and 'Lazarus') is a parable, amidst a series of parables. The language used in that section of scripture, is quite symbolic, and not at all to be taken in a literalistic fashion.

 

[kneemailer]

Sometime after the Lord's resurrection, all of the spirits of the OT saints were removed from Hades ...

This is not correct. Firstly, you have a misunderstanding of the word 'spirit', but secondly:

Mat 27:51 And, behold, the veil of the temple was rent in twain from the top to the bottom; and the earth did quake, and the rocks rent;
Mat 27:52 And the graves were opened; and many bodies of the saints which slept arose,
Mat 27:53 And came out of the graves after his resurrection, and went into the holy city, and appeared unto many.

The text states "many", not "all". This group (also known as the 'firstfruits') was a select set of unnumbered persons which were in their graves around the city of Jerusalem only. This was not every deceased that had believed in the redeemer from the beginning of time, nor in every location. It was limited, and again, unnumbered specifically. It might have included John the Baptist, but there is no scriptural evidence directly to that. We know who it did not include, since Peter stated in Acts, that King David, was still dead, buried and not in Heaven, and the tomb was still with them all (unopened) (Acts 2:29,34, 13:36; Hebrews 11:32). In Hebrews 11, we see a list of deceased, such as Abraham, Samson, David, Isaac, Sarah, etc. They too are not resurrected, yet. Additionally, 'firstfruits' or 'wavesheaf' was only a first select portion (a tithe), never the entire harvest, or even a large portion of harvest.

Isaiah foretold, that the body of Jesus would be resurrected, and along with Him, others at Jerusalem:

Isaiah 26:19 - Thy dead men shall live, together with my dead body shall they arise. Awake and sing, ye that dwell in dust: for thy dew is as the dew of herbs, and the earth shall cast out the dead.

See also Psalms 40:6; Hebrews 10:5; Galatians 4:4;

Psalms 40:6 - Sacrifice and offering thou didst not desire; mine ears hast thou opened: burnt offering and sin offering hast thou not required.

Hebrews 10:5 - Wherefore when he cometh into the world, he saith, Sacrifice and offering thou wouldest not, but a body hast thou prepared me:

Galatians 4:4 - But when the fulness of the time was come, God sent forth his Son, made of a woman, made under the law,

Psalms 68, a Psalms of David, sang about the Son of David, Jesus Christ, and His victory over sin and the grave:

Psalms 68:8 - The earth shook, the heavens also dropped at the presence of God: even Sinai itself was moved at the presence of God, the God of Israel.

Psalms 68:17 - The chariots of God are twenty thousand, even thousands of angels: the Lord is among them, as in Sinai, in the holy place.

Psalms 68:18 - Thou hast ascended on high, thou hast led captivity captive: thou hast received gifts for men; yea, for the rebellious also, that the LORD God might dwell among them.

Psalms 68:20 - He that is our God is the God of salvation; and unto GOD the Lord belong the issues from death.

Psalms 68:21 - But God shall wound the head of his enemies, and the hairy scalp of such an one as goeth on still in his trespasses.

Psalms 68:21 - references Genesis 3:15, and notice the connection to harvest, firstfruits, wavesheaf and the "seed" that began it all -

Genesis 3:15 And I will put enmity between thee and the woman, and between thy seed and her seed; it shall bruise thy head, and thou shalt bruise his heel.

Paul cites Psalms 68:18, in direction connection to the resurrection of Jesus Christ, and the freeing of the captives from the grave, and thus the specific persons around Jerusalem that had been sleeping the dust of the earth, in the graves are resurrected with Jesus, as Isaiah 26:19 shows:

Ephesians 4:8 - Wherefore he saith, When he ascended up on high, he led captivity captive, and gave gifts unto men.

Ephesians 4:9 - (Now that he ascended, what is it but that he also descended first into the lower parts of the earth?

Ephesians 4:10 - He that descended is the same also that ascended up far above all heavens, that he might fill all things.)

Paul cites Leviticus, etc., in reference to the resurrection of Jesus Christ, and the firstfruits of the harvest of souls:

1 Corinthians 15:20 - But now is Christ risen from the dead, and become the firstfruits of them that slept.

1 Corinthians 15:21 - For since by man came death, by man came also the resurrection of the dead.

1 Corinthians 15:22 - For as in Adam all die, even so in Christ shall all be made alive.

1 Corinthians 15:23 - But every man in his own order: Christ the firstfruits; afterward they that are Christ's at his coming.

Christ Jesus was fulfilling his duty, in the day of His resurrection, which was the 16th day of Abib, the 'first day of the week'; which began the numbering of days unto Pentecost; as it was written, to take of the "firstfruits", and to wave them, as the "wavesheaf", before the Father, and so took those He liberated from death to Heaven, and presented them before the Father in Heaven:

Leviticus 23:15 - And ye shall count unto you from the morrow after the sabbath, from the day that ye brought the sheaf of the wave offering; seven sabbaths shall be complete:

Leviticus 23:16 - Even unto the morrow after the seventh sabbath shall ye number fifty days; and ye shall offer a new meat offering unto the LORD.

Leviticus 23:17 - Ye shall bring out of your habitations two wave loaves of two tenth deals: they shall be of fine flour; they shall be baken with leaven; they are the firstfruits unto the LORD.

Leviticus 23:18 - And ye shall offer with the bread seven lambs without blemish of the first year, and one young bullock, and two rams: they shall be for a burnt offering unto the LORD, with their meat offering, and their drink offerings, even an offering made by fire, of sweet savour unto the LORD.

Leviticus 23:19 - Then ye shall sacrifice one kid of the goats for a sin offering, and two lambs of the first year for a sacrifice of peace offerings.

Leviticus 23:20 - And the priest shall wave them with the bread of the firstfruits for a wave offering before the LORD, with the two lambs: they shall be holy to the LORD for the priest.

Leviticus 23:21 - And ye shall proclaim on the selfsame day, that it may be an holy convocation unto you: ye shall do no servile work therein: it shall be a statute for ever in all your dwellings throughout your generations.

Leviticus 23:22 - And when ye reap the harvest of your land, thou shalt not make clean riddance of the corners of thy field when thou reapest, neither shalt thou gather any gleaning of thy harvest: thou shalt leave them unto the poor, and to the stranger: I am the LORD your God.

Matthew records the historical record:

Jesus dies:

Matthew 27:50 - Jesus, when he had cried again with a loud voice, yielded up the ghost.

An earthquake happens, and the rocks are split:

Matthew 27:51 - And, behold, the veil of the temple was rent in twain from the top to the bottom; and the earth did quake, and the rocks rent;

The graves of specific persons around Jerusalem are thus opened as angels descended to do their task [see connecting Matthew 28:2]:

Matthew 27:52 - And the graves were opened; and many bodies of the saints which slept arose,

These specific persons around Jerusalem, unnamed and unnumbered do not come out of those opened graves until the 'first day of the week' when Jesus arises, and the angel Gabriel comes down clothed in the panopoly of Heaven, calling forth the Son by command of the Father, and the other earthquake happens:

Matthew 27:53 - And came out of the graves after his resurrection, and went into the holy city, and appeared unto many.

Notice, the second earthquake in the descent of the covering Cherub and lesser arch-angel Gabriel:

Matthew 28:1 - In the end of the sabbath, as it began to dawn toward the first day of the week, came Mary Magdalene and the other Mary to see the sepulchre.

Matthew 28:2 - And, behold, there was a great earthquake: for the angel of the Lord descended from heaven, and came and rolled back the stone from the door, and sat upon it.

Matthew 28:3 - His countenance was like lightning, and his raiment white as snow:

Matthew 28:4 - And for fear of him the keepers did shake, and became as dead men.

See also Psalms 24, along with Psalms 98:1-3 and combine with Colossians 2:15.

How did Jesus leave? How is Jesus going to return?

Even Acts 1 states that a 'cloud' received Him. In that 'cloud' were the angels that came and those resurrected that had already been taken up by the angels to leave with Jesus.

 

[kneemailer]

Sheol (Hebrew)and Hades (Greek) are the same place, which is located in the heart of the earth.

"And you, Capernaum, will you be lifted up to heaven? No, you will be brought down to Hades! For if the miracles that were performed in you had been performed in Sodom, it would have remained to this day."

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.

Mat 11:23 και συ καπερναουμ η εως του ουρανου υψωθεισα εως αδου καταβιβασθηση οτι ει εν σοδομοις εγενοντο αι δυναμεις αι γενομεναι εν σοι εμειναν αν μεχρι της σημερον

The translation that you have used, has simply 'transliterated' ([h]adou) the word found in koine Greek (G86), and in no way helps with understanding the definition of said word. For that, context is required. You can also see all of the uses here - https://lexicon.katabiblon.com/index.php?lemma=ᾅδης

The same word is used in 1 Corinthians 15:55, speaking of those who will be resurrected in the First Great Resurrection of life:

1Co 15:55 O death, where is thy sting? O grave, where is thy victory?

1Co 15:55 που σου θανατε το κεντρον που σου αδη το νικος

Hos 13:14 I will ransom them from the power of the grave; I will redeem them from death: O death, I will be thy plagues; O grave, I will be thy destruction: repentance shall be hid from mine eyes.

Hos 13:14 ἐκ χειρὸς ᾅδου ῥύσομαι αὐτοὺς καὶ ἐκ θανάτου λυτρώσομαι αὐτούς· ποῦ ἡ δίκη σου, θάνατε; ποῦ τὸ κέντρον σου, ᾅδη; παράκλησις κέκρυπται ἀπὸ ὀφθαλμῶν μου.

Even Strong's Concordance definitions (for those that require non-biblical definitions, rather than Biblically defined definitions) gives as a meaning, "grave", as does Thayer's Lexicon, and many others., such as Easton's Dictionary:

"... To be buried, to go down to the grave, to descend into hades, are equivalent expressions. In the LXX. this word is the usual rendering of the Hebrew sheol, the common receptacle of the departed ( Genesis 42:38 ; Psalms 139:8 ; Hosea 13:14 ; Isaiah 14:9 ). This term is of comparatively rare occurrence in the Greek New Testament. Our Lord speaks of Capernaum as being "brought down to hell" (hades), i.e., simply to the lowest debasement, ( Matthew 11:23 ). ..."

Now, I do not rest upon these non-biblical sources. I simply cite them, showing that many others also define the word as such. Yet, mine own understanding comes not from these, but from scripture itself, since it defines itself, Genesis 40:8, Isaiah 28:10,13; 2 Peter 1:20.

There is no place in scripture, which equates "hades' with 'the heart of the earth'. The phrase, 'the heart of the earth' is only found one time in all of scripture, and it does not refer directly to the grave, but to something much greater. This may be seen as needful.

 

[garee]

I am agreeing with your point, you seem to back it up very nicely, I'll just add this. Especially since it's the Transfiguration event, it makes it very highly probable that Jesus actually talked to Moses and Elijah into the past. There's no way to prove it definitely, but I rather think that Jesus transcended the bounds of time in that moment and showed Himself to Moses and Elijah into their respective time points in history. I know, mindblowing! Furthermore, Jesus interacted with them both, but Moses and Elijah were not told to have communicated between themselves. Moses and Elijah are not said to even acknowledge that the disciples were there, it seems they only saw Jesus. It's also possible that Jesus talked to Moses and Elijah that were resting in Heaven, but my argument is - what would be the purpose of showing that to the disciples and letting us know about it? It seems to me like a no-brainer that Jesus would be able to do that. However, transcending time would really drive the point that Jesus was and is the Word of God and was God, from the beginning.

The context makes that parable clear.

Jesus was making a point in respect to the two the two witnesses of God .Moses and Elijah. The law and the prophets .Hear them as it written alone. Don't enshrine those dead asleep.

 

[Ahwatukee]

There is no need to pit the literal against the spiritual in God's word. They are really not at war.
Jesus might have also used a historical, tangible situation of real people to deliver us a parable, a spiritual situation. It's what the Bible does all the time. We have the historical, tangible nation of Israel and literal events that happened to them, that are constantly used to hint us about and illustrate "spiritual Israel" and spiritual events. The literal story of Ruth and the kinsman redeemer is spiritually about the redemption of Jesus coming for the Gentiles. This doesn't make the story of Ruth non historical or "imaginary". There's nothing to defend because nothing is actually under attack.

Yes however, while Boaz and Ruth is a literal story, it is not a parable. Parables are picture stories using symbolism to represent what is literal. Boaz and Ruth is not like that. It is a literal story, with literal people and is also a comparison regarding Israel and Gentiles.

What is the criterion that determines what to take literally and what not? Jesus was not a literal shepherd of cattle, He was a carpenter. Yet Jesus is the good shepherd, and he has fulfilled the prophecy of the Old testament about the good shepherd that was to come. Does this mean Jesus' fulfillment of the prophecy was inadequate, or imaginary? Insisting on literal at all times can become a problem, and in fact it is partially what kept the majority of Jews from accepting Jesus to this day. Insisting on spiritual at the cost of literal at all times can get equally problematic. I don't believe in turning to the right side or to the left. I try to take literally everything that reasonably seems possible to be literal, except when the literal meaning is beyond doubt impossible, and I also look if there's something spiritual to learn, packed in it. I try not to lose or discard either truth. That's the criterion that I've come to use, and I do not claim my interpretations as absolute truths, I just explain what is my reasoning and how I've come to that conclusion. (If someone has more to say about what criteria to use in this regard or want to discuss or share what they learned feel free to pm me, I'm always open to hear good insight.)

The examples you are using are easy to discern from the context. The rich man and Lazarus is not like that. You don't insist on the literal at all times, you discern what is meant by reading the context. If the plain literal meaning makes good sense, then don't seek any other sense. That said, when I read about a dragon with seven heads and ten horns, I know that this is symbolic which is referring to something literal. In this case a seven headed dragon with ten horns would does not make plain literal sense. We therefore have to find out what the literal meaning is behind the symbolism. What you are attempting to do is force the literal meaning into a symbolic one.

Let's see.
Revelation 11:8 And their dead bodies shall lie in the street of the great city (Babylon, which is referred to in this whole chapter), which spiritually is called Sodom and Egypt, where also our Lord was crucified (obviously Jerusalem).

That verse is a really good example that God indeed can and does use physical locality language in order to explain spiritual situations to us, even throwing Sodom and Egypt in to further drive the point. But in most cases it is not given to us explicitly expounded like this.

spiritually called Sodom = Jerusalem

Not that difficult to understand. The rich man and Lazarus cannot be compared to that.

It does not seem as impossible that Lazarus and the rich man were physical, actual people who died. Since I cannot determine with certainty what happened, for now, unless someone expounds a more convincing alternative, I take it to be likely a story about two literal people that is being used as an example to also render us a parable. There's definitely a parable packed as with every story in the Bible. If Jesus is the Word of God, and if without parable He spoke not, since the Bible is the Word of God and God is never changing, one must logically conclude that no story told in the Bible is spoken without a parable. But this doesn't render the Biblical stories non historical or imaginary. It just means these stories are pregnant with spiritual messages.

So, the literal name of Abraham and Lazarus are used and it doesn't seem possible that they were physical, actual people who died? What kind of exegesis is that? Was not Abraham a real person. I can show you call kinds of scriptures about him, so he was real. And it is him who the rich man is speaking with, both having died and being in their spirits. We're told right in the story that both Lazarus and the rich man died, which would demonstrate that at one time they were both alive.

Also, Jesus only spoke parables to that generation of Israel and that in fulfillment of the prophecy in Isaiah. Regarding the disciples and believers, Jesus said the knowledge of the kingdom has been given to you. So please don't use that "we can't know what God's word is saying because its a parable speech." I've heard it many times before, which is just a quick easy apologetic.

As I said previously, if you read the scripture in the plain literal sense, the it means exactly what it says.

The context will always determine whether something is symbolic or literal, such as a physical stone temple vs. the human body as the temple of the Holy Spirit. The rest of the context will reveal which one is being spoken of. Regarding the rich man and Lazarus, Jesus never spoke a parable using real names and real locations. Parables use symbolism to represent the literal. I previously provided and example of the sower=Son of Man, Field=the world, wheat=son's of the kingdom, Weeds=the wicked, harvesters=the angels, etc. When real names and real locations are used, then it would infer that the scripture is speaking plainly and needs no symbolic interpretation.

By His teaching on this event, Jesus is giving the reader a glimpse into what happens after the death of the body for both the righteous and the wicked.

* Lazarus is a poor beggar

* The rich man is rich and indifferent, having a spirit of no compassion for Lazarus and most likely anyone else

* Lazarus and the rich man both die and their bodies are buried

* Lazarus' spirit departs his body and is taken to Abraham's side in the comfort area of Hades

* The rich man's spirit departs his body and Goes to the torment side of Hades

* The rich man is having a conversation with Abraham, can see both him and Lazarus, feels pain of being in torment in the flames, and retains his memories of his father and five brothers which he wants to warn so that they don't come to that literal place of torment.

* Abraham tells the rich man that his brothers have Moses and the prophets to be warned about that place of torment.

* There is literal great chasm fixed in between the place of comfort and the place of torment which keeps everyone on either side from being able to pass over.

According to 1 Cor.5:6 and Phil.1:23, when believers in Christ die, their spirit no longer goes down into Hades to that place of comfort, but goes immediately to be in the presence of the Lord. However, when the wicked die, their spirits depart and still go down into Hades to that same place that the rich man went to and still is as I write this. We know this because Rev.20:11-15 shows the unrighteous dead resurrecting with their spirits coming out of Hades in order to stand before God at the great white throne judgment. The rich man will be among them.

These are the basic teachings that can be found in this event that the Lord revealed to us. It is also demonstrated when Jesus was on the cross when He told the thief "Today you will be with me in paradise." Since both Jesus and the thief died that very same day, then the place of paradise that Jesus was referring to was that area of comfort in Hades which is where their spirits went to.

There is no need to seek out a symbolic or parabolic interpretation for this event. For once you do, you distort the meanings that I have listed above.

You of course are free to believe what you want, but I am telling you that it is a literal story and should be received just as it reads. There is nothing in the context to lead the reader to seek out a parabolic meaning.

 

[Webers.Home]

.
The story told in Luke 16:9-31 quotes Abraham a number of times. Well, if
Abraham didn't actually say the words that he's quoted as saying; then Luke
would be guilty of reporting fake news, i.e. we would have good reason to
suspect that Luke was a man of questionable integrity who couldn't be
trusted to tell the truth about people; and nobody's reputation, not even a
sacred patriarch's reputation, was safe in his hands.
_

 

[Ahwatukee]

This is not correct. Firstly, you have a misunderstanding of the word 'spirit', but secondly:

Mat 27:51 And, behold, the veil of the temple was rent in twain from the top to the bottom; and the earth did quake, and the rocks rent;
Mat 27:52 And the graves were opened; and many bodies of the saints which slept arose,
Mat 27:53 And came out of the graves after his resurrection, and went into the holy city, and appeared unto many.

The text states "many", not "all". This group (also known as the 'firstfruits') was a select set of unnumbered persons which were in their graves around the city of Jerusalem only.

Greetings kneemailer,

Those who were resurrected, coming out of the tombs after Jesus' resurrection, are not apart of the first fruits. All of those people who resurrected did so in the mortal bodies, just like Lazarus and Jairus' twelve year old daughter. They all died again with their spirits departing and going to be with the Lord where they wait from heaven for the resurrection.

So far, no one but the Lord has resurrected in an immortal and glorified body being the first fruits of the first resurrection. The church is next. In support of this, Paul said the following:

"For as in Adam all die, so in Christ all will be made alive. But each in his own turn: Christ the firstfruits; then at His coming, those who belong to Him.

Those at the Lord's coming, would be referring to the church and are next. Those who came of their tomb's after Jesus resurrected and went into the city, they grew old and died again, just like Lazarus and Jairus daughter and just like those Paul brought back to life. No one but the Lord has a resurrected body, immortal and glorified. The church is next and is what we should all be looking forward to.

 

[Ahwatukee]

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.

Mat 11:23 και συ καπερναουμ η εως του ουρανου υψωθεισα εως αδου καταβιβασθηση οτι ει εν σοδομοις εγενοντο αι δυναμεις αι γενομεναι εν σοι εμειναν αν μεχρι της σημερον

The translation that you have used, has simply 'transliterated' ([h]adou) the word found in koine Greek (G86), and in no way helps with understanding the definition of said word. For that, context is required. You can also see all of the uses here - https://lexicon.katabiblon.com/index.php?lemma=ᾅδης

Regardless of all you listed above, the fact remains that Hades which Jesus said is down under the earth, is defined as the place of departed spirits. This is currently where the spirits of the unrighteous dead go. I don't know what you are trying to prove here, for nothing that you have said negates this fact. Bye the way, I can also list the Greek, but you haven't proven anything.

The same word is used in 1 Corinthians 15:55, speaking of those who will be resurrected in the First Great Resurrection of life:

[/quote]1Co 15:55 O death, where is thy sting? O grave, where is thy victory?

1Co 15:55 που σου θανατε το κεντρον που σου αδη το νικος

Hos 13:14 I will ransom them from the power of the grave; I will redeem them from death: O death, I will be thy plagues; O grave, I will be thy destruction: repentance shall be hid from mine eyes.

Hos 13:14 ἐκ χειρὸς ᾅδου ῥύσομαι αὐτοὺς καὶ ἐκ θανάτου λυτρώσομαι αὐτούς· ποῦ ἡ δίκη σου, θάνατε; ποῦ τὸ κέντρον σου, ᾅδη; παράκλησις κέκρυπται ἀπὸ ὀφθαλμῶν μου.

Even Strong's Concordance definitions (for those that require non-biblical definitions, rather than Biblically defined definitions) gives as a meaning, "grave", as does Thayer's Lexicon, and many others., such as Easton's Dictionary:

"... To be buried, to go down to the grave, to descend into hades, are equivalent expressions. In the LXX. this word is the usual rendering of the Hebrew sheol, the common receptacle of the departed ( Genesis 42:38 ; Psalms 139:8 ; Hosea 13:14 ; Isaiah 14:9 ). This term is of comparatively rare occurrence in the Greek New Testament. Our Lord speaks of Capernaum as being "brought down to hell" (hades), i.e., simply to the lowest debasement, ( Matthew 11:23 ). ..."

Now, I do not rest upon these non-biblical sources. I simply cite them, showing that many others also define the word as such. Yet, mine own understanding comes not from these, but from scripture itself, since it defines itself, Genesis 40:8, Isaiah 28:10,13; 2 Peter 1:20.

There is no place in scripture, which equates "hades' with 'the heart of the earth'. The phrase, 'the heart of the earth' is only found one time in all of scripture, and it does not refer directly to the grave, but to something much greater. This may be seen as needful.

Sorry, but here is the definition for sheol/Hades:

======================================================
Strong's Concordance
hadés: Hades, the abode of departed spirits
Original Word: ᾍδης, ου, ὁ
Part of Speech: Noun, Masculine
Transliteration: hadés
Phonetic Spelling: (hah'-dace)
Definition: Hades, the abode of departed spirits
Usage: Hades, the unseen world.

HELPS Word-studies
86 hádēs (from 1 /A "not" and idein/eidō, "see") – properly, the "unseen place," referring to the (invisible) realm in which all the dead reside, i.e. the present dwelling place of all the departed (deceased); Hades.
===============================================================

Hades should never be translated as "grave." The word "qeber" (Hebrew) and Mnemeion (Greek) are the words that are used when referring to grave, tomb or sepulcher. The example of Hades as the realm of departed spirits can be found in the event of the rich man and Lazarus, of whom it is stated that the bodies of both men died, yet their spirits were down in Hades, conscious and aware.