Interpreting the Parable of the Rich Man and Lazarus: It's Really Good News!

[Phoneman-777]

Why would Jesus be on the wrong side of the grave? We know from Luke 16 that those on the wrong side can hear.

What about what Solomon said about the dead knowing nothing? Or what Job said about a dead man not knowing whether his sons come to honor or ruin?

Surely, if the dead could "hear", they would be aware and know things, right?

Now, if Luke 16 is just a parable, well, no such contradictions with Job and Solomon arise.

 

[Phoneman-777]

You’ll do well to stick with the preserved holy words of God in English as given in the King James Bible. Hell is the English word. Hell is correct. Hell is a real place. Hell is hot. Hell is a place of torment. Hell is located in the heart of the earth, not six feet under.

Thank you, but I'll stick with worthy translations of the INSPIRED Greek texts, Koine Greek, to be exact.
The Reformers did their best, but they failed to properly translate "Sabbatismos" as "Sabbath" in Hebrews 4:9 KJV - they translated it simply as "rest" - the previous 8 verses have "rest" translated over and over from "kataposis", which is NOT the same as "Sabbatismos".

The word is "Sabbatismos" and verse 9 should read, "It is therefore the duty of the people of God to KEEP THE SABBATH" and the reason we're supposed to do it is to demonstrate outwardly the inward rest in Jesus we we have entered.

 

[Phoneman-777]

"Erasmus of Rotterdam or Erasmus;[note 1] 28 October 1466 – 12 July 1536) was a Dutch philosopher and Catholic theologian who is considered one of the greatest scholars of the northern Renaissance.
As a Catholic priest, he was an important figure in classical scholarship who wrote in a pure Latin style. Among humanists he enjoyed the sobriquet "Prince of the Humanists", and has been called "the crowning glory of the Christian humanists"" https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Erasmus

Curiously, Erasmus was not at all antagonistic toward his beloved Catholic church...but he possessed a desire to seek and reveal truth like hardly any other. In a world of bigotry where truth has always taken a backseat to ideology, Erasmus was the man.

Did you know he published a Bible with the Roman Catholic Latin on one side of the page and his Latin translation of the Greek on the other side of the page, so that as the reader turned each page, they could read down the page and compare side by side how differently the RCC's "Bible" read from the actual Word of God?

 

[justbyfaith]

What about what Solomon said about the dead knowing nothing? Or what Job said about a dead man not knowing whether his sons come to honor or ruin?

Surely, if the dead could "hear", they would be aware and know things, right?

Now, if Luke 16 is just a parable, well, no such contradictions with Job and Solomon arise.

Solomon in Ecclesiastes was writing from the perspective of someone who was backslidden.

And Job, in his own book, when he said that the dead do not know about their descendants, that does not mean that the dead do not have any consciousness. They are simply surrounded by heaven or hell and have no concept any more of what is happening on earth.

 

[Absolutely]

Yes and the scriptures compare the lake of fire to Gods' presence. Compare,

And I saw the dead,small and great, stand before God; and the books were opened: andanother book was opened, which is the book of life: and the dead were judged out of those things which were written in the books, according to their works. Rev.20:12

A fiery stream issued and came forth from before him: thousand thousands ministered unto him, and ten thousand times ten thousand stood before him: the judgment was set, and the books were opened. Dan.7:10


Yes. Now compare this with,

And then shall that Wicked be revealed, whom the Lord shall consume with the spirit of his mouth, and shall destroy with the brightness of his coming: 2Thes.2:8

The lake of fire is compared to the Spirit of his mouth,

Is not my word likeas a fire? saith the LORD Jer.2:3:29

And the brightness of his presence,

Our God shall come, and shall not keep silence: a fireshall devour before him, and it shall be very tempestuous round about him. Psa.50:3


All will be judged at the judgement seat of Christ. Death and hell (the abode of the dead) are destroyed by him,

For our God is a consuming fire. Heb.12:29

...and we can all see the lof is a lof.
You posted nothing indicating what you are attempting to reframe concerning the lof.

 

[Phoneman-777]

Solomon in Ecclesiastes was writing from the perspective of someone who was backslidden.

Do the last two verses of the book sound like someone who was YET backslidden, or had RECOVERED from being backslidden? Doesn't the author of Ecclesiastes call the words of the book which he sought out "acceptable words"? So, why are YOU trying to make them "rejectable"? Sorry, but "the dead know not anything" is as true today as the day the man wrote these words - "acceptable", "wise" and as "goads" fastened by the true "Shepherd".

As for Job, the reason a dead man is oblivious to what's happening on Earth to his sons is NOT because he iz preoccupied with the things of heaven or hell (did not Peter and Jesus tell us that the wicked are "reserved" for the fire that burns "at the end of the world" in the "judgment"?) --- they are oblivious because they are in "wait" in the "house" of the "grave" dead as a doornail, knowing nothing, hearing nothing, seeing nothing, planning nothing, feeling nothing, and praising not God.

Again, if the Soul comes into existence ONLY as a consequence of the union of the Body and the Breath of Life (Genesis 2:7 KJV), how can the Soul continue to exist when this union is dissolved at death? IT CAN'T.

 

[Amanuensis]

Do the last two verses of the book sound like someone who was YET backslidden, or had RECOVERED from being backslidden? Doesn't the author of Ecclesiastes call the words of the book which he sought out "acceptable words"? So, why are YOU trying to make them "rejectable"? Sorry, but "the dead know not anything" is as true today as the day the man wrote these words - "acceptable", "wise" and as "goads" fastened by the true "Shepherd".

As for Job, the reason a dead man is oblivious to what's happening on Earth to his sons is NOT because he iz preoccupied with the things of heaven or hell (did not Peter and Jesus tell us that the wicked are "reserved" for the fire that burns "at the end of the world" in the "judgment"?) --- they are oblivious because they are in "wait" in the "house" of the "grave" dead as a doornail, knowing nothing, hearing nothing, seeing nothing, planning nothing, feeling nothing, and praising not God.

Again, if the Soul comes into existence ONLY as a consequence of the union of the Body and the Breath of Life, how can the Soul continue to exist when this union is dissolved in death? IT CAN'T.

Ecc 4:2 says..."And I declared that the dead, who had already died, are happier than the living, who are still alive."

So the writer states that the dead are happier than the living and that is not how one describes the thoughts of the thoughtless. I think you have some explaining to do.

 

[Amanuensis]

Do the last two verses of the book sound like someone who was YET backslidden, or had RECOVERED from being backslidden? Doesn't the author of Ecclesiastes call the words of the book which he sought out "acceptable words"? So, why are YOU trying to make them "rejectable"? Sorry, but "the dead know not anything" is as true today as the day the man wrote these words - "acceptable", "wise" and as "goads" fastened by the true "Shepherd".

As for Job, the reason a dead man is oblivious to what's happening on Earth to his sons is NOT because he iz preoccupied with the things of heaven or hell (did not Peter and Jesus tell us that the wicked are "reserved" for the fire that burns "at the end of the world" in the "judgment"?) --- they are oblivious because they are in "wait" in the "house" of the "grave" dead as a doornail, knowing nothing, hearing nothing, seeing nothing, planning nothing, feeling nothing, and praising not God.

Again, if the Soul comes into existence ONLY as a consequence of the union of the Body and the Breath of Life (Genesis 2:7 KJV), how can the Soul continue to exist when this union is dissolved at death? IT CAN'T.

He writes a testimony of how he searched for meaning in life in other things and returned to the truth that it is found only in serving God.

So in giving the testimony of how he felt about different things he discovered were vanity, he expresses his feelings about them and his desire to die because he thought that would be an escape from the frustration of his life.

He is telling us what he thought during those times of soul searching. He is not trying to give us details about what really happens to people in the afterlife because he doesn't really know and we still don't. We only have what has been revealed in the New Testament by Jesus and also things that Paul said that apply to the Christian believer.

Paul only knows that to be absent from the body is to be present with Christ and to depart in death means BETTER for him and his expectation is to be with Christ. That kind reference gives us at least an understanding that we are not to talk about or expect something in between but simply expect to be with Christ.

You may say that is because we will not be consciously aware of the time between. I would answer that why then talk about one. To be with Christ is to be our conversation and what we tell believers to expect, just as Paul said. Anything else is not what the New Testament teaches regardless of your interpretation of the verses in Ecc and Job. Your interpretation of those verses should not cause you to emphasize something Paul does not even mention when he tells us about his expectation that dying is BETTER because that means he will be with Christ.

If you want to hammer on about some in between time of sleeping before one is with Christ you have departed from how Paul spoke about it and have taken up a new approach to this subject not one that Paul preached and therefore you are going on and on about things you can't know.

Might as well be telling us about what we will eat at the marriage supper of the Lamb.

 

[Phoneman-777]

Ecc 4:2 says..."And I declared that the dead, who had already died, are happier than the living, who are still alive."

So the writer states that the dead are happier than the living and that is not how one describes the thoughts of the thoughtless. I think you have some explaining to do.

Sorry, but when post-Reformation MSS conflicts with Reformation MSS, I almost always go with the Reformation -- because the Papal Antichrist in Rome banned Protestant Bibles and declared those who read them "anathema", but placed her seal of blessing upon these corrupted versions which came after, which says all we need to know about the issue.

The KJV says "blessed", not "happier".

"Blessed" refers to an act of God upon the creature, while "happy" is a feeling experience by a creature.

See why it's so important to read a correct translation?

Solomon was simply saying he considered the dead better off than the living because they've ceased to suffer the woes of this life, but esteemed those who've "never been" - or "never existed" - to be even better off than these two...because they've never known about this horrible planet at all.

 

[Runningman]

Then you should accept the teaching of the Bible for it teaches eternal conscious torment in the lake of fire.

Their worm dieth not (Mark 9:42-48); what makes you think they will?

But the Bible doesn’t teach that. Revelation 20:10 applies to three persons.

Mark 9:42-48 says only the worms don’t die, not the sinners. Again, that doesn’t help the view you’re preaching because it’s a false doctrine.

 

[Phoneman-777]

He writes a testimony of how he searched for meaning in life in other things and returned to the truth that it is found only in serving God.

So in giving the testimony of how he felt about different things he discovered were vanity, he expresses his feelings about them and his desire to die because he thought that would be an escape from the frustration of his life.

He is telling us what he thought during those times of soul searching. He is not trying to give us details about what really happens to people in the afterlife because he doesn't really know and we still don't. We only have what has been revealed in the New Testament by Jesus and also things that Paul said that apply to the Christian believer.

That's a popular but completely subjective argument. Does the Bible say Solomon's status as wisest man who ever lived dependent upon if he allowed said wisdom to govern his life choices? No, God bestowed this gift upon him despite knowing he would stumble horribly. Solomon knew full well that the dead ceased to exist and is why he said so authoritatively they don't know anything, feel anything, remember anything, plan anything, or have anything more to do with those yet alive. Does that sound like someone who "really doesn't know" about something when he writes so plainly and directly about the thing? C'mon, let's be honest, friend.

Paul only knows that to be absent from the body is to be present with Christ

It's high time we stop misquoting Paul here. He didn't say "is to be" -- he said "and to be".

Words mean things.

The erroneous "is to be" is a "declarative" statement which demands "I'm either down here or up there".
However, the Biblical "and to be" is merely a "preferential" statement": "I'd rather be absent from down and present up there" which allows for the presence of the third option of being "naked" and "unclothed" - which a blind man can see refers to lying in a grave without a body dead and awaiting the resurrection.

Paul simply said he wanted to be absent from this earthly body, skip the intermediate state of lying in a grave dead without a body like Job awaiting the resurrection, and just go on to be with Jesus.

and to depart in death means BETTER for him and his expectation is to be with Christ. That kind reference gives us at least an understanding that we are not to talk about or expect something in between but simply expect to be with Christ.

Yes, to depart and be with Christ is far better than to be either here or lying in the grave "naked" and "unclothed" awaiting the resurrection.

You may say that is because we will not be consciously aware of the time between. I would answer that why then talk about one. To be with Christ is to be our conversation and what we tell believers to expect, just as Paul said.

Why? Because the entire pagan world was teaching "immortal soul" heresy that traces all the way back to the Serpent in Eden, that's why. This same Paul told us God only is immortal and only those who seek immortality will gain it.

Anything else is not what the New Testament teaches regardless of your interpretation of the verses in Ecc and Job. Your interpretation of those verses should not cause you to emphasize something Paul does not even mention when he tells us about his expectation that dying is BETTER because that means he will be with Christ.

I think I've shown you how Paul's words are getting "twisted" to make wrong right. Over and over I point out Paul's reference to "naked" and "unclothed" and so far, not a single person in the Immortal Soul crowd has offered any explanation.

If you want to hammer on about some in between time of sleeping before one is with Christ you have departed from how Paul spoke about it and have taken up a new approach to this subject not one that Paul preached and therefore you are going on and on about things you can't know.

I've departed from nothing, friend. Please explain what "naked" and "unclothed" means, if it doesn't mean "lying naked in the grave without a body awaiting the resurrection".

Be very careful before you suggest it means "unsaved and lost", friend, because the collateral damage from the 10 megaton truth bomb I'll drop on it will be devastating

 

[Phoneman-777]

Then you should accept the teaching of the Bible for it teaches eternal conscious torment in the lake of fire.

Their worm dieth not (Mark 9:42-48); what makes you think they will?

You see why the Immortal Soul crowd has not credibility? You guys read "God only hath immortality" but reason "humans and worms too".

Can you see what this is such a Satanic lie? It always gets back to the crux of the issue: Satan wants to be God.

Satan knows Jesus "only hath immortality" and is so insanely jealous of that, that he attacks it by convincing humanity they are also immortal...and even worms, too, right or wrong?

 

[justbyfaith]

Do the last two verses of the book sound like someone who was YET backslidden, or had RECOVERED from being backslidden? Doesn't the author of Ecclesiastes call the words of the book which he sought out "acceptable words"? So, why are YOU trying to make them "rejectable"? Sorry, but "the dead know not anything" is as true today as the day the man wrote these words - "acceptable", "wise" and as "goads" fastened by the true "Shepherd".

As for Job, the reason a dead man is oblivious to what's happening on Earth to his sons is NOT because he iz preoccupied with the things of heaven or hell (did not Peter and Jesus tell us that the wicked are "reserved" for the fire that burns "at the end of the world" in the "judgment"?) --- they are oblivious because they are in "wait" in the "house" of the "grave" dead as a doornail, knowing nothing, hearing nothing, seeing nothing, planning nothing, feeling nothing, and praising not God.

Again, if the Soul comes into existence ONLY as a consequence of the union of the Body and the Breath of Life (Genesis 2:7 KJV), how can the Soul continue to exist when this union is dissolved at death? IT CAN'T.

We will have to agree to disagree...

And I hope that your doctrine will serve as enough of a deterrent concerning sin that you may be able to enter in to the kingdom.

Because if it doesn't, your unbelief as concerning the doctrine of hell is not going to change the fact that you will be cast into hell (everlasting torments).

 

[justbyfaith]

But the Bible doesn’t teach that. Revelation 20:10 applies to three persons.

Mark 9:42-48 says only the worms don’t die, not the sinners. Again, that doesn’t help the view you’re preaching because it’s a false doctrine.

No; it is faithful and true doctrine.

Revelation 20:10 tells us what the lake of fire will be for those who are cast therein.

That this includes more than the beast, the false prophet, and the devil, is evident in Revelation 20:15.

 

[justbyfaith]

You see why the Immortal Soul crowd has not credibility? You guys read "God only hath immortality" but reason "humans and worms too".

Can you see what this is such a Satanic lie? It always gets back to the crux of the issue: Satan wants to be God.

Satan knows Jesus "only hath immortality" and is so insanely jealous of that, that he attacks it by convincing humanity they are also immortal...and even worms, too, right or wrong?

A person can be conscious in eternal death...

For death is separation.

Physical death is separation of the spirit and soul from the body.

Spiritual, eternal death is separation of the spirit and soul from the Spirit of God and all that is good.

 

[Runningman]

No; it is faithful and true doctrine.

Revelation 20:10 tells us what the lake of fire will be for those who are cast therein.

That this includes more than the beast, the false prophet, and the devil, is evident in Revelation 20:15.

Revelation 20:15 is everyone else and it says it’s their second death. Revelation 20:10 doesn’t mention second death, but says it lasts forever for three specific individuals. I think this is actually important because this is very specific.

You’re free to interpret it to your preference, but know that that literal interpretation-free meaning of Revelation 20:10 is forever torment for three specific persons and Revelation 20:15 is death for everyone else. That’s how I will understand it so I can’t agree with what you’re saying because it doesn’t hold Biblical consistency.

One or two verses is not enough to build eternal torment doctrine when confronted with a multitude of other verses that show something different than eternal torment. If you had the Biblical support I would eagerly and glad accept it. It’s not there. I’ve already went through the Bible on this. Eternal torment is a heresy in the modern church.

 

[TMS]

A person can be conscious in eternal death...

Consciousness is not death
If a person has consciousness would it be right to say they are dead.

death = absence of life.

Death = no life, = no ability to live = no thinking or acting.

Eze 18:4 Behold, all souls are mine; as the soul of the father, so also the soul of the son is mine: the soul that sinneth, it shall die.
Ecc 9:5 For the living know that they shall die: but the dead know not any thing, neither have they any more a reward; for the memory of them is forgotten.
Ecc 9:6 Also their love, and their hatred, and their envy, is now perished; neither have they any more a portion for ever in any thing that is done under the sun.

 

[justbyfaith]

Consciousness is not death
If a person has consciousness would it be right to say they are dead.

death = absence of life.

Death = no life, = no ability to live = no thinking or acting.

Eze 18:4 Behold, all souls are mine; as the soul of the father, so also the soul of the son is mine: the soul that sinneth, it shall die.
Ecc 9:5 For the living know that they shall die: but the dead know not any thing, neither have they any more a reward; for the memory of them is forgotten.
Ecc 9:6 Also their love, and their hatred, and their envy, is now perished; neither have they any more a portion for ever in any thing that is done under the sun.

The dead may not know any thing; but they can certainly be conscious of the torment that they are going through.

Would you agree or disagree that the rich man in the story of the rich man and Lazarus was dead?

Because he was certainly conscious of his own torment in the flames.

I think that Solomon was not speaking by divine revelation but by his own thinking on the matter; I find that the book of Ecclesiastes is even semi-apocryphal but was included as inspired because it can be ascertained from the context that the author was speaking from the perspective of someone who was backslidden; and therefore not by divine authority of revelation.

 

[justbyfaith]

Revelation 20:15 is everyone else and it says it’s their second death. Revelation 20:10 doesn’t mention second death, but says it lasts forever for three specific individuals. I think this is actually important because this is very specific.

You’re free to interpret it to your preference, but know that that literal interpretation-free meaning of Revelation 20:10 is forever torment for three specific persons and Revelation 20:15 is death for everyone else. That’s how I will understand it so I can’t agree with what you’re saying because it doesn’t hold Biblical consistency.

One or two verses is not enough to build eternal torment doctrine when confronted with a multitude of other verses that show something different than eternal torment. If you had the Biblical support I would eagerly and glad accept it. It’s not there. I’ve already went through the Bible on this. Eternal torment is a heresy in the modern church.

As I have said there can be consciousness in death.

What is special about the beast, the false prophet, and the devil, that their bodies are not destroyed as you seem to think that everyone else's is destroyed but they are preserved; when they are all subjected to the same fate?

Does God specifically want to punish them more for their responsibility concerning the existence of sin in the world?

But the question arises, are not others also responsible for sin being in the world; such as Adam?

Why is Adam only subjected to "death" but not eternal conscious torment? He is more responsible than anyone else (other than the devil himself) for the play of sin in this world.

I believe that when, for example, a child molester does what they do, they become responsible for their victim being subjected to sinful life patterns at an earlier age. Should that person simply fall out of consciousness and not have to face any consequences for what they did?

 

[ChristianSubMissionary]

As I have said there can be consciousness in death.

Does the old man of sin ever truly die, or is he always alive and conscious?

Immortal soul theology destroys the Gospel itself, and immortalizes sin itself. Please think about the natural to spiritual (1 Cor. 15:46), thank you. - https://archive.org/details/sincerely-dead