Eternal torment VS Annihilation

[Ahwatukee]

It is A VERY BIG DEAL. The following questions are affected by whether the narrative of the Rich Man and Lazarus is a parable or Bible truth presented by God the Son.

1. Is Jesus God with divine knowledge or is He a mere man?

2. Is God the only one who knows the truth about the afterlife?

3. Did anyone know about two divisions in Sheol/Hades before Christ revealed them?

4. Did anyone know that souls and spirits would be in conscious comfort or conscious torment in Hades before Christ revealed it?

5. Did anyone connect Sheol to Hades before Christ and is Hades still a reality?

6. Did Christ Himself literally go to Sheol/Hades for three days and three night where He was very much awake and alive while preaching to the spirits in prison?

7. Are the false doctrines of Soul Sleep and Annihilationism utterly destroyed by this narrative?

Well said!

 

[itbtsyp]

Richard Bauckham is just another writer. Why would you place the meaning of the event of the rich man and Lazarus in his or anyone else's hands?

I know he's just a writer, and I don't feel like I'm placing the meaning in his hands. I offered it up as a view point to consider. I view Bauckham as a writer who did a study on the comparable folkloric stories in ancient literature that were prominent of the time when Jesus spoke about it.

I don't see what's wrong with considering an authors comparison here. If we denounce all writers as just another writer, therefore we can't hear what they have to say, which seems like you're implying, where are we when anything is written about as things to consider? Almost as if we'd be saying, "I'll only consider them if i agree with what they're saying".

Just another author, yes. A possible folkloric story Jesus might have been referencing, also yes. I can see Jesus using the same story as a non parable as well, can't you? If Bauckham is correct, and the folkloric story existed as a common tale of the time, it doesn't prove or disprove the rich man and Lazarus is a parable.

"In addition parables use symbolism to represent what is literal, e.g. sower = the Lord, wheat = the son's of the kingdom, the weeds = the wicked, harvesters = the angels, etc. In opposition, the rich man and Lazarus uses the real names of Abraham, Lazarus and Moses, as well as the real location of Hades".

I like your explanation here.

 

[Ahwatukee]

I know he's just a writer, and I don't feel like I'm placing the meaning in his hands. I offered it up as a view point to consider. I view Bauckham as a writer who did a study on the comparable folkloric stories in ancient literature that were prominent of the time when Jesus spoke about it.

I don't see what's wrong with considering an authors comparison here. If we denounce all writers as just another writer, therefore we can't hear what they have to say, which seems like you're implying, where are we when anything is written about as things to consider? Almost as if we'd be saying, "I'll only consider them if i agree with what they're saying".

Just another author, yes. A possible folkloric story Jesus might have been referencing, also yes. I can see Jesus using the same story as a non parable as well, can't you? If Bauckham is correct, and the folkloric story existed as a common tale of the time, it doesn't prove or disprove the rich man and Lazarus is a parable.

"In addition parables use symbolism to represent what is literal, e.g. sower = the Lord, wheat = the son's of the kingdom, the weeds = the wicked, harvesters = the angels, etc. In opposition, the rich man and Lazarus uses the real names of Abraham, Lazarus and Moses, as well as the real location of Hades".

I like your explanation here.

Thank you for your honest reply. If I seem adamant about the event of the rich man and Lazarus, it is because I have been dealing with and contending for the truth of it being a literal event for many years. Those who interpret it as a parable, are usually those who believe in annihilation in order to get rid of the literal torment that the rich man was/is suffering. The others are those who believe in soul-sleep, because the event shows two men physically dying with their spirits being conscious and aware in Hades, one comforted and the other in torment, which kills the idea of soul-sleep.

 

[Nehemiah6]

I view Bauckham as a writer who did a study on the comparable folkloric stories in ancient literature that were prominent of the time when Jesus spoke about it.

God's truths have nothing to do with folklore, fairy tales, legends, and fables. Nor any mythology, whether Babylonian, Greek, or Roman. So there is nothing *comparable*. Jesus gave us divine revelations.

 

[dcontroversal]

I would offer..another way of looking at it. Two kinds of "dead" spoken of in the bible..

1# dead, never to rise to new spirit life

2# dead asleep, awaiting for the wake up call on the last day ……(no snooze alarms)

When those dead asleep and those still reigning with Christ by faith on the last day in the twinkling of the eye.. both as one rise and receive their new promised incorruptible body

I would think the bible defines the usage of the words. Dead asleep waiting for the wake up call. "Arise" for the believers glory unto God. No glory with the other kind of death (second)

John11:4 When Jesus heard that, he said, This sickness is not unto death, but for the glory of God, that the Son of God might be glorified thereby.

There he divides death into kinds. Glory and no glory and underscores it the glory by thereby. You could call it the kind of death that glories God not seen. Our grieving is not as the world as the end of the matter but the new beginning.

Satan as usual it would seem would have men believe its all one in the same to take way the seed of understanding.. If God said one kind he would say two kinds. The upside down god of this world loves to turn things upside down to take away the spiritual un-seen understanding of faith.

Again the Holy Spirit I think defines the kind of death to his glory not the kind that will not rise. But those who will.

When Jesus first said he would not die It would seem clear not die like any human but one to the glory of God. Later in verse 14 he tells them plainly he is dead .It does not contradict the first words "This sickness is not unto death_ but defines the parable of life and death how it relates to the word sleep as dead asleep. Not dead, dead, dead, dead, 4 days

John11:14 Then said Jesus unto them plainly, Lazarus is dead. (4 days)

By all human standard he had no life no qualifier by which he could arise.

The one who arose in three day is the ressurection .It his second call it would seem we are all hoping to hear.

Number two is false.....the rich man in hell is very much conscience and aware of what is happening and again I state....everyone that denies this is saying loud and clear the three following things

a. Jesus used an imaginary place with something that is not true to teach truth

b. Deny the inspired WORDS USED IN THIS STORY

c. Peddle it as a parable when in fsct it is a genuine, real account......

And your analogy above does not bear out...was it a parable when he spoke of the woman taken in adultry, the woman at the well, the account of the Roman soldier, the widow woman casting into the treasury and on and on and on......everything he spoke WAS NOT A PARABLE and the fact you yanked that out of context to prove a false point reeks of dishonesty

 

[dcontroversal]

Why would Jesus tell the thief on the cross that he would be with Him that day in paradise?

I asked an SDA one time and he told me the comma is in the wrong place......however there is no punctuation in the original Greek correct?

It is clear to me....Jesus did not use some imaginary place with things not true to teach truth and that is exactly what everyone of them believe and or accept or promote to peddle soul sleep.......

 

[itbtsyp]

God's truths have nothing to do with folklore, fairy tales, legends, and fables. Nor any mythology, whether Babylonian, Greek, or Roman. So there is nothing *comparable*. Jesus gave us divine revelations.

It's okay if you didn't seek out Bauckham and read chapter 4 in his book that I was referencing the other day , but to say the story of the rich man and Lazarus and the 2 stories in ancient literature that became folklore in the time of Jesus is silly. Read them and you'll see, it's the same story just flipped. BTW I don't ascribe to soul sleep, or annihilation.

I do however find it interesting that the stories are so similar.

Thank you for your honest reply. If I seem adamant about the event of the rich man and Lazarus, it is because I have been dealing with and contending for the truth of it being a literal event for many years. Those who interpret it as a parable, are usually those who believe in annihilation in order to get rid of the literal torment that the rich man was/is suffering. The others are those who believe in soul-sleep, because the event shows two men physically dying with their spirits being conscious and aware in Hades, one comforted and the other in torment, which kills the idea of soul-sleep.

And thank you for your honest reply as well. I was hoping to have a conversation about the similarities, and not have these ideas just swept under a rug just because of old arguments. I thought perhaps introducing a new scenario to an old argument might make for something new to consider. (again, not trying to side one way or the other on soul sleep or annihilation). But it is the subject of the OP.

 

[UnderGrace]

It's okay if you didn't seek out Bauckham and read chapter 4 in his book that I was referencing the other day , but to say the story of the rich man and Lazarus and the 2 stories in ancient literature that became folklore in the time of Jesus is silly. Read them and you'll see, it's the same story just flipped. BTW I don't ascribe to soul sleep, or annihilation.

I do however find it interesting that the stories are so similar.



And thank you for your honest reply as well. I was hoping to have a conversation about the similarities, and not have these ideas just swept under a rug just because of old arguments. I thought perhaps introducing a new scenario to an old argument might make for something new to consider. (again, not trying to side one way or the other on soul sleep or annihilation). But it is the subject of the OP.

In a discussion forum we should be able to reference works of scholars if we wish... as well it is important to understand the other side to even begin to refute it or know why you disagree with it.

For years I discussed only from the position I knew... but then when I met someone who know both sides equally well that is when I realized that if I really wanted a studied position I had to look deeper and wider.

Jesus met people where they were ... and I can see him drawing in people's prior knowledge on all levels... after all He did talk about farming on occasion too!!

 

[JesusLives]

Good day JesusLives,

It is the body that is not immortal. However, everyone who comes into the world their spirit exists forever in one state or another. At the time of death those who are in Christ, their spirit departs and goes to be in the presence of the Lord (2 Cor.5:6, Phil.1:23). In opposition, when the unbeliever dies, just as the rich man of Lazarus fame, their spirit departs and goes down into Hades where they will remain in torment in flame until the great white throne judgment. As scripture states, there will be a resurrection of both righteous and the wicked. The righteous will receive immortal and glorified bodies, while the unrighteous will receive a resurrected body mete for their punishment in the lake of fire. Life and death are both states of conscious existence.

Life = Eternal existence in the joy of the Lord in the kingdom of God

Death = Eternal existence in separation from God in the lake of fire



The problem with your claim above is that, if the resurrection and catching away was to take place at the second coming (end of the age), then it would put the living church through the entire wrath of God, which believers are not appointed to suffer (1 Thess.5:9) and which time period Jesus said He would keep us out of (Rev.3:10). The bottom line is that, because Jesus already suffered God's wrath on behalf of every believer satisfying it completely, then God's wrath no longer rests upon those who in Christ and therefore we will not be exposed to it.

Regarding we not being immortal, we have many scriptures that demonstrate that the spirit does indeed goes on, conscious and aware after death. The event of the rich man and Lazarus is a good example of this, that is unless it is forced into a parable and therefore getting rid of the information which reveals the rich man and Lazarus both dying and yet showing their spirits as being conscious and aware down in Sheol/Hades, with Lazarus in a place of comfort and the Rich man in a place of torment in flame.

Then we have Moses and Elijah appearing before Jesus on the mount of transfiguration. We have Jesus telling the thief crucified with Him saying, "today you will be with me in paradise," which begs the question, since Jesus and the thief both died that very day, how could Jesus promise him that they would both be in paradise that same day? I hope that you are not going to use that apologetic which says that the comma was in the wrong place so that the verse reads as "Truly I say to you today, you will be with me in paradise," instead of "Truly I say to you, today you will be with me in paradise."

Then you have the souls of the fifth seal martyrs under the altar in heaven who are very much conscious and aware, having a conversation with the Lord. (Rev.6:9-12)

And there are many other examples demonstrating that the spirit is conscious and aware after the death of the body.

Believers become immortal and glorified at the resurrection of the dead, with the living being changed immortal and glorified and caught up with them. This all happens prior to God's wrath at least seven years prior to when Jesus returns to the earth to end the age, which is the second coming. In fact, Rev.17:14, 19:14 shows those who will have previously been caught up following the Lord out of heaven riding on white horses and wearing the fine linen that she will have received at the wedding of the Lamb, which takes place in heaven during the time of God's wath.

I won't talk about a comma but I will say that Jesus said to the woman wanting to cling to him after he raised from the dead that he told her he had not yet ascended to his Father in heaven which would lead me to believe he lay sleeping/dead in the grave until Sunday morning so if Jesus had not gone to heaven on the day he died the thief didn't either and is still sleeping/dead in the grave until Jesus returns in the second coming.

As to your we won't go through tribulation.... The Jews would disagree with you that God spared them from going through the plagues that hit Egypt. They were there and witnessed the plagues but were spared from some of them. The same for us in the end of time and the plagues falling God's people will be spared.

 

[Ahwatukee]

I won't talk about a comma but I will say that Jesus said to the woman wanting to cling to him after he raised from the dead that he told her he had not yet ascended to his Father in heaven which would lead me to believe he lay sleeping/dead in the grave until Sunday morning so if Jesus had not gone to heaven on the day he died the thief didn't either and is still sleeping/dead in the grave until Jesus returns in the second coming.

Greetings JesusLives,

Jesus' and the thief's "body" was sleeping/dead in the tomb, but at the time of death their spirits departed and went down to Sheol/Hades. When Jesus said, "the Son of man will be in the heart of the earth 3 days and 3 nights" I believe He was speaking about His spirit being in Hades in that same area where Abraham and Lazarus were, that place of comfort/paradise. Otherwise, how would you explain what Jesus said to the man crucified with him:

"And Jesus said to him, “Truly I tell you, today you will be with Me in Paradise."

Since they both died that very day and their bodies were buried, which they were, what did Jesus mean when He said "today you will be with me in paradise?" The answer is that He could only be referring to their spirits departing from their bodies and going to that place of comfort/paradise in Hades.

As to your we won't go through tribulation.... The Jews would disagree with you that God spared them from going through the plagues that hit Egypt. They were there and witnessed the plagues but were spared from some of them. The same for us in the end of time and the plagues falling God's people will be spared.

Regarding the coming wrath of God which will be carried out via the seals, trumpets and bowl judgments, I would suggest that you do a detailed study on them. For it will be a time of wrath like no other since man has been on the earth.

First of all, as Jesus said regarding God's coming wrath "For at that time there will be great tribulation, unmatched from the beginning of the world until now, and never to be seen again. If those days had not been cut short, nobody would be saved."

The common error is that people do not differentiate between common trials and tribulation, which the Lord said we would have vs. God's coming, unprecedented wrath. It is the later that believers are not appointed to suffer. By the time the seals, trumpets and bowl judgments are completed, the majority of the earths population will have been decimated and all human government dismantled. (See Daniel 2:31-46)

The underlying principle is that, because Jesus already experienced God's wrath on behalf of every believer, satisfying it completely, then the wrath of God no longer rests upon those who believe in His Son and therefore will not go through His wrath. We have been credited with righteousness and reconciled to God through faith in Christ and therefore will not be exposed to God's wrath. See Isaiah 53:5, Rom.5:9, I Thess.1:10, 5:9 and Rev.3:10.

 

[Nehemiah6]

so if Jesus had not gone to heaven on the day he died the thief didn't either and is still sleeping/dead in the grave until Jesus returns in the second coming.

No one is sleeping in their graves. You won't find any souls and spirits by digging under their tombstones. Check it out for yourself! That is one of the most ABSURD ideas to come along. And it is primarily because the Hebrew word Sheol was INCORRECTLY translated as "the grave".

You call yourself "JesusLives" and if Jesus lives then there are no souls and spirits in any graves. Those who are in Christ go to be with Christ in Heaven (where He is seated at the right hand of the Father), since to be absent from the body is to be present with the Lord. Those who are not in Christ go to Hades.

 

[ToastAndTea]

Nothing like a parable .What's a parable like.

Jesus said with out parable he spoke not .That enough to convince me. What what it take to convince you? The words "this is a parable"?

The word parable is not in chapter 14 . Are there any parable in that chapter?

That's an oversimplification. Jesus did not "only" speak in parables. He spoke in parables to the crowd because they did not understand the spiritual truths he was saying. When we was speaking to the disciples in Luke 16, he spoke plainly. It's not a parable, will never be a parable and no matter how many times you repeat otherwise, will still never be a parable.

 

[Ahwatukee]

No one is sleeping in their graves. You won't find any souls and spirits by digging under their tombstones. Check it out for yourself! That is one of the most ABSURD ideas to come along. And it is primarily because the Hebrew word Sheol was INCORRECTLY translated as "the grave".

You call yourself "JesusLives" and if Jesus lives then there are no souls and spirits in any graves. Those who are in Christ go to be with Christ in Heaven (where He is seated at the right hand of the Father), since to be absent from the body is to be present with the Lord. Those who are not in Christ go to Hades.

I totally agree! The words "Sheol/Hades" should never be translated as "grave, tomb or sepulcher." The proper Hebrew and Greek words for them are qeber and Mnemeion, respectively. Sheol and Hades, (referring to the same place) should always be interpreted as the "place of departed spirits. The realm of the dead.

 

[garee]

That's an oversimplification. Jesus did not "only" speak in parables. He spoke in parables to the crowd because they did not understand the spiritual truths he was saying. When we was speaking to the disciples in Luke 16, he spoke plainly. It's not a parable, will never be a parable and no matter how many times you repeat otherwise, will still never be a parable.

He said without parables he spoke not. Why complicate it rather than search out the unseen understanding?

He simply spoke to multitude (everyone) in parable .Hiding the spiritual understanding from every believer and unbeliever . When he would get the disciples alone he would teach them "how to hear Him" so they could understand the food they knew not of .Parables using the proper prescription like 2 Corinthians 4:18 is the teaching tool designed so that those can hear as his understanding gives us ears to hear what the Spirit is saying to the churches..

No interpretation of the signified language of God no understanding.

Psalm 49:4 I will incline mine ear to a parable: I will open my dark saying upon the harp.

Psalm 78:I will open my mouth in a parable: I will utter dark sayings of old:

Proverbs 1:5-7 King James Version (KJV) A wise man will hear, and will increase learning; and a man of understanding shall attain unto wise counsels: To understand a proverb, and the interpretation; the words of the wise, and their dark sayings. The fear of the Lord is the beginning of knowledge: but fools despise wisdom and instruction.

Remember the whole period of Kings in Israel was used as a parable up until the reformation.

Not sure why but the 1 century reformation brought on be the death of Jesus one of the most glorious events .To me like the crossing of the Red Sea. Today in most circles it seems to get swept under the rug as if it never occurred .

Luke 16 is full of parables. The one involving Lazarus is in a series of them . Jesus did not speak in parables for the one purpose to how we can hear Him and then to trick up some giving them a literal interpretation again in the middle of a series

That kind of teaching is un heard of through the Bible.

The answer to the para ble hidden from those who refuse to seek it out is easy. Do not go above all things written in the law (Moses) and the prophets (sola scriptura . Which would include taking away the understanding of the parable

And he said unto him, If they hear not Moses and the prophets, neither will they be persuaded, though one rose from the dead
Luke 16:31

What do you think the conclusion of the parable is. Some would say the occlusion to the parable is do not look to the spiritual underrsatanding .

 

[ToastAndTea]

He said without parables he spoke not. Why complicate it rather than search out the unseen understanding?

He simply spoke to multitude (everyone) in parable .Hiding the spiritual understanding from every believer and unbeliever . When he would get the disciples alone he would teach them "how to hear Him" so they could understand the food they knew not of .Parables using the proper prescription like 2 Corinthians 4:18 is the teaching tool designed so that those can hear as his understanding gives us ears to hear what the Spirit is saying to the churches..

No interpretation of the signified language of God no understanding.

Psalm 49:4 I will incline mine ear to a parable: I will open my dark saying upon the harp.

Psalm 78:I will open my mouth in a parable: I will utter dark sayings of old:

Proverbs 1:5-7 King James Version (KJV) A wise man will hear, and will increase learning; and a man of understanding shall attain unto wise counsels: To understand a proverb, and the interpretation; the words of the wise, and their dark sayings. The fear of the Lord is the beginning of knowledge: but fools despise wisdom and instruction.

Remember the whole period of Kings in Israel was used as a parable up until the reformation.

Not sure why but the 1 century reformation brought on be the death of Jesus one of the most glorious events .To me like the crossing of the Red Sea. Today in most circles it seems to get swept under the rug as if it never occurred .

Luke 16 is full of parables. The one involving Lazarus is in a series of them . Jesus did not speak in parables for the one purpose to how we can hear Him and then to trick up some giving them a literal interpretation again in the middle of a series

That kind of teaching is un heard of through the Bible.

The answer to the para ble hidden from those who refuse to seek it out is easy. Do not go above all things written in the law (Moses) and the prophets (sola scriptura . Which would include taking away the understanding of the parable

And he said unto him, If they hear not Moses and the prophets, neither will they be persuaded, though one rose from the dead
Luke 16:31

What do you think the conclusion of the parable is. Some would say the occlusion to the parable is do not look to the spiritual underrsatanding .

Matthew 13:34

Jesus spoke all these things to the crowds in parables. He did not tell them anything without using a parable. So was fulfilled what was spoken through the prophet: “I will open My mouth in parables; I will utter things hidden since the foundation of the world.”

Jesus used parables when talking to the crowds. He did not use these parables when talking to the disciples. The reason he did this was because they didn't understand the spiritual truths he was trying to say.

The point of this whole discussion is: Is Luke 16 a parable? If so, it undermines the whole doctrine of conscious living eternal torment after death. If it's not a parable, it's a story about a literal event that took place. And therefore we need to heed the words of Jesus.

 

[Nehemiah6]

The reason he did this was because they didn't understand the spiritual truths he was trying to say.

Yes, parables ILLUSTRATED spiritual truths.

But the narrative of the Rich Man and Lazarus does not illustrate anything. It is a REVELATION OF THE AFTERLIFE. So why do people resent such a revelation? That is the real issue.

 

[Karraster]

Just trying to understand. If the rich man/Lazarus story is not a parable, then how is it that body parts are mentioned....finger, tongue? Because we know the physical body goes to the grave and is buried, who can argue with that? So then where does the spirit go? Some say to Abraham's bosom, but then how is it the disembodied spirit has fingers and tongues? How is it they can see and speak to each other? Don't seem literal to me, but I'm certainly no authority.

 

[Karraster]

Another question.....where did the people go who lived and died before Abraham?

 

[ToastAndTea]

Yes, parables ILLUSTRATED spiritual truths.

But the narrative of the Rich Man and Lazarus does not illustrate anything. It is a REVELATION OF THE AFTERLIFE. So why do people resent such a revelation? That is the real issue.

Yes I agree. The language used within this account is far too detailed for a parable. It is definitely a revelation and moreso because Jesus was talking to the disciples. But one wonders as you say, why people resent such a revelation.

 

[ToastAndTea]

Another question.....where did the people go who lived and died before Abraham?

Abraham's bosom is not literally "Abraham's bosom", it's a term used to refer to comfort in the Biblical place of Sheol, where both the righteous dead and the righteous undead are. Therefore everyone from the foundation of the world who has died, has either been to be with the Lord in Paradise, or is in a place of eternal suffering.