Daniel, your whoel premise is that because Christ only used ‘real events’ in other parables or analogies, that that means He is prevented from using soemthign that isn’t real to make a point-
I’ve explained several tiems why it was important for Him to use the MYTH of Abraham’s bosom to drive the p oint home to the heretics who taught a false religion, and hwo wre leading people astray-
[[Nonsense. The sinless Christ would never teach of a place and experience that nowhere existed,]]
Sure he would- to those who needed to see that their religion and teachings were false- Nothing about the Pharisees teachings was true- once Again, Christ used their own myth to show how WRONG they were about Heaven and hell-
[[You have Christ affirming a myth.]]
Christ is NOT affirming a myth- No more so than Christ is telling everyone He is a literal vine when he gave the parable of a vine and branches- Is it a ‘reality’ as you put it that Christ is a vine? Of course not- it’s simply an allegorical message to ILLUSTRATE A POINT- Noone in their rightm ind believes the ‘absudity’ as you put it that Christ is a literal vine
IF Christ is able to use NON LITERAL allegories to illustrate a point- then I think He’s able to use non literal myths to drive the point home that the Pharisees were WRONG
[[for which you have zero precedent.]]
Sorry, but the parable of the rich man IS the precedent for the reasons already explained
[[And Jude quoted a true part of the book of Enoch, showing that coming from a source that is not wholly inspired does not make it fiction. Paul even quote a pagan prophet. ]]
You again missed the point- The book describes the myth
There is no ‘Abraham’s bosom’- So the fact that Christ mentions it at all proves He’s doing so only to drive home a point to the Pharisees- As does the FACT that the man in sheol wanted his tongue and lips cooled- Obviously then, since Christ DID use this analogy for a specific purpose already explained, He DID teach by setting a precedent-
There was no ‘holding place’ for those who were bound for heaven, nor one for hell- There is no soul sleep-
There are so many things wrong with the whole parable according to the bible that it MUST be nothing more than a parable using a MYTH to drive a point home
[[That is absurd. If that was the case then the Lord would have taught something like that the rich man simply was buried and was tormented,]]
Now we’re thinking for Christ are we? The facts speak for themselves- There is too much wrong with the parable to be taken as a literal event that took place- or reference to a literal event-
Most bible commentators and theologians conclude that the parable can’t be true because it flies In the face of the rest of the bible’s teachings- Yet some persist in declaring it must be true- despite the evidence to the contrary, and despite the clear fact that the MYTH of Abraham’s bosom, purgatory and paradise is a distinctly Babylonian myth, and NOT a biblical truth
But whatever, like I said- you need to narrow down your points- I’m not sitting here for hours answering a boatload of points-
You main premise seems to be that because Christ never used ‘non-real’ analogies before, He is prevented from ever doing so- I’d like to see a verse that explains this rule-
Your next premise seems to be that He couldn’t possibly use ‘science fiction’ to convince anyone because doing so would be ‘fraud’
Not sure how you come to that conclusion- especially in light of the FACT that He clearly used a false teaching by the Pharisees to show them how wrong their false teaching really is
So why didn't Christ correct the 'superstition' or the 'Babylonian myth' that there is conscious existence after death?
When Jesus said, "I am the vine" everyone understands that he was not saying he is made out of wood, but rather that he was using a figure of speech; a metaphor, a sustained metaphor. We understand the difference between literal and figurative.
However, at least a vine is something that actually exists. You are essentially asking us to believe that Jesus used a superstitious myth that is not only supposedly contrary to Biblical teaching, but also purportedly describes a non-existent state of existence; namely, two men in conscious existence after they died.
It is evident from you posts they you have already concluded from what you have been taught by some group (I don't yet know which one - probably some Millerite or Russellite group or offshoot) based on some proof texts that the Bible teaches the annihilation of the wicked, or that there is no conscious existence after a person dies. You then use what you have already concluded that the Bible teaches on the subject as a controlling presupposition when you look at Luke 16.
I do not know what the extent of your knowledge of Scripture but I'm pretty sure nothing I say is going to change what you think the Bible teaches on the subject of conscious existence after death. However, I don't believe it is even possible for you to give a coherent account of
1. what is essentially a contradiction in terms, i.e., a non-existent state of existence2. and why Christ would even use in the first place the aforementioned contradiction in terms that you claim is a 'superstition' or 'Babylonian myth' that there is conscious existence after death, which you claim he did as a 'precedent', and why he would use such a superstitious myth which is supposedly contrary to Biblical teaching without correcting it.
Cordially,
The more your try the more desperate and absurd you are exposed to be.
I’ve explained several tiems why it was important for Him to use the MYTH of Abraham’s bosom
Wrong, for all the Scriptural reasons given. Real names were never used in parable and the Lord never used any non-existent place or experience as representing reality, including in metaphors. And in Lk. 16 He separated the Truth from the additions of tradition. As does Scripture do in other places, such as referring the book of Enoch, which also contains fiction.
Christ is NOT affirming a myth- No more so than Christ is telling everyone He is a literal vine when he gave the parable of a vine and branches
You are Wrong again, for once again the Lord is using a real and known physical reality, not some unknown growth, as a metaphor which is analogous to another reality.
[[for which you have zero precedent.]]
Sorry, but the parable of the rich man IS the precedent for the reasons already explained
What?! You want to use something outside Scripture for Scriptural precedent? In our next episode Bob434 will have the Lord channeling Vedic mythology as representing Biblical reality.
There is no ‘Abraham’s bosom’-
Well that was easy. The Lord taught that there was, since He was not teaching myth, but you say there was none. Of course we must believe the gospel according to Bob434.
There was no ‘holding place’ for those who were bound for heaven, nor one for hell- There is no soul sleep-
Indeed, as a conscious man in torments does not equate to soul sleep, yet the blood of bulls and goats could not take away sin, and the way into the holiest in the Heavenly place was not yet opened, and thus Christ went to Paradise the day of His death, descending first into lower places of the earth, led captivity captive and gave gifts unto men, and many of the OT saints arose and appeared unto many.
There is too much wrong with the parable to be taken as a literal event that took place- or reference to a literal event-
Rather, There is nothing wrong with the account of Christ, only with those who relegate the Son of God as teaching science fiction and scientific error.
You main premise seems to be that because Christ never used ‘non-real’ analogies before, He is prevented from ever doing so- I’d like to see a verse that explains this rule-
Let me help you. Since the Lord could not lie of deceive, and He never taught any place or experience that never existed, and since the spiritual reality that He taught of in parables and figurative language was real, then so were the physical things that He used to illustrate them, then you have a rule of both integrity and precedent.
Now if you want to argue that since it is nowhere explicitly said that the Lord could not teach of fictional places and experiences, then there are some Mormons who would like to meet you.
Your next premise seems to be that He couldn’t possibly use ‘science fiction’ to convince anyone because doing so would be ‘fraud’ Not sure how you come to that conclusion- especially in light of the FACT that He clearly used a false teaching by the Pharisees to show them how wrong their false teaching really is
Once again the Lord no more taught a false teaching due to using some true elements of tradition then the Holy Spirit also did then doing the same with Truth from other books which also contain myths (the book of Enoch has 40 feet - or 400 depending on source - giants in Genesis). And as said, the Lord validated the True aspects while correcting the errors.
And in so doing the Lord is show you how wrong your false teaching really is !