Posted on 06/04/2014 6:52:46 AM PDT by SeekAndFind
Because Jesus never taught soul annihilation.
RE: Thats not a practical way to interpret that scripture for one simple reason: Every rich person is different.
The emphasis of the teaching is not on the man’s wealth, it is on the fact that the rich man DID NOT CARE about helping Lazarus.
I agree with your reading of Scripture.
I remember in both OT and NT, we are commanded not to add to or take away from God’s Word (just a sample of applicable verses):
Deuteronomy 4:2 “Ye shall not add unto the word which I command you, neither shall ye diminish ought from it, that ye may keep the commandments of the Lord your God which I command you.”
1 Timothy 4
“1 Now the Spirit speaketh expressly, that in the latter times some shall depart from the faith, giving heed to seducing spirits, and doctrines of devils;
2 Speaking lies in hypocrisy; having their conscience seared with a hot iron;
3 Forbidding to marry, and commanding to abstain from meats, which God hath created to be received with thanksgiving of them which believe and know the truth.
4 For every creature of God is good, and nothing to be refused, if it be received with thanksgiving:
5 For it is sanctified by the word of God and prayer.”
A common theme in the Bible is to do ALL of what the Lord commands and ONLY what the Lord commands, to not add to, take away from or change God’s revealed Word. It is very emphatic. Remembering King Saul’s unlawful offering (not heeding the direct revelation of the prophet Samuel):
1 Samuel 10:8 “8 And thou shalt go down before me to Gilgal; and, behold, I will come down unto thee, to offer burnt offerings, and to sacrifice sacrifices of peace offerings: seven days shalt thou tarry, till I come to thee, and shew thee what thou shalt do.”
1 Samuel 13:13 “13 And Samuel said to Saul, Thou hast done foolishly: thou hast not kept the commandment of the Lord thy God, which he commanded thee: for now would the Lord have established thy kingdom upon Israel for ever.”
He was told to wait for Samuel and he did not, he went and performed the sacrifice for himself. What’s worse, he made excuses instead of repenting when Samuel confronted him. We all sin and God will forgive, but we must repent and ask for his forgiveness, instead of stubbornly denying that we sinned.
If we look throughout all of Scripture we find a prohibition of drunkenness, but no prohibition of drinking alcoholic beverages. When we add that strict prohibition, we are making up a rule that does not exist in Scripture.
Yes, they had fermented wine in Biblical times; wine keeps very well around 55F (+/- depending on the expert you talk to; this is around normal ground temperature once you go down a few feet).
Regarding worship, once again, the Bible should be our guide; this is the WCF link:
http://www.reformed.org/documents/wcf_with_proofs/ch_XXI.html
The emphasis of the teaching is not on the mans wealth, it is on the fact that the rich man DID NOT CARE about helping Lazarus.
RE: And here is where you touch on the meaning of the parable.
Sure ( again, I am simply assuming that it is a parable, but that, I doubt ), let us not forget the FATE of the rich man. His fate is NOT metaphorical. It was meant to be a warning.
The word — torment, the fact that he is conscious, cannot be taken to be metaphorical. That would be stretching the parable ( even if we concede that it is ).
It was meant to be a warning.
http://bible-truths.com/lazarus.html
The first two paragraphs:
“Before reading my opening statement there will be many who will find fault with this paper. “What parable?” they will ask. Contrary to all the Scriptural proof that Luke 16:19-31 is indeed a classic example of a parable, there are many who deny this fact. The reason for so many desiring to take this parable literally is an attempt to add credence to the heretical teaching that God Almighty is going to torture the vast majority of all humanity who has ever lived by burning their flesh with real fire in a hellhole of insane pain for all eternity. But even if we take this parable literally, it still does not support such an absurd and evil teaching. When the truth is seen, the Rich man is overcome with great emotional torment by whatever “this flame” represents, but he is not physically being burned or barbecued in this flame..
“That the Rich man is in a most distressful situation, there is no argument. But he is not “burning in eternal hell fire.” That Lazarus is being comforted, there is also no argument, but neither is he presently basking in the sunshine of heaven. The two main figures in this parable represent whole nations of people who are either being shown the spiritual things of God or are being blinded to the spiritual things of God. The situation looks particularly grim and bleak for the Rich man, but certainly not hopeless as is taught in the pulpits of mainstream Christianity.”
RE: That the Rich man is in a most distressful situation, there is no argument.
Good, then we agree that the torment is real and the place is real and the consciousness is real.
Since the DURATION of the rich man’s situation is not mentioned, I can’t garner anything from this particular teaching.
RE: But he is not burning in eternal hell fire.
We don’t know if it is eternal or not, so we can speculate one way or the other. So, the above, for me, is speculation.
RE: That Lazarus is being comforted, there is also no argument, but neither is he presently basking in the sunshine of heaven.
Again, speculation. Simply making a statement does not de facto make it correct.
RE: The two main figures in this parable represent whole nations of people
They might represent whole nations, but nations are still made up of people and Lazarus and the rich man are presented as INDIVIDUALS.
RE: The situation looks particularly grim and bleak for the Rich man, but certainly not hopeless as is taught in the pulpits of mainstream Christianity.
Again we don’t know if it is hopeless or not. All we know is that his requests were all DENIED. Any attempts to determine whether the rich man’s situation is eternal or not is speculation.
We know these:
* The rich man is in torment.
* The place is called Hades.
* The rich man is conscious.
* His requests were all denied.
RE: That the Rich man is in a most distressful situation, there is no argument.
Good, then we agree that the torment is real and the place is real and the consciousness is real.
RE: But he is not burning in eternal hell fire.
We dont know if it is eternal or not, so we can speculate one way or the other. So, the above, for me, is speculation.
We know these:
* The rich man is in torment.
* The place is called Hades.
* The rich man is conscious.
* His requests were all denied.
THE RICH MAN
He was RICH ... Ver 19
He wore PURPLE & CAMBRIC ... Ver 19
He made MERRY (Gk: cheerful, & glad) SPLENDIDLY [like Angels-Acts 10:30] DAILY ... Ver 19
He had a nice HOUSE (”his gate”) Ver 20
He gave Lazarus FOOD [Gk. psichion, “a particle of food left over”-scraps] Ver 21 He DIED and was [Gk. entombed] Ver 22
He lifts up his eyes in [Gk. hades “the UNSEEN or IMPERCEPTIBLE] Ver 23
He is in TORMENTS ... Ver 22
He’s ALIVE with a BODY, “eyes,’ Ver 23
He desires a drop of WATER ... Ver 24
In life he got GOOD things ... Ver 25
He is respectful toward authority (”FATHER Abraham”) Ver 24
He was TORMENTED ... Ver 25
He could not cross the GULF ... Ver 26
Exhibits LOVE toward his family even while in torment (”I have five brothers”) Ver 28
PLEADS for their welfare (”Nay..”) Ver 30
LAZARUS
He was POOR ... Ver 20
Probably CRIPPLED (”was laid”) Ver 20
DISEASED (”full of sores”) Ver 20
HUNGRY (”desiring to be fed”) Ver 21
He DIED Ver 22
Is “carried by the angels into Abraham’s bosom” Ver 22
He’s ALIVE with a BODY, “finger “Ver 24
In life he got EVIL things ... Ver 25
Was COMFORTED [Gk. parakaleo = “to comfort when in distress”] Ver. 25
He could not cross the GULF ... Ver 26
Still trolling religion threads, I see.
OK, all of those things are mentioned in the teaching... how does that prove one way or the other that the rich man won’t be there for eternity?
OK, all of those things are mentioned in the teaching... how does that prove one way or the other that the rich man wont be there for eternity?
...and anyone who tries to suggest that Hell is NOT eternal has to resort to the most extraordinary mental calisthenics...
The bible says hell is not eternal.
The first death is physical death.
The second death is eternal separation from God.
And separate from God there is no life.
RE: The word was included because that is part of the whole picture that OTHERS paint into said picture that he is refuting.
Which OTHERS? Certainly not me.
Since you are arguing that punishment is not eternal, how can we glean it from THIS particular teaching?
Because Jesus never taught soul annihilation.
OK, all of those things are mentioned in the teaching... how does that prove one way or the other that the rich man wont be there for eternity?
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.