-Removed-
Your "point 5" which I posted above has already revealed your willingness to completely circumvent the physical, cosmological, geographical and rational constraints associated with claiming that the Lazarus parable is actually a real life event, so I'm not at all surprised that you continue to reinforce this temporal dilemma a with comments like this.
I don't think I am "completely circumvent" scientific things for believing the teaching any more that being unable to explain the virgin birth of Christ or the resurrection of Christ.
God looks for us to supplement our ignorance of some of His mysteries with obedience. We know enough to respond with obedience to His revealed will.
IE.
"The things that are hidden belong to Jehovah our God; but the things that are revealed, to us and out children forever, that we may do all the words of this law." (Deut. 29:29)
My point is that I think if I read the Luke 16 passage and tremble at Christ's word and allow it to shine on my conscience, enliven my spiritual eyes, and encourage me to live close to Him, I have obtained the benefit God intends. That my curiosity is not completely satisfied is quite secondary.
I know some rebellious people went down alive into Sheol in the incident with Korah and 250 followers of him in Numbers 16 and that Hades is the New Testament equivalent of the OT Sheol.
"But if Jehovah brings about a new thing, and the ground opens its mouth and swallows them up with all that belongs to them, and they descend alive into Sheol, then you will understand that these men have despised Jehovah." (Num. 16:30)
"So the earth opened its mouth ... and everyone who belonged to Korah ...descended alive into Sheol; and the earth closed over them, and they perished ..." (v.33)
It is not too much at all to believe that Hades is a place where men go, either typically dead or perhaps another way of God's choosing.
The prophet Amos in Amos 9:2 seems to suggest that Sheol is a place one could dig down to if the digging could possibly be completed:
"Though they dig into Sheol, From there My hand will take them; ..." (Amos 9:2)
In this age when we hear about space warps and time warps it should be easier rather than harder, to imagine God has some places we cannot get to except with His power to put us there.
The rich man being in flames in torment yet able to carry on a conversation is also not shocking. God regulated the heat of the flame somehow for the three Hebrew men thrown into Nebuchadnezzar's furnace. Yet they came out completely not singed in clothing or skin. God can regulate for whoever He wills the effect of a flame.
So I do not "completely circumvent" the physical or physiological or geographic details. I simply admit that they all have not been revealed to me.
All the "judgments" you spoke about occur after the Lazarus event so therefore in order for you to maintain your position you have to find a way whereby Lazarus has died,
I don't think I said that. I specified two judgments. I did not say that God is limited to those.
I did not mention, by the way, the judgment seat of Christ which is strictly for those for whom the issue of eternal salvation has already been settled in the affirmative. We Christian [including the saved Paul] must all appear before the judgment seat of Christ.
And the passage of passage of 2 Peter 2:9 tells us that God knows how to "keep the unrighteous under punishment for the day of judgment" .
The suffering part of Hades is therefore like a jail where some are kept under punishment until the day of a final judgment. The immediate context of that verse about the unrighteous pertains to the people of Sodom and Gomorrah in verse 6.
Souls of unrighteous being kept under punishment before the great white throne judgment or before the judgment of the living before the millennial is not a problem.
been judged, gone to ("be hung in chains of suffering as a warning to those on other worlds"😉 hell, been observed by someone who is not in hell and has himself observed this person who is not in hell and have a conversation with them no less...(how this occurs in a real life scenario is still to be explained),
Here you either are attempting to put words in my mouth or you're referring to a long past conversation we had before. This one is immediately before me. I don't want to mix the two and get confused.
then be seen also by Jesus who has not yet been given the keys to and hell/Hades...and all this before the crucifixion, atonement and any judgement.
So err, yes, I think being able to at least explain how this occurs within anyone's understanding of the space-time continuum would certainly lend a modicum of credence to yet another of your ding-bat attempts to support your ghastly vision of the hellish afterlife which you are so fond of.
I will comment on this latter.
5 edits
Jesus who has not yet been given the keys to and hell/Hades...and all this before the crucifixion, atonement and any judgement.
So err, yes, I think being able to at least explain how this occurs within anyone's understanding of the space-time continuum would certainly lend a modicum of credence to yet another of your ding-bat attempts to support your ghastly vision of the hellish afterlife which you are so fond of.
I find your tone in this paragraph and in the last to be unnecessarily disrespectful.
Some of us are looking for more light than heat of emotion which calls for slinging phrases around like "ding-bat" and your other remarks about SCI-FI and cognitive dissonance and being "fond of" punishment and other provoking zingers you want to use to convey your contempt.
If you are trying to poison the well of discussion so you don't have to consider how others think about these difficult passages (as you advertized), you're doing a good job.
In this atmosphere fellowship about how I take the passage is not encouraged. If Christ's redemption could be retroactively applied to the believers prior to Calvary per (Rom. 3:25) condemnation can be also.
It is not an insurmountable difficulty, if one is hunting for one, that God determined destinies for Lazarus and the rich man before Calvary.
And if it had clearly occurred AFTER Calvary, I think your objection would be not diminished. It bears repeating that if Jesus Christ is unrighteous to misrepresent God to convey such a teaching then He is a sinner.
I believe that He "knew no sin" (2 Cor. 5:21)
3 edits
Originally posted by sonship
So err, yes, I think being able to at least explain how this occurs within anyone's understanding of the space-time continuum would certainly lend a modicum of credence to yet another of your ding-bat attempts to support your ghastly vision of the hellish afterlife which you are so fond of.
I agree that you should check your notes. In the thread of a Difficult Teaching to Robbie you wrote concerning Christ's redemption:
1 Peter 3:18
For Christ also died for sins once for all, the just for the unjust, so that He might bring us to God, having been put to death in the flesh, but made alive in the spirit.
If Christ died for ALL, even those before Calvary, then "the space time continuum" you must believe, does not prevent God from condemning or justifying in Christ before Calvary.
In Abraham's ancient confession that "the Judge of all the earth [will] do justly " (Gen. 18:25) I also believe.
I do not think the teaching of Luke 16:1-13 is reason to doubt this. Apparently, you feel it is so much a threat to the perfect just dealing of God that you are prone to explain it away accusing others who accept in terms of various insults.
4 edits
-Removed-
I think some of the things you believe and construct to support your biblical view are frankly ding-bat-ish** and are more like SiFi than a reasoned approach to scripture.
It is the other way around. Some Sci Fi is sometimes vaguely reminiscent of something taught in Scripture. Reality is more fascinating then man's fiction.
You have that right to reverse things in your thinking if you wish.
The very first verse in the Bible about God creating the heavens and the earth establishes forever His authority and power far exceed man's.
So what is essentially communicated by Jesus teaching Luke 16:19-31 cannot be beyond God's authority and power and moral judgment, to execute.
I also honestly believe you are deceiving yourself in this matter. I'm not intending to offend I'm speaking the truth about how I perceive your beliefs.
I cannot take scissors and cut the passage out of my New Testament.
I cannot say Jesus was lying.
I cannot say Jesus was mistaken.
If I work really really hard I might pretend somewhat that the words do not really mean there is retribution or salvation awaiting those who die.
If there is no peace of salvation and punishment of damnation after death then Jesus was wrong to so clearly convey that message.
I am not sure how many times you need to be told this.
You're going to have to envoke some Bart Erhman like theory of misquoting Jesus and decide He never uttered those words.
Then if you start down that road, why not call into question more and more words of Jesus?
Either you must say "The interpretation you give is WAY, WAY off and self deceiving" or you have to take a position that Christ never taught Luke 16:19-31.
**the "being hung out in chains" statement for example.
The ONLY reason you are banging on and on about Lazarus at all, is because it supports your grotesque ideology of eternal punishment in a burning hell.
Excuse me. You started this thread and kept it alive for over 420 posts. You ASKED people to come here and "bang" one thing or another.
So I comment about what you advertized, ie. how do Christians think about the matter of eternal judgment. And in standing up to your scrutiny (which I don't mind ) you accuse me of banging on and on.
You would prefer I lay down and just let you walk over my convictions ? You asked to see how others think about these things. If you didn't really mean it it is better not to invite others' thoughts.
Even if you do somehow excise Luke 16:19-31 from the New Testament on this matter, its like "one down, nine more to go."
Do you believe that there is such a thing in this universe as an ultimate offence against an ultimate goodness? I think there must be.
I think there must be a final and ultimate goodness and an unrecoverable offense against it. I believe that that termination point where God's tolerance comes to an end is set by God.
I don't insist that the point of God's final tolerance is where I think it should be. But I do think it is there somewhere where God says it should be.
And it is righteous of Him to warn us that that line does exist past which reconciliation to God is no longer available.
I have read tracts on hell which I thought were bad. And God even rebuked Moses for misrepresenting Him. Given all that, He still has revealed that reconciliation and redemption go up to a terminal point.
3 edits
-Removed-
What you believe is morally reprehensible and by no stretch of the imagination "the perfect just dealing of God".
I assume that you are taking the approach that Christ did indeed teach Luke 16:19-31. But I understand that you think I have a terribly, horribly, horrendously wrong misunderstanding of the passage.
Well, that is possible. I don't take all of my interpretations as infallible. But I would be concerned that the lengths you go to to argue that the words are being misunderstood do not betray too desperate an attempt to bury the teaching of Christ.
Now notice what Jesus said immediately following the discussed passage in Matthew 17:1
"And He said to His disciples, It is impossible for causes of stumbling not to come, but woe to him through whom they come."
That disciples of Jesus will offend other disciples of Jesus is IMPOSSIBLE to NOT happen. Woe, though if they are deliberate or sinful in nature.
A Christian like me takes at face value the warning of Luke 16:19-31. I don't mean to smugly beat any other brother over the head with it as if I am "Oh so FOND" of the matter of God's punishment.
Apparently, your disagreement with my interpretation goes beyond just disagreement. You are really stumbled by the interpretation - "ghastly" you describe it. You really make no secret about showing contempt for those who believe eternal punishment is a teaching.
You seem to want to make the issue - ME. I don't come up to your standard of decency because I believe the warning is clear in that passage and in others. For you the litmus test for the decency of a Christian is how they feel about this hated teaching.
It is impossible that there should not be some stumbling offenses between Christians. There is no reason to use disagreement on this point as a bludgeon to castigate believers who take at face value teachings which are nearly impossible to exegetically nullify.
To recall:
The God who so loved the world, has created and maintains by his executive will, an eternal (before time began and after time ceases to exist) place of unimaginable horror and suffering for those who reject the offer of salvation. Furthermore, and in reference to my OP, some support the notion that Christ with his angels will stand and witness (spectate) this flesh-melting apocalypse.
The word that Antichrist and his followers will be tormented in the presence of the Lamb and His holy angels I do not take as you take. You take it to mean that for eternity Jesus has nothing else to do but enjoy the sight of Antichrist and his followers being tormented.
That is your caricature. IE. "Jesus forever will do nothing else but enjoy gazing down every moment for eternity at these punished enemies. How horribly unrepresentative of what Jesus is! "
Anyway, I am warned not to change anything in the prophecy to make it more to my liking.
" And if anyone takes away from the words of the scroll of this prophecy, God will take away his part from the tree of life and out of the holy city, which is written in this scroll " (Rev. 22:19)
I do not see an exception for Revelation 14:9-12 - that THAT passage is OK for us to tamper with. Did you see any exception mentioned for that passage ? Where?
I think the warning not to add or take away applies to that section of the scroll too. Including the horrific words -
"And the smoke of their tormenting goes up forever and ever; and they have no rest day and night, those who worship the beast and his image, and whoever receives the mark of his name."
Now you can spit at me, scoff at me, hiss, fret, frown, suck your teeth at me, turn up your nose in disgust, look down your indignant spectacles at me all you want sir. I don't have to LIKE that passage. I am just called to believe it.
Jesus turn and rebuked the two disciples who wanted to call fire down from heaven and burn up a town which rejected Him. The same Jesus also taught Luke 16:19-31 and God says will look upon His last enemies with His holy angels as they are tormented.
Why can't I believe BOTH revelations ?
You explain to me why I should have to use one to suppress the other. I trust my Father who has revealed BOTH truths to us.
If you cannot believe both truths that is up to you.
I want to believe both truths for my God has spoken them both.
Now. You sonship, support this horror so much, you believe it to be true so much, that you will insult mine and other readers intelligence by claiming that the parable of Lazarus is an actual real event which however occurred outside of the normal time continuum in some sort of time-vacuum or something.
My comment about your reference to space time continuum was only meant to mean, God justifying or condemning man before the historical event of Calvary, should not be a problem.
The physical part of the matter is just one of the many mysteries which I am sure is not beyond God's authority and power to bring about.
I did say that that God has some realms which are somehow on another plane should be less problematic to conceive in the 21rst Century than ever before.
I don't think I insult the intelligence of skeptics who want to preach multiple universes at me while scoff if I say God may have some unusual places that only by His power He could put us.
How am I insulting some skeptic's intelligence when he wants me to conceive of an infinite number of universes and I say God has some places where He can work out certain aspects of His will?
And this is the level you will stoop to support this horrible sleight on the nature of god.
If this is the best you can do - seriously - why not just step away from it and accept the eternal suffering is itself parabolic, unrighteous, unfair and completely out of alignment with a god of unending mercy.
The other possibility is that you just do not realize WHO it was who died upon that cross, slashed, tormented, disgraced out of His love to save sinners.
The other real possibility is that your unbelief in eternal punishment is commensurate with an under appreciation of Who was nailed on the cross for us and what it meant to God for that to happen.
And I think you could spend at least an equal amount of time before God in prayer about that.
Now let me ask you this: If a sinner dies yet is still existent, if not physically alive, do you have any reason to believe that he will not continue to have the same heart?
Do you have any reason to believe that continued sinning will not merit continued punishment ? That is if annihilation into non-existence is not an option.
2 edits
-Removed-
Matthew 17:1 isn't talking about you sonship. Your self-centric (not self-centred as in selfish) perspective is clouding your judgement. All you do is look for more scriptures to support your preconceived POV.
Divegeester is offended by what I believe....ah...but the Lord said that disciples of Jesus will offend people so that's OK and my opinion must still be correct.
You sound like one of the JWs.
Okay. Stop right there.
No I do not believe JUST because I am a nuisance to someone therefore it follows I am doing God's will. So drop that concept.
Secondly, if you're not offended by my believing in eternal punishment then you could stop acting like you are.
Now to the clouding of my judgment.
You indeed have acted as if Christians who take eternal punishment as the plain truth out from the mouth of Christ are really horrible and indecent people. Have you not given that impression?
"How can you people possibly think that way??"
I think you make it a personal matter of being offended. You fight it like the messenger is the one that needs to be attacked rather than the message.
If I am wrong about this, I am sorry. The way you make it personal seems like you have a need to defend your belief with castigating the personality of the disagreeing one.
There is the kindness of God the Scripture.
There is also the severity of God in the Scripture.
Being a whole eternal God why should I not expect that there would be both?
"Behold the kindness and the severity of God" (Rom. 11:21)
To preach only His severity would be lopsided and skewed.
To preach only His kindness would also be warped and lopsided.
We should not be as a cake unturned (Hosea 7:8)
King James Bible
Ephraim, he hath mixed himself among the people; Ephraim is a cake not turned.
Holman Christian Standard Bible
Ephraim has allowed himself to get mixed up with the nations. Ephraim is unturned bread baked on a griddle.
That means all cooked on only one side and all uncooked on the opposite side. You have to turn the cake over to cook it on both sides.
When we teach about God's mercy and kindness we should emphasize how great His love is, even His mercy endures forever. All true.
But we should not be "a cake unturned". When it is called for we have to tell the truth about God's severity. He hates sin. He will never ever give up His hatred of sin and of sinning.
To the unreconciled sinning one He will be severe. Such an unforgiven one who rejects His love and redemption will know forever just how God feels about those sins and that sinning.
And yes, there is no argument that that is the worst thing that is imaginable. He who knew no sin became sin that we might become the righteousness of God in Him.
The Divine love of man and the Divine hatred of sin meet together on the cross of Jesus. And we are commanded to believe into this One.
I don't think God requires us to grovel in the dust.
I don't think God requires us to shrink in cowering about hell every moment.
I do think He commands that we believe in Christ, the One who knew no sin but became sin for us that we might become the righteousness of God in Him. He carried up our sins in His body onto the tree.