God is eternally good. Allowing Satan to mislead but then condemning his children to burning for an eternity isn't good, that isn't love, that would be an eternally evil God.
Hell is an idea invented by man who judges others and is hoping they get burned up for a long time after they leave here.
God is eternally good. Allowing Satan to mislead but then condemning his children to burning for an eternity isn't good, that isn't love, that would be an eternally evil God.
:nono:
not God's children and good luck convicting God of sin after he made the way of escape which you reject.
Joh 8:43 Why do you not understand what I say? It is because you cannot bear to hear my word.
Joh 8:44 You are of your father the devil, and your will is to do your father's desires. He was a murderer from the beginning, and does not stand in the truth, because there is no truth in him. When he lies, he speaks out of his own character, for he is a liar and the father of lies.
Joh 8:45 But because I tell the truth, you do not believe me.
Joh 8:46 Which one of you convicts me of sin? If I tell the truth, why do you not believe me?
Joh 8:47 Whoever is of God hears the words of God. The reason why you do not hear them is that you are not of God.”
Mat 25:41 “Then he will say to those on his left, ‘Depart from me, you cursed, into the eternal fire prepared for the devil and his angels.
Hell is an idea invented by man who judges others and is hoping they get burned up for a long time after they leave here.
Mat 25:41 “Then he will say to those on his left, ‘Depart from me, you cursed, into the eternal fire prepared for the devil and his angels.
Rev 20:10 and the devil who had deceived them was thrown into the lake of fire and sulfur where the beast and the false prophet were, and they will be tormented day and night forever and ever.
Jesus taught us the fire is not consuming
Luk 16:24 And he called out, ‘Father Abraham, have mercy on me, and send Lazarus to dip the end of his finger in water and cool my tongue, for I am in anguish in this flame.’
I notice you avoided addressing the actual definition of perish, and won't accept that you are agreeing with Satan by teaching that the wicked won't die, but live eternally. Um... it'll suck... but you have them eternally living in an oven.
Check this out...
Gen. 5:5 - And all the days that Adam lived were nine hundred and thirty years: and he died
like God said they died that day but you do not believe God, you call God a liar.
Gen 2:17 but you shall not eat of the tree of knowledge of good and evil. For in the day that you eat of it you shall surely die.
Luk 16:24 And he called out, ‘Father Abraham, have mercy on me, and send Lazarus to dip the end of his finger in water and cool my tongue, for I am in anguish in this flame.’
has the rich man perished ? yes
does the rich man still exist ? yes
Also, You never explained how hell is cast in hell?(Rev. 20:14) - (Matthew 10:28)
Then Death and Hades were thrown into the lake of fire.
so?
Mat 10:28 And do not fear those who kill the body but cannot kill the soul. Rather fear him who can destroy both soul and body in hell.
Luk 16:24 And he called out, ‘Father Abraham, have mercy on me, and send Lazarus to dip the end of his finger in water and cool my tongue, for I am in anguish in this flame.’
has the rich man perished ? yes
does the rich man still exist ? yes
is the rich man in charge anymore ? :nono:
is the rich man in control of anything anymore ? :nono:
the rich man has nothing left as in he is destroyed , ruined , crushed, wrecked , done for , reduced to nothing, etc.
:nono:
not God's children and good luck convicting God of sin after he made the way of escape which you reject.
Joh 8:43 Why do you not understand what I say? It is because you cannot bear to hear my word.
Joh 8:44 You are of your father the devil, and your will is to do your father's desires. He was a murderer from the beginning, and does not stand in the truth, because there is no truth in him. When he lies, he speaks out of his own character, for he is a liar and the father of lies.
Joh 8:45 But because I tell the truth, you do not believe me.
Joh 8:46 Which one of you convicts me of sin? If I tell the truth, why do you not believe me?
Joh 8:47 Whoever is of God hears the words of God. The reason why you do not hear them is that you are not of God.”
Mat 25:41 “Then he will say to those on his left, ‘Depart from me, you cursed, into the eternal fire prepared for the devil and his angels.
:nono:
no , Jesus taught us about hell
Mat 25:41 “Then he will say to those on his left, ‘Depart from me, you cursed, into the eternal fire prepared for the devil and his angels.
Rev 20:10 and the devil who had deceived them was thrown into the lake of fire and sulfur where the beast and the false prophet were, and they will be tormented day and night forever and ever.
Jesus taught us the fire is not consuming
Luk 16:24 And he called out, ‘Father Abraham, have mercy on me, and send Lazarus to dip the end of his finger in water and cool my tongue, for I am in anguish in this flame.’
It's a good thing you remember so much better than the gospel writers did. Especially since they were remembering what Jesus taught them directly, or that someone Jesus taught directly described to them, and you are remembering...what experience was it again you are remembering that makes you so certain?
In reality, the fact that you even know anything about Jesus' teachings is due to someone else's memory, since you weren't there. Are you really that confident in your own memory over those that were or that knew those who were?
And how do you know anything about God? How do you know God is good, kind, loving and just? What you know about God likely comes from what others have told you about Him, or from what you have read about Him. Thus, it is also from people's memories. How do you know that those people have remembered about God correctly?
Even if you have had experiences with God directly, what you relate to us about it here is from YOUR memory? Why should we trust YOUR memory over the writers of scripture? You might easily have "misremembered" what God is like, or even "misremembered" that you had some kind of interaction with God at all.
The attack on the memory of those that wrote scripture works just as well to negate anything you write here.
like God said they died that day but you do not believe God, you call God a liar.
Gen 2:17 but you shall not eat of the tree of knowledge of good and evil. For in the day that you eat of it you shall surely die.
Luk 16:24 And he called out, ‘Father Abraham, have mercy on me, and send Lazarus to dip the end of his finger in water and cool my tongue, for I am in anguish in this flame.’
has the rich man perished ? yes
does the rich man still exist ? yes
Then Death and Hades were thrown into the lake of fire.
so?
Mat 10:28 And do not fear those who kill the body but cannot kill the soul. Rather fear him who can destroy both soul and body in hell.
Luk 16:24 And he called out, ‘Father Abraham, have mercy on me, and send Lazarus to dip the end of his finger in water and cool my tongue, for I am in anguish in this flame.’
has the rich man perished ? yes
does the rich man still exist ? yes
is the rich man in charge anymore ? :nono:
is the rich man in control of anything anymore ? :nono:
the rich man has nothing left as in he is destroyed , ruined , crushed, wrecked , done for , reduced to nothing, etc.
We know one another's theological comfort levels and we both present respect for the Authority of scripture. It is here that I agree to disagree with your definitive stance... but tip my hat to your respect for scripture.
Jesus did teach about hell - you can find red letter passages such as in Mark 9:43. However, the hell that Jesus talks of is quite different than the hell that Way 2 Go would like to imagine.
Mark 9:42-44 KJV 42 And whosoever shall offend one of these little ones that believe in me, it is better for him that a millstone were hanged about his neck, and he were cast into the sea.
43 And if thy hand offend thee, cut it off: it is better for thee to enter into life maimed, than having two hands to go into hell, into the fire that never shall be quenched:
44 Where their worm dieth not, and the fire is not quenched.
Note that in the hell fire that Jesus speaks of, it is the fire that is not quenched, and the worm that dieth not. In Way 2 Go's version, it is the person that dieth not.
Nor is there any conflict between Old and New Testament, gospel and Revelation. When Jesus spoke in Mark 9 above, he was quoting Isaiah, and underlying assumption is that the reader will recognize the context (the reader is not supposed to be ignorant of prior scripture.)
Isaiah 66:24 KJV 24 And they shall go forth, and look upon the carcases of the men that have transgressed against me: for their worm shall not die, neither shall their fire be quenched; and they shall be an abhorring unto all flesh.
Note that in Isaiah that Jesus quotes in Mark, the picture is not of never-dying spirits roasting in an ethereal flame, but of the carcasses of dead men being burnt in a massive fire, under the open sky, in a funeral pyre, subject to the elements and larva of insects ( aka "the worm." ) Point being, it's not accurate to say Jesus didn't teach hell. It's more like Jesus didn't teach Way 2 Go.
Revelation is similar in that it also assumes that the reader has a foundation in the Old Testament. Those familiar with Isaiah and Ezekiel know that the devil is prophesied to be called out, cast down, judged, destroyed, slain, and reduced to ashes by the end of that judgment. It says so in explicit language. When people attempt to use Revelation to prove "eternal conscious torment" they start by ignoring the Bible where it says "God only hath immortality" and proceeding in ignorance of prior revelation from the prophets. Point being here, don't be so quick to cast aside Revelation. It's not in conflict with the rest of scripture on this topic, either.
Had seen this posted by a few in thread. Well worth the repost. It is short and a good verse for contemplation.
Luke 16 has the rich ruler in torment and is the Lord Jesus Christ's description. Because of this, many stumble over the righteousness demands of God. I was crushed by them and remade. I will not be correcting God today. We all must stand before Him and give account for our belief, trust, obedience, and accurate portrayal of His scriptures.
Had seen this posted by a few in thread. Well worth the repost. It is short and a good verse for contemplation.
Luke 16 has the rich ruler in torment and is the Lord Jesus Christ's description. Because of this, many stumble over the righteousness demands of God. I was crushed by them and remade. I will not be correcting God today. We all must stand before Him and give account for our belief, trust, obedience, and accurate portrayal of His scriptures.
It does say eternal punishment. It doesn't say temporary punishment, or a punishment that shall be undone or revoked or recovered from.
The question is the nature and effect of the punishment, rather than the duration. Romans 6:23 tells us that the wages of sin is death. 1 Corinthians 15:56 tells us that the sting of death is sin. James 1:15 tells us that sin, when it is finished, bringeth forth death. Malachi and John the Baptist both concur that the judgment of fire will "burn up" the wicked, an eternal punishment that leaves ash, not surviving (never-ending-tormented) souls.(Mal 4:1, Mat 3:`12). Plenty of passages in agreement that the punishment for sin is death, that the wicked shall perish, and be no more.
If the punishment of sin is death, an eternal punishment of death is a death from which there is no further resurrection. Finality.
Had seen this posted by a few in thread. Well worth the repost. It is short and a good verse for contemplation.
Luke 16 has the rich ruler in torment and is the Lord Jesus Christ's description. Because of this, many stumble over the righteousness demands of God. I was crushed by them and remade. I will not be correcting God today. We all must stand before Him and give account for our belief, trust, obedience, and accurate portrayal of His scriptures.
You said the rich man was a ruler? Maybe, maybe not. Jesus gave all the hints so that he can be called by name. He gave Lazarus a name, so who is the rich man?
Let us suppose that this fellow can be found in scripture recognized by Christ's Jewish audience at this time. Probably even someone that the Pharisees would relate to, since they were being targeted by this story. Try it for a moment, see where it leads. Perhaps try it without the spoilers first, because no one believes an answer that is handed to them (we only believe it if we find it ourselves, it seems.)
a) reduce your set to those who have five brothers (the amount of sisters was unspecified)
Spoiler
Genesis 35:23-26 KJV
(23) The sons of Leah; Reuben, Jacob's firstborn, and Simeon, and Levi, and Judah, and Issachar, and Zebulun:
(24) The sons of Rachel; Joseph, and Benjamin:
(25) And the sons of Bilhah, Rachel's handmaid; Dan, and Naphtali:
(26) And the sons of Zilpah, Leah's handmaid; Gad, and Asher: these are the sons of Jacob, which were born to him in Padanaram.
b) out of that pool (of six brothers) pick the one that is also associated with purple and fine linen
Spoiler
Genesis 49:9-12 KJV(9) Judah is a lion's whelp: from the prey, my son, thou art gone up: he stooped down, he couched as a lion, and as an old lion; who shall rouse him up?
(10) The sceptre shall not depart from Judah, nor a lawgiver from between his feet, until Shiloh come; and unto him shall the gathering of the people be.
(11) Binding his foal unto the vine, and his ***'s colt unto the choice vine; he washed his garments in wine, and his clothes in the blood of grapes:
(12) His eyes shall be red with wine, and his teeth white with milk.
c) Was your answer Jewish? Remember, he has "Moses and the prophets"
Spoiler
John 8:39 KJV(39) They answered and said unto him, Abraham is our father. Jesus saith unto them, If ye were Abraham's children, ye would do the works of Abraham.
If you figured out who the rich man is, who is Lazarus (or who does he represent?) You're not searching for a name this time, but the other details should likely give us enough clues to make this easy. Didn't Jesus say that he was outside the city, associated him with dogs that licked his sores, and indicate that he was without Moses and the prophets? Surely he didn't say this for nothing.
Once we have the symbols identified (and for what other reason did Jesus include those details) then let's see what that parable actually means. As an additional check, does the parable also agree with and find support from other parables that Jesus gave us? Does it oppose any other existing scripture?
I would suggest that it is highly unlikely that Jesus was attempting to teach something contrary to that which was already told us in existing scripture: we are already told in more than a few places that death is darkness, blackness, silence, the absence of thought, emotion, feeling, or existence, that in death there even the wicked cease from troubling. So unless you are ready to say that Jesus came to destroy the law and the prophets and that the scripture can be broken then this parable isn't saying what some suggest.
In the parable in Luke 16, I don't see a judgment seat in that picture. For that matter, God and Jesus (I use these as synonyms) are absent as well. Given that we know that the timing of the judgment is in the future after the return of Christ, and that the rich man says that he has brothers still on earth at the present time, that sort of preempts this being about the judgment or its resulting punishment, doesn't it?
I would suggest that it is highly unlikely that Jesus was attempting to teach something contrary to that which was already told us in existing scripture: we are already told in more than a few places that death is darkness, blackness, silence, the absence of thought, emotion, feeling, or existence, that in death there even the wicked cease from troubling. So unless you are ready to say that Jesus came to destroy the law and the prophets and that the scripture can be broken then this parable isn't saying what some suggest.
Luke 16:23 In Hades, where he was in torment, he looked up and saw Abraham far away, with Lazarus by his side. 24 So he called to him, ‘Father Abraham, have pity on me and send Lazarus to dip the tip of his finger in water and cool my tongue, because I am in agony in this fire.’25 “But Abraham replied, ‘Son, remember that in your lifetime you received your good things, while Lazarus received bad things, but now he is comforted here and you are in agony.
:think:
The OT dealt more concerning the physical place for our bodies to be laid in many of the conveyances. The Lord Jesus Christ did not contradict a thing, except, perhaps, what one does not surmise correctly.
No, there is serious contradiction between Jesus and the rest of the bible, if that passage uses literal elements rather than symbolic. We are left with a choice of which we will believe: that the point of Christ's speech was to bring forth new revelation about the state of death and a punishment that would precede judgment, or that his parable was using symbolic elements to illustrate a different message.
When God punishes Adam for sin, he tells him that the effect of his death is "returning to the dust from whence he came." Genesis 3:17-19
Spoiler
Genesis 3:17-19 KJV(17) And unto Adam he said, Because thou hast hearkened unto the voice of thy wife, and hast eaten of the tree, of which I commanded thee, saying, Thou shalt not eat of it: cursed is the ground for thy sake; in sorrow shalt thou eat of it all the days of thy life;
(18) Thorns also and thistles shall it bring forth to thee; and thou shalt eat the herb of the field;
(19) In the sweat of thy face shalt thou eat bread, till thou return unto the ground; for out of it wast thou taken: for dust thou art, and unto dust shalt thou return.
Job tells us that in death. the dead lay still, are quiet, and even the wicked are free from trouble and oppression. See Job 3:12-22,
Spoiler
Job 3:11-22 KJV(11) Why died I not from the womb? why did I not give up the ghost when I came out of the belly?
(12) Why did the knees prevent me? or why the breasts that I should suck?
(13) For now should I have lain still and been quiet, I should have slept: then had I been at rest,
(14) With kings and counsellors of the earth, which built desolate places for themselves;
(15) Or with princes that had gold, who filled their houses with silver:
(16) Or as an hidden untimely birth I had not been; as infants which never saw light.
(17) There the wicked cease from troubling; and there the weary be at rest. (18) There the prisoners rest together; they hear not the voice of the oppressor. (19) The small and great are there; and the servant is free from his master.
(20) Wherefore is light given to him that is in misery, and life unto the bitter in soul;
(21) Which long for death, but it cometh not; and dig for it more than for hid treasures;
(22) Which rejoice exceedingly, and are glad, when they can find the grave?
David tells us that in death ones thoughts cease to be, that even their thoughts perish. See Psalms 146;2-4
Spoiler
Psalms 146:2-4 KJV(2) While I live will I praise the LORD: I will sing praises unto my God while I have any being.
(3) Put not your trust in princes, nor in the son of man, in whom there is no help.
(4) His breath goeth forth, he returneth to his earth; in that very day his thoughts perish.
Solomon tells us that that the dead no longer experience love, hatred, envy, and don't even have the benefit of the knowledge that they are dead. See Ecclesiastes 9:4-6
Spoiler
Ecclesiastes 9:4-6 KJV
(4) For to him that is joined to all the living there is hope: for a living dog is better than a dead lion.
(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.
(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.
Isaiah tells us that the dead cannot praise God. See Isaiah 38:18-19
Spoiler
Isaiah 38:18-19 KJV(18) For the grave cannot praise thee, death can not celebrate thee: they that go down into the pit cannot hope for thy truth.
(19) The living, the living, he shall praise thee, as I do this day: the father to the children shall make known thy truth.
Psalms describes death as "going down into silence" and Jude describes an eternal death as the "blackness of darkness forever." When Jesus intended to raise someone, Jesus referred to death simply as "sleep." See Psalms 115:17, Jude 1:12-13, Luke 8:52-53, John 11:11-14
Spoiler
Psalms 115:17 KJV
(17) The dead praise not the LORD, neither any that go down into silence.
Jude 1:12-13 KJV
(12) These are spots in your feasts of charity, when they feast with you, feeding themselves without fear: clouds they are without water, carried about of winds; trees whose fruit withereth, without fruit, twice dead, plucked up by the roots;
(13) Raging waves of the sea, foaming out their own shame; wandering stars, to whom is reserved the blackness of darkness for ever.
Luke 8:52-53 KJV
(52) And all wept, and bewailed her: but he said, Weep not; she is not dead, but sleepeth.
(53) And they laughed him to scorn, knowing that she was dead.
John 11:11-14 KJV
(11) These things said he: and after that he saith unto them, Our friend Lazarus sleepeth; but I go, that I may awake him out of sleep.
(12) Then said his disciples, Lord, if he sleep, he shall do well.
(13) Howbeit Jesus spake of his death: but they thought that he had spoken of taking of rest in sleep.
(14) Then said Jesus unto them plainly, Lazarus is dead.
Paul tells us that the judgment awaits us after death, not an indeterminate holding or punishment preceding judgment. See Hebrews 9:27. Regardless, it should be common sense that justice requires judgment before punishment, not the other way around.
Spoiler
Hebrews 9:27 KJV(27) And as it is appointed unto men once to die, but after this the judgment:
When Paul comforts the survivors of the dead, he does not tell them that their loves ones are in heaven or otherwise with Jesus. Rather he tells them that Jesus will raise them from the dead as he returns. To paraphrase William Tyndale, wouldn't Paul have rather comforted them telling them that their loved ones were in heaven, if only he had known it? See 1 Thes 4:13-18
Spoiler
1 Thessalonians 4:13-18 KJV(13) But I would not have you to be ignorant, brethren, concerning them which are asleep, that ye sorrow not, even as others which have no hope.
(14) For if we believe that Jesus died and rose again, even so them also which sleep in Jesus will God bring with him.
(15) For this we say unto you by the word of the Lord, that we which are alive and remain unto the coming of the Lord shall not prevent them which are asleep.
(16) For the Lord himself shall descend from heaven with a shout, with the voice of the archangel, and with the trump of God: and the dead in Christ shall rise first:
(17) Then we which are alive and remain shall be caught up together with them in the clouds, to meet the Lord in the air: and so shall we ever be with the Lord.
(18) Wherefore comfort one another with these words.
Likewise, Paul also says that if we are not raised, we are without hope and of all men most miserable. Paul wasn't aware of any sort of reward or existence without resurrection. He, like Jesus, also refers to death as sleep, rather than conscious experience. In another place, he says that those who died in faith have not received the promises. See 1 Corinthians 15:15-22, also Hebrews 11:13.
Spoiler
1 Corinthians 15:15-22 KJV(15) Yea, and we are found false witnesses of God; because we have testified of God that he raised up Christ: whom he raised not up, if so be that the dead rise not.
(16) For if the dead rise not, then is not Christ raised:
(17) And if Christ be not raised, your faith is vain; ye are yet in your sins.
(18) Then they also which are fallen asleep in Christ are perished.
(19) If in this life only we have hope in Christ, we are of all men most miserable.
(20) But now is Christ risen from the dead, and become the firstfruits of them that slept.
(21) For since by man came death, by man came also the resurrection of the dead.
(22) For as in Adam all die, even so in Christ shall all be made alive.
Hebrews 11:13 KJV
(13) These all died in faith, not having received the promises, but having seen them afar off, and were persuaded of them, and embraced them, and confessed that they were strangers and pilgrims on the earth.
So what are the possible consequences of these possible choices?
1) Jesus thought he was relating real events and reality. Jesus is incorrect but the prophets and apostles are correct.
2) Jesus thought he was relating real events and reality. Jesus breaks his own rule of "the scripture cannot be broken" and the prophets and apostles of both testaments are mistaken in their beliefs and doctrine. Likewise, the Holy Spirit that authored the scriptures both before and after this parable was spoke is mistaken about the reality of death.
3) Jesus never intended to relate real events or reality, and expected his audience to recognize his meaning through symbolic elements.There is no conflict between Old or New Testament, the words of Jesus or his apostles, the Son of God does not contradict the Father or Holy Spirit.
It seems a little strange to me that anyone would choose option 1 or 2 without having given fair examination to option 3.
If death involved a conscious experience, it would seem a little strange to see the scripture consistently describe it as sleep, darkness, silence, the absence of being, freedom from oppression, the absence of thought, hatred, love, envy, and self-awareness, from which our only hope is resurrection from the dead. A resurrection from the dead, I might add, which Paul says is the definition of the gospel.
Let's keep looking at that parable. What might be the intent of placing the symbol of the Jewish nation in the Greek Hades, and placing a symbol of the gentile without Moses and the prophets (yet who places his help in God) in the bosom of Abraham? Is it possible that Jesus was telling the Pharisees something with this upside-down juxtaposition?
Luke 16:23 In Hades, where he was in torment, he looked up and saw Abraham far away, with Lazarus by his side. 24 So he called to him, ‘Father Abraham, have pity on me and send Lazarus to dip the tip of his finger in water and cool my tongue, because I am in agony in this fire.’25 “But Abraham replied, ‘Son, remember that in your lifetime you received your good things, while Lazarus received bad things, but now he is comforted here and you are in agony.
:think:
The OT dealt more concerning the physical place for our bodies to be laid in many of the conveyances. The Lord Jesus Christ did not contradict a thing, except, perhaps, what one does not surmise correctly.
Matt. 22:23-34
Mat 22:29 But Jesus answered them, “You are wrong, because you know neither the Scriptures nor the power of God.
Mat 22:32 ‘I am the God of Abraham, and the God of Isaac, and the God of Jacob’? He is not God of the dead, but of the living.”
If God really did torture people in Hell for an eternity for not trusting in his goodness, they would be eternally right, reminded each painful day why they didn't trust him.
Hell is a fictional creation of primitive men, for those who reject God death is the eternal consequence.
Lon, do you realize that God being the "God of the Living" actually contradicts any assumption that the dead are currently alive? The passage is important enough to be repeated in multiple gospels:
Matthew 22:31-32 KJV
(31) But as touching the resurrection of the dead, have ye not read that which was spoken unto you by God, saying,
(32) I am the God of Abraham, and the God of Isaac, and the God of Jacob? God is not the God of the dead, but of the living.
Mark 12:26-27 KJV
(26) And as touching the dead, that they rise: have ye not read in the book of Moses, how in the bush God spake unto him, saying, I am the God of Abraham, and the God of Isaac, and the God of Jacob?
(27) He is not the God of the dead, but the God of the living: ye therefore do greatly err.
Luke 20:37-38 KJV
(37) Now that the dead are raised, even Moses shewed at the bush, when he calleth the Lord the God of Abraham, and the God of Isaac, and the God of Jacob.
(38) For he is not a God of the dead, but of the living: for all live unto him.
Had this been in another context, there might be confusion, but Jesus specifically says that this is spoken as an intended proof of the resurrection of the dead. So here's my question for you: if Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob are alive right now, then how does God being the God of the Living prove the resurrection of the dead? If they be alive at this moment, then they need not rise for "God of the Living" to be applicable.
If you prefer the more eloquent presentation of the question, here's William Tyndale's response when Sir Thomas More used the same phrase "God of the Living" to claim that the saints were alive in heaven:
Spoiler
from "An Answer to Sir Thomas More's Dialogue"
And when he proveth that the saints be in heaven in glory with Christ already, saying, ‘If God be their God, they be in heaven, for is not the God of the dead;’ there he stealeth away Christ’s argument, wherewith he proveth the resurrection: that Abraham and all saints should rise again, and not that their souls were in heaven, which doctrine was not yet in the world. And with that doctrine he taketh away the resurrection quite and maketh Christ’s argument of none effect. For when Christ allegeth the scripture, that God is Abraham’s God, and addeth to, that God is not God of the dead but of the living, and so proveth that Abraham must rise again, I deny Christ’s argument, and I say with M. More, that Abraham is yet alive, not because of the resurrection, but because his soul is in heaven.
And in like manner, Paul’s argument unto the Corinthians is nought worth: for when he saith, ‘If there be no resurrection, we be of all wretches the miserablest; here we have no pleasure, but sorrow, care, and oppression; and therefore, if we rise not again, all our suffering is in vain: ‘ ‘Nay, Paul, thou art un-learned; go to Master More, and learn a new way. We be not most miserable, though we rise not again; for our souls go to heaven as soon as we be dead, and are there in as great joy as Christ that is risen again.’ And I marvel that Paul had not comforted the Thessalonians with that doctrine, if he had wist it, that the souls of their dead had been in joy; as he did with the resurrection, that their dead should rise again. If the souls be in heaven, in as great glory as the angels, after your doctrine, shew me what cause should be of the resurrection?
The net effect of that argument backfires ... it doesn't support "the dead have awareness" but rather quite the opposite. The saints cannot be alive or Christ disproves his own argument in front of the Sadducees.
Matt. 22:23-34
Mat 22:29 But Jesus answered them, “You are wrong, because you know neither the Scriptures nor the power of God.
Mat 22:32 ‘I am the God of Abraham, and the God of Isaac, and the God of Jacob’? He is not God of the dead, but of the living.”
... which brings us back to the original question. Is it preferable that Jesus contradict the inspiration of the Holy Spirit in both Old and New Testaments (and disprove his own arguments) or is it worth considering that his parable might invoke non-literal elements for specific effect and meaning?
If God tormented people in a hell for eternity for not trusting in his goodness, perhaps with enough time he would prove his goodness through that torment, confess their sins, and be saved. Psalms 51:17 does say "the sacrifices of God are a broken spirit: a broken and a contrite heart, O God, thou wilt not despise." Are you saying that you don't think that an eternity of torment would eventually persuade those that did not believe that God is love?
1 John 4:16 KJV
(16) And we have known and believed the love that God hath to us. God is love; and he that dwelleth in love dwelleth in God, and God in him.
If God really did torture people in Hell for an eternity for not trusting in his goodness, they would be eternally right, reminded each painful day why they didn't trust him.
Hell is a fictional creation of primitive men, for those who reject God death is the eternal consequence.
Lon, do you realize that God being the "God of the Living" actually contradicts any assumption that the dead are currently alive? The passage is important enough to be repeated in multiple gospels:
Matthew 22:31-32 KJV
(31) But as touching the resurrection of the dead, have ye not read that which was spoken unto you by God, saying,
(32) I am the God of Abraham, and the God of Isaac, and the God of Jacob? God is not the God of the dead, but of the living.
Mark 12:26-27 KJV
(26) And as touching the dead, that they rise: have ye not read in the book of Moses, how in the bush God spake unto him, saying, I am the God of Abraham, and the God of Isaac, and the God of Jacob?
(27) He is not the God of the dead, but the God of the living: ye therefore do greatly err.
Luke 20:37-38 KJV
(37) Now that the dead are raised, even Moses shewed at the bush, when he calleth the Lord the God of Abraham, and the God of Isaac, and the God of Jacob.
(38) For he is not a God of the dead, but of the living: for all live unto him.
Had this been in another context, there might be confusion, but Jesus specifically says that this is spoken as an intended proof of the resurrection of the dead. So here's my question for you: if Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob are alive right now, then how does God being the God of the Living prove the resurrection of the dead? If they be alive at this moment, then they need not rise for "God of the Living" to be applicable.
If you prefer the more eloquent presentation of the question, here's William Tyndale's response when Sir Thomas More used the same phrase "God of the Living" to claim that the saints were alive in heaven:
Spoiler
from "An Answer to Sir Thomas More's Dialogue"
And when he proveth that the saints be in heaven in glory with Christ already, saying, ‘If God be their God, they be in heaven, for is not the God of the dead;’ there he stealeth away Christ’s argument, wherewith he proveth the resurrection: that Abraham and all saints should rise again, and not that their souls were in heaven, which doctrine was not yet in the world. And with that doctrine he taketh away the resurrection quite and maketh Christ’s argument of none effect. For when Christ allegeth the scripture, that God is Abraham’s God, and addeth to, that God is not God of the dead but of the living, and so proveth that Abraham must rise again, I deny Christ’s argument, and I say with M. More, that Abraham is yet alive, not because of the resurrection, but because his soul is in heaven.
And in like manner, Paul’s argument unto the Corinthians is nought worth: for when he saith, ‘If there be no resurrection, we be of all wretches the miserablest; here we have no pleasure, but sorrow, care, and oppression; and therefore, if we rise not again, all our suffering is in vain: ‘ ‘Nay, Paul, thou art un-learned; go to Master More, and learn a new way. We be not most miserable, though we rise not again; for our souls go to heaven as soon as we be dead, and are there in as great joy as Christ that is risen again.’ And I marvel that Paul had not comforted the Thessalonians with that doctrine, if he had wist it, that the souls of their dead had been in joy; as he did with the resurrection, that their dead should rise again. If the souls be in heaven, in as great glory as the angels, after your doctrine, shew me what cause should be of the resurrection?
The net effect of that argument backfires ... it doesn't support "the dead have awareness" but rather quite the opposite. The saints cannot be alive or Christ disproves his own argument in front of the Sadducees.
... which brings us back to the original question. Is it preferable that Jesus contradict the inspiration of the Holy Spirit in both Old and New Testaments (and disprove his own arguments) or is it worth considering that his parable might invoke non-literal elements for specific effect and meaning?
What is resurrected when the soul and spirit of man do not die? It's the body.
1 Cor. 15:35 But some man will say, How are the dead raised up? and with what body do they come?
Abraham was alive and aware, though his body was in the tomb. Jesus made it clear what being the God of the living meant.
Luke 16:23-25
And in hell he lift up his eyes, being in torments, and seeth Abraham afar off, and Lazarus in his bosom. And he cried and said, Father Abraham, have mercy on me, and send Lazarus, that he may dip the tip of his finger in water, and cool my tongue; for I am tormented in this flame. But Abraham said, Son, remember that thou in thy lifetime receivedst thy good things, and likewise Lazarus evil things: but now he is comforted, and thou art tormented.
Lon, do you realize that God being the "God of the Living" actually contradicts any assumption that the dead are currently alive? The passage is important enough to be repeated in multiple gospels:
Spoiler
Matthew 22:31-32 KJV
(31) But as touching the resurrection of the dead, have ye not read that which was spoken unto you by God, saying,
(32) I am the God of Abraham, and the God of Isaac, and the God of Jacob? God is not the God of the dead, but of the living.
Mark 12:26-27 KJV
(26) And as touching the dead, that they rise: have ye not read in the book of Moses, how in the bush God spake unto him, saying, I am the God of Abraham, and the God of Isaac, and the God of Jacob?
(27) He is not the God of the dead, but the God of the living: ye therefore do greatly err.
Luke 20:37-38 KJV
(37) Now that the dead are raised, even Moses shewed at the bush, when he calleth the Lord the God of Abraham, and the God of Isaac, and the God of Jacob.
(38) For he is not a God of the dead, but of the living: for all live unto him.
Had this been in another context, there might be confusion, but Jesus specifically says that this is spoken as an intended proof of the resurrection of the dead. So here's my question for you: if Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob are alive right now, then how does God being the God of the Living prove the resurrection of the dead? If they be alive at this moment, then they need not rise for "God of the Living" to be applicable.
If you prefer the more eloquent presentation of the question, here's William Tyndale's response when Sir Thomas More used the same phrase "God of the Living" to claim that the saints were alive in heaven:
Spoiler
from "An Answer to Sir Thomas More's Dialogue"
And when he proveth that the saints be in heaven in glory with Christ already, saying, ‘If God be their God, they be in heaven, for is not the God of the dead;’ there he stealeth away Christ’s argument, wherewith he proveth the resurrection: that Abraham and all saints should rise again, and not that their souls were in heaven, which doctrine was not yet in the world. And with that doctrine he taketh away the resurrection quite and maketh Christ’s argument of none effect. For when Christ allegeth the scripture, that God is Abraham’s God, and addeth to, that God is not God of the dead but of the living, and so proveth that Abraham must rise again, I deny Christ’s argument, and I say with M. More, that Abraham is yet alive, not because of the resurrection, but because his soul is in heaven.
And in like manner, Paul’s argument unto the Corinthians is nought worth: for when he saith, ‘If there be no resurrection, we be of all wretches the miserablest; here we have no pleasure, but sorrow, care, and oppression; and therefore, if we rise not again, all our suffering is in vain: ‘ ‘Nay, Paul, thou art un-learned; go to Master More, and learn a new way. We be not most miserable, though we rise not again; for our souls go to heaven as soon as we be dead, and are there in as great joy as Christ that is risen again.’ And I marvel that Paul had not comforted the Thessalonians with that doctrine, if he had wist it, that the souls of their dead had been in joy; as he did with the resurrection, that their dead should rise again. If the souls be in heaven, in as great glory as the angels, after your doctrine, shew me what cause should be of the resurrection?
The net effect of that argument backfires ... it doesn't support "the dead have awareness" but rather quite the opposite. The saints cannot be alive or Christ disproves his own argument in front of the Sadducees.
... which brings us back to the original question.
Is it preferable that Jesus contradict the inspiration of the Holy Spirit in both Old and New Testaments (and disprove his own arguments) or is it worth considering that his parable might invoke non-literal elements for specific effect and meaning?
Those who died went either Hades (death and hades are thrown eventually into the lake of fire (hell) not to be confused).
One side of Hades as Luke 16 portrays, was Paradise, the other a place of torment. Any mention of the dead not 'aware' is in relation to their bodies and their awareness on earth. They were completely removed from 'life' on earth.
When Jesus died, He told the thief on the cross that he would be with Him in paradise. The Lord Jesus Christ preached to captives 'in prison' (Paradise). Because Abraham and all the other men of faith needed to be covered by the DBR of the Lord Jesus Christ, He explained to them in prison where their trust and hope were met in Him.
3 days later, The Lord Jesus Christ rose with those saints. He appeared to the disciples and went to His Father. He came back down, spent time with the disciples then rose again with all the saints after.
Now, when any die, they either go to hades or heaven (no longer Paradise).
Such does not contradict any scripture, but it does go against your beliefs concerning them. -Lon
Luke 16:23 In Hades, where he was in torment, he looked up and saw Abraham far away, with Lazarus by his side. 24 So he called to him, ‘Father Abraham, have pity on me and send Lazarus to dip the tip of his finger in water and cool my tongue, because I am in agony in this fire.
