Posted on 04/29/2009 12:48:26 PM PDT by ScubieNuc
See post #22
or read this...
Good question. Here’s my answer:
The parable of the Rich man and Lazarus (Luke 16: 19-31).
It is the fifth parable in a series of parables starting in Luke 15. These parables are in response to the Pharisees and scribes talking about how Jesus receives sinners and tax collectors.
The first parable is about the lost sheep and how a shepherd will leave the safe 99 to find the one lost sheep. The second parable is about the woman and the ten pieces of silver, and how she cleans house to find the one missing piece. The third parable is about the prodigal son who once was lost but now is found. The fourth parable is about the rich man and his steward who settles his debts for less then what was owed. The fifth parable is about the rich man and Lazarus.
A few interesting things to note:
When Jesus spoke to the groups he spoke ONLY in parables.
Mat 13:34 All these things spake Jesus unto the multitude in parables; and without a parable spake he not unto them:
The parables all deal with money on some level.
The parables are about the value of the “least of these” over the money value.
Before starting the parable of Lazarus, Jesus states that the “Law and Prophets UNTIL John”.
The Pharisees are not happy with Jesus’s teachings.
After the Lazarus story, you read in Luke 17 about how Jesus heals 10 lepers but only ONE comes back and thanks Jesus. That one was a Samaritan, not a Jew.
The main reason people say that this isn’t a parable is because Jesus uses a name, so let’s look at that name. Lazarus is the Greek word for the Hebrew name Eliezer. What is interesting about that name is Abraham was going to give his inheritance to Eliezer of Damascus (Gen. 15:2-4), but God provided Abraham with his own lineage.
This raises the question as to why Jesus didn’t name the rich man. He does describe the rich man though, so we can analyze what those things tells us. The rich man was dressed in purple and fine linen (cambric). Purple was known as a royal color worn by kings and royalty. Cambric or fine linen was clothing worn by priests (Ex. 28:5, 25:4) and it decorated the Tabernacle (Ex. 26:1). Judah was given the position of ruler of the Jews (Gen. 49:10). Judah also had five brothers from his Leah (Reuben, Simeon, Levi, Issachar, Zebulun). Because Judah was the leader of the nation of Israel, Israelites were known as followers of Judah or what we now call Jews.
From this breakdown, we can see that the rich man symbolizes the nation of Israel, including their priests and kings. Lazarus symbolizes those outside of Abraham’s inheritance or Gentiles. This makes sense when you consider who Jesus was talking with and who was upset by it in Luke 15. It also fits in with the other parables dealing with who was lost and what real value is.
One other aspect to look at is, does this story make sense if it reveals an actual event?
Is being wealthy and well dressed a sin deserving Hell?
Is being thrown into the street, being poor, and begging a virtue worthy of Heaven?
If Lazarus ascended into heaven, then doesn’t that contradict Jesus saying that no man has ascended in to heaven in John 3:13?
How many people could actually fit in Abraham’s bosom?
Is the torments the rich man is feeling, physical? If so, how does he see through the flames? People on fire close their eyes. How does the rich man talk coherently about saving his brothers or being tormented, or wanting water from Lazarus’s finger tip? If you are burning up, what good is moisture on the tip of a finger? Why not cry to have your skin or eyes drenched?
Why does the rich man go to hell without a day in court?
How does the rich man recognize Abraham? If the rich man recognizes Abraham how would he have “heard” Moses (who lived hundreds of years after Abraham)?
When you look at the totality of actual events would be like and the context of the story, it becomes clear that it is a parable telling of value and the fallen state of Abraham’s descendants.
God made His Word very clear he doen’t need an interpreter.
Folks are always wanting to bring their preconceptions and misconceptions to the table, rather than letting the text speak for itself.
The Bible doesn't say that those (whose name were not in the book of life) were annihilated either. You are just assuming (adding) that. I, on the other hand, am using the first example as a model for what happens with the second. And since no additional language exists to distinguish it from the former (i.e. "they were annihilated", "they ceased for all time", "they were blotted out from existence", etc.), I take the conservative tac. So, I am not adding anything. Annihilation, on the other hand, is a gross addition, since it has no supporting language.
(btw is it "Revelation", no 's').
>>However, “forever and ever” implies and unending, timeless quality to the experience.<<
I guess a lot of this depends on what the bible means when it says “death” and what it means when it says “forever and ever”.
One thing that is interesting is that when we are not discussing this issue, everyone knows what death means. It is an ending. Complete and total. Yet when we discuss the bible, people want to make it mean something else. Why is that?
And what does “forever and eve” really mean. That one is not so simple. Most would call it “eternity” (as strongs does). If one sees it simply from the perspective of this human existance, it means time never ending. For someone who sees linear time as merely one of the attributes of this “part” of creation, then “eternity” means something else.
I like to say that time is a current flowing in an ocean called eternity. When the bible says “forever and ever, I a, thinkingof what happened to Han Solo at the end of “The Empire Strikes Back”. He will be forever and ever in that position of torment, yet time does not “flow” for him.
Either that, or the bible seriously contradicts itself on this whole issue.
Seriously.
The author in the OP discusses it as well: http://www.jeremyandchristine.com/articles/lazarus.html
This has been something that was difficult for me as well, and the OP nails it where you live with this analogy:
Suppose for a moment that a wonderful man—Mr. Right—offers a marriage proposal to the woman he loves. "Marry me," he says, "and I will give you a life like you've never dreamed of before. You will be loved with the greatest commitment and passion that any woman has ever known. I will give you the finest house with all of the wonderful things you've ever wanted, and you will be happy for the rest of your days!"
Now suppose the woman is very flattered by the proposal, but is uncertain about whether or not she is ready for such a commitment. Asking for a few more days to think it over, Mr. Right answers, "You are welcome to take more time, but it's only fair that I warn you what will happen if you decline my generous offer. Your only option, other than spending paradise with me, is to be thrown into my underground dungeon, have your eyeballs plucked from their sockets, your fingers and toes cut off, and continually be burned with a soldering iron every hour, on the hour, for the rest of your life."
What do you suppose would be going through the young woman's mind at a time like this? I imagine that would change the way she feels about the man considerably. She might have previously accepted Mr. Right's proposal because of her love for him, but is there much chance of that now? Surely not. If she takes him seriously, she'll undoubtedly marry him, but not as much for love as out of genuine terror at the alternative.
Is this God's way of doing things? Does God want His people to turn to Him out of fear that they will be tortured otherwise? Where is the love in that? If everyone really believed in this doctrine, wouldn't that properly tarnish their concept of the Savior? I would imagine some might even have a hard time calling Him "Savior" at all. How merciful can it be to create a never-ending torture pit for everyone and then save only a few from it?
>>So, if annihilation is given to the unsaved why not “eat drink and be merry”, be evil and swift annihilation awaits you. No punishment! just a swift soul death!
Good question. And it stands valid in my book. One does not follow Christ because he is afraid of what will happen if he doesn’t. That is the way of Muslims who follow Mohamed.
One follows Christ out of love, acknowledgement and appreciation for what Christ did, what he offers, and a desire to be with Him in eternity.
If one rejects the gift of eternal life, then, well, he will not eternally live. He will die. It is the second death.
>>The Word of God is not to be taken literally?? Don’t even go there with me. If that is the case just throw your book away.<<
I think it is deeper than that. Otherwise, you would have gouged out your eye and cut off your hand by now. And the apostles whould have done the same thing.
>>It’s a strain to arrive at annihilation when the straightforward meaning is natural and obvious.<<
Yes it is. If someone, today, created a 100 foot diameter lake of fire 20 feet deep and then threw me into it I know what would happen to me: I would suffer immense pain for a few seconds and then I would die. All done.
I did not have to strain the meaning of words at all to come to that conclusion.
Correction: the italics inadvertantly stopped when they shouuld have continued to the bottom.
I fprgot the paragraph break effectively ended the italics.
>>The lack of “eternal life” is simply eternal death, basically torture and no purpose or joy and with no chance of escape. <<
Then you’re not dead.
Death: the act of dying; the end of life; the total and permanent cessation of all the vital functions of an organism.
Spiritual death: Loss or absence of spiritual life.
I’m with you. I take the meaning of the word death from the english dictionary (the language in which all my bibles are translated) and then apply that wherever I see the word “death”.
I never used to do that. It was always confusing, but now it is crystal clear.
Obviously I agree with you.
I believe those who repeatedly rebel against God are permanently removed from the game. If you can’t play nicely with others, you’re expelled.
BTW, some of the ancient and medieval church fathers spend a good deal of time talking about how a primary source of the pleasure for the saints in heaven is observing the torments of the damned in hell. This does not fit my idea of what “the good” is. In fact, I’m not sure I wouldn’t prefer the other place over an eternity with such people.
BTW, while I’m not a Catholic, their concept of purgatory at least makes some sense. Most Protestants believe there is only heaven and hell, which means some poor jerk just misses making it into a heaven of eternal bliss and therefore gets an eternity of torment, apparently the only two options. We can talk about Hitler and Stalin deserving this, but what about the poor slob who barely misses qualifying?
That it's a parable? In any case, I'm glad the OP posted this, certainly worthy of discussion - my own view would agree with the article, in fact I recall that in the case of those judged to hell are blotted out, erased from being so completely that even believers in Heaven who knew them would no longer remember they even existed. Referred to as the Second Death, death of the soul, as opposed to the First Death of the body. Death and eternal life don't seem to go hand in hand. I know I'm in the minority on this but so be it.
It's Apocryphal, but I remember some passages from the book of Enoch that cover the 7 pleasures and 7 torments...the torments being those that didn't make the cut are separated out after death and exist in a state removed from God, yet, can see Heaven, can see people there living blissfully, and know that they themselves will never experience that joy. I can't imagine a more tortuous state of existence..it is apocryphal, but it makes a ton of sense.
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.