View Full Version : Why do so many Christians believe in a place called "Hell"?
Just started dabbling with this, but would love to know why so many Christians believe in a place called "hell" - i.e. a place of eternal torment for the "unsaved"....
I tend to think most of us have been raised to think that way because we misinterpet the Bible - Hell in the OT always meant "the grave" and in the NT, the word (Gehenna) was a place outside the city of Jeruselem.
5stringJeff
07-02-2008, 11:48 AM
Come on now, you've been "dabbling" with this for at least a year. :)
I think you'll find that Christ mentions eternal punishment a few times in the Gospel of Matthew, and that Revelation mentions that all whose name was not found in the Book of Life were thrown into the lake of fire. Eternal torment is part of Biblical teaching, and is consistent with God's holiness and justice.
Come on now, you've been "dabbling" with this for at least a year. :)
I think you'll find that Christ mentions eternal punishment a few times in the Gospel of Matthew, and that Revelation mentions that all whose name was not found in the Book of Life were thrown into the lake of fire. Eternal torment is part of Biblical teaching, and is consistent with God's holiness and justice.
The english word "eternal" appears in Matthew, however, that word does not mean "endless" - it means "age-lasting"...
The lake of fire is to destroy death and hell...is it not?
The fire that the Hebrew children were cast into did two things, burned only the wicked (those who cast them in) and the "son of man" appeared. The Children of God were infected in no way. Thus this fire was both a consuming (of evil) and a non-consuming (of good).
The fire (light) in the Holy of Holies was both a consuming and a non-consuming fire. It would kill a man carrying guilt if he entered, but would not harm a man cleansed. A
The fire that is used to purify gold is also a consuming and non-consuming fire, it burns the dross but doesn't harm the gold.
The fire that Paul mentions in:1 Corinthians 3:15
If any man's work shall be burned, he shall suffer loss: but he himself shall be saved; yet so as by fire.
the evil deeds that even Paul mentions in Rom.7 are burned up, and the man himself is saved from the evil that once controlled his flesh.
And the sudden transformation mentioned in 1 Cor.15) Shows the mortal body being consumed/clothed with the inner immortal. And what happens "death is swallowed up", but the man himself remains unharmed.
Your faith is tried by fire:1 Peter 1:7
That the trial of your faith, being much more precious than of gold that perisheth, though it be tried with fire, might be found unto praise and honour and glory at the appearing of Jesus Christ:
Reason for that may be: Jesus was "THE" son of God, he was the "Flame" (Isaiah 10:17
And the light of Israel shall be for a fire, and his Holy One for a flame: and it shall burn and devour his thorns and his briers in one day;). Notice Israel (the people of God) are the fire, Jesus Christ the Holy one is but a flame. In Revelation we are dealing with one "like unto" the Son of man(Rev.1:13And in the midst of the seven candlesticks one like unto the Son of man, clothed with a garment down to the foot, and girt about the paps with a golden girdle.) This, in my view is the many membered body of Christ. The one with many voices.
The same fire that is used to purify gold also burns the dross. Look at how the sons of Levi are to be purified:
Mal.3:2But who may abide the day of his coming? and who shall stand when he appeareth? for he is like a refiner's fire, and like fullers' soap:
3And he shall sit as a refiner and purifier of silver: and he shall purify the sons of Levi, and purge them as gold and silver, that they may offer unto the LORD an offering in righteousness.
He shall sit and He shall purify. Purify them from what? Sounds like their little devils are going to burned in, and by, the same fire that saves them.
As for god not being made a "thing", The fire is the very "presence" of God. And what would you do with the verse "God is a consuming fire"?
The fire of God only tortures his enemies, it's a blessing to all else.
Let me leave you with one last verse showing the army of God (manifested sons) in the last day:
Joel 2:2A day of darkness and of gloominess, a day of clouds and of thick darkness, as the morning spread upon the mountains: a great people and a strong; there hath not been ever the like, neither shall be any more after it, even to the years of many generations.
3A fire devoureth before them; and behind them a flame burneth: the land is as the garden of Eden before them, and behind them a desolate wilderness; yea, and nothing shall escape them.
If the Lake of Fire is actually a place of everlasting burnings, why isn't it defined as such? The Bible calls it the "second death," that is, the death of the first death. One would think that the death of death would be LIFE, which is a good thing! (Rev. 20:14) Even in mathematics two negatives make a positive.
If Hell is real and a person is considered foolish trying to build a tower without first seeing if he has enough resources with which to complete it, wouldn't Jesus also be foolish if He purposed to save the world but only came away with a part of it? And wouldn't Jesus appear foolish if He came to destroy the works of the devil but left most of the devil's work continuing endlessly in the Lake of Fire ? Wouldn't He be found guilty of not counting the costs before He began?(Luke 14:28-32)
Hagbard Celine
07-02-2008, 12:21 PM
Just started dabbling with this, but would love to know why so many Christians believe in a place called "hell" - i.e. a place of eternal torment for the "unsaved"....
I tend to think most of us have been raised to think that way because we misinterpet the Bible - Hell in the OT always meant "the grave" and in the NT, the word (Gehenna) was a place outside the city of Jeruselem.
They believe in it because they've been taught that it exists--what they haven't been taught is to question what they've been taught.
why so many Christians believe in a place called "hell" - i.e. a place of eternal torment for the "unsaved"....
Cus its mentioned in the bible? For example the story of the sheep and the goats (also known as "The Judgment of the Nations")
When the Son of Man comes in His glory, and all the angels with Him, then He will sit on the throne of His glory. 32 All the nations will be gathered before Him, and He will separate people one from another as a shepherd separates the sheep from the goats, 33 and He will put the sheep at his right hand and the goats at the left. 34 Then the king will say to those at His right hand, “Come, you that are blessed by my Father, inherit the kingdom prepared for you from the foundation of the world
‘Then He will say to those at His left hand, “You that are accursed, depart from me into the eternal fire prepared for the devil and his angels"
And you discribed hell as:
"hell" - i.e. a place of eternal torment for the "unsaved"....
unsaved...Accursed, eternal fire...eternal torment...close enough?..
Cus its mentioned in the bible? For example the story of the sheep and the goats (also known as "The Judgment of the Nations")
EDIT: LINK: http://predici.resursecrestine.ro/predici-Planul---Veacurilor--Eternitatea-344.htm
The word eternal there does not mean everlasting..
The word translated "eternal" in the phrase "eternal purpose" is the Greek word AIONON which means "ages."
There are many precious and important truths contained in this parable, but we must restrain ourselves from pursuing them at this time in order to deal briefly with two points. First, it is important to note that this separation of the sheep from the goats was brought about, not on the basis of whether one had accepted Jesus Christ as his personal saviour, but solely on the basis of works. Everything depended entirely upon what the sheep or goats had done or had not done. There was nothing of faith or a spiritual experience connected with this separation. The sheep were set on God's right hand because of the fact that they had done something - given meat and drink to the Lord's brethren, clothed them, visited them, and comforted them. All these things the Lord said they had done to Him. But the sheep confessed that they had never seen Him, so how could they have done these things to the Lord? He answered, "Inasmuch as you have done it to the least of these my brethren, you have done it unto Me."
All of this is a kind of ministry unto the Lord Himself and it brought all these people into a separation unto blessings of the right hand of God! This had nothing whatever to do with how the sheep treated the Jews, or the orphans in foreign lands, or the destitute masses or the poor drunk in the gutter. None of those are the Lord's brethren! Paul identifies the Lord's brethren in Rom. 8:29, "For whom He did foreknow, He also did predestinate to be conformed to the image of His Son, that He might be the firstborn among many brethren." The Lord's brethren are the sons of God, the members of His body, of His flesh, of His bone, of His spirit and nature. The sheep had responded in a positive way to these brethren in their time of testing and preparation during their sojourn in the flesh, and now there is rich reward!
And you discribed hell as:
unsaved...Accursed, eternal fire...eternal torment...close enough?..
EDIT: LINK: http://www.heavendwellers.com/hd_bible_hell_part_1.htm
The English word Hell grew into its present meaning. The words hell, heel, hill, hole, whole, hall, hull, halt and hold are all from the same root.
"Hell, any place, or some place covered over. Heel, that part of the foot which is covered by the leg. Hill, any heap of earth, or stone, etc., by which the plain or level surface of the earth is covered. Hale, i.e., healed or whole. Whole, the same as hale, i.e., covered. It was formerly written whole, without the w, as a wound or sore is healed, or whole, that is, covered over by the skin, which manner of expression will not seem extraordinary if we consider our use of the word recover. Hall, a covered building, where persons assemble, or where goods are protected from the weather. Hull, of a nut, etc. That by which a nut is covered. Hole, some place covered over. 'You shall seek for holes to hide your heads in.' Holt, holed, hol'd holt. A rising ground or knoll covered with trees. Hold, as the hold of a ship, in which things are covered, or the covered part of a ship."
The word was first applied to the grave by our German and English ancestors, and as superstition came to regard the grave as an entrance to a world of torment, Hell at length became the word used to denote an imaginary realm of fiery woe.
"The word Hell, used in the common translation, conveys now an improper meaning of the original word; because Hell is only used to signify the place of the damned. But as the word Hell comes from the Anglo-Saxon helan, to cover, or hide, henee the tiling or slating of a house is called, in some parts of England (particularly Cornwall), heling, to this day, and the corers of books (in Lancashire), by the same name, so the literal import of the original word hades was formerly well expressed by it."
Also there is not one instance in the Bible where the word hell is used that it does not refer to a place on the earth.
5stringJeff
07-02-2008, 02:02 PM
I'll reply later. But please, remember the rules of the board and post links when you copy and paste text.
I'll reply later. But please, remember the rules of the board and post links when you copy and paste text.
Why are there links in my post now which I never used?
5stringJeff
07-02-2008, 03:26 PM
Why are there links in my post now which I never used?
Because I Googled it and found it.
Because I Googled it and found it.
But I've never been to nor heard of those sites...
5stringJeff
07-02-2008, 03:39 PM
But I've never been to nor heard of those sites...
Nevertheless, they are the original source of the text you provided (as far as I was able to ascertain via Google), even if you received that text from other means, such as e-mail. At the very least, if you get something via e-mail, then say so when reproducing it here. This protects Jim, as the owner of the board, from copyright infringement and fair use issues.
metaphors....God has no reason to keep those who do not want to live under His Law, alive. Sometimes we need references, lakes of fire....but there is no way a God who rests on the seventh day, is going to keep sinners alive forever.
Abbey Marie
07-02-2008, 03:51 PM
Nice to see you again, -Cp. :)
avatar4321
07-02-2008, 08:20 PM
Just started dabbling with this, but would love to know why so many Christians believe in a place called "hell" - i.e. a place of eternal torment for the "unsaved"....
I tend to think most of us have been raised to think that way because we misinterpet the Bible - Hell in the OT always meant "the grave" and in the NT, the word (Gehenna) was a place outside the city of Jeruselem.
I don't believe in hell as traditionally understood by Christians, partially because of these exact reasons.
Nor do I understand Eternal or Endless Damnation like traditional Christians.
This is not to say i dont believe God punishes the wicked. He does. But not like the traditions.
metaphors....God has no reason to keep those who do not want to live under His Law, alive. Sometimes we need references, lakes of fire....but there is no way a God who rests on the seventh day, is going to keep sinners alive forever.
If God loses the overwhelming majority of his creation to be "tormented forever" - is he not s colossal failure?
Did not Christ come to "die the sins of the whole world"?
manu1959
07-02-2008, 09:08 PM
They believe in it because they've been taught that it exists--what they haven't been taught is to question what they've been taught.
this thread would seem to prove your claim wrong .....
actsnoblemartin
07-02-2008, 10:31 PM
nice anti-christian swipe asshole. I dont hear you ever criticizing islam or any other religion you piece of shit
They believe in it because they've been taught that it exists--what they haven't been taught is to question what they've been taught.
Hobbit
07-02-2008, 10:41 PM
In Jewish tradition, Gehenna was an afterlife of eternal torment. When the word 'Hell' is used in the Bible, the original word is usually 'Gehenna.' Hell somehow became the replacement for Gehenna in Western Europe, though that's actually the name of the Nordic afterlife. Sheol is another one that doesn't see much use in English Bibles, and refers to the dreary, Hades-like, Jewish afterlife where souls awaited judgement, and is often referred to as 'death' or 'the grave.'
The main evidence for Hell as is often depicted is found in a parable from Jesus. It depicts a man who dies and goes to Hell. In the parable, he's tortured and has unquenchable thirst. He then yells across the gap to Heaven and says that if he can't be helped, at least have the ghosts of dead prophets appear to his family so they might believe. He's told that if they didn't believe what was already shown to them, that that wouldn't help. There are also references to the lake of fire in places like Revelation. There are disputes as to the exact nature of Hell, as the Greek word used for burning in Hell means 'to consume,' and some theologists think it means that the souls are actually destroyed by the fire and that those people cease to be. However, Revelation says 'the smoke from their torment rises forever and ever,' which pretty much refutes that theory.
Hagbard Celine
07-02-2008, 11:00 PM
nice anti-christian swipe asshole. I dont hear you ever criticizing islam or any other religion you piece of shit
Maybe if you started a thread about "any other religion," you'd hear me criticize it dumbsh*t.
You're comment is so f*cking asinine it could only be more stupid if you insulted me for ordering food in a restaurant or for watching a movie in a theater. What the f*ck else am I supposed to talk about in a thread about Christianity? Cock fighting? Playing the harmonica? Sailing technique? No. I'm supposed to talk about Christianity. If I were supposed to talk about "any other religion," the thread wouldn't be about "Christians" you f*cking twat.
Hagbard Celine
07-02-2008, 11:12 PM
In Jewish tradition, Gehenna was an afterlife of eternal torment. When the word 'Hell' is used in the Bible, the original word is usually 'Gehenna.' Hell somehow became the replacement for Gehenna in Western Europe, though that's actually the name of the Nordic afterlife. Sheol is another one that doesn't see much use in English Bibles, and refers to the dreary, Hades-like, Jewish afterlife where souls awaited judgement, and is often referred to as 'death' or 'the grave.'
The main evidence for Hell as is often depicted is found in a parable from Jesus. It depicts a man who dies and goes to Hell. In the parable, he's tortured and has unquenchable thirst. He then yells across the gap to Heaven and says that if he can't be helped, at least have the ghosts of dead prophets appear to his family so they might believe. He's told that if they didn't believe what was already shown to them, that that wouldn't help. There are also references to the lake of fire in places like Revelation. There are disputes as to the exact nature of Hell, as the Greek word used for burning in Hell means 'to consume,' and some theologists think it means that the souls are actually destroyed by the fire and that those people cease to be. However, Revelation says 'the smoke from their torment rises forever and ever,' which pretty much refutes that theory.
Most old-world references to eternal torment have to do with being parched of thirst or of being tempted with but never getting food. There are a lot of parallels between the beliefs of the Mesopotamians and the Jews--"Gehenna" being one of them. The Mesopotamians believed that when a person died (good or bad) they went to a shadowy world much like our own in the dirt. For this reason, families would give offerings of real food and drink to the dead so that they would be able to eat and drink something other than dirt and dust.
There's also the Greek mythology story of Tantalus who could never reach the grapes.
It's a common theme.
The truth is that "hell" in any name is a way to exert control over people--make them step into line by scaring them straight. "If you don't follow the rules that I made up, you'll be eternally tormented." -Said the brainwasher to the brainwashee.
crin63
07-02-2008, 11:46 PM
Just started dabbling with this, but would love to know why so many Christians believe in a place called "hell" - i.e. a place of eternal torment for the "unsaved"....
I tend to think most of us have been raised to think that way because we misinterpet the Bible - Hell in the OT always meant "the grave" and in the NT, the word (Gehenna) was a place outside the city of Jeruselem.
There are 2 other meanings of hell in the NT that were left out of your post.
hadēs
hah'-dace ; properly unseen, that is, “Hades” or the place (state) of departed souls: - grave, hell.
tartaroō
From Τάρταρος Tartaros̄ (the deepest abyss of Hades); to incarcerate in eternal torment: - cast down to hell.
tartaroo was only used in 2Pe 2:4
You left a little bit out of your definition of hell. How the word was used.
gheh'-en-nah
Of Hebrew origin; valley of (the son of) Hinnom; gehenna (or Ge-Hinnom), a valley of Jerusalem, used (figuratively) as a name for the place (or state) of everlasting punishment: - hell.
All 3 are taken from Strong's Concordance.
Hades is the place of the unsaved dead and where Abraham's bosom was. There was a great gulf between the 2. As seen in the parable of the, "Rich man and Lazarus" in Luke 16. That's why the rich man was able to talk to Abraham. It also demonstrates the torment part of hell.
Because there were actual names mentioned in this parable that would mean this was probably an actual event recorded and not just a story to teach a lesson.
With regards to death and hell being cast into the lake of fire, it makes sense that its referencing people being cast into the lake of fire because of the same reference to hell in the parable above.
In Jewish tradition, Gehenna was an afterlife of eternal torment. When the word 'Hell' is used in the Bible, the original word is usually 'Gehenna.' Hell somehow became the replacement for Gehenna in Western Europe, though that's actually the name of the Nordic afterlife. Sheol is another one that doesn't see much use in English Bibles, and refers to the dreary, Hades-like, Jewish afterlife where souls awaited judgement, and is often referred to as 'death' or 'the grave.'
The main evidence for Hell as is often depicted is found in a parable from Jesus. It depicts a man who dies and goes to Hell. In the parable, he's tortured and has unquenchable thirst. He then yells across the gap to Heaven and says that if he can't be helped, at least have the ghosts of dead prophets appear to his family so they might believe. He's told that if they didn't believe what was already shown to them, that that wouldn't help. There are also references to the lake of fire in places like Revelation. There are disputes as to the exact nature of Hell, as the Greek word used for burning in Hell means 'to consume,' and some theologists think it means that the souls are actually destroyed by the fire and that those people cease to be. However, Revelation says 'the smoke from their torment rises forever and ever,' which pretty much refutes that theory.
If there is a Hell and according to most denominations of Christianity the majority of mankind will go there, could you really enjoy heaven knowing your mother or father or children or best friend are suffering everlasting tortures the likes of which would make the Holocaust seem like a picnic? If the Rich Man and Lazarus story (Luke chapter 16) is real and NOT a parable, then we will be able to converse with our loves ones who did not make it into heaven. Would heaven really be paradise if this were true?
Hagbard Celine
07-03-2008, 07:34 AM
If there is a Hell and according to most denominations of Christianity the majority of mankind will go there, could you really enjoy heaven knowing your mother or father or children or best friend are suffering everlasting tortures the likes of which would make the Holocaust seem like a picnic? If the Rich Man and Lazarus story (Luke chapter 16) is real and NOT a parable, then we will be able to converse with our loves ones who did not make it into heaven. Would heaven really be paradise if this were true?
There are too many inconsistencies for any of it to be remotely true. It's probably a waste of time talking about this stuff when nobody knows anything about it either way and our only guide is a book of parables put together by committee 2000 years ago.
crin63
07-03-2008, 10:28 AM
If God loses the overwhelming majority of his creation to be "tormented forever" - is he not s colossal failure?
Did not Christ come to "die the sins of the whole world"?
God will be glorified either way. God will be glorified in those who come to Jesus by faith and are saved, or God will be glorified by those who are punished in the lake of fire. Either way his character remains holy.
God doesn’t lose them, God gives them over to their sins and gives them strong delusions so that they believe a lie. Salvation is a gift of God.
Jesus died for the sins of all those who come to him and are saved by him.
If there is a Hell and according to most denominations of Christianity the majority of mankind will go there, could you really enjoy heaven knowing your mother or father or children or best friend are suffering everlasting tortures the likes of which would make the Holocaust seem like a picnic? If the Rich Man and Lazarus story (Luke chapter 16) is real and NOT a parable, then we will be able to converse with our loves ones who did not make it into heaven. Would heaven really be paradise if this were true?
Rev 21:4 And God shall wipe away all tears from their eyes; and there shall be no more death, neither sorrow, nor crying, neither shall there be any more pain: for the former things are passed away.
It's too bad your analysis of that parable is wrong:
The parable of Lazarus and the rich man has been the foundation for many of the erroneous beliefs about "hell" within traditional Christianity. Some have viewed it not as a parable, but as a true story Christ told to give details about the punishment of sinners in hell. Yet a thorough, unbiased examination of this story will show that the generally accepted interpretations of this passage of Scripture are fallacious and misleading. In this article, we will go through the parable verse by verse to determine what Christ was truly teaching.
Those who insist that this is not a parable, but a true, literal story Christ told to describe the condition of the lost in hell must overlook several facts to arrive at that conclusion. First, Yeshua the Messiah never accuses the rich man of any sin. He is simply portrayed as a wealthy man who lived the good life. Furthermore, Lazarus is never proclaimed to be a righteous man. He is just one who had the misfortune to be poor and unable to care for himself. If this story is literal, then the logical implication is that all the rich are destined to burn in hell, while all the homeless and destitute will be saved. Does anyone believe this to be the case?
If hell is truly as it is pictured in this story, then the saved will be able to view the lost who are burning there. Could anyone enjoy eternal existence if they were able to see lost friends, family, and acquaintances being incinerated in hell, yet never burning up? Additionally, if hell (as it is traditionally taught) is an abyss of fire and brimstone where sinners are tormented forever, does anyone really believe that one drop of water would relieve the pain and anguish of someone suffering in its flames?
These are just some of the difficulties we encounter when we try to make the account of Lazarus and the rich man literal, instead of realizing that it is a parable. If it is a true story, then all of the things Christ said must be factual. If all the points of the story are not literal, then we must view this tale as an analogy Jesus used to teach larger spiritual truths.
Most people think that the Messiah spoke in parables to make the meaning clearer for the uneducated people he was teaching. Reflecting this belief, an appendix to the NKJV says that "Jesus' reputation as a great teacher spread far and wide. And no wonder. He taught in parables, simple stories, that made His lessons clear to all who were ready to learn" ("Man for All Times," p. 1870). Yet Christ said his purpose for speaking to the people in parables was exactly the opposite of the explanation cited above.
MATTHEW 13:1 On the same day Jesus went out of the house and sat by the sea. 2 And great multitudes were gathered together to Him, so that He got into a boat and sat; and the whole multitude stood on the shore. 3 Then He spoke many things to them in parables . . . 10 And the disciples came and said to Him, "Why do You speak to them in parables?" 11 He answered and said to them, "Because it has been given to you to know the mysteries of the kingdom of heaven, but to them it has not been given. 12 For whoever has, to him more will be given, and he will have abundance; but whoever does not have, even what he has will be taken away from him. 13 Therefore I speak to them in parables, because seeing they do not see, and hearing they do not hear, nor do they understand. 14 And in them the prophecy of Isaiah is fulfilled, which says: 'Hearing you will hear and shall not understand, and seeing you will see and not perceive; 15 for the hearts of this people have grown dull. Their ears are hard of hearing, and their eyes they have closed, lest they should see with their eyes and hear with their ears, lest they should understand with their hearts and turn, so that I should heal them.'" (NKJV)
As this passage and the parallel Scripture in Mark 4 clearly state, Yeshua spoke to the people in parables to hide the spiritual meaning of what he was saying. He only intended for his disciples to understand what the parables truly meant. It is no wonder, then, that so many have misunderstood what Christ was teaching with the parable of Lazarus and the rich man.
Let's start by getting some background information on the situation in which Christ told this parable. Luke tells us that all the tax collectors and sinners were coming to Christ to hear what he had to say (Luke 15:1). This made the Pharisees and scribes jealous and they complained, vehemently criticizing Yeshua for receiving sinners and eating with them (Luke 15:2). They were probably envious of Christ's growing fame, afraid that his popularity would diminish their own authority and prestige.
So the Messiah first spoke a three-part parable (the lost sheep, the lost coin, and the prodigal son) to those gathered around him. This parable was designed to show the tax collectors and sinners (as well as the Pharisees) that God was concerned for them and that He would seek out the lost and welcome them into His family when they repented and turned back to Him.
The self-righteous, accusing Pharisees and scribes, who Christ acknowledged as the legitimate religious teachers of the Jews (Matt. 23:1-3), should have been the ones telling these people of God's love for them. They should have been the ones teaching these sinners, exhorting them to return to God and receive His love and forgiveness. However, because of their faith in their own righteousness and their contempt for these tax collectors and sinners who didn't measure up to their standards, the Pharisees and scribes excluded them and considered them accursed (John 7:49).
Afterward, speaking primarily to his disciples but with the Pharisees (and probably the crowd) still listening in, Christ related the parable of the unjust steward (Luke 16:1-13). The Pharisees, who were "lovers of money" (Luke 16:14), realized that the Messiah was alluding to them with this parable and took offense. They scoffed at Jesus. The final part of Christ's response to the derision of the Pharisees and scribes was the parable of Lazarus and the rich man.
We'll now examine this parable in detail to grasp exactly what the Messiah was teaching about the Kingdom of God.
LUKE 16:19 "There was a certain rich man who was clothed in purple and fine linen and fared sumptuously every day." (NKJV)
We begin by scrutinizing the description Christ gives us of the rich man. First, he tells us that this man is clothed in purple and fine linen. This type of clothing would not have been out of the ordinary for one of considerable wealth during this time period. However, this raiment also has symbolic meaning. The Eerdmans Bible Dictionary says: "The wearing of purple was associated particularly with royalty . . ." ("Purple," p. 863). In addition, the New Bible Dictionary tells us: "The use of linen in OT times was prescribed for priests (Ex. 28:39). The coat, turban and girdle must be of fine linen." ("Linen," p. 702).
So we see that the garments worn by this rich man were symbolic of royalty and the priesthood. With that in mind, let's see what God told Moses just before giving the Israelites the Law on Mount Sinai.
EXODUS 19:6 And ye shall be to me a royal priesthood and a holy nation: these words shalt thou speak to the children of Israel. (Brenton's LXX)
The clothing of the rich man identifies him symbolically with the people of Israel, who God chose to be a special people. They were called to be a witness to the nations surrounding them, confirming the blessings available to those who would obey God and keep His laws. Unfortunately, only infrequently did they live up to the high calling given to them by the Eternal. Eventually He had to send them into captivity for their refusal to honor their part of the covenant ratified at Mount Sinai. At the time of Christ, only the remnant of the house of Judah which had returned from the Babylonian captivity continued to have a covenant relationship with God. The rich man in this parable represents the Jews of Jesus' day, exemplified by the religious teachers, the Pharisees and scribes.
Verse 19 also tells us that the rich man "fared sumptuously every day." Figuratively, this represents the magnificent spriritual feast available only to the Jews, who were the sole remaining part of God's called people Israel. In the first century A.D., they were the only people on earth who had the true religion. Indeed, Paul recounts the glorious station of the house of Judah in Romans 9:3-5.
ROMANS 9:3 For I could wish that I myself were accursed and cut off from Christ for the sake of my brethren, my kinsmen by race. 4 They are Israelites, and to them belong the sonship, the glory, the covenants, the giving of the law, the worship, and the promises; 5 to them belong the patriarchs, and of their race, according to the flesh, is the Christ. God who is over all be blessed for ever. Amen. (RSV)
The Jews were truly rich, feasting on God's spiritual blessings. Yet these very gifts caused them to stumble because they prompted them to self-righteousness. They gloried in the gifts, without glorifying the Eternal God who gave them. Instead of being a "royal priesthood" that was a blessing to all nations, they instead loathed and despised the surrounding Gentile peoples. Certainly, as Paul wrote, "their table become a snare and a trap, a stumbling block and a retribution for them" (Rom. 11:9).
LUKE 16:20 "But there was a certain beggar named Lazarus, full of sores, who was laid at his gate, 21 desiring to be fed with the crumbs which fell from the rich man's table. Moreover the dogs came and licked his sores." (NKJV)
In contrast to the rich man, we now see Lazarus. The first thing to note is that he is depicted as a beggar. This is an apt description of the Gentiles who "laid at the gate" of Judah. Paul describes the predicament of the Gentiles before they received Christ in Ephesians 2:12.
EPHESIANS 2:12 Remember that you were at that time separated from Christ, alienated from the commonwealth of Israel, and strangers to the covenants of promise, having no hope and without God in the world. (RSV)
This Scripture is also a fitting representation of the position of the Gentile nations before the Messiah's sacrifice for the world's sins. They were certainly "excluded from the commonwealth of Israel," "strangers to the covenants of promise," and "without hope and without God in the world." The Gentiles were beggars, located outside Judah and longing to be fed spiritual crumbs from the table of the divinely blessed Jews.
Additionally, we are told that dogs came and consoled Lazarus in his misery, licking his sores. The Jews considered the surrounding Gentiles to be unclean "dogs." Even Christ himself used this unflattering comparison when he conversed with the Greek Syrophoenician woman while in the region of Tyre (Mark 7:24-30).
Also important to the story is the meaning of the name Lazarus. This Greek name is a form of the Hebrew Eleazer, and it literally means "he whom God helps." The use of this particular name is very significant to the message of the parable, for the Gentiles would indeed become "those whom God helped" through the sacrifice of His son, Yeshua.
LUKE 16:22 "So it was that the beggar died, and was carried by the angels to Abraham's bosom. The rich man also died and was buried." (NKJV)
The next events recorded in this parable are the deaths of Lazarus and then the rich man. Since the parable has been figurative up until this point, there is no reason to assume it becomes literal now.
First, to prove that this language is symbolic and not meant to be taken literally, let's examine exactly what we are told by Christ. He says that first, Lazarus dies and is taken to the bosom of Abraham. Notice, there is no mention of his burial here. Then later the rich man dies, and he is buried (in Hades, according to verse 23). So the time sequence given indicates that upon his death, Lazarus was taken immediately to Abraham's bosom, while afterward the rich man was buried in Hades after his death.
If this story is literal, then we have a contradiction in the Bible. Here, Lazarus is shown to have immediately received the promise of eternal life. Yet the author of Hebrews clearly tells us that Abraham, as well as all the other Old Testament saints, have not yet received the promises given to them by God.
HEBREWS 11:13 All these [Abraham, Noah, Abel, etc.] died in faith, without receiving the promises, but having seen them and having welcomed them from a distance, and having confessed that they were strangers and exiles on the earth. . . . 39 And all these [including Abraham], having gained approval through their faith, did not receive what was promised, 40 because God had provided something better for us, so that apart from us they would not be made perfect. (NASB)
The great men and women of faith listed in Hebrews 11 have not yet been made perfect and given eternal life. They, along with all the saints of God from every age, are currently sleeping in their graves (Job 3:11-19; Psa. 6:5; 115:17; Ecc. 9:5, 10; I Cor. 15:20; Isa. 57:1-2; Dan. 12:2; Acts 2:29, 34; 13:36). These saints are awaiting the first resurrection, which will take place when Yeshua the Messiah returns at the sounding of the seventh trumpet (Matt. 24:30-31; I Cor. 15:51-52; I The. 4:16; Rev. 11:15-18).
Clearly, there is no way to reconcile the numerous Scriptures listed above with a literal understanding of the story of Lazarus and the rich man. What, then, does the death of these two men represent?
The deaths of both the rich man (who represented the Jews) and Lazarus (who represented the Gentile nations) are symbolic in this parable. Here, their demise depicts an elemental change in the status and position of the two groups.
To confirm this, let's look at the meaning of Lazarus being "carried to Abraham's bosom." The figurative meaning of being in one's bosom is to be in a position of closeness, to be highly regarded. This symbolism is indicated by the ancient practice of having guests at a feast recline on the chest of their neighbors. The place of highest honor would therefore belong to the one seated next to the host, calling to mind the example of John at the Last Supper (John 13:23). Paul explains this imagery in Galatians 3:6-9 by telling us how the Gentiles could be in this place of highest honor.
GALATIANS 3:6 . . . Abraham "believed God, and it was accounted to him for righteousness." 7 Therefore know that only those who are of faith are sons of Abraham. 8 And the Scripture, foreseeing that God would justify the Gentiles by faith, preached the gospel to Abraham beforehand, saying, "In you all the nations shall be blessed." 9 So then those who are of faith are blessed with believing Abraham. (NKJV)
As the passage above (as well as the fourth and ninth chapters of Romans) shows, Gentile believers become "sons of Abraham" through faith in Christ. This faith allows Gentiles to no longer be "strangers and foreigners, but fellow citizens with the saints and members of the household of God" (Eph. 2:19). For centuries the Jews had received the benefits of being God's chosen people by virtue of being Abraham's physical descendants. But after the sacrifice of Christ, this place of honor and blessing would be given to the people represented by Lazarus. This is the meaning of being "carried to the bosom of Abraham" in this parable.
In contrast to Lazarus, the rich man was buried in Hades. An understanding of the original meaning of the Greek word hades is necessary to grasp the message of the parable. Regarding the possible etymology of this word, the The New International Dictionary of New Testament Theology states that hades ". . . comes from idein (to see) with the negative prefix, a-, and so would mean the invisible . . . In the LXX hades occurs more than 100 times, in the majority of instances to translate Heb. she'ol, the underworld which receives all the dead. It is the land of darkness . . ." (vol. 2, p. 206).
Most likely, hades originally meant "unseen." Later, it came to refer to the hidden state of those buried in the earth. Symbolically, this parable shows that a point would come when the house of Judah would become "unseen" by God, out of favor because of their unbelief. There would come a time when the Jews as a whole would no longer be God's favored nation. Their hard hearts would lead them to reject their Messiah (John 1:11).
LUKE 16:23 "And being in torments in Hades, he lifted up his eyes and saw Abraham afar off, and Lazarus in his bosom." (NKJV)
What did Christ mean by saying here that the rich man was in "torments in Hades"? The key to discovering the symbolic meaning of this verse is the Greek noun basanois, translated "torments" above.
According to Friberg's Analytical Lexicon of the Greek New Testament, basanois, which is a form of the noun basanos, means "strictly, a touchstone for testing the genuineness of metals by rubbing against it . . ."
The etymology of basanos found in Kittel's Theological Dictionary of the New Testament is very helpful in correctly understanding this verse:
In non-biblical Gk. [basanos] is a commercial expression, or is used in relation to government. It then acquires the meaning of the checking of calculations, which develops naturally out of the basic sense of [basanos, basanizein] . . . In the spiritual sphere it has the figur[ative] sense, which is closely related to the original concrete meaning, of a means of testing . . .
The word then undergoes a change in meaning. The original sense fades into the background. [Basanos] now comes to denote "torture" or "the rack," espec[ially] used with slaves . . . [Basanos] occurs in the sense of "torment" . . .
The change in meaning is best explained if we begin with the object of treatment. If we put men instead of metal or a coin, the stone of testing become[s] torture or the rack. The metal which has survived the testing stone is subjected to harsher treatment. Man is in the same position when severely tested by torture. In the testing of metal an essential role was played by the thought of testing and proving genuineness. The rack is a means of showing the true state of affairs. In its proper sense it is a means of testing and proving, though also of punishment. Finally, even this special meaning was weakened and only the general element of torture remained (vol. I, pp. 561, 562, emphasis mine).
In this verse, basanois simply conveys a sense of testing and proving through punishment. When this understanding is combined with a proper discernment of the symbolism of Hades, we can begin to see the point Yeshua is making. As a whole, the house of Judah would to be cut off and replaced during this current age by those Gentiles who in faith would accept the sacrifice of the Messiah.
If the Pharisees and scribes understood this prophetic parable, it must have astonished and infuriated those who listened as Christ spoke. The implication that the house of Judah and the Gentile nations were to change places, with the Jews becoming alienated from God while the Gentiles were to become the "seed of Abraham," would have been almost impossible for them to believe.
LUKE 16:24 "Then 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.'" (NKJV)
First, notice that the rich man identifies Abraham as his father, just as the Pharisees did (John 8:39). The rich man (Judah) is now shown to be undergoing reproof, testing, and punishment in "this flame" (singular, not "these flames"). It is quite obvious that the flame is not literal, because a wet fingertip on the tongue would do nothing to quench the pain inflicted by real flames.
The word rendered "torment" here is a form of the Greek verb odunao, which literally means "grief," "pain," or "suffering." Predominantly, it conveys the sense of mental anguish, not physical pain. Forms of this word are found only four times in the Scriptures, all in the writings of Luke. It appears twice in this parable, in verses 24 and 25. In Luke 2:48, it is used to describe the anxious distress that Mary and Joseph felt after they discovered the 12-year old Jesus missing on the trip home from Jerusalem after the Passover feast. In Acts 20:38, it depicts the sorrow the elders of the Ephesian Church felt at Paul's farewell announcement that they would never see him again.
The rich man cries out from the symbolic darkness of Hades for comfort because of the suffering caused by the flame. The explanation of the symbolism of the flame will require a little background information.
In Deuteronomy 11 and 28, Moses delineates God's part in His covenant with Israel. Moses told them that if they obeyed the Eternal, they would be the most blessed nation on earth. Conversely, if they disobeyed, God promised to curse and eventually destroy them because of their sins.
As the history of Israel in the Tanakh shows, only rarely did they obey God. Although the Eternal was patient and forgave them many times when they repented and turned back to Him, eventually He was forced to curse Israel as He had vowed to do.
First the house of Israel, the ten tribes that composed the northern kingdom with Samaria as their capital, was carried into captivity by Assyria (c. 722 B.C.). Hosea, who prophesied during the end of the northern kingdom, said this about God's chosen people who were called to be a royal priesthood and a holy nation.
HOSEA 4:6 My people are destroyed for lack of knowledge. Because you have rejected knowledge, I also will reject you from being priest for Me; because you have forgotten the law of your God, I also will forget your children. (NKJV)
Then, about 135 years later, the southern kingdom of Judah was subdued and finally conquered by Babylon (c. 587 B.C.). God had delivered His people to their enemies, as He had promised.
The people of Judah were given another chance. After the Persians defeated the Babylonians, the Jews were allowed to return to Judea (c. 538 B.C.) and eventually they rebuilt the Temple. Chastened and aware that their sins had brought about the captivity, many sought to obey God's laws upon their return to the land.
But by the time of Christ, once again unbelief had become a major problem. Many of the religious teachers of the day had substituted human traditions for the laws God had given Israel (Matt. 15:1-9; Mark 7:1-13). Because of their lack of faith, they didn't really believe the very Scriptures they professed to follow (John 5:39, 45-47). In the end, they rejected the anointed one God sent to them and had the Romans crucify him.
Now back to the question at hand. What does the flame in the parable represent?
When one looks at the history of the Jewish people from the time of Christ until today, one theme remains constant -- persecution. With the quashing of the Jewish revolts against Rome (66-70 A.D. and 132-135 A.D.), the saga of the Jewish people in the Diaspora has been one of persistent and harsh persecution from virtually all quarters. The Inquisition of the 15th century and the Holocaust of the 20th century are two of the more well-known anti-semitic episodes, but many more are recorded on the bloody pages of history. For their unbelief and rejection of truth and knowledge, the Jews have been cursed by God with the "flame" of suffering and grief down through the centuries. Unfortunately, most of that mistreatment has come at the hands of those who called themselves "Christians."
The Jews pictured by the rich man in this parable are in their present state because of their unbelief, which ultimately manifested itself in the rejection of the Messiah, Yeshua. Unfortunately, this parable shows that the punishment and testing they would undergo would not immediately lead them to Christ. Instead of calling on the Messiah, the rich man calls on his ancestor Abraham to help ease his suffering.
LUKE 16:25 "But Abraham said, 'Son, remember that in your lifetime you received your good things, and likewise Lazarus evil things; but now he is comforted and you are tormented. (NKJV)
Abraham clearly identifies the rich man as his descendant by calling him "son." He tells him that things have changed. When the Jews were God's chosen people, they enjoyed the spiritual blessings associated with that status. But now, Abraham says, Lazarus is enjoying those blessings while the rich man is grieving and in sorrow. "Tormented" here is another form of odunao, the same Greek verb found above in verse 24.
LUKE 16:26 "'And besides all this, between us and you there is a great gulf fixed, so that those who want to pass from here to you cannot, nor can those from there pass to us.'" (NKJV)
What is the "great gulf" which stands between the rich man and Lazarus? Paul aptly explains it to us in the eleventh chapter of Romans. He tells us that because of the Jews' unbelief, "God has given them a spirit of stupor, eyes that they should not see and ears that they should not hear, to this very day" (Rom. 11:8). Paul goes on to say that "a partial hardening would happen to Israel until the fullness of the Gentiles had come in" (Rom. 11:25). In II Corinthians 3:14-15, Paul tells us that the Israelites' "minds were blinded. For until this day the same veil remains unlifted in the reading of the Old Testament, because the veil is taken away in Christ. But even to this day, when Moses is read, a veil lies on their heart."
The "great gulf" mentioned by Abraham is nothing less than God's blinding in this age of the Jews as a whole to the truth about their Messiah! It's not that the Jewish nation won't acknowledge Christ; they cannot recognize his true identity because of God's actions! Yet because of the Eternal's great mercy, this state of affairs will not last forever (Rom. 11:26).
LUKE 16:27 "Then he said, 'I beg you therefore, father, that you would send him to my father's house, 28 for I have five brothers, that he may testify to them, lest they also come to this place of torment.'" (NKJV)
Yielding himself to his destiny, the rich man asks one more thing of his forefather Abraham. He pleads with him to send someone to warn his brothers, so that they may escape "this place of torment" (basanou), the testing and punishment that he was undergoing.
The fact that the rich man has five brothers is a vital clue to his true symbolic identity. Judah, the progenitor of the Jews, was the son of Jacob through Leah (Gen. 29:35). He had five full-blooded brothers: Reuben, Simeon, Levi, Issachar, and Zebulun (Gen. 35:23).
While the significance of this seemingly pointless detail has been neglected by scholars throughout the centuries, you can be certain that it did not escape the notice of the Pharisees and scribes to which Christ was speaking. They thoroughly knew their history and were extremely proud of their heritage. Yeshua wanted those self-righteous Pharisees to know exactly who He was referring to with this parable. This detail cements the identity of the rich man as the house of Judah, the Jews!
LUKE 16:29 "Abraham said to him, 'They have Moses and the prophets; let them hear them.'" (NKJV)
Once again Abraham refuses the rich man's request, telling him that the brothers already have a witness in the writings of Moses and the prophets that will allow them to escape his fate. Moses, as well as the prophets, are shown several times in the New Testament to support Yeshua's identity as the Messiah (Luke 24:27, 44; John 1:45; 5:46; Acts 3:22-24; 7:37; 26:22-23; 28:23). Abraham tells the rich man that his brothers would have to recognize the prophesied Messiah because of the things written about him in the Tanakh. This echoes what Yeshua told the Jews in John 5:45-47.
JOHN 5:45 "Do not think that I shall accuse you to the Father; there is one who accuses you -- Moses, in whom you trust. 46 For if you believed Moses, you would believe Me; for he wrote about Me. 47 But if you do not believe his writings, how will you believe My words?" (NKJV)
As the Scriptures show, the Jewish leaders of Christ's day generally failed to recognize the very one Moses wrote about (Deu. 18:15, 18).
LUKE 16:30 "And he said, 'No, father Abraham; but if one goes to them from the dead, they will repent.' 31 "But he said to him, 'If they do not hear Moses and the prophets, neither will they be persuaded though one rise from the dead.'" (NKJV)
Christ uses the last two verses of this parable as an amazing prophecy of his pending resurrection from the dead. The rich man says that although his brothers may not accept the scriptural evidence for the identity of the Messiah, they will accept the evidence of one who is raised from the dead.
But Abraham answers and plainly tells him that anyone who rejects God's Word about the Messiah will also refuse to acknowledge the evidence of a miraculous resurrection. This last verse is a sad prophecy about the Jews and about all the Israelites who have not, despite God's resurrection of His son from the power of the grave, recognized Christ as the Messiah.
Christ ends this parable abruptly, with no real resolution presented. The picture presented is a bleak one, yet there is hope for the Jews and for all Israel. In Romans 11, Paul laid out that hope in such a manner that scarcely few today have really believed it.
In Romans 11:1 Paul rhetorically asks if God has cast away His people, Israel. He answers his own question emphatically by saying "Certainly not!" He tells us that God has not cast away His people whom He foreknew. Paul writes that there is currently a remnant of Israel, analogous to the seven thousand reserved to God in Elijah's time (I Kings 19:18), that God has elected by grace. The rest God hardened, that the Gentiles might also be included in salvation through grace. He gives the resolution of the situation in verse 26.
ROMANS 11:25 For I do not desire, brethren, that you should be ignorant of this mystery, lest you should be wise in your own opinion, that blindness in part has happened to Israel until the fullness of the Gentiles has come in. 26 And so all Israel will be saved, as it is written: "The Deliverer will come out of Zion, and He will turn away ungodliness from Jacob; 27 for this is My covenant with them, when I take away their sins." 28 Concerning the gospel they are enemies for your sake, but concerning the election they are beloved for the sake of the fathers. 29 For the gifts and the calling of God are irrevocable. 30 For as you were once disobedient to God, yet have now obtained mercy through their disobedience, 31 even so these also have now been disobedient, that through the mercy shown you they also may obtain mercy. 32 For God has committed them all to disobedience, that He might have mercy on all. 33 Oh, the depth of the riches both of the wisdom and knowledge of God! How unsearchable are His judgments and His ways past finding out! (NKJV)
The same God that blinded Israel unto disobedience will have mercy on all that have been rebellious due to that blindness. To quote Paul once again, "Oh, the depth of the riches both of the wisdom and knowledge of God! How unsearchable are His judgments and unfathomable His ways!" Praised be the Eternal Creator of all things!
CONCLUSION
The parable of Lazarus and the rich man, long used by mainstream ministers to teach the reality of "hell," really has nothing to say about punishment or reward in the afterlife. Christ used this story, which fit the common misconception about life after death in his day, to show the fate that awaited the Jewish nation because of the unbelief and faithlessness which led them to reject him as the Messiah. They still suffer from that fate to this very day. Yet the time is soon coming when God will pour on the Jews the Spirit of grace and supplication; then they will look on Christ whom they pierced, and they will mourn for Him as one mourns for his only son, and grieve for Him as one grieves for a firstborn (Zec. 12:10).
Bryan T. (http://www.tentmaker.org/articles/Lazarus-byHuie.htm) Huie
Updated: January 9, 1998
avatar4321
07-03-2008, 11:33 AM
metaphors....God has no reason to keep those who do not want to live under His Law, alive. Sometimes we need references, lakes of fire....but there is no way a God who rests on the seventh day, is going to keep sinners alive forever.
Then why is there a resurrection of the just and unjust?
avatar4321
07-03-2008, 11:48 AM
I disagree with the analysis of Lazarus and the Rich man having nothing to do with a description of the afterlife. I think Christ accurately described what was going on in Hades at the time.
However, this parable was given prior to the Atonement and the Resurrection from the dead. It doesn't take into account the affects the Resurrection had on the separation in Hades because it hadn't happened yet.
Christ turned the key and opened the door when He descended to hades and overcame it. The concept is lost on alot of people nowadays because they don't speak of it much in the Bible, and not as many people read the Bible.
Christ's descent into hell (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Harrowing_of_Hell)
The fact is we know so very little on the afterlife, even in the scriptures. Most of what we have comes with the parable, but post resurrection, there isnt much given. Paul gave us a little info in what type of bodies we have in the resurrection. But other than that...
Hagbard Celine
07-03-2008, 12:00 PM
I disagree with the analysis of Lazarus and the Rich man having nothing to do with a description of the afterlife. I think Christ accurately described what was going on in Hades at the time.
However, this parable was given prior to the Atonement and the Resurrection from the dead. It doesn't take into account the affects the Resurrection had on the separation in Hades because it hadn't happened yet.
Christ turned the key and opened the door when He descended to hades and overcame it. The concept is lost on alot of people nowadays because they don't speak of it much in the Bible, and not as many people read the Bible.
Christ's descent into hell (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Harrowing_of_Hell)
The fact is we know so very little on the afterlife, even in the scriptures. Most of what we have comes with the parable, but post resurrection, there isnt much given. Paul gave us a little info in what type of bodies we have in the resurrection. But other than that...
Maybe if the committee had decided to put the Book of Thomas in the Bible instead of Revelations, we would know more about it. :eek:
actsnoblemartin
07-03-2008, 01:25 PM
I never hear you talk about islam, ever.
that was my point
Maybe if you started a thread about "any other religion," you'd hear me criticize it dumbsh*t.
You're comment is so f*cking asinine it could only be more stupid if you insulted me for ordering food in a restaurant or for watching a movie in a theater. What the f*ck else am I supposed to talk about in a thread about Christianity? Cock fighting? Playing the harmonica? Sailing technique? No. I'm supposed to talk about Christianity. If I were supposed to talk about "any other religion," the thread wouldn't be about "Christians" you f*cking twat.
If God loses the overwhelming majority of his creation to be "tormented forever" - is he not s colossal failure?
Did not Christ come to "die the sins of the whole world"?
he did. we have free choice, God is not going to force people to live with him. that is not true love. those who choose not God, have no place with Him. if one believes God is good and the opposite or the choice of not following/loving God is evil, then we cannot have a perfect existence with people/beings who choose evil. right now God is allowing evil and good to co-exist, to show the universe what exactly life is without God or what exactly are the consequences of not choosing him. IMO. this is why i do not believe these people will be forever residing in a "hell", that is cruel and unnecessary and also means that the universe is not perfect.
Maybe if you started a thread about "any other religion," you'd hear me criticize it dumbsh*t.
You're comment is so f*cking asinine it could only be more stupid if you insulted me for ordering food in a restaurant or for watching a movie in a theater. What the f*ck else am I supposed to talk about in a thread about Christianity? Cock fighting? Playing the harmonica? Sailing technique? No. I'm supposed to talk about Christianity. If I were supposed to talk about "any other religion," the thread wouldn't be about "Christians" you f*cking twat.
tell us how you really feel :laugh2:
Then why is there a resurrection of the just and unjust?
i am not sure, my understanding is so that all can have "justice." to have their "day in court." to see what sin is, to finally and forever choose between God or not God, to follow lucifer. i believe that after the 1000 years when God reestablishes his kingdom on earth, sin and those who choose sin, will cease to exist.
actsnoblemartin
07-03-2008, 03:47 PM
I gave you a chance you little twirp, (in another thread) and what did you do, you ran away like a little bitch.
Maybe if you started a thread about "any other religion," you'd hear me criticize it dumbsh*t.
You're comment is so f*cking asinine it could only be more stupid if you insulted me for ordering food in a restaurant or for watching a movie in a theater. What the f*ck else am I supposed to talk about in a thread about Christianity? Cock fighting? Playing the harmonica? Sailing technique? No. I'm supposed to talk about Christianity. If I were supposed to talk about "any other religion," the thread wouldn't be about "Christians" you f*cking twat.
Hagbard Celine
07-03-2008, 04:11 PM
I gave you a chance you little twirp, (in another thread) and what did you do, you ran away like a little bitch.
My purpose here is not to prove myself to the dregs of the Internet message board. If you're too lazy and/or f*cking stupid to actually look-up the threads ABOUT MUSLIMS where I have spoken-out against them then whose problem is that? It's certainly not mine d*ckhead.
he did. we have free choice, God is not going to force people to live with him. that is not true love. those who choose not God, have no place with Him. if one believes God is good and the opposite or the choice of not following/loving God is evil, then we cannot have a perfect existence with people/beings who choose evil. right now God is allowing evil and good to co-exist, to show the universe what exactly life is without God or what exactly are the consequences of not choosing him. IMO. this is why i do not believe these people will be forever residing in a "hell", that is cruel and unnecessary and also means that the universe is not perfect.
So is it "true love" or a "true relationship" to tell folks "either follow me or suffer eternal torment"? If I told you I'd kill you with a bullet to the head unless you were my friend - how would that be a 'real' friendship/relationship you'd have with me?
i am not sure, my understanding is so that all can have "justice." to have their "day in court." to see what sin is, to finally and forever choose between God or not God, to follow lucifer. i believe that after the 1000 years when God reestablishes his kingdom on earth, sin and those who choose sin, will cease to exist.
But doesn't the Bible tell us that "every knee will bow and every tongue confess"?
And in Romans 10 it tells us that if someone does that they'll be saved?
Also, can you please tell me where in the Bible it explicitly tell us that we have "free will" to follow God or not?
manu1959
07-04-2008, 12:03 AM
So is it "true love" or a "true relationship" to tell folks "either follow me or suffer eternal torment"? If I told you I'd kill you with a bullet to the head unless you were my friend - how would that be a 'real' friendship/relationship you'd have with me?
But doesn't the Bible tell us that "every knee will bow and every tongue confess"?
And in Romans 10 it tells us that if someone does that they'll be saved?
Also, can you please tell me where in the Bible it explicitly tell us that we have "free will" to follow God or not?
where in the bible does it say you must follow christ......he offers a relationship and it is up to you to choose to dance or not.....choices have consequences.....
you can live forever and be remembered as a good person or live forever and be remembered as an evil man......
where in the bible does it say you must follow christ......he offers a relationship and it is up to you to choose to dance or not.....choices have consequences.....
you can live forever and be remembered as a good person or live forever and be remembered as an evil man......
I don't recall every saying the Bible said you "must follow Christ"..
Christ's attonement for the sins of the world has already been paid.. nowhere do I see him offering a "relationship" - what he already offered he did so about 2000 years ago....
• If Hell was real and all died NOT because of their transgressions but because of Adam's transgression (Rom 5:18), why do many Christians not see what is plainly written, that "even so through one Man's righteous act the free gift came to ALL MEN, resulting in JUSTIFICATION OF LIFE!" (Rom. 5:18) This Scripture declares the FACT that all are justified due to Christ's righteous act. No one "decided" to die in Adam, it was "reckoned" to us. Equally no one "decided" to "receive eternal life," it is also "reckoned" to us. (A thorough understanding of Romans Chapter five carefully comparing several English translations would be a very good exercise. The omission of the definite article "the" in Rom. 5:15 before the word "many" in some translations has caused some great misunderstanding of this most important chapter of the Bible. (http://www.tentmaker.org/articles/hell_test.html))
• If there is a Hell and all who have sinned are destined to go there (which is everyone) unless they figure out how to avoid it, does that not consign all aborted babies and most children to Hell? (While some denominations teach a so-called "age of accountability," it is NOT found anywhere in the Bible. It is just some people's way of trying to make God more humane than the Hell teaching makes Him out to be.)
• If all things were made for GOD'S pleasure, is it conceivable that God would derive pleasure from seeing those He created endlessly tortured?
• If Hell is real since there is only one name under heaven by which men might be saved (Acts 4:12), why did God wait thousands of years and millions of souls after Adam's fall to provide the name and means of salvation? Are all those before Jesus' birth damned forever because they never heard of the death, burial, and resurrection of Christ? Would that be just? (Remember the Mosaic Law can never "save" anyone and it was only for Israel . Rom. 3:20)
• If Hell is a real place of everlasting punishment and if Jesus died in our place to save us from this fate, wouldn't Jesus have to be eternally punished if in fact He took our punishment upon Himself? But He's NOT being eternally punished. He DIED which is what the penalty of the wages of sin is, DEATH, NOT everlasting life of unending torture or eternal death (annihilation).
• If Hell is real, in Romans 5:19, the "many" who were made sinners were actually "all" of the human race. Why is the "many" who were made "righteous" not equally be "all" of the human race? "For as by one man's disobedience MANY were made sinners, so also by one Man's obedience MANY will be made righteous."
• If Hell is a real place of merciless endless torture, since God knows the beginning from the end, why didn't God just kill Adam and Eve and end the long terrible chain of misery that passed to their offspring before it began? After all, the Scriptures say that all died BECAUSE of Adam. (Rom. 5:18)
• If Hell is real, why is it not mentioned in most leading English Bible translations until Matthew? (Most Bible translations now acknowledge Sheol should NOT ever be translated Hell as the King James Bible incorrectly did.)
• If Hell was real, and if Paul was commissioned by God to preach the gospel to the nations, why did Paul not mention Hell even once except to declare victory over it? (1 Cor. 15:55, the word death in this passage is the word "Hades" which some translations of the Bible also translate Hell.)
• If Hell is real and everlasting, why does Psalm 30:5 say His anger is but for a moment?
• If Hell as a place of everlasting tortures was the real fate of all mankind unless they did something here on earth to prevent it, why didn't God make that warning plain right at the beginning of the Bible? God said the penalty for eating of the Tree of the Knowledge of Good and Evil was DEATH. He did NOT define death as eternal life being forever tortured in burning fire and brimstone.
• If Hell was real why didn't Moses warn about this fate in the Ten Commandments or the Mosaic Covenant consisting of over 600 laws, ordinances, and warnings? The Mosaic Law simply stated blessings and cursings IN THIS LIFETIME for failure to keep the Mosaic Law.
• If Hell is real and it is a place of eternally being separated from God, why does David say in the King James Bible, "Though I make my bed in Hell (Sheol) lo, Thou art there? (Again please note, most Christian Bibles NO LONGER have the word "Hell" in the Old Testament. The KJV written over 350 years ago is an exception. The Jews do NOT put the word "Hell" in their English translations of the Hebrew Scriptures, that is, the Old Testament and the leading English Christian Bibles have removed it because it is NOT in the originals. Most Christian scholars now acknowledge it should never have been placed there in the first place.)
• If Hell is real and if good people go to heaven and bad people go to Hell, why does EVERYONE, good or bad, go to the same place in the Old Testament? They ALL go to Sheol which the King James Version translated "Hell" thirty-0ne times, "grave" thirty-one times and "pit" three times? Are we all destined to go to Hell or did the King's translators make some gross translation errors?
• If Hell is real, why don't the Jews, many who know the Old Testament better than most Christians, not believe in the modern Christian concept of Hell? They say they don't believe it because it is not in their Scriptures. Most scholars today can not find Hell in the Old Testament. Most leading Bible translations no longer contain the word Hell in the entire Old Testament. (Genesis through Malachi.)
• If Hell doesn't exist in the Old Testament, how could Jesus and his disciples teach that salvation was deliverance from a place that is not even found in their Scriptures? (There was only the Old Testament at that time.) Would that not make Him appear like a false teacher? Or could it be that Jesus never taught such a concept in the first place? Could it be that this concept has been added to the church and SOME Bibles through "traditions of men?"
• If Hell is real, since SOME English translations use the word Hell for the Greek word "Gehenna," in the New Testament, why didn't this same place (Gehenna) get translated Hell in the many places where it appears in the Hebrew form "ga ben Hinnom" in the Old Testament? If the Jews did not understand this valley as a symbol of everlasting torture, why do SOME English translations give this word such a meaning? And who burned who in this valley? And what was God's response for Israel doing such a horrible thing to their children? (Jer. 32:33-35) And how could God say "such a thing never entered His mind" if in fact He is going to do the very same thing to most of His own children?
• If Hell was real and a place of no escape, why did the early church teach Jesus went to Hell (Hades), preached to them and led captivity captive? (Eph. 4:8,9; Psalm 68:18; 1 Peter 3:18-20)
• If Hell was real, why did the first complete presentation of Christianity (Origen, 220 A.D.) contain the doctrine of universal salvation?
• If Hell was real, why didn't the church teach it until AFTER the church departed from reading the Bible in Greek and Hebrew, substituting Latin in its stead several centuries after Christ's death?
Powered by vBulletin® Version 4.2.5 Copyright © 2024 vBulletin Solutions Inc. All rights reserved.