What's your view on Hell?

[1 God]

Originally Posted by Nicodemus1968

So you read that parable as in a literal sense?

I mean the way I’m reading this post of yours is, there is no reason why Jesus would use specific name in this parable, something he usually didn’t do. And the fact he uses Abraham, Lazarus, which means Eleazar in the Hebrew, stats that the rich man had 5 brothers (as did Judah). And you say it basically means if your rich and people die of hunger at your gates, you’re going to hell?

It was no more a parable than Mark 16:16 was.

[1 God]

Originally Posted by coksiw

1 God,


Who was him referring this parable to back then?

The context is "Luk 16:14 NKJV - 14 Now the Pharisees, who were lovers of money, also heard all these things, and they derided Him."

So it seems that the targeted audience consisted of the Pharisees, who already believed in Hades.

The point of the parable back then wasn't to tell them of the existence of Hades, but rather the everlasting consequences of their unrighteousness, or more precisely, the reverse of fortune: 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. Their unrighteousness was the lack of compassion for the poor, who were also children of Abraham, and therefore their brethren; which would be a violation of the law of Moses.

Mat 5:20 NKJV - 20 "For I say to you, that unless your righteousness exceeds [the righteousness] of the scribes and Pharisees, you will by no means enter the kingdom of heaven.

Luk 11:40-41 NKJV - 40 "Foolish ones! Did not He who made the outside make the inside also? 41 "But rather give alms of such things as you have; then indeed all things are clean to you.

There are also other points in the parable, of course, like the reality that if they haven't believed Moses's writings and obeyed a this point, they will not change even with great signs.

It was not a parable. It was an indictment.

[coksiw]

Originally Posted by Nicodemus1968

Regarding the highlighted portion.

Then why did the consequence come after death?

The verse you posted says, the rich man was tormented, and Lazarus is comforted.

I don’t understand your question. The point back then wasn’t to tell the Pharisees about Hades because they already believed in it. I already said that in my post. Hades is real, but the point of the parable was not to teach about it originally. I keep saying “back then” on purpose. That is the truth and you have to face it.

The parable “here and now” reveals to us the understanding of Jesus himself showing evidences of a Hades truth, assuming this is a parable and not a fable.

[coksiw]

Originally Posted by 1 God

It was not a parable. It was an indictment.

You should be able to explain why it is not a parable. I would love to see you analysis of the text to identify the genre. Please go ahead.

[Esaias]

Originally Posted by mizpeh

What kind of death is the second death?

Annihilation:

Psalm 37:20 KJV
But the wicked shall perish, and the enemies of the Lord shall be as the fat of lambs: they shall consume; into smoke shall they consume away.

[Esaias]

As I previously posted, the Old Testament clearly and unequivocally teaches there is no consciousness in death. This is the BIBLICAL doctrine of "the intermediate state" up to and including Jesus' time.

Then Jesus, in the middle of a series of parables directed against the scribes and Pharisees, attacking their notions of their own self importance, suddenly has a boomer moment and drifts off into a reverie about some dead beggar named Lazarus and some unnamed rich guy and their adventures in the afterlife?

Let's assume that is true. A few questions naturally arise.

1. Why was nobody startled about this clearly unbiblical portrayal of the afterlife? There is no denying the OT description of the after-death state and the Rich Man and Lazarus story are contradictory and incompatible, if both are actually describing what happens after death. If the Pharisees believed the Bible, they would have said Jesus was introducing Greek myths to the people. The disciples should have been like "Wait, huh? Where did all this stuff come from?" Because try as one might, there is no Abraham's bosom, angels carrying away the dead, a great chasm, separated compartments, crying whining tormented wicked, and righteous saints getting pats on the head from Father Abraham, in the Old Testament (the Bible in the first century). So why does everyone take it in stride? Nobody is startled by the description of the after death state? Almost like they are familiar with the description already? Almost like they heard it before? How is that?

2. Why does the story sound exactly like the kind of stories common among pagan Greeks, and so unlike the Bible's prior teaching on the subject?

3. Why is the story simply a slight variation of several rabbinic/talmudic stories regarding a dead rich guy and a dead beggar/poor person who die and go to separate-but-close compartments in hades?

4. Why did pharisees already believe in two compartments in hades for the dead, one for the righteous and one for the unrighteous, separated from each other by a chasm or gulf, yet close enough for the inhabitants to converse? Where did they get that idea from?

5. Why do the rabbinic pharisee versions of the same story serve a literary purpose of illustrating the importance of certain moral values and ethical behaviours regarding "social justice" and are NOT used to teach about the cosmology of hades/sheol or the literal characteristics of the intermediate or after-death state?

There are more questions, of course, and none of these are for Sean/Rene, but I'll stop here for now.

[Esaias]

Originally Posted by Amanah

So, Jesus is teaching that if you pass by someone who is begging on a street corner and you dont help them you will burn and scream in agony in hell for eternity?

Actually, the story makes absolutely no claims whatsoever about the rich man's moral condition or ethical behaviour, nor about the beggar's moral condition or ethical behaviour:

Luke 16:19-31 KJV
There was a certain rich man, which was clothed in purple and fine linen, and fared sumptuously every day: [20] And there was a certain beggar named Lazarus, which was laid at his gate, full of sores, [21] And desiring to be fed with the crumbs which fell from the rich man's table: moreover the dogs came and licked his sores. [22] And it came to pass, that the beggar died, and was carried by the angels into Abraham's bosom: the rich man also died, and was buried; [23] And in hell he lift up his eyes, being in torments, and seeth Abraham afar off, and Lazarus in his bosom. [24] 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. [25] 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. [26] And beside all this, between us and you there is a great gulf fixed: so that they which would pass from hence to you cannot; neither can they pass to us, that would come from thence. [27] Then he said, I pray thee therefore, father, that thou wouldest send him to my father's house: [28] For I have five brethren; that he may testify unto them, lest they also come into this place of torment. [29] Abraham saith unto him, They have Moses and the prophets; let them hear them. [30] And he said, Nay, father Abraham: but if one went unto them from the dead, they will repent. [31] And he said unto him, If they hear not Moses and the prophets, neither will they be persuaded, though one rose from the dead.

The most one could conclude from the raw data is that rich people (except Abraham) are tormented in hell while poor beggars are comforted. That is, IF the story is meant to teach about people's final destination in the afterlife.

[1 God]

https://wol.jw.org/en/wol/d/r1/lp-e/2002521


The JWs teach hell is the grave of all mankind.

[diakonos]

Originally Posted by 1 God

https://wol.jw.org/en/wol/d/r1/lp-e/2002521


The JWs teach hell is the grave of all mankind.

Not relevant to this thread.

[1 God]

Originally Posted by coksiw

You should be able to explain why it is not a parable. I would love to see you analysis of the text to identify the genre. Please go ahead.

There is not even a hint in the region of the passage that it is remotely a parable. If there was, I would concede. It does not implicate just greedy men, but mistreatment of others by ignoring them. The book of James calls it out too.