Mark68

Sheol, Hell and Lazarus and the Rich Man

7 posts in this topic

I was watching a video about hell not existing and one Christian argued it does. I'll paraphrase for brevity.

 

The early Jews did not teach a fiery hell, however, I read this:

 

"Sheol simply refers to the abode of the dead in general, not particularly the place of the punishment for the wicked. In fact, sheol was divided into two compartments, one for the righteous dead and one for the wicked dead."

 

First the relevant verses from the Rich Man and Lazarus story:

 

Luke 16: 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. 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.  

 

The author then says:

 

"First, we see (from Jesus' description) that the place of the dead is divided into two compartments separated by a gulf so that those on either side cannot go to the other side.

 

Second, we see that the beggar is taken to the side on which Abraham resides. This side of the place of the dead is a place of comfort. And the name for this portion of the place of the dead (where the righteous) go was "the Bosom of Abraham." As we will soon see, this place of the righteous dead was also known as "Paradise."

 

Third, we see that the rich man goes to the other side of the gulf, which is described as a place of fiery torment."

 

Isn't Jesus (who was a Jew) describing the Jewish underworld as (a) divided into two compartments and (b) with a fiery compartment? If the Jews never believed in a fiery hell, why does Jesus (a Jew) describe their Sheol as having a hell like location? I'm worried it might be because the Jews were wrong and the Son of God was putting them right.

 

--------------------------------------------

 

A related question

 

Is the punishment for the wicked eternal torment?

Revelation 20:10 And the devil that deceived them was cast into the lake of fire and brimstone, where the beast and the false prophet are, and shall be tormented day and night for ever and ever.

Matthew 25: 41 “Then he will say to those on his left, ‘Depart from me, you cursed, into the eternal fire prepared for the devil and his angels.

So the wicked are thrown into the same place as the devil, the beast and false prophet, and if the devil, beast and false prophet are tormented forever, doesn’t that mean the wicked will also be tormented forever?

Edited by Mark68

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I will be interested what someone comments for the first part.

 

 


For your related question my guess is that CD's will say devil is symbolic, fire is symbolic, so therefore torment is symbolic or something like that.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 hours ago, Flappie said:

Interesting interpretation that the rich man = Caiaphas and that the 5 brothers were high priests.
"Some of the keys (purple and fine linen, the beggar covered in sores, the crumbs from the rich man’s table) can only be understood by comparison with other Old Testament and New Testament passages"

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 5/20/2017 at 9:12 PM, Chris said:

Steven Cox wrote a good series on this as well as other fables in the NT. Here's the link to the series on the Tidings website.

http://www.tidings.org/wp//?s=Jewish+Fables

 

"Yet when he comes to Zechariah 3, he suddenly, and gratuitously, adds in the name “Michael.” Our usual interpretation of Jude 9 tends to turn a blind eye :word:to this, but the trouble is that the more you ignore the name, the more it sticks out like a sore thumb." 

http://www.tidings.org/wp/?p=2047

-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

"The third piece of evidence is that uncomfortable phrase “body of Moses.” The absence of any mention of “Joshua” in Jude’s version of the angelic dispute, shows that “body of Moses” is in some way a substitute for Joshua. Anyone who denies this has to explain why Jude deleted Joshua and introduced Moses’ corpse into a dispute where the other two parties (the angel and the devil) remain the same as in Zechariah 3:1. But the question for us is why Jude created a problem where none existed, by not simply writing “Joshua.”"

What about Hebrews 2:14? Same two parties but different dispute?

I would argue it is about the resurrection of Moses: Matthew 17:1–8, Mark 9:2–8, Luke 9:28–36

-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

"“turning the grace of our God into lasciviousness, and denying the only Lord God and our Lord Jesus Christ” (Jude 4)" with the objective of saving as many as possible (see Jude 22-23 in a modern translation)

"For certain men have secretly slipped in among you—men who long ago were marked out for the condemnation I am about to describe—ungodly men who have turned the grace of our God into a license for evil and who deny our only Master and Lord, Jesus Christ." Jude 4 (NET)

Strange for Steven to use that first translation in his article while recommending a modern translation for the other verses?

-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

"The name Azazel in I Enoch is based on the word “scapegoat” in Lev. 16:8,10,26, and, as a result of this, the Good News and Jerusalem Bibles have “Azazel” in the O.T. text. I mention this only because modern Enochites, of whom there are plenty, delight in these verses. But it’s clearly an anachronism to translate Leviticus according to much later Rabbinic legends which says more about the translators than the text."

Rotherham considers it to be Azazel

-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

"We know that Jude is primarily concerned with problems predicted earlier by Peter. In particular Jude was concerned with the growth of a belief in fallen angels within the church. The first half of Jude’s letter is largely requoting, emphasising and expanding upon what Peter had written (II Pet. 2) but which was apparently being ignored by the believers."

I couldn't quite see what the bold part was based on?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 4/27/2017 at 6:20 PM, Mark68 said:

--------------------------------------------

 

A related question

 

Is the punishment for the wicked eternal torment?

Revelation 20:10 And the devil that deceived them was cast into the lake of fire and brimstone, where the beast and the false prophet are, and shall be tormented day and night for ever and ever.
 

In Elpis Israel near the end John Thomas interprets this verse to mean something like the fire of wars and people will die by the sword

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!


Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.


Sign In Now

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.