Hell, Hades, Abrahams Bosom, Death, Lake of Fire, Bottomless Pit

[David Taylor]

SuperSonic,

What about the parable of the Unjust Steward (Luke 16:1?) You accept that this is a parable, don't you?

The difference in attempting to apply Luke 16 as 'only a parable' compared to other NT parables, is the concept of truthfulness.

In every parable, whether the parable was intended to be literal, or a figure of speech example, they were all truthful and possible.

People going out to sew crops.
People going out to tend their vineyards.
People going out to gather fishes in nets.
People going to town to earn a wage.
People wearing old and new garments.
People going forth to a wedding.
Blind people leading blind people into a ditch.
Trees putting forth branches, fruit, and leaves.
Sheep getting lost and gathered in by the shepherd.
etc...etc...

All of Jesus' parables, whether literally actual events, or just examples Jesus made up to teach a lesson; were all truthful, possible, and something related to every day life for all of the people listening.

But that entire pattern stops dead in it's tracks, with the viewpoint that wants to say that Luke 16's presentation of Jesus is just a parable and not a true situation.

In the Luke 16 story; some would say that Jesus isn't presenting a truthful, possible, realistic lesson at all. Jesus is making of a post-death situation that is not true. Jesus is making up elements of this untrue post-death environment like awareness, suffering, torment; that also are all untrue. For the most part, the entire 'parable' of Luke 16, once you leave the land of the living, and both the Rich man and the beggar are thrust into a completely false, untruthful, impossible venue.

This makes Luke 16, if not an accurate and true representation of the post-death afterlife of both the righteous and the wicked, a falsehood created by Jesus, and perpetuated by Jesus, of something that would NEVER occur. (unlike all of the other practical and realistically possible parables Jesus told).

That is the problem with attempting to classify Luke 16 as a parable...not that it couldn't be a parable; but that if one does that application, they should not take the next step, and force Jesus into fabricating known falsehoods and misleading information; of which the entire parable does do...(if it isn't understood by the reader to be a real place Jesus is warning against in His figurative parable).

Think about it folks. Did Jesus specifically intend to deceive with Luke 16, by presenting an untrue and false situation, as if it were true and expected?

[John 8:32]

The difference in attempting to apply Luke 16 as 'only a parable' compared to other NT parables, is the concept of truthfulness.

In every parable, whether the parable was intended to be literal, or a figure of speech example, they were all truthful and possible.

People going out to sew crops.
People going out to tend their vineyards.
People going out to gather fishes in nets.
People going to town to earn a wage.
People wearing old and new garments.
People going forth to a wedding.
Blind people leading blind people into a ditch.
Trees putting forth branches, fruit, and leaves.
Sheep getting lost and gathered in by the shepherd.
etc...etc...

All of Jesus' parables, whether literally actual events, or just examples Jesus made up to teach a lesson; were all truthful, possible, and something related to every day life for all of the people listening.

But that entire pattern stops dead in it's tracks, with the viewpoint that wants to say that Luke 16's presentation of Jesus is just a parable and not a true situation.

In the Luke 16 story; some would say that Jesus isn't presenting a truthful, possible, realistic lesson at all. Jesus is making of a post-death situation that is not true. Jesus is making up elements of this untrue post-death environment like awareness, suffering, torment; that also are all untrue. For the most part, the entire 'parable' of Luke 16, once you leave the land of the living, and both the Rich man and the beggar are thrust into a completely false, untruthful, impossible venue.

This makes Luke 16, if not an accurate and true representation of the post-death afterlife of both the righteous and the wicked, a falsehood created by Jesus, and perpetuated by Jesus, of something that would NEVER occur. (unlike all of the other practical and realistically possible parables Jesus told).

That is the problem with attempting to classify Luke 16 as a parable...not that it couldn't be a parable; but that if one does that application, they should not take the next step, and force Jesus into fabricating known falsehoods and misleading information; of which the entire parable does do...(if it isn't understood by the reader to be a real place Jesus is warning against in His figurative parable).

Think about it folks. Did Jesus specifically intend to deceive with Luke 16, by presenting an untrue and false situation, as if it were true and expected?

Well, what was the purpose for parables? Straightforward, simple lessons so that all could understand?

Mat 13:13 Therefore speak I to them in parables: because they seeing see not; and hearing they hear not, neither do they understand.
Mat 13:14 And in them is fulfilled the prophecy of Esaias, which saith, By hearing ye shall hear, and shall not understand; and seeing ye shall see, and shall not perceive:
Mat 13:15 For this people's heart is waxed gross, and their ears are dull of hearing, and their eyes they have closed; lest at any time they should see with their eyes, and hear with their ears, and should understand with their heart, and should be converted, and I should heal them.

Mar 4:11 And he said unto them, Unto you it is given to know the mystery of the kingdom of God: but unto them that are without, all these things are done in parables:
Mar 4:12 That seeing they may see, and not perceive; and hearing they may hear,and not understand; lest at any time they should be converted, and their sins should be forgiven them.

Luk 8:9 And his disciples asked him, saying, What might this parable be?
Luk 8:10 And he said,Unto you it is given to know the mysteries of the kingdom of God: but to other sin parables; that seeing they might not see, and hearing they might notunderstand.

[John146]

The difference in attempting to apply Luke 16 as 'only a parable' compared to other NT parables, is the concept of truthfulness.

In every parable, whether the parable was intended to be literal, or a figure of speech example, they were all truthful and possible.

People going out to sew crops.
People going out to tend their vineyards.
People going out to gather fishes in nets.
People going to town to earn a wage.
People wearing old and new garments.
People going forth to a wedding.
Blind people leading blind people into a ditch.
Trees putting forth branches, fruit, and leaves.
Sheep getting lost and gathered in by the shepherd.
etc...etc...

All of Jesus' parables, whether literally actual events, or just examples Jesus made up to teach a lesson; were all truthful, possible, and something related to every day life for all of the people listening.

But that entire pattern stops dead in it's tracks, with the viewpoint that wants to say that Luke 16's presentation of Jesus is just a parable and not a true situation.

In the Luke 16 story; some would say that Jesus isn't presenting a truthful, possible, realistic lesson at all. Jesus is making of a post-death situation that is not true. Jesus is making up elements of this untrue post-death environment like awareness, suffering, torment; that also are all untrue. For the most part, the entire 'parable' of Luke 16, once you leave the land of the living, and both the Rich man and the beggar are thrust into a completely false, untruthful, impossible venue.

This makes Luke 16, if not an accurate and true representation of the post-death afterlife of both the righteous and the wicked, a falsehood created by Jesus, and perpetuated by Jesus, of something that would NEVER occur. (unlike all of the other practical and realistically possible parables Jesus told).

That is the problem with attempting to classify Luke 16 as a parable...not that it couldn't be a parable; but that if one does that application, they should not take the next step, and force Jesus into fabricating known falsehoods and misleading information; of which the entire parable does do...(if it isn't understood by the reader to be a real place Jesus is warning against in His figurative parable).

Think about it folks. Did Jesus specifically intend to deceive with Luke 16, by presenting an untrue and false situation, as if it were true and expected?

Well said. Some people here are completely missing what you talked about here. When Jesus told a made up story, it did not involve made up things that didn't exist at all in reality, it involved things that were real, such as seeds, thorns, wheat, tares, leaven, treasure, a field, a mustard seed and so on. Even though those things were being referenced symbolically in His parables, they were still real things and not things He just made up that didn't exist in reality. He spoke of real things and real situations that could happen in reality even though they were usually made up stories involving made up people, places and things (if Luke 16:19-31 is a parable then it is an exception to that).

We know Hades is a real place so when He mentions Hades in Luke 16:19-31, there is absolutely no reason whatsoever to think He wasn't speaking of the real place called Hades. Same with Abraham's bosom. And there is no basis for thinking that portraying a person being in torment in Hades is not a description of something that could really occur even if the rich man was a made up person. If he was a made up person then he was representing what it was like for real people in Hades. They are in torment. Why would Jesus portray a person being in torment in Hades if wasn't actually possible for a person to be in torment in Hades? That makes no sense. If Hades is real then the torment that Jesus portrayed the rich man as feeling in Hades must at least represent what it's like for those who are in Hades even if the rich man was not a real person. The bottom line is that there's no reason to think that Jesus would portray someone as being in torment in Hades unless people were really in torment in Hades.

[John146]

Well, what was the purpose for parables? Straightforward, simple lessons so that all could understand?

Mat 13:13 Therefore speak I to them in parables: because they seeing see not; and hearing they hear not, neither do they understand.
Mat 13:14 And in them is fulfilled the prophecy of Esaias, which saith, By hearing ye shall hear, and shall not understand; and seeing ye shall see, and shall not perceive:
Mat 13:15 For this people's heart is waxed gross, and their ears are dull of hearing, and their eyes they have closed; lest at any time they should see with their eyes, and hear with their ears, and should understand with their heart, and should be converted, and I should heal them.

Mar 4:11 And he said unto them, Unto you it is given to know the mystery of the kingdom of God: but unto them that are without, all these things are done in parables:
Mar 4:12 That seeing they may see, and not perceive; and hearing they may hear,and not understand; lest at any time they should be converted, and their sins should be forgiven them.

Luk 8:9 And his disciples asked him, saying, What might this parable be?
Luk 8:10 And he said,Unto you it is given to know the mysteries of the kingdom of God: but to other sin parables; that seeing they might not see, and hearing they might notunderstand.

Obviously, believers can understand them while unbelievers cannot understand them. What is the reason for your question?

[Samuel Cripps]

The parable of the rich man and Lazarus is unique, but it is a parable nonetheless. Don't you find it telling that it begins the same way as the parable of the unjust steward? Also, don't you find it odd that this parable, if taken literally, contradicts what Jesus said elsewhere about judgment occurring at the end of the age, after the resurrection of the dead?

The difference in attempting to apply Luke 16 as 'only a parable' compared to other NT parables, is the concept of truthfulness.

In every parable, whether the parable was intended to be literal, or a figure of speech example, they were all truthful and possible.

People going out to sew crops.
People going out to tend their vineyards.
People going out to gather fishes in nets.
People going to town to earn a wage.
People wearing old and new garments.
People going forth to a wedding.
Blind people leading blind people into a ditch.
Trees putting forth branches, fruit, and leaves.
Sheep getting lost and gathered in by the shepherd.
etc...etc...

All of Jesus' parables, whether literally actual events, or just examples Jesus made up to teach a lesson; were all truthful, possible, and something related to every day life for all of the people listening.

But that entire pattern stops dead in it's tracks, with the viewpoint that wants to say that Luke 16's presentation of Jesus is just a parable and not a true situation.

In the Luke 16 story; some would say that Jesus isn't presenting a truthful, possible, realistic lesson at all. Jesus is making of a post-death situation that is not true. Jesus is making up elements of this untrue post-death environment like awareness, suffering, torment; that also are all untrue. For the most part, the entire 'parable' of Luke 16, once you leave the land of the living, and both the Rich man and the beggar are thrust into a completely false, untruthful, impossible venue.

This makes Luke 16, if not an accurate and true representation of the post-death afterlife of both the righteous and the wicked, a falsehood created by Jesus, and perpetuated by Jesus, of something that would NEVER occur. (unlike all of the other practical and realistically possible parables Jesus told).

That is the problem with attempting to classify Luke 16 as a parable...not that it couldn't be a parable; but that if one does that application, they should not take the next step, and force Jesus into fabricating known falsehoods and misleading information; of which the entire parable does do...(if it isn't understood by the reader to be a real place Jesus is warning against in His figurative parable).

Think about it folks. Did Jesus specifically intend to deceive with Luke 16, by presenting an untrue and false situation, as if it were true and expected?

[John146]

The parable of the rich man and Lazarus is unique, but it is a parable nonetheless. Don't you find it telling that it begins the same way as the parable of the unjust steward?

If it's a parable, how does that change what is depicted? Do you not believe that Hades is a real place? It seems clear that Jesus mentioned real people and places in the story so why can't anything be learned about those people and places from the story?

Also, don't you find it odd that this parable, if taken literally, contradicts what Jesus said elsewhere about judgment occurring at the end of the age, after the resurrection of the dead?

No, it doesn't. Hades and the lake of fire are not the same. Hades will be cast into the lake of fire (Rev 20:14).

[Samuel Cripps]

No, it doesn't. Hades and the lake of fire are not the same. Hades will be cast into the lake of fire (Rev 20:14).

I understand this. But Jesus elsewhere taught that judgment will only take place after the resurrection of the dead. Or do you dispute this?

[John146]

I understand this. But Jesus elsewhere taught that judgment will only take place after the resurrection of the dead. Or do you dispute this?

I dispute the doctrine of soul sleep that you apparently believe in (correct me if I'm wrong about that). Being held in Hades is not the judgment He was referring to as occurring after the resurrection of the dead. Simple as that. Judgment day is a day when He will hand out eternal rewards for the righteous and eternal punishment for the wicked, which will occur upon being cast into the lake of fire.

[David Taylor]

Well, what was the purpose for parables? Straightforward, simple lessons so that all could understand?

Mat 13:13 Therefore speak I to them in parables: because they seeing see not; and hearing they hear not, neither do they understand.
Mat 13:14 And in them is fulfilled the prophecy of Esaias, which saith, By hearing ye shall hear, and shall not understand; and seeing ye shall see, and shall not perceive:
Mat 13:15 For this people's heart is waxed gross, and their ears are dull of hearing, and their eyes they have closed; lest at any time they should see with their eyes, and hear with their ears, and should understand with their heart, and should be converted, and I should heal them.

Mar 4:11 And he said unto them, Unto you it is given to know the mystery of the kingdom of God: but unto them that are without, all these things are done in parables:
Mar 4:12 That seeing they may see, and not perceive; and hearing they may hear,and not understand; lest at any time they should be converted, and their sins should be forgiven them.

Luk 8:9 And his disciples asked him, saying, What might this parable be?
Luk 8:10 And he said,Unto you it is given to know the mysteries of the kingdom of God: but to other sin parables; that seeing they might not see, and hearing they might notunderstand.

You missed my point entirely.

The scriptures you wrote, say something completely different.

Those scriptures tell us that the parables intent was to be understood by those who believe Jesus and hear they by faith; but the wicked, self-righteous ones, like the Pharisees and Scribes would not understand them, because they had no faith.

My point, was that Jesus always presented parables in common, realistic, truthful presentations; of commonly known situations and events that either occur or could occur.

The only time this is brought into problem, is with the soul-sleep viewpoint when it wants to say that there is no after-death venue as Jesus describes vividly in Luke 16. In this case, Jesus is made into being a creator of a deceptive parable....not to just the unfaithful Pharisees who can't understand all the parables; but also to the faithful who want to believe and trust Jesus at His word; and who should be able to understand this parable like all the others, in it's truthful presentation.

Only the soul-sleep interpretation of Luke 17 makes Jesus into a teacher to the faithful, about a place and immediate consequences, that don't really exist.

[David Taylor]

The parable of the rich man and Lazarus is unique, but it is a parable nonetheless. Don't you find it telling that it begins the same way as the parable of the unjust steward? Also, don't you find it odd that this parable, if taken literally, contradicts what Jesus said elsewhere about judgment occurring at the end of the age, after the resurrection of the dead?

No contradiction at all Mr Cripps. Everyone being judged at the resurrection of the dead at the end of the age, doesn't preclude an interim division of the faithful and unfaithful at death prior to that final judgment, as Jesus describes in Luke 16.

[markedward]

We can all so "Oh, but it's symbolic!" but then again, I guess we could say that about every verse that doesn't agree with what we believe.

This is not even remotely how I approach the Bible. If you can't bother to engage in dialogue without relying on deceptive caricatures of those you disagree with, I'm not going to spend my time on that dialogue.

[percho]

My bible tells me the soul of Jesus was resurrected from Hades. My bible nowhere tells me that Hades has compartments, one for the "good" and or one for the "bad".

I would assume the soul arrives wherever it goes the moment the last of breath maintaining life in a person departs from that person. If so then I assume the soul of Jesus arrived in Hades somewhere around the ninth hour on the fourteenth of Nisan and being Jesus himself said the Son of Man would be three days and three nights in the heart of the earth, I guess Hades and the heart of the earth would be synonymous.
Course my bible also says Jesus said something to one of the thieves about paradise relative to the day he died. Now the thief had asked Jesus to remember him when he came in his kingdom and my bible tells me that Jesus had at that time come in the flesh that he had come by the water and the blood, and flesh and blood cannot inherit the kingdom of God and the change enabling one to inherit the kingdom of God comes through resurrection as a spiritual, quickened man and Jesus was the firstborn from the dead. A new creation of man? Anyway it appears to me that it would have been at least three days and three nights from his death before he could have inherited the kingdom of God. After all he was the heir of something of which we are also joint heirs with him.

Just where was his soul for those three days and three nights and just what was his soul doing all that time? Was his soul and body together all the time his soul was in Hades or did his body get moved around a bit?

The rich man. In Hades he lift up his eyes. The man was being physically resurrected from the dead in a physical body to house his soul of which both could be destroyed in Hell Fire, the second death.

When do you believe Jesus lifted up his eyes in Hades? Or do you?

[warfrog]

As far as "compartments" go, Revelation gives you an idea that thier are indeed seperate places, if even just for the dead.

13And the sea gave up the dead which were in it; and death and hell delivered up the dead which were in them: and they were judged every man according to their works.

Seems understandable that in fact seperate places exist for one to be in upon physical death in our present generation.

[John 8:32]

My bible tells me the soul of Jesus was resurrected from Hades. My bible nowhere tells me that Hades has compartments, one for the "good" and or one for the "bad".

I would assume the soul arrives wherever it goes the moment the last of breath maintaining life in a person departs from that person. If so then I assume the soul of Jesus arrived in Hades somewhere around the ninth hour on the fourteenth of Nisan and being Jesus himself said the Son of Man would be three days and three nights in the heart of the earth, I guess Hades and the heart of the earth would be synonymous.
Course my bible also says Jesus said something to one of the thieves about paradise relative to the day he died. Now the thief had asked Jesus to remember him when he came in his kingdom and my bible tells me that Jesus had at that time come in the flesh that he had come by the water and the blood, and flesh and blood cannot inherit the kingdom of God and the change enabling one to inherit the kingdom of God comes through resurrection as a spiritual, quickened man and Jesus was the firstborn from the dead. A new creation of man? Anyway it appears to me that it would have been at least three days and three nights from his death before he could have inherited the kingdom of God. After all he was the heir of something of which we are also joint heirs with him.

Just where was his soul for those three days and three nights and just what was his soul doing all that time? Was his soul and body together all the time his soul was in Hades or did his body get moved around a bit?

The rich man. In Hades he lift up his eyes. The man was being physically resurrected from the dead in a physical body to house his soul of which both could be destroyed in Hell Fire, the second death.

When do you believe Jesus lifted up his eyes in Hades? Or do you?

My Bible tells me Jesus Christ was resurrected from the DEAD...

1Co 15:12 Now if Christ be preached that he rose from the dead, how say some among you that there is no resurrection of the dead?

G3498
νεκρός
nekros
nek-ros'
From an apparently primary word νέκυς nekus (a corpse); dead (literally or figuratively; also as noun): - dead.

Not from life in some other place, from the dead.

[David Taylor]

My Bible tells me Jesus Christ was resurrected from the DEAD...

1Co 15:12 Now if Christ be preached that he rose from the dead, how say some among you that there is no resurrection of the dead?

G3498
νεκρός
nekros
nek-ros'
From an apparently primary word νέκυς nekus (a corpse); dead (literally or figuratively; also as noun): - dead.

Not from life in some other place, from the dead.

Yes for 3 days, Jesus Christ's body was dead, and in the grave. That body arose from the dead.

The question is, was His spirit also dead in the grave for three days, or did it go somewhere else during that three day period.
The further question is, if the spirit separates from the body at death, and goes some other place, is the spirit aware, conscious, and sentient during that time?

I doubt that any Christian would disagree that Christ's body was dead and in the grave for three days. The question however, where there is disagreement, is related to His immaterial spirit.

I avoided using the term 'soul' because spirit is more precise. Spirit is always used to denote the immaterial aspect of a person. Whereas soul is a loosely defined term, depending on the context of how it is used. The most common use of soul is as a synononym to the immaterial spirit; but sometimes soul is also used to denote the body itself, or the spirit/body unit....so soul can be more difficult to identify; because of the context. Spirit is always the immaterial aspect of a person; and body is always the physical aspect of a person.