Lazarus and the Rich man...

[Rhema]

Rhema. -- nor to sound mean -- but is everything the working of the devil?

That doesn't sound mean, just highly ignorant (and insular). Most of the time people are just stupid.

The term Bible is the same as God's Word.

A claim that cannot be found in the Bible. And as I've said, I rely upon the Bible to tell me what the Word(LOGOS) of God and the Word(RHEMA) of God mean.

The term Bible is the same as God's Word.

A teaching that is not found in the words of Jesus, but rather was cemented by Martin Luther ... (who was not a Baptist ... nor a King).

The term Bible is the same as God's Word.

Who told you this?

I've never seen the Need to do that though it was brought up before. A generation could be 30 yrs.or 60 yes.

Most Christians never see the Need to do any studying. And I didn't ask how long a generation was. I asked if you counted the people and compared the two lists.

In First Chronicles 3:10-24, the genealogy of the family of Solomon is given, and in the book of Chronicles there are 18 generations between King David and the Babylonian exile, and not 14. In addition, Matthew is missing four names that are clearly listed in the Hebrew Bible (although one might be an alternate spelling).

But .... hey, no NEED, right?

It's trusting God's Word to be truthful.

But is it wrong to believe that "truthful" also means accurate ??
Indeed, God's Word (whether LOGOS or RHEMA) is truthful.
The Bible ... well, despite the screeds and histrionics of inerrancy, one can easily find the facts.

That entire chapter is wonderful.

That entire chapter is mistranslated.

Rhema -- seriously -- there will no more conversations with you. At all.

How rude. But you do not disappoint.

Rhema

(And I'm the one that's "messed up?")
.

 

[Sue D.]

Bye Rhema.

 

[Rhema]

Bye Rhema.

auf Wiedersehen

(And my apologies. I ought to have known that you really couldn't handle any complicated questions.)

Rhema

 

[Beetow]

And why wouldn't the rich man ask how to cross over to get out of the flames ??

It's reasonable to expect that folks' first reaction upon arrival on the wrong side of
the netherworld is primal fear, i.e. panic; which would quite naturally trigger a very
strong impulse to try and find some way out of the flames the same as anybody
would do caught in, say, a hotel fire. Consequently they find out right quick either
by personal experience or by talking with long-time prisoners, that the chasm is
impassible; at least from their side.

Now; exactly what the man had seen, or heard tell by others, that led him to hope
against hope that folks from Abraham's side were able to cross, I don't know;
maybe his request was just an act of desperation. But I'm beginning to suspect
there is a lot more to this story than only the portions that Jesus exposed-- a lot more.

I take it, Beetow, that you think this passage to be a spiritual lesson, and not a
scientific cosmology ??

The information you seek is located back in post No.194
_

 

[Sue D.]

auf Wiedersehen

(And my apologies. I ought to have known that you really couldn't handle any complicated questions.)

Rhema

Rhema -- you simply have no confidence in God's Word . You choose to skrutenize the daylights out of His Word. You've run down every thing I say. Including God's way of salvation. So-- no there will be no more interaction between us. And it has nothing to do with my being a temporary resident in an assisted living facility. I'm not some nim-witted old lady in a nursing home. Far from it.

 

[Beetow]

There's no mention of the rich man wailing and/or gnashing his teeth; which
suggests to me the although he's in a great deal of discomfort; it's all
what might be called threshold, i.e. within the limits of his tolerance for pain
and not quite enough to make him writhe, groan, and/or howl like a
wounded dog.
_

 

[Rhema]

The information you seek is located back in post No.194

So it troubles you that Jesus could have used the name of Abraham within a parable ??

But I'm beginning to suspect
there is a lot more to this story than only the portions that Jesus exposed-- a lot more.

I would agree. One would merely need to reference what the Judaic teaching of the "Bosom of Abraham" meant at the time. It is found only in this passage of Luke and remains cryptic and vague. I have sometimes wondered if such were equivalent to the Catholic concept of Purgatory, a place wherein one suffers until one's remaining "sin-debt" is paid, and then is released. The rich man would have had no "primal fear" to try and cross over, knowing that he was supposed to "serve his time" yet just didn't realize how bad it was.

Imagine the surprise of the rich man to find out that such a doctrine wasn't true:

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. Then he said, I pray thee therefore, father, that thou wouldest send him to my father's house: For I have five brethren; that he may testify unto them, lest they also come into this place of torment.​

(Luke 16:26-28 KJV)​

The passage above shows that the request to send a dead man (Lazarus) back to the living as a Testament came only after it was revealed that the "great gulf" is fixed and that one cannot cross over.

It's obvious here that Jesus is teaching that one doesn't get a second chance or a "do over." Or that "sin-debt" can be paid for in a later afterlife.

The key, of course, is here:

And he said unto him, If they hear not Moses and the prophets, neither will they be persuaded, though one rose from the dead.​

(Luke 16:31 KJV)​

It would explain why people reject the Resurrection of Jesus as a basis for belief.

Kindly,
Rhema

 

[Rhema]

Rhema -- you simply have no confidence in God's Word .

Shame on you. Seriously.

I have the utmost confidence in the Bible to tell me what the Word of God is (whether LOGOS or RHEMA). But when one rejects the actual definitions found in the Bible, to change the "Word of God" to BE the Bible itself, then such truly perverts the truth found therein.

But I get it. "Word of God" means Bible was drilled into your head for decades and decades to the point where you cannot fathom anything else. But it's a teaching that just is not true - according to the Bible.

You've run down every thing I say.

And I get that you cannot discuss a theological premise without getting personal. Most people can't. It's all about "feelings" and hardly anything about Facts or Truth. But get over yourself. Stop playing the victim card. I'm not your enemy, nor am I attacking you when I disagree with things you say, or present an explanation that refutes what you've been led to believe.

Including God's way of salvation.

You think that Jesus gave a prayer that was insufficient unto salvation. I believe differently. If the following is true -

Be it known unto you therefore, men and brethren, that through this man is preached unto you the forgiveness of sins:​

(Acts 13:38 KJV)​

Then one needs to learn what Jesus preached about the forgiveness of sins and follow it. It truly is that simple. (And it's found in the Lord's Prayer.)

If Jesus came preaching the Gospel, then the Gospel is what Jesus preached.

I know God's way of salvation, but unlike you, I have never stated that you are unsaved. (Have I? If so, where?)

So-- no there will be no more interaction between us.

Well... you kinda strike me as a person who needs to get in the last word. So... I have little faith in that statement.

I'm not some nim-witted old lady in a nursing home. Far from it.

Then address the concerns and issues I've broached. You haven't. Far from it, you've only repeated your personal opinions without a shred of reasoning or logic behind them.

Rhema

 

[Rhema]

There's no mention of the rich man wailing and/or gnashing his teeth; which
suggests to me the although he's in a great deal of discomfort; it's all
what might be called threshold, i.e. within the limits of his tolerance for pain
and not quite enough to make him writhe, groan, and/or howl like a
wounded dog.
_

Hence ... allegory ... parable ... a fictional story meant to convey a spiritual truth.

Kindly,
Rhema

 

[Sue D.]

@Rhema -- look at John 1:1. "In the beginning was the Word and the Woed was with God and the Word was God.

The Bible we have is a compilation of books that were written by Godly men who were chosen by God to write them.

Going to take a moment to look up a verse. 2 Peter 1:21. "knowing this first that no prophesy of scripture.is of any private interpretation for prophesy never came by the will of Man it holy men of God.spokr.as they were moved by the Holy Spirit. " The previous verses go along with that..vs 16 and following. The only reason your salvation has been questioned is because you have such a negative attitude towards it.

Do you trust the fact that the blood of Jesus Christ shed on the cross is sufficient to take care of your sins and that Jesus Christ rose from the dead on the third day.

 

[Sue D.]

There's no mention of the rich man wailing and/or gnashing his teeth; which
suggests to me the although he's in a great deal of discomfort; it's all
what might be called threshold, i.e. within the limits of his tolerance for pain
and not quite enough to make him writhe, groan, and/or howl like a
wounded dog.
_

The rich man's location is on Hades and in book of Revelation 20:13 "rhee the sea gave up the dead who were in it,.and Death and Hades were delivered up the dead who were in them . And they were judged , each one according to his works. Vs 14 then death and Hades were cast into the lake of fire."

 

[Rhema]

@Rhema -- look at John 1:1. "In the beginning was the Word and the Woed was with God and the Word was God.

Hi Sue, I've translated John 1:1.

The first phrase actually states ...

(John 1:1a GRK) The Pattern was suffused throughout the cosmic protoplasm.​

And yes, this is a verse in the Bible that defines the LOGOS-Word of God.

However, you think the Word of God is the Bible, when right here in the first chapter of John, the Bible declares that the LOGOS of God (the Word of God) is Jesus... nothing else. Jesus was indeed the Pattern of God, the LOGOS/word of God. (No?)

The Bible we have is a compilation of books that were written by Godly men who were chosen by God to write them.

And what of the Godly men that wrote the book of Enoch, or the Gospel of Thomas, or the Shepherd of Hermas, or the Didache? The Apocalypse of Peter? The epistle of Barnabas?

What I have asked you to consider is WHO compiled those books, telling you that these were the ones chosen by God ?? And this "who" would be the Bishops of the Catholic Church in the late 300's. What I don't understand is how one can believe that God would ensure that the Catholics would select the "right" books for the Bible, when God wouldn't ensure that these very same Catholics could teach a true message of salvation? As if God was more interested in writing a book than in saving souls. And if so, why didn't Jesus write anything or command anything to be written down? (The answer to that is found in Acts chapter 2.)

The canon that you think is the only correct one ... well ... there are other believers who hold to a different canon, and as I've mentioned before, I loosely hold to the canon of the Church of the (far) East.

TheAramaicScriptures.com

The Holy Aramaic Scriptures: With a literal English translation and transliteration of The Eastern Peshitta New Testament Text, such as given in The Khabouris Codex.

www.thearamaicscriptures.com

Going to take a moment to look up a verse. 2 Peter 1:21. "knowing this first that no prophesy of scripture.

Indeed, ... and to the people of that age, "SCRIPTURE" meant the Septuagint - the Greek translation of the Old Testament. We know this because the quotes in the New Testament writings are mostly word for word from the LXX and not the Hebrew mss. But if we change the definition of Scripture to include the New Testament writings, then we are actually changing the meaning of the text in 2nd Peter, placing words in the author's mouth that he did not intend. I believe that people who do this, have a negative attitude toward truth.

prophesy never came by the will of Man it holy men of God.spokr.as they were moved by the Holy Spirit. "

??? ... I gather your phone(?) interface is problematic for cut and paste. Allow me to help:

For the prophecy came not in old time by the will of man: but holy men of God spake as they were moved by the Holy Ghost.​

(2 Peter 1:21 KJV)​

First, might you at least have the respect to understand that 2nd Peter is not in our canon since it was written quite awhile after Peter was dead ?? Else it would be in the canon, as the Apostle Thomas would have made sure to include it. (Please see the table of contents in the above link.)

Now as to its interpretation (or meaning), when this epistle of 2nd Peter was written, neither Peter nor Paul were from "in old time." So I have no problem agreeing with the sentiments of the author to say that prophecy of old time came from holy men of God, at least to the point where it was accurately copied.

(Jeremiah 7:22 NRSV)​

For in the day that I brought your ancestors out of the land of Egypt, I did not speak to them or command them concerning burnt offerings and sacrifices.​

​

(Jeremiah 8:8 NRSV)​

How can you say, “We are wise, and the law of the Lord is with us,” when, in fact, the false pen of the scribes has made it into a lie?​

This is why God found it necessary to father Jesus His Son, as by the time of Jesus' teachings, Judaism had strayed significantly from the Word that God actually gave to Moses (a Word that had not at that time been made into a lie by the false pen of the scribes.)

The only reason your salvation has been questioned is because you have such a negative attitude towards it.

A negative attitude toward what ?? The prophets of old time ?? The Scriptures that Jesus used ?? The actual definition of the "Word of God" (whether LOGOS or RHEMA) as found in the New Testament texts ?? God forbid. I am not negative toward any of this. I am, however, rather concerned when people start changing the Biblical definitions of "Word of God" to mean something that cannot be found in the Bible (of either canon). Shouldn't this cause concern ??

Do you trust the fact that the blood of Jesus Christ shed on the cross is sufficient to take care of your sins and that Jesus Christ rose from the dead on the third day.

Most assuredly Jesus Christ rose from the dead on the third day, in that he died on Thursday, not Friday.

But since I had asked first, I think you need to answer first: Do you trust the fact that God anointed Jesus to preach a Gospel that is sufficient unto salvation as is attested to here in this verse:

Be it known unto you therefore, men and brethren, that through this man is preached unto you the forgiveness of sins:​

(Acts 13:38 KJV)​

Ye men of Israel, hear these words; Jesus of Nazareth, a man approved of God among you by miracles and wonders and signs, which God did by him in the midst of you, as ye yourselves also know: ... Therefore let all the house of Israel know assuredly, that God hath made that same Jesus, whom ye have crucified, both Lord and Christ. Now when they heard this, they were pricked in their heart, and said unto Peter and to the rest of the apostles, Men and brethren, what shall we do? Then Peter said unto them, Repent, and be baptized every one of you in the name of Jesus Christ for the remission of sins, and ye shall receive the gift of the Holy Ghost.​

(Acts 2:22, 36-38 KJV)​

So, do you trust the fact that God anointed Jesus to preach a Gospel that is sufficient unto salvation?

Rhema

 

[Rhema]

The rich man's location is on Hades and in book of Revelation 20:13 "rhee the sea gave up the dead who were in it,.and Death and Hades were delivered up the dead who were in them . And they were judged , each one according to his works. Vs 14 then death and Hades were cast into the lake of fire."

And 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.​

(Revelation 20:13 KJV)​

So... there are dead in the sea. And there are dead in hades. Those are two different places you know.

In addition, "death" (νεκρός) and "hades" (ᾅδης) gave up the dead in THEM (plural). So we now have three different places where there are dead people.

Kindly,
Rhema

 

[Sue D.]

Happy Sunday--. Non-believers who died physically while out at sea=one group. And, yes. Death and Hades are two different groups of people. So, yes, three different catagories or places of people.

NO one is left out.

Every single person dead or alive will appear to be judged and put into the lake of fire just as that Revelation passage states.

 

[Sue D.]

Rhema. So you believe that God caused Jesus Christ to be born which resulted in Jesus Christ being the Son of God.

Do you believe in the Trinity. = God the Father,. Jesus Christ is the Son of God and then there is the Holy Spirit.

Jesus Christ didn't preach the gospel unto salvation. He Was our means Of salvation . He became our salvation. He was the One who died on the and was buried and rose again bodily on the third day. And the verse says 'according to the scriptures.'

Your situation is that you rely only on your own translation of the Greek and Hebrew. You can have it say anything you want it to say.

What if someone were to show you a different translation that agreed more with the English would you listen to that?.

 

[Beetow]

• Rev 20:12-13 . . And I saw the dead, the great and the small, standing before the
throne . . And the sea gave up the dead which were in it, and death and Hades
gave up the dead which were in them.

There are no living mentioned in Rev 20:11-15; only dead, i.e. people without life;
for example:

"I say to you: unless you eat the flesh of the Son of Man and drink his blood, you
have no life in yourselves." (John 6:53)

"I say to you, he who hears my word, and believes Him who sent me, has eternal.
life, and does not come into judgment, but has passed out of death into life." (John
5:24)

The "dead great and small standing" are basically resurrected unsaved; and
according to Matt 7:13-14, Matt 22:14, and Luke 13:22-24 there's more of them
than saved.

The sea is a bit of a mystery because whereas it's mentioned; dry land isn't. But
the sea doesn't always pertain to water, rather, it can be used to speak of the great
seething mass of humanity; which today numbers around 7.87 billion; and were we
to tally them all beginning with Adam, it would likely number in the trillions.

"death and Hades" pertain to one's corpse, and to the afterlife location where folks
like the rich man are confined awaiting trial per Luke 16:19-31.

"death and Hades were thrown into the lake of fire."

Hades is a facility-- an institution --so it's easy to understand how it would be
thrown into the lake.

Death is a bit more subtle. It pertains to whatever and/or whoever you might name
that's dead to God-- that which to Him is both intolerable and unacceptable, i.e. all
that has no place in His world.
_

 

[Sue D.]

Referring back to Revelation 20:11-13. The part that you didn't include was "and the dead were judged according to their works". If they are really dead how can they be judged. They were each judged according to their works. Vs 13

 

[Bug]

Rhema -- seriously -- there will no more conversations with you. At all.

they should just ban her

 

[Rhema]

Rhema. So you believe that God caused Jesus Christ to be born which resulted in Jesus Christ being the Son of God.

Sue, ... WHAT?? You don't believe that God caused Jesus Christ to be born ?? The New Testament texts directly state this:

What the heck are these Baptists teaching you?!?

And the angel answered and said unto her, The Holy Ghost shall come upon thee, and the power of the Highest shall overshadow thee: therefore also that holy thing which shall be born of thee shall be called the Son of God.​

(Luke 1:35 KJV)​

Do you believe in the Trinity. = God the Father,. Jesus Christ is the Son of God and then there is the Holy Spirit.

I have been requested by the moderators to not engage in discussions about the Trinity. Such discussions turn quite divisive and I respect their position. Partially it has to do with the fact that there exists several distinct Doctrines of the Trinity, and most Christians do not hold to the Orthodox Doctrine of the Trinity. I realize this answer might not be adequate, but it will have to suffice.

I can without hesitation, though, state that I believe in God, the Father of Jesus Christ. Jesus Christ his only begotten Son, and that the indwelling of the Holy Spirit is part of (if not the sole purpose of) the New Covenant. If you think that makes me a Trinitarian, then... yes.

Jesus Christ didn't preach the gospel unto salvation.

Dear sister, I would beg of you to read your words again. Pray about this, and then tell your pastor that "Jesus Christ didn't preach the gospel unto salvation." I would be very interested to know if he would agree with you or not.

To be honest, that statement just boggles the mind, and until you reflect upon what you just said, it's best left untouched for the moment.

Your situation is that you rely only on your own translation of the Greek and Hebrew. You can have it say anything you want it to say.

Sue, that's like me saying that you rely only on your own understanding of English, and by doing so, you can have English say anything you want it to say. Such a statement is obviously absurd. Whose understanding of English would you rely upon if not your own? Don't you know English? But yes, I quite understand that various words may have different definitions. "Reckon" and "fixing (to do a thing)" have different meanings in Georgia than in Pennsylvania. As a linguist, I am more than well aware of these things. AND... I never said I translate Hebrew. NOTHING I said would even give you that impression. So... somewhere along the way, your mind is playing tricks. Perhaps that why you can't trust it ??

What if someone were to show you a different translation that agreed more with the English would you listen to that?.

I think you meant to say, "What if someone were to show you a different (ENGLISH) translation that agreed more with the (GREEK) would you listen to that?

That "someone" should have better proof-reading skills, though, but yes. I've spoken with numerous Greek scholars, and they tend to wind up agreeing with me. Did you have someone specific in mind? As I've stated before, I started out with the gloss (translation) by Dr. Alfred Marshall, and as I learned the language came to trust his rendition. He has only three or four mistakes. Now as there is no online reference to his work, I tend to quote the KJV because of its prominence, not its accuracy.

Kindly,
Rhema

 

[Rhema]

The part that you didn't include was "and the dead were judged according to their works". If they are really dead how can they be judged. They were each judged according to their works. Vs 13

And yet the text clearly states that they are judged by their WORKS.
(So much for the Reformation....)

Jesus said something different though ...

But I say unto you, That every idle word that men shall speak, they shall give account thereof in the day of judgment. For by thy words thou shalt be justified, and by thy words thou shalt be condemned.​

(Matthew 12:36-37 KJV)​

The only sane conclusion is that the message in Revelation cannot be trusted, as it directly contradicts the words of Jesus.

Rhema