Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
So what if Jesus gave a character from His parable a 'Joe Blow' name to which the common listener could identify? Moreover, Jesus never spoke to His audience in any other form BUT in parables.
All these things spake Jesus unto the multitude in parables; and without a parable spake he not unto them (Matthew 13:34).
Quote:
Originally Posted by BaptistFundie
There's that little thing called context. Do you think he EVER spoke without parables? Or perhaps that reference you quoted was referring to a season of time when he used parables? Think about it. He ministered for 3 years before his crucifixion.
The tale of the Rich man and Lazarus IS a parable. And, it has NOTHING to do with some fictitious hell as believed by you. You want so badly for this piece of scripture to align with your horrible belief of a place where all those who don't share your wretched belief will be tortured for eternity and it doesn't. That you don't understand the meaning behind the parable - which is actually quite a simple message - is on you. Enough said.
Quote:
Originally Posted by RomulusXXV
This Bible of yours keeps tripping you up, doesn't it, BF?
Anyway, here's the second part of my post that you chose to omit
Quote:
Originally Posted by BaptistFundie
It wasn't particularly relevant.
It was entirely relevant since it answered the question you asked in your next post.
Quote:
Originally Posted by BaptistFundie"
I'm aware of the idea of Sheol, and it gave no additional info or concerns to address.
It addressed the probable reason WHY Jesus chose to add a name (Lazarus) to the character in the story. If this story was told present-day the name 'John Q. Citizen' or similar would likely replace 'Lazarus'.
Quote:
Originally Posted by RomulusXXV
By all means Jesus would use a popular myth with which to speak to His audience on their own level. You appear to have a very narrow view of both Jesus and your Bible, BF, and even Paul who regularly used hyperbole in his writings that you take literally.
Quote:
Originally Posted by BaptistFundie
No, I don't believe Jesus would have used a false teaching to make a point like this. It goes contrary to his goals, and shows him giving approval to the idea of something that is false.
The point IS that YOU have no idea what this parable is teaching. And, this is where you're coming unstuck. YOU believe that this parable confirms what YOU believe about eternal suffering in hell. IT DOESN'T! In fact it has NOTHING to do with that evil notion. The gist of the parable as told by Jesus to His 'John Q. Citizen' audience is merely emphasizing that wealth will not automatically buy one a ticket to a glorious after-life and that one's wealth should be shared with the poor who, as Jesus said elsewhere ..."will always be with you (Matthew 26:11)."
* I realize that I seem to be coming across as some all-knowing oracle, even arrogant perhaps, and this would understandably cause such as yourself to bristle and even to dig in your heels even further. The thing is, however, that erroneous and disgusting beliefs such as those that you and mainstream Christianity in general teach NEED to be addressed and changed ...PRONTO!
The tale of the Rich man and Lazarus IS a parable. And, it has NOTHING to do with some fictitious hell as believed by you. You want so badly for this piece of scripture to align with your horrible belief of a place where all those who don't share your wretched belief will be tortured for eternity and it doesn't. That you don't understand the meaning behind the parable - which is actually quite a simple message - is on you. Enough said.
It does illustrate the point though, that the righteous will be in paradise, the unrighteous will suffer. Put that together with Jesus talking about a place where the fire never stops burning, and parables like the wheat and the chaff and others like the wedding guests left outside and yes...we get a picture of eternal suffering for the wicked.
Quote:
It was entirely relevant since it answered the question you asked in your next post.
I'm sorry...I'm not even sure what that was, at this point. But if I know you, it's likely something taken out of context.
It addressed the probable reason WHY Jesus chose to add a name (Lazarus) to the character in the story. If this story was told present-day the name 'John Q. Citizen' or similar would likely replace 'Lazarus'.
Weird how he didn't do that in any of the other parables he told, though. In any event, whether it was a parable or based on true story really doesn't matter. It's just a point to ponder. In any event, the important thing is that yes, it reinforces the idea of the wicked suffering.
Quote:
The point IS that YOU have no idea what this parable is teaching. And, this is where you're coming unstuck. YOU believe that this parable confirms what YOU believe about eternal suffering in hell. IT DOESN'T! In fact it has NOTHING to do with that evil notion. The gist of the parable as told by Jesus to His 'John Q. Citizen' audience is merely emphasizing that wealth will not automatically buy one a ticket to a glorious after-life and that one's wealth should be shared with the poor who, as Jesus said elsewhere ..."will always be with you (Matthew 26:11)."
* I realize that I seem to be coming across as some all-knowing oracle, even arrogant perhaps, and this would understandably cause such as yourself to bristle and even to dig in your heels even further. The thing is, however, that erroneous and disgusting beliefs such as those that you and mainstream Christianity in general teach NEED to be addressed and changed ...PRONTO!
The point of the story is that it teaches that if people are unwilling to believe Moses and the Prophets -- meaning God's Word, both oral, and written, then they won't even believe anyone. Yes. I get that.
But no, a good teacher would not use a heresy to teach a truth.
It does illustrate the point though, that the righteous will be in paradise, the unrighteous will suffer. Put that together with Jesus talking about a place where the fire never stops burning, and parables like the wheat and the chaff and others like the wedding guests left outside and yes...we get a picture of eternal suffering for the wicked.
Weird how he didn't do that in any of the other parables he told, though. In any event, whether it was a parable or based on true story really doesn't matter. It's just a point to ponder. In any event, the important thing is that yes, it reinforces the idea of the wicked suffering.
The point of the story is that it teaches that if people are unwilling to believe Moses and the Prophets -- meaning God's Word, both oral, and written, then they won't even believe anyone. Yes. I get that.
But no, a good teacher would not use a heresy to teach a truth.
There he goes again...back to that love of the suffering of others.
There he goes again...back to that love of the suffering of others.
Why would you suggest such an idiotic thing? Do you enjoy lying about me? I'm sorry, but at this point this has to be intentional. You are flat out lying about my position. I've never expressed a "love" for it. You are being dishonest. Is that common for Buddhists? Should I expect all Buddhists to be liars? Or are you just a bad Buddhist?
Last edited by BaptistFundie; 01-02-2021 at 01:05 PM..
There he goes again...back to that love of the suffering of others.
Quote:
Originally Posted by BaptistFundie
Why would you suggest such an idiotic thing? Do you enjoy lying about me? I'm sorry, but at this point this has to be intentional. You are flat out lying about my position. I've never expressed a "love" for it. You are being dishonest. Is that common for Buddhists? Should I expect all Buddhists to be liars? Or are you just a bad Buddhist?
If you don't 'love the idea of people suffering' then you would flat out reject the mere premise of such a belief as well as flat out reject the 'being' who you believe initiated it. But then, as indicated in the other thread, the idea that the Rich Man and Lazarus story concerns itself with eternal suffering has now become a moot point.
It does illustrate the point though, that the righteous will be in paradise, the unrighteous will suffer. Put that together with Jesus talking about a place where the fire never stops burning, and parables like the wheat and the chaff and others like the wedding guests left outside and yes...we get a picture of eternal suffering for the wicked.
Weird how he didn't do that in any of the other parables he told, though. In any event, whether it was a parable or based on true story really doesn't matter. It's just a point to ponder. In any event, the important thing is that yes, it reinforces the idea of the wicked suffering.
The point of the story is that it teaches that if people are unwilling to believe Moses and the Prophets -- meaning God's Word, both oral, and written, then they won't even believe anyone. Yes. I get that.
But no, a good teacher would not use a heresy to teach a truth.
I must say that I think that is a fair argument.
Let's look at the story to start. Luke 16. 19 “There was a rich man who was dressed in purple and fine linen and lived in luxury every day. 20 At his gate was laid a beggar named Lazarus, covered with sores 21 and longing to eat what fell from the rich man’s table. Even the dogs came and licked his sores.
22 “The time came when the beggar died and the angels carried him to Abraham’s side. The rich man also died and was buried. 23 In Hades, where he was in torment, he looked up and saw Abraham far away, with Lazarus by his side. 24 So he called to him, ‘Father Abraham, have pity on me and send Lazarus to dip the tip of his finger in water and cool my tongue, because I am in agony in this fire.’
25 “But Abraham replied, ‘Son, remember that in your lifetime you received your good things, while Lazarus received bad things, but now he is comforted here and you are in agony. 26 And besides all this, between us and you a great chasm has been set in place, so that those who want to go from here to you cannot, nor can anyone cross over from there to us.’
27 “He answered, ‘Then I beg you, father, send Lazarus to my family, 28 for I have five brothers. Let him warn them, so that they will not also come to this place of torment.’
29 “Abraham replied, ‘They have Moses and the Prophets; let them listen to them.’
30 “‘No, father Abraham,’ he said, ‘but if someone from the dead goes to them, they will repent.’
31 “He said to him, ‘If they do not listen to Moses and the Prophets, they will not be convinced even if someone rises from the dead.’”
First thing to not is that it is only in Luke and is therefore an invention of his and only a parable using his own beliefs and opinions. His belief is that there is a comfy place with Abraham (and i won't get into a discussion about whether simply being short of money gets you entry) and there is Hades; a place of torment and there is a 'chasm' between them. Thus Luke had a belief in something that was rather like the idea of hell, and you go there if you are rich.
If you don't 'love the idea of people suffering' then you would flat out reject the mere premise of such a belief as well as flat out reject the 'being' who you believe initiated it. But then, as indicated in the other thread, the idea that the Rich Man and Lazarus story concerns itself with eternal suffering has now become a moot point.
I don't love the idea of falling if I step off a building, but it happens. My love for or appreciation of something has nothing to do with reality. I'm sorry if you are among those that think otherwise.
And no, it's not a moot point, but it isn't the PRIMARY teaching point.
if there is a soul (I don't believe one) knowing how I hurt somebody and knowing they will have that memory forever would hurt me for all eternity.
That's as far I as I can go with justifying eternal hell.
Actually you can go a great deal further with it. Living in your imagination you can really do all sorts of things. Since you believe that no soul exists, just imagine paradise for all no matter who you are, hows that?
Actually you can go a great deal further with it. Living in your imagination you can really do all sorts of things. Since you believe that no soul exists, just imagine paradise for all no matter who you are, hows that?
sorry, unlike most people, I have to actually look at what people are claiming.
atheism vs theism just isn't the best we can do out in the real world.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
