those in Sheol getting what they dished out to others?

[marie glen]

Satan never tested Jesus in the wilderness, because Satan never existed

The only other way you can really go with that is that Jesus had a carnal mind. That just brings a lot of bad and unbiblical things with that idea IMO.

I agree.  Just doesn't work scripturally, IMO.  Also, seems clear to me satan/the adversary - an actual being - did/does exist according to scripture.

:thumbsup:

I like this account (for many reasons):

Luke chapter 13:
10 And he was teaching in one of the synagogues on the sabbath,

11 and lo, there was a woman having a spirit of infirmity eighteen years, and she was bowed together, and not able to bend back at all,

12 and Jesus having seen her, did call [her] near, and said to her, `Woman, thou hast been loosed from thy infirmity;'

13 and he laid on her [his] hands, and presently she was set upright, and was glorifying God.

14 And the chief of the synagogue answering -- much displeased that on the sabbath Jesus healed -- said to the multitude, `Six days there are in which it behoveth [us] to be working; in these, then, coming, be healed, and not on the sabbath-day.'

15 Then the Lord answered him and said, `Hypocrite, doth not each of you on the sabbath loose his ox or mule from the stall, and having led away, doth water [it]?

16 and this one, being a daughter of Abraham, whom the Adversary - 4567. Satanas ►an adversary - bound, lo, eighteen years, did it not behove to be loosed from this bond on the sabbath-day?'

I think it benefits our understanding a lot to read all of the verses of a certain thing.. So being of an enquiring mind..

Strong's Greek 4567
36 Occurrences  ..but I left out repeat verses which were of the same account of something.

Matthew 4:10
NAS: to him, Go, Satan! For it is written, (using NAS - easiest to copy/paste from the list - https://biblehub.com/greek/4567.htm

Matthew 12:26 (2 occurrences)
NAS: If Satan casts out Satan, (if "the" adversary casts out "the" adversary" the interlinear word for word says "the adversary" - https://biblehub.com/interlinear/matthew/12-26.htm)

Matthew 16:23
NAS: behind Me, Satan! You are a stumbling block - to Peter, acting as adversary..

Mark 1:13
NAS: being tempted by Satan; and He was with the wild beasts, [(3588 [e] tou) = the (4567 [e] Satana) adversary - https://biblehub.com/interlinear/mark/1-13.htm

Mark 3:23 (2 occurrences)
NAS: How can Satan cast out Satan? (no "the" but "how is able satan, satan to cast out..)

Mark 3:26
NAS: If Satan has risen up against himself [1438. heautou ►of himself, herself, itself - Matthew 16:24 NAS: follow Me, he must deny himself, and take..]  -- the whole verse - And if Satan / "the" adversary has risen up against himself and has been divided, he is not able to stand, but is coming to an end. - https://biblehub.com/interlinear/mark/3-26.htm

Why should Jesus speak like this if the adversary is a part of our self? Why not simply say so?! Metaphor to me, sometimes simply seems uncalled for and, or makes a lot less sense.

Mark 4:15
NAS: immediately Satan comes - in the parable of the sower and seed, some seed falls by the wayside.. interlinear "immediately comes the adversary and takes away the word having been sown in them - https://biblehub.com/interlinear/mark/4-15.htm

Luke 10:18
NAS: And He said to them, "I was watching Satan fall from heaven like lightning.. https://biblehub.com/interlinear/luke/10-18.htm

Luke 22:3
NAS: And Satan entered into Judas - https://biblehub.com/interlinear/luke/22-3.htm

Luke 22:31
NAS: Simon, behold, Satan has demanded to have you to sift like wheat - https://biblehub.com/interlinear/luke/22-31.htm

Acts 5:3
NAS: Ananias why has Satan filled - https://biblehub.com/interlinear/acts/5-3.htm

Acts 26:18
NAS: and from the dominion of Satan to God, - https://biblehub.com/interlinear/acts/26-18.htm

Romans 16:20
NAS: will soon crush Satan under your feet. - https://biblehub.com/interlinear/romans/16-20.htm

1 Corinthians 5:5
NAS: such a one to Satan for the destruction - https://biblehub.com/interlinear/1_corinthians/5-5.htm
  :Chinscratch: "to deliver such a one to Satan for destruction of the flesh, so that his spirit may be saved in the day of the Lord. ..the sifting like wheat.. (making "satan demanded" to be a figure of speech or metaphor?)

1 Corinthians 7:5
NAS: so that Satan will not tempt you - marital advice/instructions - https://biblehub.com/interlinear/1_corinthians/7-5.htm

2 Corinthians 2:11
NAS: advantage would be taken of us by Satan, for we are not ignorant - https://biblehub.com/interlinear/2_corinthians/2-11.htm
:mshock: so that we should not be outwitted by Satan; for we are not ignorant of his schemes

2 Corinthians 11:14
NAS: for even Satan disguises - (And no wonder, for ("the") Satan himself masquerades as an angel of light.) - https://biblehub.com/interlinear/2_corinthians/11-14.htm

2 Corinthians 12:7
NAS: a messenger of Satan to torment, Paul's "thorn in his flesh" to keep him humble he said - https://biblehub.com/interlinear/2_corinthians/12-7.htm

1 Thessalonians 2:18
NAS: once-- and [yet] Satan hindered - https://biblehub.com/interlinear/1_thessalonians/2-18.htm - "Therefore we wanted to come to you--indeed I Paul, both once and twice--and Satan hindered us."

[marie glen]

Most of us don't have access to exorcists, they're pretty thin on the ground these days and people with demons tend to be in no position to seek them themselves. This is my first problem with demons. Real demons can actively seek people out and injure then I have a huge moral problem with this.

Isn't it the same though with things people do to other people? Horrors of war.. Genocides.. And all horrors of 'lesser' and greater, or that is of all ranges.. There are humans who actively seek out others in order to injure them! Even to kill.. It's my belief the tree of knowing good and evil is all the possibilities which come about when you endow thinking ability. But until someone plucked from it.. all was okay, even "good". But consider this, thinking ability (surely?) includes with it, the ability to make choices. (Not the choice of redemption, that is God's choice - the when for all.)

Doesn't that change everything? Unless He were to block it, I suppose.. Then what? How would you create enduring incorruptible perfection? Create only animals, plants, flowers and only very small children? Both angel and human?

:Peace2: :gsmile:

(Only puppies, kittens, butterflies and babies? -- sounds kind of good! :laughing7: )

[CST]

With who or what did God have the conversations below regarding Job?

"As I said i don't believe in Satan, Jesus is using a text from Isaiah which usually refers to the King of Babylon to make a point about the defeat of evil. We know now that 'Heaven' isn't actually, literally 'up there', we've sent spaceships 'up there' and not found Heaven so it is not literally possible for Satan to fall from Heaven to Earth like that Jesus is speaking in parables as usual you need to discern what He is actually saying."

"Jesus is speaking in parables" 
What's the meaning of Jesus' remark here?:
Lk 10:17-18  And those seventy whom he [Jesus] had sent returned with great joy and said to him, "Maran [our Lord], even shada [demons] were subject to us by your name!"  And he said to them, "I did see him, Satana, falling like lightning from heaven.

Is this a parable, and if so, what's the meaning of this?:
Rev 12:7-9 (KJV)
https://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Revelation+12&version=KJV
And there was war in heaven: Michael and his angels fought against the dragon; and the dragon fought and his angels, And prevailed not; neither was their place found any more in heaven.   And the great dragon was cast out, that old serpent, called the Devil, and Satan, which deceiveth the whole world:  he was cast out into the earth, and his angels were cast out with him.

"No I haven't excised any demons, while is the technical term but I know of many doctors that have. Or at least they have done with medicine things that Jesus appeared to do by exorcism. The fact the the symptoms described my many demon possessions in the Bible look suspiciously like a lot of modern diseases we can now treat with drugs is more than a bit curious."
As far as you know, did Jesus dispense drugs to anyone?
Are you aware of any instances where doctors conversed a negotiation of the terms of a patient getting free from self-harming and severe anti-social behavior?

"If you're going to say there's more to the spirit word then stated in the Bible, you are going beyond the only authorised text we have and you can claim anything and just say it goes beyond the Bible. Then you don't need to provide reliable support for anything you claim."
I'll furthermore say that there's more to the physical world than what's stated in the Bible.

But 'Hades' isn't Hell. You've got to understand this. Gehenna is the closest term in the Bible we have to what we generally understand as Hell. In Greek Hades isn't Hell, Tartarus is Hell. Hades is this strange dark and miserable place we understand very little about. And the word may still be used as merely the closest one the Greeks have.
The only term is the New Testament that definitely describes or at least approximates the modern idea of Hell is 'lake of fire' which only appears in the book of Revelation at the end. The phrase 'eternal fire' (as usually translated) in Matthew is also usually taken to represent this idea and thus so is 'unquenchable fire' whenever it appears. But Gehenna and Hades must be separate things or there'd be no need to use both words even though they appear, occasionally, to become confused.

"Tartarus is Hell"
Do you think some angels:  sinned?   are in Tartarus?  are being "kept unto the judgment of torture"?

2 Peter 2:4 (KJV)
For if God spared not the angels that sinned, but cast them down to hell [Greek:  tartarosas], and delivered them into chains of darkness, to be reserved unto judgment;
interlinear
https://biblehub.com/interlinear/2_peter/2-4.htm

2 Peter 2:4 (from Aramaic), http://www.dukhrana.com
(Etheridge) For if Aloha upon the angels who sinned was not lenient,
but in chains of darkness shut them in the deeps,
and delivered them to be kept to the judgment of pain;
(Murdock) For, if God spared not the angels that sinned,
but cast them down to the infernal regions in chains of darkness,
and delivered them up to be kept unto the judgment of torture,

"'Hades' isn't Hell"
Do you agree with me that Jesus' story about the rich man and Lazarus has the rich man being tormented in flames in hades?

Luke 16 King James Version (KJV)
https://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Luke+16&version=KJV
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 [Greek:  hades] 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.  ....
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.

"hades" in interlinear
https://biblehub.com/interlinear/luke/16-23.htm

Right, continuing.

I've said this before somewhere but, to me, in the book of Job, Satan represents Job's enemies. These are also his (false) friends who are increasingly unhelpful to him during the course of the book. These people are envious of Job and have brought complaints about him to God. Satan represents these complaints. I have come to this conclusion because Satan disappears from the text once he's all but got his way. After this the three 'friends' appear and try to get Job to deny his righteousness and do all sorts of other things he shouldn't do. Basically the sort of things Satan wants Job to do. Satan never appears again but the 'friends' are upbraided by God at the end. Hence why I suspect they are actually the same.

Oh, my! Finish the quote:

'And He said to them, I saw Satan fall like lightening from heaven. Behold, I have given you authority to tread upon serpents and scorpions, and over all the power of the enemy; and nothing shall hurt you. Nevertheless do not rejoice in this, that the spirits are subject to you; but rejoice that your names are written in heaven."

I suspect the serpents and scorpions may well not be literal here. To go from demons to serpents and scorpions seems a bit of a downward step. Even I can tread on and crush scorpions and serpents if I'm quick enough but I think it safer not to try. But note the part at the end I have highlighted, I think it's quite curious that a. Jesus has them prioritise there place in heaven in their rejoicing and b. when Jesus gives His answer He doesn't say 'demons' He says 'spirits'. Obviously a much broader term. Of course, Jesus does use the word demons but here He appears to be correcting the disciples and the fact He doesn't use the word 'demons' is curious.

Do you believe Satan is an actual dragon? What is an actual dragon doing in heaven, there are none on Earth. The dragon is symbolic of something so is Satan. It doesn't mean Satan is either a literal dragon or anything you might think he is.

Did Jesus distribute drugs to anyone? Wow, well that's a straw man is ever I aw one and i'm not even sure where you're going with it. Why would Jesus need to distribute drugs when the power of God worked perfectly well? That doesn't mean the disease is different, that's a non-sequitur. Luke was a physician maybe you should ask him about drugs.

And I suspect what you are describing is what psychiatrists do, so yes I know of some examples, in theory.

Well, obviously there's more to the physical world than is stated in the Bible. The Bible isn't a science book or a geography book and doesn't cover the full scope of our planet. It is, however, concerned with our spiritual welfare and some equip us for maintaining is sufficiently. A lack of proper information on demons is a pretty big lack to me.

If the fallen angels are in Tartarus, they are somewhere different from the dead in Sheol/Hades aren't they? So I would expect some difference in the state they are in. But obviously your Aramaic doesn't say that, so you don't. Another reason to suspect that the Bible perhaps should properly be in Greek because the Aramaic appears to have no equivalent to 'Tartarus'

I've a lot to say about the story of the Rich Man and Lazarus but it would go beyond the scope of this discussion. Suffice is to say, it is the only place in the whole of the New Testament where Hades appears to conflate with Gehenna like this and, most importantly, the Rich man is being torment by flame not demons. No demons are recorded as being present nor so far as we can tell did the Rich man spend his life burning people to death, so in the only major picture of the afterlife we have in the Bible where we actually see what happens to people, there are no demons present and the person involved is not receiving something he distributed to others. Huge arguments against your theory here.

Most of us don't have access to exorcists, they're pretty thin on the ground these days and people with demons tend to be in no position to seek them themselves. This is my first problem with demons. Real demons can actively seek people out and injure then I have a huge moral problem with this.

Isn't it the same though with things people do to other people? Horrors of war.. Genocides.. And all horrors of 'lesser' and greater, or that is of all ranges.. There are humans who actively seek out others in order to injure them! Even to kill.. It's my belief the tree of knowing good and evil is all the possibilities which come about when you endow thinking ability. But until someone plucked from it.. all was okay, even "good". But consider this, thinking ability (surely?) includes with it, the ability to make choices. (Not the choice of redemption, that is God's choice - the when for all.)

Doesn't that change everything? Unless He were to block it, I suppose.. Then what? How would you create enduring incorruptible perfection? Create only animals, plants, flowers and only very small children? Both angel and human?

:Peace2: :gsmile:

(Only puppies, kittens, butterflies and babies? -- sounds kind of good! :laughing7: )

Ah, no! That's the problem. Humans are humans on a path to redemption, God loves them and is patient with them when they do wicked things in the hope they will eventually turn away from them. If a human mistreats me i generally have some defence though justice sometimes fails.

But I don't believe in UR for demons because demons are always presented as being utterly evil and cannot be redeemed. It is their nature to be evil and they take absolute pleasure from causing harm to humans and only from causing pain to humans. It is what they exist for and I have a major moral problem with this.

[CST]

Satan never tested Jesus in the wilderness, because Satan never existed

The only other way you can really go with that is that Jesus had a carnal mind. That just brings a lot of bad and unbiblical things with that idea IMO.

Ah, but to me that's precisely the problem. According to the popular model of the incarnation is has been decided that in Jesus, God is both fully human and fully divine (this, of course, is debated). But in the age Jesus came all full humans had a carnal mind and, as I understand having this carnal mind is why humans are susceptible to temptation. So when Jesus is tempted in the desert I can only see this one of two ways:

Jesus is capable, theoretically, of being tempted. In which case what's the problem with saying He has a carnal mind? The point here is that He is able to repeatedly and consistently overcome it, surely? Or,

Jesus is not capable of being tempted. In which case how is it remotely meaningful to say Satan tempted Him and He resisted? The former option seems more plausible here.

Jesus teaches that: "...every one who looks at a woman lustfully has already committed adultery with her in his heart." (Matthew 5:28) This is some sort of hyperbole, surely? Here Jesus seems to suggest that the temptation to sin is equal to the sin its self but if that's so how can Jesus be legitimately tempted to sin but not actually sin? Which He obviously didn't do. Why?

I suspect it's because despite this warning resisting the temptation to sin still matters a lot.

[marie glen]

by David Ford

“'Hades' isn't Hell”
Do you agree with me that Jesus’ story about the rich man and Lazarus has the rich man being tormented in flames in hades?

This verse is really making me think of shadow and shades.. that what's called "outer darkness" (hades?! Culminating in, ultimately, the grave, the "place and realm of the dead"?) will exist on Judgment 'Day'.. That in the bible, hades is the shadowy realm of sin.. which wages is death. The whole thing = hades(?) Which such - "missing the mark" is translated as, and what we understand to be, "sin" / 'wrong-ness'. After 2nd resurrection ("the rest of the dead rise not until the thousand years are ended" The thousand years, age 1 following Jesus' return?) Then all the not yet saved rising to a "resurrection of judgment". -- The church fell into superstition and tagged onto this the idea of simply dumping everyone into a hell of never-ending torment. But Jesus talked about the queen of the south rising up in judgment against the generation of pharisees and priests who killed Jesus on Judgment 'Day'.. And said Sodom and Gomorrah will rise up against the cities that rejected Him on Judgment 'Day' for they would have repented if what happened in those cities had happened in Sodom and Gomorrah.. I believe hades is the "outer darkness" is sin, is the abyss/dark pit (which turns out to be the grave also :Chinscratch: but I can't remember what verse.. Isaiah 14, right after the worms being the king of Babylon's bed and covering at his 'end'/where he will end up. Believed to be a type of 'Satan', but not by others.)

I think this also because of parables Jesus told about a supper and told the pharisees and high priests that they would see many come from the 4 winds and sit down at the supper but they themselves will be "cast out". When studying on this, through prayer, etc, I read something which said on holy days, the feasts were brightly lit and one was happy to be at the feast/supper.. Included.. and to be inside, in the light, and at the feast, and you were most un-fortunate if you found yourself outside the feast, in the outside darkness..

:Chinscratch: Now that I think about it again.. It's the flames!  That are (imo) metaphor. :Peace2:

[MusicLover123]

But I don't believe in UR for demons because demons are always presented as being utterly evil and cannot be redeemed

Phillipians 2
10That at the name of Jesus every knee should bow, of things in heaven, and things in earth, and things under the earth

Isaiah 45
23By myself I have sworn,
my mouth has uttered in all integrity
a word that will not be revoked:
Before me every knee will bow;
by me every tongue will swear.
24They will say of me, 'In the Lord alone
are deliverance and strength.'

Romans 14
11It is written:
" 'As surely as I live,' says the Lord,
'every knee will bow before me;
every tongue will acknowledge God.' 

1 Corinthians 15
28And when all things shall be subdued unto him, then shall the Son also himself be subject unto him that put all things under him, that God may be all in all.

Psalm 103
9He will not always chide: neither will he keep his anger for ever.

Micah 7
18Who is a God like unto thee, that pardoneth iniquity, and passeth by the transgression of the remnant of his heritage? he retaineth not his anger for ever, because he delighteth in mercy.

Don't see any exclusion here.

[marie glen]

Satan never tested Jesus in the wilderness, because Satan never existed.

:Chinscratch: I come down on the side of believing Satan is a fallen creature. One who was endowed with rationality, which turns out to be the whole 'Pandora's box'. Jesus said He saw Satan / the adversary fall like lightning.. Revelation 12 says Michael and his angels fought against the dragon / slanderer and his angels (then the dragon enraged [again, 1st time 70a.d.] persecuted/inquisitioned(?) the faith, but it was given the 2 wings of an eagle.. sorry.. a favorite wormhole/bible prophecy..

What a thrilling story! I don't believe it's metaphor. Why bother? I never seriously consider something as metaphor if the metaphor has already been openly taught about in the scriptures.. Why make the carnal mind into a whispery, fruedian thing..? (That guy was kind of nuts you know.) The carnal mind is a whispery, freudian thing.. but we don't need an elaborate metaphor or myth of fallen rebel angels to communicate it, so it doesn't sound logical to me.

I believe it all from Genesis to Revelation as literal. (Even if Revelation is portrayed via symbols, metaphor, orchestra, seals, trumpets, flames.. well, the flames I do not believe are metaphor, until the 'after' life ages.. oh dear, I'm starting to babble big time..)

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

Jesus saw satan / the adversary fall from heaven like lightning.. the dragon stood in front of the woman (virgin) to devour the manchild (son of man; via herod the great) -- I go into this to show the dragon cannot be the un or sub conscious mind of man -- This is the dragon which swept 1/3 of the stars - see last verse Rev 1 "the stars are angels" - with his tail

Now do I think he swept the angels out of heaven or the heavens (?) with his tail? No. I do not. But I do think 1/3 of God's angels followed him in his rebellion.

:Chinscratch: So... why did God choose that very moment - pretty much - to create the 'earthly' universe and man and woman? What could possibly go wrong? Or that is to say, didn't He know what would happen? (Trickery, sedition.) Of course He did.
:cloud9: He is so wise.

Meanwhile.. the manchild/Son of man is caught up (yes, harpazo.. but we "meet Jesus at His coming" not ascend up to God's right hand(imo). And so, foiled, the dragon is enraged and pursues the faith (70 a.d.) but the faith flees.. relocates.. migrates..

[Revelation 12, awesome chapter, amazing. An insert & total history.]

..Then war breaks out in heaven, the war between Michael & angels and dragon & angels.. Michael & angels win.. dragon&co are no longer allowed access to the heavens..
-- "So the great dragon was cast out,
that serpent of old, called the Devil and Satan,
who deceives the whole world;
he was cast to the earth,
and his angels were cast
out with him."

He, "god of this world" is like totally ticked off now.. so he "persecutes the woman" / inqusitions the faith, but she is given the two wings of an eagle to fly (sail?) to a new place.. safe from the dragon's face ( :Chinscratch: ) for 3.5 division of time.. then the serpent guise of the dragon vomits a flood after the faith trying to wash it from off the Earth.

But the Earth will swallow the flood.

Then the dragon will turn his attention (back?) to her other children "who have the commandments of God and (by then?) the testimony of Jesus", ("you will not see Me again, Jerusalem until you say, blessed is He who comes in the name of the LORD" to make war against them - Revelation 16:14,15,16 "3 frogs go out to gather the kings to war against God, blessed are those attired, for Jesus comes like a thief. And they gather to Armageddon/Gehenna Valley"

Revelation 13 is an insert alongside 12. [Rev 14 two harvests, [1]wheat and [2]grapes of wrath/tares at Gehenna Valley -- (the 2nd "angel came out from the altar, who had power over fire, and he cried with a loud cry to him who had the sharp sickle, saying, “Thrust in your sharp sickle and gather the clusters of the vine of the earth, for her grapes are fully ripe.” 19 So the angel thrust his sickle into the earth and gathered the vine of the earth, and threw it into the great winepress (metaphor for Gehenna Valley/H'armageddon) of the wrath of God. 20 And the winepress was trampled outside the city, and blood came out of the winepress, up to the horses’ bridles, for one thousand six hundred furlongs."

War.

Yes, I think man wars with God. But I think "dark" spirit forces, principalities and powers of the heavenly/spiritual realm, that is, the rebel scheming angels working behind the scenes (hidden/want to be hidden), keep it from taking half of forever..

I think letting the adversary and his angels be the first to wander off from God /  His will (thinking ability includes choice) - That there are rebel spirits, I think, really escalates the whole process.. quickens it, a sort of let's get it over with.

That's my :2c: anyway..
:Peace2:

[DavidFord]

Matthew 16:23
NAS: behind Me, Satan! You are a stumbling block - to Peter, acting as adversary..
....
1 Corinthians 5:5
NAS: such a one to Satan for the destruction - https://biblehub.com/interlinear/1_corinthians/5-5.htm
  :Chinscratch: "to deliver such a one to Satan for destruction of the flesh, so that his spirit may be saved in the day of the Lord. ..the sifting like wheat.. (making "satan demanded" to be a figure of speech or metaphor?)
....
2 Corinthians 2:11
NAS: advantage would be taken of us by Satan, for we are not ignorant - https://biblehub.com/interlinear/2_corinthians/2-11.htm
:mshock: so that we should not be outwitted by Satan; for we are not ignorant of his schemes

Re: 2 Cor 2:11, only intelligent entities are capable of scheming, and Satan is an intelligent, very crafty, creature.
For Mt 16:23, Jesus isn't calling Peter _the_ Satan, but rather, satan i.e. adversary.

For 1 Cor 5, I think taking 'satan' as _the_ Satan is too strong a take on the word, and think Paul's remark should be understood as, 'deliver him to adversaries,' as in people outside the church.  The overall point of 1 Cor 5 is that the sexually-immoral guy calling himself a Christian ought get booted from 'Christians-only' groups, and handled as if he were a pagan.

1 Cor 5 (KJV)
https://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=1+cor+5&version=KJV
1 It is reported commonly that there is fornication among you, and such fornication as is not so much as named among the Gentiles, that one should have his father's wife. 2 And ye are puffed up, and have not rather mourned, that he that hath done this deed might be taken away from among you.  3 For I verily, as absent in body, but present in spirit, have judged already, as though I were present, concerning him that hath so done this deed, 4 In the name of our Lord Jesus Christ, when ye are gathered together, and my spirit, with the power of our Lord Jesus Christ,  5 To deliver such an one unto Satan for the destruction of the flesh, that the spirit may be saved in the day of the Lord Jesus.  6 Your glorying is not good. Know ye not that a little leaven leaveneth the whole lump?  7 Purge out therefore the old leaven, that ye may be a new lump, as ye are unleavened. For even Christ our passover is sacrificed for us:  8 Therefore let us keep the feast, not with old leaven, neither with the leaven of malice and wickedness; but with the unleavened bread of sincerity and truth.  9 I wrote unto you in an epistle not to company with fornicators: 10 Yet not altogether with the fornicators of this world, or with the covetous, or extortioners, or with idolaters; for then must ye needs go out of the world.  11 But now I have written unto you not to keep company, if any man that is called a brother be a fornicator, or covetous, or an idolator, or a railer, or a drunkard, or an extortioner; with such an one no not to eat.  12 For what have I to do to judge them also that are without? do not ye judge them that are within?  13 But them that are without God judgeth. Therefore put away from among yourselves that wicked person.

[DavidFord]

16 and this one, being a daughter of Abraham, whom the Adversary - 4567. Satanas ►an adversary - bound, lo, eighteen years, did it not behove to be loosed from this bond on the sabbath-day?'
I think it benefits our understanding a lot to read all of the verses of a certain thing.. So being of an enquiring mind..

For that passage, the Aramaic has not Satana, but rather Akelqartza, i.e. Slanderer/ Accuser/ Eater of the Broken.

Luke 13 (based on Younan), http://dukhrana.com
10. Now while Yeshua taught on the Shabbata in one of the assemblies, 11. there was there a woman who had a rukha [spirit] of infirmity eighteen years. And she was bent down and she was not able to straighten herself at all. 12. And Yeshua saw her and called her and said to her,
"Woman, you are freed from your infirmity."
13. And he placed his hand on her, and she straightened herself immediately and glorified Allaha. 14. But the leader of the assembly answered while he was angered because Yeshua had healed on the Shabbata, and said to the assembly, "Six are the days in which it is right to labor in them. You should come (and) be healed, but not on the day of the Shabbata." 15. But Yeshua answered and said to him,
"Hypocrite!
Does not each one of you on the Shabbata
loose his ox or his donkey from the stable
and goes (and) waters it?
16. And this (woman) because she is a daughter of Awraham,
and Akelqartza has bound her behold eighteen years,
was it not right to free her from this bondage
on the day of the Shabbata?"
17. And while he was saying these things, all of those who opposed him were ashamed, and all the people were rejoicing at all the wonders that were occurring by his hand.

Aramaic verses that contain akel (or some variation thereof, e.g. akli or aklin) + qartza = Slanderer/ Accuser/ slanderer/ slander/ eater of the broken/ eater of ridicule
Mt 4:1, 4:5, 4:8, 4:11, 25:41
Lk 4:2, 4:3, 4:6, 4:13, 13:16
John 8:44, 18:29
Acts 13:10
Romans 1:30
2Cor 12:20
Eph 4:27, 6:11
1Tim 3:11
2Tim 3:3
Titus 2:3
1Peter 2:1
Jude 1:9
Rev 2:10, 12:9, 12:12, 20:2, 20:10.

[DavidFord]

This verse is really making me think of shadow and shades....  Now that I think about it again.. It's the flames!  That are (imo) metaphor.

Do you think merely-metaphorical flames could prompt someone suffering-pain i.e. in torment beg for a drop of water?

Luke 16 (DLNT)
https://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Luke+16&version=DLNT
....And the rich man also died and was buried. 23 And having lifted-up his eyes in Hades while being in torments, he sees Abraham from a-distance, and Lazarus in his bosom. 24 And he, having called, said, 'Father Abraham, have-mercy-on me and send Lazarus in order that he may dip the tip of his finger in water and cool-off my tongue, because I am suffering-pain in this flame'. .... warn them in order that they also might not come to this place of torment'.

Sheol in NABRE
https://www.biblegateway.com/quicksearch/?quicksearch=sheol&qs_version=NABRE&limit=500

Proverbs 9:18
Little do they know that the shades are there,
that her guests are in the depths of Sheol!

Isaiah 14:9
Below, Sheol is all astir preparing for your coming;
Awakening the shades to greet you,
all the leaders of the earth;
Making all the kings of the nations
rise from their thrones.

[GodIsLove]

http://www.tentmaker.org/articles/Lazarus-byHuie.htm

[CST]

Satan never tested Jesus in the wilderness, because Satan never existed.

:Chinscratch: I come down on the side of believing Satan is a fallen creature. One who was endowed with rationality, which turns out to be the whole 'Pandora's box'. Jesus said He saw Satan / the adversary fall like lightning.. Revelation 12 says Michael and his angels fought against the dragon / slanderer and his angels (then the dragon enraged [again, 1st time 70a.d.] persecuted/inquisitioned(?) the faith, but it was given the 2 wings of an eagle.. sorry.. a favorite wormhole/bible prophecy..

What a thrilling story! I don't believe it's metaphor. Why bother? I never seriously consider something as metaphor if the metaphor has already been openly taught about in the scriptures.. Why make the carnal mind into a whispery, fruedian thing..? (That guy was kind of nuts you know.) The carnal mind is a whispery, freudian thing.. but we don't need an elaborate metaphor or myth of fallen rebel angels to communicate it, so it doesn't sound logical to me.

I believe it all from Genesis to Revelation as literal. (Even if Revelation is portrayed via symbols, metaphor, orchestra, seals, trumpets, flames.. well, the flames I do not believe are metaphor, until the 'after' life ages.. oh dear, I'm starting to babble big time..)

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

Jesus saw satan / the adversary fall from heaven like lightning.. the dragon stood in front of the woman (virgin) to devour the manchild (son of man; via herod the great) -- I go into this to show the dragon cannot be the un or sub conscious mind of man -- This is the dragon which swept 1/3 of the stars - see last verse Rev 1 "the stars are angels" - with his tail

Now do I think he swept the angels out of heaven or the heavens (?) with his tail? No. I do not. But I do think 1/3 of God's angels followed him in his rebellion.

:Chinscratch: So... why did God choose that very moment - pretty much - to create the 'earthly' universe and man and woman? What could possibly go wrong? Or that is to say, didn't He know what would happen? (Trickery, sedition.) Of course He did.
:cloud9: He is so wise.

Meanwhile.. the manchild/Son of man is caught up (yes, harpazo.. but we "meet Jesus at His coming" not ascend up to God's right hand(imo). And so, foiled, the dragon is enraged and pursues the faith (70 a.d.) but the faith flees.. relocates.. migrates..

[Revelation 12, awesome chapter, amazing. An insert & total history.]

..Then war breaks out in heaven, the war between Michael & angels and dragon & angels.. Michael & angels win.. dragon&co are no longer allowed access to the heavens..
-- "So the great dragon was cast out,
that serpent of old, called the Devil and Satan,
who deceives the whole world;
he was cast to the earth,
and his angels were cast
out with him."

He, "god of this world" is like totally ticked off now.. so he "persecutes the woman" / inqusitions the faith, but she is given the two wings of an eagle to fly (sail?) to a new place.. safe from the dragon's face ( :Chinscratch: ) for 3.5 division of time.. then the serpent guise of the dragon vomits a flood after the faith trying to wash it from off the Earth.

But the Earth will swallow the flood.

Then the dragon will turn his attention (back?) to her other children "who have the commandments of God and (by then?) the testimony of Jesus", ("you will not see Me again, Jerusalem until you say, blessed is He who comes in the name of the LORD" to make war against them - Revelation 16:14,15,16 "3 frogs go out to gather the kings to war against God, blessed are those attired, for Jesus comes like a thief. And they gather to Armageddon/Gehenna Valley"

Revelation 13 is an insert alongside 12. [Rev 14 two harvests, [1]wheat and [2]grapes of wrath/tares at Gehenna Valley -- (the 2nd "angel came out from the altar, who had power over fire, and he cried with a loud cry to him who had the sharp sickle, saying, "Thrust in your sharp sickle and gather the clusters of the vine of the earth, for her grapes are fully ripe." 19 So the angel thrust his sickle into the earth and gathered the vine of the earth, and threw it into the great winepress (metaphor for Gehenna Valley/H'armageddon) of the wrath of God. 20 And the winepress was trampled outside the city, and blood came out of the winepress, up to the horses' bridles, for one thousand six hundred furlongs."

War.

Yes, I think man wars with God. But I think "dark" spirit forces, principalities and powers of the heavenly/spiritual realm, that is, the rebel scheming angels working behind the scenes (hidden/want to be hidden), keep it from taking half of forever..

I think letting the adversary and his angels be the first to wander off from God /  His will (thinking ability includes choice) - That there are rebel spirits, I think, really escalates the whole process.. quickens it, a sort of let's get it over with.

That's my :2c: anyway..
:Peace2:

Do you believe that Satan is literally, a great, red (fire-like) dragon, with wings that once flew around Heaven cooking and/or eating God's angels? Because if you don't it's difficult to claim Satan is 'literally' anything.

Matthew 16:23
NAS: behind Me, Satan! You are a stumbling block - to Peter, acting as adversary..
....
1 Corinthians 5:5
NAS: such a one to Satan for the destruction - https://biblehub.com/interlinear/1_corinthians/5-5.htm
  :Chinscratch: "to deliver such a one to Satan for destruction of the flesh, so that his spirit may be saved in the day of the Lord. ..the sifting like wheat.. (making "satan demanded" to be a figure of speech or metaphor?)
....
2 Corinthians 2:11
NAS: advantage would be taken of us by Satan, for we are not ignorant - https://biblehub.com/interlinear/2_corinthians/2-11.htm
:mshock: so that we should not be outwitted by Satan; for we are not ignorant of his schemes

Re: 2 Cor 2:11, only intelligent entities are capable of scheming, and Satan is an intelligent, very crafty, creature.
For Mt 16:23, Jesus isn't calling Peter _the_ Satan, but rather, satan i.e. adversary.

For 1 Cor 5, I think taking 'satan' as _the_ Satan is too strong a take on the word, and think Paul's remark should be understood as, 'deliver him to adversaries,' as in people outside the church.  The overall point of 1 Cor 5 is that the sexually-immoral guy calling himself a Christian ought get booted from 'Christians-only' groups, and handled as if he were a pagan.

1 Cor 5 (KJV)
https://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=1+cor+5&version=KJV
1 It is reported commonly that there is fornication among you, and such fornication as is not so much as named among the Gentiles, that one should have his father's wife. 2 And ye are puffed up, and have not rather mourned, that he that hath done this deed might be taken away from among you.  3 For I verily, as absent in body, but present in spirit, have judged already, as though I were present, concerning him that hath so done this deed, 4 In the name of our Lord Jesus Christ, when ye are gathered together, and my spirit, with the power of our Lord Jesus Christ,  5 To deliver such an one unto Satan for the destruction of the flesh, that the spirit may be saved in the day of the Lord Jesus.  6 Your glorying is not good. Know ye not that a little leaven leaveneth the whole lump?  7 Purge out therefore the old leaven, that ye may be a new lump, as ye are unleavened. For even Christ our passover is sacrificed for us:  8 Therefore let us keep the feast, not with old leaven, neither with the leaven of malice and wickedness; but with the unleavened bread of sincerity and truth.  9 I wrote unto you in an epistle not to company with fornicators: 10 Yet not altogether with the fornicators of this world, or with the covetous, or extortioners, or with idolaters; for then must ye needs go out of the world.  11 But now I have written unto you not to keep company, if any man that is called a brother be a fornicator, or covetous, or an idolator, or a railer, or a drunkard, or an extortioner; with such an one no not to eat.  12 For what have I to do to judge them also that are without? do not ye judge them that are within?  13 But them that are without God judgeth. Therefore put away from among yourselves that wicked person.

But that's the problem. It's easy to say 'satan' doesn't mean 'Satan' whenever it doesn't suit you so what's to stop you saying 'satan' never means 'Satan?

For that passage, the Aramaic has not Satana, but rather Akelqartza, i.e. Slanderer/ Accuser/ Eater of the Broken.

Hmm, yeah, in Greek that would usually be 'diabolos' (the Devil) so the distinction isn't that great unless you have reason to question whether the two word always refer to the same thing which you clearly seem to.

[lastpost]

Greetings!

CONCLUSION
The parable of Lazarus and the rich man, long used by mainstream ministers to teach the reality of "hell," really has nothing to say about punishment or reward in the afterlife. Christ used this story, which fit the common misconception about life after death in his day, to show the fate that awaited the Jewish nation because of the unbelief and faithlessness which led them to reject him as the Messiah.

Well, yes, if one has a certain doctrine to establish then the above, is true for such people. And if it keeps them from selfishness and sinning, then Christ's parable has served its purpose for them.

However, on the contrary to the above conclusion, as interesting as it is, I believe that Christ used "the common belief about life after death in His day" (not "misconception") to quite simply warn each and every human being as to punishment and reward in the Afterlife – "Simple" being the operative word. I believe that Christ spoke this parable to provide the full gist of its meaning as a warning to take heed of ignoring the plight of others - not to lessen its impact with theological harmonisation.

Personally, I would say, yes, it is a metaphorical story in the sense that not everyone who is selfish like the rich man finds themselves in an identical scenario – but rather they endure the discomfort similar to the discomfort they caused to others. Sometimes the only way for a selfish person to learn is to experience the agony that they cause to others through their own selfishness, whether ignorantly or intentionally, and whether through commission or omission. Once they have learnt through expiation (they must learn to love all humanity equally, not just close family) then it is onward and upward for them. I see no good reason to minimise the impact of such a state simply because there are others who refer to this as a permanent hellish state.

Again, returning to simplicity, I believe that this is simply a warning for each and everyone to benefit from – young, old, educated, illiterate, simple or intellectual - even if they have never heard of the house of Judah.

I think it can be taken for granted that the Pharisees could count up to six, and one brother plus five brothers equals six brothers. Therefore, it's a bit if a stretch to name the first selfish brother to find himself alive and conscious in horrific surroundings as the house of Judah – he wasn't the father of the other five. Indeed, if the rich man had said: "I have five sons", then the theory would have had had more credence, in my opinion.

Speaking of Simple, as were all things of Christ, I believe that it is safe to remember how Jesus condensed and declared the law of Moses and the prophets:

Matthew 22:36-40

36 'Teacher, which is the greatest commandment in the Law?'

37 Jesus replied: '"Love the Lord your God with all your heart and with all your soul and with all your mind." 38 This is the first and greatest commandment. 39 And the second is like it: "Love your neighbour as yourself." 40 All the Law and the Prophets hang on these two commandments.'


Is it too simple?

[DavidFord]

Snip-- nice.

Speaking of Simple, as were all things of Christ, I believe that it is safe to remember how Jesus condensed and declared the law of Moses and the prophets:
Matthew 22:36-40
36 'Teacher, which is the greatest commandment in the Law?'
37 Jesus replied: '"Love the Lord your God with all your heart and with all your soul and with all your mind." 38 This is the first and greatest commandment. 39 And the second is like it: "Love your neighbour as yourself." 40 All the Law and the Prophets hang on these two commandments.'
Is it too simple?

It's very simple, but hard to do.  If all those who call themselves followers of Christ did that consistently, this world would be a much better place.

Mt 22:36-40 (based on Younan)
36. "Malpana [Teacher], which commandment in the namusa [law] is greatest?" 37. And Yeshua said to him,
"That you should love MrYa [Master YHWH] Allahak [your Allaha]
with all your heart and with all your soul
and with all your might and with all your mind.'
38. This is the first and the greatest commandment.
39. And the second is like it:
that you should love your neighbor as yourself.'
40. On these two commandments hang the Aurayta [Torah] and the nabia [prophets]."

[DavidFord]

Did Titus 3:9 originally mention the:  law?  Scribes?

Titus 3:9 (NKJV)
https://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=titus%203%3A9&version=NKJV;NASB;NABRE
But avoid foolish disputes, genealogies,
contentions, and strivings about the law;
for they are unprofitable and useless.

Titus 3:9 (from Aramaic) http://dukhrana.com
(Murdock) But foolish questions, and stories of genealogies,
and the disputes and contests of the scribes [Aramaic:  Sapra], avoid:
for there is no profit in them, and they are vain.

[DavidFord]

Semiticism:  "house of Israel"
Do you think the book of Hebrews, which contains 2 instances of the Semiticism "house of Israel" while quoting the OT, was originally composed in Greek?

https://www.biblegateway.com/quicksearch/?quicksearch="house+of+israel"&qs_version=KJV&limit=500
147 Bible results for ""house of israel"."

6 instances in the NT
https://www.biblegateway.com/quicksearch/?qs_version=KJV&quicksearch="house+of+israel"&begin=47&end=73&limit=500
Matthew 10:6 But go rather to the lost sheep of the house of Israel.
Matthew 15:24 But he answered and said, I am not sent but unto the lost sheep of the house of Israel.
Acts 2:36 Therefore let all the house of Israel know assuredly, that God hath made the same Jesus, whom ye have crucified, both Lord and Christ.
Acts 7:42 Then God turned, and gave them up to worship the host of heaven; as it is written in the book of the prophets, O ye house of Israel, have ye offered to me slain beasts and sacrifices by the space of forty years in the wilderness?
Hebrews 8:8 For finding fault with them, he saith, Behold, the days come, saith the Lord, when I will make a new covenant with the house of Israel and with the house of Judah:
Hebrews 8:10 For this is the covenant that I will make with the house of Israel after those days, saith the Lord; I will put my laws into their mind, and write them in their hearts: and I will be to them a God, and they shall be to me a people:

[CST]

Greetings!

CONCLUSION
The parable of Lazarus and the rich man, long used by mainstream ministers to teach the reality of "hell," really has nothing to say about punishment or reward in the afterlife. Christ used this story, which fit the common misconception about life after death in his day, to show the fate that awaited the Jewish nation because of the unbelief and faithlessness which led them to reject him as the Messiah.

Well, yes, if one has a certain doctrine to establish then the above, is true for such people. And if it keeps them from selfishness and sinning, then Christ's parable has served its purpose for them.

However, on the contrary to the above conclusion, as interesting as it is, I believe that Christ used "the common belief about life after death in His day" (not "misconception") to quite simply warn each and every human being as to punishment and reward in the Afterlife – "Simple" being the operative word. I believe that Christ spoke this parable to provide the full gist of its meaning as a warning to take heed of ignoring the plight of others - not to lessen its impact with theological harmonisation.

Personally, I would say, yes, it is a metaphorical story in the sense that not everyone who is selfish like the rich man finds themselves in an identical scenario – but rather they endure the discomfort similar to the discomfort they caused to others. Sometimes the only way for a selfish person to learn is to experience the agony that they cause to others through their own selfishness, whether ignorantly or intentionally, and whether through commission or omission. Once they have learnt through expiation (they must learn to love all humanity equally, not just close family) then it is onward and upward for them. I see no good reason to minimise the impact of such a state simply because there are others who refer to this as a permanent hellish state.

Again, returning to simplicity, I believe that this is simply a warning for each and everyone to benefit from – young, old, educated, illiterate, simple or intellectual - even if they have never heard of the house of Judah.

I think it can be taken for granted that the Pharisees could count up to six, and one brother plus five brothers equals six brothers. Therefore, it's a bit if a stretch to name the first selfish brother to find himself alive and conscious in horrific surroundings as the house of Judah – he wasn't the father of the other five. Indeed, if the rich man had said: "I have five sons", then the theory would have had had more credence, in my opinion.

Speaking of Simple, as were all things of Christ, I believe that it is safe to remember how Jesus condensed and declared the law of Moses and the prophets:

Matthew 22:36-40

36 'Teacher, which is the greatest commandment in the Law?'

37 Jesus replied: '"Love the Lord your God with all your heart and with all your soul and with all your mind." 38 This is the first and greatest commandment. 39 And the second is like it: "Love your neighbour as yourself." 40 All the Law and the Prophets hang on these two commandments.'


Is it too simple?

Huh, what? It's brothers. Judah, son of Jacob (Israel) had five brothers: Reuben, Simeon, Levi, Issachar and Zebulan. These are the other five sons born to Jacob - by Leah. Obviously Judah has another five brothers but apparently they don't. Now unlike you I get this up until this point. I start to get wary when, while there seems to be possible Biblical precedent for discounting Jacob's other sons like this it seems hard pressed to think that Judah would disregard them all in this context especially as the Kingdom of Israel ended up split between Judah and Benjamin (not one of Judah's full brothers) and everyone else who became Samaritans who Judah (the rest of Israel) hates (if I've understood how history unfolded). 

[marie glen]

Did Titus 3:9 originally mention the:  law?  Scribes?

"and the disputes and contests of the scribes.."

Titus 3:9 (NKJV)
https://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=titus%203%3A9&version=NKJV;NASB;NABRE
But avoid foolish disputes, genealogies,
contentions, and strivings about the law;
for they are unprofitable and useless.

Titus 3:9 (from Aramaic) http://dukhrana.com
(Murdock) But foolish questions, and stories of genealogies,
and the disputes and contests of the scribes [Aramaic:  Sapra], avoid:
for there is no profit in them, and they are vain.

    :thumbsup:

[lastpost]

Greetings!

CONCLUSION
The parable of Lazarus and the rich man, long used by mainstream ministers to teach the reality of "hell," really has nothing to say about punishment or reward in the afterlife. Christ used this story, which fit the common misconception about life after death in his day, to show the fate that awaited the Jewish nation because of the unbelief and faithlessness which led them to reject him as the Messiah.

Well, yes, if one has a certain doctrine to establish then the above, is true for such people. And if it keeps them from selfishness and sinning, then Christ's parable has served its purpose for them.

However, on the contrary to the above conclusion, as interesting as it is, I believe that Christ used "the common belief about life after death in His day" (not "misconception") to quite simply warn each and every human being as to punishment and reward in the Afterlife – "Simple" being the operative word. I believe that Christ spoke this parable to provide the full gist of its meaning as a warning to take heed of ignoring the plight of others - not to lessen its impact with theological harmonisation.

Personally, I would say, yes, it is a metaphorical story in the sense that not everyone who is selfish like the rich man finds themselves in an identical scenario – but rather they endure the discomfort similar to the discomfort they caused to others. Sometimes the only way for a selfish person to learn is to experience the agony that they cause to others through their own selfishness, whether ignorantly or intentionally, and whether through commission or omission. Once they have learnt through expiation (they must learn to love all humanity equally, not just close family) then it is onward and upward for them. I see no good reason to minimise the impact of such a state simply because there are others who refer to this as a permanent hellish state.

Again, returning to simplicity, I believe that this is simply a warning for each and everyone to benefit from – young, old, educated, illiterate, simple or intellectual - even if they have never heard of the house of Judah.

I think it can be taken for granted that the Pharisees could count up to six, and one brother plus five brothers equals six brothers. Therefore, it's a bit if a stretch to name the first selfish brother to find himself alive and conscious in horrific surroundings as the house of Judah – he wasn't the father of the other five. Indeed, if the rich man had said: "I have five sons", then the theory would have had had more credence, in my opinion.

Speaking of Simple, as were all things of Christ, I believe that it is safe to remember how Jesus condensed and declared the law of Moses and the prophets:

Matthew 22:36-40

36 'Teacher, which is the greatest commandment in the Law?'

37 Jesus replied: '"Love the Lord your God with all your heart and with all your soul and with all your mind." 38 This is the first and greatest commandment. 39 And the second is like it: "Love your neighbour as yourself." 40 All the Law and the Prophets hang on these two commandments.'


Is it too simple?

Huh, what? It's brothers. Judah, son of Jacob (Israel) had five brothers: Reuben, Simeon, Levi, Issachar and Zebulan. These are the other five sons born to Jacob - by Leah. Obviously Judah has another five brothers but apparently they don't. Now unlike you I get this up until this point. I start to get wary when, while there seems to be possible Biblical precedent for discounting Jacob's other sons like this it seems hard pressed to think that Judah would disregard them all in this context especially as the Kingdom of Israel ended up split between Judah and Benjamin (not one of Judah's full brothers) and everyone else who became Samaritans who Judah (the rest of Israel) hates (if I've understood how history unfolded).

Yes, it's interesting, and why do the writers (there's another article using the same theory) seem to think it so significant that Judah's other brothers should be disregarded?

I think that the link to Judah in these articles is far too tentative and is certainly not "cemented", but rather it is used to bolster a doctrinal belief.

What I meant to portray was that if Christ meant for the rich man to represent Judah as the "progenitor" of "the Jews", then it would be far more relevant in this theory for any living sons of Judah to be inferred rather than five of his brothers of eponymous tribes (but as two of Judah's sons had died the number used by Christ would not have tallied, if I'm correct Biblically).

Many of the classical rabbinical sources (with only Bamidbar Rabbah stating otherwise apparently) have Simeon dying at the age of 120, roughly three years before the death of his brother Reuben.

http://www.jewishencyclopedia.com/articles/13677-simeon-tribe-of

While I do not personally accept the chronological accuracy of Biblical dates, if I have my reverse chronology correct then:
Reuben died aged 125 in 1445/1444 BCE

Therefore Simeon (born 1568 BCE or 1567 BCE ) died aged 120 in 1448/1447 BCE

Judah was born in 1565 BCE

https://www.chabad.org/library/article_cdo/aid/288958/jewish/Judah.htm

The Book of Jubilees has Judah dying aged 119 in 1446 BCE

The Book of Jasher has Judah dying aged 129 (thus 1436 BCE)

This would mean:

According to the Book of Jubilees, Judah outlived one of his blood brothers.

According to the Book of Jasher, Judah outlived two of his blood brothers.

How is it that there were five brothers alive in Christ's parable if the rich man was Judah? It's all too shaky.

[lastpost]

The following is my opinion regarding the beggar and the selfish rich man...

PART 1
THE PARABLE OF LAZARUS AND THE RICH MAN Luke: 16:19-31

I believe that the parable of Lazarus the beggar and the selfish rich man belongs to every man, woman and child in a way that each can understand in simple terms. Christ is the Saviour, the Redeemer - He said that He came "to save the world" (John 12:47).

There are many ways to view Scripture, yet it would seem to be very plain that the parable of the Rich Man and the Beggar as told by Jesus to His listeners, was meant to be taken in its rudimentary sense by them according to their understanding of a post mortem existence.

This is because the hearers of Christ who were Jews, in the main, already had in their minds the type of scenario drawn out by Jesus. This is beyond any question of doubt to the mind which is not biased towards fulfilling a theology which does not allow for Christ's parable to actually mean what it says regarding the immediate after-death experience of souls – i.e. conscious existence.

Some truly magnificent attempts by the latter theologians at providing convoluted and intricately interwoven explanations regarding Christ's parable have been presented. Similar extravagant teachings must also be used to explain away certain other passages regarding the existence of souls in other conditions such as the clear proclamation of 1 Peter 3:18-20 & 4:6 that the Spirit of Jesus preached to conscious beings immediately after His death on the Cross, references to Christ descending and ascending, and the fact that Jesus and others saw the bright spirits of Moses and Elias who had died many centuries before.

The well-known historian Josephus, a Jewish son of a father of priestly descent, born in Jerusalem AD37/38, who was extremely proficient in his studies of Jewish law, having conducted academic studies with the Essenes, Sadducees and Pharisees, could not have been in a better position to know the state of belief of the Jews of the time of Jesus of Nazareth regarding what happens when the physical body stops breathing.

Josephus writes of the Pharisees: "While claiming that everything is affected by destiny, they do not deprive human will of power in these things. For it occurred to God to make a combination and to admit to his counsel the will of men---with its virtue and its vice. Their belief is that there is an undying power in souls and that, under the ground, there is an accounting to reward and punish those who were righteous or unrighteous in (this) life" (Antiquities of the Jews - Book XVIII, Chap. 1 para. 3).

Of the Sadducees Josephus writes in Jewish War (2.164-166): "They deny the soul's permanence as well as rewards and punishments in the underworld".

The Pharisees emerged as a significant force in Jewish affairs because of their influence with the common people. The Eerdmans Bible Dictionary states of the time of Jesus: "The Sadducees were the party of those with political power" but "The views of the Pharisees prevailed among the common people". Furthemore, Josephus tells us that: "The Sadducees persuade only the well-to-do and have no popular following. But the Pharisees have the masses as allies" (Antiquities 12.297-298). Again, with specific reference to the Pharisees' doctrine of the belief in conscious existence immediately after physical death in Hades, Josephus writes: "On account of which doctrines they are able greatly to persuade the body of the people" (18.1.3).

Clearly, the Jews to whom Jesus was speaking were steeped in the teachings of the Pharisees regarding conscious existence after physical death.

This parable told by Jesus the Christ was simply meant to be interpreted according the general understanding of the common Jewish masses regarding immediate consciousness after the demise of the body. Yes, it is a parable and not a factual story, but nevertheless it is clear in its intent, so it seems to me, concerning an inviolable and immutable law of consequences regarding selfishness. It is a true blessing to humankind and should not have its meaning diluted by the misdirection of Christian religionists because it does not fit in with their theologies.

The Jewish conception of Hades was similar to that of the Greek belief, with the main exception that they had a belief in a "Final Resurrection". Many Jews believed that there were punishments and rewards for souls in Hades depending upon whether they had been virtuous and just, or wicked and unjust.

Furthermore, Christ's parable had already had an incarnation in writings from the Jews' Babylonian captivity – it is simply being purblind to state that Jesus was not referring to a state of the Afterlife which was in the minds of contemporary hearers.

Luke 16:19-31

19 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 hades 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.

All things to do with Christ are simple. The parable of Lazarus the beggar and the selfish rich man presents a simple teaching by the Good Shepherd of mankind about selfishness and the ignoring of the plight of one's fellows, and the consequences it brings to the individual; it also explains in simple terms about hardships and unfairness and the compensatory consequences that these adversaries bring to the individual.

Jesus Christ knew that thousands of years later, His parable would be read or heard by the people of that time - including people of today. The Great Teacher knew that His spiritual teachings would have to be applicable and relevant to all people, not just the contemporary people to whom He spoke then.

Therefore, He spoke a message that covered the principle in a way that anyone and everyone - man, woman or child - could easily understand and react to positively with help from God or perhaps even an angel guardian (Matthew 18:10) - even unbeknown to themselves. He did not speak this parable so that only dedicated scholars specialising in that period and context could relate to.

The person who believes in so called "everlasting punishment" says that the different states into which people go at death are completely separate and never the twain shall meet, neither shall there be any change for the inhabitants of those conditions, i.e. everlasting torment. This is clearly not what He who was Divine Love in Human Form meant.

Christ's parable shows Lazarus and the rich man dying: "...the beggar died, and was carried by the angels into Abraham's bosom: the rich man also died, and was buried" (Luke 16:22). With absolutely no sleeping or being unconscious for any length of time, they are both very much alive and conscious in Hades.

This is a parable told by Jesus Christ which expounds a general principle of God's economy and salvation, and as such the beggar and the rich man are roles used in the revealing of that principle rather than being two specific people.

Generally speaking, Hades in the minds of many of the Greek Jews at the time represented both Paradise and Hell, i.e. Hades represented the Afterlife in the minds of many.

Concerning Hades, Josephus, a first-century Romano-Jewish historian who was born in Jerusalem (AD37/38) writes: "The Sadducees rob the rewards of the righteous and the just in Hades" because the Sadducees did not believe in an Afterlife; Josephus wrote this because there was an idea abroad that there were rewards for the righteous in the Hades. "Abraham's bosom" was a term used for that part of Hades representing a type of paradise. The rich man, however, finds himself in a very different part of Hades which is a different locality of Hades-life to that of Abraham's bosom and it is extremely hellish in nature.

Hades, according to the Rabbinical writings, is the place to where both the "just and righteous" and the "unjust and wicked" go after physical death. The rich man gives a clear indication as to the nature of the environment of that particular aspect of Hades into which he passed, and indeed, which he had built up for himself, as he went to his "own place" (topos => space marked off, condition), in a similar manner that Acts reports Judas as having done (Acts 1:25). The change from physical death to the next state of being is reported by Jesus - when relating the death of both the rich man and Lazarus - as being immediate, no waiting, no mentioning of waking up; this was an instant transition (where a conversation starts): "...we shall all be changed in an instant, in the twinkling of an eye").

"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" (Luke 16:22). There is a telling aspect to Christ's portrayal of the end-of-life transition between the two characters, the rich man and Lazarus. Jesus is encouraging the mind to think about a higher state, a more elevated environment, and is drawing us away from the main idea that all afterlife takes place "under the earth" which was a common belief. Jesus says that the rich man was "buried" and finds himself in Hades, but the beggar "was carried by the angels into Abraham's bosom", inferring an upwards movement in perfect harmony with the word "anastasis" (a rising, rising up) which translates to "resurrection" in the Bible. This would correspond to his "first death" which was "close at hand" (as mentioned in the highly symbolic vision of Revelations which some treat literally but it is symbolic and non-literal here) and due to his spiritual condition there would not be a "second death". However, there clearly is a "second death" for the selfish rich man, and in that worse state he now finds himself.

The selfish rich man immediately finds himself in the hellish part of Hades, as described by our Lord: "And in hades he lift up his eyes, being in torments, and seeth Abraham afar off, and Lazarus in his bosom (Luke 16:23)". Once again, we are asked to raise our own thoughts in the direction of the locality that the beggar now finds himself, i.e. in a higher and more purified environment than that of the rich man (in contrast to contemporary ideas).

The rich man now recognised the reality of his fate and no doubt he realised now his foolishness in ignoring the warnings by God through His holy prophets to repent of evil ways in order to receive the Deliverer's salvation. But it is too late, he had led a whole lifetime of selfishness and lack of interest in his fellow's plight, and what darkness had been built up in the soul over a whole lifetime of abuse had to be purged "so as by fire" (1 Cor.3:15) - God's laws had to run their course before he was cleansed in order that he was spiritually fit to enter into a higher environment of the type already declared: "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" (Luke 16:24), but Abraham replied: "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" (Luke 16:25).

The rich man finds himself in a hellish place through utter selfishness, and Lazarus finds himself truly compensated for the hardship endured during his life. This is Divine Law at work - indeed, Divine Justice - what has been sown is reaped (Galatians 6:7, Job 4:8), the law of retribution and the law of compensation working on in spite of man's ignorance of such laws. The conditions into which each character had passed was based solely on how they had lived their lives. "There shall be weeping and gnashing of teeth, when ye shall see Abraham, and Isaac, and Jacob, and all the prophets, in the kingdom of God, and you [yourselves] thrust out" (Luke 13:28).

However, the sufferings of Lazarus the beggar drew him nearer to the likeness of Christ, he suffered mentally and physically, and while the "dogs licked his open wounds" (Luke 16:21) he was persecuted by poverty and a wilful lack of charity from people including the rich man and his family, for which they received their due comeuppance. It is plain.

Abraham continues: "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" (Luke 16:26). The "gulf" mentioned is not a gulf of a physical nature, it is a gulf of moral and spiritual attainment, or lack of it.

Continued in PART 2

[lastpost]

Continued: PART 2
THE PARABLE OF LAZARUS AND THE RICH MAN Luke: 16:19-31

Certainly, in terms of locality, the conditions in which Lazarus and the rich man find themselves are different, and yet both localities are simultaneously coexistent with the earth and those living upon it: "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 16:27,28).

The rich man assumes that someone who has physically died can visit his relatives who are clearly depicted as living on the Earth at the same time that the rich man was in his hellish place and Lazarus was in a far more congenial environment; Christ does not relate Abraham as saying that the rich man's relatives are long dead and "asleep" in a grave, but He declares the opposite: Christ confirms the assumption of the rich man that his relatives are living on the Earth at that very moment, thus Christ confirms co-existence in the most simple way - "the simplicity that is in Christ".

Abraham does not deny that one can return from death to give warnings as to the life to come and its consequences but simply states that: "They have Moses and the prophets; let them hear them" (Luke 16:29). This is an indication that in Moses and the prophets there is a spiritual instruction that shows them how to avoid the fate of the rich man. The prophets of the Old Testament had been urging the people for centuries, on behalf of God, to repent of their evil and wicked ways in order to avoid a fate worse than death and receive God's deliverance.

Now repentance is once more brought to the attention in Christ's parable: "And he said, Nay, father Abraham: but if one went unto them from the dead, they will repent (metanoeo => heartily to amend with abhorrence of one's past sins)" (Luke 16:30).

But Abraham points out it would be a pointless exercise attempting to prove to his relatives the existence of life after death and the inevitable reaping of consequences to those who did not heed Moses or the warnings of the prophets: "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).

This last statement refers not only to the pointlessness of the rich man's request to father Abraham for someone to return from "death" to warn his relatives, but it also refers to Jesus' own reappearance after physical death as being pointless to such as these relatives in their present state on Earth as they would not believe it or take heed - and being a parable, it can encompass both possibilities.

There is a process occurring. The hells, Paradise and earth all exist at the same time and each goes to his "own place" at physical death to undertake the next stage of spiritual life made out of God's laws. And it would seem that the next stage of life for the rich man's relatives was going to be a similar state of torment; they were creating a "great gulf" between themselves and Divine happiness too.

Christ's parable is about ethical living during earthly life and He is giving a severe warning of how it will be for those who ignore their duties to the less fortunate, allowing them to suffer needlessly while simply serving themselves instead; it is a severe warning because He wants people to realise it is a reality. Christ was showing that although there was communication between those in very different conditions, there could be no relief for those who had brought upon themselves by violating God's laws - through negligence and their own self-seeking motives - the consequences that must be faced.

In other words, we are being told that the selfishness of the rich man was such that on his arrival in his new condition, there was no escape from his predicament because of the health of his spiritual-body, and the consequences he must face. He had done it to himself through utter selfishness and must suffer the results.

Thus, there was not going to be relief from his torment by any cooling "water" (from Lazarus) because not only was there no accommodation for such a thing in his present environment but the scales of Divine Justice could not be altered and he therefore had to reap what he had sown and there was no relief possible, not even a temporary respite from that which "scorched".

But let us not forget the wonderful love of Christ. However permanent the position this torment may appear to be to one who has, by wilful opposition to God's Law of Love, put himself there (and very permanent it seems to such a one), there is always a time when, after a hellish purification and correction (or "age-long pruning"), such a one will have eventually had enough selfishness "pruned" away, to be able to learn something of the selfless nature of the Gospel of Love from Christ and His angels, and surely be able to lighten the conditions around. The "great gulf" which was fixed through selfishness and wickedness, can, piece by piece, be transformed into a bridge by developing selflessness, compassion and love, and all those Divine qualities exemplified in the life of Jesus Christ.

God is all-wise and all-loving, and has accounted for everything in His Plan for the redemption of His children. There may be those of God's children who fix a great gulf between their self-centred, unsympathetic and uncompassionate natures, and the spiritual health and attainment to be gained by learning from God and those "ministering spirits" who work for Him (Heb.1:14) who would relieve them of their "debt", as it were, but the Law of Consequences cannot be altered (Luke 6:37, Gal.6:7, 1 Cor.3:13-15, 2 Cor.5:10, Rom.2:6, Matt.16:27, Rev.22:12, Rev.20:12) which is in operation and which is made manifest at the end of an individual's earthly life ("the time is near", "behold I come quickly"), and which has been in force from the very beginning for the redemption of God's children; those who have imprisoned themselves in such a way must remain in their self-created jail until all "debts" are paid, yet because of God's love and wisdom, they shall be free of their darkness - God has ordained it.

Indeed, we can see the state of such a one in another teaching told by Jesus: "And his lord was wroth, and delivered him to the tormentors, until he should pay all that was due unto him" (Matt. 18:34). It is simple to associate this teaching with the parable of the selfish rich man under discussion because the state of the wicked servant and the selfish rich man is the same state, albeit in parabolic form. The fundamentalist students who truly believe in an "everlasting punishment" will have missed this association due to an erroneous assumption that he or she, and those who think like him or her, will be the only ones who are not going to Hell for eternity. However, it is important to notice the word "until" in Christ's parable about the wicked servant. He, like the selfish rich man, must reap what he had sown "until" he should "pay all that was due".

This is brought powerfully home to us by the example of the loving Good Shepherd Who seeks the lost sheep "until He finds it" (Luke 15:4), when He left His dead body on the Cross and went in His spirit to teach people who were once wicked (who had since undergone a long 'pruning' period and were now ready to learn) about His Gospel of Love; Christ was: "put to death in the flesh, but quickened in the spirit: in which also he went and preached unto the spirits in prison; Which sometime were disobedient, when once the longsuffering of God waited in the days of Noah, while the ark was a preparing" (1 Pet. 3:18-20).

The hellish place related by our Lord in which the rich man found himself, will last for a terminable time - a time with an end. The Age whose closing shall see the fulfilment of God's "Purpose of the Aeons" (Eph.3:11), i.e. "the Restitution of all things", will be the Age when all souls have been purified of the evil they contain.

This Age is a finite period, it may be a vast one, as Christ's purpose is worked through "all the generations of the Aeon of aeons" (Eph.3:21); Christ spoke of "Aeonial pruning" (Matt. 25:46), indicating an ongoing process of painful soul-purification for those who are dead spiritually, contrasted with living the Christ-Life and progressing spiritually with Christ, remembering that Christ the Redeemer was "with God" (John 1:1) from the very beginning.

This great Aeon will close only when the Purpose of God in Christ shall have been accomplished; when the epochs of pruning and death shall have passed away, and the "lost" and "dead" beings shall have been found and made alive to God.

We have a promise from our Lord bringing unimaginable comfort available to man on Earth: "If a man keep My word, he shall not see death all through the Aeon" (John 8:51). How blessed are we compared to the selfish rich man who did not have knowledge of our Lord in Person.

The great Aeon of Christ Jesus' Purpose shall finally achieve its fulfilment and to Christ's satisfaction: "He shall see of the travail of his soul, and shall be satisfied" (Isa.53:11), when in "the dispensation of the fullness of times he might gather together in one all things in Christ" (Eph.1:10) and "...when he shall have delivered up the kingdom to God, even the Father" (1 Cor. 15:24) - then those terrible pruning areas in the "Hades" of old will no longer exist as all of the children of God will now be living free from evil and spiritual death - in Perfection. He has ordained it.

This has been my opinion.

Peace.

[GodIsLove]

Ok the article and the author's interpretation may or may not have merit but in my understanding, it seems that when Jesus spoke in parables he used something to represent something else:

so when He talks of goats it's not really goats...
The same for: sheep, leaven, talents, fire, seeds, vineyards, fig trees, brides, weddings, virgins, shepherds, wine skins, garments, weeds, etc. 

So why is this parable suddenly to be taken literally when all others are stories rich with symbolism?

I do, as of now, believe in some form of after death learning/purifying, however.

Edit: Lastpost, I do agree with much of what you posted above. You were posting the same time as I was.

[lastpost]

It fine for people to believe what they want to believe. This particular parable, in my opinion, is not literal, but portrays a general condition – a template, if you will. It's not literal, but it acts very nicely as a warning by Christ in its parabolic form.


If others want to say that this parable refers to Judah as being the Jewish nation, that's up to them, but in doing so I believe that they diminish the protection afforded by Christ in the sense that this is to be taken as what happens to an individual who is selfish to the point of having no empathy towards the beggar in agony as in the example of the rich man – and that example transitions into similar scenarios.


That's just my opinion of course.

[GodIsLove]

It fine for people to believe what they want to believe. This particular parable, in my opinion, is not literal, but portrays a general condition – a template, if you will. It's not literal, but it acts very nicely as a warning by Christ in its parabolic form.


If others want to say that this parable refers to Judah as being the Jewish nation, that's up to them, but in doing so I believe that they diminish the protection afforded by Christ in the sense that this is to be taken as what happens to an individual who is selfish to the point of having no empathy towards the beggar in agony as in the example of the rich man – and that example transitions into similar scenarios.


That's just my opinion of course.

Ok, that can make sense to me.

[CST]

Yes, it's interesting, and why do the writers (there's another article using the same theory) seem to think it so significant that Judah's other brothers should be disregarded?

I think that the link to Judah in these articles is far too tentative and is certainly not "cemented", but rather it is used to bolster a doctrinal belief.

What I meant to portray was that if Christ meant for the rich man to represent Judah as the "progenitor" of "the Jews", then it would be far more relevant in this theory for any living sons of Judah to be inferred rather than five of his brothers of eponymous tribes (but as two of Judah's sons had died the number used by Christ would not have tallied, if I'm correct Biblically).

Many of the classical rabbinical sources (with only Bamidbar Rabbah stating otherwise apparently) have Simeon dying at the age of 120, roughly three years before the death of his brother Reuben.

http://www.jewishencyclopedia.com/articles/13677-simeon-tribe-of

While I do not personally accept the chronological accuracy of Biblical dates, if I have my reverse chronology correct then:
Reuben died aged 125 in 1445/1444 BCE

Therefore Simeon (born 1568 BCE or 1567 BCE ) died aged 120 in 1448/1447 BCE

Judah was born in 1565 BCE

https://www.chabad.org/library/article_cdo/aid/288958/jewish/Judah.htm

The Book of Jubilees has Judah dying aged 119 in 1446 BCE

The Book of Jasher has Judah dying aged 129 (thus 1436 BCE)

This would mean:

According to the Book of Jubilees, Judah outlived one of his blood brothers.

According to the Book of Jasher, Judah outlived two of his blood brothers.

How is it that there were five brothers alive in Christ's parable if the rich man was Judah? It's all too shaky.

Huh, wouldn't all Judah's brother's be dead by the time Jesus walked in Israel, I'm not sure trying to work out when each of Judah's brothers died is helpful the Bible doesn't tell us clearly (as far I recall Joseph dies is buried, Genesis end little else is mentioned)and so they could have died in any order. I'm not entirely convinced the order of their births in Genesis 31/32 is entirely correct, it seems incredibly neat.

I'm going to read you interpretation later, I'm now short of time.