Does the bible teach that there is a hell of eternal torment for unbelievers?

[Montalban]

Oops good brother beat me to it!

 

[benglobal]

Listen At Salvation our Old spirit [old Man dies]never dies again!

Rom_6:6 Knowing this, that our old man is Crucified with Him, that the body of sin might be destroyed, that henceforth we should not serve sin.

Our old Nailed to his cross !Gone forever More !

2Co_5:17 Therefore if any man be in Christ, he is a new creature: old things are passed away; behold, all things are become new.
Eph_4:22 That ye put off concerning the former conversation the old man, which is corrupt according to the deceitful lusts;
Col_3:9 Lie not one to another, seeing that ye have put off the old man with his deeds;

What I wrote does not contradict the scripture you have posted above, only the words you have added.

 

[Timothew]

Jesus seemed to think dead people are conscious. He told a story to such.

Luke 16:22 “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.’
​

The rich man in hell was conscious as was Lazarus in paradise.

There's another passage which demonstrates that the dead are conscious. It's found in 1st Peter 3.

1 Peter 3:19 After being made alive, he went and made proclamation to the imprisoned spirits— 20 to those who were disobedient long ago when God waited patiently in the days of Noah while the ark was being built. In it only a few people, eight in all, were saved through water
​

It would have been rather fool hardy of Jesus to waste His time ministering to unconscious dead people unless they were conscious and could hear what He had to say.

There's another passage which shows dead people being able to hear. They could not hear if they were unconscious.

John 5:28-29 Do not marvel at this, for an hour is coming when all who are in the tombs will hear his voice and come out, those who have done good to the resurrection of life, and those who have done evil to the resurrection of judgment.
​

There's more than enough verses for me to be "one of those people who think dead people are conscious".

In Christ, GB

Luke 16:22 - Parable.
1 Peter 3:19 - Does not mean Christ preached to dead people in Hell.
John 5:28-29 - The people who hear Christ's voice are not dead, They have been raised back up to life. It's the point, they are resurrected. Of course they can hear. If living people can hear, that fact doesn't prove that dead people can hear.

 

[good brother]

Luke 16:22 - Parable.

Show me where it says it's a parable. Also, find me another one of Christ's parables that uses the proper name of a person.

1 Peter 3:19 - Does not mean Christ preached to dead people in Hell.

It only demonstrates that Christ preached to people who had been dead from the time of the flood, just a few thousands years according to Biblical timelines. How old do you think they were if they weren't dead?

John 5:28-29 - The people who hear Christ's voice are not dead, They have been raised back up to life. It's the point, they are resurrected. Of course they can hear. If living people can hear, that fact doesn't prove that dead people can hear.

It says, "an hour is coming when all who are in the tombs will hear his voice and come out," It plainly states that while they are still in the tomb (preresurrected), they will hear His voice THEN they will be resurrected.

I stand firm.

In Christ, GB

 

[spirit1st]

Every person on earth is a spirit being and live in a flesh body a short time! Then the true eternal us leaves the body!
We go to hell or New Jerusalem

1Co_15:44 It is sown a natural body; it is raised a spiritual body. There is a natural body, and there is a spiritual body.

. Amen. To the Galatians written from Rome.
Phm_1:25 The grace of our Lord Jesus Christ be with your spirit.


Gal_6:18 Brethren, the grace of our Lord Jesus Christ be with your spirit

Rom_8:16 The Spirit itself beareth witness with our spirit, that we are the children of God:

Eph_2:22 In whom ye also are builded together for an habitation of God through the Spirit

shall we not much rather be in subjection unto the Father of spirits, and live?

Heb_12:9 Furthermore we have had fathers of our flesh which corrected us, and we gave them reverence: shall we not much rather be in subjection unto the Father of spirits, and live?


Rom_2:29 But he is a Jew, which is one inwardly; and circumcision is that of the heart, in the spirit, and not in the letter; whose praise is not of men, but of God.

1Co_2:11 For what man knoweth the things of a man, save the spirit of man which is in him? even so the things of God knoweth no man, but the Spirit of God.

Rom_8:10 And if Christ be in you, the body is dead because of sin; but the Spirit is life because of righteousness.



. 2Co_4:18 While we look not at the things which are seen, but at the things which are not seen: for the things which are seen are temporal; but the things which are not seen are eternal.

 

[Timothew]

Show me where it says it's a parable. Also, find me another one of Christ's parables that uses the proper name of a person.

Matthew 13:34 (NLT)
Jesus always used stories and illustrations like these when speaking to the crowds. In fact, he never spoke to them without using such parables.

This parable uses a proper name. Show me the rule that says a parable can't ever use a proper name. Jesus never spoke to the people without using a parable. Therefore, this is a parable and the no-names rule is false. In fact a parable can be quite specific and still be a parable. In the parable of the mustard seed, Jesus specified a certain seed, a mustard seed. Does this mean the parable of the mustard seed is not a parable, but a gardening guide for the mid-eastern housewife? "If you want to attract birds to your backyard, plant a mustard seed." Is that the point of the "instructions" on mustard seeds?

 

[Zaac]

I don't feel too bad being told that I'm confused about dying and death by you.

Are you are one of the people who believe that dead people are conscious?

If they are not conscious, why refer to them as people as opposed to corpses? Their bodies may have died, but the spirit lives eternally somewhere.

 

[Timothew]

If they are not conscious, why refer to them as people as opposed to corpses? Their bodies may have died, but the spirit lives eternally somewhere.

OK, corpses then. That's the same thing.
The spirit lives eternally somewhere? Chapter and Verse, please.

 

[good brother]

Matthew 13:34 (NLT)
Jesus always used stories and illustrations like these when speaking to the crowds. In fact, he never spoke to them without using such parables.

The Sermon on the mount did not have one parable in it. Do not tell me that He always spoke in parables

This

parable uses a proper name. Show me the rule that says a parable can't ever use a proper name.

Then it shouldn't be hard for you to show me another parable that does use a proper name in the story. I mean, you are so familiar with His use of parables.

Jesus never spoke to the people without using a parable.

You mean like in Matthew 19 when He talks to the pharisees about divorce? Pretty sure that was not a parable. What about when He gave the Greatest Commandment? Was that a parable?

Therefore, this is a parable and the no-names rule is false.

Then you should be able to list other parables with proper names of individuals.

In fact a parable can be quite specific and still be a parable. In the parable of the mustard seed, Jesus specified a certain seed, a mustard seed. Does this mean the parable of the mustard seed is not a parable, but a gardening guide for the mid-eastern housewife? "If you want to attract birds to your backyard, plant a mustard seed." Is that the point of the "instructions" on mustard seeds?

Using a "mustard seed" in a parable would be like using the word "human" in the story. The "mustard seed" and the "human" are not proper names at all. You know that. This is not a valid argument.

Either produce a clear cut parable that uses a proper name or concede that this story may not be a parable at all, but the true story of a guy named Lazarus and an unknown rich man.

In Christ, GB

 

[Timothew]

The Sermon on the mount did not have one parable in it. Do not tell me that He always spoke in parables

pssst! hey brother! That was a direct quote from Matthew 13:34,
Don't tell me that I can't quote from the bible in our discussion.

 

[Montalban]

pssst! hey brother! That was a direct quote from Matthew 13:34,
Don't tell me that I can't quote from the bible in our discussion.

That's not what you were told. The point was that Jesus didn't just speak in parables. You seem to think that he always did.

When Jesus died on the cross, is this a parable?

 

[good brother]

pssst! hey brother! That was a direct quote from Matthew 13:34,
Don't tell me that I can't quote from the bible in our discussion.

Pssst, hey Tim, you said that Jesus ALWAYS spoke in parables when He addressed crowds. I just showed that you are in error on that belief.

And Pssst, Hey, I never said you couldn't quote from the Bible. In fact, quite the opposite is true. I wish that you build any argument you have ON the Bible and give me Bible quotes all the time. In fact, I think I asked you to quote from the Bible all the other instances where a proper name was used in a parable.

Are you familiar with the verse from Proverbs 27:17 "As iron sharpens iron, so one person sharpens another" ? We will only ever become sharper when we can back all of our arguments, discussions, debates, witnessing, conversing, whatever we are talking about by backing our words with the Word of God.

In Christ, GB

 

[Timothew]

Pssst, hey Tim, you said that Jesus ALWAYS spoke in parables when He addressed crowds. I just showed that you are in error on that belief.

And Pssst, Hey, I never said you couldn't quote from the Bible. In fact, quite the opposite is true. I wish that you build any argument you have ON the Bible and give me Bible quotes all the time. In fact, I think I asked you to quote from the Bible all the other instances where a proper name was used in a parable.

Are you familiar with the verse from Proverbs 27:17 "As iron sharpens iron, so one person sharpens another" ? We will only ever become sharper when we can back all of our arguments, discussions, debates, witnessing, conversing, whatever we are talking about by backing our words with the Word of God.

In Christ, GB

You asked

Show me where it says it's a parable.

I provided Matthew 13:34, showing that Jesus talked in parables.

You asked me to show you another parable where Jesus used a proper name. I can't. Does this prove that the parable of Lazarus and the rich man was not a parable? I don't think it does. If Jesus wanted to used proper names in a parable, HE certainly can. Can you show me the rule that says a parable can never use a proper name? Do you think Jack and the Beanstalk is a true story because it used a proper name?

When Jesus died on the cross, is this a parable?

Jesus didn't TALK about someone dying on the cross, he actually died on the cross. So, no it is not a parable and I never said that it was. However the parable of Lazarus and the rich man is a parable, it is included in a group of parables in Luke's Gospel.

When Paul wrote "The wages of sin is death" was that a parable?

 

[good brother]

I provided Matthew 13:34, showing that Jesus talked in parables.

No, you showed where Jesus told one parable. That does not mean that every time He opened His mouth He was telling a parable. Did Jesus tell alot of parables? Yes. Does that mean He always did? No.

You asked me to show you another parable where Jesus used a proper name. I can't. Does this prove that the parable of Lazarus and the rich man was not a parable? I don't think it does. If Jesus wanted to used proper names in a parable, HE certainly can. Can you show me the rule that says a parable can never use a proper name? Do you think Jack and the Beanstalk is a true story because it used a proper name?

If Jesus did use proper names in parables you should be able to find at least one other example. If you cannot, perhaps it's because this one isn't a parable after all.

And another thing, I don't remember Jesus telling the story of Jack and beanstalk.

However the parable of Lazarus and the rich man is a parable, it is included in a group of parables in Luke's Gospel.

Jesus is not allowed to tell true stories too?

When Paul wrote "The wages of sin is death" was that a parable?

No. Look back to the Garden of Eden and the curse. Sin did not enter into the world until they sinned, so yes, the wages of sin is death.

In Christ, GB

 

[Timothew]

No, you showed where Jesus told one parable. That does not mean that every time He opened His mouth He was telling a parable. Did Jesus tell alot of parables? Yes. Does that mean He always did? No.

If Jesus did use proper names in parables you should be able to find at least one other example. If you cannot, perhaps it's because this one isn't a parable after all.

And another thing, I don't remember Jesus telling the story of Jack and beanstalk.

Jesus is not allowed to tell true stories too?

No. Look back to the Garden of Eden and the curse. Sin did not enter into the world until they sinned, so yes, the wages of sin is death.

In Christ, GB

You haven't proven that parables can't use names.
You haven't proven that if a story contains a name it must be true.
I gave an example (Jack and the BS) of a story that contains a name and is not true.
I showed that Jesus used parables.

Now it is up to you, if you want to continue this discussion with me, you must prove that the Parable of Lazarus and the rich man was a true story about Hell, not a parable.

 

[Zaac]

OK, corpses then. That's the same thing.
The spirit lives eternally somewhere? Chapter and Verse, please.

John 11:25-26
Jesus said to her, "I am the resurrection and the life. He who believes in me will live, even though he dies; and whoever lives and believes in me will never die. Do you believe this?"

1 Peter 1:3-5
Praise be to the God and Father of our Lord Jesus Christ! In his great mercy he has given us new birth into a living hope through the resurrection of Jesus Christ from the dead, and into an inheritance that can never perish, spoil or fade—kept in heaven for you, who through faith are shielded by God's power until the coming of the salvation that is ready to be revealed in the last time.

1 Corinthians 15:50-53
I declare to you, brothers, that flesh and blood cannot inherit the kingdom of God, nor does the perishable inherit the imperishable. Listen, I tell you a mystery: We will not all sleep, but we will all be changed—in a flash, in the twinkling of an eye, at the last trumpet. For the trumpet will sound, the dead will be raised imperishable, and we will be changed. For the perishable must clothe itself with the imperishable, and the mortal with immortality.

 

[Zaac]

Does the bible teach that there is a hell of eternal torment in store for unbelievers?

According to Romans 6:23, the wages of sin is death, not eternal torment.

According to 2 Thessalonians 1:9, The penalty to be paid is destruction, not eternal torment.

According to the book of revelation, the lake of fire is the second death, not eternal torment.

According to John 3:16, the fate of those who reject Christ is to perish, not suffer eternal torment.

According to Ezekiel, the soul who sins will die, not suffer eternal torment.

According to Jesus Christ, the road is wide that leads to destruction. He said destruction, not eternal torment.

According to God (recorded in Genesis) the result of sin is death and being returned to dust, not eternal torment.

According to the bible, there is no hell of eternal torment, there is only life in Christ or death without Christ.

Now as mentioned earlier that God's word says 46 “Then they will go away to eternal punishment, but the righteous to eternal life.” Matthew 25:46, whose purpose is served to author confusion that is not of God that eternal punishment is not the case?

 

[good brother]

You haven't proven that parables can't use names.

I have read through all the parables in all the gospels, I have not found one parable that uses a proper name of a person. Not one. I don't think this story can be used as proof that proper names can be used in parables since this is the only occurrence to which you are claiming the rule is set.

You haven't proven that if a story contains a name it must be true.

Nor have you shown any other (assuming you might be right about this one being a parable) parable using a proper name.

I gave an example (Jack and the BS) of a story that contains a name and is not true.

And I told you that Jesus didn't tell that story so that really doesn't count in our little discussion.

I showed that Jesus used parables.

And I showed that there are times when He didn't use parables, so what? What we must do is decide (according to the evidence) what story is and what story is not a parable.

Now it is up to you, if you want to continue this discussion with me, you must prove that the Parable of Lazarus and the rich man was a true story about Hell, not a parable.

Sir, I could no more convince you that was a real story than I could convince you that I am a real person, short of a face to face meeting. We simply must look at the facts we do have.

Fact 1. This story contains not one proper name of a historic person, but two (Abraham and Lazarus). It then mentions another specific person (Moses) and makes reference to other historical people.

Fact 2. This is either the only parable that contains proper names of individuals or this is a true story.

Fact 3. This story did not begin as other parables did with an introduction such as "The Kingdom of Heaven is like..."

Fact 4. This story begins as though it had a literal time, a literal place, and had literal people in it.

Fact 5. You will either meet Lazarus in Heaven, the rich man in Hell, or you won't meet either because they aren't real.

Fact 6. What would one glean from this story if it was just a parable? It makes as much sense as a true story as it could possibly make as a supposed parable.


In light of these facts, I don't know how it could be interpreted differently. If you would like to lay out your argument in a matter of fact way as I have done, I would encourage you to do so. However, I do not wish to read through "Jack and Beanstalk" arguments as we should only deal with the words of Jesus and the Word of God so that we may rightly divide the word of truth.
In Christ, GB

 

[Timothew]

John 11:25-26
Jesus said to her, "I am the resurrection and the life. He who believes in me will live, even though he dies; and whoever lives and believes in me will never die. Do you believe this?"

1 Peter 1:3-5
Praise be to the God and Father of our Lord Jesus Christ! In his great mercy he has given us new birth into a living hope through the resurrection of Jesus Christ from the dead, and into an inheritance that can never perish, spoil or fade—kept in heaven for you, who through faith are shielded by God's power until the coming of the salvation that is ready to be revealed in the last time.

1 Corinthians 15:50-53
I declare to you, brothers, that flesh and blood cannot inherit the kingdom of God, nor does the perishable inherit the imperishable. Listen, I tell you a mystery: We will not all sleep, but we will all be changed—in a flash, in the twinkling of an eye, at the last trumpet. For the trumpet will sound, the dead will be raised imperishable, and we will be changed. For the perishable must clothe itself with the imperishable, and the mortal with immortality.

I asked you to give scriptural support for your statement that the dead live somewhere as spirits. None of these references say that.

Now as mentioned earlier that God's word says 46 “Then they will go away to eternal punishment, but the righteous to eternal life.” Matthew 25:46, whose purpose is served to author confusion that is not of God that eternal punishment is not the case?

Are you saying that nobody is allowed to disagree with you, that if anyone disagrees with what YOU believe they are "authoring confusion"?
Who died and made you Pope?
The scriptures are not confusing. The wages of sin is death. Shall I say to you that you are "Authoring Confusion" if you dare disagree with me? Or can we have a bible study instead, and discuss what we each believe the scriptures mean.

 

[Timothew]

I have read through all the parables in all the gospels, I have not found one parable that uses a proper name of a person. Not one. I don't think this story can be used as proof that proper names can be used in parables since this is the only occurrence to which you are claiming the rule is set.

Nor have you shown any other (assuming you might be right about this one being a parable) parable using a proper name.

And I told you that Jesus didn't tell that story so that really doesn't count in our little discussion.

And I showed that there are times when He didn't use parables, so what? What we must do is decide (according to the evidence) what story is and what story is not a parable.

Sir, I could no more convince you that was a real story than I could convince you that I am a real person, short of a face to face meeting. We simply must look at the facts we do have.

Fact 1. This story contains not one proper name of a historic person, but two (Abraham and Lazarus). It then mentions another specific person (Moses) and makes reference to other historical people.

Fact 2. This is either the only parable that contains proper names of individuals or this is a true story.

Fact 3. This story did not begin as other parables did with an introduction such as "The Kingdom of Heaven is like..."

Fact 4. This story begins as though it had a literal time, a literal place, and had literal people in it.

Fact 5. You will either meet Lazarus in Heaven, the rich man in Hell, or you won't meet either because they aren't real.

Fact 6. What would one glean from this story if it was just a parable? It makes as much sense as a true story as it could possibly make as a supposed parable.


In light of these facts, I don't know how it could be interpreted differently. If you would like to lay out your argument in a matter of fact way as I have done, I would encourage you to do so. However, I do not wish to read through "Jack and Beanstalk" arguments as we should only deal with the words of Jesus and the Word of God so that we may rightly divide the word of truth.
In Christ, GB

Given that you can't prove that the parable of Lazarus and Dives wasn't a parable, and since you can't prove that it is a factual account of hell,
Then you can't use this parable as a proof-text of eternal torture in hell.

Since you are insisting so strongly that this is a true story and not a parable, you must not have any other biblical proof that the unrepentant are tortured in hell alive forver.

I don't accept this parable as proof of eternal torment. Do you have any OTHER proof?