Annihilationism: Does Rev. 20:10 teach that some demons will be tormented forever?

mmksparbud · Mar 5, 2020

Der Alter said:
If Jesus was directing His words to the Pharisees why does it say ""the Pharisees ...also heard." If Jesus was talking to them of course they heard. Vs. 16:1 and 17:1 both say Jesus was talking to His disciples the Pharisees happened to overhear.
Lazarus and the rich man is not introduced as a parable and Jesus does not explain it later to His disciples. Lazarus does not have the structure of a parable. Parable is from the Greek parabolos, to lay beside. To explain something unknown by comparison with something known. "The kingdom of heaven is like unto..." There is no such comparison in Lazarus and the rich man. The only thing known is that two men lived and died

When Jesus was talking to His disciples, as He was in Luke 16:1 -17:1, He spoke in plain language

Nonsense. It does not matter what you say about Lazarus and the rich man. The ECF are the only historical evidence we have of the faith and practice of the early post disciple church. It will take more than hand waving to dismiss the ECF.

I said when they were around---He was speaking to the crowd. Either way---it was a parable. Starting from the beginning if that chapter it goes through parables starting with the dishonest manager. and clearly states the Pharisees were there. Remember there were no chapters and verses in the bible---there were many parables just before this---starting at Luke 15 and goes through Luke 16. It is not until Luke 17 that He talks directly with the disciples. And it doesn't matter what you say.

Mar 4:33 And with many such parables spake he the word unto them, as they were able to hear it.
Mar 4:34 But without a parable spake he not unto them: and when they were alone, he expounded all things to his disciples.

redleghunter · Mar 5, 2020

summerville said:
The mark of the Beast was Caesar's head on a coin. Remember? Render unto Caesar...

Don’t see the correlation.

mmksparbud · Mar 5, 2020

redleghunter said:
Don’t see the correlation.

That's 'cause there isn't any!

nolidad · Mar 6, 2020

mmksparbud said:
This is not flights of fancy, this is the word of God:

Gen 3:22 And the LORD God said, Behold, the man is become as one of us, to know good and evil: and now, lest he put forth his hand, and take also of the tree of life, and eat, and live for ever:
Gen 3:23 Therefore the LORD God sent him forth from the garden of Eden, to till the ground from whence he was taken.

1Ti 6:15 Which in his times he shall shew, who is the blessed and only Potentate, the King of kings, and Lord of lords;
1Ti 6:16 Who only hath immortality, dwelling in the light which no man can approach unto; whom no man hath seen, nor can see: to whom be honour and power everlasting. Amen.

Mar_10:30 But he shall receive an hundredfold now in this time, houses, and brethren, and sisters, and mothers, and children, and lands, with persecutions; and in the world to come eternal life.
Joh_3:15 That whosoever believeth in him should not perish, but have eternal life.
Joh_6:68 Then Simon Peter answered him, Lord, to whom shall we go? thou hast the words of eternal life.
Joh_10:28 And I give unto them eternal life; and they shall never perish, neither shall any man pluck them out of my hand.
Joh_12:25 He that loveth his life shall lose it; and he that hateth his life in this world shall keep it unto life eternal.
Joh_17:2 As thou hast given him power over all flesh, that he should give eternal life to as many as thou hast given him.
Joh_17:3 And this is life eternal, that they might know thee the only true God, and Jesus Christ, whom thou hast sent.
Rom_5:21 That as sin hath reigned unto death, even so might grace reign through righteousness unto eternal life by Jesus Christ our Lord.
Rom_6:23 For the wages of sin is death; but the gift of God is eternal life through Jesus Christ our Lord.
1Ti_6:12 Fight the good fight of faith, lay hold on eternal life, whereunto thou art also called, and hast professed a good profession before many witnesses.
1Ti_6:19 Laying up in store for themselves a good foundation against the time to come, that they may lay hold on eternal life.
1Jn_2:25 And this is the promise that he hath promised us, even eternal life.
1Jn_3:15 Whosoever hateth his brother is a murderer: and ye know that no murderer hath eternal life abiding in him.
1Jn_5:11 And this is the record, that God hath given to us eternal life, and this life is in his Son.
1Jn_5:13 These things have I written unto you that believe on the name of the Son of God; that ye may know that ye have eternal life, and that ye may believe on the name of the Son of God.
1Jn_5:20 And we know that the Son of God is come, and hath given us an understanding, that we may know him that is true, and we are in him that is true, even in his Son Jesus Christ. This is the true God, and eternal life.
Jud_1:21 Keep yourselves in the love of God, looking for the mercy of our Lord Jesus Christ unto eternal life.

Not one verse says eternal life is given to the wicked.

Rev_2:7 He that hath an ear, let him hear what the Spirit saith unto the churches; To him that overcometh will I give to eat of the tree of life, which is in the midst of the paradise of God.
Rev_22:2 In the midst of the street of it, and on either side of the river, was there the tree of life, which bare twelve manner of fruits, and yielded her fruit every month: and the leaves of the tree were for the healing of the nations.
Rev_22:14 Blessed are they that do his commandments, that they may have right to the tree of life, and may enter in through the gates into the city.
Joh_4:14 But whosoever drinketh of the water that I shall give him shall never thirst; but the water that I shall give him shall be in him a well of water springing up into everlasting life.
Rev_21:6 And he said unto me, It is done. I am Alpha and Omega, the beginning and the end. I will give unto him that is athirst of the fountain of the water of life freely.
Rev_22:1 And he shewed me a pure river of water of life, clear as crystal, proceeding out of the throne of God and of the Lamb.
Rev_22:17 And the Spirit and the bride say, Come. And let him that heareth say, Come. And let him that is athirst come. And whosoever will, let him take the water of life freely.

Please state the verses that say the wicked get to eat of the tree of life and drink of the water of life in the lake of fire.

Rom_6:23 For the wages of sin is death; but the gift of God is eternal life through Jesus Christ our Lord.

Matthew 25:46
And these shall go away into everlasting punishment: but the righteous into life eternal.

Revelation 14:11
And the smoke of their torment ascendeth up for ever and ever: and they have no rest day nor night, who worship the beast and his image, and whosoever receiveth the mark of his name.

The the true account of Lazarus and the rich man.

And then in the end of time, after God destroys death and the grave:

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

14 And death and hell were cast into the lake of fire. This is the second death.

15 And whosoever was not found written in the book of life was cast into the lake of fire.

Now as teh bible never contradicts itself- it means ones understanding of what is being written is mistaken. People suffer forever, and the life in heaven (or the new heaven and earth) not only is it a quantity of time but also a quality of life! While life in the lake of fire is torment and pain.

There is not one verse in SCripture that declares when the lost are dead they cease to exist!

1213 · Mar 6, 2020

Der Alter said:
....Gehenna and hades are two names for the same place.....

Sorry, I disagree with that, because Bible says:

…Death and Hades were thrown into the lake of fire. This is the second death, the lake of fire. If anyone was not found written in the book of life, he was cast into the lake of fire.
Revelation 20:12-15

Der Alte · Mar 6, 2020

1213 said:
Sorry, I disagree with that, because Bible says:
…Death and Hades were thrown into the lake of fire. This is the second death, the lake of fire. If anyone was not found written in the book of life, he was cast into the lake of fire.
Revelation 20:12-15

Then you are disagreeing with the Bible. In the OT the place of everlasting punishment was called both Ge Hinnom [valley of Hinnom] and sheol. Written as Gehenna and hades in the 225 BC LXX and the NT.

Revelation 20:14 And death and hell were cast into the lake of fire. This is the second death.

Death is the point in time end of life. It has no physical properties and cannot be thrown anywhere. Hell, if the grave, is empty holes which cannot be thrown anywhere. If hell refers to the place of punishment it could be thrown into the lake of fire. But neither death nor hell has or can die a first death, no first death, no second death.
There is a scriptural answer.

Revelation 6:8 And I looked, and behold a pale horse: and his name that sat on him was Death, and Hell followed with him. And power was given unto them over the fourth part of the earth, to kill with sword, and with hunger, and with death, and with the beasts of the earth.

Two living beings I refer to as the angel of death and the demon of hell. You can call them anything you want to. They can be thrown into the lake of fire and they are capable of dying although neither has died a first death. So no problem mixing literal and figurative in the same verse and the same subject.

Der Alte · Mar 6, 2020

mmksparbud said:
I said when they were around---He was speaking to the crowd. Either way---it was a parable. Starting from the beginning if that chapter it goes through parables starting with the dishonest manager. and clearly states the Pharisees were there. Remember there were no chapters and verses in the bible---there were many parables just before this---starting at Luke 15 and goes through Luke 16. It is not until Luke 17 that He talks directly with the disciples. And it doesn't matter what you say.
Mar 4:33 And with many such parables spake he the word unto them, as they were able to hear it.
Mar 4:34 But without a parable spake he not unto them: and when they were alone, he expounded all things to his disciples.

Actually it doesn't matter what you say. You are only cherry picking verses trying to prop up your false doctrine. You can't prove what Jesus said in Luke quoting Mark unless it is the same event. And Lazarus and the rich man are only mentioned in Luke.
.....As I said Luke 16:1 clearly says Jesus was talking to His disciples "and the Pharisees also heard."
You referred to Mark 4:34 "when they were alone Jesus expounded all things to His disciples." Please show me where Jesus expounded Lazarus and the rich man to His disciples?
.....Another point all unquestioned parables refer to anonymous persons "a certain shepherd,""a certain widow" etc. At some time in history a shepherd found a lost sheep, a widow found a lost coin etc.
None of the unquestioned parables refers to fictitious events, something that never happened.
.....The Lazarus story names two specific people, Lazarus a beggar, otherwise unknown, and Abraham, a specific historical person. If Abraham was not in the place Jesus said and did not say the words Jesus quoted, Jesus was lying. It would not be a lie only if Jesus specifically said it was a parable as He did in Matthew 13:18, Matthew 21:33, Matthew 24:32, Mark 4:13, Mark 13:28 and Luke 8:11.
.....The Lazarus story is not and cannot be a parable because it does not have a parable format which is explaining/clarifying something unknown by comparing it to something known. Parable from Greek "parabolos" literally means "to lay beside."
The Lazarus story could be some other literary device but it is not a parable.

mmksparbud · Mar 6, 2020

Der Alter said:
Actually it doesn't matter what you say. You are only cherry picking verses trying to prop up your false doctrine. You can't prove what Jesus said in Luke quoting Mark unless it is the same event. And Lazarus and the rich man are only mentioned in Luke.
.....As I said Luke 16:1 clearly says Jesus was talking to His disciples "and the Pharisees also heard."
You referred to Mark 4:34 "when they were alone Jesus expounded all things to His disciples." Please show me where Jesus expounded Lazarus and the rich man to His disciples?
.....Another point all unquestioned parables refer to anonymous persons "a certain shepherd,""a certain widow" etc. At some time in history a shepherd found a lost sheep, a widow found a lost coin etc.
None of the unquestioned parables refers to fictitious events, something that never happened.
.....The Lazarus story names two specific people, Lazarus a beggar, otherwise unknown, and Abraham, a specific historical person. If Abraham was not in the place Jesus said and did not say the words Jesus quoted, Jesus was lying. It would not be a lie only if Jesus specifically said it was a parable as He did in Matthew 13:18, Matthew 21:33, Matthew 24:32, Mark 4:13, Mark 13:28 and Luke 8:11.
.....The Lazarus story is not and cannot be a parable because it does not have a parable format which is explaining/clarifying something unknown by comparing it to something known. Parable from Greek "parabolos" literally means "to lay beside."
The Lazarus story could be some other literary device but it is not a parable.

I put in what was said in Mark because that is what Jesus did---He talked to the people and Pharisees in parables---but He talked to the disciples alone and explained the parables to them. All of Luke 15 and 16 are nothing but parables. If you don't want to believe the bible---fine, don't. Jesus wasn't lying, He was telling a parable.

"The conceptual background for the concept of parable in the New Testament was Semitic, not Aristotelian Greek. This single insight could have saved the history of interpretation of the parables of Jesus from several key misconceptions. From Jülicher on, based on the Aristotelian Greek idea of parable as "pure comparison" conveying only a single point, there has been a significant school of interpretation that has regarded all allegorical traits as foreign to the parables of Jesus and has insisted that each parable has only one point. This narrow definition of parable has led interpreters to regard the allegorical interpretations of parables in the Gospels (e.g., Mark 4:14-20 ) as later misinterpretations, even though the earliest written gospels have the highest percentage of allegorical elements, and the latest, the Gospel of Thomas, has the least. It has also led to a seemingly endless series of variations of exactly just what was the "one point" of each parable. A study of the many interpretations shows a wide range of views of just what that one point must have been. For many parables, such as the prodigal son, limiting the interpretation to "one point" has proved to be a procrustean bed."

Now---I need to get off here as I fell today and am not a happy camper all over.

Butch5 · Mar 6, 2020

Der Alter said:
No you have not proved anything. Prove that they will die and not live forever. The devil, the beast and the false prophet, who is a human being, are thrown into the lake of fire and tormented day and night for ever and ever. Revelation 20;10
Now address the other 23 verses. You might get lucky and actually refute some. But I would not count on it.

Dude, you've posted this so many times most of us probably have it memorized. Aion doesn't mean forever. The people in that passage are alive. I can't believe you haven't removed the passage that I showed you were wrongly interpreting last time.

I hate to tell you this, but, posting a bunch of passages and saying prove me wrong, doesn't prove you're right.

Der Alte · Mar 6, 2020

mmksparbud said:
I put in what was said in Mark because that is what Jesus did---He talked to the people and Pharisees in parables---but He talked to the disciples alone and explained the parables to them. All of Luke 15 and 16 are nothing but parables. If you don't want to believe the bible---fine, don't. Jesus wasn't lying, He was telling a parable.
"The conceptual background for the concept of parable in the New Testament was Semitic, not Aristotelian Greek. This single insight could have saved the history of interpretation of the parables of Jesus from several key misconceptions. From Jülicher on, based on the Aristotelian Greek idea of parable as "pure comparison" conveying only a single point, there has been a significant school of interpretation that has regarded all allegorical traits as foreign to the parables of Jesus and has insisted that each parable has only one point. This narrow definition of parable has led interpreters to regard the allegorical interpretations of parables in the Gospels (e.g., Mark 4:14-20 ) as later misinterpretations, even though the earliest written gospels have the highest percentage of allegorical elements, and the latest, the Gospel of Thomas, has the least. It has also led to a seemingly endless series of variations of exactly just what was the "one point" of each parable. A study of the many interpretations shows a wide range of views of just what that one point must have been. For many parables, such as the prodigal son, limiting the interpretation to "one point" has proved to be a procrustean bed."
Now---I need to get off here as I fell today and am not a happy camper all over.

I can read the Bible in 4 languages, some better than others, and I believe the Bible but I don't believe your version of "what the Bible really says."
I don't know who you quoted but that is one person's unsupported opinion and I'll tell you the same thing you told me "I don't care what he said."
I think the historical record is far more compelling than the unsupported opinions of 21st century "scholars."
Here are all the ECF who quoted/referred to Lazarus and the rich man. I'll take the historical evidence over unnamed scholars.

Irenaeus Against Heresies Book II Chapter XXXIV.-Souls Can Be Recognised in the Separate State, and are Immortal Although They Once Had a Beginning.
Ireneaeus, 120-202 AD, was a student of Polycarp, who was a student of John.
1. The Lord has taught with very great fulness, that souls not only continue to exist, not by passing from body to body, but that they preserve the same form [in their separate state] as the body had to which they were adapted, and that they remember the deeds which they did in this state of existence, and from which they have now ceased,-in that narrative which is recorded respecting the rich man and that Lazarus who found repose in the bosom of Abraham. In this account He states that Dives [=Latin for rich] knew Lazarus after death, and Abraham in like manner, and that each one of these persons continued in his own proper position, and that [Dives] requested Lazarus to be sent to relieve him-[Lazarus], on whom he did not [formerly] bestow even the crumbs [which fell] from his table. [He tells us] also of the answer given by Abraham, who was acquainted not only with what respected himself, but Dives also, and who enjoined those who did not wish to come into that place of torment to believe Moses and the prophets, and to receive the preaching of Him who was to rise again from the dead. By these things, then, it is plainly declared that souls continue to exist that they do not pass from body to body, that they possess the form of a man, so that they may be recognised, and retain the memory of things in this world; moreover, that the gift of prophecy was possessed by Abraham, and that each class of souls] receives a habitation such as it has deserved, even before the judgment.
ANF01. The Apostolic Fathers with Justin Martyr and Irenaeus | Christian Classics Ethereal Library
Clement of Alexandria [A.D. 153-193-217] The Instructor [Paedagogus] Book 1
On the Resurrection. But he figuratively designates the vulgar rabble, attached to ephemeral pleasure, flourishing for a little, loving ornament, loving praise, and being everything but truth-loving, good for nothing but to be burned with fire. “There was a certain man,” said the Lord, narrating, “very rich, who was clothed in purple and scarlet, enjoying himself splendidly every day.” This was the day. “And a certain poor man named Lazarus was laid at the rich man’s gate, full of sores, desiring to be filled with the crumbs which fell from the rich man’s table.” This is the grass. Well, the rich man was punished in Hades, being made partaker of the fire; while the other flourished again in the Father’s bosom.
Tertullian A Treatise On The Soul [A.D. 145-220.]
In hell the soul of a certain man is in torment, punished in flames, suffering excruciating thirst, and imploring from the finger of a happier soul, for his tongue, the solace of a drop of water. Do you suppose that this end of the blessed poor man and the miserable rich man is only imaginary? Then why the name of Lazarus in this narrative, if the circumstance is not in (the category of) a real occurrence? But even if it is to be regarded as imaginary, it will still be a testimony to truth and reality. For unless the soul possessed corporeality, the image of a soul could not possibly contain a finger of a bodily substance; nor would the Scripture feign a statement about the limbs of a body, if these had no existence.
The Epistles Of Cyprian (A.D. 200-258) Epistle 54 To Cornelius, Concerning Fortunatus And Felicissimus, Or Against The Heretics
A good man out of the good treasure bringeth forth good things; and an evil man out of the evil treasure bringeth forth evil things.” Whence also that rich sinner who implores help from Lazarus, then laid in Abraham’s bosom, and established in a place of comfort, while he, writhing in torments, is consumed by the heats of burning flame, suffers most punishment of all parts of his body in his mouth and his tongue, because doubtless in his mouth and his tongue he had most sinned.
Methodius Fragments On The History Of Jonah (A.D. 260-312)
But souls, being rational bodies, are arranged by the Maker and Father of all things into members which are visible to reason, having received this impression. Whence, also, in Hades, as in the case of Lazarus and the rich man, they are spoken of as having a tongue, and a finger, and the other members; not as though they had with them another invisible body, but that the souls themselves, naturally, when entirely stripped of their covering, are such according to their essence.

Der Alte · Mar 6, 2020

Butch5 said:
Dude, you've posted this so many times most of us probably have it memorized. Aion doesn't mean forever. The people in that passage are alive. I can't believe you haven't removed the passage that I showed you were wrongly interpreting last time.
I hate to tell you this, but, posting a bunch of passages and saying prove me wrong, doesn't prove you're right.

Your unsupported opinion is meaningless. I started learning to speak Greek the year of Sputnik 1 and studied Hebrew and Greek at the graduate level about 2 decades later. You have NEVER showed me to be wrong about any passage. Your unsupported opinion is not proof. If you think I am wrong, see if you can come up with some credible scholarship and prove it.
Lots of misguided folks think that having a 100+ year old Strong's makes them a Hebrew and Greek expert,.
About 5 decades ago in Germany I was having a conversation with a friend, in German, she used a word I did not understand "beinahe" pronounced "by nah eh." She explained it something like this. "Es ist noch nicht elf uhr aber beinahe elf uhr." "It is not yet eleven o'clock but xxxxxx eleven o'clock." So I understood that "beinahe" means "almost."
That is what I have done with "aionios" in 24 verses. No "scholarly" quotes, no lexicons, no concordances etc. I showed how "aionios" was defined by other words, in the same passage. If anyone has memorized my study it is a shame that no Greek "expert" has ever definitively shown me to be wrong.

mmksparbud · Mar 6, 2020

Der Alter said:
I can read the Bible in 4 languages, some better than others, and I believe the Bible but I don't believe your version of "what the Bible really says."
I don't know who you quoted but that is one person's unsupported opinion and I'll tell you the same thing you told me "I don't care what he said."
I think the historical record is far more compelling than the unsupported opinions of 21st century "scholars."
Here are all the ECF who quoted/referred to Lazarus and the rich man. I'll take the historical evidence over unnamed scholars.

Irenaeus Against Heresies Book II Chapter XXXIV.-Souls Can Be Recognised in the Separate State, and are Immortal Although They Once Had a Beginning.
Ireneaeus, 120-202 AD, was a student of Polycarp, who was a student of John.
1. The Lord has taught with very great fulness, that souls not only continue to exist, not by passing from body to body, but that they preserve the same form [in their separate state] as the body had to which they were adapted, and that they remember the deeds which they did in this state of existence, and from which they have now ceased,-in that narrative which is recorded respecting the rich man and that Lazarus who found repose in the bosom of Abraham. In this account He states that Dives [=Latin for rich] knew Lazarus after death, and Abraham in like manner, and that each one of these persons continued in his own proper position, and that [Dives] requested Lazarus to be sent to relieve him-[Lazarus], on whom he did not [formerly] bestow even the crumbs [which fell] from his table. [He tells us] also of the answer given by Abraham, who was acquainted not only with what respected himself, but Dives also, and who enjoined those who did not wish to come into that place of torment to believe Moses and the prophets, and to receive the preaching of Him who was to rise again from the dead. By these things, then, it is plainly declared that souls continue to exist that they do not pass from body to body, that they possess the form of a man, so that they may be recognised, and retain the memory of things in this world; moreover, that the gift of prophecy was possessed by Abraham, and that each class of souls] receives a habitation such as it has deserved, even before the judgment.
ANF01. The Apostolic Fathers with Justin Martyr and Irenaeus | Christian Classics Ethereal Library
Clement of Alexandria [A.D. 153-193-217] The Instructor [Paedagogus] Book 1
On the Resurrection. But he figuratively designates the vulgar rabble, attached to ephemeral pleasure, flourishing for a little, loving ornament, loving praise, and being everything but truth-loving, good for nothing but to be burned with fire. “There was a certain man,” said the Lord, narrating, “very rich, who was clothed in purple and scarlet, enjoying himself splendidly every day.” This was the day. “And a certain poor man named Lazarus was laid at the rich man’s gate, full of sores, desiring to be filled with the crumbs which fell from the rich man’s table.” This is the grass. Well, the rich man was punished in Hades, being made partaker of the fire; while the other flourished again in the Father’s bosom.
Tertullian A Treatise On The Soul [A.D. 145-220.]
In hell the soul of a certain man is in torment, punished in flames, suffering excruciating thirst, and imploring from the finger of a happier soul, for his tongue, the solace of a drop of water. Do you suppose that this end of the blessed poor man and the miserable rich man is only imaginary? Then why the name of Lazarus in this narrative, if the circumstance is not in (the category of) a real occurrence? But even if it is to be regarded as imaginary, it will still be a testimony to truth and reality. For unless the soul possessed corporeality, the image of a soul could not possibly contain a finger of a bodily substance; nor would the Scripture feign a statement about the limbs of a body, if these had no existence.
The Epistles Of Cyprian (A.D. 200-258) Epistle 54 To Cornelius, Concerning Fortunatus And Felicissimus, Or Against The Heretics
A good man out of the good treasure bringeth forth good things; and an evil man out of the evil treasure bringeth forth evil things.” Whence also that rich sinner who implores help from Lazarus, then laid in Abraham’s bosom, and established in a place of comfort, while he, writhing in torments, is consumed by the heats of burning flame, suffers most punishment of all parts of his body in his mouth and his tongue, because doubtless in his mouth and his tongue he had most sinned.
Methodius Fragments On The History Of Jonah (A.D. 260-312)
But souls, being rational bodies, are arranged by the Maker and Father of all things into members which are visible to reason, having received this impression. Whence, also, in Hades, as in the case of Lazarus and the rich man, they are spoken of as having a tongue, and a finger, and the other members; not as though they had with them another invisible body, but that the souls themselves, naturally, when entirely stripped of their covering, are such according to their essence.

LOL! Now you know you can be wrong in 4 different languages! Is that supposed to impress us? You often quote how much you know -- that's nice. And I did forget to post the source, I'm not sure I can remember where I got it, but I'll try. I can't to too much---when I fell I hurt myself all over and everything is sore. I got to go slow, hurt both wrists.

mmksparbud · Mar 6, 2020

Der Alter said:
I can read the Bible in 4 languages, some better than others, and I believe the Bible but I don't believe your version of "what the Bible really says."
I don't know who you quoted but that is one person's unsupported opinion and I'll tell you the same thing you told me "I don't care what he said."
I think the historical record is far more compelling than the unsupported opinions of 21st century "scholars."
Here are all the ECF who quoted/referred to Lazarus and the rich man. I'll take the historical evidence over unnamed scholars.

Irenaeus Against Heresies Book II Chapter XXXIV.-Souls Can Be Recognised in the Separate State, and are Immortal Although They Once Had a Beginning.
Ireneaeus, 120-202 AD, was a student of Polycarp, who was a student of John.
1. The Lord has taught with very great fulness, that souls not only continue to exist, not by passing from body to body, but that they preserve the same form [in their separate state] as the body had to which they were adapted, and that they remember the deeds which they did in this state of existence, and from which they have now ceased,-in that narrative which is recorded respecting the rich man and that Lazarus who found repose in the bosom of Abraham. In this account He states that Dives [=Latin for rich] knew Lazarus after death, and Abraham in like manner, and that each one of these persons continued in his own proper position, and that [Dives] requested Lazarus to be sent to relieve him-[Lazarus], on whom he did not [formerly] bestow even the crumbs [which fell] from his table. [He tells us] also of the answer given by Abraham, who was acquainted not only with what respected himself, but Dives also, and who enjoined those who did not wish to come into that place of torment to believe Moses and the prophets, and to receive the preaching of Him who was to rise again from the dead. By these things, then, it is plainly declared that souls continue to exist that they do not pass from body to body, that they possess the form of a man, so that they may be recognised, and retain the memory of things in this world; moreover, that the gift of prophecy was possessed by Abraham, and that each class of souls] receives a habitation such as it has deserved, even before the judgment.
ANF01. The Apostolic Fathers with Justin Martyr and Irenaeus | Christian Classics Ethereal Library
Clement of Alexandria [A.D. 153-193-217] The Instructor [Paedagogus] Book 1
On the Resurrection. But he figuratively designates the vulgar rabble, attached to ephemeral pleasure, flourishing for a little, loving ornament, loving praise, and being everything but truth-loving, good for nothing but to be burned with fire. “There was a certain man,” said the Lord, narrating, “very rich, who was clothed in purple and scarlet, enjoying himself splendidly every day.” This was the day. “And a certain poor man named Lazarus was laid at the rich man’s gate, full of sores, desiring to be filled with the crumbs which fell from the rich man’s table.” This is the grass. Well, the rich man was punished in Hades, being made partaker of the fire; while the other flourished again in the Father’s bosom.
Tertullian A Treatise On The Soul [A.D. 145-220.]
In hell the soul of a certain man is in torment, punished in flames, suffering excruciating thirst, and imploring from the finger of a happier soul, for his tongue, the solace of a drop of water. Do you suppose that this end of the blessed poor man and the miserable rich man is only imaginary? Then why the name of Lazarus in this narrative, if the circumstance is not in (the category of) a real occurrence? But even if it is to be regarded as imaginary, it will still be a testimony to truth and reality. For unless the soul possessed corporeality, the image of a soul could not possibly contain a finger of a bodily substance; nor would the Scripture feign a statement about the limbs of a body, if these had no existence.
The Epistles Of Cyprian (A.D. 200-258) Epistle 54 To Cornelius, Concerning Fortunatus And Felicissimus, Or Against The Heretics
A good man out of the good treasure bringeth forth good things; and an evil man out of the evil treasure bringeth forth evil things.” Whence also that rich sinner who implores help from Lazarus, then laid in Abraham’s bosom, and established in a place of comfort, while he, writhing in torments, is consumed by the heats of burning flame, suffers most punishment of all parts of his body in his mouth and his tongue, because doubtless in his mouth and his tongue he had most sinned.
Methodius Fragments On The History Of Jonah (A.D. 260-312)
But souls, being rational bodies, are arranged by the Maker and Father of all things into members which are visible to reason, having received this impression. Whence, also, in Hades, as in the case of Lazarus and the rich man, they are spoken of as having a tongue, and a finger, and the other members; not as though they had with them another invisible body, but that the souls themselves, naturally, when entirely stripped of their covering, are such according to their essence.

Not that you care, I'm sure you have way more education than these poor idiots.

Parable Definition and Meaning - Bible Dictionary

Der Alte · Mar 7, 2020

mmksparbud said:
Not that you care, I'm sure you have way more education than these poor idiots.
Parable Definition and Meaning - Bible Dictionary

I read the entire article including the name of the author,. One person. Unlike lots of folks I don't make stuff up. Here is part of the lead paragraph "Parable" article in the International Standard Bible Encyclopedia. I can't post the entire article it is four typed pages.

Parable. Etymologically the word “parable” (παραβάλλω, parabállō) signifies a placing of two or more objects together, usually for the purpose of a comparison. In this widest sense of the term there is practically no difference between parable and simile (see Thayer, Dictionary of New Testament Greek, under the word). This is also what substantially some of Christ's parables amount to, which consist of only one comparison and in a single verse (compare Mat_13:33, Mat_13:44-46). In the more usual and technical sense of the word, “parable” ordinarily signifies an imaginary story, yet one that in its details could have actually transpired, the purpose of the story being to illustrate and inculcate some higher spiritual truth. These features differentiate it from other and similar figurative narratives as also from actual history.

In the story of Lazarus and the rich man there is no "placing of two or more objects together,." usually for the purpose of a comparison."

hedrick · Mar 7, 2020

I agree Lazarus and the rich man technically isn't a parable. But a lot of people use the term parable to mean anything that isn't literally true but from which we can learn something. E.g. it's common to call Gen 2 - 3 a parable. As Der Alter points out, a parable is a specific literary form. Lazarus and the Rich Man isn't a parable. Neither is Gen 2-3. That doesn't mean that they are historical, however, since there are non-historical stories other than parables.

But people often aren't so technical in their terms. I have three commentaries on Luke, from the Word, Hermeneia, and Anchor Bible series. All call it a parable. So does Bob Utley, in a commentary that comes with the Logos program, but which I don't normally use. Calvin thinks it's historical, but refers to other people who call it a parable.

I don't know whether there's any specific literary form for that particular story or not. I've compared it to people saying something like "when you meet Peter at the pearly gates, how are you going to explain ..." I assume that no one actually thinks Peter will confront us at the pearly gates, even though saying that isn't a parable, any more than they think Father Abraham presides over the afterworld. But as in my illustration with Peter, Jesus is warning that those who don't treat the poor sympathetically will be accountable. The story also has a connection to Jesus' continuing conflict with the Pharisees.

Der Alte · Mar 7, 2020

hedrick said:
...

I agree Lazarus and the rich man technically isn't a parable. But a lot of people use the term parable to mean anything that isn't literally true but from which we can learn something. E.g. it's common to call Gen 2 - 3 a parable. As Der Alter points out, a parable is a specific literary form. Lazarus and the Rich Man isn't a parable. Neither is Gen 2-3. That doesn't mean that they are historical, however, since there are non-historical stories other than parables.
But people often aren't so technical in their terms. I have three commentaries on Luke, from the Word, Hermeneia, and Anchor Bible series. All call it a parable. So does Bob Utley, in a commentary that comes with the Logos program, but which I don't normally use. Calvin thinks it's historical, but refers to other people who call it a parable.
I don't know whether there's any specific literary form for that particular story or not. I've compared it to people saying something like "when you meet Peter at the pearly gates, how are you going to explain ..." I assume that no one actually thinks Peter will confront us at the pearly gates, even though saying that isn't a parable, any more than they think Father Abraham presides over the afterworld. But as in my illustration with Peter, Jesus is warning that those who don't treat the poor sympathetically will be accountable. The story also has a connection to Jesus' continuing conflict with the Pharisees.

...

I conceded in a previous post that Lazarus and the rich man could be some other type of literary device which I am not familiar with.
I also quoted all 5 ECF who quoted/referred to Lazarus and the rich man. They considered it factual. Another disqualifying point IMO is that, unlike the unquestioned parables, where all the characters are anonymous, Lazarus and the rich man names two individuals, Lazarus, otherwise unknown, and Abraham an actual historical person.
.....At some point a shepherd found a lost sheep, a widow found a lost coin etc. If Abraham was not in the place Jesus mentioned and spoke the words Jesus quoted or a similar event, Jesus was lying.
.....The rich man was not in hades merely because he was rich, he violated a specific commandment. Lazarus didn't even get the crumbs from the rich man's table.

Deuteronomy 15:7-8
7 If there be among you a poor man of one of thy brethren within any of thy gates in thy land which the LORD thy God giveth thee, thou shalt not harden thine heart, nor shut thine hand from thy poor brother:
8 But thou shalt open thine hand wide unto him, and shalt surely lend him sufficient for his need, in that which he wanteth.

Adamina · Mar 7, 2020

hedrick said:
I just found an interesting passage. Jude 7 say that Sodom and Gomorrah "serve as an example by undergoing a punishment of eternal fire". To my knowledge those cities aren't currently burning. Presumably the author of Jude knew that, so this indicates that at least some NT authors understood that eternal fire isn't literally eternal.

What is yours and/or others take on these verses in Isaiah and Mark 9? Personally, they are fairly difficult for me to associate this with anything but entire annihilation of the body.
Then comes the final white thrown judgement of the dead.

Isaiah 66:24 “And they shall go out and look on the dead bodies of the men who have rebelled against me. For their worms shall not die, their fire shall not be quenched, and they shall be an abhorrence to all flesh.” [Jerusalem 70ad/armeggedon?]
YLT)
Mark 9:
43 `And if thy hand may cause thee to stumble, cut it off; it is better for thee maimed to be entering into the life, than having the two hands to go away to the gehenna, to the fire--the unquenchable-- 44 where their worm is not dying, and the fire is not being quenched.
45 `And if thy foot may cause thee to stumble, cut it off; it is better for thee to enter into the life lame, than having the two feet to be cast to the gehenna, to the fire--the unquenchable-- 46 where there worm is not dying, and the fire is not being quenched.
47 And if thine eye may cause thee to stumble, cast it out; it is better for thee one-eyed to enter into the reign of God, than having two eyes, to be cast to the gehenna of the fire-- 48 where their worm is not dying, and the fire is not being quenched;

The Total Victory of Christ
This video is dedicated to the memory of Gary Amirault, of Tenmaker Ministries. Gary passed behind the veil on November 3, 2018. His faithful work is what prompted me to study, and now teach, the ancient doctrine of apokatastasis, aka universal salvation. Gary's obituary is linked here: https://www.toedtmanngrosse.com/notic...

======================================
Isn't the "gehenna" a garbage dump outside of Jerusalem?

According the Jewish historian Josephus, over 1 million Jews were destroyed/annihilated in the 70ad destruction of Jerusalem. Were they burned outside of Jerusalem?

Mat 10:28
'And be not afraid of those killing the body, and are not able to kill the soul, but fear rather Him who is able both soul and body to destroy in gehenna.

Hos 5:2 - The rebels are knee-deep in slaughter. I will discipline all of them.
Dan 8:23 - “In the latter part of their reign, when rebels have become completely wicked, a fierce-looking king, a master of intrigue, will arise.

The Destruction of Jerusalem - George Peter Holford, 1805AD

The day on which Titus encompassed Jerusalem, was the feast of the Passover

Of the Jews destroyed during the siege, Josephus reckons not less than ONE MILLION AND ONE HUNDRED THOUSAND, to which must be added, above TWO-HUNDRED AND THIRTY-SEVEN THOUSAND who perished in other places, and innumerable multitudes who were swept away by famine, and pestilence, and of which no calculation could be made. Not less than two thousand laid violent hands upon themselves. Of the captives the whole was about NINETY-SEVEN THOUSAND.
========================
Reve 18:13 showing the dead bodies and souls. Don't they still have to face the final White Thrown judgement in Revelation 20:11-15?

Rev 18:13
“and cinnamon and incense, fragrant oil and frankincense, wine and oil, fine flour and wheat, cattle and sheep, horses and chariots, and bodies and souls of men.
=========================
The Total Victory of Christ

What is the Fire of Gehenna? Many Christians do not know that a place called "hell fire" does not exist at all but is merely a false translation of the bible. Understanding the Fire of Gehenna is big step toward understanding God's plan of salvation for all mankind.

Correction: In this presentation I indicate that there is a permanent loss of status in the afterlife for the people of Israel who rebelled against God. I am now unconvinced of that view, it may well be that the loss of status is temporary, either in part, or whole. My reasoning is that God created the people of Israel to hold leadership positions in his kingdom, and God will restore creation. However, in keeping with the doctrine of apokatastasis, ultimately all rule, power, and authority is abolished when God is all in all (1 Cor 15). Meaning that in the end all people are equal, the image of God, and such positions of authority will no longer be necessary.

Click to expand...

============

Rev 20:12
and I saw the dead, small and great, standing before God, and scrolls were opened, and another scroll was opened, which is that of the life, and the dead were judged out of the things written in the scrolls -- according to their works;

mmksparbud · Mar 7, 2020

The purpose of the story of Lazarus and the rich man is told at the end. It was told because the Pharisees were listening and mostly for their benefit. It is not an explanation of hell ---

Luk 16:29 Abraham saith unto him, They have Moses and the prophets; let them hear them.
Luk 16:30 And he said, Nay, father Abraham: but if one went unto them from the dead, they will repent.
Luk 16:31 And he said unto him, If they hear not Moses and the prophets, neither will they be persuaded, though one rose from the dead.

Even if someone rose from the dead they still would not believe. And Jesus had risen the real Lazarus from the dead and still the Pharisees ands others would not believe in Him.
And BTW--Lazarus said not one word about seeing anything in the afterlife---neither has anyone in the bible that was resurrected from the dead and there were several, both OT and NT.

Der Alte · Mar 7, 2020

The traditional explanation that a burning rubbish heap in the Valley of Hinnom south of Jerusalem gave rise to the idea of a fiery Gehenna of judgment is attributed to Rabbi David Kimhi's commentary on Psalm 27:13 (ca. A.D. 1200). He maintained that in this loathsome valley fires were kept burning perpetually to consume the filth and cadavers thrown into it. However, Strack and Billerbeck state that there is neither archaeological nor literary evidence in support of this claim, in either the earlier intertestamental or the later rabbinic sources (Hermann L. Strack and Paul Billerbeck, Kommentar zum Neuen Testament aus Talmud and Midrasch, 5 vols. [Munich: Beck, 1922-56], 4:2:1030). Also a more recent author holds a similar view (Lloyd R. Bailey, "Gehenna: The Topography of Hell," Biblical Archeologist 49 [1986]: 189.
Source, Bibliotheca Sacra / July–September 1992
Scharen: Gehenna in the Synoptics Pt. 1

/…..Note there is no “archaeological nor literary evidence in support of this claim, [that Gehenna was ever used as a garbage dump] in either the earlier intertestamental or the later rabbinic sources” If Gehenna was ever used as a garbage dump there should be broken pottery, tools, utensils, bones, etc. but there is no such evidence.

“Gehenna is presented as diametrically opposed to ‘life’: it is better to enter life than to go to Gehenna. . .It is common practice, both in scholarly and less technical works, to associate the description of Gehenna with the supposedly contemporary garbage dump in the valley of Hinnom. This association often leads scholars to emphasize the destructive aspects of the judgment here depicted: fire burns until the object is completely consumed. Two particular problems may be noted in connection with this approach. First, there is no convincing evidence in the primary sources for the existence of a fiery rubbish dump in this location (in any case, a thorough investigation would be appreciated). Secondly, the significant background to this passage more probably lies in Jesus’ allusion to Isaiah 66:24.”
(“The Duration of Divine Judgment in the New Testament” in

The Reader Must Understand edited by K. Brower and M. W. Ellion, p. 223, emphasis mine)
G. R. Beasley-Murray in Jesus and the Kingdom of God:
“Ge-Hinnom (Aramaic Ge-hinnam, hence the Greek Geenna), ‘The Valley of Hinnom,’ lay south of Jerusalem, immediately outside its walls. The notion, still referred to by some commentators, that the city’s rubbish was burned in this valley, has no further basis than a statement by the Jewish scholar Kimchi (sic) made about A.D. 1200; it is not attested in any ancient source.” (p. 376n.92)
http://www.btdf.org/forums/topic/20113-the-burning-garbage-dump-of-gehenna-is-a-myth/

Abstract
Miqweh of Second Temple Period. ......Jerusalem City-Dump in the Late Second Temple Period, ZDPV, 119/1 (2003),
The chance discovery of an Early Roman city dump (1st century CE) in Jerusalem has yielded for the first time ever quantitative data on garbage components that introduce us to the mundane daily life Jerusalemites led and the kind of animals that were featured in their diet. Most of the garbage consists of pottery shards, all common tableware, while prestige objects are entirely absent. Other significant garbage components include numerous fragments of cooking ovens, wall plaster, animal bones and plant remains. Of the pottery vessels, cooking pots are the most abundant type. Most of the refuse turns out to be “household garbage” originating in the domestic areas of the city, while large numbers of cooking pots may point to the presence of pilgrims. Significantly, the faunal assemblage, which is dominated by kosher species and the clear absence of pigs, set Jerusalem during its peak historical period apart from all other contemporaneous Roman urban centers.
...
Excavations near the Temple Mount and within the residential areas have already shown that no waste had accumulated there (Reich and Billig 2000), and thus waste must have been removed, most likely in an organized manner. Recently, the contemporaneous city-dump was identified on the eastern slope of the south-eastern hill of Jerusalem in the form of a thick mantle (up to 10 m, 200,000 m3 ) (Reich and Shukron 2003). The dump is located roughly 100 m outside and south-east of the Temple Mount on the eastern slope of the Kidron Valley (fig. 1), and extends at least 400 m and is 50–70 m wide. Large amounts of pottery and coins date the dump to the Early Roman period (the 1st century BCE and the 1st century CE up to the destruction of the city by the Romans in 70 CE). A preliminary study of the garbage (Bouchnik, Bar-Oz and Reich 2004; Bouchnik et al. 2005) showed the presence of animal bones, and a detailed multidisciplinary joint study of the debris was carried out.
https://www.researchgate.net/public...udy_of_the_City-Dump_of_Early_Roman_Jerusalem

hedrick · Mar 7, 2020

Adamina said:
What is yours and/or others take on these verses in Isaiah and Mark 9?

The business about garbage dump is a bit overdone. According to TDNT, by the 1st Cent Jewish ideas of the afterlife were by no means all the same. Some believed all were eventually saved, or almost all. Some believed in eternal punishment. Gehenna by that time had an eschatological implication. For people who believed in both a temporary and permanent punishment, Gehenna was the permanent one. But that wasn’t universal, so you need to look at context to know what Gehenna means in a given passage.

Is 66:4 is referring to death. At that time, notions of the afterlife were vague.

Mark 9:43 is difficult because the passage involves hyperbole. It’s very unlikely that Jesus actually intended people to cut off body parts. I agree that unquenchable fire is an OT image. But unlike Is 66:4, which is probably just death, Mark 9:43 surely is about something in the afterlife. The most literal use of the OT imagery would be annihilation. But given the varying ideas in the 1st Cent you can probably argue for temporary or permanent suffering as well. And given the hyperbole in the context, it might not be intended as literal in the first place.

This is why these discussions are so complicated. Given Paul’s unambiguous teaching of eventual reconciliation (1 Cor 15, Rom 5:18, 11:32), one should seriously consider understanding the suffering of Mark 9:43 as temporary. However I’m not convinced that all the NT authors had the same view, so using Paul to interpret Mark may not be fair. There are however implications elsewhere in the Gospels as well, e.g. Mat 5:43-48 and Mat 12:31.

Annihilationism: Does Rev. 20:10 teach that some demons will be tormented forever?

Well-Known Member

Thank You Jesus!

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Disciple of Jesus

This is me about 1 yr. old.

This is me about 1 yr. old.

Well-Known Member

Newbie

This is me about 1 yr. old.

This is me about 1 yr. old.

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

This is me about 1 yr. old.

Senior Veteran

This is me about 1 yr. old.

Praise Jesus

Well-Known Member

This is me about 1 yr. old.

Senior Veteran

Similar threads