A Defense of Dualistic Conditional Immortality

[Der Alte]

And therein lies the problem. If you cannot make a parable or real world example to defend ECT (Eternal Conscious Torment), your view of Hell is bankrupt. Even the Trinity can be illustrated by way of real world examples.

Silliest nonsense I ever heard. If you can't make a parable about a belief then it is bankrupt. Do you just make this stuff up as you go along?
…..This is all I need, Greek is now, and has always been, the language of the Eastern Greek Orthodox church. Who, better than the native Greek speaking scholars who translated the “literal” Greek Eastern Orthodox Bible [EOB], know the correct meaning of Greek words, e.g. “Gehenna,””aiōnios,”“kolasis?” etc.
…..In the EOB, footnote pg. 180

Hades is the realm of the dead. The upper part of hades was considered to be luminous and it was called “paradise” or "Abraham's bosom.” Hades is not to be confused with hell (Gehenna) which is the final place of state or place of the damned (“the lake of’ fire”).​

= = = = = = = = = =

The Eastern Greek Orthodox Bible EOB—New Testament 96
Matthew 25:46 Then he will answer them saying ‘Amen. I tell you: as much as you did not do it to one of the least of these, you did not do it to me.' “These [[ones on the left]] will go away into eternal punishment.[κολασιν αιονιον/kolasin aiōnion] but the righteous into eternal life.​

= = = = = = = = = =

KJV Romans 16:26 [EOB 14:25]
26 But now is made manifest, and by the scriptures of the prophets, according to the commandment of the everlasting [αιωνιου/aiōniou] God, made known to all nations for the obedience of faith:​

Paul, the same writer, uses αιωνιου/aiōniou, in Rom 16:26 synonymous with αιδιος/aidios in Rom 1:20, in the same writing, below.

Romans 1:20 For since the creation of the world, his invisible things are clearly seen. They perceived through created things, even his everlasting [τε αιδιος/te aidios] power and divinity. ​

= = = = = = = =
https://azbyka.ru/otechnik/books/or...tament-(The-Eastern-Greek-Orthodox-Bible).pdf
The Eastern/Greek Orthodox Bible EOB—New Testament 96 can be D/L at the link above. Whoever has doubts/questions about the EOB version I suggest they read the 200 page preface which documents the extensive Greek scholarship supporting this translation.

 

[zoidar]

.

 

[Der Alte]

.

?

 

[zoidar]

?

Can't delete posts on CF so I settled with a "."

I had a question, but found the answer own my own.

 

[Der Alte]

Can't delete posts on CF so I settled with a "."
I had a question, but found the answer own my own.

As they say in Manila. "Walang problema." I learned that from a TV used car commercial in Oakland.

 

[Butch5]

Hmmm.... something to consider.

Thank you.



I had a different life experience with the Bible than most. This may seem silly to you, but I believe by faith that the King James Bible was inspired by God despite the imperfections of the translators and despite them knowing that they were being used by God. This is not based upon some random decision but it is based upon believing certain biblical truths that leads one to such a conclusion. I believe the original language are inspired and inerrant, and they continued on into the Latin Scriptures, and then the English (KJV Cambridge Edition circa 1900).



No, brother. I don't see it. This does not sound like he is in a tomb or grave site here. It says he lifted up his eyes in torments. Surely he is in some other place besides the grave. If he was in the grave, it would say:

“And he lifted up his eyes and could not see anything; He took off the bandages wrapped around his face, and got up and felt around with his hands and it felt like he was in some kind of cave or tomb."



I disagree. People are buried in graves.

Grave -
(Noun):

a place for the burial of a corpse (especially beneath the ground and marked by a tombstone); "he put flowers on his mother's grave"​

Source:
Grave | Definition of Grave by Webster's Online Dictionary



Before you said people are not buried in a grave, and yet you are saying that the rich man went to the grave. This sounds like a contradiction. What does the word “grave” mean to you?

As for your question:

“if Hades is a subterranean location where people are alive, what went there?”

Jesus tells us what went on there with the story of Lazarus and the rich man.



Actually Jesus says, “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; And in hell he lift up his eyes, being in torments, and seeth Abraham afar off, and Lazarus in his bosom.” (Luke 16:22-23).

This sounds like the rich man died, and was buried, and then in a place called hell he lift up his eyes and he was in torments and seen Abraham afar off. Either he was hallucinating in the grave, or his spirit body was in an other worldly place or dimension. I am leaning towards the fact that he went to some spiritual other worldly place because Jesus does not indicate that he was imagining things while he was stuck in his tomb.



Paul says, “...There is a natural body, and there is a spiritual body.” (1 Corinthians 15:44). So a person can have spiritual body parts in the afterlife after their natural body dies because they have a spiritual body. The story of Lazarus and the rich man doesn't fit nicely if it was referring to his natural body that died. How could his body parts do anything if they died? It makes no sense. The only way it makes sense is if his spirit body went to a spiritual place. Remember, when Lazarus died, the angels took him to Abraham's bosom. Angels are spiritual beings. So this sets the tone and stage of some other worldly place and not a tomb.



Sometimes the majority belief can sometimes be true. There are many unbelievers who know that God is one, you can pray to God, and that the Bible is the correct way to follow God, but they simply do not want to follow God.

Anyways, I am not bringing in anything into the text. The text itself gives us the meaning. Angels, Abraham's bosom, Abraham, and a description of some other worldly place with torments in fire sounds like a spiritual place of the underworld. Jesus did not indicate that this was a metaphor or parallel of something else. He just told us like it was as if he was talking about some real account.



The story of Lazarus and the rich man is not a parable. A parable is a real world example of something else. Jesus did not say the kingdom of heaven is like.... or something along those lines. Jesus was also not describing some story in the real world to illustrate a spiritual truth, either. Jesus was giving us a real life account of the underworld so as to warn men not to go there.



If somebody does not like the idea of a hell, then I can see them wanting to look at this as a parable and or as a metaphorical story. But there is no indication the story is a metaphor. Most people have a problem with hell because they can only think the alternative to accepting hell is the wicked are tortured in flames like we see in Hollywood, and or hell houses in churches. But this is not how the Bible describes hell with the story of Lazarus and the rich man. The rich man was not screaming out in pain trying to talk to Abraham.

I don't have any problem with a concept of hell if it was in the Bible, but it's not. I used to believe the doctrine until a group and I did an in depth study of the doctrine in Scripture. It's not there. The idea came into Christianity from Greek Philosophy. Hades, was the name of the Greek god of the underworld. One question I would ask is, do you think God would name this place that you call hell after a Greek god? The word hades, literally mean, not seen. When people are buried in the grave they are, not seen, thus the grave being called hades.

As far as the parable is concerned, I suggested that you consider the details. Here is a list of the details and how they are similar. Notice how the Rich Man compares to the priesthood, the Jewish leadership. Notice how Lazarus compares to Jesus.

The parable of Lazarus and the Rich Man is also a judgment of the priesthood and their destruction. Who was Jesus talking to? The Pharisees. The Rich Man was a Jew. The priesthood was Jewish. The Rich Man had five brothers. Levi, the tribe of the priesthood, had five brothers. The Rich Man was dressed in purple and fine linen. The priesthood ruled over Israel as both king and priest and wore purple and fine linen. The Rich Man fared sumptuously. The priesthood fared sumptuously.

What about Lazarus? Lazarus is the Greek form of the Hebrew name Eleazar which means, God help. God helped Jesus. Lazarus had come to the Rich Man, a Jew. Jesus had come to the Jews. Lazarus was covered in sores. At the cross Jesus was covered in sores. The dogs licked Lazarus' sores. Lazarus was rejected by the Rich Man but accepted by the dogs. The Jews referred to the Gentiles as dogs. Jesus was rejected by the Jews but accepted by the Gentiles. Lazarus was carried away by angels. Jesus was carried away by angles. Lazarus was carried to his father Abraham. Jesus was carried to His father God. Lazarus was embraced by Abraham. Jesus was embraced by God. Lazarus was in Abraham's bosom. Is Abraham's bosom a place located down in the earth? There is nothing in Scripture to suggest any such thing. Abraham's bosom is mentioned elsewhere in Scripture though. Hagar was in Abraham's bosom, and she was alive, not dead.

And Sarai said unto Abram, My wrong be upon thee: I have given my maid into thy bosom; and when she saw that she had conceived, I was despised in her eyes: the LORD judge between me and thee. (Gen. 16:5 KJV)

Hagar was in an intimate relationship with Abram. From this we see that being in Abraham's bosom means to be in a close relationship with Abraham. Lazarus was in the bosom of his father. Jesus was in the bosom of His father.

No man hath seen God at any time; the only begotten Son, which is in the bosom of the Father, he hath declared him. (Jn. 1:18 KJV)


The Rich Man wanted Abraham to send Lazarus to his brothers, that they would believe if one came from the dead. Abraham said no. He wouldn't send Lazarus back to the Jews. When Jesus resurrected He wouldn't show Himself to the Jews.

 

[Der Alte]

I don't have any problem with a concept of hell if it was in the Bible, but it's not. I used to believe the doctrine until a group and I did an in depth study of the doctrine in Scripture. It's not there. The idea came into Christianity from Greek Philosophy. Hades, was the name of the Greek god of the underworld. One question I would ask is, do you think God would name this place that you call hell after a Greek god? The word hades, literally mean, not seen. When people are buried in the grave they are, not seen, thus the grave being called hades....

I don't know what you and your associates studied but it appears you only read material that would support the presupposition that that there is no hell etc.
…..According to three irrefutable Jewish sources; the Jewish Encyclopedia, Encyclopedia Judaica and the Talmud, quoted below, among the יהודים/Yehudim/ιουδαιων/Youdaion/Jews in Israel before and during the time of Jesus there was a belief in a place of everlasting torment of the wicked and they called it both sheol and gehinnom, translated hades and gehenna in the 225 BC LXX and the NT.
Note: My comment about the sources being irrefutable does not refer to the validity of the listed beliefs only that these are accurate records of the beliefs and practices of the ancient Jews.
…..There were different groups within Judaism; Sadducees, Pharisees, Essenes etc. and there were different beliefs about resurrection, hell etc. That there were differing beliefs does not rebut, refute, change or disprove anything in this post.

Jewish Encyclopedia, Gehenna
The place where children were sacrificed to the god Moloch … in the "valley of the son of Hinnom," to the south of Jerusalem (Josh. xv. 8, passim; II Kings xxiii. 10; Jer. ii. 23; vii. 31-32; xix. 6, 13-14). … the valley was deemed to be accursed, and "Gehenna" therefore soon became a figurative equivalent for "hell." Hell, like paradise, was created by God (Sotah 22a);[“Soon” in this verse would be about 700 BC +/-]​

[Note, this is according to the ancient Jews, long before the Christian era, NOT supposed bias of modern Christian translators. DA]

(I)n general …sinners go to hell immediately after their death. The famous teacher Johanan b. Zakkai wept before his death because he did not know whether he would go to paradise or to hell (Ber. 28b). The pious go to paradise, and sinners to hell(B.M. 83b).
But as regards the heretics, etc., and Jeroboam, Nebat's son, hell shall pass away, but they shall not pass away" (R. H. 17a; comp. Shab. 33b). All that descend into Gehenna shall come up again, with the exception of three classes of men: those who have committed adultery, or shamed their neighbors, or vilified them (B. M. 58b).[/i]
… heretics and the Roman oppressors go to Gehenna, and the same fate awaits the Persians, the oppressors of the Babylonian Jews (Ber. 8b). When Nebuchadnezzar descended into hell, [שאול/Sheol] all its inhabitants were afraid that he was coming to rule over them (Shab. 149a; comp. Isa. xiv. 9-10). The Book of Enoch [x. 6, xci. 9, etal] also says that it is chiefly the heathen who are to be cast into the fiery pool on the Day of Judgment (x. 6, xci. 9, et al). "The Lord, the Almighty, will punish them on the Day of Judgment by putting fire and worms into their flesh, so that they cry out with pain unto all eternity" (Judith xvi. 17). The sinners in Gehenna will be filled with pain when God puts back the souls into the dead bodies on the Day of Judgment, according toIsa. xxxiii. 11 (Sanh. 108b).
Link: Jewish Encyclopedia Online
Note, scripture references are highlighted in blue.
= = = = = = = = = =
Encyclopedia Judaica:
Gehinnom (Heb. גֵּי בֶן־הִנֹּם, גֵּי בְנֵי הִנֹּם, גֵּיא בֶן־הִנֹּם, גֵּיא הִנֹּם; Gr. Γέεννα; "Valley of Ben-Hinnom, Valley of [the Son (s) of] Hinnom," Gehenna), a valley south of Jerusalem on one of the borders between the territories of Judah and Benjamin, between the Valley of *Rephaim and *En-Rogel (Josh. 15:8; 18:16). It is identified with Wadi er-Rababi.
…..During the time of the Monarchy, Gehinnom, at a place called Topheth, was the site of a cult which involved the burning of children (II Kings 23:10; Jer. 7:31; 32:35 et al.; ). Jeremiah repeatedly condemned this cult and predicted that on its account Topheth and the Valley of the Son of Hinnom would be called the Valley of the "Slaughter" (Jer. 19:5–6).
In Judaism the name Gehinnom is generally used as an appellation of the place of torment reserved for the wicked after death. The New Testament used the Greek form Gehenna in the same sense.
Gehinnom
http://www.jevzajcg.me/enciklopedia/Encyclopaedia Judaica, v. 07 (Fey-Gor).pdf
= = = = = = = = = =
Talmud -Tractate Rosh Hashanah Chapter 1.
The school of Hillel says: . . . but as for Minim, [followers of Jesus] informers and disbelievers, who deny the Torah, or Resurrection, or separate themselves from the congregation, or who inspire their fellowmen with dread of them, or who sin and cause others to sin, as did Jeroboam the son of Nebat and his followers, they all descend to Gehenna, and are judged there from generation to generation, as it is said [Isa. lxvi. 24]:
"And they shall go forth and look upon the carcases of the men who have transgressed against Me; for their worm shall not die, neither shall their fire be quenched." Even when Gehenna will be destroyed, they will not be consumed, as it is written[Psalms, xlix. 15]: "And their forms wasteth away in the nether world," which the sages comment upon to mean that their forms shall endure even when the grave is no more.
Concerning them Hannah says [I Sam. ii. 10]: "The adversaries of the Lord shall be broken to pieces."
Link: Tract Rosh Hashana: Chapter I.​

When Jesus taught e.g.,

• “Depart from me, ye cursed, into everlasting fire, prepared for the devil and his angels:” Matthew 25:41
• "these shall go away into eternal punishment, Matthew 25:46"
• "the fire of hell [Γέεννα/gehenna] where the fire is not quenched and the worm does not die, 3X Mark 9:43-48"
• "cast into a fiery furnace where there will be wailing and gnashing of teeth,” Matthew 13:42, Matthew 13:50
• “But whoso shall offend one of these little ones which believe in me, it were better for him that a millstone were hanged about his neck, and that he were drowned in the depth of the sea.” Matthew 18:6
• “And then will I profess unto them, I never knew you: depart from me, ye that work iniquity.” Matthew 7:23
• “woe unto that man by whom the Son of man is betrayed! it had been good for that man if he had not been born. ” Matthew 26:24
• “But I say unto you, that it shall be more tolerable in that day for Sodom, than for that city.” Luke 10:12​

…..These teachings tacitly reaffirmed and sanctioned a then existing significant Jewish view of eternal hell, outlined above. In Matt. 18:6, 26:24 and Luk 10:12, see above, Jesus teaches that there is a punishment worse than death or nonexistence.
…..A punishment worse than death without mercy is also mentioned in Hebrews 10:28-31.

Heb 10:28 He that despised Moses' law died without mercy under two or three witnesses:
29 Of how much sorer punishment, suppose ye, shall he be thought worthy, who hath trodden under foot the Son of God, and hath counted the blood of the covenant, wherewith he was sanctified, an unholy thing, and hath done despite unto the Spirit of grace?
30 For we know him that hath said, Vengeance belongeth unto me, I will recompense, saith the Lord. And again, The Lord shall judge his people.
31 It is a fearful thing to fall into the hands of the living God.​

…..Jesus is quoted as using the word death 17 times in the gospels, if He wanted to say eternal death in Matt 25:46, that is what He would have said but He didn’t, He said “eternal punishment.” The Sadducees did not believe in the resurrection, they knew that everybody died; rich, poor, young, old, good, bad, men, women, children, infants and knew that often it had nothing to do with punishment and was permanent. When Jesus taught “eternal punishment” they would not have understood it as merely death, it would have meant something worse to them.
…..Concerning “punishment” one early church father wrote,

“‘Then these reap no advantage from their punishment, as it seems: moreover, I would say that they are not punished unless they are conscious of the punishment.” Justin Martyr [A.D. 110-165.] Dialogue with Trypho Chapter 4​

…..Jesus undoubtedly knew what the Jews, believed about hell. If that Jewish teaching was wrong, why didn’t Jesus tell them there was no hell, no eternal punishment etc? Why would Jesus teach “eternal punishment,” etc. to Jews who believed, "The Lord, the Almighty, will punish them on the Day of Judgment by putting fire and worms into their flesh, so that they cry out with pain unto all eternity," which would only encourage and reinforce their beliefs?

 

[Der Alte]

. . . Jesus was embraced by God. Lazarus was in Abraham's bosom. Is Abraham's bosom a place located down in the earth? There is nothing in Scripture to suggest any such thing. Abraham's bosom is mentioned elsewhere in Scripture though. Hagar was in Abraham's bosom, and she was alive, not dead. . .

Abrahams' bosom is not a place. It is the position of the guest of honor at a banquet hosted by Abraham.
Despite the famous painting the Jews of Jesus' time did not sit on chairs at a table. The tables were low and guests reclined on their left elbow with their feet pointing away from the table. That is how a woman was able wash Jesus' feet with her tears. In that culture a woman didn't crawl around under a table of strange men. Luke 7:38
That also explains why John leaned his head on Jesus' breast. Jesus would be behind John to look Jesus in the eye John would lean back placing his head on Jesus' breast. John 13:25

 

[Bible Highlighter]

I don't have any problem with a concept of hell if it was in the Bible, but it's not. I used to believe the doctrine until a group and I did an in depth study of the doctrine in Scripture. It's not there. The idea came into Christianity from Greek Philosophy. Hades, was the name of the Greek god of the underworld. One question I would ask is, do you think God would name this place that you call hell after a Greek god? The word hades, literally mean, not seen. When people are buried in the grave they are, not seen, thus the grave being called hades.

As far as the parable is concerned, I suggested that you consider the details. Here is a list of the details and how they are similar. Notice how the Rich Man compares to the priesthood, the Jewish leadership. Notice how Lazarus compares to Jesus.

The parable of Lazarus and the Rich Man is also a judgment of the priesthood and their destruction. Who was Jesus talking to? The Pharisees. The Rich Man was a Jew. The priesthood was Jewish. The Rich Man had five brothers. Levi, the tribe of the priesthood, had five brothers. The Rich Man was dressed in purple and fine linen. The priesthood ruled over Israel as both king and priest and wore purple and fine linen. The Rich Man fared sumptuously. The priesthood fared sumptuously.

What about Lazarus? Lazarus is the Greek form of the Hebrew name Eleazar which means, God help. God helped Jesus. Lazarus had come to the Rich Man, a Jew. Jesus had come to the Jews. Lazarus was covered in sores. At the cross Jesus was covered in sores. The dogs licked Lazarus' sores. Lazarus was rejected by the Rich Man but accepted by the dogs. The Jews referred to the Gentiles as dogs. Jesus was rejected by the Jews but accepted by the Gentiles. Lazarus was carried away by angels. Jesus was carried away by angles. Lazarus was carried to his father Abraham. Jesus was carried to His father God. Lazarus was embraced by Abraham. Jesus was embraced by God. Lazarus was in Abraham's bosom. Is Abraham's bosom a place located down in the earth? There is nothing in Scripture to suggest any such thing. Abraham's bosom is mentioned elsewhere in Scripture though. Hagar was in Abraham's bosom, and she was alive, not dead.

And Sarai said unto Abram, My wrong be upon thee: I have given my maid into thy bosom; and when she saw that she had conceived, I was despised in her eyes: the LORD judge between me and thee. (Gen. 16:5 KJV)

Hagar was in an intimate relationship with Abram. From this we see that being in Abraham's bosom means to be in a close relationship with Abraham. Lazarus was in the bosom of his father. Jesus was in the bosom of His father.

No man hath seen God at any time; the only begotten Son, which is in the bosom of the Father, he hath declared him. (Jn. 1:18 KJV)


The Rich Man wanted Abraham to send Lazarus to his brothers, that they would believe if one came from the dead. Abraham said no. He wouldn't send Lazarus back to the Jews. When Jesus resurrected He wouldn't show Himself to the Jews.

The problem I have with allegorizing the story of Lazarus and the Richman is that where does the allegorization stop? Do we start to allegorize the story of Jesus dying upon the cross? The story of Lazarus and the Richman uses a real people's names (one we are familiar with) and the name of a place. This place helps to explain Jesus' own journey into the heart of the Earth three days and three nights before He was resurrected (Whereby Christ preached to the spirits in prison). For me: The standard markers that do make up metaphors in the Bible is not there. No offense, brother, but I believe the only reason why a person would want to allegorize the story (not a parable) of Lazarus and the Richman is because they simply do not like the idea of the existence of a hell. It raises too many other uncomfortable questions. Granted, I have made my peace with it because I believe the wicked could possibly go through times of being awake along with long periods of sleep in the place of torments (also traditionally called “hell”). I also believe the richman was most likely tormented by the heat of the flame, too (And not an earthly like flame that causes extreme amounts of pain).

If there is parobolic meaning to the story, this does not prove it is a fictional story by any means. Generally metaphors are understood as being metaphors because the Bible either sometimes gives the metaphor or it mentions something so outlandish beyond the realm of reality that it has to be a metaphor (like some of the metaphors mentioned in Revelation). But even in Revelation we can tell the difference between metaphor and literal. Jesus's return mentioned in Revelation is one example of a portion in Revelation that is not a metaphor. Imagine if somebody found a really cool sounding parabolic explanation to Jesus' return. Would that undo the reality of His return? Surely not. There is no indication in the text that the 2nd coming of Jesus is a metaphor anymore than there is for the story of Lazarus and the Richman.

 

[Der Alte]

The problem I have with allegorizing the story of Lazarus and the Richman is that where does the allegorization stop? Do we start to allegorize the story of Jesus dying upon the cross? The story of Lazarus and the Richman uses a real people's names (one we are familiar with) and the name of a place. This place helps to explain Jesus' own journey into the heart of the Earth three days and three nights before He was resurrected (Whereby Christ preached to the spirits in prison). For me: The standard markers that do make up metaphors in the Bible is not there. No offense, brother, but I believe the only reason why a person would want to allegorize the story (not a parable) of Lazarus and the Richman is because they simply do not like the idea of the existence of a hell. It raises too many other uncomfortable questions. Granted, I have made my peace with it because I believe the wicked could possibly go through times of being awake along with long periods of sleep in the place of torments (also traditionally called “hell”). I also believe the richman was most likely tormented by the heat of the flame, too (And not an earthly like flame that causes extreme amounts of pain).
If there is parobolic meaning to the story, this does not prove it is a fictional story by any means. Generally metaphors are understood as being metaphors because the Bible either sometimes gives the metaphor or it mentions something so outlandish beyond the realm of reality that it has to be a metaphor (like some of the metaphors mentioned in Revelation). But even in Revelation we can tell the difference between metaphor and literal. Jesus's return mentioned in Revelation is one example of a portion in Revelation that is not a metaphor. Imagine if somebody found a really cool sounding parabolic explanation to Jesus' return. Would that undo the reality of His return? Surely not. There is no indication in the text that the 2nd coming of Jesus is a metaphor anymore than there is for the story of Lazarus and the Richman.

…..The word “parable” is from the Greek word “παραβολή/parabole” which means to place or throw beside, to clarify/explain something unknown by comparing it to something known.
…..The Lazarus/rich man account does not have the format of a parable there is no worldly situation which was or can be likened to heaven. There was no comparison.
It is not introduced as a parable and Jesus did not explain it later to His disciples.
…..All of the unquestioned parables refer to events which had happened at some time in history; a widow found lost coins, a shepherd found a lost sheep, a wayward son squandered all of his inheritance.
…..All of the unquestioned parables refer to anonymous people, “a certain man,”” a certain widow,””a certain land owner,” etc. The Lazarus account names two specific people “Lazarus” and Abraham, an actual historical person, whom the rich man refers to as “father Abraham.” If Abraham was not in the place Jesus said and did not say the words Jesus quoted, then Jesus lied.

• 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.
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.
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.
• Tertullian Part First A Treatise On The Soul Chapter 57
9. Moreover, the fact that Hades is not in any case opened for (the escape of) any soul , has been firmly established by the Lord in the person of Abraham, in His representation of the poor man at rest and the rich man in torment.
• The Epistles Of Cyprian [A.D. 200-258] Epistle 54 To Cornelius, Concerning Fortunatus And Felicissimus, Or Against The Heretics
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. ​

 

[Bible Highlighter]

…..The word “parable” is from the Greek word “παραβολή/parabole” which means to place or throw beside, to clarify/explain something unknown by comparing it to something known.
…..The Lazarus/rich man account does not have the format of a parable there is no worldly situation which was or can be likened to heaven. There was no comparison.
It is not introduced as a parable and Jesus did not explain it later to His disciples.
…..All of the unquestioned parables refer to events which had happened at some time in history; a widow found lost coins, a shepherd found a lost sheep, a wayward son squandered all of his inheritance.
…..All of the unquestioned parables refer to anonymous people, “a certain man,”” a certain widow,””a certain land owner,” etc. The Lazarus account names two specific people “Lazarus” and Abraham, an actual historical person, whom the rich man refers to as “father Abraham.” If Abraham was not in the place Jesus said and did not say the words Jesus quoted, then Jesus lied.

​

I agree with this portion of your post.

 

[Der Alte]

I agree with this portion of your post.

What about the rest? I quoted the only historical record we have how the early church understood the story of Lazarus and the rich man.

 

[Bible Highlighter]

What about the rest? I quoted the only historical record we have how the early church understood the story of Lazarus and the rich man.

You imply the Greek philosophy that teaches the inherent immortality of all souls in one reference. I believe the Bible teaches that life and or immortality is only achieved through the gospel.

“But is now made manifest by the appearing of our Saviour Jesus Christ, who hath abolished death, and hath brought life and immortality to light through the gospel:” (2 Timothy 1:10).​

Side Note:

Yes, I am aware you may have other sources for others believing in this Greek philosophy, but it does not make the Scriptures any less true in what they say.

 

[Butch5]

The problem I have with allegorizing the story of Lazarus and the Richman is that where does the allegorization stop? Do we start to allegorize the story of Jesus dying upon the cross? The story of Lazarus and the Richman uses a real people's names (one we are familiar with) and the name of a place. This place helps to explain Jesus' own journey into the heart of the Earth three days and three nights before He was resurrected (Whereby Christ preached to the spirits in prison). For me: The standard markers that do make up metaphors in the Bible is not there. No offense, brother, but I believe the only reason why a person would want to allegorize the story (not a parable) of Lazarus and the Richman is because they simply do not like the idea of the existence of a hell. It raises too many other uncomfortable questions. Granted, I have made my peace with it because I believe the wicked could possibly go through times of being awake along with long periods of sleep in the place of torments (also traditionally called “hell”). I also believe the richman was most likely tormented by the heat of the flame, too (And not an earthly like flame that causes extreme amounts of pain).

If there is parobolic meaning to the story, this does not prove it is a fictional story by any means. Generally metaphors are understood as being metaphors because the Bible either sometimes gives the metaphor or it mentions something so outlandish beyond the realm of reality that it has to be a metaphor (like some of the metaphors mentioned in Revelation). But even in Revelation we can tell the difference between metaphor and literal. Jesus's return mentioned in Revelation is one example of a portion in Revelation that is not a metaphor. Imagine if somebody found a really cool sounding parabolic explanation to Jesus' return. Would that undo the reality of His return? Surely not. There is no indication in the text that the 2nd coming of Jesus is a metaphor anymore than there is for the story of Lazarus and the Richman.

Like I said, I used to believe it was about an afterlife. So, that's not the an issue for me. What I've found is that it doesn't fit with what the Scriptures teach. I think one of the main reasons people believe the parable is about an afterlife is because people come to the Bible already believing in an afterlife. I think most people in the world believe that the dead live on after death. Both Christians and non Christians believe their loved ones go to Heaven when they die. Many believe in Reincarnation, that the person just goes from body to body. So, this idea that the dead live on isn't necessarily a Biblical idea. If a person already believes that the dead live on after death then there are certain passages in the Scriptures that they will interpret that way. One of those being the parable of Lazarus and the Rich Man. If a person doesn't believe that the dead live one after death but rather that they are in fact dead, they are going to interpret the parable of Lazarus and the Rich Man differently. So the question we really need to ask is, does the Bible teach that the dead live on or that the dead are dead?

We find that the Scriptures tell us things like, the dead know nothing, they cannot praise God, their thoughts perish the day they die. If this is the case how could the parable be an account of what happens when someone dies? Paul, speaking of dead Christians said, if there is no resurrection, they had perished. He didn't say they were in Heaven, with the Lord, or in Abraham's bosom. He said apart from the resurrection they had perished. How could that be if the parable was an actual account of what happens when someone dies?

13 But if there be no resurrection of the dead, then is Christ not risen:
14 And if Christ be not risen, then is our preaching vain, and your faith is also vain.
15 Yea, and we are found false witnesses of God; because we have testified of God that he raised up Christ: whom he raised not up, if so be that the dead rise not.
16 For if the dead rise not, then is not Christ raised:
17 And if Christ be not raised, your faith is vain; ye are yet in your sins.
18 Then they also which are fallen asleep in Christ are perished.
(1 Cor. 15:13-18 KJV)

Also, the parable is preceded by two other parables. Lazarus and the Rich Man starts out with, "there was a certain rich man". The parable before it starts out the exact same way. The one before that starts out, "A certain man had two sons". That's very similar. Why would we believe the first two are parables but not the third?

Notice also that right before the parable of Lazarus and the Rich Man Jesus is chastising the Pharisees.

14 And the Pharisees also, who were covetous, heard all these things: and they derided him.
15 And he said unto them, Ye are they which justify yourselves before men; but God knoweth your hearts: for that which is highly esteemed among men is abomination in the sight of God.
16 The law and the prophets were until John: since that time the kingdom of God is preached, and every man presseth into it.
17 And it is easier for heaven and earth to pass, than one tittle of the law to fail.
18 Whosoever putteth away his wife, and marrieth another, committeth adultery: and whosoever marrieth her that is put away from her husband committeth adultery. (Lk. 16:14-18 KJV)

Notice as the Pharisees derided Jesus, He comes back at them. He points out their self righteousness and their adulteries. But notice He says, the Law and the Prophets were until John. He's telling them that their priesthood is over. It ended with John the Baptist. He then goes into the parable of Lazarus and the Rich Man. He describes the Rich Man as having five brothers. Levi, head of the priesthood had five brothers. That's not a coincidence. He said the Rich Man was dressed in purple and fine linen. The priesthood wore purple and fine linen. That's not a coincidence. He said the Rich Man fared sumptuously. The priesthood fared sumptuously. That's not a coincidence. The Rich Man died and was buried. The priesthood ended, died. If this story had nothing to do with the Pharisees why would there be so many comparisons between the two?

This parable is the only place in the whole Bible that has a someone suffering in fire in Hades. Jesus indicated that the wicked would be cast into Gehenna, not Hades. Why is the Rich Man suffering in Hades and not Gehenna? However, Jesus was speaking to the Pharisees, and they would should have been well aware, and probably were, of something burning in Hades. It wasn't a literal fire it was God's anger. In the Song of Moses God warned the Israelites what would happen when they turned from Him.

18 Of the Rock that begat thee thou art unmindful, and hast forgotten God that formed thee.
19 And when the LORD saw it, he abhorred them, because of the provoking of his sons, and of his daughters.1
20 And he said, I will hide my face from them, I will see what their end shall be: for they are a very froward generation, children in whom is no faith.
21 They have moved me to jealousy with that which is not God; they have provoked me to anger with their vanities: and I will move them to jealousy with those which are not a people; I will provoke them to anger with a foolish nation.
22 For a fire is kindled in mine anger, and shall burn unto the lowest hell, and shall consume the earth with her increase, and set on fire the foundations of the mountains.1
(Deut. 32:18-22 KJV)

The word hell in verse 22 is the Greek word Hades. The fire that is burning in Hades, that the Rich Man, the Jew, if suffering, is God's anger. We see the Rich Man, the Pharisees suffering God's anger and Lazarus, Jesus, having God's favor. Notice in verse 20 God said He would hide His face from them. He has done that. Since AD 70 and the destruction of the temple God has hidden His face from them.

 

[Der Alte]

You imply the Greek philosophy that teaches the inherent immortality of all souls in one reference. I believe the Bible teaches that life and or immortality is only achieved through the gospel.

“But is now made manifest by the appearing of our Saviour Jesus Christ, who hath abolished death, and hath brought life and immortality to light through the gospel:” (2 Timothy 1:10).​

Side Note:
Yes, I am aware you may have other sources for others believing in this Greek philosophy, but it does not make the Scriptures any less true in what they say.

Such rubbish! I never stated or implied any such thing. I did NOT quote any "Greek philosophy!"

 

[Bible Highlighter]

Such rubbish! I never stated or implied any such thing. I did NOT quote any "Greek philosophy!"

You quoted in who you believe is: Irenaeus. According to reports by man made history: Irenaeus is a Greek bishop. In the quote by you, it implied inherent immortality of the soul with the title of his work that said, “Souls Can Be Recognised in the Separate State, and are Immortal.”

If these are indeed the words of Irenaeus, then he would be using philosophy by implying that all souls are immortal because the Bible does not teach such a thing.

 

[Bible Highlighter]

Like I said, I used to believe it was about an afterlife. So, that's not the an issue for me. What I've found is that it doesn't fit with what the Scriptures teach. I think one of the main reasons people believe the parable is about an afterlife is because people come to the Bible already believing in an afterlife. I think most people in the world believe that the dead live on after death. Both Christians and non Christians believe their loved ones go to Heaven when they die. Many believe in Reincarnation, that the person just goes from body to body. So, this idea that the dead live on isn't necessarily a Biblical idea. If a person already believes that the dead live on after death then there are certain passages in the Scriptures that they will interpret that way. One of those being the parable of Lazarus and the Rich Man. If a person doesn't believe that the dead live one after death but rather that they are in fact dead, they are going to interpret the parable of Lazarus and the Rich Man differently. So the question we really need to ask is, does the Bible teach that the dead live on or that the dead are dead?

We find that the Scriptures tell us things like, the dead know nothing, they cannot praise God, their thoughts perish the day they die. If this is the case how could the parable be an account of what happens when someone dies? Paul, speaking of dead Christians said, if there is no resurrection, they had perished. He didn't say they were in Heaven, with the Lord, or in Abraham's bosom. He said apart from the resurrection they had perished. How could that be if the parable was an actual account of what happens when someone dies?

13 But if there be no resurrection of the dead, then is Christ not risen:
14 And if Christ be not risen, then is our preaching vain, and your faith is also vain.
15 Yea, and we are found false witnesses of God; because we have testified of God that he raised up Christ: whom he raised not up, if so be that the dead rise not.
16 For if the dead rise not, then is not Christ raised:
17 And if Christ be not raised, your faith is vain; ye are yet in your sins.
18 Then they also which are fallen asleep in Christ are perished.
(1 Cor. 15:13-18 KJV)

Also, the parable is preceded by two other parables. Lazarus and the Rich Man starts out with, "there was a certain rich man". The parable before it starts out the exact same way. The one before that starts out, "A certain man had two sons". That's very similar. Why would we believe the first two are parables but not the third?

Notice also that right before the parable of Lazarus and the Rich Man Jesus is chastising the Pharisees.

14 And the Pharisees also, who were covetous, heard all these things: and they derided him.
15 And he said unto them, Ye are they which justify yourselves before men; but God knoweth your hearts: for that which is highly esteemed among men is abomination in the sight of God.
16 The law and the prophets were until John: since that time the kingdom of God is preached, and every man presseth into it.
17 And it is easier for heaven and earth to pass, than one tittle of the law to fail.
18 Whosoever putteth away his wife, and marrieth another, committeth adultery: and whosoever marrieth her that is put away from her husband committeth adultery. (Lk. 16:14-18 KJV)

Notice as the Pharisees derided Jesus, He comes back at them. He points out their self righteousness and their adulteries. But notice He says, the Law and the Prophets were until John. He's telling them that their priesthood is over. It ended with John the Baptist. He then goes into the parable of Lazarus and the Rich Man. He describes the Rich Man as having five brothers. Levi, head of the priesthood had five brothers. That's not a coincidence. He said the Rich Man was dressed in purple and fine linen. The priesthood wore purple and fine linen. That's not a coincidence. He said the Rich Man fared sumptuously. The priesthood fared sumptuously. That's not a coincidence. The Rich Man died and was buried. The priesthood ended, died. If this story had nothing to do with the Pharisees why would there be so many comparisons between the two?

This parable is the only place in the whole Bible that has a someone suffering in fire in Hades. Jesus indicated that the wicked would be cast into Gehenna, not Hades. Why is the Rich Man suffering in Hades and not Gehenna? However, Jesus was speaking to the Pharisees, and they would should have been well aware, and probably were, of something burning in Hades. It wasn't a literal fire it was God's anger. In the Song of Moses God warned the Israelites what would happen when they turned from Him.

18 Of the Rock that begat thee thou art unmindful, and hast forgotten God that formed thee.
19 And when the LORD saw it, he abhorred them, because of the provoking of his sons, and of his daughters.1
20 And he said, I will hide my face from them, I will see what their end shall be: for they are a very froward generation, children in whom is no faith.
21 They have moved me to jealousy with that which is not God; they have provoked me to anger with their vanities: and I will move them to jealousy with those which are not a people; I will provoke them to anger with a foolish nation.
22 For a fire is kindled in mine anger, and shall burn unto the lowest hell, and shall consume the earth with her increase, and set on fire the foundations of the mountains.1
(Deut. 32:18-22 KJV)

The word hell in verse 22 is the Greek word Hades. The fire that is burning in Hades, that the Rich Man, the Jew, if suffering, is God's anger. We see the Rich Man, the Pharisees suffering God's anger and Lazarus, Jesus, having God's favor. Notice in verse 20 God said He would hide His face from them. He has done that. Since AD 70 and the destruction of the temple God has hidden His face from them.

Again, brother, I am not buying it. The story of Lazarus and the Richman clearly does not have the same markers or indications that it is a parable like the other parables told by Jesus. It would be like trying to allegorize the cross and the resurrection. There is no reason to do so. Just because there may be an added parabolic spiritual meaning to the story does not make it a parable.

As for the Scriptures saying that “the dead not knowing anything”:
Well, this is either:

(a) In reference to physical dead bodies here upon the Earth, and not in reference to the soul that goes to the realm of the dead, or it is:

(b) In reference to the possibility that the wicked may go through long periods of sleep or unconsciousness only to be awakened for certain special occasions or other reasons. It could also be in reference to how the dead do not know what is going on in the world, as well.​

You have to learn to harmonize two truths together instead of writing one truth off as a parable, brother. If you don't agree, we can simply agree to disagree in love and respect.

May God bless you greatly today.

 

[Der Alte]

You quoted in who you believe is: Irenaeus. According to reports by man made history: Irenaeus is a Greek bishop. In the quote by you, it implied inherent immortality of the soul with the title of his work that said, “Souls Can Be Recognised in the Separate State, and are Immortal.”
If these are indeed the words of Irenaeus, then he would be using philosophy by implying that all souls are immortal because the Bible does not teach such a thing.

Irenaeus was a student of Polycarp who was a student of John. Irenaeus was not the only ECF I quoted. I quoted 4 ECF beside Irenaeus; Clement of Alexandria, Tertullian, Cyprian and Methodius. These 5 are the only ECF who quoted/referred to Lazarus and the rich man. If you are correct why would God and Jesus use "pagan philosophy" to teach truth?
…..In Isa 14 there is a long passage about the king of Babylon dying, according to many the dead know nothing. They are supposedly annihilated, destroyed, pfft, gone! But God, Himself, speaking, these dead people in שאול/sheol, know something, they move, meet the dead coming to sheol, stir up, raise up, speak and say, etc.

Isa 14:9-11 (KJV)
9) Hell [שאול ] from beneath is moved for thee to meet thee at thy coming: it stirreth up the dead for thee, even all the chief ones of the earth; it hath raised up from their thrones all the kings of the nations.
10) All they shall speak and say unto thee, Art thou also become weak as we? art thou become like unto us?
11) Thy pomp is brought down to the grave, [שאול] and the noise of thy viols: the worm is spread under thee, and the worms cover thee.
[ . . . ]
22) For I will rise up against them, saith the LORD of hosts, and cut off from Babylon the name, and remnant, and son, and nephew, saith the LORD.​

In this passage God, himself, is speaking, and I see a whole lot of moving, rising up, speaking etc. These dead people seem to know something, about something. We know that verses 11 through 14 describe actual historical events, the death of Nebuchadnezzar, king of Babylon.
…..Some will argue that this passage is figurative because fir trees don’t literally rejoice, vs. 8. They will argue that the passage must be figurative since God told Israel “take up this proverb against the king of Babylon.” vs. 4.
The occurrence of one figurative expression in a passage does not prove that anything else in the passage is figurative.
…..The Hebrew word םשל/mashal translated “proverb” does not necessarily mean something is fictional. For example, Israel did not become fictional when God made them a mashal/proverb in 2 Chronicles 7:20, Psalms 44:14, and Jeremiah 24:9.
…..The Jews considered this passage to be factual.

Jewish Encyclopedia-Gehenna
“When Nebuchadnezzar descended into hell, all its inhabitants were afraid that he was coming to rule over them (Shab. 149a; comp. Isa. xiv. 9-10).”
GEHENNA - JewishEncyclopedia.com​

…..Here is another passage where God, Himself, is speaking and people who are dead in sheol, speaking, being ashamed, comforted, etc.

Ezek 32:18-22, 30-31 (KJV)
18) Son of man, [Ezekiel] wail for the multitude of Egypt, and cast them down, even her, and the daughters of the famous nations, unto the nether parts of the earth, with them that go down into the pit.
19) Whom dost thou pass in beauty? go down, and be thou laid with the uncircumcised.
20) They shall fall in the midst of them that are slain by the sword: she is delivered to the sword: draw her and all her multitudes.
21) The strong among the mighty shall speak to him out of the midst of hell [שאול] with them that help him: they are gone down, they lie uncircumcised, slain by the sword.
22) Asshur is there and all her company: his graves are about him: all of them slain, fallen by the sword::[ . . . ]
Eze 32:30-31
(30) There be the princes of the north, all of them, and all the Zidonians, which are gone down with the slain; with their terror they are ashamed of their might; and they lie uncircumcised with them that be slain by the sword, and bear their shame with them that go down to the pit.
(31) Pharaoh shall see them, and shall be comforted over all his multitude, even Pharaoh and all his army slain by the sword, saith the Lord GOD.​

Jesus speaking, in the NT a dead man in Hades had eyes, was in torment, saw Abraham, “cried and said,” asked for water, begged Abraham, etc.

Luk 16:22-28
(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 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.​

 

[Butch5]

Again, brother, I am not buying it. The story of Lazarus and the Richman clearly does not have the same markers or indications that it is a parable like the other parables told by Jesus. It would be like trying to allegorize the cross and the resurrection. There is no reason to do so. Just because there may be an added parabolic spiritual meaning to the story does not make it a parable.

As for the Scriptures saying that “the dead not knowing anything”:
Well, this is either:

(a) In reference to physical dead bodies here upon the Earth, and not in reference to the soul that goes to the realm of the dead, or it is:

(b) In reference to the possibility that the wicked may go through long periods of sleep or unconsciousness only to be awakened for certain special occasions or other reasons. It could also be in reference to how the dead do not know what is going on in the world, as well.​

You have to learn to harmonize two truths together instead of writing one truth off as a parable, brother. If you don't agree, we can simply agree to disagree in love and respect.

May God bless you greatly today.

Those passages are about the dead. You spoke of the soul that goes to the realm of the dead. If it is dead how does it communicate? Are you suggesting that the dead are actually still alive. The Scriptures are clear on that. As I posted last time, Paul, speaking of dead Christians said, if there is no resurrection they had perished. He didn't say they moved on to the realm of the dead. He said if there is no resurrection they had perished. That means they no longer existed. The only options that Paul gives for dead Christians is resurrection or perishing. He doesn't speak of any existence apart from the body. How can Paul say this if the parable of Lazarus and the Rich Man is an actual account of what happens to the dead?

Let me ask a question. Do you believe that rich people go to hell and poor people get saved?

 

[SaintCody777]

Introduction:

I believe in “Dualistic Conditional Immortality,” and not “Traditional Conditional Immortality.” I used to believe in “Eternal Torment” (i.e. Eternal Conscious Torment) and even defended it at one time, but I have come to find this belief to be both unbiblical and immoral. I will provide one major real world example and lots of Scripture in my writing here to demonstrate why I believe this is so.

Conditional Immortality
(i.e. Traditional Conditional Immortality):

Lake of Fire:

This is the view that after the Judgement, the wicked are either annihilated (erased from existence), or they are eventually destroyed or eliminated (after they are punished for a certain set amount of time in the Lake of Fire). I believe this view of the Lake of Fire is biblical. So when I refer to “Conditional Immortality” in a positive way, or when I refer to “Conditional Immortality verses” in support of my view of God’s punishment of the wicked, I am referring only to the Lake of Fire teaching portion only. For I do not hold to the Conditional Immortality Proponent’s viewpoint on hell.

Hell:

Traditional Conditional Immortality Proponents believe that hell is just a metaphor, and they believe in a teaching called “soul sleep” (i.e. that the wicked will not know anything and sleep or not be aware of anything until the Judgment). I do not find their view on soul sleep to be biblical. Traditional Conditional Immortality Proponents also believe the story of Lazarus and the Richman is just a fictional story used to teach a spiritual truth or lesson. However, I do not believe this view of hell is biblical.​

Dualistic Conditional Immortality:

Lake of Fire:

This is the view that after the Judgement, the wicked are either annihilated (erased from existence), or they are eventually destroyed or eliminated (after they are punished for a certain set amount of time in the Lake of Fire). I believe this view of the Lake of Fire is biblical.

Hell:

Dualistic Conditional Immortality Proponents believe hell is a very real and literal place. There are differing views among these types of believers on how hell is portrayed, but they all believe hell is literally real, and it is a place that no person would desire to be. It is a place of torments (Just as Scripture says). Some who hold to this view believe that hell is similar to that of the view portrayed in the Eternal Torment. They believe it is a place where the wicked are being burned in flames (tortured), and they are screaming from the pain of the flames, etc.; Others (like myself) believe that the rich man was not tormented by an intense earthly flame (that would cause great pain), but he was tormented by the heat of the flame near him, or he was tormented by an otherworldly flame that did not cause him to scream uncontrollably (like an earthly flame would do).​

Eternal Conscious Torment:

Lake of Fire:

This is the view that after the Judgement, the wicked will burn alive and be tortured in the flames of the Lake of Fire for all eternity. Many have refused to come to the faith because they had a hard time accepting that God would torture people alive in flames for all eternity. It may surprise the reader that there is actually a very small number of verses that support the Eternal Torment view of the Lake of Fire (5 major ones to be exact, and there are a ton of verses in support of the wicked being annihilated as their final fate). With the exception of the Greek philosopher Epicureans, Greek philosophers (Such as Plato) generally taught of the soul's natural immortality-without God.

Hell:

The Eternal Conscious Torment View appears to teach that hell is a place of extreme torture where the wicked scream uncontrollably from the pain of being burned by the flames of hell. This appears to be the popular view in both churches and in secular movies in Hollywood. Churches have even reenacted this fictitious terrifying version of hell in this manner on Halloween calling them, “hell houses.” (satisfying people’s cravings to be afraid on Halloween with haunted houses; In my opinion, hell houses are a reenactment or imitation of pure evil that simply attempts to copy haunted houses which attempt to cater to the same wrong desires of this world).​

A Defense of Dualistic Conditional Immortality:

I........Quick Definition.
II.......Explaining Hell.
III......God is into Fair Justice.
IV......Forever Does Not Always Mean Forever.
V.......Eternal Torment Verses Explained.
VI......God Alone has Immortality.
VII.....The Tree of Life.
VIII....Verses on the Destruction of the Wicked.
IX......Verses on Destruction of the Devil & Death.
X.......Verses on Receiving Immortality.
XI......Real World Example.
XII.....Chart: Which View Allegorizes Scripture More?​

I. A Quick Definition:

Dualistic Conditional Immortality is the view as taught in the Bible that says that "hell" is a very real and literal place; But the wicked will perish (i.e. be erased from existence) in the Lake of Fire (After the Judgment).

Some believe this annihilation in the Lake of Fire happens immediately (after being cast into it), and others believe it happens after a certain amount of time (after being punished in the Lake of Fire). I hold to the view that the wicked will be punished for a certain amount of time before they are annihilated.​

II. Explaining Hell:

In Luke 16:19-31, what folks fail to understand is that when the Rich-man went to Torments (Hell or Hades), he was not actually being burned by any Earth-like flames. How so? Well, if the Rich-man was engulfed entirely by Earth-like flames --- he wouldn't be asking for a little water to cool his tongue, he would have been screaming too loudly in pain to even hear Abraham (if such were the case). If he was able to hold down his pain of screaming (for a moment), he would be shouting to Abraham for a giant barrel of water or lots of buckets of water to lower the flame or to put it out. But does the text say the rich man was screaming? Surely not. Yet, this is how people today depict the wicked in hell. In fact, if a person was being engulfed by flames today in the real world, how likely are they to carry on a normal conversation with you? They wouldn't because they would be screaming too loudly from the pain.

So we are faced with one of two possibilities here:

Possibility #1. In Luke 16:24, when the Rich-man said, "...I am tormented in this flame," the Rich-man was referring to the fact about how he was tormented in the flame that was either nearby him or in front of him that was in the gulf that was between him and Abraham (Sort of like if I said I am happy in this car --- yet the car is in front of me). (Similar language like this can be found with the words "This is now bone of my bones, and flesh of my flesh: she shall be called Woman," - Genesis 2:23). Adam was not referring to his own flesh, with the word "this", but he was referring to Eve who was in front of him. In other words, it was the heat of the flame in front of the rich-man that made him uncomfortable or tormented.

Possibility #2. The rich-man was in actual flames but it was not an Earthly flame to cause him any kind of extreme pain whereby he could carry on a normal conversation instead of screaming. The flame would have to be very mild in discomfort or it did not cause the same level of pain as a real flame would (as we know it).​

Now, do not misunderstand me, dear believer. I am not trying to minimize the true horrible nature of hell as we read about it in the story of Lazarus and the rich man. Hell is bad. I believe hell is an extremely horrible place. We should warn others not to go there, and point them to the saving grace, and love of our Lord Jesus Christ for salvation. Surely the rich-man was not putting on an actor’s performance when he desired to warn his brothers about such a place. Hell is bad. Really bad. Nobody should want to go there. It is a place of torments. But we should not also paint a picture of hell that the Bible does not paint or teach, either. Some make hell out to be something that it is not specifically stated (Portraying it as an extreme torture chamber of men and women screaming uncontrollably). We simply do not know that this is so. If the Lord wanted to let us know that hell is a place of extreme torture and pain, and screaming, He would have given us this description in Scripture as such, but He didn’t. I believe it is well, when we do not go beyond what is written (Especially when that addition leans towards the negative side). Sure, we may guess as to what may be or not, but to officially say that hell is like this or that when the Bible has not said so, is to add to Scripture something that is not there. So please understand that even my explanations on what is happening to the rich man is not a hardcore facts in Scripture but mere possibilities to give comfort about what we know involving our Lord’s goodness and fair justice.​

III. God is into fair justice:

Luke 12:47-48 says,

47 "And that servant, which knew his lord's will, and prepared not himself, neither did according to his will, shall be beaten with many stripes.
48 But he that knew not, and did commit things worthy of stripes, shall be beaten with few stripes. For unto whomsoever much is given, of him shall be much required: and to whom men have committed much, of him they will ask the more."​

“Masters, give unto your servants that which is just and equal 1; knowing that ye [you-all] also have a Master in heaven.” (Colossians 4:1).

1. equal: characterized by fairness (Source: 1913 Webster’s Dictionary).​

“Is there unrighteousness with God? God forbid.” (Romans 9:14).

Sir Arthur Conan Doyle once said,

“Once you eliminate the impossible, whatever remains, no matter how improbable, must be the truth.”​

In fact, the whole reason why Jesus went to the cross was to pay the price for our sins. If God was not into fair justice, He simply would not have needed to send His Son to pay the price for our sin and He could have simply just forgiven us with no payment for sin. But the Lord our God is a God of fair justice. So the Son was sent to die for you, and me. How bitter, and yet sweet that truth is. For it truly shows how truly loving and good the Lord is to us.​

I always thought that there's a doctrinal trend that eternal torment has to come with a Biblically literally interpretation of Luke 16 and likewise soul sleep for annihiliation, as it is with SDAs, JWs, and Armstrongnites (eg United Church of God).
But, still, if the unsaved are eventually going to be wiped out both body and soul, then would this not give the unsaved a hope that all their conscious pain and suffering would eventually end, even if lights would not be out for the next 2,000 years?
Doesn't Isaiah 48:22 say that there is no peace for the wicked?
And as for the popular view of hell, a place where demons torture people and Satan rules hell, which I believe you were trying to address, that's a straw-man argument against ECT.
For daulistic conditional immortality, it can be just as easily be said that demons torture people in hell right now, but the unsaved, all the demons, and Satan would cease to exist body and soul, after the Great White Throne of Judgement; whether it's a la Avengers Endgame snap or total destruction and wiping out of body and soul in the Lake of Fire.