Hades / The Grave

[Josheb]

The first error you make is...

Very informative post if its content is correct. Are you aware it took seven pages in a MSWord document? I've printed it out to review.

One thing I would like to say: Sheol, Queber, Gehenna, Hades, and Hell are all errors. They are all views of after-death that Jesus corrected. The prevailing view in first century Judaism was there is no life after death; the Pharisee view was not the majority view. The Greek/Roman view of miserable life unless promoted to Elysium was also false. Jesus asserted a simple dichotomy: destruction or eternal life.

Although we call it the "New" Testament, most of what Jesus taught can be found in the OT. He didn't so much teach new as he taught correct. That applies to the afterlife.

 

[Mathetes66]

Josheb: "Very informative post if its content is correct. Are you aware it took seven pages in a MSWord document? I've printed it out to review.

Thank you for taking the time to review my posts. Acts 17:11

One thing I would like to say: Sheol, Queber, Gehenna, Hades, and Hell are all errors. They are all views of after-death that Jesus corrected.

Thanks for sharing your opinion.

The prevailing view in first century Judaism was there is no life after death; the Pharisee view was not the majority view.

Again, thanks for sharing your opinion. No proof is offered by you.

Perhaps you are not familiar with THE definitive Jewish historical & exhaustive study on the Jewish view of the afterlife that covers over 4000 years of instruction, by Rabbi Simcha Paull Raphael, professor of Jewish studies at Temple University & also a practicing psychotherapist in bereavement. His two books, 'Jewish Views of the Afterlife,' & 'Grief & Bereavement' (appears in 'Jewish Pastoral Care: A Practical Handbook From Traditional & Contemporary Sources'--also from the same author) are both definitive in Jewish thought & he is well respected in the Jewish community.

Here is just one excerpt from the first book mentioned above on the afterlife.

Raphael periodically asserts throughout the book, "Judaism has always held a belief in life after death." (p.11). He & many Jews recite daily in their prayers, 'Blessed are You who revives the dead.' It is an expression which, to many Jews, is 'an essential component of a believing Jew.' (p. xxvvi)

"The wide misconception that Judaism does not believe in life after death has begun to slowly dissipate." (p. xxxv)

The Greek/Roman view of miserable life unless promoted to Elysium was also false.

Once again, this is simply your expressed opinion, as you lump Greek philosophy with Roman philosophy on the afterlife, which are definitely different from one another, as if that makes your opinion have more abbreviated weight.

Jesus asserted a simple dichotomy: destruction or eternal life.

Again a simplistic but erroneous summary & opinion of what Jesus taught. Jesus used various descriptions & various dichotomies--to describe those that are lost & those that are saved; those that are spiritually dead & those that are spiritually alive, those that are righteous & those that are unrighteous, those that are holy & those what are unholy, those that have eternal life & those that have eternal death or as you used destruction, etc.

That Greek word translated 'destruction' in English is a whole different study itself, one that shows the majority of the verses of where it is used means the ruin or loss of well-being not being.

The same word is used of the devil being destroyed, even before the millenial reign of Christ. Yet he isn't 'destroyed' or annihilated in the sense of being, as later verses show. It cannot mean destruction or annihilation of being but ruin & loss of well-being, as Vine's Expository Dictionary demonstrates in defining this term throughout Scripture.


Again, the proof is in the whole testimony of the Scriptures in their entirety, of which you have not offered even one example.

Although we call it the "New" Testament, most of what Jesus taught can be found in the OT.

Here is where we would 'generally' agree. Some know the NT but often people are not aware of the WHOLE counsel of Scripture, including the OT, ESPECIALLY about the various descriptions of the temporary, as well as the eternal hell & the many terms & 100's of verses that describe these places in the spiritual realm.

Brent MacDonald of 'Discipleship Training Institute' has studied & determined that a little over 1000 verses in the NT are quotes, references or allusions to OT passages--out of almost 8000 total verses in the NT.

 

[Josheb]

Again, thanks for sharing your opinion. No proof is offered by you.

Fail. I noted the disparate views of the Sadducees in comparison to the Pharisees and how the latter arose during the inter-testamental period. The former is verifiable by consulting scripture (Acts 23:8) and the latter with a simple Google search pertaining to the rise of the Pharisee sect.

Acts 23:6-10
"But perceiving that one group were Sadducees and the other Pharisees, Paul began crying out in the Council, "Brethren, I am a Pharisee, a son of Pharisees; I am on trial for the hope and resurrection of the dead!" As he said this, there occurred a dissension between the Pharisees and Sadducees, and the assembly was divided. For the Sadducees say that there is no resurrection, nor an angel, nor a spirit, but the Pharisees acknowledge them all. And there occurred a great uproar; and some of the scribes of the Pharisaic party stood up and began to argue heatedly, saying, "We find nothing wrong with this man; suppose a spirit or an angel has spoken to him?" And as a great dissension was developing, the commander was afraid Paul would be torn to pieces by them and ordered the troops to go down and take him away from them by force, and bring him into the barracks."[/I]​

From Wiki article "Pharisees":

"After defeating the Seleucid forces, Judas Maccabaeus' nephew John Hyrcanus established a new monarchy in the form of the priestly Hasmonean dynasty in 152 BCE, thus establishing priests as political as well as religious authorities. Although the Hasmoneans were considered heroes for resisting the Seleucids, their reign lacked the legitimacy conferred by descent from the Davidic dynasty of the First Temple era.

The Pharisee ("separatist") party emerged largely out of the group of scribes and sages. Their name comes from the Hebrew and Aramaic parush or parushi, which means "one who is separated." It may refer to their separation from Gentiles, sources of ritual impurity or from irreligious Jews. The Pharisees, among other Jewish sects, were active from the middle of the second century BCE until the destruction of the Temple in 70 CE."​

From Brittanica:

"The Pharisees (Hebrew: Perushim) emerged as a distinct group shortly after the Maccabean revolt, about 165–160 bce; they were, it is generally believed, spiritual descendants of the Hasideans. The Pharisees emerged as a party of laymen and scribes in contradistinction to the Sadducees - i.e., the party of the high priesthood that had traditionally provided the sole leadership of the Jewish people."
​

From AICE's Jewish Virtual Library:

"The most important of the three [Hasmonean rule sects] were the Pharisees because they are the spiritual fathers of modern Judaism. Their main distinguishing characteristic was a belief in an Oral Law that God gave to Moses at Sinai along with the Torah. The Torah, or Written Law, was akin to the U.S. Constitution in the sense that it set down a series of laws that were open to interpretation. The Pharisees believed that God also gave Moses the knowledge of what these laws meant and how they should be applied. This oral tradition was codified and written down roughly three centuries later in what is known as the Talmud.

The Pharisees also maintained that an after-life existed and that God punished the wicked and rewarded the righteous in the world to come. They also believed in a messiah who would herald an era of world peace."​

Personally, I would consider suspect anyone who writes books contrary to the facts of both history and scripture; rabbi or not.

Perhaps you are not familiar with THE definitive Jewish historical & exhaustive study on the Jewish view of the afterlife that covers over 4000 years of instruction, by Rabbi Simcha Paull Raphael, professor of Jewish studies at Temple University & also a practicing psychotherapist in bereavement. His two books, 'Jewish Views of the Afterlife,' & 'Grief & Bereavement' (appears in 'Jewish Pastoral Care: A Practical Handbook From Traditional & Contemporary Sources'--also from the same author) are both definitive in Jewish thought & he is well respected in the Jewish community.

Here is just one excerpt from the first book mentioned above on the afterlife.

Raphael periodically asserts throughout the book, "Judaism has always held a belief in life after death." (p.11). He & many Jews recite daily in their prayers, 'Blessed are You who revives the dead.' It is an expression which, to many Jews, is 'an essential component of a believing Jew.' (p. xxvvi)

"The wide misconception that Judaism does not believe in life after death has begun to slowly dissipate." (p. xxxv)

I am not familiar with that resource and greatly appreciate the recommendation but it does not change the facts in evidence. Scripture says one thing and Rabbi Raphael something different. Scripture states the life after death of the OT was one in which "the living know they will die; but the dead do not know anything, nor have they any longer a reward, for their memory is forgotten." so Raphael can write what he wishes but if and where it departs from the Tanakh itself he is simply evidencing extra-Tanakh doctrinal views. Furthermore, I didn't exclude the truth of the afterlife in the Tanakh canon; I simply spoke of the prevailing historical position. Raphael can claim, "Judaism has always held a belief in life after death," but that does not mean it was prevailing. The fact that the title of the book has "views" plural means there was diversity and not a single view. What modern rabbi will be forthcoming and say we believe this is the only life we have and then you die and cease to exist? Best-seller, right? Lastly, as you probably know modern Judaism often looks much different than that which was practiced in the Tanakh. So all you've done is post an appeal to authority that stands fallacious in comparison to the authority of scripture.

Once again, this is simply your expressed opinion...

The facts now in evidence prove otherwise.

Brent MacDonald of 'Discipleship Training Institute' has studied & determined that a little over 1000 verses in the NT are quotes, references or allusions to OT passages--out of almost 8000 total verses in the NT.

Yep. That which was either taught incorrectly or that which was veiled by God was correctly taught by Christ. Nothing I posted should be construed to say otherwise.

Mathetes, it is you who has posted opinion. Nothing you posted refutes what I posted, and what I posted was not merely my opinion; it was scriptural and historical fact I can in fact evidence. In comparison, you took and extra-biblical source and posted selective content apart from what scripture and the facts of history state.

So you want to start over and discuss the facts, or shall I move on?

I will concede this: on the same day I posted to this op I also posted a lengthy post containing the evidence summarized above (see Posts 146 and 195 here). What I posted here is not without evidence, and I am happy to discuss it with you if you're willing to consider the possibility what I posted might actually turn out correct. But if there's no room in your thinking for that possibility just say so and I'll move on.

 

[Mathetes66]

The prevailing view in first century Judaism was there is no life after death; the Pharisee view was not the majority view.

Finally you offer some proof in your last post but let's examine IF that is any proof at all.

Wiki article: "The Pharisees, among other Jewish sects, WERE ACTIVE FROM THE MIDDLE OF THE SECOND CENTURY BCE UNTIL THE DESTRUCTION OF THE TEMPLE IN 70 CE."

So the very proof you use utterly REFUTES your assertion! And--you left out a very important sentence that followed the temple destruction sentence. It said:

"After the destruction of the Second Temple in 70 CE, PHARISAIC BELIEFS BECAME THE FOUNDATIONAL, LITURGICAL & RITUALISTIC BASIS FOR RABBINIC JUDAISM."

Again your source says, "Sadducees--recognizing only the Written Torah (with Greek philosophy) & rejecting doctrines such as the Oral Torah, the Prophets, the Writings & the resurrection from the dead.

The PREVAILING universal VIEW of most Jews before & during the first century was to believe in ALL the Tenakh (Torah, Prophets--'Nevi'im, Writings--'Ketuvim') the THREE-FOLD JEWISH divisions of the Tenakh. The Sadducees did not believe in the resurrection from the dead but also didn't believe the Prophets nor the Writings of the OT, which all three comprise the Tenakh or Jewish Old Testament.

This is confirmed by THE Jewish historian of recorded historical facts, Josephus (37-100AD) estimated the total Pharisee population before the fall of the 2nd Temple to be around 6,000. He claimed that the Pharisees received the full support & goodwill of the common people, apparently in contrast to the more elite Sadducees, who were the minority upper class.

The very Pharisees were the ones who had the primary instruction of the people, not the Sadducees. They were only the ruling class, not the instructors of the people. And the Pharisees started in the 2nd century BC but grew & were active all the way through most of the first century AD! So for THREE CENTURIES THEY HAD THE GREATEST INFLUENCE. So actually their view, was the majority view, as is shown by even your own sources & the Jewish historian, Josephus.

Then you quote from AICE's Jewish Virtual Library: "THE MOST IMPORTANT OF THE THREE [Hasmonean rule sects] WERE THE PHARISEES BECAUSE THEY ARE THE SPIRITUAL FATHERS OF MODERN JUDAISM!

Again your own quote soundly refutes your assertion! Of the three ruling sects, the Pharisees were the most influential, NOT the Sadducees, clear into rabbincal Judaism & influencing most Jewish beliefs today!

And then you have the audacity to say this:

Nothing you posted refutes what I posted & what I posted was not merely my opinion; it was scriptural & historical fact I can in fact evidence. In comparison, you took and extra-biblical source & posted selective content apart from what scripture & the facts of history state.

You quote ONE PASSAGE ONLY (Acts 23:6-10) as your supposed SCRIPTURAL FACTS & STATE MY SEVEN PAGES OF INFORMATION, filled with scripture after scripture is somehow 'selective content apart from what Scripture & the facts of history state.'

This is ludicrous! This is not a discussion whatsoever. Your own sources refute what you say & nowhere in the ONLY Scriptural passage you quote does it support your original assertion! It only states Paul recognized that TWO PREVAILING groups were present, who held different views on the after-life. Nowhere it mentions the Sadducees had the prevailing view in that passage! So once again you have offered NO FACTUAL refutation; on the contrary you contradict yourself in your sources.

But if you need actual Scriptural evidence that the prevailing view of the Jews at that time, ALL TWELVE TRIBES, was belief in the resurrection, in an after-life, then it is in plain sight.

And if you want Jesus to refute & correct you as well as when He refuted the Sadducees view of no after-life, no resurrection, then hear Jesus Himself in Scripture.

Acts 26:1-8 So Agrippa said to Paul, “You have permission to speak for yourself.” Then Paul stretched out his hand and made his defense: “I consider myself fortunate that it is before you, King Agrippa, I am going to make my defense today against all the accusations of the Jews, especially because you are familiar with all the customs & controversies of the Jews. Therefore I beg you to listen to me patiently.

4“My manner of life from my youth, spent from the beginning among my own nation & in Jerusalem, is known by all the Jews. 5They have known FOR A LONG TIME, if they are willing to testify, that according to THE STRICTEST PARTY OF OUR RELIGION I have lived as a PHARISEE.

6And now I am standing trial for THE HOPE OF THE PROMISE MADE BY GOD TO OUR FATHERS, to which OUR TWELVE TRIBES HOPE TO ATTAIN--as they earnestly worship night& day. And FOR THIS HOPE I AM ACCUSED BY JEWS, O KING! 8Why should any of you doubt incredible that God raises the dead to life?

Paul affirms that ALL TWELVE TRIBES believed in the hope of the resurrection & that the Pharisee sect was the strictest of all the sects found in Judaism.

Paul affirms the same thing in his defense for preaching the resurrection out from among the dead to king Felix in Acts 24. Here he plainly states this is laid down BY THE LAW & WRITTEN IN THE PROPHETS, as further evidence.

Acts 24:14,15,20,21 I do confess to you, however, that I worship the God of our fathers according to the Way, which they call a sect. I BELIEVE EVERYTHING THAT IS LAID DOWN BY THE LAW & WRITTEN IN THE PROPHETS--HAVING THE SAME HOPE IN GOD THAT THEY THEMSELVES CHERISH--

That there will be a RESURRECTION OF BOTH THE RIGHTEOUS & THE WICKED...Let these men state for themselves any crime they found in me when I stood before the Sanhedrin, unless it was this one thing I called out as I stood in their presence: ‘It is concerning the resurrection of the dead that I am on trial before you today.’”

Acts 26:22,23 But I have had God's help to this day & I stand here to testify to small & great alike. I AM SAYING NOTHING BEYOND WHAT THE PROPHETS & MOSES SAID WOULD HAPPEN: that the Christ would suffer & AS THE FIRST TO RISE FROM THE DEAD, would proclaim light to our people & to the Gentiles.”

Why is it Jesus chose a Pharisee, not a Sadducee, to proclaim His gospel, with the promise of resurrection from the dead to all who believe in Him? Because what the Sadducees believed was grave error & they were quite mistaken in their beliefs & had to be 'corrected' as I would use your own word. Jesus Himself, shows the true correction, to which you should pay heed.

You will also notice the ORDER of who was sent FIRST to try & discredit Jesus. It was NOT the Sadducees but the Pharisees & Herodians that were first sent, then the Sadducees. (Mark 12:12,13 with vs 18)

Mark 12:18-27 Some Sadducees (who say that there is no resurrection) came to Jesus, & began questioning Him, saying, “Teacher, Moses wrote for us that IF A MAN’S BROTHER DIES & leaves behind a wife & leaves no child, 'his brother should marry the wife & raise up children to his brother.'

20“There were seven brothers & the first took a wife & died leaving no children. “The 2nd one married her & died leaving behind no children & the third likewise & so all seven left no children. Last of all the woman died also.

23“In the resurrection, when they rise again, which one’s wife will she be? For all 7 had married her.”

24Jesus said to them, “Is this not the reason why you are led astray (deceived, mistaken), because you do not understand the Scriptures or the power of God?

25“For when they rise from the dead, they neither marry nor are given in marriage, but are like angels in heaven. 26“But regarding the fact that the dead rise again, have you not read IN THE BOOK OF MOSES, in the passage about the burning bush, how God spoke to him, saying, ‘I AM the God of Abraham & {I AM} THE GOD OF ISAAC & {I AM} the God of Jacob’?

Mark 12:27 (Young's Literal Translation) 'He is not the God of dead men, but a God of living men; ye then go greatly astray.'

Let the LORD instruct you as well in the words of Job's teaching from the Writings ('Ketuvim') of the Jewish Scriptures, the Tenakh.

Job 19:23-27

“Oh that my words were written! Oh that they were inscribed in a book! That with an iron stylus & lead they were engraved in the rock forever!

25“As for me, I KNOW that my Redeemer LIVES! And at the last (in the end, in the latter days) He will take His stand on the earth.

26“Even AFTER my skin is destroyed, yet FROM MY FLESH I shall see God; Whom I myself will behold & whom MY EYES will see & not another. My heart faints within me!

This is the testimony of the ancients. This is the testimony of the Torah. This is the testimony of the Prophets. This is the testimony of the Writings. This is the testimony of the apostles.

The Apostles' Creed:

"...He descended into hell. On the third day He rose again. He ascended into heaven,
& is seated at the right hand of the Father. He will come again to judge the living & the dead. I believe in the Holy Spirit, the holy catholic church, the communion of saints, the forgiveness of sins, the resurrection of the body & the life everlasting. Amen."

This is the testimony of Jesus. This is the testimony of the Jewish & Christian historians. This is something that one should pay attention to & take heed.

This is my last post here, as it appears there will be no further meaningful redeeming of the time to continue. 'He who is convinced against his will, remains of the same opinion still.' Thanks for the opportunity to share what I did.

'In essentials, unity; in non-essentials, liberty; in all things, charity.'

 

[Daniel Marsh]

Why

Other people on this thread say that in hell, people remember their past lives on earth. Do people in heaven remember their earthly lives as well? If not, why? As always, scriptural support is encouraged. Speculation is also welcomed, especially when acknowledged as such.

Revelation 6:9-11 Easy-to-Read Version (ERV)
9 The Lamb opened the fifth seal. Then I saw some souls under the altar. They were the souls of those who had been killed because they were faithful to God’s message and to the truth they had received. 10 These souls shouted in a loud voice, “Holy and true Lord, how long until you judge the people of the earth and punish them for killing us?” 11 Then each one of them was given a white robe. They were told to wait a short time longer. There were still some of their brothers and sisters in the service of Christ who must be killed as they were. These souls were told to wait until all the killing was finished.

These in heaven clearly remember the event of their deaths and who did it.

Why else would God have to wipe away our tears? We would remember those who are not in heaven.

 

[Daniel Marsh]

Very informative post if its content is correct. Are you aware it took seven pages in a MSWord document? I've printed it out to review.

One thing I would like to say: Sheol, Queber, Gehenna, Hades, and Hell are all errors. They are all views of after-death that Jesus corrected. The prevailing view in first century Judaism was there is no life after death; the Pharisee view was not the majority view. The Greek/Roman view of miserable life unless promoted to Elysium was also false. Jesus asserted a simple dichotomy: destruction or eternal life.

Although we call it the "New" Testament, most of what Jesus taught can be found in the OT. He didn't so much teach new as he taught correct. That applies to the afterlife.

Prove the bold part with primary historical sources. I will give you a hint. The Talmud.


The Talmud derives its authority from the position held by the ancient academies. (i.e. Pharisee) The teachers of those academies, both of Babylonia and of Palestine. were considered the rightful successors of the older Sanhedrin . . . At the present time, the Jewish people have no living central authority comparable in status to the ancient Sanhedrins or the later academies. Therefore, any decision regarding the Jewish religion must be based on the Talmud as the final resumé of the teaching of those authorities when they existed.
[page 2] (The Jews — Their History, Culture, and Religion , Vol. 4, p. 1332, Jewish Publication Society of America, 1949).

 

[Josheb]

Prove the bold part with primary historical sources. I will give you a hint. The Talmud.


The Talmud derives its authority from the position held by the ancient academies. (i.e. Pharisee) The teachers of those academies, both of Babylonia and of Palestine. were considered the rightful successors of the older Sanhedrin . . . At the present time, the Jewish people have no living central authority comparable in status to the ancient Sanhedrins or the later academies. Therefore, any decision regarding the Jewish religion must be based on the Talmud as the final resumé of the teaching of those authorities when they existed.
[page 2] (The Jews — Their History, Culture, and Religion , Vol. 4, p. 1332, Jewish Publication Society of America, 1949).

The problem is at no point is anyone here posting about conditions about "at the present time." We are discussing New Testament era Judaism and at the time of the first century the Pharisees were the upstarts and the newer sect. Your own source states quite plainly they... "were considered the rightful successors of the older Sanhedrin..." They weren't originators; they were successors.

A "successor" is someone who succeeds or comes after another.

It is time the point is conceded. What I originally posted is correct. Those in dissent have had plenty of time and opportunity to prove it incorrect and in the effort have ended up proving it correct.

 

[Daniel Marsh]

Matthew 23 21st Century King James Version (KJ21)
23 Then spoke Jesus to the multitude and to His disciples,

2 saying, “The scribes and the Pharisees sit in Moses’ seat.

3 All therefore whatsoever they bid you observe, that observe and do; but do ye not according to their works; for they say, and do not.

4 For they bind heavy burdens and grievous to be borne, and lay them on men’s shoulders, but they themselves will not move them with one of their fingers.

5 But all their works they do to be seen by men. They make broad their phylacteries, and enlarge the borders of their garments,

6 and love the uppermost places at feasts and the chief seats in the synagogues,

7 and greetings in the markets, and to be called by men, ‘Rabbi, Rabbi.’

8 But be not ye called ‘Rabbi,’ for One is your Master, even Christ; and all ye are brethren.

9 “And call no man your father upon earth, for One is your Father, who is in Heaven.

10 Neither be ye called masters, for One is your Master, even Christ.

How does that relate?

 

[Daniel Marsh]

Influence of the Pharisees.

It further appears from Ab. i. 2-4 that the Great Bet Din was regarded as a continuation of the Keneset ha-Gedolah; for the so-called "zugot" who were at the head of the Great Bet Din are named after the men of the Great Synagogue, which was regarded as the precursor of the Great Bet Din. This explains why the latter is sometimes called also "synagogue" (; Meg. Ta'an., in Neubauer, "M. J. C." ii. 16). Originally the members of this bet din also were priests belonging to prominent families, probably under the presidency of the high priest. The Pharisees, however, held at various times more or less prominent positions in this body, according as they were the victors or the vanquished in their conflict with the Sadducees. When John Hyrcanus toward the end of his reign turned from the Pharisees ("Ant." xvi. 11, § 1), he seems to have effected their dismissal from the Sanhedrin or bet din and to have formed a Sadducean bet din (Sanh. 52b), or a Sadducean Sanhedrin, as it is called in another passage (Meg. Ta'an. l.c. p. 17). Under Alexander Jannæus, Simeon b. Sheṭaḥ succeeded in ousting the Sadducean members from the bet din and in reorganizing it so that it was composed only of Pharisees. But the latter lost their prestige in the subsequent quarrel with Alexander, gaining the upper hand again only under his successor, Salome Alexandra, from which time the Great Bet Din was composed exclusively of Pharisees. According to the Mishnah (Sanh. i. 5; Sheb. ii. 2), the bet din, at least during the last years of its existence at Jabneh, where it had been reorganized, consisted of seventy or seventy-one members, according as the president was included in or omitted from the list. Simeon b. 'Azzai (first half of the 2d cent.) says that seventy-two elders ("zeḳenim," i.e., members of the Sanhedrin) were present when R. Eleazar b. Azariah was elected president together with Rabban Gamaliel II. (Zeb. i. 3; Yad. iii. 5, iv. 2); this was one more than the usual number, and included probably, besides the seventy other members, the two presidents, Gamaliel and Eleazar b. Azariah. SANHEDRIN - JewishEncyclopedia.com

 

[Daniel Marsh]

Pharisees - Wikipedia

"
The Sadducees
The Sadducees were elitists who wanted to maintain the priestly caste, but they were also liberal in their willingness to incorporate Hellenism into their lives, something the Pharisees opposed. The Sadducees rejected the idea of the Oral Law and insisted on a literal interpretation of the Written Law; consequently, they did not believe in an after life, since it is not mentioned in the Torah. The main focus ofSadducee life was rituals associated with the Temple.

The Sadducees disappeared around 70 A.D., after the destruction of the Second Temple. None of the writings of the Sadducees has survived, so the little we know about them comes from their Pharisaic opponents.

These two "parties" served in the Great Sanhedrin, a kind of Jewish Supreme Court made up of 71 members whose responsibility was to interpret civil and religious laws.
" Pharisees, Sadducees & Essenes

SANHEDRIN - JewishEncyclopedia.com

 

[BobRyan]

.
The comments and questions below are relative to Luke 16:19-31.

How is it that the rich man and Abraham were able to see from their own grave into each other's grave? Do dead people have X-ray vision? Do they have any vision at all let alone X-ray?

Do dead people actually have the ability to communicate with other dead people? You'd think that dead people would be deaf and mute seeing as how they're deceased and no longer sentient.

What is the nature of the barrier that existed between Abraham's grave and the rich man's grave? The story suggests dead people could, and would, visit one another's graves were it not for the barrier separating them.

From whence did the rich man assume that Lazarus could fetch water? Was Lazarus' grave adjacent to an aquifer or some such?

The story suggests that Abraham and Lazarus shared the same grave, i.e. Lazarus' corpse was laid to rest with Abraham's corpse.

The story tells that Lazarus' pall bearers were angels. Is that common, or was Lazarus' funeral a special event?
_

None of the above.

This parable is not about sharing the grave and it is not about Abraham being the sovereign of all of heaven to whom we are to pray on behalf of the dead or living. (Notice that at no point does the rich man or Abraham make a reference to God as the Sovereign who determines such matters or who is judge or who approves of Angels/spirits/or resurrected saints --- going to witness to the living.

The parable teaches this lesson "If they do not listen to Moses neither will they listen though One rise from the dead" Luke 16 -- (Christ would rise from the dead and they would still not listen)

What is more Luke 16 is in a long string of parables and the chapter informs us that the Jews were complaining about Christ's parables.

notice:

Luke 16
14 Now the Pharisees, who were lovers of money, were listening to all these things and were ridiculing Him. 15 And He said to them, “You are the ones who justify yourselves in the sight of people, but God knows your hearts; because that which is highly esteemed among people is detestable in the sight of God.

So Jesus responds with a parable having Abraham as Sovereign of all saints in heaven - an ideal scenario very acceptable to Jews.

 

[robycop3]

None of the above.

This parable is not about sharing the grave and it is not about Abraham being the sovereign of all of heaven to whom we are to pray on behalf of the dead or living. (Notice that at no point does the rich man or Abraham make a reference to God as the Sovereign who determines such matters or who is judge or who approves of Angels/spirits/or resurrected saints --- going to witness to the living.

The parable teaches this lesson "If they do not listen to Moses neither will they listen though One rise from the dead" Luke 16 -- (Christ would rise from the dead and they would still not listen)

What is more Luke 16 is in a long string of parables and the chapter informs us that the Jews were complaining about Christ's parables.

notice:

Luke 16
14 Now the Pharisees, who were lovers of money, were listening to all these things and were ridiculing Him. 15 And He said to them, “You are the ones who justify yourselves in the sight of people, but God knows your hearts; because that which is highly esteemed among people is detestable in the sight of God.

So Jesus responds with a parable having Abraham as Sovereign of all saints in heaven - an ideal scenario very acceptable to Jews.

Abe was the great-grandfather of all the Jews, who didn't come into existence til Jake's son Judah was born.

 

[BobRyan]

Abe was the great-grandfather of all the Jews, who didn't come into existence til Jake's son Judah was born.

No doubt. And Paul says Abraham is the father of us all - who have faith -- in Romans 4.

 

[hedrick]

1) It's a parable, not a literal event.
2) Jesus' language is consistent with how first century Jews tended to conceive of the afterlife, with She'ol being divided in two, the abode of the righteous dead known as Gan-Eden or Paradise and the abode of the wicked dead known as Gehenna.

The point of the story isn't to give a literal description of the underworld, but rather to point out that if people won't believe even though they have the Law and the Prophets, then even if someone were to rise from the dead (hint hint, nudge nudge) it still wouldn't be enough to convince the most obstinately disbelieving.

-CryptoLutheran

I agree. But as a previous posting said (very wordily), in this case it probably refers to a temporary place, where people go before the final resurrection. That's based on how the words Hades and Gehenna were used in the first Cent.