• Welcome to Christian Forums
  1. Welcome to Christian Forums, a forum to discuss Christianity in a friendly surrounding.

    Your voice is missing! You will need to register to be able to join in fellowship with Christians all over the world.

    We hope to see you as a part of our community soon and God Bless!

  2. The forums in the Christian Congregations category are now open only to Christian members. Please review our current Faith Groups list for information on which faith groups are considered to be Christian faiths. Christian members please remember to read the Statement of Purpose threads for each forum within Christian Congregations before posting in the forum.
  3. Please note there is a new rule regarding the posting of videos. It reads, "Post a summary of the videos you post . An exception can be made for music videos.". Unless you are simply sharing music, please post a summary, or the gist, of the video you wish to share.
  4. There have been some changes in the Life Stages section involving the following forums: Roaring 20s, Terrific Thirties, Fabulous Forties, and Golden Eagles. They are changed to Gen Z, Millennials, Gen X, and Golden Eagles will have a slight change.
  5. CF Staff, Angels and Ambassadors; ask that you join us in praying for the world in this difficult time, asking our Holy Father to stop the spread of the virus, and for healing of all affected.

Featured Rich Man and Lazarus most misunderstood parable in NT?

Discussion in 'General Theology' started by LittleLambofJesus, Aug 17, 2017.

  1. Anguspure

    Anguspure Kaitiaki Peacemakers NZ Supporter

    +1,737
    New Zealand
    Christian
    Single
    RESURRECTION OR IMMORTALITY
    http://www.robertwr.com/
     
  2. Der Alte

    Der Alte This is me about 1 yr. old. Supporter

    +3,505
    United States
    Baptist
    Married
    US-Others
    Doesn't really answer my question. The Sadducees did not believe in the resurrection to them death was already eternal. If the unrighteous are killed why would they be concerned about how long the fire burns or the worms live after they are dead? What difference would it make to a person after they are dead? Only the fire is eternal in Jude it doesn't say the cities burned forever.
    Jesus used the word for death 17 times in the gospels, if Jesus had meant "death" in Matt 2:46, why would He not say death? What He did say was "punishment."
    .....Please show me any verse which says anyone dies a second death? Hint there ain't none. There is only one verse which mentions anything happening in the lake of fire and that is Rev 20:10.

    Revelation 20:10 And the devil that deceived them was cast into the lake of fire and brimstone, where the beast and the false prophet are, and shall be tormented day and night for ever and ever.
    "tormented day and night for ever and ever." no mention of second death and one of those is a person, the false prophet.
    Simply saying that they held erroneous beliefs doesn't make it so. You need to prove it. I mentioned the Jewish belief because some one claimed that the belief in hell came from Greek paganism. Where Jesus and His 12 disciples grew up had a belief in hell and nothing Jesus said or taught contradicted that belief. Please see my post #57 this thread.
    .....[/quote]If you want to discuss that the scriptures does not speak of unconditional immortality of the human soul, please quote some verses as I did in my post#57, this thread.
     
  3. LittleLambofJesus

    LittleLambofJesus Hebrews 2:14.... Pesky Devil, git! Supporter

    +28,466
    United States
    Christian
    Single
    US-Libertarian
    LUKE 16:20 "But there was a certain beggar named Lazarus, full of sores, who was laid at his gate, 21 desiring to be fed with the crumbs which fell from the rich man's table.
    Moreover the dogs came and licked his sores."


    I would like to focus on the word "dogs" in this verse. Their are 2 different greek words used for dogs in the NT, one for an adult dog [used in Luke 16]
    and one for a young dog or puppy, which is only used 4 times, 2 in Matt 15 and 2 in Mark 7 concerning a woman of Canaan. This verse ties in with Luke 16:21

    Mat 15:27
    And she said, “Yes, Lord, yet even the little dogs eat the crumbs which fall from their masters’ table.”

    Genesis 1:1 (KJV)
    Strong's Number G2965 matches the Greek κύων (kyōn), which occurs 5 times in 5 verses in the Greek concordance
    κύων kýōn, koo'-ohn; a primary word; a dog ("hound") (literally or figuratively):—dog.
    This the one used in Luke 16 and also Revelation 22:15

    Genesis 1:1 (KJV)
    Strong's Number G2952 matches the Greek κυνάριον (kynarion), which occurs 4 times in 4 verses in the Greek concordance
    κυνάριον kynárion, koo-nar'-ee-on; neuter of a presumed derivative of G2965; a puppy:—dog.

    Kindgdom Bible Studies Template Page

    In contrast to the rich man, we now see Lazarus. The first thing to note is that he is depicted as a beggar. This is an apt description of the Gentiles who "laid at the gate" of Judah. Paul describes the predicament of the Gentiles before they accepted the Messiah in his letter to the Ephesians:...................
    Additionally, we are told that dogs came and consoled Lazarus in his misery, licking his sores. The Jews considered the surrounding Gentiles to be unclean "dogs."
    Even Yeshua himself used this unflattering comparison when he conversed with the Greek Syrophoenician woman while in the region of Tyre (Mark 7:24-30).

    This Scripture is also a fitting representation of the position of the nations before the Messiah's sacrifice for the world's sins. They were certainly "excluded from the commonwealth of Israel," "strangers to the covenants of promise," and "without hope and without God in the world." The Gentiles were beggars, located outside Judah and longing to be fed spiritual crumbs from the table of the divinely blessed Jews.

    “Moreover the dogs came and licked his sores” (Lk. 16:21). A more accurate translation of the phrase, “moreover the dogs,” would be, “the other dogs.” The Greek word translated “moreover” is ALLA which means OTHER and not MOREOVER.
    I am sure that all my readers are aware that dogs will on occasion lick the sores of humans and other animals but most often they are found licking the sores of their own kind - other dogs!
    Neither Lazarus nor the dogs are, of course, literal dogs, but they serve as figures of the heathen nations surrounding Judah, and without the abundant blessings of God they soothe one another the best way they can, except when they are fighting - as dogs often do. Lazarus was a dog - a Gentile - for he found himself in the dog class..................

     
  4. Karl.C

    Karl.C Member

    132
    +32
    Australia
    Catholic
    Divorced
    Because it fits the scriptural & historical context! And contains no dogmatic prejudices. It actually listens to what Jesus is saying rather than introducing presumptions (eg: the fanciful "flames" of peoples imagination to fit dogmatics which is in direct contradiction of the text that speaks of a "single flame").

    To understand the tale of the RM&L you have to go back to Luke 14 and read foward. Luke 14 is the beginning of Jesus series of teachings which end in the first couple of verses of Chapter 17.

    Note Luke 14:1-3 "And it came to pass, as he went into the house of one of the chief Pharisees to eat bread on the sabbath day, that they watched him. And, behold, there was a certain man before him which had the dropsy. And Jesus answering spake unto the lawyers and Pharisees, saying, Is it lawful to heal on the sabbath day?".

    We begin with the teaching of the religious elite and end with the teaching of the religious elite.

    Also note Jesus is not speaking exclusively to the Pharisees througout the series, he appears to be addressing the Lawyers in Luke 16:17-18. The Lawyers were the middle men between the Pharisees & Sadducees. So it is fitting that Jesus completed his teaching series by a direct dig at the Sadducees = "neither will they be persuaded, though one rose from the dead". The Pharisees beieved in a personal resurrection, the Sadducees didn't...
     
    Last edited: Aug 19, 2017
  5. Anguspure

    Anguspure Kaitiaki Peacemakers NZ Supporter

    +1,737
    New Zealand
    Christian
    Single
    Figures of speech for judgement. Read this from the OT:

    Edom’s streams will be turned into pitch, her dust into burning sulfur; her land will become blazing pitch! It will not be quenched night or day; its smoke will rise forever. From generation to generation it will lie desolate; no one will ever pass through it again.(Isaiah 34)

    “Son of man, set your face toward the south; preach against the south and prophesy against the forest of the southland. Say to the southern forest: ‘Hear the word of the Lord. This is what the Sovereign Lord says: I am about to set fire to you, and it will consume all your trees, both green and dry. The blazing flame will not be quenched, and every face from south to north will be scorched by it. Everyone will see that I the Lord have kindled it; it will not be quenched.’ ”(Ezekiel 20)

    “ ‘Therefore this is what the Sovereign Lord says: My anger and my wrath will be poured out on this place—on man and beast, on the trees of the field and on the crops of your land—and it will burn and not be quenched.(Jeremiah 7)
    Indeed it doesn't make any difference after they are dead, and why should it? The punishment is in the realisation that ones life is being extinguished, forever. If that is not a horror to a person then the heart is very hard indeed.
    Nevertheless the cities remain as a monument to mankind, as a reminder of the wrath of God against sinful mankind.


    Yes. The punishment is death. So anybody could refer to the wages of sin as either death or punishment, both are true and they are not mutually exclusive.
    It is interesting that God said, "You shall surely die" (Genesis 2) and then
    Satan said, "You shall surely not die" (Genesis 3). Most Protestant theologians say, "You shall surely not die", just who are we supposed to believe then?
    Right next to the verse you are quoting: "The lake of fire is the second death."(Revelation 20)

    I am not opposing the idea of Hell, this is well established in Scripture. Rather I am stating that the idea of unconditional human immortality is un-biblical and in fact Greek in origin.

    Unconditional immortality is certainly not a biblical belief and nothing in the Law and the Prophets (notwithstanding translation that reflects and reinforces Platonic understanding), nor the NT would lead one to believe otherwise.

    It is not necessary for Jesus to have opposed every pagan belief directly.

    Clearly the Jewish nation had been exposed to Hellenistic influence since 334BC and so one might expect that there were many who added Hellenistic thinking to the Law and the Prophets.
     
  6. Karl.C

    Karl.C Member

    132
    +32
    Australia
    Catholic
    Divorced
    Actually it makes a huge amount of sense if you let go of your preconceptions & prejudices and stick to the written word!

    Multiple speculations regarding an actual personage have been made, ranging from Abraham's faithful servant, to the first High Priest after Aaron, to Lazarus of Bethany. None have been proved as fruitful or supportable. However, the name simply means "God has helped" which fits the configuration with which we are presented.

    Not a single depiction or insinuation of "eternal torment" in the tale!

    The Rich Man is tormented by a single flame not some fiery Hell! And there is no indication what-so-ever of the duration of his torment.

    The Rich Man, Lazarus & Abraham are all in Hades/Sheol, but a chasm seperates them. A very traditional view of Hades/Sheol amoungst the Jews in Jesus' time.

    Not a mention or insinuation of "eternal torment" in the text.

    However, there is a depiction of the Jewish concept (in the time of Jesus) of purgation. The common teaching of the Jews in the time of Jesus held that the unrighteous would undergo a period of purgation for upto 12 months before they were obliterated from existence & memory. However, this doesn't accord with Daniel 12:2 (imu, the book of Daniel has always been rejected by the Jews).

    The same applies to the theological BIAS of those advocating repetative and enduring suffering in a fiery burning hell. An idea that didn't gain popularity in Christianity until the Medieval era of history.

    Proof of BIAS: those that read "flames" into the tale when Jesus spoke of a "single flame". And those that presume the torment that the Rich Man suffers is unending, when the tale is silent on the extent or duration of his suffering (which is depicted as mild = a drop of water upon a finger tip would have relieved his torment, and people in Torment don't usually have reasonable conversations).

    vs24. "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".
     
    Last edited: Aug 19, 2017
  7. LittleLambofJesus

    LittleLambofJesus Hebrews 2:14.... Pesky Devil, git! Supporter

    +28,466
    United States
    Christian
    Single
    US-Libertarian

    Genesis 1:1 (YLT)
    "flame"
    occurs 33 times in 32 verses in the YLT.

    Used only one time in the Gospels....guess where......
    And again a reference to Revelation.......

    Luk 16:24
    and having cried, he said, Father Abraham, deal kindly with me, and send Lazarus, that he may dip the tip of his finger in water, and may cool my tongue, because I am distressed in this flame.

    Rev 19:12
    and his eyes are as a flame of fire, and upon his head are many diadems -- having a name written that no one hath known, except himself,
     
    Last edited: Aug 19, 2017
  8. Karl.C

    Karl.C Member

    132
    +32
    Australia
    Catholic
    Divorced
    None of the teachings from chapter 14 thru 16 were introduced by Jesus as being parables. They are all depicted as responses and framed to get a reaction...to which he responded eg: Luke 16:1-8...

    Actually he did! Read the first couple of verses of Luke 17 that immediately follow the tale of the RM&L.

    Point of fact: if you read the NT, Jesus infrequently explained his teachings to his disciples, and they are generally depicted as thick as a brick in the NT.

    Sure! But who would know about it!

    Basically, the tale depicts an everyday event in Jesus' time.

    People would throw their effluent & rubbish outside their gates/doors for scavengers to clean-up. That included (as scavangers) the sick, lame and impoverished who the Jewish elite conceived as being punished by God for some grievious sin.

    So there is a hunk of irony in the tale that Lazarus ends up in Abraham's bosom and not the Rich Man. The contra to Jewish expection. (There are a couple of other teachings along this line in the Gospels).

    Read John 8 from vs30. You need to get upto speed on the significance of Abraham in Jewish thought of the time (which Jesus is obviously criticising. Why did the Rich Man appeal to Abraham instead of God? How is it that the Rich Man conceived that Abraham could free Lazarus from Hades/Sheol?

    How so! What Jesus related was in full accord with his general teaching. Note John 8:40 where Jesus appeals to Abraham as a witness on his behalf (cp. Gen 18).


    Sure!

    I gave the Jewish consensus on the matter = what was generally taught in Jesus' time = what beliefs Jesus' audience would have held.

    -----------------------------
    There is nothing to respond to in the rest of your post. Interesting stuff but off topic.

    Hope you had fun doing research on what is a historical curiousity but a theological non-topic. There is a reason why YHWH ultimately rejected the Jews...it is all there in the OT...
     
    Last edited: Aug 19, 2017
  9. Karl.C

    Karl.C Member

    132
    +32
    Australia
    Catholic
    Divorced
    Regarding RM&L and the single flame, you might contemplate Acts 2:3. Orthodox scholars (RCC, ROC, EOC & OOC) and other communions have suggested that the one flame could bring benefits to the righteous, or deficits to the unrighteous...
     
  10. Karl.C

    Karl.C Member

    132
    +32
    Australia
    Catholic
    Divorced
    There is nothing original in your speculations, the "Gentiles at the gate" theory is old but in Church history quite modern. It lacks scriptural backup, which is why it isn't a widespread understanding on what Jesus is telling us.

    For instance: when speaking to various "Gentiles" that had faith in Jesus' ability he regularly chastised them (as per the example you gave) and went on to say that salvation is of the Jews. John 4:22 comes to mind.

    Now while I might accept the tale read in your context as a pleasant pastoral analogy, it doesn't fit the context or circumstances of Jesus' teaching at Luke 16.

    Jesus was preaching to Jews (Pharisees, lawyers & the common Jew who had been following him as he travelled to Jerusalem) so the teaching had to be comprendable to them even if they didn't understand it. This was a hallmark of Jesus' teaching = comprehension.

    The treatment of Lazarus was typical of the treatment of the infirmed and impoverished, whether Jew or not by the Jews of Jesus' time. The Jews (in Jesus' time) held that people in such circumstances were being punished by God and unclean... Compare John 9:2.
     
    Last edited: Aug 19, 2017
  11. TheSeabass

    TheSeabass Well-Known Member

    +357
    Non-Denom
    Private
    Luke 16: in verse one Christ is teaching a lesson to His disciples about wealth, in how one controls his wealth and not let wealth control you. They are being taught how to use their wealth in a manner that is pleasing to God in preparing for their eternal destiny and then Jesus gives an example what happens to those who allow their wealth to control them. Simple enough. Jesus is not giving a lesson on who is or isn't accepting the gospel.

    It is very evident in reading some posts in this thread there's an agenda to try and figure a way to get rid of the references to eternal torment and conscience with some wild speculations.
     
  12. TheSeabass

    TheSeabass Well-Known Member

    +357
    Non-Denom
    Private
    What reason would the fire need to be unquenchable if what is thrown in is quickly burned up into nothing?

    Death in the bible is portrayed as separation of the soul from the body (physical death) and separation of the soul from God (spiritual death). Death is NOT portrayed in the bible as annihilation.
    Does Death Imply Annihilation?
     
  13. TheSeabass

    TheSeabass Well-Known Member

    +357
    Non-Denom
    Private
    No reason to give names (Lazarus, Abraham) if they did not literally exist. THe fact names were given gives implication they actually existed.

    Jesus speaks of a gulf that is fixed with no crossing over....

    A. T. Robertson “permanent chasm” 1931. Word Pictures in the New Testament. Vol. 2. Nashville, TN: Broadman.
    A. B. Bruce said the “location is fixed and final” 1956. The Expositor’s Greek Testament. Vol. 1. W. Robertson Nicoll, ed. Grand Rapids, MI: Eerdmans.

    Why the need for permanency if it is not permanent? What difference does the point make in there never being any crossing the fixed gulf if only temporary?

    The context does not speak about how large the "flame" is. Jesus commonly used the term "fire" in referencing eternal torment. I do not see that torment in hell is a literal fire but the term fire is used to give man some semblance of understanding of what the torment will be like.

    Nothing is said about a drop of water ending his torment.


    I do find it interesting you say Jesus is speaking a "tale" when you post "when the tale is silent on the extent or duration of his suffering..'
     
  14. Der Alte

    Der Alte This is me about 1 yr. old. Supporter

    +3,505
    United States
    Baptist
    Married
    US-Others
    Yes, and?
    So what was Jesus teaching them that they did not already know? I think I can safely say that the overwhelming majority of people in Jesus' audience knew that everyone dies; old, young, male, female, righteous, unrighteous etc. and most of the time punishment had nothing to do with it.
    Exactly but it does not prove that the meaning of aion/aionios is not eternity/eternal which is what some groups use that as a proof text for.
    Why is it then that death and punish/punishment never occur in the same verse in the Bible?

    You don't know what you are talking about. Why don't you stick to the topic?

    What is your point? According to Revelation 20:10 the lake of fire is not synonymous with death or destruction. Three beings, one, the false prophet, is human are thrown into the LoF but they do not die, they are tormented day and night for ever and ever. Also death and hell are cast into the lake of fire but neither have or could die a first death therefore they can't die a second death.
    Nonsense! See my post #57 this thread.
    Irrelevant! Jesus often criticized the Jewish leaders for their false teachings, but He never corrected them about their belief in hell. In fact much of Jesus' teaching on the fate of the unrighteous mirrored and supported the Jewish belief in hell.
    "As one might expect?" Evidence? Documentation? Substantiation? Can you provide credible, verifiable, historical evidence that any of this is true.The Jews were exposed to Egyptian culture and religion for 400 years +/- do you postulate that some of their beliefs recorded in scripture are Egyptian in origin? The Jews were exposed to Babylonian culture etc. for 70 years +/-. How much of their beliefs and practices are Babylonian in origin? Or did the Jews only adopt Hellenistic culture, etc?
     
    Last edited: Aug 19, 2017
  15. Der Alte

    Der Alte This is me about 1 yr. old. Supporter

    +3,505
    United States
    Baptist
    Married
    US-Others
    The Greek word for flame φλόξ/phlox in Luk 6:24 occurs 7 times in the NT. It only occurs in the singular, never plural. The word in Acts 2:3 is πῦρ/pur i.e. fire. "Pur" occurs 73 times in the NT and like "phlox," only in the singular. I don't think we can legitimately form any theological dictum on the fact that "phlox" is singular in Luk 16.
     
  16. 2Timothy2:15

    2Timothy2:15 Well-Known Member

    +1,210
    Christian
    Married
    Problem being, this was and is not a parable so any assumptions you are making from that point are off from the get go.

    The Rich Man and Lazarus - Luke 16:19-31
     
  17. LittleLambofJesus

    LittleLambofJesus Hebrews 2:14.... Pesky Devil, git! Supporter

    +28,466
    United States
    Christian
    Single
    US-Libertarian
    Thank for showing us your expertise in the greek and for posting.

    What I am most interested in, is seeing where certain words in that parable are used in the Jewish/Hebrew/Christian book of Revelation and I am finding more than I ever thought.
    [I may start a different thread just on that.]


    Genesis 1:1 (YLT)
    Strong's Number G5395 matches the Greek φλόξ (phlox),
    which occurs 7 times in 7 verses in the Greek concordance
    5395. phlox flox from a primary phlego (to "flash" or "flame"); a blaze:--flame(-ing).

    Out of the 7 times that particular greek word is used, it is used only 1 time in the Gospels and 3 times in Revelation.
    This again shows how much this covenantle Jewish parable is tied to the "flame and fire" shown in Revelation.


    Luk 16:24
    and having cried, he said, "Father Abraham, deal kindly with me, and send Lazarus, that he may dip the tip of his finger in water and may cool my tongue,
    because I am being pained in this flame."


    ..............................................Scripture4All - Greek/Hebrew interlinear Bible software


    upload_2017-8-19_12-6-56.png

    It is interesting to note that in Rev 2:18, it is to the 4th assembly, Thyatira, that Jesus proclaims himself "Son of God". The only place in Revelation that phrase is used.

    Genesis 1:1 (YLT)

    Rev 1:14
    and His head and hairs white, as if white wool -- as snow, and His eyes as a flame of fire;
    Rev 2:18
    'And to the messenger of the assembly of Thyatira write!
    These things saith the Son of God, who is having His eyes as a flame of fire, and His feet like to fine brass;
    Rev 19:12
    and His eyes are as a flame of fire, and upon His head are many diadems --

    having a name written that no one hath known, except himself,[/QUOTE]
     
    Last edited: Aug 19, 2017
  18. Der Alte

    Der Alte This is me about 1 yr. old. Supporter

    +3,505
    United States
    Baptist
    Married
    US-Others
    Jesus explained nothing about RM&L in Lk chap. 17. I think someone has already pointed this out but to reiterate. RM&L differs from the undisputed parables in that Jesus did not use known, every day, common things and activities to introduce or clarify Biblical truths. Lost sheep, lost coins, unprepared wedding guests, wayward sons, rebellious tenants, etc. These were common things which Jesus' audience would be familiar with and which Jesus used to introduce or clarify Biblical truths. The only thing about RM&L which might be known by Jesus' audience is a beggar thrown, not gently laid, at a rich mans gate and the rich man did not even give him the crumbs from his table. Everything after "and he died" would be unknown to the audience so they don't fit a parable.
    .....So where is the parable, where is the "like unto"? Where is the common ordinary thing which is similar to the kingdom of heaven? RM&L might be some kind of literary device but it is not a parable.

    I agree but I gave more than one reason. RM&L was not introduced as a parable, it was not explained to Jesus' disciple, it doesn't fit the form of a parable, unlike all the undisputed parables it includes names, one, Abraham was an actual historical person and all the ECF who quoted or referred to it considered it to be factual. I know, I know a bunch of static about ECF is not canon, etc. etc. etc. but alas unfortunately no credible, verifiable, historical evidence they were wrong.
    Irrelevant it was something which could have happened. Eleazaros, god is help, was a common name in Israel and beggars were common. But what happened after "and he died" was not a common event known to the Jews.
    Up until "and he died."
    You might want to do some real research on that. There was a trash dump outside Jerusalem, it was not Gehenna, but it was there "up to 10 m, 200,000 m3." As conscientious as the Jews were about ritual cleanliness do you think they would throw trash and garbage right outside their homes?
    True.
    Why did the rich man appeal to Abraham? Because he could see Abraham and Lazarus.
    I'm completely up to speed but you are not. Other than Luke 16 Jesus does not quote Abraham speaking to anyone or being in any particular place at the time..

    That is what is known as credible, verifiable, historical evidence. Something you seem to be sadly unacquainted with. If one wants to know what the Jews believed and practiced in OT and NT times one should consult Jewish sources rather than googling random websites.
    Not off topic if one is interested in the truth.
    Which is off topic.
     
  19. Karl.C

    Karl.C Member

    132
    +32
    Australia
    Catholic
    Divorced
    Clearly it is evident that you have an agenda to insert (read into) Luke 16:19-31 what is simply not in the text! There is no indication of the duration of the Rich Man's torment, so no foundation to support your "eternal" premise, thats just a figment of your imagination.

    Also, the Rich Man is tormated by a single flame, not flames. And his torment can (in his perception) be remediated by a fingertip dipped in water, so the intensity of torment was perceived by him to be very mild.

    Read what is written...without imaginative addition.

    I can only assume you have been made subject to the curse of Isaiah 6:10 which Jesus was fond of applying to dogmatist...
     
  20. Karl.C

    Karl.C Member

    132
    +32
    Australia
    Catholic
    Divorced
    Note I said they "suggest", as far as I know there is no dogmatic presentation on the idea. Though I have encountered protestant writers that push it as if it were a fact.

    In anycase be careful in word assocaitions in the Greek. There are heaps of words that are "mistranslated" into the English which require amplification. The words "know/n"and "see" come immediately to mind (have a read of John 14:& & 9 and look up your lexicon on the keywords).

    A common theme I encounter from all sides is that God's grace is a torment to the unrighteous. The more he loves them, the more effort they have to employ to push him away. Psychological trauma ensuing...

    The theological question that has been common throughout the ages: What profit is there for God in punishing the flesh (soma/sarx), when it is the motivational force (psyche) that instigates transgression and tarnishes the soul?
     
    Last edited: Aug 19, 2017
Loading...