That does not prove that this parable is not a parable.
By the definition of parable, it is a parable,
Upvote
0
Starting today August 7th, 2024, in order to post in the Married Couples, Courting Couples, or Singles forums, you will not be allowed to post if you have your Marital status designated as private. Announcements will be made in the respective forums as well but please note that if yours is currently listed as Private, you will need to submit a ticket in the Support Area to have yours changed.
That does not prove that this parable is not a parable.Then there will surely be NT evidence of another account using literal people. It's very simple. There are none.
NT proof please.That does not prove that this parable is not a parable.
By the definition of parable, it is a parable,
Just as you accused those who look at it as a parable being "annihilationists", we can turn that right back around at you for you not looking at it as a parable because of your view of the "eternal hellfire torture" doctrineThen there will surely be NT evidence of another account using literal people. It's very simple. There are none.
But you have ZERO proof. We have detailed proof. You can't even find another account with a literal person.Just as you accused those who look at it as a parable being "annihilationists", we can turn that right back around at you for you not looking at it as a parable because of your view of the "eternal hellfire torture" doctrine
We gave detailed proof.But you have ZERO proof. We have detailed proof. You can't even find another account with a literal person.
There sure is. It's consistent with eternal punishment in the NT.There is no proof for the "Taint a parable" side.
How bout the parable of the "Valley of the Bones" in Ezekiel 37 where YAHWEH mentions Israel as symbolizing the bones?But you have ZERO proof. We have detailed proof. You can't even find another account with a literal person.
The parable says nothing about eternal punishment.There sure is. It's consistent with eternal punishment in the NT.
He died, he's still VERY much alive and in torment in the fire. Prove otherwise.The parable says nothing about eternal punishment.
How can that be, if the Ressurrection and Throne Judgement of Revelation hadn't occurred yetHe died, he's still VERY much alive and in torment in the fire. Prove otherwise.
Prove that the man who died in the parable is still alive today.He died, he's still VERY much alive and in torment in the fire. Prove otherwise.
While he is at it, prove that Lazarus is still up in Abraham's bosomProve that the man who died in the parable is still alive today.
I have already proven that he was alive in the fire. The NT term ETERNAL is clear enough for me.Prove that the man who died in the parable is still alive today.
The term eternal is not used in the parable, so this parable is not much help in proving that the rich man is in eternal torment.I have already proven that he was alive in the fire. The NT term ETERNAL is clear enough for me.
I don't have to prove what Luke 16 clearly says.While he is at it, prove that Lazarus is still up in Abraham's bosom
So explain how he is dead but alive in torment in fire.The term eternal is not used in the parable, so this parable is not much help in proving that the rich man is in eternal torment.
We are asking for proof of what Luke 16 doesn't say, and the traditionalists claim that it does say.I don't have to prove what Luke 16 clearly says.
I don't have to prove what Jesus said is wrong.We are asking for proof of what Luke 16 doesn't say, and the traditionalists claim that it does say.
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?