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.
You completely ignored my question. Do you believe in immortal worms?
God is able to create a tooth fairy if he pleases, but saying anything is possible with God isn't a correct logic to support your view on this scripture, and besides that, where in scripture do we even read about animals being immortal? It's ludicrous. This scripture isn't saying there will be immortal worms, its saying "there will not be an end to worms" in this place.
In the book of Isaiah God said the worms did not die. In the NT Jesus said the worms did not die. In neither account does it say "in this place!" If God chooses to keep worms alive forever do you think He can do this? Some people argue that those thrown into the fire would be burned up but I seem to recall two incidents in the OT where fire did not destroy what was thrown into it. Exo 3:2, Dan 3:25
I believe in everlasting hellfire, although I do not relish the thought of people suffering in it. And you've completely ignored my argument. What scripture do you have to falsify the perspective of those who hold to a traditional interpretation of this pericope?
Do you believe in immortal worms? Why are you dodging the question? Is it because you yourself know how ludicrous it sounds? Hmmmmmm
I am unable to dignify a strawman intended to, in my opinion, indirectly mock, the words of our Lord, with a response. Strictly speaking you are describing a statement of our Lord as ludicrous, something which I regard as contrary to piety.
First and foremost the passage of the rich man and Lazarus is a parable. There have been COUNTLESS false doctrines created from this passage breaking many other scriptures. But before even digging into the interpretation of the parable, we first need to bring to light some clues and evidences indicating that it is indeed a parable,
This passage happens to reside in a set of parables that precede it immediately, coincidence? No. Because it is part of the set of 5 parables that started off in this scripture, * * *
Lazarus is the Greek name for the Hebrew name "Eliezer", which in itself means "helpless", or "help". Aside from the obvious choice of name and its meaning to further indicate how impoverished the Lazarus of the parable was (the choice in name is not a coincidence), we also see a link with the same usage of the name the account of Genesis with Abraham's servant named Eliezer,
Taking this parable literally BREAKS countless other scriptures. The teaching of a "hell" where you are alive burning endlessly is a pagan teaching. I challenge you to study the origins of that teaching, stemming from the catholic church and even before that as well. It is pagan, it is false, and corrupts the understanding of the work of God.
It is a place. Why do you think the verse then says the carcasses of men will be visible in this place? You can only have a carcasses if you DIE. Therefore the fire does consume its subjects.
Good post, Der Alter.In the book of Isaiah God said the worms did not die. In the NT Jesus said the worms did not die. In neither account does it say "in this place!" If God chooses to keep worms alive forever do you think He can do this? Some people argue that those thrown into the fire would be burned up but I seem to recall two incidents in the OT where fire did not destroy what was thrown into it. Exo 3:2, Dan 3:25
God is able to create a tooth fairy if he pleases, but saying anything is possible with God isn't a correct logic to support your view on this scripture, and besides that, where in scripture do we even read about animals being immortal? It's ludicrous. This scripture isn't saying there will be immortal worms, its saying "there will not be an end to worms" in this place.
Good post, Der Alter.
Some people think that, since Jesus said ...
Matthew 3:12 Whose fan is in his hand, and he will throughly purge his floor, and gather his wheat into the garner; but he will burn up the chaff with unquenchable fire.
... that people in Hell will burn up like chaff (quickly).
But they overlook this passage ...
Mark 9:49a For every one shall be salted with fire,
Salt, of course, preserves.
Regardless of which church believes what, the scripture is TRUTH, and each time I declare a belief in something, I back it by a valid scripture. If any church does not abide by scripture, whether catholic, or JW, then they are in error. However, the catholic church is a terrible WICKED institution, the MOTHER OF HARLOTS (OTHER FALSE CHURCHES), the harlot OF BABYLON (THE GREAT FALSE CHURCH), so I will surely LAY BLAME where BLAME IS DUE. And it does pain me to see how deep the deception of that church runs, even in the "Christian" churches, that still uphold many of their doctrines and false teachings.
The truth is settled in my mind. As a new Christian of barely 2 weeks I had read the Gospels perhaps dozens of times. I had told no one yet I was saved.
Jesus Christ woke me from my sleep and spoke understanding to me that it is not a parable. So, I have 2 witnesses, Jesus and the Holy Spirit within me who confirmed what I was told. Jesus spoke to me in what seemed like a voice, yet it was not audible. It was spoken to my understanding.
I have no need to consider your words.
Jesus said:This verse isn't saying "there will be immortal worms", its saying "there will not be an end to worms" in this place.
Jesus said:
Mark 9:44 Where their worm dieth not, and the fire is not quenched.
Mark 9:46 Where their worm dieth not, and the fire is not quenched.
Mark 9:48 Where their worm dieth not, and the fire is not quenched.
I submit that accepting or rejecting doctrine based on private revelation is a risky business given Galatians 1:8, et cetera.
I submit that accepting or rejecting doctrine based on private revelation is a risky business given Galatians 1:8, et cetera.
Cga, look, I agree with you in that eternal torment is not taught by the parable of Lazarus and the Rich Man, but nevertheless I admonish you to step back and not go accusing Catholics of all being harlots and pagans and so on. Eternal torment in hell is not wrong because Catholics adhere to it. Not everything they say and do and believe is wrong, and it's fallacious reasoning to sum up your argument by saying if it's Catholic, it's pagan, therefore wrong. Try to rely only on solid Scriptural reasoning without slinging judgments around, okay?
Besides, there's a much simpler reason to me in that the parable teaches something other than eternal torment: if you took the story literally to prove eternal torment then it immediately becomes absurd. It would mean then that the believers are able to see unbelievers in their torment in plain view (which I kind of think would ruin my blissful experience of eternal life to see and hear them suffering every second of eternity, but hey, that's just me), that people on both sides will be able to communicate, and then, what's most absurd, that the unbelievers will actually be able to form coherent sentences amidst their painful burning when talking to believers across the way instead of - what I'd naturally assume - screaming their heads off. The Rich Man sounded only severely annoyed at best, with mild pain, as he talked to Abraham. On top of all this, even at literal interpretation, i still see nowhere in the parable that says the Rich Man was there in that flame he said he was tormented in, forever.
Alas, finally something we agree on.
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?