The Parable of the Rich Man and Lazarus Explained

[thecolorsblend]

Have you not read the Catechism of the Catholic Church? The teachings of "eternal torment" originate from them.

Um, no. The Catechism was not released until 1992 during the papacy of Pope John Paul II.

The Church was very well aware of the prospect of eternal punishment in the afterlife long before 1992. Call it "Hell" or call it whatever you want but people who were taught and trained by the apostles were convinced of the reality of fiery torment as eternal punishment as one possibility of the afterlife.

"Corrupters of families will not inherit the kingdom of God. And if they who do these things according to the flesh suffer death, how much more if a man corrupt by evil teaching the faith of God for the sake of which Jesus Christ was crucified? A man become so foul will depart into unquenchable fire: and so will anyone who listens to him."
-- St. Ignatius of Antioch (Letter to the Ephesians 16:1–2 [A.D. 110])

"If we do the will of Christ, we shall obtain rest; but if not, if we neglect his commandments, nothing will rescue us from eternal punishment."
-- Clement (Second Clement 5:5 [A.D. 150]).

"Fixing their minds on the grace of Christ, [the martyrs] despised worldly tortures and purchased eternal life with but a single hour. To them, the fire of their cruel torturers was cold. They kept before their eyes their escape from the eternal and unquenchable fire."
-- (Martyrdom of Polycarp 2:3 [A.D. 155])

There are many more references I could provide but those suffice. The point is the Early Church was very well aware of the prospect of eternal punishment in the afterlife and, more importantly, that faith in and obedience to Our Lord was how to escape from that punishment.

Frankly I find it a bit hard to believe that the Church has gotten this doctrine wrong from Day One but luckily you came along 2,000 years later and corrected the misunderstanding. Sorry, I'm not buying it.

 

[Wgw]

Um, no. The Catechism was not released until 1992 during the papacy of Pope John Paul II.

The Church was very well aware of the prospect of eternal punishment in the afterlife long before 1992. Call it "Hell" or call it whatever you want but people who were taught and trained by the apostles were convinced of the reality of fiery torment as eternal punishment as one possibility of the afterlife.

"Corrupters of families will not inherit the kingdom of God. And if they who do these things according to the flesh suffer death, how much more if a man corrupt by evil teaching the faith of God for the sake of which Jesus Christ was crucified? A man become so foul will depart into unquenchable fire: and so will anyone who listens to him."
-- St. Ignatius of Antioch (Letter to the Ephesians 16:1–2 [A.D. 110])

"If we do the will of Christ, we shall obtain rest; but if not, if we neglect his commandments, nothing will rescue us from eternal punishment."
-- Clement (Second Clement 5:5 [A.D. 150]).

"Fixing their minds on the grace of Christ, [the martyrs] despised worldly tortures and purchased eternal life with but a single hour. To them, the fire of their cruel torturers was cold. They kept before their eyes their escape from the eternal and unquenchable fire."
-- (Martyrdom of Polycarp 2:3 [A.D. 155])

There are many more references I could provide but those suffice. The point is the Early Church was very well aware of the prospect of eternal punishment in the afterlife and, more importantly, that faith in and obedience to Our Lord was how to escape from that punishment.

Frankly I find it a bit hard to believe that the Church has gotten this doctrine wrong from Day One but luckily you came along 2,000 years later and corrected the misunderstanding. Sorry, I'm not buying it.

Indeed, when one is concurrently rejecting Ss. Ignatius, Polycarp and Clement, while using the Athanasian Canon, I simply find that inconsistent. I think we need to actively point this out, so that people understand the inherent lack of logic in these ideas.

 

[BelieveTheWord]

"Unquenchable fire" and "eternal punishment" do not have to mean a person is tormented for all eternity. You are just reading your view into. If a person were given a death penalty in this life, would you call it a temporary punishment? If the electric chair were never turned off, would you assume the completely dead person is feeling the pain? The soul of an evil person is destroyed in an unquenchable fire. The punishment is not temporary, but eternal. They will cease to exist completely, and there cessation of existence is eternal. It's not hard unless you owe your allegiance to flawed human beings.

 

[cgaviria]

Um, no. The Catechism was not released until 1992 during the papacy of Pope John Paul II.

The Church was very well aware of the prospect of eternal punishment in the afterlife long before 1992. Call it "Hell" or call it whatever you want but people who were taught and trained by the apostles were convinced of the reality of fiery torment as eternal punishment as one possibility of the afterlife.

"Corrupters of families will not inherit the kingdom of God. And if they who do these things according to the flesh suffer death, how much more if a man corrupt by evil teaching the faith of God for the sake of which Jesus Christ was crucified? A man become so foul will depart into unquenchable fire: and so will anyone who listens to him."
-- St. Ignatius of Antioch (Letter to the Ephesians 16:1–2 [A.D. 110])

"If we do the will of Christ, we shall obtain rest; but if not, if we neglect his commandments, nothing will rescue us from eternal punishment."
-- Clement (Second Clement 5:5 [A.D. 150]).

"Fixing their minds on the grace of Christ, [the martyrs] despised worldly tortures and purchased eternal life with but a single hour. To them, the fire of their cruel torturers was cold. They kept before their eyes their escape from the eternal and unquenchable fire."
-- (Martyrdom of Polycarp 2:3 [A.D. 155])

There are many more references I could provide but those suffice. The point is the Early Church was very well aware of the prospect of eternal punishment in the afterlife and, more importantly, that faith in and obedience to Our Lord was how to escape from that punishment.

Frankly I find it a bit hard to believe that the Church has gotten this doctrine wrong from Day One but luckily you came along 2,000 years later and corrected the misunderstanding. Sorry, I'm not buying it.

Have I denied the existence of the fire to come? There will be torment and there will be an unquenchable fire that will last for the entire eon of the 1,000 reign of Jesus Christ and his saints. The wicked will be burned in this fire at his second coming and this same fire will be used at the final judgment of all the dead. However, the fire will consume its subjects after the time of the torment is complete. And then all things tossed into the fire will be utterly consumed and destroyed.

 

[Der Alte]

"Unquenchable fire" and "eternal punishment" do not have to mean a person is tormented for all eternity. You are just reading your view into. If a person were given a death penalty in this life, would you call it a temporary punishment? If the electric chair were never turned off, would you assume the completely dead person is feeling the pain? The soul of an evil person is destroyed in an unquenchable fire. The punishment is not temporary, but eternal. They will cease to exist completely, and there cessation of existence is eternal. It's not hard unless you owe your allegiance to flawed human beings.

The Jews, in Israel before and during the time of Jesus believed in a place of eternal, unending, fiery torment and they called it both Gehinnom/Gehenna and Sheol. When Jesus taught about,

• "Eternal punishment, Mt 25:46"
• "the fire of hell where the fire is not quenched and the worm does not die, Mk 9:43-48" and
• "cast into a fiery furnace where there will be wailing and gnashing of teeth,” Mt 13:42, 50
• “better for him [a person who offends a little one] that a millstone were hanged about his neck, and that he were drowned in the depth of the sea. Mt 18:6
• “it had been good for him [the one who betrays Jesus] if he had not been born.” Mat 26:24​

These teachings reaffirmed and sanctioned the existing Jewish view of eternal hell. In Matt. 18:6, 26:24, see above, Jesus teaches that there is a fate worse than death or nonexistence. A fate worse than death is also mentioned in Heb 10:28-31.

Heb 10:28 He that despised Moses' law died without mercy under two or three witnesses:
29 Of howmuch 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 used the word death 17 times in the gospels and if He wanted to say eternal death in Matt 25:46, that is what He would have said but He said “eternal punishment.” The Sadducees did not believe in the resurrection, they knew that everybody died, young, old, good, bad, and knew that it was permanent. When Jesus taught “eternal punishment” they would not have understood it as death, it would have meant something worse to them.

Jesus knew what the Jews, believed about hell. If the Jews were wrong, when Jesus taught about man’s eternal fate, such as eternal punishment, He would have corrected them. Jesus did not correct them, thus their teaching on hell was correct. Here is historical evidence to support this.

Jewish Encyclopedia, Gehenna
The place where children were sacrificed to the god Moloch was originally 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). For this reason 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); [Note, this is according to the ancient Jews, long before the Christian era, NOT the bias of Christian translators.]

It is assumed in general that 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]
As mentioned above, 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, [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 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 to Isa. xxxiii. 11 (Sanh. 108b).

Link: Jewish Encyclopedia Online
= = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = =
Talmud -Tractate Rosh Hashanah Chapter 1.

The school of Hillel says: . . . but as for Minim, [follower 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.​

The traditional explanation that a burning rubbish heap in the Valley of Hinnom south of Jerusalem gave rise to the idea of a fiery Gehenna of judgment is attributed to Rabbi David Kimhi's commentary on Psalm 27:13 (ca. A.D. 1200). He maintained that in this loathsome valley fires were kept burning perpetually to consume the filth and cadavers thrown into it. However, Strack and Billerbeck state that there is neither archaeological nor literary evidence in support of this claim, in either the earlier intertestamental or the later rabbinic sources (Hermann L. Strack and Paul Billerbeck, Kommentar zum Neuen Testament aus Talmud and Midrasch, 5 vols. [Munich: Beck, 1922-56], 4:2:1030). Also a more recent author holds a similar view (Lloyd R. Bailey, "Gehenna: The Topography of Hell," Biblical Archeologist 49 [1986]: 189.

Source, Bibliotheca Sacra / July–September 1992

http://faculty.gordon.edu/hu/bi/ted...Articles/BSac-NT/Scharen-GenenaSyn-Pt1-BS.htm​

Note there is no “archaeological nor literary evidence in support of this claim, [that Gehenna was ever used as a garbage dump] in either the earlier intertestamental or the later rabbinic sources” If Gehenna was ever used as a garbage dump there should be broken pottery, tools, utensils, bones, etc. but there is no such evidence.

“Gehenna is presented as diametrically opposed to ‘life’: it is better to enter life than to go to Gehenna. . .It is common practice, both in scholarly and less technical works, to associate the description of Gehenna with the supposedly contemporary garbage dump in the valley of Hinnom. This association often leads scholars to emphasize the destructive aspects of the judgment here depicted: fire burns until the object is completely consumed. Two particular problems may be noted in connection with this approach. First, there is no convincing evidence in the primary sources for the existence of a fiery rubbish dump in this location(in any case, a thorough investigation would be appreciated). Secondly, the significant background to this passage more probably lies in Jesus’ allusion to Isaiah 66:24.”

(“The Duration of Divine Judgment in the New Testament” in The Reader Must Understand edited by K. Brower and M. W. Ellion, p. 223, emphasis mine)

G. R. Beasley-Murray in Jesus and the Kingdom of God:

“Ge-Hinnom (Aramaic Ge-hinnam, hence the Greek Geenna), ‘The Valley of Hinnom,’ lay south of Jerusalem, immediately outside its walls. The notion, still referred to by some commentators, that the city’s rubbish was burned in this valley, has no further basis than a statement by the Jewish scholar Kimchi (sic) made about A.D. 1200; it is not attested in any ancient source.” (p. 376n.92)

http://www.btdf.org/forums/topic/20113-the-burning-garbage-dump-of-gehenna-is-a-myth/ ​

 

[thecolorsblend]

"Unquenchable fire" and "eternal punishment" do not have to mean a person is tormented for all eternity.

Would you like to try again?

 

[BelieveTheWord]

Would you like to try again?

Not at all. I understand the effects of brainwashing. Continue on.

 

[Der Alte]

Not at all. I understand the effects of brainwashing. Continue on.

It is not brainwashing to consider the historical evidence which I posted in my previous post, above.

 

[Wgw]

Not at all. I understand the effects of brainwashing. Continue on.

What @thecolorsblend alluded to was your suggestion that "eternal punishment" is not "eternal," which to be frank sounded rather more "We've always been at war with Eurasia" than much of what I have seen in this thread.

 

[chevyontheriver]

I am spiritually part of the church of Jesus Christ, which is ONE church of many brothers and sisters in Christ that are alive throughout the earth and of those who have also fallen asleep.

All well and good but it sounds like you have no address you could provide if someone wanted to join up with people who believe the same as you do.

I am spiritually and physically a member of the Church of Jesus Christ, the Catholic Church, part of the communion of saints on earth, in communion with those in purgatory, and heaven. I could give you an address within ten miles of you where you could find us. Or of course you could just use Google or the phone book. Just look for 'Catholic'. You have me at a handicap because I cannot do anything similar to find your confreres without any sort of a distinguishing name and you don't seem able to provide an address for them anywhere in the world.

 

[cgaviria]

All well and good but it sounds like you have no address you could provide if someone wanted to join up with people who believe the same as you do.

I am spiritually and physically a member of the Church of Jesus Christ, the Catholic Church, part of the communion of saints on earth, in communion with those in purgatory, and heaven. I could give you an address within ten miles of you where you could find us. Or of course you could just use Google or the phone book. Just look for 'Catholic'. You have me at a handicap because I cannot do anything similar to find your confreres without any sort of a distinguishing name and you don't seem able to provide an address for them anywhere in the world.

Are you aware that your church has massacred and tortured many people even before you were born?

 

[chevyontheriver]

How much clearer can I be? Prayer should ONLY directed to the FATHER. This is what even Jesus himself taught.

You are clear enough. You have ruled out prayer to Jesus or to the Holy Spirit just as much as you have ruled out prayer to Mary or the saints. I just wanted to be absolutely sure that was your intent. You have made it abundantly clear. I'll keep praying to all the persons of the Trinity thank you. And asking for intercession from the communion of the saints. Such has been the Christian norm from the beginning and is the common and persistent teaching of the Church.

 

[chevyontheriver]

Are you aware that your church has massacred and tortured many people even before you were born?

Are you aware that I see no evidence that your church exists outside of your house?

Mine had a member that betrayed Jesus for 30 pieces of silver and then killed himself, another who denied he even knew Jesus and then became the leader of the Church, only a very few dared to stand at the foot of the cross while he died to redeem humanity, one that killed Christians before becoming the greatest Christian missionary. It's not a big surprise that members of the Catholic Church have done evil things. The surprise is that there are real saints in the Church. It is no surprise at all that there are sinners in the Church. At least in the Catholic Church.

 

[thecolorsblend]

Not at all. I understand the effects of brainwashing. Continue on.

It's not really a matter of brainwashing so much as the cognitive dissonance which ensues when "eternal punishment" is asserted to somehow mean that it either is not eternal or is not punishment. The Church Fathers demonstrably believed in eternal punishment in the afterlife as one possible outcome. Some of these were personally instructed in the faith by one or more of the apostles. This all serves to raise the question of just why they believed that. Or perhaps why johnny come lately non-Trinitarians and other innovators feel at liberty to break away from orthodox Christian belief, which, contrary to other theories, did not originate with the Catechism of the Catholic Church published in 1992.

 

[thecolorsblend]

Are you aware that your church has massacred and tortured many people even before you were born?

Any institution with a sufficiently long history will have at least a few bad apples. It's a mathematical inevitability. Pointing out that the Catholic Church has members of questionable repute establishes nothing other than the obvious fact that some people are real stinkers. It says nothing either way about the legitimacy of the Church's ministry or, as is more relevant to this topic, doctrinal truthfulness.

Not to upset anybody but I frankly trust the Catholic Church's 2,000 year history of studying Sacred Scripture using some of the finest minds who have ever lived rather than somebody who graduated from "Bible college" a few years ago. Very honestly, the Church has had more time to understand and get it right than the upstarts have.

 

[cgaviria]

Are you aware that I see no evidence that your church exists outside of your house?

Mine had a member that betrayed Jesus for 30 pieces of silver and then killed himself, another who denied he even knew Jesus and then became the leader of the Church, only a very few dared to stand at the foot of the cross while he died to redeem humanity. It's not a big surprise that members of the Catholic Church have done evil things. The surprise is that there are real saints in the Church. It is no surprise at all that there are sinners in the Church. At least in the Catholic Church.

Evil men have indeed come from amidst God's people, and have departed from them and done their evil deeds. The catholic church is a very wicked church, and not only have they persecuted and massacred believers in Jesus Christ, they have also created their own doctrines contrary to scripture, and they have also made themselves wealthy contrary to what Jesus Christ commanded.

 

[cgaviria]

Any institution with a sufficiently long history will have at least a few bad apples. It's a mathematical inevitability. Pointing out that the Catholic Church has members of questionable repute establishes nothing other than the obvious fact that some people are real stinkers. It says nothing either way about the legitimacy of the Church's ministry or, as is more relevant to this topic, doctrinal truthfulness.

Not to upset anybody but I frankly trust the Catholic Church's 2,000 year history of studying Sacred Scripture using some of the finest minds who have ever lived rather than somebody who graduated from "Bible college" a few years ago. Very honestly, the Church has had more time to understand and get it right than the upstarts have.

They still teach the same things they have always taught. They teach concerning worship and pray to the virgin Mary. Prayer to the saints. They teach that they are only the authority in the world concerning the things of God. How do you not see that these things are evil?

 

[Wgw]

They still teach the same things they have always taught. They teach concerning worship and pray to the virgin Mary. Prayer to the saints. They teach that they are only the authority in the world concerning the things of God. How do you not see that these things are evil?

I find it difficult to believe that one would allege that these acts are "evil," which implies intentional malice. I would argue that whereas one could object to the corruption of the Borgias, the Crusades or the Inquisition as evil, objectively, the most one can say about these practices, which we Orthodox also engage in, is that they are wrong.

 

[thecolorsblend]

They still teach the same things they have always taught. They teach concerning worship and pray to the virgin Mary.

It's like anything, it comes down to definitions.

Latria is adoration. It is given only to one of the Holy Trinity. This is worship. It is for God (Father, Son or Spirit) and nobody else ever at any time whatsoever period.

Dulia is honor for or reverence of a saint. Theirs is an example worth emulating in many cases. Hyperdulia is a type of veneration reserved for Our Lady as she played a special and unique role in the history of salvation.

Dulia and hyperdulia are not worship. They never have been. They never will be. They are given to saints and Our Lady. But God receives latria. Only someone who doesn't understand dulia and hyperdulia would call them latria (ie, worship).

Prayer to the saints.

There is no prohibition expressed or implied against such a practice in sacred scripture. Moreover I assume you do (or would) ask your friends or church members to pray for you. Certainly sacred scripture commends the practice of praying for others. Catholics simply have a wider assortment of people from whom they ask for prayer.

They teach that they are only the authority in the world concerning the things of God.

The Church teaches she is the sole recipient of the fullness of truth and the faith. Such a claim is hardly unique in any religion, least of all Christianity.

How do you not see that these things are evil?

See above.

 

[cgaviria]

It's like anything, it comes down to definitions.

Latria is adoration. It is given only to one of the Holy Trinity. This is worship. It is for God (Father, Son or Spirit) and nobody else ever at any time whatsoever period.

Dulia is honor for or reverence of a saint. Theirs is an example worth emulating in many cases. Hyperdulia is a type of veneration reserved for Our Lady as she played a special and unique role in the history of salvation.

Dulia and hyperdulia are not worship. They never have been. They never will be. They are given to saints and Our Lady. But God receives latria. Only someone who doesn't understand dulia and hyperdulia would call them latria (ie, worship).

There is no prohibition expressed or implied against such a practice in sacred scripture. Moreover I assume you do (or would) ask your friends or church members to pray for you. Certainly sacred scripture commends the practice of praying for others. Catholics simply have a wider assortment of people from whom they ask for prayer.

The Church teaches she is the sole recipient of the fullness of truth and the faith. Such a claim is hardly unique in any religion, least of all Christianity.

See above.

We are instructed to pray TO the FATHER only, in the name of Jesus Christ. Show me scriptures proving otherwise.