THE RICH MAN AND LAZARUS (Luke 16) IS NOT A PARABLE

[Johann]

THE RICH MAN AND LAZARUS (Luke 16) IS NOT A PARABLE
This bible study uses a Greek Unicode font and is printable.

Where are the Dead Index || Search this website || Bible Studies Index

Greek Word Study ᾅδης meaning 'hades' Strong's 86

Introduction 5.2
Luke 16:19 to 31 is another scripture that shows very plainly that the souls or spirits of people are alive after someone dies physically. They can talk, think, remember, and feel pain as it says, but if we take this scripture literally then it destroys the doctrine of 'soul-sleep'. For this reason there are many who would like to explain this scripture away as a parable, because then it enables them to ignore the literal interpretation. This is wrong, and if Jesus believed the doctrine of soul-sleep he would never have told a parable like this which contradicts it very plainly. This bible study gives plenty of scriptural proof that the scripture about the rich man and Lazarus in Luke 16 is not a parable.

#5.2 THE RICH MAN AND LAZARUS (Luke 16) IS NOT A PARABLE
LUKE 16:19-31 (Jesus)
19 There was a certain rich man, who was clothed in purple and fine linen, and fared sumptuously every day:
20 And there was a certain beggar named Lazarus, who was laid at his gate, full of sores,
21 And desiring to be fed with the crumbs which fell from the rich man's table. Moreover the dogs came and licked his sores.
22 And it came to pass, that the beggar died, and was carried by the angels into Abraham's bosom: the rich man also died, and was buried;
23 And in Hades1, he lifted up his eyes, being in torment, and sees Abraham afar off, and Lazarus in his bosom.
24 And he cried and said, 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.
25 But Abraham said, Son, remember that you in your lifetime received good things, and likewise Lazarus evil things: but now he is comforted, and you tormented.
26 And beside all this, between us and you there is a great gulf fixed: so that those who would pass from here to you cannot; neither can they pass to us, that would come from there.
27 Then he said, I pray you therefore, father, that you would send him to my father's house:
28 For I have five brothers; that he may testify to them, lest they also come into this place of torment.
29 Abraham says to him, They have Moses and the prophets; let them hear them.
30 And he said, No, father Abraham: but if one went to them from the dead, they will repent.
31 And he said to him, If they will not hear Moses and the prophets, neither will they be persuaded, though one rose from the dead.

Note: Although some may ignore the truth of this scripture, by saying that it is a parable, there are several valid reasons which show that it is certainly not a parable:

(1) People are never named in parables. Search the gospels and find one if you can, but you will fail. In this scripture however, three people are named, Lazarus (v20, 23) , Abraham (v23, 24), and Moses (v29, 31), of which Moses and Abraham are definite historical figures who are mentioned many times elsewhere in the scriptures. Parables on the other hand refer to people as "a king" (Luke 14:31-42), "the master of the house" (Matthew 24:42-44), "that evil servant" (Matthew 24:48-51), "a man taking a far journey" (Mark 13:34-37), "a judge" (Luke 18:2), "a widow" (Luke 18:3), "a certain man" (Luke 13:6), "a certain rich man" (Luke 12:16), and so on; but none named.

(2) Every parable has an earthly setting, which the people hearing could relate to, but never a heavenly or spiritual one. In this scripture however, Hades1 (Gtr. hades) (v23), and 'Abraham's bosom' (v22), are not earthly settings, showing that this is not a parable.

(3) Because the settings of parables are always earthly they never include spiritual beings either, although God may be mentioned. The interpretation of a parable may include spiritual beings though, because a parable is a simile, which has a spiritual comparison to it. For example 'the reapers' in the parable of the wheat and tares, are 'angels' in the explanation, and 'the enemy' in the parable is 'the Devil' in the comparison (Matthew 13:39). So if spiritual beings such as angels only appear in a comparison, but never in a parable, then this scripture about the rich man in hell cannot be a parable, because angels are also mentioned (v22). The conclusion to be drawn is that Jesus was relating a true story here, either one that happened in the past or it was prophetic; the rich man and Lazarus were people who had or would actually live and die.

(4) If Jesus believed the doctrine of soul-sleep he would never have told a parable like this which plainly contradicts it. Doctrine should be based on plain statements of scripture, and parables are an earthly story similar to the spiritual truth, and are meant to illustrate it. They are laid alongside spiritual truths as a comparison. Parables should NEVER contradict spiritual truth, and Jesus would never tell one that did.

There are some who would object to this on the basis of this verse, "All these things Jesus spoke to the multitude in parables, and without a parable he did not speak to them." (Matthew 13:34). Now looking back in Luke 16 it says, "Now the Pharisees, who were lovers of money, also heard these things, and they derided him. And he said to them ... " (Luke 16:14-15). So the argument is that Jesus was speaking to the Pharisees, and therefore he must have been speaking a parable. This is a failure to rightly divide the word of God on the subject, for if we look immediately before he spoke about the rich man and Lazarus, we see this:

(Luke16:18) "Whoever divorces his wife and marries another commits adultery; and whoever marries her who is divorced from her husband commits adultery."

The parallel scriptures that go with this are Matthew 19:9 and Mark 10:11-12. We see that prior to these verses in Mark it says, "And in the house his disciples asked him again about the same matter." (Mark 10:10). So when he spoke the scripture in Luke 16:18 he was in the house talking to his disciples, not the Pharisees. After all, he was speaking plain language in Matthew 19:9, Mark 10:11-12, and Luke 16:18 so on the basis of their argument that he would only speak to the people in parables, he was not speaking to the Pharisees. Matthew confirms that after this statement about adultery (Matthew 19:9) he was speaking to his disciples; "His disciples said to him, ... But he said to them, ... ." (Matthew 19:10-11). So their argument to try and prove that this was a parable, on the basis that he was speaking to the Pharisees, is false.

THE RICH MAN AND LAZARUS (Luke 16) IS NOT A PARABLE

This bible study gives plenty of scriptural proof that the scripture about the rich man and Lazarus in Luke 16 is not a parable.

www.logosapostolic.org

God bless
Johann

 

[Beetow]

The rich man and Abraham are both deceased. So I have to ask how it is that they
can see each other when the dead are blind? And how are they conversing when
the dead are mute?

Not only are the dead blind, but their surroundings are typically impregnable, e.g.
stone, dirt, metal, and/or concrete. How is it that Abraham and the rich man penetrate
that kind of darkness? Do they have X-ray vision? And not only are the dead mute,
but there is usually a distance between graves. Is there some sort of cemetery
intercom system about which I'm unaware?
_

 

[Johann]

The rich man and Abraham are both deceased. So I have to ask how it is that they
can see each other when the dead are blind? And how are they conversing when
the dead are mute?

Not only are the dead blind, but their surroundings are typically impregnable, e.g.
stone, dirt, metal, and/or concrete. How is it that Abraham and the rich man penetrate
that kind of darkness? Do they have X-ray vision? And not only are the dead mute,
but there is usually a distance between graves. Is there some sort of cemetery
intercom system about which I'm unaware?
_

Not a good way to start @Beetow
Mat 22:31 But as touching the resurrection of the dead, have ye not read that which was spoken unto you by God, saying,
Mat 22:32 I am the God of Abraham, and the God of Isaac, and the God of Jacob? God is not the God of the dead, but of the living.
Mat 22:33 And when the multitude heard this, they were astonished at his doctrine.
Mar_12:26 And as touching the dead, that they rise: have ye not read in the book of Moses, how in the bush God spake unto him, saying, I am the God of Abraham, and the God of Isaac, and the God of Jacob?

Luk_20:37 Now that the dead are raised, even Moses shewed at the bush, when he calleth the Lord the God of Abraham, and the God of Isaac, and the God of Jacob.

Act_3:13 The God of Abraham, and of Isaac, and of Jacob, the God of our fathers, hath glorified his Son Jesus; whom ye delivered up, and denied him in the presence of Pilate, when he was determined to let him go.

Abraham is very much alive, according to scriptures.

The Sadducees professed themselves to be bound by the Pentateuch, and to have searched in vain for evidences of a life beyond. They were greatly startled, therefore, when our Lord proved human immortality from the book of Exodus. He had never passed through their schools and sat at the feet of their great teachers, but He showed them that “at the Bush” the voice of God attested eternal life.
The great I AM would never have spoken of Himself as the God of the patriarchs, centuries after their earthly career had closed, unless they had been living somewhere still. It was certain that they were all alive; otherwise God would have said, “I was their God.” Death is not a chamber, but a passage; not an abiding-place, but a crossing over; not a state, but an act, an experience, a crossing of the bar, a going within the veil. Abraham, Isaac, Jacob, and all the myriads who have warred and stormed over the earth, are living as intensely as ever.

God bless
Johann

 

[B-A-C]

The rich man and Abraham are both deceased.

Their bodies are deceased. The spirit never dies. Eventually some will get new bodies.

1Cor 15:
35; But someone will say, “How are the dead raised? And with what kind of body do they come?” 36; You fool! That which you sow does not come to life unless it dies; 37; and that which you sow, you do not sow the body which is to be, but a bare grain, perhaps of wheat or of something else. 38; But God gives it a body just as He wished, and to each of the seeds a body of its own. 39; All flesh is not the same flesh, but there is one flesh of mankind, another flesh of animals, another flesh of birds, and another of fish. 40; There are also heavenly bodies and earthly bodies, but the glory of the heavenly is one, and the glory of the earthly is another. 41; There is one glory of the sun, another glory of the moon, and another glory of the stars; for star differs from star in glory.
42; So also is the resurrection of the dead. It is sown a perishable body, it is raised an imperishable body; 43; it is sown in dishonor, it is raised in glory; it is sown in weakness, it is raised in power; 44; it is sown a natural body, it is raised a spiritual body. If there is a natural body, there is also a spiritual body.

but their surroundings are typically impregnable, e.g.
stone, dirt, metal, and/or concrete.

Since when does any of that stop a spirit?

God (the Father) is Spirit. Does he see? Does He feel things? Does He hear things? Does He exist even in Sheol? Yes, yes, yes and yes.

Is there some sort of cemetery
intercom system about which I'm unaware?

You do not believe in eternal life? The resurrection of everyone (good and evil)?

 

[B-A-C]

John 4:24; "God is spirit, and those who worship Him must worship in spirit and truth."

Psa 139:8; If I ascend to heaven, You are there; If I make my bed in Sheol, behold, You are there.

Matt 22:31; "But regarding the resurrection of the dead, have you not read what was spoken to you by God:
Matt 22:32; 'I AM THE GOD OF ABRAHAM, AND THE GOD OF ISAAC, AND THE GOD OF JACOB'? He is not the God of the dead but of the living."

John 5:28; "Do not marvel at this; for an hour is coming, in which all who are in the tombs will hear His voice,
John 5:29; and will come forth; those who did the good deeds to a resurrection of life, those who committed the evil deeds to a resurrection of judgment.

Acts 24:15; having a hope in God, which these men cherish themselves, that there shall certainly be a resurrection of both the righteous and the wicked.

John11:24; Martha *said to Him, "I know that he will rise again in the resurrection on the last day.

John 6:39; "This is the will of Him who sent Me, that of all that He has given Me I lose nothing, but raise it up on the last day.
John 6:40; "For this is the will of My Father, that everyone who beholds the Son and believes in Him will have eternal life, and I Myself will raise him up on the last day."
John 6:44; "No one can come to Me unless the Father who sent Me draws him; and I will raise him up on the last day.
John 6:54; "He who eats My flesh and drinks My blood has eternal life, and I will raise him up on the last day.

Luke 9:30; And behold, two men were talking with Him; and they were Moses and Elijah,
Luke 9:31; who, appearing in glory, were speaking of His departure which He was about to accomplish at Jerusalem.
Luke 9:32; Now Peter and his companions had been overcome with sleep; but when they were fully awake, they saw His glory and the two men standing with Him.
Luke 9:33; And as these were leaving Him, Peter said to Jesus, "Master, it is good for us to be here; let us make three tabernacles: one for You, and one for Moses, and one for Elijah"—not realizing what he was saying.

Jude 1:9; But Michael the archangel, when he disputed with the devil and argued about the body of Moses, did not dare pronounce against him a railing judgment, but said, "The Lord rebuke you!"

Eccl 12:7; then the dust will return to the earth as it was, and the spirit will return to God who gave it.

 

[Beetow]

Luke 16:19-31 is commonly alleged to be a parable; which of course implies that
the story is fiction; and some would even say fantasy. But the parable theory has
some fatal flaws.

For one; Jesus quoted Abraham saying things that if he didn't really say would be
despicable due to the fact that Abraham is one of God's buddies. (Isa 41:8) All I'm
saying is: if we can't trust Jesus to tell the truth about his Father's friends, then
how are we supposed to trust him to tell the truth about one of us?

This is a serious question because Jesus is the one and only mediator in Heaven
between God and Man. Well; I for one don't want someone unfaithful to me
speaking on my behalf before the throne of God.

* I have yet to read even one of Christ's parables that couldn't possibly be a real
life story. They're all actually quite believable-- banquets, stewards, weddings,
sowing seed, pearls, lost sheep, fish nets, lost coins, sons leaving home, wineskins
bursting, tares among the wheat, leavened bread, barren fig trees, the blind
leading the blind, et al.

Now; if Christ had told a story with a moon made of green cheese; we would have
good reason to suspect that particular parable was fantasy; but I have thus far
been unable to find even one so far removed from the normal round of human
experience that it has no basis in reality whatsoever.
_

 

[Brother Paul]

The rich man and Abraham are both deceased. So I have to ask how it is that they
can see each other when the dead are blind? And how are they conversing when
the dead are mute?

Not only are the dead blind, but their surroundings are typically impregnable, e.g.
stone, dirt, metal, and/or concrete. How is it that Abraham and the rich man penetrate
that kind of darkness? Do they have X-ray vision? And not only are the dead mute,
but there is usually a distance between graves. Is there some sort of cemetery
intercom system about which I'm unaware?
_

Their bodies are but not the soul.

 

[Butch5]

THE RICH MAN AND LAZARUS (Luke 16) IS NOT A PARABLE
This bible study uses a Greek Unicode font and is printable.

Where are the Dead Index || Search this website || Bible Studies Index

Greek Word Study ᾅδης meaning 'hades' Strong's 86

Introduction 5.2
Luke 16:19 to 31 is another scripture that shows very plainly that the souls or spirits of people are alive after someone dies physically. They can talk, think, remember, and feel pain as it says, but if we take this scripture literally then it destroys the doctrine of 'soul-sleep'. For this reason there are many who would like to explain this scripture away as a parable, because then it enables them to ignore the literal interpretation. This is wrong, and if Jesus believed the doctrine of soul-sleep he would never have told a parable like this which contradicts it very plainly. This bible study gives plenty of scriptural proof that the scripture about the rich man and Lazarus in Luke 16 is not a parable.

#5.2 THE RICH MAN AND LAZARUS (Luke 16) IS NOT A PARABLE
LUKE 16:19-31 (Jesus)
19 There was a certain rich man, who was clothed in purple and fine linen, and fared sumptuously every day:
20 And there was a certain beggar named Lazarus, who was laid at his gate, full of sores,
21 And desiring to be fed with the crumbs which fell from the rich man's table. Moreover the dogs came and licked his sores.
22 And it came to pass, that the beggar died, and was carried by the angels into Abraham's bosom: the rich man also died, and was buried;
23 And in Hades1, he lifted up his eyes, being in torment, and sees Abraham afar off, and Lazarus in his bosom.
24 And he cried and said, 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.
25 But Abraham said, Son, remember that you in your lifetime received good things, and likewise Lazarus evil things: but now he is comforted, and you tormented.
26 And beside all this, between us and you there is a great gulf fixed: so that those who would pass from here to you cannot; neither can they pass to us, that would come from there.
27 Then he said, I pray you therefore, father, that you would send him to my father's house:
28 For I have five brothers; that he may testify to them, lest they also come into this place of torment.
29 Abraham says to him, They have Moses and the prophets; let them hear them.
30 And he said, No, father Abraham: but if one went to them from the dead, they will repent.
31 And he said to him, If they will not hear Moses and the prophets, neither will they be persuaded, though one rose from the dead.

Note: Although some may ignore the truth of this scripture, by saying that it is a parable, there are several valid reasons which show that it is certainly not a parable:

(1) People are never named in parables. Search the gospels and find one if you can, but you will fail. In this scripture however, three people are named, Lazarus (v20, 23) , Abraham (v23, 24), and Moses (v29, 31), of which Moses and Abraham are definite historical figures who are mentioned many times elsewhere in the scriptures. Parables on the other hand refer to people as "a king" (Luke 14:31-42), "the master of the house" (Matthew 24:42-44), "that evil servant" (Matthew 24:48-51), "a man taking a far journey" (Mark 13:34-37), "a judge" (Luke 18:2), "a widow" (Luke 18:3), "a certain man" (Luke 13:6), "a certain rich man" (Luke 12:16), and so on; but none named.

(2) Every parable has an earthly setting, which the people hearing could relate to, but never a heavenly or spiritual one. In this scripture however, Hades1 (Gtr. hades) (v23), and 'Abraham's bosom' (v22), are not earthly settings, showing that this is not a parable.

(3) Because the settings of parables are always earthly they never include spiritual beings either, although God may be mentioned. The interpretation of a parable may include spiritual beings though, because a parable is a simile, which has a spiritual comparison to it. For example 'the reapers' in the parable of the wheat and tares, are 'angels' in the explanation, and 'the enemy' in the parable is 'the Devil' in the comparison (Matthew 13:39). So if spiritual beings such as angels only appear in a comparison, but never in a parable, then this scripture about the rich man in hell cannot be a parable, because angels are also mentioned (v22). The conclusion to be drawn is that Jesus was relating a true story here, either one that happened in the past or it was prophetic; the rich man and Lazarus were people who had or would actually live and die.

(4) If Jesus believed the doctrine of soul-sleep he would never have told a parable like this which plainly contradicts it. Doctrine should be based on plain statements of scripture, and parables are an earthly story similar to the spiritual truth, and are meant to illustrate it. They are laid alongside spiritual truths as a comparison. Parables should NEVER contradict spiritual truth, and Jesus would never tell one that did.

There are some who would object to this on the basis of this verse, "All these things Jesus spoke to the multitude in parables, and without a parable he did not speak to them." (Matthew 13:34). Now looking back in Luke 16 it says, "Now the Pharisees, who were lovers of money, also heard these things, and they derided him. And he said to them ... " (Luke 16:14-15). So the argument is that Jesus was speaking to the Pharisees, and therefore he must have been speaking a parable. This is a failure to rightly divide the word of God on the subject, for if we look immediately before he spoke about the rich man and Lazarus, we see this:

(Luke16:18) "Whoever divorces his wife and marries another commits adultery; and whoever marries her who is divorced from her husband commits adultery."

The parallel scriptures that go with this are Matthew 19:9 and Mark 10:11-12. We see that prior to these verses in Mark it says, "And in the house his disciples asked him again about the same matter." (Mark 10:10). So when he spoke the scripture in Luke 16:18 he was in the house talking to his disciples, not the Pharisees. After all, he was speaking plain language in Matthew 19:9, Mark 10:11-12, and Luke 16:18 so on the basis of their argument that he would only speak to the people in parables, he was not speaking to the Pharisees. Matthew confirms that after this statement about adultery (Matthew 19:9) he was speaking to his disciples; "His disciples said to him, ... But he said to them, ... ." (Matthew 19:10-11). So their argument to try and prove that this was a parable, on the basis that he was speaking to the Pharisees, is false.

THE RICH MAN AND LAZARUS (Luke 16) IS NOT A PARABLE

This bible study gives plenty of scriptural proof that the scripture about the rich man and Lazarus in Luke 16 is not a parable.

www.logosapostolic.org

God bless
Johann

Actually, it is a parable or allegory. The reasons claiming it's not a parable are all the logical fallacy, the non sequitur, or it doesn't follow. Also the claim that the story is literal is based on a false premise. The premise is that man can live apart from the body. Yet we find no such teaching in Scrioture. The idea is brought the Scriptures and then imposed on passages such as Lazarus and the Rich Man. The parable actually has nothing to do with the afterlife. It is a parable of judgment against the leadership of Israel.

 

[Brother Paul]

Actually, it is a parable or allegory. The reasons claiming it's not a parable are all the logical fallacy, the non sequitur, or it doesn't follow. Also the claim that the story is literal is based on a false premise. The premise is that man can live apart from the body. Yet we find no such teaching in Scrioture. The idea is brought the Scriptures and then imposed on passages such as Lazarus and the Rich Man. The parable actually has nothing to do with the afterlife. It is a parable of judgment against the leadership of Israel.

Revelations 7 has souls conscious in the presence of the Lord. John is experiencing being there yet flesh and blood (his body) cannot enter in.

However, I still agree Lazarus and the Rich man is a parable which is simply a method of conveying truth the common mind cannot grasp.

 

[Butch5]

Revelations 7 has souls conscious in the presence of the Lord. John is experiencing being there yet flesh and blood (his body) cannot enter in.

However, I still agree Lazarus and the Rich man is a parable which is simply a method of conveying truth the common mind cannot grasp.

I think we have to really look closely at Revelation as John is seeing both heaven and earth. it's also a future time. My point in that post was really that people come to the text of Scripture already believing that man can live apart from the body. This was the prevalent view of the Greeks in NT times. We can see from the early church how this idea entered the faith. The concept is nowhere found in Scripture. Consider that neither the Sadducees nor the Pharisees believed that man could live apart from the body. so, we find that the people who had God's word didn't believe man could live apart from the body. However, most of the pagan nations did believe that man could live apart from the body. That begs the question, why didn't God's people believe man could live apart from the body? If it is something that is taught in Scripture, we would expect both groups to believe it, yet neither did. Here's another thought for consideration. When the Gospel was first presented it was presented to the Jews. The Jews would view the Gospel based on their presuppositions, that man cannot live apart from the body. The Greeks, on the hand, would view the Gospel through their presuppositions, that being that man can live apart from the body. How these passages are understood would be different between the two groups. Initially, the apostles were on the scene and could correct the errors. However, after the apostles were gone and the majority of people becoming converts were Gentiles, we see much more of this Greek influence on the faith. This is how we've gotten several of the erroneous doctrines that are believed today. Some we can trace back to their very source. Personally, I think every Christian would benefit immensely from a serious study of the Ante-Nicean faith. What we call Christianity today is markedly different from what Jesus and the apostles actually taught. Many, if not most, Christians think what we have today has always been the Christian faith, but it hasn't been. With an understanding of the Ante-Ncean faith many would see how far the ship has drifted from the dock.

When I get some time I'm probably going to do a commentary on this parable. So many believe it to be an actual event. But that belief is not based on Scripture but rather their preconception that man can live apart from the bod that they be bring to the table. The key is in the details of the parable.

 

[Brother Paul]

I think we have to really look closely at Revelation as John is seeing both heaven and earth. it's also a future time. My point in that post was really that people come to the text of Scripture already believing that man can live apart from the body. This was the prevalent view of the Greeks in NT times. We can see from the early church how this idea entered the faith. The concept is nowhere found in Scripture. Consider that neither the Sadducees nor the Pharisees believed that man could live apart from the body. so, we find that the people who had God's word didn't believe man could live apart from the body. However, most of the pagan nations did believe that man could live apart from the body. That begs the question, why didn't God's people believe man could live apart from the body? If it is something that is taught in Scripture, we would expect both groups to believe it, yet neither did. Here's another thought for consideration. When the Gospel was first presented it was presented to the Jews. The Jews would view the Gospel based on their presuppositions, that man cannot live apart from the body. The Greeks, on the hand, would view the Gospel through their presuppositions, that being that man can live apart from the body. How these passages are understood would be different between the two groups. Initially, the apostles were on the scene and could correct the errors. However, after the apostles were gone and the majority of people becoming converts were Gentiles, we see much more of this Greek influence on the faith. This is how we've gotten several of the erroneous doctrines that are believed today. Some we can trace back to their very source. Personally, I think every Christian would benefit immensely from a serious study of the Ante-Nicean faith. What we call Christianity today is markedly different from what Jesus and the apostles actually taught. Many, if not most, Christians think what we have today has always been the Christian faith, but it hasn't been. With an understanding of the Ante-Ncean faith many would see how far the ship has drifted from the dock.

When I get some time I'm probably going to do a commentary on this parable. So many believe it to be an actual event. But that belief is not based on Scripture but rather their preconception that man can live apart from the bod that they be bring to the table. The key is in the details of the parable.

Excellent presentation of your point bro and I do agree this is a Parable however what would you say then of the experience on the Mount of Transfiguration? Moses and Elijah appear to them as conscious beings. Now ir can be argued that Elijah was assumed and thus did not bodily die but then what about Moses? And how about when the Witch of Endor shockingly (to her as well) gets the spirit of Samuel to appear?

 

[Butch5]

Excellent presentation of your point bro and I do agree this is a Parable however what would you say then of the experience on the Mount of Transfiguration? Moses and Elijah appear to them as conscious beings. Now ir can be argued that Elijah was assumed and thus did not bodily die but then what about Moses? And how about when the Witch of Endor shockingly (to her as well) gets the spirit of Samuel to appear?

Thanks! I would submit that what the apostles saw at the Transfiguration was a vision. Jesus actually said it was vision in Mathew's Gospel.

28 Verily I say unto you, There be some standing here, which shall not taste of death, till they see the Son of man coming in his kingdom.
17 And after six days Jesus taketh Peter, James, and John his brother, and bringeth them up into an high mountain apart, 2 And was transfigured before them: and his face did shine as the sun, and his raiment was white as the light. 3 And, behold, there appeared unto them Moses and Elias talking with him. 4 Then answered Peter, and said unto Jesus, Lord, it is good for us to be here: if thou wilt, let us make here three tabernacles; one for thee, and one for Moses, and one for Elias. 5 While he yet spake, behold, a bright cloud overshadowed them: and behold a voice out of the cloud, which said, This is my beloved Son, in whom I am well pleased; hear ye him. 6 And when the disciples heard it, they fell on their face, and were sore afraid. 7 And Jesus came and touched them, and said, Arise, and be not afraid. 8 And when they had lifted up their eyes, they saw no man, save Jesus only.
9 And as they came down from the mountain, Jesus charged them, saying, Tell the vision to no man, until the Son of man be risen again from the dead.


The Holy Bible: King James Version, Electronic Edition of the 1900 Authorized Version. (Bellingham, WA: Logos Research Systems, Inc., 2009), Mt 16:28–17:9.

Here Jesus says that some of them would see the Son of man coming in his kingdom. Then they go up on the mountain and see that. They saw the Second Coming. Then afterward Jesus says tell the vision to no man. Peter confirms this in his epistle.

14 Knowing that shortly I must put off this my tabernacle, even as our Lord Jesus Christ hath shewed me. 15 Moreover I will endeavour that ye may be able after my decease to have these things always in remembrance. 16 For we have not followed cunningly devised fables, when we made known unto you the power and coming of our Lord Jesus Christ, but were eyewitnesses of his majesty. 17 For he received from God the Father honour and glory, when there came such a voice to him from the excellent glory, This is my beloved Son, in whom I am well pleased. 18 And this voice which came from heaven we heard, when we were with him in the holy mount.

The Holy Bible: King James Version, Electronic Edition of the 1900 Authorized Version. (Bellingham, WA: Logos Research Systems, Inc., 2009), 2 Pe 1:14–18.

Regarding Samuel, the key here is that the passage doesn't use either the word soul or spirit. So, the question is what is it if it is Samuel? Firstly, Saul sought out a demon possessed woman. The Scriptures tell us that the gods of the pagans are demons. When the woman saw what came up it, the text says she saw elohim, gods. Samuel wasn't a god. He was a man. Both Testaments tell us that the gods of the pagans are demons. Also, 1 Chronicles tells us specifically that Saul sought to inquire of a demon.

13And Saul dieth because of his trespass that he trespassed against Jehovah, against the word of Jehovah that he kept not, and also for asking at a familiar spirit—to inquire,— 14and he inquired not at Jehovah, and He putteth him to death, and turneth round the kingdom to David son of Jesse.

Robert Young, Young’s Literal Translation (Bellingham, WA: Logos Bible Software, 1997), 1 Ch 10:13–14.

So, Saul inquired of a demon. I don't know that we can say Samuel answered a demon's summons. Either way this passage can't be used to prove man lives on after death. It wasn't Samuel's soul or spirit. It surely wasn't his body. So, if it was Samuel, what was it? Alos, another point is that God said He wouldn't speak to Saul anymore. Saul even acknowledges this.

15 And Samuel said to Saul, Why hast thou disquieted me, to bring me up? And Saul answered, I am sore distressed; for the Philistines make war against me, and God is departed from me, and answereth me no more, neither by prophets, nor by dreams: therefore I have called thee, that thou mayest make known unto me what I shall do.

The Holy Bible: King James Version, Electronic Edition of the 1900 Authorized Version. (Bellingham, WA: Logos Research Systems, Inc., 2009), 1 Sa 28:15.

Saul said that God would not answer him, not even by prophets. So why is he asking a prophet? The obvious problem is this, if God is not answering Saul, and this was Samuel, where did he get his prophecy from? It obviously wasn't God because God was not answering Saul.

I really don't think this passage gives any support to the idea that the dead are alive. No part of man is mentioned in the passage. So, one cannot claim this was Samuel's soul or spirit. Saul sought a demon and the woman saw gods, and the Scriptures tell us that the gods of the pagans are demons. Plus, we have 1 Chron. 10:13 which confirms it.

 

[Brother Paul]

And then what is Paul saying when (IYO) he tells us "to be absent FROM THE BODY is to be present with the Lord"?

And even men can be called elohim, in that time and culture, so this word choice does not demand it was a demon (Psalm 82:6).

 

[KingJ]

The rich man and Abraham are both deceased. So I have to ask how it is that they
can see each other when the dead are blind? And how are they conversing when
the dead are mute?

Not only are the dead blind, but their surroundings are typically impregnable, e.g.
stone, dirt, metal, and/or concrete. How is it that Abraham and the rich man penetrate
that kind of darkness? Do they have X-ray vision? And not only are the dead mute,
but there is usually a distance between graves. Is there some sort of cemetery
intercom system about which I'm unaware?
_

Do you have some scriptures for this?

I see everyone else supporting their statements with scripture.

 

[Brother Paul]

Do you have some scriptures for this?

I see everyone else supporting their statements with scripture.

The physical body cannot speak or hear once it is physically dead and I think this to what Butch is referring, There are a few scriptures which support this! Though I know he is not one of them, those who support the "soul sleep" position use them all them time (like Ecclesiastes 9). But remember, unless Jesus is a liar when He tells the contrite thief he will be with Him that same day in Paradise ("Sheol"{ the equivalent of hades, not the physical grave) then it must exist. IMHO it is from here that Jesus leads captivity captive (the Lazarus section) and brings them to His throne room.

 

[Johann]

Excellent presentation of your point bro and I do agree this is a Parable however what would you say then of the experience on the Mount of Transfiguration? Moses and Elijah appear to them as conscious beings. Now ir can be argued that Elijah was assumed and thus did not bodily die but then what about Moses? And how about when the Witch of Endor shockingly (to her as well) gets the spirit of Samuel to appear?

And I disagree that the account of Lazarus and the rich man was a parable.

The Servant Transfigured (9:1-13)
Having laid before the disciples the pathway of reproach, suffering, and death which He was to take, and having invited them to follow Him in lives of sacrifice and self-renunciation, the Lord now gives the other side of the picture. Though discipleship would cost them dearly in this life, it would be rewarded with glory by and by.
9:1-7 The Lord began by saying that some of the disciples would not taste death till they saw the kingdom of God present with power. He was referring to Peter, James, and John. On the Mount of Transfiguration they saw the kingdom of God in power. The argument of the passage is that anything we suffer for Christ's sake now will be abundantly repaid when He returns and His servants appear with Him in glory. The conditions which prevailed on the Mount foreshadow the Millennial Reign of Christ.
1. Jesus was transfigured—dazzling splendor radiated from His Person. Even His clothes were shining, whiter than any bleach could make them.
During His First Advent, the glory of Christ was veiled. He came in humiliation, a Man of Sorrows, and acquainted with grief. But He will return in glory. No one will mistake Him then. He will be visibly the King of kings and Lord of lords.
2. Elijah and Moses were there. They represent: (a) OT saints, or (b) the law (Moses) and the prophets (Elijah), or (c) saints who have died, and those who have been translated.
3. Peter, James and John were there. They may represent NT saints in general, or those who will be alive when the kingdom is set up.
4. Jesus was the central Person. Peter's suggestion of making three tabernacles was rebuked by the cloud and the voice from heaven. In all things Christ must have the pre-eminence. He will be the glory of Immanuel's land.
5. The cloud may have been the shekinah or glory cloud which stayed in the Holy of Holies in the tabernacle and temple in OT times. It was the visible expression of God's presence.
6. The voice was the voice of God the Father, acknowledging Christ as His beloved Son.
9:8 When the cloud was lifted the disciples saw no one anymore, but only Jesus. It was a picture of the unique, glorious and pre-eminent place He will have when the kingdom comes in power, and which He should have in the hearts of His followers at the present time.
9:9, 10 As they came down from the mountain, He commanded them not to discuss what they had seen till after He had risen from the dead. This latter point puzzled them. Perhaps they still did not grasp that He was to be slain and rise again. They wondered about the expression rising from the dead. As Jews they knew the truth that all would be raised. But Jesus was speaking of a selective resurrection. He would be raised from among the dead ones—not all would be raised when He arose. This is a truth found only in the NT.
9:11 The disciples had another problem. They had just had a preview of the kingdom. But hadn't Malachi predicted that Elijah must come as a forerunner of the Messiah, beginning the restitution of all things, and paving the way for setting up His universal reign (Mal_4:5)? Where was Elijah? Would he come first, as the scribes said he would?
9:12, 13 Jesus answered in effect, “Indeed, it is true that Elijah must come first. But a more important and immediate question is this: ‘Don't the OT Scriptures predict that the Son of Man is to endure great sufferings and be treated with contempt?’ As far as Elijah is concerned, Elijah did come (in the person and ministry of John the Baptist), but men treated him exactly as they wanted to—just as men treated Elijah. The death of John the Baptist was an advance token of what they would do to the Son of Man. They rejected the forerunner; they will reject the King.”
Believers Bible commentary.

There are times when we as Christians are forced to consult secondary resources, and there is nothing "evil" in it.

Shalom

 

[KingJ]

And I disagree that the account of Lazarus and the rich man was a parable.

Correct. Jesus would never mention the name ''Lazarus'' if it were a parable.

The rich man, as he is not in Abraham's bosom, we can understand why Jesus would refer to him as the ''rich man''.

For me however, it is a moot disagreement. Parable or story, it is something Jesus said and is included in scripture. We must read and learn from it.

 

[Johann]

Correct. Jesus would never mention the name ''Lazarus'' if it were a parable.

The rich man, as he is not in Abraham's bosom, we can understand why Jesus would refer to him as the ''rich man''.

For me however, it is a moot disagreement. Parable or story, it is something Jesus said and is included in scripture. We must read and learn from it.

Absolutely, so is the 13 epistles and 7 mysteries given to Paul in the New Covenant AFTER the resurrection of our risen Messiah, something the Old Covenant saints knew nothing about.

Shalom
Johann

 

[Butch5]

And then what is Paul saying when (IYO) he tells us "to be absent FROM THE BODY is to be present with the Lord"?

And even men can be called elohim, in that time and culture, so this word choice does not demand it was a demon (Psalm 82:6).

This one is a little more to get into, but if we look at the context, the passage is about the Resurrection. just previous to the verse you're referencing Paul is speaking about mortality being swallowed up of life. That's the Ressurection. He's not talking about an intermediate state.

I agree that elohim is used of men. My point in bringing it up was to show that the words spirit or soul are not used anywhere in the passage. The word choice doesn't demand a demon, but I think the fact that Saul was seeking a familiar spirit does demand a demon.

 

[Butch5]

Correct. Jesus would never mention the name ''Lazarus'' if it were a parable.

Why?