Search results

In the passage nobody was really physically dead, including the man’s father. If nobody was physically dead, but one was about to be, and the other is compared to him, then both were about to be physically dead, just one sooner than the other. If the son was waiting around for his father to die...

Then you’ll have to wait until I go back and deal with your earlier post more thoroughly.

I’m certainly more confused after reading your post. I never said Lazarus was in torment.

Hi Way! I don’t understand how what you said here relates to what you quoted from me. I don’t have a problem with the use of the same word for different things, but context needs to inform us as to what they mean.

In case you missed it, the rich man was already suffering punishment. How could that be unless he had already been judged? And in case you missed it, only the rich man was said to be in Hades. That doesn’t mean Lazarus wasn’t, but it is inferred, not explicit. So who’s twisting scripture to fit...

Scripture, please?

Not here, it shouldn’t. That’s not what this thread is about. I moved this one here to avoid disrupting another thread, so you are welcome to do the same. You may even tag me, if you like, but it may be awhile before I respond.

I don’t disagree with your last sentence. But are you saying the rich man was in hell—his final destiny? Had he already been through the final judgment?

Please explain for me why the grammar of the sentence doesn’t allow for the comma to be moved.

Then you agree that the movement of the uninspired comma allows my position, at least for that verse?

I explained how they can be turned into Sheol in a post to someone else, but you missed it. Please don’t clog up the thread with your preexisting souls nonsense.

Funny! If doctrine is the reason to move them, then perhaps doctrine put them there in the first place, as the original Greek didn’t have them. Try reading it this way: Luke 23:43 (NKJV) And Jesus said to him, “Assuredly, I say to you today, you will be with Me in Paradise.”

I can ask you the same question. Who taught you your doctrine? What motivates you to defend it? I’ll wager it’s the same motivation as mine—I want to understand scripture better to understand my savior better. And if something is not from the Bible, yet I think it is, I want to know the truth...

Thanks for the response, Crete. I still plan to do a fuller response to your post in the other thread, but it needs more attention than I’ve had to give it. Is it possible, in your opinion, that the commas may be misplaced in Luke 23:43, or are they inspired by God to be where Luke put them?

Scripture doesn’t talk about a “paradise side” of Sheol. It’s inferred at the most. What does “captivity” refer to? Isn’t the grave a place of captivity? Wouldn’t taking it captive mean taking away its power to hold onto people? But if Jesus ascended to where Abraham was, then Jesus death is...

You mean like a bird building a nest, or a beaver building a dam? Of course! And how do they know how to do that?

So you don’t know that Abraham is in Hades.

You’re assuming that “the spirit” here is referring to a part of the person, and that the person still exists without the body. Even if I grant you that a person is made up of body soul and spirit, or even body and spirit, the person would no longer be a person when one of those was missing.

How much of what you wrote came from the Lazarus/rich man text, and how much from your own mind/memory of what others have told you? For instance, where in the text does it say there was a paradise side of Sheol? We can tell from the story Jesus told was that Lazarus was NOT where the rich man...

Thanks! Can you explain how you think it applies ?