Is the doctrine of Eternal Conscious Torment biblical or not?

[JudgeRightly]

Death has many forms.

When a plant dies. Soul does not die because plants do not have soul yet they do have some form of life as do bacteria etc because they grow and reproduce. We could call that growth life.

I Thes 5:23 until a person receives the gift of holy spirit from God who is the Holy Spirit they are only body and soul. The image of God is spirit. John 4:24. Adam and Eve were body and soul and spirit but because of their sin did not lose body and soul but the spirit. The image of God who is eternal and right and holy... They lost their direct connection with God and the goodness of God. They became subject to Satan. They died for the Devil has the power of death not God. Hebrew's 2:14.

Epjesians speaks of being dead in sin before we received salvation.

Like post Eden Adam and Eve we had no spirit only body and soul which is guarantied to die because there is no eternality in body and soul. Eternal life is spirit.

The story in Luke is a parable used by Jesus Christ to correct the error of his enemies. There is no immediate presence with God upon death.

If the dead are not literally dead than the word death had no meaning then neither does the word life. Then Jesus did not die for us nor was he raised thus our redemption and salvation would be a lie based on lies.

But the dead are dead and remain so until a raising from the dead to life

Sorry. Nope.

Your passive-aggressive “taunt” is duly noted, but I avoid nothing except wasting valuable time.

You don’t understand the ancient Hebrew mindset. Very basically, they didn’t even think in terms of time as we know it. They perceived seasons with the past in front of them and extending out to a horizon, and the future was behind them as they were backing into it as the total unknown. Hebrew has no words for past, present, or future; and it also has no terms for everlasting or forever in the sense that we think of them.

And this is only a basic beginning hint of how you and other moderns have NO clue how to apply terms even if you know what they mean. And modern language resources are accurate only in the most very basic sense, and are written for moderns who have English patterns of thought (which isn’t saying much).

But the funny thing is how self-assured you are that the Hebrew language is so accessible to you in translation without having ANY understanding of it for what it actually is. Yours is the typical text-to-reader disposition, with no reader-to-text application whatsover. And you don’t even know what that means.

But then you want to vaguely taunt me as a neophyte because I don’t want to engage in the futility of trying to teach you hundreds of hours of truth that you’ll just dismiss in total ignorance.


So here’s a tiny taste, little one:

The Hebrew word is mavet. It comes from the ancient pictographic agglutination of the symbol for water and the symbol for the end or mark; and its most literal meaning in English would be “the end of the flow of water”, or “the end of the river that is a man’s life”.

This relates to one of the two aspects of the Greek word “Rhema”, which is “to flow” and “to speak”.

So this word doesn’t mean anything close to what you think it means in your modern misconceptions from corrupted English epistemics.

And what you want to smugly and subtly refer to as “avoidance” is me merely knowing you won’t be able to begin to understand something that has so much background behind it that is missing for you AND replaced with your modern substitutes.

And if these seems terse, then it’s because I’m responding to your smug slightly-veiled condescension that is absurd.

Death in Hebrew is referring to man coming to the end of his physical life according to the flow of the very Word of God that created him. To think that it is nihilistic is to ignore that the eternal and uncreated Logos had not been manifest in the flesh yet. HE is the Living Water and the finality of the flow, and all who had faith unto His coming from the ancient days are in Him as the flow. Mavet speaks nothing of what you think one way or the other. It wasn’t even a consideration for ancient minds.

And I’ve already wasted too much time here, as you have begun to prove you are simply a scoffer.

 

[way 2 go]

Your passive-aggressive “taunt” is duly noted, but I avoid nothing except wasting valuable time.

You don’t understand the ancient Hebrew mindset. Very basically, they didn’t even think in terms of time as we know it. They perceived seasons with the past in front of them and extending out to a horizon, and the future was behind them as they were backing into it as the total unknown. Hebrew has no words for past, present, or future; and it also has no terms for everlasting or forever in the sense that we think of them.

And this is only a basic beginning hint of how you and other moderns have NO clue how to apply terms even if you know what they mean. And modern language resources are accurate only in the most very basic sense, and are written for moderns who have English patterns of thought (which isn’t saying much).

But the funny thing is how self-assured you are that the Hebrew language is so accessible to you in translation without having ANY understanding of it for what it actually is. Yours is the typical text-to-reader disposition, with no reader-to-text application whatsover. And you don’t even know what that means.

But then you want to vaguely taunt me as a neophyte because I don’t want to engage in the futility of trying to teach you hundreds of hours of truth that you’ll just dismiss in total ignorance.


So here’s a tiny taste, little one:

The Hebrew word is mavet. It comes from the ancient pictographic agglutination of the symbol for water and the symbol for the end or mark; and its most literal meaning in English would be “the end of the flow of water”, or “the end of the river that is a man’s life”.

This relates to one of the two aspects of the Greek word “Rhema”, which is “to flow” and “to speak”.

So this word doesn’t mean anything close to what you think it means in your modern misconceptions from corrupted English epistemics.

And what you want to smugly and subtly refer to as “avoidance” is me merely knowing you won’t be able to begin to understand something that has so much background behind it that is missing for you AND replaced with your modern substitutes.

And if these seems terse, then it’s because I’m responding to your smug slightly-veiled condescension that is absurd.

Death in Hebrew is referring to man coming to the end of his physical life according to the flow of the very Word of God that created him. To think that it is nihilistic is to ignore that the eternal and uncreated Logos had not been manifest in the flesh yet. HE is the Living Water and the finality of the flow, and all who had faith unto His coming from the ancient days are in Him as the flow. Mavet speaks nothing of what you think one way or the other. It wasn’t even a consideration for ancient minds.

And I’ve already wasted too much time here, as you have begun to prove you are simply a scoffer.

your time is not wasted ,I for one enjoyed this ,thank you for your time .

also liked the post on faith and the cellphone. link

 

[oatmeal]

Sorry. Nope.

Your refusal to believe scripture and the obvious truths it teaches is your choice

 

[JudgeRightly]

Your refusal to believe scripture and the obvious truths it teaches is your choice

:blabla:

Nice straw man.

 

[PneumaPsucheSoma]

Greetings PneumaPsucheSoma, Another aspect of the poetic parallelism is the lack of consciousness expressed as “no remembrance of thee” and “who shall give thee thanks”.
Psalm 6:5 (KJV): For in death there is no remembrance of thee: in the grave who shall give thee thanks?

It appears that modern Lutherism does not fully follow the teaching of Martin Luther. I was interested in reading a 1951 Magazine and it gives a report of an interview with Professor R. Prenter, of the Aarhus (Denmark) University, who was recommended to the writer as one of the greatest authorities on Luther.
The writer states: “This professor I found to be most helpful when I spent the best part of two hours with him. Although he found it a little difficult to say in an unqualified way that Luther did not believe the doctrine of the Immortality of the Soul, there was no question in his mind that Luther did believe there was no conscious existence between death and resurrection, and that the Romish idea of Purgatory was a mere superstition.”

The writer then says that the Professor endorsed the following notes of the conversation which were submitted to him for comment: “There seems to be a certain amount of ambiguity in Luther’s works on the subject of Immortality. Luther regarded man as being immortal only in the sense that he was related to God. One has to understand this did not mean that Luther believed man to be in any way a conscious entity between death and resurrection. This condition was, to Luther, a state of sleep from which man would awake at the resurrection. The ‘sleep’ he applied to both body and soul. Both in unity make up the conscious man.”

Kind regards
Trevor

Prenter is a higher critic who knows nothing of Luther OR the other subject matter mentioned.

Death is not cessation of consciousness. There is NO Hebrew or Greek term that even remotely indicates that. Death is the cessation of constant communion with environment of origin. Physically, relative to the dust of the ground; spiritually, relative to conjoining with the Spirit of God.

You literally have NO idea what you’re talking about, and neither does your cult and its heretical indoctrination. But that will not stop you, so it would be better for you to discontinue addressing me. You have received far too many admonitions from me already. At some point, I become disobedient for contending with you.

 

[PneumaPsucheSoma]

Death has many forms.

When a plant dies. Soul does not die because plants do not have soul yet they do have some form of life as do bacteria etc because they grow and reproduce. We could call that growth life.

I Thes 5:23 until a person receives the gift of holy spirit from God who is the Holy Spirit they are only body and soul. The image of God is spirit. John 4:24. Adam and Eve were body and soul and spirit but because of their sin did not lose body and soul but the spirit. The image of God who is eternal and right and holy... They lost their direct connection with God and the goodness of God. They became subject to Satan. They died for the Devil has the power of death not God. Hebrew's 2:14.

Epjesians speaks of being dead in sin before we received salvation.

Like post Eden Adam and Eve we had no spirit only body and soul which is guarantied to die because there is no eternality in body and soul. Eternal life is spirit.

The story in Luke is a parable used by Jesus Christ to correct the error of his enemies. There is no immediate presence with God upon death.

If the dead are not literally dead than the word death had no meaning then neither does the word life. Then Jesus did not die for us nor was he raised thus our redemption and salvation would be a lie based on lies.

But the dead are dead and remain so until a raising from the dead to life

You don’t know what “soul” is and means any more than you know what “death” is and means. And yet you pretend. It’s beyond dishonest.

 

[PneumaPsucheSoma]

your time is not wasted ,I for one enjoyed this ,thank you for your time .

also liked the post on faith and the cellphone. link

You are a lover of truth and a lover of God. Thanks be to God for you and others here on TOL.

 

[PneumaPsucheSoma]

:blabla:

Nice straw man.

Isn’t it more like just a few pieces of mildewy straw? It’s not even a strawman, and the straw is kinda nasty.

 

[Arthur Brain]

I was going to ask for that, so I’m glad you’re back.

:e4e:

But surely you can recognize that you - nor anyone else - don’t necessarily have to see the point of this being the truth. And I’d hope you can see how it would smack of human entitlement, etc.

I can't very well acknowledge your position as being "the truth" without understanding it or seeing the point behind it. You're obviously a highly intelligent and educated man but your arguments are some of the most complicated and convoluted ones I've seen, sometimes similar in that regard to varying branches of Calvinism - infralapsarian and supralapsarian etc. It smacks of intellectualism more than anything as if certain things are withheld from those who lack such an ability to discern. There's parts in Jesus' ministry, the parables especially where some thought is required on part of the reader but nothing so complex as what you postulate here.

Also, you’re not understanding the scope of the subtleties between immediate creation and mediate creation. The latter as the life-from-life means of procreation has been tainted and seized upon (by the serpent and the host of hell) to bring forth those whom God has not foreknown into an existence that is only ontologically compatible with this lapsed cosmos (and this is NOT Calvinism).

So, are you saying that some people have been born into the world that shouldn't have been? The only way life can come about through this plane is via procreation so how many weren't foreknew to be born and on the flip side, how many were fore knew to die before being born?

The point is the sovereignty of God and His incommunicable and communicable attributes as the prevailing authority according to righeousness and holiness. Your questions actually come from a presumed superiority to God and His thoughts and ways (which are not ours).

My questions come about through inquiry and curiosity and sometimes bemusement. If I question something it's not because I presume myself to be superior to a deity (how would that make sense?) but because I either don't understand certain views, doctrines or they seem to be at odds with the God as described. I used to question the doctrines of my former church that taught eternal torment as a mix of literal burning and psychological suffering by way of.

Hell hath enlarged itself without measure for all them that go in thereat. This is difficult to extoll without addressing Prolepsis, which would take quite an effort; and if you’re not a Believer (which I think you’ve stated) it would be futile, for it requires an access-based knowledge that you simply cannot have as one who is unregenerated.

In short, Prolepsis is the already/not yet of time versus timelessness relative to all occurences in the current temporal lapsed cosmos.

Well, no, I haven't stated that. Certain trolls have spread rumours on the like but to clarify; I'm not an atheist, I don't hold with any form of "organized religion or church" or attend any nowadays. I was "saved" years ago.

As to the rest, why would this understanding need to be so convoluted? Wisdom and understanding isn't about intellectual or spiritual complexity.

The redeemed are not. They have their human hypostasis underlied by the hypostasis of Christ, whereby they are partaking of the divine nature and being vicariously and functionally divinized (though never innately becoming ontologically divine as intrinsic state of being).

So, are the "redeemed" chosen? Also, how much sovereignty does God have if there are people born into this world who weren't "foreknown"?

But this is a testimony to God’s grace moving in so many ways at so many times upon so many hearts. And there isn’t a multi-verse type of infinite random possibilities for such things. The multi-versity of contingent plausibilities and potential possibilities is within the eternal and immutable mind of God as noumenon. Those aren’t subject to random manifestation as phenomena. (All of God’s thought is not expressed in the divine creative utterance, so all alleged possibilities are not possiblities at all. Only that which God has foreknown.)

Again, if I've read you correctly, then there's that in existence that somehow isn't foreknown by God.

Again, this goes to understanding Prolepsis. I teach an entire 40-hour set of sessions on this alone, and it usually takes 2 or more times through to begin to understand. And a huge part of that is because of having to deprogram modern innovations and substitute concepts that don’t conform to biblical lexicography.

(Much of this is because of two areas of lack in the English language and its effects on human cognitive reasoning. I have to unravel all of that through the lexical applications in scripture that few can extract and implement.)

Again, why would spiritual understanding or insight need to be so complicated?

Yes, but it’s not really what you think that means. What you don’t realize is that all humans are not “real” hypostases (“persons”). No one is until translated into Christ by THE faith. Those who are currently in hades in their present lives (yes, NOW) and physically die without Christ are NEVER “real” hypostases (“persons”).

What about babies who die in the womb or are born with cancer etc?

The lake of fire is not at all what you think, even after my delineations and your basically accurate summary. You don’t understand the depth, breadth, and height of the hows and whys from spiritually intuitive knowledge (oida).

Those cast into the lake of fire were never to have existed, but existed as hypostases that were never “real”. (I don’t mean they were projections or some weird something; but that they were never intended to have been a part of creation.)

Well, you should know by now that I don't perceive the lake of fire in a "cartoonish" manner but your latter is honestly bizarre. You're effectively saying that an omnipotent deity isn't in control of His own creation if certain people/things exist in it that were never supposed to be part of it.

 

[ok doser]

... I was "saved" years ago....

nope

 

[Arthur Brain]

Only because, in spite of your often surprising insights, you don’t have an intuitive spiritual knowledge (or at least not a developed one if you are a professing Believer, which I think you have said you are not).

I do very much appreciate your contributions, and the fact that you generally don’t depart from subject matter to play ad hominem games and the like. Many of your questions and observations are valuable in discussions regarding Christian apologetics. So thank you.

Oh, I'm not interested in trolling or ad hominems and I addressed the rest in my last.

:e4e:

 

[TrevorL]

Greetings again PneumaPsucheSoma,

Prenter is a higher critic who knows nothing of Luther OR the other subject matter mentioned.
Death is not cessation of consciousness. There is NO Hebrew or Greek term that even remotely indicates that. Death is the cessation of constant communion with environment of origin. Physically, relative to the dust of the ground; spiritually, relative to conjoining with the Spirit of God.
You literally have NO idea what you’re talking about, and neither does your cult and its heretical indoctrination. But that will not stop you, so it would be better for you to discontinue addressing me. You have received far too many admonitions from me already. At some point, I become disobedient for contending with you.

I appreciate the information about Prenter. I have a large electronic library and I had read a suggestion that Luther did not believe in the immortality of the soul, or that man was conscious after death. The quotation that I gave was not the reference that I was looking for, but I thought it was possibly typical of that assessment. I have only read one book on Luther and I especially liked his position on the "Spirit within", suggesting the need for the Word of God to enlighten. Adam was a living soul Genesis 2:7 and when he breathed his last breath he was a dead soul. The Spirit, his life force returned to God who gave it.

For my part, recently we buried my mother in law at age 100, in the same grave as my father in law 38 years earlier. We wait in hope of the resurrection when Christ returns. We were very conscious of the reality of death, and the deterioration of mind and body that preceded this, but they rest in hope, sleeping in the dust of the earth.
Psalm 6:5 (KJV): For in death there is no remembrance of thee: in the grave who shall give thee thanks?
I appreciate our interaction, but the above simply and clearly is part of the basis of our conviction on this subject.

Kind regards
Trevor

 

[PneumaPsucheSoma]

Greetings again PneumaPsucheSoma, I appreciate the information about Prenter. I have a large electronic library and I had read a suggestion that Luther did not believe in the immortality of the soul, or that man was conscious after death. The quotation that I gave was not the reference that I was looking for, but I thought it was possibly typical of that assessment. I have only read one book on Luther and I especially liked his position on the "Spirit within", suggesting the need for the Word of God to enlighten. Adam was a living soul Genesis 2:7 and when he breathed his last breath he was a dead soul. The Spirit, his life force returned to God who gave it.

For my part, recently we buried my mother in law at age 100, in the same grave as my father in law 38 years earlier. We wait in hope of the resurrection when Christ returns. We were very conscious of the reality of death, and the deterioration of mind and body that preceded this, but they rest in hope, sleeping in the dust of the earth.
Psalm 6:5 (KJV): For in death there is no remembrance of thee: in the grave who shall give thee thanks?
I appreciate our interaction, but the above simply and clearly is part of the basis of our conviction on this subject.

Kind regards
Trevor

But why would someone’s convictions matter when they’re based on false concepts? If convictions were the final arbitrage of truth, then no one would be in jeopardy of anything negative in this life or the next.

You’re building doctrince for the Christian age upon Psalmaic references to the death of those were under the old covenants. In fact, virtually all of your false doctrine is built upon the old covenants as though you were part of Biblical Judaism instead of the Christian faith.

Death is a state of being, not a state of NOT being. There is no chronological time there, so scripture is depicting the differing from of existence whereby all will appear in judgement simultaneously. There is no “waiting” in death, nor is there lack of consciousness during “soul sleep”, for there is no duration of time as we know it in the lapsed cosmos.

But you act as though YOUR convictions are preeminent to the truth of the Word, which you’re unaware of because you don’t know what words mean and you don’t understand hermeneutics to determine valid historicity of orthodoxy and orthodpraxy.

There’s a way that seems right to a man, but the end thereof are the ways of death. That’s you, for you defy the authentic doctrines of the faith based upon modern linguistic ignorance and revisionism.

All you have is Psalm 6:5, and you can’t even consider it in Psalmaic context. Sigh.

 

[TrevorL]

Greetings PneumaPsucheSoma,

But why would someone’s convictions matter when they’re based on false concepts? If convictions were the final arbitrage of truth, then no one would be in jeopardy of anything negative in this life or the next.

You’re building doctrince for the Christian age upon Psalmaic references to the death of those were under the old covenants. In fact, virtually all of your false doctrine is built upon the old covenants as though you were part of Biblical Judaism instead of the Christian faith.

I disagree here on the covenants. I believe that there is one consistent teaching throughout the OT and NT, and the Covenant made to Abraham is the New Covenant confirmed by the blood of Christ.

Death is a state of being, not a state of NOT being. There is no chronological time there, so scripture is depicting the differing from of existence whereby all will appear in judgement simultaneously. There is no “waiting” in death, nor is there lack of consciousness during “soul sleep”, for there is no duration of time as we know it in the lapsed cosmos.

This seems to be an obscure philosophical assessment, but I believe that death is death. I recently lopped the head off our noisy rooster as it was disturbing our neighbours and waking us up early. This rooster died and was dead before we ate him. This death became a state of NOT being, especially after we ate him. If we had buried him instead then he would have returned to the dust.

I accept the view that Abraham and the faithful are in the grave and when Jesus returns he will raise them from the grave, he will judge them, and grant eternal life to the faithful. I do not accept the term “soul sleep”. The only sleep involved is the sleep in the dust of the earth, a figurative expression. The following also speaks of those “dwelling in the dust” before resurrection:
Isaiah 26:19 (KJV): Thy dead men shall live, together with my dead body shall they arise. Awake and sing, ye that dwell in dust: for thy dew is as the dew of herbs, and the earth shall cast out the dead.

But you act as though YOUR convictions are preeminent to the truth of the Word, which you’re unaware of because you don’t know what words mean and you don’t understand hermeneutics to determine valid historicity of orthodoxy and orthodpraxy.

There’s a way that seems right to a man, but the end thereof are the ways of death. That’s you, for you defy the authentic doctrines of the faith based upon modern linguistic ignorance and revisionism.

I find the above as typical of your claims, but I do rely on what the Bible states.

All you have is Psalm 6:5, and you can’t even consider it in Psalmaic context. Sigh.

It is a strong reference, so I will quote it again with the two aspects of parallelism emphasised:
Psalm 6:5 (KJV): For in death there is no remembrance of thee: in the grave who shall give thee thanks?

But there are many other passages. The following compares a rich man, who has no knowledge of the ways of God, to the death of the animals, similar to a dead rooster:
Psalm 49:15–20 (KJV): 15 But God will redeem my soul from the power of the grave: for he shall receive me. Selah. 16 Be not thou afraid when one is made rich, when the glory of his house is increased; 17 For when he dieth he shall carry nothing away: his glory shall not descend after him. 18 Though while he lived he blessed his soul: and men will praise thee, when thou doest well to thyself. 19 He shall go to the generation of his fathers; they shall never see light. 20 Man that is in honour, and understandeth not, is like the beasts that perish.

Another important Psalm is the following that is quoted by both Peter and Paul, showing contrary to your claim, that the teachings of the Psalms are relevant to the covenant confirmed in Christ:
Psalm 16:8–11 (KJV): 8 I have set the LORD always before me: because he is at my right hand, I shall not be moved. 9 Therefore my heart is glad, and my glory rejoiceth: my flesh also shall rest in hope. 10 For thou wilt not leave my soul in hell; neither wilt thou suffer thine Holy One to see corruption. 11 Thou wilt shew me the path of life: in thy presence is fulness of joy; at thy right hand there are pleasures for evermore.
I understand “hell” here as the grave, and the fact that Jesus was not allowed to see corruption is a reversal of the sentence in Genesis 3:19 that Adam would return to the dust.

Kind regards
Trevor

 

[way 2 go]

I accept the view that Abraham and the faithful are in the grave and when Jesus returns he will raise them from the grave,

Kind regards
Trevor

bodies in graves and spirits continue on

Mat 22:32 'I am the God of Abraham, and the God of Isaac, and the God of Jacob'? He is not God of the dead, but of the living."

Luk 16:22 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;
Luk 16:23 And in hell he lift up his eyes, being in torments, and seeth Abraham afar off, and Lazarus in his bosom.


btw Abraham is in heaven now
Eph 4:8 Wherefore he saith, When he ascended up on high, he led captivity captive, and gave gifts unto men.
2Co 5:8 then we are confident and we are pleased rather to go away from home out of the body, and to come home to the Lord.

 

[TrevorL]

Greetings way 2 go,

bodies in graves and spirits continue on
Mat 22:32 'I am the God of Abraham, and the God of Isaac, and the God of Jacob'? He is not God of the dead, but of the living."

Jesus is quoting Exodus 3:6 to prove to the Sadducees that there is a resurrection, not that Abraham had an immortal soul or an immaterial conscious spirit that lived on after his death. The Sadducees believed that you live your life today, and that is the end of it, but Exodus 3:6 shows that God was still associated with Abraham and the promises to him, and this necessitated his eventual resurrection.
Luke 20:34-38 (KJV): 34 And Jesus answering said unto them, The children of this world marry, and are given in marriage: 35 But they which shall be accounted worthy to obtain that world, and the resurrection from the dead, neither marry, nor are given in marriage: 36 Neither can they die any more: for they are equal unto the angels; and are the children of God, being the children of the resurrection.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. 38 For he is not a God of the dead, but of the living: for all live unto him.
He is not talking about immortal conscious spirits here, but the future resurrection of the dead.

The principle behind this language is clearly stated in the following and it is also speaking about Abraham again and the necessity of raising Abraham from the dead in order to fulfil this promise to Abraham:
Romans 4:17 (KJV): (As it is written, I have made thee a father of many nations,) before him whom he believed, even God, who quickeneth the dead, and calleth those things which be not as though they were.

Luk 16:22 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;
Luk 16:23 And in hell he lift up his eyes, being in torments, and seeth Abraham afar off, and Lazarus in his bosom.

The Rich Man and Lazarus is a parable, almost a parody based on the false beliefs of the Pharisees. The fact that Lazarus is named and shortly after he was raised from the dead, shows that Jesus is offering the true teaching in comparison to their view of their own prosperity and status. The parable concludes with Jesus warning them that they would not receive the witness of the resurrection of Lazarus and Jesus Luke 16:29-31, and after the resurrection of Lazarus they were hardened in heart to plot the death of Jesus.

btw Abraham is in heaven now
Eph 4:8 Wherefore he saith, When he ascended up on high, he led captivity captive, and gave gifts unto men.

No mention of heaven going here but his conquest over sin and death and his release of the believers from sin ensuing their future resurrection.

2Co 5:8 then we are confident and we are pleased rather to go away from home out of the body, and to come home to the Lord.

The next moment in Paul’s consciousness after he left this present body will be the return of Christ and the resurrection.
2 Timothy 4:1,6-8 (KJV): 1 I charge thee therefore before God, and the Lord Jesus Christ, who shall judge the living and the dead at his appearing and his kingdom; 6 For I am now ready to be offered, and the time of my departure is at hand. 7 I have fought a good fight, I have finished my course, I have kept the faith: 8 Henceforth there is laid up for me a crown of righteousness, which the Lord, the righteous judge, shall give me at that day: and not to me only, but unto all them also that love his appearing.

Kind regards
Trevor

 

[way 2 go]

Greetings way 2 go, Jesus is quoting Exodus 3:6 to prove to the Sadducees that there is a resurrection,
not that Abraham had an immortal soul or an immaterial conscious spirit that lived on after his death. The Sadducees believed that you live your life today, and that is the end of it, but Exodus 3:6 shows that God was still associated with Abraham and the promises to him, and this necessitated his eventual resurrection.

Luke 20:34-38 (KJV): 34 And Jesus answering said unto them, The children of this world marry, and are given in marriage: 35 But they which shall be accounted worthy to obtain that world, and the resurrection from the dead, neither marry, nor are given in marriage: 36 Neither can they die any more: for they are equal unto the angels; and are the children of God, being the children of the resurrection.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. 38 For he is not a God of the dead, but of the living: for all live unto him.

He is not talking about immortal conscious spirits here, but the future resurrection of the dead.

you try to force a humanist understanding on the bible and talk like there is no evidence of
existence of anyone after death of the body.

the verse goes on to say He is not God of the dead, but of the living


Mat 22:32 'I am the God of Abraham, and the God of Isaac, and the God of Jacob'? He is not God of the dead, but of the living."

Mar 9:4 And there appeared to them Elijah with Moses, and they were talking with Jesus.

Luk 16:22 The poor man died and was carried by the angels to Abraham's side. The rich man also died and was buried,
Luk 16:23 and in Hades, being in torment, ...
Luk 16:25 But Abraham said,

Joh 11:25 Jesus said to her, "I am the resurrection and the life. Whoever believes in me, though he die, yet shall he live,
Joh 11:26 and everyone who lives and believes in me shall never die. Do you believe this?"

The principle behind this language is clearly stated in the following and it is also speaking about Abraham again and the necessity of raising Abraham from the dead in order to fulfil this promise to Abraham:
Romans 4:17 (KJV): (As it is written, I have made thee a father of many nations,) before him whom he believed, even God, who quickeneth the dead, and calleth those things which be not as though they were.

:nono:

Gen 17:5 And your name no longer shall be called Abram, but your name shall be Abraham. For I have made you a father of many nations.

abrâhâm
ab-raw-hawm'
Contracted from H1 and an unused root (probably meaning to be populous); father of a multitude;

The Rich Man and Lazarus is a parable, almost a parody

parody , is that your word for lie ?

based on the false beliefs of the Pharisees. The fact that Lazarus is named and shortly after he was raised from the dead, shows that Jesus is offering the true teaching in comparison to their view of their own prosperity and status. The parable concludes with Jesus warning them that they would not receive the witness of the resurrection of Lazarus and Jesus Luke 16:29-31, and after the resurrection of Lazarus they were hardened in heart to plot the death of Jesus.

you stopped short of the point of what they would not believe .

Luk 16:28 for I have five brothers—so that he may warn them, lest they also come into this place of torment.'

No mention of heaven going here but his conquest over sin and death and his release of the believers from sin ensuing their future resurrection. The next moment in Paul’s consciousness after he left this present body will be the return of Christ and the resurrection.
2 Timothy 4:1,6-8 (KJV): 1 I charge thee therefore before God, and the Lord Jesus Christ, who shall judge the living and the dead at his appearing and his kingdom; 6 For I am now ready to be offered, and the time of my departure is at hand. 7 I have fought a good fight, I have finished my course, I have kept the faith: 8 Henceforth there is laid up for me a crown of righteousness, which the Lord, the righteous judge, shall give me at that day: and not to me only, but unto all them also that love his appearing.

:think:
nothing to counter
2Co 5:8 then we are confident and we are pleased rather to go away from home out of the body, and to come home to the Lord.

yes there will be a day when rewards are handed out but in the mean time believers will be with the Lord

 

[TrevorL]

Greetings again way 2 go,

you try to force a humanist understanding on the bible and talk like there is no evidence of existence of anyone after death of the body.
the verse goes on to say He is not God of the dead, but of the living
Mat 22:32 'I am the God of Abraham, and the God of Isaac, and the God of Jacob'? He is not God of the dead, but of the living."

Abraham was dead when God stated this in Exodus 6:3 and Jesus states that God is not the God of the dead, but the living. Please refer again to Romans 4:17.

Mar 9:4 And there appeared to them Elijah with Moses, and they were talking with Jesus.

The vision of the transfiguration was a vision of Jesus, Moses and Elijah in the future glory of the Kingdom 2 Peter 1:16-18. I believe that Moses was temporarily resurrected to appear in this enacted vision.

Luk 16:22 The poor man died and was carried by the angels to Abraham's side. The rich man also died and was buried, Luk 16:23 and in Hades, being in torment, ... Luk 16:25 But Abraham said,

Yes, but a parable, not a reality.

Joh 11:25 Jesus said to her, "I am the resurrection and the life. Whoever believes in me, though he die, yet shall he live,
Joh 11:26 and everyone who lives and believes in me shall never die. Do you believe this?"

Same concept as Romans 4:17.

Gen 17:5 And your name no longer shall be called Abram, but your name shall be Abraham. For I have made you a father of many nations.

But Abraham was not yet a father of many nations and we have a mixture of present and future tenses.
Genesis 17:4–6 (KJV): 4 As for me, behold, my covenant is with thee, and thou shalt be a father of many nations. 5 Neither shall thy name any more be called Abram, but thy name shall be Abraham; for a father of many nations have I made thee. 6 And I will make thee exceeding fruitful, and I will make nations of thee, and kings shall come out of thee.

parody , is that your word for lie ?

No. Jesus used many colourful methods to teach. He speaks of swallowing a camel and a man with a beam in his eye.

you stopped short of the point of what they would not believe .
Luk 16:28 for I have five brothers—so that he may warn them, lest they also come into this place of torment.'

But this is the rich man speaking, giving the Pharisee perspective. Jesus gives his own perspective when he speaks of the resurrection.

nothing to counter 2Co 5:8 then we are confident and we are pleased rather to go away from home out of the body, and to come home to the Lord.
yes there will be a day when rewards are handed out but in the mean time believers will be with the Lord

2 Corinthians 5:8–10 (KJV): 8 We are confident, I say, and willing rather to be absent from the body, and to be present with the Lord. 9 Wherefore we labour, that, whether present or absent, we may be accepted of him. 10 For we must all appear before the judgment seat of Christ; that every one may receive the things done in his body, according to that he hath done, whether it be good or bad.
There is no mention of going to heaven, but the future judgement seat and acceptance or rejection.

Kind regards
Trevor

 

[way 2 go]

Greetings again way 2 go, Abraham was dead when God stated this in Exodus 6:3 and Jesus states that God is not the God of the dead, but the living. Please refer again to Romans 4:17.

no
Abraham is alive
Luk 16:25 But Abraham said,

The vision of the transfiguration was a vision of Jesus, Moses and Elijah in the future glory of the Kingdom 2 Peter 1:16-18. I believe that Moses was temporarily resurrected to appear in this enacted vision.

no.
Moses and Elijah are with Jesus just like Stephen Act 7:59
you sure work hard on your denial of the truth

Yes, but a parable, not a reality.

Luk 16:19-31 truth , no lies.

Same concept as Romans 4:17.

no, you're still wrong

But Abraham was not yet a father of many nations and we have a mixture of present and future tenses.
Genesis 17:4–6 (KJV): 4 As for me, behold, my covenant is with thee, and thou shalt be a father of many nations. 5 Neither shall thy name any more be called Abram, but thy name shall be Abraham; for a father of many nations have I made thee. 6 And I will make thee exceeding fruitful, and I will make nations of thee, and kings shall come out of thee.

Rom 4:17 is referring to Gen. 17:5 hence Abram to Abraham calling the things that are not as if they were

according as it has been written, "I have appointed you a father of many nations;" before God, whom he believed, the One making the dead live, and calling the things that are not as if they were.

No. Jesus used many colourful methods to teach. He speaks of swallowing a camel and a man with a beam in his eye.
But this is the rich man speaking, giving the Pharisee perspective. Jesus gives his own perspective when he speaks of the resurrection.

so what part of Luke 16:19-31 is a lie ?

2 Corinthians 5:8–10 (KJV): 8 We are confident, I say, and willing rather to be absent from the body, and to be present with the Lord. 9 Wherefore we labour, that, whether present or absent, we may be accepted of him. 10 For we must all appear before the judgment seat of Christ; that every one may receive the things done in his body, according to that he hath done, whether it be good or bad.
There is no mention of going to heaven, but the future judgement seat and acceptance or rejection.

I guess you don't know where Jesus is .

Act 7:56 And said, Behold, I see the heavens opened, and the Son of man standing on the right hand of God.

 

[TrevorL]

Greetings again way 2 go,

no Abraham is alive Luk 16:25 But Abraham said, no. Moses and Elijah are with Jesus just like Stephen Act 7:59 you sure work hard on your denial of the truth

I appreciate your response. I was considering the length of this thread and I have not read much of the many posts. I imagine some of what we are now discussing has been mentioned in some of these posts. Moses and Elijah appeared in glory. Do immortal souls look similar to a man and his body? Or are they like ghosts?

I would like to mention two things. I was reading the following a few days ago, and it simply defines death:
John 21:18-19 (KJV): 18 Verily, verily, I say unto thee, When thou wast young, thou girdedst thyself, and walkedst whither thou wouldest: but when thou shalt be old, thou shalt stretch forth thy hands, and another shall gird thee, and carry thee whither thou wouldest not. 19 This spake he, signifying by what death he should glorify God. And when he had spoken this, he saith unto him, Follow me. 23 Then went this saying abroad among the brethren, that that disciple should not die: yet Jesus said not unto him, He shall not die; but, If I will that he tarry till I come, what is that to thee?
Death is when our bodies die, we cease to breathe, and contrary to what you claim, I believe that we are no longer conscious.

Luk 16:19-31 truth , no lies. so what part of Luke 16:19-31 is a lie ?

The second thing I would like to briefly consider is the Rich Man and Lazarus. Again I suggest that this may have been already discussed in this long thread. The following are a few of the problems that I have in accepting that Jesus is relating actual events and you may like to comment on each of the following:
1. The term “Abraham’s bosom”. Is this heaven or some other place?
2. Can those in hell see those in heaven?
3. Is Jesus talking about the immortal souls of the Rich Man and Lazarus?
4. Do immortal souls have tongues and fingers?
5. Would a few drops of water on the Rich Man’s tongue cool his tongue?

I guess you don't know where Jesus is .Act 7:56 And said, Behold, I see the heavens opened, and the Son of man standing on the right hand of God.

Yes, Jesus the Son of God is seated at the right hand of God the Father Psalm 110:1. When we die we await his return to raise the dead 2 Timothy 4:1,6-8. After death our next conscious moment will be with Jesus, and we will be gathered together with all the faithful Hebrews 11:39-40.

Kind regards
Trevor