14 IRRESOLVABLE CONTRADICTIONS WHICH RESULT FROM A LITERAL RICH MAN AND LAZARUS

[Phoneman777]

Though there were and have been true men throughout all ages who stood and contended for the truth faith
the problem within MUCH , but not all , of the protestant reformation was
though many of them had COME OUT of THE RCC , THE RCC was not fully removed from them .
THIS MESS led to disaster .
Its like the old saying goes , you can take the harlot out of the trailer park but you cant always get the trail park out of the harlot .
MANY of the leaders of the protestant realm had about enough truth to expose things about the RCC
but only enough to make themselves dangerous and THEY DID NOT COMPLETELY REMOVE all bad doctrines
but quickly rather just formed their own creeds and mottos . SOME , a few of the true lambs
saw this and they made an all out attempt to return to the original pattern left to us .
BOTH SIDES hated these true lambs . AND TODAY THEY HATE THEM EVEN MORE SO
as now both sides are being UNIFIED ONCE AGAIN and THAT WITH ALL THE RLEIGOINS to the cry of a HARLOT
WE IN TROUBLE . WE ARE IN TROUBLE . GET THE PEOPLE BACK INTO JUST , and i mean JUST the BIBLE .

So true. Even in colonial America, Protestant religious intolerance was a real thing, though no where near that of the papacy. It took a while for "religious freedom" to actually shake itself loose of bigotry, however well meaning they were. There was actually a requirement that a man could not hold public elected office if he didn't go to church.

 

[David in NJ]

BY CORRECTLY CONCLUDING that the story of Rich Man and Lazarus is a parable, we maintain Scriptural harmony, discern a valuable lesson from its interpretation, and put an end to its illegitimate use as a "proof text" for the doctrine of Eternal Torment - because any Bible scholar worth his salt knows we can't substantiate a doctrine on an uninterpreted parable. Here are 14 irresolvable contradictions which result from attempts to make the passage literal:

1. DISEMBODIED BODIES?
The Eternal Torment crowd claims when a person dies his body is buried, but “his disembodied soul" leaves this world to points beyond without a body - so, why do the Rich Man, Lazarus, and Abraham have eyes, fingers, tongues, bosoms, legs to carry a warning, etc.? Obviously, "disembodied souls" by definition do not have bodies, and thus can't have eyes, tongues, fingers, bosoms, etc.

Now, before anyone jumps to any conclusions, we need to remember that 2 Corinthians 5:1 KJV plainly identifies only two types of bodies - the mortal and the resurrection - and that's the only two types of bodies God's Bible knows about. There's no mention in Scripture of any third type “interim body” for the dead prior to the resurrection, so extra-Biblical ideas about a "disembodied body" or "ghost body" or "temporary body" are pure fiction and warrant no consideration whatsoever.

2. ABRAHAM'S LITERAL BOSOM?
Lazarus was carried “into Abraham's bosom" - are we to believe all the righteous dead up until that time have been carried into Abraham's literal bosom? How big can Abraham's bosom be?

Now, those who claim “Abraham's Bosom” is a literal, actual name for “heaven” or “paradise” need to read Luke 16:23 KJV which says the Rich Man sees Abraham afar off and Lazarus "in his bosom” - in the bosom of the man himself - which is physiological, not geographical.

3. LYING EYES?
The Rich Man is able to see “Abraham afar off and Lazarus in his bosom” aka “place of comfort” aka “the kingdom” - but Jesus Himself said the wicked won't see the righteous in the kingdom until the end, in the Judgment, when the wicked are told to “depart”. Yet, here we find Lazarus and Abraham in full view of the Rich Man.

Now, for those who claim these dead guys are actually in some supposed “holding chamber” next door to hell called “paradise” (now that we've seen “Abraham's Bosom” is a purely fictitious place), we must remember that “paradise” is easily shown from the Scriptures themselves to be where God is up there, not anywhere near hell down here.

4. THE DEAD KNOW NOT ANYTHING
(Ecclesiastes 9:5 KJV; Job 14:21 KJV; Psalm 146:4 KJV)

These dead guys sure seem to know a whole lot for people who aren't supposed to know anything.

5. THE DEAD DON'T REMEMBER ANYTHING
(Psalms 6:5 KJV; Ecclesiastes 9:5 KJV; Psalms 88:12 KJV)

These dead guys are sure able to remember a whole lot for people who aren't supposed to remember anything.

6. THE DEAD DON'T HAVE EMOTIONS
(Ecclesiastes 9:6 KJV; Proverbs 10:28 KJV)

These dead guys do a great job of demonstrating loving concern and also condescending disdain for people who aren't supposed to be able to have emotions.

7. THE DEAD DON'T PERFORM WORK
(Ecclesiastes 9:10 KJV; John 9:4 KJV)

The dead Rich Man mustn't have gotten the memo that Lazarus had finished his shift and clocked out - permanently.

8. THE DEAD DON'T DEVISE ANYTHING
(Ecclesiastes 9:10 KJV)

The dead Rich Man was well able to devise a plan to warn his brothers for someone unable to do so.

9. THE DEAD DON'T HAVE WISDOM
(Ecclesiastes 9:10 KJV; Proverbs 2:6 KJV)

Dead Abraham was well able give wise testimony about the convicting power of the Word of God for someone unable to do so.

10. THE DEAD DON'T PRAISE GOD
(Isaiah 38:18 KJV; Psalms 115:17 KJV; Psalms 88:11 KJV)

Dead Abraham sure spoke highly of God's Word for someone unable to do so.

11. THE DEAD ARE IN DARKNESS
(Psalms 88:12 KJV; Job 10:21-22 KJV)

These dead guys must all have been wearing night vision goggles to see through all that darkness.

12. THE DEAD ARE IN SILENCE
(Psalms 115:17 KJV; Psalm 31:17 KJV)

These dead guys were loud enough to wake the rest of the dead what with all that shouting back and forth at each other across that great gulf.

13. THE DEAD ARE ASLEEP
(Psalms 13:3 KJV; Ephesians 5:14 KJV; John 11:11-14 KJV)

These dead guys are fully awake and aware of their surroundings, especially the thirsty guy whose completely engulfed in flames of torment.

14. THE DEAD ARE RESERVED FOR FUTURE TORMENT
(2 Peter 2:9 KJV; Revelation 20:10 KJV)

The dead Rich Man must have been pretty bad to find himself immediately in flames of torment since God Himself says He's “reserved the unjust unto the day of Judgment to be punished”.

Rich man and Lazarus are 100% LITERAL

 

[Ronald Nolette]

Matthew 13:18 (KJV):
(18) Hear ye therefore the parable of the sower.Matthew 13:18 (YLT - Young's Literal Translation)
(18) 'Ye, therefore, hear ye the simile of the sower:Matthew 13:18 (LSV - Literal Standard Version):
(18) You, therefore, hear the allegory of the sower:

See Jesus made sure all knew this was a parable.

Jesus was telling a fictional story, he was not referring to an actual person - he was not a journalist reporting on an actual event, or spreading gossip. Similarly, when he said "a certain rich man" in Luke 16 he was not referring to an actual real person - it was just a fictional story.

And you know this how? Jesus did not reveal it as a parable, it does not contain comparative language. Jesus is God and He would have known of that "certain man". YOu throw a red herring with sayying journalist.

The Rich Man and LazarusLuke 16:19-31
It is evident from the whole setting of this passage that it is a parable.Otherwise the logical lesson to be drawn from it is that unless we are poorbeggars, full of sores, we will never enter eternal bliss; and that futuretorment will be our portion if we happen to wear fine linen and purple and faresumptuously every day. And, if taken literally, those who are poor are taken,not to heaven, but to Abraham's bosom. However, the context of this passageshows that Christ in this parable was teaching a great dispensational truth,namely, the change of favor from the Mosaic Law Covenant to the Covenant offaith. (Luke 16:16-18; Galatians 3:6-29) If you read carefully the 32ndchapter of Deuteronomy, you will see that Jesus was merely repeating in vividpictorial language what Moses had already said. See particularly verses 20 to29; and also Paul's quotation of the 21st verse in Romans 10:19, where he showsthat Moses' prophecy referred to the overthrow of Israel consequent upon Jesus'rejection of that nation.

This is this mans opinion and not Scripture. there is nothing in the account of Lazarus and the rich man to tell us it is not to be taken literally. On the contrary

Matthew 13:3 (KJV):
(3) And he spake many things unto them in parables, saying, Behold, a sower went forth to sow;Luke 13:6 (KJV):
(6) He spake also this parable; A certain man had a fig tree planted in his vineyard; and he came and sought fruit thereon, and found none.

See here? Scripture tells us these are parables, so we know not to take them literally. But when Jesus says "there was a certain man" and it is not identified with comparative language or that it is identified as a parable, there is no reason to accept it as such other than personal bias.

That article appears to come from the Watchtower. They use identical language as the Watchtower.

 

[Phoneman777]

That does not sound feasible. People would come up with their own Bible by crossing scriptures out.

Cross out false ideas about the Scriptures and leave the Scriptures and the truth therein intact.

If 2 Corinthians 5 plainly states there's only TWO kinds of bodies - the mortal and resurrection - the only explanation for why Jesus said the Rich Man, Lazarus, and Abraham have post-death, pre-resurrection "bodies" is that He was speaking in parable, the things in which often cannot and to not happen in real experience - just as Psalms 78:1-2 KJV says He would.

 

[Phoneman777]

Rich man and Lazarus are 100% LITERAL

Nah, 100% parable - because of the many contradictions which arise by making it literal.

Don't you guys care at all about hermeneutical consistency?

 

[Phoneman777]

... a "living" soul. I am talking about a dead soul. Maybe you don't understand what death is? The Bible describes death and equates it to something deeper than a lifeless body in a coffin six feet deep.

If you understood a "soul" is the "whole" that results from the union of its two parts - "body" and "breath of life" - then you'd know the "whole" ceases to be when the parts return to from whence they came at death.

That is a Living human soul.

Correct.

A dead human does not breath and his flesh rots in the ground.

Correct.

He does not go out-of existence. If so, you would have to delete many descriptions about death and I can give you a list.

Wrong, because a "soul" isn't an "ghost" that inhabits a body - a soul is a "whole" comprised of its "body" and "breath" parts. At death, when the body rots and the breath returns, the "soul" ceases to be.

We are made in God's image. Do you know exactly what that means?

Yes, bring forth in our image and rule over dominion - two gifts He shared with no other order of being, not even the angels.

It is not a visible form as one would see in the mirror. Since God is invisible, we are made with His attributes: a mind, will, emotions, creativity, etc.

Sorry, but angels have all that, as well - yet we rank higher than angels.

As for your above definition, is that applicable to God? No.

No, but "bring forth" and "rule over dominion" sure do apply.

If only people like you who think "in God's image" means "immortal" would read 1 Corinthians 6:16 to find out just how "immortal" we are.

OUR FATHER HAS A SOUL.
"Behold, My Servant whom I have chosen; My Beloved in whom My soul is well-pleased". Matt. 12:18

Ahhh, the "possessive pronoun" argument. Look, "my soul" is identical to "my life" which means "my whole person" - not some "ghost" that inhabits a body and flies off at death. THAT COMES FROM PAGANISM.

 

[Phoneman777]

something that many do not know and even wickipedia did not deny is
there is a seat and a name and the name adds up to SIX HUNDRED THREE SCORE and SIX .
and aint it something that from that seat IT HAS INFLUENCED the kings of this earth and now
even through interfaith , that which IS OF ANTI CHRIST , it is merging all to come as one under its shade .
EVEN WICKEPIDIA did not deny that the number is SIX HUNDRED THREE SCORE AND SIX
it just tried to claim , NO POPE ever used that title . NOW YA KNOW WHO AND WHAT SYSTEM I SPEAK OF MY FRIEND .
it has been , it has killed before and it has grown in size , power and influence and SHE WILL KILL AGAIN . mark them words .

Vicarius = 112
Filii = 53
Dei = 501

The letters in the pope's miter, which mean "Vicar of the Son of God".

You don't get any more "antichrist" aka "take the place of Christ" than that.

 

[Phoneman777]

Well you are on a thread where teh super majority are believers and love the truth, so that is an irrelevant point.

I prefer to let doctrines - not professions - be the the test as to whether we're on the right track.

If you want to show truth, prove that Lazarus is a parable, you have not.

14 contradictions ain't enough proof for you?

 

[amigo de christo]

So true. Even in colonial America, Protestant religious intolerance was a real thing, though no where near that of the papacy. It took a while for "religious freedom" to actually shake itself loose of bigotry, however well meaning they were. There was actually a requirement that a man could not hold public elected office if he didn't go to church.

The kingdom now mentality has struck all denominations .
The gospel will be silenced and the only thing protected will be the all inclusive who expose no sins and just get along .
BETTER MARK THEM WORDS WELL cause its building fast
and , and my dear friend DO NOT think religious freedom tolerance act is gonna protect a LAMB ONE .
Not a one . we been duped . i tried to warn us that ALL realms had been infiltrated . ALL have been .
WE better bible up and never look back is all i can say .

 

[Phoneman777]

I am a body, soul and spirit as Paul asked to be blessed.

"Body" and "Spirit" are what comprise the "soul". Paul's saying he wants the parts as well as the entire whole blessed in like manner when mom used to say when we were kids, "When I get back I want the bathroom, the bedrooms, the entire house, cleaned top to bottom".

also Pual taught us that when we are absent from the body, we are present with the Lord! So there is more to us than just the body which in the OT was called nephesh or soul.

He taught no such thing. Paul merely was expressing his preference ("Therefore, we are confident and willing rather to be absent...")

Hungry saints often would "rather be absent from the church pew and to be present at the Cracker Barrel" - does this preference allow them to skip the drive there or do they still have to fight traffic?

Paul's preference was to be absent from the body, skip lying "naked" and "unclothed" without a body, dead, in the grave, awaiting the resurrection, and just go on to be with the Lord in his resurrection body.

Just remember that the OT did not have the knowledge of spiritual things we in the NT have. God di dnot reveal everything all at once, but revealed it progressively over time.

Not on the subject of what happens when we die.

Even Paul noted that several things he revealed were mysteries in the old.

Not on the subject of death or the reward of the wicked. Didn't Malachi say the punishment of the wicked "shall leave them neither root nor branch"?

This was a proverb among the Hebrews to indicate "complete and total destruction - nothing left". Not my words, but the words of the best Hebraists in history (the honest ones, at least).

Even the NT says "there shall be NO MORE DEATH nor SORROW nor CRYING, neither shall there be any more PAIN, for the former things are passed away".

Let's not pretend the NT says anything differently about death than the OT - the evidence simply doesn't support this popular yet erroneous idea.

 

[amigo de christo]

Vicarius = 112
Filii = 53
Dei = 501

The letters in the pope's miter, which mean "Vicar of the Son of God".

You don't get any more "antichrist" aka "take the place of Christ" than that.

even wickepedia knew that number was SIXhunred three score and six . didnt even DENY IT .
But sure tried to down play it . Remember judas iscariot .
WHO entered into judas . And what did JESUS later call him , None is lost save The SON of perdition .
JUDAS was not a man that was on the outside either . HIMS WAS FROM WITHIN
so marvel not that the dragon and his minsitirs can come cloaked with and in wool .

 

[Phoneman777]

Your interpretation lacks wisdom.

If mine lacks wisdom, then yours lacks wisdom along with common sense logic, reason, hermeneutical consistency, etc.

Abraham's bosom is just an expression that when when Lazarus arrived in Paradise, he was greeted by Abraham with a hug, as anyone can greet you, put their arm around you up against their bosom.

Do you even read my stuff? Of course, "Abraham's bosom" refers to his chest area where we hug people.

Which is why this is a parable: because it's not reasonable to claim his bosom is big enough to hold all the righteous dead up until that time.

 

[amigo de christo]

SOUND the TRUMPET , the ENEMY has taken the realm of christendom and now leads many to their own death .
a trogan horse in the name of peace has been delivered unto the churches and the false religoins
but within that horse are men with doctrines and they will inflitrate and have taken over whole houses to a lie .
TO A LIE that will not save them , THOUGH IT HOLLERS IT IS LOVE and though it hollers
it is of GOD and is his plan for peace , HEED IT NOT . IT HAS DENIED JESUS THE CHRIST and cometh OF ANTI CHRIST .

 

[Grailhunter]

Cross out false ideas about the Scriptures and leave the Scriptures and the truth therein intact.

If 2 Corinthians 5 plainly states there's only TWO kinds of bodies - the mortal and resurrection - the only explanation for why Jesus said the Rich Man, Lazarus, and Abraham have post-death, pre-resurrection "bodies" is that He was speaking in parable, the things in which often cannot and to not happen in real experience - just as Psalms 78:1-2 KJV says He would.

Again I am not trying to explain the inaccuracies. I am saying that the inaccuracies do not matter, it is the message that matters. If anything the inaccuracies demonstrate to those listening to Him in that time period that it was the storyline and the moral to the story that was the point.

No one in that time period thought that Abraham had a lap full of people in the afterlife. In the bosom of Abraham was a cliché a figure of speech, in good graces or in a place of comfort. The meaning of it all was that you need to make your choice for Christ now, before it is too late. And if you do not, you will regret it as you stand in that fiery furnace for eternity.

And that is real and spot on.....faith in God's Son and a God Himself or pack the barbeque sause in your coffin because you will be sizzling for eternity. That also goes for those that do not think that Christ is God or Hell is real. They will learn that Hell is real and Christ is God.

 

[amigo de christo]

Again I am not trying to explain the inaccuracies. I am saying that the inaccuracies do not matter, it is the message that matters. If anything the inaccuracies demonstrate to those listening to Him in that time period that it was the storyline and the moral to the story that was the point.

No one in that time period thought that Abraham had a lap full of people in the afterlife. In the bosom of Abraham was a cliché a figure of speech, in good graces or in a place of comfort. The meaning of it all was that you need to make your choice for Christ now before it is too late. And if you do not, you will regret it as you stand in that fiery furnace for eternity.

And that is real and spot on.....faith in God's Son and a God Himself or pack the barbeque sause in your coffin because you will be sizzling for eternity. That also goes for those that do not think that Christ is God. They will learn that Hell is real and Christ is God.

lets just add a wee tiny bit more to this .
You said faith in Gods SON and God himself . the two are one . if man has no faith in the SON , that man hAS NO FAITH IN THE
FATHER WHO SENT HIM . thanks for allowing the reminder .

 

[Phoneman777]

Again I am not trying to explain the inaccuracies. I am saying that the inaccuracies do not matter, it is the message that matters.

How can inaccurate hermeneutics result anything but inaccurate messages?

"Judas went and hanged himself".
"Go and do likewise".

We can find a message in there, but it's not Biblical by a longshot.

 

[Grailhunter]

lets just add a wee tiny bit more to this .
You said faith in Gods SON and God himself . the two are one . if man has no faith in the SON , that man hAS NO FAITH IN THE
FATHER WHO SENT HIM . thanks for allowing the reminder .

Not going to get into the one thing.

I believe in…
God the Father…Yahweh…God Almighty…Creator of Heaven and Earth and Adam and Eve…..
God the Son…Yeshua…the Son of God…Messiah…Savior.
The Holy Spirit…the unnamed God…helper…guide… teacher… strengthener….nurturer…..

I believe the word Trinity expresses three Gods in unity. Tri-unity
Triune would be three in one.
But you can add them up any way you like.

McKenzie dictionary on the Trinity
The trinity of God is defined by the (Catholic) Church as the belief that in God are three persons who subsist in one nature. The belief as so defined was reached only in the 4th and 5th centuries AD and hence is not explicitly and formally a biblical belief.

 

[Grailhunter]

How can inaccurate hermeneutics result anything but inaccurate messages?

"Judas went and hanged himself".
"Go and do likewise".

We can find a message in there, but it's not Biblical by a longshot.

Now you are shooting in the dark because you know that you are wrong.

 

[amigo de christo]

Not going to get into the one thing.

I believe in…
God the Father…Yahweh…God Almighty…Creator of Heaven and Earth and Adam and Eve…..
God the Son…Yeshua…the Son of God…Messiah…Savior.
The Holy Spirit…the unnamed God…helper…guide… teacher… strengthener….nurturer…..

I believe the word Trinity expresses three Gods in unity. Tri-unity
Triune would be three in one.
But you can add them up any way you like.

McKenzie dictionary on the Trinity
The trinity of God is defined by the (Catholic) Church as the belief that in God are three persons who subsist in one nature. The belief as so defined was reached only in the 4th and 5th centuries AD and hence is not explicitly and formally a biblical belief.

So then you believe CHRIST is GOD . THE FATHER , THE SON , THE SPIRIT are one .
WELL of course that is true .
SO if one denies JESUS is the CHRIST , GUESS WHO that means THEY JUST DENIED . GOD HIMSELF . just a friendly reminder .

 

[amigo de christo]

So odd that people think jews , muslims , buddists , hindus and atheist and whatever ist all have thier own way to GOD .
RATHER ODD that GOD HIMSELF SAID QUITE the OPPOSITE to even the jews .
AS HE told them who beleived not JESUS, ye are of your father THE DEVIL . IF ONE DENIES JESUS , THEY DO DENY GOD .
a fact we better hurry up and start remembering again .