Gods wrath

[Pancho Frijoles]

So many consider the story of the rich man and Lazarus to be the teaching of the Lord concerning the state of the dead, yet if that were so then it would be a reflection of what is taught in Scripture generally, and not be a contradict of it, as it most assuredly is.

I agree with you, my brother, on the view that the main purpose of the story is not to teach dogma regarding the state of the dead.
Still, I can't imagine Jesus picking a story that could be interpreted in complete opposition to sound doctrine. Can you?
Certainly, it would be so easy for Jesus's enemies to accuse him to teach heresies.

I encourage you to consider that the state of dead among the Israelites evolved across centuries.
As you know, before the exile the most prevalent belief is that the dead went to a dark, quite place underground, the Shehol.
The dead did not cease to exist in general, but they ceased to exist for all daily worldy affaires. They were unconcious to this world. What did they do in Shehol? They didn't know and didn't care to explain. They were inexistent for all practical purposes.

Salvation, for the ancient Israelites, was a thing of this life. We were saved from drought, hunger, war, disease, poverty. By the same token, damnation was a thing of this life.

After the exile, though, they got in contact with zoroastrianism, one of the oldest monotheistic religions, that provided Jewish cosmogony or theology with important concepts. One of them was the retribution for dead according to their deeds. Zoroastrianism penetrated in Pharisees much more than in the Saducees.

So, when Jesus told the story of the rich and Lazarus, his audience was already acquainted with that concept.
Jesus didn't speak directly neither against nor in favor of mazdeist conception of a reward after death. But the very fact that he uses freely that concept, adorning his story with all details, when he could have chosen any other less controversial story, makes the case, in my opinion, that the existence of consciousness independent from brains was not a lie.

 

[Complete]

I agree with you, my brother, on the view that the main purpose of the story is not to teach dogma regarding the state of the dead.
Still, I can't imagine Jesus picking a story that could be interpreted in complete opposition to sound doctrine. Can you?
Certainly, it would be so easy for Jesus's enemies to accuse him to teach heresies.

I encourage you to consider that the state of dead among the Israelites evolved across centuries.
As you know, before the exile the most prevalent belief is that the dead went to a dark, quite place underground, the Shehol.
The dead did not cease to exist in general, but they ceased to exist for all daily worldy affaires. They were unconcious to this world. What did they do in Shehol? They didn't know and didn't care to explain. They were inexistent for all practical purposes.

Salvation, for the ancient Israelites, was a thing of this life. We were saved from drought, hunger, war, disease, poverty. By the same token, damnation was a thing of this life.

After the exile, though, they got in contact with zoroastrianism, one of the oldest monotheistic religions, that provided Jewish cosmogony or theology with important concepts. One of them was the retribution for dead according to their deeds. Zoroastrianism penetrated in Pharisees much more than in the Saducees.

So, when Jesus told the story of the rich and Lazarus, his audience was already acquainted with that concept.
Jesus didn't speak directly neither against nor in favor of mazdeist conception of a reward after death. But the very fact that he uses freely that concept, adorning his story with all details, when he could have chosen any other less controversial story, makes the case, in my opinion, that the existence of consciousness independent from brains was not a lie.

'Then understood they
how that He bade them not beware of the leaven of bread,
but of the doctrine of the Pharisees and of the Sadducees.'
(Mat 16:12)

Hello @Pancho Frijoles,

With respect: The story of the rich man and Lazarus is directed to the Pharisees and Sadducees who were deriding Him: and they were under no illusions about His meaning. He only ever spoke the words which were given Him of His Father: God the author of the Scriptures Himself, Who was well aware of their hypocrisy; for they transgressed the commandments of God by their traditions, thereby making them of none effect.

This story, placed alongside Pharisaic tradition acted as a mirror, exposing their hypocrisy and denial of the truth of God's word. It was they who believed that the dead could communicate with the living, and the concept of a place called ' Abraham's Bosom' was brought from their exile in Babylon, and is not to be found in the Scriptures of truth. It was they who excused their lack of generosity to the poor, by saying that they would receive their good things in the life to come.

The testimony of Scripture concerning the state of the dead denies that this story is a factual account.

Thank you again
In Christ Jesus
Our risen and glorified
Saviour, Lord and Head.
Chris

 

[Complete]

'Then understood they
how that He bade them not beware of the leaven of bread,
but of the doctrine of the Pharisees and of the Sadducees.'
(Matthew 16:12)

History, is a testament to the leavening action of the doctrine of the Pharisees and the Sadducees. This thread alone gives evidence to the fact, and spiritualism, in all it's many forms, gives further evidence that it fills the whole world with it's evil influence. Mankind has not listened to the word of our Lord - 'BEWARE!

In Christ Jesus
At God's right hand.
Who is far above
all principality, and power,
and might, and dominion,
and every name that is named,
not only in this world,
but also in that which is to come:
Chris

 

[civic]

'Then understood they
how that He bade them not beware of the leaven of bread,
but of the doctrine of the Pharisees and of the Sadducees.'
(Matthew 16:12)

History, is a testament to the leavening action of the doctrine of the Pharisees and the Sadducees. This thread alone gives evidence to the fact, and spiritualism, in all it's many forms, gives further evidence that it fills the whole world with it's evil influence. Mankind has not listened to the word of our Lord - 'BEWARE!

In Christ Jesus
At God's right hand.
Who is far above
all principality, and power,
and might, and dominion,
and every name that is named,
not only in this world,
but also in that which is to come:
Chris

The point of this thread was that Gods wrath only falls upon the rebellious, ungodly, reprobates who refuse to believe the gospel and never on believers, the righteous, the saints and especially the Holy, Righteous, Sinless Sons of God. Jesus is the One who dishes out Gods wrath not the One who receives Gods wrath as PSA teaches. A simple word search will prove wrath is never used of the Son as the One who receives wrath but in fact is the One who dishes out the wrath of God almighty.

hope this helps !!!

 

[Complete]

The point of this thread was that Gods wrath only falls upon the rebellious, ungodly, reprobates who refuse to believe the gospel and never on believers, the righteous, the saints and especially the Holy, Righteous, Sinless Sons of God. Jesus is the One who dishes out Gods wrath not the One who receives Gods wrath as PSA teaches. A simple word search will prove wrath is never used of the Son as the One who receives wrath but in fact is the One who dishes out the wrath of God almighty.

hope this helps !!!

Hello @civic,

Forgive me, for I have not ...

 

[civic]

Hello @civic,

Forgive me, for I have not

No worries I was just clarifying the intention of this thread and I'm ok with some threads having their own identity when it goes off topic as long as the dialogue is cordial. . At some other places online the posts will get deleted. Sometimes it's good to let a thread go in a direction that interests the members so I'm ok when a thread does that. Sometimes the moderators will try and redirect a thread and link the posters to that specific topic if it goes that direction and there are complaints.

 

[Complete]

The point of this thread was that Gods wrath only falls upon the rebellious, ungodly, reprobates who refuse to believe the gospel and never on believers, the righteous, the saints and especially the Holy, Righteous, Sinless Sons of God. Jesus is the One who dishes out Gods wrath not the One who receives Gods wrath as PSA teaches. A simple word search will prove wrath is never used of the Son as the One who receives wrath but in fact is the One who dishes out the wrath of God almighty.

hope this helps !!!

Hello @civic,

I am sorry to have deviated from the intent of the OP.
Thank you for drawing my attention to it.

I agree with your assessment regarding the wrath of God.

In Christ Jesus
Chris

 

[civic]

Hello @civic,

I am sorry to have deviated from the intent of the OP.
Thank you for drawing my attention to it.

In Christ Jesus
Chris

I didn't mind the discussion you were having with the others.

 

[Complete]

Forum Category:- Penal Substitutionary Atonement
Subject Heading:- God's Wrath

'He that believeth on the Son hath everlasting life:
and he that believeth not the Son shall not see life;
but the wrath of God abideth on him.'
(Joh 3:36)

'For this ye know, that no whoremonger, nor unclean person,
nor covetous man, who is an idolater,
hath any inheritance in the kingdom of Christ and of God.
Let no man deceive you with vain words:
for because of these things cometh the wrath of God
upon the children of disobedience.'
(Eph 5:5-6)

* Anger and Wrath are put for the punishments which flow from them.