Pope Resigns - Sign Of The Times?

Discussion in 'Bible Study' started by Silk, Feb 28, 2013.

  1. There are some grave implications if indeed this story is not a parable, but a vivid description of conditions as they actually exist for all men immediately after death, as the preachers are determined to proclaim.
    If this parable is describing conditions actually as they will be in the life to come, then those in heaven will be able to talk to those in hell. Fathers and mothers, sisters and brothers, husbands and wives will be able to look across the gulf and see their loved ones in the torment of the fiery regions. Not only will they be able to see them in the lurid flames of hell, but they will hear their piercing cries as they call for a drop of water to cool their tongues.

    How awful that would be! Could anyone enjoy the bliss (?) of heaven while compelled to listen to the hopeless, screaming pleas of unsaved loved ones and friends just across the narrow gulf. Would not such horrific noise disturb the heavenly choir with its discord?

    Worse yet, could that satisfy the heart's love of our heavenly Father who went all the way to Golgotha to save us? Suppose a mother from the heavenly regions could look across the fixed gulf and see her son in the torments of hell; suppose she could hear him crying day and night for a drop of water to cool his tongue because of the burning heat of those lower regions. Would not the mother be as much in torment as the son, and in fact, would it not be more a place of hell for the mother than it would actually be for that son?

    Therefore, it would seem impossible for anyone to believe that in the parable of the rich man and Lazarus Jesus is depicting conditions exactly as they will be in that world to come.
    calvin likes this.
  2. This is the definition of 'parable' from Noah Webster: 'A fable or allegorical relation or representation of something real in life or nature, from which a moral is drawn for instruction; such as the parable of the trees choosing a king, Judges 9.; the parable of the poor man and his lamb, 2 Samuel 12.; the parable of the Ten Virgins, Matthew 25'.

    Many of the stories labled 'parables' in the scriptures by the 'scholars' do not necessarily show evidence that they actually are. For example the 'Parable of the Prodigal Son'. Many of these 'parables' are not so called by the inspired writers, nor do they contain any characteristics of fables. There is nothing 'impossible' about the story of the prodigal son. Since Jesus was God, and knew all things, he would have known many true stories which were powerful for making a point. As a preacher/Bible teacher I often relate 'true' stories that are designed to make a point, just as a parable. But that fact does not detract from the truth of the events related. I doubt that many of the 'parables' so called by the 'scholars' are really parables. Many of them were actual, real, historical events that Jesus used to make a point. (Such as Dives and Lazarus.) Anyone can label these stories as parables, but that is certainly not proof that they actually are.

    It was the liberal higher criticism of 19th century Germany that started the trend of scholars labeling the story of Dives and Lazarus as a parable. They were desperate to get rid of the doctrine of eternal retribution and to turn Jesus into a simple Deistic philosopher. Labeling this story as a parable provided the vehicle for doing just that.
  3. First off, Lazarus was not in heaven. The text clearly says he is in Abraham's bosom. Not the same thing.

    Secondly, God will wipe away all tears for the saved, so that they can no longer suffer any anguish.

    Revelation 21:4:

    'And God shall wipe away all tears from their eyes; and there shall be no more death, neither sorrow, nor crying, neither shall there be any more pain'

    Thirdly, in the Kingdom Age, they will look upon those who are in 'hell'. Isaiah 66:23,24 says,

    'And it shall come to pass, that from one new moon to another, and from one sabbath to another, shall all flesh come to worship before me, saith the LORD.
    And they shall go forth, and look upon the carcases of the men that have transgressed against me: for their worm shall not die, neither shall their fire be quenched; and they shall be an abhorring unto all flesh.'
    Major likes this.
  4. And your evidence of this statement?
  5. Oh...so....(and I find this strange) For almost 6,000 years (some say 4000) saved Jews have been cheek to jowl and aware of the tortures of the damned? Hardly makes a difference: the point is your theory has a consciousness link between the damned and the saved, wherever you wish to place them....IF this parable God uses is as literal a map of the after life as you suppose.
  6. Read some old books. This is pretty common knowledge. Most theologians prior to 1800 viewed this story literally, Liberals after 1800 viewed it as a parable. Get the Commentary on the whole Bible published by Abingdon in the 1930's. This modernist book declares that the story is a 'parable', following a host of liberal writings before it.
  7. Yes, they were apparently aware of the damned for all those centuries before Christ. There is nothing especially remarkable about that detail.

    I would be curious to know exactly what are your views concerning the intermediate state. I don't really know what you believe other than that you label this a parable. I would like to know what theological perspective you are coming from.
  8. "Common knowledge" is a weak platform in religion, my friend.
    I have over 3,000 Christian books dating back to 1842. You made the claim; the burden of proof is on you.Please, don't base your argument on an idea you will not prove.
  9. I gave you a source buddy, check it out.
  10. So you admit your....sorry, Darby's...idea is that faithful God fearing Jews must for thousands of years endure the screams of the damned...Thank you. I doubt seriously if any of us could endure that for week without going mad.

    My views. Well...hang around. My views are not so easily condensed and are not used as pulpits. At least you can know now for a fact they are NOT Darby and Schofield's in the main.
  11. Do you have the Abingdon source? Why not quote it....You made the claim...The burden of proof is on you, not me.

    You expect me to buy a book so you can prove your point??? Pass.

    (Back to those scholars again, are we?)
  12. The book is at my father's house. Shall I go out in the night to get the book, so you can just continue to scoff at what I say? You are not going to listen to me regardless of what I say or quote. I am not even discussing this to convince you. I am just trying to give a little food for thought to the others who are reading this.

    Would you characterize yourself as a universalist, or as a proponent of soul sleep? I have a theological education. I don't need a detailed explanation, just a general idea of where you are coming from.

    In quoting the Abingdon source, I am not relying on a scholar for interpretation, just citing evidence from history about what has been believed. You can relax. I am not suggesting scholars should be the source of interpretations here, either. But, I think you just like to attack those who dare to disagree with you.
  13. I did a 15 minute research: that Commentary is not online. Oh well..suggesting a historical source that neither you or I can use is....what?...not a hot idea.

    No one is scoffing, I just do not agree with you. And I am utter relaxed. Please stop the innuendos.

    If you indeed have a "theological education" you should know that not all Christians will agree with your take on the Scriptures.

    Stick around: I don't answer questions like a witness in the box facing an attorney. You can find my views...in my posts....Read them and see.
  14. I looked online as well, couldn't find it either.

    I certainly realize not everyone agrees with my views. I think it is pretty well established that fundamental Christianity is becoming a thing of the past.

    I don't have time to read everything you post. Are you affiliated with the universalist tentmakers?
  15. I am affiliated with no organization.

    Now...I plainly said "read my posts" to know my faith; I didn't suggest how you used your time (although any authentic participation in a forum will cost you time) or that you read ALL of my posts.

    So...stop the denominational cross-examination as it is ....well....not conducive to spirit of an all-embracing Christian forum. (See Forum Rules here:
    3.2b ChristianForumSite.com has a wide variety of members from around the World. This Forum does not allow the elevation of one Christian belief system over another. This is demeaning and belittling the beliefs of other Christians while promoting another system so as to create an atmosphere of superiority. Any such posts or threads will be removed and a reminder, warning or ban issued as necessary.)

    Proof that this sort of quizzing is often in bad taste:

    Earlier you said you promoted your ideas
    and something about your theological education. Now anyone who knows a lick about all branches of Plymouth Brethren know that there is NO ordained ministry...therefore no seminary as normal in Protestant circles....So whether you're an Open Brethren, and Exclusive Brethren (doubtful as you own a wicked computer) or a Church of God Brethren, it's hard to synch what you said to what these denominations teaches.

    Now, I will not corner you and prod for an answer as you are doing to me, but I am, as you like to say "only making a point"...However grilling as to one's church affiliation NEVER comes off well.

    I frankly don't care what flavour of Faith a person has; if they tell me , fine. If they don't (and most here don't) fine again.

    So time or no time, I will not attempt to save you time by making a compact creed out of my faith in Christ and His saving Blood.
  16. I am Open Brethren, and though we do not have an ordained clergy (Though there is actually a school, which I think we would probably be better off without.), there are those among us who are called to teach/preach and fulfill that ministry to edify the saints. Those of us who fulfill that role of ministry in the Assembly are not paid to do the preaching and teaching.

    Anyway, I was pretty open from the very beginning of my coming to this site exactly where I am coming from. Don't understand why others cannot have that same openess. However, since you seem to be unwilling to answer a reasonable question, I will leave you alone.
  17. I will point out as well that I did not ask you for a denominational affilliation, but concerning what your general theological perspective is.
  18. I'm glad you NOW have explained that because your comments before hand would make most Protestants here think otherwise since the above would not be "common knowledge" outside you small church.

    Yes...Your avatar is hard to miss.

    Openness about one's denominational stand is one thing; openness that trumpets "You will never convince me in a million years" is quite another.

    I have stated repeatedly throughout my time on this forum and on this thread that I have NO denominational attachments...How is that not open?

    I also have said I would not be cross-examined and spew condensed answers about my beliefs on demand. How is that not open?

    If you will not take the time to get to know a fellow Christian than don't bother asking secondary questions. We are not on this thread discussing theories of "soul sleep" or "Universalism".....Make a thread if you want to go there.
  19. Well I'm a tad confused :confused::confused::confused: In an earlier Post Mr Darby, you said that your Brethren (Plymouth) Aren't they rather 'closed'?
    My brother-in-law was a preacher in the brethren Church. I chased him out of my house (literally) so I don't know much about what he believes in except personal conceit. Yes even placid ol' me can be driven agro.:eek:
    Notwithstanding my microscopic flaws :), I do actually have a formal theological education. I will shortly go on an archaeological expedition to dig up your last reply to me and answer it.:) count to 10,000 by 0.001s while waiting:)
  20. So....What about the pope's resignation, anyway?

Share This Page