Does Luke 16:19-31 speak of purgatory?

User avatar
darinhouston
Posts: 3114
Joined: Tue Aug 26, 2008 7:45 am

Does Luke 16:19-31 speak of purgatory?

Post by darinhouston » Fri Jan 09, 2009 12:03 pm

tom wrote:
darinhouston wrote:In any event, "alive" spiritually in heaven with Christ does not seem to have the same meaning as "alive" here on earth, and the great chasm between hades/heaven/earth etc. would suggest that there is no way to communicate or observe across it (unless you're God of course).
I think you may have written this too fast and not read through this passage, (Luke 16:19-31). The context of this passage is they can see what's going on between the chasm! There's understanding and conversation going on between the two sides. The Bible teaches that the Saints in Heaven know what's going on and can pray for us.

Tom
There a number of views of this passage, none of them seem to strongly favor a purgatorial view. Steve has pointed out that early Rabbinical traditions see this as a well-known fictitious story being used by Christ to teach a spiritual point not about the afterlife so much as a spiritual truth. This would be to see the story as something like "Pinnochio" -- something well known to the audience of the day that could be used to illustrate a point.

Other views are that the rich man represented the King or the High Priest -- wearing purple, having control of the gates -- each had 7 brothers, etc.

I don't have a lot to say about this passage, but I don't see it teaching Purgatory and hope that others will want to contribute.

User avatar
kaufmannphillips
Posts: 585
Joined: Sun Dec 21, 2008 8:00 pm

Re: Does Luke 16:19-31 speak of purgatory?

Post by kaufmannphillips » Fri Jan 09, 2009 12:13 pm

darinhouston wrote:
Steve has pointed out that early Rabbinical traditions see this as a well-known fictitious story being used by Christ to teach a spiritual point not about the afterlife so much as a spiritual truth. This would be to see the story as something like "Pinnochio" -- something well known to the audience of the day that could be used to illustrate a point.
(a) I suppose one difference is that virtually no (adult) audience would consider the premises of "Pinnochio" to actually be true; the same might not have been true for Jesus' first-century audience.

(b) Why would Jesus use this kind of fictional story, when it could play into doctrinal error? Would there not have been a doctrinally accurate way to make his point?
========================
"The more something is repeated, the more it becomes an unexamined truth...." (Nicholas Thompson)
========================

User avatar
darinhouston
Posts: 3114
Joined: Tue Aug 26, 2008 7:45 am

Re: Does Luke 16:19-31 speak of purgatory?

Post by darinhouston » Fri Jan 09, 2009 2:49 pm

kaufmannphillips wrote:
darinhouston wrote:
Steve has pointed out that early Rabbinical traditions see this as a well-known fictitious story being used by Christ to teach a spiritual point not about the afterlife so much as a spiritual truth. This would be to see the story as something like "Pinnochio" -- something well known to the audience of the day that could be used to illustrate a point.
(a) I suppose one difference is that virtually no (adult) audience would consider the premises of "Pinnochio" to actually be true; the same might not have been true for Jesus' first-century audience.
Maybe Pinnochio's a bad example, but even so -- do you really think 1000 years from now anyone would know for sure that Pinnochio was anything but a proper name? Or Harry Potter? or Charlie Brown? We have little beyond conjecture or the rumored Rabbinic tradition but it's at least as reasonable as other theories considering how this is just about the only place in Scripture such a concept is discussed.
kaufmannphillips wrote:(b) Why would Jesus use this kind of fictional story, when it could play into doctrinal error? Would there not have been a doctrinally accurate way to make his point?
Why not? The same could be said for almost all of Jesus' parables. How many doctrinal disputes have arisen based on understandings of the story of the Prodigal son, for example, or the talents or the unjust steward?

User avatar
darinhouston
Posts: 3114
Joined: Tue Aug 26, 2008 7:45 am

Re: Does Luke 16:19-31 speak of purgatory?

Post by darinhouston » Fri Jan 09, 2009 3:04 pm

I came across this interesting post....

from http://cfmin.wordpress.com/2007/07/09/
CONTRADICTIONS OF A LITERAL INTERPRETATION

If this parable is taken literally, we will find more than a few hundred major problems with the rest of God’s revealed Word.

One will have to use a black marker or cut from the Bible most verses dealing with spirit, soul, body, death, resurrection, immortality, grave, hades, sheol, sin, punishment, chastisement, firstfruits, rewards, justification, reconciliation, prophecy, grace, salvation and the sovereignty of God, just to name a few! All of these contradict the idea that this parable can be literal. All of them.

“Now the poor man came to die and he is carried away by messengers into Abraham’s bosom.”

Impossible. This statement if taken literally is neither historical nor Scriptural. Many say this represents Lazarus in Heaven. How, pray tell, could Lazarus be in Heaven while his Lord was still on the earth?

“Yet now Christ has been roused from among the dead, the firstfruit of those who are reposing.” (I Cor. 15:20).

Abraham wasn’t the “firstfruit.” Lazarus wasn’t the “firstfruit.” JESUS CHRIST WAS THE FIRSTFRUIT OF THEM THAT SLEPT! The latter fruit, Paul tells us, “are [still] reposing.”

Jesus plainly said, not only had David not ascended into the heavens, but that

“NO MAN has ascended up to heaven, but he that came down from heaven.”(John 3:13).

Teaching that this parable is a literal historical fact makes Christ out to be a liar. When our Lord was alive on this earth giving us this parable, He said: “…NO MAN HAS ASCENDED UP TO HEAVEN…” So how can it be said that at the same time our Lord was telling us that no man has ascended up to heaven, that Lazarus and Abraham are already up in heaven? This is not just an interesting sidelight or opinion of Ray Smith. THIS IS ABSOLUTE, INFALLIBLE SCRIPTURAL PROOF THAT WHEN JESUS GAVE THIS PARABLE THERE WAS NO MAN NAMED LAZARUS LIVING IN HEAVEN WITH ABRAHAM OR ANYONE ELSE!! So here then is just one of the hundreds of problems with the Scriptures if we insist this parable is literal.

There are many Scriptures that tell us where a person goes when he”dies.” The Scriptures say he “returns” from where he “came.” So if he goes to Heaven, then he “came” from Heaven; if he goes to Hell, then he “came” from Hell. But Scriptures do not teach that people “RETURN” to heaven or hell when they die. Read these plain and simple verses that tell us exactly where man came from and where he goes when he dies:

“…till you return [Hebrew, shub] unto the ground; for out of it were you taken: for dust you are, and unto dust shall you return” (Gen. 3:17-19).

“Remember I pray you that as clay you did make me, and unto dust you will cause me to return” (Job 10:9)

“You cause man to return unto dust…” (Psa. 90:3).

“His spirit [the Hebrew word here is ruach, spirit, not neshamah, breath] goes forth, he returns to his earth; in that very day his thoughts perish” (Psa. 146:3-4).

“…you gather in their spirit [Hebrew ruach, spirit] they expire [Hebrew gava, breathe out, gasp, expire], and return to their dust” (Psa. 104:29).

“For that which befalls the sons of men befalls beasts; … as the one dies, so dies the other; yea, they have all one spirit; and man has no preeminence above the beasts [in death]: for all is vanity. All go unto one place; all are of the dust, and all return to dust again” (Ecc. 3:18-21).

Will any of my readers seriously contend that BEASTS return to either heaven or hell when they die? Have we not just read in Ecc. 3:18-21 that “ALL [both men and beasts] go unto ONE PLACE?” And aren’t “heaven AND hell” TWO PLACES rather that “ONE PLACE?” Am I going too fast for anyone?

For sure our Saviour’s words are so true–the babes in Christ (minors) can understand these spiritual things, but the wise in the wisdom of this world cannot understand them.

Here is irrefutable Scriptural proof that when a person dies he returns to the dust. Messengers or angels don’t take dead people anywhere when they die. If this is literal, then they would have had to carry a “dead” Lazarus into the ancient cave of a “dead” Abraham. The “resurrection” is yet future (I Thes. 4:16:18).

Remember how Paul told us of Hymeneus and Philetus who “…swerve as to truth, saying that the resurrection has ALREADY OCCURRED [as defenders of a literal interpretation also contend] subverting the faith of some.” (II Tim. 2:18)? Lazarus was carried (in the parable) into Abraham’s bosom. Abraham’s bosom is not the reward of the saved. Abraham’s bosom is not Heaven. Furthermore, no more than one person could fit into Abraham’s bosom. It’s a parable.

When Jesus gave this parable was Abraham alive in heaven or dead in his grave? First notice what Gen. 25:8-9 says:

“Then Abraham gave up the ghost, and died … and his sons Isaac and Ishmael buried him in a cave…”

When Jesus was teaching these parables Abraham was still dead. “Abraham IS DEAD” (John 8:52)! After Christ’s crucifixion and resurrection (nearly 30 years after) Abraham was still dead.

“By faith Abraham … sojourns in the land of promise … he waited for the city having foundations, whose Artificer and Architect is God … In faith DIED ALL THESE [Abraham included], being not requited with the promises … for He [God] makes ready for them a city” (Heb. 11:8,9,10,13,16).

Abraham had not yet as of the writing of the book of Hebrews received the promises God made to him. Besides Abraham was not promised Heaven, but this earth along with King David (Jer. 30:9) and the Twelve Apostles who will be ruling over the twelve tribes of Israel on this earth (Rev. 5:10). And the “City,” New Jerusalem, comes down from heaven to the New Earth.

By the way, after Christ’s resurrection, we read that King David as well was also still dead.

“…David, that he is both dead and buried, and his sepulcher is with us unto this day…” “For David is NOT ascended into the heavens…” (Acts 2:29 & 34).

So consider: At the time Christ taught this parable, Abraham was STILL DEAD, David (a man after God’s own heart) was STILL DEAD and the Scripture specifically tells us that David DID NOT ASCEND INTO HEAVEN. Then to remove all doubt and speculation regarding heaven, Christ plainly stated that, “NO MAN HAS ASCENDED INTO HEAVEN!” Which part of the word “NO” is it that theologians do not understand?

“Now the rich man also died, and was entombed. And in the unseen [Gk: hades], lifting up his eyes…” (Ver. 23)

Impossible. He died, was entombed, and lifted up his eyes? Where did he get a body in hades, seeing that they just sealed his body in a tomb? Have you never heard of exhuming a body from a grave? Six days, six months, six years after death, when they open a grave, the body is still there. And it’s usually rotten and the “eyes” are decayed away.

“…was entombed…and in the unseen [hades], lifting up his eyes…”

If, as theologians teach that the grave is one place and hades is another place, then no man can have his body “entombed” while at the same time the eyes of his body can be lifted up in a place called “hades.” And we know his body was still in the tomb, so how can he be simultaneously in hades with a new body?

And how could this man “literally” lift up his eyes in “hell” seeing that hell is the translation of the Greek word hades which means the UNSEEN or IMPERCEPTIBLE? To “see” one can’t be in the UNSEEN, nor can it be a place of NO perception. The parable says that he “died” and was entombed, but that he “lifts up his eyes” in hades. He can’t be literally dead and literally alive at the same time and in two different locations.

Hades is a Greek word (and is synonymous with Sheol in the Hebrew O.T.) and it has a meaning. The elements are “UN-PERCEIVED.” It can be properly translated into English as “unseen” or “imperceptible.” Now how can one “see” in the unseen?” It’s ridiculous. How can anyone have “perception” in the “imperceptible?” The dead can’t “see,” It’s a parable.

There is no consciousness in [Heb: Sheol] or [Gk: Hades](Psa. 146:4)–none. “Sheol” and “Hades” are synonymous in Scripture.

In Acts 2:27 hades is translated from the Hebrew word sheol. Look carefully at these two verses:

“His spirit [ruach] goes forth, he returns to his earth; in that very day his thoughts perish” (Psa. 146-3-4).

And “…there is no works, nor device, nor knowledge, nor wisdom, in sheol where you go” (Ecc. 9:10).

“Device” [Heb. mchesh- bown--contrivance, intelligence, reason]. Do these two verses in Ecclesiasties sound like “dark sayings?” or “tricky proverbs?” or “difficult parables?” or “deep mysteries?” They are plain, simple statements of facts that any child can understand! But notice how they absolutely contradict the “consciousness in hades” theory.

One more Scriptural proof on this point.

“And it came to pass, that the beggar DIED … the rich man also DIED…” (Luke 16:22).

So from verse 22 onward, the beggar and the rich man are IN DEATH! Now Psalm 6:5

“For IN DEATH THERE IS NO REMEMBRANCE OF THEE [The LORD], in THE GRAVE who shall give thee [The LORD] thanks?”

So, is it possible to take this parable literally without violating Scripture after Scripture after Scripture? I think not.

tom
Posts: 99
Joined: Thu Dec 04, 2008 12:52 am

Re: Does Luke 16:19-31 speak of purgatory?

Post by tom » Fri Jan 09, 2009 9:29 pm

I'm sorry, but I don't know where I said Luke 16:19 was about purgatory? I was only stating that purgatory was able to be defended in scripture. Darin was the one that said no one could see what's going on on the other side of the chasm. I said in context that's exactly what's going on!


Tom

User avatar
Paidion
Posts: 5452
Joined: Mon Aug 18, 2008 10:22 pm
Location: Back Woods of North-Western Ontario

Re: Does Luke 16:19-31 speak of purgatory?

Post by Paidion » Fri Jan 09, 2009 9:55 pm

It was thought by a number of second century Christian writers that the souls of all people go to Hades, some to the comfortable section, and others to the place of pain. Then at Jesus coming, at the judgment, those in the comfortable sections would go to heaven, and those in the section of pain to Gehenna (the Lake of Fire).

Some Fundamentalists in our own day, thought this change occurred when Christ died and "descended into Hades". They believe that at that time He "led captivity captive" which they understand to mean that He led all those in Paradise (the comfortable section) to Heaven, while those in the section of pain have to stay there until they are raised from the dead at which time they will be judged and sent to the Lake of Fire. According to these Fundamentalists, all Christians who die after Jesus "led captivity captive", go directly to Heaven.

The Discourse Concerning Hades attributed to the Jewish historian Josephus, descibed the two sections in a similar way to the description in the parable of Dives and Lazarus. The writer even calls the comfortable section The Bosom of Abraham. Is it possible that Jesus was using a common belief of the Pharisees of his day as the basis for his parable?

On the other hand, some modern experts believe the writer of The Discourse Concerning Hades to have been the work of Hippolytus of Rome (170-236 A.D.)

In any case, what follows is a link to an extract from The Discourse Concerning Hades. It corresponds to the description Jesus gave in his parable but goes into more detail:

Discourse Concerning Hades
Paidion

Man judges a person by his past deeds, and administers penalties for his wrongdoing. God judges a person by his present character, and disciplines him that he may become righteous.

Avatar shows me at 75 years old. I am now 83.

User avatar
darinhouston
Posts: 3114
Joined: Tue Aug 26, 2008 7:45 am

Re: Does Luke 16:19-31 speak of purgatory?

Post by darinhouston » Fri Jan 09, 2009 10:13 pm

tom wrote:I'm sorry, but I don't know where I said Luke 16:19 was about purgatory? I was only stating that purgatory was able to be defended in scripture. Darin was the one that said no one could see what's going on on the other side of the chasm. I said in context that's exactly what's going on!

Tom
I'm sorry, Tom -- I conflated your two comments -- I'm still not convinced that you can see through the chasm so to speak -- in any event, though, where do you find the biblical support for purgatory.

SteveF

Re: Does Luke 16:19-31 speak of purgatory?

Post by SteveF » Fri Jan 09, 2009 10:32 pm

Some Fundamentalists in our own day, thought this change occurred when Christ died and "descended into Hades". They believe that at that time He "led captivity captive" which they understand to mean that He led all those in Paradise (the comfortable section) to Heaven, while those in the section of pain have to stay there until they are raised from the dead at which time they will be judged and sent to the Lake of Fire. According to these Fundamentalists, all Christians who die after Jesus "led captivity captive", go directly to Heaven.
Thanks Paidion, I think it's important to point that out. The arguments that say Luke 16 dosen't look like heaven would clearly not apply to those who hold this view.

popeman
Posts: 62
Joined: Thu Dec 25, 2008 4:19 pm

Re: Does Luke 16:19-31 speak of purgatory?

Post by popeman » Fri Jan 09, 2009 10:43 pm

Tom,

Don’t tell me you are now trying to go into Purgatory! Heck, if Protestants can not even comprehend the OT/NT figurement of Eve and Mary and the Ark which is right in front of them, how can you expect them to comprehend a state of purgatory, purgation, cleaning?

You must drink a lot to stomach all this heartache. Let me tell you a story about a man named Jed, a poor mountaineer who barely kept his family fed….opps, wrong story…I mean Brad (Protestant). He attended a Bible study of mine with his girlfriend (Catholic). It was a fun study because he and another Protestant would always bring up the typical arguments which was good for everyone to hear, but one day we spoke about death.

Come to being, Brad had survived a motorcycle accident where he had been declared dead by paramedics as he was being rushed to Emergency. Only after being in Emergency for about 30 minutes since the accident and being worked on by the MD’s did he get a heartbeat/brain wave and was revived. The story continues. It appears that Brad had experienced the “white light, out of body experience” when he was “dead”. He said that he was at total peace and in complete bliss as he was going towards the white light which was making him feel more and more blissful love as he got closer to the light and that there is no experience on earth that he can compare it to. I asked “Were you in heaven? Did you see God?”. To which he answered “No”.

My story continues now with a recent book by a Protestant minister and Christian crash victim “90 minutes in Heaven”. If you have not read this, then do so. A horrific head-on accident occurs. Paramedics simply drape the “dead” body (Christian believer). A pastor comes on the scene and asks if he can help, but is told there is no use because he is dead, but the pastor is drawn to the dead corpse and led to sing/pray for the dead man (totally contrary to what he has been taught/preach). Story comes out the man starts to breath, gets a heartbeat…a miracle occurs and lives. But, he was “dead” for ninety minutes, thus his story about being in heaven. The most important part is not his time in heaven but rather the white light that he experienced prior to being in heaven.

Both my Protestant friend and this Protestant crash victim were dead. At one moment they were dead and then they were going towards the white light. They were not on earth, nor were they yet in heaven….where were they? Protestants will tell us that there is only Heaven and Hell. Was this white light experience the light at the gate, the porch, the foyer of heaven…what? It could not have been hell because that is completely different from what we are taught as Christians. It could not be heaven yet either. Heaven is complete blissful love, not the feeling of love getting stronger and stronger …that infers getting closer and closer. Both the above experiences also state they were not in heaven yet. So, where were they?

Was this white light in the distance God, and it is the love shining out, something you can not totally comprehend until you are dead, in the spirit? Whatever you want to believe it still was not heaven. Once you are in heaven or hell they is no returning to earth, either. Therefore, these two Protestants experienced a place that was not heaven, nor hell …. guess what, sounds a bit Catholic to me, huh? Well, many Protestants will deny this until the cows come home but here are two (of many) white light death stories where for what little time was spent between earth and heaven, they were somewhere else.

Catholic Christian doctrine (catechism) places no time period on purgatory, no place for purgatory (just not heaven)…. just that it happens. It happens because scripture says no one shall enter heaven with sin, we will be totally clean before God. If we die in a state of sin (Gosh darn it, unless you are a born-again, once and forever cleansed, sinless person) where we sinned after we repented (Hebrews 6, 10) then we will be cleaned of sin before we enter heaven.

By the way, Brad is now a Catholic Christian and I have no idea about the two who wrote 90 Minutes. Baruch HaShem, Popeman.

User avatar
Michelle
Posts: 845
Joined: Fri Aug 22, 2008 12:16 pm

Re: Does Luke 16:19-31 speak of purgatory?

Post by Michelle » Fri Jan 09, 2009 11:04 pm

popeman wrote:Tom,

Don’t tell me you are now trying to go into Purgatory! Heck, if Protestants can not even comprehend the OT/NT figurement of Eve and Mary and the Ark which is right in front of them, how can you expect them to comprehend a state of purgatory, purgation, cleaning?

You must drink a lot to stomach all this heartache.....
popeman, I'm very curious to know why you come here to post. Most of the post above was pretty interesting, but the prologue, which I quoted here, was pretty condescending and makes me just want to ignore the rest of what you said. If you are trying to convince us to become Catholics, you might want to tone it down a bit with the "Protestants are stupid" stuff.

Post Reply

Return to “Roman Catholicism”