₦airaland Forum

There is something about the rich man and Lazarus story I didn't consider while a PIMI JW.

I had long believed that the story is a parable, so everything there had to be explained away as pointing to something else other than real life event. This is because of several scriptures including Eccl 9:5-10; Romans 6;23

However, aren't parables built from events familiar to once audience? Think about it, all the parables jesus told was not what his audience never knew about, it wasn't from fiction. It is true that some elements may be exaggerated or added to make a point, but events in a parable are not entirely from fiction. The good Samaritan story, the Wise Steward, the prodigal son all were stories his listeners could relate to. I mean the man who was robbed while journeying from Jerusalem to Jericho. That was a location people knew was dangerous. But the story Jesus told didn't actually happen. But the location exists, that actual event can also happen. It's not fiction.

There is a reason to think that Jesus was conveying something from the story/parable of the rich man and Lazarus. Assuming it is a parable, what reality did the parable draw from? We can quickly say, it was fabricated from unrealistic event. It is a fiction. But think about this, Jesus audience was the Pharisees, and the Pharisees believed in the immortality of the Soul, they believe also in after death torment of the wicked. Then Jesus began to tell this story of torment. The big question is:

If this torment after death was a false doctrine, why is Jesus making a parable from that? Will that act not in fact be validating a false belief? I was just thinking, let's say a JWs is trying to teach another that a wicked act is wrong, then he begins to tell a story that so and so did this wicked thing to Mr B, then after so and so died, he found himself in hell with torment, how would that JWs think his audience will view that parable, that hell is false? Never! he is in fact validating that doctrine by drawing from it to teach a lesson.

Jesus never said nor condemned torment after death, rather he even used imagery that conveys that doctrine.

We need to also consider that there is no way to allegorize all that Jesus said there. All attempt to convey the meaning in literal sense fails.

The interpretation assigned to this parable by JW leadership doesn't match the account. I will talk about their interpretation and why it doesn't fit next time.

Tags:
jimRohn or Kobojunkie or FxMasterz, maynman, Dtruthspeaker, Image123, DrJones109, Jesusjnr2022, LordReed, Jaephoenix, JessicaRabbit, Knownunknown, DeepSight, BBIA HellVictorinho6, SIXFEETUNDER, OkpaNsukkaisBae, Bacteriologist, FRANCISTOWN, SIRTee15, Aemmyjah, TheSourcerer,
Busybrain2233, 1Sharon, TakeNigeriaBack,
Botragelad, isan, Fourthpredator,
seun, hopefullandlord, bobestman, Lorrayne, HardMirror, Hahn, SlawG, albreezy4eva, Muslim, Dominique, Mrbroke, EnemyofGod2, kkins25, Wilgrea7, A001, Maynthemayn, achorladey, Jozzy4, MightySparrow, NowYouKnow, TemmyT002, johnw47, Boomark, Emusan, Dtruthspeaker, Gabrielshow24, rottennaija

Sand2022:
➜There is something about the rich man and Lazarus story I didn't consider while a PIMI JW.
I had long believed that the story is a parable, so everything there had to be explained away as pointing to something else other than real life event. This is because of several scriptures including Eccl 9:5-10; Romans 6;23
However, aren't parables built from events familiar to once audience? Think about it, all the parables jesus told was not what his audience never knew about, it wasn't from fiction. It is true that some elements may be exaggerated or added to make a point, but events in a parable are not entirely from fiction. The good Samaritan story, the Wise Steward, the prodigal son all were stories his listeners could relate to. I mean the man who was robbed while journeying from Jerusalem to Jericho. That was a location people knew was dangerous. But the story Jesus told didn't actually happen. But the location exists, that actual event can also happen. It's not fiction.

All it seems you did here was successfully confuse yourself and not much else.

A parable is a short, simple story used to illustrate a moral or spiritual lesson. It often uses human characters and everyday situations to convey a deeper meaning or truth. Parables are not meant to be taken literally but rather as a comparison or analogy that helps people understand a particular point.

Good day.
If you really want to understand the Bible I suggest you read backwards.
Start from the seven confirmed Pauline letters of :
1. Galatians
2. Romans
3.1st Corinthians
4. 2nd Corinthians
5. Philemon.
6. Philippians.
7. 1st Thessalonians

Then

Mark.
Mathew.
Luke.
John.


Most of these stories are allegory.
Once you accept this everything else falls into place.

Goosethetruth:
➜Good day. If you really want to understand the Bible I suggest you read backwards. Start from the seven confirmed Pauline letters of :
1. Galatians
2. Romans
3.1st Corinthians
4. 2nd Corinthians
5. Philemon.
6. Philippians.
7. 1st Thessalonians
Then
Mark.
Mathew.
Luke.
John.
Most of these stories are allegory. Once you accept this everything else falls into place.

Did you bother to read his post at all?

Sand2022:
There is something about the rich man and Lazarus story I didn't consider while a PIMI JW.
I had long believed that the story is a parable, so everything there had to be explained away as pointing to something else other than real life event. This is because of several scriptures including Eccl 9:5-10; Romans 6;23

OP already confirmed in his writeup that he reads backward like you do.

Reading a book backwards does not boost comprehension; it instead fuels confusion. A parable is a type of allegory, but not all allegories are parables.

Kobojunkieee:
Did you bother to read his post at all? OP already confirmed in his writeup that he reads backward like you do.

Reading a book backwards does not boost comprehension; it instead fuels confusion. A parable is a type of allegory, but not all allegories are parables.

IWhy not disregard bibliography and tell me which came first?
The true Pauline missives or the gospels?

Goosethetruth:
➜Why not disregard bibliography and tell me which came first? The true Pauline missives or the gospels?

What makes you think your ideas regarding the man named Paul came before the Gospels? Let's start with that instead.

Kobojunkie:
What makes you think your ideas regarding the man named Paul came before the Gospels? Let's start with that instead.

Answer my question first.
Who wrote first?
Paul's letters or the writers of the gospels?

Goosethetruth:
➜Answer my question first. Who wrote first? Paul's letters or the writers of the gospels?

Who wrote first? The evidence we have points to the Gospels(at least one or two) being written before Paul came into the picture as a preacher.

Kobojunkie:
Who wrote first? The evidence we have points to the Gospels(at least one or two) being written before Paul came into the picture as a preacher.

What year were the gospels written and what year were Paul's missives written? Forget the sequence in which these books appear in the Bible.
Do proper research and don't rely on the misinformation you have received since childhood.

Goosethetruth:
➜What year were the gospels written and what year were Paul's missives written?
Do proper research and don't rely on the misinformation you have received since childhood.

Sigh! 🙄🙄

Goosethetruth:
Answer my question first. Who wrote first? Paul's letters or the writers of the gospels?

I answered your question. Now proceed to answer mine.

What makes you think your ideas regarding the man named Paul came before the Gospels? Let's start with that instead.

Kobojunkie:
Sigh! 🙄🙄
I answered your question. Now proceed to answer mine.

What makes you think your ideas regarding the man named Paul came before the Gospels? Let's start with that instead.

Paul's letters had been circulating amount early Christians years before the Gospels were written. I understand that it is very difficult to adjust your mind from what you learned from your youth.
I will ask you another question,do you think the gospels were written by the persons whose names are attached to them as authors?
Do you really think those books were written by persons named,Matthew,Mark,Like and John?

Goosethetruth:
➜Paul's letters had been circulating amount early Christians years before the Gospels were written. I understand that it is very difficult to adjust your mind from what you learned from your youth.
➜I will ask you another question, do you think the gospels were written by the persons whose names are attached to them as authors? Do you really think those books were written by persons named,Matthew,Mark,Like and John?

1. Where do you get this notion of yours from? What evidence do you have of this claim of yours?

2. I never had such thoughts, and I don't see what relevance they are to this discussion you have opened up. Let's limit distractions to an absolute minimum, focusing entirely on the main here instead.

Kobojunkie:
1. Where do you get this notion of yours from? What evidence do you have of this claim of yours?

2. I never had such thoughts, and I don't see what relevance they are to this discussion you have opened up.

I am asking you to re-think all you thought you knew. I have challenged your beliefs. There are two questions I have placed before you.
1. Are the names on the gospels the real names of the authors of those books?
2. Which came first: (a) Paul's letters OR (b) the gospels of Matthew,Mark,Luke,and John?
Do your research. It is not a difficult task.

Goosethetruth:
➜I am asking you to re-think all you thought you knew. I have challenged your beliefs. There are two questions I have placed before you.
1. Are the names on the gospels the real names of the authors of those books?
2. Which came first: (a) Paul's letters OR (b) the gospels of Matthew,Mark,Luke,and John?

Are you simply here to go around in circles or something? 🙄🙄🙄

I already answered these questions of yours, so why are you struggling to answer my one question? 🙄🙄🙄

Kobojunkie:
Are you simply here to go around in circles with me or something? 🙄🙄🙄

I already answered these questions, so why are you struggling to answer my one question?

Madam,
I have answered your question. You are the one dancing around into a cul-de-sac. The questions are simple. You are the one refusing to go down the rabbit hole.

Goosethetruth:
➜Madam, I have answered your question. You are the one dancing around into a cul-de-sac. The questions are simple. You are the one refusing to go down the rabbit hole.

YOu made an unsubstantiated claim without even a lick of backing, and that is your answer? 🙄🙄🙄

Abeg, I am not in the mood for this nonsense today! Waka pass me! 🙄🙄🙄

Kobojunkie:
YOu made an unsubstantiated claim without even a lick of backing, and that is your answer? 🙄🙄🙄

Abeg, I am not in the mood for this nonsense today! Waka pass me! 🙄🙄🙄

Madam,
Retrace your steps up this thread. You engaged me first. Now because you hate the truth or because the truth does not tally with your beliefs and obstinate dogma, you are behaving like an ostrich.
I said do a research on the two questions I raised and you will discover that Paul's letters were one of the sources that Mark used to write his gospel before Luke and Mathew copied him and themselves.
Once again I advise you to do research.

Sand2022:
There is something about the rich man and Lazarus story I didn't consider while a PIMI JW.

I had long believed that the story is a parable, so everything there had to be explained away as pointing to something else other than real life event. This is because of several scriptures including Eccl 9:5-10; Romans 6;23

However, aren't parables built from events familiar to once audience? Think about it, all the parables jesus told was not what his audience never knew about, it wasn't from fiction. It is true that some elements may be exaggerated or added to make a point, but events in a parable are not entirely from fiction. The good Samaritan story, the Wise Steward, the prodigal son all were stories his listeners could relate to. I mean the man who was robbed while journeying from Jerusalem to Jericho. That was a location people knew was dangerous. But the story Jesus told didn't actually happen. But the location exists, that actual event can also happen. It's not fiction.

There is a reason to think that Jesus was conveying something from the story/parable of the rich man and Lazarus. Assuming it is a parable, what reality did the parable draw from? We can quickly say, it was fabricated from unrealistic event. It is a fiction. But think about this, Jesus audience was the Pharisees, and the Pharisees believed in the immortality of the Soul, they believe also in after death torment of the wicked. Then Jesus began to tell this story of torment. The big question is:

If this torment after death was a false doctrine, why is Jesus making a parable from that? Will that act not in fact be validating a false belief? I was just thinking, let's say a JWs is trying to teach another that a wicked act is wrong, then he begins to tell a story that so and so did this wicked thing to Mr B, then after so and so died, he found himself in hell with torment, how would that JWs think his audience will view that parable, that hell is false? Never! he is in fact validating that doctrine by drawing from it to teach a lesson.

Jesus never said nor condemned torment after death, rather he even used imagery that conveys that doctrine.

We need to also consider that there is no way to allegorize all that Jesus said there. All attempt to convey the meaning in literal sense fails.

The interpretation assigned to this parable by JW leadership doesn't match the account. I will talk about their interpretation and why it doesn't fit next time.

Tags:
jimRohn or Kobojunkie or FxMasterz, maynman, Dtruthspeaker, Image123, DrJones109, Jesusjnr2022, LordReed, Jaephoenix, JessicaRabbit, Knownunknown, DeepSight, BBIA HellVictorinho6, SIXFEETUNDER, OkpaNsukkaisBae, Bacteriologist, FRANCISTOWN, SIRTee15, Aemmyjah, TheSourcerer,
Busybrain2233, 1Sharon, TakeNigeriaBack,
Botragelad, isan, Fourthpredator,
seun, hopefullandlord, bobestman, Lorrayne, HardMirror, Hahn, SlawG, albreezy4eva, Muslim, Dominique, Mrbroke, EnemyofGod2, kkins25, Wilgrea7, A001, Maynthemayn, achorladey, Jozzy4, MightySparrow, NowYouKnow, TemmyT002, johnw47, Boomark, Emusan, Dtruthspeaker, Gabrielshow24, rottennaija

I get your point and they are valid. However, I have since to realize that truth or lack of in a events in themselves don't matter, even if the truth came from Jehovah or Jesus himself. Whatever Jw leaders thinks the truth is, is what the truth is. And it's what the following will believe. Period.

I repeat, a Jehovah or Jesus can stand on earth today, says this is A. The jw leaders aka Governing body will say, it's B. The majority of the following will take B. Nothing else matters.

rottennaija:
I get your point and they are valid. However, I have since to realize that truth or lack of in a events in themselves don't matter, even if the truth came from Jehovah or Jesus himself. Whatever Jw leaders thinks the truth is, is what the truth is. And it's what the following will believe. Period.

I repeat, a Jehovah or Jesus can stand on earth today, says this is A. The jw leaders aka Governing body will say, it's B. The majority of the following will take B. Nothing else matters.

That's true for the most part, although the PIMO experience within the group shows that even if all say they accept what the leadership says, some silent voices may object but they may not do so publicly.

Anyway, my op is about my own studies in the scriptures, each one of us will make their own decision. But I feel moved to make it public to help sincere ones out there with points they themselves may need to consider before making their own decision. Their decision may be different from mine. No problem, but at least I shared mine.

Kobojunkie:
All it seems you did here was successfully confuse yourself and not much else.

Thanks for pointing that out, perhaps you didn't get the point. The first part you quoted shows that parables are constructed from what happens, what the audience knows can happen in real life. It is not from fiction. For eg, if you say:

once upon a time, one table went to a space to purchase garri..... That is fiction. It doesn't happen in real life.

But if you say, once upon a time, a man travelled to Lagos to buy a phone, but was robbed by area boys....

Now this is an event that CAN happen in real life. Someone can travel to Lagos, he can buy a phone, he can also be robbed by area boys.
but the event is not expected to be taken literally as if it ACTUALLY happened, but that story was constructed from what the audience in nigeria knows CAN happen. It is not fiction like the earlier example. But you're not expected to view the story as literal, that is, as if it actually happened. It was a made up story told to teach a lesson.

when I said that parables are not to be taken literally in the later part you quoted, what I mean is that you don't take it as if the story ACTUALLY happened. It was just told to teach a lesson, not to be taken as a real life story, but it was borrowed from real life events. In fact some aspect of parables do sometimes get exaggerated to emphasize a point.

I don't really get your point bro.

Because the parables, jesus himself are all fairytale. Leadership of JW is just like any non governmental organization which solely exist to push a certain agenda.

Sand2022:
➜Thanks for pointing that out, perhaps you didn't get the point. The first part you quoted shows that parables are constructed from what happens, what the audience knows can happen in real life. It is not from fiction. For eg, if you say:
once upon a time, one table went to a space to purchase garri..... That is fiction. It doesn't happen in real life.
But if you say, once upon a time, a man travelled to Lagos to buy a phone, but was robbed by area boys....
Now this is an event that CAN happen in real life. Someone can travel to Lagos, he can buy a phone, he can also be robbed by area boys.
but the event is not expected to be taken literally as if it ACTUALLY happened, but that story was constructed from what the audience in nigeria knows CAN happen. It is not fiction like the earlier example. But you're not expected to view the story as literal, that is, as if it actually happened. It was a made up story told to teach a lesson.
➜when I said that parables are not to be taken literally in the later part you quoted, what I mean is that you don't take it as if the story ACTUALLY happened.
➜ It was just told to teach a lesson, not to be taken as a real life story, but it was borrowed from real life events. In fact some aspect of parables do sometimes get exaggerated to emphasize a point.

1. I am sorry, what? 😏

Fiction, literature created from the imagination, not presented as fact, though it may be based on a true story or situation. Types of literature in the fiction genre include the novel, short story, and novella. The word is from the Latin fictiō, “the act of making, fashioning, or molding.”
Here's a more detailed breakdown:
Imagination: Fiction relies heavily on the author's creative imagination to build characters, plots, settings, and other elements of the story.
Not Fact: Unlike non-fiction, which aims to present factual information, fiction deliberately portrays things that are not necessarily true or based on real-world occurrences.
Narrative: Fiction is typically presented as a narrative, meaning it tells a story with a beginning, middle, and end, often involving conflict and resolution.
Various Forms: Fiction can be expressed in many forms, including novels, short stories, plays, poems, and even films.
Entertainment & Beyond: While often enjoyed for entertainment, fiction can also explore themes, ideas, and emotions, offering readers a different perspective on the world.

Everything you described here is what amounts to fiction. The use of metaphors, personifications, and other figures of speech does not generally directly or indirectly impact the genre of a story.

2. If a story cannot be taken literally— it's not based on actual events—then the story is fictional.

3. This is what it means to say a story is fictional, though.

Naaa waaa ooooo!!!!
How many monikers do some people have?
Is this not against forum rules?


😆🙃😂🤣😃😀

Kobojunkieee:
1. I am sorry, what? 😏
Everything you described here is what amounts to fiction. The use of metaphors, personifications, and other figures of speech does not generally directly or indirectly impact the genre of a story.

2. If a story cannot be taken literally— it's not based on actual events—then the story is fictional.

3. This is what it means to say a story is fictional, though.

You're right. Fiction will match both scenarios. I felt the description should have prevented a misunderstanding. The difference is between Realistic Fiction and Fantasy Fiction.

My point is that parables are realistic fictions, as opposed to fantasy fiction that is not known to happen in reality.

Thanks for pointing that out.

Sand2022:
➜You're right. Fiction will match both scenarios. I felt the description should have prevented a misunderstanding. The difference is between Realistic Fiction and Fantasy Fiction.
My point is that parables are realistic fictions, as opposed to fantasy fiction that is not known to happen in reality. Thanks for pointing that out.

The better point here is that Parables are fictional stories, and should not be taken at face value. Rather, the focus should instead be on the message intended by the teller of the story.

Goosethetruth:
Answer my question first.
Who wrote first?
Paul's letters or the writers of the gospels?

The gospels came first. Paul even starts on the gospel itself. It's like you forget his name was first Saul.

Goosethetruth:
What year were the gospels written and what year were Paul's missives written? Forget the sequence in which these books appear in the Bible.
Do proper research and don't rely on the misinformation you have received since childhood.

Saul aka Paul had to first learn before he could preach. So the Bible's sequence is correct

Sand2022:
There is something about the rich man and Lazarus story I didn't consider while a PIMI JW.

I had long believed that the story is a parable, so everything there had to be explained away as pointing to something else other than real life event. This is because of several scriptures including Eccl 9:5-10; Romans 6;23

However, aren't parables built from events familiar to once audience? ... Dtruthspeaker,

Natural living has shown me that this things happen and that this is how people behave. So i think it is real. Christ just made it sound like it's not but discerning people who understand God's Ways know that Christ is telling us something that happened.

Dtruthspeaker:
Saul aka Paul had to first learn before he could preach. So the Bible's sequence is correct

The main problem I have with Christmas like you is the propensity to spew ignorance and falsehood as the truth. The Internet is free. Books have been written by scholars on thrse issues but Christians are scared to seek the truth about the origins of their religion and the Bible.
It is just embarrassing.
Just goggle the date the first letter of Paul was written vis a viz the first gospel was written.





While there's some debate about the exact dates, scholarly consensus points to Mark being the earliest. Several sources suggest that the Gospel of Matthew and the Gospel of Luke were written later, drawing upon Mark as a source, along with another hypothetical source called "Q". The Gospel of John is generally believed to be the last of the four canonical gospels, written some timebetween 90 and 110 AD.

Goosethetruth:
Good day.
If you really want to understand the Bible I suggest you read backwards.
Start from the seven confirmed Pauline letters of :
1. Galatians
2. Romans
3.1st Corinthians
4. 2nd Corinthians
5. Philemon.
6. Philippians.
7. 1st Thessalonians

Then

Mark.
Mathew.
Luke.
John.


Most of these stories are allegory.
Once you accept this everything else falls into place.

Nah they're not allegory, seeing as your first statement reflects the facts especially through critical textual lens, I'm surprised you're saying they're allegory.

P.S : While typing I think I found the answer to your view of allegory, correct me if I'm wrong. You're obviously a xtain who for some reason also accepts the facts from scholarship through textual critical analysis but you also need to make sense of your xtain beliefs ergo allegory.

Meanwhile the earliest Pauline letters was written between AD 48 -AD50.(The epistle to the Galatians)
This information is everywhere but because of obstinate dogma of Christians they keep on spreading ignorance all over the place.

Lucifyre:
Nah they're not allegory, seeing as your first statement reflects the facts especially through critical textual lens, I'm surprised you're saying they're allegory.

P.S : While typing I think I found the answer to your view of allegory, correct me if I'm wrong. You're obviously a xtain who for some reason also accepts the facts from scholarship through textual critical analysis but you also need to make sense of your xtain beliefs ergo allegory.

I am not a Christian. Stop assuming things. Explain how you came to this conclusion and retrace your steps to read and understand my posts.
This is the issue I have with that Kobojunkie lady,always jumping in and assuming things. Never doing any research!