Why did believers have to wait in the bosom of Abraham instead of going to God's presence immediately?

[Our Lord's God]

The story of lazarus and the rich man is told in figurative language. Surely you are not taking the images as literal?
Both their bodies were left behind. Jesus did not speak to His listenes about disembodied souls, and it must have been for a reason, they were not able, and perhaps neither are we able to hear a story about how the spiritual world really works in words that articulate spiritual realities.
So for the dimness of you and I, Jesus gets the ideas across by couching them in a relatable scenario, but for anyone who is interested in truth, the point is clear.
And the point is not that dead souls have tongues.

You just can't help yourself with your fabricating one thing after another can you?

 

[Alexander the adequate]

I'm not, You brought it up and surprised me by taking it literally when it obviously isn't. But now that we both aren't taking it literally, we can begin a meaningful dialogue.



None of this is in the text, or even alluded to. You've created a doctrine by cherry picking what part is parabolic and what part is literal to create a doctrine. Do you find that to be an acceptable method of biblical exposition?



His point is very clear, for the coveatness of money, the priesthood and their supporters were going to meet a fiery end, and wouldn't change even if Lazarus rose from the dead. And it happened. Lazarus rose from the dead as a testimony to them, and they hardened their hearts even further (see John 12) and they met a fiery end (AD70).



The number one proof text in the bible for "proving" that souls go here and there (even though souls aren't mentioned), and we suddenly we discount the obvious teaching that souls have tongues and fingers and get thirsty and feel heat.

That is some serious cherry picking within the number one proof text. Almost like it shouldn't be used as a proof text at all. This passage shouldn't inform you of how to read others, other passages should inform you of how to read it.

I stopped reading when you objected to the idea that dead people leave their bodies behind.

 

[Alexander the adequate]

You just can't help yourself with your fabricating one thing after another can you?

ok

 

[GeneZ]

This is a very strange place at times....

Which goes to show. We have been saved by grace and its not of ourselves....

 

[shnarkle]

This may have been kicked around already, but I am interested to hear people's ideas from scripture about it.
It occurred to me that when a believer died, prior to the resurrection, they could not go to be in God's presence because they had not yet been indwelt by Christ.
A person who did not have Christ indwelling them, would not be able to live in God's presence but would be destroyed.
If this is true, then it would also mean that when Jesus descended and brought up with Him those who had been captive in Abraham's bosom, those believers would have to have been, during that process, indwelt by Christ so they could stand face to face with the Father.

Other than the scriptures I am alluding to, I don't know off hand what else I might add scripturally, but I am interested to know what scriptures come to mind along with the accompanying thoughts.

The doctrines of the bosom of Abraham, under the throne of justice, and Paradise which were taught by the Pharisees were brought with them after the Babylonian captivity. This is well documented by historians, most noteworthy Usher.

Jesus' descent into hell was explicitly for the purpose of "announcing" his victory over death to those who were placed in chains awaiting their judgement for their role in attempting to thwart God's plan of redemption "during the time of Noah". This is a direct reference to the fallen angels attempt to mix and defile the bloodline that would bring the promised messiah.

The author of Genesis explicitly points out that Noah's pedigree (e.g. "his generations") were pure.

 

[Newbirth]

This may have been kicked around already, but I am interested to hear people's ideas from scripture about it.
It occurred to me that when a believer died, prior to the resurrection, they could not go to be in God's presence because they had not yet been indwelt by Christ.

Eph 4
8 Wherefore he saith, When he ascended up on high, he led captivity captive, and gave gifts unto men.
9 (Now that he ascended, what is it but that he also descended first into the lower parts of the earth?
10 He that descended is the same also that ascended up far above all heavens, that he might fill all things.)

1Thess4
13 But I would not have you to be ignorant, brethren, concerning them which are asleep, that ye sorrow not, even as others which have no hope.
14 For if we believe that Jesus died and rose again, even so them also which sleep in Jesus will God bring with him.
15 For this we say unto you by the word of the Lord, that we which are alive and remain unto the coming of the Lord shall not prevent them which are asleep.

A person who did not have Christ indwelling them, would not be able to live in God's presence but would be destroyed.
If this is true, then it would also mean that when Jesus descended and brought up with Him those who had been captive in Abraham's bosom, those believers would have to have been, during that process, indwelt by Christ so they could stand face to face with the Father.

1 Peter 4:6
For for this cause was the gospel preached also to them that are dead, that they might be judged according to men in the flesh, but live according to God in the spirit.

That is where the thief on the cross went. But it does not say Jesus took them to heaven before God.

Jn 14
2 In my Father's house are many mansions: if it were not so, I would have told you. I go to prepare a place for you.
3 And if I go and prepare a place for you, I will come again, and receive you unto myself; that where I am, there ye may be also.
4 And whither I go ye know, and the way ye know.

Other than the scriptures I am alluding to, I don't know off hand what else I might add scripturally, but I am interested to know what scriptures come to mind along with the accompanying thoughts.

Since there are no dead people in heaven then we must assume the dead rise from the earth.
1 Thessalonians 4:16
For the Lord himself shall descend from heaven with a shout, with the voice of the archangel, and with the trump of God: and the dead in Christ shall rise first:

Here is where the dead body rises from
Revelation 20:13
And the sea gave up the dead which were in it; and death and hell delivered up the dead which were in them: and they were judged every man according to their works.

 

[Newbirth]

There are a few assumptions here that I would challenge.

• Why do you believe Christ descended into Abraham's bosom?

The name of the place is not of much consequence...the fact that he descended is...
Eph 4
8 Wherefore he saith, When he ascended up on high, he led captivity captive, and gave gifts unto men.
9 (Now that he ascended, what is it but that he also descended first into the lower parts of the earth?
10 He that descended is the same also that ascended up far above all heavens, that he might fill all things.)

• Why do you think Abraham's bosom is downwards?

He descended 9 (Now that he ascended, what is it but that he also descended first into the lower parts of the earth?

1 Cor 15 is the definitive passage explaining what happens to the dead and the resurrection process. It is lengthy and detailed, and it doesn't mention any of those things. The state of the dead in Christ is described in verses 3-6, they are "asleep" rather than in Abraham's bosom.

The question was not about the dead in christ but rather those who died

It occurred to me that when a believer died, prior to the resurrection,

before the resurrection.

The order of events are given also (verses 20-28)

1. Christ's resurrection
2. The resurrection of the saints
3. The kingdom era
4. The kingdom given up to God

You seem to have missed the point of the OP here.

1 Thess 4 is another go-to chapter that describes the state of the dead, and it doesn't mention Abraham's bosom.

Again the OP is asking about those who died before the resurrection.

It states that Christ doesn't come back to earth with his saints, but rather he comes to earth to get the saints. This would suggest that the saints aren't with him where he is, but that they are on the earth.

Therefore your question as to

• Why do you think Abraham's bosom is downwards?

is moot, they are either on the earth or in the earth, which is down.

 

[cjab]

The doctrines of the bosom of Abraham, under the throne of justice, and Paradise which were taught by the Pharisees were brought with them after the Babylonian captivity. This is well documented by historians, most noteworthy Usher.

Jesus' descent into hell was explicitly for the purpose of "announcing" his victory over death to those who were placed in chains awaiting their judgement for their role in attempting to thwart God's plan of redemption "during the time of Noah". This is a direct reference to the fallen angels attempt to mix and defile the bloodline that would bring the promised messiah.

The author of Genesis explicitly points out that Noah's pedigree (e.g. "his generations") were pure.

Can you give me a reference to "Usher"?

 

[Alexander the adequate]

The doctrines of the bosom of Abraham, under the throne of justice, and Paradise which were taught by the Pharisees were brought with them after the Babylonian captivity. This is well documented by historians, most noteworthy Usher.

Jesus' descent into hell was explicitly for the purpose of "announcing" his victory over death to those who were placed in chains awaiting their judgement for their role in attempting to thwart God's plan of redemption "during the time of Noah". This is a direct reference to the fallen angels attempt to mix and defile the bloodline that would bring the promised messiah.

The author of Genesis explicitly points out that Noah's pedigree (e.g. "his generations") were pure.

thanks for your answer. But I am more interested in what he Bible states explicitly

 

[shnarkle]

thanks for your answer. But I am more interested in what he Bible states explicitly

The bible explicitly states that "the dead know nothing". Ecclesiastes 9:5

Luke's account explicitly points out that what the Pharisees taught was "an abomination", and this is explicitly what Jesus is referring to (e.g. their teachings on divorce and the dead). In fact, if you look at the conclusion of the parable, he explicitly states that those who do not listen to Moses will not be benefited even if someone were to be risen from the dead. Luke 16:31

It doesn't get much more explicit than that.

 

[Alexander the adequate]

Your claims do not align with the story of the rich man and lazarus. Jesus describes a rich man bodily, who is thirsty and is hot. He also descirbes Lazarus who was carried off bodily and has a finger that could be dipped in water. There are none of these disembodied souls described. These people are all described as being there bodily.

Let's move on to the second half of the quote.



Umm.. . you seem to be making things up that directly contradict he narrative. The formed dust became a living soul.

the dust became a soul? Can you quote that word for word from genesis? not just the reference, but those exact words

 

[Alexander the adequate]

I'm not, You brought it up and surprised me by taking it literally when it obviously isn't. But now that we both aren't taking it literally, we can begin a meaningful dialogue.



None of this is in the text, or even alluded to. You've created a doctrine by cherry picking what part is parabolic and what part is literal to create a doctrine. Do you find that to be an acceptable method of biblical exposition?



His point is very clear, for the coveatness of money, the priesthood and their supporters were going to meet a fiery end, and wouldn't change even if Lazarus rose from the dead. And it happened. Lazarus rose from the dead as a testimony to them, and they hardened their hearts even further (see John 12) and they met a fiery end (AD70).



The number one proof text in the bible for "proving" that souls go here and there (even though souls aren't mentioned), and we suddenly we discount the obvious teaching that souls have tongues and fingers and get thirsty and feel heat.
ve ieter
That is some serious cherry picking within the number one proof text. Almost like it shouldn't be used as a proof text at all. This passage shouldn't inform you of how to read others, other passages should inform you of how to read it.

At the top of this text you agree that the pictures Jesus gives of the rich man and lazarus are not literal. then you end the post saying that souls have literal tongues.
Again, the true story of Lazarus is pictured in metaphoric terms, we know both men left their bodies of flesh, including their tongues in the grave. Neither Lazarus nor the rich man had flesh bodies after death

 

[shnarkle]

At the top of this text you agree that the pictures Jesus gives of the rich man and lazarus are not literal. then you end the post saying that souls have literal tongues.
Again, the true story of Lazarus is pictured in metaphoric terms, we know both men left their bodies of flesh, including their tongues in the grave. Neither Lazarus nor the rich man had flesh bodies after death

While it may very well be true that a story is using figures of speech, until one can prove which figure is being used, they really don't have a legitimate argument. You're just assuming a figure is being used, but there are hundreds of figures of speech used in thousands of different ways for their own distinct purpose. If you don't know which figures are being used it's very likely you have no idea what the author is trying to say.

 

[ReverendRV]

Better here than there...

 

[Alexander the adequate]

While it may very well be true that a story is using figures of speech, until one can prove which figure is being used, they really don't have a legitimate argument. You're just assuming a figure is being used, but there are hundreds of figures of speech used in thousands of different ways for their own distinct purpose. If you don't know which figures are being used it's very likely you have no idea what the author is trying to say.

ok. Since you say you don't see what i am saying, I would be repeating myself to explain it over again

 

[shnarkle]

ok. Since you say you don't see what i am saying, I would be repeating myself to explain it over again

Given that you can't document which figures of speech are being used, you're just Begging the Question. Your claims are baseless. You're not explaining anything. You're fabricating nonsense.

 

[shnarkle]

the dust became a soul? Can you quote that word for word from genesis? not just the reference, but those exact words

"And the Lord God formed man of the DUST of the ground, and breathed into his nostrils the breath of life; and man BECAME A LIVING SOUL"

 

[Alexander the adequate]

Given that you can't document which figures of speech are being used, you're just Begging the Question. Your claims are baseless. You're not explaining anything. You're fabricating nonsense.

But that is not true, i specifically mentioned things that were metaphorical.
or were you asking for the particular name of the type of metaphoric langugae like personification?

 

[Alexander the adequate]

"And the Lord God formed man of the DUST of the ground, and breathed into his nostrils the breath of life; and man BECAME A LIVING SOUL"

the man became a soul, not the dust. Dust does not become a soul and when a person dies, the dust goes back to the ground and the soul continues