Is there any less indication of symbolism in that phrase than there is in his parables? Jesus does not preface parables by saying, "okay, figurative, didactic tale here..." nor does he preface his mention of Judgment with, "okay, this is purely literal."

Again, what criteria are you using to make your determination?

Look, I understand that is not an easy question to answer. It would be difficult for me to clearly explain my criteria. So, to make this fair, perhaps you could sight a passage that you find to be literal (and it would be best to sight one that I find to be figurative) and one you find to be figurative and explain how and why you reached your conclusions. I would be more than happy to do the same.

Did Jesus not say that what he taught was not easily understood?

The problem with saying that the Day of Judgment is literal is that everything said about the Day of Judgment is figurative. How do we have a literal event (a single day) when the content of that event is figurative. If everything comprising the event is figurative, then the event itself must be spoken of as figurative.

When we discuss what we, mortal men, are to call a Christian we are speaking of something quite apart from what Jesus would call a "true" or "good" Christian.


The only thing we can do is define "Christian" for us men to use; we cannot define "Christian" for God and it would be rather presumptuous for us to even make an attempt at providing God such a definition.

Christian, for use in scholarly work, is something quite different from a true and good Christian, just as Muslim for scholarly work is quite different from a good and true Muslim. For example, Osama Bin Laden is a Muslim, but most certainly not a true and good Muslim.

Would you be mad at God if your children did not make it to heaven and you unconditionally and truly loved your children, and you yourself thought them worthy of heaven?

There was an aphorism told by a war veteran (I think anyways), though I can't remember it word for word, it was a sign of maturity, understanding, and piety. "Having been there, I would not want even my worst enemy to got to hell". And it's spread around the internet so I can't find the original quote, lol. He's obviously speaking of the war, and how much worse of course hell must be.

The point is what you just quoted above assumes your fellow member here hasn't a heart, and it hints upon your views as well, which I only find to be heartless at the same time; simply have a heart, that's what God would've wanted, even if God or Jesus doesn't state that explicitly.

What you need to understand is what the Bible says about humanity. It describes it as 'wicked from it's youth'

and that there is 'none who does good, not one.' and that 'all our works are filthy rags to the Lord'. There is no rational way that I could deem my children worthy of heaven, as they are born in sin. I'm also not worthy. Salvation is of the Lord, through faith in Jesus Christ.

Yes, I wouldn't wish it upon my worst enemy either, but it is what both me and my worst enemy deserve, and justice is something to rejoice in, is it not?

Actually, the bible says the heart is 'deceitfully wicked'. We shouldn't leave decisions up to the heart. We need to use wise and proper judgment. And, I am not heartless, you just don't seem to understand how incredibly evil the human race is.

Aedes where is a picture of your lovely son?

Sin is inevitable since it is both conceivable and conditional.

I would hate to think that the only think I own is evil, and that I can never own benevolence and joyousness, that I must be penitent in order to receive it; that I could not 'harden' and refine my own heart. A literalist's heart when hardened would turn to stone.

Justice is a paradox, and when one reads literature beyond the bible, into the wonders of human creations, one realizes that justice is blind.

Well you don't know how much that stings my heart to hear that.

I won't get into moral relativism vs. absolutism because I'm sure you've heard it all, and it's a dead end to too many cases in terms of convincing someone. I will just withdraw from this thread before we hurt each other more.

No, but it's usually written by the narrator. "Jesus opened His mouth and spoke parables", or something to that end.

The context. For example, if it flat out tells you that it's a parable, it's a parable. If it's obviously poetic language, then He's using using metaphors and similes. If He makes statements that are not poetic, they probably are not poetry.

But not everything compromising the event is figurative. There's a real Judgment, and a real time period within which this Judgment takes place. Maybe it's not a day, maybe it's after the end of time, etc. But, there is a clear Judgment being taught. I think I may be able to see what you mean by it being figurative though.

Even so, I agree that when looking at history, we can use the word 'Christian' for a much broader people. That is, all professing Christians.

Take the salt of the earth parable: Matthew says 5:2 "Then He opened His mouth and taught them, saying:" and then Jesus proceeds with the famous "Blessed are the poor in spirit", meek, ect When we get to the salt of the earth, 5:13, there has been no further preface. Here we have Jesus speaking figuratively without any indication that he is, in fact, doing so.

I agree that it is context. But there has to be something to the process of looking at context.

I mentioned your examples already, about how they appear in the same sermon, literal and figurative teaching side by side, and no indication given as to which is which.

So, now we go back to the initial issue: is the Day of Judgment literally an event that will happen on some specific date in the future? Or is it a figurative teaching that is meant to instruct man in some way?

So let us look at Jesus' teachings in the Gospels; back to my favorite, Matthew:

We find Jesus speaking of the Day of Judgment in Chapter 10. He is speaking to his disciples and the content seems to be figurative. He tells them to heal the sick and the lepers and cast out demons (10:8). Obviously, these are purely figurative. At 10:9,10 he begins giving them directions about what to take with them, saying not to take gold or silver nor a bag with various supplies. This direction about what to carry seems literal, but I argue that it has literal and figurative meaning: when you go out to teach do not be concerned with your material well being. If you happen to have two tunics, for example, I doubt Jesus would be offended.

Now we get to the day of judgment. In 14,15 Jesus says that whoever will not hear or receive the disciples will be worse off "in the day of judgment" than those in Sodom and Gomorrah. In the day of judgment, not on a particular date sometime in the future.

Let me bring up something else, which I find to be the most important issue. Many scholars argue that Jesus was an apocalyptic teacher, who taught that the end times were at hand, that they were to happen quite soon. If we read the day of judgment as literal, then Jesus was clearly an apocalyptic teacher who was wrong - human beings are still around two thousand years later.

Whether or not there is a real day of judgment is exactly what we disagree upon, so let's leave that until we've decided on the matter.

You bring up a real time period: okay then, on what day, or what days, will this judgment occur? If it is some unspecified, who knows when, then it smacks of figurative language rather than literal. Not an uncommon technique.

Is there judgment? Sure. But there is no literal Day of Judgment, instead, we should take such talk of that day as a reminder that all of our works have an impact, and that we cannot escape that impact. Let's see if this makes any sense: all lies are eventually revealed, but there is not some Day of Lie-Revealing. We can talk of such a day, and doing so would serve as a reminder that all lies are revealed in lofty and emotionally impacting language.

And that is exactly what I am doing. After all, not all Christians have accepted that Epistle. Many have downright rejected it. Whether or not you and I accept it or not is beside the point: we still, as scholars, must call all honest, professing Christians, Christians. Whether or not we think they are true Christians, or Christians practicing the proper way is another matter altogether.


For example, I find infinite flaws in fundamentalist Christianity - but I none the less recognize that they are Christians.

Sorry about the late post. I've been quite lazy lately, and I won't be able to post within the next five days either, sadly. I'm going on vacation!

Yes, my mistake. He doesn't always tell us when he is being figurative, but in this particular sermon, and in most any sermon or speech I've ever listened to, metaphors are almost always easy to understand as metaphors, and easily distinguishable from that which is taken literally. For example, if I were to say something such as:
"Do not be worldly anymore! Accept Christ's sacrifice and cry out to God, and you shall be saved! Cling to the cross!"
Not the best thing I could come up with, sadly. In any case, I think it's very easy to distinguish the first part as being literal, while the latter part figurative, as there is no literal cross to cling to.

Well, there are multiple contexts to take into consideration. In order, I would say we should look at the immediate context, the context of the entire book, the context of the entire bible, and historical context, in order. And then any other contexts that would be relevant.

Well, the day of Judgment isn't just a day somewhere in the future. It's the judgment on all people at the end of time, I believe. I think I should repeat myself here and tell you I'm not very well learned in the book of revelation, as I'm more into soteriology an the character of God when it comes to my studies.

There is, however, going to be a time where God will judge mankind. This is said in many of Jesus' parables, when He talks about, for example, the wheat and tares, and how there is a point where they are separated, and the tares are removed and thrown into the fire. Why would Jesus figuratively talk about something figurative? Also, if He spoke of this figurative judgment for so long, why did He never explain what it was? Why not even to the apostles?

There are tons of opinions from scholars. This is not what the bible testifies at all, though. If Jesus did teach that there was a judgment, an apocalypse, if you will, he never gave any certain date, He just said it would come soon. Soon, though, is very relative.

How does the date being unknown imply figurative language, exactly?

So Jesus constantly, strenuously, warns against a time where you'll be succumb to human punishment because they've found out what you've done? What about God, in the OT, being a judge?

Thomas how do you think your progressing on the road of dogmatic understanding?

Do you still not think we should not destroy the faith before we rebuild it?

Can you honestly believe reason has a place to play?

By the expressed views displayed, i think you have an uphill struggle.

Have fun on vacation!

As much as I agree that it is typically easy to distinguish between figurative and literal passages, many people seem to disagree with my take on many of them.

Quite right.

I agree that the day of Judgment is not a day somewhere in the future. But I am not sure where we get this end of time notion, especially as a literal interpretation.

Revelation is a strange book, probably the strangest in the Bible.

If it is contained in a parable, shouldn't we recognize it immediately as figurative?

Jesus does not explain exactly what that day was for the reason he gives for teaching in parables in Matthew. He is using figurative language to teach because the message is not easily grasped.

Because if it were literal, then it would have an exact date(s). Right?

Jesus never teaches about human punishment outside of this very human life. Not in the Gospels, that is.

As for the OT God, I'd have to ask: which one? El, who sits and has a meal with Abraham, or YHWH who destroys cities and armies?

out of cureosity (Didymos Thomas, and Thelonelypuritan),
are you reciting verse from memory or the bible it's self, if you are using the bible (nothing wrong with that) i would like to know which translation.

I'm not sure that is the case - in fact, I disagree. Jesus employed figurative language in most of his teachings; that was his primary tool for instruction, figurative tales and expressions.

Well, they are quite unorthodox, you can't deny.

I personally hold that, as you've probably seen me say, the Holy Spirit must witness to the heart for any true understanding of Scripture.

I also think if you take a look at the rest of the New Testament and take it all to be true, you'll usually find a much more orthodox theology.

Of course by orthodox I mean the Christianity that has been seen throughout history. Namely, the Roman Catholic, Protestant, and Eastern Orthodox Churches, as well as the early Church, which would be the catholic church (Not exactly the roman catholic church as it is today, though).

Well would it not make sense for the Judgment to be at the end of the age, that all men would be judged?

But the Judgment itself is hardly ever (if not never) in the parable itself, but rather symbolized by something.

But then how could your interpretation of what He is teaching in His with these parables be misunderstood by so many, if the sole purpose they were used was to better explain things?

Not necessarily. If you were in school, and your professor told the class 'there will be a test sometime next week', he would quite obviously be speaking literally.

Though I do believe in punishment from God in this life, I would not agree that He never speaks of human punishment. Look to the story Luke 16:19-31. (It's quite long so I won't be writing it down here)

Here, we have no indication it's even a parable.

2)There is nothing in the immediate context to tell you anything about what this parable, if figurative, is talking about. The people listening to Jesus, then, would have to conclude that He is indeed speaking of a literal punishment after death.

Still, I'd like to know what your interpretation of this story is, and of this quote:
"25But Abraham said, 'Child, remember that you in your lifetime received your good things, and Lazarus in like manner bad things; but now he is comforted here, and you are in anguish."

Both are one and the same.

Click Here - Just because Jesus clarifies his teaching does not mean that his clarification is purely literal.