THE RICH MAN AND LAZARUS (Luke 16) IS NOT A PARABLE

[Gold fish]

THE RICH MAN AND LAZARUS (Luke 16) IS NOT A PARABLE

 

[Ronit]

THE RICH MAN AND LAZARUS (Luke 16) IS NOT A PARABLE

Thank You for This

 

[ClementofA]

There is no implication that the place of torments was a purgtion experience of attitudes by "physical" torment.

Could disembodied non physical human beings in Hades now be suffering bodily physical torment?

The fact that Abraham declared there was a great gulf so that no one could cross negates it being a teaching experience.

That doesn't necessarily follow logically.

The implication of the gulf is that there is no opportunity to repent and cross over!

Lk.16:26a, CLV, And in all this, between us and you a great chasm has been established,

It does not say this chasm will remain in place forever. Only that at that moment in time it was so. Neither does it explain what keeps those who are in torments from crossing over. Or deny that if they repented they could then end their torments.

The story applies that chasm to Hades & Lazarus' location, while people are there, not to after they get out of Hades. Neither does the story say the chasm is eternal or can never be destroyed or removed. It only applies as a barrier between Hades & Lazarus' location, not to other realms outside of those, such as the lake of fire & the new Jerusalem. In fact, we are told that the gates into the holy city are always open & never shut.

" "So even if we made the mistake of trying to extract from the details of this parable a position on the issue of whether there will be further chances, there still wouldn’t be much cause for taking this passage as supporting the doctrine of no further chances with any force at all. For as long as the [one] who believes in further chances sensibly allows for the possibility that, while punishment is occurring, those suffering from it can’t just end it any time they want, she can make perfectly good sense of the words this parable puts into the mouth of Father Abraham. After all, if a road has been covered with deep enough snow drifts, we’ll tell someone who must drive on that stretch of road to get to where we are, “You cannot cross over from there to us.” We’ll say this quite properly and truthfully, even if we know full well that the road will be cleared in a few days, or that, in a great enough emergency, a helicopter could be used to get across to us even today, if, say, we’re at a hospital. [But doesn’t that show that there is a sense, then, in which they can cross over to us? Yes, there’s a perfectly good sense in which they can, and a perfectly good sense in which they cannot. For enlightening and accessible explanations of the meaning of “can” and related words, I recommend Angelica Kratzer’s “What ‘Must’ and ‘Can’ Must and Can Mean” (Linguistics and Philosophy 1 (1977): pp. 337-355) and example 6 (“Relative Modality”) of David Lewis’s “Scorekeeping in a Language Game” (Journal of Philosophical Logic 8 (1979): pp. 339-359.]"

Tom Talbott said:

"As for the unbridgeable chasm of which Jesus spoke in the parable of the rich man and Lazarus, not one word in this parable, even if taken as literal history, as some do take it, implies that the chasm between Hades and Abraham’s bosom will remain unbridgeable forever. Do not Christians believe that the cross has already guaranteed the ultimate destruction of sin and death, where the “last enemy to be destroyed,” as we have already noted, “is death” itself? When 1 Peter 3:19 depicts Jesus as preaching to the spirits in prison (or those who were disobedient in the days of Noah) and 1 Peter 4:6 also depicts him as preaching the gospel to the dead, do these texts not illustrate perfectly the view of Elhanan Winchester,13 who wrote: “I believe, that Jesus Christ was not only able to pass, but that he actually did pass that gulph, which was impassable to all men but not to him”?14 Even if one should take the details of this parable more literally than one should, in other words, one can still view the Cross as the means whereby Jesus Christ has bridged this hitherto unbridgeable gulf. By flinging himself into the chasm between the dead and the living and by building a bridge over it, Jesus thus brought his message of repentance and forgiveness to all people, including those in Hades, which is the abode of the dead."

Even of the rich man in Hades (Lk.16:19-31) it is not stated how long his torments would last while there. Or denied that they could end while still there. Nor is it denied he could be saved while still in Hades. The rich man's Saviour is in Hades:

"If I ascend up into heaven, Thou art there; If I make my bed in the nether-world (Sheol = Hades), behold, Thou art there." (Psalm 139:8)

The rich man is called "son" (literally, "child") :

Lk.16:25 “But Abraham replied, ‘Son, remember that in your lifetime you received your good things

"Here, too, was one who, even in Hades, was recognized as being, now more truly than he had been in his life, a “child” or “son of Abraham.” (Comp. Luke 19:9.) The word used is the same, in its tone of pity and tenderness, as that which the father used to the elder son in the parable of the Prodigal Son (Luke 15:31), which our Lord addressed to the man sick of the palsy (Matthew 9:2), or to His own disciples (John 13:33)." Ellicott's Commentary for English Readers

The rich man in Hades is receiving the Word of Truth from Abraham. If not to lead those there to repentance & salvation, why would anyone in Hades be receiving such truths.

When it is implied that the rich man is where he is due to his lack of compassion for his fellow man, in particular Lazarus, he responds positively by turning his attention from himself to his brethren still alive & requests that they be warned about Hades. Is the rich man turning from his selfishness & showing concern for others?

The story speaks of a great gulf fixed stopping the transfer of persons from one place to the other place. It does not say this gulf will remain in place forever. Only that at that moment in time it was so. Possibly the chasm barrier refers to the unrepentant state of those in Hades, & that once they repent the barrier stopping any individual from leaving is removed. Nor does the passage deny the possibility of salvation to the rich man in Hades while he remains there.

The duration, nature, intensity & purpose of the torments the rich man was suffering are not revealed in this story. His torments there could have lasted less than 5 minutes.

In Rev.20:11-15 those in Hades get out of Hades, so Hades (Lk.16:19-31) is not a place of unending torments. Assuming the parable's story is even to be taken literally.

Unique Proof For Christian, Biblical Universalism

75 UR verses + 100 proofs + 150 reasons etc:
Web Online Help

213 Questions Without Answers:
Questions Without Answers

 

[grasping the after wind]

What other parables are we supposed to think are not parables?

 

[Der Alte]

All of the ECF who quoted/referred to the story of Lazarus and the rich man considered it to be factual

Irenaeus Against Heresies Book II Chapter XXXIV.-Souls Can Be Recognised in the Separate State, and are Immortal Although They Once Had a Beginning.
Ireneaeus, 120-202 AD, was a disciple of Polycarp, who was a disciple of John.
1. The Lord has taught with very great fulness, that souls not only continue to exist, not by passing from body to body, but that they preserve the same form [in their separate state] as the body had to which they were adapted, and that they remember the deeds which they did in this state of existence, and from which they have now ceased,-in that narrative which is recorded respecting the rich man and that Lazarus who found repose in the bosom of Abraham. In this account He states that Dives [=Latin for rich] knew Lazarus after death, and Abraham in like manner, and that each one of these persons continued in his own proper position, and that [Dives] requested Lazarus to be sent to relieve him-[Lazarus], on whom he did not [formerly] bestow even the crumbs [which fell] from his table. [He tells us] also of the answer given by Abraham, who was acquainted not only with what respected himself, but Dives also, and who enjoined those who did not wish to come into that place of torment to believe Moses and the prophets, and to receive the preaching of Him who was to rise again from the dead. By these things, then, it is plainly declared that souls continue to exist that they do not pass from body to body, that they possess the form of a man, so that they may be recognised, and retain the memory of things in this world; moreover, that the gift of prophecy was possessed by Abraham, and that each class of souls] receives a habitation such as it has deserved, even before the judgment.
ANF01. The Apostolic Fathers with Justin Martyr and Irenaeus | Christian Classics Ethereal Library
Clement of Alexandria [A.D. 153-193-217] The Instructor [Paedagogus] Book 1
On the Resurrection. But he figuratively designates the vulgar rabble, attached to ephemeral pleasure, flourishing for a little, loving ornament, loving praise, and being everything but truth-loving, good for nothing but to be burned with fire. “There was a certain man,” said the Lord, narrating, “very rich, who was clothed in purple and scarlet, enjoying himself splendidly every day.” This was the day. “And a certain poor man named Lazarus was laid at the rich man’s gate, full of sores, desiring to be filled with the crumbs which fell from the rich man’s table.” This is the grass. Well, the rich man was punished in Hades, being made partaker of the fire; while the other flourished again in the Father’s bosom.
Tertullian A Treatise On The Soul [A.D. 145-220.]
In hell the soul of a certain man is in torment, punished in flames, suffering excruciating thirst, and imploring from the finger of a happier soul, for his tongue, the solace of a drop of water. Do you suppose that this end of the blessed poor man and the miserable rich man is only imaginary? Then why the name of Lazarus in this narrative, if the circumstance is not in (the category of) a real occurrence? But even if it is to be regarded as imaginary, it will still be a testimony to truth and reality. For unless the soul possessed corporeality, the image of a soul could not possibly contain a finger of a bodily substance; nor would the Scripture feign a statement about the limbs of a body, if these had no existence.
The Epistles Of Cyprian (A.D. 200-258) Epistle 54 To Cornelius, Concerning Fortunatus And Felicissimus, Or Against The Heretics
A good man out of the good treasure bringeth forth good things; and an evil man out of the evil treasure bringeth forth evil things.” Whence also that rich sinner who implores help from Lazarus, then laid in Abraham’s bosom, and established in a place of comfort, while he, writhing in torments, is consumed by the heats of burning flame, suffers most punishment of all parts of his body in his mouth and his tongue, because doubtless in his mouth and his tongue he had most sinned.
Methodius Fragments On The History Of Jonah (A.D. 260-312)
But souls, being rational bodies, are arranged by the Maker and Father of all things into members which are visible to reason, having received this impression. Whence, also, in Hades, as in the case of Lazarus and the rich man, they are spoken of as having a tongue, and a finger, and the other members; not as though they had with them another invisible body, but that the souls themselves, naturally, when entirely stripped of their covering, are such according to their essence.​

Reasons why Lazarus and the rich man is not a parable.
…..The Lazarus and the rich man story could be some other type of literary device but it is not a parable. The word “parable” is from the Greek word παραβολή/parabolé which means “to lay beside.” A parable explains or clarifies something unknown by comparison with something known.
All unquestioned parables include this comparison e.g. “Another parable put he forth unto them, saying, The kingdom of heaven is likened unto a man which sowed good seed in his field…" Matthew 13:24
Jesus introduces five of His parables as such Matthew 21:33, Matthew 24:32, Mark 4:13, Mark 13:28 and Luke 8:11. Others identify 21 of Jesus’ parables as such.
…..The story of Lazarus is not introduced or identified as a parable and Jesus did not explain it later to His disciples.
The story of Lazarus does not have the structure of a parable. There is no comparison between something unknown/misunderstood about the kingdom of heaven and some earthly event.
All unquestioned parables refer to real type events, something which could have or has happened in this life, not something fictitious, unreasonable or impossible. Other than Lazarus and the rich man living and dying, which happens to everybody, there is nothing about the story which is or can be compared to anything in this life.
All unquestioned parables refer to anonymous people, a certain shepherd, a certain widow etc. At some time in history a shepherd searched for and found a lost sheep. At some time in history a widow searched for and found a lost coin, etc.
The story of Lazarus names two specific people, Lazarus, otherwise unknown, and Abraham, an actual historical person. If Abraham was never in the place Jesus mentioned and did not say the words Jesus quoted, then Jesus was lying.

 

[SkyWriting]

THE RICH MAN AND LAZARUS (Luke 16) IS NOT A PARABLE

Parables are all real historic events that Jesus witnessed.

 

[Radagast]

THE RICH MAN AND LAZARUS (Luke 16) IS NOT A PARABLE

Doesn't seems like a theologically sound church.

 

[Dkh587]

Parables are all real historic events that Jesus witnessed.

What makes you say that? As far as we know, parables are made up stories that are used to teach kingdom truths.

 

[ClementofA]

Like i mentioned, I find it extremely difficult to reconcile physical body parts existing in the spirit world where one would need his or her physical tongue cooling with literal water,

How do those who do not consider Lk.16:19-31 a parable & believe Jesus was speaking of a real rich man being tormented in Hades address that? Maybe that the tongue is part of a spiritual, not physical, body?

or physical belongings being with
those who go down into Sheol as
disembodied spirits.

If sheol refers to the unseen world, then it could refer to the grave in one passage & "hell" in another place. Or both at once.

For me personally, I find it sad that the resurrection hope, has been mixed with pagan concepts such as existing beyond bodily death. For me, the biblical doctrine of the resurrection isn’t some half hearted attempt at bringing back disembodied spirits to some kind of earthly existence, It’s the mind blowing and amazing fact, that once dead and gone, Christ has the power from his God to bring all people back into existence from the mouth of Sheol. A wonderful gift that awaits all.

What does it matter, whether "soul sleep" is true or not? Is the doctrine going to affect any major Christian beliefs or help people live a holier life?

Too much debate about nonessentials & doctrine is actually sinful.

2 Tim.2:14 Remind the believers of these things, charging them before God to avoid quarreling over words, which succeeds only in leading its listeners to ruin.

[1 Timothy 6:4]
he is conceited and understands nothing. Instead, he has an unhealthy interest in controversies and semantics, out of which come envy, strife, abusive talk, evil suspicions,

[2 Timothy 2:23]
But reject foolish and ignorant speculation, for you know that it breeds quarreling.

 

[Butch5]

THE RICH MAN AND LAZARUS (Luke 16) IS NOT A PARABLE

Actually, it's a judgment against the leadership of Israel. It's a parable, not a story about what happens when people die.

 

[Butch5]

" and if Jesus believed the doctrine of soul-sleep he would never have told a parable like this which contradicts it very plainly."

There's an error in reasoning in the opening paragraph. The author is presuming to know what Jesus would or would not do. The author has no such knowledge.

Every one of his 4 evidences are erroneous, as is his conclusion.

 

[ClementofA]

" and if Jesus believed the doctrine of soul-sleep he would never have told a parable like this which contradicts it very plainly."

There's an error in reasoning in the opening paragraph. The author is presuming to know what Jesus would or would not do. The author has no such knowledge.

Every one of his 4 evidences are erroneous, as is his conclusion.

What about:

I derive my view from these three passages.
In Isa 14 there is a long passage about the king of Babylon dying, according to many the dead know nothing. They are supposedly annihilated, destroyed, pfft, gone! But God, Himself, speaking, these dead people in שאול/sheol, know something, they move, meet the dead coming to sheol, stir up, raise up, speak and say, etc.

Isa 14:9-11 (KJV)
9) Hell [שאול ] from beneath is moved for thee to meet thee at thy coming: it stirreth up the dead for thee, even all the chief ones of the earth; it hath raised up from their thrones all the kings of the nations.
10) All they shall speak and say unto thee, Art thou also become weak as we? art thou become like unto us?
11) Thy pomp is brought down to the grave, [שאול] and the noise of thy viols: the worm is spread under thee, and the worms cover thee.
[ . . . ]
22) For I will rise up against them, saith the LORD of hosts, and cut off from Babylon the name, and remnant, and son, and nephew, saith the LORD.

In this passage God, himself is speaking, and I see a whole lot of shaking going on, moving, rising up, and speaking in . These dead people seem to know something, about something. We know that verses 11 through 14 describe actual historical events, the death of Nebuchadnezzar, king of Babylon.

Some will try to argue that this passage is figurative because fir trees don’t literally rejoice, vs. 8. They will try to argue that the passage must be figurative since God told Israel “take up this proverb against the king of Babylon.” vs. 4. The occurrence of one figurative expression in a passage does not prove that anything else in the passage is figurative.

.....The Hebrew word שאול/mashal translated “proverb” does not necessarily mean something is fictional. For example, Israel did not become fictional when God made them a mashal/proverb in 2 Chronicles 7:20, Psalms 44:14, and Jeremiah 24:9.

.....Here is another passage where God Himself is speaking and people who are dead in sheol, speaking, being ashamed, comforted, etc.

Ezek 32:18-22, 30-31 (KJV)
18) Son of man, [Ezekiel] wail for the multitude of Egypt, and cast them down, even her, and the daughters of the famous nations, unto the nether parts of the earth, with them that go down into the pit.
19) Whom dost thou pass in beauty? go down, and be thou laid with the uncircumcised.
20) They shall fall in the midst of them that are slain by the sword: she is delivered to the sword: draw her and all her multitudes.
21) The strong among the mighty shall speak to him out of the midst of hell [שאול] with them that help him: they are gone down, they lie uncircumcised, slain by the sword.
22) Asshur is there and all her company: his graves are about him: all of them slain, fallen by the sword::[ . . . ]
Eze 32:30-31
(30) There be the princes of the north, all of them, and all the Zidonians, which are gone down with the slain; with their terror they are ashamed of their might; and they lie uncircumcised with them that be slain by the sword, and bear their shame with them that go down to the pit.
(31) Pharaoh shall see them, and shall be comforted over all his multitude, even Pharaoh and all his army slain by the sword, saith the Lord GOD.

In the New Testament Jesus speaking, a dead man in Hades had eyes, was in torment, saw Abraham, “cried and said,” asked for water, begged Abraham, etc.

Luk 16:22-28
(22) And it came to pass, that the beggar died, and was carried by the angels into Abraham's bosom: the rich man also died, and was buried;
(23) And in hell he lift up his eyes, being in torments, and seeth Abraham afar off, and Lazarus in his bosom.
(24) And he cried and said, Father Abraham, have mercy on me, and send Lazarus, that he may dip the tip of his finger in water, and cool my tongue; for I am tormented in this flame.
(25) But Abraham said, Son, remember that thou in thy lifetime receivedst thy good things, and likewise Lazarus evil things: but now he is comforted, and thou art tormented.
(26) And beside all this, between us and you there is a great gulf fixed: so that they which would pass from hence to you cannot; neither can they pass to us, that would come from thence.
(27) Then he said, I pray thee therefore, father, that thou wouldest send him to my father's house:
(28) For I have five brethren; that he may testify unto them, lest they also come into this place of torment.

 

[Butch5]

What about:

There's lots of figurative language in the Bible. I've seen dead people. They've never done anything. They've never moved, spoken, opened their eyes, nothing. If one claims that a dead person can speak they have no proof of this what so ever. Most people believe the dead live on so when they see passages such as those you've posted, they just assume they're about dead people being alive. The Bible states plainly that the dead know nothing, that their thoughts perish when they die, that they cannot praise God, etc. So, the person who doesn't believe the dead live on simply see the language as figurative. It fits perfectly with what we find in Scripture. However, those who claim that dead people live one have many passages that run counter to their belief.

 

[ClementofA]

I’m not sure the context of John 4 and it’s use of spiritual water quite fits with in the context of the rich man and Lazarus account. To my understanding the living water Christ spoke about in John 4 and his wider teachings, were about bringing age-during life to mere mortals after death at the resurrection. I fail to see what purpose living waters [ie] spiritual water, would serve a spiritual being which already possess immortality.

Spiritually speaking John speaks to Christ being our inner satisfaction in life, like those martyrs with smiles on their faces had as they were fed to the lions. This is what the tormented rich man in Hades lacked as symbolized by his inner need to have his tongue cooled with some satisfying refreshment, i.e. water.

"Whoever believes in me, as Scripture has said, rivers of living water will flow from within them."

This word from Watchman Nee touches on the topic:

THE LIVING WATER

 

[Saint Steven]

There's lots of figurative language in the Bible. I've seen dead people. They've never done anything. They've never moved, spoken, opened their eyes, nothing. If one claims that a dead person can speak they have no proof of this what so ever. Most people believe the dead live on so when they see passages such as those you've posted, they just assume they're about dead people being alive. The Bible states plainly that the dead know nothing, that their thoughts perish when they die, that they cannot praise God, etc. So, the person who doesn't believe the dead live on simply see the language as figurative. It fits perfectly with what we find in Scripture. However, those who claim that dead people live one have many passages that run counter to their belief.

Five verses after "the dead know nothing", we read about "the realm of the dead, where you are going". The "realm of the dead" appears 29 times in the NIV translation.
Furthermore, do you really believe that the dead "have no further reward"?
And that "even their name is forgotten"? Isn't that only true of what "happens under the sun"?

Ecclesiastes 9:5-6, 10
For the living know that they will die,
but the dead know nothing;
they have no further reward,
and even their name is forgotten.
6 Their love, their hate
and their jealousy have long since vanished;
never again will they have a part
in anything that happens under the sun. ...
10 Whatever your hand finds to do, do it with all your might,
for in the realm of the dead, where you are going,
there is neither working nor planning nor knowledge nor wisdom.

 

[Butch5]

Five verses after "the dead know nothing", we read about "the realm of the dead, where you are going". The "realm of the dead" appears 29 times in the NIV translation.
Furthermore, do you really believe that the dead "have no further reward"?
And that "even their name is forgotten"? Isn't that only true of what "happens under the sun"?

Ecclesiastes 9:5-6, 10
For the living know that they will die,
but the dead know nothing;
they have no further reward,
and even their name is forgotten.
6 Their love, their hate
and their jealousy have long since vanished;
never again will they have a part
in anything that happens under the sun. ...
10 Whatever your hand finds to do, do it with all your might,
for in the realm of the dead, where you are going,
there is neither working nor planning nor knowledge nor wisdom.

Did you read that? In the realm of the dead there is no working, no planning, no knowledge, no wisdom.

 

[Saint Steven]

Did you read that? In the realm of the dead there is no working, no planning, no knowledge, no wisdom.

It is still a realm, not unconscious non-existence.
Do you also believe that there is no more reward for the dead?
That even their names will be forgotten?

And frankly, I know better than to base my doctrines on a poetic book.

Saint Steven said: ↑
Five verses after "the dead know nothing", we read about "the realm of the dead, where you are going". The "realm of the dead" appears 29 times in the NIV translation.
Furthermore, do you really believe that the dead "have no further reward"?
And that "even their name is forgotten"? Isn't that only true of what "happens under the sun"?

Ecclesiastes 9:5-6, 10
For the living know that they will die,
but the dead know nothing;
they have no further reward,
and even their name is forgotten.
6 Their love, their hate
and their jealousy have long since vanished;
never again will they have a part
in anything that happens under the sun. ...
10 Whatever your hand finds to do, do it with all your might,
for in the realm of the dead, where you are going,
there is neither working nor planning nor knowledge nor wisdom.

 

[Butch5]

It is still a realm, not unconscious non-existence.
Do you also believe that there is no more reward for the dead?
That even their names will be forgotten?

And frankly, I know better than to base my doctrines on a poetic book.

Saint Steven said: ↑
Five verses after "the dead know nothing", we read about "the realm of the dead, where you are going". The "realm of the dead" appears 29 times in the NIV translation.
Furthermore, do you really believe that the dead "have no further reward"?
And that "even their name is forgotten"? Isn't that only true of what "happens under the sun"?

Ecclesiastes 9:5-6, 10
For the living know that they will die,
but the dead know nothing;
they have no further reward,
and even their name is forgotten.
6 Their love, their hate
and their jealousy have long since vanished;
never again will they have a part
in anything that happens under the sun. ...
10 Whatever your hand finds to do, do it with all your might,
for in the realm of the dead, where you are going,
there is neither working nor planning nor knowledge nor wisdom.

Where in the definition of realm do you see the requirement that it refers to conscious people? It seems to me that you're imposing that idea onto the text.

Secondly, my doctrine isn't based on a poetic book. It's foundation is in the creation of man, Gen 2:7

7 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.1 (Gen. 2:7 KJV)

Man consists of a body, God's breath was infused into that body and together they became a living soul. What do you see there that can live on after death? God told Adam when he ate from the tree that he would die and he would return to dust.

19 In the sweat of thy face shalt thou eat bread, till thou return unto the ground; for out of it wast thou taken: for dust thou art, and unto dust shalt thou return. (Gen. 3:19 KJV)

For dust you are. God didn't say, for dust your body is. He said for dust you are. That dust will return to the ground when God's breath returns to Him

 

[Saint Steven]

Where in the definition of realm do you see the requirement that it refers to conscious people? It seems to me that you're imposing that idea onto the text.

Secondly, my doctrine isn't based on a poetic book. It's foundation is in the creation of man, Gen 2:7

7 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.1 (Gen. 2:7 KJV)

Man consists of a body, God's breath was infused into that body and together they became a living soul. What do you see there that can live on after death? God told Adam when he ate from the tree that he would die and he would return to dust.

19 In the sweat of thy face shalt thou eat bread, till thou return unto the ground; for out of it wast thou taken: for dust thou art, and unto dust shalt thou return. (Gen. 3:19 KJV)

For dust you are. God didn't say, for dust your body is. He said for dust you are. That dust will return to the ground when God's breath returns to Him

Are you claiming to not believe in the afterlife?

As I said, there are 29 references to "the realm of the dead" in the NIV translation. Two of them are in Acts chapter two. In reference to Christ's three days spent there making proclamation. Are you claiming that no one heard him preach? And that he didn't take anyone with him in his ascent from there?

The other 27 references indicate all sorts of conscious awareness. Check it out.
BibleGateway - Keyword Search: realm of the dead

Isaiah 14:9
The realm of the dead below is all astir to meet you at your coming; it rouses the spirits of the departed to greet you— all those who were leaders in the world; it makes them rise from their thrones— all those who were kings over the nations.

Ezekiel 32:27
But they do not lie with the fallen warriors of old, who went down to the realm of the dead with their weapons of war—their swords placed under their heads and their shields resting on their bones—though these warriors also had terrorized the land of the living.

Jonah 2:2
He said: “In my distress I called to the Lord, and he answered me. From deep in the realm of the dead I called for help, and you listened to my cry.

 

[Butch5]

Are you claiming to not believe in the afterlife?

As I said, there are 29 references to "the realm of the dead" in the NIV translation. Two of them are in Acts chapter two. In reference to Christ's three days spent there making proclamation. Are you claiming that no one heard him preach? And that he didn't take anyone with him in his ascent from there?

The other 27 references indicate all sorts of conscious awareness. Check it out.
BibleGateway - Keyword Search: realm of the dead

The only afterlife I believe in is the Resurrection that we find in Scripture. The phrase, "realm of the dead" doesn't appear in the original languages so we really need to see what is being spoken of. I suspect, (I haven't checked) that the majority of those references refer to Hades or sheol. Hades or sheol is the grave. That's where the dead go. This is why translators should stick to accurately translating the text and not use colloquial phrases that can be interpreted multiple ways.

The Bible is clear about the dead. They are dead. However, most people believe that the dead live on after the body dies. So, when they see passages such as Lazarus and the Rich Man they read this idea into it rather than understanding that it is a parable and has another meaning.