How could those born BC get into Heaven?

[Waggles]

I guess that is why death is referred to theologically as - "the moment of truth"

 

[Brother Paul]

The idea that the parable of Lazarus and the Rich Man represents what happens to the dead, is based on a false premise. That interpretation requires that man can live apart from the body. I have yet to see anyone prove this. I don't mean just in this thread, I mean anywhere. Often when the subject comes up people will say that the parable of Lazarus and the Rich Man proves man lives on after death. But, that's actually a fallacy. It's Begging the Question or Circular Reasoning. One simply comes to the parable already believing that man can live apart from the body and then claims, see this proves it. However, there is nothing in the parable that claims man can live apart from the body. I'm sure we've probably all heard the joke, three men meet Saint Peter at the pearly gates and xyz. Does that prove that man can live apart from the body? No, it's a joke. It doesn't prove anything. Likewise, a parable or allegory is story used to depict some other reality.

In order to hold to the idea that man can live apart from the body, one must first prove that it is possible. Here are few questions that need answers. According to the apostle Paul the Father alone has immortality, 1 Tim 6:16. Since that is the case, then man does not have immortality. So, for him to live apart from the body he has to somehow get immortality. Since the Father is the only one who has it, we can conclude that man has to get it from the Father. We are told eternal life is the gift of God and given to believers. That begs the question, how does the wicked man get eternal life in order to live apart from the body?

Here are some more for consideration. In the parable Abraham and the Rich Man are conversing. They carry on a conversation, supposedly without bodies. That would indicate that they can communicate without a body. If that is the case, then why is it that those in a coma cannot communicate with people? What about those who have a brain injury? A brain injury should in no way affect the person's ability to communicate if it is possible to communicate without a body at all. What we see in the real world, doesn't support this idea that the dead live on apart from the body. If we combine this real world evidence with the complete lack of any Biblical evidence for the support of that claim we are forced to conclude that this idea that man lives on after death is not only not Biblical, but also not possible.

Interesting post Butch and I will think about the part of living on, however, I do have a few thoughts as to whether Lazarus and the Rich man IS a parable.

In my studies I noticed that all "parables" are comparative, or illustrative, giving a teaching in almost a metaphorical way by which those who have ears to hear can hear and those (though having physical ears) who have not ears to hear just do not really get it. Secondly in all the parables, save this story, no personal names are ever mentioned or pointed out. In this story we have both.

In the Hebrew mind, the Mashal (or what was translated parabolos in Greek) is one of the standard ways the ancient Rabbis taught. In Shir Hashirim Rabbah 1:8 we read:

"Likewise: Let not the mashal seem trivial in your eyes, for by means of the mashal a man is able to understand the words of Torah.” Which means on a deeper level than just the literal.

I just do not see these qualities present in this story. I do realize that it is called a parable since the reformation but I think Jesus was telling is an actual story to teach us (as He sometimes did) and that this is NOT a parable. But I could be incorrect and knowing you are my dear brother it is also fine if we do not agree.

 

[Waggles]

THE RICH MAN AND LAZARUS - is a parable for the Jews who also believed in many extra-scripture teachings taught in the many Rabbinic schools of theology
Jesus gives criticism of the religious leaders with the parable of the dishonest manager - Luke 16:1-13
Luke 16:1 He also said to the disciples, “There was a rich man who had a manager, and charges were brought to him that this man was wasting his possessions.
Luke 16:14 The Pharisees, who were lovers of money, heard all these things, and they ridiculed him.
Jesus preaches a parable to address the problem of the love of money - (something that prosperity gospel Christians should give thought to as well)
Luke 16:19-31
Luke 16:19 “There was a rich man who was clothed in purple and fine linen and who feasted sumptuously every day.
20 And at his gate was laid a poor man named Lazarus, covered with sores,

Luke 16:24 And he called out, ‘Father Abraham, have mercy on me, and send Lazarus to dip the end of his finger in water and cool my tongue, for I am in anguish in this flame.’
is this a portrayal of the lake of fire??
And how do people in the fake of fire have sight of, and conversations with, those not in this damnation, but are with God?
It is a parable that draws upon some aspects of judgement and consequences to come in Rev 20.

 

[Butch5]

Interesting post Butch and I will think about the part of living on, however, I do have a few thoughts as to whether Lazarus and the Rich man IS a parable.

In my studies I noticed that all "parables" are comparative, or illustrative, giving a teaching in almost a metaphorical way by which those who have ears to hear can hear and those (though having physical ears) who have not ears to hear just do not really get it. Secondly in all the parables, save this story, no personal names are ever mentioned or pointed out. In this story we have both.

In the Hebrew mind, the Mashal (or what was translated parabolos in Greek) is one of the standard ways the ancient Rabbis taught. In Shir Hashirim Rabbah 1:8 we read:

"Likewise: Let not the mashal seem trivial in your eyes, for by means of the mashal a man is able to understand the words of Torah.” Which means on a deeper level than just the literal.

I just do not see these qualities present in this story. I do realize that it is called a parable since the reformation but I think Jesus was telling is an actual story to teach us (as He sometimes did) and that this is NOT a parable. But I could be incorrect and knowing you are my dear brother it is also fine if we do not agree.

Hi Brother Paul,

Let's suppose for moment that it is a parable. As you pointed out it should be illustrative of a teaching in a metaphorical way. Let us suppose that the Rich Man represents the Scribes and Pharisees. Remember, it was addressed to.

14 And the Pharisees also, who were covetous, heard all these things: and they derided him. 15 And he said unto them, Ye are they which justify yourselves before men; but God knoweth your hearts: for that which is highly esteemed among men is abomination in the sight of God. 16 The law and the prophets were until John: since that time the kingdom of God is preached, and every man presseth into it. 17 And it is easier for heaven and earth to pass, than one tittle of the law to fail. 18 Whosoever putteth away his wife, and marrieth another, committeth adultery: and whosoever marrieth her that is put away from her husband committeth adultery.
19 There was a certain rich man, which was clothed in purple and fine linen, and fared sumptuously every day:


The Holy Bible: King James Version, Electronic Edition of the 1900 Authorized Version. (Bellingham, WA: Logos Research Systems, Inc., 2009), Lk 16:14–19.

We can see what He said, He said to the Pharisees. If we read the book of Malachi we find that the Pharisees, Jewish Leadership, are justifying themselves. He also rebukes them for putting away their wives and marrying others. Again, we find this very thing in Malachi. We can see that He is addressing these Pharisees. He also tells them the Law and the Prophets were until John. What does that mean? He's telling them that the age of the Law and Prophets ends with John the Baptist. Since then a new system has begun. So, in essence, the Old leadership, the Rich Man, has died. If we look at the details in the parable they describe the Levitical priesthood. The Rich Man fared sumptuously, the priesthood did also. He was clothed in purple and fine linen, the priesthood was also. The Rich Man had five brothers. The priesthood was of the tribe of Levi, who had five brothers. The Rich Man was an Israelite, the priesthood were Israelites. What about Lazarus? Let's suppose Lazarus represents Jesus. Lazarus was poor. Jesus was poor. Lazarus was laid at the Rich Man's gate. Jesus was presented to the Jews. Lazarus was rejected by the Rich Man, the Jews. Jesus was rejected by the Jews. The dogs licked Lazarus' sores, the accepted him. The Gentiles were called dogs by the Jews. The Gentiles, the dogs, accepted Jesus. Lazarus died. Jesus died. Lazarus was carried away by angels. Jesus was carried away by angels.

9 And when he had spoken these things, while they beheld, he was taken up; and a cloud received him out of their sight. 10 And while they looked stedfastly toward heaven as he went up, behold, two men stood by them in white apparel; 11 Which also said, Ye men of Galilee, why stand ye gazing up into heaven? this same Jesus, which is taken up from you into heaven, shall so come in like manner as ye have seen him go into heaven. 12 Then returned they unto Jerusalem from the mount called Olivet, which is from Jerusalem a

The Holy Bible: King James Version, Electronic Edition of the 1900 Authorized Version. (Bellingham, WA: Logos Research Systems, Inc., 2009), Ac 1:9–12.

This passage says that Jesus was taken up. It's in the passage voice. Someone or something took Him up. He was carried away. The same way we see Lazarus was carried away. The passage says that Jesus will return in like manner. We're told elsewhere in Scripture that Jesus will return with a multitude of angels. Since He's returning with angels, He must have left with angels. He was carried away by angels. Lazarus was carried away to his father's bosom. Jesus was carried away to His Father's bosom.

18 No man hath seen God at any time; the only begotten Son, which is in the bosom of the Father, he hath declared him.

The Holy Bible: King James Version, Electronic Edition of the 1900 Authorized Version. (Bellingham, WA: Logos Research Systems, Inc., 2009), Jn 1:18.

No matter how we understand this story, I believe there are way too many similarities between Jesus and Lazarus and the Rich Man and the Pharisees to ignore. There are too many to write it off as coincidence in my opinion.

Since Jesus said that the Law and the Prophets were until John and then launches into the death of the Rich Man, I would submit that the death of the Rich Man and the end of the Law and the Prophets are one and the same. The death of the Rich Man is simply a metaphor, or an allegory, for the Law and the Prophets. They both came to an end.

That Jesus used the name Lazarus isn't surprising since He is comparing Himself who brings the new Law to the Pharisees who represented the old Law. The name Lazarus is the Greek form of the Hebrew Eleazor, which means, God help or God is my help.


4 The Lord GOD hath given me the tongue of the learned,
That I should know how to speak a word in season to him that is weary:
He wakeneth morning by morning,
He wakeneth mine ear to hear as the learned.
5 The Lord GOD hath opened mine ear,
And I was not rebellious,
Neither turned away back.
6 I gave my back to the smiters,
And ymy cheeks to them that plucked off the hair:
I hid not my face from shame and aspitting.
7 For the Lord GOD will help me;
Therefore shall I not be confounded:
Therefore have I set my face like a flint,
And I know that I shall not be ashamed.
8 He is near that justifieth me;


The Holy Bible: King James Version, Electronic Edition of the 1900 Authorized Version. (Bellingham, WA: Logos Research Systems, Inc., 2009), Is 50:4–8.

The Lord God will help me, that's what the name Lazarus means. This passage is obviously talking about Jesus, thus the name Lazarus.

The details of this parable are actually drawn from several OT passages. For instance, the Rich Man is suffering fire in Hades. Note that it's not Gehenna. Gehenna is where Jesus said the wicked go. He didn't say anything about the wicked suffering in Hades. Actually, we don't find anyone suffering in fire in Hades in the Scriptures. Remember that the Rich Man is an Israelite. He's of the priesthood. The priesthood would be very aware of the Scriptures. So, when they heard that the Rich Man was suffering in fire in Hades what would come to their mind? Almost certainly they would think of Deuteronomy 32, the Song of Moses.

For they are a very froward generation,
Children in whom is no faith.
21 They have moved me to jealousy with that which is not God;
They have provoked me to anger with their vanities:
And I will move them to jealousy with those which are not a people;
I will provoke them to anger with a foolish nation.
22 For a fire is kindled in mine anger,
And shall burn unto the lowest hell,
And ||shall consume the earth with her increase,
And set on fire the foundations of the mountains.


The Holy Bible: King James Version, Electronic Edition of the 1900 Authorized Version. (Bellingham, WA: Logos Research Systems, Inc., 2009), Dt 32:20–22.

We know this applies to Jesus' day because Paul quotes verse 21 and applies it to his day. Notice verse 22, God says a fire is kindled in His anger and it will burn to the lowest Hades. This and the parable of Lazarus and the Rich Man are the only two places that speak of someone suffering in fire in Hades. Clearly Jesus is referencing this passage as it's the only other passage in Scripture that speaks of someone suffering fire in Hades. And, the Pharisees would be well acquainted with it as it was a song they sung. This parable is drawn from Deut 32, Psalm 50, Malachi, and another passage that escapes me at the moment.

There is a lot more that can be said on this passage. There are so many details that tie into the OT that it's just about impossible to ignore. I can go into more if you're interested.

 

[Brother Paul]

Hi Brother Paul,

Let's suppose for moment that it is a parable. As you pointed out it should be illustrative of a teaching in a metaphorical way. Let us suppose that the Rich Man represents the Scribes and Pharisees. Remember, it was addressed to.

14 And the Pharisees also, who were covetous, heard all these things: and they derided him. 15 And he said unto them, Ye are they which justify yourselves before men; but God knoweth your hearts: for that which is highly esteemed among men is abomination in the sight of God. 16 The law and the prophets were until John: since that time the kingdom of God is preached, and every man presseth into it. 17 And it is easier for heaven and earth to pass, than one tittle of the law to fail. 18 Whosoever putteth away his wife, and marrieth another, committeth adultery: and whosoever marrieth her that is put away from her husband committeth adultery.
19 There was a certain rich man, which was clothed in purple and fine linen, and fared sumptuously every day:


The Holy Bible: King James Version, Electronic Edition of the 1900 Authorized Version. (Bellingham, WA: Logos Research Systems, Inc., 2009), Lk 16:14–19.

We can see what He said, He said to the Pharisees. If we read the book of Malachi we find that the Pharisees, Jewish Leadership, are justifying themselves. He also rebukes them for putting away their wives and marrying others. Again, we find this very thing in Malachi. We can see that He is addressing these Pharisees. He also tells them the Law and the Prophets were until John. What does that mean? He's telling them that the age of the Law and Prophets ends with John the Baptist. Since then a new system has begun. So, in essence, the Old leadership, the Rich Man, has died. If we look at the details in the parable they describe the Levitical priesthood. The Rich Man fared sumptuously, the priesthood did also. He was clothed in purple and fine linen, the priesthood was also. The Rich Man had five brothers. The priesthood was of the tribe of Levi, who had five brothers. The Rich Man was an Israelite, the priesthood were Israelites. What about Lazarus? Let's suppose Lazarus represents Jesus. Lazarus was poor. Jesus was poor. Lazarus was laid at the Rich Man's gate. Jesus was presented to the Jews. Lazarus was rejected by the Rich Man, the Jews. Jesus was rejected by the Jews. The dogs licked Lazarus' sores, the accepted him. The Gentiles were called dogs by the Jews. The Gentiles, the dogs, accepted Jesus. Lazarus died. Jesus died. Lazarus was carried away by angels. Jesus was carried away by angels.

9 And when he had spoken these things, while they beheld, he was taken up; and a cloud received him out of their sight. 10 And while they looked stedfastly toward heaven as he went up, behold, two men stood by them in white apparel; 11 Which also said, Ye men of Galilee, why stand ye gazing up into heaven? this same Jesus, which is taken up from you into heaven, shall so come in like manner as ye have seen him go into heaven. 12 Then returned they unto Jerusalem from the mount called Olivet, which is from Jerusalem a

The Holy Bible: King James Version, Electronic Edition of the 1900 Authorized Version. (Bellingham, WA: Logos Research Systems, Inc., 2009), Ac 1:9–12.

This passage says that Jesus was taken up. It's in the passage voice. Someone or something took Him up. He was carried away. The same way we see Lazarus was carried away. The passage says that Jesus will return in like manner. We're told elsewhere in Scripture that Jesus will return with a multitude of angels. Since He's returning with angels, He must have left with angels. He was carried away by angels. Lazarus was carried away to his father's bosom. Jesus was carried away to His Father's bosom.

18 No man hath seen God at any time; the only begotten Son, which is in the bosom of the Father, he hath declared him.

The Holy Bible: King James Version, Electronic Edition of the 1900 Authorized Version. (Bellingham, WA: Logos Research Systems, Inc., 2009), Jn 1:18.

No matter how we understand this story, I believe there are way too many similarities between Jesus and Lazarus and the Rich Man and the Pharisees to ignore. There are too many to write it off as coincidence in my opinion.

Since Jesus said that the Law and the Prophets were until John and then launches into the death of the Rich Man, I would submit that the death of the Rich Man and the end of the Law and the Prophets are one and the same. The death of the Rich Man is simply a metaphor, or an allegory, for the Law and the Prophets. They both came to an end.

That Jesus used the name Lazarus isn't surprising since He is comparing Himself who brings the new Law to the Pharisees who represented the old Law. The name Lazarus is the Greek form of the Hebrew Eleazor, which means, God help or God is my help.


4 The Lord GOD hath given me the tongue of the learned,
That I should know how to speak a word in season to him that is weary:
He wakeneth morning by morning,
He wakeneth mine ear to hear as the learned.
5 The Lord GOD hath opened mine ear,
And I was not rebellious,
Neither turned away back.
6 I gave my back to the smiters,
And ymy cheeks to them that plucked off the hair:
I hid not my face from shame and aspitting.
7 For the Lord GOD will help me;
Therefore shall I not be confounded:
Therefore have I set my face like a flint,
And I know that I shall not be ashamed.
8 He is near that justifieth me;


The Holy Bible: King James Version, Electronic Edition of the 1900 Authorized Version. (Bellingham, WA: Logos Research Systems, Inc., 2009), Is 50:4–8.

The Lord God will help me, that's what the name Lazarus means. This passage is obviously talking about Jesus, thus the name Lazarus.

The details of this parable are actually drawn from several OT passages. For instance, the Rich Man is suffering fire in Hades. Note that it's not Gehenna. Gehenna is where Jesus said the wicked go. He didn't say anything about the wicked suffering in Hades. Actually, we don't find anyone suffering in fire in Hades in the Scriptures. Remember that the Rich Man is an Israelite. He's of the priesthood. The priesthood would be very aware of the Scriptures. So, when they heard that the Rich Man was suffering in fire in Hades what would come to their mind? Almost certainly they would think of Deuteronomy 32, the Song of Moses.

For they are a very froward generation,
Children in whom is no faith.
21 They have moved me to jealousy with that which is not God;
They have provoked me to anger with their vanities:
And I will move them to jealousy with those which are not a people;
I will provoke them to anger with a foolish nation.
22 For a fire is kindled in mine anger,
And shall burn unto the lowest hell,
And ||shall consume the earth with her increase,
And set on fire the foundations of the mountains.


The Holy Bible: King James Version, Electronic Edition of the 1900 Authorized Version. (Bellingham, WA: Logos Research Systems, Inc., 2009), Dt 32:20–22.

We know this applies to Jesus' day because Paul quotes verse 21 and applies it to his day. Notice verse 22, God says a fire is kindled in His anger and it will burn to the lowest Hades. This and the parable of Lazarus and the Rich Man are the only two places that speak of someone suffering in fire in Hades. Clearly Jesus is referencing this passage as it's the only other passage in Scripture that speaks of someone suffering fire in Hades. And, the Pharisees would be well acquainted with it as it was a song they sung. This parable is drawn from Deut 32, Psalm 50, Malachi, and another passage that escapes me at the moment.

There is a lot more that can be said on this passage. There are so many details that tie into the OT that it's just about impossible to ignore. I can go into more if you're interested.

I am not sure I agree with all that however I did want to address the other issue briefly. After consideration of all those passages usually used to support the whole living in heaven thing I can clearly see that in every instance they could be taken in either way.

 

[Butch5]

I am not sure I agree with all that however I did want to address the other issue briefly. After consideration of all those passages usually used to support the whole living in heaven thing I can clearly see that in every instance they could be taken in either way.

I agree. So many passages can be understood in a different way. The thing is, we've been conditioned to understand them a certain way because that's what's been handed down generation after generation. Look at the thief on the cross. So many Christians use this passage as a proof text to argue that the dead are alive. They say that Jesus and the thief were in alive in Paradies that very day. This argument is actually a form of Begging the Question, a logical fallacy. There is nothing in the passage that says Jesus and the thief would be alive later that day. People simply assume that. So, they're coming to the passage with the belief (premise) that the dead live on, and then say see, "they were in Paradise that day". They are assuming that they are alive in paradise that day. Maybe they were dead in paradise that day. They assume they're alive because they misunderstand Paradise because they conflate it with Abraham's bosom. Because people misunderstand the parable about Lazarus and the Rich Man they think the righteous dead go to Abraham's bosom. Then they hear that Jessus and the thief would be in paradise that day and they assume that paradise and Abraham's bosom are one and the same. However, the Greek word for paradise simply means garden and is translated garden in most places. It's only in a few theologically significant places that they switch the translation from garden to paradise. Imagine if they translated Jesus words saying that the thief would be with Him that day in the garden. That doesn't fit with the whole being in Abraham's bosom idea. However, if we change garden to paradise, well, now paradise can mean whatever people think it to mean. Now we can make it fit with the idea of Abraham's bosom. But, here's the important point, there is no punctuation in the original texts. It's added by the translators. Where the comma is placed is solely up to the discretion of the translator. Either of these translations is correct in Greek.

And Jesus said unto him, Verily I say unto thee, To day shalt thou be with me in paradise.

The Holy Bible: King James Version, Electronic Edition of the 1900 Authorized Version. (Bellingham, WA: Logos Research Systems, Inc., 2009), Lk 23:43.

And Jesus said unto him, Verily I say unto thee To day, shalt thou be with me in paradise.


In the first instance of Luke 23:43 the translators placed the comma before the word today indicating that it would be that day that they would be in paradise. In the second instance I've moved the comma to after the word today. This indicates that Jesus is making the statement today. Simply moving the comma from before to after the word today we completely change the meaning of the sentence. As I said, either of these instances is grammatically correct in Greek. That means that the placement of the comma is solely at the discretion of the translator and based on what he believes to be theologically correct. So, this passage is translated base on beliefs. So if the translator believes that the dead are alive he'll translate it as the first instance. If he doesn't believe the dead are alive he'll translate it as the second instance.

My point is that that passage can be grammatically translated either way. However, one way is wrong. The translation is based on tradition and not grammar. This tradition has been handed down generation after generation and few it any ever look at the other possible translation. That it can be translated either was renders it unable to be a proof text that the dead are alive and yet so many use it as such. This shows us that the vast majority are unaware that there is another possible understanding. We find this with many passages if we look more deeply into it.

 

[Curtis]

22 But ye are come unto mount Sion, and unto the city of the living God, the heavenly Jerusalem

Who are the “ye are come” people being referre to?

 

[StewardoftheMystery]

Who are the “ye are come” people being referre to?

He is referring to the saints, but the location of the firstborn from the dead (firstfruits of Israel) is in heaven.

Hebrews 12:22-23

King James Version

​

22 But ye are come unto mount Sion, and unto the city of the living God, the heavenly Jerusalem, and to an innumerable company of angels,
23 To the general assembly and church of the firstborn, which are written in heaven, and to God the Judge of all, and to the spirits of just men made perfect,

 

[Curtis]

He is referring to the saints, but the location of the firstborn from the dead (firstfruits of Israel) is in heaven.

What about these people are they part of the same "ye are come" crowd?

Eph 2:5 Even when we were dead in sins, hath quickened us together with Christ, (by grace ye are saved
Eph 2:6 And hath raised us up together, and made us sit together in heavenly places in Christ Jesus:

 

[StewardoftheMystery]

What about these people are they part of the same "ye are come" crowd?

Eph 2:5 Even when we were dead in sins, hath quickened us together with Christ, (by grace ye are saved
Eph 2:6 And hath raised us up together, and made us sit together in heavenly places in Christ Jesus:

Yes, when we are born again of the Spirit it is like we are being raised from the dead spiritually speaking. But there is also a physical resurrection to come at the last day.

But all who are born again of the Spirit, be they physically alive or dead, belong to Gods heavenly Jerusalem as do those who were physically resurrected with Jesus, being the firstfruits of Israel.

 

[lentz]

I guess that is why death is referred to theologically as - "the moment of truth"

What is the B C in the title?

 

[Curtis]

But there is also a physical resurrection to come

The resurrection of the "dead" is the resurrection of the body because the word "dead" means "corpse" which is a body. We are waiting to know the resurrection of our bodies. (Romans 8:23) not our spirit because we are sitting together in heavenly places in Christ who is in us.

 

[StewardoftheMystery]

The resurrection of the "dead" is the resurrection of the body because the word "dead" means "corpse" which is a body. We are waiting to know the resurrection of our bodies. (Romans 8:23) not our spirit.

Yes I agree, but one can be spiritually dead because of sin, while they are yet alive in the body.

1 Timothy 5:6
But she that liveth in pleasure is dead while she liveth.

 

[Curtis]

Yes I agree, but one can be spiritually dead because of sin, while they are yet alive in the body.

1 Timothy 5:6
But she that liveth in pleasure is dead while she liveth.

I agree, and you can also be physically awake but spiritually asleep. "wakeup thou that sleepeth and arise from the dead and Christ shall give you light.

 

[lentz]

I agree, and you can also be physically awake but spiritually asleep. "wakeup thou that sleepeth and arise from the dead and Christ shall give you light.

I will ask you Curtis.
What is the B C in title ofpost?

 

[Curtis]

I will ask you Curtis.
What is the B C in title ofpost?

I would say it means "Before Christ"

 

[lentz]

I would say it means "before Christ"

I thought so. But by reading responses i couldnt tell.
But if i may interject.......
The people of the Old Testament get to heaven the same as we,grace through faith.
It is fairly easy question to answer, as Brother Hebrews points out,those people had faith,now God will supply the grace.
Everyone,then,today and in the future will be saved by grace through faith.

 

[Butch5]

I'm still trying to figure out why Christians think they go to Heaven. Jesus plainly stated to both the unbelieving Jews and His disciples, that where He was going they could not go.

32 If God be glorified in him, God shall also glorify him in himself, and shall straightway glorify him. 33 Little children, yet a little while I am with you. Ye shall seek me: and as I said unto the Jews, Whither I go, ye cannot come; so now I say to you

The Holy Bible: King James Version, Electronic Edition of the 1900 Authorized Version. (Bellingham, WA: Logos Research Systems, Inc., 2009), Jn 13:31–33.

If the unbelieving Jews couldn't go, and His disciples couldn't go, why do Christians think they can?

 

[lentz]

I'm still trying to figure out why Christians think they go to Heaven. Jesus plainly stated to both the unbelieving Jews and His disciples, that where He was going they could not go.

32 If God be glorified in him, God shall also glorify him in himself, and shall straightway glorify him. 33 Little children, yet a little while I am with you. Ye shall seek me: and as I said unto the Jews, Whither I go, ye cannot come; so now I say to you

The Holy Bible: King James Version, Electronic Edition of the 1900 Authorized Version. (Bellingham, WA: Logos Research Systems, Inc., 2009), Jn 13:31–33.

If the unbelieving Jews couldn't go, and His disciples couldn't go, why do Christians think they can?

I think brother at that time they couldnt follow.
Where ever he went,he said,i go prepare a place for you. So that where i am you may be also.
And he is in heaven at the fathers right hand.

 

[Butch5]

I think brother at that time they couldnt follow.
Where ever he went,he said,i go prepare a place for you. So that where i am you may be also.
And he is in heaven at the fathers right hand.

If we look at that passage a little closer we find that He said He would come back so that they could be with Him.\

Let not your heart be troubled: ye believe in God, believe also in me. 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.

The Holy Bible: King James Version, Electronic Edition of the 1900 Authorized Version. (Bellingham, WA: Logos Research Systems, Inc., 2009), Jn 14:1–3.

He said if He goes, He'll come again so that they can be with Him. So, the only way they can be with Him is if He comes back.