Bible Study So why did Jesus give the parable of Rich Man and Lazarus?

[reddogs]

Why did He give what has caused so much question and debate, to say nothing over whether the words of Jesus in Luke 16:19-31 were intended to be understood literally or as a parable. Some people feel that Jesus was offering a glimpse of what existence in the afterlife is like. But then we have numerous passages of Scripture that seem to contradict the portrayal of heaven and hell contained in this passage, so was Jesus teaching an altogether different kind of lesson. Lets take a look and see if we get a better understanding what lessons there are for us in the story of the rich man and Lazarus.

Luke 16:19-31
19 There was a certain rich man, which was clothed in purple and fine linen, and fared sumptuously every day:
20 And there was a certain beggar named Lazarus, which was laid at his gate, full of sores,
21 And desiring to be fed with the crumbs which fell from the rich man's table: moreover the dogs came and licked his sores.
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.
29 Abraham saith unto him, They have Moses and the prophets; let them hear them.
30 And he said, Nay, father Abraham: but if one went unto them from the dead, they will repent.
31 And he said unto him, If they hear not Moses and the prophets, neither will they be persuaded, though one rose from the dead.

The Websters describes a parable as 'a usually short fictitious story that illustrates a moral attitude or a religious principle' and another 'a short, allegorical story designed to convey a truth or moral lesson.' Whatever form the parable took, it was only a vehicle for the moral lesson being taught.

Jesus recognized the value of parables in teaching the people. He desired to stimulate their deepest thought and contemplation, and He knew that if He spoke too literally, certain of His hearers would not understand or quickly forget His words. Not only that, but others, for whom certain of His parables contained stern rebuke, would be so angered by straight speaking that they would attempt to silence Him. Christ made use of them to veil the truth from those who were not willing to see it. Those who really desired to know would not rest till they had found out the meaning.”

So to whom Jesus was speaking in this parable and which kind of people was He dealing with. The last verse before He begins in this passage tells us.
Luke 16:14
And the Pharisees also, who were covetous, heard all these things: and they derided him.

Jesus was speaking to the Pharisees, and you can see right here they 'derided him', so we have a group who were notorious for their refusal to deal with Christ honestly and the truths He taught. So we can see Jesus dealt with them with what was distinct but truthful. The safest way for Him to do this was by parable and allegory, and this is what He did here. Lets look at the text..

Luke 16:19-21
19 There was a certain rich man, which was clothed in purple and fine linen, and fared sumptuously every day: 20 And there was a certain beggar named Lazarus, which was laid at his gate, full of sores, 21 And desiring to be fed with the crumbs which fell from the rich man’s table: moreover the dogs came and licked his sores.

You see how it begins, its like the other parables
Matthew 21:33
Hear another parable: There was a certain householder, which planted a vineyard, and hedged it round about, and digged a winepress in it, and built a tower, and let it out to husbandmen, and went into a far country:


So lets look at the text and who was the symbolic rich man. The Jews had been blessed by God so felt themselves above other nations. And only a Jew would pray to “Father Abraham,” so its clear the Jewish nation was represented by this character. By contrast, Lazarus symbolized all those people in spiritual poverty, or the Gentiles who they really were supposed to share what God had given them.

But the Jews had not shared their spiritual wealth with the Gentiles at all. Instead, they considered them unclean or as 'dogs' that would have to be satisfied with the crumbs falling from the table. The metaphor was known. Jesus had used it before in testing the faith of the Canaanite woman and we see the response.
Matthew 15:26-27
26 But he answered and said, It is not meet to take the children's bread, and to cast it to dogs.
27 And she said, Truth, Lord: yet the dogs eat of the crumbs which fall from their masters' table.

The rich Jews had hoarded the truth, and in so doing, they had corrupted themselves. Only moments before relating this parable, Jesus had rebuked the Pharisees for their spiritual conceit in verse 15.
Luke 16:15
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.

So we continue in the parable with verse 22..
Luke 16:26
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.

The Jews, rich in spiritual blessing, had enjoyed 'the good life' while on earth but had done nothing to bless or enrich their neighbors. Conversely, the poor in spirit, symbolized by Lazarus, would inherit the kingdom of heaven. The Gentiles who hungered and thirsted after righteousness would be filled. The “dogs” and sinners, so despised by the self-righteous Pharisees, would enter heaven before they would.

The parable concludes with the rich man begging for his brethren to be warned against sharing his fate. Asking Abraham to send Lazarus on this mission, he alleges “if one went unto them from the dead, they will repent.” in verse 30 and Abraham replies, “If they hear not Moses and the prophets, neither will they be persuaded, though one rose from the dead.” Verse 31.

Jesus was using the parable to rebuke the Pharisees for their disregard of the Scriptures, foreseeing that even a such an event would not change the hearts of those who would not hear or rejected the teachings of “Moses and the prophets.” The miracle of raising the real life Lazarus from the dead soon afterward confirmed the accuracy of Jesus’ words. One did rise from the dead, yet the brothers of the “rich man” did not repent. In fact, the Pharisees even plotted to kill Lazarus after his resurrection.

 

[Tenchi]

Why did He give what has caused so much question and debate, to say nothing over whether the words of Jesus in Luke 16:19-31 were intended to be understood literally or as a parable.

??? Every parable Jesus spoke pointed to a literal reality. And he always used real things as analogies/metaphors/similes in his parables. What's more, in the parable of the Rich Man and Lazarus, Jesus gave an actual name, which he did in no other parable, that strongly suggests a literal rather than merely analogous parable. Only if a reader has a prior commitment to a view of the afterlife that is contradicted by this parable does a plain, straightforward reading of it require a non-literal interpretation.

But then we have numerous passages of Scripture that seem to contradict the portrayal of heaven and hell contained in this passage,

I know of no passages of Scripture that contradict a literal reading of Jesus' parable...

The Websters describes a parable as 'a usually short fictitious story that illustrates a moral attitude or a religious principle' and another 'a short, allegorical story designed to convey a truth or moral lesson.' Whatever form the parable took, it was only a vehicle for the moral lesson being taught.

But in Jesus's case, he used real, mundane things - weddings, servants and their masters, farming, etc - to point to true, actual realities: the Second Coming of Christ, the Gospel, the nature of the afterlife, etc.. In this respect, Jesus's parables were not of the Brothers-Grimm kind, or like Aesop's Fables.

Jesus recognized the value of parables in teaching the people. He desired to stimulate their deepest thought and contemplation, and He knew that if He spoke too literally, certain of His hearers would not understand or quickly forget His words. Not only that, but others, for whom certain of His parables contained stern rebuke, would be so angered by straight speaking that they would attempt to silence Him. Christ made use of them to veil the truth from those who were not willing to see it. Those who really desired to know would not rest till they had found out the meaning.”

This isn't what is in evidence in the Gospel accounts. Most who heard Christ's parables were left entirely mystified, whether they were a Pharisee or not. Christ's own closest disciples required explication of his parables. If they could not decipher his meaning without his help, it is unlikely any others who heard his parables would be able to on their own. A great example of this is found in the following passage:

John 6:41-69
41 Therefore the Jews were grumbling about Him, because He said, "I am the bread that came down out of heaven."
42 They were saying, "Is not this Jesus, the son of Joseph, whose father and mother we know? How does He now say, 'I have come down out of heaven'?"
43 Jesus answered and said to them, "Do not grumble among yourselves.
44 "No one can come to Me unless the Father who sent Me draws him; and I will raise him up on the last day.
45 "It is written in the prophets, 'AND THEY SHALL ALL BE TAUGHT OF GOD.' Everyone who has heard and learned from the Father, comes to Me.
46 "Not that anyone has seen the Father, except the One who is from God; He has seen the Father.
47 "Truly, truly, I say to you, he who believes has eternal life.
48 "I am the bread of life.
49 "Your fathers ate the manna in the wilderness, and they died.
50 "This is the bread which comes down out of heaven, so that one may eat of it and not die.
51 "I am the living bread that came down out of heaven; if anyone eats of this bread, he will live forever; and the bread also which I will give for the life of the world is My flesh."
52 Then the Jews began to argue with one another, saying, "How can this man give us His flesh to eat?"
53 So Jesus said to them, "Truly, truly, I say to you, unless you eat the flesh of the Son of Man and drink His blood, you have no life in yourselves.
54 "He who eats My flesh and drinks My blood has eternal life, and I will raise him up on the last day.
55 "For My flesh is true food, and My blood is true drink.
56 "He who eats My flesh and drinks My blood abides in Me, and I in him.
57 "As the living Father sent Me, and I live because of the Father, so he who eats Me, he also will live because of Me.
58 "This is the bread which came down out of heaven; not as the fathers ate and died; he who eats this bread will live forever."
59 These things He said in the synagogue as He taught in Capernaum.
60 Therefore many of His disciples, when they heard this said, "This is a difficult statement; who can listen to it?"
61 But Jesus, conscious that His disciples grumbled at this, said to them, "Does this cause you to stumble?
62 "What then if you see the Son of Man ascending to where He was before?
63 "It is the Spirit who gives life; the flesh profits nothing; the words that I have spoken to you are spirit and are life.
64 "But there are some of you who do not believe." For Jesus knew from the beginning who they were who did not believe, and who it was that would betray Him.
65 And He was saying, "For this reason I have said to you, that no one can come to Me unless it has been granted him from the Father."
66 As a result of this many of His disciples withdrew and were not walking with Him anymore.
67 So Jesus said to the twelve, "You do not want to go away also, do you?"
68 Simon Peter answered Him, "Lord, to whom shall we go? You have words of eternal life.
69 "We have believed and have come to know that You are the Holy One of God."

So puzzling - and grotesque - was Jesus's teaching about himself as the "Bread of Life" that "many of his disciples withdrew and were not walking with him anymore" (verse 66). It wasn't, then, just the antagonistic Pharisees who were confused by, and objected to, Jesus' metaphoric language and meaning. And Jesus made no attempt to clarify his words in the hopes of retaining those who ended up walking away. It doesn't seem to me, then, that Jesus was trying in his parabolic teaching to stimulate deep contemplation in those positive toward him and veil his teaching from those antagonistic to him, but kept his meaning hidden to all - even his own Twelve, at times.

Continued below.

 

[Tenchi]

So lets look at the text and who was the symbolic rich man. The Jews had been blessed by God so felt themselves above other nations. And only a Jew would pray to “Father Abraham,” so its clear the Jewish nation was represented by this character. By contrast, Lazarus symbolized all those people in spiritual poverty, or the Gentiles who they really were supposed to share what God had given them.

But the Jews had not shared their spiritual wealth with the Gentiles at all. Instead, they considered them unclean or as 'dogs' that would have to be satisfied with the crumbs falling from the table. The metaphor was known. Jesus had used it before in testing the faith of the Canaanite woman and we see the response.
Matthew 15:26-27
26 But he answered and said, It is not meet to take the children's bread, and to cast it to dogs.
27 And she said, Truth, Lord: yet the dogs eat of the crumbs which fall from their masters' table.

The rich Jews had hoarded the truth, and in so doing, they had corrupted themselves. Only moments before relating this parable, Jesus had rebuked the Pharisees for their spiritual conceit in verse 15.
Luke 16:15
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.

So we continue in the parable with verse 22..
Luke 16:26
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.

The Jews, rich in spiritual blessing, had enjoyed 'the good life' while on earth but had done nothing to bless or enrich their neighbors. Conversely, the poor in spirit, symbolized by Lazarus, would inherit the kingdom of heaven. The Gentiles who hungered and thirsted after righteousness would be filled. The “dogs” and sinners, so despised by the self-righteous Pharisees, would enter heaven before they would.

The parable concludes with the rich man begging for his brethren to be warned against sharing his fate. Asking Abraham to send Lazarus on this mission, he alleges “if one went unto them from the dead, they will repent.” in verse 30 and Abraham replies, “If they hear not Moses and the prophets, neither will they be persuaded, though one rose from the dead.” Verse 31.

Jesus was using the parable to rebuke the Pharisees for their disregard of the Scriptures, foreseeing that even a such an event would not change the hearts of those who would not hear or rejected the teachings of “Moses and the prophets.” The miracle of raising the real life Lazarus from the dead soon afterward confirmed the accuracy of Jesus’ words. One did rise from the dead, yet the brothers of the “rich man” did not repent. In fact, the Pharisees even plotted to kill Lazarus after his resurrection.

None of this precludes the parable of Lazarus and the Rich Man from describing a literal afterlife reality. That one can ascribe a symbolic meaning to a real thing does not mean that the real thing is therefore no longer real. Jesus was the "Lamb of God who takes away the sin of the world," spiritually and figuratively, but though he was not actually a lamb, he was nonetheless a real sacrifice that would truly atone for the sin of all mankind.

 

[reddogs]

??? Every parable Jesus spoke pointed to a literal reality. And he always used real things as analogies/metaphors/similes in his parables. What's more, in the parable of the Rich Man and Lazarus, Jesus gave an actual name, which he did in no other parable, that strongly suggests a literal rather than merely analogous parable. Only if a reader has a prior commitment to a view of the afterlife that is contradicted by this parable does a plain, straightforward reading of it require a non-literal interpretation.



I know of no passages of Scripture that contradict a literal reading of Jesus' parable...



But in Jesus's case, he used real, mundane things - weddings, servants and their masters, farming, etc - to point to true, actual realities: the Second Coming of Christ, the Gospel, the nature of the afterlife, etc.. In this respect, Jesus's parables were not of the Brothers-Grimm kind, or like Aesop's Fables.



This isn't what is in evidence in the Gospel accounts. Most who heard Christ's parables were left entirely mystified, whether they were a Pharisee or not. Christ's own closest disciples required explication of his parables. If they could not decipher his meaning without his help, it is unlikely any others who heard his parables would be able to on their own. A great example of this is found in the following passage:

John 6:41-69
41 Therefore the Jews were grumbling about Him, because He said, "I am the bread that came down out of heaven."
42 They were saying, "Is not this Jesus, the son of Joseph, whose father and mother we know? How does He now say, 'I have come down out of heaven'?"
43 Jesus answered and said to them, "Do not grumble among yourselves.
44 "No one can come to Me unless the Father who sent Me draws him; and I will raise him up on the last day.
45 "It is written in the prophets, 'AND THEY SHALL ALL BE TAUGHT OF GOD.' Everyone who has heard and learned from the Father, comes to Me.
46 "Not that anyone has seen the Father, except the One who is from God; He has seen the Father.
47 "Truly, truly, I say to you, he who believes has eternal life.
48 "I am the bread of life.
49 "Your fathers ate the manna in the wilderness, and they died.
50 "This is the bread which comes down out of heaven, so that one may eat of it and not die.
51 "I am the living bread that came down out of heaven; if anyone eats of this bread, he will live forever; and the bread also which I will give for the life of the world is My flesh."
52 Then the Jews began to argue with one another, saying, "How can this man give us His flesh to eat?"
53 So Jesus said to them, "Truly, truly, I say to you, unless you eat the flesh of the Son of Man and drink His blood, you have no life in yourselves.
54 "He who eats My flesh and drinks My blood has eternal life, and I will raise him up on the last day.
55 "For My flesh is true food, and My blood is true drink.
56 "He who eats My flesh and drinks My blood abides in Me, and I in him.
57 "As the living Father sent Me, and I live because of the Father, so he who eats Me, he also will live because of Me.
58 "This is the bread which came down out of heaven; not as the fathers ate and died; he who eats this bread will live forever."
59 These things He said in the synagogue as He taught in Capernaum.
60 Therefore many of His disciples, when they heard this said, "This is a difficult statement; who can listen to it?"
61 But Jesus, conscious that His disciples grumbled at this, said to them, "Does this cause you to stumble?
62 "What then if you see the Son of Man ascending to where He was before?
63 "It is the Spirit who gives life; the flesh profits nothing; the words that I have spoken to you are spirit and are life.
64 "But there are some of you who do not believe." For Jesus knew from the beginning who they were who did not believe, and who it was that would betray Him.
65 And He was saying, "For this reason I have said to you, that no one can come to Me unless it has been granted him from the Father."
66 As a result of this many of His disciples withdrew and were not walking with Him anymore.
67 So Jesus said to the twelve, "You do not want to go away also, do you?"
68 Simon Peter answered Him, "Lord, to whom shall we go? You have words of eternal life.
69 "We have believed and have come to know that You are the Holy One of God."

So puzzling - and grotesque - was Jesus's teaching about himself as the "Bread of Life" that "many of his disciples withdrew and were not walking with him anymore" (verse 66). It wasn't, then, just the antagonistic Pharisees who were confused by, and objected to, Jesus' metaphoric language and meaning. And Jesus made no attempt to clarify his words in the hopes of retaining those who ended up walking away. It doesn't seem to me, then, that Jesus was trying in his parabolic teaching to stimulate deep contemplation in those positive toward him and veil his teaching from those antagonistic to him, but kept his meaning hidden to all - even his own Twelve, at times.

Continued below.

The literal reality was that even if the Pharisees saw someone rise up out of the grave they would not believe and repent, and here they have the Lazarus that Christ had resurrected, and yet they wouldnt budge...

 

[reddogs]

Now as to what was it a parable or literal, here is a good commentary on the issue....
'Other Christians consider that this is a parable created by Jesus and told to his followers. Tom Wright and Joachim Jeremias both treat it as a "parable". Proponents of this view argue that the story of Lazarus and the rich man has much in common with other stories which are agreed-upon parables, both in language and content (e.g. the reversal of fortunes, the use of antithesis, and concern for the poor).

The 1st-century Jewish historian Josephus is considered the most reliable extra-biblical literary source for Caiaphas, the Jewish high priest with the dates for Caiaphas' tenure of the high priesthood.

According to Josephus, Caiaphas was appointed in AD 18 by the Roman prefect who preceded Pontius Pilate, Valerius Gratus.

Joseph was the son-in-law of Annas (also called Ananus) the son of Seth. Annas was deposed, but had five sons who served as high priest after him. The terms of Annas, Caiaphas, and the five brothers are:

Ananus (or Annas) the son of Seth (6–15)
Eleazar the son of Ananus (16–17)
Caiaphas - properly called Joseph son of Caiaphas (18–36), who had married the daughter of Annas (John 18:13)
Jonathan the son of Ananus (36–37 and 44)
Theophilus ben Ananus (37–41)
Matthias ben Ananus (43)
Ananus ben Ananus (63)
One identification is that the man in torment in the parable is Caiaphas the High Priest which as Josephus tells us had five brothers. Caiaphas met the criteria Jesus gives in the parable to the identity of the Rich Man. He was rich, and as the high priest was dressed in purple and fine linen, he had five brothers, and was well versed in Moses and the Prophets, but according to Jesus, were ignoring what they wrote.

The Pharisees believed that blessings and prosperity came from God for strict obedience to the law and that poverty and illness were the results of sin. So lepers, beggars and the poor were paying for their sins. So we are left with the picture that innocent Lazarus is given unto Abraham's bosom, but the Pharisee, and his five brothers, are given unto torment because they ignore the law. Jesus attacked the Pharisee hypocrisy regularly, and as the Pharisees believed just the opposite, the parable was against them.

The conviction that this is not a literal account of the states of the dead, but a kind of parable, or symbolic narrative, becomes a certainty when it is realized that all these details were part of the tradition of the Pharisees at the time, as Josephus shows in his 'Discourse Concerning Hades'. So Jesus was employing some of his opponents own ideas to confound them.'

 

[reddogs]

Here is a great explanation by Larry Wilson in Wake Up America which clearly shows why Christ gave the parable...

The words of Jesus are deep and sometimes difficult to understand. He is called "The Word of God" in Scripture for good reason. His ability to put spiritual concepts into words has no equal. So, let us review the story from Scripture and then I will try to explain it: "There was a rich man who was dressed in purple and fine linen and lived in luxury every day. At his gate was laid a beggar named Lazarus, covered with sores and longing to eat what fell from the rich mans table. Even the dogs came and licked his sores. The time came when the beggar died and the angels carried him to Abrahams side. The rich man also died and was buried. In hell, where he was in torment, he looked up and saw Abraham far away, with Lazarus by his side. So he called to him, 'Father Abraham, have pity on me and send Lazarus to dip the tip of his finger in water and cool my tongue, because I am in agony in this fire.' But Abraham replied, 'Son, remember that in your lifetime you received your good things, while Lazarus received bad things, but now he is comforted here and you are in agony. And besides all this, between us and you a great chasm has been fixed, so that those who want to go from here to you cannot, nor can anyone cross over from there to us.' He answered, 'Then I beg you, father, send Lazarus to my fathers house, for I have five brothers. Let him warn them, so that they will not also come to this place of torment.' Abraham replied, 'They have Moses and the Prophets; let them listen to them.' 'No, father Abraham,' he said, 'but if someone from the dead goes to them, they will repent.' He said to him, 'If they do not listen to Moses and the Prophets, they will not be convinced even if someone rises from the dead.' (Luke 16:19-31)

The first thing I like to do after reading any passage from Scripture is to ask myself a few questions. What is the setting of this passage? Who is talking to whom and under what circumstances? Is there a contest or conflict going on? In this particular story, who is the beggar named Lazarus? Who is the rich man who had five brothers? Were both people identifiable to the listeners? What effect was this story supposed to have upon the listeners? What did the listeners know then that we need to know now so that we can properly frame and understand the story? Ultimately, what is the focal point of the story? With these questions in mind, please consider the following:


Jesus told the story of the rich man and Lazarus in the presence of His disciples and a group of scoffing Pharisees. (Luke 16:14) He created this illustration because the Pharisees refused to believe anything that He said. They had seen many miracles and they still refused to believe He was the Messiah, so Jesus gave them a prophecy in the form of a story. As the story unfolds, Lazarus and the rich man die and their eternal rewards shock the listeners. The rich man goes to hell and the beggar goes to Abrahams side. This was the exact opposite of what the listeners expected. Jesus did not confront the Pharisees with loud words nor did He engage them with 100 proof texts from the Old Testament proving that He was the Messiah. Rather, Jesus created a small bomb which He planted in their minds. The story would be memorable because well known people were used and the destiny of both was totally different than what the listeners expected. It is possible the Pharisees found this story a bit amusing at first, but the story probably made them angry once they figured out its meaning. So, Jesus created a story that begins with Middle East intrigue and it ends with a condemning knockout punch.

Errant Theology

Unlike the Sadducees, the Pharisees believed in a hereafter. They believed in eternal life and an eternally burning hell. They also believed that blessings and prosperity came from God as a reward for rigorous obedience to the law. (Philippians 3:6, Deuteronomy 28:1-14) One of their favorite texts was, "Keep my decrees and laws, for the man who obeys them will live by them. I am the Lord." (Leviticus 18:5) The Pharisees also believed that poverty and illness were the results of sinning against God. "Cursed is the man who does not uphold the words of this law by carrying them out. . . ." (Deuteronomy 27:26; 28:15-68) So lepers, beggars and poor people deserved to suffer. Simply stated, such people were under a curse because either they or their parents had sinned against God. (See John 9:2.) Since most Christians are not well informed on the Pharisees beliefs, they just read how Lazarus went to Abrahams side and the high priest went to hell as though that was the way it should have been. Not so! The Pharisees believed just the opposite and this conflict in the story puzzled them.

Simon Lazarus

There is only one person in the Bible having the name Lazarus. He lived in Bethany. Most Christians have heard of him because he was the brother of Mary Magdalene and Martha. But many Christians do not know that Lazarus had a first name! His full name was Simon Lazarus and he was a leper. (John 12:1-3; Matthew 26:6) Jesus knew that His listeners were acquainted with Lazarus leprosy and this illness explains the presence of his sores in the story. Lazarus was reduced to a position of begging when he became leprous and the Pharisees had no sympathy. They regarded him as one condemned by God, a cursed sinner. (Note: Mary Magdalene, Lazarus sister, was the prostitute who Jesus rescued from stoning. (John 8:3-11) Whether she turned to prostitution to provide for herself, her brother and sister after Lazarus contracted leprosy is not known.)

Caiaphas

Jesus could not speak the name of the rich man with five brothers for a simple reason. It would have been considered blasphemy by the Pharisees to say anything less than honorable about him. (John 18:22) Nevertheless, everyone present knew who the rich man was because he wore purple and fine linen every day (an elegant robe), he lived large (spent a lot of money) and fared sumptiously (ate too much), and he was Israels religious leader. The rich man who had five brothers was the high priest of Israel, Caiaphus.

As a young man, Caiaphus married into a family of high priests. (John 18:13) Thus, Caiaphas became a son-in-law of Annas (a former high priest) and Caiaphas served as high priest in Jerusalem between A.D. 18 and A.D. 35. Because of marriage, Caiaphas had five brothers-in-law and each of these men eventually served terms as high priest in Jerusalem. Josephus wrote, "Now the report goes, that this elder Ananus proved a most fortunate man; for he had five sons, who had all performed the office of a high priest to God, and he had himself enjoyed that dignity a long time formerly, which had never happened to any other of our high priests. . . ." (Antiquities, book XX, chapter IX, paragraph 1, p.423, Kregel Publications, Grand Rapids, Michigan, 12th printing, 1974) Their names and years of service follow: Eleazar A.D. 16-17; Jonathan A.D. 36-37; Theophilus A.D. 37-41; Matthias A.D.41-43; Annas the Younger A.D. 62.....

 

[reddogs]

....Confrontation

At this point in our analysis of the story we can assemble four important facts:

1. The Pharisees knew about Lazarus and his leprosy, and they knew that the rich man was Caiaphas because he had five brothers.

2. The Pharisees did not know at the time the story was told, that Jesus would soon raise Lazarus from the dead. (John 11) Further, the Pharisees could not know that once Caiaphas learned about the resurrection of Lazarus, he would recommend to the Sanhedrin that Jesus be put to death. (John 18:14)

3. Since the Pharisees were convinced that eternal life came through rigorous obedience to the law, it had to be distressing for them to hear Jesus put the leper at Abrahams side and their high priest in hell.

4. In the story, Abraham refused to honor the request of the rich man. The high priest asked Abraham to send Lazarus to his family so that they would not end up where he was and Abraham refused saying, "They have Moses and the prophets" (the Old Testament) to guide them. This feature of the story indicates that the Word of God has greater authority than a resurrected dead man.

So, what is the focal point of this story? Jesus predicted the Jews would not believe that He was the Messiah even if a dead man was resurrected. ". . . . [The rich man said] but if someone from the dead goes to them, they will repent. He [Father Abraham] said to him, If they do not listen to Moses and the Prophets, they will not be convinced even if someone rises from the dead." (Luke 16:30,31, insertions mine)

Does this story "prove" there is an eternally burning hell? No. Jesus used the errant theology of the Pharisees to highlight the point that even if a dead man was brought to life, the high priest would not believe that Jesus was the Messiah. Jesus used their twisted logic about salvation and the hereafter to underscore the point that miracles will not soften or change a persons heart. Only the Holy Spirit can bring transformation. This prophecy also reveals that a persons mind and heart can be so blinded by religion that even if a dead person were raised up to speak to them, it would not make any difference.

Think about this. The testimony of Lazarus had no effect after he was raised from the dead. But Lazarus wasnt the only resurrected voice affirming that Jesus was the Messiah! Look at these verses: "At that moment the curtain of the temple was torn in two from top to bottom. The earth shook and the rocks split. The tombs broke open and the bodies of many holy people who had died were raised to life. They came out of the tombs, and after Jesus resurrection they went into the holy city and appeared to many people." (Matthew 27:51-53)

In closing, notice what Caiaphas and his associates did after they learned that Jesus had been resurrected: "When the chief priests had met with the elders [of Israel] and devised a plan, they gave the soldiers a large sum of money, telling them, 'You are to say, His disciples came during the night and stole him away while we were asleep. If this report gets to the governor, we will satisfy him and keep you out of trouble.' So the soldiers took the money and did as they were instructed. And this story has been widely circulated among the Jews to this very day." Matthew 28:12-15... Jesus just used the false teachings of the Pharisees to predict His rejection. The Bible confirms this prophecy was fulfilled. "He came to that which was his own, but his own did not receive him." (John 1:11)....The Rich Man and Lazarus

 

[for_his_glory]

Why did He give what has caused so much question and debate, to say nothing over whether the words of Jesus in Luke 16:19-31 were intended to be understood literally or as a parable. Some people feel that Jesus was offering a glimpse of what existence in the afterlife is like. But then we have numerous passages of Scripture that seem to contradict the portrayal of heaven and hell contained in this passage, so was Jesus teaching an altogether different kind of lesson. Lets take a look and see if we get a better understanding what lessons there are for us in the story of the rich man and Lazarus.

Luke 16:19-31
19 There was a certain rich man, which was clothed in purple and fine linen, and fared sumptuously every day:
20 And there was a certain beggar named Lazarus, which was laid at his gate, full of sores,
21 And desiring to be fed with the crumbs which fell from the rich man's table: moreover the dogs came and licked his sores.
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.
29 Abraham saith unto him, They have Moses and the prophets; let them hear them.
30 And he said, Nay, father Abraham: but if one went unto them from the dead, they will repent.
31 And he said unto him, If they hear not Moses and the prophets, neither will they be persuaded, though one rose from the dead.

The Websters describes a parable as 'a usually short fictitious story that illustrates a moral attitude or a religious principle' and another 'a short, allegorical story designed to convey a truth or moral lesson.' Whatever form the parable took, it was only a vehicle for the moral lesson being taught.

Jesus recognized the value of parables in teaching the people. He desired to stimulate their deepest thought and contemplation, and He knew that if He spoke too literally, certain of His hearers would not understand or quickly forget His words. Not only that, but others, for whom certain of His parables contained stern rebuke, would be so angered by straight speaking that they would attempt to silence Him. Christ made use of them to veil the truth from those who were not willing to see it. Those who really desired to know would not rest till they had found out the meaning.”

So to whom Jesus was speaking in this parable and which kind of people was He dealing with. The last verse before He begins in this passage tells us.
Luke 16:14
And the Pharisees also, who were covetous, heard all these things: and they derided him.

Jesus was speaking to the Pharisees, and you can see right here they 'derided him', so we have a group who were notorious for their refusal to deal with Christ honestly and the truths He taught. So we can see Jesus dealt with them with what was distinct but truthful. The safest way for Him to do this was by parable and allegory, and this is what He did here. Lets look at the text..

Luke 16:19-21
19 There was a certain rich man, which was clothed in purple and fine linen, and fared sumptuously every day: 20 And there was a certain beggar named Lazarus, which was laid at his gate, full of sores, 21 And desiring to be fed with the crumbs which fell from the rich man’s table: moreover the dogs came and licked his sores.

You see how it begins, its like the other parables
Matthew 21:33
Hear another parable: There was a certain householder, which planted a vineyard, and hedged it round about, and digged a winepress in it, and built a tower, and let it out to husbandmen, and went into a far country:


So lets look at the text and who was the symbolic rich man. The Jews had been blessed by God so felt themselves above other nations. And only a Jew would pray to “Father Abraham,” so its clear the Jewish nation was represented by this character. By contrast, Lazarus symbolized all those people in spiritual poverty, or the Gentiles who they really were supposed to share what God had given them.

But the Jews had not shared their spiritual wealth with the Gentiles at all. Instead, they considered them unclean or as 'dogs' that would have to be satisfied with the crumbs falling from the table. The metaphor was known. Jesus had used it before in testing the faith of the Canaanite woman and we see the response.
Matthew 15:26-27
26 But he answered and said, It is not meet to take the children's bread, and to cast it to dogs.
27 And she said, Truth, Lord: yet the dogs eat of the crumbs which fall from their masters' table.

The rich Jews had hoarded the truth, and in so doing, they had corrupted themselves. Only moments before relating this parable, Jesus had rebuked the Pharisees for their spiritual conceit in verse 15.
Luke 16:15
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.

So we continue in the parable with verse 22..
Luke 16:26
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.

The Jews, rich in spiritual blessing, had enjoyed 'the good life' while on earth but had done nothing to bless or enrich their neighbors. Conversely, the poor in spirit, symbolized by Lazarus, would inherit the kingdom of heaven. The Gentiles who hungered and thirsted after righteousness would be filled. The “dogs” and sinners, so despised by the self-righteous Pharisees, would enter heaven before they would.

The parable concludes with the rich man begging for his brethren to be warned against sharing his fate. Asking Abraham to send Lazarus on this mission, he alleges “if one went unto them from the dead, they will repent.” in verse 30 and Abraham replies, “If they hear not Moses and the prophets, neither will they be persuaded, though one rose from the dead.” Verse 31.

Jesus was using the parable to rebuke the Pharisees for their disregard of the Scriptures, foreseeing that even a such an event would not change the hearts of those who would not hear or rejected the teachings of “Moses and the prophets.” The miracle of raising the real life Lazarus from the dead soon afterward confirmed the accuracy of Jesus’ words. One did rise from the dead, yet the brothers of the “rich man” did not repent. In fact, the Pharisees even plotted to kill Lazarus after his resurrection.

This is for all the Pharisees that exist even today until the end of days that can not see the truth that stands before them being Christ Jesus and what God gave Him to speak and gave the Prophets and Disciples what to write within their witness and testify of Christ Jesus in whom God raised from the dead and that anyone who is thirsty they will receive the living water for their Spiritual thirst for truth.