The Rich Man & Lazarus

[TRUTH over TRADITION]

As far as the story of Lazarus and the rich man, we must ask whether it was in any way intended to reveal to us information about the state of the dead, or was the parable used by Jesus for an entirely different purpose. Notice that Lazarus hadn’t really done anything righteous; his only virtue was that he was extremely poor (if that is a virtue at all). However, he was "carried off into the favor of Abraham." And for that matter, what sin had the rich man been guilty of? To me, this isn’t a tale that describes the torture of Hell Fire; it instead was an allegory or parable that Jesus told as a warning to the Pharisees specifically as well as the physical seed of Abraham, that, despite (and because of) their pride, they were soon to lose their elevated position as religious leaders (those who sat in Moses' seat) and God's chosen people and would be replaced by the children of faith who Paul describes in Romans as being the heirs according to the promise.


----------
More on the Rich man & Lazarus

Notice Jesus’ words as found at Matthew 8:12, where he foretold, ‘However, the Sons of the Kingdom will be thrown into the darkness outside. There they will cry and grind their teeth.’ Since the Jews were ‘the sons of the kingdom’ or the sons of the Abrahamic promise, the indication here is that they as a nation were being rejected.

Also consider Matthew 21:33 and following:

33 ‘Listen to another illustration: There was a man – the master of his house – who planted a vineyard, put a fence around it, dug a wine press in it, built a tower [to protect it], and hired [people to] cultivate it; then he traveled abroad. 34 Well, when the [harvest] season came around, he sent his slaves to the farmers to get the fruit. 35 However, the farmers took his slaves and beat one up, threw stones at the next, and killed the third one. 36 Then he sent other slaves (more than the first), but they did the same to these. 37 ‘Finally, he sent his son to them, saying, They will respect my son. 38 But when they saw the son, the farmers said, This is the heir! Let’s kill him and get his inheritance! 39 So they grabbed him and threw him out of the vineyard, then killed him. 40 ‘Now, when the owner of the vineyard arrives, what will he do to those farmers?’

41 And they replied: ‘Because they’re so bad, he’ll destroy them painfully, and then hire others to cultivate the vineyard who’ll give him the fruit when it’s due.’

42 And Jesus said to them, ‘Didn’t you ever read in the Scriptures, The stone that the builders rejected has become the head of the corner… and it’s a wonderful thing in our eyes? 43 This is why I tell you; The Kingdom of God will be taken away from you and given to a nation that produces its fruit. 44 For, the person who falls on this stone will be shattered, and anyone it falls on will be smashed!’

45 Now, when the Chief Priests and the Pharisees heard these illustrations, they realized that he was talking about them.

Now take the parable in Luke 16 into consideration realizing that just before speaking of the rich man and Lazarus, this transpired:

14 Now, the Pharisees (who loved silver) were listening to these things, and they were looking at him with contempt. 15 So he said to them:
‘You claim to be righteous before men,
But God knows [what’s in] your hearts.
For, things that are important to men,
Are disgusting in the eyes of [our] God.

Then, Jesus went on to discuss the rich man and Lazarus.

 

[Elijah674]

---------PARABLES OR NON/PARABLES?-- LUKE 16--------
(in part & with my emphasis)

First we need to ask ourselves, do we 'believe' Christ Word? Really??Case in point: 'IF YE LOVE ME KEEP MY COMMANDMENTS'. (all ten of them!!)

So when these Words of Christ are given, ask yourself which class are you in?? Then, think of what GROSS means?? (as Christ defines it below)

John states that.. 'He came unto His own, and His own received Him not.' So do we 'Believe Him', REALLY?
We call the Bible the Word of God and rightly so, mostly because of John 1:14! But do we believe the Word of God?
Perhaps some might best question their 'knowledge' by the Word of God by itself? Instead of leaning upon the 'arm of flesh' that have mans reams & reams of educated PhD'ism stuff, that none seem to agree on except perhaps the two great errors that the Word of God cautions against? That of the 'd'evils first lie.. 'Ye shall not surely die' and also a day set aside by man, (see Mark 7:7) for a 'professed' sacred use! Sunday keeping which is attempted to replace the 'Day that God set aside for Holy use'. (see Gen. 2:1-3)

OK: Lets just test our individual 'belief'?

-Parables- (hold on a mite now, ok? We will get to the Luke 16 'parable' of the 'rich man & Lazarus momentarily!)

Christ's Words:
'All these things spake Jesus unto the multitude in parables; and without a parable spake He [not unto them.]That it might be fulfilled which was spoken by the prophet, saying, I will open my mouth in parables; ... Then Jesus sent the [multitude away], and went into the house: and His disciples came unto Him, saying, [Declare unto us the parable of the tares of the field.]'

OK. We.. 'some' can see so far that one group had an explanation from Christ, while the other lost so far multitude did not. Do you believe this so far??

Now: In Mark 4:10-11 we see.. 'And when He was alone, they that were about Him with the twelve asked of Him asked the parable. And He said unto them, [unto you it is given to know the mystery of the kingdom of God: (a short pause please? with all of these denominations teaching otherwise, can this statement of Christ's Word be documented?) but unto [them] that are [without] all these things are done in parables.' Now then, are you still believers?? (Rom. 8:14???)

Again: Mark 4:33-34. 'And with many [such] parables spake He the Word unto them, (who is them, Pharisees & Multitude??) as they were able to hear it.
(pay apt attention please!) But [[without]] a parable [[spake He not unto them]]: (do you believe Him??) and when they [were alone, He EXPOUNDED ALL THINGS TO HIS DISCIPLES].' Again, do you believe the Word of God??

Again: Luke 8:10 says.. 'And He said, [Unto you] it is given to know the mysteries of the kingdom of God: (break time again! THINK!!) but to others in parables; (notice?!) that seeing they might not see, and hearing they might not understand.' This parable might be a good study for some here, huh? + many Rev. 17:5 professed MINISTERS & Jer. 17:5 Arm of Flesh seekers!! **See verses 11-15 of Luke.

Why did the Lord use Parables?? These Parables my friends will bring real questions to a sincere seeker!

'And His disciples came, and said unto Him, Why [speaketh thou in parables?] He answered and said unto them, Because it is given unto [you to know the mysteries of the kingdom of heaven, but unto them, it is not given.] ... For this people's heart is waxed gross, and their ears are dull of hearing, and their eyes they have closed; least at any time they should see with their eyes, and hear with their ears, AND SHOULD UNDERSTAND WITH THEIR HEART, AND SHOULD BE CONVERTED, AND I SHOULD HEAL THEM.' Matt. 13:10-15 in part.

Surely we of Heb. 6 can readily see what Christ has told [us] so far, right? We started out with Matt. 13:34 with Christ defining whom Parables were for, & that 'without' a parable He spake not unto them. THESE MULTITUDE included all unbelievers! (And the disciples were not these!)

In Luke 16 the only question that needs to be addressed, is to whom was Christ addressing? The Disciples or the Multitude?
Remember that it is impossible for God to lie! Do you 'believe Him' that is the question for [anyone] to answer to find out which group that you are in, a disciple, or just one of the 'Multitude'?? We often hear of Luke 16's rich man and Lazarus being an 'actual' stated Truth instead of a Parable!

Verse 14 is almost always left out of your today's sermons? Notice what it says in closing!

'And the Pharisees also, who were covetous, [heard all these things: ] and [they derided Him].' And this was the setting for this Luke 16 Parable! Christ was addressing the blind multitude! And again in the next Words, we see who Christ was addressing, His disciples! (chapter 17:1. And remember that the chapters numbers and the verse numbers etc., were added by man)

---Elijah

 

[Lehigh3]

I agree Truth over Tradition, that it is a parable. And the rich man's clothing match the Jewish high priest garments. "Lazarus" name is Greek for the common Hebrew name then of Eleazar, meaning "helped by God" Lazarus represented the poor gentiles who got the spiritual crumbs of God only from the snub Pharisees. as they were seen like dogs (with idols).

The great gulf fixed is a metaphor for how far away the Pharisee Jews (who loved money) were from the kingdom of God (& still are) Jesus raised another Lazarus from the dead to incite belief from them- but to no avail.

You are correct that they were about to lose their position as God's only chosen people & the kingdom was to be given to those who entered into the New Covenant.

Such is termed "Abraham's bosom" for the faithful.

 

[Elijah674]

I think that you two are right. Here is just another angel with the same conclusion.

The [HOLY SPIRIT'S INSPIRATION] has Abraham being D-E-A-D in Heb. 11.. along with all of these others mentioned and with 'NOT HAVING RECEIVED THE PROMISE YET'!!! verse 13 ibid.

And then here satan comes and is still trying to teach disunity between Christ's Parable of Luke 16 being an actual truth, & the Holy Ghost still STRIVING well past the Gen. 6:3's 120 years of false stuff!

'some added info!'
In Gen 25 we see Abraham died 125 years old. 'Then Abraham [GAVE UP THE GHOST' ]
And the year was BC 1857 (as recorded by man)

Lets date the Luke 16 Parable as AD 33. Where some still falsely teach that even with this dated year, it is still found that Luke 16 is not a Parable.

OK: Let's get the verse from James 2:23's date also of AD 60.
[22] Seest thou how faith wrought with his works, and by works was faith made perfect?
[23] And [the scripture was fulfilled ] which saith, Abraham believed God, and [it was imputed unto him for righteousness:] and he was called the Friend of God.
​

And still after all of these years the Heb. 11 chapter of Inspiration from verse 8 on through 17 still finds Abraham having NOT received the Promises [except by faith!] (again dated in AD 64 & in part)

[8] By faith Abraham, when he was called to go out into a place which he should after receive for an inheritance, obeyed; and he went out, not knowing whither he went.
[9] By faith he sojourned in the land of promise, as in a strange country, dwelling in tabernacles with Isaac and Jacob, the [heirs with him of the same promise:]
....
[13] These [all died in faith, not having received the promises,] but having seen them afar off, and were persuaded of them, and embraced them, and confessed that they were strangers and pilgrims on the earth.
....

[16] But now they desire a better country, that is, an heavenly: wherefore God is not ashamed to be called their God: for he hath prepared for them a city.
[17] By faith Abraham, when he was tried, offered up Isaac: and he that had received the promises offered up his only begotten son.
​

AD 60 he is still DEAD IN THE FAITH! (verse 13! and not in heaven!!)

One more thought that is not even needed, (but??) is where Christ documented of John 14 to all of humanity who will be Rom. 8:14 'LED'..

[23] Jesus answered and said unto him,If a man love me, he will keep my words: and my Father will love him, and we will come unto him, and make our abode with him.
[24] He that loveth me not keepeth not my sayings: and the word which ye hear is not mine, but the Father's which sent me.
[25] These things have I spoken unto you, being yet present with you.
[26] But the Comforter, which is the Holy Ghost, whom the Father will send in my name, He shall teach you all things, and bring all things to your remembrance, whatsoever I have said unto you.
​

Love & Teach?? Who would teach Luke 16 with the Hosea 4:6 increased knowledge of 2010, as still a true accurate account????
And bring things to [your remembrance?] These verses are INSPIRED WORDS OF GOD! John who penned the REVELATION, lived up until AD 96. (even after the 70 AD slaughter of Israel) Surely if anything needed 'even Inspiration dressing' up, IT WOULD HAVE BEEN DONE! Yet, this is talking about [you] after Christ left, not the Bible Penmen!

--Elijah



​

 

[Drew]

To me, this isn’t a tale that describes the torture of Hell Fire; it instead was an allegory or parable that Jesus told as a warning to the Pharisees specifically as well as the physical seed of Abraham, that, despite (and because of) their pride, they were soon to lose their elevated position as religious leaders (those who sat in Moses' seat) and God's chosen people and would be replaced by the children of faith who Paul describes in Romans as being the heirs according to the promise.

I think you are probably right.

 

[tim-from-pa]

I think we are unanimous that this is a parable, as I believe it to be as well.

Too often it was used to scare people in the "immediate afterlife of the dead" and to justify a conscious, eternal torment (although interestingly, even if the Rich Man was in such a place and it was not a parable, the story does not go on to say how long he was suffering there).

The only thing I believe the bible teaches about "hell" is in conjunction with the lake of fire in the end times, in which the wicked will "perish". Thus, it is "eternal" fire, i.e not the conscious state being eternal, but the action of the fire is eternal. Anything that is burned up and reduced to ashes can be considered perishing in eternal fire even thought the fire long burned out.

 

[Sam21]

So by unanimous agreement we have got rid of hell...I wish it was that easy(I don't think God would agreed). In order to get rid of the teaching of hell one would have to accept that Jesus taught a fable(something not really true)rather then just parables(true stories that have a spiritual meaning). If Jesus taught fables then none of His teachings can be relied upon to be true.

 

[Lehigh3]

So by unanimous agreement we have got rid of hell...I wish it was that easy(I don't think God would agreed). In order to get rid of the teaching of hell one would have to accept that Jesus taught a fable(something not really true)rather then just parables(true stories that have a spiritual meaning). If Jesus taught fables then none of His teachings can be relied upon to be true.

Fables is what He didn't teach. That's Greek mythology. A lot of which wrongly injects pagan literalness into the parable.
Are we to believe that "angels" carry off the physical bodies of the poor at death to a bosom & the rich just appear flesh & blood in hades?
Would a little cold water help relieve the tormenting fires of hell, literally?
The Bible says our bodies return to the dust.
You're assuming that "hades" is the same as "hell" to begin with.
Hell was the garbage dump outside the city (Jerusalem) where dead bodies were burned so they didn't putrefy the city. The worms wouldn't die until they consumed all the evil from the body & soul of the old covenant worshiping Jews. They had their punishment & wrath in the great tribulation.
God is an all-consuming fire.
But I guess the topic of "Hell" is for another thread. I believe like the Jews do (it depends which one you ask too) that the most time for purifying the soul/spirit of an individual sinner at death is a maximum of 1 year.
"Age" or anion judgment they believed, is not forever or eternal as we define eternal. Only God is that eternal- having no beginning or end.

 

[Elijah674]

So by unanimous agreement we have got rid of hell...I wish it was that easy (I don't think God would agreed). In order to get rid of the teaching of hell one would have to accept that Jesus taught a fable(something not really true)rather then just parables(true stories that have a spiritual meaning). If Jesus taught fables then none of His teachings can be relied upon to be true.

No Sam, you do not read to well the [posts].. as well as scripture!;) Hell will be a VERY HOT HELL! it will find these ones as Obadiah 1:16 DOCUMENTS... GONE AS THOUGH THEY HAD [[NEVER BEEN]]! (got that?) Not a hell that finds IMMORTAL sinners there even with eternal immortal maggots never dieing??! NO, ONLY GOD HAS IMMORTALITY!

Whatever? Most it seems believe & 'teach' for mnny years even, that the Godhead did indeed lie in Gen. 3 & that satan is to be believed!

--Elijah

 

[reba]

these old people eyes cant read your post 647. They are ans noisy as facebook


EDITED:
Never mind i figured out how to read em copy and paste to notebook then paste em in word....

 

[Drew]

So by unanimous agreement we have got rid of hell...I wish it was that easy(I don't think God would agreed).

Please, we have done no such thing.

The fact that we can recognize a parable using the image of hell to make a point about something else does not mean we reject the concept of hell.

In order to get rid of the teaching of hell one would have to accept that Jesus taught a fable(something not really true)rather then just parables(true stories that have a spiritual meaning).

Please explain the specifically Biblical basis for your belief that all Jesus' teachings describe events that are factually true.

 

[Joe67]

As far as the story of Lazarus and the rich man, we must ask whether it was in any way intended to reveal to us information about the state of the dead, or was the parable used by Jesus for an entirely different purpose.

----------

ToT,

The purpose is stated in the conclusion.

Luke 16:31
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. KJV

So, it is a lesson for us today. If we are not convicted of the lusts of our flesh, the lusts of the eyes and the pride of life through Moses' writings, then we are not benefited by hearing the voice of Jesus, the one who rose from the dead, speaking to us through his blood from the new Jerusalem above.

Rom 4:24-25
24 But for us also, to whom it shall be imputed, if we believe on him that raised up Jesus our Lord from the dead;

25 Who was delivered for our offences, and was raised again for our justification. KJV

Joe

 

[TRUTH over TRADITION]

The usage of this text to teach the doctrine of eternal hell has been brought up a lot in resent posts, so I'm reviving this via a bump.

 

[TRUTH over TRADITION]

Why I Do NOT Fear Hell.........

It baffles my mind how the religious establishment has been able to convince the masses that the penalty God has in mind for sin is an eternal burning hell. Where does this line of thinking come from? It certainly is NOT supported by the scriptures and it seems to go against much of what is revealed in scripture.
Religion has backed us into a corner that forces us to choose between two "options", heaven and hell, that if we were to diligently study scripture we would find are NOT the whole of or even more than a fraction of the destiny most of mankind will face.
The books of scripture are books that discuss a destiny of either LIFE or DEATH, not some hellish eternity for the vast majority or all who have ever lived. In fact, NO ONE is destined for this place of torment so many hold up.

Scripture:

Proverbs 11:30
The fruit of the righteous is a tree of life, and he who wins souls is wise.

James 5:20
remember this: Whoever turns a sinner from the error of his way will save him from death and cover over a multitude of sins.

Romans 6:19-23
I put this in human terms because you are weak in your natural selves. Just as you used to offer the parts of your body in slavery to impurity and to ever-increasing wickedness, so now offer them in slavery to righteousness leading to holiness. When you were slaves to sin, you were free from the control of righteousness. What benefit did you reap at that time from the things you are now ashamed of? Those things result in death! But now that you have been set free from sin and have become slaves to God, the benefit you reap leads to holiness, and the result is eternal life. For the wages of sin is death, but the gift of God is eternal life in Christ Jesus our Lord.

John 3:14-18
And as Moses raised the snake in the desert, that’s how the Son of Man must be raised, so that everyone who believes in him can get life in the age. ‘This is how [much] God loved the world: He gave His only-generated Son so that everyone who believes in him won’t be destroyed, but will get life in the age. Why, God didn’t send his Son into the world to judge it, but for the world to be saved through him! So, whoever believes in [the Son] won’t be condemned. However, those who don’t believe have already been condemned, because they haven’t shown faith in the name of God’s only-generated Son, since this is [the basis for their] judgment.

What I am saying is that the scriptures DO NOT speak of an eternal burning hell, it instead speaks of death vs. life in the age. The word or concept of eternal is even foreign to scripture aside from discussing the nature of THE FATHER.
In scripture hell is not some realm where the devil rules (that's this world), what it is is THE GRAVE. So if people wish to use the word hell, I guess that's fine (although somewhat misleading and confusing), but when they use it, they should do so with the grave in mind as opposed to Danteland.

As I'd bet you know, Hades is the Greek word used in place of the Hebrew term Sheol in the LXX and the NT. Hades in scripture is equal to Sheol of the OT, NOT equal to the Hadean realm of Greek mythology.

Hades (like the English word Hell) actually means the place of the dead. However, as pagan Greek philosophy started to develop and creep into Christianity, the later-day Greek view of Hades (a place of torture) was applied to it. Was this a correct application?

An insight into how the ancient Hebrews and the early Christians understood the word can be gained by looking at how it was applied in the Greek Septuagint translation of the Ancient Scriptures of Israel (the ‘Old Testament’ Bible of Jesus’ day). There, the Hebrew word Sheol is translated into Greek as Hades in every instance; yet in each case, these are obvious references to the grave (the place of the dead), not to a place of conscious torture (see Ecclesiastes 9:5, 10).

Another revealing application of the word Hades is found at Revelation the 20:13. It says there, ‘The sea (gr. he thalassa) gave up its dead, death and the grave (gr. thanatos kai ho hades) gave up those dead in them, and they were all judged by the things that they did.’

So, notice that those who die at sea are differentiated from those who are buried in graves (Hades) and in other places (thanatos). Therefore, Hades is better translated as grave.

The pit at the center of the Earth that you refer to is what most closely describes Tartarus which is said in scripture to be a "dark place" where spirits (literally breaths) are held in prison. 2 Peter 2:4 and Job 40:20 & 41:32 speak about this place.

As far as the story of Lazarus and the rich man, I must restate my OP and insist that we must ask whether it was in any way intended to reveal to us information about the state of the dead, or was the parable used by Jesus for an entirely different purpose. Notice that Lazarus hadn’t really done anything righteous; his only virtue was that he was extremely poor (if that is a virtue at all). However, he was "carried off into the favor of Abraham." And for that matter, what sin had the rich man been guilty of? To me, this isn’t a tale that describes the torture of Hell Fire; it instead was an allegory or parable that Jesus told as a warning to the Pharisees specifically as well as the physical seed of Abraham, that, despite (and because of) their pride, they were soon to lose their elevated position as religious leaders (those who sat in Moses' seat) and God's chosen people and would be replaced by the children of faith who Paul describes in Romans as being the heirs according to the promise.

 

[Guest]

Why I Do NOT Fear Hell.........

Luke 12:5 But I will warn you whom to FEAR: FEAR him who, after he has killed, has authority to cast into hell. Yes, I tell you, FEAR him!

 

[JLB]

this was the setting for this Luke 16 Parable!

You must have a different bible.

My bible shows that Jesus was addressing His disciples and then the Pharisee's overheard and interrupted and insulted Jesus in the middle of His teaching -

1 He also said to His disciples: Luke 16:1

14 Now the Pharisees, who were lovers of money, also heard all these things, and they derided Him. Luke 16:14

15 And He said to them, "You are those who justify yourselves before men, but God knows your hearts. For what is highly esteemed among men is an abomination in the sight of God.

No parable here!

16 The law and the prophets were until John. Since that time the kingdom of God has been preached, and everyone is pressing into it.

No parable here!

17 And it is easier for heaven and earth to pass away than for one tittle of the law to fail.

No parable here!

18 Whoever divorces his wife and marries another commits adultery; and whoever marries her who is divorced from her husband commits adultery.

No parable here!

19 "There was a certain rich man who was clothed in purple and fine linen and fared sumptuously every day.

Sorry, by rule of context, Lazarus and the Rich Man is not a parable!


JLB

 

[TRUTH over TRADITION]

Sorry, by rule of context, Lazarus and the Rich Man is not a parable!

How can you make this claim in light of the bigger context? Chapter 16 begins with a parable and chapter 15 ended with one about inheritance! In the midst of chapter 16 Jesus piggybacks on his earlier parable speaks of being faithful with what has been entrusted to prove your worthiness of being entrusted with greater things. He caps it off by saying no one can serve 2 masters God and mammon. This angered the Pharisees in verse 14 because like in Matthew 21:45, they realized Jesus was talking about them. Jesus then seeminly out of left field mentions marriage and divorce (maybe the Pharisees were guilty of this transgression?) before going into his next parable, The RIch Man & Lazarus that was the last of in a series of parables.

 

[JLB]

How can you make this claim in light of the bigger context?

As I have shown you, by the context.

You don't just get to decide that Jesus is speaking in a parable.

The context tells you.

Jesus doesn't use names, especially three different peoples names in a parable.

If this was a parable, what was the explanation of the parable that He explained to His disciples?

No warning from Jesus, such as:

"Now learn this parable from the fig tree:

Then He spoke many things to them in parables, saying: "Behold, a sower went out to sow... "Therefore hear the parable of the sower:[explanation]

Another parable He put forth to them, saying:

No parables in the verses preceding His story.

We have no introduction that Jesus is speaking in a parable, and more importantly, we have no explanation from Jesus of what the parable means.

Finally, we have no request from the disciples for an explanation. Why?

Because Jesus was not speaking a parable.


JLB

 

[Butch5]

How can you make this claim in light of the bigger context?

As I have shown you, by the context.

You don't just get to decide that Jesus is speaking in a parable.

The context tells you.

Jesus doesn't use names, especially three different peoples names in a parable.

If this was a parable, what was the explanation of the parable that He explained to His disciples?

No warning from Jesus, such as:

"Now learn this parable from the fig tree:

Then He spoke many things to them in parables, saying: "Behold, a sower went out to sow... "Therefore hear the parable of the sower:[explanation]

Another parable He put forth to them, saying:

No parables in the verses preceding His story.

We have no introduction that Jesus is speaking in a parable, and more importantly, we have no explanation from Jesus of what the parable means.

Finally, we have no request from the disciples for an explanation. Why?

Because Jesus was not speaking a parable.


JLB

What was He speaking of then?

 

[Sparkey]

Is it possible that although technically this is not a parable (according to some definitions) Jesus used commonly known phrases (like the bosom of Abraham) in his teachings?