Interpreting the Parable of the Rich Man and Lazarus: It's Really Good News!

[Phoneman-777]

The popular yet erroneous teaching about Rich Man and Lazarus has succeeded to both strike fear in the hearts of Christians and drive countless others to atheism, because those who refuse to recognize this passage in Luke 16 as the parable that it is use it to advance the false idea of Eternal Torment - a doctrine of devils - because they know then can't substantiate a doctrine on an uninterpreted parable. Here's the other side of the story:

 

[Heaven_Bound]

Old News!

Shocked it took this long for others to catch on!

 

[Runningman]

The popular yet erroneous teaching about Rich Man and Lazarus has succeeded to both strike fear in the hearts of Christians and drive countless others to atheism, because those who refuse to recognize this passage in Luke 16 as the parable that it is use it to advance the false idea of Eternal Torment - a doctrine of devils - because they know then can't substantiate a doctrine on an uninterpreted parable. Here's the other side of the story:

Another proof that the Rich Man and Lazarus is actually a parable is that Jesus said so Himself.

In Matthew 13:13 He said "Therefore speak I to them in parables: because they seeing see not; and hearing they hear not, neither do they understand. "

When Jesus said "them" He was referring to people who were not His 12 disciples. The parable of the Rich man and Lazarus was spoken to people who were not His disciples.

I believe we must filter all things through the Bible and maintain strict consistency. There's no way that the parable of the Rich Man and Lazarus is not a parable without creating contradictions in scripture and I believe there are no contradictions.

 

[Webers.Home]

.
Although no one on Abraham's side of the chasm is permitted to cross over
to the other side, they can at least communicate visually and audibly. I hope
that's still the case because I would hate to think that I won't be able to
catch up with my lost loved ones and my BFFs before they're permanently
vanquished to the lake of brimstone depicted at Rev 20:11-15.
_

 

[Nehemiah6]

The popular yet erroneous teaching about Rich Man and Lazarus...

That is definitely NOT a parable. If it was a parable, what spiritual truth would it be ILLUSTRATING? The parables of Christ were always used to illustrate spiritual truths.

 

[Nehemiah6]

Another proof that the Rich Man and Lazarus is actually a parable is that Jesus said so Himself.

No. Jesus did not say any such thing about this narrative. When Christ specifically named the beggar as Lazarus, and specifically related the dialogue between Abraham and the rich man, He made it clear that He was relating an actual account of what happened in Sheol/Hades.

GAEBELEIN'S COMMENTARY
Luke 16:19-31
A solemn paragraph closes the chapter. Avoid the use of the word “parable” in connection with these verses. The Lord said, “There was a certain rich man.” It is history and not a parable. The derision of the Pharisees on account of the Lord’s words about the unjust steward must have been based upon their trust in the law and the promise of the law, that temporal blessings and riches were in store for all who keep the law. The story our Lord relates is aimed once more at the sneering, unbelieving, self-righteous Pharisees.

 

[Webers.Home]

.
There's a distinct possibility that the rich man and Abraham are related
because he addressed the man as "son".

I have two grandsons. I'm not sure how well I will cope should either of
them end up in the wrong place.
_

 

[posthuman]

The popular yet erroneous teaching about Rich Man and Lazarus has succeeded to both strike fear in the hearts of Christians and drive countless others to atheism, because those who refuse to recognize this passage in Luke 16 as the parable that it is use it to advance the false idea of Eternal Torment - a doctrine of devils - because they know then can't substantiate a doctrine on an uninterpreted parable. Here's the other side of the story:

why do you think Jesus was lying?

 

[Webers.Home]

.
In the story told at Luke 16-19-31, the beggar Lazarus died and was carried
by angels to the afterlife. Curiously, the rich man's transportation isn't
specified.

One of the most disturbing scenes I've yet to observe in a Hollywood movie
occurs in "GHOST" starring Patrick Swayze and Demi Moore. When someone
marked for the wrong side of the afterlife passes away, these eerie
phantoms emerge, having the appearance of black oily smoke, uttering
awful moans, and drag their panic-stricken captives down into the ground.

I don't know if that's how the rich man in Luke's story was transported, but
if so; I can well imagine just how shocking and horrifying it must've been for
him at death to suddenly be able to see menacing spirit creatures
surrounding him with looks on their faces that could only convey but one
unmistakable intent; and I suspect those sinister beings had been hovering
around that poor man and stalking him every day and night of his entire life
without him knowing it and patiently waiting for the green light to take him
down.

Jude 1:9 relates a quarrel between the Devil and an archangel over the
disposition of Moses' remains. No one really knows what that was all about
but I'm suspecting that the Devil wanted to give Moses a pagan funeral, and
likely felt he had a right to seeing as how he sincerely believes himself the
world's supreme sovereign (Luke 4:5-6). So, I wonder if the angels that
provided Lazarus transportation were not also assigned as security to protect
him from being shanghaied by something similar to those dark mists
depicted in "GHOST"
_

 

[CS1]

The popular yet erroneous teaching about Rich Man and Lazarus has succeeded to both strike fear in the hearts of Christians and drive countless others to atheism, because those who refuse to recognize this passage in Luke 16 as the parable that it is use it to advance the false idea of Eternal Torment - a doctrine of devils - because they know then can't substantiate a doctrine on an uninterpreted parable. Here's the other side of the story:

come Bro,

The one Parable is not all that Jesus said about the eternal conditions of hell. In light of all scripture and what Jesus said on Hell this Parable is a spiritual story told with a hidden truth for us to discern.

Hell in this Parable is in line with what Jesus said in all scripture concerning hell. Not just this Parable. Yes IF Jesus said only this Parable about Hell you would have something but, the context of the eternal condition of hell and who will be sent there is not in the Parable of Lazarus and the Rich man, is it?

 

[Webers.Home]

.
• Luke 16:25 . . Abraham said to him: Son, remember that during your
lifetime you had everything you wanted, and Lazarus had nothing. So now
he is here being comforted, and you are in anguish.

If true that it isn't necessary to be poor to be saved, nor necessary to be rich
to be lost, then why compare the two men's station in life?

Well; I can't prove this but strongly suspect that the rich man was a miser
and indifferent to deprived folks.

The rich man left Lazarus to foraging garbage when he could've easily
funded a decent soup kitchen for folks in his predicament. The rich man
could've sponsored a free clinic too instead of leaving Lazarus' medical
attention to the dogs thereabouts.

The rich man dressed himself in splendid clothing. Lazarus' clothing was
likely badly soiled from his sores and he no doubt would've benefited
greatly from the rich man's discards. And had the rich man taken the
initiative to set up drop boxes around the neighborhood, others would likely
have been drawn to contribute.

You know, Lazarus wasn't living under a bridge nor sheltering in a cardboard
box way across town. He was right there at the rich man's gate where
Mr.Pampered had to go past Lazarus every day on his way out so it wouldn't
have inconvenienced the rich man the slightest to help alleviate the poor
wretch's predicament.
_

 

[Isaskar]

Obviously its a parable as no one can talk to the unsaved in heaven and no one can talk to Abraham in hell.

 

[Runningman]

No. Jesus did not say any such thing about this narrative. When Christ specifically named the beggar as Lazarus, and specifically related the dialogue between Abraham and the rich man, He made it clear that He was relating an actual account of what happened in Sheol/Hades.

GAEBELEIN'S COMMENTARY
Luke 16:19-31
A solemn paragraph closes the chapter. Avoid the use of the word “parable” in connection with these verses. The Lord said, “There was a certain rich man.” It is history and not a parable. The derision of the Pharisees on account of the Lord’s words about the unjust steward must have been based upon their trust in the law and the promise of the law, that temporal blessings and riches were in store for all who keep the law. The story our Lord relates is aimed once more at the sneering, unbelieving, self-righteous Pharisees.

Clearly Jesus was teaching something and His teaching style was often parables. Jesus used stories to illustrate moral and spiritual lessons without directly revealing the plain-language.

There are moral and spiritual truths in the parable, story if you will, of the rich man and Lazarus. It’s a similar lesson to the parable of the Good Samaritan; take care of those who are needy and don’t be cruel to them. There are numerous other lessons here, too.

There is no evidence I’m aware of that Lazarus, the beggar by the gates, is a historical character. Note, this is not the same Lazarus that Jesus raised from the dead who was a brother to Martha and Mary of the town of Bethany.

The Strong’s concordance and the Thayer’s Greek Lexicon say that Lazarus the beggar is imaginary.

https://biblehub.com/greek/2976.htm

 

[Nehemiah6]

The Strong’s concordance and the Thayer’s Greek Lexicon say that Lazarus the beggar is imaginary.

So why would Jesus say "a certain beggar named Lazarus"? He could have simply said "a beggar". I believe almost all the commentators and perhaps the lexicons did not want to deal with the reality of Sheol/Hades. The Greek word there should have been transliterated as "Hades", not "hell" which has caused a lot of confusion. Please see my thread here:
Why are so many Christians still so confused about the afterlife?

 

[Phoneman-777]

Another proof that the Rich Man and Lazarus is actually a parable is that Jesus said so Himself.

In Matthew 13:13 He said "Therefore speak I to them in parables: because they seeing see not; and hearing they hear not, neither do they understand. "

When Jesus said "them" He was referring to people who were not His 12 disciples. The parable of the Rich man and Lazarus was spoken to people who were not His disciples.

I believe we must filter all things through the Bible and maintain strict consistency. There's no way that the parable of the Rich Man and Lazarus is not a parable without creating contradictions in scripture and I believe there are no contradictions.

Matthew says Jesus fulfilled the prophecy of Psalms 78:1-2 KJV where the God of the OT says He would come and "open My mouth in parable".

 

[Phoneman-777]

That is definitely NOT a parable. If it was a parable, what spiritual truth would it be ILLUSTRATING? The parables of Christ were always used to illustrate spiritual truths.

You see, bro? That's why I know my position is correct. It never fails that the opposition is so flippin scared they might discover something that would force them to change their position, they stop their ears and sut their eyes. The reason I'm an annihilationist is because when I believed in Eternal Torment, I had the cojones to investigate the opposition's arguments.

WATCH THE VIDEO, please.

 

[Phoneman-777]

No. Jesus did not say any such thing about this narrative. When Christ specifically named the beggar as Lazarus, and specifically related the dialogue between Abraham and the rich man, He made it clear that He was relating an actual account of what happened in Sheol/Hades.

GAEBELEIN'S COMMENTARY
Luke 16:19-31
A solemn paragraph closes the chapter. Avoid the use of the word “parable” in connection with these verses. The Lord said, “There was a certain rich man.” It is history and not a parable. The derision of the Pharisees on account of the Lord’s words about the unjust steward must have been based upon their trust in the law and the promise of the law, that temporal blessings and riches were in store for all who keep the law. The story our Lord relates is aimed once more at the sneering, unbelieving, self-righteous Pharisees.

The claim that Jesus' use of the proper name "Lazarus" is proof the passage is literal will go down in history as one of the most blatant examples of subjective hermeneutical reasoning in all the Bible - like Sotomayor running off about how dangerous Omnicron is to kids when there's NO EVIDENCE to support anything she said.

The reason Jesus said "Lazarus" is because He knew not long after He'd be raising the literal Lazarus from the dead, but the Jews not only insisted on rejecting what He said to them "though one rose from the dead", they actually went away to take counsel how they might destroy both Jesus and Lazarus.

 

[Phoneman-777]

why do you think Jesus was lying?

Do you still beat your wife?

 

[Phoneman-777]

come Bro,

The one Parable is not all that Jesus said about the eternal conditions of hell. In light of all scripture and what Jesus said on Hell this Parable is a spiritual story told with a hidden truth for us to discern.

Hell in this Parable is in line with what Jesus said in all scripture concerning hell. Not just this Parable. Yes IF Jesus said only this Parable about Hell you would have something but, the context of the eternal condition of hell and who will be sent there is not in the Parable of Lazarus and the Rich man, is it?

Jesus never said the conditions of hell were eternal. He was referring to the city dump in the Valley of Gehenna when He said "the worm dieth not and the fire is not quenched".

No body was running around the Valley of Gehenna with a fire hose trying to quench the fire and the maggots continuously fed on the carcasses while they were rotting next to it.

QUESTION: IS THE FIRE IN THE VALLEY OF GEHENNA STILL BURNING TODAY?

 

[Pilgrimshope]

That is definitely NOT a parable. If it was a parable, what spiritual truth would it be ILLUSTRATING? The parables of Christ were always used to illustrate spiritual truths.

yes I think it is a parable and agree it teaches us about what happens when we die we as humans and the two seperate places . Teaches us we can’t cross into the other once we’re there .

shows us we are going to be conscious of wha the happening , feel torment , Thirst ect I’m sure joy and peace and all the great things Lazarus was experiencing also.

that’s exactly right his parables are spiritual deep teachings of truth. But if we aren’t born of the spirit we’ll not be able to get anything from them they seem Irrelevant and not needed or as if a “ parable “ was to confuse “ spiritual wisdom that leads us to consider what’s being said the lesson and truth being imparted