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

  • Christian Chat is a moderated online Christian community allowing Christians around the world to fellowship with each other in real time chat via webcam, voice, and text, with the Christian Chat app. You can also start or participate in a Bible-based discussion here in the Christian Chat Forums, where members can also share with each other their own videos, pictures, or favorite Christian music.

    If you are a Christian and need encouragement and fellowship, we're here for you! If you are not a Christian but interested in knowing more about Jesus our Lord, you're also welcome! Want to know what the Bible says, and how you can apply it to your life? Join us!

    To make new Christian friends now around the world, click here to join Christian Chat.

Webers.Home

Well-known member
May 28, 2018
5,783
1,068
113
Oregon
cfbac.org
.
Luke 16:27-29 . .I beg you, father, send Lazarus to my father's 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.

Somebody needs to assist me with Abraham's instructions by guiding me to
locations in the Old Testament that speak of an afterlife place of conscious
suffering like where the rich man is situated. In other words: a hell where
folks are taken into custody the moment they pass away as opposed to the
future hell depicted at Isa 66:22-24 and Rev 20:11-15.

Thank You.
_
 
Dec 29, 2021
1,317
314
83
I think you're making the assumption that immediately upon awakening the unrighteous will be the ones feeling disgrace and/or contempt. As I showed you in my previous post, the awakening that Daniel speaks of is the resurrection to judgement where they will experience the second death. After having been put to death, there isn't a way for them to feel anything. All of this started when you said that unsaved people have eternal life which is a false gospel. These are my attempts to get you back on the straight and narrow as the Bible has a curse for those who preach a different gospel.

Again, Isaiah 66:24 (directly from the infallible Tanakh) says:

24"And they shall go out and see the corpses of the people who rebelled against Me, for their worm shall not die, and their fire shall not be quenched, and they shall be an abhorring for all flesh."

Bear in mind that the context of Isaiah 66:24 is beset in the New Heavens and New Earth. Those who awaken to "disgrace and everlasting contempt" will be confronted with disgrace, but what will be everlasting is the contempt or abhorrence that the righteous feel for the wicked who will be put to death.

As Isaiah 66:24 says "...and they shall be an abhorring for all flesh." means that those who living on the New Earth will feel abhorrence when the see the corpses of the people who rebelled against God.
I am discussing Daniel 12 and you are discussing Isaiah which both do not speak of the same events. How you took my post and turned it into yours is beyond me, but we are discussing 2 different issues.
 

Laura798

Well-known member
Jun 6, 2020
1,716
593
113
Better to rely on Holy Spirit who was given to guide us in ALL truth, then we will not make the error of leaning on our own understanding.
Agreed. The only problem is many Christians will say the HS told them and theyve got it very wrong.
 

Laura798

Well-known member
Jun 6, 2020
1,716
593
113
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.
Agreed. And Ill add:

Matthew 13:34
All these things Jesus spoke to the crowds in parables, and He did not speak to them without a parable.

.

Mark 4:34
and He did not speak to them without a parable; but He was explaining everything privately to His own disciples.

Source: https://bible.knowing-jesus.com/topics/Jesus-Using-Parables
 

BroTan

Active member
Sep 16, 2021
898
161
43
First of all, Isaiah 33:14 does not say what the kjv claims:

Tanakh:
Isaiah 33:
14 Sinners in Zion were afraid; trembling seized the flatterers, 'Who will stand up for us against a consuming fire? Who will stand up for us against the everlasting fires?'


Your Version is not even close:
Isaiah 33:14 The sinners in Zion are afraid; fearfulness hath surprised the hypocrites. Who among us shall dwell with the devouring fire? who among us shall dwell with everlasting burnings?
I take it, that you believe in the Tanakh version over the KJV Bible?
 
Dec 29, 2021
1,317
314
83
The Inspired Order of the Bible - Bellevue University's ...
http://jpatton.bellevue.edu › inspired

Of a truth once a tradition becomes established, it is difficult to change. Yet Jerome knew better. He had a rationale, a wrong rationale, for making these ...


In A.D. 391 Jerome said the following, “As, then, there are twenty-two elementary characters by means of which we write in Hebrew … so we reckon twenty-two books, by which, as by the alphabet of the doctrine of God, a righteous man is instructed…1 Yes, Jerome understood that the Hebrew Old Testament contained 22 books coinciding with the 22 letters in the Hebrew alphabet, not 39. And to this day the Jewish translations contain 22 Old Testament books. The books and arrangement or order of the books has never been lost. Even Josephus, in Book 1, Section 8 of his famous work, Antiquities of the Jews, recognized “only 22 books.”


Concerning the New Testament, E.W. Bullinger in his Companion Bible made this bold statement: “Our English Bibles follow the order as given in the Latin Vulgate. This order, therefore, depends on the arbitrary judgment of one man, Jerome. All theories based on this order rest on human authority, and are thus without any true foundation.2 Dr. Bullinger has hit the nail on the head!

The scholar, now deceased, who has done the most research, in the author’s assessment, on the issue of Bible book order, is Earnest Martin. His 1994 book entitled, Restoring the Original Bible, is the most systemic, documented, referenced and scholarly work on the Inspired Order of the Bible. It’s available for $24 from his Web site: http://www.askelm.com.


The Order should be: 49 Inspired Books, not 66 [the number of Man]

Table 1
Inspired Order of the Old Testament:




Table 2
Inspired Order of the New Testament:





Christ Himself gives us the Correct Order the Old Testament should follow in Luke 24:44
44 And he said unto them, These are the words which I spake unto you, while I was yet with you, that all things must be fulfilled, which were written in the law of Moses, and in the prophets, and in the psalms, concerning me.

It should read like the Tanakh:
Law
Prophets
Psalms/Writings

But ROMAN Catholic Jerome flip flopped Prophets and Psalms


So, anyone thinking the Latin Vulgate and the English Bibles are legit According to God, are being FOOLED!

Should be 49 Inspired Books and the Order should be Law/Prophets/Psalms-Writings + New Testament is out of Order as well!



How TERRIBLE is it that Jerome did not even Follow Jesus' Own Correct Order in Luke 24:44?

44 And he said unto them, These are the words which I spake unto you, while I was yet with you, that all things must be fulfilled, which were written in the law of Moses, and in the prophets, and in the psalms, concerning me.

Law
Prophets
Psalms/Writings

To purposefully not follow God's Order is Rebellion, the same as Witchcraft!

Plus, he admits there's only 22 O.T. Books and then creates 39 Books!

The man is no Saint, he is a DEMON Possessed Maniac!
 

Webers.Home

Well-known member
May 28, 2018
5,783
1,068
113
Oregon
cfbac.org
.
The 16th chapter of Luke was meant for his disciples' learning.

Luke 16:1 . . And he said also unto his disciples . . etc. etc.

The Pharisees were eavesdropping.

Luke 16:14 . . And the Pharisees also, who were covetous, heard all these
things: and they derided him.

After Jesus scolded the Pharisees with Luke 16:15, he picked up where he
left off with his disciplines at Luke16:16 and continued with them all the way
down to Luke 17:10.

It's tricky sometimes to tell whether Jesus was speaking to a crowd or to his
disciples but it's very important to sleuth the difference because he taught
his disciples differently than he taught the crowds.

Matt 13:10-16 . . And the disciples came and said to him: Why do you
speak to them in parables? And he answered and said to them: To you it has
been granted to know the mysteries of the kingdom of heaven, but to them
it has not been granted, etc, etc.

Seeing as how the story of the rich man, Lazarus, and Abraham was meant
for the ears of Jesus' disciples, then I sincerely believe we should not
attempt to categorize it as a parable per Matt 13:34.
_
 
Jul 24, 2021
494
78
28
These questions simply show your confusion about eternal torment. The Bible does have all the answers, and DNA has nothing to do with this matter.
Eternal torment is unbiblical and fabricated with pagan notions and greek philosophies. It is said the concept of hell is indistingushable whether pagan or christian. With demonic worms, I think it is certainly more exotic.
The only reason that I can arrive at is that the doctrine of hell is a form of control manufactured by the monarchial episcopacies. I contend they are nicolaitan doctrines.

Consider the real world impact of such a teaching. 75% of so called christians support torture.
See https://thefederalist.com/2014/12/17/yes-christians-can-support-torture/
Don`t worry, the writer is a torture loving christian. If that ain't a mark on the right hand, or what? Try conforming torture to the Scriptures.

Also consider this thought experiment. If I imagine a whore, God will see me as a whoremonger. What if I imagine a hell? As what will God see me. A torturer?

There is no need to eisegete the Scriptures. Hell is not in the Scriptures.
 

Nehemiah6

Senior Member
Jul 18, 2017
26,074
13,771
113
Eternal torment is unbiblical and fabricated with pagan notions and greek philosophies.
That statement itself is a complete fabrication since there are a dozen or more verses about eternal torment in Scripture. Pagan notions were derived from the Bible, not the other way around.
 
Jul 24, 2021
494
78
28
That statement itself is a complete fabrication since there are a dozen or more verses about eternal torment in Scripture. Pagan notions were derived from the Bible, not the other way around.
Once again eisegesis. The interpretation is always influenced with the preconceived answer.
To me
1) The wages of sin is death.
2) The OT sheol has no capacity to accommodate a hell. The NT hell is eisegesis.
3) There is no logical requirement for a hell.
4) The details of hell are like a grab bag of pagan notions. Demonic worms, it is a chasm, it is a lake, etc...
5) The spirit with which hell is spoken is nicolaitan and hypocritical.
6) The notion of hell takes away from the Glory of Jesus. Don't need fire at my backside to walk with Jesus.
7) The notion of hell insults the Most High.
This is enough to reject this primitive hell myth.

The commonality of pagan myths and the hell doctrine should be an alarm bell to any discerning Christian. It is not something that needs to be explained. False idols are man-made as with their hell. They leave a tell tale sign of magic.
 
Jul 23, 2018
12,199
2,775
113
for sure the context preceding Luke 16 gives us a lot of information about why He said these things at this time -- but overall, whether we call it a parable or suspect it's a real account, we can't be imagine that Christ is in this passage preaching 'doctrines of devils' as He has been tacitly accused of in this thread by some people, because it is very clear from the text that Christ is not regarding the death of the body as equivalent to cessation of existence, and He is presenting the torment of the unsaved as very much real and very much perpetual.
either Christ is a liar, or Christ is presenting an accurate picture of what comes after the body returns to dust.



and if we call this a parable - while even literal events ((see: the whole OT)) are recorded in scripture as not only literal but also figures and antitypes and metaphors - even if we call this a parable we have a very profound question remaining about Lazarus: why is he called by name, when in no other parable recorded that Jesus gave, anyone is called by name?

my point being, bro, that while i may side with @Nehemiah6 here and believe it's not a parable, and while you may believe it is, that's a small thing: you and i both know that Jesus is talking about impossible imaginary mythos here. parable or not-parable, what He says and what He describes is based in the true reality, not in fantasy.
on that point we have people taking part in the discussion who do not agree with us, and i guess i'm a bit stuck on trying to turn their opinions around to what we know is true.


that said tho, yeah -- the things leading up to this make it pretty clear that the rich man is at least representative of those vain, unbelieving people who reject Christ, who neglected the poor, and who sought to kill Him. the pharisees are emblematic of that mindset in the NT, and they were generally also rich. it's a natural assumption then that the certain rich man either was himself a pharisee or could easily be understood as an analogy of them.
Question;
To me it is not in any way a parable.
But lets play it out as if it were.

Has anyone that claims it is a parable , given the "interpretation"?
Because there is a lesson there?
Keeping in mind a parable is a story within a story.

So the rich man is what?
Laz is what?
Hell is what?
Paradise is what?
No pardon or green slip for r man is what?
Laz in a good place but not heaven is what?
R man having fingers and a tongue is what?
 
Jul 23, 2018
12,199
2,775
113
Once again eisegesis. The interpretation is always influenced with the preconceived answer.
To me
1) The wages of sin is death.
2) The OT sheol has no capacity to accommodate a hell. The NT hell is eisegesis.
3) There is no logical requirement for a hell.
4) The details of hell are like a grab bag of pagan notions. Demonic worms, it is a chasm, it is a lake, etc...
5) The spirit with which hell is spoken is nicolaitan and hypocritical.
6) The notion of hell takes away from the Glory of Jesus. Don't need fire at my backside to walk with Jesus.
7) The notion of hell insults the Most High.
This is enough to reject this primitive hell myth.

The commonality of pagan myths and the hell doctrine should be an alarm bell to any discerning Christian. It is not something that needs to be explained. False idols are man-made as with their hell. They leave a tell tale sign of magic.
"""Once again eisegesis"""

So you are offering eisegesis vs his eisegesis?
 
Jul 23, 2018
12,199
2,775
113
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.
Jesus was spreading doctrines of devils?
 
Jul 23, 2018
12,199
2,775
113
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.
There is no evidence either way in what you are saying.
You are offering opinion.

.....and labeling it as fact.
 
Jul 23, 2018
12,199
2,775
113
Revelation states their smoke and torment will be forever. The Eternal Damnation of the Lake of Fire is for forever.

But the Parable is not actually about Hell, it's about the Jews losing the position and place they had in God, and the Gentiles taking their place.
Begin your exegesis by listing the facts of the story.

All you are doing is backing up opinion derived through omission of facts.