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

[Webers.Home]

.

Abraham says that some people would not believe the testimony of the dead

Abraham's remark was specifically relative to the man's five brothers rather
than the entire world at large.

Take for example the other Lazarus-- the brother of Mary and Martha. His
return from death had a positive effect upon those who saw him. (John
11:45)

If my brother named Lazarus died, remained dead for a period of time, was
resurrected, and told me about his experiences in the afterlife I would
believe him.

I've no doubt you would believe your brother, and the rich man's five
brothers would've likely been influenced by the return of their deceased
sibling. But Lazarus isn't their sibling; he's an outsider.

NOTE: All six of those men are by now all together in the netherworld: apparently
none were spared. Well; at least they have each other down there. I don't
know how helpful that might be but at least they're family.
_

 

[Phoneman-777]

in context of the nature, you don't have to be a brain surgeon to know that. You should know the word of God speaks of natural and supernatural things guy. Come on really? Hell is the supernatural place to hold a devil who is not flesh and blood as you and I YET hell is a place you do not want to go to with an eternal soul and spirit.

what makes you think hell is a supernatural place? It's a REAL place that will burn in the future, and the devil will burn up and "never shalt thou BE anymore". Do you understand that "BE" means "EXIST"? The devil is not going to "exist" anymore, so there's no "hold" on him or anyone else cast therein.

 

[Diakonos]

What do you think of the interpretation of the parable?

We may discuss my view another time. I'm testing your hermeneutic here to see if it's worth exploring. I'll wait for your answer.

 

[Phoneman-777]

that's completely illogical.

if they don't exist, there is no such thing as 'them' to resurrect.
if they are resurrected, they exist, and never ceased to exist.

Wait, God stepped out onto NOTHING and spoke to NOTHING and from NOTHING sprang forth EVERYTHING, but you're going to limit His ability to bring forth from nonexistence the dead who ceased to exist when at death their Body returned to the Dust and the Spirit returned to God Who gave it?

Perhaps you need a broader concept of Who and What God is?

 

[Phoneman-777]

We may discuss my view another time. I'm testing your hermeneutic here to see if it's worth exploring. I'll wait for your answer.

I'd rather we discuss the CONTENT of the OP, if you don't mind. What do you think of the INTERPRETATION of the parable of the Rich Man and Lazarus as presented by the speaker?

 

[Phoneman-777]

but you say that a soul ceases to exist when the spirit of a man is separated from the body of a man - and by doing so, arguing that the soul doesn't truly have any independent existence at all, but is a mere abstract to describe the union of the two.

so if Christ is the hypostatic union of two natures, and one nature is removed, then by your argument Christ Himself ceases to exist; He is no longer Christ, but only some broken pieces of what once-was-Christ.

The BIBLE says the Soul ceases to exist when the Spirit and the Body disunion, because the only way for the Soul to come into existence is through the UNION of the two.

Christ's human nature ceased to be in the grave, but His Divine nature continued to exist as it has from eternity past to eternity future.

 

[posthuman]

Wait, God stepped out onto NOTHING and spoke to NOTHING and from NOTHING sprang forth EVERYTHING, but you're going to limit His ability to bring forth from nonexistence the dead who ceased to exist when at death their Body returned to the Dust and the Spirit returned to God Who gave it?

Perhaps you need a broader concept of Who and What God is?

He created your soul
did He bring you into the wilderness only to destroy you, your children, and your animals?

is life eternal or does it have an expiration date?

this isn't about 'is anything possible for God'
it's about 'is God good or is God evil'

 

[posthuman]

The BIBLE says the Soul ceases to exist when the Spirit and the Body disunion, because the only way for the Soul to come into existence is through the UNION of the two.

the Bible doesn't say that. Christ specifically says that's not the case, in Luke 16 and also other places.

your private interpretation of Genesis 2 says that. which means you are misinterpreting Genesis.

your interpretation makes Christ a liar: you explicitly accuse Him of presenting doctrines of demons.

'find yourself in the Bible' -- who else says Jesus represents Beelzebub?

 

[CS1]

what makes you think hell is a supernatural place? It's a REAL place that will burn in the future, and the devil will burn up and "never shalt thou BE anymore". Do you understand that "BE" means "EXIST"? The devil is not going to "exist" anymore, so there's no "hold" on him or anyone else cast therein.

God made hell for the devil and his angels.

Hell is Eternal and places where God is NOT. Think about that Where can God not be? HE is Omni- Present Yet God chooses not to be there, that alone is supernatural. DO you understand the Supernatural? That is beyond human reasoning.

 

[Diakonos]

I'd rather we discuss the CONTENT of the OP, if you don't mind. What do you think of the INTERPRETATION of the parable of the Rich Man and Lazarus as presented by the speaker?

1. I already commented on something you said, which is about the OP.
2. You are demonstrating a pattern of ignoring things that put you in a corner. For example, our conversation from the
"How We Can Tell If We Possess The Agape of God" forum:


I've been waiting for you to respond since October.
Why should I respond to your questions when you won't respond to me?

So I'll repeat my question, which is the beginning of our conversation here:
"If you think the characters in the story of Luke 16 correspond to real people in the near future, then tell me, who is the rich man in contrast to Lazarous?"

 

[LactoseIntolerant]

Great post, thank you! God is working to reconcile all things unto Himself. Those things which are reconciled to God in Christ will have eternal life. Those not reconciled will not.

Col_1:20 And, having made peace through the blood of his cross, by him to reconcile all things unto himself; by him, I say, whether they be things in earth, or things in heaven.

The Scriptures are very profound. It is not from a God seeking to punish the naked man, but it is a Divine Father who is asking him to put on some clothes.
Cheers.

 

[Runningman]

.



Abraham's remark was specifically relative to the man's five brothers rather
than the entire world at large.

Take for example the other Lazarus-- the brother of Mary and Martha. His
return from death had a positive effect upon those who saw him. (John
11:45)





I've no doubt you would believe your brother, and the rich man's five
brothers would've likely been influenced by the return of their deceased
sibling. But Lazarus isn't their sibling; he's an outsider.

NOTE: All six of those men are by now all together in the netherworld: apparently
none were spared. Well; at least they have each other down there. I don't
know how helpful that might be but at least they're family.
_

Then the rabbit hole just gets deeper from my perspective. How did Abraham gain the omniscient ability to know how his brothers would react? Anyone with any sense who sees someone come back from death, especially after a period of time, and they’re discussing the afterlife would believe them.

I don’t think Abraham is being literal. Throughout scripture the miracle of resurrection had a profound impact on those who witnessed it and knew about it.

I don’t think it’s true that a resurrection would have had no effect on the brothers of the rich man; that’s why it isn’t literal and is a parable.

Clearly the point Abraham was trying to make was that it’s better to obey the Law and Prophets than to die and get to the afterlife and find out the hard way that it’s too late to go back and fix it.

 

[Webers.Home]

.

How did Abraham gain the omniscient ability to know how his brothers would
react?

According to Gen 20:7 Abraham was a prophet. As such, he would be privy
to information normally unavailable to John Que and Jane Doe pew warmer.
He is also one of God's close personal friends. (Gen 18:17-19, Isa 41:8)

So then, I think it's fairly safe to assume the information that Abraham
passed on to the rich man came to Abraham via inspiration; which, if so,
means that our reaction to his remarks should be very different than the rich
man's. He brushed aside what Abraham told him; but we, I should hope, are
wiser than that impious dunce because we know that a prophet's teachings
are the voice of God.
_

 

[Phoneman-777]

Spin it however it makes you feel best, but Eternal means Forever and Ever. There is no debating Forever and Ever!

Don't forget about "eternal redemption" which means Jesus will be crucified every Friday in heaven forever and ever, because "eternal" refers to the process, not the result, right?

Or, "eternal judgment" which means God will be heard saying "order in the court, order in the court" continually at the never-ending judgment because "eternal" refers to the process, not the result, right?

Or, that Sodom and Gomorrah was burned with "eternal fire" which means the fire is still burning these two cities to this day, even though both cities are under the Dead Sea now and are not burning at all, because "eternal" refers to the process, not the result, right?

 

[Phoneman-777]

Your video is a farce. The dogs in the account, were literal dogs. Lazarus wasn't one of those dogs. He was a literal man. The rich man's 5 literal brothers were still alive and savable.
... neither can they pass to us, that would come from thence. Luke 16:26 (KJV) Individual Jews have been getting saved for the last 2,000 years.

If you believe the story was literal, then you must believe dead folks can talk, though Scripture says they can't, Abraham's bosom is as big as the state of Texas to accommodate all them dead folks that have ever lived, a dude completely on fire can hold a conversation as easily as if he were sitting on a sofa, dead folks get their bodies as soon as they die although the Bible repeatedly teaches that our resurrection bodies aren't provided until the resurrection, etc.

You believe all that? I mean, this is a LITERAL story, right? You really believe the dead can travel back to the land of the living, though Solomon plainly says that's impossible?

 

[Phoneman-777]

Do you see the absurdity of this statement? It would be far better to admit that you have been indoctrinated into unbiblical teachings, and it is now high time to abandon such nonsense.

I had to remind Compostman that God stepped out onto nothing, and spoke to nothing, and from nothing sprang forth EVERYTHING. Need I remind you, as well?

God can just as easily bring back into existence that which has ceased to exist JUST AS EASILY as He brought forth into existence things which were previously nonexistent.

 

[Phoneman-777]

1. I already commented on something you said, which is about the OP.
2. You are demonstrating a pattern of ignoring things that put you in a corner. For example, our conversation from the
"How We Can Tell If We Possess The Agape of God" forum:
View attachment 235220

I've been waiting for you to respond since October.
Why should I respond to your questions when you won't respond to me?

So I'll repeat my question, which is the beginning of our conversation here:
"If you think the characters in the story of Luke 16 correspond to real people in the near future, then tell me, who is the rich man in contrast to Lazarous?"

Sorry, but we got a little busy around here during that time in October...with a Category 3 hurricane. Can you put a link to your post in question and I'll be happy to respond. Thanks.

 

[Runningman]

.



According to Gen 20:7 Abraham was a prophet. As such, he would be privy
to information normally unavailable to John Que and Jane Doe pew warmer.
He is also one of God's close personal friends. (Gen 18:17-19, Isa 41:8)

So then, I think it's fairly safe to assume the information that Abraham
passed on to the rich man came to Abraham via inspiration; which, if so,
means that our reaction to his remarks should be very different than the rich
man's. He brushed aside what Abraham told him; but we, I should hope, are
wiser than that impious dunce because we know that a prophet's teachings
are the voice of God.
_

Yes, I definitely agree with that. There's too many things with the rich man and Lazarus for me to take it literally and I didn't even list all of those reasons.

 

[TheLearner]

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.

Luke 16
19-31 “There was once a rich man who used to dress in purple and fine linen and lead a life of daily luxury. And there was a poor man called Lazarus who was put down at his gate. He was covered with sores. He used to long to be fed with the scraps from the rich man’s table. Yes, and the dogs used to come and lick his sores. Well, it happened that the poor man died, and was carried by the angels into Abraham’s bosom. The rich man also died and was buried. And from among the dead he looked up and saw Abraham a long way away, and Lazarus in his arms. ‘Father Abraham!’ he cried out, ‘please pity me. Send Lazarus to dip the tip of his finger in water and cool my tongue, for I am in agony in these flames.’ But Abraham replied, ‘Remember, my son, that you used to have the good things in your lifetime, while Lazarus suffered the bad. Now he is being comforted here, while you are in agony. And besides this, a great chasm has been set between you and us, so that those who want to go to you from this side cannot do so, and people cannot come to us from your side.’ At this he said, ‘Then I beg you, father, to send him to my father’s house for I have five brothers. He could warn them about all this and prevent their coming to this place of torture.’ But Abraham said, ‘They have Moses and the Prophets: they can listen to them.’ ‘Ah no, father Abraham,’ he said, ‘if only someone were to go to them from the dead, they would change completely.’ But Abraham told him, ‘If they will not listen to Moses and the Prophets, they would not be convinced even if somebody were to rise from the dead.’”

We know that this story is about the grave, not Heaven and Hell as we know of it. There is nothing in the text that says it is a parable. The only one's who came centuries later are those that deny that Hell is eternal punishment Matthew 25:46. I do not remember the first person who taught that, but I think it was after 1500 AD.

Maybe, someone knows.

 

[Runningman]

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.

This parable illustrates many things. If you won't allow this to be a parable then you'll undoubtedly miss them much like how you just did in your comment.