Interpreting the Parable of the Rich Man and Lazarus: It's Really Good News!
- Thread starter Phoneman-777
- Start date
-
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.
previously covered.
your private interpretation is incompatible with Christ.
you make Him a liar, as you explicitly said in post #1, teaching 'doctrines of demons' ((your own words))
you still have no defense, nor even tried to offer a poor one.
instead here you are calling Christ absurd, again! calling Him a liar, again! with pride instead of shame!!
for shame! you think yourself God's judge!
we're not just going to ride your merry-go-round;
examine yourself.
your private interpretation is incompatible with Christ.
you make Him a liar, as you explicitly said in post #1, teaching 'doctrines of demons' ((your own words))
you still have no defense, nor even tried to offer a poor one.
instead here you are calling Christ absurd, again! calling Him a liar, again! with pride instead of shame!!
for shame! you think yourself God's judge!
we're not just going to ride your merry-go-round;
examine yourself.
Again... that TRUTH could only be that... The bible teaches about a place of torment that awaits immediately for the wicked dead. That was the "myth" that you say they understood to be a familiar idea? Well it was not so familiar an idea for his brothers but he wanted them to be warned about it and the TRUTH that Jesus was trying teach using this PARABLE could only be that Moses and the Prophets warn of this torment that awaits the wicked dead immediately upon their death but that if they do not believe Moses and the Prophets about this place of torment then they would not believe is a ghost appeared or a man came back from the dead and told them about it. This is the TRUTH of the parable and you cannot deny that is the lesson. Instead of just reiterating that the Parable teaches a lesson one must CONCEDE that the is the LESSON that the parable teaches and therefore the TRUTH of the place of torment that awaits the wicked being taught by Moses and the Prophets is underscored and part of the lesson.
I expect you to concede now Phoneman and say, "Yes that is the lesson of the parable."
I expect you to concede now Phoneman and say, "Yes that is the lesson of the parable."
Until you come to terms with certain things like the Jesus and Paul are not liars who teach the dead put on their resurrection bodies BEFORE the resurrection, and that the dead know things and remember things and plan things, and feel things, etc., you will continue to call Jesus, Paul, Job, Peter, and the rest of anyone who had anything to say about death a liar.
What helped me was to step back and look at the big picture. Context and other scriptures help to give the spiritual guidance needed. In Jesus' day the theory of eternal torment and life after death as a soul was not believed by Jews. Because it was believed by pagan religions it may have existed but not taught amongst the Jews. If Jesus understood that the Jews did not believe this and the rest of the bible did not teach this, He was able to use an illustration about Abraham who is dead, and two people that die to explain spiritual truth for the living. The lesson taught isn't about the after life but about the result of the life chosen by the living.
"The early Hebrews apparently had a concept of the soul but did not separate it from the body, although later Jewish writers developed the idea of the soul further. Biblical references to the soul are related to the concept of breath and establish no distinction between the ethereal soul and the corporeal body. Christian concepts of a body-soul dichotomy originated with the ancient Greeks and were introduced into Christian theology at an early date by St. Gregory of Nyssa (died 394ad) and by St. Augustine (430ad). ..."encyclopedia Britannica"
"The early Hebrews apparently had a concept of the soul but did not separate it from the body, although later Jewish writers developed the idea of the soul further. Biblical references to the soul are related to the concept of breath and establish no distinction between the ethereal soul and the corporeal body. Christian concepts of a body-soul dichotomy originated with the ancient Greeks and were introduced into Christian theology at an early date by St. Gregory of Nyssa (died 394ad) and by St. Augustine (430ad). ..."encyclopedia Britannica"
-
1
- Show all
Again... that TRUTH could only be that... The bible teaches about a place of torment that awaits immediately for the wicked dead. That was the "myth" that you say they understood to be a familiar idea?
THEY ARE DEAD.
They cannot hear, see, know, speak, remember, feel, devise, or have anything more to do with our world...until the resurrection. That's the testimony of the Bible writers. The Serpent says the dead are dead, yes, but NOT SURELY dead, right? It seems the church is following the word of Satan over the Word of God Who said, "Ye shall SURELY die".
Chiasmus anyone?
[97]The rich man and Lazarus (Luke 16:19-31)
A(16:19-21) 16:19 dined sumptuously each day.(16:19) (εὐφραινόμενος)
B(16:22) 16:22 When the poor man died, he was carried away (16:22)" (ἀποθανεῖν)
C(16:23) 16:23 saw Abraham far off (16:23) (ὁρᾷ)
D(16:24) 16:24 Send Lazarus to cool my tongue (16:24) (πέμψον)
E(16:25-26) 16:25 now he is comforted here, whereas you are tormented. (16:25)
D'(16:27-28) 16:27 send him to my father's house, (16:27)" (πέμψῃς)
C'(16:29) 16:29 Let them listen to them (16:29) (ἀκουσάτωσαν)
B'(16:30) 16:30 if someone from the dead goes to them (16:30) (νεκρῶν)
A'(16:31) 16:31 neither will they be persuaded (16:31) (οὐκ ἀκούουσιν)
A: Disobey against God. B: The dead goes. C: Look / Listen. D: Lazarus is sent. E: The rich suffers and Lazarus is comforted.
On another note. Poor guy Lazarus, someone should help him, Eleazar is what they used to name him.
[97]The rich man and Lazarus (Luke 16:19-31)
A(16:19-21) 16:19 dined sumptuously each day.(16:19) (εὐφραινόμενος)
B(16:22) 16:22 When the poor man died, he was carried away (16:22)" (ἀποθανεῖν)
C(16:23) 16:23 saw Abraham far off (16:23) (ὁρᾷ)
D(16:24) 16:24 Send Lazarus to cool my tongue (16:24) (πέμψον)
E(16:25-26) 16:25 now he is comforted here, whereas you are tormented. (16:25)
D'(16:27-28) 16:27 send him to my father's house, (16:27)" (πέμψῃς)
C'(16:29) 16:29 Let them listen to them (16:29) (ἀκουσάτωσαν)
B'(16:30) 16:30 if someone from the dead goes to them (16:30) (νεκρῶν)
A'(16:31) 16:31 neither will they be persuaded (16:31) (οὐκ ἀκούουσιν)
A: Disobey against God. B: The dead goes. C: Look / Listen. D: Lazarus is sent. E: The rich suffers and Lazarus is comforted.
On another note. Poor guy Lazarus, someone should help him, Eleazar is what they used to name him.
The influence of Hellenistic thinking was widespread at the time of Jesus. Many of the Jewish leaders trained in schools heavily corrupted by Greek ideas. Yes, some Jews were confused about the subject of death and hell, so much so that Jesus had to correct these errors, as did Paul in his writings to the Thessalonians, for instance.
However, we can't ignore that the elements within the passage are too symbolic to be accepted as literal except by those who are willing to ignore these glaring contradictions in order to retain their beliefs.
However, we can't ignore that the elements within the passage are too symbolic to be accepted as literal except by those who are willing to ignore these glaring contradictions in order to retain their beliefs.
You are not identifying what the Lesson of the Parable would be with this kind of rhetoric.
The "ah ha" moment of the Parable was...
"If they don't believe Moses and the Prophets ABOUT THE PLACE OF TORMENT that awaits the wicked dead, then they won't believe it if a dead man comes back and tells them about the PLACE OF TORMENT"
That is the text and that is the Lesson of the parable, the "moral" or the "truth" as you call it. The part that any child could underline and identify in his school lesson on "what is the moral of this parable"
Any other answer the child gave would be marked wrong. Only the part I have highlighted can be the correct LESSON of the parable.
27And he said, ‘Then I beg you, father, to send him to my father’s house— 28for I have five brothers—so that he may warn them, lest they also come into this place of torment.’ 29But Abraham said, ‘They have Moses and the Prophets; let them hear them.’ (Hear them about what? That which the rich man wanted to warn them about THIS PLACE OF TORMENT.) 30And he said, ‘No, father Abraham, but if someone goes to them from the dead, (goes to them from the dead to say what? vs 28.. to warn them about this place of torment) they will repent.’ 31He said to him, ‘If they do not hear Moses and the Prophets, (Hear Moses and the Prophets say what? Warn them about a place of torment that awaits the wicked dead) neither will they be convinced if someone should rise from the dead.’”
So now you must concede that the LESSON of the Parable is not that of it being a Parable, (being a Parable is not the Lesson) You say that it teaches a truth, and then you say that the truth it teaches is that their ideas of the dead are false? That is not the lesson of the parable. No child who said that would pass his school lesson on how to read a parable. The Lesson is as I have stated it and you must concede to that. At the very least you must concede that he has stated from this parable that Moses and the Prophets warn of a place of torment that one can avoid if they believe Moses and the Prophets whereas supernatural visits from dead people would not convince them if they are not convinced by Moses and the Prophets.
The "ah ha" moment of the Parable was...
"If they don't believe Moses and the Prophets ABOUT THE PLACE OF TORMENT that awaits the wicked dead, then they won't believe it if a dead man comes back and tells them about the PLACE OF TORMENT"
That is the text and that is the Lesson of the parable, the "moral" or the "truth" as you call it. The part that any child could underline and identify in his school lesson on "what is the moral of this parable"
Any other answer the child gave would be marked wrong. Only the part I have highlighted can be the correct LESSON of the parable.
27And he said, ‘Then I beg you, father, to send him to my father’s house— 28for I have five brothers—so that he may warn them, lest they also come into this place of torment.’ 29But Abraham said, ‘They have Moses and the Prophets; let them hear them.’ (Hear them about what? That which the rich man wanted to warn them about THIS PLACE OF TORMENT.) 30And he said, ‘No, father Abraham, but if someone goes to them from the dead, (goes to them from the dead to say what? vs 28.. to warn them about this place of torment) they will repent.’ 31He said to him, ‘If they do not hear Moses and the Prophets, (Hear Moses and the Prophets say what? Warn them about a place of torment that awaits the wicked dead) neither will they be convinced if someone should rise from the dead.’”
So now you must concede that the LESSON of the Parable is not that of it being a Parable, (being a Parable is not the Lesson) You say that it teaches a truth, and then you say that the truth it teaches is that their ideas of the dead are false? That is not the lesson of the parable. No child who said that would pass his school lesson on how to read a parable. The Lesson is as I have stated it and you must concede to that. At the very least you must concede that he has stated from this parable that Moses and the Prophets warn of a place of torment that one can avoid if they believe Moses and the Prophets whereas supernatural visits from dead people would not convince them if they are not convinced by Moses and the Prophets.
Separating the sheep and the goats. How was the Rich Man of the parable in life towards Lazarus the Beggar, and where did he end up?
Matthew 25:41-46
41 Then shall he say also unto them on the left hand, Depart from me, ye cursed, into everlasting fire, prepared for the devil and his angels:
42 For I was an hungred, and ye gave me no meat: I was thirsty, and ye gave me no drink:
43 I was a stranger, and ye took me not in: naked, and ye clothed me not: sick, and in prison, and ye visited me not.
44 Then shall they also answer him, saying, Lord, when saw we thee an hungred, or athirst, or a stranger, or naked, or sick, or in prison, and did not minister unto thee?
45 Then shall he answer them, saying, Verily I say unto you, Inasmuch as ye did it not to one of the least of these, ye did it not to me.
46 And these shall go away into everlasting punishment: but the righteous into life eternal.
Matthew 25:41-46
41 Then shall he say also unto them on the left hand, Depart from me, ye cursed, into everlasting fire, prepared for the devil and his angels:
42 For I was an hungred, and ye gave me no meat: I was thirsty, and ye gave me no drink:
43 I was a stranger, and ye took me not in: naked, and ye clothed me not: sick, and in prison, and ye visited me not.
44 Then shall they also answer him, saying, Lord, when saw we thee an hungred, or athirst, or a stranger, or naked, or sick, or in prison, and did not minister unto thee?
45 Then shall he answer them, saying, Verily I say unto you, Inasmuch as ye did it not to one of the least of these, ye did it not to me.
46 And these shall go away into everlasting punishment: but the righteous into life eternal.
Bro, that is so asinine.
Paul plainly tells you we have only TWO bodies: this one in the here and now, and the resurrection body we get IN THE RESURRECTION. Really, have you ever been to a funeral and looked down into the casket and seen a flame?
It never ceases to amaze me how you Immortal Soul folks just make it up as you go when somebody like me comes with tons of Scriptural reasons why you're wrong. CASE IN POINT:
Every single Immortal Soul person has always taught that at death, the Body returns to the dust, but the "Soul" goes straight to heaven or burning in hell WITHOUT A BODY, right or wrong? A DISEMBODIED Ghost, Poltergeist, Spook, Spirit goes burning in hell or walking in heaven and the purpose of the Resurrection is relegated to a mere Celestial Fashion Show where the good people in heaven now get to put on that long awaited new resurrection body.
But, just as you shucked and jived at my Matthew 24:12-13 KJV proof that the "many" are the formerly saved who will be going to hell, you now attempt to teach these dead actually have bodies before the resurrection. SMH
Paul plainly tells you we have only TWO bodies: this one in the here and now, and the resurrection body we get IN THE RESURRECTION. Really, have you ever been to a funeral and looked down into the casket and seen a flame?
It never ceases to amaze me how you Immortal Soul folks just make it up as you go when somebody like me comes with tons of Scriptural reasons why you're wrong. CASE IN POINT:
Every single Immortal Soul person has always taught that at death, the Body returns to the dust, but the "Soul" goes straight to heaven or burning in hell WITHOUT A BODY, right or wrong? A DISEMBODIED Ghost, Poltergeist, Spook, Spirit goes burning in hell or walking in heaven and the purpose of the Resurrection is relegated to a mere Celestial Fashion Show where the good people in heaven now get to put on that long awaited new resurrection body.
But, just as you shucked and jived at my Matthew 24:12-13 KJV proof that the "many" are the formerly saved who will be going to hell, you now attempt to teach these dead actually have bodies before the resurrection. SMH
God sent the dogs to do exactly that
I don't see any indication that the dogs were sent by God. Seems like dogs did what dogs do. They are gross like that and eat their own poo too.
It seems to me that the dogs are in the story to reveal that this was not a scene at the rich man's gate that could have gone unnoticed and therefore the rich man was guilty of knowingly neglecting the beggar's condition.
Dogs licking his sores adds a level of detail to the story that removes any doubt that the rich man was unaware of what was happening at his gate. Therefore the listener to the parable has such questions answered (did the rich man know?) by the details of this story, i.e. a pack of dogs licking his sores. Not something that wouldn't cause a scene.
-
1
-
1
- Show all
As an SDA. I completely agree with you that the Rich Man and Lazarus story cannot be talking about a real place because it contradicts a whole bunch of other scriptures.
But also as an SDA, aren't we supposed to demonstrate love toward everyone the same way Jesus does, no matter how much they disagree with us?
"Beloved, let us love one another, for love is of God; and everyone who loves is born of God and knows God. He who does not love does not know God, for God is love. There is no fear in love; but perfect love casts out fear, because fear involves torment. But he who fears has not been made perfect in love." - 1 John 4:7,8,18
I understand your frustration with people who insist on overlooking the host of passages which describe God as merciful, gracious, fair, and righteous, and instead turn God into some evil demonic tyrant who would allow people to be tormented in pain forever. If I believed that God is like that, I would be joining the ranks of unbelievers who claim they cannot believe a God exists who would do that to His own creatures. Many people have already left Christianity based on this one misunderstanding of what God really is like.
While I am alive, I prefer to believe in a God who loves me and wants to save me, and then after I die, find out I was wrong, rather than the other way around. It would be so disheartening to live my life in fear of eternal torment, and then find out after I die that all that mental anguish was unnecessary, because a loving, merciful, fair, and gracious God would never torment His creatures in a forever burning fire.
Everyone has the freedom to make up their own minds on which way they view God, so please knock off the rude comments. They do not help anyone to see God's love.
But also as an SDA, aren't we supposed to demonstrate love toward everyone the same way Jesus does, no matter how much they disagree with us?
"Beloved, let us love one another, for love is of God; and everyone who loves is born of God and knows God. He who does not love does not know God, for God is love. There is no fear in love; but perfect love casts out fear, because fear involves torment. But he who fears has not been made perfect in love." - 1 John 4:7,8,18
I understand your frustration with people who insist on overlooking the host of passages which describe God as merciful, gracious, fair, and righteous, and instead turn God into some evil demonic tyrant who would allow people to be tormented in pain forever. If I believed that God is like that, I would be joining the ranks of unbelievers who claim they cannot believe a God exists who would do that to His own creatures. Many people have already left Christianity based on this one misunderstanding of what God really is like.
While I am alive, I prefer to believe in a God who loves me and wants to save me, and then after I die, find out I was wrong, rather than the other way around. It would be so disheartening to live my life in fear of eternal torment, and then find out after I die that all that mental anguish was unnecessary, because a loving, merciful, fair, and gracious God would never torment His creatures in a forever burning fire.
Everyone has the freedom to make up their own minds on which way they view God, so please knock off the rude comments. They do not help anyone to see God's love.
Now you are talking about an Allegory.
There is no need for the objects and examples in a parable to represent something else to teach a lesson.
Is it an allegory or a parable?
There is a difference.
I concede that it could be a parable. I do not concede that it is an allegory.
If it is a parable it has to have a main point. One easily grasped by the listeners.
Not a riddle, not a mystery, not an allegory that needs a key to understand what each detail really represents.
A parable contains familiar examples from things people understand usually from daily common life like farming etc, and has a clever twist or "Gotcha" moment that is easy to grasp.
In this case it would be that the Scriptures should be sufficient to warn them of the place of torment that awaits them and if that does not work for them because of their lack of respect toward the scripture then supernatural visits from dead people will not work either.
It is clearly the lesson of the parable.
There is no need for the objects and examples in a parable to represent something else to teach a lesson.
Is it an allegory or a parable?
There is a difference.
I concede that it could be a parable. I do not concede that it is an allegory.
If it is a parable it has to have a main point. One easily grasped by the listeners.
Not a riddle, not a mystery, not an allegory that needs a key to understand what each detail really represents.
A parable contains familiar examples from things people understand usually from daily common life like farming etc, and has a clever twist or "Gotcha" moment that is easy to grasp.
In this case it would be that the Scriptures should be sufficient to warn them of the place of torment that awaits them and if that does not work for them because of their lack of respect toward the scripture then supernatural visits from dead people will not work either.
It is clearly the lesson of the parable.