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

[Phoneman-777]

Well what I found was an explanation that it was a parable that meant that your decisions now effect your eternity.

Seems to skip the whole, "if they don't hear Moses and the prophets they want believe if one rose from the dead" statement as possibly being the main point. But maybe they use different rules about identifying lessons in parables. Rules no one but the SDA knows about.

It's actually very easy to interpret the parable.

Remember the Gentile Syro-Phonecian woman who told Jesus, "Truth, Lord! Yet the dogs eat of the crumbs which fall from their master's table."


The Rich Man represents the Jews, the "children of Abraham.

Lazarus outside with the dogs represent the Gentiles, who the Jews call "dogs" to this day.


The crumbs which fall from the Rich Man's buffet table full with the covenants, the blessings, the lively oracles, etc., represent the Jews casting aside everything Jesus came to offer them, and allowing them to fall to the floor, while Gentiles look on but are cut off form the commonwealth of Israel.

But, the tables get turned, don't they? When the Jews cried, "His blood be upon us and our children forever" they were indeed turning the tables on themselves. One atrocity after another has marked the Jewish race throughout history. They indeed are in torments. Paul says of the Jews, "WRATH HAS COME UPON TEHM TO THE UTTERMOST.

When the Jews rejected Jesus, they lost everything. Now, the Church is exalted and in comfort by the Comforter, the Holy Ghost. And the parable closes with the Rich Man being told if his Jew brethren won't believe the Word of God, they won't believe even if they see one rise from the dead. And, sure enough, not long after, a real man named Lazarus rose from the dead, and instead of believing, the Jews went away to plot how to murder Jesus and Lazarus.

 

[Phoneman-777]

I like making him squirm. JK. I think @Phoneman-777 is actually a well meaning SDA advocate. He will probably extract himself one day.

My church is being overrun by Jesuits LOL You wouldn't believe some of the stuff that goes on. But, one thing we do know: the last church is the Laodicean, which is anything but perfect, so....

 

[Phoneman-777]

Sorry that you're having trouble. Let me help you:

Abraham's bosom is within earshot of Hades (proper) (Luke 16).
People in Hades (proper) can see and hear and talk to people in Abraham's bosom. My last post tells you that this whole region is under the earth.

Abraham's bosom is located within a geographical region that is well documented throughout the Bible.

I have to say again that if Luke 16 is literal, several major Scriptural contradictions erupt, like when Jesus said the wicked are cast bodily into hell, but that's not possible now because we've been to countless funerals where some scoundrel lies there all powdered up and dressed up and there's no smoke or flames.

 

[Phoneman-777]

The SDA and yourself has suggested that Jesus was using a common Greek pagan idea they had. That does not make sense. Wouldn't he be using a Jewish tradition they had?

Are you saying Jesus would not use a Jewish tradition but he would a Pagan tradition to teach a parable?

Jesus drew upon things evident at that time, the harvest, the sea, the economy, relationships...and no doubt played upon their misconceptions about death that many Jews held at the time due to severe Hellenistic influence.

Paul did the same thing, resorting to pagan philosophy with which the people were familiar in order to make a point.

 

[Amanuensis]

I don't trust ANYTHING the Jews say - they crucified my Lord, and to this day call Him "the great imposter" and "son of a whore". They were the most stiffnecked race to ever grace the topside of the Earth. Time and time again, we read, "And the children of Israel DID EVIL in the sight of the Lord". Why should they be trusted as authoritative on anything except church history?

I don't see how that applies.

You concede that Jesus was using their belief system to teach a lesson in a parable story.
You then say that the belief system they were using was a pagan belief about immortality.
But the audience were Jewish and their belief system was what Jesus was referencing. It included their idea that there was an abode for the wicked dead where there was torment and that there was going to be a feast table waiting for the righteous and they would set at table with Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob.
If Jesus was simply using their belief system to teach a parable it was that of the Jewish belief system not a Greek pagan one. The Greek Pagans knew nothing of Abrahams Bosom, a place at that table.

Now if Jesus was using their Jewish belief system to teach a parable but he was NOT validating that belief, as you and SDA are trying to point out, but only using it to teach a lesson in parable form then the lesson that he ends up teaching using this parable is

"That Moses and the Prophets warn of a place of torment for the wicked dead but if people do not believe what Moses and the Prophets say about it, then they will not believe even if one rose from the dead and warned them about it."

So even if their ideas about Abrahams Bosom, or the separation between the abode of the righteous dead and the abode of the wicked dead was not accurate (and the Jewish tradition taught that this was separated by a handbreadth but Jesus in the parable presents information not known by anyone before this, that it was separated by a great chasm. This was not even part of their belief system, but something entirely new) however, even if their ideas were not accurate, the lesson that the listener would have understood by the parable is...

"Moses and the Prophets (believing the Word of God) is the only way you will believe that the wicked will face torment after death and therefore change your life so that you do not come to that place of torment"

A supernatural sign will not be enough to change you. Only the Word can really change people. That was the lesson, or at least a major part of the lesson as defined in the text of the parable itself.

Now conceding that is what any Hebrew scholar would agree is how you identify the lesson in the parable, then your entire argument that it is only a parable has done nothing to prove that there is not a place of torment for the wicked dead but rather proved it quite conclusively.

 

[Aerials1978]

I have to say again that if Luke 16 is literal, several major Scriptural contradictions erupt, like when Jesus said the wicked are cast bodily into hell, but that's not possible now because we've been to countless funerals where some scoundrel lies there all powdered up and dressed up and there's no smoke or flames.

Jesus was talking about the resurrection of all people. Everyone will be resurrected in physical bodies that are eternal. Some to be with God and others to βάσανος.

 

[Amanuensis]

It's actually very easy to interpret the parable.

Remember the Gentile Syro-Phonecian woman who told Jesus, "Truth, Lord! Yet the dogs eat of the crumbs which fall from their master's table."


The Rich Man represents the Jews, the "children of Abraham.

Lazarus outside with the dogs represent the Gentiles, who the Jews call "dogs" to this day.


The crumbs which fall from the Rich Man's buffet table full with the covenants, the blessings, the lively oracles, etc., represent the Jews casting aside everything Jesus came to offer them, and allowing them to fall to the floor, while Gentiles look on but are cut off form the commonwealth of Israel.

But, the tables get turned, don't they? When the Jews cried, "His blood be upon us and our children forever" they were indeed turning the tables on themselves. One atrocity after another has marked the Jewish race throughout history. They indeed are in torments. Paul says of the Jews, "WRATH HAS COME UPON TEHM TO THE UTTERMOST.

When the Jews rejected Jesus, they lost everything. Now, the Church is exalted and in comfort by the Comforter, the Holy Ghost. And the parable closes with the Rich Man being told if his Jew brethren won't believe the Word of God, they won't believe even if they see one rise from the dead. And, sure enough, not long after, a real man named Lazarus rose from the dead, and instead of believing, the Jews went away to plot how to murder Jesus and Lazarus.

That is an allegory, not a parable. You should start saying that this story is an allegory, that would save a lot of time.

And there is a difference between allegory and parables in ancient Hebrew literature and it is taught in bible colleges. It is not splitting hairs. Jesus audience knew what a parable was according to their culture and what an allegory was which the Jews used often in their teachings and writings and there was a difference between them they were taught in synagoge school.

You are following the rules of allegory with this explanation. If you were to stick to the allegory that Jesus was saying that the rich man represents all unbelieving Jews who will not believe Moses and the Prophets and therefore will not believe if one rose from the dead (but the believing gentiles who believe Moses and the Prophets will inherit their place in the coming kingdom) I can pretty much get on the same page with you there.

But if the beggar represents all believing gentiles who inherit a place at the table with Abraham and we will say that is an allegory of the blessings in total that include many things in allegorical form, then we can say that the Torment and flames of the unbelieving Jews represent many untold torments and sufferings in allegorical form.

Now whether we approach this as a parable (which I have previously identified the lesson using the rules of parables) or whether we apply the rules of allegory to this we still end up with a very clear teaching that there are torments awaiting the wicked unbelieving Jews who do not believe what Moses and the Prophets (scriptures) teach?

We cannot remove the symbolism of the torments from the allegory without assigning an allegorical meaning to the torments.
We may not know exactly what they are, and I concede they are not the same flames as the campfire flame since that is physical and the allegorical flame is a spiritual context, nevertheless assigning the allegorical meaning of the torments and flame cannot be sweet blissful sleep and non existence as that would not fit any reasonable allegorical torment in anyone's frame of reference this life of the next.

 

[justbyfaith]

Also, if a Hebrew slave chooses not to leave after his master dismisses him, he can opt to "remain his slave forever" which means he'll be slaving away for his master in heaven, right?

"Forever" (Gr. "Aionios") means "duration - either undefined BUT NOT ENDLESS, or undefined because endless".

All scholars agree when "forever" is applied to the affairs of God it means "eternity", but when applied to the affairs of men, it usually means "all the days of life".

Do you church pastors ever mention that? Do the pastors you listen to on the TV and radio ever mention that? OF COURSE NOT. They know how lucrative FEARMONGERING can be, and nothing fills the church coffers faster than Christians who want nothing to do with obedience to God's commandments desperately trying to buy ecclesiastical fire insurance.

Now, fear is a warranted motivation in the word of the Lord (Job 28:28, Luke 12:4-5, 1 Peter 1:17).

And the Bible definitely teaches that the unredeemed sinners shall face "everlasting fire" (Matthew 25:41) as "everlasting punishment" (Matthew 25:46); which will be characterized by "wailing and gnashing of teeth." (Matthew 13:41-42, Matthew 13:49-50).

So, if you think that that is "fear-mongering" then I would conclude that you yourself do not have much assurance of your own salvation.

Since you don't have such an assurance, I would suggest that you seek the Lord and His righteousness until you have found it.

For I have no fear of hell for as long as I walk within the boundaries of a life filled with faith.

And I do believe that hell is indeed, everlasting torments.

 

[John146]

It's Genesis 2:7, and it's plain to see that the Soul comes into existence only as a consequence of the union of the Body and the Breath of Life.

Body + Breath of Life = Living Soul
Body - Breath of Life = Living Soul ceases to exist (Dead Soul)

Much like a light circuit:

Bulb + Electricity = light
Bulb - Electricity = light ceases to exist

God created the body, brought it to life with the spirit and created the soul to occupy a living body. That’s man, a tri-part being.

 

[John146]

Paul plainly says that if the dead don't rise, what good is it to fight with beasts at Ephesus.'

If he taught what the "Immortal Soul" crowd teaches, he would have said, "If the dead rise not, SO WHAT??? The minute the Ephesus beast slit my jugular, I die and go straight to heaven with Jesus".

No, Paul said if the dead don't rise, then they who sleep in Jesus aren't in heaven, they're PERISHED.

And then spends the rest of the chapter explaining about how the body is sown and raised. Our soul will be given a new glorified body to live in for all eternity at the resurrection.

 

[TheLearner]

Can't seem to find the verse where the inner Earth is called "Abraham's Bosom".

BTW, Paradise is UP, not DOWN. Would you like me to provide the verses?

4 Maccabees 13:17
New Revised Standard Version
For if we so die, Abraham and Isaac and Jacob will welcome us, and all the fathers will praise us.”

 

[TheLearner]

"The word found in the Greek text for "bosom" is kolpos, meaning "lap" "bay".[2] This relates to the Second Temple period practice of reclining and eating meals in proximity to other guests, the closest of whom physically was said to lie on the bosom (chest) of the host. (See John 13:23 )[3][4]
During the Second Temple period (roughly 500 BCE–70 CE) the concept of a Bosom of Abraham first occurs in Jewish papyri that refer to the "Bosom of Abraham, Isaac and Jacob".[9] This reflects the belief of Jewish martyrs who died expecting that: "after our death in this fashion Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob will receive us and all our forefathers will praise us" (4 Maccabees 13:17).

...

During the Second Temple period (roughly 500 BCE–70 CE) the concept of a Bosom of Abraham first occurs in Jewish papyri that refer to the "Bosom of Abraham, Isaac and Jacob".[9] This reflects the belief of Jewish martyrs who died expecting that: "after our death in this fashion Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob will receive us and all our forefathers will praise us" (4 Maccabees 13:17).

...

The pseudepigraphic Book of Enoch describes travels through the cosmos and divides Sheol into four sections: for the truly righteous, the good, the wicked who are punished till they are released at the resurrection, and the wicked that are complete in their transgressions and who will not even be granted mercy at the resurrection.

" https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bosom_of_Abraham#Origin_of_the_phrase

related footnotes to follow up on:
F. Preisigke, Sammelbuch Griechischer Urkunden aus Aegypten (Scrapbook Greek documents from Egypt) 2034:11
https://archive.org/details/sammelbuchgriech02wissuoft

Hippolytus of Rome, Against Plato, on the Cause of the Universe, §1. As to the state of the righteous, he writes, "And there the righteous from the beginning dwell, not ruled by necessity, but enjoying always the contemplation of the blessings which are in their view, and delighting themselves with the expectation of others ever new, and deeming those ever better than these. And that place brings no toils to them. There, there is neither fierce heat, nor cold, nor thorn; but the face of the fathers and the righteous is seen to be always smiling, as they wait for the rest and eternal revival in heaven which succeed this location. And we call it by the name Abraham's bosom." Ibid.
Josephus, Flavius; Whiston, William (1841). The works of Flavius Josephus, the learned and authentic Jewish historian. Simms and Mʻintyre. p. 824.
Augustine of Hippo, City of God, Book XII
Tertullian, A Treatise on the Soul, Chapter 7.
Life After Death Archived 2009-02-19 at the Wayback Machine by Metropolitan Hierotheos
John Lightfoot Horae Hebraicae et Talmudicae 1671

 

[TheLearner]

"Up to the time of Maldonatus (a.d. 1583), its origin was traced back to the universal custom of parents to take up into their arms, or place upon their knees, their children when they are fatigued, or return home, and to make them rest by their side during the night (cf. II Kings, xii, 2; III Kings, iii, 20; xvii, 19; Luke, xi, 7 sqq.), thus causing them to enjoy rest and security in the bosom of a loving parent. "
https://en.wikisource.org/wiki/Catholic_Encyclopedia_(1913)/Bosom_of_Abraham

 

[TheLearner]

2 Samuel 12:3
3but the poor man had nothing but one little ewe lamb, which he had bought. He brought it up, and it grew up with him and with his children; it used to eat of his meager fare, and drink from his cup, and lie in his bosom, and it was like a daughter to him.

1 Kings 3:20
20She got up in the middle of the night and took my son from beside me while your servant slept. She laid him at her breast, and laid her dead son at my breast.

1 Kings 17:19
19But he said to her, “Give me your son.” He took him from her bosom, carried him up into the upper chamber where he was lodging, and laid him on his own bed.

Luke 11:7
7And he answers from within, ‘Do not bother me; the door has already been locked, and my children are with me in bed; I cannot get up and give you anything.’

 

[TheLearner]

"

• In Matthew 12:40 Jesus said he would spend three days AND three nights in the heart of the earth.
• In Luke 16:19-31 Jesus identifies a place called "Abraham's bosom" within eyesight of a place of torment called "hell" separated by a "great gulf."
• In Luke 23:43 Jesus tells the thief that got saved that today he would join him in "paradise," not Heaven.
• In I Peter 3:19 Peter says that Jesus preached to the "spirits in prison."
• In Ephesians 4:8-10 Paul says that Jesus descended into the lower parts of the earth after his crucifixion and led "captivity captive" i.e. "a band of captives" when he ascended.
• In John 20:17 Jesus tells Mary not to touch him because he has not yet ascended to "my Father."
• In Matthew 27:52-54 we see that after the resurrection of Jesus, "many" of the resurrected saints wandered into Jerusalem and appeared to many.

"
http://www.bibletrack.org/notes/resource/misc/Paradise.html

 

[TheLearner]

1 Peter 3:19
Easy-to-Read Version
19 And by the Spirit he went and preached to the spirits in prison.

 

[TheLearner]

Monks practice DEMONIC RELIGION and likely had demonic assistance blocking pain, much like practitoners of demonic martial arts. Remember the guy who stood around a group of pro football players and had them simultaneously throat punch him from all directions?

A normal man with no supernatural assistance will only shriek and wail.

likely the nerves are cooked and don't feel pain.

 

[TheLearner]

It's Genesis 2:7, and it's plain to see that the Soul comes into existence only as a consequence of the union of the Body and the Breath of Life.

Body + Breath of Life = Living Soul
Body - Breath of Life = Living Soul ceases to exist (Dead Soul)

Much like a light circuit:

Bulb + Electricity = light
Bulb - Electricity = light ceases to exist

friend, you just described mono something related to the soul.

 

[TheLearner]

Paul plainly says that if the dead don't rise, what good is it to fight with beasts at Ephesus.'

If he taught what the "Immortal Soul" crowd teaches, he would have said, "If the dead rise not, SO WHAT??? The minute the Ephesus beast slit my jugular, I die and go straight to heaven with Jesus".

No, Paul said if the dead don't rise, then they who sleep in Jesus aren't in heaven, they're PERISHED.

To my knowledge no one here teaches an "Immortal Soul" . That was a strawman argument created by Unitarians.


" But it was suppressed by the government in 1658, and the followers of Socinus, after protracted persecution, were likewise expelled from Poland. Socinus came to be opposed by Catholics and Protestants alike because of his attacks on orthodox teachings. He maintained that DO doctrine, even though founded on the Bible, was forced to withdraw from Cracow, where He had strongly influenced the theology of the developing Polish Unitarian Church, unifying and organizing the budding movement. In 1562 he wrote a treatise on John's Gospel, denying the essential deity of Christ. And in 1563 he denied the natural immortality of the soul. "
https://www.truthaccordingtoscriptu.../froom/luther-conditionalism.php#.YfE6RtXMLhc

A SOUL SERMON FOR UNITARIAN UNIVERSALISTS



The Unitarian Universalist Church of the Palouse



See also On the Nature of the Soul



April 5, 2009
https://www.webpages.uidaho.edu/ngier/SoulSermon.htm

https://christianhistoryinstitute.org › magazine › article
Most Unitarians denied the natural immortality of the soul and eternal punishment, ... unity and do not have an immortal soul that exists after death.

 

[TheLearner]

As per the Berean Study Bible
1 Corinthians 15:53 For the perishable must be clothed with the imperishable, and the mortal with immortality.
When the perishable has been clothed with the imperishable and the mortal with immortality, then the saying that is written will come to pass: “Death has been swallowed up in victory.”

The greek is 1746. enduo
Definition: to clothe or be clothed with (in the sense of sinking into a garment)
Usage: I put on, clothe (another).

I will paraphrase
when you wear the cloak of imperishability the perishable wiil be imperishable
when you wear the cloak of immortality the mortal wiil be immortal
when immortal and imperishable, there is no more dying.

Who made the cloak of imperishability and immortality? God
How much does it cost? Grace in the Eyes of God through faith in Jesus Christ
When can you have it? After judgement day, not a single day before.

Immortality is not free.

The word for immortality is also used in only God is immortal proof text.
Since the Resurrection is General Matthew 25, both the goats and sheep get the same kind of immortal body friend.