"The rich man And Lazarus..."

[Runningman]

So, Jesus is lying in the "parable"? Why would Jesus say this if it's not true?

No it’s not a lie anymore than when Jesus said He’ll come like a thief in the night. Obviously thievery is a sin and Jesus didn’t literally mean He’s going to steal something. Or was He lying according to you?

In the same way, Abraham’s quote in the rich man and Lazarus reveals a spiritual truth through the story.

 

[Runningman]

Show us the parable where Jesus uses real people, and quotes real people out of the 50 He gave.

OTHERWISE, YOU, are the one who is privately interpreting the passage. WE, are taking Jesus at His Word.

The parable of the rich man and Lazarus uses real names, but it doesn’t name the rich man’s name or any his family member’s names.

Your sole criteria for this or being a parable is that real names are mentioned, but when real names aren’t mentioned you can’t accept that it’s a parable. So it’s your preference.

 

[PennEd]

The parable of the rich man and Lazarus uses real names, but it doesn’t name the rich man’s name or any his family member’s names.

Your sole criteria for this or being a parable is that real names are mentioned, but when real names aren’t mentioned you can’t accept that it’s a parable. So it’s your preference.

Dear Lord, time to get off the merry go round!

 

[John146]

No it’s not a lie anymore than when Jesus said He’ll come like a thief in the night. Obviously thievery is a sin and Jesus didn’t literally mean He’s going to steal something. Or was He lying according to you?

In the same way, Abraham’s quote in the rich man and Lazarus reveals a spiritual truth through the story.

The word "like" indicates to not take what is said literally.

 

[PennEd]

Ok. I heard an argument it was Mary's brother with reference to his resurrection but that didn't agree with this state of living as a beggar, and if that were the case then Jesus made up the part of his being a beggar so that's definitely ruled out.
So, the next question is, if this is a parable, then why would Jesus use a familiar name. What would he want to illustrate by it? The name means, "God has helped," and in this case, I believe it shows God's help when there is no other help available.

Because this is NOT a parable. At least not in the sense that it’s not a true account.

 

[John146]

The parable of the rich man and Lazarus uses real names, but it doesn’t name the rich man’s name or any his family member’s names.

Your sole criteria for this or being a parable is that real names are mentioned, but when real names aren’t mentioned you can’t accept that it’s a parable. So it’s your preference.

Why do you have a problem with this being an actually, historical event?

 

[Mem]

Because this is NOT a parable. At least not in the sense that it’s not a true account.

Lazarus isn't the only one in "Abraham's bosom"

Why do you have a problem with this being an actually, historical event?

Presenting it as fact if it were not in fact an actual historical event but a parable, is misleading so therein would be the problem.

 

[The_Watchers_2017]

Why do you have a problem with this being an actually, historical event?

Why do you believe something where it potentially has 3 witnesses and they never mention it but someone not there does [[supposedly]] mention it?

You don't see the issue here?

 

[Jackson123]

Because this is NOT a parable. At least not in the sense that it’s not a true account.

Parable or story in this case we see the rich man go to hell but not cease to exist, he suffer in hell not disappear

 

[Mem]

Parable or story in this case we see the rich man go to hell but not cease to exist, he suffer in hell not disappear

He won't 'disappear' until he's thrown into the LOF, especially considering is required, and must, "appear" at the GWTJ

 

[Jackson123]

He won't 'disappear' until he's thrown into the LOF, especially considering is required, and must, "appear" at the GWTJ

What verse you use to prove LOF mean disapoear

 

[Runningman]

Dear Lord, time to get off the merry go round!

Ditto.

 

[Snacks]

Jesus spoke to His disciples and those He was teach to in different styles.

Matthew 13:10-23
10The disciples came to him and asked, “Why do you speak to the people in parables?”
11He replied, “Because the knowledge of the secrets of the kingdom of heaven has been given to you, but not to them.12Whoever has will be given more, and they will have an abundance. Whoever does not have, even what they have will be taken from them. 13This is why I speak to them in parables:
“Though seeing, they do not see;
though hearing, they do not hear or understand.

You’re making my argument for me. Jesus was talking to His disciples thus He was speaking plainly, not in a parable.

 

[Snacks]

My faith in the New Testament would be shaken if Abraham contradicted the gospel. Abraham says they won’t be persuaded by someone who raised from the dead and Jesus requires faith in His resurrection.

Also, Abraham said the rich man went to torment for having good things in life and Lazarus went to comfort for having evil things in life. Neither of those are reasons why people are saved and lost.

Maybe you can explain how what Abraham said is literal. I am just not seeing it.

Again you’re contradicting yourself. If this is a parable then Jesus was teaching it and you’re saying He was teaching incorrectly because He is the one who is saying the things you mention above.

The rich man did not have faith in God but rather in money. And though it is not stated, it is safe to believe the poor man looked to God for comfort and peace, and it was given to him.

 

[Mem]

What verse you use to prove LOF mean disapoear

Rev 20: 14-15
14Then Death and Hades were thrown into the lake of fire. This is the second death—the lake of fire. 15And if anyone was found whose name was not written in the Book of Life, he was thrown into the lake of fire.

and Rev 21:4
4‘ He will wipe away every tear from their eyes,’ and there will be no more death or mourning or crying or pain, for the former things have passed away.”

passed away, i.e., are gone, that is 'diasppeared'

 

[Snacks]

That’s not what I’m saying. I’m saying that it’s a parable and it’s a true parable, but it isn’t true in the sense that people aren’t persuaded by resurrection.

Once again by claiming this you’re saying Jesus taught an inaccuracy.

 

[Runningman]

You’re making my argument for me. Jesus was talking to His disciples thus He was speaking plainly, not in a parable.

That’s false. If you would have read Luke 16 you would have seen the audience are Pharisees.

Luke 16:14
14The Pharisees, who were lovers of money, heard all of this and were scoffing at Jesus

 

[Snacks]

And your criteria seems to be subjective based on a private interpretation.

For example, was Judas saved? He betrayed Jesus then committed suicide. Why did they call him by name then?

Because Judas wasn’t a parable.

 

[Runningman]

Once again by claiming this you’re saying Jesus taught an inaccuracy.

By saying it isn’t a parable, I see you are claiming Jesus taught an inaccuracy. As I just proved to you, the audience were Pharisees, not His disciples.

 

[Runningman]

Again you’re contradicting yourself. If this is a parable then Jesus was teaching it and you’re saying He was teaching incorrectly because He is the one who is saying the things you mention above.

The rich man did not have faith in God but rather in money. And though it is not stated, it is safe to believe the poor man looked to God for comfort and peace, and it was given to him.

I’m saying that the way people are understanding this is not accurate if they don’t understand it’s a parable. I am not saying Jesus is inaccurate even one time. In fact, I’ve said the opposite repeatedly.