"The rich man And Lazarus..."

Oh my. Who is calling Jesus a liar? Did Jesus lie when He called the transfiguration on the mountain
with Moses and Elijah a vision? Were they there or not? Did they really speak, or not, if it was a vision?

I suppose all of Jesus' parables were lies then, according to some people's line of reasoning.

Snacks said:
Jesus quoted Abraham. If the incident never took place and Abraham never spoke
those words then Jesus lied about Abraham. I for one will never call Jesus a liar.
Are you just trying real hard to miss the obvious point here?

Jesus gave an account of a conversation between Abraham, the Father of the Jewish nation no less, with another man, both of who had died.

Why would Jesus put words in Abraham's mouth if Abraham didn't have that conversation?

One of the nay-sayers on this thread asked how could the rich man even recognize Abraham. Well, the rich man was a Jew, just like Lazarus and Abraham. Since Jesus used THAT term, obviously the Jews who were listening to Him knew exactly what He was talking about.

If there was no real place called Abraham's bosom, then all Jesus would have done is confuse the crowd. They would have wondered what Jesus was talking about, and been distracted from what else He said. That doesn't make sense.

Scholars believe that Lazarus was known in Jerusalem for begging at the gate of the rich man. So what Jesus was telling the people was a story about people who were commonly known. Some scholars believe that both men had died recently, so that both men would have been a recent memory among the people.

But you can believe whatever you want to believe. Why does the account being a real event threaten people so much?

What is to be afraid of? It's a simple account of where all souls went prior to Jesus' resurrection. Jesus gave us a glimpse of souls after death in the OT.

You don't have to be afraid that the account really happened. Not at all.

Your line of reasoning with regards to this is faulty at best. But thanks for sharing anyway.

Show me this Biblical rule that says real people cannot be named in a parable.

Hmmm, there is no such verse, is there?

So whose line of reasoning is faulty?

Thanks for playing

I'll stick with the Bible.

Y'all can have your man-made traditions.

This is heresy for a lot of reasons, not the least of which is the teaching that Jesus suffered torments in Hades.

Who said people CAN’T be named in a parable? Who said such a rule existed? You’re moving the goalpost as you play because you can’t handle the thought of eternal torment therefore you have to fight, scratch, claw and scream that this is a parable. Take your tantrum elsewhere.

This is an excellent point.

Those that want to allegorize this passage as a parable, also have a huge problem with the clear Biblical text that says the witch of Endor summoned Samuel to speak with King Saul.

Not that Samuel HAD to come, but it was allowed for our learning.

nowhere in the Torah can you find the phrase, "Abraham's Bosom."

nowhere in the Tanakh can you find the phrase, "Abraham's Bosom."

doesn't make sense to use a term never used before when we have writers like King David who spoke about Paradise and Hell numerous times without ever using such a phrase.

some theologians and Scholars think this Parable/Story is an add in by the RCC around the early 3rd Century.

but it does seem odd why would Jesus use Abraham's Bosom to the Jews who would never had heard that term before. it would not even make sense to a Jew.

the rich in this story is not Jesus
jesus love the poor, this man not

I agree about the color purple, but the parable doesn’t say the rich man was going to be there for eternity anyway. I highly doubt the rich man was Jesus. Why would you say the rich man is Jesus?

.
Continuing from No.36

• Luke 16:29-30a . . Abraham saith unto him: They have Moses and the
Prophets; let them hear them. And he said, Nay, father Abraham:

Abraham had lots more sons than Isaac-- there was also Ishmael, but in
matters related to God; he's really not all that important. (Rom 9:6-9)

The point is: the rich man was all too aware that his five brothers weren't
what might be called Bible-believing Jews.

• Luke 16:30b . . but if one went unto them from the dead, they will repent.

Well; that works with some people, but it wouldn't work with that man's five
brothers. They would've remained resolute and likely brushed off a messenger
as some deranged kook impersonating a dead man.

• Luke 16:31 . . But he said to him: If they do not hear Moses and the
prophets, neither will they be persuaded though one rise from the dead.

But why didn't the rich man request himself be sent to his five brothers?
Well; there was that impassible chasm (Luke 16:26) he was stuck.

The man's five brothers were on a road to hell and he was utterly helpless to
to do anything about it. For some families, the only thing they have to look
forward to in the afterlife is a sad reunion in misery and despair.

NOTE: Solomon wrote somewhat about the afterlife in the book of
Ecclesiastes; but Solomon had never seen the afterlife for himself. He wrote
from the perspective of a man "under the sun" whereas Jesus spoke of the
afterlife as a man from Heaven (John 3:13). In my book, Jesus is the one to
hear in matters related to the afterlife.

• Matt 12:42 . .The queen of the south will be raised up in the judgment
with this generation and will condemn it; because she came from the ends of
the earth to hear the wisdom of Solomon, but, look! something more than
Solomon is here.

• John 3:31 . . The one who comes from above is above all; the one who is
from the earth belongs to the earth, and speaks as one from the earth. The
one who comes from heaven is above all.

And Jesus comes highly recommended too.

• Matt 17:5 . . This is my Son, the beloved, whom I have approved; listen to
him.

So then, when encountering remarks in the book of Ecclesiastes that are out
of step with Jesus; my unsolicited spiritual counseling is to ignore Solomon's
world view and go with the wisdom of "my Son".

• John 8:12 . . I am the light of the world. He that follows me will by no
means walk in darkness, but will possess the light of life.
_

There’s no Biblical rule for that. It’s a false pretense and a subjective criteria for defining a parable.

Parable - a simple story used to illustrate a moral or spiritual lesson, as told by Jesus in the Gospels.

That's certainly an explanation not often heard.

Jesus quotes Abraham as saying this:

Luke 16:31
31Then Abraham said to him, ‘If they do not listen to Moses and the prophets, they will not be persuaded even if someone rises from the dead.’ ”

This isn’t literal because God requires us be persuaded that Someone rose from the dead.

Romans 10:9
9that if you confess with your mouth, “Jesus is Lord,” and believe in your heart that God raised Him from the dead, you will be saved.

1 Corinthians 15:2-4
2By this gospel you are saved, if you hold firmly to the word I preached to you. Otherwise, you have believed in vain.
3For what I received I passed on to you as of first importance: that Christ died for our sins according to the Scriptures, 4that He was buried, that He was raised on the third day according to the Scriptures,

.

In my judicious estimation, it would be despicable for Jesus to quote
Abraham saying things that he didn't really say, especially due to the fact
that Abraham is one of God's buddies. (Isa 41:8) And if people can't trust
Jesus to tell the truth about his Father's friends, then how are we supposed
to trust him to tell the truth about one of us?

This is a serious question because Jesus is the one and only mediator in
Heaven between God and Man. Well; I don't want someone unfaithful to me
speaking on my behalf before the throne of God.

As for Abraham; he was a prophet, i.e. an inspired man (Gen 20:7). As
such, he would be privy to information that would normally be unavailable
to the average rank and file pew warmer. Abraham was also a reliable
teacher/mentor. (Gen 18:19)

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. Mr. Silver Spoon 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.

As for God: Jesus' stories didn't originated with himself, i.e. he was
micromanaged.

• John 3:34 . . For he is sent by God. He speaks God's words, for God's Spirit
is upon him without measure or limit

• John 8:28 . . I do nothing on my own initiative, but I speak these things as
the Father taught me.

• John 12:49 . . I have not spoken of myself; but the Father which sent me,
he gave me a commandment, what I should say, and what I should speak.

• John 14:24 . .The word which you hear is not mine, but the Father's who
sent me.

So when people allege Jesus' stories are fiction, they are inferring his
Father is a tale-spinner who can't be trusted to give people the facts.
_

Most people believe Jesus' parables are fictional tales meant to convey spiritual truths.

Problem is, many don't understand them.

Doesn't mean Jesus and/or God is a liar

I love the way your mind works as it’s often a fun trip getting from point A to point B.

It’s really just that the parable of the rich man and Lazarus is a non-literal parable, not that anyone is lying, spinning tales, or can’t be trusted.

For example, the other parables say many non-literal things that aren’t lies. They’re just symbolic or they contain a kind of metaphor.

Here’s a question that should challenge your conclusion on the matter: will Jesus come like a literal thief in the night?

Who said there was such a biblical rule?
Talk about false pretenses.

Why did you deliberately leave out EVERYTHING Abraham said, according to Jesus? 🤔

This would have been a much more edifying discussion if the meaning of the teaching was explored and not its category imo.