"The rich man And Lazarus..."

[FreeGrace2]

The rich man and Lazarus is a parable.

Oh, stop it. Jesus never used real people in His parables. They were always generic people, fathers, kings, etc.

In this account, He specifically mentioned a poor man named Lazarus. And, of course, He mentioned Abraham, who every Jew was very aware of.

A mere drop of literal water being transported through literal flames would either evaporate quickly or be very hot by the time the rich man tried to drink it.

Isn't Jesus allowed to use figures of speech in teaching people like you?

Also note, how was the rich man able to look across a gulf and single out who Abraham was if he didn’t even know what Abraham looked like?

Maybe you can ask him some day.

There’s also the matter of speaking clearly while allegedly engulfed in flames; that isn’t possible.

Please point out the words "engulfed in flames". It says "in fire". Remember, Jesus is talking about the souls of people who have died. We have no idea how souls experience things, apart from the body.

Quit being so picky.

No weeping, wailing, gnashing of teeth going on. Never mind that there would have undoubtedly been other people crying out with a loud voice. Impossible to tell who in all of that racket. The sound would probably be like a roaring crowd.

Sounds like you've been there. Or just have a pretty wild imagination.

Jesus was making a point. He wasn't giving the whole story. Sorry that offends you, apparently.

Furthermore, Abraham explained the judgements against the rich man and Lazarus. Abraham said the reason the rich man was in torment was because he had good things in life and Lazarus in comfort for having evil things in life. These aren’t literal reasons for why anyone in the Old Testament or New Testament was ever lost or saved.

Jesus NEVER even suggested "having good things in life" will result in "bad things in eternity". It's that darn imagination of yours, again.

That’s not all. Abraham said that others wouldn’t be persuaded by someone who raised from the dead. A very curious statement, if literal, since Jesus rising from the dead is something God wants us to be persuaded by.

What was Jesus' point in all that? The brothers HAD the answer to missing torments. In the Scriptures. iow, bringing someone back from the dead for just 5 people out of the whole human race would hardly be fair, now would it.

So in summary, the parable of the rich man and Lazarus is not literal. Like all other parables, it’s meant to convey symbolism and spiritual insight into things Jesus has first-hand knowledge about.

So, what was this "spiritual insight"? Can you explain?

 

[Saul-to-Paul]

FreeGrace2 said:
Excellent OP!! Jesus gave us an actual glimpse of life after death. 2 men, one saved and one lost. In the OT, all souls went to Hades, but Lazarus went to Paradise, also called "Abraham's bosom" and the rich man went to torments. The 2 compartments were close enough together that residents of either compartment could see and talk to people in the other compartment, but they weren't able to cross over either way.

It is clear the rich man realized his grave mistake and he didn't want his brothers to have the same fate as he. When Jesus died, He went to Hades to "preach to the spirits in prison", and then took all the saved souls in Paradise with Him to heaven. So there are no souls in the compartment called Paradise now, and not since Jesus emptied it.

However, the souls of unbelievers continue to fill torments. There must be some interesting conversations there about that empty compartment across the fixed gulf.

So, at the GWT judgment, Hades will be emptied of all souls of the unsaved, to appear before the throne and be judged on their works. The result of that judgment will determine the level of how "tolerable" it will be for them in the LOF. Jesus taught that it will be more tolerable to Sodom and Gomorrha than some of the cities of His day, who rejected Him as Messiah.

I have no idea. You'll have to ask them.

If that was directed to me, how about prove your claim about "my own interpretations".

You said Jesus gave a glimpse of 2 people after death...
There's no word "after" in that parable. In other words the parable doesn't say the rich man was in hell "after" he died.

 

[FreeGrace2]

Mark 4:34 KJV
34But without a parable spake he not unto them: and when they were alone, he expounded all things to his disciples.

Really? so, by your "logic", which is quite fuzzy, everything John recorded about what Jesus said was a parable? Are you kidding?

Pure nonsense.

 

[FreeGrace2]

Saul-to-Paul said:
With that said, and I agree, who is the rich man?

Unfortunately Jesus never explained it exactly. It’s open to speculation what his identity is or what he may represent as far as I’m aware. The rest of what I said is able to be cross-referenced with other verses.

But when you take the account as Jesus gave it, you don't have to speculate about anything. Simply understand the compartments for the dead in the OT; saved go to Paradise and the lost go to torments. And wish they weren't there.

That's clear enough. We don't need to spiritualize what Jesus said. There was nothing to explain, like all of His parables required.

 

[FreeGrace2]

You said Jesus gave a glimpse of 2 people after death...

Yes, He did.

There's no word "after" in that parable. In other words the parable doesn't say the rich man was in hell "after" he died.

Why do people demand specific words that would satisfy them?

19 “There was a rich man who was dressed in purple and fine linen and lived in luxury every day.
20 At his gate was laid a beggar named Lazarus, covered with sores
21 and longing to eat what fell from the rich man’s table. Even the dogs came and licked his sores.
22 “The time came when the beggar died and the angels carried him to Abraham’s side. The rich man also died and was buried.
23 In Hades, where he was in torment, he looked up and saw Abraham far away, with Lazarus by his side.

v.22 and 23 PROVE that they both died and where they went. So why the demand for the word "after"?

 

[Runningman]

Oh, stop it. Jesus never used real people in His parables. They were always generic people, fathers, kings, etc.

In this account, He specifically mentioned a poor man named Lazarus. And, of course, He mentioned Abraham, who every Jew was very aware of.


Isn't Jesus allowed to use figures of speech in teaching people like you?


Maybe you can ask him some day.


Please point out the words "engulfed in flames". It says "in fire". Remember, Jesus is talking about the souls of people who have died. We have no idea how souls experience things, apart from the body.

Quit being so picky.


Sounds like you've been there. Or just have a pretty wild imagination.

Jesus was making a point. He wasn't giving the whole story. Sorry that offends you, apparently.


Jesus NEVER even suggested "having good things in life" will result in "bad things in eternity". It's that darn imagination of yours, again.


What was Jesus' point in all that? The brothers HAD the answer to missing torments. In the Scriptures. iow, bringing someone back from the dead for just 5 people out of the whole human race would hardly be fair, now would it.


So, what was this "spiritual insight"? Can you explain?

Stop wasting your words on nonsense. It’s a parable. Quit rejecting truth and you’ll be blessed for it.

 

[Runningman]

Really? so, by your "logic", which is quite fuzzy, everything John recorded about what Jesus said was a parable? Are you kidding?

Pure nonsense.

Now you’re arguing against a comment that was nothing but a Bible verse. That’s between you and God at this point.

 

[Runningman]

Saul-to-Paul said:
With that said, and I agree, who is the rich man?

But when you take the account as Jesus gave it, you don't have to speculate about anything. Simply understand the compartments for the dead in the OT; saved go to Paradise and the lost go to torments. And wish they weren't there.

That's clear enough. We don't need to spiritualize what Jesus said. There was nothing to explain, like all of His parables required.

No that’s false. Read the Bible. People don’t go to torment or comfort for having good or bad things in life.

 

[Magenta]

Why do people demand specific words that would satisfy them?

You do the same.

 

[FreeGrace2]

Stop wasting your words on nonsense. It’s a parable. Quit rejecting truth and you’ll be blessed for it.

You don't even believe Rev 20. So who are you telling me what to believe?

You admit to having to speculate on what or who the "rich man" represents. That is nonsense. He was a person who didn't believe in the coming Messiah and ended up in torments, awaiting the GWT judgment and then the LOF.

In every parable, Jesus used generic descriptions of people. ONLY in Luke 16 did He mention people who LIVED and died.

 

[FreeGrace2]

FreeGrace2 said:
Really? so, by your "logic", which is quite fuzzy, everything John recorded about what Jesus said was a parable? Are you kidding?

Now you’re arguing against a comment that was nothing but a Bible verse. That’s between you and God at this point.

Seems you have a knack for missing the whole point.

The verse didn't say everything Jesus said was a parable. Was John 3:3-21 all a parable? John records them as what Jesus said.

 

[FreeGrace2]

FreeGrace2 said:
Saul-to-Paul said:
With that said, and I agree, who is the rich man?

But when you take the account as Jesus gave it, you don't have to speculate about anything. Simply understand the compartments for the dead in the OT; saved go to Paradise and the lost go to torments. And wish they weren't there.

That's clear enough. We don't need to spiritualize what Jesus said. There was nothing to explain, like all of His parables required.

No that’s false. Read the Bible. People don’t go to torment or comfort for having good or bad things in life.

Some times your posts are about as clear as mud.

Please explain what is "false".

 

[FreeGrace2]

FreeGrace2 said:
Why do people demand specific words that would satisfy them?

You do the same.

Sorry you are so misinformed. I never do. I ask for verses that "show" or teach a claim. I never ask for specific words.

But maybe you think you have an example. So please share.

 

[awelight]

Previous study was Hell, Sheol, Hades!

"...The question is often asked, is the account of the rich man and
Lazarus a historical account or is it a parable?...or is it a made-up story...

...The hearers of this story could follow the contrast between these two men
right up to the moment of their deaths. At that point, however, the situation
changes drastically...

...Following are some [5] reasons that this should be considered a history
of two real men and not a parable...

...Being based on truth, the facts learned from the experience of the rich man
and Lazarus are consistent with what is found in other places in Scriptures.
From this passage we know [7 things]...
"
(E Bedore)

FULL study:
The rich man And Lazarus (I)
The rich man And Lazarus (II)

"And As It Is Appointed Unto men ONCE to die, ​

But After this The JUDGMENT!" (Hebrews 9:27)​

GRACE, Peace, And JOY...

This was a very good article - thanks for sharing.

I would like to elaborate on point #7. The writer talked about those who went to hell or Paradise as having some sort of body. It is this I would like to address.

I would submit, that the ones in Paradise were in their glorified bodies and the ones in hell are in their bodies made for eternal punishment. This view does not conflict with the resurrection, when viewed properly from an "eternal" point of view versus a "temporal" point of view.

When one steps out of time and into eternity, that one is immediately - in a blink of an eye - transformed. Eternity knows no time. It is described as "The ever present now". This is why, in the story, Lazarus is with Abraham and the rich man is in torment. For them, the Resurrection and Judgment have already taken place. This is the eternal view.

In the temporal view, for those listening to Christ speak, the Resurrection and Judgment are still future but the Lord gives us a glimpse into eternity.

One thing that is for certain, Lazarus and the rich man have a body - they are not disembodied souls.

 

[Snacks]

Previous study was Hell, Sheol, Hades!

"...The question is often asked, is the account of the rich man and
Lazarus a historical account or is it a parable?...or is it a made-up story...

...The hearers of this story could follow the contrast between these two men
right up to the moment of their deaths. At that point, however, the situation
changes drastically...

...Following are some [5] reasons that this should be considered a history
of two real men and not a parable...

...Being based on truth, the facts learned from the experience of the rich man
and Lazarus are consistent with what is found in other places in Scriptures.
From this passage we know [7 things]...
"
(E Bedore)

FULL study:
The rich man And Lazarus (I)
The rich man And Lazarus (II)

"And As It Is Appointed Unto men ONCE to die, ​

But After this The JUDGMENT!" (Hebrews 9:27)​

GRACE, Peace, And JOY...

Jesus never mentioned anyone by name in any parable therefore I believe the rich man and Lazarus to be an actual, historical account.

 

[Webers.Home]

.
• Luke 16:19a . .There was a certain rich man, which was clothed in purple
and fine linen, and fared sumptuously every day; and there was a certain
beggar named Lazarus, which was laid at his gate

In other words: the rich man had to walk past Lazarus every day on his way
to work.

"was laid" suggests Lazarus had a disability issue and needed help to get
around, sort like the guy Jesus assisted at the pool of Bethesda. (John 5:2-
-9)

• Luke 16:19b . . covered with sores.

In those days, common treatments included essential oils, e.g. Rosemary,
Frankincense, Myrrh, and Cedarwood. (cf. Luke 10:33-34)

• Luke 16:21b . . the dogs came and licked his sores.

Essential oils were expensive, but I've no doubt the rich man was able to
afford them, and could've spared some of his for Lazarus instead forcing the
poor slob to rely on dogs for treatment.

• Luke 16:21a . . and longing to eat what fell from the rich man's table.

In our day, that's called dumpster diving; but no matter as Lazarus was
unable to do that for himself due to his disability.

• Luke 16:27-29 . . I beg you, father, send Lazarus to my father's house, for
I have five brothers. Let him warn them, so that they will not also come to
this place of torment. Abraham replied: They have Moses and the Prophets;
let them listen to them.

Seeing as how the rich man's' five brothers had Moses and the Prophets,
then I think we can safely assume the rich man had them too. Well; that's
not good for the man because Moses said:

"If one of your countrymen becomes poor and is unable to support himself
among you, help him as you would an alien or a temporary resident, so he
can continue to live among you." (Lev 25:35)

Apparently the man ignored that law, and by doing so got himself in some
serious trouble.

"Cursed is the man who does not uphold the words of this law by carrying
them out." (Deut 27:26)
_

 

[Magenta]

Jesus never mentioned anyone by name in any parable therefore I believe the rich man and Lazarus to be an actual, historical account.

The whole "it-has-to-be-a-true-story-because-real-people-are-mentioned-by-name-and-they-never-were-before"
is a man made tradition not supported by any verses in Scripture. Jesus taught in parables... some verses say He
only taught in parables, and the RM&L is smack dab in the midst of a slew of parables. If one says something
can't be true because it never happened before, then much of the Bible cannot be true starting right in Genesis.

 

[Saul-to-Paul]

Unfortunately Jesus never explained it exactly. It’s open to speculation what his identity is or what he may represent as far as I’m aware. The rest of what I said is able to be cross-referenced with other verses.

Jesus Himself didn't explain it but Scripture with Scripture does. The color "purple" is a righteous color. It's so righteous that no unsaved man, demon, or devil in the Bible possessed (held with hand) or wore that color. Fine linen is the righteousness of the saints.

Luke 16
19 There was a certain rich man, which was clothed in purple and fine linen, and fared sumptuously every day:

Mark 15
17 And they clothed him with purple, and platted a crown of thorns, and put it about his head,
18 And began to salute him, Hail, King of the Jews!

Revelation 19
7 Let us be glad and rejoice, and give honour to him: for the marriage of the Lamb is come, and his wife hath made herself ready.
8 And to her was granted that she should be arrayed in fine linen, clean and white: for the fine linen is the righteousness of saints.

The rich man of that parable is Jesus.

And here cometh the doubter...."Well the rich man was there for an eternity. There was a great gulf fixed and God said no one can pass from where the rich was to where God is.

Luke 16
26 And beside all this, between us and you there is a great gulf fixed: so that they which would pass from hence to you cannot; neither can they pass to us, that would come from thence.

Father Abraham never said the rich man could not pass.

 

[FreeGrace2]

I would submit, that the ones in Paradise were in their glorified bodies and the ones in hell are in their bodies made for eternal punishment. This view does not conflict with the resurrection, when viewed properly from an "eternal" point of view versus a "temporal" point of view.

Yes, this view does conflict with the resurrection of the saved.

1 Cor 15-
20 But Christ has indeed been raised from the dead, the firstfruits of those who have fallen asleep.
21 For since death came through a man, the resurrection of the dead comes also through a man.
22 For as in Adam all die, so in Christ all will be made alive.
23 But each in turn: Christ, the firstfruits; then, when he comes, those who belong to him.

v.20 establishes the context, which is the resurrection of believers. And Jesus was the FIRST human to receive a glorified (resurrected) body.

v.23 states the order of "resurrection": Christ the FIRST one, or "firstfruits", then, when He comes (a reference to the Second Advent), those who belong to Him (meaning every believer from Adam forward.

So no believer in Paradise received a glorified body. They will accompany Jesus the King back to earth from heaven "when He comes" back to end the Tribulation and set up His Millennial kingdom.

When one steps out of time and into eternity, that one is immediately - in a blink of an eye - transformed.

No. Since Jesus took all the saved souls from Paradise to heaven at His resurrection, the souls of the saved now all go to heaven. But they don't have glorified bodies because 1 Cor 15:23 says they get theirs "when He comes".

 

[Snacks]

The whole "it-has-to-be-a-true-story-because-real-people-are-mentioned-by-name-and-they-never-were-before"
is a man made tradition not supported by any verses in Scripture. Jesus taught in parables... some verses say He
only taught in parables, and the RM&L is smack dab in the midst of a slew of parables. If one says something
can't be true because it never happened before, then much of the Bible cannot be true starting right in Genesis.

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.