In order to avoid posting one extremely long post, I will, Yahweh willing, be posting several replies concening the Rich Man and Lazarus.
The account of Luke 16:19-31 is a parable describing in sybmolic terms what Jesus had just spoken of in Luke 16:16-18. Contrary to what most seem to believe, Jesus said he spoke in parables so that "seeing, they don't see, and hearing, they don't hear, neither do they understand." (Matthew 13:13) Thus, the people in general could hear the words of the parables, but they were not hearing, and not understanding, what the parables meant. Sad to say, this is still true today, since most people still do not get the sense of the meaning of the parables that Jesus spoke.
Jesus words recorded in Luke 16:19 begin as "there was a certain rich man." Jesus used this same phrase in his previous parable (Luke 16:1), thus this phrase indicates that Jesus is beginning another parable as recorded in Luke 16:19. Jesus used the expression "certain" in many of his parables. (Matthew 18:23; 22:2; Luke 10:30,31,33; 12:6; 13:6; 14:16; 15:11; 18:2) Was he in all of those parables actually, literally, speaking of one certain individual? In saying that "there was a certain rich man," Jesus was not saying that there was actually one certain literal rich man that he had in mind in speaking those parables. If Jesus was simply relating about two individuals who actually existed in his day, and of their death, etc., then there is no symbolic application that could be laid upon this. The "rich man" would simply be the one man that Jesus spoke of. Lazarus would simply be the one "certain beggar" spoken of. (Luke 16:20) Nor should we think that by using the name "Lazarus" that Jesus was speaking of his friend Lazarus. Jesus' friend evidently had not died at the time that Jesus spoke the words recorded in Luke 16:1. In the case of the real Lazarus, when he died, Jesus temporarily raised him back from death. Lazarus did not relate about being alive somewhere while he was dead. -- John 11:1-44.
In none of the parables that Jesus spoke did he speak of actualities except in the realities that are the fulfillment of the symbology used in the parables. Does this mean that Jesus, in telling parables, was a liar? Absolutely not! Parables assume the reader who has ears to hear should understand the parables are meant to symbolize the realities being demonstrated by the symbols. It is similar to all the parabolic-type symbolisms that are used in the books of Daniel, Isaiah, Ezekiel, and other Old Testament prophets, as well as the Revelation. For instance, are we to really to believe that there is to be a literal wild beast with seven literal heads and ten literal horns coming out the literal sea? (Revelation 13:1) Were God, Jesus, and the angel lying to John by depicting such a thing? No, because it is assumed that this depiction is symbolic, and that such symbolism will be understood only by those who diligently compare and apply spiritual revealment with spiritual revealment.-- 1 Corinthians 2:13,14.
Likewise, in the parable of the Rich Man and Lazarus, if we are to think that that Jesus' statements in this parable are literal, or that this not actually a parable but that Jesus was relating an actual event, then Jesus' statements would be absurd.
We should note that the parable does not say that the rich man was a bad man; nor does it say that the poor man was a good man. Jesus begins by saying "there was a certain rich man." It is not necessarily evil, of course, to be rich. Abraham was rich, but he did not live for his riches, and proved his obedience to Yahweh. Jesus was rich in his glory with his God and Father, but he became poor for our sakes. (2 Corinthians 8:9) Of course, Yahweh Himself is the most rich person in existence, for the whole universe belongs to Him. (Genesis 14:22; Deuteronomy 10:14) Nor does being in poverty mean that one is good, for many in poverty curse God for their poverty, and may show hatred toward their nieghbors. Although not stated in the parable, evidently the rich man was negligent in that he could have displayed loved for the poor man by inviting him to sit at his table and dine on the feast from the table. But this is not stated in the parable. "Abraham" addressed him saying: (Luke 16:25), "Remember that you, in your lifetime, received your good things, and Lazarus, in like manner, bad things." (Luke 16:25) The Bible also says that "he was clothed in purple and fine linen, living in luxury every day." (Luke 16:19) We do not read in the parable that this rich man was a bad man, or profane, or anything of the kind, but merely that he was rich and fared sumptuously every day -- wore purple and fine linen, and received good things; that was his crime. Now to say that any man would have to be roasted to all eternity because he wore purple or because he wore fine linen, and had plenty to eat, and because he was very rich, would not be rational.
Likewise, there is nothing said about the poor man's being particularly good, nor that he prayed a great deal -- not a suggestion about his ever praying; he was simply a poor man and he lay at the rich man's gate, and he was full of sores, and the dogs came along and licked his sores, and he ate of the crumbs that fell from the rich man's table, and he was carried by the messengers to -- not "heaven," but to Abraham's bosom. Now to take that literally would be also absurd. It would mean, in the first place, that only one person that would go to Abraham's bosom, that is, that one poor man -- identified as "Lazarus" -- who had laid at this certain one rich man's gate. There would be no application to others, since, if it is not a parable, it would be something that would applied to any others than the literal story would state. Thus, you and I could not be seen as having any side with that poor man, since neither you nor I would be represented in that one poor man that Jesus spoke of. So you see it would be an absurdity to take what Jesus is saying as being literal.
Jesus was evidently drawing upon something that was in the real world of his day, the apostate Jewish belief which blended the Grecian mythologies into the Bible. Not all the Jewish leaders believed in these mythologies, but many did, but only as they could blend such mythologies in with the Bible so as to make them appear to no longer be mythology, but a revealing by God. Nevertheless, the Pharisees, whom Jesus was speaking to, knew of these beliefs. However, Jesus did not present the apostate Jewish belief in the parable. His depiction of hades, although it is similar to that of some Jewish sources, is also quite dissimilar in detail. Jesus adapted part of the Jewish belief for the purpose of the parable, changing the details to fit the purpose of the parable. He used such beliefs, not to condone their apostate mythology, but to illustrate the change he had just spoken of: "The law and the prophets were until John." -- Luke 16:16.
Regardless as to how one might view the verses, we should note that Jesus never mentions anything about anyone suffering for eternity in hades. In the book of Revelation, those in hades are depicted as being "dead," not alive, and all the dead in hades will be raised out of hades in the day of judgment. -- Revelation 20:13.
To be continued at another time, Yahweh willing. (Study on Luke 16:16-18 is planned next, to be followed even later by a more detailed study of the parable itself, and perhaps even later, a study of comparison between Jesus' parable and that of Jewish mythology.)
Christian love,
Ronald
Free Forum Hosting
Important Announcement
0 recommendations 
First
Return to ONE/ONE DEBATES