the rich man & Lazarus is not a parable

Der Alte

This is me about 1 yr. old.
Site Supporter
Aug 21, 2003
28,578
6,064
EST
✟993,488.00
Country
United States
Faith
Baptist
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Others
I agree with you that Lazarus and the Richman story is talking about a story of the afterlife in hell.
I disagree that you think there is no Paradise or Abraham’s Bosom (A place), though. Where did Lazarus and Abraham go?
Abraham's bosom is not a place it is a position. At that time people did not dine sitting down in chairs but reclined at a low table leaning on their left forearm with their feet extended away from the table.. That explains how the woman was able to wash Jesus' feet and wipe them with her hair. A woman did not crawl around under a table among the feet of men she did not know.
Abraham is said to be the host at the final dinner the position to his front would be referred to as his bosom. Jn 13:25 When Simon Peter laid his head on Jesus breast, he leaned back so he could turn his head and look Jesus in the face.
 

Cockcrow

Well-Known Member
Jan 12, 2022
403
161
Southern USA
✟75,128.00
Country
United States
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Celibate
I agree with you that Lazarus and the Richman story is talking about a story of the afterlife in hell.
I disagree that you think there is no Paradise or Abraham’s Bosom (A place), though. Where did Lazarus and Abraham go?
Paradise is heaven. Abraham Lazarus are in Heaven. the Rich man is in Hell. there is no Abrahams bosom part of hell, or a good part of hell.
 
Upvote 0

Bible Highlighter

Law of the Lord is perfect, converting the soul.
Site Supporter
Jul 22, 2014
41,511
7,861
...
✟1,195,112.00
Country
United States
Faith
Non-Denom
Marital Status
Married
Paradise is heaven. Abraham Lazarus are in Heaven. the Rich man is in Hell. there is no Abrahams bosom part of hell, or a good part of hell.
Yeah, that does not make any sense; Especially when we look at all the pieces of the puzzle in Scripture. First, Abraham and the Richman were said to be separated by a great gulf from the Richman (Luke 16:26). So they were not in Heaven. Second, Jesus said He was in the heart of the Earth for three days and three nights (Matthew 12:40). The heart of the Earth would have been where hell (Sheol or the realm of the dead) is located and not Heaven. Three, when Jesus resurrected, and He encountered Mary, He told her not to touch Him because He still needed to ascend to His Father. He told her He would return to see the disciples later (John 20:17-18). In other words, after the resurrection, Jesus did not ascend yet bodily to the Father yet where He would have been residing in Heaven above. So when Jesus said He would be with the thief in paradise (Luke 23:43), this would have been the compartment known as Abraham’s bosom separated by the great gulf from the place of torments. To conclude otherwise is to make a mess out of the verses I mentioned.
 
Upvote 0

Der Alte

This is me about 1 yr. old.
Site Supporter
Aug 21, 2003
28,578
6,064
EST
✟993,488.00
Country
United States
Faith
Baptist
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Others
Yeah, that does not make any sense; Especially when we look at all the pieces of the puzzle in Scripture. First, Abraham and the Richman were said to be separated by a great gulf from the Richman (Luke 16:26). So they were not in Heaven. Second, Jesus said He was in the heart of the Earth for three days and three nights (Matthew 12:40). The heart of the Earth would have been where hell (Sheol or the realm of the dead) is located and not Heaven. Three, when Jesus resurrected, and He encountered Mary, He told her not to touch Him because He still needed to ascend to His Father. He told her He would return to see the disciples later (John 20:17-18). In other words, after the resurrection, Jesus did not ascend yet bodily to the Father yet where He would have been residing in Heaven above. So when Jesus said He would be with the thief in paradise (Luke 23:43), this would have been the compartment known as Abraham’s bosom separated by the great gulf from the place of torments. To conclude otherwise is to make a mess out of the verses I mentioned.
Abraham's bosom is not a place or a compartment anywhere. It is the POSITION of honor to the right of the host at the heavenly banquet. At that time people did not sit in chairs at a table but reclined on their left forearm at a low table with their legs extending away from the table. That is how a woman was able to wash Jesus' feet with her hair. A woman would not be crawling around under a table among the legs of men she did not know. Since the diners are on their left elbow the position of honor would be to the right or in front of the host who would be reclining in the center. When Peter laid his head on Jesus' breast he would have leaned back a little and turned his head to the right so he could see Jesus' face.
 
Last edited:
  • Agree
Reactions: The Liturgist

The Liturgist

Traditional Liturgical Christian
Site Supporter
Nov 26, 2019
11,191
5,710
49
The Wild West
✟476,419.00
Country
United States
Faith
Generic Orthodox Christian
Marital Status
Celibate
You are trying to dazzle me with science, it won't work. You are making something simple complicated. in the context of, not a tittle can be changed in the Law, Jesus first accuses the Pharisees, using parables, of adultery and then of failing Deuteronomy 15:7-8.

No, he is providing scriptural references. And being scientific is being reasonable and logical, and Jesus Christ is Reaaon and Logic - literally (John 1:1-18, the word Logos means among other things reason and logic).
 
  • Like
Reactions: Der Alte
Upvote 0

The Liturgist

Traditional Liturgical Christian
Site Supporter
Nov 26, 2019
11,191
5,710
49
The Wild West
✟476,419.00
Country
United States
Faith
Generic Orthodox Christian
Marital Status
Celibate
Abraham's bosom is not a place it is a position. At that time people did not dine sitting down in chairs but reclined at a low table leaning on their left forearm with their feet extended away from the table.. That explains how the woman was able to wash Jesus' feet and wipe them with her hair. A woman did not crawl around under a table among the feet of men she did not know.
Abraham is said to be the host at the final dinner the position to his front would be referred to as his bosom. Jn 13:25 When Simon Peter laid his head on Jesus breast, he leaned back so he could turn his head and look Jesus in the face.

It was St. John the Beloved Disciple who rested his head on our Lord, surely.
 
Upvote 0

The Liturgist

Traditional Liturgical Christian
Site Supporter
Nov 26, 2019
11,191
5,710
49
The Wild West
✟476,419.00
Country
United States
Faith
Generic Orthodox Christian
Marital Status
Celibate
And you attribute your communication failure to what? I usually support what I say with credible, verifiable, historical etc. evidence. I cannot say the same for you.

Yes you do, and we appreciate you for it!
 
Upvote 0

Der Alte

This is me about 1 yr. old.
Site Supporter
Aug 21, 2003
28,578
6,064
EST
✟993,488.00
Country
United States
Faith
Baptist
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Others
You talk through your hat, you articulate nonsense to the nth degree, and fake dismay when I do not understand.
Your failure to comprehend is not evidence that I failed in any way.
 
  • Agree
Reactions: The Liturgist

Der Alte

This is me about 1 yr. old.
Site Supporter
Aug 21, 2003
28,578
6,064
EST
✟993,488.00
Country
United States
Faith
Baptist
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Others
It was St. John the Beloved Disciple who rested his head on our Lord, surely.
John 13:24-14:1
(24) Simon Peter therefore beckoned to him, that he should ask who it should be of whom he spake.
(25) He then lying on Jesus' breast saith unto him, Lord, who is it?
 
  • Useful
Reactions: The Liturgist
This site stays free and accessible to all because of donations from people like you.
Consider making a one-time or monthly donation. We appreciate your support!
- Dan Doughty and Team Christian Forums

The Liturgist

Traditional Liturgical Christian
Site Supporter
Nov 26, 2019
11,191
5,710
49
The Wild West
✟476,419.00
Country
United States
Faith
Generic Orthodox Christian
Marital Status
Celibate
John 13:24-14:1
(24) Simon Peter therefore beckoned to him, that he should ask who it should be of whom he spake.
(25) He then lying on Jesus' breast saith unto him, Lord, who is it?

Ah, I was thinking of John 13:23, the same dinner, but I had forgotten that both St. Peter and St. John the Beloved Disciple were close to our Lord that evening, and it makes sense, given how much they loved Him, St. Peter as the leader among the disciples and St. John as the youngest, and one particularly cared for by our Lord.

And this was all entirely proper, and it sickens me that some liberal Christians distort passages like this and ignore what St. Paul wrote to support sexual perversion.
 
Upvote 0

FireDragon76

Well-Known Member
Site Supporter
Apr 30, 2013
30,679
18,559
Orlando, Florida
✟1,262,323.00
Country
United States
Faith
United Ch. of Christ
Politics
US-Democrat
Luke 16:19-31 is not a parable of Jesus like most people falsely believe, it is sickening how mainstream this false narrative of "its just a parable" when the reality is that it is actually a true story. Jesus never named real names in Parables, and in Luke 16:19-31 he names multiple real people 1. a certain rich man 2. Lazarus the beggar 3. Abraham 4. Moses 5. The Prophets. Jesus clearly was teaching about the reality of eternal conscious torment in hell.
Luke 16:19-31

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

20 And there was a certain beggar named Lazarus, which was laid at his gate, full of sores,

21 And desiring to be fed with the crumbs which fell from the rich man's table: moreover the dogs came and licked his sores.

22 And it came to pass, that the beggar died, and was carried by the angels into Abraham's bosom: the rich man also died, and was buried;

23 And in hell he lift up his eyes, being in torments, and seeth Abraham afar off, and Lazarus in his bosom.

24 And he cried and said, Father Abraham, have mercy on me, and send Lazarus, that he may dip the tip of his finger in water, and cool my tongue; for I am tormented in this flame.

25 But Abraham said, Son, remember that thou in thy lifetime receivedst thy good things, and likewise Lazarus evil things: but now he is comforted, and thou art tormented.

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.

27 Then he said, I pray thee therefore, father, that thou wouldest send him to my father's house:

28 For I have five brethren; that he may testify unto them, lest they also come into this place of torment.

29 Abraham saith unto him, They have Moses and the prophets; let them hear them.

30 And he said, Nay, father Abraham: but if one went unto them from the dead, they will repent.

31 And he said unto him, If they hear not Moses and the prophets, neither will they be persuaded, though one rose from the dead.

Multiple things we learn from this true story that Jesus gives, 1. Hell is immediate after last breath, 2. Hell is a real place of torment 3. You will feel pain, punishment in hell. 3. You will have full memory in hell 4. Once you're in hell it is too late (nothing can be done for you, there is no salvation in hell) 5. People who go to hell deserve to go there (the rich man didn't argue or protest with Abraham about his own salvation, he simply was begging for Abraham to send Lazarus back to warn his brothers, and also begging for water, relief from his torment) 6. People preaching The word of God bible (Moses and prophets) is what saves people, not physical signs, or miracles.

Jesus obviously tells this true story to warn us of the reality of hell. one can not simply dismiss this as "just a parable" when the Lord Jesus Christ was so specific here. Also there are some weird people who teach that "Abraham's bosom" is actually a place, or some good part of hell, but that is not biblical. Abrahams bosom is a body part, not a location.

Whether or not Lazarus actually existed, the story is told as an allegory or morality tale, which is what parables actually are.
 
Upvote 0

Der Alte

This is me about 1 yr. old.
Site Supporter
Aug 21, 2003
28,578
6,064
EST
✟993,488.00
Country
United States
Faith
Baptist
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Others
Ah, I was thinking of John 13:23, the same dinner, but I had forgotten that both St. Peter and St. John the Beloved Disciple were close to our Lord that evening, and it makes sense, given how much they loved Him, St. Peter as the leader among the disciples and St. John as the youngest, and one particularly cared for by our Lord.
And this was all entirely proper, and it sickens me that some liberal Christians distort passages like this and ignore what St. Paul wrote to support sexual perversion.
I do not understand your comment "liberal Christians distort passages like this and ignore what St. Paul wrote to support sexual perversion."
 
Upvote 0

Der Alte

This is me about 1 yr. old.
Site Supporter
Aug 21, 2003
28,578
6,064
EST
✟993,488.00
Country
United States
Faith
Baptist
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Others
Whether or not Lazarus actually existed, the story is told as an allegory or morality tale, which is what parables actually are.
The four ECF who quoted/referred to Lazarus and the rich considered it factual.
 
  • Agree
Reactions: The Liturgist
Upvote 0

The Liturgist

Traditional Liturgical Christian
Site Supporter
Nov 26, 2019
11,191
5,710
49
The Wild West
✟476,419.00
Country
United States
Faith
Generic Orthodox Christian
Marital Status
Celibate
I do not understand your comment "liberal Christians distort passages like this and ignore what St. Paul wrote to support sexual perversion."

I intentionally mentioned it in an obfuscated way, for what they do with that part of the Gospel of John is very depressing; sick, twisted and blasphemous, and you might not want to know any more than that, and frankly I regret even mentioning it in passing. It happened to recently come across some more blasphemies of queer theologians and it was in the context of that.
 
Upvote 0
This site stays free and accessible to all because of donations from people like you.
Consider making a one-time or monthly donation. We appreciate your support!
- Dan Doughty and Team Christian Forums

Der Alte

This is me about 1 yr. old.
Site Supporter
Aug 21, 2003
28,578
6,064
EST
✟993,488.00
Country
United States
Faith
Baptist
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Others
I intentionally mentioned it in an obfuscated way, for what they do with that part of the Gospel of John is very depressing; sick, twisted and blasphemous, and you might not want to know any more than that, and frankly I regret even mentioning it in passing. It happened to recently come across some more blasphemies of queer theologians and it was in the context of that.
No problem. Thought I might be misreading it.
 
Upvote 0

Der Alte

This is me about 1 yr. old.
Site Supporter
Aug 21, 2003
28,578
6,064
EST
✟993,488.00
Country
United States
Faith
Baptist
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Others
Ah, I was thinking of John 13:23, the same dinner, but I had forgotten that both St. Peter and St. John the Beloved Disciple were close to our Lord that evening, and it makes sense, given how much they loved Him, St. Peter as the leader among the disciples and St. John as the youngest, and one particularly cared for by our Lord.
And this was all entirely proper, and it sickens me that some liberal Christians distort passages like this and ignore what St. Paul wrote to support sexual perversion.
I have a an actual anecdote about the Lord's supper. In the '90s I belonged to a church in Irvine Ca. every year they had a living Lord's supper where 13 men in period costume would be seated at a table when the congregation entered, then the lights would go down and one by one they would stand, say something about themselves. Then they would mention Jesus saying one of you will betray me and end with "Is it I Lord, is it I?" One of the 12 was driving with his son in his car seat in the back while practicing his lines and saying "Is it I Lord, is it I?". He heard his son saying something in the back. He looked and his son was pointing at his eye saying "This eye daddy, this eye."
 
Last edited:
  • Haha
Reactions: The Liturgist
Upvote 0

sparow

Well-Known Member
Site Supporter
Oct 7, 2014
2,554
428
85
✟489,464.00
Country
Australia
Faith
Protestant
Marital Status
Single
No, he is providing scriptural references. And being scientific is being reasonable and logical, and Jesus Christ is Reaaon and Logic - literally (John 1:1-18, the word Logos means among other things reason and logic).

Logic and reason are to do with mathematics. Pure mathematics are pure, applied mathematics assume the purity of what ever it is they are applied to. Where the word scribe is found in the OT, a more accurate rendering would be mathematician or counter of numbers.

Is the story of Lazarus and the rich man a parable? I say the concocted handle is irrelevant, but the story contains secret understanding never previously revealed, in accordance with prophesy.
 
Upvote 0
This site stays free and accessible to all because of donations from people like you.
Consider making a one-time or monthly donation. We appreciate your support!
- Dan Doughty and Team Christian Forums

Cockcrow

Well-Known Member
Jan 12, 2022
403
161
Southern USA
✟75,128.00
Country
United States
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Celibate
Whether or not Lazarus actually existed, the story is told as an allegory or morality tale, which is what parables actually are.
a morality about what? Here you have a story about a guy burning in torments in hell. what is that supposed to represent? I don't see how you can dismiss this as a parable given the naming of actual people which Jesus never did in his parables.
 
  • Agree
Reactions: The Liturgist
Upvote 0