The Rich man and Lazarus

M Strain Jr · Nov 18, 2018

ewq1938 said:
Except what Christ said? Parable or not, what Christ teaches is always true. If he said a good person went to a good place, and a bad person went to a bad place I'd say let's believe these things.

Even in the world this was true. Did a bad criminal, let's say a rapist, did he have the same grave as a good wealthy man? No.

Jesus was buried in a rich man's grave/tomb...but the bad types went to other places for a grave. I just use this as an analogy that good and bad people don't rest in the same place which is one of Christ's main points including to not assume rich people are blessed by God and are good people, and poor sick beggars are bad people.

Actually no. Christ was clear only the rich man was in Hades and that Abraham and Lazarus were far off, across a great gulf in a completely different place.

Because all the unsaved are judged at the same time. They will be removed from their various dark places, resurrected back to mortal life and face judgment. Ever wonder why resurrected people, who are naturally alive again are called the dead? The only people who are alive but still called dead are the unsaved, spiritually dead.

I don't see any inconsistencies.

All parables contains things that are true. That's what they are used for. True things are in the parable but you are saying part of it is not true. You seem to have issue with there being two different places for the dead and that the wicked dead suffer. You say stick to the word of God, so shouldn't we accept what is said in the parable? Or do you think the parable is not valid scripture?

Do you have doubts that the book of Luke is valid? I'm just trying to understand your position on these matters.

Okay, so let's start here: you ask if I have doubts that the book of Luke is valid. Not exactly. I mean, we could sit here and have a discussion lasting many years over whether each book and letter in the Bible was written by the person whose name is at the top of the page or mentioned at the beginning or whatever, but that would be fruitless. The Bible is what it is. Now, the book of Luke itself never actually says that it was written by Luke, but even if it wasn't, it could have been someone else who was close to Paul; it wouldn't change the meaning of the words in the book. But I will say that it's established in the Bible that testimony of two witnesses is necessary for legal matters, so I do feel weary about basing important doctrine on the word of one person, especially when we can't really be sure who wrote it.

But I don't really want to open another whole can of worms discussing the differences between the gospels and such, though I feel tempted to do so.

As for your other arguments, I feel like maybe I was misunderstood? I didn't question whether Jesus was speaking the truth. Of course there is some kind of truth in every parable, which is the reason Jesus told them. But the parable of the rich man and Lazarus, in its context, wasn't supposed to be some kind of revelation about the afterlife. Jesus had made the statement that a person cannot serve both God and earthly wealth (vs. 13), and the Pharisees, who were "lovers of money" scoffed at him. The parable was aimed at them, how God looks more at the heart than the amount of money a person has. It also goes on to speak of the stubbornness of such wealthy people that they would ignore the Law of Moses even if a dead person were to raise from the dead and prove to them their folly. So yes, all of that is true. But Jesus wasn't making a statement on Heaven and Hell.

Ever wonder why resurrected people, who are naturally alive again are called the dead? The only people who are alive but still called dead are the unsaved, spiritually dead.

I would warn about making such interpreted statements about the Bible when such a thing isn't stated plainly in the text. You're making an assumption about the writer's intent. Paul says in Romans 6:23 that "the wages of sin is death, but the gift of God is eternal life through Jesus Christ our Lord". He does not say that the wages of sin is burning in torment for all of eternity. The traditional view of death among the Jews was that death was death; it was the end of life. Revelation says that they will be brought back to be judged, and those not found in the Book of Life will be thrown into the Lake of Fire, which is referred to as being the "second death". Here is not the place to do it because it's off topic, but I could make a very good argument as to why the Lake of Fire is a place of destruction and not a place of eternal torture. And I can do it based solely on actual history and the Bible rather than assumption.

Even in the world this was true. Did a bad criminal, let's say a rapist, did he have the same grave as a good wealthy man? No.

Funny you say that. It fits in with my argument about Hell. Criminals and other such people who were not worthy of being buried were thrown into Valley of Hinnom, where the city trash burned with sulfur outside the walls of Jerusalem. The Greek word for such a place? Gehenna, and that was mistranslated as "hell" as well. I truly believe Jesus was speaking of the literal place, which was known for being a defiled place where the people had worshipped Moloch and had their children pass through his fire. Those who believed in the resurrection also believed in preserving the body and properly burying it so it could be brought back. But the judge sent criminals to the burning trash heap, where their bodies would be burned and eaten by maggots.

Everyone went to Hades to await the end when they would be brought back to be judged. That makes the most sense to me, and that seems to be more inline with what I found in my critical studies over the years.

ewq1938 · Nov 18, 2018

M Strain Jr said:
But I will say that it's established in the Bible that testimony of two witnesses is necessary for legal matters, so I do feel weary about basing important doctrine on the word of one person, especially when we can't really be sure who wrote it.

Ok, so you question the validity of the book of Luke. Noted.

But the parable of the rich man and Lazarus, in its context, wasn't supposed to be some kind of revelation about the afterlife.

Yes, in context it is exactly intended to show revelation about the afterlife. Two people die and we find out what happens.

Jesus had made the statement that a person cannot serve both God and earthly wealth (vs. 13), and the Pharisees, who were "lovers of money" scoffed at him. The parable was aimed at them, how God looks more at the heart than the amount of money a person has.

ie: Just because you are rich doesn't mean you go to heaven in the afterlife.

It also goes on to speak of the stubbornness of such wealthy people that they would ignore the Law of Moses even if a dead person were to raise from the dead and prove to them their folly. So yes, all of that is true. But Jesus wasn't making a statement on Heaven and Hell.

He obviously was.

I would warn about making such interpreted statements about the Bible when such a thing isn't stated plainly in the text. You're making an assumption about the writer's intent.

I find my statements to be accurate to the text and I cannot say the same about yours...especially since you question the very validity of the text.

Everyone went to Hades to await the end when they would be brought back to be judged. That makes the most sense to me, and that seems to be more inline with what I found in my critical studies over the years.

The souls of the dead in Christ are known to be in heaven not in Hades.

Rev 6:9 And when he had opened the fifth seal, I saw under the altar the souls of them that were slain for the word of God, and for the testimony which they held:

Never does the NT place the souls of the saved in Hades.

M Strain Jr · Nov 18, 2018

ewq1938 said:
The souls of the dead in Christ are known to be in heaven not in Hades.

Rev 6:9 And when he had opened the fifth seal, I saw under the altar the souls of them that were slain for the word of God, and for the testimony which they held:

Never does the NT place the souls of the saved in Hades.

Revelation also says that Jesus is a sheep on a throne. Which things are literal and which are figurative?

Look, I want to stay on topic here. I think the evidence shows that the parable of Lazarus and the rich man is figurative and is meant to illustrate how God rewards by the heart rather than the wealth.

If you're interested at all in doing a little research, look at what the book of Enoch says about the layers of Sheol. One is for the righteous, while three are for the unrighteous. There is a divide between each layer. This is relevant to us because clearly Enoch was relevant to the people of Jesus's day, as it was quoted in a good chunk of Jude's book, and it seems to have echoes elsewhere in the New Testament. But here is not the place to get deep into a discussion about "Hell". I plan to eventually bring that up on this forum in the near future. Gives us all something to look forward to, since the new Star Wars movies stink and aren't worth the wait.

DamianWarS · Nov 19, 2018

Willie T said:
It is definitely a parable, since Jesus spoke to the crowds in parables only. And also because a tip-off to the entire point of the parable was to show the Jews that this GREEK man, Lazarus, could go to Heaven, when a Jew who was depending on his heritage and ancestry might not. The Jews were certain no Greek would ever go to Heaven, simply because he was not a legitimate descendent of Abraham like the Jews were.

This was never intended to give a visual picture of Heaven and Hell.

Although I agree it is not intended to give images of the afterlife but I can't get on board with Lazarus being Greek. The name is indeed the Greek form of the hebrew name but this doesn't mean he is Greek it just means it was written in Greek. We know of another Lazarus in the bible who wasn't Greek but his name is still the same. I get your point that if he was Greek it would drive the point harder but there is no need to push the point out of scope of the text. We really don't know what ethnicity he was as we don't know the ethnicity of the rich man but why assume Greek? I would think given the context both men were Jewish, one was just prestige and of high honour and the other was forsaken and tossed aside, then the account has these positions switched in the afterlife. And this is the point of the text that it is not earthly treasure or position that determines your position after death. Lazarus is embraced as a son of abraham and the rich man is tossed aside

2tim_215 · Nov 19, 2018

Regarding whether or not it's a parable, you'll note that when Jesus is giving a parable, He says so and in Lazarus and the rich man He does not call it a parable which I think is no coincidence. The Bible tells us whether or not it is a parable so it's definitely not ridiculous to say that it's a true story. As Damian said above, it's almost certain that Lazarus was a Jew. I'm not certain that a non-Jew could have entered into Paradise at the time since you had to be a believing Jew to enter in. And I believe it is one of the few places in the Bible which gives us a glimpse of the afterlife.
Jesus Parables
Matthew 13:18 (KJV)
18 Hear ye therefore the parable of the sower.
Matthew 13:24 (KJV)
24 Another parable put he forth unto them, saying, The kingdom of heaven is likened unto a man which sowed good seed in his field:
Matthew 13:31 (KJV)
31 Another parable put he forth unto them, saying, The kingdom of heaven is like to a grain of mustard seed, which a man took, and sowed in his field:
Matthew 13:33 (KJV)
33 Another parable spake he unto them; The kingdom of heaven is like unto leaven, which a woman took, and hid in three measures of meal, till the whole was leavened.
Matthew 13:34 (KJV)
34 All these things spake Jesus unto the multitude in parables; and without a parable spake he not unto them:
Matthew 13:36 (KJV)
36 Then Jesus sent the multitude away, and went into the house: and his disciples came unto him, saying, Declare unto us the parable of the tares of the field.
Matthew 15:15 (KJV)
15 Then answered Peter and said unto him, Declare unto us this parable.
Matthew 21:33 (KJV)
33 Hear another parable: There was a certain householder, which planted a vineyard, and hedged it round about, and digged a winepress in it, and built a tower, and let it out to husbandmen, and went into a far country:
Matthew 24:32 (KJV)
32 Now learn a parable of the fig tree; When his branch is yet tender, and putteth forth leaves, ye know that summer is nigh:
Mark 4:10 (KJV)
10 And when he was alone, they that were about him with the twelve asked of him the parable.
Mark 4:13 (KJV)
13 And he said unto them, Know ye not this parable? and how then will ye know all parables?
Mark 4:34 (KJV)
34 But without a parable spake he not unto them: and when they were alone, he expounded all things to his disciples.
Mark 7:17 (KJV)
17 And when he was entered into the house from the people, his disciples asked him concerning the parable.
Mark 12:12 (KJV)
12 And they sought to lay hold on him, but feared the people: for they knew that he had spoken the parable against them: and they left him, and went their way.
Mark 13:28 (KJV)
28 Now learn a parable of the fig tree; When her branch is yet tender, and putteth forth leaves, ye know that summer is near:
Luke 5:36 (KJV)
36 And he spake also a parable unto them; No man putteth a piece of a new garment upon an old; if otherwise, then both the new maketh a rent, and the piece that was taken out of the new agreeth not with the old.
Luke 6:39 (KJV)
39 And he spake a parable unto them, Can the blind lead the blind? shall they not both fall into the ditch?
Luke 8:4 (KJV)
4 And when much people were gathered together, and were come to him out of every city, he spake by a parable:
Luke 8:9 (KJV)
9 And his disciples asked him, saying, What might this parable be?
Luke 8:11 (KJV)
11 Now the parable is this: The seed is the word of God.
Luke 12:16 (KJV)
16 And he spake a parable unto them, saying, The ground of a certain rich man brought forth plentifully:
Luke 12:41 (KJV)
41 Then Peter said unto him, Lord, speakest thou this parable unto us, or even to all?
Luke 13:6 (KJV)
6 He spake also this parable; A certain man had a fig tree planted in his vineyard; and he came and sought fruit thereon, and found none.
Luke 14:7 (KJV)
7 And he put forth a parable to those which were bidden, when he marked how they chose out the chief rooms; saying unto them,
Luke 15:3 (KJV)
3 And he spake this parable unto them, saying,
Luke 18:1 (KJV)
1 And he spake a parable unto them to this end, that men ought always to pray, and not to faint;
Luke 18:9 (KJV)
9 And he spake this parable unto certain which trusted in themselves that they were righteous, and despised others:
Luke 19:11 (KJV)
11 And as they heard these things, he added and spake a parable, because he was nigh to Jerusalem, and because they thought that the kingdom of God should immediately appear.
Luke 20:9 (KJV)
9 Then began he to speak to the people this parable; A certain man planted a vineyard, and let it forth to husbandmen, and went into a far country for a long time.
Luke 20:19 (KJV)
19 And the chief priests and the scribes the same hour sought to lay hands on him; and they feared the people: for they perceived that he had spoken this parable against them.
Luke 21:29 (KJV)
29 And he spake to them a parable; Behold the fig tree, and all the trees;
John 10:6 (KJV)
6 This parable spake Jesus unto them: but they understood not what things they were which he spake unto them.

DamianWarS · Nov 19, 2018

2tim_215 said:
Regarding whether or not it's a parable, you'll note that when Jesus is giving a parable, He says so and in Lazarus and the rich man He does not call it a parable which I think is no coincidence. The Bible tells us whether or not it is a parable so it's definitely not ridiculous to say that it's a true story. As Damian said above, it's almost certain that Lazarus was a Jew. I'm not certain that a non-Jew could have entered into Paradise at the time since you had to be a believing Jew to enter in. And I believe it is one of the few places in the Bible which gives us a glimpse of the afterlife.
Jesus Parables
Matthew 13:18 (KJV)
18 Hear ye therefore the parable of the sower.
Matthew 13:24 (KJV)
24 Another parable put he forth unto them, saying, The kingdom of heaven is likened unto a man which sowed good seed in his field:
Matthew 13:31 (KJV)
31 Another parable put he forth unto them, saying, The kingdom of heaven is like to a grain of mustard seed, which a man took, and sowed in his field:
Matthew 13:33 (KJV)
33 Another parable spake he unto them; The kingdom of heaven is like unto leaven, which a woman took, and hid in three measures of meal, till the whole was leavened.
Matthew 13:34 (KJV)
34 All these things spake Jesus unto the multitude in parables; and without a parable spake he not unto them:
Matthew 13:36 (KJV)
36 Then Jesus sent the multitude away, and went into the house: and his disciples came unto him, saying, Declare unto us the parable of the tares of the field.
Matthew 15:15 (KJV)
15 Then answered Peter and said unto him, Declare unto us this parable.
Matthew 21:33 (KJV)
33 Hear another parable: There was a certain householder, which planted a vineyard, and hedged it round about, and digged a winepress in it, and built a tower, and let it out to husbandmen, and went into a far country:
Matthew 24:32 (KJV)
32 Now learn a parable of the fig tree; When his branch is yet tender, and putteth forth leaves, ye know that summer is nigh:
Mark 4:10 (KJV)
10 And when he was alone, they that were about him with the twelve asked of him the parable.
Mark 4:13 (KJV)
13 And he said unto them, Know ye not this parable? and how then will ye know all parables?
Mark 4:34 (KJV)
34 But without a parable spake he not unto them: and when they were alone, he expounded all things to his disciples.
Mark 7:17 (KJV)
17 And when he was entered into the house from the people, his disciples asked him concerning the parable.
Mark 12:12 (KJV)
12 And they sought to lay hold on him, but feared the people: for they knew that he had spoken the parable against them: and they left him, and went their way.
Mark 13:28 (KJV)
28 Now learn a parable of the fig tree; When her branch is yet tender, and putteth forth leaves, ye know that summer is near:
Luke 5:36 (KJV)
36 And he spake also a parable unto them; No man putteth a piece of a new garment upon an old; if otherwise, then both the new maketh a rent, and the piece that was taken out of the new agreeth not with the old.
Luke 6:39 (KJV)
39 And he spake a parable unto them, Can the blind lead the blind? shall they not both fall into the ditch?
Luke 8:4 (KJV)
4 And when much people were gathered together, and were come to him out of every city, he spake by a parable:
Luke 8:9 (KJV)
9 And his disciples asked him, saying, What might this parable be?
Luke 8:11 (KJV)
11 Now the parable is this: The seed is the word of God.
Luke 12:16 (KJV)
16 And he spake a parable unto them, saying, The ground of a certain rich man brought forth plentifully:
Luke 12:41 (KJV)
41 Then Peter said unto him, Lord, speakest thou this parable unto us, or even to all?
Luke 13:6 (KJV)
6 He spake also this parable; A certain man had a fig tree planted in his vineyard; and he came and sought fruit thereon, and found none.
Luke 14:7 (KJV)
7 And he put forth a parable to those which were bidden, when he marked how they chose out the chief rooms; saying unto them,
Luke 15:3 (KJV)
3 And he spake this parable unto them, saying,
Luke 18:1 (KJV)
1 And he spake a parable unto them to this end, that men ought always to pray, and not to faint;
Luke 18:9 (KJV)
9 And he spake this parable unto certain which trusted in themselves that they were righteous, and despised others:
Luke 19:11 (KJV)
11 And as they heard these things, he added and spake a parable, because he was nigh to Jerusalem, and because they thought that the kingdom of God should immediately appear.
Luke 20:9 (KJV)
9 Then began he to speak to the people this parable; A certain man planted a vineyard, and let it forth to husbandmen, and went into a far country for a long time.
Luke 20:19 (KJV)
19 And the chief priests and the scribes the same hour sought to lay hands on him; and they feared the people: for they perceived that he had spoken this parable against them.
Luke 21:29 (KJV)
29 And he spake to them a parable; Behold the fig tree, and all the trees;
John 10:6 (KJV)
6 This parable spake Jesus unto them: but they understood not what things they were which he spake unto them.

except there are no other examples of Jesus speaking of a factual account and scripture specifically says that he speaks in parables. It's fun to do word searches but there are also examples of parables that are not prefaced with "he spoke in a parable..." nor does it demand it for it to be a parable. for example in the immediate context alone:

the parable of the Dinner from Luke 14:16-24
"But He said to him, “A man was giving a big dinner, and he invited many..."

the parable of the lost coin from Luke 15:8-10
"Or what woman, if she has ten silver coins and loses one coin..."

the parable of Prodigal Son from Luke 15:11-32
And He said, “A man had two sons....

The parable of the Unrighteous Steward from Luke 16:1-13
Now He was also saying to the disciples, “There was a rich man who had a manager...

and these are all the immediate context and right on the heels of the account in question which opens very consistently from the rest saying in verse 19
"Now there was a rich man, and he habitually dressed in purple and fine linen..."

A lot of parables are introduced saying they are a parable but a parable doesn't demand it for it to be a parable. in chapters 14-16, which is the immediate context you quote 2 parables that call themselves a parable and I quoted 4 parables in the same context (not including the account in question) that do not say they are parables, so the ratio is stacked in favour of implicit parables rather than explicit. You could argue that these accounts inherit the parable context from the preceding parables since Jesus was heavily speaking in parables, and you'd be right to do so, but if that's the case the account in question also inherits the parable context for the same reasons.

DamianWarS · Nov 19, 2018

AvgJoe said:
the story of the rich man and Lazarus uses the actual name of a person. Such specificity would set it apart from ordinary parables, in which the characters are not named

what I find ironic in this passage is there are two Lazarus that seem to oppose this account in scripture.

Abraham had a servant named Lazarus of damascus who was to become his heir by default as Abraham laments in Gen 15:2 "O Lord God, what will You give me, since I am childless, and the heir of my house is Eliezer of Damascus" to which God replies in v4 "This man will not be your heir; but one who will come forth from your own body, he shall be your heir." God told Abraham it is your bloodline from your own body that will be your heir not some toss away servant. it seems in this account it is reversed as the implications are the rich man was the blood heir (clealy directed at the pharisees) and Lazarus was not yet Lazarus received the sonship and was embraced by Abraham where the rich man was toss aside. This is a classic "turning things on it's head" move of Jesus.

The other Lazarus that is ironic is at the end of this account where the Rich man begs Abraham to send Lazarus to his brother, Abraham denies his request saying "If they do not listen to Moses and the Prophets, they will not be persuaded even if someone rises from the dead." this is a clear foreshadow to Christ but what is ironic is we know of a Lazarus that was raised from the dead. Not that there is any dispute that these two are the same people but if there was a thought toward this then this should help separate that. At the very least, the friend of Jesus is not the Lazarus in this account as the friend of Jesus was risen from the dead and the Lazarus in this account stayed at the side of Abraham.

2tim_215 · Nov 19, 2018

DamianWarS said:
what I find ironic in this passage is there are two Lazarus that seem to oppose this account in scripture.

Abraham had a servant named Lazarus of damascus who was to become his heir by default as Abraham laments in Gen 15:2 "O Lord God, what will You give me, since I am childless, and the heir of my house is Eliezer of Damascus" to which God replies in v4 "This man will not be your heir; but one who will come forth from your own body, he shall be your heir." God told Abraham it is your bloodline from your own body that will be your heir not some toss away servant. it seems in this account it is reversed as the implications are the rich man was the blood heir (clealy directed at the pharisees) and Lazarus was not yet Lazarus received the sonship and was embraced by Abraham where the rich man was toss aside. This is a classic "turning things on it's head" move of Jesus.

The other Lazarus that is ironic is at the end of this account where the Rich man begs Abraham to send Lazarus to his brother, Abraham denies his request saying "If they do not listen to Moses and the Prophets, they will not be persuaded even if someone rises from the dead." this is a clear foreshadow to Christ but what is ironic is we know of a Lazarus that was raised from the dead. Not that there is any dispute that these two are the same people but if there was a thought toward this then this should help separate that. At the very least, the friend of Jesus is not the Lazarus in this account as the friend of Jesus was risen from the dead and the Lazarus in this account stayed at the side of Abraham.

All this does is point out that there is more than one Lazarus (also shows that this was a Jewish name). The fact that this one passage of scripture uses two persons names (Lazarus, and Abraham whom we all know). Not uncommon in the Bible (and in real life in general) for more than one person to have the same name. None of the parables (including the ones you listed) have any personal names in them.

Also, as Der Alter shared, Irenaeus, Clement of Alexandria, Tertullianm Cyprian and Methodius believed it was literal, all pretty good sources.

ewq1938 · Nov 19, 2018

DamianWarS said:
except there are no other examples of Jesus speaking of a factual account and scripture specifically says that he speaks in parables. It's fun to do word searches but there are also examples of parables that are not prefaced with "he spoke in a parable..." nor does it demand it for it to be a parable. for example in the immediate context alone:

the parable of the Dinner from Luke 14:16-24
"But He said to him, “A man was giving a big dinner, and he invited many..."

How do you know it's a parable and not a historic event? Claiming it's a parable doesn't make it one.

Radagast · Nov 19, 2018

2tim_215 said:
Regarding whether or not it's a parable, you'll note that when Jesus is giving a parable, He says so

Not always. Not in the parable of the 10 virgins in Matthew 25, for example.

Is this story a parable? That's been debated for centuries. I don't think we'll settle it here.

DamianWarS · Nov 19, 2018

ewq1938 said:
How do you know it's a parable and not a historic event? Claiming it's a parable doesn't make it one.

Because it fits the context, it reads as a parable with very specific spiritual and tongue and cheek references, there are no historical accounts Jesus tells, and scripture says Jesus speaks in parables. Saying it is not a parable because it doesn't introduce itself as a parable and because it uses a name are not strong cases, especially given the context.

M Strain Jr · Nov 19, 2018

This is just another case of people believing what they want to believe and sticking to their guns, regardless of context or whatever other evidence that could be presented. A debate between closed minds is much like a tied game of soccer: you can kick balls around for what feels like an eternity, but in the end, no one wins. And it does feel like an eternity because I don't like soccer.

Obviously, no one is budging here, so I wonder how long this conversation will go on.

You know, what really helped set off my journey for Biblical truth was that I stopped using the Bible to justify my beliefs. Instead, I challenged myself by using it to disprove my beliefs. When that was done and I was emptied of my preconceived ideas, I then opened myself to what the text of the Bible was actually saying instead of what I wanted it to say. That's the difference between an objective study and a subjective study. I had to really wrestle with some of the things I found, mostly because it upset me that they were different than what I had been told my whole life up to that point. It actually caused a rift between myself and my mom, and I hated it. But I had to be humble and accept that I didn't know everything. And now my mom and I are okay as long as we don't talk about doctrine or politics.

ewq1938 · Nov 19, 2018

DamianWarS said:
B there are no historical accounts Jesus tells

Unless he did tell historical accounts and some people call them parables.

DamianWarS · Nov 19, 2018

ewq1938 said:
Unless he did tell historical accounts and some people call them parables.

Guessing doesn't help the discussion. Which ones are in dispute and why? I would suggest this account is the only one.

ewq1938 · Nov 19, 2018

DamianWarS said:
Guessing doesn't help the discussion.

Back at ya...

DamianWarS · Nov 19, 2018

Radagast said:
Not always. Not in the parable of the 10 virgins in Matthew 25, for example.

Is this story a parable? That's been debated for centuries. I don't think we'll settle it here.

Or the parables preceding it in the immediate context

DamianWarS · Nov 19, 2018

ewq1938 said:
Back at ya...

But I did offer support and sound logic, I didn't just say because I say so, if others are in dispute defend them properly

Radagast · Nov 19, 2018

DamianWarS said:
Or the parables preceding it in the immediate context

I mentioned the parable of the 10 virgins because it does not use the word "parable," and the preceding text does not use the word "parable" either.

DamianWarS · Nov 20, 2018

Radagast said:
I mentioned the parable of the 10 virgins because it does not use the word "parable," and the preceding text does not use the word "parable" either.

I think the immediate context helps the most as it establishes that Jesus in context didn't have to announce it was a parable and it also sets a parable context as there are indisputable parables in the passages that preceded it. The parable of the 10 virgins is useful too as it also doesn't open with announcing it was a parable and it only is in matthew.

The user @2tim_215 tries to establish that all parables open with saying they are a parable by clearly just doing a word search for the word parable and just dumping all the results in the post but without doing an exhaustive search on all parables to see how they open. I'm not about to do that either because it is unnecessary and posting even 1 that doesn't announce it as a parable disproves the point.

ewq1938 · Nov 20, 2018

Mar_4:34 But without a parable spake he not unto them: and when they were alone, he expounded all things to his disciples.

Mar_7:17 And when he was entered into the house from the people, his disciples asked him concerning the parable.

Luk 8:10 And he said, Unto you it is given to know the mysteries of the kingdom of God: but to others in parables; that seeing they might not see, and hearing they might not understand.
Luk 8:11 Now the parable is this: The seed is the word of God.

The implication here is he will only speak a parable to others without explaining but when he speaks a parable to the disciples, he will explain it to them.

So, if he speaks about something to the disciples only but does not call it a parable and does not explain it, then it seems logical it was based on something that actually happened and is not a made up story/parable.

Mat 13:36 Then Jesus sent the multitude away, and went into the house: and his disciples came unto him, saying, Declare unto us the parable of the tares of the field.

Mat_15:15 Then answered Peter and said unto him, Declare unto us this parable.

We see this in these passages.

Luk 16:19 There was a certain rich man, which was clothed in purple and fine linen, and fared sumptuously every day:
Luk 16:20 And there was a certain beggar named Lazarus, which was laid at his gate, full of sores,
Luk 16:21 And desiring to be fed with the crumbs which fell from the rich man's table: moreover the dogs came and licked his sores.
Luk 16:22 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;
Luk 16:23 And in hell he lift up his eyes, being in torments, and seeth Abraham afar off, and Lazarus in his bosom.
Luk 16:24 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.
Luk 16:25 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.
Luk 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.
Luk 16:27 Then he said, I pray thee therefore, father, that thou wouldest send him to my father's house:
Luk 16:28 For I have five brethren; that he may testify unto them, lest they also come into this place of torment.
Luk 16:29 Abraham saith unto him, They have Moses and the prophets; let them hear them.
Luk 16:30 And he said, Nay, father Abraham: but if one went unto them from the dead, they will repent.
Luk 16:31 And he said unto him, If they hear not Moses and the prophets, neither will they be persuaded, though one rose from the dead.

Here Jesus tells a story but does not call it a parable nor does he ever explain it to the disciples. The reason why is it is not a parable. It is a story about two literal people who died and what happened to them. There isn't anything to explain not to mention the Jews already believed in a Hades type concept for the wicked and already believed in heaven but referred to as Abraham's bosom which is father Abraham taking care of them after they have died.

The Rich man and Lazarus

Member

I love you three.

Member

Follower of Isa Al Masih

Well-Known Member

Follower of Isa Al Masih

Follower of Isa Al Masih

Well-Known Member

I love you three.

comes and goes

Follower of Isa Al Masih

Member

I love you three.

Follower of Isa Al Masih

I love you three.

Follower of Isa Al Masih

Follower of Isa Al Masih

comes and goes

Follower of Isa Al Masih

I love you three.

Similar threads