Rich Man and Lazarus most misunderstood parable in NT?

thecolorsblend

If God is your Father, who is your Mother?
Site Supporter
Jul 1, 2013
9,199
8,425
Gotham City, New Jersey
✟308,231.00
Country
United States
Faith
Catholic
Marital Status
Married
There's about 2000 years of false church tradition/myths to overcome,
so
whether little by little today, or any quicker, it will take a lot of "words"/ explaining/ unless someone has not learned the false traditions/myths pervasively present today.
The simple truth. "that story" has been mis-represented billions of times. (so-called prima facie is not at all a defense of the myths (false interpretations and tales) most people have believed for generations)
By your own admission, the prima facie interpretation of that passage goes back 2,000 years. If only you'd been born sooner, you could've corrected the people who wrote and compiled the scriptures. Alas...
 
Upvote 0

Shempster

ImJustMe
Site Supporter
Dec 28, 2014
1,560
786
✟258,881.00
Country
United States
Faith
Non-Denom
Marital Status
Married
Its a parable - complete with prayers to the dead.

But even in its parable form - it has some good instructive statements.

For example - Christ's conclusion for the parable is pretty instructive (as always)

31 But he 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.’”
Very true.
The parable was directly about the Pharisees. He was saying that they should be able to see the truth in the bible they had at the time, but they refuse to know the the meanings which point to Jesus himself. Another meaning is that they as teachers should not be so worldly minded. They were greedy and took money from the weak to make themselves wealthy.
He was also saying that even when he rises from the dead after three days, they will still not believe. So many meanings here!

Besides, Matt 13:34 plainly tells us that Jesus ONLY spoke to the crowds in parables, therefore we can know that it is a parable.
English Standard Version
All these things Jesus said to the crowds in parables; indeed, he said nothing to them without a parable.
 
Last edited:
Upvote 0

BobRyan

Junior Member
Angels Team
Site Supporter
Nov 21, 2008
51,352
10,607
Georgia
✟912,157.00
Country
United States
Faith
SDA
Marital Status
Married
By your own admission, the prima facie interpretation of that passage goes back 2,000 years. If only you'd been born sooner, you could've corrected the people who wrote and compiled the scriptures. Alas...

It is a parable.. most Bible scholars admit it.
 
Upvote 0

BobRyan

Junior Member
Angels Team
Site Supporter
Nov 21, 2008
51,352
10,607
Georgia
✟912,157.00
Country
United States
Faith
SDA
Marital Status
Married
And finally, these last 2 verses which again clearly identifies the rich man as symbolizing the OC Priesthood of the House of Judah


LUKE 16:
30 "And he said, 'nay! father Abraham;
but if one goes to them from the dead, they will repent.'
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.'
"

Yeshua uses the last two verses of this parable as an amazing prophecy of his pending resurrection from the dead.

Amen!

If they will not listen to scripture "Moses AND the prophets" they will not listen though one rises from the DEAD (Messiah is resurrected).

So then to the "faithful" we have this Luke 24: "27 Then beginning with Moses and with all the prophets, He explained to them the things concerning Himself in all the Scriptures."

Sola scriptura -- to the very end
 
Last edited:
Upvote 0

thecolorsblend

If God is your Father, who is your Mother?
Site Supporter
Jul 1, 2013
9,199
8,425
Gotham City, New Jersey
✟308,231.00
Country
United States
Faith
Catholic
Marital Status
Married
Upvote 0

BobRyan

Junior Member
Angels Team
Site Supporter
Nov 21, 2008
51,352
10,607
Georgia
✟912,157.00
Country
United States
Faith
SDA
Marital Status
Married
Apparently that's a new thing because for the past 2,000 years...

you have a 2000 year old document about this parable of prayers to the dead not being a parable and that Abraham is in fact the great sovereign of heaven to whom we all pray for his sovereign decision on who may be resurrected to come back and speak to the living?

Hint: the Parable of Luke 16 comes as the last of a long string of parables in Luke - and starts off with the fact that the Jews were complaining about his parables.
 
Upvote 0

LittleLambofJesus

Hebrews 2:14.... Pesky Devil, git!
Site Supporter
May 19, 2015
125,492
28,588
73
GOD's country of Texas
Visit site
✟1,237,270.00
Country
United States
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Single
Politics
US-Libertarian
I like the depiction of Herod in Jesus Christ Superstar. He especially sounded foxy there ... whereas the yeast of the Pharisees were in what they did and not in what they said.
Also, beware the scorpions, serpents and vipers

Eze 2:
3
And He said to me: “Son of adam! I am sending you to the children of Israel, to a rebellious nation that has rebelled against Me;
they and their fathers have transgressed against Me to this very day
.
6
“And you, son of adam, do not be afraid of them nor be afraid of their words, though briers and thorns are with you and you dwell among scorpions;
do not be afraid of their words or dismayed by their looks, though they are a rebellious house
.
Jer 8:17 “For behold, I will send serpents among you,
Vipers which cannot be charmed,
And they shall bite you,” says the LORD.


Luk 10:19
“Behold, I give you the authority to trample on serpents and scorpions, and over all the power of the enemy, and nothing shall by any means hurt you.
Mat 23:33
“Serpents, brood of vipers! How can you escape the condemnation of Gehenna?!

Revelation 14:11 And the smoke of the tormenting of Them is ascending into Ages to-Ages....... [Luke 16:24,26]
Reve 19:3 and a second time They have declared "Halleluyah!
and the smoke of Her is ascending into the Ages of the Ages
"

The Destruction of Jerusalem - George Peter Holford, 1805AD
The Destruction Of JERUSALEM
An Absolute and Irresistible PROOF OF THE DIVINE ORIGIN OF

CHRISTIANITY: INCLUDING A NARRATIVE OF THE CALAMITIES WHICH BEFEL THE JEWS

"I consider the Prophecy relative to the destruction of the Jewish nation,
if there were nothing else to support Christianity, as absolutely irresistible."

(Mr. Erskine's Speech, at the Trial of Williams, for publishing Paine's Age of Reason)
 
Upvote 0

DamianWarS

Follower of Isa Al Masih
Site Supporter
May 15, 2008
9,486
3,322
✟858,457.00
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Private
By your own admission, misunderstanding abounds, including yours.

Parables are meant to teach the simple people, simple ideas in clear concepts they can relate to. They take earthly relationships and relate them to heavenly ideas. These will never be exact or perfect descriptors of a heavenly concept. Regardless if the text is a story or parable, the message is SIMPLE.

You take this and twist it into a complex concept with no explicit relationship between the earthly and the heavenly objects in the text. You take the simple concepts and throw them out. You forget who Jesus was talking to, simple people.

Further you ignore the context of the preceding parable of the shrewd manager which is clearly about judgement and reward for our actions in this age.

often Jesus speaks to an indirect audience, those who are listening in, but directly is addressing another audience, for example Luke 13:1 "...when so many thousands of the people had gathered together ... he began to say to his disciples..." Jesus was teaching his disciples but the message more broadly impacted all the people listening in.

It would seem in the text it opens with the direct audience being his disciples and the indirect audience the Pharisees but in v14 there is a switch. The Pharisees who "heard all these things" ridiculed him and Jesus then begin to speak to them directly. Previous to this (ch15) we see the parables of the lost sheep, the lost coin and prodigal son and the direct audience is revealed in 15:1 being the "tax collectors and sinners" and it seems the indirect audience was again the Pharisees who "grumbled, saying, 'This man receives sinners and eats with them.'" then the direct audience switches in ch16 which opens saying "He also said to the disciples..." but what seems to be clear is during all of this the Pharisees were in the background until v14 when Jesus begins to speak to them directly.

I do believe the account of Lazarus and the Rich Man is a parable but it reads differently because of who the direct audience is which was the Pharisees and the point Jesus is trying to make. The account of Lazarus and the Rich Man is about contrasting the proper and dignified with the unclean and undeserving, essentially he was signaling out the Pharisees. This becomes most apparent after the characters die and the Rich Man is rejected his birth right of being beside Abraham and then is humiliated, tortured and permanently separated. This contrasted with Lazarus, which means "whom God helps", is depicted as essentially unclean and undeserving but is honored with a place beside Abraham. Those with Abraham would be understood as Abraham's sons so in the account Lazarus is honored as a son but the Rich Man is rejected as a son with this sort of recurring theme of "thrown out where there will be weeping and gnashing of teeth" judgment.

Like other parables the parable itself is not actually about sheep or lost coins and the point of this account is not a physical description of the afterlife for either side and if that's our take away then we miss the point. This account is about Jesus calling out the Pharisees in his underhanded sneaky way saying "You are not Abraham's Sons and you will not partake in his inheritance" with this counter-culture idea of highest honor to the lowest place and humiliation to the highest; he flip flops it and burst their bubble.

In these honor based cultures there is an art of calling someone out in an indirect way and that's what Jesus is doing but Jesus also indirectly provokes them too. The Pharisees started to make fun of Jesus and so Jesus turns around and tells them what he really thinks but in a way they can all awkwardly agree then shuffle away slowly before he starts to call them out by name.
 
Last edited:
Upvote 0

ClementofA

Well-Known Member
Site Supporter
Jul 10, 2016
5,459
2,197
Vancouver
✟310,073.00
Country
Canada
Faith
Non-Denom
Marital Status
Private
We know that until Jesus came on earth and was crucified the saints of the OT did not go to heaven until afterwards, when He died they went to be with Him. And we also see in v26 that there was a great gulf fixed so that those who want to pass from here to you cannot, nor can those from there pass to us. So that nullifies an exchange from one place to the other for the OT people. Now the saved, their spirits go to be in heaven and the others to death and hades is all the scriptures tell us. Rev 20:12-15 And I saw the dead, small and great, standing before God, and books were opened. And another book was opened, which is the Book of Life. And the dead were judged according to their works, by the things which were written in the books. 13 The sea gave up the dead who were in it, and Death and Hades delivered up the dead who were in them. And they were judged, each one according to his works. 14 Then Death and Hades were cast into the lake of fire. This is the second death. 15 And anyone not found written in the Book of Life was cast into the lake of fire.

Luke 16:22-31 So it was that the beggar died, and was carried by the angels to Abraham’s bosom. The rich man also died and was buried. 23 And being in torments in Hades, he lifted up his eyes and saw Abraham afar off, and Lazarus in his bosom. 24 “Then 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 in your lifetime you received your good things, and likewise Lazarus evil things; but now he is comforted and you are tormented. 26 And besides all this, between us and you there is a great gulf fixed, so that those who want to pass from here to you cannot, nor can those from there pass to us.’ 27 “Then he said, ‘I beg you therefore, father, that you would send him to my father’s house, 28 for I have five brothers, that he may testify to them, lest they also come to this place of torment.’ 29 Abraham said to him, ‘They have Moses and the prophets; let them hear them.’ 30 And he said, ‘No, father Abraham; but if one goes to them from the dead, they will repent.’ 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.’”


Nothing there denies the possibility of repentance & salvation to any who might end up in the lake of fire. In Rev.20:11-15 those in Hades get out of Hades, so Hades (Lk.16:19-31) is not a place of unending torments.

Even of the rich man in Hades (Lk.16:19-31) it is not stated how long his torments would last while there. Or denied that they could end while still there. Nor is it denied he could be saved while still in Hades. The rich man's Saviour is in Hades:

"If I ascend up into heaven, Thou art there; If I make my bed in the nether-world (Sheol = Hades), behold, Thou art there." (Psalm 139:8)

The rich man is called "son" (literally, "child") :

Lk.16:25 “But Abraham replied, ‘Son, remember that in your lifetime you received your good things

"Here, too, was one who, even in Hades, was recognised as being, now more truly than he had been in his life, a “child” or “son of Abraham.” (Comp. Luke 19:9.) The word used is the same, in its tone of pity and tenderness, as that which the father used to the elder son in the parable of the Prodigal Son (Luke 15:31), which our Lord addressed to the man sick of the palsy (Matthew 9:2), or to His own disciples (John 13:33)." Ellicott's Commentary for English Readers

The rich man in Hades is receiving the Word of Truth from Abraham. If not to lead those there to repentance & salvation, why would anyone in Hades be receiving such truths.

When it is implied that the rich man is where he is due to his lack of compassion for his fellow man, in particular Lazarus, he responds positively by turning his attention from himself to his brethren still alive & requests that they be warned about Hades. Is the rich man turning from his selfishness & showing concern for others?

The story speaks of a great gulf fixed stopping the transfer of persons from one place to the other place. It does not say this gulf will remain in place forever. Only that at that moment in time it was so. Possibly the chasm barrier refers to the unrepentant state of those in Hades, & that once they repent the barrier stopping any individual from leaving is removed. Nor does the passage deny the possibility of salvation to the rich man in Hades while he remains there.

" “And besides all this, between us and you a great chasm has been fixed, so that those who want to go from here to you cannot, nor can anyone cross over from there to us.” "

" "So even if we made the mistake of trying to extract from the details of this parable a position on the issue of whether there will be further chances, there still wouldn’t be much cause for taking this passage as supporting the doctrine of no further chances with any force at all. For as long as the [one] who believes in further chances sensibly allows for the possibility that, while punishment is occurring, those suffering from it can’t just end it any time they want, she can make perfectly good sense of the words this parable puts into the mouth of Father Abraham. After all, if a road has been covered with deep enough snow drifts, we’ll tell someone who must drive on that stretch of road to get to where we are, “You cannot cross over from there to us.” We’ll say this quite properly and truthfully, even if we know full well that the road will be cleared in a few days, or that, in a great enough emergency, a helicopter could be used to get across to us even today, if, say, we’re at a hospital. [But doesn’t that show that there is a sense, then, in which they can cross over to us? Yes, there’s a perfectly good sense in which they can, and a perfectly good sense in which they cannot. For enlightening and accessible explanations of the meaning of “can” and related words, I recommend Angelica Kratzer’s “What ‘Must’ and ‘Can’ Must and Can Mean” (Linguistics and Philosophy 1 (1977): pp. 337-355) and example 6 (“Relative Modality”) of David Lewis’s “Scorekeeping in a Language Game” (Journal of Philosophical Logic 8 (1979): pp. 339-359.]"

The duration, nature, intensity & purpose of the torments the rich man was suffering are not revealed in this story. His torments there could have lasted less than 5 minutes.

Luke 16:19-31 rich man in "hell"
 
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

iwbswiaihl2

Newbie
Aug 18, 2007
1,694
259
✟40,387.00
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
Your very first line show where you stopped short of showing the whole truth out of the text that you spoke of, here is the text and it clearly shows where those that came out of Hades for their final judgment and where they went back to; Rev 20:11-15Then I saw a great white throne and Him who sat on it, from whose face the earth and the heaven fled away. And there was found no place for them. 12 And I saw the dead, small and great, standing before God, and books were opened. And another book was opened, which is the Book of Life. And the dead were judged according to their works, by the things which were written in the books. 13 The sea gave up the dead who were in it, and Death and Hades delivered up the dead who were in them. And they were judged, each one according to his works. 14 Then Death and Hades were cast into the lake of fire. This is the second death. 15 And anyone not found written in the Book of Life was cast into the lake of fire.

The Lord has spoken and I only need show what He wrote; Thy word is a lamp unto my feet, and a light to my path Ps 119:105
 
Upvote 0

ClementofA

Well-Known Member
Site Supporter
Jul 10, 2016
5,459
2,197
Vancouver
✟310,073.00
Country
Canada
Faith
Non-Denom
Marital Status
Private
Your very first line show where you stopped short of showing the whole truth out of the text that you spoke of, here is the text and it clearly shows where those that came out of Hades for their final judgment and where they went back to; Rev 20:11-15Then I saw a great white throne and Him who sat on it, from whose face the earth and the heaven fled away. And there was found no place for them. 12 And I saw the dead, small and great, standing before God, and books were opened. And another book was opened, which is the Book of Life. And the dead were judged according to their works, by the things which were written in the books. 13 The sea gave up the dead who were in it, and Death and Hades delivered up the dead who were in them. And they were judged, each one according to his works. 14 Then Death and Hades were cast into the lake of fire. This is the second death. 15 And anyone not found written in the Book of Life was cast into the lake of fire.

The Lord has spoken and I only need show what He wrote; Thy word is a lamp unto my feet, and a light to my path Ps 119:105

Huh? Pardon me for not quoting the entire Bible in my post. Also where does your quote say those in "hell" or the LOF (lake of fire) can't be saved?

Have you been decieved by your Bible translation?

For the Lord will NOT cast off FOR EVER:

Augustine's ignorance & error re Matthew 25:46

Church Fathers & Universalism since Early Church times

If endless punishment were true & victims of infanticide all go to heaven
 
Last edited:
Upvote 0

iwbswiaihl2

Newbie
Aug 18, 2007
1,694
259
✟40,387.00
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married

I don't know what the LOF is in reference to, but the lake of fire does that not describe hell?:scratch: And besides, no where in scripture that you have shown in writing does it ever mention a chance after death, why not show those to me? You have to read that into the ones you have shown, it doesn't read that way. Besides in the 20th chapter it clearly says their names are not in the book of life go to the same place they came from. Does it or not say that? Is it wrong according to you? That is your proof of who you believe most, the scripture or what you have to read into it.

The answer to your post after this one being about the same question you ask for this one is the same. Your possibility of another ending came from your view, show where it states your view in scripture in black and white, I have shown you mine in verses from the bible which is my proof, you keep saying could it not also be true;;;;;;;;;;;;;;but never show any scripture. That should tell you something, possibly that you are wrong. Merry Christmas
 
Last edited:
Upvote 0

LittleLambofJesus

Hebrews 2:14.... Pesky Devil, git!
Site Supporter
May 19, 2015
125,492
28,588
73
GOD's country of Texas
Visit site
✟1,237,270.00
Country
United States
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Single
Politics
US-Libertarian
often Jesus speaks to an indirect audience, those who are listening in, but directly is addressing another audience, for example Luke 13:1 "...when so many thousands of the people had gathered together ... he began to say to his disciples..." Jesus was teaching his disciples but the message more broadly impacted all the people listening in.

It would seem in the text it opens with the direct audience being his disciples and the indirect audience the Pharisees but in v14 there is a switch. The Pharisees who "heard all these things" ridiculed him and Jesus then begin to speak to them directly. Previous to this (ch15) we see the parables of the lost sheep, the lost coin and prodigal son and the direct audience is revealed in 15:1 being the "tax collectors and sinners" and it seems the indirect audience was again the Pharisees who "grumbled, saying, 'This man receives sinners and eats with them.'" then the direct audience switches in ch16 which opens saying "He also said to the disciples..." but what seems to be clear is during all of this the Pharisees were in the background until v14 when Jesus begins to speak to them directly.

I do believe the account of Lazarus and the Rich Man is a parable but it reads differently because of who the direct audience is which was the Pharisees and the point Jesus is trying to make. The account of Lazarus and the Rich Man is about contrasting the proper and dignified with the unclean and undeserving, essentially he was signaling out the Pharisees. This becomes most apparent after the characters die and the Rich Man is rejected his birth right of being beside Abraham and then is humiliated, tortured and permanently separated. This contrasted with Lazarus, which means "whom God helps", is depicted as essentially unclean and undeserving but is honored with a place beside Abraham. Those with Abraham would be understood as Abraham's sons so in the account Lazarus is honored as a son but the Rich Man is rejected as a son with this sort of recurring theme of "thrown out where there will be weeping and gnashing of teeth" judgment.

Like other parables the parable itself is not actually about sheep or lost coins and the point of this account is not a physical description of the afterlife for either side and if that's our take away then we miss the point. This account is about Jesus calling out the Pharisees in his underhanded sneaky way saying "You are not Abraham's Sons and you will not partake in his inheritance" with this counter-culture idea of highest honor to the lowest place and humiliation to the highest; he flip flops it and burst their bubble.

In these honor based cultures there is an art of calling someone out in an indirect way and that's what Jesus is doing but Jesus also indirectly provokes them too. The Pharisees started to make fun of Jesus and so Jesus turns around and tells them what he really thinks but in a way they can all awkwardly agree then shuffle away slowly before he starts to call them out by name.
Thank you for that excellent clarifying post.
Abraham represented the forefather of the Israelites thru Jacob/Israel.
Lazarus represented the resurrection of all peoples/nations thru the faith that is of both Abraham and Jesus.
The Rich Man representing unbelieving Israelites is not receiving the Promise giving to the Israelites because of their non belief in Jesus the Christ

I like the way this one commentator put it concerning the 5 parables actually being 1 whole parable:

Kindgdom Bible Studies Template Page

The Greek is very definite in making the word for parable clearly a singular noun. It is “the parable this..” This statement is followed by five separate stories, the first of which is the story of the lost sheep, and the last is the story of the rich man and Lazarus.
You see, the teaching in chapter sixteen is but the continuation of the discourse in chapter fifteen, without interruption. Now, which of the five stories He gave them in this sermon was called a parable? The only one of the five which is prefaced by the claim, “And He spoke this parable unto them,” was the story about the lost sheep. Was the lost sheep the only one that could be called a parable? And yet, any preacher or believer that I know will answer that the story of the lost coin, as well as the prodigal son, were also parables. Then why was the singular used - “this parable”? It should be clear to any thinking mind that all these stories were ONE PARABLE, like the facets of a diamond, as they turn each scintillates with new brilliance. Each was illustrating a view point of one great truth, and together they compose a whole. And this parabolic discourse of Jesus is continued into chapter sixteen of Luke, including the story of the rich man and Lazarus. The truth is that all five stories are each a fractional part of the complete parable, and when we read, “He spoke this parable unto them,” this embraces the entire collection of symbol-pictures which in their completeness constituted the parable which He spoke. It is a careless assumption and an unfounded assertion to argue that the story of the rich man and Lazarus is not a parable!

L. F. Hurley wrote, “Jesus loved the publicans and sinners and wanted to help and save them. But these self-righteous Pharisees and scribes, whose business it should have been to teach them the love of God and to invite them to love and obey God in return for His grace, not only hated these publicans and sinners, but ostracized and excommunicated them from all the privileges of Jewish worship and fellowship. So, in the presence of both leaders and outcasts Jesus gave this parable, part of it to bring hope to the outcasts and part of it to condemn the leaders for their heartlessness and neglect. The first part consisting of three stories, was for the encouragement of the publicans and sinners; the last part consisting of two stories, expresses His condemnation of the Pharisees and scribes.”
 
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

AnticipateHisComing

Newbie
Site Supporter
Dec 21, 2013
2,787
574
✟103,332.00
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
I like the way this one commentator put it concerning the 5 parables actually being 1 whole parable:
If you can acknowledge the 5 parables in Luke 15-16 being one narrative, then you should be able to identify a common theme. Heaven rejoices in the lost being found/redeemed because their life has eternal consequences, Luke 16:9 and God desires us to be saved. Why? Because it is going to be miserable for those not saved, Luke 16:23-24.

Yes, Jesus is warning the Pharisees, but the message is eternal, Luke 16:17. Note the the story of Lazarus is more than just parable. It is prophetic for Jesus did in fact raise Lazarus from the dead. This only prompted the Pharisees to plot Jesus' death to protect their power/authority.

John 11:45 Therefore many of the Jews who had come to visit Mary, and had seen what Jesus did, believed in him. 46 But some of them went to the Pharisees and told them what Jesus had done. 47 Then the chief priests and the Pharisees called a meeting of the Sanhedrin.

“What are we accomplishing?” they asked. “Here is this man performing many signs. 48 If we let him go on like this, everyone will believe in him, and then the Romans will come and take away both our temple and our nation.”

49 Then one of them, named Caiaphas, who was high priest that year, spoke up, “You know nothing at all! 50 You do not realize that it is better for you that one man die for the people than that the whole nation perish.
I am amazed at how even a corrupted high priest could still prophesy;
and even more so how one can be so wrong and yet so right. There is a poetic completeness to scripture and God's plan.
 
Upvote 0

AnticipateHisComing

Newbie
Site Supporter
Dec 21, 2013
2,787
574
✟103,332.00
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
By your own admission, the prima facie interpretation of that passage goes back 2,000 years. If only you'd been born sooner, you could've corrected the people who wrote and compiled the scriptures. Alas...
It is a parable.. most Bible scholars admit it.
Apparently that's a new thing because for the past 2,000 years...
And so the Catholics are right because that is what their Catholic teacher says as if their teachers never changed/invented traditions in 2000 years. How about your current "teacher"? He wants to change the Lord's Prayer after how many years. You kid yourself that you are always right and have always been right and never changed what you thought was right in 2000 years. You don't fool us and your statement is just unsupported opinion.

And, how many years did it take you to add "Jesus descended into hell" to the Apostle's Creed? How many years did it take for the doctrine of immaculate conception?

Now if you want to argue length of teaching being any indication of truth, you can take that up with present day Jews. They have you beat with the length of their traditions. Can you recognize that at one time they were God's ordained to maintain truth in the Church and yet even while doing so introduced false traditions? Can you admit that just because one generation has a specific role in God's plan, does not mean all successors of have the same role and authority and are guaranteed to be true?
 
Upvote 0

thecolorsblend

If God is your Father, who is your Mother?
Site Supporter
Jul 1, 2013
9,199
8,425
Gotham City, New Jersey
✟308,231.00
Country
United States
Faith
Catholic
Marital Status
Married
And so the Catholics are right because that is what their Catholic teacher says as if their teachers never changed/invented traditions in 2000 years. How about your current "teacher"? He wants to change the Lord's Prayer after how many years.
How is he changing the prayer? Sacred scripture will say what it has always said.

You kid yourself that you are always right and have always been right and never changed what you thought was right in 2000 years.
My Church has refined her understanding of doctrine, theology and other things. The core truths of them are as they've always been. But, with prayerful contemplation, the Church better grasps those truths.

It should be understood that there is a kind of huge difference between a better understanding of the same doctrine and inventing a completely new doctrine out of whole cloth.

You don't fool us and your statement is just unsupported opinion.
Not really, even yeshuaslavejeff acknowledged that the parable view was ahistorical.

And, how many years did it take you to add "Jesus descended into hell" to the Apostle's Creed?
I didn't add it. But the Harrowing Of Hell was taught by many Early Church fathers. Since we're talking about the Apostle's Creed, I'm not aware of any airtight evidence that the descended into hell bit was a post-hoc addition to that creed. It's quite possible that I've missed something though.

But perhaps it's better that we not get lost in the weeds with this and other tangential matters. The fact remains that the common and accepted method of interpretation of this passage for the vast bulk of the Church's history has been to take the words at face value and assume Our Lord was speaking literally and factually rather than in some other mode.

Now if you want to argue length of teaching being any indication of truth,
I've implied that a teaching's worthiness will have some relation to history. That said, I have never (and would never) say that a new teaching isn't possible. If it can be justified without contradicting anything else, I think it would be worth considering.

My main gripes with interpreting the story of Lazarus and the rich man as a parable are that (1) doing so contradicts historical understanding of that passage and (2) doing so runs contrary to the prima facie interpretation which is so obvious as to be self-evident in that passage.

Through this thread, people have responded to me with vague appeals to a nameless authority, created strange-brew ad absurdum arguments, flatly told me I'm wrong, etc. But if there's been a reply directed at me which factually rebuffed both of the above issues I mentioned, I must not have seen it.

And I still haven't seen it.
 
Upvote 0

BobRyan

Junior Member
Angels Team
Site Supporter
Nov 21, 2008
51,352
10,607
Georgia
✟912,157.00
Country
United States
Faith
SDA
Marital Status
Married
Huh? Pardon me for not quoting the entire Bible in my post. Also where does your quote say those in "hell" or the LOF (lake of fire) can't be saved?

It is impossible to be saved from the 2nd-death judgment - lake of fire ... if you are already in it.
 
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

LittleLambofJesus

Hebrews 2:14.... Pesky Devil, git!
Site Supporter
May 19, 2015
125,492
28,588
73
GOD's country of Texas
Visit site
✟1,237,270.00
Country
United States
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Single
Politics
US-Libertarian
It's most misunderstood parable because people think that it is parable . In parables people don't have names . It's actuall even which happend ans Jesus is telling you about it , and this man is still burning 2000 years later and will be burning forever .

It's not about that he was Rich , but that he was rich and was egoistic his whole life and never shared with anybody , he treat his servants like dogs , he even wanted Lazarus to serve him and give him water while he is burning .
He knew that he did wrong , he also knew past , he knew that his brothers will get same punishment if they don't repent . He never said that this was not just punishment .
Do you and or other believe the 5 brothers mentioned in that parable has any significance?

"for I am having 5 brothers...." Luke 16:28
"for I am having 5 brothers...." Luke 16:28

Luke 16:28 "For I have five brothers that he may be testifying to them, that no also they may be coming into the place, this, of the torment/basanou <931>".
Luke 16:29 "Abraham said to him, 'they have Moses and the prophets; let them hear them.' "

Lazarus and the Rich Man - Here a little, there a little - Commentary
While the significance of this seemingly pointless detail has been neglected by scholars throughout the centuries, you can be certain that it did not escape the notice of the Pharisees and scribes to which Christ was speaking. They thoroughly knew their history and were extremely proud of their heritage. Yeshua wanted those self-righteous Pharisees to know exactly who He was referring to with this parable. This detail cements the identity of the rich man as the house of Judah, the Jews!
 
  • Like
Reactions: Anguspure
Upvote 0