Rich-man and Lazarus True story or Parable

[LittleLambofJesus]

Is there a vss./passage where heaven is compared to a mustard seed? If not, what is the relevance?

There is a well known maxim about Bible interpretation. If the plain sense makes good sense, then it is nonsense to look for any other sense. Since both Rabbinical schools in 1st century Israel, Hillel and Shammai, taught a literal hell where the wicked were punished forever, we can assume that Jesus was referring to that place and that is what his disciples, and the Jews if they were still eavesdropping, would have understood.

Never heard of them.......Did they believe a literal Jesus existed?

 

[brinny]

Actually, it is interesting to note that it nowhere says that. This is why we know it's a parable. There are no sins listed there. It seems that Lazarus was saved because he was poor and the rich man was lost because he was very very rich.

That doesn't make sense.

There is a reason the rich man was where he was. I got a hunch that the rich man and Lazarus knew each other and the rich man was an un-blessing to Lazarus and only added to his misery, during their earthly lives. Therefore he was under the wrath OF God.

Thus is the fate of those who kick others when they're down.

 

[LittleLambofJesus]

There is a reason the rich man was where he was. I got a hunch that the rich man and Lazarus knew each other and the rich man was an un-blessing to Lazarus and only added to his misery, during their earthly lives. Therefore he was under the wrath OF God.

Thus is the fate of those who kick others when they're down.

These corrupt Judean rulers knew Lazarus..why do ya think they wanted to kill him?

John 12:10 Counsel yet the Chief-Priests that also the Lazarus they may be killing.

http://www.christianforums.com/t7461118/#post54553876
Lazarus and 2 witnesses of Reve 11 similarity

 

[Der Alte]

I agree. Why would Yahshua neglect the importance of righteousness? The belief in Hell has never been a teaching in Judaism. Is there any reason to believe that Yahshua was a Gnostic or a Pagan?

Despite your user name you evidently do not know much about Judaism. The two Rabbinical schools in 1st century Israel, Hillel and Shammai, clearly taught a literal hell where the wicked were punished forever.

Talmud – Tractate Rosh Hashanah

We have learned in a Boraitha: The school of Shammai said: There are three divisions of mankind at the Resurrection: the wholly righteous, the utterly wicked, and the average class. The wholly righteous are at once inscribed, and life is decreed for them; the utterly wicked are at once inscribed, and destined for Gehenna, as we read [Dan. xii. 2]: "And many of them that sleep in the dust shall awake, some to everlasting life, and some to shame and everlasting contempt." The third class, the men between the former two, descend to Gehenna, but they weep and come up again, in accordance with the passage [Zech. xiii. 9]: "And I will bring the third part through the fire, and I will refine them as silver is refined, and will try them as gold is tried; and he shall call on My name, and I will answer him."

Concerning this last class of men Hannah says [I Sam. ii. 6]: "The Lord causeth to die and maketh alive, He bringeth down to the grave and bringeth up again." The school of Hillel says: The Merciful One inclines (the scale of justice) to the side of mercy, and of this third class of men David says [Psalms, cxvi. 1]: "It is lovely to me that the Lord heareth my voice"; in fact, David applies to them the Psalm mentioned down to the words, "Thou hast delivered my soul from death" [ibid. 8].

Transgressors of Jewish birth and also of non-Jewish birth, who sin with their body descend to Gehenna, and are judged there for twelve months; after that time their bodies are destroyed and burnt, and the winds scatter their ashes under the soles of the feet of the righteous, as we read [Mal. iii. 23]: "And ye shall tread down the wicked, for they shall be as ashes under the soles of your feet"; but as for Minim, informers and disbelievers, who deny the Torah, or Resurrection, or separate themselves from the congregation, or who inspire their fellowmen with dread of them, or who sin and cause others to sin, as did Jeroboam the son of Nebat and his followers, they all descend to Gehenna, and are judged there from generation to generation, as it is said [Isa. lxvi. 24]: "And they shall go forth and look upon the carcases of the men who have transgressed against Me; for their worm shall not die, neither shall their fire be quenched." Even when Gehenna will be destroyed, they will not be consumed, as it is written [Psalms, xlix. 15]: "And their forms wasteth away in the nether world," which the sages comment upon to mean that their forms shall endure even when the grave is no more. Concerning them Hannah says [I Sam. ii. 10]: "The adversaries of the Lord shall be broken to pieces." R. Itz'hac b. Abhin says: "Their faces are black like the sides of a caldron"; while Rabha remarked: "Those who are now the handsomest of the people of Me'huzza will yet be called the children of Gehenna."

Tract Rosh Hashana: Chapter I.​

 

[Der Alte]

Is there a vss./passage where heaven is compared to a mustard seed? If not, what is the relevance?

There is a well known maxim about Bible interpretation. "If the plain sense makes good sense, then it is nonsense to look for any other sense."

Since both Rabbinical schools in 1st century Israel, Hillel and Shammai, taught a literal hell where the wicked were punished forever, we can assume that Jesus was referring to that place and that is what his disciples, and the Jews if they were still eavesdropping, would have understood.

Never heard of them.......Did they believe a literal Jesus existed?

Since the schools were operating at the time of Jesus it is very likely they knew of him as did all the Jewish leaders of that day. Jesus is mentioned in the Talmud, many times very unfavorably.

 

[LittleLambofJesus]

Since the schools were operating at the time of Jesus it is very likely they knew of him as did all the Jewish leaders of that day. Jesus is mentioned in the Talmud, many times very unfavorably.

I read thru it once [as I did with the Quran]. That was years ago tho

Truth About the Talmud: Judaism's Holiest Book
The Truth About the Talmud

 

[Yab Yum]

Not sure if this has been suggested yet. But is not the Hebrew equivalent of "Lazarus" [helpless], "Eliezer" [God helps]?

If so is it possible this parable is referring to the fact that whereas the Jews looked to Judah [the Pharisees, dressed in purple and fine linen, who has five brothers from his mother Leah] and Abraham, the Gentiles can now look to Abraham's steward for the inheritance of the New Covenant?

Just a thought.

 

[LittleLambofJesus]

Not sure if this has been suggested yet. But is not the Hebrew equivalent of "Lazarus" [helpless], "Eliezer" [God helps]?

If so is it possible this parable is referring to the fact that whereas the Jews looked to Judah [the Pharisees, dressed in purple and fine linen, who has five brothers from his mother Leah] and Abraham, the Gentiles can now look to Abraham's steward for the inheritance of the New Covenant?

Just a thought.

Excellent point! Thanks for bringing that up

Any thoughts on this post I posted earlier?

http://www.christianforums.com/t7306890/#post54805230

 

[Der Alte]

Actually, it is interesting to note that it nowhere says that. This is why we know it's a parable. There are no sins listed there. It seems that Lazarus was saved because he was poor and the rich man was lost because he was very very rich.

That doesn't make sense.

The text does not say Lazarus ate or did eat of the crumbs. The word translated "desiring" in Luke 16:21, "desiring to be fed" means it was unfulfilled. And Jews were obligated by God's law to care for the poor.

Lev 25:35 And if thy brother be waxen poor, and fallen in decay with thee; then thou shalt relieve him: yea, though he be a stranger, or a sojourner; that he may live with thee.​

 

[Yab Yum]

Excellent point! Thanks for bringing that up

Any thoughts on this post I posted earlier?

http://www.christianforums.com/t7306890/#post54805230

You think the parable could be referring to the same man? (Sorry I have not gone through much of this thread).

 

[Jig]

Likewise heaven may in fact be a literal mustard seed? Doesn't follow.

Jesus was using an analogy. All analogies fail if you press the points. The Kingdom "IS LIKE". The only perfect analogy would be to compare the Kingdom of God to the Kingdom of God. You've failed to interpret this literary device correctly. It is not supposed to be literal, much in the same way a metaphor isn't supposed to.

However, it follows perfectly if you understand how analogies work and apply proper hermeneutics. The issue is Jesus compared the Kingdom to something REAL, a mustard seed. Not to something pretend or made-up.

 

[Jig]

Or casting a literal mountain into the sea

Please read the post above.

Mountains are real - this is my point. The situation, moving them, is literary exaggeration to emphasize the power of having faith - that has nothing to do with my point.

 

[LittleLambofJesus]

Please read the post above.

Mountains are real - this is my point. The situation, moving them, is literary exaggeration to emphasize the power of having faith - that has nothing to do with my point.

Good point

Reve 14:12 Here the endurance of the Saints is, the ones keeping the commandments of the God and the Faith of Jesus.

Luke 16:26 And upon all of these between us and ye a great chasm hath been established

http://www.christianforums.com/t7436472-2/#post54015375
Luke 16:26 and the great "chasm/gulf".

 

[Yab Yum]

Jesus was using an analogy. All analogies fail if you press the points. The Kingdom "IS LIKE". The only perfect analogy would be to compare the Kingdom of God to the Kingdom of God. You've failed to interpret this literary device correctly. It is not supposed to be literal, much in the same way a metaphor isn't supposed to.

However, it follows perfectly if you understand how analogies work and apply proper hermeneutics. The issue is Jesus compared the Kingdom to something REAL, a mustard seed. Not to something pretend or made-up.

OK. But John the Baptist also said Jesus was the lamb of God but not that Jesus was "like" the lamb of God. Does that mean Jesus is going to grow wool and sprout horns? Yes I'm being facetious. Point is though when do we know something is a metaphor and when do we know it isn't? How do we know for sure the parable isn't about the Pharisees?

 

[Der Alte]

Jesus was using an analogy. All analogies fail if you press the points. The Kingdom "IS LIKE". The only perfect analogy would be to compare the Kingdom of God to the Kingdom of God. You've failed to interpret this literary device correctly. It is not supposed to be literal, much in the same way a metaphor isn't supposed to.

However, it follows perfectly if you understand how analogies work and apply proper hermeneutics. The issue is Jesus compared the Kingdom to something REAL, a mustard seed. Not to something pretend or made-up.

OK. But John the Baptist also said Jesus was the lamb of God but not that Jesus was "like" the lamb of God. Does that mean Jesus is going to grow wool and sprout horns? Yes I'm being facetious. Point is though when do we know something is a metaphor and when do we know it isn't? How do we know for sure the parable isn't about the Pharisees?

"If the plain sense makes good sense then it is nonsense to look for any other sense." When e.g. John said, "Behold the lamb of God which takes away the sins of the world." The plain sense is that Jesus was actually a lamb. We know that is nonsense so John was using a figure of speech. How do we know that the story of Lazarus & the rich man is literal and not a parable. Ask the early church all of whom spoke Greek.

Irenaeus Against Heresies Book II Chapter XXXIV.-Souls Can Be Recognised in the Separate State, and are Immortal Although They Once Had a Beginning.
Ireneaeus, [120-202 AD], was a disciple of Polycarp, who was a disciple of John.

1. The Lord has taught with very great fulness, that souls not only continue to exist, not by passing from body to body, but that they preserve the same form [in their separate state] as the body had to which they were adapted, and that they remember the deeds which they did in this state of existence, and from which they have now ceased,-in that narrative which is recorded respecting the rich man and that Lazarus who found repose in the bosom of Abraham. In this account He states that Dives [=Latin for rich] knew Lazarus after death, and Abraham in like manner, and that each one of these persons continued in his own proper position, and that [Dives] requested Lazarus to be sent to relieve him-[Lazarus], on whom he did not [formerly] bestow even the crumbs [which fell] from his table. [He tells us] also of the answer given by Abraham, who was acquainted not only with what respected himself, but Dives also, and who enjoined those who did not wish to come into that place of torment to believe Moses and the prophets, and to receive the preaching of Him who was to rise again from the dead. By these things, then, it is plainly declared that souls continue to exist that they do not pass from body to body, that they possess the form of a man, so that they may be recognised, and retain the memory of things in this world; moreover, that the gift of prophecy was possessed by Abraham, and that each class of souls] receives a habitation such as it has deserved, even before the judgment.

ANF01. The Apostolic Fathers with Justin Martyr and Irenaeus | Christian Classics Ethereal Library

Tertullian - 9. A Treatise On The Soul
Chapter 7 [145-220 Ad]

The Soul’s Corporeality Demonstrated Out Of The Gospels

So far as the philosophers are concerned, we have said enough. As for our own teachers, indeed, our reference to them is ex abundant — a surplusage of authority: in the Gospel itself they will be found to have the clearest evidence for the corporeal nature of the soul. In hell the soul of a certain man is in torment, punished in flames, suffering excruciating thirst, and imploring from the finger of a happier soul, for his tongue, the solace of a drop of water. Do you suppose that this end of the blessed poor man and the miserable rich man is only imaginary? Then why the name of Lazarus in this narrative, if the circumstance is not in (the category of) a real occurrence? But even if it is to be regarded as imaginary, it will still be a testimony to truth and reality. For unless the soul possessed corporeality, the image of a soul could not possibly contain a finger of a bodily substance; nor would the Scripture feign a statement about the limbs of a body, if these had no existence. But what is that which is removed to Hades after the separation of the body; which is there detained; which is reserved until the day of judgment; to which Christ also, on dying, descended? I imagine it is the souls of the patriarchs. But wherefore (all this), if the soul is nothing in its subterranean abode? For nothing it certainly is, if it is not a bodily substance. For whatever is incorporeal is incapable of being kept and guarded in any way; it is also exempt from either punishment or refreshment. That must be a body, by which punishment and refreshment can be experienced. Of this I shall treat more fully in a more fitting place. Therefore, whatever amount of punishment or refreshment the soul tastes in Hades, in its prison or lodging, in the fire or in Abraham’s bosom, it gives proof thereby of its own corporeality. For an incorporeal thing suffers nothing, not having that which makes it capable of suffering; else, if it has such capacity, it must be a bodily substance. For in as far as every corporeal thing is capable of suffering, in so far is that which is capable of suffering also corporeal.

Cyprian - Epistle 54 To Cornelius, Concerning Fortunatus And Felicissimus, Or Against The Heretics [200-258 AD]

By his mouth, therefore, and by his words, is every one at once betrayed; and whether he has Christ in his heart, or Antichrist, is discerned in his speaking, according to what the Lord says in His Gospel, “O generation of vipers, how can ye, being evil, speak good things? for out of the abundance of the heart the mouth speaketh. A good man out of the good treasure bringeth forth good things; 703 and an evil man out of the evil treasure bringeth forth evil things.” Whence also that rich sinner who implores help from Lazarus, then laid in Abraham’s bosom, and established in a place of comfort, while he, writhing in torments, is consumed by the heats of burning flame, suffers most punishment of all parts of his body in his mouth and his tongue, because doubtless in his mouth and his tongue he had most sinned.


Methodius - A SYNOPSIS OF SOME APOSTOLIC WORDS FROM THE SAME DISCOURSE. [A.D. 260-312].

XIX. He says that Origen holds these opinions which he refutes. And there may be a doubt concerning Lazarus and the rich man. The simpler persons think that these things were spoken as though both were receiving their due for the things which they had done in life in their bodies; but the more accurate think that, since no one is left in life after the resurrection,
these things do not happen at the resurrection. For the rich man says: “I have five brethren;... lest they also come into this place of torment, “ send Lazarus, that he may tell them of those things which are here. And, therefore, if we ask respecting the “tongue,” and the “finger,” and “Abraham’s bosom,” and the reclining there, it may perhaps be that the soul receives in the change a form similar in appearance to its gross and 718 earthly body. If, then, any one of those who have fallen asleep is recorded as having appeared, in the same way he has been seen in the form which he had when he was in the flesh. Besides, when Samuel appeared, it is clear that, being seen, he was clothed in a body; and this must especially be admitted, if we are pressed by arguments which prove that the essence of the soul is incorporeal, and is manifested by itself. But the rich man in torment, and the poor man who was comforted in the bosom of Abraham, are said, the one to be punished in Hades, and the other to be comforted in Abraham’s bosom, before the appearing of the Savior, and before the end of the world, and therefore before the resurrection; teaching that now already, at the change, the soul rises a body.​

To verify writings of the ECF, click (Here).

 

[Yab Yum]

Other than Luke 16 can you name any parable where Jesus named a specific location or geography?

Mark 4:15 Mentions Satan
Matt. 13:37 Mentions The Son of man
Matt. 13:39 Mentions The devil
Matt. 15:13 Mentions God the Father
Luke 4:23 Jesus applies ‘Physician’ to Himself

 

[Yab Yum]

All these things Jesus speaks in parables to the throngs, and apart from a parable He spoke nothing to them... Mat. 13:34.

 

[Yab Yum]

Luke 15:1 Now the tax collectors and sinners were all drawing near to hear him. 2 And the Pharisees and the scribes grumbled, saying, "This man receives sinners and eats with them." 3 So he told them this parable ... 8 "Or ... 11 And he said A CERTAIN MAN ... 16:1 There was A CERTAIN RICH MAN ... 19 There was A CERTAIN RICH MAN ...

 

[Yab Yum]

Only I speak Greek, only people who speak Greek go to heaven, God only loves people who speak Greek, etc etc. Kidding, just kidding.

Are the interpretations of the ECFs you set forth absolutely the one and only official dogma of the church with respect to the interpretation of this passage?

CCC 66: Yet even if Revelation is already complete, it has not been made completely explicit; it remains for Christian faith gradually to grasp its full significance over the course of the centuries.

Indeed it would seem that some people have different designs on this particular passage:

CCC 2463: How can we not recognize Lazarus, the hungry beggar in the parable (cf. Lk 17:19-31), in the multitude of human beings without bread, a roof or a place to stay? How can we fail to hear Jesus: "As you did it not to one of the least of these, you did it not to me" (Mt 25:45)?

The mere fact that all the ECFs you cite understand the passage to signify different things tells us something. Ireneaeus says continued existence. Tertullian says corporeality. Cyprian says punishments in mouth and tongue. Methodius says bodily form arises before resurrection.

 

[Der Alte]

Other than Luke 16 can you name any parable where Jesus named a specific location or geography?

Mark 4:15 Mentions Satan
Matt. 13:37 Mentions The Son of man
Matt. 13:39 Mentions The devil
Matt. 15:13 Mentions God the Father
Luke 4:23 Jesus applies ‘Physician’ to Himself

You will observe that I said "specific location or geography." Mk 4:15, So what? Many people claim that Satan is not an actual being. In none of your examples is the "person" you named the subject. They are what was being compared to.

Luke 4:23 is not a parable.