Rich-man and Lazarus True story or Parable

[Der Alte]

Thks.
Did you know "gog" is also used in the transliterated greek word for "synagogue"

Reve 3:9 Behold! I am giving out of the synagogue/sun-agwghV <4864> of the Satan, to-the ones saying themselves Judeans to-be and not they are, but are false.
Behold! I shall be making them that they shall be arriving, and they shall be worshipping before the feet of thee, and they may be knowing that I love/hgaphsa <25> (5656) thee.

Sounds similar but different roots.

G4864 &#963;&#965;&#957;&#945;&#947;&#969;&#947;&#951;&#769; sunago&#772;ge&#772; soon-ag-o-gay'

From (the reduplicated form of) G4863; an assemblage of persons; specifically a Jewish “synagogue” (the meeting or the place); by analogy a Christian church: - assembly, congregation, synagogue.

G4863 &#963;&#965;&#957;&#945;&#769;&#947;&#969; sunago&#772; soon-ag'-o

From G4862 and G71; to lead together, that is, collect or convene; specifically to entertain (hospitably): - + accompany, assemble (selves, together), bestow, come together, gather (selves together, up, together), lead into, resort, take in.
​

​

​

 

[LittleLambofJesus]

Sounds similar but different roots.

G4864 &#963;&#965;&#957;&#945;&#947;&#969;&#947;&#951;&#769; sunago&#772;ge&#772; soon-ag-o-gay'

From (the reduplicated form of) G4863; an assemblage of persons; specifically a Jewish “synagogue” (the meeting or the place); by analogy a Christian church: - assembly, congregation, synagogue.

G4863 &#963;&#965;&#957;&#945;&#769;&#947;&#969; sunago&#772; soon-ag'-o

From G4862 and G71; to lead together, that is, collect or convene; specifically to entertain (hospitably): - + accompany, assemble (selves, together), bestow, come together, gather (selves together, up, together), lead into, resort, take in.

Magog is also close to the word used for "magician".
So literally it would be an "assembly of magicians"

Acts 13:6 Passing thru yet the island until Paphos/pafou <3974>, they found a certain man who a magian/magon <3097> false prophet Judean to whom name Bar-Jesus

 

[heritage36]

Rich man and Lazarus is actually sattire, not parable or truth. Jesus used many forms of communication to work with who he was telling these stories to. You really have to take context into consideration when considering Rich man and Lazarus, as there are many things that do not add up to it having much if any truth to it. First off, he is talking to pharisees when he tells this, so why would be reveal a unbelievable story like this to them of all people and not only to his disciples if it were truth?

Also, consider that Abraham was very rich himself, and we were never told that the Rich man was a bad person, just that he was rich, as was Abraham, so why would Abraham recieve a better fortune? Why is there no mention of lazarus being righteous and no mention of the rich man being a wicked person? I don't think this is even talking about "Heaven" and "Hell" here, just a way to reprove the pharisees for being rich and not taking care of the poor.

 

[Hentenza]

Rich man and Lazarus is actually sattire, not parable or truth. Jesus used many forms of communication to work with who he was telling these stories to. You really have to take context into consideration when considering Rich man and Lazarus, as there are many things that do not add up to it having much if any truth to it. First off, he is talking to pharisees when he tells this, so why would be reveal a unbelievable story like this to them of all people and not only to his disciples if it were truth?

Jesus was talking to His disciples. The pharisees merely overheard was Jesus was saying (see v.14). Furthermore, all that Jesus ever told the pharisees was truthful. Jesus never lied, otherwise, He would have sinned. The parable is not a satire.

Also, consider that Abraham was very rich himself, and we were never told that the Rich man was a bad person, just that he was rich, as was Abraham, so why would Abraham recieve a better fortune? Why is there no mention of lazarus being righteous and no mention of the rich man being a wicked person? I don't think this is even talking about "Heaven" and "Hell" here, just a way to reprove the pharisees for being rich and not taking care of the poor.

Abraham was indeed rich, however, his object of faith and adoration was God not money. Being rich is not the issue. Lazarus merely wanted to eat the crumbs from the rich man's table but the rich man declined to help him including allowing dogs (presumably his dogs) to lick the mans sores. The rich man was a typical pharisee of the time which was only concerned with himself and what others thought of him. This is evidenced by him asking Abraham to allow him to warn his brothers and Abraham's response to him.

All parables told by Jesus include names of real people, real places, etc. There is no grammatical, biblical, or historical reason to assume that this parable is different than any other and not truthful.

 

[NewCreature13]

its true - jesus can't lie

 

[Jig]

I don't think this is even talking about "Heaven" and "Hell" here

You're right. Jesus is talking about Hades.

No one is in the Lake of Fire (Hell) or on the New Earth (Heaven) yet. This is all AFTER judgment.

 

[Der Alte]

Rich man and Lazarus is actually sattire, not parable or truth. Jesus used many forms of communication to work with who he was telling these stories to. You really have to take context into consideration when considering Rich man and Lazarus, as there are many things that do not add up to it having much if any truth to it. First off, he is talking to pharisees when he tells this, so why would be reveal a unbelievable story like this to them of all people and not only to his disciples if it were truth?

Also, consider that Abraham was very rich himself, and we were never told that the Rich man was a bad person, just that he was rich, as was Abraham, so why would Abraham recieve a better fortune? Why is there no mention of lazarus being righteous and no mention of the rich man being a wicked person? I don't think this is even talking about "Heaven" and "Hell" here, just a way to reprove the pharisees for being rich and not taking care of the poor.

First off Jesus was NOT talking to the Pharisees! See Luke 16:1 and 17:1, "Jesus said to his disciples." Some of the Pharisees happened to overhear part of Jesus' teaching.

What did the rich man do? Nothing. Note the passages says Lazarus "desired" to eat of the crumbs from the rich man's table. That word means unfulfilled desire. Nothing says Lazarus did eat of those crumbs. What should the rich man have done and didn't?

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.​

In this story, NOT parable, Jesus mentions the name of a historical person. In none of the legitimate parables is a specific person named. Neither Jesus nor any other NT writer ever identifies this story as a parable. If Abraham was not in that specific place and did not say the words that Jesus quoted then Jesus lied.

 

[Der Alte]

Rich man and Lazarus is actually sattire, not parable or truth. Jesus used many forms of communication to work with who he was telling these stories to. You really have to take context into consideration when considering Rich man and Lazarus, as there are many things that do not add up to it having much if any truth to it. First off, he is talking to pharisees when he tells this, so why would be reveal a unbelievable story like this to them of all people and not only to his disciples if it were truth?

Also, consider that Abraham was very rich himself, and we were never told that the Rich man was a bad person, just that he was rich, as was Abraham, so why would Abraham recieve a better fortune? Why is there no mention of lazarus being righteous and no mention of the rich man being a wicked person? I don't think this is even talking about "Heaven" and "Hell" here, just a way to reprove the pharisees for being rich and not taking care of the poor.

First off Jesus was NOT talking to the Pharisees! See Luke 16:1 and 17:1, "Jesus said to his disciples." Some of the Pharisees happened to overhear part of Jesus' teaching.

What did the rich man do? Nothing. Note the passages says Lazarus "desired" to eat of the crumbs from the rich man's table. That word means unfulfilled desire. Nothing says Lazarus did eat of those crumbs. What should the rich man have done and didn't?

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.​

In this story, NOT parable, Jesus mentions the name of a historical person. In none of the legitimate parables is a specific person named. Neither Jesus nor any other NT writer ever identifies this story as a parable. If Abraham was not in that specific place and did not say the words that Jesus quoted then Jesus lied.

 

[LittleLambofJesus]

You're right. Jesus is talking about Hades.

No one is in the Lake of Fire (Hell) or on the New Earth (Heaven) yet. This is all AFTER judgment.

Death and Hades are also cast into the LoF

Reve 6:8 And I saw and behold! a green horse and the one sitting up on it a name to him the death, and the hades followed with him.
And was given to them authority upon the fourth of the land to-kill in sword and in famine and in death and by the beasts of the land.

Reve 20:14 And the Death and the Hades were cast into the lake of the fire.
This the Death, the Second, is the Lake of the fire

 

[visionary]

I see it as a DeJa Vu' for several reasons.

The story names "Lazarus", there is a specific conversation, and a definite location unlike the other parables the Lord told...

I can see it now... Here we are after the thousand year rest, inside the Camp surrounded by the wicked... Lazarus and Yeshua are standing on the wall looking down on the horde of the wicked gathered around.... Then someone from the crowd of the wicked looks up and sees Lazarus and has the conversation... It is "DeJa Vu" for all who know the story. It is especially true for those who were there that day when our Lord told the story.

 

[Der Alte]

Death and Hades are also cast into the LoF

Reve 6:8 And I saw and behold! a green horse and the one sitting up on it a name to him the death, and the hades followed with him.
And was given to them authority upon the fourth of the land to-kill in sword and in famine and in death and by the beasts of the land.

Reve 20:14 And the Death and the Hades were cast into the lake of the fire.
This the Death, the Second, is the Lake of the fire.

I would say the the angel of death and the demon or angel of hell were cast into the LOF. Death, the punctiliar cessation of life, has no physical properties and cannot be thrown anywhere. The angel of death and the demon/angel of hell are sentient beings who are given power to kill they are cast into the LOF and their power to kill ended.

 

[Jig]

I would say the the angel of death and the demon or angel of hell were cast into the LOF. Death, the punctiliar cessation of life, has no physical properties and cannot be thrown anywhere. The angel of death and the demon/angel of hell are sentient beings who are given power to kill they are cast into the LOF and their power to kill ended.

Scripture nowhere teaches that there is a specific angel of death.

God, and God alone, is sovereign over the timing of our deaths. No angel or demon can in any sense cause our death before the time God has willed it to occur. Sure, angels can cause death, and may be involved in what happens to us after death—but there is no such thing as the “angel of death.”

 

[martymonster]

Greetings. How do others view that story Jesus told to the Jews in Luke 16 concerning the rich-man and lazarus. A parable or true story? This is one of the largest studies I have of the NT/NC.

I myself humbly view it as a "Covenantle" parable, but would like to here views from other fellow Christians of it. Thanks.......

Matthew 3:9 "And no ye should be thinking to say in yourselves 'a Father we are having, the Abraham'. For I am saying unto ye, that is able the God out of the Stones, these, to raise-up offsprings/children to the Abraham. [Luke 3:8/16:24]

Luke 16:24 And he sounding said: "Father Abraham! be thou merciful to-me! and send Lazarus!, that he should be dipping the tip of the finger of him of water, and should be cooling down the tongue of me,--that I am being pained in the Flame,this."

Hi there I'm sure what you need is not for someone to tell you whether Lazarus and the Rich man is a parable but what a parable actually is.

Apparently, those of you who think this a parable designed to teach about the reality of a place of everlasting punishment have no idea!

If it was a true account of Lazarus and the rich man it the after life, then that's what it would be, a real life account and not a parable.

Further more, if it is indeed a parable designed to warn it's hearers about the dire consequences of rejecting Christ then why does it not mention either of the two men's qualifications for the eternal destinies?

And then there's just this.

Mat 13:10 And the disciples came, and said unto him, Why speakest thou unto them in parables?
Mat 13:11 He answered and said unto them, Because it is given unto you to know the mysteries of the kingdom of heaven, but to them it is not given.
Mat 13:12 For whosoever hath, to him shall be given, and he shall have more abundance: but whosoever hath not, from him shall be taken away even that he hath.
Mat 13:13 Therefore speak I to them in parables: because they seeing see not; and hearing they hear not, neither do they understand.
Mat 13:14 And in them is fulfilled the prophecy of Esaias, which saith, By hearing ye shall hear, and shall not understand; and seeing ye shall see, and shall not perceive:
Mat 13:15 For this people's heart is waxed gross, and their ears are dull of hearing, and their eyes they have closed; lest at any time they should see with their eyes, and hear with their ears, and should understand with their heart, and should be converted, and I should heal them.

In this verse He makes it perfectly clear that He's not trying to make everyone understand and on top of that He's not trying to save everyone anyway.

So how does this jive with the supposed dire warning that He's just got to get across to people so they don't end up in this terrible place then eh?

It is a parable but it's true meaning is hidden from the vast majority just like all of the other parables.

 

[Der Alte]

Scripture nowhere teaches that there is a specific angel of death.

God, and God alone, is sovereign over the timing of our deaths. No angel or demon can in any sense cause our death before the time God has willed it to occur. Sure, angels can cause death, and may be involved in what happens to us after death—but there is no such thing as the “angel of death.”

You are partly correct! There is no scripture which identifies a specific being as "the angel of death." That is merely a convenient title for me. But God did send an angel to kill all the first born in Exodus. And again in Ezekiel God sent an angel to kill those who worshipped idols. And in Revelation there is a sentient being, not specifically called an angel, named "death," along with another sentient being named "hell." both of whom God sent to destroy 1/4 of the earth.

Rev 6:8 And I looked, and behold a pale horse: and his name that sat on him was Death, and Hell followed with him. And power was given unto them over the fourth part of the earth, to kill with sword, and with hunger, and with death, and with the beasts of the earth.​

These two beings were later cast into the lake of fire and their power to kill was ended.

 

[Der Alte]

Hi there I'm sure what you need is not for someone to tell you whether Lazarus and the Rich man is a parable but what a parable actually is.

Apparently, those of you who think this a parable designed to teach about the reality of a place of everlasting punishment have no idea!

If it was a true account of Lazarus and the rich man it the after life, then that's what it would be, a real life account and not a parable.

Further more, if it is indeed a parable designed to warn it's hearers about the dire consequences of rejecting Christ then why does it not mention either of the two men's qualifications for the eternal destinies?

And then there's just this.

Mat 13:10 And the disciples came, and said unto him, Why speakest thou unto them in parables?
Mat 13:11 He answered and said unto them, Because it is given unto you to know the mysteries of the kingdom of heaven, but to them it is not given.
[ . . . ]

In this verse He makes it perfectly clear that He's not trying to make everyone understand and on top of that He's not trying to save everyone anyway.

So how does this jive with the supposed dire warning that He's just got to get across to people so they don't end up in this terrible place then eh?

It is a parable but it's true meaning is hidden from the vast majority just like all of the other parables.

Huge font sizes are not necessary to make your point. This is all well and good but Jesus was not talking to the multitudes, he was talking to his disciples.

Luk 16:1 And he said also unto his disciples, There was a certain rich man, which had a steward; and the same was accused unto him that he had wasted his goods.

Luk 17:1 Then said he unto the disciples, It is impossible but that offences will come: but woe unto him, through whom they come!​

 

[martymonster]

Huge font sizes are not necessary to make your point. This is all well and good but Jesus was not talking to the multitudes, he was talking to his disciples.

Luk 16:1 And he said also unto his disciples, There was a certain rich man, which had a steward; and the same was accused unto him that he had wasted his goods.

Luk 17:1 Then said he unto the disciples, It is impossible but that offences will come: but woe unto him, through whom they come!​

Jesus talked to the disciples in parables and they didn't understand either.

Mat 16:5 And when his disciples were come to the other side, they had forgotten to take bread.
Mat 16:6 Then Jesus said unto them, Take heed and beware of the leaven of the Pharisees and of the Sadducees.
Mat 16:7 And they reasoned among themselves, saying, It is because we have taken no bread.
Mat 16:8 Which when Jesus perceived, he said unto them, O ye of little faith, why reason ye among yourselves, because ye have brought no bread?
Mat 16:9 Do ye not yet understand, neither remember the five loaves of the five thousand, and how many baskets ye took up?

Just because Jesus was talking to His talking to His disciples, doesn't mean that He wasn't talking in parables.

Pretty much everything Christ said was a parable because Christ is spiritual and everything He says is spiritual.

Joh 6:63 It is the spirit that quickeneth; the flesh profiteth nothing: the words that I speak unto you, they are spirit, and they are life.

You notice that He doesn't say that the words He speaks aren't carnal and death?

Rom 8:6 For to be carnally minded is death; but to be spiritually minded is life and peace.
Rom 8:7 Because the carnal mind is enmity against God: for it is not subject to the law of God, neither indeed can be.
Rom 8:8 So then they that are in the flesh cannot please God.
Rom 8:9 But ye are not in the flesh, but in the Spirit, if so be that the Spirit of God dwell in you. Now if any man have not the Spirit of Christ, he is none of his.
Rom 8:10 And if Christ be in you, the body is dead because of sin; but the Spirit is life because of righteousness.

The only death Christ ever preached is the death of the flesh which must happen to everyone regardless of how spiritual they are, because flesh and blood cannot inherit the kingdom of God.

Not only was everything Christ said a parable but everything He did too.
eg. the loaves and the fishes, walking on water and indeed His death, but that is beyond the scope of this little discussion.

 

[Der Alte]

Jesus talked to the disciples in parables and they didn't understand either.

Mat 16:5 And when his disciples were come to the other side, they had forgotten to take bread.
Mat 16:6 Then Jesus said unto them, Take heed and beware of the leaven of the Pharisees and of the Sadducees.
Mat 16:7 And they reasoned among themselves, saying, It is because we have taken no bread.
Mat 16:8 Which when Jesus perceived, he said unto them, O ye of little faith, why reason ye among yourselves, because ye have brought no bread?
Mat 16:9 Do ye not yet understand, neither remember the five loaves of the five thousand, and how many baskets ye took up?

Using a metaphor "leaven" for "doctrine" is NOT a parable.

Just because Jesus was talking to His talking to His disciples, doesn't mean that He wasn't talking in parables.

True! But you merely saying this does NOT make everything Jesus said a parable.

Pretty much everything Christ said was a parable because Christ is spiritual and everything He says is spiritual.

I have heard this before, Jim Jones, David Koresh, etc. Did God give you some special revelation that the rest of us mere mortals are not worthy to receive?

[ . . . ]

The only death Christ ever preached is the death of the flesh which must happen to everyone regardless of how spiritual they are, because flesh and blood cannot inherit the kingdom of God.

See Matt 5:29-30, 13:39-42, 49; 18:8-9, 25:11-46, Mark 9:43-48, Luke 16:19-48.

Not only was everything Christ said a parable but everything He did too.
eg. the loaves and the fishes, walking on water and indeed His death, but that is beyond the scope of this little discussion.

. . . and only you have the correct interpretation of all these parables? Wonder why the entire early church, all of whom read and spoke Greek, the language of the NT, from 90 AD, when the NT was completed, until 300 AD never understood what you claim? Why did God wait 2000 years or so to reveal this to only you?

 

[heritage36]

Everyone responded to my posting by saying Jesus cannot lie, even though I did not say he lied, but that he spoke in sattire. If he cannot say things that are not factual in any form of speech, was Herrod actually a fox then when Jesus called him that in Luke 13:32?

 

[WarriorAngel]

Greetings. How do others view.....<snip>

Matthew 3:9 "And no ye should be thinking to say in yourselves 'a Father we are having, the Abraham'. For I am saying unto ye, that is able the God out of the Stones, these, to raise-up offsprings/children to the Abraham. [Luke 3:8/16:24]

Luke 16:24 And he sounding said: "Father Abraham! be thou merciful to-me! and send Lazarus!, that he should be dipping the tip of the finger of him of water, and should be cooling down the tongue of me,--that I am being pained in the Flame,this."

To point out what seems obvious to me - basically stemming from Tradition...

Nothing about this [possible] parable - is about hell.

The man is a believer to call Abraham his father.
People in Heaven cannot see ppl in hell. The great love would cause them pain to see it.
And ppl in hell are not so caring to wish to spare others of the misery.

In hell, they cannot see Heaven...it would be a comfort. They also want company - the more the merrier - hence the demons seek ruin of souls to have lots of company. Hence the term - Abyss.

I say possibly a parable, because Jesus would never share someone's actual judgement and will spare others knowing.

SO possibly He changed the name - but knew what the future would hold for those who are selfish within hearing of His parable.

They would need the fire to expiate their sins.


One last thought - how can Lazarus be sent - if ppl in Heaven cannot go to hell?
Obviously this is the fire of purgation.
We know how it works in the after life when we are there. Jesus would not even mention the rich man asking for Lazarus to help him - if he were in hell.

Blessings

 

[Der Alte]

Everyone responded to my posting by saying Jesus cannot lie, even though I did not say he lied, but that he spoke in sattire. If he cannot say things that are not factual in any form of speech, was Herrod actually a fox then when Jesus called him that in Luke 13:32?

There is a big difference between using a metaphor e.g. Herod/Fox, and a complete story 29 vss. long, every detail of which supposedly means something else, which OBTW, is never explained anywhere in scripture. Everybody and their pet cat has a theory what the story "really means." Nobody has ever explained how the early church, who spoke and read Greek, got is wrong but 2000 years later, they supposedly got it right although they don't read/understand Greek.