Lazarus and The Rich Man Part 2

Why use a Parable?

The disciples asked Jesus this very same question, they wanted to know why Christ made truth such a riddle for the public.

"The disciples came, and said to him, "Why do you speak to them in parables?" He answered them, "To you it is given to know the mysteries of the Kingdom of Heaven, but it is not given to them. For whoever has, to him will be given, and he will have abundance, but whoever doesn't have, from him will be taken away even that which he has. Therefore I speak to them in parables, because seeing they don't see, and hearing, they don't hear, neither do they understand.

In them the prophecy of Isaiah is fulfilled, which says, 'By hearing you will hear, and will in no way understand; Seeing you will see, and will in no way perceive: for this people's heart has grown callous, their ears are dull of hearing, they have closed their eyes; or else perhaps they might perceive with their eyes, hear with their ears, understand with their heart, and should turn again; and I would heal them.'

But blessed are your eyes, for they see; and your ears, for they hear. For most certainly I tell you that many prophets and righteous men desired to see the things which you see, and didn't see them; and to hear the things which you hear, and didn't hear them." (Matt. 13:10-15)

Walk Me Through It

Here is where I get into the crux of the paper, what does it all really mean. I want to go first over the different characters with in the story and then get into the differences surrounding these people and finally tie it all together to see the global message.

First let's look at a prophecy given to Moses when Israel fell away from God to worship other god's and do what they wanted. I want to submit this prophecy first, because I believe this prophecy is being given again by Jesus through a false Talmudic story that the Pharisees would have known. He uses it as a means to use their false beliefs against them as He has done before.

"You neglected the Rock who had fathered you; you forgot the God who had given you birth. The Lord saw this and drew back, provoked to anger by his own sons and daughters. He said, ‘I will abandon them; then see what becomes of them. For they are a twisted generation, children without integrity. They have roused my jealousy by worshiping things that are not God; they have provoked my anger with their useless idols.

Now I will rouse their jealousy through people who are not even a people; I will provoke their anger through the foolish Gentiles. For my anger blazes forth like fire and burns to the depths of the grave. It devours the earth and all its crops and ignites the foundations of the mountains." (Deut. 32:18-22 NIV)

God was showing even Moses way back then that His anger would be like fire down to the depths of the grave (She'ol\Hades), and that He would bring Israel to jealousy by making the Gentiles His people. Now God has come to earth to again find His people adulterous and forgetting the One who had given them birth.

"The Pharisees and Sadducees came, and testing him, asked him to show them a sign from heaven. But he answered them, "When it is evening, you say, 'It will be fair weather, for the sky is red.' In the morning, 'It will be foul weather today, for the sky is red and threatening.' Hypocrites! You know how to discern the appearance of the sky, but you can't discern the signs of the times! An evil and adulterous generation seeks after a sign, and there will be no sign given to it, except the sign of the prophet Jonah." He left them, and departed. (Mark 8:1-4)

Up to this point in Luke 16, Jesus had been eating with the tax collectors and other various multitudes of people (including the Pharisees), and gone through a number of parables speaking about those things that were lost, After His parable of The Lost Coin, the teachers around Him begin to scoff at Jesus, in which He sets up His story by confronting the scoffers. A generation without integrity, loving those things that are not God.

"The Pharisees, who were lovers of money, also heard all these things, and they scoffed at him. He said to them, "You are those who justify yourselves in the sight of men, but God knows your hearts. For that which is exalted among men is an abomination in the sight of God. The law and the prophets were until John. From that time the Good News of the Kingdom of God is preached, and everyone is forcing his way into it. But it is easier for heaven and earth to pass away, than for one tiny stroke of a pen in the law to fall. Everyone who divorces his wife, and marries another, commits adultery. He who marries one who is divorced from a husband commits adultery."

Jesus speaks a few words at the Pharisees, and show us the reader that they are the generation without integrity, loving those things that are not God. An adulterous generation that seeks for signs and those people who wish to be like these will also become adulterers.

Let's take a look at the Rich Man:

• Clothed in Purple and Fine Linen (v19)
• Lives in luxury, behind a Gate (v19,20)
• Identifies Abraham as 'Father', and called 'Son' (v24, 25)
• Has Five Brothers (v28)
• Had Moses and the Prophets (v29)

We notice that this rich man was clothed in fine linen and purple garments, which would have been quite expensive and only worn by a royal class of people.

"Of the blue, purple, and scarlet, they made finely worked garments, for ministering in the holy place, and made the holy garments for Aaron; as Yahweh commanded Moses.

He made the ephod of gold, blue, purple, scarlet, and fine twined linen. They beat the gold into thin plates, and cut it into wires, to work it in the blue, in the purple, in the scarlet, and in the fine linen, the work of the skillful workman. They made shoulder straps for it, joined together. At the two ends it was joined together. The skillfully woven band that was on it, with which to fasten it on, was of the same piece, like its work; of gold, of blue, purple, scarlet, and fine twined linen; as Yahweh commanded Moses." (Ex. 38:1-6)

"You shall weave the coat in checker work of fine linen, and you shall make a turban of fine linen, and you shall make a sash, the work of the embroiderer. You shall make coats for Aaron's sons, and you shall make sashes for them and you shall make headbands for them, for glory and for beauty." (Exodus 28:39-40)

"David was clothed with a robe of fine linen, and all the Levites who bore the ark, and the singers, and Chenaniah the master of the song [with] the singers: and David had on him an ephod of linen." (2 Chron. 15:27)

So it was kings and the priests who would wear the fine linen and purple. These garments were made in service of the Holy of Holies in the temple. Was this temple located behind a gate?

"And a man who had been lame from his mother’s womb was being carried along, whom they used to set down every day at the gate of the temple which is called Beautiful, in order to beg alms of those who were entering the temple." (Acts 3:2)

In Chronicles it says that it was the Levites who were wearing the fine linen carrying the Ark that usually sat in the temple. Was Levi (whom the tribe is named) of any significance? Indeed! Jacob and Leah (Gen. 29:35) had Levi who had five other full blooded brothers; Reubun, Simeon, Judah, Issachar, and Zebulun (Gen. 35:23). Also Jacob is the son of Isaac who is the son of Abraham (Luke 3:34). Jacob had wrestled with God and his name was then changed to Israel (Gen. 35:10). So we have people of Israel matching nearly all of the qualities of the rich man, let's see if we can find the rest.

"Then Jesus spoke to the multitudes and to his disciples, saying, "The scribes and the Pharisees sat on Moses' seat. All things therefore whatever they tell you to observe, observe and do, but don't do their works; for they say, and don't do." (Matt. 23:1-3)

"The officers [temple gaurds] therefore came to the chief priests and Pharisees, and they said to them, "Why didn't you bring him?" The officers answered, "No man ever spoke like this man!" The Pharisees therefore answered them, "You aren't also led astray, are you? Have any of the rulers believed in him, or of the Pharisees? But this multitude that doesn't know the law is accursed." (John 7:47-49)

"They [scribes and Pharisees] answered him, "Our father is Abraham." Jesus said to them, "If you were Abraham's children, you would do the works of Abraham." (John 8:38)

We find Jesus using the rich man to describe the priests, scribes, and Pharisees. The very people He was surrounded and being scorned by. Now the beggar Lazarus. We have already seen this beggar is someone(s) who are outside the temple gates (Acts 3:2). The name Lazarus is the Greek name for Eleazar in Hebrew. The importance of this name is not in the identity, but of the meaning. It means "those whom God has helped", "the comforter", or more literally "God (is) helper". Who is it that God would want to help, that would be outside the gates? What are the dogs?

"Now the woman was a Greek, a Syrophoenician by race. She begged him that he would cast the demon out of her daughter. But Jesus said to her, "Let the children be filled first, for it is not appropriate to take the children's bread and throw it to the dogs." But she answered him, "Yes, Lord. Yet even the dogs under the table eat the children's crumbs." He said to her, "For this saying, go your way. The demon has gone out of your daughter." (Mark 7:26-30)

This is a clear depiction of the events going on with Lazarus sitting under the rich man's table wishing to be fed with the scraps, The children of Israel have sat at their table, while the Gentiles have sat under wishing to be fed the scraps. It seems that Jesus is using this story to show God is faithful to His word. We recall back when Jesus said that heaven and earth would pass before His law would fall. He told the very man He gave the law to, that one day He would draw Israel to jealousy through the Gentiles.

"It happened that the beggar died, and that he was carried away by the angels to Abraham's bosom. The rich man also died, and was buried." (Luke 16:22)

There is a shift now in the "world" that these two are going into. Angels had been used in previous instances to carry, deliver, or ordain a certain thing. They were used to ordain the law with Moses, they also came to tell Abraham that he will carry a son.

"You received the law as it was ordained by angels, and didn't keep it!" (Acts 7:53)

"For if the inheritance is of the law, it is no more of promise; but God has granted it to Abraham by promise. What then is the law? It was added because of transgressions, until the seed should come to whom the promise has been made. It was ordained through angels by the hand of a mediator." (Gal. 3:18-20)

Abraham is a very important figure as well in the story, because he is the one that God promised a seed in which "all nations shall be blessed".

"Even as Abraham "believed God, and it was counted to him for righteousness." Know therefore that those who are of faith, the same are children of Abraham. The Scripture, foreseeing that God would justify the Gentiles by faith, preached the Good News beforehand to Abraham, saying, "In you all the nations will be blessed." So then, those who are of faith are blessed with the faithful Abraham." (Gal. 3:6-9)

"For as many of you as were baptized into Christ have put on Christ. There is neither Jew nor Greek, there is neither slave nor free man, there is neither male nor female; for you are all one in Christ Jesus. If you are Christ's, then you are Abraham's seed and heirs according to promise." (Gal. 3:27-29)

This carrying over didn't happen until there was a "death", in which the way Israel did things to stay in Abraham's promise is buried, and like wise the ways of the Gentiles would be changed and carried over to the ways of Abraham. Recalling again back to Jesus saying "the law and the prophets were until John", that was when John began to proclaim:

"I am the voice of one crying in the wilderness, 'Make straight the way of the Lord,' as Isaiah the prophet said." (John 1:23)

"The next day, he [John] saw Jesus coming to him, and said, "Behold, the Lamb of God, who takes away the sin of the world! This is he of whom I said, 'After me comes a man who is preferred before me, for he was before me.' I didn't know him, but for this reason I came baptizing in water: that he would be revealed to Israel." John testified, saying, "I have seen the Spirit descending like a dove out of heaven, and it remained on him. I didn't recognize him, but he who sent me to baptize in water, he said to me, 'On whomever you will see the Spirit descending, and remaining on him, the same is he who baptizes in the Holy Spirit.' I have seen, and have testified that this is the Son of God." (Luke 1:29-34)

When John saw Jesus the Good News of the Kingdom began to be proclaimed to all of Israel, that the promises of Abraham were about to be fulfilled and great change was coming. The seed promised to Abraham was Christ, who would accomplish the task of the law and bring the Gentiles into the promises and relationship with Abraham. This relationship is identified as "the bosom of Abraham". It is a common practice when the one in relationship would lay on the bosom or chest of the other person when eating meals together. One of Jesus' disciples is offered this privilege, and Jesus himself is in the bosom of His father.

"Now there was leaning on Jesus' bosom one of his disciples, whom Jesus loved." (John 13:23) KJV

"No one has seen God at any time; the only begotten God who is in the bosom of the Father, He has explained Him." (John 1:18)

"In Hades, he lifted up his eyes, being in torment, and saw Abraham far off, and Lazarus at his bosom." (Luke 16:23)

To get the possible etymology of the word Hades, 'The New International Dictionary of New Testament Theology' states hades ". . . comes from idein (to see) with the negative prefix, a-, and so would mean the invisible . . . In the LXX hades occurs more than 100 times, in the majority of instances to translate Heb. she'ol, the underworld which receives all the dead. It is the land of darkness . . ." (p. 206, vol. 2).

In this instance Jesus is using Hades to show that the Israel would be in a place of darkness and unseen to God (at least for a time), just as the prophecy in Deut. says. In the time of being cut off Israel would be "tormented", the Greek is basanois. According to Friberg's Analytical Lexicon of the Greek New Testament, basanois, which is a form of the noun basanos, means "strictly, a touchstone for testing the genuineness of metals by rubbing against it . . ." Basanos, found in Kittel's Theological Dictionary of the New Testament states:

In non-biblical Gk. [basanos] is a commercial expression, or is used in relation to government. It then acquires the meaning of the checking of calculations, which develops naturally out of the basic sense of [basanos, basanizein] . . . In the spiritual sphere it has the figur[ative] sense, which is closely related to the original concrete meaning, of a means of testing . . .

The word then undergoes a change in meaning. The original sense fades into the background. [Basanos] now comes to denote "torture" or "the rack," espec[ially] used with slaves . . . [Basanos] occurs in the sense of "torment" . . .

The change in meaning is best explained if we begin with the object of treatment. If we put men instead of metal or a coin, the stone of testing become[s] torture or the rack. The metal which has survived the testing stone is subjected to harsher treatment. Man is in the same position when severely tested by torture. In the testing of metal an essential role was played by the thought of testing and proving genuineness. The rack is a means of showing the true state of affairs. In its proper sense it is a means of testing and proving, though also of punishment. Finally, even this special meaning was weakened and only the general element of torture remained (pp. 561, 562, vol. I).

Israel was going to be thrown into the darkness and cut off from the Good News while the Gentiles would be given the rights to it and the promises of Abraham. While there, Israel would be tested like with a stone through fire, to show themselves worthy; to see what they would do. Not because God didn't know, but so they themselves would see their own problems.

"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 in anguish in this flame.'" (Luke 16:24)

The word translated "anguish" is odunao the root being odune which means sorrow or to grieve. More literally 'to bring low'. This is found a total of four times and three are in Luke, two here in this parable and once in Acts. Each use is in a state of emotional grief and not physical torment.

"When they saw him [Jesus], they were astonished, and his mother said to him, "Son, why have you treated us this way? Behold, your father and I were anxiously looking for you." (Luke 2:48)

"sorrowing most of all because of the word which he had spoken, that they should see his face no more. And they accompanied him to the ship." Acts 20:38

The flame in verse 24 is 'phlox' and is a dative singular feminine word meaning flame(ing) and is describing the grief itself not a "fire", it is also not 'active' meaning it is not "burning" like a fire burns through its fuel. Whenever phlox is used it is usually added with a word to be a descriptive of the word, i.e. "flame of fire", and in this instance it was a "flame or intensity of grief or sorrow".

"Flame" is used to denote excitement (Proverbs 29:8 the Revised Version (British and American)), shame, astonishment, "faces of flame" (Isaiah 13:8); in Revelation 1:14, the glorified Christ is described as having eyes "as a flame of fire," signifying their searching purity (compare Revelation 2:18; 19:12). Flame is also a symbol of God's wrath (Psalms 83:14; Isaiah 5:24; 10:17). International Standard Encyclopedia

When water is used of an event of any significance (especially in the NT) it is used with baptism, which is a ceremonial cleansing of oneself. The finger is used in scripture as sign of power, but also a means of cleansing the alter or healing.

"When I behold the heavens, the work of Thy fingers, the moon and the stars which Thou hast prepared" (Ps. 8:3).

"Jesus said, If I by the finger of God cast out demons, surely the kingdom of God is come unto you" (Luke 11:20).

"Thou shalt take of the blood of the bullock, and put it upon the horns of the altar with thy finger" (Exod. 29:12; Lev. 4:6; 9:9)

"They brought to him one who was deaf and had an impediment in his speech. They begged him to lay his hand on him. He took him aside from the multitude, privately, and put his fingers into his ears, and he spat, and touched his tongue. Looking up to heaven, he sighed, and said to him, "Ephphatha!" that is, "Be opened!" Immediately his ears were opened, and the impediment of his tongue was released, and he spoke clearly." (Mark 7:32-35)

In the above Mark 7 account, Christ heals a man's speech by touching his tongue, the rich man had asked Lazarus to do the same thing. Jesus was showing that Israel will be grieved by words they had spoken in the past, because the testing they were undergoing showed them the evilness of their heart. The rich man is asking for a healing of his tongue so that he will no longer speak or be that way and thus relieve his grief.

"If anyone among you thinks himself to be religious while he doesn't bridle his tongue, but deceives his heart, this man's religion is worthless." (James 1:26)

"A gentle tongue is a tree of life, but deceit in it crushes the spirit." (Prov. 15:4)

"So the tongue is also a little member, and boasts great things. See how a small fire can spread to a large forest!" (James 3:5)

"You offspring of vipers, how can you, being evil, speak good things? For out of the abundance of the heart, the mouth speaks." (Matt. 12:34)

"But Abraham said, 'Son, remember that you, in your lifetime, received your good things, and Lazarus, in the same way, bad things. But now here he is comforted and you are in anguish. Besides all this, between us and you there is a great gulf fixed, that those who want to pass from here to you are not able, and that none may cross over from there to us.' " (Luke 16:25-26)

Here a great gulf or divide that will be between Israel and the Gentiles is described, in which neither one will be able to reach the other respective sides. In which Israel cannot receive the healing they want until the time is come.

"I ask then, did God reject his people? May it never be! For I also am an Israelite, a descendant of Abraham, of the tribe of Benjamin. God didn't reject his people, which he foreknew... What then? That which Israel seeks for, that he didn't obtain, but the chosen ones obtained it, and the rest were hardened. According as it is written, "God gave them a spirit of stupor, eyes that they should not see, and ears that they should not hear, to this very day... For I don't desire you to be ignorant, brothers, of this mystery, so that you won't be wise in your own conceits, that a partial hardening has happened to Israel, until the fullness of the Gentiles has come in, and so all Israel will be saved. Even as it is written, "There will come out of Zion the Deliverer, and he will turn away ungodliness from Jacob." (Rom. 11:1-2a, 7-8, 25-26)

It is note worthy to point out the odd statement here by Abraham. He says there is a great gulf so that those "who want to pass from here" to the rich man's place are unable. Now you have to ask yourself, if this is paradise and hell or torment is next to it...why would anyone in paradise want to cross from paradise to torment? This creates huge problems to introduce the option of going to hell from heaven if you really wanted to. But this is not what is happening. What Abraham is saying is that there will be those who would want to act as Israel's teachers did and will not be able to. There will also not be found with Abraham those who act like the hypocritical teachers of Israel, it just flatly will not happen. This separation through blinding is temporary, and in which will be fulfilled when the time of the Gentiles is complete.

"He said, 'I ask you therefore, father, that you would send him to my father's house; for I have five brothers, that he may testify to them, so they won't also come into this place of torment.' But Abraham said to him, 'They have Moses and the prophets. Let them listen to them." (Luke 16:29)

Jesus uses Abraham to echo His words already spoken before.

"How can you believe, who receive glory from one another, and you don't seek the glory that comes from the only God? "Don't think that I will accuse you to the Father. There is one who accuses you, even Moses, on whom you have set your hope. For if you believed Moses, you would believe me; for he wrote about me. But if you don't believe his writings, how will you believe my words?" (John 5:44-47)

"Yahweh your God will raise up to you a prophet from the midst of you, of your brothers, like me. You shall listen to him...I will raise them up a prophet from among their brothers, like you; and I will put my words in his mouth, and he shall speak to them all that I shall command him." (Deut. 18:15, 18)

Sadly, they were failing to see the One sent for them...

"He said, 'No, father Abraham, but if one goes to them from the dead, they will repent.' "He said to him, 'If they don't listen to Moses and the prophets, neither will they be persuaded if one rises from the dead.'" (Luke 16:30-31)

Jesus was telling the surrounding multitudes and teachers, that if they continue to ignore the writings of Moses and the prophets they were going to end up missing out. He was telling them if they didn't even believe Moses was speaking about Christ now, they would not believe a resurrection. Surely enough, the real Lazarus is brought back to life (John 11) and they sought council to stone both him and Jesus. The one man Moses was telling them would do such things!

Conclusion

Through the length of this paper I showed that by calling this story of Lazarus and the Rich Man a parable, we are not demoting this to merely a story of no significance. Rather, we are noting that it contains all the tell tale characteristics of parabolic literature. Also, I provided evidence that taking the symbols of this piece of literature as literal, there would be a great injustice done to the foundational understandings of the resurrection. Jesus and Paul in many times past used Talmudic, and Helenistic understandings against the teachers as a means of telling a greater truth.

Ultimately we find that Jesus is using Luke 16:19-31 as a climactic end to a line of parables. He was showing that He came to retrieve those which were lost, and that though Israel was adulterous and lovers of those things not God once again. That He came to make a way for them, but that the Gentiles were going to be used in their stead until their time was complete.

Lazarus and The Rich Man Part 1

Introduction

When you think of Luke 16:19-31, you immediately recall this epic story between the two destinies of Lazarus and a certain rich man. When you read this account, we assume that it is a literal historical event to explain the definitive results of our lives in the land of the living. But what the account also does is arise a lot of questions, like why did the rich man get condemned to a fiery torment and the poor man a rest with Abraham just because one received good things and the other bad? How is there life after death, when life itself is found in the breath (spirit) of Life from God? Or, also how is eternal life achieved for the wicked if "the gift of eternal life" hangs solely on faith with Jesus as our savior?

The purpose of this paper is to explore the writing style of this account to determine if it is literal or not. Then also get into what Jesus might have meant by giving this story to the disciples amidst the Scribes and Pharisees. I hope to be able to prove a different perspective to this account by the time I am done. Through this paper, there will be a few statements in passing that I will not have time to fully support here, but will leave a lot of unanswered assumptions. These assumptions will have to be addressed in another paper.

Literal or Parable?

This is the most hotly contested question regarding this account that I have ever heard about. Both scholars and bible readers alike fall on either side of the line. It seems all we can do is give as much evidence to one side, and hope it is sufficient to drive it home. One of the reasons this is so contested is because it is the "go to" verse for those that hold a Traditionlist view of the immortality of the soul. There is such strong resistance to interpreting this as a parable because it would collapse a pillar verse of their view. While it is not my purpose to attack the Traditionlist view at this time, it does bring out a concern that we would allow our traditional views to keep us from the truth of the Word. Jesus rebuked the Pharisees for doing this very same thing (Mark 7:3-9) saying

"But in vain do they worship me, teaching as doctrines the commandments of men..."

Josephus (a Jewish historian, c. 37-100 A.D.), in his work Discourse to the Greeks Concerning Hades notes that the concept of a soul being created immortal by God is "according to the doctrine of Plato" who in early 400 B.C. first got it from the Egyptians. Thus classifying it as a doctrine of man. So we must be sure to not allow ourselves to cloud or mold the bible through presuppositional mindsets, but rather allow the Word to mold us.

So which is it, parable or literal history? One argument for the literal interpretation is the use of an actual name; Lazarus. While I am not contending with the importance of the reference to this name, I do however contend the conclusion. If we recall back through previous chapters of Luke, we begin to see a pattern use of "and there was a certain man". Luke 15:11 "A certain man...", Luke 16: 1 "There was a certain rich man...", and Luke 16:19 "And now there was a certain rich man..." The Scofield Reference Notes avoids this and states

"Lk 16:19-31. are not said to be a parable. Rich men and beggars are common; there is no reason why Jesus may not have had in mind a particular case. In no parable is an individual named."

It is for this reason why I believe most readers use this argument, but while Luke may not have explicitly named it a parable, nor is there a name mentioned in the others, does not ultimately remove its parabolic references. I do in fact believe that Christ had a "particular case" and reason for mentioning Lazarus, but for different reasons then to elevate the parable to a documented account.

"If we speak of it sometimes as a Parable, it is not because we hold it to be one of Christ's Parables, specially so called, but because it partakes of the nature of parabolic teaching..." (E. W. Bullinger, D.D.).

When I speak of this as being a parable, I am not trying to rob the bible of its truth being portrayed with in this account. What I want to get readers to take into account is that Jesus is using this to illustrate the truth through imagery that the listeners would have heard before. We need to be cautious not to make doctrine from imagery, but also not to lose sight of the purpose because we think that it is just a story. Dr. Alfred Edersheim notes

"it will be necessary in the interpretation of this parable to keep in mind that its parabolic details must not be exploited, nor doctrines of any kind derived from them, either as to the character of the other world, the question of the duration of future punishments, or possible moral improvement of those in Gehinnom. All such things are foreign to the parable" (The Life and Times of Jesus the Messiah, Book IV, p. 277). "We must not look in this parabolic language for Christ's teaching about the 'after death'" (ibid, p. 279). "Doctrinal statements should not be drawn from parabolic illustrations" (ibid, p. 282).

"The very reason we do not feel compelled to interpret the parables historically is that they are presented in a somewhat stylized fashion -- the reader or hearer is immediately aware that they belong to a different genre (literary type)" (Walter Kaiser and Moises Silva, An Introduction to Biblical Hermeneutics: The Search for Meaning, p. 106).

Literally makes contradictions

Which brings us to the reason why we must not allow this to be interpreted as a literal account. While this topic has its fingers in the biblical anthropology debate, a literal rendering of this parable would fly in the face of one of the foundational understandings of Christianity; The Judgment. If we establish the account to be literal then we are rearranging the judgment process and dividing it into two time frames; which is wholly contrary to scripture.

Hebrews 9 establishes the exclusive need for Christ to die one time and become that final sacrifice for all sin. In verse 27, through this single sacrifice it established “Inasmuch as it is appointed for men to die once, and after this, judgment…” and look forward to our salvation. One might suggest that “see we get judged when we die”, but the scriptures clearly establishes when the Day of Judgment would occur.

“For we must all be revealed before the judgment seat of Christ; that each one may receive the things in the body, according to what he has done, whether good or bad.”

(2 Cor. 5:10)

“For the Son of Man will come in the glory of his Father with his angels, and then he will render to everyone according to his deeds.” (Matt. 16:27)

“For this we tell you by the word of the Lord, that we who are alive, who are left to the coming of the Lord, will in no way precede those who have fallen asleep. For the Lord himself will descend from heaven with a shout, with the voice of the archangel, and with God's trumpet. The dead in Christ will rise first, then we who are alive, who are left, will be caught up together with them in the clouds, to meet the Lord in the air. So we will be with the Lord forever.” (1 Thess. 4:15-17).

"Most certainly, I tell you, the hour comes, and now is, when the dead will hear the Son of God's voice; and those who hear will live. For as the Father has life in himself, even so he gave to the Son also to have life in himself. He also gave him authority to execute judgment, because he is a son of man. Don't marvel at this, for the hour comes, in which all that are in the tombs will hear his voice, and will come out; those who have done good, to the resurrection of life; and those who have done evil, to the resurrection of judgment.” (John 5:25-29)

Ultimately we must conclude from these clear passages that judgment is not passed until after the parousia of Christ and the subsequent resurrection. This not only goes for the punishment of the wicked, but the glorious reward of the saints. To take Luke 16:19-31 as a historical account is to proclaim that man survives even after death and is judged at that time. In other words he is immortal. Surely the scriptures teach us the Lord "alone possess immortality” (1 Tim. 6:16) and that it is the reward of the saints to be able to “put on” the immortal in body, which as I pointed out we receive after the resurrection. (1 Cor. 15:53)

Why would He use a man made lie to tell the Truth?

I have established that Luke 15-16 documents Christ using parables to teach certain Kingdom truths, but it leads us to ask why use a doctrine of men in a parable to teach a truth? Or more sharply, why use a lie to tell the truth?

This is not the only time Jesus uses this type of tactic to turn the tables on the teachers of the day.

"In the story, then, of the rich man and Lazarus, Jesus has put them down with one of their own superstitions. ... He used their own ideas to condemn them. ... It is simply a case of taking what others believe, practice, or say, and using it to condemn them" (Sidney Hatch, Daring To Differ: Adventures in Conditional Immortality, p. 91). "Since the elements of the story are taken from the Pharisees' own traditions, they are judged out of their own mouths" (Dr. Edersheim: ibid, p. 92).

In Mark 12:18-27 a Sadducee had approached Jesus and told a story of a woman who had married seven times because she had become a widow that many times. The question became whose wife she would be at the resurrection. Verse 18 starts with an important clue, the Sadducees' didn't even believe in the resurrection. More to that point Acts 23:8

"For the Sadducees say that there is no resurrection, nor angel, nor spirit; but the Pharisees confess all of these."

From the start, the Sadducee seems to be asking Jesus a rhetorical question almost as if he was baiting him.

"...Isn't this because you are mistaken, not knowing the Scriptures, nor the power of God? For when they will rise from the dead, they neither marry, nor are given in marriage, but are like angels in heaven."

This is where Jesus picks up on it and seemingly replies with an equally sarcastic retort. He replies saying 'you don't even know scripture if you're asking me a question like that, believing what you do. Come back to me when you actually have a question'. Jesus was not endorsing or denying any view, but using a tradition against them.

Paul employs a similar tactic in 1 Cor. 15:29 when he was speaking about baptism for the dead. By mentioning it in his teachings yet not condemning it, Paul was surely not endorsing the baptism for the dead. But using it to drive a different truth home.

A final example would be in John 9:1-3 where Jesus and the disciples came across a blind man and asked

"Rabbi, who sinned, this man or his parents, that he should be born blind?"

Hopefully you can see the implications of this question. We know that generational curses can pass infirmities to offspring, but if you read the question. They were asking if this man sinned prior to his own birth in order for him to be born blind. Thanks to the Hellenistic influence on Jewish thought, the notion of the eternality of the soul had even reached the disciples before they followed Jesus. But Jesus does not even address the issue but just replies by stating neither the blind man nor his parents caused it. By not condemning a doctrine or using it, as Jesus shows, it does not mean He endorsed it.

"(1) In Kiddushin (Treatise on Betrothal), fol. 72, there is quoted from Juchasin, fol. 75, 2, a long story about what Levi said of Rabbi Judah: “This day he sits in Abraham's bosom”, i.e. the day he died. There is a difference here between the Jerusalem and the Babylonian Talmuds – the former says Rabbi Judah was “carried by angels”; the latter says that he was “placed in Abraham's bosom”. Here we have again the Pharisees' tradition as used against them by our Lord.

(2) There was a story of a woman who had seen six of her sons slain (we have it also in II Macc. vii). She heard the command given to kill the youngest (two-and-a-half years old),

and running into the embraces of her little son, kissed him and said, “Go thou, my son, to Abraham my father, and tell him 'Thus saith thy mother. Do not thou boast, saying, I built an altar, and offered my son Isaac. For thy mother hath built seven altars, and offered seven sons in one day”, etc. (Midrash Echah, fol. 68.1)

(3) Another example may be given out of a host of others (Midrash on Ruth, fol. 44, 2; and Midrash on Coheleth (Ecclesiastes) fol. 86, 4). “There are wicked men, that are

coupled together in this world. But one of them repents before death, the other doth not, so one is found standing in the assembly of the just, the other in the assembly of the wicked. The one seeth the other and saith, 'Woe! And Alas! There is accepting of persons in this thing. He and I robbed together, committed murder together; and now he stands in the congregation of the just, and I, in the congregation of the wicked.' They answered him: 'O thou foolish among mortals that are in the world! Thou weft abominable and cast forth for three days after thy death, and they did not lay thee in the grave; the

worm was under thee, and the worm covered thee; which, when this companion of thine came to understand, he became a penitent. It was in thy power also to have repented, but thou dist not'. He saith to them, 'Let me go now, and become a penitent'. But they say, 'O thou foolishest of men, dost thou not know, that this world in which thou are, is like a Sabbath, and the world out of which thou comest is like the evening of the Sabbath? If thou does not provide something on the evening of the Sabbath, what

wilt thou eat on the Sabbath day? Dost thou not know that the world out of which thou camest is like the land; and the world, in which thou now art, is like the sea? If a man make no provision on land for what he should eat at sea, what will he have to eat?' He gnashed his teeth, and gnawed his own flesh”.

(4) We have examples also of the dead discoursing with one another; and also with those who are still alive (Beracoth, fol. 18, 2 – Treatise on Blessings). “R. Samuel Bar Nachman saith, R. Jonathan saith, How doth it appear that the dead have any discourse among themselves? It appears from what is said (Deut. xxxiv. 4), And the Lord said unto him, This is the land, concerning which I sware unto Abraham, to Isaac, and to Jacob, saying” What is the meaning of the word saying? The Holy Blessed God saith unto Moses, 'Go thou and say to Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob, the oath which I sware unto you, I have

performed unto your children'.” Note that 'Go thou and say to Abraham', etc. Then follows a story of a certain pious man that went and lodged in a burying place, and heard two souls discoursing among themselves. “The one said unto the other, 'Come, my

companion, and let us wander about the world, and listen behind the veil, what kind of plagues are coming upon the world'. To which the other replied, 'O my companion, I cannot; for I am buried in a can mat; but do thou go and whatsoever thou hearest,

do thou come and tell me',” etc. The story goes on to tell of the wandering of the soul and what he heard, etc.

(5) There was a good man and a wicked man that died; as for the good man, “he had no funeral rites solemnized”; but the wicked man had. Afterward, there was one who say in his dream, the good man walking in gardens, and hard by pleasant springs; but the wicked man “with his tongue trickling drop by drop, at the bank of a river, endeavouring to touch the water, but he could not”. (Chagigah, fol. 77. Treatise on Exodus 23:17).

(6) As to “the great gulf”, we read (Midrash [or Commentary] on Coheleth [Ecclesiastes], 103. 2), “God hath set the one against the other (Ecc. vii. 14) that is Gehenna and Paradise. How far are they distant? A hand-breadth”. Jochanan saith, “A wall is between”, but the Rabbis say “They are so even with one another, that they may see out of one into the other”. (E.D. Bullinger D.D. Lazarus and The Rich Man, Intermediate State? p.17-18)

Bullinger goes on to say that these writings were widely used by some early century writers, and spread during the Dark Ages "to all the worst errors of Romanism" (starting approx. 400 A.D.). One of these the apocryphal books of prayers to the dead called "song of the three children" in which the "the souls and spirits of the righteous" are called on to praise the Lord.

While I believe Jesus uses this parable to make foolish their teachings, I will show that it also has a subtext of prophetic truth.