The Richman and Lazarus a parable

  • Christian Chat is a moderated online Christian community allowing Christians around the world to fellowship with each other in real time chat via webcam, voice, and text, with the Christian Chat app. You can also start or participate in a Bible-based discussion here in the Christian Chat Forums, where members can also share with each other their own videos, pictures, or favorite Christian music.

    If you are a Christian and need encouragement and fellowship, we're here for you! If you are not a Christian but interested in knowing more about Jesus our Lord, you're also welcome! Want to know what the Bible says, and how you can apply it to your life? Join us!

    To make new Christian friends now around the world, click here to join Christian Chat.

garee

Senior Member
Mar 28, 2016
13,402
1,272
113
#41
Oxford isn’t the authority on Scripture, but it is an authority on words. “Parable” has a specific meaning, just as “prophecy” does. No point in arguing if we don’t agree on what words even mean.
I would think we would go to the scriptures to define the mysteries made know through the parables, the signified language of God.

The other alternative is to use our imagination of our deceitful hearts as a source of faith as the unseen spiritual understanding.

No point in arguing if we don’t agree on what words even mean.

Proverbs are parables of another kind in respect to morals.

It would seem you misunderstand the word prophecy as well.
 

garee

Senior Member
Mar 28, 2016
13,402
1,272
113
#42
Yes a donkey really spoke. (and not Shrek!)
What is the spiritual meaning of that historically true parable?

Or of the historically true parable below?

Who does our "bloody husband" represent other than the suffering of Christ beforehand and the glory that did follow (1 Peter 1:11 )The gospel hid.

And it came to pass by the way in the inn, that the Lord met him, and sought to kill him.Then Zipporah took a sharp stone, and cut off the foreskin of her son, and cast it at his feet, and said, Surely a bloody husband art thou to me.So he let him go: then she said, A bloody husband thou art, because of the circumcision.And the Lord said to Aaron, Go into the wilderness to meet Moses. And he went, and met him in the mount of God, and kissed him.Exodus 4:24-27 King James Version (KJV)

Circumcision as ceremonial law was fulfilled during the first century "time of refomation" the shadow became sight .
 

garee

Senior Member
Mar 28, 2016
13,402
1,272
113
#43
I have previously related a story about how I accidentally swallowed bleach. I should have died, or at least been greatly injured. I suffered no injury beyond fear and my breath taken away for a moment.

I don't believe we are to tempt or test the Lord in anything beyond giving. That is the only Scripture I'm aware of that God says to do so. Found in Malachi I believe.
Sounds like one chasing after a sign before they would commit the faith that comes from hearing God as some sort of something to confirm something? (no sign gifts)

The signs follow after they do not lead us to confirm something that not there . The drinking of poison and it does not harm to a person represents false doctrines of men. They will not effect the true believers that refuses to go above all things written in the law and the prophets (sola scriptura).

Just those called a law of fathers that Christ called a brood of vipers. The poison of Asps is on their lips as they bring their lying signs as false wonders .

It is the perfect or complete law of faith they can quicken the soul of the lost, giving the simply ones a understanding of Him not seen The perfect law of faith as statues are infallible enlightening the eyes of our newly created hearts .

His going forth is from the end of the heaven, and his circuit unto the ends of it: and there is nothing hid from the heat thereof.
The law of the Lord is perfect, "converting the soul": the testimony of the Lord is sure, "making wise the simple".The statutes of the Lord are right, "rejoicing the heart": the commandment of the Lord is pure, "enlightening the eyes".Psalm 19:6-8 King James Version (KJV)
 

garee

Senior Member
Mar 28, 2016
13,402
1,272
113
#44
First of all the actual name of Lazarus is being used, as well as Moses, Abraham and the name of the literal location of Hades. This is not consistent with parables as a parable uses symbolism to represent what is literal.
The signified language of God. He uses literal names in historically true parables throughout the bible .

He uses the word Moses (drawn out) as in no man can come to salvation unless the father draws them using Moses to represent God not seen, putting his will into Aaron representing Christ our high priest, as the Son of man seen


Exodus 4:15-17 King James Version (KJV) And thou shalt speak unto him, and put words in his mouth: and I will be with thy mouth, and with his mouth, and will teach you what ye shall do.And he (Aaron seen) shall be thy spokesman unto the people: and he shall be, even he shall be to thee instead of a mouth, and thou shalt be to him instead of God. ( the father Not seen) And thou shalt take this rod in thine hand, wherewith thou shalt do signs.

Repeated below

It is written in the prophets, And they shall be all taught of God. Every man therefore that hath heard, and hath learned of the Father,(not seen) cometh unto me .(the son of man seen) John 6 :45

We know its a parable by its conclusion.

Abraham saith unto him, They have Moses and the prophets; let them hear them. And he said, Nay, father Abraham: but if one went unto them from the dead, they will repent. And he said unto him, If they hear not Moses and the prophets, neither will they be persuaded, though one "rose from the dead".Luke 16:30-31
 

Dino246

Senior Member
Jun 30, 2015
12,953
6,973
113
#45
I would think we would go to the scriptures to define the mysteries made know through the parables, the signified language of God.

The other alternative is to use our imagination of our deceitful hearts as a source of faith as the unseen spiritual understanding.

No point in arguing if we don’t agree on what words even mean.

Proverbs are parables of another kind in respect to morals.

It would seem you misunderstand the word prophecy as well.
Equivocation!

The word "parable" has a specific meaning. You're talking about the meaning of the parable, not the meaning of "parable". They are two different things.

Proverbs aren't parables either.
 

Jewel5712

Well-known member
Jun 22, 2018
4,091
2,265
113
#46
Equivocation!

The word "parable" has a specific meaning. You're talking about the meaning of the parable, not the meaning of "parable". They are two different things.

Proverbs aren't parables either.
Sounds like hes grasping at straws...
 

Dino246

Senior Member
Jun 30, 2015
12,953
6,973
113
#47
Moses used to represent the law of God as the unseen law giver is shown not entering the promised land typified as the new heavenly Jerusalem the bride of Christ. When told to strike the rock representing Christ once as the father did require him to drink the wrath of those he came to save once.

Moses using the rod of Arron used to represent the authority of God not seen as those who rebelled against it .... struck it twice . The water came out that represented the gospel but again Moses was prevented from entering the promised land as a figure of speech , a parable

Parable or just a lucky coincident?

Numbers 20:10 And Moses and Aaron gathered the congregation together before the rock, and he said unto them, Hear now, ye rebels; must we fetch you water out of this rock?
Neither parable nor lucky coincidence. This was a historical event with real people at a real time and place, not a mere tale intended to convey a spiritual truth in hidden symbolism.
 

PennEd

Senior Member
Apr 22, 2013
8,030
4,293
113
#48
What is the spiritual meaning of that historically true parable?

Or of the historically true parable below?

Who does our "bloody husband" represent other than the suffering of Christ beforehand and the glory that did follow (1 Peter 1:11 )The gospel hid.

And it came to pass by the way in the inn, that the Lord met him, and sought to kill him.Then Zipporah took a sharp stone, and cut off the foreskin of her son, and cast it at his feet, and said, Surely a bloody husband art thou to me.So he let him go: then she said, A bloody husband thou art, because of the circumcision.And the Lord said to Aaron, Go into the wilderness to meet Moses. And he went, and met him in the mount of God, and kissed him.Exodus 4:24-27 King James Version (KJV)

Circumcision as ceremonial law was fulfilled during the first century "time of refomation" the shadow became sight .
I'm sorry but your ramblings and allegorical view of Scripture is getting more and more incoherent.

A historically accurate PARABLE is an oxymoron.
 

Bladerunner

Senior Member
Aug 22, 2016
3,076
52
48
#49
It has often been said that this is a parable while yet others contend and say it is not a parable.

So with that in mind lets look at a few examples on how this is clearly a parable.

1) It starts out by saying "There was a certain..." we have a few examples of this same phrase and with this phrase all of them are parables. [Mt. 21:33, Lk 7:41]

2) Lazarus was poor and yet he was physically poor but the fact was that he was Spiritually poor and that can coincide with that of Mt. 5

3) A drop of water on the tongue. This idea can be liked unto the idea of a car that has just overheated and the radiator is dry and yet some how a drop of water is going to cool the car off or likewise being such dire torment and burning a drop of water is going to satisfy.

4) There are no verses showing that the unsaved once they die they will ever have eternal life. This idea is shown as one being born again as depicted in Jn. 3.

5) There is a great gulf / chasm between them and there is darkness and considering heaven is in the 3rd heaven and we assume that hell is down below and so how could one possible see that far from such a distance.

6) The idea of torment and suffering in fire has caused great confusing and yet I can see why. But the one thing that is a common thread throughout the Bible is that Christ spoke in parables. So with that in mind fire has to do with that of judgement and the idea of suffering and being tormented in a fire is a picture showing what it is like to be cut off from the glory of God and his kingdom. This idea of reading as it literally stands would be using the same idea as in Mrk. 16 as to picking up serpents and getting bit and not dying or drinking cyanided and expecting to live.

All in all there is no doubt that this accoun
You left out one criteria...In parables, there are no Names of People within,. The Richman and Lazarus is NOT , I repeat NOT a parable

Bl;ade
 

Ahwatukee

Senior Member
Mar 12, 2015
9,034
1,319
113
#50
What does *no one has ascended to heaven as yet* have to do with the torments of Hell (Q) And you have also misunderstood John 3:13 (but that is another topic).

And what exactly do Christians gain by calling this narrative a *parable* (Q) What that shows is UNBELIEF -- that the words of Christ mean nothing to you.
Hey Nehemiah6,

What I have found in contending with those who claim that the rich man and Lazarus (RMAL) as being a parable, as I'm sure that you have too, is that this was an apologetic created for-the-most-part, by those who believe in soul-sleep and annihilationist. The event of the RMAL destroys both of these beliefs and so this is just their way of discrediting the truth. It's right along the lines with the apologetic which says, "the commas in the wrong place." In short, they attempt to get rid of the proof and then say, "show us the scriptural proof." I find that these people will continue to provide the false existing apologetics and/or will invent their own.

But the real truth is that, if one just reads this event in the plain literal sense, then the information given means exactly what it says. There is no need to twist, distort or parabalize the scripture.
 

carl11

Senior Member
Oct 20, 2017
277
31
28
#51
Hello Carl11

forgive me, but your claim of Lazarus being spiritually poor is not supported in the context. In fact, that his spirit went to the placed of comfort would demonstrate that he was spiritually rich. First of all the actual name of Lazarus is being used, as well as Moses, Abraham and the name of the literal location of Hades. This is not consistent with parables as a parable uses symbolism to represent what is literal. The context supports the reference to Lazarus as being literally poor i.e. lacking the basic requirements for life which is supported by the fact that he is laid at the gate of the rich man longing to be fed from the rich man's table, which would demonstrate his lack of sustenance. Lazarus' material poorness is also in opposition to the rich man living in luxury every day. The context then demonstrates that this is referring to the lack of basic material life necessities of Lazarus and the material richness of the rich man.
The idea of Lazarus being poor in the spirit is supported by scripture, what does Mt. 5:3 have to say about being poor in the spirit ? Does it not say that theirs is the KOG ?

The idea of looking at this as just a story would make no sense because we would already draw the conclusion of the poor man and the richman but rather what does this have to do with the gospel ?



The above also does not support your claim in that, for anyone being in Hades in torment in flame, any relief would be greatly desired. As Abraham said to the rich man, "remember in your life time you received you good things and Lazarus received bad things? Now he is comforted and you are in torment."
What ? The Richman is screaming, he is crying for water in order that his tongue may be cooled he is desiring for a drop of water.



After cross-reverencing and comparing all the related scriptures, that once a person dies the grace of God is no longer in operation for that person, as their record is sealed. Consider what Jesus said to the religious leaders of His time:
I'm sorry then you have not done enough searching; death is death for the unsaved.





Your error is assuming that Abraham and Lazarus are in the third heaven, when the scripture does not support this. Both the rich man and Lazarus died and their bodies were buried, but we see their spirits conscious and aware both being in Sheol/Hades. The area that Abraham and Lazarus were in was separated from the area where the rich man was. Abraham goes on to say that between us and you a great chasm has been fixed so that no one can cross over from either side, which again would demonstrate that both areas were in the same location, i.e. Hades. How in the world expositors come to the conclusion that Abraham and Lazarus are in heaven escapes me, as there is absolutely nothing in the context that would suggest that.
Then where are they in a place of limbo ? The place sheol o hades the place of limbo is that it ? it can be readily shown that this refers to the grave.



I have heard this false apologetic regarding Christ speaking only in parables many times, which false teachers do in order to take away the true meaning. The reference to Jesus speaking in parables was to that generation of Israel in fulfillment of the prophecy in Isaiah:

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

Then the disciples came to Jesus and asked, “Why do You speak to the people in parables?”

He replied, “The knowledge of the mysteries of the kingdom of heaven has been given to you, but not to them. Whoever has will be given more, and he will have an abundance. Whoever does not have, even what he has will be taken away from him. This is why I speak to them in parables:

‘Though seeing, they do not see;

though hearing, they do not hear or understand.’

In them the prophecy of Isaiah is fulfilled:

‘You will be ever hearing but never understanding;

you will be ever seeing but never perceiving.

For this people’s heart has grown callous;

they hardly hear with their ears,

and they have closed their eyes.

Otherwise they might see with their eyes,

hear with their ears,

understand with their hearts,

and turn,

and I would heal them.’

But blessed are your eyes because they see, and your ears because they hear. For truly I tell you, many prophets and righteous men longed to see what you see but did not see it, and to hear what you hear but did not hear it."

Notice in the scripture above, the disciples ask "why do you speak to the people in parables," which would be referring to that generation of Israel and the not those who believe in Christ. In support of this, when Jesus answers them He says "The knowledge of the kingdom of heaven has been given to you" i.e. the church. But regarding the Lord speaking in parables, it was in fulfillment of the prophecy of Isaiah which the Lord then quotes. Therefore, Jesus did not speak to us in parables and so we can know what the word of God is saying and God means what He says. Therefore, when God uses the supporting words of torment, punishment, eternal, everlasting, forever and ever, no rest day or night, that's exactly what He means.
So when God speaks of biding Satan with a great chain and casting or throwing him viscously into a bottomless pit we are to take this at face value or perhaps when Christ is called a Lamb this to should be taking at face value because it mentions nothing of the sort of these being a parable.



Really Carl11? Tell me what you think of the following:

"Paul gathered a pile of brushwood and, as he put it on the fire, a viper, driven out by the heat, fastened itself on his hand. When the islanders saw the snake hanging from his hand, they said to each other, “This man must be a murderer; for though he escaped from the sea, the goddess Justice has not allowed him to live.” But Paul shook the snake off into the fire and suffered no ill effects."
Yes really Ahwatukee, So a snake bit him, what we don't read that it was venomous snake and yet sometimes just because one gets by a venomous snake does not mean that he has been injected with venom.
 

carl11

Senior Member
Oct 20, 2017
277
31
28
#52
You left out one criteria...In parables, there are no Names of People within,. The Richman and Lazarus is NOT , I repeat NOT a parable

Bl;ade
The reason that Lazarus name was mentioned at not the Richman was because Lazarus name was written in the book. Ex. 32:32, Rev. 21:27
 

Dino246

Senior Member
Jun 30, 2015
12,953
6,973
113
#53
The idea of Lazarus being poor in the spirit is supported by scripture, what does Mt. 5:3 have to say about being poor in the spirit ? Does it not say that theirs is the KOG ?
You're employing a subtle logical fallacy here. Because a certain result has occurred, you assume the cause. That may be true, but it may not.

Yes really Ahwatukee, So a snake bit him, what we don't read that it was venomous snake and yet sometimes just because one gets by a venomous snake does not mean that he has been injected with venom.
Luke calls it a viper; vipers are snakes that kill their prey by toxic venom injection. While it's true that Paul may not have been injected with venom, it is natural to assume that he was.
 

Dino246

Senior Member
Jun 30, 2015
12,953
6,973
113
#54
The reason that Lazarus name was mentioned at not the Richman was because Lazarus name was written in the book. Ex. 32:32, Rev. 21:27
This doesn't follow. The tax collector in Luke 18:14 was justified, but his name is not recorded. Neither the righteous father nor the repentant son in Luke 15 are named.
 

Ahwatukee

Senior Member
Mar 12, 2015
9,034
1,319
113
#55
The idea of Lazarus being poor in the spirit is supported by scripture, what does Mt. 5:3 have to say about being poor in the spirit ? Does it not say that theirs is the KOG ?
Matt:5:3 has nothing to do with Lazarus being poor in spirit. As I demonstrated to you, the context is comparing Lazarus who is was said to be a poor beggar, to the rich man who lived in luxury every day. The mention of Lazarus desiring to be fed with the crumbs (food) from the rich man's table also supports that the context is speaking about literal material abundance vs. Lazarus' lack of material needs.

The idea of looking at this as just a story would make no sense because we would already draw the conclusion of the poor man and the richman but rather what does this have to do with the gospel ?
If read in its plain literal sense, the conclusion is that, the bodies of both men died, but their spirits were conscious and aware in Hades, with Lazarus being in a place of comfort and the rich man, because of his lack of love and mercy, went to the place of torment in flame which was separated by that great chasm. It also teaches that once a person dies in their sins, there is no coming back.

What ? The Richman is screaming, he is crying for water in order that his tongue may be cooled he is desiring for a drop of water.
I can see that you cannot fathom the torment that the rich is in, because if you did, you would understand that anyone in that situation would greatly welcome even the slightest, briefest relief from torment in flame.


I'm sorry then you have not done enough searching; death is death for the unsaved.
I have studied everything that can be studied on these Biblical subjects for over 40 years, so I have indeed done enough study and will continue to do so. And if you would do your own studies on this subject instead of repeating someone else's, the scriptures would lead you to the understanding that both life and death are states of conscious existence in relation to an individuals status with God.

Eternal Life
= Never ending conscious existence, with immortal and glorified bodies in the kingdom of God

Eternal death = Never ending conscious existence, with a resurrected body, separated from God in the lake of fire.

The above is what the combined scriptures teach regarding life and death. The Greek words translated as destroy and punish are not defined as annihilation or extinction. There is no scripture that even suggests temporary punishment or annihilation. The supporting words are always, "torment, punishment, eternal, everlasting, forever and ever, no rest day or night, etc." I have never seen a scripture that says that a person will be thrown into the lake of fire and will be burned up immediately, or that they will be cast in and torment for a little while and then cease to exist. You won't find it!

Then where are they in a place of limbo ? The place sheol o hades the place of limbo is that it ? it can be readily shown that this refers to the grave.
Sheol/Hades, is a temporary place of punishment for the unfaithful throughout all of history. At the end Christ's thousand years, the unrighteous dead throughout all history will be resurrected and will stand before God at the great white throne judgment (Rev.20:11-15) and will be judged. Anyone's name not found in the book of life will be cast into the lake of fire.

Neither Sheol nor Hades should ever be translated as "the grave." The proper word in the Hebrew referring to the grave, tomb or sepulcher is the word "qeber" with its NT counter part being "Mnemion." Both Sheol and Hades refer to the unseen realm of departed spirits. Below is the definition of the word:

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

Strong's Concordance
hadés: Hades, the abode of departed spirits
Original Word: ᾍδης, ου, ὁ
Part of Speech: Noun, Masculine
Transliteration: hadés
Phonetic Spelling: (hah'-dace)
Short Definition: Hades
Definition: Hades, the unseen world.

HELPS Word-studies
86
hádēs (from 1 /A "not" and idein/eidō, "see") – properly, the "unseen place," referring to the (invisible) realm in which all the dead reside, i.e. the present dwelling place of all the departed (deceased); Hades.

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

So when God speaks of biding Satan with a great chain and casting or throwing him viscously into a bottomless pit we are to take this at face value or perhaps when Christ is called a Lamb this to should be taking at face value because it mentions nothing of the sort of these being a parable.
The binding of Satan is exactly what is going to take place. When the Lord returns to the earth to end the age, which is depicted in Rev.19:11-21 and which is also when the beast and the false prophet are thrown into the lake of fire. Following that in Rev.20:1-3, a mighty angel comes down from heaven and seizes Satan and throws him into the Abyss and seals it over him during the same thousand years in which Christ will reign.

"The Lamb," the Sheep Gate, the Bread of Life, the Rock, Immanuel, eternal life, the Living Water and many, many more, are just other designations referring to the Lord Jesus. Just because Jesus is referred to by different names is no reason to include the angel seizing Satan as also being figurative, which is your error. Whether the chain is corporeal or incorporeal, the result is the same, which is the binding of Satan. It is also supported by the fact that at the sounding of the 5th trumpet, a star, which is figurative for an angel, has the key to the Abyss and opens it and which remains open until the Lord returns to the earth to end the age and which is then locked back up after Satan is thrown in. It's just a matter of being able to discern between what is literal and what is symbolic.

Yes really Ahwatukee, So a snake bit him, what we don't read that it was venomous snake and yet sometimes just because one gets by a venomous snake does not mean that he has been injected with venom.
Yes we do read that it was venomous. I truly wish that you people who spend most of your time resisting the truth, would consider what we are teaching.

"But Paul shook the snake off into the fire and suffered no ill effects. The people expected him to swell up or suddenly fall dead; but after waiting a long time and seeing nothing unusual happen to him, they changed their minds and said he was a god."

The above tells us that the indigenous people of the island of Malta, knew that the snake that had bitten Paul was a deadly poisonous snake, for the scripture states that they were expecting him to swell or suddenly fall dead. Attention to detail is very important if you are going to debate scripture.
 

carl11

Senior Member
Oct 20, 2017
277
31
28
#56
I agree. this does away with your objection (4) in the OP.
taking this further, the rich man didn't have what God calls 'life' even while he was 'alive' in the flesh. no one who does not have Christ has life, regardless of their physical bodies having beating hearts and their physical brains showing electrical activity, and existence and life are not the same thing.
No my OP is referring to when one dies afterwards.
 

posthuman

Senior Member
Jul 31, 2013
26,534
7,632
113
#57
No my OP is referring to when one dies afterwards.
yeah you were saying the man in hades had eternal life, because he hadn't ceased to exist. continued existence isn't what God calls life, is my point. eternal life is to know God, and Christ. that's not what the man in hades has, either before or after his existing on earth.

we have to use God's definition of death as well, and that isn't 'cessation of existence'
 

carl11

Senior Member
Oct 20, 2017
277
31
28
#58
yeah you were saying the man in hades had eternal life, because he hadn't ceased to exist. continued existence isn't what God calls life, is my point. eternal life is to know God, and Christ. that's not what the man in hades has, either before or after his existing on earth.

we have to use God's definition of death as well, and that isn't 'cessation of existence'
Maybe we are not seeing well or understanding what I’m conveying but I never said the Richman had eternal life afterwards. I do however see what you are conveying in that we have physical life and yet we don’t have a spiritual life / eternal life until we have truly become saved.
 

posthuman

Senior Member
Jul 31, 2013
26,534
7,632
113
#59
Maybe we are not seeing well or understanding what I’m conveying but I never said the Richman had eternal life afterwards. I do however see what you are conveying in that we have physical life and yet we don’t have a spiritual life / eternal life until we have truly become saved.
ok, then the issue must be that i don't quite understand what you meant by objection number 4, about the unsaved not having eternal life...?


4) There are no verses showing that the unsaved once they die they will ever have eternal life. This idea is shown as one being born again as depicted in Jn. 3
 
M

Miri

Guest
#60
Whether it’s a parable or not the meaning is well understood. Rejecting
God (spiritual poverty) is like playing
with fire. 🔥