Why did the Rich Man go to Hell? What Grave Sin did he commit?

A former assoc. pastor preached that from the pulpit. I talked to him about it afterwards, but he wasn't willing to admit he made a mistake.

Its simple he did not believe in Jesus

SHHH dont diss the KJV. Those are fighitng words. WE better man the Trenches and prepare to protect one aother from the coming onslaught


.

========= Simple The Rich Man had NO Compassion, NO Mercy, No Gracy, Did not help only critized

The rich mans sin was that he rejected the Messiah, the rich man represented Judah, notice in verse Luke 16 verse 21 it says he has 5 brethren, Judah had 5 brothers. The poor man was the gentiles who Judah considered dogs. In verse 31 it says, "If they hear not Moses and the prophets, neither will they be persuaded, though one rose from the dead. " this was a prophecy of what was to happen, Jesus was resurrected but still Judah did not believe.

I am not a KJV-onlyist, but I had a thought while I was reading that version's statement of 1 Timothy 6:10:

Money = time spent = life

What if "money" represents more than just coins and bills, but includes the love of life itself and all of its worldly pursuits? If we love (chase after) what we invest into our lives more than God and other people, wouldn't that be the root of all evil?

The Strong's Concordance translates the phrase "love of money" as covetousness, which basically boils down to the same concept I mentioned above. Isn't a covetous attitude, which focuses on getting everything possible out of this life more than serving God, the root of all evil? Don't get me wrong, there is nothing wrong with trying to get something out of life. The problem is when the focus becomes living for self rather than for God.

I am not trying to redefine terms here or saying that any version is more accurate than the others. In fact, I agree that adding in "kinds of" does clarify the meaning of the verse. But is it possible that both the KJV and the other versions can be correct? This is just some food for thought.

The book of Malachi is a prophecy about the destruction of Jerusalem because of the wickedness of Jewish priesthood and their rejection of the Messiah. If you read that book alongside Luke 15 and 16, you will see that parables follow that book and Jesus is laying the charges against Judah.

"Lovers of money" (Luke 16:14; Malachi 3:8-10)
Justified themselves (Luke 16:15; Malachi 1:7; 2:14; 3:8, 13)
Improperly Divorced and remarried (Luke 16:18; Malachi 2:13-16)

The rich man in the parable is Judah, notice he is clothed in purple, Judah was the royal tribe and purple was the colour of royalty. It also says he had 5 brothers, Judah had 5 brothers (Genesis 35:23)

If you think the parable is about it being a sin to be rich, you are missing the point.

Interesting interpretation and it makes sense.

What’s your take on why Abraham said this:

Luke 16:29-31 NASB
29But Abraham *said, ‘They have Moses and the Prophets; let them hear them.’
30But he said, ‘No, father Abraham, but if someone goes to them from the dead, they will repent!’
31But he said to him, ‘If they do not listen to Moses and the Prophets, they will not be persuaded even if someone rises from the dead.’”

The bit about how they wouldn’t be persuaded if someone rises from the dead (Jesus rises from the dead later) is like a prophecy about Israel not believing in Jesus’s resurrection?

Here's my take on the last 3 verses:
In verse 29 it says they have the law and the prophets, the scriptures which spoke of Christ and they rejected Him.
I see the last two verses as a prophecy of Christs pending resurrection. The Rich man thinks seeing this will convince them, but as Jesus said in the parable, they still rejected Him

For verse 29 I think verses such as these help the understanding:

John 5:46 For had ye believed Moses, ye would have believed me; for he wrote of me.
47 But if ye believe not his writings, how shall ye believe my words?

The rich man and the crippled begger Lazarus were both sinners. The difference was that Lazarus was forgiven because he trusted in Jesus to save him from hell, but the rich man was trusting in his riches. This is very common. However few, some rich men get saved because with God all things are possible.

I hope this helps.
Have a great weekend.

Neglected salvation.

Hebrews 2:3

“How shall we escape, if we neglect so great salvation; which at the first began to be spoken by the Lord, and was confirmed unto us by them that heard him;”

What I find worthy of thought, is that the name 'Lazarus" appears in only 2 of the 4 Gospels, Luke, and John.
In Luke, we are told of the Rich man and Lazarus, whereas in John, we are told of Mary and Martha's brother, Lazarus.
In Luke the rich man wants Lazarus sent back from the dead to warn his brothers not to come to that place of torment.
In John, Jesus raises Lazarus from the dead.

Did Jesus hint at a future miracle?
Do the two mentions of "Lazarus" correlate?
What happened to Lazarus after being brought back from the dead?

Inquiring minds want to know.

Question:
"Why did the rich man go to hell? What grave sin did he commit?"

Answer:
James 2:10
"For whosoever shall keep the whole law, and yet offend in one point, he is guilty of all."

The very FIRST sin as an adult when he was accountable to God.
Even though there are degrees of sin pointed out from Genesis to Revelation, it only takes ONE sin to bring a man or woman under the wrath of the just and holy God . He was as guilty as if he committed all sins.
Think about that. You don't have to commit a terrible crime to go to be with the rich man.

Some say that you have to "turn from sins" and not "practice sin." This is Not a biblical doctrine. God does not grade on a curve and give those who get at least a "D" on the exam a pass. Every one of us have practiced sin and are pretty good at it.
"What grave sin?..."
You failed with the first sin.
The rich man man failed.
Why? Because he was covetous?
No, that wasn't his only sin anymore than those who read this statement.
The fact of the matter is that we ALL have sinned and come short of the glory of God.

Even though Lazarus is not described as to why he is saved, certainly not for being a begger. Likewise being handicapped doesn't bring about auto-salvation.

We can look at literally 100 places in the gospel of John and know how he was saved from that torment that the rich man was condemned to.

Let's face it, we are all condemned regardless of how good or bad we see ourselves.
That's why we, just like Lazarus, needed to see his need for the Savior. We all need to change our minds from "I'm good enough and am a good person to "I am condemned and in need of the Savior."
He offers kindness, but it is undeserved by us.
He paid it all, so unless you have always been perfect, you have nothing to give or trust in,. EXCEPT the Lord Jesus Christ.
Rich have a hard time trusting in Him. They have a tendency to be self righteous, trusting in their riches.

Here's just one example. Jesus is speaking to a highly esteemed Pharisee, Nicodemus. Nicodemus' denomination taught that salvation was earned by keeping the law, obeying the commandments. Today people would say, "turning from your sins."

"He that believeth on him is not condemned: but he that believeth not is condemned already, because he hath not believed in the name of the only begotten Son of God."

John the Baptist backed up the Lord's message in the same chapter.

"He that believeth on the Son hath everlasting life: and he that believeth not the Son shall not see life; but the wrath of God abideth on him."

More details about the subject:

Its a parable, not an actual event. What it teaches us is that trust in material possession and lack of compassion is damnable. While faith regardless of material possession is saved.

If it is a parable, which Jesus did not preface by saying so, then it is the only one that actually mentions a character by name, or in this case two, Abraham, and Lazarus.

And?

Not all parables were introduced as such. And yes, there is a man-made tradition
that states that it cannot be a parable because real people are mentioned.

Beware lest anyone cheat you through philosophy and empty deceit, according to the
tradition of men, according to the basic principles of the world, and not according to Christ.

Hi Rich,

Here's a sermon from a Baptist church service in case you want to check out the sermon.
They start by reading the whole chapter of Luke about the rich man and Lazarus at 17:24 mark. Then is the sermon. Just looked it up and I'll try to listen after work tomorrow.
https://www.kjv1611only.com/video/02preaching/Sermons_Pastor_Anderson/The_Rich_Man_And_Lazarus.mp4
If there's anything you want to discuss, just note the time mark for me. There's only so much information given, but I honestly can't think of any reason why this would not be a literal event. Jesus gave a lot of other references of hell as a place described as here. It is very humbling regardless of whether the characters are fictional or literal. One thing is beyond doubt, hell is literal and Jesus warned about it.

One more note, had the rich man shown a good work such as compassion, he would still be damned. All our good works are as filthy rags. It took the sinless Savior to be the propitiation for our sins, not a compassionate rich man.