Interpreting the Parable of the Rich Man and Lazarus: It's Really Good News!

The Fathers follow the line of the Apostles. Some were taught by the Apostles.

So, we're just going to ignore Jesus calling the Gentile Syrophoenician woman a "dog" unworthy of bread intended for Jewish "children", and the woman acknowledging that by saying, "Truth Lord! Yet, the dogs eat of the crumbs which fall from their master's table"? The parable of the Rich Man and Lazarus has nothing to do with what happens when we die - it nees interpretation.

Of course, the beggar outside with the "dogs" is representative of the Gentiles. The Jews still to this day refer to us Gentiles as "dogs". That's why they never tip...because why tip lowly "dogs" who were only put here on Earth by Yahweh to serve their Jew "masters"?

That makes no sense. The beggar is not called a dog in the parable.

The Fathers follow the line of the Apostles. Some were taught by the Apostles.

He's "outside" the gate with the "dogs".

Were not the Gentiles "outside" the commonwealth of Israel, shut out from God's covenant, blessings, promises, and referred to as "dogs" which desired a few "crumbs" of God's blessings like that Gentile Syrophoenician woman?

Look, I realize you're not going to be convinced otherwise - what a shame. Immortal Soul doctrine guarantees its adherents will eventually become victims of demonic deception in the form of "familiar spirits", and Eternal Torment doctrine has driven more people either insane or to denounce God altogether than anything else, because it portrays God as the cruelest, most maniacal, despotic psychopath with shoes that seems only Satan himself could fill.

They're finally getting a chance to see how these two doctrines of devils are incapable of standing the test of Biblical scrutiny, and are praising God for it, I assure you. They will not be demonically deceived and will discover in God a character previously unknown to them. They'll gladly commit, perhaps for the first time, all to Him, up to and including their lives for the Gospel, instead of doing the bare minimum to secure this "fire insurance" being peddled by thousands of false pulpit prophets and their equally misguided faithful.

God is just to cast people into everlasting torments.

Because, the reason why they are cast there is that they never avail themselves of the Cross to be born again.

Because they are not born again, their sin nature has not been dealt with.

And therefore, when they are cast into their punishment, they will continue to add to that which is deserving of punishment in their lives (see Revelation 16:10-11, for example)...they will continue to add sin to sin...because that is what is in their nature.

If they ever "catch up" so that they have paid every penny, because their sin nature has not been dealt with, they will sin yet again and will justly be cast into the furnace of fire once again for the new sins that they commit.

However, realistically, most people will never "catch up" but that which deserves punishment in their lives will exceed the amount of time that they have spent in payment for them every moment that they are in the lake of fire.

God is just to cast people into everlasting torments.

Because, the reason why they are cast there is that they never avail themselves of the Cross to be born again.

Because they are not born again, their sin nature has not been dealt with.

And therefore, when they are cast into their punishment, they will continue to add to that which is deserving of punishment in their lives (see Revelation 16:10-11, for example)...they will continue to add sin to sin...because that is what is in their nature.

If they ever "catch up" so that they have paid every penny, because their sin nature has not been dealt with, they will sin yet again and will justly be cast into the furnace of fire once again for the new sins that they commit.

However, realistically, most people will never "catch up" but that which deserves punishment in their lives will exceed the amount of time that they have spent in payment for them every moment that they are in the lake of fire.

It does not say he was outside the gate with the dogs. You made that up to make it fit into your invented allegory.

20And at his gate was laid a poor man named Lazarus, covered with sores, 21who desired to be fed with what fell from the rich man’s table. Moreover, even the dogs came and licked his sores.

This is obviously a statement of "add insult to injury" A "on top of all that" or "moreover" the dogs came and licked his sores. Which suggests that he was a Jew, since it would be a humiliation to a Jew and not to a gentile.

And those that have a revelation of the greatness of the salvation offered by the blood of Jesus Christ don't accuse God of wrong doing concerning the nature of the punishment of those who reject so great a salvation. Anyone who walks away from God because of the doctrine of eternal punishment were never born again, and never fell in love with His holiness.

Amazes me how those who think eternal torment punishment is "just" proceeded to recoil in horror at what everyone immediately recognized as totally unjust punishment when Islamic fundamentalists caged that enemy fighter pilot and set the whole thing on fire and burned him alive.


The only way you can answer "no" to the question, "Shall mortal man be more just than God?" above is to get busy defending unspeakable, horrific, barbaric torture as "just" punishment down here.

I'm pretty sure no rich Jew would allow unclean animals - especially mongrel dogs - inside his gate.

Lazarus is outside the gate with the dogs, is he not?

Not only have I presented a more logical hermeneutic that the the beggar is a Jew humiliated by being licked by dogs on top of all else he has suffered, but it is also clear that the parable has the rich man in torment while his 5 brothers are still living.

Assigning the rich man an allegorical meaning of all Pharisees doesn't work becuase other Pharisees (his brothers) are not in torment while he is. This Alllegory if it is an Allegory would have to be interpreted in some way that allows for part of the Pharisees to be in torment while part are needing to warned about the place of torment that awaits them which warning is found in the scripture.

No matter how you allegorize it the parable/allegory would include a place or torment for the wicked dead while as yet the final judgment is yet to come.

The constant effort to make verses like the ones below mean something different than what they say should be an obvious indication that one is being intellectually dishonest and I am persuaded that the conscience of the people who do it is always smitten, but something keeps driving them. Maybe an idol of denominational doctrine or something. Or maybe a "so and so leader and teacher and so and so author of my denomination says this is what it means, and they can't be wrong because they are so smart, so it is ok for me to keep teaching it this way even though my conscience is telling me that this is really bad hermeneutics" which sort of reasoning is equivalent to idolatry because it puts "denomination, teachers, authors, leaders" over the place of God.


Matthew 25:46
And these will go away into eternal punishment, but the righteous into eternal life.”

Jude 1:7
Just as Sodom and Gomorrah and the surrounding cities, which likewise indulged in sexual immorality and pursued unnatural desire, serve as an example by undergoing a punishment of eternal fire.

Revelation 20:10
And the devil who had deceived them was thrown into the lake of fire and sulfur where the beast and the false prophet were, and they will be tormented day and night forever and ever.

Revelation 14:11
And the smoke of their torment goes up forever and ever, and they have no rest, day or night, these worshipers of the beast and its image, and whoever receives the mark of its name.”

Daniel 12:2
And many of those who sleep in the dust of the earth shall awake, some to everlasting life, and some to shame and everlasting contempt.

Jude 1:13
Wild waves of the sea, casting up the foam of their own shame; wandering stars, for whom the gloom of utter darkness has been reserved forever.

Mark 9:43-48
And if your hand causes you to sin, cut it off. It is better for you to enter life crippled than with two hands to go to hell, to the unquenchable fire. And if your foot causes you to sin, cut it off. It is better for you to enter life lame than with two feet to be thrown into hell. And if your eye causes you to sin, tear it out. It is better for you to enter the kingdom of God with one eye than with two eyes to be thrown into hell, ‘where their worm does not die and the fire is not quenched.’

There are many more but I got tired.

It doesn't matter because I know that you will have an explanation for each, not matter how many I post and that the constant necessity to come up with an explanation as to why they don't mean what it seems like they say is not going to trigger a red flag for you. You learned how to ignore those red flags long ago.

Accusing God of being cruel because of the doctrine of everlasting punishment has always been an argument of the unbeliever and does not require a defense other than "believe the scriptures" if you will not be convinced about eternal punishment by reading the scriptures then you will not believe even if one rose from the dead and warned you about it.

I am pretty much done with this conversation, you can have the last word. Unless you come up with something new that we have not already been over many times.

I'm pretty sure no rich Jew would allow unclean animals - especially mongrel dogs - inside his gate.

Lazarus is outside the gate with the dogs, is he not?

Already answered. You're being stubborn. Your interpretation is not what most readers would get. They would get that "moreover the dogs licked his sores" was the point. An "add insult to injury statement" Not a hidden mystery allegory code that needed to be deciphered. Give it up. Your' trying to force a jigsaw piece in the wrong place and say it fits but it doesn't.

Already answered. You're being stubborn. Your interpretation is not what most readers would get. They would get that "moreover the dogs licked his sores" was the point. An "add insult to injury statement" Not a hidden mystery allegory code that needed to be deciphered. Give it up. Your' trying to force a jigsaw piece in the wrong place and say it fits but it doesn't.

He's "outside" the gate with the "dogs".

Were not the Gentiles "outside" the commonwealth of Israel, shut out from God's covenant, blessings, promises, and referred to as "dogs" which desired a few "crumbs" of God's blessings like that Gentile Syrophoenician woman?

Look, I realize you're not going to be convinced otherwise - what a shame. Immortal Soul doctrine guarantees its adherents will eventually become victims of demonic deception in the form of "familiar spirits", and Eternal Torment doctrine has driven more people either insane or to denounce God altogether than anything else, because it portrays God as the cruelest, most maniacal, despotic psychopath with shoes that seems only Satan himself could fill.

They're finally getting a chance to see how these two doctrines of devils are incapable of standing the test of Biblical scrutiny, and are praising God for it, I assure you. They will not be demonically deceived and will discover in God a character previously unknown to them. They'll gladly commit, perhaps for the first time, all to Him, up to and including their lives for the Gospel, instead of doing the bare minimum to secure this "fire insurance" being peddled by thousands of false pulpit prophets and their equally misguided faithful.

If he wanted to make the point that the beggar was a gentile he would have said a "gentile beggar" or mentioned his nationality in order to make that point as he did with other stories when that point needed to be made like the Samaritan or the Syrophoenician woman. But in this case dogs licking his sores is the point not that he himself was a dog. And the wording is "moreover, the dogs... " which means, "on top of all his other troubles, the dogs came and licked his sore" which point would mean that he would now be considered unclean by his countrymen, Jews. This seems to be a Jewish Beggar and the dogs licking him seem to mark him as Jewish otherwise it might seem like an act of kindness for the dogs to lick him as it has been interpreted that way by modern "gentiles" who have a modern western view of dogs and who are not putting themselves in the mind and culture of a first century Jewish beggar.

Jesus knew how to make a point about the nationality of a person in a parable and this one marks him as Jewish in order for the humiliation of being licked by dogs to be applicable.

Now concede already and let your world come unglued for a minute. It will hurt at first but eventually you will be free.

Dogs, my friend. Lazarus was with the dogs...

outside the gate...

where the Gentile dogs were, outside the Jerusalem gate cut off from the blessings, promises, covenants, etc....

just like that Syrophoenician woman Jesus called a "dog", a fact she admitted to be true, by saying "yet the dogs eat of the crumbs which fall from their master's table" ...

the very key to interpreting the parable which for some strange reason refuse to acknowledge.

I leave this thread for a while and happen to peak back in and you’re still preaching false doctrines, with no conviction to the contrary, seemingly with more vigor than before. That’s troubling to say the least, but nonetheless the battle with darkness seems to never end.

Revelation 20:10 says that only three persons are tormented forever: the devil, beast, and false prophet.

Revelation 20:15 says they everyone else not written in the book of life is sent to the lake of fire where they are punished with the second death.

I don’t know why you insist on preaching something different than the written word. Why are you doing that?

He's "outside" the gate with the "dogs".

Were not the Gentiles "outside" the commonwealth of Israel, shut out from God's covenant, blessings, promises, and referred to as "dogs" which desired a few "crumbs" of God's blessings like that Gentile Syrophoenician woman?

Look, I realize you're not going to be convinced otherwise - what a shame. Immortal Soul doctrine guarantees its adherents will eventually become victims of demonic deception in the form of "familiar spirits", and Eternal Torment doctrine has driven more people either insane or to denounce God altogether than anything else, because it portrays God as the cruelest, most maniacal, despotic psychopath with shoes that seems only Satan himself could fill.

They're finally getting a chance to see how these two doctrines of devils are incapable of standing the test of Biblical scrutiny, and are praising God for it, I assure you. They will not be demonically deceived and will discover in God a character previously unknown to them. They'll gladly commit, perhaps for the first time, all to Him, up to and including their lives for the Gospel, instead of doing the bare minimum to secure this "fire insurance" being peddled by thousands of false pulpit prophets and their equally misguided faithful.