102. Chapter 43 - The Rich Man and Lazarus
Chapter 43 - The Rich Man and Lazarus
Luke 16:14-31 The Pharisees’ Philosophy
Jesus’ warnings against the perils of riches had been an attack upon the entire philosophy of life which the Pharisees held. They maintained that their wealth was their concrete proof of God’s favor upon them. When Jesus called it “the mammon of unrighteousness,” it stirred their conscience as to the ways they had secured their wealth and were using it. Jesus now follows with the account of the rich man and Lazarus. This is usually called a parable, but Jesus does not state it is a parable. In no parable is a person named, as Lazarus is. Discussion as to whether it is a parable is not necessary. The pictures Jesus gives of life beyond the grave cannot be tested by us because of our lack of information. They are true to the facts or else Jesus deceived us. The Contrasts The account opens with an extraordinary series of contrasts in which the ordinary elements of life are described: rich man vs. beggar; purple and clothed in fine linen vs. the beggar laid at his gate (rags, dogs, sores); faring sumptuously every day vs. desiring to be fed with the crumbs. Jesus had been giving instruction on the right use of wealth so that we might gain entrance into “the eternal tabernacles.” He now showed the disastrous results of a false use of wealth. In the account of the rich man and Lazarus we see “that which is exalted among men” becoming “an abomination in the sight of God.” Jesus is not delivering a diatribe against the possession of wealth, but a warning against the perils of wealth and fatal results of its misuse. The rich man had a mansion on earth, but none in heaven. He might have used his mammon to help Lazarus and others like him and thus have gained the “eternal tabernacles.” Earthly treasures are not evil; they are called “good things.” But when men worship mammon instead of God, their misuse becomes the basis for their condemnation.
High Living
“Now there was a certain rich man, and he was clothed in purple and fine linen, faring sumptuously every day” (Luke 16:19). Purple and fine linen describe the outer and the under garments. The Greek words mean: (1) the murex secured from the sea (small shell fish); then the dye made from it, and finally the costly fabric dyed with it; (2) the Egyptian flax; then the fine linen made from the flax. The marginal reading for faring sumptuously every day is revealing: “living in mirth and splendor.”
“And a certain beggar named Lazarus was laid at his gate, full of sores, and desiring to be fed with the crumbs that fell from the rich man’s table; yea, even the dogs came and licked his sores.” That the name of one of the persons in the account is given was used by Tertullian to prove that the account is history and not parable. Some modernists try to claim that the name was added later to connect the account with Lazarus of Bethany. Other unbelievers hold that the account of the resurrection of Lazarus is an invention suggested by this account of the rich man and Lazarus. There is not the slightest basis for either position. Tradition gives the name Nineuis to the rich man. He is often referred to as Dives, the Latin word for rich man.
Starvation Rations The Greek word at his gate means a large gateway or portico; it is uncertain whether this was the entrance to the estate or to the mansion itself. The word suggests what a magnificent palace the home of the rich man was. Lazarus may have had no home. Friends brought him daily to the most promising place where he might expect to get food or attract the attention of someone who would have pity on him and help him. The rich man did not drive the beggar away; he simply ignored the unpleasant sight at his gate. Since the friends kept bringing him from day to day, he must have received some food or was constantly in hope that he might find help. The phrase desiring to be fed certainly suggests that what he got did not satisfy his hunger. He may have been given occasionally some scraps from the table. The dogs were wild scavengers of the camp which Lazarus was unable to drive away. While the nature of his sores is not indicated, the dogs must have added greatly to his misery. Some think that the mention of the dogs is to show that even the vicious dogs were kinder to him than the rich man, but it may only be introduced as the climax of his suffering.
Paradise The godly character of Lazarus is both revealed and implied. His faith in God caused him to accept without complaining the miserable existence he had on earth. His continued effort to improve his condition and make the best of what opportunity he had shows that he maintained his courage in spite of his helpless condition. The impressive silence of Lazarus throughout the account has been pointed out. He does not
“murmur against God’s distribution of wealth, nor against the rich man’s abuse of it, in this world. And in Hades he neither exults over the change of relations between himself and Dives, nor protests against being asked to wait upon him in the place of torment, or to go errands for him to the visible world” (Plummer, Commentary on Luke, p. 392).
Those who suffer long and much often develop great patience. The beautiful picture of the angels coming to take his soul to Paradise is a sort of divine epitaph expressing his righteous character and noble life. It is nowhere suggested that poverty is a virtue or that he was saved because he was poor or had suffered much. The attitude that a person takes toward such suffering is what reveals his character. That the death of Lazarus occurred first probably reflects the actual history of the case. The rich man’s opportunity to help Lazarus ended before the rich man died, but there is no indication that he had any regrets or even noticed it.
“He was carried away by the angels into Abraham’s bosom.” We are not to suppose that his body was not buried. The preservation of the living would have procured the burial of even the poorest. The poor were buried in a “potter’s field.” Any account of the burial is passed over as a matter of no moment to make the sharpest contrast to the burial of the body of the rich man, which must have been with mighty pomp and circumstance. The glorious reception of Lazarus into Paradise is in contrast. That Paradise should be called “Abraham’s bosom” is indicative of the great place which this messenger of God had in the Old Testament. Paradise is the part of Hades (Greek), or Sheol (Hebrew), where the righteous in a state of blessedness await their final reception into heaven. Abraham welcomed Lazarus into Paradise and later responded to the pleas and complaints of the rich man. The earthly luxury and extravagance of the rich man was matched now by the depths of suffering in Hades. He was punished, not for having been rich, but for having refused to use his riches nobly. Abraham was a rich man who had remained faithful to God and helpful to his fellowmen in spite of his riches. Formerly the rich man had looked with scorn at Lazarus suffering in silence at his gate. Now he looks with anguish and unspeakable longing upon him as he is comforted in Abraham’s bosom.
Principles The principles taught in this account are as follows. (1) The use or abuse of earthly opportunities determines the eternal state. In this respect it has a strong kinship to the preceding discussion of the unjust steward. The refusal to use earthly possessions as a divinely bestowed trust was the basis for the rich man’s condemnation. (2) The state of probation ends at death. There can be no change from the place of punishment to that of blessedness after death. (3) God’s mercy is all-inclusive; His justice, perfect; His revelation of the way of life is completely adequate; therefore, the wicked man is solely responsible for final condemnation. To appeal for further signs and evidence is unwarranted. The Rich Man’s Appeal
“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 major contention of the Pharisees was that they were Abraham’s children and hence had the sole approval of God. The rich man appeals for help on the basis that he, too, is a son of Abraham. He could not appeal on the basis of righteous character or loving service, for he had scorned his earthly opportunities. Here is a strong presentation of the folly of the Pharisees’ position. Lange thinks this is a master stroke in having the rich man still arrogantly request that Lazarus be assigned to wait on him. But there is no evidence that the rich man, while on earth, had ordered Lazarus about or tried to compel him to be his servant. He had simply neglected the beggar at his gate. His suffering in Hades is too great for him to have been arrogant in this request. He is humble in his request and asks for the help of Lazarus because he sees and knows him.
Purgatory The following facts concerning the fate of the wicked in Hades emerge from this account: (1) Their state will be that of untold anguish and suffering. If the flame is figurative, then it must represent something worse than anything we know in this world. (2) The suffering will be unending; it will be impossible to change from a state of suffering to one of blessedness in eternity. The doctrine of purgatory receives a deathblow in this account. It is useless for anyone to argue that this is a parable and therefore the teaching is uncertain; this is either a historic case that happened or it could have happened, for Jesus is teaching the fundamental lesson as to the use of earthly opportunities and the absolute finality of death. Everything else said on the subject in the Old Testament and the New Testament confirms this elemental proposition.
(3) The lost will not be able to return to this world or to send messages back. Spiritualism is disproved by this account. Samuel returned and talked to Saul, and Moses and Elijah met with Jesus on the Mount of Transfiguration because God so willed these revelations; but the proposition of messages coming from the dead to warn and guide the living, which is the whole basis of Spiritualism, is absolutely denied as any divine program.
Heavenly Bodies
Tertullian used this passage to argue that “tip of his finger” and “tongue” prove corporal bodies in Paradise and Hades, but the Scripture does not reveal clearly to us whether we are to have bodies in Paradise or whether we are to be disembodied spirits until the judgment day, when the earthly body shall be resurrected and transformed into a heavenly body, as the spirit and body are reunited. Paul says that he did not know what sort of body a spiritual body will be. To us with our limited vision “a spiritual body” seems a contradiction in terms. But we cannot even explain precisely how the spirit is at present united with our earthly body. Paul states in 1 Corinthians fifteen that God has not revealed to us what the heavenly body is to be like, but that He will provide a glorious eternal body fit for heaven, even as He provided in the beginning a body fit for earth. The difference is obvious between insisting on a literal interpretation of such details as “finger,” “tongue,” “flame,” concerning which the Scripture does not give us further information, and accepting a fundamental principle such as the finality of death which is everywhere affirmed in the Scripture.
Memory and Hell
“Son, remember that thou in thy lifetime receivedst thy good things, and Lazarus in like manner evil things: but now he is comforted, and thou art in anguish” (Luke 16:25). Remember indicates the survival of personality, for it required the retention of memory. If we could not remember or recognize ourselves, there would no longer be personality. Heaven and hell would no longer have significance. This is strongly supported by the other passages, such as the appearance of Samuel to Saul and the appearance of Moses and Elijah to Christ and the three apostles on the Mount of Transfiguration. This raises the most difficult problem which eternity presents to us; how will it he possible for those in heaven to be happy when they discover that some whom they have loved dearly in this world are not in heaven? That this should he a problem to us shows how slight is our comprehension of the blessedness of being received by God into His eternal presence. Our earthly families have been very precious, but the family of God in heaven will be so glorious we cannot even comprehend it. God is able to wipe every tear from our eyes and will provide eternal comfort.
Son is used in Abraham’s reply to the rich man. He had appealed to “Father Abraham,” and the answer is gentle though firm. Abraham did not deny that the rich man was a descendant, but he had not lived in harmony with his heritage. Having admitted the relationship, Abraham at once stated the facts as to his ignoble life which the rich man must admit and which established the justice of his punishment. He demanded that the rich man recall all the wealth and the misused opportunities of earth. The Greek religion taught that the river Lethe rendered the blessed entirely oblivious to all that had occurred in life and thus assured their happiness. They did not seem to see that this contradicted the moral issues of the judgment day and blotted out the personality. The Christian gospel teaches the essential responsibility of the individual for his earthly opportunities and the absolute preservation of identity, to which memory is essential. The promise of Christ is that “earth has no sorrows which heaven cannot heal.” Lazarus in spite of all his terrible suffering on earth was now comforted. God is able to preserve the identity of the individual, but have us begin a new life in which all sorrow will he assuaged. We cannot understand how this will be; we can only trust to God’s love and power. The Impassable Gulf
Abraham’s reply did not imply that the rich man received his earthly riches as a reward for good deeds and that this was a sufficient reward. Nor did he imply that Lazarus suffered earthly misery because of his sins and that having thus suffered sufficiently he had now been received into Paradise. Neither is it taught that each man receives so much suffering or pleasure at one time or another and that those receiving a full allowance on earth will have none hereafter. The rich man was not lost because he had been rich; he was not condemned to suffer in eternity because he had had enjoyment on earth. Lazarus was not saved because he had been poor; he was not enjoying blessedness because he had suffered on earth. The basis of eternal judgment is the use and abuse of opportunities to do the will of God. In Luke 16:25 Abraham shows that no alleviation of the rich man’s suffering was permissible on the grounds of justice. In Luke 16:26 he declared that the alleviation asked was impossible because of God’s irrevocable law concerning eternity. “And besides all this, between us and you there is a great gulf fixed, that they that would pass from hence to you may not be able, and that none may cross over from thence to us.” Conversation across this vast gulf should offer no difficulty to our faith in a space age which affords mechanical communication with the moon by means of puny man’s invention. Besides all this has the marginal reading in all these things (things is supplied). Plummer suggests, “in all these regions, from end to end.” It is most remarkable that in all the teaching of Jesus and the entire Bible there is no description of the location of heaven and hell. Jesus has gone to prepare a place. God will provide. This is sufficient. The Gospel Alone
“I pray thee therefore, father, that thou wouldest send him to my father’s house; for I have five brethren; that he may testify unto them, lest they also come into this place of torment” (Luke 16:27, Luke 16:28). Did these five brethren also share the banquets in the palace of the rich man as they all lived in mirth and splendor? The rich man’s request carries an undercurrent of argument that he had not had a fair chance, a reasonable amount of warning, evidence, and persuasion to cause him to devote himself to God’s will and to prepare for eternity. This petition, “if less selfish than the first, is also less humble.” Abraham sets forth in reply that Moses and the prophets were adequate for leading men to God in their dispensation, if men were willing to be saved, that the gospel is sufficient for all men, that men continually seek without justification for a further sign as did the Pharisees vainly claiming that with more evidence they would believe. “They have Moses and the prophets; let them hear them.” That which causes their doubt and disobedience is not lack of evidence or earnest appeal, but the unwillingness to believe. God’s revelation is complete and adequate, but men may and will reject it, if they so determine, regardless of what evidence is offered or what appeals are made.
“Nay, father Abraham: but if one go to 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, if one rise from the dead” (Luke 16:30, Luke 16:31). This answers the persistent demand of the Pharisees for a sign from heaven. The Book of Acts shows that not even the resurrection of Jesus was able to bring the stubborn unbelievers to repentance. The resurrection of Lazarus of Bethany did not bring the Pharisees to repentance, but stirred them to plot his assassination, as they plotted to kill Jesus. The account closes with this profound emphasis upon the freedom of the will and man’s moral responsibility for his eternal fate.