Rich Man and Lazarus

Project
Restore >> Library >> A Love Stronger Than Death >> Love Stronger contents >> 26 Your Thought Questions Answered ..

The aware reader will readily observe that much of Christian thought disagrees with the understanding of Luke 16:19-31 (the story of the rich man and Lazarus) that is advanced in "A Love Stronger Than Death." This page takes a point-by-point look at one expression of a common view and comments on the discussion.
Our comments Of course, the Watchtower movement (Jehovah's Witnesses) are not to supercede the Bible either in validating or condemning a Bible teaching. We must look to the Bible. Mr. Jackson likely agrees that the Bible is to be the highest authority, but one might wonder why he chose to add Jehovah's Witnesses to this discussion without taking note of the range of discussion even within the evangelical community (except in the note at the end of the article) regarding what the Bible says on this topic.	Are the Dead Conscious? http://www.christiancourier.com/archives/deadConscious.htm by Wayne Jackson Christian Courier: Archives Thursday, December 9, 1999 There is an on-going controversy in the religious community as to whether or not human beings, after death, exist in a state of consciousness. The Watchtower movement claims: “The dead are shown to be ‘conscious of nothing at all’ and the death state to be one of complete inactivity” (Aid to Bible Understanding, Brooklyn, NY: Watchtower, 1971, p. 431).
Unquestionably? Is this an attempt to pre-determine the conclusions in the mind of the reader?	Unquestionably, the Bible teaches otherwise. Though there are numerous arguments that one might employ to establish the fact that the dead are aware of their post-mortem existence, the narrative concerning the rich man and Lazarus is one of the most comprehensive affirmations of this truth.
We are in basic agreement with the statement of the Bible account.	In the parable of the unrighteous steward (Lk. 16:1-13), Christ had taught the value of using one’s material possessions to prepare for eternity. Likewise, He had cautioned about the dangers of becoming enslaved to money. But the Pharisees, who were lovers of money, ridiculed the Lord (16:14). Thus, Jesus subsequently introduced the account concerning a certain rich man and a beggar named Lazarus (16:19-31). The basic design of this case is to show the vivid contrast between these two men – both before and after death!
The question of whether or not Luke 16:19-31 is a parable relates to the understanding that in parables, there is one major fundamental truth and the details need not have significance in themselves. Arndt and Gingrich's A Greek-English Lexicon of the New Testament (1952, Fourth Edition, p. 617) has this regarding "parabolen": "In the synoptics the word denotes a characteristic form of the teaching of Jesus. . . . A parable is a short discourse that makes a comparision; it expresses a (single) complete thought. The evangelists considered that it needed interpretation because it presented teaching in obscure fashion." Despite what some commentators have said, there is certainly not a consensus among Bible scholars that that the details of the story must have literal meaning. In fact, as will be seen below, the details of this parable contradict other teachings that Jesus explicitly gave. While Jesus's parables are frequently labeled as such either explicitly or by saying that the kingdom of heaven is like a person or thing in certain circumstnces, not all parables are so labeled. Examples are in Luke 15:8 (parable of the lost coin), Luke 15:11 (parable of the lost son), and Luke 16:1 (parable of the unjust steward). There are also two stories in the Old Testament that are generally understood as parables although not so labeled: Judges 9:8-15 (the parable of the trees) and 2 Kings 14:9 (the thistle and the cedar).	Is It a Parable? There are many respectable Bible scholars who consider the account in Luke 16:19ff to be a parable. Even if such were the case, that would not militate against the force of the instruction contained within the story, for the parable is “confined to that which is real. Its imagery always embodies a narrative which is true to the facts and experiences of human life” (M.S. Terry, Hermeneutics, New York: Eaton & Mains, 1890, p. 188). In a parable “the events must be possible, or likely to have happened” (E.W. Bullinger, Figures of Speech Used in the Bible, Grand Rapids: Baker, 1968, p. 752). D.R. Dungan notes: “The actors in a parable are real – human beings are the actors, and they do nothing which they could not do . . .” (Hermeneutics, Cincinnati: Standard, n.d., p. 227). It is more likely, though, that this record is not a parable. Some of the apostolic “church fathers” (e.g., Ambrosius, Irenaeus, Tertullian) argued that the account was not parabolic. R.C. Trench stated that this “little history . . . does not fulfill the conditions of a parable” (Notes on the Parables, London: Macmillan, 1877, p. 453). For example, it would be the only parable in which the characters are actually named. R.C. Foster’s comment is helpful: “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” (Studies in the Life of Christ, Grand Rapids: Baker, 1971, p. 955).
Here the article writer shows a logical flaw in a particular interpretation.	It would not be out of order here to point out that some religious materialists, i.e., those who deny conscious punishment for the wicked – such as the “Jehovah’s Witnesses,” have placed a very bizarre construction upon this report. The Watchtower people allege: “By this parable Jesus uttered a prophecy which undergoes fulfillment in its modern setting since A.D. 1918. It has its application to two classes existing on earth today. The rich man represents the ultraselfish class of the clergy of ‘Christendom’, who are now alienated from God and dead to his favor and tormented by the truth proclaimed. Lazarus depicts the remnant of the ‘body of Christ’ and also that class of persons who are of good-will” (Let God Be True, Brooklyn: Watchtower, 1946, p. 79). In refutation it only need be momentarily noted that if such is the case, since there is a non-negotiable gulf between the two groups, one must suppose that no “clergyman” could ever be converted to the “body of Christ,” and none within the body-class could ever apostatize to the ultra-selfish crowd! Yet, this is a consequence to which the “Witnesses” do not subscribe.
Note that the logical difficulty of having a human body decaying in the earth and also a description mentioning human body parts (tongue, finger, etc.) is explained by an (unispired) interpretation that "The Lord is describing only the condition of the spirits of these men." Further, the author asserts that "the nature of pure spirits" is beyond human understanding. Here the author suggests that the physical traits are figuratively applied to spirits (when in fact they probably don't have such traits since presumably spirits don't have bodies). The author asserts that these are anthropomorphisms (human characteristics that we commonly observe) used just to assist our understanding. This appears to be a subjective attempt to logically understand a difficult story. The author doesn't have difficulty, however, sounding authoritative regarding the meaning of the story details, as will be seen later in his article.	A Difficulty There is, however, a difficulty in this discussion which must be addressed. It is frequently alleged that this account cannot involve a representation of actual facts for, whereas both the rich man and Lazarus had died and their bodies were decaying in the earth, nonetheless, reference is made to their physical features – eyes, tongue, and finger (23-24). But these allusions do not negate the literalness of the account overall. The truth is, the Lord is describing only the condition of the spirits of these men. The resurrection has not occurred as evidenced by the fact that it is stated that there are still people upon the earth (28). Since, however, we are not yet prepared to understand the nature of pure spirits, inspiration must somehow attempt to accommodate ideas regarding the spirit to our current level of comprehension. This is done by figuratively applying physical traits to the description of the spirit. It is a form of anthropomorphism; hence, it is similar to the use of physical characteristics in describing God (cf. Isa. 59:1-2; 1 Pet. 3:12), even though we know He is not human (Jn. 4:24; Lk. 24:39).
Of course there is some disagreement among Bible students whether this Bible passage should be taken to prove that "it is very obvious that the dead, both righteous and wicked, are conscious." "Hell" in verse 22 is from the Greek word "hades" which in turn is from the Greek words "not" and "to see," thus literally "unseen," meaning the "unseen [world]," the realm or abode of the dead: hence "death" or "grave." This corresponds to the Hebrew term "she'ol," the temporary abode of all the dead, both righetous and wicked. In Acts 2:27 Peter applied a Psalm of David to Jesus "Because You will not leave my soul in Hades," Arndt and Gingrich (op.cit., p. 16) define "Hades" as "the underworld as the place of the dead." They give as their first reference, Acts 2:27 and 31. It is important to distinguish between the "hell" of "hades" and that of "Gehenna" (Greek: geenna), the "hell" of fire (see Matthew 5:22). Usually "hades" and fire are not associated together -- a possible indication that Jesus is here using symbolic language. In discussing this passage during a discussion of the meaning of "hades", the International Standard Bible Encyclopedia (http://www.reference-guides.com/isbe/H/HADES/) has: "In further estimating its bearing upon the problem of the local conditions of the disembodied life after death, the parabolic character of the representation must be taken into account. The parable is certainly not intended to give us topographical information about the realm of the dead, although it presupposes that there is a distinct place of abode for the righteous and wicked respectively." Note that the Commentary considers the story to be a parable and while they would agree that some of the details are symbolic, they think that some others are not symbolic. It is really safe to use this story to build an understanding of what happens to people after they die?	The Facts of the Case The narrative involves a certain rich man who lived in an expensive house (suggested by the word “gate”), who was luxuriously clothed, and who lived “in mirth and splendor every day” (cf. ASVfn). By way of stark contrast, Lazarus, a beggar (the Greek word denotes the poorest of the poor), was unceremoniously dumped (so the original language indicates) daily at the wealthy man’s gate, hoping only for the crumbs that fell from that gentleman’s table. Any meager comfort that Lazarus enjoyed was provided by the foraging street dogs who licked the diseased tumors of his frail body. Finally, both men died and their state of affairs was dramatically altered. The rich man was subjected to agonizing torment while Lazarus was honored and comforted. It is in consideration of the details chronicled in verses 22ff that it becomes very obvious that the dead, both righteous and wicked, are conscious. Let us note some of these indications:
Note that although the author understands many of the aspects of this story to be literal, he apparently understands "Abraham's bosom" to be symbolic (a "biblical idiom"). All these details help to tell the story, but should not be taken to represent after-death reality. The Broadman Bible Commentary says this: "The parable is coherent with and illustrates themes already presented in Luke. Especially do we call to mind the blessings on the poor and woes on the rich in the great sermon (6:20 ff.). Stories on a similar theme, the fate of the poor just man and the unjust rich man, were current in both Egypt and Palestine." Note the characterization of the story as a parable and that similar stories were current in Jesus' time. The author's conclusion that this parable teaches that both righteous and wicked persons are conscious after death and before the resurrection appears to be at variance with the explanation of Jesus (John 11) about His friend Lazarus who had died: 11 These things said he: and after that he saith unto them, Our friend Lazarus sleepeth; but I go, that I may awake him out of sleep. 12 Then said his disciples, Lord, if he sleep, he shall do well. 13 Howbeit Jesus spake of his death: but they thought that he had spoken of taking of rest in sleep. 14 Then said Jesus unto them plainly, Lazarus is dead. While humans dream during sleep, perhaps processing accumulated information, they are generally not conscious of what is going on around them. Other verses to consider as noted in the main text are Matt. 27:52; Acts 7:59, 60; 1 Cor. 15:6; 1 Cor. 15:51; Eph. 5:14; 1 Thess. 4:13-15. These verses also suggest that death is like a sleep: a state of unconsciousness. We are persuaded that this story is best understood as a parable and that the details are there just to get the main point across and not to comment about what happens when a person dies. We would explain the details as Jesus using a familiar story to get a point across and not to try to comment on the state of a person in death. We think that the whole body of Scripture teaching on this subject almost forces the student to this conclusion if the student believes the teachings of the Scripture must harmonize with each other given a divine inspiration.	Perception The rich man could see both Abraham and Lazarus; he thus possessed perception. Perception involves an awareness of objects, hence, consciousness. Satisfaction Lazarus was described as being “in Abraham’s bosom.” This expression is a biblical idiom which suggests a state of honor (cf. Jn. 1:18; 13:23). It implies that Lazarus was in a warm and respected fellowship with Abraham. Alfred Plummer notes that the language suggests that the former beggar now shares Abraham’s “happiness” (International Critical Commentary on Luke, Edinburgh: T.&T. Clark, 1896, p. 303). Clearly, this indicates consciousness. Sensation The rich man is in “torments.” Indeed, he is suffering “anguish,” which certainly affirms conscious sorrow (cf. 2:48; Acts 20:38). On the other hand, Lazarus is “comforted.” Communication The rich man could both speak and be spoken to. Communication is possible only with conscious beings. The suffering rebel had not been annihilated. Recognition The rich man recognized Lazarus and requested his services by name. Recognition involves consciousness. Comprehension The rich man made two requests of Abraham. First, he asked that Lazarus be permitted to dip his finger in water in order cool his parched tongue. Abraham reasoned that such was impossible because an impassable gulf separated the righteous from the wicked. Second, the rich man requested that Lazarus be allowed to go and warn his brothers not to come to that place of punishment. The patriarch replied that those brethren had access to the Old Testament Scriptures, and that such was sufficient to prevent those kinsmen from dying lost if they were disposed to heed the message. Apparently, the rich man understood Abraham’s response; he had no further comment to make. Again, the narrative implies consciousness. Volition The rich man’s petition that Lazarus be allowed to enter the hadean realm where he was, or that he be permitted to return to earth, implies that Lazarus had the volitional and/or locomotive ability to accomplish that feat if divinely allowed. That further suggests consciousness. Recollection Abraham reminded the rich man of his earthly status: “Son, remember that you in your lifetime received your good things . . . .” Where there is memory, there is consciousness. Emotion When the rich man reflected upon the spiritual condition of his earthly brothers, he evidenced concern, and urged that they be warned not to enter that dreadful hadean realm. People without consciousness evidence no concern for others. A careful and honest consideration of the information contained in this account can only lead to the conclusion that the dead are conscious. Theories which allow for the extinction of the wicked, or for “soul-sleeping” on the part of the righteous dead, are not consistent with this divine teaching as given by Jesus Christ.
Well, as noted in the response immediately above, in consideration of all the other Scripture bearing on this point, we think there is good reason to "struggle mightily" with this parable. It seems to us that the cavalier dismissal of that struggle is inappropriate for a serious Bible student.	Note: In his book The Fire That Consumes, which affirms that the wicked will be ultimately annihilated, Edward Fudge, preacher and elder for the Bering Drive Church of Christ in Houston, Texas, struggles mightily with Luke 16:19ff. He finally concludes that the narrative is but a parable drawn “from intertestamental and first-century folklore” (Houston: Providential Press, 1982, p. 208). Such a superficial and modernistic approach is scarcely worthy of a response.