Rich Man and Lazarus most misunderstood parable in NT?

[LittleLambofJesus]

This is a spinoff from another thread that is closed:
Rich-man and Lazarus True story or Parable

Why do some commentators view the Rich Man and Lazarus parable of Luke 16 as of the most misunderstood parables in NT?
If I am understanding this correctly, it appears it is more of a covenantle story between the OC[Moses] and NC[Jesus]

LUKE 16:26 " 'And besides all this, between us[NC Jesus/Spirit?] and ye[OC/Moses/Carnal?] there is a great gulf fixed,
so that those who want to pass from here to you cannot, nor can those from there pass to us.' "
LUKE 16:29 "Abraham said to him, 'They have Moses and the prophets;
let them hear them.' "

Lazarus and the Rich Man - Here a little, there a little - Commentary

The parable of Lazarus and the rich man has been the foundation for many of the erroneous beliefs about "hell" within traditional Christianity. Some have viewed it not as a parable, but as a true story Yeshua told to give details about the punishment of sinners in hell.............

CONCLUSION
The parable of Lazarus and the rich man, long used by mainstream Christian ministers to teach the "reality of hell," really has nothing to say about punishment or reward in the afterlife.
Yeshua used this story, which fit the common misconception about life after death in his day, to show the fate that awaited the Jewish nation because of the unbelief and faithlessness which caused them to reject him as the Messiah.............
===========================
Kindgdom Bible Studies Template Page

The story of the rich man and Lazarus is without doubt one of the most misunderstood of all the stories in the Bible. Is it a parable, or an actual statement of facts concerning life beyond the grave? It is strenuously denied by most evangelists that this story, as told by Christ, could be a parable. They hold that this is not a parable because it starts out in narrative form. Yet it is generally conceded that the story of the prodigal son is a parable and all the fundamentalist preachers love to preach from its beautiful figures, thus applying it as a parable.
=================
.................................................

 

[TheSeabass]

Christ would not teach falsehoods about eternal punishment. Even if it could be proven this is a parable, a 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” (Terry, M. S. 1890. Hermeneutics. New York, NY: Eaton & Mains.) Are the Dead Conscious?

Christ shows there is a continued existence of both good and bad, consciousness of both, a permanent fixed gulf with no end and no crossing over.

 

[amariselle]

Thank you for sharing this. I think that many still do struggle with Jesus' parables, even today. It can be especially difficult, 2,000 years removed from the time and place Jesus spoke them to really grasp the depth and significance of what He taught. They really are quite amazing and beautiful when we do carefully study them, however.

I think another one of the most misunderstood parables of Jesus is that which He told in John 6.

Thanks again.

God bless!

 

[Faith Alone 1 Cor 15:1-4]

Why do some commentators view the Rich Man and Lazarus parable of Luke 16 as of the most misunderstood parables in NT?
If I am understanding this correctly, it appears it is more of a covenantle story between the OC[Moses] and NC[Jesus]

LUKE 16:26 " 'And besides all this, between us[NC Jesus/Spirit?] and ye[OC/Moses/Carnal?] there is a great gulf fixed,
so that those who want to pass from here to you cannot, nor can those from there pass to us.' "
LUKE 16:29 "Abraham said to him, 'They have Moses and the prophets;
let them hear them.' "

Lazarus and the Rich Man - Here a little, there a little - Commentary

The parable of Lazarus and the rich man has been the foundation for many of the erroneous beliefs about "hell" within traditional Christianity. Some have viewed it not as a parable, but as a true story Yeshua told to give details about the punishment of sinners in hell. Yet a thorough, unbiased examination of this story will show that the generally accepted interpretations of this passage of Scripture are erroneous and misleading. In this article, we will go through the parable verse by verse to determine what the Messiah was truly teaching..............................

While the significance of this seemingly pointless detail has been neglected by scholars throughout the centuries, you can be certain that it did not escape the notice of the Pharisees and scribes to which Yeshua was speaking. They thoroughly knew their history and were extremely proud of their heritage. Yeshua wanted those self-righteous Pharisees to know exactly who he was referring to with this parable. This detail cements the identity of the rich man as the House of Judah, the Jews!

CONCLUSION
The parable of Lazarus and the rich man, long used by mainstream Christian ministers to teach the "reality of hell," really has nothing to say about punishment or reward in the afterlife. Yeshua used this story, which fit the common misconception about life after death in his day, to show the fate that awaited the Jewish nation because of the unbelief and faithlessness which caused them to reject him as the Messiah.............

Kindgdom Bible Studies Template Page

The story of the rich man and Lazarus is without doubt one of the most misunderstood of all the stories in the Bible. Is it a parable, or an actual statement of facts concerning life beyond the grave? It is strenuously denied by most evangelists that this story, as told by Christ, could be a parable. They hold that this is not a parable because it starts out in narrative form. It is argued, because it reads, “There was a certain rich man, which was clothed in purple and fine linen, and fared sumptuously every day,” that Christ is speaking here of an actual incident that took place. But in the parable of the prodigal son, in the fifteenth chapter of Luke, the narrative introduction is found also, for it says, “A certain man had two sons...”

THE RICH MAN

The parable of the rich man and Lazarus is without question one of the least understood of all the teachings of our Lord. What is its aim? It is a similitude of something; for all the parables are similitudes,..................

Observe the particulars respecting the rich man. He was one of Abraham’s seed, one who even in hell could not forget his election, but still cried, “Father! Abraham.” He was “clothed in purple and fine linen, “the raiment of the Kingdom, and, as a child of the Kingdom, he “fared sumptuously every day.” Who is this man? The rich man in this parable represents the Jewish nation, the house of Judah,
Purple is the color of royalty. Fine linen stands for righteousness in this instance the righteousness of the law, established by the priests and Levites who, dressed in white linen, officiated in the sacrifices and ceremonies of the nation. The rich man was “clothed in purple and fine linen.” Those who are in purple are rulers. The rich man was a ruler. And Jesus never uttered His parables or sermons concerning someone away off in Siberia or China. He spoke to and of the Jews, the church of His day. Judah was the royal tribe, and purple is the color pertaining to royalty. The kingdom of Judah had the ministry of the priesthood - clothed in fine linen.

.................................................

It's most misunderstood parable because people think that it is parable . In parables people don't have names . It's actuall even which happend ans Jesus is telling you about it , and this man is still burning 2000 years later and will be burning forever .

It's not about that he was Rich , but that he was rich and was egoistic his whole life and never shared with anybody , he treat his servants like dogs , he even wanted Lazarus to serve him and give him water while he is burning .

He knew that he did wrong , he also knew past , he knew that his brothers will get same punishment if they don't repent . He never said that this was not just punishment .

 

[LittleLambofJesus]

Thank you for sharing this. I think that many still do struggle with Jesus' parables, even today. It can be especially difficult, 2,000 years removed from the time and place Jesus spoke them to really grasp the depth and significance of what He taught. They really are quite amazing and beautiful when we do carefully study them, however.
I think another one of the most misunderstood parables of Jesus is that which He told in John 6.
Thanks again.
God bless!

Thank you for that enlightening post and.
This is actually my favorite commentator and I like the way he views all 5 parables in conjunction with the topic parable.

Kindgdom Bible Studies Template Page

Now, which of the five stories He gave them in this sermon was called a parable? The only one of the five which is prefaced by the claim, “And He spoke this parable unto them,” was the story about the lost sheep.
Was the lost sheep the only one that could be called a parable? And yet, any preacher or believer that I know will answer that the story of the lost coin, as well as the prodigal son, were also parables. Then why was the singular used - “this parable”?

It should be clear to any thinking mind that all these stories were ONE PARABLE, like the facets of a diamond, as they turn each scintillates with new brilliance. Each was illustrating a view point of one great truth, and together they compose a whole.
And this parabolic discourse of Jesus is continued into chapter sixteen of Luke, including the story of the rich man and Lazarus.
The truth is that all five stories are each a fractional part of the complete parable, and when we read, “He spoke this parable unto them,” this embraces the entire collection of symbol-pictures which in their completeness constituted the parable which He spoke. It is a careless assumption and an unfounded assertion to argue that the story of the rich man and Lazarus is not a parable!

 

[TheSeabass]

"There was a certain rich man..."
"And there was a certain beggar named Lazarus..."

Reads like reality to me.

 

[amariselle]

Thank you for that enlightening post and.
This is actually my favorite commentator and I like the way he views all 5 parables in conjunction with the topic parable.

Kindgdom Bible Studies Template Page

Now, which of the five stories He gave them in this sermon was called a parable? The only one of the five which is prefaced by the claim, “And He spoke this parable unto them,” was the story about the lost sheep.
Was the lost sheep the only one that could be called a parable? And yet, any preacher or believer that I know will answer that the story of the lost coin, as well as the prodigal son, were also parables. Then why was the singular used - “this parable”?

It should be clear to any thinking mind that all these stories were ONE PARABLE, like the facets of a diamond, as they turn each scintillates with new brilliance. Each was illustrating a view point of one great truth, and together they compose a whole.
And this parabolic discourse of Jesus is continued into chapter sixteen of Luke, including the story of the rich man and Lazarus.
The truth is that all five stories are each a fractional part of the complete parable, and when we read, “He spoke this parable unto them,” this embraces the entire collection of symbol-pictures which in their completeness constituted the parable which He spoke. It is a careless assumption and an unfounded assertion to argue that the story of the rich man and Lazarus is not a parable!

......................................

Yes, the very arrangement of particular teachings and actions of Jesus during His earthly ministry is very important. The way the events of Jesus' ministry are recounted in Scripture is not necessarily chronological, but has greater significance when understood in context. As the Bible is God's inspired word, this is obviously how He chose to share His truth.

 

[LittleLambofJesus]

It's most misunderstood parable because people think that it is parable . In parables people don't have names . It's actuall even which happend ans Jesus is telling you about it , and this man is still burning 2000 years later and will be burning forever .

It's not about that he was Rich , but that he was rich and was egoistic his whole life and never shared with anybody , he treat his servants like dogs , he even wanted Lazarus to serve him and give him water while he is burning .

He knew that he did wrong , he also knew past , he knew that his brothers will get same punishment if they don't repent . He never said that this was not just punishment .

I forgot I had a thread from some yrs back asking whether this was a parable or true story.

Rich-man and Lazarus True story or Parable

MrPolo said: ↑
It is unclear. The tone of the story is parable-ish. However, it would be the only one like it that uses actual names. Interpreters throughout history who believe it to be a true story point this out.

archierieus said: ↑
Jesus used stories and illustrations with which the people were familiar. The Rich Man and Lazarus is one of a series of parables, starting with that about the dishonest steward. As for the background of the RM&L story, it comes out of Hellenestic Judaism, and the details in the parable are straight out of Josephus. I will try to provide a quote from Mr. J later on. 'Hellenistic Judaism' arose from the influence of Pan Hellenism following Alexander's conquest of the ancient world.
As for Jesus' parables, they were intended to illustrate a point, not to stand on four legs.

As for the details of the Hellenistic belief, they are in conflict with the plain teaching of Scripture. Some of those details show up in the parable. As for what the Bible teaches about hell, that is an interesting study in itself!

Dave

Jesus did raise Lazarus from the dead after 3 days [John 11:38-44] and it is eerily similar to the raising of the 2 witnesses in Reve 11:11
[I have a thread on that also for those interested]. In some ways, I also view Revelation as "covenantle"

Lazarus and 2 witnesses of Reve 11 similarity

John 11:39 Jesus is saying "take away ye!" the stone. Martha, the sister of the one having deceased, Is saying to Him "Lord, already he stinking, for it is fourth-day
43 And these saying, to a great Voice He cries-out "Lazarus, hither out!"

Reve 11:11 And after the three and half days, a breath of life out of the God entered in them and they stand upon their feet and great fear fall upon the ones observing them.
12 And they hear a great Voice out of the Heaven saying to them "ascend ye here!"
And they ascended into the heaven in the cloud....

Lazarus and the Rich Man - Here a little, there a little - Commentary

First, to prove that this language is symbolic and not meant to be taken literally, let's examine exactly what we are told by Yeshua.
He says that first, Lazarus dies and is taken to the bosom of Abraham. Notice, there is no mention of his burial here.
Then later the rich man dies, and he is buried (in Hades, according to verse 23).
So the time sequence given indicates that upon his death, Lazarus was taken immediately to Abraham's bosom, while afterward the rich man was buried in Hades when he died.

If this story is literal, then we have a contradiction in the Bible. Here, Lazarus is shown to have immediately received the promise of eternal life. Yet the author of Hebrews clearly tells us that Abraham, as well as all the other Old Testament saints, have not yet received the promises given to them by God:

The deaths of both the rich man (who represented the Jews) and Lazarus (who represented the other nations) are symbolic in this parable. Here, their demise depicts an elemental change in the status and position of the two groups.

To confirm this, let's look at the meaning of Lazarus being "carried to Abraham's bosom." The figurative meaning of being in one's bosom is to be in a position of closeness, to be highly regarded. This symbolism is indicated by the ancient practice of having guests at a feast recline on the chest of their neighbors.
The place of highest honor would therefore belong to the one seated next to the host, calling to mind the example of John at the Last Supper (John 13:23).
......................................

 

[amariselle]

And Jesus was referring to Himself when He said:

"... If they hear not Moses and the prophets, neither will they be persuaded, though one rose from the dead." - Luke 16:31

I think, given this statement, it is clear that Jesus was in fact speaking of the Jews rejecting their Messiah, even though God had sent them prophet after prophet to warn them and tell them all that was to come.

34 Wherefore, behold, I send unto you prophets, and wise men, and scribes: and some of them ye shall kill and crucify; and some of them shall ye scourge in your synagogues, and persecute them from city to city:

35 That upon you may come all the righteous blood shed upon the earth, from the blood of righteous Abel unto the blood of Zacharias son of Barachias, whom ye slew between the temple and the altar.

36 Verily I say unto you, All these things shall come upon this generation.

37 O Jerusalem, Jerusalem, thou that killest the prophets, and stonest them which are sent unto thee, how often would I have gathered thy children together, even as a hen gathereth her chickens under her wings, and ye would not!

38 Behold, your house is left unto you desolate.

39 For I say unto you, Ye shall not see me henceforth, till ye shall say, Blessed is he that cometh in the name of the Lord. - Matthew 23:34-39

 

[TheSeabass]

Lazarus and the Rich Man - Here a little, there a little - Commentary

First, to prove that this language is symbolic and not meant to be taken literally, let's examine exactly what we are told by Yeshua.
He says that first, Lazarus dies and is taken to the bosom of Abraham. Notice, there is no mention of his burial here.
Then later the rich man dies, and he is buried (in Hades, according to verse 23).
So the time sequence given indicates that upon his death, Lazarus was taken immediately to Abraham's bosom, while afterward the rich man was buried in Hades when he died.

If this story is literal, then we have a contradiction in the Bible. Here, Lazarus is shown to have immediately received the promise of eternal life. Yet the author of Hebrews clearly tells us that Abraham, as well as all the other Old Testament saints, have not yet received the promises given to them by God:

I do not see the contradiction. The fact the rich man was buried shows he had money to have a funeral, friends in attendance and other things that accompanied a funeral at that time. The fact nothing is said about Lazarus being buried is that he was poor, had no money and his body would have been disposed of as bodies other indigent were. I see nothing about the rich man's physical dead body being in Hades or buried in Hades. His physical body was buried in a grave/tomb and it was his departed soul that was in Hades, physical death defined in the bible as separation of the soul from the body. All who die go to the Hadean realm to await judgment. Those on the paradise side of the Hadean realm as Lazarus will be eternally in heaven (eternal reward) after receiving sentence on judgment day.

 

[Halbhh]

Thank you for sharing this. I think that many still do struggle with Jesus' parables, even today. It can be especially difficult, 2,000 years removed from the time and place Jesus spoke them to really grasp the depth and significance of what He taught. They really are quite amazing and beautiful when we do carefully study them, however.

I think another one of the most misunderstood parables of Jesus is that which He told in John 6.

Thanks again.

God bless!

You and I seem to agree on most things (though it may seem different on an internet forum, where I usually would only respond when I think something is incomplete, for instance). I bet we agree on 95% or 100% of what truly is essential. But which part of John chapter 6 do you think is a parable? I ask because I believe He did literally walk on the water, and that He did literally feed 5,000 (and those they had with them), and there were actually 12 baskets of bread pieces left over. Now this does indeed symbolize abundance -- that all were fed, even to fullness, yet there was not even a shortage slightly, but even more than at the start. So, it is like a parable. It symbolizes I think that when we ask for things, there isn't a limit on what God can do, and we cannot exhaust the supply. So, you could say this is like a parable in that it has a meaning that is more than merely the events alone, of course. But is that what you meant? I think it literally happened (and in contrast, I think there could be actual parables in the Old Testament, such as the book of Job; but it doesn't even matter whether Job is a parable, because the meaning is the essential thing regardless). I'm not a person given to saying "it's literal!". But He did literally walk on the water we see in the text.

Finally, when He said "I am the bread of life...", the fact it uses metaphor is not the relevant thing of course, though this metaphor we need -- the meaning is overwhelmingly important. We are to listen. He is talking of what is ultimately not subject to our mere intellectual reduction. (Our doctrines are ultimately of no importance -- we are not to approach communion with intellectual thinking and abstraction of course. Instead, we are to remember what He said and did, without reducing or altering or in any way replacing His Words should we know His Words. They are in a sense above us, in that we cannot manage them down into anything less than they are as He said them. No reduction. But instead, awe and love and remembering.)

So, see, I need to fully put aside every doctrine (not only some doctrine I think is wrong, but also any other doctrine I think is correct), and remember what He said, the Words, during the last supper. I need to remember His Words because they are His Words, but also we have the overwhelming benefit then that His Words displace ours, our mere ideas, with His holy Words. I need that. But I expect so does everyone.

 

[nonaeroterraqueous]

Some have viewed it not as a parable, but as a true story Yeshua told to give details about the punishment of sinners in hell.

It's not an either/or situation. Parables aren't necessarily false stories, and, offhand, I can't think of a single one that Jesus told that couldn't have also been true.

It's most misunderstood parable because people think that it is parable . In parables people don't have names .

That's a good point. Parables are usually shorter and less detailed, to get to the point, and they're usually vaguer, to accentuate the symbolism. Not only that, but Christ's parables always related to things and events that people could see around them. If this was a parable, then it was the only one that used an obscure event to tell an even more obscure event (which would have been a huge literary blunder).

 

[1213]

...
The parable of Lazarus and the rich man has been the foundation for many of the erroneous beliefs about "hell" within traditional Christianity....

Maybe the biggest mistake is that it doesn’t actually speak about hell, but about hades.

In Hades, he lifted up his eyes, being in torment, and saw Abraham far off, and Lazarus at his bosom.
Luke 16:23

In some translations that is translated to hell, all thought he word is hades. And that is totally different thing than hell, because in the end, hades will be thrown into hell.

…Death and Hades gave up the dead who were in them. They were judged, each one according to his works. Death and Hades were thrown into the lake of fire. This is the second death, the lake of fire. If anyone was not found written in the book of life, he was cast into the lake of fire.
Revelation 20:12-15

 

[Faith Alone 1 Cor 15:1-4]

Maybe the biggest mistake is that it doesn’t actually speak about hell, but about hades.

In Hades, he lifted up his eyes, being in torment, and saw Abraham far off, and Lazarus at his bosom.
Luke 16:23

In some translations that is translated to hell, all thought he word is hades. And that is totally different thing than hell, because in the end, hades will be thrown into hell.

…Death and Hades gave up the dead who were in them. They were judged, each one according to his works. Death and Hades were thrown into the lake of fire. This is the second death, the lake of fire. If anyone was not found written in the book of life, he was cast into the lake of fire.
Revelation 20:12-15

Yea , Hell will be thrown into Lake of Fire , depending on which bible you use you get different name .

I know there is also place where wicked angels are it's called Abbuso or Abyss or bottomless pit , the only place for bottomless pit can be in the center of earth , because any way from here is only up so it has no bottom but that's just my opinion.

 

[LittleLambofJesus]

Maybe the biggest mistake is that it doesn’t actually speak about hell, but about hades.

In Hades, he lifted up his eyes, being in torment, and saw Abraham far off, and Lazarus at his bosom.
Luke 16:23

In some translations that is translated to hell, all thought he word is hades. And that is totally different thing than hell, because in the end, hades will be thrown into hell.
Revelation 20:12-15

Excellent post! [The greek word for hell is "gehenna" or literally, "lake of fire"]
Genesis 1:1 (YLT)
G1067 matches the Greek γέεννα (geenna), which occurs 12 times in 12 verses
Matt 23:33 "Serpents! produce of vipers! how? ye may be fleeing from the judging of the geennhV <1067>
[Ezekiel 39:12/Reve 14:11]

This commentator also describes what the words "torments" and "hades" means:

Lazarus and the Rich Man - Here a little, there a little - Commentary

LUKE 16:23 "And being in torments in Hades, he lifted up his eyes and saw Abraham afar off, and Lazarus in his bosom."

In contrast to Lazarus, the rich man was buried in Hades. An understanding of the original meaning of the Greek word hades is necessary to grasp the message of the parable. Regarding the possible etymology of this word, the The New International Dictionary of New Testament Theology states that hades ". . . comes from idein (to see) with the negative prefix, a-, and so would mean the invisible . . . In the LXX hades occurs more than 100 times, in the majority of instances to translate Heb. she'ol, the underworld which receives all the dead. It is the land of darkness . . ." (p. 206, vol. 2).

Most likely, hades originally meant "unseen." Later, it came to refer to the hidden state of those buried in the earth. Symbolically, this parable shows that a point would come when the House of Judah would become "unseen" by God, out of favor because of their unbelief. There would come a time when the Jews as a whole would no longer be God's favored nation. God would harden their hearts, leading them to reject their Messiah (John 1:11).

What did Yeshua mean by saying here that the rich man was in "torments in Hades"? The key to discovering the symbolic meaning of this verse is the Greek noun basanois, translated "torments" above.
According to Friberg's Analytical Lexicon of the Greek New Testament, basanois, which is a form of the noun basanos, means "strictly, a touchstone for testing the genuineness of metals by rubbing against it . . ."
The etymology of basanos found in Kittel's Theological Dictionary of the New Testament is very helpful in correctly understanding this verse:
In this verse, basanois simply conveys a sense of testing and proving through punishment.
When this understanding is combined with a proper discernment of the symbolism of Hades, we can begin to see the point Yeshua is making.
As a whole, the House of Judah would to be cut off and replaced during this current age by those from the nations who in faith would accept the sacrifice of the Messiah.

If the Pharisees and scribes understood Yeshua's prophetic parable, it must have astonished and infuriated them. How could the Jews become alienated from God while the elect Gentiles became the "seed of Abraham"? The implication that the House of Judah and those called from the Gentile nations were to change places would have been almost impossible for the Pharisees and scribes to believe.

 

[Halbhh]

It's most misunderstood parable because people think that it is parable . In parables people don't have names . It's actuall even which happend ans Jesus is telling you about it , and this man is still burning 2000 years later and will be burning forever .

It's not about that he was Rich , but that he was rich and was egoistic his whole life and never shared with anybody , he treat his servants like dogs , he even wanted Lazarus to serve him and give him water while he is burning .

He knew that he did wrong , he also knew past , he knew that his brothers will get same punishment if they don't repent . He never said that this was not just punishment .

Hades, where Christ tells us the rich man is suffering, will itself be thrown into the lake of fire after the day of Judgment -- the last part of Revelation chapter 20. That's a change. Before the day of Judgement Hades is not yet thrown into the lake of fire. Christ told us to "Rather, be afraid of the One who can destroy both soul and body in hell." That destruction is only after the Day of Judgement.

 

[amariselle]

You and I seem to agree on most things (though it may seem different on an internet forum, where I usually would only respond when I think something is incomplete, for instance). I bet we agree on 95% or 100% of what truly is essential. But which part of John chapter 6 do you think is a parable? I ask because I believe He did literally walk on the water, and that He did literally feed 5,000 (and those they had with them), and there were actually 12 baskets of bread pieces left over. Now this does indeed symbolize abundance -- that all were fed, even to fullness, yet there was not even a shortage slightly, but even more than at the start. So, it is like a parable. It symbolizes I think that when we ask for things, there isn't a limit on what God can do, and we cannot exhaust the supply. So, you could say this is like a parable in that it has a meaning that is more than merely the events alone, of course. But is that what you meant? I think it literally happened (and in contrast, I think there could be actual parables in the Old Testament, such as the book of Job; but it doesn't even matter whether Job is a parable, because the meaning is the essential thing regardless). I'm not a person given to saying "it's literal!". But He did literally walk on the water we see in the text.

This is what I was referring to, thank you for asking:

"Verily, verily, I say unto you, He that believeth on me hath everlasting life. I am that bread of life. Your fathers did eat manna in the wilderness, and are dead. This is the bread which cometh down from heaven, that a man may eat thereof, and not die. I am the living bread which came down from heaven: if any man eat of this bread, he shall live for ever: and the bread that I will give is my flesh, which I will give for the life of the world. The Jews therefore strove among themselves, saying, How can this man give us his flesh to eat? Then Jesus said unto them, Verily, verily, I say unto you, Except ye eat the flesh of the Son of man, and drink his blood, ye have no life in you. Whoso eateth my flesh, and drinketh my blood, hath eternal life; and I will raise him up at the last day. For my flesh is meat indeed, and my blood is drink indeed. He that eateth my flesh, and drinketh my blood, dwelleth in me, and I in him. As the living Father hath sent me, and I live by the Father: so he that eateth me, even he shall live by me. This is that bread which came down from heaven: not as your fathers did eat manna, and are dead: he that eateth of this bread shall live for ever." - John 6:47-58

Here, Jesus is equating "eating" with believing, as we see from the very first sentence of these verses. He is not saying He is literally bread or that people should literally eat His flesh and drink His blood (which would be cannibalism), He is saying that true life (eternal) is found in Him and foretelling His death on the cross, by which we are reconciled to God, through faith. (He earlier referred to the manna that the Jewish ancestors ate in the wilderness, which was a type and shadow of Christ. There were those who took Jesus literally even then, and so they departed from Him.

Finally, when He said "I am the bread of life...", the fact it uses metaphor is not the relevant thing of course, though this metaphor we need -- the meaning is overwhelmingly important. We are to listen. He is talking of what is ultimately not subject to our mere intellectual reduction. (Our doctrines are ultimately of no importance -- we are not to approach communion with intellectual thinking and abstraction of course. Instead, we are to remember what He said and did, without reducing or altering or in any way replacing His Words should we know His Words. They are in a sense above us, in that we cannot manage them down into anything less than they are as He said them. No reduction. But instead, awe and love and remembering.)

Yes, Communion is indeed an act of remembrance, instituted by Christ Himself.

So, see, I need to fully put aside every doctrine (not only some doctrine I think is wrong, but also any other doctrine I think is correct), and remember what He said, the Words, during the last supper. I need to remember His Words because they are His Words, but also we have the overwhelming benefit then that His Words displace ours, our mere ideas, with His holy Words. I need that. But I expect so does everyone.

Yes, we need to search the Scriptures and study them carefully for ourselves, praying for guidance and discernment.

God bless.

 

[Aseyesee]

Why do some commentators view the Rich Man and Lazarus parable of Luke 16 as of the most misunderstood parables in NT?
If I am understanding this correctly, it appears it is more of a covenantle story between the OC[Moses] and NC[Jesus]

LUKE 16:26 " 'And besides all this, between us[NC Jesus/Spirit?] and ye[OC/Moses/Carnal?] there is a great gulf fixed,
so that those who want to pass from here to you cannot, nor can those from there pass to us.' "
LUKE 16:29 "Abraham said to him, 'They have Moses and the prophets;
let them hear them.' "

Lazarus and the Rich Man - Here a little, there a little - Commentary

The parable of Lazarus and the rich man has been the foundation for many of the erroneous beliefs about "hell" within traditional Christianity. Some have viewed it not as a parable, but as a true story Yeshua told to give details about the punishment of sinners in hell. Yet a thorough, unbiased examination of this story will show that the generally accepted interpretations of this passage of Scripture are erroneous and misleading. In this article, we will go through the parable verse by verse to determine what the Messiah was truly teaching..............................

While the significance of this seemingly pointless detail has been neglected by scholars throughout the centuries, you can be certain that it did not escape the notice of the Pharisees and scribes to which Yeshua was speaking. They thoroughly knew their history and were extremely proud of their heritage. Yeshua wanted those self-righteous Pharisees to know exactly who he was referring to with this parable. This detail cements the identity of the rich man as the House of Judah, the Jews!

CONCLUSION
The parable of Lazarus and the rich man, long used by mainstream Christian ministers to teach the "reality of hell," really has nothing to say about punishment or reward in the afterlife. Yeshua used this story, which fit the common misconception about life after death in his day, to show the fate that awaited the Jewish nation because of the unbelief and faithlessness which caused them to reject him as the Messiah.............

Kindgdom Bible Studies Template Page

The story of the rich man and Lazarus is without doubt one of the most misunderstood of all the stories in the Bible. Is it a parable, or an actual statement of facts concerning life beyond the grave? It is strenuously denied by most evangelists that this story, as told by Christ, could be a parable. They hold that this is not a parable because it starts out in narrative form. It is argued, because it reads, “There was a certain rich man, which was clothed in purple and fine linen, and fared sumptuously every day,” that Christ is speaking here of an actual incident that took place. But in the parable of the prodigal son, in the fifteenth chapter of Luke, the narrative introduction is found also, for it says, “A certain man had two sons...”

THE RICH MAN

The parable of the rich man and Lazarus is without question one of the least understood of all the teachings of our Lord. What is its aim? It is a similitude of something; for all the parables are similitudes,..................

Observe the particulars respecting the rich man. He was one of Abraham’s seed, one who even in hell could not forget his election, but still cried, “Father! Abraham.” He was “clothed in purple and fine linen, “the raiment of the Kingdom, and, as a child of the Kingdom, he “fared sumptuously every day.” Who is this man? The rich man in this parable represents the Jewish nation, the house of Judah,
Purple is the color of royalty. Fine linen stands for righteousness in this instance the righteousness of the law, established by the priests and Levites who, dressed in white linen, officiated in the sacrifices and ceremonies of the nation. The rich man was “clothed in purple and fine linen.” Those who are in purple are rulers. The rich man was a ruler. And Jesus never uttered His parables or sermons concerning someone away off in Siberia or China. He spoke to and of the Jews, the church of His day. Judah was the royal tribe, and purple is the color pertaining to royalty. The kingdom of Judah had the ministry of the priesthood - clothed in fine linen.

.................................................

The problem with Jesus' words is that they are spirit, and life, which life, as spirit is as unending as his words (in their ability to continually open to us, provided we don't build three tabernacles for them at the expense of the furthering of what we see).

We measure his words ... which is how the word divides the city ... a truth of line upon line from the beginning.

Everything that has come before us, has lead us to where we are now ...

 

[-V-]

Even if we presume it's not a "true story", we have to remember it's a parable, NOT a fable. Fables use unrealistic situations (a rabbit and tortoise being sentient and agreeing to a foot race), whereas parables use realistic situations - things that can actually happen in reality.

 

[AnticipateHisComing]

Why do some commentators view the Rich Man and Lazarus parable of Luke 16 as of the most misunderstood parables in NT?
If I am understanding this correctly

By your own admission, misunderstanding abounds, including yours.

it appears it is more of a covenantle story between the OC[Moses] and NC[Jesus]

Parables are meant to teach the simple people, simple ideas in clear concepts they can relate to. They take earthly relationships and relate them to heavenly ideas. These will never be exact or perfect descriptors of a heavenly concept. Regardless if the text is a story or parable, the message is SIMPLE.

You take this and twist it into a complex concept with no explicit relationship between the earthly and the heavenly objects in the text. You take the simple concepts and throw them out. You forget who Jesus was talking to, simple people.

Further you ignore the context of the preceding parable of the shrewd manager which is clearly about judgement and reward for our actions in this age.