Scripture Text (NRSV)
Luke 16:19-31
16:19 "There was a rich man who was dressed in purple and fine
linen and whofeasted sumptuously every day.
16:20 And at his gate lay a poor man named Lazarus, covered with
sores,
16:21 who longed to satisfy his hunger with what fell from the rich
man's table; eventhe dogs would come and lick his sores.
16:22 The poor man died and was carried away by the angels to be
with Abraham. The richman also died and was buried.
16:23 In Hades, where he was being tormented, he looked up and saw
Abraham far awaywith Lazarus by his side.
16:24 He called out, 'Father Abraham, have mercy on me, and send
Lazarus to dip the tipof his finger in water and cool my tongue; for I
am in agony in these flames.'
16:25 But Abraham said, 'Child, remember that during your lifetime
you received yourgood things, and Lazarus in like manner evil things;
but now he is comforted here, and youare in agony.
16:26 Besides all this, between you and us a great chasm has been
fixed, so that thosewho might want to pass from here to you cannot do
so, and no one can cross from there tous.'
16:27 He said, 'Then, father, I beg you to send him to my father's
house--
16:28 for I have five brothers--that he may warn them, so that they
will not also comeinto this place of torment.'
16:29 Abraham replied, 'They have Moses and the prophets; they
should listen to them.'
16:30 He said, 'No, father Abraham; but if someone goes to them
from the dead, theywill repent.'
16:31 He said to him, 'If they do not listen to Moses and the
prophets, neither willthey be convinced even if someone rises from the
dead.'"
Comments:
When Jesus taught that no one can serve both God and wealth, some of
his hearers mocked him. He responded with the story of the rich man
and Lazarus.
When this story was first heard, wealth was understood to be a sign of
God's favour and poverty a sign of God's displeasure. Imagine the
shock and intrigue of a story like this in that context. It is not the
rich mand but poor Lazarus who is brought into eternal favour in the
bosom of Abraham, a way of speaking about highest blessing and
ultimate comfort. Reversals of fortune and things being turned upside
down happen frequently in the gospel of Luke, along with critiques of
the rich. At the heart of the critique of the rich man in this story
is not what he possesses, but what he lacks. With his wealth he could
have done so much to relieve the suffering of the man outside the
gate, but as the name Lazarus suggests by its meaning, "God helps,"
the rich man did not even lift a finger to help. We do not witness
them interacting at all, only the rich man's dogs lick Lazarus' sores.
How ironic that the story turns to show the rich man begging Abraham
to allow Lazarus to cool his parched lips. Clearly the man knew of
Lazarus, his is able to call him by name when he wants to be served by
him after death, but he had done nothing in life to show Lazarus
mercy.
For the ones outside the gates in our world, the good news of this
story is that "God helps." The challenge for those inside the gates,
particularly those who not only have Moses and the prophets but also
one who has risen from the dead to convince them, is "will you help?"
Fred Craddock writes:
The first part of the parable (vv. 19-26) is a much-traveled story,
forms of it being found in several cultures. Some scholars trace its
origin to Egypt, where stories of the dead and of messages being
brought from the dead are in abundance. At least seven versions are to
be found in the rabbis. In one version the characters are a rich
merchant and a poor teacher; in another, a rich and haughty woman and
her servile husband. The story in Luke is, of course, Jewish in
orientation (Father Abraham), appropriate to an audience of Pharisees
and to the point that Luke is making. Theologically it is most
congenial to Luke, not only in its perspectives on rich and poor but
also in the reversal of the fortunes of the rich man and Lazarus. An
eschatological reversal is central in Luke's understanding of the
final coming of the reign of God. The parable reflects popular beliefs
about the hereafter and the state of the dead. The preacher will want
to avoid getting reduced into using the descriptions of the fates of
the two men as providing revealed truth on the state of the dead. In
other words, this is not a text for a sermon on "Five Minutes After
Death." Details are rich and sharp. For the rich man, life is a daily
banquet at a bounteous table, his abundance spilling over onto his
person, draped as he is in robes of royalty over fine Egyptian
undergarments. Nothing about him even hints of need. The poor man,
clothed in running sores, squats (lies) among the dogs, gaunt,
hollow-eyed, and famished, his face turned toward the rich man's house
in the museum stare of the dying. Both die, but only the rich man has
a burial (v. 22). Now their roles are reversed. Lazarus is an honored
guest at the messianic banquet, while the rich man lies in anguish in
the flames of hades (Old Testament: Sheol). Their conditions now
unalterably final.
Let us pause to remind ourselves that whatever this story meant in
other contexts, it is here used by Luke to address Pharisees who loved
wealth and scoffed at Jesus' position on the subject (v. 14). As
Pharisees whose religion wa s of the Book, their love of wealth found
its confirmation in the law and the prophets, as pointed out at verses
14-15. Whoever is careful to obey the commands of God shall be highly
favored: "Blessed shall you be in the city, and blessed shall you be
in the field. Blessed shall be the fruit of your body, and the fruit
of your ground, and the fruit of your beasts, the increase of your
cattle, and the young of your flock" (Dt 28.3-4). The equations are
quite clear to them: wealth=blessed of God-obedience to God's
commandments. If, then, the parable is to address them, the rich man
cannot be an exaggeration of godless materialism but a realistic
portrait of a man whose wealth was taken as evidence of God's favor, a
man with whom the Pharisees can identify. Otherwise the story has
interest but no power. And as for the poor man, is not his condition
the punishment of God on a life unknown to us but known to God? It is
true that Luke reveals nothing directly about the characters of these
two men, and some have faulted the story for its apparent economic
prejudice: the rich go to hell, the poor go to heaven. But there is a
theology assumed in the parable that Luke is attacking, a theology
that says of the one who delights in God's law, "In all that he does,
he prospers," but "the wicked are not so" (Ps 1.3-4). In fact, and may
this thought self-destruct immediately, the rich man could have
defended his not helping Lazarus with the argument that one should not
interfere when God is punishing a person. Such have been the reasoning
of some church people in this country who have refused to minister to
the hungry and the homeless.
This portrait of the rich man has been drawn to fit the Pharisees
before whom he is placed. Whatever confirmation and support the rich
man and the Pharisees found in the Scriptures for their love of
wealth, it is a fact that the situation presented in the parable is a
clear violation of those same Scriptures. The law of Moses
specifically required that the harvest be shared with the poor and the
transient (Lev 19.9- 10), and the law spelled out other ways to carry
out the fundamental injunction, "You shall open wide your hand to your
brother, to the needy and to the poor, in the land" (Dt 15.7-11). And
the prophets offered no release from the law: "Is not this the fast
that I choose: to loose the bonds of wickedness, to undo the thongs of
the yoke, to let the oppressed go free, and to break every yoke? Is it
not to share your bread with the hungry, and bring the homeless poor
into your house; when you see the naked, to cover him, and not to hide
yourself from your own flesh?" (Isa 58.6-7). Neither did Jesus: "But
it is easier for heaven and earth to pass away, than for one dot of
the law to become void" (v. 17). It is because of this point about the
law and the prophets that for Luke the parable must continue, even
though stopping at verse 26 would have already made a point vital not
only for Luke but for all disciples of Jesus: wherever some eat and
others do not eat, there the kingdom does not exist, quote whatever
Scripture you will.
In verses 27-32, the rich man wants a message sent to his five
brothers so they can avoid the torment of Hades. Abraham tells him
that they already have in the law and the prophets the adequate and
sufficient message, just as the rich man did. The rich man knows that
just as he missed the word of God to him in the Scriptures, so might
his brothers. Something more extraordinary is needed, such as someone
rising from the dead. Not only is Abraham's word true in principle,
that the Scriptures are sufficient for faith and for a life in the
will of God, but it was also, in Luke's view, true historically: the
rejection of the risen Christ had its root in the misunderstanding of
the true meaning of the law and the prophets. According to Luke, it is
not only on the subject of wealth and poverty that Jesus and not the
Pharisees properly interprets Scripture; Luke has been careful to
show, from the birth narratives on, that what Jesus says and does is
according to Scripture. Later, Luke will point out that the risen
Christ taught his disciples to understand Moses, the prophets, and the
writings (24.25-27, 44-47). And even later, in Acts, Luke will present
the early church's message about Jesus as being true to the Jewish
Scriptures (Acts 2.16-36). Luke does not, as many preachers after him
have, handle the tensions with Judaism by easily speaking of the Old
superseded by the New. Jesus and the church lived within that
tradition and worked at an interpretation of that tradition which
opened the way for the full reign of God. The meaning of Scripture and
the will of God concerning material good, wealth, and poverty was a
vital subject in the debate between Jesus and some of the Pharisees.
The debate continues, but now it is between Jesus and some of his
followers.
The contrast of the rich man (traditionally given the name "Dives")
and the poor man (Lazarus) is all- too-familiar to us today in our
contrast of classes today. The rich are dressed in the finest linens
and "feast sumptuously," while the poor lay at the doorsteps. In some
cases, the doorsteps may lay outside our borders, or outside our
neighborhoods; but the divisions are sharply defined, and just as
sharply maintained.
Not listening to others is a sign of a closed heart. The rich man's
problem is not simply that he failed to listen to Moses and the
Prophets. That would probably not even be the failing of his five
brothers. It is likely, however, that he and his brothers observed the
path of least commitment to the tradition—so much so that they could
not really claim allegiance to it. Instead of hearing the cries of the
poor, who are really echoing God's own call for justice, the rich shut
out the "noise" and listen only to their own sense of
self-sufficiency, or seek the easy path of self-justification.
Likewise, the poor, in their own struggle to be heard, may insist on
their own rights—and thereby place too much value in having that plea
heard as their final justification.
Ultimately, the judgment of God is a result of witnessing our
"non-listening" being. God takes that aspect of our human lives
seriously; but it is not for our benefit. Is it any wonder, therefore,
that in the last analysis, the great chasm is fixed which "no one can
cross"?
Our Christian creeds confess that Jesus the Christ "descended into
hell." That confession is not simply about some other-worldly locus,
but (as Luther correctly noted) that Christ descended into the hell of
our lives today. There, where the great divide between God and
ourselves is ever present, Jesus becomes himself humbled by descending
into the depths of our chasm—but not to bring us the judgment we
deserve. He descends into our hell to bring us the enduring hope
through his exaltation and resurrection from the dead!
That hope which Jesus brings in his rising from the dead lifts us out
of our chasm and into a new life by which we become "convinced."
Convinced of what? Convinced of what Moses and the Prophets were
pointing us to—that we are not ultimately self-sufficient, but that we
are—all of us, rich and poor alike—dependent on God's grace, which is
alone sufficient to save, and does in fact save us from the "justice"
we deserved under the law. Our conviction in that hope overcomes the
barriers in our hearts, and keeps us open to God's renewing, daily
promise.
That sense of dependence that we have on God our Father through our
Lord Jesus Christ has a humbling effect—and produces a humbling
lifestyle. But, like our Lord, it is in being humbled that we are
ultimately exalted as children in the faithful line of Abraham. The
humility of dependency is, in fact, the way to overcome the barriers
of class, and to love one another.
Mike Hoy
Responding to Fredrick Neidner and all those who seem to be black and
white on this issue; remember that Jesus did not sit at the door step
of rich men begging. In fact at one time he was asked if he and his
disciples should go and buy food for thousands. Not to say that they
had that kind of money, but they did have a treasurer. By all means,
let us not commit the sin of ignoring those in need... but let us not
commit the sin of blissful ignorance... it is O.K. to have a 401(k)
and a good salary. I am relativly sure that just because you are on
the forbes list of wealthy people that does not put you in hell.
Polarizing the argument only polarizes the participants. Is that what
we are called to do? Kyle
The sin of "Dives" and of many others who are wealthy is not that they
are rich; it is when they (we) become haughty or set their (our) hopes
on riches and on ourselves--our ability to get rich and to hold onto
riches--instead of on God. Paul in the Epistle lesson for this week
counsels contentment with whatever we have, and generosity if we have
more than we need to live. Is it fair to understand that Jesus, by his
parable of the rich man and Lazarus, is also counseling reliance not
on self and wealth, but on God? In verse 15, after all, he states that
"what is prized by human beings is an abomination in the sight of
God." Reliance on wealth??
Finally, I have always just loved the irony in verse 31, that even if
someone rises from the dead some will not be convinced. I love the
foreshadowing of the Resurrection and the many who still do not
believe.
Heidi in MN
Abraham told the rich man in hades, No one can cross between where you
are and where Lazarus is. Well, maybe according to Jewish faith, but
according to mine, somebody did just that. He descended into hell and
later he ascended into heaven and sitteth on the right hand of God the
Father Almighty. (Apostles' Creed, for those of you who don't use it
in your churches)
God has broken out of the mold that human faith has cast him into. He
can do what the great ones of Judaism said could never be done. Jesus
has passed from glory to torment to glory again.
God continues to amaze us with what he does. We haven't seen the last
of him yet. What we now consider impossible or undo-able may very well
be on God's To Do Next list. For the Jews of Luke's time, they didn't
accept what God had done in Jesus, and so still considered the leap
from hades to heaven as an unachievable one. It is a chasm Jesus has
bridged for us. We can go from death to life because of him, from the
awfulness of death into the blessings of a Christ-embraced eternity.
To personalize this parable a little:
This parable tells me that I'm going to be surprised when the people I
didn't want to deal with fairly on earth because they were a little
weird or prejudiced or were somehow not my type are the people God
keeps closest to his heart. Even the people I would happily toss out
the nearest window because they are impossible to deal with. I'm going
to be odd person out if I can't see people with the eyes of Jesus
Christ, which see past the parts that put me off and into the parts
that are good. For the rich of Luke's time, anything not associated
with wealth and its blessings was off-putting and rejectable. For me,
it's anyone who doesn't fit in my neat box of acceptable behavior and
thinking. I may be needing my own cup of cool water soon.
Early thoughts. I'm looking forward to yours as the week progresses.
KHC
I'm curious about the chasm. No one can cross from here to you, and no
one can cross form there to us.'
Generally this is preached from the context of "cross that chasm from
sinner to righteous person before it's too late and you're unable to
cross and end up tormented along with the Rich Man."
Then again, there's a side of me that wants to preach this hell, fire,
and brimstone-style only without all the usual drivel about illicit
sex, homosexuality, family values, and abortion... This is different.
Rather than being tormented because he was not personally pious, the
rich man was tormented because he ignored the need (Lazarus, whom even
the dogs tended to) right under his nose (which is a form of personal
piety ... just has nothing to do with sex). Kind of like the Wicked
Witch of the West, I want to say to rich people, "You'll get yours, My
Pretty."
Be Alert ... you know neither the day nor the hour... a voice is
calling, 'You Fool! It's tonight.' ... God is calling us right this
moment and we often can't even see the need on our doorsteps.
Sally in GA
ohhh ... should clarify ... the chasm may just be the chasm between
our looking to the pie in the sky by and by Heaven - bound future and
focusing so heavily on the hereafter that we fail to recognize the
right now. The right now cannot see the eternal (at least not fully)
and the eternal cannot fully reveal itself within the context of the
finite right now.
Sally
You've touched a nerve with me, Sally. I am concerned about the trend
in modern times that I'm Saved is the whole enchilada, a home run.
It's not. We still have to run the bases before we score. While we're
running the bases, we are called to pay attention to the needs of the
people around us - and not just whether they are saved or not. If they
need food, supplies to clean up their homes after the hurricanes,
medical insurance, whatever, we cannot turn our backs because it
messes up our plans for the day or eats into our vacation savings.
Being saved has become a ticket to laziness and self-congratulations
for not being like "them" in their obvious need. So the Pharisees.
They just knew they were chosen for the good life in eternity so they
paid no mind to the call to love your neighbor when the neighbor is an
unclean nobody. I know too many saved Christians who do nothing but
sing about being saved and when they are asked to lend a real hand,
all they want to do is win the soul rather than feed the body.
Another story. I love stories. As a Social Work major in college, I
went around to different social service agencies in the college town.
One was the Salvation Army. They do good work, no doubt. But we were
just getting ready to sit down to an evening worship service one night
when a man in desperate need came through the door looking for a meal
and a bed. He looked like it had been weeks since he'd seen either.
They welcomed in the "brother" but made him sit through the entire
service of worship (and it was lengthy) before they would give him so
much as a cup of soup. He was nearly falling off his chair in hunger
and fatigue, but he had to get saved before he could eat. I was
outraged, and was also thwarted in my effort to bring him a sandwich
from the fully stocked kitchen that had the aroma of soup wafting
through the room. They told me in no uncertain terms that he needed to
give thanks to God first for saving him, then he could fill his belly.
I told them he needed something to thank God about - food and sleep -
before he'd understand what he was being thankful to God for. Needless
to say, I did not get assigned to the Salvation Army camp for my
internship. It's been 30 years, but I have never forgotten that
evening.
KHC
sally and khc,
you've really started us off this week.
this story (as told through your posts) makes me think of those people
i know who don't come to church, but who do the work of the church
better than many "christians" i know. they feed the hungry, clothe the
naked, sit with the grieving, etc... while we sit in church on sunday
mornings singing our hymns and thinking: i'm so glad that i've been
saved.
i'm not trying to downplay worship, i feel strongly about the need and
the command to worship God in Christ Jesus, but could this parable
really be telling us about just what the church should be rahter than
what it is?
another story that i think of is the one where jesus contrasts the
prayers of the pharisee and the tax collector.
the work of the church is to feed the hungry (and sometimes the food
is spiritual rather than actual bread) the church is not a thing, but
a constant action: a verb.
the rich man could have "churched" lazarus, but instead he acted as
some churches do.
i also appreciate the thoughts on the creed. is there a second chance
for the rich man in hell because someone was raised from the dead?
and if so, does that mean that what jesus does, in the resurrection,
is to make the chasm crossable so that rich and poor alike might be
able to minister to one another?
early musings.
and thanks to everyone for last week, you got me through a difficult
text and helped make my sermon "relevant" (as one person said).
God's peace, christine
I wonder if the chasm was established by the rich man in this life? It
seems to me that in God's economy enough is supplied for all, but it
usually doesn't get fully distributed directly. God allows us to
participate in the distribution so that we can participate in the joy
of generosity and grace. When we divorce ourselves from God's plan for
meeting the needs of the community, we tear a chasm between the
"haves" and "have-nots." The chasm it seems is of our design, not of
God. I love the foreshadowing as well. Will we listen to one who was
raised from the dead who was sent to warn us? Dare we live without the
chasm? (You know the one. It is so massive and frightening we turn
away or grow glassy eyed when we get too close to the edge, for fear
we will fall in too.) What happens when we dare to reach across?
(reach a cross?) Hmmm. Sunday night musings. -ss in PA
Maybe the title in Central's bulletin will be: "Five things in Hell
That Ought to Be in Church!" 1. v.23 farsightedness 2. v.24 praying 3.
v.24 humility 4. v.27 concern for others 5. v.30 talking about Jesus
(Galveston Teacher)
This whole deal about eating what falls off the table and being in the
company of dogs reminds me of that Canaanite woman story in Matthew
...
gone to check it out ...
Storyteller
What strikes me in this scripture is the sheer arogance of the rich
man. Even as hes is lamenting his fate while in torment he demands
that Lazarus dip his finger into water to cool his tongue. He also
demands that father Abraham send Lazarus to his fathers house to warn
his brothers. The rich man just didnt get it. Joe
KHC - "Here, Here" on everything you said with one exception: you
indicated that it's a modern trend to get stuck in the "I'm Saved!"
mode. I don't think it's modern; there have been spiritually lazy
people all along ... it just happens to be the latest version of the
Pharisaical frame of mind. For example: today's praise choruses are no
less "meaty" than some of the camp meeting songs from the 30's. The
genre has changed, but the tendency is toward a theology that says
"I'm going to Heaven, nanny nanny boo boo!" (of course, implicit in
this is "you're NOT going to Heaven, but that's just the icing on the
cake).
I liked your example: I know a number of Salvation Army folks - and
they, too, would have been appalled at that scene. I guess, like
anywhere else, some camps/congregations are healthier than others.
Here's one of my own, that came to me from my church administration
professor, Tom Frank. He was talking about the trustees of the church
and how the tendency is to want to "protect ~their~ church." He
described a congregation in Atlanta with a permanent painted (though
it had faded) sign that announced "Men's Bible Study: Every Wednesday
7:00 PM. All Welcome!" In the doorway of that (locked) church were
huddled about 3 homeless men finding shelter against the wind. He
wondered if the men's Bible Study at 7:00 that Wednesday would have
REALLY welcomed those men. Dr. Frank wondered if ALL were REALLY
welcome. I do, too.
The thing I notice soooooo much in all congregations is how often we
kid ourselves. This may be a good week to look inside ourselves to see
where (not "if") we're kidding ourselves.
Sally in GA
Joe: WOW! I'd never thought of that ... his view of Lazarus' and Laz'
servile station never changed even though all the evidence told him,
"this is wrong."
Don't have to look far to see THAT play out today. Who else thinks of
certain groups of people as servants - and probably will never change
their minds? It's not limited to a racial thing, but it sheds an extra
facet of poignancy on the Negro Spiritual (that's the genre name,
folks) "Poor Man, Lazarus."
It's the underdogs who can say so confidently, "You'll get yours, My
Pretty."
Sally in GA
this is a meaty text. (no pun intended)as compared to yesterday's
dense gospel reading. but they are certainly connected.
the rich man was most likely very shrewd with money to have acquired
so much, yet... look at what it got him.
luke's theme of caring for the poor certainly points us to examining
just how we use and abuse the gifts God gives us.
moneys only real worth comes when we give it away.
sally, what strikes me is not that the rich man demanded that abraham
send lazarus to help him and his brothers, but that he chose lazarus
to help.
he didn't ask abraham to quench his thirst, or to send himself to warn
his brothers, but that he wanted abraham to "use" lazarus to fulfill
his needs.
he was still walking on the backs of the poor.
since, we are often called to read parables by putting jesus, God, and
us in the places of the characters... this makes jesus=lazarus.
to follow along with the discussion; we expect jesus to do our
bidding, even when we have no standing to ask anything of him.
what will change when he is actaully raised from the dead?
God's peace, christine at the shore
Galveston Teacher: That was good, very good!
KHC: While I agree with you that "I'm going to be surprised when the
people I didn't want to deal with" will be in heaven, I am not sure
that it is the thrust of the parable. No surprise there, since
Craddock found many similar traditions.
Sally, I thought your reaction would be close to the indignation Jesus
may have as he tell this story in response to the rejection/mocking of
the materalistic Pharisee. This could give you the ammo you need to
confront the modern ones today.
Christine, I would line up with your social justice take on the text
this week. Right on.
Have othing to contribute yet, Coho.
I have always been struck by the graphic imagery of the finger being
dipped in cool water and then placed on the tongue to asuage the agony
of the fire... dramatic stuff!
Rev NB
Thanks to all the desperate preachers from another. Last week's
discussion stimulated my thought process which needed a serious
jumpstart re: the dishonest manager. I am reasonably satisfied with
the resulting sermon. And now with thoughts of the rich man and poor
Laz, I am grateful for all of you and your willingness to engage in a
process of sharing. Maybe my desperation can carry all week with more
helpful stewing time this time. Anyway, I certainly do concur with
those who emphasize the social justice, compassion matter and plan to
preach on "Which Side Are You On?" Now I have to do a soul check on
myself to consider the question I am going to ask my congregation. But
more than just what side I am on, I need to realize how Christ is
present and whose side he or Abraham or other holy servants of God are
at. Am I just into me and my stuff and my agenda and neglecting real
matters of life and need at my doorstep? And how much is that true of
my church? And my society (and government)? Thanks again to God for
desperate preachers like y'all! E D W
As part of the way the Luke reports the reversal of fortunes that come
when Christ enters a situation, notice that the poor man has a name
and the rich man does not. (Dives is traditon, not scripture)
I ran across a quote in the Earthlink Newsletter from William
Stringfellow: "When money is an idol, to be poor is a sin." How true.
We blame the poor for being poor. We don't care that the nation of
Sudan has killed more than 50,000 of its own (poor) people. Hurricanes
that only bring death and destruction to Haiti and Cuba, and not to
us, are of no consequence. We want God to bless America and no one
else, and then wonder why there is no joy in our (supposed)
faith-life. Maybe if someone would just rise from the dead that would
get our attention??? JRW in OH
I like to start my sermons off with some sort of relavant story and I
am trying to think of how to work in something to do with Dante's
Divine Comedy to perhaps expound on the "Hell" imagery?
Rev NB
Galveston Teacher
Great idea and outline.
To those who would name the rich man using church tradition, I believe
part of the original irony of the parable is that the rich man is
nameless (which would be a tremendeous dishonor even and especially in
death) and the poor man has a name.
It's a dangerous thing to do to change Jesus' stories.
Pr.del in Ia
Someone had said, "It's not the thing I don't understand about
Scripture that bother me; but it's the thing that I do understand!"
When I re-read the text with a focus on social justice, the bothersome
question is "How and to what extent?"
I identified myself with the rich man.
Even though I consider myself a faithful follower of Christ; our
family tithed beyond what was asked of us to finance for various
ministries, we spent all our times outside of work to serve the people
of God in the church, we committed to a simplistic life (my boy is not
even have Xbox, or PS2 yet, but borrowing someone else obsolete Sega
Dreamcast to play), etc.
Yet, I am still a rich man with double managerial incomes, a house and
two cars. Compare to the third world country I came from, we are
beyond rich! Compare to our average congregation, we are rich! My wife
could afford the latest brand name fashion (even though she often got
them on sales at outlet mall), so in a way we were "dressed in purple
and fine linen". I myself loved good food, I watched "Iron Chef" every
time I got a chance, and I feel no regret dining in Beverly Hills on
vacation and paying for $35 per plate, so in a way I was "feasting
sumptuously".
One can justify my life style by exegete the word "every day" at the
end of verse 19. But if one willing to compare my daily "standard"
with those "standards" in the third world countries, then in deed, I
am living large "every day", even in my modest days.
Some would point to the fact that Lazarus was placed at the rich man's
gate as an indicator that contrasts between the rich and poor here
happened at the local context. Of course, if we compare ourselves to
Haiti and Bangladesh then we all the rich men. But may be we are
called to confront the situation at our own gates first as a start.
I found comfort in the fact that the Gospel didn't condemn the rich
man to hell just because he was rich, or admit Lazarus to heaven just
because he was poor.
May be the text was not about social justice as "the rich will be
punished, and the poor will be rewarded eternally" at all. But it more
like social justice in the local context, make sure you respond to
whatever opportunities God placed around you.
But was that it?
I still see myself as the rich man. He knew Lazarus by name, he even
allowed the poor beggar to hang out at the gate, he probably gave the
poor guy a few coins here and there on a good day. But Scripture
seemed to condemn the rich man with the description of Lazarus "longed
to satisfy his hunger with what fell from the rich man’s table." So,
when the parishioner who live in the mobile home slump long to have a
big house like mine, would I be condemned too?
What do I and the rich man were supposed to do? Selling off my house
and move into the mobile home slump? Embrace the ascetic life and
deprive myself of any good thing in life like the monks would?
No! Notice that the message the rich man wanted to send back was not
that of, "live a pious life", nor "sell all your possessions now!" The
message was "warn them", (Gk. diamarturomai = thoroughly/dia +
testify/martureo). He wanted Lazarus to testify what he had been
through, that there is an after life, that there is heaven and hell,
that there is punishments and rewards.
Abraham generalized the message a bit more and said that the Law and
the Prophets was enough for living people to listen to already. It is
interesting that Jesus referred to the same term Law and Prophet only
a few verses earlier in v. 16, and confirmed its eternal validity in
v. 17. Jesus also pointed to the Good News of the Kingdom in v.16b
which caused a stampede for people to rush in the Kingdom since then.
After all, He was the guy who comes back from the dead to carry the
message of the tormented rich man (grin, not literally of course).
Seeing the parable in this light, I am no longer identified myself as
the rich man, or fear condemnation because of I am rich (compare to my
other brothers and sisters). If I have the farsightedness to prepare
to the next age, if I walked my life accordingly to the Law of God, if
I heed the warning of the Prophets, if I repented according to the
Resurrected One, I should have nothing to fear.
In the mean time, I understood that my blessing (even though coming
from God), could cause social barriers to many of my less unfortunate
brothers, and that's why we didn't drive a Mercedes nor spending money
on unnecessities. I also understood that we would be ridiculed by my
less unfortunate brothers too, for sending my kid to private school,
and buying top-of-the-line products if they worth the money I invest
in. (Especially if I keep my charity giving records private as Jesus
commanded me).
I realized that my disclosure above would not be an accurate
measurement of who I am since you don't know who I am personally in my
context. But I am open to your judgment of my thinking on this text.
After all, in the next few verses, Jesus said to his disciples about
not causing anyone to stumble, and that "if another disciple sins, you
must rebuke the offender" (Luke 17:3).
What do you think? Am I rationalizing my way to have my cake and eat
it too?
Name-Withheld-to-ensure-impartial-judgment...
the same chasm that effected the rich man and Lazarus following their
death was equally present in their relationship to one another in
life... how can one person be so short-sighted that they cannot see
the needs of others around them...
niebuhrian in va
A chasm - I had enjoyed supper in a very nice downtown restuarant,
attended a talk in a beautiful cathedral style church and was heading
back to my lodging on public transit. It was crowded and I stood at
the back of the car. One harmless looking fellow was giving a lecture
on the transit systems to whoever would listen. Suddenly a very dirty
person jumped up and came toward where I was standing. "Some one
should call the cops. That guy's on drugs." he or she said right in my
face. "Get away from me!" I silently said to this person who covered
in sores and flaking skin. His or her (for I honestly couldn't tell)
clothes were filthy - their colour totally indistinguishable. I hoped
I had not physically stepped as far as I had mentally. Even as I tried
to politley ignore this person, I remembered how often I have preached
on seeing Christ in all we meet, so I tried to smile at this person
and really respond to him or her. But the chasm was too wide for me to
cross and I continued to hope to just be left alone. So when I read
this parable, you know with whom I identify. I guess I am trying cross
a chasm when I really should be trying to fill it in. Blessings LGB
Name-Withheld, Go ahead and eat that cake, you know who blessed you
with it, and if someone looks hungry -- share--never knew anyone who
needed to eat a whole cake :) On the heals of last week's text I
wondered how much it would have hurt the rich man to offer some food
and medicine to Lazarus or even find some work for him to do? Would it
have sent him to the poor house? Probably just cost him a little
pride. Along with humility, look how much more would he have gained. I
think there is a point where we have to admit those who have and often
have a lot, can do some great things they couldn't do if they didn't
have. It's all in who's name we do those things (again a connection
form last week to this week) I agree with those who see danger in
reading this story as "rich is bad, poor is good" story. I've rambled
enough for the first time here--thanks for your patience and all your
wonderful insights everyone--I'm loving this site. It was a blessing
last week! Rev G
Name-Withheld, Go ahead and eat that cake, you know who blessed you
with it, and if someone looks hungry -- share--never knew anyone who
needed to eat a whole cake :) On the heals of last week's text I
wondered how much it would have hurt the rich man to offer some food
and medicine to Lazarus or even find some work for him to do? Would it
have sent him to the poor house? Probably just cost him a little
pride. Along with humility, look how much more would he have gained. I
think there is a point where we have to admit those who have and often
have a lot, can do some great things they couldn't do if they didn't
have. It's all in who's name we do those things (again a conection
form last week to this week) I agree with those who see danger in
reading this story as "rich is bad, poor is good" story. I've rambled
enough for the first time here--thanks for your patience and all your
wonderful insights everyone--I'm loving this site. It was a blessing
last week! Rev G
jrw in oh,
your post reminded me of a time at my internship congregation (which
was fairly affluent). hubby and i lived in newark, nj and i communted
to the church while hubby worked in newark.
people at my internship site were always concerned about me living
"there." newark was named the most dangerous city in america the year
we did internship.
at a lenten supper my supervisor used my situation as an example and a
member commented that we needed to forgive them for being poor. i
understand what he was trying to say, but he had missed the point. no,
i said, that's not quite right: we must realize that we are all in
need of forgiveness.
rich or poor we are all expected to give and to be repentant for those
times when we hoard possessions rather than sharing our riches with
others.
what might have the rich man received if instead of asking for more
"stuff" while tormented in hell, he had simply asked for forgiveness
for his neglect of lazarus?
God's peace, christine at the shore
One thing that should strike many of us: the rich man was concerned
for his "brothers" those in his family but had all along forgotten his
brother Lazarus. Father Abraham had to remind him of that Pastor Keg
Dear friends,
Since it is only Monday and I have been away from preaching for two
weeks this may not be very focused but here goes on some subjects of
the story:
1. Hell. Hell, place of the dead. Sheol in OT terms. Gehenna (not sure
I spelled that right) was the garbage heap of Jerusalem. A smelly foul
place which prefigured the place of eternal torment which he talked
about often. The place of everlasting torment according to Revelation
is yet to be opened for business. Contrary to popular belief Satan and
all the demons are not there ruling now. They roam the face of the
earth. They are in many cases unnoticed. They probably dress up well
and attend church since it seems to me that is where they do their
best work! We just don’t walk down the street and say, “Hey, honey.
Look at that demon over there!” There are in fact some people that
look like hell but they may or may not be demons. Contrary to modern
notions there will be no rulers there, only suffering. I believe it
was Dante’s Inferno where Satan’s remark to God was, “Better to rule
in hell than serve in heaven”. The hell that is to be opened and then
filled after judgement day is real and eternal. It is nothing to
snicker at.
The chasm thing: Death itself is the chasm that cannot be crossed.
Jesus is the exception and others have brought that out. I do not
think this is the passage to use to make a point about the chasme that
keeps up apart since it is an after death knd of thing. Of course
there is much freedom of thought on this.
To "Name-Withheld-to-ensure-impartial-judgment... " I know who you
are! And I am proud to know you.
Grace and peace, Mike in Sunshine
Forgiveness becomes an issue for me in this parable. Since Lazarus had
known torment in his earthly life, why did he not lift a finger
(despite Abraham) to help a brother of the covenant who was now in
torment? Seems to me that there is no room for forgiveness in this
story, which bothers me. It is part of our NT, which brings it under
the banner of Good News, which I find lacking here. I read retribution
and coldness where Jesus might require restoration and healing.
Surely, if Jesus could forgive those who tormented him, there could be
something in here about Lazarus (and Abraham) dealing gently with the
rich man who sinned against his fellow covenant person. This is too
tit-for-tat for my comprehension and stands opposed to my faith.
Sorry.
Sorry, (I am not sure if you intended to sign with that handle or
not...)
It seems like there is a point in our eternal existence that
forgiveness will no longer be available. The chasm here "has been
fixed (Gk. 'strengthen', or 'fortified'), so that those who might want
to pass from here to you cannot do so, and no one can cross from there
to us"
As Christine noted, the rich man there didn't even ask for forgiveness
(may it was beyond his capability by then?). Once we decided to NOT
follow God, He will respect our choice. That's why both John and Jesus
preached "repent and believe, while the Kingdom of God is at hand".
And that's why the book of Revelation was hard to swallow (since
there's no forgiveness there either).
Coho, Midway City.
PS: Sorry if I dug up the old debate about the "judgement of God" from
a few weeks ago. But this time, I think the text would be more
appropriate rather than the 99 sheep passage.
KHC, A very good illustration from your experience as a social worker,
but most likely not typical of SA mission. I have worked along side of
the Salvation Army for many years as a missionary in Africa. Not only
do I not see any rice ministry on their part, thier dedication to the
poor and victimized puts us Lutherans to shame. sj in Nairobi
Rev NB - your dipping the finger comment is true ... and leads me to
another thought!
Why not say, "Father Abraham, send Lazarus to douse me with a bucket
of water and put the flame out!"
Sally in GA
Good thoughts this week, y'all! Again, I'm posting one by one as I
read through yesterday's posts...
Rev G - your thoughts on whether the Rich Man could have given food or
medicine to Laz - or even given him work to do ... reminded me of
Elizabeth Smart. Her mother hired a vagrant to do work in the house
and he abducted her and made her his wife and kept her in secret for 6
- 9 months.
Sally
It always strikes me that the cross of Christ is the bridge across the
"unbridgeable" chasm. Without it - without the kind of self-giving
love of Christ - rich and poor have nothing to say to each other, and
feel no responsibility toward each other.
Last week, when I was preaching on "the admirable qualities of the
corporate thief" (yes, really!) I talked about a well-known
businessman, est. worth one billion dollars. I pointed out that he's
actually worth much more than that: he's worth the blood of Christ,
shed for him and you and me and the poor and the rich. That transforms
all our relationships with each other.
I must admit: it does bother me a little that Lazarus has no voice in
this parable. He is treated as object (of rich man's arrogance, of
Abraham's compassion) but not as subject. I guess Jesus wasn't as
politically correct as I am!? Hey... why did the sign on my office
door just change to "Chief Pharisee?" :-)
LF
Last Response to "Name Witheld" - thank you for bringing into focus
the ambiguities in this text. I started this week on Sunday night.
It's our habit to go out to lunch after worship on Sunday (and being a
predominantly white church in a predominantly African American area,
we get there before the rest of the after-church crowd!) Anyways, we
went to an Italian restaurant - our first time going there.
It was goooooooooooooood! Even though it was a chain, it was probably
the best Italian food I've had. But it was expensive - our bill was
$44 for the four of us. Also, I ate veal parmesian. I'd not been
"tormented" enough, ethically speaking, to eat something other than
veal ... nor to ask for the menu when we walked in before we realized
how expensive it was.
And we won't even TALK about going out on Sunday, forcing someone ELSE
to work while we worship and take it easy!
What a tangled web we weave. After doing all that Sunday afternoon,
then reading this post Sunday evening ... I identified with the rich
man.
HOWEVER ... while Jesus uses the "rich" and "poor" reversal of
fortunes to challenge the popular thoughts of the day, that the poor
were under divine punishment or something ... we can really get
disoriented when we try to identify who's rich and who's poor. We all
know rich people who are rich in spirit and poor people who are rich
in spirit, and rich who are poor, and poor who are poor.
Therefore, I'm considering whether this is less about identifying
who's who and what we privileged people ought to do about it than it
is about responsible stewardship ... and above all, humility.
We feast pretty sumptuously today ... only in American can obsese
people be malnourished! And what we're DRIVING these days!
I saw a commercial about a month ago - and I haven't seen it since,
but I laughed out loud at it. It shows people going to pick up their
kids after school in vehicles like tanks and steamrollers and
bulldozers... and the caption for the vehicle they were selling was
"How big does your SUV have to be?" it was for a more modest van-like
SUV. But it's so true! My Corolla gets positively dwarfed (and my
daughter has missed me altogether) after school, sandwiched in between
luxury SUV's and Hummers. And this is at a Christian school!
But it's not much better at the public school where my little one goes
(and where the folks of my church worry about her going - presuming
that because the school is 99% African American that it's an inferior
school - but it's actually better than the public elementary schools
my older girl went to in the rural white areas).
Oh, I'll just say it again ... what a tangled web we weave.
I'd better shut up now; that post just made me burn my oatmeal. Blech!
Sally in GA
Thanks to all for your posts on this challenging passage. After
reading them , this is what came to mind. Maybe the message, the
lesson is that wealth our possessions mean nothing. They get us
nowhere with God. To have or not have is no measure of our worth. What
matters is relationship - valuing each person in ways which reflect
GOd's love as taught by Scripture and especially Jesus. THe only issue
we hafve with possesions and wealth is will we do with them waht God
would have us do with them, which is to use them for good & for love -
per Jesus' commands. The things that really matter in life are free
and freeing. Jim inCT.
Great things to think about here...
One thing Jesus never condems the rich for being rich, it is in the
remembering who we are... May not who we are but who's we are?
Another thing which seems absent from this conversation so far is the
fact the poor man is names Lazarus, and the rich man is not, Divas is
from the latin for rich and is given as his name, but Jesus does not
name him.
Another thing is that Abraham calls the rich man Child, he is a child
of Abraham, yet is not with him in paradise! The Law and the Prohpets
are effecient to lead us to an understanding of what will happen when
the one rises from the grave, but if you can not understand it before,
you will not get it after... Is this really what Jesus meant?
We need to remember the law and prophets and what Jesus told us, and
it is the fact we are named by God, that the grace flows freely and we
are accepted because of him, that we can be rich or poor, and see the
needs of those around us and help the last little least lost, and be
Jesus to the world.
asacredrebel
Jesus talks about money more than any other topic. He condemns the
Pharisees for being "lovers of money," (see the text before this
story). He tells the rich young ruler that he must give away
everything before he can enter into eternity. We can spiritualize it
to make people feel better about having so many possessions, but it
doesn't cover the fact that living in such a way causes chasms between
the haves and have nots, between us and eternity. God can surely over
come it, but we must not easily gloss over the radical nature of
Jesus' message about wealth. RB in CA
LF,
On your point of, "Lazarus has no voice in this parable." Some had
posulated that it is not possible for many in heaven (like Lazarus,
except Abraham) to see (or to even know/aware about) hell. If not,
would it be possible for the heavenly citizens to go about and not
being tormented by knowing people who suffered hell...
Aahh, going down this path and we will enter the realm of
speculations, and leave the realm of the actual revelations.
Coho, Midway City.
First musings...."It's Good To Be Rich" pick up on 1 Timothy 6.18 and
preach on Luke and Timothy. revjaw
I've been reading your posts and am so thankful for all of the various
insights. I am confused about a few things though. Many
interpretations seems to implicitly (some explicitly) assume that the
rich man is in hell for being rich....but does that mean that Lazarus
is in heaven because he is poor? For lack of a better way to say it,
does that mean that being poor is in itself a virtue? I don't think
so. There must be more here. I am beginning to wonder, as many of you
seem to be, if this whole text is about reliance. Lazarus laid at the
gate of this man's house seeking grace...and got nothing. Well, to be
fair he got some dogs licking his sores (which is such a nasty
biblical detail). The rich man needed no grace because he had all he
needed and then some. (again lots of details here about his wealth).
Lazarus (his name means God helps doesn't it?) had to rely on God (I
assume)just to stay alive everyday. Rich guy relied on himself. Well,
in the end they both got what they had always wanted. Don't know if
I'm going there or not yet but here's a scary sermon title, "What You
Always Wanted" Thanks for letting me in on the conversation. Blesings,
Don in Middle Earth
KHC - I certainly hope the Salvation Army has changed in 30 years!!
And we call ourselves Christian....revjaw
I'm from a church that puts on a lot of "fund-raising" dinners; simple
meals most of them. I once suggested we offer a free meal to the
community some time - say, a soup supper. What I was met with was just
under hostility, as though I had lost my mind....prefer to be
anonymous
Sally... Your "Why not say, "Father Abraham, send Lazarus to douse me
with a bucket of water and put the flame out!" is hilarious!
It's good to see we can still have some humor and not take ourselves
too seriously.
Here are some excerpts I either found or created. I am going to preach
about Hell.
When I worked in the Auto Racing industry, there was a racing team
that also marketed their own line of clothing. Perhaps you have heard
of them, their brand was known as “No Fear”. One of their slogans was,
“It’s not that life is so short”, it’s that you’re dead for such a
long time”. For those who do not believe in Jesus Christ, this will
indeed be their sad reality, the alternative of course, is eternal
life with God the Father.
I read part of another article by Larry Dixon titled “Whatever
Happened to Hell”. I found this man’s work on the subject of Hell to
be both poignant and insightful. Here the author states that many
Christians today are, in an alarmingly misguided fashion, attempting
to “soft-peddle” the entire concept and reality of Hell. He says that
many today believe that the fear of Hell is a terrible motive for
moving others toward Christ. To counter this notion, he states that:
“Upon hearing the rattle of a diamondback, who would stand and debate
the persuasive power of absolute terror? If running for one’s life
makes sense in the presence of a deadly snake, how should we respond
to the soul-threatening reality of Hell? Here he makes his point, “If
we neglect the bad news, then some people simply won’t listen to the
good”.
When I went to get a cup of coffee the other day, the lady behind the
counter asked me what my sermon would be on this week. I answered,
“It’s about Hell”. To which she responded, “If someone goes to Hell,
are they there forever?
Good question. We as Anglicans, according to the 39 Articles of
Religion, the 22nd actually, do not believe in the Doctrine of
Purgatory because it is "Romish" and has no basis in Scripture
whatsoever.
As for eternal damnation, writing in the middle of the third century
Saint Cyprian said:
“The pain of punishment will be without the fruit of penitence;
weeping will be useless, and prayer ineffectual. Too late they will
believe in eternal punishment, those who would not believe in eternal
life.”
One of my favorite British comedians recently did a funny skit based
on Dante’s Inferno. Rowan Atkinson, who you may recognize as Mr. Bean,
or Lord Edmund Blackadder, plays the part of the Devil as he welcomes
the various sinners into their new home.
At one point he says to an unheard question, “No sorry, there aren’t
any toilets down here. I ‘m afraid if you didn’t go before you came
you aren’t going to enjoy yourself very much. But then, the sign did
say, Eternal Damnation… without relief!”
Rev NB
it is somewhat weird that the rich man (despite the chasm) can still
see heaven. (is this supposed to be additional torment?)
this is a text about perception, point of view, what we see and don't
see depending upon our "seat".
in the world, both men sat at the table: one reclined at it, the other
reclining below it.
then the situation is reversed, the perspectives change. in both
places the "rich" are unable to see the "poor" and their plight.
...then God changes the perspective, makes a new table where all are
seated and fed equally.
hum...
God's peace, christine at the shore
Sally - The Elizabeth Smart thing is a tough challenge. After that
whole event, had several comments about how "nuts" her family was to
hire a street person. What do we do with that as Christians......?
revjaw
Did the rich man ignore (for the most part) Lazarus because he was
uncaring or because Lazarus was ritually unclean, a sinner, etc. and
the rich man feared becoming unclean himself; ie, what if he was just
following the law the way he thought he was supposed to; actually
thought he was being generous by giving crumbs without having to touch
the guy....revjaw
It is not wealth, but blindness, that was the sin in both the
Pharisees ridiculing Jesus, and the rich man. It is in like that
illustration we all know – the preacher who holds the silver dollar
held before the stingy member’s eye, blocking his ability to see the
cross, illustrating the problem. The same was true for the Pharisees
in this chapter. That blindness explains the backhanded compliment
paid to the shrewd manager – at least he recognized the urgency of his
situation. The Pharisees, self styled “children of light,” can’t
recognize God when he is right in front of him, nor get that the
kingdom is at hand. Neither can the rich man. He can’t see God in
Lazarus – right at his door. He also can’t see the big picture, the
eternal picture. He doen’t know what time it is. He thinks his wealth
is all there is. He thinks he has time. He can’t hear the voice of the
prophets. Again, the children of darkness are sharper than he is.
The question hangs in the air – are they also sharper than his five
brothers?
Have you seen those Hungry Man commercials? The slogan for these
super-sized, beer-battered TV dinners is, "It's Good To Be Full."
Sumptuous might be a bit of a stretch in reference to TV dinners, but
we have become a nation of daily feasting.
Sally - I like Survivor - and commercials, too!
Someone on the epistle page suggested that there are a lot of
opportunities to "afflict the comfortable."
Such is true ... however I need to do it differently; I feel like I've
done a good bit of afflicting lately - and I don't want to "Alienate
the comfortable." Without the comfortable people (see the epistle
page), I wouldn't have a church at all.
These two tie together so well (Gospel and Epistle)
Sally
I have been hesitant to chime in lately as I think maybe I have over
posted on the discussions board, which incidently has something of
value here on the discussions of a phenomenon of "Hellhouses." Anyway,
here goes my two cents:
First of all, $44 for four of you to eat? sounds cheap to me. Good
Grief, I find my self living in a place that is rich beyond sense,
famous and jet set are all over this coastal riviera in California.
Yes I am bringing up the proverbial "it's relative, isn't it?" issue.
The poor in our country are rich the world over. However it seems to
me like many of you, rich bad - poor good is an over simplification.
I have ventured out on a Sermon topic titled "Making the Rich,
Richer." and will concentrate on good, generous and benevolent
stewardship of my gang. Seems to me there is a dual issue at stake
here, "Where will you spend eternity?" and "What earthly good are
you?" Frankly, my faith has brought me to the point, I am not going to
worry about where i am going to spend eternity (can't earn that by
anything I do here - yes I am a Lutheran anti-works justification
dogma that includes excluding making even faith a good work. Besides I
think Luther himself once made a comment that he didn't care where God
would decide he would spend eternity, knowing God in this life was
good enough for him. Ok if he didn't say this I am just helping out a
rumor, but it seems pretty good to me!) I want to know "What earthly
good am I (an you too)? I may be rich, I may not be rich, I may be
poor, I may not be poor, but I sure as H*** do something now with what
I got and while I got it to make life (mine and others) different and
better. Ok enough on that before it no longer makes cents.
(pecial note to Coho: Your post and link stunned me. I am doing an
adult series inspired by The Da Vinci Code and calling it "Christians
In Culture" I stumbled upon Richard Niebuhr's "Christians and Culture"
and gave the folks a synopsis which they loved! I will look over
closely your link too and may have later comments on it.)
OMG
A friend of mine, Kip... says... "The poor man was so poor he couldn't
even afford to be buried..."
:?)
pulpitt in ND
The social Gospel theme is easily preached from this but for me the
focus is in the last verse:
Verse 16:31 He said to him, 'If they do not listen to Moses and the
prophets, neither will they be convinced even if someone rises from
the dead."
As an evangelist and student of apologetics, I find in this verse a
key to the nature of unbelief. When presented with the testimonies of
the Gospels, people still choose not to believe.
My faith totally hangs on whether or not Jesus came back from being
dead. If he did, he was who he said he was and will do what he said he
would. If he did not, then I am just a fool living out wish fulfilment.
There are a couple of gentlemen on the discussion page who revel in
the fact that I call myself a fool for Christ.
Jesus, in the last line of the pericope, says that people will not
allow themselves to be convinced no matter what evidence there may be.
Apparently from the first part of the story, the consequences of
unbelief are not pleasant.
This text must have slipped past Thomas Jefferson because he left it
in his version (though he cut out the resurrection of Jesus):
http://www.angelfire.com/co/JeffersonBible/jeffb10.html
~~Paul in Georgia
"send Lazarus" !!!!!
Rich man is clueless about the new status of Lazarus. Lazarus is no
longer send-able! Lazarus can no longer play fetch! The rich man is no
longer in a place where he can give orders about Lazarus.
Storyteller
I think I with the unsigned poster above.
The rich man never lifted and finger to help Lazarus. And Lazarus
never lifts a finger to help the rich man. That seems to be the chasm
which neither could cross-then and now.
This parable seems to indite both as without compassion for the other.
Ironically, Abraham, the father of faith, is pessmistic. Yet the
hearers in the Lukan community would already have known that Jesus has
risen from the dead.
And many still don't beleive it.
Pr.del in Ia
The Chasm is key for me. Was it placed, or did it just happen? Is it
productive, or destructive? I also focus on the fact each one did
something. the one with no present income needed food, so reached for
the crumbs. the one with satisfying access to needs, when he later
does not, wants to try to warn his brothers.
shalom bammamma
Isn't it possible that the rich man wanted Lazarus sent because he was
recognizable....not because he was servile? Surely the rich man's
brother's had tripped over Lazarus a time or two....so he would be
believable. I don't see where this text casts Lazarus as the rich
man's servant. Don in Middle Earth
I have trouble with the idea of finiteness in the context of religion.
My concept of God is that he cannot be limited by time, space or even
human choices. To me, death does not mark the end of anything except
the end of mortality and its many errors. So you can understand my
difficulty with any interpretation of this text that draws a line,
saying God cannot or will not cross any chasms because he is limited
by the time frame (after death), the space (eternity) and/or the poor
choice made by the rich man. God transcends it all.
And to reply to whoever it was who mentioned earlier that these hell
fire texts are erroneously touted as "we'll scare you into making
right choices", I say that's exactly what they are. And, for many,
that might work. But I think God is bitterly disappointed when he gets
another person "on his side" who is there only for the purpose of
escaping punishment. I think his preference is to have people want to
walk with him, to want to adore and follow his Son. There are many
members in my church who will try to correct their children and
grandchildren with "do you want to end up in hell for being
disobedient to me?" It's a crime and a sin against God when we do this
to people, and I hate Biblical texts that can get interpreted to
follow that line of thinking that hell belongs to those who were "bad"
and heaven belongs to those who were "good", and God cannot do
anything about it at any point after the last breath is taken. (Was
Jerry Falwell Luke's editor? It smacks of his input.) God forgives
even what we cannot imagine is possible to forgive. God can reach
right down into our dead selves and breathe blessings and life right
back in. And he does. Abraham might not have been forgiving of sins
against Lazarus, but Jesus is another story. What would Jesus do with
the rich man? The Jesus I know would never leave him to rot in torment
no matter what his life choices had been. I serve a bigger Savior than
that.
Maybe that's one of the points that I can bring into this text. The
old Law was an eye for an eye, punishment for sin against one's
brother, but the New Law in Jesus Christ would encourage Lazarus to
pray for his tormenter and enemy and they would both be blessed for it
- despite it being post-mortem.
KHC
themes of social justice certainly resonate through out the passage,
however, is that the thrust of the message?
coupled with the epistle lesson, if this rich man had been found to
possess righteousness, godliness, faith, love, endurance, gentleness
would there be a problem here?
my sense is that it is the inability to look a person, a creation of
God, in the eye and see the humanity and the divine within them that
is the thrust of the message. it is also where the chasm comes from;
when we talk about social justice, it is usually comes from an "us
helping them" framework, and the relationship is often (not always)
about sending something, giving something, or praying about something,
rarely is it about searching out and finding the humanity and the
divine in those who we consider "them" (or whatever label you
prefer)...
we are all tormented and live in hell when we are unable to see beyond
ourselves and notice life of others around us...
niebuhrian in va
KHC,
You said, "but the New Law in Jesus Christ would encourage Lazarus to
pray for his tormenter and enemy and they would both be blessed for it
- despite it being post-mortem."
It's precisely the point here that Jesus DID NOT have Lazarus do so!
So, should we blame a "Jerry Falwell Luke's editor" for leaving Jesus'
original moral of the story now in our preaching? And doing so, are we
in danger of making up stuff into the Word of God?
The Exegetical Police.
There is one difference between the rich man and Lazarus that I have
not seen mentioned here- the rich man has no desire to change and
Lazarus has "longing to satisfy his hunger." Even to the bitter end of
this story, the rich man is still exactly who he was at the
beginning... not even hell and death has changed him. Lazarus has been
transformed into what he longed for.
I don't see this story as solely about rich and poor or better and
worse. I see it as a contrast between what gives us satisfaction and
what prompts us to longing.
TB in MN
A quick observation...The rich man didn't just know there was a poor
man at his gate, he knew him by name! (16:24 He called out, 'Father
Abraham, have mercy on me, and send Lazarus..') How true this is for
us too. We often think of the poor in a "those people" sort of way.
But we know there are people in need in our communities and even in
our own congregations, and we too know them by name. A little
something more to chew on as I eat my modest, but filling lunch. Thank
you all for your wonderful insights and the willingess to share them!
Shalom, P2 in WI
Maybe bammamma has got it. The chasm is uncrossible without the cross
of Christ. WE cannot serve God and mammon. So, perhaps the question
is, "what's in your wallet?"
SD Vicar
Yes, I also like bammamama's idea. I will be using an image in my
sermon (I think) that is the same idea. A friend of mine in high
school painted his youth room with a mural that had a chasm with a
huge cross across it, and flames coming up from the chasm. The cross
was the bridge and then, very teeny at the end of the cross on the
other side of the chasm, was Jesus, waving with arms outstretched.
Okay, it's simplistic theology and it's more black and white than I
would like, but so is this text. Thanks for your insights already,
Beth in Ga
Beth in Ga, the image you shared of the Cross as the Bridge is an
important one to me. Jesus waves us across despite our sinfulness. He
has made it sufficiently wide and strong to support everyone and it
blocks the way into the fire below, making it virtually impossible to
drop down. We are safe because Jesus spanned the chasm with his own
Cross, even the most self-centered and uncaring among us. Hallelujah.
SallySally and KHS...
Thank you for your insights...
I'm bothered by the dualistic approach of Heaven VS Hell in the
world...
I'm not a firm believer of "HELL" or "SATAN" for that matter... so the
"Devil and Hell" get very little airtime, ok, NO airtime from my
pulpit. The idea that we are saved from HELL is not reason enough for
me to preach the GOOD NEWS.
I don't like this passage because I think it echoes the Sunday School
teachers I've had and heard of that put the fear of GOD in people.
Surely, Jesus knew that power, TRUE power comes from UNCONDITIONAL
LOVE... rather than "beating someone up with the B-I-B-L-E!"
Too many pastors and modern day Christians get stuck in the old
stories... without putting their MINDS to it...
Granted, there IS evil in the world. The be-heading of another HUMAN
BEING regardless of what country their from... is an abomination to
God's love... still, evil happens.
I agree that there is something, MUCH to be said of loving our
enemies... NOW... on earth. I'll let GOD do the judging of "who's in
and who's out" when it comes to the "eternal home".
Still working on the angle... although I DO LIKE... Mike's spin...
"That confession is not simply about some other-worldly locus, but (as
Luther correctly noted) that Christ descended into the hell of our
lives today. There, where the great divide between God and ourselves
is ever present, Jesus becomes himself humbled by descending into the
depths of our chasm—but not to bring us the judgment we deserve. He
descends into our hell to bring us the enduring hope through his
exaltation and resurrection from the dead!"
There are many chasms in our lives... I've been to my share of them as
I know each of you have as well. Still, what keeps me proclaiming the
GOOD NEWS... is the HOPE...
Sorry for the long post, I'm almost done...
My wife and I toured NYC last weekend 9/12-9/13... I was performing a
wedding on 9-11 in Connecticut. We went to ground zero... Empire State
Building, Central Park, we were on the Today Show... my wife shook Al
Rokers hand, we took the Statten Island Ferry right past the Statue of
Liberty... while in NYC we called a local UMC church and stored our
luggage there while we toured. It was a Japanese American UM Church.
We met Howard... (not his real name)... seems Howard was living in
California in 1942 when his family and friends were jailed because of
their "heritage". A dark time for America that we have heard little
about in our public school history classes.
The camp he was sent to was in Kentucky, when they were finally freed,
he could choose between Chicago and NYC.
He told about how when he came to NYC... and saw the Statue of Liberty
for the first time... he wept... because he felt for the very first
time he was not judged different by the color of his skin or his
Japanese heritage... he was an equal, and no one treated him any
different.
How this relates to this passage from Luke's gospel I don't know...
other than Howard was like Lazarus in that people looked past him...
God calls us to look in the eyes of a stranger with that unconditional
love Howard found and Lazarus knew...
Thanks for listening with your eyes...
pulpitt in ND
niebuhrian in va
Thanks for the very subtle but deep insight. I am with you totally.
Like your sense of fun in titles too on the class. Would love to
receive any source or resource materials you might want to pass on
about the study on Culture. I have found that Niebuhr brothers keep "pop"ing
up in my journey and keep thinking I should delve into them all the
more even if they were Presbyterian! (Could it be double
predestination?)
Since I am living among the very rich, I want to make the rich, richer
(not guilty, bad, or whatever). If I can get them to see others not
like them from their hearts, the money -charity- will come. I
personally think we all need to 'dig' this text in a way that
sermonizing does not come off like some 16th century indulgence and
bring as many of our people into the 21st century world... good luck
to you all! OMG
I'm working with the title, "You Only Live Once," and comparing the
sin of the rich man's gluttony (sumptuous feasts every day, and fine
clothes) with today's "you only live once" phenomenon - revealed
somewhat at the Emmy awards. "Who are you wearing?" is the common
question.
It's not that it's BAD to wear nice clothes ... it's not that the
antidote to this is to live, as one post-er said, an ascetic and
austere life. Feasts aren't BAD ... there are many biblical feasts!
The problem is the value we place on these material values ... when
they become ordinary, we stop seeing much else. The problem is, You
only life ONCE - and that life lasts a lot longer than we think. And
God DOES reverse fortunes.
There is no specific statement where Father Abraham says, "You should
have taken care of Lazarus, so shame on you." or "You overlooked
Lazarus all these years, so now you're being punished." Rather, the
torment is the natural progression of the rich man's lifestyle.
Lazarus may not have had the opportunity to live a deeply spiritual
life, but it doesn't matter because the rich man OUGHT to have had the
opportunity and he placed his value in feasts and clothes.
thoughts ... hope it makes sense, my kids keep calling me!
sally in GA
The rich man reminds me of most good church folks I know. In an
evangelistic sence we are all supposed to be warning people, including
our families, about the danger and/or rewards of eternity. The rich
man says let someone else do it. Does he not think his brothers will
listen to him? He obviously cares, at least a little bit, but not
enough to plead that he be allowed to go and warn his brothers. Let
some one else do it. "You do it, preacher, that's why we give you the
scraps from our tables."
OOh that sounds bitter. Well, yeah, maybe a little, but that seems to
be the rich attitude. Fisher in TN
Nearly twenty years ago, back when CB radios were ther craze, my
mentor told me his handle was "Pontificate" (Sorry for the spelling.)
When asked why a good Baptist preacher would choose such, he told me
that the word "pontificate" meant "Bridge builder" in the language
from which it derives. Can anyone substantiate that for me?
It seems that the converstation has focused on Christ as the great
bridge builder. I wonder, however, if this was the intent of Jesus. I
do like all the comments about the rich man's sin being his
"ignorance" of Lazarus.
I am struggling with this text. It seems to me that reversal of
fortune is at the center of the story. Maybe Jesus is saying we need
to be extra careful about assuming we are entitled to salvation, etc.,
just because we are church people.
Steve in NC
PS> Sally, Is there any other way to say Lazareth?
Fisher in TN - there is a woman in my church who, in one breath
(during the parsonage walk-through) bragged about her $400,000 home
(yes, she told me the price) and in the next said how she "couldn't
afford" to give money to the church and how the church can't afford
some basic maintenance on the church (like the shed doors in the
basement are practically rotted through because the leak is so bad ...
the couches are worn out, doors are losing their veneer, cabinets
don't close right, the den floor is torn up, the couch is worn out and
broken down, and we won't go with the UGLY furniture complete with
nasty-looking water stains). Hmmmm. It's hard to keep loving folks
like that.
This same woman (above) who bragged about how she got some kind of
federal assitance for medications. She laughed and said, "Me in a
$400,000 house and getting assistance! hahahaha! But I worked for it;
I deserve it. So many poor people don't even know about the programs
out there and I'm not going to say anything, either. I want it for
me." She was offended when I didn't affirm her (though I did keep my
mouth shut, which I do believe is to my credit).
Then there's the woman who wouldn't donate a couch to the parsonage
because it was "too good to put in a parsonage."
name withheld because my congregants know I come here and I don't want
anyone checking up on me.
Steve in NC, Pontificate comes from the root word pontifex, which is
Latin for Bridge builder. Pont/pons = bridge, facere = to build.
Pontiff (pope) and all associated words come from it.
KHC
OMG and niebuhrian in va,
I'm also thinking of delving into a Pop Culture kind of class (Love
your title!) -- not just the DaVinci Codes, but also things like the
Five People We Meet in Heaven -- probably a walk through Barnes and
Noble or the local movie theater kind of thing -- maybe even go back
to the original What Would Jesus Do book from ... gee, what,
60/80/close to a hundred years go now? Do people even realize that?
Anyway, that's kind of a beginning thought for a class -- any ideas,
suggestions, outlines, resources you'd be willing to share (things
that didn't work as well, things you wish you'd included) -- it would
be very helpful to a Still Rookie like me.
Thanks, FC
In other words, yes, the preachers are often treated like the church
gophers. And supposed to work miracles on no resources; people in
$400,000 houses can't afford to give to "charity."
Still, we are servants living out a calling and not Trump's
apprentices trying to score the next big salary job.
Sally
In response to the crummy manse poster: better to have a house that
nobody gets all upset about than a newly remodeled one they watch over
like a hawk. In my newly redecorated former manse, they told me where
to place my own furniture, how often to wash the windows, and the
church's huge piano had to stay in the front hall because that's where
they all remember it being for 6,000 years or so. Here, the house is
dumpy, and so nobody is breathing down my back about my oak furniture
in their walnut dining room.
Suggestion: start replacing things as a gift to the church. Instead of
writing checks to the church for your tithe, spend it on the manse. It
will be money they don't have to spend, it will improve your living
conditions, and assuming your gift gets left there, it will be
welcoming and inviting for the next pastor who shows up. That's what I
'm doing, and the church appreciates it. I'm checking with the IRS to
see if it's tax deductible, too, but that's less important.
Steve in NC
You make me think about the growing interest and potential conflict of
the difference between the Historical Jesus and the Christ of Faith.
What did the Historical Jesus mean by this parable? How has the Christ
of Faith (Church doctrine) interpret (reinterpret, twist, change) this
parable? Which are we more likely to reveal in our own understanding
and preaching? It might help to seperate the two distinctions.
In regards to the housing discussion and its relevance to the
wealth/impoverishment of laity and clergy, when I came to my current
call the median house price was $600,000! Shocked I entered into a
equity share arrangement with my congregation (I own 52%). Needless to
say, it was a bloody process to reach the agreement with some 'well
meaning' congregants who didn't think the pastor should have a house
like them (some suggested I drive in from a neighboring town some 40
miles away!). In three years the median price has doubled!! Now I know
prices around the country have risen but think about that, from
$600,000 to 1.2 million for a 45 year old house on .19 acres! Here is
what is weird, had they insisted on the church NOT entering into a
equity share and forced me to borrow and scratch out a living for
three years I could have retired by now if I owned 100% ~ Maybe God
doesn't want me to retire!:-) Anyway, I again state my angle that this
text is not about rich/poor but something else, something more but
then again maybe that is an apology for the Christ of Faith and not
true to the Historical Jesus who I think called em as he saw them.
OMG
I keep thinking of the chasm as starting in this life, not just in the
afterlife. Think of the 800 plus people (as of Wednesday) who have
died in Haiti, and the hordes waiting for water and food there, not
having had anything for 3 days. That is a poor country. Yes there was
death and destruction in Florida. But most people in Florida have
insurance, and relief was brought in immediately. We are a rich
country.
It's not that rich is bad and poor is good. Everyone should have the
support the people of Florida are experiencing. And there were many
good rich people in the Bible. Abraham was rich. Jacob was rich. Job
was rich. Joanna followed Jesus and porvided for him from her own
resources, which means she had money to spare.
The problem with wealth is the separation, the physical and
psychological chasm that can form between rich and poor.
And rich people are in a dangerous/tempting situation. There is a
temptation to think we don't need God or other people (and I say we
because almost everyone who lives in the United States is rich). There
is a temptation to selfishness and self-righteousness. Often we come
across as haughty, and turn a blind eye to serious problems in other
lands. Our actions in the world are often based on our own
self-interest, rather than what is possible and right and good.
At the root, the message of the gospel is not about money. It is about
God's love for us and God's call in our lives to repent and believe.
And God calls both rich and poor to repent and believe. But if we
really believe, it will have an effect on our entire lives, including
our money.
As for the Elizabeth Smart thing, there are good and bad "street
people", just as there are good and bad rich people. There are some
corporate execs I wouldn't trust working in my home either.
thank you everyone for posting. DGinNYC
Name-Withheld-to-ensure-impartial-judgment...
Why are you asking us to judge you? Are we to judge whether you have
done enough to earn your salvation? Why are you so worried? Martin
Luther used to worry that he had not confessed enough. You are worried
that you do not give enough. Trust in God, for God is a God of mercy.
Name-Withheld-to-offer-peace.
Hi, All,
I've been at convocation till now, so I'm catching up on all the
posts. Thanks!
I also have confirmation this Sunday. I need to figure out how to use
this text with eight students who are publicly affirming their faith
(unless I choose another one).
I'm toying with, "The Time Is Now," or "Committing to Serve." Don't
know yet, though.
Michelle
Some of the comments reminded me of a column I once wrote, back in
1988. This is something of an abridged version, and I actually tied it
to the Parable of the Good Samaritan in the column. But I thought it
might be fodder here, too. After all, might not the preacher in this
story be something of a Dives?
PastorBuzz in TN
"The Fellow, The Man, and Fellow Man"
While they didnĚt exactly walk by him, the people protesting "The Last
Temptation of Christ" at the old Westown Theater were oblivious to the
man standing 50 yards away on Kingston Pike.
But one fellow, who was on his way to buy a birthday present, noticed
him. As a Christian, he was struck both by the crowd and the sign
carried by the man: It was a variation of the many "Will work for
food" signs he had seen in the past.
At an intersection, he turned in the opposite direction and drove on
to complete his errand. He couldn't get his mind off the hungry man
while in the store. It made him uncomfortable.
Upon leaving, the fellow thought, "I could go home the back way and
avoid the man," but he couldn't. Something kept pulling him back to
the man, and the crowd.
He drove to the mall parking lot, past the protesters and past the
point adjacent to the hungry man.
The fellow walked back toward where the man stood. Closer now, he saw
the man had a few days' growth of beard and two or three small bags
beside him.
A red sports car had pulled up and the driver, a woman, was talking to
the man. She left as the fellow approached and another car drove up.
This driver, also a woman, handed the man a grocery bag with fruit and
other foodstuffs.
The fellow walked to the man and learned he was from Nashville, on his
way to North Carolina where he hoped to "just make a new start." He,
like many others, had slept under an interstate bridge the night
before. The man said he was 34 years old.
"What I really need right now is a place to clean up," the man said,
seeming somewhat embarrassed by his appearance.
The fellow asked, "What about one of the missions?"
The man said while the missions were run by "good people," sometimes
ruffians are encountered and on one occasion he even had his shoes
stolen.
The fellow said he was hesitant to take the man home, having had a
trying situation develop when he attempted to help out a stranger a
couple of years before. Neither could he really afford to get the man
a motel room for the night. Still, he felt there must be something he
could do. Then, an idea came to him and the fellow looked back toward
the group of protesting Christians.
The fellow told the man he would talk to his wife about helping the
man out and left, walking toward the theater. The fellow thought if he
and some of the protesters pooled some money, maybe enough could be
raised to get the man a room for the night.
Near the theater, the fellow spoke to a reporter he knew and made his
way to the preacher whose picture had run in the newspaper a day or
two before. No one other than the reporter knew the fellow, but surely
this preacher could help in taking up a collection.
"I'm here to preach," the preacher said in rejecting the fellow's
idea.
He tried to persuade the preacher that it would be a "good witness" to
others that Christians did more than protest against moral outrages,
but the preacher stood his ground. He was there to preach.
The fellow explained that he, too, despised the movie and had even
signed a petition, distributed petitions and made phone calls.
"You know, people say we do too much of this and not enough of this,"
the fellow said, pointing first to the crowd of protesters then to the
hungry man. "I agree with you about the movie, but why can't we do
both?"
"I understand your feeling, but I'm sorry. I'm here to preach," the
preacher said.
The fellow left, discouraged.
All the ridicule he encountered at work about Christians having their
priorities messed up was right before him, in the flesh.
The fellow walked back to where the man stood. The man looked at the
fellow.
"Come on," the fellow said, going down to the street and picking up
the man's bags.
"Where're we going?"
"I'm going to get you a room," the fellow said. ...
