Text: This week we’re covering Luke 16:19-31 dealing with heaven and hell and how it is related to our decision to either “hear” God’s Word or to reject it. It is set in the context of the amazing story of Lazarus and the rich man. This story has much to say about social justice and material stewardship, but it is so much more. Let’s look a little closer.
Other passages to read: The “Parable”
of the Rich man and Lazarus is unique to the Gospel of Luke, however concepts
it contains can be found in other passages, such as:
·
Hardened Luxury: James 5:5-6; Matthew 25:31-46; Job
21:13-15
·
Death of the Unprepared: Matthew 24:44-51
·
Hades & Abraham’s side: Luke 12:8-9; Matthew
8:10-12
·
Father Abraham: John 8:39-47
·
Warnings in the Word: Ezekiel 33:11; John 5:45-47;
Acts 26:19-23
·
Unbelief despite resurrection: Matthew 28:11-15; John
11:38-53; 12:9-11; Acts 28:23-28
Pastor Randy's Sermon Notes: Eternity is at Stake
Read Luke 16:19-31
· Is hell for real?
· Is hell eternal?
· Is hell necessary?
“Then he will say to those on his left, ‘Depart from me, you who are cursed, into the eternal fire prepared for the devil and his angels.” (Matthew 25:41)
o for civic virtue
o final justice
o for the benefit of impenitent sinners
o for the glory of God
Two Things to think about:
1.The “Lazarus” outside our gate“But whoever has this world’s goods, and sees his brother in need, and shuts up his heart from him, how does the love of God abide in him?” (1 John 3:17)
“Command those who are rich in this present world not to be arrogant nor to put their hope in wealth, which is so uncertain, but to put their hope in God, who richly provides us with everything for our enjoyment. 18 Command them to do good, to be rich in good deeds, and to be generous and willing to share.” (I Timothy 6:17-18)
“The Lord is not slack concerning His promise, as some count slackness, but is longsuffering toward us, not willing that any should perish but that all should come to repentance.” (2 Peter 3:9)
2. Our own mortality
“Just as people are destined to die once, and after that to face judgment” (Hebrews 9:27)
“Whoever believes in the Son has eternal life, but whoever rejects the Son will not see life, for God’s wrath remains on them.” (John 3:36)
Points to ponder: In your study this week, you might want to think about one of these questions:
· How is this parable connected to the parable of the Parable
of the Dishonest Manager which precedes it in 16:1-9? (Hint: this connection
will be an interpretive key for us.
· What
did Dives (the Latin word for “rich” and often considered the personal name of
the rich man in this story) do to be condemned to hell?
· Once
in “torment” did Dives (the rich man) repent of his sin? What evidence is there
either for or against?
·
What
did it mean to “hear Moses and the Prophets”? What does it mean for us today to
“hear”?
·
What are a few “sure” lessons about the after-life
that we can glean from this “parable” without too much speculation?
·
What is the stealth message in this story? Read it
carefully again! Journaling blog may give a hint as well.
We try to answer these questions on the
Jesus4Everyone blog in the next week’s post.
Questions to ask ourselves: The
following questions are intended to help us move towards greater application of
what we learn about Jesus…
·
Building on last
week’s lesson about stewardship as key to our witness in the world, how should
we be different from the rich man in this story?
·
Where is it that we
are intent upon seeking our “good things”? (v. 25)
·
Does it matter then
how we treat our neighbor in need? How do we respond to the good gifts and
suffering in the lives of others around us?
·
In what ways are we
sensitive and kind to those in need around us at all levels of relationship: In
our family, our congregation, our community, our world? What can we change this
week?
·
Are we ready to
meet Jesus? On what basis do we have confidence?
“The story seems to be saying: Life is unfair. But, never mind, God will `even things up' in the next life. Lazarus had a hard time here and as a result, he will enjoy good times in heaven. The rich man had a good life on earth and will therefore automatically spend eternity in hell. Put bluntly, the parable would then mean, If you are comfortable here, hell awaits you. If you are homeless here, heaven is guaranteed. Indeed, there are stories like this from before and shortly after the time of Jesus,' but did Jesus endorse them? If so, most of the rest of the New Testament must be discarded. How then can this parable be viewed? What is it saying, and what is it not saying?” (Kenneth E. Bailey. Jesus Through Middle Eastern Eyes: Cultural Studies in the Gospels (Downers Grove, IVP Academic, 2008). 378.
Amos
5:12, 15 "For I know how many are your transgressions
and how great are your sins—
you who afflict the righteous, who take a bribe, and turn aside the needy in
the gate...Hate evil, and love good, and establish justice in the
gate it may be that the Lord, the God of hosts, will be
gracious to the remnant of Joseph."
Quotes & Commentary:
Kenneth Bailey sees the following literary outline in this story…
The Story
1.
Rich Man (In Life:
banquets) A
2.
Lazarus In Life: pain) B
3.
Lazarus (In Death: a
banquet) B’
4.
Rich Man (In Death: pain)
A’
5.
Rich Man (1) A
6.
Abraham (1) B
7.
Rich Man (2) A’
8.
Abraham (2) B’
9.
Rich Man (3) A”
10.
Abraham (3) B”
- A prodigal wasted his father’s possessions
- A dishonest steward wastes his master’s possessions
- A rich man wastes his own possessions
I
will put my comments and other quotes inside Bailey’s literary outline:
1.
Rich Man (In Life:
banquets)
v. 19 Purple:
very expensive to own purple garments; Linen:
the finest Egyptian cotton underwear; Every
day: his habit of feasting all the time seems to indicate that he didn’t
keep the Sabbath; Sumptuously=
wastefully feasting. There would have been more than a few crumbs leftover.
“He is not
said to have committed any grave sin, but he lived only for himself. That was
his condemnation.” (Leon Morris, Luke)
276.
2 . Lazarus (In Life: pain)v.20-21 Lazarus= His name is the Greek form of the Hebrew name El’azar=“the one whom God helps”…ironically it didn’t look like God was helping; Dogs: dogs were considered unclean and would have been half-wild guard dogs on the rich man’s estate. Licked: By their licking, were hurting or helping? Much has been said about this over the years on both sides, however it seems to be a contrast that Luke has in mind. The “civilized" rich man refused to help while his wild guard dogs did what they could to ease Lazarus’ suffering…the dogs were better than their master.
3. Lazarus (In Death: a banquet)
v.
22
There is no mention of the poor man having a funeral and burial, but he is
attended by angels who take him to the banquet at Abraham’s side or as the King
James says, “Abraham’s Bosom”. This implies that he is reclining at the banquet
in Paradise.
4. Rich Man (In Death: pain)
v.
22-23 The rich man, though buried is in torment. We learn
something new about the rich man…he seems to have known who Lazarus was, since
he was able to recognize him, from “far off”. . . doing what the rich man had
done in life. Does the rich man apologize? Does he ask forgiveness?
In Hades: Lazarus was in Hades also for both Paradise (Abraham's bosom)
and Gehenna are in the unseen world beyond the grave. In torments (en
basanoi). The touchstone by which gold and other metals were tested,
then the rack for torturing people. Old word, but in the N.T. only here, Luke
16:28; Matthew 4:24. Sees: The Jews believed
that Gehenna and Paradise were close together. This detail in the parable does
not demand that we believe it. The picture calls for it. (Robertson’s Word Pictures in the New Testament, Vol. 2) 222.
The Dialogue
- Rich Man (1)
"Amazingly, the wealthy man has not been humbled by his new and undoubtedly startling circumstances. Instead, he assumes that Abraham is still his 'father' and that Lazarus, whom he knows by name but has never helped, is present with Abraham in order to carry out errands on behalf of a wealthy man like himself. Those who legitimately refer to Abraham as 'father,' however, are those whose lives reflect their repentance, their orientation towards God's redemptive aim (3:8)." (Joel B. Green, The Gospel of Luke, Eerdmans, 608.)
- Abraham (1)
“In life, the rich man had had his good things. The adjective your is significant. He had had what he chose. He could have spent time with the things of God and delighted in the word of God. he could have engaged in almsgiving (Lazarus had been close enough!). For him, good things had been purple and fine linen, daily merriment, and feasting. He had chosen what he wanted and now he must abide by his choice. Lazarus had received evil things. In this case, there is no ‘his’. Lazarus had not been responsible for the evils he had suffered.” (Leon Morris, Luke) 277.
- Rich Man (2)
- Abraham (2)
v. 29 Abraham basically says, “They have the OT! Let them
pay attention to it.”
- Rich Man (3)
v. 30 They will repent: (metanohsousin). The Rich Man had
failed to do this and he now sees that it is the one thing lacking. It is not
wealth, not poverty, not alms, not influence, but repentance that is needed. He
had thought repentance was for others, not for all. (Robertson’s Word Pictures
in the New Testament, Vol. 2) 224.
- Abraham (3)
So we see that the main theme of this story is not really an issue of money, but one of response to the Word of God.
“The door to hell is locked on the inside.” Dr. Paul Louis Metzger
Don’t forget that we are continuing to provide devotional journaling posts from Luke (http://b4lukejournal.blogspot.com).
Previously
on Ponderables: In
your study this last week, you might have been thinking about one of these
questions:
·
How is this parable connected to the
parable of the Lost Son which immediately precedes it in Ch. 15? The younger son
wasted the father’s goodsàthe steward wastes
the master’s goods. The older son refused to enter into the celebration of the
Father’s love for his returned sonà the steward banks on
the character of the master but doesn’t enter into it relationally. The father
uses his wealth to show his careà the steward uses the
master’s wealth to win friends.
·
Why doesn’t the master in the parable annul the illegal
transactions that defraud him? Because the steward knew something about the character of
the master…that he was gracious and cared about his people. Why would the
master go back to the town, now singing his praises and reverse the
adjustments? Why would he not rather be defrauded and keep the resulting
good-will of his people?
·
Why does the master commend the dishonest manager? He comes up with a
plan to use fleeting riches to provide friends that will take him in once he
loses his position. It is a shrewd plan that counts on the generous nature of
the master. Followers of Jesus need to count on the generous character of the
Lord and make a plan to use what is God’s to make friends for eternity…for the
kingdom of God. Will there be people there to welcome us who have benefitted
from the way we invested in the Kingdom mission?
·
How do we see the justice and mercy of
God demonstrated in this parable? The man is held accountable for his mismanagement
but by not reversing the discounted transactions he did not take away the joy
that must have been ringing in that village at their “tax breaks.”
·
In this passage, we see several pairs
of contrasting terms. What are they and how do they define each other? Faithfulàdishonest;
faithfulànot faithful; littleàmuch;
dishonest wealthà true riches. “Hence, ‘faithful in a very little’ is correlated with
faithfulness with regard to ‘dishonest wealth,’ and the meaning of both
expressions is grounded in the practices recommended in v. 9. Faithfulness,
then, is evidenced in the cancellation of debts and in almsgiving on behalf of
the poor. These behaviors grow out of dispositions shaped by an orientation to
the new kingdom age …and are rooted in a commitment towards solidarity across
social lines. Lack of faithfulness, on the other hand, is related to dishonest
practices—that is practices that reflect a fundamental commitment to the
present [age] (v. 8).” (Joel B. Green, The Gospel of Luke, 595)
·
How do the themes in verse 15 relate
to the rest of chapters 14-16? Self-justification alienates us from God. Repentance
draws us near to God. It was the ones who thought they were worthy that looked
down at the sinners that repented. They didn’t recognize that their idolatry of
money prevented them from loving God. As a result, they didn’t share the
message of God’s love with those who so desperately needed and wanted it. This,
in turn, resulted in their rejection of their relationship with God and God’s
subsequent rejection of them as “stewards.”
·
Why is this apparently random verse
about divorce (v.18) included here? It may have been the point of the law
which they were breaking that Jesus wanted to point out as an example of the
result of their self-focus. However, more likely in my opinion, is the
application of the “can’t serve two masters” principle and at the same time an
allusion to a repeated prophetic theme. Their hearts were not turned towards
God in love and as a result, they pursued their own desires, and in so doing
they despised God and were spiritually adulterers. This makes the placement of
this divorce verse very appropriate.
