![]() Therefore, we make no effort to twist everything so that it fits our own explanation, striving to avoid every discrepancy. We, however, do not take the parables as sources of doctrine, but rather we take doctrine as a norm for interpreting the parables. We agree that the main issue is comprehending “the doctrine which it contains.” The difficulty, of course, as Klyne Snodgrass points out, is that “no formula exists for determining whether an element is theologically significant.” The best approach is to use the immediate context of the parable and a theology derived from the whole Bible as our guide. Further, there’s a good reason why the poor man is named and why it’s Lazarus.īut does it matter whether or not this is a parable? I don’t think so and neither did Calvin. All are introduced with the generalizing formula “a certain (wo)man. Calvin, for example, thought this because it has a named character (Lazarus)-something no parable has.Ĭalvin’s observation is right, but it’s hard to miss the fact that Luke introduces the story the same way he does the four parables that precede it, including the famed prodigal son. Now is the time to respond to God’s Word, including what it says about caring for the poor.First, is it a parable or a tale of historical figures? Some in the medieval church and the Reformation believed it was an account of actual people rather than a parable. It is perilous to ignore God’s Word and to trust in the praise of other people. Only God’s estimation of us finally matters, not that of other humans. This is a powerful parable to which we should listen, in context, for its own truths. Even scholars who believe that hell will involve unending conscious torture are now beginning to admit both these points. Others use this story to teach about an intermediate state between death and resurrection, although the context (see the previous gracEmail) has nothing to do with that subject at all. Whatever this parable portrays, it is not final punishment. Yet all the scenes in this story occur before the Judgment - while earthly life goes on, while Moses and the Prophets are the “last word” for the story’s all-Jewish characters. This story has long been misused to teach about the final punishment of the wicked in hell. ![]() A drop of water on the tongue would not stop the pains of fiery torture! We need not take this parable literally in order to take it seriously. No one really believes that Jesus endorsed all the details here. Parables usually contain one or two intended truths, communicated by an imaginary story. Some insist that every detail in this story must be literal, for “Jesus would not mislead by teaching what is not real.” These well-meaning interpreters confuse form with substance and mistake incidentals for the point. ![]() Jesus simply borrows a well-known tale and changes the details to make his own points. Not only is the story of the Rich Man and Lazarus a parable, scholars of first-century Jewish literature have found it in a dozen forms. Similarly, the story of the Pharisee and the Publican begins with “two men went up into the temple to pray,” and that story, too, is a parable (Lk. Some argue that this story cannot be a parable because Jesus says “there was a certain rich man” and “a certain poor man.” However, Jesus also introduces the story of the Unrighteous Judge by saying “there was in a certain city a judge,” yet Luke tells us that story is a parable (Lk. ![]() A gracEmail subscriber has heard the story of the Rich Man and Lazarus (Luke 16:19-31) used to teach that when the wicked die they immediately begin to suffer conscious torment, and that after the Resurrection they will suffer that conscious torment forever. ![]()
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |