Luke 16:19-31.Are more and more people starting to think this story isn't literal?

[Frank Goad]

Luke 16:19-31.Are more and more people starting to think this story isn't literal?

 

[Brian2]

Luke 16:19-31.Are more and more people starting to think this story isn't literal?

Possibly but that does not change the meaning at all. The JWs seem to think that if it is a parable then it does not teach about a place for the spirts of the dead. (Hades/Sheol)

 

[paarsurrey]

Luke 16:19-31.Are more and more people starting to think this story isn't literal?

Sorry, to start with a verse some verses preceding yet very much in the context, please, Right? :

15 And he said unto them, Ye are they which justify yourselves before men; but God knoweth your hearts: for that which is highly esteemed among men is abomination in the sight of God.

By "God" in the above verse Yeshua means most certainly "God the Father" neither Yeshua himself nor the Holy Ghost/Spirit, one gets to know, please, Right?

Regards

 

[Truth in love]

Luke 16:19-31.Are more and more people starting to think this story isn't literal?

I think it is a parable. Like the others based on real things and teaches valuable lesions.

 

[paarsurrey]

Sorry, to start with a verse some verses preceding yet very much in the context, please, Right? :

15 And he said unto them, Ye are they which justify yourselves before men; but God knoweth your hearts: for that which is highly esteemed among men is abomination in the sight of God.

By "God" in the above verse Yeshua means most certainly "God the Father" neither Yeshua himself nor the Holy Ghost/Spirit, one gets to know, please, Right?

Regards

Mustn't one interpret verses from Jesus, if these or literal/physical or metaphorical, supported by some other clear-cut, unambiguous, straightforward and unequivocal verses from Jesus, else, it will be a disrespect to Jesus, please?
Right?

Regards

 

[metis]

Let me point out that the concept of "parable" is actually neutral as to whether the event actually happened. What it does imply is that there's at least a meaning to the story that goes beyond a literalistic interpretation. The early Church somewhat struggled with this and basically decided that it is not important if the event depicted is real.

 

[pearl]

The parable of the rich man and Lazarus again illustrates Luke’s concern with Jesus’ attitude toward the rich and the poor. The reversal of the fates of the rich man and Lazarus illustrates the teachings of Jesus in Luke’s 'Sermon on the Plain'
The oldest Greek manuscript of Luke dating from ca. A.D. 175–225 records the name of the rich man as an abbreviated form of “Nineveh,” but there is very little textual support in other manuscripts for this reading. “Dives” of popular tradition is the Latin Vulgate’s translation for “rich man”
16:30-31 A foreshadowing in Luke’s gospel of the rejection of the call to repentance even after Jesus’ resurrection.
The parable of the dishonest steward has to be understood in the light of the Palestinian custom of agents acting on behalf of their masters and the usurious practices common to such agents. The dishonesty of the steward consisted in the squandering of his master’s property and not in any subsequent graft. The master commends the dishonest steward who has forgone his own usurious commission on the business transaction by having the debtors write new notes that reflected only the real amount owed the master (i.e., minus the steward’s profit). The dishonest steward acts in this way in order to ingratiate himself with the debtors because he knows he is being dismissed from his position. The parable, then, teaches the prudent use of one’s material goods in light of an imminent crisis.

 

[paarsurrey]

The parable of the rich man and Lazarus again illustrates Luke’s concern with Jesus’ attitude toward the rich and the poor. The reversal of the fates of the rich man and Lazarus illustrates the teachings of Jesus in Luke’s 'Sermon on the Plain'
The oldest Greek manuscript of Luke dating from ca. A.D. 175–225 records the name of the rich man as an abbreviated form of “Nineveh,” but there is very little textual support in other manuscripts for this reading. “Dives” of popular tradition is the Latin Vulgate’s translation for “rich man”
16:30-31 A foreshadowing in Luke’s gospel of the rejection of the call to repentance even after Jesus’ resurrection.
The parable of the dishonest steward has to be understood in the light of the Palestinian custom of agents acting on behalf of their masters and the usurious practices common to such agents. The dishonesty of the steward consisted in the squandering of his master’s property and not in any subsequent graft. The master commends the dishonest steward who has forgone his own usurious commission on the business transaction by having the debtors write new notes that reflected only the real amount owed the master (i.e., minus the steward’s profit). The dishonest steward acts in this way in order to ingratiate himself with the debtors because he knows he is being dismissed from his position. The parable, then, teaches the prudent use of one’s material goods in light of an imminent crisis.

What are the principles to know parable from the literal, please? Right?
Did Jesus tell any, please? Right?

Regards

Regards

 

[Frank Goad]

What are the principles to know parable from the literal, please? Right?
Did Jesus tell any, please? Right?

Regards

Regards

Matthew 13:12-13.

 

[Spirit of Light]

Luke 16:19-31.Are more and more people starting to think this story isn't literal?

My understanding is that this is one of many parables in the bible, its an example of how things can change, so one can never be to comfortable in ones own situation in life.

 

[wizanda]

Luke 16:19-31.Are more and more people starting to think this story isn't literal?

I think it is concerning Judgement Day, as Yeshua repeats the same sentiments that the Patriarchs will be in the Kingdom and many will be kicked out (Matthew 8:11-12)...

Yet when they're kicked out, it is at the Judgement Day Fire.

Plus the idea of someone coming back from the dead, simply to share the details of religious prophecy again, and many people are disrespectful is really blatant.

Thus the sentiments that if they truly had wanted to listen, they'd have already studied the religious prophecies, I believe is a real narrative.

In my opinion.

 

[paarsurrey]

Matthew 13:12-13.

Matthew 13:12-13
12 For whosoever hath, to him shall be given, and he shall have more abundance: but whosoever hath not, from him shall be taken away even that he hath.
13 Therefore speak I to them in parables: because they seeing see not; and hearing they hear not, neither do they understand.

Doe that mean Yeshua always spoke in parables and never otherwise, please? Right?

Regards

 

[pearl]

What are the principles to know parable from the literal, please? Right?
Did Jesus tell any, please? Right?

Jesus' parables have one theme, the Kingdom of God 'is like'. And through lived situations of the listeners illustrates this. There is the question as to whether a parable goes back to Jesus himself or as some scholars think they may not go back to Jesus but represents the theology of the later church.
While many elements are due to church sources, they have been added to a basic parable spoken by Jesus. Many of the parables may be compared with those found in the Gospel of Thomas in a more primitive form.

 

[paarsurrey]

Jesus' parables have one theme, the Kingdom of God 'is like'. And through lived situations of the listeners illustrates this. There is the question as to whether a parable goes back to Jesus himself or as some scholars think they may not go back to Jesus but represents the theology of the later church.
While many elements are due to church sources, they have been added to a basic parable spoken by Jesus. Many of the parables may be compared with those found in the Gospel of Thomas in a more primitive form.

"Jesus' parables have one theme "

Did Jesus tell that his parables have one theme, please? Right?
If yes, then kindly quote from Yeshua in this connection, please. Right?
Did Jesus create any clergy and said that Yeshua was unable to express things with clarity himself so was leaving such things to be explained by them, please? Right?

Regards

 

[pearl]

Did Jesus tell that his parables have one theme, please? Right?

Have you ever read the parables? Have you ever read the Gospels as to His ministry and what He preached about? "The Kingdom of God is upon you", this is the 'theme' of Jesus' teaching.

Did Jesus create any clergy and said that Yeshua was unable to express things with clarity himself so was leaving such things to be explained by them, please? Right?

He created no clergy, there was already a priesthood. After the D/R the authors of the NT attempt to explain Jesus' purpose through narrative.

“The kingdom of heaven is like a treasure buried in a field, which a person finds and hides again, and out of joy goes and sells all that he has and buys that field. Again, the kingdom of heaven is like a merchant searching for fine pearls. When he finds a pearl of great price, he goes and sells all that he has and buys it.” (Mt 13:44-46)

Try reading the parables for yourself in Matthew 13.
The Kingdom of Heaven Is Like… (lifehopeandtruth.com)

 

[Bree]

Luke 16:19-31.Are more and more people starting to think this story isn't literal?

definitely not literal

 

[Brian2]

definitely not literal

So that means that Lazarus and the rich man were not real people but the story was about things that the Jews of the day understood, hades, bosom of Abraham, more than one section in hades, conscious souls in hades etc.

 

[Bree]

So that means that Lazarus and the rich man were not real people but the story was about things that the Jews of the day understood, hades, bosom of Abraham, more than one section in hades, conscious souls in hades etc.

correct, the rich man and lazarus were not real people....Jesus was creating a story to teach a spiritual truth. But incorrect to say Jesus was using their false beliefs in his parable.

It was a story about final rewards, and a reversal in the spiritual status, or condition, of those represented by Lazarus and by the rich man.

The rich man represented the spiritual leaders of the day while Lazarus represented the people who lived under the authority of the religious rulers.

 

[Brian2]

correct, the rich man and lazarus were not real people....Jesus was creating a story to teach a spiritual truth. But incorrect to say Jesus was using their false beliefs in his parable.

It was a story about final rewards, and a reversal in the spiritual status, or condition, of those represented by Lazarus and by the rich man.

The rich man represented the spiritual leaders of the day while Lazarus represented the people who lived under the authority of the religious rulers.

I would say that is too narrow an interpretation. It is relevant to us also and what could be our fate if we do not love our neighbour.
But if Jesus was not using false beliefs in His parable, why do JWs say they are false beliefs that He was using in the parable?

 

[Bree]

I would say that is too narrow an interpretation. It is relevant to us also and what could be our fate if we do not love our neighbour.
But if Jesus was not using false beliefs in His parable, why do JWs say they are false beliefs that He was using in the parable?

Im not sure we do say that is the case. Our insight on the scriptures publication Vol2,p226 states this:


For Jesus’ illustration of the rich man and Lazarus, did he draw on rabbinic beliefs concerning the dead?

Teachers and students of comparative religion have in some cases suggested that in giving this illustration, Jesus Christ drew upon the ancient rabbinic concept and teaching regarding the underworld. Josephus furnishes the following information regarding the then-current view of the Pharisees in this regard: “They believe that souls have power to survive death and that there are rewards and punishments under the earth for those who have led lives of virtue or vice: eternal imprisonment is the lot of evil souls, while the good souls receive an easy passage to a new life.” (Jewish Antiquities, XVIII, 14 [i, 3]) However, Jesus flatly rejected false teachings, including those of the Pharisees. (Mt 23) Hence, it would have been inconsistent for him to frame his illustration of the rich man and Lazarus according to the outlines of the false rabbinic concept of the underworld. Consequently, it must be concluded that Jesus had in mind the fulfillment of the illustration and framed its details and movement in harmony with the facts of the fulfillment rather than according to any unscriptural teaching.

The context and the wording of the story show clearly that it is a parable and not an actual historical account. Poverty is not being extolled, nor are riches being condemned. Rather, conduct, final rewards, and a reversal in the spiritual status, or condition, of those represented by Lazarus and by the rich man are evidently indicated. The fact that the rich man’s brothers rejected Moses and the prophets also shows that the illustration had a deeper meaning and purpose than that of contrasting poverty and the possession of riches.