Results 1 - 7 of 7
|
|
|||||
Results from: Answered Bible Questions, Answers, Unanswered Bible Questions, Notes Ordered by Verse | ||||||
Results | Verse | Author | ID# | |||
1 | Jesus decended into hell? | Eph 4:9 | drbloor | 169265 | ||
Mark, The story of Lazarus and The Rich Man is a parable and that can be proved beyond a shadow of a doubt. This is largely because it is possible to identify who Lazarus and The Rich Man were - we know who they were, we know their names, and we know that they were in fact both alive and well at the time of the parable. The first thing to do when approaching a parable is to identify the characters in it. Starting with the easiest first, we can identify Abraham as Abraham of the OT. Next up, Lazarus. Well there is only one other person in the Bible called Lazarus, so we would immediately think of him. Interestingly though, the parable categorically points us to this man. If you compare the accounts of the anointing of Jesus in John 12:3 and Matthew 26:6 you will find that Lazarus was also known as "Simon the Leper". This explains why the Lazarus in the parable was "full of sores" (Luke 16:20) – he was Simon the Leper. His begging in the parable was not directly from poverty, but because he was ceremonially unclean under OT law. So we have two men, both called Lazarus, both lepers, both beggars, both of whom died, and both of whom would not convince people by their resurrection (compare Luke 16:30-31 and John 12:10.) I think we can safely conclude then that Lazarus in the parable was Jesus friend Lazarus. Now the rich man. We are told many specific details of this man, too many in fact for this to merely represent "all rich men" – let's see if we can identify him from the facts: 1. he was rich (vs.19) 2. dressed in purple and fine linen (vs.19) 3. lived in luxury every day (vs.19) 4. in his lifetime he received good things (vs.25) 5. he had five brothers (vs.28) 6. they lived in his father’s house (vs.27) 7. they had Moses and the Prophets (vs.25) 8. but they did not listen to them (vs.29) 9. they would not be convinced even if someone were to rise from the dead (vs.31) Now it might not be obvious to us who this person was, but it would have been instantly obvious to the Pharisees listening, because there was in fact only one person in all of Israel who dressed in purple and fine linen, and to whom ALL of the above clues matched perfectly – the High Priest Caiaphas. The Jewish historian Josephus records that Caiaphas meets the first 4 criteria above. Caiaphas was rich, dressed in purple and fine linen, lived in luxury and received good things. (see Antiquities of the Jews, XIII: 10:vi:p.281, XVIII:1:iv:p.377, also Wars of the Jews 11:8:xiv: p. 478). Furthermore, Exodus 28 records the instructions given to Aaron for making the High Priests garments, and tells us that they were "purple, and scarlet yarn and fine linen". There are no two ways about it - this man must have been a High Priest. Caiaphas the High Priest also had five brothers-in-law. Again, as recorded by Josephus: "Now the report goes, that this elder Annas [father in law of Caiaphas, John 18:13] proved a most fortunate man; for he had five sons, who had all performed the office of a high priest to God, and he had himself enjoyed that dignity a long time formerly, which had never happened to any other of our high priests. . ." (Antiquities, Book XX, chapter 9, section i, p.423)" They served as High Priest as follows: Eleazar 16-17AD Jonathan 36-37AD Theophilus 37-41AD Matthias 41-43AD Annas the Younger 62AD The reference to "their fathers house" is obviously to Annas, their father, and High Priest before Caiaphas. It is not difficult for us to agree with Jesus conclusion that these men had Moses and the prophets (vs. 25) but did not listen to them (vs. 29). And finally, John 12:10 confirms the last connection in our list. The resurrection of both the Lazarus of the parable and Simon the Leper was rejected by Annas, Caiaphas and his five brothers. So now we have established the identities of the characters of this parable: Abraham is Abraham Lazarus is Lazarus, also known as Simon the Leper of Bethany The Rich Man is Caiaphas the high priest His father is Annas His 5 brothers are Eleazar, Jonathan, Theophilus, Matthias, Annas the Younger And now that we have done this, we can also prove that Jesus cannot be recounting an historical event, because both Caiaphas and Lazarus were both still alive. There is obviously more to say about this parable, but I think I will leave it at that for now. I will just leave you with the following conclusions: The parable cannot be literal. Caiaphas did not literally die and descend to Hades. He was still very much alive in Acts 4:6. Likewise although Abraham refused to raise Lazarus in the parable, in reality Jesus did raise Lazarus. The only thing that is literal about the parable is the prophecy of Luke 16:31 that was fulfilled in John 12:10 when Caiaphas and his family tried to kill Lazarus rather than accept the fact that Jesus had raised him from the dead. Okay for now, and God bless, Dr. B. |
||||||
2 | Jesus decended into hell? | Eph 4:9 | mark d seyler | 169490 | ||
Hi Dbloor, As I look over again what you have written, it looks to me like a house of cards, supposition built upon supposition. It is your identification of Lazarus with Simon that claims Lazarus was a leper. Your idea that he was a leper places him outside the temple. (wouldn't he have had to been outside the city?) Putting him outside the temple puts him in contact with Caiaphas. But it all falls apart without the identification of Lazarus as Simon, of which there is no actual evidence. And since Jesus calls them by different names, I think He meant different people. Now, I know different people sometimes know the same person by different names, but how many of us would call the same person by different names? I know that's purely subjective, but still, it makes much more sense the other way. And "when the plain sense makes sense, seek no other sense..." Now for Caiaphas. All of your nine points with the exception of the five brothers could as easily be applied to any of the rich of Israel, of whom there were many. He described "one of the elite", with the single specific feature being that he had five brothers, who lived in his father's house. I do not have the Wars of the Jews handy, although I do have Antiquities on my computer. I do not see any reference to Caiaphas, or these other things written about him, in your citations. In fact, what I have for 18.1.4 is as follows: "4. But the doctrine of the Sadducees is this: That souls die with the bodies; nor do they regard the observation of any thing besides what the law enjoins them; for they think it an instance of virtue to dispute with those teachers of philosophy whom they frequent: but this doctrine is received but by a few, yet by those still of the greatest dignity. But they are able to do almost nothing of themselves; for when they become magistrates, as they are unwillingly and by force sometimes obliged to be, they addict themselves to the notions of the Pharisees, because the multitude would not otherwise bear them." There is a certain connection in the thought, but not to identify Caiaphas as the rich man. 13.10.6 didn't seem to have any relevence whatsoever. Do you perhaps have a different edition? Prov. 31:22 talks about women wearing linen and purple. Certainly there were other men wearing this also. I find nothing that would prohibit this from being historical, exactly as Jesus told it. Even the analysis of the non-fictitious Abraham in the non-fictitious Side of Comfort, (Luke 16:31) "And he said to him, If they will not hear Moses and the Prophets, they will not be persuaded even if one from the dead should rise." - Which thing could not be a prophecy unless Abraham actually said it, and if he wasn't in this side of comfort being confronted by the rich man, well, I think you understand. Love in Christ, Mark |
||||||
3 | Jesus decended into hell? | Eph 4:9 | drbloor | 169516 | ||
Dear Mark, Thanks for the kind reply. I can understand where you are coming from and I suppose we shall have to leave this subject as one to agree to disagree on. I find no evidence in Scripture for anything or anywhere called "the bosom of Abraham" or any teaching related to anything similar. I do however find it in some strange writings of the Pharisees of Christs time. My suppostion may be that Lazarus is Simon (though that does not really matter), your supposition is that the bosom of Abraham exists. I suppose the best I can say is that neither is explicitly stated in the Bible. And similarly, I see no evidence that the event is historic and I find nothing that would prohibit it from being parabolic, exactly as Jesus told it. Anyway, I haven't answered all your points, but be sure I have considered them. Indeed, although you didn't mention it, I am beginning to wonder myself whether John 12 and Matthew 26 actually relate the same incident. Anyway, thanks for your thoughts, as always, Dr. B. P.S. Not having my notes around here, the passages on Antiquities probably slipped in from a point I removed for the sake of brevity (which you may notice I can struggle with!) |
||||||
4 | Jesus decended into hell? | Eph 4:9 | mark d seyler | 169518 | ||
Hi Dr. B, Thank you for your graciousness. To be honest, my last post was one of which I later reflected that I would have liked to have toned down a bit, and I felt that I was being overly abrupt, and without the proper note of graciousness. I can tell from what you have written that you come by your belief honestly, and hey, you may be right! I can't tell you how many times I have editted a post, then re-editted, and submitted it, only to go back and reread the half-sentences left behind from all my editting! I expect sometimes people read my posts, and then just walk away scratching their heads. . . This is indeed and interesting story that Jesus tells. It seems to stand alone in Scripture, except that to me it fits with Eph 4, as well as the whole idea that the faithful do not receive the same as the lost. I would say that you have presented the best case I have ever heard for this being a parable. I find that I am wondering if the Prodigal Son really existed! Thank you for the good discussion, and for your kindness! Love in Christ, Mark |
||||||
5 | Jesus decended into hell? | Eph 4:9 | justme | 169649 | ||
Mark: I have read a few of the notes in this thread, and thought I might just pop in and say a few words. For me, if the Scripture is not as it says, thenhow do we know what parts to believe. This kind of scriptural critisim is taught in many seminaries. I chose to disagree with it's use. The Rev. Dr. Jimmy Draper, has said in his book THE AUTHORITY OF SCRIPTURE "When a person begins to doubt the authority of Scripture or to put it in another way, when he substitutes human reason for devine revelation, this inevitably cuts the very nerve of evangelism and missions in the Biblical sence" This so impressed me that I put it in my Bible when I first started my BA in Bible at Grand Canyon University. I have stood by this, and made it one of my underpinings for my Theology. Blessings. Justme |
||||||
6 | Jesus decended into hell? | Eph 4:9 | mark d seyler | 169657 | ||
Hi Justme, Thank you for your encouragement. Since I have chosen to base my life on this book, I never want to become guilty of somehow modifying its content simply because I either don't understand or don't believe. If Jesus said "there was a rich man", then there WAS a rich man. Love in Christ, Mark |
||||||
7 | Jesus decended into hell? | Eph 4:9 | justme | 169710 | ||
Mark: For me the most difficult book is Job. There are many who say Job never really existed. I heard many times liberal Christians hammer this. I took the position that I take literal what is clearly intended to be so. There are many places in Revelation that simply are very uncertian to me, and I would not attempt to challenge someone. I have an opinion, but that's just my opinion, and there are so many who say that all of it is literal, and theres where we can surely have much differences as believers. Blessings Mark, and thanks for replying. Justme |
||||||