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

[Brian2]

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.

It seems pretty plain that Jesus was using at least part of the teachings of the Pharisees in the parable of the rich man and Lazarus. Certainly He was using the concept of conscious existence in hades after death and other parts of what the Jews believed. (Even Jesus taught that the soul does not die at the death of the body Matt 10:28)
If as Insight into the Scriptures says, Jesus would not have used false teachings of the Pharisees in His teachings, that means that those teachings that Jesus did use cannot be false, according to Insight into the Scriptures. And it cannot be denied that He did use some of those teachings in the parable.
You don't deny that He used some of those teachings in the parable do you?

 

[syo]

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

ALL religious texts are literal.

 

[Bree]

It seems pretty plain that Jesus was using at least part of the teachings of the Pharisees in the parable of the rich man and Lazarus. Certainly He was using the concept of conscious existence in hades after death and other parts of what the Jews believed. (Even Jesus taught that the soul does not die at the death of the body Matt 10:28)
If as Insight into the Scriptures says, Jesus would not have used false teachings of the Pharisees in His teachings, that means that those teachings that Jesus did use cannot be false, according to Insight into the Scriptures. And it cannot be denied that He did use some of those teachings in the parable.
You don't deny that He used some of those teachings in the parable do you?

I dont think we can say Jesus was teaching that the soul cannot be killed in Matt 10:28

The word 'soul' was in hebrew Nephesh and greek Psyche.... they can mean the 'life' that the person enjoys. So a person can kill your body, but your 'life' is given to you by God and therefore no one can kill a life that God chooses to give life to.

In the Rich man and Lazarus parable, he wasn't teaching about life and death. He was teaching about the spiritual condition of a person.
So no I dont think we need to assume that he was using their false teachings as part of his own.

 

[Brian2]

I dont think we can say Jesus was teaching that the soul cannot be killed in Matt 10:28

The word 'soul' was in hebrew Nephesh and greek Psyche.... they can mean the 'life' that the person enjoys. So a person can kill your body, but your 'life' is given to you by God and therefore no one can kill a life that God chooses to give life to.

In the Rich man and Lazarus parable, he wasn't teaching about life and death. He was teaching about the spiritual condition of a person.
So no I dont think we need to assume that he was using their false teachings as part of his own.

It is true that the parable has conscious dead people in hades however even if you think that Jesus did not believe hades was a place for the conscious dead.

Matt 10:28 And you should not be afraid of those killing the body but not being able to kill the soul. Indeed rather you should fear the One being able to destroy both soul and body in Gehenna.

However a person can kill our body and by so doing they have made a living soul into a dead soul. This is a JW teaching. But it is good to have various meaning of certain words so that you can play with the meaning.

 

[Bree]

It is true that the parable has conscious dead people in hades however even if you think that Jesus did not believe hades was a place for the conscious dead.

There are other parables where Jesus uses things that are clearly imaginary in order to make a point. It doesnt mean that Jesus believed what he was saying had real basis in fact.
For example, he said: “Why . . . do you look at the straw in your brother’s eye but do not notice the rafter in your own eye?” (Mt 7:3) A rafter is not something you would ever find in anyone's eye because a rafter is much larger then a persons entire body, so how could one be found in a persons eye? It couldn't and I'm sure you would agree that Jesus never thought that perhaps a rafter could be lodged into someone's eye.
Hyperbole such as this is not to be taken literally and that's why its reasonable not to take the rich man and lazarus literally.

Another example from within that parable itself is "the rich man asked for a drop of water to quench his thirst" Im sure you would agree that a single drop of water is not going to quench a persons thirst. Can you see that perhaps the 'rich man' was not quenching for water but rather something else? We need to think deeply about these illustrations of Jesus, they are not what they appear on the surface.

Matt 10:28 And you should not be afraid of those killing the body but not being able to kill the soul. Indeed rather you should fear the One being able to destroy both soul and body in Gehenna.

However a person can kill our body and by so doing they have made a living soul into a dead soul. This is a JW teaching. But it is good to have various meaning of certain words so that you can play with the meaning.

The hebrew language has nuance's to it that give way to allow for different meanings. To come to the correct meaning though, one must ensure that the final explanation is in harmony with the entire scriptures as a whole. Each book is linked by the same author and he does not have conflicting views. Gods views and laws and standards and truths are the same in every book of the bible. For that reason, our explanation of a particular phrase or parable must be in harmony with the beliefs and teachings of the bible as a whole.

 

[Brian2]

There are other parables where Jesus uses things that are clearly imaginary in order to make a point. It doesnt mean that Jesus believed what he was saying had real basis in fact.
For example, he said: “Why . . . do you look at the straw in your brother’s eye but do not notice the rafter in your own eye?” (Mt 7:3) A rafter is not something you would ever find in anyone's eye because a rafter is much larger then a persons entire body, so how could one be found in a persons eye? It couldn't and I'm sure you would agree that Jesus never thought that perhaps a rafter could be lodged into someone's eye.
Hyperbole such as this is not to be taken literally and that's why its reasonable not to take the rich man and lazarus literally.

Another example from within that parable itself is "the rich man asked for a drop of water to quench his thirst" Im sure you would agree that a single drop of water is not going to quench a persons thirst. Can you see that perhaps the 'rich man' was not quenching for water but rather something else? We need to think deeply about these illustrations of Jesus, they are not what they appear on the surface.

It sounds like the rich man was in a place of suffering and discomfort and Lazarus was being comforted in the bosom of Abraham. These are things that the Jews believed and Jesus was using them in His parable to tell the Jews to listen to Moses and the prophets and to love your neighbour, no matter whom they are, or the same might happen to them.

The hebrew language has nuance's to it that give way to allow for different meanings. To come to the correct meaning though, one must ensure that the final explanation is in harmony with the entire scriptures as a whole. Each book is linked by the same author and he does not have conflicting views. Gods views and laws and standards and truths are the same in every book of the bible. For that reason, our explanation of a particular phrase or parable must be in harmony with the beliefs and teachings of the bible as a whole.

Yes that would be the reason you say that "soul" in Matt 10:28 means "life".
It does not answer other uses of "soul" referring to the conscious dead, but I guess you have other answers for those cases from the Watch Tower.

 

[Bree]

It sounds like the rich man was in a place of suffering and discomfort and Lazarus was being comforted in the bosom of Abraham. These are things that the Jews believed and Jesus was using them in His parable to tell the Jews to listen to Moses and the prophets and to love your neighbour, no matter whom they are, or the same might happen to them.

I dont think the jews whom Jesus was speaking with did believe that at all.

The 'rich' man represented the scribes and pharasees who did not believe that the lowly people (lazarus) were favored by God. The entire point of the illustration is to describe that God actually does favor the lowly people. The pharisees did not believe that, the religious leaders called the lowly people 'cursed' and they looked down on them.

The illustration Jesus gave shows that God favors the lowly and when a religious leader (as the one in the story came to understand) he would be in torment over it as if he was burning in a literal place of fiery torment.

Yes that would be the reason you say that "soul" in Matt 10:28 means "life".
It does not answer other uses of "soul" referring to the conscious dead, but I guess you have other answers for those cases from the Watch Tower.

Other uses of the word soul will be determined by the context. I dont believe there are any cases for a dead person being conscious in the scriptures. The scriptures are clear that the soul is the life of the fleshly body. If that life dies, the soul is dead and consciousness ceases. The scriptures are very clear on that so if you do read a scripture that seems to say otherwise, then your interpretation is incorrect.

 

[Brian2]

I dont think the jews whom Jesus was speaking with did believe that at all.

The 'rich' man represented the scribes and pharasees who did not believe that the lowly people (lazarus) were favored by God. The entire point of the illustration is to describe that God actually does favor the lowly people. The pharisees did not believe that, the religious leaders called the lowly people 'cursed' and they looked down on them.

The illustration Jesus gave shows that God favors the lowly and when a religious leader (as the one in the story came to understand) he would be in torment over it as if he was burning in a literal place of fiery torment.

I suppose the parable would include the scribes and pharisees looking down on the the poor and uneducated but of course the rich man in hades did want to let his brothers know the truth so that they would not end up in that place of torment.

Other uses of the word soul will be determined by the context. I dont believe there are any cases for a dead person being conscious in the scriptures. The scriptures are clear that the soul is the life of the fleshly body. If that life dies, the soul is dead and consciousness ceases. The scriptures are very clear on that so if you do read a scripture that seems to say otherwise, then your interpretation is incorrect.

It is possible that the interpretation that the dead are totally unconscious is not correct.

 

[Bree]

I suppose the parable would include the scribes and pharisees looking down on the the poor and uneducated but of course the rich man in hades did want to let his brothers know the truth so that they would not end up in that place of torment.

but in a parable that is very obviously hyperbole, its not meant to be taken literally

It is possible that the interpretation that the dead are totally unconscious is not correct.

If its not correct, then why would Solomon make such a statement? And would God have had it recorded in scripture if it was not accurate? And would God have inspired such an inaccuracy??

Eccl 9:4 There is hope for whoever is among the living, because a live dog is better off than a dead lion.+ 5 For the living knowd that they will die,+ but the dead know nothing at all,+ nor do they have any more reward,e because all memory of them is forgotten.+ 6 Also, their love and their hate and their jealousy have already perished, and they no longer have any share in what is done under the sun

Eccl 9:10 Whatever your hand finds to do, do with all your might, for there is no work nor planning nor knowledge nor wisdom in the Grave,+ where you are going.

Other writers were inspired with the same idea about the dead ...they are not conscious

Psalm 115:17 The dead do not praise Jah;+ Nor do any who go down into the silence of death.+

Psalm 146:4 His spirit goes out, he returns to the ground;+ On that very day his thoughts perish.+

Isaiah 38::18 For the Grave cannot glorify you,+ Death cannot praise you.+ Those who go down into the pit cannot hope for your faithfulness.+


Even Jesus himself spoke of death as a state of unconsciousness when he spoke of Lazarus who had died as being 'asleep'
John 11:11 After he said these things, he added: “Lazʹa·rus our friend has fallen asleep,+ but I am traveling there to awaken him.”

 

[Brian2]

but in a parable that is very obviously hyperbole, its not meant to be taken literally

The parable is said in a way that people would understand but I don't see it as being hyperbole.
It might be talking about suffering after death and comfort after death just to show that God was not pleased with the rich man and cared for Lazarus, but that could create confusion as to why the dead were conscious in hades.

If its not correct, then why would Solomon make such a statement? And would God have had it recorded in scripture if it was not accurate? And would God have inspired such an inaccuracy??

Eccl 9:4 There is hope for whoever is among the living, because a live dog is better off than a dead lion.+ 5 For the living knowd that they will die,+ but the dead know nothing at all,+ nor do they have any more reward,e because all memory of them is forgotten.+ 6 Also, their love and their hate and their jealousy have already perished, and they no longer have any share in what is done under the sun

Eccl 9:10 Whatever your hand finds to do, do with all your might, for there is no work nor planning nor knowledge nor wisdom in the Grave,+ where you are going.

Other writers were inspired with the same idea about the dead ...they are not conscious

Psalm 115:17 The dead do not praise Jah;+ Nor do any who go down into the silence of death.+

Psalm 146:4 His spirit goes out, he returns to the ground;+ On that very day his thoughts perish.+

Isaiah 38::18 For the Grave cannot glorify you,+ Death cannot praise you.+ Those who go down into the pit cannot hope for your faithfulness.+


Even Jesus himself spoke of death as a state of unconsciousness when he spoke of Lazarus who had died as being 'asleep'
John 11:11 After he said these things, he added: “Lazʹa·rus our friend has fallen asleep,+ but I am traveling there to awaken him.”

I see Eccles 9:5 as speaking about not knowing what is happening on the earth (under the sun) when they die.
Eccles 9:10 helps us to understand also more about hades and the type of place it is. But it is a place that the dead are going as the end of verse 10 says. It is not that the dead go out of existence at death.

In Ps 115:17 it is talking about worship as in temple worship where there is plenty of noise. Hades is a place of silence. (The word for praise is a Hebrew word usually used in that way)

Psalm 146:4 is better translated "on that day his plans perish". This then is the same idea as in Eccles 9:4-6
Psalm 146 certainly is not saying that the dead cannot think or that they are necessarily unconscious.
Isa 38:18 is similar to Ps 115:17 in terms of "praise" and what it means.
In life is when we trust God to deliver us as Hezekiah did in Isa 38. In death all has been determined and we don't have to hope for God's faithfulness. We die and are judged and go to hades already judged and either go to punishment (the rich man) or to comfort.
Heb 9:27 Just as man is appointed to die once, and after that to face judgment,
(This is similar to what Jesus said to the thief on the cross "Today you will be with me in paradise" The paradise was the paradise of hades where he could receive comfort. That is what the Jews thought about sheol from a time a bit after the exile to the time of Jesus. Sheol was a place of both punishment and comfort)
In John 11:11 sleep is certainly not going out of existence at death and the usual interpretation is that the dead are said to be asleep because that is how they look.
The souls under the altar are certainly not unconscious and certainly existed. (Rev 6:9-11)