This is vol. 3 of a study of Jesus as a hell fire preacher. Many have studied and written on this passage of Scripture dealing with the rich man in hell, and so we have much to learn about hell from it.

1. JESUS WAS A HELL FIRE PREACHER VOL 3
EDITED BY GLENN PEASE
LUKE 16:19-31
The Rich Man and Lazarus
STEVEN COLE
A GreatChasm Fixed (Luke 16:19-31)
RelatedMedia
A man on an oceanliner was leaning over the ship’s rail, tossing something in
the air and catching it. An onlookerasked, “Whatare you tossing?” “A
diamond of great value,” the man said. “It is all that I have in this world.”
“Aren’t you afraid of losing it, tossing it over the waterlike that?” “No, I’ve
been doing it for the past half hour, and I’ve caught it every time,” the man
casuallyreplied. “But there might come a last time,” remarkedthe onlooker.
The man laughed and tossedit again—but this time he missed. For a moment
he stood aghast. Thenhe cried out, “Lost!Lost! Lost!”
You say, “That story is not true.” But, it is true of many people! The oceanis
eternity. They are on the vesselof life. That diamond is their soul. If they do
not know Christ as their Savior, they are taking greatrisk that every day will

2. be their last on this earth. If they should die without Him, they would be
eternally lost.
How can people be so carelessabouttheir eternal destiny? One answeris that
they getso caughtup with the goodthings of this life that they neglect
thinking about the life to come. The great deceiver, Satan, gets them focused
on the here and now. Every once in a while—whena friend dies or when a
major catastrophe claims many lives—they think briefly about death. But
they figure, “I’m a basicallygoodperson. Godis loving; He wouldn’t
condemn a decent personlike me.” And, they put it out of their minds and get
on with pursuing the goodlife.
Jesus directedthe parable of the rich man and Lazarus to the Pharisees,who
thought that they would get into heaven because they were goodmen. They
were the religious leaders. Theywere at the synagogue everytime the doors
opened. They studied the Law and the Prophets and could quote lengthy
sections ofit. They participated in all of the annual feasts and holy days of the
Jewishfaith. They gave ten percent or more of their income to the temple.
They calledAbraham their father.
But, their religion was outward. They did what they did to impress others. But
God was not impressed because their hearts were full of pride and hypocrisy
(16:15). They would have protestedthat they kept the Law, but they were not
concernedabout inner, heart righteousness before God. Like the rich man in
the parable, they were living the goodlife, assuming that they would go to
heaven. But their love of money had blinded them to God’s perspective. They
were in for a rude awakening if they did not repent and take heed to the true
messageofthe Law and the Prophets before they died.

3. As far as we know, the rich man in the parable was not guilty of any gross sin.
His fault was in living for himself and for this life only, with no view to
eternity. His sin was not in having money; Abraham was a wealthy man. His
sin was that he did not use the mammon of unrighteousness to make friends
for himself so that when it failed, they would receive him into eternal
dwellings (16:9). He failed to lay up treasures in heaven, even though the
opportunity to do so literally lay at his doorstepevery day. Even having
Abraham as his father (16:24, 27, 30)wouldn’t help him on judgment day,
because he had neglectedthe true messageofMoses andthe Prophets. His
faith was mere professionthat did not result in obedience. Thus the message
for us is:
Since present choices determine eternal destiny, we must repent and believe
God’s Word and not be deceivedby outward appearances.
There are three lessons to take to heart:
1. There are two and only two eternaldestinies.
Jesus makes it plain that there are two eternal destinies, heavenand hell.
Heaven is pictured in the parable in the common Jewishsymbolism as a
Messianic banquet (13:28-29). At a banquet in that culture, the guests reclined
at the table in such a manner that you could lean back upon the breastof the
one near you to engage in intimate conversation. Lazarus is pictured at the
banquet next to Abraham, the father of the faith, enjoying rest, comfort, and
fellowship, delivered from the trials he had knownin this life.
While we won’t be eating perpetually throughout eternity (although that
might be heavenfor some!), that is the picture here to show us that it will be a
place of eternal rest and enjoyment. Whateverheaven is like, you can be sure
that it will not be boring! The idea of sitting on a cloud strumming a harp

4. forever and everdoesn’t sound very exciting! But Paul says that we will judge
angels (1 Cor. 6:3). While we don’t know all that God has prepared for those
who love Him, we do know that He will give us meaningful and fulfilling
activity. I believe that God has given us the most enjoyable activities on this
earth as a little foretaste of what heaven will be like. We will be free from all
sin and the devastating consequences ofsin, both our own sins and the sins of
others againstus. God Himself will dwell among us and there will be no
mourning or crying or pain (Rev. 21:3-4). Heavenwill be infinitely better than
the bestlife that you canimagine on this fallen earth!
But the Bible (and especiallyJesus)makes it plain that there is also a place of
eternal torment, called hell. Here Jesus uses the Greek word, Hades. Scholars
debate whether Hades (and the Hebrew Sheol)was the abode of all the dead,
with separate compartments for the righteous and the wicked, orwhether it
refers only to the place for the wickeddead. We can’t be dogmatic about such
specifics, but we can saywith certainty that hell is a real place and that you
don’t want to spend eternity there! Sometimes cartoons picture hell as a place
where the wickedparty throughout eternity, while the righteous sit around
bored on a cloud in heaven. Mark Twainsaid, “I’ll take Heaven for the
climate and Hell for society.” Butthere won’t be any societyin hell!
Jesus uses awfulword pictures to teachus that it isn’t going to be a fun place.
He refers to it as the outer darkness, where there is weeping and gnashing of
teeth (Matt. 25:30). He cites Isaiah66:24, describing hell as a place “where
their worm does not die and the fire is not quenched” (Mark 9:48). He says
that it would be better to have a millstone hung around your neck and be
thrown into the sea than to go into the unquenchable fire (Mark. 9:43). The
flames of hell may, like the golden streets of heaven, be symbolic. But if so,
they are a most frightening symbol to warn us that hell will be a place of awful
torment. The rich man in the parable says, “I am in agonyin this flame”
(16:24). If it were a fun place, he would want his brothers to join him for the
party. But he doesn’t want them to “come to this place of torment” (16:28).

5. The doctrine of eternal punishment in hell is not pleasant, but you cannot
acceptJesus andreject hell, because He taught it so plainly and frequently. R.
C. Sproul wrote (“Tabletalk [11/90]),
The fact is, however, that virtually every statement in the Bible concerning
hell comes from the lips of Jesus Christ. We cannottake Jesus seriously
without also taking seriouslywhat He said regarding eternal punishment.
There is very little about hell in the Old Testament, and very little in the
epistles. It is almostas if God decidedthat a teaching this frightening would
not be receivedfrom any lesserauthority than that of His own Son.
There are three popular views that we must reject. The first is universalism,
the view that everyone will eventually be saved. The universalist says, “A good
and loving God could not condemn anyone to hell. There is some goodin even
the worstof people. God will take that into account, so that no one will be
condemned.” But the universalist underestimates both the awful sinfulness of
the human heart and the absolute holiness of God. The rich man in the
parable was not an evil man in human terms. He wasn’ta mass murderer or
child molester. He wasn’t deliberately hurting people. He was a just living for
himself, oblivious to the poor man at his gate. And yet here he is in the place
of eternal torment! Clearly, Jesus did not teachthat everyone, let alone
everyone who isn’t terribly evil, would be in heaven.
The secondpopular view we must rejectis annihilationism. This is the view
that God will destroy the unrepentant sinner, so that he ceasesto exist. In
other words, the soul is not immortal. Perhaps God will punish the person for
a time, proportionate to his sin. But at some point, God will say, “That’s
enough,” and the person will not suffer eternally. God will annihilate the

6. person’s soul. Severalprofessing evangelicals, mostnotably John Stott, have
suggestedif not embraced this idea. The Seventh Day Adventists teachthis
doctrine.
Frankly, the idea sounds humane and appealing. But I cannot dodge Matthew
25:46, where Jesus uses the same word “eternal” in the same verse to refer to
eternal punishment and eternallife. If life is eternal, then so is punishment.
Also, Revelation20:10 states that the devil, the beast, and the false prophet
will be tormented in the lake of fire and brimstone “day and night foreverand
ever.” Then, just a few verses later (20:15), it states that all of those whose
names are not found written in the book of life are also thrown into the lake of
fire. “Dayand night forever and ever” sure sounds eternal! The best defense
of eternal punishment that I’ve read is JonathanEdwards’ sermon, “The
Justice of God in the Damnation of Sinners.” He argues that since any sin is
againstthe infinite God, it is worthy of infinite punishment.
The third popular view that this parable refutes is the doctrine of purgatory.
Both the RomanCatholic Church and the Orthodox Church teachthat when
a believer dies, unless he has attained a state of moral perfectionon earth, he
goes to an intermediate place where he suffers until all sin is purged away.
The sufferings vary according to the guilt and impenitence of the sufferer.
Gifts and services to the church, prayers on behalf of the deceased, and
Massesprovided by friends or loved ones, canall shorten the amount of time
the personspends in Purgatory.
If anyone was a candidate for Purgatory, this rich man was. As I said, he was
not a bad man. He calledAbraham his father, showing his devotion to the
Jewishfaith. He had a concernfor his five brothers’ eternaldestiny. But he
wasn’t in Purgatory, with a chance to getinto heaven after he had suffered a
while. He was in hell and there was a greatchasmfixed so that he could never
cross over. The doctrine of Purgatoryis not taught in Scripture (it is basedon

7. the apocryphal 2 Maccabees 12:39-45). Itundermines the doctrine of
justification by faith alone in Christ alone. It adds human works to His
finished work on the cross.
So while it is a hard doctrine to fathom, both intellectually and emotionally,
we cannot say that we believe in Jesus and the Bible and at the same time
rejectthe doctrine of eternal hell. There are two and only two eternal
destinies.
2. The basis for a person’s eternal destiny is fixed in the presentlife.
A. THE FACT OF A FIXED DESTINY:A GREAT CHASM FIXED (16:26).
Abraham says to the rich man in hell that there is a greatchasm fixed
betweenthose in heaven and those in hell, so that none can cross from one side
to the other. Notonly does this mean that there is no Purgatory, it also means
that there is no secondchance after death. Hebrews 9:27 states, “Itis
appointed for men to die once and after this comes judgment.” As someone
has said, there are no unbelievers in hell. They just believed too late!
In the parable, Lazarus died and the angels carriedhim to heaven. The rich
man died, was buried, and was in hell in the flames. Since it was a parable,
designedto illustrate a centraltruth, Jesus pictures the final outcome without
spelling out details about future resurrections of the body. Paul says (2 Cor.
5:8) that for believers, to be absentfrom the body is to be presentwith the
Lord. There is no such thing as “soulsleep” while we wait for the resurrection
of our bodies at His secondcoming. The souls of unbelievers go immediately
at death into a place of conscioustorment to await the GreatWhite Throne
judgment when their bodies are raisedand thrown into the Lake of Fire (Rev.
20:11-15).

8. Before death, a personcan move from spiritual death to eternallife. But once
a person dies, his eternaldestiny is fixed. He goes either to heaven or to hell
and there is no crossing overfrom one place to the other after that. There is a
greatchasm fixed.
B. THE BASIS OF A FIXED DESTINY:REPENTANCE AND FAITH IN
THE TESTIMONYOF GOD’S WORD.
A superficial reading of the story might lead you to conclude that a person
who is rich and comfortable in this life goes to hell, while a person who is poor
and miserable goes to heaven, to even things out. But that would contradict
other Scriptures, and even in the story itself, the wealthy Abraham is in
heaven. The rich man’s problem was not that he was rich, but that he did not
repent of his sin of squandering his riches on himself and begin to use them as
God would have him to do, to make friends for eternity.
The rich man knew that his brothers needed to do what he had not done,
namely, to repent and to be persuadedto believe the messageofMoses andthe
Prophets (= Scripture; 16:30-31). The apostle Paul summarized his preaching
as “solemnly testifying both to Jews and Greeks ofrepentance toward God
and faith in our Lord Jesus Christ” (Acts 20:21). Repentance and faith are
two sides of the same coin. You cannot have one without the other.
Repentance is a change of mind that results in a turning of the whole person
from sin to God. Saving faith is to trust the testimony that God has borne
concerning His Son, the Lord Jesus Christ, who offered Himself as the penalty
for our sins. A personwho has truly believed in Christ as Savior will live a life
of repentance and growth in godliness. The factthat this rich man never
showedconcernfor Lazarus, even though he had to walk past him every day,
is ample evidence that his faith was an empty profession. He had never
repented of his selfishness.

9. The rich man may have protested: “How was I to know that I should take
care of this poor man at my gate?”
(1). GOD’S WORD IS A SUFFICIENT WITNESSTO LEAD A PERSON TO
REPENTANCE.
When the rich man asks Abraham to send Lazarus to warn his brothers,
Abraham replies that they have what they need to repent, namely, Mosesand
the Prophets. But the rich man protests, saying in effect, “That’s not enough.
They need something more spectacular, something miraculous. Send them a
man risen from the dead to preach to them and then they will repent.” But
Abraham insists that Scripture is a sufficient witness. If they won’t believe
Scripture, they won’t believe if someone rises from the dead.
Sometimes when you’re witnessing, the person will say, “If I could just see a
miracle, I’d believe.” That is just a smokescreen. The Bible bears witness of
many miracles, first and foremostthe resurrection of Jesus Christ from the
dead. There is sufficient evidence to believe the apostolic witness ofthe
resurrection. If a person won’t read and believe the Bible, then he has a
deeper problem, namely, a moral problem.
(2). REPENTANCE IS A MORAL ISSUE, NOT AN INTELLECTUAL ONE.
The rich man had known what God’s Word says about concernfor the poor
and needy. But he chose to ignore this hurting man on his doorstep. In effect,
he is blaming Godfor not giving him sufficient witness:“If You had just sent
someone from the dead to warn me, I wouldn’t be in this place!” But the fact
is, he did not want to inconvenience his comfortable lifestyle in order to care
about this poor man.

10. Invariably, when you’re sharing the gospeland a personraises an intellectual
problem, it is not the true problem. One wayI deal with this is to ask the
person, “Are you saying that if I can provide a reasonable answerto that
problem, you will repent of your sins and trust in Christ as Saviorand Lord?”
The answeralmostalways is, “Well, there are other issues, too.” I’ll say,
“Great, make me a list and I’ll see if I can find reasonable answers. Thenwill
you become a Christian?” Repentance isn’t the result of having all your
intellectual questions answered. Repentance andfaith in Christ hinge on the
recognitionthat you are a sinner and that you need a Savior. We need to
make it clearto people that if they die without repenting of their sins and
trusting in Christ, they are fixing their eternal destiny in hell, not in heaven.
Thus, there are two and only two eternal destinies. The basis for a person’s
eternal destiny is fixed by his choices inthis life.
3. It is possible to be deceivedabout our eternaldestiny by present outward
appearances.
One key to understanding this parable is 16:15b, “that which is highly
esteemedamong men is detestable in the sight of God.” In the eyes of men, the
rich man was successfuland Lazarus was a loser. The rich man lived well and
enjoyed the finest things in life. Lazarus was a miserable wretch, with the dogs
licking his sores. But the irony is, Lazarus was eternally rich and the rich man
was eternally bankrupt.
It is interesting that the rich man is left unnamed (sometimes he is called
“Dives,” but that is the Latin word for rich man). In this world, he was
probably well-known, renowned for his wealthlike the Kennedy family or Bill
Gates. But nobody would have known the poor man’s name, much less cared
about it. But in God’s sight, the rich man is left unnamed and the poor beggar
is named. Lazarus means, “Godhas helped,” and truly God had helped him
because he had come to salvation.

11. The point is, it’s easyto be deceivedby present outward appearances into
thinking that you or someone else is well-off because ofcareersuccess. But if
you are not rich before God, laying up eternalriches in heaven, you are really
bankrupt in the worst sense ofthe word. Don’t be deceivedinto pursuing
financial successatthe expense of your soul! Those who believe God’s Word
live in light of eternity as stewards who will give accountto God, using the
wealth Godprovides to make friends for eternity.
Conclusion
A Sunday schoolteachertold his class the story of the rich man and Lazarus
and then asked, “Now, whichwould you rather be, boys—the rich man or
Lazarus?” One boy replied, “I’d like to be the rich man while I’m living and
Lazarus when I die.”
Wouldn’t we all! But, of course, it doesn’t work that way. You can’t live for
selfishpleasure in this life, disobeying God’s Word, and expectto live with
God in heaven when you die. But, the goodnews is, when you repent of your
sins and live in obedience to Jesus Christ, you find greatpleasure, both for
time and eternity, no matter what your earthly circumstances. As Jesus said,
“Whoeverwishes to save his life shall lose it, but whoeverloses his life for My
sake, he is the one who will save it” (Luke 9:25). Two very different destinies
lie before you, with a greatchasm fixed betweenthem. I urge you, choose life
by choosing to follow Jesus Christ.
DiscussionQuestions
Have we reactedagainsthellfire preachers by under-emphasizing the terrors
of hell?
How would you refute biblically: Universalism? Annihilationism? Purgatory?

12. How would you answera person who said, “I think that God is cruel if He
torments people for eternity in hell”?
A person might argue that Jesus is teaching here that we are savedby our
gooddeeds. How would you refute this biblically?
What are the implications for witnessing of the factthat repentance is a moral
issue, not an intellectual one?
Copyright, Steven J. Cole, 1999,All Rights Reserved.
BOB DEFFINBAUGH
The Rich Man and Lazarus (Luke 16:14-31)
14 The Pharisees, who lovedmoney, heard all this and were sneering at Jesus.
15 He said to them, “You are the ones who justify yourselves in the eyes of
men, but God knows your hearts. What is highly valued among men is
detestable in God’s sight. 16 “The Law and the Prophets were proclaimed
until John. Since that time, the goodnews of the kingdom of God is being
preached, and everyone is forcing his way into it. 17 It is easierfor heaven and
earth to disappear than for the leaststroke of a pen to drop out of the Law. 18
“Anyone who divorces his wife and marries another woman commits
adultery, and the man who marries a divorced woman commits adultery. 19
“There was a rich man who was dressedin purple and fine linen and lived in
luxury every day. 20 At his gate was laid a beggarnamed Lazarus, covered
with sores 21 and longing to eat what fell from the rich man’s table. Even the
dogs came and lickedhis sores. 22 “The time came when the beggardied and
the angels carriedhim to Abraham’s side. The rich man also died and was
buried. 23 In hell, where he was in torment, he lookedup and saw Abraham
far away, with Lazarus by his side. 24 So he calledto him, ‘Father Abraham,
have pity on me and send Lazarus to dip the tip of his finger in waterand cool
my tongue, because I am in agonyin this fire.’ 25 “But Abraham replied,

13. ‘Son, remember that in your lifetime you receivedyour goodthings, while
Lazarus receivedbad things, but now he is comforted here and you are in
agony. 26 And besides all this, betweenus and you a greatchasmhas been
fixed, so that those who want to go from here to you cannot, nor cananyone
cross overfrom there to us.’ 27 “He answered, ‘ThenI beg you, father, send
Lazarus to my father’s house, 28 for I have five brothers. Let him warn them,
so that they will not also come to this place of torment.’ 29 “Abraham replied,
‘They have Moses and the Prophets; let them listen to them.’ 30 “‘No, father
Abraham,’ he said, ‘but if someone from the dead goes to them, they will
repent.’ 31 “He saidto him, ‘If they do not listen to Moses andthe Prophets,
they will not be convincedeven if someone rises from the dead.’ “
Introduction
A long time ago, I made the statement from the pulpit that I would rather
conduct two funerals than conduct one wedding. The reasonis simple. At
weddings, everyone is happy. It is a joyous occasion. Two people, very much
in love, are joining together. It is a time long awaited. Everyone can feelthe
excitement and share in the joy of it all. Quite frankly, the mood is such that
one could say almostanything and people would leave delighted. I can just
hear someone saying, “Goodword,” atthe end of the ceremony, even if a
nursery rhyme had been recited.
It is not so at a funeral. People are not happy at all. Someone they loved has
been snatchedawayby death, never againto be seenor heard in this life. And
not only is there the painful reality of the loss of a loved one, but also the
frightening reminder that we, too, must die. What one says on such an
occasionis of great moment. This is why it is so sadwhen the gospelis not
preached, for there is no hope apart from the goodnews that Jesus has died
and has risen, so that we, too, might be forgiven of our sins and live eternally
in fellowship with God.

14. An older womanand her daughter-in-law happened to be in the audience on
this particular occasion, whenI spoke of my preference for funerals. To my
knowledge, Inever met this woman. Nevertheless, onthat day she turned to
her daughter-in-law and said, “When I die, I want you to call that man to
preach at my funeral.” She did die, years later, and I receiveda call from the
daughter-in-law. She told me that she and her mother-in-law were Gypsies.
She told of her mother’s death, and of her request of years back that I deliver
the funeral message.I did so, gladly. I delivered the funeral message fromour
text in Luke chapter 16. There was, to my knowledge,just one or two
Christians. It was a tragic funeral because so few shared the hope of the
gospelwhich this womanhad found.
At the end of the service, I walkedto the rear of the little chapel, virtually
ignored by most of the people who had come. A young woman came up to me,
a woman whom I doubt was saved. She said something very encouraging to
me, however. Her comment on the messagewas this: “Whatyou preachedwas
what my grandmother believed.” I believe that it was.
When I preach a funeral message, Ihave always done so with the knowledge
that I representedJesus Christ, and with a sense ofresponsibility to proclaim
the gospel, the goodnews of forgiveness andsalvation in Him, which is the
only basis for hope in the face of death. In addition to this, I also have the
sense that I am speaking notonly for God, but also for the one who has died,
even if that person is not a Christian. I say with full assurance that the
messageI am bringing is that messagewhichthe one who has died would
want me to proclaim. I saythis, basedupon the parable of the rich man and
Lazarus. We shall see why this is so.
This accountof the rich man and Lazarus is of very greatimportance to every
one of us. In recent years, there have been many who have died and then been
revived, reporting their “after-life” experiences. Ido not wish to doubt or to

15. debate eachand every experience. I do wish to say, however, that none of
these experiences are inspired, inerrant, and authoritative, as this accountis.
Even the apostle Paulrefrained from describing what seems to have been his
“life after death experience” (cf. 2 Corinthians 12:1-5). This story of the rich
man and Lazarus is, I believe, a parable, but its description of the fate of men
after death is both true and unchanging. Let us listen very carefully to these
words. If the rich man was not able to warn his brothers, he can warn us, if
we will listen.
Background
The Lord Jesus has been speaking to the crowds, among whom are Pharisees.
They are not at all pleasedwith what they have seenand heard from Jesus.
They grumbled againstJesus forreceiving sinners and even eating with them
(Luke 15:2). In response to this, Jesus told three parables, all of which dealt
with the finding of something lost. While the Pharisees couldidentify with the
rejoicing of one who found something material (a lost sheepor a coin), they
could not rejoice in the return of a repentant sinner, even though all of heaven
did so. This is because theyhated grace. Theydid not believe they needed
grace, and they did not appreciate it being manifested to anyone else,
especiallythe undeserving (which are always the recipients of grace). If Jesus
was out of stepwith the Pharisees,they were out of step with Godand with
heaven.
In chapter 16, the grumbling of the Pharisees turned sour—to scoffing. This
scoffing was the result of yet another parable, the parable of the shrewd
steward. This stewardwas unrighteous. He had been squandering his
master’s possessions, but when he learned that he was soonto be unemployed,
he became very shrewd, using his master’s money to gain friends, who would
minister to him in the future. While the master commended his wicked
stewardfor his shrewdness, Jesusdid not. Jesus taught that His disciples
should, like the steward, make friends for the future, but in an entirely
different way. The watchwordfor disciples was not shrewdness but

16. faithfulness. In verses 9-13, Jesus laiddown the principles which should
govern the way in which the disciples viewed and used material possessions.
What especiallyangeredthe Pharisees, however, was something else. Jesus
had identified this evil man as a shrewd man, when it came to money. The
Pharisees,whomLuke now tells us were “lovers of money” (v. 14), were very
shrewd in their use of money, in such an evil way as to make the unjust
stewardlook like a saint. The stewardripped off a rich (and evil) master. The
Pharisees were “ripping off” little old ladies, as Jesus put it in Matthew’s
gospel, they were robbing widows’houses (Matthew 23:14). That for which
the Phariseesprided themselves, Jesus viewedas wicked. In His parable of the
unjust steward, Jesus identified the shrewd as unbelievers, contrasting them
with saints. Now, the Pharisees, who were proud of their skill in making
money were mad. That did it! Grumbling turned to scoffing.
The Structure of our Text15
Jesus’teaching in verses 14-18 is in response to the scoffing of the money-
loving Pharisees (v. 14). He deals first with their fundamental (root) problem
in principle (vv. 15-18). He then illustrated the problem with the parable of
the rich man and Lazarus (vv. 19-31).
The unity of the entire chapter is evident in many ways. The thread which
unifies the chapter is money. The unjust stewardused his master’s money to
serve his own interests, rather than to serve his master. The rich man will also
use his money for his own interests, ignoring the needs of Lazarus, who lay at
his gate. Bothparables begin with virtually the same expression:“There was a
certain rich man … ” (vv. 1, 19). Verses 14-18 enable us to understand the evil
of these two rich men, which was descriptive of the wickednessofthe
Pharisees,by showing the source of their sin.

17. The Scoffing of the Pharisees
(16:14)
14 The Pharisees, who lovedmoney, heard all this and were sneering at Jesus.
The Pharisees,it would seem, had previously been mumbling and grumbling
to and among themselves (cf. 15:2). Now, however, they seemmore vocaland
more public. Their reactionhas turned from discontent to disruption. They
kept on scoffing,16 so as to become “hecklers”ofJesus. His words on the
subject of money had proven to be too much. Luke tells his readers here that
the Phariseeswere “lovers ofmoney,” an expressionwhich is found only
elsewhere in the New Testamentin 2 Timothy 3:2. Luke tells us this fact
because it helps us to understand why the Pharisees wouldbe so distressedby
Jesus’teaching on money in the previous parable and its interpretation. They
loved money and they were shrewd in the ways they found to gain it, to keep
it, and to use it to indulge themselves.
But what, specifically, were the Phariseesscoffing about? The text does not
tell us exactly, and perhaps we would do best to leave it at that. Given the
Lord’s words in response to their scoffing, we might conjecture what they
would be scoffing about. They judged on appearances.Jesuswas talking a
greatdeal about money, and how to use it. They could well have said to
themselves and others, “Who is this expert on money, anyway? Who does He
think He is? How much money does He possess?He is so poor that He has to
have women of means accompanyHim, to provide for His needs!” They may
very well have mockedJesus’teaching, basedupon His poverty.
But you see, Jesus’poverty was that which proved His qualification to teach
on money. Jesus did not have money because He did not take money. He had
no vested interest. He had no desire to getrich and to live luxuriously. Thus,

18. Jesus couldspeak as one who was disinterested, rather than as one who was
preoccupiedwith money and material things.
The Wrong Judge
and the Wrong Standard
(16:15)
In response to these scoffers, Jesus did not bother pointing out that the
Pharisees were really“lovers of money.” The reasonis, I believe, that Jesus
was interestedin the source of their problem, not just in symptoms. Loving
money was a serious problem, but it was not the root of their problem. In
verses 15 Jesus exposedthe rootproblem—The Pharisees soughtapproval
from the wrong person, on the wrong basis:
15 He said to them, “You are the ones who justify yourselves in the eyes of
men, but God knows your hearts. What is highly valued among men is
detestable17 inGod’s sight.
The underlying problem of the Phariseeswas that they were seeking their
approval from the wrong source, and they were seeking to be judged
according to the wrong standard. They were striving to be justified by men,
and their standard had to be that which men could see and evaluate—
outward appearances.
This simple observationexplains the actions of the Phariseesand also their
reactions to Jesus. Because the Pharisees wantedthe approval of men they
actedin a way that would attractattention to themselves, in a way that would
make them look righteous, as men might judge it. The Phariseeswere into
long prayers, they visibly fasted, and made contributions, and took the places
of prominence at banquets and the like. Their clothing, too, was

19. ostentatious—theylengthenedtheir phylacteries. The Phariseeswere repulsed
by the fact that Jesus associatedwith sinners, and even ate with them. They
were proud of the fact that they kept their distance. No defilement for them!
They meticulously washedthemselves ceremonially, and they observed
Sabbath regulations. In all of this, Jesus said, they were hypocrites, because
their hearts were wicked, becausethey were not really righteous at all.
It is God, howeverwho justifies, and not men. God does not judge on the basis
of outward appearance, but He knows and bases His judgment on what is in
man’s heart:
But the LORD said to Samuel, “Do no look at his appearance or at the height
of his stature, because I have rejectedhim [Eliab, cf. v. 6]; for God sees not as
man sees, forman looks atthe outward appearance, but the LORD looks at
the heart” (1 Samuel 16:7).
God’s standards differ greatly from man’s, indeed, they are the exact
opposite. Those things which men highly esteem, Jesus said, are an
abomination to God(Luke 16:15).
What were some of the things which men esteemedin Jesus’day, which God
abhorred? I believe that there are many things which could be listed under
these two contrasting categories,but to simplify matters, let me simply outline
the two categorieswhichwe find in the Sermon on the Mount (Luke 6:20-
26):18
Blessedare …

20. Woe to …
The poor
The rich
The hungry
The well-fed
The mourners
The happy
Those persecutedas evil
Those respectedas “good”
In the context of our passage,there is a very clearillustration of what our
Lord was talking about when He said that God detests the things which men
highly esteem(v. 15). The Pharisees,and, according to Jesus’words, the “sons
of this age” esteemshrewdness,and thus the master could commend his
steward, even though he had ripped him off. God’s values are not man’s
values, just as His ways are not man’s ways (cf. Isaiah55:8).

21. Now we can see why the Pharisees valuedmoney so highly. Money, to the
Pharisee, was one ofthe external proofs of piety. After all, had Godnot
promised to prosper His people Israelif they kept His laws (cf. Deuteronomy
28:1-14), and to bring them greatpoverty and adversity if they disobeyed
(Deuteronomy 28:15ff.)? Moneywas the proof of piety that would cause an
externalist to love. The Pharisees’love of money was an indication of their
attachment to external standards and appearances, so that they could obtain
the praise of men. In the process ofseeking men’s praise, they also obtained
God’s condemnation.
The Keepers of
the Law are its Corrupters
(16:16-18)
In verse 15, Jesus indicted His opponents as playing before the wrong
audience, according to the wrong standards or rules. In verses 16-18,Jesus
accusesthose who prided themselves as the “custodians ofthe Law” as being
its corrupters:
16 “The Law and the Prophets were proclaimed until John. Since that time,
the goodnews of the kingdom of God is being preached, and everyone is
forcing his way into it. 17 It is easier for heaven and earth to disappear than
for the leaststroke of a pen to drop out of the Law. 18 “Anyone who divorces
his wife and marries another woman commits adultery, and the man who
marries a divorced woman commits adultery.
Jesus beganby referring to the fact that the former dispensationhad ended
with John the Baptist, and that at His appearance there was inaugurated a
new age, a new dispensation(v. 16). This new dispensation was welcomedby

22. many, in fact, Jesus said, men were pushing and shoving to get into this
kingdom. Men were violently trying to force their way in. This, then, was
regardedas a welcome change.
But the coming of the new dispensationdid not do awaywith everything that
had to do with the old. The Old Testamentdid not terminate with the coming
of Christ. As Jesus saidelsewhere,He did not come to abolish the Law, but to
fulfill it (Matthew 5:17). The two commandments which Jesus taught simply
summed up the Law and the Prophets (Matthew 7:12; 22:40). Paul, who
rigorously held the line for grace, rather than law, said that the salvation
which was accomplishedin Christ was that which was that “to which the Law
and the Prophets testify” (Romans 3:21).
There is a vastdifference betweenthe Mosaic Covenant, which was but a
temporary solution (a putting off, a buying of time) to the problem of sin, and
the New Covenant. With the coming of Christ and His death, burial, and
resurrection, the Mosaic Covenantwas put away, replacedby a new, better,
covenant, as the book of Hebrews forcefully argues. The expression, “the Law
and the Prophets” was one that summed up the entire Old Testament
revelation, and not just the Law given through Moses onMt. Sinai. The Law
and the Prophets was that revelation which provided men with a divine
standard of righteousness, a standard to which no man could attain, and thus
all men are condemned as sinners. The Old Testament, the “Law and the
Prophets,” still serves this same role as a divine declarationof the standards
of righteousness. Thus, the apostle Paul cansay that the one who “walks in the
Spirit” will fulfill the requirement of the Law (Romans 8:4).
This Old Testamentrevelationis that which the Pharisees prided themselves
for preserving. They, unlike the “sinners” oftheir time, “loved the law,” and
sought to preserve it, or so they thought. But the exactopposite was the case.
Once againthe hypocrisy of the Pharisees is evident. Jesus, like the Pharisees,

23. was committed to the preservation of the “Law and the Prophets,” the Old
Testamentrevelation, despite the change of dispensationthat occurredas a
result of His incarnation. Thus, He insists that “it is easierfor heaven and
earth to pass away than for one stroke ofa letter of the law to fail.” Here is
something to which the Pharisees couldsay, “Amen!” But could they?
The Pharisees were adamantabout their fidelity to the “law,” but this was
heavily weightedin the direction of the Law of Moses,and thus of that old
covenant.19 Jesus persistentlyspoke ofthe “Law and the Prophets,” forthis
was the sum total of the Old Testamentrevelation, not just a portion of it.
While the Pharisees focusedon the outward aspects ofreligion, the Old
Testamentprophets persistently calledIsrael’s attention to the “heart issues”
of the Law. No wonder the prophets were all persecutedand put to death.
Note these words of the prophet Isaiah, as they bear upon the Pharisees and
the text which is to follow. Notice how the outward appearance is hypocritical
in the preceding context of Isaiah, but the heart of the nation is corrupt:
1 “Shout it aloud, do not hold back. Raise your voice like a trumpet. Declare
to my people their rebellion and to the house of Jacobtheir sins. 2 Forday
after day they seek me out; they seemeagerto know my ways, as if they were
a nation that does what is right and has not forsakenthe commands of its
God. They ask me for just decisions and seem eagerfor God to come near
them. 3 ‘Why have we fasted,’they say, ‘and you have not seenit? Why have
we humbled ourselves, andyou have not noticed?’“Yet on the day of your
fasting, you do as you please and exploit all your workers. 4 Your fasting ends
in quarreling and strife, and in striking eachother with wickedfists. You
cannot fastas you do today and expectyour voice to be heard on high. 5 Is
this the kind of fastI have chosen, only a day for a man to humble himself? Is
it only for bowing one’s head like a reed and for lying on sackclothand ashes?
Is that what you call a fast, a day acceptable to the Lord? 6 “Is not this the
kind of fasting I have chosen:to loose the chains of injustice and untie the
cords of the yoke, to setthe oppressedfree and break every yoke? 7 Is it not to

24. share your food with the hungry and to provide the poor wandererwith
shelter—whenyou see the naked, to clothe him, and not to turn away from
your own flesh and blood? 8 Then your light will break forth like the dawn,
and your healing will quickly appear; then your righteousness willgo before
you, and the glory of the Lord will be your rear guard. 9 Then you will call,
and the Lord will answer;you will cry for help, and he will say: Here am I. “If
you do awaywith the yoke of oppression, with the pointing finger and
malicious talk, 10 and if you spend yourselves in behalf of the hungry and
satisfy the needs of the oppressed, then your light will rise in the darkness,
and your night will become like the noonday. 11 The Lord will guide you
always;he will satisfyyour needs in a sun-scorchedland and will strengthen
your frame. You will be like a well-wateredgarden, like a spring whose waters
never fail (Isaiah 58:1-11).
The Old Testamentprophets thus had much to say about the “heart issues” of
life. God’s revelationin the Old Testamentwas not seeking mere outward
conformity, but inward conformity to the will of God. No one portrays this
“heart” better than David, and David confessedthat the source of his “heart
for God” was the Law of God (cf. Psalm 119).
On the surface, the Pharisees andthe Saviorseemed, for once, to agree, onthe
importance of the Old Testamentrevelation, exceptthat for our Lord it was
the Old Testamentas a whole, including the prophets, and for our Lord it was
a matter of the heart, and not merely of outward conformity to the Law (cf.
Matthew 5-7).
The final verse of this section, verse 18, is a biblical (Old Testament)
indictment of the Pharisees’disregardfor the Law and the Prophets. While
they claimed to obey and to seek to promote and preserve the Law, the
Pharisees actuallysetit aside. A case in point was the matter of divorce. Jesus

25. thus lays down the Old Testamentstandard concerning divorce, which stood
in dramatic contrastto the stand takenby the Pharisees:
“Anyone who divorces his wife and marries another woman commits
adultery, and the man who marries a divorced woman commits adultery.
To my knowledge, this is the only reference to divorce in the gospelof Luke.
Elsewhere in the gospels, we know that the Pharisees questionedJesus about
His position on divorce (cf. Matthew 19:3). We canrather easilyimply that
the Phariseeswere much more liberal on the conditions under which divorce
was permissible than our Lord. Jesus contrasts the “liberal” view they held
with the biblical view consistentlyheld to in the Bible. The bottom line is this:
God hates divorce; divorce is sinful; divorce causes sin.
Men had come to acceptdivorce, to take it very lightly. There were conditions
under which divorce was permissible, but men always soughtto expand them.
While men wished to talk about the exceptions which permitted divorce, Jesus
insisted in stressing the rule, in holding to the divine standard. He expresses
that standard again. God’s ideal for marriage is that one man and one woman
should remain married so long as they live.
Verse 18 is a specific illustration of the charge Jesus made againstthe
Pharisees:The Pharisees had capitulatedto the standards of men, and had set
aside the Law and the Prophets. They had come to live in accordancewith
what men approved. Jesus challengedthem, showing that they had turned
their backs on what God approved and disapproved. Men had come to
“highly esteem” the freedom to change wives;to God, this was an
abomination. The so-calledcustodians ofthe law were really its corrupters.

26. I must take a momentary aside at this point, for surely those who have
experiencedthe ravages ofdivorce are feeling especiallyuneasy. Does divorce
categoricallycondemn one to being a sinner? I am inclined to say yes. But, lest
the divorced somehow feelthat they are the focus of attention, the object of
scorn, let me remind you that the purpose of the law was to prove every man a
sinner. Thus, those who have experienceddivorce must also be joined by those
who have had an immoral thought (and who can be excluded here), for Jesus
taught that immoral thoughts constitute adultery, too (Matthew 5:31-32).
Anger constitutes murder. On and on the list of sins and sinners goes and
grows.
The purpose of the Law was to prove men sinners, and to promise them a
provision for sins—the Lamb of God. If the revealedWord of God proves us
sinners and pointed us to Christ, it serves us well. Regardless ofwhat our sins
may be, the shed blood of Christ covers them all, for all who believe. Let the
divorced not feelsingled out by our Lord’s words. They were chosenbecause
this was one place where the conservative Phariseeshad become far too
liberal, and where they had set aside the standards of the Word of God for
those of their culture. They had thus soughtjustification by men, in
accordancewith appearances, ratherthan justification from God, basedupon
a cleanheart.
The Rich Man and Lazarus
(16:19-31)
Two very important charges have been laid down againstthe scoffing
Pharisees in verses 15-18:
(1) They have soughtthe approval of men (based upon what men can see—
appearances),not of God (basedupon the heart).

27. (2) They have setaside the revelationof God, which exposes the heart.
The parable of the rich man and Lazarus graphically illustrates both of these
points:
19 “There was a rich man who was dressedin purple and fine linen and lived
in luxury every day. 20 At his gate was laid a beggarnamed Lazarus, covered
with sores 21 and longing to eat what fell from the rich man’s table. Even the
dogs came and lickedhis sores. 22 “The time came when the beggardied and
the angels carriedhim to Abraham’s side. The rich man also died and was
buried. 23 In hell, where he was in torment, he lookedup and saw Abraham
far away, with Lazarus by his side. 24 So he calledto him, ‘Father Abraham,
have pity on me and send Lazarus to dip the tip of his finger in waterand cool
my tongue, because I am in agonyin this fire.’ 25 “But Abraham replied,
‘Son, remember that in your lifetime you receivedyour goodthings, while
Lazarus receivedbad things, but now he is comforted here and you are in
agony. 26 And besides all this, betweenus and you a greatchasmhas been
fixed, so that those who want to go from here to you cannot, nor cananyone
cross overfrom there to us.’ 27 “He answered, ‘ThenI beg you, father, send
Lazarus to my father’s house, 28 for I have five brothers. Let him warn them,
so that they will not also come to this place of torment.’ 29 “Abraham replied,
‘They have Moses and the Prophets; let them listen to them.’ 30 “‘No, father
Abraham,’ he said, ‘but if someone from the dead goes to them, they will
repent.’ 31 “He saidto him, ‘If they do not listen to Moses andthe Prophets,
they will not be convincedeven if someone rises from the dead.’”
In dealing with this passage, Iwill divide it into three sections:(1) the rich
man and Lazarus in life—vv. 19-21;(2) the rich man and Lazarus after
death—vv. 22-23;(3) the rich man’s requests—vv. 24-31.

28. THE RICH MAN AND LAZARUS IN LIFE (VS. 19-21)
Verse 19 begins almost identically with verse 1: “There was a certain rich man
… ” This rich man “had it made.” Jesus’descriptionof his life is incredibly
similar to the fate of the one on whom Jesus pronouncedwoes in his Sermon
on the Mount (Luke 6:20-26). So, too, with Lazarus. He epitomized all that
Jesus called“blessed.”Failing to name the rich man is typical of parables, and
the naming of Lazarus is unique. This name means “the one God helps.”20
The rich man was wealthy, and enjoyed all the benefits of his wealth. He was
magnificently dressed. We getthe impression that his wardrobe was filled
with expensive garments. He ate well, and he lived happily. Life was goodto
this man. From all appearances,and from a superficialreading of
Deuteronomy 28, this man, the Phariseeswouldhave supposed, was a
righteous man. Surely he would go to heaven when he died.
Lazarus was the exact opposite. He was a poor man, a virtual beggar. He was
placed21 by the gate to the rich man’s house. His clothing is not described, but
we can well imagine how bad it was. His food was whateverscraps he might
get from the rich man’s garbage—fighting off the dogs to beatthem to the
food. He had sores and these the dogs licked. He was preciselythe kind of
person that the Pharisees wouldbrand a “sinner,” a man whom, in their
minds, was worthy of hell.
These two men lived in close proximity to eachother. I believe that Lazarus
was in close enoughproximity to this rich man’s living quarters that he could
see the entourage of people coming and going. He could hear the laughter. He
could smell the aroma of the sumptuous meals being prepared in the kitchen.
He knew what he was missing.

29. And if Lazarus was painfully aware of the bounty and blessings ofthe rich
man, but evidently not a sharer in them, so, too, the rich man had to have
been aware of the pathetic plight of Lazarus. He would have had to walk past
Lazarus every time he left or entered his house. This means that he would
have had to have consciouslychosento ignore his need. The rich man thus
used his wealthto indulge himself, but not to minister to the needy. This was a
clearviolation of the Old Testamentstandard of righteousness.22
Basedupon appearance alone, one couldsee how the Pharisees wouldhave
judged these two men. They would have justified the rich man and
condemned Lazarus. The fate of these two men after their deaths shows man’s
judgment to be wrong. Thus, their destiny after death will illustrate our
Lord’s indictment againstthe Phariseesabove, namely that they soughtto be
justified before men, according to appearances, ratherthan before God, based
upon the heart.
THE RICH MAN AND LAZARUS IN ETERNITY(VV. 22-23)
It was only after both men died that God’s judgment was evident. Here, the
roles of the two men are almost exactlyreversed. Now, it is the rich man who
is in torment, and Lazarus who is blessed. The change occurredat the deaths
of the two. On earth, one can imagine that the rich man had a very
ostentatious funeral. Lazarus’ funeral would have been basic. It is even
possible that his body may have been castonto a dung or refuse heap. From a
heavenly viewpoint it was decidedly different. We are told that the soul of
Lazarus was escortedto “Abraham’s bosom.” Of the rich man we are simply
(even tersely) told that he died and was buried.
The identification of the place of Lazarus’ above as “Abraham’s bosom” is
both interesting and highly significant. In our parable, Lazarus is not said to
be in the presence of God, but in the bosomof Abraham. We must remember
that this parable is told to an Israelite, for an Old Testamentpoint of view. I

30. believe that in Old Testamenttimes there was a kind of “holding place” for
the souls of those who died. I believe this holding place had two separate
compartments, so to speak. One was reservedfor the righteous, the other for
the unrighteous. Each compartment had its eternal counterpart. The above of
the righteous had heavenas its eternal counterpart, while the place of the
wickedwas a prototype of hell. The rich man and Lazarus are thus eachin
their own place.
The place of Lazarus’ bliss was called “Abraham’s bosom.” From his place of
torment, the rich man addresses Abraham as “FatherAbraham.” I can
almost see the faces ofthe Phariseesflinch as Jesus spokethe words “Father
Abraham,” for this rich man thus addressedAbraham as his “father,” and
Abraham called him “Child.” The Pharisees believedthat all one needed to
get into the kingdom of God was a birth certificate which proved they were a
physical descendantof Abraham (cf. Luke 3:8). Here is a rich man, an
offspring of Abraham, in hell (or rather, its prototype). What a striking way
to remind the Jews thatbeing a physical descendantof Abraham was not a
guarantee of one’s salvation.
The place of bliss was “Abraham’s bosom.” I believe that we may find a clue
to the meaning of this expressionin Matthew 8:11:
“And I say to you, that many shall come from eastand west, and recline at
table with Abraham, and Isaac, and Jacob, in the kingdom of God” (Matthew
8:11; cp. Luke 13:29).
Lazarus was representedas reclining in Abraham’s bosom. The occasion
when a man would lean on the bosom or breast of another was at the meal
table, as John did with our Lord (cf. John 13:23, 25;21:20). Thus, it may well

31. be that Lazarus is being portrayed as reclining at a banquet meal with
Abraham.
The circumstances ofthe rich man and Lazarus are thus almost exactly
reversedafter death. The rich man, who lived in luxury, now lived in agony.
He was distant from Abraham’s bosom, but was aware ofwhat was taking
place there. Lazarus, who had suffered greatly in his life now was in bliss.
While he had struggledin order to getthe scraps from the rich man’s table,
now he reclined at Abraham’s table, leaning on his bosom! While it was
formerly Lazarus who lookedupon the bounty of the rich man, but did not
share in it, now it is the rich man who beholds Lazarus in bounty and blessing.
It would seemthat the rich man’s “hell” is something like solitary
confinement in a prison. There may be others there with you, but you are
hardly aware ofthem, nor is there any realfellowship. What you are aware of
is the bliss of the righteous. It is as though hell has a one-waypicture window,
and eachresident of hell is given a pair of binoculars. The wickedare thus
enabled to see the joy and bliss of the righteous, but it appears that the
righteous are unaware of the suffering of the wicked. The wickedcan see out,
but the righteous cannotsee in, so to speak.
THE RICH MAN’S REQUESTS (VV. 24-31)
It would be easyto think that the bulk of the parable might be devoted to a
description of the bliss of Lazarus and the agony of the rich man. In fact, the
largerportion of the parable is devoted to two requests which are made by the
rich man. Before we look more closelyat these requests, take note of several
observations. First, both requests were denied. Second, the first request of the
rich man had to do with his personalcomfort, while the second was for the
eternal well-being of his immediate family (his five brothers). Third, both of
his requests are that Abraham send Lazarus to do something. In my opinion,

32. the rich man still looks down upon Lazarus, viewing him as a kind of servant,
not as a superior.
The rich man’s first request was the result of his torment, his suffering. The
flames were causing him greatdiscomfort. He pled for mercy, asking that
Lazarus be sent to him with the smallestquantity of water, to coolhis tongue.
His petition was denied, basedon two factors. First, the rich man’s fate was a
just one. He had gotten just what he had deserved. He had his “goodthings”
in life. Now, justice demanded that he getwhat he deserved. His suffering was
a just penalty. Justice would not allow Abraham to diminish his suffering.
Second, hell and heaven are divided, with no accessbetweenthe two. There
was, Abraham said, a great fixed chasm, locatedbetweenthe two abodes. The
wickedcould not cross overto the place of blessing, and the righteous could
not (to show mercy, such as to take waterto the suffering) cross overto the
place of the wicked. Thus, the rich man’s petition must be denied. Hell is the
irreversible destiny of some, with the choice of entering it being made in one’s
life.
The rich man’s secondrequeststill involves the service of Lazarus, but this
time he does not request that Lazarus ease his suffering, but that Lazarus go
to his five brothers to warn them not to come to this place. The rich man now
understands that men’s choices must be made before death, and that their
decisions remain after their deaths.
Abraham responded negatively to the secondrequest, as well as to the first.
There was no need for someone to be sent from the grave to warn the lost.
Moses andthe Prophets served this purpose well. Let the lost listen to the Old
Testamentrevelation. That, Abraham maintained, should serve as a sufficient
warning.

33. The rich man protested, however. He insisted that while men may not heed
the Old TestamentScriptures, they could not ignore the message ofa man
who had returned from death. They thought that “signs and wonders” could
do more than the Word of God. This is but a continuation of the request that
Jesus prove Himself by performing some miracle as a proof of His person and
His power.
Abraham’s answerwas short and pointed. He said that if his brothers refused
to listen to Mosesand the Prophets, they would not be convincedby a
spectacularappearancefrom the grave. There is a very significant principle
underlying this answer. Man’s failure to believe is not due to any lack of
evidence, but due to a closedheart, determined to disbelieve any amount of
evidence. The problem, to put it differently, was not a lack of external
evidence (appearances), but a willful rebellion of the heart againstGod. The
hearts of this man and his five brothers were unbelieving. Such unbelief was
not solvedby a preponderance of the evidence, but only by a change in the
heart. Once again, the outward appearancesare not the issue, but the heart is.
Jesus would soonbe crucified, and He would soonrise from the dead. That
empty tomb in Jerusalemdid not result in a host of conversions, for it was not
appearances whichwere the problem, but the closednessofmen’s hearts. If
men were to believe in Christ for Salvation, they would have to believe in the
Christ of which the Old TestamentScriptures foretold. Thus, when Peter
preachedhis Pentecostsermon, he grounded his preaching on the Old
TestamentScriptures, on the “Law and the Prophets” (cf. Acts 2:16-36).
Conclusion
The Pharisees rejectedJesus fortwo principle reasons. First, they sought to
win men’s approval, basedupon outward appearances, ratherthan God’s,

34. basedupon the heart. Second, in so doing they had rejectedthe Old
TestamentScriptures, the “Law and the Prophets,” exchanging the divine
standard of righteousnessfor a human standard.
The story of the rich man and Lazarus dramatically illustrates these two
errors. Basedupon appearances, it would seemthat the rich man would be
pronounced righteous and enter into God’s kingdom, and Lazarus would be
rejectedand condemned. The outcome after these two men died was just the
reverse. Appearances, Jesus proved, were deceptive. Men would “highly
esteem” the rich man, but God rejectedhim. Men would despise Lazarus, but
God justified him.
What, then, was the basis of the rejectionof the rich man and the justification
of the beggar, Lazarus? We are immediately tempted to suppose that the
answeris an external one—something we can judge by appearances. We are
inclined to suppose that God judged these two men on appearances, only He
did so with a reversedsystem of values. God condemned the rich man and
justified the poor man. God must save the poor and send the rich to heaven.
This conclusionwould be the same kind of error that the Pharisees practiced,
with a reversedsystem of external values.
The story of the rich man and Lazarus concludes in such a way as to indicate
what really justifies a man. The rich man was not condemned because he was
rich, any more than the poor man was justified for being poor. These outward
conditions (riches and poverty) were fundamentally irrelevant to the eternal
destiny of these men. A godly rich man would have used his wealthdifferently,
but it was not his works that would have saved him. The real basis for
justification or condemnation is to be found in the context of the rich man’s
concernfor his lost brothers. The issue was whether or not these men were
rich or poor, but whether or not these men believed the Scriptures, Moses and

35. the Prophets. It is not riches nor poverty which determines one’s destiny, but
belief or unbelief.
Thus, the last portion of the parable illustrates the secondcharge ofour Lord
againstthe Pharisees—thattheyhad exchangedthe eternal, unchanging
standards of the Law and the Prophets for the ever-changing standards of
their society. The Pharisees, who saw themselves as the custodians, the
guardians of the Law, were really its corrupters. In so-doing, they sealedtheir
own fate. While they may appear to be righteous on the outside, while men
may considerthem to be righteous, their fate would be the same as the rich
man, unless they believed and repented.
Beliefand repentance was what the Old Testamentrevelationwas given to
produce. These Scriptures were not given to provide an external standard of
righteousness whichmen, if they workedhard enough, could achieve. The
Scriptures were given to convince all men that they were sinners, miserably
and hopelesslylost. But these same Scriptures provided a temporary means of
escape—thesacrificialsystem. Sins could thereby be put off for a time, like
one might receive an extensionon an unpaid debt. These same Scriptures
spoke of an ultimate salvationwhich God would accomplish, basedupon a
new covenant, and upon the sacrificialdeath of Messiah, who would bear the
penalty for a man’s sins, and on the basis of whose righteousness mencould be
declaredrighteous as well. Note Paul’s summation of all this as found in
Romans chapter three:
19 Now we know that whateverthe law says, it says to those who are under
the law, so that every mouth may be silencedand the whole world held
accountable to God. 20 Therefore no one will be declaredrighteous in his
sight by observing the law;rather, through the law we become conscious of
sin. 21 But now a righteousness from God, apart from law, has been made
known, to which the Law and the Prophets testify. 22 This righteousness from

36. God comes through faith in Jesus Christto all who believe. There is no
difference, 23 for all have sinned and fall short of the glory of God, 24 and are
justified freely by his grace through the redemption that came by Christ
Jesus. 25 Godpresented him as a sacrifice ofatonement, through faith in his
blood. He did this to demonstrate his justice, because in his forbearance he
had left the sins committed beforehand unpunished— 26 he did it to
demonstrate his justice at the present time, so as to be just and the one who
justifies those who have faith in Jesus. (Romans 3:19-26).
What an incentive our text is to unsaved men to turn to Christ and to be
saved. The parable of the rich man and Lazarus teaches us severalfacts about
hell which should be the source ofgreat consternationto the lost:
(1) Hell is a real place. It comes after death, but it is a certainty.
(2) Hell is a real place, even though it seems fanciful now.
(3) Hell is the place which justice requires, for it is there and there only that
the evils of life are made right. I often hear people protesting againsthell,
insisting that a loving God could not sent anyone to such a place. But Godis
also a just God, who cannot overlook evil. The love of God sent Jesus to the
cross ofCalvary, to bear God’s wrath on sin, to those who rejectthe love of
God in Christ must bear the wrath of God in hell.
(4) Hell is that place where men suffer torment. That torment seems to include
physical pain (the heat of the flames in our parable), as well as the mental
anguish resulting from seeing the joy of heaven, but being removed from it,
and the anguish of worrying about loved ones still living, who will share the
same fate.

37. (5) Hell, once entered, is an irreversible fate. There was no passagepossible
betweenheaven and hell. Once a person is in hell, he or she is there forever.
(6) Hell is that place to which many go, thinking that they were going to
heaven. The Bible teaches that there is a way which seems right to a man, but
its ends are the ways of death. The self-righteous Phariseesneverdreamed
they would populate hell.
(7) Hell is that place to which men go because their hearts are not pure before
God, and who have not believed the Scriptures, either regarding their sin, or
God’s salvation in Christ.
There is certainly a strong message inthis parable to those who may feel
religious, but who are not really saved. Such was the case with the Pharisees.
But there is a very grave danger of the errors of the Pharisees creeping into
genuine Christianity.
We, like the Pharisees, are in danger of using external criteria by which to
judge spirituality, both in ourselves and in others. When we do so, we, like the
Pharisees,will place too greata value on money. We will, like them, become
lovers of money. The “prosperity gospel” ofrecenttimes equates spirituality
and prosperity. This is a most serious error, for in such cases, moneybecomes
our master. As Jesus saidabove, man cannot serve two masters. When God is
our Master, money becomes a means of serving Him. But when our god is
money, God becomes the means of making money, of making us prosperous.
The prosperity gospelhas made God the means to riches, not riches a means
of serving God.

38. There are many other ways in which we falselymeasure spirituality by
external standards appearances. Some, as I have indicated, measure
spirituality by one’s wealth. Others change the labels, and equate spirituality
with poverty. Others, with a particular spiritual gift, or a particular form of
ministry (usually public, popular, and “successful”). Some measure
spirituality by the way one’s children turn out, or by the number of days and
nights one spends at the church, or in church-related activities.
This error of externalism is much more serious than we may initially
recognize. I fear that the motivation for much that we do, or do not do, is a
desire to win men’s approval, or to avoid their disapproval. Divorce, for
example, was something which few Christians would have consideredas an
option, just a few years ago. Now it would seemthat many Christians are not
only considering it, but doing it. Why the change? I do not think it is because
men’s understanding of the Scriptures have changedall that much, but
because our culture (even our Christian culture the value system of the
church and of our fellow Christians) has changed. Men and women may have
refused to divorce in the past, not because it was displeasing to God (God
hates it, you will recall Malachi2:16), but because societywould look down
upon them for divorcing. Now, when societyapproves, Christians feel free to
divorce. We see in this that we, too, are more eager for man’s approval, than
for God’s.
And we do these things, all the while maintaining that we are biblicists. We
believe that the Bible is inspired and inerrant, and applicable to our lives. We
would oppose those who would sayotherwise. But in the nitty gritty practice
of the Word of God, we, like the Pharisees, oftenput God’s standards aside
when they conflict with those of our culture. Let us seriously considerwhom
we are striving to please. The New Testament, like the old, has plenty to say
about pleasing men (cf. Romans 2:29; 12:17;14:18;1 Corinthians 10:33;
Galatians 1:10; Ephesians 6:7; 1 Thessalonians 2:4).

39. We would do well, I believe, to explore those things which our culture highly
esteems, andthen to consider whether or not these things are wellpleasing in
the sight of God. I fear that the values of our culture those values which may
be an abomination to God have been adopted into our Christian culture
without thought. Our secularculture, for example, highly values “a goodself
image,” which is dangerouslyclose to, if not identical with, selflove. Our
culture values aggressivenessand assertiveness. Godesteems meeknessand
humility. He teaches us to submit ourselves one to another. Let us carefully
evaluate our values, and to considerthe condition of our hearts. Only the
Word of God canand will expose this (Hebrews 4:1213), so let us turn to the
Scriptures, and not to our society, evenas our Lord has taught.
15 “The section, which is an attack on the Pharisaic assumptions about
wealth, is organized into a two-prongedgroup of sayings (vss. 14-18), followed
by a double-edged parable (vss. 19-31). Verses 19-26 ofthe parable are an
exposition of vss. 14-15, while vss. 27-31 serve as an illustration of vss. 16-18
(E. E. Ellis, The Gospel of Luke, p. 201, following a hint by John Calvin). This
pattern gives unity to the section.” Charles H. Talbert, Reading Luke: A
Literary and TheologicalCommentaryon the Third Gospel(New York: The
CrossroadPublishing Company, 1984), p. 156.
16 The imperfect tense of the verbs “listening” and “scoffing,” accurately
conveyedby the NASB’s “were listening” and “were scoffing,”indicates that
the Phariseeshad been listening to Jesus, just as they had also been scoffing. It
was not a one-time kind of thing, but an on-going reactionand resistance to
Jesus’teaching. Incidentally, the term rendered “scoffing” is found elsewhere
only in Luke 23:35.
17 A. T. Robertsonreminds us that this term “detestable”is a strong one, use
“… for a detestable thing as when Antiochus Epiphanes setup an altar to
Zeus in place of that to Jehovah. There is withering scorn in the use of this

40. phrase by Jesus to these pious pretenders.” A. T. Robertson, Word Pictures in
the New Testament(Nashville:Broadman Press, 1930), II, p. 220.
18 More and more I am inclined to see the parable of the rich man and
Lazarus as a playing out of this passagein the Sermon on the Mount. The rich
man of the parable personifies the one on whom Jesus pronounced woes. The
poor man, Lazarus, portrays the blessednessofthose whom Jesus called
blessedin the sermon.
19 If I am correctin my view that the Pharisees majoredon just one part of
the Old Testament, namely the Law of Moses, thenthey were really not all
that different from the Samaritans, whom they disdained. The Samaritans
recognizedonly the Pentateuchas inspired revelation, with a few changes. The
Pharisees reveredthe same portion, but their revisions did not require
tampering with the text, but only the addition of their traditions and
interpretations of it.
20 “The name Lazarus is from Eleazaros,‘Goda help,’ and was a common
one. Lazar in English means one afflicted with a pestilential disease.”
Robertson, II, p. 221.
21 “Pastperfectpassive of the common verb ballo. He had been flung there
and was still there, ‘as if contemptuous roughness is implied’ (Plummer).”
Robertson, II, p. 221.
22 Cf. Deuteronomy 15:4, 7-11;Proverbs 11:23-25;14:21; 17:5; 21:26;29:7.

41. The GreatReversal - Luke 16:19-31
Rev. Bruce Goettsche
Union Church of La Harpe Illinois
Luke • Sermon • Submitted 6 months ago • Presented10 years ago
HeavenConversionHellAfterlife
0 ratings · 18 views
Share
Notes
Transcript
Anyone who is a sports enthusiast has had the experience of heading home or
turning off the televisionbecause your team was desperatelybehind or
comfortably ahead, only to discoverlater in the day that your team did not
lose or win as you were expecting. These times prove the old adage that the
game is not won until the game is over. Comebacks andsurprising finishes are
always the lead stories on the sports shows.
But this isn’t true just in sports. Many multimillion dollar businesses today
beganwith many people concluding “it would never work” or saying “sucha
product would never sell.” Many successfulauthors can show you a file filled
with rejectionletters.
This morning we are going to look at an accountof one of the greatest
reversals ofall. It is the story of the rich man and Lazarus.

42. Scene One:On Earth
Jesus tells a story with two primary characters,
19 “There was a rich man who was dressedin purple and fine linen and lived
in luxury every day. 20 At his gate was laid a beggarnamed Lazarus, covered
with sores 21 and longing to eat what fell from the rich man’s table. Even the
dogs came and lickedhis sores.
The rich man was not simply rich . . . he was “filthy rich”. The factthat he
was dressedin purple indicated his wealth. Purple dye apparently had to be
extractedfrom shellfish and was a very expensive process. It might help to
think of this man as one who wore a Guccisuit and silk underwearevery day!
Their daily clothes budget would exceedwhat the average middle class person
would make in severalweeks(or months) of work. This man ate gourmet food
every day. (It would be like eating at a fancy restaurant every day!)
In stark contrast to this rich man was a very poor man by the name of
Lazarus. The name Lazarus is a Latinized version of Eleazarwhich means
“Godis my help!” However, from all appearancesthis man did not seemto be
getting any help from God.
We are told that he was laid at the gate (and this isn’t a gate like you would
have with a chain link fence….this was the kind of gate would have at the
entrance to a mansion like you might see at Graceland, the former home of
Elvis Presley.) Lazarus was “laid” at the gate probably because he was
crippled or so malnourished that he could no longer walk. His legs were
coveredwith ulceratedsores. He came to the gate of the rich man hoping that
maybe he could get some of the rich man’s scraps. In those days they didn’t

43. have napkins so people often wiped their hands on pieces of bread and then
tossedthem away. Lazarus hoped to get even one of those pieces ofbread that
was tossedawayas garbage. All he receivedwas torment from the dogs that
lickedhis wounds. He was so weak he could not even defend himself from the
dogs.
Scene Two:After Death
The next scene is setin Heaven and Hell.
“The time came when the beggardied and the angels carriedhim to
Abraham’s side. The rich man also died and was buried. 23 In hell, where he
was in torment, he lookedup and saw Abraham far away, with Lazarus by his
side.
Both men died. We are only told that the rich man was buried. It is likely that
Lazarus was simply brought out to the city garbage dump. However, at the
moment of death Lazarus was greetedby angels who carried him to
Abraham’s side (this is an image of Heaven. Abraham was consideredthe
Father of the Faithful. Since this is before the resurrectionof Jesus this may
have been consideredthe holding place of the believing dead until Christ
opened the door of Heavento those who put their trust in Him.)
The rich man, who had been honored in life and appearedto have reachedthe
pinnacle of successin the world’s eyes, was in Hell and in torment. His
torment is multiplied by the factthat he sees the former beggarLazarus at the
side of Abraham. Talk about a greatreversal!!

44. It’s interesting that the rich man knows the name of the beggar. This makes
the rich man more despicable. It may indicate that he knew Lazarus was out
at his gate and did nothing to help him. The rich man is still looking for
favors,
So he calledto him, ‘Father Abraham, have pity on me and send Lazarus to
dip the tip of his finger in waterand coolmy tongue, because I am in agony in
this fire.’
The man feels justified in making requests to Abraham and to ask for Lazarus
to still serve him! After he is told that it was impossible for Lazarus to come to
him (because the chasm is fixed), he askedthat a warning be given to his
brothers.
One of the questions raisedby our text is: How much of what we are told here
is what life will really be like after we die? Since Jesus is the one telling the
story (the One who actually knew what eternity would be like) the questions
become more intriguing. We must be careful of making the story teachtoo
much but there are some things we probably can conclude from this glimpse
of eternity.
Heaven and Hell are real places
We will be aware ofwhere we are
Hell will not be a place of partying with friends; it will be a place of great
torment. The blessing of God will be removed and all joy, happiness,

45. friendship, laughter, and delight will be absent. We will not want friends of
family to be there.
Our destination will be a FINAL destination. There will be no secondchance
once we die. There is no possibility of our friends and family “praying us out”
of Hell.
A person’s final destination is not determined by their status in the world.
This howeveris not the end of the story.
Scene Three:Those Still Alive
Abraham told the Rich man that he had his “heaven” (the heaven he pursued)
while he was on the earth. It was too late now. It is interesting that the rich
man does not say, “That’s not fair”. He has no protest. He seems to graspthe
righteous nature of the judgment. He knows God has given him exactly what
he deserves and has chosen. In fact, the rich man actually adopts the
viewpoint of Christ and Abraham. He sees the emptiness of the way he lived
and we are told he makes a request of Abraham,
I beg you, father, send Lazarus to my father’s house, 28 for I have five
brothers. Let him warn them, so that they will not also come to this place of
torment.’
29 “Abraham replied, ‘They have Moses andthe Prophets;let them listen to
them.’

46. 30 “ ‘No, father Abraham,’ he said, ‘but if someone from the dead goes to
them, they will repent.’
31 “He said to him, ‘If they do not listen to Moses and the Prophets, they will
not be convinced evenif someone rises from the dead.’ ”
He can’t do anything about his own destiny but he is concernedthat his
family will end up where he is and wants to warn them. This man doesn’tsay,
“I can hardly waituntil my friends gether because we are going to have a
goodtime now. The beer will be flowing and the party will begin.” That is not
the case atall. This man understood that his family was heading toward an
eternity that would horrible. He does not want those he loved to follow in his
footsteps.
I wonder how many people are on the other side of the grave saying the same
thing. I wonder how many captains of industry, stars in the media, famous
authors, outspokenatheists, and leaders in the field of academia are in Hell
wishing they could keeppeople from following in their footsteps. What a
horrendous sense ofregret that must be.
The rich man figured that if someone from the dead (like the beggarLazarus)
could come back from the dead, his brothers would realize that they were
headed in the wrong direction and repent. Jesus saidthey have “Mosesand
the Prophets), in other words, they have the Bible (in this case the Old
Testament). The rich man thinks they need something more. Jesus says pretty
clearly, “If they do not listen to Moses andthe Prophets, they will not be
convinced if someone rises from the dead.”

47. This very truth was illustrated in the resurrectionof another Lazarus, the
brother of Mary and Martha. Jesus brought him back from the dead and
rather than become followers of Christ, the leaders became allthe more
determined to kill Jesus AND Lazarus!
God has revealedHimself clearlyand fully in the Word of God. If people will
not read the stories and see the characterofGod and submit to His
commands; if they will not respond to the Son of God who healedthe lepers,
castout demons, caredfor the sick, and taught with authority, no great
miracle will change their heart. These people will always find some way to
explain awaythe work of God.
Perhaps you know someone who says, “I will believe in God when He proves
to me that He is real. If He’d come down and show me some sign . . . then I
would believe.” One wonders, “Whatmore you expect God to do than what
He has already done?” Yet, God is still giving us evidence. He has led people
to the discoveryof DNA and the invention of the electronmicroscope which
shows that eachindividual is unique and complex . . . too complex in fact, for
evolution to possibly be true, but people continue to resistthe notion of a
Creator, much less a Creatorwho wants to have a relationship with us.
God has given us the testimonies of radically transformed lives. Miracles still
take place. The vibrant and detailed history of God’s dealing with Israelhas
been verified by archaeologyagainand again. But most of all we have the
history of Jesus from eyewitness testimonies. Goddoes not ask us to believe
without evidence.
The real problem is that most people don’t want evidence . . . they just want to
believe what they have always believed. No matter what evidence you give
them it will never be enough. The only hope for such people is a Sovereign

48. work of God in their hearts. The Holy Spirit must change the direction and
bent of that person’s heart. He must open their eyes to the truth of Scripture.
Conclusions
Let’s draw some conclusions. First, we are reminded that things are not
always what they seem. We can’t be sure what is going to happen in a
person’s life until that life is actually lived. We can’t determine who will win
the contestuntil the contestis completed. We can’t know whether a plan will
be effective until it is actually implemented. In the same waywe should not
draw conclusions about the destiny of an individual basedon their
circumstances in this world.
Practicallythis is a warning to those who are richly blessed(and that would
be most of us). We must not conclude that we are children of Godsimply
because we go to church, live in America, are electedto a position of spiritual
leadership, or are applauded by the world. God does not judge on the basis of
human standards. God looks athow we serve.
If we talk about love but don’t practically seek to help those who are hurting
then we must not expect more than the rich man.
If we speak aboutour “commitment to Christ” but push Him to the side
wheneverHis commands are inconvenient God is not fooled. He sees that our
commitment is shallow and spurious.

49. When we claim to be a followerof Christ but are ignorant about the Bible we
have to question whether or not we are following the true Christ or have
createda Saviorof our own imagination.
If we live defiantly againstGod we should not realisticallyexpectthat we will
have time (or the desire) to repent and turn to Christ before we die.
We must heed the warning of the rich man.
On the other hand, this is a messageofencouragementto others. You may be
one who is largelyoverlookedin this world. You may have had more to cope
with in your life than most families have to face in severalgenerations. You
may be ridiculed, abused, and made fun of by others. People may look at you
like you were cursed by God. However, God sees the real you. He sees your
faith as you hold on to Him even though life is hard. He sees your faithfulness
in the way you live your life even if no one else does.
A day of vindication is coming! It may be in this life and it may not be . . . but
it will certainly be in the next. The Lord will carry you to His side and declare
you to be His own. Imagine what it would be like to be in line outside of the
White House waiting for a tour. Suddenly a SecretService agenttaps you one
the shoulder and asks youto come with them. You naturally ask, “Have I
done something wrong?” The agentresponds, “No, the Presidentsaw you
standing out here and he would like you to come in so he can sit and visit with
you.”
Imagine the looks ofthose around you. Some might even quickly snap a
picture of you. You would certainly feel specialand honored. That wonderful
feeling is nothing comparedto how wonderful it will be when God puts His

50. arm around you and says to the rest of the world, “I would like you to meet
my child.” God is just. Justice will be done. . . it may not be swift but it will be
certain.
Secondwe are reminded that, our eternal destiny is decided by the choices we
make now. People actlike everyone goes to Heaven. It has been said that most
people believe the only thing you need to do in order to go to Heavenis to die.
Everyone thinks they or their loved one will be in Heaven. However, we don’t
make that decision, God does.
What can we do to prepare for that day? First, we need to realize that we are
headed to Hell if we have to be measuredby our lives alone. Not a one of us
has lived even in the vicinity of a goodlife that can earn a spot in Heaven.
Without a Savior every one of us will, like the rich man, not be able to utter
one word about the justice of our own eternal destiny. We deserve Hell.
Second, we need to realize that faith in Christ is about more than membership
and words. The Bible tells us to be doers of the word and not hearers only. In
other words, our faith should result in a changedlife.
We should be changedin our relationship to the Lord. No longerdo true
followers try to keepGod at a distance. Instead we look for ways to honor
Him. We should be trying to getto know Him We exalt Him by seeking to
introduce our friends to Him. We put Him first in our lives. And we will seek
to align our lives with what He says is right and wrong.
But we will also be changedin our relationships with eachother. True
followers don’t ignore the beggars who sit at their gate. We can’t solve the
problems of the whole world but we can show love and kindness to the people

51. we can help. This parable reminds us that part of our job is to representthe
Lord in this world. We do this by trying to
Provide for the needy
Care for the sick
Counselthe troubled
Befriend those who are castoff or made targets by the world
Teachand protect the children
Help those who are overwhelmedby life
Stand up for those who are victims of our society
We are to be knownas those who are wonderfully willing to forgive and give
people a chance to begin again. We are to be known as those who will work
hard to share the love of Christ with everyone. You see, a personwho is a
followerof Christ knows whatit is like to be rescued.
I am of the opinion that pound puppies see to be filled with love and gratitude.
They act like they know they have been rescuedfrom a sad life or premature

52. death. That’s the way a person who has experiencedthe grace ofGod should
live. We should be those who celebrate life and embrace the broken.
If the rich man had taken the time to really compare the image he saw in the
mirror with the Word of God, he might have seenthat he was self-absorbed.
If he had seenthis maybe he would have seenthat he and Lazarus were both
in need of the mercy of God. Maybe he would have fed some scraps to
Lazarus. Maybe he would have even brought him a meal, found him a Doctor,
or become his friend. Maybe his heart would have changedand then the story
might have had a different ending.
We must not measure ourselves by our scrapbook ofclippings. When all is
said and done we will be surprised by the many reversals. Some who appear
to be winners will turn out to be losers and others who appear to be losers will
be revealedas children of God. It’s too late for the Rich man and for countless
others who were too busy or too distractedduring the course oftheir lives.
You still have time. Take advantage ofit.
MATTHEW HENRY
Verses 19-31
The Rich Man and Lazarus.
19 There was a certain rich man, which was clothed in purple and fine linen,
and fared sumptuously every day: 20 And there was a certainbeggarnamed
Lazarus, which was laid at his gate, full of sores, 21Anddesiring to be fed with
the crumbs which fell from the rich man's table: moreoverthe dogs came and
lickedhis sores. 22Andit came to pass, that the beggardied, and was carried
by the angels into Abraham's bosom: the rich man also died, and was buried

53. 23And in hell he lift up his eyes, being in torments, and seethAbraham afar
off, and Lazarus in his bosom. 24And he cried and said, Father Abraham,
have mercy on me, and send Lazarus, that he may dip the tip of his finger in
water, and coolmy tongue for I am tormented in this flame. 25 But Abraham
said, Son, remember that thou in thy lifetime receivedstthy goodthings, and
likewise Lazarus evil things: but now he is comforted, and thou art tormented.
26 And beside all this, betweenus and you there is a greatgulf fixed: so that
they which would pass from hence to you cannot neither can they pass to us,
that would come from thence. 27 Then he said, I pray thee therefore, father,
that thou wouldestsend him to my father's house:28 For I have five brethren
that he may testify unto them, lest they also come into this place of torment. 29
Abraham saith unto him, They have Moses andthe prophets let them hear
them. 30 And he said, Nay, father Abraham: but if one went unto them from
the dead, they will repent. 31And he said unto him, If they hear not Moses and
the prophets, neither will they be persuaded, though one rose from the dead.
As the parable of the prodigal sonset before us the grace of the gospel, which
is encouraging to us all, so this sets before us the wrath to come, and is
designedfor our awakening and very fast asleepthose are in sin that will not
be awakenedby it. The Pharisees made a jest of Christ's sermon against
worldliness now this parable was intended to make those mockers serious.
The tendency of the gospelof Christ is both to reconcile us to poverty and
affliction and to arm us againsttemptations to worldliness and sensuality.
Now this parable, by drawing the curtain, and letting us see what will be the
end of both in the other world, goes very far in prosecuting those two great
intentions. This parable is not like Christ's other parables, in which spiritual
things are representedby similitudes borrowed from worldly things, as those
of the sowerand the seed(except that of the sheepand goats), the prodigal
son, and indeed all the restbut this. But here the spiritual things themselves
are representedin a narrative or descriptionof the different state of goodand
bad in this world and the other. Yet we need not call it a history of a
particular occurrence,but it is matter of factthat is true every day, that poor
godly people, whom men neglectand trample upon, die awayout of their
miseries, and go to heavenly bliss and joy, which is made the more pleasantto

54. them by their preceding sorrows and that rich epicures, who live in luxury,
and are unmerciful to the poor, die, and go into a state of insupportable
torment, which is the more grievous and terrible to them because ofthe
sensuallives they lived: and that there is no gaining any relief from their
torments. Is this a parable? What similitude is there in this? The discourse
indeed betweenAbraham and the rich man is only an illustration of the
description, to make it the more affecting, like that betweenGod and Satanin
the story of Job. Our Saviour came to bring us acquainted with another
world, and to show us the reference which this world has to that and here is
does it. In this description (for so I shall choose to callit) we may observe,
I. The different condition of a wickedrich man, and a godly poor man, in this
world. We know that as some of late, so the Jews ofold, were ready to make
prosperity one of the marks of a true church, of a goodman and a favourite of
heaven, so that they could hardly have any favourable thoughts of a poor
man. This mistake Christ, upon all occasions, sethimselfto correct, and here
very fully, where we have,
1. A wickedman, and one that will be for ever miserable, in the height of
prosperity (Luke 16:19): There was a certain rich man. From the Latin we
commonly callhim Dives--a rich man but, as BishopTillotsonobserves, he has
no name given him, as the poor man has, because it had been invidious to have
named any particular rich man in such a description as this, and apt to
provoke and gain ill-will. But others observe that Christ would not do the rich
man so much honour as to name him, though when perhaps he calledhis
lands by his own name he thought it should long survive that of the beggarat
his gate, whichyet is here preserved, when that of the rich man is buried in
oblivion. Now we are told concerning this rich man,
(1.) That he was clothedin purple and fine linen, and that was his adorning.
He had fine linen for pleasure, and clean, no doubt, every day night-linen, and

55. day-linen. He had purple for state, for that was the wearof princes, which has
made some conjecture that Christ had an eye to Herod in it. He never
appearedabroad but in greatmagnificence.
(2.) He fared deliciously and sumptuously every day. His table was furnished
with all the varieties and dainties that nature and art could supply his side-
table richly adorned with plate his servants, who waitedat table, in rich
liveries and the guests at his table, no doubt, such as he thought gracedit.
Well, and what harm was there in all this? It is no sin to be rich, no sin to
wearpurple and fine linen, nor to keepa plentiful table, if a man's estate will
afford it. Not are we told that he gothis estate by fraud, oppression, or
extortion, no, nor that he was drunk, or made others drunk but, [1.] Christ
would hereby show that a man may have a greatdeal of the wealth, and
pomp, and pleasure of this world, and yet lie and perish for ever under God's
wrath and curse. We cannotinfer from men's living greateither that God
loves them in giving them so much, or that they love God for giving them so
much happiness consists notin these things. [2.] That plenty and pleasure are
a very dangerous and to many a fatal temptation to luxury, and sensuality,
and forgetfulness ofGod and another world. This man might have been happy
if he had not had greatpossessions andenjoyments. [3.] That the indulgence
of the body, and the ease and pleasure of that, are the ruin of many a soul, and
the interests of it. It is true, eating goodmeat and wearing goodclothes are
lawful but it is true that they often become the food and fuel of pride and
luxury, and so turn into sin to us. [4.] That feasting ourselves and our friends,
and, at the same time, forgetting the distresses ofthe poor and afflicted, are
very provoking to God and damning to the soul. The sin of this rich man was
not so much his dress or his diet, but his providing only for himself.
2. Here is a godly man, and one that will be for everhappy, in the depth of
adversity and distress (Luke 16:20): There was a certain beggar, named
Lazarus. A beggarof that name, eminently devout, and in greatdistress, was
probably well known among goodpeople at that time: a beggar, suppose such

56. a one as Eleazar, or Lazarus. Some think Eleazara proper name for any poor
man, for it signifies the help of God, which they must fly to that are destitute
of other helps. This poor man was reduced to the lastextremity, as miserable,
as to outward things, as you canlightly suppose a man to be in this world.
(1.) His body was full of sores, like Job. To be sick and weak in body is a great
affliction but sores are more painful to the patient, and more loathsome to
those about him.
(2.) He was forcedto beg his bread, and to take up with such scraps as he
could get at rich people's doors. He was so sore and lame that he could not go
himself, but was carried by some compassionatehand or other, and laid at the
rich man's gate. Note, Those that are not able to help the poor with their
purses should help them with their pains those that cannot lend them a penny
should lend them a hand those that have not themselves wherewithalto give to
them should either bring them, or go for them, to those that have. Lazarus, in
his distress, had nothing of his own to subsiston, no relation to go to, nor did
the parish take care of him. It is an instance of the degeneracyofthe Jewish
church at this time that such a godly man as Lazarus was should be suffered
to perish for want of necessaryfood. Now observe,
[1.] His expectations from the rich man's table: He desiredto be fed with the
crumbs, Luke 16:21. He did not look for a mess from off his table, though he
ought to have had one, one of the best but would be thankful for the crumbs
from under the table, the broken meat which was the rich man's leavings nay,
the leavings of his dogs. The poor use entreaties, and must be content with
such as they can get. Now this is takennotice of to show, First, What was the
distress, and what the disposition, of the poor man. He was poor, but he was
poor in spirit, contentedly poor. He did not lie at the rich man's gate
complaining, and bawling, and making a noise, but silently and modestly
desiring to be fed with the crumbs. This miserable man was a goodman, and

57. in favour with God. Note, It is often the lot of some of the dearestof God's
saints and servants to be greatlyafflicted in this world, while wickedpeople
prosper, and have abundance see Psalm73:7,10,14. Here is a child of wrath
and an heir of hell sitting in the house, faring sumptuously and a child of love
and an heir of heaven lying at the gate, perishing for hunger. And is men's
spiritual state to be judged of then by their outward condition? Secondly,
What was the temper of the rich man towards him. We are not told that he
abused him, or forbade him his gate, or did him any harm, but it is intimated
that he slighted him he had no concernfor him, took no care about him. Here
was a real objectof charity, and a very moving one, which spoke for itself it
was presentedto him at his own gate. The poor man had a goodcharacterand
goodconduct, and every thing that could recommend him. A little thing would
be a greatkindness to him, and yet he took no cognizance ofhis case, did not
order him to be takenin and lodged in the barn, or some of the out-buildings,
but let him lie there. Note, It is not enoughnot to oppress and trample upon
the poor we shall be found unfaithful stewards of our Lord's goods, in the
greatday, if we do not succourand relieve them. The reasongiven for the
most fearful doom is, I was hungry, and you gave me no meat. I wonder how
those rich people who have read the gospelof Christ, and waythat they
believe it, can be so unconcernedas they often are in the necessities and
miseries of the poor and afflicted.
[2.] The usage he had from the dogs The dogs came and lickedhis sores. The
rich man kept a kennelof hounds, it may be, or other dogs, for his diversion,
and to please his fancy, and these were fed to the full, when poor Lazarus
could not getenough to keephim alive. Note, Those will have a greatdeal to
answerfor hereafter that feed their dogs, but neglectthe poor. And it is a
greataggravationofthe uncharitableness of many rich people that they
bestow that upon their fancies and follies which would supply the necessity,
and rejoice the heart, of many a goodChristian in distress. Those offendGod,
nay, and they put a contempt upon human nature, that pamper their dogs and
horses, and let the families of their poor neighbours starve. Now those dogs
came and lickedthe sores ofpoor Lazarus, which may be taken, First, As an
aggravationofhis misery. His sores were bloody, which tempted the dogs to