Luke 16:19-31 - The Call to Compassion
In our passage from Luke’s Gospel today, Jesus tells a story, a parable, of a rich man who lived in luxury every day, while a poor beggar named Lazarus lay at his gate, covered in sores and longing for scraps of food. When both died, their fortunes were reversed: Lazarus was carried to Abraham’s side, a place of comfort, while the rich man found himself in torment. The rich man begged for relief, but Abraham explained that a great gulf separated them, and that in life the rich man had ignored Lazarus’s suffering.
As we consider the parable today is from Luke 16:19-31, I would like to make a few interesting observations -
Firstly, isn’t it interesting that in this parable, Lazarus the poor beggar is given a name. But the Rich Man is not.
There is something quite unusual about that in the world of ancient literature. In the ancient world, reading and writing were the preserve of the rich and the well-to-do. And so almost all literature tended to be written by the rich, for the rich and about the rich. Because of this, in ancient literature, the rich were named, but in contrast, the poor masses were simply part of the expendable un-named masses and their lives were regarded as being of less value than those of the rich.
Some would argue that things haven’t changed all that much. In our world today, it is still largely true the more money you have, generally speaking, the more value is put on your life. If the child of a rich person goes missing or dies, the story could easily make headlines... but if the child were from a poor family, hardly anyone takes notice. Our world does not value all lives equally.
But in this parable, this whole order of things is turned upside down. In this parable, the poor beggar is given a name. And by contrast, the Rich Man is left nameless. Very unusual in the ancient world of literature.
It seems to me a deliberate story-telling device to communicate the sense that the values of this world are not the values of God. In God’s scheme of things, lonely beggars on the street are named and valued. The way of Jesus turns upside down the ways and the values of this world. This is a major theme in Luke’s Gospel. In the Song of Mary when she praises God when she finds herself pregnant with Jesus, she speaks of how God will raise up the lowly and bring down the mighty from their thrones. In God’s scheme of things, lonely beggars on the street are named and valued.
Secondly, isn’t it interesting that the dogs in this parable seem to care more for Lazarus than the Rich Man. The Rich Man seems completely oblivious to the presence of Lazarus. It is like Lazarus doesn't even exist to him.
Have you ever had the experience when it felt like someone was looking right through you, as though you didn’t even exist. Like you were just a non-person. In highly patriarchal cultures, woman often speak of this experience of being treated by men as though they were not real persons.
That is the sense you get from this parable. How difficult would it have been for the Rich Man to let Lazarus eat from the scraps under his table?
What does this parable say about the state of the Rich Man’s soul that he could so easily and so thoroughly block out the need of a fellow human being and even pretend that he does not exist at all. The Rich Man has cut himself off from an important part of what it means to be human. In psychological terms, when a person is unable to empathise with another human being in their suffering, such people are called socio-paths. The inability to empathise with another is a sign of a mal-formed humanity.
But look by contrast at the dogs. In his deplorable state, the dogs come and lick his wounds. When I first heard this parable, I interpreted this as simply pointing to the fact that dogs are disgusting and a sign of just how deplorable this man’s condition was. But when I allowed the image to sit in my mind for a while the thought struck me: Isn’t this the way a mother dog would treat her little pups: licking their wounds to clean them, as an act of motherly care. Isn’t this how dogs lick themselves when they are wounded?
And so isn’t it interesting that even the dogs show more love and care to Lazarus than the Rich Man? An animal, who we regard as sub-human shows more care for Lazarus than his fellow human being. We might ask the question - has the Rich man begun to lose his humanity?
Thirdly, isn’t it interesting in the parable that when the Rich Man dies and is on the other side, that he is still primarily motivated by self-concern. The only reason he calls out is because he is now suffering. But even in the state of his suffering, his attitude towards Lazarus has changed very little. At least now he acknowledges the presence of Lazarus. This is progress. But even in his state of suffering he is still caught up in his old way of looking at things. Although he has finally acknowledged Lazarus’s existence and even calls him now by name, he still wants to use Lazarus as a servant for his own ends. He wishes to treat Lazarus as a servant to run an errand for him, bringing him a drink of water from across the great divide. Lazarus is not yet being treated by the Rich Man as a full human being of equal value and equal dignity.
It raises a question: What if hell is not a physical place at all, but rather a metaphorical description of the state of the soul – a soul that has turned in on itself, self-obsessed, self-absorbed with a distorted view of the world and others and as a result cut off from others and as a result also from God, the source of all love and true joy. What if hell is a heart whose door is closed and locked from the inside. What if release from this hell can happen, the moment we awaken out of our own self-absorbed-ness.
There are signs of hope in this parable. Sometimes suffering can have its benefits – it can be a catalyst for growth and self-understanding. It would seem in this parable the Rich Man’s suffering has had some impact upon him. At least now he sees Lazarus as a human being with a name. In his suffering we also see a glimpse of hope that there is still a glimmer of love and care in his heart... he is concerned about his brothers. He doesn’t want to see them suffering. That is a glimmer of hope.
Even in Stalin, the faintest glimmer of of the image of God remained in him. Despite all his murderous human rights abuses, Stalin still showed a love for his mother. And there lies the hope for all humanity, that ultimately, no matter how much it is covered up and covered over, there is nothing that can ultimately destroy the image of God within us.
The great gulf or chasm in the parable between the Rich Man on the one-side and Abraham and Lazarus on the other is one that neither Lazarus nor Abraham are able to cross. Why can’t they cross it? Because the gulf or chasm exists in the heart and consciousness of the Rich Man. It can only be crossed when the Rich Man’s consciousness is healed.
It seems like an impossible situation. How will the Rich Man find relief from his suffering? But interestingly, a little later in Luke’s Gospel, in the story of the Rich Ruler who walks away from Jesus because he is unable to give his wealth away, Jesus reminds us that what is impossible for human beings is not impossible for God (Luke 18:27).-
And though the door of the heart is locked from the inside, at the end of John’s Gospel, we hear of the ability of the Risen Jesus to appear behind locked doors, perhaps an image of the Risen Christ’s ability to appear behind the locked door of our hearts and souls to help liberate us from the hells of our own making.
Evangelical preachers would hold this passage up as proof of eternal hell… but interestingly there is nothing in this passage to suggest that the Rich Man’s suffering will last forever.
In Timothy 2:4-6 we read: “God desires everyone to be saved” And in Ephesians 1:11 we read that God accomplishes all things according to his counsel and will. If God’s desires all to be saved, then in God’s time God will accomplish all things according to his will.
In 1 Cor 15:28 Paul speaks of the day when God will be all in all. This is the final end of Paul’s Theology: That God will be all and in all.
How can God one day be all and in all, if some are left suffering for all eternity? God will only one day be all and in all, if in the end all without exception are saved from the hells of their own making and brought into the wide embrace of God’s love and mercy. Amen.
In closing: How are we to respond to the beggars and the destitute lying at our gates? And what might this mean for us who live in first world countries where there may not literally be beggars lying at our doors? Does this absolve us from needing to respond to the needs of the suffering in other parts of the world?
In our passage from Luke’s Gospel today, Jesus tells a story, a parable, of a rich man who lived in luxury every day, while a poor beggar named Lazarus lay at his gate, covered in sores and longing for scraps of food. When both died, their fortunes were reversed: Lazarus was carried to Abraham’s side, a place of comfort, while the rich man found himself in torment. The rich man begged for relief, but Abraham explained that a great gulf separated them, and that in life the rich man had ignored Lazarus’s suffering.
As we consider the parable today is from Luke 16:19-31, I would like to make a few interesting observations -
Firstly, isn’t it interesting that in this parable, Lazarus the poor beggar is given a name. But the Rich Man is not.
There is something quite unusual about that in the world of ancient literature. In the ancient world, reading and writing were the preserve of the rich and the well-to-do. And so almost all literature tended to be written by the rich, for the rich and about the rich. Because of this, in ancient literature, the rich were named, but in contrast, the poor masses were simply part of the expendable un-named masses and their lives were regarded as being of less value than those of the rich.
Some would argue that things haven’t changed all that much. In our world today, it is still largely true the more money you have, generally speaking, the more value is put on your life. If the child of a rich person goes missing or dies, the story could easily make headlines... but if the child were from a poor family, hardly anyone takes notice. Our world does not value all lives equally.
But in this parable, this whole order of things is turned upside down. In this parable, the poor beggar is given a name. And by contrast, the Rich Man is left nameless. Very unusual in the ancient world of literature.
It seems to me a deliberate story-telling device to communicate the sense that the values of this world are not the values of God. In God’s scheme of things, lonely beggars on the street are named and valued. The way of Jesus turns upside down the ways and the values of this world. This is a major theme in Luke’s Gospel. In the Song of Mary when she praises God when she finds herself pregnant with Jesus, she speaks of how God will raise up the lowly and bring down the mighty from their thrones. In God’s scheme of things, lonely beggars on the street are named and valued.
Secondly, isn’t it interesting that the dogs in this parable seem to care more for Lazarus than the Rich Man. The Rich Man seems completely oblivious to the presence of Lazarus. It is like Lazarus doesn't even exist to him.
Have you ever had the experience when it felt like someone was looking right through you, as though you didn’t even exist. Like you were just a non-person. In highly patriarchal cultures, woman often speak of this experience of being treated by men as though they were not real persons.
That is the sense you get from this parable. How difficult would it have been for the Rich Man to let Lazarus eat from the scraps under his table?
What does this parable say about the state of the Rich Man’s soul that he could so easily and so thoroughly block out the need of a fellow human being and even pretend that he does not exist at all. The Rich Man has cut himself off from an important part of what it means to be human. In psychological terms, when a person is unable to empathise with another human being in their suffering, such people are called socio-paths. The inability to empathise with another is a sign of a mal-formed humanity.
But look by contrast at the dogs. In his deplorable state, the dogs come and lick his wounds. When I first heard this parable, I interpreted this as simply pointing to the fact that dogs are disgusting and a sign of just how deplorable this man’s condition was. But when I allowed the image to sit in my mind for a while the thought struck me: Isn’t this the way a mother dog would treat her little pups: licking their wounds to clean them, as an act of motherly care. Isn’t this how dogs lick themselves when they are wounded?
And so isn’t it interesting that even the dogs show more love and care to Lazarus than the Rich Man? An animal, who we regard as sub-human shows more care for Lazarus than his fellow human being. We might ask the question - has the Rich man begun to lose his humanity?
Thirdly, isn’t it interesting in the parable that when the Rich Man dies and is on the other side, that he is still primarily motivated by self-concern. The only reason he calls out is because he is now suffering. But even in the state of his suffering, his attitude towards Lazarus has changed very little. At least now he acknowledges the presence of Lazarus. This is progress. But even in his state of suffering he is still caught up in his old way of looking at things. Although he has finally acknowledged Lazarus’s existence and even calls him now by name, he still wants to use Lazarus as a servant for his own ends. He wishes to treat Lazarus as a servant to run an errand for him, bringing him a drink of water from across the great divide. Lazarus is not yet being treated by the Rich Man as a full human being of equal value and equal dignity.
It raises a question: What if hell is not a physical place at all, but rather a metaphorical description of the state of the soul – a soul that has turned in on itself, self-obsessed, self-absorbed with a distorted view of the world and others and as a result cut off from others and as a result also from God, the source of all love and true joy. What if hell is a heart whose door is closed and locked from the inside. What if release from this hell can happen, the moment we awaken out of our own self-absorbed-ness.
There are signs of hope in this parable. Sometimes suffering can have its benefits – it can be a catalyst for growth and self-understanding. It would seem in this parable the Rich Man’s suffering has had some impact upon him. At least now he sees Lazarus as a human being with a name. In his suffering we also see a glimpse of hope that there is still a glimmer of love and care in his heart... he is concerned about his brothers. He doesn’t want to see them suffering. That is a glimmer of hope.
Even in Stalin, the faintest glimmer of of the image of God remained in him. Despite all his murderous human rights abuses, Stalin still showed a love for his mother. And there lies the hope for all humanity, that ultimately, no matter how much it is covered up and covered over, there is nothing that can ultimately destroy the image of God within us.
The great gulf or chasm in the parable between the Rich Man on the one-side and Abraham and Lazarus on the other is one that neither Lazarus nor Abraham are able to cross. Why can’t they cross it? Because the gulf or chasm exists in the heart and consciousness of the Rich Man. It can only be crossed when the Rich Man’s consciousness is healed.
It seems like an impossible situation. How will the Rich Man find relief from his suffering? But interestingly, a little later in Luke’s Gospel, in the story of the Rich Ruler who walks away from Jesus because he is unable to give his wealth away, Jesus reminds us that what is impossible for human beings is not impossible for God (Luke 18:27).-
And though the door of the heart is locked from the inside, at the end of John’s Gospel, we hear of the ability of the Risen Jesus to appear behind locked doors, perhaps an image of the Risen Christ’s ability to appear behind the locked door of our hearts and souls to help liberate us from the hells of our own making.
Evangelical preachers would hold this passage up as proof of eternal hell… but interestingly there is nothing in this passage to suggest that the Rich Man’s suffering will last forever.
In Timothy 2:4-6 we read: “God desires everyone to be saved” And in Ephesians 1:11 we read that God accomplishes all things according to his counsel and will. If God’s desires all to be saved, then in God’s time God will accomplish all things according to his will.
In 1 Cor 15:28 Paul speaks of the day when God will be all in all. This is the final end of Paul’s Theology: That God will be all and in all.
How can God one day be all and in all, if some are left suffering for all eternity? God will only one day be all and in all, if in the end all without exception are saved from the hells of their own making and brought into the wide embrace of God’s love and mercy. Amen.
In closing: How are we to respond to the beggars and the destitute lying at our gates? And what might this mean for us who live in first world countries where there may not literally be beggars lying at our doors? Does this absolve us from needing to respond to the needs of the suffering in other parts of the world?
RSS Feed