Lazarus and The Rich Man
Just as most Christians do not understand the story of Lazarus and the rich man, as taught by Jesus in Luke 16, neither do they understand about the Jews. this is a direct result of the erroneous teachings of our Christian "Ministers." Therefore, we are going to deal in detail herein with the story [parable] of "The Rich Man and Lazarus," as it was taught by Jesus and as recorded in Luke chapter 16 in the King James Bible.
Most Christians have read a tract or heard a sermon in which this story is used. Almost invariably the speaker or author will say, "The rich man was being tortured in the fires of hell and Lazarus was in heaven." They then insist this story "proves" their doctrine that "after death most human beings will spend the eternal ages screaming and crying in great heat and fire." Ignoring God's statement to the contrary: "They have built also the high places of Baal, to burn their sons with fire...which I commanded not, nor spake it, neither came it into my mind." (Jeremiah 19:5)
At the present time thousands of tracts and books are in circulation in Christendom which repeat the general claim that this story told by Jesus to His disciples is simply about "the bliss of heaven and the torment of hell."
Now, lets read the story from Luke 16. As we read, please note, there are people, animals and objects in the story other than the rich man and Lazarus. These are very seldom mention by our "Ministers" and are even more seldom explained.
"There was a certain rich man, which was clothed in purple and find linen, and fared sumptuously every day: And there was a certain beggar named Lazarus, which was laid at his gate, full of sores, And desiring to be fed with the crumbs which fell from the rich man's table: moreover the dogs came and licked his sores. And it came to pass, that the beggar died, and was carried by the angels into Abraham’s bosom: the rich man also died, and was buried; And in hell he lift up his eyes, being in torments, and seeth Abraham afar off, and Lazarus in his bosom. And 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 cool my tongue; for I am tormented in this flame. But Abraham said, Son, remember that thou in thy lifetime receivedst thy good things, and likewise Lazarus evil things: but now he is comforted, and thou art tormented. And beside all this, between us and you there is a great gulf fixed: so that they which would pass from hence to you cannot; neither can they pass to us, that would come from thence. Then he said, I pray thee therefore, father, that thou wouldest send him to my father's house: For I have five brethren; that he may testify unto them, lest they also come into this place of torment. Abraham saith unto him, They have Moses and the prophets; let them hear them. And he said, Nay, father Abraham: but if one went unto them from the dead, they will repent. And he said unto him, If they hear not Moses and the prophets, neither will they be persuaded, though one rose from the dead." (Luke 16:19‑31)
In addition to the three men and hell, the following are listed: purple, fine linen, gate, sores, crumbs, table dogs, angels, water, five brethren, Moses and the prophets. Why did Jesus include these if they have no meaning? Is this only a "story of hell and heaven?" Or is it of something else?
Christ was careful to tell us that the "rich man" was clothed in purple and fine linen. What does this fine linen have to do with some man dying and going to hell? And why did Jesus say that "he fared sumptuously every day?" What possible difference could that make. Also, "There was a certain beggar." Why was he a beggar? Why was his name Lazarus? Why did "he lay at his gate," that is at the gate of the rich man's house." What were the crumbs from the rich man's table that Lazarus desired? Further, there is this detail that "dogs came and licked his sores." What were the dogs, and why did Lazarus have sores? If this man was just going to die and go to heaven, why in the world would Christ waste time referring to dogs licking the sores of the beggar? It states in verse 22 that the beggar died and was taken by the Angels into Abraham's bosom. Perhaps you have never thought about or have been told why the beggar was taken to "Abraham's bosom," rather than to heaven. This is something that our "Ministers" should always explain, but almost never do.
The rich man also died, but apparently was not carried anywhere. Instead, he "was buried, and in hell [this is from the word hades] he lift up his eyes, being in torments, and seeth Abraham afar off, and Lazarus in his bosom." Is it not apparent from this that wherever this man was, he was able to see, not only Lazarus, who had been taken unto Abraham's bosom, but Abraham also! For the rich man said, "Father Abraham, have mercy on me, and send Lazarus, that he may dip the tip of his finger in water and cool my tongue."
Have you never wondered why the rich man would want just the tip of Lazarus' finger in the water? A man "burning in hell" would surely ask for a pail or an ocean of water, would he not? So it stands to reason that there is something about this request which needs further explanation.
The rich man goes on to say, "for I am tormented in this flame." Our "Ministers" invariably explain this as being "the fires of hell." As will be shown later, this word here translated "flame" is used only seven times in the New Testament, in
six places the Greek word for FIRE is added to it, in order to make it mean a burning flame of fire (Luke 16:14‑flame, Acts 7:30, Hebrews 1:7, Revelation 1:14, 2:18, 19:12‑flame of fire).
In Luke 16:24 the word is used without the additional word meaning "fire." Therefore, it is very simple to see that this word "flame" does not make it mean "fire." Why do our "Ministers" not explain this as they go through the story? "But Abraham said, Son." Why did Abraham call this man, the rich man, "Son.?" "Remember that thou in they lifetime receivedst thy good things, and likewise Lazarus evil things: but now he is comforted, and thou art tormented. And beside all this, between us and you there is a great gulf fixed: so that they which would pass from hence to you cannot; neither can they pass to us, that would come from thence."
Please note that Abraham has identified the rich man by the word "Son," and yet he tells him that those who want to change sides cannot do so. This implies that while they cannot, that some "would," or would want to go there. Now why would anyone want to pass down from this "heaven" of the so‑called fundamentalists down to a "hell?" Then the rich man said, "I pray thee therefore, father, that thou wouldest send him to my father's house? "For I have five brethren." now, brothers and sisters, if Jesus' story was merely to give an example of two men dying, with one of them going to heaven and the other going to a burning hell, why would He have described the man as having five brethren? neither God nor Jesus put meaningless things in His Word! The rich man wanted Lazarus to warn his five brethren to repent, but Abraham refused. Why did Jesus say that the rich mans's brethren had Moses and the prophets? And whose resurrection would not convince them to repent?
As we proceed in this study, by Pastor Sheldon Emry, every effort to try to show you the answers to the question raised in this story, which are never or almost never answered by those who preach that it is just a story of heaven and hell. It is our hope that we have whetted your appetite enough to make you want to know the answers to these questions in this strange story recorded in Luke 16.
We know that the dead know nothing, see nothing and hear nothing, as proven in the Scriptures. Therefore these two men, to be able to see and to talk they must still be alive, but dead in name only.
"The dead praise not the Lord, neither any that go down into silence." (Psalm 115:17); "...but the dead know not any thing..." (Ecclesiastes 9:5; Verses which show that the dead do not know anything until the resurrection (Job 14:12; 17:13-16; 19:25-27; Psalm 6:5; 17:15; 49:8-20; 88:10; 115:17; 141:7; 146:4; Ecclesiastes 9:5-10; Isaiah 9:19-20; Daniel 12:17; Hosea 13:14; John 3:13; Acts 2:34; 1 Corinthians 15:55; Hebrews 11:13)
Then we have the testimony of Paul concerning David, a man after God's heart, who was still in the grave in his day and time and had not been taken to heaven: "Men and brethren, let me freely speak unto you of the patriarch David, that he is both dead and buried, and his sepulchre is with us unto this day." (Acts 2:29)
Now, let's determine who was the "certain rich man?" "There was a certain rich man, which was clothed in purple and fine linen, and fared sumptuously every day." Why did Jesus describe this man as being dressed in purple and fine linen?
Some of you may remember an old saying that was used in speaking of a high‑class person, or nobility: "He must have been born to the purple."
When the Midianites had conquered Israel, God raised up Gideon to free Israel and destroy the power of the Midianites. When the war was over, we read that Gideon collected all the Midianites' wealth: "And the weight of the golden earrings that he requested was a thousand and seven hundred shekels of gold; beside ornaments, and collars, and purple raiment that was on the kings of Midian, and beside the chains that were about their camels' neck." (Judges 8:26)
Notice that the kings of the Midianites wore purple. At the crucifixion, Jesus was called by Pilate; to MOCK the Jews: "And Pilate wrote a title, and put it on the cross. And the writing was, Jesus of Nazareth the king of the Jews." (Mark 15:17‑18)
In making fun of Jesus, the band [Jews — Soldiers of the Chief Priests, Pharisees and etc.] put a purple robe on Him to represent kingship, for purple is the color used by royalty.
Not only was the certain rich man dressed in purple to represent rulership over the people, but he was also arrayed in fine linen. To explain this lets return to when the priesthood in Israel was reestablished, God instructed Moses: "And take thou unto thee Aaron thy brother, and his sons with him, from among the children of Israel, that he may minister unto me in the priest's office, even Aaron, Nadab and Abihu, Eleazar and Ithamar, Aaron's sons. And thou shalt make holy garments for Aaron thy brother for glory and for beauty. And thou shalt speak unto all that are wise hearted, whom I have filed with the spirit of wisdom, that they may make Aaron's garments...and his sons... And they shall take gold, and blue, and purple, and scarlet, fine linen." (Exodus 28:1‑5)
Leviticus 6:10 and 16:4 also tells us that the priests were to wear a robe of linen, and the high priest was to wear trousers of linen. Ezekiel 9 and Daniel 10 and 12 tell us that the messengers of God who gave these prophets visions from God Almighty were clothed in linen. Revelation says: "...And the seven angels...clothed in pure and white linen..." (Revelation 15:4‑6)
Revelation 19:8 tell us that clothing of fine linen is symbolic of the righteousness of the Saints. According to all four gospels, Christ's body was wrapped in linen cloth for His burial. So we see that many of the things pertaining to God's priests, God's messengers, and God's Holy People who believe in Him and work for Him, are clothed in fine linen. Thus, when Jesus tells us in Luke 16 that the certain rich man was clothed in fine linen, this should tell us that the rich man was ‑‑ or was supposed to be; working for God in the priesthood and he was part of the ruling class.
The third and most obvious description of the man is that he was rich. Can we find in the Scriptures any clues to help us to identify this "certain rich man?"
In Revelation we find: "And there came one of the seven angels which had the seven vials, and talked with me, saying unto me, Come hither; I will shew thee the judgment of the great whore that sitteth upon many waters: With whom the kings of the arth have committed fornication, and the inhabitants of the earth have been made drunk with the wine of her fornication. So he carried me away in the spirit into the wilderness: and I saw a woman sit upon a scarlet coloured beast, full of names of blasphemy, having seven heads and ten horns." (Revelation 17:1‑3)
Notice very carefully the description of the woman: "And upon her forehead was a name written, Mystery, Babylon the Great, the Mother of Harlots and Abominations of the earth. And I saw the woman drunken with the blood of the saints, and with the blood of the martyrs of Jesus: and when I saw her, I wondered with great admiration." (Revelation 17:5‑6)
In verse 18 of the same chapter we read: "And the woman which thou sawest is that great city, which reigneth over the kings of the earth." (Revevelation 17:18)
Then chapter 18 describes her fall and destruction, and the merchants say: "...Alas, alas that great city, that was clothed in fine linen, and purple, and scarlet, and decked with gold, and precious stones, and pearls!" (Revelation 18:16)
Thus, we can see that Mystery Babylon fits the description of the "certain rich man," with its purple, fine linen, and gold. The word rich indicates great financial power and points to the money‑controllers of the world. (Remember how Jesus over threw the tables of the money‑changers [money‑controllers] and told them they had made His house of prayer a house of Merchandise and Thieves ‑‑ Which shows that the churches are part of Mystery Babylon]. Purple describes the rulers [kings] of the earth, and fine linen describes the Great Whore called Religion; the great world church, that masquerades in clothing of righteousness to deceive the people. Today's religious leaders, while dressed in their "fine linen," support non‑Christian rulers by telling the people that these wicked rulers are really "good men who are trying to bring peace to the world." They utter no warning to Christians that most world leaders are non-Christians, and are even anti-Christ. "...they are shepherds that cannot understand: they all look to their own way, every one for his gain..." (Isaiah 56:11)
We have seen from the Scriptures that purple is the apparel of royalty and that it denotes authority. We have also seen that fine linen is representative of the priesthood, or the religious leaders of the people. So let us see if there were people at the time of Christ who fit Jesus' description.
It is an indisputable fact that the scribes and Pharisees were the priestly ruling class of Christ's day. Dressed in fine linen and purple, they must have felt terribly self‑conscious while Jesus described the clothing of the "certain rich man." In speaking to the multitudes and to his disciples in Matthew, Jews said: "...The scribes and the Pharisees sit in Moses' seat." (Matthew 23:2)
Now, Moses was the civil and religious ruler of the nation. Today he would be called, "President" or "Premier." Jesus was saying the Jewish scribes and Pharisees had both religious and civil authority over the people in Judea.
"All therefore whatsoever they bid you observe, that observe and do; but do not ye after their works: for they say, and do not." (Matthew 23:3) Christ here indicates that these scribes and Pharisees had legal or ruling authority over the people.
"For they bind heavy burdens and grievous to be borne, and lay them on men's shoulders; but they themselves will not move them with one of their fingers. But all their works they do for to be seen of men: they make broad their phylacteries and enlarge the borders of their garments." (Matthew 23:4‑5)
If they were not the rulers, how could they lay heavy and grievous burdens on the peoples shoulders. Also the expression, "borders of their garments," means to enlarge their law, their authority, their rulership. Jesus then goes on
to say: "And love the uppermost rooms at feasts, and the chief seats in the synagogues, And greetings in the markets, and to be called of men, Rabbi, Rabbi." (Matthew 23:6‑7)
Some will insist at this point that the Romans ruled in Palestine at the time of Christ, and that it was not the Jewish chief priests, scribes and Pharisees who ruled there at all. But, Jesus said that "the scribes and scribes and Pharisees sit in Moses' seat!" That this is true is also shown in John, when the scribes and Pharisees consulted together to kill Christ: "Then gathered the chief priests and the Pharisees a council, and said, What do we? for this man doeth many miracles. If we let him thus alone, all men will believe on him: and the Romans shall come and take away both our place and nation." (John 11:47‑48)
Yes, that's right, they were fearful that if the people began to believe on Jesus Christ, the Roman authority, which was the military occupation army, would take away the Pharisees' rulership over the people. They were afraid they might lose not only their religious and civil authority and perhaps would even be driven from the land by the Romans.
An Associated Press article, published on September 27, 1969, began with this headline: "Jewish Effort to Save Jesus From Execution Told." The article began: "Jewish officials sought to save Jesus from Roman execution, but He would not co‑operate, says noted authority on first century Jewish and Roman Law."
He then identifies, this "noted authority" as Justice Haim Cohen, of the Israeli Supreme Court. The article proceeds to say that Haim Cohen stated that the Jews brought Christ before the Sanhedrin, in order to save Him from Roman execution.
The article continues: "Rather than being prompted by purely ethics religious considerations, however, 'their motives were realistic and political...' aimed at regaining some of their lost influence among the people. 'Nothing could have been further from their intentions or more harmful to their purpose, than to arouse the discontent and disaffection of the people by lending a hand in the execution by the Romans of one in their midst.' On the other hand, 'any action on their part to prevent such an execution, would, if successful, have been likely to arouse popular applause and to reinstate them in the eyes of the people as their natural and legitimate leaders.'"
From the above it can be seen this modern‑day Jew admits that whatever it was the Jews did about Jesus Christ at that time, it was not moral, but would have been "Realistic and Political," and would have been done to reinstate themselves as the leaders of the people, i.e. to save their "place."
He is right, but they didn't try to retain their "place" over the Israelites in Palestine by saving Jesus’ life, they tried to do it by killing Jesus, as the Gospels attest.
Following are a few of the plots of the chief priests, scribes and Pharisees to kill Jesus: "Then the Pharisees went out, and held a council against him, how they might destroy him." (Matthew 12:14); "And consulted that they might take Jesus by subtlety, and kill him." (Matthew 26:4)
See also the following Scriptures ‑‑ (Matthew 27:1, Mark 14:55, Luke 6:7‑11, John 5:16, 11:53). These prove the "Jews" to be lying about their part in the crucifixion of Christ today, just as they did while He was here in the flesh.
Another factor, that almost no one thinks about; That being; Caiaphas the high priest had made a prophesy that Jesus would die that year! Therefore, to avoid becoming an obvious false prophet, he worked almost frantically for Christ's death. "...Caiaphas...being high priest that year, he prophesied that Jesus should die..." (John 11:49‑51)
But, lost in the confusion and over shadowed by the Crucifixion of Jesus, he, Caiaphas, was proven to be a false prophet in spite of everything he could do. Revealed, as, the true reason as to why they [the Jews; elders, scribes, chief priests and Pharisees] wanted to kill Christ: That being because He did not fulfill Caiaphas second prophecy concerning Him. "...but that also he [Christ] should gather together in one the children of God that were scattered abroad. Then from that day forth they took counsel together for to put him to death." (John 11:52‑53)
With this verse we can see clearly that the scribes and Pharisees did not wish Jesus to regather the scattered children of Israel! Jesus also accused the scribes and Pharisees: "Wherefore, behold, I send unto you prophets, and wise men, and scribes: and some of them ye shall kill and crucify; and some of them ye shall kill and crucify; and some of them shall ye scourge in your synagogues, and persecute them from city to city: That upon you may come all the righteous blood shed upon the earth, from the blood of righteous Abel unto the blood of Zacharias son of Barachias, whom ye slew between the temple and the altar." (Matthew 23:34‑35)
Thus the similarity between the "scribes and Pharisees" and "Mystery Babylon" is too concise and obvious to miss. For both are described as being wealthy, dressed in purple, and accused in like manner: "And in her was found the blood of prophets, and of saints, and of all that were slain upon the earth." (Revelation 18:24)
The Bible makes only the scribes and Pharisees (The Jews) and Mystery Babylon who have shed the blood of the prophets, saints, and all that have been killed on the earth. The Pharisees are even today the controllers of Mystery Babylon, the world economic system, the financiers of both sides of all wars. Now some will cry out that this must be wrong, because Jesus described the "certain rich man" in Luke 16 as a person who died. Does this fit what Jesus Christ said about the scribes and Pharisees?
The Scriptures say it does: "Woe unto you, scribes and Pharisees, hypocrites! for ye are like unto whited sepulchers, which indeed appear beautiful outward, but are within full of dead men's bones, and of all uncleanness. Even so ye also outwardly appear righteous unto men, but within ye are full of hypocrisy and iniquity." (Matthew 23:27‑28)
Here we can see that Jesus said that the Pharisees, who wore purple and fine linen were "within full of dead men's bones" and that they "appeared like unto whited sepulchers," or tombs. Then in Luke chapter 11 Jesus again said to the Pharisees: "Woe unto you, scribes and Pharisees, hypocrites! for ye are as graves which appear not, and the men that walk over them are not aware of them." (Luke 11:44)
Jesus is saying to the Jewish scribes and Pharisees, "you are spiritually and morally dead and buried in your graves, but people do not know it even as they walk among you." In Luke 16 Jesus said the "rich man died," but he kept right on complaining about his "torment," and asked for help while he envied Lazarus' position in Abraham's Bosom.
Water in the New Testament is symbolic of the Word of God: "But whosoever drinketh of the water that I shall give him shall never thirst; but the water I shall give him shall be in him a well of water springing up into everlasting life." (John 4:14)
Then again we find: "He that believeth on me, as the scripture hath said, out of his belly shall flow rivers of living water. (But this spake he of the Spirit, which they that believe on him should receive: for the Holy Ghost was not yet given; because that Jesus was not yet glorified." (John 7:38‑39)
The man was rich, he ruled over the people, he was spiritually dead but physically alive, he wanted only a touch of the water [Word of God] but not enough so that it would have made him "alive," yet he griped about his condition. Is it coincidence that today's Jews have great wealth and power, but refuse the Word of God, except a tiny portion [the tip of his finger in water], complain continuously of "persecution" [torment], and try to insist Christians [Abraham's children] must help all Jews? [They do that by quoting (Genesis 12:1‑3) and insist, "God will curse anyone who does not help us Jews."]
Thus we can see clearly that throughout, the parable, Jesus was using a "certain rich man" as symbolic of a certain people, and that Jesus' description of the "certain rich man" fits only the Jewish scribes and Pharisees. So, with this identification of "the certain rich man," we can identify "the rich man" today and see Jesus' story is a parable which relates prophetically to the end of the age.
Now, that we have identified the "certain rich man," lets see if the rich man did go to a burning Hell-Fire? "...the rich man also died, and was buried; And in hell [hades] he lift up his eyes, being in torments..." (Luke 16:22‑23)
Usually this passage is used to "prove" that when wicked people die, they suffer the "fires in hell." However, if one diligently studies the Bible, he will find that God's Word teaches no such horrible, pagan doctrine as, "The Creator‑God tortures most men and women in fire forever and forever."
The Greek word basanos, here translated "torments," is used only twice in the New Testament. According to Strong's Concordance ‑ (#931) ‑ it means "through the motion of going to the bottom," and we get our word "base" from it [Page 18: Greek Dictionary of the New Testament]. In other words, this man was abased (i.e. to lower, bring down; Second College Edition New World Dictionary of the American Language, page 2), he was degraded, he was brought low, he went to the bottom. It does not mean he suffered physical pain in hell, as most "Ministers" teach. They stretch the Word for their own purposes.
The "rich man" was abased. "...and seeth Abraham afar off, and Lazarus in his bosom. And 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 cool my tongue; for I am tormented in this flame." (Luke 16:23‑24)
The word "tormented" comes from another Greek word adunad, and according to Strong's Concordance ‑ (#3600) ‑‑ it means "to grieve, to be dejected, sorrowful, or tormented." It does not refer to physical torment. Adimap is also used in Acts where Paul told his friends that he would never see them again: "And they all wept sore, and fell on Paul's neck, and kissed him, Sorrowing [adunao] most of all for the words which he spake, that they should see his face no more..." (Acts 20:37‑38)
Their torment, like that of the rich man in "Hades," was one of mental grievance, dejection, or sorrow. Thus the "rich man" was saying in effect, "I am tormented, I am sorrowful in this flame." This word "flame" come from the Greek word phlox, and is used seven times in the New Testament: (Luke 16:24, Acts 7:30, Hebrews 1:7, 2 Thessalonians 1:18, Revelation 1:14 and 19:12). And in every case except that of the rich man in Luke 16 the word "fire" is added, in order to make it mean "flame of fire" or "flaming fire." Jesus saw to it in His wisdom to leave out the word for "fire" in speaking of the condition of the rich man, so that we would not think that we must interpret the flame literally.
However, "Minister" after "Minister" preaches about how this rich man was in the "fires" of a burning hell, and that he will suffer physical torments forever. But this is an error, he is dejected and sorrowful in his base, or low, condition, he is suffering "flame." Not a flaming fire.
In order to understand the Bible's teaching as to how the rich man suffers from this "flame," we must first identify the rich man's "five brethren" who were destined for the same suffering. The rich man said: "...I pray thee therefore, father, that thou wouldest send him to my father's house: For I have five brethren; that he may testify unto them, lest they also come into this place of torment." (Luke 16:27‑28)
Genesis 36 tells the story of a man who had five brethren. As we read this genealogical account, we shall see how this fits the description of the five brethren of Luke 16. "Now these are the generations of Esau, who is Edom." (Genesis 36:1)
Edom means "red," and as we go along in this study we learn that Edom fits into the Biblical description of Mystery Babylon of Revelation 18, which is "Red Communism."
"Esau took his wives of the daughters of Canaan; Adah the daughter of Elon the Hittite, and Ahalibamah the daughter Anah the daughter of Zibean the Hivite; And Bashemath Ishmael's daughter, sister of Nebajolh. And Adah bare to Esau (1) Eliphaz; and Bashemath bare (2) Reuel; and Ahalibamah bare (3) Jeush, and (4) Jaalam, and (5) Korah: these are the sons of Esau, which were born unto him in the land of Canaan." (Genesis 36:2‑5)
Thus Esau had five sons, and throughout the Scriptures will be found occasional places where the word "brethren" includes parents and children. So Esau clearly fits this description of having five "brethren" in his house. (See Genesis 36:8, 36:19, 36:21, 36:43).
In the listed Scriptures we can see that "Seir," was the name of the place where Esau‑Edom settled, and is interchangeable with the name "Edom." According to Genesis 36, Esau married into the line of the Canaanites, and for some strange and prophetic reason Esau was therefore known by the name Edom, which means red, and is now the color of world communism.
Please recall that the Edomites are the age‑long enemies of Israel. Esau's grandson, Amalek was the father of the Amalekites, who were the first enemies to attack Israel after they came out of Egypt. God said of the Amelikite branch of Edom: "...I will utterly put out the remembrance of Amalek from under heaven...Because the Lord hath sworn that the Lord will have war with Amalek from generation to generation." (Exodus 17:14‑16)
Then we have the Book of Obadiah, the prophet, who tells in a one‑page prophecy of the House of Esau [which would include Amalek] being burned in a flame: "The vision of Obadiah. thus saith the Lord God concerning Edom; We have heard a rumor from the Lord, and an ambassador is sent among the heathen. Arise ye, and let us rise up against her in battle. Behold, I have made thee small among the heathen: thou art greatly despised." (Obadiah 1‑2)
The next thirteen verses describe how Edom was to work against Jacob‑Israel all down through the ages. He accused Edom of coming against Jacob and Judah in the day of their calamity; he accused them of trying to conquer Jerusalem. Then beginning with verse 15, Obadiah shows that this is an end‑time prophecy (Obadiah 15). In other words, God said, the thing you are attempting to do will turn and destroy you.
"For as ye have drank upon my holy mountain, so shall all the heathen drink continually, yea, they shall drink, and they shall swallow down, and they shall be as though they had not been. But upon mount Zion shall be deliverance, and there shall be holiness; and the house of Joseph a flame, and the house of Esau for stubble, and they shall kindle in them, and devour them..." (Obadiah 16‑18)
Can you not see, Esau in Obadiah and the rich man in Luke 16 were to have an identical fate; they would both be in a "flame," Obadiah then continues: "...and there shall not be any remaining of the house of Esau..." (Obadiah 18)
That this is a prophecy that is yet to be fulfilled at the end of the age is shown by the last verse in Obadiah, which reads: "...and saviours shall come up on mount Zion to judge the mount of Esau; and the kingdom shall be the Lord's." (Obadiah 21)
In Luke 16 the rich man appealed to someone in authority, "Father Abraham," and asked him for a little water. We know the water represents the Word of God, and that according to the Scriptures, if anyone asks for the Word of God, that God will pour out His spirit upon them and give them understanding of the Word.
"If any of you lack wisdom, let him ask of God, that giveth to all men liberally...and it shall be given him." (James 1:5) Now this rich man wanted only a tiny bit of the Word, hardly enough to make a difference. If he was in such a flame, why did he want just a tiny drop of water on his tongue? The scribes and Pharisees had the Scriptures at their disposal, but they did not want more than a tiny bit of it. They preferred to follow the "tradition of the elders."
"Then the Pharisees and scribes asked him, Why walk not thy disciples according to the tradition of the elders...He answered and said unto them, Well hath Esaias prophesied of you hypocrites, as it is written, This people honoureth me with their lips, but their heart is far from me. Howbeit in vain do they worship me, teaching for doctrines the commandments of men. For laying aside the commandment of God, ye hold the tradition of men...Full well ye reject the Commandment of God, that ye may keep your own tradition...making the word of God of none effect through your tradition..." (Mark 7:5‑13)
This, while only believing and teaching a tiny portion of the Scriptures. This, the rich man, who called Abraham "Father," can be identified with both the Esau and the Pharisees. How can the rich man represent both at the same time? The answer is found in Jesus' own words, as recorded in John: "They answered him, We be Abraham's seed, and were never in bondage to any man..." (John 8:33)
Jesus then admitted they were Abrahams' "seed." "I know that ye are Abraham's seed..." (John 8:37) On the one hand, they were Abraham's descendants [seed], even admitted to be so by Christ, yet they denied they were ever "in bondage to any man," and Jesus did not contradict them. Therefore, since they were never "in bondage to any man." they were not in the Egyptian bondage with Israel. What people could be "Abraham's seed," yet not be in the Egyptian bondage?
The descendants of Jacob's brother, Esau, of course! Although Esau was Abraham's grandson, as was Jacob [they were twins], neither he nor his descendants went into Egypt with Jacob and his children. After Jesus confirmed the Pharisees' claim they were "the seed of Abraham," He denied they were Abraham's Children: "...If ye were Abraham's children, ye would do the works of Abraham." (John 8:39)
In this passage, by Jesus' own words with the Pharisees, we find that the Jewish Pharisees could claim descent from Abraham, but could not [ever] be called "the children of Abraham." This can be seen clearly in (Genesis 21:12) and in: "And it came to pass after these things, that God did tempt Abraham, and said unto him...Take now thy son, thine only son Isaac..." (Genesis 22:1‑2)
In other words, what God through the Scriptures is telling us is, those who are descended from Abraham through Ishmael and Esau can claim to be called the seed of Abraham, but "ONLY" those who are born of Isaac and Jacob can be called the Children of Abraham! In fact, the Bible never calls the Ishmaelites and Edomites nor any of the other six sons Abraham had children, but both the Old and the New Testament Scriptures call the Israelites children many hundreds of times. For example, Paul excluded Ishmael and Esau with these words: "Neither, because they are the seed of Abraham, are they ll children: but, in Isaac shall thy seed be called." (Romans 9:7)
Thus, the Bible identifies the Jewish Pharisees as being the seed of Abraham, but NOT Abraham's Children. We know, from historical sources that nearly two centuries before Christ, the Judeans conquered the entire Edomite nation and forced them to adopt the religion of the Judeans [See Josephus, Ant., Bk. 13, ch. 15, par. 4].
Later, Herod, a half‑Edomite, obtained rulership over the Israelites in Palestine by killing all but one of the members of the Sanhedrin, the judicial and religious body of the Judeans, replacing them with men of his own race. Thus, the Edomites took civil and religious rule over the Israelites. [Herod ‑ the tetrach ‑ king of Galilee; The Sanhedrin chief priests, elders, scribes and Pharisees over Judea. So the Edomites ruled over all of Palestine]. The Edomites were called "Ioudians," translated "Jews," in the King James Bible, but Jesus bitterly denounced the Edomite — chief priests, elders, scribes and Pharisees at every turn.
In the story Jesus relates that Abraham told the rich man: "And beside all this, between us and you there is a great gulf fixed: so that they which would pass from hence to you cannot; neither can they pass to us, that would come from thence." (Luke 16:26)
From this it would appear that the descendants of the people represented by the rich man are totally prevented from coming to Abraham or "Abraham's bosom." The "gulf" is "fixed," i.e., it cannot be breached, changed or passed. Then there is the statement "neither can they pass to us, that would..." meaning that some would not pass from this so‑called "hell" even if they could. Now, if this is, as our "Ministers" would have us to believe, is a real "burning hell," would not every single one, without exception wish to escape?
This phraseology fits the future state of the Pharisee descendants of the Esau for he lost the Abrahamic Birthright when he sold it to Jacob (Genesis 25:31‑34). The New Testament verifies this in (Hebrews 12:16‑17)
Esau's act of despising the birthright and selling it to his brother Jacob [Israel] "fixed" the "great gulf" between his progeny and Jacob's progeny who would inherit "Abraham's Birthright promises. This was put into words by the Jewish writer, Maurice Samuels in his book "You Gentiles," on page 9 he writes: "I suspected from the first dawning of Jewish self‑consciousness, that between gentiles [Christians] and us Jews lies an unbridgeable gulf."
This total inability of the Edomite Jews to become Christian inheritors of the Abrahamic promises is what Jesus was revealing when He related what Abraham told the rich man. That there was no point in preaching a risen Christ to the Edomites, as they could not inherit the Abrahamic Covenants and Promises, in fact Jesus is telling us in so many words: THE JEWS cannot be saved!!!
"Then said Jesus unto them [Jews]...where I [Jesus] am, thither ye [Jews] cannot come [where Jesus is the Jews cannot go, in other words cannot be saved]." (John 7:33‑34)
For the "gulf" was "fixed." by God Himself.
That the Edomites [Jews] did not even believe Moses and the Prophets, let alone a risen Christ, is clearly revealed by Jesus in Abraham's answer to the rich man, after the rich man asked Abraham to send Lazarus to his five brethren: "Abraham saith unto him, They have Moses and the prophets; let them hear them. And he said, Nay, father Abraham [the rich man knew that his brethren, The Jews, did not then, nor would they in the future believe Moses and the Prophets]: but if one went unto them from the dead, they will repent. And he [Abraham] said unto him [rich man], if they hear [believe] not Moses and the prophets, neither will they be persuaded, though one rose from the dead [Jesus rose from the dead, and still they ‑ the Jews ‑ did not believe, thus fulfilling Jesus Words]." (Luke 16:29‑31)
Now, some will say that Abraham's answer is an un‑Christian reply, so let's see how Christ Himself handled a similar situation. In John chapter 5, Jesus spoke to the scribes and Pharisees, whom we have already identified as fitting the description of the rich man.
They hated Jesus and were plotting to kill Him. "Therefore the Jews sought the more to kill him..." (John 5:18)
So He told them: "And ye have not his word abiding in you: for whom he hath sent, him ye believe not. Search the scriptures; for in them ye [Jews] think ye have eternal life [the way this is worded, is showing Jesus again telling the Jews that they cannot be saved]: and they are they which testify of me. And ye will not come to me [Jews‑here again Jesus says they will NOT come to Him], that ye might have life [again Jesus declared that the Jews cannot be saved]." (John 5:38‑40)
Think about it! Three times in just this one verse Jesus Christ, in effect, said the Jews cannot be saved!!! This is a remarkable revelation from Jesus Christ Himself. Then if that were not enough, Jesus again says they will not believe: "Do not think that I will accuse you to the Father: there is one that accuseth you, even Moses, in whom ye trust [or would have men believe your claim to trust him]. For had ye believed Moses, ye would have believed me: for he wrote of me (Genesis 3:15, Deuteronomy 18:15). But if ye believe not his [Moses] writings, how shall ye believe my words?" (John 5:45‑47)
Jesus said that the scribes and Pharisees did have the Scriptures, and they claimed to believe the writings of Moses. The rich man of Luke 16 also claimed Abraham as his father, and that his brethren had the writings of Moses. But because they refused to believe Moses and the Prophets, they would also refuse to believe Christ, though He rose from the dead.
Therefore, one must conclude, that the rich man of Luke 16 is NOT just some wicked person, who died and then was tortured in a literal fire. Instead, in the story, he represents [is symbolic] of a specific people, the descendants of Esau, the age‑old enemy of Jacob [Israel], known in Jesus' time as the Jewish Scribes and Pharisees.
Modern "Ministers," by wrongly interpreting parts of the story, and by not explaining other parts of it at all, completely hide from Christians the Truth Jesus was revealing in this parable, that not only are the people known and called "Jews" are actually Edomites and not Israelites, and that God Almighty has "fixed" a "great gulf" so that they will never become believers or followers of Christianity.
In the parable, Jesus related that the rich man said in verse 30 that his brethren [Edomites; Jews, as we have seen] would repent "if one went unto them from the dead." Jesus then relates that Abraham answered in verse 31 that they would not repent, "though one rose from the dead." It was Jesus Christ Himself who later rose from the dead and His Words were proven true, when the Jews not only did not repent but they set about persecuting and killing all who did believe and follow the Resurrected Jesus.
Evidence abounds on every hand that their descendants have continued to hate, ridicule, malign, murder [when provided with the opportunity to do so], and secretly made and do still make war against the followers of Jesus for almost 2000 years; That there has been no repentance by the Edomite Jews and this parable taught by Jesus teaches quite plainly that there will be none in the future.
Because of the false interpretation of this parable by "Ministers" and Evangelists, most Christians do not know that Jesus taught that these Edomite Jews, who masquerade as Israelites, will not be converted, neither can be, and that a great gulf is "fixed," so that they cannot cross over. Their father Esau sold his, and their, birthright and they cannot regain it, though the seek it with many tears!
Thus, because this parable is not taught correctly in our churches, most Christians are totally deceived about the modern Jews and their true place in Bible Prophecy. May this study open your eyes to the truth.
Now let us turn to Lazarus and identify him. "And there was a certain beggar named Lazarus, which was laid at his gate, full of sores, And desiring to be fed with the crumbs which fell from the rich man's table: more over the dogs came and licked his sores." (Luke 16:20‑21)
You have probably recognized already that Lazarus is Symbolic of True Israel, which had been divorced from God and cast off over 700 years before Christ. The name Lazarus is the Greek form of the Hebrew name Eleazar. Eleazar means "God is helper," and before Israel was divorced, she used to be able to say of God: "...the Lord thinketh upon me: thou are my help and my deliverer..." (Psalms 40:17)
However, after Israel's divorcement (Jeremiah 3:8), she was cast off and made a "beggar." Therefore, in Luke 16 Jesus called Israel by the Greek name LAZARUS, which means "without help" (Youngs Concordance). The Greek word translated beggar in Luke 16 is only used in the Bible twice, both times here in this parable. The word is ptochos, which means "to crouch, cringing" only straitened circumstances [Strong's Concordance 4434, page 62, Greek Dictionary of the New Testament]. Not necessarily poor monetarily, but one in a subservient state before another. Lazarus was not necessarily poor monetarily, but he was in a subservient state.
Now this "beggar," Lazarus, had to beg for the crumbs from the table of the rich man. The Pharisees of Christ's day had become wealthy by means of usury, which they had learned in Babylon.
"And there was a great cry of the people and of their wives against...the Jews...and I rebuked the nobles, and the rulers, and said unto them, Ye exact usury...It is not good that ye do...I pray you, let us leave off this usury...Restore...to them...their lands, their vineyards, their oliveyards, and their houses, also the hundredth part of the money, and of the corn, the wine, and the oil, that ye exact of them." (Nehemiah 5:1‑11)
History tells us that the Pharisees set up their usurious banking system throughout the Roman Empire, and this practice continued throughout the middle age, finally climaxing in our present International World Banks.
In America today the Edomite Pharisees [Jews] are again removing God's Word from our schools and from our government. They confiscate [steal] billions of dollars from the taxpayers each year as usury payments, and the people have to beg to obtain higher wages to pay the rich their USURY. Just as the true Judeans of Christ's day had to crouch and cringe before the Edomite Pharisees [Jews]. (See John 7:13, 9:22). And even today the True Israelites of Christian Anglo‑Saxons must beg from the banks to remain solvent.
Christ pictured Israel in this parable as one who had to crouch before the rich man. He further said that the "dogs came and licked his sores." What or who are the "dogs?" Jesus identified them in Matthew 15: "And, behold, a woman of Canaan came out of the same coasts, and cried unto him, saying, Have mercy on me, O Lord, thou son of David; my daughter is grievously vexed with a devil. But he answered her not a word. And his disciples came and besought him, saying, Send her away; for she crieth after us. But he answered and said, I am not sent but unto the lost sheep of the house of Israel. Then she worshiped him, saying, Lord, help me. But he answered and said, It is not meet to take the children's bread, and to cast it to dogs." (John 15:22‑26)
Here Jesus called the True Israelites children, but the Canaanite woman, being a non‑Israelite, he called a dog.
"And she said, Truth, Lord: yet the dogs eat of the crumbs which fall from their masters' table. Then Jesus answered and said unto her, O woman, great is thy faith: be it unto thee even as thou wilt. And her daughter was made whole from that very hour." (John 15:27‑28)
This passage verifies the Scriptural principle that non‑Israelites can come become Christians by faith in Jesus Christ. But they are not called the Children of Abraham, but simply believers or Christians.
Jesus' words show that "dogs" refer to non‑ Israelite people. The lost sheep of the house of Israel had been cast out of the land of Palestine and had migrated north and west among the nations, the "dogs." Ezekiel 34 describes their cast‑off condition. They were ill‑fed, for they no longer had God's Word to eat; their sicknesses [from sin] were not healed, and they were oppressed cruelly by their civil and religious leaders.
"...Woe be to the shepherds of Israel that do feed themselves! should not the shepherds feed the flocks? Ye eat the fat, and ye clothe you with the wool, ye kill them that are fed: but ye feed not the flock. The diseased have ye not strengthened, neither have ye healed that which was sick, neither have ye bound up that which was broken... with force and with cruelty have ye ruled them." (Ezekiel 34:2‑4)
Then, when Isaiah pictured Israel in her sinful state, he said: "From the sole of the foot even unto the head there is no soundness in it; but wounds, and bruises, and putrefying sores: they have not been closed, neither bound up, neither mollified with ointment." (Isaiah 1:6)
Thus, Jesus pictured Lazarus [Israel] as having sores and living without property or wealth with "dogs" to comfort him. Like Lazarus' dogs, although they can do little for us, as the Christians of America and other Western Nations are being reduced in status, wherever the "dogs," i.e., the colored, or non‑Israelitish People, are not totally antagonized against us by Red Bolshevik anti‑ Christ propaganda, they express respect and veneration for "the Christians," most preferring the Christian Nations to the Communist ones.
Lazarus was said to have died and gone to his reward, Abraham's bosom. Paul wrote: "For he that is dead is freed [literally, "justified"] from sin. Now if we be dead with Christ, we believe that we shall also live with him." (Romans 6:7‑8)
In other words, a Christian is one who dies with Christ. This is the only way one qualifies to inherit "Abraham's bosom." Since we are told that Lazarus was rewarded in this way, his "death" must have been his acceptance of a belief in Jesus Christ. "Therefore we are buried with him by baptism into death..." (Romans 6:4)
But what is meant by "Abraham's bosom?"
A Roman centurion who had an ill servant came to Jesus once, asking that Jesus heal him. Jesus said of the centurion: "...Verily I say unto you, I have not found so great faith, no, not in Israel. And I say unto you, That many shall come from the east and west, and shall sit down with Abraham, and Isaac, and Jacob, in the kingdom of heaven. But the children of the kingdom shall be cast out into outer darkness: there shall be weeping and gnashing of teeth." (Matthew 8:10‑12)
Where shall these believers be with Abraham, Isaac and Jacob? In the Kingdom of Heaven. "Abraham's bosom" IS "the kingdom of God." Where is it? Luke tells us: "There shall be weeping and gnashing of teeth, when ye shall see Abraham, and Isaac, and Jacob, and all the prophets, in the kingdom of God, and you [Jews] yourselves thrust out. And they shall come from the east, and from the west, and from the north, and from the south, and shall sit down in the kingdom of God." (Luke 13:28‑29)
This passage does not say that all these Godly people will go up into heaven, but that they will come from all directions to one place on the earth. Matthew then gives a parable which proves beyond a shadow of a doubt that the Kingdom of God is on the earth: "Another parable put he forth unto them, saying, The kingdom of heaven is likened unto a man which sowed good seed in his field. But while men slept, his enemy came and sowed tares among the wheat, and went his way." (Matthew 13:24‑25)
This is the parable of the tares and the wheat. The disciples did not understand the meaning of the parable, so later they asked Jesus for the explanation. Jesus gave them the true interpretation: "He answered and said unto them, He that soweth the good seed is the Son of man [Christ]; The field is the world; the good seed are the Children of the Kingdom [Israelites]; but the tares [Jews] are the Children of the wicked one." (Matthew 13:37‑38)
Where is the Kingdom of Heaven? Jesus said it is in the field, and the field is the world. Therefore, the Kingdom of Heaven is in the world, where the tares could be sown in it. In fact, Jesus Christ described the Kingdom of God as being a place where both the tares and the wheat would grow up together until the harvest, which is "the end of the world [age]." "...the harvest is the end of the world..." (Matthew 18:39)
Therefore it is clear, the Kingdom is here on the earth NOW. Jesus said in this same parable that He would send His angels: "The Son of man shall send forth his angels, and they shall gather out of his kingdom all things that offend, and them which do iniquity; And shall cast them into a furnace of fire: there shall be wailing and gnashing of the teeth. Then shall the righteous shine forth as the sun [where] in the kingdom of their father. Who hath ears to hear [understanding], let him hear." (Matthew 13:41‑43)
Some will say, Ah Ha, Jesus said "cast them into a furnace of fire," a burning hell! Which produces a question: Shall these wicked tares be tortured in a burning hell forever? The answer is NO, for we have already shown that Esau‑Edom [the Jews] would be burnt in a flame kindled by the house of Israel [Obadiah 18], and Malachi extends this punishment toward "all that do wickedly."
"For, behold, the day cometh, that shall burn as an oven; and all the proud, yea, and all that do wickedly, shall be stubble: and the day that cometh shall burn them UP, saith the Lord of hosts, that it shall leave them neither root nor branch [descendants]...And ye shall tread down the wicked; for they shall be ashes under the soles of your feet in the day...I shall do this, saith the Lord of hosts." (Malachi 4:1‑3)
By wrongly teaching Jesus' story of the rich man and Lazarus, the "Ministers" commit a crime against the people. They hide Jesus' true teachings which would reveal that the world is already ruled by "the anti‑Christ" [which "rule" our "Minister" insist is "yet future"]. Can you not see, most churches are a part of the present, “anti-Christ,” world-ruling system!
Examine all the church doctrines [Traditions]. For Jesus gave warning: "And Jesus answered and said unto them, Take heed that no man deceive you. For many shall come in my name [come in Jesus' name], saying, I am Christ [saying that Jesus is the Christ]; and shall deceive many." (Matthew 24:4‑5)
Christians [the elect] just as Adam are not deceived by an open anti‑Christ: "For there shall arise false Christs, and false prophets ["Ministers"], and shall shew great signs and wonders; insomuch that, if it were possible, they shall deceive the very elect." (Matthew 24:24); "For false Christs and false prophets shall rise, and shall shew signs and wonders, to seduce, if it were possible, even the elect." (Mark 13:22)
Christians can only be deceived by those who come in Jesus' Name, such as Billy Graham, and then teach them falsehoods!
Search the Scriptures for yourselves and may God bless you as you seek His Truth, in Christ's Name. Amen.