CRITICAL NOTES
Luke 16:14-18. In this section, the connection of which with the preceding and following parables is not at first sight apparent, we have evidently the heads of a discourse addressed to the Pharisees. The thread of connection seems to be the following. The Pharisees derided the teaching of Jesus concerning riches, and plumed themselves upon their righteousness. Jesus contrasts merely outward and legal righteousness with that inward righteousness which approves itself to God (Luke 16:15). He declares that the period of outward legal righteousness came to an end with the preaching of John the Baptist; that the kingdom of God is now preached and every one (i.e., publicans and sinners) presseth into it. Yet no reproach was thus cast upon the Law; there was no relaxation of the standard of holiness—nay, in the kingdom of God a strict observance of the rules of conduct was insisted upon. The scaffolding of the legal system was taken away, but the inward principle of the Law is eternal (Luke 16:17). The example given of the indissolubility of the moral law and of the revelation, through Christ, of a stricter morality than that of the Mosaic enactments, is taken from the law of adultery. The paragraph Luke 16:14-18 forms an introduction to the parable of the Rich Man and Lazarus. The words (Luke 16:15) “that which is highly esteemed among men” are illustrated by the picture of the brilliant and sumptuous life of the Rich Man; the words, “is abomination in the sight of God” correspond to the statement of the terrible chastisement in hell which falls upon him; while the permanent value of the Law (Luke 16:17) is asserted over again by Abraham—“They have Moses and the prophets; let them hear them” (Luke 16:30). In contrast, too, with those who press violently into the kingdom of God (Luke 16:16), is the life of the self-indulgent sinner, who is indifferent to everything but his own ease and comfort.
Luke 16:14. Covetous.—Rather, “lovers of money” (R.V.). Derided.—The literal meaning of the word is “to turn up the nose at.” Derided the idea; that is, that riches hindered religion.
Luke 16:15. Justify yourselves.—I.e., declare yourselves to be just, or righteous. Highly esteemed.—Rather, “exalted” (R.V.); lit. “lofty.”
Luke 16:16. The law, etc.—Christ here clearly distinguishes between the Old and the New Dispensation. Presseth into it.—Rather, “entereth violently into it” (R.V.) (cf. Matthew 11:12-13). The allusion is to the eagerness with which some classes of the community received the message of the kingdom (cf. Luke 7:29; John 12:19).
Luke 16:17. One tittle.—The word used described the little turns of the strokes by which one letter of the alphabet differs from another somewhat like it.
Luke 16:18. Whosoever putteth away his wife.—The allusion here to the law of divorce is probably a reference to the fact that the Pharisees were lax in their opinions on this point. They allowed divorce for any cause: Christ forbade it, except for the one cause of “fornication.” The expression in this verse might seem to forbid divorce altogether, but in other passages where the matter is dealt with, the one exception is specified (see Matthew 5:32; Matthew 19:9).
Luke 16:19. A certain rich man.—No name given him, while the beggar has a name (Luke 16:20). He is often called Dives (Latin for “rich”). Clothed in purple.—His outer dress of costly Tyrian purple, his inner of fine linen from Egypt. Fared sumptuously.—Or “living in mirth and splendour” (R.V. margin). No charge of gluttony or other sensual vice can be founded on these words. He enjoyed the pleasures of this life which his wealth could purchase, instead of providing friends against the day of death (Luke 16:9). His luxuriousness was of the type described in 1 John 2:16.
Luke 16:20. Lazarus.—A form of Eleazar, which means “God my help.” This name is evidently chosen to indicate the beggar’s piety, upon which, however, the parable lays no stress, as the Rich Man’s sin was neglect of a brother man, and not neglect of a pious brother man. The word translated “beggar” means simply a poor man. Full of sores.—As persons of his class often are—cutaneous disorders, from meagre diet, and neglect.
Luke 16:21. Desiring.—And evidently obtaining his desire: accepting willingly the crumbs, though they were insufficient to satisfy his hunger. The dogs.—The wild, ownerless dogs that roam in the streets of an Eastern city, and act as scavengers. Licked.—In contrast with the inhumanity of men towards the beggar is set the pity of the dogs: they licked his sores as they lick their own.
Luke 16:22. The beggar died.—No mention made of burial, as in the case of the Rich Man: the funeral rites of a pauper attract little attention. Was carried.—I.e., his soul was carried. Abraham’s bosom.—I.e., the happy side of Hades, where the saints were regarded as resting in bliss. The figure is that of a banquet: the beggar is placed in a seat of honour next Abraham. The reclining at table by which the head of one person almost rested on the lap of another, explains “Abraham’s bosom” (cf. John 13:23). And was buried.—Splendid obsequies, in accordance with the rank and wealth he had enjoyed. Taken in connection with what follows, there seems a strain of irony in the mention of the Rich Man’s burial.
Luke 16:23. In hell.—Rather, “in Hades” (R.V.), the baleful side of the world of spirits. There can be no doubt that in the representation of the state of matters in the future world, as given in this parable, Christ uses figurative language, in accommodation to the prevailing Jewish ideas of His time, rather than reveals that world as it is. In torments.—Perhaps we are to understand by this the anticipation of condemnation—the final condemnation being still in the distance.
Luke 16:24. Send Lazarus.—As, having been his inferior on earth, he may be employed still as a servant. The Rich Man is now the suppliant, but is not yet accustomed to the reversal of his lot. Tongue.—Which had been an organ of luxury. Am tormented.—Rather, “am in anguish” (R.V.); the word differing from that in Luke 16:23.
Luke 16:25. Son.—Solemn and calm reply: no mockery of his state, no grief concerning him either. Receivedst.—Or “receivedst to the full.” All thy good things.—“All thou didst account good, came to an end with life.” “Thy good things.” Notice that the corresponding word is not used of Lazarus’ “evil things.” He did not, probably, regard them as evil, but as part of God’s discipline towards him.
Luke 16:26. And beside all this.—I.e., “Even if it were not so, God’s decree has placed thee where thou art, and a great gulf between us, so that it is impossible to grant thy request.” So that they.—Rather, “in order that” none may pass it. Is fixed.—For ever impassable.
Luke 16:27-28. I pray thee, therefore.—His brethren were living carelessly as he had lived. In his solicitude on their account we have a certain change in his disposition—his selfishness gives way: and in this change we would gladly believe there is the germ of a better life. The general tone, however, of the parable forbids much stress being laid on this.
Luke 16:30. Nay, father Abraham.—Not “They will not hear them,” for he could not tell that; but “Leave them not to that uncertain chance; make their repentance sure by sending a messenger from the dead.”
Luke 16:31. If they hear not, etc.—The words of Abraham are stronger than those of the Rich Man—even the lesser work of persuasion, not to speak of the greater of bringing to repentance, could not be wrought by this means. The possibility of sending such a messenger is not denied. There is no impassable gulf between Hades and the world. Lazarus of Bethany (whose name so strangely corresponds to that of the beggar here) crossed it, and so did Christ Himself. The Pharisees did not believe, though confronted with the fact of the resurrection of some from the dead. Christ, after His rising again, did not go to them—the fact is here asserted that they would not have believed, even if He had done so. The reason for such unbelief has its explanation: mere marvels have not necessarily any moral value, and soon pall upon those who witness them.
MAIN HOMILETICS ON THE PARAGRAPH.— Luke 16:14-31
Abused Wealth the Rich Man’s Ruin.—The parable of the Unjust Steward teaches the right use of worldly wealth; and the central point of the miscellaneous sayings in Luke 16:14-18 is the permanence of the Law and the Prophets. Both points reappear in this parable.
I. The earthly contrast of the two lives.—There is a double contrast—the sharp and shocking diversity between the prodigal abundance of the Rich Man’s dress and fare and the squalid misery of the diseased beggar, and the contrast between the end of their lives. With regard to the first it is to be clearly understood that Jesus Christ is not running a-tilt against rich men, as if wealth was wickedness, or a beggar necessarily a saint. But it should be as clearly noted that He is declaring the essential wickedness and inhumanity which dog the possession of wealth, as a constant danger; namely, the use of it for selfish purposes, so as to preserve in all its sharpness the contrast between its possessor and the poor. The Rich Man’s duty to Lazarus was not discharged by letting him have the leavings of his feasts, as he seems to have done. Rich men may do small charities and yet be guilty of such use of their wealth as will sink them to ruin. The name Lazarus (Eleazar, “God is help”) suggests the thought of the poor man’s devoutness, though in the parable the fact of his piety is not dwelt upon. Not because Lazarus was pious, but because he was poor and leprous, was it the Rich Man’s business to help him. Christ’s teaching about wealth is not communistic or socialistic. He recognises fully the right of individual possession, but He emphatically asserts that possession is stewardship, and that we hold money, as we do everything, in trust for those who lack and need it. Lazarus dies first, worn out by privation and disease. Perhaps, if he had been carried indoors from the gate, he would have lasted longer. What a change for him! The one moment lying in the fierce sunshine, so motionless and helpless that the dogs came about him as if he were dead, and he had no strength to drive them away; and then he is carried by angels into Abraham’s bosom. He has no funeral, as the other has. The Rich Man dies, and, of course, has a splendid interment, with all the proper pomp and circumstance. His wealth can get him a fine funeral, of which he knows nothing; and that is all that it can do.
II. The contrast of the two lives in Hades.—Our Lord paints that unseen state in colours taken from the ordinary Jewish conceptions. “Abraham’s bosom,” the bearing of the soul by angels, the dialogues between the dead, were all familiar rabbinical ideas; so that it is difficult to say how far we have here representations of fact. The main idea seems to be that of the reversal, in Hades, of the earthly condition. Lazarus is now in the place of joy and abundance; the Rich Man is now the beggar lying at the gate. He who would give nothing of his abundance, but was deaf to the groans and blind to the misery at his gate, has now to feel the pangs of need and to crave a drop of water to cool his tongue. The solemn answer put into the lips of Abraham expresses the impossibility, from the very nature of that state, of granting the desired alleviation. It is a state of retribution, the outgrowth and necessary issue of the earthly life, and so cannot be otherwise than it is. “Remember.” The past will stand clear before the selfish man and be a torment—he is tortured by the very desires he has nourished and by the stings of conscience and memory. “Thy good things.” He who makes the world his good is necessarily wretched when he is swept out of it by the whirlwind of death, and sees, when too late, what a blunder his estimate of its good was. On the other hand, the pious beggar received things that were “evil” in reality, but yet were not the things which he regarded as truly evil; and because he, on his part, placed his good higher than the world, therefore evil wrought for good to him. The lesson of this parable is the converse of that of the Unjust Steward; namely, that the selfish use of wealth is fatal, and brings bitter retribution in another life. The second ground for the refusal of the request is the existence of the “great gulf” which forbids passage from either side. Doctrinal statements can scarcely be founded on the parable, yet we see that there is no hint of repentance in the Rich’s Man’s cry, and that the implication of the whole is that his character was set. True, the state of Hades is not a final state; but it is also true that the narrative gives no reason for holding that the character of its inhabitants is anything but permanent.
III. The sufficient warnings by Law and Prophets.—The rich man’s second petition has often been treated as a sign that his selfishness was melting, and that so he was on the road to a better mind. But the natural instinct of family is not in itself more than selfishness in another form; and his request implies that he thinks the fault of his being where he is, lies not at his door, but is due to imperfect warnings. That does not sound like repentance. “If I had had a message from the grave, I would have repented.” So many of us think that it is God’s fault, not ours, that we yield to temptation. But the real ground of our sinful, godless lives is not a deficiency of light and warning, but inward aversion. Every man has far more knowledge of good than he uses. It is not for lack either of warning or conviction that men are lost. They do not need enlightenment, but, as Christ significantly puts it here, “persuasion.” The Pharisees, whom Christ is pointing at here, were giving signal proof of the power of neglecting miraculous evidence, even while, like the Rich Man, they were calling out for it from Jesus. This latter portion of the parable is directed against them, and completes the reference of the whole to the preceding part of the chapter. The first part echoes the lesson of the Unjust Steward: this repeats the assertion of the permanent validity of Law and Prophets. But though directed presumably against the Pharisees, both have their lesson for us. We have knowledge and motive enough to walk in the paths of godliness. If we do not give heed to what we have, it would be vain to send even messengers from the dead to us. What is lacking in us, if we do not yield to the light, is not more light, but eyes to see, and a heart to love it.—Maclaren.
SUGGESTIVE COMMENTS ON Luke 16:14-31
Luke 16:14. “Derided Him.”—The Pharisees listened to these counsels concerning wealth with a scorn and contempt which expressed themselves openly. The Saviour and most of His followers were poor, and rich men are very apt to despise what they consider the cheap Quixotism of the views of pious men concerning the best use of riches, when those men are themselves poor.
No doubt the Pharisees found confirmation of their belief that the love of riches was compatible with the love of God in the fact that the Law spoke of riches as a mark of the Divine blessing.
Luke 16:15. The Judgment of Men and the Judgment of God.
I. Men see but the outside, and are easily deceived: God sees the heart, and cannot be deceived.
II. Man judges by one standard, God by another.—Rank, wealth, ability, learning, attract the admiration of men, while only moral and spiritual elevation of character wins the approval of God.
Luke 16:16. Until John and Since.
I. The ministry of the Baptist, short as it was in its duration, slight apparently in its consequences, is made the turning point of the dispensations. The spiritual history of the world was cleft in twain by that brief mission.
II. Our Lord regards that mission as already part of the past—almost of the far past. Time moves quietly when God is making history; one day is sometimes as a thousand years, no less truly than the converse.
III. There is a strength in the expression “presseth” which makes it less the statement of a fact than the utterance of a triumphant anticipation.—This is that tone of prophetic jubilation which breaks in so often upon sadder themes of discourse as the Saviour marches toward Jerusalem and Calvary.—Vaughan.
The Virtue of Violence.—“Presseth violently.” Violence is here for once made a virtue. In the life of the kingdom there are some characteristics fitly expressed by these strong words.
I. The life of the kingdom is, in part, a life of renunciations.—It has to make sacrifices, to make war on sins, vehemently to determine not to miss the heaven where only righteousness dwells with God.
II. The life of the kingdom is not an easy one, in what it demands of the reason. Not that Christ would commend haste or rashness in belief, or expect any man to believe first and then inquire. But even in believing there is a timidity which is not prudence, and a vehemence which is not presumption. The gospel is a life, the entrance upon a new idea and plan of existence; and, this being so, it is folly to make the question of faith or no faith a matter of caprice or accident. Therefore the man is to be commended who will brook no delay and no diversion in the settlement of the question of questions: how, in what allegiance, he is to live.
III. The life of the kingdom is a life of two chief activities.—Godward and manward. Devotion and work. Vehemence in prayer is not an incongruous term to apply to devotion. Force, zeal, earnestness too, are necessary to the perfection of the Christian character. Positive activity manward. For lack of this most men swim with the stream, and their spiritual life tends to decay. How much nobler the life of the man who “presses” into the kingdom!—Ibid.
Luke 16:16-18. The New Era.—
1. There is a change in the Divine method: the Law and the Prophets prepared men for the kingdom of God, but now the kingdom has come; the mercy of God to the sinful is revealed, and all are summoned to take advantage of it.
2. There is a general movement in human society; multitudes of the outcast and despised are pressing into the kingdom.
3. Yet the holiness of God which the Law proclaims remains for ever the same; the glad tidings of forgiveness do not imply a diminution of the Divine requirements.
4. On the contrary, under the gospel a severer and more spiritual standard of morality is set up: the sanctity of the marriage-tie, for example, is greater under Christianity than it had been in Jewish society.
Luke 16:19-31. Contrasted Destinies.
I. A series of solemn dramatic contrasts to startle the Pharisees out of their complacent selfishness.—
1. The contrast between Dives and Lazarus in life.
2. The contrast is resumed beyond the grave.
3. A contrast of character underlies the picture.
II. Passage from the dramatic to the didactic stage of the parable.—
1. The destinies of a lost soul are appealed in vain to the court of natural affection.
2. The contrasts of the hereafter are maintained by the inexorable necessities of the Divine government.
3. The permanence of the contrasted destinies beyond the grave is certified by the permanence of human character.
4. These final contrasts hereafter rest upon a common probation in this life.—Selby.
Dives and Lazarus.
I. Dives was lacking in the necessary grace of holy charity.—His ignorance of Lazarus was culpable. A man ought to know the sorrows of those who are in his path.
II. The other world-picture reverses their positions.—Two great principles prevent Dives’ misery from being mitigated.
1. God’s compensating justice.
2. God’s sovereign arrangement that in another world there should be the exact contrast of this.
III. Good desires may spring up too late in the heart.
IV. Every living man has provided for him, within his present grasp, all that is necessary for his own salvation.
V. The manner in which the Bible is to be savingly used.—Vaughan.
An Unfaithful Steward’s Doom.—The Pharisees scoffed at our Lord’s “visionary” account of property: this parable is His reply. The intense and natural curiosity of men about the future life has led them to pass over the tremendous moral and practical lessons of the parable, in their endeavour to discover what it reveals concerning the fate of the impenitent. But what is it that our Lord meant the parable to teach? The Rich Man thought that his wealth was his own, to do with as he liked. It never occurred to him that it all belonged to God. How did he incur such a terrible doom in the spirit-world? An awful and hopeless doom! By his flagrant breach of trust in not using his wealth for the relief of those whose sufferings touched the Divine heart, and to whom he should have been the minister of Divine pity. To God this was intolerable. The “flame” is the fiery displeasure which God feels at his selfishness.—Dale.
A Warning to the Selfish.
I. The covetous rich.—Condemned by Christ.
1. By direct reproof.
2. By illustrative parable.
II. The covetous rich and the godly poor.—
1. Contrasted in worldly condition.
2. Contrasted in the hour of death.
3. Contrasted in the unseen world.
III. Lessons of the story.—
1. Certain destruction awaits the worldly.
2. Peace and joy await those whose treasure is in heaven.
3. Repentance must be in this life: there is none beyond.—Taylor.
Here and Hereafter.—The story of two men.
I. In this world.—
1. The Rich Man.
2. The poor man.
II. In the next world.—
1. In Abraham’s bosom.
2. In hell.—Watson.
Outline of the Parable.
I. The earthly condition of the two men (Luke 16:19-22).
1. The Rich Man’s mode of life (Luke 16:19).
2. The poor man’s mode of life (Luke 16:20-21).
3. The death of the former (Luke 16:22 a).
4. That of the latter.
II. The condition of both in the world beyond the grave (Luke 16:23-31).
1. The torment of the Rich Man, and his request (Luke 16:23-24).
2. The reply of Abraham (Luke 16:25-26).
3. The Rich Man’s second request (Luke 16:27-28).
4. Abraham’s second reply (Luke 16:29-31).
The parable teaches—
1. The uncertainty and transitoriness of earthly blessings.
2. The responsibility of rich men, not only for what they do, but for what they do not do with their wealth.
3. The supremacy of the law of God as a guide to eternal life.—Speaker’s Commentary.
Selfishness and Its Doom.—
1. The Rich Man’s selfishness.
2. His indifference to the misery of his fellows.
3. His dreadful doom.
Two Scenes.
I. The earthly scene.—The condition and manner of life of the two men; their characters and dispositions, as yet unrevealed.
II. The Rich Man’s selfishness implied by his neglect of his poor neighbour.
III. The scene beyond the grave.—The altered circumstances of the two: the permanent character of the new conditions; relief of present misery, and a warning to those still on earth refused.
This World and The Next.
I. For mankind, after this life is done, another world remains, consisting of two opposite spheres or conditions—one of holiness and happiness, the other of sin and misery.
II. There is a way from this present life to the place of future misery, and also a way to the place of future blessedness.
III. There is no way over from one of these future states to the other.
IV. Our Lord would constrain us to make the needful transition now.—Arnot.
The parable emphasises the facts—
(1) that one may enjoy a high standing in the sight of men and be reprobate before God;
(2) that an unloving temper is essentially base; and
(3) that a terrible penalty is inflicted on those who misuse the world’s goods.
A Trilogy.—The parable of Lazarus and the Rich Man is the sublimest delineation of this side and of that side of the grave in its astounding antitheses. What is the trilogy of a Dante, in which He sings of hell, purgatory, and heaven, compared with the trilogy of this parable, which places with few but significant strokes the great whole of Earth, Gehenna, and Paradise, at once before our eyes.—Van Oosterzee.
Luke 16:19. “A certain rich man.”—Jesus said not, a calumniator; He said not, an oppressor of the poor; He said not, a robber of other men’s goods, nor a receiver of such, nor a false accuser; He said not, a spoiler of orphans, a persecutor of widows;—none of these. But what did he say? “There was a certain rich man.” And what was his crime? A lazar lying at his gate, and lying unrelieved.—Augustine.
Abuse of Riches.—Riches may be abused
(1) not only by positive misuse, but also
(2) by the careless and thoughtless use of them. These two lessons are taught respectively by the preceding and by the present parable.
Luke 16:20. “Named Lazarus.”—Seems he not to you to have been reading from that book where He found the name of the poor man written, but found not the name of the rich; for that book is the book of life.—Augustine.
Luke 16:21. “The dogs came.”—The kindness of the brute brings out in deep relief the inhumanity of man.
The nakedness and hunger of Lazarus are contrasted with the rich clothing and sumptuous banquets of the Rich Man.
Luke 16:22. “The beggar died.”—The beggar died first, being taken from his sufferings; the other was given longer space for repentance.
“Carried by angels.”—Here is one who in his life had not a single friend; and now suddenly not one, but many angels wait upon him.—Luther.
The Beggar’s Escort.—
I. Angelic ministry.—Surplusage of angelic service. Not one angel, but two or more, an indication of the glad and bright willingness with which the humble task of duty was done. A gracious and honouring superfluity of helpfulness.
II. The differentiation of Divine and human estimates.—The angels were doing God’s bidding. The plurality of this deputed bodyguard means, not only service, but honour. A message to us not to stand on our dignity and self-respect, but to honour Christ’s lowly ones. The scornful rabbis would have declined to accompany a beggar’s funeral. The angels gladly escort his liberated spirit to the abodes of the blessed, for he was a true “son of Abraham.” Would you feel honoured if asked to attend a pauper’s funeral, or to help to lay the deal-encased body in the grave? Or would you judge only by the outward appearance, and show yourself at the rich man’s burial? The angels “see not as man seeth,” and count it an honour to be the bodyguard of a beggar, and the ministrants of his spirit.—Grosart.
“Abraham’s bosom.”—To correct the notion that wealth, as such, excludes from happiness hereafter; or that poverty, as such, ensures fruition of that happiness, it is sufficient to observe that the beggar Lazarus is carried by angels into the bosom of the rich man Abraham, who made a right use of the riches of this world.
A Sudden Change for The Better.—In an instant Lazarus finds in the heavenly world the sympathy and help which had been denied him on earth.
“And was buried.”—There is a sublime irony, a stain upon all earthly glory, in this mention of his burial, connected as it is with what is immediately to follow. The world, loving its own, follows him, no doubt, with its pomp and pride, till it could not follow any farther. There was not wanting the long procession of the funeral solemnities through the streets of Jerusalem, the crowd of hired mourners, the spices and ointment, very precious, wrapping the body; nor yet the costly sepulchre, on which the genial virtues of the departed were recorded. This splendid carrying of the forsaken tenement of clay to the grave is for him what the carrying into Abraham’s bosom was for Lazarus; it is his equivalent, which, however, profits him little where he now is. For death has been for him an awakening from his flattering dream of ease and self-enjoyment upon the stern and terrible realities of eternity. He has sought to save his life, and has lost it. The play in which he acted the rich man is ended, and, as he went off the stage, he was stripped of all the trappings with which he had been furnished that he might sustain his part. There remains only the fact that he has played it badly, and will therefore have no praise, but uttermost rebuke, from Him who allotted to him this character to sustain.—Trench.
Luke 16:23. “In hell.”—The Rich Man is thus represented as awakening from the momentary unconsciousness of death to full consciousness; and the first object he discerns is Lazarus, whom he had seen lying in wretchedness at his gate, reposing in the seat of honour beside Abraham.
Luke 16:24. “Father Abraham.”—This is the only example in Scripture of the invocation of saints, and does not afford much encouragement for the practice.
Luke 16:25-26. The Request Denied.—The request is denied for two weighty reasons:
1. It is unreasonable.
2. It is impossible to grant it.
Luke 16:25. Memory in Another World.—
I. Memory will be so widened as to take in the whole life.
II. Memory in a future state will probably be so rapid as to embrace all the past life at once.
III. It will be a constant remembrance.
IV. Memory will be associated with a perfectly accurate knowledge, and a perfectly sensitive conscience as to the criminality of the past.—Maclaren.
Different Modes of Divine Procedure.—God deals with men in different ways: on some He seeks to awaken gratitude by bestowing upon them many gifts; others He leads through suffering to humility and pious resignation in spirit. And in accordance with the results produced is the retribution in the future world: the ungrateful find themselves in poverty and misery; the meek are healed of their wounds, and exalted to felicity.
Luke 16:26. “Beside all this.”—Not only would there be a moral impropriety in granting the request, but the decree of God had made it impossible to grant it. An unfathomable gulf which could not be spanned separated between the Rich Man and the company of the blessed.
Luke 16:27-28. “Send him to my father’s house.”—The request of the Rich Man is incompatible with the interpretation of the parable, which regards it as condemning riches, and not merely the abuse of riches. The five brethren are in danger of coming to the place of torment because of their unbelief and impenitence, and not because of their being wealthy.
Luke 16:28. “Lest they also.”—We cannot escape the conclusion that in the Rich Man’s words there is a certain reproach against God and the Old-Testament economy, for his not having received sufficient warning. The reproach is rolled back by Abraham’s reply: “They are sufficiently warned: the fault is theirs if they, too, go to the place of torment.”
The Five Brethren.—The effect which might possibly have been produced upon the five brethren of Dives, by Lazarus “going to them from the dead” has been described as follows: “He stands and knocks at the door of their mansion, and at length enters in his grave-shroud. His glazed eyeballs and hollow cheeks declare him a tenant of the narrow house. In deep, sepulchral tones he says, “I have come from the night of the grave, and I know of death, and of hell, and of heaven, and it’s all true.” But the eldest brother is a Pharisee. He is a self-righteous man. He fasts and he prays. He pays tithes of all he possesses. He is not as other men are—the message cannot be for him. The second brother is a Sadducee. He believes neither in angel nor in spirit. He is the type of the sceptic of the present day—when death comes, it is utter annihilation. He explains away the appearance of Lazarus as an optical illusion. The third is a merchant—buying, and selling, and getting gain. He is an avaricious man; but his brother left him no legacy in his will, and he cannot now believe that he cares for his soul in eternity, when he cared so little for his body on earth. The fourth is a fashionable man, a man of æsthetic taste and culture; he loses himself in the beauties of nature, of art, of literature. The sight of Lazarus in his mansion was an offence to him. What had this beggar got to do here. The message could not be for him. The fifth was a delicate, pale-faced youth; the least thing put his poor heart in a flutter. He could bear no excitement, and, as he beheld the form of Lazarus in his grave-clothes, he swooned away; and when he recovered, the apparition was gone.—Robertson.
Luke 16:29. “Hear them.”—There are two kinds of hearing.
I. That which is confined to outward acquaintance with the Law and the Prophets, and acceptance of their teaching Divine truth.
II. That which is manifested in obedience to the will of God revealed in His Word. The Scriptures were read in the synagogues, and were carefully studied by the Rabbis, so that no Jew could fail to “hear “in the one sense of the word. There needed to be added to intellectual knowledge a love of holiness, and practice of it in daily life.
Luke 16:30. “Nay, … but if one went.”—As the works of the blessed dead follow them, so follow this man his ignorance of the way of salvation, his neglect and practical contempt of the extant Word, his self-will and self-vindication, his pertinacious demand of signs and wonders from the mighty hand of God.—Stier.
Luke 16:31. “If they hear not,” etc.—
I. The ordinary means of salvation which we enjoy are amply sufficient.
II. If the ordinary means of grace fail to convert us, no extraordinary—that is, miraculous—means are to be expected.
III. When the ordinary means fail to convert men, miracles, though they were wrought, would fail also.—Foote