Luke
16:14-31
The teachings of Messiah, 9:51-19:44
5. The Great Reversal, 16:14-18:14
i] The rich man and Lazarus
SynopsisIn the context of the Pharisees ridiculing Jesus, following his statement "you cannot serve God and wealth", Luke records Jesus' condemnation of the Pharisees self-justification, v14-15, a saying concerning the fulfilment of the law in Christ, v16, a saying on the immutable nature of the law, v17, a saying on the law regarding divorce, v18, and an illustrative fable on the Rich Man and Lazarus, v19-31.
Teaching
In the age of the dawning kingdom, everything is turned on its head; the righteous are judged and the humble blessed.
Issues
i] Context: See 1:5-25. We now come to the next set of six episodes, The Great Reversal, 16:14-18:14, episodes which reveal, in the presence of the coming kingdom, the condemnation of the "righteous" (self-righteous) under the law, in contrast to the blessing of the humble (repentant) under grace. This theme is central to the previous six episodes, in fact, as Ellis notes, "it may be that Luke intends the twelve episodes to be viewed as one unit." None-the-less, the six episodes before us do particularly focus on the theme of the Great Reversal.
The opening episode, 16:14-21, underlines the editorial theme of the great reversal, evident in the law / grace dichotomy. It presents as a single unit, although not all agree, eg., Marshall, Bock, Fitzmyer, .... In 17:1-10, Jesus warns his disciples of the danger of causing "one of these little ones to sin." The "little ones" are God's children, Christ's brothers. The "sin" is law-righteousness, pharisaism, nomism. This fact is confirmed by a saying on forgiveness - an impossible law to keep. The disciples call for faith to do, but Jesus offers them a faith to receive. In 17:11-19, Luke illustrates the one law that we must obey, faith / reliance on Jesus for the full realisation of the promised covenant blessings. A question asking when the kingdom of God would come then prompts a set of apocalyptic sayings, 17:20-37, followed up by the parable of the judge and the widow, 18:1-8. The following parable, the Pharisee and the Tax Collector, 18:9-14, also plays an important contextual role. The parable answers the question "whom does God vindicate?" In the day of judgment, when the Son of Man comes, who will stand? The answer is unexpected, because it is not the religious / righteous who stand in that terrible day, but the one who is humble before God and confident of his mercy. Such is the Great Reversal.
ii] Structure: All things are reversed:
Setting, v14-15:
The Pharisees scoff at Jesus, v14;
A word of condemnation, v15:
"what people value highly is detestable in God's sight."
Saying #1, v16:
"the Law and the Prophets were proclaimed ...."
Paired sayings #2, v17-18:
"it is easier for heaven and earth to disappear than ...."
"anyone who divorces his wife and marries another ...."
Parable - the rich man and Lazarus, v19-31.
iii] Interpretation:
Luke now deals with the great reversal realised in the coming of Christ: In the face of the coming kingdom, good people under the law are condemned and repentant sinners under grace are blessed.
In response to the Pharisees' sneer, Jesus tells them that in the face of the coming kingdom, their love of money condemns them. Jesus exposes the self-righteousness of the Pharisees (possibly as it relates to almsgiving). In truth, "an outwardly cultivated righteousness can only disgust God", Nolland. This is a terrible time for a religious person to be found wanting before God. The time is fulfilled, the realisation of the covenant (the agreement between God and mankind) is now, the kingdom of God is at hand, and all mankind is being forced up against it, either to find themselves blessed, or cursed, v16.
Jesus goes on in the following sayings, v17-18, to provide evidence for the present reality of the kingdom. The Pharisees know well that the law is unchangeable - "the moral elements of the Law are indestructible", Plummer. Yet before their very eyes the moral demands of the law are changing. Take for example divorce. Under the Mosaic Law, divorce was possible; under the new utopian law of the kingdom, to divorce and remarry, or marry a divorced person, is to commit adultery. The Mosaic law "is superseded by a higher and prior demand under which all now stand", Ellis. Such a fulfilling of the law, in the ministry of Christ the messiah, proclaims that the kingdom of God is indeed at hand.
The parable of the rich man and Lazarus, v19-31, serves to illustrate / reinforce the point made so far. The kingdom of God is at hand, the great reversal of the day of judgment is upon us, the self-righteous brought low, the humble lifted high. Of all people, the Pharisees, with their knowledge of the scriptures, should realise that the kingdom of God is at hand.
The parable of the rich man and Lazarus, v19-31: This parable (a story about the reversal of fortunes) is not a typical crisis / kingdom parable, but is best classified as such. It proclaims that the kingdom of God is upon us; the day of judgment is at hand; now is the time to repent. So, the parable serves as an abstraction of God's kingdom realised, as illustrated in the traditional folk-tale of the reversal of fortunes in the afterlife. For the classification of Jesus' parables, see The Parables of Jesus, 8:1-18.
So, the parable illustrates a judgment scene, the great reversal, the settling of accounts. This reality is pressing up against us even now - "the kingdom of God is at hand." The righteous may seek to "justify themselves", but "the law and the prophets" holds all to account, such that even the righteous are about to be overwhelmed by the day of judgment - the great reversal when the humble (repentant) are "comforted" and the self-righteous "are in agony." "In the face of this challenge of the hour, evasion is impossible", Jeremias.
As Ellis argues, this parable serves to illustrate the truth revealed in the introductory sayings. The sayings proclaim the present reality of "the coming messianic age", a reality demonstrated by the "superseding" of the Mosaic law "as a pointer [that] the law stands fulfilled." Israel has this witness in Moses and the Prophets, v29, such that "the abiding witness of the Old testament message [serves as a] sufficient basis for believing the kingdom of God message. No miraculous sign would be more persuasive."
Of course, other interpretations offer themselves. Nolland suggests that the parable serves to condemn "conspicuous consumption"; such people "will discover in Hades the bitter truth of the implications of their disregard for the basic demands of the law and the prophets. Those who live so, despite all pretence of piety, will not mend their ways even if one should rise from the dead to bring them warning."
The literary form of the parable: This kingdom parable presents in the form of a moral folk-tale. It is likely that it was a well-known Jewish story of the reversal of fortunes in the afterlife. Similar stories have been found in other Eastern cultures, eg., Egypt, "The journey of Si-Osiris"
Jeremias argues that the individual elements of the story - the preaching of the resurrection, the resurrection of the just and unjust, the blessing of the poor and the cursing of the rich, the goings on in heaven and hell / hades / the underworld - are not used by Jesus for a didactic purpose, but are simply elements of a well-known story which Jesus uses to announce the great reversal. "Where has Jesus ever suggested that wealth in itself merits hell, and that poverty in itself is rewarded by paradise?" Jeremias.
The moral of the story is found in v29; "they have Moses and the Prophets, they should listen to them." This is most likely part of the original folk-tale and not a punch-line provided by Jesus.
Evans thinks that the concluding words, v30-31, are a Lukan construction making the point that "a message of exhortation to repentance through the preaching of the resurrection of Jesus ..... is represented as being no more than what the law (Moses) and the prophets had been saying." Yet, the point of these verses in the folk-tale is that the miraculous return of a dead person from Hades is no greater evidence for the need to live a Godly life than the divine Word found in the Scriptures. So, these two verses are part of the original folk-tale and, as with the story itself, says nothing whatsoever about the resurrection of Christ,
The issue of divorce and remarriage: Jesus' take on the law concerning divorce is a typical example of his fulfilling / completing of the Law of Moses. In exposing God's perfect intent behind covenant law, Jesus forces the child of God to recognise the fact that righteousness cannot be earned but only given as a gift of grace through the instrument of faith, a faith like that of Abraham.
The Law of Moses regulated divorce by the provision of a contract given to the wife, indicating that she was free to remarry. The grounds for divorce were a matter of some debate; see Deut.24:1-4. As Jesus explained, it was a regulation to restrain sinful behaviour, but in no way reflects the divine will, a will evident in the permanent nature of the one-flesh bond of marriage, Gen.2:24. As Jesus puts it; "What God has joined, let not man separate."
Matthew covers the issue of divorce in some detail, cf., Matt.,5:31-32, 19,3-9. The intention of the command in all three gospels is probably the same, but is made somewhat unclear by the exception in Matthew; parektoV logou porneiaV, "except a matter (on the grounds) of fornication." Given the difficulties caused by the exception, it is understandable why Luke would leave it out. Mark goes for an even simpler version, Mk.10:11-12. At first sight, the exception looks like an example of reductionism, blunting Jesus' exposition of the law. Yet, if the exception is original, it helps us understand Luke's rather difficult second clause; "marrying the one having been divorced by a man / husband commits adultery."
The gist of Jesus' instruction on divorce is probably something like this: any man who divorces his wife for another woman, except on the grounds of adultery, makes her an adulteress / commits adultery against her (He does this by putting her in a situation where she is forced into adultery by taking another partner in order to survive). By implication, any man who marries a divorced woman (a wife who has been divorced on the grounds of adultery) commits adultery (by marrying an adulteress).
The exception does not imply that having divorced an adulterous wife a man may remarry. A legal divorce does not annul the original one flesh union. Divorce only allows a person to separate from an adulterous partner. The exception is a ground for divorce, not a ground for annulment.
For the logic behind Jesus' utopian exposition of the Law, see Introductory notes to the Great Sermon, 6:17-49.
iv] Synoptics:
See 3:1-20. In this editorial unit, under the topic of the Great Reversal, Luke gathers a set of sayings followed up by a parable. The opening, v14-15, is unique to Luke, with v14 probably from his own hand, followed in v15 by an independent saying of Jesus, L source. These introductory verses tie nicely to the parable.
Then follows two sayings on the great reversal, with respect to the Mosaic Law in general, v16-17. Matthew 11:12-13 parallels v16, although he has v16a at the end of the saying. Both versions probably reflect the received tradition available to the authors, rather than arguing that one of them has reworked Q. Matthew 5:18 parallels v17.
This is followed up by a saying on a specific law, namely divorce, serving as an example of the great reversal at work. Parallels may be found in Matthew 5:32, 19:9, and Mark 10:11-12. The saying is usually assigned to Q.
The parable of the rich man and Lazarus follows. This folk-tale is unique to Luke. It is usually assigned as an L source; a special Lukan source.
v] Exposition: A simple exposition of this passage may be found in the linked pew-level Sermon Notes.
Text - 16:14
In the face of the coming kingdom, everything is turned on its head, v14-31: i] A condemnation of the Pharisees' self-righteousness, v14-15. Jesus has just finished making the point that it is not possible to stand in the face of the coming kingdom and "serve the things of this world." Foolish as it may seem, this is exactly what "the children of light" do. The Pharisees ("who loved money" - Luke's comment) react with cynicism. Jesus' response is straight to the point. The Pharisees may be impressed with their own self-righteousness (when it comes to money, their alms-giving might be quite impressive), but in the eyes of God, their status is nothing; they should beware!
de "-" - but/and. Transitional, indicating a step in the narrative.
uJparconteV (uJparkw) pres. part. "who" - [the pharisees] being [lovers of money]. The participle is probably, adjectival, attributive, limiting "the Pharisees", as NIV; "who were lovers of money", ESV. Possibly adverbial, causal, "the Pharisees ...... sneered at Jesus because they loved money (there are those who argue that in NT. Greek a participle is always adverbial unless it can be proved otherwise, eg. it is articular). The present tense possibly indicating "a permanent characteristic", Plummer. "The Pharisees were fond of money", Moffatt, or stronger "avaricious", TH.
hkouon (akouw) imperf. "heard [all this]" - was hearing [all these things]. The imperfect, being durative, is possibly expressing the fact that the Pharisees had been listening all along to Jesus' teaching on this world's things / money.
exemukthrizon (ekmukthrizw) imperf. "were sneering" - they were ridiculing, mocking, deriding. Imperfect is again durative, as NIV. Lit. "turn up the nose." A fairly strong reaction, but understandable, particularly for those who see wealth as a blessing from God and who also understand the impossible nature of Jesus' utopian ethic. "Jeered at him", NJB.
v15
A word of condemnation against the Pharisees
autoiV dat. pro. "to them - [and he said] to them. Dative of indirect object.
oiJ dikaiounteV "the ones who justify" - [you are] the ones justifying [yourselves]. The participle serves as a substantive, predicate nominative of the verb to-be with "you" as the subject. "You" is emphatic, "you yourselves". "The ones' = "those characterised by the fact that", TH. The present tense is possibly tendential, expressing attempted action, so "trying to justify yourselves", or simply "claim to be / present as, just", TH. They strive to maintain a high moral standing, primarily before their fellows. Creed argues that it is in the context of the use of money, particularly almsgiving; "you do indeed give alms, but you only do so to justify yourselves before men", Creed.
enwpion + gen. "in the eyes of" - before [men]. Spatial, "in the presence of", but possibly with the sense "in the opinion of." "You are always making yourselves look good", CEV.
oJti "-" - [but/and god knows the hearts of you] because. Introducing a causal clause explaining why their reasoning in rejected by God. That "knows your hearts" carries the implicit consequence "and judges them", so Marshall. So, "God knows what you are like (and holds you accountable), for there is nothing more loathsome to God than human pride", Barclay. Another possible approach is "I can make this complaint because the things that people exalt are an abomination before God", Bock.
en + dat. "among" - [the thing esteemed] in [men]. Culy suggests association, "with / among". Peterson suggests the prepositional phrase carries the sense "in the opinion of men", in much the same way as the prepositional phrase "before God" carries the sense "in the opinion of / in the judgment of God."
bdelugma (a atoV) "detestable [in God's sight]" - is detestable, an abomination, abhorrent [before god]. In the immediate context where the issue of stewardship of the resources on loan to us from God is covered, v1-13, the Pharisees, whose stewardship under the law is impeccable (tithing), are condemned for loving their wealth (as we all do!). Their righteousness under the law is an abomination to God. It is for this reason that we need to stand in Christ's righteousness rather than our own.
v16
ii] Saying #1, v16: This verse is usually linked to verses 17 and 18, or possibly just verse 17, or even left to stand as an independent saying, but it is rarely linked to v15, a word of condemnation against the Pharisees. None-the-less, it does seem likely that this verse, with its dominant judgment theme, is intended to interact with v15. The Pharisees, with their flawed works-based holiness / nomism, are like a stricken ship being driven upon a rocky shore; they are about to come to grief in the face of the kingdom's coming. Since the time when John the Baptist announced the coming of the long-promised kingdom of God, it has burst in upon the world and all humanity is being forced up against it. Confronted with this reality, a person must either resist and be condemned, or believe and be blessed. For the heresy of Nomism, see background notes 11:37-54.
oJ nomoV kai oiJ profhtai "the Law and the Prophets" - the law and the prophets. Nominative subject of an assumed verb to-be. The books of the Law and the books of the Prophets, although here, without a verb, the statement serves as "a summary way of referring to Old Testament preaching", Fitzmyer.
eprofhteusan (profhteuw) aor. "were proclaimed" - were prophesied / were. Variant, obviously transposed from Matthew's version of this saying, Matt.11:13. An assumed verb to-be may be intended, "till John we had the Law and the Prophets", Berkeley, so NJB, REB, .... An obvious ellipsis like this usually indicates that the verb to-be is intended. Other contenders are "were enough till John", Rieu; "continue up to John", Johnson; "lasted till John", Moffatt; "were the supreme revelation up to John", Barclay; "were in force", Phillips.
mecri + gen. "until [John]" - up to [john]. Matthew has e{wV. Temporal, extension of time "up to." Possibly "up to and including", but the intended division may be the beginning of the ministry of John, so "up to John", since his message was the same as that of Jesus, namely "the kingdom of God is at hand." John is somewhat of a pivot point between the Sinai covenant and the renewed covenant realised in Jesus.
tou qeou (oV) gen. "of God" - [from then the kingdom] of god. The genitive is usually classified as verbal, subjective, although adjectival, possessive may be a better classification. The kingdom of God entails "all the blessings that are brought by the eschatological rule of God", Nolland. See tou qeou, 4:43.
euaggelizetai (euaggelizw) pres. pas. "is being preached" - is being proclaimed. The present tense is durative, where the action implied is continuous; here of communicating an important message. "From then onwards the kingdom of God has been preached", NJB.
paV "everyone" - [and] all, every = everyone. Possibly "anyone", the kingdom is open to all, so "anyone presses in", Manson. "Everybody" is more likely, not "all the Jewish authorities", but "everyone."
biazetai (biazw) pres. pas "is forcing his way" - is being violently forced [into it]. The intended sense is unclear. Note the following:
•iThe present tense is possibly tendential, expressing attempted action, "trying to", although more likely durative, where the action begins in the past and continues into the present.
•iThe action of the verb primarily describes the application of a strong force, although some argue for a less violent constant pressure. This action may be positive or negative.
•iThe preposition eiV can mean "into" or "to / toward", or "against", even possibly representing an Aramaic preposition not required in Greek, so "everyone oppresses it", Leaney.
•iThe voice of the verb is either middle or passive; active, "to force"; middle, "to make use of force"; passive, "to be forced." The middle voice is accepted by most commentators.
So, the choice is usually between everyone trying to force their way into the kingdom, "storm his way into it", Barclay, as NIV, along with most translations, or everyone is acting violently against / striving against the kingdom, "but every man treats it with violence", Torrey.
Given that not paV, "everyone", uses force to get in the kingdom, or uses force to oppose the kingdom, the passive voice is more likely. The passive is usually taken to mean "everyone is urged to enter the kingdom", although the more likely sense is that "everyone is forced up against the kingdom", ie., The kingdom is bursting in on the world, and everyone is being forced up against it. Confronted with this reality, a person must either resist and be condemned, or believe and be blessed. Note Matthew 11:12 for a different slant on a very similar saying.
v17
iii] Paired sayings #2, v17-18. "The moral elements of the Law are indestructible", Plummer, and yet when linked to v18, we see that the immutable is made mutable in the face of the coming Kingdom. The Mosaic Law is being set aside ("fulfilled") because of the arrival of something greater. To touch even the smallest bit of the law is an anathema, yet we see in verse 18 that this is exactly what is happening. So, these paired sayings demonstrate that the Mosaic Law has indeed been turned on its head, as evidence of the great reversal. Such an impossible event must herald the inauguration of God's long-promised reign through His messiah. The Mosaic law "is superseded by a higher and prior demand under which all now stand", Ellis.
de "-" - but/and. Transitional, indicating a new saying. Best untranslated, as NIV.
eukopwteron (eukopoV) com. adj. "easier" - [it is] easier. Comparative predicate adjective; "it is easier." "It is an easier thing for heaven and earth to pass away than for one comma of the Law to be deleted", Rieu.
parelqein aor. inf. "to disappear" - [the heaven and the earth] to pass away, come to an end, disappear. "Cease to be", Barclay. The infinitive, with its accusative subject, "heaven and earth", serves as the subject of the verb to-be; "heaven and earth to pass away is easier ...."
h] "than" - or = than. Here the disjunctive serves as a comparative, introducing a comparative clause. The clause consists of a combined subject formed by an accusative infinitive construction, "one small stroke to fall of the law", with an assumed verb to be, "is", with its predicate adjective "easy"; "than it is easy for one dot of the law to become void."
mian keraian acc. "the least stroke of a pen" - one small stroke. The accusative subject of the infinitive "to fall." The jot or tittle, a small stroke mark of a pen to distinguish certain letters of the Hebrew alphabet, eg. d, r, h.
pesein (piptw) aor. inf. "to drop" - to fall. The infinitive, with its accusative subject "one small stroke", serves as the subject of an assumed verb to-be; "for heaven and earth to disappear is easier than for one dot of the law to become void is easy." It's easier for the world to disappear than for the law to become invalid", TH.
tou nomou (oV) gen. "of the Law" - of the law. The genitive is ablative, source / origin; "from the law."
v18
A saying on the divine ideal that lays behind the Mosaic Law concerning divorce, v18. To make the point that the kingdom of God is indeed "at hand", Jesus points out how the ethic of the dawning kingdom has already transcended the immutable Law of Moses.
oJ apoluwn (apoluw) pres. part. "[anyone] who divorces" - [all] the ones divorcing, sending away. If paV, "all", is taken as a substantive, "everyone", then the participle is adjectival, attributive, limiting "anyone"; "any man who divorces his wife", Barclay.
autou gen. pro. "his" - [the wife] of him. The genitive is adjectival, relational.
gamwn (gamew) pres. part. "marries" - [and] marrying [another, commits adultery]. The present tense here is gnomic, expressing a timeless truth. The participle is again adjectival, attributive, limiting "anyone", but also possibly adverbial, final, expressing purpose, he divorces his wife "in order to marry another woman", so Nolland, ie., divorce, with the intention of marrying another, is adulterous. Only "divorcing" takes an article, thus making "divorcing and remarrying" a single act.
kai "and" - and. Coordinate seems likely, but possibly either inferential, "and so / therefore", or consecutive, "and so / with the result that", even adjunctive, "also"; "and also, anyone marrying a woman divorced on the grounds of fornication is an adulterer."
o ... gamwn (gamew) pres. part. "the man who marries" - the one marrying]. The participle serves as a substantive, nominative subject of the verb "to divorce"
apolelumenhn acc. perf. part. "a divorced woman" - the one having been divorced. The participle serves as a substantive, accusative direct object of the participle "marrying".
apo + gen. "-" - from [a man, husband, commits adultery (violates the one flesh bond of marriage)]. Expressing separation, "away from." The sense of this clause is not overly clear, but as indicated in the notes above, The Issue of Divorce and Remarriage, the instruction probably concerns marrying a woman who was divorced on the grounds of adultery (ie., the Matthean exception, "except for adultery"). Such a union is adulterous. As Marshall notes, in these instructions, Jesus is "going beyond Jewish law."
v19
iii] The parable of the Rich Man and Lazarus, v19-31. The parable of the Rich Man and Lazarus is used by Jesus to illustrate the Great Reversal realised in the coming of the kingdom. The folk-tale illustrates the reversal of fortunes now evident in the coming kingdom. In like manner to the reversal of fortunes in the folk-tale, in the age of the dawning kingdom, the righteous (self-righteous) are judged, and the humble (repentant) blessed - good people are going to hell and bad people are going to heaven. What next! Even the immutable Law is found mutable in the face of the coming kingdom.
As already noted, the story does not represent Jesus' teaching on the hereafter. The description, in this folk-tale of Hades and of souls at death going into the underworld for punishment, is not part of Jesus' eschatological teaching.
eipen de kai eteran parabolhn "-" - and he spoke another parable. Variant, obviously added to deter a literal interpretation of the story.
de "-" - but/and, now. Transitional, indicating a step in the narrative; "Now there was a rich man."
enedidusketo (endiduskw) imperf. "who was dressed" - [a certain man was rich and] was clothing himself. The imperfect is customary, or just being used for background information: "it was his custom to dress in the finest cloths."
eufrainomenoV (eufrainw) pres. pas. part. "lived" - [with purple and linen] being merry, glad, rejoicing (often used of feasting) [extravagantly]. Attendant circumstance participle expressing action accompanying the verb "was clothed"; "it was his custom to dress ..... and live in luxury every day."
kaq (kata) + acc. "every [day]" - according to [day]. Distributive use of the preposition, as NIV.
v20
The rich man's house is a gated compound with Lazarus positioned at the gate for alms. The name Lazarus is used in the story because it is a common one, like John Smith in English tradition.
onomati (a atoV) dat. "named [Lazarus]" - [a certain poor man] by name [lazarus, had been laid toward the gate of him]. Dative of reference / respect; "with respect to his name, Lazarus" = "named Lazarus." The pluperfect verb "having been laid" expresses the fact that he had been laid there and was still there.
eilkwmenoV (elkow) perf. pas. pat. "covered with sores" - having been covered with sores, ulcerated. The participle is adjectival, attributive, limiting "a certain poor man"; "a beggar named Lazarus, who was covered with sores, was laid ..."
v21
The description of the rich man and Lazarus is of one man blessed and another abandoned - the righteous are blessed and sinners abandoned, but ......
epiqumwn (epqumew) pres. part. "longing" - [and] desiring. The participle is adjectival, limiting, by describing the man; "he was a man who longed to eat from the rich man's table." The present tense is possibly being used to express an unfulfilled wish.
cortasqhnai (cortazw) aor. pas. inf. "to eat" - to be filled. The infinitive is usually classified as complementary, completing the sense of the participle "longing", although after a cognitive verb, as here, it may be treated as introducing a dependent statement of perception expressing what he longed for; "he longed to satisfy his hunger", Barclay.
apo + gen. "-" - from. Expressing separation, or serving instead of a partitive genitive.
twn piptontwn (piptw) gen. pres. part. "what fell" - the things falling [from the table of the rich man]. The participle serves as a substantive, "from what fell." The scraps may be the pieces of flat bread used to clean one's hands at the end of the meal and then cast aside. "He was happy to eat the scraps that fell from the rich man's table", CEV.
alla "-" - but. Adversative; introducing a clause contrasting what was desired with what actually happened.
kai "even" - and = even. Ascensive, as NIV.
ercomenoi (ercomai) pres. mid. part. "came" - [dogs] coming [were licking the sores of him]. Attendant circumstance participle expressing action accompanying the verb "to lick." Dogs were regarded as unclean animals, most being scavengers rather than household pets.
v22
de "the time [came]" - and [it happened]. Transitional, denoting the next step in the narrative. Typically Lukan form, best treated as a temporal clause, "Then the poor man died and was carried by the angels", TNT. As already noted, using this verse to support an immediate resurrection at death, as opposed to a resurrection of the dead at the return of Christ, is unwise. This applies to the following images of hell, etc.
apoqanein (apoqnhskw) aor. inf. "when [the beggar] died" - [the poor man] to die [and him to be carried away]. This infinitive, along with the infinitive apenecahnai, "to be carried away", serve as the subject of the impersonal verb egeneto, "it happened, came to be." The accusative subject of the infinitive "to die" is "the poor man", and the accusative subject of "to be carried away", is auton, "him". "It happened that he poor man died and was carried away by the angels to Abraham's side."
uJpo + gen. "and [the angels]" - by [the angels into the bosom of abraham, and = also the rich man died and he was buried]. Expressing agency; "carried away by the angels."
v23
en + dat. "in [hell]" - [and] in [hades]. Local, expressing space / place. The rich man was in the place of the dead; "the netherworld", NAB. "From among the dead", Phillips.
uJparcwn (uJparcw) pres. part. "where he was" - being, existing [in a state of torment]. The participle is adverbial, best treated as temporal, "while being in torment."
en + dat. "in [torment]" - in [torture]. Local, expressing state or condition; "in a state of torment."
eparaV (epairw) aor. part. "he looked up" - having lifted up [the eyes]. The participle is adverbial, possibly temporal; "Then, while being in torment in Hades, he lifted his eyes."
apo + gen. "-" - [he sees abraham] from [far off and lazarus in the bosoms of him]. Expressing source / origin; "a long way off", HCSB.
v24
Hades is the Greek term for Sheol, the place of the dead, and is sometimes used in the LXX for the habitation of the unrighteous dead. In this story, hades is the residence of the unrighteous dead, with "Abraham's side" being heaven.
kai "so" - and [he]. Possibly inferential / consecutive; "and so he ....."
fwnhsaV (fwnew) aor. part. "so he called [to him]" - having called [said, father abraham have mercy on me and send lazarus]. Attendant circumstance participle expressing action accompanying the main verb "he said"; "he cried out and said". Redundancy produces "he shouted", Barclay, so NIV.
iJna + subj. "to" - that. Introducing a final clause expressing purpose, "in order that he may dip."
bayh/ (baptw) aor. subj. "dip" - he may dip. Note that this verb takes the accusative of the thing dipped, namely "the finger", and the genitive of that into which it is dipped, namely the uJdatoV, "water."
tou daktulou (oV) gen. " of [his] finger" - [the tip] of the finger [of him into water and may cool the tongue of me]. The genitive is adjectival, partitive.
oJti "because" - because [i am suffering in this flame]. Introducing a causal clause explaining why Lazarus should place his wetted finger on the rich man's tongue.
v25
An actual reversal of rich and poor at the great assize, of the rich suffering and the poor comforted, serves to promote the story line rather than a propositional truth. Attempts at contextualising / spiritualising the "agony", etc., eg. "the spiritual torture of remorse", Hauck, ignores the fact that Jesus is using this story as an illustration.
oJti "that" - [but/and abraham said, child, remember] that. Here introducing an object clause / dependent statement of perception expressing what should be remembered.
en + dat. "in [your lifetime]" - in [the life of you]. Temporal; "during your life."
apelabeV (apolambanw) aor. "you received" - you received. Possibly with the sense here of "enjoyed"; "remember that you enjoyed the good things in your lifetime", Berkeley.
ta agaqa "good things" - the good things [of you]. The accusative object of the verb "to receive." The rich man had "the good life", while Lazarus did it rough.
kai "while" - and. Here contrastive, as NIV.
ta kaka adj. "bad things" - [lazarus likewise] the bad. The articular adjective serves as a substantive, "the bad things", accusative object of the verb "to receive." "Received" = "enjoyed", is assumed.
odunasai (odunaw) pres. pas. "you are in agony" - [but/and now, he is comforted here, but/and you] you are suffering. Hapax legomenon, once only use in the NT. "To experience great distress or anxiety", Culy. The use of su, "you", is emphatic by use.
v26
en "besides [all this]" - in [all these things]. The preposition here is functioning adverbially, expressing association, "among all these things" = "as if all this is not enough", Zerwick. A variant epi, "upon", exists = "in addition to all these things", Culy. "And in any case."
oJpwV + subj. "so that [.... cannot]" - [between us and you has been fixed a great gulf] that. Introducing a final clause expressing purpose, "in order that", or possibly a consecutive clause expressing result, "with the result that."
oiJ qelonteV (qelw) pres. part. "those who want" - the ones wanting. The participle serves as a substantive, nominative subject of the negated verb "to be able", as NIV.
diabhnai (diabainw) aor. inf. "to go" - to come over [from there toward you are not able, neither may they go over from there toward us]. The infinitive is usually classified as complementary, completing the sense of the participle "wanting"; "Those who wish to cross from here to you cannot do so", Barclay.
v27
de "-" - but/and [he said]. Transitional, indicating a change in subject from Abraham to the rich man.
oun "then [I beg you]" - [i ask you] therefore [father]. Inferential; drawing a logical conclusion.
iJna + subj. "-" - that [you may send him]. Introducing an object clause / dependent statement of indirect speech expressing what he asks of Abraham; "I beg you, father, to send ..."
mou gen. pro. "my [family]" - [into the house of the father] of me. The genitive is adjectival, relational.
v28
gar "for " - for [i have five brothers]. Introducing a causal clause explaining why the rich man wants Abraham to send Lazarus to warn his family.
oJpwV + subj. "let [him warn]" - that [he may warn]. Likely introducing a final clause expressing, "in order that", but possibly consecutive, expressing result, "so that." "Send him to my father's house ...... that he may warn them", NRSV.
autoiV dat. pro. "them" - them. Dative of direct object after the dia prefix verb "to testify to, declare to" = "warn".
iJna mh + subj. "so that" - that not = lest [and = also they may come]. Introducing a negated final clause expressing result; "in order that they may not come ..."
thV basanou (oV) gen. "of torment" - [into this place] of torment, torture. The genitive is adjectival, attributive, limiting "place"; "torturous place." As noted above, it is not wise to use this verse in support of the proposition that punishment in hell is perpetual.
v29
"They have the written word of God read and expounded in the synagogue", TH. As already noted, this fable / folk-tale is used by Jesus to illustrate the great reversal in the coming of the kingdom of God. Some commentators see this verse as Jesus' application, and v30-31 as Luke's application, but it is more than likely that they are all part of the folk-tale.
Evans makes the point that "the law is permanently there to move men to repentance", yet, within the context of the passage, this fact is even more compelling in that Jesus, the messiah, is completing / fulfilling the Law and the Prophets, so heightening the need for repentance in the face of eschatological necessity (a kingdom at hand). Such is more compelling than "a messenger even from death's realm", Fitzmyer.
de "-" - but/and [abraham says]. Transitional, supported by a narrative present tense indicating a change in subject from the rich man to Abraham.
autwn gen. pro. "them" - [they have moses and the prophets, let them listen to] them. Genitive of direct object after the verb akouw, "listen to", which takes a genitive of persons. "Your brothers can read the Scriptures for themselves."
v30
de "-" - but/and [he said, no father abraham]. Transitional, indicating a change in subject from Abraham to the rich man.
alla "but" - but. Adversative, introducing a counterpoint.
ean + subj. "if" - if. Introducing a conditional clause, 3rd. class, where the proposed condition is assumed a possibility, "if, as may be the case, .... then ...."
apo + gen. "from" - [someone] from [dead should go toward them, then they will repent]. Expressing source / origin, or separation, "away from / from among the dead."
v31
de "-" - but/and. Transitional, indicating a change in subject from the rich man to Abraham.
autw/ dat. pro. "to him" - [he said] to him. Dative of indirect object.
ei + ind. "if" - if. Introducing a conditional clause, 1st. class, where the condition is assumed to be true; "if, as is the case ......., then ....". The negated verb ouk akouousin, "do not listen", really forms a single word, "disregard", and so is not forming a 2nd class condition, cf., Plummer; "if they disregard Moses and the Prophets, which they do, then ...." The apodosis of the conditional clause is formed by a second conditional clause, 3rd. class, where the condition has the possibility of coming true, "if, as may be the case, ......, then ......"; "If they do not hear Moses and the Prophets, then, even if they had a visit by someone from the underworld, then they probably wouldn't be convinced."
twn profhtwn (hV ou) gen. " the Prophets" - [they do not listen to moses and] the prophets. As with Moses, genitive of direct object after the verb akouw, "to listen to", a verb which takes a genitive of persons. Again, "the Law and the Prophets" means the Scriptures.
ek + gen. "from [the dead]" - [then if someone] from [dead should rise again, then neither will they be persuaded]. Expressing source / origin; "from out of the place of the dead."
![[Pumpkin Cottage]](images/cottage1s.gif){kind=small}
lectionarystudies.com