Why were they “sneering at him”? He had “stated” a parallel – see Info CA – in which a “house-master”, on losing his position of trust with a “rich man”, had unrighteously reduced the “loan-debts” due to his “lord.” He did that so as to become “friends” with those debtors so that those new “friends” would provide him a home with them in future.
“The Pharisees”, Jerusalem’s religious leaders, had been minimising the responsibilities of their wealthy “friends” to live for the Lord God in every aspect of their lives. By minimising “the Law and the Prophets” in the Bible’s Old Testament, they had made many such “friends” who shared their “love of silver.” Good “house-masters” of the Lord God?
“The Law and the Prophets – until John. From then, the kingdom of God is announced good and everyone forces into it but it is easier for heaven and earth to pass away than for one dot of the Law to fall. Everyone who sets free his wife and marries another is adulterous and the one marrying one set free from a husband is adulterous.”
Were “the Law and the Prophets” only “until John” the Baptist? On him, see Info AJ. Some had forced themselves into “the kingdom of God” – into merciful forgiveness by Jesus. They still wanted to live as though “the Law”, from God through “Moses”, no longer applied to them. They wanted to live their lives as they wished – "silver", warts, and all.
The two examples of an “adulterous” man need to be connected with the discussions so far. In both cases, the “adultery” arose, in Jesus’ view, not from the marital breakdown but from the actual “marrying.” Is it “adulterous” for one forgiven by Jesus is to continue to love self, and “silver” rather than the Lord God and his “the Law and the Prophets.”
|
|
“A certain man was rich, clothing himself in purple and fine linen and celebrating splendidly every day. But a certain poor man named Lazarus had been thrown near his entrance, ulcerated and longing to be fed from the fallings from the rich man’s table. Instead, the dogs also, coming, were licking his ulcers. But it came to be the poor man died away and was carried away by the angels into Abraham’s embrace. But the rich man also died away and was buried and, in the hades, belonging in torments, lifting up his eyes, he saw Abraham far away and Lazarus in his embrace.”
|
.
|
This new “rich man”, like “the Pharisees” and their “friends”, trusted in human descent from “Abraham.” Not for him (or them) the love of God’s “Law.” He loved himself too much for that. But things do come to an end.
“And he himself called out, ‘Father Abraham, do mercy to me! And send Lazarus so that he may baptise the extremity of his finger in water and may cool down my tongue! For I am in anguish in this flame.’ But Abraham said, ‘Child, remember that you in your life received back your good things and Lazarus likewise the bad things! But now he is being encouraged here, and you are being anguished. And, with all these, between us and you a great chasm has been set firm, in order that those desiring to step through from here to you may not have power, nor may they pass over from there to us.’”
The “rich man” had already, on earth, received his own “good things.”
|
|
| “But he said, ‘Then I ask you, father, that you may send him into the house of my father - because I have five brothers—so that he may testify across to them so that they themselves may not also come into the place of torment.’ But Abraham stated, ‘They have Moses and the Prophets. Hear them!’ But that one said, ‘No, father Abraham. Instead, if a certain one goes to them from the dead, they will mind-change.’ But he said to him, ‘If they do not hear Moses and the Prophets, neither will they be convinced if a certain one may rise from the dead.’”
|
.
|
| The “rich man” was not changed, even after death. He was still concerned for self and his own loved ones. Also, was Jesus correct? Still today, are very many not “convinced” by Jesus who rose “from the dead.”
|
|
|
