The Rich man and Lazarus

[jpd]

I've heard preachers teaching of the total depravity of man. God sees man as totally depraved a his good works as filthy rags. All sin is the same before God, regardless of how big or small. Everyone deserves damnation.

So my question comes with the story Jesus told about the rich man and Lazarus (Luke 16 vs. 19 - 28). Why is it that Lazarus ended up in a different place that the rich man?

If the theology of total depravity hold true, Lazarus would have deserved the same place as the rich man. Since Jesus had not yet died on the cross when this story was told, Lazarus sins would not have yet been atoned for. If Lazarus' sins had not yet been paid for by the cross, why was it Lazarus was judged to experience a better outcome than that of the rich man?

[Alan Stevens]

Hi

Interesting post, but i am not really sure waht you are getting at!

Originally posted by jpd

If the theology of total depravity hold true, Lazarus would have deserved the same place as the rich man. Since Jesus had not yet died on the cross when this story was told, Lazarus sins would not have yet been atoned for. If Lazarus' sins had not yet been paid for by the cross, why was it Lazarus was judged to experience a better outcome than that of the rich man?

Do i take it that you believe nobody was saved before Christ atoning death !!

Surely people were saved under the old covenant.

Some like moses, rahab, etc received salvation, some like the wicked sons of Eli did not.

I can't understand why you seem to state that because Christ antoning work had not been comlpeted both should be judged the same!!

Is it me !!!

Surley we are all saved by faith in Christ, through faith, that is as relevant for me and you as it was for Moses and Rahab. The method of salavtion has never changed, just the results of it.

Cheerrs

[jpd]

If people were saved under the old covenant prior to the atoning death of Jesus, then they would not be in need of a savior and the theology of the “total depravity of man” would be untrue.

If people are only saved by the new covenant, I would think this would only hold true after it was ratified.

[Fledge]

How were Old Testament saints saved?


Many people falsely assume that only New Testament believers are saved by grace, whereas Old Testament believers were saved by their obedience to the law of Moses. The truth is that both the Old and New Testaments clearly teach that everyone who is saved, throughout all history, is saved the same way: by grace, through faith, on account of Christ alone.

In fact, the New Testament writers argue their case largely by appealing to the Old Testament Scriptures themselves. First, after spending the bulk of three chapters to prove that both Jews and Gentiles are unrighteous, quoting extensively from the Old Testament (Rom. 1-3), the apostle Paul concludes that no one will be declared righteous by observing the law (Rom. 3:20).

Furthermore, Paul points to Abraham, the father of the Jews who lived long before Moses, as his prime test case to prove that salvation comes through faith apart from works that we perform. Paul writes, “If, in fact, Abraham was justified by works, he had something to boast about—but not before God. What does the Scripture say? ‘Abraham believed God, and it was credited to him as righteousness’ ” (Rom. 4:2-3; cf. Gen. 15:6; Gal. 3:6-9).

Finally, Jesus Christ is the fulfillment of all the symbols and predictions of the Old Testament (Luke 24:44; Rom. 3:21-22; Heb. 1:1-3). For example, the Jews celebrated the Passover every year to keep them focused on the One who was to come and die for their sins. As the book of Hebrews says, “The law is only a shadow of the good things that are coming—not the realities themselves. Day after day every priest stands and performs his religious duties; again and again he offers the same sacrifices, which can never take away sins. But when this priest [Christ] had offered for all time one sacrifice for sins, he sat down at the right hand of God because by one sacrifice he has made perfect forever those who are being made holy” (Heb. 10:1, 11-12, 14).

Jesus Christ stands at the apex of history. Just as we look back in history to Christ’s sacrifice for our sins on the cross, Old Testament believers looked forward to His sacrifice for them.

[Alan Stevens]

Hi

Right On Fledge.

We (old testament saints included ) are all saved by grace, through faith, based on Christ's atoning work.

Cheers

[countrypret]

Originally posted by jpd
I've heard preachers teaching of the total depravity of man. God sees man as totally depraved a his good works as filthy rags. All sin is the same before God, regardless of how big or small. Everyone deserves damnation.

So my question comes with the story Jesus told about the rich man and Lazarus (Luke 16 vs. 19 - 28). Why is it that Lazarus ended up in a different place that the rich man?

If the theology of total depravity hold true, Lazarus would have deserved the same place as the rich man. Since Jesus had not yet died on the cross when this story was told, Lazarus sins would not have yet been atoned for. If Lazarus' sins had not yet been paid for by the cross, why was it Lazarus was judged to experience a better outcome than that of the rich man?

The story of the Rich man and Lazurus is not really a literal story, it is a parable used by Christ to emphasize a point. This passage is the fifth in a series of parables:
The lost sheep - Luke 15:3-7; The lost coin - Luke 15:8-10;
The lost boy - Luke 15:11-32; The unjust rich man - Luke 16:1-15; The rich man and Lazarus - Luke 16:19-31.

Concerning "The rich man and Lazarus," a manuscript of the seventh century reads: "And he spake also another parable." Another of the tenth century reads: "the Lord spake this parable." I wonder why this disappeared from the Bible? The point Christ was making is found in the very last verse of this parable:
Luke 16:31, "And he said unto him, If they hear not Moses and the prophets, neither will they be persuaded, though one rose from the dead."
Nowhere does this story speak of sending back ‘spirits’, not even in the matter of returning to warn men, but of rising "from the dead." The lesson Jesus was trying to teach in this parable is apparent from the remarks with which He prefaced the story. The Pharisees were covetous (verse 14). They also regarded wealth as an evidence of God's favor and poverty of His displeasure.

As for what you are referring to about total depravity, I posted a thread regarding the myth of original sin. http://www.predestinarian.net/showth...&threadid=1072

[jpd]

To Fledge and Alan Stevens:
You still confuse me with the chronology of this. I can see how people of the old testament may have known they needed salvation and that God would provide a means of salvation. This would give them a vague sort of faith in Christ and perhaps a hope of salvation. However, it is another thing to say they already already experienced the salvation prior to the atoning death of Jesus.

To countrypret:
I understand the primary perpose of this parable. What I can’t help notice is the detailed setup explaining how each person got into the state that they were. There was no mention of faith or law, but simple justice.

[dugsixx]

JPD

Old testiment saints when they died didn't go to paradise,(not until the atoning death of christ) They went to a place that is known to the Jews as Abrahams bosom. where they awaited the Messiah. why do you think that at the time of Christs death people where coming out of the tombs.


I believe that this parable does cary some literal meaning.

[Agent 1nez]

The fact that Lazereth died before the Messiah atoned means that Laz wasn't in the bride of Christ. Note that the rich man cried out to Laz and Abraham. They were not in heaven, but in Abraham's bossom. Remember the witch that Saul hired to speak with Samuel the deceased prophet?

[countrymouse]

oops!