Lazarus and the Rich Man

[rinnie]

Hello jmcrae,

Slava Isusu Christu!

I am sorry to say that rinnie will never show you the verses–or anything else for that matter. She is stubbornly locked into a circular pattern of false understanding and she tries to set it forth on this forum as legitimate Catholic teaching. I hope that the protestants and lurkers on this forum do not adhere to what she proclaims. Many knowledgeable Catholics here have attempted to gently correct her, but she will not retreat from her false beliefs. Personally, I will not respond to her any longer because of her continuing pattern of insults and failure to understand the charitable corrections that are offered to her. I have placed her on my ignore list, but perhaps you and the other good Catholics here can set her straight.

Peace and blessings,
Mickey

Mickey you never have responded to the scripture. That is why I am on your ignore list because you do not understand the scripture. If you do why would you not define it for others to show then that there is indeed no purgatory, and it is all in my mind.

Because we as RC do believe what the bible says that we can pray for our brothers and sisters who are going through the final cleansing that Paul talks about in the bible.

Anyone can go through and see Mickey has not answered one question on one scripture I have quoted. You must ask yourself WHY! At least I can show proof. I can at least show scripture to show there is indeed a place of purification. Mickey just mocks that scripture when I state it, and ignores it anyother time.

Again why would he not defend his belief and show me where this scripture indeed means something else other then purgatory.

He has not only mocked me constantly, he never responed to defend himself. Because he cant!

 

[Mickey]

more of a real Catholic perspective from variou sources.

“Wishing to come down to topics that are practical and of some urgency, the Council lays stress on respect for the human person: everyone should look upon his neighbor (without any exception) as another self, bearing in mind above all his life and the means necessary for living it in a dignified way lest he follow the example of the rich man who ignored Lazarus, the poor man” (Vatican II, “Gaudium Et Spes”, 27).

---

usccb.org/sdwp/ejp/background/articles/consumption.shtml
As the basis of his teaching, the Holy Father drew upon the parable in St. Luke’s Gospel regarding Lazarus and the rich man. The Lukan Gospel is particularly harsh regarding the hazards of wealth. The parable may be read as another illustration of the biblical saying that it is easier for a camel to pass through the needle’s eye than for a rich person to enter God’s kingdom (Lk 18:25). What is notable in the parable is that the rich man is condemned because he is rich. Enclosed in his world of wealth and self-sufficiency that wealth brings, he simply failed to notice Lazarus begging at his gate, much less help him. Even the natural world, symbolized by the dogs licking Lazarus’ sores, displayed more sympathy. The rich man’s incurable spiritual condition continues into eternity; he continues to regard Lazarus as a social inferior and begs Abraham to dispatch Lazarus with a message of warning to his brothers. Abraham explains that this is impossible: the “abyss” between Lazarus and the rich man is “too great” (Lk 16:19ff).

---

ewtn.com/library/MARY/JP2ANMTR.HTM
There are so many poor-rich people and so many more rich-poor people in today’s world. This is well explained in the parable of Lazarus and the rich man in the Gospel of Luke (cf. 16:19-31). The rich man was condemned to hell, not for the evils he committed, the lies he told, the blasphemies and bad words he uttered, but for failing to do what he should have done. “I was hungry and you gave me no food, I was thirsty and you gave me no drink… Lord, when did we see you hungry, thirsty, naked, homeless, sick or imprisoned?.. As long as you did not do this to the least of my brothers, you did not do it to me… These will go to eternal damnation, while the just to eternal life” (cf. Mt 25:31-46).

Yes Chaldean. It has been established without a shadow of doubt that the rich man is not in purgatory. Yet rinnie continues to argue that the parable proves the RC doctrine of purgatory. This has been pointed out to her over and over, but she does not have ears to hear nor eyes to see. She is setting forth a false teaching–a teaching that goes against the priests and bishops of her own Church!!!

How very, very sad.

 

[rinnie]

Okay Mickey I will make a deal with you. I will leave for the moment and leave this whole thread to you.

I will not say a word. Now it is your turn define all of the scripture I have asked about.

Phil 2:10
2 tim 1:16-15
hev 12:14
heb 12:23
l peter 3:19 4:6
rev 21:4
rev 21:27
luke 23:43
gen 50:10
num 20:29
deut 34:8
baruch 3:4
2 macc 12:43-45

We will leave it there right now. Now according to Mickey not only was the rich man indeed in hell. There never was a waiting place for the waiting and cleansing it never existed and it still does not exist today. Mickey denys purgatory of today. As in the past.

So its all you Mickey. Game ON!

I will just sit back and enjoy the game.

Bet the Superbowl will be long gone and still Mickey will not answer one scripture.

We will See!

So for now I will enjoy the beauty of the snow, pray for my family dead and alive. And read up on the word. God Bless you all.

Oh and Mickey GOOD LUCK!

 

[Mickey]

Are you serious??!! No, Judas did not repent. He died in his sins. He is most likely in Hell.

Correct. Judas fell into despair and killed himself. St Peter repented and shed bitter tears.

 

[Mickey]

The rich man can never be where Lazarus is, which is eventually heaven.

Correct.

 

[Mickey]

The consensus for this thread seems to be:

The parable shows that Lazarus is experiencing a foretaste of heaven (his ultimate destination) while the rich man is experiencing a foretaste of hell (his ultimate destination).

The parable does not prove and is not cited as a proof for the Roman Catholic doctrine of purgatory.

Mankind cannot repent after this life. Repentance must take place before we die.

Thank you to all who have participated in this thread.

Over and out!

 

[Chaldean_Rite]

The consensus for this thread seems to be:

The parable shows that Lazarus is experiencing a foretaste of heaven (his ultimate destination) while the rich man is experiencing a foretaste of hell (his ultimate destination).

The parable does not prove and is not cited as a proof for the -]Roman /-]Catholic doctrine of purgatory.

Mankind cannot repent after this life. Repentance must take place before we die.

Thank you to all who have participated in this thread.

Over and out!

roger that.

 

[steve_b]

The consensus for this thread seems to be:

The parable shows that Lazarus is experiencing a foretaste of heaven (his ultimate destination) while the rich man is experiencing a foretaste of hell (his ultimate destination).

The parable does not prove and is not cited as a proof for the Roman Catholic doctrine of purgatory.

Mankind cannot repent after this life. Repentance must take place before we die.

Thank you to all who have participated in this thread.

Over and out!

That passage from Luke as you say, is not used for proof of purgatory
newadvent.org/cathen/12575a.htm#III

However this is a discussion about the the rich man and Lazarus parable. Jews understood purification after death, and also punishment as I previously said in the following
.
http://forums.catholic-questions.org/showpost.php?p=4659800&postcount=117

http://forums.catholic-questions.org/showpost.php?p=4677632&postcount=302

Even though we understand gehenna as permanent. Jews see it as temporary for some and permanent for others.

As you can see from the last post #302, there is a link to a Jewish encyclopedia search engine for description of terms. If you look up gehenna it will eventually (following internal links) take you to

:
Only the very righteous go directly to Gan Eden. The average person descends to a place of punishment and/or purification, generally referred to as Gehinnom (guh-hee-NOHM) (in Yiddish, Gehenna), but sometimes as She’ol or by other names. According to one mystical view, every sin we commit creates an angel of destruction (a demon), and after we die we are punished by the very demons that we created. Some views see Gehinnom as one of severe punishment, a bit like the Christian Hell of fire and brimstone. Other sources merely see it as a time when we can see the actions of our lives objectively, see the harm that we have done and the opportunities we missed, and experience remorse for our actions. The period of time in Gehinnom does not exceed 12 months, and then ascends to take his place on Olam Ha-Ba.

Therefore, at least in the Jewish mind, the parable Jesus gives could give the impression in a Jewish ear, of purgation and NOT necessarily absolute damnation. It doesn’t rule out hell and permanent punishment however.

 

[Mickey]

Therefore, at least in the Jewish mind, the parable Jesus gives could give the impression in a Jewish ear, of purgation and NOT necessarily absolute damnation.

In the Jewish mind? In the Jewish ear?

Catholic and Orthodox Christians both say that the rich man is condemned and it is too late for him to repent. We are the completed Jews–the New Israel.

So you are in the minority if you think otherwise.

 

[steve_b]

In the Jewish mind? In the Jewish ear?

Catholic and Orthodox Christians both say that the rich man is condemned and it is too late for him to repent. We are the completed Jews–the New Israel.

So you are in the minority if you think otherwise.

Catholics believe in purgation after death and so do Jews (at least the Orthodox Jews believe in it). Personally, I think that’s the point to begin dialogue.

 

[Mickey]

Catholics believe in purgation after death and so do Jews (at least the Orthodox Jews believe in it).

I am well aware that RC’s believe in the post-schism doctrine of purgatory. And I am not certain how the jews feel about this doctrine.

There are many threads on purgatory. This is not about purgatory. If that is what you love to discuss, then go to the proper thread. One of the major points here, (and you are not alone in your obstinance), is that this parable has nothing to do with the RC doctrine of purgatory.

Lazarus is saved and the rich man is damned. Is that clear enough for you? Or do you rebel against your Church’s teaching?

 

[steve_b]

I am well aware that RC’s believe in the post-schism doctrine of purgatory.

Did you even read the proofs of purgatory from the link I gave?
newadvent.org/cathen/12575a.htm#III (scroll up to catch all the explanation ) The proofs are pre schism NOT post schism. The Catholic Church refined the doctrine over time, but then, that’s how doctrine develops. But it was always believed from scripture AND Tradition…

mickey:

And I am not certain how the jews feel about this doctrine.

Jews don’t call it purgatory. But so what! They believe in a temporary purification after death that takes up to 1 year (their description NOT mine). Now one can rightfully say there is no time outside of time, yada yada, and I won’t argue that… So 1 year is meaningless in eternity. But either way, they (Orthodox Jews) believe in purification after death, and punishment for sin that is temporary for some and permanent for others. And I gave you THEIR explanation NOT my interpretation of what they believe. And let’s face it. Jesus is telling this parable to Jews, and the people mentioned in the story died under the terms of the OT.

mickey:

There are many threads on purgatory. This is not about purgatory.

If that is what you love to discuss, then go to the proper thread. One of the major points here, (and you are not alone in your obstinance), is that this parable has nothing to do with the RC doctrine of purgatory.

My obstinance???

You’re the OP. You’re the one who brought up purgatory in your opening remarks.YOU set the tone. You brought MY post over from another thread where purgatory was being discussed. And you bust MY chops for talking about purgatry here? Gimme a break!!! .
forums.catholic-questions.org/showpost.php?p=4657540&postcount=1

mickey:

Lazarus is saved and the rich man is damned. Is that clear enough for you? Or do you rebel against your Church’s teaching?

No need to get snippy. And I’m not rebeling. I’m just discussing the issue from two sides.

 

[Mickey]

. But it was always believed from scripture AND Tradition.

Again, I am not here to argue about the Catholic doctrine of purgatory. Sheesh!

Jews don’t call it purgatory. But so what!.

I’m sure they don’t. But again, I am not here to argue about the Catholic doctrine of purgatory.

And let’s face it. Jesus is telling this parable to Jews

Oh, you mean it is not for you and I? Oh brother.

My obstinance?

Yes. You just do not seem to understand that this is not a discussion about purgatory–unless you think that the parable is a proof for purgatory. If that is what you think, then you are in the minority with rinnie. Otherwise, you are just being stubborn and argumentative for reasons unknown.

You’re the OP. You’re the one who brought up purgatory in your opening remarks.

Read it again Steve. I said : "Some people think that it is a proof of purgatory". I am not asking about evidence regarding the legitimacy of the doctrine itself. The Catholics here are overwhelmingly in agreement that the parable is not a proof for purgatory. The Catholic Church references other verses for that apologetic.

Unless you have more to say about the parable, or you can prove that your Church uses it as a proof for purgatory, (Church Fathers, CCC, Papal Encyclicals, etc), then I think you have not much more to say. Otherwise, move yourself to the relevant thread on purgatory and argue your heart out.

I’m just discussing the issue from two sides.

There are not two sides. There is one side. Lazarus is saved. The rich man is condemned. We cannot repent after we die. And the parable has nothing to do with the Catholic doctrine of purgatory.

It’s very simple Steve.

 

[steve_b]

Again, I am not here to argue about the Catholic doctrine of purgatory. Sheesh!

why then did you start this thread by bringing one of my posts over to this thread from the purgatory thread?

mickey:

But again, I am not here to argue about the Catholic doctrine of purgatory.

Why did you bring my post over here into this thread in the first place? .

mickey:

Oh, you mean it is not for you and I? Oh brother.

You know what I meant.

mickey:

Yes. You just do not seem to understand that this is not a discussion about purgatory–unless you think that the parable is a proof for purgatory. If that is what you think, then you are in the minority with rinnie. Otherwise, you are just being stubborn and argumentative for reasons unknown.

Look friend,

YOU are the one to bring up purgatory in your opening post. Why did you do that if it’s not about purgatory??

mickey:

Read it again Steve. I said : "Some people think that it is a proof of purgatory".

Why do you even bring this up here if this thread is NOT about purgatory? The reason is, you WANTED to talk about purgatory

mickey:

I am not asking about evidence regarding the legitimacy of the doctrine itself. The Catholics here are overwhelmingly in agreement that the parable is not a proof for purgatory. The Catholic Church references other verses for that apologetic.

So why did you bring it up HERE if it’s NOT about purgatory? Why did you bring MY post over from the purgatory thread if this thread isn’t about purgatory??? You’re so defensive when caught, you can’t even see the inconsistency of your own argument. But don’t blame me for that.

mickey:

Unless you have more to say about the parable, or you can prove that your Church uses it as a proof for purgatory, (Church Fathers, CCC, Papal Encyclicals, etc), then I think you have not much more to say. Otherwise, move yourself to the relevant thread on purgatory and argue your heart out.

Incredable!!! You bring my post over here from the purgatory thread, criticize it here, then tell me it’s NOT about purgatory, then tell me to take my post to the relevant thread. UNBELIEVABLE!!! Sheesh!!! I think you’ve lost it!

mickey:

There are not two sides. There is one side. Lazarus is saved. The rich man is condemned. We cannot repent after we die. And the parable has nothing to do with the Catholic doctrine of purgatory.

It’s very simple Steve.

Yeah, it’s real simple mickey, don’t import my posts from other threads for the purpose of starting an argument with them in a new thread, then tell ms I’m in the wrong thread. good grief.

And based on the way Jews view gehenna, (Orthodox Jewish links provided previously) part of gehenna is permanent and part is temporary. Disagree with them, but that’s what they believe.

The dialogue can move forward between Catholics and Orthodox Jews on the point of purification after death…because We agree. The EO on the other hand do NOT believe in this as you consistently tell us…

 

[Shlomey]

Interesting. Most people in this thread have referred to it as a parable, but are taking literal meanings out of it. The question should be, I believe, what is it a parable OF?

The parables in Luke 15 and 16 are being told to a mixed group of people: Jesus’ disciples, people who were following him, and the Pharisees.

Who does the rich man represent in the parable? ISRAEL
Who does Lazarus represent (Lazarus = Eleazar)? GENTILES
What happens? Israel is separated from Abraham, and Gentiles are with him (wherever they happen to be).

What gives us these clues?

Who doesn’t listen to the Law and the Prophets? ISRAEL
Who sits “outside the gate”? (Gentiles - not allowed inside the Temple, etc.)

What ultimately happens? Gentiles are allowed in, Israel is kicked out, loses its place, etc…

This is pretty simple. Being a parable, we should be looking for what Jesus really meant, not trying to create or support literal doctrines from a parable.

This is the best interpretation I have heard of thus far. Thanks!

 

[jmcrae]

Why did you bring my post over here into this thread in the first place?

He didn’t; I was automatically subscribed to this thread, which means that one of the Moderators did it. Probably because the topic of the discussion had changed from Purgatory to the parable about Lazarus and the Rich Man - so, Mickey is right. The topic of this thread is Lazarus and the Rich Man.

(I don’t know why they made the split at your particular post; you’d have to ask them about that.)

 

[steve_b]

He didn’t; I was automatically subscribed to this thread, which means that one of the Moderators did it. Probably because the topic of the discussion had changed from Purgatory to the parable about Lazarus and the Rich Man - so, Mickey is right. The topic of this thread is Lazarus and the Rich Man.

(I don’t know why they made the split at your particular post; you’d have to ask them about that.)

Moderators in my experience don’t edit someone’s post the way I was edited.

Here was my complete post from the other thread
forums.catholic-questions.org/showpost.php?p=4647557&postcount=266

I was merely showing how a previous poster had a perfectly reasonable understanding of the passage. I wasn’t being dogmatic, I merely expressed an opinion and at the end conceded I could be absolutely wrong

Here is the opening sequence of THIS thread. Mickey is the OP of this thread. He makes the first 2 posts.

http://forums.catholic-questions.org/showpost.php?p=4657540&postcount=1
http://forums.catholic-questions.org/showpost.php?p=4657544&postcount=2 [my post edited]

here is where the transfer from the other thread occured

(topic: does purgatory really exist?)

294 posts into that thread, Mickey said

:

I will start a thread on this.

forums.catholic-questions.org/showpost.php?p=4657228&postcount=294

Then mickey refers people to the new thread

http://forums.catholic-questions.org/showpost.php?p=4657571&postcount=296

This looks to me like mickey edited and transfered my post over. I don’t see any moderator action, which they usually do if THEY split a thread.

Either way,

In my post I wasn’t beating anybody over the head with my opinion. I was agreeing with a poster [Ryan] that his particular opinion was reasonable.

 

[Mickey]

why then did you start this thread by bringing one of my posts over to this thread from the purgatory thread?

Because it was in relation to this parable. Why are you not getting this?

Why did you bring my post over here into this thread in the first place?

Because I was studying the parable of Lazarus and the rich man.

YOU are the one to bring up purgatory in your opening post. Why did you do that if it’s not about purgatory?

Wow! Are you kidding me? How many times must I tell you that this is about the parable. Purgatory becomes relevant if you think that the parable is an apologetic for purgatory. This thread is not about the doctrine itself. Do you understand this yet?

Why do you even bring this up here if this thread is NOT about purgatory? The reason is, you WANTED to talk about purgatory

Wrong again Steve. Almost every Catholic here agrees that the parable is not about purgatory. That part has been settled. It is you with the problem now. Read my lips Steve: **This is not about the RC doctrine of purgatory. **

Why did you bring MY post over from the purgatory thread if this thread isn’t about purgatory?

Is your ego hurt because I transported one of your posts? I have explained this to you dozens of times. I think you are now just arguing for the sake of argument.

You’re so defensive when caught

Okay. You got me Steve. I confess! This thread is really all about purgatory. I have veiled the thread by focusing on the parable of Lazarus and the rich man. LOL!

Incredable!!!

Incredible indeed!

You bring my post over here from the purgatory thread, criticize it here

I am sorry if I hurt your feelings by bringing your post here. I did not mean to damage your self-esteem. In your post, you claim that this parable is a proof for purgatory. That is why I used it. I did not use it to disprove the doctrine of purgatory. Do you understand that? Here is what you said: "Therefore, I think it’s perfectly reasonable to think he is in purgatory being purified".

Almost every Catholic here disagrees with you and so does your Church and the patristic understanding. But you cannot admit it. Instead, you are trying to be a spin doctor.

don’t import my posts from other threads for the purpose of starting an argument with them in a new thread, then tell ms I’m in the wrong thread.

If you would like to continue your false teaching about the parable proving purgatory—then it is applicable. If you continue in your false accusations about this thread being about the doctrine itself—then I will tell you to take it elsewhere.

The dialogue can move forward between Catholics and Orthodox Jews on the point of purification after death.

This thread is not about the RC doctrine of purgatory. Take it to the relevant thread.

But I will ask you this one more time–point blank. Yes or No Steve:

Do you believe that the parable of Lazarus and the rich man is showing us the RC doctrine of purgatory. If your answer is yes, please provide references from patristics, CCC, Papal encyclicals, etc.

 

[Mickey]

He didn’t; I was automatically subscribed to this thread, which means that one of the Moderators did it.

No jmcrae. Steve is correct. It was me who edited the posts to begin a new thread. Sadly, It has hurt Steve’s feelings–for which I apologize. I had no idea he would take it so hard. My reasons for the edit? I was tired of discussing the differences between the Catholics and Orthodox regarding the doctrine of purgatory. I understand that Catholics accept this doctrine. I wanted to talk in depth about the parable so I began a new thread. Steve said in reference to the rich man: "Therefore, I think it’s perfectly reasonable to think he is in purgatory being purified".

And so Steve felt that the parable was an apologetic for the doctrine–very few agreed with him. And now he is trying to back-peddle.

The topic of this thread is Lazarus and the Rich Man.

Amen, my brother.

 

[Mickey]

I merely expressed an opinion and at the end conceded I could be absolutely wrong

And indeed, your **opinion **has shown to be extremely flawed.

Again, I apologize for using your post to start this new thread. I did not realize that you would be so offended. Please forgive this wretched sinner. I will ask that the moderators remove it.