Introduction
There
are a few films out there that I’ve seen just once that I wouldn’t choose to
see again. One is The Passion of the
Christ and the other is Schindler’s
List. I don’t ever want to see again the way Jesus was tortured and
crucified. There is a kind of blissful ignorance when we read the words of The
Passion on paper; an ignorance that is not possible when pictures are put to those
words. It is like this when we read about the Holocaust isn’t it? It’s hard to
wrap our minds around the brutal murder of more than six million Jews when we
read the stories. But it’s impossible to ignore the reality when we see the smokestacks
of Auschwitz and Dachau or when we see pictures of the dead bodies stacked like
cordwood along the barbed wire fences in any number of the Nazi death camps. The
images are heart-wrenching on a humanitarian level, and certainly for Jews for
obvious reasons, but also for Christians who are forever tied to the Jewish people
through Jesus Christ. Christians share faith in the same God and although Jews
in general do not recognize Jesus as their Messiah, the Bible teaches us that
God has yet a plan for the salvation of the Jews through Jesus Christ. In this
way Christians are bound to Jews in a way that Jews are not yet bound to
Christians. That’s why I have a tough time watching Schindler’s List—because it’s tragic on so many levels. Nevertheless,
I noticed it was showing the other day and for some reason felt compelled to
tune in. I was in time to see the end of the movie. For those of you who
haven’t seen the movie, let me give you a quick review. Based on a true story,
the film is set in Nazi-occupied Poland during World War II. The main character
of the film is a German/Nazi businessman named Oskar Schindler. At the
beginning of the movie, Schindler is revealed as a self-centered, money-hungry
war profiteer building wealth with the help of Jewish
slave labor. Schindler has a love for good wine, beautiful women, and pursues
happiness through the success of his munitions factory. However, while
Schindler was busy lining his pockets with money, millions of Jews were being
exterminated during a time most label as one of the darkest periods of human
history. While Schindler lived the high-life, Nazis were trying to annihilate
and entire race of people. After witnessing the utter brutality and evil of the
Nazi empire and their desire to eradicate the Jewish race, Schindler is
compelled to turn his munitions factory into a refuge for Jews. Schindler
expends his entire accumulated wealth to purposely manufacture faulty munitions
purchased by the German military and to save about 1,100 Jews from being gassed
at the Auschwitz death camp. The images of persecution, suffering, torture,
anguish and death portrayed in the film are gut-wrenching to watch. However, I
want to focus on the final scene in the movie because it contains a reality
that we try not to think about because it makes us uncomfortable. In the final
scene, after the Jews were liberated, Schindler must flee as a war criminal. The
Jews circle around him to give him a parting gift of thanks and to say
good-bye. At that particular moment, Schindler realizes that even though he
eventually used his resources to save some Jews, he expended so many resources
prior to that point on self-satisfaction and frivolity. The reality struck him
hard that he could have saved more people had he used his resources to do so
earlier or more wisely. Although his Jewish friend, the factory accountant,
tried to reassure him that he should focus on the 1,100 people he did save,
Schindler would not be consoled as he realized that because of his inaction,
some Jews were needlessly murdered. You can hear the pain in his words when he
says over and over again: “I could have got more.” Take a moment to watch the
scene.
Do
you know what that’s called? Regret! We’ve all been there haven’t we? We’ve
said something or done something that we desperately wish we could unsay or
undo or not said something or not done something we should have said or done.
Now imagine you had the information needed to save someone but kept it to
yourself and that person was lost. And imagine you were a willing accomplice—you
didn’t accidently withhold information that could have saved someone, you did
it on purpose. Let’s take it a step farther shall we: What if you were to come
face to face with the person that was lost and you couldn’t get them back? Come
on! Close your eyes and put a face on that person—a family member, friend,
neighbor, or the person standing in front of you in the grocery line. I don’t
know about you but I’m uncomfortable just writing the words for you to read. If
you’re feeling like that then you’re in the perfect place to hear Jesus tell a
similar story that Luke records for us about a man who will live with regret
for eternity; someone who realizes too late, “I Could Have Done More.”
Subject
Text
Luke 16:19-31
19“There was a rich man who was
dressed in purple and fine linen and lived in luxury every day. 20At his gate was laid a
beggar named Lazarus, covered with sores 21and longing to eat what fell
from the rich man’s table. Even the dogs came and licked his
sores. 22The time came when the beggar died and the angels
carried him to Abraham's side. The rich man also died and was buried. 23In hell, where
he was in torment, he looked up and saw Abraham far away, with Lazarus by his
side. 24So he called to him, ‘Father Abraham, have
pity on me and send Lazarus to dip the tip of his finger in water and cool my
tongue, because I am in agony in this fire.’ 25But Abraham replied, ‘Son,
remember that in your lifetime you received your good things, while Lazarus
received bad things, but now he is comforted here and you are in
agony. 26And besides all this,
between us and you a great chasm has been fixed, so that those who want to go
from here to you cannot, nor can anyone cross over from there to us.’ 27He answered, ‘Then I beg
you, father, send Lazarus to my father’s house, 28for I have five brothers.
Let him warn them, so that they will not also
come to this place of torment.’ 29Abraham replied, ‘They have
Moses and the Prophets; let them listen to them.’ 30‘No, father Abraham,’ he said, ‘but if someone from the dead goes to them, they will
repent.’ 31He said to him, ‘If they do not listen to Moses and
the Prophets, they will not be convinced even if someone rises from the dead.’”
Context
The
context for our subject text travels along an important path. We learn in
Chapter 14 that large crowds, as usual, are again traveling with Jesus, eager
to learn from him. Also included in the crowd were the much-hated tax
collectors, “sinners,” Pharisees, and teachers of the Law. In Chapter 15 Jesus
tells those listening the parables of the lost sheep, the lost coin and the
lost son (aka “prodigal son”). The focus of the entire chapter is the paramount
value of saving even one person who is lost. Jesus claims that there is greater
celebration in heaven when the one who is lost is rescued and saved than there
is for all those who were never lost in the first place. Jesus’ point is that
each and every soul is singularly most important to Him and deserves the
opportunity to be found and rescued/saved. In the first eighteen verses of
Chapter 16, Jesus turns his full attention to the Pharisees and teachers of the
Law. Therein Jesus tells the parable of the dishonest manager and the way he
shrewdly accumulates wealth to keep himself out of trouble. Jesus continues to
condemn the religious leaders for their failure to be faithful with the
resources that God has entrusted to them. The religious leaders loved money and
were only interested in enriching and caring for themselves. They believed that
wealth was the external proof of their internal righteousness. However, the
people entrusted to them were lost and the religious leaders who were
responsible to care for them were neglecting their charge. They should have
been the ones searching for those lost and bringing them back and caring for
those suffering. But they were enticed away from their responsibilities by the
love of money and those who were lost remained lost and those who were
suffering continued to suffer. Jesus then launches into a parable, our subject
text, that places the consequences of their selfishness and irresponsibility
into sharp focus.
Text
Analysis
The
rich man in v. 19 is described as wearing purple which is the color of royalty
in the ancient world. This sets the stage for the disparate characters in Jesus’
parable. “His clothing the costliest ‘purple without, Egyptian byssus underneath
[Byssus cloth is also known as “sea silk” because it is woven from the fibers
or filaments of sea shells and clams. It was the finest fabric produced in
Egypt and was usually reserved for burial wraps of Egyptian royalty.],
splendidly, characterising his style of living; life a daily feast.”[1]
First
off, it’s important to remember that the Lazarus in v. 20 is not Jesus’ good
friend Lazarus that He raised from the dead as recorded in John 11. This
Lazarus, whether he is a real of fictionary character, represents the lowest of
the low in Israel’s society. He was a beggar; he was poor and remember what I
said earlier about the religious leadership’s understanding of the relationship
between wealth and righteousness. When those present heard the word “beggar,”
they immediately associated that person with unrighteousness; he sinned in some
way that led to his physical and socio-economic circumstances (cf. Jn 9:2). Compounding
Lazarus’ condition, the text describes him as being covered in sores. Ok I
don’t want to be overly graphic but it’s important to remember that we’re not
talking about a minor case of psoriasis. We’re talking about open, running
sores (perhaps a form of leprosy),—think nasty! In any event, his physical
condition, according to the Law made him religiously “unclean.” Nevertheless,
he was placed at the gate of this rich man because he had the resources to help
Lazarus and Lazarus desperately needed help. Although the text says that
Lazarus was placed at the rich man’s gate, the literal translation of the Greek
is that he was tossed down at the gate and lends weight to the belief that
Lazarus was a cripple as well but also provides a sad image of a person being
discarded. Does it seem at all odd to you that Jesus generalizes the “rich man”
while personalizing “Lazarus?” Lazarus was a common name during the time of
Jesus along with its derivative, “Eleazar.” However, what’s important is that
both names mean “God helps.” Consequently, “Lazarus is the type of poor whom
God receives and the anonymous rich man who failed in his duty to him is the
type of those condemned by God.”[2]
Placing Lazarus at the rich man’s gate gives the rich man every opportunity to
help. There can be no excuse of ignorance even though Lazarus was hardly the
only person in need in Israel.
According
to v. 21, Lazarus is simply hoping for the opportunity to receive some of the
rich man’s table scraps. The fact that dogs are present supports this since
dogs were the ones who received table scraps; there was no such thing as dog
food in ancient Israel. Dog food! All Lazarus wanted was a chance to get a
little dog food! The rich man wouldn’t even give him dog food! “The rich man
could easily have shared from his extravagance by sending a servant out with a
plateful. But the rich man chose to spend his money on himself, refusing to
share, probably not even taking notice of the poor man at his door. His wealth
was not sinful, but his selfishness was.”[3]
In case the image of Lazarus to this point was not dire enough, the text says
that the dogs, waiting for their dog food, are licking at Lazarus’ sores. Some
theologians see in this an illustration that dogs have come to care for Lazarus
while the rich man does nothing. However, this is syntactically unlikely. It is
possible that these dogs were well kept animals belonging to the rich man which
was not unusual. However, such animals were generally guard dogs and hardly
friendly to strangers. Nevertheless, much would have to be assumed to reach
this particular interpretation of the text anyway. Instead, “although we may be
tempted to think of the dogs in Jesus’ story in sentimental terms, we should
rather imagine pariahlike mongrels that roamed the outskirts of town in search
of refuse. These curs have not come to ‘lick his wounds’ (as we would say), but
to abuse him further and, in the story, to add one more reason for us to regard
him as less than human, unclean, through-and-through an outcast.”[4]
Jesus’
story takes a sudden twist in vv. 22-23 as both the rich man and Lazarus die.
However, their lives after death are as divergent as were their lives before
death. The rich man lived like royalty; he had wealth, health, comfort, and
ease. The trajectory of Jesus’ illustration is that the rich man lived a life
of heaven on earth. Conversely, Lazarus lived the life of an outcast; he was
poor, sick, handicapped and destitute; he lived a life in a state lower than
dogs. Lazarus’ life was hell on earth. However, there roles are dramatically
reversed in Jesus’ story upon their respective deaths as Lazarus is taken to
Abraham’s bosom (place of consolation) while the rich man is buried and goes to
hell. We must be careful not to read something implicitly into this text that is
not explicitly there. Specifically, the poor and destitute don’t automatically
go to heaven and the rich and affluent don’t automatically go to hell. In any
event, why did Jesus say that the angels took Lazarus to Abraham’s bosom? We
automatically assume that Jesus is referring to heaven and that is probably
correct. However, we must always be careful not to read backwards into the
subject text a theology that isn’t developed until later in the biblical text. “Abraham’s
bosom means the pouch above the girdle made by pulling up the garment slightly.
This picture is relatively seldom found in Rab[binic] writings. It may refer to
special care, as that of a mother loving her child which she carries in the
folds of her dress over her breast, or to the place of honour at [the] table
beside Abraham…In our Lord’s parable the emphasis rests not on the condition on
which this blessing is granted but on the nature of the blessing itself: bliss,
recompense, eternal separation from all that is evil, a richness that cannot be
forfeited, for the gulf that separates also encloses. This specific idea of
eternal distinctions after death is no more than barely incipient in the OT and
began to emerge with clarity from Enoch (c. 110 B.C.) onwards becoming specific
in 1st cent. A.D. Jewish literature.”[5]
Conversely, we read that the rich man is “tormented” in hell. In Jewish
eschatology the righteous dead and the unrighteous dead could see each other although
they were separated by an impassible chasm. However, the point of the illustration
is that each of them knows where the other is. The Greek word here for
“torture” is often used to describe the brutal interrogation method used on
slaves to illicit a confession. “This suffering, however, is probably more
mental than physical, since otherwise the fire could be expected to consume
him. There is great anguish in discovering that one’s ultimate abode is not
with the righteous and that this position is eternal.”[6]
Don’t
miss something very important that just happened here. Although Jesus is
speaking directly to the Pharisees and teachers of the Law, there is a lesson
for all those who are listening. Remember that for the Pharisees wealth
represented God’s favor; God’s blessing. Their view is not without biblical
support according to Deuteronomy 28:3-4. It is therefore not unreasonable to
assume the converse is also true; poverty and destitution represents God’s
disfavor. However, Jesus is not condemning their wealth which they justified
with the Scriptures, he is condemning their failure to be obedient to all the Scriptures which also stated
that they were to use their resources to care for those in need (cf. Lev
19:9-10; Deut 15:7-11; Isa 58:6-7). They were banking their salvation on their
Jewish heritage as demonstrated by God’s favor and represented by health,
wealth and comfort. However, they failed to consider the things that were most
important to God—to act justly, to love mercy, and to walk humbly with God (Mic
6:8). Jesus will return to this principle later as recorded by Matthew when
Jesus addresses those who say they believe in him when He says that not all
those who call Him Lord will be saved (Mt 7:21). Jesus’ lesson holds true for
Christians in the same way it held true for the Pharisees. We could bank our
salvation on Scriptures that say all we have to do is believe in Jesus but we
might be very disappointed in the end if we neglect all the other Scriptures
that demand our obedience in every other area of our lives. We can try and hide
behind the Scriptures concerning salvation by grace but “wherever some eat and
others do not eat, there the kingdom does not exist, quote whatever Scripture
you will.”[7]
The
role reversal continues in v. 24 as we see the rich man call out to Abraham to
have pity on him and ask Lazarus to bring him some relief from his pain and
suffering. Don’t miss the profound irony in this exchange. Those words had to
seem oddly familiar to the rich man even as they came out of his mouth;
certainly he must have heard something similar from Lazarus during the time
Lazarus languished at his gate. Maybe something like, ‘Please sir could you
just send one of your servants to bring me a scrap of food to relieve my hunger
and refresh my strength.’ “The call for mercy is entirely appropriate but, as
will become clear, is voiced too late.”[8]
Abraham
answers the rich man in vv. 25-26 by reiterating that he had received his
blessing during his lifetime while Lazarus endured a lifetime of pain and
suffering and now their circumstances are reversed. Again it is important not
to take this text to be a quid-pro-quo that those who are blessed during their
earthly life go to hell while those who suffer go to heaven. That’s not what
the text is conveying here when considered within the context of the entire
passage. “The parable of the rich man and Lazarus…declares that we cannot be
whole until we become sensitive and responsive to the needs of our destitute
brothers and sisters. The plight of the poor is a social sickness, and as long
as our hearts remain hardened to others in need, with our blinders on and our
focus elsewhere, we ourselves participate in that sickness.”[9]
Let me see if I can give you a sense of what Abraham is saying to the rich man.
Abraham is saying, ‘God blessed you with great resources during your lifetime
and you used them to satisfy your own desires. However, God did not bless you
with resources so you could keep them for your exclusive benefit, they were
supposed to be used to care for those less fortunate around you as well. God
made sure you had more than enough to go around. Well since God cares for all
people, he is caring for Lazarus now the way he gave you the opportunity to do
in your lifetime. You received your blessing during your lifetime, now it’s
Lazarus’ turn for eternity. Furthermore, Lazarus couldn’t help you if he wanted
to. Once God decides your eternal destiny, it’s done.’ “For all its imagery,
this text suggests that suffering in the afterlife is permanent (‘a great
chasm’ that cannot be crossed). Once entered, we cannot escape hell, and the
torment there is painful and conscious…These images are among the most tragic
and serious in the Bible. Our culture avoids such ideas by denying their truth.
That is a fateful gamble to take, for if one is wrong, the consequences are
devastating.”[10]
It almost
seems like the rich man remembers something in vv. 27-31 that he obviously
hadn’t considered before; he has five brothers still living at home and they
are behaving the same way he did. He begs Abraham in vv. 27-28 to send Lazarus
to his father’s house to warn his brothers. To which Abraham responds in v. 29,
in essence, ‘Why? They have Moses and the Prophets so they have more than
enough warning.’ But the rich man is convinced in v. 30 that if someone who is
raised from the dead were to go to them, they would have to listen. But Abraham
assures him that if they didn’t listen to Moses or the Prophets then they won’t
listen to anyone, even if that person were raised from the dead. “Those who put
no credence in the Scriptures will not be persuaded by a resurrection.
Certainly Jesus’ resurrection was in Luke’s mind when he wrote this. The point
of the last part of the parable is clear. No miracle can convince anyone of the
credibility of the kingdom message. The Scriptures are sufficient for
salvation, and those who reject their message will rationalize miraculous
phenomena as well.”[11]
In this parable, Jesus is talking to the Pharisees but he is talking past them
as well. In fact, he is talking to all people in all times; he is talking to us
today. The last time I checked, the tomb where they put Jesus’ body after he
was crucified and died on a cross is still empty! Yet people still refuse to
believe even after hundreds of people testified to seeing him alive. Jesus’
words in this parable should be like burning coals in the ears of everyone who
hears them.
Ultimately, do you want to
know who had the best chance of warning and convincing the five brothers to
change their lives? The rich man! He could have changed his own life which
would have been a testimony to his brothers of the truth contained in all the Scriptures not just those that
supported what they wanted to believe. Imagine what his brothers would have
thought about that? It’s still no guarantee his brothers would have believed
him but now he will never know. Maybe that’s the mistake that is chewing at him
the most; regret! Maybe, just maybe he was thinking, ‘I Could Have Done More.’
Application
Back
in 2009 the construction business in Colorado was terrible. Most people were
rightfully concerned about the financial future of the country generally and
their future specifically. So work was hard to find which dramatically affected
my own finances and ability to care for my wife and children. I agreed to take
on a large construction project in a town nearly 200 miles away from home. For
the most part, I stayed at the worksite during the week and came home on the
weekends. It was a year-long project that paid well enough for me to take care
of my family. And you know what? It is one of the biggest regrets of my life. I
missed a year of my girls’ lives! I missed seeing them off to school in the
mornings; missed seeing them when I got home after work; missed kissing them
goodnight; missed their soccer practices; missed all the things that we usually
did together. I pretty much don’t remember anything specific about 2008 or 2010
but I remember 2009 very clearly because of all the things I missed. I regret
it more than I can even tell you especially now that they are far away at
college. I lost an entire year that I can never, ever get back—I regret that!
What makes it worse is I didn’t really expend much energy trying to find
another way to support my family, I accepted a project away from home for a
year as though I had no other options. I
Could Have Done More to find another way to care for my family without
being away from them and that drives my regret even deeper. I’m sure that
doesn’t sound like a big deal to some of you in the grand scheme of eternity
and it probably isn’t, but my point is that most of us (maybe all of us) have
regrets in our lives for something we’ve said or haven’t said or something
we’ve done or haven’t done. Some of those things have short-term consequences
and some of the consequences last a lifetime. But what I want talk to you about
is your actions, or more appropriately your inactions, that have eternal
consequences. First, go back and watch the video clip from Schindler’s List. There
was much that Schindler did but in the end, he realized that it was the few
little things; a car or a gold pin he could have sold, that he neglected to do
that cost the lives of some Jews he could have saved. Even with his Herculean
efforts, Schindler regretted the things he didn’t do because he understood the
grave consequences of his inaction. On the surface, our subject text is about
using the resources entrusted to us to care for others and the consequences of
our failure to do so. However, there is a much deeper level to this parable.
Let me try to explain. You would agree that we have a duty to care for those
who are in need, right? But what difference does it make if we don’t share the
message of the Gospel with them? Anyone can care for those in need but only
believers have the duty to share the Gospel with people. While caring for
people in this life is very important, isn’t caring for their eternal life more
important? In Jesus’ own words, what good is it if a person gains the whole
world yet loses their soul (Mt 16:26)? We must do both! However, most of us
only do one don’t we? It is so much easier to bring someone a meal than it is
to share Christ with them. It is so much easier to visit someone in the
hospital than it is to share Christ with them. It is so much easier to care for
a sick neighbor or friend than it is to share Christ with them. I fully
acknowledge that the motivation for serving others is to demonstrate Christ’s
love for people, but at some point you have to find the courage to share Christ’s
message of love and salvation with those people. After all you have done to
serve others, don’t allow those people to reach the end of their lives without
giving them the opportunity to hear the message of Jesus Christ’s salvation
from you. Don’t get to the point where you’ve done so much in the name of
Christ and then have to live with the regret of wondering if I Could Have Done More.
Let
me try and help: You can start a conversation about Jesus with something really
simple. Tell people your story; why you believe in Christ. However, I
understand that it might be awkward to figure out how to initiate that in the
normal course of your daily conversations. If you can’t find an opportune time
to introduce the topic, introduce your family and friends to this website and
let me do it for you. I have no doubt that they will find something in the more
than 100 lessons available to them that will irritate them and that can be your
opportunity to engage them. I know people are always skeptical when a pastor
asks people to share the message(s) they want to convey, believing there is
some kind of financial gain involved. Well, in case you are new to this
ministry, I do not solicit or accept donations. I pay for all ministry expenses
myself through my construction/carpentry work. In other words, there’s nothing
in it for me when you share my ministry website with your family and friends.
I’ve made it really easy for you. At the end of each lesson are various tabs
you can use to share this and any other lesson. Share using: Email, Blogger
Share, Twitter, Facebook, or Google +. Listen, life is filled with enough
regrets, and this one is so easy to avoid. Do yourself a favor and care for
those who are in need with the resources God has given you and share Jesus’
message of salvation at every opportunity and I’m convinced that you won’t
reach the end of your life with the regret of thinking I Could Have Done More.
[1] W.
Robertson Nicoll, ed., The Expositor’s
Greek Testament, Vol. 1, (Grand Rapids, MI: Wm. B. Eerdmans Publishing Co.,
1983), p. 588.
[2] Colin
Brown, ed., New International Dictionary
of New Testament Theology, Vol. 2, (Grand Rapids, MI: Zondervan Publishing
House, 1986), p. 825
[3]
Bruce Barton, Philip Comfort, Grant Osborne, Linda K. Taylor, Dave Veerman, Life Application New Testament Commentary,
(Wheaton, IL: Tyndale House Publishers, 2001), p. 324.
[4] Joel
B. Green, The Gospel of Luke—The New
International Commentary on the New Testament, (Grand Rapids, MI: William B.
Eerdmans Publishing, 1997), p. 606.
[5]
Colin Brown, ed., NIDONTT, Vol. 1,
pp. 78; 240.
[6]
Darrell L. Bock, Luke
9:51-24:53—Baker Exegetical Commentary on the New Testament, (Grand Rapids, MI:
Baker Books, 1996), p. 1370.
[7]
Fred B. Craddock, Luke—Interpretation,
(Louisville, KY: John Knox Press, 1990), p. 197.
[8]
John Nolland, Luke 9:21-18:34—Word
Biblical Commentary, (Dallas, TX: Word Books, 1993), p. 830.
[9]
David A. deSilva, An Introduction to the
New Testment—Contexts, Methods & Ministry Formation, (Downers Grove,
IL: InterVarsity Press, 2004), p. 343.
[10]
Darrell L. Bock, Luke—The NIV
Application Commentary, (Grand Rapids, MI: Zondervan Publishing House, 1996),
p. 435.
[11]
Walter A. Elwell, ed., Baker Commentary
on the Bible, (Grand Rapids, MI: Baker Books, 1989), p. 829.
No comments:
Post a Comment