Skip to content

Study 9: The Rich Man and Lazarus -- Advanced Study Answer Key

Luke 16:19-31 -- Genre Determination, Vocabulary Analysis, and Same-Author Evidence

Evidence Tiers

This series uses a three-tier evidence classification to distinguish what Scripture says from what people claim it teaches:

  1. Explicit (E) -- The text directly says this. You can point to a verse and quote it.
  2. Necessary Implication (N) -- No single verse says this word-for-word, but it unavoidably follows from what the text does say. No interpretation is needed -- every reader, regardless of theological position, must agree.
  3. Inference (I) -- Someone claims the Bible teaches this, but no verse says it and no combination of verses forces it. Something must be added beyond what the text contains: a concept, a framework, or a choice between possible readings.

The hierarchy matters: Explicit > Necessary Implication > Inference. An inference cannot override what the text explicitly states.

Section A: The Lukan "Certain Rich Man" Formula

1. The Greek phrase anthropos tis plousios ("a certain rich man") appears three times in Luke's Gospel: Luke 12:16, Luke 16:1, and Luke 16:19. Read all three passages. In which occurrence does Luke provide an explicit parabole label? In which occurrence is no label given but the genre is universally accepted as parabolic? In which occurrence is the genre disputed?

  • Luke 12:16 -- explicit parabole label: "And he spake a parable unto them, saying, The ground of a certain rich man brought forth plentifully."
  • Luke 16:1 -- no label, universally recognized as parabolic: "There was a certain rich man, which had a steward." No commentator treats the Unjust Steward as literal history.
  • Luke 16:19 -- no label, disputed: "There was a certain rich man, which was clothed in purple and fine linen."

The pattern is clear: the same formula is labeled a parable in one instance, unlabeled but universally parabolic in the second, and unlabeled and disputed only in the third. The formula itself functions as a Lukan parabolic marker.

2. Luke 15:3 provides a single parabole label ("he spake this parable unto them") that covers three consecutive stories (lost sheep, 15:4-7; lost coin, 15:8-10; prodigal son, 15:11-32) without re-labeling each. What does this labeling pattern establish about Luke's practice?

Luke's practice is to provide a single parabole label at the opening of a parabolic discourse and not re-label each subsequent unit. The absence of a new label for the lost coin, the prodigal son, the unjust steward, or the Rich Man and Lazarus is consistent with Luke's demonstrated convention. It is not evidence of a genre change.

"And he spake this parable unto them, saying..." -- Luke 15:3

3. Given that Luke 16:1 uses the identical "certain rich man" formula without a parabole label and is universally recognized as a parable, and that Luke's labeling convention in 15:3 covers multiple stories with a single label, is the absence of a parabole label in 16:19 informative about genre? Why or why not?

No. The absence of a label is uninformative. Two independent lines of evidence converge: (1) Luke 16:1 uses the same formula without a label and is universally parabolic -- demonstrating that the formula operates as a genre marker independent of the label. (2) Luke 15:3 establishes that a single label covers multiple stories -- demonstrating that Luke does not re-label each unit. The claim that "no label = not a parable" requires a rule that Luke's own writing contradicts.

Section B: Literary Structure of Luke 15-16

4. Map the literary structure of Luke 15-16. Identify: (a) the setting and audience (15:1-2), (b) the opening parabole label (15:3), (c) each narrative unit through 16:31, and (d) the Pharisees' reaction recorded in 16:14-15. At what point does the parabolic discourse close?

Unit Passage Content
Setting 15:1-2 Publicans/sinners draw near; Pharisees/scribes murmur
Parabole label 15:3 "He spake this parable unto them"
Story 1 15:4-7 Lost Sheep
Story 2 15:8-10 Lost Coin
Story 3 15:11-32 Prodigal Son
Story 4 16:1-13 Unjust Steward
Audience reaction 16:14-15 Pharisees (covetous) deride Jesus
Transition 16:16-18 Law and prophets; not one tittle fails
Story 5 16:19-31 Rich Man and Lazarus
Discourse closes 16:31 Final line of the fifth story
New unit begins 17:1 "Then said he unto the disciples..."

The parabolic discourse runs continuously from 15:3 through 16:31. The next scene change occurs at 17:1.

5. Read Luke 16:14-17. Between the Unjust Steward and the Rich Man and Lazarus, Luke records three items: the Pharisees are "covetous" and "derided" Jesus (v.14-15); "the law and the prophets were until John" (v.16); and "it is easier for heaven and earth to pass, than one tittle of the law to fail" (v.17). How do these transitional verses connect to the Rich Man and Lazarus -- specifically, how does the theme of "Moses and the prophets" in these verses anticipate the passage's climax in vv.29, 31?

The transitional verses establish the exact theme that the Rich Man and Lazarus will drive home. "The law and the prophets" in v.16 is the same phrase Abraham uses in v.29 ("they have Moses and the prophets") and v.31 ("if they hear not Moses and the prophets"). The story is a parabolic dramatization of the principle stated in the transition: the sufficiency and authority of existing Scripture. The Pharisees' covetousness (v.14) is directly targeted by the story's reversal of fortunes.

"The law and the prophets were until John." -- Luke 16:16 "They have Moses and the prophets; let them hear them." -- Luke 16:29

6. The Rich Man and Lazarus is the fifth consecutive narrative in the Luke 15-16 discourse. No scene change occurs between stories. The discourse opens with the Pharisees' murmuring (15:1-2) and does not resume narrative action until 17:1. What genre conclusion does this continuous parabolic context support?

The continuous parabolic context supports classifying the Rich Man and Lazarus as the fifth parable in the discourse. The discourse opens with an explicit parabole label (15:3), contains five consecutive narratives without scene change, and closes at 16:31. Reading the fifth story as a different genre (literal history) within a continuous parabolic discourse requires a genre shift that the text does not signal.

Section C: Vocabulary Analysis -- basanos/odunao vs. basanizo

7. Luke 16 uses two words for the rich man's suffering: basanos (G931, noun: "torment/touchstone") in vv.23, 28, and odunao (G3600, verb: "to grieve/sorrow") in vv.24, 25. The standard NT verb for eschatological torment is basanizo (G928), used in Rev 14:10 and Rev 20:10. Does Luke 16 use basanizo?

No. Luke 16 does not use basanizo (G928) anywhere in the passage. The standard NT verb for eschatological torment is absent. Luke uses a different noun (basanos instead of basanismos) and a different verb (odunao instead of basanizo).

8. odunao (G3600) appears four times in the NT. Luke uses it three times: Luke 2:48 (Mary "sorrowing" for the child Jesus), Acts 20:38 (disciples "sorrowing" at Paul's departure), and Luke 16:24-25 ("tormented"). The KJV translates odunao as "sorrowing" in Luke 2:48 and Acts 20:38 but as "tormented" in Luke 16:24-25. What does the word actually mean in its non-parabolic Lukan uses? How should this inform the reading of Luke 16?

In its non-parabolic Lukan uses, odunao means ordinary grief or sorrow. Mary was "sorrowing" (odunao) when she could not find the child Jesus -- she was worried, not tortured. The disciples were "sorrowing" (odunao) at Paul's departure -- they were grieving, not in eschatological torment. The KJV's translation of the same word as "tormented" in Luke 16 but "sorrowing" in Luke 2:48 and Acts 20:38 reflects a translational choice influenced by context, not a difference in the underlying Greek. The word means "to grieve/sorrow" across all its Lukan uses.

"Thy father and I have sought thee sorrowing [odunao]." -- Luke 2:48 "Sorrowing [odunao] most of all for the words which he spake, that they should see his face no more." -- Acts 20:38

9. basanos (G931) outside Luke 16 appears only in Matthew 4:24, where it refers to physical diseases and ailments -- not eschatological punishment. The eschatological torment vocabulary in Revelation uses basanismos (G929, noun: "torment") and basanizo (G928, verb: "to torment"). Construct a comparison:

Term Meaning Passages Eschatological?
basanos (G931) touchstone, test, physical ailments Matt 4:24; Luke 16:23, 28 No -- physical diseases (Matt 4:24); parabolic context (Luke 16)
odunao (G3600) to grieve, to sorrow Luke 2:48; 16:24-25; Acts 20:38 No -- ordinary grief in non-parabolic uses
basanizo (G928) to torment, to torture Rev 14:10; 20:10; Matt 8:29; Mark 5:7 Yes -- used in eschatological torment passages
basanismos (G929) torment (noun) Rev 9:5; 14:11; 18:7, 10, 15 Yes -- used in Revelation's torment descriptions

10. What does the vocabulary divergence between Luke 16 and the eschatological torment passages suggest about whether Luke intended to describe the same phenomenon?

The vocabulary divergence is significant. If Luke intended to describe the same eschatological torment depicted in Revelation, his choice of odunao (grieve/sorrow -- a word he uses for Mary's worry and the disciples' sadness) instead of basanizo (the standard eschatological torment verb) is a notable departure. The different word family suggests Luke was not describing the same phenomenon as the Revelation passages. The vocabulary choice is consistent with parabolic narrative using familiar imagery, not with didactic teaching about eschatological punishment.

Section D: Genre Gate Analysis (Tree 3)

11. Tree 3 evaluates whether a passage can function as positional evidence. Apply Gates 1 and 3 to the rich man in Luke 16:19-31:

Gate 1 (Subject): The rich man is a parabolic character. He is unnamed in the Greek text -- "Dives" is from the Latin Vulgate, not the original. His counterpart Lazarus bears a thematic name (Lazaros = Eleazar = "God helps") that fits the reversal-of-fortunes plot. The passage follows Luke's parabolic formula (anthropos tis plousios) and is situated within a continuous parabolic discourse. These are narrative characters, not identified historical individuals. FAIL: subject is a parabolic character.

Gate 3 (Genre): The genre is parabolic. The passage is the fifth consecutive narrative in the Luke 15-16 parabolic discourse. Luke 15:3 labels the discourse with parabole. The opening formula matches Luke 12:16 (labeled parabole) and 16:1 (unlabeled, universally parabolic). The passage's self-identified teaching point (vv.29, 31) concerns hearing Moses and the prophets, not afterlife cosmology. FAIL: genre is parabolic.

12. If the passage fails Gate 1 (parabolic character) and Gate 3 (parabolic genre), what is the consequence for using it as evidence about the literal geography of the afterlife?

A passage that fails Gates 1 and 3 cannot function as didactic evidence for the literal geography of the afterlife. The observation that a parable depicts afterlife imagery is accepted by both sides. The interpretation of whether that imagery constitutes doctrinal teaching about actual afterlife conditions is an inference that imports a framework from outside the passage. Parabolic imagery requires corroboration from didactic passages before it can be treated as doctrine.

Section E: Same-Author Evidence from Acts

13. Luke wrote both the Gospel of Luke and the book of Acts. Read Acts 2:27, 29, 31, 34. Document what these verses say about:

  • David's current state (v.29): "Men and brethren, let me freely speak unto you of the patriarch David, that he is both dead and buried, and his sepulchre is with us unto this day." David is dead and buried.

  • David's location relative to heaven (v.34): "For David is not ascended into the heavens." David has not gone to heaven.

  • Christ's soul in hades (v.27, 31): "Thou wilt not leave my soul in hell [hades]" (v.27). "His soul was not left in hell [hades], neither his flesh did see corruption" (v.31). Christ's soul was in hades but was not left there -- resurrection is the deliverance from hades.

14. Acts 2:29, 34 is didactic prose: Peter is preaching to a crowd, making direct statements about a named historical individual (David). Luke 16:19-31 is narrative set within a parabolic discourse. In the hierarchy of clarity, which genre carries more weight for establishing doctrine -- didactic or parabolic? How does the same author's didactic material in Acts interpret his parabolic material in Luke 16?

Didactic prose carries more weight than parabolic narrative for establishing doctrine. Peter's statements about David are direct, unambiguous, and concern a named historical person. Luke 16:19-31 is a narrative within a parabolic discourse using unnamed/thematically-named characters and culturally familiar imagery. The same author's didactic material in Acts presents death as a state where the righteous are dead, buried, and not in heaven -- not as conscious existence in a compartment of hades. Luke's didactic prose interprets his parabolic imagery: the afterlife details in Luke 16 are narrative elements, not doctrinal claims.

15. Nine didactic passages from 6+ authors across 5+ books describe the dead as unconscious: no knowledge (Ecc 9:5), no work or wisdom in sheol (Ecc 9:10), no remembrance (Ps 6:5), silence (Ps 115:17), thoughts perish (Ps 146:4), not awake (Job 14:12), unknowing (Job 14:21), cessation (Job 3:17-18), no praise (Isa 38:18-19). The rich man in Luke 16 remembers his life and knows about his brothers. If this is a literal account, how does it harmonize with nine didactic passages stating the dead "know not any thing"?

If Luke 16 is a literal account, the rich man's knowledge, memory, speech, and concern for his brothers directly contradict Ecc 9:5 ("the dead know not any thing"), Ps 146:4 ("in that very day his thoughts perish"), and Job 14:21 ("his sons come to honour, and he knoweth it not"). Nine didactic passages from multiple authors across centuries uniformly describe the dead as unconscious. A literal reading of Luke 16 would place one parabolic passage in conflict with nine didactic passages -- and in the clarity hierarchy, didactic overrides parabolic.

If Luke 16 is a parable, the rich man's knowledge and memory are narrative necessities. The story cannot reach its teaching point (vv.29, 31) without dialogue -- and dialogue requires consciousness, memory, and awareness. The parabolic reading accounts for the data without contradicting any didactic passage. Isaiah 14:9-10 provides precedent: a mashal (taunt-poem, v.4) depicts the dead "speaking" in sheol, and no one takes those details as literal.

Section F: Counter-Arguments and the Naming Question

16. The strongest argument for the literal reading is that Lazarus is the only named human character in any parable of Jesus. Evaluate this claim by considering:

  • Is the name thematic? Yes. Lazaros is the Greek form of Eleazar, meaning "God helps." In a story about a poor man ignored by a rich man but ultimately received by God, the name is a plot device -- "the man God helped."

  • Is the rich man named? No. The rich man is unnamed in the Greek text. If this were a historical account of two real individuals, both should be identifiable. One named, one unnamed is a storytelling pattern, not a historical record.

  • Do OT parables name characters? Yes. Ezekiel 23 names Aholah ("her tent") and Aholibah ("my tent is in her") -- symbolic names for Samaria and Jerusalem. Naming characters in figurative narratives has OT precedent.

  • Does Nave's Topical Bible list this Lazarus as historical? No. Nave's lists only one Lazarus: the brother of Mary and Martha (John 11-12). The Lazarus of Luke 16 is not listed as a separate historical person.

The naming of Lazarus is atypical for parables but does not override the convergence of eight independent indicators supporting the parabolic reading (Lukan formula, labeling convention, literary context, stated teaching point, vocabulary divergence, unique imagery, same-author didactic evidence, physical impossibilities).

17. An ECT defender might argue: "Jesus would not use false imagery in a teaching story -- therefore the afterlife details must be accurate." Evaluate this argument. Does Jesus endorse all details within his parables as doctrine?

Jesus does not endorse all parabolic details as doctrine. The Unjust Steward (Luke 16:1-8) commends a dishonest man -- Jesus is not endorsing dishonesty. The parable of the ten virgins (Matt 25:1-13) is not a lesson about lamp oil. The parable of the wicked tenants (Matt 21:33-46) uses a vineyard setting -- Jesus is not teaching viticulture. Parables use culturally recognizable scenarios to make a single point. The Rich Man and Lazarus uses familiar afterlife imagery (which had currency in first-century Jewish culture) to make its point about hearing Moses and the prophets. The use of familiar cultural elements does not equal endorsement of those elements as theological reality.

18. The rich man has knowledge, memory, speech, and concern for his brothers (Luke 16:25, 27-28). The didactic passages say the dead "know not any thing" (Ecc 9:5) and "his thoughts perish" (Ps 146:4). If the passage is literal, these are contradictions. If the passage is parabolic, these are narrative necessities enabling the story to reach its teaching point. Which reading accounts for the data without contradiction?

The parabolic reading accounts for the data without contradiction. The rich man must remember his life and know about his brothers for the story to reach its climax in vv.29-31. These are narrative requirements of the teaching story, not doctrinal claims about the death-state. The parabolic reading harmonizes with all nine didactic death-state passages. The literal reading creates a direct contradiction between one parabolic passage and nine didactic passages from multiple authors. Abel's blood "cries" from the ground (Gen 4:10) -- no one takes this as evidence that Abel is literally conscious and speaking. The dead "speak" in Isaiah 14:9-10 -- within a mashal (taunt-poem), and no one takes those details as literal. Luke 16 operates in the same literary tradition.

Section G: Evidence Classification Exercise -- Answers

1. "Luke 15:3 provides a single parabole label covering three consecutive stories." - Classification: E (Explicit) - Observable textual fact. Read Luke 15:3, then note that three stories follow without new labels.

2. "The absence of the word 'parable' in Luke 16:19 proves the passage is not a parable." - Classification: I (Inference) - What is added: A rule that every parable must be individually labeled -- a rule contradicted by Luke 15:3 (one label for three stories) and Luke 16:1 (same formula, no label, universally parabolic).

3. "The passage's climactic statement is about hearing Moses and the prophets, not about afterlife geography (Luke 16:29, 31)." - Classification: E (Explicit) - The text directly states its climactic lines: "They have Moses and the prophets; let them hear them" (v.29) and "If they hear not Moses and the prophets, neither will they be persuaded, though one rose from the dead" (v.31).

4. "Abraham's bosom as a post-mortem location is unique to Luke 16:22-23 and does not appear elsewhere in Scripture." - Classification: E (Explicit) - Observable textual fact verified by concordance search. kolpos Abraam in this locational sense appears nowhere else.

5. "Luke 16 uses basanos/odunao rather than basanizo/basanismos -- different vocabulary from the eschatological torment passages." - Classification: E (Explicit) - Observable vocabulary data. The words used in Luke 16 can be documented, and they differ from the words used in Rev 14:10; 20:10.

6. "The naming of Lazarus proves the passage is a literal historical account, not a parable." - Classification: I (Inference) - What is added: A rule that named characters cannot appear in figurative narratives -- contradicted by Ezek 23 (Aholah, Aholibah). The claim extracts one atypical element and uses it to override multiple standard genre indicators.

7. "The physical details (tongue, water, flame, conversation across a gulf) describe literal post-mortem conditions for disembodied souls." - Classification: I (Inference) - What is added: A framework where disembodied souls have physical bodies (tongues, fingers), where physical water relieves spiritual fire, and where conversation occurs across an impassable chasm with visual recognition. This requires importing a concept of embodied disembodied existence.

Section H: What CAN Be Said / What CANNOT Be Said -- Answers

What CAN be said (the Bible explicitly states or necessarily implies):

  1. Luke 16:19-31 is situated within a continuous parabolic discourse (Luke 15-16) containing five consecutive narratives. Luke 15:3 provides a single parabole label that covers three stories without re-labeling each. The absence of a parabole label in 16:19 does not determine genre.

  2. The opening formula "there was a certain rich man" (anthropos tis plousios) is used by Luke three times: 12:16 (with explicit label), 16:1 (without label, universally parabolic), and 16:19 (without label, disputed). The formula functions as a Lukan parabolic marker.

  3. The passage's own stated teaching point (vv.29, 31) is about the sufficiency of Moses and the prophets: "They have Moses and the prophets; let them hear them" and "If they hear not Moses and the prophets, neither will they be persuaded, though one rose from the dead."

  4. "Abraham's bosom" (kolpos Abraam) as a post-mortem location appears only in Luke 16:22-23. It is not found elsewhere in Scripture. kolpos in other NT uses means intimate relationship, physical proximity, garment fold, or geographic bay.

  5. The passage does not use paradeisos ("paradise"), the standard NT term for the abode of the blessed. The same author uses paradeisos in Luke 23:43.

  6. Luke 16 uses basanos (G931) and odunao (G3600, "grieve/sorrow") -- not basanizo (G928), the standard NT verb for eschatological torment. odunao means ordinary grief in its other Lukan uses (Luke 2:48; Acts 20:38). basanos outside Luke 16 appears only in Matt 4:24 for physical diseases.

  7. The rich man is unnamed in the Greek text. Lazarus (Eleazar, "God helps") is the only named human character in any parable of Jesus, and the name is thematic.

  8. The same author (Luke) records Peter stating David is "both dead and buried" and "is not ascended into the heavens" (Acts 2:29, 34). This is didactic prose about a named historical individual.

  9. Nine didactic passages from 6+ authors across 5+ books describe the dead as unconscious: no knowledge (Ecc 9:5), no work or wisdom in sheol (Ecc 9:10), no remembrance (Ps 6:5), silence (Ps 115:17), thoughts perish (Ps 146:4), not awake (Job 14:12), unknowing (Job 14:21), cessation (Job 3:17-18), no praise (Isa 38:18-19). In the clarity hierarchy, didactic overrides parabolic.

  10. The Pharisees are identified as "covetous" and as having "derided" Jesus immediately before the Rich Man and Lazarus (Luke 16:14-15). The passage addresses their love of money and their failure to heed Moses and the prophets.

What CANNOT be said (not stated or necessarily implied -- requires adding something):

  1. It cannot be said that the absence of the word parabole in Luke 16:19 proves the passage is not a parable. Luke's labeling pattern demonstrates that he does not re-label each unit in a parabolic discourse (15:3 covers three stories). Luke 16:1 uses the same formula without a label and is universally recognized as a parable.

  2. It cannot be said that Luke 16:19-31 teaches the literal geography of the afterlife. The passage fails Tree 3 Gates 1 (parabolic character) and 3 (parabolic genre). Its stated teaching point (vv.29, 31) concerns the sufficiency of Moses and the prophets, not cosmology. "Abraham's bosom" as a post-mortem location is unique to this passage and uncorroborated elsewhere.

  3. It cannot be said that the naming of Lazarus proves the passage is literal history. The name is thematic (Eleazar = "God helps"), the rich man is unnamed, OT parables name characters symbolically (Ezek 23: Aholah and Aholibah), and Nave's does not list this Lazarus as a historical person.

  4. It cannot be said that Luke 16's torment vocabulary establishes eschatological torment of the wicked. The passage uses basanos/odunao, not basanizo/basanismos. odunao means "grieve/sorrow" in its other Lukan uses. The vocabulary does not match the eschatological torment passages in Revelation.

  5. It cannot be said that the physical details (tongue, water, flame, conversation across a gulf) describe literal post-mortem conditions. Disembodied souls do not have physical tongues or fingers. A drop of water on a fingertip cannot relieve flame. These details serve the parabolic narrative, not literal afterlife description.

  6. It cannot be said that the rich man's knowledge and memory contradict the death-state passages. In a parable, consciousness, memory, and dialogue are narrative necessities enabling the story to reach its teaching point. In a literal account, they would contradict nine didactic passages describing the dead as unconscious. The parabolic reading harmonizes the data without contradiction.

  7. It cannot be said that Luke's use of afterlife imagery endorses it as theology. Jesus uses culturally familiar elements in parables without endorsing all details as doctrine. The Unjust Steward's dishonesty is not endorsed. The ten virgins' oil lamps are not theology. Luke 16's afterlife imagery provides the setting for the teaching about Moses and the prophets.