Jesus & the Pharisees

Jesus & the Pharisees.!3!. HISTORICAL BACKGROUND Another major religious group in Israel at the time of Christ was known as the Pharisees. They advocated strict adherence to the Law of Moses, and enjoyed general popularity among the masses. Theologically, they were much closer to Jesus than were the Sadducees. In fact, Jesus once said: All therefore whatsoever they [the Pharisees] bid you observe, that observe and do; but do not ye after their works: for they say, and do not (Matthew 23:3). So the biggest problem Jesus had with the Pharisees was not over some major doctrine, it was with their duplicity. As He warned His disciples: Beware ye of the leaven of the Pharisees, which is hypocrisy (Luke 12:1e). Many of them taught one thing, and did another. Before his encounter with Christ, the Apostle Paul was himself a Pharisee (Philippians 3:5). Even after his conversion, when he appeared before the Sanhedrin, Paul aligned himself with the Pharisees and their belief in the afterlife: 6 But when Paul perceived that the one part were Sadducees, and the other Pharisees, he cried out in the council, Men and brethren, I am a Pharisee, the son of a Pharisee: of the hope and resurrection of the dead I am called in question. 7 And when he had so said, there arose a dissension between the Pharisees and the Sadducees: and the multitude was divided. 8 For the Sadducees say that there is no resurrection, neither angel, nor spirit: but the Pharisees confess both (Acts 23:6-8). 5

The Sadducees viewed man as an indivisible unity. To them, the spirit (or soul) in man could not consciously survive the dissolution of the body. Since the Pharisees believed otherwise, they readily accepted the concept of resurrection. Josephus confirms this: They also believe that souls have an immortal vigor in them, and that under the earth there will be rewards or punishments, according as they have lived virtuously or viciously in this life; and the latter are to be detained in an everlasting prison, but that the former shall have power to revive and live again. 1 ENCOUNTER On one occasion, the covetous Pharisees scoffed at Jesus for His teaching on the proper use of money (Luke 16:14). Jesus told them that they were simply trying to justify themselves before men, but they could not fool God (Luke 16:15). The Pharisees had thought that their prosperity was not only a clear indication of God s approval on their lives, but also an assurance that they would have no worries in death. The poor were often viewed as being punished for their wickedness. This is why Jesus tells the story about what happened when the rich man and poor Lazarus died (Luke 16:19-31): An unnamed rich man lived in self-indulgent luxury. As a descendant of Abraham (Luke 16:25), he had confidence in the flesh (Philippians 3:3), while ignoring the plight of a sick beggar, Lazarus, just outside his gates (I John 3:17). Lazarus is the only person named by Jesus in all of His parables, so it carries spiritual significance. Lazarus is the shortened form of Eleazar, which means, he whom God helps. So his very name suggests his faith. When Lazarus dies, the angels carry him to Abraham s bosom. 2 What a tremendous change he encounters! Instead of misery and deprivation, Lazarus now enjoys comfort and the prestige of a close association with Abraham (Luke 16:25). The rich man, in his death, finds himself in Hades (KJV: hell ). 3 According to the context, this would be what the Old Testament refers to as the lowest Sheol. For a fire is kindled in Mine anger, and shall burn unto the lowest hell [Sheol] (Deuteronomy 32:22). What a tremendous change he encounters! He now exclaims: I am tormented in this flame! (Luke 16:24g). 1 Flavius Josephus, The Aniquities of the Jews, 18:14 2 This use of the term bosom comes from the Jewish custom of reclining next to someone at a meal (John 13:23). Thus it describes intimate fellowship at someone s side. However, Abraham s bosom is not heaven. No one went to heaven at death before the resurrection of Jesus (John 3:13). 3 Hell (KJV), in this passage, is an English translation of the Greek a[ dhj (HA-DES), which is a translation of the Hebrew laavi (SHE-OL). See footnote 5 on page 15. 6

Regardless of how some attempt to regard hell as merely the abstract condition of nonexistence in death, instead of a literal place, the rich man knows differently. He plainly calls it:...this place of torment (Luke 16:28c). So hell is a place. That place is not the grave (as some would think). There can be no torment in the grave, but there is in hell. The rich man, who ignored Lazarus in life, recognizes him, and now seeks his aid in death (Luke 16:24). However, an impassable gulf fixed between them prevents this (Luke 16:26). Not even the slightest alleviation of his suffering can be granted. Then, for the first time, the rich man shows some concern for others... his brothers. He requests that Lazarus be resurrected and sent back to earth to warn them about that place (Luke 16-27-28). He knew they were still alive, and in jeopardy of coming there, too. The petition was denied on the grounds that God had already spoken to them in His word (Luke 16:29). If they reject that, then someone s claim to an afterlife experience would not impress them either (Luke 16:30-31). ANALYSIS In this narrative, Jesus makes use of the popular concepts and terminology of His day. This can be verified by extra-biblical sources. 4 Notice these six striking parallels: 1 The nonmaterial part of man (soul/spirit) consciously survives physical death. Did not the souls of the righteous in their chambers [in Hades ] ask about these matters, saying, How long are we to remain here? And when will the harvest of our reward come? (II Esdras 4:35...!!around A.D. 100). And in hell [Hades] he [the rich man] lift up his eyes, being in torments, and seeth Abraham afar off, and Lazarus 5 in his bosom (Luke 16:23). But Abraham said, Son, remember that thou in thy lifetime receivedst thy good things, and likewise Lazarus evil things: but now he is comforted, and thou art tormented (Luke 16:25). 4 These extra-biblical Jewish writings are not utilized to determine truth, but to better understand how a word or phrase was used in Jesus time. Word usage determines definition. Scripture alone is the foundation for truth. However, any resource which can show how a word was used in Bible times is a valuable tool. 5 The spirit/soul of man appears to retain the form of its deceased body, so recognition is possible. 7

Although Jesus does not use the words soul or spirit in this story, such is implied by the clear reference to the consciousness of the rich man, Abraham and Lazarus. 2 There was a place provided for the soul or spirit of man at death. In Hades the chambers of the souls are like the womb (II Esdras 4:41...!!around A.D. 100). And in hell [Hades] he [the rich man] lift up his eyes... (Luke 16:23). 3 The general name for this place was Hades/Sheol. In Hades the chambers of the souls are like the womb (II Esdras 4:41...!!around A.D. 100). And in hell [Hades] he [the rich man] lift up his eyes... (Luke 16:23). 4 Both the righteous and the wicked went to that place. However, they were kept separate from each other. And in the manner in which the souls of the righteous are separated (by) this spring of water with light upon it, in like manner, the sinners are set apart when they die... (I Enoch 22:9-10!...!!around 100 B.C.). And beside all this, between us and you there is a great gulf fixed: so that they which would pass from hence to you cannot; neither can they pass to us, that would come from thence (Luke 16:26). 5 The area of Hades/Sheol where the righteous went was referred to as being in Abraham s bosom, or Paradise. Take My friend, Abraham into Paradise... (Testament of Abraham 20:14a...!!around A.D. 100). Isaac and Jacob are in his [Abraham s] bosom, where there is no toil, no grief, no moaning, but peace and exultation, and endless life (Testament of Abraham 20:14c...!!around A.D. 100). And it came to pass, that the beggar died, and was carried by the angels into Abraham's bosom (Luke 16:22). 6 Angels carried the righteous into Paradise. And immediately, Michael the archangel stood beside him [Abraham] with multitudes of angels, and they bore his precious soul in their hands... (Testament of Abraham 20:10...!!around A.D. 100). And it came to pass, that the beggar died, and was carried by the angels into Abraham's bosom (Luke 16:22). 8

Edersheim referred to a Jewish tale in the first century that was a close parallel to the story which Jesus told: The righteous is seen beside delicious springs, and the wicked with his tongue parched at the brink of a river, the waves of which are constantly receding from him. But there is this very marked and characteristic contrast, that in the Jewish legend the beatified is a Pharisee, while the sinner tormented with thirst is a Publican! 6 So it is quite possible that Jesus took a popular story, and put His own twist to it. In the narrative of the Rich Man and Lazarus, however, Jesus made no attempt whatsoever to redefine any of the words. From a historical standpoint, no one can deny what these words and phrases meant to the Jews in Jesus day. This was an obvious continuation of our Lord s rebuke of the smug, self-justifying Pharisees who thought their eternal destiny was secure. JESUS VS HERESY Some modern-day Sadducees wish to make the words of Christ null and void, when they claim that Jesus merely accommodated the crowd in using this terminology. He really didn t mean it. Instead, they suggest that our Lord had some obscure, esoteric meaning to this story which had nothing whatsoever to do with life after physical death. 7 On the one hand, it can be acknowledged that there were times when Jesus veiled His responses in metaphorical language, as when He said: Destroy this temple, and in three days I will raise it up! (John 2:19). We know He had reference to the temple of His body, not to Herod s Temple. It simply would have been unwise for Jesus to speak plainly of His death early in His ministry. Besides, there was nothing wrong for Jesus to use parables or figures of speech to hide the truth from hypocrites (Matthew 13:13). They had no love for the truth anyway. They would only use it against Him (Matthew 7:6). On the other hand, it is an entirely different matter to suggest that Jesus would tolerate or even employ any false Jewish tradition in His own teaching. That 6 Alfred Edersheim, The Life and Times of Jesus the Messiah (Grand Rapids: Wm. B. Eerdmans Publishing Company, 1979), Part 2, page 281 7 Many claim that the account of the rich man and Lazarus is just a parable. I prefer calling it a narrative, but I will not argue the point. However, a parable has to be true-to-life, or it is a fable, not a parable. (Jesus never told fables. Titus was to warn others not to pay attention to Jewish fables [Titus 1:14].) In New Testament Greek, the word parabolh, (PA-RA-BO-LE) means comparison. Thus it is a story which makes a comparison between that which is known with that which is often not known. So in order for a story to even qualify as a parable, it must be realistic. 9

is preposterous! 8 He would have then ceased to be the personification of the Truth (John 14:6). Jesus would have never utilized false doctrine, even as an illustration of the truth. Error is never a proper vehicle for the truth. Jesus fully understood what these terms and concepts meant to the people who heard Him. This fact can lead only to one of two possible conclusions: 1 Jesus knowingly and intentionally taught heresy. O R 2 Jesus acknowledged the truth that one s consciousness does not cease at physical death for either the righteous or for the wicked. Either He lied, or He told the truth. There are no other options. Since I could never accept the former statement, I am left with the latter. The wisdom which has guided this study can be demonstrated logically in the following syllogism: 9 Jesus never taught false religious doctrine. He did teach about Abraham s bosom and Hades, where one s consciousness continued after death. Therefore, the concept of a continuing consciousness after death, in either Abraham s bosom or in Hades, was not a false religious doctrine. This is an irrefutable syllogism. To verify that fact, simply examine its premises. The major premise is: Jesus never taught false religious doctrine. Does anyone wish to refute this statement? Did our Lord ever promote and confirm the bondage of deception? Did He who is the Truth ever accommodate Himself to the use of popular heresy? To say He did, is nothing short of blasphemy! Jesus would never employ heresy (without even a hint that it was error) as a means to convey the Truth. No true prophet in the whole Bible ever did that! 8 What would you think of a missionary to Hindus who used the word reincarnation when he taught about being born again (John 3:7)? Unless he clearly redefined this terminology to all who heard him, he would simply be confirming error in the minds of those who listened. Even Jesus explained to Nicodemus he was not speaking about a natural, physical rebirth (John 3:6). 9 A syllogism is one of the basic forms of deductive reasoning. It may be defined as an argument in which two premises necessitate a conclusion. In a valid argument, the truth of the premises guarantees the truth of the conclusion. If you cannot refute either premise of a syllogism, then neither can you refute the conclusion which is drawn from them. It is inescapable. 10

The minor premise is: He did teach about Abraham s bosom and Hades, where one s consciousness continued after death. Does anyone wish to refute this statement? It is impossible to deny that the terms Abraham s bosom and Hades were used during the first century to refer to the realm of a continuing consciousness after physical death. Josephus and many other contemporary Jewish writers provide ample evidence of that. Neither can anyone possibly deny that Jesus really did use these terms. Since we cannot refute the second premise, and we dare not refute the first, we are then left with an indisputable conclusion: The concept of a continuing consciousness after death, in either Abraham s bosom or in Hades, was not a false religious doctrine. CONCLUSION Although Jesus had much more to say on this subject, these two events in His ministry (where He confronts the Sadducees [Matthew 22:23-33] and the Pharisees [Luke 16:14-31]) clearly establish an incontrovertible historical fact: On the one hand, Jesus publicly repudiated the Sadducees on what they thought happened to man at death; but, on the other hand, He publicly aligned Himself with the Pharisees and their basic concept of the afterlife: particularly, that man remains conscious in death, and must then face the eternal consequences of the choices he made in life. Nothing else which Jesus says will ever alter that. 11