Overall, I'd be very careful with the online Orthosphere as it can be full of cranks and toxicity.
Thank you for your concern. I only frequent one site and primarily there to support those struggling in my small way. I try, not always successfully, to avoid those cranky, triumphalist posts.
Sure. I get that. But what I was puzzled by was your apparent assertion that taking a NT parable literally, such as the one we are discussing here, is a standard Orthodox position.
I get squirmy at the idea that being poor is enough to qualify you for salvation. I've met any number of poor bastards, and a few rich non-bastards. Heck, I've BEEN a poor bastard. I don't see why my bastardly behavior should be overlooked simply because I'm poor.
I think a likelier explanation for Lazarus ending up with Abraham without whatever description of evangelism/faith/whatsit you fancy is that the parable simply wasn't dealing with that. Jesus wanted to get on with the story, which was focused primarily on the rich man.
Sure. I get that. But what I was puzzled by was your apparent assertion that taking a NT parable literally, such as the one we are discussing here, is a standard Orthodox position.
I've never come across that.
Apologies for being unclear in my post; that was not my intent. To take this text, I had always been taught it was a parable. In and out of Orthodoxy. Encountering the view online that it was history was confusing, hence my post.
<snip>One of the interesting things about this parable is that Lazarus is saved. We get no explanation about how this was accomplished. Lazarus is never depicted as repenting of his sins or holding the correct theological beliefs when he died. <snip>
The same or similar could be said of Abraham in whose bosom Lazarus rests, and of Moses and the prophets. But I agree with @Lamb Chopped that this isn’t really Lazarus’ story. The focus is on the rich man.
I get squirmy at the idea that being poor is enough to qualify you for salvation. I've met any number of poor bastards, and a few rich non-bastards. Heck, I've BEEN a poor bastard. I don't see why my bastardly behavior should be overlooked simply because I'm poor.
I get the impression that "the poor and oppressed" is a sort of code for "the sinned against rather than the sinners" in general terms.
Of course as individuals each of us is both sinner and sinned against, so both bits of the gospel apply to a greater or lesser extent. But there are people very much on one end or the other of the spectrum. Lazarus and Dives then are types, from those extreme ends.
What's important - what's really important, to my mind, is the reinforcement that salvation is not simply a matter of religious belief or practice - this is scarcely the only place where the Kingdom of God is described as being where the poor and downtrodden are lifted up and the mighty and oppressive cut down.
The Magnificat should get its annual outing pretty soon in the church calendar, should it not?
Comments
I've never come across that.
I think a likelier explanation for Lazarus ending up with Abraham without whatever description of evangelism/faith/whatsit you fancy is that the parable simply wasn't dealing with that. Jesus wanted to get on with the story, which was focused primarily on the rich man.
Apologies for being unclear in my post; that was not my intent. To take this text, I had always been taught it was a parable. In and out of Orthodoxy. Encountering the view online that it was history was confusing, hence my post.
Apologies again.
I get the impression that "the poor and oppressed" is a sort of code for "the sinned against rather than the sinners" in general terms.
Of course as individuals each of us is both sinner and sinned against, so both bits of the gospel apply to a greater or lesser extent. But there are people very much on one end or the other of the spectrum. Lazarus and Dives then are types, from those extreme ends.
What's important - what's really important, to my mind, is the reinforcement that salvation is not simply a matter of religious belief or practice - this is scarcely the only place where the Kingdom of God is described as being where the poor and downtrodden are lifted up and the mighty and oppressive cut down.
The Magnificat should get its annual outing pretty soon in the church calendar, should it not?
@Lamb Chopped, so what kind of bastard are you now then? 😉
Over here the term tends to be reserved for blokes.
Not sure any of them say much about grace. But I’m willing to stand corrected.
“Don’t be indifferent to others in this life. You’ll pay for it later”.
Reminds me of Lasker’s old chess adage. “The threat is more powerful than the execution”. Something of that in the story of Jonah.