“The time came when the beggar died and the angels carried him to Abraham’s side. The rich man also died and was buried. In Hades, where he was in torment, he looked up and saw Abraham far away, with Lazarus by his side. So 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.’
“But 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. And besides all this, between us and you a great chasm has been set in place, so that those who want to go from here to you cannot, nor can anyone cross over from there to us.’
“He answered, ‘Then I beg you, father, send Lazarus to my family, for I have five brothers. Let him warn them, so that they will not also come to this place of torment.’
“Abraham replied, ‘They have Moses and the Prophets; let them listen to them.’
“‘No, father Abraham,’ he said, ‘but if someone from the dead goes to them, they will repent.’
“He 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.’”
I just read a new book called "Fighting Poverty, Inequality and Injustice (a manifesto inspired by Peter Townsend)". It has a particularly interesting chapter by Conor Gearty called "Putting the lawyers in their place: the role of human rights in the struggle against poverty". It is fascinating because it tries to answer the question "Why care?" without reference to God. Conor asks:
"Why does it matter that so many are currently lost to the world on account of their impoverishment, either because they die unnaturally young or lead lives of unyielding grimness? Why should we not think of this as simply the (bad) luck of the species birth lottery? In times past it was easy to grasp why we both cared for others and ought to care for them: it was God's direction... At least since Marx, however, secular society has had the greatest of difficulty with absolutes of any sort, a scepticism that has extended to a reluctance to explore any of the supposed ethical foundations that might lie at its core."
The reason secular society has these difficulties, of course, is because God really is there. All "oughts" come from Him, and are incoherent apart from Him. Indeed - in societies without Christianity, the "oughts" vary tremendously, and emphatically do not tend to share the same ideals. Any historian will tell you this! Consider the Romans, the Spartans, the Babylonians, the men of Nineveh. Or take the Nazis, the Communists, the Taliban. The pre-Christian tribes of Scandinavia or the British Isles? These cultures did not have "universal" rights. They lauded revenge, war, conquest, booty, death, greed, craftiness, trickery, guile. The questions of the playground obtain: "who says?" - "You and what army?"
The only reason people should care about poverty and injustice is that God loves people, which creates value in them, making us all valuable. We are valuable because valued. Hell (and only hell) is what happens when people reject God, and God acquiesces in their rejection of Him by withdrawing Himself, along with all the Goodness that only comes from His presence. As C.S. Lewis put it, "God cannot give us a happiness and peace apart from Himself, because it is not there. There is no such thing." Or to quote Don Carson: "Society set free from God is its own worst enemy."
The nameless "rich man", defined by his wealth, does not seek to leave his place of torment. Of course he hates it, but...
The rich man asked for Lazarus to dip his finger in water and cool his tongue. Why such an effete request? Why not ask for a cup of water? Would that have satisfied him? No more should it than did the fine linen, the sumptuous debauchery of his recklessly selfish life! Here is the man who has eradicated his own humanity by refusing to recognise the humanity of his unfortunate fellow man.
Lazarus did not get past this man's gate. Even what he wasted could have fed wretched Lazarus! Even the dogs came and licked Lazarus' sores. The dogs did more for Lazarus than the rich man did. But Lazarus has a name.
"Warn my brothers," he demands. (Or rather: "send Lazarus": even now, he can only conceive of Lazarus as his lackey!) But does he really care about these nameless five? Of course not! He only mentions them by way of indirect accusation. "I wasn't warned that I'd end up in this place of torment, so how should they know?" He has spent his life in worship of the creation, being devoted not merely to outward show (purple garments and daily feasting) but to excess of delicacy: even his undergarments were of the finest linen. His god is his belly. What now torments him is this: he can no longer have the things he craves. In his lifetime he received all his good things. Literally all of them. There will be no more. God had been good to him. The rich man had nothing to complain of, and much to be thankful for. He did not earn these good things, and did not deserve them, and did not use them for the purpose for which he was given them. He had been blessed to be a blessing.
God always blesses people so they can be a blessing. (We are made to bear his image, after all!) This rich man claims Abraham as his father. But Abraham was blessed to be a blessing, and lived out of faith, pleasing God. So now that these blessings of God have been withdrawn, all he is left with is a sense of entitlement, and unfulfilled desire, and resentment.
Lazarus has a name. But look what else: he has a place. He has comfort. Angels attend him. God gives him the value He created him to have. He is at Abraham's side: a place of eternal honour.
Jesus tells this story to the pharisees. The context is significant, and sheds light on its meaning. Consider what has come before:
The proud pharisees hated the people Jesus loved, considering them to be morally tarnished. Jesus therefore told them three stories of how compassionate God goes after the lost: desperately, relentlessly and recklessly. The pharisees themselves were every bit as morally tarnished as the people they despised. The elder brother, however, was the one who did not get in to the father's party. He kept himself outside. (Though the gracious father pleaded with him to come in.) Jesus challenged the pharisees to see themselves in this light: as the ones outside of the kingdom of heaven.
Then, to draw their attention to their plight, he told them the story about a servant who was also in a desperate situation. This shrewd servant realised that he had a limited window of opportunity to betray his former master to secure good terms and a future with a new master. The pharisees were in the same boat. They loved money, rather than God, but God was the one to whom they were going to give account.
Jesus made it clear that he was not sweeping aside the demands of the law, as the pharisees thought he was. Indeed, it is impossible to do that! The law was a divine ordinance: even human agreements, such as marriage, for instance, may not be set aside without consequences! How much more impossible is it for the Law to be set aside! No - Jesus came to fulfill the law by loving God and loving people just as God and people ought to be loved.
The point is that anyone who does not live out of respect for that love is like the rich man who lacks love. He will end up living in a world of pain: a world without love. Hell.
0 comments:
Post a Comment