Was Lazarus A 'Bum'?

[Arthur Brain]

He wasn't working and he begged for food.

Why was the rich man wrong in denying him even the scraps of food off his table?

Plenty here seem to think that those who don't work shouldn't eat so does this apply to all the homeless 'bums' and those down on their luck as well?

 

[aCultureWarrior]

He wasn't working and he begged for food.

Being the great biblical scholar that you are (Art only uses the Bible in attempts to promote his Godless agenda), was Lazarus capable of working?

Why was the rich man wrong in denying him even the scraps of food off his table?

The parable that Jesus used wasn't used in the context that you're using it in (but you being the biblical scholar that you are, already knew that), it dealt with the false 'prosperity gospel'.

Plenty here seem to think that those who don't work shouldn't eat so does this apply to all the homeless 'bums' and those down on their luck as well?

A large percentage of the "homeless" as you call them are drug addicts and/or alcoholics, who, if they were helped off their substance abuse problems could work for a living and take pride in providing for themselves and their families if they still have one.

But you liberals and your Libertarian allies have to make yourselves feel good by ruining the lives of others...

 

[Arthur Brain]

Being the great biblical scholar that you are (Art only uses the Bible in attempts to promote his Godless agenda), was Lazarus capable of working?

Why not? Who's fault was it that he ended up in the position of having to beg for scraps of food? A lot of folk blame the homeless for their plight and even consider many disabled people as workshy or lazy and it's usually fundamentalists so what's the difference with Lazarus?

The parable that Jesus used wasn't used in the context that you're using it in (but you being the biblical scholar that you are, already knew that), it dealt with the false 'prosperity gospel'.

Telling that you consider it to be a parable. Many here consider the whole to be an actual depiction of events and use it to justify a literal "hell" although that's going off topic for the purposes of this thread.

A large percentage of the "homeless" as you call them are drug addicts and/or alcoholics, who, if they were helped off their substance abuse problems could work for a living and take pride in providing for themselves and their families if they still have one.

But you liberals and your Libertarian allies have to make yourselves feel good by ruining the lives of others...

I call them that because they are and there's many reasons why people find themselves on the streets and it's often through a lot more than your narrow parameters. Nice to see your objectivity and understanding coming to the fore though aCW.

:thumb:

 

[aCultureWarrior]

Quote Originally Posted by aCultureWarrior

Being the great biblical scholar that you are (Art only uses the Bible in attempts to promote his Godless agenda), was Lazarus capable of working?

Why not? Who's fault was it that he ended up in the position of having to beg for scraps of food? A lot of folk blame the homeless for their plight and even consider many disabled people as workshy or lazy and it's usually fundamentalists so what's the difference with Lazarus?

You didn't answer my question ole biblical scholar: Was Lazurus capable of working? If he was and decided to leach off of society instead of working to provide for himself, based on your knowledge of Holy Scripture ole biblical scholar, would Jesus have approved?

Quote: Originally posted by aCultureWarrior
The parable that Jesus used wasn't used in the context that you're using it in (but you being the biblical scholar that you are, already knew that), it dealt with the false 'prosperity gospel'.

Telling that you consider it to be a parable. Many here consider the whole to be an actual depiction of events and use it to justify a literal "hell" although that's going off topic for the purposes of this thread.

Since I'm not conversing with "many here" (note how I didn't call this a debate), perhaps you can provide biblical passages showing that the story of Lazarus and the financially rich man (who went to Hell) wasn't a parable used by Jesus?


Quote: Originally posted by aCultureWarrior
A large percentage of the "homeless" as you call them are drug addicts and/or alcoholics, who, if they were helped off their substance abuse problems could work for a living and take pride in providing for themselves and their families if they still have one.

But you liberals and your Libertarian allies have to make yourselves feel good by ruining the lives of others...

I call them that because they are and there's many reasons why people find themselves on the streets and it's often through a lot more than your narrow parameters. Nice to see your objectivity and understanding coming to the fore though aCW

Drug and alcohol addiction is the predominate reason why many of these people don't have a place to call home. Private charities help these people as well as people who are truly "homeless" (abused women with children, people who are temporarily displaced due to a disaster/fire/earthquake/hurricane, etc.).

You want government to be the fix all for these people, I want the Church and private charities to help them, as their track record is so much better than your "Great Society" welfare state.

 

[Arthur Brain]

You didn't answer my question ole biblical scholar: Was Lazurus capable of working? If he was and decided to leach off of society instead of working to provide for himself, based on your knowledge of Holy Scripture ole biblical scholar, would Jesus have approved?

Who's 'Lazurus'? Considering Lazarus wasn't above begging for scraps of food it seems blatantly apparent he was down on his luck and poverty stricken so whether he was formerly capable of work or potentially capable of it in the future seems rather moot. The pompous and those lacking compassion don't fare too well in the bible and one doesn't need a diploma to get that. I don't claim to be a 'biblical scholar' and neither should you.

Since I'm not conversing with "many here" (note how I didn't call this a debate), perhaps you can provide biblical passages showing that the story of Lazarus and the financially rich man (who went to Hell) wasn't a parable used by Jesus?

Oh, I think it was a parable and rather blatant at that, so I'm using it in order to maker a wider point. If you think it's a parable yourself then the rich man didn't go anywhere so 'hell' doesn't even come into it.

Drug and alcohol addiction is the predominate reason why many of these people don't have a place to call home. Private charities help these people as well as people who are truly "homeless" (abused women with children, people who are temporarily displaced due to a disaster/fire/earthquake/hurricane, etc.).

So was Lazarus most likely a drunkard to be on the streets and begging for food? It's not explicitly stated as to why he was in such a condition else being the biblical scholar that you imply yourself to be then perhaps you can supply an informed commentary? Otherwise you're just another 'rich man' ready to condemn those on the poverty ladder through pompous self righteousness. Gee, that'd be new for you wouldn't it?

You want government to be the fix all for these people, I want the Church and private charities to help them, as their track record is so much better than your "Great Society" welfare state.

Which they could never achieve through simply those means themselves and working for a charity that fights poverty I'm in a far better educated position than you on the subject. Charities would absolutely balk at your ignorance as there's enough to deal with even with governmental aid. Take that away and you'd increase poverty tenfold. It's not a case of welfare being a 'fix' for people and if you had something about you, outside of pompous legalism and a callous disregard for people out of work you might just be able to see something that those fundamentalist blinkers deprive you of.

 

[aCultureWarrior]

Quote Originally Posted by aCultureWarrior

You didn't answer my question ole biblical scholar: Was Lazurus capable of working? If he was and decided to leach off of society instead of working to provide for himself, based on your knowledge of Holy Scripture ole biblical scholar, would Jesus have approved?

Who's 'Lazurus'? Considering Lazarus wasn't above begging for scraps of food it seems blatantly apparent he was down on his luck and poverty stricken so whether he was formerly capable of work or potentially capable of it in the future seems rather moot. The pompous and those lacking compassion don't fare too well in the bible and one doesn't need a diploma to get that. I don't claim to be a 'biblical scholar' and neither should you.

Contrary to what you would like to believe: Jesus' parable wasn't about creating a welfare state to feed, clothe and house LazArus, it was about a rich man who thought that his riches would buy his way to Heaven.

Pick up a Bible and study it sometime Art, honest, it won't burn your pagan fingertips.

 

[Arthur Brain]

Contrary to what you would like to believe: Jesus' parable wasn't about creating a welfare state to feed, clothe and house LazArus, it was about a rich man who thought that his riches would buy his way to Heaven.

Pick up a Bible and study it sometime Art, honest, it won't burn your pagan fingertips.

If you seriously think that it was about a rich man 'buying' his way into Heaven then please don't clutter up the thread anymore thanks. I've read way better exposition off a pizza leaflet. Go back to your own thread and get on with your 'table of contents' as you've nothing to add to this one obviously.

 

[meshak]

He wasn't working and he begged for food.

Why was the rich man wrong in denying him even the scraps of food off his table?

Plenty here seem to think that those who don't work shouldn't eat so does this apply to all the homeless 'bums' and those down on their luck as well?

I think he was disable.

 

[aCultureWarrior]

Originally Posted by aCultureWarrior
Contrary to what you would like to believe: Jesus' parable wasn't about creating a welfare state to feed, clothe and house LazArus, it was about a rich man who thought that his riches would buy his way to Heaven.

Pick up a Bible and study it sometime Art, honest, it won't burn your pagan fingertips.

If you seriously think that it was about a rich man 'buying' his way into Heaven then please don't clutter up the thread anymore thanks. I've read way better exposition off a pizza leaflet. Go back to your own thread and get on with your 'table of contents' as you've nothing to add to this one obviously.

I understand how very important it is for you God hating secular humanists to take a bit of Holy Scripture and twist it around to meet your perverted needs, but if you're going to make a biblical case for a welfare state (which you can't), at least attempt to do so without using the parable of LazArus and the rich man.

You can find commentaries on Bible verses and passages on the internet, such as this one:

In Luke 16:19-31 appears the Parable of Lazarus and the Rich Man, which Jesus spoke to those who would not repent. Jesus uses it to help them understand His earlier words: "Depart from Me, all you workers of iniquity. There will be weeping and gnashing of teeth, when you see Abraham and Isaac and Jacob and all the prophets in the kingdom of God, and yourselves thrust out" (Luke 13:27-28). In the parable, the rich man—representing all workers of iniquity, all sinners—illustrates what is to befall the unrepentant
http://www.bibletools.org/index.cfm.../cgg/ID/2207/Parable-Lazarus-and-Rich-Man.htm

Here's another:

The parable of Lazarus and the rich man, long used by mainstream ministers to teach the reality of "hell," really has nothing to say about punishment or reward in the afterlife. Christ used this story, which fit the common misconception about life after death in his day, to show the fate that awaited the Jewish nation because of the unbelief and faithlessness which led them to reject him as the Messiah.
http://tentmaker.org/articles/Lazarus-byHuie.htm

Etc. etc. etc.

Now be a good little God-hating secular humanist Art and cherry pick a few verses out of the Bible in an attempt to show that Jesus Christ was a promoter of today's godless welfare state, but leave the parable of LazArus and the rich man alone, as it has nothing to do with your lame socialist ideology.

 

[Crucible]

Holding a job requires a place to sleep, maintain hygiene, wash clothes, and a way for an employer to reach a person.

There are a lot of people on the streets who do not have access to anything- no support system whatsoever, and spend a good deal of their time pan handling or finding a way to stave of the miserable situation.

People like [MENTION=13737]aCultureWarrior[/MENTION] have no clue about homelessness, so spew the same old stupid things.
"Don't work, don't eat"- "They're all drug addicts"- "It's their fault".

The hardest thing a person could go through is being on the street. It is the last place they want to be, and are willing to go far lengths to do something about it.

The problem is that this society is filled with judgemental people, and only built for people who already have a home and/or living.
For the homeless, every day is a struggle.


As for Jesus, he spent most of his time with the poor- he gave them food and healed their ill. In fact, Christianity was largely the religion of the poor in it's first centuries. The religion vindicated the poor, so what these people end up doing is being Pharisaic, or like Roman gentry, and be what Christ spent a lot of words denouncing :AMR:

So for those who want to act so terribly toward the poor, you are without excuse.

They are just trying to justify their unwillingness to care about anyone else is all, or make themselves look holy by putting others below them

 

[Nick M]

Won’t work ≠ can’t work.

 

[aCultureWarrior]

Since Crucible used my name I'll respond; but first, let me set the groundwork on where he's coming from.

Crucible came from a broken home and early in life was placed in various foster homes and eventually ended up on the street, fending for himself amongst the drug addicts, homosexuals/pederasts that roam the streets looking for vulnerable youth to exploit. One found him and took him in and became his mentor.

Holding a job requires a place to sleep, maintain hygiene, wash clothes, and a way for an employer to reach a person.

For those that aren't addicted to drugs and/or alcohol, there are plenty of services that provide all of the above so that people can get a fresh start in life. Of course those places won't take people who don't want a fresh start in life, i.e. those who won't commit themselves to being 'clean and sober'.

For those who won't commit to becoming 'clean and sober', there are still places where they can get the necessary services so that they can hopefully overcome their addiction problems while working.

That being said: Many employers don't want to hire drug addicts and/or alcoholics because of the problems that come with those addictions (theft, tardiness/absenteeism, excessive work related injuries, etc.).

 

[Crucible]

For those that aren't addicted to drugs and/or alcohol, there are plenty of services that provide all of the above so that people can get a fresh start in life. Of course those places won't take people who don't want a fresh start in life, i.e. those who won't commit themselves to being 'clean and sober'.

For those who won't commit to becoming 'clean and sober', there are still places where they can get the necessary services so that they can hopefully overcome their addiction problems while working.

That being said: Many employers don't want to hire drug addicts and/or alcoholics because of the problems that come with those addictions (theft, tardiness/absenteeism, excessive work related injuries, etc.).

There are places you can spend a night at, or temporarily stay for perhaps a month. They are temporary solutions to a permanent problem, and no job you acquire is going to pay you more than you have to spend just to survive when you're out on the street.

Sure, there are places a person can go to get cleaned up, and then when they are back on the street they pick up a bottle because being out there is miserable.
Even more so with people like you existing lain:
Places like the Salvation Army only hold like fifty beds to a damn city, and those are the only places that can be of any real help to the homeless- so don't sit there and preach about something you know jack about.

Unless you're speaking of women- they don't have to really worry about having zero options. That's what you all have decided is righteous- put all resources to special agendas rather then to humanity while you judge from your porch chair.
That's the world you shaped. Good job you self righteous hypocrite :wave2:

 

[serpentdove]

Why was the rich man wrong in denying him even the scraps of food off his table?

Do you ever read your bible? lain: Lev. 16:11, 14; 19:9, 10, 13; 25:25–30, 35, 37

 

[serpentdove]

Who's 'Lazurus'?

A beggar described in a parable (Luke 16:20–25).

See:

When People Mistreat You: Sentencing for Snobs by Daryl Ferguson

 

[aCultureWarrior]

Let's pretend for a moment in Crucible's imaginary world that these "homeless" people are 'clean and sober' (which they're not, hence the problem).

There are places you can spend a night at, or temporarily stay for perhaps a month.

One month equals at least one paycheck if not two at your new place of employment. If that isn't enough to pay for a room somewhere, the person can share an apartment with another employee until he or she can get enough for their own place.

They are temporary solutions to a permanent problem,...

Drug and alcohol addiction is "the problem", but it doesn't have to be "permanent" (that's where free will comes in).

Sure, there are places a person can go to get cleaned up, and then you're back on the street. That's an unfortunate but very true reality that I've seen with my own two eyes- they get cleaned up and within a week are right back under the bridge with a bottle.

In this day and age, the bottle is usually a heroin needle.

Places like the Salvation Army only hold like fifty beds to a damn city, so don't sit there and preach about something you know jack about.

I deal with punks like you numerous times a day on a daily basis. They lie, cheat and steal to get that drug fix and that is the only thing important in their miserable lives.

There is help for those people, most of them in their early 20's (the life expectancy of a heroin addict isn't very long), but first we have to shut down your welfare state and turn the problem over to people who espouse Judeo-Christian values, i.e redemption through Christ.

 

[Arthur Brain]

I understand how very important it is for you God hating secular humanists to take a bit of Holy Scripture and twist it around to meet your perverted needs, but if you're going to make a biblical case for a welfare state (which you can't), at least attempt to do so without using the parable of LazArus and the rich man.

You can find commentaries on Bible verses and passages on the internet, such as this one:

In Luke 16:19-31 appears the Parable of Lazarus and the Rich Man, which Jesus spoke to those who would not repent. Jesus uses it to help them understand His earlier words: "Depart from Me, all you workers of iniquity. There will be weeping and gnashing of teeth, when you see Abraham and Isaac and Jacob and all the prophets in the kingdom of God, and yourselves thrust out" (Luke 13:27-28). In the parable, the rich man—representing all workers of iniquity, all sinners—illustrates what is to befall the unrepentant
http://www.bibletools.org/index.cfm.../cgg/ID/2207/Parable-Lazarus-and-Rich-Man.htm

Here's another:

The parable of Lazarus and the rich man, long used by mainstream ministers to teach the reality of "hell," really has nothing to say about punishment or reward in the afterlife. Christ used this story, which fit the common misconception about life after death in his day, to show the fate that awaited the Jewish nation because of the unbelief and faithlessness which led them to reject him as the Messiah.
http://tentmaker.org/articles/Lazarus-byHuie.htm

Etc. etc. etc.

Now be a good little God-hating secular humanist Art and cherry pick a few verses out of the Bible in an attempt to show that Jesus Christ was a promoter of today's godless welfare state, but leave the parable of LazArus and the rich man alone, as it has nothing to do with your lame socialist ideology.

Uh, why are you emphasizing the word 'parable'? I'm not arguing that it isn't you dipstick.

:doh:

Frankly, if you think removing aid from people exemplifies biblical principles then you're the one who'd be hard pressed to make a case for it as the resulting soar of poverty and increased squalor would be on your own head. You simply haven't got a clue if you think charitable organizations would in any way be able to reach everyone in need. Even with the safety nets in place there's people who still fall through them. I work for a charity and they'd be disgusted at your ideas, let alone ignorance. If you think everyone 'living' on the streets is there because of drink/drug addiction then that's you being your usual pompous, out of touch and self righteous moronic self.

You have more in common with the rich man in this story and you're just as puffed up as well.

 

[ok doser]

Why was the rich man wrong in denying him even the scraps of food off his table?

where are you getting that from? :freak:

 

[aCultureWarrior]

Uh, why are you emphasizing the word 'parable'? I'm not arguing that it isn't you dipstick.

Because I'm emphasizing that Jesus used the story of LazArus for a different purpose.

Frankly, if you think removing aid from people exemplifies biblical principles then you're the one who'd be hard pressed to make a case for it as the resulting soar of poverty and increased squalor would be on your own head. You simply haven't got a clue if you think charitable organizations would in any way be able to reach everyone in need. Even with the safety nets in place there's people who still fall through them. I work for a charity and they'd be disgusted at your ideas, let alone ignorance. If you think everyone 'living' on the streets is there because of drink/drug addiction then that's you being your usual pompous, out of touch and self righteous moronic self.

You have more in common with the rich man in this story and you're just as puffed up as well.

If you think that Jesus Christ, the Son of God/God in the flesh wants to use the force of government to take from those who have, and give to those who they (government) deem in need, then make your case based on verses and passages in Holy Scripture.

I'll wait...

 

[Arthur Brain]

Because I'm emphasizing that Jesus used the story of LazArus for a different purpose.

A story can convey more than one intent or purpose and the inhumanity of treating those in poverty like scum is pretty darn blatant as one.

If you think that Jesus Christ, the Son of God/God in the flesh wants to use the force of government to take from those who have, and give to those who they (government) deem in need, then make your case based on verses and passages in Holy Scripture.

I'll wait...

Whereas I suppose it would be biblical to cast off the poor and let the chips fall where they may at the whims of charity? If it's biblical to let the poor starve and the homeless rot then the rich man really didn't do anything wrong did he, because what you suggest would result in that and an exponential increase of it as well. Maybe you can show where it's biblical to grumble about where your taxes go?

You are clueless.