Part 3: Moses and the Law

(This is the third of a series of articles that first appeared in 1950 in Truth magazine, published by Milwaukee Bible Institute/Worldwide Grace Testimony, now the Grace Gospel Fellowship. These articles have never before appeared in the Searchlight.)


The covenant of the law was made between God and Israel, with Moses as mediator and angels to witness and confirm the transaction (See John 1:17; Acts 7:53; Gal. 3:19).

It was made 430 years after the Abrahamic covenant, in which God had promised repeatedly and unconditionally that Abraham’s multiplied seed should be His people and should become the blessers of the world.

This poses a problem, for here, more than four centuries after making these unconditional promises to Abraham and confirming them to Isaac and to Jacob, God begins to add qualifications, saying:

“Now therefore, IF ye will obey my voice indeed, and keep my covenant, THEN ye shall be a peculiar treasure unto me above all people; for all the earth is mine” (Exod. 19:5).

Paul faces this problem candidly when he states in Galatians 3:15:

“Brethren, I speak after the manner of men; Though it be but a man’s covenant, yet if it be confirmed, no man disanulleth, or addeth thereto.”

Or to state it in modern English: Even a man, after having signed an agreement would not think of taking from it or adding to it. Once the agreement is confirmed by his signature it must be carried out as agreed.

And then, presenting the problem, the apostle adds:

“Wherefore then serveth the law? It was added…” (Gal. 3:19).

Would God, then, add qualifying clauses to a covenant already made and confirmed? Yes—indeed, He added a whole new covenant! And to increase the difficulty, Israel confirmed the added covenant, answering in unison:

“…All that the Lord hath spoken we will do…” (Exod. 19:8).

Thus what Abraham’s seed had once been promised unconditionally now seemed to depend upon a very big “IF”—probably the Bible’s biggest “IF,” for who could obey God’s voice indeed and fully keep His law?


Thank God, we are also given the solution to this perplexing problem. To begin with, the apostle assures his readers:

“And this I say, that the covenant, that was confirmed before of God in Christ, the law, which was four hundred and thirty years after, cannot disannul, that is should make the promise of none effect” (Gal. 3:17).

What, then, is the solution?

First, the law was not given, as so many suppose, to help men to be good, but to show them that they are bad. And be it noted that while the covenant of the law was made with Israel, it nevertheless spells condemnation to all the race, for it outlines those standards of holiness to which none of Adam’s children can attain and without which no man shall see God (Heb. 12:14).

“Now we know that what things soever the law saith, it saith to them who are under the law: that every mouth may be stopped, and all the world may become guilty before God.

“Therefore by the deeds of the law there shall no flesh be justified in His sight: for by the law is the knowledge of sin” (Rom. 3:19,20).

“…It was added because of transgressions…” (Gal. 3:19).

But did not this very fact make it impossible for God to fulfill the unconditional promises made under the Abrahamic covenant without violating the stipulations of this added covenant? Did not this added covenant specify that they should be His people IF they obeyed His voice indeed? Was it not now impossible for the most godly Jew to be saved? Had not God in fact nullified the whole Abrahamic covenant?

No, for the penalty for the broken law was to be met by God Himself in due time. God had made this added covenant simply to show man his moral and spiritual bankruptcy and that on the grounds of the added covenant he could never be saved. The unconditional promise made so long ago still stood and every believing Israelite was accepted of God.


That God did not mean the Mosaic covenant to make the Abrahamic void is evident from several interesting facts found in the record of the Mosaic covenant itself.

After giving Israel claim to acceptance with Him only IF they obeyed His will, God proceeded to instruct Moses:

“Speak unto the children of Israel, that they bring me an offering: of every man that giveth it willingly with his heart ye shall take my offering….And let them make me a sanctuary; that I may dwell among them” (Exod. 25:2,8).

And this while He knew they were not obeying His voice and were preparing to dance as heathen about a golden calf!

This seeming indifference to His own solemn word is partially explained as He further instructs Moses:

“And they shall make an ark…. And thou shalt put into the ark the testimony which I shall give thee” (Exod. 25:10,16).

The word here rendered “ark” is really “coffin.” The very same word is used in Genesis 50:26, where we read of Joseph:

“And they embalmed him, and he was put in a coffin in Egypt.”

Thus the very first article of furniture God commanded for the tabernacle was a coffin to bury the law in!

It is unfortunate that this word has been translated “ark” in the Authorized Version. Wherever we read of the “ark of the covenant” in the Bible we should remember it is the “coffin of the covenant.” This will throw light on many, many passages which otherwise might be obscure.

Significantly God commanded that the cover for this coffin should be a “mercy seat” (Exod. 25:17).

“And thou shalt put the mercy seat above upon the ark; and in the ark thou shalt put the testimony which I shall give thee.

“And there I will meet with thee, and I will commune with thee from above the mercy seat” (Exod. 25:21,22).

All this, of course, was symbolic of truths later to be revealed, but it indicates that God did not for one moment mean the Mosaic covenant to make the Abrahamic covenant void, since Christ was to meet the full demands of a broken law by His death.


God would not have added the Mosaic covenant had it not been for the Lamb “foreordained before the foundation of the world” (I Pet. 1:19,20). Nevertheless, having Christ in mind, He did add it and Israel accepted and confirmed it so that, for the time being, it was binding upon them. And this served to demonstrate to them their utter depravity and inability to obey God.

By about 600 B.C. it had been more than fully proven that the covenant of the law could not bring Israel to God and He promised to make a New Covenant with them, putting His law in their inward parts and writing it upon their hearts. This was about the time Israel lost her national supremacy and “the times of the Gentiles” began. The law was growing old. Hebrews 8:13 says of this:

“In that he saith, A new covenant, He hath made the first old. Now that which decayeth and waxeth old is ready to vanish away.”


As it was the coming death of Christ that warranted putting the law into a coffin in the first place, so it was the death of Christ that finally abolished this covenant. But all this began to be manifested only after sin had risen to its height and God had saved the chief of sinners, sending him forth with the gospel of the grace of God.

For sometime after the Cross Messiah’s followers still considered themselves under the law. No revelation had yet been given to indicate that they were not. Ananias, that faithful follower of Christ who baptized Saul of Tarsus, was “a devout man according to the law, having a good report of all the Jews which dwelt there” (Acts 22:12). It was only in Acts 15, at the great Jerusalem council, that the Jewish believers first agreed that Gentiles were not to be under the law. Whether or not the Jews were to be under the law was not even discussed. They assumed that they were still to continue under the law, for no revelation had been given to the contrary. However, with the fall and setting aside of the nation with whom the covenant had been made, and with the further revelation of Paul concerning both the law and the work of Christ, it became evident that the covenant and dispensation of the law had come to an end.

There are those who suppose the Pentecostal believers should have realized that the law had been nailed to the Cross, but it must be emphasized that not until Paul did God give any revelation to that effect. The “dispensation of the grace of God” was not committed to Peter but to Paul and until Paul it had been a mystery (See Eph. 3:1-3). Not until Paul do we read:

“BUT NOW the righteousness of God without the law is manifested…to declare His righteousness for the remission of sins that are past…to declare, I say, AT THIS TIME His righteousness: that He might be just and the Justifier of him that believeth in Jesus” (Rom. 3:21-26).

Not until Paul do we read:

“For sin shall not have dominion over you: for ye are not under law, but under grace” (Rom. 6:14).


But while the covenant of the law was abolished, the law itself will, of course, remain forever. God has graciously removed the “IF” but this does not alter the fact that His people in every age should seek to obey His voice indeed. Also, the dispensation of the law—the ordinances, statutes and all that—has passed away, but the principle remains.

“For what the law could not do, in that it was weak through the flesh, God sending His own Son in the likeness of sinful flesh and for sin, condemned sin in the flesh:

“That the righteousness of the law might be fulfilled in us, who walk not after the flesh, but after the Spirit” (Rom. 8:3,4).


Those who suppose that at Pentecost the twelve should have known that the law was done away sometimes think this because the New Covenant was made at Calvary. But the making of a covenant is not the fulfillment of it. It is too often forgotten that God merely promised to make a new covenant in Jeremiah 31:31, and that the covenant was not made until Calvary. It will not be fulfilled until all Israel is saved and they all know the Lord, from the least of them to the greatest of them.

But here again it should be noticed that the New Covenant, while displacing the covenant of the law does not displace the law itself. Indeed, by it, God’s people will spontaneously fulfil the law. This could not be stated more clearly than it is in Jeremiah 31:33:

“But this shall be the covenant that I will make with the house of Israel; After those days, saith the Lord, I will put my law in their inward parts, and write it in their hearts; and will be their God, and they shall be my people.”


As the Old Covenant was made with Israel alone, yet affects the whole world (Rom. 3:19), so the New Covenant, while made “with the house of Israel and with the house of Judah,” affects the whole world too, for by “the blood of the New Covenant” the condemnation of the Old was removed.

Moses was the mediator of the Old Covenant (Gal. 3:19); Christ was the Mediator of the New (Heb. 9:15). Moses demanded righteousness, but he could neither give the ability to obey the law nor undo the effects of a broken law. But Christ as the Mediator of the New Covenant, paid the debt of a broken law, offers His own perfect righteousness and by His Spirit enables the believer to live pleasing to God.

You can receive More Minutes With the Bible every week in your email inbox. This list features longer articles, including both original content and articles that have appeared in the Berean Searchlight.

Berean Searchlight – June 2004

Free Mail Subscription

For a free subscription to the Berean Searchlight by mail, visit the Berean Searchlight Subscription page.

Subscribe to the Berean Searchlight Monthly Email to receive an email announcement when each issue of the Searchlight is posted online.

The Rich Man and Lazarus – Luke 16:19-31

The question is often asked, is the account of the rich man and Lazarus a historical account or is it a parable? Is it the true story of two men who lived and died during the time of Christ’s earthly ministry or is it a made-up story used by the Lord to drive home a point? I believe that the evidence is that it describes an actual history of these two men.

By definition, a parable is a true-to-life story used to illustrate or illuminate a truth. This is true even if all of the details never occurred exactly as presented in the story. They are special stories that may, or may not, reflect historical events. Nevertheless, they must be true-to-life. By true-to-life we mean that a parable must be based on a real-life situation that the hearers are familiar with. In other words, the story itself has to be based on events that could have happened, whether they ever actually did or not.

Our English word “parable” is a transliteration of the Greek word parabole. It is a derivative of paraballo, which comes from two Greek words para and ballo. Para means alongside or by the side of. And ballo means to lie, or to place, something. Thus, a parable is a story put down beside a truth in order to illustrate that truth through comparison. Therefore a parable must be a true-to-life story in order for it to have any meaning to those who hear it. To try to use a fanciful story containing elements that have no basis to the world in which men and women live would only serve to confuse people rather than providing them with spiritual light. A simple survey of the Lord Jesus’ use of parables reveals that He always used things commonplace to daily life, such as the building of houses, storing old and new wine, sowing seed, weeds growing along with the crop, yeast permeating bread dough, hidden treasure, fishing, monetary debts, unforgiveness, vineyards, family life, weddings, a barren fig tree, a lost coin, an unjust judge, etc. While His hearers may not have made the connection to the truths the Lord was pointing out, they needed no explanation as to what the stories were about because they involved common everyday things to which they could relate. When the hearers of the parables perceived that there was an analogy between the story and their own situation, they were prompted to think about it, hopefully to respond by faith to the truth illustrated. Parables can be extraordinary and even shocking, but never unrealistic or fanciful.

When we come to the account of the rich man and Lazarus, we find a situation different from what is found in any of the parables. The Lord Jesus’ hearers could understand the contrast between the lives of a rich man and a poor beggar. It was common to see beggars sitting by the road hoping for a handout, and they could easily identify the folks who had more than enough wealth to live comfortably. Then, as now, there was a stark difference between the lives of those who have an overabundance and those with nothing. Although we can still grasp that there is a great difference between the lifestyles of these two men, the vastness of the “great gulf” between them is often lost to us because of the welfare and social services provided by the government. This is not the case in many third world nations today where people are literally starving to death. Regardless, the contrast in this story is the reversal of that gulf after the death of these two men.

The hearers of this story could follow the contrast between these two men right up to the moment of their deaths. At that point, however, the situation changes drastically. The outcome was something that they could not relate to any life situations that they had ever witnessed. The state and location of the departed soul was beyond their life experiences, or what is commonly known to be true by experience. The circumstances described go beyond the realm of the parable. That does not mean that it isn’t a true-to-life story, however. Physical death is a natural part of the life experience of all mankind, but what takes place afterward is hidden from those who have not yet experienced it. In this account of a beggar and a rich man, the Lord was revealing the reality of what takes place following physical death to drive home an important truth. We should mention at this point that even if it was a parable, the place referred to as Abraham’s bosom and the account of what took place in there would have to be based on reality for it to have any meaning.

Following are some reasons that this should be considered a history of two real men and not a parable.

  1. Parables are true-to-life, but hypothetical, illustrative stories. The names of specific individuals are never given in them, but here the names of three men are given; Lazarus, Abraham, and Moses. Also mentioned are the “prophets” who were also real people. (“Moses and the prophets” is a general term for the whole Old Testament that refers to its human authors).
  2. It does not have the normal form of a parable with an introduction, analogy story, and application. Instead it is in the form of the narration of a real-life story given for the purpose of illustration.
  3. It does not use the principle of comparison in a way that is characteristic of parables.
  4. The discussion between the rich man and Abraham is not consistent with the parabolic style found in the Scriptures.
  5. It seems obvious that in relating this particular story when He did, the Lord Jesus was using a real-life account that many of those listening to Him that day could readily relate to it because they actually knew, or at least knew of, the two men involved. The rich man’s brothers may have even been in the audience.


The main point of the story of the rich man and Lazarus is that an individual’s wealth and social standing, or the lack thereof, is not necessarily an indication of that person’s spiritual standing before God. Many of the Jews believed that the fact that they had accumulated wealth that afforded them social status and prominent positions in the religious community proved that they were under the blessing of God. They also thought, according to their logic, that those who were poor were under the curse of God. They no doubt appealed to the promises made to Israel in the Law of Moses concerning the blessings of prosperity for obedience to God’s Law and the curses of poverty because of disobedience, failing to recognize the national rather then the personal nature of those promises (see Deut. 28:1-45ff.; etc.). They were also ignoring the many warnings found in “Moses and the Prophets” that were directed towards the leaders of Israel who selfishly misused their power and wealth (see Isa. 56:10-12; Ezek. 34:1-4ff.; Micah 3:1-4; etc.).

To challenge their seriously flawed thinking, the Lord Jesus told the parable of the unjust (or dishonest) steward (Luke 16:1-13). The main point of this parable was that the dishonest steward, who represented the Gentiles, was wiser than the “children of light,” a reference to the sons of Israel, who were to be a channel through which God’s light would reach the Gentiles, i.e., the nations of the world (Isa. 42:5-7; 49:5-6; 60:1-3; 62:1-3). The true Light of the World is Jesus Christ Himself (John 8:12), who is the Messiah of Israel. In the prophetic program, the only avenue through which the Gentiles can come to the Light is through the nation of Israel (Isa. 60:1-3; Zech. 8:20-23). The point of this parable was that those who were striving after riches were actually self-serving rather than servants of God. He was calling on them to choose between the two, saying: “No servant can serve two masters: for either he will hate the one, and love the other; or else he will hold to the one, and despise the other. Ye cannot serve God and mammon [money]” (Luke 16:13). The implication was that those whose priorities were based on accumulating wealth were demonstrating that their hearts were not right with God (cf. Matt. 6:19-21).

On hearing Him, the Pharisees, who were lovers of money, scoffed at the Lord (Luke 16:14), who then accused them of being self-righteous and trying to press, or force their way into the Kingdom on their own terms (Luke 16:15-16). That is to say, they were counting on their self-proclaimed righteousness to open the door of the Kingdom to them. Jesus plainly declared that the terms of the Law were solid and could not be circumvented. The principles underlying the Mosaic Law express God’s character, and therefore the Law is more enduring than the whole of creation (Luke 16:17). He then revealed their hypocrisy by pointing out that their attitude about divorce and remarriage was not in line with God’s purposes (Luke 16:18; cf. Matt. 5:31-32; 19:3-9).

The key to understanding the point that the Lord is making in telling the story of the rich man and Lazarus is found in verses 15 and 16; “And He said unto them, ye are they which justify yourselves before men; but God knoweth your hearts: for that which is highly esteemed among men is abomination in the sight of God. The Law and the Prophets were until John: since that time the Kingdom of God is preached and every man presseth into it” (Luke 16:15-16).

Though their self-justification might gain them favor among men, it would not gain God’s favor because He knew what was in their heart (cf. Jer. 17:9-10). The things that men hold in high regard, things that gain them position and respect among men, are disgusting to God. In truth, the love of money reveals a covetous heart that has given its allegiance to “mammon” rather than God (cf. I Tim. 6:10).

In the Law and the Prophets, a general term for the Old Testament Scriptures, is found the promise, or proclamation of God’s coming Kingdom on earth, which Israel was waiting for. John the Baptist came on the scene to introduce the Messiah, who would usher in the Kingdom Age, to Israel (John 1:26-34). After being baptized by John Jesus Christ began His public ministry by saying, “The Kingdom of God is at hand: repent ye, and believe the Gospel” (see Mark 1:9-15).

Of course, the Jews, especially the Pharisees, knew that entrance into the Kingdom was conditioned on obedience to God’s Law. To drive home His point about how the money-loving Pharisees were misusing their wealth, to their own peril, the Lord told the true story of the rich man and Lazarus. The rich man wasn’t lost because he had wealth, nor was Lazarus saved because he was poor. This was a matter of the heart with the focus being on the rich man, not Lazarus.

The rich man’s failure to help Lazarus, a fellow Israelite, revealed that he had a wicked heart, a non-repentant heart. By refusing to provide for the poor beggar sitting at his gate, the rich man was rebelling against God who, through Moses, had given Israel specific instructions on how those with resources were to treat their poor fellow countrymen (see Deut. 15:7-11). They were to open their hands wide in providing for the poor and needy in their land. This man showed that he did not love the Lord God of Israel with all of his heart, soul, and might as commanded by the Law (Deut. 6:4-5; cf. Mark 12:28-30). The evidence of this was that he did not love his neighbor, who in this case was Lazarus (Lev. 19:18; cf. Matt. 22:34-40). Although he thought he could force his way into God’s Kingdom, his heart attitude, which was demonstrated by his actions, proved him to be unworthy to enter.

When he asked Abraham to send Lazarus back to warn his brothers about what awaited them beyond death’s door if they did not repent, “Abraham saith unto Him, They have Moses and the Prophets; let them hear them” (Luke 16:29). If, like the rich man, his brothers would not heed the warnings found in God’s Word, from Moses and the Prophets, neither would they believe someone who had been raised from the dead. This proved to be true as even after His own resurrection the leaders of Israel rejected the Lord Jesus as their Messiah. It is sad to say, but for the most part mankind has continued to reject Christ as savior, even until today.

Being true-to-life, whether it is historical or parable, this story is based on truths from which we can learn certain facts about the state of those who have experienced physical death. This is true even though teaching these things is not the main purpose the Lord had in telling it. Being based on truth, the facts learned from the experience of the rich man and Lazarus are consistent with what is found in other places in Scriptures. From this passage we know that:

  1. After physical death, individuals continue to exist in a state of personal consciousness (vv. 22-25ff.; cf. Rev. 6:9-10).
  2. Having experienced physical death, the individual’s destiny is sealed. There is no opportunity to cross over from the place of utter hopelessness to a place of hope after physical death (vv. 25-26).
  3. Hades is not a figure of speech but a real place of suffering to which the unsaved go to await the final judgment (vv. 23-24). They will stay there until the time of the resurrection to condemnation when they will be consigned to the Lake of Fire forever (cf. Rev. 20:11-15).
  4. There is a place, referred to here as Abraham’s Bosom, which is a place of comfort and joy (v. 25). The saved go there until the time of their resurrection unto life. This place is also referred to as “Paradise” in the Scriptures (cf. Luke 23:39-43). Originally it was a partitioned section of Hades, but was moved to heaven after Christ’s resurrection. Paul speaks of being “caught up into paradise” (II Cor. 12:4). This implies that Grace saints and Kingdom saints may jointly occupy Paradise until the time of their respective resurrections.
  5. After physical death, unsaved individuals will have regretful memories of the past and knowledge of their hopeless future (vv. 25-28).
  6. After having died, individuals go to Hades or Paradise and are not able to return or send back messages to those still living (vv. 26-28). Samuel, Moses, and Elijah are exceptions, having been sent by God as special envoys. No one can return by an act of their own will. The Scriptures leave no possibility for reincarnation and spiritism.
  7. Neither the saved or the lost will cease to exist, nor will they exist without form between physical death and the resurrection. Both have a temporary form of some kind that enables them to see, speak, hear and feel (vv. 22-25). No doubt this form is of a spiritual nature and substance, but nevertheless, it is a tangible form with a recognizable human likeness.


The story of the rich man and Lazarus clearly shows that after physical death they were very much aware of their circumstances and what was going on around them. The Apostle Paul stated that for the believer “to live is Christ, and to die is gain” (see Phil. 1:21-23), indicating that this is in fact the case. That he had “a desire to depart (this life)” to be with the Lord tells us that he expected to consciously experience something “far better” than can be found in this life. This means that at the time of physical death believers will “gain” something. As precious as the believer’s life “in Christ” is in the here and now, it will be greatly enhanced when he leaves it to enter into the presence of the Lord. Paul’s statement that “to live is Christ” speaks of a purposeful life lived in service to and for the glory of the Lord Jesus Christ. The only way to add to this, to gain that which is better, is to enter into the very presence of Christ in heaven to consciously enjoy perfect fellowship with Him in a way that we cannot in this life. It is only by faith that the believer can find the confidence to face death “willing rather to be absent from the body, and to be present with the Lord” (see II Cor. 5:7-8).

That the death of a believer brings him, or her, into a situation considered to be “gain”, or the increased experience of spiritual blessing, refutes all erroneous ideas such as soul sleep or that the soul ceases to exist at death to be awakened or recreated at the time of the resurrection. To enjoy the life of Christ in this life only to be experientially separated from Him by becoming unconscious or ceasing to exist would be loss, not gain. This would be true even if it was only for a short time. But the fact that we have been given eternal life guarantees that we have everlasting fellowship with God. Our life in Christ will never be diminished, only enlarged. That “the love of God is shed abroad in our hearts by the Holy Spirit who is given unto us” (Rom. 5:5) mandates the continued conscious existence of the believer after physical death because nothing, not even death, “shall be able to separate us from the love of God, which is in Christ Jesus our Lord” (Rom. 8:39).


  1. The Old Testament saints are pictured as being “gathered to their people” after physical death (see Gen. 25:8; 35:29; 49:29,33; Num. 20:24,26; 27:13; 31:2; Deut. 32:48-50): To be gathered to other people makes no sense, and no meaning, if it only refers to entering into an unconscious state of being. To be gathered to their people speaks of being joined together in a relational way.
  2. His child having died, David expected to eventually go to his son (see II Sam. 12:13-23): If he had expected to enter into an unconscious state, he would have had no such hope. David fully expected to see his son on the other side of the vale of physical death. David’s words, “I shall go to him, but he shall not return to me,” show that he did not have the hope of resurrection in mind, but to join his son after he died. Together they would await the resurrection while enjoying each other’s company.
  3. Samuel’s appearance to Saul and the woman of Endor (see I Sam. 28:3-20): King Saul was struck with fear over a coming battle with the Philistines, and the Lord God was ignoring his petitions for guidance. He became so frightened and distressed that he sought out a necromancer in a desperate effort to contact Samuel, the departed prophet, who had in better times been his spiritual counselor. It was a frightful shock to this woman when God allowed Samuel to actually appear to deliver a prophetic message from the Lord to Saul. No doubt she either planned to trick Saul or expected a demon masquerading as Samuel to appear. Adding to her fear was the realization that the man who had come to her in an effort to communicate with Samuel was actually King Saul, who had a reputation for putting mediums like her to death. In his appearance Samuel had a recognizable human form and was able to carry on a conversation with Saul. His complaint about being disquieted (disturbed) indicates that he was abiding in a state of conscious bliss that was interrupted in order for him to make this appearance. That it is said he was brought “up” rather than brought “back” shows that he was residing in the lower parts of the earth. We believe that he was in Abraham’s Bosom, or Paradise, which at that time was located in the heart of the earth in a place called Sheol, or Hades (see the Repentant Thief on the Cross below).
  4. The Calling of Lazarus from the Grave (John 11:1-46): Although the “how” is beyond our understanding, the fact that Lazarus responded to the Lord Jesus Christ’s command to “come forth” from the grave speaks to us of the continued conscious existence of the soul following physical death.
  5. The Repentant Thief on the Cross (Luke 23:32-34, 39-43): As they hung on their respective crosses, one of the thieves who was crucified with Him turned to Jesus with a repentant heart saying, “Lord, remember me when thou comest into thy kingdom”. Christ’s response was to say, “Verily I say unto thee, Today shalt thou be with me in Paradise” (see Luke 23:39-43). We know that at the time of His death the Lord Jesus descended to the “heart of the earth” where He stayed for three days and three nights (Matt. 12:40) “and preached to the spirits in prison” (I Pet. 3:19). This tells us that up to the time of Christ’s sacrifice for the sins of the world, “Paradise” was in the heart of the earth. He promised the repentant thief they would be together in Paradise that very day. This is the same place that is referred to as Abraham’s Bosom in Luke 16:22. From II Corinthians we know that Paradise is now located in “the third heaven” (see II Cor. 12:1-4). Obviously this abode of the saved dead was moved from the innermost parts, or the heart, of the earth to the heavenly abode of God. Paradise is the place where the souls of the redeemed reside awaiting the resurrection. Before the price of their redemption was paid on the cross, it was located in the heart of the earth. But, after the full payment was made, it was relocated to the third heaven, or the Heaven of heavens, where God is. There they wait in God’s presence for the time of their resurrection. The souls of all of the redeemed who have died since Jesus Christ’s resurrection have entered into God’s presence there as to be “absent from the body” is to be “present with the Lord” (see II Cor. 5:6-8).
  6. Jesus Christ’s Direct Teaching that Departed Saints are Alive (see Matt. 22:23-32): Using a hypothetical situation, the Sadducees challenged the Lord Jesus concerning the resurrection of the dead, which was something that they did not believe in. The Lord turned the tables on them, though, by exposing their ignorance about the subject. First He explained that in the resurrection, marriage would not be a consideration. He then went on to confront them on an important issue concerning the saints who have experienced physical death. He knew that the Sadducees not only denied a literal resurrection of the dead, but also even denied the continued existence of the person after death. To reveal their error, the Lord quoted God’s words to Moses at the burning bush, “I am the God of thy father, the God of Abraham, the God of Isaac, and the God of Jacob” (Ex. 3:6). Although Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob had died hundreds of years before the time of Moses, God used the present tense “I am” rather than the past tense “I was” when identifying Himself to Moses as their God. This shows that they were existing in a conscious state at that time. The Lord Jesus’ remark, in the present tense, that “God is not the God of the dead, but of the living” (Matt. 22:32) reveals that they were still alive as He spoke, some 1500 years later. Being alive indicates a continued conscious existence. If this was true before the Cross, it is undoubtedly true of believers on this side of the cross.
  7. The Appearance of Moses and Elijah on the Mount of Transfiguration (Luke 9:28-36): It could be argued that Elijah couldn’t be held up as an example because, rather then going through the normal experience of physical death, he was caught up into heaven in an unusual way (II Kings 2:11). However, even though it was under unique circumstances, there is no doubt that Moses suffered physical death and his body was buried (Deut. 34:5-6). Moses, with Elijah, appeared on the mountain after Jesus Christ was temporarily glorified before the eyes of Peter, John, and James. They appeared in a recognizable form and it is specifically stated that they spoke with the Lord about His impending death. This event reveals the continued conscious awareness of those who have departed this life. That Moses and Elijah spoke with Christ about His departure, which was about to take place at Jerusalem, confirms their continued ability to think, remember, and communicate. We don’t have a record of exactly what Moses and Elijah spoke to the Lord Jesus about concerning the death He would die, but there can be little doubt that their conversation centered on what would be accomplished through the sacrifice of Himself for the sins of the world. He would fulfill the prophecies about Himself found in Moses and the Prophets (cf. Luke 24:25-26,44-48).
  8. That Jesus Christ Will Bring the Departed Grace Believers with Him from Heaven at the Time of the Rapture of the Church (I Thess. 4:13-18): Those who have died physically are presently in heaven as their body “sleeps” in the grave. Returning with Christ from heaven (v. 14) when He comes for His Church, they will receive their glorified bodies first (vv. 15-16) and then those still living will receive theirs as they are caught up to be with the Lord (v. 17; cf. I Cor. 15:51-54). That Christ will bring them from heaven with Him can only mean that they are first in heaven with Him.
  9. The Martyred Saints of the Tribulation (Rev. 6:9-11; 7:9-10,14): While the believers who will die for their faith in Christ during the Tribulation are particularly singled out here, it must be remembered that their status is that of Kingdom saints. That is to say that their hope is to enter into Christ’s Millennial Kingdom along with all of the other Kingdom saints. Their experience of being martyred during the Tribulation will be unique to the time in which they will live and die, but they will share the same general hope of all of the Old Testament saints. That they are found in heaven after having died indicates that all of the Kingdom saints who have gone before them are there as well. That they are pictured as asking the Lord to bring forth judgment on the earth indicates that they are anticipating returning with Him to receive their inheritance in His Kingdom (see Jude 14-15; Rev. 19:14-16). These martyred Kingdom saints, and all the others, who will accompany the Lord when He returns to earth, are obviously waiting in heaven until the appointed time. That they are specifically said to be wearing robes and bowing before the altar in heaven tells us not only that they will continue to exist in a state of consciousness after death, but also, that they will have a recognizable human form.


The inter-dispensational principle that we learn from the story of the rich man and Lazarus is that it is only in this life that any man or woman has the opportunity to be reconciled to God. For those who die in unbelief, there is no second chance and there is no one to intervene on their behalf. To die without Christ is to be separated from God forever, first in the torments of Hades and finally in the Lake of Fire. As believers, this should move us with compassion for the lost and stimulate us to use every means available to proclaim the Gospel of Grace as far and wide as possible.

We also learn from this story that believers immediately enter into a better place when they leave this life at the time of physical death. Knowing that this is true provides hope and comfort both to believers who are facing death and to those they leave behind in this life.

The Lord Jesus’ purpose in telling this story was to warn the self-righteous money-loving Pharisees about the consequences of trusting in the traditions of man and worldly riches rather than in the Word of God (cf. Mark 7:5-13; Luke 12:16-21). He also made it clear that people cannot be convinced of the truth through miracles such as someone being raised from the dead, but are to be convicted of the truth through the agency of God’s Word (cf. Rom. 10:17). Those who foolishly reject the message of salvation through the cross will die without hope, while those who accept the gospel as true and place their faith in Christ are reconciled to God and receive the gift of eternal life. “In the wisdom of God the world by wisdom knew not God, it pleased God by the foolishness of preaching to save them that believe” (I Cor. 1:21). There is no one greater than “our Savior Jesus Christ” (Titus 2:13-14); there is no greater message than that of “Jesus Christ and Him crucified” (I Cor. 2:1-5); There is no greater calling than to “the preaching of Jesus Christ, according to the revelation of the mystery” (Rom. 16:25-27).