The Rich Man, Lazarus, and the Great Equalizer

In all the Bible I do not believe there is a story more stirring or more disturbing than that of the rich man and Lazarus. It is stirring for its description of two men, one rich and one poor. They are set in contrast, and the contrast is not only between their circumstances in this life but also between their destinies in the life to come. The latter contrast is sharp, absolute, and permanent. The parable is disturbing because of its portrayal of the rich man’s suffering. It is the only passage in the entire Bible that describes the actual thoughts, emotions, and words of somebody who is in hell. Hell itself is described else-where. There are warnings against it. But this is the only description of a person suffering in hell.

Besides the rather obvious contrasts we have between the rich man and the poor man in life, in death, and in their attitudes and knowledge following death, there are some additional but more subtle contrasts to be observed along the way.

Their Earthly Condition

The first contrast is an obvious one: the rich man “who was clothed in purple and fine linen and who feasted sumptuously every day” and the poor man, Lazarus, who was “covered with sores, who desired to be fed with what fell from the rich man’s table” (Luke 16:19–21).

It is important to recognize that there is nothing here or elsewhere in the parable that condemns the rich man for being rich or praises the poor man for being poor. It is true that the rich man’s riches undoubtedly worked to his hurt, for he apparently lived for those and nothing else. It is hard for the rich to enter heaven, as Jesus said elsewhere (Luke 18:25). It is also true that Lazarus’s poverty worked to his spiritual good, for lacking earthly joys and comfort he undoubtedly turned his eyes to heaven and sought divine consolation. But regardless of those truths, it is still the case that nothing in the parable praises Lazarus for his poverty or condemns the rich man for his wealth. This is merely a description of two men: one rich, one poor. It is the way things were, and it is the way things are. There are always rich men, some of whom go to hell and some of whom go to heaven. There are always poor men, some of whom go to heaven and some of whom go to hell. But we are to focus on the spiritual distinction and not merely on the earthly one.

The man who was rich in this world’s goods was actually poor spiritually, while the poor man was rich spiritually.

It is worth stressing that Lazarus’s poverty was an indirect blessing to him, however, as I have indicated. We think of deprivation as irredeemably bad, but it obviously was not in his case. In his suffering Lazarus was forced to draw close to God, as the rich man was not. He must have filled his mind with the words of Scripture. He must have prayed. In that way he found God, and having found God he actually became richer than the rich man, though the world would never have been able to see that reality.

This leads to the most important thing that can be said about these two men in their earthly condition. We began with the superficial contrast: a rich man and a poor man. But at this point we need to elaborate. The man who was rich in this world’s goods was actually poor spiritually, while the poor man was rich spiritually. From God’s perspective this is a contrast between a poor rich man and a rich poor man, between one who did not have God although he had much else and one who had God although he lacked all else.

At that stage of their lives neither of those men would have willingly changed places with the other. The rich man did not value Lazarus’s spiritual riches, so he would not have traded with him. And Lazarus, who valued the riches of a life with God, would not have traded with the rich man for his or anybody else’s prosperity.

What Death Did

The next stage in the story is the death of the two men: “The poor man died and was carried by the angels to Abraham’s side. The rich man also died and was buried” (v. 22). The rich man’s burial must have been a fine thing. He had been favored in life, and some of the trappings of his earthly life must have followed him to the tomb. There would have been great pomp, great wealth, great heaps of flowers, great crowds of mourners. So far as Lazarus is concerned, it is not even said that he was buried, though he may well have been—unceremoniously, without pomp, unattended. But whether rich or poor, both died. In both cases, earthly life was terminated.

That is why death has been called “the great equalizer,” though that is a misleading phrase in most cases. Brownlow North was a member of the English nobility who lived a carefree life until his conversion in 1854. After that he became a preacher and participated in the great awakenings in Ireland in 1859. North preached on this parable and tells at one point that many of the poor of his day had the idea that their condition in life would inevitably be righted in the next world.

One told him, “Sir, the thought that I shall die and have done with this life is my only happiness on earth. My one pleasure is to know that I must soon die, and that with my death my sorrows and my sufferings will be ended.” Another said, “I have never known anything but misery; and now I am dying as I have lived. Do you think God will let me be miserable in the next world? It is the rich and not the poor who will suffer in the world to come.” Many have that view today, but it is as wrong today as it was then. Death is an equalizer only in the sense that all die: “golden lads and girls all must, as chimney-sweepers, come to dust” (Shakespeare). But it does not necessarily equal out the blessings and agonies of this world. On the contrary, it sometimes accentuates them.