Who was Lazarus in the Bible?

Brother of Martha and Mary, and a resident at Bethany. Jesus loved them all, and He spoke of Lazarus as 'our friend.' Very little is recorded of him except the striking fact that he was raised from the dead by the Lord Jesus, which manifested the glory of God and glorified the Son of God. When his sisters made the Lord a supper at Bethany, Lazarus was one of those who sat with Him. He was a living witness of the power of the Son of God over death, and as such he was in danger of being killed by the Jews, on account of many believing on the Lord because of him. John 11:1-43; John 12:1-17.

The poor man in the parable of Luke 16. His circumstances are related — his poverty, his sores, and his desiring to be fed with the crumbs that fell from the rich man's table; but nothing is said as to his moral character. Neither is the rich man spoken of as a wicked man, though it is clear that he was living to himself and not to God; he was neither loving his neighbour as himself, nor was he sacrificing the present for the future. The teaching of the parable appears to be that worldly prosperity, which had been a token in O.T. times of God's blessing, was used to exclude the Blesser from the thoughts and life of the man rich in this world only. The poor man entered into Abraham's bosom, and the rich man into torments. Though a parable, it is a vivid picture of the reality of existence after death, and of the different conditions in that existence. Luke 16:19-31.

Eleazar, the son of Aaron, "my God is help," was the successor of his father — an evident type of Christ in resurrection — as Aaron the priest dies, Eleazar is clothed with his garments. This same name, clothed in the Greek of the New Testament, "Lazarus," is associated with the resurrection of the brother of Martha and Mary, as well as hinted at in the case of that beggar who was carried by the angels to Abraham's bosom, for whom, therefore, opened a new life of blessedness.

IN the Gospel of Luke there is no further mention of Mary or Martha; and it is only from the Gospel of John that we learn that they had a brother, and that, as it would seem, he formed part of the highly-favoured household at Bethany. This we judge to be clear from verse 4, where it says, Now Jesus loved Martha, and her sister, and Lazarus. In verse 1 it is only said, "Now a certain man was sick, named Lazarus, of Bethany, the town of Mary and her sister Martha." The three are so grouped together in verse 4 as the objects of the Lord's affection, and they were evidently so knit together also, as seen from the grief of the sisters in their bereavement, by such tender love one to the other, that the conclusion is forced upon us that they formed one family and one household. It should likewise be remarked that the typical teaching of the chapter circles mainly around Lazarus, for he who runs may read that he sets forth Israel in a future day, when, as Daniel teaches, "many of them that sleep in the dust of the earth shall awake" — indicating doubtless the moral resurrection of the remnant of Israel in a future day, of which the raising of Lazarus in our chapter was a type or figure. Into this however we do not enter on this occasion, as our concern is chiefly with Mary, the sister of Lazarus; but the three, Martha, Mary and Lazarus, are so bound up together in the narrative that it will be necessary to consider Mary in the relations in which she was found; for indeed it is through these relationships and the circumstances of the moment that her character is displayed.

The story begins with the sickness of Lazarus. "Now a certain man was sick, named Lazarus." This was the brother of that Mary who anointed the Lord, yet his relationship with that illustrious woman did not make him immune from suffering. Further, his sisters sent to Jesus saying "Lord, behold, he whom Thou lovest is sick". How infinitely blessed to be an object of the love of Jesus, but even this did not provide immunity from sickness. The work of divine love is not to guarantee freedom from suffering, but to make it serve the divine end. "This sickness is not unto death, but for the glory of God, that the Son of God might be glorified thereby."

Some of the most anxious questions of the human mind are answered in the solemn story of the rich man and Lazarus. This story is often spoken of as a parable. Personally, I am not free so to regard it. First, because it is not called a parable; and second, because it was not customary with our Lord to introduce names into His parabolic instruction. It is simpler to regard Luke 16:19-31 as a divine sketch of the course and end of two persons whose careers the eye of the Lord had noted.

The contrasts in this story are tremendous: Earth, Hades; luxury, torment; beggary, bliss. The question naturally arises, What was the sin of the rich man which involved him in so fearful a doom? Was he morally one of earth's vilest? Nothing of the kind is stated concerning him. Neither blasphemy, nor adultery, nor any other glaring transgression is laid to his charge. Then what was it that blasted his prospects for eternity? Simply this: he lived entirely for the present, with never a thought of God or his own soul. He was the twin brother, so to speak, of the rich fool of Luke 12:16-21: a neglecter, rather than a deliberate rejector (Heb. 2:3). In connection with God's government of the earth riches were, for the Jew, a mark of divine favour (Ps. 112:3); but such is the perverseness of the human heart in making everything of the visible and temporal that it becomes exceedingly difficult for a rich man to enter into the Kingdom of God (Mark 10:24-25). The parable of the Great Supper in Luke 14 was intended to show how things which are perfectly legitimate in themselves, and which indeed are favours from a bountiful God to men, may be used to the utter exclusion of God Himself and to the everlasting ruin of the soul.

The beggar's name was Lazarus; the rich man's name is not recorded. Lazarus means "God is my helper." It is infinitely better to have the knowledge of God than to have all the world's wealth rolled into one's lap. For of all that which stands connected with a man here below nothing can be carried out of the world but his sins, and these he carries with him right up to the Judgment Throne! The beggar's name has been carefully preserved for us, for precious in the sight of the Lord is every child of faith, however lowly his station here; the name of the fool who wasted his life (however exalted his standing) is better blotted out.

Now follows the lesson for the enforcement of the Lord's gracious warnings (16:19-31). It comes to us not called a parable, though presented in the form in which so many had been uttered. There may have been two such men on earth as are here described, and whose history in the other world answers to that set forth in language suited to the day. A rich man is depicted, clothed in fine linen, and faring sumptuously every day. At his gate was laid a poor man, a beggar, full of sores, and desiring to be fed with the crumbs which fell from the rich man's table. Moreover, the dogs came and licked his sores (vers. 20-21). A pitiable case. Who put him at the rich man's gate is not told us. Some one must have done it for he was laid at the rich man's gate, desiring that which fell from his table. Did he get it? That question is left unsolved. The beggar was called Lazarus, the same word as Eleazar, i.e., God helps. The rich man, whose name in life must have been in many mouths, is nameless. How fitting, all will own, was this. Who cares to know the name of the one who lived to himself? Better bury it in oblivion as regards any record on earth.

So far we have their earthly history, ending with death. Now we learn about them in the other world, where their positions were reversed. Lazarus, the suppliant for the rich man's crumbs whilst on earth, is the very one whose service the rich man craves to cool his parched tongue with one drop of water; for he was in anguish in the flame. Lazarus was at rest. He was in torment. His good things he had possessed on earth, but there they ended. Lazarus, whose lot had been a suffering one in life, was comforted, and was in Abraham's bosom. What a difference — anguish without alleviation the portion of the former, perfect rest the lot of the latter! The veil is here lifted by Him who was competent to do it, and the condition of the lost in the unclothed state laid bare for us. Isaiah had contrasted the lot of the righteous dead with that of the ungodly dead. The former, he wrote, shall rest in their beds, each one walking in his uprightness (Isa. 57:2). For the latter, the wicked, there is no peace, he has twice over declared (Isa. 48:22; 57:21). In Luke 16 the rich man in the unclothed state speaks, and in the most awful way confirms the prophetic announcement. How gladly would he have welcomed the ministry of Lazarus, to whom he had shown no mercy when he had it in his power. But in vain. Between him and Lazarus there was an impassable gulf. Temporal death, it is plain, is not the end of human existence, nor the termination of the creature's consciousness. The rich man was in torments, and painfully conscious of his unmitigable sufferings. And now thought and concern were awakened in his bosom for his brethren still on earth. He who had been here the incarnation of selfishness desired a message from the other world to reach his brethren, lest they should enter that place of torment. His petition for himself had been denied. His petition for his brethren was rejected. "They have Moses and the prophets; let them hear them." The written word, comprised under the designation of the law and the prophets, was sufficient. The revelation of the day is all that is needed, and no more will be vouchsafed.

I do not think there can rightly be any question regarding the parabolic nature of this scripture. “Abraham’s bosom,” the “great gulf,” the drop of water from the finger of Lazarus, all proclaim it to be one of the parables of our Lord. It is not said to be a parable in Scripture, but neither is “The Good Samaritan” (chap. 10), “The Great Supper” (chap. 14), nor “The Talents” (chap. 19), though these are all parables; that is, they are allegories by means of which moral lessons are conveyed.

The rich man had great riches. But his riches were not the evidences of divine favor and blessing. Lazarus, the poor man, had no earthly possessions. Was his poverty an evidence of divine displeasure? Then the Lord, the omniscient Lord, draws aside the veil and reveals what is hidden from the sight of man. Both die. Lazarus is carried by the angels into Abraham's bosom. He had no means to make friends for himself by using the mammon of unrighteousness, so as to be welcomed in the everlasting habitations. And yet he is there. God had in His infinite grace carried him so high. Lazarus' name means "God is Helper."

The rich man also died and is in Hades (not in hell; the lake of fire opens after the judgment). He is in torment and sees Lazarus in Abraham's bosom. He hears that there is no relief, no hope. An impassable gulf is fixed, which separates forever the lost and the saved. Not a ray of hope is given by the Lord, that there is the slightest possibility after death for another chance. Death fixes forever the eternal condition of every human being. Whoever meddles with this solemn truth, whether a Russellite, or Restorationist or whatever name he may bear, rejects the testimony of the Son of God and charges Him with not having spoken the truth. We cannot follow the solemn story in all its details. Future punishment of the wicked, the future conscious punishment of the wicked, the future conscious and eternal punishment of the wicked is denied and sneered at today by the majority of professing Christians. But the Lord Jesus, the friend of sinners, the One who came to seek and to save what is lost, teaches beyond controversy in this solemn story, the future, conscious and eternal punishment of the wicked.

The supper was made for the Lord, who had raised Lazarus from the dead (John 12:1-2). And Lazarus, we here learn, formed one of the company; whilst Martha, true to her natural character, was serving. But where did the supper take place? On this John is silent; but his brother Evangelists, the son of Alphaeus and the son of Mary, have both placed on record. It took place in the house of Simon the leper. Of him, as we have before remarked (p. 239), we know nothing more, than that he, who had been a leper, owned a house at Bethany, in which they now made a supper for the Lord. Our knowledge, however, of the supper being in his house, explains why Lazarus is mentioned by John as sitting at the table on that occasion with the Lord. For if the supper had been in Lazarus' house, such a notice would have been superfluous.

All these matters in the previous verses have to do with the fact that what men esteem highly is often abomination in God's sight. This is emphasized by the record of Lazarus and the rich man. The rich man, clothed in purple (that is, living as a king) and fine linen (the assuming of at least outward moral righteousness, as did the Pharisees), partook of the finest food every day. Such luxury in Israel was considered a sign of God's approval: but how far this is from the truth! The poor man, Lazarus, was laid at the rich man's gate, full of sores. His condition ought to have awakened sympathy and concern. But even his desire to have only the crumbs from the rich man's table was evidently ignored. The dogs had more sympathy for him than did the man of wealth. (Is there not a hint here that Gentile "dogs" had more heart than did the self-righteous Pharisees?)

However, what a reversal at death! "The rich man died and was buried." The poor man, Lazarus, died also. The rich man's name is not told us: it was not worth remembering. Whether Lazarus had a burial or not is of no importance, for, as to his spirit and soul, he was carried by the angels into Abraham's bosom. This tells us that his faith had been in the living God, for he is "blessed with faithful Abraham" (Gal.3:9). Jews considered this their natural title, but the rich man found he had no such title at all, as many Jews will find to their regret. The rich man may have had a beautiful, imposing funeral, but it made no difference to his condition of torment after death.

The rich man's body was in a grave, but he lifted up his eyes in "hades," which speaks of the condition of his soul and spirit as separated from his body. Hades is an unseen state, and does not refer to a place, just as death refers to a state, not a place (as is popularly believed). But there was a great distance between him and Abraham. Each was in a place, but the place of the rich man was a place of torment, and that of Lazarus a place of blessing. The rich man pled for mercy, but too late! He asked only that Lazarus might be sent to merely dip his finger in water and cool his tongue, for the heat of the judgment he must bear was tormenting. Did he remember that he had shown no mercy to Lazarus in his lifetime?