the Week of Proper 28 / Ordinary 33
Click here to join the effort!
Bible Dictionaries
Dives
Hastings' Dictionary of the New Testament
or DIVES.—The Latin adjective for ‘rich,’ commonly employed as a quasi-proper name for the rich man in our Lord’s parable of the Rich Man and Lazarus (Luke 16:19-31). This use of the word Dives, derived, no doubt, from the Vulgate, is common in English literature, and can be traced back at least to the time of Chancer, who, in The Somnour’s Tale, lines 169, 170, says:
‘Lazar and Dives liveden diversly,
And divers guerdon hadden they ther-by.’
Compare also Piers the Plowman, passus xvi. lines 303, 304:
‘And Dives in his deyntes lyuede. and in douce uye;
And now he buyeth hit ful bitere. he is a heggere of helle.’
Although we are not concerned in this article with the interpretation of the parable as a whole, we may yet appropriately refer to the various opinions which have been held as to who was intended by our Lord under the figure of the rich man.
The noticeable circumstances that in this alone of all His parables our Lord names one of the characters, i.e. Lazarus, while the other chief character, the rich man, is significantly nameless, and that the parable has no prefatory introduction, such as ‘He spake another parable,’ or the like, have given rise to the conjecture that this is not a parable pure and simple, but that it is either a narrative of facts, or that persons more or less known are alluded to in the story.
1. Some, as Tertullian and Schleiermacher, have supposed that in Dives allusion was made to Herod Antipas, and that Lazarus represents John the Baptist, who is referred to in v. 18, cf. also v. 18, where our Lord speaks about adultery. This, however, is surely an extravagant notion which scarcely needs refutation.
2. Another equally improbable suggestion, put forward by Michaelis, is that Dives represents Caiaphas, son-in-law of Annas, and that Lazarus is Christ; and so the five brethren of the rich man are explained as the five sons of Annas (Josephus Ant. xx. ix. 1).
3. Closely connected with this opinion is another which has the support of Ambrose, Augustine, Teclman (quoted by Trench, Parables), and others, according to which, while Lazarus is Christ, Dives is the Jewish people who despised and rejected Him who for their sakes was poor and afflicted. This, however, is an allegorizing of the parable which, though attractive at first sight, will not bear close examination.
4. Another interpretation, supported by Aphraates, Augustine (as an alternative), Gregory the Great, and Theophylact, and widely held in all sections of the Universal Church, is, that Dives represents, as in the last case, the Jewish people, but that Lazarus represents the Gentiles. Bleek, Godet, and Alford reject this view, the two latter saying that the very name Lazarus (i.e. a Jewish name) is against it. Yet, though not the primary, this may be a true application of the parable, and is not lightly to be set aside.
5. According to a tradition alluded to by Theophylact and Euthymius Zigabenus, Dives and Lazarus were actual persons known at the time, and our Lord, while honouring the poor man by naming him, passes over the guilty rich man’s name in merciful silence.
6. The interpretation which best suits all the facts of the case is that the rich man is a typical instance of the religious leaders of the people, Pharisees and Sadducees, and that Lazarus is a representative of the despised publicans, or of the neglected ‘common people.’ If this is the primary significance of Dives and Lazarus, then we can see, as stated above, that interpretation 4 is not lightly to be set aside; for if Pharisees and Sadducees despised and neglected those of their own nation, much more would they contemptuously overlook ‘sinners of the Gentiles.’ Under this head it has been debated whether Dives is a typical Pharisee or a Sadducee. Didon (Life of Christ), Mosheim, and Wetstein hold that he is a Sadducee, since the Pharisees were not characterized by luxurious living or by unbelief; but if, with the majority of expositors, who say that the connexion of the parable with what precedes requires it, we hold him to be a Pharisee, he is at least a Pharisee who, as Stier says, ‘lives as a Sadducee.’
As to the special sin of Dives, opinions have differed. All, however, concur in pointing out that he is not accused of any positive crime,—his sin is negative. It may be, indeed, that our Lord in the parable glances back at what is said in vv. 13–16; yet Dives’ chief sin most evidently was that he left undone the things which he ought to have done. He is an instance, in fact, of one who did not make to himself friends of the mammon of unrighteousness. Doubtless the cause of this was his virtual unbelief in a kingdom of God here implying a brotherhood of all men, and a kingdom of God hereafter implying a retribution.
Euthymius says that some asserted that, according to a tradition, the rich man was called Ninevis; and Tischendort (Gr. Test. in loc.) quotes a scholion εὗρον δέ τινες καὶ τοῦ πλουσιου ἔν τισιν ἀντιγράφοις τοὕνομα Νινεύης λεγόμενον. Further, the Sahidic Version adds to the mention of the rich man: ‘whose name was Nineue.’ It has, however, been suggested (Rendel Harris, Expositor, March 1900) that this name may have been evolved from the words ‘hic dives,’ or ‘en dives,’ accompanying some ancient pictorial representation of the parable. Harnack (ib.), however, has thought that the word may be a corruption of Φινεές (Finaeus in pseudo-Cyprian, de Pascha Computus, circa (about) 17), and ‘that since in Numbers 25:7 Phinehas is said to be the son of Eleazar, an attempt has been made to suggest that the poor man … was the rich man’s own father.’ See art. Lazarus.
Albert Bonus.
These files are public domain.
Text Courtesy of BibleSupport.com. Used by Permission.
Hastings, James. Entry for 'Dives'. Hastings' Dictionary of the New Testament. https://www.studylight.org/dictionaries/eng/hdn/d/dives.html. 1906-1918.
