The Chasm in Luke 16

The bible records Jesus telling a story about two men who lived near to each other. One was rich and lived in luxury, the other poor and was hungry and suffering right outside the rich mans door. After they both die, the rich man is suffering and the poor man is with Abraham in peace. The story depicts a chasm that separates the two men so that neither can cross to each other.

I believe this parable is often used as a dogmatic illustration of the afterlife depicting a stereotypical hell as a place of torment and solitude. Perhaps because it reminds us so much of Dante’s Inferno.

I believe it does tell us something about hell and about our life, but not about its geography.

Most people conclude that the chasm is fixed after death, but I’m wondering if it isn’t actually established long before. In the story, the tormented rich man asks Abraham to send the poor man to dip his finger in water and touch a drop of it to the rich mans tongue to briefly relieve his suffering.  It seems clear that the suffering has not altered the rich mans disposition. In other words, the chasm between him and the poor man still exists. I think the text is telling us that the chasm belongs to the rich man, not to hell.

When the rich man lived in luxury he had the means to help the poor man right out side his gate. He didn’t because of his chasm

  • A chasm of class
  • A chasm of race (possibly)
  • A chasm of power
  • A chasm of ideals
  • A chasm of lifestyle

The rich man, because of his chasm, devalued the poor man. He lacked humility. He lacked the ability to see himself within the life of the poor man. His chasm was “otherness.” He lacked the heart of generosity and service to love and serve this man with his possessions.

After death, the chasm remained. He still devalued the poor man. He still possessed and maintained his chasm. He still lacked humility. He still had otherness.

Later when the rich man asks to warn his brothers about the chasm, he still appeals to his class, his power, his connections to arrange something special for his brothers.  Abraham informs him that so long as this chasm exists, not even a person coming back from the dead could affect their thinking.

This drastically changes the nature of the chasm.

The chasm is invisible pride. It is a misplaced confidence in ones social, religious, personal distinctions. It is that seemingly little thing in the heart of a man that says he is slightly better off than another, and that chasm is actually very big.  It’s a choice of exclusivity rather than inclusivity in how we form our identities.

This means the chasm of hell is not one of geography or physicality, but one of consciousness. The rich man’s inability to walk with Abraham was his unwillingness to see the poor man as his brother, not some cosmic grand canyon. He could not or would not let go of his particulars and his class distinctions. He would not humble himself.

The essence of the chasm was in his head, not in hell. Thus it is reasonable to conclude that an afterlife of peace is one where such distinctions do not and cannot exist. If that is true then at any point in our lives (before or after dying) where we lay these distinctions down in humility then the chasm disappears. In other words we can bring heaven to earth now, or we can bring hell with us forever.  If we cannot love others now, and we remain on this trajectory, then hell is the only fitting description of what the afterlife could be.

The question today is does this chasm exist within us? Is it there when we see a homeless person begging for one of the dollars in our pocket? It’s not too late to change. But if we won’t do it here, we may not do it there.  If we possess otherness now, then we are already in a version of hell and our religions are powerless and our claims of faith are empty.

I supposes if the chasm can be fixed before and after life, then it can disappear before and after death.  And that changes everything we thought we believed about hell and how to avoid it.

Some of you will say, “Keven, once you die you can’t change your mind.”

I would reply that this story seems to indicate that we don’t die. Thus the issue is whether we possess the chasm now and are willing to do anything about it.

  • Do we devalue republicans or democrats?
  • Do we hate gays or those of other religions?
  • Do we despise the immigrants who cross the boarder?
  • Considering our luxury, what have we done for the poor on our step?

You see, the certainty (dogmatics) that makes us think heaven is ours is easily denied by our chasms. Heaven is ours if we but humbly lay these down. We best choose now, because we probably won’t want to later. What if the chasm isn’t fixed after we die, but while we live?

Now, who wants to be dogmatic?

Sniper God

Sniper God

We all have ideas about God. Atheists and believers of all religions have some form of God-concept. This is another way of saying that we all possess a THEOLOGY.

Christians derive their theology or God concept from the Bible. Other faith systems use other sacred texts. Atheist derive their  God-concept (no-God) from their sacred texts and worldview teachings. All of us measure these ideas in relation to our own experience and our own ability to wrap our heads around the idea of God.

Many faith traditions (including Christianity) have what I call a “Sniper God” concept.  Its the idea that God is watching us at every moment and then waiting for us to sin or mess things up.  Typically, the more “reformed” a denomination is, the more they try and assert that all words, verses, and concepts in scripture are 100% inspired, perfect and flawless in describing who God is and what God desires of his people. They often see the ancient “God-concepts” captured in scripture as necessary to today.

Within these systems is an impregnated notion of apostasy (the idea a person will lose their salvation if they sin too much). This creates a scorecard theology of who is the bigger sinner and when a person does sin, the feelings of fear, guilt, and failure pile up higher and higher. Even though there is a belief that Jesus can save a person from all of that, he only does so intermittently. This leaves people feeling pretty bad most of the time and it drives them deeper into the institutions that use this line to gain economic, social and institutional power.

You can see how they get here by reading through the Old Testament.  The God-concept of the Old Testament people is that God had no problem smiting people. One story in Joshua 7:10 depicts a man named Achan who saw some silver and nice linen when he was invading a camp. He coveted them and then took them and buried them in his tent because he was told not to touch anything from those people. Even though he repented when confronted with his transgression, there was no mercy and they stoned and burned and buried him on the spot. Afterwards, God was happy again.

This is one of many examples like this but typifies this notion that modern people must live in fear of God’s sniper fire. Not all Christians, Jews or Muslims have a “Sniper God” mentality. However, it pains me to see this wherever it exists. Whether it be internally manifest as in a guilt ridden person who thinks God hates them, or externally displayed in those who think killing others is a way to be God’s hand on the trigger. Both parties have gained a religion and missed God.

So how does this gel with Jesus and the woman who was caught in the act of adultery? He didn’t encourage the religious elite to throw the stones. (He didn’t prohibit it either). He just reordered the measuring stick from the external action to the internal contemplation. Rather than use fear to destroy her, he loved her into wholeness and restoration. This is the opposite of apostasy. In the presence of Christ, her terrible sin was simply passed over, not punished.

I lived many years with a God concept where I had a lazer tagged onto my chest most days. It produced fear, anxiety, and the kind of repentance was solely based in self preservation.  Now I see things so much differently.  Repentance isn’t an act, but a process of changing our minds. It’s more like a description of what it looks like for something lost to find its way back to a loving home (Luke15). In this sense it is not heavy handed, or manipulated. It is a response from within the heart that says, I actually want to be a better person and that means I need to work on some things.

Given that revelation, it stands to reason that not only those in the Christian faith will have this experience. In fact that is precisely what we see. This doesn’t minimize the fact that the work of Christ on the heart is prompting and calling for this change of behavior, it only means that a person need not be fully aware that it is Christ who is doing the calling.

If you live with a sniper-God concept. Can I encourage you to be a bit more honest in your prayers. Your behavior is not as good nor as bad as you realize, and the measuring stick isn’t located there anyway.  The cross means the end of appeasement, thus the end of religious systems that oppress and use fear to control behavior. It’s revolutionary freedom that all comers are invited into. Humility is the gateway.

The apostle John put it this way. “There is no fear in love, but perfect love casts out fear. For fear has to do with punishment, and whoever fears has not been perfected in love.” (1 John 4:18.)  Thus it seems we have a choice of two key God-concepts. The fear way (which we see in religious systems), or the love way which we find among humble people who recognize their own faults and thus extend grace and love to others.

Learn more and sign up for my weekly newsletter at: