Luke 16:20

Luk 16:20-21. And there was a certain beggar named Lazarus — According to the Greek pronunciation; or Eliazar, according to the Hebrew; a name very proper for a person in such a condition, signifying, the help of God; or if, as some think, the word be derived from לא עזר, lo azer, a helpless person. Which was laid at his gate full of sores — He was so diseased and decrepit that he could not go himself to the rich man’s gate, but he was carried by some compassionate hand or other, and laid there; he was so naked that his ulcers lay uncovered and exposed to the weather; and so poor, that he desired to be fed with the crumbs which fell from the rich man’s table. This expression, επιθυμων χορτασθηναι απο των ψιχιων, as Dr. Campbell observes, does not afford any foundation for supposing that he was refused the crumbs, the word επιθυμων, rendered desiring, not implying so much in the Scriptural use of it, and the other circumstances of the story not being consistent with such an opinion. For when the historian says, that he was laid at the rich man’s gate, he means not, surely, that he was once there, but that he was usually so placed, which would not probably have happened if he had got nothing at all by being laid there. The other circumstances concur in heightening the probability. Such are, the rich man’s immediately knowing him; his asking that he might be made the instrument of the relief wanted; to which may be added, that, though the patriarch upbraids the rich man with the carelessness and luxury in which he lived, he says not a word of inhumanity; yet, if we consider Lazarus as having experienced it so recently, it could hardly, on this occasion, have failed to be taken notice of. Can we suppose that Abraham, in the charge he brought against him, would have mentioned only the things of the least moment, and omitted those of the greatest? “Much injury,” adds the doctor, “has been done to our Saviour’s instructions, by the ill-judged endeavours of some expositors to improve and strengthen them. Many, dissatisfied with the simplicity of this parable, as related by the evangelist, and desirous, one would think, to vindicate the character of the Judge from the charge of excessive severity, in the condemnation of the rich man, load that wretched sinner with all the crimes which can blacken human nature, and for which they have no authority from the words of inspiration. They will have him to have been a glutton and a drunkard, rapacious and unjust, cruel and hard-hearted, one who spent in intemperance what he had acquired by extortion and fraud. Now, I must be allowed to remark that, by so doing, they totally pervert the design of this most instructive lesson, which is, to admonish us, not that a monster of wickedness, who has, as it were, devoted his life to the service of Satan, shall be punished in the other world; but that the man, who, though not chargeable with doing much ill, does little or no good, and lives, though not perhaps an intemperate, a sensual life; who, careless about the situation of others, exists only for the gratification of himself, the indulgence of his own appetites, and his own vanity, shall not escape punishment. It is to show the danger of living in the neglect of duties, though not chargeable with the commission of crimes; and particularly the danger of considering the gifts of Providence as our own property, and not as a trust from our Creator, to be employed in his service, and for which we are accountable to him. These appear to be the reasons for which our Lord has here shown the evil of a life, which, so far from being universally detested, is at this day but too much admired, envied, and imitated.” Thus also Henry: “It is not said that the rich man abused Lazarus, forbid him his gate, or did him any harm; but it is intimated that he slighted him, was under no concern for him, took no care about him. Here was a real object of charity, and a very moving one, which spoke for itself, and was presented to him at his own gate. The poor man had a good character, and a good carriage, and every thing that could recommend him. A little thing done for him would have been considered as a great kindness; and yet the rich man took no cognizance of his case; did not order him to be taken in and lodged in his barn, or one of his outbuildings, but let him lie there. Observe, reader, it is not sufficient not to oppress and trample upon the poor: we shall be found unfaithful stewards of our Lord’s goods, in the great day, if we do not succour and relieve them. The reason given for the most fearful doom is, I was hungry, and ye gave me no meat. I wonder how those rich people, that have read the gospel of Christ, and say they believe it, can be so unconcerned, as they often are, in the necessities and miseries of the poor and afflicted.” Moreover — Or rather, yea even, as αλλα και should be rendered, (for the circumstance is undoubtedly mentioned as an aggravation of the poor man’s distress,) the dogs came and licked his sores — In this manner did Lazarus, a child of God, and an heir of heaven, laid at the rich man’s gate, drag out an afflicted life, pining away with hunger, and cold, and painful disease; while the great man within, though a child of wrath, and an heir of hell, spent every day in the highest luxury of dress and table: the former, according to the opinion of the world, being a remarkable instance of the greatest misery, and the other of the most consummate felicity.

Joseph Benson's Commentary on the Old and New Testaments (1811–1818) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword module.

Luk 16:20. Ὀνόματι, by name) Lazarus was known by his own name in heaven; whereas the rich man is not designated by any name (is not accounted worthy of any name or reputation marked by a name), Luk 16:25 [‘Son’], but has merely a genealogy in the world, Luk 16:27-28. [This is not due to the parabolic nature of the narrative, for] Even in a parable a proper name has place: Eze 23:4 [Aholah and Aholibah]. However that there was really at Jerusalem at that time such a person, named Lazarus, is recorded by Theophylact from the tradition of the Hebrews.—ἐβέβλητο, was lying)[175] disabled in his limbs. His hunger and nakedness is opposed to the sumptuous fare and fine clothing of the rich man. The character which marked the soul of Lazarus is to be gathered in part from his own external condition, and in part from the opposite character of the rich man.—πυλῶνα, gate) that of a great house: the poor man was removed to a distance from the rich man, at such a distance however, as that the rich man might have been moved to compassion, and Lazarus at the same time might see his table. The antithesis is “Abraham’s bosom,” [κόλπον, Luk 16:22], Comp. note Act 12:13 [πυλὼν is more spacious than πύλη, and may include the adjoining hall or uncovered entrance].

[175] Rather, he had been laid by others, not being able to move himself.—E. and T.

Bengel's Gnomon of the New Testament — English translation (T&T Clark, Edinburgh, 1860) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword module.

Luk_16:20-21. In view of the significance of the name, we can the less conclude, with Calvin and others, following Tertullian, that this is an actual history, since even at so early a period Theophylact describes the occurrence of the circumstances as ἀνοήτως.[208] ΛΆΖΑΡΟς, i.e. לַעְזָר, abbreviated for אֶלְעָזָר, Deus auxilium, as frequently also among the Rabbins. See Lightfoot on Joh_11:1. Not: לֹא עֶזֶר, auxilio destitutus (Olshausen, Baumgarten-Crusius, and others). But that any kind of confusion with the Lazarus from Bethany had arisen (de Wette) is a quite arbitrary conjecture. Just as groundless, moreover, is it either to doubt of the historical reality of the Lazarus of the fourth Gospel and his resurrection, because of the Lazarus of the parable being fictitious; or, on the other hand, to support this historical character by the assumption that Jesus in the parable referred to the actual Lazarus (Hengstenberg). The two men called Lazarus have nothing to do with one another. The name which the Lazarus of Bethany actually bore is here a symbolically chosen name, and how appropriate it is!

ἐβέβλητο] not: was laid down (Paulus, Baumgarten-Crusius), but pluperfect, had been thrown down. The poor sick man had been cast down there in order to procure for him what fell from the rich mans table. Even in Mat_8:6; Mat_9:2, the idea is not merely that of lying, but of being cast down.

πρὸς τὸν πυλῶνα] there at the gate (see on Mat_26:71), which led from the ΠΡΟΑΎΛΙΟΝ into the house. The form ΕἹΛΚΩΜΈΝΟς (Lachmann, Tischendorf), afflicted with ulcers (from ἑλκόω), is convincingly attested, and that in opposition to the usage elsewhere (Eur. Alc. 878: ἭΛΚΩΣΕΝ; Plut. Phoc. 2 : τὰ ἡλκωμένα); but it was probably formed by Luke, according to the analogy of the augment of ἕλκω and ἑλκύω (Lobeck, Paral. p. 35 f.).

Luk_16:21. ἘΠΙΘΥΜῶΝ] desiring, craving after it. Whether he received of what fell or not is left undecided by the expression in itself, and de Wette (comp. Bleek) leaves the matter as it is, there being, as he thinks, nothing at all said about what was done or not done, but only about a lot and a condition. But the following ἈΛΛᾺ ΚΑῚ Κ.Τ.Λ. shows that the craving was not satisfied, which, moreover, presents itself a priori according to the purpose of the description as the most natural thing. The addition borrowed from Luk_15:16 : καὶ οὐδεὶς ἐδίδου αὐτῷ, in min. and vss., after πλουσίου, is hence (comp. Luk_15:16) a gloss correct in sense.

ἈΛΛᾺ ΚΑῚ ΟἹ ΚΎΝΕς Κ.Τ.Λ.] but, instead of being satisfied, even still (ΚΑΊ, see Hartung, Partikell. I. p. 134) the dogs came, etc. An aggravation of the misery, and that too not merely as depicting the negative evil of neglect (ἀλλὰ καὶ ἔρημος τῶν θεραπευσόντων, Theophylact; comp. Euthymius Zigabenus), but also positively: the unclean beasts and their licking (ἐπέλειχον) aggravating the pain of the helpless creature! According to others (Jerome, Erasmus, Calvin, Wetstein, Michaelis, and others, including Kuinoel, Paulus, Baumgarten-Crusius, de Wette, Ewald, Bleek), even the dogs appeared to have compassion upon him. So also Klinckhardt, super parab. de hom. divite et Lazaro, Lips. 1831. But the idea of contrast which ἈΛΛΆ must introduce would not thus be made prominent, nor the accumulation which καί indicates, nor would the whole strength of the contrast between Luk_16:21-22 remain. According to Bornemann, the meaning is: οὐ μόνον ἐχορτάσθη … ἀλλὰ καὶ κ.τ.λ., egestati ejus micae de divitis mensa allatae, vulneribus succurrebant canes. This is opposed to the purpose of the doctrinal narrative, to which purpose corresponds rather the unmitigated greatness of the suffering (Luk_16:25; moreover, the rich mans suffering in Hades is not mitigated).

[208] Nevertheless, the houses of the rich man and of Lazarus are still shown to this day on the Via dolorosa (Robinson, I. p. 387).

Meyer — Critical and Exegetical Commentary on the New Testament — English translation by Peter Christie, edited by Frederick Crombie (T&T Clark, 1880) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword module.

Luk 16:20 . Λάζαρος gives the impression of a story from real life, but the name for the poor man is introduced for convenience in telling the tale. He has to be referred to in the sequel (Luk 16:24 ). No symbolic meaning should be attached to the name. πρὸς τὸν πυλῶνα αὐτοῦ : Lazarus is brought into relation with the rich man. This favours the view that the moral is the folly of neglecting beneficence. If the story were meant to illustrate merely the reversals of lot, why not describe Lazarus’ situation in this world without reference to the rich man? Is he placed at his door simply that he may know him in the next world? εἱλκωμένος : covered with ulcers, therefore needing to be carried to the rich man’s gate; supposed to be a leper, hence the words lazaretto, lazar, etc.

The Expositor's Greek Testament, edited by W. Robertson Nicoll (1897–1910) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword module.

laid--having to be carried and put down.

full of sores--open, running, "not closed, nor bound up, nor mollified with ointment" (Isa 1:6).

Jamieson, Fausset & Brown — Commentary Critical and Explanatory on the Whole Bible (1871) — public domain (CC PDM 1.0). Text via the HelloAO Bible API.

Verse 20. There was a certain beggar named Lazarus] His name is mentioned, because his character was good, and his end glorious; and because it is the purpose of God that the righteous shall be had in everlasting remembrance. Lazarus, לעזר is a contraction of the word אלעזר Eliezar, which signifies the help or assistance of God - a name properly given to a man who was both poor and afflicted, and had no help but that which came from heaven.

Adam Clarke's Commentary on the Bible (1810–1826) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword/MySword module.

(20) And there was a certain beggar named Lazarus.—The word for “beggar,” it may be noted, is the same as the “poor” of Luk_6:20. The occurrence in this one solitary instance of a personal name in our Lord’s parables, suggests the question, What was meant by it? Three answers present themselves, each of which is more or less compatible with the other two. (1) There may have been an actual beggar of that name known both to the disciples and the Pharisees. (2) The significance of the name, the current Greek form of Eleazar (=“God is the helper”), may have been meant to symbolise the outward wretchedness of one who had no other help. (3) As that which seems most probable, the name may have been intended as a warning to Lazarus of Bethany. He was certainly rich. We have seen some reason to identify him with the young ruler that had great possessions. (See Notes on Mat_19:18.) In any case he was exposed to the temptations that wealth brings with it. What more effectual warning could be given him than to hear his own name brought into a parable, as belonging to the beggar who was carried into Abraham’s bosom, while his own actual life corresponded more or less closely to that of the rich man who passed into the torments of Hades? Was he not taught in this way, what all else failed to teach him, that if he wished for eternal life he must strip himself of the wealth which made it impossible for him to enter the Kingdom of God? It may be noted that almost every harmonised arrangement of the Gospel history places the parable almost immediately before the death and raising of Lazarus (see Note on Joh_11:1), while in some of them the question of the young ruler comes between the two. The combination, in either case, suggests the thought of a continuous process of spiritual education, by which the things that were “impossible with men” were shown to be “possible with God” (Mat_19:26). First the picture of the unseen world drawn in symbolic imagery, so as to force itself upon his notice, then an actual experience of the realities of that life; this was what he needed, and this was given him.

Laid at his gate, full of sores, . . .—Literally, at his porch, or gateway. The Greek word for “full of sores” is somewhat more technical than the English one; literally, ulcerated, one which a medical writer like St. Luke would use to express a generally ulcerous state of the whole body. The description led, in course of time, to the application of the leper’s name to those who suffered from leprosy, as producing an analogous condition, and so we get the terms, lazar, lazar-house, lazaretto. In the Italian lazzaroni the idea of the beggary is prominent without that of the sores.

A Bible Commentary for English Readers, edited by Charles John Ellicott (1878–1897) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword module.

20. named Lazarus] Lazarus is not from lo ezer, ‘no help,’ i.e. ‘forsaken,’ but from Eli ezer, ‘helped of God,’ Gotthilf. It is contracted from the commoner Eleazar. This is the only parable in which a proper name occurs; and the only miracles of which the recipients are named are Mary Magdalene, Jairus, Malchus, and Bartimaeus. Whether in the name there be some allusive contrast to the young and perhaps wealthy Lazarus, brother of Martha and Mary, as Prof. Plumptre has conjectured, is uncertain. From this parable come the words—lazaretto, lazzarini, a lazar, &c.

at his gate] Not a mere putt but a pulon—a stately portal.

The Cambridge Bible for Schools and Colleges (gen. ed. J. J. S. Perowne; Cambridge University Press, 1878–1918) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword module.

And desiring to be fed with the crumbs,.... The offal food, broken bread, fragments of meat: that food which falls from the knife, or plate, in eating, and from thence on the ground; and literally understood, may express the low condition Christ was in, in his human nature: he assumed a true body, like to ours, and partook of the same flesh and blood with us, and was liable to the same infirmities as ours, which are sinless; and among the rest, was subject to hunger and thirst, and was obliged to the ministration of others for a subsistence: and it may also express his contentment in such a condition; he never murmured at the providence of God, but was entirely, resigned to his will; he did not desire to live in fulness and affluence, but avoided and shunned every step that led unto it; nor did he envy the plenty of others, and was fully satisfied with his meanness; nor did he ever work a miracle for the sake of feeding himself. Moreover, the words being understood mystically, may design the elect of God among the Jews, who, like crumbs, were few in number, a seed, a remnant, according to the election of grace; there were but few among them that were chosen of God, and effectually called by his grace; and but a little flock to whom he gave the kingdom; and a small number, who entered in at the strait gate, and were saved; and these few were very mean and despicable for their outward poverty; for the poor had the Gospel preached to them, and they received it, when the rich, and the rulers of the people, rejected it: and they were like crumbs their small degree of worldly wisdom and knowledge, being babes, simple, and foolish, who followed Christ, while the learned, wise, and prudent despised him; and for their sinfulness and vileness, being, generally speaking, notorious sinners, publicans and harlots; and of these it may be said what follows,

which fell from the rich man's table; being originally of the Jews, but separated from them by the grace of God, and rejected by them with scorn and contempt. These Christ "desired"; see Sol 7:10 his desire was towards them from everlasting, when he asked them of his Father, and they were given to him; and it was not only after their persons, but after their salvation, and that both in eternity and in time; and which he signified by various words and actions; and it is towards them, while in a state of unregeneracy, that they may be converted, and believe in him; and when they are called, he delights in the grace he puts in them, and in the righteousness he puts upon them; he takes pleasure in their company; he desires them for his habitation; he stands at the door and knocks for admission to them; and nothing is he more earnestly solicitous for, and eager after, than their being with him in glory to all eternity; and his end in all, "is to be fed" or "satisfied with them"; see Isa 53:11 he came into the world to gather these scattered crumbs and fragments together; it was his meat and drink, to work out their salvation; and it will be his highest joy and pleasure to present them to his Father, and himself, complete and perfect, and introduce them into his kingdom and glory: he will be fully satisfied in them, and they in him, when they shall awake in his likeness. Then will all Christ's desires, prayers, and intercessions, have their full accomplishment. The Vulgate Latin adds, "and no man gave to him"; which seems to be transcribed from Luk 15:16 and is not supported by any copy or version.

Moreover, the dogs came and licked his sores: by the dogs are meant not the Jews, though they are sometimes so called, and especially the Scribes and Pharisees, Psa 22:16 for these made his sores and wounds, or were the authors of his sorrows and sufferings; but rather the Gentiles, who were so called by the Jews; See Gill on Mat 15:26 because these creatures were unclean by the law, and had in the greatest contempt by the Jews; and for their barbarity, malice, and cruelty, Deu 23:18 as the Gentiles were by the Jews esteemed unclean and unfit, either for civil or religious conversation; and were treated as aliens by them; and were indeed in their Heathenish state, barbarous and inhuman, and lived in malice, hateful, and hating one another: these, some of them came to Christ in person, as the centurion, and Syrophenician woman, many of the Samaritans, who, with the Jews, were all one as Heathens, and several Grecians at the feast; and many of them also came to him by faith, through the ministry of his servants, under the influence of divine grace, and that according to various prophecies in the Old Testament, concerning the calling and gathering of the Gentiles to him: these embraced a crucified Christ; and fed upon the slain Lamb of God; eat his flesh, and drank his blood; stretched forth the hand of faith, and thrust it into his bleeding wounds; and lived by faith on him, who was wounded and bruised for their sins, and whose blood was shed for the remission of them.

John Gill's Exposition of the Whole Bible (1746–1763) — public domain (CC PDM 1.0). Text via the HelloAO Bible API.

20 And there was a certain beggar named Lazarus, which was laid at his gate, full of sores,

Ver. 20. A certain beggar named Lazarus] Or Eleazar (as Tertullian and Prudentius call him), who having been Abraham’s faithful servant, now resteth in his bosom.

John Trapp, A Commentary or Exposition upon All the Books of the Old and New Testament (1647–1656) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword module.

Beggar - Poor man. The original word does not mean “beggar,” but simply that he was “poor.” It should have been so translated to keep up the contrast with the “rich man.”

Named Lazarus - The word Lazarus is Hebrew, and means a man destitute of help, a needy, poor man. It is a name given, therefore, to denote his needy condition.

Laid at his gate - At the door of the rich man, in order that he might obtain aid.

Full of sores - Covered with ulcers; afflicted not only with poverty, but with loathsome and offensive ulcers, such as often are the accompaniments of poverty and want. These circumstances are designed to show how different was his condition from that of the rich man. “He” was clothed in purple; the poor man was covered with sores; “he” fared sumptuously; the poor man was dependent even for the crumbs that fell from the rich man’s table.

The dogs came - Such was his miserable condition that even the dogs, as if moved by pity, came and licked his sores in kindness to him. These circumstances of his misery are very touching, and his condition, contrasted with that of the rich man, is very striking. It is not affirmed that the rich man was unkind to him, or drove him away, or refused to aid him. The narrative is designed simply to show that the possession of wealth, and all the blessings of this life, could not exempt from death and misery, and that the lowest condition among mortals may be connected with life and happiness beyond the grave. There was no provision made for the helpless poor in those days, and consequently they were often laid at the gates of the rich, and in places of public resort, for charity. See Act 3:2. The gospel has been the means of all the public charity now made for the needy, as it has of providing hospitals for those who are sick and afflicted. No pagan nation ever had a hospital or an almshouse for the needy, the aged, the blind, the insane. Many heathen nations, as the Hindoos and the Sandwich Islanders, destroyed their aged people; and “all” left their poor to the miseries of public begging, and their sick to the care of their friends or to private charity.

Albert Barnes' Notes on the Bible (1834–1885) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword/MySword module.

20. Named Lazarus—The abbreviated form of Eleazar, signifying, “God is my help;” a very suitable name for one who had no sympathy from man, and very little aid from the brutes. But, besides this suitableness, it is very probable that our Lord was soon to be on his way to raise Lazarus of Bethany from the dead; a circumstance which not only sheds a peculiar illustration upon Luk_16:31, but suggests the reason why Jesus at this time adopted that name for the parable. See notes on Luk_13:32. Two messages had just been announced to Jesus: one that his friend Lazarus is dead; the other that his own life is threatened by Herod. To the silver-loving Pharisees, followers of Herod, he might now say: Let a Lazarus be as poor as a perishing beggar, and an Antipas rich as a prince, yet the destiny of the former is infinitely preferable to that of the latter.

Laid at his gate—Deposited there with the hope of attracting the rich man’s pity. The portals of the wealthy were the customary resort for mendicants.

Full of sores—Ulcerated; one of the natural effects of a mendicant’s life.

Daniel D. Whedon (gen. ed.), Commentary on the Old and New Testaments (1874–1909) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword module.

Vers. 20, 21. And there was a certain beggar named Lazarus, which was laid at his gate, full of sores, and desiring to be fed with the crumbs which fell from the rich man"s table. In striking contrast to the life of the rich man, the Master, with a few touches, paints the life of the beggar Lazarus. This giving a name to a personage in the parable occurs nowhere else in the evangelists" reports of our Lord"s parabolic teaching. It probably was done in this case just to give us a hint, for it is nothing more, of the personal character of the poor sufferer who in the end was so blessed. The object of the parable, as we shall see, did not include any detailed account of the beggar-man"s inner life; just this name is given him to show us why, when he died, he found himself at once in bliss. Among the Jews the name very often describes the character of him who bears it. The Greek name Lazarus is derived from two Hebrew words, El-ezer ("God-help"), shortened by the rabbis into Leazar, whence Lazarus. He was, then, one of those happy ones whose confidence, in all his grief and misery, was in God alone. Well was his trust, as we shall see, justified. The gate at which he was daily laid was a stately portal (pulwn). Lazarus is represented as utterly unable to win his bread. He was a constant sufferer, covered with sores, wasting under the dominion of a loathsome, incurable disease. This representative of human suffering has taken a strange hold on the imagination of men. In many of the languages of Europe the name of the beggar of the parable appears in the terms "lazar," "lazar-house," and "lazaretto," "lazzaroni." Unable himself to walk, some pitying friend or friends among the poor the poor are never backward in helping others poorer than themselves, thus setting a noble example to the rich brought him and laid him daily close by the splendid gates of the palace of Dives. The crumbs signify the broken fragments which the servants of the rich man would contemptuously, perhaps pityingly, toss to the poor helpless beggar-man as he lay by the gate. Moreover the dogs came and licked his sores. These were the wild, homeless pariah dogs so common in all Eastern cities, who act as the street-scavengers, and are regarded as unclean. This mention of the dogs clustering round him does not suggest any contrast between the pitying animals and pitiless men, but simply adds additional colour to the picture of the utter helplessness of the diseased sufferer; there he lay, and as he lay, the rough homeless dogs would lick his unbandaged wounds as they passed on the forage.

The Pulpit Commentary (1880–1919), ed. H.D.M. Spence-Jones & Joseph S. Exell — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword module.

And there was a certain beggar named Lazarus, (according to the Greek pronunciation) or Eleazer. By his name it may be conjectured, he was of no mean family, though it was thus reduced. There was no reason for our Lord to conceal his name, which probably was then well known. Theophylact observes, from the tradition of the Hebrews, that he lived at Jerusalem. Yea, the dogs also came and licked his sores - It seems this circumstance is recorded to show that all his ulcers lay bare, and were not closed or bound up.

John Wesley, Explanatory Notes Upon the Whole Bible (1754–1765) — public domain. Text via the GEBible commentary corpus.

20. A certain beggar. Beggary, such as is here depicted, is much more common in the East than with us, and, in the absence of any more systematic provision, alms-giving to the poor was insisted upon by the Old Testament (Job 29:13; Psa. 41:1; 112:9; Prov. 14:31). Named Lazarus. “Does not Christ seem to you to have been reading in that book where the found the name of the poor man written, but found not the name of the rich? For that book is the Book of Life.”—Augustine. Laid at his gate. Carried there because unable to walk. At the gate, where so many were passing, would be a favorable place for alms. Full of sores. Cutaneous sores are most common in connection with abject poverty.

B. W. Johnson's The People's New Testament with Notes (1889–1891) — public domain. Electronic text from the Christian Classics Ethereal Library (CCEL) ThML edition.

20. Λάζαρος. Lazarus is not from lo ezer, ‘no help,’ i.e. ‘forsaken,’ but from Elî ezer, ‘helped of God,’ Gotthilf. It is contracted from the commoner Eleazar. This is the only parable in which a proper name occurs; and the only miracles of which the recipients are named are, Mary Magdalene, Jairus, Malchus, and Bartimaeus. Whether in the name there be some allusive contrast to the young and perhaps wealthy Lazarus, brother of Martha and Mary, as Prof. Plumptre has conjectured, is uncertain. From this parable come the words—lazaretto, lazzarini, a lazar, &c.

ἐβέβλητο. Not ‘was laid,’ as in A.V[302], but ‘had been cast down,’ implying by one graphic touch the careless roughness and neglect with which he was treated.

[302] A.V. Authorised Version.

πρὸς τὸν πυλῶνα αὐτοῦ. Not a mere πύλη but a πυλών—a stately portal.

Cambridge Greek Testament for Schools and Colleges (Cambridge University Press, 1896; 21 vols, various authors incl. Carr, Maclear, Plummer, Farrar, Lumby, Moule, M. R. James, Simcox) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword module.

20.] The significant name Lazarus (= Eleazarus = אֶלְעָזָר, Deus auxilium) should have prevented the expositors from imagining this to be a true history.

Perhaps by this name our Lord may have intended to fill in the character of the poor man, which indeed must otherwise be understood to be that of one who feared God.

ἐβέβ., was, or had been, cast down, i.e. was placed there on purpose to get what he could of alms.

πυλῶνα, see on ref. Matt.: it was the portal, which led out of the προαύλιον into the αὐλή.

Henry Alford, The Greek Testament (1849–1861) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword module.

20. ὀνόματι Λάζαρος . For ὀνόματι see on 5:27: the expression is freq. in Lk. Nowhere else does Christ give a name to any character in a parable. That this signifies that the name was “written in heaven,” while that of the rich man was not, is farfetched. Tertullian urges the name as proof that the narrative is not a parable but history, and that the scene in Hades involves his doctrine that the soul is corporeal (De Animâ, 7.).2 It is possible that the name is a later addition to the parable, to connect it with Lazarus of Bethany. He was one who “went to them from the dead,” and still they did not repent. As he was raised from the dead just about this time, so far as we can determine the chronology, there may be a reference to him. But it is more probable that the name suggests the helplessness of the beggar; and some name was needed (ver. 24). Tradition has given the name Nineuis to the rich man. The theory that the story of the raising of Lazarus has grown out of this parable is altogether arbitrary.

ἐβέβλητο πρὸς τὸν πυλῶνα αὐτοῦ. Not “had been flung at his gate,” as if contemptuous roughness were implied. In late Greek βάλλειν often loses the notion of violence, and means simply ‘lay, place”: 5:37; Joh 5:7, Joh 5:7:6, Joh 5:18:11, Joh 5:20:25, Joh 5:27, Joh 5:21:6; Jas 3:3; Num 22:38. By πυλῶνα is meant a large gateway or portico, whether part of the house or not (Act 10:17, Act 10:12:14; Mat 26:71; 2Ch 3:7; Zep 2:14). It indicates the grandeur of the house.

εἱλκωμένος . The verb occurs here only in bibl. Grk., but is common in medical writers, especially in the pass., “be ulcerated.”

The irregular augment, instead of the usual ἡλκωμένος, is well attested here, and perhaps arose from analogy with ἔλκω. Comp. κατειργάσατο (Rom 15:18). WH. ii. App. p. 161; Greg. Proleg. p. 121. Syr-Sin. omits.

International Critical Commentary — older volumes (1896–1929), various authors — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword module.

Beggar. See on poor, Mt 5:3.

Lazarus. Abbreviated from 'Eleazarov, Eleazar, and meaning God a help. "It is a striking evidence of the deep impression which this parable has made on the mind of Christendom, that the term lazar should have passed into so many languages as it has, losing altogether its signification as a proper name" (Trench).

Was laid [εβεβλητο] . Lit., was thrown : cast carelessly down by his bearers and left there.

Gate [πυλωνα] . The gateway, often separated from the house or temple. In Mt 26:71, it is rendered porch.

Full of sores [ειλκωμενος] . Only here in New Testament. The regular medical term for to be ulcerated. John uses the kindred noun elkov, an ulcer (Rev 16:2). See next verse.

Marvin R. Vincent, Word Studies in the New Testament (1887–1900) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword/MySword module.