[Esaias]

Lazarus in the parable is Lazarus, Mary and Martha's brother. (Very likely he is also known as Simon the leper.)

The rich man is the high priest Caiaphas, who had five brothers-in-law who also previously served as priests.

None of them would get right with God even if Lazarus rose from the dead. When Lazarus did in fact rise from the dead, Caiaphas and the "chief priests" sought to have him (Lazarus) killed to stop the spread of his testimony, which was causing people to flock to Jesus.

...

I believe the two Lazaruses are the same person, the connection to coming back from the dead, the rich man's brothers not believing even if Lazarus came back from the dead, and the historical events concerning Lazarus coming back from the dead and the rulers, priests, etc still not believing and getting right with God... it all fits.

Plus, there is a strong indication Simon the Leper was an epithet (other name) for Lazarus, and Lazarus in the story was a leper as well.

On the other hand, if this is a literal account of historical events, it creates insurmountable contradictions with the rest of Scripture, especially those areas of the Bible containing plain, unambiguous doctrinal teaching. Additionally, everyone who says it is a literal history don't actually take it that way, they do not believe in sitting in Abraham's lap literally, or literal flames, literal communication between the tormented and the refreshed, literal physical body parts (eyes, tongue, finger, etc), physical chasms, etc etc etc. So, even though people often claim it is a literal historical account, they turn right around and deny its literalness!