Lucas 20
John MacArthur · Citado em PreceptAustin
Lucas 20
MacArthur - John had clearly testified that Jesus was the Messiah. If John was a prophet whose words were true, they ought to believe his testimony about Christ. (Borrow The MacArthur study Bible) What the Bible teaches - If they admitted, as the people believed, that John was a prophet from God, then their rejection of him was rank unbelief against the messenger of God. (What the Bible Teaches – Luke) Stevenson writes "I enjoy playing chess. There sometimes comes a point in a chess game where, no matter what you do, you are going to lose a piece. That is what happened here. They pondered their possible range of answers and came to the conclusion that, no matter what they said, it would be wrong. Notice that they are more interested in fighting Jesus and in holding onto their popularity than they are in learning the truth. The one thing that they do not do is to ask, "I wonder if John and Jesus are right in what they are saying?" Why? Why don’t they see their need for the truth? It is because they have a vested interest in continuing in their unbelief. And so, they refuse to answer the question." Luke 20:6 "But if we say, 'From men,' all the people will stone us to death, for they are convinced that John was a prophet." Luke 20:6KJV But and if we say, Of men; all the people will stone us: for they be persuaded that John was a prophet. all the people will stone us to death Mt 21:26,46; 26:5; Mark 12:12; Acts 5:26 for they are convinced that John was a prophet Lk 1:76; 7:26-29; Mt 14:5; 21:26; John 10:41 Luke 20 Resources - Multiple Sermons and Commentaries Luke 19:45-20:8 By What Authority? - Steven Cole Luke 20:1-8 Rejecting the King's Authority - John MacArthur FEAR OF MEN NOT OF GOD But (term of contrast - the other horn of their dilemma) if we say, 'From men,' all the people will stone s to death (katalithazo) for they are convinced that John was a prophet.- Luke alone mentions the possibility of stoning. Why would they stone them? Because if they rejected God’s prophet they would in effect be rejecting and blaspheming God Himself and this was considered a crime punishable by death by stoning. See Stoning in Judaism. For (gar) is a term of explanation (see my youtube video). What is Luke explaining? This one is easy -- he is explaining why the Jews would stone their leaders if they denied John B was sent by God. The answer is that the people WERE CONVINCED (peitho) John B was from God! Norman Crawford on stone us to death - It expresses the potential violence of the crowd, for these religious leaders genuinely feared the people who had been "very attentive to hear" Christ (Luke 19:48) and a large company waited to hear their answer. (What the Bible Teaches – Luke) Robert Stein on stone us to death - This threat of being stoned is unique to Luke. This probably should not be interpreted as an example of hyperbole, for the volatility of the people made something like this quite possible (cf Acts 5:26; Acts 7:54–60; Acts 14:19; John 10:31–33.). Another possible interpretation is that by claiming John the Baptist was not a true prophet, the Jewish leadership would have been liable to the penalty for false prophesy—“stoning” (Dt 13:1–11). On the other hand the implication might be that by claiming John the Baptist was not a true prophet, the Jewish leadership would be guilty of false witness and liable to that punishment the falsely accused would have received—in this case stoning as a false prophet. The latter two suggestions probably would have been too subtle for Luke’s readers. (See Luke: An Exegetical and Theological Exposition) Grotius has an interesting remark - They had themselves accustomed the people to this violence. When they could not legally convict their enemies, they incited the people to stone them. It was called the judgment of zeal. (This reminds one of the zeal of Phinehas in Nu 25:6-8). (See Expository thoughts on the Gospels) Adam
Lucas 20
MacArthur - It would have been political folly for the Pharisees to attack the legitimacy of John the Baptist or deny his authority as a prophet of God. John was enormously popular with the people, and a martyr at the hands of the despised Herod. For the Pharisees to question John’s authority was to attack a national hero, and they knew better than that. So they pleaded ignorance (Luke 20:7). (Borrow The MacArthur study Bible) Luke 20:7 So they answered that they did not know where it came from. Luke 20:7KJV And they answered, that they could not tell whence it was. that they did not know where it came from Isaiah 6:9,10; 26:11; 29:9-12,14; 41:28; 42:19,20; 44:18; Jer 8:7-9; Zechariah 11:15,17; Malachi 2:7-9; John 3:19,20; 9:39; 2 Th 2:10-12; 2 Ti 3:8,9; 2 Peter 3:3 Luke 20 Resources - Multiple Sermons and Commentaries Luke 19:45-20:8 By What Authority? - Steven Cole Luke 20:1-8 Rejecting the King's Authority - John MacArthur ON THE HORNS OF A DILEMMA The idiomatic phrase that is apropos regarding the response of the religious leaders is that they were "on the horns of a dilemma" which is defined as having to choose between two things, both of which are unpleasant or difficult. In short they were between "a between a rock and a hard place" if they said ANYTHING and they knew it, so they said NOTHING! So - I would say about them what my wife used to say about my children when she knew they were guilty of lying - "Liar, liar, pants on fire!" "The Jewish leaders saved themselves from this dilemma by professing ignorance. (Wuest) They answered that they did not know where it came from - Notice that their statement was dishonest because they do not say, "We don't want to answer Your question." That would have been a cowardly but honest answer. But to say "We do not know" was a lie. Stein adds "it was not ignorance but insincerity and hypocrisy that shaped their answer." Very few questions could have so completely revealed the wicked intentions of the religious leaders. Jesus’ question revealed the motivation of the religious leaders and exposed them for what they really were—hypocrites. They indicted themselves when they cited only two options and chose neither of them. The point of Luke 20:1–8 is that no matter what Jesus said in response to their question they were not going to believe it and would in the end use it against him. John MacArthur - After three years of teaching and performing miracles, Jesus had given them sufficient proof that He was the Messiah. No more information would be forthcoming. There was no point in continuing to cast pearls before swine. The Jewish leaders had willfully rejected all the light they had seen; there was no reason to give them more. This was a pronouncement of judgment on the leadership of Israel. At His mock trial two days later, these men demanded of Jesus, “‘If You are the Christ, tell us.’ But He said to them, ‘If I tell you, you will not believe; and if I ask a question, you will not answer. But from now on the Son of Man will be seated at the right hand of the power of God’” (Luke 22:67-69). There was nothing left for them but judgment, and He would sit on that judgment seat to render sentence on them. There is a limit to God’s patience. Those who hard-heartedly reject the light will eventually be abandoned to judicial darkness. (See Luke Commentary) R C Foster summarizes this section - "The baptism of John, whence was it? from heaven or from men?" Two questions are matched against the two which they have asked. Baptism was such a concrete, vivid, impressive act they could not avoid His question about John by asking "What teaching?" and then beclouding the issue with fine distinctions. Moreover, the baptism of John had been an innovation. Since nothing like it had been commanded in the law, the same acute issue was faced: Did John have the right to set up an institution for the forgiveness of sins when the Old Testament plainly declared the sacrifices in the temple were to be offered for that purpose? Only on the ground that John was a prophet directly inspired to speak for God, as had been the case with Moses when he gave the law, was John justified in doing this. Whether their decision as to a reply resulted from an immediate, covert, desperate exchange of ideas by looks and whispers or by withdrawal and lengthy consideration, their public reply which was awaited by Jesus and the multitude left them utterly discomfited. They refused to answer the question as to whether the authority of John's baptism was from heaven or merely from men, but their refusal constituted the most humiliating kind of confession. And in thus admitting that they dared not answer the dilemma (their hypocritical statement, "we know not," was too thin to deceive any one), they showed that the nation knew, and they did not dare deny, that John had been sent with a message from heaven. (Studies in the Life of Christ) Luke 20:8 And Jesus said to them, "Nor will I tell you by what authority I do these things." Luke 20:8KJV And Jesus said unto them, Neither tell I you by what authority I do these things. Lk 22:68; Job 5:12,13; Pr 26:4,5; Mt 15:14; 16:4; 21:27; Mark 11:33 Luke 20 Resources - Multiple Sermons and Commentaries Luke 19:45-20:8 By What Authority? - Steven Cole Luke 20:1-8 Rejecting the King's Authority - John MacArthur NO ANSWER FROM JEWS RECEIVES NO ANSWER FROM JESUS And Jesus said to them, "Nor will I tell you by what authority (exousia) I do these things - Though Jesus gave no answer, the analogy he used to their own question makes His view clear. His authority came from heaven. He did not say that he had no authority. Jesus refused to give them more light for they refused to accept the light that He had been clearly presented. (cf John 7:17 - "If (CONDITIONAL PROMISE) anyone is willing to do His will, [NB: NOT JUST HEAR HIS WILL IN HIS WORD BUT DO IT!] he will know of the teaching, whether it is of God or whether I speak from Myself."). Stevenson - There is a lesson here. It is that when you refuse to believe the teachings of Jesus, then no further teachings are given. The criteria for receiving further spiritual truth is receiving and believing that which you have been given. William
Lucas 20
MacArthur adds that Isaiah 5 describes "God’s planting of Israel in detail (see verse by verse commentary). God planted them “on a fertile hill,” the wonderful land of Canaan. God planted “a choice vine,” that is to say the genetics of Jews is among the noblest of all humanity. God hedged them, protected them, put a moat around them, a hedge around them, built a wine-press, (this could be the symbol of the sacrificial system), and a tower of protection. God did everything He could do and had every right to expect good grapes, Isaiah writes. But He received beushim, sour berries....(THIS PRESENT PARABLE IS) very reminiscent of Isaiah 5, and Jesus is saying, “Nothing has changed.” Vineyard (290)(ampelon) was a plot of land where grapes were grown on grapevines. Used figuratively Figuratively in Matt. 21:28, 33, 39-41; Mark 12:1, 2, 9; Luke 13:6; 20:9, 10, 13, 15, 16. Ampelon - 23x in 21v - Matt. 20:1; Matt. 20:2; Matt. 20:4; Matt. 20:7; Matt. 20:8; Matt. 21:28; Matt. 21:33; Matt. 21:39; Matt. 21:40; Matt. 21:41; Mk. 12:1; Mk. 12:2; Mk. 12:8; Mk. 12:9; Lk. 13:6; Lk. 20:9; Lk. 20:10; Lk. 20:13; Lk. 20:15; Lk. 20:16; 1 Co. 9:7 Ampelon - 101x in 90v - Gen. 9:20; Exod. 22:5; Exod. 23:11; Lev. 19:10; Lev. 19:19; Num. 16:14; Num. 20:17; Num. 21:22; Deut. 6:11; Deut. 20:6; Deut. 22:9; Deut. 23:24; Deut. 24:21; Deut. 28:30; Deut. 28:39; Jos. 24:13; Jdg. 9:27; Jdg. 11:33; Jdg. 14:5; Jdg. 15:5; Jdg. 21:20; Jdg. 21:21; 1 Sam. 8:14; 1 Sam. 8:15; 1 Sam. 15:9; 1 Sam. 22:7; 1 Ki. 21:1; 1 Ki. 21:2; 1 Ki. 21:6; 1 Ki. 21:7; 1 Ki. 21:15; 1 Ki. 21:16; 1 Ki. 21:18; 2 Ki. 5:26; 2 Ki. 18:32; 2 Ki. 19:29; Neh. 5:3; Neh. 5:4; Neh. 5:5; Neh. 5:11; Neh. 9:25; Job 24:6; Ps. 107:37; Prov. 9:12; Prov. 24:30; Eccl. 2:4; Cant. 1:6; Cant. 1:14; Cant. 2:15; Cant. 7:12; Cant. 8:11; Cant. 8:12; Isa. 1:8; Isa. 3:14; Isa. 5:1; Isa. 5:3; Isa. 5:4; Isa. 5:5; Isa. 5:6; Isa. 5:7; Isa. 16:10; Isa. 27:2; Isa. 36:17; Isa. 37:30; Isa. 65:21; Jer. 5:17; Jer. 12:10; Jer. 31:5; Jer. 32:15; Jer. 35:7; Jer. 35:9; Ezek. 28:26; Amos 4:9; Amos 5:11; Amos 9:14; Mic. 1:6; Zeph. 1:13; Vine-grower (1092) georgos from ge = the earth + ergo = to work) describes one who tills or works the soil or the ground. A husbandman (one that plows and cultivates land). Matthew 21:33 adds that the landowner "PLANTED A VINEYARD AND PUT A WALL AROUND IT AND DUG A WINE PRESS IN IT a trough into which the juice ran after having been crushed from the grapes), AND BUILT A TOWER." Matthew speaking to Jewish readers (Luke more to Gentile readers) includes a quote from the parabolic story in Isaiah 5:1-2-note, adding the details of a wall around the vineyard, a wine press and a tower. Brooks rightly emphasizes that "No attempt should be made, however, to identify the wall, the pit, or the tower as the law, the altar, and the temple, respectively, as did the medieval church in its excessive allegorical interpretations....In Isaiah the problem is a fruitless vineyard, i.e., a nation that failed to produce the fruits of righteousness. In the present parable the emphasis is on the wickedness (greed, dishonesty, violence, murder) of the tenants, who seem to represent the leaders of the nation." (Ibid)
Lucas 20
MacArthur comments "After all the shameful things they’ve done, up to this point, surely one could expect some kind of righteous, civil treatment of my own beloved son. Maybe they had a low view of people who were slaves. Maybe they saw slaves the way a lot of people in the secular and Gentile world saw slaves, as animals. So the owner expresses a reasonable thought that they will show respect to a son, if not a slave." (The Murder of God's Son: A Prophetic Parable) Perhaps means in English "by chance," possibly, maybe, it may happen. Of course God knew what would happen, but as
Lucas 20
MacArthur comments on when the vine-growers saw Him - Jesus’ whole life was marked with endless evidences that He was indeed the Son of God, the Messiah. It was unmistakably clear. And the vine-growers say, “This is the heir.” What an indictment. “This is the heir.” They knew what His claims were. They knew He substantiated them by power over disease, power over death, power over demons. They knew His miracle power. They knew there was no explanation for Him other than that He was divine. Why didn’t they believe? Listen to John 12:42. “Nevertheless many even of the rulers believed in Him, but because of the Pharisees they were not confessing Him, lest they should be put out of the synagogue; for they loved the approval of men rather than the approval of God.” It never was a question of evidences. Never. They even say, “We know that You speak the true words of God.” They never argued about His miracles. They never denied one miracle. It just was not acceptable to them to believe in Him because they loved their own religion and the praise that it brought them more than they loved God. It was not a head issue, it was a heart issue. He is the Messiah. He is the only and beloved Son of God. (Sermon) Reasoned (1260)(dialogizomai from dia = intensifies meaning + logizomai - to reason, reckon, consider. Related to our English word "dialogue" a conversation between two or more people) means to consider, reason or reckon thoroughly, to think through, to deliberate by reflection. "To bring together different reasons." (Vine) To hold a discussion.
Lucas 20
MacArthur comments "Thoughtful planning. Full knowledge of who he is. The renters premeditate his murder so they can control and possess everything. They don’t want him encroaching. They don’t want him taking anything that they now believe is theirs. And the way to get that is to kill him...According to the Talmud, if three years went by and no one laid claim to land, it reverted to those who were working the land. So if they got rid of the son, assuming that the son had come because the father may have been dead, it would belong to them. They wanted the inheritance to be theirs completely. They didn’t want the son exercising any control, having any authority, or exacting anything from them."
Lucas 20
MacArthur explains that in Matthew's version (Mt 21:40+) "In typical rabbinical fashion, Jesus led His hearers to finish the story themselves, asking, "What will he do to those vine-growers?" (Mt 21:40b+) "The chief priests and elders readily replied with moral indignation, "He will bring those wretches to a wretched end, and will rent out the vineyard to other vine-growers, who will pay him the proceeds at the proper seasons." (Mt 21:41+) " They no doubt were highly pleased with this unusual opportunity to parade their self-righteousness before Jesus. They rightly assessed the proper ending of the parable, that the irate owner would first severely punish the wicked growers and then replace them with others who were reliable. They were completely unaware that, as they fed their pride on Jesus' baited question, they sprang the trap of their own condemnation." (See The MacArthur New Testament Commentary) James Brooks (commenting on the parallel passage in Mark 12:9) writes that "The origin of this verse has been denied to Jesus because elsewhere He did not answer His own questions. He may not have done so in the present instance, as Mt 21:41 indicates. Mark simply was not concerned to identify who gave the answer. (New American Commentary – Volume 23: Mark) John Heading - A suitable question by the Lord, "what will he do unto those husbandmen?", provoked the Pharisees to condemn themselves out of their own mouths; such wicked men would be miserably destroyed. Men see sin in others, but not in themselves; see Luke 18:11, and compare David, who, concerning a parable relating to his own sin, had said, "the man that hath done this thing shall surely die" (2 Sam 12:5). The Pharisees were constrained to speak the truth, as Caiaphas also had to do (John 11:51). But at least it appears that the Pharisees at that point in the parable did not realise that the Lord was speaking against them. They realised this when the Lord said "you" in Mt 21:43. (What the Bible teaches – Matthew and Mark) He will come and destroy (apollumi) these vine-growers and will give the vineyard to others - Here Jesus issues in effect a prophetic promise of divine judgment similar to the warnings in Luke 13:34–35+ and Luke 19:41–44+. In Luke's version Jesus affirms the conclusion of the audience in Mt 21:40-41 (as discussed in the preceding notes). Here is the NLT paraphrase - "I'll tell you-- he will come and kill those farmers and lease the vineyard to others." "How terrible that such a thing should ever happen," his listeners protested." (Lk 20:16NLT) MacArthur on destroy (apollumi) these vine-growers that "This is prediction of the destruction of Jerusalem in 70 A.D. by the Romans. Hundreds of thousands, of Jews were slaughtered and the city and the Temple were leveled to the ground. From that moment on, no priesthood has ever existed in Israel, no Temple, no sacrifices, no ceremonies, no Sadducees, no Pharisees, no chief priests, no high priests, the whole system ended, never again has it been restored." Stein agrees writing "This judgment occurs within history, for it is associated with the giving of the vineyard to others. Luke wanted his readers to understand that this was fulfilled in Jerusalem’s destruction in A.D. 70 (cf. Lk 13:35; Lk 19:43–44; Lk 21:20–24; Lk 23:29–31). (NAC) ESV Study Bible note on destroy (apollumi) these vine-growers - In a preliminary sense this happened during the destruction of Jerusalem in a.d. 70, but in a fuller sense it refers to the final judgment. (Borrow ESV Study Bible) And will give the vineyard to others - As noted above in Matthew 21:41 says it in a slightly different way declaring he (the owner - God) "will rent out the vineyard to other vine-growers who will pay him the proceeds at the proper seasons." Who are the others? Most commentaries say the "others" are the Gentiles which sounds reasonable considering the fact that the church is now predominantly Gentile. But as discussed below by John MacArthur, one should not overlook that the first individuals who received charge over God's "Gospel seed" were all Jewish - 12 Jewish apostles and then one additional Jewish apostle Paul. It was through their ministry that the Gospel of the Kingdom was spread throughout the known world. So MacArthur makes an interesting point that the "others" may not be Gentiles as normally interpreted but actually be the believing Jewish apostles who replace the evil "vine-growers," the unbelieving Jewish religious leaders. NET Note thinks the "others" refers "to Gentile inclusion; see Eph 2:11–22." Robert Stein interprets "others" - Compare Acts 13:45–47; 18:6; 28:25–28. Here the vineyard refers to God’s kingdom, which would be offered to the Gentiles, whose time had now come (Lk 21:24). Matthew 21:43 elaborates on this, “Therefore I tell you that the kingdom of God will be taken away from you and given to a people who will produce its fruits.” (NAC) John MacArthur as alluded to above has a somewhat different explanation for the "others" writing "It is not just a simple shift from Jew to Gentile, although obviously the people of God in the past were predominantly Jewish and now are predominantly Gentile. It is a shift in leadership. That’s what our Lord is talking about. And of all people, the new leadership are the despised apostles and disciples of Jesus." MacArthur devotes almost an entire sermon to explaining who the "others" are and if you are interested in a more detailed discussion read or listen to The Murder of God's Son - A Prophetic Parable-Part 2. It is certainly food for thought and something I have never heretofore considered. It is notable that others is not heteros (different kind which would favor others as Gentiles) but allos (others of the same kind which would favor Jews), which does support MacArthur's premise the other vine-growers are of the same kind are also Jews. And of course the early church was almost entirely Jewish at its inception. Interesting!
Lucas 20
MacArthur explains that "In the first half of Mt 21:43 and in Mt 21:44, the Lord reiterated the judgment on unbelieving Israel and her ungodly leaders; in the second half of Mt 21:43 He reiterated their replacement by believing Gentiles." James Brooks - The Jews understood the stone (IN Ps 118:22) to be their own nation, which was rejected by other nations but which would be restored by the Lord. The early Christians understood it to be Jesus Christ (note especially Eph 2:20). Other “stone” passages are Rom 9:33 and 1 Pet 2:8, which quote Isa 8:14, and 1 Pet 2:6, which quotes Isa 28:16. (Ibid) JESUS THE PROPHESIED CHIEF CORNER STONE THE STONE WHICH THE BUILDERS REJECTED (apodokimazo), THIS BECAME THE CHIEF CORNER stone - Jesus appeals to a seemingly insignificant statement in this Psalm which describes a stone which was thrown aside by the stone masons. But Jesus interpreted this prophecy in light of the New Testament revelation and thus He teaches that He Himself is the Stone Who was examined and then rejected by the builders! The builders are the Jewish religious leaders who saw His miracles, who witnessed His sinless life, who saw His power of the natural and supernatural world (demons), and yet still chose to reject Him. Like the stone masons, they made an examination of the "Stone" and refused to accept Him and instead killed Him. This Stone which was rejected was in fact the most important stone in the building! Jesus’ point was that He was the most important "Stone" in the "Building" of the Jewish nation, and even though this Stone was rejected, ultimately it would be the supreme Stone! This reminds me of an old Gospel song by Leon Patillo entitled Cornerstone. If you like songs with a little beat, give Cornerstone a listen.
Lucas 20
MacArthur explains "The chief corner stone was the most important part of a stone building, because it properly set every angle for construction. Builders knew that without an absolutely perfect cornerstone, the entire building would drift out of plumb. In the historical context of Psalm 118, the stone rejected by the builders represented Israel, ignored and assaulted by the nations and empires of the world. But that rejected nation will yet become God’s cornerstone nation, and the rejected Messiah will be the redeemer and the cornerstone....the chief corner stone, specifically refers to Jesus Christ, as Peter boldly declared to the Sanhedrin, " Let it be known to all of you and to all the people of Israel, that by the name of Jesus Christ the Nazarene, whom you crucified, whom God raised from the dead—by this name this man stands here before you in good health. He is the stone which was rejected by you, the builders, but which became the chief corner stone." (Acts 4:10–11+) The stone (JESUS CHRIST) rejected by the Jewish leadership and the nation became the most important stone (JESUS CHRIST) in the eternal kingdom of God, supporting the whole structure and symmetry of God’s glorious kingdom of salvation." (See LukeCommentary)
Lucas 20
MacArthur writes that this message (the Parable of the Vineyard and Stone) is one "of love and warning, though delivering it brought the Lord not joy, but rather intense sorrow moving Him to tears (cf. Luke 19:41). Predictably, but tragically, the leaders rejected His warning and redoubled their efforts to kill Him (Luke 20:19). That same warning applies to everyone: either submit to Christ as Lord and Savior, or be crushed by Him in judgment. Rejecting Jesus Christ is the most tragic choice anyone can ever make. “He who believes in the Son has eternal life; but he who does not obey the Son will not see life, but the wrath of God abides on him” (John 3:36, cf John 8:24)." (See Luke Commentary) “If the stone falls on the pot, alas for the pot; if the pot falls on the stone, alas for the pot!” -- Jewish Proverb (Midrash Esther 3:6). Treasury of Scriptural Knowledge note on this passage - This is an allusion to the Jewish mode of stoning. "The place of stoning was twice as high as a man. From the top of this one of the witnesses struck the culprit on the loins, and felled him to the ground: if he died of this, well; if not, the other witness threw a stone upon his heart," etc. Our Lord seems to refer not only to the dreadful crushing of the Jews by the Ro, but also to their general dispersion to the present day. What the Bible teaches - We have frequently heard gospel preachers apply this verse to repentance, contrasting those who fall upon the stone and are broken before God with all those who do not repent and will know the grinding judgment of the stone that shall fall on sinners. If a preacher chooses to use such an application, it is wise to explain the meaning of the verse first. Those who "fall upon that stone" are broken to pieces. Sunthlaō ("to break") is used only here and in Matt 21:44 with the meaning "to dash to pieces". It is not a word that can be rightly interpreted as repentance. The contrast is not between repentance and judgment, but between those who stumbled at the "stumbling stone" and rejected Christ at His first advent and those who will be here to experience His judgment in the second advent. It is also only here and in Matt 21:44 that likmaō ("it will grind him to powder") is used. (What the Bible Teaches – Luke) Life Application Study Bible - The word "broken" conjures up uniformly negative images: broken bones, broken hearts, broken toys. You don't want something you value to be broken. Conversely, in God's dictionary, brokenness is not only good but also essential. He uses only people whose hearts, volition, and pride have been broken. Jesus gives a double warning: those who stumble over that stone-himself-"will be broken to pieces," while it will crush anyone it falls on. God offers a choice of "brokennesses." Those who cast themselves on Jesus, submitting their wills and all that they are to him, will be broken by him of arrogance, hard-heartedness, and self-centeredness. It is not a pleasant process but an absolutely necessary one. For those who do not submit to him, he will ultimately "fall on them," an experience that can only be described as "crushing." (Luke Application Study Notes) The choice is yours: Broken before Him or crushed by Him. Luke 20:19 The scribes and the chief priests tried to lay hands on Him that very hour, and they feared the people; for they understood that He spoke this parable against them. Luke 20:19KJV And the chief priests and the scribes the same hour sought to lay hands on him; and they feared the people: for they perceived that he had spoken this parable against them. The scribes and the chief priests tried to lay hands on Him that very hour Lk 20:14; 19:47,48; Mt 21:45,46; 26:3,4; Mark 12:12 Parallel parable passages - Mt. 21:33-46; Mk 12:1-12 Luke 20 Resources - Multiple Sermons and Commentaries Luke 20:9-19 Who Owns the Vineyard? - Steven Cole Luke 20:20-26 Guile, Government, and God - Steven Cole Luke 20:19-26 The Diagnosis of the Christ Rejecters - John MacArthur THE LEADERS PERCEIVED THE PARABOLIC POINT The scribes (grammateus) and the chief priests (archiereus) tried (zeteo) to lay hands on Him that very hour - This is "laying on of hands" with an intent to do harm, quite different than the usual purpose of positive sense of laying on of hands elsewhere in the New Testament (where same verb is used - 2 Ti 1:6, Acts 8:17,18 Acts 19:6 1Ti 4:14 Heb 6:2). Is is notable that it is not the Jewish crowd that is seeking to seize Jesus, but the religious leaders, for they understood the parable was directed not so much against the nation as a whole as against its leaders. Sadly, the nation would still suffer the consequences of the the sins of their leaders. The leaders of nations impact the people of the nation more than most people understand! Be careful who you vote into office! Did Team Sanhedrin get the message? Oh yes! They recognized a spiritual slam dunk when they saw one. -- R Kent Hughes R Kent
Lucas 20
MacArthur says "In a remarkable display of diabolical brilliance, they engineered a complete shift in the public attitude toward Jesus. On Friday, the crowd that had enthusiastically shouted, “Hosanna,” and hailed Jesus as the Messiah on Monday, changed their shout to “Crucify Him!”" And they feared (phobeo) the people, for they understood (ginosko) that He spoke this parable (parabole) against them - Matthew explains the reason they feared the people - "because they considered Him to be a prophet." (Mt 21:46). For explains not why they feared the people, but why they tried to lay hands on Him.
Lucas 20
MacArthur - The Lord did not adjust His message based on the kind of response He received or who He was talking to. He did not equivocate because of human opinion or possible consequences. (See Luke Commentary) Rienecker on not partial - Used in the expression “to accept the face,” which is a Hebraism meaning “to regard w. favor,” “to show partiality” (Geldenhuys). Pres. indicates the habitual practice. Th’ eternal law before Him stands; His justice, with impartial hands, Divides to all their due reward, Or by the scepter or the sword. (Isaac Watts) Matthew has And they (PHARISEES - Mt 22:15) sent their disciples (mathetes = cf Mk 2:18 = There were two Pharisaic theological seminaries in Jerusalem - House of Hillel and House of Shammai) to Him, along with the Herodians (partisans not family members - see note above. Cp similar collusion in Mk 3:6), saying, “Teacher, we know that You are truthful and teach the way of God in truth, and defer to no one; for You are not partial (two words - blepo = look + prosopon = face - Vivid idiom, literally ‘to see into the face' = to judge on the basis of external appearances, render a superficial judgment) to any - same idiom in Mk 12:14 below). (Mt 22:16) THOUGHT - Beloved, aren't you glad our Jesus is not impressed by external show or lavish appearance! He accepts us as we come to him, beggars in desperate need of a holy handout of grace! Mark has They came and said to Him, “Teacher, we know that You are truthful (alethes) and defer to no one; for You are not partial to any, but teach the way of God in truth. Is it lawful to pay a poll-tax to Caesar, or not? (Mark 12:14+) But teach (didasko) the way of God in truth - Three times in this verse they emphasize Jesus as one who teaches. They said it but did not believe Him when He said “I am the way, and the truth, and the life; no one comes to the Father but through Me." (John 14:6). This phrase way of God in truth is found in all three Gospels - Mt 22:16, Mk 12:14, Luke 20:21. In addition, Luke uses the phrase the way of God in Acts 18:26 where Paul explains the way more fully to Apollos (Mt 18:24-25). Hendriksen on the way - The word way, as here used, indicates the manner in which God wants people to think and to live. It is his will for man's heart, mind, and behavior. They are saying, therefore, "You are a teacher on whom people can depend; you faithfully declare the will of God for doctrine and life." (Borrow Exposition of the Gospel According to Luke) NET Note: Teach the way of God in accordance with the truth. Very few comments are as deceitful as this one; they did not really believe this at all. The question was specifically designed to trap Jesus. Swete on the Herodian spies' flattery - The preamble is skillfully arranged with the view of disarming suspicion, and at the same time preventing escape. So independent and fearless a teacher of truth could not from fear of consequences either refuse an answer to honest and perplexed inquiries, or conceal His real opinion … There is veiled irony in the words. He had shown little consideration for men of learning and hierarchical rank; doubtless He would be equally indifferent to the views of the Procurator and the Emperor himself; when the truth was concerned, His independence would assert itself with fearless impartiality.” Steven
Lucas 20
MacArthur comments that "By lawful they were referring not to Roman law, but to God’s law. They thought they knew that the biblically correct answer was negative, and that that was the answer the people would expect. The people believed that the land of Israel and all that it produced belonged to God. Consequently, they hated paying taxes to occupying pagan idolaters. And there were diverse taxes imposed by the Romans, including income taxes, land taxes, import taxes, and transport taxes. But the tax the Jewish people hated most was the poll tax everyone paid for living under Rome’s authority. They found it especially offensive because it suggested that Caesar owned them, while they passionately viewed both themselves and the nation as solely God’s possession. Taxation was a constant source of friction between the Jews and Rome, and played a large part in both the rebellion led by Judas of Galilee (ED: Jewish leader who led resistance to the census imposed for Roman tax purposes by Quirinius in Iudaea Provincea around 6 A D) and the Jewish revolt of a.d. 66-70, which ended in the utter destruction of Jerusalem by the Roman general Titus. (See Luke Commentary)
Lucas 20
MacArthur writes "Christians are always required to render to God the things that are God’s. He is the one to whom we belong and whom we serve (Acts 27:23). To Him belong solely our soul’s, worship, praise, trust, love, and obedience. (See Luke Commentary) Steven Cole on “Render ... to God the things that are God’s.” - Jesus’ statement implies that just as the Roman coin had Caesar’s image stamped on it and thus rightfully fell under his jurisdiction, so every person has God’s image stamped on him or her and thus rightfully belongs to God. Just as Caesar had sole authority to issue coins stamped with his image, so God is the only one who creates human beings stamped with His image. We owe God our very existence. He rightfully owns us, our possessions, our money, and our time. If we are not yielding ourselves completely to His sovereign lordship, we are disobeying the supreme authority of the universe! By challenging Jesus, these Pharisees and Herodians were guilty of not rendering to God the things that are God’s. They came to Jesus, not to obey Him, but to trap Him. They acted as if they were sincerely interested in His opinion about a moral issue, but they had no intention of obeying what He said. But the only way you can come to Christ is to come honestly, confessing your sins, being willing to obey Him. If you come to contend with Him in order to get your own way, beware! He knows the secret motives of every heart! One day every knee will bow before Him. So the overarching principle is that we must submit all of our lives to the absolute sovereignty of God, the supreme ruler of the universe. He sets up rulers and takes them down according to His will. As Daniel 4 repeats three times, “The Most High is ruler over the realm of mankind, and bestows it on whom He wishes” (Da 4:17, 25, 32+). When God’s authority confronts our authority to rule our lives, we must submit to Him or face His judgment. We’ve all got to do business with God who examines our hearts. Don’t risk playing games with Him! It always causes great damage to the cause of Christ when a man who has crusaded against pornography gets caught with a prostitute. We need to judge our hypocrisy and live with integrity before God. A few years ago, the late Senate Chaplain Richard Halverson told about a senator who was speaking at a church men’s dinner. The senator asked how many men believed in prayer in the public schools. Almost every hand went up. He then asked, “How many of you pray daily with your children in your home?” Only a few hands were raised. Ouch! Render to Caesar the things that are Caesar’s. But above all, render to God the things that are God’s. (Luke 20:20-26 Guile, Government, and God) Related Resource: El Elyon: Most High God - Sovereign Over All Life Application Study Bible - As God's followers, we have legitimate obligations to both God and the government. But it is important to keep our priorities straight. When the two authorities conflict, our duty to God always must come before our duty to the government. (See Luke Application Study Notes) Lawrence Richards - Throughout the last 2,000 years believer and unbeliever have paused in wonder over the profound simplicity of Jesus’ saying. We live in the world, but are not of it. Caesar can require worldly things from us, and we are to give them gladly. But nothing Caesar does can touch that which we owe to God: our love, our worship, and our concern for others for whom Jesus also died. David
Lucas 20
MacArthur comments that these religious leaders "Instead of marveling at Christ’s astonishing wisdom and reexamining their obligation to God, the frustrated leaders were amazed, but rather than admit that to Jesus, they became silent. Their attitude toward Him had not changed. Though they had failed to elicit the incriminating response from Him that they had hoped for, they stubbornly persisted in trying to find another way. When they finally managed to bring Jesus before Pilate, they lied and said, “We found this man misleading our nation and forbidding to pay taxes to Caesar” (Luke 23:2).Their sinful stubbornness left them in a hopeless, irremediable, unredeemable situation." (See Luke Commentary) Luke 20:27 Now there came to Him some of the Sadducees (who say that there is no resurrection), Luke 20:27KJV Then came to him certain of the Sadducees, which deny that there is any resurrection; and they asked him, the Sadducees Mt 16:1,6,12; 22:23-33 Parallel passages - Matthew 22:23-33; Mark 12:18-27 Luke 20 Resources - Multiple Sermons and Commentaries Luke 20:27-40 Why You Should Care About Doctrine - Steven Cole Luke 20:27-40 The Savior Silences the Sadducees - John MacArthur THE SADDUCEES DID NOT ACKNOWLEDGE ETERNITY IN THEIR HEART In Ecclesiastes 3:11 Solomon wrote "He has made everything appropriate in its time. He has also set eternity [Heb = olam; Lxx = aion] in their heart, yet so that man will not find out the work which God has done from the beginning even to the end." So while the Sadducees say there is no resurrection, they cannot deny what God placed in their heart. They obviously simply refused to believe this divine desire in their heart! R M Edgar - The Pharisees having been confounded by His subtle power, He is next beset by the rival party, the party of skeptical and worldly tendencies. Now there came to Him some of the Sadducees - This is the third group of religious leaders (those that made up the priestly party) who sought to trip Jesus with a trick question. First the "the chief priests (some of which were quite likely Sadducees) and the scribes with the elders" (Lk 20:1-8) Following the prophetic parable spoken against the Jewish religious leaders (Lk 20:9-19), we (Lk 20:20-26) we see the Herodians attempt to trip Jesus over a question of paying the poll tax to Rome. Now, we see the third attempt to trap Jesus, but this time it was the Sadducees. Stevenson on Sadducees - The next question coming to Jesus also follows this theme of authority. In this case, it is a question of the authority of RATIONALISM. The rationalists of that day were known as the Sadducees. The Sadducees were made up of the aristocracy. They were the advocates of Hellenization. They held the Law of Moses in high regard, but did not hold that the rest of the Scriptures were inspired. They did not believe in angels or miracles. They were not looking for any future Messiah and they rejected any notion of a future bodily resurrection. They tended to represent the upper class, the royalty and the priesthood. They were the philosophically sophisticated. Have you ever noticed that when people achieve a certain social strata, they often stop believing in certain things? Politicians are like that. And so were the Sadducees. They did not believe in the supernatural. They did not believe in miracles. And Jesus had the effrontery to have performed miracles. The Sadducees were the poster child for modern rationalists - A rationalist is someone who emphasizes observable facts and excludes metaphysical speculation about origins or ultimate causes. It is the reliance on one's own reason as the basis for establishment of religious truth. We all know rationalists or have heard of them (Plato, Socrates, Descartes, Spinoza, etc). Rationalism is the view that "regards reason as the chief source and test of knowledge" or "any view appealing to reason as a source of knowledge or justification." Steven
Lucas 20
MacArthur says "They are agents of Satan sent to fight the purposes of God....False religion never restrains the flesh. So these people operate like the worst of the unregenerate, except that it is not apparent on the surface. But false religion cannot subdue their wretched heart, for that can only be subdued by regeneration by means of the truth of the Gospel. So these men are to be avoided because they are always one thing on the outside and something else on the inside. They have nothing to offer spiritually and are destructive...deadly...dangerous. Do not get near them, because you will get singed, stained." And believers today should practice a Psalm 1:1+ approach with men like the Scribes and Pharisees. It is interesting that the Psalmist after giving a caution against these ungodly men proceeds to their condemnation in Psalm 1:4-6 much like Jesus does in Lk 20:47. How blessed is the man who does not walk in the counsel of the wicked, Nor stand in the path of sinners, Nor sit in the seat of scoffers! J C
Lucas 20
MacArthur writes that "They were so defined by not believing in the resurrection, that they had mastered the art of infuriating the Pharisees and the rest of the people with their arguments. They made a joke out of resurrection." The Sadducees did not accept the OT passages that teach a future resurrection and a quick scan of the passages reveals the most likely reason they did not accept the following passages. Why not? Because none are taken from the Torah which was their primary authoritative source. Jesus would soon crush their absurd argument with Scripture from the Torah! Job 19:25-27 (probably the oldest book in the Bible indicating belief in resurrection from ancient times) “As for me, I know that my Redeemer lives, And at the last He will take His stand on the earth. 26 “Even after my skin is destroyed, Yet from my flesh I shall see God; 27 Whom I myself shall behold, And whom my eyes will see and not another. My heart faints within me! Psalm 16:9-11 (A Messianic Psalm) Therefore my heart is glad and my glory rejoices; My flesh also will dwell securely. 10 For You will not abandon my soul to Sheol; Nor will You allow Your Holy One to undergo decay. 11 You will make known to me the path of life; In Your presence is fullness of joy; In Your right hand there are pleasures forever. Comment: Psalm 16:10 is quoted by Peter in Acts 2:27 in his first sermon to the Jews after Pentecost as a prophecy that was fulfilled in the resurrection of Jesus from the dead. Peter states clearly that David did not fulfill the promise of this psalm (Acts 2:29). Psalm 49:15 But God will redeem my soul from the power of Sheol, For He will receive me. Selah. Isaiah 26:19 Your dead will live; Their corpses will rise. You who lie in the dust, awake and shout for joy, For your dew is as the dew of the dawn, And the earth will give birth to the departed spirits. Daniel 12:2-note “Many of those who sleep in the dust of the ground will awake, these to everlasting life, but the others to disgrace and everlasting contempt. Daniel 12:13-note “But as for you (DANIEL), go your way to the end; then you will enter into rest and rise again for your allotted portion (REWARD SURELY ALLUDED TO IN Da 12:3-note) at the end of the age.” Comment: When will Daniel be resurrected (and the other OT saints)? This passage says at the end of the age (see timing of resurrections). We are still in that same age now and it will be brought to an abrupt end when Messiah returns at His Second Coming, defeats all opposition (Gentile and Jew) and sets up His Millennial Kingdom. Resurrection (386)(anastasis from ana = up, again + histemi = to cause to stand) literally means “to stand again" or "to cause to stand again" and most NT uses refer to a physical body rising from the dead or coming back to life after having once died. The resurrection is distinguished from belief in reincarnation, which usually involves a series of rebirths from which the soul may seek release. Resurrection has primary reference to the body. The resurrection is the central, defining doctrine and claim of the gospel for as Paul wrote "if Christ has not been raised, then our preaching is vain, your faith also is vain." (1Cor 15:14) John MacArthur notes has an interesting compilation of allusions to the afterlife which can be found in various cultures throughout the ages indicating that men of all cultures have had a belief in life after death, which should not surprise us given the truth of Eccl 3:11 where we read that God has set eternity in the heart of all men. - "It beats in the human heart in every culture, in every era of time. You can go back to The Egyptian Book of the Dead and find there prominent belief in life after death in the most ancient of times of human history. In the tomb of Pharaoh Cheops, sealed over five thousand years ago was found by archaeologists the solar boat (or here) which he had built to sail through the heavens in the afterlife. The ancient Greek religion, a silver coin was often placed in the mouth of a corpse to pay his fare across the mystic river of death into the land of resurrection life. Even American Indians often placed within the grave of a dead warrior his bow and arrows and sometimes his dead pony so he could have them in the happy hunting ground. Norsemen were buried also with a dead horse and armor to carry on life in the world to come. In Greenland, dead native children were buried with a dog to guide them through the cold wasteland to come (from The Destiny of the Soul: A Critical History of the Doctrine of a Future Life - Alger, 1889). Humanity has always felt the pull of the afterlife, even in the most primitive of cultures....Whether you are in a primitive ancient culture or sophisticated more modern culture, it beats in the human heart to believe in afterlife. " - Eccl 3:11).. (The Savior Silences the Sadducees) Recommended Resource: Don Richardson's incredible book Eternity in Their Hearts. (Related to the truth in Ecclesiastes 3:11) Why is the truth of the bodily resurrection of Jesus Christ so important? | GotQuestions.org Why is the resurrection of Jesus Christ important? | GotQuestions.org When will the Resurrection take place? | GotQuestions.org Why should I believe in Christ’s resurrection? | GotQuestions.org What is the first resurrection? What is the second resurrection? | GotQuestions.org What is more important, the death of Christ or His resurrection? | GotQuestions.org Is the resurrection of Jesus Christ true? | GotQuestions.org Can the various resurrection accounts from the four Gospels be harmonized? | GotQuestions.org What did Jesus mean when He said, “I am the Resurrection and the Life” (John 11:25)? | GotQuestions.org Where do the Hebrew Scriptures prophesy the death and resurrection of the Messiah? | GotQuestions.org Where was Jesus for the three days between His death and resurrection? | GotQuestions.org How will our resurrection body be different from our current body? | GotQuestions.org Akin's excellent summary of the Sadducees - A small sect of the priestly families. - Wealthy aristocrats with significant political/temple influences. They dominated the Sanhedrin (cf. Acts 5:17). - Sympathetic to Hellenism, the Herods and Rome. - Considered only the books of Moses (Pentateuch) as authoritative. In a sense this made them theological conservatives. - Had a strong doctrine of human free will. - Did not believe in angels and demons (Acts 23:8). - Were not looking for a Messiah-King from David’s line. - Did not believe in the immortality of the soul. - Did not believe in a future bodily resurrection. Josephus said, “The doctrine of the Sadducees is this: souls die with bodies.” (Antiquites, 18:1, 4 - INTERESTING NOTE AS HE DISCUSSES PHARISEES IN 18:3). - With the total destruction of Jerusalem and the temple in A.D. 70, their center of power, and political influence came to an end and they vanished from history. In Acts 23 Luke records Paul's defense before the Council declaring But perceiving that one group were Sadducees and the other Pharisees, Paul began crying out in the Council, “Brethren, I am a Pharisee, a son of Pharisees; I am on trial for the hope and resurrection of the dead!” 7 As he said this, there occurred a dissension between the Pharisees and Sadducees, and the assembly was divided. 8 For the Sadducees say that there is no resurrection, nor an angel, nor a spirit, but the Pharisees acknowledge them all. (Acts 23:6-8+) And so we see that the Sadducees scoffed at many of the Pharisees’ beliefs in the supernatural. The Sadducees remind me of Thomas Jefferson's so-called "Bible" which "is especially notable for its exclusion of all miracles by Jesus and most mentions of the supernatural, including sections of the four gospels that contain the Resurrection and most other miracles, and passages that portray Jesus as divine!" Amazing! Shocking! (See Jefferson's Bible). Clearly the Sadducees and Pharisees were bitter rivals, except when it came to opposing Jesus again proving the truth of the ancient proverb that "The enemy of my enemy is my friend!" (See Jn 11:47 where "chief priests" are the Sadducees) Of the major groups of Jewish religious leaders, the Sadducees were the smallest and yet one of the most influential, because of their wealth, and aristocratic standing in Jewish society. Many of the priests and chief priest were Sadducees as well as most of the Sanhedrin. They held most of the positions of power in the Temple including oversight of the lucrative business operations in the Court of the Gentiles on the Temple grounds, giving them good reason to hate Jesus Who overturned their lucrative business (Lk 19:45-48). Surprisingly they, like the Herodians, were eager to cooperate with the Romans. The Sadducees were religious liberals in their denial of the resurrection, angels, and the age to come. Josephus wrote that the Sadducees believed that the soul and body perish together at death. Since they rejected life after death, the Sadducees focused all their attention on this present life, this world which "is passing away, and also its lusts." (1 Jn 2:17). The Sadducees lived life as if there were no tomorrow. They fastidiously observed the Mosaic Law, but at the same time oppressed the common people, and used their positions of power to indulge themselves at the expense of the common people. If the Sadducees were alive today, their "theme song" might have been the Grassroots "Let's Live for Today!" especially the refrain "Sha la la la la la, let's live for today and don't worry about tomorrow"! On the other hand they were fundamentalists who rejected the oral traditions which the Pharisees accepted. The Sadducees only accepted the Torah or Pentateuch as their primary authority and they contended that the resurrection was not taught in the Torah nor in any of the other OT books. The Sadducees did not accept the OT passages that teach a future resurrection and a quick scan of the passages reveals the most likely reason they did not accept the following passages. Why not? Because none are taken from the Torah which was their primary authoritative source. Jesus would soon crush their absurd argument with Scripture from the Torah! Job 19:25-27 (probably the oldest book in the Bible indicating belief in resurrection from ancient times) “As for me, I know that my Redeemer lives, And at the last He will take His stand on the earth. 26 “Even after my skin is destroyed, Yet from my flesh I shall see God; 27 Whom I myself shall behold, And whom my eyes will see and not another. My heart faints within me! Comment - A site I respect feels this is not a resurrection passage, but I disagree. Daniel Akin agrees that "The doctrine of resurrection finds Old Testament support in places like Job 19:25-27; Psalm 16:9-11; and Daniel 12:2." Psalm 16:9-11+ (A Messianic Psalm) Therefore my heart is glad and my glory rejoices; My flesh also will dwell securely. 10 For You will not abandon my soul to Sheol; Nor will You allow Your Holy One to undergo decay. 11 You will make known to me the path of life; In Your presence is fullness of joy; In Your right hand there are pleasures forever. Comment: Psalm 16:10 is quoted by Peter in Acts 2:27+ in his first sermon to the Jews after Pentecost as a prophecy that was fulfilled in the resurrection of Jesus from the dead. Peter states clearly that David did not fulfill the promise of this psalm (Acts 2:29+). (Read the full context - Acts 2:22-27+ and compare Acts 13:33-35+) Gotquestions - The resurrection of the Messiah is strongly implied in another Davidic psalm. Again, this is Psalm 22. In verses 19–21, the suffering Savior prays for deliverance “from the lion’s mouth” (a metaphor for Satan). This desperate prayer is then followed immediately in verses 22–24 by a hymn of praise in which the Messiah thanks God for hearing His prayer and delivering Him. The resurrection of the Messiah is clearly implied between the ending of the prayer in verse 21 and the beginning of the praise song in verse 22. Psalm 49:15+ But God will redeem my soul from the power of Sheol, For He will receive me. Selah. Isaiah 53:10-11+ But the LORD was pleased To crush Him, putting Him to grief; If He would render Himself as a guilt offering, He will see His offspring (CLEARLY IMPLIES HE WOULD LIVE AFTER BEING RENDERED AS A GUILT OFFERING), He will prolong His days, And the good pleasure of the LORD will prosper in His hand. 11 As a result of the anguish of His soul, He will see it and be satisfied; By His knowledge the Righteous One, My Servant, will justify the many, As He will bear their iniquities. Comment: And back again to Isaiah 53: after prophesying that the Suffering Servant of God would suffer for the sins of His people, the prophet says He would then be “cut off out of the land of the living.” But Isaiah then states that He (Messiah) “will see His offspring” and that God the Father will “prolong His days” (Isaiah 53:5, 8, 10). Isaiah proceeds to reaffirm the promise of the resurrection in different words: “As a result of the anguish of His soul, He will see light and be satisfied” (Isaiah 53:11). (Scriptures prophesy resurrection of Messiah) Isaiah 26:19 Your dead will live; Their corpses will rise. You who lie in the dust, awake and shout for joy, For your dew is as the dew of the dawn, And the earth will give birth to the departed spirits. Daniel 12:2+ “Many of those who sleep in the dust of the ground will awake, these to everlasting life, but the others to disgrace and everlasting contempt. Daniel 12:13+ “But as for you (DANIEL), go your way to the end; then you will enter into rest and rise again for your allotted portion (REWARD SURELY ALLUDED TO IN Da 12:3+) at the end of the age.” Comment: When will Daniel be resurrected (and the other OT saints)? This passage says at the end of the age (see timing of resurrections). We are still in that same age now and it will be brought to an abrupt end when Messiah returns at His Second Coming, defeats all opposition (Gentile and Jew) and sets up His Millennial Kingdom. EXAMPLE OF BELIEF IN THE AFTERLIFE - Benjamin Franklin penned the words on his own epitaph, doing so at the young age of 22 and living to age 84. The Body of B. Franklin, Printer Like the Cover of an old Book Its contents torn out, And stript of its Lettering and Guilding, Lies here, Food for Worms, But the Work shall not be wholly lost: For it will, as he believ’d, Appear once more In a new & more perfect Edition, Corrected and amended by the Author. This last line is so sad as the 22 yo Franklin assumed that after he died, he would wake up in the presence of the Author (as he calls God). Franklin epitomizes the tragedy that even the wisest of the wise can be spiritually deceived. Six weeks before his death he penned the following words as to his religious beliefs... "Here is my Creed. I believe in one God, Creator of the Universe. That He governs it by His Providence. That he ought to be worshipped. That the most acceptable Service we render to him, is doing Good to his other Children. That the Soul of Man is immortal, and will be treated with Justice in another Life respecting its Conduct in this ... As for Jesus of Nazareth ... I think the system of Morals and Religion as he left them to us, the best the World ever saw ... but I have ... some Doubts to his Divinity; though' it is a Question I do not dogmatism upon, having never studied it, and think it is needless to busy myself with it now, where I expect soon an Opportunity of knowing the Truth with less Trouble." (Reference) The narrative is classic Franklin, witty and to the point, but sadly mistaken on the truth about Jesus, unless of course he had a change of heart and mind in the intervening 6 weeks before he died (and that is always a possibility!). So in light of his questioning the divinity of Jesus, despite his hope penned in the last line of his epitaph that he would receive a "new and more perfect Edition (referring to his body) corrected and amended by the Author (His reference to God), he seems to have not believed the critical truth "there is salvation in no one else; for there is no other name under heaven that has been given among men by which we must be saved.” (Acts 4:12+)! Related Resource: What is deism? What do deists believe? | GotQuestions.org Luke 20:28 and they questioned Him, saying, "Teacher, Moses wrote for us that IF A MAN'S BROTHER DIES, having a wife, AND HE IS CHILDLESS, HIS BROTHER SHOULD MARRY THE WIFE AND RAISE UP CHILDREN TO HIS BROTHER. Luke 20:28KJV Saying, Master, Moses wrote unto us, If any man's brother die, having a wife, and he die without children, that his brother should take his wife, and raise up seed unto his brother. Genesis 38:8,11,26; Deuteronomy 25:5-10; Ruth 1:11,12 Parallel passages - Matthew 22:23-33; Mark 12:18-27 Luke 20 Resources - Multiple Sermons and Commentaries Luke 20:27-40 Why You Should Care About Doctrine - Steven Cole Luke 20:27-40 The Savior Silences the Sadducees - John MacArthur THE SADDUCEES' ABSURD EXAMPLE Absurd is defined in English dictionaries as contrary to reason or propriety; obviously and flatly opposed to manifest truth; inconsistent with the plain dictates of common sense; logically contradictory; nonsensical; ridiculous; silly. Inconsistent with reason, inviting ridicule; manifestly false, ludicrous. In short as discussed in Lk 20:33 (see note) the Sadducees were using the argument of Reductio ad absurdum, to show belief in the resurrection was absurd! Their intent was to make the idea of a resurrection a joke! Stevenson - The question is meant as a trick. It is not a sincere question. It is one of those "can God make a rock so big that He cannot move it" questions. It is a question designed to disprove the doctrine of the resurrection. The question revolves around the laws of the levirate marriage as set forth in the book of Deuteronomy. Remember, the Sadducees only believed in the books of Moses. And they questioned Him, saying, "Teacher" (didaskalos) - This is a respectful greeting, but was undoubtedly tinged with duplicity by these hypocrites. They certainly did not really consider Jesus to be THEIR Teacher! As they allude to in their quote, their "Teacher" is Moses (the Torah). Talk about evil hypocrites! They do not even believe the resurrection but will still attempt to use it to trap Jesus.
Lucas 20
MacArthur explains "those who come to the age of resurrection will take on the character of angels who do not procreate, do not have those kinds of relationships, but who take on the character of sons of God, that is they will be the possessors of the pure fulfilling life of God. And as sons of resurrection they will take on the character of resurrection, newness of life. Marriage is not necessary and thus does not define any aspect of life in the heavenly age to come. (The Savior Silences the Sadducees) R M Edgar - The complicated earthly relations shall give place to the simplicity of sonship. God's family shall embrace all others. His Fatherhood shall absorb all the descending affections which on earth illustrate feebly his surpassing love, and our sonship to him will embrace all the ascending affection which his descending love demands. The Simplicity of a holy family, in which God is Father and all are brethren, and the angels are our highborn elder brethren, will take the place of those complex relationships which sometimes sweeten and sometimes sadden human love. (Christ Supreme in Debate) Since there is no death in heaven, there is no need for birth and therefore no need for marriage. The Sadducees’ question regarding resurrection had no relevance to reality! Steven Cole ponders no marriage in heaven! Having been married to the same wonderful woman (Marty) for almost 50 years, Cole's meditation on marriage being absent in heaven resonates deeply in my soul. Pastor
Lucas 20
MacArthur summarizes Jesus descent from the Davidic line - "The genealogy of Matthew 1 establishes that He’s in the Davidic line. The genealogy of Luke 3 establishes that He’s in the Davidic line. His father Joseph was in the Davidic line. His mother Mary was in the Davidic line. Both lines converge, of course, in Him, by blood through His mother, by right through His father, even though His father was not His father in terms of actual human birth. Nonetheless, He is the Son of David." NOTE: If you are confused about the two genealogies of Jesus in Matthew and Luke, I would highly recommend taking time to read Dr MacArthur's easy to understand explanation of the differences and the significance of those differences in his sermon The Messiah's Royal Lineage. It will greatly enhance your understanding of a topic which many believers often find puzzling. See also the commentary on Luke 3:23-38 for additional discussion of Jesus' royal line from David. Also keep in mind that Jesus is using just one of many Old Testament passages that the Jews accepted as Messianic prophecies. Had He used other Messianic prophecies, this chapter would doubtless have taken up the space of an entire book. But the one from Psalm 110:1 was sufficient to make His point that Messiah was fully Man and fully God. With that in mind, you may find it interesting to review some of the Messianic prophecies found at the bottom of the note on this passage. What is fascinating to me is that this quote is not taken from a Christian source but from the online version of Wikipedia. I think you will find the list fascinating. (See Wikipedia quote on Messiah in Judaism - See also list of Messianic Prophecies). Then He said to them - The religious leaders dare not question Jesus any longer. In Luke 20 each of the groups of religious leaders had struck out as each of the three groups had tried to entrap Jesus (See Outline). They have nothing left they can say and they know it. And Luke 20:40 says they don't have the courage to ask anything else. So now it is Jesus' turn to initiate the questions. The other two Synopists add some interesting details to this pericope on Messiah's origin from David's line as it relates to Psalm 110:1. Mark adds "as He taught in the temple." (Mk 12:35) Amazing! Jesus knows He will soon die in just a few day and yet He is still TEACHING! What does that say about how important it is that we continue teaching (and that includes us older guys out there -- If you are 70+ and you are not teaching, let me say it gently "Shame on you!" We must imitate our Lord. We know when we are 70+ that we are in the last part of our race and we should ask God to enable us by His Spirit to be able to quote 2 Ti 4:8 on our deathbed.) Matthew adds "Now while the Pharisees were gathered together, Jesus asked them a question." (Mt 22:41) Comment: So Mark says He was teaching and here are a group of Pharisees, His avowed enemies and He is still teaching them! Not only is He teaching but as we will discuss below, He teaching them truth about Himself which if grasped could set them free from their legalism and eternal death. One might say, "I thought we were not supposed to cast our pearls before swine." True enough. But Jesus sees hearts and has just stated in Mk 12:34 "You are not far from the kingdom of God." Jesus knew there were men like Joseph of Arimathea who would eventually believe in Him (Mt 27:57) and provide His burial tomb (Mt 27:59-60). Mark 15:43 describes Joseph of Arimathea as "a prominent member of the Council, who himself was waiting for the kingdom of God (cf others "waiting" - Lk 2:38+)." Of course the other side of coin is that for those who reject what amounts to an evangelistic question regarding the meaning of Psalm 110:1 will be held even more accountable for their rejection (this principle of a greater degree of judgment for rejection of greater light is found in Lk 10:12-15+). Deffinbaugh on resolving how Matthew's passage fits with Luke's passage - In Matthew’s account, Jesus is reported as having asked the Pharisees directly about whose son the Christ was (Mt 22:41-42). In Mark and Luke, Jesus seems to be speaking to others about the teaching of the Pharisees. I see no contradiction. Jesus was daily in the temple, teaching the people. It was also here that our Lord was confronted and challenged by the leadership of the nation. I believe that Jesus asked the Pharisees directly, at this time of confrontation, and then referred to it in His subsequent teaching (Lk 20:41). They had all heard the question posed to the Pharisees by Jesus, and the answer that was given (ED: BUT IN FACT NO ANSWER BY JESUS IS ACTUALLY RECORDED IN ALL THREE SYNOPTIC ACCOUNTS!). Now, Jesus would challenge the crowd to think about what they had heard, and to come to their own conclusions. Mark 12:35 has "How is it that the scribes say that the Christ is the son of David?" So Mark identifies the "they" as the Scribes (note), who as noted above are primarily also Pharisees (although not all Pharisees are Scribes). John MacArthur characterizes Jesus' question regarding Ps 110:1 as His "one final evangelistic effort. Even after all the hatred expressed by these leaders, the superficial interest of the fickle, indecisive crowd, Jesus in spite of all of the rejection is still the compassionate evangelist. He is still (evangelizing) even in His very last conversation, inviting sinners who otherwise are headed to hell, to know Him for Who He truly is, to cease their rejection and indecision....He still manifests enough concern to speak one more time the truth for He as God has no pleasure in the death of the wicked. His joy is in the salvation of sinners. His sadness is in their destruction.(cf Lk 19:41-note where Jesus wept over Jerusalem)....So, once more, the Lord Jesus affirms and asserts His divine nature as God, and thus offers Himself even to those who despised Him." If we compare the parallel passage in Matthew, Matthew 22:42 seems to be where Jesus begins His conversation with the Pharisees (but see Deffinbaugh's analysis), asking them a direct question “What do you think about the Christ, whose son is He?” They respond “David.” (the phrase "son of" is added but is not in the Greek) (Mt 22:42) They say Messiah had to be a son of David, where "son of..." is a Hebraism which simply means a descendant of and in this context a "descendant of David". MacArthur comments on David's Son and David's Lord - No Middle Eastern father would ever under any circumstances call his son “Lord.” That would be to honor and respect on its head. And yet David’s Son is also David’s Lord....This is Jesus' last time to engage the religious leaders of Israel...You would assume that if His conversation with them is the last one, He is going to discuss what is the most important matter, and He does. (David's Son and Lord) How is it that they say the Christ (the Messiah) is David's son? - Assuming the dialogue in Mt 22:42 precedes the dialogue in Lk 20:41, now we see Jesus probe deeper into their answer that Christ is David's son. He knew that they would answer the Messiah is the "Son of David," for virtually any knowledgeable Jew if asked would have given that response. It was a commonly held belief that the Messiah would be a descendant of King David as we saw the Jewish crowds exclaim in Lk 19:38-note at Jesus' "Triumphal Entry." So what point is Jesus emphasizing? Jesus knew that the Jews believed that the Messiah would be a from David's line, but He also knew that they believed the Messiah would be like David, merely a man, yes, a very good, gifted and blessed man, but still a human being, flesh and blood. Were they correct? Yes, in part, for Second Samuel (and many other OT passages) had prophesied the Messiah would come from the Davidic line... When your days are complete and you lie down with your fathers, I (JEHOVAH SPEAKING) will raise up your descendant after you, who will come forth from you, and I will establish his kingdom. 13 “He shall build a house for My name, and I will establish the throne of his kingdom forever (THIS IS THE PART THE JEWS MISSED - NO HUMAN WOULD HAVE A FOREVER KINGDOM. SOLOMON'S WAS SOON DIVIDED! 1 Kings 11:11-13). 14 “I will be a father to him and he will be a son to Me (THIS CERTAINTY IS CONSISTENT WITH THE TRINITY); when he commits iniquity (OF COURSE THIS PORTION OF THE PROPHECY DID NOT APPLY TO JESUS WHO WAS SINLESS), I will correct him with the rod of men and the strokes of the sons of men. (2 Samuel 7:12-14) So the Jews believed the Messiah would be human, and they did not believe He would be divine (See previous note). Of course, this cuts to the fundamental question of Christianity which is what is the nature of Jesus Christ? If Jesus is just another man, and not God, Christianity is a dead belief system, for the founder was a liar. Of course He was not a liar, nor a lunatic, but the Lord. Sadly the Jewish leaders did not acknowledge His divinity and were convinced that the Messiah would merely be a man. Jesus is trying one last time to get them to open their eyes to the prophecy in Psalm 110:1 which they all knew, but which they all also misinterpreted! Can we not see the compassion, forbearance, long suffering and kindness of our Lord seeking to lead the religious leaders (and all the hearers in the large crowd) to repentance (cf Ro 2:4-note, Romans 2 being a chapter which Paul under the direction of the Holy Spirit wrote especially toward his Jewish readers in Rome). Deffinbaugh explains that the use of the term "son of David" by the Jews of Jesus' day (and still today among orthodox Jews) "This seems to have meant two things to the Israelite. (1) Messiah would be of the Davidic line; and (2) Messiah would be a man—human. It was not carried through so as to be consistent with other revelation—that Messiah would also be divine, that Messiah was to be both man and God (cf Isaiah 9:6-7-note). Jesus did not appeal to Isaiah to prove His point, but rather to the 110th psalm, a psalm of David. This psalm does not stress the humanity of Messiah. David did not refer to the Messiah as “his Son,” but rather reveals the words of the Father Himself (“The LORD,” Ps 110:1 = Jehovah or Yahweh), who speaks to Messiah, His Son and David’s Lord (“my Lord,” Ps 110:1 = 'Adonay). It was taught in Scripture that Messiah would be the “son of David,” and yet David himself refers to Messiah as “his Lord.” How can this be? There was a clear, simple, but miraculous answer—the incarnation. Jesus Christ was, as the Old Testament Scriptures foretold, and as the New Testament writers attested and confirmed, both God and man, human and divine, through the miracle of the virgin birth. Before the birth of our Lord, the two aspects of His character and nature—the divine and the human—seemed in conflict, but not after His birth. The incarnation was a miracle, but it is the all-powerful God who promised it, and who brought it to pass. John MacArthur adds "So you have this very direct and important question placed before the Pharisees. I call it a “discerning question” because it discerns where a person is spiritually. It is followed by a deficient answer. Their answer was “David’s,” (Mt 22:42). (Or as the translations have it) “son of David.” Was that true? Yes...Messiah will come out of the loins of David. (cf Amos 9:11). So the Pharisees gave Jesus a "deficient answer" because it was only partially correct. And one cannot be just "partially correct" regarding the Messiah, for one's eternal destiny hangs on what one believes about the Son of David. The Jews believed Messiah was to be a man ("Son of David"), but they did not believe He was to be God and that is the fatal misunderstanding which Jesus lovingly and mercifully sought to correct in this last evangelistic salvo to the Jews just days before He went to the Cross. He knew that to believe on Him as a human Messiah and not a divine Messiah would condemn a person to hell for eternity. His persistence and patience to proclaim the truth to the bitter end is a perfect illustration of Peter's description of God writing that "The Lord is not slow about His promise, as some count slowness, but is patient toward you, not wishing for any to perish but for all to come to repentance." (2 Peter 3:9+) So son of David was a title that Jews to describe the coming Messiah. In Luke 18 the blind beggar Bartimaeus cried out to Jesus acknowledging Him as the Messiah by using the term son of David..."And he called out, saying, “Jesus, Son of David, have mercy on me!” Those who led the way were sternly telling him to be quiet; but he kept crying out all the more, “Son of David, have mercy on me!” (Lk 18:38-39+). In Matthew we see that Son of David clearly used as a title of the Messiah...Then there was brought to Him a demon-possessed man who was blind and dumb, and He healed him, so that the dumb man spoke and saw. 23 And all the multitudes were amazed, and began to say, "This man cannot be the Son of David, can he?" (Mt 12:22-23+) Son of David - 16x in 16v (10x in Matthew, none in John) - Mt. 1:1; Mt. 1:20; Mt. 9:27; Mt. 12:23; Mt. 15:22; Mt. 20:30; Mt. 20:31; Mt. 21:9; Mt. 21:15; Mt. 22:42; Mk. 10:47; Mk. 10:48; Mk. 12:35; Lk. 3:31; Lk. 18:38; Lk. 18:39. NET Note: It was a common belief in Judaism that Messiah would be David’s son in that he would come from the lineage of David. On this point the Pharisees agreed and were correct. But their understanding was nonetheless incomplete, for Messiah is also David’s Lord. With this statement Jesus was affirming that, as the Messiah, he is both God and man Don Stewart on Son of David - David was promised that one of his offspring would rule forever. Jesus was called the "Son of David" while he was here on the earth. He was born in David's city, Bethlehem. The gospel of Matthew records that various people, on six different occasions, acknowledged Jesus as the Son of David. This is a messianic title. Jesus never denied that he was the Son of David.. In fact, on Palm Sunday he received the praise and worship of the people. (Why Was Jesus Called the Son of David?) Christ (5547)(Christos from chrio = to rub or anoint, consecrate to an office) means one who has been anointed, symbolizing appointment to a task. Christ is the transliteration of christos, which means “the Anointed One." As noted below some Bible versions also translate Christos as "Messiah" (especially the HCSB and NLT). Excursus on Bible Translation of Christos - Christos is translated in the NAS95 as Christ (516x), Christ's (11x) and Messiah (4x - Mt 1:1, 16, 17, 2:4). The NIV and ESV never translate Christos as Messiah, but always as Christ. The Holman Christian Standard Bible translates Christos as Messiah many times depending on the context (see explanatory note) The NLT translates Christos as Messiah over 80 times. The NET translates Christos as Messiah in Jn 4:29, Acts 3:20, Eph 2:12. Related Resource: What does it mean that Jesus is the son of David? See also Messiah - Anointed One. NEW TESTAMENT USES OF PSALM 110:1 IN A MESSIANIC CONTEXT Psalm 110 is the most frequently quoted or referenced psalm in the New Testament. New Testament authors directly cite Psalm 110:1, regarding my Lord sitting at the right hand of the LORD in Matthew 22:44; Mark 12:36; Luke 20:42; Acts 2:34; Hebrews 1:13; and they allude to it in Matthew 26:64; Mark 14:62; Luke 22:69; Ephesians 1:20; Colossians 3:1; and Hebrews 8:1. Also the author of the Book of Hebrews quoted Psalm 110:4 in affirming that is of the priestly order of Melchizedek in Hebrews 5:6; 7:17; and he made general reference to the psalm in Hebrews 5:10; 6:20; and 7:11, 15. A few writers argue that Psalm 110:1 was not Messianic and did not refer to the Messiah (Ref), but the main refutation of that hypothesis is the fact that Peter (for one) used this verse clearly to explain to his Jewish audience (who would have recognized a quote from Ps 110:1 as messianic) that when they crucified Jesus, they crucified the Messiah (Acts 2:34-36)! (1) Jesus cited this verse to prove that Messiah is more than a mere physical descendant of David Matt. 22:41–45 Mark 12:35–37 Luke 20:41–44 (2) Peter quoted Psalm 110:1 on the Day of Pentecost to demonstrate that Jesus is the Messiah. Acts 2:34–36 “For it was not David who ascended into heaven, but he himself says: ‘THE LORD SAID TO MY LORD, “SIT AT MY RIGHT HAND, 35 UNTIL I MAKE YOUR ENEMIES A FOOTSTOOL FOR YOUR FEET.”’ 36 “Therefore let all the house of Israel know for certain that God has made Him both Lord and Christ–this Jesus whom you crucified.” (3) The writer of Hebrews quoted the verse to argue that the Messiah (Who is Jesus) is greater than the angels. Hebrews 1:13 But to which of the angels has He ever said, “SIT AT MY RIGHT HAND, UNTIL I MAKE YOUR ENEMIES A FOOTSTOOL FOR YOUR FEET”? (4) Ps 110:1 cited in order to show that after Jesus' crucifixion, resurrection, and ascension, He is now seated at the right hand of God the Father in heaven. Acts 2:33-35“Therefore having been exalted to the right hand of God, and having received from the Father the promise of the Holy Spirit, He has poured forth this which you both see and hear. 34 “For it was not David who ascended into heaven, but he himself says: ‘THE LORD SAID TO MY LORD, “SIT AT MY RIGHT HAND, 35 UNTIL I MAKE YOUR ENEMIES A FOOTSTOOL FOR YOUR FEET.”’ Hebrews 6:20 where Jesus has entered as a forerunner for us, having become a high priest forever according to the order of Melchizedek (NB: This actually refers to Ps 110:4-5) (5) In addition New Testament writers stated that God places His enemies under Jesus' feet: 1 Corinthians 15:25-28 For He must reign until He has put all His enemies under His feet. 26 The last enemy that will be abolished is death. 27 For HE HAS PUT ALL THINGS IN SUBJECTION UNDER HIS FEET. But when He says, “All things are put in subjection,” it is evident that He is excepted who put all things in subjection to Him. 28 When all things are subjected to Him, then the Son Himself also will be subjected to the One who subjected all things to Him, so that God may be all in all. Ephesians 1:22 And He put all things in subjection under His feet, and gave Him as head over all things to the church, Hebrews 10:13 waiting from that time onward UNTIL HIS ENEMIES BE MADE A FOOTSTOOL FOR HIS FEET. MISCELLANEOUS NOTES RELATED TO PSALM 110 For Jesus' premise (in Luke 20:41-44) that Psalm 110:1 was a Messianic prophecy that ultimately spoke of Him, hinged upon the fact that David that actually wrote the Psalm. And so it is not surprising that so-called "higher critics" (I call them "lower" critics!) challenge the premise that David wrote the Psalm. If he did not, then Psalm 110:1 does not speak of a "son of David" and would not be messianic, because other OT prophecies clearly established the fact that Messiah must descend from the line of David. Derek Kidner responds to this criticism regarding the opening words of Psalm 110:1 "A Psalm of David. The LORD says to my Lord"... “Nowhere in the Psalter does so much hang on the familiar title A Psalm of David as it does here; nor is the authorship of any other psalm quite so emphatically endorsed in other parts of Scripture. To amputate this opening phrase, or to allow it no reference to the authorship of the psalm, is to be at odds with the New Testament, which finds King David’s acknowledgment of his ‘Lord’ highly significant. For while other psalms share with this one the exalted language which points beyond the reigning king to the Messiah, here alone the king himself does homage to this personage—thereby settling two important questions: whether the perfect king was someone to come, or simply the present ruler idealized; and whether the one to come would be merely man at his best, or more than this. “Our Lord gave full weight to David’s authorship and David’s words, stressing the former twice by the expression ‘David himself,’ and the latter by the comment that he was speaking ‘in the Holy Spirit’ (Mk. 12:36f.) and by insisting that his terms presented a challenge to accepted ideas of the Messiah, which must be taken seriously. Peter, too, on the Day of Pentecost, stressed the contrast in the psalm between David ‘himself’ and his ‘Lord’, who ‘ascended into the heavens’ to be ‘exalted at the right hand of God’ (Acts 2:33-35).” Derek Kidner, Psalms 73-150 (Downers Grove: InterVarsity Press, 1975), pp. 391-392. Perowne agrees when he writes, “This Psalm claims emphatically to be the fruit and record of a Divine revelation. The words of the Poet, though shaped in the Poet’s heart, come to him from the very sanctuary of the Most High.” PSALM 110: DAVID'S LORD Excerpt from Bob Deffinbaugh's message - Psalm 110: David's Lord Psalm 110:1 is distinct as a directly Messianic psalm. Basically, Messianic psalms are of two types: (1) those which are indirectly (or typically) Messianic, and (2) those which are directly Messianic. In a typically Messianic psalm, the psalmist writes of his own experiences, but in words that go beyond his own circumstances and describe the experience of Messiah as well. Psalm 22 is an example of a typically Messianic psalm. A directly Messianic psalm does not refer to the psalmist’s experience at all, but speaks only of the Messiah to come. Such is the case in Psalm 110... The Messiah to which David referred in Psalm 110 was understood by those of Jesus’ day (on the basis of passages such as 2 Sam. 7:11-16) to be David’s son (Matt. 22:42). Our Lord pointed out in addition that David referred to his “son” as his “Lord.” If David’s son was also his Lord, then Messiah must be both divine and human. The very thing which they objected to, namely Jesus’ claim to be equal with God (cf. John 8), is the conclusion to which Psalm 110 leads us. Jesus was the God-man, just as God had indicated through His “prophet” David. How should you and I respond to the prophecy of Psalm 110? In two words, very seriously. The message of the psalm is even more powerful today than it was in David’s time. In the first place, the final fulfillment of the psalm is still future. We look forward to its fulfillment just as men in that day did. Secondly, the message, to use Peters expression, is a “prophetic word made more sure, to which you do well to pay attention” (2 Pet. 1:18). The message of the Book of Acts and the epistles is that the first part of the prophecy of the psalm has been fulfilled in the resurrection and ascension of our Lord to the right hand of the Father (cf. Acts 2:34-35; Rom. 8:34; 1 Cor. 15:25; Eph. 1:20). If God has faithfully fulfilled the first part of His promise, how much more sure is the completion of God’s purpose as spelled out in this psalm? As Peter said, we do well to pay attention to it. The revelation of the Lord Jesus Christ as the person of whom David spoke should cause us to seriously consider our relationship to this One who will soon establish His rule over the earth. We can relate to Him in only one of two ways, both of which are suggested in the psalm itself. We can relate to the Messiah as an enemy. We can reject the claim of Jesus to be the Messiah who died as God’s sacrifice for sinners. If such is the case, the great priest-king will relate to us as God’s avenger, who will come to rule with a rod of iron, “shattering” (that is the word we find in the psalm, cf. vv. 5, 6) His foes. In the New Testament Book of Revelation chapter 19 we find the same destruction described: And I saw heaven opened; and behold, a white horse, and He who sat upon it is called Faithful and True; and in righteousness He judges and wages war. … And I saw an angel standing in the sun; and he cried out with a loud voice, saying to all the birds which fly in mid-heaven, “Come, assemble for the great supper of God; in order that you may eat the flesh of kings and the flesh of commanders and the flesh of mighty men and the flesh of horses and of those who sit on them and the flesh of all men, both free men and slaves, and small and great.” And I saw the beast and the kings of the earth and their armies, assembled to make war against Him who sat upon the horse, and against His army. And the beast was seized, and with him the false prophet who performed the signs in his presence, by which he deceived those who had received the mark of the beast and those who worshiped his image; these two were thrown into the lake of fire which burns with brimstone. And the rest were killed with the sword which came from the mouth of Him who sat upon the horse, and all the birds were filled with their flesh (Rev. 19:11, 17-21). The reason for the delay in Messiah’s return is not apathy or disinterest, but mercy. God is giving men time to repent and turn in faith to Messiah as their Savior, rather than to face Him as soldier-king who must destroy the enemies of God (cf. 2 Pet. 3:3-12). For those who have come to trust in Jesus as their Messiah and who willingly follow Him, they find Him no longer an awesome adversary, but an advocate and friend. In the Book of Hebrews the writer spells out the implications of Christ’s priesthood, now that He has died, risen, and ascended to the right hand of the Father. Christ’s humanity, when added to His deity, makes Him a compassionate advocate, intercessor, and friend: Since then we have a great high priest who has passed through the heavens, Jesus the Son of God, let us hold fast our confession. For we do not have a high priest who cannot sympathize with our weaknesses, but one who has been tempted in all things as we are, yet without sin. Let us therefore draw near with confidence to the throne of grace, that we may receive mercy and may find grace to help in time of need (Heb. 4:14-16). Not only is our Great High Priest our helper, He is our hope: This hope we have as an anchor of the soul, a hope both sure and steadfast and one which enters within the veil, where Jesus has entered as a forerunner for us, having become a high priest forever according to the order of Melchizedek (Heb. 6:19-20). With such an advocate, let us press on to the goal, “fixing our eyes on Jesus, the author and perfecter of faith, who for the joy set before Him endured the cross, despising the shame, and has sat down at the right hand of the throne of God” (Heb. 12:2). Just as our Lord endured the suffering of the cross, assured of the promise of God contained in Psalm 110, let us likewise persevere in our faith, knowing that our hope is secure in the Messiah, David’s son and David’s sovereign. Finally, let us learn from our Lord and His apostles how we ought to use this psalm, and, in fact, all prophecy. First, we should always apply prophesy personally. We should respond to prophetic promises as the certain purposes of God and we should live our present lives in the light of these certainties. Second, we should use prophecy to encourage other saints and to evangelize the lost. What is a word of comfort to a Christian is also a word of warning to the unbeliever. Just as Peter warned those of his day to repent before the coming day of divine wrath (Acts 2), so we should use the prophecies of scripture to warn men of God’s impending wrath. (I think Hal Lindsey’s book, The Late Great Planet Earth, is but one illustration of the evangelistic application of prophecy.) We should employ the fulfilled prophecies of God’s word apologetically, to show the reliability of the Bible. (Psalm 110 - David's Lord) JEWISH ESCHATOLOGY Wikipedia 3/28/2018 See also list of related resources on Messianic Prophecies below. In Jewish eschatology the term mashiach, or "Messiah", came to refer to a future Jewish king from the Davidic line, who is expected to be anointed with holy anointing oil and rule the Jewish people during the Messianic Age.[1][2][5] The Messiah is often referred to as "King Messiah", or, in Hebrew, מלך משיח (melekh mashiach), and, in Aramaic, malka meshiḥa.[6] Orthodox views have generally held that the Messiah will be descended from his father through the line of King David,[7] and will gather the Jews back into the Land of Israel, usher in an era of peace, build the Third Temple, father a male heir, re-institute the Sanhedrin, and so on. Jewish tradition alludes to two redeemers, both of whom are called mashiach and are involved in ushering in the Messianic age: Mashiach ben David; and Mashiach ben Yosef. In general, the term Messiah unqualified refers to Mashiach ben David (Messiah, son of David).[1][2] (ED NOTE: SEE The Jewish Tradition Of Two Messiahs) Scriptural requirements - Many of the scriptural requirements concerning the Messiah, what he will do, and what will be done during his reign are located in the Book of Isaiah, although requirements are mentioned by other prophets as well. Views on whether Hebrew Bible passages are Messianic may vary from and among scholars of ancient Israel looking at their meaning in original context and from and among rabbinical scholars. Isaiah 1:26: "And I will restore your judges as at first and your counsellors as in the beginning; afterwards you shall be called City of Righteousness, Faithful City." Some Jews[8] interpret this to mean that the Sanhedrin will be re-established." (Isaiah 1:26) Once he is King, leaders of other nations will look to him for guidance. (Isaiah 2:4) The whole world will worship the One God of Israel (Isaiah 2:11–17) He will be descended from King David (Isaiah 11:1) via Solomon (1 Chronicles 22:8–10, 2 Chronicles 7:18) The "spirit of the Lord" will be upon him, and he will have a "fear of God" (Isaiah 11:2) Evil and tyranny will not be able to stand before his leadership (Isaiah 11:4) Knowledge of God will fill the world (Isaiah 11:9) He will include and attract people from all cultures and nations (Isaiah 11:10) All Israelites will be returned to their homeland (Isaiah 11:12) Death will be swallowed up forever (Isaiah 25:8) There will be no more hunger or illness, and death will cease (Isaiah 25:8) All of the dead will rise again (Isaiah 26:19) The Jewish people will experience eternal joy and gladness (Isaiah 51:11) He will be a messenger of peace (Isaiah 52:7) Nations will recognize the wrongs they did to Israel (Isaiah 52:13–53:5) The peoples of the world will turn to the Jews for spiritual guidance (Zechariah 8:23) The ruined cities of Israel will be restored (Ezekiel 16:55) Weapons of war will be destroyed (Ezekiel 39:9) The people of Israel will have direct access to the Torah through their minds and Torah study will become the study of the wisdom of the heart (Jeremiah 31:33)[9] He will give you all the worthy desires of your heart (Psalms 37:4) He will take the barren land and make it abundant and fruitful (Isaiah 51:3, Amos 9:13–15, Ezekiel 36:29–30, Isaiah 11:6–9) Click here for the original article and explanation of the notes appended to the original Wikipedia article. Illustration of Luke 20:41-44 - THE "45" CHANGED THINGS - from Bob Deffinbaugh - A friend of days gone by used to tell the story of his uncle, who had just purchased a new convertible, and was enjoying a ride in the Ozark Mountains (as I recall the story). He had the top down and the radio up. He did not notice the man in car behind him, eager to pass, and getting more and more irritated. Nor did he hear the man’s horn, blaring obnoxiously at him. Finally, the man behind had had enough. He found room to get by the uncle, but instead of going on by, he forced the fellow off the road, jumped out of his car and came alongside in a very hostile mood. The uncle was quick to apologize. He was sorry, he said. He had been driving too slow and he had not been observant to see that the man behind wanted to pass him. He had said all that one could say to apologize, but the angry driver was not satisfied. He told him that he was going to yank him from the car and thump on him. Only that would appease his anger. The uncle realized that words would not suffice, and so he reached under the seat and pulled out his service 45 pistol, and pointed it at the enraged driver. It didn’t take that fellow very long to have a change of heart. Without hesitation he said, “I accept your apology,” turned and drove off. That 45 changed things considerably. It did not change the hostile motorist’s attitude, but it did end the discussion. Jesus did not pull a 45 on His adversaries, but when our Lord drew His opponent’s attention to the 110th Psalm, it did end the discussion. Matthew informs us that from this time on no one dared to ask Jesus a question (Matthew 22:46). The debate was over. (Sermon) Adrian Rogers on Jesus fully Man, fully God - It has wisely been said that “great minds discuss ideals. Average minds discuss events. Small minds discuss people.” This, however, is not true when it comes to the person of Jesus Christ. When you discuss Jesus Christ, you can discuss nothing greater. Now, the Bible teaches that Jesus Christ is God in human flesh. Somebody wrote these words, and they sound very noble: If Jesus Christ is a man And only a man, I say That of all mankind I will cleave to Him, And to Him will cleave alway. If Jesus Christ is a God, And the only God, I swear I will follow Him through heaven and hell, The earth, the sea, and the air. —RICHARD WATSON GILDER Those are beautiful words, but I don’t agree with them at all. If Jesus Christ is a man, and only a man, I’m not going to cleave to Him. If Jesus Christ is a man, and only a man, I’m going to reject Him as a fake, a fraud, and an impostor. Jesus Christ is more than a man. He is God, a very God. It’s very important that you understand what I have to say because it is the story, the cornerstone, of Christianity. And, I want to give you four lines of evidence for the deity of Jesus Christ. I want you to jot these down. I want you to get the Scripture, and I want you to see clearly and plainly that Jesus Christ is the Son of God with power and God in human flesh. Here are the four lines of argument—here are four evidences—for the absolute deity of Jesus Christ.....I want to remind you who Jesus is: To the artist He’s the One Altogether Lovely. To the architect He’s the Chief Cornerstone. To the baker He’s the Living Bread. To the banker He’s the Hidden Treasure. To the biologist He’s the Life. To the builder He’s the Sure Foundation. To the doctor He’s the Great Physician. To the educator He’s the Great Teacher. To the farmer He’s the Lord of the Harvest. To the florist He’s the Rose of Sharon. To the geologist He’s the Rock of Ages. To the judge He’s the Righteous Judge. To the jeweler He’s the Pearl of Great Price. To the lawyer He is the Advocate. To the publisher He is Good Tidings of Great Joy. To the philosopher He is the Wisdom of God. To the preacher He is the Word of God. To the sculptor He is the Living Stone. To the statesman He is the Desire of All Nations. To the theologian He is the Author and Finisher of Our Faith. To the traveler He is the New and Living Way. To the sinner He is the Lamb of God that taketh away the sin of the world. To the Christian He is forever the Son of the Living God, Savior, Redeemer, Lord, Everlasting Father, Mighty God, Prince of Peace. Luke 20:42 "For David himself says in the book of Psalms, 'THE LORD SAID TO MY LORD, "SIT AT MY RIGHT HAND, Luke 20:42KJV And David himself saith in the book of Ps, The LORD said unto my Lord, Sit thou on my right hand, For David himself says in the book of Psalms Lk 24:44; 2 Sa 23:1,2; Mt 22:43; Mark 12:36,37; Acts 1:20; 13:33-35; Hebrews 3:7 THE LORD SAID TO MY LORD, "SIT AT MY RIGHT HAND Ps 110:1; Mt 22:44,45; Acts 2:34,35; 1 Cor 15:25; Hebrews 1:13 Parallel passages - Matthew 22:41-46; Mark 12:35-37 Luke 20 Resources - Multiple Sermons and Commentaries Luke 20:41-47 True and False Religion - Steven Cole Luke 20:41-44 David's Son and Lord - John MacArthur CHRIST IS DAVID'S LORD For they did not have courage to question Him any longer about anything. 41 Then He said to them, “How is it that they say the Christ is David’s son? 42“For David himself says in the book of Psalms, ‘THE LORD SAID TO MY LORD, “SIT AT MY RIGHT HAND, 43 UNTIL I MAKE YOUR ENEMIES A FOOTSTOOL FOR YOUR FEET.”’ 44 “Therefore David calls Him ‘Lord,’ and how is He his son?” For David himself says in the book of Psalms - In Matthew 22:43 Jesus asks that "Then how does David in the Spirit call Him ‘Lord." Mark adds "David himself said in the Holy Spirit." (Mk 12:36) In other words, the synoptic passages underscore the fact that these were not just David's words (which they were), but they were also the words that the Holy Spirit had inspired David to record, "for no prophecy was ever made by an act of human will, but men moved by the Holy Spirit spoke from God." (2 Peter 1:21-note). You might be thinking, "Well, thank you. That is a nice little detail to know, but it is of no real value regarding Jesus' discourse." Wrong! It is of IMMENSE VALUE. Why? For the answer see Derek Kidner's comment below. THE LORD SAID TO MY LORD, "SIT AT MY RIGHT HAND - See the original psalm below - notice that they are 4 participants in this psalm - (1) Jehovah or Yahweh (2) David (3) 'Adonay and (4) enemies. David is inspired to record the words of Jehovah which were addressed to Adonay, Who Himself was also David's Lord. To sit at the "right hand" of the king was an honor (see 1 Ki 2:19) The Lord's invitation to the Davidic king to sit down at his right hand reflects the king's position as the Lord's vice-regent. The enemies under Adonay's feet signify that Adonay will conquer and subdue His enemies. "A Psalm of David. The LORD (Jehovah or Yahweh) says to my (David's) Lord ('Adonay): "Sit at My right hand Until I make Your enemies a footstool for Your feet." All glory, laud and honor, To Thee, Redeemer, King, To Whom the lips of children Made sweet hosannas ring. Thou art the King of Israel, Thou David’s royal Son, Who in the Lord’s Name comest, The King and Blessèd One.
Lucas 20
MacArthur - Messiah is both David’s Son and David’s Lord, and therefore He is a man yet to be born, but He must also be God who was alive at the time David spoke. Deffinbaugh - Psalm 110 confronts the Israelite with a very perplexing problem, a problem which is central and foundational to the Israelite leaders’ rejection of Jesus as the Christ. The Psalm clearly teaches both the humanity of Messiah (a son of David) and His deity (David’s Lord). This was the fundamental problem which the leaders of Israel had with Jesus. If you could sum up the grievance of the Jewish leaders with Jesus, I believe it would be this: ALTHOUGH JESUS WAS MERELY A MAN (in the eyes of the Jews who rejected Him), HE HAD THE AUDACITY TO ACT LIKE GOD Hendriksen on David calls Him 'Lord,' and how is He his son? - The words do not mean, "the Messiah cannot be David's son," but must mean, "cannot be David's son merely in the sense of his descendant." He is far more than that. He is the root as well as the offspring of David (Rev. 22:16; cf. Isa. 11:1, 10)....It is comforting to know that not only according to Mark 12:10, 11 but also according to the present passage Jesus a few days before his most bitter agony was fully aware that the way of the cross would for him lead home, to the crown! (Exposition of the Gospel According to Mark) Revelation 22:16 “I, Jesus, have sent My angel to testify to you these things for the churches. I am the root and the descendant of David, the bright morning star.” Isaiah 11:1 Then a shoot will spring from the stem of Jesse, And a branch from his roots will bear fruit. (11:10) Then in that day The nations will resort to the root of Jesse, Who will stand as a signal for the peoples; And His resting place will be glorious.
Lucas 20
MacArthur - He said all there is to say, nothing more can be said. He’s answered every question that could be raised. He will turn and give instruction to those who are still following, still showing interest, still wanting to learn from Him, still following Him. The attackers are gone and the crowd fades away. But there’s one final message for everybody to hear, disciples and people. Listening (191)(akouo) means they were physical hearing Jesus words, but as discussed above, akouo has a number of nuances depending on the context. In this context it appears they were listening, enjoying what Jesus had been saying, but most of them were not necessarily listening with a desire to believe in Him or obey Him. Doubtless many who were listening now, would soon be crying out "Crucify! Crucify!" Applying this picture of their listening which was more like "in one ear and out the other," it recalls times when I read His Scripture and I am like those in the crowd, enjoying the words, but only superficially listening. It strikes me that when Jesus is speaking (when we are in His written Word), we need to be listening carefully with a heart ready to heed and obey what He says. Otherwise, we are really wasting our time and sadly we only have a finite amount of time we can spend with Him on earth because life is so short. Father, by Thy Spirit give us ears to hear and hearts to obey and have a desire to be pleasing to Thee, in Jesus' Name. Amen. Disciples (3101)(mathetes from manthano = to learn) describes one who learns from another by instruction and includes the idea of intentionally learning by inquiry and observation (cf inductive Bible study). "As followers of Jesus we are to be, first of all, learners. We are to learn from Him by listening to Him, learn the truth that will set us free (John 8:32) and keep us from error. But we are also to learn from Him by looking at Him‑ learn how to live a life of beauty and blessing." (Ralph Earle) Luke 20:46 "Beware of the scribes, who like to walk around in long robes, and love respectful greetings in the market places, and chief seats in the synagogues and places of honor at banquets, Luke 20:46KJV Beware of the scribes, which desire to walk in long robes, and love greetings in the markets, and the highest seats in the synagogues, and the chief rooms at feasts; Beware of the scribes Lk 12:1; Mt 16:6; Mark 8:15; 2 Ti 4:15 who like to walk around in long robes Lk 11:43; 14:7; Pr 29:23; Mt 23:5-7; Mark 12:38,39; Ro 12:10; Php 2:3-5; 3 John 1:9 Parallel Passages - Matthew 23:1-36; Mark 12:38-40; Luke 11:37-54 Luke 20 Resources - Multiple Sermons and Commentaries Luke 20:41-47 True and False Religion - Steven Cole Luke 20:45-47 Confronting Error with Condemnation, Not Conversation - John MacArthur Related Passage: Mark 12:38-40+ In His teaching He was saying: “Beware of the scribes who like to walk around in long robes, and like respectful greetings in the market places, 39 and chief seats in the synagogues and places of honor at banquets, 40 who devour widows’ houses, and for appearance’s sake offer long prayers; these will receive greater condemnation.” LAST WORDS A WARNING Luke 20:46-47 and the parallel account in Mark 12:38-40 are in a sense a summary of Jesus' in depth denunciation of these hypocritical religious leaders recorded by Matthew in Mt 23:1-36. Given the fact that Scripture is always the best commentary on Scripture, the reader is strongly encouraged to read Jesus' blistering diatribe to give one a fuller sense of what Luke and Mark only summarize, keeping in mind that this is the end of His public ministry. Luke 20:45 says "And while all the people were listening, He said to the disciples." The parallel section in Matthew 23:1 has "Then Jesus spoke to the crowds and to His disciples." After Jesus' scathing rebuke of the Scribes and Pharisees (with 8 Woes!), Mt 24:1 says "Jesus came out from the temple and was going away when His disciples came up to point out the temple buildings to Him." The point is that these passages mark the end of Jesus' public ministry to the nation of Israel and the beginning of His pronouncement of judgment on the Jewish religious leaders, and the coming desolation of their entire religious system, including the destruction of the symbol of their apostate system, Herod's Temple and the city of Jerusalem some 40 years later. Matthew ends Jesus 8 woe warning to the religious leaders with His famous lament “Jerusalem, Jerusalem, who kills the prophets and stones those who are sent to her! How often I wanted to gather your children together, the way a hen gathers her chicks under her wings, and you were unwilling. “Behold, your house (THE TEMPLE, THE CITY) is being left to you desolate! “For I say to you, from now on you will not see Me UNTIL (NOTICE THIS WORD IS A SMALL RAY OF HOPE) you say, ‘BLESSED IS HE WHO COMES IN THE NAME OF THE LORD!’” (cf Zech 12:10+) (Mt 23:37-39) Recall that this is a repeat of an almost identical lament earlier in His ministry Luke recording “O Jerusalem, Jerusalem, the city that kills the prophets and stones those sent to her! How often I wanted to gather your children together, just as a hen gathers her brood under her wings, and you would not have it! “Behold, your house is left to you desolate; and I say to you, you will not see Me UNTIL the time comes (THIS IS A PROPHECY THAT THIS "TIME" WILL COME - IT WILL BE AT MESSIAH'S SECOND COMING) when you say, ‘BLESSED IS HE WHO COMES IN THE NAME OF THE LORD!’” (Lk 13:34-35+) Luke earlier issued a similar warning regarding the HYPOCRISY of the Pharisees... Under these circumstances, after so many thousands of people had gathered together that they were stepping on one another, He began saying to His disciples first of all, “Beware (prosecho in present imperative) of the leaven of the Pharisees, which is hypocrisy (hupokrisis). (Lk. 12:1+) Wuest on the Greek word hypokrisis - It "is made up of hupo under, and krinō “to judge” and referred originally to “one who judged from under the cover of a mask,” thus, assuming an identity and a character which he was not. This person was the actor on the Greek stage, one who took the part of another. The true identity of the person is covered up. It refers to acts of impersonation or deception. Christianity requires that believers should be open and above-board. They should be themselves. Their lives should be like an open book, easily read. This begs the question beloved - IS YOUR LIFE AN "OPEN BOOK?" IS WHAT PEOPLE SEE REALLY WHO YOU ARE? (Wuest Word Studies - Eerdman Publishing Company Volume 1, Volume 2, Volume 3 - used by permission) And so this section of Luke gives us Jesus' final warning. Last words should always be carefully heeded especially if they are the words of Jesus! And these words are two-fold - words of warning and condemnation. A T
Lucas 20
MacArthur adds that "the Jews had a saying....“Moses received the law and gave it to Joshua. Joshua received the law and gave it to the elders. The elders received the law and gave it to the prophets. The prophets received the law and gave it to the Pharisees and the Scribes.” They were the treasurers of the Law of God. They were the ones given the trust. They were experts. They were the lawyers of Israel. They handled all legal matters: Property, estates, contracts, resolutions....And every adjudication that they rendered, and every position that they took was, in fact, supposed to be a representation of God and what God willed; a stewardship, if you will, from God. Because they then were the agents of God, they carried with them tremendous weight and trust. People had nowhere else to turn because there were no others than the scribes to handle all their matters." Recall that Not all Pharisees were Scribes, but the Scribes were primarily Pharisees, and were the interpreters and teachers of the law of Moses and the traditional rabbinic writings. Adam
Lucas 20
MacArthur - Greek word stolē, from which the old word “stole” comes, a robe to the ground. And they began to develop robes that were very different than other people’s robes. They were robes that had certain little things on them, markings and fancy things. They became unique, and fancy, and expensive robes that would identify them as the holy people. They “lengthened the tassels on their robes,” Matthew 23:5 says. And that comes from the Old Testament. In the Old Testament, back in Numbers 15:38-40, God had ordained that the Jews could put little tassels on the bottom of the robe, and it was a really wonderful little kind of symbol to remind them of the law of God. Everywhere you go you see that, it reminds you of the law of God. Jesus had them on His robe, according to Matthew 9:20. But the scribes and the Pharisees lengthened the tassels, not for the sake of a better memory device, but for the sake of ostentation, appearance. They weren’t trying to bring attention to God and His Word, they were trying to bring attention to themselves as if they were holy. (Confronting Error with Condemnation, Not Conversation)
Lucas 20
MacArthur - If you were called “rabbi,” you were so exalted that in the Talmud, Sanhedrin 88 says that “It is more punishable to act against the words of a scribe than the words of Scripture.” They wanted to be called “excellency, elevated one, most knowledgeable one, exalted one.” They wanted to be “leader.” That is the one who determines direction, the one who determines destiny, the one who sets the course.
Lucas 20
MacArthur - They go after the most defenseless. Like the false teachers of whom Paul writes to Timothy, they go after silly women. They go after the unprotected and the weak. Widows are the easiest ones to get to....Widows were to be protected in the Old Testament, pure religion, says James 1:27, is to care for widows. Ex 22:22, Dt 10:18, Mal 3:5, etc call upon the people of God to care for widows. God cares for widows. These Scribes devour them. How do they do that? Now keep in mind that they were the lawyers of the system. So when a woman who was a widow needed someone to protect her, she would turn to the lawyer with the idea that he would protect her home and her property. There is an interesting study on the kind of behavior that was going on. First, the lawyers would take money for themselves from widows although it was forbidden. Knowledge without price. That was the code of a true rabbi, certainly with regard to widows. They would disobey that and whatever wisdom they would give to widows, they would charge exorbitantly. What could a widow do? Secondly, they would cheat widows of their estate by getting into the legal machinations under the guise that they would provide legal protection, and would literally begin to "eat away" the estate. Thirdly, they would leach on them and abuse their hospitality, taking advantage of room, board, food. There are some stories about gluttony and excessive drinking, taking that from poor widows. Another way, by mismanaging the property of widows, so that out of complete carelessness a widow was absolutely made destitute. One of the popular ones was to take money from older widows with deficient mental powers, taking advantage of those who were unable to defend themselves mentally. And maybe the worst, they would accumulate debts the widow would owe them, and be unable to pay and would take the widow’s home as pledge for the debt, and thus "devour" the house. When the widow could not pay, they threw her out. That is why they are characterized in Luke 11:39 as “full of robbery and wickedness.” Or Luke 16:14, “The Pharisees....were lovers of money.” (Sermon) (6) And for appearance's sake offer long prayers - Pretense prayers (Pretense means pretending with intention to deceive. )! While there is nothing wrong with a long prayer, it is wrong if one is praying pretense, praying just to be seen and heard. Their words were nothing but supercilious piety! Their audience may have heard, but God certainly did not hear such shallow praying! Jesus warned against this type of praying in Mt 6:5+ "When you pray, you are not to be like the hypocrites; for they love to stand and pray in the synagogues and on the street corners so that they may be seen by men. Truly I say to you, they have their reward in full." For appearance's sake (pretense) (4392)(prophasis from prophaíno = to cause to shine before, to appear before, be apparent <> pró = before, + phaíno = to appear) is that which is alleged as the cause, an allegation, plea. In other words it denotes something put forward for appearance to conceal what lies behind it. In the NT it is used only in a bad sense and with the idea is That which is put out in front to hide the true state of things.” Jesus alluded to the practice of pretense by the Scribes and Pharisees... “Woe to you, scribes and Pharisees, hypocrites! For you clean the outside of the cup and of the dish, but inside they are full of robbery and self-indulgence. 26 “You blind Pharisee, first clean the inside of the cup and of the dish, so that the outside of it may become clean also. 27 “Woe to you, scribes and Pharisees, hypocrites! For you are like whitewashed tombs which on the outside appear beautiful, but inside they are full of dead men’s bones and all uncleanness. 28 “So you, too, outwardly appear righteous to men, but inwardly you are full of hypocrisy and lawlessness (Mt 23:25-28) Brian Bell on long prayers - Samuel Chadwick (minister during the late 1800’s & early 1900’s) said when he went away from his home, he wrote every day to his wife. And when he was going a short journey their letters were short; and the further away he went, the longer his letters were; & that reminded him of some people. He thought “some people must be a long distance from God because their prayers were so long!” The inspiration of all their activity was self-centered. God is seeking servants, not celebrities; He sees the heart! Listen,…those people who seem “too spiritual to be true”…usually aren’t! (Commentary)
Lucas 20
MacArthur - The idea is clear. If you’re in the wrong religion, you’re going to be condemned. If you’re a purveyor of the wrong religion, you’re going to receive a far greater suffering and damnation in hell. They’re dangerous. Be warned. They’re hypocrites. They’re worthy of condemnation. Compassion? Yes. Gospel? Give them the gospel. Pray for their salvation. Have a sad heart. But in the end, we have nothing to learn from false teachers and false religions. And they must know that they are under sentence of divine condemnation. They must know for their sake and the sake of those who need to be protected from them. (Confronting Error with Condemnation, Not Conversation)