Lucas 20
Kenneth Wuest · Citado em PreceptAustin
Lucas 20
Wuest - As He walked along He was teaching the people (Matthew). Then, representatives of three orders approach Him, the chief priests, the scribes, and the elders. The definite article is used in each case, which fact indicates that those who came, represented their own group. This united action was probably agreed upon during the night. Their questions were in themselves reasonable ones from their point of view. They were the custodians of the Temple. Our Lord, by forcibly ejecting those who were engaged in business in the Temple, was claiming a superior jurisdiction. They ask Him in public now to produce His credentials, first, to state the nature of His authority, and second, to name the person from whom He had received it. Priests (749) (archiereus from arche = leader idea of rank + hiereus = priest) refers to the priests that were chief over other priests. In the plural as in this verse archiereus refers to all the ruling priests, the members of the high-priestly families as a group, the upper echelons of the priestly class, especially those who served on the Sanhedrin, the Jewish high court (Lk 9:22, Mk 8:31) There were 24 courses of priests who took turns serving in the Temple. At Passover, ALL of the priests were in attendance, and without doubt the upper echelon from among the priests would be in this delegation. Scribes (1122)(grammateus from grapho = to write) were recognized experts in the law of Moses and in traditional laws and regulations. (Mt 2.4). Most sources consider the lawyers (nomikos - meaning one skilled in the Mosaic law) to be scribes specialized in the jurisprudence of the Law of Moses. The traditional rendering as "scribes" does not communicate much to the modern English reader, for whom the term might mean professional copyist, if it means anything at all so a rendering such as "experts in the law" comes closer to the actual meaning. Elders (4245)(presbuteros the comparative form of présbus = an old man or an ambassador) referred to men who were older or more senior and deserving of a sense of venerability. Presbuteros is transliterated into English as “presbyter” (a leader in one of the Jewish communities--especially a member of the Sanhedrin--or of the early Christian churches) and from which the word “priest” (from Late Latin presbyter) was derived. Elders in the The Intertestamental Period . The office of elder survived the Babylonian exile, but not without change. As previously, elders were in positions of leadership both in the homeland (Ezra 10:14 ) and Babylon (Jeremiah 29:1 ; Ezekiel 8:1 ; 14:1 ; 20:1,3 ). With the disintegration of the tribal unit, influential families came to fill the void of authority left by the breakdown of the clan. Whereas the elders' authority once derived from their position within the tribe, real authority now became based on the prominence of a particular family and an aristocratic ruling class emerged. By the second century b.c., we read of a council comprised of aristocratic elders (cf. 1 Maccabees 12:6 ; 14:20 ; Josephus, Antiquities, 12.3.3 ), which by the first century was known as the Sanhedrin (Josephus, Antiquities, 14.9.3-5). Although elders were historically the oldest members, in later times they became less important compared to the priests and scribes and the term "elders" came to signify lay members. This is the situation encountered in the New Testament, where the triad of chief priests, scribes, and elders is often referred to as the Sanhedrin (Mark 11:27 ; 14:43 ; also cf. Matthew 16:21 ; Mark 15:1 ) (Baker's Evangelical Dictionary) Confronted (stand over)(2186)(ephistemi) literally means to stand near (it makes me think these evil religious leaders were "in His face" so to speak). Many times this verb is used of someone coming suddenly upon an individual, which may have been the case with the religious leaders. One can see then coming on the scene and interrupting His proclamation of good news! This is an interesting verb to use here for it is the same verb used by Paul in one of his last exhortations to "preach the word, be ready (ephistemi) in season and out of season" (2 Ti 4:2) which is what the religious leaders should have been doing instead of confronting Jesus! The English word confront means to oppose, as in hostility or a competition (and in a sense both of these nuances would aptly describe the jealous religious leaders). Luke 2:4+ gives us a sense of what ephistemi pictures in the present confrontation, for in that passage Luke describes "an angel of the Lord suddenly stood before them." (cf uses of ephistemi in Lk 2:38+, Lk 21:34+, Lk 24:4+. And picture Martha coming up to Jesus in Lk 10:40+!) So one gets the picture that suddenly the religious leaders stood in front of Jesus. (This is not a fair fight but they don't know it yet!) John Stevenson gives an interesting illustration introducing his message on Luke 20 - His name was Irwin Rommel. He was to be known as the Desert Fox. But before leading the Axis army in North Africa, Rommel was a commander in the German army as they invaded France in 1940. It was during that invasion that Rommel tells of having taken a ride in his command car to reconnoiter the front. He was driving through the Belgium hills when he rounded a turn and came face to face with a truck filled with enemy soldiers. Without missing a beat, Rommel was out of his command car and calling loudly to the soldiers, "You are all now prisoners of the German army. Just drive your truck in that direction and you will be processed accordingly." The soldiers in the truck nodded their agreement and moved to comply. The truck behind them followed suit. As did the truck behind that one. In amazement, Rommel watched while 20 truckloads of soldiers meekly surrendered, all because one man had spoken with authority. One of the distinctive things about Jesus was that He spoke with a calm but unshakable authority. This set him apart from the rabbinical teachers of that day who were always having to quote the opinion of some earlier rabbi or expert. Jesus spoke from God. He was able to say, "Thus saith the Lord." And He even went further to say, "Thus saith ME." He did not only speak with authority; He also ACTED with authority. He acted with authority when He commanded demons to leave those whom they had possessed. He acted with authority when He told a storm to be silent. He acted with authority when He told a lame man to walk, when He rebuked disease and it departed, and when He commanded a dead girl to get up. And He acted with authority when He came in and cleansed the Temple, driving out those who had come to make a profit instead of to listen to the Prophet. Imagine what would be the reaction if an out-of-town carpenter showed up this Sunday in your church and began overturning pews and tossing around the offering plates. What would be your reaction? It would probably be the same as was seen by the Temple leaders: "What gives you the right to do these things? Just who do you think you are?" (The Authority of the King - Luke 20:1-47) Luke 20:2 and they spoke, saying to Him, "Tell us by what authority You are doing these things, or who is the one who gave You this authority?" Luke 20:2KJV And spake unto him, saying, Tell us, by what authority doest thou these things? or who is he that gave thee this authority? Tell us by what authority You are doing these things, Lk 19:35-40,45,46; Mt 21:23-27; Mark 11:28-33 who is the one who gave You this authority Exodus 2:14; John 2:18; 5:22-27; Acts 4:7-10; 7:27,35-39,51 The Question of Christ's Authority - Alfred Edersheim 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 Parallel Passage: Mark 11:28-33+ and began saying to Him, “By what authority are You doing these things, or who gave You this authority to do these things?” 29 And Jesus said to them, “I will ask you one question, and you answer Me, and then I will tell you by what authority I do these things. 30 “Was the baptism of John from heaven, or from men? Answer Me.” 31 They began reasoning among themselves, saying, “If we say, ‘From heaven,’ He will say, ‘Then why did you not believe him?’ 32 “But shall we say, ‘From men’?”–they were afraid of the people, for everyone considered John to have been a real prophet. 33 Answering Jesus, they *said, “We do not know.” And Jesus *said to them, “Nor will I tell you by what authority I do these things.” James Tissot: Jesus' Authority Questioned A QUESTION OF AUTHORITY The leadership is looking back to acts like the temple cleansing (Luke 19:45–48). How could a Galilean preacher do these things? Tell us (command in the aorist imperative - Do this now! Don't delay!) by what authority (exousia) You are doing these things - This entire chapter is about authority (exousia). And notice who raises the question - those who were assigned "authority" over the Temple complex. To what do these things refer? Most agree that from the immediate context (Lk 19:45-48+) these things refer to His cleansing of the Temple and expulsion of the corrupt merchants which would have significantly impacted the income of the religious leaders who were skimming off the top. These things (note it is plural supporting more than just the Temple cleansing) would also obviously refer to the enthusiastic reception of Jesus' triumphal entry and the crowd acknowledging Him as Messiah and King (Lk 19:38+). What is sad is that Jesus had in effect told them by what authority He had cleansed the Temple and His authority was the Word of God quoting Isaiah 56:7 and Jeremiah 7:11 in Luke 19:46+! Perhaps these religious leaders did not hear Him state His basis for the cleansing. More likely is they did not want to hear it for although they pontificated and spoke the Scriptures, they did not live the Scriptures, once again showing that they were hypocrites of the highest order! This was about their pocket book not their "hymn book" (so to speak)! The reaction of the religious leaders to their loss of revenue stream reminds me of Paul in Philippi when he cast out a "spirit of divination" of a slave girl who was bringing her masters much profit by fortunetelling (Acts 16:16+). This act incited the ire of her masters and the pagan crowd who beat Paul and Silas and had them thrown in prison (Acts 16:19-24+). Stevenson comments "Jesus has not been ordained by any reputable denomination. He has no seminary degrees hanging on His wall. He goes by not title such as "reverend" or "rabbi." So what gives Him the right to overturn money changers’ tables or to drive out animals being bought and sold? What gives Him the right to stop the "business as usual" within the Temple?" Notice that this is the first of a series of questions calculated to trip up Jesus. In this case, if Jesus stated that He was teaching and preaching based on His own authority, these evil men could say He was in effect out of His mind, acting like a meglomaniac! On the other hand if Jesus said He was acting on the authority of God, they would accuse Him of blaspheming God. So it looks good for these tricksters who now think they have Jesus boxed into a corner! English definition of authority - the power or right to give orders or make decisions; the power or right to control, judge, or prohibit the actions of others; power to influence or command thought, opinion, or behavior; the power or right to give orders, make decisions, and enforce obedience; the moral or legal right or ability to control. Authority (1849)(exousia from éxesti = it is permitted, it is lawful) means the power to do something and was a technical term used in the law courts, of a legal right. "Authority or right is the dominant meaning (of exousia) in the New Testament." (Vincent) Exousía refers to delegated authority and combines the idea of the "right and the might", these attributes having been granted to someone. Exousia is an important term in the Gospels because as in our present verse, many conflicts in Jesus' ministry turn on debates about authority or the idea that Jesus taught with an unparalleled authority (Mt 7:29; 8:9; 9:6, 8; 21:23-27; 28:18; Mk 1:22, 27; 2:10; 3:15; 11:28-33; Lk 4:32, 36; 5:24; 7:8; 20:2-8). Power and authority (right and might, power and privilege) are a recurrent theme in Matthew (see Mt 8:9; 9:6, 8; 10:1; 21:23, 24, 27). In fact Matthew 28:18 sums it up very well "And Jesus came up and spoke to them, saying, “All authority (exousia) has been given to Me in heaven and on earth." That settles any quibbling over authority, for He is sovereign over all the Creation (which He created)! Luke's uses of exousia - Lk. 4:6; Lk. 4:32; Lk. 4:36; Lk. 5:24; Lk. 7:8; Lk. 9:1; Lk. 10:19; Lk. 12:5; Lk. 12:11; Lk. 19:17; Lk. 20:2; Lk. 20:8; Lk. 20:20; Lk. 22:53; Lk. 23:7; Acts 1:7; Acts 5:4; Acts 8:19; Acts 9:14; Acts 26:10; Acts 26:12; Acts 26:18 The New Testament affirms that even Jesus' speaking conveyed a clear sense of His authority as Mark records They went into Capernaum; and immediately on the Sabbath He entered the synagogue and began to teach. They were amazed at His teaching; for He was teaching them as one having authority (exousia), and not as the scribes. (Mark 1:21-22+) Lane comments that Mark's "primary emphasis is on the authority of Jesus’ teaching and the response of the people, whose astonishment conveys the impression of real alarm. Jesus’ word, presented with a sovereign authority which permitted neither debate nor theoretical reflection, confronted the congregation with the absolute claim of God upon their whole person. Jesus’ teaching recalled the categorical demand of the prophets rather than scribal tradition....In the presence of Jesus men are disturbed, and this disturbance is the precise act of fishing to which Jesus had called the four fishermen." (NICNT-Mark) Comment - Jesus' teaching differed from the "scribes" for many of them limited their teaching to the authorities they cited, and a great part of their training centered on memorizing the received traditions. They spoke by the authority of others, whereas Jesus spoke with His own authority. As explained above, authority (exousia), speaks of the fact that Jesus possessed both the power and the privilege, and in the NT His authority served to prove His sovereignty. Whereas the scribes quoted other human sources to lend a sense of authority to their proclamations, Jesus quoted God's Word, the final authority. Exousia is used for the power that proves and reflects the sovereignty of Jesus. Jesus declaration with power was in marked contrast to the scribes who quoted others to lend authority to their teachings. Jesus quoted only God’s Word and spoke as the final authority on truth. He spoke eternal truth simply, directly, with love (in contrast to the bitter hatred of the Pharisees), and without hesitation or consultation. That astounded the crowd. Matthew records a similar reaction from the Jewish audience at the end of the Sermon on the Mount When Jesus had finished these words, the crowds were amazed at His teaching; for He was teaching them as one having authority, (exousia) and not as their scribes. (Matthew 7:28-29+) A. T. Pierson observed that Christ taught the Scriptures to the people as if He were its Author (cp Heb 1:1, 2-note) rather than its commentator. How incredible, Pierson added, that He "comes forth from the carpenter’s shop, where like all other well-trained Hebrew youth, He had learned His father’s trade, and His first public utterance (referring to Sermon on the Mount) is the most original and revolutionary address on practical morals which the world has ever heard."
Lucas 20
Wuest - Our Lord meets their questions with another question. He says that He has one question to ask them. The one question is not contrasted to the two questions asked Him, but points to the simplicity of the issue. The answer to our Lord’s one question should clear the air. He refers to John the Baptist. The latter had testified to the divine source of His mission. The question of the Sanhedrin resolved itself into a question as to the source of the Baptist’s teaching. In demanding an answer from them, our Lord was claiming an answer as from authorized teachers who were acquainted with the facts. In twentieth century language, He put them on the spot. (Wuest Word Studies - Eerdman Publishing Company Volume 1, Volume 2, Volume 3 - used by permission) In Matthew Jesus added “I will also ask you one thing, which if you tell Me, I will also tell you by what authority I do these things." (Mt 21:24) Mark is similar - "And Jesus said to them, “I will ask you one question, and you answer Me, and then I will tell you by what authority I do these things." (Mk 11:29)
Lucas 20
Wuest - Our Lord’s teaching changed its manner of presentation to that of parables....Our Lord was accusing the spiritual leaders of Israel of being the future murderers of the Messiah, and this in the presence of the crowd. His purpose was to expose the true character of the hostility of the Sanhedrin. The vineyard was a recognized symbol of Israel itself as the covenant people, and both the members of the Sanhedrin and the better-taught among the crowd, could not but understand the symbolism. (Wuest Word Studies - Eerdman Publishing Company Volume 1, Volume 2, Volume 3 - used by permission -- or Borrow Mark in the Greek New Testament for the English reader ) Steven
Lucas 20
Wuest adds that dero meant "originally “to flay,” but in the NT, “to beat severely, to scourge.” Matthew 21:35 adds that "The vine-growers took his slaves and beat (dero) one, and killed another, and stoned a third." Empty-handed (2756)(kenos) means literally to be without something material and thus means empty or without content. It is used here with it's literal meaning (as in Mk 12:3). More often kenos is used figuratively referring to things that lack effectiveness. In Luke's first use he says “HE HAS FILLED THE HUNGRY WITH GOOD THINGS; And sent away the rich empty-handed." (Lk 1:53-note) Wuest - The failure to receive fruit points to the failure of Israel to heed the preaching of the prophets. The image of the tenants beating up the owner’s slave pictures the nation’s rejection of the prophets and their message.
Lucas 20
Wuest - The Greek text reads, “Yet he had one,” that is, one person to send, after all his bondslaves were either maltreated or killed. He reasons that the vineyard men would not dare to harm his son. Swete says of this: “But to the owner any other result was inconceivable, and the parable sets forth the improbability from the human point of view, of such an issue as the incarnation actually had.” All of which means that mankind does not have any proper conception of the utter and complete depravity of the fallen race, nor to what lengths it will go to hold on to its sin. Mt 21:37 “But afterward (KJV has "LAST OF ALL", YOUNG'S LITERAL has "AND AT LAST")) he sent his son to them, saying, ‘They will respect my son.
Lucas 20
Wuest explains that "Here we have the prophecy of the destruction of Jerusalem and the world-wide dispersion of the Jews A.D. 70, the call of the Gentiles, and the Church of Jesus Christ, the latter being the channel through which God is operating temporarily (cf Ro 11:17-18) while Israel is in dispersion (See Jewish Diaspora), and until Israel will be regathered at the second Advent (cf Isa 11:12-note, Isa 43:1,5, Ezek 34:13, see excursus below), and restored to fellowship with and usefulness to God." (Wuest Word Studies - Eerdman Publishing Company Volume 1, Volume 2, Volume 3 - used by permission -- or Borrow Mark in the Greek New Testament for the English reader ) Excursus - The key passages dealing with the future restoration of Israel - Mic 2:12-13; 4:1-8; Isa 11:10-16; Jer 23:1-8; 29:10-14; 31:1-34; 32:37-44; Ezek 11:16-20; 20:33-44; 28:25-26; 34:11-31; 36:22-38; 37:11-28; 39:25-29. James Brooks writes that "The story primarily justifies the church’s replacement of Israel as God’s favored people. It also functions in the book as preparation for the passion narrative....The “others” to whom the vineyard was given were, of course, the Gentile church. The church is the inheritor of the position formerly held by Israel, the recipient of many of the promises (ED: MANY YES, BUT NOT ALL OF THEM!) originally made to Israel." (New American Commentary – Volume 23: Mark) Comment: Brooks is correct that the Church is God's replacement of Israel in this age, which is commonly referred to as the "Church Age." But this does not warrant the radical interpretation that God is forever finished with ethnic Israel in His grand plan of redemption. Paul could not have been much clearer than he was in Romans 11 where he wrote such things as "Now if their (ISRAEL) transgression is riches for the world (THE GENTILES) and their failure is riches for the Gentiles, how much more will their fulfillment be (WHOSE FULFILLMENT? DOES THIS SOUND LIKE GOD IS FINISHED WITH ISRAEL?) (Ro 11:12+) Even the ESV Study Bible comments their fulfillment "looks forward to the fulfillment of God’s saving promises to ethnic Israel." In other words, Israel means literal nation of Israel and not the Church as sadly is falsely taught in so-called replacement theology or supersessionism (cf "Israel of God")! Destroy (622) (apollumi from apo = away from or wholly) means to destroy utterly but not to cause to cease to exist. The idea is not the loss of being, but is more the loss of well-being. It means to be ruined so that one can no longer serve the use for which they were designed. Luke's uses of apollumi - Lk. 4:34; Lk. 5:37; Lk. 6:9; Lk. 8:24; Lk. 9:24; Lk. 9:25; Lk. 9:56; Lk. 11:51; Lk. 13:3; Lk. 13:5; Lk. 13:33; Lk. 15:4; Lk. 15:6; Lk. 15:8; Lk. 15:9; Lk. 15:17; Lk. 15:24; Lk. 15:32; Lk. 17:27; Lk. 17:29; Lk. 17:33; Lk. 19:10; Lk. 19:47; Lk. 20:16; Lk. 21:18; Acts 5:37; Acts 27:34 When they heard it, - "Heard" in this context indicates that this time they "Got it!" They did not just hear the sound of His words, but they deduced the substance of His words. It is one thing to simply hear someone speak and to really listen to them with understanding. How many times has someone spoken to us and we heard their voice, but did not truly pay attention to what they were saying? All of us are guilty of this selfish response! But this time Jesus' words have them come in one ear but did not go out the other. In this case they heard and understood and thus they responded with a what amounts to a strong negative protest. They said, "May it never be!" - They were horrified at the implications of Jesus' condemning conclusion to the parable as emphasized by use of the unusual Greek phrase me genoito which is found in no other place in the Gospels. Some of the other translations give you a sense of their reaction of shock and negative response to the truth of Jesus' words - "such a thing should ever happen," (NLT), "No-- never!" (CSB) "God forbid!," (KJV and RSV) "May this never happen" (NET). Note that me genoito is the strongest way in the Greek language they could express their negative response. As an aside the only other uses of "me genoito," (May it never be!) are by the apostle Paul who has 14 of the 15 NT occurrences, with most in the book of Romans...Lk. 20:16; Rom. 3:4; Rom. 3:6; Rom. 3:31; Rom. 6:2; Rom. 6:15; Rom. 7:7; Rom. 7:13; Rom. 9:14; Rom. 11:1; Rom. 11:11; 1 Co. 6:15; Gal. 2:17; Gal. 3:21; Gal. 6:14 Some writers propose that this negative reaction "May it never be!" is spoken by the religious leaders, others think this represents the response of those in the crowd. Lk 20:19 would seem to favor that this parable is directed at the religious leaders -- "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." (cf Lk 20:1 where it is not the people but " the chief priests and the scribes with the elders confronted Him."). Of course, the crowd was also guilty of rejecting Jesus They (these comments would be apropos to both religious leaders and the crowd) understood that Jesus story was referring to the judgment of their nation, Israel, and for this reason they strongly protested that such a thing should ever occur. But as the old saying goes, it was "too little, too late!" They had received countless opportunities to respond to Jesus' miracles which authenticated His Gospel proclamation the way of truth. God the Father, through the words and actions of His Son Jesus had offered amazing grace (and mercy) to the Chosen People, and especially to the Jewish religious leaders. The religious leaders were the most responsible because they were the ones who were called to teach the nation spiritual truth, especially the way of righteousness. But instead of receiving Jesus' teaching about the true way of righteousness, they chose to present a false way of obtaining (self) righteousness. They were guilty as charged. The only thing left for them as leaders and sadly for the entire nation was condemnation and just punishment for rejecting the way of truth. And so from the beginning of Jesus' ministry to the end, they continued to be stiff-necked and uncircumcised in heart, steadfastly resisting the Holy Spirit, just as their fathers had done (cf Acts 7:51). As Steven
Lucas 20
Wuest adds "The Sanhedrin recognized our Lord for what He was, the Son of God, the Messiah of Israel. The Lord had come to claim the vineyard, Israel, for Himself. He had received friendly recognition from the people. This had aroused the jealousy of their spiritual leaders. They tried in desperation to recover their waning power over the people by giving Him over to the Gentiles for crucifixion." (Wuest Word Studies - Eerdman Publishing Company Volume 1, Volume 2, Volume 3 - used by permission -- or Borrow Mark in the Greek New Testament for the English reader ) It is fascinating that the attitude of the tenants toward the beloved son and heir reflects the same attitude of Joseph's jealous brothers who when they saw him in his coat of many colors, the sign of heirship conspired together and said "come and let us kill him." (Ge 37:20) Martin Luther once exclaimed, “If I were God and the world had treated me as it treated Him, I would kick the wretched thing to pieces!” We can all identify with his feelings! And can it be that I should gain An int’rest in the Savior’s blood? Died He for me, who caused His pain— For me, who Him to death pursued? Amazing love! How can it be, That Thou, my God, shouldst die for me? - Charles Wesley Let us kill him so that the inheritance will be ours - "Under Jewish law, any man could lay claim to ownerless property. The tenants may have concluded that the owner was dead; otherwise he would have come himself. If they killed the son, then they could claim the vineyard for themselves. This is exactly the way the religious leaders were thinking as they stood there before Jesus! (see John 11:47-54)" (Wiersbe Borrow Be courageous)
Lucas 20
Wuest - The “casting out” speaks of the act of Israel’s leaders excommunicating our Lord. He was treated as excommunicate when He was condemned as a blasphemer and handed over to the Romans for punishment. Our Lord’s crucifixion outside of the walls of Jerusalem symbolized this expulsion from the community of Israel. (Wuest Word Studies - Eerdman Publishing used by permission -- or Borrow Mark in the Greek New Testament for the English reader ) This parabolic detail (threw him out of the vineyard) was fulfilled in the murder of Jesus, for He was crucified outside the gates of the city of Jerusalem... They took Jesus, therefore, and He went out, bearing His own Cross (the cross-member or horizontal bar which condemned carried on their shoulders to the place of execution), to the place called the Place of a Skull, which is called in Hebrew, Golgotha (see excellent diagram of proposed site of Golgotha outside the city gates). (Jn 19:17, cf Stephen being stoned outside the city - Acts 7:58+) Therefore Jesus also, that He might sanctify the people through His own blood, suffered outside the gate (OF THE CITY). So, let us go out to Him outside the camp, bearing His reproach. (Heb. 13:12, 13+) Lenski on the owner of the vineyard - It does not need to be said that these vine-growers will not be able to escape justice and retain the vineyard as their own. Justice must strike them at last. There is still the lord of the vineyard to deal with. He will come, but not as the slaves and as the son came. He will not seek fruit, he will come to do something with these vine-growers. What, then, will the owner of the vineyard do to them? - The rabbinical method of teaching was to ask the students questions calculated to engage them in a deeper level in the topic under discussion. In this case, the implication first of all is that the owner is alive. Jesus is in a sense asking His audience to fill in the blanks and finish the parable! As discussed in the notes on Lk 20:16, in Mark's and Luke's versions Jesus "fills in the blank," but in Matthew's version the listeners actually "fill in the blanks" (see discussion below on Mt 21:40-41) Owner is the Greek word kurios used over 665 times in the NT and translated most often as Lord (with a capital "L" - 626v). So in a sense Jesus is giving an interpretation of the passage, for His use of kurios implies that the owner is God.
Lucas 20
Wuest comments that "The simple verb (dokimazo) means “to put to the test for the purpose of approving.” The prefixed preposition (apo-) means “off, away from.” This tells us the story of Messiah’s rejection by Israel. Israel was looking for its Messiah. Jesus of Nazareth claimed to be Messiah. The leaders of Israel investigated His claims, found them to be true, substantiated by the miracles He performed (John 3:2), yet with all this evidence, rejected Him as Messiah because He did not meet their specifications. They were looking for a Messiah who would deliver Israel from the despotism of Rome, not from the dominion of sin. But this Messiah will some day become the King of kings and Lord of lords over the earth as the Head of the Millennial empire, the Headstone of the Corner. (Wuest Word Studies - Eerdman Publishing Company Volume 1, Volume 2, Volume 3 - used by permission -- or Borrow Mark in the Greek New Testament for the English reader ) In 1 Peter 2:6+ Peter quotes from Isaiah 28:16 (also quoted by Paul in Ro 9:33). For this is contained in Scripture (TESTIFIES TO THE INSPIRATION AND AUTHORITY OF ISAIAH): “BEHOLD (PAY ATTENTION! DON'T MISS THIS!), I LAY IN ZION (CITY OF JERUSALEM) A CHOICE STONE, A PRECIOUS CORNER stone, AND HE WHO BELIEVES IN HIM WILL NOT BE DISAPPOINTED.” Here is the original passage in Isaiah 28:16 - Therefore thus says the Lord GOD, “Behold, I am laying in Zion a stone, a tested stone, A costly cornerstone for the foundation, firmly placed. He who believes in it will not be disturbed. This passage is the prophetic promise that Jesus Christ would be the Corner Stone of God's new spiritual house, which is made up of believers (See Eph. 2:19-22+ where verse 20 = "Christ Jesus Himself being the corner" [stone]). Peter uses a different Greek word for Corner Stone (204) (akrogoniaios from akron = end, extremity + gonia = corner) a word which means literally lying at the extreme corner and thus describes the capstone (top stone in a building or wall sometimes used to tie two intersecting walls together but as the top stone it was the crowning point (JESUS)! Amen! THIS BECAME THE CHIEF CORNER stone - Note that "stone" is added to the translation. "This" refers to the stone which the stone masons examined and then rejected in Psalm 118:22. But what the Psalmist says is that this rejected stone would be the chief cornerstone (some interpret it as "capstone" a stone at the top of the wall binding the whole together and consummating the work). Cornerstone in its literal usage most often referred to the large stone placed in the foundation at the main corner of a building. In biblical times, buildings were often made of cut, squared stone. By uniting two intersecting walls, a cornerstone helped align the whole building and tie it together. In addition the cornerstone occasionally referred to the top or final stone of a building (capstone). THOUGHT - Regardless of which meaning one prefers, the important point is that Jesus is both the Foundation Stone and the Capstone! Anyone who believes in Jesus will come to experience that He is the Solid Rock on which they can build their life in this present age and the one to come and forever. Amen! My Hope Is Built -- Edward Mote My hope is built on nothing less Than Jesus’ blood and righteousness. I dare not trust the sweetest frame, But wholly trust in Jesus’ Name. Refrain On Christ the Solid Rock I stand, All other ground is sinking sand; All other ground is sinking sand Wikipedia says "The cornerstone (or foundation stone or setting stone) is the first stone set in the construction of a masonry foundation, important since all other stones will be set in reference to this stone, thus determining the position of the entire structure. Over time a cornerstone became a ceremonial masonry stone, or replica, set in a prominent location on the outside of a building, with an inscription on the stone indicating the construction dates of the building and the names of architect, builder, and other significant individuals. The rite of laying a cornerstone is an important cultural component of eastern architecture and metaphorically in sacred architecture generally. Some cornerstones include time capsules from, or engravings commemorating, the time a particular building was built." Nelson's New Christian Dictionary has an interesting note writing that cornerstone also referred to "The capital letter or gammadion L in the Latin alphabet, used as the symbol of Christ as the cornerstone. It was first used in the Roman catacombs in the fourth century, and the practice continued into the Middle Ages." (Kurian, G. T. Nelson's New Christian Dictionary. Nashville, Tenn.: Thomas Nelson Pubs) Unger writes that "The term “cornerstone” is sometimes used to denote any principal person, such as the princes of Egypt (Isa. 19:13). Christ is called the “corner stone” in reference to His being the foundation of the Christian faith (Eph. 2:20-note) and the importance and conspicuousness of the place He occupies (Matt. 21:42; 1Pe 2:6-note). (The New Unger's Bible Dictionary. Chicago: Moody Press) ISBE has an interesting note on cornerstone writing that "No doubt the original meaning was some important stone, which was laid at the foundation of a building. With the Canaanites, who preceded Israel in the possession of Palestine, cornerstone-laying seems to have been a most sacred and impressive ceremony. Under this important stone of temples or other great structures bodies of children or older persons would be laid, consecrating the building by such human sacrifice. This was one of many rites and practices that Israel was to extirpate. (Bromiley, G. W. The International Standard Bible Encyclopedia, Revised. Wm. B. Eerdmans) Erdman's Dictionary summarizes cornerstone as follows - (1) the stone in a new building laid first with great care and ceremony so as to ensure a straight and level foundation; (2) the interlocking cornerstones that join and strengthen two connecting walls; (3) the capstone at the top corner of a wall; or (4) the keystone of an arched door or gateway, the center and topmost stone that joins the two sides and supports the arch itself (the most important stone in which the name of the city, the ruler, and builder were often carved). (Freedman, D. N., Myers, A. C., & Beck, A. B. Eerdmans dictionary of the Bible Grand Rapids, Mich. W. B. Eerdmans) Leon Morris on Chief Corner - Jesus is saying that, though people might reject Him, He is accepted by God whose acceptance is what counts. Even though the Jews make the same kind of mistake as the builders (in the OT made) and reject Him, God’s purposes will be fulfilled. (Borrow The Gospel According to St. Luke: An Introduction and Commentary ) Bock writes that the "chief corner" (stone is added) "refers to a foundation stone, not a capstone...In the ancient world this stone bore the weight of two intersecting walls and was crucial to the building’s stability."
Lucas 20
Wuest notes that lawful is "The word is exestin. The English word “lawful” at once suggests government, a system of civil or criminal law. The Greek word does not necessarily refer to that. The word means “it is permissible, it is allowed, permitted.” The context indicates whether the restrictions are religious or civil. Here the Jews were not discussing the legality of paying poll tax to Caesar, but whether a Jew should do so in view of his theocratic relationship to God. They pressed for an answer, yes or no, as if there were no other possible answer. They hoped, in view of His Jewish background and teaching, that He would say no. That would involve Him at once with the Roman authorities. Such a reply, considering the present mood of the crowd, might put Him at the head of a rebellion (Acts 5:37) or at least would have made Him liable to a charge of treason (Luke 23:2). Had He given an affirmative answer, He would have incurred the displeasure of the Jewish crowds. "The baseness of the plot is evident. Their hearts are hostile to Caesar, but they are ready to become "informers" against him for the sake of getting rid of him." (R M Edgar) Is it lawful (exesti) for us to pay taxes (phoros) to Caesar, or not - This tax refers specifically to the "poll tax" or capitation tax (head money, see tributum capitis) "for which silver denaria were struck, with the figure of Caesar and a superscription, e.g. “Tiberiou Kaisaros." (Robertson) This payment made by the people of one nation to another was in a sense a symbol of submission to and dependence on the ruling nation. Imagine how this must have "rubbed the wrong way" (see pix) in the hearts of the Jews when year after year they had to come up with a silver denarius to drop in the Roman coffer to support a pagan, idolatrous nation that oppressed them and whom they hated deeply! Indeed, the Jews hated the system that allowed tax collectors to charge exorbitant rates and skim off extra for themselves. It was the Jews' deep seated hatred that these pretenders were hoping to stir up against Jesus. If Jesus said they should pay taxes, they would call Him a false Messiah and a traitor to their nation and their religion. But if he said they should not, the evil spies would report Him to Rome as a traitor of the empire. Jesus' questioners thought they had Him between a rock and a hard place this time, but He outwitted them yet once again. John
Lucas 20
Wuest comments on the poll tax - This payment was objectionable to them for two reasons, first, because it was a sign of subjection to a foreign power, and second, because the coin with which it was to be paid, the denarius, bore the Emperor’s effigy stamped upon it. And this Emperor, it was Roman law to worship as a god. The compulsory use of the denarius could not but increase the scruples of patriotic and religious Jews. (Wuest Word Studies - Eerdman Publishing Company Volume 1, Volume 2, Volume 3 - used by permission -- or Borrow Mark in the Greek New Testament for the English reader ) Lawful (1832)(exesti from ek = out + eimi = to be) means it is lawful, it is permitted, it is possible (referring to moral possibility or propriety meaning). The lawful is that which is permissible or permitted by law. Specifically in most uses exesti refers to things permitted or not permitted by the Torah (the Law), which had to do with standards of conduct which the Word either required or prohibited. Exesti implies and acknowledges the authority of the Word of God or an authority prescribed by what is proper and permitted. And so the Word of God, especially the Torah was the standard that guided the conversation and actions of Jesus and the disciples and was part of many of His disagreements with the religious leaders. So we see that exesti had to do with what the Word said about eating (Mt 12:4), Sabbath (Mt 12:2,10), marriage (Mt 19:3-5), taxes (Mt 22:17). Often exesti took the form of a question, “Is it lawful?” (Mt 12:10, 12, Mt 19:3, 20:15, 22:17,Mk 2:24, 3:4, 10:2, 12:14, Lk 6:9, 14:3, 20:22, Acts 21:37). Paul used it in the phrase "all things are lawful for me" in the sense of "permitted." (1 Cor 6:12, 10:23). Lawrence Richards comments that "The Pharisees of Jesus’ day had developed a vast network of interpretations of OT statutes and commandments. The result was that these “commandments of men” (Mt 15:9KJV) condemned many perfectly neutral actions as unlawful. This is well illustrated in Mt 12:1–14. Jesus rejected Pharisaical legalism and met the issue head on. When those who wanted to accuse Jesus asked Him if it was legal to heal on the Sabbath, Jesus said, “It is lawful to do good on the Sabbath” (Mt 12:12), and he healed. The Pharisees hated Jesus for cutting through their convoluted thinking to reestablish the original concern of law: to show people how to love God and others. Paul uses exesti in a distinctive way in 1 Co 6:12 and 10:23. He says, “All things are lawful for me, but …” His point is that while believers are not under the OT law—and thus technically all actions are lawful—there are still criteria by which one must evaluate his or her decisions." (Borrow Expository Dictionary of Bible Words) Friberg on exesti - impersonal verb; (1) as denoting that there are no hindrances to an action or that the opportunity for it occurs it is possible, followed by an infinitive (Acts 2.29); (2) predominately as denoting that an action is not prevented by a higher court or by law it is permitted, it is lawful, it may be done (Mk 10.2) (Borrow Analytical Lexicon of the Greek New Testament) Mounce on exesti - The term occurs primarily in the Gospels and Acts (26 of 31 times) to signify what is right, what is permitted, or what is proper. The term figures prominently in the disputes between Jesus and the Jewish religious authorities as to what is and is not in keeping with Jewish law (Mt 12:2, 4, 10, 12; 19:3; 22:17; Mk 2:24, 26; Lk 6:2, 4; Jn 5:10). exesti is also used with respect to Roman law (Acts 16:21; 22:25). Paul quotes exesti as a slogan of libertarian members of the Corinthian church (1 Cor. 6:12; 10:23). This verb can also denote the idea of something being within the range of possibility (Acts 2:29). (Mounce's Complete Expository Dictionary of the Old and New Testament) Gilbrant on exesti - Exesti depicts both the “opportunity” to do something as well as the “ability.” In addition, it also suggests that the action taken is not prohibited by some higher authority or court. Thus in the legal realm it particularly suggests something either required or forbidden by the law (see Foerster, “exesti,” Kittel, 2:560). (Complete Biblical Library) Exesti - 32x in 30v - lawful(26), may(3), permissible(1), permitted(2). Note it occurs primarily in the Gospels and Acts Matt. 12:2; Matt. 12:4; Matt. 12:10; Matt. 12:12; Matt. 14:4; Matt. 19:3; Matt. 20:15; Matt. 22:17; Matt. 27:6; Mk. 2:24; Mk. 2:26; Mk. 3:4; Mk. 6:18; Mk. 10:2; Mk. 12:14; Lk. 6:2; Lk. 6:4; Lk. 6:9; Lk. 14:3; Lk. 20:22; Jn. 5:10; Jn. 18:31; Acts 2:29; Acts 8:37; Acts 16:21; Acts 21:37; Acts 22:25; 1 Co. 6:12; 1 Co. 10:23; 2 Co. 12:4 Exesti - 3x in the Septuagint - Ezr. 4:14; Est. 4:2; Est. 8:12 Taxes (5411) (phoros from phéro = to bring) describes particularly what is brought and describes taxes or tributes imposed upon persons and property annually, in distinction from custom (télos) toll, which was usually levied on merchandise and travelers.Phoros was a tax that subject people paid to their conqueror. Phoros was generally considered a direct tax (eg, property tax or poll tax) and telos as an indirect tax such as customs (TLB paraphrases it "import duties").
Lucas 20
Wuest comments - Mark has “knowing their hypocrisy,” Matthew, “perceived their malice” (Mt 22:18), Luke, “perceived their trickery” (Mt 20:23). Thus, the three evangelists give us a rounded picture of the impressions these men made upon our Lord. Why tempt ye Me? The word is peirazo “to put to the test.” The secondary and late meaning of the word is “to tempt in the sense of soliciting to do evil.” Here, the Jewish leaders were putting our Lord to the test.(Wuest Word Studies - Eerdman Publishing Company Volume 1, Volume 2, Volume 3 - used by permission -- or Borrow Mark in the Greek New Testament for the English reader ) Comment on Mark 12:15+ from Ralph Earle (Word Meanings in the NT) - This verse and its two parallels (Mt. 22:18; Luke 20:23+) furnish an interesting example of how the three Synoptic accounts supplement each other. Three different verbs and three different nouns are used. Let us look first at the nouns. Matthew has poneria, Luke has panourgia, while Mark has hupokrisis. In his excellent commentary on the Greek text of Mark, Swete writes: "Malice (poneria) lay at the root of their conduct, unscrupulous cunning (panourgia) supplied them with the means of seeking their end, whilst they sought to screen themselves under the pretence (hupokrisis) of a desire for guidance and an admiration of fearless truthfulness" (p. 259). Now to the verbs. Mark uses eidos, a form of the verb oida (eido)(know intuitively). Matthew has gnous, the aorist of ginosko (know by experience or experimentation). Luke has katanoesas. The verb is katanoeo, which means "notice" or "observe" (AG). Swete comments: "The Lord detected their true character intuitively (eidos), He knew it by experience (gnous), and He perceived it by tokens which did not escape His observation (katanoesas)." He adds: "Thus each Evangelist contributes to the completeness of the picture." Luke does not mention their hypocrisy, but both Matthew and Mark allude to their hypocrisy in their question, hypocrisy signifying an act of pretending to have beliefs, opinions, virtues, feelings, qualities, or standards that one does not actually have. We never play this game do we? Like the pastor said when he asked his congregation a very convicting question "Now, don't raise your hands!" Why not? Every hand in the auditorium would or should go up! We all from time to time put on masks and play act, pretending to be some "super saint" when we know we ain't! Can I hear an "Amen?" Or at least an "O my!" Trickery (3834)(panourgia from pas = all + ergon = work) is literally "all working" or capable of all work. It means basically readiness to do anything and speaks of one's skill. In the NT (and clearly in this context) panourgia takes on a negative meaning and conveys the idea of trickery involving cunning, cleverness, craftiness or treachery. Panourgia speaks of clever manipulation of error to make it look like the truth. ("truth hucksters!") Someone who practiced panourgia would be willing to do anything to achieve his goals. Panourgia is the unscrupulousness that stops at nothing. Paul's use of panourgia in Second Corinthians gives us a "clue" as to who ultimately is behind this trickery designed to destroy Jesus - "But I am afraid that, as the serpent deceived Eve by his craftiness (panourgia), your minds will be led astray from the simplicity and purity of devotion to Christ. (2 Corinthians 11:3; see Genesis 3:1+ "Now the serpent was more crafty (but Lxx does not use panourgia) than any beast of the field which the LORD God had made." The point is that the trickery was designed to deceive Jesus, the Sin Bearer, just as it deceived Eve, the sin bringer, so to speak! Steven Cole on detected their trickery - Jesus saw right through their trickery (the word is used of Satan’s craftiness in deceiving Eve, 2 Cor. 11:3+). Jesus always sees through hypocrisy! As Hebrews 4:13+ says, “And there is no creature hidden from His sight, but all things are open and laid bare to the eyes of Him with whom we have to do.” Paul said that he lived, “not as pleasing men but God, who examines our hearts” (1 Th. 2:4+). Let us learn from the pretense of these religious men that we sometimes can fool others, but we can never fool God. Be on guard against the sin of religious hypocrisy. (Luke 20:20-26 Guile, Government, and God) And said to them - In typical rabbinical style, Jesus responds to the pretender's question with a question of His own. T W Hunt in his book The Mind of Christ (ED: Our position is that we have the "mind of Christ" - but we must practice our position to partake of that wonderful truth in 1 Cor 2:16+) uses this section of Luke's gospel as an example of "The Readiness Principle" - Hunt writes that "Our third verb-command associated with the mind takes us to the climax of the process: "Gird your minds for action" (1 Pet. 1:13+). In the first century, people wore long, flowing robes. To run or move quickly, a person had to turn the robe into a kind of pantaloon by "girding up" the robe. This illustrates the Readiness Principle. Our minds are to remain prepared for action. Jesus remained alert, or ready, as various groups tried to trap Him with trick questions in Luke 20:20-40. The "scribes and the chief priests" asked whether Jews should pay taxes to the foreign Roman government. Their trap failed as He answered that they should satisfy both God and Caesar appropriately. When the Sadducees questioned Him about resurrection, He deftly corrected their erroneous ideas about the nature of the future life. Readiness is being qualified for service. If our will is set and our mind has grown through constant renewal (Eph 4:23-24+, Ro 12:1-2+), we will be qualified for any test God allows to come our way! (ED: THIS BEGS THE QUESTION, WHAT ARE DOING TO RENEW YOUR MIND? DAILY YOU WILL BE EXPOSED TO THE DEADLY "DUST" OF THIS FALLEN WORLD AND MUST DAILY "WASH" YOURSELF WITH THE PURE WATER OF THE WORD [Eph 5:26+] THAT YOU MIGHT RENEW YOUR MIND! IS YOUR "QUIET TIME" TOO QUIET OR HAVE YOU EVEN QUIT IT?) Luke 20:24 "Show Me a denarius. Whose likeness and inscription does it have?" They said, "Caesar's." Luke 20:24KJV Shew me a penny. Whose image and superscription hath it? They answered and said, Caesar's. Show Me a denarius Mt 18:28; 20:2 Whose likeness This was the head of the emperor; the superscription his titles. Caesar's Lk 20:22; 2:1; 3:1; 23:2; Acts 11:28; 25:8-12; 26:32; Php 4:22 Parallel passages - Matthew 22:15-22; Mark 12:13-17 Luke 20 Resources - Multiple Sermons and Commentaries Luke 20:20-26 Guile, Government, and God - Steven Cole Luke 20:19-26 The Diagnosis of the Christ Rejecters - John MacArthur Marcus Aurelius on Denarius Jesus' command to "Show (deiknuo) Me a denarius" (denarion) was a Master stroke (pun intended!) As discussed below, the Jews were revolted (some so much they wanted to revolt - Zealots) by Caesar's head on the denarius for it smacked of idolatry! But Jesus knew that at least one Jew in the throng was carrying an "idol" in his pocket. Imagine the hush that came over this group and the trepidation that began to enter the wicked hearts of the religious leaders who must have thought "He's up to something again!" I am intrigued that none of the Gospel accounts state that Jesus actually touched the denarius or took it in His hand (cf Mt 22:19; Mark 12:15-16). Wuest suggests a possible different scenario - Our Lord asked for a denarius. Such a coin was not likely to be ready at hand, since only Jewish coins were used in the Temple. It was necessary for them to send for one. During the pause, it is easy to imagine the breathless silence and the fresh interest this wait for the coin caused. (Wuest Word Studies - Eerdman Publishing Company Volume 1, Volume 2, Volume 3 - used by permission -- or Borrow Mark in the Greek New Testament for the English reader ) Stein adds that "Jesus may have explicitly asked for a denarius, the official coinage in which the poll tax was to be paid, because he knew it contained the emperor’s image. On the side with the image were the words “Tiberius Caesar, son of the divine Augustus.” (New American Commentary – Volume 24: Luke) Brian Bell - I remember watching a special on Bill Gates and the last question of the interview was “how much money do you carry on you?” Answer: “none”. The wealthiest man on earth with no cash on him. (like Jesus) (Luke:20:20-47 Render to God That Which is His) Show (1166)(deiknuo) means to show and has the sense of to draw attention to or to show so as to prove something is true (as in the present context). Mt 22:19 “Show Me the coin used for the poll-tax (kensos).” And they brought Him a denarius. 20 And He said to them, “Whose likeness and inscription is this?” 21 They said to Him, “Caesar’s.” Then He said to them, “Then render (give back) to Caesar the things that are Caesar’s (WHAT IS ALREADY CAESAR'S); and to God the things that are God’s.” Poll-tax (tribute)(2778)(kensos from Latin census, which means a counting of the people and valuation of property. Kensos is equivalent to the Greek word apographé (582) which literally means a write-up or an assessment. In the NT, tribute or poll-tax paid by each person whose name was taken in the census which the Greeks called epikephálaion, head tax (found 4x - Mt 17:25, 22:17, 19, Mk 12:14). Gilbrant adds "This noun (kensos) is the Greek transliteration of the Latin word censēre, meaning “enrollment” (cf. the English word census). It is quoted in Greek literature from the First Century B.C. meaning “poll tax, tribute.” The Romans always levied a tax in conjunction with a census, so the two meanings of “enrollment” and “tax” were closely associated.It occurs only four times in the New Testament. In Mt 17:25; 22:17,19; and Mk 12:14, the tax in view is the “census” or “poll tax” paid with a Roman coin on which appeared Caesar’s image, such an image being objectionable to the Jews. It is significant that Matthew, a tax collector, should use this term." (Complete Biblical Library) Denarius (1220)(denarion from Latin origin) denoted a Roman silver coin equivalent to a laborer's average daily wage. Here the specific name of the coin was retained in the translation, because not all coins in circulation in Palestine at the time carried the image of Caesar. (Dictionary article). See ROMAN COINAGE It was the practice of all new emperors to issue new coins with their own likeness stamped on the face. There is a sense in which the coin was considered to be the personal property of the king. It bore testimony to the rule of the king whose likeness it carried. The first thing that a conqueror would do would be to issue new coins with a new face.
Lucas 20
Wuest adds that "The Pharisees were the ritualists, the Herodians, the political party among the Jews allied with the ruling Roman class, the Sadducees, the rationalists. The latter professed a disbelief in angels or spirits, and in a resurrection. They were closely identified with the priestly aristocracy (Acts 5:7), were relatively few in numbers, and were not held in as much esteem by the people as the Pharisees. These approached Jesus with the question which divided them from the Pharisees." (Wuest Word Studies - Eerdman Publishing Company Volume 1, Volume 2, Volume 3 - used by permission -- or Borrow Mark in the Greek New Testament for the English reader ) Who say that there is no resurrection (anastasis) - And as you have likely heard, that is why they were "sad you see!" (Get it?)
Lucas 20
Wuest writes that "Their purpose was hostile. They address our Lord as Teacher, but the use of the title is purely formal. They did not come to learn." No, they came to trap Jesus in a "Resurrection Riddle!" (Wuest Word Studies - Eerdman Publishing Company used by permission -- or Borrow Mark in the Greek New Testament for the English reader page 234) Moses wrote for us that - Since their Scriptural authority is the Torah, they immediately resort to Moses to provide the foundation for their question which is geared to stump and/or entrap Jesus and make Him look like anything but a respected "Teacher" to the Jewish crowd. Remember that it is Tuesday (some think Wednesday) and Jesus is still popular with the crowd as they are still hoping He will be their Messiah and King to bring in His political kingdom and crush the Gentile opposition (Rome). They were correct in there supposition, but were off on their timing, for His crushing would indeed occur when the Stone returns the Second Time and strikes Nebuchadnezzar's "statue on its feet of iron and clay (THE REVIVED ROMAN EMPIRE) and (CRUSHES) them." (Da 2:34+) 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 (Mk 12:19) - Remember that all caps in the NASB indicates a direct quotation from the Old Testament. As an aside, these men knew the Torah and undoubtedly spoke this passage from memory (cf importance of believers Memorizing His Word; see also Memory Verses by Topic). Some contend the Sadducees' story was not hypothetical but was an actual occurrence. Whether it was hypothetical or true does not really matter. As a side note several Hollywood stars have each been married eight times - Mickey Rooney, Elizabeth Taylor, and Lana Turner!
Lucas 20
Wuest comments - "Is it not (ou) for this cause that you err, namely, that you do not know the scriptures nor even the power of God?" The Greek negative ou (Is it not for this cause) when used with a question, expects an affirmative answer. This form of question is stronger than a formal direct statement would be (Like the NLT paraphrase = "Your mistake is that you don't know the Scriptures, and you don't know the power of God"). The word “that” points to the cause of their ignorance which was two-fold, both inexcusable in members of the priesthood, which most of these Sadducees probably were, (1) ignorance of the Old Testament and (2) ignorance of the power of God. Swete says: “The Sadducees (and the Pharisees also, so far as they connected marriage and the propagation of the race with the future life), showed themselves incapable of conceiving a power which could produce an entirely different order from any within their experience. They assumed either that God could not raise the dead, or that He could raise them only to a life which would be a counterpart of the present, or even more replete with material pleasures.” (Wuest Word Studies - Eerdman Publishing Company - used by permission -- or Borrow Mark in the Greek New Testament for the English reader ) Steven
Lucas 20
Wuest explains "As to the words “are like angels,” we note the following: the word “like” is hōs, an adverb of comparison (contrasted to here in Lk 20:36 = isaggelos) meaning, “in the same manner as, after the fashion of.” It speaks of similarity and equality. This similarity and equality here is of course, limited to the restrictions of the context which speaks of marriage and the propagation of the race. Angels were originally created. There are the same number of angels in existence today as when they were created. They do not propagate their kind. Human beings in the next life will not be angels, but human beings. They will be like angels in this respect, that they will not propagate their kind. Thus, the hypothetical case of the Sadducees has no relation to the future life. (Wuest Word Studies - Eerdman Publishing Company Volume 1, Volume 2, Volume 3 - used by permission -- or Borrow Mark in the Greek New Testament for the English reader ) So let's review - What are the arguments Jesus gives to refute the Sadducees' question on the heavenly arrangement of multiple spouses? (1) There will be no marriage in heaven (2) There will be no death in heaven (3) There is no need for procreation (implied) And are sons of God being sons of the resurrection (earlier "sons of this age" - Lk 20:34) - Jesus has 3 phrases in this section which begin as "sons of..." which is a Hebraic way to identify the essential nature or defining quality of something or someone. Sons of this age (Lk 20:34) describe those who live in this present passing world. Sons of God are those who take on the character or quality of the life of God (which has no sexual overtones). Sons of the resurrection are those who are characterized by resurrection from the dead. Sons of worthless men (belial) (1 Sa 2:12) can be translated "sons of Belial" indicating their essential quality was satanic. The essential quality of sons of God is possession of divine life. Sons of resurrection possess resurrection life. Sons of God - First note "sons" includes sons and daughters. Second, note that it is easy to read past this phrase too quickly, but the implications are staggering and will take eternity to even BEGIN to unfold! (See devotionals at bottom of this verse note). To be a son of God is to experience the closeness and security of a Father Who loves us, accepts us, and wants to know us personally and intimately. In Galatians 3:26+ Paul writes "you are all sons of God through faith in Christ Jesus." Using a synonymous term children of God, John writes "See how great a love the Father has bestowed on us, that we would be called children of God; and such we are. For this reason the world does not know us, because it did not know Him. (1 John 3:1+) As
Lucas 20
Wuest - Both the scribes and the people believed that the Jewish Messiah would come from the royal line of David. David was human, so would the Messiah be human. Thus, He would be David’s son. Our Lord reminds His hearers that David calls the Messiah his Lord (Ps. 110:1). That is, he recognizes Him as Deity, the Jehovah of the Old Testament. The difficulty our Lord puts before His listeners and at the same time tosses into the lap of the Pharisees, is as to how, since Messiah is Jehovah, deity, He can also be human. At once the incarnation is brought before them. One of the charges brought against the Lord Jesus was that He called God His (His private, unique) Father, making Himself equal with God, thus deity (John 5:18). Thus, the Jewish leaders rejected the teaching of the incarnation, and Jesus’ claim to deity. It is well to notice our Lord’s testimony to the divine inspiration of David, also the recognition by David of the two other Persons of the Trinity, the Father saying to the Son, “Sit thou on my right hand, till I make thine enemies thy footstool.” Thus, we have the Trinity mentioned in an Old Testament setting in Mark 12:36. (Wuest Word Studies - Eerdman Publishing Company Volume 1, Volume 2, Volume 3 - used by permission -- or Borrow Mark in the Greek New Testament for the English reader ) Luke 20:43 UNTIL I MAKE YOUR ENEMIES A FOOTSTOOL FOR YOUR FEET."' Luke 20:43KJV Till I make thine enemies thy footstool. Lk 19:27; Ps 2:1-9; Ps 21:8-12; 72:9; 109:4-20; 110:5,6; Rev 19:14-21 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 Related Passages: Psalm 2:1-9 Why are the nations in an uproar And the peoples devising a vain thing? 2 The kings of the earth take their stand And the rulers take counsel together Against the LORD and against His Anointed (MESSIAH), saying, 3 “Let us tear their fetters apart And cast away their cords from us!” 4He who sits in the heavens laughs, The Lord scoffs at them. 5 Then He will speak to them in His anger And terrify them in His fury, saying, 6 “But as for Me, I have installed My King Upon Zion, My holy mountain.” 7 “I will surely tell of the decree of the LORD: He said to Me, ‘You are My Son, Today I have begotten You. 8 ‘Ask of Me, and I will surely give the nations as Your inheritance, And the very ends of the earth as Your possession. 9 ‘You shall break them with a rod of iron, You shall shatter them like earthenware.’” Near and far fulfillment schematic UNTIL - See discussion of this important expression of time. The preposition UNTIL can indicate the time before an event takes place (Ezek 33:22), the time until it takes place (Ps 104:23), or occasionally the time during which an event takes place (2 KI 9:22). It can also “mark a relative limit beyond which the activity of the main clause still continues” as it does in Psalm 112:8. in Psalm 110 UNTIL signifies the time until an event occurs. Stated another way, UNTIL indicates enemies will be active up to a point and then it will not happen. The point that it will not happen is when Jesus reigns over and subjugates all His enemies. Deffinbaugh elaborates on another aspect of UNTIL - "While the Messiah was to share in the power and prestige of Yahweh’s reign, there was a GAP OF TIME indicated between the time of His exaltation (“Sit …”) and His triumph (“UNTIL”). There is both a present and a future dimension to the prophetic oracle of Yahweh. The enemies of the Messiah will, at a later time, be subjected to Him, but not immediately. To make someone “the footstool for their feet” (v. 1c) was to completely subject him (cf. Ps. 8:6; 18:39), an expression probably based upon the practice of military conquerors who placed their feet on the necks of their defeated foes (cf. Josh. 10:24-25). Messiah was elevated to a position of equality with Yahweh, yet the outworking of His power was yet viewed as future." (Ref) (Bold font added) I MAKE YOUR ENEMIES A FOOTSTOOL FOR YOUR FEET - This is the picture (sometimes literally practiced as in Joshua 10:24) that results is when a defeated enemy lies before a person in the dust, so that the conqueror's feet can be placed upon their necks. The picture is that of complete and utter triumph over every foe, in this context this victory being assured by "the Lord" to "the Lord." When the Lord made his covenant with David, he promised to subdue the king's enemies 2 Samuel 7:9-11 “I have been with you wherever you have gone and have cut off all your enemies from before you; and I will make you a great name, like the names of the great men who are on the earth. 10 “I will also appoint a place for My people Israel and will plant them, that they may live in their own place and not be disturbed again, nor will the wicked afflict them any more as formerly, 11 even from the day that I commanded judges to be over My people Israel; and I will give you rest from all your enemies. The LORD also declares to you that the LORD will make a house for you. Ps 89:22-23 “The enemy will not deceive him, Nor the son of wickedness afflict him. But I shall crush his adversaries before him, And strike those who hate him. See Eph. 1:20-23; Phil. 2:5-11; Heb. 2:9; Rev. 5:1-10; 12:5. Luke 20:44 "Therefore David calls Him 'Lord,' and how is He his son?" Luke 20:44KJV David therefore calleth him Lord, how is he then his son? how is He his son Lk 1:31-35; 2:11; Isaiah 7:14; Mt 1:23; Ro 9:5; Galatians 4:4; 1 Ti 3:16; Rev 22:16 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 JESUS ASKS A RADICAL RIDDLE Why is this a "radical riddle?" It is radical because the answer is that the son of David is not just a Man but He is God, God in the flesh, the mystery of mysteries which is hidden in David's Spirit inspired words (Mt 22:43, Mk 12:36+) of Psalm 110:1. It is a riddle because it makes no sense to the human mind which tries to reason out how any person could be 100% Man and 100% God. It is a riddle for the natural mind, and its solution can only be provided by the Spirit of Christ opening the eyes of one's heart to see the truth of Messiah, Son of David, fully God and fully Man, and then to receive that incredible truth by grace through faith. Tragically it will remain a "radical riddle" to the natural, unbelieving mind for as Paul explains "a natural man does not accept the things of the Spirit of God, for they are foolishness to him; and he cannot understand them, because they are spiritually appraised." (1 Cor 2:14-note) Here are parallel passages in Mark and Matthew... Mark 12:37+ “David himself calls Him ‘Lord’; so in what sense is He his son?” And the large crowd enjoyed listening to Him. A T
Lucas 20
Wuest - He says they love certain things. The word is phileō “to be fond of, to like.” They are fond of wearing long clothing. The word is stolē, and is used in the Old Testament of priestly or royal robes, and in the New Testament, of dress worn on festive or solemn occasions. Our Lord does not condemn the use of a dignified costume, but the use of it for the sake of ostentatious display. (Wuest Word Studies - Eerdman Publishing Company Volume 1, Volume 2, Volume 3 - used by permission) Brian Bell - They loved their uniform because it indicated their office wherever they went! (Commentary) (Are the any parallels today? Rhetorical question of course!) Kent
Lucas 20
Wuest - The scribes were also fond of salutations in the market places (the public forums) in the cities or towns, and to be called Rabbi. Our Lord did not refuse such titles, but He did not demand nor desire them, as did the scribes.
Lucas 20
Wuest - They were fond of the chief seats in the synagogues. These were benches up in front facing the congregation, and were reserved for officials and persons of distinction. The scribes claimed the places of honor also at social gatherings. They were fond of the uppermost places at feasts. The word here is prōtoklisia, “the first reclining place.” This is the place of the most honored guest at a feast. The orientals reclined on couches around the table instead of sitting on chairs as we do. THOUGHT- Mattoon - Let's stop for a second. Do you find yourself entertaining the same attitudes and desires? Do you insist on titles, positioning, and symbols of authority? Are you more motivated by service or by receiving attention and adulation? Do you dress in a sloppy fashion or immodestly to cause men or women to notice you? Do you crave attention at any cost? Luke 20:47 who devour widows' houses, and for appearance's sake offer long prayers. These will receive greater condemnation." Luke 20:47KJV Which devour widows' houses, and for a shew make long prayers: the same shall receive greater damnation. who devour widows' houses Isaiah 10:2; Jer 7:6-10; Ezekiel 22:7; Amos 2:7; 8:4-6; Micah 2:2,8; 3:2; Mt 23:14; Mark 12:40; 2 Ti 3:6 and for appearance's sake offer long prayers Lk 12:1; Ezekiel 33:31; Mt 23:26-28; 1 Th 2:5; 2 Ti 3:2-5; Titus 1:16 These will receive greater condemnation Lk 10:12-14; 12:47,48; Mt 11:22-24; James 3:1 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 Passages: (Degrees of Condemnation) Matthew 11:20-24 Then He began to denounce the cities in which most of His miracles were done, because they did not repent. 21 “Woe to you, Chorazin! Woe to you, Bethsaida! For if the miracles had occurred in Tyre and Sidon which occurred in you, they would have repented long ago in sackcloth and ashes. 22 “Nevertheless I say to you, it will be more tolerable for Tyre and Sidon in the day of judgment than for you. 23 “And you, Capernaum, will not be exalted to heaven, will you? You will descend to Hades; for if the miracles had occurred in Sodom which occurred in you, it would have remained to this day. 24 “Nevertheless I say to you that it will be more tolerable for the land of Sodom in the day of judgment, than for you.” Luke 10:12-16 “I say to you, it will be more tolerable in that day for Sodom than for that city. 13 “Woe to you, Chorazin! Woe to you, Bethsaida! For if the miracles had been performed in Tyre and Sidon which occurred in you, they would have repented long ago, sitting in sackcloth and ashes. 14 “But it will be more tolerable for Tyre and Sidon in the judgment than for you. 15 “And you, Capernaum, will not be exalted to heaven, will you? You will be brought down to Hades! 16 “The one who listens to you listens to Me, and the one who rejects you rejects Me; and he who rejects Me rejects the One who sent Me.” Luke 11:31-32 “The Queen of the South will rise up with the men of this generation at the judgment and condemn them, because she came from the ends of the earth to hear the wisdom of Solomon; and behold, something greater than Solomon is here. 32 “The men of Nineveh will stand up with this generation at the judgment and condemn it, because they repented at the preaching of Jonah; and behold, something greater than Jonah is here. Matthew 12:41-42 “The men of Nineveh will stand up with this generation at the judgment, and will condemn it because they repented at the preaching of Jonah; and behold, something greater than Jonah is here. 42 “The Queen of the South will rise up with this generation at the judgment and will condemn it, because she came from the ends of the earth to hear the wisdom of Solomon; and behold, something greater than Solomon is here. 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 CONDEMNATION (5) Who devour (katesthio) widows' houses - Clearly this is figurative language but it gives a dramatic picture of the depth of depravity of these men's evil hearts, to take advantage of the most helpless members of society. They should have been assisting widow instead of bilking them of much need funds for living! NET Note: How they were able to devour widows’ houses is debated. Did they seek too much for contributions, or take too high a commission for their work, or take homes after debts failed to be paid? There is too little said here to be sure.
Lucas 20
Wuest - These scribes devour widows’ houses. People often left their whole fortunes to the Temple, and a good part of the money went finally to the scribes and Pharisees. The scribes were employed to make out wills and conveyances of property. They inveigled widows to give their homes to the Temple, and then took the proceeds of the sale for themselves. In order to do this, they offered long prayers in the homes of these widows and for them. Thus, they bent the widows to their will. Our Lord calls these prayers, a pretence. They could not be true prayers when offered with such an ulterior purpose. Swete says: “Men who rob widows, and use prayer as a means of securing opportunities for committing a crime, shall receive a sentence in excess of that which falls to the lot of the dishonest man who makes no pretence to piety; to the sentence of the robber will be added in their case the sentence on the hypocrite.” Devour (consume, ate) (2719)(katesthio from kata = down + esthio = to eat) means to eat up, totally consume, devour (Lk 8:5). Figuratively katesthio means to destroy by fire (consume, burn up) (Rev 11.5), by illegal exploitation (rob, take complete advantage of )(Mk 12.40) or by strife within a group which cause great division (destroys division)(Gal 5.15). John