Luke 6

Luke 6:1

‘Now it came about on a sabbath, that he was going through the grainfields, and his disciples plucked the ears, and ate, rubbing them in their hands.’ On this particular Sabbath Jesus was walking through a grainfield with His disciples. The Law of Moses allowed anyone walking through a grainfield to partake of the grain for his own needs, but not to put in a sickle (Deuteronomy 23:25). This was to be of especial benefit to the poor. Thus the disciples were within their rights in what they were doing. They were plucking the grain, rubbing it between their hands in order to rid it of the husk, and then eating it. But as they were not used to being too strict about Sabbath Day observance they had failed to recognise that this might cause offence. For the ‘Elders’ had laid down the principle that reaping and threshing were not allowed on the Sabbath for they were to be seen as work. Jesus would not have disagreed with that. Where the controversy came in was in interpreting what the disciples had been doing as ‘reaping and threshing’. He would have been able to point out that reaping and threshing someone else’s field would have been frowned on as breaking the Law (they must not put in the sickle), so that as the Law allowed what His disciples were doing it was not seen as reaping and threshing. But the Pharisees saw it otherwise, and the synagogue elders would probably have backed them. )Under later interpretation they would have been able to do what they did to amounts less than the size of a dried fig, so pedantic had things become). So Jesus will advance another argument which will also emphasise His own authority.

Luke 6:2

‘But certain of the Pharisees said, “Why do you do what is not lawful to do on the sabbath day?” Some of the Pharisees became aware of what His disciples were doing. It may be that they had been walking with the disciples, professing interest in Jesus’ message, while carefully watching for any failures in the behaviour of Jesus and His disciples, or it may be that it had simply been reported to them by people who saw it, bringing them hurriedly to the scene. Either way they pointed out that He and His disciples (as their Master He was responsible) were doing what was not lawful on the Sabbath Day. ‘What is not lawful to do.’ We should note that this is probably not just a comment. It is an official warning. Proceedings could not be taken under the Law at the first offence. The culprits had first to be warned so as to ensure that they did know what the Law was. If the warning was then ignored, proceedings could be taken. (compare Acts 4:18 with Luke 5:17). Thus Jesus and His disciples were being warned that if it happened again proceedings would be taken. The opposition was hardening.

Luke 6:3-4

‘And Jesus answering them said, “Have you not read even this, what David did, when he was hungry, he, and those who were with him? How he entered into the house of God, and took and ate the showbread, and gave also to those who were with him, that which it is not lawful to eat save for the priests alone?” ’ Jesus replied from a well known passage concerning David. There David and his companions had persuaded the High Priest of the day to let him and his men have the old showbread which had been taken from the Table of Showbread in the Tabernacle when, as was the custom, it was replaced. This was holy and could only be eaten by the priests. But David had pleaded special circumstances and that his men were in a state of consecration, and it had been allowed. No one now criticised David for this because he was seen as having been God’s anointed. Jesus’ point was that as the Greater than David as ‘the Son of Man’, He had the same right. What David could lawfully do for himself and his men, He could lawfully do for Himself and His men. He could interpret the Law in their favour.

Luke 6:5

‘And he said to them, “The Son of man is lord of the sabbath.” ’ And this was because as the Son of Man He was Lord of the Sabbath, that is, He was the overall authority who could make declarations of what was lawful to be done on the Sabbath Day. It was basically a claim to be the heaven appointed and heaven enthroned Messiah, thus setting Him up before God as having a higher authority than the Scribes, the Jewish teachers and arbiters of the Law.

Luke 6:6-11

The Man With The Withered Hand (6:6-11). This final incident in this cycle of stories contrasts the rigidity of the Pharisees with the compassion of Jesus. The one were concerned with the minutiae of the Law, the Other with the heart of God. In it He again reveals that He is Lord of the Sabbath. But it also reveals a deeper message, and that is that He has come to restore what is withered. The word used for ‘withered’ (Greek ‘xeros’ - Hebrew equivalent ‘yabash’) is the same as that used in LXX of the ‘dry’ bones in Ezekiel 37:2; Ezekiel 37:4. There the Spirit of the Lord would blow on them to give them life. God’s question was, will these dry bones live, and the answer was that they would in response to the proclamation of the word (‘prophesy’) when the Spirit came upon them. The same word is also used of the eunuch who says, ‘I am a dry tree’ (Isaiah 56:3), and in Ezekiel 17:24 God says, ‘I the Lord make the dry tree to flourish’. It is regularly used in the Old Testament of ‘dry trees’ (compare also Luke 23:31). Thus in view of the context of the previous incidents which have all contained Old Testament motifs we are justified in seeing this man’s withered hand which will be made whole as a picture of the dry (withered) trees which will flourish and become fruitful (compare Luke 3:8; Luke 6:43-44; Luke 13:6-9) and the dry (withered) bones of Israel which will be given life through the Spirit by the word of the prophet. As Jesus says here, ‘Is it lawful on the Sabbath day to do good (be like a fruitful tree which is no longer withered but produces fruit) or to do harm (be as a withered tree which produces no fruit), to save life (to make a restored bone that is no longer withered) or to kill (to make like a dry bone that is withered). It thus finalises this section with a picture of Jesus as at work in the restoration of what is dried out and withered (He prophesies to the dried arm and it lives), and leads on into the picture of the establishing of the new Israel. In contrast are the Pharisees who prove indeed to be dry trees. Also in this narrative the Pharisees are seen as out to trap Jesus. Their opposition to Him has been growing and it has now reached a climax. There is a man there with a withered hand and they are deliberately watching to see what Jesus will do on the Sabbath day. By this they are laid bare. Here is a man in real need, and they know what Jesus will do. He will have compassion on the man and will heal him.

Their very watching Him is a testimony to His goodness, and to the fact that they realise that He is good. And once He has revealed His goodness they will jump on Him and accuse Him of breaking God’s Law. And yet they claim to serve the One Who declared, ‘You shall love your neighbour as yourself’. Consider what this tells us about them and their religion. But Jesus confuted them, not by diminishing the Sabbath, but by exalting it as of great benefit to mankind. The incident may be analysed as follows: a On another sabbath, He entered into the synagogue and taught, and there was a man there, and his right hand was withered (Luke 6:6). b The scribes and the Pharisees watched him, whether he would heal on the sabbath, so that they might find how to accuse him (Luke 6:7). c He knew their thoughts, and he said to the man who had his hand withered, “Rise up, and stand forth among us.” And he arose and stood forth (Luke 6:8). d Jesus said to them, “I ask you, Is it lawful on the sabbath to do good, or to do harm? To save a life, or to destroy it?” (Luke 6:9). c He looked round about on them all, and said to him, “Stretch forth your hand” (Luke 6:10 a) b And he did so, and his hand was restored (Luke 6:10 b). a They were filled with mad fury, and discussed together one with another what they might do to Jesus (Luke 6:11). Note that in ‘a’ we see the man whose arm is withered, and in the parallel we see the men whose minds are withered. In ‘b’ Jesus is watched to see if He will heal on the Sabbath and in the parallel the healing takes place. In ‘c’ Jesus tells the man to stand forth, and in the parallel He tells him to put forth his hand. Central in ‘d’ comes the crunch question as to what is lawful to do when faced with a choice of doing good or harm, saving life or destroying it.

Luke 6:8

‘But he knew their thoughts, and he said to the man who had his hand withered, “Rise up, and stand forth among us.” And he arose and stood forth.’ Jesus was fully aware of the situation. ‘He knew their thoughts.’ This fact is stressed regularly (compare Luke 5:22). However, they were not hard to assess. We can imagine the long hall, and the Pharisees sitting there in the chief seats, and the pointed silence when Jesus came in, and the eyes turning to look at the paralysed man. Jesus was left in no doubt of what the situation was. He could have avoided confrontation. He could have told the man to come and see Him after sunset, when the Sabbath was over, but that would have been to concede that the Rabbis were right. And He did not believe that they were. In His eyes they had gone too far in their desire to preserve the Sabbath. And He further knew that they were directly challenging His authority, and that the crowds were aware of it as well. So He called the man to come and stand where everyone could see. ‘Rise up and stand forth among us.’ This is literally, ‘Rise into the midst’.

Luke 6:9

‘And Jesus said to them, “I ask you, Is it lawful on the sabbath to do good, or to do harm? To save a life, or to destroy it?” ’ Jesus could see the workings of their hearts. He knew exactly what they were thinking. And He knew that they had it in their minds to have Him killed. So while to the ordinary people His words were about the man and his condition, and He was asking whether he should heal (do good) or refrain from healing (do harm and fail to help the man in his distress), the Pharisees knew that He knew their hearts and was speaking of them. It was they who were there to do harm to Jesus, and even to kill Him, and they were using the Sabbath day in order to attain their end. The words, ‘to save life or to destroy it’ refers pointedly to them. His words contrasted what He was about to do, with what they were about to do. He was going to do good, they were aiming to do harm, He was going to help a man live again, they were planning to have Him put to death. But He longed to help them too and He was pleading with them to consider and to ask themselves who was really in the right. But His words also emphasised why He was here, it was so that through His word others too would begin to ‘do good’ and to ‘save life. So that others would cease to be withered. This was central to His message. As He would heal this withered hand, so did He long to restore the withered trees (Ezekiel 17:24) and withered bones (Ezekiel 37:2) of Israel (and none more withered than those He saw before Him). He longed that He might prophesy to them that they might live (Ezekiel 37:4). ‘Is it lawful.’ The Pharisees were very keen on describing something as ‘lawful’ or ‘unlawful’. They had only recently asked His disciples the same question in the grainfields. So Jesus gently hits back. They were concerned about what was lawful so He wanted them to consider whether they thought that what they were planning to do was lawful. As a technical phrase which they used for their final warning they should have taken especial note of it. ‘On the Sabbath.’ That day which God had set aside as life-giving and blessed. Surely if any day was a day for doing good, that one was. ‘To do good or to do harm.’ This was the crux. What should the right thinking person do when these alternatives were offered? Standing in the sight of God should he do good, or should he do harm? There were no doubt many common people there. They would be with Him. They would instinctively know the answer and may well not have realised what a fix the Rabbis were in. (And the Rabbis knew it). The way the question is put is also illuminating. The Pharisees would have stated that they did not do harm by not healing on the Sabbath, they simply did nothing. Jesus reply is that not to do good when it can be done is actually to do harm. Doing nothing is doing harm. The tree that bears no fruit is no more use than the tree that produces bad fruit (Luke 13:6-9). It is cast into the fire (Luke 3:9; Matthew 7:19). ‘To him who knows to do good, and does it not, to him it is sin’ (James 4:17). ‘To save life or to kill.’ That was not a question about the man with his withered arm, as though he were in danger of death. Rather He had the aims of the Pharisees in mind, otherwise He could have stopped after ‘to do harm’. The crowds simply saw it as an added example to justify doing good on the Sabbath, but the guilty men present could hardly have avoided seeing the further implication.

Luke 6:10

‘And he looked round about on them all, and said to him, “Stretch forth your hand.” And he did so, and his hand was restored.’ Then He looked round at them all, one by one, giving each an opportunity to reply. But all they did was glare back. Then He turned to the man, saying, “Stretch forth your hand.” He knew what He was doing. He knew what the reaction would be. But He knew that He had to do it. They were challenging His very authority to act as He was doing.

They were seeking to make Him bend to the will of the Rabbis and admit that His claims at the previous incident had been excessive. But this He could not do, for He did have God’s authority to question the interpretations of the Rabbis. (Had He been a fellow Rabbi they might have accepted this once he had established a great reputation. But to them He was an outsider making great and dangerous claims. He was challenging their authority just as they were challenging His). So He recognised that He had no alternative to what He intended to do. But in fact He ‘did’ nothing. As the man stretched forth his hand it was restored. So the question now was, Who had done it? Was it God, or Jesus, or both. The simple common folk knew that answer. It was both. The Pharisees and scribes too realised that they were trapped. What do you do in such a case? Jesus had not touched the man. All He had done was tell Him to stretch out his poor withered arm. As far as the evidence went God had done the work. But not a single person there doubted that Jesus had done it too.

Luke 6:11

‘But they were filled with mad fury, and discussed together one with another what they might do to Jesus.’ So they were mad with blind fury. All they could think of was how they could get rid of this man who was such a bain on their lives. Neither His compassion, nor His power to work miracles, moved them. For here was a man who was guilty of the greatest crime that a man of that day could commit. He did not agree with them, and said so. In view of the parallel in the chiasmus it is clear that Luke intends us to see that these men were withered inside. Their inner hearts were not working properly. Their consciences were atrophied. How could these men be so blind as not to see the truth? I remember as a schoolboy arriving home with a typical piece of schoolboy knowledge. My mother, eager that I should know the truth, fetched a book to show me that I was wrong. But I refused to look at it. She did not know what a blow it was to me to discover that all the books and encyclopaedias in the world were wrong on such an important matter. That is human nature. These men were simply like me. They wanted the truth to bend to fit into their pattern, and if it would not, they did not want to know. This last incident has finalised this series of incidents from Luke 5:1 onwards, which has revealed how Jesus fulfils in Himself many of the Old Testament figures and promises. It has done it by manifesting two vital things about Jesus, firstly that He has come supremely as the Doer of good and Saver of life, acting as a positive figure in a negative world, and secondly that He has come as the One Who can restore those of the withered Creation Who respond to Him, making them into fruitful trees and living bones, while those whose hearts are atrophied will oppose Him and seek to do away with Him. In the subsection that follows Luke will now move on in order to show how He is establishing the new Israel. But before that the foundation is laid in the calling of the Twelve Apostles.

Luke 6:12-19

The Laying Of The Foundation For The New Israel (6:12-19). After revealing what He has come to be, Jesus now goes about establishing the new Israel. He appoints leaders for the twelve tribes (Luke 6:12-16). He proclaims a new Law (Luke 6:17-49). He provides a foretaste of the sending out of His power to the Gentiles (Luke 7:1-10). He raises the dead, a foretaste of the resurrection (Luke 7:11-17). He points to His signs and wonders in order to encourage John and as evidence that He is the promised One (Luke 7:18-33). And He is greeted by the prostitute who has been transformed, a vivid picture of the future restoration of Israel as described in Ezekiel 16:59-63. Jesus Appoints the New Leaders of The Twelve Tribes (6:12-16 compare 22:30). Jesus now chooses out twelve Apostles as the foundation of the new Israel, His new ‘ekklesia’ (Matthew 16:18; Matthew 18:17). The word means a gathering, church, congregation, and is a word regularly used in LXX of ‘the congregation of Israel’. That this is the significance here comes out in Luke 22:30. The Apostles have been chosen in order to watch over the true Israel. In the same way in John 15:1 Jesus reveals Himself as ‘the true vine’ in contrast to the false vine. The same idea is in mind there. Israel is a false vine, as it is often portrayed to be in the Old Testament (Isaiah 5:1-7; Jeremiah 2:21). Jesus, and those who will become one with Him are the true vine, the true Israel. This stress on the church as being the new Israel is confirmed in Romans 11:17-27 where unbelieving Israel are cut out of the olive tree and new believers are grafted in; Galatians 6:16 where the church, God’s new creation, are called ‘the Israel of God’; Ephesians 2:11-22 where believing Gentiles, having been previously alienated from the commonwealth of Israel, have been brought near through the blood of Christ, and have become fellow-citizens with the saints and members of the household of God, and, on the foundation of the Apostles and prophets, become the Temple of God. The passage may be analysed as follows: a Jesus went out into the mountain to pray, and He continued all night in prayer to God (Luke 6:12). b When it was day, He called his disciples, and He chose from them twelve, whom also He named Apostles (Luke 6:13). c Simon, whom he also named Peter, and Andrew his brother, and James and John, and Philip and Bartholomew, and Matthew and Thomas, and James the son of Alphaeus, and Simon who was called the Zealot, and Judas the son of James, and Judas Iscariot, who became a traitor (Luke 6:14-16). b He came downwith them, and stood on a level place, and a great multitude of his disciples, and a great number of the people from all Judaea and Jerusalem, and the sea coast of Tyre and Sidon, who came to hear him, and to be healed of their diseases (Luke 6:17). a Those who were troubled with unclean spirits were healed, and all the multitude sought to touch Him, for power came forth from Him, and healed them all (Luke 6:18-19). Note that in ‘a’ Jesus prays all night to God, and in the parallel unclean spirits were cast out and power came out from Him to heal all who touched Him. In ‘b’ He appoints twelve Apostles and in the parallel He identifies Himself with them as He joins the crowds along with them in order to continue what is now their joint preaching and healing ministry. Central in ‘c’ are the names of the twelve, the first is ‘the Rock’, the last is ‘the Traitor’.

Luke 6:13

‘And when it was day, he called his disciples; and he chose from them twelve, whom also he named apostles.’ Having spent the night in prayer He now called all His disciples together, of whom there were a goodly number (He will shortly be able to send out seventy to preach), and out of them He chose twelve whom He called ‘Apostles. A ‘disciple’ was someone who attached himself to a Teacher in order to learn from him. It was a closer association than just that of a student. ‘Twelve whom also He named Apostles.’ ‘Apostolos’, an apostle, is derived from apostellein, (to send forth,) and originally signified literally a messenger. The term was employed by earlier classical writers to denote the commander of an expedition, or a delegate, or an ambassador (see Herodotus, 5. 38), but its use in this way was later rare as it came to have a technical meaning referring to ‘the fleet’, and possibly also the fleet’s admiral. It may be that Jesus spoke with a sense of humour when he used this term and named the fishermen ‘Apostles’, seeing them as the future ‘catchers of men’. It would require that He gave the title in Greek, but He may well have done so because it tickled His sense of humour. It may, however, be that He called each of them a shaliach, which was then translated as apostolos. A shaliach was a personal representative acting on behalf of another. In the New Testament, apart from the Apostles, the term apostolos is also employed in a more general sense to denote important messengers sent out on God’s service (see Luke 11:49; 2 Corinthians 8:23; Philippians 2:25; 1 Thessalonians 2:6), and in one instance is applied to Christ Himself, as the One sent forth from God (Hebrews 3:1). But in the main it is reserved for the twelve, James, the Lord’s brother, and Paul and Barnabas (Acts 14:4; Acts 14:14). Paul certainly saw it as giving him a recognised authority direct from Jesus Christ. He saw himself, along with the twelve, as being specifically commissioned by Jesus.

Luke 6:14

‘Simon, whom he also named Peter, and Andrew his brother, and James and John, and Philip and Bartholomew,’ The list of the twelve is also found in Acts 1:13; Matthew 10-2-4; Mark 3:16-19, with slight variations. Many people in those days had two names, and Jesus may have given each a new name as He did Peter. Peter always comes first in every list and Judas last. Thus there may be a deliberate contrast in Luke, ‘Simon who is called a Rock, – and Judas who became a traitor.’ But ‘became’ makes clear that at first he was genuinely committed to following Jesus, even if it might have been for the wrong reasons. Simon’s new name of ‘Peter’ was first given to him when he met Jesus after being introduced to Him by Andrew in John 1:42. We must thus read it here as indicating ‘Simon, to whom He had given the new name Peter’. The name given was actually the Aramaic Cephas (kepha) which meant a rock (John 1:42), but when translated into Greek it became petros (masculine - which means small rock) and not petra (feminine - a large foundation rock, rocky ground). This was, of course, because Simon was male. However the distinction was maintained in Matthew 16:18, where petros could have been used both times as a translation of kepha if Jesus had there been speaking in Aramaic. But there the switch is not to petros but to petra.

This was in order to signify that the rock in mind there was either Peter’s statement. Out of 76 of the early church fathers only 18 thought that the reference was to Peter, and that at a time when Peter was seen as prominent. Over forty applied it to the statement that he made. Jesus chose Peter not only to be one of the twelve, but also to be one of the inner three, Peter, James and John (Luke 5:37; Luke 9:2; Luke 14:33). He clearly saw in him one who, once he had conquered his impetuosity and occasional unreliability (Mark 8:32-33; Mark 14:37; Mark 14:68; Mark 14:70-71; Galatians 2:11 following), would in the end prove to be a rock. Perhaps the giving of the name was intended to make him consider his need to do exactly this. He is always named first and became a natural leading figure among the twelve (Luke 8:40; Luke 9:20; Luke 9:32-33; Luke 12:41; Luke 18:28; Matthew 17:24; John 21:3; Acts 1:15; Acts 2:14; Acts 8:14 (with John)), but not officially so, or in such a way that he could not be challenged. See Acts 11:2-3 - where he had to back up his position with reason, not by claiming special personal God-given authority - see also Galatians 2:11. With Peter He chose Andrew his brother and James and John. Along with James and John, Peter formed the inner three (see above). They have already been introduced to us previously in 5/1-11. It is likely that Jesus gave new names to all His disciples but the others tend to be ignored here, probably because they were not so prominent later on. Philip was the first that we know of who was called to ‘follow Me’ (John 1:43). Bartholomew may be ‘son of Ptolemy’ or ‘Talmai’ and by his association here with Philip may quite likely be Nathanael (Bartholomew is not a first name). Nathanael may in fact not have been one of the Twelve, although John 21:2 may suggest that he was. It partly depends on what John meant there by ‘disciple’. .

Luke 6:15

‘And Matthew and Thomas, and James the son of Alphaeus, and Simon who was called Zelotes, (or ‘the zealous one’),’ Matthew is Levi, the son of Alphaeus, who was the toll collector mentioned in Luke 5:27-32 (see Matthew 10:3). Thomas occasionally came into prominence (John 11:16; John 14:5) but is best known for not having been present when the other equally doubting Apostles met the risen Lord in Jerusalem (John 20:24-27) and was therefore rather unfairly dubbed ‘Doubting Thomas’. James the son of Alphaeus (who may be the James the Little of Mar 15:40) may have been brother to Levi the son of Alphaeus (Mark 2:14), although the name Alphaeus was fairly common. Simon is also called Zelotes, which means ‘the zealous one’. It may be that he established a reputation for over-eagerness. The term Zealot, signifying insurrectionists against Rome, did not arise until later, although it is possible that the term was affectionately applied to him later by the Apostles because of his hotheadedness.

Luke 6:16

‘And Judas the son of James, and Judas Iscariot, who became a traitor.’ Judas, the son of James (‘Judas, not Iscariot’ - John 14:22), is probably Thaddaeus, (which Matthew possibly has as Lebbaeus. This is, however, by no means certain as many manuscripts have Thaddaeus. One may have been a new name and one a nickname). Judas Iscariot is always mentioned last because he betrayed Jesus. Luke specifically designates him as the one who became a traitor. If his name means man (ish) of Kerioth (which is by no means certain), he was the only Judean among the Apostles. It may, however, be that his name is derived from the Aramaic word seqar, ‘falsehood’, with a prosthetic aleph added.

Luke 6:17

‘And he came down with them, and stood on a level place, and a great multitude of his disciples, and a great number of the people from all Judaea and Jerusalem, and the sea coast of Tyre and Sidon, who came to hear him, and to be healed of their diseases.’ Having chosen the twelve He then came down with all His disciples to a level place, quite probably still on the mountain. There He found a great crowd of disciples, people who came regularly to hear Him, and along with them hosts of people from all around, from Judaea and Jerusalem in the south, to Tyre and Sidon in the north. While there were many Jews in Tyre and Sidon there were also many Gentiles, and it is quite likely that Luke wants us to realise that Gentiles came too, and were welcome. Many had come in order to be healed.

Luke 6:18-19

‘And those who were troubled with unclean spirits were healed. And all the multitude sought to touch him, for power came forth from him, and healed them all.’ Unclean spirits could not stand His presence. We are probably to see that those who were possessed were healed at His word. Uncleanness was being banished, and Satan’s kingdom overthrown (compare Luke 11:17-22). And the crowd pressed in to touch Him for the power came forth from Him, and it healed them all.

Luke 6:20-8

2). THE OF THE NEW ISRAEL UNDER THE KINGLY RULE OF GOD (6:20-8:18)In this second part of the section Luke 5:1 to Luke 9:50, Jesus now reveals Himself as the founder of the new Israel under the Kingly Rule of God: a He proclaims the new Law of the Kingly Rule of God (Luke 6:20-49). b He sends out His power to the Gentiles, to those who are seen as unclean, but who have believed. They too are to benefit from His Kingly Rule (Luke 7:1-10). c He raises the dead, a foretaste of the resurrection, revealing Him as ‘the Lord’. The Kingly Rule of God is here (Luke 7:11-17). d John’s disciples come to ‘the Lord’ enquiring on behalf of John, and He points to His signs and wonders as evidence that He is the promised One. The King is present to heal and proclaim the Good News of the Kingly Rule of God (Luke 7:18-23). c He exalts, yet also sets in his rightful place, John the Baptiser as the greatest of the prophets and points beyond him to the new Kingly Rule of God, emphasising again that the Kingly Rule of God is here (Luke 7:24-35). b He is greeted by the transformed prostitute, who has believed, a picture of restored Israel (Ezekiel 16:59-63) and of the fact that the Kingly Rule of God is available to all Who seek Him and hear Him. a He proclaims the parables of the Kingly Rule of God (Luke 8:1-18).

Luke 6:23

“Rejoice in that day, and leap for joy, For behold, your reward is great in heaven, For in the same manner did their fathers to the prophets.” Yes, if they are persecuted for His sake they can rejoice and jump for joy, for they will receive great reward in Heaven, for that is how God’s prophets were treated when they too came on earth (including John the Baptiser). By their response as described above they will be aligning themselves with the true prophets, who also sought only to please God, and they will therefore enjoy a prophet’s reward. The reference to the prophets may have in mind: 1)That as the prophets were persecuted they too must expect to be persecuted (Luke 11:47; Luke 11:49-50; Luke 13:34; Matthew 23:29-31; Matthew 23:34). 2)That as the prophets have gone to their reward (Luke 13:28), so will they too go to their reward. 3)The fact that they will be persecuted is positive proof that they are equal with the prophets and will therefore enjoy both what they suffered and what they will receive (compare 1 Peter 4:12-14). The mention of the reward is not as a kind of bribe. Those whose eyes were only on a reward would not be welcome, or genuine. The point was that having chosen to walk in God’s way, it was something that they could look forward to. It was an incentive while they were in the way. Note the reference to theirfathers. Jesus has already divided Israel into two parts, those who are for Him and those who are against Him, the old Israel and the new.

Luke 6:24-26

“But woe to you who are rich! for you have received your consolation. Woe to you, you who are full now! for you shall hunger. Woe to you, you who laugh now! for you shall mourn and weep. Woe to you, when all men shall speak well of you! for in the same manner did their fathers to the false prophets.” Jesus then turned His attention to the group of wealthy onlookers. Any who are sitting there who are rich and complacent should note that they have already received their reward in this life. They may be simply supercilious, or they may be sneering, but they should recognise that they have nothing to look forward to. Those who are rich have already had their consolation (contrast Luke 2:25 which describes the consolation that they have lost). Those who are full and satisfied with themselves now, will one day be hungry as they see the good things that they will miss out on (compare Isaiah 65:13). Those who are laughing and having an easy time now, with little regard for others, should ask themselves why times are so easy for them.

It is because they have little regard for God. Thus when they are called to account they will mourn and weep (compare Isaiah 65:14). And if all speak well of them it reveals that they are satisfied with the falsity and dishonesty of the religion around them, and are conforming with it, following the false prophets because it suits them. They have nothing to rejoice in or for which to jump for joy. For a commentary on this passage we only have to turn to Revelation 3:15-20). ‘You say, “I am rich, and increased with goods, and have need of nothing”, and do not realise that you are the one who is wretched; miserable, and poor, and blind, and naked.’ ‘The false prophets.’ These are those who are popular because their message suits people’s tastes. They soothe people’s consciences by saying, ‘peace, peace, where there is no peace’ (Jeremiah 6:14; Jeremiah 8:11). They are loved by all for they say nothing disturbing (see Jeremiah 5:31). It may well be that there were few such people as he has described here in his audience, and that these words were on the whole spoken mainly of those not present, as an encouragement to the godly that God does see how men behave towards them, and that He also had in mind future generations. He knew well enough that His words would be recorded and passed on into the future. But our knowledge of human beings tells us that His wonder-working must have drawn a number of such people, while such was the work of the Spirit that we would expect that a good number of such people, hungry of soul and seeking something more than they had, would have come to hear Him in order to try to find what all their wealth had not given them. For them the message would be very significant, as they recognised the change of direction that their lives must take if they were to be His disciples, and it would provide them with a warning of how seriously they must take the matter. In the end the whole point here is that He is assessing the response of all who are present with Him and listening to His teaching. Those who walk humbly with God and acknowledge Him, will be blessed, those who allow the pleasures of the world, the deceitfulness of riches and the desire for other things to take their minds off responding to Him will in the end face woe. A stark choice lies before them. The Question is, will they respond to the new teaching that He has brought and recognise Him for what He is, or will they remain in the old ways, and perish? ‘Woe.’ This could be translated ‘alas’, but that would not be a good contrast with ‘Blessed’. The comparison of blessings and woes ties in with Isaiah 3:10-11. ‘Tell the righteous that it will be well with them, for they will eat the fruit of their deeds. Woe to the wicked it shall be ill with him, for what his hands have done will be done to him.’ This could well have been a summary of these words of Jesus. ‘Woes’ already occur fairly regularly in the Old Testament (Isaiah 3:9-11; Isaiah 5:8-23; Isaiah 10:1; Isaiah 33:1; Amos 5:18 to Amos 6:7; Habakkuk 2:6-19), and even blessings in comparison with woes, and their equivalent (Ecclesiastes 10:16-17; Isaiah 3:9-11; compare Deuteronomy 28:3-19). Thus Jesus is speaking as the prophets of old of the fact that a man must choose between blessing and woe (see Matthew 7:13-14). But the point is that they each choose the way for themselves. So He will now lay out His new ways, and He calls on them to consider them and respond to them. For they are dynamic and demanding and call for a totally new approach to life, and a new attitude towards God and towards others. They speak of total self-giving, as against self-receiving. They must, however, be seen in the light of the environment of His hearers. They are not speaking of how to deal with scoundrels and rogues who try to fleece them, and of outsiders who come with violence to attack them, but of how to respond to the people who live within their environment, who they rub shoulders with every day. Nor are they describing how the country must be run. A Christian will support his country’s laws and its police force, where these are behaving justly. He supports the punishment of evildoers (even though he may sometimes recommend mercy). The instructions here are personal not judicial.

A country could not be run in this way, for there justice and punishment are necessary. He is rather speaking of how individual Christians should respond to others in their daily lives, of how we should treat all men, and especially our ‘neighbours’.

Luke 6:27-38

True Love Is All Important And Must Be Practically Expressed (6:27-38).(This section is all about loving and giving and proceeds in a 4 4 6 6 4 4 pattern). ‘But I say to you who hear (Luke 6:27 a).’

Luke 6:29-31

“To him who smites you on the one cheek offer also the other, And from him who takes away your cloak withhold not your coat also. Give to every one who asks you, and of him who takes away your goods ask them not again. And as you would that men should do to you, do you also to them in the same way.” We have here four examples of how love behaves. When struck it does not strike back. This is talking about response to a blow struck in anger or in contempt. It is not talking about how to deal with someone who intends severe physical harm. To a blow struck suddenly in anger or contempt the Christian is to turn the other cheek, not literally, but in how he responds. He does not respond blow for blow. Instead he seeks to be conciliatory and to show love to the one who has hit or smitten him (compare John 18:23). To the one who takes his outer coat the Christian hands over his undergarment also. If this were taken literally all Christians would walk around naked. But that is not the intention. The point is that the person has taken his outer garment, which most Jews would look on as sacrosanct. This would be looked on by most as an unforgivable injury. But for the Christian the point is that if a man is in such need that he will do such a dreadful thing then the Christian should not just be satisfied with letting him have the coat, but should follow him up to see if he can do anything further for him as well. In Matthew 5:40 Jesus had spoken of the inner clothing being taken by court action. Thus here He has strengthened the picture of the affront that has been given in order to make the illustration more forceful. ‘Give to him who asks of you’ refers to someone known to be in need who seeks financial help. The assumption is that the circumstances will be known, although that must not take away from the general idea. Help should be given to those in need. But in many cases today, with people who we do not know, simple giving to assuage the conscience would not necessarily be an act of love. If a man says to us that he is hungry he may well mean hungry for drugs. It would not be love to give him money. Love will rather take him to the bakery or food stall in order to buy him food. In such cases giving money might be the easy way out and might even be seen as doing him harm and therefore as sinful. The basic idea is, ‘make sure that the needs of anyone who comes to you for help are being met’. ‘Of him who takes away your goods ask them not again.’ This does not refer to someone who has borrowed a book or a lawnmower. It refers to someone who in dire need has taken what belongs to someone else. If the person is in such need then love will allow him to keep it, and will see what more it can do. ‘And as you would that men should do to you, do you also to them in the same way.’ Finally Jesus adds on a catch-all saying. This principle is a simple test of what is right. It means behaving towards others in their best interests, in the same way as we would want them to behave towards us. By taking this approach we can fairly quickly define what is good and what is not. In its negative form this statement was a well known, if not well practised, saying. In its negative form it was spoken by Isocrates and the Stoics among others, by Confucius, and by Rabbi Hillel who came before the time of Jesus, and it has often been pointed out that essentially, when analysed in depth, the negative form is saying the same thing as the positive form. But while philosophically that might be true, there is no question but that the positive form gives a more positive angle to the saying, for people on the whole do not analyse. They gather impressions. The positive form is much rarer, and probably did not occur before Jesus’ use of it. It stresses the positive approach, rather than just that of abstaining from doing harmful things. Jesus was concerned with positive living. So in a well rounded way Jesus completed the list of positive actions with the most positive of all. It is another way of saying, ‘you shall love your neighbour as yourself’ (Leviticus 19:18; Leviticus 19:34), as long as by our neighbour we understand those that we share the earth with. But the problem with the latter was that many of the Jews had hedged it round. Firstly they limited it to Jews. Then they limited it to Jews that they approved of. Thus in the end it came to mean for them ‘love those who are in your particular circle’. Jesus here makes sure that His command applies to all men and women. Such Love Is To Be Towards The Undeserving. Luke 6:31 is now taken up and explained, in the context of what has gone before. To treat friends in a loving way is normal, but to treat all others in such a way is unusual. However that is the very purpose of the Messianic requirement.

Luke 6:32-34

“And if you love those who love you, what grace is there to you? For even sinners love those who love them. And if you do good to those who do good to you, what grace (charis) is there to you? For even sinners do the same. And if you lend to those of whom you hope to receive, what grace is there to you? Even sinners lend to sinners, to receive again as much.” ‘Charis’ (grace, approbation) can be used of the gracious approbation of a superior, thus here ‘why should you expect thanks from God’. But it is also regularly used in the greeting ‘grace to you’. It may therefore here point to the grace of God which by its action enables the Christian to do what is unnatural, love his enemy. Or it may refer to a gift coming from God’s grace. Matthew 5:46 on a similar question has ‘if you love those who love you, what reward have you?’ This would suggest the third is in mind, or possibly the first, if God’s gracious thanks can be seen as a reward. On the other hand in the sermon preached in Luke Jesus may have altered the emphasis as against Matthew, for the passages are not strict parallels. Whichever way that is, Jesus now emphasised His teaching by pointing out that simply loving, and doing good, and lending to those who love us and do us good and lend to us, is not what He is talking about, for then we are simply behaving naturally, and benefiting by it. It is only when we do it for those who do not do it for us that we manifest the grace of God at work within us and can expect to receive God’s approval, and/or His reward. Loving those who love us is not difficult, says Jesus, it is loving those who do not love us which is often difficult. Doing good to those who do good to us is normal courtesy, and would be expected of most normal human beings. It is doing good to those who hate us, in the same way as God does good to those who hate Him, which reveals the grace of God at work. Lending to those from whom we hope to benefit in one way or another is not unusual. What is unusual is lending not expecting to receive it back, or gain benefit from it. And that is the test of Christian love. ‘Of whom you hope to receive.’ This could either refer to the return of the capital, the receipt of interest, or having built up a stock of credit so that a reciprocal loan might be forthcoming in the future if needed. Whichever way it was the person who had made the loan would benefit by it. So the point is that the special nature of Christian love is revealed by lending, expecting nothing back. Lending not expecting to receive back the loan might appear an unlikely scenario. But it is precisely the scenario in Deuteronomy 15:7-11 where God’s people were to lend to the poor even though the year of release was coming and they therefore knew that the debt would be forfeit. They were to lend anyway, not expecting to receive the full amount back. Thus the idea here was not totally new, or so revolutionary as it sounds. The revolution lies in the fact that the idea has expanded to all loans at any time. The promise in Deuteronomy 15 was that if they did lend, not hoping to receive it back, God would bless them more abundantly. Note on Deuteronomy 14:28 to Deuteronomy 15:10. In this passage we find God’s provision so as to ensure that in Israel none went hungry or bankrupt. Every third year (the third and sixth in the seven year cycle) the tithe was to be set aside for the poor and needy, especially those who had no land of their own. Then every seventh year all loans made had to be cancelled. This ensured food available for the poor and the survival of the insolvent. But the danger then was that people would be unwilling to lend as the seventh year grew near. God thus firmly warned that they were not to behave so.

They were to lend even if they suspected that they would not even have their loan repaid. And the promise was then that God would Himself pay them back and reward them with prosperity in their fields and in their lives. Jesus is taking these charitable provisions and expanding on them End of note. The Reason Why Christians Should Love the Undeserving (Luke 6:35) Having defined Christian love, given practical examples of it, and demonstrated that in order for it to be thankworthy before God it must be shown to the undeserving, He now summarises it again in order to demonstrate its source.

Luke 6:35

“But love your enemies, And do them good, And lend, never despairing, And your reward shall be great, And you shall be sons of the Most High, For he is kind toward the unthankful and evil.” So in view of what He has just said about loving the undeserving, let them do it. Let them love their enemies, and do them good, and lend to them when they are in need, never despairing, because it will mean being like God Himself. It will mean revealing themselves as sons of the Most High, Who is kind towards the unthankful and the evil. It will be walking with Him on the higher plane and revealing that they are like Him, that they are His sons. And then they will receive great reward. This may be because of the response that comes from the act themselves, or from the joy that results, or from God’s blessing to those who obey Him, or indeed all three. But it will also include God’s reward on that final day when all of us have to give an account of ourselves to God (Romans 14:10; 2 Corinthians 5:10). ‘Never despairing (apelpizo).’ This is a word often used as a medical term. It strictly means ‘despairing’. Thus it may signify that they are not to despair of the fact that God will reward them as He promised in Deuteronomy 15:10. Or it possibly here means ‘not despairing of anyone.’ The idea may then be that we must not say something like, ‘Oh, if I lend to them they will only waste it’, but must give them the benefit of the doubt. Or it may signify that we must not despair of winning over our enemies in this way. But comparison with ‘of whom you hope to receive’ in Luke 6:34, may be seen as supporting the meaning ‘not hoping (elpizo) to receive anything in return’, which is found later in the early fathers. But it is never used in that way in classical literature, or before that time. ‘You shall be sons of the Most High.’ This firstly gains meaning from Luke 1:32, in that we will then be like our Master (compare 1 John 3:2). We will be revealing ourselves as the sons of the Most High like He is. And secondly it will be genuine evidence that we are truly ‘sons of God’ (Romans 8:14-15; Galatians 4:5-6), which we will be demonstrating by our behaviour. We will be revealing God-likeness. Note that here the Most High is gracious towards those from whom He expects no return. This parallels much better than Matthew’s statement would the previous instructions concerning lending not hoping to receive again. It fits this message much better. General Attitudes Which Should Result From This Kind of Love (Luke 6:36-37).

Luke 6:36-37

“Be you merciful, even as your Father is merciful. And judge not, and you shall not be judged, And condemn not, and you shall not be condemned, Release, and you shall be released.” Having described acts of mercy Jesus now applies the idea generally. The first command here is ‘be you merciful’, and it relates back to ‘lending never despairing’. To make unrequited loans is a big thing to ask, but it should be possible for one who has received mercy and therefore loves God enough (compare Luke 7:43). Such people should be willing to show mercy, even to a lender who cannot repay his debt. And in return they will receive mercy, for God will abundantly bless their crops (Deuteronomy 15:10). Note the reference to ‘your Father’. Now they are revealing themselves as His sons by their merciful behaviour they can expect Him to bless them, not just as a reward, but because He is their Father. But the thought of showing mercy in this way leads on to being merciful to all. Being merciful refers to more than just forgiving a monetary debt. It refers to not holding people to account, out of compassion. Then their Father will not hold them to account (Matthew 6:14-15). They are therefore not to judge unmercifully, and the result will be that they themselves will not be judged unmercifully. (They may judge righteous judgment in order to help others - John 7:24; as in Luke 6:42). The thought is to prevent censoriousness.

They are not to condemnatory, but to be forgiving, so that they too may not be condemned (compare Matthew 6:14-15). They must remember that they too are sinners. They must leave the condemning to God. (That is not, of course, to prevent them from pointing out that God will condemn in the end). They are ‘to release’, and thus ‘be released’. This may have in mind the ‘year of release’ whose regulations caused the kind of lending which hoped for nothing in return (Deuteronomy 15). They are to carry out the ideas contained in the provisions for the year of release and then they can be sure that God will release them from their debts too. If this last is the meaning, either Luke read Deuteronomy 15 in a Greek version other than LXX (a good possibility) where ‘release’ was connected with apoluo and not with aphesis, or he changes the term here because aphesis would have been too general to get over the specific point. (In Deuteronomy 15 LXX ‘release’ is aphesis). Otherwise we may translate apoluo here as signifying forgive, which of course is what aphesis also means. Whichever way it is the point is certainly that as we release and forgive others, so will we be forgiven and released. As we forgive others the little that they owe us so will God be able to forgive us the huge amounts that we owe Him. The Generosity That Should Result From This Kind of Love (Luke 6:38-40). The ‘release’ just mentioned is the same thing as giving. Indeed it is a kind of giving, for it turns the loan into a gift. Thus Jesus now moves from the particular to the general. Not only are they to release debts but they are to give generously in all things. They are to be open handed like their Father. Then they too will receive bountifully. Elsewhere He puts it simply as, ‘freely you have received, freely give’ (Matthew 10:8). On the basis of Luk 6:32-34 this includes giving to those from whom we can expect to receive no return.

Luke 6:38-40

The Generosity That Should Result From This Kind of Love And The Assurance of God’s Reciprocal Generosity (6:38-40).q Give, and it shall be given to you (Luke 6:38 a), r Good measure, pressed down, shaken together, running over, shall they give into your bosom (Luke 6:38 b). r For with what measure you mete (Luke 6:38 c), q It shall be measured to you again (38d).

Luke 6:39-49

Distinguishing The Genuine From The Fake (6:39-49).

Luke 6:41-42

“And why do you behold the splinter that is in your brother’s eye, But do not consider the beam that is in your own eye? Or how can you say to your brother, Brother, let me cast out the splinter that is in your eye, When you yourself do not behold the beam which is in your own eye? You hypocrite, cast out first the beam out of your own eye, And then you will see clearly to cast out the splinter that is in your brother’s eye.” The ‘splinter’ and the ‘beam’ in this illustration both connect with building. They will lead on to the parable about building. A ‘splinter’ (or ‘chip’) is a tiny piece of timber, a ‘beam is a huge piece of timber which is used, for example, to hold up roofs. (The same contrast is found later in the Rabbis). That is why some have translated as ‘splinter’ and ‘plank’. The point is that we must not try to remove our brother’s small imperfections while in our own lives there are huge imperfections. First we must ensure that the huge imperfections are removed from our own lives.

We must come into God’s light and let Him deal with all our own sin. We must put aside from our lives all that we know to be wrong. We must examine out own thoughts and motives. And then, once we have genuinely and fully done that, and the huge beam which has been marring our lives has been removed, then and only then, we can approach our brother to help him (compare Galatians 6:1-2). ‘You hypocrite.’ The word means a play-actor, and thus someone who is putting on a show which is not genuine, or acting in a contradictory way. In The End What Men Are Is Revealed In What They Produce By Their Lives (Luke 6:43-46). Yet it is important that we help each other with regards to imperfections in us, for a tree is known by its fruit, and therefore it is important for all of us that our imperfections are dealt with. We have already seen this illustration about trees bearing fruit in the teaching of John the Baptiser (Luke 3:8).

Luke 6:43-44

For there is no good tree which brings forth bad fruit, Nor again a corrupt tree that brings forth good fruit. For each tree is known by its own fruit. For of thorns men do not gather figs, Nor of a bramble bush gather they grapes. Jesus now emphasises that the test of what we are is the fruit that we bear. This applies to all who read these words. This is what salvation is all about. It is in order to produce fruit-bearing trees. Jesus is saying that a man will be revealed as what he is by what men behold in his life. If he is a genuine Christian, ‘a good tree’, he will bring forth good fruit and not bad fruit. Whereas those who are corrupt trees, and therefore not Christians, will not produce good fruit but bad fruit. Every tree will be known by its fruit. Jesus is saying, ‘Show me a Christian whose life has not changed for the good, slow though the process may be, and I will show you a man or woman who is not a Christian.’ Our lives, says Jesus, should be producing good fruit, the equivalent of figs and grapes which delight man’s heart. But if we are not producing such fruit then we are simply revealing ourselves to be brambles and thorns. And what fruit should we be producing? ‘The fruit of the Spirit is love, joy, peace, longsuffering, kindness, goodness, faith, gentleness and self-control’ (Galatians 5:22). But we should note that the point here is not that men are what they are and cannot be changed. The good tree here is a good tree because the Holy Spirit has made it so. It was not naturally a good tree. Christ has not come simply to develop good trees which do not need changing, He has come to seek and to save the lost and turn them into good trees. That is why He goes on to speak of the treasure that God puts in men’s hearts. Note the differences with Matthew 7:16. Both are clearly drawing from a different source in spite of similarities. There is absolutely no reason why one or the other should have arbitrarily altered the source of the fruit, whereas we can understand Jesus doing so at two different times depending on His surroundings.

Luke 6:45-46

“The good man out of the good treasure of his heart brings forth what is good, And the evil man out of the evil treasure brings forth what is evil, For out of the abundance of the heart his mouth speaks. And why do you call me, Lord, Lord, and do not do the things which I say?” Jesus then points out that our hearts are like a treasure store. If we are Christians God had filled us with His treasures. He has put His Holy Spirit within us. He has created within us a new heart (2 Corinthians 5:17). He has filled our hearts with His love (Romans 5:5). And the truly good man, the true Christian, whose heart is thus full of good treasure, will bring that forth to the world. He brings forth what is good. All that he brings forth is a blessing. But the non-good only have evil treasures in their hearts. When they reach into their hearts and lives they only bring forth what is harmful, and unhelpful, and evil. (There really is no argument from this to support the idea that a man can be a Christian but not change. Such a view is an insult to Christ and to God). For in the end it is what is in the heart that will come from the mouth. We speak as we are, and reveal what we are by our words. Do we want to know what a man’s heart is like? Listen to what he says. He cannot keep it hidden for long. For out of the abundance that is in the heart (or otherwise) the mouth speaks. Jesus then applies the lesson practically. Here are words that can so easily come from the mouth, ‘Lord, Lord.’ But the test of their genuineness is whether we do what He says. This is not, however, contradicting the previous line, for eventually the mouth will reveal whether Jesus is Lord or not. It is rather emphasising the same truth from a different viewpoint. ‘Lord, Lord.’ The repetition stresses the depth of the profession (compare Genesis 22:11; Genesis 46:2; Exodus 3:4; 1 Samuel 3:10). This person is making a great outward show of his submission. He is trying to make a huge impression, both in the eyes of Jesus and in the eyes of man. But Jesus is saying that such submission is worse than no submission if we do not do what He says. It is only obedience which really shows that He is our Lord. Otherwise we are simply emphasising our own hypocrisy. The question here is not as to whether ‘we have made Jesus Lord of our lives’. God does not humble Himself to a position where He leaves such a choice to us. For the fact is that if we are Christians we profess Jesus as Lord, and God and Creator, to Whom we are responsible in all things. He is therefore our Lord. And the point here is that if we call Him ‘Lord, Lord’ and do not do what He says we are hypocrites and fools. We can only expect destruction, as the following illustration makes clear. The Security Of The One Who Hears The Words Of Jesus And Does Them (Luke 6:47-48). Jesus now ends His message with a forceful parable. He likens all who claim to be disciples to compare themselves with two men who set about building themselves a house. One built firmly on a rock. He was like the man who hears Jesus’ words and does them. The other built directly onto the earth with no foundations. He was like a man who hears Jesus’ words and does not do them.

Luke 6:47-48

Every one who comes to me, and hears my words, and does them, I will show you to whom he is like, He is like a man building a house, who dug and went deep, And laid a foundation on the rock, And when a flood arose, the stream broke against that house, And could not shake it, because it had been built well. There is a difference between this parable here and the parallel one in Matthew 7:24-27. Sometimes in different messages Jesus emphasised His previous words by repetition. Sometimes He did it by alteration. Here the man is seen as putting in effort. He ‘digs deep’. He wants to be certain of the soundness of the foundation (it hints at nothing about a cellar). Then he lays a foundation on a rock. (This is done equally by both Jews and Gentiles). The result is that when the bad years come and floods arise his house is able to cope with the pounding of the water. In the same way the man who hears Jesus’ words and does them will be able to stand against all that life can throw at Him and against all the attacks of the Enemy. Nothing will hurt him (Luke 10:19). He is unshakeable. When a person tells you that they are having difficulty believing, ask them about their lives. The problem in all probability lies in what they are doing, or planning to do, rather than with their faith or lack of it. The house is being shaken because it is no longer on the rock. Disaster For Those Who Hear the Words of Jesus and Do Not Do Them (Luke 6:49).

Luke 6:49

But he who hears, and does not, Is like a man who built a house on the earth without a foundation, Against which the stream broke, and straightway it fell in, And the ruin of that house was great. But the one who hears Jesus’ words and does not do them is like the man who builds his house without a foundation. And when the floods come his house collapses. There is no reason for talking about wadi beds here. Where there are mountains, and valleys, and rain floods are common to life in most parts of the world in one form or another, and equally so in Palestine. Chapter 7 The Centurion’s Servant, The Widow of Nain, The Concerns of John the Baptiser Are Met, The sinful Woman. Following the proclamation of the law of the new Kingly Rule of God, Luke now presents us with a number of incidents which reveal the breadth and depth of that Kingly Rule. It reaches out to the believing Gentiles with a word of power, it reaches out to a weeping widow of Israel with the offer of life, it affects the dead and restores them to life, it encourages imprisoned John who is raised to his true status, an incident which, however, also bring out the greatness of that Kingly Rule. It reaches down to a ‘sinful woman’ and makes her whole. And it will be followed by a further address in which Jesus makes clear the provision for the advancement of His Kingly Rule. The Centurion’s Servant (Luke 7:1-10). Jesus’ Kingly Rule over Disease In this incident Jesus is true to His own teaching and ‘gives to him who asks of him’ (compare Matthew 10:8 where giving is related to healing). The incident gains in importance in that it reveals to Christians the might of Rome submitting itself as unworthy even to come to Jesus, with Jesus then sending there His word (which is how Acts ends). Jesus as the great Prophet and King is seen as superior to Rome. Yet it is a clear indication that the grace of God through Jesus is available to those Gentiles who humbly seek it. It also indicated to non-Christians that Rome approved of Jesus Christ. The very way in which Jesus heals the servant is an indication of the Kingly Rule of God. All nature is under His control, and He has but to speak and it is done. Just as in the beginning He spoke and the worlds came into being, now He speaks and one part of that world, which has been corrupted, is restored. The passage may be analysed as follows: a After He had ended all His sayings in the ears of the people Jesus entered into Capernaum (Luke 6:1). b A certain centurion’s servant, who was dear to him, was sick and at the point of death. And when he heard about Jesus, he sent to him elders of the Jews, asking Him that He would come and save his servant (Luke 6:2-3). c They, when they came to Jesus, besought him earnestly, saying, “He is worthy that you should do this for him, for he loves our nation, and himself built us our synagogue’ (Luke 6:4-5) d Jesus went with them. And when He was now not far from the house, the centurion sent friends to him, saying to Him, “Lord, do not trouble yourself, for I am not worthy that you should come under my roof” (Luke 6:6) c That is why I did not think myself worthy to come to you. But say the word, and my servant shall be healed, for I also am a man set under authority, having under myself soldiers. And I say to this one, “Go”, and he goes; and to another, “Come”, and he comes; and to my servant, “Do this”, and he does it’ (Luke 6:7-8) b And when Jesus heard these things, He marvelled at him, and turned and said to the crowd who followed Him, “I say to you, I have not found so great faith, no, not in Israel” (Luke 6:9). a And those who were sent, returning to the house, found the servant whole (Luke 6:10). Note how in ‘a’ Jesus enters into Capernaum, and in the parallel the people return to the centurion’s home with the servant healed. With the King comes healing. In ‘b’ the centurion exercises his faith and in the parallel Jesus marvels at his faith. In ‘c’ the elders say that the centurion is worthy, in the parallel the centurion says that he is not worthy. In ‘d’ the might of Rome confesses its unworthiness before Jesus.