The Invitation

Hello everyone.

I am writing this on the day after Christmas.  Hope you are having a great holiday time.  

Anyway, I will continue my exegesis of Luke 14, today.  We will start in verse 15.  Jesus has been invited into the home of a Pharisee on a Sabbath.  He has healed a man of abnormal swelling (verses 1-6) and then given some practical advice to those present about how they not seek the places of honor, but instead seek places of humility (verses 7-14). Then, in verse Jesus says, "You will be blessed because they do not have the ability to repay you. So your repayment will come at the resurrection of the righteous.”

Here is what happens next: One of the men sitting at the table responded to Jesus' talk of receiving reward at the resurrection of the righteous.. He said, “Blessed are those who will eat at the banquet in the kingdom of God.”  They were at a banquet, but now Jesus has used this imagery to bring up the greatest banquet of them all, the fellowship that will come at the gathering of the Kingdom of God. And as the man said, anyone able to eat at that table will be blessed indeed. 

While the man was right, it is quite possible that the statement comes with the underlying assumption that the Pharisees will be those that eat at that table, and Jesus is going to challenge that assumption. 

According to Kenneth Bailey, the audience would expect Jesus to respond something like this, “Oh, that we might keep the law in a precise fashion so that when that great day comes, we might be counted worthy to sit with the Messiah at His banquet.” (Bailey, 309.)  Jesus did not respond in the expected fashion.  (He usually didn’t.)  Instead, Jesus uses the statement as a springboard into another parable. In the parable Jesus talks about those who will sit at his table.  

Jesus tells a story of a man who prepared a great banquet and sent out his servants to call in those whom he had invited to the banquet.  It appears that the invitees had been invited at an earlier date and had accepted the invitation.  But now that the banquet was prepared they all began to make excuses. 

The excuse makers parallel Israel and its leadership.  Israel had been first to be invited to the banquet and it is , for the most part, rejecting it. Bailey also points out the first two excuse-makers offer this pattern. 'I have done this.  I must do this.  Please excuse me.' So, according to Bailey, these men who had previously accepted the invitation, now decline to come once the banquet is ready.  This is a serious breach of etiquette, even insulting to the master. Bailey states that these excuses were intentionally insulting. He states, “An implausible excuse is a deliberate public insult.” (Bailey, 315.) 

I love Bailey's explanation. He describes it in these modern terms:  "Imagine saying to the host I have just bought a house over the phone, and now must go look at it.  Or I just bought five used cars over the phone and now I must go test drive them." (Bailey, 314-315.) We all understand that buying a house or a car without first inspecting it is foolish.  No one does business that way. A house is carefully inspected before purchase.  Cars are, too.  

The third man does not even ask to be excused, and according to Bailey, this forthright way of speaking about one’s wife would have been considered offensive and rude.  (Bailey, 316.) Bock points out that according to the law, newly married men were exempt for battle. However, they were not exempt from attending banquets that they had previously said they would attend.  (Bock, 1275.)

When the servant returns and tells the master about the excuses , the master is rightly angered.  But the banquet is ready, but there is no one to enjoy it.  Bock says, “Jesus does not postpone the banquet or withdraw the meal.  He gets a new audience ... .One can accept or reject the invitation, but in either case, the party is coming and will not be rescheduled or postponed.”  (Bock, 1275.)

In the parable, the master sends out his servants again.  This time to alleyways of the city, to bring in the poor, lame, crippled and blind.  The very people that Jesus had just told the Pharisees that they should invite.   Think about this, In Lev.  21:17 it says that any of Aaron’s descendants that were lame, blind or crippled, could not approach God to make the offering.  But now the invitation to join the banquet is extended to all, even the lame, blind and crippled.   

While the nation of Israel, for the most part, rejects Jesus, there are some that accept Jesus as Lord and come to his banquet.  Very few among the nation’s spiritual leadership accept the invitation, (Nicodemus, Joseph of Arimathea, and later Paul.) Most of those that accept it are far less glamorous, fishermen, tax collectors, ‘sinners.’ 

Having issued a second set of invitations, the servant comments that there is still plenty of room at the banquet.  The servant is then told to issue a third set of invitations.  They had reached out to the poor and needy of the town, now the servants are to go into the countryside and find anyone and compel them to come in.  The master wants a full house. In order to have his full house the master sends his invitation to complete outsiders.  The obvious parallel is that having been rejected by the Jews, the invitation will go out in all directions, including the Gentiles. 

There are three rounds of invitations.  1st: The Israelites.  2nd: The needy among the Israelites. 3rd: Gentiles. 

Jesus concludes the parable with the master making this statement, “I am telling you that not one of those men that I invited will even get a taste of my banquet.” The master was not going to prepare carry-out packages with leftovers for those originally invited.  

Jesus is driving home the point that these men in positions of leadership, who appear to be first in line for the Great Banquet in the Kingdom of God, are actually going to miss it all together, because of their refusal to accept the invitation that Jesus is offering them.  Instead, those who seem unworthy of the banquet will end up first in line. 

Tom 

Find Your Seat

Greetings

I'm continuing my examination of Luke 14 today.  Jesus is in the home of a Pharisee and he has just healed a man of his abnormal swelling, and now goes on to make some observations aobut the behavior of the Pharisees. Here is my translation of the verses 7-14:

7 Noticing how those who had been invited, chose the places of honor, he told them this parable. 8 “When someone invites you to a wedding feast, don’t sit in the seat of honor.  It is possible that someone more important than you has been invited. 9 Then one who invited you may come to you and say, ‘Give this person that seat.’ Embarrassed, you will have to sit in the least desirable place. 10 Instead, when you are invited, go and sit in the least important seat, then the one who invited you will come to you and say, “My friend, move over to this better seat. That way, you will be honored in front of all of the other guests. 11 All of those who honor themselves will be humbled and those who humble themselves will be honored. 12 Then Jesus said to the one who had invited him, “When you are having a dinner or and a banquet, don’t invite your friends, your brothers and your relatives. Don’t invite your wealthy neighbors. They can, in return, invite you over, and then you will be repaid. 13 Instead, when you hold a banquet, invite the poor, the crippled, the disabled and the blind.  14 You will be blessed because they do not have the ability to repay you. So your repayment will come at the resurrection of the righteous.”

Earlier in verse 1 we saw that the Pharisees had been watching Jesus closely.  Now, we see in verse 7 that Jesus has been watching them as well.  He notices that they go quickly to the places of honor, the seat next to the host or the master of the house.  Luke says that noticing this, Jesus tells them a parable. The point of the parable is obvious.  "Don’t assume that you belong in the palace of honor."  Darrell Bock states that the most honored guests tend to arrive after everyone else.  (Bock, 1263)  Jesus' point is that it would be embarrassing to take the place of honor, only to be asked to give that seat up when the most honored guest arrives.  Bock states it well.  “Jesus tells them that it is better not to overestimate one’s importance, which can put you at risk of public disgrace.” (1264.) 

In fact, Jesus tells them to do the opposite.  Sit in the lowest seat.  Assume a humble position.  That way, you can only move up.  In taking the more humble approach and sitting in the last seat, a person who is moved to a better seat is honored , rather than humiliated, in front of everyone. Humility is never wrong, and our place should be recognized by others, not seized upon by us. 

We see in verse 11 that we have choices to make, whether to proceed humbly or to proceed in a self-seeking prideful manner.  Befroe we make our choice, we should understand that God honors humility.  Those who seek to honor themselves will ultimately be humbled.  Those who humble themselves will be honored.  

In verses 12-14 - Jesus follows the talk of not seeking to honor oneself with talk of graciousness toward those who may not be able to repay kindness that is offered.  Certainly, we should offer kindness to all, but understand that those who can repay the kindness, often do, and their reciprocation serves as our reward.  Jesus says that when we offer kindness to those who cannot repay it, we will receive our reward later.  It is a lasting blessing that comes from God.  Bock says “God honors such selfless graciousness.” (Bock, 1266.)

Jesus, in his observation of the Pharisees points out some things to them that is obviously against their nature. Don't seek the place of honor. Show kindness to those who cannot repay it. These are mandates that require both humility and love. Ultimately, Jesus is just calling the Pharisees to be like him, a man of humility and love.

Tom

Their Silence Speaks Volumes

Hello everyone, 

Hope everyone is doing well.  Today, I will jump back into my exegesis of Luke, starting with Luke 14:1.  Here is my translation:

1 One day, on a Sabbath, Jesus went into the home of one of the leaders of the Pharisees to eat a meal.  They were watching him closely. 2 While he was there, a man suffering from abnormal swelling came before him. 3  So Jesus asked the experts in the law and the Pharisees, “ Is it lawful to heal on the Sabbath or not?” 4 But they remained silent. So Jesus took hold of the man, healed him and sent him on this way.  5 Then Jesus asked them, “Which one of you, if your child or your ox fell into a well on a Sabbath, would not immediately pull it out? 6 They were unable to reply to Jesus’ questions.

So, on a Sabbath, one of the Pharisees invited Jesus over, and collectively, they were watching him closely to see what he would do.  Since he was in the home of one the leaders, it is possible that Jesus was invited to the home to watch him and try to catch him in some kind of mistake. 

While he was there, a man came in front of Jesus who was suffering from an abnormal swelling somewhere in his body.  The Greek word ὑδρωπικὸς (hydrōpikos) is used here. In many older translations it uses the word Dropsy.  Dropsy is a dated medical term.  Some modern translations use the word Edema, and others, like TNIV, use abnormal swelling.  I went with abnormal swelling because I understand what that means.  Had this man been invited over, as well?  Or did he show up uninvited?  The text doesn’t say.  He may or may not have been a part of a trap laid by the Pharisees.

  

When the man appears before him, Jesus is the one to ask the question this time. “ Is it lawful to heal on the Sabbath or not?” He is putting it back on them.  They have questioned him on it in the past, and now he turns the tables.  But they remain silent. 

Jesus has put the Pharisees in a difficult spot.  If they say, ‘yes’ then it would raise questions about their 'rule-keeper' view of the law.  If they say ‘no,’ then they are taking a stand against doing something that is overwhelmingly positive and against showing compassion, simply because of the day of the week it is.  So, they say nothing.  

Since  they say nothing, Jesus heals the man and sends him on his way.  They had their opportunity to speak and they said nothing.  They neither approve nor condemn, so Jesus does what he knows is right, and heals the man. 

However, Jesus is not done questioning them. After the healed man has left, he asks them, “Which of you, if your child or your ox fell into a well on a Sabbath, would not immediately pull it out?”  Would they hold stubbornly to their tradition if  they needed to rescue their oxen on a Sabbath.  The implication here is that they would definitely rescue the oxen, and none of them say otherwise.  Like before, there is no response from the Pharisees and the teachers of the law.  This has come up before, but it seems that the Pharisees have learned nothing.  

The Pharisees and the teachers of the law hold out strict obedience to the law.  Jesus holds out compassion. Compassion wins the argument. (It reminds me of what Jesus said to the Pharisees in Matt. 9:13, when Jesus quotes Hosea 6:6, “I desire mercy, not sacrifice.” and he tells the Pharisees to go and learn what that means.) 

Jesus was not silent here, but the Pharisees were, and their silence spoke volumes.  Jesus put up arguments that they could not argue with.  The winning argument, Compassion is greater than rule-keeping.