If Anyone Would Follow Me

 Happy New Year everyone.  

This is my first blog post of 2024. I have been sharing my exegesis from the book of Luke.  We are in chapter 14.  In Luke 14:25-34 Jesus spells out very clearly what it means to follow him and to be his disciple.  There is a lot here to look at, so today we will focus on verses 25-27.  Here is my translation:

25 Large crowds were traveling with Jesus, and turning to them he said, 26 “If anyone comes to me and does not hate their father and mother, spouse and children, brothers and sisters, and yes even their own life, that person is unable to be my disciple. 27 Anyone who does not carry their own cross and follow me, cannot be my disciple. 

In the passage leading up to this, Jesus has been at a banquet with the Pharisees, but now, starting in verse 25, Jesus has left the banquet, and is back on his journey toward Jerusalem. As he traveled along, there were large crowds traveling with him.  It wasn’t just Jesus and his apostles on this journey. Many are following he, and now he is going to tell them the cost of following him.  It is a heavy cost:

Darrell Bock states that his teaching here is directed to all, not just to the converted.  Jesus wants those who are contemplating following him to understand what they are committing themselves to. (Bock, 1283.)  Recall the excuses offered in the most recent parable, Luke 14:15-24.) No excuse will be acceptable.  We are to let nothing get in the way of serving Jesus wholeheartedly. 

Disciples of Jesus must put him first.  He is speaking in hyperbole, but Jesus tells them that if they want to follow him they have to ‘hate’ everyone else in their lives, father, mother, spouse, children, everyone. The Greek word μισεῖ (misei) has two definitions in my Greek-English Lexicon. 1) Hate, detest. 2) Disfavor, disregard.  “Hate” is a strong word, but even if we were to substitute the not-as-strong ‘disfavor,” and disfavor our father, mother, spouse and children, the result is the same.  If we are going to follow Jesus, we cannot put any relationship ahead of him. Our allegiance is to Jesus. Bock points out that there was no casual relationship with Jesus in 1st Century Israel.  Coming to Christ often meant alienation from family. (Bock, 1285.)

With that, we also have to be willing to ‘hate’ or ‘disfavor’ even ourselves and put Jesus first. For me, this is a call to set aside among other things, laziness and love for comfort.  

Then he says that we have to be willing to carry our own cross to follow him.  Whatever the ‘cross’ might be, we have to be willing to carry it. Alan Thompson points out that Jesus is talking about death to self, as he, himself is on a journey toward his own death. (Thompson, 237.) Jesus is calling his would-be followers to a life of self-sacrifice. 

It is important to note that when Jesus said this, he had not yet gone to the Cross.  His statement is going to be viewed a little differently by its original audience than it will be by us.  We see crosses as a symbol of spirituality.  They did not.  To them it was just a horrible means of execution. 

Bock says this about the cost of being a disciple. “A disciple - μαθητής. (mathētēs) is a learner, a pupil, In ancient culture, a disciple sat at the feet of great teachers…the difference between Jesus and these other models of discipleship is that Jesus’ call requires more, even everything.” (Bock, 1285-1286.)

Jesus' call is to put him first, and accept a life of self-sacrifice. Then, we can follow Jesus.  Following means being just like him.  He put all of us first, and lived a life of self-sacrifice on our behalf and he is calling us to do what he has already done. That is what Jesus says it means to follow him. 

     Darrell L. Bock, Luke - Volume 2 - 9:51-24:53, Grand Rapids, Michigan, Baker Academic, 1996.

      Alan J. Thompson, Exegetical Guide to the Greek New Testament: Luke, Nashville, Tennessee, B & H Academic, 2016. 

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 place 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.  

Lament for Jerusalem

Hey everybody.

Today, I will wrap my exegesis of Luke 13.  This section of scripture begins as some Pharisees come to Jesus with a warning.  Herod Antipas wants to kill him.  It is not clear whether this is a friendly gesture from these Pharisees or simply a warning designed to get Jesus to go away. Here is my translation:

31 At that time, some Pharisees came to Jesus, saying, “You need to leave. Get out of here, because Herod wants to kill you.” 32 Jesus responded, “You go tell that fox that today and tomorrow, I will cast out demons and heal people and on the third day I will finish my work.  33 Nevertheless, it is a necessary journey for me today, tomorrow and the next day, because it is impossible for a prophet to die outside of Jerusalem.” 34  “O Jerusalem, Jerusalem, the place that kills the prophets and throws stones at those who are sent to her, how often I have wanted to gather your children together, the way that a hen gathers her chicks under her wings, but you are not willing. 35 Pay attention, then, because your house will be deserted. But, I tell you, you will not see me until the time comes when you say, ‘Blessed is the name of the one who comes in the name of the Lord’”

Jesus does not seem to be threatened at all by this warning in any way.  Jesus knows what awaits him, and knows that Herod will not be the one to kill him.  Instead, he sends a message to Herod. He starts by calling Herod a 'fox.'  I doubt that this was meant as a compliment.  (I also doubt that these Pharisees delivered this message.) Jesus, unmoved by the threat, simply responds by saying that he will continue his work of healing and casting out demons and continue his journey toward Jerusalem.  

Jesus then declares that his journey to Jerusalem was necessary for him and he would do this in his time.  He was not going to be rushed by the Pharisees or by Herod. 

In verse 33, Jesus makes the comment that no prophet can die outside of Jerusalem.  In his lament for Jerusalem, he calls the city the place that kills the prophets and stones those that are sent to them.  Jesus is going to Jerusalem to die.  Jesus clearly considers himself a prophet. Many others did too.  Luke 7:16, the crowd says that a great prophet had appeared among them.  Later, in the same chapter, Simon the Pharisee questions whether Jesus was a prophet, because he was allowing a ‘sinful’ woman to touch his feet. (7:39)  So the question is out there, “Is Jesus a prophet?” The answer is ‘yes.”  And prophets die in Jerusalem. 

Jesus is now ready to take on the role of suffering servant that we read about in Isaiah 51. He is determined to head to Jerusalem where he knows that he will suffer and be brutally killed. He will carry out the mission that God had sent him for.  

Jesus laments over Jerusalem.  Again, he has recognized its checkered history, calling it a place that kills the prophets.  But this is not what he wants.  He loves Jerusalem and wants to bring it together, and offer it protection and comfort. His comparison is to a mother hen and how it will gather its chicks to protect them.  This emphasis shows God’s heart.  He has an intense desire to care for and nurture his people. Sadly, for the most part, the people of Jerusalem and certainly its leadership, refused to listen to God’s message.  Just like their many ancestors who stoned the prophets sent to them, this generation of Jerusalemites would kill the greatest of the prophets, Jesus.

While God’s heart is to care for His people, it is clear that His people do not want Him to do so.  They have consistently rejected those God has sent. We have seen throughout Luke this idea of trusting God for protection and provision.  That is what the mother hen does. But they have rejected it. Because of their rejection of God’s protection and provision, Jerusalem ‘s house, the temple, will be left desolate.  Their unwillingness to listen to God would leave them desolate.  Jesus is a prophet, and his prophecy is a warning that their temple would eventually be destroyed.  

Let me add a thought to this:  The temple in Jerusalem will be destroyed, but God’s plan involves a different temple, our own bodies, a temple of the Holy Spirit.  No longer will you have to go to Jerusalem to be in God’s dwelling place, because we carry His dwelling place with us.  This is good for us, since the original dwelling place has now been destroyed. 

The Narrow Door

Greetings

We saw back in Luke 9:51 that Jesus set out resolutely toward Jerusalem. Jesus is still on that journey here in Luke 13.  Today's exegesis will cover Luke 13:22-30.  Verse 22 states that as he travels, he stops in the various towns along the way and teaches. Along the way on his journey, someone asks, “Are only a few going to be saved?”  

Jesus doesn't answer the question directly, in his response, it is implied that the answer to that question is ‘yes.’  He answers, “Strive to enter through the narrow door, because I tell you that many will attempt to enter and will not be able to.” The word that I have translated as ‘strive’ comes from the Greek Ἀγωνίζεσθε (agōnizesthe) which according to the Greek-English lexicon, means, ‘to engage in a contest, to fight or struggle.” Jesus is saying that salvation is not an automatic thing.  We strive and struggle to find that narrow door. 

Also, the door is narrow. Jesus doesn’t seem to have to have a problem with the idea that only a small number will be saved.  That stands in a stark contrast to our modern society that accepts everything and ushers everyone off into Heaven when they die.  Jesus indicates that it is not like that. Like Matt. 7:13-14, where Jesus says that the gate to salvation is narrow and only a few find it.  In Matthew, Jesus says that the road to destruction is broad.  In Jesus’ statement is Luke, this is implied.  

Sadly, many will be told, “I don’t know you.”  Jesus is speaking to an audience that likely assumed that everything was good between them and God. Jesus' message must have been shocking.  Many would say, “We ate and drank with you and you taught in our streets.”  These were people who had spent time with Jesus, and yet they were being told that they would find a closed door, and not be able to enter, and that master of the house would say that he did not know them.  

How is it that Jesus did not know them, even though they had spent time together?  Darrell Bock says it like this, “Among those rejected are some who were physically close to Jesus but who never responded to his message with repentance, never entered into a relationship of faith.” (Bock, 1237.)

Some will be caught unaware, thinking that they are right with Jesus, but are left outside, but will be told to go away, because they practice evil.  It would be very sad to live your life thinking of yourself as righteous, only to find out in the end that you are not. 

In verse 28, we see that those left on the outside would see some of the all-time greats enter in, Abraham, Isaac, Jacob and the Old Testament prophets, like Elijah.  Jesus then goes on to say that people would be entering from all directions, north, south, east and west, and would be reclining at the table with the master, while they remained on the outside. 

Those left out, will actually be cast out.  Jesus uses the word  ἐκβαλλομένους (ekballomenous) which means ‘cast out’ or ‘thrown out.’ This rejection will lead to bitter tears and gnashing of teeth, sadness and anger. 

Bock points out that Jesus makes no emphasis on Israelite sovereignty, but paints a picture that includes Gentiles, while many of them are left out. (Bock, 1240.)  Jesus concludes here, by saying that the first would be last and the last would be first.  He repeats the end-time reversal that he had just described, where the outsiders are in, and the insiders are out.  So, It seems that it would be very important for us to know Jesus, but also for Jesus to know us. 

The Kingdom of God Be Like

 Hello everyone,

Today, I will continue my exegesis of Luke 13. We will pick up the story in verse 18.  Here is my translation:

18 Then Jesus said, “What is the kingdom of God like, and what can I compare it to? 19 It is like mustard seeds that a man takes and throws into his garden. It grows and becomes a tree, and the birds of the sky build nests in its branches.”  20 He asked again, “What can I compare the kingdom of God to? 21 It is like yeast that a woman takes and mixes into three full measures of flour until the whole batch is leavened.

There is a Greek word here οὖν (oun), is generally translated as ‘therefore.’  I mention it here because that word would connect what Jesus says here to the previous passage.  He tells two quick parables, asking what the kingdom of God could be compared to.  So, in the previous passage, Jesus has healed a woman who could not stand up straight and stated that he had released her from bonds that Satan had her in for eighteen years.  Darrell Bock says that Jesus releasing her from Satan’s power raises the issue of authority and rule.  (Luke has previously established that Jesus has greater authority and greater power than Satan.) Where do we see Jesus’ authority and rule most clearly? Within his kingdom. (Bock, 1225.)

In truth, Jesus’ audience here probably had a very different idea of what the kingdom of God was than Jesus did.  For the most part they were expecting the Messiah to come in and drive out the Romans, reestablish the Davidic line and make Israel into a great kingdom.  So when they heard parables like these, they likely took away a different meaning than what Jesus was intending. 

What is the kingdom of God like?  What does Jesus compare it to? 

First, he compares it to a mustard seed. The point is fairly obvious.  The seed starts as something very small, but grows into something very large; large enough to provide shelter and protection for animals.  The kingdom of God would start small and become large. This parable makes two points about God’s kingdom.  It grows and it provides safety. God's kingdom should provide a safe space for anyone and everyone. 

Second, he compares it to yeast.  A woman mixes three full measures of flour.  According to Bock, three full measures is about 50 pounds of flour.  (Bock, 1228.) That is a lot of flour.  Jesus’ point is that the yeast spreads throughout the large amount of flour, eventually leavening all of it. The kingdom of God spreads. 

Jesus presents God's kingdom as a kingdom that starts small and is seemingly insignificant, but over time spreads, becomes large and influential, and provides benefit and safety to all.