Chapter 14
The chapter opens with "One Sabbath...", so we are floating in time here. No real way to know when this was except in reference to other gospels. Jesus heals on the Sabbath yet again. There are Pharisees watching him closely this day to see if they can catch him in something that will serve as a basis to undermine his teaching. Jesus knows this. Before he heals, he asks them all if it is lawful to do so on the Sabbath. They won't answer. They know that to say it is not lawful is a cruel and heartless point of view, unworthy of the God they worship. But to say yes it is lawful is to violate the letter of Mosaic law. Summarily guilty is what that would be.
2021 - Note that the man healed here had dropsy. A very similar Sabbath healing elsewhere was of a man who had a withered hand. Two distinct occurrences I believe. Note that in this case, he was on his way to Jerusalem. I believe the withered hand was much earlier. (Yes. The withered hand was Luke 6:9, so two different healings, on the Sabbath, both to illustrate the hypocrisy of the Pharisees for all to see. )
Jesus heals the man anyway, and tells those present that they would pull a donkey or an ox out of a well on the Sabbath, yet they begrudge a human being healing on the Sabbath. It says "they could not reply". 2020 - A note to the ESV on vs 5 says he asked whether they would pull a son or an ox in some manuscripts. Surely there was no dodging whether they would pull a son out of a well on the Sabbath. Wish I knew which he really said, not because it changes the point at all, but it does sort of change his tone. It seems to me that by this time in his ministry, Jesus was getting a lot more direct in his characterization of the Pharisees and the religious elite. His remarks are now more "pointed".
2022 - Here is a thought that occurred to me yesterday after reading about the healing of the woman with the disabling spirit on the Sabbath. We need to understand that Jesus is NOT saying that sometimes it is ok to break the Law. He is NOT saying that sin for the right reason is ok. If he were saying that, then his healings on the Sabbath would all be sin, but "good" sin. What a slippery slope that would be! Look in vs 3 how Jesus asked the question:
3 And Jesus responded to the lawyers and Pharisees, saying, "Is it lawful to heal on the Sabbath, or not?" [Luk 14:3 ESV]. His point is that it IS lawful to heal, because that honors the Sabbath, where turning a blind eye to desperate need that it is in your power to relieve does NOT honor the Sabbath. We must see and understand this. It was not a sin.
So what Jesus is saying is that we ought to realize that healing a person you can heal, pulling a distressed donkey from a pit, casting out a disabling spirit, all honor the Sabbath, where leaving all these to suffer or starve or drown, dishonors the Sabbath. To honor the Sabbath is to honor the one who made the Sabbath, and act with the grace and the mercy that He would use. Honoring the Sabbath is what the Law says. The Law does not say "never lift a finger, even to help someone in need, on the Sabbath. They had turned the Law from "honor" the Sabbath to lift not a finger for any reason on the Sabbath. Like the story that says the elevators in Israel stop at every floor on the Sabbath, so you don't have to push the button, because pushing the button would be violating the Sabbath. Does trivializing the Sabbath in that way really honor the Sabbath, or make a joke of it?
Be careful of getting pulled into the "sometimes the need is great enough to makes it ok to sin". That is never what it means. What it means is that we ought to understand what the Law really means, and to what it is applicable. The Law, even the Law, was about the heart, and the attitude we have toward God when we follow the rule. Sometimes, it is following the rule that is the sin, if our hearts and minds are not in it or resent it.
Jesus says we should always choose the lower place, the further place. It is up to the host to decide to honor us by "promoting" us to a better location, a better seat at the table. We are to do our work humbly where we are. 2020 - The point is that it is better to be honored by another, when he asks you to move up front, than to honor yourself by marching right up front and having a seat. Here it is in so many words:
11 For everyone who exalts himself will be humbled, and he who humbles himself will be exalted." [Luk 14:11 ESV] Note that it doesn't say we should eschew honor. It doesn't say we shouldn't prefer the place of honor. It says we should not award it to ourselves.
This theme seems to be coming up a lot, and not just in Luke. It is almost as if THE hindrance to salvation is self-importance. The rich guy building all those barns and then taking it easy...he only wanted to please himself, not even do a day's work until he had to do it. In Luke 12 yesterday, Jesus warned of the hypocrisy of the Pharisees. They were one thing outwardly, but inside, were just too smart to buy into all this religious stuff. They were arrogant, not humble. Jesus pointed it out to the disciples, so they would recognize that it was a huge problem. They, also in yesterday's reading, don't worry about food and clothes, because God knows and will provide for you. That is, don't let the elite tell you that you are useless to God because you cannot afford your own food. What greater honor than to have God see to your needs, as you serve Him. Over and over...and not just the last two days.
When we are so sure we are "right", or that we are...I don't know how to state this. If someone is spouting about evolution, and I don't speak up and say creation, because it will be too embarrassing for me to put forth such an "intellectually bankrupt" theory, then I am letting pride rule over me. I don't want to be ridiculed. This first occurred to me when I was reading Jesus' words about confessing him before men. If we "keep the secret" that we believe in creation, we believe in the flood, we believe in the Tower, we believe a virgin conceived, we believe a man born blind had his sight restored, AND we believe a dead man rose from the grave, we should be right up front about that. If someone says these are impossible, we should speak up and say we believe it happened. Keeping silent is not confessing. To believe these things and keep silent is to commit Peter's sin. What is worse is to be among believers and nod in agreement when creation is preached, but in your mind think that you are just sooo much smarter than these poor ignorant superstitious Christians. To think you are above all this is to give yourself a place of honor in your own mind, rather than waiting for God to give you that place. This goes even back to where Jesus says that there is nothing hidden that won't be revealed. Those who honor themselves above God in this way absolutely know they are doing it. Perhaps we don't talk about it much, but we know when we do it. Successfully fooling the assembled is not the same as fooling God about what we really think. He knows. And at some point, all will know because He will bring to light what our attitudes really are.
I really think this is profound, I think I'm doing a poor job of getting it stated correctly and completely, but it needs to be stated. It is the thread that is tying all these things Jesus was saying on that last journey to Jerusalem together.
Jesus says we are to be a benefit to those who cannot repay what we give them. Then it is God who will repay us in the end. If we do things that men repay on earth, we have our whole reward. 2020 - This is a further extension of the idea that we are not to put ourselves above others, not to judge the worth of others by there titles, their clothes, their ability to pay us back. When we make such judgements, we are honoring ourselves above these others, and perpetuating a judgemental attitude towards others. We make ourselves better than those who have less. It isn't that it is wrong to have more than others, God blesses some more than others. It is wrong to believe that we have more because we are better - which is to promote ourselves at the banquet. Ok, that is getting closer I think to the attitude that Jesus is speaking against. God does not think this way, and goes to great lengths to show us this. How many times does the chosen of God have a pretty unimpressive resume'? David was the youngest. Jacob was younger than Esau. Abraham lied to save his own skin. This lesson is hammered on from creation to Revelation, and yet Jesus is having to repeat it over and over and over.
2022 - Oh my...these verses:
13 But when you give a feast, invite the poor, the crippled, the lame, the blind, 14 and you will be blessed, because they cannot repay you. For you will be repaid at the resurrection of the just." [Luk 14:13-14 ESV].
Look at this phrase! The resurrection of the just. Surely that refers to the rapture, where ONLY the saved are resurrected. This characteristic is unique to the rapture. And the repayment? What will that be? Well that is the bema seat judgment, in heaven. Here it is from Jesus.
2024 - So here is the interesting thing about this verse as I see it today. We can argue here that we are in the New Covenant at this time...though I really think that begins only after the resurrection...but you can argue here that Jesus is talking New Covenant, that he is talking about the church. If we look at it that way, this says the Judgement seat of Christ will be only for those raptured, and those will be the church, NOT the OT saints. But if you stay hard core about the church not starting until Pentecost, then Jesus is telling the OT saints that THEY TOO will be raptured. There isn't enough here to be certain, based on this one verse. But there is a clue here...We ought to note that inviting sick and lame into your house was NOT a teaching the Pharisees would have approved. They believed such people were under God's punishment for some sin in their lives or for some family sin. This was OT thinking. So that weighs in favor of a church only rapture.
2024 - Ahh, the context though. Look at 15-24! Jesus tells them, I believe quite certainly, that the Old Covenant saints will NOT be raptured. They wouldn't come when invited, so when the feast takes place - when the church is raptured out of the great tribulation spoken of in Matt 24, the Jews will not come with them. They miss the feast, and instead go through the worst of God's wrath. So with context added, the OT saints will not be raptured.
On hearing this:
15 When one of those who reclined at table with him heard these things, he said to him, "Blessed is everyone who will eat bread in the kingdom of God!" [Luk 14:15 ESV]
I think this one was saying that no matter how "un-exalted" we may be, if we are in heaven, then we are blessed. Jesus answer begins with "But...", so I am guessing this statement will turn out to be bad thinking....though I tend to agree with it. Jesus tells about the wedding feast where the invited guests all make excuses and don't show up. So the master of the wedding sends out his servants to invite others - still in the city - who are poor and crippled, blind and lame. Those the original guests would have disdained are now the ones invited. But still the hall for the wedding is not full. So the servants are sent out to the highways, to bring in even those not of the town. Gentiles maybe? And the last line says that NONE who were originally invited will be part of the banquet. This could mean that no Jews at all will be saved during the age of the Gentiles. But this can't be right, because the lower classes in the city were there. Those too full of themselves though, they will never be allowed in.
2020 - I think this is still on the theme of being humble and not judging others. I suspect now that all those the man invited to his banquet considered themselves too important to associate with him. They were buying fields and oxen and getting married. Doing "rich" things, and this man had taken a long time to get the banquet ready. Perhaps his means were limited and it took time to save up enough to throw this banquet. Those who wouldn't come were judgemental. So the man invited different people, whom we perceive to be of even lower station than the banquet thrower. And these were honored to attend. But there weren't enough. The man wanted his house filled for the banquet...so even foreigners and total strangers who wouldn't even be around to repay him in some way were invited. And these came too. But the ones who were invited in the first place? None were allowed to change their minds when they saw the lights and understood that the banquet was in progress. This is about that judgemental attitude, but it is about Jews that have it. This is about the attitude that Israel has towards each other, and in spades towards those not Israel. They consider non-Jews to be dogs, all with the same classification. Not Samaritan dogs and Roman dogs. Not even worthy of that much distinction. Just "not us" dogs. This is a very pointed parable. Jesus says that because of their haughty attitudes, their pride of ancestry, and their perfect lives wrt the Law, that they are excluded from the kingdom. Excluded. Maybe this also ties back in to the theme in John where they can't come unless God chooses them. John emphasizes repeatedly that the religious elite don't understand Jesus' sayings because they are not allowed to understand. They are kicked out of banquet. This sounds "in their face" because it is intended to be exactly "in their face". In Luke, we see that judging themselves as better than others is a roadblock to understanding, in John, they are told their exclusion because of the attitude is strictly enforced. Hmmm...The banquet is already in progress, and the doors are locked, and the Jews may not enter at this point. Things are past that point already.
2022 - Isn't this told elsewhere, and it is a ruler rather than "a man" who does the inviting? And I don't remember the other placing saying that guests should be "compelled" to come? What could that part mean? Wish I had more time on a Sunday morning to look these things up.
Jesus tells the crowds following him to count the cost. It is likely that many who followed were only there for the miracles, the spectacle, or just to be part of the crowd. But the day was coming when it was going to be very unpopular to be identified as a follower of Jesus. Friends of the "camp followers" would see them run backwards and laugh at them. This would further inhibit those friends from ever coming to Christ. If the cost were counted, and one could follow no matter the circumstances, no matter the personal loss, then that one would be in a much better position to win his friends to Christ.
And what about the part that says we have to hate our mother, father, and so on if we are to follow? We know that a man who preached "love thy neighbor" did not literally mean that we should begin to hate our loved ones if we follow Christ. But it might mean that if we end up isolated from them because of our commitment, we should be prepared for it and deal with it, and accept it. We might be isolated even from those we love most. And if a parent dies, shouldn't we continue in loyalty to God rather than blaming him for our loss? If we blame God, then aren't we saying we love our parent more? We reject the Almighty because of the loss of a loved one? Who then did we love most? 2020 - I think this view is correct. This is how we "test" whether we have given up all. When we do lose it, are we angry at God about it, or do we thank him for the lesson?
I am not sure what sending a delegation when the enemy is a long way off and suing for peace is about though? Perhaps it means that even when it comes to following Christ, it should not be all about the emotion of the moment, but a deliberated, thought out commitment and decision to follow him. Can a 6 year old even do this? Or is Jesus speaking here mainly to adults - to the crowds that are following him so long as things are good. Self-examination seems to be what is in view. And I suppose that would be tailored to the individual doing the calculation. Even to 6 year olds.
Then Luke's version of the verse I posted this morning about salt losing its savor. A good verse.
2020 - Look at the last words of this chapter:
35 ...He who has ears to hear, let him hear." [Luk 14:35 ESV] Here is that phrase again. I think this ties back yet again to the verses in Isaiah and Ezekiel (wasn't it?) where the eyes and ears of Israel were closed as part of God's wrath against them for their rebellion. He is perhaps saying that very very few of the listeners can understand, but that if you do understand, now is your time. This is the chance. And to "break out" of the wrath and follow Christ - which was in fact their only escape - will have dire consequences, because the elite are going to try and stomp out even the memory of Jesus and his teaching. Few will be able to tolerate the persecution, but God has chosen some. A few have ears, a few can come apart from the salt that has lost it's savor.
2020 - The 2020 notes on 14 took a while. Reading through the rest of today's material. Will focus on 15 next year.
2022 - Counting the cost avoids ridicule. Avoids bringing ridicule on your efforts. This says that if you are not willing to 100% commit, and so never "fail" in a way that holds your purpose up to ridicule, then you ought not come. Think of the applications. If you follow, that ought to be a well known fact about you. "Tom calls himself a Christian". The ridicule would come when Tom gets drunk one night. When Tom screams bloody murder at his wife in a parking lot in Missouri. When Tom uses horrid language in a conversation. When Tom says ... other things that a Christian shouldn't say. This a a terribly difficult passage to actually live. Surely we all fail miserably and frequently at this one.