Category Archive

            In our last essay we studied Luke 14:1-24.  That study ended with the Parable of the Great Dinner, which Jesus told at a Pharisee’s house (vv. 15-24).  In this essay we are studying 14:25-35, a segment that has a very general setting and has to do with the cost of discipleship.  As you can see in verses 25-27, this segment took place in a different location and had a different audience.  But Luke saw a connection of theme.  In the parable of the Great Dinner, the invited guests made excuses and refused to attend the meal.  For Jesus, their refusal symbolized a refusal to attend the end-time messianic banquet; and he applied the parable by saying that none of the originally invited ones would taste of his dinner, meaning they would not be saved.  Those originally invited people obviously did not grasp the cost of discipleship.  So Luke placed this segment on the cost of discipleship right after the parable in order to impress upon his readers the fact that discipleship is quite costly. 

            After leaving the Pharisee’s house, a rather large crowd was accompanying Jesus to Jerusalem when he turned to them and said, “Whoever comes to me and does not hate father and mother, wife and children, brothers and sisters, yes, and even life itself, cannot be my disciple.”  Wow!  In Matthew’s parallel, which was given in a different context, Jesus doesn’t use the word “hate.”  Rather he is quoted as saying, “Whoever loves father or mother more than me is not worthy of me; and whoever loves son or daughter more than me is not worthy of me” (Mt. 10:37-38). Thus in Matthew’s version, the point simply is that love for God must take priority over love for family. 

            But here in Luke, Jesus uses the word “hate”: “Whoever comes to me and does not hate father and mother, etc.”   That is a bit shocking at first glance.  It’s one thing to put love of God ahead of love of family, but it seems to be something else altogether to hate one’s family.  So we must get to the bottom of the meaning of that word. 

            One way that scholars deal with the word “hate” is to point out that the underlying Hebrew word often was used to mean, “to love less.”  If that was Jesus’ intention when he used the word, then this version in Luke means basically the same thing as in Matthew.  The word also was sometimes used to mean, “to leave aside,” or “abandon.”  If that was what Jesus had in mind, then he was talking about leaving one’s family to follow Jesus.  Either way, Jesus was not talking about psychologically hating our families. 

            Coming back to the crowd to whom Jesus made the statement, Jesus was well aware that most of the people in the crowd were not really committed to him.  Some of them were curiosity seekers who were hoping to see a miracle.  Others probably had heard that he miraculously fed people and were hoping to get a free meal.  Still others were hoping he would be the one to overthrow the hated Romans.  None of those reasons represented true discipleship.  So Jesus gave this teaching on the cost of discipleship.  One must be willing to give up one’s family, or even one’s life, to be a disciple.  Obviously, we need to ask ourselves, “Are we willing to pay this price?” 

            Jesus added something else to this teaching.  Not only must we be willing to abandon our family and give up our life to be a disciple, we also must be willing to bear our cross as we follow Jesus.  The NRSV translates badly here when it translates “does not carry the cross.”  The Greek clearly says, as the NIV translates, “does not carry his cross.”  In other words each of us has a cross to carry as we follow Jesus.  It is not Jesus’ cross, which is the cross.  Simon of Cyrene literally did carry Jesus cross (Lk. 23:26).  But we are not called to do that.  We are called to bear our own crosses. 

            Now Jesus does not spell out what that means, but at the very least it means hardship that comes our way because of the ministry, or ministries, to which we have been called.  I do not believe that it means our physical problems, our unappreciative in laws, or a cranky boss, and the like.  There are certain things in life that are unpleasant, and we have to learn to put up with them.  But those are not our crosses. 

            Our crosses have to do with Christ’s ministry in the world and our part in that ministry.  I said that physical problems are not a cross.  But if those physical problems are a result of our ministry for Christ, then they do constitute a cross to carry.  I believe that persecution because of faith in Jesus is a cross.  And I believe financial hardship that is due to our decision to follow Jesus is a cross.  You may be able to think of other examples. 

            Now then, after giving this basic teaching on the cost of discipleship, in verses 28-35 Jesus gives three parables to illustrate the teaching: a man building a tower, a king fighting a war, and salt that loses its flavor. 

            The first illustration is that of a man building a tower.  Jesus indicates that one who undertakes such a project will at the very beginning ascertain what the tower will cost and evaluate whether or not he has the money to complete it.  Otherwise he will open himself to ridicule. 

            The second parable is similar to the first, and yet quite different.  It is that of a king who is faced with a war against an opponent who has twice as large an army, 20,000 as opposed to his 10,000.  Jesus suggests that such a king would consider whether or not he could win with half as many troops as the other king; and if not, he would send a delegation to work out terms of peace. 

            The two parables are similar in that they both emphasize counting the cost.  Traditionally, interpreters have seen the parables as symbolic of the Christian life.  Like the man desiring to build a tower and the king faced with a war, we must count the cost of discipleship so that we will not fail as disciples of Jesus, due to an unwillingness to pay the price.  Christ wants us to succeed.  Therefore he wants us to understand that we must sacrifice everything: our families, our possessions, and even our lives in order to be his disciple.  And we also must be willing to carry our cross for his sake. 

            G. Campbell Morgan took a different view.  He taught that the tower builder and the king represent Jesus rather than the Christian life.  Thus Jesus is the one who must count the cost.  He must decide whether or not we believers provide him with adequate material with which to build his Church and battle the enemy.  We are not adequate material unless we are willing to pay the price and are completely committed.  Morgan’s interpretation may appeal to you, but I prefer the traditional interpretation.  And I’ll explain why in a moment. 

            Now then, having seen how the parables are similar, let’s now look at how they differ.  The parables differ in that the second one about the king involves suing for peace with the enemy, which adds an element not present in the parable about building a tower.  This is the main reason why I prefer the traditional interpretation of these parables.  If the king represents Jesus, as Morgan says, that means that if we prove to be a weaker army, then Jesus would sue for peace with the enemy.  I cannot accept that interpretation.  In the traditional interpretation, we believers must realize that we are weak and that we need to sue for peace with God in order to become effective disciples. 

            Verse 33 is Jesus’ application: “So therefore, none of you can become my disciple if you do not give up all your possessions.”  Obviously, Jesus is using the word “possessions” here broadly.  And from what we have just studied, Jesus includes literally everything in the term.  We must give up our material possessions, which are on the surface of the term.  But we also must give up our families in the sense of putting them in a secondary place in our affection.  And we must give up our very lives in the sense that we dedicate them completely to Christ.  There are no exceptions.  In order to be a disciple of Jesus, we must give up everything. 

            The third parable closes out Jesus’ little discourse on the cost of discipleship: “Salt is good, but if salt has lost its taste, how can its saltiness be restored?  It is fit neither for the soil nor for the manure pile; they throw it away.  Let anyone with ears to hear listen!” 

            Mark and Matthew record similar sayings, but they are in totally different contexts.  In Matthew, for example, it appears in the Sermon on the Mount, after Jesus declared that the disciples were the “salt of the earth.”  Here in Luke, as we have just seen, Jesus spoke the parable as a third illustration of the cost of discipleship. 

            Salt was valuable in ancient times.  Indeed salt sometimes was given to soldiers as part of their pay.  Thus the term “salary” is related to the term “salt.”  And that led to the expression, “He isn’t worth his salt.”  Jesus says, “Salt is good.”  Why is salt good? 

            First, it is a flavoring agent.  Indeed that is its most common use.  Salt also is a preservative.  Mankind has used salt to preserve meat and fish for generations.  Actually one can go to a more basic level of preservation.  Salt is necessary for life.  We would die if we didn’t have access to salt.  Salt also has an antiseptic or healing quality.  I suspect that many of you readers as children, when you had a sore throat, were given salt water with which to gargle? 

            Now you may aware of the fact that salt technically cannot lose its flavor.  But that is true only of salt that is pure.  In ancient Palestine, much of their salt was obtained by evaporation from the Dead Sea.  That salt was not pure.  Other substances present in the water contaminated the salt [carnallite, also known as gypsum].  The salt often was contaminated by fine soil as well.  If enough of these substances were in the salt, it could lose its flavor, in which case it was useless and could only be thrown out. 

            To sum up, discipleship is serious business.  It is a costly business, so we must count the cost.  And it will cost us everything.  We must put Christ ahead of our families, our possessions, and even our lives.  And we must be salt to the world.

Dear Readers,

Tillie and I will be on the road for the next three weeks, and I will not be posting any studies during that time.   We are traveling to Pennsylvania,  Alabama, and Missouri visiting family, attending a high school reunion, and giving leadership to a Christna Ashram.  Love and blessings to all,  Bob

            In our last essay we studied 12:35-59, in which we saw Jesus deal with spiritual preparation for his own second coming with a series of parables.  In this essay we are studying 13:1-30.  In verses 1-5 Jesus shows the necessity for repentance.  Verse one suggests that someone came from Jerusalem and interrupted Jesus with a message about an incident there, in which at least two Galileans had been killed while making sacrifices, thus mingling their blood with that of their sacrifices.  Howard Marshal suggests that the expression may have meant that the Galileans were killed at the same time as their sacrifices, rather than that their blood literally was mingled with that of the sacrifices. 

            At any rate, Jesus, after hearing the report, says, “Do you think that because these Galileans suffered in this way they were worse sinners than all other Galileans?  And answering his own question, he says, “No, I tell you: but unless you repent, you will all perish as they did.”  Now some Pharisees would have argued that the Galileans Pilate killed were worse sinners, because the Pharisees in general believed that calamities were punishments from God for sin.  But Jesus said that was not the case.  The book of Job also makes that point in a powerful way.

            Then in verses 4-5 Jesus mentions another, apparently well-known incident as an additional illustration.  Eighteen people had been killed when the tower of Siloam at Jerusalem fell on them.  And Jesus asks the same question in regard to those people.  And again he answers “No.”  And then he adds the same punch line: “but unless you repent, you will all perish just as they did.” 

            Jesus made two major points here.  First, he declared that natural calamities are not proof that those who suffer them are worse sinners than anyone else.  And second, in his application, Jesus raised the issue to a higher level by making the point that all sinners, including his listeners that day, face the judgment of God unless they repent. 

            It is important to note the fact that this teaching is not just about repentance, as important as that is.  It also concerns the classic theological and philosophical problem of evil.  Today, as always, people tend to hold God responsible for natural calamities.  They either say, as the Pharisees did, that God is punishing people.  Or they say that God has some higher goal in mind that we cannot see.  But Jesus says that God is not manipulating nature.  People suffer from natural calamities because they are in the wrong place at the wrong time. 

            Next, in verses 6-9, Jesus tells the Parable of the Barren Fig Tree.  Jesus tied this parable to his teaching on repentance in a subtle but definite way.  After announcing that all sinners must repent of their sins, Jesus indicates that a period of mercy is being extended.  In the parable, the fig tree has been fruitless for three years in an ideal environment.  The owner of the vineyard in which the fig tree was planted discusses the tree with his gardener.  The owner believes the tree should be cut down, but the gardener intercedes on behalf of the tree.  He asks for one more year of cultivation before a final decision is made.  The assumption is that the owner granted the year’s grace.  And thus mercy is illustrated.  However, the grace period is limited.  They must repent soon, or they will face the judgment. 

            Older interpreters tended to interpret all parables as allegories.  So in this case they identified the fig tree as Israel, the owner as God, and the gardener as Jesus.  But such allegorizing is unnecessary.  Allegorizing simply adds layers of meaning that Jesus did not intend.  The point of the parable as just explained is clear. 

            Now then, at verse ten we see a change of Jesus’ location.  Therefore it is the beginning of a new section.  It is a lengthy and diverse section that continues until 18:30.  I have called it “The Way of the Kingdom.”  The first incident in the section is the healing of a crippled woman in verses 10-17. 

            As you can see in verses 10-14, the setting was in a synagogue on a Sabbath.  There is some difficulty in interpretation caused by the fact that Luke says the woman had a “spirit that had crippled her for eighteen years.”  And in verse 16, Jesus says that Satan bound her.  Of course this raises the possibility that an evil spirit held her in bondage.  Yet there is no indication that Jesus cast out a spirit.  He simply pronounced her free from the ailment and laid hands on her.  And she was immediately healed. 

            Some scholars try to diagnose the woman’s condition medically.  The severe bending over does suggest a couple of medical possibilities, but the medical speculations are essentially useless.  Others suggest that she “spirit” mentioned was psychological, and Jesus delivered the woman from her self-made spirit of bondage.  The truth is there is no way to know exactly what was wrong with the woman.  And it isn’t really important.  The important thing is that Jesus healed her, and the healing created a controversy with the leader of the synagogue who believed that healing was work and ought not be done on the Sabbath. 

            In verses 15-17 Jesus answers the challenge from the leader of the synagogue.  He accuses him, and those who agree with him, of being hypocrites, because they feed and water their cattle on the Sabbath, but do not wish to allow people to be healed on the Sabbath.  The comparison between animals and people was deadly, and the congregation was shamed.  Indeed they began to praise God for what Jesus was doing, because they understood that this is the way of the kingdom of God. 

            In verses 18-22 we find two parables that present the power of the kingdom.  Sometimes these parables are called twin parables, because they both are making a point about kingdom power.  The first of the two parables is the Parable of the Mustard Seed.  Jesus likened the kingdom to a mustard seed.  In Jesus’ day the mustard seed was the smallest known seed, a fact that Mark points out in his parallel (Mk. 4:31).  And yet when a mustard seed was planted, it grew into a large bush or tree from four to nine feet tall, which was large enough for birds to take shelter in it.  Jesus was making the point that the future of the kingdom of God is related to the present like the future mustard tree is related to the present tiny seed.  Although the present state of the kingdom may seem quite small, the future state will be large and strong.  Thus that parable illustrates the power of the kingdom to grow. 

            A different point about the power of the kingdom is made in the parable of the Leaven, or Yeast.  In this case the point has to do with the way the church will affect the world, rather than with the church’s size.  Leaven often was used in that culture to symbolize the effects of evil; but in this case, Jesus used it to symbolize the positive effects of the kingdom.  As a small amount of leaven makes the entire loaf rise, the church (though very small) will have a beneficial effect on the whole society of which it is a part.  That is the power of the kingdom to affect the world. 

            The next segment, verses 22-30, tells us about entry into the kingdom.  In verse 22 Luke reminds us that Jesus still is on his way to Jerusalem to suffer and die.  Then in verses 23 an unidentified person asks Jesus a question: “Lord, will only a few be saved?” 

            Notice that Jesus doesn’t answer the question “Yes” or “No.”  He doesn’t even answer in terms of how many will be saved.  Rather Jesus answers in terms of how many will not be saved.  “Strive to enter through the narrow door; for many, I tell you, will try to enter and will not be able.”  Then Jesus explains why.  “When once the owner of the house has got up and shut the door, and you begin to stand outside and to knock on the door, saying, ‘Lord, open to us,’ then in reply he will say to you, ‘I do not know where you come from.’” 

            There are several items of interest here.  First, Jesus says that the door of salvation is narrow.  That means that there are restrictions.  One cannot enter with a load of sin, for example.  We must repent.  We also cannot take our worldly goods with us.  We must give them up at the door. 

            Second, there is a limited time, or window, of opportunity for salvation.  The day will come when the door will be shut; and those who have refused to enter will not be able to get in. 

            Finally, third, Jesus makes it clear that a passing acquaintance with him will not be adequate.  Just being a Jew who heard him preach or teach in their streets will not do it.  Even having eaten a meal with Jesus will not be enough to get one in.  One has to have responded positively to his teachings; one has to have been in real fellowship with Jesus, to enter in. 

            Then Jesus points out that the patriarchs and prophets will be in the kingdom; and many people will be coming in from all points of the compass.  These who come from everywhere represent the many Gentiles who will be part of it.  Then Jesus concludes with the saying, “some are last who will be first, and some are first who will be last.”  That saying indicates hat heaven’s view of things is different from ours; and although I believe there will not be any unhappy people in heaven, I believe there will be some who are greatly surprised.  Some who have thought they had great ministries will be last in the heavenly realm; and others who didn’t think they had any ministry worth mentioning will be first.

            In our last essay we studied 12:13-34.  In this essay we are studying 12:35-59, which is part three of Jesus’ discourse with the disciples and crowds.  At this point in his discourse, Jesus shifts his focus once again.  In the first part of the discourse, he dealt with greed (12:1-21); and in the second part he dealt with anxiety or worry (12:22-34).  Now in the third part he deals with spiritual preparation for his own second coming with a series of parables. 

            The first parable contains two pictures in verses 35-36.  The first picture is seen in the first phrase, “Be dressed for action.”  That phrase literally reads, “Let your loins be girded.”  In that culture, to gird one’s loins meant to tuck the ends of long robe everyone wore into the belt so that one would be ready to walk or work.  So it does mean to be ready for action; but we need the picture of the tucked in robe in order to completely understand what he meant. 

            The second picture is that of servants or slaves waiting for their master to return from a wedding banquet.  The question is whether or not they have kept their lamps lit and are alert and ready to let him into the house when he arrives. 

            In verses 37-38 Jesus calls those servants who stay alert and keep their lamps lit blessed.  And to reward their loyalty, the master will sit them down and serve them a meal.  This parable would have mystified the disciples apart from some understanding that Jesus was teaching about the second coming, no master in Jesus’ day actually would have done that.  But Jesus was teaching about the second coming.  Those believers who are expecting him to return and are prepared for his return, even if delayed through the night, will be rewarded.  The important issue here is that of delay.  We must not be discouraged by the delay of the second coming.  At the same time, we must remain prepared for it. 

            Whereas the first parable emphasized a possible delay of the second coming, the second (vv. 39-40) suggests that its arrival will be sudden and unexpected.  As a thief comes when the owner of a house is not expecting him, so Christ will come when most are not expecting him. 

            In verse 41 Peter asks Jesus a question, “Lord, are you telling this parable to us or for everyone?”  That was an important question, and Jesus replies with another parable that is aimed at leaders, that is, at servants who are placed in charge of other servants.  Once again the emphasis is on loyalty.  Verses 43-44 tell us that the slave, the leader, who remains faithful and prudent, will be blessed.  Indeed he will be given greater responsibilities.  The idea is that the temporary authority he had been given will be made permanent. 

            Next, in verses 45-48, Jesus points out that not every servant remains faithful and prudent.  As you see, a servant leader, instead of being faithful and prudent, may choose to yield to his sinful nature and not be faithful to the master.  He may take the attitude that the master isn’t coming back for a long time.  And so he begins to do whatever he wants to do.  He abuses the slaves under his authority and lives it up at the master’s expense, including getting drunk, which was not acceptable in that culture. 

            Then Jesus says in verse 46 that the unfaithful servant’s master will return at an unexpected time and will severely punish him.  He will “cut him in pieces and put him with the unfaithful.”  Scholars generally believe that Jesus intended the expression cutting in pieces to be metaphorical.  This kind of brutality was occasionally done in ancient times, but it is unlikely that Jesus meant it literally.  The statement that the unfaithful servant would be put with the unfaithful after the cutting suggests to some interpreters that Jesus had in mind a scourging prior to putting the servant in prison.  What is certain is that the servant would be severely punished. 

            In verses 47-48 Jesus adds a twist to his teaching.  Whereas verses 42-46 are concerned with faithfulness and unfaithfulness, in these verses he speaks of greater or lesser knowledge of God’s will (v. 47) and of greater or lesser responsibility (v. 48b).  Those leaders like the Twelve and others, who have greater knowledge of God’s will and are assigned greater responsibilities, will be under a stricter judgment.  You may recall that the apostle James made this point in regard to teachers of the Word in James 3:1.  It reads, “Not many of you should become teachers, my brothers and sisters.  For you know that we who teach will be judged with greater strictness.” 

            Coming back to our verses here in Luke, Jesus declares that those who know what the Master (capital “M”) wants and fails to do it will be severely judged.  On the other hand, those who do wrong things, but who don’t know what they are doing will be lightly punished.  Jesus tops off the teaching with the last sentence in verses 48: “From everyone to whom much has been given, much will be required; and from the one to whom much has been entrusted, even more will be demanded. 

            In verses 49-53 Jesus emotionally speaks about how he personally will cause division.  Jesus begins this section by expressing a longing for the fulfillment of two things: the fire that he came to kindle on the earth and a coming baptism that was causing him great stress.  Historically there have been two interpretations of the fire: the fire of the Holy Spirit and the fire of judgment.  Based on what Jesus says next, it is more likely the fire of judgment. 

            The baptism refers not to his water baptism, which had taken place some time earlier, but to the baptism of his coming suffering and death.  It is interesting to learn that Jesus experienced stress, or distress, about this matter during his teaching and preaching ministry.  As we know that stress came to a head in the Garden of Gethsemane the night before he died on the cross. 

            The words in 12:51-53 may seem strange to some.  After all, every Christmas, in connection with Jesus’ birth, we talk about peace on earth and good will toward men.  Indeed we call Jesus the Prince of Peace.  But Jesus’ message was consistent.  Although he offered peace to people who were open to it, the overall result of his ministry was not peace, but division.  He illustrates with a family of five, father, mother, son, daughter, and the son’s wife. 

            In 12:54-56 Jesus turns to the crowds once again.  Jesus chastises the crowds for not being able to discern the times.  Indeed he accuses them of hypocrisy.  He reminds them that they can tell when it is going to rain and when the scorching heat is coming.  In other words, they can read the weather.  But they are not able to read the times.  That is, they fail to discern the actions of God.  The implication is that they should be able to do it.  Therefore, it is unwillingness rather than inability that is the issue. 

            Finally, in verses 57-59, Jesus closes the section with a parable.  In verse 57 he asks them why they don’t judge for themselves what is right.  Again the implication is that they can do it.  They just don’t. 

            The parable put the hearers in a situation that actually could have happened to them.  If someone would threaten to take them to court over a debt, the wise thing to do would have been to settle the debt before getting to court, because one could not predict what a magistrate might do.  The magistrate could throw them into debtor’s prison until the debt was paid, which would have made their situation worse than if they had settled the debt.  Jesus’ point was that they should get right with God before the judgment, because the result of the judgment could be much worse if they did not.  They could end up in hell.