What I Noticed Today (Luke 19-20)
Luke 19
In verses 1-10, Jesus entered Jericho. Zacchaeus, a rich chief tax collector, wanted to see Jesus, but he ran ahead and climbed a tree because he was short. Jesus saw him and told him to come down, saying He needed to stay at his house. Zacchaeus rejoiced and greeted Jesus joyfully and promised to give half his possessions to the poor and pay back four times any money he had extorted. Jesus said today salvation has come to this house because the Son of Man has come to seek and save the lost.
Note: The chief tax collector was the supervisor of other tax collectors over a region of the Roman empire. He became rich by extorting more money from people than were actually due in taxes to Rome.
Note: Zacchaeus was not saved because he gave half of his possessions to the poor but because his actions demonstrated his right relationship with God.
Note: Zacchaeus’ response to Jesus stands in stark contrast to the rich young ruler who left Jesus saddened by the thought of giving away his possessions.
In verses 11-27, (See also Matthew 25:14-30), Jesus taught the parable of the 10 Minas. He and the disciples were nearing Jerusalem, and the disciples thought the kingdom of God was going to appear soon. A wealthy man called 10 of his servants together and gave each of them a mina, and told them to engage in business until he returned from a business trip. The man returned, now a king, and called the servants together to have them account for the money he had given them. One servant stepped forward and said he had gained ten more minas. He was commended and rewarded with authority over ten towns. Another stepped forward and said he had earned five minas, and he was given authority over five towns. A third servant stepped forward and returned the mina saying he was afraid to invest it for fear of losing it. The master condemned him for not at least putting it on deposit to earn interest. So the mina was taken from him and given to the man who had earned 10.
Note: A mina was the equivalent of 100 drachmas, and a single drachma was a common daily wage for a worker. So giving each man a mina to invest in was a significant responsibility.
Note: The group that did not want the man to be the ruler (king) over them represents the religious rulers and others who rejected Jesus. The man who did nothing with the mina accepted the king’s rule but was unfaithful. Those who earned a return had accepted the king’s rule and faithfully invested what they were given just as they had been commanded.
The lesson of the parable for the disciples is that Jesus would go away and when He returned, He would return as king. Those that invest what they have for the kingdom will be rewarded. Those that do not will have their reward taken away, and those who reject Him will be judged.
Luke 19:28-21:38
Jesus enters Jerusalem to begin His ministry there. He begins with His triumphal entry and then teaches in the temple, presenting Himself as the Messiah.
Luke 20
In verses 28-40, Jesus and the disciples journeyed on toward Jerusalem. As they approached the Mount of Olives, Jesus sent two disciples ahead with instructions to go into the village (Bethany) and find a young donkey and bring it back to him. If questioned, they were simply to say the Lord needs it (this fulfills Zechariah 9:9).
Note: Bethany and Bethphage are small towns near the road from Jericho to Jerusalem. Bethany was two miles east of Jerusalem.
The disciples returned with the donkey, and Jesus began riding toward Jerusalem. As they went, people spread robes out on the ground.
Note: Spreading robes out on the ground was a way to honor a king as he entered a town (2 Kings 9:13).
The crowd and the disciples shouted Psalm 118:26 (a messianic psalm of praise).
Notes: They added the word “King” to the Psalm, indicating that they considered Jesus to be the Messiah.
Pharisees in the crowd heard this and told Jesus to tell the disciples to stop (proclaiming Him as King).
In verses 41-44, as Jesus approached the city, he wept (we know from John 11:35 that Jesus was at Lazarus’ tomb). He knew the city would be destroyed one day, and the people did not recognize what His coming into the city represented.
Note: The city of Jerusalem was destroyed by the Romans beginning in A.D. 70.
In verses 45-48, Jesus went into the temple complex and began throwing out those selling animals. He quoted from Isaiah 56:7 (God’s house was to be a house of prayer) and Jeremiah 7:11 (you’ve made it a den of thieves).
Note: The area where animals were sold was the outer courtyard. They sold animals for sacrifice at highly inflated prices and thereby corrupted the sacrificial system God had put in place.
Jesus taught in the temple complex every day. The chief priests, scribes, and leaders of the people looked for ways to destroy Jesus.
Thoughts for further consideration:
- The parable of the ten minas reminds us there are only three responses to Jesus. We can reject Him and be judged. We can accept him but remain unfaithful, in which case we lose our reward. Or, we can accept Him and be faithful by investing our gifts into the Kingdom.
- Pharisees tried to keep Jesus and His disciples from announcing His kingship. Who are the Pharisees in our society today?
Luke 20
Luke 20
In verses 1-7 (see also Mark 11:19-20, 27-33), Jesus finds himself in a challenging situation where the religious authorities—the chief priests, the teachers of the law, and the elders—confront Him as He is teaching in the temple. They question His authority, asking Him to specify the source from which He derives His right to teach, perform miracles, and basically do the things He has been doing.
Note: The chief priests, scribes, and elders were part of the Jewish ruling council, the Sanhedrin.
Jesus, showing His wisdom, responds to their inquiry with a counter-question. He asks them about the baptism of John the Baptist: Was it from heaven or from human origin? This question puts His interrogators in a dilemma. If they acknowledge that John's baptism was from heaven, then it logically follows that they should accept Jesus, whom John endorsed. However, if they claim that the baptism was of human origin, they risk offending the people who held John to be a prophet.
Recognizing the trap, the religious authorities opt to plead ignorance, saying they don't know where John's authority came from. Jesus, in turn, declines to answer their original question about His own authority. In this way, Jesus skillfully avoids being cornered and exposes the insincerity and cunning of His questioners. The passage serves as a clear demonstration of Jesus' wisdom and authority, and it also underscores the motives of those who are attempting to undermine Him.
In verses 9-19, Jesus tells the Parable of the Tenants. The parable serves as an allegory illustrating the history of God's relationship with His people, Israel, as well as a veiled criticism of the religious leaders who oppose Him. In the story, a man plants a vineyard, rents it to tenants, and then goes away for a long time. When he sends a servant to collect some of the fruit of the vineyard as rent, the tenants mistreat and send the servant away empty-handed. The man sends several more servants, but each meets a similar fate. Finally, he decides to send his son, thinking the tenants will respect him. However, the tenants conspire to kill the son, believing that doing so will give them the inheritance of the vineyard.
In this parable, the vineyard symbolizes Israel, and the tenants are the religious leaders. The servants who are sent to collect the fruit represent the prophets of old, whom Israel mistreated or ignored. The son signifies Jesus Himself, the heir to the vineyard. By killing the son, the tenants (religious leaders) believe they can seize control, but instead, they seal their own doom. After telling the parable, Jesus asks what will happen to the tenants, and the answer is that they will be killed and the vineyard given to others.
Jesus then cites Psalm 118:22, about the stone that the builders rejected becoming the cornerstone. He is identifying Himself as that cornerstone, rejected by the religious authorities but central to God’s plan. The religious leaders understand that the parable is spoken against them and wish to arrest Jesus immediately, but they refrain because they fear the people's reaction.
This narrative serves multiple purposes. It recounts Israel's history of turning away from God, rejecting His prophets, and now, rejecting His Son. It also issues a veiled warning to the religious authorities, suggesting that their opposition to Jesus will result in their downfall and loss of authority. Moreover, it makes a prophetic claim about Jesus' ultimate vindication despite being rejected by the religious establishment. Thus, the parable serves as a complex layering of history, criticism, warning, and prophecy.
In verses 20-26, the religious authorities employ a new tactic to entrap Jesus: they send spies pretending to be sincere disciples. These spies ask Jesus a politically charged question about whether it is lawful to pay taxes to Caesar, the Roman Emperor. The question is a highly sensitive one and a double-edged sword. If Jesus says it's not lawful to pay taxes to Caesar, he could be accused of inciting rebellion against Roman rule. On the other hand, if He says it is lawful, he risks alienating the Jewish people who are resentful of Roman occupation.
Recognizing the trap, Jesus asks for a denarius, a Roman coin, and inquires whose image and inscription it bears. They respond that it is Caesar's. Jesus then delivers a masterful answer: "Give to Caesar what is Caesar's, and to God what is God's." With this response, He avoids falling into their trap and offers a nuanced perspective that goes beyond the simplistic dichotomy they were trying to force upon Him.
On one level, Jesus acknowledges the practical necessity of abiding by the laws of the land, represented by paying the tax to Caesar. However, His answer also implies that there is a higher law, a divine obligation, symbolized by giving to God what is God's. Essentially, He reminds them that while there are earthly obligations, they should not eclipse or negate the spiritual commitments and responsibilities one has to God.
His interrogators are amazed at His answer, and they are unable to catch Him in His words in front of the people; thus, they become silenced and leave the scene. This segment showcases Jesus' skill in navigating complex ethical and political questions, emphasizing His wisdom and further exposing the duplicity of those who aim to discredit Him.
In verses 27-39, Jesus encounters the Sadducees, a sect of Judaism that did not believe in the resurrection of the dead. They pose a hypothetical question designed to challenge the idea of resurrection, asking about a woman who has been married to seven brothers in succession, each dying childless. They inquire whose wife she would be in the resurrection, thinking that the conundrum would render the concept of resurrection problematic or absurd.
Jesus responds by indicating that their question stems from a misunderstanding of the nature of the resurrection and the life to come. He states that those considered worthy to attain the resurrection will neither marry nor be given in marriage, and they can no longer die. They will be like angels and are God's children precisely because they are children of the resurrection.
Jesus then goes on to validate the concept of resurrection by referring to the account of Moses at the burning bush in Exodus 3:6. There, God identifies Himself as the God of Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob. Jesus argues that God is not the God of the dead but of the living; for Him, all are alive. His argument hinges on the premise that a relationship with God implies life, not death. If God identifies Himself with these patriarchs, it means they must be alive in some form, thereby affirming the concept of the resurrection.
The passage concludes with some of the teachers of the law complimenting Jesus, stating that he has spoken well. This acknowledgment suggests that even among the religious elite, there are those who recognize the wisdom and authority with which Jesus speaks.
Thoughts for additional consideration:
- Jesus' intellectual and theological acumen: He is not easily entrapped by tricky questions but responds with deep theological insight.
- The limitations of human understanding in apprehending divine realities: The Sadducees' question is rooted in an earthly understanding of relationships, which Jesus expands to encompass a heavenly perspective.
- Affirmation of the doctrine of resurrection: Jesus not only defends the idea but roots it deeply in the scriptural tradition, pointing to the relationship God has with the patriarchs as evidence of life beyond death.
- Overall, the episode showcases Jesus' adept handling of complex theological issues and his capacity to challenge prevailing interpretations, thereby revealing deeper spiritual truths.
What did you notice in your study today? Feel free to visit the website and leave a question or a comment.
