Luke 18:31-43 Bible Teaching

Welcome
Prayer

(Corona Virus Quarantine Week Three)
Luke 19.1-21
April 19th 2020
Recorded April 14h 2020

So, let’s read the first 15 verses again which we left off reading last week:

Luke 19:1 And Jesus entered and passed through Jericho.
2 And, behold, there was a man named Zacchaeus, which was the chief among the publicans, and he was rich.
3 And he sought to see Jesus who he was; and could not for the press, because he was little of stature.
4 And he ran before, and climbed up into a sycomore tree to see him: for he was to pass that way.
5 And when Jesus came to the place, he looked up, and saw him, and said unto him, Zacchaeus, make haste, and come down; for to day I must abide at thy house.6 And he made haste, and came down, and received him joyfully.
7 And when they saw it, they all murmured, saying, That he was gone to be guest with a man that is a sinner.
8 And Zacchaeus stood, and said unto the Lord; Behold, Lord, the half of my goods I give to the poor; and if I have taken any thing from any man by false accusation, I restore him fourfold.
9 And Jesus said unto him, This day is salvation come to this house, forsomuch as he also is a son of Abraham.
10 For the Son of man is come to seek and to save that which was lost.
11 And as they heard these things, he added and spake a parable, because he was nigh to Jerusalem, and because they thought that the kingdom of God should immediately appear.
12 He said therefore, A certain nobleman went into a far country to receive for himself a kingdom, and to return.
13 And he called his ten servants, and delivered them ten pounds, and said unto them, Occupy till I come.
14 But his citizens hated him, and sent a message after him, saying, We will not have this man to reign over us.
15 And it came to pass, that when he was returned, having received the kingdom, then he commanded these servants to be called unto him, to whom he had given the money, that he might know how much every man had gained by trading.
16 Then came the first, saying, Lord, thy pound hath gained ten pounds.
17 And he said unto him, Well, thou good servant: because thou hast been faithful in a very little, have thou authority over ten cities.
18 And the second came, saying, Lord, thy pound hath gained five pounds.
19 And he said likewise to him, Be thou also over five cities.
20 And another came, saying, Lord, behold, here is thy pound, which I have kept laid up in a napkin:
21 For I feared thee, because thou art an austere man: thou takest up that thou layedst not down, and reapest that thou didst not sow.

Alright, back to verse 1 of chapter 19:

1 And Jesus entered and passed through Jericho.

Meaning that as he was passing through Jericho.

2 And, behold, there was a man named Zacchaeus, which was the chief among the publicans, and he was rich.

Zaccheus is a Hebrew name and from this we confirm he was of course a Jew. I say this because it is believed by some that the publicans were all foreigners.

And remember, a publican was simply a tax collector who gathered taxes and gave them over to the Roman Government who taxed the people.

And as we know by now they were hated for the following reasons:

The collected tax
The worked for the Romans, and
They were known for skimming off the top of the collected taxes and sometimes gathering more than they should from the people in order to get more.

Jesus himself spoke of them in less than perfect terms a time or two (collectively) and so they truly bore a bad reputation in Jerusalem in that day.

Of course Zaccheus was labeled here as Chief among the publicans, meaning he presided over other tax-gatherers. Because they were so hated this would automatically make Zaccheus hated more and seen as the king of sinners.

Here we read that he was rich. So even though these men were despised and often spoken of unclean they were often
wealthy.

And in this we are automatically introduced to a unique individual in scripture – a rich man pursuing Jesus.

Typically speaking it was the poor and outcast that pursued him but not in the case of Zaccheus.

And so in him we find an exception to the general rule – Jesus said it was impossible for a rich man to enter the Kingdom of Heaven. But, he added, with God, anything is possible.

We are seeing right here in the man Zaccheus the heart of a rich man who seeks God.

At verse three we are given another insight into the heart and life of the man Zaccheus

3 And he sought to see Jesus who he was; and could not for the press, because he was little of stature.

What makes this description of Zaccheus interesting is at least from what Luke says, he was initially just curious about the person called Christ.

He was not in need of healing nor did he have someone he wanted to have healed in his family. But he “simply sought to see who Jesus was.”

So we have two unique, out of the box situations here with the man Zaccheus. One, he was rich, and two his introduction to Jesus was one of mere curiosity.

Most rich men, because they have money are not so open. This tells us something insightful to Zaccheuse’s heart.

And we learn one more thing, a personal thing, about Zaccheus – he was short – so short that he couldn’t see above the “press,” of the crowd.

This problem was avoided by King’s and Princes who were carried through cities of palanquins which were platforms that were placed on the shoulders of men who bore them and elevated the noble above the crowd.

Of course Jesus had no one to bear him around, or at least he didn’t get his disciples to do such a thing.

And this situation leads us to yet another unique characteristic about our man Zaccheus (verse 4)

4 And he ran before, and climbed up into a sycomore tree to see him: for he was to pass that way.

I am sort of a strange guy when it comes to people I really enjoy as human beings.
I am not impressed with people who have a lot of money or who drive nice cars or any of that.

I cannot help but really loving people who without fear are passionate. There is an old saying that says:

“What people want is the image of passion, not passion itself.”

I get this, and see how the world reacts to passion itself – it really hates mocks it. But I am not a fan of the image of passion. That is shallow. But for some strange reason I cannot help but personally adore people who have passion itself.

Its why I love Van Gogh so much. And the bassist Jaco Pastorius. But the passion I love the most in people is when it is directed at our Lord.

The blind men who scream out with all their hearts for Jesus even when the crowd tries to silence them.

The people in our lives who love Jesus so much they profess him without even considering the audience. I mean, these people have no hesitation meeting the president of the United States and they cannot help bringing him up in the first thirty seconds.

I love them. I’m not like them, but I love the flat out, all out, drop dead passion they have for Him. They are NOT ashamed.

So Zaccheus proves to me at least that he is this sort of man. Why? First of all he runs. He’s little and he runs to get ahead of the crowd.

In the East it was a shame then and it was a shame even today for a man to run in public. They had to reach down and gather up all the cloth of their skirt and draw it up around their waist or crotch, exposing their legs, and then to run. It was sheer shame culturally.

But not for Zaccheus and not for the Father in the Lord’s parable of the Prodigal Son.

Passion for truth. Passion for children. Passion for Him.

But Zaccheus didn’t stop there. After running in public to get ahead of the crowd, this short rich man climbed at tree!

That is just awesome. It both impresses men and cracks me up. I would have looked at Zaccheus in that day with great delight, not to mock but our of sheer appreciation for his heart.

He is one of my favorite Bible characters along with John the Baptist, Jeremiah, and David.

5 And when Jesus came to the place, he looked up, and saw him, and said unto him, Zacchaeus, make haste, and come down; for to day I must abide at thy house.

Now, of course, we wonder, how did Jesus know Zaccheus’s name?

There are numerous possibilities but let’s just talk about two.

The first possibility is Jesus was merely expressing his omniscience, which means his all knowingness.

In Isaiah 43:1 we read:

“But now thus saith the LORD that created thee, O Jacob, and he that formed thee, O Israel, Fear not: for I have redeemed thee, I have called thee by thy name; thou art mine.”

We know that the LORD of the Old Testament calls every star by name too (Psalm 147:4) and from John 10:3 that he calls all his sheep by name, so with Jesus being God with us, may have had this ability – as he had many others that showed such powers.

However, we have some issue with Jesus having the same omniscience as the Word of God preincarnate.

Hebrews 5:8 says that Jesus “learned obedience” through the things he suffered. The word “learned” is manthanó and is used 25 times in the NT to mean exactly what “learned” means in English.

Because its meaning is so consistent everywhere else, it’s unlikely manthanó means anything different when applied to Jesus by the author of Hebrews.

So, here we see that the Bible teaches us that Jesus “learned.” You cannot learn things if you know everything.

Of course Jesus’ “limited knowledge” is also revealed in his comments about the end times because in Matthews 24 Jesus admits that he didn’t know “the day or hour” of his own second coming – only his father knew that.

Christians like to use the repeated phrase that Jesus was fully God – fully God – in their description of Him, and I have no issue with this description being assigned to what was in him, but I resist the notion that what was in Jesus of Nazareth made Jesus of Nazareth fully God – I think Jesus of Nazareth was fully man who was allowing Fully God within Him to overcome his flesh, teaching Him obedience through the things he suffered, and ultimately deifying that human flesh to being fully God after his death and resurrection.

Finally, in Philippians 2:6-7 we read a description of the Word of God before he took on flesh. And the writer says

“Though he [speaking of Jesus preincarnate ontology] was God, he did not think of equality with God as something to cling to. Instead, he gave up his divine privileges; he took the humble position of a slave and was born as a human being.”

Would a “slave” know the Scriptures perfectly from birth? Would any “human being”?

I don’t think so. And so we see that what he was before becoming Jesus was God, when he took on flesh, that flesh was not omniscient.

And this leads us to the second way that Jesus could have known Zaccheus’s name:

The people were mocking Zaccheus for either running or being in a tree – calling out his name, hating his real passion – and Jesus heard it.

Simple as that. You decide.

5 And when Jesus came to the place, he looked up, and saw him, and said unto him, Zacchaeus, make haste, and come down; for to day I must abide at thy house.

In this we might see that Jesus was impressed by the efforts of Zaccheus to see him and perhaps knowing his heart (there’s that Omniscience Jesus did have by the Spirit) He was willing to spend more time with him over all the pressing masses.

We note that Jesus does not, as a respecter of persons, refuse to go with the rich Zaccheus or to stay with him.

He does not possess revers discrimination against the wealthy. He is open to all people of every walk. But it does seem that Jesus does have a preference to spend time with those who want to hear, who do seek Him, and is not about casting pearls before swine.

6 And he (Zaccheus) made haste, and came down, and received him joyfully.
7 And when they (the people, the religious leaders, the critics) saw it, they all murmured, saying, That he was gone to be guest with a man that is a sinner.

Judgements all around, right?

That Zaccheus was a sinner and that Jesus was going to be the guest of a sinner. Now, I am convinced that while devout in his seeking after Jesus that Zaccheus was probably worthy of his reputation.

Based on his confession he appears to have exercised oppression – which was part of the nature of his job, and then from what Jesus will say back to him the fact of his sinfulness is made pretty clear.

So, let’s read:

8 And Zacchaeus stood, and said unto the Lord; Behold, Lord, the half of my goods I give to the poor; and if I have taken any thing from any man by false accusation, I restore him fourfold.

We have no reason given why Zaccheus suddenly went into confession mode. He appears to have been just curious to see the Lord but perhaps he knew of his reputation as the Messiah or perhaps he knew in his heart, by the witness of the Holy Spirit, that he was in the presence of God.

We can’t really say. All we can say is he confessed to some of his ways, saying first:

“The half of my goods I give to the poor.”

It is natural for us to read this as a practice that he was accustom to doing but the Greek allows for Zaccheus to be saying what he was willing to do from that time forward.

Perhaps the people in the crowd were yelling specific accusations at him:

“He forced me to pay more!” or “He is rich while our family starves!” It is not said if this was the case but it is possible.

And so amidst these cries, or just being in the presence of the Lord, he felt driven to say what he was WILLING to do . . . in the face of his sin.

Behold, Lord, the half of my goods I give to the poor; and if I have taken any thing from any man by false accusation, I restore him fourfold.

His office gave him the power to oppress people and it seems that he did not deny that it had been done, by, it appears, false accusation.

Perhaps Zaccheus is saying that if he knows that he has accused someone falsely he made it a practice to repay them four fold OR that he was willing to repay four fold to anyone he has falsely accused (of not paying enough tax).

In terms of a four fold repayment this was the amount that was required in the Jewish law when a sheep had been stolen, according to Exodus 22:1.

Interestingly, if a man confessed to stealing a sheep himself and without the theft being detected and him being tried, he had only to restore what was stolen, and add to it a fifth part of its value (based on Numbers 5:6,7).

But if he was caught and found guilty the payment was a four fold return.

Zaccheus’ repentance is seen in his willingness to make the maximum restoration.

9 And Jesus said unto him, This day is salvation come to this house, forsomuch as he also is a son of Abraham.

In other words the family (or house) of Zaccheus, on this day, had salvation come to it.

They have (this day) received the blessings of the gospel and become citizens of the Messiah’s kingdom.

For the Jews and their nation in the face of the Messiah, salvation began with repentance – and this was what Zaccheus was evidencing – a willingness to repent.

And Jesus adds, “Forasmuch,” or “because, as he also is a son of Abraham.”

As a Jew, Zaccheus has been a sinner but he is also a son of Abraham. Prior to this day, he was not worthy to be called a son of Abraham. But now, by repentance which was brought about due to the presence of the promised Messiah, he had shown himself to be worthy to be called his son.

Abraham was an example of great faith and piety and was known as the father of the faithful in addition to being the founding ancestor of the Jews.

They were called his sons as his descendants but especially if they were faithful.

Zaccheus became faithful in and through his repentance, and therefore the status of Abraham’s son was returned to him.

And then Jesus adds a line that confirms the fact that Zaccheus was a sinful man, saying:

10 For the Son of man is come to seek and to save that which was lost.

We have in this story a fantastic illustration of two things:

First, what salvation meant to a Jew who came face to face with the Messiah then.

It meant what John the Baptist said when he entered the scene: to repent. We do not hear or read of Jesus telling Zaccheus to believe on him or to place his faith on Jesus. He had proven enough or sufficient faith on him by running and climbing the tree to just see him.

But the thing required of him as a Jew was to repent – that proved that his faith was real.

And that is the model all the Jews were under when their Messiah came to them.

This was a viable religious model and was totally appropriate for them to embrace.

But not us – not us non-Jews. Why? Because we have never been under the Law.

Therefore the message to us Gentiles has always been look in faith at Jesus and receive the grace of God into your hearts which forgives you of all your sins past present and future.

And when this occurs, you will become readily aware of your sins, and you will, because of the presence of the Holy Spirit, begin to turn from them, by and through the sanctifying presence of the Holy Spirit, and repentance will be the natural outcome of having been forgiven and therefore saved.

Get it? So the story of Zaccheus really plays for us today, though the responses are not coming about in the same order.

11 And as they heard these things, he added and spake a parable, because he was nigh to Jerusalem, and because they thought that the kingdom of God should immediately appear.

Now, this parable that we are about to read is similar (in some respects) to the parable of the talents that Jesus delivers in Matthew 25:14-28). In fact, most lay teachers suggest that they are really the same – but most scholars suggest that they are not.

Entire papers and studies have been done to compare the two – and I want to just touch on some of the highlights.

First of all Matthews parable of the Talents is located in Matt 25:14-30 and is shared with the Apostles who came to Jesus and asked him when the end of the Age was coming and what were the signs.

Luke’s version of the Parable is given here “because he was nigh to Jerusalem, and because they thought that the kingdom of God should immediately appear.”

This is the MOST significant difference between the two parables -why they were given and the audience to whom they were given.

Notice, however, that both parables are eschatologically based. This must be remembered – that Jesus gave them in reference to His coming (or the coming of the Kingdom of God)

The similarities are obvious – with each point I will share having reference in both Matthew and Lukes account.

A man was going on a trip (M14, L12).
He called his slaves and gave each responsibility for some of his possessions/wealth (M14, L13). When he returned, he called his slaves to him and settled accounts (M19, L15).

The first slave had made considerable profit (M20, L16). The master praised him and told him that he would have many responsibilities in the future, because he had shown he was trustworthy with little (M21, L17).

The second slave had made moderate profit and was given additional responsibilities relative to the gain he made (M22-23, L18-19).

Finally the last slave came and told the man, “Here is your property. I simply kept my portion safe. I was afraid because you are harsh, reaping where you do not sow and taking what you don’t own”(M24-25, L20-21).

The boss was livid, and said, “You wicked slave. If you believe that about me, you should have done what I would do. You should have, at least, put it in the bank so I could get interest. Take this slave’s portion and give it to the one that made the most profit” (M26-28, L22-24).

But Luke appears to have taken this basic tale and interwoven it with another separable story that is absent from Matthew. Luke’s addition would read something like:

“A nobleman went on a trip to gain himself a kingdom (L12). The citizens of his country hated him and sent a delegation saying, “We don’t want this man to rule over us”(L14). Upon being granted his kingdom, the king returned and summoned his subjects to hold them accountable for their actions (L15). To those that supported him he gave authority over cities within the kingdom (L17,19). Angry at the defiance of his detractors he had them slaughtered in his presence (L27).

Besides these departures in Luke, each of the evangelists incorporated additional details into their accounts as well. For instance

The number of slaves summoned in Matthew was three (M15), while in Luke it was ten (L13).

In Luke account each slave got one pound while in Matthew the slaves were prejudged as to their abilities and given dissimilar amounts – five, two and one talent respectively.

In both versions the end result was the destruction of the unprofitable servant and so we see a tie to eschatology there.

But one is slayed before him (in Lukes account) and in Matthew the unprofitable servant is thrown into the outer darkness where there will be weeping and gnashing of teeth (M30).

Of course this makes sense with Matthew’s telling of it because of Peter, James, John and Andrew coming to Jesus and asking about when the end was coming and the signs of it.

But within Luke, the parable was placed within Jesus’ journey to Jerusalem, after just leaving Jericho (L19:1) and again was a means, as verse 11 says:

“he added and spake a parable, because he was nigh to Jerusalem, and because they thought that the kingdom of God should immediately appear.”

And so in the case of Matthews parable the purpose was to show that there was coming a judgement where those who had been given little were expected to have given little and those who had given much were expected to return much.

But in Luke’s parable, where the stated purpose for Jesus telling it in the first place was to show that the Kingdom of God would NOT immediately appear, we have the major difference between the telling of the two.

12 He said therefore, A certain nobleman went into a far country to receive for himself a kingdom, and to return.

To me this is a direct allusion to Jesus leaving and going to heaven to establish His kingdom on High after his death and resurrection and then once he did that he would return, hence:

A certain nobleman went into a far country to receive for himself a kingdom, and to return.

13 And he called his ten servants, and delivered them ten pounds, and said unto them, Occupy till I come.

The Greek word translated to occupy here means not merely to possess, as it does to us, but to “improve” or increase.

So take this wealth you have been given and increase it.

To me this seems that in this Jesus is commanding his disciples to improve or increase what they have been given, which is the Good News. (verse 14)

14 But his citizens hated him, and sent a message after him, saying, We will not have this man to reign over us.

The Nobleman has left the Kingdom to go and establish another kingdom and he says here in verse 14 that the citizen of where he left behind hated him and sent a message through a delegation saying, “we will not have him rule over us.”

To me this delegation represented the Sanhedrim and them refusing to let Jesus reign over them.

15 And it came to pass, that when he was returned, having received the kingdom, then he commanded these servants to be called unto him, to whom he had given the money, that he might know how much every man had gained by trading.

Of course this is a clear reference to the Judgment seat and the judgment of every person at his return to them in that day.

16 Then came the first, saying, Lord, thy pound hath gained ten pounds.
17 And he said unto him, Well, thou good servant: because thou hast been faithful in a very little, have thou authority over ten cities.

Remember, this is a parable to illustrate a point, and so ten pounds for ten cities is all representational.

Same thing with the next verses:

18 And the second came, saying, Lord, thy pound hath gained five pounds.
19 And he said likewise to him, Be thou also over five cities.

And then we come to a similar result found in the Parable of the Talents:

20 And another came, saying, Lord, behold, here is thy pound, which I have kept laid up in a napkin:

This servant did not waste the money or was careless with it but hid it in a towel for safekeeping.

The money is representative of the Gospel given and those who took it out and shared it with others.

I am of the opinion that this was pointed at his apostles, just like the parable of the talents – could easily be wrong on this one, but it seems so.

And in the case of this last person the gospel was not shared and so the amount was not increased. Why? (verse 15)

21 For I feared thee, because thou art an austere man: thou takest up that thou layedst not down, and reapest that thou didst not sow.

And we will wrap this parable up next week. We hope you will join us from your homes and pray that you are well in the Lord.

Let’s pray.