Welcome
Prayer
Week six of Corona Virus shut down.
Luke 20.15-36
Taped May 5th 2020
Aired May 10th 2020
Okay so last week we read part of the parable Jesus shares in Luke 20 but we couldn’t finish our verse by verse coverage of it. So let’s read the parable shared (beginning at verse 9) and then pick it up at verse 15.
9 Then began he to speak to the people this parable; A certain man planted a vineyard, and let it forth to husbandmen, and went into a far country for a long time.
10 And at the season he sent a servant to the husbandmen, that they should give him of the fruit of the vineyard: but the husbandmen beat him, and sent him away empty.
11 And again he sent another servant: and they beat him also, and entreated him shamefully, and sent him away empty.
12 And again he sent a third: and they wounded him also, and cast him out.
13 Then said the lord of the vineyard, What shall I do? I will send my beloved son: it may be they will reverence him when they see him.
14 But when the husbandmen saw him, they reasoned among themselves, saying, This is the heir: come, let us kill him, that the inheritance may be ours.
And this is our text today – quite a bit – verse 15-38:
15 So they cast him out of the vineyard, and killed him. What therefore shall the lord of the vineyard do unto them?
16 He shall come and destroy these husbandmen, and shall give the vineyard to others. And when they heard it, they said, God forbid.
17 And he beheld them, and said, What is this then that is written, The stone which the builders rejected, the same is become the head of the corner?
18 Whosoever shall fall upon that stone shall be broken; but on whomsoever it shall fall, it will grind him to powder.
19 And the chief priests and the scribes the same hour sought to lay hands on him; and they feared the people: for they perceived that he had spoken this parable against them.
20 And they watched him, and sent forth spies, which should feign themselves just men, that they might take hold of his words, that so they might deliver him unto the power and authority of the governor.
21 And they asked him, saying, Master, we know that thou sayest and teachest rightly, neither acceptest thou the person of any, but teachest the way of God truly:
22 Is it lawful for us to give tribute unto Caesar, or no?
23 But he perceived their craftiness, and said unto them, Why tempt ye me?
24 Shew me a penny. Whose image and superscription hath it? They answered and said, Caesar’s.
25 And he said unto them, Render therefore unto Caesar the things which be Caesar’s, and unto God the things which be God’s.
26 And they could not take hold of his words before the people: and they marveled at his answer, and held their peace.
27 Then came to him certain of the Sadducees, which deny that there is any resurrection; and they asked him,
28 Saying, Master, Moses wrote unto us, If any man’s brother die, having a wife, and he die without children, that his brother should take his wife, and raise up seed unto his brother.
29 There were therefore seven brethren: and the first took a wife, and died without children.
30 And the second took her to wife, and he died childless.
31 And the third took her; and in like manner the seven also: and they left no children, and died.
32 Last of all the woman died also.
33 Therefore in the resurrection whose wife of them is she? for seven had her to wife.
34 And Jesus answering said unto them, The children of this world marry, and are given in marriage:
35 But they which shall be accounted worthy to obtain that world, and the resurrection from the dead, neither marry, nor are given in marriage:
36 Neither can they die any more: for they are equal unto the angels; and are the children of God, being the children of the resurrection.
So back to verse 15 if you will where Jesus will wrap up the parable where the Landowner sent his son to collect the fruits of his vineyard but the husbandmen, or the Nation of Israel, rejected him. And now Jesus tells us what they did with the Landowners Son, saying:
Luke 20:15 So they cast him out of the vineyard, and killed him. What therefore shall the lord of the vineyard do unto them?
Of course this is exactly what the Jewish leaders were going to do with Jesus, and he is explaining this ahead of time to them.
They would cast him out of the city gates, which was what they did with all of their diseased, and criminals, and offal and trash, and they would kill him, on a cross.
And then Jesus asks the very men who were going to do this to him a question:
“What therefore shall the lord of the vineyard do unto them?”
What would be just? What would be fair? How should the Landowner respond to those who do this to his messengers and then to his only Son?
Jesus answers the question for them here. However, in Matthew 21 Jesus tells a very similar tale and the men he tells it to when asked what the Lord should do to them reply:
“He will miserably destroy those wicked men, and will let out his vineyard unto other husbandmen, which shall render him the fruits in their seasons.”
In either situation – whether Jesus answers his own question or whether the Jewish leaders themselves provide the answer, the answer is the same -which is our verse 16 where Jesus says.
16 He shall come and destroy these husbandmen, and shall give the vineyard to others. And when they heard it, they said, God forbid.
So between the leaders response and Jesus response to what the Landowner would do, we have it plainly established that God, because they killed his Son, was going to
“come and destroy these husbandmen, and shall give the vineyard to others.”
Both Jesus and the men knew that if such things were carried out the only justification on those who did it would be destruction.
In Matthew chapter 24 Peter, James, John and Andrew came to Jesus on the Mount of Olives and asked him three questions:
When will all these things (that you have taught us) be, and what will be the sign of your coming and the end of this age.
The age that they asked about ended was the age that was established by God when he came and gave the vineyard he created to the House of Israel.
It was an age that included him going away for a while and then sending prophets and then his own son to gather the fruits of it.
It was an age that deserve being totally destroyed for killing the prophets and the Messiah. Here both Jesus and the Jewish leaders (according to Matthew 21) agreed that this destruction was a reasonable response for the killing of the Landowners Son.
After telling them what the result would be, the men said:
God forbid!
Meaning what a horrible destruction this would be. (verse 17)
17 And he beheld them, and said, What is this then that is written, The stone which the builders rejected, the same is become the head of the corner?
Having led them to admit that the justice which God was about to bring upon them for killing his Son, Jesus proceeds to show that their own scripture declares that this very thing had been predicted respecting their own nation.
The passage is found in Psalm 118:22-23 and it first had application to David and then as with many Old Testament prophecies, to Jesus.
The figure of a stone is taken from building a house. The principal stone for size and beauty is that commonly laid as the corner stone and which serves in the construction of a brick foundation or building as the stone to base all the rest of the house upon.
Of course the chief cornerstone here has reference to Jesus, who in the House of God, serves as the primary setting stone by which all other stones are placed and leveled.
But the passage in Pslam 118 that Jesus cites says that the builders rejected this stone. Apparently it was too big, too beautiful, too right, and the builders of that age and kingdom rejected it – just like they rejected their Messiah.
Nevertheless, in spite of their rejection of Him God still made him the chief cornerstone, as Paul says, speaking of the Gentiles who received Him in faith:
19 Now therefore ye are no more strangers and foreigners, but fellow-citizens with the saints, and of the household of God;
20 And are built upon the foundation of the apostles and prophets, Jesus Christ himself being the chief corner stone;
21 In whom all the building fitly framed together groweth unto an holy temple in the Lord.
In this Jesus would take his place as the Spiritual cornerstone over his spiritual house and all that follow-in after him on this foundation of apostles and prophets with Jesus being the chief cornerstone, would make up a holy temple, a spiritual house.
But prior to this fully happening, the former brick and mortar temple had to be laid waste. And this is what Jesus speaks to these men about here.
At this point in Matthews teaching of the same parable and subject Jesus adds:
21:43 Therefore say I unto you, The kingdom of God shall be taken from you, and given to a nation bringing forth the fruits thereof.
Which is exactly what I am saying is happening here in this description. What nation will bring forth the fruits of the Kingdom established? The Gentiles, as Paul said to a group of Jews in Acts 28:28:
“Be it known therefore unto you, that the salvation of God is sent unto the Gentiles, and that they will hear it.”
With hearing in scripture being equivalent in many cases to doing, we know that God took the Gospel to the Nations of the world who would receive the Messiah and in hearing him, produce the fruits commensurate with that reception – love – love for God first and neighbor second.
Having established himself as the chief cornerstone, Jesus goes on and says something profound to these men at verse 18
18 Whosoever shall fall upon that stone shall be broken; but on whomsoever it shall fall, it will grind him to powder.
In all probability Jesus is borrowing from Isaiah 8:14-15 where he says
14 And he shall be for a sanctuary; but for a stone of stumbling and for a rock of offence to both the houses of Israel, for a gin and for a snare to the inhabitants of Jerusalem.
15 And many among them shall stumble, and fall, and be broken, and be snared, and be taken.
Jesus is speaking of what it means to have contact with Him the Rock and it is profound.
First think of his example in literal terms. Suppose that there is a giant rock, the size of a car, and you, being elevated and high above it, fall upon that rock. You will in the least find yourself stunned, and more likely broken up, cracked, shattered in one or more places in your frame, right?
Then take that same rock, the size of a car, and have it drop from the same height upon you. We might suggest that there would be a total squashing or flattening of a person under such a weighty force.
Now let’s take Jesus as the Rock. People have a choice in terms of contact with him. They can fall upon him. That means from a proud height of our self importance, we can come to see whom He is relative to who we are, and we can fall from our lofty puffed up heights and the contact we will make will be shattering. We will be broken. We will see that the framework of our minds and lives is actually fragile in comparison.
Contact with the Rock in this way is certainly painful, and results in having to recover and adjust to new ways of living, but in Jesus’ example, the result is being broken.
This was his call to the Jews in his audience there – to His brethren. Fall upon me and be broken by the contact.
However, if you don’t, then you will have contact with me in another way – I will fall on you.
That was coming. He was going to come down (from the heavens) and fall upon all those who refused to be broken on Him.
If that was the case, he would grind them to powder. It is interesting because in our literal rock example the act of that rock falling on us would be a utter flattening or smashing, right?
But Jesus is the living Rock. And so the imagery is that he sort of serves as a pestle that moves, grinding everything under it into powder.
It is by not mistake that the term in Revelation for brimstone is synonymous with a stone that is used to rub away impurities; that the afterlife action described in places of torment are that of a rubbing or wearing away of a person, presumably of their hardness, pride and callousness.
Fall on Jesus and be broken or have him fall on you and be ground to dust – another interesting reference to man and our origins.
Verse 19 and 20 reveal the heart of those whom Jesus taught. They were not about to fall on him and be broken. And so we read
19 And the chief priests and the scribes the same hour sought to lay hands on him; and they feared the people: for they perceived that he had spoken this parable against them.
Interesting – like the old saying goes – the Sun can melt butter or it can harden clay. To me each individual has to decide what they want their heart to be – willing to humble itself (be broken by the words of the Savior) or refusing and to become hard (setting themselves up to be ground into dust).
In the case of these men the words of Jesus worked to harden, but they were fearful of the peoples reactions, and so they went the way of subterfuge (verse 20)
20 And they watched him, and sent forth spies, which should feign themselves just men, that they might take hold of his words, that so they might deliver him unto the power and authority of the governor.
In other words, through feigning to be goodly men, men interested in truth, they sent forth spies who would appear the same, who infiltrated his space and teachings as a means to catch and trap him and then deliver him over to the Romans.
I have to admit a personal prejudice and that is feigning. I quite detest it. Every now and again we have people who come to our gatherings that feign interest in what we are doing but who are on a mission to catch and trap.
Can’t stand such – though I have to love them. To me, be who you are. Say what you believe, be open and without shadow. I prefer that in any person over feigning. Anyway, in the spirit or guise of feigning men came (verse 21)
21 And they asked him, saying, Master, we know that thou sayest and teachest rightly, neither acceptest thou the person of any, but teachest the way of God truly:
Matthew tells us that these spies included a group that were call Herodians. We don’t really know much about them but it seems likely that they took their name from Herod the Great.
Many scholars believe that they were a political party and that they held some strict views on how the Nation of Israel were to engage with politics of the day – especially when it came to supporting Kings and or paying tribute or taxes to them and their reign.
This makes sense in light of what they are going to ask Jesus about in the next verses. But with regard to their approach listen to what they say to Him
“We know that thou art true.”
“Neither carest thou for any man”
“For you regard not the person of men”
These are hypocritical compliments, not necessarily believed by them, but artfully said, as compliments often are, to conceal their true design.
The first line is especially hypocritical – we know that you are true. This is a flat out lie. But they add:
“Neither carest thou for any man.”
To me this is an attempt to set him up with man-flattery. A “you are so strong and so independent!” type of thing. “So fearless,” things that were said to try and sort of stoke the fires of his flesh to speak ill of men in power and to be condemned an insurrectionist.
“For thou regardest not the person of men.” You are not partial. Thou speak according to the truth.
See,. That is not how someone should be who is under a King. They would be very careful to say NOTHING contrary to the King and would be very particular in their expresssions toward him and his policies.
So, they wanted Jesus to speak openly and frankly about the King as a means to indict him. And after having said this, they ask (verse 21)
22 Is it lawful for us to give tribute unto Caesar, or no?
Caesar was the Roman emperor and was a title name. When they asked Jesus this question the Caesar on the throne was called, Tiberius, and he was one vile guy.
(verse 23)
23 But he perceived their craftiness, and said unto them, Why tempt ye me?
Jesus was God with us, working and engaging through flesh. He was astute to their hypocrisy and ways, and calls them out on it right out of the gates. (Verse 24) and he says
24 Shew me a penny. Whose image and superscription hath it? They answered and said, Caesar’s.
They had asked Jesus if he paid tribute so he asked them to bring him a coin from the money in which the tribute was paid. This was a Roman coin.
They were not asking him if he paid the temple tax – that was a different tax paid with shekels; but the Roman government had foreign coins.
The fact that when Jesus asked for a roman coin and they provided him one shows that they were in collusion with Rome (at least the Herodians were) and bore about its currency in their lives.
On the Roman coin, like we have on our coins, was the likeness of the reigning Emperor along with some subscription (meaning his title)
So, he gets a coin FROM THEM that is Roman, he asks them whose image and subscription is on the coin, and the said Caesars and he then gives them their answer:
(verse 25) Render therefore unto Caesar the things which be Caesar’s, and unto God the things which be God’s.
Caesar’s image and name on the coin proved that it was his. It was proper, therefore, to give it back to him when he called for it.
But while this was his directive to them he took the time to also tell them “to give to God what was His.
This could have referred to the temple tax or more importantly to their hearts and minds and therefore lives (verse 26)
26 And they could not take hold of his words before the people: and they marveled at his answer, and held their peace.
In other words his reply confounded all who were there – the Herodians whom he supported, but also all other factions who put the temple tax ahead of everything else.
So that was the Herodians and the Pharisees and scribes. At verse 27 we enter into a new challenge:
27 Then came to him certain of the Sadducees, which deny that there is any resurrection; and they asked him,
In that day the resurrection literally meant the raising up the body to life after it had been dead but it also had reference to life after death.
The Sadducees not only denied the raising up of the body but also the existence of any future state.
Because of this they also denied the existence of the human soul after death, as well as angels or spirits.
It goes without saying that if a person rejects an afterlife, then they would reject a resurrection, and spiritually based things like spirits and angels. In any case, this appears to be the Sadducees attempt to stump the Messiah, and so they said (verse 28)
“Master, Moses wrote unto us, If any man’s brother die, having a wife, and he die without children, that his brother should take his wife, and raise up seed unto his brother.
De 25:5,6. This law was given by Moses in order to keep the families and tribes of the Israelites distinct, and to perpetuate them. It is found in Deuteronomy 25:5-6 and is know as Levirate Marriage.
The way it worked is if a brother had a wife and died before she had children the brother was to take her to wife and sire children with her in the family name.
Using this accepted practice the Sadducees present Jesus with a tricky situation and say:
29 There were therefore seven brethren: and the first took a wife, and died without children.
Whether this situation was actual is unknown but it seems like the Sadducees concocted it to present Jesus with a tough predicament.
So according to the Levirate Marriage code, (verse 30)
30 And the second took her to wife, and he died childless.
31 And the third took her; and in like manner the seven also: and they left no children, and died.
32 Last of all the woman died also.
So seven brothers took the first dead brothers wife in a row, died, and none produced children with her, and last of all the woman died.
So they are all in heaven (ostensibly) verse 33
33 Therefore in the resurrection whose wife of them is she? for seven had her to wife.
It might seem like an easy answer if marriage as a status in heaven – as Jesus could have said, she would be wife to “the first to have her.”
But (and this is important) when something isn’t true, then the explanations of such thing never hold water when held up to scruntiny.
What I mean by this is if Jesus had said that she would have been the wife of the first, there are all sorts of side issues that the Sadducees could come up with to challenge that answer.
And the arguments would have gone on until today.
But Jesus answer was true – and being true he shut down any opportunity to debate. And so he says:
34 The children of this world marry, and are given in marriage:
35 But they which shall be accounted worthy to obtain that world, and the resurrection from the dead, neither marry, nor are given in marriage:
36 Neither can they die any more: for they are equal unto the angels; and are the children of God, being the children of the resurrection.
In Matthew he tells them first that they do err, not knowing the scripture. And then he clears the whole matter up in verses 34-36, saying:
34 The children of this world marry, and are given in marriage:
The King James take the term AION here and translates it world. If the Greek was Kosmos then the translation would be correct. But it’s not. So Jesus really said to them/then:
The children of this AGE marry and are given in marriage.
To them, those of that age, marriage was an earthly unit and agreement. And the children of that age – the Age of material religion, the age of the law, they were given to being married.
35 But they which shall be accounted worthy to obtain “that” world, and the resurrection from the dead, neither marry, nor are given in marriage:
36 Neither can they die any more: for they are equal unto the angels; and are the children of God, being the children of the resurrection.
This is a VERY specific set of passages given to them then and must be understood as such.
If it was written to us today, then we have a real issue with people getting married who are Christian.
I mean Jesus plainly states here that the children of THAT former age marry and are given in marriage but (verse 35) “BUT . . .”
they which shall be
1. accounted worthy to obtain “that” age (meaning the Kingdom Age)
2. and the resurrection from the dead
neither marry, nor are given in marriage: Neither can they die any more: for they are equal unto the angels; and are the children of God, being the children of the resurrection.
These passages are really really really important to understanding the context of Jesus words here to them/then because if Jesus was speaking to us now, Gentiles who are following him today, then nobody who considers themselves a follower of Christ, who wants to be accounted worthy to obtain the Kingdom of God, nobody who seeks to enter into the resurrection of the just, nobody will either marry or be given in marriage (get engaged).
See, to the Jews who were single, or even the Gentiles who were single when they received Jesus as Lord in that day, the message was clear from both Jesus HERE IN THESE PASSAGES and from Paul = don’t get married.
Children of the Kingdom will refrain from such. This is plain as day in the teachings of both Jesus and Paul – moreso with Jesus as Paul allows for marriage if the couple cannot refrain from sexual relations.
But the message is clear – IN THAT DAY it was best for them to remain single, so much so that Jesus radically describes the heavenly fate of those who are Children as neither marrying nor being given in marriage!
In our day, the age of fulfillment, the age where Christ has restored everything to the earth spiritually and the way things were in the Garden of Eden where God commanded the two to become one, marriage is acceptable.
But in Jesus day, and Pauls, the members that made of the bride were described as people who:
“neither marry, nor are given in marriage:
Neither can they die any more: for they are equal unto the angels; and are the children of God, being the children of the resurrection.
Yes, Jesus was asked about the marital state of the seven brothers to the one wife. But here, at least in this situation, he describes the new way in place for those who seek to enter into the Kingdom as Sons and Daughters – they don’t get married at all.
These passages are really really difficult to teach without messing them around or without seeing them in the context of which they were given – to them then – and not for our day.
PRAYER
