Thursday, April 5, 2012

Luke 20

The Authority of Jesus Challenged

chief priests, scribes and elders came up to Jesus to ask him on what authority he does these things. He asks them whether the baptism of John was from heaven or from man. They can't say it was from heaven because John said Jesus was the real deal, they can't say from man because the crowd would stone him to death. So they refused to answer his question, he then replied in kind.

This seems like a pretty lame debate strategy to me, why not just answer the question and say it is from God?

The Parable of the Wicked Tenants

A guy planted a vineyard and then left it in the hands of some tenants while he went to another country. When it was time he sent a servant to collect some of the fruits of the vineyard but they beat him up and sent him away empty handed. He tried a few more servants with similar results then sent his son thinking they would respect him. They thought if they killed the heir they would get the vineyard so they killed him. Jesus then asked what the owner would do next and then declared that he would go kill the tenants and give the vineyard to someone else. The disciples said "surely not!" Then Jesus quoted some old thing.

Why are they surprised? What other possible action could the father have at that point? Give up and let the people who killed his son take his property?

Wait a minute I just checked this verses this story in Matthew, the lesson Jesus is teaching is opposite, even though he quotes the same thing "The stone that the builders rejected has become the cornerstone". In that story the people listening said the owner should kill the tenants and Jesus said no, the vineyard would be given to those that produce the fruits. Am I misreading this? It literally reads to me like it is saying the opposite thing.

Paying Taxes to Caesar

Some spies tried to listen to Jesus and find some offence that they could arrest him for, they asked if they needed to pay taxes. He said the coin has Caesar's face on it, so they should pay their taxes.

Sadducees Ask About the Resurrection

Some Sadducees ask Jesus a question. According to the law of Moses, if a man dies having a wife and no children his brother must marry his wife. Suppose this happens a bunch of times and one woman wind up married to 7 brothers in sequence. When the resurrection happens who is she married to. Jesus says that "those who are considered worthy to attain to that age and to the resurrection from the dead neither marry nor are given in marriage"

Jesus is saying you can only get resurrected if you are single. Makes sense given a lot of other stuff he has said (abandon your family to follow me, etc) but this seems to be a far cry from the Christianity of today.

Whose Son Is the Christ?

How can Christ be David's son, for David calls him lord

Beware of the Scribes

Jesus doesn't like the scribes


  1. The Parable of the Wicked Tenants. This story to me just shows how wicked God is. He is like a land owner who owns a vineyard (which is interesting if you look at these     verses in Revelations). He loans it to poor farmers. He sends servants (prophets and martyrs?) to collect the rent, the tenants beat and kill them. He sends his son (Jesus?). They kill him as well. He then comes and kills all of them and rents the vineyard to the others. I can't really blame him for taking vengeance in a way, but this really seems to contradict an all loving and forgiving God. A really good call on the contradiction. That's a really big one.

    Paying Taxes to Caesar. I have a note that this might be trying to say keep church and state separate. If that is the case, I really like this chapter.

    Sadducees Ask About the Resurrection. Yeah, this whole story and marriage stuff was a real “wtf?” for me when I read it.

  2. On the parable of the wicked tenants, I agree with you, I was thinking the same thing, I can't really blame him for wanting to take vengeance on the people who killed his son either. Although it goes against an all loving God and turn the other cheek and such, but it should be an expected reaction.

    But when I compared the story with the one from Matthew, I found that it seems the lesson is the opposite. Look at the verses side by side.

    In the Matthew Version, the disciples say that the owner should kill the tenants and rent the vineyard out to new people. Jesus says no, the land will go to the people who produce the fruit.

    In the Luke version, Jesus says the owner will kill the tenants and give it to new people and the disciples are horrified and say that shouldn't happen.

    In both versions, Jesus quotes the same thing, but he does the exact opposite. Unless I am being stupid and misreading one of them. The only thing I can figure is there was a translation error and the order got mixed up in one of the stories. Seriously, am I just misreading this?

  3. That "surely not!" response the people give in the Parable of the Wicked Tenants is a bit tricky to decipher, for sure. I don't think that it's an objection to the vineyard owner's course discipline, but rather a rejection of the circumstance. In other words, they were saying: "God forbid a situation like this ever happens." Jesus asking them about the quoted scripture is then equivalent to Him saying: "Oh, not only will it happen, but God told y'all long ago that it would happen. Ah snap!" :-)

    1. That seems like a pretty reasonable answer actually. And it reviewing this, I was not really comfortable with what I had written before. I still found it confusing but couldn't quite figure out what was being said.

    2. Oh, and I meant to put a link to your post on this, as I might want to reference it at some point later.


Related Posts Plugin for WordPress, Blogger...