article36

§30 Jesus Challenges the Pharisees (Luke 11:27–54)

The four parts of this section are loosely tied together around the theme of conflict, conflict between the views of Jesus and his opponents, the Pharisees. The four parts are (1) a saying about true happiness (vv. 27–28); (2) the demand for a sign (vv. 29–32); (3) sayings about light (vv. 33–36); and (4) a lengthy diatribe against the Pharisees (vv. 37–54). Other than the saying about true happiness and some of the sayings in the diatribe, Luke has derived his material from the sayings source (vv. 29–32=Matt. 12:38–42; vv. 33–36=Matt. 5:15; 6:22–23; vv. 39, 42, 44, 46–52=Matt. 23:4, 14, 23–27, 29–31, 34–36). Evans (pp. 44–45) suggests a parallel between Deut. 10:12–11:32 and Luke 11:27–12:12, which contain such ideas as “blessing” (Deut. 11:26–27; Luke 11:27–28), “eye(s)” (Deut. 11:7, 12; Luke 11:34), stranger or alien (Deut. 10:19; Luke 11:30–32). The most impressive parallel has to do with laws pertaining to clean and unclean (cf. Deut. 12:1–16 with Luke 11:37–12:12). Here again is further evidence that Luke has indeed ordered his teaching portion of the Central Section (10:1–18:14) after Deuteronomy 1–26 (see commentary on 10:1–24 above).

11:27–28 / The exclamation of the woman in the crowd probably means how happy the mother of Jesus must be for having such a wonderful son. B. S. Easton suggests that the implicit thought was, “If only I could have had such a son” (cited by Marshall, p. 481). This may be. But the heart of the incident is reflected in Jesus’ reply. Those who are truly blessed … are those who hear the word of God and obey it. In view of the fact that a sign from a skeptical crowd had been asked for above in v. 16 and that Jesus will make a pronouncement of judgment upon his generation for craving for signs, Luke may regard the saying on true happiness as a blessing on those who hear and obey but who do not demand dramatic proof, such as a miracle would afford.

11:29–32 / The pronouncement, This is a wicked generation, starkly contrasts the pronouncement in the preceding verses. The request for the sign in v. 16 is now finally addressed. Jesus calls his generation wicked because it refuses to believe and obey Jesus, asking instead for a new sign. The request for a sign betrays their unbelief, not a willingness to learn more and become fully persuaded. No sign will be given this generation except the sign of Jonah. What is in mind is very likely Jonah’s “miraculous deliverance from death” (Marshall, p. 485). (Some think that Jesus intends no more than a comparison between his proclamation of judgment and that of Jonah’s; see Ellis, pp. 167–68; Tiede, pp. 219–20.) If the Queen of the South was willing to travel to listen to Solomon’s wisdom (1 Kings 10:1–10), and if the men of Nineveh saw their need to repent because of the preaching of Jonah (Jonah 3:4–5), then Jesus’ generation is utterly without excuse if it does not heed him. For he is greater than both Solomon and Jonah. On the day of judgment these people will stand up and condemn Jesus’ generation for its lack of faith.

11:33–36 / Verse 33 contains a saying on light, while vv. 34–36 contain an extended saying based on a similar metaphor. The lamp that is lit and then placed on its stand is probably to be understood as referring either to Jesus himself or his proclamation of the kingdom. When one hears Jesus (=one lights a lamp), one is to respond in obedience (=he puts it on its stand). The second metaphor is slightly different. Jesus equates the eyes with the lamp. If one’s eyes are good then one is full of light. The “eyes” probably represent one’s moral disposition. The one inclined to hear and obey Jesus (=eyes are good) will be full of truth (=light). If one’s moral disposition is to disregard Jesus and his proclamation (=eyes are bad), then one will be left in ignorance (=whole body is full of darkness). Verse 35 is an exhortation to examine one’s self carefully, to make sure that the light is truly light and not darkness. Verse 36 promises that whoever is full of light can be assured of the complete transformation (=it will be completely lighted) at the last day.

11:37–54 / This lengthy section begins by a Pharisee’s observation that Jesus did not first wash before the meal (see note below). The reference is to Pharisaic ritual, as expressed in their oral laws and traditions. In response to this, Jesus addressed the issue (ritualistic washing) in vv. 39–41, but then goes on to deliver a diatribe revolving around the theme of Pharisaic hypocrisy. The first example of hypocrisy that Jesus cites is a take-off on the Pharisaic concern with washing. In actual practice the Pharisees did clean the inside of the cup and dish (see Lev. 11:32; 15:12), but Jesus’ figurative remark suggests “that the Pharisaic ritual of only washing the outside of a man is as foolish as only washing the exterior of a dirty vessel” (Marshall, p. 494). If God made both the outside and the inside of a person, then both are important. Indeed, it is really the inside (the attitude of the heart) that is most important.

In his next example (v. 42) Jesus notes that although the Pharisees were careful to give God a tenth of everything, even of the smallest of produce (see Lev. 27:3–33; Deut. 14:22–29; 26:12–15), they neglect justice and the love of God, the most basic things that God expects. (For similar expression in the prophetic tradition see 1 Sam. 15:22; Hos. 6:6.) Verses 43–44 offer a pair of contrasting sayings. In v. 43 the Pharisees are criticized for their desire to sit in the most important seats in the synagogues and to receive greetings in the marketplaces. The idea is that the Pharisees want to be seen, recognized, and treated preferentially. The metaphor shifts in v. 44 to the idea of being unseen. The Pharisees (as is implied) are like unmarked graves, which people walk over without knowing it. That is, they are like graves that have become overgrown and so are able to hide their corruption and uncleanness from people. Because of their mask of religiosity people do not realize that they have come into contact with corruption (Fitzmyer, p. 949).

With vv. 45–46 (which Luke alone has) the diatribe shifts its attention from the Pharisees to the experts in the law (lit. “lawyers”) who have felt the sting of Jesus’ words also. Through their numerous, complicated, and strict rules these legal experts have placed heavy burdens upon the people, but they have been unwilling to lift one finger to help them. Although this may have meant that the legal experts were able themselves to escape the burden of their rituals (so Marshall, p. 500), these people often had little concern or compassion on those who struggled, and usually failed, to keep the oral laws (and probably the written ones too) and traditions. Rather than helping their own people, they build tombs for the prophets (whom, according to Matt. 23:30, they would never have murdered had they lived then—or so they claim!). By tending to their tombs the Pharisees and scribes show themselves to be accomplices in the murders of the prophets. Their forefathers murdered them; they build their tombs. Neither their ancestors nor they themselves responded to the message of the prophets. Because of this sad history and tradition of rejecting, persecuting, and murdering the prophets, from Abel (Gen. 4:8) to Zechariah (2 Chron. 24:20–21), future prophets and messengers (i.e., Christian apostles and evangelists) will be mistreated as well. Although the warning of judgment and punishment that were to come probably originally had in view the Last Day, it is quite possible that Christians in Luke’s time believed the warning to be fulfilled, perhaps only partially, at the time of Jerusalem’s destruction in A.D. 70 (see note below).

The diatribe concludes with the summary of v. 52. Although the experts in the law possess the key to knowledge (i.e., they are able to read and understand the Scriptures), they themselves have not entered (i.e., they do not obey the Scriptures), and they have hindered those who were entering. Thus, a double condemnation falls upon them. They are condemned because of their unbelief and hostility toward God’s messengers and what the Scriptures really teach, and they are condemned because they have failed in their responsibilities as true experts in the law. After this harsh accusation the Pharisees and the teachers of the law began to oppose him fiercely and besiege him with questions. With this acrimonious exchange the plot begins to thicken.