WHEN AN EVIL spirit comes out of a man, it goes through arid places seeking rest and does not find it. Then it says, ‘I will return to the house I left.’ 25When it arrives, it finds the house swept clean and put in order. 26Then it goes and takes seven other spirits more wicked than itself, and they go in and live there. And the final condition of that man is worse than the first.”
27As Jesus was saying these things, a woman in the crowd called out, “Blessed is the mother who gave you birth and nursed you.”
28He replied, “Blessed rather are those who hear the word of God and obey it.”
29As the crowds increased, Jesus said, “This is a wicked generation. It asks for a miraculous sign, but none will be given it except the sign of Jonah. 30For as Jonah was a sign to the Ninevites, so also will the Son of Man be to this generation. 31The Queen of the South will rise at the judgment with the men of this generation and condemn them; for she came from the ends of the earth to listen to Solomon’s wisdom, and now one greater than Solomon is here. 32The men of Nineveh will stand up at the judgment with this generation and condemn it; for they repented at the preaching of Jonah, and now one greater than Jonah is here.
33“No one lights a lamp and puts it in a place where it will be hidden, or under a bowl. Instead he puts it on its stand, so that those who come in may see the light. 34Your eye is the lamp of your body. When your eyes are good, your whole body also is full of light. But when they are bad, your body also is full of darkness. 35See to it, then, that the light within you is not darkness. 36Therefore, if your whole body is full of light, and no part of it dark, it will be completely lighted, as when the light of a lamp shines on you.”
Original Meaning
THE MINISTRY OF Jesus requires choices, the most basic choices in life. This section underscores that point with a series of exhortations indicating just how crucial the choice is.1 The point is made by illustration (vv. 24–26), beatitude (vv. 27–28), warning (vv. 29–32), and exhortation (vv. 33–34). Each text is a call to respond faithfully to the revelation Jesus brings.
The first remark (vv. 24–26) reports of an exorcism where the demon departs a house, but nothing is put in the house to replace it. The house is clean but still left empty. So the demon decides to return and brings with him seven other spirits more wicked than himself.2 They reenter the house, making the situation far worse than it was before the exorcism. The passage is about spiritual response. If God’s grace frees someone from the presence of evil temporarily, or at least offers to do so, and then a refusal to respond comes, a dangerous situation emerges. The “house” is left clean, and the door remains open for those forces to return more determined than ever to live there. The end result is then worse than the first. Revelation missed becomes a one step closer to being left in evil hands. Refusing to respond to God’s grace is not a matter of being neutral, but of remaining in destructive hands.
Next comes a short exchange that concludes with a beatitude (vv. 27–28). The possibility of falling into a worse state causes someone to change the subject and offer praise for those who cared for Jesus. The woman’s blessing of Jesus’ mother attempts to honor his family. It was not unusual to honor a mother in that culture by the accomplishments of her sons (Gen. 49:25; Prov. 23:24–25).3 But Jesus transforms the remark into another opportunity to declare where real blessing in life resides—in those who hear and obey God’s Word. Like the previous illustration, Jesus is focusing on the cruciality of receiving that Word. Richness and fullness of life are not a matter of biological or social origin, but relating well to the Lord of the universe (cf. 8:19–21).
Jesus then turns to history as he issues a warning about the endless pursuit of signs (vv. 29–32). By introducing the remark with an address to “a wicked generation,” Jesus makes it clear that such a continual quest, especially in light of what has already been done, is sinful. It is an excuse to refuse to face what Jesus is doing. Our Lord insists that no sign will come beside what Jonah and Solomon have provided. The comparison between the Son of Man and Jonah is not about Jonah’s three days in the belly of the fish. Rather, verse 32 makes it clear that Jonah’s preaching is the issue here (Jonah 3:6–10). The sign is therefore the call to repent.
Reinforcing that Jesus’ teaching is the main issue is the picture of the Queen of the South, who visited Solomon to hear about his wisdom (1 Kings 10:1–13; 2 Chron. 9:1–12).4 She came from Southern Arabia to hear his teaching. Now someone greater than both Jonah and Solomon stands before them, and his teaching offers what they longed to see. In other words, Jesus’ miracles and signs point to the more important issue—his teaching. In fact, this Queen and the men of Nineveh will stand at the judgment to testify against this generation for what they are missing in Jesus. Their testimony will condemn them. The remark is a warning. To refuse Jesus is to face rejection in judgment and the condemnation of previous generations who understand the unique opportunity that Jesus’ preaching provides.
Finally, Jesus uses the image of light to make his point more strongly (vv. 33–34). He compares his teaching to “a lamp,” which in the ancient world was a candle or some type of oil lamp. One does not go to the effort of lighting a lamp in order to place it where its light is covered. It goes on a lampstand, where it can give light. Thus, Jesus’ teaching is light made available for all to see. What he says is not designed to be concealed, since God intends Jesus to reveal God’s promises.
But light not only has to be lit; it has to be received by the eye. The juxtaposition of this image with the previous one suggests the need to draw on the light Jesus provides. So Jesus compares the eye to a lamp—a substitution figure of speech known as metonymy, where the means of reception (eye) is associated with that which is received (light). The eye is a lamp in the sense that it is a doorkeeper (cf. 2 Baruch 18:1–2 [Syriac] for use of this imagery). What the eye lets into the mind makes up the person. When such eyes are good, letting in light, then the person is full of light and reflects light in life. But if the eyes are bad, letting nothing good come in, then the body is a dark place, since our inclinations unled by divine revelation take us in destructive directions. Of course, what is let in is a reflection of where our heart is. Jesus, therefore, calls for people to be full of light. They are to respond to the light of God’s Word by receiving it. To take in light is to shine from the inside.
Such light imagery is frequent in the New Testament (Luke 1:78–79; 2:32; John 1:4; 3:19–21; 9:39–41; Acts 26:18; 2 Cor. 6:14–15; Eph. 5:14–15; 1 John 1:6–10). As a fundamental image, it indicates that without God’s presence, only darkness presides. There is no automatic “inner light” as far as Jesus is concerned. So we must be careful what goes into our soul through the door (the eye). The Great Physician recommends that the intake be filled with light.
Bridging Contexts
THIS PASSAGE HIGHLIGHTS our need to respond to Jesus. One crucial issue today must be addressed, if we are to speak to our world. When Jesus taught, people assumed both the reality of revelation from God and absolute truths; the issue was merely pursuing and finding them. Today, however, many deny absolute truth even exists. In our culture, particularly in its more philosophical form, the most one can claim is that truth is perspectival. It is true that recognizing perspective in viewing a topic need not lead to relativism. But often the claim today is that all perspectives are relative, functioning as strictly human constructions. Truth for me is only where I see it, and it fits only within a self-constructed system of reality. No one has the corner on truth to the point where he or she can dictate it to others. Any other view is ruled out as dogmatism or a quest for power.
This position needs to be addressed at two levels. (1) The claim of absolute authority for this relative view is itself an absolute claim that cannot be made, if absolute statements are not tenable. The attempt to rule a discussion of absolutes out of bounds by definition trips over its own assumptions. Unfortunately, many do not understand the subtlety of this logical contradiction.
(2) A more substantive reply starts with the assumption of the objector. If truth is an experience to be appreciated and if it operates within a given perception of reality, then that is exactly what Jesus offers for our consideration. Here Jesus offers a perspective on reality that includes God, wrestles with claims of transcendent truth, and asserts responsibility and accountability for the choices made. This latter point is especially important, for it is often missed in the debate over whether absolute truth exists. Jesus does not compel a decision for his model. He simply notes that the one who rejects what he has on offer is responsible for that decision. One may reject the light he offers, even though that rejection may cost dearly. Theology, as the church has presented it, is not just a matter of truth, but just as importantly, a matter of accountability and responsibility. This is why Jesus calls his teaching “light.” It illumines and shows the way. The refusal to walk in its path means one is free to negotiate life in the darkness with all the rights, privileges, and obstacles that such darkness sets in the way.
One additional proviso is raised in this text. Someday we will see God, and he will ask us what we have done with his light. Witnesses from the ages will testify to our response. That is accountability. In the modern era, the way to share the light is to highlight such accountability. Truth, in terms of experience, is a choice; but with choice there is profound responsibility. Watch closely and choose wisely.
I am reminded of Shakespeare’s remark, “All the world’s a stage and we are merely players in it.” Though he used it to speak of our roles in a life designed by destiny, there is another way to see the figure. Our view of truth and our choices are on public view, part of a cosmic broadcast about who we are. Our actions and choices reveal our character and values. The idea that our choices about truth are private is a bold distortion. So Jesus claims his teaching is light. The bridge to our context is that claim, as is our responsibility to respond.
Contemporary Significance
THE APPLICATION OF Jesus’ claim to reveal light and of his call to be careful how we respond to God’s presence and revelation is to take seriously the claim that he offers light. In our society, responsibility for truth has been abandoned to the black hole of shifting public perception. The church may never again function in a world where objective truth is seen as a given. So we must think through representing our message in light of the abandonment of a belief that such truth exists. The life raft to get to the human heart lost in this sea of relativity is not merely to refight the battle for objective truth, but simply to affirm the immense responsibility of living in a universe where one is responsible for one’s choices. In fact, this second approach may be more fruitful in personal evangelism, for it makes clear that our choices come at great risk.
In terms of experience and perception, life often is a constructed reality. We have to make judgments about what life is and how it works. We must choose the sources and influences that form how we see life. The issue is whether it is well constructed. The challenge of the church of our age is to have people see that there is no escape from responsibility for reflecting over ultimate questions. In the future, God will ascertain the fate of every person’s decision. The church’s role is to set forth its message in the public square and make clear what is at stake.
There is another crucial application here. No religious discussion is a private affair. One’s decision made about religion is privately made and considered, but the consequences are decidedly public, since character and morals are often the product of our religious choices. Our culture’s commitment to relegate religious discussion to the sidelines of life represents one of the great abdications of intellectual and spiritual well-being in the history of humanity. To pursue every other avenue of life with diligence and energy while ignoring the soul is to produce people whose lives may be full of activity, but whose souls are empty shells, houses waiting to be filled with something. Hollow people often live shallow lives. If any discussion should fill the public square, it is that of religion. The possibility of the existence of light means that discussion about where it can be found should proceed with vigor for everyone.