for you shall laugh.

for you shall laugh.

It is surely arbitrary to say, as is done by some, that Luke’s third Beatitude has no equivalent in Matthew’s Gospel. With most commentators²⁴⁹ we see Luke’s third reflected in Matthew’s second. “You who now weep” are “the mourners.” And “for you shall laugh” has the same basic meaning as “for they shall be comforted.”

The weeping to which reference is made here has its source in the tragedy of sin. It is not necessary, however, to limit this weeping to that which takes place because of a person’s individual sins: those whereby he himself has grieved his God. That type of sorrow can be poignant indeed (Ps. 51:4). More, however, is undoubtedly included. The regenerated learn to love God to such an extent that they weep because of “all the deeds of ungodliness which the ungodly have committed in such an ungodly manner” (Jude 15). Their weeping is God-centered. They sigh and cry not only over their own sins, nor only over these plus the power of the wicked to oppress the righteous (Hab. 1:4; II Tim. 3:12), but over “all the abominations that are done in the midst of Jerusalem” (Ezek. 9:4). It grieves them that God, their own God whom they love, is being dishonored. Cf. Ps. 139:21. This type of grief “to the glory of God” is also strikingly expressed in Ps. 119:136, “Streams of water run down my eyes because they do not observe thy law.” See also Ezra 10:6. In a most touching chapter Daniel, while weeping over and making confession of sin, combines his own personal sins and those of his people (Dan. 9:1–20; see especially verse 20). In doing so he pleads, “O Lord hear, O Lord forgive, O Lord hearken and do; defer not, for thine own sake, O my God, because thy city and thy people are called by thy name” (verse 19).

Nevertheless, these weepers, too, are pronounced “Blessed,” the reason being, “for you shall laugh.” The godly sorrow which now characterizes the devout listeners turns their souls to God. God, in turn, comforts them with the cheering news of his forgiving love. It is he who pardons, strengthens, delivers, reassures (Ps. 30:5; 50:15; Isa. 1:18; 55:6, 7; Mic. 7:18–20; Matt. 11:28–30). Thus tears, like raindrops, fall to the ground and come up in flowers (Ps. 126:5).

22, 23. Blessed are you when men hate you; when they exclude

you heap insults upon you, and spurn your name as evil, on

account of the Son of man.

Exult in that day and leap for joy,

for great, indeed, is your reward in heaven; for in just the same way

their fathers used to treat the prophets.

In a sense these words embody a prophecy. They describe what is going to happen to the followers of Jesus after his departure from this earth. However, it is not at all necessary to limit this description entirely to the future. Right at this very moment, while the Master is still with his disciples, this hatred is already manifesting itself. Otherwise how can we adequately account for such passages as Luke 6:27; cf. John 15:18, 19? Surely those who did not hesitate to address Jesus as follows, “Are we not correct in saying, You are a Samaritan and have a demon?” would not hesitate to show their hatred also to his disciples (John 15:20).

That this hatred implies exclusion, even expulsion from the synagogue, is clear from John 9:22, 34. Insults, too, were being, and were going to be, heaped upon believers (John 9:34). What was happening to the Savior (Matt. 27:29, 30, 39, 40 f.) would, in a sense, also befall his disciples (John 16:33; Acts 21:28; 24:5). Heaping scorn on a disciple’s name, whether by refusing to mention it at all, pronouncing it with disgust, slandering it, or expunging it from the synagogue membership roll, was another form of inflicting harm on the followers of the Man of Sorrows (Matt. 10:25; John 16:2; Acts 21:28; 24:5; 28:22). However, the very fact that these crimes were perpetrated “on account of the Son of man,” that is, because of the disciples’ connection with him and faith in him, guarantees the heavenly reward reserved for the Lord’s loyal adherents (I Peter 4:13).

Let them therefore exult and leap for joy. Blessed, indeed, are they! Let them bear in mind that their reward is in proportion to, yet much greater than, their sacrifice (Rom. 8:18; II Cor. 4:17, 18). They, God’s prophets, will receive a prophet’s reward. Their very willingness to suffer on account of “the Son of man”—for this concept see on 5:24—proves that they are the true successors of the prophets. For the treatment the prophets received see N.T.C. on Matt. 5:11, 12, pp. 280–282.

B. 6:24–26 Four Woes

In each case the Beatitude and the Woe form a pair. For these corresponding or correlative pairs see p. 339. What holds with respect to the Beatitude is true also with respect to its complementary Woe: it comes as a surprise, for the thought expressed in it runs counter to worldly standards of evaluation. A worldly person believes that the poor man is to be pitied, the rich to be envied. Instead, Jesus says, “Blessed (are) you poor—Woe to you who are rich.” And so throughout.

What is the nature of these Woes? There are those who maintain that they give expression to compassion, to nothing else. So interpreted, each Woe would have to be rendered “Alas!” or “Too bad!” Now it must be admitted that in the tenderly loving heart of the Master the element of sorrow with respect to the evaluations, words, and activities of unbelievers was real and strong. Cf. Ezek. 33:11; Matt. 23:37. Yet, this should not blind us to the equally important fact that what we have here, in both the Beatitude and the Woe, is an authoritative declaration. Just as for believers the Beatitudes are effective pronouncements of blessing, so also for impenitents the woes are effective pronouncements of the curse. The element of warning and threat must not be excluded from the Woe. It is exactly as Lenski observes, “ ‘Woe’ too is neither a wish nor a mere description, but the Lord’s judgment, rendered now already.”²⁵⁰ See Ezek. 3:16–21; Matt. 23:38; also N.T.C. on Matthew, p. 826.

In each case, once the Beatitude is understood, the corresponding Woe follows so naturally that little need be said by way of further explanation.

24. But woe to you who are rich,

for you have already received your consolation in full.

Jesus pronounces a Woe on the rich, that is, on those who trusted in riches (Mark 10:24). He does this because the attainment of earthly wealth, of whatever kind, was their sole ambition. It was their passionate, all-absorbing pursuit. Well, they had obtained what they were after. On a receipt they can write the words, “Received payment in full.” That is their one and only “consolation.” For their everlasting future they have provided … exactly nothing! They have nothing of real value to look forward to. See Luke 12:16–21; 16:25.

25a. Woe to you who now are well-fed,

for you shall go hungry.

On the threshold of eternity those who have placed their trust in earthly goods suddenly discover how desperately poor they are. Similarly, those who have set their hearts on earthly pleasures are going to discover in the end that they are stuffed so full that all desire is lost. Yet, having never shown any appreciation for the higher values of life, these gluttons, unless they are converted, face the never-ending future with a maddening ache that can never be assuaged, a burning thirst that can never be quenched, a ravening hunger that can never be alleviated.

25b. Woe (to you) who now are laughing,

for you shall mourn and weep.

The same holds too for those who now revel in silly merriment, while they reject God and his word and never weep about their sinful condition. In eternity their mourning will never cease. Their tears will never be wiped away.

26. Woe (to you) when all men speak well of you,

for in just the same way their fathers used to treat the false prophets.

What Jesus is saying amounts to this: “When everybody speaks well of you it must be that you are a deceitful, servile flatterer.” Think of Absalom (II Sam. 15:2–6), who tried to ingratiate himself with everybody, but was insincere, seeking only his own honor and glory. He resembled a false prophet. To be sure, for a while these men basked in the favor of the crowds, the ancestors of those deceivers who were Christ’s contemporaries.

The word of Jeremiah is ever applicable, “My people love to have it so.” But this flattery is vacuous. When all men speak well of you there must be something wrong with you. You are not taking a stand for the truth. You are not being a blessing. And you are digging your own grave.²⁵¹

Practical Lessons Derived from Luke 6:20–26

Verses 20, 24

“Blessed (are) you poor.… But woe to you who are rich.” Though Jesus never condemned wealth, he was aware of its dangers. If it makes people arrogant, self-centered, and cold-hearted, it becomes a curse. Prov. 30:7–9 should be taken to heart.

Verse 22

“Blessed are you when men hate you … on account of the Son of man.” That final phrase must not be forgotten. If a person senses that he is unpopular, he should ask himself, “Is this because I am loyal to my Lord … or is it because I have failed to reveal a Christlike character?”

Verses 20–26

Verses 20–23, “Blessed”; Verses 24–26, “Woe.” Some preachers are forever saying “Blessed.” Others specialize in thundering “Woe.” Jesus avoids both extremes. So should we. Cf. Isa. 3:10, 11.

Verse 26

“For in just the same way their fathers used to treat the false prophets.” The study of history can be neglected only to a person’s own hurt.

Let children thus learn from history’s light,

To hope in our God and walk in his sight,

The God of our fathers to fear and obey,

And ne’er like their fathers to turn from his way.

Lines from No. 149 (based on Ps. 78) of the Psalter Hymnal of the Christian Reformed Church (Centennial Edition), Grand Rapids, 1959.

Notes on Greek Words, Phrases, and Constructions in 6:20–26

Verse 20

ἐπάρας, nom. s. masc. aor. act. participle of ἐπαίρω, to lift up. The verb also has other, though related, meanings: to rise up, to raise (one’s heel, voice, head). In the passive it is used in connection with Christ’s ascension (Acts 1:9).

Verse 21

χορτασθήσεοθε, sec. per. pl. fut. passive indicat. of χορτάζω. This verb, though used at first with respect to the feeding and fattening of animals (there is an echo of this meaning in the clause: “all the birds gorged themselves with their flesh,” Rev. 19:21), and applied to men chiefly by the Comic poets, was gradually losing its deprecatory sense and is here simply used as a synonym for to have plenty, to be(come) fully satisfied. Cf. Matt. 14:20; 15:33, 37; Mark 6:42; 7:27; 8:4, 8; Luke 9:17; 15:16; 16:21; John 6:26; Phil. 4:12; James 2:16.

γελάσετε, sec. per. pl. fut. indicat. of γελάω*, to laugh.

Verse 22

The four verbs which here have the meanings: to hate, exclude, revile (heap insults upon), and throw out (spurn), are all third per. pl. aor. subjunct. active forms.

The meaning of the basic form ὀνειδίζω is: to heap abuse or insults upon, rebuke, reproach, reprove, revile, chide, find fault with. See also the parallel (Matt. 27:44).

The meaning will become clear from the other New Testament passages in which this verb is used:

“Blessed are you whenever people heap insults upon you” (Matt. 5:11).

“Then he began to reproach the cities” (Matt. 11:20).

“And those crucified with him were also heaping insults on him” (Mark 15:32).

“He rebuked them for their lack of faith” (Mark 16:14).

“The reproaches of those approaching you fell upon me” (Rom. 15:3).

“… who gives generously to all, without reproaching” (James 1:5).

“If you are reproached because of the name of Christ, blessed (are you)” (I Peter 4:14).

The suggested renderings are by no means the only good ones.

The root of the word seems to be nid (preceded by euphonic ὀ), but whether or not the Dutch word nijdig (angry), somewhat related in meaning, belongs to the same etymological family I do not know.

Verse 23

σκιρτήσατε, sec. per. pl. aor. imperat. of σκιρτάω. See also the note on 1:14 on page 80; and the note on 1:41, 44 on page 99.

Verse 24

ἀπέχετε, sec. per. pl. pres. indicat. active of ἀπέχω, to receive in full, so that one can hand out a receipt; so also in Matt. 6:2, 5, 16; and see N.T.C. on Phil. 4:18. Other related meanings: Mark 14:41, “It is enough”; Luke 7:6, “was (not far) from”; 15:20, “he was (still a long way) off”; and Philem. 15 “that you might have him back.” In Acts 15:20, 29; I Thess. 4:3; 5:22; I Tim. 4:3; and I Peter 2:11 the sense is: to abstain from.

Verse 25

ἐμπεπλησμένοι, nom. pl. masc. perf. passive participle of ἐμπίπλημι, to fill, satisfy; in the passive, as here, to be well-fed, to have plenty to eat; in Rom. 15:24, to enjoy.

6:27–45 II. The Standard of Life Demanded by the King

27 “But I say to you who are listening, love your enemies, do good to those who hate you, 28 bless those who curse you, pray for those who mistreat you. 29 To the one who strikes you on the cheek offer also the other (cheek), and from the one who takes away your outer garment²⁵² do not withhold your undergarment.²⁵³ 30 Give to everyone who asks you, and from the one who takes away what is yours do not exact reimbursement.²⁵⁴ 31 And as you wish that men would do to you, so do to them.²⁵⁵

32 “If you are in the habit of loving those who love you, what credit is that to you? Why, even sinners²⁵⁶ are in the habit of loving those who love them. 33 And if you are in the habit of doing good to those who do good to you,²⁵⁷ what credit is that to you? Even sinners do the same. 34 And if you lend to those from whom you are expecting to receive, what credit is that to you? Even sinners are in the habit of lending to sinners, that they may be repaid in full.

35 “But love your enemies, and do good, and lend, without expecting to get anything back. Then your reward will be great, and you will be sons of the Most High, because he is kind to the ungrateful and wicked. 36 Be merciful, just as your Father is merciful.²⁵⁸

37 “Do not pass judgment (on others), and you will not have judgment passed on yourselves. Do not condemn, and you will not be condemned. Forgive, and you will be forgiven. 38 Give, and (gifts) will be given to you. A good measure, pressed down, shaken together, and running over will be poured into your lap.²⁵⁹ For in accordance with the measure with which you measure, it will be measured to you in return.”²⁶⁰

A. 6:27–38 The Light of Love He Commends

Cf. Matt. 5:38–48; 7:1, 2, 12a

That this entire section (verses 27–38) is really a unit is clear from the similarity in phraseology. Throughout, love for everybody, including even those who hate the listeners, is held up as the ideal to be cherished and cultivated. Note the following: “Love your enemies, do good to those who hate you, bless those who curse you, pray for those who mistreat you; offer the other cheek; do not withhold; treat others as you would have them treat you; love your enemies [again], and do good, and lend, without expecting anything back; be merciful, do not pass judgment, do not condemn; forgive, give.”

Interspersed between these exhortations is the observation that anything less than this type of conduct is unworthy of a follower of Jesus: “If you are in the habit of loving those who love you, what credit is that to you?” etc. Not until verse 39 is reached does the style change and does a logically conceived new section begin: “He also told them this parable,” etc.²⁶¹

The Beatitudes and Woes have ended. The listeners are now told what kind of life they must live in order to prove that they have taken to heart the warnings implied in the Woes, and have a right, by grace, to claim the Blessings for themselves.

27, 28. But I say to you who are listening, love your enemies, do good to those who have you, bless those who curse you, pray for those who mistreat you.

“Love your enemies” was not what the scribes were teaching the people. They were saying, “Love your neighbor and hate your enemy” (Matt. 5:43). By means of this addition—“and hate your enemy”—the emphasis was shifted away from the real intention of the law. The law placed all the emphasis on love over against vengeance. Note Lev. 19:18, “You shall not take vengeance, nor bear any grudge against the children of your people; you shall love your neighbor as yourself; I am Jehovah.” The rabbinic misinterpretation soft-pedaled the word love and underscored “the children of your people,” as if the meaning were, “the others you are allowed to hate to your heart’s content.” Human nature being what it is, it was but too easy for people who were chafing under the galling yoke of a foreign oppressor to yield to their malignant impulses. Thus a wall of separation was being built between Jew and Gentile; the former to be loved, the latter to be hated. But it was hard to stop here. Another barricade was erected between good Israelites, such as the scribes and Pharisees, and bad Israelites, such as those renegades, the publicans, and in general the entire rabble that did not know the law (John 7:49). In such an atmosphere it was impossible for hatred to starve. It had plenty to feed on.

It was in the midst of this intensely narrow-minded, exclusivistic, and intolerant environment that Jesus carried on his ministry. All around him were those walls and fences. He came for the very purpose of bursting those barriers, so that love—pure, warm, divine, infinite—would be able to flow straight down from the heart of God, hence from his own marvelous heart, into the hearts of men. His love overleaped all the boundaries of race, nationality, party, age, sex, etc.

When he said, “Love your enemies,” he must have startled his audience, for he was saying something that probably never before had been said so succinctly, positively, and forcefully. Thorough research of all the relevant sources resulted in the statement: “The conclusion remains that the first one who has taught mankind to see the neighbor in every human being, and therefore to encounter every human being in love was Jesus; see the parable of The Good (literally, the Compassionate) Samaritan.”²⁶² Without in any way denying that statement one might add, Jesus taught the people that one should not even ask, “And who is my neighbor?” but should prove himself neighbor to the man in need, whoever that might be (see Luke 10:36).

Although in the form here expressed (“Love your enemies”) Christ’s teaching was new, it did not contradict the law. Rather, it was the fruition of the seed planted earlier. As has been shown, the Old Testament forbade revenge. But it even went beyond that, teaching that whenever necessary one should render assistance to his enemy:

“If you happen upon your enemy’s stray ox or donkey, you must bring it back to him. If you see the donkey of one who hates you lying (helpless) under its pack, you must refrain from leaving him with it. You must help him to lift it up” (Exod. 23:4, 5).

From “Assist your enemy” to “Love him” was but a step. Jesus took that step. He added, “Do good to those who hate you.” In other words, “Your favorable disposition of heart and mind must reveal itself in deeds.” The Master did not demand of his listeners that they approve of the evil perpetrated by their opponents. Neither did he reject the administration of law and justice (Matt. 5:25; Luke 20:25). What was wicked must be branded as such. But there must be no spirit of revenge; rather, the very opposite: the answer to a deed of cruelty must be a deed of kindness!

The exhortation, in fact, builds up to a climax: not only must there be love in the heart, love even for “enemies,” plus, in general, good treatment, but even more specifically, “Bless those who curse you, pray for those who mistreat you,” meaning at least this, “In all sincerity ask the Lord to bless those who curse you; be sure to show kindness to them and to intercede for them at the throne of grace.”

Even more strikingly Jesus adds, 29a. To the one who strikes you on the cheek offer also the other (cheek). What did he mean? That his words were not intended to be taken literally follows from his own reaction when he was struck in the face (John 18:22, 23). In fact, those who insist on interpreting every saying of Jesus literally get into difficulty again and again (Matt. 16:6–12; John 2:18–21; 3:3–5; 4:10–14; 6:51–58; 11:11–14).

What, then, did Jesus mean? When his words are read in the light of what immediately precedes in verses 27, 28, and when Matthew’s parallel (5:39 f.) is read in the light of what follows in verses 43–48, it becomes clear that the key passage, identical in both Gospels, is, “Love your enemies” (Matt. 5:44; Luke 6:27). In other words, Jesus condemns the spirit of lovelessness, hatred, yearning for revenge. He is saying, “Do not resist the evildoer with measures that arise from an unloving, unforgiving, unrelenting, vindictive disposition.” Once this is understood it becomes clear that “turning the other cheek” means to show in attitude, word, and deed that one is not filled with the spirit of rancor but with the spirit of love. Rom. 12:19–21 presents an excellent commentary.

Jesus continues: 29b.… and from the one who takes away your outer garment do not withhold your undergarment. Instead of being filled with bitterness and the lust for retaliation, show the very opposite attitude. Let him who deprives you of your robe take your tunic (worn next to the skin) also; and conversely (with Matt. 5:40), if anyone wishes to go to law with you and take your tunic (or shirt), let him take your robe also. Here again Rom. 12:19–21 shows what is meant.

30. Give to everyone who asks you, and from the one who takes away what is yours do not exact reimbursement.

The sentence has two parts. With respect to the first there is rather general agreement in interpretation. The “asking” or request is probably borne of poverty. Such interpretative passages as Deut. 15:7, 8; Ps. 37:26; Prov. 19:17; 21:26b come to mind immediately.

But how must we explain the second part? It is surprising how many commentators skip the problem one faces. Among those who have addressed themselves to it there is a division of opinion. According to some the person who “asks you” for a gift is also “the one who takes away what is yours.” The petitioner and the taker are the same person. The meaning of the entire verse would then be: in cases of privation love demands that whatever is needed be freely given, without expecting any return.²⁶³

This interpretation may seem to have in its favor that the principle here expressed gains immediate assent. Who would not agree that a person who, through no fault of his, is too poor to make a return should be excused from doing so? On the other hand, the very naturalness of the interpretation may, in fact, make it less acceptable, since it is a known fact that The Sermon on the Mount is full of surprising—sometimes even shocking—statements.

According to the more widely accepted view, the asker of the first clause and the taker of the second clause are not the same person.²⁶⁴

I believe that this is the correct view and that the first interpretation is wrong, and this for the following reasons:

a. The one who has received a gift from you can hardly be described as taking away what still is yours.

b. In the original the phrase from the one who takes away occurs twice in that exact form, a fact obscured by most English translations. It is found first in verse 29b, then in verse 30. In verse 29b the reference is clearly to a forceful, unjust taking away. It is logical to believe that also in the immediately following verse the meaning is the same.

By accepting this interpretation have we not made matters more difficult for ourselves? Was Jesus really saying, then, that under no circumstances whatever should anyone ever make any effort to regain stolen property?

To answer this question it is necessary to re-emphasize that the sermon is full of startling statements, pronouncements which should not be interpreted in their strictly literal sense as being applicable to every situation in life. So, for example, the exhortation “Do not take any oath at all” (Matt. 5:34) cannot mean that in the entire realm of human relations there is never any room for the solemn invocation of the name of God in substantiation of an important affirmation or promise. For similar startling statements see Matt. 5:39, 40; 7:1; 23:3; Luke 6:29a, 37a. It is characteristic of Hebrew style that a startling statement is made in order to shake people, to arouse them from their lethargy. At times one startling statement seems to be a flat contradiction of another equally surprising one (cf. Prov. 26:5 with the immediately preceding verse). There is no real conflict, however. Each statement emphasizes one aspect of the total truth.

So it is also here in Luke 6:30b. That there are times when a person should stand up for his rights is clearly taught in such passages as John 18:22, 23; Acts 16:37–40. That the functioning of lawcourts is not infringed upon has been shown. What the present passage teaches is the very important truth that our personal attitude should never be one of taking revenge. In fact, at times the better course may well be to allow the thief to keep the stolen goods. We should be willing, if circumstances so demand, to forego our rights. In this connection read I Cor. 6:7; also study the example Jesus gave us, described so vividly in I Peter 2:21–24. Our disposition should ever be that of returning good for evil. So here, as in the case of Luke 6:29a and 29b, Rom. 12:19–21 offers the true explanation.

In order that a person may know at any moment how to conduct himself toward someone else, whether that other individual be man or woman, Jew or Gentile, bond or free, etc., Jesus now lays down a principle which, as it consists of measuring one’s duty by one’s self-love, is like a pocketknife or carpenter’s rule, always immediately at hand, ready to be used. That principle is: 31. And as you wish that men would do to you, so do to them, or rendered differently but expressing the same thought: Treat others as you would have them treat you.

In its negative form this principle is expressed in Tob. 4:15, “What you yourself hate do not do to anyone else.” The great Jewish teacher Hillel stated similarly, “What is hateful to you, do not do to your neighbor.” In one form or another the rule also appears in the writings of Plato, Aristotle, Isocrates, Seneca, etc.

There are those who contend that the difference between Christ’s rule and that of others, for example, the one laid down by Confucius, consists in this, that the latter rule is merely negative, while Christ’s rule is positive. Confucius said, “Do nothing to your neighbor which afterward you would not have your neighbor do to you” (Mahabharata XIII.5571). As I see it, however, the difference on this score has been exaggerated. To be sure, when the worst possible interpretation is given to the negative rule, as if it meant no more than, “Do not kill your neighbor and do not steal his marriage partner or his property, for you would not like to have him do this to you either; so, leave your neighbor strictly alone,” then it must be admitted that in its positive form the rule is far better. However, even in its negative form this rule can be interpreted far more favorably. It can also mean, “Do not treat your neighbor with anything less than genuine love.” Thus construed, the negative implies the positive. And must we not in fairness to Confucius grant that he had at least something of this positive implication in mind? Are not his words that were quoted preceded by the line, “This is the sum of all true righteousness. Treat others as you would yourself be treated”? That surely is positive.

Besides, is not the kernel of the Golden Rule already found in Lev. 19:18, “You shall love your neighbor as yourself”? This surely is a positive command, especially when the word neighbor is interpreted as infallibly as it is in Luke 10:25–37.

Similarly, Jesus teaches that the law with its negative commandments (“You shall not kill; you shall not commit adultery,” etc.) is fulfilled in obedience to the positive rule, “You shall love your neighbor as yourself” (Matt. 5:21 ff.; 19:19; 22:39). Rom. 13:9 is conclusive on this point, “For this, ‘You shall not commit adultery, You shall not kill, You shall not steal, You shall not covet,’ and if (there be) any other commandment, is summed up in this one rule, ‘You shall love your neighbor as yourself.’ ” Now it is true that in Christ’s teaching the emphasis on love for the neighbor, not merely kind treatment, a love, moreover, that is bestowed even upon the enemy, receives greater stress than it does outside of Christianity. But it will not do to declare that a rule expressed negatively is, because of that very fact, necessarily inferior to one stated positively.

Nevertheless, there are important differences between Christ’s truly Golden Rule and somewhat similar rules that have come to us from the non-Christian religions or are favored by religious liberals. These differences are as follows:

1. The non-Christian religious prophet views his rule as a requirement which man is able to fulfil in his own strength, or at best in the strength of someone or something other than the true God, who revealed himself in Jesus Christ. The Gospel of Luke emphatically denies that man by nature has this ability. He needs the Holy Spirit and the Father’s drawing power (1:15; 11:13; 12:12; cf. John 6:44; Rom. 7:18, 24; Phil. 2:12, 13; II Thess. 2:13).

2. The religious liberal has a tendency to separate the rule of love for man from the commandment of love for God. He generally minimizes the latter’s importance. According to his view the Golden Rule is the sum and substance of all ethics. The one important thing in life, as he sees it, is rendering service to fellow men. It is in support of this contention that an appeal is made to Christ’s Golden Rule. But such an appeal is unjustified. According to the teaching of Jesus love for God and love for one’s fellow man cannot be separated (Luke 10:25–28).

It should be noted that the Golden Rule does not read, “Treat others as they treat you,” but “Treat others as you would have them treat you.” Jesus wants his followers to be distinctive. This very thought receives added emphasis in

verses 32–34. If you are in the habit of loving those who love you, what credit is that to you? Why, even sinners are in the habit of loving those who love them. And if you are in the habit of doing good to those who do good to you, what credit is that to you? Even sinners do the same. And if you lend to those from whom you are expecting to receive, what credit is that to you? Even sinners are in the habit of lending to sinners, that they may be repaid in full.

Sinners! They were “the irreligious,” those who had no regard for God’s law (cf. Ps. 1:1, 5); for example, the heathen (Matt. 26:45) and even those Israelites who, in the judgment of strict Jews, were guilty of reprehensible conduct. Undoubtedly some of these despised people were actually wicked. Prostitutes were generally regarded as “sinners.” So were also “tax-collectors.” On the other hand, the uncomplimentary term was even applied to those who lived in disregard of Pharisaic ceremonial prescriptions (Matt. 9:10, 11; Mark 2:15 f.; Luke 5:30). “Respectable” people did not want to be regarded as “sinners.”

In the present little paragraph, consisting of just three verses, the term sinners is used three times, once in each verse. What Jesus is saying is that listeners who love merely those who love them, who do good only to those who do good to them, and who make only “safe” loans (such as they know will be returned, probably with interest), are not any better than the very “sinners” they are always looking down upon, for even those at the bottom of the social-religious scale love their own kind, do good to them, and lend to them, in the firm expectation that at some future time they, the givers and lenders, will be the recipients.

Accordingly, if those people who are now listening to this sermon do not rise above such self-centered ethics, they cannot expect God’s special favor to rest on them. They are in a class with the very “riffraff” they so despise.

Over against the practices Jesus condemns he now places the very opposite, again mentioning the very same items to which he has just referred, and listing them in the same order, namely, loving, doing good, lending!

35. But love your enemies, and do good, and lend,²⁶⁵ without expecting to get anything back. In substance the exhortation of verse 27 is repeated here, and the admonition clearly implied in verse 34—that one should lend for the sheer joy of helping the person in need and not for any selfish reason—is here reaffirmed.

The admonition is striking, especially for the following reasons:

a. By nature a person does not love his “enemies,” that is, those who hate him.

b. Many of those who were told to love, to do good, and to lend were poor (verse 20).

c. An earnest attempt to love enemies and even to do good to them might be regarded as possible, but even to lend to them when they are in need! Yet, this is what Jesus is urging.²⁶⁶

d. The addition “without expecting to get anything back” (cf. verse 30) makes this exhortation even more startling. For more on this addition see the note on this verse on page 359.

A great reward is promised to those who obey this command: Then your reward will be great.…

Jesus refers, of course, to the reward of grace, not to any wage won by human merit. The reward is in proportion to, yet always far greater than, the sacrifice (Rom. 8:18; II Cor. 4:17, 18). In this present life it consists of such things as the inner satisfaction of having been able to help others, hence rejoicing in their joy (Rom. 12:15), “the peace of God” and “the God of peace” within the heart (Phil. 4:7, 9). After this life there is the sum total of all the blessings of salvation throughout eternity (Matt. 16:27; 25:46). Of this God’s children have a foretaste even now. In particular, there is the public acknowledgment by Jesus Christ himself at his glorious return (Matt. 25:34 f.).

What may well be the most glorious description of the reward is this: and you will be sons of the Most High.… Not that unselfish love makes them sons, but it proves that they are sons. They are God’s image bearers. For the transformation into that image see II Cor. 3:18; cf. I John 3:2. Note also the close relation between Christ, “the Son of the Most High” (Luke 1:32), and these “sons of the Most High.” For the term the Most High see on 1:32.

Resemblance to God—always in a finite manner, as creatures; he alone, the Creator-Redeemer, is the Infinite—is demonstrated by the kindness, the active sympathy and helpfulness which the true followers of Jesus show even to those who are their enemies, that is, who hate them. In doing this the children of God reveal God’s image, because he is kind to the ungrateful and wicked.

The ungrateful are those who do not from the heart thank God for the blessings he bestows on them. They are the “wicked,” the “evil” ones. They fail to complete the circle; that is, when blessings drop down from heaven upon them, they do not make any return in the form of humble praises rising from earth to heaven.

A vivid illustration is provided by Luke 17:11–19. Ten lepers are cleansed, but only one responds by returning and glorifying God. Does this not prove that though there is what has been called “common grace” (see also Ps. 36:7; 145:9, 17; Acts 14:17; 17:25; I Tim. 4:10), there is no “common gratitude”?

What was definitely stated in verses 27–31, 35, and was implied in verses 32–34, is now summarized: 36. Be merciful, just as your Father is merciful. To be merciful means to be compassionate; that is, filled with the kind of sympathy that expresses itself in words and deeds. It is the concern the Father revealed when he sent—gave, spared not—his only-begotten Son to save us (John 3:16; Rom. 5:8; 8:32).

As we have already observed, in a sense even the ungrateful and wicked are the object of God’s kindness (Luke 6:35). When Jesus walked on earth his heart went out to the throngs in their fatigued, forlorn condition (Matt. 9:36). He felt deeply for them and was eager to help them. See also Luke 7:13; cf. Matt. 8:17; 14:14; 15:32; 18:27; 20:34; Mark 1:41; 5:19; 6:34. It is comforting to realize that by means of this strong but deeply tender love, as well as by means of everything else, Jesus pictured the Father, so that he was able to say, “He who has seen me has seen the Father” (John 14:9).

When Jesus says, “Be merciful, just as your Father is merciful,” he is telling his audience to imitate the Father. Note how often Jesus, the apostles, etc., emphasized the oft neglected truth that men should strive to be imitators of God, of Christ, of God in Christ. In addition to Luke 6:35 and the somewhat similar Matt. 5:48 (see N.T.C. on that passage) see also Matt. 11:29; 16:24; John 13:15, 34; 15:12; Rom. 15:2, 3, 5, 7; I Cor. 11:1; II Cor. 8:7–9; 10:1; Eph. 4:32–5:2; 5:25; Phil. 2:3–8; Col. 3:13; Heb. 3:1 f.; 12:2; I Peter 2:21–24; I John 3:16; 4:10, 11. Of course, it takes special grace to obey this command. But the responsibility rests on all men.

Note “your Father.” When Jesus himself directly addresses the One who sent him, he says, “Father” (Luke 10:21, 22; 22:42; 23:34, 46) or “my Father” (Luke 2:49; 22:29; 24:49), showing that he was and is deeply conscious of his own unique relation to the Father, his own singular sonship.

In line with the command to be merciful is the tripartite exhortation, “Do not pass judgment … do not condemn … forgive,” which now follows, beginning with 37. Do not pass judgment (on others).…

Just what did the Lord mean when he said, “Do not pass judgment,” or, as others prefer to translate, “Judge not”? Did he mean that all manner of judging is absolutely and without any qualification forbidden, so that with respect to the neighbor we are not allowed to form or express any opinion whatever, or at least that with respect to him we must never voice an adverse or unfavorable opinion? In the light of what Jesus himself says in this very chapter (verses 42, 45), where he implies that we must regard certain individuals as being hypocrites and evil, and of John 7:24; cf. I Cor. 5:12; 6:1–5; Gal. 1:8, 9; Phil. 3:2; I Thess. 2:14, 15; I Tim. 1:6, 7; Titus 3:2, 10; I John 4:1; II John 10; III John 9, and a good many other passages that could be added, it is clear that no such wholesale condemnation of forming an opinion about a person and expressing it can have been intended.

Jesus himself had arrived at certain conclusions regarding scribes and Pharisees, and he did not hesitate to express them (Luke 11:42–44; 20:46, 47). Though it is true that we, on our part, cannot read what is in our neighbor’s heart, as Jesus was able to do (John 2:24, 25), so that our judgment must be more reserved and can never be final, there is nothing in the teaching either of Christ himself or of the apostles after him that relieves us of the obligation to form opinions about people and to act upon the basis of these opinions; this also implies that at times it will be our duty to express our judgments. Luke 6:37 has been used at times as an excuse for laxity in exercising church discipline, but in the light of its context, and also of Matt. 18:15–18 and John 20:23, such use of this passage is without any justification.

What, then, does Jesus mean? He means (see verses 41, 42) that it is wrong for anyone to concentrate his attention on the speck in his brother’s eye and, while thus occupied, to ignore the beam in his own eye. The Lord is here condemning the spirit of censoriousness, judging harshly, self-righteously, without mercy, without love, as also the context (verses 35, 36) clearly indicates.

To be discriminating and critical is necessary; to be hypercritical is wrong. One should avoid saying what is untrue (Exod. 23:1), unnecessary (Prov. 11:13), and unkind (Prov. 18:8).

That the sin here condemned was very common is clear, for example, from the fact that David condemned to death the rich man who, so the king had been made to believe, had stolen and killed the poor man’s little ewe lamb, not realizing that in thus condemning him he (David) was passing sentence on himself (II Sam. 12:1–7)!

This inclination to discover and severely condemn the faults, real or imaginary, of others, while passing lightly over one’s own frequently even more lamentable violations of God’s holy law, was common among the Jews (Rom. 2:1 f.), especially among the Pharisees (Luke 18:9; John 7:49), and is common always and everywhere. According to the words of Jesus here in Luke 6:37 … and you will not have judgment passed on yourselves, the habitual self-righteous faultfinder must remember that he himself can expect to be adversely criticized and condemned, and this not only by men but also and especially by God. See Matt. 6:14, 15; 18:23–35.

What Jesus forbids is brought out even more clearly by the explanatory addition: Do not condemn, and you will not be condemned.

The opposite of condemning is forgiving: Forgive, and you will be forgiven. On this see also Luke 11:4. The admonition is in line with Matt. 6:12, 14, 15; 18:21–35. As these passages indicate, the command is absolute. Neither here nor in Matthew are there any softening restrictions or qualifications (“Forgive unless …”; or “forgive if …”). The object of the ordered forgiveness is “men,” not just “believers.” And in order to receive the divine pardon it is necessary for a person to have within him, by God’s grace, the disposition to forgive, a disposition that blossoms into action. “Do not pass judgment … do not condemn … forgive,” an impressive climax!

The full climax has even now not been reached, however. We are told to go beyond forgiving wrongs; we should also bestow gifts, and this generously:

38. Give, and (gifts) will be given to you. A good measure, pressed down, shaken together, and running over will be poured into your lap.

The underlying symbolism is that of the Near East grain market. But similar conditions are found all over the world. Anyone who has had anything to do with the sale of grains, fruits, or vegetables knows that a bushel loosely filled contains far less produce than one in which the grain or other agricultural products have been pressed down, shaken together, and added to until they run over the edge of the container.

The promise here given is that the person who gives generously will also receive back generously. The return gift or reward is pictured as being poured into his “lap,” really into the pocket that is formed by his garment as it drops from the chest over the belt. Since one of the meanings of the English word lap is a garment’s fold that serves as a repository, the rendering “into your lap” is correct. That such a “pocket” could hold a considerable quantity of grain is clear from Ruth 3:15.²⁶⁷

The general principle with respect to rewards or returns is now stated: For in accordance with the measure with which you measure, it will be measured to you in return. For the same basic idea see II Cor. 9:6, “He who sows sparingly will also reap sparingly; and he who sows generously will also reap generously.”

Examples of stingy giving—in some cases even complete refusal to do justice to the obligations one owes to God and/or to the other person—plus the sad results: Lot (Gen. 13:10, 11; 14:11, 12); Nabal (I Sam. 25:10, 11, 37, 38); the Israelites in the days of Haggai (Hag. 1:6, 9); and of Malachi (Mal. 1:6–8); the rich in the days of James (James 5:1–5). Examples of generous giving, plus reward: Abraham (Gen. 13:7–9; 15:1, 18–21; 17:1–8); Judah (Gen. 44:18–34; 49:8–10); Ruth (Ruth 1:16, 17; 4:13–22); Hannah (I Sam. 1:11, 19, 20; 3:19); David (II Sam. 7:1–3, 8–17); the woman of Shunem (II Kings 4:8–10, 36, 37; 8:1–6); Ebed-melech (Jer. 38:7–13; 39:15–18); Mary of Bethany (John 12:1–3; Matt. 26:6, 7, 10–13); The Twelve (Matt. 19:27–30); the apostle Paul (Phil. 3:7; II Tim. 4:8).²⁶⁸

Practical Lessons Derived from Luke 6:27–38

Verse 27

“Love your enemies.” Jesus did not say, “Like them,” but “Love them.” One loves a person when he tries earnestly to promote that person’s welfare.

Verse 29

“Offer also the other cheek.” Cf. Rom. 12:21, “Overcome evil with good.” This is the spirit of Acts 7:60; especially of Luke 23:34. To put this into practice requires (a) constant and diligent study of the example of Jesus as portrayed in the Gospels, (b) self-denial, and above all (c) prayer for the enabling grace of God.

Verse 31

“Treat others as you would have them treat you.” This implies that one should always be strict with himself, lenient with the neighbor; for that is exactly the rule one wants the neighbor to obey.

Verse 34

“And if you lend to those from whom you are expecting to receive, what credit is that to you?” Here the basic assumption is, of course, that the person to whom one lends is in need. In no way does the passage forbid the practice of depositing money in a bank, with expectation of earning interest on it. See Matt. 25:27.

Verse 38

The reward is described as “a good measure, pressed down, shaken together, and running over.” This is understandable when it is borne in mind that, in the final analysis, it is not man but God who recompenses. And God is far richer than man!

Notes on Greek Words, Phrases, and Constructions in 6:27–38

Verses 27–29

The imperatives love, do good, bless, pray (for), and offer are all second per. pl. presents; hence, “Continue to love,” etc.

ἐπηρεαζόντων, gen. pl. masc. present participle of ἐπηρεάζω, to mistreat, abuse, speak maliciously (about); in the New Testament only here and in I Peter 3:16.

The basic meaning of σιαγών is jaw, jawbone (LXX Judg. 15:14–17). Nevertheless, the rendering “cheek” here in Luke 6:29 is not wrong. See LXX Isa. 50:6; also M. M., pp. 573, 574.

μὴ κωλύσῃς, sec. per. s. aor. subjunct. in a prohibition forbidding the action, viewed as a simple event; literally: “do not hinder [or stop] him (from taking).…”

Verse 30

Note present imperatives: continue to give; be in the habit of not asking him to return what he has taken away from you.

Verse 31

The two forms of the verb ποιέω are third per. pl. pres. (durative) subjunctive and sec. per. pl. active imperative.

Verse 32

Note the three forms of the verb ἀγαπάω: (a) sec. per. pl. pres. (durative) active indicat.; (b) pres. act. participle, pl. acc. (twice); and (c) third per. pl. pres. indicat. act. See also N.T.C. on John, Vol. II, pp. 494–500. For χάρις see the note on 2:40 on pages 181, 182.

Verse 33

ἐὰν ἀγαθοποιῆτε, sec. per. pl. pres. subjunct. (durative) in a future more vivid (third class) conditional sentence.

Verse 34

δανίσητε, sec. per. pl. aor. act. subjunct. of δανίζω, to lend, in a fut. more vivid (third class) conditional sentence. Matt. 5:42 uses the middle of this verb: “from him who wants to borrow,” etc.

ἀπολάβωσιν, third per. pl. 2nd aor. active subjunctive of ἀπολαμβάνω, to receive in return, to get back, be repaid in full.

Verse 35

The expression μηδὲν ἀπελπίζοντες has been interpreted to mean “not without hope” or “not despairing” of getting back what you have loaned. See A. T. Robertson, Translation, pp. 44, 170. So interpreted, Jesus would here be recommending what he has censured just a moment ago (see verse 34). The real meaning must be, “without expecting to get anything back.” It is a known fact that from the time of Chrysostom the expression has been so interpreted.

Verse 36

Γίνεσθε οἰκτίρμονες, second per. pl. durative or linear pres. imperative of γίνομαι, plus nom. pl. masc. adj.; hence, “Be and continue to be merciful [or: compassionate].” Cf. James 5:11.

Verse 37

κρίνετε, sec. per. pl. pres. act. imperative of κρίνω, “Do not continue to pass judgment (on others).” From the same verb is κριθῆτε (here preceded by οὐ μή). This form is sec. per. pl. 1st aor. pass. subjunct. Cf. critic, criticism, etc. Preceded by another double negative is καταδικασθῆτε “(Do not condemn and) you will not be condemned,” that is, judgment will not be passed against (κατά) you, another sec. per. pl. 1st aor. pass. subjunctive. Though καταδικασθῆτε (aor. pass. subjunct.) is not actually an indicative, it does have the force of an emphatic fut. indicative (see Gram. N.T., p. 929).

ἀπολύετε, sec. per. pl. pres. act. imperat.; and ἀπολυθήσεσθε, sec. per. pl. fut. pass. indicat. of ἀπολύω, here used in the sense of to pardon, to forgive. For more on this verb see the note on 2:29 on page 176.

Verse 38

The verb δίδωμι, of which three forms appear in this one verse—(a) δίδοτε, sec. per. pl. pres. act. imperat.; (b) δοθήσεται, third per. s. fut. indicat. pass.; and (c) δώσουσιν, third per. pl. fut. indicat. act.—has many different meanings. In each case the correct translation into English depends on the context; that is, on the thing that is given. Examples: give, give up, give out, render, put, place, pour, pay, entrust. Instead of “they will pour into your lap,” the passive construction can be substituted: “… will be poured into your lap.”

Note the four modifiers of the word measure: good, pressed down, shaken together, running over; the first of these is an adjective; the second and third, perfect passive participles; the fourth, a present middle participle. Note particularly the last modifier, ὑπερεκχυννόμενον, with double prefix. The basic verb is ὑπερεκχύννομαι*. The return gift is represented as being so liberal that it is flowing over and out of its container.

In ἀντιμετρηθήσεται, third per. s. fut. indicat. pass. of ἀντιμετρέω, the prefix ἀντί has the meaning “in return.” See my dissertation, The Meaning of the Preposition ἀντί in the New Testament, p. 81.

B. 6:39–45 The Darkness of Sin He Condemns

With 6:39 cf. Matt. 15:14

With 6:40 cf. Matt. 10:24

With 6:41, 42 cf. Matt. 7:3–5

With 6:43, 44 cf. Matt. 7:16–20

With 6:45 cf. Matt. 12:33–35

39 He also told them this parable: “A blind man cannot lead a blind man, can he? Will they not both fall into a pit? 40 A pupil does not outrank his teacher, but everyone who is fully trained will be like his teacher. 41 And why do you gaze at the speck in your brother’s eye, while the beam that is in your own eye you do not (even) observe? 42 How can you say to your brother, ‘Brother, let me take out the speck that is in your eye,’ while you yourself do not (even) see the beam that is in your own eye? You hypocrite, first take the beam out of your own eye, and then you will see clearly (enough) to take the speck out of your brother’s eye.

43 “For there is no healthy²⁶⁹ tree that bears sickly²⁷⁰ fruit; nor, on the other hand, does a sickly tree bear healthy fruit. 44 For every tree is known by its own fruit. Figs are not gathered from thorn-bushes, not is a cluster of grapes picked from a bramble-bush. 45 The good man out of the good treasure stored in his heart produces what is good, and the evil man out of his evil storehouse produces what is evil. For out of the abundance of the heart his mouth speaks.”

As Luke reports Christ’s sermon, Jesus has been speaking about the light of love, love even for enemies, shining brightly in the hearts and lives of his followers. With this light of love the Master now contrasts the darkness of sin: self-delusion, a beam in the eye. Jesus closes the paragraph by picturing the good man producing what is good over against the wicked man producing what is wicked.

For the fact that these sayings are found also in Matthew (with variations) there are at least two reasons: (a) Luke 6:41–44 is part of The Sermon on the Mount, which is summarized also in Matthew (chapters 5–7); and (b) the few remaining sayings, those found in Luke 6:39, 40, 45, may very well have been used by Jesus on different occasions, and not always necessarily with identical application (see below, footnote 271).

39. He also told them this parable: A blind man cannot lead a blind man, can he? Will they not both fall into a pit?

Jesus makes a transition to a new subject. At first there may seem to be no connection at all with the preceding. Nevertheless there may well be one. The Master has been saying, “Blessed are you poor.… Woe to you who are rich.… Love your enemies … lend without expecting to get anything back.” All this was strange, startling, yet also thought-provoking. It was nourishing food for the soul. It contrasted sharply with the sickly, warmed-up stew that was being constantly ladled to them by their scribes. See Matt. 7:28; Mark 1:22. The people could not help noticing the difference. So Jesus now explains this contrast: these scribes are blind. They cannot shed light because, to a considerable extent, they do not honor the light. They resemble a blind guide who is trying to lead a blind man, with the result that both fall into a pit.

In parabolic language Jesus asks, “A blind man cannot lead a blind man, can he?” The expected answer is, “No, indeed!” The next question is, “Will they not both fall into a pit?” The only logical answer is, “Yes, they will.”

Palestine’s rugged terrain was full of pits, holes into which people might fall and meet with very serious accidents. Note the many references to such pits in Scripture; Ps. 40:2; 57:6; Prov. 23:27; 26:27; 28:10; Eccles. 10:8; Matt. 12:11; Luke 14:5, etc. It is clear from these references that the term pit is frequently used in a figurative sense.

The implication is that people should not follow those blind guides. And is not another clear implication this, that The Twelve—and others too perhaps; cf. Luke 10:1—should replace these blind guides? To do this they must be trained for their task. They trust be humble pupils of the Greatest Teacher of all.

So the Master continues: 40. A pupil does not outrank his teacher, but everyone who is fully trained will be like his teacher.

On the part of The Twelve what may well have been the natural reaction to this suggestion? It should be borne in mind that most of them were men with very little education. They were “unschooled and untrained” (Acts 4:13a). How then would it ever be possible for them to take the place of these learned scribes, men drilled in the law and in tradition? Besides, if even the distance between The Twelve and the scribes was great, what about the immeasurably greater distance between these twelve men and their Teacher, Jesus?

Tenderly and lovingly the Master now assures them that although they will never be able to outrank or surprass him, yet thorough training under his direction will, if they accept it, cause them to become like their Teacher; that is, like him not in degree of knowledge or wisdom but in truly reflecting his image to the world, so that people instructed by them will begin to say, “We can notice that these men have been with Jesus” (see Acts 4:13b). For different explanations see footnote.²⁷¹

For a disciple to become an effective teacher and leader of men, and in fact for anyone to be an effective witness for God and his truth, love is necessary, a love that expresses itself in deeds of mercy and generosity. That is what Jesus has been saying in verses 27–38.

What is also necessary is humility, stressed here in verses 41, 42. And why do you gaze at the speck in your brother’s eye, while the beam that is in your own eye you do not (even) observe? How can you say to your brother, Brother, let me take out the speck that is in your eye, while you yourself do not (even) see the beam that is in your own eye? You hypocrite, first take the beam out of your own eye, and then you will see clearly (enough) to take the speck out of your brother’s eye.

The beam is a heavy piece of timber fit to be used for the rafter or joist of a building. The “speck” or “mote” is a small piece of straw or of wood, a tiny chip from a beam, perhaps. Now in the figure which Jesus uses he asks the listener how it is that he is gazing at a mere speck in his brother’s eye, and even requests permission to remove that speck, while at the same time he completely overlooks the incomparably larger beam in his own eye. Cf. John 8:7!

The question is: Who is this would-be eye-doctor? Answer: he is called a “hypocrite,” a word which Jesus generally uses to characterize the scribes and Pharisees of his day (12:56; 13:15; cf. Matt. 6:2, 5, 16; 7:5; 15:7; 22:18; 23:13–15; 24:51; Mark 7:6), a class of individuals whom the Lord describes as “those who trusted in themselves that they were righteous and who despised all others” (Luke 18:9). Any person with a pharisaic disposition is meant, therefore. Since in the hearts of all, including even Christ’s followers to the extent to which grace has not yet fully transformed them, there houses a Pharisee, the conclusion follows that thus passage applies to all, in the sense that all need to examine themselves (I Cor. 11:28), lest without self-examination and self-discipline they find fault with and strive to correct someone else. A person may be ever so good in his own eyes (Cf. Luke 18:11, 12); yet, if he is not humble, then, as God sees him, there is a beam in his eye, the beam of self-righteousness. This makes him a blind eye-doctor who tries to perform an operation on someone else’s eye! However grievous the other man’s error may have seemed to the eye of the would-be corrector, was it not a mere “speck” compared with his own self-righteousness, a defect so glaring that in the sight of God it amounts to a beam in the critic’s eye?

When by sovereign grace this beam has been removed, the former faultfinder will be able to see clearly enough to take the speck out of his brother’s eye; that is, he will then be able to “restore such a person in the spirit of gentleness,” and, examining himself in the light, let us say, of I Cor. 13, will look to himself lest he also be tempted (Gal. 6:1).

It is clear from the last clause, in which mention is made of removing the speck from the brother’s eye, that it was not Christ’s purpose to discourage mutual discipline. On the contrary, both self-discipline and mutual discipline are encouraged in this saying.

43, 44. For there is no healthy tree that bears sickly fruit; nor, on the other hand, does a sickly tree bear healthy fruit. For every tree is known by its own fruit. Figs are not gathered from thorn-bushes, nor is a cluster of grapes picked from a bramble-bush.

The little word For has given trouble to some. Now it is true that at times the Greek word on which it is based is better left untranslated. However, in the present case the rendering “For” makes excellent sense. The connection is close. Jesus is, as it were, saying, “Remove that beam of self-righteousness, for it is a very serious defect, showing that you are a spiritually sick person. You are not bearing good fruit.” Good fruit shows that the tree from which it came is healthy; bad fruit indicates that the tree from which it fell is sickly. Every tree—the term tree as here used includes what we call a “shrub”—is known by its fruit.

The underlying figure fruit includes all the various ways in which a person expresses himself: his attitudes, words, deeds, etc. It includes his speech, confession, teaching. This is clear from verse 45b, “Out of the abundance of the heart his mouth speaks.” See also Isa. 8:20; Matt. 15:9; Titus 1:9–12; Heb. 13:9; I John 4:1–3; II John 9–11. It also includes his deeds, general behavior; in fact, his entire life as it manifests itself: Luke 3:8–14; John 15:8–10; Gal. 5:22–24; Eph. 5:9–12; Phil. 1:11; Col. 1:10; James 3:17, 18.

The point Jesus drives home is that each tree yields the type of fruit for which it was planned by the Creator, a type not produced by any other tree or plant. Therefore from thorn-bushes one must not expect to gather figs, and from a bramble-bush one must not expect to pick a bunch of grapes. The same holds with respect to people; as Jesus now adds: 45. The good man out of the good treasure stored in his heart produces what is good, and the evil man out of his evil storehouse produces what is evil. For out of the abundance of the heart his mouth speaks.

A person’s heart is a reservoir, a storehouse, a thesaurus. (Compare Matt. 2:11 where the word is used to indicate a chest or box from which the wise men took gold, frankincense, and myrrh.) What a man produces from this inner storehouse, whether good or bad, depends on what he was carrying in it.

It is out of the overflow of the heart that the mouth speaks. As a teeming population will overflow into adjoining territory, and a too full cistern into an overflow pipe, so also the overplus of the heart will burst out into speech. If what is in the heart is good, this overflow will be good; if the contents of the inner being are bad, what spills out through the mouth will also be bad. Whatever a person has set his heart on will sooner or later be revealed in his speech. Therefore what is in his heart is very, very important.

This, however, does not provide any excuse for a fatalistic view of life. It does not make it right for a man to say, “Can I help what I have in my heart?” In Matthew the parallel passage is immediately followed by the words, “But I say to you that for every careless word that men shall speak they shall render account on the day of judgment” (Matt. 12:36). The real solution is found in the prayer of Ps. 51:10.²⁷²

Practical Lessons Derived from Luke 6:39–45

Verse 42

“First take the beam out of your own eye.” The basic requirement for the exercise of mutual discipline is self-discipline. Love toward man presupposes humility before God.

Verse 45

“Out of the abundance of the heart his mouth speaks.” But what if there is no “abundance” of good things stored away in his heart and mind; such things as faith, hope, love, interest in the work of God in creation and redemption, eagerness to read edifying literature, desire to listen to uplifting music and song, zeal to win people for God and his kingdom, etc.? This shows how very important it is to take to heart Phil. 4:8, 9.

Notes on Greek Words, Phrases, and Constructions in 6:39–45

Verse 39

μήτι expects negative answer; οὐχί, affirmative.

βόθυνον, acc. s. of βόθυνος, pit.

Verse 40

For μαθητής see the note on 6:13 on page 333.

For διδάσκαλος, master, teacher, see N.T.C. on Mark, p. 177, footnote 172. Cf. didactic.

κατηρτισμένος, nom. s. masc. perf. passive participle of καταρτίζω, to restore, complete, mend, render fit, furnish or train completely. For a synonym see II Tim. 3:17.

Verse 41

The terms κάρφος, speck, chip, cinder; δοκός, beam, joist; and κατανοεῖς, sec. per. s. pres. act. indicat. of κατανοέω, to notice, detect, observe, perceive, are also found in Matt. 7:3–5.

Verse 42

ἄφες, sec. per. s., 2nd aor. imperat. of ἀφίημι. This verb has a wide range of meanings: let go, utter, send away, divorce, tolerate, permit, let, allow, pardon, forgive, leave off, leave behind, stop, abandon, etc. In 6:42 “let” is a good translation. See also, on this verb, N.T.C. on Mark, p. 664, footnote 830.

Verse 43

σαπρός, rotten, bad, decayed, sickly. Cf. septic, saprophyte.

Verse 44

Note the nouns ἄκανθα, thorn-bush; σῦκον, fig (cf. sycamore); βάτος, bramble-bush; and σταφυλή, a cluster of grapes.

τρυγῶσιν, third per. pl. pres. indicat. of τρυγάω. Cf. Rev. 14:18, 19. The characteristically Hebrew idiom “They do not gather figs from thorn-bushes” can be changed to “Figs are not gathered from thorn-bushes.”

Verse 45

περισσεύματος, gen. s. of περίσσευμα, what is over and above, abundance.

6:46–49 III. Application: The Parable of The Two Builders

Cf. Matt. 7:21, 24–27

46 “Now why do you call me ‘Lord, Lord,’ but do not put into practice what I say? 47 Everyone who comes to me and listens to my words and puts them into practice, I will show you whom he is like: 48 He is like a man building a house, who dug deep and laid a foundation on rock. Then, when a flood came, the torrent burst against that house but could not shake it, because it was well built.

49 “But he who listened and failed to put (my words) into practice is like a man who built a house upon the ground, without a foundation. The moment the torrent burst against it, it collapsed, and the crash of that house was tremendous.”²⁷³

As the sermon is about to be concluded, the necessity of bearing healthy fruit (see verses 43–45) is re-emphasized. Too many people fail to put their supposed religion into practice.

274

So Jesus continues by saying,

46. Now why do you call me Lord, Lord, but do not put into practice what I say?

When these people address Jesus as “Lord, Lord,” the very least one can say is that they acknowledge the fact that they owe their allegiance to him. The suggestion that they even ascribed to him divine glory and majesty cannot be ruled out. In the Greek translation of the Old Testament—the rendering called the Septuagint (LXX)—the tetragrammaton (four consonant name YHWH) is reproduced by the Greek word

Kurios

, that is,

Lord

. But whatever may have been the degree of honor these people bestowed upon Jesus when they addressed him as “Lord, Lord,” he stresses that they were dishonest; for, while confessing him to be their Lord, they failed to

render obedience to him. So Jesus puts the question directly to them, “Why do you call me ‘Lord, Lord’?”

That, with a view to man’s salvation, the actual doing of the Lord’s will is of supreme importance is now set forth, namely, in the unforgettably impressive parable of The Two Builders. As already indicated, this parable is found also in Matthew (7:24–27). In both Gospels it forms the conclusion of the discourse, just as in both The Beatitudes constitute the beginning. The resemblances between the two reports of this parable are so many and so striking that it is generally admitted that we are dealing with the same story illustration.

Yet, there are also differences:

a. In Matthew’s report the first builder is called “sensible,” the second “foolish.” Luke omits these designations. But is it not obvious that in Luke’s view too the Master meant exactly that?

b. In Matthew’s report the first builder constructed his house on rock, the second on sand. In Luke’s the first builder, in constructing his house, “laid a foundation on rock,” the second omitted any foundation. He simply built his house on the ground. But does not any impartial reader immediately understand that in connection with the first builder Luke, without in any way disagreeing with Matthew, adds something?

c. Matthew mentions both floods and winds; Luke makes no mention of winds. Why should he? Were not the raging floods, considered by themselves, sufficiently violent to prove the stability of the first house and the instability of the second?

It is clear that those who discover “discrepancies” here are “splitting hairs.”²⁷⁵

47, 48. Everyone who comes to me and listens to my words and puts them into practice, I will show you whom he is like: He is like a man building a house, who dug deep and laid a foundation on rock. Then, when a flood came, the torrent burst against that house but could not shake it, because it was well built.

The words, “I will show you whom he is like [or: resembles],” indicate that Jesus wants everyone to listen carefully, for without his explanation the meaning would not be clear.

The first builder is a man with foresight, a cautious person. He realizes that fair, cloudless weather will not last. The rainy season is coming, bringing floods and washouts. So, deeper and deeper he digs, until at last he touches rock bottom. Upon this he constructs a foundation and builds his house.

In his explanation of the parable Jesus points out that the figurative meaning of what the first builder does is as follows. He represents everyone who comes to the Savior, listens to his words, and takes them to heart. He puts into practice whatever Jesus commands, for he has placed his trust in him.

Such a man is truly building on the true foundation, the one that rests on the Rock, Christ (Isa. 28:16; cf. I Peter 2:6; see also Rom. 9:33; I Cor. 3:11; 10:4, etc.). In fact what is said about God as the believers’ Rock (Deut. 32:15, 18; Ps. 18:2; 89:26; Isa. 17:10) is also applicable to Christ. See N.T.C. on Ephesians, p. 190.

The day of testing arrives. The rainy season begins. Rivulets start to descend from the hills. They combine and form a torrent, deep, swift, and furious. It dashes against the house of the first builder. However, the onrushing, swirling waters are not even able to shake it. It withstands the enormous force of the lashing, devastating flood. When the violence of the elements is completely spent, there stands that house, none the worse for all the punishment it has received. Reason: it was well built, its foundation resting on rock.

So also for everyone, including every hearer of the gospel, the test or crisis is coming. It comes in various forms and shapes: trial, temptation, bereavement, death, the final judgment. It often arrives with dramatic suddenness. That applies especially to the judgment day (Luke 17:24; cf. 21:17, 34b, 35; I Thess. 5:2). But as far as the first builder is concerned, what is the outcome? Never is he put to shame. He receives grace for every trial. Even the day of judgment is for him the day of triumph (I Thess. 2:19, 20; 3:13; 4:16; II Thess. 1:10; II Tim. 4:8; Titus 2:13, 14; Rev. 11:15–18; 17:14; 19:6–8).

49. But he who listened and failed to put (my words) into practice is like a man who built a house upon the ground, without a foundation. The moment the torrent burst against it, it collapsed, and the crash of that house was tremendous.

The second builder erects his house on loose gravel. A foundation of any kind he considers entirely unnecessary. He seems to think that bright and sunny days will never cease.

This represents the man who follows the promptings of his own sinful will. He listens to Christ’s words, to be sure, but he does not place his trust in him. Therefore he fails completely to obey the Savior’s commands.

It is understandable that it took hardly any effort for the angry torrent, sweeping down upon the second house, to undermine its walls and to carry away the very sand and gravel on which it had been erected. With a tremendous crash the foolish man’s house fell into the water and was washed away, pieces of wreckage being strewn about everywhere. The ruin of this house was complete.

The ruin in store for those people who are building merely on ground or sand, and whose house lacks a foundation, is described at the very close of the sermon, probably all the more to impress upon the listeners and on those who afterward would be brought into contact with this earnest message that their reaction to the words of the Lord has significance for all eternity. In reality, therefore, the announcement of the unbelievers’ tragic end is a manifestation of Christ’s mercy, an implied serious invitation to repent, extended to all who are still living in the day of grace.²⁷⁶

Practical Lessons Derived from Luke 6:46–49

Taking this short paragraph as a unit, we note the following lessons:

1. Everyone is a builder, for to live means to build. According to this parable, it is especially every hearer of the gospel that is considered a builder.

2. There are only two kinds of builders, not three or more. There are wise builders and there are foolish builders.

3. The wise or sensible builder builds his house—that is, his life—on Christ, the solid Rock. He earnestly and prayerfully endeavors to regulate his life in harmony with the words of Jesus, as revealed in Scripture. The foolish builder goes his own way.

4. The hour of crisis is unavoidable. No one can escape it. The result is irrevocable. The wise builder’s house is not even shaken by the downrushing torrent. The foolish builder’s house immediately collapses. Application: build wisely.

On Christ, the solid rock, I stand,

All other ground is sinking sand.

lines from Edward Mote’s hymn,

“My Hope Is Built”

Notes on Greek Words, Phrases, and Constructions in 6:46–49

Verse 46

Κύριε, vocat. s. of κύριος. For this word see N.T.C. on Mark, pp. 433–435.

Verses 48, 49

On the question whether ἔσκαψεν καὶ ἐβάθυνεν can be regarded as hendiadys there is a difference of opinion. Must we translate “he dug and went deep” or “he dug deep”? See A. T. Robertson, Word Pictures, Vol. II, p. 95, and same author, Translation, p. 171. Most translators accept the hendiadys, and even if the opposite view is accepted, the resultant difference is minor.

Note the genitive absolute, “a flood having arisen,” i.e., “when a flood arose.…” The word πλημμύρης, gen. s. of πλήμμυρα (cf. πλήθω, πίμπλημι), indicates a more than abundant amount of water, a flood.

Note προσέρηξεν twice, once in verse 48, once in verse 49. It is the third per. s. aor. indicat. of προσρήγνυμι, to break—or burst—against. Related to the basic verb ῥήγνυμι is the noun ῥῆγμα, wreck, ruin, collapse, crash, in verse 49. Cf. break, wreck, fracture, hemorrhage.

Summary of Chapter 6

The Son of Man Asserting His Authority as Lord of the Sabbath (verses 1–11). Friends of the Bridegroom should be feasting instead of fasting (5:33–39). This attitude of gladness instead of sadness must also mark the manner in which the sabbath is observed. Once on a sabbath the disciples were picking and eating heads of grain, rubbing them with their hands. Criticized by the Pharisees for doing this, Jesus, with an appeal to what David did, as recorded in I Sam. 21:1–6; 22:9, 10, demolished the attack of the faultfinders and declared himself to be “Lord of the sabbath.”

On another sabbath Jesus entered the synagogue and was teaching. He noticed a man with a shriveled hand. With murder in their hearts the scribes and Pharisees were watching, to see whether they could find a charge against Jesus for healing on the sabbath. He told the handicapped man to stand up in front of the entire audience. Then he asked the evil-minded spies, “Is it right on the sabbath to do good or to do harm, to save life or to destroy it?” When they remained silent, he told the man to stretch out his hand. It was completely restored. “They, however, were filled with senseless rage and began to discuss with one another what they might do to Jesus.”

The Choosing of The Twelve (verses 12–16). Since the enemies of Jesus were planning his destruction and since gospel proclamation must continue even after his departure, Jesus, on a mountain and after an all-night prayer vigil, chose twelve men to be closely associated with himself and to be sent out to do his work. As listed by Luke their names are as follows (except that in the evangelist’s account the names of Judas the Greater and Simon the Zealot are given in reversed order, James the Less is called “James the son of Alphaeus,” and Judas the Greater is called “Judas the son of James”):

Peter and Andrew, James and John,

Philip and Bartholomew,

Matthew next and Thomas too,

James the Less and Judas the Greater,

Simon the Zealot and Judas the Traitor.

Jesus’ Poorer to Heal (verses 17–19). Having descended to a level place on this mountain, Jesus, surrounded by a vast throng from nearby and faraway places, healed their sick and demon-possessed.

The Sermon on the Mount (verses 20–49). For an expanded report of this sermon see Matt. 5–7. In this unforgettably beautiful sermon Jesus pronounced Blessings on his true followers, and Woes on the impenitents. From his lips there flowed such precious passages as, “Love your enemies, do good to those who hate you, bless those who curse you, pray for those who mistreat you.” He concluded the sermon by telling the parable of The Two Builders: the first digging deep and laying a foundation on rock; the second building his house upon the ground, without a foundation. Result: when the torrent struck those houses, the first was not even shaken; the second immediately collapsed. The first builder symbolizes the man who not only listens to Jesus but also puts his words into practice; the second listens … and then goes his own way.

N.T.C. W. Hendriksen, New Testament Commentary

²³⁵ See Shabbath 7:2, 4; S.BK., Vol. I, pp. 615–618; and A. T. Robertson, The Pharisees and Jesus, New York, 1920, pp. 87, 88.

²³⁶ For Practical Lessons derived from 6:1–5 see p. 324.

A.V. Authorized Version (King James)

Gram. N.T. A. T. Robertson, Grammar of the Greek New Testament in the Light of Historical Research

Gram. N.T. (Bl.-Debr.) F. Blass and A. DeBrunner, A Greek Grammar of the New Testament and Other Early Christian Literature

²³⁷ Or: and began to teach.

²³⁸ Or: withered, wasted away, paralyzed.

²³⁹ Or: fully restored.

²⁴⁰ That it was indeed the sabbath is clear from all the synoptic accounts (Matt. 12:10, 11, 12; Mark 3:2, 4; Luke 6:6, 7, 9). In light of this fact Robertson’s remark (“Only Luke notes that it was on a sabbath,” Word Pictures, Vol. II, p. 81) may cause some difficulty.

²⁴¹ See S.BK., Vol. I, pp. 622–629.

²⁴² Notes on Greek words, phrases, and constructions in 6:6–11 begin on this page.

²⁴³ See Howard La Fay, “Where Jesus Walked,” National Geographic, Vol. 132, No. 6 (Dec. 1967), p. 763.

²⁴⁴ Notes on Greek words, phrases, and constructions in 6:12–16 begin on this page.

Th.D.N.T. Theological Dictionary of the New Testament, edited by G. Kittel and G. Friedrich, and translated from the German by G. W. Bromiley

²⁴⁵ For another possible solution see N.T.C. on Matthew, p. 260.

²⁴⁶ Note: “and he was curing” (or “healing”) or something similar is preferred by Phillips; by A. T. Robertson (Translation, p. 42); by S. Greijdanus, Korte Verklaring, pp. 155, 158; and cf. Dutch Bible (both Statenvertaling and Nieuwe Vertaling).

²⁴⁷ Notes on Greek words, phrases, and constructions in 6:17–19 begin on page 337.

²⁴⁸ Or: revile you.

²⁴⁹ Including A. T. Robertson, Word Pictures, Vol. II, p. 88; R. C. H. Lenski, op. cit., p. 222; S. M. Gilmour, The Gospel According to St. Luke (The Interpreter’s Bible), New York, 1952, p. 118; F. Godet, op. cit., Vol. I, p. 314.

²⁵⁰ Op. cit., p. 225.

²⁵¹ Notes on Greek words, phrases, and constructions in 6:20–26 begin on page 345.

²⁵² Or: cloak, coat, robe.

²⁵³ Or: tunic, shirt.

²⁵⁴ Or: do not ask that he give it back.

²⁵⁵ Or: And treat others as you would have them treat you.

²⁵⁶ I.e., notorious sinners, or those so regarded. So also in verses 33, 34.

²⁵⁷ Or: of treating those well who treat you well.

²⁵⁸ In both cases “compassionate” can be substituted for “merciful.”

²⁵⁹ Or: into the fold of your garment.

²⁶⁰ Or: For with the measure you use, it will be measured back to you.

²⁶¹ See p. 337 for a summary of Luke’s report of The Sermon on the Mount. In general, this is also the division favored by S. Greijdanus, Korte Verklaring, p. 161, and approaches that found in Lenski, op. cit., p. 218. Accordingly, I depart here from the division into sections followed by Grk. N.T. (A-B-M-W) for 6:27–45.

²⁶² S.BK., Vol. I, p. 354.

²⁶³ This interpretation is perhaps best represented by S. Greijdanus, Korte Verklaring, pp. 165, 166. He states, “Here naturally the reference is to a request borne of want or need, and an inability, due to poverty, to return what was given.”

²⁶⁴ That is the position of the following, among others: A. Stöger, Das Evangelium nach Lukas, Eng. tr. The Gospel According to St. Luke, Dublin, 1969, Vol. I, p. 119; A. B. Bruce, op. cit., Vol. I, p. 506; R. C. H. Lenski, op. cit., p. 231; F. Godet, op. cit., Vol. I, p. 323.

²⁶⁵ Meaning: But be in the habit of loving … and doing good and lending, etc.

²⁶⁶ Lenski (op. cit., p. 235) disagrees, “for,” says he, “enemies would not borrow from us.” Yet both the immediate context (“Love your enemies”) and the similar passage (verse 27) support the conclusion that the entire closely connected series of commands (love, do good, lend) has as its object “your enemies.” Some even favor the translation, “But love your enemies, do good to them, and lend to them.” Whether this phrase to them should be inserted is a minor point. It is certainly implied, though strict adherence to the original favors its omission in the translation.

²⁶⁷ For other applications of the underlying figure see Ps. 79:12; Isa. 65:7; and Mark 4:24.

²⁶⁸ Notes on Greek words, phrases, and constructions in 6:27–38 begin on page 358.

M. M. The Vocabulary of the Greek New Testament Illustrated from the Papyri and Other Non-Literary Sources, by James Hope Moulton and George Milligan

²⁶⁹ Or: good (twice in this passage).

²⁷⁰ Or: bad (twice in this passage).

²⁷¹

Among several dissenting explanations there are two to which I wish to call special attention:

a. That of F. Godet, op. cit., Vol. I, pp. 329, 330, namely, that Jesus here teaches what will happen to the people if they remain under the direction of the Pharisees. The further they advance in the school of such masters, the nearer they will come to … perdition.

Objection. The ring or the words, “Everyone who is fully trained will be like his master,” is positive. It reminds one of II Tim. 3:16, and not of anything having to do with “perdition.”

b. That of S. Greijdanus, Korte Verklaring, Vol. I, p. 170. He regards Luke 6:40 as similar in meaning to Matt. 10:24, 25. The sense then would be: a pupil must not expect to be treated better than his teacher. He will share his teacher’s lot.

Objection. The contexts differ. Jesus at times used the same or a similar figure but with a different application. The treatment a teacher and his pupils can expect is stressed in Matt. 10:24, 25; thorough training under the direction of their Master whose image they will reflect is the point in Luke 6:40. In Luke 22:27 and John 13:16 the emphasis is on humility.

²⁷² Notes on Greek words, phrases, and constructions in 6:39–45 begin on this page.

²⁷³ Or: and the wreck of that house was complete.

²⁷⁴ Luke represents Jesus as directly addressing his audience, using the second person plural, where Matthew uses the third. Something similar occurs in connection with The Beatitudes. In a sermon of far greater length than either of these summaries, or of both put together, the Master may very well have used both the second and the third.

²⁷⁵ Or, as the Dutch saying goes, “Zij zoeken spijkers op laag water,” that is, they wait for the water to ebb in order to find nails!

N.T.C. W. Hendriksen, New Testament Commentary

²⁷⁶ Notes on Greek words, phrases, and constructions in 6:46–49 begin on this page.

↑ Back to top