The Gospel of Luke
Chapter 20
By this point in the Gospel, Jesus is in Jerusalem during the final week of His life before His crucifixion. The opposition of the religious leaders in all parties in Jerusalem is hardening toward Him. He has drawn immediate attention toward Himself with His entry into the city and His attack on the merchants selling sacrifices in the Temple. The tension escalates through this chapter as we get the sense that something explosive will happen soon.
Authority—Luke 20:1-19
During this week, Luke is not careful to give us a chronological breakdown of Jesus’ activities. His emphasis is to show the increasing friction and tension between Jesus and the religiously powerful leaders. Consequently, he opens this series of events with a vague “one day” comment as he places Jesus in the Temple courts in the act of preaching the gospel and teaching people who will listen and learn. Jesus is in the heart of the opposition territory and it takes no time for them to confront Him with a demand to know the source of His actions. This is an attempt to intimidate Jesus into silence or else lead Him to the outrageous claim of being sent by God—which would likely inflame His followers (at least, so thought the leaders).
Jesus countered with a question of His own and everybody knew that His answer to their question would depend precisely upon their answer of His question. So He asked them what the source of John’s message had been—Divine? Or human? The leaders instantly saw their dilemma and refused to make answer without first withdrawing into conference! It is beyond question that they considered John to have been a powerful figure in years past, but hardly an inspired prophet and certainly not the messenger of the Messiah that he claimed to be and that the people believed him to be. If they disdained the message of John, they faced the wrath of a mob. If they admitted that the message was from God, then Jesus would very logically ask them why they rejected John’s message about a coming Messiah. Their response was just to say, “We don’t know.” They refused to answer Him, so Jesus in response told them plainly that He would not answer them, either.
Immediately He launched into another parable that He addressed to the assembled hearers. The story centered upon a vineyard hired to tenant farmers—which would be a situation very familiar to the people of the day. It is also worthwhile to remember that God compared the nation of Israel to a vineyard in the words of Isaiah 5:1-7, and people commonly used that passage to speak of the nation. As Jesus told the parable, the situation became more and more unjust and outrageous: first, the tenants refused to perform their agreed-upon duties, then they became abusive, then violent, and finally, murderous when the owner’s son arrived. Jesus asked for the judgment that would be fair for those tenants and confirmed that the residents would be killed and the vineyard turned over to others. The crowd was horrified at the suggestion that Israel would be turned over to another people, but Jesus capped the whole discussion by appealing to a statement from Psalm 118:22. This identified Him as the stone in question—and then He adjusted a common proverb of the day to point out the danger of rejecting Him! It was common for people to say, “If a stone falls on a pot, woe to the pot; if the pot falls on a stone, woe to the pot!” No matter which direction the force is applied, the pot will always be the loser! Jesus meant for the people to know that opposition to Him would always result in the destruction of His enemy. And the entire exchange infuriated the religious leaders. They were ready to move against Him instantly because they understood the parable perfectly
They knew that Jesus identified them as the unrighteous tenants of the vineyard. However, they were stopped by their anxiety about the mob and they were unable to do anything about Him at that moment. This did not stop their attempts to destroy Him, though. Next, they would try something more subtle than raw intimidation.
Attempted Subversion—Luke 20:20-40
Luke presents to our eyes the spectacle of spies who pretended to be honest questioners of Jesus, seeking the truth and how to please God. The goal was to lead Him into some unwise comment that they could twist into an accusation. Then the Romans, who could be counted upon to be ignorant of nuances of the Aramaic language and the Jewish mentality, would take any action against Jesus. This would be both effective and keep them “innocent” of any violence. They hit upon a hot-button issue of the day—the use of money that included images (prohibited by the Law) and inscriptions that were considered blasphemous by the Jews (identifying Caesar as “High Priest” for instance). To use the money was to accept these violations; to refuse the money would be treason. Whether Jesus said it was allowable or not, the answer should destroy Him.
Jesus instantly saw their hypocrisy and the trap they laid. He asked to see a coin (showing that He, for one, did not possess the money!) and they furnished one (someone of them had the coins!). He asked about the image and inscription and they identified it as Caesar. Jesus returned the coin and commanded them to give to Caesar what belongs to him and to God what belongs to Him. The image identified the owner—and humans bear the image of God. The clear implication silenced this attack, but another was quickly brought up.
The Sadducees were the religious “conservatives” of the day, accepting only the books of Moses since they were known to have come from God. Other writings were suspect in their minds and the Law alone gave plenty of room for accommodation to the Gentile rulers. However, teachings about angels, prophets, resurrection, and life after death were rejected by them. They quickly spun a story about a woman who obeyed the Law in marrying subsequent brothers but asked whose wife she would be when they all rose from the dead. They expected no answer but only a laugh at the ridiculous suggestion of a resurrection and all the problems it would create. Jesus pointed out that resurrection made everything different and that even in the Law of Moses it was clear that Abraham, Isaac and Jacob were in some way alive. Some of the Pharisees loved the answer—but everybody quit asking Him entrapment questions.
Obvious Failures—Luke 20:41-47
In the gathering quiet, Jesus turned upon His questioners and asked a counter-question. The cultural understanding was that the father was superior to the son and any ancestor would be greater than a descendant. However, David—whom they acknowledged as a prophet—addressed the Messiah as “Lord,” showing superiority over David, a king and prophet. How could such a thing be possible; that a “Son” of David be his superior? There was no answer.
Jesus turned to His followers and warned them against the teachers of the law. These men loved their badges of status and rank: special clothes and deference by the public and privileges among the faithful. Meanwhile they were, in fact, corrupt and vicious and pretended to be pious when they themselves knew they were just putting on a show. Jesus saw through their pretence and also saw clearly their fate. They would be punished most severely, as their falseness deserved. The greater accountability of those who dare to teach God’s word has always been pointed out in Scripture. One of the most pointed reminders is stated clearly in James 3:1. And it is absolutely fair for teachers to be held to the strictest judgment—they speak for God.