Luke 7

H. Leo Boles Commentary On Luke 7 THE AT Luke 7:1-10 Luke 7:1 —After he had ended all his sayings—Having ended his ser-mon, Luke proceeds to narrate other events. A parallel of this account is found in Matthew 8:5-13. Luke’ s account is fuller at the beginning, but Matthew’ s record is fuller at the close; Matthew records some things that Luke omits, and Luke records some that Matthew does not. The context here shows that this discourse which has just been narrated was delivered at one time, and not a mere collection of sayings or detached parts of different discourses. Jesus had ended all of these sayings “ in the ears of the people’’; the discourse recorded in chapter 6 was for the instruction of the people as well as his disciples. “ He entered into Capernaum.’’ The language implies that he was not far from Capernaum when he delivered this discourse; Capernaum was the center of his operations, and to it he frequently returned from his preaching tours. Luke 7:2 —And a certain centurion’ s servant,—A “ centurion” was a Roman officer commanding a hundred men. This one was probably in the service of Herod Antipas, and stationed at Capernaum as an important provincial town and a place of considerable traffic on the Sea of Galilee, to preserve order there and in the adjacent country. Matthew tells us that he was a gentile (Matthew 8:10), but he seems to have been very strongly attached to the Jewish nation. He may have been a proselyte to the Jewish faith; he would be called a “ proselyte of the gate,” one who lived among the Jewish people and conformed to what were called the seven precepts of Noah, which prohibited blasphemy, idolatry, murder, robbery, rebellion, and eating of blood and things strangled. Those who submit¬ted to circumcision and became naturalized Jews were termed “ proselytes of righteousness.” The New Testament mentions three other centurions, £tnd all of them are favorably men-tioned. (Luke 23:47; Acts 10:1 Acts 27:1 Acts 27:3 Acts 27:43.). His servant was sick and “ at the point of death.” This servant was very dear to the centurion. Matthew reports the servant as being grievously tormented. Luke 7:3 —And when he heard concerning Jesus,—He heard of the mi-raculous power of Jesus and “ sent unto him elders of the Jews.” They were persons who were elders or magistrates of the city; they may have been officers of the synagogue which this centurion had built. The term “ elder” was first applied to men of age (Genesis 24:2 Genesis 50:7) ; and as persons of right age and experience would naturally be called to the management of public affairs (Joshua 24:31), it afterwards became an official title (Exodus 3:16 Exodus 4:29 Exodus 19:7 Exodus 24:1 Exodus 24:9). The office grew out of the patriarchal system. Matthew makes no mention of the elders of the Jews coming to Jesus. It may be that the centurion followed the elders, or what he did through his representatives may be said of himself as doing. Luke 7:4 —And they, when they came to Jesus,—The elders were very urgent in their request that Jesus go as quickly as possi¬ble to the centurion’ s house. Luke 7:5 —For he loveth our nation—They give as their reason that he was “ worthy” that Jesus should do this for him. The Jews pleaded the worthiness of the centurion, but the centurion declared his own unworthiness; truly greatness and humility go together. The elders of the Jews wanted to repay him for what he had done in building a synagogue for them. This centurion had built a synagogue at his own expense. Every town where there were Jews had its synagogue. Luke 7:6 —And Jesus went with them.—Messengers were sent in succession to an important person of whom a favor was de-sired, making the request in varied form with many expressions of humility in the East. Even when it was known that the request would be granted, it was customary to send again, urging the great one not to put himself to trouble, and offering apologies and expression of unworthiness. So the centurion followed this custom; Luke 7:7 —the centurion sent friends to Him—he sent his friends to Jesus, saying: “ Lord, trouble not thyself; for I am not worthy that thou shouldest come under my roof.”Luke 7:8 —For I also am a man set under authority,—Being a cen-turion this man would be under the authority of higher officials, as the centurion had command of only one hundred soldiers; however, he could say to those under him: “ Go, and he goeth; and to another, Come, and he cometh.” He could command his servants to do anything that he wished done, and they would do it. This centurion appears to have regarded the sickness of his servant either as due to some peculiar state of body or to demons, which were under the authority of Jesus, precisely as the centurion’ s soldiers were subject to his order. It is remarkable that while Matthew calls the disease “ palsy,” Luke, a physician, does not name the disease. Luke 7:8 —For I also am a man set under authority, having under myself soldiers—He recognized that Christ’s authority was greater than his. Luke 7:9-10 —I have not found so great faith,—When Jesus heard what the centurion had said about commanding and having it done, he turned to the multitude that was following him and said: “ I have not found so great faith, no, not in Israel.” These words were spoken to the Jews who followed Jesus. The centurion, a Gentile and a military man, Jesus commended as having greater faith than anyone he had found among God’ s chosen people. This is the first recorded instance of faith in Christ’ s power to heal at a distance; this great faith was not found in some favored Israelite, but in one far less privileged and favored, a Gentile. When those who had been sent to Jesus returned, they “ found the servant whole.” Jesus had healed or restored to health the servant as the centurion had requested. RAISING THE SON OF THE WIDOW OF NAINLuk_7:11-17 Luke 7:11—And it came to pass soon afterwards,—Soon after the restoration of the centurion’ s servant in Capernaum, Jesus and his disciples and the great multitude went to the city “ called Nain.” “ Nain” is not used anywhere else in the Bible; its exact location has not been determined. Many think that it was on the northern slope of Mount Hermon, immediately west of Endor, which lies in a further recess of the same range of mountains. It was probably about twelve or fifteen miles from Capernaum. Luke is the only writer of the gospel that records this miracle, as John is the only one that records the miracle of raising Lazarus from the dead. We do not know why others omitted the record of this miracle. Jesus was on one of his preaching tours through Galilee when he went to Nain. Luke 7:12 —Now when he drew near to the gate of the city,—This small town was a walled city, hence the “ gate” of entrance to it. Most of the towns and villages were walled for protection. As Jesus and his company came near to the gate, “ there was carried out one that was dead.” The burial of bodies within the town or city was forbidden, hence the sepulchers and tombs were located without the limits of the cities and vil¬lages. Luke describes very minutely the scene; it was a “ fu¬neral procession” of “ the only son of his mother” and this mother “ was a widow.” Luke 7:13 —And when the Lord saw her,—It is significant that the “ Lord saw her” ; no bereaved heart or contrite spirit ever es¬caped his attention. It seems that Jesus and his disciples with a multitude following him were going into the city of Nain and met the funeral procession as it came out of the city. It is very probable that this mother had never seen Jesus before ; he was a stranger to her so far as we know, and yet when he saw her he said in his compassion for her, “ Weep not.” The sympathies of Jesus are in full and lively exercise for this bereaved mother. The word translated “ weep” is that which denotes the outward expression of grief. The people in the East gave vent to their sorrow in loud shrieks and lamen¬tations over the bodies of the dead. Oftentimes they employed persons whose office it was to sing dirges and utter do¬lorous groans and lamentations; they were “ professional mourners.” The louder they would groan and shriek the greater was the grief supposed to be. It is not known whether there were such “ professional mourners” in this fu¬neral procession that Jesus met. Luke 7:14 —And he came nigh and touched the bier:—“ The bier” was an open frame upon which the dead body, wrapped in folds of linen, was placed and carried on the shoulders of four, and sometimes six persons, to the grave or tomb. Jesus touched the bier as a signal for the bearers to stand still. “ The bearers stood still.” There must have been a dignity and air of authority in our Lord to stop in this way the pro¬cession of such a solemn occasion by a simple gesture, or the mere laying his hand upon the bier. When the bearers stopped Jesus simply said: “ Young man, I say unto thee, Arise.” The authority and power with which Jesus spoke should be observed. There are three records of Jesus’ raising the dead. The first is the raising of the daughter of Jairus (Matthew 9:18-19 Matthew 9:23-26; Mark 5:22-24 Mark 5:35-43; Luke 8:41-42 Luke 8:49-56); the widow’ s son (Luke 7:11-17); and the raising of Lazarus (John 11:35-53). In all of these miracles Jesus’ authority is expressed by “ Damsel, I say unto thee, Arise” ; “ Young man, I say unto thee, Arise” ; and “ Lazarus, come forth.” All of these forms are expressive of our Lord’ s power to perform the act. There are seven instances of restoration to life recorded in the Bible: (1) the child of the widow of Zarephath (1 Kings 17:22); (2) son of the Shunammite woman (2 Kings 4:33-36) ; (3) the case of a man raised by touching Elisha’ s bones (2 Kings 13:21) ; (4) Jairus’ daughter (Matthew 9:18-19 Matthew 9:23-26; (5) the widow’ s son (Luke 7:11-17); (6) the raising of Lazarus (John 11:35-53); and (7) Tabitha or Dorcas by Peter (Acts 9:36-42). Our Lord’ s resurrection differs from all these; these all died again, but Jesus arose never to die again. Luke 7:15 —And he that was dead sat up,—The young man that was dead obeyed the voice of Jesus and sat up and began to speak. His speaking proved the reality of the raising from the dead to the large company. It should be recalled that Jesus and his disciples were present and a great multitude had followed them; again there was a great multitude that was following the funeral procession; putting these two large groups together, we have many witnesses to this resurrection. In no case where the dead were restored to life does the Bible tell us what they said; their experience and their knowledge of anything beyond death are withheld from us. The body was in full view and there was no possible chance for deception in this case. It is a beautiful touch of sympathy described by Luke when he reports that Jesus “ gave him to his mother.” Luke 7:16-17 —And fear took hold on all:—The people were filled with awe, and praised God for what they had seen. In their praise they said: “ A great prophet is arisen among us; and, God hath visited his people.” They at once recalled Elijah and Elisha and declared that a great prophet like these had arisen “ among us,” and that God had visited his people again with a prophet. It had been about four hundred years since the prophets ceased to bring God’s message to the people. And this report went forth concerning him—Such a miracle would be reported quickly and would have a wide circulation; the whole country would ring with the many accounts and rumors of his work. All Galilee, Samaria, and Judea would be talking of this great prophet and of his wonderful power. With the rumor would go the probability that this prophet was the Messiah himself. The crowds that witnessed this would help to norate the report. One crowd followed Jesus and another was following the bier and friends of the widow and her son; both crowds help to broadcast the great miracle which they had witnessed. JESUS JOHN THE BAPTISTLuk_7:18-35 Luke 7:18 —And the disciples of John told him—A parallel of this is found in Matthew 11:2-19. The whole country was in excite¬ment over Jesus; the report of his wonderful works had reached the ears of both his enemies and his friends. The disciples of John the Baptist learned of the increased fame of Jesus from the reports that went out. John had been cast in prison; we do not know just how long he had been in prison, but his disciples found a way of telling John while he was in prison at Machaerus about the works and fame of this new prophet who seemed to outstrip John himself. Luke 7:19 —And John calling unto him two of his disciples—John was at this time in prison, but his disciples seemed to have had free access to him; so far as Luke’ s account is concerned we would not know that John was in prison; we learn this from Matthew. John was probably seventy miles away from the place where Jesus was preaching and in prison. We do not know what his purpose was in sending two of his disciples to Jesus; some think that John was in doubt; others think that he sent his disciples to Jesus that they might be strengthened in their faith. John had designated Jesus to his disciples as the Lamb of God that taketh away the sin of the world (John 1:29.) It matters not whether John sent these disciples to relieve his own doubts or those of his disciples; the fact remains that he sent two of them to ask Jesus: “ Art thou he that cometh, or look we for another?”Luke 7:20 —And when the men were come unto him,— Since John was in prison at Machaerus, fifteen miles southeast from the northern extremity of the Dead Sea, and about seventy miles from the cities on the Sea of Galilee, it would take these two disciples of John several days to bring the message from John to Jesus. They were faithful to the trust imposed upon them, and came directly to Jesus and reported that they were messengers from John the Baptist and that John had propounded the question. The question was: “ Art thou the coming one, the Messiah, or should we look for another?” The Greek im¬plies by another, one of a different kind. The point in John’ s mind seems to have been— it is time for the Messiah. Luke 7:21 —In that hour he cured many of diseases— In the presence of these two disciples that John had sent Jesus “ cured many of diseases and plagues and evil spirits.” The disciples of John witnessed all of these miracles. Jesus cured diseases of ordinary kind, such as plagues and scourges, which meant diseases that were believed to be sent as special punishments from God. He cast out evil spirits and restored sight to many that were blind. Luke, as a physician, carefully divides the diseased into three classes, and distinguishes each of these from the blind. The three classes are “ diseases and plagues and evil spirits.” Luke 7:22-23 —And he answered and said unto them,—Jesus gave a very emphatic answer to the messengers of John; they were to report to John what they had seen and heard. There was no mustering of military forces; no gathering of armies; no training of men for carnal war; no preparation for breaking down the towers of the Herods of that day and releasing his prisoners at the point of his conquering sword; no amassing of wealth to finance any great movement. But there was every demonstration of tender sympathy with human woes and of miraculous power, stooping low to touch the blind, the lame, the leper, the deaf, and the dead. The only detailed account of raising the dead in the ministry of Jesus up to this time is that of the widow’s son and, possibly, according to a few historians, of Jairus’ daughter; but we do not know how many cases of raising the dead there were that are mentioned. We know that many miracles were performed by Jesus of which we have no detailed account. (John 21:25.) As great as these things were, the greatest spiritual miracle, which is the climax of this list of marvelous works and of evidence, was the poor “ have good tidings preached to them.” Luke 7:24-25 —And when the messengers of John were departed,— Jesus began his eulogy of John so soon as the messengers of John left. He began by asking some vivid questions about the interest of the people in John. Matthew records the same questions (Matthew 11:7-8). Jesus’ testimony concerning John is one of those tender, earnest, and exquisitely beautiful utterances of our Lord that sparkles like diamonds in the twilight. This testimony is reserved until after John’ s messengers have gone that it may not seem to be words of compliment so common in speeches of flattery. John’ s work was done chiefly in the wilderness of Judea; hence the people went out there to hear him.

Jesus asked them if they went out to see “ a reed shaken with the wind?” The “ reed” was a tall, slender plant, easily shaken about by the wind; it grew in abundance along the Jordan where John baptized. John was no slender, trifling character blown about by every new doctrine; he was no deli¬cate, spiritual character, merely amusing himself by turning himself into a preacher; he was more like the sturdy oak which cannot be moved so easily. But what went ye out to see?—This is another one of those questions which Jesus asked about John; it helped to drive home the answer that Jesus gave to it. John was no man clothed in soft raiment; he was clothed in a garment of rough “ camel’ s hair, and a leathern girdle about his loins.” (Matthew 3:4.) He was not clothed in fine raiment, neither did he seek any “ soft, easy” places, but his work was done in the wilderness. He did not live in luxury and was not dressed in gorgeous apparel. Luke adds “ in kings’ courts” ; John did not live in idle ease in the palace of kings. His work and manner of dress belonged to the sturdy yeomanry of the wilderness, and those who came out of the cities to hear him. Luke 7:26-27 —But what went ye out to see? a prophet?—If the people did not go out to see a person living in luxury and dressed in fine apparel, that is, an effeminate person, then what did they expect to find? Anticipating their reply he asks: “ A prophet?” A “ prophet” was not only one who foretold future events, but also one who was divinely commissioned as a reli-gious teacher, or who would instruct men as to the will of God. John was more than an ordinary prophet; he had a message far different from that of any prophet; he had a work far different from the work that any prophet had done. All the people accepted John as a prophet (Luke 20:6), but Jesus ranked John far higher than a prophet. John was the special messenger (Malachi 3:1) to get the people ready for the coming of Christ; therefore he was much more than a prophet; he was the great forerunner of the Messiah. Jesus here points John out as the one who fulfilled the prophecy uttered by Mal- achi.

The word “ prophet” in the original means to “ speak before, in front of, in behalf of, or for another.”Luke 7:28 —I say unto you, Among them that are born—Jesus here means to say that there is none greater than John the Baptist; none enjoyed the distinction that he enjoyed; his relative po-sition to the Messiah placed him far above everyone else who had lived on the earth. This does not mean that John excelled all others in piety and purity of character; it only means that the position John held and his relation to Jesus as the Messiah placed him out of the class of all others.

Jesus adds, “ Yet he that is but little in the kingdom of God is greater than he.”Luke 7:29—And all the people when they heard,—Matthew does not record this verse; Luke throws in a brief allusion to the effect of these teachings on his hearers. Many think that verses 29 and 20 belong to the language of Jesus; others think that Luke adds these verses to the speech of Jesus. They do not seem to belong to the discourse of Jesus; their whole diction and form are historical. However, they show the success of John’ s ministry. The people who heard and the publicans “ justified God” by being baptized with the baptism of John. In the strictest sense no one can make God more just than he is, since he is infinitely just; it means that the people per¬ceived, confessed, and declared God’ s justice in all of his acts among men. These had been prepared to make this confes¬sion as they had been baptized of John, and must have openly confessed their sins. Luke 7:30 —But the Pharisees and the lawyers—There were two classes, Pharisees and lawyers, not included among the first two classes mentioned above, the people and the publicans, who did not join in praising God, but “ rejected for themselves the counsel of God, being not baptized of him.” These Pharisees and lawyers thwarted the good purpose of God toward them by refusing to submit to John’ s baptism. They did not confess their sins, and hence were not baptized by John. They annulled God’ s purposes of grace so far as they applied to them. Had they submitted to John’ s baptism they would have received God’ s blessings, because they would have been carrying out God’ s purpose with them. “Pharisees” were a sect of religionists who were strict conformists to the traditions of the fathers; “ lawyers” were those who were well informed in the traditions of the fathers and the law of Moses; both classes were teachers of the people. They set the exam¬ple of disobedience to God. Luke 7:31-35 —Whereunto then shall I liken the men—Here again Jesus asks some pointed questions to stimulate an interest in what he is about to say; he does this to make his answers the more emphatic. He answered his own questions by saying that they were “ like unto children that sit in the marketplace, and call one to another.” His illustration here was familiar to the people. The market place was open like our modern city squares, where people trade, hear the news, and the children have their games and sports. The Jews at this time were as foolish and perverse and hard to please as a lot of children at play, calling one to another in the market place, “ We piped unto you, and ye did not dance”; that is, they played on the pipe as at a wedding, but they would not respond. The children were imitating a marriage procession or feast in their play, but some of them refused to respond. Jesus changed the figure; the children first imitated the glad wedding march, but some of them would not play; then they went to the extreme and imiated a funeral procession, and some would not play that either; they were contrary and would not respond to ei¬ther play. Jesus says that these Jews were like these children playing in the market place. For John the Baptist is come—Jesus made his own application ; the point of his illustrations was the unreasonableness common to children and to childish men. John the Baptist came among them with very abstemious habits— his food not bread, but locusts and wild honey; his drink not wine, but probably cold water. They could not bear that, for they said, “ He hath a demon” ; that is, no man would live as he lived if he were not possessed with a demon. “ The Son of man” came “ eating and drinking” like the most of men, but this did not suit them any better; they railed at him and said: “ Behold, a gluttonous man, and a winebibber, a friend of publi¬cans and sinners!” Neither mode of life would satisfy them; they were sulky, sour, and as unreasonable as a group of dis¬agreeable children. JESUS BY A SINFUL WOMANLuk_7:36-50 Luke 7:36 —And one of the Pharisees desired him—Luke gives the only record we have of this incident. He records two other incidences of Pharisees who invited Jesus to meals and he alone gives them. (Luke 11:37 Luke 14:1.) Jesus would dine with a Pharisee or with a publican (Matthew 9:10; Mark 2:15; Luke 5:29), and he even invited himself to be the guest of Zaccheus who was a publican (Luke 19:5). In this account two characters are brought together; they are not only di¬verse, but strongly contrasted. Valuable lessons may be learned from these two opposite characters. Jesus accepted the invitation to eat with this Pharisee. This Pharisee seems not to have been as hostile toward Jesus as many other Pharisees were; there is no evidence that he invited Jesus to his table to do him harm. Luke 7:37-38 —And behold, a woman who was in the city,—It is probable that this woman was from Capernaum. There has been much speculation as to who this woman was. Some have thought that she was Mary Magdalene, others that she was Mary of Bethany, the sister of Lazarus. In some respects this account is similar to the anointing of Jesus by Mary as narrated in Matthew 26:7; Mark 14:3; and John 12:3, but this does not seem to be an account of the same event. The name of the Pharisee who entertained Jesus happens to be the same in both instances; however, the Simon of Bethany was a very different man from the one here mentioned. Nor can this woman, who seems to have been of a notoriously bad reputation, be identical with the Mary of Bethany who had sat at Jesus’ feet, and by her gentle confiding love and won so strong a hold upon his affections. (Luke 10:38-42.) These incidents must have been two distinct events. and when she knew that he was sitting at meat—It was the custom at that time for the guests to remove the sandals before the meal and recline on the left elbow or side with the feet outward from the table. They did not have the custom of sitting in chairs as we have today. It was also customary for anyone to come into the house during a feast and sit and con¬verse with those who were invited to the feast; the invited guests reclined at the table, while the uninvited guests sat around the wall. This woman brought an “ alabaster cruse of ointment,” and anointed the feet of Jesus. It seems that she was standing behind his feet weeping, and was drawn irresis¬tibly by gratitude to Jesus and “ wet his feet with her tears, and wiped them with the hair of her head.” It was regarded among the Jews as a shameful thing for a woman to let down her hair in public but she made this sacrifice because of her affection for Jesus. Luke 7:39 —Now when the Pharisee that had bidden him—The emphasis is put here on “ the Pharisee”; he had invited Jesus to come into his house and dine with him; Jesus had accepted the invitation and the penitent woman had approached Jesus and paid great honor and respect to him. The Pharisee had witnessed the whole affair and was “ saying” “ within himself” that Jesus was not a prophet as he claimed to be. Thoughts passed through his mind, or he reasoned with himself that Jesus could not be a prophet. He had already reached the conclusion that Jesus was not a prophet; if he had been one, as he claimed to be, he would have known “ who and what manner of woman this is that toucheth him.” This woman was regarded as a great sinner; she was notorious in person and character. Surely if Jesus had known who she was, the Pharisee reasoned, he would not have permitted her to have touched him. For a woman of such abandoned character to touch one was regarded as the highest species of defilement.

The Pharisee thought that Jesus did not know her character, or he would never have permitted her to touch him, much less to remain at his feet kissing them and continuing to express her love for him by such demonstrations. His reasoning was fallacious. Luke 7:40 —And Jesus answering said unto him,—The Pharisee had concluded that Jesus was not a prophet, because he did not know the life and character of this woman; he had not spoken aloud on this point; he had only reasoned with himself. But Jesus now does the very thing which the Pharisee considered as a mark or characteristic of a prophet— he reads the mind of the Pharisee. Jesus spoke directly to him; he addressed him as “ Simon,” and then stated emphatically that he had something to say to him. The Pharisee is very brief and emphatic in his reply; he said: “ Teacher, say on.” Jesus answers the thoughts and doubts of Simon and shows that he knows about Simon’ s thoughts and therefore knows all about this woman; there is a kind of Socratic irony in the speech of Jesus. Luke 7:41-42 —A certain lender had two debtors:—A lender of money for interest is here meant as the original shows. The parable which Jesus now proposed for the instruction of this self-righteous Pharisee is based on well-known facts. This lender of money for interest “ had two debtors”; the first one owed him “ five hundred shillings,” while the second one only owed him “ fifty.” The term used here is “ denarius,” which was the chief silver coin of the Romans at this time, and of the value of about seventeen cents. It was the rate of wages for a day’ s work. Five hundred would amount to about eig’hty- five dollars, while fifty would amount to eight dollars and fifty cents; hence expressed in our values one of these debtors owed eighty-five dollars and the other owed eight dollars and fifty cents. When they had not wherewith to pay,—Neither one of these debtors could pay the lender the amount owed him; the lender, out of the kindness and generosity of his heart, re¬leased them of their indebtedness. Favor, kindness, benevolence, compassion, and sympathy are the sole basis of the act, all merit on the part of the recipient being excluded. After presenting this parable in its simplicity to the Pharisee, Jesus asked him: “ Which of them therefore will love him most?” Jesus by this question forces the Pharisee to draw the only conclusion that was possible to draw from the parable, and then Jesus makes the application. The point of the parable then is the attitude of the two debtors toward the lender who forgave both of them. Luke 7:43 —Simon answered and said,—It seems that Simon began to see the point that Jesus was making; hence he said, “ He, I suppose, to whom he forgave the most.” The Pharisee’s reply indicates a descent from his lofty and arrogant tone to one of more humility. Simon saw how his answer would convict himself as he had perceived in part the drift of the illustration. Jesus did not leave him in doubt as to what he had said; he replied to Simon: “ Thou hast rightly judged.” This was the end of the argument; there was nothing further to say. Leaving the matter thus as did Jesus made the point more emphatic. Luke 7:44-46 —And turning to the woman,—Jesus now directed Simon’ s attention to the woman who had bestowed such gracious favors upon him. It seems that this was the first time that Jesus looked at the woman, and he asks the Pharisee to look at her; she was behind Jesus, hence he would have to turn to look at her. Jesus was an invited guest; the Pharisee had neglected some points of common and customary hospitality; the contrasts here made, scholars tell us, have the rhythm of Hebrew poetry; in each contrast the first word is the point of defect in Simon’ s conduct toward Jesus. “ Water,” “ kiss,” and “ oil” are the points of emphasis. The water which Simon had failed to give was supplied by the tears of the woman; the failure of Simon to show affection for his guest was supplied by the kisses of the woman; and the failure of Simon to honor his guest was supplied by the precious oil with which she anointed the feet of Jesus. Simon had failed as a host to an¬oint the head of Jesus, the nobler part, with ordinary oil, but the woman had anointed his feet with costly oil. This penitent, sinful woman had done far more for Jesus than had the Pharisee; it was expected of the Pharisee to show such acts of customary honor to Jesus as his guest, but it was not expected of this woman to bestow any acts of honor upon him. Luke 7:47-48 —Wherefore I say unto thee,—Jesus now turns from Simon and speaks to the woman; this seems to be the first time that he has spoken to her. “ Wherefore” introduces the conclusion which is drawn from what has been said. Jesus says, “ Her sins, which are many, are forgiven.” Here Jesus shows that he knew her condition, and that the Pharisee had misjudged him and his ability to know the hearts of people. Jesus not only refers to her public and scandalous sins, but to all which she had ever committed. His forgiveness is most ample, covering the sins of a whole life. Jesus gave the reason for his forgiving her. “ For she loved much” is the assuring statement that Jesus made. All that she had done for Jesus showed her love for him; her coming to Jesus showed her consciousness of a need of a Savior; Jesus’ words to her showed that he was willing to save.

Jesus then stated the conclusion from his parable by saying: “ But to whom little is forgiven, the same loveth little.”Luke 7:49-50 —And they that sat at meat with him—The friends of the Pharisee who sat at meat with Jesus began to reason with themselves and made inquiry of their own hearts as to who this man was. They thought that he was presumptuous to claim to forgive sins; they did not speak aloud or speak to each other, but they were unanimous in their conclusion that he was a presumptuous sinner.

Perhaps their surprise was expressed in their faces. Jesus without answering them or their thoughts changed the form of his address to the woman, perhaps that she might not be misled into thinking that her acts of devotion were misjudged. Jesus said to her: “ Thy faith hath saved thee; go in peace.” This shows that Jesus knew the full condition of her heart; he knew her life; he knew her faith in him. Jesus ignored the old question which the Pharisaic mind raised about his claim to forgive sins; he had fully answered them, and had taught them an important lesson. They were not disposed to receive the lesson. There was a wide contrast in the faith of this woman and the lack of faith on the part of the Pharisee; the width between these two is emphasized in the contrast between what the woman did for him and what the Pharisee had failed to do.

Verse 1 Luke brought the love of Christ into sharp focus in this chapter, along with the ethic derived from it, namely, that it is in the love of God and the love of man that a soul may hope to commend itself to the Lord. First, there is the centurion who loved his servant (Luke 7:1-10); then, Jesus showed his love for the bereaved by raising the son of the widow of Nain (Luke 7:11-17); next, Jesus offered his love of the afflicted and the poor as proof of his Messiahship to John the Baptist, laying stress on the publicans and harlots who accepted John’s message (Luke 7:24-25); and then, he gave the explanation of how publicans and harlots were saved and the Pharisees were not, this explanation growing out of a dinner in the house of a Pharisee (Luke 7:36-50). THE HEALING OF THE ‘S SERVANTIn my Commentary on Matthew this miracle was referred to as being identical with the one in Matthew 8:5-13, this view being that of Lamar, Boles, McGarvey, and many others; and it is reaffirmed here that it may be so interpreted, all of the variations in the two accounts yielding easily to harmonizing suggested by many commentators. It should be noted, however, that it is by no means CERTAIN that Matthew and Luke have recorded the same incident. More mature study has convinced this writer that the two episodes COULD be different miracles, and that the higher probability is that they WERE separate wonders. The Greek words translated “my servant” (Matthew 8:6) are from terms which are literally “the boy of me,"[1] an expression which MacKnight affirms would have been translated “my son” except “for the supposition that the miracles are the same."[2] About the only objection to viewing the miracles as separate wonders springs from the alleged unlikelihood that there would have been two centurions, one with a sick son, another with a sick slave, who would have approached Jesus with approximately the same words, manifesting exactly the same attitude. MacKnight, however, suggested that: There might have been two centurions. Both made the same speech to Jesus, one through his friends, and the other in person; but this circumstance may be accounted for. As the faith of the first centurion, who was a heathen, took its rise from the extraordinary cure wrought on the nobleman’s son (John 4:46-54), the faith of the second centurion might have taken its rise from the success of the first, which could not fail to be well known both in the town and in the country.[3]MacKnight elaborated the above argument in his harmony of the Gospels in such a manner as to foreclose any logical objections to it. He concluded thus: To conclude that two centurions should have had, the one his son, the other his slave, cured in Capernaum with like circumstances, is no more improbable than that the temple should have been twice purged, the multitude twice fed, and the fishes twice caught by miracle, and with the same circumstances.[4]This consideration has been introduced here, not because of any bearing the question has with reference to interpreting the miracles themselves, but because of the implications bearing on the two great sermons, the one on the mount, the other on the plain. The big argument for making those sermons the same depends upon making these two miracles the same; but it is clear enough that the uncertainty of their being indeed but one wonder totally removes the principal argument for viewing Luke’s record of the Sermon on the Plain as merely an abbreviated account of the Sermon on the Mount in Matthew. Significantly, some of the commentators who treat these two miracles as one refuse to view the sermons as one (Boles, for example). It appears that it is more logical to view the miracles also as separate wonders. [1] The Nestle Greek Text (Grand Rapids, Michigan: Zondervan Publishing House, 1958), en loco. [2] James MacKnight, Harmony of the Gospels (Grand Rapids, Michigan: Baker Book House, 1950), p. 468. [3] Ibid. [4] Ibid., p. 469. After he had ended all his sayings in the ears of the people, he entered into Capernaum. (Luke 7:1) The first clause here, according to Boles, Shows that the discourse which had just been narrated was delivered at one time, and was not a mere collection of sayings or detached parts of different discourses.[5]A great deal of Jesus’ teaching was done in Capernaum, which was his residence for a long while; and the event of our Lord’s finishing a discourse at some place near the city and then returning to the place where he stayed must have recurred often. Nothing is plainer in the sacred Gospels than the fact that the sum total recorded by all of them put together was merely the tip of the iceberg, compared to all that Jesus said and did. The last word that has come down to us across the long centuries since Jesus walked on the earth is that “the world itself could not contain the books that should be written” (John 21:25), if men had recorded all that Jesus did and taught! This monumental truth destroys the conceit which would explain similar teachings or miracles of Jesus as inaccurate, garbled accounts of but one event or sermon. ENDNOTE: [5] H. Leo Boles, A Commentary on the Gospel according to Luke (Nashville: The Gospel Advocate Company, 1972), p. 145.

Verse 2 And a certain centurion’s servant, who was dear to him, was sick and at the point of death.Centurion … Even counting the two centurions of these miracles (the one here, and the other in Matthew) as but one man, there are no less than eight centurions mentioned in the New Testament; and it is significant that all of them appear in a favorable light. As Ryle expressed it, “It is worthy of remark that in no case is there the slightest hint that the profession of a soldier is unlawful in the sight of God."[6] The list of centurions listed in the New Testament is:

1. The one whose servant was healed (in this passage).
2. The one who confessed Christ at the cross (Matthew 27:54).
3. The ones who rescued Paul from the mob (Acts 21:32).
4. The one who bore Paul’s message to the chiliarch (Acts 22:25).
5. Cornelius, the first Gentile convert (Acts 10:1)
6. Julius, who saved Paul’s life on the voyage to Rome (Acts 27:3; Acts 27:43)
7. The centurion who brought Paul’s nephew to the chiliarch (Acts 23:17-18).
8. The centurions who escorted Paul to Caesarea (Acts 23:23). Servant … The word here is “bondservant” or slave; and it is evident that Luke recorded this for the purpose of showing the centurion’s love for such a person. “He did not despise slaves as other Gentiles commonly did."[7] The character of this noble soldier was evident, not merely in the love lavished upon a slave, but in his love for Israel, (Luke 7:5), and in his support of the worship of God (Luke 7:5). Some sought the aid of Jesus for a son, or daughter, or for themselves; but this man came to Jesus on behalf of a slave. [6] J. C. Ryle, Expository Thoughts on the Gospels, Luke (Grand Rapids, Michigan: Zondervan Publishing House), p. 205. [7] Ibid., p. 200.

Verse 3 And when he heard concerning Jesus, he sent unto him elders of the Jews, asking him that he would come and save his servant.And when he heard … What is more likely than the supposition that this centurion had heard from his fellow officer in the same city of the healing of a son; and that both were familiar with the healing of the nobleman’s son in the same city? A vast number of Jesus’ deeds were wrought in Capernaum (Matthew 11:23). The “hearing” would also have included the very words and attitude by which the first centurion had approached the Lord; and the second would have adopted the approach which was so successful with the first. The elders … In this appears one of the differences in the two similar miracles. The first centurion was a heathen; this one was evidently some kind of proselyte to Judaism; for it is hard to believe that he would have built the Jews a synagogue unless he was a follower of Judaism. This officer enlisted the elders of the people to convey his request to the Lord; in the case in Matthew, the centurion himself went to Jesus and made the request.

Verse 4 And they, when they came to Jesus, besought him earnestly, saying, He is worthy that thou shouldest do this for him; for he loveth our nation, and himself built our synagogue.Clearly, the centurion had remained at home (Luke 7:6), and the Jewish elders actually bore the request to Jesus. Our synagogue … McGarvey wrote that: The ruins of Capernaum show the ruins of a synagogue. It was a beautiful structure, built of white limestone, shows by its architecture that it was built in the time of the Herods, and there is little doubt that it is the one which this pious Gentile erected, and in which Jesus taught and healed.[8]Thus, God raised up a devout Gentile to provide a platform from which many of the marvelous teachings of the Lord would be announced (see John 6:59). How strange it is that this Roman centurion, a Gentile, and an officer in the hated army of the oppressors, should have received such a commendation as the Jewish elders in Capernaum delivered to Jesus on his behalf. He was one of a class of persons who rose above the base morals of the ancient empire and who rejected the vanity and falsehood of the pagan religions. He was one among the proselytes, whom the providence of God had so wonderfully prepared in all the great cities of the Greek and Roman world as a link of communication between Gentile and Jew, in contact with both - holding to the first by their race, and to the latter by their religion; and who must have materially helped in the early spread of the faith.[9][8] J. W. McGarvey, The Fourfold Gospel (Cincinnati, Ohio: Standard Publishing Company, 1914), p. 271. [9] Richard Trench, Notes on the Miracles of Our Lord (Old Tappan, New Jersey: Fleming H. Revell Company, 1953), p. 241.

Verse 6 And Jesus went with them. And when he was now not far from the house, the centurion sent friends to him, saying unto him, Lord, trouble not thyself: for I am not worthy that thou shouldest come under my roof. This is clearly a different circumstance from that of the miracle in Matthew, as the next verses emphasize.

Verse 7 Wherefore neither thought I myself worthy to come unto thee: but say the word, and my servant shall be healed.Such faith as that shown by the centurion is remarkable indeed. Say the word … It is an attribute of God that his word alone is sufficient unto all things. “He spake, and they were made; he commanded, and they were created” (Psalms 148:5). Read the book of Genesis. God said, “Let there be light. And there was light”! It is amazing that this centurion understood this as being true of Jesus. The next verse shows how he arrived at such a conclusion.

Verse 8 For I also am a man under authority, having under myself soldiers: and I say to this one, Go, and he goeth; and to another, Come and he cometh; and to my servant, Do this, and he doeth it.Having in his possession the knowledge of how Jesus’ word had wrought many cures, this centurion, like his fellow officer, had come to recognize God come in the flesh. As Ryle observed: A greater miracle of healing than this is nowhere recorded in the Gospels. Without even seeing the sufferer, without touch of hand, or look of eye, our Lord restored health to a dying man. He spoke and the sick was cured. He commanded, and the disease departed. No apostle or prophet did a miracle like this. We see here the finger of God.[10]ENDNOTE: [10] J. C. Ryle, op. cit., p. 200.

Verse 9 And when Jesus heard these things, he marvelled at him, and turned and said to the multitude that followed him, I say unto you, I have not found so great faith, no, not in Israel. And they that were sent, returning to the house, found the servant whole.It does not appear that the centurion ever came into the presence of the Lord, physically; but, disclaiming for himself any worthiness that Jesus might come under his roof, he nevertheless received him in his heart, which was a far more glorious reception. No, not in Israel … That Jesus placed this centurion’s faith above ALL that he had seen in Israel is significant. As Taylor said: This centurion placed Jesus on the throne of the universe, regarding him as the ruler of the world, and as having all things under his command. He saw him, not merely as Messiah, but as God Incarnate, and therein lay the superiority of his faith to that of any of the Israelites. Not even any of the apostles, at that time, had reached the lofty altitude on which this Gentile soldier stood.[11]He marvelled … For an article on the “Marvel of Unbelief,” see my Commentary on John, index. It is not recorded very often that Jesus marveled; but his marveling here contrasts with his marveling at unbelief (Mark 6:6). It was an inherent condition of the incarnation that Jesus should have experienced amazement and wonder.

How would the Lord, to whom all things were known, have wondered, or marveled? Trench called this question “One of the hardest in the whole domain of theology."[12] Every student of the Holy Scriptures must confess the awareness of the mystery in this which is beyond all human comprehension; but by faith we receive the answer supplied by the apostle who wrote that “He emptied himself, and took upon him the form of a servant” (Philippians 2:6-8). Accepting this account as a second miracle wrought for the benefit of a centurion would also fit the evident purpose in Luke of giving TWO instances of Jesus’ mightiest deeds, rather than merely one. Thus he recorded TWO instances of Jesus’ raising the dead (no other Gospel did this), the OTHER genealogy (that of Mary), a SECOND anointing, ANOTHER sermon similar to the one on the mount, a SECOND version of the prayer Jesus taught his disciples to pray, the cure of a second woman who had long been afflicted (Luke 13:10); a SECOND lament over Jerusalem, a SECOND parable of the slighted invitation, and even recorded very significant utterances of Jesus from the cross which were not even hinted in the other Gospels. This is clearly a characteristic of this Gospel. [11] William M. Taylor, The Miracles of Our Saviour (New York: Richard R. Smith, 1930), p. 167. [12] Richard Trench, op. cit., p. 246.

Verse 11 And it came to pass soon afterwards, that he went to a city called Nain; and his disciples went with him, and a great multitude.THE RAISING OF THE WIDOW’S SON AT NAIN"There are many ancient remains of Nain, proving that the place was once of considerable size."[13] It is located “on the northwestern edge of `Little Hermon,’ where the ground falls into the plain of Esdraelon."[14] Just east of the city are the remains of rock sepulchres; and the extensive ruins disprove the notion that the place was merely “a humble village of mud-built houses near Nazareth."[15] Luke was altogether correct in calling the place a “city.” Today the village is a rather insignificant place called Nein. Soon afterwards … may mean “the very next day,” as this place reads in some ancient authorities (English Revised Version (1885), margin). Amazingly, only Luke recorded this wonder, the sacred authors having been most certainly restrained by the Spirit of God in what they included or left out. [13]; ISBE, p. 2111. [14] F. N. Peloubet, A Dictionary of the Bible (Philadelphia: The John C. Winston Company, 1912), p. 433. [15] Roland de Vaux, The World of Jesus (Washington, D.C.: The National Geographic Society, 1967), p. 304.

Verse 12 Now when he drew near to the gate of the city, behold there was carried out one that was dead, the only son of his mother, and she was a widow: and much people of the city was with her.The gate of the city … does not indicate that the city had a wall, referring rather to “the opening between the houses, by which the road entered the town."[16]ENDNOTE: [16]; ISBE, p. 2111.

Verse 13 And when the Lord saw her, he had compassion on her, and said unto her, Weep not.Weep not … It was not possible, at the moment, for this bereaved widow to respond to such a command; but the Lord never gave a command without supplying the power to obey it. This is still an imperative, with qualification, to Christians of all ages: “Sorrow not, even as the rest, who have no hope” (1 Thessalonians 4:13). Someone has remarked that Jesus broke up every funeral he ever attended!

Verse 14 And he came nigh and touched the bier; and the bearers stood still. And he said, Young man, I say unto thee, Arise.Touched the bier … Thus, Jesus defied the ceremonial defilement forbidding such a thing; because the dead could not defile him, but conversely he raised the dead! Young man, I say unto thee, Arise … This corresponds exactly, except for the salutation, with what Jesus said to the daughter of Jairus (Mark 5:41); and the spiritual application is the same. See under that reference in my Commentary on Mark.

Verse 15 And he that was dead sat up, and began to speak. And he gave him to his mother.The power of the Son of God is truly infinite. Not even the charlatans of earth have ever attempted to fake such a thing as this. That a dead body should respond to the command of Jesus is a wonder of such magnitude as to numb the senses of all who contemplate it. Following the pattern of all his miracles of raising the dead, Jesus here obviously restored the young man to his former condition in life; and, in this, these miracles of Jesus were different from the resurrection of the Lord. He rose to an eternal existence which he already possessed; those whom he raised rose to the life they had previously possessed, but still subject to mortality.

Verse 16 And fear took hold on all; and they glorified God, saying, A great prophet is arisen among us: and, God hath visited his people.Fear took hold … This was the natural result of such a miracle. The souls of men tremble when conscious of the presence of God; and such a presence had clearly demonstrated itself at the gate of Nain. The incarnation was affirmed by the conviction of the people who said, “God hath visited his people.”

Verse 17 And this report went forth concerning him in the whole of Judaea, and all the region round about.The whole of Judaea … is inclusive of the entire domain of the Herods (Antipas and Agrippa I) with “all the region round about,” thus having reference to the whole of what is today called Palestine. There is no way for men to stretch their minds to fully comprehend the impact of such a miracle as Jesus performed, shocking the entire eastern half of the Roman empire. Nor should it be left unnoticed that this miracle was wrought within a very few miles of Nazareth, whose citizens refused to believe in Jesus. This miracle was close enough that they could not have avoided knowing it happened; and thus Jesus gave his home village another chance to believe on him whom they had despised. There is a progression in the New Testament resurrections. The daughter of Jairus had been dead but a little while; this son of the widow was dead a longer period, the body being carried to the tomb; and Lazarus was dead and buried four days! All of the resurrections Jesus wrought (except his own) have this in common, that no word has come down to posterity of what any of them said concerning the state of death from which they were rescued. As Taylor said, “They uttered no word concerning the state from which they had been recalled. It was not theirs to bring light and immortality to light."[17]; THAT was reserved for Christ. ENDNOTE: [17] William M. Taylor, op. cit., p. 182.

Verse 18 And the disciples of John told him all these things. And John calling unto him two of his disciples sent them to the Lord, saying, Art thou he who cometh, or look we for another?THE FROM JOHN THE BAPTISTJohn’s uncertainty is understandable. He had publicly identified Jesus as the Christ; but the Saviour’s Messiahship was not being proclaimed with the dogmatic certainty which John might have expected; therefore, he did with his doubts what every true believer in Christ should always do, that is, he brought them to Jesus who answered and relieved them. When God’s children are in doubt, let them search the word of the Lord. If John, instead, had taken his doubts to the Pharisees, he would have been confirmed in his doubt, not in his faith; and the same is true today of many religious leaders. For more on this, see my Commentary on Matthew, Matthew 11:1-3. Art thou he that should come …? Humanity must have a Saviour; God promised one; and, if Jesus is not the Saviour, then who is? John did not say, “Art thou he that should come, or shall we cease looking?” but “shall we look for another?” Such is the state of Adam’s fallen race that only a Saviour can avail anything. This desperate need of all mankind surfaces in John’s question. This was the text chosen by this writer as his “trial sermon” at Walnut Street Church of Christ, Sherman, Texas Oct. 6,1935; but the speaker was not aware of the reason for the murmur of laughter that swept over the audience when his text was announced.

Verse 20 And when the men were come unto him, they said, John the Baptist hath sent us unto thee, saying, Art thou he that cometh, or look we for another? In that hour he cured many of diseases and plagues, and evil spirits; and on many that were blind he bestowed sight.Jesus’ answer to John was twofold, including: (1) a demonstration of his messianic power (as here), and (2) a verbal reiteration of it in the next two verses. John the Baptist performed no miracles (John 10:41); and this outflashing of Jesus’ miraculous power must have been very impressive to John’s disciples; but Jesus went beyond this and quoted the prophecy of Isaiah, who described the times of the Messiah in the terms that Jesus used of his own ministry. See next two verses.

Verse 22 And he answered, and said unto them, Go and tell John the things which ye have seen and heard; the blind receive their sight, the lame walk, the lepers are cleansed, and the deaf hear, the dead are raised up, the poor have good tidings preached to them. And blessed is he whosoever shall find no occasion of stumbling in me.One passage which Jesus clearly had in mind was Isaiah 35:5, in which the prophet foretold the messianic age. Thus Jesus answered John plainly, but not too plainly, that he was indeed the Christ. The reason for Jesus’ avoidance of a more dogmatic declaration concerning himself at that time was to deny on his own behalf the malignant, carnal notions of Messiah’s true character which had perverted the popular mind of that day. For more on this, see my Commentary on Matthew, Matthew 11:1-3. The dead are raised up … has reference to a plurality of resurrections; and here is proof that not all such wonders have been recorded by the sacred authors. Long after the synoptic Gospels were written, John recorded the raising of Lazarus; and there may have been many others whom the Lord raised to life from the dead. Blessed is he … The clause introduced by these words shows that Jesus expected John to continue in faith; and the passage immediately afterward indicates that Jesus knew he would continue.

Verse 24 And when the messengers of John were departed, he began to say unto the multitudes concerning John, What went ye out into the wilderness to behold? a reed shaken with the wind?JESUS’ EULOGY OF JOHN THE BAPTISTJesus meant by this that John was not a vacillating popularity seeker, preaching only those things that fitted the popular mood, a weather-vane type of preacher, pointing in all directions like a reed in the wind.

Verse 25 But what went ye out to see? a man clothed in soft raiment? Behold they that are gorgeously appareled, and live delicately, are in the kings’ courts.The rugged nature of the mighty John was well known, as well as his garment of camel’s hair, noted for its discomfort, John being the original man in a hair shirt; and Jesus was saying by this reference that John would stand by his identification of our Lord as “the Lamb of God,” regardless of the hardships involved.

Verse 26 But what went ye out to see? a prophet? Yea, I say unto you, and much more than a prophet.Significantly, these eulogistic remarks were spoken by Jesus after John’s disciples had departed, and were therefore offered for the enlightenment of the multitude, and not for any purpose of flattering John. John was more than a prophet in that he was the herald of the Christ, a man of the most magnificent spiritual dimensions.

Verse 27 This is he of whom it is written, Behold, I send my messenger before thy face. Who shall prepare thy way before thee. I say unto you, Among them that are born of women, there is none greater than John: yet he that is little in the kingdom of God is greater than he.Thus Jesus identified John the Baptist as the “Elijah” who was to come (Malachi 3:1 ff), and as the herald of King Jesus. Greater than he … This seemingly paradoxical statement is resolved by the considerations: (1) that John the Baptist was not in the kingdom of Christ, the same not being set up until after John’s death, and (2) that the term “greater” has reference to privilege, rather than to character.

Verse 29 And all the people when they heard, and the publicans, justified God, being baptized with the baptism of John. But the Pharisees and the lawyers rejected for themselves the counsel of God, being not baptized of him.These are among the most significant words in the New Testament, showing categorically that the refusal to accept baptism at the hands of John was, in fact, a rejection of the counsel of God on the part of the Pharisees. In the preparatory phase of the kingdom of God, no less than in its reality after Pentecost, refusal to be baptized was here pointed out by Jesus as a “rejection” of God’s counsel. Water baptism is one of the elements of the new birth, the being “born of water” to which Jesus referred in his interview with Nicodemus (see comments in my Commentary on John, third chapter). It is therefore true in the present era that failure to heed Christ’s command that all men should be baptized is no less a rejection of God’s will now than it was when those ancient Pharisees and lawyers rejected it. It is in fact a greater rejection, because John’s baptism was only water baptism, the Holy Spirit not having at that time been given; whereas, the baptism of the great commission is followed by the reception of the Holy Spirit.

Moreover the conceit that men may receive God’s Spirit while rejecting his baptism is refuted by this passage. The new birth, without which none shall see the kingdom of God, includes being “born of water,” although that is not the totality of it. In this passage lies the reason why the publicans and harlots entered into God’s kingdom, whereas the Pharisees did not enter it. Another significant reason also appears in the next episode where the sinful woman is presented as “loving” Jesus more than the proud Pharisee; and, as Jesus said, “If ye love me, ye will keep my commandments” (John 14:15).

Verse 31 Whereunto then shall I liken the men of this generation, and to what are they like? They are like unto children that sit in the marketplace, and call one to another; who say, We piped unto you, and ye did not dance; we wailed, and ye did not weep. For John the Baptist is come eating no bread, nor drinking wine; and ye say, He hath a demon. The Son of man is come eating and drinking; and ye say, Behold, a gluttonous man and a winebibber, a friend of publicans and sinners. And wisdom is justified of all her children.The simile spelled out by Jesus in this passage compares the rejection of both John and Jesus by the same generation to the perverse and unreasonable behavior of spoiled brats sitting in the marketplace, and who would not dance when the piper played, nor mourn when the wailer wailed. They would not play wedding, for that was too happy; and they would not play funeral, for that was too sad!

The opposite personalities of John and Jesus were alike rejected by Israel. The last clause, that “wisdom is justified of all her children,” shows that both John and Jesus were fulfilling the true mission God sent them to achieve. The criticisms Jesus mentioned here as having been leveled against himself were only a few of the vicious and unprincipled remarks directed against the Saviour. For no less than ten different false charges made against Jesus by the evil men in that generation, see my Commentary on Matthew, Matthew 11:18-19. ANOTHER This anointing which took place in the house of Simon the Pharisee should not be confused with that which took place in Bethany (see my Commentary on John 12:1-8).

Verse 36 And one of the Pharisees desired him that he would eat with him. And he entered into the Pharisee’s house, and sat down to meat.This Pharisee was Simon (Luke 7:43); and he may not be identified as Simon the Leper (Matthew 26:6; Mark 14:3; John 12:1 f). The circumstances here do not fit the anointing in Bethany at all. Luke’s record of another anointing perfectly fits into the pattern he followed throughout the Gospel. See under Luke 7:10. This Simon was doing what might be called “slumming.” He had invited Jesus out for the purpose of studying him; but before the evening ended, Simon found himself the one studied, analyzed and found wanting.

Verse 37 And behold, a woman who was in the city, a sinner; and when she knew that he was sitting at meat in the Pharisee’s house, she brought an alabaster cruse of ointment and standing behind at his feet weeping, she began to wet his feet with her tears, and wiped them with the hair of her head, and kissed his feet, and anointed them with the ointment.It is hyper-ridiculous to equate this with the anointing by the devout Mary, as recorded in the other Gospels. This person was a “sinner,” and her knowledge of what was going on in this Pharisee’s house speaks volumes about the Pharisee. Her free access to his house shows some affinity between them, although it did not extend so far as a common attitude toward Jesus, whom the Pharisee dishonored, and whom the woman honored. This unfortunate daughter of Israel had fallen into a life of sin, but she recognized in Jesus a holiness and love which opened up the fountain of her tears falling inadvertently upon his feet, a fault (as she viewed it) which was quickly corrected by her wiping them with her hair, and anointing them with the precious ointment. Her kisses, lavished upon his feet, were a further expression of her love for the Son of God.

Verse 39 Now when the Pharisee that had bidden him saw it, he spake within himself, saying, This man, if he were a prophet, would have perceived who and what manner of woman this is that toucheth him, that she is a sinner.Spake within himself … Only in the word of God may it be read what men said within themselves, and Luke has several such instances: the prodigal son (Luke 15:17), the unjust steward (Luke 16:3), etc. This Pharisee was correct in one of the premises of his conceited syllogism, namely, that a true prophet would have known who and what manner of person the woman was. However, he was wrong in his companion premise that Jesus did not know who and what manner of person the woman was. He not only knew that but also knew all about Simon, as the conversation at once revealed.

Verse 40 And Jesus answering said unto him, Simon, I have somewhat to say unto thee. And he saith, Teacher, say on.This was a dramatic moment. The proud, unloving Pharisee had already made up his mind. He had decided that Jesus was an impostor, and one cannot fail to sense the condescension in his icy “Teacher, say on?’ But he was in for the shock of his life. The Master began by relating what Simon probably thought was an innocuous little parable; the point he would get later on.

Verse 41 A certain lender had two debtors: the one owed five hundred shillings, and the other fifty. When they had not wherewith to pay, he forgave them both. Which of them will love him most?The lender = Jesus Christ our Lord The one who owed five hundred shillings = the sinful woman The one who owed fifty shillings = the Pharisee Their both being unable to pay = the fact that no mortal can atone for even the most insignificant of his sins. His freely forgiving both = the unmerited favor of God in providing a means of forgiveness for all. The question of who “loved” the most focuses upon the most important element in determining who shall be saved. Significantly, the sins of the Pharisee, consisting of pride, conceit, and self-righteousness, were here set forth as only a tenth as weighty as the sins of the woman.

Verse 43 Simon answered and said, He, I suppose, to whom he forgave the most. And he said unto him, Thou hast rightly judged.Simon, so he thought, was merely going along with the little game; his “I suppose” is in the same vein of condescension as the “say on” of Luke 7:40. There was not even anything in Jesus’ address to Simon that revealed the blockbuster that Jesus was about to detonate in his face. Simon, no doubt, was still smiling a sophisticated sneer when Jesus said, “Thou hast rightly judged.” Then turning to the woman, who in Jesus’ sight was the principal audience, he spoke, as it were, over his shoulder to Simon.

Verse 44 And turning to the woman, he said unto Simon, Seest thou this woman? I entered into thy house, thou gavest me no water for my feet: but she hath wetted my feet with her tears, and wiped them with her hair.Simon had slighted and insulted Jesus by withholding the basin of water and the towel normally extended to a visitor, usually at the hands of a servant; and one may only wonder how Simon had made such a slip. Did he suppose that the humble Prophet of the poor would not recognize the omission of such a customary courtesy? Whatever his reason, it must be viewed as an intentional slight, a discourtesy that this Pharisee would not have allowed toward any of his priestly friends; yet he has snubbed the great High Priest. But God had provided the honor which his only begotten Son required. What the proud Pharisee withheld the sinful woman gave. Her tears replace the basin of water and her hair the towel. How the heart of Simon the hypocrite must have quailed before such a denunciation. His sneering smile froze on his pallid face, as the Judge of all men pronounced sentence upon him in his own house and in the presence of one whom he despised and who was a witness to his humiliation.

Verse 45 Thou gavest me no kiss: but she, since the time I came in, hath not ceased to kiss my feet. My head with oil thou didst not anoint: but she hath anointed my feet with ointment.It was thus a triple insult that Simon had directed against the Lord of life; not merely the basin and the towel, but the customary greeting of a guest with a kiss, and the anointing of the head with oil had also been withheld. But the woman supplied, out of love, all three!

Verse 47 Wherefore I say unto thee, Her sins, which are many, are forgiven; for she loved much; but to whom little is forgiven, the same loveth little. And he said unto her, Thy sins are forgiven.Simon who thought he was judging the Lord suddenly found himself the judged, Jesus claiming in his presence the divine prerogative of judging all men, and announcing in the full majesty of his glorious person forgiveness of the woman whom Simon despised, and conspicuously omitting any reference at all to the forgiveness of Simon. There is not a more dramatic incident in the Scriptures than this. What did Simon say to such a thing? No response was recorded. One may well suppose that both his conversation and his appetite were overcome by what had occurred. The focus at once shifted to what the other guests were saying “within themselves,” indicating that the judgment of silence had fallen upon them all.

Verse 49 And they that sat at meat with him began to say within themselves, Who is this that even forgiveth sins?While the dinner guests were thus concentrating upon their inner thoughts, Jesus reiterated what he had already said.

Verse 50 And he said unto the woman, Thy faith hath saved thee; go in peace.Far more than forgiveness, salvation itself was thus extended to Simon’s impromptu guest. What about her obedience? It was assured. “If ye love me, ye will keep my commandments,” Jesus said; and here was one who truly loved him. She was not saved by “faith only.”

Questions by E.M Zerr For Luke 71. Into what city did Jesus enter? 2. Whose messengers met him there? 3. State the nature of the man’ s trouble.; 4. Who acted as the messengers ? 5. State their request. 6. What recommendation did they furnish? 7. Why did the centurion intercept Jesus? 8. Give his argument. 9. What comment did Jesus make on this? 10. In meantime what happened to the servant? 11. Where did Jesus go next day? 12. Tell what procession he met. 13. How about this mother’ s support? 14. Was she without sympathizers? 15. How was Jesus affected toward her? 16. What did he first do? 17. State what he said. 18. With what result? 19. What indicated returning consciousness? 20. Tell what this brought upon all. 21. For what did they glorify God? 22. State the extent of this rumor. 23. Who brought the news to John? 24. Tell what inquiry John made. 25. What was Jesus doing at that time? 26. State the message he sent to John. 27. Who was promised to be blessed ? 28. After their departure of whom did Jesus speak? 29. Was he as unsteady as a reed? 30. Why should he not be clothed in soft raiment? 31. What title did Jesus admit for John? 32. Tell what had been written of him. 33. For whom was this preparation to be made? 34. Who was a greater prophet than John? 35. Who was greater than John? 36. Was John in the kingdom of heaven? 37. Who accepted John’ s baptism? 38. In so doing whom did they justify ? 39. Who rejected this baptism? 40. So doing, what counsel did they reject? 41. To whom did Jesus liken that people? 42. Wbat response should have come for the piping? 43. And for the mourning? 44. Which had been done? 45. What two teachers are in his mind ? 46. State the complaint against John. 47. And against Christ. 48. How are wisdom’ s children justified? 49. In whose house did Christ eat? 50. What kind of woman ministered to him? 51. Tell who objected. 52. State the reasoning of Jesus. 53. Who had done the most for Jesus? 54. Tell what illustration Jesus used. 55. What favor did he bestow on the woman? 56. On what was this favor based ? 57. State objection made to his forgiveness.

Luke 7:1

1 His sayings refers to the ones in the preceding chapter. Caper-naum was the city that Jesus adopted as his residence after leaving Nazareth (Matthew 4:13).

Luke 7:2

2 A centurion was a man having charge of a hundred soldiers.

Luke 7:3

3 The centurion was a Gentile, but was in good standing with the Jews, for they had their elders to take a message of request to Jesus from the officers.

Luke 7:4

4 Jesus had taught the principle of favoring those only who were worthy (Matthew 7:6), hence that point was stressed in their appeal for his help.

Luke 7:5

5 Synagogues were places built for assembling to hear the law read. Strangers are not to be solicited for contributions to the Lord’s cause, but their voluntary offerings may be accepted. Paul accepted help from non-Christians (Acts 28:2; Acts 28:7; Acts 28:10).

Luke 7:6

6 This Gentile felt unworthy to have Jesus in his house.

Luke 7:7

7 He did not even think he was good enough to make a personal contact with the Lord, but sent others to speak for him. He expressed faith in the power of Jesus to heal his servant by just speaking the work.

Luke 7:8

8 This reasoning was to show that his remarks were not in flattery. (See the comments at Matthew 8:9.)

Luke 7:9

9 The Jews had not produced any example of faith that was as great as this. Jesus announced this truth to the people who were following him.

Luke 7:10

0 The faith of the centurion was rewarded with the immediate healing of his servant, for the messengers found him well upon their return.

Luke 7:11

1 Nain was a village of Galilee, the same district that contained Capernaum. As usual, as Jesus journeyed toward this place the crowds followed him.

Luke 7:12

2 The death of this young man was especially saddening by the circumstance that he was the only support of his widowed mother; this explains why much people was with her and thus showing their sympathy for her.

Luke 7:13

3 Compassion means pity, and Jesus felt that way toward this sorrowing mother. (See Isaiah 53:4.) In his sympathy for her he bade her cease weeping.

Luke 7:14

4 Jesus touched the bier (casket) to indicate he wished the pallbearers to stop. He then spoke to the dead man, showing he had power over inanimate objects.

Luke 7:15

5 n response to the command of Jesus the man came to life and sat up. It was not merely a mechanical performance upon a dead body for the young man spoke to them and then rejoined his mother.

Luke 7:16

6 This fear was that of deep respect, for they glorified God which means they gave Him credit for the deed performed by Jesus. It meant to the people that he was a great prophet, else God would not. have enabled him to perform this deed.

Luke 7:17

7 This rumor means the report of what had been done for the dead.

Luke 7:18

8 John’s disciples reported this deed to him, which would be of special interest to him in view of his preparatory work for Christ.

Luke 7:19-22

2 This paragraph is so much like Matthew 11:2-5 which is commented upon at length, that I shall ask the reader to consult that place in explanation of this.

Luke 7:23

3 This is explained with the lexicon definition at Matthew 11:6.

Luke 7:24

4 The importance of John and his work will be the subject of some verses, all of which will show that Jesus had a high regard for him. A reed is a tall and slender stem that would be swayed easily by the wind. Such would illustrate a man with little stability and one who could be easily influenced. The question of Jesus implies that John was not that way.

Luke 7:25

5 A man who was accustomed to the soft and luxurious life of royal palaces would be unsuited for work out in the wilderness. But the prophets had predicted the forerunner of Jesus was to operate in the wilderness, hence no surprise should be felt over the rough outdoor raiment of the Baptist.

Luke 7:26

6 More than a prophet. John not only uttered prophecies, but his life and work in preparing a people for Christ constituted a fulfillment of the sayings of other prophets, which made him more than a mere prophet.

Luke 7:27

7 This prediction is recorded in Malachi 3:1.

Luke 7:28

8 See the comments on Matthew 11:11.

Luke 7:29

9 Justified God means they acknowledged God to be just in authorizing John to baptize the people. They expressed their belief on this subject by being baptized.

Luke 7:30

0 To reject an ordinance of God is interpreted as rejecting Him. The lawyers were men who were acquainted with the law of Moses and interpreted it to others.

Luke 7:31-35

5 This paragraph is explained at Matthew 11:16-19.

Luke 7:36

6 The Pharisees were a sect of the Jews who were prominent in the time of Christ. See a description of them in the comments at Matthew 16:12.

Luke 7:37

7 All people are sinners in a general sense, but there were certain outcasts who were called thus as a class. This incident must not be confused with the one in Matthew 26:7; that woman was Mary a sister of Lazarus (John 11:2).

Luke 7:38

8 Kissing the feet of Jesus was an act of worship (Matthew 2:2) that was prompted by the spirit of humility. It also indicated reverence for Jesus as a holy man. Another custom of those times was the washing of the feet of a guest. This will be explained when we come to John 13.

Luke 7:39

9 Jesus knew the thoughts of men, whether they were expressed or not. This Pharisee was thinking of the woman in the light of the class she supposedly represented.

Luke 7:40

0 Jesus called for the attention of his host. The word master is from an original that properly means “teacher,” and Simon used it in that sense.

Luke 7:41

1 A pence would be worth about sixteen cents in our money. The value of the individual coin is unimportant, the illustration being drawn from the difference between fifty and five hundred.

Luke 7:42

2 The question was based on the comparative favors each debtor received.

Luke 7:43

3 Simon answered the question correctly that Jesus asked.

Luke 7:44

4 Simon had other guests (verse 49), and evidently they were “rating” a little higher than Jesus, and had received the regular attention usually paid to visitors. For some reason, Jesus had been neglected and he decided to make a lesson of it.

Luke 7:45

5 The kiss was the customary form of greeting in those days. But Simon did not give Jesus the usual kiss on the mouth, while this woman kissed his feet often.

Luke 7:46

6 As a matter of refreshing, a guest was anointed on the head with olive oil. Jesus had been neglected in that by his host, while the woman anointed his feet.

Luke 7:47

7 Jesus did not deny that the woman was of the lower class and had many sins. But she was given a higher rating than the debtor who owed five hundred pence. He gave his love after receiving the favor of being forgiven the debt, but the woman loved Jesus because of her sincere faith in him even before having received any favor. In return for that attitude Jesus gave her the great reward of complete forgiveness.

Luke 7:48

8 No further condition was mentioned, for she was forgiven her sins as a reward for her loving service and her simple trust in the grace of Jesus.

Luke 7:49

9 This is the question raised by the people in Matthew 9:1-6.

Luke 7:50

0 Her faith saved her, but it does not say faith alone. She had performed the works for which her sins were forgiven.