Jesus was silencing his enemies

JESUS WAS SILENCING HIS ENEMIES
EDITED BY GLENN PEASE
LUKE 14:1-6 1 One Sabbath, when Jesus went to eat
in the house of a prominent Pharisee, he was being
carefullywatched. 2 There in front of him was a man
suffering from abnormal swellingof his body. 3 Jesus
asked the Phariseesand experts in the law, “Is it
lawful to heal on the Sabbathor not?” 4 But they
remained silent. So taking hold of the man, he healed
him and sent him on his way.5 Then he asked them,
“If one of you has a child[a]or an ox that falls into a
well on the Sabbathday, will you not immediately pull
it out?” 6 And they had nothing to say.
NOTE: Jesus gives a perfect illustration as to when a rule is broken.
If your child is at risk will you keep the Sabbath rule of no work, or
will you labor hard to rescue your child? Who would be so foolish to
let the child die in order to keep the Sabbath rule? No wonder they
were silent and did not complain that He healed on that Sabbath. He
rescued the man rather than keep the Sabbath rule. The point is
that rules are rightly broken when it comes to the choices of legalism
or love. Love always outweighs legalism, and so it is the choice that
must be made when the two are in conflict.

BIBLEHUB RESOURCES
Table-talk Of Jesus
Luke 14:1-24
R.M. Edgar
We have now brought before us an interesting conversationwhich Jesus had
with certain guests atan entertainment in the house of "one of the chief
Pharisees." It was a sabbath-day feast, indicating that socialitywas not
incompatible even with Jewishsabbath-keeping. Into the guest-chamberhad
come a poor man afflicted with the dropsy, and, to the compassionateeye of
our Lord, he afforded an opportunity for a miracle of mercy. But, before
performing it, he tests their ideas about sabbath-observance. Theywere
sufficiently merciful to approve of socialityamong themselves, but the healing
of neighbours was another matter. They could even be merciful to cattle if
they were their own; but to be merciful to a brother-man would have shown
too much breadth of sympathy. The sick man might wait till Monday, but an
ass or an ox might die if not delivered out of its difficulty, which would be so
much personalloss. In spite of their narrow-mindedness, our Lord took the
poor man and healedhim, and then proceededto give the guests very
wholesome advice.
I. LET US LOOK AT THE PARABLE ABOUT THE WEDDING. (Vers. 7-
11). To the Lord's eye the feastbecame the symbol of what is spiritual. The
wedding of the parable is the consummation of the union betweenGodand his
people. The invitation is what is given in the gospel. Hence the advice is not
instructive as to the prudential temper, but as to our spirit in coming before
God. Shall it be the spirit which claims as right the highest room, or that
which accepts as more than we deserve the lowestroom? In other words, shall

we come before God in a spirit of self-righteousnessorin a spirit of self-
abasement? Now, ourLord points out, from the collisions ofsociallife, the
absolute certainty of the self-important and self-righteous being abased
among men: how much more in the righteous administration of God! The self-
righteous under his administration shall be abased, how deeply and terribly
we cannot conceive. Onthe other hand, those who have learned to humble
themselves under the mighty hand of God shall be exalted in due season, and
have glory in the presence ofthe celestialguests!Jesus thus attackedthe self-
righteousness ofthe Pharisees, notas a social, but as a spiritual question. God
would at lastcastit awayfrom his presence and societywith loathing and
contempt On the other hand, self-abasementis the sure sign of grace and the
sure earnestof glory. He who takes with gratitude the lowestroom in God's
house is certain of speedy promotion!
II. OUR HOSPITALITY SHOULD BE DIVINE IN ITS SPIRIT AND
CHARACTER. (Vers. 12-14.)Having improved the conductof the guests, and
shown its spiritual bearings, he next turns to the host, and gives him an idea of
what hospitality should be. It should not be speculative, but disinterested -
something, in fact, which can only be recompensedat the resurrectionof the
just. In no clearerway could our Lord indicate that hospitality should be
exercisedin the light of eternity; and the bearing of it upon spiritual interests
should constantlybe regarded. And here we surely should learn:
1. How important it is to be social. Godis social. His Trinity guarantees the
socialityof his nature. We are to be God-like in our sociality.
2. It may be most helpful to lonely spirits upon earth. Many a lonely heart
may be saved for better things by a timely socialattention.

3. There is greatblessing in giving attention to people who cannot return it. It
is a greatfield of delight that those with large hearts may have. "It is more
blessedto give than to receive." We are following God's plan in the attentions
we bestow.
4. At the final arrangementof God's kingdom, all such disinterested
hospitality shall be recompensed. How? Surely by opportunity being afforded
of doing the like again!The hospitable heart, which keeps eternity in view in
all its hospitality, shall have eternity to be still more hospitable in.
III. THE PARABLE OF THE GREAT SUPPER. (VEER. 15-24.)Jesus
proceeds from the question of hospitalities to presentthe gospelin the light of
a supper provided by the greatFather above, and to which he invites sinners
as his guests. And here we have to notice:
1. The greatness ofthe supper. The preparations were long and elaborate.
How many centuries were consumedin preparing the feastwhich we have in
the gospel!It was to be the greatest"feastofreasonand flow of soul" the
world has seen. And so it is. Nowhere else does man getsuch food for his mind
and heart as in the gospelof Christ.
2. The freedom of the invitations. Many were bidden. No stinginess about the
invitations. They are scatteredso freely that, alas!they are not by many
sufficiently prized.
3. The supplementary summons by the faithful servant. It is not an invitation
by ink and pen merely that God sends, but he backs the written revelation by
personalpersuasionby the mouth of faithful servants. Here is the sphere of

the gospelministry. These true ministers tell what a feastis ready in the
gospel, and what their own experience of it has been.
4. The triviality of the excuses. To the invitations sentout by God men make
excuses. There is something peculiarly sad and significantin refusals upon
insufficient grounds. Our Lord gives us three examples of the excuses men
make for refusing salvationand the gospel.
(1) The first man puts a piece of ground before salvation. "Realproperty"
keeps many a man out of the kingdom of heaven.
(2) The secondputs cattle before salvation. Many men are so interestedin
good"stock,"andall the mysteries of breeding and work, as to have no time
for their eternalinterests. A few chattels keepmulti-ruder out of God's
kingdom.
(3) The third puts social concerns before spiritual. He has married a wife, and
so cannot attend to the claims of God. Society, its attractions and allurements,
is keeping multitudes out of the kingdom above. These are but specimens of
the trivialities which are monopolizing men's attention, and preventing their
giving good heed to the things of the gospel.
5. The extension of the invitation to those who are sure to acceptit. The poor,
maimed, halt, and blind representthe souls who feel their spiritual poverty
and defects, and who are sure to appreciate God's gracious invitation. When
the self-righteous spurn it, the abasedand humiliated greedily receive it.

6. The abundant room, and the difficulty in getting the places filled. There is
no possibility of any one coming and being refused admittance. There is room
for all who Care to come. Those who will not taste of the supper are those who
thought themselves better employed. In compelling men to come in, we must
do our best in persuading them to acceptthe gospel. May we leave nothing
undone that the Divine table may be filled. - R.M.E.
Biblical Illustrator
He went into the house of one of the chief Pharisees.
Luke 14:1-6
The gospelfor the seventeenthSunday after Trinity
J. A. Seiss, D. D.
I. WE HERE BEHOLD OUR SAVIOUR IN THE SOCIAL CIRCLE. Jesus
was not a recluse. He had a kind and socialheart. He came to instruct, benefit,
and redeem men, and He took pleasure in mingling with them. With all His

holiness, majesty, and glory, He was a meek and socialbeing, worthy of all
admiration and imitation.
II. WE HERE HAVE A REMARKABLE TESTIMONYTO CHRIST'S
GOODNESS.There is reasonto suspectthat His invitation to this Pharisee's
house was for no friendly purpose. The Pharisees, as a class, hatedJesus, and
were intent upon bringing Him into condemnation; and this man had
distinguished friends with him on this occasion, who were no exception. This
is proven from what occurredwhen they all gottogetherin the house.
Immediately in front of Christ, and in a manner thrust upon His notice, was
"a certain man that had the dropsy." How he got there is to be inferred.
Evidently he was placedthere to tempt our Lord to commit Himself. Yes, even
their hard and bitter hearts were so assuredof the Saviour's goodness,that
they felt warranted in building on it their plot to ruin Him. Sabbath day as it
was, their convictions were deep and positive that He would not pass by the
opportunity for exercising his marvellous powerto cure the invalid they had
stationedbefore Him. And that one incidental fact speaks volumes. It tells of
the constantstreamof healing power dispensedby the Saviour wheresoever
He went. As the very cloud that would coverthe sun with darkness bears the
bow which the more beautifully reflects his glory, so the very wrath and
malignity of these designing hypocrites did the more magnificently attestthe
gracious goodness ofour Lord. Nor did they miscalculate. Knowing full well
the nature and intent of the arrangement, and comprehending all the ill use
the treacherous watchersaround Him meant to make of it, He did not flinch
from His wont, nor suffer His merciful power to be diverted or constrained.
III. BUT HOW BASE THE COWARDICE BROUGHT BEFOREUS IN THE
CONDUCT OF THESE MEN!To wish to unseatand injure one of whose
goodness theywere so thoroughly convinced, was in itself a self-contradictory
wickednessalmostbeyond comprehension. Shame on a zeal that attaches
sanctity to such hypocrisy, or honour to such cowardice!

IV. WE HERE BEHOLD THE TRUE SPIRIT OF THE LAW. The Sabbath
was not ordained for itself and its own sake;nor as a mere arbitrary actof
Divine sovereignty;but for the good of the living beings concernedin its
observance.
V. WE LIKEWISE BEHOLD FROM THIS NARRATIVE, THAT AN
UNCHARITABLE PUNCTILIOUSNESS ABOUT RELIGIOUS THINGS, IS
APT TO HAVE, AS ITS ACCOMPANIMENT,IF NOT ITS ROOT, SOME
HIDDEN SELFISHNESS AND SELF-CONSEQUENCE. Itwas not that they
so loved God's appointments, or that they were so devoutly concernedto obey
them; but anxiety for a bludgeon to break the head of Him whose pure
teachings were undermining their falsehoodand tyranny. It was not God, but
greed;not righteousness, but honour, place, and dominion; not concernfor
Moses andthe prophets, but for themselves and their own consequence. On
the occasionbefore us, there was a marked concernabout honours and place.
This was the inspiration of their assumed sanctity, and all their superior
orthodoxy was only a sham for pride and lust of power. And only too apt is
this to be the case in every intolerant and uncharitable ado about the mere
"mint, anise, and cummin" of the faith.
VI. BUT THE END OF THE WHOLE MATTER IS ALSO HERE SHOWN
US. Such a spirit has no favour with God, and has nothing goodto expect.
(J. A. Seiss, D. D.)
They watchedHim
What may be learnt from watching Christ
Van Doren.

If we watchChrist also, we see how exalted piety instructs the worldly-
minded.
1. He condescends to acceptin friendly spirit the invitation that appeared to
be friendly.
2. He explains and defends the right use of the Sabbath.
3. He rebukes pride by inculcating humility.
4. He unfolds to those around Him the nature of true humility.
5. From humility as His subject, in the presence of the proud, He proceeds to
speak of hospitality in the presence ofthe selfish.
6. Our Lord distinguishes betweenthe hospitality of ostentation, and the
hospitality of true benevolence.
7. He deduces His instruction from passing events or from surrounding
objects.
8. Seatedatthe supper, He utters to His host and the guests the parable of the
GreatSupper.
(Van Doren.)

Healing on the Sabbath
T. T. Lynch.
Is it lawful to do anything but heal on the Sabbath day? Certainly not; that is
the purpose of the day; it is a day of healing. If, therefore, in the very complex
arrangements of our modern life, we are trying to interfere with anything that
is customary on the Sabbath day, we should ask whether we are interfering
with that which has a healing effect, or whether we are interfering with that
which has an injurious effect;because there are many things that in their
outward form are "works"that nevertheless in their generaleffects are
healing.
(T. T. Lynch.)
The coming Sabbath
T. T. Lynch.
We have been thinking and speaking ofa miracle done on the Sabbath. It is
evident that our Saviour had a preference for the Sabbath as a time for
working miracles. How, then, is it with respectto ourselves — we who, many
of us, would be glad to have a miracle wrought on our behalf, and yet have no
right whateverto expectone? It is just thus — we are waiting for the Sabbath.
In other words, it was intended, no doubt, to be taught us by our Saviour's
practice, that there is a specialtime of rest coming, when all the various
troubles that hamper and injure us will be utterly removed — our burdens
unbound; our fevers cooledfor ever; our weaknesschangedto strength; all
our heaviness lightened; our blind eyes made clear;our deaf ears unstopped;
our feetfilled with vigorous leaping blood; and all that is within us lighted up
with joy, even as the house was lighted up, and music and dancing sounded in
it, when the prodigal came home. There is a Sabbath coming; and as Christ
wrought His cures upon the Sabbath, when He was upon earth, we are taught
to look on to a day of cure that is coming — that Sabbath, namely, of rest, into
which we hope to enter hereafter. It may be needful for our perfection, and
the perfectionof our friends, that we should still be burdened; but we are

quite sure that, after the round of the six days, there will come the seventh; we
are quite sure, when the time of trial has ended, the boon of health will be
granted.
(T. T. Lynch.)
The dropsy
Dropsy a figure of avarice
Venedien.
Dropsy is a disease whichin generalattacks only those of an advanced age. In
a similar manner, from indifference to God and celestialthings, and
attachment to earthly goods, arises avarice — a vice to which many fall
victims, especiallyin advancedyears.
I. SIMILARITY BETWEEN DROPSYAND AVARICE.
1. In the thirst occasionedby both.
2. In the sufferings occasionedby both.
(1)Want of rest and joy.
(2)Pains throughout the whole body.
3. In the dangerous characterofthe respective diseases.

(1)Avarice is difficult of cure.
(2)Should the avaricious man be converted, there is the utmost dangerof his
relapsing into his former sins.
(3)Avarice frequently causes premature death.
(4)Avarice causes everlasting death.
II. DEATH THE DELIVERER FROM BOTHDISEASES.
1. Deathand the grave warn us to despise earthly goods.
2. The judgment warns the avaricious to tremble on accountof their
possessions. Forthey provoke God —
(1)By their injustice and hard-heartedness, which are often the cause of sins
crying to heaven.
(2)By the false confidence which they place in their goods.
3. Eternity teaches us to covetunfailing goods.
(Venedien.)

Grief aiding thought
T. T. Lynch.
Here, then, stands the man that had the dropsy. Does he object to a miracle on
the Sabbath day? It is surprising how our own necessitiesgive an internal
light to our principles. Many a thing that has been wholly dark to a man, so
that he has said, "I cannotunderstand it," becomes translucentto him as soon
as God has lighted up a grief within him. Put a grief inside a thought, and it is
astonishing how much clearerthe thought is. This man had clearviews of the
Sabbath — very clearviews. The dropsy had given him those views.
(T. T. Lynch.)
COMMENTARIES
Ellicott's Commentary for English Readers
XIV.
(1) Into the house of one of the chief Pharisees.—Better,ofthe rulers of the
Pharisees.The meaning of the phrase is probably more definite than that
suggestedby the English. The man was either a “ruler” in the same sense as
Nicodemus (John 3:1), or the rich young man in Luke 18:18 - i.e., a member of
the Sanhedrin (which seems mostlikely)—or else occupieda high position in
the lay-hierarchy (if the phrase may be allowed)which had developed itself in
the organisationofPharisaism.

To eat bread on the Sabbath day.—Sabbath feasts were then, as at a later
time, part of the sociallife of the Jews, andwere often—subject, of course, to
the condition that the food was cold—occasions ofgreatluxury and display.
Augustine speaks ofthem as including dancing and song, and the “Sabbath
luxury” of the Jews became a proverb. On the motives of the Pharisee—
probably half respectand half curiosity—see Notes onLuke 7:36.
MacLaren's Expositions
Luke
THE LESSONS OF A FEAST
Luke 14:1 - Luke 14:14.
Jesus neverrefused an invitation, whether the inviter were a Pharisee ora
publican, a friend or a foe. He never mistook the disposition of His host. He
accepted‘greetings where no kindness is,’ and on this occasionthere was
none. The entertainerwas a spy, and the feastwas a trap. What a contrast
betweenthe malicious watchers atthe table, ready to note and to interpret in
the worstsense everyaction of His, and Him loving and wishing to bless even
them! The chill atmosphere of suspicion did not freeze the flow of His gentle
beneficence and wise teaching. His meek goodness remaineditself in the face
of hostile observers. The miracle and the two parables are aimed straight at
their errors.
I. How came the dropsical man there?

Possiblyhe had simply strayed in to look on at the feast, as the freedom of
manners then would permit him to do. The absence ofany hint that he came
hoping for a cure, and of any trace of faith on his part, or of speechto him on
Christ’s, joined with his immediate dismissal after his cure, rather favours the
supposition that he had been put as the bait of the trap, on the calculationthat
the sight of him would move Jesus to heal him. The setters of the snare were
‘watching’ whether it would work, and Jesus ‘answered’their thoughts,
which were, doubtless, visible in their eyes. His answerhas three stages-a
question which is an assertion, the cure, and another affirming question. All
three are met with sulky silence, whichspeaks more than words would have
done. The first question takes the ‘lawyers’ on their own ground, and in effect
asserts thatto heal did not break the Sabbath. Jesus challenges denialof the
lawfulness of it, and the silence of the Pharisees confessesthat they dare not
deny. ‘The bare factof healing is not prohibited,’ they might have said, ‘but
the acts necessaryfor healing are.’ But no acts were necessaryforthis
Healer’s power to operate. The outgoing of His will had power. Their finespun
distinctions of deeds lawful and unlawful were spiders’ webs, and His act of
mercy flew high above the webs, like some fair winged creature glancing in
the sunshine, while the spider sits in his crevice balked. The broad principle
involved in Jesus’first question is that no Sabbath law, no so-calledreligious
restriction, can ever forbid helping the miserable. The repose ofthe Sabbath
is deepened, not disturbed, by activity for man’s good.
The cure is told without detail, probably because there were no details to tell.
There is no sign of request or of faith on the sufferer’s part; there seems to
have been no outward acton Christ’s beyond ‘taking’ him, which appears
simply to mean that He called him nearer, and then, by a simple exercise of
His will, healed him. There is no trace of thanks or of wonder in the heart of
the sufferer, who probably never had anything more to do with his
benefactor. Silently he comes onthe stage, silentlyhe gets his blessing, silently
he disappears. A strange, sadinstance of how possible it is to have a
momentary connectionwith Jesus, andeven to receive gifts from His hand,
and yet to have no real, permanent relation to Him!

The secondquestion turns from the legalto a broader consideration. The
spontaneous workings ofthe heart are not to be dammed back by ceremonial
laws. Needcalls for immediate succour. You do not wait for the Sabbath’s sun
to set when your ox or your ass is in a pit. {The reading ‘son’ instead of ‘ox,’
as in the RevisedVersion margin, is incongruous.} Jesus is appealing to the
instinctive wish to give immediate help even to a beast in trouble, and implies
that much more should the same instinct be allowedimmediate play when its
objectis a man. The listeners were self-condemned, and their obstinate silence
proves that the arrow had struck deep.
II. The cure seems to have takenplace before the guests seatedthemselves.
Then came a scramble for the most honourable places, onwhich He looked
with perhaps a sad smile. Again the silence of the guests is noticeable, as well
as the calm assumption of authority by Jesus, evenamong such hostile
company. Where He comes a guest, He becomes teacher, andby divine right
He rebukes. The lessonis given, says Luke, as ‘a parable,’by which we are to
understand that our Lord is not here giving, as might appear if His words are
superficially interpreted, a mere lessonof proper behaviour at a feast, but is
taking that behaviour as an illustration of a far deeper thing. Possiblysome
too ambitious guesthad contrived to seathimself in the place of honour, and
had had to turn out, and, with an embarrassedmien, had to go down to the
very lowestplace, as all the intermediate ones were full. His eagernessto be at
the top had ended in his being at the bottom. That is a ‘parable,’ says Jesus,
an illustration in the region of daily life, of large truths in morals and religion.
It is a poor motive for outward humility and self-abasementthat it may end in
higher honour. And if Jesus was here only giving directions for conduct in
regard to men, He was inculcating a doubtful kind of morality. The devil’s
‘darling sin

Is the pride that apes humility.’
Jesus was not recommending that, but what is crafty ambition, veiling itself in
lowliness for its own purposes, when exercisedin outward life, becomes a
noble, pure, and altogetherworthy, thing in the spiritual sphere. Forto desire
to be exaltedin the kingdom is wholly right, and to humble one’s self with a
direct view to that exaltation is to tread the path which He has hallowedby
His own footsteps. The true aim for ambition is the honour that cometh from
God only, and the true path to it is through the valley; for ‘God resisteththe
proud, but giveth grace to the humble.’
III. Unbroken silence still prevailed among the guests, but again Jesus speaks
as teacher, and now to the host.
A guestdoes not usually make remarks on the compositionof the company,
Jesus couldmake no ‘recompense’to His entertainer, but to give him this
counsel. Again, He inculcated a wide generallessonunder the guise of a
particular exhortation appropriate to the occasion. Probablythe bulk of the
guests were well-to-do people of the host’s own socialrank, and, as probably,
there were onlookers ofa lowerdegree, like the dropsicalman. The
prohibition is not directed againstthe natural custom of inviting one’s
associatesandequals, but againstinviting them only, and againstdoing so
with a sharp eye to the advantages to be derived from it. That wearyround of
giving a self-regarding hospitality, and then getting a return dinner or evening
entertainment from eachguest, which makes up so much of the sociallife
among us, is a pitiful affair, hollow and selfish. What would Jesus say-what
does Jesus say-aboutit all? The sacredname of hospitality is profaned, and
the very springs of it dried up by much of our socialcustoms, and the most
literal application of our Lord’s teaching here is sorelyneeded.

But the words are meant as a ‘parable,’ and are to be widened out to include
all sorts of kindnesses andhelps given in the sacredname of charity to those
whose only claim is their need. ‘They cannotrecompense thee’-so much the
better, for, if an eye to their doing so could have influenced thee, thy
beneficence wouldhave lost its grace and savour, and would have been simple
selfishness, and, as such, incapable of future reward. It is only love that is
lavished on those who can make no return which is so free from the taint of
secretregardto self that it is fit to be recognisedas love in the revealing light
of that greatday, and therefore is fit to be ‘recompensedin the resurrectionof
the just.’
BensonCommentary
Luke 14:1-4. And it came to pass — About this time, probably just as our
Lord was finishing his journey through Herod’s dominions; he went into the
house of one of the chief Pharisees — Τινος των αρχοντωνΦαρισαιων, of a
certain one of the ruling Pharisees, that is, of a magistrate, ora member of the
greatcouncil, calledthe sanhedrim. This personprobably resided generallyin
Jerusalem, but had a country-seatin Peræa;and happening to meet with
Jesus while he abode there, he carried him home to dinner. The invitation,
however, it appears was insidious; for we are told they watchedhim — That
is, the chief Pharisee and others of his sect, who were gatheredtogetherfor
this very end, watchedall his words and actions, in order that they might find
something to blame in them, whereby they hoped to blast his reputation as a
prophet. And behold, there was a certainman before him which had the
dropsy — Who, having heard that Jesus was to dine there, had got himself
conveyedthither, in hopes of receiving a cure. And Jesus — Answering the
thoughts which he saw arising in their hearts;spake unto the lawyers — The
doctors of the law;and other Pharisees who were then present. Is it lawful to
heal on the sabbath day — Can there be any thing in so benevolentan action,
as healing a distempered person, inconsistentwith the sacredrestrequired on
that day? And they held their peace — Not being able, with any face, to deny
the lawfulness ofthe action, and yet being unwilling to say any thing which
might seemto authorize or countenance those cures which Christ performed

on sabbath days, as well as at other times, and which in generalthey had been
well knownto censure. And he took him — Επιλαβομενος, taking him by the
hand, or laying his hand on him, he healed him and let him go — Απελυσε,
sent him away. The moment that Jesus laid his hand on the man, his
complexion returned, and his body was reduced to its ordinary size;
becoming, at the same time, vigorous and fit for action, as appearedby the
manner in which he went out of the room. Doubtless our Lord could have
accomplishedthis cure as wellby a secretvolition, and so might have cut off
all matter of cavilling. But he chose rather to produce it by an action, in which
there was the very leastdegree of bodily labour that could be, because that
thus he had an opportunity of reproving the reigning superstition of the times.
Matthew Henry's Concise Commentary
14:1-6 This Pharisee, as wellas others, seems to have had an ill designin
entertaining Jesus at his house. But our Lord would not be hindered from
healing a man, though he knew a clamour would be raisedat his doing it on
the sabbath. It requires care to understand the proper connexionbetween
piety and charity in observing the sabbath, and the distinction betweenworks
of real necessityand habits of self-indulgence. Wisdomfrom above, teaches
patient perseverancein well-doing.
Barnes'Notes on the Bible
It came to pass - It so happened or occurred.
As he went ... - It is probable that he was invited to go, being in the
neighborhood Luke 14:12;and it is also probable that the Pharisee invited
him for the purpose of getting him to saysomething that would involve him in
difficulty.
One of the chief Pharisees- One of the Phariseeswho were "rulers," or
members of the greatcouncil or the Sanhedrin. See the notes at Matthew 5:22.
It does not mean that he was the head of the "sect" ofthe Pharisees, but one
of those who happened to be a member of the Sanhedrin. He was, therefore, a
man of influence and reputation.

To eat bread - To dine. To partake of the hospitalities of his house.
On the sabbath-day - It may seemstrange that our Saviour should have gone
to dine with a man who was a strangeron the Sabbath; but we are to
remember:
1. That he was traveling, having no home of his own, and that it was no more
improper to go there than to any other place.
2. That he did not go there for the purpose of feasting and amusement, but to
do good.
3. That as severalof that class ofpersons were together, it gave him an
opportunity to address them on the subject of religion, and to reprove their
vices.
If, therefore, the example of Jesus shouldbe pled to authorize accepting an
invitation to dine on the Sabbath, it should be pled just as it was. If we can go
"just as he did," it is right. If when awayfrom home; if we go to do good;if
we make it an occasionto discourse on the subject of religion and to persuade
people to repent, then it is not improper. Farther than this we cannotplead
the example of Christ. And surely this should be the lastinstance in the world
to be adduced to justify dinner-parties, and scenesofriot and gluttony on the
Sabbath.
They watchedhim - They malignantly fixed their eyes on him, to see if he did
anything on which they could lay hold to accuse him.

Jamieson-Fausset-BrownBible Commentary
CHAPTER 14
Lu 14:1-24. Healing of a DropsicalMan, and Manifold Teachings ata
Sabbath Feast.Luke 14:1-6 Christhealeth the dropsy on the sabbath, and
justifieth his doing so.
Luke 14:7-11 He recommends humility,
Luke 14:12-14 and hospitality toward the poor.
Luke 14:15-24 The parable of the marriage supper, and of the
guests, who making excuses were excluded, and their
rooms filled by others.
Luke 14:25-33 He advises those who are willing to be his disciples to
examine beforehand their resolution in case ofpersecutions.
Luke 14:34-35 The unprofitableness of salt, when it hath lost its savour.

Ver. 1-6. We have before observedthe freedom of our Saviour’s converse;
sometimes he will dine with publicans, sometimes with Pharisees, becoming all
things to all men that he might gainsome. Christians certainly have the same
liberty; the matter is not in whose houses we are, but what we do or say, how
we behave ourselves there. In his going to a Pharisee’s house, he gives us a
greatprecedent of humanity and self-denial, for the Pharisees were his great
enemies, and we shall observe no greatkindness showedto him in the
invitation of him. Whether this Pharisee be called
one of the chief of the Pharisees becausehe was a member of the sanhedrim,
or a ruler of a synagogue,orbecause he was one of the eldestand greatest
repute, is not worth the inquiry. Thither Christ went
to eat bread, that is, to take a meal with him. It is a phrase often used to
signify dining, or supping, for they ordinarily under the notion of bread
understood all manner of victuals.
It was
on the sabbath day. In the mean time, the evangelisttells us,
they watchedhim, to wit, whether they might hear any thing from him, or see
any thing in him, whereofthey might accuse him.
It happened

there was a man which had the dropsy, whether casually, or brought thither
on purpose by the Pharisees, the Scripture saith not; he was not there without
a Divine direction, to give Christ an occasionof a miracle, and further to
instruct people in the true doctrine of the sabbath.
Christ upon the sabbath begins us a discourse proper for the day, asking the
Pharisees ifit were
lawful to heal on the sabbath day. They make him no reply. Christ healeth
him, then preacheth a doctrine to them, which he had twice before inculcated,
in the case ofa man who had a withered hand, Matthew 12:10, and of the
woman whom Satan had bound, of which we heard, Luke 13:11, viz. That
works of mercy are lawful on the sabbath day. Then he justifieth his fact by
the confessionoftheir own practice, in lifting up beasts fallen into pits on the
sabbath day. His argument is this: If it be lawful on the sabbath day to relieve
a beast, it is much more lawful to relieve a man: but you do the former. The
evangelistreports them put to silence, but saith nothing of their conviction. It
is an easierthing to stop malicious persons’mouths than to remove their
prejudices. Malice will ordinarily hold the conclusion, whenthe reasonof the
soul infected with it is not able to justify the premises.
Gill's Exposition of the Entire Bible
And it came to pass,.... The Persic versionadds, "on a certain day"; and it is
afterwards said to be the sabbath day. This seems to have been somewhere or
other in Galilee;see Luke 17:11.
As he went into the house of one of the chief Pharisees;or rather, one of the
rulers, and of the sectof the Pharisees:and he might be either a ruler of a
synagogue, ora member of one of the lesseror greatersanhedrim; such
another as Nicodemus, who was of the Pharisees, anda ruler of the Jews, John
3:1 for that there was any distinction among the Pharisees as a sect, does not

appear: to this man's house Christ went, after he came out of the synagogue,
being invited by him;
to eat bread on the sabbath day. The sabbath day was a feasting day with the
Jews, in which they made very large and magnificent entertainments, for the
honour of the sabbath; and he was reckonedthe most praiseworthy, that
exceededthis way; and no doubt, since this man was a Pharisee, one that was
tenacious of the traditions of the elders, and was also a ruler, his table was
well spread: the rules concerning this part of keeping the sabbath, are these
(g);
"whatis this delight? the wise men say, a man ought to prepare abundance of
food and spicedliquids, for the sabbath, all according to a man's substance;
and whoevermultiplies in the expenses of the sabbath, and in preparing food,
much and good, lo, he is praiseworthy; and if he is not able, though he only
prepares boiled food, and such like, on accountof the glory of the sabbath, lo,
this is the delight of the sabbath: and he is not obliged to straiten himself, nor
to ask of others, to increase the food of the sabbath: the ancientwise men said,
make thy sabbath a common day, and do not make thyself necessitousto men;
he who is delicate and rich, and lo, all his days are as a sabbath day, ought to
have food on a sabbath day, different from that on a weekday;and if it is not
possible to change, let him alter the time of eating; if he had been used to have
it soon, let him have it late; and if late, let him have it sooner:a man is obliged
to eat three meals, or feasts, ona sabbath day; one in the evening, and one in
the morning, and one at the time of the meat offering; and he ought to take
heed to those three feasts, thathe does not diminish them at all; and even a
poor man that is maintained by alms, must keepthe three feasts.''
And this lastcanon, or rule, is of the utmost importance with them; for they
(h) say,

"whoeverkeeps the three feasts on the sabbath day, shall be delivered from
three punishments, from the sorrows ofthe Messiah, fromthe judgment of
hell, and from the war of Gog and Magog.''
That they watchedhim; that is, those that satdown to meat with him, the
lawyers and Pharisees:and it is very probable, that it was not out of pure
respectto him, that he was askedto eatmeat at this ruler's house; but with a
design to observe whatevermight be said, or done by him, they could take any
advantage from, againsthim.
(g) Maimon. Hilchot Sabbat, c. 30. sect. 7, 8, 9. (h) T. Bab. Sabbat, fol. 118. 1.
Kimchi in Isaiah 58.13.
Geneva Study Bible
And {1} it came to pass, as he went into the house of {a} one of the chief
Pharisees to eatbread on the sabbath day, that they watchedhim.
(1) The law of the very sabbath ought not to hinder the offices of charity.
(a) Either one of the elders, whom they calledthe sanhedrin, or one of the
chiefs of the synagogue:for all the Pharisees were not chief men of the
synagogue Joh7:48; for this word Pharisee was the name of a sect, though it
appears by viewing the whole history of the matter that the Phariseeshad
much authority.
EXEGETICAL(ORIGINAL LANGUAGES)
Meyer's NT Commentary
Luke 14:1-6 peculiar to Luke from his source ofthe narrative of the journey.

Ἐν τῷ ἐλθεῖν κ.τ.λ.]when He came, to wit, in the progress of the journey,
Luke 13:33.
τῶν ἀρχόντωντ. Φαρισαίων] not: of the members of the Sanhedrim belonging
to the Pharisees (Grotius, Kuinoel, and many others), such as Nicodemus
therefore, John 3:1; for the incident is in Galilee (not Jerusalem, as Grotius;
not Judea, as Schenkelwill have it), and, literally, it means nothing more
than: of the Pharisee leaders, i.e. ofthe chiefs of the Pharisees.It is not to be
defined more precisely;but men such as Hillel, Schammai, Gamaliel, and
others belong to this category.
σαββάτῳ]the holiness of which (the preparation occurredpreviously) was not
opposedto it, nay, “lautiores erant isto die illis mensae … idque ipsis
judicantibus ex pietate et religione,” Lightfoot. Comp. Nehemiah8:10; Tob
2:1; also John 12:2; Wetsteinin loc.; Spencer, de leg. rit. p. 87 ff.
φαγεῖν ἄρτον]comp. Matthew 15:2. Jesus was invited, Luke 14:12.
καὶ αὑτοί]This is the common use of καί after ἐγένετο; αὐτοί, they on their
part, the Pharisees.
παρατηρούμ.]generally, whetherHe would give them occasionfor charge or
complaint. Otherwise, Luke 6:7.
Luke 14:2. And behold a dropsical man was there in His presence. This
denotes the unexpected sight of the presence (not as a guest, see Luke 14:4) of
the sick man, who ἦν ἱστάμενος, καὶ μὴ τολμῶνμὲν ζητῆσαι θεραπείανδιὰ τὸ

σάββατονκαὶ τοὺς Φαρισαίους·φαινόμενος δὲ μόνον, ἵνα ἰδὼν οἰκτειρήσῃ
τοῦτονἀφʼ ἑαυτοῦ καὶ ἀπαλλάξῃ τοῦ ὕδρωπος, Euthymius Zigabenus. The
view of many (see also Wetstein, Kuinoel, Glöckler, Lange), that the sick man
was intentionally brought in by the Pharisees, is the more arbitrary, as Luke
14:2 is not linked on by γάρ. Moreover, the cure occurredbefore the dinner,
Luke 14:7.
Luke 14:3. ἀποκριθ.]atthis appearance ofthe sick man.
Luke 14:4. ἑπιλαβόμενος]a taking hold which brought about the miraculous
cure, strongerthan ἁψάμενος.[172]Otherwise Mark 8:23. The accusative
αὐτόνis not dependent on ἐπιλ. See Buttmann, Neut. Gr. p. 140 [E. T. 160].
Luke 14:5. Comp. on Matthew 12:11. The constructionis such that the
nominative of τίνος ὑμῶν is the subject in the secondhalf of the sentence.
Comp. generally, Bernhardy, p. 468;Stallbaum, ad Plat. Phaed. p. 72 B.
In respectof the reading υἱός (see the critical remarks;Mill, Bornemann, and
Lachmann, Praef. II. p. vii., unjustifiably conjecture ὄϊς), which is not
inappropriate (de Wette), the conclusionof Jesus is not drawn, as Luke 13:15
f., a minori ad majus,[173]but from the ethical principle that the helpful
compassionwhichwe show in reference to that which is our own (be it son or
beast)on the Sabbath, we are also bound to show to others (love thy
neighbour as thyself).
[172]Paulus after his fashion makes use of the word for the naturalizing of
the miracle: “ProbablyJesus took him aside, and lookedafterthe operationof
the means previously employed.”

[173]This reading, moreover, sets aside the opinion of Schleiermacher, p. 196,
that in respectof the quotation of this expressionthere is no reference back to
Luke 13:10.
Expositor's Greek Testament
Luke 14:1-24 contain a digestof sayings of Jesus at the table of a Pharisee,
this being the third instance in this Gospelof such friendly intercourse
betweenHim and members of the Pharisaic party. The remaining part of the
chapter consists ofsolemn words on self-sacrificeand on counting the cost
representedas addressedto the people.
Cambridge Bible for Schools andColleges
1-6. Sabbath healing of a Man with the Dropsy.
1. of one of the chief Pharisees]Rather, of the Rulers of the Pharisees. The
rendering of our version gives the generalsense but is inadmissible. It is
perhaps due to the translators being aware that the Pharisees had (strictly
speaking)no Rulers. There were no grades of distinction between-Pharisees as
such. But obviously the expressionwould be popularly used of a Pharisee who
was an eminent Rabbi like Hillel or Shammai, or of one who was also a
Sanhedrist.
to eat bread on the sabbath day] Sabbath entertainments of a luxurious and
joyous characterwere the rule among the Jews, andwere even regardedas a
religious duty (Nehemiah 8:9-12). All the food was howevercookedonthe
previous day (Exodus 16:23). That our Lord acceptedthe invitation, though
He was well aware of the implacable hostility of the Pharisaic party towards
Him, was due to His gracious spirit of forgiving friendliness; and to this we
owe the beautiful picture of His discourse and bearing throughout the feast
which this chapter preserves for us. Every incident and remark of the banquet
was turned to good. We have first the scene in the house (Luke 14:1-6); then
the manoeuvres to secure precedence atthe meal (Luke 14:7-11);then the

lessonto the host about the choice of guests (Luke 14:12-14);then the Parable
of the King’s Feastsuggestedby the vapid exclamationof one of the company
(Luke 14:15-24).
that they watchedhim] More emphatically in the original ‘and they
themselves were carefully watching Him,’ comp. Luke 6:7. The invitation in
fact even more than those in Luke 7:36, Luke 11:37 was a mere plot;—part of
that elaborate espionage, andmalignant heresy-hunting (Luke 11:53-54, Luke
20:20;Mark 12:13), which is the mark of a decadent religion, and which the
Pharisees performedwith exemplary diligence. The Pharisees regardedit as
their greatobject in life to exalt their sacredbooks;had they never read so
much as this? “the wickedwatcheththe righteous and seekethoccasionto slay
him,” Psalm37:32; “allthat watch for iniquity are cut off, that make a man
an offender for a word, and lay a snare for him that reproveth in the gate,”
Isaiah29:20-21.
Bengel's Gnomen
Luke 14:1. Ἐν τῷ ἐλθεῖν, when He was coming)by invitation. See Luke
14:12.—ἀρχόντων, ofthe chiefs) The Phariseeshad their own chiefs, and these
also numerous, possessing pre-eminent authority; which, however, Jesus did
not regardwith fear. See Luke 14:12, at the beginning. [—ἦσαν
παρατηρούμενοιαὐτὸν, they were craftily watching Him) The spiritual
Sabbath is grosslyprofaned by crafty and wickedthoughts.—V. g.]
Pulpit Commentary
Verses 1-6. - The Pharisee's feastona sabbath day. The healing of the sick
with dropsy. Verse 1. - And it came to pass, as he went into the house of one of
the chief Phariseesto eat bread on the sabbath day. Still on the same journey;
the Lord was approaching gradually nearer Jerusalem. The house into which
he entered this sabbath belongedto one who was a leading member of the
Pharisee party, probably an influential rabbi, a man of greatwealth, or a
member of the Sanhedrim "To eatbread on the sabbath day," as a guest, was
a usual practice;such entertainments on the sabbath day were very usual;

they were often luxurious and costly. The only rule observedwas that all the
viands provided were cold,, everything having been cookedon a previous day.
Augustine alludes to these sabbath feasts as including at times singing and
dancing. They watchedhim. This explains the reasonof the invitation to the
greatTeacher, onthe part of a leading Pharisee, afterthe Master's bitter
denunciation of the party (see Luke 11:39-52). The feastand its attendant
circumstances were allarranged, and Jesus'watchfulenemies waited to see
what he would do.
Vincent's Word Studies
Watched(ἧσαν παρατηρούμενοι)
The participle and finite verb, were engagedin watching. Closely (παρά). See
on Mark 3:2.
PRECEPTAUSTIN RESOURCES
BRUCE HURT MD
Luke 14:1 It happened that when He went into the house of one of the leaders
of the Pharisees onthe Sabbath to eat bread, they were watching Him closely.
KJV Luke 14:1 And it came to pass, as he went into the house of one of the
chief Pharisees to eatbread on the sabbath day, that they watchedhim.

It happened that when He went into the house Lk 7:34-36;11:37; 1 Cor 9:19-
22
of one of the leaders of the Pharisees onthe Sabbath Jn 3:1; Acts 5:34
they were watching Him closely. Lk 6:7; 11:53,54;20:20;Ps 37:32; 41:6; 62:4;
64:5,6;Pr 23:7; Isa 29:20; Isa 29:21; Jer20:10,11;Mark 3:2
Luke 14 Resources - Multiple Sermons and Commentaries
Luke 14:1-14 Jesus the Confronter - StevenCole
Luke 14:1-6 The Healing Savior vs the Hypocritical System - John MacArthur
Luke 14:1-6 The Way Our Lord Kept the Sabbath - R A Torrey
ANOTHER SABBATH DAY
CONFRONTATION
It happened that when He went into the house of one of the leaders of the
Pharisees onthe Sabbath - The time and place is not specified, but given the
preceding contextthe place was most likely in Perea. Of course it did not "just
happen" for God had foreordained the steps of His Son's journey to the Cross
before the heaven and earth were created. We must never forget that while
wickedmen are plotting pernicious plans, God is totally in control allowing
the drama of redemption to play out as foreordained.
The table is spread
and the trap is set!
He went into the house of one...ofthe Pharisees - Jesus had ventured into the
"lion's den" before in Luke 7:36-50;11:37-54. He knew full well what was in
store for Him for His goalwas to expose the Pharisees’hypocrisy and pride.

J C Ryle - Let us mark in this passage, how our Lord Jesus Christ accepted
the hospitality of those who were not His disciples....Ifwe want to know how
our Lord carried Himself at a Pharisee’s table, we have only to read
attentively the first twenty-four verses of this chapter. We shall find Him the
same there that He was elsewhere, alwaysaboutHis Father’s business. We
shall see Him first defending the true observance ofthe Sabbath-day,—then
expounding to those who were bidden togetherwith Him the nature of true
humility,—then urging on His host the characteroftrue hospitality,—and
finally delivering that most apposite and striking parable, the parable of the
greatsupper. And all this is done in the most wise, and calm, and dignified
manner. The words are all words in season. The speechis “always with grace,
seasonedwith salt. (Coloss.4:6.)The perfection of our Lord’s conduct
appears on this, as on all other occasions.He always saidthe right thing, at
the right time, and in the right way. He never forgot, for a moment, who He
was and where He was. The example of Christ in this passage deserves the
close attentionof all Christians, and speciallyof ministers of the Gospel. It
throws strong light on some most difficult points,—ourintercourse with
unconverted people,—the extent to which we should carry it,—the manner in
which we should behave when we are with them. Our Lord has left us a
pattern for our conduct in this chapter. It will be our wisdom to endeavor to
walk in His steps. We ought not to withdraw entirely from all intercourse with
unconverted people. It would be cowardice and indolence to do so, even if it
were possible. It would shut us out from many opportunities of doing good.
But we ought to go into their societymoderately, watchfully, and prayerfully,
and with a firm resolutionto carry our Masterand our Master’s business
with us. The house from which Christ is deliberately excluded is not the house
at which Christians ought to receive hospitalities, and keepup intimacy.—The
extent to which we should carry our intercourse with the unconverted, is a
point which eachbelievermust settle for himself. Some can go much further
than others in this direction, with advantage to their company, and without
injury to themselves. “Everyman hath his proper gift.” (1 Cor. 7:7.) There
are two questions which we should often put to ourselves, in reference to this
subject. “Do I, in company, spend all my time in light and worldly
conversation? Ordo I endeavor to follow, howeverfeebly, the example of
Christ?” The societyin which we cannotanswerthese questions satisfactorily,

is societyfrom which we had better withdraw.—So long as we go into
company as Christ went to the Pharisee’s house, we shalltake no harm.
Ironside - Jesus acceptedthe invitation, and as usual He was soonthe real
Host rather than just a specialguest. WhereverHe went men had to recognize
His superiority, although He was ever meek and lowly in heart. There was
something so compelling about His words and His bearing that even His
enemies had to acknowledge the authority with which He taught.
(Commentary)
One of the leaders of the Pharisees -This literally is a "ruler of the Pharisees"
and is most likely a synagogue official. He may have been a member of the
Sanhedrin (but we can only speculate), the highest Jewishcouncil in the first
century that had 71 members presided over by the high priest with members
from both of the main Jewishparties among its membership.
Pharisees (5330)(pharisaios)is transliterated from the Hebrew parash(06567
- to separate)from Aramaic word peras (06537)("Peres"in Da 5:28-note),
signifying to separate, owing to a different manner of life from that of the
generalpublic. Pharisees were a strict, legalistic, religious party that arose
after Jewishexiles returned from Babylon. They calledfor a separationfrom
paganismand a return to a strict adherence to the Old Testamentlaw. The
Pharisees hadno interestin politics (unlike the Sadducees andthe Zealots),
nor were they mystics (unlike the Essenes). In contrastto the Sadducees,who
were mostly wealthy priests or Levites, the Pharisees were laymen, and
generallycame from the middle class. Theywere very popular and highly
respectedamong the masses during the time of Christ. Jewishhistorian
Josephus records that there were about 6,000 atthe time of Herod the Great.
Becauseoftheir popularity, the Sadducees usually had to submit to their
decisions or else evoke the wrath of the people (Josephus Antiquities 18.1.4).

MacArthur adds that "While pretending to be devout, the Pharisees were
actually hypocrites who failed to live up to even their own strict teaching
regarding the law (Matt. 23:3). They abandoned the true religion of the heart
for an external one, which they hoped would elicit the admiration and respect
of the people, as well as God’s approval (Matt. 6:1-5; 9:14; 12:2; 23:5-7, 23;
Luke 11:38-39). The Pharisees’superficial, externalrighteousness, however,
fell far short of what heavendemands (Matt. 5:20; 23:28;Luke 11:39-40). So
despite their zeal for the law, they amounted only to “blind guides of the
blind” (Matt. 15:14), who made their proselytes doubly worthy of the hell to
which they themselves were headed. Closelyassociatedwith the Pharisees
were their scribes (Lk 5:21, 30; 6:7; 11:53; 15:2; Matt. 5:20; 12:38;15:1; 23:2,
13, 15, 23, 25, 27, 29; Mark 7:1, 5; John 8:3; Mark 2:16 refers to “the scribes
of the Pharisees,” andActs 23:9 to “the scribes of the Pharisaic party”), the
professionalscholars who specializedin the interpretation and application of
the Old Testamentlaw. The scribes provided the theologicalfoundationfor
the Pharisees’teaching. (MacArthur New TestamentCommentary – Luke 11-
17)
To eat bread (cf Lk 7:36-note, Lk 11:37-note)- Eating bread was an idiomatic
way of saying they would eata meal (but not just bread!). Since no work was
to be done on the Sabbath, the meals were prepared the day before. This meal
was most likely the Sabbath meal which took place after the morning meeting
in the synagogue,much like we today go out for lunch after church on Sunday
morning.
Barclayadds that "All food had to be cookedonthe Friday; and, if it was
necessaryto keepit hot, it must be kept hot in such a way that it was not
cookedanymore! So it is laid down that food to be kept warm for the Sabbath
must not be put into 'oil dregs, manure, salt, chalk or sand, whether moist or
dry, nor into straw, grape-skins, flock orvegetables,if these are damp, though
it may be if they are dry. It may be, however, put into clothes, amid fruits,
pigeons'feathers and flax tow.'(Ed: See writing from Sabbot4:1-2 below) It
was the observance ofregulations like this that the Pharisees andscribes
regardedas religion. No wonderthey could not understand Jesus!(Daily
Study Bible)

CleonRogers - Normally there were two main meals in the day, but on the
Sabbath there were three. The Sabbath meal, which was prepared the day
before and kept warm (M, Shab. 3:1-6; 4:1-2), was around noon (Jos., Life,
279), after the synagogue service,and it was common to invite guests to the
Sabbath meal
On the Sabbath - Luke records five of Jesus'sevenmiracles on the Sabbath
and Luke depicts His Sabbath healings more than any other Gospel. While
Jesus knew He was inciting confrontation, what better day than the Sabbath
to show divine compassion. Sadlyevery Sabbath miracle only made the
religious leaders more convinced that they must do whateverit took to get rid
of this Man! Spiritual blindness is an amazing thing -- miracles right in front
of their eyes and yet the eyes of their heart were absolutely blind! We all know
some folks like that and it makes us very sad, because many are our close
relatives or friends. Of course the religious legalists consideredJesus to be a
law-breakerbecauseHe was doing miraculous work on the Sabbath. Legalism
blinds one to grace. It even has that effectin believers, so make sure you cast
off any and all legalistic tends that otherwise will blunt grace and grieve the
Spirit.
This was the last Sabbath in the Lord's ministry (of which we have record)
before His arrival at His destination of Jerusalem.
Sabbath (4521)See study of sabbaton. Jesus was fully aware ofhow the
religious leaders had added many burdensome rules not commanded by God
and in a sense made an idol out of the Sabbath. This was Jesus'lasthealing on
the Sabbath, a day which had been so sadly perverted by the religious leaders.
What should have been a day of rest was a day of burden, which is exactly
what legalismwill do to one's soul. Legalismtraps, while grace sets free.

They were watching Him closely- The presenttense indicates they watched
him continually "like a hawk" would watchits prey. He was continually being
"monitored" by their evil eyes!The middle voice (reflexive) emphasizes that
they themselves did this insidiously, with evil intent to catchHim! The use of
paratereo in Mark 3:2 explains the motive of these legalistic leaders "They
were watching Him to see if He would heal him on the Sabbath, so that they
might accuse Him." Of course Jesus was fully aware oftheir wicked
intentions. Remember that Jesus had "stedfastlysethis face to go to
Jerusalem, (Lk 9:51KJV) and Sabbath confrontations were part of His
journey.
John Trapp - They watchedas intently as a dog doth for a bone!
Wiersbe - Jesus was fully aware of what was in men’s hearts (John 2:24–25),
so He was never caughtoff guard. In fact, insteadof hosts or guests judging
Jesus, it was Jesus who passedjudgment on them when they leastexpectedit.
Indeed, in this respect, He was a dangerous personto sit with at a meal or to
follow on the road! (BEC)
Guzik makes a point of application, writing that we, like Jesus, are "letters"
that others are watching ("reading")to see how we will live for "In 2
Corinthians 3:2-3, Paul explained that we are letters from Jesus, thatall men
read; and that the letters are not written with ink, but with the Holy Spirit,
and not on paper, but on our ownhearts. We are the only kind of Bible many
will ever read." (Commentary)
Watching closely(3906)(paratereofrom para = beside + tereo = to watch)
describes a direct perceptionof something through close observation. They
were on the lookout, here with the sense oflurking and spying, watching for
an opportunity with malicious intent. The enemies of Paul watchedthe gates

at Damascus so they could murder him (ultimately what these men wanted to
do to Jesus.)There is a somewhatironic use in Gal 4:10 describe legalists as
those who "observe days and months and seasons andyears." Barclayadds
that "the word used for watching is the word used for 'interested and sinister
espionage'. Jesus was under scrutiny." As we would say today "They were out
to get Him!"
Crawford on watching closely - Under the closestscrutiny by clevermen who
sought opportunities to accuse Him, the Lord Jesus proved to be blameless.
Luke records three times when they so watchedHim (Lk 6:7; 14:1; 20:20).
Mark also tells us that they watchedHim to see if He would heal the man with
the withered hand on the Sabbath day (Mk 3:2), and uses the same word for
"watch" (paratēreō)as an active verb.
J C Ryle applies the fact that the enemies of Jesus were watching closely - The
circumstance here recorded, is only a type of what our Lord was constantly
subjectedto, all through His earthly ministry. The eyes of His enemies were
continually observing Him. They watchedfor His halting, and waitedeagerly
for some word or deed on which they could lay hold and build an accusation.
Yet they found none. Our blessedLord was ever holy, harmless, undefiled,
and separate from evil (cf Heb 7:26-note). Perfectindeed must that life have
been, in which the bitterest enemy could find no flaw, or blemish, or spot, or
wrinkle, or any such thing! He that desires to serve Christ must make up his
mind to be “watched” andobserved, no less than His Master. He must never
forgetthat the eyes of the world are upon him, and that the wickedare
looking narrowly at all his ways. Speciallyought he to remember this when he
goes into the societyof the unconverted. If he makes a slip there, in word or
deed, and acts inconsistently, he may rest assuredit will not be forgotten. Let
us endeavor to live daily as in the sight of a holy God (cf Pr 15:3, John the
Baptist in Lk 1:15-note). So living, it will matter little how much we are
“watched” by an ill-natured and malicious world. Let us exercise ourselves to
have a consciencevoid of offence towardGod and man, and to do nothing
which can give occasionto the Lord’s enemies to blaspheme. The thing is
possible. By the grace ofGod it can be done. The haters of Daniel were obliged
to confess, “we shallnot find any occasionagainstthis Daniel, except we find
it againsthim concerning the law of his God.” (Dan. 6:5-note; See also See

notes on Daniela Man of Integrity; IntegritySee also Study on Integrity) (Ed:
I might add one point to Ryle's application of "watching" - The true test of
our integrity comes whenno one [humanly speaking]is watching us.)
Jesus'opponents were aware of the previous Sabbath healings
Luke 6:6-11 On another Sabbath He entered the synagogue andwas
teaching;and there was a man there whose right hand was withered. 7 The
scribes and the Pharisees were watching Him closelyto see if He healedon the
Sabbath, so that they might find reasonto accuse Him. 8 But He knew what
they were thinking, and He said to the man with the withered hand, “Getup
and come forward!” And he gotup and came forward. 9 And Jesus saidto
them, “I ask you, is it lawful to do goodor to do harm on the Sabbath, to save
a life or to destroy it?” 10 After looking around at them all, He said to him,
“Stretchout your hand!” And he did so; and his hand was restored. 11 But
they themselves were filled with rage, and discussedtogetherwhat they might
do to Jesus.
Luke 13:10-17 And He was teaching in one of the synagogues onthe Sabbath.
11 And there was a woman who for eighteenyears had had a sickness caused
by a spirit; and she was bent double, and could not straightenup at all. 12
When Jesus saw her, He called her over and said to her, “Woman, you are
freed from your sickness.” 13 And He laid His hands on her; and immediately
she was made erectagainand beganglorifying God. 14 But the synagogue
official, indignant because Jesushad healedon the Sabbath, begansaying to
the crowdin response, “There are six days in which work should be done; so
come during them and gethealed, and not on the Sabbath day.” 15 But the
Lord answeredhim and said, “You hypocrites, does not eachof you on the
Sabbath untie his ox or his donkey from the stall and lead him awayto water
him? 16 “And this woman, a daughter of Abraham as she is, whom Satanhas
bound for eighteenlong years, should she not have been releasedfrom this

bond on the Sabbath day?” 17 As He said this, all His opponents were being
humiliated; and the entire crowdwas rejoicing over all the glorious things
being done by Him.
JESUS'SEVEN SABBATH MIRACLES
1 Jesus sends a demon out of a man Lk 4:31-37+
Mk 1:21-28
2 Jesus heals Peter's mother-in-law Lk 4:38-39+
Mt 8:14-15
Mk 1:29-31
3 Jesus heals a lame man by the pool of Bethesda Jn 5:1-18
4 Jesus heals a man with a "withered" hand
(cf Lk 6:1-5+ - allowing disciples to pluck grain on Sabbath)Lk 6:6-11+
Mt 12:9-14
Mk 3:1-6
5 Jesus restores a crippled woman Lk 13:10-17+
6 Jesus heals a man with dropsy (edema) Lk 14:1-6+
7 Jesus heals a man born blind Jn 9:1-16
Sabbot 4:1-2

A With what do they cover[up food to keepit hot], and with what
do they not coverup [food to keepit hot]?
B They do not coverwith (1) peat, (2) compost, (3) salt, (4) lime, or
(5) sand,
C whether wetor dry.
D or with (6) straw, (7) grape skins, (8) flocking [rags], or (9)
grass,
E when wet.
F But they do cover up [food to keepit hot] with them when they
are dry.
G They coverup [food to keepit hot] with (1) cloth, (2) produce,
(3) the wings of a dove, (4) carpenters’sawdust,
H and (5) soft hackledflax.
I R. Judah prohibits in the case ofsoft [hackledflax] and permits
in the case ofcoarse [hackledflax].
4:2 A They coverup [food to keepit hot] with fresh hides, and they
carry [handle] them;
B with woolshearings, but they do not carry them.
C What does one do?
D He [simply] takes off the cover, and [the woolshearings]fall off
[on their own].
E R. Eleazarb. Azariah says, “A basket[holding a pot and
shearings]does he turn onto its side, and he removes (the food],
F “lesthe should take it and not be able to put it back.”
G And sages say, “He takes [out the food] and puts it back.”

H [If] he did not coverup [the food] while it is still day, he should
not coverit up after dark.
I [But if] he coveredit up and it became uncovered, it is permitted
to coverit up again.
J One fills a jug [on the Sabbath with cold food or liquid] and puts
it under a pillow or a blanket [to keepit cool].
Luke 14:2 And there in front of Him was a man suffering from dropsy.
Luke 14 Resources- Multiple Sermons and Commentaries
A MAN WITH DROPSYJUST HAPPENS
TO DROP IN FOR DINNER!
And there - ("And behold" = ESV, KJV) The NAS unfortunately fails to
translate the interjection idou ("behold" a command in aoristimperative to
"Look!")and as noted elsewhereis clearly used to prompt attention or arouse
interest. And this is certainly an attention grabbing moment for this is the
only mention of a man with dropsy in the entire Bible!
The trap was sprung!
And there in front of Him was a man suffering from dropsy - Now remember
that we are in the Phariseeshouse, and these religious bigots made a practice
of associating only with the elite and not the outcasts, so it is shocking that this

man was (presumably) invited along with Jesus. The Pharisees were well
aware that Jesus had performed healings on the Sabbath. And so here we are
on the Sabbath with a man who is obviously in greatneed of healing. It sounds
like a classic "legalistic setup" to me! Now think about their twisted logic --
Jesus performance of a miracle would points to His divinity, but these hard-
hearted, spiritually blind legalists could not see that sign, and to the contrary
they interpreted it as a sign that He was NOT FROM GOD!Surely a man
from God would not break the Sabbath regulations.
Adam Clarke - Probably the insidious Pharisee had brought this dropsical
man to the place, not doubting that our Lord’s eye would affecthis heart, and
that he would instantly cure him; and then he could most plausibly accusehim
for a breachof the Sabbath. If this were the case, and it is likely, how deep
must have been the perfidy and malice of the Pharisee!
Dropsy (cf "hydrops")(5303)(hudropikós from hudor = water + ops = face,
countenance)is an adjective which describes anedematous condition in which
there is an excessive accumulationof serous fluid in the body. Dropsy per se is
not a disease but the signof an underlying disease (oftenrenal dysfunction
such as in membranous nephropathy - the glomeruli [nice diagram] have a
striking pattern on histologyas I morph back to my days as a pathologist).
Notice that this word derives from “water” and “face” because the disease
often made a person look bloated in their face. Luke the physician has the
only NT use of this medical term.
Luke does not quantify the degree of dropsy or edema, but given that it was
clearly visible it was likely generalizededema (because a robe would have
coveredhis legs which are usually the most swollenin dropsy. Of course
markedly swollenfeet bulging out of sandals would arouse attention!).
(Picture of 4/4 pitting edema of the legs)Some of the most severe cases of
generalizededema which I have seenas a physician were related to kidney
diseases, specific those resulting in nephrotic syndrome. In any case it was
obvious for the man was there in front of Him.

MacArthur discussing the man's dropsy explains that "The rabbis viewed
such a condition, however, as God’s judgment for immorality, or as
uncleanness due to the body’s failure to eliminate (Lev. 15:1-3-note). Thus in
their view this man was both immoral and ritually unclean. Since no Pharisee
would have tolerated such a defiled person at the meal, they obviously
planned to use him for a sinister purpose. And they were fairly sure that
basedon His pattern Jesus, seeing his dropsy, would do what they wanted."
(Ibid)
Bock has a note relatedto what the Jews thought about dropsy - Lev. Rab.
15.2 on 13:2 comments on Job28:25: “Manis evenly balanced, half of him is
water, and the other half is blood. When he is deserving, the waterdoes not
exceedthe blood, nor does the blood exceedthe water;but when he sins, it
sometimes happens that the watergains over the blood and then he becomes a
sufferer from dropsy; at other times the blood gains overthe waterand he
then becomes leprous”;Van Der Loos 1965:505. (Ed: As a medical doctor I
can attestthey were wrong on both accounts!)Some rabbis argued that
dropsy resulted from sexualoffenses (b. Šab. 33a)or from intentionally failing
to have bowel movements (b. Ber. 25a)(for Greek examples, see Van Der Loos
1965:506). The tradition is late, but it does show that dropsy was often viewed
as God’s judgment, either for sin or uncleanness.
Not every writer assumes the worse about the Pharisees forLenski questions
whether they brought the man in to test Jesus, explaining that "Trenchdraws
attention to the fact that feasts suchas the present one were semi-public.
Outsiders could enter, stand, or sit, and watchwhat was going on. So the
woman mentioned in Lk 7:37-note came in after the dinner was in progress,
and this man apparently before it started, for Jesus presentlyfound him right
before him." (The Interpretation of St. Luke's Gospel).

I suppose we will have to wait until heaven to find out for certain whether the
man with dropsy was merely a drop-in or a "decoy,", but the factthat the
context says they were watching Jesus closelysuggeststhere was some element
of pre-planning (and pre-meditation). Recallalso that after the last meal in
Luke 11, "When (Jesus)left there (cf Lk 11:37-38-note), the scribes and the
Pharisees beganto be very hostile and to question Him closelyon many
subjects, plotting (enedreuo = lying in wait - presenttense = continually)
againstHim to catchHim in something He might say." (Lk 11:53-54-note)
Recallin John the response Jesus receivedwhenhe healed the blind man
John 9:16 Therefore some of the Pharisees were saying, “This man is not
from God, (WHY? LOOK AT THEIR TWISTED LOGIC!) because He does
not keepthe Sabbath.” But others were saying, “How can a man who is a
sinner perform such signs?” (NOT EVERYONE WAS TOTALLY TWISTED
IN THEIR THINKING!) And there was a division among them.
And in Matthew and Luke they went to far as to attribute Jesus'powerto
Satan!
Matthew 12:24 But when the Phariseesheardthis, they said, “This man casts
out demons only by Beelzebulthe ruler of the demons.”
Luke 11:15-note (THE SPEAKER IS NOT CLEARLY IDENTIFIED IN
THIS PASSAGE)"He casts out demons by Beelzebul, the ruler of the
demons."
On other occasionsJesus shockedthe religious leaders by eating with riff-raff
(disreputable or undesirable people)

Matthew 9:10-11 Then it happened that as Jesus was reclining at the table in
the house, behold, many tax collectorsand sinners came and were dining with
Jesus and His disciples. 11 When the Phariseessaw this, they said to His
disciples, “Why is your Teachereating with the tax collectors andsinners?”
Luke 15:1-2 Now all the tax collectors andthe sinners were coming near Him
to listen to Him. 2 Both the Pharisees andthe scribes beganto grumble,
saying, “This man receives sinners and eats with them.”
Luke 14:3 And Jesus answeredand spoke to the lawyers and Pharisees,
saying, "Is it lawful to healon the Sabbath, or not?"
KJV Luke 14:3 And Jesus answering spake unto the lawyers and Pharisees,
saying, Is it lawful to heal on the sabbath day?
Jesus answeredandspoke to the lawyers and Pharisees Lk 14:11:44,45
Is it lawful to heal on the Sabbath, or not Lk 6:9; 13:14-16;Mt 12:10;Mark
3:4; Jn 7:23
THE TABLES WERE
TURNED!

And Jesus answeredand spoke - Luke begins with an arresting word
answeredwhich normally describes a reply to a question, but in this case
there is no evidence that a question was asked. The verb apokrinomai means
to answeror reply and in this context seems to be used Hebraistically or as a
formula to control the flow of discourse (cfMt 11.25). In classic Greekthis
verb also conveyedthe sense ofto separate or condemn which is certainly
interesting given the contextof Jesus'confrontationwith the religious leaders.
Crawford adds "No one had spokento the Lord, so He was answering an
actionor hidden thought."
Gilbrant on apokrinomai - The translators of the Septuagint used apokrinō to
render the Hebrew phrase “to answerand say” or “to begin to speak.” This
phrase was a very somber introduction to an important exhortation. It is
thought by some to introduce words that were divinely inspired. (Compare
this principle of Biblical interpretation from the SecondCentury A.D.:
“Wheneverit says [in the OT]: He answeredand said this, lo, the one
concernedspoke in the Holy Ghost” [Büchsel, “krinō,” Kittel, 3:945].)Thus,
while it is appropriate to translate apokrinō as “answer,”it must be
remembered that the answerwas not always to a question. The word could be
used of any situation, whether word or deed, which demanded a response.
Moreover, the word was not taken from everyday language. Its use reminded
readers of the solemnand formal tone the verb evokedin their Old Testament
Bible. The Gospelwriters seemto have relied heavily on the meaning found in
the Septuagint. (Complete Biblical Library Greek-EnglishDictionary)
Lawyers (3544)(nomikos fromnomos - law) means related to the law and
generallyrefers to a legalscholar, anexpert in the Mosaiaclaw, in
interpreting Jewishlaw (Ed: but certainly not "experts" in practicing it as
God intended!). Vincent adds that these men were "not legalpractioners, but
interpreters and doctors of the Mosaic law."
Is it lawful to heal on the Sabbath, or not - Of course it was lawful to heal on
the Sabbath! The best defense is a good offense so Jesus preempts the question
that was surely about to come from the religious legalists as it did in Luke 6:2

when "some of the Pharisees said, “Why do you do what is not lawful on the
Sabbath?” What the Lord describedas healing they defined as working.
Steven Cole - This put them in a bind. If they said that healing is permitted,
they concededHis point and they raisedproblems about their traditions,
which had added to the Law of Moses. If they said that healing is not
permitted, they came across as uncaring. Besides, ifthey had invited this man
to be there, it castquestions on their motives for them to say, “No, healing is
not permitted.” So they kept silent.
John Phillips - These people, particularly the Pharisees andthe lawyers,
insisted on the most rigid observance ofthe Sabbath laws, but they practiced
the opposite. Theyturned the closing hours of the Sabbath into an occasion
for feasting. (Exploring the Gospelof Luke: An Expository Commentary)
Lawful (permitted)(1832)(exestifrom from ek = out + eimí = to be) is an
impersonal verb, signifying "it is permitted, it is allowed, it is lawful" (or
interrogatively, "is it lawful?"). Exesti occurs mostfrequently in the synoptic
Gospels and the Acts, especiallyin Jesus'conflicts with the PhariseesoverHis
actions (and those of His disciples)on the Sabbath (Matt. 12:2; 12:4; 12:10;
12:12, etc).
Exesti- 32x in 30v -
Matt. 12:2; Matt. 12:4; Matt. 12:10; Matt. 12:12;Matt. 14:4; Matt. 19:3;
Matt. 20:15;Matt. 22:17;Matt. 27:6; Mk. 2:24; Mk. 2:26; Mk. 3:4; Mk. 6:18;
Mk. 10:2; Mk. 12:14;Lk. 6:2; Lk. 6:4; Lk. 6:9; Lk. 14:3; Lk. 20:22;Jn. 5:10;
Jn. 18:31; Acts 2:29; Acts 8:37; Acts 16:21;Acts 21:37;Acts 22:25; 1 Co. 6:12;
1 Co. 10:23; 2 Co. 12:4

Sabbath (4521)See study of sabbaton.
Heal (cure)(2323)(therapeuo fromtherapon = an attendant, servant) has an
interesting evolution in meaning - therapeuō ordinarily originally meant “I
serve” in secularGreek. Graduallythe term suggested“to care” for someone,
and finally it acquired the definition of “to heal” or “to render medical
treatment. It has two main senses inthe NT, one speaking of rendering service
(Acts 17:25) and the more common use as in the present passagedescribing
medical aspects suchas to take care of the sick, to heal, to cure (Mt. 4:24;
12:10;Mk 1:34; Lk 6:7; 10:9), to recoverhealth, to restore. Therapeúō means
to heal miraculously in Mt. 4:23, 24;10:1, 8; Acts 4:14.
Luke's uses of therapeuo -
Lk. 4:23; Lk. 4:40; Lk. 5:15; Lk. 6:7; Lk. 6:18; Lk. 7:21; Lk. 8:2; Lk. 8:43;
Lk. 9:1; Lk. 9:6; Lk. 10:9; Lk. 13:14; Lk. 14:3; Acts 4:14; Acts 5:16; Acts 8:7;
Acts 17:25;Acts 28:9
NET Note asks "Willthe Pharisees andexperts in religious law defend
tradition and speak out againstdoing goodon the Sabbath? Has anything at
all been learned since Luke 13:10–17?Has repentance come (Lk 13:6–9)?"As
we shall see, they were resolute in their resistance to repentance!Legalismwill
do that to a person. They think that since they are "keeping allthe laws" they
have no need for repentance. When distilled down, is this not arrogantself-
righteousness under the guise of feigned obedience?
MacArthur - Ministering to a sick person was by no means a violation of any
Old Testamentregulationconcerning the Sabbath (cf. Matt. 12:7). Rabbinic
attachments, however, prohibited anyone from treating a sick person on the

Sabbath unless that person was in imminent danger of death if left untreated
until the next day. To do so, the rabbis taught, would constitute work and
hence be a violation of the required Sabbath rest. Even matters of life and
death were subject to their cruel, inflexible, and ridiculous man-made
restrictions. (Ibid)
Guzik - Jesus never broke the commandments of God, but He often offended
man’s traditions that surrounded and extended the commandments of God.
The commandments of God are enough, and we should never make the
traditions of man – even goodtraditions – equal to the commandments of God
(Mark 7:8-9). (Ibid)
J C Ryle - Let us notice in this passage,how our Lord asserts the lawfulness of
doing deeds of mercy on the Sabbath day. The qualification which our Lord
here puts on the requirements of the fourth commandment is evidently based
on Scripture, reason, and common sense. The Sabbathwas made for man, for
his benefit, not for his harm – for his advantage, not for his disadvantage.
Interpreting God's law about the Sabbath was never meant to impinge on
charity, kindness and the real needs of human nature. Our Lord shows that
deeds of necessityand mercy do not break the observance ofthe Sabbath.
(Expository Thoughts on the Gospels)
Recallthat in anotherSabbath healing confrontation Jesus had deflectedthe
Pharisees'legalistic rebuke with a gracious reply - And Jesus saidto them, “I
ask you, is it lawful to do goodor to do harm on the Sabbath, to save a life or
to destroy it?” (Lk 6:9). Do you recalltheir answer? They had none, just as in
this vignette. Grace and law do not mix. Recalltheir reactionin Lk 6:11 "they
themselves were filled with rage, and discussedtogetherwhat they might do to
Jesus."
Life Application Bible Commentary – SORTING RIGHT FROM WRONG

Sometimes matters of right and wrong can getvery complicated, as they had
here concerning "lawful" Sabbath activities. Jesus cut through all the
complications with a simple appeal to love.
Is your faith in gridlock (like the Pharisees)becauseofoverlapping and
conflicting regulations that hardly seemto make sense?With eachaction ask
yourself—whatdoes love require?
Love will always respectGod's rules (the Ten Commandments, for example)
and will always serve people's bestinterests. Often a simple appealto love will
cut through the fog and clarify a plan of action.
Luke 14:4 But they kept silent. And He took hold of him and healed him, and
sent him away.
KJV Luke 14:4 And they held their peace. And he took him, and healedhim,
and let him go;
Mt 21:25-27;22:46
But they kept silent - Bettertranslated "“theybecame silent." They weren't
even whispering in one another's ears or grumbling, which was something
new for them! Why did they not speak? As we commonly say, they were "on
the horns of a dilemma (or this interesting note)", "betweena rock and a hard
place!" If they answeredthat it was lawful to healon the Sabbath, that would
give approval to Jesus performing the healing. They would then be seenas
agreeing with Jesus and could not hold Him in "contempt" of their Sabbath

regulations. On the other hand ("horn") if they responded that it was
unlawful, then Jesus might not perform the healing and they would lose the
opportunity of trapping Him in breaking their Sabbaticallaws.
Pate - If they said no, they would reveal themselves for what they really were
– inhumane religious leaders. If they said yes, they would be breaking their
own laws governing the Sabbath.
Wiersbe - When Jesus askedwhattheir convictions were about the Sabbath
Day, He used on them the weaponthey had forgedfor Him. To begin with,
they couldn’t heal anybody on any day, and everybody knew it. But even
more, if the Pharisees saidthat nobody should be healed on the Sabbath, the
people would considerthem heartless;if they gave permissionfor healing,
their associateswouldconsiderthem lawless. The dilemma was now theirs,
not the Lord’s, and they needed a way to escape.As they did on more than
one occasion, the scribes and Pharisees evaded the issue by saying nothing.
(BEC)
Kept silent (2270)(hesuchazofrom hesuchos = quiet, still) means to be still or
to be silent. In classicalGreek hēsuchazōgenerallydenotes a termination of
speech, conflict, or work;an imposition of silence;or a self-induced calming.
It is interesting that Luke uses this same verb in Lk 23:56 after Jesus'was
crucified "and on the Sabbath they rested according to the commandment."
Luke used it of himself when Paul would not be persuaded from going to
Jerusalem(where danger lurked) writing "we fell silent remarking 'The will
of the Lord be done.'"
And He took hold of him - The man did not take hold of Jesus, but Jesus in
His greatcompassiontook hold of the miserably ill man. And doubtless, the
man was "unclean" but this did not prevent the compassionof our Lord to

touch him! Has Jesus takenhold of you dear reader? You are more ill than
you realize if you are unsaved, and you will be forever miserable if you never
come to saving faith! Let Jesus take hold of you today! Believe in the Lord
Jesus Christ and you will be "healed" (saved)!
Jesus couldhave said, “Come back after sundown. It's only a few hours from
now. And then I’ll heal you." This would have avoid a confrontation with the
Pharisees.But He didn’t do that. He cured the man and confronted His
critics.
Steven Cole - Jesus was very confrontational! If you hang out with Him for
very long, you’ll find that He confronts your sin. He does it out of love for a
goodreason:Jesus confronts our sin so that we will inherit rewards for all
eternity.
Took hold (seized) (1949)(epilambano from epi = upon + lambano = take hold
of) means to lay hold of, geta goodgrip on, take possessionof. The meaning of
epilambano is determined by the context as to whether the actionof laying
hold of someone is favorable or unfavorable. In this case it is clearly
favorable. In a clearly unfavorable metaphorical use in Luke 20:20 Jesus
enemies "watchedHim, and sent spies who pretended to be righteous, in
order that they might catch (epilambano) Him in some statement, but Luke
records they "were unable to catchHim in a saying" againstCaesar(Lk
20:26, context - Lk 20:20-25).
Crawford - This is the only time in the NT that epilambanō ("he took him") is
used in a case ofhealing. Luke uses this word about the child that the Lord
"took ... and sethim by him" (Lk 9:47), but its other uses give its usual
meaning "that they might take hold of his words" (Lk 20:20, 26), and "they
laid hold upon one Simon" (Lk 23:26). In Acts 16:19, "they caughtPaul and

Silas" suggests a sudden, violent arrest. Perhaps the meaning in connection
with this victim of dropsy relates to his far advance in the disease andutter
helplessnessto come to the Lord of his own volition, so the Lord "took him"
and then "healedhim".
Luke's uses of epilambano -
Lk. 9:47; Lk. 14:4; Lk. 20:20;Lk. 20:26; Lk. 23:26; Acts 9:27; Acts 16:19;
Acts 17:19;Acts 18:17; Acts 21:30;Acts 21:33; Acts 23:19
And healedhim, and sent him away - This was surely a dramatic scene for a
man who was markedly swollenfrom edema in a divine instant returned to a
completely normal appearance.
Wiersbe - Instead of providing evidence againstJesus, the man provided
evidence againstthe Pharisees, forhe was “exhibit A” of the healing power of
the Lord Jesus Christ.
Healed (cured) (2390)(iaomai)means to cure, to heal, to restore. Iaomaiis
used literally of deliverance from physical diseasesand afflictions and so to
make whole, restore to bodily health and refers primarily to physical healing
in the NT (although clearlythere is overlap with spiritual healing because
some of the instances involved demonic oppression - Lk 9:42-note). Less
commonly iaomaireferred to spiritual healing or healing (saving)from
"moral illnesses"and the consequencesofsin. When used in this sense iaomai
has much the same meaning as sozo, to save, make whole, restore to spiritual
health. Here are the uses of iaomai used with a spiritual meaning = Mt 13:15,
John 12:40, Acts 28:27 - preceding quotes from Isa 6:10, 1Pe 2:24 = quote
from Isa 53:5. Mostof the NT uses in the Gospels referto physical healing by
Jesus, howeverin the OT (Lxx) iaomairefers primarily to spiritual healing by
the Messiah(Isa 53:5, Isa 61:1, et al).

Crawford on sent away - The man was healedand dismissed, indicating that
he was present for healing and as a test for the Lord, not as a guestat the
supper.
Sent away(630)(apoluo from apó = markerof dissociation, implying a rupture
from a former association, separation+ luo = loose)is used often of sending a
person or a group away from someone (Mt14:15, 22, 23, 32, etc). Apoluo
frequently has the sense ofto let loose from or to release,to let go free or setat
liberty. Apoluo is used in all four Gospels describing the release ofBarabbas
instead of Jesus (Jn 18:39, Mt 27:15, 17, 21, etc, cf Acts 16:35) Apoluo was
used in secularGreco-Romanwritings of discharge from the military, of
release from jail or of setting a debtor free. In the legalcontext it means to
dismiss (as innocent), to grant acquittal, setfree, release,pardon. The text
does not tell us whether this man's external healing was also accompaniedby
an internal saving of his soul. We'll have to waitto heaven, but if so, canyou
imagine this man's testimony! Every believer will in fact have a glorious
testimony to having experienceda miracle from the "touch" of Jesus and His
fully atoning, substitutionary work!
J C Ryle - Let us mark, lastly, in this passage, how our Lord asserts the
lawfulness of doing works of mercy on the Sabbath day....The qualification
which our Lord here puts on the requirements of the fourth commandment, is
evidently founded on Scripture, reason, and common sense. The Sabbath was
made for man,—for his benefit, not for his injury,—for his advantage, notfor
his hurt. The interpretation of God’s law respecting the Sabbath was never
intended to be strained so far as to interfere with charity, kindness, and the
real wants of human nature. All such interpretations only defeattheir own
end. They require that which fallen man cannotperform, and thus bring the
whole commandment into disrepute. Our Lord saw this clearly, and labored
throughout His ministry to restore this precious part of God’s law to its just
position. The principle which our Lord lays down about Sabbath observance
needs carefully fencing with cautions. The right to do works of necessityand

mercy is fearfully abusedin these latter days. Thousands of Christians appear
to have thrown down the hedge, and burst the bounds entirely with respectto
this holy day. They seemto forget that though our Lord repeatedly explains
the requirements of the fourth commandment, He never struck it out of the
law of God or said that it was not binding on Christians at all. Canany one
say that Sunday travelling, except on very rare emergencies,is a work of
mercy?—Will any one tell us that Sunday trading, Sunday dinner parties,
Sunday excursion-trains on railways, Sunday deliveries of letters and
newspapers, are works ofmercy?—Have servants, and shopmen, and engine-
drivers, and coachmen, and clerks, and porters, no souls? Do they not need
rest for their bodies and time for their souls, like other men?—These are
serious questions, and ought to make many people think. Whatever others do,
let us resolve to “keepthe Sabbath holy.” Godhas a controversywith the
churches about Sabbath desecration. Itis a sin of which the cry goes up to
heaven, and will be reckonedfor one day. Let us washour hands of this sin,
and have nothing to do with it. If others are determined to rob God, and take
possessionofthe Lord’s day for their own selfish ends, let us not be partakers
in their sins.
Luke 14:5 And He said to them, "Which one of you will have a son or an ox
fall into a well, and will not immediately pull him out on a Sabbath day?"
KJV Luke 14:5 And answeredthem, saying, Which of you shall have an ass or
an ox fallen into a pit, and will not straightwaypull him out on the Sabbath
day?
Which one of you will have a son or an ox fall into a well, and will not
immediately pull him out on a Sabbath dayLk 13:15;Exodus 23:4,5;Da 4:24;
Mt 12:11,12

GOTCHA!...NOT!
At that instant of healing, the religious leaders were thinking "We've got Him
now!" But not so fast, for Jesus has a probing question. And this before they
could even open their mouth in condemnatory accusations!
Cornerstone BiblicalCommentary – In the interest of keeping the Sabbath
holy, as a day of rest, the Jews had expanded on the OT Sabbath laws,
developing 39 rules concerning activities forbidden on the Sabbath (cf. Exod
34:21).
Which one of you will have a son or an ox fall into a well, and will not
immediately pull him out on a Sabbath day?" - Jesus followedup the miracle
by asking them a rhetorical question to underscore His point. Of course the
logic of His question is indisputable. All of them would pull out their son or
their ox, even on the Sabbath. They would not want to lose a son they loved or
an ox they knew would incur financial costto replace. Theywere "pious
pragmatists!" As we saw in Lk 13:15-note eachof them "on the Sabbath
(would) untie his ox or his donkeyfrom the stall and lead him away to water
him."
Technicalnote - Some manuscripts read “donkey” instead of “son,” but the
evidence is clearly in favor of “son” as the original reading.
What happened when one fell into a well of water? If not rescued, ofcourse
they would drown, for even if they could swim, they would eventually become

too weak to continue paddling. And so here was a man with dropsy who was
in a sense "drowning" in his own fluids (edema), and they were unwilling to
see him "rescued!"
Notice that the phrase which one of you directly draws Jesus'listeners into the
illustration.
Mattoon- The Lord againuses the illustration of an ox or ass to make His
point. In chapter 13, he spoke about feeding these animals on the Sabbath,
which everyone did. Here He talks about pulling them out of a pit on the
Sabbath which was done by the owners of those animals. The Lord is trying to
expose their inconsistentteachings aboutworking on the Sabbath day.
Crawford on will not immediately pull him out on a Sabbath day - This was
not so much out of pity for the hapless beast, but out of an unwillingness to
suffer material loss. The point, pressedhome, must have pierced deeply. They
had a care for their material gain, but no real feeling for a man suffering from
dropsy. Stephen's words not long after cut the Jewishleaders to the heart, but
their response was to gnash on him with their teeth and condemn him to be
stoned. (What the Bible teaches – Luke)
Motivated by either love of son or love of money one would effectthis rescue
operationwithout any loss of time, lestthere be loss of life.
Immediately (2112)(eutheos from euthus = straight, immediate) is an adverb
which generally means at once, right away, forthwith, straightaway, without
an interval of time or a point of time subsequent to a previous point of time.
Note that the actual interval of time depends on the nature of the events and
the manner in which the sequence is interpreted by the writer. Eutheos is a
"time sensitive" word (see expressionof time) and should prompt questions
like "To what time does it refer?" or "Whathappens in this time?"

Barclay- Open wells were quite common in Palestine, andwere not
infrequently the cause ofaccidents (cf. Ex 21:33 = "If a man opens a pit, or
digs a pit and does not coverit over, and an ox or a donkey falls into it [and
dies]." ). It was perfectly allowable to rescue an animal which had fallen in.
Jesus, with searing contempt, demands how, if it is right to help an animal on
the Sabbath, it can be wrong to help a human being.
Morganis kind in his comment - Thus, while our Lord rebuked the wrong
attitude and temper of these men, He did so by appealing to the best within
them and calling them to be true to it. His purpose is not that of shaming men,
but that of saving them.
Jesus is showing that they caredabout their animals more than about this
man suffering in a swollen, miserable state! Jesus was exposing their lack of
love and their religious hypocrisy.
Notice that while there was a Mosaic command not to work, there is not a
stipulation not to show mercy and perform an emergencyrescue if needed. In
other words, a day of rest never precluded that it could also be a day of
rescue!
Deuteronomy 5:12-14 ‘Observe the sabbath day to keepit holy, as the LORD
your God commanded you. 13‘Sixdays you shall labor and do all your work,
14but the seventh day is a sabbath of the LORD your God; in it you shall not
do any work, you or your son or your daughter or your male servantor your
female servantor your ox or your donkey or any of your cattle or your
sojournerwho stays with you, so that your male servant and your female
servant may restas well as you.

Life Application Bible Commentary – Jesus did no more than touch the man.
The Pharisees'rules and regulations did not ban touching another person. In
fact, Jesus explained that when it served their purposes, they did work on the
Sabbath. They could go pull a son or a cow out of a pit if need be, but they
were ready to condemn Jesus for touching a man and healing him from a
disease. Jesus pointedthis out to them, but they had no answer.
Pull up (385)(anaspaōfrom aná = up or back again+ spáō = to draw) means
to draw up or back again. In classicalliterature, as in the New Testament, it
means “to haul or pull up.
Only other NT use
Acts 11:10 “This happened three times, and everything was drawn back up
into the sky.
Crawford adds that "The word for "he will pull him out" () is only used
elsewhere in the NT in Peter's description of the vision of the greatsheetlet
down from heaven; "all were drawn up againinto heaven" (Acts 11:10). The
Lord Jesus chose a word that graphically pictures the labour involved, even
on a Sabbath day, in drawing up out of a pit a large animal. In the case ofthe
woman "whom Satanhad bound" (13:16), the Lord used an illustration
suitable to her need: an ox or ass bound in a stall that was unable to go to
drink. In this case He used the figure of an animal in a pit because He was
speaking ofa man who was literally drowning in his own fluids. He was a
master in the use of apt illustrations. (What the Bible teaches – Luke)

Anaspao - 3x in the Septuagint - Da 6:16; Amos 9:2 ("My hand will [drag
them] take them"); Hab. 1:15 ("bring all [anaspao - brought up] of them up
with a hook")
Luke 14:6 And they could make no reply to this.
KJV Luke 14:6 And they could not answerhim again to these things.
Lk 13:17;20:26,40;21:15;Acts 6:10
THEIR NEFARIOUS PLAN BACKFIRED:
SILENCED A SECOND TIME
And they could make no reply to this - They could not answerback. The
Greek particle for "no" is ouk signifying that their mouths were
ABSOLUTELY shut, by the words and deeds of the Lord Jesus. A dilemma
also silences a group of Jewishleaders in Lk 20:3-7. They will have the same
response atthe GreatWhite Throne judgment (Rev 20:11-15-note)whenthey
are condemned for their words and deeds and sent to the place where there
will be weeping and gnashing of teeth (Matt. 8:12; Matt. 13:42; Matt. 13:50;
Matt. 22:13;Matt. 24:51;Matt. 25:30; Lk. 13:28-note).
Notice in Lk 14:4 they did not want to answerand here in Lk 14:6 they were
not able to answer. Theydid not want to admit they were wrong. Has God
ever allowedyou to be encloseda "corner" and yet because ofyour pride, you

steadfastlyrefused to admit that you were wrong? If so, you were a lot like the
Pharisees!
Wiersbe - Jesus exposedthe false piety of the Phariseesand the scribes. They
claimed to be defending God’s Sabbath laws, whenin reality they were
denying God by the way they abusedpeople and accusedthe Saviour. There is
a big difference betweenprotecting God’s truth and promoting man’s
traditions. (BEC)
Cornerstone BiblicalCommentary emphasizes that they simply could not
dispute or refute the logic of our Lord – The reasoning pattern used by Jesus
is a familiar one for Him, arguing from the lesserto the greater(cf. Mt 7:11
with Lk 11:13-note); Mt 6:30 with Luke 12:28-note)):if a Jew could quite
properly rescue a cow falling into a pit on the Sabbath, how much more
should Jesus be able to heal a sick person on the Sabbath (cf. Lk 13:15-note))!
The heartless applicationby Jesus’opponents of legalistic regulations in the
face of human need was thereby exposed.
If they had said that saving a son or an ox on the Sabbath was not permissible,
they would have condemned themselves. If they had saidthat it was, they
could not have criticized Jesus.
Reply (470)(antapokrinomaifrom anti = against, back + apokrinomai = to
answer)means to answerback or reply against. In the only other NT use it
means to contradictor dispute - "On the contrary, who are you, O man, who
answers back to God? The thing molded will not sayto the molder, “Why did
you make me like this,” will it?" (Ro 9:20)
Jesus had this effectof humiliating His enemies and shutting their mouths...

Jesus was silencing his enemies

Jesus was silencing his enemies

Recommended

Recommended

More Related Content

What's hot

What's hot (20)

Similar to Jesus was silencing his enemies

Similar to Jesus was silencing his enemies (20)

More from GLENN PEASE

More from GLENN PEASE (20)

Recently uploaded

Recently uploaded (20)

Jesus was silencing his enemies