Commentrie on Luke 19:27

  • Thread starter Thread starter Stephentlig
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
S

Stephentlig

Guest
Hello Forum, Peace be with you.

I am looking for a commentry on Lk:19:27 but finding it impossible to get one.

many people are saying that if Jesus said ‘‘Love your enemies’’ then why in this scriptural passage does he says to bring his enemies before him and execute them in his presence?

I know that truth cannot contradict truth and that these words must be taken in the spiritual sense. My thoughts on it was that he was talking about judgment day and that the enemies Jesus is talking about are the evil spirits.

Your thoughts are more than welcome and also if you could help me find a good commentry on it that would be wonderful.

God bless you
Stephen <3
 
Hi Stephen,

This is a parable. Jesus neither approved or disapproves of the doings in the parable. It tells us that God wants us to make the most of the gifts he has given us. As for the last comment, it seems to be directed at the Jews who rejected Jesus and who were punished for this (destruction of Jerusalem etc.).

Verbum
 
‘‘But as for **my **enemies’’

‘‘Love your enemies’’

I feel that both our enemies and the enemies of Christ are quite different of course.

there are only two people I can think of that are the enemies of Christ.

The evil spirits and those who put themselves in a position of being in complete opposition towards Jesus and therefore automatically giving themselves the title of an enemy and they therefore have condemned themselves.

as you say, the Jews refused to accept Jesus as King and thus we conclude that they put themselves in that position and thus condemed themselves. the only thing left to understand is why Jesus would send his servants to execute. I feel that if he is sending servants to execute them, those servants are his angels and not humans, as this peice of scripture must be taken in the spiritual sense.

‘‘and he said to those standing by’’,

those who were standing by are not the human servants to whom he gives the money to, but someone else, and I feel that someone else are angels, thus its the angels who have been ordered to execute and not humans.

Catholic apologist John Salza has made the claim also for defence of the ‘‘Just war’’ that Jesus teaches us is Luke 19:27 that not all killing is intrinsically evil, but I feel thats just his own eisigesis on the text and doing what protestents do when they force a peice of text to make it mean what they want it to mean, because it fits with their idea of how it should be.

what do you think? thank you for you thoughts by the way.

I am baffled at the moment.
 
It’s a parable, a story Jesus uses to convey a message. It’s not about Jesus’ enemies.
 
It’s a parable, a story Jesus uses to convey a message. It’s not about Jesus’ enemies.
Hi Eucharisted, the Message that Jesus is trying to convey with the words ‘‘But as for my enemies who did not want me for their king, bring them here and execute them in my presence.’’ is what we are looking to find out.
 
Hi Stephen,

Using this passage for defending a “just war” is stretching the rubber band to the breaking point. This is a parable. Following this logic, we would be justified in cheating on our employer, since the dishonest manager of the parable did so.

As for the punishment part, it seems to refer simply to the retribution that was applied later to the Jewish people as a whole. It is not to be taken literally as sending humans or angels to execute people.

Verbum
 
Hi Stephen,

Using this passage for defending a “just war” is stretching the rubber band to the breaking point. This is a parable. Following this logic, we would be justified in cheating on our employer, since the dishonest manager of the parable did so.

As for the punishment part, it seems to refer simply to the retribution that was applied later to the Jewish people as a whole. It is not to be taken literally as sending humans or angels to execute people.

Verbum
Verbum, maybe there is a little confusion here, but John salza is only referring to verse 27, which turns the attention away from from the dishonest manager and to those who didnt want him as king.

he seems to feel that in verse 27 that Jesus is teaching us that all killing is not intrinsically an evil act.
As for the punishment part, it seems to refer simply to the retribution that was applied later to the Jewish people as a whole. It is not to be taken literally as sending humans or angels to execute people.
but in this parable, isnt Jesus referring himself to be the king? and if so those who didnt want him as king he sends is servants to bring them before him and execute them in his presence?:confused: thus by me referring to the angels being those servants he sends I am not ( at least I feell this way for now ) taken the literal sense and I am taking the spiritual sense of it.
 
Steven,

There doesn’t seem to be a commentary on this line in Scripture, but it is closely related to 1 Corinthians 15:25 and the commentary for that verse is:
1 Cor 15:25
“For he must reign until he has put all his enemies under his feet.” RSV-CE
  1. “He must reign”: every year, on the last Sunday of ordinary time, the Church celebrates the solemnity of Christ the King, to acknowledge his absolute sovereignty over all created things. On instituting this feast, Pius XI pointed out that “He must reign in our minds, which should assent with perfect submission and firm belief to revealed truths and to the teachings of Christ. He must reign in our wills, which should obey the laws and precepts of the God. He must reign in our hearts, which should spurn natural desires and love God above all things, and cleave to him alone. He must reign in our bodies and in our members, which should serve as instruments for the interior sanctification of our souls, or, to use the words of the Apostle Paul, as instruments of righteousness unto God (Rom 6:13) (Quas primas).
Psalm 2:9 uses similar language:
Psalm 2:9
“…You shall break them with a rod of iron and dash them in pieces like a potter’s vessel.” RSV-CE
Also Isaiah 63:1-6:
Isaiah 63:1-6
Victory at the End
Who is this that comes from Edom, in crimsoned garments from Bozrah, he that is glorious in his apparel, marching in the greatness of his strength? “It is I, announcing vindication, mighty to save.” Why is thy apparel red, and thy garment like his that treads in the wine press? “I have trodden the wine press alone, and from the people no one was with me; I trod them in my anger and trampled them in my wrath; their lifeblood is sprinkled upon my garments, and I have stained all my raiment. For the day of vengeance was in my heart, and my year of redemption has come. I looked, but there was no one to help; I was appalled, but there was no one to uphold; so my own arm brought me victory, and my wrath upheld me. I trod down the peoples in my anger, I made them drunk in my wrath, and I poured out their lifeblood on the earth.” RSV-CE
All citations from the Navarre Bibles

All these verses seem to refer to Christ’s battle with the beast and His eventual victory.
 
The parable begins in Luke 19:12. Here, Jesus says, “…A certain nobleman went into a far country, to receive for himself a kingdom, and to return.” This certain "nobleman” would be Jesus. He has gone into a far country (Heaven) to receive His Kingdom (from the Father). He has entrusted His servants (Christians) with “talents” to be used for His glory. When Jesus returns, there will be an accounting (final judgment), and His enemies will be executed before Him (cast into the Lake of Fire) by His angels. Certainly we would agree that Lucifer doesn’t want Jesus to reign over him. The same is true of all who reject the free gift of Salvation.
 
The parable begins in Luke 19:12. Here, Jesus says, “…A certain nobleman went into a far country, to receive for himself a kingdom, and to return.” This certain "nobleman” would be Jesus. He has gone into a far country (Heaven) to receive His Kingdom (from the Father). He has entrusted His servants (Christians) with “talents” to be used for His glory. When Jesus returns, there will be an accounting (final judgment), and His enemies will be executed before Him (cast into the Lake of Fire) by His angels. Certainly we would agree that Lucifer doesn’t want Jesus to reign over him. The same is true of all who reject the free gift of Salvation.
Luke CH 19;
11 4 While they were listening to him speak, he proceeded to tell a parable because he was near Jerusalem and they thought that the kingdom of God would appear there immediately. 12 So he said, “A nobleman went off to a distant country to obtain the kingship for himself and then to return. 13 He called ten of his servants and gave them ten gold coins 5 and told them, ‘Engage in trade with these until I return.’ 14 His fellow citizens, however, despised him and sent a delegation after him to announce, ‘We do not want this man to be our king.’ 15 But when he returned after obtaining the kingship, he had the servants called, to whom he had given the money, to learn what they had gained by trading. 16 The first came forward and said, ‘Sir, your gold coin has earned ten additional ones.’ 17 He replied, ‘Well done, good servant! You have been faithful in this very small matter; take charge of ten cities.’ 18 Then the second came and reported, ‘Your gold coin, sir, has earned five more.’ 19 And to this servant too he said, ‘You, take charge of five cities.’ 20 Then the other servant came and said, ‘Sir, here is your gold coin; I kept it stored away in a handkerchief, 21 for I was afraid of you, because you are a demanding person; you take up what you did not lay down and you harvest what you did not plant.’ 22 He said to him, ‘With your own words I shall condemn you, you wicked servant. You knew I was a demanding person, taking up what I did not lay down and harvesting what I did not plant; 23 why did you not put my money in a bank? Then on my return I would have collected it with interest.’ 24 And to those standing by he said, ‘Take the gold coin from him and give it to the servant who has ten.’ 25 But they said to him, ‘Sir, he has ten gold coins.’ 26 ‘I tell you, to everyone who has, more will be given, but from the one who has not, even what he has will be taken away. 27 Now as for those enemies of mine who did not want me as their king, bring them here and slay them before me.’”

Historically recognized and accepted interpretation;
Luke CH 19;
[11-27] In this parable Luke has combined two originally distinct parables: (1) a parable about the conduct of faithful and productive servants (⇒ Luke 19:13, ⇒ 15b-26) and (2) a parable about a rejected king (⇒ Luke 19:12, ⇒ 14-15a, ⇒ 27). The story about the conduct of servants occurs in another form in ⇒ Matthew 25:14-20. The story about the rejected king may have originated with a contemporary historical event. After the death of Herod the Great, his son Archelaus traveled to Rome to receive the title of king. A delegation of Jews appeared in Rome before Caesar Augustus to oppose the request of Archelaus. Although not given the title of king, Archelaus was made ruler over Judea and Samaria. As the story is used by Luke, however, it furnishes a correction to the expectation of the imminent end of the age and of the establishment of the kingdom in Jerusalem (⇒ Luke 19:11). Jesus is not on his way to Jerusalem to receive the kingly power; for that, he must go away and only after returning from the distant country (a reference to the parousia) will reward and judgment take place.
 
but the man of noble birth is Jesus, he doesnt need to go off somewhere to be a king because he is already a King, he was born a king.

so if he was born a king, why must he twice receive his kingship?
 
but the man of noble birth is Jesus, he doesnt need to go off somewhere to be a king because he is already a King, he was born a king.

so if he was born a king, why must he twice receive his kingship?
Luke CH 19;
11 4 While they were listening to him speak, he proceeded to tell a parable because he was near Jerusalem and they thought that the kingdom of God would appear there immediately. 12 So he said, “A nobleman went off to a distant country to obtain the kingship for himself and then to return. 13 He called ten of his servants and gave them ten gold coins 5 and told them, ‘Engage in trade with these until I return.’ 14 His fellow citizens, however, despised him and sent a delegation after him to announce, ‘We do not want this man to be our king.’ 15 But when he returned after obtaining the kingship, he had the servants called, to whom he had given the money, to learn what they had gained by trading. 16 The first came forward and said, ‘Sir, your gold coin has earned ten additional ones.’ 17 He replied, ‘Well done, good servant! You have been faithful in this very small matter; take charge of ten cities.’ 18 Then the second came and reported, ‘Your gold coin, sir, has earned five more.’ 19 And to this servant too he said, ‘You, take charge of five cities.’ 20 Then the other servant came and said, ‘Sir, here is your gold coin; I kept it stored away in a handkerchief, 21 for I was afraid of you, because you are a demanding person; you take up what you did not lay down and you harvest what you did not plant.’ 22 He said to him, ‘With your own words I shall condemn you, you wicked servant. You knew I was a demanding person, taking up what I did not lay down and harvesting what I did not plant; 23 why did you not put my money in a bank? Then on my return I would have collected it with interest.’ 24 And to those standing by he said, ‘Take the gold coin from him and give it to the servant who has ten.’ 25 But they said to him, ‘Sir, he has ten gold coins.’ 26 ‘I tell you, to everyone who has, more will be given, but from the one who has not, even what he has will be taken away. 27 Now as for those enemies of mine who did not want me as their king, bring them here and slay them before me.’”

Historically accepted interpretation
[11-27] In this parable Luke has combined two originally distinct parables: (1) a parable about the conduct of faithful and productive servants (⇒ Luke 19:13, ⇒ 15b-26) and (2) a parable about a rejected king (⇒ Luke 19:12, ⇒ 14-15a, ⇒ 27). The story about the conduct of servants occurs in another form in ⇒ Matthew 25:14-20. The story about the rejected king may have originated with a contemporary historical event. After the death of Herod the Great, his son Archelaus traveled to Rome to receive the title of king. A delegation of Jews appeared in Rome before Caesar Augustus to oppose the request of Archelaus. Although not given the title of king, Archelaus was made ruler over Judea and Samaria. As the story is used by Luke, however, it furnishes a correction to the expectation of the imminent end of the age and of the establishment of the kingdom in Jerusalem (⇒ Luke 19:11). Jesus is not on his way to Jerusalem to receive the kingly power; for that, he must go away and only after returning from the distant country (a reference to the parousia) will reward and judgment take place.
 
Luke CH 19;
11 4 While they were listening to him speak, he proceeded to tell a parable because he was near Jerusalem and they thought that the kingdom of God would appear there immediately. 12 So he said, “A nobleman went off to a distant country to obtain the kingship for himself and then to return. 13 He called ten of his servants and gave them ten gold coins 5 and told them, ‘Engage in trade with these until I return.’ 14 His fellow citizens, however, despised him and sent a delegation after him to announce, ‘We do not want this man to be our king.’ 15 But when he returned after obtaining the kingship, he had the servants called, to whom he had given the money, to learn what they had gained by trading. 16 The first came forward and said, ‘Sir, your gold coin has earned ten additional ones.’ 17 He replied, ‘Well done, good servant! You have been faithful in this very small matter; take charge of ten cities.’ 18 Then the second came and reported, ‘Your gold coin, sir, has earned five more.’ 19 And to this servant too he said, ‘You, take charge of five cities.’ 20 Then the other servant came and said, ‘Sir, here is your gold coin; I kept it stored away in a handkerchief, 21 for I was afraid of you, because you are a demanding person; you take up what you did not lay down and you harvest what you did not plant.’ 22 He said to him, ‘With your own words I shall condemn you, you wicked servant. You knew I was a demanding person, taking up what I did not lay down and harvesting what I did not plant; 23 why did you not put my money in a bank? Then on my return I would have collected it with interest.’ 24 And to those standing by he said, ‘Take the gold coin from him and give it to the servant who has ten.’ 25 But they said to him, ‘Sir, he has ten gold coins.’ 26 ‘I tell you, to everyone who has, more will be given, but from the one who has not, even what he has will be taken away. 27 Now as for those enemies of mine who did not want me as their king, bring them here and slay them before me.’”

Historically accepted interpretation
[11-27] In this parable Luke has combined two originally distinct parables: (1) a parable about the conduct of faithful and productive servants (⇒ Luke 19:13, ⇒ 15b-26) and (2) a parable about a rejected king (⇒ Luke 19:12, ⇒ 14-15a, ⇒ 27). The story about the conduct of servants occurs in another form in ⇒ Matthew 25:14-20. The story about the rejected king may have originated with a contemporary historical event. After the death of Herod the Great, his son Archelaus traveled to Rome to receive the title of king. A delegation of Jews appeared in Rome before Caesar Augustus to oppose the request of Archelaus. Although not given the title of king, Archelaus was made ruler over Judea and Samaria. As the story is used by Luke, however, it furnishes a correction to the expectation of the imminent end of the age and of the establishment of the kingdom in Jerusalem (⇒ Luke 19:11). Jesus is not on his way to Jerusalem to receive the kingly power; for that, he must go away and only after returning from the distant country (a reference to the parousia) will reward and judgment take place.
Yes I have received this much.

but what baffles me is that,

‘‘man of noble birth’’

this man is Jesus who is already a king

goes off to distant country ( heaven ) to receive his kingship.

but if he is already a king why would he need to off and receive a kingship he already has?
 
40.png
Stephentlig:
but the man of noble birth is Jesus, he doesnt need to go off somewhere to be a king because he is already a King, he was born a king.

so if he was born a king, why must he twice receive his kingship?
He receives His Kingship once (from the Father). Jesus (the King) is currently away in a far country (Heaven). He WILL return (to Earth) When He returns, there will be a final judgment, then His Kingdom will be established here on Earth. There will no longer be any sin, any curse, or any enemies (they will all have been cast into the Lake of Fire). This is the time for His servants (Christians) to be increasing their “talents”. There seems to be some confusion about Jesus “receiving” the Kingdom. Remember, Jesus receives the Kingdom from the Father.
 
Yes I have received this much.

but what baffles me is that,

‘‘man of noble birth’’

this man is Jesus who is already a king

goes off to distant country ( heaven ) to receive his kingship.

but if he is already a king why would he need to off and receive a kingship he already has?
That’s the point. The Biblical interpretation does not refer it to Jesus but to an event or events taking place at the time regarding the son of Herod the Great, Archelaus.
 
He receives His Kingship once (from the Father). Jesus (the King) is currently away in a far country (Heaven). He WILL return (to Earth) When He returns, there will be a final judgment, then His Kingdom will be established here on Earth. There will no longer be any sin, any curse, or any enemies (they will all have been cast into the Lake of Fire). This is the time for His servants (Christians) to be increasing their “talents”. There seems to be some confusion about Jesus “receiving” the Kingdom. Remember, Jesus receives the Kingdom from the Father.
4 [11-27] In this parable Luke has combined two originally distinct parables: (1) a parable about the conduct of faithful and productive servants (Luke 19:13, 15b-26) and (2) a parable about a rejected king (Luke 19:12, 14-15a, 27). The story about the conduct of servants occurs in another form in Matthew 25:14-20. The story about the rejected king may have originated with a contemporary historical event. After the death of Herod the Great, his son Archelaus traveled to Rome to receive the title of king. A delegation of Jews appeared in Rome before Caesar Augustus to oppose the request of Archelaus. Although not given the title of king, Archelaus was made ruler over Judea and Samaria. As the story is used by Luke, however, it furnishes a correction to the expectation of the imminent end of the age and of the establishment of the kingdom in Jerusalem (Luke 19:11). Jesus is not on his way to Jerusalem to receive the kingly power; for that, he must go away and only after returning from the distant country (a reference to the parousia) will reward and judgment take place.
 
This is from a commentary by John Calvin. I found it in the Faith Database. I know he is Protestant, but his comments make some sense.

Luke 19:27. But those my enemies In this second part, he appears to glance principally at the Jews, but includes all who in the absence of their master, determine to revolt. Now Christ’s intention was, not only to terrify such persons by threatening an awful punishment, but also to keep his own people in faithful subjection; for it was no small temptation to see the kingdom of God scattered by the treachery and rebellion of many. In order then that we may preserve our composure in the midst of troubles, Christ informs us that he will return, and that at his coming he will punish wicked rebellion. [697]
 
The Lord has been a great help to me, and I pray for those of you whom he has used to educate me on this matter.

God bless
Stephen.
 
“But bring here those enemies of mine, who did not want me to reign over them, and slay them before me” (Luke 19:27, NKJV). Christians do no slay Jesus’ enemies because only Jesus and His angels have the power to slay Jesus’ enemies, the Devil and its following angels.

As for Christians, Jesus clearly commands us to love our neighbors, and even to love our enemies.

Jesus’ enemies in Luke 19:27 are also written in Revelations 12:9 and 20:10.

“So the great dragon was cast out, that serpent of old, called the Devil and Satan, who deceives the whole world; he was cast to the earth, and his angels were cast out with him” (Rev 12:9, NKJV).

“The devil, who deceived them, was cast into the lake of fire and brimstone where the beast and the false prophet are” (Rev 20:10, NKJV).
 
The parable is about how Christ will JUDGE us when he comes back again for the second coming- and or perhaps how he will judge us come the day of judgement, after we die.

Christ would not have killed any man while he was here on earth, but after he ascended to heaven then he sits at the right hand of the Father and will judge the living and the dead. So the point it that Christ will condemn those to hell who did evil with no repentance and did not make use of the gifts that God gave them to use for good and his glory in this world. However, Christ did allow for some violence in extreme circumstances such as in Luke when he told the apostles to buy swords for self defense against the workings of those against him during the devil’s hour, and also when he threw the money changers out of the temple was an example of violence to some degree.

So the parable is about the day of Judgement essentially. Remember Christ can and WILL judge us, and cast some if not many into hell, because he is our Lord. We as mere human beings however are not to judge souls ever.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top