Exegetical and Hermeneutical Commentary of Luke 11:45
Then answered one of the lawyers, and said unto him, Master, thus saying thou reproachest us also.
45. one of the lawyers ] See on Luk 7:30, Luk 10:25. This Scribe thought that Jesus could not possibly mean to reflect on the honoured class who copied and expounded the Law.
reproachest ] Literally, “ insultest.” There was a difference between
Pharisees and lawyers; the position of the latter involved more culture and distinction. They were the ‘divines,’ the ‘theologians’ of that day. Hence the man’s reproach. ‘Lawyer’ and ‘Scribe’ seem to be more or less convertible terms (Luk 11:52-53; Mat 23:13). Jesus here charges them with tyrannical insincerity (Luk 11:46), persecuting rancour (Luk 11:47-51), and theological arrogance and exclusiveness (Luk 11:52).
Fuente: The Cambridge Bible for Schools and Colleges
Lawyers – Men learned in the law; but it is not known in what way the lawyers differed from the scribes, or whether they were Pharisees or Sadducees.
Thus saying, thou … – He felt that the remarks of Jesus about loving the chief seats, etc., applied to them as well as to the Pharisees. His conscience told him that if they were to blame, he was also, and he therefore applied the discourse to himself.
Reproachest – Accusest. Dost calumniate or blame us, for we do the same things. Sinners often consider faithfulness as reproach – they know not how to separate them. Jesus did not reproach or abuse them. He dealt faithfully with them; reproved them; told them the unvarnished truth. Such faithfulness is rare; but when it is used, we must expect that people will flinch, perhaps be enraged. Though their consciences tell them they are guilty, still they will consider it as abuse.
Fuente: Albert Barnes’ Notes on the Bible
Luk 11:45
Thou reproachest us also
Disputes reviewed
I.
WE MUST ALL EXPECT TO BE CALLED TO AN ACCOUNT BY THE LORD JESUS.
1. We are all now in the way–travellers–following Christ in consort.
2. There will be a review of what passes in the way.
3. The accounts in the great day must be given up to our Lord Jesus. God made the world, by His Son; and by Him, as the fittest person, He will judge the world. Now this is a good reason–
(1) Why we should judge ourselves, and prove our own work, and see that our matters be right and good against that day. Let us examine ourselves concerning our spiritual state, that we may make sure work for our own souls.
(2) Why we should not judge one another, or be severe in our censures one of another. We thereby invade Christs throne.
II. WE MUST IN A PARTICULAR MANNER BE CALLED TO AN ACCOUNT ABOUT OUR DISCOURSES AMONG OURSELVES.
1. If we talk anything which is good among ourselves, and which is to the use of edifying; which manifests grace in the speaker, and ministers grace to the hearers; Christ takes notice of that, and we shall hear of it again to our comfort, in that day when those who thus confess Christ before men shall be owned by Him before His father and the holy angels.
2. If we talk anything that is ill among ourselves; if any corrupt communication proceeds out of our mouths, dictated by the corruption of our minds, and which has a tendency to corrupt the minds and manners of others; Christ observes that too, is displeased with it–and we shall hear of it again, either by the checks of our own consciences, in order to our repentance, or in the day of the revelation of the righteous judgment of God, when, according to Enoch s prophecy, the Lord shall come to reckon with sinners, not only for all their ungodly deeds, but for all their hard speeches, spoken against Him.
III. As our other discourses among ourselves by the way, so ESPECIALLY OUR DISPUTES, WILL ALL BE CALLED OVER AGAIN, and we shall be called to an account about them.
1. Disputes commonly arise from difference of opinion, either in religion and Divine things (about which oftentimes the disputes and contests are most violent); or in philosophy, politics, or other parts of learning; or in the conduct of human life. These disputes (though not necessarily sinful in themselves, for men cannot be expected to agree on all points) are often such as we may justly be ashamed of, when we come to look back upon them.
(1) Upon account of the matter of them. This may have been–
(a) Something above us, with which we had no concern; or
(b) something below us, not worth disputing about.
(2) Upon account of our management of them. Our Master will be displeased with us if it be found that we have been hot and fierce in our disputes, and have mingled our passions and peevish resentments with them; if a point of honour has governed us more than a point of conscience, and we have contended more for victory and reputation, than for truth and duty; if we have contended about things of small moment for, or against, them, and have neglected the weightier matters of the law and gospel; if we have spent more of our zeal on matters in difference than they deserve; and have lost the vitals of religion in our heat about circumstantials, and have disputed away our seriousness and devotion–What then shall we do when God riseth up? and when He visiteth, what shall we answer Him?
2. Many disputes arise from separate and interfering interests in this world. Neighbours and relations quarrel about their rights and properties, their estates and trades, their honours and powers and pleasures; Meum and Tuum–my rent and thy bond, are the great subjects of dispute, and engage people in endless strifes. These disputes, as they are most common, so they are most scandalous, among relations, and those who are under particular obligations to love one another. And whatever keeps brethren from dwelling together in unity, is very provoking to Christ, who has made brotherly love the livery of His family: and it is very hardly removed.
3. Some disputes, and hot ones too, arise merely from passion and clashing humours, where really there is nothing of judgment or interest in the case.
(1) As far as we are able to make a judgment, let us see to it that we have truth and right on our side, in all our disputes, and not be confident any further than we see just cause to be so. We must not only never contend for that which we know to be false and wrong, but also never for that which is doubtful, or which we do not know to be true and right.
(2) In matters of doubtful disputation. While we are contending for that which we take to be right, let us at the same time think it possible that we may be in the wrong.
(3) Let us keep the full possession and government of our own spirits, in all our disputes. Let us carefully suppress all inward tumults, whatever provocation may be given us; and let our minds be calm and sedate, whatever argument we are engaged in.
(4) Let us never lose the charity we ought to have for our brethren in our disputes of any kind, nor violate the sacred laws of it.
(5) Let us often think of the account we must shortly give to our great Master of all our disputes with our fellow-servants by the way. Let us consider how our disputes will look in that day, and what our own reflections will be then upon them.
IV. Of all disputes, Christ will be sure to reckon with His disciples for their DISPUTES ABOUT PRECEDENCY AND SUPERIORITY. The prevalency of such a temper as this, as far as it appears, is very threatening. But when the Spirit shall be poured out upon us from on high, there shall be no more such disputes as these; and then the wilderness shall become a fruitful field. Upon the whole matter, therefore, let our strife be, Who shall be best, not Who shall be greatest.
1. Let us never strive who shall be greatest in this world; who shall have the best preferment; who shall be master of the best estate, or make the best figure; but acquiesce in the lot Providence carves out to us, not aiming at great things, or striving for them. Consider what worldly greatness is.
(1) What a despicable thing it is to those who have their eyes upon another world.
(2) What a dangerous thing this worldly greatness is to those who have not their eyes upon another world; how apt it is to keep their hearts at a distance from God, and from the consideration and pursuit of a future blessedness; and to fix them to this world, and make them willing to take up with a portion in it; and, especially, what a strong temptation it is to break through all the sacred fences of the Divine law to compass it.
2. Let all our strife be who shall be best, not disputing who has been best, that is a vain-glorious strife, but humbly contending who shall be so; who shall be most humble, and stoop lowest, for the good of others; and who shall labour most for the common welfare. This is a gracious strife; a strife that will pass well in our account, when all our disputes will be reviewed, (Matthew Henry.)
Fuente: Biblical Illustrator Edited by Joseph S. Exell
Verse 45. Thou reproachest as] He alone who searches the heart could unmask these hypocrites; and he did it so effectually that their own consciences acknowledged the guilt, and re-echoed their own reproach.
Fuente: Adam Clarke’s Commentary and Critical Notes on the Bible
This lawyer was a scribe of the law, Luk 11:44. The work of these men was to interpret the law; the Pharisees strictly observed their decrees and interpretations. The lawyer therefore spake rightly in thinking our Saviours words had some reflection upon men of his order, but he woefully erred both in thinking his own order was unblamable, and also in calling our Lords just reproof a reproaching them. But by this he gives an occasion to him, who used rightly to divide the word of God, and to give every one their portion out of it, to let them know wherein they were faulty, as well as the Pharisees.
Fuente: English Annotations on the Holy Bible by Matthew Poole
Then answered one of the lawyers,…. Or Scribes, as the Syriac and Persic versions read: and so the Ethiopic version calls him, “a Scribe of the city”: the Scribes and lawyers were the same sort of persons who were interpreters of the law, and equally tenacious of the traditions of the elders Christ had referred to, as the Pharisees, and in general were Pharisees; though some of them might be of the sect of the Sadducees. This man observing that Christ, in his last words, joined the Scribes and Pharisees together, and charged them both with hypocrisy, and pronounced a woe upon them, was very uneasy at it:
and saith unto him, master, thus saying, thou reproachest us also; us lawyers, or Scribes also; both by mentioning their names, and accusing the Pharisees of the same things, which they must be conscious to themselves they were equally guilty of; so that if the one were criminal, the others were also. The Ethiopic version reads by way of interrogation, “what thou sayest, does it not injure us?”
Fuente: John Gill’s Exposition of the Entire Bible
Thou reproachest us also ( ). Because the lawyers (scribes) were usually Pharisees. The verb is an old one and common for outrageous treatment, a positive insult (so Luke 18:32; Matt 22:6; Matt 22:14; Matt 22:5; 1Thess 2:2). So Jesus proceeds to give the lawyers three woes as he had done to the Pharisees.
Fuente: Robertson’s Word Pictures in the New Testament
Reproachest [] . The lawyer converts Jesus ‘ reproach (see Mr 16:14, upbraided) into an insult; the word meaning to outrage or affront.
Us also [ ] . Or perhaps better, even us, the learned.
Fuente: Vincent’s Word Studies in the New Testament
JESUS PRONOUNCED WOES UPON CERTAIN LAWYERS V. 45-54
1) “Then answered one of the lawyers,” (apokritheis de tis ton nomikon) “Then replying one of the lawyers,” who taught and expounded the meticulous traditions of the elders, as the scribes expounded the text of Mosaic Law, Mat 22:35.
2) “And said unto him,” (legei auto) “Says to him,” to Jesus, with resentment.
3) “Master, thus saying thou reproachest us also.” (dedaskale tauta legon kai hemas hubeizies) “Teacher, these things you are saying, (the way you are talking) you also insult us.” Proud hearts tend to be insulted or hurt by even the kindest of reproof; and these scorning lawyers of traditions resented even the kindest reproof from the Lord, Pro 15:12; Pro 29:1. They were generally inclined to Phariseeism which had a wider popularity than Sadduceeism, though both, doting on acquiring salvation by their own morality and good works, were candidates and travelers on their way to hell, rejecting Jesus, the only Savior, Act 23:8; Joh 5:20; Mar 7:7-9; Mar 7:13; Act 4:12. They were rushing toward hell’s damnation, filled with hypocrisy, Mat 23:33.
Fuente: Garner-Howes Baptist Commentary
(45) Then answered one of the lawyers.See Note on Mat. 22:35 for the term lawyer. We note here the sense at once of distinctness and of class fellowship. Though something more than a scribe, he feels that he stands or falls with them.
Fuente: Ellicott’s Commentary for English Readers (Old and New Testaments)
45. One of the lawyers There were several present, doubtless to take share in the contest. This lawyer was a professional man, as the inviting Pharisee was a layman.
Reproachest us also For the layman furnishes the practice, while we furnish the theory.
Fuente: Whedon’s Commentary on the Old and New Testaments
‘And one of the lawyers answering says to him, “Teacher, in saying this you insult us also.” ’
The Rabbis who were sitting there were quite happy to listen to His criticism of the Pharisees. They would feel that it was certainly something that they needed, for they saw them as coming far too short of what they should be. But now that it had begun to impinge on their own teaching it became a different matter. Thus one of them took up His comments. He asked Him if He realised that by what He was saying He was on the verge of criticising the Rabbis. By criticising the Traditions of the Elders He was criticising them. But by doing so the ‘lawyer’ only succeeded in bringing Jesus’ fire on them.
Fuente: Commentary Series on the Bible by Peter Pett
The insulted lawyer:
v. 45. Then answered one of the lawyers and said unto Him, Master, thus saying Thou reproachest us also.
v. 46. And He said, Woe unto you also, ye lawyers! For ye lade men with burdens grievous to be borne, and ye yourselves touch not the burdens with one of your fingers.
v. 47. Woe unto you! For ye build the sepulchers of the prophets, and your fathers killed them.
v. 48. Truly ye bear witness that ye allow the deeds of your fathers; for they indeed killed them, and ye build their sepulchers. A certain scribe, one of the teachers of the Law, who was sitting by, felt that the description which Jesus had just given of the Pharisees fitted his own case remarkably well. And so he actually invited the criticism of Jesus upon himself and his fellows by challenging Him at this point. For Christ fearlessly proceeds to say exactly what He thinks of the whole class. These teachers of the Law, in their rules of conduct for the people, weighed them down with heavy, unbearable burdens, with precepts which regulated even the most minute happenings of their daily life, but they themselves did not so much as touch the burdens with one of their fingers, for they knew better and did not care to torture themselves. How well this fits many rules of the Roman Catholic Church! The lawyers also built tombs unto the prophets with the idea of honoring them. But in reality they were continuing the evil work of their fathers. Their forefathers had put more than one of the prophets of old to death, and the present people, in erecting the tombs, agreed with the work of their ancestors. “They killed, you build; worthy sons of such fathers!” The lawyers truly had their fathers’ disposition. Outwardly they honored the prophets, insisted upon observing any precept that might be found in any book of the Old Testament, but the prophecy concerning the Messiah they garbled and denied. This feature characterizes the preaching of the false prophets of all times. They refer to the Bible and praise many sections of it highly, but the great central doctrines of Scripture, especially that concerning the justification of a poor sinner through the merits of Jesus, by faith only, that they omit, and they are full of enmity toward the true messengers of the Gospel, persecuting them whenever they have an opportunity.
Fuente: The Popular Commentary on the Bible by Kretzmann
Luk 11:45 . This was no Sadducee (Paulus, yet see his Exeget. Handb .), because he otherwise would not have applied these reproaches to himself as well as to the Pharisees, and Jesus would not have continued to discourse so entirely in an anti- Pharisaic tone , but he likewise was a Pharisee , as in general were most of the . That he only partially professed the principles of the Pharisees is assumed by de Wette on account of , in which, however, is implied “not merely the common Pharisees (the laity), but even us , the learned, thou art aspersing.” The scribe calls what was a righteous (Mat 11:20 ; Mar 16:14 ) by the name of (Luk 18:32 ; Act 14:5 ; Mat 22:6 ). Although this episode is not mentioned in Matthew, there is no sufficient ground to doubt its historical character. Comp. on Luk 12:41 . Consequently, all that follows down to Luk 11:52 is addressed to the , as they are once again addressed at the close by name, Luk 11:52 . But it is not to be proved that Luke in his representation had in view the legalists of the apostolic time (Weizscker), although the words recorded must needs touch them, just as they were also concerned in the denunciations of Mat 23 .
Fuente: Heinrich August Wilhelm Meyer’s New Testament Commentary
45 Then answered one of the lawyers, and said unto him, Master, thus saying thou reproachest us also.
Ver. 45. Thou reproachest us also ] Who meddled with them, but that their own consciences accused them? It is a rule of Jerome, Ubi generalis de vitiis disputatio est, ibi nullius personae est iniuria; neque carbone notatur quisquam, quasi malus sit, sed omnes admonentur ne sint mali. Where the discourse is of all, there is no personal intimation of any.
Fuente: John Trapp’s Complete Commentary (Old and New Testaments)
45. ] This man appears to have been not a common Pharisee merely, but besides, a , whose duty it especially was to interpret the law. Perhaps he found himself involved in the censure of Luk 11:42 ; or generally among the other Pharisees.
Fuente: Henry Alford’s Greek Testament
Luk 11:45-52 . Castigation of the scribes present ; severe, but justified by having been invited.
Fuente: The Expositors Greek Testament by Robertson
Luk 11:45 . : a professional man, the Pharisees being laymen; the two classes kindred in spirit, hence the lawyer who speaks felt hit.
Fuente: The Expositors Greek Testament by Robertson
NASB (UPDATED) TEXT: Luk 11:45-52
45One of the lawyers said to Him in reply, “Teacher, when You say this, You insult us too.” 46But He said, “Woe to you lawyers as well! For you weigh men down with burdens hard to bear, while you yourselves will not even touch the burdens with one of your fingers. 47Woe to you! For you build the tombs of the prophets, and it was your fathers who killed them. 48So you are witnesses and approve the deeds of your fathers; because it was they who killed them, and you build their tombs. 49For this reason also the wisdom of God said, ‘I will send to them prophets and apostles, and some of them they will kill and some they will persecute, 50 so that the blood of all the prophets, shed since the foundation of the world, may be charged against this generation, 51from the blood of Abel to the blood of Zechariah, who was killed between the altar and the house of God; yes, I tell you, it shall be charged against this generation.’ 52Woe to you lawyers! For you have taken away the key of knowledge; you yourselves did not enter, and you hindered those who were entering.”
Luk 11:45 “One of the lawyers” This refers to a scribe (see Special Topic at Luk 5:21) whose major task was to interpret the oral (Talmud) and written (OT) law. They took the place of the local Levites as instructors and interpreters of the Law and became the religious experts for people to consult about daily matters (binding and loosing). Most scribes in Jesus’ day were also Pharisees.
“you insult us too” The Greek term hubriz means “violent mistreatment” (cf. Mat 22:6; Luk 18:32; Act 14:5; 1Th 2:2). It is common in the Septuagint (“to insult,” cf 2 Sam. 19:44; 2Ma 14:42 and “to be haughty,” Jer 31:29). These Jewish religious leaders felt the sting of Jesus’ comments (cf. Matthew 23).
Luk 11:46 “For you weigh men down with burdens hard to bear” There is a word play (cognate accusative) in this verse. The verb and noun (twice) of “burden” are used. This refers to rabbinical nit-picking interpretations of the Torah developed in the Oral Traditions (later codified in the Talmud). These religious rules and procedures were so complicated and contradictory that normal working people could not do them (cf. Mat 23:4; Act 15:10).
NASB”while you yourselves will not even touch the burdens with one of your fingers”
NKJV”you yourselves do not touch the burden with one of your fingers”
NRSV”you yourselves do not lift a finger to ease them”
TEV”you yourselves will not stretch out a finger to help them carry those loads”
NJB”burdens that you yourselves do not touch with your fingertips”
They did meticulously perform their rabbinical interpretations, yet would not make any exceptions for others or even take time to help others.
The word “touch” is found only here in the NT (not in the Septuagint or the Egyptian Papyri). M. R. Vincent, Word Studies, vol. 1, p. 187, says it is a medical term used of lightly touching a sore. If this was the general connotation, then these religious leaders would not even sympathize with the plight of the common person (“people of the land”) as they tried to keep the meticulous rules of the Pharisees.
Luk 11:47 “you build the tombs of the prophets” The parallel in Mat 23:29-33 is striking! In the OT God’s people would kill God’s prophets (i.e., reject their message) and then build large tombs for them to honor their memory. The building of monuments to God’s spokesmen is not what God wanted. He desires obedience to His message. As the leaders of the OT killed the prophets, these leaders will kill Jesus and His followers (cf. Mat 23:34).
Luk 11:49 “For this reason also the wisdom of God said” There is no place in the OT where this is quoted. Therefore, many believed that Jesus was referring to Himself as “the Wisdom of God” (cf. 1Co 1:24; 1Co 1:30; Col 2:3), which would be an allusion to Pro 8:22-31. This OT text is the background to Joh 1:1-14.
“prophets and apostles” This seems to refer to OT and NT speakers for God. This is a panorama of how the Jews received God’s spokespersons (death and persecution).
Luk 11:50 “may be charged against this generation” This is a shocking verse. Jesus was the culmination of Jewish theology, history, and hope. To miss Him was to miss everything! Ultimate truth had come and now they were rejecting Him (cf. Luk 11:14-26; Luk 11:29-36)! See full note at Luk 11:31.
This may refer to the destruction of Jerusalem in A.D. 70 by Titus.
Luk 11:51 “from the blood of Abel” This refers to the first premeditated murder in the Bible, recorded in Gen 4:8.
“to the blood of Zechariah, who was killed between the altar and the house of God” This refers to the incident recorded in 2Ch 24:20-22.
It is possible that Jesus chose one example (i.e., Abel) from Genesis, the first book of the Hebrew canon, and one (Zechariah) from 2 Chronicles, the last book of the Hebrew canon, to illustrate the ongoing problem of the Jews (cf. Deu 9:6-7; Deu 9:13; Deu 9:24; Deu 9:27; Deu 31:27).
The altar referred to is the sacrificial altar at the entrance to the temple, while the “House of God” refers to the building itself, which had two major chambers, the outer one called “the Holy Place” and the inner one called “the Holy of Holies.”
Abel’s death was an evidence of the fall (cf. Genesis 3), while Zechariah’s death showed a willful disregard for God’s special dwelling place (the temple). The Jews now were plotting (cf. Luk 11:53-54) to murder Jesus also.
Luk 11:52 “For you have taken away the key of knowledge” The Jewish leaders who should have recognized Jesus (“the key of knowledge”) not only missed Him, but led others into their willful blindness in God’s name (cf. Mat 23:13). This is shocking condemnation of the religious elite of Jesus’ day.
When we share Christ we use the “keys of the kingdom” (cf. Mat 16:19). When believers live godless or arrogant lives, they become like the Pharisees (cf. Mat 23:13-15) who hinder people seeking God.
Jesus, not human knowledge, is the key of wisdom (cf. 1Co 1:18-31). Jesus has the keys of death and hades (cf. Rev 1:18). Jesus is the true descendant and promise of David (cf. 2 Samuel 7 and Rev 3:7).
Fuente: You Can Understand the Bible: Study Guide Commentary Series by Bob Utley
lawyers = teachers of the law. Greek. nomikos. Not the same as in Luk 5:17.
Master = Teacher. App-98.
thus = these things.
reproachest = insultest.
Fuente: Companion Bible Notes, Appendices and Graphics
45.] This man appears to have been not a common Pharisee merely, but besides, a , whose duty it especially was to interpret the law. Perhaps he found himself involved in the censure of Luk 11:42; or generally among the other Pharisees.
Fuente: The Greek Testament
Luk 11:45. [, these things) which precede, especially in Luk 11:43.-V. g.]-, thou dost insult) , to insult, to treat with insolence, is a different idea from that of justly reproving, as expressed by , to reproach.
Fuente: Gnomon of the New Testament
Searching Words for Hypocrites
Luk 11:45-54
The minute oral and written rules promulgated by the Hebrew religious leaders overlaid and almost buried under their weight the simple Mosaic code. They were the subject of incessant disputing and discussion. A vast crowd of copyists, lecturers, teachers and casuists were always debating them. The lawyer who here addressed Christ was one of this class. He could hardly believe that this revered rabbi could include him and his fellows in these terrible woes.
Our Lord speaks of Himself as the Wisdom of God. Compare Luk 11:49 with Mat 23:34. For a moment He rises above the low levels of His Incarnation and identifies Himself with the Eternal God. But what profound sorrow filled His heart, as these stern words were wrung from His lips by the stubborn obduracy of His people! In the Hebrew Scriptures, where the order of the books differs from that of our Old Testament, the death of Abel is related in the first book and that of Zacharias in the last, 2Ch 24:20-22. The legend said that the blood of the latter was bubbling up when Nebuchadnezzar took Jerusalem. No sacrifices availed to stop it.
Fuente: F.B. Meyer’s Through the Bible Commentary
lawyers
(See Scofield “Mat 22:35”).
Fuente: Scofield Reference Bible Notes
thou: 1Ki 22:8, Jer 6:10, Jer 20:8, Amo 7:10-13, Joh 7:7, Joh 7:48, Joh 9:40
Reciprocal: 1Ki 22:18 – Did I not tell Neh 13:25 – cursed Jer 18:18 – for the Mal 2:8 – ye have caused Mat 21:45 – they Mat 22:35 – a lawyer Luk 10:25 – a certain Luk 14:3 – the lawyers Joh 3:20 – every Joh 9:34 – and dost Tit 3:13 – the lawyer
Fuente: The Treasury of Scripture Knowledge
5
Thus saying refers to the general denunciation Jesus has been uttering against leaders among the Jews. The lawyer may have thought he would bring an apology from Jesus by complaining in this way, relying, perhaps, on the dignity of his profession.
Fuente: Combined Bible Commentary
Then answered one of the lawyers, and said unto him, Master, thus saying thou reproachest us also.
[Then answered one of the lawyers.] Here seems a little difficulty, that whereas, in the foregoing verse Luk 11:44, it is said, “Woe unto you scribes and Pharisees,” it is not subjoined then answered one of the scribes; but one of the lawyers; which scruple perhaps the Vulgar observing, made him leave scribes and Pharisees wholly out. Our Saviour inveighs more peculiarly, and by name, against the Pharisees, Luk 11:37; Luk 11:42-43; and at length joins the scribes with them, Luk 11:44. Hence that lawyer cavils and complains, either that he had named the scribes in terms, or that he had accused the Pharisees of nothing but what the scribes might be equally accused of. As to this very scribe, did not he wash his hands before dinner as the Pharisees did? For it is said of all the Jews, “except they wash their hands oft; eat not.” Did not the scribe tithe mint and rue as well as the Pharisee? When we find that the tithing of herbs was instituted by the Rabbins. In a word, the scribes and the Pharisees go hand in hand in that discourse of our Saviour’s, Matthew_23; where he blameth both the one and the other for the same things. So that it is plain enough why this man complains; but it is not so plain why he should be termed “one of the lawyers;” and not “one of the scribes.”
I. It is not very easy distinguishing betwixt the scribe and the Pharisee, unless that Pharisaism was a kind of tumour and excrescence as to superstition and austerities of religion beyond the common and stated practice of that nation, even of the scribes themselves. Whether that distinction betwixt singular; and a disciple; hints any difference as to the austerity of religion, I cannot affirm; I will only lay a passage or two in the reader’s eye for him to consider.
“The Rabbins have a tradition, Let no one say, I am a Disciple, I am not fit to be made a Singular.” The Gloss hath it, “I am not fit to begin the fasts with the Singulars.” And the Gemara a little after; “The Rabbins have a tradition: Every one that would make himself a Singular; let him not make himself so: but if any one would make himself a Disciple; let him.” And at length; It is not lawful for a Disciple of the Wise to continue in fastings, because he diminisheth from the work of God; that is, he ceaseth from learning and teaching.
One would here think, that it is plainly distinguished betwixt a Pharisee and any other; and yet the Gemarists, in the very same place, say thus, All the Disciples of the Wise are Singulars. At length they query, “Who is a Singular, and who is a Disciple? A Singular is he that is worthy to be preferred to be a pastor of a synagogue. A Disciple is he, who if they ask him any thing concerning a tradition in his doctrine, he hath wherewithal to answer.” So that by a Disciple they mean not him that is now learning, but him who hath already learned and now teacheth; but, in other places, they apply both these to the Disciple.
“R. Jochanan saith, Who is a Disciple of the Wise? He whom they prefer to be pastor of a synagogue: he who, if they ask him about any tradition in any place, hath wherewithal to answer.” The difference between these, however confounded in this place, was this: that the Disciple could answer doubts and questions fetched out of that place or from that subject upon which he had taught or read; but the Singular; could answer all doubts raised from any place, even out of the treatise concerning marriages. That mention of the pastor and the teacher; Eph 4:11; we seem to have some shadow of it here: the Disciple is the teacher; and the Singular is the pastor of the synagogue; and perhaps if these things were observed, it might give some light into that place of the apostle.
II. As the Disciple and the Singular are sometimes confounded, sometimes distinguished, so also is the scribe and the Pharisee. They are sometimes confounded; for many of the Pharisees were scribes: and they are sometimes distinguished; for many of them were of the common people, and not scribes. Perhaps it may not be improperly said, that there were Pharisees that were of the clergy, and Pharisees that were of the laity. He whom we have now before us was a scribe, but not a Pharisee; but it is not easy to give the reason why he is termed a lawyer and not a scribe. Here is some place for conjecture, but not for demonstration. As to conjecture, therefore, let us make a little essay in this matter.
I. I conceive that the lawyer and teacher of the law; may be opposed to the Sadducees to whom the Pharisee is diametrically opposite; for they were contrary to them in their practice of the traditional rites as much as they could; and these again abundantly contrary to them in traditional doctrines. The Sadducees had, indeed, their scribes or their teachers, as well as any other party: and there is frequent mention of the scribes of the Sadducees. And from this antithesis, probably, is Rabban Gamaliel termed a doctor of law. For there was then an assembly of the ‘sect of the Sadducees,’ Luk 11:17; and when Gamaliel, who was of the other sect, made his speech amongst them, it is easy to conceive why he is there termed a doctor of law. For the same reason we may suppose the person here before us might be called one of the lawyers; and not a scribe; because there were scribes even amongst the Sadducees.
II. I conceive, therefore, that the lawyers and teachers of the law were the traditionary doctors of the law. As to Gamaliel, a doctor of the law, the thing is without dispute: and if there were any difference between the lawyers and doctors of the law, yet as to this matter, I suppose there was none. Let us consider this following passage: “It is a tradition: R. Simeon Ben Jochai saith, He that is conversant, in the textual exposition of the law; hath a measure, which is not a measure. He that is conversant in Misna, hath a measure, from whence they receive a reward: but if he be conversant in the Talmud, there is not a greater measure than this. Always betake yourself to the Misna rather than the Talmud. But R. Jose Ben R. Bon saith, This which thou sayest, obtained before the Rabbi had mixed with it manifold traditions: but from the time that he mixed with it manifold traditions, always have recourse to the Talmud rather than to the Misna.”
Now, I pray, who is he that, according to this tradition, merits most the title of a doctor of law? He that is conversant in the exposition and interpretation of the written law; and the context of it, alas! he doth but little; and for all the oil and labour he hath spent, hath only a measure, which is not a measure. But he that is conversant in the Misna and Talmud, in the traditional doctrine or exposition of the traditional law, he bears away the bell; he hath some reward for his pains, and is dignified with the title of doctor.
III. If there were any distinction betwixt doctors of tradition and doctors of law (which I hardly believe), we may suppose it might be this; either that the doctor of law had his school and his disciples, and the doctor of tradition had none; or that the doctor of tradition was conversant in the Misna, or the plain and literal exposition of traditions, and the doctor of law; in the Talmud, or a more profound and scholastic way of teaching.
However, be there this distinction betwixt them, or some other, or indeed none at all, yet I presume they were both doctors of traditions, and expounders of that which they called the oral law, in opposition to the scribes, whether amongst the Jews or the Sadducees, who employed themselves in the textual exposition of the law.
Fuente: Lightfoot Commentary Gospels
THE passage before us is an example of our Lord Jesus Christ’s faithful dealing with the souls of men. We see Him without fear or favor rebuking the sins of the Jewish expounders of God’s law. That false charity which calls it “unkind” to say that any one is in error, finds no encouragement in the language used by our Lord. He calls things by their right names. He knew that acute diseases need severe remedies. He would have us know that the truest friend to our souls, is not the man who is always “speaking smooth things,” and agreeing with everything we say, but the man who tells us the most truth.
We learn, firstly, from our Lord’s words, how great is the sin of professing to teach others what we do not practice ourselves. He says to the lawyers, “Ye lade men with burdens grievous to be borne, while ye yourselves touch not the burdens with one of your fingers.” They required others to observe wearisome ceremonies in religion which they themselves neglected. They had the impudence to lay yokes upon the consciences of other men, and yet to grant exemptions from these yokes for themselves. In a word, they had one set of measures and weights for their hearers, and another set for their own souls.
The stern reproof which our Lord here administers, should come home with special power to certain classes in the church. It is a word in season to all teachers of young people. It is a word to all masters of families and heads of households. It is a word to all fathers and mothers. Above all, it is a word to all clergymen and ministers of religion. Let all such mark well our Lord’s language in this passage. Let them beware of telling others to aim at a standard which they do not aim at themselves. Such conduct, to say the least, is gross inconsistency.
Perfection, no doubt, is unattainable in this world. If nobody is to lay down rules, or teach, or preach, until he is faultless himself, the whole fabric of society would be thrown into confusion. But we have a right to expect some agreement between a man’s words and a man’s work,-between his teaching and his doing,-between his preaching and his practice. One thing at all events is very certain. No lessons produce such effects on men as those which the teacher illustrates by his own daily life. Happy is he who can say with Paul, “Those things which ye have heard and seen in me, do.” (Php 4:9.)
We learn, secondly, from our Lord’s words, how much more easy it is to admire dead saints than living ones. He says to the lawyers, “Ye build the sepulchers of the prophets, and your fathers killed them.” They professed to honor the memory of the prophets, while they lived in the very same ways which the prophets had condemned! They openly neglected their advice and teaching, and yet they pretended to respect their graves!
The practice which is here exposed has never been without followers in spirit, if not in the letter. Thousands of wicked men in every age of the church have tried to deceive themselves and others by loud professions of admiration for the saints of God after their decease. By so doing they have endeavored to ease their own consciences, and blind the eyes of the world. They have sought to raise in the minds of others the thought, “If these men love the memories of the good so dearly they must surely be of one heart with them.” They have forgotten that even a child can see that “dead men tell no tales,” and that to admire men when they can neither reprove us by their lips, nor put us to shame by their lives, is a very cheap admiration indeed.
Would we know what a man’s religious character really is? Let us inquire what he thinks of true Christians while they are yet alive.-Does he love them, and cleave to them, and delight in them, as the excellent of the earth?-Or does he avoid them, and dislike them, and regard them as fanatics, and enthusiasts, and extreme, and righteous overmuch?-The answers to these questions are a pretty safe test of a man’s true character. When a man can see no beauty in living saints, but much in dead ones, his soul is in a very rotten state. The Lord Jesus has pronounced his condemnation. He is a hypocrite in the sight of God.
We learn, thirdly, from our Lord’s words, how surely a reckoning day for persecution will come upon the persecutors. He says that the “blood of all the prophets shall be required.”
There is something peculiarly solemn in this statement. The number of those who have been put to death for the faith of Christ in every age of the world, is exceedingly great. Thousands of men and women have laid down their lives rather than deny their Savior, and have shed their blood for the truth. At the time they died they seemed to have no helper. Like Zacharias, and James, and Stephen, and John the Baptist, and Ignatius, and Huss, and Hooper, and Latimer, they died without resistance. They were soon buried and forgotten on earth, and their enemies seemed to triumph utterly.
But their deaths were not forgotten in heaven. Their blood was had in remembrance before God. The persecutions of Herod, and Nero, and Diocletian, and bloody Mary, and Charles IX, are not forgotten. There shall be a great assize one day, and then all the world shall see that “precious in the sight of the LORD is the death of his saints.” (Psa 116:15.)
Let us often look forward to the judgment day. There are many things going on in the world which are trying to our faith. The frequent triumphing of the wicked is perplexing. The frequent depression of the godly is a problem that appears hard to solve. But it shall all be made clear one day. The great white throne and the books of God shall put all things in their right places. The tangled maze of God’s providence shall be unraveled. All shall be proved to a wondering world to have been “well done.” Every tear that the wicked have caused the godly to shed shall be reckoned for. Every drop of righteous blood that has been spilled shall at length be required.
We learn, lastly, from our Lord’s words, how great is the wickedness of keeping back others from religious knowledge. He says to the lawyers, “Ye have taken away the key of knowledge: ye entered not in yourselves, and those that were entering in ye hindered.”
The sin here denounced is awfully common. The guilt of it lies at far more doors than at first sight many are aware. It is the sin of the Romish priest who forbids the poor man to read his Bible.-It is the sin of the unconverted Protestant minister who warns his people against “extreme views,” and sneers at the idea of conversion.-It is the sin of the ungodly, thoughtless husband who dislikes his wife becoming “serious.”-It is the sin of the worldly-minded mother who cannot bear the idea of her daughter thinking of spiritual things, and giving up theaters and balls. All these, wittingly or unwittingly, are bringing down on themselves our Lord’s emphatic “woe.” They are hindering others from entering heaven!
Let us pray that this awful sin may never be ours. Whatever we are ourselves in religion, let us dread discouraging others, if they have the least serious concern about their souls. Let us never check any of those around us in their religion, and specially in the matter of reading the Bible, hearing the Gospel, and private prayer. Let us rather cheer them, encourage them, help them, and thank God if they are better than ourselves. “Deliver me from blood-guiltiness,” was a prayer of David’s. (Psa 51:14.) It may be feared that the blood of relatives will be heavy on the heads of some at the last day. They saw them about to “enter” the kingdom of God, and they “hindered” them.
==================
Notes-
v45.-[One of the lawyers.] The lawyers, be it remembered, were a class of men among the Jews who devoted themselves to the study of the law of God. We generally find them in league with the Scribes and Pharisees in the Gospel history.
v46.-[Woe unto you also, ye lawyers.] These words are a striking instance of our Lord’s boldness in rebuking sinners. He is appealed to in an angry tone, and He tells those who appeal to Him their sins and wickedness to their face.
[Ye lade men with burdens.] These burdens mean the many vexatious and trifling rules laid down by the Jewish expounders of the law, as requiring men’s attention, if they would be saved. Chemnitius remarks the close resemblance between these Jewish teachers and the Roman Catholic priests, who hedged up the way to heaven with a long list of things to be observed,-penances, pilgrimages, fastings, flagellations, contrition’s, attritions, confessions, and the like.
v47.-[Ye build the sepulchres of the prophets.] Let it be remembered that in every age of the Church, true Christians have been more admired and praised when they were dead than when they were alive. Chemnitius observes that the conduct of these lawyers related in this verse is that of the Roman Catholic Church. No people can be more zealous than the Romish priests in honouring the tombs and relics of saints and martyrs, and building costly churches in honour of them. And yet the doctrines of these saints are not believed, and their lives are not imitated!
v48.-[Ye bear witness that ye allow the deeds of your fathers.] The meaning of these words can only be that the lives of the Jewish teachers were clear evidence that they agreed with those who murdered the prophets more than with the prophets. A man’s life is the best proof of a man’s opinions. It is absurd and hypocritical to pretend admiration of dead saints, if we do not at the same time endeavour to walk in their steps. Poole remarks, “It is gross hypocrisy for men to magnify the servants of God in former ages, and in the mean time to malign and persecute the servants of the same God in a present age, owning the same truth, and living by the same rule.”
v49.-[Said the wisdom of God.] It is a disputed question what these words mean. Alford thinks that they simply refer to the description of the death of Zechariah, in the book of Chronicles, (2Ch 24:18-22,) and that our Lord gives a paraphrase and summary of the lessons contained in that passage. The more common opinion is that our Lord speaks of Himself under the name of “Wisdom,” and that comparing the passage with Mat 23:34, it means, “I, the eternal wisdom of God, have said.”
v50.-[Of this generation.] Both here and in the following verse, it seems probable that the word generation means nation or people, as in Mat 24:34. It is a certain fact that the greater part of the men who were alive when our Lord said these things, must have been dead forty years after, when the great inquisition for blood took place, at the destruction of Jerusalem.
v51.-[Zacharias.] There can be little doubt that this Zacharias was the son of Jehoiada, who was murdered in the days of Joash. (2Ch 24:20.) Lightfoot gives some remarkable quotations from Rabbinical writers, proving how very great a crime this murder was regarded by the Jews themselves.
[The temple.] Let it be noted, that the Greek word so translated, is commonly rendered, “The house.”
[It shall be required.] This is one of those fearful passages of Scripture which teach us that sins are not forgotten by God because not punished at the time of commission. There are evidently many sins recorded in the book of God’s remembrance which will all be brought to light and reckoned for one day.
v52.-[Ye have taken away the key of knowledge.] It is a doubtful question whether these words should not have been rendered “Ye have borne, or taken up, and carried the key of knowledge.” Let the expression be compared with Joh 1:29, and the marginal reading in that place [“…which beareth away the sin of the world.”]; and with such phrases as that translated, “Take up his cross,” in Luk 9:23. The meaning would then be, “Ye have been by profession the instructors of the Jews in spiritual knowledge. Ye have, so to speak, carried the keys. Yet ye made no use of them yourselves, and allowed nobody else to use them.” According to Watson, the Jewish teachers of the law had a key formally given to them, when they were ordained or set apart for the office of teaching.
Baxter remarks on this verse, “This is just the description of a wicked clergy.”-It certainly describes the Church of Rome.
v53.-[To provoke him to speak of many things.] The Greek verb in this expression is remarkable, and is only found here in the New Testament. Parkhurst says that it means “To draw or force words from the mouth of another, to question magisterially, as a master does his scholars.” Hammond says on this text, “They did ask questions to hear what Christ would say, as an angry schoolmaster that seeks occasion against a scholar.” Hesychius says it is “to require another to recite from memory.” The meaning is obvious. Our Lord’s enemies knew that “In the multitude of words there wanteth not sin,” and they hoped to find occasion against Him.
v54.-[To catch.] The original idea of the Greek word so translated is “to hunt,” or to lay hold of and catch in hunting.
We should remember the words of James, “He that offendeth not in word, the same is a perfect man.” The perfect meekness of our Lord is strikingly shown in His never losing His temper under abounding provocations, and His perfect wisdom in never saying a word on which His deadliest enemies could justly lay hold.
Fuente: Ryle’s Expository Thoughts on the Gospels
Luk 11:45. One of the lawyers (see on chap. Luk 10:25).
Thou reproachest us also, who are in official, ecclesiastical position. The man was not a Sadducee, but a Pharisee, and probably felt that the censure applied to him. He would shelter his character behind his office! Doubtless he would imply, as his successors have done: in touching us, the God-appointed officials, you are blaspheming.
Fuente: A Popular Commentary on the New Testament
The former woes were denounced by our Saviour against the Pharisees, who had their names from an Hebrew word, which signifies to separate, because they were persons separated and set apart for studying the law of God, and teaching it to others.
The next woe is here denounced against the lawyers, that is, the scribes of the law, of which there were two sorts: the civil scribe and the ecclesiastical scribe.
The civil scribe was a public notary, or a register of the synagogue, employed in writing bills of divorce, and sentences on the phylacteries. The ecclesiastical scribe was an expounder of the scripture, an interpreter of the law; men of great learning and knowledge, whose decrees and interpretations the Pharisees strictly observed. This lawyer here insolently calls our Saviour’s reproof a reproach: however, our Saviour, who never feared the face or regarded the person of any man, gives them their portion, and lets them know wherein they were faulty as well as the Pharisees, and accordingly pronounces a woe unto them also, for a threefold crime.
1. For their laying heavy burdens upon others’ shoulders, which they would not touch with one of their fingers. These burdens in general were a rigid exaction of obedience in the whole ceremonial law, and in particular the burden of traditions, certain austerities and severities, which they imposed upon the people, but would not undergo any part of them themselves. In vain do we hope to oblige our hearers to follow those rules of life, which we refuse or neglect to put in practice ourselves.
Fuente: Expository Notes with Practical Observations on the New Testament
Luk 11:45. Then answered one of the lawyers, &c. A doctor, or interpreter of the law. The Jewish lawyers (as our translation not very properly terms them) were the most considerable species of scribes, who applied themselves peculiarly to study and explain the law. Probably many of them were Pharisees, but it was no ways essential to their office that they should be so. What touched the person here speaking was, that our Lord, in his last wo, Luk 11:44, had joined the scribes with the Pharisees. Master, thus saying, thou reproachest us The rebuke which thou hast given the scribes and Pharisees in so general a way, affects us lawyers also. And he said, Wo unto you also, ye lawyers The lawyers, even of the Pharisean denomination, had done unspeakable mischief by their erroneous interpretation of Scripture, which they perverted to favour the tradition of the elders as much as possible, and so bound heavy burdens on mens shoulders, which they themselves would not touch with one of their fingers. Jesus, therefore, spake his mind freely concerning them also, laid open their character, and denounced further woes against them. Wo unto you, for ye build the sepulchres of the prophets He blames them for building the sepulchres of the prophets, because they did it from no regard to the murdered prophets, though in words they pretended to venerate their memory, but in order to make an ostentation of their piety. Truly ye bear witness that ye allow the deeds of your fathers By all your conduct you show that inwardly, in your minds, you approve of the deeds of your fathers, who persecuted the prophets; for they killed them, and ye build their sepulchres You are men of precisely the same character and disposition with them; hypocrites, who covered the grossest acts of wickedness with the specious appearance of piety. For like them you pretend great reverence for the ancient prophets, while ye destroy those whom God sends to yourselves. Ye therefore bear witness, by this deep hypocrisy, that you are of the very same spirit with them. Or, more at large, thus: From your known disposition, as well as from your open practice, which is to trample upon the laws of God, as often as they stand in the way of your wicked purposes, and particularly from your persecuting the messengers of God, one is obliged to think that you build the sepulchres of the prophets whom your fathers killed, not from any pious regard for God, whose messengers they were, nor to do honour to the prophets themselves, but to do honour to their murderers, as approving of their deeds, and intending to perpetuate the memory of them to posterity with applause. The great men among the Jews always possessed the true spirit of politicians. In the time of the prophets they made no scruple to kill persons, whom they knew to be the messengers of God, because, forsooth, the good of the state required it. In our Saviours time, Caiaphas, the high- priest, openly avowed this principle in a full meeting of the grandees. For when some were opposing the resolution of the major part of the council, who had determined to kill Jesus, and urged the unlawfulness of the action, he told them plainly that they were a parcel of ignorant bigots, who knew nothing at all either of the principles or ends of government, which render it necessary oft-times to sacrifice the most innocent for the safety of the community. Therefore also said the wisdom of God Agreeably to this the wisdom of God hath said, in many places of Scripture, though not in these very words, I will send them prophets, &c. Because you imitate the ways of your fathers, by persecuting the messengers of God; because you carry your wickedness to as great a pitch as your fathers did; for these reasons God hath declared his last resolutions concerning you: he hath said, I will send them prophets and apostles, yea, and my beloved Son, notwithstanding I know they will persecute and slay them: That the blood of all the prophets, &c. That by this last and greatest act of rebellion, the iniquity of the nation being completed, God may at length testify how much he was displeased with this people from the beginning, for persecuting and murdering his prophets, and that by sending upon the generation which completed the iniquity of the nation, such signal judgments as should evidently appear to be the punishment of that great and accumulated wickedness, committed by them in their several successive generations. Verily I say, It shall be required of this generation And so it was within forty years, in a most astonishing manner, by the dreadful destruction of the temple, the city, and the nation. The justice of such a procedure every thinking person will acknowledge, who considers that sins committed by men, as constituting a body politic, can only be punished in the present life; the proper punishment of national sins being national judgments, even such judgments as dissolve the transgressing state. And these the providence of God thinks necessary for its own vindication, always inflicting them upon nations, when the measure fixed upon by God for punishment is filled up, that the wrath of God being revealed from heaven against all ungodliness and unrighteousness of men, the nations of the world may be awed and kept in subjection to the government of God. See on Mat 23:29-33.
Fuente: Joseph Bensons Commentary on the Old and New Testaments
2 d. To the Scribes: Luk 11:45-54. A remark made by a scribe gives a new turn to the conversation. The Pharisees were only a religious party; but the scribes, the experts in the law, formed a profession strictly so called. They were the learned, the wise, who discovered nice prescriptions in the law, such as that alluded to in Luk 11:42, and gave them over for the observance of their pious disciples. The scribes played the part of clerical guides. The majority of them seem to have belonged to the pharisaic party; for we meet with no others in the N. T. But their official dignity gave them a higher place in the theocracy than that of a mere party. Hence the exclamation of him who here interrupts Jesus: Thus saying, Thou reproachest us, us scribes also, which evidently constitutes in his eyes a much graver offence than that of reproaching the Pharisees. In His answer Jesus upbraids them on three grounds, as He had done the Pharisees: 1 st. Religious intellectualism (Luk 11:46); 2 d. Persecuting fanaticism (Luk 11:47-51); 3 d. The pernicious influence which they exercised on the religious state of the people (Luk 11:52).
Vers. 53 and 54 describe the end of the feast.
Fuente: Godet Commentary (Luke, John, Romans and 1 Corinthians)
Verse 45
Thus saying; that is, not particularly by the last denunciation, but by the whole course of his remarks.
Fuente: Abbott’s Illustrated New Testament
11:45 {14} Then answered one of the lawyers, and said unto him, Master, thus saying thou reproachest us also.
(14) Hypocrites are very severe against other men, but think that all things are lawful for themselves.
Fuente: Geneva Bible Notes
Three woes against the lawyers 11:45-52
Fuente: Expository Notes of Dr. Constable (Old and New Testaments)
The lawyers (or scribes) were a distinct group, though most of them were Pharisees. The scribes and Pharisees often acted together. The lawyer who spoke up wanted to distinguish his group from the Pharisees, but Jesus refused to do so because the scribes were as hypocritical as the Pharisees. The lawyers involved themselves more in the interpretation of the law whereas the Pharisees generally advocated and enforced those interpretations. The former group was a professional class and the latter a religious party. By interpreting the law strictly the scribes placed heavy moral burdens on the Jews. However they had cleverly found ways of escaping their own responsibility to keep the law while at the same time giving the impression that they were obedient. This reflected lack of love for the rest of the Jews who had to labor under their demands.
"The Mishnah lays it down that it is more important to observe the scribal interpretations than the Law itself (Sanhedrin Luk 11:3). The reasoning is that if it was a serious matter to offend against the Law which was sometimes hard to understand, it was a much more serious matter to offend against the interpretation which, the scribes thought, made everything clear." [Note: Ibid., p. 205.]