Exegetical and Hermeneutical Commentary of Luke 11:20
But if I with the finger of God cast out devils, no doubt the kingdom of God is come upon you.
20. with the finger of God ] “Then the magicians said unto Pharaoh, This is the finger of God” Exo 8:19.
is come upon you ] The word and tense imply suddenness and surprise.
Fuente: The Cambridge Bible for Schools and Colleges
Verse 20. Finger of God] See Clarke on Ex 8:19.
Fuente: Adam Clarke’s Commentary and Critical Notes on the Bible
20. the finger of God“theSpirit of God” (Mt 12:28);the former figuratively denoting the power of God, the latterthe living Personal Agent in every exercise of it.
Fuente: Jamieson, Fausset and Brown’s Commentary Critical and Explanatory on the Whole Bible
But if I with the, finger of God,…. The power of God, referring to Ex 8:19 and so the Cabalistic Jews r explain it,
“the finger is one of the five in the hand, and is that finger which works by the power of Elohim;”
it is the same with the Spirit of God; [See comments on Mt 12:28] which is often called the hand of the Lord, Eze 1:3.
r R. Mosch in Sepher Hashem, apud Cabal. Denudata. T. I. par. l. p. 146.
Fuente: John Gill’s Exposition of the Entire Bible
By the finger of God ( ). In distinction from the Jewish exorcists. Mt 12:28 has “by the Spirit of God.”
Then is come ( ). in late Greek comes to mean simply to come, not to come before. The aorist indicative tense here is timeless. Note (accordingly) in the conclusion ().
Fuente: Robertson’s Word Pictures in the New Testament
Is come upon you. See on Mt 12:28.
Fuente: Vincent’s Word Studies in the New Testament
1) “But if I with the finger of God cast out devils,” (ei de en daktuon theou (ego) ekballo ta daimonia) “Yet if I expel the demons by the finger (appointment or direction) of God,” as in Exo 8:19, by His power and His mandate expel demons, heal the mentally obsessed, possessed, and deranged, and He had and did, Mat 9:35; Mat 11:5; Mat 12:28.
2) “No doubt the kingdom of God is come upon you.” (ara epthasen eph’ humas he basileia tou theou) “Then the kingdom of God (has already) come upon you all,” or among you, for your acceptance or rejection. This visible manifestation of the kingdom of God was the church, then or already existing, called, chosen, following, worshipping under His Lordship, Joh 15:16; Joh 15:27; Mat 5:13-16; Joh 3:28-29.
Fuente: Garner-Howes Baptist Commentary
(20) If I with the finger of God . . .Note the substitution of this language for by the Spirit of God, in Mat. 12:28, and its connection with the use by the older prophets of the hand of the Lord, to indicate the state which issued in prophetic inspiration (Eze. 1:3; Eze. 37:1), and with the finger of God as writing the Commandments on the tables of stone (Exo. 31:18), and Pharaohs confession that the finger of God was with Moses and Aaron in the wonders which they wrought (Exo. 8:19). The meaning of this boldly anthropomorphic language is sufficiently obvious. As the hand denotes power generally, so the finger symbolises power in its concentrated and specially-directed energy.
Fuente: Ellicott’s Commentary for English Readers (Old and New Testaments)
“But if I by the finger of God cast out demons, then is the Kingly Rule of God come upon you.”
On the other hand they should consider the fact that if He cast out evil spirits by the finger of God, then it proved that the Kingly Rule of God was present in Him. That it had come on them unexpectedly. This is not arguing that the fact that evil spirits were cast out proved that the Kingly Rule of God had come. Their ‘sons’ did similar things and no one suggested that that meant that the Kingly Rule of God had come. All that did was prove that they and He were of God.
What He is saying here is that it is because He, as God’s Anointed One, was doing it by the finger of God that it proved that the Kingly Rule of God had come. For the admission that He did cast out demons by the power of God when combined with His claims (which His success against demons would confirm) would establish His claims. They could not agree that He cast out demons by the power of God and at the same time deny His claims to be the Son of man, for His success against demons would be evidence that God was pleased with Him and acknowledged His claims. That would then be sufficient proof that the Kingly Rule of God had come.
The phrase ‘finger of God’ is an Old Testament phrase denoting God’s direct action free from any occult methods. The Egyptian magicians used it when they at last had to recognise that Moses was not using conjuring tricks or demonic magic, but that God Himself was acting directly (Exo 8:19). They recognised that now God had put His seal on things. It was also used of the writing of ‘the ten words on the tablet which were ‘written by the finger of God’ (Exo 31:18; Deu 9:10). The finger of God was the guarantee that the words were His words. Thus here it is a seal of Who and What Jesus is. Matthew translates it as ‘if I by the Spirit of God’ (Mat 12:28), which is saying the same thing, for the phrase ‘Spirit of God’ always indicates direct action.
As the chiasmus demonstrates, these words are central to the whole passage. Luke’s central point here is that the Kingly Rule of God has come with power in Jesus as He does battle with the forces of evil. This will then be further emphasised in order to demonstrate that Jesus is the ‘Stronger than he’.
Fuente: Commentary Series on the Bible by Peter Pett
20. ] . = . Matt. No distinction can be established, as Gresw. attempts. The one expression explains the other. What was done (Hebraistically speaking) by the finger of God, was done by the Spirit of God. We have much greater variations than this in sayings demonstrably the same. And as to what the same author maintains about the relative magnitude of the works of the finger, hand , and arm of God, a reference to ref. Ps., where the heavens are ‘the works of Thy fingers ,’ will sufficiently shew how little reliance is to be placed on such subtleties.
Fuente: Henry Alford’s Greek Testament
Luk 11:20 . : instead of Mt.’s , which is doubtless the original expression, being more appropriate to the connection of thought. Lk.’s expression emphasises the immediateness of the Divine action through Jesus, in accordance with his habit of giving prominence to the miraculousness of Christ’s healing acts. But the question was not as to the fact, but as to the moral quality of the miracle. The phrase recalls Exo 8:9 . : in classics means to anticipate, in later Greek to reach , the idea of priority being dropped out.
Fuente: The Expositors Greek Testament by Robertson
with = by. Greek. en, as in Luk 11:19. Compare Mat 3:11.
the finger of God. Figure of speech Anthropopatheia. App-6See Exo 8:19. Finger, here, put by Figure of speech Metonymy (of Subject), App-6, for the Holy Spirit Himself.
the kingdom of God. See App-114.
come upon you. With suddenness and surprise Greek. phthano. Occurances elsewhere: Mat 12:28. Rom 9:31, 2Co 10:14. Php 1:3, Php 1:16. 1Th 2:16; 1Th 4:15.
Fuente: Companion Bible Notes, Appendices and Graphics
20.] . = . Matt. No distinction can be established, as Gresw. attempts. The one expression explains the other. What was done (Hebraistically speaking) by the finger of God, was done by the Spirit of God. We have much greater variations than this in sayings demonstrably the same. And as to what the same author maintains about the relative magnitude of the works of the finger, hand, and arm of God, a reference to ref. Ps., where the heavens are the works of Thy fingers, will sufficiently shew how little reliance is to be placed on such subtleties.
Fuente: The Greek Testament
Luk 11:20. , with the finger) by a power manifestly divine, and without any difficulty. Comp. Exo 8:19.
Fuente: Gnomon of the New Testament
the finger: Exo 8:19, Mat 12:28
the kingdom: For the destruction of the kingdom of Satan plainly implies the setting up of the kingdom of God. The reasoning of the Pharisees – Luk 11:17, and Mat 12:24, Mat 12:25, was not expressed, and Jesus knowing their thoughts, gave ample proof of his omniscience. This, with our Lord’s masterly confutation of their reasonings, by a conclusion drawn from their own premises, one would have supposed might have humbled and convinced those men; but the most conclusive reasoning, and the most astonishing miracles, were lost upon a people who were obstinately determined to disbelieve every thing that was good relative to Jesus of Nazareth. Luk 10:9, Luk 10:11, Dan 2:44, Act 20:25, Act 28:23-28, 2Th 1:5
Reciprocal: Exo 31:18 – the finger Deu 9:10 – written with Psa 8:3 – work Zec 13:2 – unclean Act 2:22 – which 1Co 1:22 – the Jews Phi 3:8 – doubtless Rev 20:2 – he laid
Fuente: The Treasury of Scripture Knowledge
0
Explained at Mat 12:28.
Fuente: Combined Bible Commentary
Vers. 20-26. After having by this new argumentum ad hominem refuted the supposition of His adversaries, Jesus gives the true explanation of His cures by contrasting the picture of one of those expulsions which He works (Luk 11:20-22) with that of a cure performed by the exorcists (Luk 11:23-26).
Vers. 20-22.But if I with the finger of God cast out devils, no doubt the kingdom of God is come upon you. 21. When a strong man armed keepeth his palace, his goods are in peace. 22. But when a stronger than he shall come upon him and overcome him, he taketh from him all his armour wherein he trusted, and divideth his spoils. Luk 11:20 draws the conclusion (, now; , then) from the preceding arguments, and forms the transition to the two following scenes. In this declaration there is betrayed intense indignation: Let them take heed! The kingdom of God, for which they are waiting, is already there without their suspecting it; and it is upon it that their blasphemies fall. They imagine that it will come with noise and tumult; and it has come more quickly than they thought, and far otherwise it has reached them (). The construction , upon you, has a threatening sense. Since they set themselves in array against it, it is an enemy which has surprised them, and which will crush them. The term finger of God is admirably in keeping with the context: the arm is the natural seat and emblem of strength; and the finger, the smallest part of the arm, is the symbol of the ease with which this power acts. Jesus means, As for me, I have only to lift my finger to make the devils leave their prey. These victories, so easily won, prove that henceforth Satan has found his conqueror, and that now God begins really to reign. This word, full of majesty, unveils to His adversaries the grandeur of the work which is going forward, and what tragic results are involved in the hostile attitude which they are taking towards it. Instead of by the finger of God, Matthew says by the Spirit of God; and Weizscker, always in favour of the hypothesis of a common document, supposes that Luke has designedly replaced it by another, because it seemed to put Jesus in dependence on the Holy Spirit. What may a man not prove with such criticism? Is it not simpler, with Bleek, to regard the figurative term of Luke as the original form in the saying of Jesus, which has been replaced by the abstract but radically equivalent expression of Matthew?
Mark omits the two Luk 11:19-20. Why would he have done so, if he had had before his eyes the same document as the others?
Vers. 21 and 22 serve to illustrate the thought of Luk 11:20 : the citadel of Satan is plundered; the fact proves that Satan is vanquished, and that the kingdom of God is come. A strong and well-armed warrior watches at the gate of his fortress. So long as he is in this position (), all is tranquil ( ) in his fastness; his captives remain chained, and his booty () is secure. The warrior is Satan (the art. alludes to a single and definite personality); his castle is the world, which up till now has been his confirmed property. His armour consists of those powerful means of influence which he wields. His booty is, first of all, according to the context, those possessed ones, the palpable monuments of his sway over humanity; and in a wider sense, that humanity itself, which with mirth or groans bears the chains of sin. But a warrior superior in strength has appeared on the world’s stage; and from that moment all is changed. , from the time that, denotes the abrupt and decisive character of this succession to power, in opposition to , as long as, which suited the period of security. This stronger man is Jesus (the art. also alludes to His definite personality). He alone can really plunder the citadel of the prince of this world. Why? Because He alone began by conquering him in single combat. This victory in a personal engagement was the preliminary condition of His taking possession of the earth. It cannot be doubted that, as Keim and Weizscker acknowledge, Jesus is here thinking of the scene of His temptation. That spiritual triumph is the foundation laid for the establishment of the kingdom of God on the earth, and for the destruction of that of Satan. As soon as a man can tell the prince of this world to his face, Thou hast nothing in me (Joh 14:30), the stronger man, the vanquisher of the strong man, is come; and the plundering of his house begins. This plundering consists, first of all, of the healings of the possessed wrought by Jesus. Thus is explained the ease with which He performs those acts by which He rescues those unhappy ones from malignant powers, and restores them to God, to themselves, and to human society. All the figures of this scene are evidently borrowed from Isa 49:24-25, where Jehovah Himself fills the part of liberator, which Jesus here ascribes to Himself.
Vers. 23-26. He that is not with me is against me; and he that gathereth not with me scattereth. 24. When the unclean spirit is gone out of a man, he walketh through dry places, seeking rest; and finding none, he saith, I will return unto my house whence I came out. 25. And when he cometh, he findeth it swept and garnished. 26. Then goeth he, and taketh to him seven other spirits more wicked than himself; and they enter in, and dwell there: and the last state of that man is worse than the first.
The relation between Luk 11:23 and the verses which precede and follow has been thought so obscure by De Wette and Bleek, that they give up the attempt to explain it. In itself the figure is clear. It is that of a troop which has been dispersed by a victorious enemy, and which its captain seeks to rally, after having put the enemy to flight; but false allies hinder rather than promote the rallying. Is it so difficult to understand the connection of this figure with the context? The dispersed army denotes humanity, which Satan has conquered; the chief who rallies it is Jesus; the seeming allies, who have the appearance of fighting for the same cause as He does, but who in reality scatter abroad with Satan, are the exorcists. Not having conquered for themselves the chief of the kingdom of darkness, it is only in appearance that they can drive out his underlings; in reality, they serve no end by those alleged exploits, except to strengthen the previous state of things, and to keep up the reign of the ancient master of the world. Such is the object which the following illustration goes to prove. By the thrice-repeated , me, of Luk 11:23, there is brought into relief the decisive importance of the part which Jesus plays in the history of humanity; He is the impersonation of the kingdom of God; His appearance is the advent of a new power. The words , to disperse, and , to gather together, are found united in the same sense as here, Joh 10:13-16.
The two following verses serve to illustrate the saying of Luk 11:23, as Luk 11:21-22 illustrated the declaration of Luk 11:20. They are a sort of apologue poetically describing a cure wrought by the means which the exorcists employ, and the end of which is to show, that to combat Satan apart from Christ, his sole conqueror, is to work for him and against God; comp. the opposite case, Luk 9:49-50. The exorcist has plied his art; the impure spirit has let go his prey, quitted his dwelling, which for the time has become intolerable to him. But two things are wanting to the cure to make it real and durable. First of all, the enemy has not been conquered, bound; he has only been expelled, and he is free to take his course of the world, perhaps to return. Jesus, on the other hand, sent the malignant spirits to their prison, the abyss whence they could no longer come forth till the judgment (Luk 8:31, Luk 4:34). Then the house vacated is not occupied by a new tenant, who can bar the entrance of it against the old one. Jesus, on the contrary, does not content Himself with expelling the demon; He brings back the soul to its God; He replaces the unclean spirit by the Holy Spirit. As a relapse after a cure of this sort is impossible, so is it probable and imminent in the former case. Every line of the picture in which Jesus represents this state of things is charged with irony. The spirit driven out walks through dry places. This strange expression was probably borrowed from the formulas of exorcism. The spirit was relegated to the desert, the presumed abode of evil spirits (Tob 8:3; Bar 4:35). The reference was the same in the symbolical sending of the goat into the wilderness for Azazel, the prince of the devils.
But the malignant spirit, after roaming for a time, begins to regret the loss of his old abode; would it not be well, he asks himself, to return to it? He is so sure that he needs only to will it, that he exclaims with sarcastic gaiety: I will return unto my house. At bottom he knows very well that he has not ceased to be the proprietor of it; a proprietor is only dispossessed in so far as he is replaced. First he determines to reconnoitre. Having come, he finds that the house is disposable (, Matt.). He finds what is better still: the exorcist has worked with so much success, that the house has recovered a most agreeable air of propriety, order, and comfort since his departure. Far, therefore, from being closed against the malignant spirit, it is only better prepared to receive him. Jesus means thereby to describe the restoration of the physical and mental powers conferred by the half cures which He is stigmatizing. Anew there is a famous work of destruction to be accomplished
Satan cares for no otherbut this time it is not to be done by halves. And therefore there is need for reinforcement. Besides, it is a festival; there is need of friends. The evil spirit goes off to seek a number of companions sufficient to finish the work which had been interrupted. These do not require a second bidding, and the merry crew throw themselves into their dwelling. This time, we may be sure, nothing will be wanting to the physical, intellectual, and moral destruction of the possessed. Such was the state in which Jesus had found the Gergesene demoniac (Luk 8:29), and probably also Mary Magdalene (Luk 8:2). This explains in those two cases the words Legion (Luk 8:30) and seven devils (Luk 8:2), which are both symbolical expressions for a desperate state resulting from one or more relapses.
Nothing is clearer than this context, or more striking than this scene, in which it is impossible for us to distinguish fully between what belongs to the idea and what to the figure. Thus has Jesus succeeded in retorting upon the exorcists, so highly extolled by His adversaries, the reproach of being auxiliaries of Satan, which they had dared to cast on Him. Need we wonder at the enthusiasm which this discourse excited in the multitude, and at the exclamation of the woman, in which this feeling of admiration finds utterance?
3 d. Luk 11:27-28. The Incident.And it came to pass, as He spake these things, a certain woman of the company lifted up her voice, and said unto Him, Blessed is the womb that bare Thee, and the paps which Thou hast sucked. 28. But He said, Yea, rather, blessed are they that hear the word of God, and keep it. Perhaps, like Mary Magdalene, this woman had herself experienced the two kinds of healing which Jesus had been contrasting. In any case, living in a society where scenes of the kind were passing frequently, she had not felt the same difficulty in apprehending the figures as we, to whom they are so strange.
Jesus in His answer neither denies nor affirms the blessedness of her who gave Him birth. All depends on this, if she shall take rank in the class of those whom alone He declares to be blessed. The true reading appears to be , .There is undoubtedly a blessedness; (the restricting particle as always): at least for those who…
Does not this short account bear in itself the seal of its historical reality? It is altogether peculiar to Luke, and suffices to demonstrate the originality of the source from which this whole piece was derived. For this incident could not possibly stand as a narrative by itself; it must have formed part of the account of the entire scene.
The allegorical tableau, Luk 11:24 et seq., is set by Matthew in an altogether different place, and so as to give it a quite different application (Luk 12:43 et seq.). The words with which it closes, Even so shall it be also unto this wicked generation, prove that it is applied in that Gospel to the Jewish people taken collectively. The old form of possession was the spirit of idolatry; that of the present, seven times worse, is the Rabbinical pride, the pharisaic formalism and hypocrisy, which have dominion over the nation in the midst of its monotheistic zeal. The stroke which will fall upon it will be seven times more terrible than that with which it was visited when it was led into captivity in Jeremiah’s day. This application is certainly grand and felicitous. But it forces us entirely to separate this scene, Luk 11:24-26, as the first Gospel does, from the preceding, Luk 11:21-22, which in Matthew as well as in Luke can only refer to the healing of cases of possession; and yet those two scenes are indisputably the pendants of one another. Gess understands the application of this word in Matthew to the Jewish people in a wholly different sense. The first cure, according to him, was the enthusiastic impulse of the people in favour of Jesus in the beginning of His Galilean ministry; the relapse referred to the coldness which had followed, and which had obliged Jesus to teach in parables. But nowhere does Jesus make so marked an allusion to that crisis, to which probably the conscience of the people was not awakened. Would it not be better in this case to apply the first cure to the powerful effect produced by John the Baptist? Ye were willing for a season, says Jesus Himself, to rejoice in his light (Joh 5:35). Anyhow, what leads Matthew to convert the second scene into a national apologue, instead of leaving it with its demonological and individual application, is his insertion, immediately before, of the saying which relates to blasphemy against the Holy Spirit,a saying which in Mark also follows the scene of the combat between the strong man and the stronger man. When, after so grave an utterance, Matthew returns to the scene (omitted by Mark) of the spirit recovering possession of his abandoned dwelling, he must necessarily give it a different bearing from that which it has in Luke. The superiority of Luke’s account cannot appear doubtful to the reader who has caught the admirable connection of this discourse, and the striking meaning of all the figures which Jesus uses to compose those two scenes. As to the true position of the saying about the blasphemy against the Holy Spirit, the question will be discussed chap. 12
Fuente: Godet Commentary (Luke, John, Romans and 1 Corinthians)
11:20 But if I with the {d} finger of God cast out devils, no doubt the kingdom of God is come upon you.
(d) That is, by the power of God: so it says in Geneva “Exo 8:19”.