50<\/strong>. he that is not against us is for us<\/em> ] Cf. Php 1:18<\/span>. The complementary<\/em> but not contradictory truth to this, is “He who is not with me is against me,” Mat 12:30<\/span>. Both are true in different circumstances. Neutrality is sometimes as deadly as opposition (Jdg 5:23<\/span>); it is sometimes as effectual as aid (Sueton., Jul. Caes.<\/em> 75). See Vinet, La tolerance et I’intolerance de I’Evangile (Discours,<\/em> p. 268). Renan calls these “two irreconcilable rules of proselytism, and a contradiction evoked by a passionate struggle.” Guizot expresses his astonishment at so frivolous a criticism, and calls them two contrasted facts which every one must have noticed in the course of an active life. “Les deux assertions, loin de se contredire, peuvent etre egalement vraies, et Jesus- Christ en les exprimant a parle en observateur sagace, non en moraliste qui donne les preceptes.” Miditations,<\/em> p. 229.<\/p>\n It is a great pity that the chapter does not end at this verse; since it closes another great section in our Lord’s ministry the epoch of opposition and flight. A new phase of the ministry begins at Luk 9:51<\/span>.<\/p>\n Luk 9:51<\/span> to Luk 18:31<\/span> . <\/em> Rejected by the Samaritans. A lesson of Tolerance.<\/p>\n <\/em><\/p>\n This section forms a great episode in St Luke, which may be called the departure for the final conflict, and is identical with the journey (probably to the Feast of the Dedication, Joh 10:22<\/span>) which is partially Luk 9:51-56<\/span>. And it came to pass, when the time was come that he touched upon in Mat 18:1<\/span> to Mat 20:16<\/span> and Mar 10:1-31<\/span>. It contains many incidents recorded by this Evangelist alone, and though the recorded identifications of time and place are vague, yet they all point (Luk 9:51<\/span>, Luk 13:22<\/span>, Luk 17:11<\/span>, Luk 10:38<\/span>) to a slow<\/em>, solemn<\/em>, and public progress from Galilee to Jerusalem<\/em>, of which the events themselves are often grouped by subjective considerations. So little certain is the order<\/em> of the separate incidents, that one writer (Rev. W. Stewart) has made an ingenious attempt to shew that it is determined by the alphabetic arrangement of the leading Greek verbs ( ,<\/em> Luk 10:25-42<\/span>; ,<\/em> Luk 11:1-5<\/span>; Luk 11:8-13<\/span>, &c.). Canon Westcott arranges the order thus: The Rejection of the Jews foreshewn; preparation, Luk 9:43 to<\/span>Luk 11:13<\/span>; Lessons of Warning, Luk 11:14 to<\/span>Luk 13:9<\/span>; Lessons of Progress, Luk 13:10 to<\/span>Luk 14:24<\/span>; Lessons of Discipleship, Luk 14:25<\/span> xvii. 10; the Coming End, Luk 17:10 to<\/span>Luk 18:30<\/span>.<\/p>\n The order of events after ‘the Galilaean spring’ of our Lord’s ministry on the plain of Gennesareth seems to have been this: After the period of flight among the heathen or in countries which were only semi-Jewish, of which almost the sole recorded incident is the healing of the daughter of the Syrophoenician woman (Mat 15:21-28<\/span> ).<\/em> He returned to Peraea and fed the four thousand. He then sailed back to Gennesareth, but left it in deep sorrow on being met by the Pharisees with insolent demands for a sign from heaven. Turning His back once more on Galilee, He again travelled northwards; healed a blind man at Bethsaida Julias; received St Peter’s great confession on the way to Caesarea Philippi; was transfigured; healed the demoniac boy; rebuked the ambition of the disciples by the example of the little child; returned for a brief rest in Capernaum, during which occurred the incident of the Temple Tax; then journeyed to the Feast of Tabernacles, during which occurred the incidents so fully narrated by St John (Joh 7:1<\/span> to Joh 10:21<\/span>). The events and teachings in this great section of St Luke seem to belong mainly, if not entirely, to the two months between the hasty return of Jesus to Galilee and His arrival in Jerusalem, two months afterwards, at the Feast of Dedication; a period respecting which St Luke must have had access to special sources of information.<\/p>\n For fuller discussion of the question I must refer to my Life of Christ, <\/em> ii. 89-150.<\/p>\n And Jesus said unto him, forbid him not<\/strong>,…. “Or forbid not” him, or any other so doing:<\/p>\n for he that is not against us, is for us<\/strong>: in two exemplars of Beza’s it is read, “for he is not against you”: the Vulgate Latin, and Syriac versions, instead of “us”, in both clauses read “you”, and so likewise the Persic and Ethiopic versions; [See comments on Mr 9:39]<\/span>,<\/p>\n [See comments on Mr 9:40]<\/span>.<\/p>\n “Against you is for you” <\/B> (‘ <\/SPAN><\/span>). Mr 9:40<\/span> has “against us is for us” ( … <\/SPAN><\/span>). The Koine<\/I> Greek <\/SPAN><\/span> and <\/SPAN><\/span> were often pronounced alike and it was easy to interchange them. So many MSS. here read just as in Mark. The point is precisely the same as it is a proverbial saying. See a similar saying in Lu 11:23<\/span>: “He that is not with me is against me.” The prohibition here as in Mr 9:39<\/span> is general: “Stop hindering him” ( , <\/SPAN><\/span> and the present imperative, not <\/SPAN><\/span> and the aorist subjunctive). The lesson of toleration in methods of work for Christ is needed today. <\/P> <\/p>\n <\/strong><\/p>\n 1) “And Jesus said unto him,” <\/strong>(eipen de pros auton lesous) “Then Jesus said directly to him,” to John, one of the “Sons of Thunder,” one who was boisterous at times, Mar 3:17<\/span>.<\/p>\n 2) “Forbid him not:” <\/strong>(me koluete) “You all do not prevent, obstruct, or hinder,” much as Moses gave direction at a time of misunderstanding among the Israelites, Num 11:26-29<\/span>.<\/p>\n 3) “For he that is not against us is for us.” <\/strong>(hos gar ouk estin kath’ humon huper estin) “For, the one who is not against you all is (exists) for you,” or is on your behalf or exists for your welfare, Mat 10:42<\/span>; Luk 11:23<\/span>; Php_1:15-18.<\/p>\n ‘But Jesus said to him, “Do not forbid him, for he who is not against you is for you.” ’<\/p>\n But Jesus told them that they were wrong to forbid him. For if this man was being successful then it demonstrated that God was with him, and that he believed in Jesus. And such a man should therefore be encouraged, for he clearly did support them even though he was not with them. Had he not truly believed in Jesus his exorcisms would not have been successful (as the disciples had cause to know could happen).<\/p>\n ‘He who is not against you is for you.’ Jesus is here speaking of those who were active in proclaiming the word of God and in ministry of that word, not just of anyone in general. If men truly ministered the word and were not antagonistic to Jesus and His disciples then they were clearly on the same side together. For had they not been they would have been antagonistic.<\/p>\n The question is sometimes posed, ‘would a man have cast out evil spirits in Jesus name while Jesus was still alive?’ The answer is undoubtedly, ‘yes’. There were many potential exorcists around in Jesus’ day, and they would always be alert to anything that could make them more successful. If they saw the disciples successfully casting out evil spirits in Jesus’ name (Luk 10:17<\/span>) it is certain that some would see that as another name that they could experiment with. It is probable therefore that quite a few commenced using the name of Jesus, as did the sons of Sceva after them (Act 19:13-14<\/span>). The point here is that the man used it successfully. And Jesus’ point is that His Father would not have given success were his belief in Jesus not genuine. He was thus in his heart ‘one of them’.<\/p>\n against. Greek. kata. App-104. <\/p>\n us. All the texts read “you”. <\/p>\n for us = on our behalf. Greek. huper. App-104. <\/p>\n Luk 9:50. , , for he who is not against you is for you) So too Mar 9:40, although some Greek MSS. in Mark, and most of them in Luke, have written for . To such a degree were the Greek transcribers indifferent in their confounding these pronouns, that the true reading must be decided not so much by the number of Greek MSS., as by the ancient versions, which translate and present these pronouns with greater accuracy of distinction, and also especially by a comparison of the context. The more or the less different is the condition of these concerning whom the expression we and you is used, the more or the less weight in proportion the variety of reading has. And in this passage the variety of reading is not a matter of indifference. For when He is speaking of external association and mode of procedure (conversatione), the Lord used the first person Plural, Let us pass over to the other side; Lo, we go up to Jerusalem, etc. But when matters of a more internal character were concerned, He made an appropriate distinction in His language, and did not say, we, but, I, or else, you. I ascend, saith He, to My Father and your Father, and My God and your God, not, to our Father and God. Therefore He does not here say, He who is not against us, is for us, but, he who is not against you, is for you; and in another passage, He who is not with Me, is against Me.[87]<\/p>\n [87] ABCDabc Vulg. have . BCDabc Vulg. have also . But A have . Rec. Text has – . In Mar 9:40, ADabc Vulg. read twice. But BC Memph. later Syr. in marg. read .-ED. and TRANSL.<\/p>\n Forbid: Jos 9:14, Pro 3:5, Pro 3:6, Mat 13:28-30, Mat 17:24, Mat 17:26, Phi 1:15-18 <\/p>\n for: Luk 11:23, Luk 16:13, Mat 12:30, Mar 9:41, 1Co 12:3 <\/p>\n Reciprocal: Num 11:28 – My Lord 2Ki 10:6 – If ye be mine Mat 12:27 – by whom Mat 19:13 – and the Mar 9:38 – Master Luk 18:15 – they rebuked Joh 12:22 – Andrew and Phi 1:18 – and I<\/p>\n And Jesus said unto him, Forbid [him] not: for he that is not against us is for us. 50. he that is not against us is for us ] Cf. Php 1:18. The complementary but not contradictory truth to this, is “He who is not with me is against me,” Mat 12:30. Both are true … Continue reading “Exegetical and Hermeneutical Commentary of Luke 9:50”<\/span><\/a><\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":1,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"","ping_status":"","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"footnotes":""},"categories":[1],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-25335","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-commentary"],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.biblia.work\/bible-commentary\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/25335","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.biblia.work\/bible-commentary\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.biblia.work\/bible-commentary\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.biblia.work\/bible-commentary\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/1"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.biblia.work\/bible-commentary\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=25335"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/www.biblia.work\/bible-commentary\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/25335\/revisions"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.biblia.work\/bible-commentary\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=25335"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.biblia.work\/bible-commentary\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=25335"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.biblia.work\/bible-commentary\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=25335"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}Fuente: The Cambridge Bible for Schools and Colleges<\/b><\/i><\/h4>\n
Fuente: The Cambridge Bible for Schools and Colleges<\/b><\/i><\/h4>\n
Fuente: John Gill’s Exposition of the Entire Bible<\/b><\/i><\/h4>\n
Fuente: Robertson’s Word Pictures in the New Testament<\/b><\/i><\/h4>\n
Fuente: Garner-Howes Baptist Commentary<\/b><\/i><\/h4>\n
Fuente: Commentary Series on the Bible by Peter Pett<\/b><\/i><\/h4>\n
Fuente: Companion Bible Notes, Appendices and Graphics<\/b><\/i><\/h4>\n
Fuente: Gnomon of the New Testament<\/b><\/i><\/h4>\n
Fuente: The Treasury of Scripture Knowledge<\/b><\/i><\/h4>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"