52<\/strong>. sent messengers<\/em> ] Some think that they were two of the Seventy disciples; others that they were James and John.<\/p>\n into a village of the Samaritans<\/em> ] On the way to Judaea from Galilee He would doubtless avoid Nazareth, and therefore His road probably lay over Mount Tabor, past Little Hermon (see Luk 7:11<\/span>), past Nain, Enaor, and Shunem. The first Samaritan village at which He would arrive would be En Gannim<\/em> (Fountain of Gardens), now Jenin (2Ki 9:27<\/span>), a pleasant village at the first pass into the Samaritan hills. The inhabitants are still described as “fanatical, rude, and rebellious” (Thomson, Land and Book<\/em>, II . <\/strong> xxx.). The Samaritans are not mentioned in St Mark, and only once in St Matthew (Mat 10:5<\/span>).<\/p>\n to make ready for him<\/em> ] As He was now accompanied not only by the Twelve, but by a numerous multitude of followers, His unannounced arrival would have caused embarrassment. But, further than this, He now openly avowed Himself as the Christ.<\/p>\n Sent messengers – <\/B>In the original the word is angels; and the use of that word here shows that the word angel in the Bible does not always mean heavenly beings.<\/P> To make ready – <\/B>To prepare a place, lodgings, refreshments. He had no reason to expect that he would experience any kind treatment from the Samaritans if he came suddenly among them, and if they saw that he was going to Jerusalem. He therefore made provision beforehand, and thus has shown us that it is not improper to look out beforehand for the supply of our wants, and to guard against want and poverty.<\/P> Samaritans – <\/B>See the notes at Mat 10:5<\/span>. They had no dealings with the Jews, Joh 4:9<\/span>.<\/P><\/p>\n Verse 52. Sent messengers<\/B><\/I>] , angels<\/I>, literally; but this proves that the word angel<\/I> signifies a messenger of any kind, whether Divine or human. The messengers in this case were probably James<\/I> and John<\/I>.<\/P><\/p>\n The land of Canaan was by Joshua divided among all the twelve tribes of Israel, as we read in the book of Joshua, Jos 14:1-15<\/span>; 15:1-63<\/span>; 16:1-10<\/span>; 17:1-18<\/span> Saul, David, and Solomon (after the death of Joshua, the judges, and Samuel) ruled over them all; but Rehoboam the son of Solomon, following the counsel of the young men in his counsels, ten tribes revolted from the house of David, 1Ki 12:16-19<\/span>. Jeroboam brought them to idolatry, Luk 9:28<\/span>,29<\/span>, setting up calves at Dan and Bethel. So as that there was a perpetual difference between the Israelites and those that adhered to the house of David, both upon a civil and religious account. This held for about two hundred and sixty years. In the time of Hoshea, their last king, the king of Assyria, after a siege of three years, takes Samaria their head city. Of this we have an account, 2Ki 17:6<\/span>, as also of those sins which had provoked God to give them up into his hands. 2Ki 17:24<\/span> we read that the king of Assyria brought men from Babylon, Cuthah, Ava, Hamath, and Sepharvaim, and placed them in the cities of Samaria instead of the children of Israel.<\/I> He removed the most of the Jews, 2Ki 17:6<\/span>, and placed them in Halah and in Habor by the Driver of Gozan, and in the cities of the Medes.<\/I> After this there were several mutations in the government of those countries. We must not imagine that all the Jews were carried away, but the chief and principal men; and we read in 2Ki 17:1-41<\/span>, that a priest was sent back to instruct the new colonies how to worship the God of the country; because the lions infesting them, they conceived their non acquaintance with the methods of worship used toward the God of that country was the cause of it, 2Ki 17:26<\/span>,27<\/span>. But yet the people of the several nations brought thither worshipped their several idols, as may be read there, 2Ki 17:29<\/span>. After this, about a hundred and sixty years, these places came under the dominion of Cyrus, who gave the Jews a liberty to return, but it chiefly concerned those that belonged to the kingdom of Judah, for we read, Ezr 1:5<\/span>, that they were the fathers of Judah and Benjamin<\/I> that rose up<\/I> to return. The Samaritans were their enemies as to the building of the temple, Ezr 4:4<\/span>,5<\/span>. After this, they fell under the power, first of the Grecians, then of the Romans, under which they at this time were. This old feud, both upon the account of their former civil difference, and their difference in religion, still held, so as there was a great enmity (especially occasioned by their difference in religion) betwixt those who belonged to the tribes of Judah and Benjamin, and the Samaritans, who were indeed idolaters. The Jews (for so now were they only called who adhered to the house of David) had no dealings with them, Joh 4:9<\/span>; though it be the opinion of some that there were common civilities between them, and that the rigidness lay on the Jewish part, rather than the Samaritans. Galilee lay beyond Samaria, and it should seem was more generally inhabited by native Jews. The king of Assyria planted his colonies (it is probable) more in that which was now more strictly called Samaria, which lay in the heart of the land; which might be the reason that the inhabitants of that part now called Samaria were more absurd and gross in their worship than the inhabitants of Galilee, amongst whom Christ so long preached. From whence (as was before said) Christ going to Jerusalem to the feast was to pass. The Samaritans refused to receive him, which ordinarily, it is said, they did not to passengers, but possibly their knowing that he was going to the feast was the cause, or his attendants might be more than they liked. When we come to Joh 4:1-54<\/span> we shall hear more of the religious differences between the Jews and the Samaritans. This is enough to have at present noted. <\/P> <\/p>\n 52. messengers before his face . . .to make ready for him<\/B>He had not done this before; but now,instead of avoiding, He seems to court publicityall now hasteningto maturity.<\/P><\/p>\n And sent messengers before his face<\/strong>,…. Who very likely were his two disciples, James and John, since they so highly resented the ill treatment their master met with from the Samaritans:<\/p>\n and they went<\/strong>; before him:<\/p>\n and entered into a village of the Samaritans<\/strong>; or “city”, as the Vulgate Latin, Persic, and Ethiopic versions read, and so one of Stephens’s copies; which lay in the way from Galilee to Judea, where the disciples had been forbid to enter, that is, in order to preach,<\/p>\n Mt 10:5<\/span><\/p>\n To make ready for him<\/strong>; to prepare a lodging, and proper food for him and his disciples, as they passed on in their journey, for his intention was not to make any stay there.<\/p>\n Sent messengers <\/B> ( <\/SPAN><\/span>). As a precaution since he was going to Jerusalem through Samaria. The Samaritans did not object when people went north from Jerusalem through their country. He was repudiating Mount Gerizim by going by it to Jerusalem. This was an unusual precaution by Jesus and we do not know who the messengers ( angels <\/B>) were.<\/P> To make ready for him <\/B> ( <\/SPAN><\/span>). H<\/SPAN><\/span> is correct here, not <\/SPAN><\/span>. The only examples of the final use of <\/SPAN><\/span> with the infinitive in the N.T. are this one and Heb 7:9<\/span> (absolute use). In Acts 20:24<\/span> Westcott and Hort read <\/SPAN><\/span> and put <\/SPAN><\/span> in the margin (Robertson, Grammar<\/I>, p. 1091). <\/P> <\/p>\n <\/strong><\/p>\n 1) “And sent messengers before his face,” <\/strong>(kai apestrilen angelous pro prosopou autou) “And he sent (commissioned or mandated) messengers to go before his face,” ahead of His personal appearance, heralding His coming, for He had now declared Himself to be the Messiah, the Christ, Mat 16:13-17<\/span>.<\/p>\n 2) “And they went,” <\/strong>(kai proseuthentes) “And they went before him,” as He had bid them, Joh 7:3<\/span>; Joh 7:8<\/span>.<\/p>\n 3) “And entered into a village of the Samaritans,” <\/strong>(eiselthon eis komen Samariton) “And they entered into a village of Samaritans,” along the way, from Galilee up to Jerusalem.<\/p>\n 4) “To make ready for him.” <\/strong>(hoste hetoimasai auto) “So as to prepare for him,” for Jesus in His journey to Jerusalem; Our Lord sent men before Him, through all His itinerant ministry, “two by two,” into “every city and village,” wherever He went, Luk 10:1<\/span>.<\/p>\n 52. And he sent messengers. It is probable that our Lord was, at that time, attended by a great multitude of followers; for the messengers were not sent to prepare a splendid banquet, or to select some magnificent palace, but only to tell that a vast number of guests were approaching. They again, when excluded and repulsed, wait for their Master. Hence, too, we learn, what I remarked in the second place, (588) that when men differ among themselves about the doctrines of religion, they readily break out into hatred of each other; for it was an evidence of very bitter hatred to withhold food from the hungry, and lodging from those who were fatigued. But the Samaritans have such a dislike and enmity at the Jewish religion, that they look upon all who follow it as unworthy of any kindness. Perhaps, too, they were tormented with vexation at being despised; for they knew that their temple was detested by the Jews as profane, and that they were considered to be spurious and corrupt worshippers of God. But as the superstition once admitted kept so firm a hold of them, they strove, with wicked emulation, to maintain it to the last. At length the contention grew so hot, that it consumed both nations in one conflagration; for Josephus assures us that it was the torch which kindled the Jewish war. Now though Christ might easily have avoided that dislike, he chooses rather to profess himself to be a Jew, than by an indirect denial to procure a lodging. <\/p>\n (588) See our Author’s observations above on Luk 9:51<\/span>. <\/p>\n (52) And sent messengers before his face.<\/strong>It is remarkable that the words Samaria and Samaritan do not occur at all in St. Mark, and in St. Matthew in one passage only (Mat. 10:5<\/span>), and then in the command given to the Twelve that they were not to enter into any city of the Samaritans. St. Luke, on the other hand, seems to have carried his inquiries into that country, and to have treasured up whatever he could find of our Lords acts and words in relation to it. This seems accordingly the right place for a short account of the region and the people, and of their relations, in our Lords time, to their neighbours of Juda and Galilee. The city of Samaria (the modern Sebastieh<\/em>) first comes into notice as built by Omri to be the capital of the kingdom of Israel (1Ki. 16:23-24<\/span>). It continued to occupy that position till its capture by Salmaneser, B.C. 721. After the deportation of the ten tribes, Esar-haddon (Ezr. 4:2<\/span>; Ezr. 4:10<\/span>), after the manner of the great monarchs of the East, brought a mingled race from Babylon, and Cuthah, and Ava, and Hamath, and Sepharvaim (2Ki. 17:24<\/span>), to occupy the district thus left depopulated, and from these the Samaritans of later history were descended. They were accordingly of alien races, and their neighbours of Juda kept up the memory of their foreign origin by speaking of them as Cuthans. Under the influence of a priest of Israel sent by the king of Assyria, they became worshippers of Jehovah (2Ki. 17:41<\/span>), and on the return of Judah and Benjamin from the Captivity, they sought to be admitted as co-religionists, to share with them in the work of rebuilding the Temple, and therefore to obtain like privileges as worshippers in its courts. That claim was, however, refused, and they in return, B.C. 409, guided by Manasseh, a priest who had been expelled from Jerusalem by Nehemiah. for an unlawful marriage with the daughter of Sanballat the Horonite (Neh. 13:28<\/span>), obtained permission from the Persian king, Darius Nothus, to erect a temple on Mount Gerizim. Josephus, it should be added (Ant.<\/em> xi. 7), places the whole story much later, in the time of Darius Nothus and Alexander the Great. The new worship thus started, placed them at once in the position of a rival and schismatical sect, and their after-history presented the usual features of such antagonism. They refused all hospitality to pilgrims on their way to Jerusalem, or would way-lay and maltreat them on their journey. They mocked the more distant Jews by false signals of the rising of the Paschal moon at Jerusalem. (See Note on Luk. 6:1<\/span>.) They found their way into the Temple, and profaned it by scattering dead mens bones on the sacred pavement (Jos. Ant.<\/em> xviii. 2, 2; xx. 6, 1). Outrages of this kind rankled in the memory of the Jews, and they, in their turn, looked on the Samaritans as worse than heathen, had no dealings with them (Joh. 4:9<\/span>), cursed them in their synagogues, and even the wise of heart among them, like the son of Sirach, named them as a people that they abhorred (Sir. 1:25-26). Probably in consequence of this bitter hostility, the Samaritans became more and more jealous in their observance of the Law, boasted that they possessed the authentic copy of it, substituted Gerizim for Ebal in Deu. 27:4<\/span>, to support its claim to sanctity, and maintained that it, and not the Temple at Jerusalem, was the chosen sanctuary of Jehovah. They too were looking for the Messiah, who would come as a prophet, and tell them all things (Joh. 4:25<\/span>). Such was the relative position of the two races in the time of our Lords ministry, and we cannot wonder that He should have shrunk (if we may so speak) from bringing His disciples at the outset of their work into contact with a people who hated all Jews, and whom all Jews had learnt to hate in return. He Himself, however, had not shrunk from that contact; and some few of the disciples, at all events, had, at an early period of His work, learnt that He saw in them those whom He owned as the sheep of His flock, though not of that fold. In the narrative now before us we find Him apparently endeavouring to continue the work which had then begun so successfully. (See Note on Joh. 4:39<\/span>.)<\/p>\n 52<\/strong>. <\/strong> Sent messengers<\/em> The messengers were procured in Galilee; sent, <\/em> doubtless, from Capernaum, being probably prepared before the conversation with his brothers in John 7<\/span>. So that he could start upon his journey as soon as they had departed upon theirs, and, as he had the cross route, he might arrive first, if he had the same destination, namely, Jerusalem. <\/p>\n Before his face<\/em> Though unknown to the world and secret from his brothers, there was, as Alford says, “something of state” in this procedure. The purpose was to secure a safe and rapid transit through Samaria; as well as to summon a select body of his followers to form the organization of <\/p>\n the Seventy. To make ready for him<\/em> He had doubtless not a few adherents in Samaria, and these messengers would provide for him safety where there was danger, entertainment where there were friends, and means of instruction if there were ready hearers.<\/p>\n ‘And he sent messengers before his face, and they went, and entered into a village of the Samaritans, to prepare for him, and they did not receive him, because his face was as though he were going to Jerusalem.’<\/p>\n Many Galileans on going to Jerusalem would go via Peraea in order to avoid Samaria precisely for this reason, because the Samaritans, who had had their own temple on Mount Gerizim before it was destroyed and hated the Temple in Jerusalem (so much so that they had turned down Herod’s offer to rebuild their temple because he was also intending to build one in Jerusalem), often physically opposed any Galileans if they were on their way to Jerusalem, while if they were going the other way there was no such problem.<\/p>\n But Jesus had a purpose for going through Samaria, for He ‘sent forth’ (apostellein) messengers ‘before His face’ (pro prosopou) to prepare the way for His coming. If we compare how the seventy are also ‘sent forth’ (apostellein) ‘before His face’ (pro prosopou) to cities to which He is to come, presumably again to prepare the way for His coming, everything suggests that these messengers were intended also to prepare for the proclamation of the Kingly Rule of God.<\/p>\n Up to this point in Luke the verb ‘prepare’ has been used exclusively with the significance of God preparing His people to receive His word through His servants (Luk 1:17<\/span>; Luk 1:76<\/span>; Luk 2:31<\/span>; Luk 3:4<\/span>). This gives support to the idea that we have the same use here. (Although it is used later in Luke in its more mundane meaning).<\/p>\n But on the arrival of His messengers at one of their villages, on being told that Jesus was on the way to Jerusalem they refused to receive Him or His message. This is the first time we learn of Jesus sending messengers before Him. The sending of the seventy will be the second. Such indications must therefore be seen as significant and as pointing to the same purpose, they are messengers who have come to prepare the way of the Lord.<\/p>\n Jesus Is Warned Off By The Samaritans Because He Is Headed For Jerusalem (9:52-56).<\/p>\n <\/strong><\/p>\n The Samaritans lived between Galilee and Judaea in Samaria, in and around Shechem, and had grown into quite a large community. We do not really know from where they came. They were possibly originally a group of religious purists from the Northern tribes who settled there in order to establish their own form of Israelite religion based on the Law of Moses, a belief in the coming Taheb (Redeemer) and a Temple established at Mount Gerizim. That Temple was destroyed by John Hyrcanus for which the Jews were never forgiven. They were, however, not regarded by the Jews as Gentiles for they observed the rules of cleanliness and were thus seen as ‘half-Jews’, especially at better times.<\/p>\n We note that Jesus ‘sent (apostello) messengers (angels) before His face (prosopon)’ to go to a Samaritan village who were ‘to make ready for Him.’ The verb for ‘make ready’ could simply mean to assure lodgings, but it is also used of John the Baptiser ‘preparing the way for the Lord’, where it clearly signifies preaching. In Luk 10:1<\/span> the seventy are similarly sent (apostello) before His face (prosopon) to every city to which He was about to come (to prepare the way of the Lord), and in their case it clearly included proclamation of the Kingly Rule of God.<\/p>\n Therefore knowing Jesus, and remembering John 4<\/span>, we must surely recognise that they would not only arrange lodgings but would also expect to proclaim the Kingly Rule of God. The Samaritans in the normal course of events might well have been expected to hear His message. It is difficult to believe that Jesus would expect to lodge in a city and not proclaim His message. His fame as a preacher and healer had spread far and wide, and it is incredible to suggest that the Samaritans would not know of it. They lived too near to Galilee, even if we ignore Jesus’ impact on them in John 4<\/span>. This explains why this story is here. It is the first stage in the fulfilment of ‘Your Kingly Rule come’ in the Lord’s prayer. And to Luke it is the more important because it represents his first attempt to speak of Jesus as aiming to minister to ‘foreigners’ (non-Jews).<\/p>\n A further reason for telling this story about the Samaritans is in order to bring out that, while in some ways Jesus has been very much like Elijah and Elisha in what He has done, He is of a totally different spirit. He had come to seek and save, not to seek and destroy. It may also be significant that just as Jesus’ initial ministry had commenced with a rejection by the Jews (Luk 4:16-30<\/span>), so His first ministry after the commencement of His purpose to go to Jerusalem commences with rejection by the Samaritans.<\/p>\n Above all the story makes clear that Jesus does not bring His own judgment on the Samaritans. In the future the Good News will be opened to them again (Acts 8<\/span>) and indeed John tells us that there has already been an initial outreach to the Samaritans as early as John 4<\/span>. But if they were seen as having rejected His message as well as His presence it helps to explain why James and John were so incensed that this particular village had rejected him, and why they were quite sure that He would want to punish them. In their view fire was far more effective than shaking off dust at indicating judgment. That would certainly make people around sit up!<\/p>\n What a contrast between Jesus’ attitude and theirs. And what a difference there is between Jesus’ attitude and that of His opponents. They were seeking to destroy Him because they rejected His teaching. Jesus here is called on to destroy people who reject Him, people whose teaching He disagrees with and who will not receive Him, but He refuses to do so. Jesus used words as His weapons, not hatred and fire. He would not be like His opponents. Rather He would leave judgment in His Father’s hands.<\/p>\n Analysis.<\/p>\n a <\/strong> He sent forth messengers before His face, and they went, and entered into a village of the Samaritans, to make ready for Him (Luk 9:52<\/span>).<\/p>\n b <\/strong> They did not receive Him, because His face was as though He were going to Jerusalem (Luk 9:52-53<\/span>).<\/p>\n c <\/strong> When His disciples James and John saw this, they said, “Lord, is it your will that we bid fire to come down from heaven, and consume them?” (Luk 9:54<\/span>).<\/p>\n b <\/strong> But he turned, and rebuked them (Luk 9:55<\/span>).<\/p>\n a <\/strong> And they went to another village (Luk 9:56<\/span>).<\/p>\n Note how in ‘a’ Jesus has chosen a village where they are to prepare for Him, and in the parallel because of His rejection they go to another village. In ‘b’ they receive a hot reception, and in the parallel James and John receive a hot reception from Jesus. Central to the passage is the request of James and John which enable Him to reveal His true nature, and His true goodness.<\/p>\n Jesus Attempts To Bring The Kingly Rule of God to the Samaritans But Is Rejected.<\/p>\n Luk 9:52-53<\/span><\/em><\/strong>. <\/strong>And sent messengers<\/em><\/strong><\/strong> Our Lord did not now travel privately to Jerusalem, as he had often done before; but, declaring his intention publicly, entered on the journey with the most perfect fortitude.The road to Jerusalem from Galilee lay through Samaria; wherefore, as the inhabitants of this country bore the greatest ill-will to all that worshipped in Jerusalem, Jesus thought it necessary to send messengers before him, with orders to find out quarters for him in one of the villages: but the inhabitants refused to receive him, because his intention in this journey was publicly known. The Samaritans could not well refuse lodgings to all the travellers who went to Jerusalem, as the high road lay through their country: such travellers only as went thither professedly to worship, were the objects of their indignation. Hence the expression, because his face was as though he would go to Jerusalem, <\/em>must imply, that his design of worshipping at Jerusalem was known to the Samaritans. <\/p>\n Luk 9:52-53<\/span> . does not as yet mean the Seventy (Neander), and is as at Luk 4:29<\/span> .<\/p>\n ] to make preparation for Him<\/em> (comp. Mar 14:15<\/span> ), i.e.<\/em> in this case: , Euthymius Zigabenus.<\/p>\n Luk 9:53<\/span> . ] which rejection was accomplished by the refusal given to the messengers that He had sent before, see Luk 9:52<\/span> . That Jesus Himself followed them is not implied in the passage.<\/p>\n , not because generally<\/em> He was journeying towards Jerusalem ( , Euthymius Zigabenus; so usually), for through Samaria passed the usual<\/em> pilgrims’ road of the Galilaeans, Josephus, Antt<\/em> . xx. 6. 1; Vit<\/em> . 52; comp. Joh 4:4<\/span> ; nor yet because they were unwilling to lodge “ so large a Jewish procession<\/em> ” as the train of disciples (Lange, of which, however, nothing appears), but because they regarded an alleged. Messiah journeying towards Jerusalem as not being the actual Messiah<\/em> . We must think of the messengers themselves announcing Jesus as the Messiah, although, besides, according to Joh 4<\/span> , the knowledge of His Messianic call might have already penetrated from Galilee to the Samaritan villages; but the Samaritans did not expect of the Messiah (see the expositors on Joh 4:25<\/span> ) the observance of festivals in Jerusalem<\/em> , but the restoration and glorification of the worship upon Gerizim<\/em> . (Comp. Bertholdt, Christol<\/em> . p. 21 f.) The expression . . is a Hebraism, Exo 33:14<\/span> ; 2Sa 17:11<\/span> .<\/p>\n 52.<\/strong> ] <\/strong> ,<\/strong> who have been assumed without reason to have been James and John.<\/p>\n <\/strong> .<\/strong> ] On the enmity of the Jews and Samaritans, see note, Joh 4:9<\/span> . The publicity now courted by our Lord is in remarkable contrast to His former avoidance of notice, and is a feature of the close of His ministry<\/em> , giving rise to the accusation of ch. Luk 23:5<\/span> .<\/p>\n <\/strong> . <\/strong> <\/strong> must mean something more, surely, than to provide board and lodging; there is a solemnity about the sentence which forbids that supposition. It must have been to announce the coming of Jesus as the Messiah, which He did not conceal in Samaria, as in Juda and Galilee, see Joh 4:26<\/span> ; and the refusal of the Samaritans must have been grounded on the jealousy excited by the preference shewn for the Jewish rites and metropolis.<\/p>\n They<\/em> expected that the Messiah would have confirmed their anti-Jewish rites and Gerizim temple, instead of going up solemnly to Jerusalem, and thereby condemning them.<\/p>\n Luk 9:52-56<\/span> . Samaritan intolerance<\/em> . : this indicates an intention to go southward through Samaritan territory. Not an unusual thing. Josephus (Antiq., xx., vi. 1) states that it was the custom for Galileans going to Jerusalem to the feasts to pass through Samaria. ., to prepare for Him, i.e.<\/em> , to find lodgings for the night. in view of the sequel can only express tendency or intention. .: the aorist, implying “that they at once rejected Him,” Farrar (C. G. T.). introduces the reason: Christ’s face was, looked like, going to Jerusalem. In view of what Josephus states, this hardly accounts for the inhospitable treatment. Perhaps the manner of the messengers had something to do with it. Had Jesus gone Himself the result might have been different. Perhaps He was making an experiment to see how His followers and the Samaritans would get on together. In that case the result would make Him change His plan, and turn aside from Samaria into Peraea. If so then Baur’s idea of a Samaritan ministry is a misnomer.<\/p>\n before. Greek. pro. App-104. Samaritans. Compare 2Ki 17:26-33. <\/p>\n ready = to prepare [reception]. <\/p>\n 52.] , who have been assumed without reason to have been James and John.<\/p>\n .] On the enmity of the Jews and Samaritans, see note, Joh 4:9. The publicity now courted by our Lord is in remarkable contrast to His former avoidance of notice, and is a feature of the close of His ministry, giving rise to the accusation of ch. Luk 23:5.<\/p>\n . must mean something more, surely, than to provide board and lodging; there is a solemnity about the sentence which forbids that supposition. It must have been to announce the coming of Jesus as the Messiah, which He did not conceal in Samaria, as in Juda and Galilee, see Joh 4:26; and the refusal of the Samaritans must have been grounded on the jealousy excited by the preference shewn for the Jewish rites and metropolis.<\/p>\n They expected that the Messiah would have confirmed their anti-Jewish rites and Gerizim temple, instead of going up solemnly to Jerusalem, and thereby condemning them.<\/p>\n Luk 9:52. , to make ready) viz. whatever needed to be made ready. The great number of those accompanying Him required this: nor was Jesus wont in His place of lodging to blend with the crowd.<\/p>\n sent: Luk 7:27, Luk 10:1, Mal 3:1 <\/p>\n and they: Mat 10:5 <\/p>\n the Samaritans: Luk 10:33, Luk 17:16, 2Ki 17:24-33, Ezr 4:1-5, Joh 8:48 <\/p>\n Reciprocal: Gen 32:3 – sent Luk 17:11 – General Joh 4:4 – General Joh 4:9 – for Act 8:25 – villages<\/p>\n 2<\/p>\n Jesus was in Galilee at this time which would make it necessary to go through Samaria. He sent some ahead to find a place for him to stop on the way.<\/p>\n And sent messengers before his face: and they went, and entered into a village of the Samaritans, to make ready for him. <\/p>\n [Into a village of the Samaritans.] It may be a question, whether the Jews, in their journeying to and from Jerusalem, would ordinarily deign to lodge in any of the Samaritan towns. But if necessity should at any time compel them to betake themselves into any of their inns, we must know that nothing but their mere hatred to the nation could forbid them: for “their land was clean, their waters were clean, their dwellings were clean, and their roads were clean.” So that there could be no offence or danger of uncleanness in their dwelling; and so long as the Samaritans, in most things, came the nearest the Jewish religion of all others, there was less danger of being defiled either in their meats or beds or tables, etc.<\/p>\n Luk 9:52. Messengers. Supposed, but without reason, to have been the two sons of Zebedee.<\/p>\n Samaritans. The direct route towards Jerusalem from Galilee lay through Samaria. See on Mat 10:5; and Joh 4:9.<\/p>\n To make ready for him. To provide food and shelter for Him and the large party accompanying Him. Yet they probably also announced His coming as the Messiah; since in Samaria this was not concealed (Joh 4:26) as in Judea and Galilee.<\/p>\n Our Saviour was now going from Galilee to Jerusalem, and being to pass through a village of Samaria, he sent messengers before him to prepare entertainment for him. The Son of God, who was heir of all things, sends to, and sues for a lodging in, a Samaritan cottage. <\/p>\n Oh blessed Saviour, how can we be abased enough for thee, who thus neglected thyself fo us! It was thy pleasure to appear, not in the figure of a prince, but in the form of a servant, yet the people in the Samaritan village would not receive him!<\/p>\n Strange! To hear the Son of God sue for a lodging, and be denied; but the reason was, the difference of religion which was between the Jews and the Samaritans: the Jews worshipped at the temple of their own, built upon Mount Gerizim. Upon the building of this new temple there arose so great a feud between the Jews and the Samaritans, and in the process of time such an implacable hatred, that they would not show a common civility to one another. A Samaritan’s bread to a Jew, was no better than swine’s flesh; they would rather thirst than drink a draught of Samaritan water.<\/p>\n Hence we learn, that no enmity is so desperate as that which arises from matters of religion.<\/p>\n Vers. 52-56. The Refusal.<\/p>\n This tentative message of Jesus does not prove, as Meyer and Bleek think, that He had the intention of penetrating farther into Samaria, and of going directly to Jerusalem in that way. He desired to do a work in the north of that province, like that which had succeeded so admirably in the south (John 4). <\/p>\n The sending of messengers was indispensable, on account of the numerous retinue which accompanied Him. The reading (Luk 9:52), though less supported, appears to us preferable to the reading , which is probably taken from Luk 9:56.<\/p>\n In general, the Samaritans put no obstacle in the way of Jews travelling through their country. It was even by this route, according to Josephus, that the Galileans usually went to Jerusalem; but Samaritan toleration did not go so far as to offer hospitality. The aim of Jesus was to remove the wall which for long centuries had separated the two peoples.<\/p>\n The Hebraism, (Luk 9:53), (Exo 33:14; 2Sa 17:11), proves an Aramaic document.<\/p>\n The conduct of James and John betrays a state of exaltation, which was perhaps still due to the impression produced by the transfiguration scene. The proposal which they make to Jesus seems to be related to the recent appearance of Elias. This remark does not lose its truth, even if the words, as did Elias, which several Alex. omit, are not authentic. <\/p>\n Perhaps this addition was meant to extenuate the fault of the disciples; but it may also have been left out to prevent the rebuke of Jesus from falling on the prophet, or because the Gnostics employed this passage against the authority of the O. T. (Tertullian, Adv. Marc. 4.23). The most natural supposition after all is, that the passage is an explanatory gloss.<\/p>\n Is the surname of sons of thunder, given by Jesus to James and John, to be dated from this circumstance? We think not. Jesus would not have perpetuated the memory of a fault committed by His two beloved disciples.<\/p>\n The phrase, He turned (Luk 9:55), is explained by the fact that Jesus was walking at the head of the company.<\/p>\n A great many Alex. and Byz. MSS. agree in rejecting the last words of this verse, And said, Ye know not; but the oldest versions, the Itala and Peschito, confirm its authenticity; and it is probable that the cause of the omission is nothing else than the confounding of the words KAI EME with the following KAI . They may be understood in three ways: either interrogatively, Know ye not what is the new spiritual reign which I bring in, and of which you are to be the instruments, that of meekness?or affirmatively, with the same sense, Ye know not yet… The third meaning is much more severe: Ye know not of what spirit you are the instruments when speaking thus; you think that you are working a miracle of faith in my service, but you are obeying a spirit alien from mine. This last meaning, which is that of St. Augustine and of Calvin, is more in keeping with the expression , He rebuked them. <\/p>\n The following words (Luk 9:56), For the Son of man is not come to destroy men’s lives, but to save them, are wanting in the same authorities as the preceding, and in the Cantabrigian besides. It is a gloss brought in from Luk 19:10 and Mat 18:11. In these words there are, besides, numerous variations, as is usual in interpolated passages. Here, probably, we have the beginning of those many alterations in the text which are remarked in this piece. The copyists, rendered distrustful by the first gloss, seem to have taken the liberty of making arbitrary corrections in the rest of the passage. The suspicion of Gnostic interpolations may have equally contributed to the same result. <\/p>\n Jesus offered, but did not impose Himself (Luk 8:37); He withdrew. Was the other village where He was received Jewish or Samaritan? Jewish, most probably; otherwise the difference of treatment experienced in two villages belonging to the same people would have been more expressly emphasized. <\/p>\n The messengers that Jesus sent ahead were apparently to arrange overnight accommodations for Jesus and His disciples. They were not on a preaching mission. Normally Jewish pilgrims on their way from Galilee to Jerusalem passed through Samaria. [Note: Marshall, The Gospel . . ., p. 406.] <\/span> They were unwelcome visitors. A trip directly from Galilee to Jerusalem would have taken about three days.<\/p>\n The Jews had regarded the Samaritans as apostates and half-pagans since the Exile. The Samaritans descended from the poor Israelites who remained in the land when the Assyrians captured the northern kingdom of Israel in 722 B.C. The Jews believed that the Samaritans were the descendants of Israelites who intermarried with the non-Jews that the Assyrian kings imported into the land (2Ki 17:6; 2Ki 17:24-26). However they may have been the pureblooded descendants of the Israelites who remained in the land. [Note: Zondervan Pictorial Bible Encyclopedia, s.v. "Samaritans," by J. L. Kelso, pp. 244-47.] <\/span> Eventually the Samaritans rejected the Jewish Scriptures except the Pentateuch. The two groups of people were still mutually hostile in Jesus’ day (cf. Joh 4:9). [Note: Jeremias, Jerusalem in . . ., pp. 352-58.] <\/span><\/p>\n And sent messengers before his face: and they went, and entered into a village of the Samaritans, to make ready for him. 52. sent messengers ] Some think that they were two of the Seventy disciples; others that they were James and John. into a village of the Samaritans ] On the way to Judaea … Continue reading “Exegetical and Hermeneutical Commentary of Luke 9:52”<\/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-25337","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-commentary"],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.biblia.work\/bible-commentary\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/25337","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=25337"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/www.biblia.work\/bible-commentary\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/25337\/revisions"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.biblia.work\/bible-commentary\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=25337"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.biblia.work\/bible-commentary\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=25337"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.biblia.work\/bible-commentary\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=25337"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}Fuente: The Cambridge Bible for Schools and Colleges<\/b><\/i><\/h4>\n
Fuente: Albert Barnes’ Notes on the Bible<\/b><\/i><\/h4>\n
Fuente: Adam Clarke’s Commentary and Critical Notes on the Bible<\/b><\/i><\/h4>\n
Fuente: English Annotations on the Holy Bible by Matthew Poole<\/b><\/i><\/h4>\n
Fuente: Jamieson, Fausset and Brown’s Commentary Critical and Explanatory on the Whole Bible <\/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: Calvin’s Complete Commentary<\/b><\/i><\/h4>\n
Fuente: Ellicott’s Commentary for English Readers (Old and New Testaments)<\/b><\/i><\/h4>\n
Fuente: Whedon’s Commentary on the Old and New Testaments<\/b><\/i><\/h4>\n
Fuente: Commentary Series on the Bible by Peter Pett<\/b><\/i><\/h4>\n
Fuente: Commentary Series on the Bible by Peter Pett<\/b><\/i><\/h4>\n
Fuente: Commentary on the Holy Bible by Thomas Coke<\/b><\/i><\/h4>\n
Fuente: Heinrich August Wilhelm Meyer’s New Testament Commentary<\/b><\/i><\/h4>\n
Fuente: Henry Alford’s Greek Testament<\/b><\/i><\/h4>\n
Fuente: The Expositors Greek Testament by Robertson<\/b><\/i><\/h4>\n
Fuente: Companion Bible Notes, Appendices and Graphics<\/b><\/i><\/h4>\n
Fuente: The Greek Testament<\/b><\/i><\/h4>\n
Fuente: Gnomon of the New Testament<\/b><\/i><\/h4>\n
Fuente: The Treasury of Scripture Knowledge<\/b><\/i><\/h4>\n
Fuente: Combined Bible Commentary<\/b><\/i><\/h4>\n
Fuente: Lightfoot Commentary Gospels<\/b><\/i><\/h4>\n
Fuente: A Popular Commentary on the New Testament<\/b><\/i><\/h4>\n
Fuente: Expository Notes with Practical Observations on the New Testament<\/b><\/i><\/h4>\n
Fuente: Godet Commentary (Luke, John, Romans and 1 Corinthians)<\/b><\/i><\/h4>\n
Fuente: Expository Notes of Dr. Constable (Old and New Testaments)<\/b><\/i><\/h4>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"