28<\/strong>. in the days of Lot<\/em> ] See Gen 19:15-25<\/span>; Jdg 1:7<\/span>; Eze 16:46-56<\/span>; Amo 4:11<\/span>; Isa 13:19<\/span>.<\/p>\n They did eat … – <\/B>They were busy in the affairs of this life, as if nothing were about to happen.<\/P> The same day … – <\/B>See Gen 19:23-25<\/span>. It rained. The word here used might have been rendered he rained. In Genesis it is said that the Lord did it.<\/P> Fire and brimstone – <\/B>God destroyed Sodom on account of its great wickedness. He took vengeance on it for its sins; and the example of Sodom is set before people to deter them from committing great transgressions, and as a full proof that God will punish the guilty. See Jud 1:7<\/span>; also Isa 1:10<\/span>; Jer 23:14<\/span>. Yet, in overthrowing it, he used natural means. He is not to be supposed to have created fire and brimstone for the occasion, but to have directed the natural means at his disposal for their overthrow; as he did not create the waters to drown the world, but merely broke up the fountains of the great deep and opened the windows of heaven. Sodom and Gomorrah, Admah and Zeboim Deu 29:23<\/span>, were four great cities, on a plain where is now the Dead Sea, at the southeast of Palestine, and into which the river Jordan flows. They were built on ground which abounded, doubtless, as all that region now does, in bitumen or naphtha, which is easily kindled, and which burns with great intensity. The phrase fire and brimstone is a Hebrew form of expression, denoting sulphurous fire, or fire having the smell of sulphur; and may denote a volcanic eruption, or any burning like that of naphtha. There is no improbability in supposing either that this destruction was accomplished by lightning, which ignited the naphtha, or that it was a volcanic eruption, which, by direction of God, overthrew the wicked cities.<\/P> From heaven – <\/B>By command of God, or from the sky. To the people of Sodom it had the appearance of coming from heaven, as all volcanic eruptions would have. Hundreds of towns have been overthrown in this way, and all by the agency of God. He rules the elements, and makes them his instruments, at his pleasure, in accomplishing the destruction of the wicked.<\/P> Luk 17:30<\/B><\/span><\/P> Even thus … – <\/B>Destruction came upon the old world, and upon Sodom, suddenly; when they were engaged in other things, and little expecting this. So suddenly and unexpectedly, says he, shall destruction come upon the Jewish people. See the notes at Matt. 24<\/span>.<\/P> <\/p>\n Likewise also as it was in the days of Lot<\/strong>,…. When he lived in Sodom, and before, and at the time of the destruction of that city with other neighbouring ones:<\/p>\n they did eat, they drank<\/strong>; [See comments on Lu 17:27]<\/span>, and<\/p>\n Eze 16:49<\/span>. This is to be understood of the inhabitants of Sodom, and the other cities that perished with it:<\/p>\n they bought, they sold<\/strong>: they traded among themselves, and with their neighbours; and, as it appears from the text referred to, they had no regard to the poor and needy; they made no conscience of defrauding and oppressing them:<\/p>\n they planted<\/strong>; vineyards, and fruit trees; living in a very fruitful soil, like the garden of God, Ge 13:10<\/span><\/p>\n they builded<\/strong>; houses for themselves and posterity; and thus, as a Jewish writer h observes of them, in agreement with our Lord’s design in all this, being filled with the increase of the earth, they lived in security, peace, and tranquillity.<\/p>\n h Pirke Eliezer, c. 25.<\/p>\n Note the same sharp contrast between the imperfects here ( ate <\/B> <\/SPAN><\/span>,<\/P> drank <\/B> <\/SPAN><\/span>,<\/P> bought <\/B> <\/SPAN><\/span>,<\/P> sold <\/B> <\/SPAN><\/span>,<\/P> planted <\/B> <\/SPAN><\/span>,<\/P> builded <\/B> <\/SPAN><\/span>) and the aorists in verse 29<\/span> ( went out <\/B> <\/SPAN><\/span>,<\/P> rained <\/B> <\/SPAN><\/span>,<\/P> destroyed <\/B> <\/SPAN><\/span>). <\/P> <\/p>\n <\/strong><\/p>\n 1) “Likewise also as it was in the days of Lot;” <\/strong>(homoios kathos egeneto en tais hemerais Lot) “in a like manner as it was (existed) in the days of Lot,” in Sodom and Gomorrha, and the cities round about, 2Pe 2:6-8<\/span>. This is another New Testament attestation of the authentic history of the Old Testament, Gen 19:23-24<\/span>.<\/p>\n 2) “They did eat, they drank,” <\/strong>(esthion epinon) “They were eating and drinking,” wholly given over to hedonistic things of the flesh, of this life, with disregards for the giver of life, 1Jn 2:17-19<\/span>.<\/p>\n 3) “They bought, they sold,” <\/strong>(egorazon epoloun) “Continually buying and selling,” commercializing and profiteering, for earthly gain of the moment, covetously they “lived it up,” Luk 12:15<\/span>.<\/p>\n 4) “They planted, they builded;” <\/strong>(ephuteuon okodomoun) “They were planting and they were building,” engaging in agricultural and residential and commercial business priorities of every day life, caring not for God and righteousness, or considering the welfare of their eternal souls. They were so much like the rich barn builder whom Jesus addressed as a fool, foolish one, Luk 12:20-21<\/span>. These worldly pursuits, “me first” priorities continued till judgment fell, both in Noah and Lot’s time.<\/p>\n (28) Likewise also as it was in the days of Lot.<\/strong>The illustration does not occur in the otherwise parallel passage of Mat. 24:26-27<\/span>, but was naturally suggested by our Lords frequent reference to the Cities of the Plain (Luk. 10:12<\/span>; Mat. 10:15<\/span>; Mat. 11:23<\/span>); The allusion to Lot in 2Pe. 2:7<\/span>, may perhaps be traced to the impression made on the Apostle by this revival of the history.<\/p>\n They bought, they sold.<\/strong>As in the preceding verse, the imperfect tense is used, they were buying, they were selling.<\/em> There is a characteristic difference in the insertion of these verbs and the two which follow, as indicating a higher advance in social life than in the days of Noah.<\/p>\n 28<\/strong>. <\/strong> Days of Lot<\/em> Were this entire part 26-37 a fragmentary report by a fourth hand of some passage in the great discourse on Olivet, this passage would be additional to what has been furnished by any other hand. <\/p>\n Eat drank bought sold planted builded<\/em> All these describe not any special course of sinfulness, but a regular train of careless daily life, expecting no sudden advent of destruction.<\/p>\n “In the same way even as it occurred in the days of Lot. They ate, they drank, they bought, they sold, they planted, they built, but in the day that Lot went out from Sodom it rained fire and brimstone from heaven, and destroyed them all.”<\/p>\n A second example is now given, the days of Lot, which is ‘in the same way’, thus again being compared with the days of the Son of man. They ate and they drank, they participated in all the activities which made up their lives, firmly establishing themselves in the world, but when Lot was taken out of Sodom (because his heart was grieved at their utterly sinful behaviour – 2Pe 2:7-8<\/span>) fire and brimstone came down from heaven and destroyed them all. Once again we have the eating and drinking, which parallel the life of the Son of Man and those in the world in His day, and the ‘going out’ which parallels His crucifixion and resurrection when He too was taken out of the world. From that moment on the final judgment on the world was determined. We can compare here ‘the days drew near for Him to be received up’ (Luk 9:51<\/span>) which also includes more than just the crucifixion.<\/p>\n Luk 17:28-30<\/span> . ] does not belong to (Bornemann, who assumes a Latinism: perdidit omnes pariter atque ut accidit<\/em> ), against which is to be set the similarity of the twofold , Luk 17:27<\/span> ; Luk 17:29<\/span> . Moreover, we are not to conceive of again after . (Paulus, Bleek), against which is Luk 17:30<\/span> ; but similiter quoque, sicuti accidit<\/em> , etc. This is afterwards again taken up<\/em> by , Luk 17:30<\/span> , and the that lies between the two is epexegetically<\/em> annexed to the , as in Luk 7:11<\/span> , Luk 8:40<\/span> , and frequently; so that is not to be put in a parenthesis at all (Lachmann), but neither is any point to be placed after (Tischendorf).<\/p>\n Luk 17:29<\/span> f. ] scil<\/em> . . Comp. Mat 5:45<\/span> ; Gen 19:24<\/span> . In remembrance of the latter passage the subject is presupposed as known, and hence the verb is not intransitive, as at Rev 11:6<\/span> (Grotius). On the use of the word in classical Greek, see Lobeck, ad Phryn<\/em> . p. 291.<\/p>\n . ] Comp. Hom. Od<\/em> . xxii. 493; it is not to be transformed into lightnings<\/em> (Kuinoel); Jesus follows the representation of Gen 19<\/span><\/p>\n ] is revealed<\/em> , 1Pe 5:4 ; 1Jn 2:28<\/span> ; 1Jn 3:2<\/span> . Up to that time He is hidden<\/em> with God in His glory, Col 3:3<\/span> f.; 2Th 1:7 ; 1Co 1:7<\/span> ; 1Pe 1:7 ; 1Pe 4:13<\/span> .<\/p>\n 28 Likewise also as it was in the days of Lot; they did eat, they drank, they bought, they sold, they planted, they builded; <\/p>\n<\/p>\n <\/strong><\/p>\n Ver. 28. They did eat, they drank<\/strong> ] It is not said here, as Luk 17:27<\/span> , they married wives; they affected rather those odious concubitus, qui non utrinque resolvunt<\/em> (Ovid). The Turkish pashas have their catamites, a<\/em> which are their serious loves; for their wives are used but to dress their meat, to laundress, and for reputation, saith one that had been among them. Sodomy (saith he) in the Levant is not held a vice. (Blount’s Voyage.)<\/p>\n<\/p>\n a<\/em> A boy kept for unnatural purposes. D <\/p>\n 28.<\/strong> ] Bornemann joins with the former verse but thus the parallelism (see Luk 17:29<\/span> , end) is broken.<\/p>\n Luk 17:28<\/span> . : introducing a new comparison = similarly, as it was in the days, etc. so shall it be in the day of, etc. (Luk 17:30<\/span> ). Bornemann ingeniously connects with going before, and, treating it as a Latinism, renders perdidit omnes pariter<\/em> . , etc.: again a series of unconnected verbs, and a larger, six<\/em> , and all in the imperfect tense. This second comparison, taken from Lot’s history, is not given in Mt. The suddenness of the catastrophe makes it very apposite.<\/p>\n also = even. <\/p>\n the days of Lot. See Gen 19:15-25. Isa 13:19. Isa 16:46-56.<\/p>\n Amo 4:11. Jud 1:7. App-117. <\/p>\n 28.] Bornemann joins with the former verse-but thus the parallelism (see Luk 17:29, end) is broken.<\/p>\n Luk 17:28. , in the days of Lot) Gen 19:14.-, they were buying) Already the world had become more motley in its employments in the time of Lot, than in that of Noah; how much more so in our times, when the arts of merchandise, navigation, war, the bar [or the market], the school, the senate, etc., have been advanced to the highest perfection!<\/p>\n Gen 13:13, Gen 18:20, Gen 18:21, Gen 19:4-15, Eze 16:49, Eze 16:50, Jam 5:1-5 <\/p>\n Reciprocal: Gen 4:17 – and he Gen 19:14 – as one Gen 19:24 – the Lord Deu 8:12 – and hast built Jdg 20:41 – were amazed Job 21:13 – They Jer 50:40 – General Eze 16:46 – thy younger sister Rom 13:13 – rioting 2Pe 2:6 – turning<\/p>\n THREE CRITICAL DAYS<\/p>\n And as it was in the days of Noe when the Son of Man is revealed.<\/p>\n Luk 17:26; Luk 17:28; Luk 17:30<\/p>\n The subject is the Kingdom of God. A number of Pharisees had forced themselves upon our Lord with the question, when the Kingdom of God should come? And our Lord answered them. The Kingdom of God, He said, cometh not with observation or outward show. It is a spiritual kingdom in the hearts and consciences of men. To the inquiring Pharisees He said no more. But to His disciples He gives the further teaching contained in the passage in which our text occurs.<\/p>\n There can be no doubt that our Lord chose out from Old Testament history these two days, as being above all others typical of the day when the Son of Man should be revealed.<\/p>\n I. Days of Noah.These, as we gather from the early chapters of Genesis, were<\/p>\n (1) Days of astounding and widespread wickedness.<\/p>\n (2) Days of unbelief and careless ease.<\/p>\n (3) Days in which the mercy of God was especially manifested.<\/p>\n (4) Days of a long probation.<\/p>\n II. Days of Lot.When we consider the days of Lot we find much the same characteristics as those which marked the days of Noah. A difference between the days of Noah and Lot is remarkable when we contrast the characters of these two men. Noah was a sincere man, walking with God, wholly consecrated to His service, separated from the evil world. With Lot it was different. He was a just man, vexed at the sinfulness around him, but this is almost all that can be said. There is nothing very lovely in his character. He was weak and selfish, a moral coward.<\/p>\n III. The day of the Son of Man.And Christ says, As it was of Noah and Lot, even thus shall it be in the day when the Son of Man is revealed. Thusfollowing our line of thoughtwe may expect that that day will be marked by abounding and widespread wickedness. There will be less sanctity surrounding the marriage state and family life; lawlessness will abound; unbelief will increase and men will scoff at the threatenings of judgments. And as it was in the days of Noah and Lot, so in that coming day it will be seen that the love and mercy of God have been fully manifested, yea, more fully than in the former days. Deliverance has been brought within the reach of man, not by a material ark or an angel, but by the eternal Son of God, incarnate for man.<\/p>\n Rev. Dr. Noyes.<\/p>\n Illustration<\/p>\n The ark itself was a token of Gods mercy, telling of a place of deliverance. Every plank added to the ark was a call to men to repentance and faith in God. Its extraordinary size, the length of time in which it was buildingthese were Gods warnings given in mercy to a guilty world that a day of judgment must come. Some during the one hundred and twenty years may have believed and died in faith; but it would seem at the time of the Flood there were none found faithful but Noah and those who entered with him into the ark. And so if the world was to be saved the corrupt must be destroyed. The cause of righteousness had at length but one efficient representative in the person of Noah, and he, much like a lodge in a garden of cucumberslike a besieged citythe object of profane mockery and scorn, taunted, reviled, plied with every weapon fitted to overcome his constancy, and if not in himself, at least in his family, in danger of suffering shipwreck amid the swelling wave of wickedness around him. It was to save him, and with him the cause of God, from this source of imminent danger and perdition that the Flood was sent; and it could only do so by effectually separating between him and the seed of evildoers, engulphing them in ruin, and sustaining him in his temporary home.<\/p>\n 8<\/p>\n The remarks about what the people were doing in the days of Lot, receive the same comments that are cited from the preceding verses.<\/p>\n Luk 17:28-30. In the days of Lot. Comp. Genesis 19, the literal truthfulness of which passage is endorsed by our Lord, in the vivid sketch He gives of the destruction of Sodom. This illustration is peculiar to Luke, and a further proof of his accuracy.<\/p>\n THE DAYS OF LOT<\/p>\n Luk 17:28-30. Likewise it was thus in the days of Lot. They were eating, drinking, buying, selling, planting, building; and on the day Lot went out from Sodom, fire and brimstone rained from heaven, and destroyed them all. According to these things shall it be in the day the Son of man is revealed. Among the cities which dotted the Salt Sea round and round in the beautiful Vale of Siddim, indescribably fertile, and well watered as the garden of the Lord, encompassed by the mountains of Simeon, Judah, and Benjamin on the west, and those of Moab on the east, the largest and most prominent were Sodom and Gomorrah. We not only have Lots testimony as to the fertility, irrigation, and prosperity of this country, but (Genesis 14) we find four great kings coming from Babylon, Nineveh, Persia, and Mesopotamia to invade this country, conquer it, and carry away the spoils. Hence it must have been very important. At present that whole region is desolate and barren, without an inhabitant, unless the wandering Arab should there pitch his tent. It is now a desert for the want of water, whereas the Bible assures us that in the days of its prosperity it was well watered. The soil is now very rich, and would be exceedingly productive if the rains fell on it. It is by all authorities admitted that the very site of Sodom and Gomorrah is now under the waters of the Dead Sea, so called because no fish can live in its waters, which doubtless abounded with valuable fish before the retribution of the Almighty fell on it, destroying the cities with fire and brimstone, withering and blighting all the surrounding country, so that death reigns without a rival, and the sea is significantly denominated Dead. The ruins of cities are found all around on the coast of that sea, while all authorities locate Sodom and Gomorrah within the territory now occupied by the sea. Just as Lot and his family were delivered from the awful doom of Sodom and Gomorrah, so will the saints be delivered when the Lord cometh. Jesus here says, with reference to both Noah and Lot, that they illustrate the state of things calamities on the wicked and deliverance to the righteous when the Son of man is revealed.<\/p>\n This second example of unexpected judgment reinforces the first. It also repeats the hope that some will escape divine condemnation when the Son of Man returns, namely, the righteous living on earth then. By comparing moral conditions on the earth at the Second Coming with Sodom, Jesus was picturing the worst kinds of evil running rampant. Destruction unexpected by most people fell quickly and interrupted normal daily living.<\/p>\n Likewise also as it was in the days of Lot; they did eat, they drank, they bought, they sold, they planted, they builded; 28. in the days of Lot ] See Gen 19:15-25; Jdg 1:7; Eze 16:46-56; Amo 4:11; Isa 13:19. Fuente: The Cambridge Bible for Schools and Colleges They did eat … – They … Continue reading “Exegetical and Hermeneutical Commentary of Luke 17:28”<\/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-25661","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-commentary"],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.biblia.work\/bible-commentary\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/25661","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=25661"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/www.biblia.work\/bible-commentary\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/25661\/revisions"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.biblia.work\/bible-commentary\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=25661"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.biblia.work\/bible-commentary\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=25661"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.biblia.work\/bible-commentary\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=25661"}],"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: 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: 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: Heinrich August Wilhelm Meyer’s New Testament Commentary<\/b><\/i><\/h4>\n
Fuente: John Trapp’s Complete Commentary (Old and New Testaments)<\/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: Church Pulpit Commentary<\/b><\/i><\/h4>\n
Fuente: Combined Bible Commentary<\/b><\/i><\/h4>\n
Fuente: A Popular Commentary on the New Testament<\/b><\/i><\/h4>\n
Fuente: William Godbey’s Commentary on the New Testament<\/b><\/i><\/h4>\n
Fuente: Expository Notes of Dr. Constable (Old and New Testaments)<\/b><\/i><\/h4>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"