Luke 18:35-19:27 "The Return of the King" A wasteful and profligate son, a dishonest manager, a poor man being licked by dogs, a Samaritan leper, an unrighteous judge, a tax collector, and little babies. Over the last three chapters we have been treated to quite an array of unusual heroes. If you aren't convinced by now that Jesus' interpretation of the kingdom of God is a little weird, then you must be blind. Oh, wait, that wouldn't be so bad, because a blind beggar is the hero of our next story! The dispossessed, the outcast, those who have nothing left these are the ones whom Jesus calls to himself. And what is more, Jesus' whole attitude toward them and others welcomes such attention. People especially the down and out came away from hearing Jesus with the conviction and confidence that they were welcome in his kingdom. We have found Jesus that way too, haven't we? He does not turn away the one who comes to him in faith! Rather, he welcomes us, draws us to himself, and has mercy on us in our need. The three episodes in our text today are all held together with the image of the king. The blind beggar calls Jesus the Son of David. Jesus identifies himself as the Son of Man in his discussion with Zacchaeus. And the parable of the minas is couched in the context of the return of the king. 1. The Blind Beggar and the Son of David (18:35-43) While I haven't spent much time in this series comparing Luke with Matthew and Mark, the blind beggar deserves some comment. In Luke's gospel there is one blind man sitting by the road, and it happens as Jesus "drew near to Jericho." In Matthew's gospel there are two blind men sitting by the road, and Jesus is leaving Jericho. In Mark's gospel there is one blind man (and gives his name as Bartimaeus), and Jesus is leaving Jericho. So was there one blind man or were there two? Was Jesus drawing near to Jericho, or was he leaving? The first question is easy probably there were two, and Mark and Luke just don't mention the other one. The second question is more difficult, because the Greek words in question do not admit an easy reconciliation. Some have proposed that since there was an "old city" and "new city" of Jericho, that perhaps this episode happened in between the old city and the new city. Maybe. But this illustrates the pitfalls of the harmonization approach. If you try to figure out what "really" happened the story behind all the stories you wind up losing sight of the story that Luke is telling. What is inspired, infallible and inerrant is each narrative not a harmonization of the four gospels. Because, as we've seen, Luke uses geography very intentionally. When he says that this happened during Jesus' approach to Jericho, as Jesus was drawing near to Jericho, he is saying something that we will miss if we try to harmonize everything. Because he chooses to use the word eggizo. This word is used 42 times in the NT, 24 times by Luke. In the LXX it is used frequently to refer to either the priests or people drawing near to God in worship, or God drawing near to his people for judgment (or occasionally blessing!). The NT uses it in the same ways: The night is far gone; the day is drawing near (Romans 13:2) A better hope is introduced, through which we draw near to God (Hebrews 7:19) Encourage one another as you see the day drawing near (Hebrews 10:25) Draw near to God and he will draw near to you (James 4:8) The coming of the Lord is drawing near (James 5:8) The end of all things is drawing near (1 Peter 4:7) Luke uses it in this way: "the kingdom of God has come near to you" (10:9, 11) But he also uses eggizo to speak of Jesus drawing near to a city (7:12) or of people drawing near to Jesus (15:1) In our passage it is used both ways: first Jesus draws near to Jericho and then the blind beggar draws near to Jesus (18:40). More than a quarter of its NT uses come in the last seven chapters of Luke's gospel. Jesus is drawing near to Jericho, and then to Jerusalem. Jesus, the Son of David, is drawing near to Jericho. How will Jericho respond to the coming of the king? A great crowd surrounds Jesus, and when the blind man hears the crowd, he inquired what this meant. When told that Jesus of Nazareth was passing by, he cried out, Jesus, Son of David, have mercy on me! This is the only time in Luke's gospel that Jesus is called the Son of David. This blind man sees who Jesus is far more clearly than those around him. Because they shush him, but he cried out all the more, Son of David, have mercy on me! When Jesus hears this, he stops and commands that the man be brought, and when he drew near (the same word, eggizo), Jesus asked, What do you want me to do for you? He said, Lord, let me recover my sight. And Jesus said to him, Recover your sight; your faith has made you well. (v41-42) This is why we read Ezekiel 34. God said that he himself would seek out his sheep and heal them, and give them David as prince among them. This blind man remembered God's promises, and he now cries out for mercy from the Son of David. And immediately he recovered his sight and followed him, glorifying God. And all the people, when they saw it, gave praise to God. So Jesus, the Son of David, has mercy on the poor and helpless. 2. The Rich Tax Collector and the Son of Man (19:1-10) Then he enters Jericho and as he is passing through, there was a man named Zacchaeus, who was the chief tax collector, and very rich probably filthy rich would be the right way to say it! And he wanted to see Jesus. Why? We're not told, but it probably had something to do with Jesus' reputation as a friend of tax collectors. It was rare to find a rabbi who welcomed tax collectors and sinners! The problem was that Zacchaeus was a wee little man, and a wee little man was he! So he climbed up into a sycamore tree, so that he could see Jesus. And when Jesus came to the place, he looked up and said to him, Zacchaeus, hurry and come down, for I must stay at your house today. Note the two responses to this: Zacchaeus hurried and came down and received him joyfully. Zacchaeus obeys the voice of the Lord with joy. But "they all" (the crowd) grumbled. He has gone in to be the guest of a man who is a sinner. When Jesus gave sight to a blind beggar, they rejoiced and gave praise to God, but when Jesus goes to the house of a tax collector, they grumble and complain. This is not what the kingdom of God is about! The kingdom of God is about the blind seeing, the deaf hearing, and the gospel being preached to the poor! Why is Jesus now accepting hospitality from a wealthy tax collector a collaborator with the Romans. Zacchaeus is an apostate Jew! How can Jesus be his guest and friend? By sitting at table with Zacchaeus, Jesus is saying that Zacchaeus is welcome in the kingdom of God. We are supposed to remember back to 18:10, when a Pharisee and a tax collector came to the temple to pray, and Jesus declared that the tax collector was justified not the Pharisee. Now we have a case study. And having been restored to the fellowship of the Kingdom of God, Zacchaeus stands up. He cannot do this reclining at table. He stands before his Lord and says, Behold, Lord, the half of my goods I give to the poor. And if I have defrauded anyone of anything, I restore it fourfold. Zacchaeus accepts responsibility for his actions and promises fourfold restitution to those he has defrauded. This is based on the principle in the law that required at least double restitution for theft. The idea is that if you intended to defraud someone, then the penalty should be commensurate with the crime. Your goal was to steal $1,000 but the result of your crime will be that you enrich them by $1,000, so not only do you restore the $1,000, but you also give them an additional $1,000. (Wouldn't that have some effect on deterrence? If you knew that if you were caught you would have to give them twice as much as you stole?) Zacchaeus understands what it means to seek first the kingdom of God. When Jesus has mercy on him, that mercy produces true repentance, resulting in the transformation of the rich. But what does it mean that Jesus is calling people to repentance? After all, the Pharisees called Zacchaeus to repentance. And his repentance would have been cheaper! But in an old testament context, calling people to repentance would include sending Zacchaeus to the temple so that he could take care of the sacrificial requirements of repentance. But Jesus doesn't send Zacchaeus to the temple. He says Today salvation has come to this house, since he also is a son of Abraham. For the Son of Man came to seek and to save the lost. Salvation comes not at the temple, but in Jesus. The Pharisees expected national restoration through the overthrow of the Romans, and the greater glory of the temple in Jerusalem. Jesus says that the kingdom of God will have a different effect. 3. The Ten Minas and the Return of the King (19:11-27) And that effect is clearly portrayed in the parable of the ten minas in verses 11-27. We have two fairly different versions of this story in Matthew 25 and Luke 19, but there is no reason to try to harmonize them. Jesus spent at least three years preaching and there is no reason to suggest that he did not use different variations on the same story. Luke's version would remind his hearers of the story of Archelaus, son of Herod the Great, who went to Rome in 4 BC to ask Augustus for the kingdom of his father. The Jews sent a deputation after him to Augustus to protest Archelaus's request. Augustus gave the kingdom to Archelaus and Archelaus then slaughtered his enemies. So this story would have had particular resonance with Jesus' hearers, and even Theophilus and other Gentiles would have been quite familiar with the political intrigues of the day. (We still remember quite well the stories of Hitler and Stalin from sixty years ago) Most people read this story as a story of Jesus going away and coming back, and the servants, then, are Christians, with rewards and punishments given for how we use the gifts God has given us. But this does not fit the preface: he proceeded to tell a parable, because he was near to Jerusalem, and because they supposed that the kingdom of God was to appear immediately. If Jesus is talking about something that won't be happening for several thousand years, what would that mean to his hearers? How would that help them understand anything about the coming of the kingdom? Who is the king? The king is Yahweh returning to Jerusalem, to the temple. Jesus' coming to Jerusalem is the return of the king. Since the overthrow of the Davidic monarchy there is a sense in which God has not been ruling over Israel. In David, God ruled over Israel through his anointed king. That is the way that God rules over his people. And now the king is about to return. The people supposed that the kingdom of God was to appear immediately. They were right. But they are on the wrong side. They have been grumbling at Jesus' eating with tax collectors and sinners. They have been objecting to Jesus' reinterpretation of the kingdom of God. They have been saying that they don't want Yahweh as king, especially if that means having Jesus as Lord. And so those who refuse to have God as King over them, those who refuse to praise God for the restoration of Zacchaeus, are just like the Jews who protested against Archelaus. And they will face the same end they will be slaughtered by the Romans in AD 70. The point of the parable is that yes, the kingdom is coming, but it will mean judgment, not blessing, for Israel. God has given great gifts to Israel. And those of his servants (the Jews) who have been faithful will be blessed in the kingdom. But those wicked servants who did not prepare for the return of the king will be lose everything they had been given. Why does this matter to us? If this is all about Israel, why should we care? Because we have been grafted into Israel! We are now part of the one people of God. And Jesus is our king. We are not waiting for Jesus to return in order for him to become our king! He is already king he is lord and head of his church! So while the timing of the passage is focused on what God was doing in Jesus Christ in the first century, the application of the passage is only slightly different. Rather than say you should be faithful in your stewardship because of what God will say at the final day, this passage says, you should be faithful in your stewardship because of what God has said in the judgment of Jesus Christ. Because Jesus now reigns as king, therefore continue in your faithful service. Conclusion The simple way to summarize this passage is that if you are poor and blind, come to Jesus and he will open your eyes. If you have used your wealth for your own selfish benefit, and especially if you have not used your wealth for the sake of the kingdom of God and the good of others, then come to Jesus because he has come to seek and to save the lost. Indeed, we must remember that all that we have is given to us on loan. We are but stewards engaging in business under lordship of Christ our King.