Bible Commentaries
Luke 6

Verses 1-49

VI 1-11 The Lord of the Sabbath —(Matthew 12:1-8; Mark 2:23-28). This is the last of the disputes recorded by Lk and Mk at this time, postponed by Mt to a more advanced stage in the conflict between Jesus and his adversaries, and it concerns a question to which the latter attached such importance that the result of the dispute drives them to madness and brings things to a head, 11. It is a commonplace that the Rabbis had rendered the law of the Sabbath so intolerable a burden by their complicated and puerile legislation (Edersheim, Append. xvii) that they defeated their own professed purpose to make the Sabbath not only a day of rest but of delight, when Jews should wear their best clothes and eat their best food. Exaggeration ran rife, some Rabbis holding that even the tortures of Gehenna were suspended on the Sabbath, while if one kept two Sabbaths perfectly salvation was assured. And the Mishnah’ (c a.d. 200) taught that desecration of the Sabbath was a crime deserving death. As much of this would appear trivial to Gentile minds there was no need for Lk to add with Mk ’the Sabbath was made for man and not man for the Sabbath’. For the rest he follows Mk closely, avoiding the difficulty of reconciliation with 1 Kg 21 by omitting mention of Abiathar. There is no entirely satisfactory explanation of’ secondfirst Sabbath’, and the best MSS omit ’second-first’; it is probably a combination of different glosses. One suggested view is that it means the first Sabbath of the first month (Nisan) the new sacred year, the first ’first Sabbath’ being the first of the month Tišri, in which the civil year began. The objection made to our Lord is that the action of his disciples is equivalent to reaping; sillier things are found in the rabbinic books. He refuses to descend to discussion on the casuistical point and lays down in reply the broad ethical principle that nulla lex positiva, e’iam divina, obligat cum magno incommodo. Since Law is a dictate of the reason for the common good of man, when the observance of positive law is found to be for the harm of the community it is right to dispense with it. The example seems, to Jewish minds at least, rather an extreme one, but our Lord chose it doubtless to draw attention to himself and his mission. Note his startling conclusion: ’I, as Son of Man, have authority over the Mosaic Law which you all hold to have been given by God’. It is this that probably leads to the determination to destroy him, 11. The miracle in the synagogue, 6-10, provides another application of the principle Jesus Jesus just laid down; there was no pressing need for a cure on that Sabbath day, but he wishes to show his adversaries that their very principles are wrong. It is certainly wrong to do evil on the Sabbath, not because it is the Sabbath but because evil is against the moral law. But not all good things may be done on the Sabbath; some are forbidden by God’s positive law given to Moses. Therefore one must consider what was the legislator’s purpose, i.e. the good of man, and where that is seriously frustrated by the observance of positive law, then the legislator does not intend the law to stand. This is an example of our Lord’s ’teaching with authority’, 4:32, which caused so much admiration. The Rabbis had drowned even the Ten Commandments in a sea of positive prescriptions, never seeking principles but only some text or rabbinical authority on which to base their teaching. Note the Lucan details: it was the man’s right hand, 6, Jesus again manifests supernatural power in reading thoughts, 8, Lk omits that Jesus looked around ’with anger’, Mark 3:5.

12-19 Call of the Apostles —(Matthew 10:1-4; Mark 3:13-19). Having broken with the representatives of official Judaism, Jesus now groups around himself new followers—a Church. Lk is peculiar in giving the impression of something of grave import; it calls for a night spent alone in the mountain ’in the prayer of God’. This is characteristic: cf. 3:21; 9:18 before confession of Peter, 9:29, etc. Lk records in Ac how this practice was kept up by the Church; 13:3. He emphasizes (here and in Acts 1:2) the deliberate choice of the Twelve from a greater number; there were 120 disciples gathered for Peter’s address in Acts 1:15 ff. He insists on the name bestowed, Apostles (not referred to till later in Mark 6:30) and throughout Lk and Ac he shows a preference for this title, contrary to the practice of the other evangelists. Insistence on the note of choice recalls God’s choice of the twelve patriarchs (cf.Acts 13:17) and emphasizes the idea that something new is beginning, the new Israel of God (cf.Galatians 3:7-9; Galatians 6:16). His order of Apostles differs from Mk and Mt, as these differ from each other; but all observe the same three groups of four, and the same names head each group, Peter’s name always heading the first group. Thaddaeus of Mk, Lebbaeus of Mt, is ’Jude of James’ in Lk, identified with the Jude of John 14:22, the author of the Epistle. Doubtless like others of his time he enjoyed several names, and it is natural that the early Christians should have avoided the name he shared with the traitor. Finally, Lk follows. Mk in omitting to identify Matthew with Levi the publican.

17-49 Discourse on the Qualifications of a True Disciple —Usually called the Sermon on the Plain because of 17a. Lk here forsakes Mk who has no collection of sayings of Jesus. Is this the same discourse as the Sermon on the Mount in Mt 5-7? But the first uestion is whether these two sermons are here as our Lord gave them. A common opinion today is that both are a collection of his principal sayings which must have been often repeated. Both in Mt and Lk they appear in an artificial setting; cf.Matthew 4:23 ff. with Luke 6:17 ff. In both there is a similar mise en scène, in both the same beginning and the same conclusion. Mt makes collections of sayings, parables and miracles. Lk, who prefers a different sort of order, has distributed much of Mt’s sermon through his Gospel, putting savings in their due setting, whether chronological or logical we do not know. St Augustine seems to conclude that Mt and Lk have both taken the inaugural sermon of Jesus to his chosen disciples, each editing it after his own fashion and purpose, § 745a. In Lk the sermon is addressed to disciples and would-be disciples; it forms a programme of the dispositions required of them. 20-26. Like Mt he begins with the opposition existing between the spirit of Jesus and the spirit of the world, exemplified by the Beatitudes to which here Lk adds the Woes (reserved by Mt to much later; cf. 23:13; Lk is a lover of contrasts). Those animated by the spirit of this world seek riches, comfort, pleasure and honour; the disciple is to look for happiness (the Beatitudes begin with µa????? ’happy are ye’) in the midst of poverty, privation, tears and persecution. Lk agrees with Mt in proceeding to show Jesus predicting the inevitable clash between these contrary spirits.

27-36. Here, as in Matthew 5:44-48, the disciple is warned that persecution is to be met with charity alone, a superhuman charity which involves detachment from worldly considerations, which demands that absolute surrender of self insisted on so often in Lk.

37-45. As in Matthew 7:1 ff., warning against the temptation to judge oneself better than others, even while meeting hatred with goodness, mercy and generosity of an extraordinary kind. The disciple must strive to make others better by his example, even correcting them when necessary; but let him begin the work of improvement and correction with himself. Only the good can do good.

46-49. Conclusion as in Matthew 7:21-27; let all set to work, not satisfied with listening to their Master but eager to carry out his teaching loyally. Such is Lagrange’s summary of the discourse. It will be noted that Lk omits Mt’s references to the Old Law; he has not the latter’s precise purpose of showing our Lord as the long-foretold Messias, and showing him in this sermon like a new Moses giving a New Law from the mountain.

20. Lk puts simply ’poor’ for Mt’s ’poor in spirit’; it is clear from the whole sermon that he is not preaching social revolution or beatifying material conditions as themselves the sources of happiness. As in Mt emphasis is here laid on the interior dispositions of soul. Unorthodox critics argue from 20-38 that this teaching anticipates ’a speedy end of the age and the early advent of the Kingdom of God’; a literal application of this teaching ’would be to invite anarchy’. But there is no indication that Jesus is laying down precepts to be followed by all, nor even counsels of perfection which absolve his followers from their social duties. But ’if these words were a little oftener practised in imitation of the Saints, society would rather gain than lose by such heroic examples of charity’ (Lagrange). We have just seen the enormous influence exercised by Gandhi, a non-Christian, who practised some of these teachings heroically.

22. ’when they shall excommunicate you (cf.Jn 9:22; 12:42 16:2) and insult you, and proscribe your name as evil etc., recalling, the proscriptions so common at the beginning of the Roman empire.

32-34. Lk substitutes ’sinners’ for ’publicans’ and ’Gentiles’ in Matthew 5:46-7.

35. Difficulty about true reading here; it is maintained that the Greek will not bear the translation of DV and Vg; ’thereby’ is a gloss. Some translate ’nothing despairing’or’ despairing of none’ or ’making none despair’. But although ?pe?p??e?? is not found elsewhere with the Vg meaning, there is no doubt that such meaning best fits the context. 36. Substitution of ’merciful’ for Mt’s ’perfect’: characteristically Lucan.