Lucas 14

Lucas 14

Clarke - Probably the insidious Pharisee had brought this dropsical man to the place, not doubting that our Lord’s eye would affect his heart, and that he would instantly cure him; and then he could most plausibly accuse him for a breach of the Sabbath. If this were the case, and it is likely, how deep must have been the perfidy and malice of the Pharisee! (Luke 14) Luke does not quantify the degree of dropsy or edema, but given that it was clearly visible it was likely generalized edema (because a robe would have covered his legs which are usually the most swollen in dropsy. Of course markedly swollen feet bulging out of sandals would arouse attention!). (Picture of 4/4 pitting edema of the legs) Some of the most severe cases of generalized edema which I have seen as a physician were related to kidney diseases, specific those resulting in nephrotic syndrome. In any case it was obvious for the man was there in front of Him. MacArthur discussing the man's dropsy explains that "The rabbis viewed such a condition, however, as God’s judgment for immorality, or as uncleanness due to the body’s failure to eliminate (Lev. 15:1-3+). Thus in their view this man was both immoral and ritually unclean. Since no Pharisee would have tolerated such a defiled person at the meal, they obviously planned to use him for a sinister purpose. And they were fairly sure that based on His pattern Jesus, seeing his dropsy, would do what they wanted." (See Luke Commentary) Bock has a note related to what the Jews thought about dropsy - Lev. Rab. 15.2 on 13:2 comments on Job 28:25: “Man is evenly balanced, half of him is water, and the other half is blood. When he is deserving, the water does not exceed the blood, nor does the blood exceed the water; but when he sins, it sometimes happens that the water gains over the blood and then he becomes a sufferer from dropsy; at other times the blood gains over the water and he then becomes leprous”; Van Der Loos 1965: 505. (Ed: As a medical doctor I can attest they were wrong on both accounts!) Some rabbis argued that dropsy resulted from sexual offenses (b. Šab. 33a) or from intentionally failing to have bowel movements (b. Ber. 25a) (for Greek examples, see Van Der Loos 1965: 506). The tradition is late, but it does show that dropsy was often viewed as God’s judgment, either for sin or uncleanness. (See Another Sabbath Healing Controversy Luke 14:1-6) Not every writer assumes the worse about the Pharisees for Lenski questions whether they brought the man in to test Jesus, explaining that "Trench draws attention to the fact that feasts such as the present one were semi-public. Outsiders could enter, stand, or sit, and watch what was going on. So the woman mentioned in Lk 7:37+ came in after the dinner was in progress, and this man apparently before it started, for Jesus presently found him right before him." (See The Interpretation of St. Luke's Gospel). I suppose we will have to wait until heaven to find out for certain whether the man with dropsy was merely a drop-in or a "decoy,", but the fact that the context says they were watching Jesus closely suggests there was some element of pre-planning (and pre-meditation). Recall also that after the last meal in Luke 11, "When (Jesus) left there (cf Lk 11:37-38+), the scribes and the Pharisees began to be very hostile and to question Him closely on many subjects, plotting (enedreuo = lying in wait - present tense = continually) against Him to catch Him in something He might say." (Lk 11:53-54+) Recall in John the response Jesus received when he healed the blind man John 9:16 Therefore some of the Pharisees were saying, “This man is not from God, (WHY? LOOK AT THEIR TWISTED LOGIC!) because He does not keep the Sabbath.” But others were saying, “How can a man who is a sinner perform such signs?” (NOT EVERYONE WAS TOTALLY TWISTED IN THEIR THINKING!) And there was a division among them. And in Matthew and Luke they went to far as to attribute Jesus' power to Satan! Matthew 12:24 But when the Pharisees heard this, they said, “This man casts out demons only by Beelzebul the ruler of the demons.” Luke 11:15+ (THE SPEAKER IS NOT CLEARLY IDENTIFIED IN THIS PASSAGE) "He casts out demons by Beelzebul, the ruler of the demons." On other occasions Jesus shocked the religious leaders by eating with riff-raff (disreputable or undesirable people) Matthew 9:10-11 Then it happened that as Jesus was reclining at the table in the house, behold, many tax collectors and sinners came and were dining with Jesus and His disciples. 11 When the Pharisees saw this, they said to His disciples, “Why is your Teacher eating with the tax collectors and sinners?” Luke 15:1-2 Now all the tax collectors and the sinners were coming near Him to listen to Him. 2 Both the Pharisees and the scribes began to grumble, saying, “This man receives sinners and eats with them.” Suffering from dropsy (cf "hydrops")(5303)(hudropikós from hudor = water + ops = face, countenance) is an adjective which describes an edematous condition in which there is an excessive accumulation of serous fluid in the body. Dropsy per se is not a disease but the sign of an underlying disease (often renal dysfunction such as in membranous nephropathy - the glomeruli [nice diagram] have a striking pattern on histology as I morph back to my days as a pathologist). Notice that this word derives from “water” and “face” because the disease often made a person look bloated in their face. Luke the physician has the only NT use of this medical term. Related Resources: Why did Jesus heal on the Sabbath? | GotQuestions.org Did Jesus break the Sabbath law? | GotQuestions.org How is Jesus our Sabbath Rest? | GotQuestions.org Luke 14:3 And Jesus answered and spoke to the lawyers and Pharisees, saying, "Is it lawful to heal on the Sabbath, or not?" KJV Luke 14:3 And Jesus answering spake unto the lawyers and Pharisees, saying, Is it lawful to heal on the sabbath day? Jesus answered and spoke to the lawyers and Pharisees Lk 14:11:44,45 Is it lawful to heal on the Sabbath, or not Lk 6:9; 13:14-16; Mt 12:10; Mark 3:4; Jn 7:23 Luke 14 Resources - Multiple Sermons and Commentaries Luke 14:1-14 Jesus the Confronter - Steven Cole Luke 14:1-6 The Healing Savior vs the Hypocritical System - John MacArthur THE LUNCH TABLES WERE TURNED! And Jesus answered (apokrinomai) and spoke to the lawyers (nomikos) and the Pharisees - Luke begins with an arresting word answered which normally describes a reply to a question, but in this case there is no evidence that a question was asked. The verb apokrinomai means to answer or reply and in this context seems to be used Hebraistically or as a formula to control the flow of discourse (cf Mt 11.25). In classic Greek this verb also conveyed the sense of to separate or condemn which is certainly interesting given the context of Jesus' confrontation with the religious leaders. Crawford adds "No one had spoken to the Lord, so He was answering an action or hidden thought." Jesus knew that these hypocrites would help an animal but not a man on the Sabbath and so launches with an open ended question! Is it lawful (exesti) to heal (therapeuo) on the Sabbath, or not - Of course it was lawful to heal on the Sabbath! The best defense is a good offense so Jesus preempts the question that was surely about to come from the religious legalists as it did in Luke 6:2 when "some of the Pharisees said, “Why do you do what is not lawful on the Sabbath?” What the Lord described as healing they defined as working. Steven