The man on the radio was literally screaming, though I was never able to discern the source of his outrage. “If he keeps that up,” I thought to myself, “he’s going to burst a blood vessel in his throat.” Perhaps it was some form of morbid curiosity that caused me to continue to listen, waiting for it to happen as the preacher continued to distort the P.A. system. As I listened, half paying attention and half avoiding other vehicles in traffic, I mused about the distinct differences between denominational preachers and the sound brethren of the churches of Christ, how their messages are manifestly more honest with the scripture. The corners of my mouth then took a downward turn as the screamer burned through a quotation of Luke 13:3 and 5.
“‘I tell you, Nay: but, except ye repent, ye shall all likewise perish.’ DO YOU KNOW WHAT THAT MEANS,” he bellowed with at least five exclamation points at the end of his sentence. “JESUS SAID, IF YOU DON’T REPENT, YOU’RE GOING TO HELL!”
I cringed out of guilt, not superiority. Many of my fellows preach this passage in the very same way (except, maybe a little more tactfully). Indeed, for a long time I had done the same, being persuaded that this is the accepted understanding of a widely used passage that is teaching a universal truth. I tried to console myself with the thoughts that many greater men than I have preached it that way, but this left me sour, knowing my responsibility to never allow popular thought to persuade me without “…try[ing] the spirits whether they are of God.” (1John 4:1)
It is an unassailable fact that God requires everyone, universally, to repent from sin before forgiveness may be given – the necessary consequence of a failure to do so being eternal condemnation. Is it reasonable, however, to assign this universal truth to what Jesus was saying simply because some of the terms are alike? It is incumbent upon us to call into question everything that is the accepted norm, and to “[p]rove all things, hold[ing] fast to that which is good.” (1Thessalonians 5:21) If it is true that Jesus was saying every human of accountability must repent or suffer spiritual death at the Final Judgment, then we should accept that as what He meant at the moment. If that interpretation makes a pretext out of this passage, then teaching it as such is not “speak[ing] as of the oracles of God,” (1Peter 4:11) and therefore should be rejected completely. Whether or not some of the greatest expositors of the Bible used to teach it that way, and no matter who currently does also, if it cannot be tested and proven, it must be expunged.
There are a few basic questions we ask whenever trying to discern the meaning of any passage. We should begin with these. Who is doing the speaking? The divinely inspired Luke is recounting the words of Jesus as a direct quote. What is the period of time? It is commonly known as the Mosaical Age, when the Law of Moses was still in force, and church had not yet come into existence. In this age, the Jews were God’s chosen people, a people to whom Christ would come in fulfillment of the promises given. Those promises maintained that the Messiah would come and establish the Kingdom of God. Jesus was doing this while teaching the Jews how the citizens of His Kingdom are to behave. In a sense, this also answers another question: To whom was He speaking? Jesus primarily taught the Jews. Gentiles may have been present on occasion, but Jesus specifically sent His disciples to the Jews, instructing them to “Go not into the way of the Gentiles, and into any city of the Samaritans enter ye not, but go rather to the lost sheep of the house of Israel.” (Matthew 10:5, 6) To ask why this is so would be a different study, but the fact remains, and it is an important one. Jesus was only speaking to the Jews in Luke 13:1-5.
It is always important to know who the recipient of any statement is because any interpretation of the statement must have significance and meaning to those who heard it as it was spoken. That being true, we are obliged to ask ourselves of the likelihood that Jesus expected the Jews to understand what He said in the way that it is commonly being taught today. Maybe, and maybe not – we should not answer too quickly. A closer look into the context is required.
We are not told of the motivation, but there were some who “…told [Jesus] of the Galilaeans, whose blood Pilate had mingled with their sacrifices.” (Luke 13:1) We may suppose they simply wanted to see His reaction, for whatever reason. His answer to them probably caught them by surprise. He had a broader point to make that centralizes in verses 3 and 5, but the point should not be sought without the context of the two examples cited. “Suppose ye that these Galilaeans were sinners above all the Galilaeans, because they suffered such things?” (v. 2) “Or those eighteen, upon whom the tower in Siloam fell, and slew them, think ye that they were sinners above all men that dwelt in Jerusalem?” (v. 4)
These are rhetorical questions, for He answers them in verses 3 and 5: “I tell you Nay…” No, the Galilaeans were not more sinful than the rest, and neither were the victims of the falling tower. Nevertheless, these things did happen to them, being of equal rank with everyone else. Jesus continues: “…but, except ye repent, ye shall all…” There was something significant that those who stood there that day needed to learn from the example of the two groups who died. With the exception of those who repent from their own sins, they would “…likewise perish,” said He.
Likewise? In what way were the deaths of those Galileans and victims of the tower alike that it may mean something to those who heard Jesus that day? The Galileans were slaughtered while attempting to worship God. Whether they were trying to worship correctly or not at this point does not seem to matter. We have already determined that their sins were no greater than anyone’s was. We do not know much about those upon whom the tower of Siloam fell. Determining their sinfulness is out of the question; therefore, the spiritual condition of the second group cannot be determined. The spiritual condition of these two groups cannot be the thing they had in common that Jesus was warning might happen “likewise” to any standing there who refused to repent.
I do not mean to repeat the point, but there are several unlikelihoods here. It is not likely that Jesus would conceal such an important theme as repentance having an affect upon their eternal destination. It is not likely that the eternal destination would even have entered the minds of the Jews at the time; much less be understood that this was Jesus’ point. If so, the statement of Jesus supposes the Jews knew that every person who died in both examples, either sacrificing in worship or beneath the falling tower, were eternally lost. Is it likely that they knew this, or that Jesus would expect them to know this? No, it is not likely on either account. We can conclude that Jesus was not warning those who stood there that repentance was required or they would die the spiritual death at the Judgment. If He did not mean it to be interpreted that way when speaking to the Jews on that day, then that is not what Jesus meant when He said it, period.
What is it that the two groups have in common that Jesus might expect them to understand, and therefore understand will “likewise” happen to them, except they repent? The only thing we know each group had in common from the context is that they all died a physical and tragic death. This is something the Jews obviously understood. The one group died at the hands of men, others died as the result of an unfortunate occurrence outside their control. Can this be the warning Jesus posed to them?
Such a consideration may rightly put you in mind of the statements in Matthew 24: “When ye therefore shall see the abomination of desolation, spoken of by Daniel the prophet, stand in the holy place, (whoso readeth, let him understand:) then let them which be in Judaea flee into the mountains” (Matthew 24:15, 16). In that passage, Jesus was telling his disciples privately about the destruction of Jerusalem. History records the Roman General, Titus’ conquest of Jerusalem being as terrible as Jesus said it would be, and fulfilling His words and the prophet’s words, precisely. History also records that the Christians in Jerusalem fled to the mountains, and not one Christian life was lost. Those who had believed Jesus’ words, those who had confessed their belief in Him, those who had repented and were baptized in His name, did not die while everyone else who had heard the words of Jesus were dying a physical and tragically unnecessary death.
A physical death comes upon every man. A warning about this being contingent on repentance would be both unnecessary, and sensibly untrue. The statement of Jesus, then, must not be given as a universal and timeless principle, but as a limited warning with a fulfillment occurring within the lifetime of those who heard it. Jesus must have had the destruction of Jerusalem in mind with this warning. Except the Jews who heard Jesus that day repented from their own sins, they would all die tragically, either at the hands of men or by some unfortunate occurrence.
Of course, in principle, this is also true today. The destruction of Jerusalem and the end of the Jewish order are examples “for our learning” (cf. Romans 15:4); and puts us in mind of the typology between the Jewish order (the Mosaical Age) and the church. If we obey the gospel and drift back into sinful ways, refusing to repent, we also can be cut off, just as they were. Their physical connection to God typifies our spiritual connection, and as God adopts us into His family, He can also disinherit us.
There is no denying the typological connection of Luke 13:3, and 5 to us today. Rather than appearing to imply, however, that we might “likewise perish” as the Galileans or the eighteen victims of the tower did, we might consider another way. That repentance belongs in God’s plan to save man is as obvious and plain as anything else is in the Bible, but to use passages in ways they were not intended in order to say so is not good. To call upon scripture to show the necessity of repentance and its universal appeal, consider Acts 17:30, 31 instead:
“And the times of this ignorance God winked at; but now commandeth all men every where to repent: because he hath appointed a day, in the which he will judge the world in righteousness by that man whom he hath ordained; whereof he hath given assurance unto all men, in that he hath raised him from the dead.”
Shall we take the liberty of a circuitous typological connection, and continue to quote Luke 13:3 and 5 as a direct warning to all of mankind to “repent or perish?” I will not make a scene in the open with those who do, but I cannot assent to that use of the passage. The instruction from Peter is too deeply imbedded upon my conscience:
“If any man speak, let him speak as the oracles of God; if any man minister, let him do it as of the ability which God giveth: that God in all things may be glorified through Jesus Christ, to whom be praise and dominion for ever and ever. Amen.” (1Peter 4:11)
-Robetron
Posted by sklaft 