February 7, 2016

If I told you that I was going to go over to the cemetery and preach to the dead bodies there, you’d rightly think, “Steve has lost it!” And yet really, that’s what we’re doing whenever we speak to lost people about the Savior. Outside of Christ, people aren’t just spiritually misguided or weak or ignorant. They’re dead! They don’t just need to be persuaded to believe in Jesus. They need the Holy Spirit to convict them of sin, righteousness, and judgment (John 16:8-11) and they need God to make them alive from the dead.

So, as someone has said, before we get people saved, we need to get them lost. If they do not see that they are hopelessly dead in their sins, they will not see their need for new life. If they think that they’re doing okay spiritually, they may welcome a little guidance or assistance with their problems. But they won’t see their desperate need for new life.

So although lost people do not realize it, they have three crucial needs: (1) They are spiritually dead, alienated from God, so they need new life. (2) They are under God’s just condemnation because of their sin, so they need forgiveness. (3) They are living under Satan’s power, in his domain of darkness, so they need deliverance and victory over the forces of evil. In our text, Paul reminds the Colossians of these three great needs that God met for them in Christ. Paul is continuing to show the superiority of Christ over everything else, including the rules-keeping religion of the false teachers. Empty religion has no saving power, but Christ crucified and risen from the dead is all-powerful. Paul is showing that…

Because Christ died and is risen, in Him we have new life, forgiveness of all our sins, and victory over the forces of evil.

Verses 13-15 rest on the truth that Paul has just mentioned in verse 12: Baptism pictures our salvation, when we died with Christ and God raised us up with Him, when He raised Him from the dead. Through God’s grace in saving us, we are identified with Jesus in His death and resurrection.

1. Because Christ died and is risen, in Him we have new life.

Colossians 2:12-13a: “…having been buried with Him in baptism, in which you were also raised up with Him through faith in the working of God, who raised Him from the dead. When you were dead in your transgressions and the uncircumcision of your flesh, He made you alive together with Him, …” There are three truths to grasp here:

A. Apart from Christ, we were spiritually dead.

Paul could have used less severe language than this if he had wanted to. He could have said, “When you were apart from Christ, He brought you near.” That’s certainly true! He could have said, “When you were alienated from Christ, He reconciled you to Himself.” That’s also true. But here (also, Eph. 2:1) Paul uses the word “dead” to describe our condition before we met Christ.

Before Adam and Eve sinned, God told them that if they ate of the tree of the knowledge of good and evil, they would die (Gen. 2:17). Death in the Bible always means separation, not cessation. So when Adam and Eve sinned, they were instantly separated from God. Their bodies became subject to the process of illness and aging that ultimately resulted in physical death. When a person dies physically, his soul is separated from his body. To be spiritually dead means to be separated from the living God, the author and giver of all life. If we die physically while we are still spiritually dead, we will be eternally separated from God, under His wrath, which would be the most horrible existence imaginable.

Death is an ugly thing and we should not minimize the horror of that word. A dead body is foul and corrupt. If the Jews touched a dead body, they were ceremonially defiled (Lev. 21:1-4). We embalm dead bodies and try to make them look as lifelike as possible, but the truth is, there is nothing pleasant about a dead body.

Paul says here that we were spiritually dead, because of two causes (or in two spheres): transgressions, which refers to sins we have committed; and the uncircumcision of our flesh, which refers to the sinful nature that we inherited from Adam. When Adam sinned, his sin was imputed to the entire human race (Rom. 5:12-21). That second phrase especially reminded the Gentile Colossians that before they met Christ, they “were at that time separate from Christ, excluded from the commonwealth of Israel, and strangers to the covenants of promise, having no hope and without God in the world” (Eph. 2:12).

So apart from Christ, we had two serious problems: we were spiritually dead because of our sins, and because of our sin nature which we got at birth. We aren’t sinners because we sin; we sin because by nature we are sinners. Sometimes people say, “It’s unfair of God to impute Adam’s sin to the entire human race.” My reply is, first, a word of caution: It’s never right to accuse the Almighty of unfairness! Second, do you think you would have done better than Adam in obeying God? If so, you have too high an estimate of your own moral ability!

These two aspects of sin, our actual sins that stem from our sin nature, mean that we had a very serious problem. Adding good deeds to our sinful nature cannot solve that problem. You can put a tuxedo on a pig, but that pig will go right back to wallowing in the mud because it has a pig nature. You can dress a sinner in good deeds, but unless you change his heart, he will still go back to sinning. Also, all the good deeds in the world cannot eradicate the charges against us in God’s holy courtroom. And they do not raise the dead sinner to spiritual life. He needs resurrection.

B. Christ’s resurrection is the basis for our resurrection because through faith we are in Him.

In Colossians 2:12, Paul states that “you were also raised up with Him through faith in the working of God, who raised Him from the dead.” But even our faith does not originate with us; it is God’s gift (Eph. 2:8-9; Phil. 1:29). So in verse 13, Paul attributes our new life totally to God: “He made you alive together with Him.” The Puritan Thomas Goodwin used to say, “There are but two men standing before God: Adam and Christ. And these two men have all other men hanging at their girdles.” (Source unknown. By “girdles,” he meant “belts.”) Either you’re spiritually dead in Adam; or, because God made you alive, you’re in Christ. There are no other categories. If you’re in Christ, it’s God’s doing, since …

C. Only God can raise the dead.

“He made you alive together with Him” (Col. 2:13). Becoming a Christian isn’t a matter of deciding to turn over a new leaf. It isn’t a self-improvement project or a resolution to try harder. No amount of persuasion can talk a spiritual corpse into spiritual life, because dead sinners cannot understand God’s truth (1 Cor. 2:14; John 8:43). They do not have spiritual ears to hear. No amount of efforts on the part of the corpse will bring about his own resurrection, because corpses aren’t able to do anything. God must impart new life to a dead sinner by His power.

There is an obvious difference between something lifeless and someone who is living. I learned this in what was the most fun job I’ve ever had—yes, even more fun than this job! The summer of 1970, I worked as “Charlie Chaplin” at the Movieland Wax Museum near Knott’s Berry Farm in Southern California. Each day I would make myself up to look like Charlie Chaplin and then spend my day entertaining the guests. I would walk like Charlie, twirl my cane, and have my picture taken with everyone.

But the most fun of the job was when I would stand in a frozen pose to look like one of the wax figures. People would touch my hand, thinking that they were touching a lifeless wax statue. But I would grab the person’s finger and as he frantically tried to pull away, I would suddenly talk to him. At that moment, he discovered the difference between what he had thought was a lifeless wax figure and a living one! One rather large woman was so stunned that she couldn’t scream. She just walked backwards away from me and plopped her 200+ pounds on top of a baby in a stroller behind her. When I reached out to try to help her off the screaming baby, the woman went hysterical! I had to make a fast exit and leave the poor mother to try to pry this woman off her squashed baby.

There’s a huge difference between death and life. Spiritually, there’s a huge difference between dead religion and new life in the risen Savior. Do you have new life in Christ? Has God made you alive from the dead, so that you responded by saying, “Yes, Lord, I believe in You; I receive You as my Savior and Lord”? (See John 1:12-13.) If not, you may be just a good, religious person who is a walking spiritual corpse. You need life from God!

You may ask, “How can I know if I have spiritual life?” Well, how do you know if you’re alive physically this morning? I’m not sure about some of you, but most of you seem to have some signs of life! Your heart is beating, you’re breathing, you’re warm to the touch, you have an appetite. Spiritually, there are some vital signs. You have a heart for the things of God which used to bore you. You love Jesus because He died for your sins. You have a hunger for God’s Word. You struggle against sins that didn’t used to concern you. You’re growing in the things of God. And, you experience the forgiveness of your sins.

2. Because Christ died and is risen, in Him we have forgiveness of all our sins.

Colossians 2:13b-14: “… having forgiven us all our transgressions, having canceled out the certificate of debt consisting of decrees against us, which was hostile to us; and He has taken it out of the way, having nailed it to the cross.” J. B. Phillips paraphrases this, “He has forgiven you all your sins: Christ has utterly wiped out the damning evidence of broken laws and commandments which always hung over our heads, and has completely annulled it by nailing it over his own head on the cross.”

Perhaps you’re thinking, “Wait a minute. In Colossians 1:14, Paul already said that in Christ we have the forgiveness of our sins. So why is he repeating it here?” The answer is, because it’s so wonderful that we need to hear it over and over again! Don’t ever get over the amazing truth that in Christ, you have forgiveness of all your transgressions! Note two things:

A. To save us, God had to deal with the penalty for our sins in line with His righteousness and justice.

God couldn’t just sweep our sins under the rug. The penalty had to be paid. If God did not demand the full penalty for our sins, He would not be righteous and just. If He were not righteous and just, He would not be God. If a robber killed your mother to get a few bucks to support his drug habit and the judge said to the murderer, “I love you, man! Try not to do it again,” you’d rightly be outraged. That judge would be unrighteous and unjust. Justice requires that lawbreakers pay the penalty for their crimes.

The Bible says that we all have sinned (Rom. 3:23) and that the wages of sin is death (Rom. 6:23). Thus we all deserve eternal separation from God. We all have what Paul here calls “the certificate of debt consisting of decrees against us, which is hostile to us.” We come before the bench of God’s judgment as lawbreakers with thousands of counts against us! God cannot justly forgive us without the penalty being paid.

But perhaps you’re thinking: “But I’m a good person. I’m not a terrorist or rapist or child molester! I’ve never been arrested. I go to church and live a moral life. I don’t deserve death for my sins!” But if you’re thinking along those lines, you’re falling into the error that I mentioned earlier: You have too high a view of your own goodness and too low a view of God’s holiness.

When Paul mentions “the certificate of debt consisting of decrees against us, which was hostile to us,” he’s referring to the commandments of God’s law. That law is against us and hostile to us because it justly condemns us because we’ve broken it repeatedly. The first commandment is (Exod. 20:3), “You shall have no other gods before Me.” Can you honestly say that you’ve always obeyed that commandment? Right now, does God rightly have priority over everything in your life?

What about the second commandment? Have you ever served an idol instead of God? You say, “Of course not! I’m not a primitive pagan!” Oh! But let me ask, how many hours a week do you spend watching godless TV shows or movies? Could your possessions or your career be ruling your life? (Luke 18:18-23)? Some even make an idol out of Jesus. They set Him on the shelf and consult Him when they want something, but neglect Him the rest of the time. Do you have any idols?

The third commandment is that we should not take the Lord’s name in vain. You say, “That’s one that I haven’t broken!” Really? Even many Christians exclaim, “O, Geez,” which is short for “Jesus,” or, “O my God!” Very few of us honestly can say that we’ve never taken the Lord’s name in vain.

The fourth commandment is to keep the Sabbath holy. You say, “Christians aren’t under that commandment, are we?” My understanding is that we are not under the Jewish Sabbath laws. But there is a New Testament command about not forsaking assembling with the Lord’s people (Heb. 10:25). And, Sunday is “the Lord’s Day” (Rev. 1:10), which implies that it’s not my day. I read recently that most Christians now think that if they go to church twice a month, they’re committed. That strikes me as being half-committed! The fifth commandment is to honor our parents. Can anyone claim that you made it through childhood obeying that commandment? And it applies to us as adult children, too.

The sixth commandment is that we should not murder. Most of us could claim that we’ve kept that one, until we read the Sermon on the Mount, where Jesus says that if we’ve ever been wrongfully angry with someone, we’ve murdered him in God’s sight. The same applies to commandment seven, not to commit adultery. If you’ve ever lusted, you’re guilty according to Jesus.

Number eight commands us not to steal. That applies to cheating on your taxes! Moving right along, number nine is against bearing false witness. Have you always been truthful? And number ten is directed at our hearts, telling us not to covet anything not belonging to us.

Jesus summed up both tables of the law by saying that we are to love God with all our heart, soul, mind, and strength (commands 1-4) and to love our neighbor as ourselves (commands 5-10). We all stand guilty of breaking every command many times over. That’s why we have a huge IOU against us. God’s law is hostile to us, because it condemns us all as guilty. So, how can we possibly escape the just condemnation of God’s holy law?

B. On the cross, Christ completely paid the debt that we owe.

Paul piles up terms to reinforce this wonderful truth. First, he says that God has “forgiven us all our transgressions.” “Forgiven” comes from the Greek word for “grace.” It means that God grants forgiveness as a free gift, not as payment to those who earn it. You can’t get forgiveness by doing penance or promising to try harder. It’s a free gift that you can only receive.

Note also that God forgave all our transgressions. While we need to ask His forgiveness when we sin to restore fellowship with Him, once we have trusted in Christ we never need to ask forgiveness to restore our salvation. That transaction was taken care of once for all when we trusted in Jesus Christ as our sin-bearer. Paul adds that God has canceled out or erased our IOU or certificate of debt. It’s gone!

But how can God do that and still be just and righteous? The answer is, “He has taken it out of the way, having nailed it to the cross” (Col. 2:14). On the cross, Jesus paid the penalty for every sinner who trusts in Him. As Paul put it (2 Cor. 5:21), “He made Him who knew no sin to be sin on our behalf, so that we might become the righteousness of God in Him.” By Jesus paying the penalty, God can be both “just and the justifier of the one who has faith in Jesus” (Rom. 3:26). So the crucial question is, “Have you put your trust in Jesus Christ and His death on the cross as the payment for all your sins?” If so, then your debt has been paid in full.

But maybe you’re thinking, “I have trusted in Christ, but I still feel guilty sometimes. When I sin, even if I confess it and turn from it, it keeps coming back to haunt me. Is that guilt from God?” If you’ve truly trusted in Christ and repented of your sin, the answer is, no. Your guilt is from Satan, the accuser of the saints (Rev. 12:10; Zech. 3:1-5). Thus you need to know …

3. Because Christ died and is risen, in Him we have victory over the forces of evil.

Col. 2:15: “When He had disarmed the rulers and authorities, He made a public display of them, having triumphed over them through Him.” “Through Him” could be translated, “through it,” that is, the cross. But either way, it refers to Christ crucified. God took what looked like Satan’s greatest moment of triumph, the death of the sinless Lord of glory, and turned it into Satan’s greatest defeat. On the cross, Jesus accomplished perfect redemption for all of His people. We were captives in Satan’s domain of darkness, but through Jesus’ death, God rescued us (Col. 1:13).

When Paul speaks of God disarming the rulers and authorities, the picture is of a Roman general’s triumphal parade. The conquered foes were stripped of their armor and paraded in shame through the streets in chains. When Christ willingly gave His life on the cross to pay for our sins, Satan and his evil forces were stripped of their power over us. They can no longer rightfully accuse us, because Christ has paid the debt of our sin. They can no longer hold us captive through the fear of death, because Christ won the victory over Satan and over death on the cross. His victory was confirmed when God raised Him from the dead. And we who believe are raised with Him, seated in heaven with Him (Eph. 2:6).

So when the enemy accuses you, tell him to take it up with Jesus and His shed blood. James 4:7 says, “Submit therefore to God. Resist the devil and he will flee from you.” Satan has no power over us because Jesus died and was raised on our behalf.

Conclusion

For the godly British pastor, William Sangster, the death and resurrection of Jesus Christ filled him with hope, even as he faced his own death from a slow, degenerative muscular paralysis just shy of his sixtieth birthday. He devoted his fading energy to the cause of Christ, organizing prayer groups and writing articles and books as long as he could. Finally, his vocal cords were paralyzed and he could only move two of his fingers to scratch out written messages.

On his final Easter morning just a few weeks before he died, he could not speak. But he wrote a letter to his daughter in which he said, “It is terrible to wake up on Easter morning and have no voice with which to shout, ‘He is risen!’ But it would be still more terrible to have a voice and not want to shout.”

Dead religion cannot give new life. It can’t forgive your sins. It can’t defeat the devil. The crucified and risen Savior can. Trust in Him and enjoy life, forgiveness, and victory!

Application Questions

1. If dead sinners are unable to believe before God gives them life, how can He hold them accountable for unbelief? How can we urge them to believe if they can’t believe?
2. Some argue that everyone can believe if they simply choose to. What Scriptures show that even saving faith is God’s gift? Why is this important?
3. The notion that we’re good people, not deserving of God’s wrath, is a main obstacle to overcome when you’re sharing the gospel. What are some ways to show sinners their true guilt?
4. How can a believer know whether his guilt is conviction from the Spirit or condemnation from the enemy?

Copyright, Steven J. Cole, 2016, All Rights Reserved.

Unless otherwise noted, all Scripture Quotations are from the New American Standard Bible, Updated Edition © The Lockman Foundation

Introduction

Each summer when my family and I go to Washington state to visit our families and friends, my father and I traditionally play our annual game of golf. This year my father and I went as a threesome with my uncle, who also happens to be a golf coach. My dad tactfully took me aside as we were approaching the clubhouse and gave me a bit of advice: “Bobby, why don’t you use your number three iron at first, until you gain a little confidence.” My answer tells you a lot about me: “Pop, I don’t have any trouble with confidence, just ability.”

Occasionally, though, I do lack a sense of security and self-confidence. I once worked as a school teacher in a medium-security prison in my home town in Washington state. In the prison school we had a guard who was stationed in the hall just outside the classroom. The guard, Mr. Look, was a man who was in control of things to such a degree that he inspired confidence in every teacher. He seemed to be almost omniscient (he always knew what the inmates were thinking), omnipresent (he seemed to be everywhere at once and to have eyes in the back of his head), and omnipotent (Mr. Look always got his way). From the teachers’ standpoint, Mr. Look was synonymous with security.

One week, however, Mr. Look went on vacation. The guard who took his place had neither the competence nor the confidence which all the teaching staff had come to expect. I must tell you that week was torture for all of us. No one had to tell us that matters were entirely in our hands. If we failed to control things in the classroom, we could expect little help from the guard outside. That week insecurity became a very real feeling which I had to contend with.

As I view the world in which we live, overconfidence may be a problem for some, but insecurity is epidemic in proportion. Science was once touted to be the savior of mankind. Now the ominous threat of the atom bomb hangs over our heads. Some would say that even if the bomb doesn’t kill us, nuclear power plants (such as Three Mile Island) will. The airplane has dramatically changed travel, but those of us who fly not only wonder if the plane will hold together, but we fear being hijacked to some foreign country or colliding in mid-air because of the air traffic controllers’ strike. The environment continues to become a garbage dump for all kinds of pollution and poison. The elderly are frightened to go out on the streets and yet afraid to be alone in their homes. And now the final blow has been struck—we are told that Social Security is no longer secure. And what little people have been able to save is being devoured by inflation.

With all of these sources of insecurity, some Christians would have us add yet another to our list—spiritual insecurity. They would tell us that it is possible for a person who has genuinely been converted, who has come to a personal trust in Jesus Christ for salvation, to lose that salvation through disobedience and sin. They want us to believe that we are only as secure as we are saintly. Because of this we must address ourselves to the subject of spiritual security.

I have chosen to approach the subject of the security of the saints in a somewhat backward fashion. I believe the Bible emphatically teaches the security of the saints, but first I want to show you that the doctrine of the security of the saints is not only true, but necessary. Insecurity is a devastating thing. I do not believe that it ever produces anything of eternal value. In order to demonstrate this I want to turn your attention to several instances in the Scriptures where insecurity has ruled the day. In this way we will see that security is essential to us, not only for our future, but also for day to day Christian living.

In Genesis 11 the people of Babel were insecure with the thought of spreading out and filling the earth as God had commanded (Genesis 9:7), so they set out to build a city with a tower in order to find their security in a city and a society. That project was cut short, and the people were dispersed by confusing their languages (Genesis 11:6-9). In Genesis 12 Abram was not secure in the promise of God in verses 1-3, so he fled to Egypt and resorted to deception to save his skin at his wife’s expense (verses l0ff.). This sin was repeated in chapter 20. In Genesis 16 Abram and Sarai felt insecure without a child to assure them of their future and the realization of God’s promises, so they set out to produce a child in their own way. The child which came from the union of Abram and Hagar brought only discord and sorrow (cf. 16:4ff.; 21:1ff.). In chapter 27 we find that Rebekah could not trust God to give Jacob preeminence over Esau as He had said (25:23), and so she sought to bring it about by intrigue and deception (27:5ff.), but at the cost of the son she most loved. She probably never saw him again before she died (27:41ff.). Over and over in Genesis insecurity was a major factor in actions which greatly displeased God and resulted in great suffering and sorrow for the saints. The same could be shown throughout Scripture.

Spiritual life, growth, and service is often etched away by the acid of insecurity. We must look for a biblical and more positive basis for spiritual motivation and ministry. A very significant part is played by the biblical teaching of the absolute security of the saint. It is to this truth that we are devoting our attention in this lesson.

A Scriptural Definition of Spiritual Security

Before we begin to defend spiritual security we must first define it. Spiritual security is the biblical teaching that a Christian is not only saved by God’s grace and power, but he is also kept by it. One who is truly born again can never relapse into the former state of being lost. Thus the saint is spiritually secure from the time of his salvation to the time of his glorification.

To put this into its simplest form, “Once saved, always saved.” To speak of it in more biblical terms, all those who have been chosen in eternity past and, in time, called and justified will, without exception, be glorified:

And we know that God causes all things to work together for good to those who love God, to those who are called according to His purpose. For whom He foreknew, He also predestined to become conformed to the image of His Son, that He might be the first-born among many brethren; and whom He predestined, these He also called; and whom He called, these he also justified and whom He justified, these He also glorified (Romans 8:28-30).

There is not so much as a hint that some will be lost from one step to another in the divinely directed process from election to glorification because it is God who is working all things together for good.

This doctrine of the security of the saints is based upon several biblical assumptions.

First, we assume that not all who profess to be saved are actually saved:

“Many will say to Me on that day, ‘Lord, Lord, did we not prophesy in Your name, and in Your name cast out demons, and in Your name perform many miracles?’ And then I will declare to them, ‘I never knew you; depart from Me, you who practice lawlessness’” (Matthew 7:22-23; cf. also James 2:14-26).

Some will appear to be Christians who never were.

Second, we must regretfully admit that some who are genuinely saved may not, at a given point in time, appear to be a Christian. In the Old Testament Pharaoh might not think Abram to be saved as he lied about Sarai (Genesis 12), nor does David seem to be a saint when he took Uriah’s wife and his life (2 Samuel 11). In the New Testament, Peter did not appear to belong to our Lord when he denied Him (Luke 22:54-62), nor did the man who was living with his father’s wife, an act considered pagan by unbelievers (1 Corinthians 5:1-5). The doctrine of the security of the saint does not mean that a Christian cannot fall, but only that his salvation will never fail:

The steps of a man are established by the LORD; And He delights in his way. When he falls, he shall not be hurled headlong; because the LORD is the one who holds his hand (Psalm 37:23-24).

Third, we must say that the doctrine of the security of the saints does not mean that all who are truly saved will necessarily feel so at any given moment in time. There is a great deal of difference between security and assurance. Security is a reality, while assurance is our perception of this reality. Security is a fact; assurance is a feeling. At times of sinfulness and disobedience, assurance is frequently lacking, but security is not.

Fourth, I have chosen for a definite reason to employ the expression “spiritual security” instead of the more familiar “eternal security.” While it need not be so, there is the implication in the latter expression that while my eternal destiny is secure, my day to day experience is a horse of a different color. I can be sure of going to heaven, but there is considerable doubt whether or not God’s purposes for my life will be realized. If I make but one mistake, some think, I will throw God’s plan for my life irreversibly off course. That is not spiritual security, for spiritual security assures me that God’s purpose to bring me to glory will certainly be realized, just as His purpose of bringing glory to Himself through me in this life will be (Romans 8:28-39; Philippians 1:6).

We know that Daniel continued to pray to his God even when the Law of the land prohibited it. We are not surprised when God shut the mouths of the lions because Daniel trusted his God and obeyed Him (cf. Daniel 6). Similarly, Daniel’s three friends were delivered out of the fiery furnace because they trusted in God (Daniel 3). Abraham obeyed God by taking his son Isaac to Mt. Moriah to sacrifice him as God had commanded, and God spared his son (Genesis 22). In all of these situations God preserved and protected men when they were faithful to Him. But what of those times when men choose to disobey?

The doctrine of spiritual security maintains that God’s purposes for our lives will be realized in spite of our disobedience. God promised to bless Abraham and the world through him (Genesis 12:1-3, etc.). He protected and even prospered Abram and Sarai in Egypt when they lied (Genesis 12:10ff). God purposed that Messiah would come through the tribe of Judah (Genesis 49:8-12). Judah, however, was willing to enter into marriage with a Canaanite and into a sexual union with a woman he thought to be a cult prostitute. His sons were wicked and sought to avoid having children through Judah’s daughter-in-law, Tamar, but God nevertheless provided a son, Perez, who would be the ancestor of our Lord (Genesis 38). The book of Esther describes the fate of those Jews who chose to remain in Persia when they could have (and should have) returned to the promised land. By and large, the people of God were in unbelief. Throughout the book the future of these Jews seems to hang by a thread, but God saved them in spite of their unbelief and scheming. It was the purpose of God to bring the Ninevites to repentance through the preaching of Jonah. While Jonah arrived somewhat later than might have been the case, and certainly shaken by his experience, nevertheless he preached and many were saved, despite Jonah’s disgruntled attitude, even at the last of the book.

God’s purposes are not dependent upon our willful or joyful cooperation. When we choose to trust and obey, we have the privilege of participating knowingly and joyfully in God’s work through us. But when we disobey, God uses us anyway. The difference is that He uses us without our being aware of it, without our experience of the peace and joy that results from obedience, and often with the painful consequences brought about by our waywardness. Thus Joseph’s brothers accomplished the will of God (cf. Genesis 50:20), but unknowingly. And they went through much unnecessary grief and anxiety because of their sin. Yet in all of this the plan of God was being carried out without a hitch (cf. Genesis 37-50). Whether we respond to God’s leading or resist it, God’s will is accomplished. Therein is spiritual security.

Fifth, while I am spiritually secure from the moment I have been born again, pursuing a life of sin and disobedience is ill-advised:

It is actually reported that there is immorality among you, and immorality of such a kind as does not exist even among the Gentiles, that someone has his father’s wife. And you have become arrogant, and have not mourned instead, in order that the one who had done this deed might be removed from your midst. For I, on my part, though absent in body but present in spirit, have already judged him who has so committed this, as though I were present. In the name of our Lord Jesus, when you are assembled, and I with you in spirit, with the power of our Lord Jesus, I have decided to deliver such a one to Satan for the destruction of his flesh, that his spirit may be saved in the day of the Lord Jesus (1 Corinthians 5:1-5).

The sinner here was a true Christian, I believe. He had done that which shocked even the pagans and brought discredit to our Lord and His church. The discipline which Paul urged was intended to restore this brother, a course of action that was effective (2 Corinthians 2:5-11). Paul said that while his flesh might be destroyed, his spirit would be saved. Spiritually this sinning saint was secure, eternally secure, but he was nevertheless in great danger. God has ways of dealing with sin besides revoking salvation. Being turned over to Satan is a frightening possibility. Our souls are secure in the Lord, now and forever, but we still may reap the consequences of divine chastening if we choose to take the grace of God lightly.

A Scriptural Defense of Spiritual Security

The doctrine of our spiritual security is not just true because we want it to be so and not even because we need it to be true; it is a fact because the Bible boldly states this to be the case. While there are many lines of proof for the security of the saints, I will focus on some of those which are most striking to me.

(1) The saints are spiritually secure because the Scriptures say so. Our Lord Himself assured us of our security in Him:

“My sheep hear My voice, and I know them, and they follow Me; and I give eternal life to them; and they shall never perish, and no one shall snatch them out of My hand. My Father, who has given them to Me, is greater than all; and no one is able to snatch them out of the Father’s hand” (John 10:27-29).

Several things in this passage support the conclusion that our Lord assured the Christian of his spiritual security. His sheep, true sheep (not hogs or dogs—2 Peter 2:22) listened to Him, recognized His voice and followed Him, as opposed to false teachers (John 10:5,14,26). The sheep of our Lord are given eternal life, and their security is as certain as the strength of God to keep them. Since the Father is greater than all, no one can snatch us from His hand (verse 29).

Let your way of life be free from the love of money, being content with what you have; for He Himself has said, “I will never desert you, nor will I ever forsake you” (Hebrews 13:5).

Christians should never seek their security from riches, for such security is uncertain (cf. 1 Timothy 6:17). Instead we should be content with what we have, for true security is in Him who will never leave us nor forsake us.

What Jesus promised, Paul preached:

What then shall we say to these things? If God is for us, who is against us? He who did not spare His own Son, but delivered Him up for us all, how will He not also with Him freely give us all things? Who will bring a charge against God’s elect? God is the one who justifies; who is the one who condemns? Christ Jesus is He who died, yes, rather who was raised, who is at the right hand of God, who also intercedes for us. Who shall separate us from the love of Christ? Shall tribulation, or distress, or persecution, or famine, or nakedness, or peril, or sword? Just as it is written, “For Thy sake we are being put to death all day long; we were considered as sheep to be slaughtered.” But in all these things we overwhelmingly conquer through Him who loved us. For I am convinced that neither death, nor life, nor angels, nor principalities, nor things present, nor things to come, nor powers, nor height, nor depth, nor any other created thing, shall be able to separate us from the love of God, which is in Christ Jesus our Lord (Romans 8:31-39).

But God demonstrates His own love toward us, in that while we were yet sinners, Christ died for us. Much more then, having now been justified by His blood, we shall be saved from the wrath of God through Him. For if while we were enemies, we were reconciled to God through the death of His Son, much more, having been reconciled, we shall be saved by His life (Romans 5:8-10).

Paul says that our victory was won on the cross of Calvary through. Christ, who died and was raised again. Our victory is in Him, and nothing can separate us from His love. In Romans 5 the certainty of His love is stressed by contrasting our past condition with our present state. He died for us while we were yet in our sins, His enemies, and resisting His will. If His love was such that He would die for His enemies, how much more we can be confident of being kept since we are now members of His family. If He saved us as enemies, surely He will keep us as members of the family.

Paul has yet another argument for our security. His confidence in the keeping power of God is unshakable because God always finishes what He begins:

For I can confident of this very thing, that He who began a good work in you will perfect it until the day of Christ Jesus (Philippians 1:6).

Here is the fundamental issue in the matter of our security: who initiated our salvation, God or us? The song says, “If you’ll take one step toward the Savior, my friend, you’ll find His arms open wide.” It would appear from the song that it is man who makes the first move, but the song is wrong. Notice what Paul says in Philippians 1:29:

For to you it has been granted for Christ’s sake, not only to believe in Him, but also to suffer for His sake.

Now this verse tells us that it is God who has granted us to believe. Other passages bear out this same point:

… and as many as had been appointed to eternal life believed (Acts 13:48).

… and the Lord opened her heart to respond to the things spoken by Paul (Acts 16:14).

“You did not choose Me, but I chose you, and appointed you, that you should go and bear fruit, and that your fruit should remain; that whatever you ask of the Father in My name, He may give to you” (John 15:16).

Blessed be the God and Father of our Lord Jesus Christ, who has blessed us with every spiritual blessing in the heavenly places in Christ-, just as He chose us in Him before the foundation of the world, that we should be holy and blameless before Him. In love He predestined us to adoption as sons through Jesus Christ to Himself, according to the kind intention of His will (Ephesians 1:3-5; cf. also 2:1-10).

When we were dead in our sins, enemies of God (Ephesians 2:1-3), not seeking Him (Romans 3:10-18), He chose us, sent His Son to Calvary, regenerated us by His Spirit, and drew us to Himself. Salvation begins with God, and therefore God will finish what He began.

Peter reiterates what Jesus promised and Paul preached:

Blessed be the God and Father of our Lord Jesus Christ, who according to His great mercy has caused us to be born again to a living hope through the resurrection of Jesus Christ from the dead, to obtain an inheritance which is imperishable and undefiled and will not fade away reserved in heaven for you, who are protected by the power of God through faith for a salvation ready to be revealed in the last time (1 Peter 1:3-5).

The writer to the Hebrews says plainly that God both initiates and completes our salvation:

… fixing our eyes on Jesus the author and perfecter of faith, who for the joy set before Him endured the cross, despising the shame, and has sat down at the right hand of the throne of God (Hebrews 12:2).

Heaven, Peter assures us, is kept securely for us. Frankly, I have never stayed up nights worrying about that. More important for me is the promise that we are being kept for it, by God’s power.³²

(2) In addition to explicit statements in the Scriptures there are also many implicit assurances of the security of the saints. We know that God is omniscient (that is, He knows all). Knowing all means that God knew all of our sins long before He ever chose us (in eternity past) or called us. How inconceivable it is to think that an omniscient God would save us from some of our sins, all the while knowing that by other sins we would be lost. Since God is immutable (that is, He never changes), His purposes never change, nor do His promises, nor does His love. If God’s love does not change, nor His purposes, and His power is greater than all, how can we ever be lost, having once been saved? The gifts and the calling of God are irrevocable (Romans 11:29).

(3) We never find any instance in the Bible, Old or New Testament, where one who was once saved lost his salvation. David sinned greatly, but he was restored. Peter denied his Lord, but he had a position of prominence in His church. And even the man who lived with his father’s wife was considered spiritually secure (1 Corinthians 5:5). And lest someone object that these men were all lost and then saved once again, let me remind you of this passage:

For in the case of those who have once been enlightened and have tasted of the heavenly gift and have been made partakers of the Holy Spirit, and have tasted the good word of God and the powers of the age to come, and then have fallen away, it is impossible to renew them again to repentance, since they again crucify to themselves the Son of God, and put Him to open shame (Hebrews 6:4-6; emphasis added).

If it were possible to be lost after once being saved (which it is not),³³ then that one would be lost forever.

(4) Finally, the character of God demands that the saints be spiritually secure. In Exodus 32 we find the nation Israel had quickly turned from true worship and had become involved in idolatry (verses 1-6). While I am reading between the lines, I do not believe that God was as willing to give up on the Israelites as was Moses, who, I think, was ready to resign. The interchange between God and His servant was a brilliant stroke, for it caused Moses to intercede for the Israelites, pleading with God to preserve them.

Notice how God chose His words to suggest that these people were really the responsibility of Moses when the LORD spoke to Moses, “Go down at once, for your people, whom you brought up from the land of Egypt, have corrupted themselves” (Exodus 32:7; emphasis added).

Since when were the Israelites Moses’ people? They were God’s chosen people! It would seem that neither Moses nor God wanted them at the moment. It sounds something like our house when our children have misbehaved. I tell my wife to deal with her children, and she insists that they are mine.

I do not think for a moment that Moses’ answer really changed God’s mind,³⁴ but I do believe that it changed his. How could God give up on the nation of Israel? He had publicly identified with them in Egypt and brought about their miraculous release by the plagues and bringing them through the Red Sea. Moses told God that all the nations knew of this. If He were to fail to finish what He started, it would be His reputation that would be blemished. Like it or not, Moses seemed to be saying, God could not give up on His people, even if He wanted to, because it was His reputation that was on the line.

Isn’t that a comforting thought? God has committed Himself to saving us and to completing the work of salvation by glorifying us with Him in heaven. All of heaven looks on with keen interest (1 Corinthians 11:10; 1 Peter 1:12). His glory is to be realized by our redemption:

In Him, you also, after listening to the message of truth, the gospel of your salvation—having also believed, you were sealed in Him with the Holy Spirit of promise, who is given as a pledge of our inheritance, with a view to the redemption of God’s own possession, to the praise of His glory (Ephesians 1:13-14).

… in order that the manifold wisdom of God might now be made known through the church to the rulers and the authorities in the heavenly places. This was in accordance with the eternal purpose which He carried out in Christ Jesus our Lord (Ephesians 3:10-11).

Conclusion and Application

Most of us are probably familiar with the little Peanuts book which carried out the theme “Happiness is …” I would like to give you my version of “Security is …” only without the cartoons to accompany it.

• Security is knowing that my salvation is as certain as He is loving, powerful, and unchanging.
• Security is knowing that God is my Father and that He will always deal with me as a son, not as a stranger.
• Security is knowing that God will bring about His glory and my good through my failures as well as through my faithfulness.
• Security is knowing that I am secure no matter how I may feel at the moment.
• Security is knowing that God purposes not only the ends, but also provides the means.
• Security is knowing that God has given me a vital task to perform and the gifts to do it (cf. 1 Corinthians 12).
• Security is knowing that God loves to confound the wise by using the simple (1 Corinthians 1:18-31).

The biblical teaching of the spiritual security of the saints provides us with several principles which we need to understand and apply in our Christian experience:

(1) While fear has value as a deterrent, it is security and faith that motivate us to steadfast service.

For rulers are not a cause of fear for good behavior, but for evil. Do you want to have no fear of authority? Do what is good, and you will have praise from the same; for it is a minister of God to you for good. But if you do what is evil, be afraid; for it does not bear the sword for nothing; for it is a minister of God, an avenger who brings wrath upon the one who practices evil (Romans 13:3-4).

Fear has the beneficial effect of causing some to turn away from evil. Fear of eternal judgment has a very definite part to play in the conversion of the lost (cf. John 16:8; Acts 2:14ff., 16:29), but it does not provide an adequate or satisfactory basis for a life of service. A life of service is the result of spiritual security. Jesus frequently used the comforting words, “Fear not” (cf. Luke 5:10, 12:7, etc.). John wrote,

There is no fear in love; but perfect love casts out fear, because fear involves punishment, and the one who fears is not perfected in love (1 John 4:18).

I believe that Timothy was a man who lacked confidence. I do not think it is difficult to see that he was a timid person who needed encouragement from Paul. In his second epistle to Timothy it was necessary for Paul to exhort him to diligence in the ministry to which he was called and for which God had gifted him:

And for this reason I remind you to kindle afresh the gift of God which is in you through the laying on of my hands. For God has not given us a spirit of timidity, but of power and love and discipline. Therefore do not be ashamed of the testimony of our Lord, or of me His prisoner; but join with me in suffering for the gospel according to the power of God (2 Timothy 1:6-8).

In this same context Paul underscored the confidence and security he had in Christ, a confidence which Timothy should share:

For this reason I also suffer these things, but I am not ashamed; for I know whom I have believed and I am convinced that He is able to guard what I have entrusted to Him until that day (2 Timothy 1:12).

The writer to the Hebrews, who were tempted to shrink back in a time of testing, stresses the confidence which should be the basis for boldness and endurance:

Since therefore, brethren, we have confidence to enter the holy place by the blood of Jesus, by a new and living way which He inaugurated for us through the veil, that is, His flesh, and since we have a great priest over the house of God, let us draw near with a sincere heart in full assurance of faith, having our hearts sprinkled clean from an evil conscience and our body washed with pure water. Let us hold fast the confession of our hope without wavering, for He who promised is faithful; and let us consider how to stimulate one another to love and good deeds, not forsaking our own assembling together, as is the habit of some, but encouraging one another; and all the more, as you see the day drawing near (Hebrews 10:19-25).³⁵

In the long term, fear does not motivate the saints to be saintly. If the security of my salvation were dependent upon my own faithfulness rather than upon God’s, I would just as well bail out early and avoid the rush. If my salvation is secure, even when I fail, I cannot lose, and therefore I can invest my life in God with the utmost of confidence.

May I go so far as to suggest that if fear has only a deterring value, while security has a positive and constructive dimension, we need to ask ourselves what motivation we are employing to promote the security of others. Marriages today are entered into with the understanding that if the union fails to produce all that we had hoped for, the union must be set aside. That is burdening marriage with a deadly sense of insecurity. Who is willing to invest everything in a relationship which is structured to fail? Permanence promises security, and security promotes long-tem investment. Do we imply to our mates that we will love them if …? Do our children conclude that we only love them when …? That is insecurity, and it does no more for our families than it does for our faith. Let us put aside all such things. And if insecurity does not work well in the family, I suspect it is unproductive in the factory or anywhere else.

(2) The security of the saints was never intended to encourage slothfulness or sin in the Christian’s life. The major objection to the doctrine of the security of the saints is not exegetical or biblical, but practical: “Once saved, always saved means that once I am saved I can live any way I wish and still go to heaven.” In one sense this is hypothetically true. Nothing I can do, once I am saved, will cause me to lose my salvation. But let me remind you, as I often do, that just because a doctrine is wrongly applied does not mean that the doctrine itself is wrong. Any truth can be misapplied and yet still be true.

The doctrine of spiritual security means that when I sin as a saint God will deal with me as a son, not as a stranger:

For consider Him who has endured such hostility by sinners against Himself, so that you may not grow weary and lose heart. You have not yet resisted to the point of shedding blood, in your striving against sin; and you have forgotten the exhortation which is addressed to you as sons, “My son, do not regard lightly the discipline of the Lord, nor faint when you are reproved by Him; for those whom the Lord loves He disciplines, and He scourges every son whom He receives.” It is for discipline that you endure; God deals with you as with sons; for what son is there whom his father does not discipline? But if you are without discipline, of which all have become partakers, then you are illegitimate children and not sons. Furthermore, we had earthly fathers to discipline us, and we respected them; shall we not much rather be subject to the Father of spirits, and live? For they disciplined us for a short time as seemed best to them, but He disciplines us for our good, that we may share His holiness. All discipline for the moment seems not to be joyful, but sorrowful; yet to those who have been trained by it-, afterwards it yields the peaceful fruit of righteousness. Therefore, strengthen the hands that are weak and the knees that are feeble (Hebrews 12:3-12).

Now I must tell you that when I was naughty as a boy it was of little comfort, at the moment, to know it was my father who would be giving me my “licks.” Because he was my father, I knew that he had much more invested in me than the next-door neighbor or a total stranger. Consequently, those spankings hurt a lot.

When I was in elementary school one of the ways I found to get out of class was to be a projectionist. As such, my friend Rickey and I had a great deal more freedom than our peers. One day Rickey and I were careening down the hall at breakneck speed with the projector, cart, and all. As we executed a particularly skillfully banked corner, we ran into my father. He was the last teacher in that building I wanted to meet under such circumstances. Fathers do not go lightly on their sons if they love them. But when all is said and done, I never questioned the fact that I was still a son. Chastening is bearable, but being disowned is something entirely different. That is something the Christian need never fear.

(3) While our security is founded upon the promises of God, it is ultimately rooted in the person of God. No promise is any better than the person who has given it. Because God is omniscient, omnipotent, loving, merciful, and changeless I know that I will ever be secure in His salvation.

I find that Christians today are placing more emphasis upon the quality and quantity of their faith than upon the object of their faith. I may have great faith that I can fly by flapping my arms feverishly, but if I jump off a cliff with faith in my arms, I’ll die. On the other hand, I may have a weak and faltering faith in the 747 leaving Dallas/Ft. Worth today, but that plane is completely trustworthy. The object of my faith is far more important than the amount of my faith. Many will perish because they have much faith in the wrong object. When we wish to be assured of our security, we would do well to focus more upon the object—God Himself, His attributes, His character, His faithfulness in history (e.g., Psalm 78)—than upon our faith. In the words of one more honest than many of us, “I do believe; help me in my unbelief” (Mark 9:24).

(4) A security that is based upon anything other than God Himself and the work of His Son on Calvary is a false security, doomed to disappoint us. Money, for example, is not a firm foundation for our security:

A rich man’s wealth is his strong city, And like a high wall in his own imagination (Proverbs 18:11).

Instruct those who are rich in this present world not to be conceited or to fix their hope on the uncertainty of riches, but on God, who richly supplies us with all things to enjoy (1 Timothy 6:17).

Our security is not in money, not in our position or power, not in our friends, but only in God.

(5) The saint is never more secure than when he has no visible means of support. It is easy for Christians to glibly say that we trust only in God. After all, even our coins say this. But in reality most of us trust in God and our bank account, our influence, our abilities, and our accomplishments. Nearly every Christian has “something up his sleeve,” so to speak, some extra hedge against insecurity. God has a marvelous way of pulling these “props” out from under us, gently and one at a time (usually), but surely. Abraham, for example, seemed to rely upon his relatives. While he was commanded to leave both his country and his relatives, he did not leave Terah, his father, but Terah left him in death, after taking the family to Haran (cf. Genesis 1:27-32; 12:1; Acts 7:2-4). Only reluctantly and after considerable time did Abraham leave Lot behind. Then he clung to Ishmael, whom God said had to be sent away. Finally it was Isaac who was Abraham’s sole source of security, and so God had to test his faith by commanding him to sacrifice Isaac (Genesis 22).

The message of the book of Hebrews is that our faith is not in earthly, visible things, but in God alone and in His promises of a new and better land, for which we still wait: “Now faith is the assurance of things hoped for, the conviction of things not seen” (Hebrews 11:1).

All these died in faith, without receiving the promises, but having seen them and having welcomed them from a distance, and having confessed that they were strangers and exiles on the earth. For those who say such things make it clear that they are seeking a country of their own. And indeed if they had been thinking of that country from which they went out, they would have had opportunity to return. But as it is, they desire a better country, that is a heavenly one. Therefore God is not ashamed to be called their God, for He has prepared a city for them (Hebrews 11:1, 13-16).

If security is to be found only in God, then I now have an entirely different outlook on the matter of suffering. Suffering causes me to take His Word more seriously:

Before I was afflicted I went astray, But now I keep thy word (Psalm 119:67).

It is good for me that I was afflicted, That I may learn Thy statutes (Psalm 119:71).

If Thy Law had not been my delight, Then I would have perished in my affliction (Psalm 119:92).

Suffering makes me cling more loosely to the things of this life and to yearn for Him:

Therefore we do not lose heart, but though our outer man is decaying, yet our inner man is being renewed day by day. For momentary, light affliction is producing for us an eternal weight of glory far beyond all comparison, while we look not at the things which are seen, but at the things which are not seen; for the things which are seen are temporal, but the things which are not seen are eternal.

For we know that if the earthly tent which is our house is torn down, we have a building from God, a house not made with hands, eternal in the heavens. For indeed in this house we groan, longing to be clothed with our dwelling from heaven; inasmuch as we, having put it on, shall not be found naked. For indeed while we are in this tent, we groan, being burdened, because we do not want to be unclothed, but to be clothed, in order that what is mortal may be swallowed up by life. Now He who prepared us for this very purpose is God, who gave to us the Spirit as a pledge. Therefore, being always of good courage, and knowing that while we are at home in the body we are absent from the Lord—for we walk by faith, not by sight—we are of good courage, I say, and prefer rather to be absent from the body and to be at home with the Lord (2 Corinthians 4:16-5:8).

In short, suffering and affliction force me to find my security only in God:

Whom have I in heaven but thee? And besides Thee, I desire nothing on earth. My flesh and my heart may fail; But God is the strength of my heart and my portion forever. For, behold, those who are far from Thee will perish; Thou hast destroyed all those who are unfaithful to Thee. But as for me, the nearness of God is my good; I have made the Lord God my refuge. That I may tell of all Thy works (Psalm 73:25-28).

The song writer has grasped the security of the saints and has penned these words of comfort and praise:

More secure is no one ever Than the loved ones of the Saviour
Not yon star on high abiding Nor the bird in home nest hiding.

God His own doth tend and nourish, In His holy courts they flourish;
Like a father kind He spares them. In His loving arms He bears them.

Neither life nor death can ever From the Lord His children sever,
For His love and deep compassion comforts them in tribulation.

Little flock, to joy then yield thee! Jacob’s God will ever shield thee;
Rest secure with this Defender, At His will all foes surrender.

What He takes or what He gives us Shows the Father’s love so precious:
We may trust His purpose wholly Tis His children’s welfare solely.

The security of which we have been speaking does not belong to all men by right, but it is a part of the salvation God has offered to men through faith in the shed blood of His Son, Jesus Christ. He died for your sins; He was raised from the dead and ascended to the right hand of the Father. He intercedes for His own, and in Him every true believer has absolute security for time and eternity. If you have never trusted in Him, I urge you to acknowledge your sinful state of rebellion against God and to cease trusting for your spiritual security in anything other than what our Lord has accomplished for you at Calvary.

---

32 One may hasten to point out that we are “protected by the power of God through faith.” But since faith itself is a gift from God and not of ourselves (Ephesians 2:8-10), we know that keeping us is God’s work.

33 Many interpretations of Hebrews 6 are to be found, but regardless of which you choose, the point remains: a Christian, if he could be lost, could not be re-saved. While some believe that this passage speaks of those who are only acquainted with the gospel and therefore never (yet) saved, I believe it to be a hypothetical argument intended to spur true Christians on to deeper things (cf. 5:11-6:3). If a Christian could be lost and then re-saved, the gospel should be the continual diet of the Christian (or ex-Christian, if he has sinned lately). But if no one can be re-saved, the subject of their study should be the deeper truths beyond that of salvation. Many churches who pride themselves for preaching the gospel every service should seriously consider this word from the writer to the Hebrews.

34 The statement of verse 14 is thus anthropomorphic; that is, it describes the event as Moses perceived it and not as it was precisely. In the same way we say that the sun rises, for so it appears, yet we know there is a different scientific explanation. Similarly, our Lord in Luke 24:28 seemed intent upon leaving the two disciples and going His way, but they persuaded Him to dine with them (verse 29). God is free to change His actions, but His attributes and His decrees do not change.

35 You might ask, “But aren’t the following verses (26-31) proof of the Arminian argument that we can lose our salvation?” The confidence of which the writer speaks in verses 19-25 is that which we have in Christ, as true believers. The dread of which he writes in verses 26-31 is that which is to befall those who have rejected the work of Christ, who are His adversaries (verse 27), who have disregarded our Lord and insulted His Holy Spirit (verse 29).

February 21, 2016

Ever since Adam and Eve sinned, the problem of controlling sinful desires has plagued the human race. Whether you call it the flesh, the old nature, or indwelling sin, we all wrestle with strong internal temptations to do wrong. So a very practical question is, “How can we keep the flesh in check?”

One answer, which is not limited to Christians, has been to treat the body harshly in an attempt to gain mastery over it. When we were in Nepal, we saw two Hindu “holy men” at the temple who looked really weird, presumably in an attempt to control the flesh. (They also made money from foreigners like us who had to pay to take their picture!) Another Hindu, the Indian leader, Gandhi, stopped having sexual relations with his wife. Then, to prove his control over fleshly urges, he slept in the same bed with naked, beautiful young women, but never touched them. The Christian mystic, Origen, took literally the words of Jesus about becoming eunuchs for the sake of the kingdom and castrated himself. Christian monks have slept on boards, worn hair shirts, exposed themselves to extremes of heat and cold, lived on top of pillars, gone without bathing, fasted, and remained celibate in their attempts to deal with the flesh.

Even these Christian attempts to be holy probably strike us as really weird. We live in a culture where the motto is, “If it feels good, do it!” I haven’t seen any best-sellers lately on “self-denial,” unless it’s a diet to help you look good so that you can snag the hunk or beauty queen that you’re after!

But even in our libertarian society, the idea of monasticism still appeals to some. Back in 1988, Christianity Today [8/12/1988, pp. 20-21] published an editorial calling for a return to monasticism in the church. Granted, they weren’t calling for hair shirts, sleeping on hard beds, or living on top of pillars. But they did call for vows of celibacy and poverty. The editorial cited John Stott, the late respected Anglican pastor, who said that if he were beginning his Christian discipleship over, he would establish an evangelical monastic order where men would take a vow of celibacy, poverty, and peaceable living.

While I admire much about John Stott’s ministry, I think that the idea of a new Christian monastic order is perfectly horrible! The fact that the modern church has become infected with worldliness should not lead us to solve the problem by a rules-based, withdraw from the world, approach to holiness. While the church desperately needs self-discipline for the purpose of godliness, we must avoid asceticism, which invariably lies behind monasticism.

In Colossians 2:20-23, Paul shows that asceticism is how not to become godly. The false teachers in Colossae had a system of rules which they imposed on their followers. They said, “If you keep these rules, you will have victory over fleshly desires.” They took some of the Old Testament regulations concerning ceremonial cleanliness and diet and added to them, much as the Pharisees had done. Paul admits (Col. 2:23) that these rules had “the appearance of wisdom,” but, he adds, they “are of no value against fleshly indulgence.” Rather, Paul argues that …

Godliness is not achieved through asceticism but through our identification with Christ.

When Paul writes (Col. 2:20), “If you have died with Christ,” the Greek construction implies certainty, not doubt. But, as Douglas Moo (The Letters to the Colossians and Philemon [Eerdmans/Apollos], p. 233) states, by using “if,” Paul “is inviting us to consider whether, indeed, we have died with Christ and thus ponder its implications.” The same is true in Colossians 3:1, where Paul considers the corresponding truth, “Therefore if you have been raised up with Christ ….” Both terms focus on the truth that as believers, we are identified with Christ in His death and resurrection. So Paul is asking the rhetorical question, “If you truly died with Christ and were raised up with Him, why are you going back, not just to the Old Testament law, but even worse, to manmade rules added to that law?”

1. Godliness is not achieved through asceticism.

What is asceticism? Webster (merriam-webster.com) defines it as “relating to or having a strict and simple way of living that avoids physical pleasure.” The Oxford American Dictionary (oxforddictionaries.com) defines it: “Characterized by severe self-discipline and abstention from all forms of indulgence, typically for religious reasons.”

But if asceticism is self-denial, then isn’t it taught in the Bible? Paul said that he disciplined his body and made it his slave (1 Cor. 9:27). He instructed Timothy to endure hardship as a good soldier of Christ Jesus (2 Tim. 2:3) and to discipline himself for the purpose of godliness (1 Tim. 4:7). Self-control is a fruit of the Spirit (Gal. 5:23). Jesus said that self-denial is an essential requirement for following Him (Matt. 16:24). So what’s the difference between the asceticism that Paul attacks in our text and biblical self-denial or self-discipline? Here are a number of contrasts to consider:

• Asceticism sees the body as evil, to be totally suppressed; self-discipline sees the body as good, but needing control.

These false teachers probably taught that matter is evil, but spirit is good. Thus we must treat our bodies harshly. But the Bible teaches that as Christians, our bodies are the temple of the Holy Spirit. Thus we need to take care of our bodies and to glorify God with them (1 Cor. 6:19-20). To do this, we need to exercise control over what we eat and drink, over harmful substances such as tobacco and drugs, over sexual impulses, etc. But there is a basic difference in outlook toward the body between asceticism and biblical self-discipline.

• Asceticism is submitting my body to my will; self-discipline is submitting my whole life to God’s will.

The ascetic operates on will power. His goal is to bring his body under the control of his mind or spirit, as in Gandhi’s ludicrous experiment. But Christian self-denial has a higher aim, namely, to glorify Jesus Christ by bringing my whole being into submission to Him. It is to renounce my control of my life and to give that control willingly to Christ.

• Asceticism labels all material things as evil; self-discipline properly uses and enjoys the things of the world.

Ascetics cannot enjoy material possessions. While as Christians, we must be generous and ready to share, and not fix our hope on material things, Paul taught that God “richly supplies us with all things to enjoy” (1 Tim. 6:17). Countering those who forbade marriage and advocated abstaining from certain foods, Paul said (1 Tim. 4:4), “For everything created by God is good, and nothing is to be rejected, if it is received with gratitude.” Christians can rightly enjoy all of life under the lordship of Christ, including a good meal, the beauty of God’s creation, and the sexual relationship within marriage. Ascetics teach that such pleasurable enjoyment is wrong.

• Asceticism views joy and pleasure as wrong; self-disci­pline allows for the fullness of joy and pleasure in God.

Ascetics are as H. L. Mencken erroneously, but humorously, described a Puritan: “Someone with the haunting fear that someone, somewhere, may be happy.” But, as I said, Christians can legitimately enjoy God and all of His gracious gifts and blessings (Ps. 16:10). He wants our joy to be full (John 15:11; Ps. 5:11).

• Asceticism is restrictive; self-discipline leads to greater freedom.

Asceticism emphasizes all the things you cannot do: “Don’t handle this; don’t taste that; don’t touch that!” It leads to a restrictive, repressive kind of life. But self-discipline is the key to liberty. The disciplined athlete is free to do things that I cannot do. The skillful musician has disciplined himself over hours of practice so that he is free to play a Beethoven symphony that I could never play. And the disciplined Christian has freedom in the Lord to obey Him and not to sin, which is always for our good.

• Asceticism is aimed at obeying manmade commands; self-discipline is aimed at obeying God’s commands.

Paul says that these false teachers were promoting the commandments and teachings of men. He probably had in mind Jesus’ words when He denounced the Pharisees (Mark 7:7, citing Isa. 29:13), “But in vain do they worship Me, teaching as doctrines the precepts of men.” Jesus went on to tell them (Mark 7:9), “You nicely set aside the commandment of God in order to keep your tradition.” Ascetics add things to the Bible in an attempt to be spiritual. In the Ten Commandments, God said to keep the Sabbath holy; the Pharisees came up with over 600 detailed commands to specify what they thought that meant. As you know, Jesus frequently attacked the Pharisees for their ridiculous Sabbath rules. Biblical self-discipline distinguishes between what God commands and what men add to God’s commands.

• Asceticism stems from the flesh and often leads to sin; self-discipline stems from the Holy Spirit and is a means to true godliness.

The Colossian heretics were “inflated without cause by [their] fleshly mind” (Col. 2:18). While it is difficult to translate Colossians 2:23 (Moo, pp. 238-239), it probably means (as most modern translations agree) that while the rules of the false teachers may seem to promote godliness, in actuality, they are “of no value against fleshly indulgence.” Many people erroneously think that legalism is on one end of the scale and licentiousness on the other end, with grace being the balance point in the middle. But actually, legalism and licentiousness are two sides of the same coin, because both operate in the flesh. Thus Jesus accused the legalistic Pharisees of being full of self-indulgence, all uncleanness, and lawlessness (Matt. 23:25, 27, 28). Their manmade rules and outward restrictions could not deal with the flesh. Only the Holy Spirit living in us can make us holy by producing His fruit of self-control (Gal. 5:23).

• Asceticism is often motivated by gaining acceptance from God; self-discipline is motivated by assurance of being accepted by God.

The ascetic is often trying to make himself acceptable to God through harsh treatment of the body. By this he thinks he can atone for his sins or show enough contrition to merit God’s favor. But Christian self-discipline operates from the platform of knowing that God has accepted us in Jesus Christ on the basis of His grace. The motive behind self-discipline is not to gain His favor, but to be pleasing to the Lord because He loved me and died for me.

With that as a backdrop, let’s look more carefully at Paul’s argument in our text: When he says that we have died with Christ to the elementary principles of the world, I think the best explanation is his argument in Romans 7. There he argues that in Christ, we have died to the law, which could never produce godliness, so that we might be married to Christ. He says that the law of God is holy, righteous, and good. But the problem is, I am of the flesh, sold into bondage to sin. So when my sinful nature comes into contact with God’s holy law, the result is not godliness, but an arousal of my sinful desires, leading to more sin. However, Paul says, in Christ, who fulfilled the righteous demands of the law, we died to the law so that we are released from its jurisdiction, not to live unto sin, but rather to Christ, our new bridegroom (see also, Gal. 2:19).

In Colossians 2:20, when Paul says that we have died with Christ to (literally, “from,” since death means separation) “the elementary principles of the world,” he is referring to a rules-based approach to God (he uses the term this way in Gal. 4:3, 9). (Most modern scholars and some translations interpret “elementary principles” as “elemental spirits,” but I think it refers to an approach to God through keeping certain rules.) The cross ended that rules-keeping approach to God. We no longer have to “observe days and months and seasons and years” (Gal. 4:10) in order to come before God. Christ fulfilled all of that. He is “the end of the law for righteousness to everyone who believes” (Rom. 10:4).

Then, arguing from the greater to the lesser, Paul shows that since Christians have died to God’s law, which couldn’t produce righteousness, they should have nothing to do with manmade, ascetic rules, which are of no value against the flesh. He makes three points about these ascetic rules:

A. Ascetic rules deal with externals, not with the heart.

Colossians 2:21: “Do not handle, do not taste, do not touch!” Paul is probably citing the false teachers’ own words to mock them. The Greek words for the first and third terms mean virtually the same thing (Moo, p. 235). If there is any nuance of difference, he may be indicating that if you follow their rules, pretty soon you can’t even touch their forbidden foods, let alone eat them. But his main point is that these sorts of rules cannot deal with the problem that we all wrestle against, namely, sinful desires in our hearts. You can keep all the rules, but your heart is still far from God. After Jesus confronted the Pharisees for their external religion, while their hearts were far from Him (Mark 7:6-7), He went on to point out that all sin begins in our hearts. He said (Mark 7:20-23):

“That which proceeds out of the man, that is what defiles the man. For from within, out of the heart of men, proceed the evil thoughts, fornications, thefts, murders, adulteries, deeds of coveting and wickedness, as well as deceit, sensuality, envy, slander, pride and foolishness. All these evil things proceed from within and defile the man.”

So if we want a solution to our sin problem, it has to change our hearts. Being identified with Christ in His death and resurrection, through the new birth, enables us to become “obedient from the heart” to God’s righteous commandments (Rom. 6:17).

B. Ascetic rules are the ideas of men, not the principles of God’s Word.

Paul emphasizes this twice: First he calls these rules the commandments and teachings of men; then he calls it, “self-made religion.” It’s a type of worship which people make up for themselves, apart from what God has revealed. It’s a religion that takes some of God’s commands, but sets aside others. And it adds to what God has said by taking it farther than God intended.

For example, I’ve known Christians who take God’s Word regarding divorce and remarriage more strictly than the Bible stipulates. I was at a conference where the speaker taught that if you have ever been divorced for any reason, even if it was before you were a Christian, you could not remarry. So a young man who was divorced and then met Christ had to live in celibacy for the rest of his life. But God’s Word doesn’t say that!

And, he said, if you were divorced and remarried, even if it happened before you were saved, you could never be a pastor. Faithful pastors were going to the stage and saying that they were going to go home and resign from their ministries, because years before they met the Lord, they had gone through a divorce. I was appalled! To no avail, I argued with the speaker that he was laying on these men a standard that was stricter than God’s Word. Asceticism takes God’s Word and adds to it in an attempt to keep people from sinning. But it doesn’t work.

C. Ascetic rules appear to lead to godliness, but only feed pride and self-indulgence.

Paul grants (Col. 2:23) that these rules have “the appearance of wisdom in self-made religion and self-abasement and severe treatment of the body, but,” he adds, “are of no value against fleshly indulgence.” This sort of rules-keeping approach to the Christian life only serves to feed the flesh, because it does not deal with our pride. Pretty soon, those who keep the rules begin to look down on those who don’t keep the rules. If we fall into this trap, pretty soon we’ll start thinking like the Pharisee in Jesus’ story who prayed (Luke 18:11-12), “God, I thank You that I am not like other people: swindlers, unjust, adulterers, or even like this tax collector. I fast twice a week; I pay tithes of all that I get.”

That story shows that we can take even good things and become proud of ourselves for doing them: It’s right not to be a swindler or unjust or an adulterer. It’s right to fast (for the right reasons) and to be faithful in stewardship. It’s right to study God’s Word, to spend time in prayer, and to be faithful in gathering with God’s people to worship. But when you begin boasting, even to yourself, about your performance, you’re acting in the flesh, not in the Spirit. And the flesh never produces true godliness.

“Well,” you ask, “if asceticism isn’t the way to godliness, what is?” Our text for next week gives a more complete answer. But Paul hints at it in the opening phrase of verse 20:

2. Godliness is achieved through our identification with Christ.

The key phrase in Colossians 2:20 is, “If you have died with Christ ….” In Colossians 3:1-4, Paul talks about the corresponding truth of being raised up with Christ so that our life is now hidden with Christ in God. But for now, let’s briefly consider what it means to be identified with Christ in His death.

If you know Christ as Savior, you were there in Him when He died on the cross. The law of God had put a curse on the human race, because we all have violated it repeatedly. We stand condemned under its penalty of death. But Jesus, born under the law, perfectly fulfilled it. His death met the just requirement of the law. Because we are in Him, we also died to the law. It no longer has power or jurisdiction over us who are in Christ.

You may not feel or experience this truth. But it’s a legal fact in God’s sight. When you act upon it as true, it frees you from the cycle of sin and death under the law and enables you, through God’s Spirit, to live a life of holiness (see Rom. 8:1-4). Remember, in the Bible death always means separation, not cessation. The Greek preposition used in verse 20 means that we died from the law: we are separated from the law’s jurisdiction so that it no longer condemns us.

To illustrate, consider a man from a foreign country where the law imposed a 6 p.m. curfew. The man moves to our country and becomes a U.S. citizen. He has thus been legally separated from his country and its laws and become identified with our country. One evening he is out walking far from his home. Suddenly he realizes that it’s almost 6 p.m. He stops a man on the street and says, “Please, help me! I’m not allowed to be on the streets after 6 p.m.” The American would say to him, “Sir, I don’t know who told you such a thing. But let me assure you that in the United States, there is no such law.” That man’s freedom was a fact; but he wasn’t enjoying his freedom because he wasn’t acting on the basis of the truth that he was dead to (separated from) the laws of his old country and alive to the freedom of his new country.

That’s what Paul means when he says (Rom. 7:6), “But now we have been released from the Law, having died to that by which we were bound, so that we serve in newness of the Spirit and not in oldness of the letter.” Or, again (Gal. 2:19-20): “For through the Law I died to the Law, so that I might live to God. I have been crucified with Christ; and it is no longer I who live, but Christ lives in me; and the life which I now live in the flesh I live by faith in the Son of God, who loved me, and gave Himself up for me.” Godliness comes through our identification with Christ in His death, not through the rules-keeping of asceticism.

Conclusion

I doubt if there’s much danger of any of you running off to join a monastery or a convent. If you’re thinking about it, talk to me first! It won’t kill the flesh! But, because of your sincere desire to live for Christ, some of you may be trying to live by all sorts of manmade rules. But the rules approach doesn’t work. The way toward a godly life and victory over sin is to trust in Christ as your Savior and then to understand who you are in Christ and to live in light of your identification with Him.

Application Questions

1. Have you encountered Christians who practice asceticism? Were they trying to recruit you? Did you try it? Did it work?
2. How would you counsel a Christian young man who is fighting a losing battle with lust? Is it wrong to make rules about his use of the internet or his cell phone? Why/why not?
3. Since self-discipline is a godly virtue, but asceticism is not, how can we know when we cross that line?
4. A Christian tells you, “In Christ, I may be dead to sin, but I don’t feel dead to sin!” How would you counsel him?

Copyright, Steven J. Cole, 2016, All Rights Reserved.

Unless otherwise noted, all Scripture Quotations are from the New American Standard Bible, Updated Edition © The Lockman Foundation

1 Now there were some present at that time who told Jesus about the Galileans whose blood Pilate had mixed with their sacrifices. 2 Jesus answered, “Do you think that these Galileans were worse sinners than all the other Galileans because they suffered this way? 3 I tell you, no! But unless you repent, you too will all [“likewise,” NASB] perish. 4 Or those eighteen who died when the tower in Siloam fell on them—do you think they were more guilty than all the others living in Jerusalem? 5 I tell you, no! But unless you repent, you too will all [“likewise,” NASB] perish.”

6 Then he told this parable: “A man had a fig tree, planted in his vineyard, and he went to look for fruit on it, but did not find any. 7 So he said to the man who took care of the vineyard, ‘For three years now I’ve been coming to look for fruit on this fig tree and haven’t found any. Cut it down! Why should it use up the soil?’ 8 “‘Sir,’ the man replied, ‘leave it alone for one more year, and I’ll dig around it and fertilize it. 9 If it bears fruit next year, fine! If not, then cut it down.’ “

10 On a Sabbath Jesus was teaching in one of the synagogues, 11 and a woman was there who had been crippled by a spirit for eighteen years. She was bent over and could not straighten up at all. 12 When Jesus saw her, he called her forward and said to her, “Woman, you are set free from your infirmity.” 13 Then he put his hands on her, and immediately she straightened up and praised God. 14 Indignant because Jesus had healed on the Sabbath, the synagogue ruler said to the people, “There are six days for work. So come and be healed on those days, not on the Sabbath.” 15 The Lord answered him, “You hypocrites! Doesn’t each of you on the Sabbath untie his ox or donkey from the stall and lead it out to give it water? 16 Then should not this woman, a daughter of Abraham, whom Satan has kept bound for eighteen long years, be set free on the Sabbath day from what bound her?” 17 When he said this, all his opponents were humiliated, but the people were delighted with all the wonderful things he was doing.

18 Then Jesus asked, “What is the kingdom of God like? What shall I compare it to? 19 It is like a mustard seed, which a man took and planted in [“threw into,” NASB] his garden. It grew and became a tree, and the birds of the air perched in its branches.”

20 Again he asked, “What shall I compare the kingdom of God to? 21 It is like yeast that a woman took and mixed into [“hid in,” NASB] a large amount of flour until it worked all through the dough.”

Introduction

One’s perspective makes all the difference in the world. To most of you, a car that is “sick” or “dead” has no appeal. If you own it, you probably will try to think of a way of getting someone else to purchase it, or even to take it off your hands. On the other hand, when I look through the “car” section of the want ads, I have no interest in those cars which are running well. I want the sick and the dead ones.

The son of a farmer looks at cow manure as something which he must endlessly shovel out of the barn—a pain in the neck. The flower gardener, on the other hand, looks at manure as free fertilizer. They delight to get the stuff. They shovel it around the flower beds with joy. A mere matter of perspective.

Our perspective is very much a reflection of who we are. A Christian’s perspective is very much determined by his or her spiritual gifts. To the apostle Paul, John Mark was a liability, a man who could not be counted on, and thus a man who should not be taken along on a missionary journey. To Barnabas, whose gift was encouragement, Mark was an opportunity and a challenge. Mark was a man who needed encouragement, and Barnabas was the man to do it, just as he had ministered to Paul (Saul) in the early days of his Christian walk.

In our text, we find two very different perspectives reflected. One is that of the Jewish leadership and of many of their followers. The other is the perspective of God, as seen in the viewpoint of our Lord Jesus Christ, the Son of God. In verses 1-5, a certain group of people viewed the tragic and untimely death of a group of men as an indicator of great sin and of God’s wrath. To Jesus this tragedy took on an entirely different meaning, one which He shared with His listeners. The parable of the fruitless fig tree in verses 6-9 is our Lord’s response to the previous incident, teaching Israel about themselves and about God.

The account of the healing of the hunchback, the Israelite woman who had been stooped over for 18 years (verses 10-17) again reveals a very different set of perspectives. The woman’s long-term suffering produced one response, and her healing evoked praise from her and delight for many, but it greatly irritated the ruler of the synagogue, who did not want the Sabbath violated by such “work” as healing. Jesus has an entirely different perspective from this man, as we shall see in our study.

Finally, in verses 18-21 our text ends with two very short parables. These parables, one about a mustard tree (vv. 18-19) and the other about leaven (vv. 20-21), give a divine perspective on the kingdom of God, one, as we might expect, very different from that of most Israelites.

Man’s natural way of viewing things is never the same as God’s (Isaiah 55:6-9), and thus we can only know God’s thoughts from His Word, as revealed to us through His Spirit (1 Corinthians 2:14-16). Let us approach this text as those whose perspective is warped and distorted by sin, and let us look to God to give us that perspective which is like His. Let us listen well to these words of Scripture and heed them as the Word of God.

A Reminder

As we approach this text it is especially important for us to remember Luke’s audience and his purpose in writing this gospel. Other gospels were known to Luke, but he wrote this gospel for Gentile believers. He is not writing to a Jewish audience, as Matthew has done, but he is writing to Gentiles, showing them how a Jewish Messiah, in fulfillment of His promises to Israel, can bring salvation to the entire world.

Our text from this lesson is one which helps to explain why Israel rejected Jesus as her Messiah, and of the way in which God used Israel’s hardness of heart and rejection of Christ to bring about His promised kingdom. The nature of the kingdom of God is very different from that which Israel expected, and it is brought about in a very different manner than they thought it would be. Few texts will give us more insight into the reasons why God took the kingdom away from Israel and gave it, as it were, to the Gentiles.

The Meaning of
the Massacre of the Galileans
(13:1-5)

Now there were some present at that time who told Jesus about the Galileans whose blood Pilate had mixed with their sacrifices. Jesus answered, “Do you think that these Galileans were worse sinners than all the other Galileans because they suffered this way? I tell you, no! But unless you repent, you too will all [“likewise,” NASB] perish. Or those eighteen who died when the tower in Siloam fell on them—do you think they were more guilty than all the others living in Jerusalem? I tell you, no! But unless you repent, you too will all [“likewise,” NASB] perish.”

Jesus was still surrounded by a multitude of thousands (Luke 12:1), sometimes teaching the masses (e.g. 12:54) and at other times teaching His disciples (e.g. 12:22). Sometimes it was not clear just who He was speaking to (cf. 12:41). At one point in time a delegation came to Jesus with some tragic news—a report that Pilate had recently slain a group of Galileans²³⁷ as they were worshipping. He mixed their blood with their sacrifices, we are told (v. 1). We do not know whether those who came bearing this account were Galileans themselves, or (more likely in my opinion), whether they were not.²³⁸

There was a meaning to this message. The report was conveyed to Jesus for a reason. Those who were the bearers of this bad news viewed it through their own perspective, a perspective which differed from our Lord’s. Jesus’ response to them exposed both their thinking and the error it betrayed. They had already drawn a false conclusion: these Galileans were greater sinners than others. This false conclusion was based upon a faulty premise: one’s suffering in life is indicative of one’s sin, just as one’s prosperity is proportional to one’s piety.

Jesus rejected both the conclusion and its premise as being false. He asked the question, which He answered with a simple, but emphatic, “no.” Then He immediately changed the focus. The tragedy which befell those Galileans should not be viewed as an opportunity to judge those who died at the hand of Pilate to be great sinners. Instead, it should be perceived as a warning to all sinners, namely themselves, of a judgment which awaits them.

Before we turn to the words of our Lord, found first in verse 3 and then repeated in verse 5, let us first take note that our Lord turned the attention of these men to another tragedy. This was also a tragedy which occurred in Jerusalem, at the tower of Siloam.²³⁹ Here, 18 men were killed when the tower in Siloam suddenly collapsed and fell on them. These men were not greater sinners than others either.

Some point out that while the Galileans died at the hand of man (namely Pilate), the 18 people who died in Jerusalem died at the hand of “nature,” at what we would call an “act of God.” We may also conclude that while the first group of men who died were those from Galilee, the second group seems to be those who lived in Jerusalem. If these Jerusalemites tended to look down their noses at the Galileans, Jesus will provide them with an example of their own peers dying in a similar way, tragically, prematurely, unexpectedly. While they compared Galileans with themselves, Jesus compared Galileans with Galileans (v. 2), and Jerusalemites with Jerusalemites (v. 4).

There are differences between these two groups of men who died, but the similarities seem more striking to me. First, those in both groups died. Jesus is not speaking of suffering in general terms, but specifically of death. He also warns His audience of the death which they will experience. Second, both groups died in a similar way—quickly, unexpectedly, tragically. Third, both groups died at a place and time when they may have felt very safe. When would a legalistic Jew feel more spiritual and “closer to God” (thus “safe” from divine judgment) than when he was performing his religious ritual of sacrifice. They died while offering sacrifices! And the 18 men who died in Jerusalem died while standing near a tower, undoubtedly a tower that was a significant part of their defense network. The tower would be that place where guards were stationed, the place from which an attack from outside the walls of the city would be countered. Where could anyone have stood that would have made them feel more secure? And yet they died by the tower. Literally, they died under the rubble of that tower. That which they viewed as their salvation was their destruction.

Judaism, from the perspective of the self-righteous (and lost) Israelite, was his salvation. Being a physical descendant of Abraham was all one needed to be assured of a place in the coming kingdom. This was what the typical Israelite thought. Jesus’ words should have sent a chill down the spine of every listener. These people all died doing that which made them feel safe and secure.

Jesus’ words, as I understand them, and as they are twice stated in our text, are specifically directed toward the nation of Israel:

“I tell you, no! But unless you repent, you too will all [“likewise,” NASB] perish.

The Lord calls upon all of His hearers to repent. The word “repent” is not new, but here it underscores the fact that those who are listening are sinners, too. Would they play the mental game of weighing the sins of those who died? Jesus let them know they were sinners. Would they ponder the death of those Galileans? Let them recognize that they, too, will die. Will they look at these few as especially sinful? Then they must be told that they will all die in a similar way.

I do not think that our Lord is speaking of death in a general way. He is not saying that all men will eventually die, and thus they must repent of their sins in order to be ready for their time of death. Jesus is speaking to the nation Israel. Jesus is speaking to that generation of Israelites which has seen God’s Messiah and has failed to accept Him as their King. This generation will perish, but it will, as a group, face an even more terrible death than those about whom they have just been speaking. That generation of Israelites will come to a tragic ending themselves, the sudden and irreversible destruction that will come when Rome comes in full force to annihilate the inhabitants of Jerusalem and to destroy the city.²⁴⁰ I believe that this is what Peter was referring to in his powerful sermon, recorded by Luke in the Book of Acts:

And with many other words he solemnly testified and kept on exhorting them, saying, “Be saved from this perverse generation!” (Acts 2:40).

There is, of course a general (and very important) sense in which “be saved” should be understood, but here the salvation of Peter’s audience specifically includes a salvation from that generation and the destruction which lies ahead for all who persist in their rejection of Christ. This is the same destruction of which our Lord speaks in our text in Luke’s gospel. If Jesus’ listeners think that these two small groups of people died suddenly and unexpectedly for their sins, it is nothing compared to that which lies ahead for them. Let them not bother to ponder the sins of others. Let them repent of their own, and quickly!

The Parable of
the Fruitless Fig Tree
(13:6-9)

Then he told this parable: “A man had a fig tree, planted in his vineyard, and he went to look for fruit on it, but did not find any. So he said to the man who took care of the vineyard, ‘For three years now I’ve been coming to look for fruit on this fig tree and haven’t found any. Cut it down! Why should it use up the soil?’ “‘Sir,’ the man replied, ‘leave it alone for one more year, and I’ll dig around it and fertilize it. If it bears fruit next year, fine! If not, then cut it down.’”

The relationship between the preceding five verses and this parable may not be immediately apparent, but it is clear and direct.²⁴¹ In the previous paragraph, Jesus was speaking to Israelites as Israelites, and warning them of the destruction which was coming for the nation. This parable of the “fruitless fig tree” is drawing attention to the same thing, only in a different way. The fig tree was a frequently employed and well-understood symbol of the nation Israel.²⁴² Jesus uses this parable to underscore for His audience, once again, the utter failure of Israel to live up to the standards and expectations which God had held for it over its centuries of history. The parable is not only going to underscore Israel’s sinful fruitlessness, but also the nearness of its destruction, in tree-terms, its time for being cut down.

Typical of ancient and modern practice, a fig tree was planted in the midst of a man’s vineyard.²⁴³ The farmer expected the tree to be producing figs, and for three years he had come to look for fruit, only to find none. He had concluded (and long experience would confirm) that the tree was never going to produce, and so he ordered it cut down. The vinedresser appealed to him to wait just one more year, and then cut it down if it persisted in failing to produce a crop. The tree was not only fruitless and useless, it used up valuable ground. It should be cut down if it continued not to produce.

Farmers understand this imagery very well. An egg farmer will keep careful record of the production of his hens. A non-producer will not be kept long, but will be put to better use in the stew pot. So, too, with cattle or with other kinds of fruit trees. Useless and unproductive plants are not tolerated, nor should they be. A farmer has the right to expect a return on his investment. This farmer is “fed up” with this fig tree, but he is persuaded to wait one more year. Time for this “tree” is short indeed.

This parable not only teaches the sinfulness of the nation Israel, it also underscores the shortness of the time and thus the urgency for the nation to repent and be saved from the wrath of God which is to come. That “fire” of which John the Baptist has warned (Luke 3:8-9) and more recently our Lord (Luke 12:49ff.) is drawing near in time. Let the Israelites cease to ponder the sins of others and begin to act in repentance concerning their own sins.

Do the “three years” that the owner has waited for figs (v. 7) correspond to the length of time our Lord has already spent preaching the gospel to the nation Israel? Perhaps. I am inclined to think so. This would mean that there is little time left for the nation to repent. Jesus is already pressing toward Jerusalem (9:31, 53; cf. 13:31-35). As the time of His death draws near, so does the time of Israel’s destruction.

While this parable, like the account of the tragic deaths of the Galileans and those who died by the tower of Siloam, conveys a message of warning to the Israelites, it also corrects another error in the thinking of the people. The inference underlying the conclusion of the people in verses 1-5 is that God hastened the death of those who died, in judgment of their (greater than normal) sins. Our parable tells us the exact opposite. The people were wrong to conclude that these people who died prematurely were greater sinners than their peers. God had not come to judge them early because of their greater evil. Indeed, the parable of the farmer and the fruitless fig tree speaks rather of the patience and longsuffering of God with respect to the stubborn rebellion and sin of Israel. This extended time, this delay in judgment, was for the purpose of allowing God’s people further opportunity to repent. While some sinners may very well interpret and apply His delay as an occasion to expand in their sin (cf. 12:45), the righteous will know better. The erroneous conclusion of the people reveals the perspective of the people; the point of the parable reveals the perspective of God.

The Healing of the Hunchback
(13:10-17)

On a Sabbath Jesus was teaching in one of the synagogues, and a woman was there who had been crippled by a spirit for eighteen years. She was bent over and could not straighten up at all. When Jesus saw her, he called her forward and said to her, “Woman, you are set free from your infirmity.” Then he put his hands on her, and immediately she straightened up and praised God. Indignant because Jesus had healed on the Sabbath, the synagogue ruler said to the people, “There are six days for work. So come and be healed on those days, not on the Sabbath.” The Lord answered him, “You hypocrites! Doesn’t each of you on the Sabbath untie his ox or donkey from the stall and lead it out to give it water? Then should not this woman, a daughter of Abraham, whom Satan has kept bound for eighteen long years, be set free on the Sabbath day from what bound her?” When he said this, all his opponents were humiliated, but the people were delighted with all the wonderful things he was doing.

The next paragraph, you will note, is the longest in our passage. That should tell us something of its significance. At first it would seem that the story of the healing of this woman is totally out of context. It almost seems like an interruption. This is not the case however, for this incident vividly demonstrates the difference in perspective between the Jewish religious leaders and Jesus, a difference which will shortly climax at the cross of Calvary.

The scene has now changed. Jesus is no longer teaching the multitude; he is teaching, for the last time in Luke,²⁴⁴ in a synagogue. There was a woman there who had been demonically afflicted with a spinal problem for 18 years. Jesus took the initiative and sought out the woman, laying His hands on her (something Jesus seemingly never did to demoniacs) and healing her instantly and completely.

Her response was almost instantaneous. She began glorifying God. Here was worship like this synagogue had probably never seen before. Many of the crowd joined her in rejoicing at her healing. Many, but not all. The ruler of the synagogue and some others (cf. vv. 15, 17) were not happy at all. Unlike Jesus, they had no compassion on the woman, nor did they rejoice in her deliverance. In contrast to the joy of many, the ruler of the synagogue was mad. He was incensed, but he did not confront Jesus. Instead, he went about rebuking the people, demanding that if they wanted to be healed there were six days in the week for such things, but not the Sabbath.

Jesus called the man and those who agreed with him²⁴⁵ hypocrites. There was much about this ruler’s objections which were hypocritical. For example, he says that there are six days on which people can be healed. How many healings do you think occurred in that synagogue? Do you think that this woman could have come back on the following day and been healed? Not if Jesus were gone. I suspect that this woman was a “regular” at this synagogue, but she had not found healing (let alone sympathy) in 18 years. How could the ruler of the synagogue dare to even suggest that healing would be available at some other time?

Another form of hypocrisy, as I read between these lines, is that this man was to be a leader in worship, as well as in teaching. While most of those present were actively praising God—worshipping as they had never done before—this leader was doing everything possible to “shut down” what was going on.

The greatest hypocrisy however must be that which Jesus chose to highlight. Jesus accused the religious leaders of hypocrisy because they would routinely sanction “breaking the Sabbath” for the benefit of one of their animals, but not for the benefit of this woman, a daughter of Abraham. They would loose their donkey on the Sabbath, and let it drink,²⁴⁶ but they would prohibit Jesus from loosing this woman from Satan’s grip, from her bondage, which had lasted now 18 long years. Their compassion was selective, self-centered, and hypocritical.

Jesus’ stinging rebuke of this hypocrisy brought a two-fold response. The people who rejoiced with the woman loved it, rejoicing over all that Jesus was saying and doing. The opponents, however, were humiliated. They were not sorry. They were not corrected. They were just put to shame. Their day, they must be telling themselves, will come. So it will seem.

What was the difference in perspective, in the thinking of the Jewish religious leaders, which brought about this totally opposite response to the healing of this woman? How could they be indignant when the people were ecstatic? I believe that the answer is really quite simple. The Jewish religious leaders felt that they were righteous, deserving of divine blessings. The others seemed to know better. The Jewish leaders therefore not only refused and rejected the grace of God (as seen in the woman’s healing), they despised it. How could this be? They felt that both divine blessing and divine indignation were God’s response to man’s deeds. They thought legalistically. In their minds, EVERY ACTION HAS AN EQUAL AND CORRESPONDING RESPONSE FROM GOD.

When you read the Mosaic Covenant, this is precisely what you find. When Israel sinned, God brought chastening and discipline. When Israel obeyed the law which God gave, God blessed them. Thus, we can see how those who came with the report of the tragic slaughter of the Galileans revealed a legalistic outlook. If something really bad happened to people, they must have been really bad. If something really good happened to them (e.g. prosperity or long life), they had to have been good. In the words of the song Julie Andrews sings in the Sound of Music, “I must have done something good … ”

What the Israelites had forgotten was that the Mosaic Covenant was temporary and provisional. The promises God made to Abraham would not be fulfilled through the Mosaic Covenant, but through a new covenant. This new covenant was prophesied and described, for example, in Jeremiah 32 and 33. The blessings of God and the coming of the kingdom of God would not be the result of Israel’s obedience to the law, but due to the righteousness of Messiah, and through His death on behalf of sinners, bearing the condemnation of the law which man’s sins merit (Isaiah 52:13–53:12).

Why would Israelites reject the Messiah and the new covenant which He came to establish? Why would they prefer the condemnation of the law to the blessings of forgiveness and eternal life in Christ? There is only one answer: These Israelites were self-righteous. They did not regard themselves to be sinners, but rather as those who were righteous before God and thus deserving of His blessings on the basis of their good works. They would, in contemporary terminology, “rather do it themselves.”

It is the difference between Jesus’ perspective and that of His opponents which is spelled out in the final two parables of our passage. Let us consider them and their message as we attempt to draw this lesson to a conclusion.

The Mustard Seed and the Yeast
(13:18-21)

Then Jesus asked, “What is the kingdom of God like? What shall I compare it to? It is like a mustard seed, which a man took and planted in [“threw into,” NASB] his garden. It grew and became a tree, and the birds of the air perched in its branches.” Again he asked, “What shall I compare the kingdom of God to? It is like yeast that a woman took and mixed into [“hid in,” NASB] a large amount of flour until it worked all through the dough.”

Before we consider the meaning of these two very brief parables, let us draw back for a moment to think through the gospel from a broader point of view, as it is explained in the context of all the gospels, and in the remainder of the New Testament. We know that Israel did not, as a nation, turn to Jesus as God’s Messiah, and that the nation as a whole rejected Him, agreeing with His crucifixion. We know also that Jerusalem was destroyed and that the nation was scattered, not to be brought back to the land until a few years ago, and they are still in a state of unbelief so far as Jesus is concerned. We know that the Jews rejected the grace of God and that the gospel has subsequently (and consequently) gone out to the Gentiles, and that God is now working through the church, rather than through Israel, although in a future day this will change (cf. Romans 9-11). The Messiah and the message which Israel rejected, some of the Gentiles (and a few Jews) have believed. These two parables describe this, I believe, in somewhat veiled language.

The Parable of the Mustard Seed

The first parable is that of the mustard seed. Elsewhere the emphasis falls upon how small the seed is and how great the tree which results (cf. Matthew 13:31-32). Here, however, Jesus places the emphasis on the action of the man, who carelessly casts the mustard seed aside, into his garden. The NIV is clearly inaccurate here, veiling the clear sense of the language. The NASB says it literally, the man threw the seed into the garden.²⁴⁷ He did not “plant” it (another word, which is found above in verse 6). This parable must be understood in contrast to the parable above, of the fruitless fig tree. The fig tree was purposely planted (a different word in verse 6 than our word here in verse 19), and it was carefully tended and nurtured. This mustard seed was cast into the garden. I am inclined to think it was a part of his throwing compost into the garden, as fertilizer. The man did not intend for a tree to grow here, and surely not a mustard tree. The birds which gathered in it would only tend to steal the things growing in the garden (as any of us farmer-types know from painful experience).

The message of this parable is simple and pointed, I believe. Jesus has warned Israel of God’s impending wrath. They have been the fruitless fig tree that is about to be cut down. The mustard tree is that tree which God has chosen to replace it with. The imagery of a tree, providing a place of protection for birds, is one commonly associated with the Gentiles in the Old Testament.²⁴⁸ It is the careless “casting away” of the seed by Israel which results in the great tree of the largely Gentile “kingdom.”

Isn’t this amazing? Many of the Jews wanted to “work” for their place in the kingdom of God by meticulously “keeping the law.” No wonder the ruler of the synagogue was so upset about “breaking the law” as he saw it at least. But in striving to earn God’s blessings, they rejected their own sinfulness and thus the Savior as well. When they threw salvation away, the fig tree was cut down, but the mustard tree flourished. The rejection of Messiah by Israel has brought salvation to the Gentiles.

The Parable of the Leaven

The second parable in this pair is that found in verses 20 and 21. Here, Jesus likens the “kingdom of God” to the leaven which a woman seeks to hide in three pecks of meal. The NASB speaks of the leaven as being “hidden” in the three pecks of meal, while the NIV says it was “mixed into a large amount of flour.” The word clearly means to “hide” (cf. its use in Luke 8:17; 18:34; 19:42; Matt. 13:44; 25:25). While the woman attempts to hide the leaven, the result is the opposite, for it permeates the entire portion of meal.

You will remember that God saved Israel to be a “light to the Gentiles.” The Jews did not like the Gentiles, as the book of Jonah graphically reveals. They did not want to share their blessings with the Gentiles, and thus they sought to “hide” the truth and keep its blessings only to themselves. It was foolish and futile for the woman to attempt to “hide” the leaven in the meal. So, too, it was foolish and futile for the Israelites to try to “hide” the light of the gospel from the Gentiles. You will recall that Jesus spoke clearly about the salvation of the Gentiles to His people, and that their reaction was a violent one (cf. Luke 4:16-30). In the very act of their trying to prevent the gospel from going forth to the Gentiles they only caused it to spread more quickly and effectively. In the book of Acts Luke will demonstrate that Jewish persecution in Jerusalem will only scatter the church and the gospel more and more.

The kingdom of God is like this, Jesus says. The Jews who think they are righteous will reject Christ and will refuse to repent, and thus they will be judged as a nation. The fig tree will be cut down. And in its place will be a mustard tree, as it were, the church. By trying to conceal the truth from the Gentiles, the nation has only proven to have unwittingly spread it abroad—God’s unfaithful and uncooperative evangelists. Let all Israel listen and learn from Jesus’ words of warning and instruction.

Conclusion

This passage concerns the nation of Israel, its rejection of Messiah, its self-righteousness, and the impending judgment which will fall on all those who do not renounce their faith in Judaism and identify Jesus as their Christ, their Messiah. It explains why the kingdom of God was taken from Israel, and why the Gentiles have come to play a very prominent part in God’s program for the church.

This text surely underscores the urgency of Israel’s need to repent, before the time of judgment comes upon that generation. But if it contains a message of warning to that generation, it also speaks to us of the urgency of repentance and of evangelism. If you have not come to a personal faith in Jesus Christ as the Savior whom God sent into the world to bring about the forgiveness of sins, you should sense the same urgency of which Jesus spoke. You see, when Jesus ascended to heaven, to sit at the right hand of the Father, He did so to wait until the Father indicated that it was time to return to judge the world and to deal finally with the wicked. He is coming again, and that coming is soon. Those who have not trusted in Christ as their Savior may soon find themselves standing (or falling) before Him as their judge, even as Paul warns in Philippians chapter 2. Jesus will return to purify the earth with fire, as Peter spells out in the third chapter of 2 Peter. The delay in His coming is not do to His disinterest, but is due to His compassion and longsuffering. He is giving men further time to repent, just as the “fruitless fig tree” was given addition time to produce. But there is a day of judgment and “fire” coming soon. Be ready for it. The only way to be ready is to repent of your sin and to trust in Jesus as the One who died in your place, for your sins.

This text also admonishes Christians that as the time of Christ’s return draws near, we need to be found watching and waiting for Him. We need to be faithful to proclaim and hold forth the gospel, which is the “light” that we are to carry to all men. We are no more to “hide” this light than Israel was to do so. Let us be faithful to call upon men to be ready for the coming kingdom of God.

Finally, let us beware of the same kind of thinking which was typical of the Israelites of Jesus’ day. Let us beware of thinking that those who die early or in some tragic way are worse sinners than we. Let us view a more prosperous and lengthy life not as our reward for being righteous, but as God’s grace.

I find that we Americans often exude the same kind of national pride which typified the Israelites. They thought that God blessed them because they were more pious, more spiritual. This was not so. God blessed His people in spite of their sin, and out of His grace, rather than their goodness. We Americans often think (and even are so bold as to say) that we are prosperous because we are a “Christian nation,” and we send out missionaries, and so on. Any prosperity we have and continue to experience is, in my understanding, solely the outgrowth of divine grace, rather than of human merit. Let us realize that the kingdom of God comes to the earth because of the righteousness of Christ and the grace of God manifested through His Son. And let us be humbled by the fact that the kingdom has come to include the Gentiles because of Israel’s failure and sin, not due to our own righteousness.

---

237 “‘The Galilean zealots were notoriously turbulent, and Pilate was ruthlessly cruel. Many massacres marked his administration’ (Major, The Mission and Message of Jesus, p. 281)… The fact that Josephus makes no mention of this particular instance of Pilate’s cruelty is of no importance. He leaves many incidents unmentioned. In any case he mentions a sufficient number of Pilate’s actions to make us realize that this Roman ruler was an utter brute who on more than one occasion acted as in this case.” Norval Geldenhuys, Commentary on the Gospel of Luke, The New International Commentary on the New Testament Series (Grand Rapids: Wm. B. Eerdmans Publishing Company, 1975 [reprint]), p. 370, fn. 4.

238 If the Galileans were offering their sacrifices in Jerusalem, as it would appear, then the tragedy occurred there. This could mean that the ones who came to Jesus with this report were, themselves, from Jerusalem. They may have been residents of Jerusalem. If so, they would be inclined to look down on Galileans (cf. John 1:46; Matthew 26:69; John 19:19; Acts 1:11; 4:13-16). There may thus have been some pleasure in giving this report.

239 “The pool is Siloam was near the angle where the southern and eastern walls of Jerusalem came together. The tower of Siloam which fell was probably part of the ancient system of defense on the walls in the vicinity of the pool of Siloam.” Geldenhuys, p. 371, fn. 7.

240 “‘The fate of these people is a reminder not of their sins—they were neither better nor worse than many others—but of the urgency of the Gospel. Had they only known what was astir, been warned that Pilate was in a black mood or that the building was dangerous, they might have saved their lives. But there was nobody to warn them, and they perished. So this generation, says Jesus in effect, is walking—politically and religiously—straight for disaster. But the warning has been given, first by John the Baptist and now by Jesus. It is a warning to change direction before it is too late’ (T. W. Manson, pp. 565ff.).” Geldenhuys, p. 371, fn. 6.

“The parable here evidently refers to Israel, to whom God gave full opportunity to bear fruit but who remain unfruitful, as appears from their rejection of Him, the promised Christ. But nevertheless God will give them a last chance, and if they should then still persist in unbelief and sin they will be irrevocably cut down from their privileged and protected position as the chosen people of God… The majority, however, refused to repent and thus they drew upon themselves the disasters which accompanied the Roman-Jewish wars (A.D. 66-70), when their national existence in the Holy Land was irrevocably cut down.” Ibid, p. 372.

241 “This parable fits in exceptionally well with what is described in verses 1-5, for through this parable Jesus once more calls attention to the urgent necessity of true repentance—a repentance which will bring forth fruit.” Geldenhuys, p. 372.

“The preceding passage has stressed the importance of repenting and this one highlights the fact that opportunity does not last for ever.” Leon Morris, The Gospel According To St. Luke, The Tyndale Bible Commentary Series, R. V. G. Tasker, General Editor (Grand Rapids: William B. Eerdmans Publishing Company, 1974), p. 222.

“The point is that the absence of judgment here and now cannot be construed as a sign of one’s righteousness. Rather, if judgment does not strike immediately, it is a sign of God’s mercy, not his approval (cf. Acts 14:15-17; 17:30; Rom 2:4ff.; 2 Pet 3:9ff.). One is being given a last chance.” Charles H. Talbert, Reading Luke: A Literary and Theological Commentary on the Third Gospel (New York: Crossroad Publishing Company, 1984), p. 145.

242 “The fig tree is frequently used as symbolical of the Jewish people (cf. Hos. ix. 10; Joel i. 7). ‘The position of the parable after the preceding narrative points to an interpretation of the fig tree as symbolical of the Jewish people, which is to be allowed yet a short period for repentance’ (Creed, in loc.).” Geldenhuys, p. 373, fn. 1.

John the Baptist (Matthew 3:10; Luke 3:9) warned Israel that she, like a bad tree, was near to the time of being chopped down.

243 “It was and still is the custom in Palestine to plant fig trees and other trees in a vineyard.” Ibid, p. 372.

Note the linking of the fig tree with the vineyard in these texts, for example: Joel 1:7; Zechariah 3:10; Micah 4:4; Joel 2:22.

244 “This is the last instance in Luke where Jesus appears teaching in a synagogue. The hostility of the Jewish authorities increased to such an extent towards the end of the Savior’s activities that He would afterwards no longer be allowed to appear in the synagogues.” Geldenhuys, p. 374.

245 In verse 15 we are told Jesus answered him, the focus being on this one man, but then Jesus went on to accuse others with the plural expression, “You hypocrites.” We see in verse 17 that the synagogue ruler and all Jesus’ opponents were being humiliated. The rebuke of this one man was, in effect, a rebuke to the others who agreed with him.

246 “The rabbis were greatly concerned that animals be treated well. On the Sabbath, animals could be led out by a chain or the like as long as nothing was carried (Shabbath 5:1). Water could be drawn for them and poured into a trough, though a man must not hold a bucket for the animal to drink from (Erubin 20b, 21a). If animals may be cared for in such ways, much more may a daughter of Abraham be set free from Satan’s bondage on the Sabbath. In fact Jesus uses a strong term and says she ‘must’ (dei) be loosed.” Morris, p. 223.

247 The word “threw” in the NASB is “planted” in the NIV. The term Ballo seems to have the meaning, “to throw or let go of a thing without caring where it falls” as indicated (among two other choices) by Thayer, p. 93. Thus, in Luke 23:34 (and parallels) it is used for the “casting of lots” of the soldiers. It is found in the very text we are studying in 13:8, for “putting in fertilizer.” One throws manure. In Luke 21:1-4 the term is used to describe those who are “casting” their offerings into the treasury. The “planting of the fig tree” above in Luke uses another term for its planting.

248 “The birds roosting in the branches are often a symbol for the nations of the earth (Ezk. 17:23; 31:6; Dn. 4:12, 21).” Morris, p. 224.

“Plummer here writes: ‘This was a recognized metaphor for a great empire giving protection to the nations’ (in loc). T. W. Manson agrees with this: ‘Both in apocalyptic and Rabbinical literature `the birds of the heaven’ stand for the Gentile nations’ (loc. cit.).” Geldenhuys, p. 378, fn. 4.