1. Lesson One of the Book of Daniel, Introduction to the Book of Daniel

The Book of  Luke,  The Authority of Christ, Part II - Lesson 210

Chapter 20 of Luke begins with a demand by the chief priests, and scribes and the elders, that Jesus Christ identify the authority by which he has done the things that have offended them, especially his use of authority to take over the temple.

Jesus Christ has countered their demand by challenging them to commit themselves as to the authority of John the Baptist.

They of course were not willing to commit to any conclusion about John for they saw themselves between a rock and a hard place, and being good politicians they chose the course of least resistance.

This answer of course is typical of wishy washy, non committal religious men, men who are without conviction and who are more interested in keeping their place, than in keeping in right relationship with God.

Since they could not accept the message of John the Baptist who was the forerunner of Christ, Jesus Christ was not about to enlighten them about himself.

He chose to keep from them the knowledge of by what authority he did those things, but he did not keep from them a parable which we are told they understood was spoken against them.

By this parable he revealed much about himself and the ultimate doom of Israel’s leaders.

Luke 20:8-16, Then began he to speak to the people this parable; A certain man planted a vineyard, and let it forth to husbandmen, and went into a far country for a long time. ¹⁰And at the season he sent a servant to the husbandmen, that they should give him of the fruit of the vineyard: but the husbandmen beat him, and sent him away empty. ¹¹And again he sent another servant: and they beat him also, and entreated him shamefully, and sent him away empty. ¹²And again he sent a third: and they wounded him also, and cast him out. ¹³Then said the lord of the vineyard, What shall I do? I will send my beloved son: it may be they will reverence him when they see him. ¹⁴But when the husbandmen saw him, they reasoned among themselves, saying, This is the heir: come, let us kill him, that the inheritance may be ours. ¹⁵So they cast him out of the vineyard, and killed him. What therefore shall the lord of the vineyard do unto them? ¹⁶He shall come and destroy these husbandmen, and shall give the vineyard to others. And when they heard it, they said, God forbid.

This is one of the many parables that Jesus told to those who were not among his disciples as Mark tells us in:

This parable relates a very simple story and is full of meaning for the Jewish leaders, and we are given the fact that they understood the parable to pertain to them.

As we will read later in verse 19: "they perceived that he had spoken this parable against them."

He chose not to answer the question as to His authority directly but instead gave them much to ponder, by this pointed and powerful parable.

The setting of the parable is a vineyard which was well known to depict the nation of Israel for on many occasions God referred to Israel as his vineyard or his vine.

Isaiah 5:7. For the vineyard of the LORD of hosts is the house of Israel, and the men of Judah his pleasant plant:

Jeremiah 2:21a, Yet I had planted thee a noble vine, wholly a right seed:

God had taken Israel out of Egypt and planted him in this fine land, expecting fruit.

This fruit bearing expectancy is a principal with God for God is a husbandman in everything he does and as any husbandman, he expects fruit.

The Law of Moses defined what God expected from His people.

It is obvious that the vine-keepers of the parable are the leaders of the nation.

When Israel failed to produce what God required, God sent His prophets, who are the "servants" depicted in the parable.

But Israel, through its leaders, consistently rejected the prophets and their message which was in fact from the owner of the vineyard.

The prophets spoke not for themselves but for God who owned the vineyard.

John the Baptist, whom Jesus had challenged the leaders to acknowledge as sent from God, was the last of these prophets.

But as we have seen in the Gospel accounts, was rejected like all the rest whom the vineyard owner had sent.

The prophets were not regarded as having any authority over the vine-keepers.

Eventually, the Lord of the vineyard decided to send His own Son thinking that it may be they will reverence him when they see him, and will submit to his authority.

But it was not to be, for instead of seeing the Son as the ultimate authority, they saw him as the heir come to claim his rights.

In thinking this, they seem to take for granted that the Lord of the vineyard has died and if they could kill the heir then the vineyard would be theirs.

According to the law at that time, under certain conditions if the owner died, leaving no heir, whoever were the first to claim the estate, especially those who occupied it, were allowed to have it.

But certainly anyone would agree that under these circumstances the Lord of the vineyard would have every right to take authority into his own hand and destroy these rebels and place others in charge of his vineyard.

In telling this parable it is plain who Jesus is talking about.

He brought into the discussion John the Baptist, a prophet sent by the Lord of the vineyard, a prophet who had the authority to speak for God.

John, as a divinely appointed spokesman for God, proclaimed Jesus to be the Messiah.

John had clearly identified Jesus as the Messiah when he said to Israel: Behold the Lamb of God, which taketh away the sin of the world.

But the message of John like all of the other prophets was rejected.

Jesus, in this parable, is telling His audience that He is not like the other prophets, he is not like the servants who were sent, but He is the Son, he is the heir.

That is the basis of His authority for he owns the vineyard.

He has been sent by His Father to possess what is His.

But they will reject Him and put Him to death.

And according to this parable they do so with the full knowledge that He is the Son.

And they kill him because He is the Son and if He is killed they will own the vineyard and will no longer have to deal with the Lord of the vineyard.

In this, they think they will realize what they have wanted all along.

The authority to rule over the vineyard without having to serve the Lord of the vineyard or to obey his commands.

For they have been doing this all along as they have gone about to make their own way in operating the vineyard.

They do not observe that which the owner has given them to obey but instead they make their own rules and regulations, in other words they go about establishing their own righteousness.

In this they refuse to accept the authority of the Son for in so doing they lose the authority that they have stolen from the Lord of the vineyard.

It is not the identity of Jesus that is in question, but His authority.

So the Father of this Son, the owner of the vineyard, will be fully justified in destroying these leaders.

And this He will do.

He will also be justified in giving their positions of leadership to others.

And the others who will replace the leaders we know to be Gentiles by what takes place in the book of Acts.

Jesus is saying that He is the Son of God, that He comes in God’s authority, that they will kill Him, and that God will not only destroy them, but He will give their leadership to the Gentiles.

What we see from this declaration is a reaction that indicates that this transfer of the vineyard to the Gentiles is unthinkable for their answer is a prayer for God to forbid such a thing.

This is the only place in the gospels that this expression, God forbid, appears.

It indicates in the mind of these leaders a thought almost too horrible to consider.

This cannot be, but it is to be, for God, the owner of the vineyard will have his fruit.

He will have his fruit in the Gentiles for his nation Israel has not borne the fruit and will be set aside for a time while God does the work of a husbandman in the Gentiles.

So in the end of the telling of this parable Jesus adds a quote from Psalm 118:22 which says: The stone which the builders refused is become the head stone of the corner.

Luke 20:17-19, And he beheld them, and said, What is this then that is written, The stone which the builders rejected, the same is become the head of the corner? ¹⁸Whosoever shall fall upon that stone shall be broken; but on whomsoever it shall fall, it will grind him to powder. ¹⁹And the chief priests and the scribes the same hour sought to lay hands on him; and they feared the people: for they perceived that he had spoken this parable against them.

In adding this, Jesus Christ gives a warning to these leaders.

When you reject me it is not the end of the story.

For there is a day of reckoning that will come about for that which is rejected by the builders will be placed in the most prominent of places in the building, that place which is occupied by the cornerstone of the building.

Something marvelous was going to happen to the stone even though the stone was rejected.

This reminds me of the principle that says he that shall humble himself shall be exalted.

Jesus would endure the humbling of the cross but the Lord of the vineyard, the master builder, the Father, had exaltation in mind and would take the stone and place it in the most exalted position, that of cornerstone.

The Son who is rejected and put to death is the Son of God who will rise from the dead, and who will someday return to the earth to establish His kingdom.

The Son is on the one hand, a "stone of stumbling," a cause of stumbling to the Jews.

This was our Lord’s role at that moment in time.

Firstly the stone is pictured as not moving, men stumbled over it.

Jesus was a stumbling block to men who refused to acknowledge their sin and their need of a Savior.

But this unmoving "stone of stumbling," whom the rejected, will also be an active agent in their destruction.

Secondly Jesus Christ is viewed as a moving stone, a falling stone that crushes and grinds His enemies.

And you can look at this in another way for it seems there are two choices.

You can fall upon the stone or you can have the stone fall upon you.

The choice is for all.

Fall upon the stone, who is Christ in repentance, and this will lead to a broken heart and a contrite spirit.

With this choice the stone will be a comforting stone, a sheltering stone, a stone of strength.

It will be a sheltering rock in the time of storm.

However that same stone will be to the arrogant sinner, the unrepentant sinner, the prideful sinner, a rock of judgment.

The day will come when that same rock will fall in judgment and grind that sinner to powder.

Some folks think there are many choices, some folks think there is a middle choice, a neutral choice.

But if a man chooses to be neutral he chooses for that stone to fall on him, for Christ put it simply in Matthew 12:30, ³⁰He that is not with me is against me; and he that gathereth not with me scattereth abroad.

Remember that refrain from the hymn, What Will You Do With Jesus? By Albert Simpson

Will I find shelter in the rock now in this time of God’s grace or will the rock grind me to powder?

The neutral position is like the position of a drowning man who ignores the rope thrown to him.

He looks at the rope and says to himself, I’ll take a neutral position on that rope. I’ll not take hold of the rope in order to take hold of and be saved.

But if he takes a neutral position toward the rope there is only one result and that result is to perish.