Baptist Catechism 68 – 71

Q. 68. Which is the fifth commandment?

A. The fifth commandment is, “Honor thy father and thy mother, that thy days may be long upon the land which the Lord thy God giveth thee.” (Exodus 20:12)

Q. 69. What is required in the fifth commandment?

A. The fifth commandment requireth the preserving the honor, and performing the duties, belonging to everyone in their several places and relations, as superiors, inferiors, or equals. (Lev. 19:32; 1 Peter 2:17; Rom. 13:1; Eph. 5:21,22; Eph. 6:1,5,9; Col. 3:19-22; Rom. 12:10)

Q. 70. What is forbidden in the fifth commandment?

A. The fifth commandment forbideth the neglecting of, or, doing anything against the honor and duty which belongeth to everyone in their several places and relations. (Prov. 30:17; Rom. 13:7,8)

Q. 71. What is the reason annexed to the fifth commandment?

A. The reason annexed to the fifth commandment is a promise of long life and prosperity (as far as it shall serve God’s glory and their own good), to all such as keep this commandment. (Eph. 6:2,3; Prov. 4:3-6; 6:20-22)

Scripture Reading: Proverbs 4

“Hear, O sons, a father’s instruction, and be attentive, that you may gain insight, for I give you good precepts; do not forsake my teaching. When I was a son with my father, tender, the only one in the sight of my mother, he taught me and said to me, “Let your heart hold fast my words; keep my commandments, and live. Get wisdom; get insight; do not forget, and do not turn away from the words of my mouth. Do not forsake her, and she will keep you; love her, and she will guard you. The beginning of wisdom is this: Get wisdom, and whatever you get, get insight. Prize her highly, and she will exalt you; she will honor you if you embrace her. She will place on your head a graceful garland; she will bestow on you a beautiful crown.” Hear, my son, and accept my words, that the years of your life may be many. I have taught you the way of wisdom; I have led you in the paths of uprightness. When you walk, your step will not be hampered, and if you run, you will not stumble. Keep hold of instruction; do not let go; guard her, for she is your life. Do not enter the path of the wicked, and do not walk in the way of the evil. Avoid it; do not go on it; turn away from it and pass on. For they cannot sleep unless they have done wrong; they are robbed of sleep unless they have made someone stumble. For they eat the bread of wickedness and drink the wine of violence. But the path of the righteous is like the light of dawn, which shines brighter and brighter until full day. The way of the wicked is like deep darkness; they do not know over what they stumble. My son, be attentive to my words; incline your ear to my sayings. Let them not escape from your sight; keep them within your heart. For they are life to those who find them, and healing to all their flesh. Keep your heart with all vigilance, for from it flow the springs of life. Put away from you crooked speech, and put devious talk far from you. Let your eyes look directly forward, and your gaze be straight before you. Ponder the path of your feet; then all your ways will be sure. Do not swerve to the right or to the left; turn your foot away from evil.” (Proverbs 4, ESV)

*****

Please excuse any typos and misspellings within this manuscript. It has been published online for the benefit of the saints of Emmaus Reformed Baptist Church but without the benefit of proofreading.

*****

Introduction

I have come to really love and appreciate the instruction that our catechism provides on the Ten Commandments. One thing I appreciate is the breadth of the interpretation. Our catechism does not give us a narrow interpretation of the Ten Commandments, but a broad one. In other words, these commandments are teased out a little so we might see their implications. And it is right for the Ten Commandments to be teased out, for this is what the Scriptures do, and this is what Christ himself did. We confess that the Ten Commandments contain a summary of God’s moral law. And you know what a summary is. A summary provides a brief or concise account of something. It does not tell the whole story. The Ten Commandments contain God’s moral law, in summary form. 

So, the fifth commandment, which is “Honor thy father and thy mother”, does not merely require little children to respect their parents. No, properly understood, it requires us “to  preserve the honor, and perform the duties, belonging to everyone in their [various] places and relations, as superiors, inferiors, or equals.” Stated negatively, it forbids “the neglecting of, or, doing anything against the honor and duty which [belongs] to everyone in their [various]  places and relations.” In other words, the fifth commandment requires us to show respect to all people, taking into consideration their relation to us as either superiors, inferiors, or equals. Notice, or catechism teaches that it is not only superiors, like parents, who are to be respected but equals and inferiors too, each in a fitting way. 

Let me ask you, brothers and sisters, where is this respectful behavior first learned? In the home. It is in the family environment where children are taught to show honor and respect to others. First, they learn to show honor to their parents. Second, if they have siblings, they learn to honor them as equals. And third, they are taught to take this respectful behavior with them out into the world to apply in every realm. “The fifth commandment requireth the preserving the honor, and performing the duties, belonging to everyone in their several places and relations, as superiors, inferiors, or equals.”

*****

Baptist Catechism 69 & 70

Notice that the fifth commandment is the first commandment of the second table of God’s law. The first table of the law (commandments 1-4) has to do with our relationship to God and the worship of his name. The second table of the law (commandments 5-10) has to do with our relationship to our fellow man. We should not be surprised to see that the fifth commandment, just like the first commandment, is foundational. 

Where do we start if we wish to relate to our fellow man in the right way? We must start by learning to show honor to others. And the very first people we must learn to honor are our parents.       

My time is very limited in this second portion of our liturgy, and so I will not expand upon this much. But think of how devastating the breakdown of the family is to society. Think of how devastating it is for God’s moral law to be abandoned and suppressed within a society. If God’s law is not honored, and if children are not taught to honor God and man within the home, then do not be surprised when that society grows very sinful. 

Notice that our catechism says that we must “preserve the honor” of others. Does this not imply that men and women possess a certain kind of dignity by nature? Yes, and this is because all humans are made in the image of God. And add to this the place that God has given them in the world. Each position or place within society, be it high or low, demands a certain kind of honor or respect. This honor is to be preserved. Does this phrase not also imply that we, because of our sinful condition, do tend to show dishonor to others? Throughout the history of the world, the weak have been exploited by the strong. This cannot be. And men often will slander other men. This is also a great evil. Not only are we to show honor to others who have been made in God’s image, but we must also seek to preserve their honor. So this may involve standing up for the weak and oppressed and rebuking the gossiper or slanderer to preserve the reputation of another.

Next, our catechism speaks of “performing the duties, belonging to everyone”. When I think of the instruction to preserve the honor… belonging to everyone”, I think of defense. We must defend the honor of others. But the words, “performing the duties, belonging to everyone”, communicates that we are to positively and proactively give to others the honor that is due to them. 

Children owe their parents honor in the form of respect and obedience. Children, honor your parents. You must. God commands it. And when you fail to honor your parents, you must repent. That means that you must confess your sin to God, for you sin against him when you dishonor your parents. You must ask him to forgive you in Christ Jesus. And you must also ask your parents to forgive you, for you have done wrong to them. You have failed to give them what they deserve as your parent, that is, respect and obedience. You must also ask the Lord to help you not to stumble again. Children owe their parents honor in the form of respect and obedience. Citizens owe respect to governing authorities; congregants owe respect to their ministers; wives owe respect to their husbands; employees owe respect to their employers. On and on I could go. 

But I do love this little phrase, “ in their several places and relations, as superiors, inferiors, or equals.” It helps us to remember that honor is owed, not only to those who are over us, but also to those who stand beside us and are under us. Husbands, honor your wives, therefore. Am I now contradicting the scriptures which say, “Wives, submit to your husbands, as is fitting in the Lord.” No! I am only drawing your attention to what is said next in that same passage—“Husbands, love your wives, and do not be harsh with them.” So do you see that there is a special kind of honor that a wife owes to her husband, and there is a special kind of honor that a husband owes to his wife? Yes, the husband has authority in the home, but honor is to be shown to all. As Peter says, “Likewise, husbands, live with your wives in an understanding way, showing honor to the woman as the weaker vessel, since they are heirs with you of the grace of life, so that your prayers may not be hindered” (1 Peter 3:7, ESV). In a similar way, governors owe a certain kind of honor to their citizens. Bosses owe a certain kind of honor to their employees. And parents are even called to honor their children. “Fathers, do not provoke your children, lest they become discouraged” (Colossians 3:21, ESV). “Fathers, do not provoke your children to anger, but bring them up in the discipline and instruction of the Lord” (Ephesians 6:4, ESV).

I hope you are able to see, brothers and sisters, that the fifth commandment is foundational. It sets the standard, not only for the relationship between child and parent, but for all human relationships. Honor is to be shown to all in a way that is fitting. Or to use another term, love is to be shown. And I’m sure you remember how Christ summed up the whole law with the word love. Love God with all you are, and love your neighbor as yourself. In fact, listen to the way he summed up the second table of the law as he spoke to a rich young man who was covetous. “And Jesus said, ‘You shall not murder, You shall not commit adultery, You shall not steal, You shall not bear false witness, Honor your father and mother, and, You shall love your neighbor as yourself’” (Matthew 19:18–19, ESV). The law, “You shall love your neighbor as yourself”, is the sum of the entirety of the second table of God’s moral law. 

*****

Baptist Catechism 71

In the remainder of our time together, I would like to briefly consider Baptist Catechism 71, which asks, “What is the reason annexed to the fifth commandment?” “Annexed” is simply an old-fashioned word for added. “What is the reason [added or attached] to the fifth commandment?”

This is a question about the promise attached to the fifth commandment itself, which says, “Honor your father and your mother, that your days may be long in the land that the LORD your God is giving you.” (Exodus 20:12, ESV). So there is a blessing attached to the fifth commandment. In Ephesians 6:1, Paul says, “Children, obey your parents in the Lord, for this is right. ‘Honor your father and mother’”, and then he adds, “this is the first commandment with a promise” (Ephesians 6:1–2, ESV). 

So what is this promise all about? Our catechism gives this answer: “The reason annexed to the fifth commandment is a promise of long life and prosperity (as far as it shall serve God’s glory and their own good), to all such as keep this commandment.”

The little qualification, “as far as it shall serve God’s glory and their own good,” is meant to keep us from assuming that this is a guarantee. In other words, we should not take this to mean that every child who honors his parents will live a very long and prosperous life. No, life doesn’t work that way. The righteous do sometimes suffer and die young. 

Instead, we are to take this as a general rule. In fact, the Proverbs are filled with little principles like this. They are not promises, strictly speaking, but general principles. Those who obey God’s law and pursue wisdom will be blessed in life, generally speaking. And you know this to be true. Wise living usually produces good things. But not always. As I said, sometimes the righteous do suffer. In fact, I think that is one reason we have the book of Job. That book shows us that the righteous do sometimes suffer. But what is the general principle in this promise attached to the fifth commandment?

Well, we should remember that the Ten Commandments were originally given to Israel as a nation. If Israel were to obey this law, it would be blessed in the land. But Paul also applies this same law to New Covenant Christians who do not have a homeland. And to us, he says, “‘Honor your father and mother’ (this is the first commandment with a promise), ‘that it may go well with you and that you may live long in the land [or earth]’” (Ephesians 6:2–3, ESV).

Here is the principle. Though it is true that God may have other plans and purposes, in general, it is true that keeping this commandment will be rewarded with good things in this life. Good things will come to you because the blessing of God is on you. And also, good things will come to you because of the so-called natural consequences of your actions. Those who are rebellious will most often suffer difficulty, whereas those who honor God and their fellow man will most often enjoy the blessings that come with that way of life. You have witnessed this, I’m sure. 

And indeed this is true when it comes to all of God’s commandments. There is a blessing in them. There is life in them. No, we do not keep them perfectly, so we need a Savior. But God’s law is good. God’s law is not burdensome. 

Proverbs 4, which was read at the start of this sermon, speaks to this reality. It begins, “Hear, O sons, a father’s instruction, and be attentive, that you may gain insight, for I give you good precepts; do not forsake my teaching.” And then later it says, “Get wisdom, and whatever you get, get insight. Prize her highly, and she will exalt you; she will honor you if you embrace her. She will place on your head a graceful garland; she will bestow on you a beautiful crown. Hear, my son, and accept my words, that the years of your life may be many.”

And I would like to show you this same principle in Paul’s instructions to husbands. He says, among other things, “In the same way husbands should love their wives as their own bodies. He who loves his wife loves himself” (Ephesians 5:28, ESV). Oh, how true that is. Brothers, do you want it good? Then love your wives with the love of Christ. And sisters, do you want it good, then honor your husbands in the Lord. Children, do you want it good? Then honor your father and mother—indeed, give everyone the honor that is due to them. 

*****

Conclusion

Friends, I’ll conclude with this question: Have you kept this law perfectly? No, we have violated this law in thought, word, and deed. Let us turn from our sins to Christ for the forgiveness of our sins. And by God’s grace and with the strength he provides, let us strive to keep his law from this day forward, out of gratitude for all God has done, for his glory and our good, 

Baptist Catechism 66 & 67

Q. 66. What is forbidden in the fourth commandment?

A. The fourth commandment forbids the omission or careless performance of the duties required, and the profaning the day by idleness, or doing that which is in itself sinful, or by unnecessary thoughts, words, or works, about worldly employments or recreations. (Ezekiel 22:26; 23:38; Jer. 17:21; Neh. 13:15,17; Acts 20:7)

Q. 67. What are the reasons annexed to the fourth commandment?

A. The reasons annexed to the fourth commandment are, God’s allowing us six days of the week for our own lawful employments, His challenging a special propriety in a seventh, His own example and His blessing the Sabbath day. (Exodus 34:21; 31:16,17; Gen. 2:2,3)

Scripture Reading: Acts 20:7-12

“On the first day of the week, when we were gathered together to break bread, Paul talked with them, intending to depart on the next day, and he prolonged his speech until midnight. There were many lamps in the upper room where we were gathered. And a young man named Eutychus, sitting at the window, sank into a deep sleep as Paul talked still longer. And being overcome by sleep, he fell down from the third story and was taken up dead. But Paul went down and bent over him, and taking him in his arms, said, ‘Do not be alarmed, for his life is in him.’ And when Paul had gone up and had broken bread and eaten, he conversed with them a long while, until daybreak, and so departed. And they took the youth away alive, and were not a little comforted.” (Acts 20:7–12, ESV)

*****

Please excuse any typos and misspellings within this manuscript. It has been published online for the benefit of the saints of Emmaus Reformed Baptist Church but without the benefit of proofreading.

*****

Introduction

As we consider the moral law of God as summarized in the Ten Commandments, there are two errors that must be avoided. The first error is legalism. The second error is antinomianism. Both of these errors are very serious and must be avoided.

What is legalism? Well, it takes different forms. 

One, it is the false belief that sinful men and women can be made right with God through obedience to the law of God. The Scriptures are clear that this is impossible for the simple reason that all mere men are lawbreakers. Apart from Christ, we stand guilty before God. No amount of lawkeeping will fix that problem. We need a Redeemer. His name is Jesus Christ. He kept God’s law in our place. He died in our place, too, so that we might be forgiven and reconciled to the God the Father. 

There is a second form of legalism that must also be avoid, and it is the elevation of human traditions and opinions to the level of law, along with the imposition of those traditions and opinions on others. If I choose to fast every Thursday and to make that a law for myself—if I do it, not to earn God’s favor, but from the heart and out of gratitude for all that God has done for me in Christ Jesus—that is not legalism. But if I begin to preach and to bind the consciences of others, saying, you must fast every Thursday, or you must not eat meat during this time of the year, or you must observe these holidays, etc, that is legalism, for the word of God has not commanded such things. We must not treat human traditions or opinions as if they are the law of God.

A third form of legalism is really a subcategory of the second, and that is the false teaching that believers under the New Covenant are obliged to obey the civil and ceremonial laws that were given to Isarel under the Old Covenant. Granted, these laws are biblical in the sense that they are found in the Bible, but they are not binding on us now because we do not live under the Old Covenant of which they were a part. We live under the New Covenant, not the Old. Yes, the Hebrews living under the Old Covenant were obligated to circumcise their male children, offer sacrifices at the temple, and to observe many holy days and Sabbaths, throughout the year. They were not legalists when they keep these laws (provided that they weren’t trying to earn eternal life through the keeping of them instead of through faith in the promised Redeemer). No, they were right to obey these laws, for these laws were not the product of man, but were given by God to them. But if anyone comes to you today and says, you are obligated to keep the civil and ceremonial laws given to Israel—to be circumcised, to abstain from certain foods, or to observe Old Covenant festivals, new moons, and Sabbaths (see Colossians 2:16)—that person is a legalist. Though it is true that all of these laws were from God, it is also true that they are not for us, for we live under the New Covenant and not the Old. We have Christ as our High Priest, and not Aaron. The Scriptures are clear, “when there is a change in the priesthood, there is necessarily a change in the law as well” (Hebrews 7:12, ESV). New Covenant saints are not bound to observe Old Covenant laws.

Beware of legalism in all of its forms, brothers and sisters.

What then is antinomianism? Well, it is the false teaching that says, there is no law for the Christian. The prefix “anti” means “against”, and “nomos” means “law”. So then, antinomians teach, in one way or another, that there is no law for the Christian. As with legalism, antinomianism comes in different flavors. Some may teach that there is no objective law for the Christian, period. I suspect that most would say that there is a law, but it is the law of the Spirit, or the law of Christ. They then suppose that the law of the Spirit or of Christ is different in substance from the law written on stone at Sinai. Both views are erroneous, and they leave the Christian without an objective moral standard. If I were to guess, I would say antinomianism is a bigger problem in the church today (at least in our region) than legalism is. It must be avoided. 

If you wish to read a very helpful summary of what we believe concerning God’s law, I would encourage you to read chapter 19 of our confession of faith, The Second London Baptist Conefssion. In brief, we confess that God’s moral law was given first, not to Israel, but to Adam, having been written on his heart. The moral law of God is for all people living in all times and places, therefore. Furthermore, we confess that the same moral law written on Adam’s heart is contained within the Ten Commandments which were written on stone and given to Isarel through Moses at Sinai. In those days, many other civil and ceremonial laws were added to the Ten Commandments and given peculiarly to Isarel. The moral law, as contained within the Ten Commandments, is for all people living in all places and times. But the civil and ceremonial laws found in the Old Testament were binding on Old Covenant Isarel only.

I mention chapter 19 of our confession, because it helps guard against the errors of legalism and antinomianism. On the one hand, it protects us from leagalism when it states in paragraph 6 that “true believers [are] not under the law as a covenant of works, to be thereby justified or condemned…” It also protects us from leagalism when it clearly teaches that the civil and ceremonial laws given to Old Covenant Israel have been fulfilled and taken away. On the other hand, our confession protects against antinomianism when it says in paragraph 5 that “The moral law doth for ever bind all, as well justified persons as others, to the obedience thereof, and that not only in regard of the matter contained in it, but also in respect of the authority of God the Creator, who gave it; neither doth Christ in the Gospel any way dissolve, but much strengthen this obligation.” In paragraph 6, we confess that the moral law is it is “of great use to [believers] as well as to others”, and then a list of uses follows. I especially appreciate paragraph 7, which says, “Neither are the aforementioned uses of the law contrary to the grace of the Gospel, but do sweetly comply with it, the Spirit of Christ subduing and enabling the will of man to do that freely and cheerfully which the will of God, revealed in the law, requireth to be done.” 

*****

Baptist Catechism 66 & 67

You may be wondering what all of this has to do with Baptist Catechism questions 66 and 67. Well, I believe I have said enough about what the fourth commandment requires and forbids in the previous two sermons. Here I wanted to take a moment to counter the criticism that we will certainly face, even from other Christians living in our time and place, as we strive, by the grace of God and in the power of the Spirit, to honor the Lord’s Day Sabbath and to keep it holy. What will some charge us with? Answer: legalism.

But is it legalistic to say that the Christian ought to obey God’s moral law? Is it legalistic to say that the Christian ought to worship God alone in the way he has prescribed, honoring one day in seven as holy unto him until the end of the world? Certainly not. 

Some who are anti-Sabbatiarians will say, well, the practice of Sabbath keeping belonged to the ceremonial laws of Old Covenant Israel and has been done away with. You are guilty of legalism for teaching that the Sabbath Day is to be kept under the New Covenant. This is not true. As has been said in previous sermons, that Sabbath command was not given first to Israel through Moses, but to Adam. And when the Sabbath command was given to Isarel through Moses, it was given a special place at the heart of the Ten Commandments, wherein God’s universal and unchanging moral law is summarized. Will the anti-Sabitarians charge us with legalism when we say that God alone is to be worshiped, not with images, and with reverence for his name? Will they charge us with legalism when we say, You shall honor your father and mother, do not murder, commit adultery, steal, bear false witness, or covet? Are we guilty of legalism when we teach that Christians are to keep these laws, not to earn God’s favor, but from a heart renewed and empowered by the Holy Spirit out of gratitude for all that God has done for us in Christ? OI doubt it! Why then do so many professing Christians in our day charge us with legalism when we teach that the fourth of these ten Commandments is to be kept, too? I’m afraid that the antinomian error has had a devastating effect on the modern church.    

Some who are anti-Sabbatiarians will respond, saying, but the command to keep the Sabbath day holy is not restated in the New Testament, therefore we are not bound to keep it. 

First of all, this is simply not true. But let us assume for a moment that it was true. What if the fourth commandment were not restated in the New Testament? Would this mean that we are not bound to keep it? I think not. The question I would ask in reply is this: Who invented this rule that for something to be believed or obeyed by the New Covenant people of God, it must be restated in the New Testament? This is a false assumption. In fact, the New Testament is not written as a fresh start. It is written as a continuation and fulfillment of the Old. If something is to be done away with, you will need to demonstrate that it has been fulfilled or advanced somehow under the New Covenant. And as I said in the previous sermon, the thing of which the Sabbath is a sign, namely eternal rest in the presence of God, is not here yet in full. Christ has entered his rest. We rest in him in part. We will rest eternally when he returns to make all things new. Until then, the practice of Sabbath keeping remains for the people of God. This idea that something must be said in the New Testament for it to be believed or obeyed is not true.

But as I have said, this claim that the Sabbath is not taught in the New Testament is not true. Christ kept the Old Covenant Sabbath. He also stripped away all of the legalistic gunk that the religious leaders had piled on it so as to demonstrate what true Sabbath-keeping looked like. And after his resurrection, he met with his disciples on the first day of the week to break bread. The early church did the same, as recorded in Acts. And the writer of Hebrews clearly states that “there remains a [Sabbath-keeping] for the people of God…” (Hebrews 4:9).

Friends, assembling for Christian worship on the first day of the week is not merely the tradition of man. It is the law of God properly understood. It is the Christian, New Covenant, Lord’s Day Sabbath. I hope you understand, if it is only the tradition of man, then there is nothing at all binding us to worship on Sunday. In fact, nothing is binding us to weekly worship either.

Some who are anti-Sabbatiarians will respond, saying, then why has the day changed? Answer: The everabiding and unchanging moral principle is that a proportion of time is to be set apart for the worship of God. The pattern or rhythm God established at creation was one day in seven. This is the moral principle that remains. The particular itself is symbolic or ceremonial. In previous sermons, I described how the seventh day Sabbath fit with the terms of the Covenant of Works that God made with Adam in the garden (work will lead to rest). Also, the seventh day Sabbath was a reminder of the original creation, which has been ruined by sin. But the first day Sabbath fits with the terms of Covenant of Grace instituted by Christ  (rest in Christ leads to work). Also, the first day Sabbath is a reminder of the original creation and of the new creation which Christ earned through his life, death, and ressurection. The new creation was inaugurated when Christ rose. It will be consummated at his return. Then the weekly Sabbath will be fulfilled and swallowed up byu eternal rest in the presence of God.

*****

Conclusion

The fourth commandment remains, brothers and sisters. The day has changed. But the moral obligation to devote a proportion of time to the public and private worship of God remains. The pattern established at creation was one and seven. While this world remains, that weekly pattern will remain. From Adam to the resurrection of Christ, the holy day for rest and worship was Saturday. From the resurrection of Christ to the end of the world, the day is Sunday. And this is why you need to know that “the fourth commandment forbids the omission or careless performance of the duties required, and the profaning the day by idleness, or doing that which is in itself sinful, or by unnecessary thoughts, words, or works, about worldly employments or recreations.” 

I’ll conclude by asking you, have you kept this law perfectly? No, we have violated this law in thought, word, and deed. Thanks be to God for the forgiveness that is in Christ Jesus, and for the gift of the Spirit, who has regenerated us and freed us from bondage to sin so that we, by God’s grace, might obey God’s law willingly and from the heart, for our good and his glory.  

Pre-Introduction

Brothers and sisters, I realize this is Easter or Resurrection Sunday. Given that we will soon be considering Luke’s account of the death, burial, and resurrection of Christ as we continue in our expositional study of his Gospel, I thought it best to stay the course and to consider Luke 20:1-18. Though this text is not about the resurrection of Christ, his death is foretold.  Furthermore, his resurrection is implied in the conclusion of this text, in the words, “The stone that the builders rejected has become the cornerstone?” (Luke 20:17, ESV). I trust that you are capable of keeping the significance of the death, burial, and resurrection of Christ in mind as we consider this passage, which tells of events that transpired no more than a week before Christ’s crucifixion.  

*****

Old Testament Reading: Isaiah 5:1-7

“Let me sing for my beloved my love song concerning his vineyard: My beloved had a vineyard on a very fertile hill. He dug it and cleared it of stones, and planted it with choice vines; he built a watchtower in the midst of it, and hewed out a wine vat in it; and he looked for it to yield grapes, but it yielded wild grapes. And now, O inhabitants of Jerusalem and men of Judah, judge between me and my vineyard. What more was there to do for my vineyard, that I have not done in it? When I looked for it to yield grapes, why did it yield wild grapes? And now I will tell you what I will do to my vineyard. I will remove its hedge, and it shall be devoured; I will break down its wall, and it shall be trampled down. I will make it a waste; it shall not be pruned or hoed, and briers and thorns shall grow up; I will also command the clouds that they rain no rain upon it. For the vineyard of the LORD of hosts is the house of Israel, and the men of Judah are his pleasant planting; and he looked for justice, but behold, bloodshed; for righteousness, but behold, an outcry!” (Isaiah 5:1-7, ESV)

New Testament Reading: Luke 20:1-18

“One day, as Jesus was teaching the people in the temple and preaching the gospel, the chief priests and the scribes with the elders came up and said to him, ‘Tell us by what authority you do these things, or who it is that gave you this authority.’ He answered them, ‘I also will ask you a question. Now tell me, was the baptism of John from heaven or from man?’ And they discussed it with one another, saying, ‘If we say, ‘From heaven,’ he will say, ‘Why did you not believe him?’ But if we say, ‘From man,’ all the people will stone us to death, for they are convinced that John was a prophet.’ So they answered that they did not know where it came from. And Jesus said to them, ‘Neither will I tell you by what authority I do these things.’ And he began to tell the people this parable: ‘A man planted a vineyard and let it out to tenants and went into another country for a long while. When the time came, he sent a servant to the tenants, so that they would give him some of the fruit of the vineyard. But the tenants beat him and sent him away empty-handed. And he sent another servant. But they also beat and treated him shamefully, and sent him away empty-handed. And he sent yet a third. This one also they wounded and cast out. Then the owner of the vineyard said, ‘What shall I do? I will send my beloved son; perhaps they will respect him.’ But when the tenants saw him, they said to themselves, ‘This is the heir. Let us kill him, so that the inheritance may be ours.’ And they threw him out of the vineyard and killed him. What then will the owner of the vineyard do to them? He will come and destroy those tenants and give the vineyard to others.’ When they heard this, they said, ‘Surely not!’ But he looked directly at them and said, ‘What then is this that is written: ‘The stone that the builders rejected has become the cornerstone’? Everyone who falls on that stone will be broken to pieces, and when it falls on anyone, it will crush him.’” (Luke 20:1-18, ESV)

*****

Please excuse any typos and misspellings within this manuscript. It has been published online for the benefit of the saints of Emmaus Reformed Baptist Church but without the benefit of proofreading.

Introduction

Do not forget that at this point in Luke’s narrative, Jesus has finally entered Jerusalem. It was back in Luke 9:51 that we read, “When the days drew near for [Jesus] to be taken up, he set his face to go to Jerusalem” (Luke 9:51, ESV), and now he has arrived. In Luke 19:28-40, we read of Jesus’s approach to Jerusalem. In Luke 19:41-48, we learned that when Jesus “drew near and saw the city, he wept over it” and announced its destruction was near. Jesus then went into the temple to cleanse it, driving out those who sold within. After this, Luke reports that “Jesus was teaching daily in the temple. Luke 19:47-48 says, “The chief priests and the scribes and the principal men of the people were seeking to destroy him, but they did not find anything they could do, for all the people were hanging on his words” (Luke 19:47-48, ESV). This is all background to the text we are considering today. Jesus is in the city of Jerusalem. Soon, he would be crucified and on the third day rise. But now he is found teaching in the temple with a great multitude of disciples around him.

Jesus’s Authority Was Questioned 

In Luke 20:1 we read, “One day, as Jesus was teaching the people in the temple and preaching the gospel, the chief priests and the scribes with the elders came up and said to him, “Tell us by what authority you do these things, or who it is that gave you this authority” (Luke 20:1–2, ESV).

Can you picture the scene? It’s truly an incredible one. Jesus the Messiah had arrived at his temple, and he was teaching the people. We should envision a great multitude of people surrounding Jesus. Many of them would have been regarded as outcasts in Israel. Perhaps some Gentiles had gathered around Jesus, too. At the close of the previous passage, Luke tells us that the people were “hanging on Jesus’s words.” This means they were paying very close attention to everything he said. 

[This, friends, is one of the defining characteristics of a disciple of Jesus. True disciples of Jesus hang on his words. True disciples of Jesus listen to his words and pay careful attention to them. This they will do when reading the Scriptures privately. And this they will do especially when the words of Christ are read and preached in his New Covenant temple, that is to say, the church. Friends, I must ask you, do you hang on the words of Jesus? Do you listen attentively to his words to receive them, submit to them, and obey them? True disciples of Jesus will hang on his words, whereas the non-believer and the false-believer will neglect and disregard them.]

Now, what was Jesus speaking about as he taught in the temple? Luke tells us he “was preaching the gospel”, that is to say, the good news regarding the arrival of the kingdom of God and of God’s salvation. Think of it. For hundreds of years, the temple had pointed forward to the arrival of the Messiah in a symbolic way. The Old Testament Scriptures, which testify concerning the coming Messiah, were read in that place. And the Psalms, which speak of Jesus, were sung there. Now, Jesus the Messiah stood in the temple, opened his mouth, and filled that sacred space with his voice as he announced the arrival of God’s salvation and kingdom. What a momentous event this was! 

Suddenly, Jesus was approached by a group of very powerful men. None other than the chief priests, the scribes, and the elders of Israel approached him. I imagine them entering the temple quickly and aggressively. I can picture the crowd that surrounded Jesus parting to make way for them. And what was their concern? They spoke to Jesus, saying, “Tell us by what authority you do these things, or who it is that gave you this authority”. In other words, they came to challenge the authority of Jesus by asking him, Who has given you the authority or right to do these things, that is to say, to cleanse the temple and to teach authoritatively in this place? 

Make no mistake about it, this was not a humble or honest question these men asked. It was a prideful question meant to challenge Jesus’s authority. They asked this question to oppose Jesus because they hated him. And they hated him because he threatened to undermine the authority they possessed within Old Covenant Israel.

This is the first observation concerning our text: The authority of Jesus was challenged or questioned by a group of very powerful men. They questioned his power and authority because he was a threat to theirs. 

Jesus Answered Their Question With A Question

Secondly, notice that Jesus answered their question with a question. 

Look at verse 3: “He answered them, ‘I also will ask you a question. Now tell me, was the baptism of John from heaven or from man?’” (Luke 20:3–4, ESV). In other words, who gave John the Baptist the authority to baptize? Was his authority from man, or was it from God? 

We should not think that Jesus was evading the question put to him by the principal men of Israel when he replied with a question of his own, for the question he asked them regarding their opinion of John the Baptist had everything to do with the question they asked him. If their opinion of John was that he was a mere man, then it would follow that Jesus’s authority was merely from man. But if their opinion of John was that he was a prophet sent by God, then it would follow that Jesus was from God too, for John testified that Jesus was the Messiah whom God had promised and provided.  

In verse 5, we read, “And [the leading men] discussed it with one another, saying, ‘If we say, ‘From heaven,’ he will say, ‘Why did you not believe him?’ But if we say, ‘From man,’ all the people will stone us to death, for they are convinced that John was a prophet” (Luke 20:5–6, ESV).

Consider how wise it was for Jesus to respond to the question of the chief priests, scribes, and elders with this question.  

First of all, by responding to their question with this question, he placed them on the horns of a dilemma. On the one hand, they were not willing to admit that John was a prophet sent by God, for to admit that would mean that they should have listened to what John said regarding Jesus, for John was the forerunner to Jesus! But on the other hand, they were not willing to say that John’s authority was from man, for the people believed John was a prophet sent from God, and the high priests, elders, and scribes were afraid of upsetting the multitude. So they pleaded ignorance. Look at verse 7: “So they answered that they did not know where it came from.” 

[As you can clearly see, these men did not care about the truth. They only cared about themselves and maintaining their power and authority. As you may know, many live life this way. They go along to get along in the world. The question that drives them is not, What is true or right, but What will benefit my cause and further my agenda. This way of life may benefit men for a time, but it will not benefit them in the end. Dear friends, I hope and pray that you do not live this way. I hope and pray that you are driven by the truth and a desire to see God and Christ glorified. I hope and pray that you are eager to believe what is true and do what is right, even if it costs you in the moment. 

When the chief priests, scribes, and elders came together to deliberate over Jesus’s question, they did not ask, What is right and true? Their concern was only to find a way to maintain the power and authority they had in the world. They took the path of least resistance. They replied like politicians. They attempted to remain neutral. But you cannot remain neutral with Jesus. Either you are for him or against him—there is no other option. This is what Jesus plainly taught. In Luke 11:23, we hear him say, “Whoever is not with me is against me, and whoever does not gather with me scatters.” 

So what is your answer, friend? What do you say about John the Baptist?  Was he a prophet from God, or was his authority derived from men? And what you think about John will impact what you think about Jesus, for John testified concerning Jesus that he was the Lamb of God who takes away the sins of the world. What you think about these two men, John and Jesus, will demand a response from you. And what you believe about Jesus has eternal ramifications.]

Jesus was wise to respond to the question of the leading men of Israel with a question, for by doing so he set his opponents on the horns of a dilemma. Secondly, Jesus’s reply was wise because when he mentioned John the Baptist, it took the minds of his hearers back to the beginning days of his ministry, when John testified that Jesus was the Messiah, the Lamb of God who takes away the sin of the world. By mentioning John, it was a reminder of what happened when John baptized Jesus. As you know, “the Holy Spirit descended on [Jesus] in bodily form, like a dove; and a voice came from heaven, ‘You are my beloved Son; with you I am well pleased’” (Luke 3:22, ESV). By mentioning John, it caused his audience to recall John’s ministry, which marked the beginning of Jesus’s ministry, and all the things that had happened in the three years that followed. In other words, when the chief priests, scribes, and elders approached Jesus in the temple and said, “Tell us by what authority you do these things, or who it is that gave you this authority”, he could have simply said, it is God the Father who has given me this auithority, But by answering their question with this question, he gave those who heard him so much more by helping them to recal the glorious things that had transpired beginning with the ministry of John the Baptist, the great prophet of God and forerunner to the Messiah. As we remember the ministry of John the Baptist, Jesus’ baptism and the voice from heaven, and the ministry of Jesus that followed, the answer is very clear: Jesus’s authority was not derived from man but from God.   

Three, Jesus’ reply was wise because it showed that his authority was greater than theirs. The chief priests, scribes, and elders arrogantly entered the temple to question, judge, and condemn Jesus, but Jesus turned the tables on them. He showed that his authority was greater than theirs when he questioned them concerning their opinion of John.  

[Dear friends, there is a warning here to all who would be so arrogant and foolish as to attempt to stand in judgment over King Jesus. So humble and lowly was he at his first coming that many erred in this way. They imagined their authority was greater than his, so they stood over him to judge him. We see it here in the passage that is open before us today, and we will see it again in the passages that follow, which speak of Jesus’s arrest, trial, and crucifixion. Think of it! Sinful men stood in judgment over the Lord of glory, and they crucified him (see 1 Corinthians 2:8)! And arrogant men and women do the same thing with Jesus today. They stand above him to question him and to put him to the test. In pride, they dismiss him and refuse to submit to his Lordship.  But friends, on the last day, no man will question Jesus. Instead, King Jesus will question all men, and he will judge in rightousness. On that day, “at the name of Jesus every knee [will] bow, in heaven and on earth and under the earth, and every tongue confess that Jesus Christ is Lord, to the glory of God the Father” (Philippians 2:10–11, ESV). Do not make the error that the chief priests, scribes, and elders of Israel made, assuming that their authority was greater than the authority of Jesus. No, recognize that Jesus is Lord Most High. He is the King of kings and Lord of lords. All authority in heaven and earth has been given to him. Humble yourself before him, therefore, and submit to him as King. Those who have not yet placed their faith in Christ must be exhorted to do this for the first time. Bow the knee to King Jesus and confess him as Lord, to have him as Savior. And those who have Christ as Lord must be encouraged to submit to the authority of King Jesus more and more each day, for God “gives more grace.” He “opposes the proud but gives grace to the humble. Submit yourselves therefore to God” through Christ the King (see James 4:6–7).

Jesus answered the question put to him by the chief priests, scribes, and elders with a question, and this was very wise. But that is not all he had to say. He also answered them with a parable.

Jesus Answered Their Question With A Parable

Look with me at verse 9: “And he began to tell the people this parable…” I take this to mean that he uttered this parable (an earthly story with a spiritual meaning) to all the people who had gathered around him in the temple, including the chief priests, scribes, and elders. The parable begins like this: “A man planted a vineyard and let [or leased] it out to tenants and went into another country for a long while” (Luke 20:9, ESV). 

When those who gathered around Jesus in the temple heard the words, “A man planted a vineyard”, they would have immediately thought of the Isaiah 5 passage we read at the beginning of this sermon. These people were familiar with the Old Testament Scriptures, and Isaiah 5 is a very famous text. 

As I was studying this text, the thought occurred to me, I should set Isaiah 5:1-7 alongside Luke 20:9-18 to see how they relate to each other. I’m glad I did. The two passages mirror one another very closely. The structure of each is the same. They are both chiasms, which means that the first half of the prophecy mirrors the second half and that the two halves are divided by a central point. A, B, C, centre point D, C’, B’, A’ —this is the structure of Isaiah 5 and Luke 20:9-18. Once you see the matching structures, it is very interesting and instructive to compare the parts. 

A — As has been said, the prophecies of Isaiah 5:1-7 and Luke 20:9-18 begin similarly. In Isaiah 5:1, the prophet says, “Let me sing for my beloved my love song concerning his vineyard.” As the song progresses, it becomes clear that the “beloved” is the LORD God of Israel, and the vineyard represents all Israel. The same is true of the beginning of Jesus’ parable. It begins with the words, ‘A man planted a vineyard.” As the parable progresses, it becomes clear that, like Isaiah 5, the man represents God, and the vineyard represents Israel in general. There is a big difference, though. Whereas in Isaiah 5, no other characters are introduced to make distinctions between people within Israel, Jesus mentions “tenants”. Luke 20:9 says, “A man planted a vineyard and let it out to tenants and went into another country for a long while.” A tenant is a renter. In this context, a tenant is a farmer who does not own the land, but leases it so that he might farm it. The expectation is that he would give some of the produce to the owner of the vineyard. As has been said, the vineyard represents Old Covenant Israel in general, but who do these tenants symbolize? They must symbolize the leaders or principal men within Israel—men like the chief priests, scribes, and elders who had approached Jesus in the temple to question and challenge his authority. In this parable, these leaders within Israel are represented by tenants to show that the vineyard of Israel was not theirs, but God’s, and that they had a responsibility to care for God’s vineyard, Israel. They were to protect it and cultivate it to ensure it would produce good and bountiful fruit, to the glory of God. So you can see that Jesus’ parable is more pointed than Isaiah’s song. Whereas the prophecy of Isaiah 5:1-7 is a condemnation of Israel in general, in this parable, Jesus focuses his attention on the leaders of Israel, represented by these tenants. 

B — The second scene of the prophecy of Isaiah 5 also mirrors the second scene in Jesus’ parable. In Isaiah 5:2, we read, “and he [the beloved] looked for [his vineyard] to yield grapes…” In Luke 20:10 we read, “When the time came, he sent a servant to the tenants, so that they would give him some of the fruit of the vineyard.” What do the two passages share in common? The owner of the vineyard wished to have some of the fruit from his vineyard. Where do the passages differ? Jesus introduces another set of characters to make further distinctions within Old Covenant Israel. He says that the owner “sent a servant to the tenants, so that they would give him some of the fruit of the vineyard.” We know who the tenants represent—the leading men of Old Covenant Israel. Who does the servant represent? As the parable progresses, it becomes clear that this servant (and two others) represent the prophets of God who ministered to Old Covenant Israel. It was the job of the prophets to declare the word of God to the people, to call them to repentance, faith, and good deeds. The prophets were God’s ministers. Indeed, they were servants whose aim it was to move the people to bear spiritual fruit to the glory of God.

C —  The third scene of the prophecy of Isaiah 5 also mirrors the third scene in Jesus’ parable. Isaiah 5:2 goes on to say, “and he looked for it to yield grapes, but it yielded wild grapes” (Isaiah 5:2, ESV). This means that Israel did not produce good fruit, but bad. Instead of repentance, faith, and good deeds, they were rebellious and sinful. Corresponding to this, Luke 20:10 goes on to say, “When the time came, he sent a servant to the tenants, so that they would give him some of the fruit of the vineyard. But the tenants beat him and sent him away empty-handed. And he sent another servant. But they also beat and treated him shamefully, and sent him away empty-handed. And he sent yet a third. This one also they wounded and cast out” (Luke 20:10-12, ESV). When the prophecy of Isaiah 5 and the parable of Luke 20 are set side by side, it becomes clear that, while Isaiah condemned Israel in general for the sins of bloodshed and injustice (these were the wild grapes they produced), Jesus’s parable condemns the leaders of Israel in particular for their repeated rejection, mistreatment, and even murder of the prophets God had sent to them (these are the wild grapes Christ condemned them for).

D — The fourth scene of the prophecy of Isaiah 5 mirrors the fourth scene in Jesus’ parable, and this is the central point of both passages. In Isaiah 5:3, the beloved, that is to say, the LORD, speaks, saying, “And now, O inhabitants of Jerusalem and men of Judah, judge between me and my vineyard. What more was there to do for my vineyard, that I have not done in it? When I looked for it to yield grapes, why did it yield wild grapes?” (Isaiah 5:3-4, ESV). And in Luke 20:13, the owner of the vineyard, that is to say, the LORD, speaks, saying, “What shall I do? I will send my beloved son; perhaps they will respect him” (Luke 20:13, ESV). What do the two passages share in common at this central point? In both, the owner of the vineyard asks a question: “What more was there to do for my vineyard?” or “What shall I do?” How do the passages differ? In Isaiah 5, the implied answer is, nothing. It’s time for judgment, and so it was. In Jesus’ parable, the answer is this: “I will send my beloved son; perhaps they will respect him.” Who does the beloved son of the vineyard owner represent? Clearly, he represents Jesus, the eternal Son of God incarnate, the Messiah, the great Prophet, Priest, and King promised from long ago. The tenants of Israel did not respect the prophets of old! Perhaps they would respect the Son, or so the thinking goes within the parable. 

C’ — The fifth scene of the prophecy of Isaiah 5 also mirrors the fifth scene in Jesus’ parable. Isaiah 5:4 says, “What more was there to do for my vineyard, that I have not done in it? When I looked for it to yield grapes, why did it yield wild grapes?” Here we have another reference to wild grapes, that is to say, to the sin of the people. We should not be surprised to see the same pattern in Christ’s parable. Verse 14: “But when the tenants saw [the son], they said to themselves, ‘This is the heir. Let us kill him, so that the inheritance may be ours.’ And they threw him out of the vineyard and killed him.” (Luke 20:14–15, ESV) Clearly, this symbolizes what was soon to happen in Jerusalem. The tenants of Israel — the high priests, scribes, and elders — would soon conspire together against Jesus, the Son of God incarnate — the beloved son of the vineyard owner—to put him to death. Why would they kill him? They would kill him because they wanted the vineyard to be theirs! They had power and authority in the vineyard, and they did not want to give it up! This is why they rejected and killed the prophets of old, and this is why they rejected and killed the beloved Son of God.  

B’ —  The sixth scene of the prophecy of Isaiah 5 also mirrors the sixth scene in Jesus’ parable. In Isaiah 5:5, the LORD says, “And now I will tell you what I will do to my vineyard…” And in Luke 20:15, Jesus raises the question, “What then will the owner of the vineyard do to them?” The similarities between the two texts are obvious, but there is an important difference. In Isaiah 5, the LORD says, “And now I will tell you what I will do to my vineyard…”, that is to say, to Israel in general. In Luke 20:15, Jesus asks, “What then will the owner of the vineyard do to them”, that is to say, to the tenants? 

A’ — Both passages conclude with an answer or a declaration of judgment. In Isaiah 5:5-6, the LORD says, “And now I will tell you what I will do to my vineyard. I will remove its hedge, and it shall be devoured; I will break down its wall, and it shall be trampled down. I will make it a waste; it shall not be pruned or hoed, and briers and thorns shall grow up; I will also command the clouds that they rain no rain upon it.” These words from Isaiah the prophet would be fulfilled in the year 722 BC, when the northern kingdom of Israel was conquered by the Assyrians, and in the year 586 BC, when the southern kingdom of Judah was conquered by the Babylonians and the people were carried off into captivity. As you may know, some from Judah would return to Jerusalem 70 years later in fulfilment of other prophecies previously made. 

Brothers and sisters, it is important to note that what Christ here describes as the consequence for the murder of the vineyard owner’s Son is very different from what is described in Isaiah’s prophecy. What Isaiah described was consistent with conquest and captivity. What Isaiah described was judgment that was to come upon all Israel.  But what Christ describes here is different. It is the judgment of the original tenants of the vineyard, followed by a change in management. The old tenants would be judged. The vineyard of God would remain. But it would be given to others. Hear the words of Christ again: the owner of the vineyard “will come and destroy those tenants and give the vineyard to others.” 

This was not the first time Christ spoke of this great change that was soon to take place. He spoke of these things earlier in his ministry, too. In Matthew 8, Christ commended the great faith of a Roman centurion, saying, “Truly, I tell you, with no one in Israel have I found such faith” (Matthew 8:10, ESV). In verse 11, he spoke of the future, saying, “I tell you, many will come from east and west and recline at table with Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob in the kingdom of heaven, while the sons of the kingdom will be thrown into the outer darkness. In that place there will be weeping and gnashing of teeth” (Matthew 8:11-12, ESV). In Matthew 21:43, we hear Christ speak to the leaders of Israel, saying, “Therefore I tell you, the kingdom of God will be taken away from you and given to a people producing its fruits” (Matthew 21:43, ESV). Both of these passages are about the great transition that was about to happen. The kingdom or vineyard of Israel was about to be taken from the Hebrews and given to the Gentiles.

The same message is communicated here in the parable of the wicked tenants, wherein Christ teaches that God, the owner of the vineyard of Israel, would soon come in judgment to destroy those tenants of old who had rejected and mistreated his servants in the past, and would soon kill the beloved Son of God, in attempt to have his inheritance and authority as their own. These tenants would be judged, and the vineyard of God would be given to others.

The rest of the New Testament describes the fulfilment of these prophecies. In the remainder of the Gospel of Luke, we will witness the tenants of Old Covenant Israel conspire together to put the beloved Son of God to death in a vain attempt to have his inheritance and authority for themselves. 

In Luke’s second volume, the book of The Acts Of The Apostles, we see the beginning stages of the judgment of those tenants of old and the transfer of the management of God’s vineyard to others. Consider Acts 13:26: “And Paul and Barnabas spoke out boldly [to Jews], saying, ‘It was necessary that the word of God be spoken first to you. Since you thrust it aside and judge yourselves unworthy of eternal life, behold, we are turning to the Gentiles” (Acts 13:46, ESV). In Acts 18:6 we read, “And when [the Jews] opposed and reviled [Paul], he shook out his garments and said to them, ‘Your blood be on your own heads! I am innocent. From now on I will go to the Gentiles” (Acts 18:6, ESV). In Acts 28:28, Paul spoke to the Jewish leaders in Rome, saying, “Therefore let it be known to you that this salvation of God has been sent to the Gentiles; they will listen” (Acts 28:28, ESV).

The same Paul speaks of this great transition in his letter to the Romans, saying, “Lest you be wise in your own sight, I do not want you to be unaware of this mystery, brothers: a partial hardening has come upon Israel, until the fullness of the Gentiles has come in. And in this way all Israel will be saved…” (Romans 11:25–26, ESV). 

Dear friends, the true Israel of God remains even to this present day. Or to use the language of Jesus’ parable, God’s vineyard remains. But in these last days, that is to say, in the days between Christ’s first and second comings, the vineyard of God, or the true Israel of God, has been given to Gentiles. Though elect Jews remain, by in large, the kingdom of God [has been] taken away from [them] and given to a people producing its fruits” (Matthew 21:43, ESV), “a partial hardening has come upon [ethnic] Israel, until the fullness of the Gentiles has come in”.  “And in this way all Israel [the true Israel of God consisting of all who are united to Christ by faith from from amongst ethnic Jews and ethnic Gentiles] will be saved” (Romans 11:26, ESV). Friends, nowhere do the Scriptures speak of an eventual return of the kingdom of God or the vineyard of God to ethnic Israel. That idea is a common myth read into the pages of Holy Scripture. 

While the book of Acts describes the beginning of this transition away from ethnic and earthly Israel and to the nations, and while the epistles speak of these realities, the fulfilment of Jesus’s words concerning the owner of the vineyard coming to “destroy those tenants and give the vineyard to others” happened in a most pronounced way in the year 70 AD when the Romans under emperor Titus, besieged Jerusalem, slaughtered its population, and tore everything in the city, including the great and magnificent temple, to the ground. In Luke 19:43-44, Jesus predicted the destruction of the city of Jerusalem and the temple. In Luke 13:35, Jesus declared that the temple was forsaken. But here in this parable, Jesus focuses his attention on the principal or leading men of Old Covenant Israel and declares that they will be judged and removed as tenants of God’s vineyard, and that new tenants will be appointed in their place.  

[Dear brothers and sisters, do you understand what this means for us? It means that those who are united to Christ by faith are the vineyard of God and the true Israel of God. Ethnicity does not matter under the New Covenant. Your genealogy does not matter. What matters is faith in Jesus the Messiah. If you have Jesus as Lord and King, you belong to him. You are the Israel of God. You are God’s vineyard. The vineyard of God under the Old Covenant often produced wild grapes. But under the New Covenant, God has given his vineyard to others who will produce its fruit. Are you producing good fruit, brothers and sisters? Are you producing the fruit of the Spirit—“love, joy, peace, patience, kindness, goodness, faithfulness, gentleness, self-control”? (Galatians 5:22–23, ESV). The Old Covenant Israel of God was often fruitless, and that is because that covenant did not produce regeneration. But all who are in the New Covenant are regenerated by the Holy Spirit (see Jeremiah 31:31ff.). And regenerated persons will, over time, bear the fruit of the Holy Spirit as they abide in Christ. Are you bearing fruit, brothers and sisters—the fruit of repentance, faith, and good deeds? 

Furthermore, as we view ourselves as the New Covenant Israel of God and the vineyard of God, there is special application for pastors and elders, and other leading men, who are to be regarded as tenants. Are we being faithful to tend to the vineyard of God, to protect it, weed it, prune and water it, so that it produces good fruit—fruit that is pleasing to God, the owner of this vineyard, and to God’s Son, the heir? May God help us to be good and faithful tenants, and not wicked tenants, like these chief priests, scribes, and elders were.]  

Now, back to our parable. Notice, the chief priests, scribes, and elders understood exactly what Jesus meant by this parable. They knew it was an indictment against them and an announcement concerning the judgment that was soon to come upon them. Look at the middle of verse 16: “When they heard this, they said, ‘Surely not!’” (Luke 20:16, ESV), or may it never be! To be clear, they were not troubled by the fact that their forefathers had killed the prophets or that they would soon kill the vineyard owner’s son, but that they, the tenants of Old Covenant Israel, would soon be judged and that the vineyard would be given to others who would productive its fruit. It was to this thought that they replied, “Surely not”, or may it never be.

It was at this very moment that Jesus “looked directly at [the chief priests, scribes, and elders] and said, “What then is this that is written: ‘The stone that the builders rejected has become the cornerstone’? Everyone who falls on that stone will be broken to pieces, and when it falls on anyone, it will crush him’” (Luke 20:17–18, ESV). 

The saying, “The stone that the builders rejected has become the cornerstone”, is from Psalm 118:22. Go and read that Psalm later and see that it has everything to do with the arrival of the Messiah in Jerusalem. This particular verse reveals that, ironically, the Messiah would be rejected by the builders, or principal men, of Israel. Nevertheless, this rejected stone would become the cornerstone, that is to say, the precious and important stone in God’s temple.

The saying, “Everyone who falls on that stone will be broken to pieces” alludes to Isaiah 8:14-15 which speaks of the Lord, saying, “And he will become a sanctuary and a stone of offense and a rock of stumbling to both houses of Israel, a trap and a snare to the inhabitants of Jerusalem. And many shall stumble on it. They shall fall and be broken; they shall be snared and taken” (Isaiah 8:14–15, ESV). So the Lord is a sanctuary to some and stone of offence to others. Those who take refuge in Jesus the Messiah will be saved! Those who stumble over him will be broken to pieces.

The saying, “and when it falls on anyone, it will crush him,” alludes to the prophecy of Daniel 2:34ff., which portrays the Messiah as a stone “cut out by no human hand” which would topple nations. Daniel 2:44 says, “And in the days of those kings the God of heaven will set up a kingdom that shall never be destroyed, nor shall the kingdom be left to another people. It shall break in pieces all these kingdoms and bring them to an end, and it shall stand forever…” (Daniel 2:44, ESV). This is the kingdom of Jesus the Messiah. 

Do not forget that Jesus cited these Old Testament prophesies containing references to stones while teaching in the temple, being surrounded by the great and marvelous stones of that magnificent structure. This he did not long after declaring that soon Jerusalem would be destroyed, and not one stone would be left standing upon another (Luke 19:44). One stone would remain. He is the cornerstone of God’s New Covenant temple, Jesus Christ the Lord. 

Conclusion

I think the high priests, scribes, and elders got more than they were bargaining for when they stormed into the temple to challenge Jesus’s authority and to question him, saying, “Tell us by what authority you do these things, or who it is that gave you this authority” (Luke 20:2, ESV). Jesus’s answer was very clear. His authority is from God, for he is the Lord’s Messiah, the Lamb of God who takes away the sin of the world, just as John the Baptist declared. More than this, he is the beloved Son of God incarnate, just as the voice from heaven declared when John baptized him. He is, in fact, the son of a vineyard owner. Though the tenants would reject and kill him, he would rise. Indeed, “The stone that the builders rejected has become the cornerstone. This is the LORD’s doing; it is marvelous in our eyes” (Psalm 118:22-23, ESV).