Christians sometimes get confused with the concept of judging. Biblically we are commanded to judge (John 7:24 says, “Stop judging by mere appearances, and make it right judgement”). Then at the same time we are biblically told that we are not to …
Luke describes a “Perean ministry” that accompanied Jesus’ final journey to Jerusalem (Luke 9:51–18:34). Perea was a Roman district east of the Jordan with its capital at Gadara. The Arnon River formed its southern boundary. Its eastern boundary was west of Gerasa and Philadelphia. Perea included the fortress of Machaerus, where John the Baptist was beheaded, and Pella, where Jerusalem Christians fled just before Rome destroyed Jerusalem in A.D. 70. Herod the Great and then Herod Antipas governed Perea. Scholars continue to debate the extent of the Perean ministry, although several passages suggest that Jesus visited Perea more than once (see John 10:40; Matt. 19:1, where “Judea beyond the Jordan” points to Perea).
Brisco, T. V. (1998). Holman Bible atlas (p. 226). Broadman & Holman Publishers.
It is curious to find some Pharisees warning Jesus against Herod. Though they were vigorously opposed to much that he said and did, they may have recognized that they stood a good deal closer to him than they did to Herod. It is perhaps more likely that they were Herod’s witting or unwitting agents. After his experience with John the Baptist the tetrarch may not have wanted the murder of another prophet on his conscience; but he did want to be rid of Jesus. So he used the Pharisees to pass on a death threat. They may have been ready to cooperate in the hope of frightening Jesus into moving out of Perea into Judea, where they had more power.
The fox was used by the Jews as a symbol of a sly man, but more often for an insignificant or worthless one (SB). It was sometimes a symbol of destructiveness. T. W. Manson says, ‘To call Herod “that fox” is as much as to say he is neither a great man nor a straight man; he has neither majesty nor honour.’12 The expression is thus contemptuous. Herod is the only person Jesus is recorded as having treated with contempt. Later we read that he wanted to see Jesus perform a miracle, and that when Jesus stood before him the Master said nothing to him at all (23:8f.). When Jesus has nothing to say to a man that man’s position is hopeless. That Jesus tells the Pharisees to go to Herod may support the view that they had some connection with the tetrarch. But it may be no more than his way of making the point that it does not matter to him if Herod comes to hear what he has to say. The casting out of demons and healing mean that Jesus will continue his ministry. But he makes it clear that this will not last indefinitely. The third day means ‘in a short time’, or ‘at the end of a definite time’, or both. Then Jesus will ‘be finished’. The word (teleioumai) might denote the end of his work in that region or the completion of his work of redemption. Jesus is saying that he will complete his allotted course. God, not Herod, will determine when he is to die. The divine plan will be fulfilled.
The same time-note with the same problem of interpretation (and the same solution) occurs again. Jesus follows the path God maps out for him. This is strengthened with the word must (dei), which points to the divine necessity that dictated Jesus’ movements. The verse comes to an ironical climax, ‘it would never do for a prophet to perish except in Jerusalem!’ (Moffatt). The capital was the heart of the nation; it was there that its destiny and that of its prophets were wrought out. This may be the reason for Luke’s strong interest in the city. He has the name ‘Jerusalem’ all told ninety times, while it occurs only forty-nine times in all the rest of the New Testament. It was at Jerusalem, before the Sanhedrin, that trials of prophets took place. It was there that the nation’s attitude to Jesus would take its final shape and that death take place that would accomplish God’s purpose for his Messiah.
Lament over Jerusalem (13:34–35)
It is possible that Luke records the lament over Jerusalem at this point simply because of its kinship with the subject-matter. It seems probable that it occurred as Jesus approached the city as Matthew says it did. The alternative is that Jesus uttered the words twice, which does not seem likely. The tender address shows that Jesus was deeply concerned about the final fate of the city. It shows also that he must have had more dealings with Jerusalem than are recorded in the Synoptic Gospels, for How often would be a curious way of referring to the few contacts with the city of which they speak. Jesus describes Jerusalem as habitually rejecting, even killing God’s messengers, be they prophets or others (cf. 2 Kgs 21:16; 2 Chr. 24:21; Jer. 26:20f., etc.). Yet even so she was not rejected out of hand. The Son of God would often have gathered her children together, but they would not come (for a contrasting attitude cf. Ps. 57:1). There is a tenderness in the imagery of the hen and its chicks. The responsibility of the Jews for their fate is sheeted home with the final you would not!
The nation has invited the final result. When a nation or an individual persists in rejecting God the end is inevitable. So Jesus says your house is forsaken. Many hold the house to be the temple, but it is more probably Jerusalem as a whole. Whatever the truth of this, the important thing is that it is forsaken (cf. Jer. 22:5). God no longer lives there: that is the final disaster. Jesus goes on to say that the city will see him no more until it greets him in the words of Psalm 118:26. Some see in this a reference to the triumphal entry when these words were used about Jesus. But this seems an inadequate fulfilment of such a solemn prediction. And in any case it was not the people of the city but the Galilean pilgrims who uttered the words then. Moreover Matthew records Jesus’ prediction after the entry (Matt. 23:39; the entry is in Matt. 21:1–11). Others think of the words as the response of believing Jews at some future conversion of Jerusalem, but it is hard to see this either in the words themselves or in history. It is better to think of the second advent. Jesus’ return in splendour will draw from Jerusalem this recognition, however unwilling, of his Messiahship.
Morris, L. (1988). Luke: an introduction and commentary (Vol. 3, pp. 244–247). InterVarsity Press.
Proverbs 31:25 (NET) w/notes
31:25 She is clothed59 with strength60 and honor,61
and she can laugh62 at the time63 to come.
Biblical Studies Press. (2005). The NET Bible First Edition; Bible. English. NET Bible.; The NET Bible (Pr 31:25). Biblical Studies Press.
Notes for 31:25
59 sn The idea of clothing and being clothed is a favorite figure in Hebrew. It makes a comparison between wearing clothes and having strength and honor. Just as clothes immediately indicate something of the nature and circumstances of the person, so do these virtues. 60 tn The first word of the sixteenth line begins with ע (ayin), the sixteenth letter of the Hebrew alphabet. 61 sn This word appears in Ps 111:3 which says that the LORD’s work is honorable, and here the woman is clothed with strength and honor. 62 sn Here “laugh” is either a metonymy of adjunct or effect. The point is that she is confident for the future because of all her industry and planning. 63 tn Heb “day.” This word is a metonymy of subject meaning any events that take place on the day or in the time to come.
Biblical Studies Press. (2006). The NET Bible First Edition Notes (Pr 31:25). Biblical Studies Press.
Read through the biblical passages written in Biblical Aramaic, namely, Genesis 31:47, Jeremiah 10:11, Ezra 4:8–6:18 and 7:12–26, and Daniel 2:4b–7:28 with our archive of videos. Subscribe on the website: qrco.de/bcQftQ
The short “Daily Dose” free Biblical Hebrew videos are aimed at helping you hone and sharpen your Hebrew skills. Five-seven days per week, we will deliver to you a free 2-minute video in which I talk through a single Hebrew verse. See dailydoseofhebrew.com