Luke 9:51

And it came to pass when the days were well-nigh come that he should be received up, he stedfastly set his face to go to Jerusalem, and sent messengers before his face: and they went and entered into a village of the Samaritans, to make ready for him. And they did not receive him, because his face was as though he were going to Jerusalem. And when his disciples James and John saw this, they said, Lord, wilt thou that we bid fire to come down from heaven, and consume them? But he turned and rebuked them and they went to another village.

THE PROPOSAL TO CALL DOWN FIRE

With this paragraph, and continuing through the next ten chapters of this Gospel, Luke recorded a wealth of material, nearly all of which is found nowhere else; but the allegation that here is "a great interpolation"[9] is emphatically rejected. It is also untrue that in these chapters, "Jesus is always on the way but is no closer to Jerusalem at the last than at the first."[10] Only three times (here, in Luke 13:22, and Luke 17:11) is our Lord's purpose of going to Jerusalem mentioned; and the commentators who call this section "Journeyings to Jerusalem"[11] are by no means accurate. See under Luke 17:11 for further comment on this.

This rather extended tour of Galilee filled up "the last six or seven months of our Lord's earth life,"[12] from the October feast of the tabernacles (John 7:2), A.D. 29, to March 30, the week before Passover began on April 7,30 A.D. It evidently was a careful visitation by Jesus of many villages not included on previous tours.

There was an excellent reason why Matthew, John and Peter's beloved Mark omitted practically all that is revealed in this section. As has already been commented upon:

The Lord was in the habit of constantly sending out by themselves small companies of his disciples as missionaries in the neighboring districts, thus accustoming his followers, in view of his own approaching death, to act and to think alone.[13]

It is extremely probable that Matthew, John and Peter (whose preaching was the real source of Mark) were absent from Jesus throughout a large part of this last six months. It was therefore quite natural that their respective Gospels should have detailed the teachings and wonders in which they have been present and eyewitnesses. God preserved this most valuable material, however, through the imprisonment of the apostle Paul for two whole years in Caesarea, during which time Luke the beloved physician had every favorable opportunity to interview hundreds of the persons who had seen and heard the things related. Unerringly, through the power of God's Spirit, Luke produced the glorious account which lies before us in this section. The presence in this section of certain linguistic evidence shows that some of these events were first narrated in the Aramaic language;[14] and, as that was the vernacular of that era, the conclusion is justified that Luke interviewed the people themselves with regard to what is here related, just as he implied in his preface. Traces of their dialect have been preserved by the sacred author.

Therefore, how fortunate are we that, through God's providence, we may study what Jesus said and did during that last, vital six months.

Set his face to go to Jerusalem ... cannot mean that Jesus traveled in a straight line to that city, but rather that certain final things were being done before he should enter the capital and suffer for the sins of mankind.

James and John ... Just why the other disciples were not mentioned here is not clear. Perhaps they did not agree with the proposal to call down fire on the village.

They did not receive him ... Just why this particular Samaritan village should have behaved so differently from Sychar was due to the same Gentile conceit to which Paul addressed himself in Romans (Romans 10-12). They hated Jerusalem and all it stood for and were ready to reject the Lord himself because of his intention of going there to die FOR THEM! How blind is hatred.

Wilt thou that we bid fire ...? It is quite revealing that the apostles believed that they had such power; and, with Jesus' permission, of course they did. That permission, however, they did not have.

He rebuked them ... The additions to this found in some ancient manuscripts and now relegated to the margin are nevertheless true to the meaning of the context. They read, "Ye know not what manner of spirit ye are of. For the Son of man came not to destroy men's lives, but to save them" (English Revised Version (1885) margin).

And they went to another village ... Isn't it wonderful that God does not retaliate against sinful men, repaying evil with evil? A village rejected the only begotten Son, but he only went on to another village. In all history, God has honored the freedom of the human will which he created; and all who ever lived are absolutely free to choose either good or evil, only with this limitation, that their choices determine their destiny.

Boanerges, "The Sons of Thunder," would have punished without mercy this wretched village of the Samaritans; but Jesus rebuked the very thought of doing such a thing.

There are countless places on earth today where Christ is openly dishonored, where evil is a principal employment of the vast majority, if not of all; and yet God still causes his sun to shine on the just and the unjust and flowers to bloom in the gardens of the depraved no less than in the yards of the righteous. How wonderful are the ways of God.

There is a principal of Christian missionary endeavor in evidence also. Finding a field difficult, or nearly impossible, the follower of Christ should try another location. If not received in one place, let him go to another. Jesus said, "When they persecute you in this city, flee into the next"; if one village does not receive the word, the next will.

[9] Anthony Lee Ash, op. cit., II, p. 7.

[10] Ibid.

[11] H. D. M. Spence, op. cit., 244.

[12] Ibid.

[13] Ibid.

[14] Ibid.