Luke 9:22

‘Saying, “The Son of man must (it is necessary) suffer many things, and be rejected of the elders and chief priests and scribes, and be killed, and the third day be raised up.”

Now He feels it important to make clear to them the deeper truths concerning His coming. They must recognise once and for all that He was not here to lead them to victory against the Romans. He was here to suffer many things, as the Son of man had suffered in Daniel 7 (as ‘the saints of the Most High') under the depredations of the beasts, which represented empires like Rome. And this must be so because godly people must always suffer (Acts 14:22). Let them consider the Psalms. Let them consider what had happened to the prophets. Let them consider the Servant of the Lord in Isaiah 50, 53. It was the nature of the world that those who followed God would suffer (compare Hebrews 11). And thus He, Who as the Son of Man was representative man, must also ‘suffer many things' including scorn, rejection, tears, scourgings and death. (Compare Luke 17:25; Luke 22:15; Luke 24:7; Luke 24:26; Luke 24:46; Mark 9:12; Mark 10:45; John 3:14; John 10:15; John 10:17; Acts 1:3; Acts 3:18; Hebrews 2:18; Hebrews 5:8; Hebrews 9:26; Hebrews 13:12; 1Pe 2:21; 1 Peter 2:23; 1 Peter 3:18; 1 Peter 4:1)

‘And be rejected of the elders and chief priests and scribes.' The elders were the prominent lay people on the Council (Luke 7:3; Luke 20:1; Luke 22:52; Luke 22:66; Mark 11:27; Mark 14:43; Mark 14:53; Mark 15:1), the chief priests were the hierarchy who regulated Temple affairs, and the scribes were the Teachers of the Law (Luke 5:21; Luke 5:30; Luke 6:7). He was already rejected by many of them and He recognised that it was to be expected that almost all of them would turn against Him (Psalms 118 (LXX 117).22), for He knew what was in man (John 2:25), and He was hardly ensuring His popularity by tearing down their structures and their hypocrisy. He was no different in this respect than the previous prophets. He was here to be ‘rejected' (literally ‘rejected after scrutiny with regard to office') by the great Jewish religious leaders of the day, as the great prophets had always been, and necessarily must be (compare Luke 6:23; Luke 13:33; Luke 20:10; Mark 12:5; Matthew 23:35; Matthew 23:37). In His view this was inevitable. Had He not Himself declared, ‘Woe to you when all men speak well of you'? (Luke 6:26). It was of false prophets that men spoke well (Luke 6:26). They had rejected Jeremiah. Would they not do the same to Him?

We can consider here God's complaint against the Jewish leaders in Jeremiah 2:8, of whom He says, “the priests did not say ‘where is the Lord' and they that handle the Law knew Me not.” They had long ago turned against God. Compare in this regard Jeremiah 18:18 where Jeremiah too was rejected by those who handled the Law and Luke 20:1 where he was smitten by ‘the priest who was the chief officer in the house of the Lord'. See also Jeremiah 26:7; Jeremiah 26:11 where ‘the priests and the prophets' sought his death. Jeremiah would be especially significant to Jesus as he too prophesied the destruction of the Temple (Jeremiah 7:14), calling it a ‘den of robbers' (Jeremiah 7:11). And now a greater than Jeremiah was here saying the same things. So it would be nothing new for the religious leaders of Israel to condemn such a prophet ‘for the sake of the nation' (John 18:14). This rejection by the Jewish leaders is further based on the pattern of such Scriptures as Zechariah 11 where the true shepherd who had fed the flock was rejected by the false shepherds of Judah and Israel, and was dismissed for thirty pieces of silver, the value of a slave, which he cast to the potter in the house of the Lord as a sign that it was rejected by him and was insufficient. Thus rejection by the elders, and chief priests and scribes must not be seen as anything unusual.

‘And be killed.' He had no doubts about what lay ahead. It is not really surprising that Jesus saw His future in terms of suffering. He had witnessed what had happened to John the Baptiser (Luke 9:7; Luke 9:9), He knew of the growing antagonism against Him (Luke 6:11; Mark 3:6; Mark 3:22), He knew of the career of the Suffering Servant in Isaiah 51:4; Isaiah 52:13 to Isaiah 53:12, and of the Smitten Shepherd in Zechariah 13:7 (consider John 10:11). He knew of the references to the suffering of the godly in the Psalms (e.g. Psalms 22; Psalms 118:10 on) and He knew that the Son of Man in Daniel as the representative of God's people would come out of suffering into the presence of God, as ‘the beasts' attacked the true people of God (Daniel 7:13 with Daniel 7:22 and Daniel 7:25). He had no Messianic delusions. Unlike the disciples He knew what was in store. And He knew that His death was necessary so that He could be a ‘ransom for many' (Mark 10:45)

Strictly speaking the disciples should also have been prepared for this, but like us they had the ability to make words mean what they wanted them to mean. Some of them had been disciples of John the Baptiser, and they had been shocked when he had met a violent end. Then they had been told that the Bridegroom was to be ‘snatched away' from them (Luke 2:20), and then they would fast. It had further been inferred that the temple of His body would be destroyed, and in three days raised again (John 2:19). And Jesus had clearly stated that He was giving His flesh for the life of the world (John 6:51) and that men would ‘eat and drink' of Him (John 6:56), a clear reference to His being put to death according to Old Testament passages such as Psalms 14:4; Psalms 53:4; Micah 3:3; Isaiah 49:26; Zechariah 9:15 LXX; compare Matthew 23:30. But in the way men have they had refused to accept the unpalatable truth and had ignored it. Now they were being faced up with it in a way that they could not ignore.

Interestingly we have here an evidence of how carefully the actual words of Jesus were preserved. It would have been so easy to alter it to read ‘crucified', especially in the light of Luke 9:23 (and see Luke 24:7) and the fact that crucifixion was the normal death under the Romans for high treason, but they did not.

‘And the third day be raised up.' But on the third day He would rise again. He may not have intended ‘the third day' literally. ‘Three days' indicated a relatively short period of time and could mean ‘within days' (compare the ‘three days journey', a standard phrase in the Pentateuch indicating a shortish journey compared with the longer ‘seven days journey' - Genesis 30:36; Exodus 3:18; Exodus 5:3; Exodus 8:27; Numbers 10:33; Numbers 33:8; Jonah 3:3).

This idea of a third day resurrection is finally taken from Hosea 6:1 (Luke, like Matthew, interprets the ‘three days' of Mark as ‘the third day') interpreted in the light of the suffering Servant of Isaiah. It was initially spoken of Israel, (God's vine). But Jesus was here as in Himself representing the true Israel, the true Vine (John 15:1). As the Servant He was Israel (Isaiah 49:3). Thus he could apply it to Himself.

Note the context in Hosea. God will wait ‘in His place' until Israel acknowledge their guilt and seek His face, and in their distress seek Him and say, ‘come let us return to the Lord'. But this will not be until ‘He has torn that He may heal them, He has stricken and will bind them up'. These last words could well have been spoken looking at the Servant. For as Isaiah has made clear (Isaiah 53:3) this was what first had be played out on the One Who has come as the representative of Israel. We have here a clear picture of the Servant in Isaiah 53. It is in Him finally that He has torn them, it is in Him that He has stricken them, for He has borne for them all that they should have faced. And the result will be a reviving and a raising up on the third day, first for Him (Isaiah 53:10; Isaiah 53:12) and then for them. For He will have gone before them in order to be a guilt offering and make it possible for all. It could all only be because their representative had first gone through it for them that they could enjoy it.

So as the One Who saw Himself as suffering for Israel, in their place as their representative, Jesus also saw Himself as being raised again like them, on the third day.

Indeed the fact is that the Servant's task could only be fulfilled by resurrection. How else could He see His offspring, prolong His days and receive the spoils of victory (Isaiah 53:10; Isaiah 53:12)? (Compare also Isaiah 52:13). And how else could the Son of Man come triumphantly out of suffering into the presence of the Ancient of Days to receive the everlasting kingdom (Daniel 7:13)? And unless He was raised how could the Holy One ‘not see corruption' (Psalms 16:10)? Resurrection was required as God's vindication in a suffering world (Isaiah 26:19). And it is also constantly implied by such statements as Luke 9:24. All this was clear from the Scriptures (Luke 18:31).

That Jesus spoke of Himself as the Son of Man is almost indisputable. The title was of no interest to the early church, only ever being used by Stephen, for they did not understand it and were at a loss what to make of it. After the resurrection it was the titles of Messiah and Lord which were clearly applied to Him. Its constant appearance on the lips of Jesus can therefore only really be due to the fact that it was well recognised that He used it in preference to other titles. And this is especially so in view of the fact that it is so applied in all four Gospels without exception, and almost always on His lips.

Note on Daniel 7:13.

In the Book of Daniel the empires (e.g. Luke 7:23) of the Mediterranean world are likened to rapacious beasts because their behaviour is seen as like that of beasts who conquer and ravage and destroy (Daniel 7:1; Daniel 8:1). These beasts also represent their kings (Luke 7:17), and their horns represent later kings and kingdoms (e.g. Luke 8:20). In contrast the people of God are seen as a ‘son of man' (Luke 7:13 with Luke 9:18; Luke 9:25). In their obedience to God they are human in contrast with the bestial empires. Because they are God's people they will be subject to suffering and tribulation (Luke 7:25). But finally they will triumph when ‘the thrones are placed' (Luke 7:9) and their kingly representative (Luke 7:13) will come on the clouds of heaven into the presence of God, ‘the Ancient of Days', to receive the everlasting dominion and glory and kingdom (Luke 7:13 compare Luke 7:27).

As Himself the representative of the people of God Jesus takes to Himself the designation ‘the Son of Man' and so aligns Himself with their suffering prior to everlasting glory. Thus the Son of Man is One Who comes out of earthly suffering and will enter in triumph into the presence of God to be crowned and glorified.

(End of note).

‘It is necessary for the Son of Man to suffer.' Jesus' life was very much determined by the divine necessity. ‘It was necessary' for Him to be in His Father's house (Luke 2:49). ‘It was necessary' for Him to proclaim the Kingly Rule of God (Luke 4:43). His every step was determined by the divine necessity (Luke 13:33). But above all it was necessary for Him to suffer (Luke 17:25; Luke 24:7). For it was through His suffering that His purposes would be accomplished.

Jesus Now Challenges All Who Are Following Him About To Crystallise Their Behaviour By Following Him Fully (Luke 9:23).

These words, while universally recognised as a definition of the Christian life, are placed by Luke in the context of the hour. Herod is seen as a dark cloud on the horizon, so much so that Jesus has felt it sensible to move out of his territory, the Scribes and Pharisees are in discussions with the Herodians about how to deal with Jesus and His followers (Luke 6:11 with Mark 3:6). All is threatening. Jesus therefore now warns His followers of what might be the immediate consequences of following Him, and sets it against the background of eternity.

Furthermore, the Apostles having recognised Him for something of what He is, a new phase now begins in His ministry. Thus He recognises that He must bring all who are still following Him about to an appreciation about the future. They must make a decision as to whether they will turn from Him, or whether they will follow Him fully, and they must do it in the light of the realities.

Many have already gone away (John 6:66). It is time for the remainder to face up to what continuing to follow Him will involve. And in the light of the growing enmity against Him (Luke 5:35; Luke 6:11; Luke 9:9) He could only do it by facing them up with the possible consequences. He wanted them to recognise that in spite of the feeding of the five thousand the future was to be no picnic. Indeed it might lead them to a cross.

This passage may be analysed as follows:

a And he said to all, “If any man would come after me, let him deny himself, and take up his cross daily, and follow me.”

b For whoever would save his life shall lose it, but whoever shall lose his life for my sake, the same shall save it.”

c For what is a man profited, if he gain the whole world, and lose or forfeit his own self?”

b “For whoever shall be ashamed of me and of my words, of him will the Son of man be ashamed, when he comes in his own glory, and the glory of the Father, and of the holy angels.”

a “But I tell you of a truth, There are some of them who stand here, who will in no wise taste of death, till they see the Kingly Rule of God.”

We note that ‘a' speaks of a daily dying, all must taste of death, while in the parallel He promises that not all will ‘taste of death' until they see the Kingly Rule of God. In ‘b' we have those who are ready to lose their lives for His sake, and thus save them, and in the parallel the contrast of the one who is not willing to confess Christ and who thus loses all. And central to the whole is the question as to what profit there is in gaining the whole world and then losing their own ‘soul'.

The verses that follow are intense with a recognition of the seriousness of the situation with which Jesus is facing them. Compared with what He has previously taught they are a revelation and warning of something new.