Luke 11:14-36

7. The Blasphemy of the Pharisees: Luke 11:14-36.

We have already observed (see on Luke 6:11) how remarkably coincident in time are the accusations called forth in Galilee by the healings on the Sabbath, and those which are raised about the same period at Jerusalem by the healing of the impotent man (John 5). There is a similar correspondence between the yet graver accusation of complicity with Beelzebub, raised against Jesus on the occasion of His healing demoniacs, and the charge brought against Him at Jerusalem at the feasts of Tabernacles and of the Dedication: “ Thou art a Samaritan, and hast a devil! ” (John 8:48); “ He hath a devil, and is mad! ” (Luke 10:20). Matthew (Matthew 12) and Mark (Mark 3) place this accusation and the answer of Jesus much earlier, in the first part of the Galilean ministry. The accusation may and must have often been repeated. The comparison of John would tell in favour of Luke's narrative. Two sayings which proceeded from the crowd give rise to the following discourse: the accusation of complicity with Beelzebub (Luke 11:15), and the demand for a sign from heaven (Luke 11:16). It might seem at first sight that these are two sayings simply placed in juxtaposition; but it is not so. The second is intended to offer Jesus the means of clearing Himself of the terrible charge involved in the first: “Work a miracle in the heavens, that sphere which is exclusively divine, and we shall then acknowledge that it is God who acts through thee, and not Satan.” This demand in appearance proceeds from a disposition favourable to Jesus; but as those who address Him reckon on His powerlessness to meet the demand, the result of the test, in their view, will be a condemnation without appeal. Those last are therefore in reality the worst intentioned, and it is in that light that Luke's text represents them. Matthew isolates the two questions, and simply puts in juxtaposition the two discourses which reply to them (Luke 12:22 et seq., 38 et seq.); thus the significant connection which we have just indicated disappears. It is difficult to understand how Holtzmann and other moderns can see nothing in this relation established by Luke, but a specimen of his “[arbitrary] manner of joining together pieces which were detached in the Logia ( Λ ). ”

This piece includes: 1 st. A statement of the facts which gave rise to the two following discourses (Luke 11:14-16); 2 d. The first discourse in reply to the accusation of Luke 11:15 (Luke 11:17-26); 3 d. An episode showing the deep impression produced on the people by this discourse (Luke 11:27-28); 4 th. The second discourse in reply to the challenge thrown out to Jesus, Luke 11:16 (Luke 11:29-36).