Prior Book | Prior Chapter | Prior Verse | Next Verse | Next Chapter | Next Book | Viewing NASB and Amplified 2015 | |
NASB | Luke 19:44 and they will level you to the ground and your children within you, and they will not leave in you one stone upon another, because you did not recognize the time of your visitation." |
AMPLIFIED 2015 | Luke 19:44 and they will level you to the ground, you [Jerusalem] and your children within you. They will not leave in you one stone on another, all because you did not [come progressively to] recognize [from observation and personal experience] the time of your visitation [when God was gracious toward you and offered you salvation]." |
Subject: The time of your visitation? |
Bible Note: Hi Steve, I was able to look over Piper's sermon. Some things troubled me about it. He said, "Therefore, when Jesus says to Jerusalem, "You did not know the time of your visitation," he means, "You did not know that my coming to you is the coming of God for your redemption, your salvation." Doesn't that change Jesus' words from "the time of My visitation" to "the purpose of My visitation"? Since he has ably pointed out that the term "visitation" in this context carries the purpose (for salvation) within it - I agree - why he is deflecting attention from the "time" of Jesus' visitation? He goes on to refer to the general "time of His coming", although I understand Jesus was referring to a particular day prophesied by Daniel, the very day He came on a colt. Perhaps this has something to do with Piper's preterist beliefs? I don't know. Piper later said: "Therefore, when Jesus says, "O that today you knew the terms of peace," he uses the word "know" in a different sense, very common in the Bible. For example in Matthew 7:22f. Jesus says, On that day many will say to me, "Lord, Lord, did we not prophesy in your name . . . and do many mighty works in your name?" And then I will declare to them, "I never knew you; depart from me, you evildoers." Now Jesus knows all the facts there are to know about every man. What he means here is: "I never approved of you; I never acknowledged your rightness; I never accepted your work." That's the sense in which "know" is used in Luke 19:42 and 44. "O that you knew the terms of peace" means, "O that you approved these terms, that you acknowledged their rightness and accepted them into your life as what governs your conduct." Doesn't the Bible use the word "know", when in the context of relationships, to refer to intimacy? So when Jesus is saying "I never knew you", He is saying "I never actually had a relationship with you"? All the uses of "knowing" regarding relationships seem to be like that. Are you aware of any that would clearly show the word "know" used for "approve"? I can't think of any. But that aside, this usage of "know", or "knew" is not of people, but of things. Where in the Bible do we have an example of "know" or "knew" being used to refer to "approving" or "accepting" of things? Again, I can't think of any. But Jesus seems to clarify, if there was to be any confusion, by saying "but they are hid from your eyes," as if to say, "you did not know them", "were not aware of them." Here is the LITV translation of this passage: Luk 19:41 And as He drew near, seeing the city, He wept over it, Luk 19:42 saying, If you had known, even you, even at least in this day of yours, the things for your peace! But now they were hidden from your eyes. I am somewhat surprised of his treatment of this passage because of the emphasis he puts on the Jews' "acceptance" or "approval" of the "terms of peace". Aside from the fact that I don't agree with that interpretation, it doesn't seem to be in line with Piper's generally Calvinist teaching. Although he does address that later as being subordinate to God's supposed desire to destroy some men, as he writes: "Viewing reality in one set of relationships, God is not willing that any perish, he does not delight in the death of the wicked. He is grieved at sin and destruction. But viewing reality in another set of relationships and from a larger, all-encompassing perspective, he deems it right and praiseworthy sometimes to hide the terms of peace and to shut man up to his own sin and bring him into judgment." I think this exemplifies my fundamental disagreement with this line of thought. Piper, as do many others, expresses this as "parallel relationships", as if on the one hand, God desires none to perish, but on the other hand, God considers it good that some do. I see only one relationship between God and man, and for the man who rejects God's offer, the time will come when they cannot go back. Well, perhaps that is what he actually means and I am simply misunderstanding him. But I sure appreciated how he closed his message with one of my all-time favorite passages: 2 Corinthians 5:19–21 God was in Christ reconciling the world to himself, not counting their trespasses against them, and entrusting to us the message of reconciliation. So we are ambassadors for Christ, God making his appeal through us. We beseech you on behalf of Christ, be reconciled to God. Amen to that!!!! So, these were some of my thoughts on Piper's sermon on this passage. But back to your post! :-) I am on the same page with you in that the most meaningful part of the passage to me is, as you say, the reaction of our Lord. This really shows the heart of God towards man, as the Lord cries for those who would not receive Him, and who would be destroyed because of that. Love in Christ, Mark |