Luke 12:13-21, the Parable of the Rich Fool

 

In Luke 12:13-21, Jesus told a parable about a man who had riches to a man who wanted riches. A man in the crowd approached Jesus as an authority figure that the man’s brother might listen to. He asked Jesus to tell his brother to give him his share of the family inheritance. The family inheritance was much more important to first century Israel than we can imagine–it meant their future. In Deuteronomy 21:17, Moses gave them the law of birth right that the oldest son got a double portion of the property and money, and became the head of the family business. It was very common for the oldest son to “hold out” on the other children. Also the oldest son might not liquidate the family farm or business, so the other children had to work for him to get any money. Jesus was teaching deep spiritual truth, and eternal matters, yet He was interrupted by someone whose concern reflects human nature which is obsessed with riches. The man thought Jesus could persuade his brother to cough up some money. This is where the guy’s heart was, but Jesus’ conclusion in Luke 12:31-34 would condemn this. Instead of arbitrating between the brothers, Jesus taught a parable illustrating the danger of greed and selfishness. The parable exposes the man’s motive and reveals Gods perspective on these matters.

 

This parable is especially important to us today because never before has any culture lived for the here and now of this present world than 21st century America. We are focused on the body and our material possessions. The seeking of entertainment and pleasure dominates life now as if that were our meaning and purpose. Someone wrote that any culture that pays athletes 20 million dollars a year, but pays teachers, policemen, firemen, and soldiers $30,000–50,000 a year is insane.

 

Real Problem—Greed

 

Jesus asked the question “Who appointed Me a judge or arbiter over you?” Jesus did not come into the world to be a probate judge of petty squabbles. Jesus cut quickly to the real problem the guy had. Jesus was interested only in his sin problem of greed. Jesus did come to settle the separation between God and man brought about by sin.

 

In v.15, Jesus gave an important warning about the dangers of greed. This consuming desire diverts our attention from what life is truly about, and then greed makes fools of us all. Most of the human race fantasizes and dreams of great riches. They dream of the life portrayed on TV and in the movies with palatial mansions, cars, clothes, servants, and vacations. Jesus made it clear that “life does not consist of possessions”. The Bible consistently teaches that this world with all its corrupt systems “is passing away along with all its lusts” (1John 2:15-17). All the stuff, the pleasures, and the lusts will be done away with, therefore it just makes sense to be more interested in what is eternal. We have all heard many times that money can’t make you happy, but we all want to test that for ourselves. Somebody said that money can’t make you happy, but it makes you less unhappy. My point is that no matter what we’ve been told about the dangers of greed, there is still great danger of all of us falling into that trap. Therefore Jesus told a parable about a worldly story they could understand in order to reveal a spiritual heavenly truth they didn’t understand. Since Jesus says in Luke 12:15 that life does not consist of your possessions, the question remains –What does life consist of?

 

The Rich Fool

 

In Luke 12:16, Jesus told them a parable about a man who was already rich, but still the riches kept flowing in. He had very productive land, and he had such a bumper crop that  he had a problem that we all wish we had–he had so much stu...

Luke 19—the Parable of the Minas

In Luke 18:33-34, Jesus had been teaching His disciples that He must go to Jerusalem, be sacrificed, and then resurrected. After the resurrection, He would go to Heaven to be with God the Father. Therefore there would be a delay in setting up the Kingdom of God. Theoretically, if everyone in Israel had received Jesus as the Messiah, Lord, and Savior, then He would have immediately set up the Kingdom. Jesus’ widespread rejection necessitated a delay theologians call “the inter-advent age”, or church age, which is the extended time period between Jesus’ first and second coming. Unfortunately, because of their presuppositions, His disciples “understood none of these things…and they did not comprehend the things He told them” (Luke 18:33-34). Then in Luke 19:1-10, Jesus saved a known sinner, Zaccheus which further blew their mind because they thought Jesus came to set up the kingdom, but Jesus told them “the Son of Man has come to seek and to save that which was lost (sinners)”. The problem that provoked the Parable of the Minas was the incorrect Messianic expectations that He would set up the Kingdom immediately. In Luke 19:11, we are told they were near Jerusalem, and “they supposed that the kingdom of God was going to appear immediately”. Jesus countered their expectations by telling them this parable which had a remarkable likeness to the well known historical story about Herod’s son receiving his kingdom. The parable explains the delay in the kingdom, rejection by Israel, Jesus’ investment in His followers, His return to be King, and the day of judgment. By way of application for us, we learn about what kind of stewardship Jesus expects of His disciples while He is gone.

The Historian Josephus

The great historian of the first century, Josephus, wrote that when king Herod the Great died, his will named his son Archelaus as king over Judea (the area in and around Jerusalem). This kingship would have to be approved by Rome, so Archelaus went to Rome to appeal to Caesar for his title. Amazingly, part of his own family and a contingent of 50 prominent Jews went to Rome to oppose Archelaus before Caesar. They were joined by 8,000 expatriate Jews living in Rome. In a public setting at the Temple of Apollo, the well publicized confrontation took place. After hearing both sides, Caesar gave the kingdom of Judea to Archelaus. When Archelaus got back to Israel, he rewarded his supporters and punished his enemies. Therefore back in Jerusalem, this scandal was well known by all the Jews. When Jesus told His Parable of the Minas about the king who left to receive a kingdom and then return, He was using a well known story as an attention grabber.

Delegation of Responsibility

In Luke 19:13, the nobleman who was leaving to receive a kingdom, met with ten of His servants to delegate stewardships to all of them while He was gone. He gave each a mina to do business with for His account while He was gone. A mina was 100 denarii and thus was 3 months wages for the average worker. For our purposes, just consider it whatever you make in 3 months.

Use it or Lose it

While His loyal followers were supposed to be working on His behalf, the rest of the citizens (Israel) rejected and opposed Him saying “we do not want this man to reign over us”. In Luke 19:15, after an extended period of time, the nobleman returned as king. The first thing He did was call His servants in that He had given the money to in order to come see Him to give an accounting of what they had done in His absence. The first servant had gained an extra ten minas for his master, and the second servant had gained an extra five minas for his master. Both had been excellent stewards of what they were entrusted. They were very humble, taking no credit for themselves, they said “Sir your mina has earned ten minas more”, and the second servant repeated the same with five minas more.

Luke 10:25-37, the Good Samaritan

For years I was baffled by this classic popular parable. Jesus seems to be asking us to exhibit a love that goes far beyond human capabilities. Most of the sermons I have heard on the Good Samaritan made it sound like keeping the law of loving your neighbor is a way to eternal life. This is contrary to the means and basis of salvation as being by the grace of God received by faith. Therefore loving your neighbor as the Samaritan did must be a way of Christian life after our salvation. Then I remembered the story of the rich young ruler in Luke 18:18-27 who asked the same question of Jesus, “What must I do to inherit eternal life?” In each case, Jesus directed their attention to keeping the law. In both Luke 10:25 and 18:18, Jesus knows that these men believe they are saved by keeping the law of Moses. Therefore Jesus asks them questions about the law. In Luke 18, the rich young ruler’s problem is that he was breaking the first law of not putting anything in the place of God. So Jesus told him to sell his idols (properties), but the man refused. In Luke 10:25, Jesus knows that the lawyer’s problem was in failing to love his neighbor as himself. By revealing to them and us that they are breaking the law that they hold as the means of their salvation, Jesus was establishing their great need for God’s grace. In each case, Jesus directed their attention to the law that they might understand their failure to perfectly keep the law, and might then look to God’s grace for salvation. The Parable of the Good Samaritan illustrates their inability to keep the most important commandments. In Galatians 3:10, Paul quoted Moses in Deut. 27:26 “Cursed is everyone who does not abide by all things written in the law, to perform them”. Therefore if you live by the law, you will die by the law. James 2:10 says “If you break any of the law, you become guilty of all”. Paul also says in Romans 7:10-11 that “The commandments which were to result in life, proved to result in death for me”. What he meant was that he tried to be saved by keeping the law, but when he broke the law it brought death.

The classic politicians defense against breaking the law is to qualify it and give it loopholes. The first century Rabbis taught that the “neighbor” you were supposed to love can be limited to your countrymen, family members, close friends, and members of your tribe and race. If my neighbor is defined broadly by Jesus in the parable as even my enemy, then this is a command too hard to keep. Therefore, the parable teaches that we are all lost. We are like the helpless guy on the road that needs help, and Jesus alone is the Good Samaritan–only Jesus loves this way. Therefore if I am to be justified before God, “I must be found in Christ, not having a righteousness of my own, but that which is through faith in Christ” (Phil. 3:9)).

Context of the Parable of the Good Samaritan

In Luke 10:21, Jesus had just praised God for hiding the secrets of the kingdom from the wise, learned, and proud. Now in v.25, a lawyer (scribe), asked the all important question of what he could do to inherit eternal life. Remember that in first century Israel there was no separation of church and state, so lawyer/scribes were experts in the Mosaic Law. Jesus, knowing the guy’s belief system, answers his question with a question about the law, “What does the law say?” The law expert said that the most important law is to love God with all your heart and love your neighbor as yourself. Jesus’ reply was that he should do just that. The lawyer wishing to limit the law and find loopholes in it, asked “who is my neighbor?” We know his motivation because v.29 says he asked because he was trying to justify himself. If he could limit it, like the rabbis taught, to Jews, relatives, friends, etc.

Luke 15:  Parables of the Lost and Found

 

Jesus was the master of teaching spiritual truth through parables. Parables are fictitious stories about common stuff His disciples understood to explain unknown spiritual truth they did not understand. But Jesus told most of His parables to the public crowd which included the religious leaders who had rejected Him. When asked why He was suddenly teaching in cryptic parables, He said that in order that believers would understand and unbelievers would not understand. At the time He said that (Matt. 13), the religious leaders had totally rejected Him, and they were just listening in order to find some way to disgrace or indict Him. Apparently, Jesus knew their heart, and He knew they would not respond positively to the truth He was teaching. On the other hand, His disciples would seek the important meaning of His teaching. This was illustrated when they would come to Him later in private for explanation and interpretation (Mark 4:34). Along with that, I think an excellent reason to tell important truth through parables is that they illustrated truth without any argument. Jesus could teach this way without the Pharisees contradicting and arguing with Him. A wise man once said, “Never argue with fools in public, people might not know who is who”. In Jesus’ case, He was refuting the established religious traditions; therefore there would have been a guarantee of argumentation.

 

In every parable of Christ, there was always a question or an issue that prompted the parable, and it is important to our interpretation to know what that is. In Luke 15:1-2, we read that the Pharisees were upset that Jesus made Himself available to the known sinners like the tax collectors, prostitutes, and other undesirables. The Pharisees asked why a great religious leader and a prophet would “receive sinners and eat with them”. This is something the Pharisees would never do, instead they ostracized sinners and banned them from the Temple and the synagogues. They did not understand Jesus’ purpose statement in passages like Luke 5:31-32, “It is not those who are well who need a doctor, but those who are sick. I have not come to call the righteous (self-righteous) but sinners to repentance”, or Luke 19:10, “For the Son of Man has come to seek and to save that which was lost”.

 

In order to answer the Pharisees’ grumbling complaints, Jesus told three parables in Luke 15 about something or someone who was lost and then found. The Pharisees obviously don’t believe that God loves sinners, and they don’t believe that they themselves are sinners. Jesus makes it obvious in the first two parables of Luke 15 that God loves sinners and there is rejoicing in heaven when even one sinner repents and is saved. If Jesus’ audience can connect the dots, they would realize that the youngest son in the third parable represents the known sinners, and the oldest self righteous son represents the Pharisees. The father clearly represents God, and we can see that He loves both the sons. Whether the religious leaders figure it out, we are not told, but we can see that all three parables refute the traditions and beliefs of the religious leaders. God loves sinners, and it’s a good thing because we are all sinners. Whether we are wild and rebellious like the younger son or self righteous and holier than thou like the older son, or somewhere in between, God loves us and desires an intimate relationship with us.

 

Loss, Search, Recovery, and Great Joy

 

In Luke 15:3-10, Jesus told two short parables about a lost sheep and a lost coin. 99 sheep were already safe in the pasture, but one is in danger and needs to be found. This story makes it clear that God cares about each individual, God takes the initiative to search for each individual,

Matthew 13:24-43, The Parable of the Wheat and the Tares

 

 

Before Jesus came into the world and began His ministry, there was almost unanimous Jewish expectations of the Messiah who would come on the scene in Israel and start the Kingdom of God by restoring Israel to its previous glory experienced during the time of King David and then Solomon. The Messiah would end their subjugation to the Gentiles, end their poverty and mistreatment, and bring in justice, peace, and prosperity. There were many reasons why they did not recognize or accept Jesus as that Messiah. The leaders saw Him as a threat to their power, wealth, and prestige. But most did not understand Him because they expected a political/military deliverer. Jesus did not come with an army to enforce His will, and He did not use His power as God to enforce the Kingdom. Jesus’ weapon was love. He came as a suffering servant who sacrificed Himself out of love. The world has no concept of this weapon of love.

Even His closest disciples were confused because they expected Him to immediately set up the Kingdom of God, restoring Israel, and ending all the evil and unbelief in the world. How could Jesus be the Messiah who came to usher in the Kingdom, yet evil and unbelief continued? It seemed like a contradiction that the Kingdom had come in Jesus Christ, but everything was still messed up. Why does the Kingdom not result in separating true believers from the hypocrites, fakes, and pretenders? Jesus’ audience was ready for that separation, as are we today in the Church. All Christians want the weeding out of evil and evildoers. When will evil be corrected and justice prevail? When will true righteousness actually come to planet earth? The parable of The Wheat and the Tares was given to answer these questions. The parable was presented to the public which could not make heads or tails out of it, but then the interpretation was given to His disciples in private.

What is the Kingdom of God Like?

According to Matt. 13:24-30, what is the Kingdom like? First of all the Kingdom is growing. Seed is being sown that takes root and grows. The sower is Jesus, the “good seed” is believers whose lives have been changed and they are growing in Christ. Eventually this seed will be mature and then be harvested. Now the Kingdom is represented by the reign and rule of Christ in their hearts, but it will be fully realized at the harvest. Jesus is the sower of good seed which is growing in the kingdom. The “field” is the world, and Jesus is growing His Kingdom by saving and growing disciples throughout the world. He is using the church (all believers are in the universal church) to save sinners and then disciple them.

Secondly, the Kingdom of God is growing but there is aggressive opposition. The enemy is sneaky and stealthily comes in the night to plant “tares” among the good seed to ruin the field. Tares are a type of rye grass that can grow with the wheat and looks exactly like it until the wheat finally matures and the seeds appear just before the harvest. Jesus’ audience would not be surprised at this since in the first century competitors would often sneak into an enemy’s field and plant tares to ruin his crop. There was a Roman law passed against this, but the perpetrators were rarely caught. In this parable the enemy is the adversary of God who is secretly behind the enemies of the church. How serious is God’s adversary? 1 Peter 5:8 says “your adversary the devil prowls around like a roaring lion seeking someone to devour.” Eph.6:11-12 says “stand firm against the schemes of the devil. For our struggle is not against flesh and blood, but against…the spiritual forces of wickedness”. The adversary dwells in the invisible realm, but his followers, the tares, are visible and oppose the church.

 

 

Try to imagine the scene in which Jesus taught the Parable of the Sower, the Seeds, and the Soils. In Matt.11-12, the increasing strong opposition to Jesus and His message reached such a boiling point that it was clear that no matter how awesome His teaching was, no matter how many miracles He did, and no matter how many prophecies He fulfilled, the religious leaders of Israel were rejecting Him with great hostility. It reached the point of no return in Matt. 12:24 when the Pharisees attributed His miracles to Satan. Jesus made it clear that their unbelief was irretrievable when He responded that they had committed the unforgiveable sin of unbelief. Any further signs that Jesus did, only further hardened their hearts against Him. This was clear in Matt.12:38 when they asked Him for a sign (miracle), but He refused. Naturally Jesus’ disciples must have been shocked at all this opposition. Since Jesus was the Son of God and He was teaching God’s Word, why were all the people responding in so many different ways?

 

In His first sermon on the mount, Jesus’ conclusion to the crowd was that it is not enough to just hear His words and like them. They must take His Word to heart. Jesus’ words were like seed. They were creative, producing new life to anyone who took them to heart. Jesus’ view of His words as life giving seed, are echoed throughout the New Testament. James 1:21 says “accept the word planted in you, which can save your life”. 1 Peter 1:23 says “you have been born spiritually not of perishable seed, but of imperishable through the living and enduring Word of God”. And Colossians 1:5-6, “all over the world the gospel is bearing fruit and growing”.

 

Why weren’t all people accepting and believing in Jesus and His good news? Why were the priests and religious leaders rejecting Him? Why did the crowds react emotionally to His teaching, but their lives were not changed? One reason is that Jesus depended not on military force or supernatural power to force the kingdom on to people. Instead, Jesus depended on the Word of God, the seed of the kingdom as depicted in the Parable of the Soils. Jesus called them to believe, but did not force the belief. He came to serve and to conquer by love and personal sacrifice, not by force. Therefore the receptivity of a person’s heart determined whether they would believe in Him and take His words to heart. If they would take His words to heart, the “seed” would grow within them and be productive. The question then was, “Would the seed of the gospel fall on cultivated soft hearts, or on hard rocky hearts? Would the people focus on His Words, or were they too distracted by the worries and materialistic concerns of the world?

 

Context of the Parable of the Soils in Matthew 13:1-23

 

Previously, that same day, Jesus had the confrontation with the Pharisees who attributed the work of the Holy Spirit to Satan, and said Jesus got His power from Satan. After Jesus refused to give them any more signs, He condemned them. At the end of His showdown with the religious leaders, His mother and brothers came and tried to “take custody” of Him because “He has lost His senses” (Mark 3:21, 31-35). All parents and siblings usually want their relatives to be law abiding and to conform to all the traditions of society and religion, but Jesus was in opposition to the hypocrisy of the establishment. John 7:5 tells us that “not even His brothers were believing in him”. How did He explain all the different reactions to the same message and same miracles? Matthew 13 is a pivot in Jesus’ ministry. Up until now, Jesus had been speaking relatively straightforward and clear, but in Matthew 13 Jesus began speaking in cryptic parables. Naturally, His true followers wanted an interpretation, but the religious leaders were deaf to His message. The crowds reacted emotionally at first, but when opposition or the realities of all their problems arose t...

Exodus 32-33, Moses’ Bad Day

 

In Exodus 20, the Israelites had pleaded with Moses not to let God speak directly to them again–it was just too fearsome for them to live. Therefore, Moses went up on the mountain to receive further instructions from God and also to have God give him a written copy of the Ten Commandments written in stone. On the 40th day on the mountain God informed Moses of events down in the camp that would make it the worst day of his life. That is certainly revealing since Moses had had a pattern of getting no respect from Israel going back to Exodus 5:21.

The people blamed Moses for Pharaoh’s harsh treatment. Then in 6:9, they did not listen to Moses. After all the miracles, the people still cried out against him in Ex 14:10 when they saw the Egyptian army. Then again after witnessing the parting of the Red Sea, walking across on dry land, and seeing God destroy the Egyptian army, they still complained about the water in 15:24, and the food in 16:2, and disobeyed God in 16:20. In 17:2, the people continued to quarrel and grumble against Moses. Nevertheless, the situation that developed in the camp in Ex.32 was the worst of all. Moses had been gone for 40 days and again the people began their grumbling. I think the boredom and monotony of being camped out in the wilderness for about 130 days made them restless and aroused their sinful passions. What do men want after 130 days of bad food, only water to drink, no action for 40 days, and no illicit sex? Suddenly they remembered the great parties/orgies in Egypt. Like all people they wanted their cake and eat it too. They had gotten their freedom from Egypt, but they still missed the great parties in Egypt that were held in “worshipping” the golden bull, Apis, the fertility god. They were hungry, thirsty, and their “passions” were aroused.

 

 

Joshua 24:14 tells us that the Israelites had previously in Egypt “served the gods of Egypt”, meaning they had participated in the idol worship. In Acts 7:39, Stephen was giving the history of Israel and said, “Israel was unwilling to be obedient but repudiated Moses and in their hearts turned back to Egypt…they made a golden bull…and were rejoicing in the works of their hands”.

 

 

Moses had left His brother Aaron in charge while Moses went up the mountain. In Ex.32:1, the people “assembled” threateningly around Aaron and demanded that he make them a god “who will go before us”. In other words, make us a god of our own choosing who likes to party. Why did Aaron agree to it? I think he was like most political leaders who fear losing their job, and their power and authority. He probably rationalized, “We have to make concessions because the people demand it”. From our perspective this whole episode seems crazy because they had seen the glory of God, heard the awesome voice of God, so why now would they want an idol? Theologian F.B. Meyer commented, “They wanted something they could see and touch which appealed to their senses, their pride, and rewarded the passions of their flesh”. R.C. Sproul wrote, “The bull gave no law and demanded no obedience. There was no wrath or holiness to fear. It would not intrude on their fun, but instead promote an orgy.” Under pressure, Aaron folded like an army cot, and he collected all their gold earrings they had brought from Egypt. He melted down the gold and reshaped it into the Egyptian god Apis. The irony here was that God had given them all that gold in order to build His Tabernacle, but they used it to be disobedient and commit idolatry. Their idolatry led to a drunken orgy in the pursuit of pleasure.

 

 

Meanwhile up on the Mountain

 

 

In Exodus 32:7, God told Moses the bad news “Go down,

Exodus 32-33, Moses’ Bad Day   In Exodus 20, the Israelites had pleaded with Moses not to let God speak directly to them again–it was just too fearsome for them to live. Therefore, Moses went up on the mountain to receive further instructions from God and also to have God give him a written copy […]

Exodus 20—the Ten Suggestions ?   James Patterson and Peter Kim wrote a book entitled THE DAY AMERICA TOLD THE TRUTH. They did widespread surveys across America concerning the Ten Commandments and found out that there is “absolutely no moral consensus at all”. Everyone is making up their own moral code that fits their personal […]

Exodus 20—the Ten Suggestions ?

 

James Patterson and Peter Kim wrote a book entitled THE DAY AMERICA TOLD THE TRUTH. They did widespread surveys across America concerning the Ten Commandments and found out that there is “absolutely no moral consensus at all”. Everyone is making up their own moral code that fits their personal lifestyle. The authors laid out a list they called “the ten real commandments” meaning the general moral code that people live by according to their anonymous surveys. As we go down the list of the Bible’s Ten Commandments, here is a list of America’s new commandments: 1 and 2. Any god will do, 3. Your god is your good buddy and he won’t mind you using his name frivolously, 4. There is no point in observing the Sabbath, 5. Honor your parents if they deserve it, 6. Don’t murder, 7. I will cheat on my spouse, 8. I will steal from those who won’t really miss it, 9. I will lie when I need to, 10. Desiring stuff is good for the economy.

What is this but a big dose of moral relativism? These people feel free to just make up their own rules, and then even change them as they go according to convenience. Obviously the above rules violate the actual law of God given in Exodus 20. God gave the nation of Israel 10 absolute laws that have not changed in over 3400 years.

If there is a God, then we must live by His rules and not our own. Remember the setting and context of Exodus 19-20 when God gave His moral law directly to the entire nation of Israel. In order to put the “fear of God” in them, God came down onto the mountain with an awesome spectacle of His power and authority. The people saw His glory in the thick cloud, and there was great lightning and thunder, and smoke and fire erupted like a volcano. At the same time, there was an earthquake that shook the mountain, and then God spoke the Ten Commandments to them. They heard His voice like thunder, and they trembled in great fear. We get the intensity of the moment as we read Exodus 20:18-19. The people were so afraid that they begged Moses to ask God to never speak that way directly to them again, but to speak to Moses and let him relay the message. There were no atheists in Israel that day, and there was no moral relativism that day. They clearly were not the ten suggestions, but the Ten Commandments were God’s absolute unchanging holy standard that they were commanded to live by.

You may ask, “What gives Him the right to tell us what to do?” God anticipated that question when He told Moses to remind them beforehand of all the miracles He did to deliver them from Egypt and slavery. Then God had saved them from the Egyptian army and He had destroyed the Egyptian army as He parted the Red Sea to let them pass on dry land out of Egypt. Then in the desert wilderness God had fed them manna and quail and brought a river of water out of a rock. Then God protected them from the Amalekites, and led Israel with His brilliant glory in the pillar of cloud to Mt. Sinai. Added to all that, God then revealed Himself with all His awesome power and authority when all the forces of nature, all under His control slammed into that mountain. With all the resultant fear of God, they understood that God had the right to tell them what to do. It was clear that He was the one and only God, and His standard was perfect holiness and purity of heart, and God fully required them to completely (not partially or relatively) obey His commandments.

 

Since God is Omniscient, Why Would He Give Them a Law They Couldn’t Keep?

 

It is helpful to consult all the great Christian theologians for the answer to this question. Augustine said, “The usefulness of the law lies in convicting man of his infirmity and moving him to call upon the remedy of grace which is in Christ”. Martin Luther said, ”it is a most useful servant impelling us to Christ”. John Calvin added, “Moses had no other intention than to invite all men to g...