The Seventeenth Sunday after Trinity is October 1, 2023.

Readings for Year A can be found here, used for the Sixteenth Sunday after Trinity in 2020.

The Gospel reading is as follows (emphases mine):

Matthew 21:23-32

21:23 When he entered the Temple, the chief priests and the elders of the people came to him as he was teaching, and said, “By what Authority are you doing these things, and who gave you this authority?”

21:24 Jesus said to them, “I will also ask you one question; if you tell me the answer, then I will also tell you by what authority I do these things.

21:25 Did the baptism of John come from heaven, or was it of human origin?” And they argued with one another, “If we say, ‘From heaven,’ he will say to us, ‘Why then did you not believe him?’

21:26 But if we say, ‘Of human origin,’ we are afraid of the crowd; for all regard John as a prophet.”

21:27 So they answered Jesus, “We do not know.” And he said to them, “Neither will I tell you by what authority I am doing these things.

21:28 “What do you think? A man had two sons; he went to the first and said, ‘Son, go and work in the vineyard today.’

21:29 He answered, ‘I will not’; but later he changed his mind and went.

21:30 The father went to the second and said the same; and he answered, ‘I go, sir’; but he did not go.

21:31 Which of the two did the will of his father?” They said, “The first.” Jesus said to them, “Truly I tell you, the tax collectors and the prostitutes are going into the kingdom of God ahead of you.

21:32 For John came to you in the way of righteousness and you did not believe him, but the tax collectors and the prostitutes believed him; and even after you saw it, you did not change your minds and believe him.

Commentary comes from Matthew Henry and John MacArthur.

Jesus related The Parable of the Two Sons early in what was what Christians know as Passion — Holy — Week, just days before His crucifixion.

Earlier passages in Matthew 21 tell us that Jesus had already made His triumphal entry into Jerusalem, which believers remember on Palm Sunday.

At the time, Jerusalem was teeming with people, probably more than 2 million, who gathered there from all over the ancient world for Passover.

He cleared out the temple of money-changers and sacrifice sellers, which was nothing more than a big racket, to put it bluntly. These men fleeced the poor. Interestingly, the first time Jesus cleared out the temple, He had just started His ministry. John 2:13-25 has the account.

Returning to Matthew 21, after the clearing out of the temple:

¹⁴ The blind and the lame came to him at the temple, and he healed them. ¹⁵ But when the chief priests and the teachers of the law saw the wonderful things he did and the children shouting in the temple courts, ‘Hosanna to the Son of David,’ they were indignant.

¹⁶ ‘Do you hear what these children are saying?’ they asked him.

‘Yes,’ replied Jesus, ‘have you never read,

Jesus and the Apostles returned to Bethany, where they were staying. They were probably at the home of Mary, Martha and Lazarus. Jesus had resurrected Lazarus a few days beforehand, news of which spread like wildfire. The tremendous miracle heightened the joyous atmosphere surrounding His entry into Jerusalem.

The day after Jesus rid the temple of the money-changers and sacrifice sellers, He was hungry on His return to Jerusalem. He wished to eat a fig for breakfast, but the tree He happened across was barren, so He cursed it, causing it to wither immediately:

²⁰ When the disciples saw this, they were amazed. ‘How did the fig-tree wither so quickly?’ they asked.

²¹ Jesus replied, ‘Truly I tell you, if you have faith and do not doubt, not only can you do what was done to the fig-tree, but also you can say to this mountain, “Go, throw yourself into the sea,” and it will be done. ²² If you believe, you will receive whatever you ask for in prayer.’

This brings us to today’s verses.

When Jesus entered the temple, as He was teaching, the chief priests and elders of the people approached him and asked (verse 23), ‘By what authority are you doing these things, and who gave you this authority?’

Matthew Henry’s commentary puts the verse into context:

As soon as he came into Jerusalem, he went to the temple, though he had been affronted there the day before, was there in the midst of enemies and in the mouth of danger; yet thither he went, for there he had a fairer opportunity of doing good to souls than any where else in Jerusalem. Though he came hungry to the city, and was disappointed of a breakfast at the barren fig-tree, yet, for aught that appears, he went straight to the temple, as one that esteemed the words of God’s mouth, the preaching of them, more than his necessary food.

In the temple he was teaching; he had called it a house of prayer (v. 13), and here we have him preaching there. Note, In the solemn assemblies of Christians, praying and preaching must go together, and neither must encroach upon, or jostle out, the other. To make up communion with God, we must not only speak to him in prayer, but hear what he has to say to us by his word; ministers must give themselves both to the word and to prayer, Acts 6 4. Now that Christ taught in the temple, that scripture was fulfilled (Isa 2 3), Let us go up to the house of the Lord, and he will teach us his ways. The priests of old often taught there the good knowledge of the Lord; but they never had such a teacher as this.

Of the Jewish Sanhedrin, our Lord’s enemies, Henry tells us:

Our Lord Jesus (like St. Paul after him) preached his gospel with much contention; his first appearance was in a dispute with the doctors in the temple, when he was twelve years old; and here, just before he died, we have him engaged in controversy. In this sense, he was like Jeremiah, a man of contention; not striving, but striven with. The great contenders with him, were, the chief priests and the elders, the judges of two distinct courts: the chief priests presided in the ecclesiastical court, in all matters of the Lord, as they are called; the elders of the people were judges of the civil courts, in temporal matters. See an idea of both, 2 Chron 19 5, 8, 11. These joined to attack Christ thinking they should find or make him obnoxious either to the one or to the other. See how woefully degenerate that generation was, when the governors both in church and state, who should have been the great promoters of the Messiah’s kingdom, were the great opposers of it! Here we have them disturbing him when he was preaching, v. 23. They would neither receive his instructions themselves, nor let others receive them.

John MacArthur reminds us of the background:

Now, He had so much authority that He was a problem to the Jewish system. Because, you see, they believed that they were the authorities. And they had a very highly-developed and sophisticated system of authority. And He absolutely ignored it. He never asked their information for anything. He didn’t ask them to approve His doctrine. He didn’t ask them to approve His healings. He didn’t ask them to approve His casting out of demons. He didn’t ask them to approve His verdicts and His judgments. He didn’t ask them to help Him decide who were the children of God, and He didn’t ask for their advice on how to give eternal life. He totally ignored them.

MacArthur discusses the difference between authority and power in classical Greek:

Now, in thinking about the authority of Christ, perhaps it’s helpful to consider two words. The first is the word dunamis which the Bible translates power. The second is the word exousía which the Bible translates power or authority and is best understood as authority, and there is a difference.

Dunamis or power is the ability to do something. Exousía or authority is the right to do it. And when we say Jesus had authority, we mean not just that He had power, but that He had privilege. God had given Him the privilege of acting in His behalf, in this world, with no regard for the authorities of men. And so, He had both dunamis and exousía. He had the power and He had the privilege. It was given Him by God. And He said that again and again. He said in John’s Gospel at least three or four times, from chapter 5 to 8, “I do what the Father shows Me to do, and that’s exactly what I do.” He had God-given authority.

MacArthur tells us what the Sanhedrin meant by authority:

You had to be ordained by the Sanhedrin to function as an accepted rabbi.

But Jesus was His own authority, because all authority had been given to Him by God, and He never had authorization from men for anything at all. In fact, He ignored their whole system of authorization, and this sets up conflict. It sets up conflict. All through His ministry, He’s in conflict with existing authorities in the Jewish community. And it comes to a head as we come now to Matthew chapter 21. And it comes to a very, very severe conflict.

… when He came to the temple, He saw the wretched, wicked, devastation by the selfish moneychangers and animal sellers and all of that. And so, He cleaned out the temple. And this infuriated the religious leaders who already despised Him and wanted Him dead. And now, the flames are fanned even hotter and hotter.

And when He has just finished cleaning out the temple, little boys began to sing hosannas and to sing and praise Him. And this infuriated the leaders even more. Perhaps those little boys were the sons of Levites being trained in some of the temple activities.

And when they see the temple being cleansed, and in that cleansing He unmasks their hypocrisy and the falseness of their religious systems, the religious leaders are threatened more severely than ever. And when they hear the hosannas of those little boys, they know they represent the people who are on His side and who are enamored with Him. And in fear, they work all the more feverishly to plot His murder. They cannot tolerate a person who exposes their false worship, who unmasks their rabid hypocrisy; and so, they must eliminate Him as fast as they can before a religious revolution takes place.

… And it is on Wednesday morning, in the temple, that we find Him in verse 23. He has cleansed the temple the day before. He now confronts the leaders and the people who are gathered there. It’s almost as if He had to clean the place up before He could go back and minister.

Now, He begins a confrontation in verse 23 that doesn’t end until the end of chapter 23. It’s a long morning, folks, of confrontations. And it builds up the flames that ultimately lead to the crucifixion …

… Now you know the issue is authority. That’s the whole issue here. “When He was come into the temple,” it says. That was His turf. Remember? Remember that I’ve been telling you that He didn’t come to overthrow the Roman occupation; He came to clean up Israel. He wasn’t concerned with Fort Antonia; He wasn’t concerned with economics; He wasn’t concerned with the state of the nation militarily, economically, or socially. He was concerned with the state of the nation spiritually. He was no political Messiah; He was a Savior. And He came and confronted the heart of the nation where it needed to be confronted, and that was at the point of its religion.

So, He came to the temple. That’s always the place where God has to begin His work. That’s why the New Testament says, “Judgment has to begin at the house of God.” He’s cleansed the place, and now He takes center stage …

I mean here you’ve got the Pharisees, the Sadducees, the Herodians, maybe even the Zealots and the Essenes, none of whom could agree with each other. You’ve got all these divergent rabbinical viewpoints coming together, and everybody had their own rabbi, and everybody’s own rabbi had their his own view. And they can’t get together on much, but they can sure get together on stopping Christ because of this, folks: all religion that is false has this in common – it is the religion of human achievement. It is a religion of works. And thus it can define itself as against the religion of divine accomplishment, which is the Gospel. It’s that way even today …

And so, they say, “By what authority do You do these things? Show us Your ordination papers. Show us Your credentials. Where is Your Sanhedrin approval?” Now, what did they mean by these things? Well, no doubt teaching and preaching, but more than that, cleansing the temple, the royal entry, accepting the accolades of the crowd, all of that. And probably the miracles and everything else He did – commanding demons, forgiving sin, whatever else. “Where did You get the authority for this? Where are Your credentials? Where is Your Sanhedrin authorization?”

By the way, that’s the same question they asked Him in John 2:18 the first time He cleansed the temple, “Who gave You the right to do that?” I mean, really, that was a very, very strange thing for someone to do without authorization …

You just didn’t take things into your own hands and exercise your own authority and do whatever you wanted. But Jesus did that, and they didn’t like that. See, they were used to authorization. I mean you either had to be the disciple of an eminent rabbi or have Sanhedrin approval.

Did you know there was a regular ordination process? I don’t know if you’re aware of that. But there was a regular ordination process. It started out that eminent rabbis would ordain their own disciples, but there was some abuse of that. So, the Sanhedrin took that over. And then the chief priest also had the right to ordain people without the Sanhedrin, but he abused that, so they eliminated that.

So, it came to the time of Christ, when according to Edersheim, the Jewish historian, the Sanhedrin was the one that gave authorized ordination papers. And a person who wanted to be ordained as a rabbi was ordained as rabbi elder judge because he was given the right to teach, to show wisdom, and to make decisions or render verdicts – those three functions combined in one office. And a rabbi had to come to a special ordination service. He had to give a discourse. He had to be approved. And then after His discourse, there was certain poetry read; there were certain hymns read; there were certain tradition followed. And there was a ceremony by which he was granted the power to bind and loose, that is he was granted the power to teach and judge and so forth.

And once he had his rabbinical authorization – which, by the way, could only be given within the land of Israel, not outside – he was recognized as a rabbinically credentialed teacher. But Jesus had no such credentials, no such authorization. They’re big on that.

Jesus said that He would ask them a question; if they could answer it, then He would explain His authority (verse 24).

Jesus asked whether John the Baptist performed baptisms out of heavenly or human authority; the Jewish hierarchy then began to argue amongst themselves. They couldn’t answer with ‘heavenly authority’, because then Jesus would ask why they did not believe John (verse 25).

However, they realised they could not answer ‘human authority’, either, because they were afraid of the crowd — an immense one — which rightly regarded John as a prophet (verse 26).

Henry points out:

… they knew the truth, but would not own it …

… Many that will not be kept by the fear of sin from neglecting and opposing that which they know to be true and good are kept by the fear of shame from owning that to be true and good which they neglect and oppose. Thus they reject the counsel of God against themselves …

… It seems, then, First, That the people had truer sentiments of John than the chief priests and the elders had, or, at least, were more free and faithful in declaring their sentiments. This people, of whom they said in their pride that they knew not the law, and were cursed (John 7 49), it seems, knew the gospel, and were blessed. Secondly, That the chief priests and elders stood in awe of the common people, which is an evidence that things were in disorder among them, and that mutual jealousies were at a great height; that the government was become obnoxious to the hatred and scorn of the people, and the scripture was fulfilled, I have made you contemptible and base, Mal 2 8, 9. If they had kept their integrity, and done their duty, they had kept up their authority, and needed not to fear the people. We find sometimes that the people feared them, and it served them for a reason why they did not confess Christ, John 9 22, 12 42. Note, Those could not but fear the people, who studied only how to make the people fear them. Thirdly, That it is usually the temper even of common people to be zealous for the honour of that which they account sacred and divine. If they account John as a prophet, they will not endure that it should be said, His baptism was of men; hence the hottest contests have been about holy things. Fourthly, That the chief priests and elders were kept from an open denial of the truth, even against the conviction of their own minds, not by the fear of God, but purely by the fear of the people; as the fear of man may bring good people into a snare (Prov 29 25), so sometimes it may keep bad people from being overmuch wicked, lest they should die before their time, Eccl 7 17. Many bad people would be much worse than they are, if they durst.

The hierarchy told Jesus that they did not know the answer to His question, so Jesus responded, saying that He would not reveal the source of His authority (verse 27).

MacArthur explains:

He’s not evading the answer. In fact, if they answered the question, they would have the answer to their question. He’s not evading it. He’s giving them an opportunity to honestly answer the question. And if they answer the question, their own question will be answered. You see, they knew what authority He acted on. They knew He had said many times that He did what the Father showed Him to do. They knew that.

And I think they would have liked Him to have said that again, and then they would have accused Him of blasphemy and killed Him, because, you remember, earlier, when He had claimed that He had authority from God, they said that He had blasphemed making Himself equal with God. Right? Perhaps they wanted Him to say that again so that they could accuse Him of blasphemy, and that would be part of hatching the plot that would ultimately bring about His death …

When unbelief investigates the truth, it comes up with the wrong answers, see? Because it’s already predisposed to ignore the facts. Typical of people who come to look at the Gospel message and look at the virtue of Jesus Christ, already having convinced themselves that their way is right and the way of God is wrong. And no matter how much evidence you give them, they’ll still reject, because that’s their predisposition …

Now, it was their duty to be the acute observers of religious matters. It was their duty to know. And they ignored all the evidence because they would not be put in a position where they would admit Jesus Christ to be the Messiah. Oh, the hardness of their hearts. And so, “He says” – verse 27 – “‘Neither tell I you by what authority I do these things.’”

“I’m not answering your question either. Why cast pearls before swine?” They rejected the light, so He turned it off. “I have nothing more to say to you. Nothing more.” And He didn’t. He really didn’t.

He said to them, in 23:33, “You serpents, you generation of snakes, how can you escape the damnation of hell?” In verse 38, He said, “Behold, your house is left unto you desolate.” Desolate. I mean it was over. He turned off the lights. And when He was confronted before Caiaphas, in Matthew 26:63, it says, “And Jesus held His peace.” Never said a word. He had nothing to say. “And when He was accused by the chief priests and elders” – Matthew 27:12 – “He answered nothing.” Nothing. Oh, what a fearful moment. They had so long rejected, that He rejected them.

Jesus then related the Parable of the Two Sons, asking the priests and elders what they thought; a man told one to work in the vineyard (verse 28).

The first son replied, ‘I will not’ but later relented and went to work in the vineyard (verse 29).

The father went to the second son with the same instruction; that son said, ‘I go, sir’ — sounding respectful and obedient — yet did not go (verse 30).

MacArthur explains why Jesus related this particular parable:

The reason you have a father and two sons here is because built into that relationship you have a responsibility for obedience … two bad ones. It’s a characterization of humanity. See?

Henry has more:

Reproving parables are appeals to the offenders themselves, and judge them out of their own mouths. This Christ designs here, as appears by the first words (v. 28), But what think you? …

I. The parable itself, which represents two sorts of persons; some that prove better than they promise, represented by the first of those sons; others that promise better than they prove represented by the second.

1. They had both one and the same father, which signifies that God is a common Father to all mankind. There are favours which all alike receive from him, and obligations which all alike lie under to him; Have we not all one Father? Yes, and yet there is a vast difference between men’s characters.

2. They had both the same command given them; Son, go work to-day in my vineyard. Parents should not breed up their children in idleness; nothing is more pleasing, and yet nothing more pernicious, to youth than that. Lam 3 27. God sets his children to work, though they are all heirs. This command is given to every one of us. Note, (1.) The work of religion, which we are called to engage in, is vineyard work, creditable, profitable, and pleasant. By the sin of Adam we were turned out to work upon the common, and to eat the herb of the field; but by the grace of our Lord Jesus we are called to work again in the vineyard. (2.) The gospel call to work in the vineyard, requires present obedience; Son, go work to-day, while it is called to-day, because the night comes when no man can work. We were not sent into the world to be idle, nor had we daylight given us to play by; and therefore, if ever we mean to do any thing for God and our souls, why not now? Why not to-day? (3.) The exhortation to go work to-day in the vineyard, speaketh unto us as unto children (Heb 12 5); Son, go work. It is the command of a Father, which carries with it both authority and affection, a Father that pities his children, and considers their frame, and will not overtask them (Ps 103 13, 14), a Father that is very tender of his Son that serves him, Mal 3 17 …

Of the first son, Henry says:

Note, There are many who in the beginning are wicked and wilful, and very unpromising, who afterward repent and mend, and come to something. Some that God hath chosen, are suffered for a great while to run to a great excess of riot; Such were some of you, 1 Cor 6 11. These are set forth for patterns of long-suffering, 1 Tim 1 16. Afterward he repented. Repentance is metanoia—an after-wit: and metameleia—an after-care. Better late than never. Observe, When he repented he went; that was the fruit meet for repentance. The only evidence of our repentance for our former resistance, is, immediately to comply, and set to work; and then what is past, shall be pardoned, and all shall be well. See what a kind Father God is; he resents not the affront of our refusals, as justly he might.

Of the second son, he says:

… his answer was good but his actions bad. To him the father said likewise, v. 30. The gospel call, though very different, is, in effect, the same to all, and is carried on with an even tenour. We have all the same commands, engagements, encouragements, though to some they are a savour of life unto life, to others of death unto death …

… Note, There are many that give good words, and make fair promises, in religion, and those from some good motions for the present, that rest there, and go no further, and so come to nothing. Saying and doing are two things; and many there are that say, and do not; it is particularly charged upon the Pharisees, ch. 23 3. Many with their mouth show much love, but their heart goes another way. They had a good mind to be religious, but they met with something to be done, that was too hard, or something to be parted with, that was too dear, and so their purposes are to no purpose. Buds and blossoms are not fruit.

Jesus asked the Jewish hierarchy which son did the will of his father; they said that the first one did. Jesus said emphatically — ‘Truly I tell you’ — ‘the tax collectors and the prostitutes are going into the kingdom of God ahead of you’ (verse 31).

Jesus said that John the Baptist came in the way of righteousness, yet the hierarchy did not believe him, while the outcasts of society did; furthermore, even after the hierarchy saw that, they still did not change their minds and believe him (verse 32).

MacArthur explains the rebuke, that the priests and the elders represented the second son:

When they hurriedly answered, “The first,” they put themselves in a dire situation for a great rebuke.

“Jesus saith unto them, ‘Truly I say unto you that the tax collectors and harlots go into the kingdom of God before you.’” Ooh. You see, this is the religious elite, folks. These people are so moral; they’re looking for the first vacancy in the Trinity in their own thinking. See? They – they are living under the illusion that God is thrilled with them because of their purity. And tax collectors and harlots is a proverbial statement. That’s a euphemism for the scum of society. Tax collectors were treasonists, traitors who – Jews who should themselves to Rome to exact unfair taxes from the people. They were traitors. And harlots were those who sort of symbolize all of the gross, God-defying immorality. Tax collectors and harlots were outcasts, the scum of society.

And Jesus says, “You” – in effect – “are like that second son. You say, ‘We will,’ and you never do. You feign to obey God, but you never do go in His vineyard and live under His terms and obey His commands. And on the other hand, there are the rebels of society, the tax collectors and the harlots, who start out rebelling but repent and do go into His vineyard and obey Him.”

The point here is you have people who claim obedience and don’t obey, people who deny obedience but ultimately do, and that’s the difference. Tax collectors and harlots go into the kingdom of God before you. I mean that is a strong statement, and boy, have they lost face in front of the crowd. He’s not saying, “You’re going to go in after them.” That’s not the implication. The idea is, “They’re going to go in, and you’re not” …

But the Gospels tell us, so beautifully, that in the ministry of John, many – it says, “Many harlots believed on Him.” It was the people who were overwhelmed with their sin. And they came down to John, and they said, “We got to get ready for the kingdom. If the Messiah’s coming, we got to get ready. We want to confess. We want to repent of our sins.”

But when the Pharisees – you remember in Matthew 3? – came down, and John was baptizing? And John says, “You snakes. You snakes. Who warned you to flee from the wrath to come? You better bring forth fruits unto repentance, because the Messiah’s coming, and when He gets here, He’s going to take the ax, and He’s going to lay it at the root of the tree. And” – he says – “He’s going to come, and in His hand is the fan, and He’s going to separate the wheat and the chaff, and He’s going to start a furnace of fire.”

In other words, he gave them a whole judgment message. He was taking the sinners in, and they were confessing and repenting and being baptized in a baptism of repentance to get ready for the Messiah. And the religious leaders were coming, and not accepting the message, and not believing at all, and not repenting.

And He says, “Because of that, you’re like son number two who says, ‘Oh, yes, God, we will obey you, and you never do.’ And on the other hand, these who rebel have turned to repent and obey.” That’s why, in chapter 23, verse 3, He says to those same religious leaders, “They” – of those same religious leaders, “They say” – at the end of verse 3 – “They say and do not.” They say they obey God. They don’t.

Then verse 32, “For John came unto you in the way of righteousness” – and here He answers His question, “Was John’s ministry from heaven or earth” – “he came in the way of righteousness.” Not just with a message of righteousness; no, in the way of righteousness.

He didn’t just have a good word, he was a good man. He fasted. In fact, his disciples were curious why Jesus’ disciples didn’t fast like John’s did. His way was a way of righteousness; it was a way of virtue; it was of morality; it was a way of godliness. He was a good man; he was a holy man; he was a righteous man. And he had a righteous message as well as a righteous life. And here he came with a righteous example, and a righteous message, and, “You believed him not. You heard a good man speak a good word, and you refused to believe it.” That’s indictment enough. That’s indictment enough.

And then He gives them another indictment, “But the tax collectors and the harlots” – prostitutes – “believed him.” They believed him. They heard John. They accepted his message. They repented.

And then this, “And ye, when ye had seen that, repented not afterward, that ye might believe him.” That’s a double indictment. Listen very carefully. He says, “You saw a man with a rat’s life preach a righteous message, and you didn’t believe that. And then, when you saw tax collectors and harlots repent and have their lives transformed, you didn’t even believe after seeing that.” In other words, “You rejected the message, and you rejected the power that you saw in the prophet of God.” Doubly indicted.

MacArthur says that the Parable of the Two Sons should resonate as much with us today as when Jesus delivered it:

Like today. You can sit and listen to the preacher preach. You can listen to the Gospel of Jesus Christ. You can listen to the saving message of Jesus Christ, and you can walk way, and you can say, “I will not believe that. I will not believe that message, that word preached by John, that word preached by Jesus, that word preached by the preacher today. I will not believe it.” And that’s your first indictment.

And then comes your second indictment, because you, too, have sat and seen that power in that Gospel transform lives. And you’ve seen people’s lives changed. And their lives transformed, and even after having seen that, you still don’t believe. That’s a double indictment. And the word that we see in this, to those men, is a word of final judgment; a word of doom; a word of hell; hopelessness for those who had been exposed to the full light of the Son of God, the full light of the prophet of God, the full light of the prophet of God – John the Baptist. They’d seen it all; they’d heard it all, and they wouldn’t believe the message, and they wouldn’t even believe the transforming power.

And so, He turns out the light. End of discussion. So, have you looked at your own heart? And what did you see? Do you believe the message? How about the transforming power? Can you deny that? “My Spirit will not always strive with man.” The Lord didn’t always strive even with His own rebellious, hardhearted, willfully blind people, and He won’t with men today, either.

And no man – no man – should know the wrath of God, should fall under the wrath of God, the condemnation that comes to unbelievers …

And over and over again, He revealed Himself as He does now, through His Word, through His power. You’ve heard His message; You’ve seen His transforming power in the lives of others. Do you stand with these religious leaders who willfully reject in spite of all of that you’ve heard and all of that you’ve seen? Inconceivable. Open your heart to Christ; receive Him as Savior, Lord, Master, King, for this is your day. Jerusalem had their day; this is your day. May it not be said that you entered into judgment because you didn’t know the day of your visitation.

How true.

How many Sunday sermons will carry that important message? I wonder.