Now after these things the Lord appointed seventy others also, and sent them two and two before his face into every city and place where he himself was about to come.
Only Luke records this mission. After the twelve, the Lord appoints a much larger group and sends them out ahead of Him, into every town He plans to visit. Why a second and bigger sending? Why in pairs? And why send them ahead of His own arrival?
The Lord had already preached through the towns Himself, and the twelve had been sent on the same errand. This new sending is the third round, and one writer reads it as evidence that the earlier efforts had not won the nation.
The Lord would make one last appeal. For that He chose and sent seventy disciples. They were to go as He had sent the twelve: two by two, ahead of Him, into every city and place where He Himself would come. The mission of the twelve had clearly not won the nation to listen to the prophet foretold by Moses. So He would make another effort, sending messengers ahead of Him to prepare His way. This appeal was not the fruit of human pleading. It rose out of the grace of His heart, and out of that love which nothing could quench.
The timing matters. The twelve went out before the transfiguration; the seventy go out after it, after the Lord has spoken plainly of His suffering and death. That gives the mission a double edge.
The mission of the Seventy is peculiar to Luke. In itself it has a character of grace. Yet once it is rejected, it becomes the herald of judgment soon to fall on Israel. Since the transfiguration of the Lord, everything is now out in the open. The earlier mission came before that great event, and other Gospels record it; Luke adds the mission of the seventy. He has now fully announced His death, His suffering, His rejection… And now, closing the testimony to Israel, this new mission goes out to announce the kingdom of God — a message given before He revealed His rejection, and given again since.
The older translation these writers use reads "seventy" where the ESV reads "seventy-two." One writer ties the number back to Moses, and sees in this larger group a ministry that reaches past Israel's borders.
This chapter gives us the mission of the Seventy. But it is only here that we get this. In this Gospel, as I have already said, the Lord looks out to people beyond the Jewish boundary. So we see a ministry wider in character than one that fitted itself to Jewish arrangements. It signalled a departure from strict original order in Israel, as did a similar appointment of seventy elders in the days of Moses.
Pairing the messengers is deliberate, and the reason lies in what they lacked and He did not.
The sending out of the twelve was the start of an extension of the Lord's ministry and service. Until then all had been in His own hands, with the disciples as onlookers; now they are to act on His behalf. He was completely enough in Himself. They are not, and so they are to go out two by two. There is help and courage in companionship, for just where one is weak another may be strong, and He who sent them knew exactly how to pair them together. Companionship helps most in pioneering work. In Acts we see Paul following this instruction of the Lord.
They are not replacements. They are forerunners into places He had already decided to enter — and the arithmetic of that is striking near the end of His life.
It is significant that the Lord sent the seventy out two by two, ahead of Him, into every city and place where He Himself would come. So even as His busy life on earth drew to a close, He was planning to visit at least thirty-five more places.
The verse says the Lord appointed and the Lord sent. One writer presses that this did not stop when He returned to heaven.
The Lord Himself "sent" the Twelve and the Seventy when He was here. Now that He is above, He, by the Spirit of God, gives and sends out those alive again for evermore whom He has qualified for His work, whatever that work may be. He has not given up His rights. He has not handed them over to the church, or to any people in it… Mission, like gift, belongs to the Lord; and He is the same still.
- Grace first. No one asked for this mission. The Lord Himself appointed and sent it, out of the grace of His heart and a love that nothing could put out.
- Grace widened. Seventy follow twelve. The ministry is wider than the old order in Israel allowed, and it looks out to people beyond Israel.
- Grace paired. He was sufficient alone; they were not, so they went two and two, and He knew exactly who belonged with whom.
- Grace ahead of Him. They went ahead into towns He still meant to enter — at least thirty-five more visits planned as His life was closing.
- Grace refused. He sent this grace out after announcing His death and rejection. To those who turned it away, it became the warning of judgment.
And he said to them, The harvest indeed [is] great, but the workmen few; supplicate therefore the Lord of the harvest that he may send out workmen into his harvest.
The words come as the Lord appoints seventy others and sends them ahead of Him into every town He was about to visit. Commentators ask who the Lord of the harvest is, why the workers are so few, and why He answers this prayer before it is even prayed.
The twelve had already been sent out, and the nation still had not listened. One writer traces where this second mission came from:
Clearly the mission of the twelve had not won the nation to listen to the prophet Moses foretold. So He would make another effort, sending messengers ahead of Him to prepare His way. This appeal did not come from anyone's prayers. It came from the grace of His heart, and from a love that nothing could quench... Matthew introduces the mission of the twelve with the same words. But comparing Luke and Matthew, we cannot doubt that the Lord said this on more than one occasion, as He said other things.
Open opposition surrounded Jesus by now. Yet the harvest was still great, and one writer explains how:
Still the harvest was great. For love, unchilled by sin, saw the need through the outward opposition; but there were few moved by this love. The Lord of the harvest alone could send forth true labourers.
Praying this prayer keeps a worker humble, and the word Jesus chose for the workers does the same:
They were not to think of themselves as a select group on a higher level than others. They were to pray instead that the Lord of the harvest would send out more labourers into His harvest. The term labourers describes those on the lowest level of employment; though they have no dignified title, they do the hard work. Yet what is their work compared to His? He was coming to every place where it took seventy men, plus the twelve, to prepare the way for Him.
The command is not a mild suggestion, as the Greek word behind it shows:
The New Testament uses many words for pray, but this is the strongest of them all. It is deomai: it might be translated 'beseech', or 'supplicate'... I wonder how many of us obey the Lord's command (for it is a command) given in these verses. I wonder how often in our own private prayers we plead with the Lord of the harvest to thrust out labourers. I wonder how often in the prayer meetings we hear this earnest, fervent pleading. I fear not very often. Is this why the labourers are so pitifully few?
"Send out" translates a forceful word. Two things follow: who has the right to send, and who pays:
The word translated 'send forth' is ek-ballo in each of these Gospels. The Lord of the harvest Himself is the one who sends out, or thrusts out, these labourers. It is not left to the labourer's own choice whether he will go or not. No man, and no mission board, has the authority to send out these labourers. The Lord of the harvest alone has the right to send a labourer. And I hardly need add that if the Lord of the harvest sends out a labourer, He makes Himself responsible for the support and care of that labourer.
The same point is pressed elsewhere as a matter of God's own prerogative:
In no part of scripture is man said to send out the preacher: God keeps this prerogative in His own hands.
Notice the order in Luke: the Lord appoints the seventy in verse 1, then tells them to pray in verse 2. That order tells you who the Lord of the harvest is:
The Lord's heart felt for the people as He said, "The harvest is plentiful, but the laborers are few"... "Pray earnestly therefore to the Lord of the harvest." Still, He was encouraging prayer, because He is Himself appointing these seventy to go out before He tells them to pray. He was the Lord of the harvest.
The shortage did not end with the seventy:
Bright spots there are, thank God — places where the Spirit of God is clearly at work. But taken as a whole, the picture is a dark one... even where the Spirit of God is working, wholehearted servants of God are all too few. Who stirs himself up to take hold of God about it? Who prays to the Lord of the harvest, that He will send out labourers into His harvest?
- Love sees the harvest. Opposition was open, yet love that sin could not chill saw the need and counted the harvest great.
- Love supplies the workers. No one prayed this mission into being. It came from the grace of His heart.
- Love commands the prayer. The word is the strongest one for prayer in the New Testament — beseech, plead — and it is a command, not advice.
- Love does the sending. The verb is forceful. The Lord alone thrusts out labourers; no man and no board may do it, and He supports those He sends.
- Love answers first. He told them to pray after He had already appointed the seventy — because He Himself is the Lord of the harvest.
Go behold *I* send you forth as lambs in the midst of wolves.
Jesus appoints seventy others and sends them out ahead of Him. Before He tells them what to carry, He tells them what they will meet — and the picture is not comforting.
The warning comes right after the words about a great harvest and few workers. The One who tells them to ask for workers is already sending them.
The Lord's heart felt for the people as He said, "The harvest indeed is great, but the workmen few." Now He raises up far more labourers, because the need pressed on His soul. "Pray therefore to the Lord of the harvest." Yet He was encouraging prayer. The reason is this: before He tells them to pray, He is Himself appointing these seventy to go out. He was the Lord of the harvest. At the same time He warns them what to expect. "Go your way; behold, I am sending you out as lambs in the midst of wolves." He knew well what man was, even in Israel, and they were to know it too. Flesh was completely judged. The Jews are no longer seen as the lost sheep of Israel, but as wolves — with the messengers themselves as the lambs they prey on.
The sentence turns on who is speaking. Their comfort was not that the danger was smaller than it looked. It was that the One sending them had already measured it.
"I send you" is the great basis. The Lord knew what He was doing when He sent them. He knew it was "as sheep in the midst of wolves." Knowing that He knew this took away its sting, if they felt the force of that "I." He did not merely say, you will be. He said, "I send you as." It was a supreme commission.
The image fixes the method as well as the danger. A lamb has no defence of its own, and the servant may not borrow one.
They were to be perfectly dependent on God, and independent of everything else. They were to expect to meet enemies, wolves. "Go your way; behold, I am sending you out as lambs in the midst of wolves." You cannot turn a lamb into a wolf to defend itself. Peter wanted to take a sword and cut off the servant's right ear. But the Lord forbids him and says, "All who take the sword will perish by the sword." It is difficult to receive everything and do nothing, to be a lamb among wolves — as Shadrach, Meshach and Abednego were. Facing the fiery furnace, they said, "we have no need to answer you in this matter. If this be so, our God whom we serve is able to deliver us."
The Lord said this at the start, so opposition never means something has gone wrong. Yet the same word that warns of trouble also rules out inviting it.
How thoroughly the Lord is supposing the hostility of man! He expects it, for in truth the gospel starts with it. "I am sending you out as lambs in the midst of wolves." He did not say lambs among lambs. He said lambs among wolves. So, dear friends, if you meet this hostility, "do not be surprised at the fiery trial when it comes upon you to test you, as though something strange were happening to you." What Christ met in His own person down here He fully expects for all His followers. So "rejoice insofar as you share Christ's sufferings." But it is as lambs — not in rashness, but harmless as doves, though wise as serpents. Be careful not to give occasion for hostility. But if confessing the name of Christ brings it out, take it patiently and trust God.
The warning did not cancel the errand.
The instructions the Lord gave to the seventy are similar to those given to the twelve. There was the same simplicity and absence of self-seeking, the same dependence on Him for the supply of their needs. They had, however, extra warnings which showed growing opposition from the people. The Lord told them they would be as lambs among wolves, a very striking picture. Yet even when people refused, they were to make it very plain that the kingdom had come near to the people.
The same character appears later. John Wycliffe's travelling preachers were formed on this very passage, and "it might truly be said that they went out as 'lambs among wolves'" (For the Young).
- Sent. The Lord of the harvest does not only hear the prayer for workers; He is already appointing and sending them.
- Seen. The emphatic "I send you" means the Sender knew and measured the danger before the servant ever met it.
- Small. A lamb cannot turn into a wolf. The Lord forbade Peter's sword, so the servant's only defence is total dependence on God.
- Steady. He said lambs among wolves, not lambs among lambs. He expects hostility, so trouble is never strange. Bear it patiently, not rashly.
- Spoken. Even where people refused the messengers, the message stood: the kingdom of God had come near.
Carry neither purse nor scrip nor sandals, and salute no one on the way.
The seventy go out ahead of Jesus with almost nothing: no money, no travel bag, no spare footwear. They are told not even to stop and greet people on the road. The instructions sound severe. They raise two questions. What were these messengers meant to live on? And why would the Lord forbid ordinary politeness?
Kelly ties the empty pockets and the silence on the road together. The messengers had the King's backing and no time to lose.
He sent them out in a spirit of grace, exposed to the evil of man. Yet they were to go with the full awareness of His glory. "Carry no moneybag, no knapsack, no sandals, and greet no one on the road." The danger was imminent, the duty was urgent. They needed no preparation and no resources from outside. They had every right to count on the power of His name to provide for them in Israel, for He was the King, however much men rejected Him. On the other hand, there was no time for greetings. Such courtesy is fine for the earth and for the present time. But eternity was coming more and more clearly before the minds of the servants, as it was fully before the Lord. Deeper interests were at stake, and anything that filled their minds with what could be done without was only a hindrance.
Travelling empty-handed had a purpose. It put the duty of support on the nation these men went to.
As with the twelve disciples in chapter 9:1-5, He told them to carry no provisions: no purse for money, no bag for food, no extra shoes. The testimony is toward Israel, God's chosen nation, and they were responsible to care for the servants of Israel's Messiah. They were not to carry anything unnecessary. They were also to hold back from what was irrelevant, even from greeting people along the way. They had a single purpose, and even social courtesy must not get in its way — that is, spending time in social conversation. This did not mean they should be rude.
The phrase is not a ban on kindness. Kelly explains it from the local custom behind the word.
"Greet no one" means avoid what in that part of the world is a prolonged ceremony (compare 2 Kings 4:29). Ryle: "The man of God ought to have no leisure for any work but that of his Master."
Darby looks at what the empty hands ask of the heart.
"Carry no moneybag, no knapsack, no sandals, and greet no one on the road." This did not mean they should be rude. They were not to waste time in useless ceremonies. When in God's service, and among God's enemies, God must be everything. It needs concentration of heart in Him. You know that the world has rejected your Master, and that it will reject you if you are faithful to Him. Faith knows this and goes on, not with worldly prudence and human wisdom, but knowing what to do and going on to do it.
So how did they eat? Stuart points behind the hosts who fed them to the One who sent them.
They received the generosity of their hosts in each village where they preached and found a welcome. Yet the Lord who had sent them would move hearts to be favourable to them. And so it was, as they later acknowledged. They went out just as they were, with no bag, no provisions, no money, no extra clothing.
The instruction did not stand forever. Kelly points to a later moment when the Lord Himself withdrew it.
In Luke 22:35, referring to this very mission, the Lord asks, "When I sent you out with no moneybag or knapsack or sandals, did you lack anything?" And they said, "Nothing." Then the Lord tells them to provide themselves now with moneybag, knapsack and sword. The very things they were not to do before, they were to do from that time. The Lord cancels what He had earlier commanded, so far as those special circumstances went. His goodness and love to them would remain, and so would their walking in wisdom and harmlessness. But the particular character of this mission ended at the death of Christ.
- Urgency. The danger was near and the duty urgent. Haste shaped everything they carried — even a greeting on the road cost time the errand could not spare.
- Empty hands. No money, no food bag, no spare sandals. The messengers were to count on the power of the King's name to provide for them among His own people.
- Not rudeness. The ban targets a long ceremony, not courtesy. The servant has no spare time for anything but his Master's work.
- One focus. Take away the outward supports, and God must be everything. Faith goes forward without worldly prudence in a world that has rejected its Master.
- Proved, then changed. They lacked nothing. Later the Lord Himself reversed the instruction, so verse 4 is not a rule of dress and budget for servants today.
And into whatsoever house ye enter, first say, Peace to this house.
Jesus sends seventy messengers ahead of Himself, and their first word in any house is peace. Why peace, from men sent out among wolves, and what happens to that peace if the house refuses it?
Before any demand or warning, the messenger speaks peace. One writer sees grace given out first, with loss only for those who turn it down:
"Whatever house you enter, first say, 'Peace be to this house!'" So the full word of grace was sent out to them. At the same time, so much the worse for those who rejected it.
These men are sent into hostile ground. The danger does not change their job:
Then, though they are in the middle of wolves, let their business be that of peacemakers.
These messengers must greet no one on the road, yet they must speak peace over every house. One writer explains why:
This mission goes out with a message of peace from God to every city and every house. Along with that, the messengers were to greet no one on the way. Jesus is not settling how people deal with each other in society, dear friends. He is settling the connection between God and sinners. That is the great matter, and the Lord must provide for it first… The Lord's messengers were not to carry the courtesies of human life on their lips. They carried a happy, holy, and weighty message from God to sinners.
This silence is not rudeness. One writer explains the focus behind it:
Do not be discourteous, but do not waste time on useless ceremonies. When you are in God's service, and among God's enemies, God must be everything.
Commentators weigh the words differently. Kelly hears the full word of grace. Bellett draws a line between wishing peace on a house and declaring the house has it:
This was a greeting, a wishing well, an announcement of good-will towards the house. It was not an authoritative pronouncement of peace. That would come once a son of peace was found there.
The messenger speaks this greeting before he knows how the house will answer. The answer can split the household, but it never changes what he brought:
Faith always carries peace to the house. It produces hostility — two against three, and three against two — because some will receive it and some will not. But the thing brought is always peace.
Once a household takes the messenger in, he stays there and eats what they provide. He has no reason to feel awkward about it:
Theirs was a message of peace. If a house welcomed them when they entered a city, God would see that peace was effective in that house. The servant was to stay in that house as long as he stayed in the city. He was not to be ashamed to share the food they offered him. This was God's means of provision, and their labour deserved such recognition.
Do these travel orders bind Christians today? One writer answers plainly:
The testimony is toward Israel, God's chosen nation, whose people were responsible to care for the servants of Israel's Messiah… We have noticed before that these instructions are not a commission for our day, for this was changed completely by the Lord in view of His approaching death (Luke 22:35-37).
The errand itself has not changed. What the messengers carry now rests on something already finished:
The condition of the world now is that it has rejected Christ… we bring the testimony of peace to it — peace that has been made, for the sacrifice has been offered.
- Peace first. The messenger's first word over a house is peace. It is grace in full, offered before the house has answered anything.
- Peace instead of chatter. They greet no one on the road. What they do say is not social courtesy but a message from God to sinners.
- Peace wished, then settled. The greeting is good-will towards the house. Whether that peace rests there turns on finding a son of peace inside.
- Peace unchanged by refusal. Some in a house receive it and some do not, and division follows — but the thing carried in is always peace.
- Peace still carried. The Lord later changed the travel orders. The errand stands, and the peace announced now is peace already made, because the sacrifice has been offered.
And if a son of peace be there, your peace shall rest upon it; but if not it shall turn to you again.
Jesus sends seventy messengers ahead of Him with one word on their lips: peace. This verse tells them what happens to that word — it rests on "a son of peace," and where a house refuses it, it is not wasted.
The phrase follows a Hebrew pattern. One commentator lists other examples of it in Luke:
"Sons of the resurrection" (Luke 20:36). Compare Hebrew expressions like it that we have already met: "sons of the bride-chamber" (Luke 5:34), "sons of peace" (Luke 10:6), and "sons of this age" (Luke 16:8).
The greeting carried real goodwill, but not yet the settled peace announced after the cross. One writer separates the two:
This was a greeting, a wishing well, a declaration of goodwill towards the house. It was not an authoritative pronouncement of peace. That would follow instead, once the son of peace was found to be there.
After the resurrection the same word carries new weight. Today's messenger stands on firmer ground:
"Peace be with you," the risen Saviour said to His disciples... and when He said that, He showed them His hands and His side. He let them read their title to peace. Peace was now not merely wished; it was announced with authority, given to them on the ground of the cross. Jesus now gave peace to them, because He had already made it for them... We do not merely say, like the seventy who were sent out, "Peace be to this house," greeting it or wishing it well. We proclaim to it the sure, settled, purchased peace that sinners have a right to, in the blood of the cross.
The second half of the verse tells the messengers what happens when a house refuses their peace:
So the full word of grace went out to them. At the same time, so much the worse for those who rejected it. Nevertheless the peace should turn to them again. It was not war; they had nothing to do with that. "And if a son of peace is there, your peace will rest upon him. But if not, it will return to you." Rejected peace came back to the messengers themselves.
Another commentator, writing on the same instruction in Matthew, sees the principle still holding today:
That was a blessing for those they greeted. But those who gave the greeting lost nothing if the message was rejected, and the greeting itself was not lost. In principle that may be true now. When a faithful message is not received, a blessing returns to the messenger.
This mission had a defined audience:
When they wished peace to a house, the peace would stay there if the son of peace lived there. If not, it would return on them. This is not the gospel sent to the world, to sinners. It is the gospel of the kingdom, sent to those in Israel who had ears to hear.
The response to that word sorted people out, and no judgment fell yet:
There were those in Israel who were not children of peace. The remnant would be marked out by the effect of their mission on people's hearts, not yet by judgment. But peace should rest on the children of peace.
Whatever the reception, what the messenger brings never changes:
Faith always carries peace to the house. It stirs up hostility — two against three, and three against two — because some will receive it and some will not. But the thing brought is always peace.
One writer applies the title to disciples today:
The Lord Jesus wants us, as His disciples, to represent Him in a world where He is rejected. We are here as sons of peace (Luke 10:6).
Commentators differ on how far the instructions transfer. Leslie M. Grant holds that "these instructions are not a commission for our day, for this was changed completely by the Lord in view of His coming death."
- Peace offered. The messengers led with peace — Kelly calls their message "the full word of grace."
- Peace tested. The greeting worked like a sieve. It rested where a son of peace lived, and it marked out the rest by how hearts responded, not by judgment.
- Peace named. "Son of peace" is a Hebrew turn of phrase, like "sons of the bride-chamber" or "sons of this age."
- Peace returned. Refusal cost the messenger nothing. The peace came back, and a blessing returns to the one who spoke faithfully.
- Peace secured. What was then a wish is now a purchased fact. Christ made peace at the cross and announced it when He rose, and His people carry it into a world that rejected Him.
And in the same house abide, eating and drinking such things as they have; for the workman is worthy of his hire. Remove not from house to house.
The seventy go ahead of Jesus into every town He is about to visit, carrying no money, no bag, no spare sandals. Verse 7 tells them what to do once a door opens: stay in that one house, take the food offered, and count the worker worthy of his pay. It is a short line that later became the Bible's main text on supporting those who serve God.
Why accept a stranger's table? Because the Lord sent them out with nothing. One writer ties the two together, and also marks the limit of these travel orders:
The seventy were sent as lambs in the midst of wolves (v.3). As with the twelve in chapter 9:1-5, the Lord told them to carry no provisions with them: no purse (for money), no bag (for food), no extra shoes. The testimony was toward Israel, God's chosen nation, and Israel was responsible to care for the servants of Israel's Messiah… These instructions are not a commission for our day, for the Lord changed this completely in view of His coming death (Luke 22:35-37). But the seventy were to expect the hospitality of the houses they visited… The servant was to remain in that house as long as he stayed in the city, and was not to feel ashamed to share the food they offered. This was God's way of providing, and their labour deserved such recognition. Faith, in its simplicity and humility, would accept this, and would not restlessly try to pass the responsibility for one's keep around to others as well.
"Remain in the same house" is a restraint, not a comfort. One writer sees the Lord's own glory at stake:
There was to be no greed and no self-seeking. They cast themselves on hearts that were loyal to the Messiah, and took such things as were given. The Messiah Himself acknowledges the worthiness of the labourer: the labourer is worthy of his hire… They were not to go from house to house. That would take away from His glory, because it could look like self-seeking.
Another writer turns the same rule on us:
"Remain in the same house." We had this in the mission of the twelve — "Do not be looking out for better fare." What a defiling thing, to see the followers of Christ trying to make themselves comfortable here!
Matthew's parallel says the worker deserves his food; Luke says his wages. One writer says the Lord meant both words, and follows the point through to Paul's own practice.
The labourer is indeed worthy of his food, and of his hire, for there are other needs beyond food. The Lord forgot none of them, as this twofold statement makes plain (Matt. 10:10; Luke 10:7, as cited in 1 Tim. 5:18). So the apostle declares that the Lord ordained that those who preach the gospel should live by the gospel (1 Cor. 9:14), as the law had done before for those who served at the holy things. Yet in the same passage, while he insists on a right so just and true for others, we see this blessed man give it up for himself.
The verse grants a right. It does not create an employment contract. One writer draws the line clearly:
God did use the willing hands of His people here too. But no one thought that they "hired" him, or that he was their labourer. What they gave, it was to God they gave it, and his privilege was to be Christ's servant. His responsibility was to the Lord, and theirs also. They did not understand that they were to get so much work for so much money. They did not pay, but "offered." There is a wonderful difference; for you cannot "pay" God… The moment you pay, God is out of the question.
Paul repeats this exact sentence in 1 Timothy 5:18. One writer asks where Paul got it, and what that answer settles about Luke's Gospel.
The saying may well be a proverb, but the apostle quotes the phrase itself as "the scripture." Where did he get it? From the Gospel of Luke (Luke 10:7); for so it stands there word for word, not in Matt. 10:10, where the Lord says the workman is worthy "of his food."… it is a decisive instance of an apostle quoting from another inspired man as "scripture."
- Sent — empty-handed by design; the messengers carried no purse and leaned on God's way of providing.
- Received — one open door was enough; staying in it kept the message clear of any hint of self-seeking.
- Deserved — the Master Himself calls the worker worthy, and that right covers food and more besides.
- Offered — believers give their gifts to God, not wages to a hired man; the moment you pay, God is out of the question.
- Scripture — Paul quotes this line word for word from Luke and calls it Scripture: one inspired writer quoting another.
And into whatsoever city ye may enter and they receive you, eat what is set before you,
Jesus sent the seventy out two by two, ahead of Him, into every town He meant to visit. Verse 8 covers the welcome: when a town takes them in, they sit down and eat what the house serves — so why does a preaching mission need a rule about meals?
This mission comes after the Lord has already announced His death and rejection. One writer reads its tone as kindness with a warning inside it.
The mission of the seventy is found only in Luke. It has in itself a character of grace about it, though really, once rejected, it becomes the herald of judgment about to fall on Israel... Now, as the closing testimony to Israel, this new mission goes out to announce the kingdom of God — not only before the Lord had spoken of His rejection, but after it.
The messengers carried no money and no food bag. Their meals were part of the plan: the Messiah who sent them would move the hearts of the people they visited.
They were to trust (like the twelve apostles) the care of the Messiah, who was present on earth and moved hearts by divine power. They were to go as the Lord's labourers, openly declaring their purpose, not working for their food, but as having a claim on His behalf... Time pressed. Judgment was coming.
Taking the food of the house was more than convenience.
They were to eat the food given them, willingly identifying themselves with those who received them.
The same rule closed off any search for a better table. Moving from house to house would reflect on the Master they served.
There was to be no covetousness, no self-seeking. Casting themselves on the loyalty of hearts to the Messiah, they were to take whatever people gave them... They were not to go from house to house. This would take away from His glory, because it could look like self-seeking. The great point was the solemn claim of the Lord Jesus in Israel.
Another writer states the same warning plainly:
"Do not go looking for better food." What a defiling thing, to see the followers of Christ trying to make themselves comfortable here!
"They receive you" is the hinge of the verse. A town could also turn the messengers away, and one writer weighs what that refusal cost.
So rejecting this mission would be very serious. The greatness of the grace behind it made unbelief more dangerous, and its judgment more final... It would not alter the truth. They might reject it, but the kingdom of God had come near to them.
These directions were tied to a moment. Later the Lord Himself set them aside.
In Luke 22:35 the Lord looks back on this very mission and asks, "When I sent you out with no moneybag or knapsack or sandals, did you lack anything?" They said, "Nothing." Then the Lord tells them to provide themselves with a moneybag, a knapsack, and a sword. The very things they were not to take before, they were to take from that time on. The Lord sets aside what He had earlier commanded, so far as the special circumstances went. His goodness and love toward them would remain, and so would their walk in wisdom and harmlessness. But the special character of this mission ended at the death of Christ.
- Sent — the seventy appear only in Luke. Theirs is the Lord's closing appeal to Israel, sent out after He had spoken of His own rejection.
- Supplied — the messengers did not work for their food. They leaned on the Messiah who sent them, and He moved hearts to feed them.
- Seated — eating what the house served joined the messenger to the people who took him in.
- Satisfied — no looking for better food, no moving from house to house. A servant chasing comfort dims his Master's glory.
- Settled — the greater the grace, the graver the refusal. And the rule itself ended at the death of Christ, when the Lord told them to take a moneybag and knapsack again.
and heal the sick in it, and say to them, The kingdom of God is come nigh to you.
Jesus sends seventy messengers into the towns ahead of Him. Their whole task comes down to two things: heal, and announce. But what kingdom had come near while its King still walked the roads unrecognised? And what did the healings have to do with it?
Why send seventy messengers out at all? One writer reads the sending itself as kindness with a warning folded inside it.
Only Luke records the mission of the Seventy. It has a character of grace about it. Yet once rejected, it heralded the judgment about to fall on Israel.
Why heal at all, if the errand was a message?
They were to heal the sick by the miraculous power the Lord gave them. The purpose was to focus attention on their message: the kingdom of God had come near. This kingdom's authority rested in the person of the Lord Jesus, Israel's true King. Yet He made no claim to a kingdom on public display. The kingdom was among men in hidden form. It will be public when the Lord reigns. For now it had come in the person of the King. Many were subject to Him in heart, though He was not yet reigning.
The two sendings did not carry the same powers. One commentator notes the difference:
The apostles received delegated power to raise the dead (Matt. 10:8). The seventy received power to heal the sick, which included casting out demons (Luke 10:9, 17). But we have not a word about their raising the dead, and we read of no case of it except by the Lord and the apostles.
They carried real power. Yet the Lord put the weight on the words they were to speak.
There was no lack of power, but the word was, "The kingdom of God has come near to you." This they were to say to them. It was not a matter of a miraculous display to strike the mind or the eye, or of anything for this present life only.
Healing met sickness. The message went deeper. Why should anyone have to announce God's kingdom in God's own world?
They were to say, "The kingdom of God has come near to you," as well as to heal the sick. What a terrible verdict against this world, that God has to announce His kingdom in it! A well-ordered family would be insulted if you told the children to obey their parents. Yet the world has to be told to submit to God. That alone shows its true condition.
The same writer sums up the Lord's own ministry in one line:
He published God's claims while He met man's need.
The message did not change with the reception it got.
This is not just a statement that this or that is God's will. Whatever you do, whether you receive it or reject it, "the kingdom of God has come near to you." The condition of the world now is that it has rejected Christ. The Son of God, the King, has come into the world, put it to the test, and it says, We will not have Him.
Dust could be shaken off; something else could not.
That city might reject them. They would then shake off all connection with it, even the very dust its streets had left on their feet. But those who rejected the messengers could not shake off their responsibility. The kingdom of God had come near, and they had cared nothing about it. People may indulge in carelessness, indifference and scoffing, but a day of reckoning must come... What a responsibility rests on anyone who gets the chance to hear the message of God! It was so then. It is so now.
- Near in grace. The seventy went out to Israel in grace. Judgment followed only after the nation refused the message.
- Near in power. The healings were not the point. They fixed attention on the message the seventy carried.
- Near in person. The kingdom had arrived because the King had arrived — owned in hearts, not yet on public display.
- Near in claim. One visit relieved need and announced God's rights. The world had to be told to submit to God.
- Near regardless. Welcome or refusal changed nothing about the fact. A town could shake off the messengers, but not its responsibility for having heard.
But into whatsoever city ye may have entered and they do not receive you, go out into its streets and say,
Jesus sent seventy messengers ahead of Him into the towns He was about to visit, and this verse deals with the towns that shut the door. What were the messengers to do when a city refused them, and did that refusal cancel their message?
Two things stand out to commentators here: how many were sent, and what was said over the cities that would not hear.
The number of those sent shows the urgency of the message, as the woe added upon the cities of Israel implies the nearing judgment of the nation. In practice, though not openly, everything was already decided. So the only result could be the separation of a remnant from a people who had doomed themselves. Yet the kingdom of God has come near, and its glories are opening more than ever before. They are still hidden from eyes that have no care to see them.
The verse assumes a city may say no. What makes that no so serious is the grace behind the visit.
So the rejection of this mission would be most serious. The very measure of grace it springs from would make unbelief the more dangerous, and the judgment of it more final.
The messengers were to go out into the streets, where everyone could see. Commentators explain what wiping off the dust meant, and why gospel work now does not repeat it.
If His subjects refused such a message from the King, the servants were to leave and wipe the very dust of the city off their feet, as a testimony against that city. It was to be a solemn act of separation, giving up all connection with the city that rejected their Lord. Preaching the gospel today calls for no such action. The gospel goes to people in an evil world, not to cities. But cities are earthly, and these cities were tied to God's earthly people Israel. As cities, they would suffer for refusing their Messiah.
The messengers were also told how to take a refusal.
If anyone rejected them, they were to bow to it, and yet shake the dust off their feet against such people. The servant was not to strive, but God would surely remember it, for these were His messengers, and this was the treatment they got.
The messengers could leave the dust behind. The city could not leave behind what the visit had placed on it.
That city might reject them. They would then shake off all connection with it, even the very dust its streets had left on their feet. But there was something those who rejected the messengers could not shake off — their responsibility. The kingdom of God had come near, and they had cared nothing about it. They might indulge in carelessness, indifference and scoffing, but a day of reckoning must come.
The refusal in this verse lands on the messengers, but it does not stop with them.
People tend to judge how free they are to refuse the message by looking at the messengers. The right thing is to think whose messengers they are, and to own it. The One who sends them is received or refused, depending on whether the messengers are welcomed or not.
Rejection does not change the fact announced. The city that turns the messengers away hears the same word as the city that takes them in.
It is not just that such and such a thing is God's will. Whatever you do, whether you receive it or reject it, "the kingdom of God has come near to you." The world's condition now is that it has rejected Christ. The Son of God, the King, has come into the world, put it to the test, and it says, We will not have Him. That fact has not lost its solemnity now. We are walking through a world that has rejected Christ, and we bring the testimony of peace to it — peace that has been made, for the sacrifice has been offered.
Even with judgment near, the sending itself is an act of kindness.
In sending out these seventy we see the same patient grace at work as when He sent out the twelve. If they were not received, they were to shake the dust off their feet. God's love never stops, whatever the wickedness of man, until His work is done. His grace never fails. Christ looks at the power of grace in God more than at the wickedness of men.
- Sent — the large number of messengers marks urgency. Judgment on the nation was near, and only a remnant would be separated out.
- Refused — a city may reject the messengers. The greater the grace behind the visit, the more dangerous the unbelief and the more final the judgment.
- Renounced — wiping off the dust in public was a solemn act of separation. It gave up all connection with the city that turned away its Lord.
- Retained — the messengers shook off the dust. The city could not shake off its responsibility, for the kingdom had come near and it cared nothing.
- Repeated — grace does not stop at refusal. Christ still sends, and still brings peace into a world that has rejected Him.
Even the dust of your city, which cleaves to us on the feet, do we shake off against you; but know this, that the kingdom of God is come nigh.
Jesus sends seventy messengers ahead of Him into towns He plans to visit. Here He tells them what to do when a town will not have them: do one last public act, then leave. Yet they must still announce the same message they would have given if welcomed.
One writer draws out what the announcement itself exposes:
They were to say, "The kingdom of God has come near to you," as well as to heal the sick. What a terrible verdict against this world, that God has to publish His kingdom in it! A well-run family would take it as an insult if you told the children to obey their parents. But the world has to be told to obey God — and that only shows its true condition.
Wiping the dust off was not a private gesture of frustration. It was a public act, and it cut a tie:
If His subjects refused such a message from the King, the servants were to leave. They were to wipe the very dust of the city off their feet, as a testimony against the city. It was to be a solemn act of separation, refusing all connection with the city that rejected their Lord.
The same writer adds that this does not carry over to gospel work today: "The preaching of the gospel today does not call for any such action, for the gospel is to people in an evil world, not to cities."
The messengers shake off the dust. But one thing stays with the town, whatever it does with them:
That city might reject them. They would then shake off all connection with it, even the very dust collected there by their feet. But those who rejected the messengers could not shake off one thing — their responsibility. For the kingdom of God had come near, and they had cared nothing about it. They might go on being careless, indifferent or scoffing. But a day of reckoning must come.
The same writer turns it on the reader: "What a responsibility rests on anyone who has the chance to hear the message of God! It was so then. It is so now."
The town that says no still hears the announcement. Refusal changes the town's standing. It does not change the fact:
"The kingdom of God has come near to you." This is not just a statement that such and such a thing is God's will. Whatever you do, whether you receive it or reject it, "the kingdom of God has come near to you." The world's condition now is that it has rejected Christ. The Son of God, the King, has come into the world, put it to the test, and it says, We will not have Him.
The same writer notes what faith rests on: "Faith carries things in its own sphere, needing nothing but God's word."
The kindness behind this mission is exactly what makes turning it down so serious:
So the rejection of this mission would be very serious. The measure of the grace it springs from would make unbelief all the more dangerous, and the judgment of it all the more final... It would not change the truth. They might reject, but the kingdom of God had come near to them.
The next verse names Sodom, the ancient city destroyed for its wickedness. The same writer explains why its case is lighter: "Sodom had not known the witness of the personal presence of the Lord Jesus and was therefore not as responsible as these."
The size of the mission carries its own message:
The number of those sent shows how urgent the message was. The woe added on the cities of Israel implies that judgment on the nation was near... Yet the kingdom of God has come near. Its glories are opening more than ever before, though hidden from eyes that have no care to see them.
- Announced — God has to proclaim His kingdom in this world. That fact alone is a verdict on it. Children in a well-run home need no such notice.
- Offered — grace sent many messengers in haste, because judgment on the nation was drawing near.
- Refused — wiping off the dust was a public act of separation. It cut every tie with a city that would not have its Lord.
- Unchanged — refusal does not touch the fact. Welcomed or driven out, the messengers say the same thing. Faith needs nothing but God's word to hold it.
- Retained — the servants shake off the dust. The town keeps what it cannot shake off: its responsibility, measured by the grace that came to it.
I say to you that it shall be more tolerable for Sodom in that day than for that city.
Jesus sends seventy messengers ahead of Him with one message: the kingdom of God has come near. Here He tells them what happens to a town that shuts the door — and the town He measures it against is Sodom, a city remembered for its wickedness.
Jesus told the messengers to shake off even the dust of a town that refused them. One writer contrasts what they could leave behind with what stayed:
That city might reject them. They would then shake off all connection with it, even the very dust collected there by their feet. But there was something the rejecters of the messengers could not shake off — their responsibility. The kingdom of God had come near, and they had cared nothing about it. They might indulge in carelessness, indifference, or scoffing. But a day of reckoning must come.
Jesus sentences a whole town, not just individuals. One writer explains why these towns answered as towns, and why Sodom's case was still the lighter one:
Wiping off the dust is not how the gospel goes out today, because the gospel goes to individuals in an evil world, not to cities… But cities are earthly, and these cities were connected with God's earthly people Israel. As cities they would suffer for refusing their Messiah. Sodom's judgment would be more tolerable than God's judgment on a city that rejected them (v.12). The reason is that Sodom never had the witness of the Lord Jesus present in person. So Sodom was not as responsible as these cities.
Jesus puts a heavier sentence on rejecting these messengers than on rejecting Himself. They were ordinary men, easy to look down on:
The Lord attaches a more awful judgment to the words of His disciples than to His own. He does this because people were more likely to despise the disciples than their Master. People might use this against His disciples and say they were only men with the same passions as themselves, and that they had faults — and so they did. But the question was, what was their testimony, their mission, and from whom? … They testified of God's kingdom at hand. There was nothing ever presented to man to compare with this.
Commentators place "that day" in the future. Sodom's people and those who refused Christ will stand at the same judgment and receive different sentences:
It is very solemn and very striking about Sodom. At the Great White Throne, those who rejected Christ will face a harsher judgment and a harsher penalty than even the filthy people of Sodom. God alone knows how to apportion the measure of guilt to each. The greatest guilt that can rest on any soul is the rejection of Him.
"More bearable" — older translations say "more tolerable" — means God does not weigh every case the same. One writer applies the principle widely:
The Gentile will not be judged on the same ground as the Jew, nor the Jew on the same ground as the nominal Christian. God will deal with each one on his own ground, according to his light and privilege… The Judge of all the earth will do right. But man is responsible, and God measures that responsibility by the light and advantage He gave him. All are not huddled together carelessly, as though they were all on one common ground. On the contrary, God distinguishes with perfect accuracy. He will never condemn anyone for slighting and refusing advantages that were never within his reach.
Kelly applies the same measure to whole countries:
This is a solemn principle far too easily and too often forgotten. People are quick to pity those who have never heard, and to think of distant lands… But there is no greater delusion than this: to suppose that when the judgment comes, people will be better off in England than in central Asia. No doubt, wherever there is faith in a rejected Christ, that faith will bring people into heavenly glory. But rejecting Christ is fatal — whether when He was on earth, or now that He is in heaven… Privileges despised or misused bring only a deeper ruin on those who reject or pervert them.
- Near. The kingdom of God came near to that town, and the town waved it away. That nearness is what the verse weighs.
- Measured. God does not judge everyone on one flat ground. He weighs each case by the light a person had within reach.
- Sodom. Sodom is the low bar because it never saw or heard the Lord Jesus in person. Less light meant less accountability.
- Messengers. The seventy were plain men, easy to dismiss. But their message carried the kingdom, so brushing them aside was no small thing.
- Fatal. Commentators call rejecting Christ the heaviest guilt a soul can carry. Privilege despised does not soften the sentence — it deepens it.