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.