And there was also a strife among them which of them should be held to be [the] greatest.
The Lord has just spoken of His body given and His blood poured out. He has named a betrayer at the table. At that exact moment His twelve disciples fall into an argument about rank. Why does Luke record the quarrel here, and what does the Lord do with men who want to be great while He walks toward the cross?
The dispute was not about ability but about reputation — who would be reckoned the greatest. One writer notes both the force of the phrase and the fact that Luke alone sets it at this point in the story:
"Should be held": American Revisers, "Was accounted." The order here is peculiar to Luke. According to his Gospel, the disciples must have had this contention twice over: see Luke 9:46.
The other Gospels report the same rivalry, but at an earlier and calmer point. Luke puts it where it stings most.
There was honesty in these hearts; but what ignorance! Self was still unbroken! "A dispute also arose among them, as to which of them was to be regarded as the greatest." The other Gospel writers, as well as Luke, tell us that they were full of this unfitting rivalry while He was busy with His miracles and teaching. Luke mentions it where it was by far the most painful and humiliating — in the presence of the communion of His body and His blood, and just after they had heard that the traitor was there among them, offering to sell their Master for thirty pieces of silver!
His mind was full of what lay ahead. Theirs was full of themselves. That gap is not theirs alone.
For us the curtain is pulled back. When we read of this, we can hardly understand how they could be busy with such things; but we know what was about to happen. So many things have power to pull even us, who have more light than they had, away from the thought that filled the heart of Jesus then!
One writer traces this quarrel, and every quarrel like it since, back to a single root: wanting glory for yourself.
Nothing hurts the heart more, or weakens our testimony more, than the differences of judgment among the true people of God. In the second chapter of his letter to the Philippians, the Apostle traces all envy and strife to this one root — "vainglory" (Philippians 2:3). Even in the very presence of the Lord, the Apostles argued, because each wanted to be counted the greatest… And in our day, the same root explains all the division and strife among the people of God — someone wanted to be great.
The Lord does not deny that greatness exists. He shows where it is found. One writer sets the two kinds side by side.
There was also strife among them, each wanting the foremost place, and this just as their great Master was about to take the lowest place. Such, sadly, is the heart of man, even of believers. But it brought out very clearly the basic difference between the disciple and the world. Worldly greatness shows itself and holds on by ruling over others. Christian greatness takes a servant's place. In that greatness Jesus Himself stood above all.
The cure is not stricter rules about rank. It is nearness to Christ. Close to Him, self shrinks to nothing.
This is the most humiliating picture of man's heart. Right after the table where He showed His love, they argue about which of them should be the greatest. When you get near to Christ you feel as if every shred of yourself was gone… The more we are with Christ, the more we welcome obscurity, and He knows; that is enough. The soul that goes on with Christ can say, "Well, I am content to be nothing"… We never help anyone except by setting Christ before them.
The Lord answers their ambition with gentleness. He teaches them by His own example, and turns them away from pushing themselves forward.
The Lord, ever full of gentleness and meekness, forgets Himself in His care for His disciples… He knows how to teach them, by His own example, what the love of God is. At the same time He shows them the grace that is in Him, and all the faithfulness He has shown them, which puts them in His debt. It is as though He had said, You need not raise yourselves: my Father will raise you.
- Root — The strife has one source: someone wanted to be great. The same root divides believers still.
- Timing — Luke places the quarrel at the supper table, right after the bread and the cup and the news of a traitor. Nowhere could it look worse.
- Contrast — They reached for the highest place as their Master took the lowest. Worldly greatness rules; Christian greatness serves.
- Cure — Nearness, not better rules. Close to Christ, a person is content to be nothing, and helps others only by setting Christ before them.
- Grace — He does not crush them. He teaches by His own example, and tells them they need not raise themselves: His Father will raise them.
And he said to them, The kings of the nations rule over them, and they that exercise authority over them are called benefactors.
At the Lord's table the disciples argued about rank, and He answered by pointing to the kings of the Gentiles — the rulers of the nations. His words expose a title the world's rulers loved — and set a different standard for those who follow Him.
The timing is what makes this scene so painful. One writer notes that the other Gospel writers record the same rivalry at earlier moments. Luke places it at the most humiliating hour of all.
There was honesty in these hearts. But what ignorance! How unbroken their self-will was! Luke tells us that a quarrel also broke out among them over which of them should be counted the greatest. The other Gospel writers, as well as Luke, mention that they were full of this shameful rivalry while He was in the middle of His miracles and teaching. Luke records it at the point where it was by far the most painful and humiliating — during the sharing of His body and His blood, and just after they had heard that the traitor was among them, offering to sell their Master for thirty pieces of silver!
The word was not a description but a compliment — a public honour paid to men in power, and one they enjoyed hearing.
This was a term of praise and flattery, often used for rulers who loved to hear themselves praised. The Lord said it must not be so among His disciples. They had been arguing about who should be the greatest — and that while their Lord was on His way to the cross! Instead they should have taken a low place, following in His steps.
The title also had a history. Real rulers carried it as a name.
History knows one of the Ptolemies by the title of "benefactor," Euergetes, and people often gave the same title to the Roman emperor. But this flattery was not to exist among His disciples. Instead, the greater was to be as the younger, and the leader was to take the servant's place.
The flattering word covered something else. What these rulers did to people was not generosity.
People flattered the kings of the nations as "benefactors," while those kings were in fact putting others under their authority. Sinful human nature longs for such power over others, but believers were to have no such ambition.
One writer connects the rejection of the title to the way God gives. A benefactor hands down favours from a height; God's love does not work that way.
The Saviour does not give, like man, from high to low; that is why He rejects the word "benefactor."
One writer applies this to a woman who came to Christ for help. She gained more than the help she asked for.
Christ does not deal with her as a mere patron or benefactor. She has a share in Himself as well as in His power to bless her. And this is the gospel. The gospel tells us of our right to the "benefit," and of our share in the "Benefactor," that He is our Kinsman as well as our Deliverer.
There is a counterfeit of this that looks like humility. Commenting on the call to associate with people of low position, one writer warns against helping others in a way that quietly preserves your own superiority.
The idea of condescension goes against the teaching of both the Lord and His servant. It assumes we keep a sense of worldly superiority in our own hearts, because it means showing kindness to the lowly in a patronising way.
The pattern the Lord named did not stay outside the circle of His followers. It reappeared among them, which is why He warned of it at all.
Men soon twisted service into lordship. Yet our Lord took care to foresee the danger and warn of it. He also planted the principle of grace, which, if we hold it in faith, guards us from evil and shapes the heart according to God. This evil was so bold and so deeply rooted that it followed the apostles themselves right up to the last Passover and the Lord's Supper.
One writer applies this to claims of supremacy in the church itself.
Christ — so says the Holy Scripture — forbade Peter and his colleagues to reign, to exercise lordship, or to have authority over the faithful like the kings of the Gentiles.
- Title. "Benefactor" was flattery. Rulers loved to hear it: one Ptolemy carried it as a name, and Roman emperors received it too.
- Reality. Behind the compliment, these men were putting others under their authority. The word made domination sound like generosity.
- Refusal. Christ rejects the title because He does not give from a height downward, as men do.
- Relationship. He deals with us as a Kinsman, not as a distant patron. The gospel gives us a share in the Benefactor Himself, not only in His benefits.
- Risk. The quarrel over greatness broke out at the Lord's Supper. The same instinct later turned service into lordship in the church.
But *ye* [shall] not [be] thus; but let the greater among you be as the younger, and the leader as he that serves.
Jesus says this at the table on the night He was betrayed. The disciples had just been arguing over which of them was the greatest, and His answer turns the whole idea of rank upside down.
Commentators note where Luke places this quarrel: at the most painful moment possible.
There was honesty in these hearts; but what ignorance! What unbrokenness of self! "There was also a dispute among them about which of them should be considered the greatest." Other Gospel writers also mention this rivalry, which was out of place, while He was doing miracles and teaching. Luke mentions it at the most painful and humiliating point of all. It came while they shared in the communion of His body and His blood, and just after they heard that the traitor was among them, offering to sell their Master for thirty pieces of silver!
Verse 25 shows how power works in the world. Verse 26 draws the opposite line for the disciples.
There was also strife among them. Each one wanted the top place, and this just as their great Master was about to take the lowest place. Such, sadly, is the heart of man, even of saints. But it did bring out the basic difference between the disciple and the world very clearly. The world shows and keeps its greatness by taking the place of a master. Christian greatness comes from taking the place of a servant.
One writer finds the cure for their rivalry in nearness to Christ Himself.
This is the most humiliating picture of man's heart. Right after the table where His love is displayed, they argue about who should be the greatest. When you get near to Christ you feel as if every shred of yourself was gone. Verse 25 shows what goes on in the world; but verse 26 shows that Christianity is the total and entire opposite of it. It is a beautiful state of soul that brings a person into the place of being nothing, and glad to stay out of sight… The soul that goes on with Christ can say, "Well, I am content to be nothing."
The Lord did not only give the command. He was the living example of it, and He acted it out that same evening.
The Lord knew what was going on. He took the chance to teach them the lesson of true greatness, and also the favour in the kingdom in store for them all. True greatness would be shown in serving. And the Lord Himself showed this: "I am among you as the one who serves." What a rebuke! Had He not been serving all along? … What, too, must they have felt when they saw Him get up from the table, tie a cloth around Himself, and begin to wash the feet of each one of them (John 13)! For it was during the supper that the Lord stooped to that lowly service.
The verse speaks to "the leader," and the danger it corrects did not stop with the disciples.
Men soon turned service into lordship. Our Lord took pains to see the danger coming and to warn of it. He also planted the principle of grace, and that grace, if held in faith, guards from evil and shapes the heart according to God. This evil was so bold and stubborn that it followed the apostles themselves right up to the last Passover and the Lord's Supper.
A promise follows the rebuke at once. The Lord answers their scramble for rank by giving them a kingdom.
The Lord, always full of gentleness and meekness, forgets Himself in His care for His disciples. He says to them, "Let the greatest among you become as the youngest, and the leader as one who serves." He teaches them by His own example what the love of God is… It is as though He had said, You need not raise yourselves: My Father will raise you. "You are those who have continued with me in my trials, and I appoint to you a kingdom, as my Father has appointed to me."
- Rivalry. The argument over rank broke out at the supper table. The traitor sat there, and the Master was about to take the lowest place of all.
- Reversal. The world keeps greatness by holding the place of a master. Among disciples, greatness comes from taking the place of a servant. The two are opposites, not variations.
- Rule. "As the youngest" means being content to be nothing. That contentment comes from nearness to Christ, not from effort.
- Example. He had already lived the command, and He proved it that same evening by rising from the table to wash their feet.
- Reward. Turning service into lordship is the old danger. But no one needs to grab a place: the Father raises those who take the low one, and He appoints them a kingdom.
For which [is] greater, he that is at table or he that serves? [Is] not he that is at table? But *I* am in the midst of you as the one that serves.
The argument breaks out at the worst moment. Jesus is speaking of His betrayal and death, and His closest followers are arguing about which of them is the greatest. He answers with a question about rank at a table — and then puts Himself on the serving side.
One writer notes where Luke places this quarrel: at the table, moments after Jesus named the traitor.
There was honesty in these hearts, but what ignorance! How unbroken their self-will was! "A dispute also arose among them, as to which of them was to be regarded as the greatest." Other Gospel writers, as well as Luke, mention their unfitting rivalry while He was in the middle of His miracles and teaching. Luke mentions it where it was by far the most painful and humiliating: at the sharing of His body and His blood, and just after they heard that the traitor was among them, offering to sell their Master for thirty pieces of silver.
Their scramble for the top place exposed two opposite ways of measuring greatness.
There was also strife among them, each wanting the foremost place, and this just as their great Master was about to take the lowest place. Such, sadly, is the heart of man, even of saints. Yet it brought out very clearly the basic difference between the disciple and the world. Worldly greatness shows and keeps itself by taking a place above others. Christian greatness takes a servant's place. In that greatness Jesus Himself was pre-eminent. Few words are more touching than this — "I am among you as the one who serves." Such had been His life of perfect grace, and such, in supreme measure, His death was about to be.
The title "benefactor" carried real weight in the world of that day.
The title of "benefactor," Euergetes, is the one by which one of the Ptolemies is known in history, and it was often given to the Roman emperor. But this flattery was not to be found among His disciples. Instead the greater was to be as the younger, and the leader was to be in the servant's place. In men's thoughts, who was the greater — the one at the table or the one who served there? What did they see in Him? The Greatest was the One who served them all!
The claim was not a mood or a general attitude. It described how He had lived in front of them for three years.
Consider what these words meant. When they woke in the morning, He had often been awake before them and had prepared their breakfast. They never needed a servant if He was near. His love made Him watch for chances to work on their behalf, and if there was one task more menial than another, that was the task He took. He, the Lord of glory, was the servant of those rough, unschooled fishermen. His love bound Him with unbreakable chains to a life of service. He is our pattern... He who loves most serves most, and he who would be most like his Lord must take the lowest place among his brothers, so that he may serve them all.
His service did not stop when His life on earth did.
In John 13, when the blessed Lord was going to glory, we would have said, there is an end of service. It is not so. He gets up from where He was sitting among them as a companion. He washes their feet — and that is what He is doing now... In Luke 12 we learn that He still continues the service in glory: "He will dress Himself for service and have them recline at table, and He will come and serve them." There we get His service in glory. It is His glory in love, though in the form of service... He never gives up the service. Selfishness likes to be served, but love likes to serve.
One writer adds a warning. These words can be misread as softness toward sin.
But do not use this precious word as a cover for indifference about evil. It does not mean He lovingly allowed the smallest evil or defilement. Nothing could be more false or more dangerous. He does not allow it, but lovingly takes the towel and dresses Himself to serve. He pours the water into the basin — not to allow or overlook evil, but to wash it away, to restore our consciences.
- Setting. The argument over greatness erupted at the table, moments after Jesus named the betrayer — the most humiliating moment possible for such a quarrel.
- Contrast. Worldly greatness takes the place above others and collects flattering titles. Greatness among His own takes the servant's place.
- Proof. He was describing His own life, not just stating a principle. He watched for chances to help them and took the lowest task — the Lord of glory serving fishermen.
- Permanence. He washed their feet on the way to glory, and Luke 12 shows Him serving still. Love likes to serve, so He never gives the place up.
- Purpose. His service is not indifference to evil. He takes the towel to wash defilement away. The same love should shape how His followers treat each other.
But *ye* are they who have persevered with me in my temptations.
At the Last Supper the disciples argued over which of them was greatest. In the middle of it the Lord named them as the men who had stood by Him through all He suffered. The words raise a hard question: how could He say this of men who were hours away from sleeping, denying and running?
The timing makes this startling. He speaks after one disciple's treachery and after their quarrel over rank.
And the bright day will come when Jesus will tell us what He told the disciples, "You are those who have stayed with me in my trials." This was after the discussion of who should be the greatest, after He had before Him the treachery of one disciple, and the unworthy vanity of the others. He knew all that they had been in the past, the trial they had been to Himself, their many weaknesses and failures. Yet He puts it as an honour to them.
Only Luke records these words of praise. The other Gospels tell the same night from a very different side.
Only Luke tells how graciously He noticed that they had persevered with Him in His trials. Both accounts, of course, were perfectly true. In Luke it was the reckoning of grace. It was really the Lord who had stooped to stay with them, and had held up their faltering steps. Yet He could say that they had stayed with Him. … It is always like this in grace. Matthew and Mark tell us the sad truth that, when He needed the disciples most, they all forsook Him and fled.
The wonder is not that they stayed. It is who kept them standing.
We know they would not have stood one hour with Him if His grace had not enabled them; and yet notice how He even gives them credit for what His own grace alone had wrought.
Older translations read "temptations" here. The word reaches back over His whole life on earth, not only to the night ahead.
But the Lord owns their faithful continuance with Him while in His trials. We know what they were like when the dark hour really came — asleep, or running away, or denying Him. That is how they were sifted. Yet by grace they had stayed with Him through the time of His humiliation and trials. He had submitted Himself to these in His life on earth, for man's sake.
He is not only crediting them. He is telling them what their love is worth to Him.
We do not believe enough in Christ's heart towards us, and we have not enough heart for Him either. He values our affections: "You are those who have stayed with me in my trials." What a Saviour He is!
Instead of settling their dispute over rank, He hands them a kingdom — which makes the argument pointless.
Then as to the future, what room could there be for strife among those who were all destined to sit on thrones? Would the Lord forget their service? Would He fail to value it rightly? Let Him speak, and settle that: "You are those who have stayed with me in my trials." So none of them will be forgotten in the coming day. Continuance with Him to the end will certainly have its recognition and full reward.
Rank is His Father's to give, not theirs to grab.
He knows how to teach them, by His own example, what the love of God is; and at the same time He shows them the grace which is in Him, and all the faithfulness for which they are indebted to Him. It is as though He had said, You need not raise yourselves: my Father will raise you.
They had kept company with a rejected King.
Those who had been the companions of the rejected Messiah would be the companions of the glorified Messiah. As His Father had appointed Him a kingdom, the reward of His humiliation and faithfulness, so He appointed one to them, to share with Himself.
What He said to those first disciples holds for His own today.
Those men whom our Lord chose to be with Him wherever He went on earth were wayward and full of failure. Yet how blessed and encouraging it is to find Him giving them the credit of faithfulness in the end … And so it is with us today who are Christ's own — "who by God's power are being guarded through faith for a salvation ready to be revealed in the last time" (1 Peter 1:5).
- Grace speaks first. He commends them right after the betrayal and the quarrel over greatness — He honours them in full view of their failure.
- Grace supplies what it credits. They could not have stood one hour on their own; it was He who stayed with them, and yet He calls the perseverance theirs.
- Grace looks back over a life. "My trials" reaches across His whole path of humiliation on earth, not only the coming night.
- Grace hands out a kingdom. He forgets nothing they gave Him. Companions in His rejection become companions in His glory. Men headed for thrones need not argue about rank.
- Grace still reckons this way. The Father raises His own, so we need not raise ourselves. His power keeps us to the end.
And *I* appoint unto you, as my Father has appointed unto me, a kingdom,
The Lord speaks these words at the supper table on the night of His betrayal. The twelve have just been arguing over which of them is the greatest. His answer is not a rebuke about rank but a gift: He hands them a kingdom on the same terms He received one from His Father.
One commentator weighs the Greek word behind "assign" (older translations read "I appoint") and rules out any idea of a will:
"I appoint," διατίθεμαι. Not "I bequeath": compare Jeremiah 31:31 in the Greek Old Testament. As far as we know, the Jews used no wills at the time when the Gospel of Luke and the Letter to the Hebrews first circulated.
The setting makes this startling. He gives away a kingdom while His enemies wait at the door:
Think what a moment this was for Him. Think of the surroundings He was in — sorrow and rejection, and men waiting outside to drag Him away to death. Yet He speaks about the kingdom. The kingdom was present to Him, and He says, "I appoint to you a kingdom." Only a man in power and position can talk about appointing.
The men receiving this kingdom would abandon Him within hours. Yet He has just said they stayed with Him through His trials — and one writer points out that Luke alone preserves this side of the story:
Matthew and Mark, and even John, make their forsaking of Christ very obvious a little later. Luke alone tells how graciously He noticed their perseverance with Himself in His trials. Both, of course, were perfectly true. In Luke it was the reckoning of grace. It was really the Lord who had chosen to continue with them, and had sustained their faltering steps.
He treats His people the same way still, right up to the day each of them stands before Him:
Because He loves them, He delights to say everything He can in their favour. He delights to say all He can for each of us; and when we stand before the judgment seat, He will surprise us. Little things we had forgotten He will remember and bring up in our favour.
He ends the argument over greatness by pointing to what His Father will do:
The Lord, always full of gentleness and meekness, forgets Himself in His care for His disciples… He knows how to teach them, by His own example, what the love of God is. At the same time He shows them the grace that is in Him, and all the faithfulness they owe to Him. It is as though He had said, You need not raise yourselves: my Father will raise you.
The clause "as my Father assigned to me" places Christ Himself in the position of a receiver. He did not seize the crown any more than He seized the priesthood:
The kingdom is a delegated thing, a stewardship. All is subjection: His days of kingly power, His days of self-emptying sorrow, His days of heavenly priestly ministry. All alike are subjection and service. Christ did not glorify Himself to be made a High Priest. The One who glorified Him said to Him, "You are My Son; today I have begotten You." So we may say He did not glorify Himself to be made a King either. The One who glorified Him said to Him, "Sit at My right hand, until I make Your enemies Your footstool."
The kingdom is theirs, but not yet. The waiting itself has a purpose:
They could expect present trial. Yet He appointed His disciples a kingdom — future indeed, but such as the Father had appointed to Him to be revealed in due time. They would have to wait for the time of this glorious exaltation, when they would be feasted in His kingdom and sit on thrones judging the twelve tribes of Israel. This judging will be an administrative government in the Millennium, for which suffering with Him has fitted them.
Our reign waits on His:
We shall reign with Christ; but even He sits on the Father's throne as yet. He waits to receive His own throne; and so do we much more. If our hearts were right, we should not want to reign without Him… He will come in His kingdom, which He has not yet received. Until then our calling is to endure, not to reign. When He appears, we shall appear with Him; when He reigns, so shall we with Him.
- Appointed, not bequeathed — the word is a formal assignment made by One in power. It is not a will left behind by a dying man.
- Received before given — Christ takes the kingdom from His Father's hand, just as He took the priesthood. He hands it on to His people on the same terms.
- Grace speaks first — He credits the twelve with standing by Him, when in truth He had stood by them. He still says everything He can in His people's favour.
- Rivalry answered — no one needs to lift himself up when the Father will do it. The promised kingdom leaves the argument over greatness with no point at all.
- Endure now, reign then — He waits for His own throne, and His people wait with Him. Today's trial trains them for the government to come.
that ye may eat and drink at my table in my kingdom, and sit on thrones judging the twelve tribes of Israel.
At the last supper the disciples argued over who was the greatest, and Jesus answered with a promise of a table and thrones. His words raise three questions: what kingdom, what eating and drinking, and which twelve tribes?
The promise comes at an ugly moment, and the Lord meets it with grace.
Luke records a humbling moral fact: even here they argued about who should be greatest — at such a moment! But it gave an opening to the perfect and patient grace of Christ. He could teach them the true path of glory He had followed: humility, and being servant to all... He appointed them a kingdom, as His Father had appointed one to Him. So they would be at table in His kingdom, and sit on twelve thrones, judging the twelve tribes of Israel. The very greatness of the glory and the blessing ought to silence the dispute.
It is easy to read this promise as payment for loyalty. One commentator rejects that reading, pointing to what these men did within hours.
The Lord speaks of His own in a grace which secures them from all their slips and follies. To take His words here, or anywhere else, as a reward for their righteousness is distressing error and real self-righteousness. In fact they failed badly, and Peter in particular. How can saints be so blind as to argue the contrary?
Commentators differ over how far our conduct shapes our place in the kingdom. Another writer holds grace and reward together.
We must never confuse the doctrine of grace with that of reward. Grace pardons our sins and gives us a place in heaven; our ways in practice will determine our place in Christ's kingdom. We must never use the doctrine of grace to deny that of rewards. But Christ Himself must always be the motive for the saint's daily, hourly walk.
The picture is a meal. One writer denies that literal food is the point.
I do not think the eating and drinking refers to any physical eating in the kingdom on earth. It means their being with Christ in the glory in which He rules over the earth, seated at His table as the King's accepted ones. Then, as such people would naturally do, they rule over His subjects — and here in the most favoured position. The thought starts from verse 27.
Another writer draws out what Christ Himself does at that table when He returns.
So He will return a second time to the earthly objects of His affection, to renew His intimacy with them in the millennial age. He will again come forth and serve them — yes, gather them around Himself, as He said: "that you may eat and drink at my table in my kingdom and sit on thrones judging the twelve tribes of Israel."
Judging here means a share in running the kingdom during the Millennium — Christ's thousand-year reign on earth. It is still future.
They could expect present trial. Yet He appointed His disciples a kingdom — future, but the same kind the Father had appointed to Him, and it will be revealed in due time. They would have to wait for that glorious exaltation. Then they would feast in His kingdom and sit on thrones judging the twelve tribes of Israel. This judging will be administrative government in the Millennium, and suffering with Him has fitted them for it. Then indeed they will have no such attitude of seeking to exalt themselves, and only then will He exalt them.
The promise names twelve tribes. Nobody today knows where ten of them are.
No one knows clearly or certainly where the ten tribes are. It does not seem to be anyone's business to search them out beforehand. We may leave them in the obscurity that God has put them in. We know, if we believe His word, that as surely as He has preserved the scattered remnant of the two tribes, so will He bring the descendants of the ten out of their hiding place. We know that not only the Jews proper are to be restored, but the full nationality of Israel — the full twelve tribes making one nation in the land, with one King over them all. Every letter of the promises will be accomplished. Scripture cannot be broken.
- Occasion. The quarrel over greatness is what draws out the promise; the size of the coming glory is meant to end the argument.
- Gift. He appoints them a kingdom, as the Father appointed one to Christ — not wages for their record, which failed within hours.
- Table. Their place at His table means being with Christ in His glory, as the King's accepted ones. And He will serve them there.
- Throne. The judging is real government in the coming kingdom. It waits for the time He has set.
- Tribes. Twelve thrones need twelve tribes. God knows where the lost ten are, and He will restore the whole nation.
And the Lord said, Simon, Simon, behold, Satan has demanded to have you, to sift [you] as wheat;
The Lord warns Peter about something happening out of sight. Satan has asked for the disciples, and God has said yes. Why would God hand His own people over to be shaken? And what remains when the shaking ends?
The word behind "demanded" is not a casual wish. One commentator, noting the force of the Greek, explains what kind of asking this was:
"Has begged" is the sense here. The ek in exētēsato points to intensity and persistent asking.
But pressing hard is not the same as having power. Satan must ask, and God sets the limits:
Always remember: no matter what Satan wants, he cannot touch one hair of our heads without God's permission. Both Job and Simon were in Satan's hands for a time, but in each case Satan could go only as far as divine wisdom allowed him. God let Satan lead Simon into a temptation, and Satan made him fail in it. Yet all Satan really achieved was to destroy Simon's self-confidence. He could not destroy his faith.
The picture is a threshing floor, and the word itself tells the story:
Peter and all the disciples were to be "sifted like wheat." But every trial any child of God goes through is sifting. That is what tribulation means, and "in the world you will have tribulation" is a sure word. The word comes from the tribulum, the threshing tool that separated the wheat from the chaff. Loss of loved ones, sickness, personal suffering, loss of possessions, hard circumstances, strong temptation — all these sift the wheat from the chaff. And Satan is not far away when the sifting begins.
The enemy expected an empty sieve. He had miscalculated what he was sifting:
As in Job's case, the enemy had presented himself before God to accuse them. He chose the moment that suited his plans, when the Lord would be taken from them and they would have no visible protection. He asked to put them into the sieve. He was certain that nothing would remain which God could accept. This way he thought to wrench them away from Christ, but he was mistaken. No doubt nothing of man would remain in the sieve; but what God had worked in the disciples must remain. In his hatred Satan forgot that if he had all power over the flesh, he had none at all over God and what comes from Him.
The Lord names Simon, but the demand covers the whole group. Older English translations showed a difference modern English hides: "you" for them all, then "thee" for Simon by himself. That change points to where the crack was:
You notice the change. "Satan demanded to have you." It was not only Simon, though He addresses Simon — Satan wanted them all. "But I have prayed for you." Why for Simon alone, and not for them all? Because Satan was making a dead set at Simon, and what gave Satan the opening was this: Simon's self-confidence. Confidence in what? In his natural character? Not at all — in his love for the Lord. If his confidence had been in the Lord's love to him it would have been a very different matter.
Satan asked for all of them. The Lord had already prayed before Peter knew anything was wrong:
Peter did not yet know his danger or his need. Before he knew either, the Lord prayed for him. … He had demanded to have them all so that he might sift them like wheat. He did not get them. Peter did go astray by rushing into temptation, but God heard the Lord's intercession for him.
The prayer that follows did not ask God to cancel the trial:
The Lord said, "Satan demanded to have you, that he might sift you like wheat, but I have prayed for you." What did He ask — that Peter should not be sifted? No, not at all. Peter needed sifting, because he had confidence in the flesh. But the Lord prayed that his "faith may not fail." That is, Peter would be held up under his trial. His heart would not lose its grip on Christ. He would be sure of His love and get the blessing intended.
God used Satan for this work. That is startling, and there is a line the enemy cannot cross:
Peter needed sifting, and God employed Satan to do the work — just as with Job, and the man in 1 Corinthians 5. It seems very wonderful, very mysterious, very solemn, that God should use Satan like this. Yet so it is. God uses him "for the destruction of the flesh." He cannot touch the spirit. That is eternally safe. But it is terrible work to get into Satan's sieve.
- Asked — the demand was urgent and insistent, but Satan still had to ask. The enemy moves only as far as God permits.
- Granted — God allowed the sieve because Peter trusted his own love for the Lord, and that confidence had to break.
- Sifted — trial is the threshing tool that separates wheat from chaff. Nothing of man survives it. What God has worked in a person remains.
- Guarded — Satan wanted the whole group and got none of them. He can reach the flesh; he cannot touch the spirit, and Peter's faith held.
- Ahead — the Lord prayed for Peter before Peter knew he was in danger, and that prayer was heard.
but *I* have besought for thee that thy faith fail not; and *thou*, when once thou hast been restored, confirm thy brethren.
On the night before the cross, Jesus warns Simon Peter that Satan has asked for him. He then speaks of a prayer already made, and of what Peter must do after the fall. Two questions follow. What did Christ actually ask for? And why did He not ask that Peter never fall?
The timing is the heart of it. Christ speaks of the prayer in the past tense. Peter is still standing, still confident, still hours away from his fall.
With Peter, it was not after he had fallen that Christ says to him, "I have prayed for you," but before. His intercession for Peter was going on all the time. He exercises it because we go wrong, not because we are right. Our feebleness and failure become the occasion for the exercise of this grace.
That order changes how we understand repentance. Peter's tears did not unlock Christ's help. They came from it.
Repentance is the effect of His advocacy... He prayed for him before the sin was committed. Then He looked at Peter at the right moment. Peter repented, went out and wept bitterly. But He had prayed for him before he repented.
Look at what Christ asks for. He does not ask that Peter escape the fall.
"I have prayed for you, that" — what? Was it that he might not fail? No, but that, having failed, his faith might not give way. Had Christ not prayed for His poor, feeble servant, he would have gone from bad to worse, and from worse to worst. But the intercession of Christ obtained for Peter the grace of true repentance, self-judgment and bitter sorrow for his sin. In the end it brought complete restoration of his heart and conscience.
Sifting separates grain from husk. So there must be grain there in the first place.
Notice, Satan sifted him just because he was wheat. Perhaps you have sometimes wondered whether there was any wheat there at all. If there were no wheat there would be no sifting. Satan never sifts mere chaff... And he will do the same with any of us, if we are not watchful and do not judge ourselves.
In verse 31, "you" is plural in the original. Here it is singular. Christ turns from the group to one man.
The Lord Jesus told Peter that Satan had desired to have "you" (a plural word), that is, all the disciples... But it is Peter alone to whom He says, "I have prayed for you (singular) that your faith may not fail."... The Lord Jesus, as the faithful Advocate, prayed for Peter before his fall. Certainly then Peter's faith did not fail, though he failed.
Older translations read "when you are converted." That wording confuses readers, because Peter already believed. The word means turning.
The word translated "converted" means turning to God. It covers conversion at the start, and also turning back after someone has departed from Him. The second is of course what is meant here. It is what we usually call "restoration" of soul, not what most people mean by "conversion."
Notice what Christ tells the restored man to do — and what He does not tell him.
He does not say, "When you are restored, take care you do not fall again." He says, "When you are restored, strengthen your brothers." That is what Christ cares about. You must learn from failure; but when you are restored, strengthen the brothers. That is our business, and we can only strengthen each other by the ministry of Christ.
It also answers the instinct to write off anyone who has fallen.
He was the object of such grace, and of the power that drew him back again. That fact would give confidence not only to him, but to them. So it is quite wrong to say that God does not restore a man, or that you must never trust someone who has once broken down... Peter broke down here, and he broke down later just as seriously: he failed over the Gentiles — the non-Jews God had sent him to welcome... Even so, no one except perhaps the apostle Paul was used by God more to strengthen his brothers. I think it is a serious thing to weaken the source of confidence in a soul that has slipped aside.
- Asked — Satan demanded all the disciples. Christ answered by praying for one man by name.
- Prayed — Christ prayed before the sin, not after it. Peter's tears were the fruit of that prayer, not the price of it.
- Held — Christ did not ask that Peter avoid the fall, but that his faith not give way. Peter failed; his faith did not.
- Turned — "converted" here means restoration of a believer who has wandered, not the first turning of a sinner to God.
- Strengthened — Christ's aim was not caution but usefulness. The man who fell became the one who could steady others.