What Seat Would Jesus Have Taken?

What Place at the Table Did Jesus Take?

Lule 14:1-14

Everyone wants to feel important. Some derive their sense of self-worth by how many followers he has on social media. This desire for relevance can lead to depression and suicide. Someone once wrote a song named “Looking for Love in all the Wrong Places.” the question is where and from whom do you get your sense of self-worth?

The first verse sets the scene for us. There was a meal set forth for guests by one of the chief Pharisees after the Sabbath services in the synagogue. As the host, he would, of course, would seat at the head of the table. He would soak in all the prestige of his position. Seating was strictly ordered by rank. Who sat at this Pharisee’s right and left? Who got to eat at the first setting for the meal? Lesser persons had to wait until the first sitting was done to be served. The servants would eat last. The entire meal was intended to show people their place.

Why was Jesus invited? Why was the man with the withered hand invited? The context suggests that this was a set up. It says they watched Him closely to see if Jesus would heal the man. Normally. a crippled man was considered to be of low status. The Pharisees saw disease as being the result of sin. The situation might be different if the man with the dropsy was the son of one of the chief Pharisees. But we are not told this, and it seems quite the opposite. The man might not have been invited at all, unless it was to entrap Jesus.

I would suppose that Jesus would have been offered an honorable place at the table. One can think of how Jezebel told Ahab to call a feast and invite Naboth to a privileged place at the table. This made Naboth the center of attention. the purpose of this was so he could be prominently accused by false witnesses unto Naboth’s death. (1 Kings 21). I think there is a similar theme here. The motives of the Pharisees were not good.

Jesus cured the man’s condition. the man whose body was severely and painfully bloated was healed. Jesus took the initiative and asked them whether it was lawful to heal on the Sabbath. He was reading their minds. He knew what they were up to. Everyone was watching. Then Jesus chides them by telling them that if their ox or donkey fell into a pit, they would work to take the poor animal out. This is the second time in Luke that oxen and donkeys are mentioned. The guests remained silent. They were shamed. their purpose was to shame Jesus as a Sabbath-breaker. Instead it was they who were prominently put to shame.

Much is said in commentaries about the honor-shame culture in the time of Jesus as if honor and shame do not exist today. People care just as much today about honor and shame as always. The fact that many are shameless about what should shame them is irrelevant. This is because what is honored and what is shamed is changed somewhat. what would be shameful in the context of the Pharisees and what would be shameful in today’s “woke” culture are different. If one goes against the views of the elite who consider themselves morally superior to the common people, he would be shamed. He would be banned from social media, He would be ridiculed for his backward views. These people are called “deplorables.” It is ironic, though, that today’s “woke” elitists and the Pharisees of that day were not as morally superior as they might think.

Jesus observed how the rules of the feast were enforced. He noticed that there was some jockeying over who should sit in the chief seats. Perhaps one of them had taken a higher place than he was entitled to and told to take a lower place. But this was the case in the parable which Jesus tells. Parables serve as illustrations of a point. Part of the power of the parable was that is was a story from everyday life. Everyone at the feast knew the rules from the greatest to the least. The other part of the parable is the application of this truth, often involving a surprise where the rules are turned on their heads. This is the case here.

People are conflicted between their desire for advancement and their desire not to be shamed. Most avoided shaming and took their assigned place, even though they coveted the better placement in their hearts. One might rationalize this by saying that at least they were higher on the scale than this miserable wretch with the dropsy. At least they got a seat and were not the servants who had to serve the guests on the Sabbath day. This stratification of society was kept stable by this comparison. The Middle Class might inspire to the lives of the rich and famous and be frustrated but at least they are not the homeless. So this desire for prestige infects all.