Beam-Eye Blindness - June 29th, 2025

COMBINED EXPOSITORY SERMON BRIEF – LUKE 6:39‑45

(Inductive opening that flows into a deductive five‑point exposition; includes key lexical, historical, theological, and literary insights for maximum content)

FORMAL ELEMENTS / DESCRIPTIVE DATA

Text – Luke 6:39‑45

Luke 6:39–45 KJV

39 And he spake a parable unto them, Can the blind lead the blind? shall they not both fall into the ditch? 40 The disciple is not above his master: but every one that is perfect shall be as his master. 41 And why beholdest thou the mote that is in thy brother’s eye, but perceivest not the beam that is in thine own eye? 42 Either how canst thou say to thy brother, Brother, let me pull out the mote that is in thine eye, when thou thyself beholdest not the beam that is in thine own eye? Thou hypocrite, cast out first the beam out of thine own eye, and then shalt thou see clearly to pull out the mote that is in thy brother’s eye. 43 For a good tree bringeth not forth corrupt fruit; neither doth a corrupt tree bring forth good fruit. 44 For every tree is known by his own fruit. For of thorns men do not gather figs, nor of a bramble bush gather they grapes. 45 A good man out of the good treasure of his heart bringeth forth that which is good; and an evil man out of the evil treasure of his heart bringeth forth that which is evil: for of the abundance of the heart his mouth speaketh.

(KJV text with optional 21st‑century equivalents in brackets)

“Can the blind lead the blind [‘Can a driver with no GPS guide another lost driver’]? shall they not both fall into the ditch [‘end up in a wreck’]?

The disciple is not above his master: but every one that is perfect [‘fully trained’] shall be as his master.

And why beholdest thou the mote [‘speck of sawdust’] that is in thy brother’s eye, but perceivest not the beam [‘two‑by‑four’] that is in thine own eye?

Either how canst thou say to thy brother, Brother, let me pull out the mote that is in thine eye, when thou thyself beholdest not the beam that is in thine own eye? Thou hypocrite, cast out first the beam out of thine own eye, and then shalt thou see clearly to pull out the mote that is in thy brother’s eye.

For a good tree bringeth not forth corrupt fruit [‘a healthy apple tree never yields worm‑eaten apples’]; neither doth a corrupt tree bring forth good fruit.

For every tree is known by his own fruit. For of thorns men do not gather figs [‘you don’t pick peaches off tumbleweeds’], nor of a bramble bush gather they grapes [‘or harvest coffee beans from cactus’].

A good man out of the good treasure of his heart bringeth forth that which is good; and an evil man out of the evil treasure of his heart bringeth forth that which is evil: for of the abundance [‘overflow’] of the heart his mouth speaketh.”

Central Idea of the Text (CIT) –

Jesus demonstrated that blind leadership, shallow discipleship, hidden hypocrisy, corrupt character, and toxic speech inevitably drag His followers into ruin, whereas clear vision, Christ‑shaped formation, rigorous self‑examination, sound character, and wholesome words safeguard both guide and guided.

Proposition –

Since Christ alone grants clear vision and good fruit, we must let Him expose our blindness, train our hearts, pull our beams, cultivate our roots, and season our speech.

Statement of Purpose –

(1) Major Objective – Ethical

(2) Specific Objective – I want my hearers, this week, to conduct a Spirit‑led “heart audit,” removing known hypocrisy and replacing corrupt inner treasure with Scripture, prayer, and practical obedience so their words and influence become life‑giving.

Title – Beam-Eye Blindness: FROM DITCHES TO DISCERNMENT

Structural Pattern – Combined: Problem‑Solution progression (inductive) that lands in an Enumeration outline of five imperatives (deductive).

INFORMAL ELEMENTS / RHETORICAL DATA

INDUCTIVE INITIATION – LIFE‑INTEREST

L.M. – Last month rescue crews pulled a minivan from a drainage ditch. The driver had followed a GPS that showed a paved road where only a mud lane existed. Tech‑savvy but direction‑blind, the family slept in the car overnight until help arrived.

L.I. – Why do people drowning in information still land in life’s ditches? Is the problem the guides we pick, the training we pursue, the hypocrisy we ignore, the character we cultivate, or the words we spill? Jesus addresses every layer.

[Non‑Technical Summary

Jesus sketches five vivid pictures to show how inner character determines outward influence. First, He asks whether one blind man can safely lead another—both would tumble into a ditch. He then reminds His listeners that students never outrank their teacher; only after thorough training can they resemble him. Shifting the image, He exposes the hypocrisy of spotting a tiny splinter in a brother’s eye while ignoring the roof‑beam in one’s own; only after removing the beam can someone see clearly enough to help another. Next, He notes that healthy trees never bear rotten fruit, nor diseased trees good fruit—figs and grapes are never gathered from thorns or brambles. Finally, He explains the point: a good heart overflows with good words, while an evil heart spills harmful ones, because the mouth simply echoes the surplus stored inside.]

INDUCTIVE MIDDLE MOVEMENTS (Problem Escalation)

1. Maybe it’s merely poor leadership.

(EXP v 39) Blind guides cannot keep anyone out of a pit.

Tentative Resolution – Let’s just find better experts.

Transition – Yet Jesus moves from guides to pupils.

2. Maybe more education fixes it.

(EXP v 40) Disciples mirror their teachers—but only when fully trained.

Tentative Resolution – Enroll in more courses and we’ll be fine.

Transition – Still, honor‑roll hypocrites wreck relationships.

3. Maybe the issue is hypocrisy.

(EXP vv 41‑42) A man volunteering eye‑surgery with a roof‑beam jutting from his own socket is beyond satire.

Tentative Resolution – So confess hypocrisy, problem solved.

Transition – Not yet; the tree itself may be diseased.

4. Maybe character is defective.

(EXP vv 43‑44) Thorn bushes never grow grapes.

Tentative Resolution – Replace bad habits and plant good ones.

Transition – But how do we change the storehouse that feeds the fruit?

The Spirit now “guides into all truth” (John 16:13), replacing blind teachers with divine illumination.

[Modernized Literary Rendering of TR (Didactic/Wisdom Style)

Picture two travelers in the dark—each groping for a road he cannot see. When one blind man reaches for another to guide him, they both tumble into the same ditch. Remember this: no student outruns the wisdom of his teacher; but when the lessons are finished and the rough edges planed away, the best pupils resemble the Master who shaped them. So why are your eyes sharp enough to spot a splinter in your brother yet dull to the beam lodged in your own? How can you say, “Friend, let me fix your vision,” while a timber blocks your sight? Hypocrite! Clear your own eye first; then you will see well enough to help. After all, a healthy tree never yields rotten fruit, and a diseased tree cannot bear a harvest fit for the table. We do not pluck figs from thistles or cut clusters from a thorn bush. Likewise the good person draws good things from a heart stocked with treasure, while the corrupt heart delivers poison. For the mouth is simply the spout of the heart—whatever fills the reservoir will surely overflow in words.]

CLIMAX / FINAL RESOLUTION (Deductive turn)

L.M. – Cyber‑security experts warn: whatever resides in your hard drive eventually leaks. Jesus said it first. (Modern equivalents could speak of “the driver with no headlights” or “software with malware cannot debug another program.”)

EXP v 45 – “A good man out of the good treasure of his heart… an evil man out of the evil treasure of his heart… for of the abundance of the heart his mouth speaketh.”

F.R. – The ultimate solution is heart‑transformation by Christ, and that takes five deliberate responses.

DEDUCTIVE BODY – FIVE GAUGES FOR GENUINE DISCIPLESHIP

Jesus strings together five rapid‑fire images to press one central truth on His disciples: only a heart transformed by Christ can give reliable guidance, exercise righteous judgment, and produce life‑giving speech.

Historical-Cultural and Contextual Notes:

Luke places these sayings near the close of Jesus’ “Sermon on the Plain,” delivered in Galilee early in His public ministry (cf. Lk. 6:17‑49). The sermon answers the opposition and skepticism Jesus is already meeting from religious leaders and sets the ethical charter for a new messianic community (Perrin 2022, TNTC 3: Lk. 6:37‑49). Written roughly A.D. 70‑85, Luke’s Gospel translates that address for a largely Gentile readership facing social marginalization and the danger of false teaching in the post‑apostolic era (Bock 1994, 613‑17).

The imagery Jesus employs was instantly recognizable in first‑century Palestine. Blindness stood for helplessness and moral ignorance in both Jewish and Greco‑Roman proverbs (Arnold 2002, ZIBBC 1:164). The pupil‑teacher relationship reflected rabbinic apprenticeship, where a disciple’s learning could rise no higher than his master’s knowledge (Green 1997, 273‑74). Hyperbolic contrasts—speck versus roof‑beam, good versus rotten fruit—were common didactic exaggerations. Figs, grapes, and bramble bushes evoke Palestine’s dominant crops and thorny scrub (Arnold 2002, sub Lk. 6:43‑44).

Luke’s immediate audience consists of disciples drawn from the needy masses (Lk. 6:20‑23) plus curious crowds. Many wrestle with Pharisaic rigor and Gentile skepticism, producing both hunger for authentic guidance and susceptibility to hypocritical leaders. Luke underscores their vulnerability: “choose the right teacher” and practice rigorous self‑examination (Bock 1994, 613; Green 1997,  274).

Luke frames the unit with “He also told them a parable” (Lk. 6:39) and concludes the sermon with the call to “hear…and do” (Lk. 6:46‑49), signaling that these proverbs aim to provoke self‑assessment and obedient response (Stein 1992, 895‑96).

The five images form one parenetic chain: warning against blind leaders (v 39); urging maturation to Christ‑likeness (v 40); demanding self‑purification before critique (vv 41‑42); insisting on inner‑outer consistency (vv 43‑44); and grounding speech in a renewed heart (v 45). Each command or rhetorical question presses readers toward authentic discipleship (Bock 1994, 613‑17).

Luke omits Matthew’s polemic against false prophets (Mt. 7:15‑20), thereby shifting emphasis from identifying others’ errors to scrutinizing one’s own heart. He is silent about ceremonial regulations but repeatedly stresses “doing” Jesus’ words (Green 1997, NICNT Lk. 6:39‑45).

Luke writes this cluster of parabolic sayings to urge disciples to reject unqualified guides, cultivate Christ‑like integrity, and let transformed hearts issue in discerning speech and action.

I. Sharp VISION – Reject blind guides (Lk. 6:39)

Luke 6:39 KJV

39 And he spake a parable unto them, Can the blind lead the blind? shall they not both fall into the ditch?

EXP - v 39 presents a QUESTION–RESULT pair. A double rhetorical question ( μήτι …; οὐχί …) expects “no” then “yes,” creating an antithetic proverb: If the leaders are blind, the inevitable result is a shared fall into the ditch.

A. The peril of undiscerning leadership—“Can the blind guide the blind?” (v 39a)

Historical note: Palestinian field‑ditches could break animals’ legs; the proverb was literal and lethal. Blind guides (v 39) warn against following leaders who lack spiritual vision.

Eyes = Moral Perception — In Second‑Temple Judaism the “eye” commonly symbolized discernment or motive (Prov. 28:22; Sir 14:8). Jesus taps that convention: a clear eye pictures spiritual insight, while a blind eye signals ethical obtuseness (Marshall 1978, 269). The metaphor works bidirectionally—eyes both receive light and project one’s moral stance (Green 1997, 274).

Word-Study Notes

Word Meaning Analysis [τυφλός / tuphlós / “blind”]

English Meanings - Blind in English first denotes the literal loss or absence of sight—“destitute of the sense of seeing” (Noah Webster, An American Dictionary of the English Language). From this concrete idea flow figurative uses: “destitute of intellectual light,” “unable to understand or judge,” and hence “ignorant,” “heedless,” or “undeliberating.” The term is also employed adjectivally of things hidden from view (“a blind corner”) or obscure in direction (“a blind path”). Scripture writers similarly exploit both the literal and figurative ideas, often pairing physical blindness with spiritual incapacity (e.g., Isa. 42:18–19; Matt 15:14).

Range of Meanings - Classical and Koine Greek use tuphlós for (1) literal blindness—whether congenital or acquired (John 9:1; Acts 13:11), and (2) metaphorical blindness—a culpable inability or refusal to perceive truth (Matt. 23:16–26; Rom. 2:19). Jewish and Greco‑Roman physiognomy sometimes regarded ocular defects as outward signs of moral failure, a notion the Gospels echo yet subvert by showing Jesus giving both physical sight and spiritual insight (Luke 4:18; Mark 8:22–26). In the LXX tuphlós renders Hebrew terms for the blind who deserve protection (Lev. 19:14) or who symbolize helplessness (Lam. 4:14). Thus the lexical field spans sensory deficiency, social vulnerability, and moral ignorance.

Intended Meaning in Luke 6:39  - Jesus asks, “Μήτι δύναται τυφλὸς τυφλὸν ὁδηγεῖν;” (“Can a blind man guide a blind man?”). The immediate context contrasts hypocritical self‑appointed guides with genuinely trained disciples (vv. 40–42). Here tuphlós functions metaphorically: it labels teachers who lack spiritual discernment yet presume to direct others. The ensuing image of both falling into a pit underscores the danger of following leaders whose moral and theological vision is opaque. Physical blindness is not in view; rather, Jesus exposes willful ignorance and ethical insensitivity that disqualify one from guiding fellow believers.

B. The pitfall that awaits—“Will they not both fall into a pit?” (v 39b)

Lexical note: “Blind” (tuphlos) often symbolized spiritual ignorance. Luke’s deliberate pairing of contrasts (blind/sighted, speck/beam, good/bad fruit) reflects a Greco‑Roman rhetorical fondness for antithesis, aiding memorization among oral learners (NIGTC Lk. 6:39‑49).

Blindness versus sight echoes Isaiah’s critique of faithless shepherds (Isa. 56:10) and anticipates the Servant who “opens blind eyes” (Isa. 42:7).

C. Pastoral implication—choose mentors with spiritual sight (v 39)

Word-Study Notes

Word Meaning Analysis [ὁδηγέω / hodēgeō / “lead, guide”]

English Meanings - Lead means “to guide or conduct by showing the way; to direct” (Webster).

Range of Meanings - Rooted in hodós (“road, way”), hodēgeō literally denotes guiding travellers (Matt. 15:14) or metaphorically giving instruction (John 16:13: Spirit guides into truth). Secular papyri apply it to tutors or leaders of processions. Noun hodēgos = “guide, leader.”

Intended Meaning in Luke 6:39 - Jesus pictures a “blind man guiding (hodēgein) a blind man.” The verb underscores responsibility: one who assumes the role of moral navigator but lacks vision imperils both self and followers. It exposes the folly of unqualified teachers who offer direction without spiritual insight.

Revelation warns of blind Laodicea yet offers eye‑salve (Rev. 3:17‑18), reaffirming Jesus’ remedy for spiritual myopia.

Illustration - Blind guides → “influencers without moral compass,” “malware‑infected software advising users.”

Application – Evaluate every influencer by Scripture and fruit. Choose your guides wisely: follow leaders whose lives and lips display clear spiritual sight.

II. Shared VOCATION – Grow until you match the Master (Lk. 6:40)

Luke 6:40 KJV

40 The disciple is not above his master: but every one that is perfect shall be as his master.

EXP - v 40 supplies an AXIOM of COMPARISON that grounds v 39. The denial clause ( οὐκ ἔστιν … ὑπὲρ) states the limit; the following κατηρτισμένος clause gives the GOAL‑RESULT (“when fully trained he will be like his teacher”).

A. Inviolable limit—no disciple outranks the teacher (v 40a)

Lexical note: “Fully trained” (katērtismenos) pictures a net mended tight, a bone perfectly set. The teacher‑disciple maxim (v 40) insists that learners must submit to the Master until they mirror His character.

Word Study Notes -

Word Meaning Analysis [καταρτίζω / katartizō / “perfect, equip, fully train”]

English Meanings - Early English defined perfect (v. 40) as “to finish or complete so as to leave nothing wanting,” and the adjective denoted something “finished, complete, consummate; not defective” (Noah Webster, American Dictionary of the English Language, 1828 facsimile). Modern dictionaries keep both senses—“make perfect; bring to completion” and, of a person or thing, “having all the required qualities” (Catherine Soanes and Angus Stevenson, Concise Oxford English Dictionary, 2004). Thus when translators render katartizō with “perfect,” the English idea is not flawlessness but bringing something (or someone) into a finished, fully functional state.

Range of Meanings - Classical Greek used katartizō literally for “adjusting, restoring, mending” objects—from repairing nets (Hdt. 5.30; Mt. 4:21) to setting fractured bones (LSJ). Figuratively it meant “bring into proper condition,” “equip,” or “train,” whether fitting soldiers for battle, reconciling a city, or shaping moral character (Epictetus 3.20.10). Septuagint writers employ it for “finishing” the temple (Ezra 4–6) or “establishing” creation (Ps. 74:16 LXX). New‑Testament lexicons list two chief nuances: (1) to restore/mend what is damaged (Gal. 6:1; 1Pet. 5:10); (2) to equip or make complete for a purpose—“complete what is lacking” (1Th. 3:10), “equip you in every good work” (Heb. 13:21). In form the perfect participle katērtismenos in Luke 6:40 describes a disciple who has gone through the process and now stands “fully formed” or “fully trained.”

Intended Meaning in Luke 6:40 - Jesus states: “The disciple is not above his teacher, but everyone katērtismenos shall be as his teacher.” The contrast is not between sinless and sinful but between an unfinished learner and one thoroughly equipped. In context (vv. 39–42) He rebukes blind, hypocritical guides and commends those who submit to authentic instruction until they are properly shaped. Katartizō therefore points to the comprehensive formation—intellectual, moral, and practical—that enables a follower to reflect the character and competencies of the Master. The KJV’s “perfect” captures the idea of completed preparation, not absolute moral perfection.

B. Inevitable goal—“when fully trained” the disciple mirrors the teacher (v 40b)

The “fully trained” disciple points ahead to Pentecost when the Spirit will guide believers into all truth (John 16:13; Acts 1‑2).

C. Lifelong mandate—formation is compulsory, not optional (v 40)

Theological tie: New‑Covenant disciples bear the image of Christ (Rom. 8:29).

Application – Schedule daily apprenticeship: Word, prayer, obedience. Submit to the Master’s training plan: pursue Christ‑likeness until your reactions look like His.

III. Strict VERIFICATION – Remove your beam before you reprove (Lk. 6:41‑42)

EXP - vv 41‑42 expand the warning with two WHY/HOW QUESTIONS that expose hypocrisy, followed by an imperative–result sequence: (1) ὑποκριτά, ἔκβαλε πρῶτον … (COMMAND/PREREQUISITE); (2) καὶ τότε διαβλέψεις ἐκβαλεῖν … (RESULT).

A. Selective sight—seeing a brother’s speck, ignoring one’s beam (v 41)

Luke 6:41 KJV

41 And why beholdest thou the mote that is in thy brother’s eye, but perceivest not the beam that is in thine own eye?

Lexical contrast: karphos (speck) versus dokos (roof‑beam) – comic hyperbole exposes deadly hypocrisy. The speck‑and‑beam hyperbole (vv 41‑42) exposes hypocrisy and sets self‑purification as the prerequisite to helping others.

Word-Study Notes

Word Meaning Analysis [κάρφος / karphos / “mote, speck”]

English Meanings - The English word mote denotes “a small particle; anything proverbially small; a spot” (Noah Webster, An American Dictionary of the English Language [Anaheim, CA: Foundation for American Christian Education, 2006]). Modern English keeps the sense of “speck” (Catherine Soanes and Angus Stevenson, Concise Oxford English Dictionary [Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2004]). Biblical reference works note that the KJV renders Greek kárphos with “mote,” whereas most contemporary versions choose “speck” or “splinter” to convey the idea of a minute piece of straw, chaff, or wood that might lodge in the eye (Moisés Silva and Merrill C. Tenney, Zondervan Encyclopedia of the Bible, 4:334; S. S. Smalley, “Speck,” New Bible Dictionary, 3rd ed., 1125; Chad Brand et al., Holman Illustrated Bible Dictionary, 1154).

Range of Meanings - Classical Greek uses kárphos for any small, dry fragment—“chip of wood, dry stalk, straw, bit of wool,” even a toothpick or the tiny tablet on which a military watchword was written (Henry G. Liddell et al., A Greek‑English Lexicon, 881; Franco Montanari, Brill Dictionary of Ancient Greek). In the Septuagint it can describe an olive leaf or twig (Gen. 8:11). New‑Testament‑era lexicons retain the nuance of something “quite insignificant,” contrasting it with the far larger dokos (“beam”) in Jesus’ illustration (William Arndt et al., BDAG, 510–11; James H. Moulton and George Milligan, Vocabulary of the Greek Testament, 322; Thoralf Gilbrant, “κάρφος,” New Testament Greek‑English Dictionary; Exegetical Dictionary of the New Testament, 2:253).

Intended Meaning in Luke 6:41–42 - In Luke 6 Jesus rebukes hypocritical judgment by juxtaposing a kárphos in another’s eye with a dokos in one’s own. Within this rhetorical contrast, kárphos functions metaphorically for a comparatively minor moral flaw—real but small—while the “beam” represents a glaring, larger sin the critic ignores. The term therefore highlights the pettiness of fault‑finding when one’s own transgressions are greater. The intended meaning is not “dust” in general but a tiny splinter that nonetheless irritates the eye, underscoring both the reality of the brother’s fault and the gross disproportion in the critic’s perspective.

Word-Study Notes

Word Meaning Analysis [ὀφθαλμός / ophthalmos / “eye”]

English Meanings - In English eye denotes “the organ of sight … the globe or ball movable in the orbit” (Noah Webster, An American Dictionary of the English Language). By extension it can signify eyesight itself (“I have a man now in my eye”), attention (“keep an eye on”), opinion (“in his eyes”), a small opening (“eye of a needle”), a bud on a plant, or any structure resembling the orb (e.g., “eye” of a feather or hurricane). The word therefore moves easily from strict anatomy to varied figurative senses of perception, vigilance, desire, or focal point.

Range of Meanings - Classical Greek employs ὀφθαλμός for the literal organ and, by metonymy, for visual capacity, insight, envy (“evil eye”), compassion (“eye of pity”), and the personified gaze of deities. The Septuagint renders several Hebrew terms (ʿayin, ʿôyēn, etc.), preserving similar flexibility: God’s watchful “eyes” (Ps. 33:18), human understanding (Prov. 3:7), sorrow dimming the eyes (Job 17:7), prophetic “seers.” In the New Testament the noun appears over a hundred times, in literal healing narratives (Matt. 9:27; Jn 9) and in metaphors: the “lamp of the body” (Matt. 6:22 = Luke 11:34), “eye for an eye” (Matt. 5:38), apostolic eyewitness (2Pet. 1:16). Cognate idioms include “evil eye” for greed (Mark 7:22), “twinkling of an eye” for sudden change (1Cor. 15:52), and “eyes of the heart” enlightened (Eph. 1:18). Second‑temple physiology often assumed extramission—light emanating from the eye—informing Jesus’ lamp imagery.

Intended Meaning in Luke 6:41–42 - Within the hyperbolic contrast of a κάρφος (“speck”) and a δοκός (“beam”), ὀφθαλμός functions as the locus of moral perception. To meddle with a brother’s “eye” is to critique his discernment or character; the critic’s own eye, obscured by a plank of hypocrisy, is spiritually impaired. Thus the term retains its literal sense (the delicate organ that must be cleared) while bearing metaphorical weight: the faculty of ethical vision. Jesus teaches that only when one’s own eye is unobstructed—i.e., when personal sin is confessed—can one see clearly to assist another.

B. Self‑righteous speech—“Brother, let me cast it out” while blind to self (v 42a)

Beam / Splinter = Disproportionate Sin — The lexical contrast between κάρφος (“tiny straw‑fiber”) and δοκός (“load‑bearing roof‑beam”) creates comic hyperbole (Fitzmyer 1985, 641). It unmasks hypocrisy by magnifying the critic’s fault to absurd dimensions while miniaturizing the brother’s, forcing hearers to feel the moral imbalance (Bock 1994, 615).

Word-Study Notes

Word Meaning Analysis [κατανοέω / katanoeō / “perceive, notice, consider closely”]

English Meanings - To perceive is “to become aware or conscious of; to observe, notice, or understand” (Webster; COED).

Range of Meanings - Classical Greek uses katanoeō for focused observation—literally “to direct the mind downward upon.” It can mark (1) visual inspection (“look attentively,” Acts 7:31), (2) intellectual reflection (“consider,” Heb. 3:1), or (3) moral awareness (“realize,” Acts 11:6). Cognate noun katanoēsis = “consideration.”

Intended Meaning in Luke 6:41 - Jesus asks why the critic “does not katanoeis” the beam in his own eye. The verb highlights culpable failure in self‑examination: the observer gives sustained attention to another’s speck yet refuses comparable scrutiny of self. Thus the issue is willful inattention, not mere oversight.

Word-Study Notes

Word Meaning Analysis [δοκός / dokos / “beam, log, plank”]

English Meanings - Early English defined beam as “the largest, or a principal piece in a building, that lies across the walls and serves to support the principal rafters … any large piece of timber, long in proportion to its thickness” (Noah Webster, An American Dictionary of the English Language [Anaheim, CA: Foundation for American Christian Education, 2006]). Modern dictionaries keep the architectural sense (“a long sturdy piece of squared timber … used horizontally in building to support a load”) and add figurative extensions such as “a ray or shaft of light” and, proverbially, “a fault that is greater in oneself than in the person one is criticizing” (Catherine Soanes and Angus Stevenson, Concise Oxford English Dictionary [Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2004]).

Range of Meanings - Classical Greek uses dokos for a “bearing‑beam, main cross‑timber, or bar of a gate,” the heavy timber that kept walls from collapsing (Homer, Odyssey 22.176; Aristophanes, Vespae 201; Liddell‑Scott‑Jones, 443). Papyri show it for beams or “logs” employed in oil‑press repair and bath heating (P.Flor. 176 [A.D. 256]); architects listed dokoi alongside flooring joists (Syll. 587.62, 4th cent. B.C.). The Septuagint translates several Hebrew roof or ceiling terms with dokos (2Kgs. 6:2; 2Chr. 34:11). New‑Testament lexicons gloss it as “a piece of heavy timber such as a beam used in roof construction or to bar a door” and note that Jesus employs it hyperbolically for a plank in the eye (BDAG, 256; EDNT 1:343).

Intended Meaning in Luke 6:41–42 - In Jesus’ illustration the dokos contrasts with the kárphos (“mote/speck”). The image is deliberately exaggerated: a disciple eager to extract a tiny splinter from a brother’s eye is oblivious to a structural beam jutting from his own. Within the rhetorical framework of vv. 39–42 the dokos functions metaphorically for a glaring, disqualifying sin (hypocrisy) that renders the critic spiritually blind; until it is “cast out” he cannot “see clearly” to assist another. The term therefore underscores the absurdity of severe judgment when one’s own moral impediment is immensely larger than the fault detected in others.

C. Sequence for service—first remove the beam; then see clearly to help (v 42b)

Literary device: mini‑parable with imperative punch line. A domestic carpenter image; the ridiculous exaggeration arrests attention, then pivots to self‑examination. Its imperative punch line (“First take out…”) turns story into demand (Green 1997, 274).

Illustration - Speck/beam → “criticizing a coworker’s typo while your own email is riddled with plagiarism.”

Application – Conduct a weekly “beam check,” inviting honest feedback. Begin correction at home: pray Psalm 139:23‑24, remove your own “beam,” then serve others with gentle clarity.

IV. Sound VEGETATION – Healthy roots produce wholesome fruit (Lk. 6:43‑44)

EXP - vv 43‑44 employ NEGATED POSSIBILITIES to assert a universal CAUSE‑EFFECT rule (good tree → good fruit / bad tree → bad fruit). The γάρ clauses ( ἕκαστον γὰρ δένδρον …; οὐ γὰρ ἐξ ἀκανθῶν …) give EVIDENCE/EXPLANATION for the maxim.

A. Mutual exclusives—no good tree bears rotten fruit, nor bad tree good (v 43)

Luke 6:43 KJV

43 For a good tree bringeth not forth corrupt fruit; neither doth a corrupt tree bring forth good fruit.

Cultural backdrop: Figs and grapes were staple crops; hearers understood species locks outcome. The tree‑and‑fruit proverb (vv 43‑44) declares that inner quality inevitably shows in outward conduct.

Literary Notes

Tree / Fruit = Character / Conduct — Ancient wisdom literature equated agricultural health with ethical health (Ps. 1:3; Sir 27:6). Jesus revives the trope: kalon/dendron versus sapron/dendron dramatizes how intrinsic quality dictates visible output (Witherington 1998, 288). The metaphor also appeals to common agrarian experience—nobody expects figs from thorns—making the lesson self‑authenticating.

v 39 and vv 43‑44 employ concise proverbial forms (“Can the blind guide the blind?”; “A good tree does not bear rotten fruit”). (1) Form. Both the blind‑guide couplet (v 39) and the tree‑fruit antithesis (vv 43‑44) match classical Hebrew mashal and Greco‑Roman gnome structure: brevity, parallelism, implicit universal claim (Fitzmyer 1985, 642). (2) Function. Proverbs in antiquity served as memory hooks and authority claims. Jesus’ questions use the qal‑va‑ḥomer (“how much more”) logic: if blind guides lead to disaster, how much more must sighted guides be sought (Green 1997, 273). (3) Theological Weight. By couching doctrine in proverb form, Jesus democratizes wisdom—any disciple can test leaders or self by these yardsticks (Bock 1994, 614).

Word-Study Notes

Word Meaning Analysis [ἀγαθός / agathos & καλός / kalos / “good”]

English Meanings - Good in English covers physical soundness, moral excellence, usefulness, pleasantness, and fitness for purpose (Noah Webster, American Dictionary of the English Language; Catherine Soanes & Angus Stevenson, Concise Oxford English Dictionary).

Range of Meanings - In Koine Greek agathos emphasizes intrinsic value or benevolence, while kalos highlights visible beauty, suitability, or moral attractiveness. They overlap widely and can function almost synonymously, e.g., the “good tree” imagery where agathos (Matt. 7:17) alternates with kalos (Luke 6:43). Lexicons list concrete senses (“useful, serviceable”) and ethical senses (“upright, righteous”), and note that kalos also connotes social approval (“noble, honorable”) (ZEB; AYBD).

Intended Meaning in Luke 6:43‑45 - Jesus sets kalon dendron (“good tree”) over against sapron dendron (“corrupt tree”), then parallels the contrast with “the good (agathos) man” who brings forth good treasure. The double vocabulary allows Luke to stress both the objective worth (agathos: inner moral quality) and the evident excellence (kalos: outwardly observable) of the renewed heart. Thus “good” denotes a heart sound in character and consequently beneficial in its fruit—words and deeds that accord with God’s standards.

Word-Study Notes

Word Meaning Analysis [σαπρός / sapros / “corrupt, rotten, worthless”]

English Meanings - The older English word corrupt once described literal decay—“to change from a sound to a putrid state”—and later broadened to moral debasement (Noah Webster, An American Dictionary of the English Language [Anaheim, CA: Foundation for American Christian Education, 2006]). Contemporary dictionaries preserve both ideas: “rotten or putrid” (archaic) and “evil, morally depraved” (Catherine Soanes and Angus Stevenson, Concise Oxford English Dictionary [Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2004]).

Range of Meanings - Classical and Koine Greek root sapros in the notion of rot (σήπω, “make putrid”). Lexicons list two chief nuances: (1) concrete—“spoiled, rotten, of fish, fruit, wood, stone” (Henry G. Liddell et al., A Greek‑English Lexicon, 1583); (2) qualitative—“bad, worthless, unfit for use,” which easily shades into moral judgment, “harmful, evil” (William Arndt et al., BDAG, 913; Otto Bauernfeind, “σαπρός,” TDNT 7:94‑97). The New Testament uses the term eight times: worthless trees/fruit (Mt. 7:17‑18; 12:33; Lk. 6:43), spoiled fish (Mt. 13:48), and unwholesome speech (Eph. 4:29) (Horst R. Balz and Gerhard Schneider, EDNT, 3:228‑29).

Intended Meaning in Luke 6:43 - Jesus opposes sapros to kalos (“good”): “A good tree bringeth not forth corrupt (sapros) fruit, neither doth a corrupt tree bring forth good fruit.” The contrast is qualitative, not botanical. A tree labeled sapros may be alive, but its produce is valueless and therefore rejected. Metaphorically, the adjective depicts a heart whose inner condition is morally decayed; its words and deeds are spiritually harmful (vv. 44‑45). Thus sapros highlights worthlessness arising from internal corruption—underscoring that hypocritical discipleship cannot yield genuinely righteous outcomes. 

B. Principle of recognition—each tree is known by its own fruit (v 44a)

Luke 6:44 KJV

44 For every tree is known by his own fruit. For of thorns men do not gather figs, nor of a bramble bush gather they grapes.

Tree‑and‑fruit imagery anticipates the eschatological harvest where every tree not bearing good fruit is cut down (Matt. 7:19) and the final separation of wicked and righteous (Rev. 22:11‑15).

Word-Study Notes

Word Meaning Analysis [δένδρον / déndron / “tree”]

English Meanings - The English word tree denotes “the largest of the vegetables … consisting of a firm woody stem … spreading above into branches” and, by extension, anything that resembles such a structure (e.g., a genealogical “family tree,” the cross of Acts 10:39) (Webster’s 1828). Standard English dictionaries keep this dual sense of (1) a woody plant of substantial height and (2) any branched, supporting framework.

Range of Meanings - In classical Greek déndron is the ordinary, concrete term for a living tree of any kind—fruit‑bearing, forest, ornamental, or timber—distinguished from ξύλον (“wood, log, stick”) that often refers to cut wood or constructed objects. Greek authors use déndron in botanical catalogues, parables, and proverbial sayings. The Septuagint renders several Hebrew words (’êṣ, ’illān, etc.) with déndron, maintaining the generic idea of “tree” without specifying species. In the New Testament the noun occurs frequently in literal contexts (e.g., the fig‑tree Jesus curses, Mt. 21:19) and metaphorical ones: a man healed of blindness sees people “as trees walking” (Mk. 8:24); the eschatological “tree of life” (Rev. 2:7); and, in our passage, trees that are “good” or “corrupt,” known by their fruit (Lk. 6:43–44). Hellenistic papyri extend the term to lumber inventories and land leases, but always with the notion of a standing plant.

Intended Meaning in Luke 6:43–44 - Jesus opposes “a good déndron” to “a corrupt (sapros) déndron” to illustrate the moral quality of human hearts. The focus is qualitative, not botanical: a “good tree” represents an interior life sound and fertile, while a “corrupt tree” symbolizes a heart spiritually decayed or worthless. The point is epistemological (“is known by its own fruit”) and ethical: words and deeds inevitably disclose inner character (v. 45). Hence déndron here functions as a transparent, common‑language vehicle for the larger moral principle that authentic discipleship must spring from a renewed heart capable of producing correspondingly wholesome “fruit.”

C. Common‑sense proof—no figs from thorns, no grapes from brambles (v 44b)

OT echo: Psalm 1 and Jeremiah 17 describe righteous as fruitful trees. Paul describes the ethical “fruit of the Spirit” versus “works of the flesh” (Gal. 5:19‑23), amplifying Jesus’ tree‑fruit axiom.

Word-Study Notes

Word Meaning Analysis [τρυγάω / trygáō / “gather (grapes), harvest”]

English Meanings - To gather is “to bring together; to collect” especially a crop (Webster).

Range of Meanings - In classical usage trygáō specializes in the vintage: “pick ripe grapes, harvest clusters.” The cognate noun trygḗ is “vintage (time).” Outside viticulture it can extend to picking figs or olives. LXX uses it for vintage offerings (Lev. 19:10). In the NT it appears only in Luke 6:44 and Rev. 14:18–19 (eschatological grape harvest), still bearing the viticultural nuance.

Intended Meaning in Luke 6:44 - Jesus argues that men “do not harvest (trygōsin) grapes from brambles.” The vintage‑verb preserves the concrete picture of carefully gathering ripe fruit—a practice impossible among thorny bushes. Its force supports the thesis that nature determines produce: authentic fruit cannot be collected where the essential nature is contrary.

Theological Notes

From creation onward God has sought a covenant relationship with people made in His image, calling them to reflect His character in the world. Human sin distorts perception and behavior, yet God graciously restores sight and fruitfulness through revelation, redemption, and Spirit‑empowered transformation (Gen. 1:26‑27; Jer. 31:31‑34; 2Cor. 3:18) (Marshall 1978, 270; Bock 1994, 617).

Assuming that God both exposes sin and supplies grace shapes the reading: Jesus is not merely shaming hypocrisy; He is inviting disciples to the restorative process that removes the “beam,” trains the heart, and thus enables true guidance and wholesome speech (Green 1997, 274). The warnings are covenantal safeguards meant to protect community integrity.

Illustration - Tree/fruit → “a compromised server inevitably sends out corrupted files.”

Application – Diagnose repeated patterns; seek Spirit renewal at the root. Inspect the fruit continually: habits, words, and relationships reveal the state of your root; repent where rot appears.

V. Spiritual VOICE – The mouth spills the heart’s surplus (Lk. 6:45)

Luke 6:45 KJV

45 A good man out of the good treasure of his heart bringeth forth that which is good; and an evil man out of the evil treasure of his heart bringeth forth that which is evil: for of the abundance of the heart his mouth speaketh.

EXP - v 45 converts the agricultural image to anthropological reality through parallel SOURCE‑PRODUCT propositions: good/evil treasure → corresponding speech. The explanatory γάρ clause (“for out of the abundance…”) seals the argument by identifying the INTERNAL CAUSE of external words.

A. Inner treasury—good/evil storehouse determines output (v 45a‑b)

Textual note: Traditional wording retains “evil treasure of his heart,” pinpointing sin’s seat. The heart‑and‑mouth axiom (v 45) locates speech in the “treasure of the heart,” sealing the argument: what fills the reservoir will spill. The only theologically weighty deviation in the NA‑UBS critical text is its omission of “θησαυροῦ τῆς καρδίας αὐτοῦ” (“treasure of his heart”) plus the possessive “αὐτοῦ” in Luke 6:45.

– Thirty‑one inspired syllables disappear, dislocating evil from its explicit seat in the heart and disrupting the Spirit‑designed triple parallelism.

– For defenders of verbal‑plenary preservation this constitutes a material loss, not a stylistic quibble; therefore it is classified as a doctrinal deficiency.

– Critical‑text advocates call the shorter reading “original” on external support, yet their probabilistic method presupposes that God allowed His church to copy a defective text for almost two millennia—an assumption that clashes with Ps. 12:6‑7; Isa. 59:21; Matt. 5:18. In contrast, these modern critical editions, by excising words, repeat the “corruption” Paul condemned (2Cor. 2:17).

The preservation of the text adds the following values: (1) Full triple expression in v 45 (“evil treasure of his heart”) sharpens hamartiology and anthropology, emphasizing inner corruption over mere behaviour (e.g., the TR explicitly locates evil in the human heart’s “treasury”, reinforcing total depravity). (2) Restores perfect 3 × 3 rhetorical symmetry characteristic of Lukan artistry. (3) Underlines providential preservation, affirming that the church never lacked the words God inspired. (4) Provides firmer pastoral footing: the heart must first be stocked with grace before the mouth overflows with it.

The living Lord not only spoke truth but also safeguarded every syllable for His people. When editors prefer conjecture over providence and amputate the phrase “treasure of his heart” from Luke 6:45, they dim the Lord’s lamp and undermine the very doctrines they claim to expound. We stand with the church‑through‑the‑ages, receiving the text that God has preserved, and we proclaim its full warning: good or evil will overflow from the treasure of your heart—so stock it well.

B. Inevitable overflow—speech betrays the heart’s abundance (v 45c)

Heart Treasury = Moral Storehouse — “Treasure” (thēsauros) evokes storerooms in first‑century homes or temples (Mt. 12:35). Good or evil deposits accumulate unseen, yet the overflow (περίσσευμα) inevitably pours through speech (v 45). The image shifts responsibility from momentary slips to sustained inner stocking (Stein 1992, 196).

Word-Study Notes

Word Meaning Analysis [ἀγαθός / agathos & καλός / kalos / “good”]

English Meanings - Good in English covers physical soundness, moral excellence, usefulness, pleasantness, and fitness for purpose (Noah Webster, American Dictionary of the English Language; Catherine Soanes & Angus Stevenson, Concise Oxford English Dictionary).

Range of Meanings - In Koine Greek agathos emphasizes intrinsic value or benevolence, while kalos highlights visible beauty, suitability, or moral attractiveness. They overlap widely and can function almost synonymously, e.g., the “good tree” imagery where agathos (Matt. 7:17) alternates with kalos (Luke 6:43). Lexicons list concrete senses (“useful, serviceable”) and ethical senses (“upright, righteous”), and note that kalos also connotes social approval (“noble, honorable”) (ZEB; AYBD).

Intended Meaning in Luke 6:43‑45 - Jesus sets kalon dendron (“good tree”) over against sapron dendron (“corrupt tree”), then parallels the contrast with “the good (agathos) man” who brings forth good treasure. The double vocabulary allows Luke to stress both the objective worth (agathos: inner moral quality) and the evident excellence (kalos: outwardly observable) of the renewed heart. Thus “good” denotes a heart sound in character and consequently beneficial in its fruit—words and deeds that accord with God’s standards.

Word-Study Notes

Word Meaning Analysis [προφέρω / prophérō / “bring forth, produce”]

English Meanings - Modern English verbs such as bring and produce convey motion toward the speaker (“carry, lead, cause to come”) or the idea of causing something to exist or appear (“create, yield, generate”). Older dictionaries emphasize the causative nuance—“to lead, draw, or cause to come,” “to bring to light; disclose.” The phrases “bring forth” and “bring forward” are idiomatic extensions that stress outward movement from concealment into view.

Range of Meanings - Classical Greek regularly uses prophérō (προφέρω) in two spheres: (1) physical movement—“carry or bring out/up” (e.g., a ship’s cargo, a corpse for burial), and (2) verbal expression—“bring forward, proclaim, declare.” Related compounds (anaphérō, enéphérō, prosphérō) confirm that the underlying root phérō means “bear, carry,” while the preverb pro- adds the idea of forward direction or public display. In the Septuagint prophérō can render Hebrew roots meaning “bring out” (e.g., Exod. 4:6–7) or “offer up” sacrificially (Lev. 2:2). New‑Testament lexicons list only one occurrence—Luke 6:45—where the verb is figurative: a person “brings out” (prophérō) good or evil from the inner “treasury” of the heart, much as a storehouse yields its contents.

Intended Meaning in Luke 6:45 - Within Jesus’ tree‑and‑fruit analogy (vv. 43–45) prophérō pictures the heart as a storehouse whose hidden surplus inevitably moves outward in words and actions. The good person “brings forth” (prophérō) what is morally wholesome, while the evil person does the same with corrupt matter. The focus is expression, not origin: character already resident within is carried forward into observable speech and behavior. Thus the verb underscores the inevitability and visibility of inner character—what fills the heart will unfailingly be “brought out” for others to see.

The heart‑treasure motif aligns with the prophets’ promise of a new heart (Ezek. 36:26‑27) and the gospel certainty that “every idle word” will face judgment (Matt. 12:36).

C. Authenticity test—words verify the quality of discipleship (v 45)

Canonical link: The passage anticipates Pauline calls to self‑examination (Gal. 6:1‑4); James 3:8‑12 echoes the heart‑mouth pipeline.

First‑century Jewish listeners were steeped in wisdom traditions that linked heart, mouth, and fruit (Prov. 4:23; Sir 27:6) and in prophetic critiques of blind leaders (Isa. 56:10). They expected the Messiah to gather a righteous remnant and form a new covenant people. Gentile God‑fearers in Luke’s readership shared an awareness of moral exemplars and the corrupting power of words in Greco‑Roman ethics (Bock 1994, 613‑14).

Jesus’ five images call hearers to reject unseeing leaders, submit to His formative teaching, practice rigorous self‑examination, and let renewed hearts produce visible righteousness. The passage’s force lies in assuring them that authentic discipleship is measured by transformed perception and speech, not by outward status (Fitzmyer 1985, 642).

Illustration - Heart overflow → “your social‑media feed eventually mirrors your search history.”

Application – Stock the heart with Scripture, worship, gratitude so words drip grace. Stock the heart with grace: saturate mind and affections with Scripture, prayer, and worship so the inevitable overflow is good treasure.

CONCLUSION (INDUCTIVE ENERGY, DEDUCTIVE CLARITY)

Good news: the Carpenter who sees your beam is ready with steady hands and loving eyes. He sets bones, mends nets, grafts trees, and installs a new treasury inside every repentant heart.

Recap the journey: Blind guides → inadequate; Classroom alone → insufficient; Hypocrisy exposed → necessary; Diseased tree → replaced; Heart treasury → transformed. The heart’s transformation—and the speech that overflows from it—remains the non‑negotiable evidence of genuine life in Christ. Some clear principles from these verses:

1. Guidance requires vision: only those with spiritual sight should lead others.

2. Growth requires submission: learners become like their teacher through complete formation.

3. Correction requires self‑examination: deal with personal sin before addressing another’s.

4. Character determines conduct: inner quality inevitably shows in outward fruit.

5. Speech reveals the heart: words are the overflow of stored motives and values.

Will you book that heart audit tonight—letting Jesus clear your vision, reshape your vocation, verify your motives, heal your roots, and sweeten your voice? The ditch you avoid may not be only yours; many travelers follow the footsteps you leave.

Homiletical Recap and Challenge

And so Luke—carefully preserving the earthy wisdom Jesus shared with everyday disciples on a Galilean plain—lets us overhear the Master’s call for clear vision and authentic living. Imagine the humor in His questions, the sting in His rebuke, and the warmth in His invitation: your eyes, your hands, your lips all tell on your heart.

Friend, Jesus’ word to us is plain: submit to the true Teacher until your eyes see, your judgments heal, and your fruit nourishes. Before correcting a sibling, stand before the mirror of the cross and let Him tug the beam from your own soul. Follow guides whose sight is fixed on Christ, and measure your progress not by applause but by the flavor of the fruit your life gives others.

So today, ask the Spirit to cleanse your vision, shape your heart, and guard your tongue; then step out to guide, serve, and speak with the freshness of a life rooted in Him. Let the overflow of grace in you become refreshment for everyone around you—and may your words this week taste like sweet fruit from a good tree.

Selected Bibliography

Arndt, William, Frederick W. Danker, and Walter Bauer. A Greek-English Lexicon of the New Testament and Other Early Christian Literature, 3rd ed. Revised and edited by Frederick W. Danker. Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 2000.

Balz, Horst R., and Gerhard Schneider, eds. Expository Dictionary of the New Testament, 3 vols. Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1990–93.

Bauer, Walter, William F. Arndt, and F. Wilbur Gingrich. A Greek-English Lexicon of the New Testament and Other Early Christian Literature. 2nd ed. Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1979.

Bock, Darrell L. Luke 1:1–9:50. Baker Exegetical Commentary on the New Testament. Grand Rapids: Baker Academic, 1994.

Burgon, John William. The Revision Revised; Or, Strictures on the New Version of the New Testament. London: John Murray, 1883.

Danker, Frederick W., William F. Arndt, and Walter Bauer. A Greek-English Lexicon of the New Testament and Other Early Christian Literature. Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 2000.

Fitzmyer, Joseph A. The Gospel According to Luke I–IX. Anchor Bible 28. Garden City, NY: Doubleday, 1985.

Fuller, David O. Which Bible? A Comparison of the King James Version with the Modern Translations. 3rd ed. Grand Rapids: Grand Rapids International, 1972.

Gilbrant, Thoralf. “κάρφος.” In New Testament Greek-English Dictionary, edited by Thoralf Gilbrant. Peabody, MA: Hendrickson, 2003.

Green, Joel B. The Gospel of Luke. New International Commentary on the New Testament. Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1997.

Hughes, Philip E., and Robert L. Harkness. Knowing the Bible through the Method of Inductive Bible Study. Grand Rapids: Kregel, 1998.

Liddell, Henry G., Robert Scott, Henry Stuart Jones, and Roderick McKenzie. A Greek-English Lexicon. 9th ed. Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1940.

Marshall, I. Howard. The Gospel of Luke: A Commentary on the Greek Text. New International Greek Testament Commentary. Exeter: Paternoster, 1978.

Montanari, Franco. The Brill Dictionary of Ancient Greek. Leiden: Brill, 2015.

Moulton, James H., and George Milligan. Vocabulary of the Greek Testament. London: Hodder & Stoughton, 1930.

Pickering, Wilbur N. The Identity of the New Testament Text. Nashville: Thomas Nelson, 1980.

Riddle, Edward. The Divine Preservation of Scripture. Manchester: The Trinitarian Bible Society, 2015.

Soanes, Catherine, and Angus Stevenson, eds. Concise Oxford English Dictionary. 11th ed. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2004.

Stein, Robert H. Luke. New American Commentary 24. Nashville: Broadman & Holman, 1992.

Trinitarian Bible Society. “Are Modern Versions Corrupting the Word of God?—2 Corinthians 2 : 17.” Accessed June 14, 2025. https://www.tbsbibles.org/page/2Corinthians2verse17.

Webster, Noah. An American Dictionary of the English Language. Anaheim, CA: Foundation for American Christian Education, 2006.

Witherington, Ben III. The Gospel of Luke: A Socio-Rhetorical Commentary. Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1998.