Friends,

The midterm election is done. I praise God for the outcomes I prayed for, and I believe He has heard our diligent prayers. However, I encourage you not to gloat or denigrate those who lost. Instead, let's pray for them and for those who voted for them, that God would bless them — particularly with salvation, and with eyes and hearts opened to His Word of truth. Remember this wise command from Scripture: "Do not rejoice when your enemy falls," nor let your heart be glad when he stumbles, lest the Lord see it and be displeased (a paraphrase of Proverbs 24:17–18).

If we recognize that this outcome is from the Lord, which I believe, then that is all the more reason to honor His command. Let us refrain from making mocking or critical posts about those who lost. Let us simply praise our God for His favor and rejoice over His faithful people who voted.

I praise God for each of you and for your patience with me, as I have been so actively encouraging all of you to vote. Now that these elections are over and the short game is done, I believe our long-term and most effective strategy is to spread the gospel of Jesus Christ and the clear teaching of His Word to as many people as we can. Let us give ourselves to winning new souls to the gospel of Jesus Christ!

AI-Expanded Reflection

The comment's instinct after a political victory — do not gloat, pray for opponents, and return attention to the gospel — reflects Proverbs 24:17–18 exactly as quoted, and it is worth noticing how unusual that counsel is in any era. Jesus went further: "Love your enemies and pray for those who persecute you" (Matthew 5:44–45). Paul added, "Bless those who persecute you; bless and do not curse them" (Romans 12:14).

The comment's turn from the "short game" to gospel proclamation also reflects a New Testament emphasis. The apostles lived under an empire they had no vote in and no power to change, and their strategy was proclamation, prayer, and visible love (Acts 2:42–47; 1 Peter 2:11–17). Whatever Christians conclude about political engagement, the long game Scripture describes is the same one the comment names: people brought to Christ, taught His Word, and formed into communities whose love is itself a witness (John 13:35).

He began saying to His disciples first of all, “Beware of the leaven of the Pharisees, which is hypocrisy. But there is nothing covered up that will not be revealed, and hidden that will not be known. Accordingly, whatever you have said in the dark will be heard in the light, and what you have whispered in the inner rooms will be proclaimed upon the housetops” (Luke 12:1–3).

Jesus warned His disciples about the teaching of the Pharisees, because it was hypocritical. They did not practice what they preached. They held a double-standard, whereby they demanded an obedience for others that they did not require of themselves. He called them whitewashed tombs, all clean on the outside but within full of dead men's bones and all corruption.

Jesus prophesied that the hidden nature of their hypocrisy would be exposed. God would reveal the hidden motivations of their hearts. He would make plain their secret boasts, evil plots and wicked schemes.

Therefore, Jesus taught His disciples, as of first importance, to maintain integrity and sincerity in all that they spoke and did. Then, if they were exposed, they would be found blameless and righteous. If their speech was revealed, it would be shown to be innocent and pure.

Friends, let us take Jesus' instructions to His disciples to heart. Rather than participating in the hypocritical maneuverings of the world around us, let us instead choose integrity and sincerity in all that we say and do. Rather than fearing men, who can harm only our earthly bodies, let us fear God, who has authority over both our bodies and our eternal souls (cf. Luke 12:4–5).

Some people feed on what they can get away with, or on how effectively they can manipulate others, or on having the political skill of believably saying one thing and doing the exact opposite. Let us not be like this, knowing that we have a Judge, who knows our hearts. Instead, let us speak and do and live as those, whose hope is entirely in the Lord.

AI-Expanded Reflection

Luke introduces Jesus’ warning amid a crowd so large that people are stepping on one another (12:1). Public attention is intense, yet Jesus speaks first to his disciples about hypocrisy. That placement is significant. The danger is not only the opposition they may encounter but the kind of people they may become while being watched. Religious visibility can encourage a person to cultivate an appearance that gradually replaces the more difficult work of inward faithfulness. Jesus directs attention beneath the performance to the truth that cannot remain hidden from God.

The leaven image suggests something capable of spreading through the whole. Hypocrisy is not always a fully formed scheme adopted at once. A small concession to image management can become a habit: describing an action more favorably than it deserves, requiring an accountability one personally evades, or using pious language to conceal resentment. Over time, a person may become skilled at maintaining the distinction between public identity and private conduct. The warning concerns disciples as well as the leaders whose behavior Jesus criticizes.

The promise of disclosure is therefore both sobering and liberating. It means that manipulation cannot finally control the truth. It also means that the faithful person need not treat reputation as the final court of judgment. The following verses move from fear of those who can kill the body to fear of God, and then to the Father’s knowledge of even the sparrows and the hairs of the disciples’ heads (12:4–7). Reverence and reassurance belong together. God’s complete knowledge is not merely surveillance threatening exposure; it is also the knowledge of the One who values and keeps his people.

The original applies this to sincerity, but sincerity must be distinguished from the claim that a sincere person has nothing to confess. We may honestly hold a mistaken belief or remain unaware of our own mixed motives. Integrity includes willingness to be corrected, acknowledgment of failure, and refusal to protect a favorable image by denying what has happened. An apology can demonstrate more truthfulness than an unbroken record of appearing right. The opposite of hypocrisy is not a flawless public identity but a life increasingly brought into agreement with the truth before God.

There is also a difference between integrity and indiscriminate disclosure. Confidentiality, privacy, and discretion can serve love; they are not necessarily concealment of wrongdoing. The question is whether secrecy protects a legitimate responsibility or shelters a contradiction that ought to be addressed. We can examine how we speak about absent people, how we handle money and authority, and whether our private choices fit the standards we commend publicly. Jesus’ warning frees us from the exhausting ambition to manage every observer. We can seek a clear conscience, repair what is wrong, and entrust the final disclosure to the God whose judgment cannot be manipulated and whose care does not depend on our success at appearing impressive.

But God said to him, ‘You fool! This very night your soul is required of you; and now who will own what you have prepared?’ So is the man who stores up treasure for himself, and is not rich toward God (Luke 12:20–21).

These verses close Jesus' parable of the rich fool. It was prompted by someone demanding that Jesus arbitrate the division of an inheritance between siblings. Jesus declared that even when someone has many possessions, their life is not shaped by their possessions. Their days are ordered by God, and God can suddenly nip the bud of their lives just before they bloom, so that they do not enjoy all the things for which they toiled. Solomon calls this a great evil under the sun:

I have seen another evil under the sun, and it weighs heavily on mankind: God gives some people wealth, possessions and honor, so that they lack nothing their hearts desire, but God does not grant them the ability to enjoy them, and strangers enjoy them instead. This is meaningless, a grievous evil (Ecclesiastes 6:1–2).

Again, Solomon writes about the futility of hoarding wealth in this life, since neither their children are blessed nor can they take anything with them in death:

I have seen a grievous evil under the sun: wealth hoarded to the harm of its owners, … so that when they have children there is nothing left for them to inherit. Everyone comes naked from their mother’s womb, and as everyone comes, so they depart. They take nothing from their toil that they can carry in their hands (Ecclesiastes 5:13–15).

Now, Solomon notes that when God gives wealth and allows them to enjoy them, this is truly a gift from God:

Moreover, when God gives someone wealth and possessions, and the ability to enjoy them, to accept their lot and be happy in their toil—this is a gift of God (Ecclesiastes 5:19).

Since this blessing comes as a gift and not as a guarantee, I presume that it should not be expected. While it is a blessing, it is still temporary. Sometimes it may even be a hindrance to viewing life with a proper perspective, namely, the consideration of eternal treasures over earthly ones.

Friends, let us not be like this rich fool, whose only consideration was storing up treasures for himself and not what will endure into eternity. Jesus taught,

Do not store up for yourselves treasures on earth, where moths and vermin destroy, and where thieves break in and steal. But store up for yourselves treasures in heaven, where moths and vermin do not destroy, and where thieves do not break in and steal. For where your treasure is, there your heart will be also (Matthew 6:19–21).

Now, some may ask, 'Does this mean that I should not save money, invest, get insurance, or do all those things that preserve my wellbeing and that of my family in this life?'

I think it is telling that the Bible never says how much is too much. It only gives the principle that everyone should be rich toward God. We certainly have examples of both the rich and faithful (e.g. Abraham, Job), as well as the poor and faithful (John the Baptist, Jesus). The prophet Agur reminds us that faithfulness to God should not be about riches or poverty:

Two things I ask of you, Lord; do not refuse me before I die: Keep falsehood and lies far from me; give me neither poverty nor riches, but give me only my daily bread. Otherwise, I may have too much and disown you and say, ‘Who is the Lord?’ Or I may become poor and steal, and so dishonor the name of my God (Proverbs 30:7–9).

If I might draw out a teaching from these words. I believe Agur was not teaching a lifestyle of moderation, as some Buddhists also teach. No, quite the contrary, he was teaching a lifestyle of radical devotion to God, such that neither riches nor poverty should get in the way of knowing and honoring God. It is consistent with what Jesus also taught in the Sermon on the Mount:

But seek first his kingdom and his righteousness, and all these things will be given to you as well (Matthew 6:33).

Jesus was not teaching His followers to neglect the necessities of this life but not to make them the priority of their lives. Likewise, friends, let us not make the accumulation of possessions for ourselves the focus of our lives.

AI-Expanded Reflection

The rich man’s immediate difficulty is not scarcity but abundance: his land has produced more than his existing storage can hold (Luke 12:16–18). Nothing in the parable says that building a barn is inherently sinful. The revealing feature is the closed world of his deliberation. He speaks to himself about his crops, his goods, and the many years he assumes will be available to enjoy them. God, neighbor, and dependence disappear from the plan. The abundance that could have become an occasion for gratitude and generosity instead reinforces the illusion that he can secure his own future.

God’s interruption exposes the assumption beneath the calculation. The man can enlarge storage but cannot guarantee another night of life. The question about who will possess what he has prepared does not merely ridicule planning; it reveals how little ultimate control possession gives. Jesus has already warned that life does not consist in an abundance of possessions (12:15). The man confuses the means that may support life with the source and meaning of life itself. That confusion can be present in someone with modest savings as well as in someone with extensive wealth.

Ecclesiastes adds another distinction: possessing goods and being able to enjoy them are not identical gifts. The original comment brings together passages about hoarding, loss, mortality, and enjoyment. They should not be flattened into a rule that material pleasure is always spiritually suspect. Ecclesiastes can affirm the reception of ordinary food, work, and companionship with gratitude even while exposing their inability to deliver permanent security. The danger lies in demanding that a temporary gift do the work of an ultimate refuge. Enjoyment becomes freer when it no longer has to prove that our lives are beyond loss.

Jesus’ ensuing teaching gives “rich toward God” a practical direction. He calls disciples away from consuming anxiety, reminds them of the Father’s knowledge, and speaks of generosity and treasure in heaven (Luke 12:22–34). The alternative to hoarding is not merely an inward disclaimer that we are unattached to everything we retain. It involves trust expressed through the use of resources. Yet responsible provision for dependents and thoughtful preparation are not thereby forbidden. The distinction concerns the governing aim: provision can serve love, while accumulation can become an attempt to make dependence unnecessary.

An honest examination therefore goes beyond choosing a supposedly spiritual account balance. What obligations have I neglected while acquiring more? Does increased security produce greater generosity or only a higher threshold for feeling safe? Can I enjoy what I have without needing it to establish my worth? The original warning is strongest when it directs us toward these concrete questions rather than toward suspicion of every financial tool. Insurance, saving, and investment cannot conquer mortality, but they may serve responsible care. Being rich toward God means receiving life as entrusted rather than self-created, holding plans with humility, and allowing the needs of others and the promises of Christ to shape what we do with the goods passing through our hands.

Do not be afraid, little flock, for your Father has been pleased to give you the kingdom. Sell your possessions and give to the poor. Provide purses for yourselves that will not wear out, a treasure in heaven that will never fail, where no thief comes near and no moth destroys — for where your treasure is, there your heart will be also (a paraphrase of Luke 12:32–34). Then Peter asks whether this parable is meant for them or for everyone (a reference to Luke 12:41).

Today I want to raise a question without a certain answer. We are all familiar with Matthew 6, where Jesus teaches against anxiety over food and clothing and directs His followers to seek God's kingdom and righteousness instead. We have applied those verses in broad strokes that bring little discomfort to our present way of life.

But in this parallel in Luke we find harder and more specific instructions. Jesus says, sell your possessions and give to the poor. I have heard many sermons from Matthew 6 and never one from its parallel in Luke 12. It appears that in Luke, Jesus says the disciples can demonstrate that they are seeking first God's kingdom by actually selling and giving. Rather than simply saying they trust God to provide, this would be showing it.

If this instruction applies to every believer, we may be coming woefully short. Peter's own question in verse 41 suggests he wondered the same thing.

AI-Expanded Reflection

The honesty of this comment is its strength — it raises a hard question, admits it has never heard the passage preached, and declines to resolve it comfortably. That is a better posture toward Luke 12:33 than most treatments manage.

Peter's question is the right one to notice, and Jesus's answer is famously oblique: He responds with another parable about a manager put in charge of the master's household, and ends with the principle that from everyone who has been given much, much will be demanded. That is not a yes or a no. It suggests the obligation scales rather than applying identically, which is some help without letting anyone off.

Worth adding that Luke shows the instruction being lived out in Acts, and shows it working in more than one way. Believers sold property and laid the proceeds at the apostles' feet, and Peter tells Ananias that the land was his to keep and the money his to control — the sin was the lie, not the retention. Luke reports radical generosity as genuine and voluntary rather than as a uniform rule, which is about where the comment's own uncertainty lands.

Jesus speaks to the disciples about faithful stewardship and being always prepared. He tells them to be dressed ready for service and keep their lamps burning, like servants waiting for their master to return from a wedding banquet, so that when he knocks they can open the door immediately. It will be good for those servants whose master finds them watching — he will dress himself to serve, have them recline at the table, and wait on them. It will be good for those found ready, even if he comes in the middle of the night or toward daybreak. If the owner of the house had known when the thief was coming, he would not have let his house be broken into. They too must be ready, because the Son of Man will come at an unexpected hour. And from everyone given much, much will be demanded; from the one entrusted with much, much more will be asked (a paraphrase of Luke 12:35–40, 48).

The master and servants are of course the Lord and us. This is about the importance of daily faithfulness in serving God. We get sidetracked in a life full of commitments and set aside the things of God — reading Scripture, praying, reaching out to others — telling ourselves we'll return to it once things settle down. Jesus reminds us we never know when He will return, or, as in the parable just before this, when our own time is up (see Luke 12:20).

AI-Expanded Reflection

The detail that makes this parable strange is the one this comment quotes and passes over: the master, finding his servants awake, dresses himself for service, seats them at the table, and waits on them. That is a complete inversion of the expected transaction. Watchfulness is not rewarded with approval or promotion but with the master taking the servant's role — which is what Jesus does literally at the last supper, and what He states directly elsewhere in saying He came not to be served but to serve.

That reframes what readiness is for. The comment is right that the parable urges daily faithfulness against the pull of a crowded life, but the motive it supplies is not the avoidance of being caught unprepared. It is that the one being waited for intends, on arrival, to serve the people who waited.

Friends, consider Luke 13:1–5:

There were present at that season some who told Him about the Galileans whose blood Pilate had mingled with their sacrifices. And Jesus answered and said to them, “Do you suppose that these Galileans were worse sinners than all other Galileans, because they suffered such things? I tell you, no; but unless you repent you will all likewise perish. Or those eighteen on whom the tower in Siloam fell and killed them, do you think that they were worse sinners than all other men who dwelt in Jerusalem? I tell you, no; but unless you repent you will all likewise perish.”

The two scenarios presented here sound awful, particularly in Jewish ears. These would be among the Jew's worst ways to die. And many Jews considered such outcomes as indicative of terrible sin in the life of the person that suffered such a fate.

Yet, remarkably, Jesus says, "unless you repent you will likewise perish." Jesus, as is often the case, defies conventional wisdom and does not answer in the way expected. The people, who are living, expected Jesus to confirm their suspicions that the people, who died, died because they were more sinful than the ones living. Instead, Jesus says that the living are just as sinful and they should expect the same. A further implication is that the living are living not because they are more righteous but because God has extended grace to them. As we read in 2 Peter 3:9,

The Lord is not slack concerning His promise, as some count slackness, but is longsuffering toward us, not willing that any should perish but that all should come to repentance.

The words "all should come to repentance" here does not mean that everyone will repent and be saved; however, it does mean that everyone that God has elected to salvation will eventually repent and be saved. This is what we understand from Romans 9:22–23,

What if God, wanting to show His wrath and to make His power known, endured with much longsuffering the vessels of wrath prepared for destruction, and that He might make known the riches of His glory on the vessels of mercy, which He had prepared beforehand for glory,

In order to magnify God's power and wrath, He suspended judgment on some, allowing their wickedness to persist in order to show His justice and patience in wrath, and to contrast the judgment of the "vessels of wrath" with the grace He extends to the "vessels of mercy."

These verses are interesting because of what they say regarding human responsibility and divine sovereignty. In the expression "vessels of wrath prepared for destruction" the word "prepared" is Perfect, Middle (or passive), Participle, Accusative, Neuter, Plural. This grammatical analysis may not mean much to you, but it is significant. It not only connects the verb to the proper subject, namely, "vessels of wrath," but the "middle voice" also tells us that it can be properly understood as "prepared themselves." In other words, God did not make these people wicked, but they made themselves wicked.

On the other hand, in the expression "prepared beforehand for glory," the word translated "prepared" is a different Greek word, which is grammatically parsed as an Aorist, Indicative, Active, 3rd Person, Singular verb. Note, because it is singular, we can see that "vessels of mercy" is not the subject. In fact, as a 3rd Person Singular verb, the only subject this verb can have is God. Therefore, while the vessels of wrath prepared themselves for destruction, God prepared the vessels of mercy for glory.

In this latter expression we find an additional word in the Greek, namely, the word "beforehand." So God prepared the vessels of mercy for glory beforehand. Why would Paul find it necessary to include this word here? Its inclusion demonstrates Paul's argument in Romans 9, that God chose these "vessels of mercy" even before they were born (cf. Romans 9:10–13; 14–18). The individuals chosen had no part in the choosing. It was not because they were more righteous. It was not because they had more faith. It was completely based on God's grace, even the free and unmoved, sovereign will of God. This understanding is confirmed in the Book of Revelation, which speaks of those whose names are written in the Book of Life "from the foundation of the world" (Revelation 17:8; cf. Revelation 13:8). Paul also writes in Ephesians 1:4, "He [God] chose us in Him [Christ] before the foundation of the world."

One final note on the grammar of this latter word translated "prepared." It is in the Aorist tense. The normal understanding of this tense is of something that happened "once for always." Therefore, it further supports the understanding that God's choosing of some for salvation is not a process but a completed fact.

Now, what does this have to do with Luke 13:1–5? We should understand Jesus' words "unless you repent you will all likewise perish" in this way. The general fate of everyone, because all are sinful and fall short of God's glory (Romans 3:9–18, 23), is destruction. Therefore, no one can say that in themselves they are better than anyone else. But then how do we explain that some live a long life and others a short one, some have horrible deaths and others have peaceful ones? Jesus does not answer this question, except to suggest that the living are only alive because of the grace of God, since they too are deserving of death. And the only hope for them is "to repent." This is a genuine call to repentance. But we must understand that only those whom God has chosen can repent and will repent. God has to overcome our stubborn, self-exalting, and ultimately self-condemning free-will by His sovereign grace in order for us to repent and embrace the salvation of God that is offered in Christ Jesus our Lord. He accomplishes this through the inner working of the Holy Spirit, by whom we experience a new birth, whereby we can believe and receive eternal life (John 3:5; John 1:12–13).

Friends, do not think highly of yourselves, but let us be like Jesus, humbling ourselves, and even esteeming others better than ourselves (Philippians 2:3–4). If we boast, let us boast only in the Lord (1 Corinthians 1:31), who has given us faith and salvation and our eternal, unshakeable hope to be with Him in heaven forever.

AI-Expanded Reflection

Jesus refuses the inference that a horrifying death proves its victims were worse sinners than those who survived. Both political violence and a collapsing tower become occasions for examining the hearers' need to repent. The warning is not a prediction that everyone will die by those identical mechanisms. It removes the false security that treats survival as evidence of moral superiority. The following parable of the barren fig tree adds a further emphasis: continued opportunity is a summons to fruitfulness, not permission for presumption. Read Luke 13:1–9.

The original develops this into an account of election through Romans 9. Its grammatical observations require several distinctions. The participle describing vessels prepared for destruction has a form that can be understood as passive or middle; the form alone does not prove “prepared themselves.” By contrast, the active verb concerning preparation beforehand explicitly presents God as the agent in its context. That contrast is significant without resolving every question about the origin and agency of the preparation for destruction. See Romans 9:22–24 and the NET notes.

Two further claims should not be based on tense alone. The aorist normally presents an action as a whole; it does not inherently mean “once for always.” And the sense of “beforehand” is incorporated into the compound verb, rather than supplied by an additional independent Greek word in this clause. A doctrine of God's prior purpose may be argued from the wider passage and related texts, but these grammatical features should not be asked to prove more than they express.

The Reformed reading of 2 Peter 3:9 as concerning the elect is also an interpretation of the scope of the address, not the only reading Christians have given the sentence. Across those disagreements, Jesus' immediate application remains clear: do not turn another person's tragedy into self-congratulation. Respond to the mercy of continued life through repentance, humility, and compassion toward those who suffer. Theological reflection serves this passage well when it deepens those responses rather than replacing them with speculation about the victims' standing before God.