Luke 13: 22-30
Straight Talk on God’s Judgment

by Gary DeLashmutt

Introduction

One of the main points of Luke 13: 1-9 is that we should not expect God to exhibit his justice in this life (vs 3a, 5a). That's why we can't draw any correlation between how much suffering people experience in this life and their standing with God. The Pilate/Tower victims weren't necessarily under God's judgment, and the ones who escaped shouldn't conclude they are righteous. Remember . . . ???

Should we infer from this that God will never exhibit his justice? No, he will do this—in the next life. That's what he was warning them about in 13:3b, 5b, 9. That's what he continues talking about in 13:22-25 (read). This man asks about salvation, and Jesus gives him some straight talk on it.

Biblical “salvation” refers primarily to deliverance from God’s final judgment. Yes, it also refers to things like deliverance from God’s enemies, the effects of the fall, etc.—but the primary idea is this. The Bible states that unless we are delivered from God’s final judgment, we will spend eternity in conscious alienation from him. This is usually known as “hell.” You see some familiar description of it in 12:28 (read).
Yes, I think the references to “gnashing of teeth,” “outer darkness” and “fire” are probably figurative rather than literal. But they are describing a literal reality that is worse than the figurative language—horrible alienation, everlasting regret, etc.

Jesus' audience accepted the concept of final judgment; they were more concerned with things like how many people were going to escape from it, like the man in 13:22.

We cannot assume this consensus today. I don't assume it in this room—some of you probably don't believe in it. Others of you do, but feel embarrassed by it. I don't "like" it (neither does God >> Ezek. 18:23, 32), but I know it is both reasonable and moral. So before we take a closer look at what Jesus says about salvation in this passage, let's back up and answer to objections to God’s judgment.

Objections to God’s judgment

"It isn’t biblical." Ironically, this view has been popularized primarily by theologians and pastors. Many of them say the Bible is simply the record of the evolution of human's thinking about God. That's why (they say) the God of the Old Testament is full of wrath and vengeance, but the God of the New Testament is more loving and forgiving. Since we can see the direction this is headed and extrapolate it to its obvious conclusion, the most "biblical" view is that hell doesn't exist.

How would you respond to this? The fact is that the Bible is not the record of human speculation about God, it is the revelation of God about himself to us. And his revelation has been consistent. What part of the Bible are we studying? In both the Old Testament and New Testament, God reveals himself as both loving and judging (Ex. 34:6-7; 2 Pet. 3:9, 10, 7). Jesus, who was God-incarnate, spoke about hell more than all the other human authors combined (180+, including at least 34 references in Luke. I think God did it this way on purpose. He saved the most difficult issue for his Son to talk about most, so we wouldn't pass it off as a human invention.

"It isn’t fair." This is the most common objection. The sentence simply sounds too harsh to be fair.

But can we trust our ability to judge what is fair for ourselves? People tend to think that what they do is not very bad and does not deserve much punishment. Most prisoners believe that they are sentenced too severely. Because of our imperfect criminal justice system, some of them probably are—but it is highly unlikely that most of them are. Children demonstrate that this is a inborn attitude. This is why we don't let children or criminals choose their own punishments; they tend to go too soft on themselves. But God's judgment is perfect. He knows all the factors, every mitigating circumstance—and on that day he will demonstrate that he has been absolutely fair in his judgment.
Furthermore, the alternative to this—universalism—is definitely not fair. Is it fair for people to never be called to account for their actions? Is it fair that wicked people and not the righteous God have the last word on evil (STALIN: safe to the end, clenched fist at the end)? Is it fair for repentant people to spend eternity with an unrepentant STALIN? Is it fair for God to allow this world to go on for so long if he will send everyone to heaven? If people can't make a decision about where to spend eternity during this life, what is the point?? Ironically, universalism raises more objections to God's fairness than it resolves . . .
Finally, this objection assumes that we have a proper moral standard by which to evaluate whether God’s judgment is fair or unfair. As we will soon see, this is a faulty assumption . . .

"I don't believe in it . . . therefore, it doesn’t exist." This is a very recent objection. Not that people have only recently disbelieved in hell. People have been doing that for many centuries. But until very recently, when people said "I don't believe in hell," they went on to explain their reasons for their beliefs. This is because they realized that their beliefs were valid only if there was evidence to back them up. Otherwise, they were acting like OSTRICHES . . . But today, everything has changed. In our postmodern culture, this is an irrefutable response, because my belief creates reality—for me.

What if you heard the doctor tell your mother that she has cancer and that unless she undergoes surgery and chemotherapy she will die within a year? How would you respond if she smiled and said, "Well, I don't believe it." Would you breathe a sigh of relief and realize that your mom's health was now safe?
What's the difference? In both cases, it's either real or not real regardless of whether we believe in it! True, it may be more difficult to demonstrate the existence of hell than the existence of cancer—but that doesn’t mean that your beliefs about the afterlife create it! In both cases, the value of our beliefs is not that they create reality, but that they correspond to it.
The more important question, therefore, in both cases, is "What is the evidence that it exists?" If the doctor provides good evidence for the cancer, and if you have no good reason to distrust his competence, you should adjust your belief to correspond to what he says. Likewise, if there is good evidence that the Bible is right about hell, and if there is no good reason to distrust its reliability, then you should adjust your beliefs accordingly. Though we don't have time to go into the evidence today, there is more than enough of it that's it's not worth gambling through this kind of DENIAL—especially since the same Bible tells us how we can be delivered from final judgment.

"It is only for really bad people." This view is evidently more prevalent than I thought. A recent survey shows that 82 percent of adult Americans believe in an afterlife that includes both heaven and hell, but only 4 percent of those people believe that they will go to hell.[1] Since only a small fraction of adult Americans are evangelical, most Americans believe only those who have committed murder, etc. will go to hell.

There is a fatal flaw in this belief. How bad is bad enough? If Mother Theresa is good enough to go to heaven, and if Stalin is bad enough to go to hell, should we draw the line exactly halfway between them? What if you were one sin on Stalin’s side of that line (that bad thought you had about your mother when you were ten years old)? Is this fair? No matter where you draw the line in this scenario, you always have the same dilemma.
The Bible rejects this answer for one simple reason. It draws the line at God's moral perfection (Jas. 2:10; Matt. 5:48). This makes perfect sense, and God is certainly within his rights to draw it here. However, it is really bad news because it means all of us—Stalin, Mother Theresa, you, me—are under God's judgment. I deserve to go to hell!
But the good news is that God has offered to take the rap for all of us. He says he has come in the Person of Jesus to bear God’s judgment for us on the cross (2 Cor. 5:21). Now the way is open for all of us to escape God’s judgment—if we put our trust in his payment. Now we're ready to go back to our passage and appreciate what Jesus says about salvation . . .

Insights into salvation

Read vs 23-24a. Jesus is saying, "Before you get all immersed in how many are being saved from God’s final judgment, you'd better make sure you are saved." And he tells him how to do that.

The "narrow door" means that the way of salvation is narrow. There are not many ways to salvation (as the dogma of our culture insists)—there is only one way. This way refers to Jesus himself and his death on the cross for our sins (read Jn. 14:6 and Jn. 10:9). Jesus is the only way because only he has paid the penalty for our sins.
Why does he say "strive . . . (agonizomai)?" This sounds like we must do something to earn our salvation. Actually, it describes something about saving faith. It hurts to admit you deserve God's judgment; it's painful to agree you need charity. Humbling yourself before God to do this is one of the hardest things you'll ever do . . .
"Strive" may also be used to bring in a note of urgency . . .

Read vs 24b-25. Note the NASB margin punctuation. The point is not that God runs out of willingness to save us, but that we run out of time. The opportunity for salvation is limited. We can all be rescued from God’s final judgment through faith in Christ, but we only have a limited amount of time to make this decision.

Our time runs out when we die (Heb. 9:27) or when Jesus returns (Matt. 25:1-12)—whichever comes first. There is no second chance, as many cults and Roman Catholicism teach. The Bible consistently says that the decision you make about Jesus in this life has binding eternal implications.
"I think it's probably true, but I'm gonna put it off until I get older." You can do this, but you are taking a huge risk. You can't guarantee you'll be alive 25 hours from now, let alone 25 years from now. If you think it may be true, the time to believe it is now.
"I need more evidence." This is valid—as long as you're really seeking the evidence and not just using it as an excuse to put off a decision . . .

Read vs 26-27. On that day, people will protest: “You visited my town . . . I heard you teach . . .” The parallel in Matt. 7:22-23 adds some even more compelling protests: “I taught Sunday school . . . I cast out demons . . .” To these we might add: “I belonged to a church . . . I got baptized/took communion regularly . . . I served as a volunteer . . . “ Jesus doesn't deny these things, nor does he view them as unimportant. But he says they are not what counts when it comes to being delivered from God’s judgment.

"I do not know where you are from" means "I never knew you—there was never any genuine relationship between us.” The basis of salvation is personal relationship with Jesus. It's not whether you know about Christ—it’s whether you know him. It’s not what you did for Christ—it’s whether you’ve allowed him to know you personally (Rev. 3:20).
This insight helps us to understand the final verses . . .

Read vs 28-30. Jesus sort of answers the man’s original question (v. 23) here: “Yes, many are being saved—but not necessarily the ones you think.” The recipients of salvation will be surprising to many. Many who expect to be there won't be—but many who they expect won't be there will be.

The rabbis taught that all Jews except for the really bad ones, and that no Gentiles except for the really righteous ones had a place in God’s future kingdom. But Jesus says that many Jews will not be saved, yet many Gentiles (including many who were “sinners”) will be saved—because of their response to him.
In the same way, many “religious” people will not be saved, while many “sinners” (like the thief on the cross) will be saved—because they acknowledge their need for Jesus’ forgiveness and respond to his invitation to know him personally.
Would you be offended to know that someone like JEFFREY DAHMER could be included, while someone like ???? could be excluded? Then you don’t understand what we’ve been talking about . . .

Conclusion

“How many are being saved?” “Whatever their number, respond to me and be sure that you are among their number.” “Will the saved be few?” “Will you be among the saved?”

Footnote