Meaning behind the quote in Luke 20:17 from Psalms 118:22?

liars_paradox · #1 25th August 2009, 08:41 PM

I don't know if a thread like this has already been made, but if not then I hope some knowledgeable people will post on here and discuss the issue I'm having with this passage.

From what I understand, the prophet speaking in Psalms 118 was speaking about how God had defended him from his enemies. When researching the quote "The stone the builders rejected has become the capstone" (Psalms 118:22, Luke 20:17, NIV) it appears that many people view that the "builders" referenced in this passage is God and that the author of Psalms 118 has been made into the "cornerstone" or crowning achievement of God. That God had rejected him but has now made the author important.

But, in trying to see how this relates to Jesus' parable about the tenants and in trying to explain why the "teaches of the law and chief priests" knew that Jesus was talking about them (Luke 20:19) I'm not so sure about.

Did the rabbinical authority view themselves as the "builders" who rejected John the Baptist and is why they were so offended? Or, is there something else that I'm missing?

Also, how does it relate to the tenants in Jesus' parables? I think when I saw the same passage in Mark, the NIV footnote made a reference to Isaiah 8:14-15. Do you guys think that Jesus had this passage in mind when he gave the parable?

Thanks for taking the time in reading this and I appreciate any helpful comments that God might will for you to give me. Honestly, I probably don't have as much time as I need to have in reading the scripture due to my other obligations in life but I think that this passage is probably something that God might want for me to understand.

Bouke285 · #2 26th August 2009, 04:12 PM

Originally Posted by liars_paradox

I don't know if a thread like this has already been made, but if not then I hope some knowledgeable people will post on here and discuss the issue I'm having with this passage.

From what I understand, the prophet speaking in Psalms 118 was speaking about how God had defended him from his enemies. When researching the quote "The stone the builders rejected has become the capstone" (Psalms 118:22, Luke 20:17, NIV) it appears that many people view that the "builders" referenced in this passage is God and that the author of Psalms 118 has been made into the "cornerstone" or crowning achievement of God. That God had rejected him but has now made the author important.

But, in trying to see how this relates to Jesus' parable about the tenants and in trying to explain why the "teaches of the law and chief priests" knew that Jesus was talking about them (Luke 20:19) I'm not so sure about.

Did the rabbinical authority view themselves as the "builders" who rejected John the Baptist and is why they were so offended? Or, is there something else that I'm missing?

Also, how does it relate to the tenants in Jesus' parables? I think when I saw the same passage in Mark, the NIV footnote made a reference to Isaiah 8:14-15. Do you guys think that Jesus had this passage in mind when he gave the parable?

Thanks for taking the time in reading this and I appreciate any helpful comments that God might will for you to give me. Honestly, I probably don't have as much time as I need to have in reading the scripture due to my other obligations in life but I think that this passage is probably something that God might want for me to understand.

Alright I think I do have an understanding of both the parable and the OT passage. The owner of the vineyard God sent servants they were rejected and sent away. So the owner decides to send his beloved Son Probably they will respect him when they see him. Luke 15 -16 So they cast him out of the vineyard and killed him. Therefore what will the owner of the vineyard do to them? 16 "He will come and destroy those vinedressers and give the vineyard to others."

To me this is prophesying the fall of Israel and the grafting in of the gentiles. The Jews reject and kill the beloved son, they rejected the Chief cornerstone without even realizing it.

This is why the chief priests and scribes were angry and offended, because this was referring directly to them.

liars_paradox · #3 27th August 2009, 02:04 AM

Originally Posted by Bouke285

Alright I think I do have an understanding of both the parable and the OT passage. The owner of the vineyard God sent servants they were rejected and sent away. So the owner decides to send his beloved Son Probably they will respect him when they see him. Luke 15 -16 So they cast him out of the vineyard and killed him. Therefore what will the owner of the vineyard do to them? 16 "He will come and destroy those vinedressers and give the vineyard to others."

Originally Posted by Bouke285

To me this is prophesying the fall of Israel and the grafting in of the gentiles. The Jews reject and kill the beloved son, they rejected the Chief cornerstone without even realizing it. This is why the chief priests and scribes were angry and offended, because this was referring directly to them.

Of course, if they didn't realize it, then why would they have been so angry in the first place? I think that when analyzed as literature (non-fiction) that the story of the cornerstone could foreshadow the events would later take place. However, I don't think that this would qualify as a prophesy from Jesus considering Jesus would've known that they wouldn't have known who they were talking about about.

Here are the major concerns that I have with your statement:

Prophesy: This implies that Jesus was presenting the chief priests with a message concerning the future, but not like a fortune-telling because it's a message from God and a message that is meant to be understood and not cryptic - like many fortune tellers on TV seem to be. Unlike fortune-tellers, God tends to be direct so there isn't doubt in anyone's mind what it is that's expected of them.

- So, with that in mind, was Jesus trying to prophesy to the priests? If the first thought that the chief priests and teachers of the laws had after Jesus gave them that parable consisted of them trying to figure out a way to kill Jesus, then it's likely that they didn't get the Jesus and vineyard owner's son analogy. And, if Jesus knew that they wouldn't get the analogy, then it's not likely that he really was prophesying to them since Jesus would've wanted for them to know what he was talking about.
So, the next question that comes to mind is, what was it that made the chief priests and teachers of the law so angry? What was it in Jesus' parable that offended them? Considering that Jesus had just brought up the question of John the Baptist after the chief priests had questioned Jesus' authority, who do you think it was that the chief priests saw as the "corner stone" and the "son" of the vineyard's owner?
- Most likely it was John the Baptist that they saw as the capstone and as the vineyard owner's son. And, when Jesus talked about the owner killing the tenants and giving the vineyard to someone else, the pharisees probably viewed the vineyard as a metaphor for their jobs - and the privileged that come with them - the someone else Jesus was referring to was himself. Although, this doesn't really say much about who Jesus had in mind when he brought up the passage from Psalms 118.

So, what I just did now, I think, is establish the context in which the passage has taken place. By identifying the situation surrounding this event, we gain insight into what the audience might interpret when they heard the parable the first time.
Yet, another necessary consideration for understanding this passage is understanding the type of knowledge that the audience would've likely had at the time. Since, we know that they couldn't predict the future and know how the people were going to be turned against Jesus so that the priests wouldn't have to worry about Jesus stealing away their followers, it seems like the next rational approach is to analyze the Old Testament scripture itself.

By analyzing the Old Testament passage, Psalms 118, we come to my next problem with your statement. Probably the most striking contradiction concerns the personalities of the author of Psalms 118 and Jesus Christ.

Who is the Capstone? Considering that the very writer of Psalms 118 admits to having been a sinner (the very reason for which God had chastised him in the first place), along with the idea that Jesus isn't capable of sin (a pivotal point in Christian theology), then it follows that the cornerstone couldn't be a reference about Jesus.
Who are the builders? Another problem with the Jesus-capstone analogy is that the builders of Psalms 118 rejected its author. Yet, if the "builders" from Psalms 118 is God then does this mean that Jesus was rejected by God? Why? This really doesn't make any sense considering there's no where in the NT which suggests that God rejected His only begotten son.
Jesus' intended meaning. Even though it's not always so easy to fully comprehend God's word, it doesn't seem like God goes around giving elusive riddles and simply chooses whatever interpretation that is convenient to Him at the time. It does appear that God likes to be direct, when the time calls for Him to communicate to His people. So, considering Jesus is the Son of God then it's likely that the same idea applies to here. Whatever meaning Jesus had by His parable is likely one meant to be understood by the people who were there at the time and not for people who already knew how things were going to turn out.

Even though this parable appears to foreshadow Jesus' crucifixion, it doesn't seem likely that he actually could be the capstone referenced here, considering that the priests wouldn't have been able to make that connection. Additionally, when one thinks about the back story behind the itself Psalms 118 and how the writer of Psalms 118 is a fallible human it really doesn't seem that Jesus could have been talking about himself he used this passage.

But, this doesn't mean we know who the owner's son is based on my thoughts alone. I really don't think that John the Baptist really fits the idea that John was God's son if God is being alluded from the owner of the vineyard in Luke 20 parable. But, this is why I brought this thread here, because I was hoping some people could give me further insight into this issue. I thought that if I gained some deeper insight into Psalms 118 then I would understand Luke 20 better.

In anycase I do appreciate your commenting though. Sorry if I come off as someone who isn't willing to learn if I argue back with you. It isn't meant to be a personal attack on anyone, but rather as a means to understanding the scripture better.

Bouke285 · #4 27th August 2009, 03:38 AM

What makes you assume they wouldn't get the analogy? They could very well have heard what Jesus knows will happen to them already. They were very familiar with OT prophecy they would have studied this. Maybe they didn't know it would be happening to them, but when Jesus brought this up referring to them it did make them angry. They get angry because they do understand the analogy think about it. The stone made the chief cornerstone, the son who is sent away and brings on the destruction of the vineyard keepers.

Yes, this is just MY view I know there are others who would agree with me, but some may not.

liars_paradox · #5 28th August 2009, 11:25 PM

Originally Posted by Bouke285

What makes you assume they wouldn't get the analogy? They could very well have heard what Jesus knows will happen to them already. They were very familiar with OT prophecy they would have studied this. Maybe they didn't know it would be happening to them, but when Jesus brought this up referring to them it did make them angry. They get angry because they do understand the analogy think about it. The stone made the chief cornerstone, the son who is sent away and brings on the destruction of the vineyard keepers.

Yes, this is just MY view I know there are others who would agree with me, but some may not.

I might not know the bible well enough to be certain of the meaning behind the passage, but I'm learning and trying to understand. What I'm having a hard time getting past is the fact that the writer of Psalms 118 confesses to having been a sinner in the past. Also, I don't see anything in this passage which would suggest the inclusion of Gentiles either.

Also, just because other people might agree with you doesn't mean that you're right. You know that it's possible that for more than one person to be wrong about the same thing, it's best to use scripture as evidence for your claim.

If you don't know of exactly where you can cite such information yourself, you could always ask someone at your church or anyone who might be able to cite more scriptural evidence to back up your claim.

In any case, I have a request, that you pray for me to gain a better understanding of scripture. Even though I consider myself an intelligent person, there's still a lot for me to learn from the bible and there are others with more knowledge on this matter who might be better able to help me on this. Anyways, I appreciate your responding giving me your insight.

Bouke285 · #6 29th August 2009, 03:23 AM

Originally Posted by liars_paradox

I might not know the bible well enough to be certain of the meaning behind the passage, but I'm learning and trying to understand. What I'm having a hard time getting past is the fact that the writer of Psalms 118 confesses to having been a sinner in the past. Also, I don't see anything in this passage which would suggest the inclusion of Gentiles either.

Also, just because other people might agree with you doesn't mean that you're right. You know that it's possible that for more than one person to be wrong about the same thing, it's best to use scripture as evidence for your claim.

If you don't know of exactly where you can cite such information yourself, you could always ask someone at your church or anyone who might be able to cite more scriptural evidence to back up your claim.

In any case, I have a request, that you pray for me to gain a better understanding of scripture. Even though I consider myself an intelligent person, there's still a lot for me to learn from the bible and there are others with more knowledge on this matter who might be better able to help me on this. Anyways, I appreciate your responding giving me your insight.

That's the thing no one else is helping you, I never said I was right because others may agree with me, if you look back I also said some may not. This is just MY view I tried to make this clear. I don't know what you mean by cite such information yourself. We were talking about two passages in the Bible and they had already been quoted in your post. I don't know why it is so hard for you to see this prophecy :/. Let me try and explain a little more clearly. Is it because I'm young? maybe you are too i have no idea here we go.

you said you wanted some help from someone who knows what they are talking about, well here is a word from three Bible scholars. I hadn't even checked the commentary until I read this post and to no surprise they have the same view. Edward Dobson, Charles Feinberg, Edward Hindson

"This verse may refer to Israel or the Temple, but it undoubtedly has its primary referent to the Lord Jesus Christ Himself. He is the living stone, the precious stone. The Messiah that the Jews rejected the King of Kings, and the Lord of Lords. Jesus is the cornerstone of His church, that which holds it together, and that upon which it is built. This is the Lord's doing; the resurrection and position of Jesus were not the work of men they had rejected Him. It was the work of God." - KJV Commentary

I don't know why you are so stuck on the author of the psalm confessed to sin in the past, Jesus didn't have to physically write this psalm to give the author prophecy to include. Where does it say that vs 22-23 must be referring to the author? I don't like to argue very much at all, only when I feel I can do some good you seem to keep shutting out my answers like I could have no idea what I am talking about. I look at the same scripture as you do, you call yourself intelligent, but if you study the New Testament you find that intelligence is nothing unless given by God. I do not want to cause any anger I just want to understand why is this answer so hard to accept?

Anyhow, I will pray that you grow in your understanding of scripture as well as I myself grow in the understanding. God Bless sorry if this post came off as harsh.

geoffinsegg · #7 29th August 2009, 03:35 AM

I remember being taught in a sermon at some stage that the Stone that the builders rejected was refering to the Jews rejection of Jesus as messiah.

liars_paradox · #8 30th August 2009, 12:02 AM

Originally Posted by Bouke285

That's the thing no one else is helping you, I never said I was right because others may agree with me, if you look back I also said some may not. This is just MY view I tried to make this clear. I don't know what you mean by cite such information yourself. We were talking about two passages in the Bible and they had already been quoted in your post. I don't know why it is so hard for you to see this prophecy :/. Let me try and explain a little more clearly. Is it because I'm young? maybe you are too i have no idea here we go.

I am young too - I guess. But, when I mean cite more information, provide other scriptural references which might help your argument.

Originally Posted by Bouke285

you said you wanted some help from someone who knows what they are talking about, well here is a word from three Bible scholars. I hadn't even checked the commentary until I read this post and to no surprise they have the same view. Edward Dobson, Charles Feinberg, Edward Hindson

"This verse may refer to Israel or the Temple, but it undoubtedly has its primary referent to the Lord Jesus Christ Himself. He is the living stone, the precious stone. The Messiah that the Jews rejected the King of Kings, and the Lord of Lords. Jesus is the cornerstone of His church, that which holds it together, and that upon which it is built. This is the Lord's doing; the resurrection and position of Jesus were not the work of men they had rejected Him. It was the work of God." - KJV Commentary

I don't have a copy of the KJV bible but which of the three scholars would've wrote the KJV commentary?
Also, the commentary doesn't really address the issues that I brought up.

Originally Posted by Bouke285

I don't know why you are so stuck on the author of the psalm confessed to sin in the past, Jesus didn't have to physically write this psalm to give the author prophecy to include. Where does it say that vs 22-23 must be referring to the author?

You're talking about verses 22-23 in Psalms 118, correct? To answer your question, I guess that no where does. But, one assumes that that's who the author is writing about. If you read Psalms 118 by itself you wouldn't think otherwise, and that's because that's how we generally read literature as well as any kind of communication between people.
And, the reason why I'm stuck on the author is because Jesus used this passage. He had to have had a good reason for using it, and if the passage was meant to be a reference to Him then we should have the evidence to back this up.

Originally Posted by Bouke285

I don't like to argue very much at all, only when I feel I can do some good you seem to keep shutting out my answers like I could have no idea what I am talking about. I look at the same scripture as you do, you call yourself intelligent, but if you study the New Testament you find that intelligence is nothing unless given by God. I do not want to cause any anger I just want to understand why is this answer so hard to accept?

Sorry, about that. And, honestly I probably do have that attitude about people - I think. Which is ridiculous because I know from personal experience what that's like. Although, people don't criticize my intelligence during arguments (such things wouldn't bother me because it's a sign of weakness anyhow during an argument), but with other intellectual aspects about myself that I am insecure about.

But, I did ask God to keep me from thinking that way about the Bible. I think that the realization that I'm not smarter than other people, that I don't automatically know the answer, is a lesson that God wants me to learn.

This lesson would not only apply to reading scripture but also with my interactions with people in general and probably on a large number of topics. I don't consider myself a close-minded person or someone who just simply wants to win an argument, but I don't have to quick to judgment about the opposing arguer or their argument.

This lesson that I think God might want me to learn reminds me of Proverbs 18:2

A fool finds no pleasure in understanding but delights in airing his own opinions.

Which does remind me of myself, I guess.

As for why I don't just accept it so readily, well mostly it's for the reasons that I've stated. And, possibly a personal bias on my own part. For some reason I don't like to look at the NT as being antisemitic honestly. I understand that theologically it is, but this goes for any religion and technically you reject a religion by just simply not believing in it.
But, beside that, there are still the issues about that interpretation, which I have brought up, that prevents me from accepting it. Also, Jesus would've used the passage in the way that not only the Pharisees would've understood but the ordinary people who were gathered around to listen to Him as well. But, I'll bring this up again later in this post.

Originally Posted by geoffinsegg

I remember being taught in a sermon at some stage that the Stone that the builders rejected was refering to the Jews rejection of Jesus as messiah.

Well, I guess that's because it seems like the obvious answer. But consider this, what do you think it was that the audience understood from this?

Do you think that these Jewish people saw themselves as rejecters of Jesus? I really don't think that the people who were taking the time to listen to Jesus, the very same people who the chief priests were afraid of, would see themselves as the rejecters of Jesus. Even if they would later be turned against Jesus by the teachers of the Law, they wouldn't have been able to forsee any of this. But, Jesus was addressing them as well.

If my interpretation is wrong, then it is, but I still think that the argument of the cornerstone being the John the Baptist is still very likely. I'm just simply basing this off the fact that Jesus brought up John the Baptist right before He gave this parable. That, and that I'm trying to imagine this as if I was one of the audience members. There's no way that I'd be able to know what would happen to Jesus at some point if I was just simply an observer.

Originally Posted by Bouke285

Anyhow, I will pray that you grow in your understanding of scripture as well as I myself grow in the understanding. God Bless sorry if this post came off as harsh.

No, not all. I didn't find you at all harsh. Thanks for taking the time to respond.

Bouke285 · #9 30th August 2009, 03:21 PM

Originally Posted by liars_paradox

If my interpretation is wrong, then it is, but I still think that the argument of the cornerstone being the John the Baptist is still very likely. I'm just simply basing this off the fact that Jesus brought up John the Baptist right before He gave this parable. That, and that I'm trying to imagine this as if I was one of the audience members. There's no way that I'd be able to know what would happen to Jesus at some point if I was just simply an observer.

No, not all. I didn't find you at all harsh. Thanks for taking the time to respond.

I get what you are saying, but you also have to realize there was tons of prophesy which the Jewish people understood to be about their savior. They were blinded they rejected when that savior came, they did still know the prophecy. They most likely just thought it would be applying to someone else. It's always good to look into scripture especially the new testament as if you were one of the audience members

I do this too. God's word is living we can study it for an eternity and still not know everything in the form we are now. It's interesting how you can take 1 or 2 short passages and wonder, pray, discuss them for days isn't it?

fm107 · #10 30th August 2009, 05:50 PM

I don't have the time to read what everyone has posted here. From what I have read I shall attempt to answer what I believe it is your asking.

The Capstone Parable

The builders refered to are the chief priests and the Pharisees.
The capstone is Jesus.
The chief priests and the Pharisees were angry because they knew Jesus was talking about him.

The Vineyard Parable

The servents sent were the prophets
The tenants were the those described in Matt 23:30-35 & Acts 7:52
The son is Jesus
The other tenants are Christians

- I have made no reference to Psalm 118 nor the verse in Isaiah you quoted. I hope what I have posted helps you in some way though.