The Pulpit Commentary — Luke — Volume 1 — Section 323

food which hie hum hie house cont11ins; when, lo I to hie surprise, 11 friend 11rrive~ nftcr 11 long journey, hungry as well ae weary-a most fitting object, theref<:,re, of hospitaliry. What ie to be done? He quickly decides. Having most probably arranged for the w11shing of the guest's feet, he passes out into the darkness, and seeks the door of a friend who can, he believes, lend him as m11ny loaves 118 he needs. It is not a personal wnnt he is 11bout to urge, but the need of a hungry 11nd weary friend. He stands before the door, consequently, in the simple majesty of disinterestedness. He begins to knock, but nt first receives no encouragement. "Trouble me not," says hie friend within: "the door is now shut, and my children are with me in bed; I cannot rise and give thee." Nothing d11unted, however, and pocketing all his pride, for he knows wcli it is no selfish plea he is urging, he resolves to knock on till his belenguered friend capitulates. At length importunity triumphs; the friend in bed sees plainly that the only chnnce of rest th11t night for himself and his children is to give in as soon as possible, and let the importunate petitioner have his way; and so be rises and gives him 118 many lo11ves as he needs. Here, then, according to our Lord, is a case of efficacious intercessory pr11yer as between men. It may not receive an immediate answer, but importunity secures an ultimate answer. We are warranted, therefore, in rising from efficacious intercessory prayer among men to the assurance that intercessory prayer will prove efficacious with God. God may keep us waiting, not certainly from any selfish consideration, but for our own good, but ultimately he will respond to every unselfish intercession. Hence our Lord reaches the assurance, "And I say unto you, Ask, and it shall be given you; seek, and ye shall find; knock, and it ~hall be opened unto you," etc. The second case brought before us by Christ is efficacious prayer in the family circle. Hungry children present prayers to parents for food, for bread, for fish, for eg/1:e, as among the humbler classes in Palestine; and the fathers who a.re asked for euch things never think of mocking the hungry ones with a stone, a. serpent, or a scorpion. The earthly parent hears and answers the children's prayer; the prayer is efficacious. So will it be, argues our Lord, as we appeal for the needful blessings to our Father in heaven. 11 If ye then, being evil, know how to give good gifts unto yonr children : how much more shall your heavenly Father give the Holy Spirit to them that ask him?" It is surely instructive to think that earthly parents, in the midst of a. "reign of law," which they only partially understand, can yet know how to give good things to their children. Be the times ever so hard, they can generally manage to give the little ones bread and keep them off the parish. Is it not reasonable to argue that the heavenly Father, who knows all" the reign of law," because its Author and Lord, can give the Holy Spirit, or any minor e.nd needful blessing his children crave, unto the prayerful? We have only, in conclusion, to emphasize the fact that the Holy SpiriG is the great need of human souls, Let us ask him as God'8 supreme Gift, and we sh,tll assuredly receive him even in Pentecostal power. It is this Gift which individuals a.nd Churches need to make them truly useful !-R. M. E. Vers. 14-36.-In~i:rations. Our Lord had just held out the possibility of Divine inspirations for prayerful disciples, and the evangelist next takes up and contrasts diabolical inspirations with this. Unless we notice the artistic treatment by the accomplished author of the Third Go~pel, we shall miss much of his meaning. The circumstance which led to the question of infernal inspiration was the healing of a man who was possessed by a dumb devil. Here was a case, then, where a demon, entering into and possessing a human being, had sealed his lips so that he could not speak. OW' Saviour expelled the demon, and the man immediately recovered tbe power of speech. at this the people wondered. But the wise men among his enemies had a theory to JJeet the case; they insisted that it was because Beelzebub, the chief ~f ~he devils, dwelt in Christ that he was able to expel the inferior demon. Others rns1Sted on a si~ from heaven to supplement these "signs" on earth. To bot~ classes he gives _di:e answer, Let us look at the two theories, and the interlude which separates Chns,·, treatment of them, in their order. I. 'l'nE THEORY THAT JESUS WAS POSSESSED BY BEELZEBUB. There was something plausible in this. Assuming that demons are subject to their superiors, the hostile 8pirits iaRinuntod that Jesus had ~ot the chief of the devils in him, and so was able to orJor the iuferior domons. In the theory there wu the adm.~~ion th:\t the ,!evil, wllu 828 'l'RE GOST'F.L ACCORDING TO Sl'. LUKE. [rn. x,. 1-M.