Apollo performs physically demanding and routine tasks that one would not want to do
Apptronik, a leader in the field of creating the next generation of humanoid general purpose robots tasked with changing the way we live and work, announced that it has entered into an agreement with Mercedes-Benz. As part of it, Apptronik and Tristar will collaborate to identify applications for highly advanced robotics in manufacturing.
The partnership represents the first publicly announced commercial deployment of the Apollo robot and the first application of humanoid robotics for Mercedes-Benz
The test introduction of Apollo, one of the most advanced commercial humanoid robots in the world, gives Mercedes-Benz the opportunity to explore the potential applications for the use of humanoid robots in logistics. It will test whether Apollo can carry parts to the assembly line where they can be assembled by workers while inspecting the components.
The general idea is to put an emphasis on automating some physical, repetitive and boring tasks for which it is increasingly difficult to find reliable workers.
Apollo is the size of an average man – height of 170 cm, weight 73 kilograms. The robot can lift a weight of 25 kilograms, and one battery pack provides operation for up to 4 hours.
Mercedes-Benz is looking for a way to free specialists from burdensome tasks and concentrate on production until low-skilled labor is replaced.
We are exploring new opportunities with the use of robotics to assist our skilled manufacturing workforce. This is a new frontier and we want to understand the potential of both robotics and automotive manufacturing to fill the workforce gaps in low-skill, repetitive and physically demanding areas and free up our highly skilled assembly line workers.” , commented Jörg Burzer, member of the Board of Management of Mercedes-Benz Group AG.
Apollo’s computing power enables leading AI companies to use it for a variety of applications beyond what Apptronik originally envisioned, similar to the concept of the iPhone: easy-to-use, world-class hardware that comes with some pre-built applications and can add applications , developed by third parties.
The UN Security Council adopts a resolution demanding a ceasefire in Gaza during Ramadan, by a vote of 14 in favour to none against, with one abstention (United States)
Resolution 2728 also calls for the immediate release of hostages and for ensuring humanitarian access to Gaza
The Council rejected a Russia-proposed amendment that would have called for a permanent ceasefire
The US ambassador said her delegation “fully supports” the critical objectives of the draft
Algeria’s ambassador says the ceasefire will end “the bloodbath”
“This must be a turning point,” says the ambassador for the observer State of Palestine
The draft’s lack of condemnation of Hamas is “a disgrace”, says Israel’s ambassador
For summaries of UN meetings, visit our colleagues at the UN Meetings Coverage in English and French
12:15 PM
This is a first step: Yemen
The Representative of Yemen Abdullah Ali Fadhel Al-Saadi, on behalf of the Arab Group, said they valued the votes of the 14 States supporting the resolution.
He said the resolution must be considered as a first step leading to a binding resolution on a permanent ceasefire.
The Arab Group also reaffirms that the efforts to reach an agreement on a ceasefire do not go against the call for freeing all hostages.
He said the Group sought immediate compliance with the resolution and categorically rejects the double standard that is prolonging this conflict, as Israeli occupation forces continue with their genocidal war, targeting women and children and even adopting a policy of starvation.
He called on the Council to impose strict sanctions on Israeli settlers who are inciting violence against Palestinians, including in Jerusalem.
The Arab group will continue efforts for an immediate ceasefire, the delivery of humanitarian aid, an end to forced displacement of Palestinians and greater international protection for the Palestinians.
Israel must be held accountable for its crimes. It is also time that the international community accept the State of Palestine as a full member of the United Nations, he concluded.
11:52 AM
Lack of Hamas condemnation is ‘a disgrace’: Israel
Ambassador Gilad Erdan, Permanent Representative of Israel to the UN, addresses the Security Council meeting on the situation in the Middle East, including the Palestinian question.
Gilad Erdan, Ambassador and Permanent Representative of Israel, questioned why the Security Council “discriminates” among victims, recalling that it condemned the deadly attack on a concert hall in Moscow on Friday, but failed to condemn the Nova music festival massacre of 7 October.
“Civilians, no matter where they live, deserve to enjoy music in safety and security and the Security Council should have the moral clarity to condemn such acts of terror equally, without discrimination,” he said.
“Sadly, today as well this Council refused to condemn the 7 October massacre – this is a disgrace,” he added.
Mr. Erdan further note that for the past 18 years, Hamas initiated ceaseless attacks against Israeli civilians.
“Thousands and thousands of indiscriminate rockets and missiles against civilians,” he stressed.
He added that while the resolution failed to condemn Hamas, it did “state something that should have been the driving moral force”.
“This resolution denounces the taking of hostages, recalling that it in violation of international law,” he said, stressing taking innocent civilians hostage, is a war crime.
“When it comes to bringing the hostages home, the Security Council must not settle for words alone but take action, real action,” he added.
11:45 AM
Gaza’s ordeal must end, now: Palestine
Ambassador Riyad Mansour, Permanent Representative of the State of Palestine to the United Nations addresses the Security Council meeting on the situation in the Middle East, including the Palestinian question.
Riyad Mansour, Permanent Observer for the observer State of Palestine, said it had taken six months, with more than 100,000 Palestinians killed and maimed, to finally demand an immediate ceasefire.
The Palestinians in Gaza have shouted, cried, cursed and prayed, defying the odds time and time again. Now they live with famine with many buried under the rubble of their own houses.
“Their ordeal must come to an end, and it must come to an immediate end, now”, he told ambassadors.
He said the rule of international law was being destroyed by Israel’s crimes. Instead of implementing a mandatory order from the International Criminal Court (ICC), Israel has doubled down on its actions, he said.
He said Palestinians had been killed if they stayed, or left, and now Israel threatens an invasion of Rafah.
They have also continued their incitement of the UN, attacking the UN chief and the UN relief agency UNRWA. The UN must be defended, he said.
“This outrageous incitement has real life consequences for UN and humanitarian staff on the ground who are targets of attacks, who are killed, arrested and tortured”, he said.
It also has real life consequences for the blocking of UNRWA aid. “It is time for all these Israeli actions to trigger a serious international action”, he said.
He welcomed the adoption of the resolution and saluted Arab unity in demanding the ceasefire.
“This must be a turning point, this must lead to saving lives on the ground. This must signal the end of this assault of atrocities against our people”, said, declaring that his entire nation was “being murdered”.
11:30 AM
Russia: Council must work towards permanent ceasefire
Ambassador Vassily Nebenzia, Permanent Representative of Russia to the UN, addresses the Security Council meeting on the situation in the Middle East, including the Palestinian question.
Mr. Nebenzia, Russian Ambassador and Permanent Representative, said that his country voted in favour of the resolution, as it called for an immediate ceasefire “even if it is limited to the month of Ramadan”.
“Unfortunately, what happens after that ends remains unclear, since the word ‘lasting’ could be interpreted in various different ways,” he said.
“Those who are providing cover for Israel still want to give it a free hand,” he added, expressing hope that the wording contained in the resolution “will be used in the interests of peace rather than advancing the inhumane Israeli operation against the Palestinians”.
The word “permanent” would be more precise, the ambassador said, voicing his delegation’s “disappointment” that his delegation’s proposal did not make it through.
“Nevertheless, we believe it is fundamentally important to vote in favour of peace,” he said, urging the Security Council to continue to work on achieving a permanent ceasefire.
11:28 AM
Humanitarian pause key, then sustainable peace: UK
Ambassador Barbara Woodward, Permanent Representative of the United Kingdom to the UN, addresses the Security Council meeting on the situation in the Middle East, including the Palestinian question.
United Kingdom Ambassador Barbara Woodward said her country had long been calling for an immediate humanitarian pause leading to a sustainable ceasefire without a return to destruction, fighting and loss of life as the fastest way to get hostages out and aid in.
That is what this resolution calls for and why the UK voted in favour of the text. “We regret that this resolution has not condemned the terrorist attacks perpetrated by Hamas on 7 October,” she said, but it sets out the urgent demand for the unconditional release of all hostages.
Now, the Council must focus on an immediate humanitarian pause leading to a lasting, sustainable peace without a return to fighting.
That means the formation of a new Palestinian Government for the West Bank and Gaza accompanied by an international support package, Ambassador Woodward said, as well as ending Hamas’s ability to launch attacks.
There must be a pathway towards a two-State solution with Israel and Palestine, living side-by-side in security and peace.
11:17 AM
Life and death vote: Guyana
Ambassador Carolyn Rodrigues-Birkett, Guyana’s Permanent Representative to the UN, addresses the Security Council meeting on the situation in the Middle East, including the Palestinian question.
Carolyn Rodrigues-Birkett, Ambassador and Permanent Representative of Guyana, said that after more than five months of a “war of utter terror and destruction”, a ceasefire is the difference between life and death for hundreds of thousands of Palestinians and others.
“This demand [by the Council] comes at a significant time as Palestinians are observing the holy month of Ramadan,” she said, noting continuing deaths in the enclave and a growing number of families left homeless.
Voicing concern over the looming starvation in Gaza, the ambassador also highlighted the disproportionate impact of the war on women and children.
“At the same time, the anguish of the families of the hostages held in Gaza continues to mount with no clear prospect for the return of their loved ones,” she said, adding that “Palestinians experience the same anguish, waiting for their relatives who are illegally detained in Israel to come home.”
11:14 AM
Too late for some: China
Zhang Jun, Ambassador and Permanent Representative of China to the UN, thanked the E-10 members for their efforts on the draft.
Noting that his country’s negative vote on the US-led draft resolution last Friday, he stated that a comparison of the two drafts showed the differences.
“The current draft is unequivocal and correct in its direction, demanding an immediate ceasefire, while the previous one was evasive and ambiguous,” he said, adding that the present resolution also reflected the general expectations of the international community and enjoyed the collective support of Arab nations.
He said China had forced the US to realise it could not continue obstructing the Council.
“For the lives that have already perished, the Council resolution today comes too late,” he said, but for those still living in the Strip, the resolution represents “long awaited hope”.
“All harm to civilians must cease immediately” and the offensive must end, he said.
11:01 AM
After ‘deafening silence’, Council must focus on solutions: France
Ambassador Nicolas de Rivière, Permanent Representative of France to the UN, addresses the Security Council meeting on the situation in the Middle East, including the Palestinian question.
French Ambassador and Permanent Representative Nicholas de Rivière welcomed the adoption of the resolution, stressing that “it was high time” that the Security Council act.
“The adoption of this resolution demonstrates that the Security Council can still act when all of its members make the necessary effort to discharge their mandate,” he said.
“The Security Council’s silence on Gaza was becoming deafening, it is high time now for the Council to finally contribute to finding a solution to this crisis,” he continued, noting that it is not yet over and that the 15-member body will have to remain mobilised and immediately get to work.
“It will have to, following Ramadan, which finishes in two weeks, [the Council] will have to establish a permanent ceasefire,” the ambassador added, stressing also the importance of the two-State solution.
10:55 AM
Resolution must make a difference: Republic of Korea
The Republic of Korea’s Ambassador Hwang Joonkook, said it was the first ever resolution from the E-10 to be adopted on this Middle East agenda and represents a huge breakthrough.
But for today’s resolution to have concrete significance, it must have a tangible impact in Gaza itself, he said.
“The situation must be different before and after this resolution. This will only be possible when both Israel and Hamas respect and faithfully implement this resolution.”
They must understand this resolution reflects the consensus of the international community, starting right now with a ceasefire.
The destruction of buildings has continued in Khan Younis, in the southern Gaza Strip.
10:46 AM
Supporting crucial talks: US
US Ambassador and Permanent Representative Linda Thomas-Greenfield said that in adopting the resolution, the Security Council “spoke out in support” of the ongoing diplomatic efforts led by the US, Qatar and Egypt to bring about an immediate and sustainable ceasefire, secure the immediate release of all hostages, and help alleviate the tremendous suffering of Palestinian civilians in need in Gaza.
“The United States fully supports these critical objectives,” she said.
“In fact, they were the foundation of the resolution we put forward last week – a resolution that Russia and China vetoed.”
Emphasizing that her country’s support for the objectives “is not simply rhetorical,” Ms. Thomas-Greenfield said that the US “is working around the clock to make them real on the ground, through diplomacy.”
She urged Council members to be clear that a ceasefire could have come “months ago” had Hamas been ready to release the hostages, accusing the group of throwing roadblocks in the path of peace.
“So today my ask to the members of this Council…is ‘speak out and demand unequivocally that Hamas accepts the deal on the table’,” she said.
10:47 AM
Resolution must be implemented: UN chief
Reacting immediately after the vote, Secretary-General António Guterres said on X that the long-awaited resolution must be implemented; the Council’s failure to do so “would be unforgivable”.
10:40 AM
Algeria says draft will end the ‘bloodbath’ in Gaza
Ambassador Amar Benjama, Permanent Representative of Algeria to the UN, addressing the Security Council meeting on the situation in the Middle East, including the Palestinian question.
Algeria’s Ambassador Amar Benjama said the draft will put an end to the massacres that have been going on for five months.
“The bloodbath has gone far too long,” he said. “Finally, the Security Council is finally responding to the calls of the international community and the Secretary-General.”
The draft conveys a clear message to the Palestinian people, he said.
“The international community, in its entirety, did not abandon you,” he said. “Adopting today’s resolution is on the beginning to meet the aspiration of the Palestinian people…to put an end of the bloodbath without any conditions.”
0:39 AM
Draft resolution passes, US abstains
UN Security Council votes on resolution demanding an immediate ceasefire in Gaza for the month of Ramadan.
The Russian verbal amendment did not pass due to lack of votes.
But in the substantive vote, there were 14 in favour, with the US abstaining. The resolution therefore has passed.
10:36 AM
The sticking point is the removal of the word “permanent” from an earlier version of the draft. It now calls for an “immediate ceasefire”.
Russia proposes amendment
Russian Ambassador Vassily Nebenzia said the fact that word “permanent” in operative paragraph one was replaced with weaker language is “unacceptable”.
“We all received instructions for a vote on the text that contained the word ‘permanent’” and anything else could be seen as permission for Israel to continue its attacks, he said.
As such, his delegation proposed an oral amendment to return the word “permanent” to the draft.
10:27 AM
Israel and Yemen will be taking part in the meeting together with the Observer State of Palestine.
Those who wish to make a statement before the vote are speaking.
A girl stands in front of her shelter in the city of Rafah.
Mozambique’s Ambassador Pero Afonso is introducing the draft on behalf of the 10 elected members (E-10) of the Council.
He said it was essential to end the catastrophic situation in the Gaza Strip, which is a matter of “grave concern to the entire international community” and a clear threat to peace and security.
There is a mandate under the UN Charter to work towards these key aims and this is the main motivation for introducing this text.
He said the E-10 group have always supported the call for an immediate ceasefire as a “fundamental” starting point. But the draft resolution also demands the immediate release of all hostages and full humanitarian access to them.
“Given the utmost urgency of the situation” we call on all members to vote in favour of the resolution and work towards a comprehensive ceasefire and a lasting peace in the Middle East, he said.
10:25 AM
The meeting has finally got underway. Ambassador Yamazaki has led a minute’s silence in honour of those who died in the terrorist attack in Moscow on Friday.
10:13 AM
These are unusual scenes going on now in the Chamber. The Russian Ambassador is in a large huddle with many other top diplomats, including the Palestinian Observer and the Ambassador for Malta. There are clearly negotiations still going on over the draft that’s due to be voted on.
Only a few of the ambassadors are already at the table. It looks like we won’t see the gavel come down for a while yet.
10:07 AM
Japan holds the presidency of the Security Council for March. Ambassador Kazuyuki Yamazaki will get the meeting underway soon but delegations are still filing into the Council Chamber, some huddled together in animated discussion.
09:30 AM – Disagreement in the Council has seen several rounds of drafts quashed by one or more of its five veto-wielding permanent members (China, France, Russia, United Kingdom, United States) since the war began in October following the Hamas-led terror attacks on southern Israel.
The current draft that ambassadors will consider around the iconic horseshoe table in the Security Council Chamber this morning is only four operative paragraphs long and was prepared by its non-permanent members.
Three main demands: Ceasefire, return hostages, let aid into Gaza
The resolution is a bare-bones call for a ceasefire during the month of Ramadan, which began on 11 March. It also demands the return of about 130 hostages seized in Israel and held in Gaza and emphasizes the urgent need to allow ample lifesaving aid to reach a starving population in the besieged enclave.
The demand to end hostilities has so far eluded the Council following the Israeli forces’ invasion of Gaza in October after Hamas attacks left almost 1,200 dead and 240 taken hostage.
Since then, Israel’s daily bombardment alongside its near total blockade of water, electricity and lifesaving aid has killed more than 32,000 Palestinians in Gaza, according to the health ministry there, where a recent UN-backed report showed an imminent famine unfolding.
Growing calls to end the war
Missile attacks on Gaza are continuing.
While a week-long ceasefire in November saw an exchange of hostages held in Gaza for Palestinians detained in Israel, fighting resumed and has only escalated, as the death toll and malnutrition in Gaza continues to soar along with ever louder calls to end the war and rapidly address the stark humanitarian suffering.
Previous rejected drafts contained basically the same provisions as this new one, as did resolutions 2712 and 2720 that were adopted in late 2023, but points of contention persist among the membership while calls continue to demand that the 15-member Council take a stronger stand to end the conflict.
Read our explainer on what happens when the Security Council deadlocks here, and follow our coverage as the meeting unfolds.
What’s the new draft resolution calling for?
The Council would demand “an immediate ceasefire for the month of Ramadan respected by all parties leading to a permanent sustainable ceasefire”
It would also demand “the immediate and unconditional release of all hostages, as well as ensuring humanitarian access to address their medical and other humanitarian needs” and “that the parties comply with their obligations under international law in relation to all persons they detain”
Other provisions would have the Council emphasize “the urgent need to expand the flow of humanitarian assistance to and reinforce the protection of civilians in the entire Gaza Strip.
In this regard, the draft would have the Council reiterate its demand for the lifting of all barriers to the provision of humanitarian assistance at scale, in line with international humanitarian law as well as resolutions 2712 (2023) and 2720 (2023).
A US-proposed draft to end the war in Gaza was vetoed by permanent Council members China and Russia, in a vote of 11 favour to three against (Algeria, China, Russia) and one abstention (Guyana)
Several ambassadors voiced their support for a new draft proposed by the “E-10” group of non-permanent Council members, which calls for an immediate ceasefire
The vetoed draft would have made imperative an immediate and sustained ceasefire in Gaza, with an “urgent need to expand the flow of humanitarian assistance” to all civilians and lifting “all barriers” to delivering aid
Council members disagreed over elements of the draft, and some highlighted glaring exclusions despite having raised multiple concerns with the US during negotiations
Ambassadors largely supported swift action to bring food and lifesaving aid at scale into Gaza, where concerns of famine grew as Israel continues to block and slow walk shipments into the besieged enclave
Some Council members called for pursuing the two-State solution to the ongoing conflict
Israel’s ambassador was invited to speak, calling the draft’s failure to pass and condemn Hamas “a stain that will never be forgotten”
On 22 March, a side event was held at the Human Rights Council on the situation of minorities in South Asia organized by NEP-JKGBL (National Equality Party Jammu Kashmir, Gilgit Baltistan & Ladakh) in the Palais des Nations in Geneva. The panelists were Prof. Nicolas Levrat, Special Rapporteur on minority issues, Mr. Konstantin Bogdanos, journalist and former member of the Greek Parliament, Mr. Tsenge Tsering, Mr. Humphrey Hawksley, British Journalist and author, expert on South Asian Affairs and Mr. Sajjad Raja, Founder Chairman of NEP-JKGBL. Mr. Joseph Chongsi of the Centre for Human Rights and Peace Advocacy acted as moderator.
The side event was focused on the situation of minorities in Pakistan, especially in the regions of Jammu & Kashmir and Gilgit-Baltistan.
The first speaker was Mr. Bogdanos, who insisted on the need for politicians, but also for European citizens to take an interest in these issues, even if they are physically far away from our borders. He strongly criticized the policies pursued by the Pakistani government with regard to minorities and the militarization of the territory, turning prosperous areas into hostile places. He also referred to the situation in his country in Northern Cyprus, arguing that they are fighting against the oppressors.
In his speech, Prof. Levrat, the Special Rapporteur, then undertook to address the issues relating to minorities in this region, highlighting a historical “oversight”, as only one visit had been made since the creation of the rapporteurship to Sri Lanka in 2006.
He stressed the difficulty of his mandate due to the fact that there is no closed list of minorities and that each group faces different vulnerabilities in different sociological contexts. He advocated that all such persons should be treated equally, but with consideration of their particularities.
He advocated communications with NGOs and members of civil society to understand more about specific situations, and then work and collaborate with governments.
The next speaker, Mr. Tsenge Tsering, a native of the Gilgit-Baltistan region, located between Pakistan and China, explained the importance of this place in the trade relations between the two countries and that, despite being a prosperous region, the population lives in poverty, without educational and medical infrastructures and at risk of food security, used as an instrument of blackmail by the Pakistani government.
He also denounced the fact that they live without constitutional rights, without the right to vote and without the right to legislate, despite being the majority in this territory.
In his speech, Mr. Hawksley defended peaceful resistance to the oppressor and the need to develop these regions as the only strategy to avoid disaster. He made a historical comparison of the situations in Palestine and Taiwan, defending the strategy of the latter, which has become a prosperous and technologically advanced democracy by avoiding armed struggle. He emphasized the idea that it is these societies that have to make a commitment to their own future and determine what they want to be, because no country or the international community has come or will come to help.
A member of the democratic forum denounced that minorities in Pakistan are suffering genocide and that the international community ignores this situation that is why events such as these and the work of committed rapporteurs are important.
Chapter 19. 1 – 10. Zacchaeus the publican. 11 – 27. The parable of the mines. 28 – 48. Entry into Jerusalem and cleansing of the temple.
Luke 19:1. Then Jesus entered Jericho and was passing through it.
Luke 19:2. And behold, there was a man named Zacchaeus, who was a chief tax collector and a rich man,
The story of Zacchaeus the tax collector is a feature of the Gospel of Luke and is not described in the other evangelists. When the Lord, on his way to Jerusalem, passed through Jericho (for Jericho, see the comments on Matt. 20:29), the chief of the local tax collectors (in Jericho they received a lot of duties from the production and export of balsam and therefore there were several tax collectors), a rich a man named Zacchaeus (from Hebrew – pure), obviously a Jew, tried to see Jesus among those who were passing by. “Who is He?”, i.e. which of the passers-by was Jesus. But he did not succeed because he was small in stature.
Luke 19:3. he wanted to see Jesus, who He was, but he could not from the people, because he was small in stature;
Luke 19:4. and running forward, he climbed a fig tree to see Him, for He was about to pass by.
“running forward”, i.e. to this street which Christ had not yet passed, but would pass (according to the best reading: εἰς ἔμπροσθεν, and according to the Textus receptus – simply ἔμπροσθεν).
“climbed a fig tree” – the tree was obviously quite tall.
“from there”. The Greek text has the word δί ἐκείνης, but the preposition διά is superfluous here, it is not found in the best codices.
Luke 19:5. Jesus, coming to that place, looked up and saw him and said to him: Zacchaeus, come down quickly, for today I must be at your house.
“Zacchaeus”. It is not known whether the Lord knew Zacchaeus before this. It is possible that he heard the tax collector’s name from those around him who knew Zacchaeus and called him by name when they saw him in this strange position on the tree.
“today I have to be…”. The Lord points out to Zacchaeus the special importance for him of this day: Christ, according to the definition from above (cf. v. 10), must stay with Zacchaeus for the night (compare the expression μεῖναι – “to be” with John 1:39).
Luke 19:6. And he quickly came down and received Him with joy.
When Christ drew near, Zacchaeus indeed saw Him, and rejoiced at it; but we can imagine the joy of his heart when the great prophet, the acknowledged Messiah of His people, stopped under the tree, looked up, and, calling him by name, told him to come down, for he intended to be at his house. Zacchaeus would not only see Him, but also receive Him into his home, dine with Him and offer Him a night in his home – the despised publican would have the glorious Messiah as his guest. With joy, Zacchaeus hurried down from the tree and welcomed the tall guest into his home.
Luke 19:7. And all, when they saw this, grumbled and said: you stopped at the wrong person.
“all” is a hyperbolic expression. It refers to the Jews who accompanied Christ to the house of Zacchaeus and saw Zacchaeus meet the Lord at the entrance.
“stopped by” – more precisely: came in to stop here (εἰσῆλθε καταλῦσαι).
Luke 19:8. And Zacchaeus stood and said to the Lord: behold, half of my possessions, Lord, I give to the poor, and if I have taken anything unjustly from anyone, I will repay fourfold.
The conversation which Christ had with Zacchaeus when he came to him must have made a strong impression on the publican’s soul. By promising to pay the poor and those offended by him, he thereby expresses the consciousness of his unworthiness before such a great happiness with which he is now honored – the Messiah Himself has come to him.
“took unjustly” (ἐσυκοφάντησα), i.e. if I have harmed someone materially through my reports. Indeed, it is possible that Zacchaeus, as head of the tax collectors, played a major role in fining merchants who did not pay the legal tax on goods.
“quadruple”. He considered his act to be theft, and as theft according to the Mosaic law it was lawful to pay four times or even five times the value of the stolen goods (Ex. 22:1).
Luke 19:9. Then Jesus said of him: today salvation has come to this house, because this one is also a son of Abraham,
“said about him” – in relation to him, to Zacchaeus (πρός αὐτόν), addressing both His disciples and the guests who were in the house (and not, as in the Russian translation, “said to him”).
“of this home”, i.e. for the whole family of Zacchaeus.
“son of Abraham,” i.e. in spite of his profession, despised by all the Jews, and Zacchaeus had some theocratic right to salvation through the Messiah. This is not about his moral dignity, but the next verse confirms the idea that Zacchaeus really belonged to the people vainly called “perished.”
Luke 19:10. for the Son of Man came to seek and to save the perishing.
Here the Lord confirms the truth of what he says in verse 9. Indeed, salvation has come to the family of Zacchaeus, because the Messiah has come to seek and save those who are subject to eternal destruction (cf. Matt. 18:11).
Luke 19:11. And when they were listening to this, he added a parable, – because He was near Jerusalem, and they thought that at that hour the kingdom of God would be revealed, –
The parable of the mines is similar to the parable of the talents given by the evangelist Matthew (cf. the interpretation of Matt. 25:14-30).
Evangelist Luke points to the fact that the Lord’s announcement of the salvation of Zacchaeus’ house (verse 9) was heard by Christ’s disciples and probably by Zacchaeus’ guests, who understood this to mean that Christ would soon open God’s kingdom for all (the Lord was only 150 stadia from Jerusalem). It is clear that the kingdom they all expected was external, political. To dispel this expectation, the Lord tells the present parable.
Luke 19:12. and said: a certain noble man was going to a distant country, to get a kingdom for himself and to return;
It is very possible that when the Lord spoke of a man who endeavored to obtain royal dignity for himself, He meant the Jewish king Archelaus, who, by traveling to Rome, succeeded in establishing himself as king in spite of the protests of his subjects (Josephus, “Jewish Antiquities”, XVII, 11, 1). (Josephus, “Jewish Antiquities”, XVII, 11, 1, 1.) So also Christ, before receiving the glorious kingdom, will have to go to a “far country” – to heaven, to His Father, and then to appeared on earth in His glory. However, there is no need to make such a comparison, because the main idea in the parable is not this, but about the condemnation of the wicked servants (verses 26-27).
Luke 19:13. and having called ten of his servants, he gave them ten minas and said to them: trade until he returns.
The man called ten of his (ἑαυτοῦ) slaves, from whom he could expect that they would look after his interests (cf. Matt. 25:14).
“mini”. The Jewish mina was equal to one hundred shekels, i.e. 80 rubles (1.6 kg. silver). The Attic mine was equal to one hundred drachmas—if it was a silver mine—that is. at 20 (approx. 400 grams of silver). However, the gold mine was equal to 1250 rubles. In the Gospel of Matthew, the calculations are larger – talents are used – but there the man gives away all his possessions, which is not said here of the one who went to seek a kingdom for himself.
“trade”, i.e. use them to trade.
By “servants”, of course, Christ’s disciples should be understood, and by “mins” – the various gifts that they received from God.
Luke 19:14. But his citizens hated him, and sent messengers after him, saying: We do not want him to reign over us.
By the “citizens” who did not want the aforementioned man to be their king, we must understand Christ’s fellow citizens, the unbelieving Jews.
Luke 19:15. And when he returned, after he had received the kingdom, he bade them call those servants to whom he had given the money, that he might know who had gained what.
(See Matt. 25:19).
“who gained what” – it is more correct to say “who undertook what”.
Luke 19:16. The first came and said: master, your mine has earned ten mines.
Here we find that one benefited many and multiplied his gift tenfold (blessed Theophylact).
Luke 19:17. And he said to him: good, good servant; because you have been faithful in too little, be ruler over ten cities.
(see Matt. 25:20-21).
Luke 19:18. The second came and said: master, your mina brought five mina.
Luke 19:19. And he said to that: you too shall be over five cities.
Luke 19:20. Another came and said: master, here is your mine, which I kept in a cloth,
The third servant was completely useless and spent his working time in idleness.
Let’s see what he says, “Sir, here is your mine,” take it. “I kept her wrapped in a towel.” A towel was placed on the dead Lord’s head (John 20:7), and Lazarus’ face in the tomb was wrapped in a towel (John 11:44). Therefore, this careless person rightly says that he wrapped the gift in a cloth. For, having made it dead and inoperative, he made no use of it, nor profited by it (blessed Theophylact).
Luke 19:21. for I was afraid of you, for you are a cruel man: you take what you did not sow, and reap what you did not sow.
The servant thought that the zeal of the merchants alone, without the help of God, accomplished everything, and that He, as a cruel man, exacted what others had acquired without the least assistance. The parable presents such an excuse, wishing to show that such people can offer no reasonable excuse, and that whatever they say will be turned against them. And hear further: He said to him, “With your mouth I will judge you, you wicked servant!” (Evthymius Zygaben)
Luke 19:22. His master said: with your mouth I will judge you, cunning slave: you knew that I am a cruel man, I take what I did not sow, and reap what I did not sow;
Luke 19:23. then, why didn’t you put my money in the bank, so that when I come, I can get it with interest?
Luke 19:24. And he said to those present: take the mine from him and give it to the one who has ten mines.
Luke 19:25. (And they said to him: master, he has ten mines!)
Luke 19:26. For I say to you, to everyone who has, more will be given, and from him who does not have, even what he has will be taken away;
(see the interpretation of Matt. 25:22-29).
Luke 19:27. and those of mine enemies, who would not have me reign over them, bring hither, and cut them down before me.
Here the king looks away from the wicked servant and remembers his enemies spoken of in verse 14.
“cut down before me” is a figure denoting the condemnation of Christ’s enemies to eternal death.
In this way, the parable refers both to the fate of the Jews who did not believe in Christ, and – and this is its main purpose – to the future fate of Christ’s disciples. Each disciple is given a certain gift by which he is to serve the Church, and if he does not use this gift properly, he will be punished by exclusion from the kingdom of the Messiah, while the diligent executors of Christ’s will will receive the highest honors in it kingdom.
This parable has many uses: it points to Christ’s impending departure from the world; the hatred with which He was rejected; the duty of faithfulness in the use of all that is entrusted to those who believe in Him; the uncertainty of the time of His return; the assurance that at His return all will have to give a stern account; the condemnation of the lazy; the great reward for all who serve Him faithfully; and the final destruction of those who reject Him.
Luke 19:28. Having said this, He went on, going up to Jerusalem.
Here Evangelist Luke speaks of Christ’s entry into Jerusalem according to Evangelist Mark (Mark 11:1-10; cf. Matt. 21:1-16). But at the same time he makes some additions, and in some places also cuts.
The last decisive moment in the life of Christ has approached. The malice of His enemies increases and they seek ways to undermine His influence among the people and even kill Him.
“went on”. More precisely, “I go before (ἐπορεύετο ἔμπροσθεν) His disciples” (cf. Mark 10:32).
Luke 19:29. And when he drew near to Bethphage and Bethany, to the mount called Olivet, he sent two of his disciples
“to the mountain called Eleon” – more correctly “to the Mount of Olives” (ἐλαιῶν – olive grove; Josephus also uses the name “Mount of Olives” (“Josephus.” “Jewish Antiquities”, VII, 9, 2).
Luke 19:30. and said to them: go to the opposite village; when you enter it, you will find an ass tethered, which no man has ever ridden; untie it and bring it.
Luke 19:31. And if someone asks you: why do you untie him? tell him thus: it is necessary for the Lord.
Luke 19:32. The sent went and found as he had told them.
Luke 19:33. And when they were untying the donkey, its owners said to them: Why are you untying the donkey?
Luke 19:34. They answered: it is necessary for the Lord.
Luke 19:35. And they brought him to Jesus; and putting their clothes on the donkey, they put Jesus on it.
Luke 19:36. And when He passed by, they spread their clothes on the road.
Luke 19:37. And when he was about to pass over the Mount of Olives, the whole multitude of disciples, rejoicing, began to praise God with a loud voice for all the miracles which they had seen,
“when he was about to pass the Mount of Olives”. Where the descent from the mountain had been, Jerusalem was seen in all its glory. Hence the sudden outburst of ecstatic shouts of the people who accompany Christ as their king entering His capital is understandable.
“many disciples”. These are students in the broadest sense of the word.
“as they had seen”. It means earlier when they followed Christ.
Luke 19:38. saying: blessed is the King who comes in the name of the Lord! Peace in heaven and glory in the highest!
“blessed be the King”. The disciples call the Lord King only in Luke and John (John 12:13).
“Peace in heaven and glory in the highest.” With these words Luke replaces the exclamation “Hosanna in the highest” (in Matthew and Mark). He, so to speak, divides “hosanna” into two exclamations: “peace in heaven”, i.e. salvation in heaven, with God, Who will now dispense this salvation through the Messiah, and then “glory in the highest,” i.e. God will be glorified for this by the angels on high.
Luke 19:39. And some Pharisees from among the people said to Him: Teacher, rebuke Your disciples.
Luke 19:40. But He answered them and said: I tell you, if they keep silent, the stones will cry out.
This passage is found only in the Evangelist Luke. Some of the Pharisees, emerging from the crowd in which they were, turned to Christ with a proposal to forbid His disciples to shout in this way. The Lord replied that such an outburst of praise to God could not be stopped. In doing so, He used the proverb about stones, which is also found in the Talmud.
Luke 19:41. And when he came near and saw the city, he wept over it
“wept for him”. When He drew near to the city, He looked upon it and wept—wept bitterly for it, as the verb used shows us (ἔκλαυσεν ἐπ´ αὐτήν, not ἐδάκρυσεν, as at the tomb of Lazarus, John 11:35).
Luke 19:42. and said: if only you had known, at least in this day of yours, what serves for your peace! But now it is hidden from your eyes,
“if it were”. Speech is broken, as “happens to those who weep” (Evthymius Zigaben). “For the peace” or the salvation of Jerusalem had to serve, of course, faith in Christ as the promised Messiah (cf. Luke 14:32).
“and you” – like My disciples.
“in this thy day,” i.e. in this day which may be for you a day of salvation.
“now…” – in the present relationship this is impossible, since God has hidden this salvation from you (ἐκρύβη indicates God’s determination, cf. John 12:37ff.; Rom. 11:7ff.).
Luke 19:43. for days shall come upon thee, and thine enemies shall surround thee with trenches, and shall surround thee, and shall strait thee on the other side,
“days will come for you”. The Lord has just said that from the Jewish people is hidden that which serves for their salvation. Now He proves this by mentioning the punishment that surely awaits this people.
“they will surround you with trenches”. This was accomplished at the siege of Jerusalem by the Romans, when Titus, to prevent supplies from being brought into Jerusalem, surrounded it with a rampart or palisade, which was burnt by the besiegers, and afterwards replaced by a wall.
Luke 19:44. and they will destroy you and your children within you, and they will not leave a stone upon a stone in you, because you did not know the time when you were visited.
“they will ruin you”. More precisely, “they will level you with the ground” (ἐδαφιοῦσι).
“and your children in you”. The city in Scripture is often represented under the image of a mother (cf. Joel 2:23; Isa. 31:8), and therefore by children must be understood the inhabitants of the city.
“the time when he was visited,” i.e. a certain moment in time when God has shown special care for you, offering you to receive messianic salvation through Me (τόν καρδονν τῆς ἐπισκοπῆς – cf. 1 Pet. 2:12).
Luke 19:45. And when he entered the temple, he began to chase those who were selling and buying in it,
Evangelist Luke tells about the cleansing of the temple from unusual activity according to Mark (Mark 11:15 – 17) and partly according to Matthew (the interpretation of Matt. 21:12 – 13).
Christ did not begin his usual sermon until the Temple had been reduced to a state of propriety and silence. This work was certainly easier now that it had already been done once. When the ugly commercial bustle ceased, the temple again assumed its usual appearance. Suffering people came to Christ and He healed them. Meanwhile, the news of the new expulsion of the merchants from the Temple reached the Sanhedrin, and its members, after a little recovering from their embarrassment, came to the Temple to demand from the preacher an answer to the questions: “By what authority do you do this? And who gave you this power!” These questions were evidently intended to provoke him to some such statement, which, as had happened before, would give them grounds to accuse him of blasphemy and stone him to death. But this treachery fell upon their own heads (cf. Luke 20, the question of John’s baptism).
Luke 19:46. and he said to them: it is written: “My house is a house of prayer”, and you have made it a den of robbers.
Luke 19:47. And he taught every day in the temple. And the chief priests and the scribes and the elders of the people sought to kill Him,
“And he studied every day.” The Evangelist Luke notes the fact of Christ’s daily appearance in the temple as a teacher to make a transition to the subject of the next chapter. Evangelist Mark also mentions this “teaching” (Mark 11:17).
Luke 19:48. and they did not find what to do to Him, because all the people were attached to Him and listened to Him.
“He was attached to him and listened to him” (ἐξεκρέματο αὐτοῦ ἀκούων). The attention with which the people listened to Christ was an obstacle for the Saviour’s enemies in their designs against Him.
Source in Russian: Explanatory Bible, or Commentaries on all the books of the Holy Scriptures of the Old and New Testaments: In 7 volumes / Ed. prof. A.P. Lopukhin. – Ed. 4th. – Moscow: Dar, 2009. / T. 6: Four Gospels. – 1232 pp. / Gospel of Luke. 735-959 p.
Kiev is sticking to the price of $600 million despite Sofia’s desire to gain more from a possible deal.
Ukraine expects to start building four new nuclear reactors this summer or fall, Energy Minister German Galushchenko told Reuters at the end of January this year. The country is trying to compensate for lost energy capacity due to the war with Russia. Two of the units, which include the reactors and related equipment, will be based on Russian-made equipment that Ukraine wants to import from Bulgaria, and the other two will use Western technology from power equipment maker Westinghouse.
Ukraine hopes to sign a deal in June to buy two nuclear reactors from Bulgaria as it seeks to compensate for the loss of its Russian-occupied Zaporozhye nuclear power plant, the head of nuclear company Energoatom said in an interview. quoted on 23 march by Euractiv.
The new reactors will be installed at the Khmelnytskyi nuclear power plant in western Ukraine and will be equipped with Russian-designed equipment that Kiev wants to import from Bulgaria, Petro Kotin told Reuters.
The two reactors, originally purchased by Bulgaria from Russia more than five years ago, were to be used for the Belene NPP project, which has now been abandoned, as Russia is no longer involved in the assembly of the reactors and Bulgaria cannot shoulder the bill alone .
Russia gained control of the Zaporizhia nuclear power plant, Europe’s largest nuclear power plant, after it launched its invasion of Ukraine in February 2022. Zaporizhia’s six nuclear reactors are no longer operational.
“Negotiations between the government of Ukraine and Bulgaria continue… and I think that sometime in June we will have the result of concluding contracts with Bulgaria for the purchase of this equipment,” Kotin points out. “I set a (task) for our construction organization and the Khmelnitsky NPP to have it ready for installation by June,” he adds, referring to the first of two reactors that will be ready for installation immediately.
According to him, if the reactor is delivered on time, Energoatom will be ready to start commissioning the new reactor in two to three years, a period that is also needed for the production of the turbine for the unit. “Energoatom” is conducting preliminary negotiations with General Electric for the construction of the turbine.
The second reactor will be installed later, with Cottin giving no timeframe.
He pointed out that Bulgaria had previously priced the two reactors at $600 million, but Sofia wanted to increase the cost of the equipment.
“On the Bulgarian side, there is a constant desire to achieve greater benefits for themselves than this 600 million dollars, and the more time passes, the higher prices they announce, but we are still focused on the price of 600 million dollars” , adds Kotin.
Energoatom also intends to build two more reactors at Khmelnytskyi based on the US AP-1000 reactor, and that the company will start concreting the two new units in early April.
After the loss of Zaporozhye, Ukraine relies on nuclear power from the country’s three other operating plants, a total of nine reactors, including two currently operating at the Khmelnytskyi NPP.
Kotin says that Ukraine has not given up on its plans to restart the Zaporozhye NPP one day and that, unlike Russia, it will be able and know how to get the power plant back into operation.
Illustrative Photo by Johannes Plenio: https://www.pexels.com/photo/huge-cooling-towers-in-nuclear-power-plant-4460676/
Under a 1907 law, adultery is still a crime in New York state, the AP reported. A legislative change is foreseen, after which the text will finally be dropped.
Adultery is still treated as a crime in several US states, although charges in court are rare and convictions even rarer.
The legal texts are left over from a time when adultery was still the only legal ground for divorce.
According to the New York law of 1907, the definition of adultery is when “a person whose spouse is alive enters into intimate relations with another”. A relationship with a married man or a married woman is also adultery. Only a few weeks after the law was passed in 1907, a married man and a 25-year-old woman were arrested. The man’s wife has filed for divorce, the New York Times reports.
Since 1972, only a dozen people have been charged with adultery and only five cases have resulted in a conviction. The last adultery case in New York was filed in 2010.
According to Kathryn B. Silbaugh, a law professor at Boston University, the adultery law was aimed at women to discourage them from having an extramarital affair and thus prevent questions about the actual paternity of children. “Let’s put it this way: patriarchy,” Silbo said.
The change is expected to be considered by the Senate soon, after which it will be advanced to the signature of the governor of the state of New York.
Most states that still have adultery laws treat it as a misdemeanor. However, Oklahoma, Wisconsin and Michigan still treat adultery as a felony. Several states, including Colorado and New Hampshire, have repealed adultery laws, as does New York. The question of whether the ban on adultery does not contradict the Constitution remains open, the Associated Press commented.
Illustrative Photo by Mateusz Walendzik: https://www.pexels.com/photo/manhattan-skyscrapers-at-night-17133002/
The Ministry of Defense continues to recruit convicts from penal colonies to fill the ranks of the Storm-Z unit
Authorities in the Krasnoyarsk region in Russia’s Far East plan to close several prisons this year amid a dwindling number of incarcerated people, prompted by the recruitment of people serving sentences for the war in Ukraine, Russia’s Kommersant newspaper reported, cited by Reuters.
The newspaper cited Merk Denisov, the human rights commissioner of the Krasnoyarsk region, who told the regional legislature that at least two local prisons would be closed due to “a large one-time reduction in the number of convicts in the context of the special military operation (in Ukraine) “.
Russia has been recruiting prisoners to fight on the front in Ukraine since 2022, when Yevgeny Prigozhin, the late head of the private military company Wagner, began touring penal colonies, offering convicts a pardon if they survived six months on the battlefield , notes Reuters.
Prigogine, who died in a plane crash shortly after leading a short-lived rebellion against Russian military leaders, had claimed to have recruited 50,000 prisoners to join the Wagner PMC. At the time, data released by Russia’s Penitentiary Service showed a sudden drop in the country’s prison population.
The Ministry of Defense continues to recruit convicts from penal colonies to fill the ranks of the “Storm-Z” unit, made up of recruited prisoners, notes Reuters.
Illustrative Photo by Jimmy Chan: https://www.pexels.com/photo/hallway-with-window-1309902/
This prestigious award recognizes the exceptional efforts made by organizations to promote interfaith harmony and understanding, in line with the goals of the World Interfaith Harmony Week established by the United Nations.
The World Interfaith Harmony Week (WIHW), proposed by H.M. King Abdullah II of Jordan at the UN General Assembly in 2010 and adopted unanimously on October 20 of the same year, designates the first week of February as a time to promote dialogue and cooperation among different faith traditions. The Royal Aal Al-Bayt Institute for Islamic Thought in Jordan established the World Interfaith Harmony Week Prize in 2013 to honor events during this week that best embody its objectives.
In 2024, a total of 1180 events were held globally in observance of the UN World Interfaith Harmony Week, reflecting the widespread commitment to fostering interfaith understanding and cooperation. Among these events, 59 reports were submitted for consideration for the H.M. King Abdullah II World Interfaith Harmony Week Prize.
The judging panel, consisting of esteemed individuals such as H.R.H. Prince Ghazi bin Muhammad and H.B. Patriarch Theophilus III, carefully evaluated the submissions based on criteria such as the excellence of efforts, collaboration, impact, and adherence to the principles outlined in the UN Resolution establishing the Prize. They awarded the top prize to Bridges – Eastern European Forum for Dialogue for their exceptional contribution.
The winning event, “Gift of Love,” was a captivating interfaith art performance held at Plovdiv’s Bishop’s Cathedral on February 9th. This event brought together 56 youth participants from diverse religious backgrounds, including Armenian, Muslim, Christian Orthodox, Catholic, Buddhist, and pagan traditions. Under the patronage of Her Excellency Ambassador Andrea Ikić-Böhm and the Embassy of the Republic of Austria, the performance showcased a variety of artistic expressions such as paintings, dances, musical performances, and poetry.
The core messages conveyed through the artistic mediums included love for God, compassion for fellow beings, solidarity with global communities, and a spirit of acceptance and tolerance towards individuals from different faiths. The event exemplified the spirit of unity and cooperation that lies at the heart of the World Interfaith Harmony Week.
Angelina Vladikova, President of Bridges-Eastern Europe for Dialogue, said after learning about winning the first prize, “During the last four years we were organizing art performances on the occasion of the WIHW. For four years we were applying for the Prince Award of Jordan – not because we wanted to win the prize, but because we wanted to show the world our understanding of interfaith harmony. This year it was a big surprise for us that we actually won the first prize. This shows to us that every dedication and all the efforts that we put into our work matters. We are grateful for all the youngsters in our association who give us the meaning to continue building bridges across cultures and religions.”
Through their innovative and impactful event, Bridges – Eastern European Forum for Dialogue demonstrated a commitment to fostering meaningful interfaith dialogue and promoting harmony and understanding across religious and cultural divides. Their achievement serves as an inspiration and a testament to the transformative power of collaborative efforts in building a more inclusive and peaceful world.
Chapter 20. 1-26. The question of the authority of Christ. 27-38. The question of the Sadducees. 39-47. Christ and the Scribes.
Luke 20:1. On one of those days when He was teaching the people in the temple and preaching the good news, the high priests and the scribes stood with the elders
This part corresponds perfectly with the account of the evangelist Mark (Mark 11:27-33), which Luke apparently follows here, as well as with the Gospel of Matthew (see the interpretation of Matt. 21:23-27).
Meanwhile, the news of the new expulsion of the merchants from the Temple reached the Sanhedrin, and its members, after a little recovering from their embarrassment, came to the Temple to demand from the preacher an answer to the questions: “By what authority do you do this? And who gave you this power!” These questions were evidently intended to provoke him to some such statement, which, as had happened before, would give them grounds to accuse him of blasphemy and stone him to death. But this treachery fell upon their own heads (cf. Luke 20, the question of John’s baptism).
Luke 20:2. and they said to Him: tell us, by what authority do You do these things, or who gave You this authority?
Luke 20:3. He answered them and said: I will also ask you one word, and tell me:
Anticipating their evil thought, Christ in divine wisdom told them that He would answer them only if they themselves would first answer His question. This question immediately confused the questioners and there was silence. They fully understood the meaning and purpose of the question.
Luke 20:4. Was John’s baptism from heaven or from men?
Luke 20:5. And they, thinking among themselves, said: if we say from heaven, he will say: why didn’t you believe him?
Luke 20:6. If we say, of men, the whole nation will stone us, because they are convinced that John was a prophet.
“all the people will stone us” – Common execution among the Jews (cf. Ex. 17:4).
Luke 20:7. And they answered: we do not know where he was from.
Blaz. Augustine says: “Truly, you do not know because you are in darkness, deprived of light. Is it not better, when some darkness suddenly appears in a man’s heart, to let in the light instead of driving it out? And when they said, “We know not,” the Lord answered, “Neither will I tell you by what authority I do this (Luke 20:8). For I know that in your hearts you have said, “We do not know” (Luke 20:7), not because you want to learn, but because you are afraid to confess the truth.”
Luke 20:8. Jesus said to them: and I do not tell you by what authority I do this.
Luke 20:9. And he began to speak to the people this parable: a man planted a vineyard and gave it to vinedressers, and went away for a long time;
The parable of the vineyard in the evangelist Luke is similar to the way it is presented in the evangelist Mark (Mark 12:1-12; cf. the interpretation of Matt. 21:33-46).
“And he began to speak to the people.” According to Mark, the Lord spoke the parable to the high priests, scribes and elders (Mark 12:1: “to them”; cf. Mark 11:27), not to the people. But the evangelist Luke probably understands by “the people” also the high priests together with the scribes and the elders. At least from his Gospel it is clear that these persons were also present when the parable was told (cf. v. 19).
Luke 20:10. and in due time he sent a servant to the vinedressers, that they might give him of the fruit of the vineyard; but the vinedressers, having pierced him, sent him away empty.
But despite all that he did for his vineyard, it did not bear any fruit, perhaps only wild fruit. Since the vinedressers could not produce fruit and did not dare to reveal their unproductiveness, for which they were responsible, they insulted, beat, wounded and killed one after another the messengers whom the master of the vineyard sent to them. Finally he sent his son, but this son, whom they recognized and could not but recognize, they also beat, drove out, and killed.
Luke 20:11. He also sent another servant; but they, having beaten and humiliated him, sent him away empty.
He sends various “servants”, i.e. prophets that there might be at least some small profit; for, it is said, He desired to receive “fruits,” not all fruits. What can be our fruit to God but His knowledge? And that is our gain; but He makes our salvation and our benefit His own. The evil workers wronged those sent, beat them and sent them away with nothing, i.e. became so ungrateful that they not only turned away from good and did not bear good fruit, but also committed evil that deserves a greater punishment. (Blessed Theophylact)
Luke 20:12. Send also a third; but they also wounded him and drove him away.
Luke 20:13. Then the master of the vineyard said: what shall I do? I will send my beloved son; perhaps when they see him they will be ashamed.
Luke 20:14. But the husbandmen, when they saw him, reasoned among themselves, saying, This is the heir; let us slay him, that his inheritance may be ours.
Luke 20:15. And when they brought him out of the vineyard, they killed him. What, then, will the master of the vineyard do to them?
“they killed him”. They “killed” the Son by “taking Him out of the vineyard.” It is convenient to say “from Jerusalem” because Christ suffered “outside the gates” (Heb. 13:12). But since by vineyard we understand the people, and not Jerusalem, it is hardly nearer to say that the people, though they killed Him, were outside the vineyard, i.e. not by deliberately putting Him to death, but by handing Him over to Pilate and the Gentiles. Therefore, the Lord suffered outside the vineyard, i.e. not by the hands of the people, for they were not permitted to kill any, therefore He died by the hands of the soldiers. Some have understood the Scriptures by vine. That is, that the Lord suffered outside the Scriptures, that he was killed by those who did not believe Moses. For if they had believed Moses and searched the Scriptures, they would not have killed the Lord of the Scriptures. (Blessed Theophylact)
Luke 20:16. He will come and destroy these vinedressers and give the vineyard to others. And those, hearing this, said: may it not be!
“when they heard this, they said: may it not be”. Obviously, these were people from the common people who realized that the Lord was depicting in the parable the attitude of the Jews towards Him. They say they don’t want the vinedressers to kill the “son”, ie. they were sorry for Christ.
Luke 20:17. But He, looking at them, said: then what does it mean that it is written: “the stone which the builders rejected, it became the head of the corner”?
“what is written means”. More precisely: what then should the sentence from the scriptures about the “stone” mean, if your desire “not to be” comes true, that is, in such a case, the will of God, spoken about Me in the Scriptures, will not be fulfilled.
Luke 20:18. Anyone who falls on this stone will be broken; and on whom it falls, it will crush him.
“everyone who falls” (cf. the interpretation of Matt. 21:44).
Luke 20:19. And at that hour the chief priests and the scribes wanted to lay hands on Him, because they understood that He spoke this parable about them, but they were afraid of the people.
“because they understood”. Who found out? The people or the hierarchs? According to the Evangelist Luke, it is more likely the people who understood that the parable was told about the hierarchs (see verses 16-17). It is as if the evangelist wants to say that the people, who understood the parable indicating the plans of the hierarchs against Christ, were already on the alert, and this is exactly what the hierarchs were afraid of, which is why they did not dare to capture Christ.
Luke 20:20. And as they followed Him, they sent spies, who pretending to be righteous, to catch Him in some word, and then hand Him over to the authorities and the governor’s authority.
The conversation of Christ with the “sly men” about Caesar’s tax is narrated by the evangelist Luke in agreement with the account of the evangelist Mark (Mark 12:13-17; cf. Matt. 22:15-22).
“as they followed Him.” Nevertheless, the hierarchs did not give up their designs and, being constantly on the alert for every deed and word of Christ, sent to Him wicked ones, i.e. conspirators (ἐγκαθἐτους) of them, who, pretending to be pious, i. pretending to act from their own religious necessity, they will catch Christ in some careless word. However, this translation of the Russian text of the Gospel does not fully correspond to the Greek; it is more correct: “they sent learned men, pretending to be pious, to capture Him…”. They wanted to hand over Christ to the principality, and more specifically (κα… – clarifying conjunction) to the power of the procurator.
Luke 20:21. And they asked him, saying: Master, we know that you speak and teach rightly and do not look to the face, but truly teach in the way of God;
“you don’t look at the face”, i.e. you do not belong to any party, but reason impartially (cf. Gal. 2:6).
Luke 20:22. are we allowed to give tribute to Caesar or not?
“to give” poll tax and land tax (φόρον, as opposed to τέλος – duty or indirect tax).
Luke 20:23. And He, realizing their cunning, said to them: Why are you tempting Me?
Luke 20:24. Show me a denarius: whose image and inscription is there? They answered: to Caesar.
Luke 20:25. He said to them: therefore render to Caesar the things that are Caesar’s, and to God the things that are God’s.
Luke 20:26. And they could not catch Him with a word before the people, they were amazed at His answer and kept silent.
Luke 20:27. Then came some of the Sadducees, who maintained that there is no resurrection, and questioned Him, saying,
“some of the Sadducees came” – it is more correct to say: “rejecting the resurrection”, which refers as a definition to “some”. From this it is clear that only some of the Sadducees rejected the resurrection of the dead because it seemed primitive to them.
It is true that some of the rabbis had more lofty ideas about the afterlife, but the majority had the crudest notions in this respect. According to them, the resurrection would be the restoration of men not only to their former bodies, but also to their former tastes and passions; the resurrected would not only eat, drink, and marry, but would also rise in the same clothes they walked in, even with the same bodily features and defects, “so that people could recognize that they are the same people who they knew during their lifetime”.
With all these gross sensual notions, and denying the resurrection in general (the doctrine of it, according to them, was not contained in the Pentateuch of Moses, which they recognized), they came to the Savior with their question.
Luke 20:28. Teacher, Moses wrote to us: if a married man dies childless, his brother should take his wife and raise up offspring for his brother;
They chose from the field of rabbinic casuistry the case of a woman who married seven brothers in succession, each of whom died childless, and wanted to know to which of them she would belong in the resurrection.
Luke 20:29. he had, therefore, seven brothers, and the first, having taken a wife, died childless;
Although imaginary, this case was possible because the law stated that if a husband died childless, his brother had to marry his widow to restore his offspring and carry on his name, and the first-born son of this second brother was recorded as son of the deceased.
Disbelieving in the afterlife and resurrection, and supposing that Jesus, whom they had heard teach of the resurrection, and who held the same views of him as their Pharisaic opponents, they foretold the pleasure of perplexing Him with these perplexing questions, and thus ridiculing Him and His very teaching of the resurrection.
Luke 20:30. that woman took the second; and he died childless;
Luke 20:31. the third took her, – so did all the seven, and they died without leaving children;
Luke 20:32. after all the woman also died;
Luke 20:33. and so, at the resurrection, which of them will she be his wife? because all seven had her as their wife.
Luke 20:34. Jesus answered them and said: the children of this world marry and are given in marriage;
“the children of this century”, i.e. the people of the pre-Messianic period.
Luke 20:35. but those who are worthy to receive that world and the resurrection from the dead neither marry nor are given in marriage,
Luke 20:36. and they can no longer die, because they are equal to Angels and, being sons of the resurrection, they are sons of God.
“and they can no longer die.” It is more correct “because they can no longer die” (οὐδέ γάρ ἀποθανεῖν ἔτι δύνανται). Because of the immortality of the resurrected, their immortality, marriage between them (but not the difference of the sexes) will not exist, since marriage is necessary only where there is death (bl. Theophylact).
“because they are equal to Angels”. This is the reason why they will not die. They will not die by virtue of the change to which their nature is subject, because their equality or likeness to the angels consists in a higher, no longer gross and carnal, corporeality. This physicality will not be subject to death.
“being sons of the resurrection,” i.e. through the resurrection to rise to new life.
“are sons of God”. There is another reason for the immortality of the future life. People will be God’s sons – not only in a moral sense, as God’s beloved children, but also in a higher, metaphysical sense – they will have in themselves the higher divine life, the divine glory (Rom. 8:17), which (life) is eternal naturally.
Luke 20:37. And that the dead will rise, and Moses said it at the blackberry, when he called the Lord the God of Abraham, and the God of Isaac, and the God of Jacob.
“Moses said it at the blackberry”. The word “said” (ἐμήνυσεν, in Bishop Michael Luzinus wrongly read as ἑρμήνευσεν – interprets) means the announcement of the hidden (John 11:57; Acts 23:30). The Lord mentions Moses mainly because those asking him refer to Moses (see verse 28).
Luke 20:38. But He is not the God of the dead, but of the living, for with Him all are alive.
“because with Him all are alive”, i.e. all – to whom He is God – are alive with Him. Even though they are dead, it is for men, with respect to men, but not with respect to God. Thus the future resurrection of the dead is the natural and necessary conclusion of that state of life in which the dead are before the Last Judgment.
Luke 20:39. At this some of the scribes said: Teacher, well said.
“some of the scribes”. According to the evangelist Mark, this was said by a scribe who talked with Christ about the most important commandment (Mark 12:32). As the evangelist Luke has already quoted this conversation above (Luke 10:25, etc.), he here omits it, and mentions only the result of this conversation, the answer of the scribe, or “certain scribes,” as he expresses it.
Luke 20:40. And they no longer dared to ask Him about anything. And He said to them:
“they no longer dared to ask Him about anything”. Here Evangelist Luke also repeats what was reported by Mark (Mark 12:34).
Luke 20:41. how do they say that Christ is the son of David?
“as they say”. See the interpretation to Mark. 12:35-37.
In their blindness they lost sight of the true dignity of the Messiah, and expected to see in Him a political conqueror who would conquer for them the whole world with all its treasures, and since Christ did not live up to these expectations, they declared Him a deceiver, a seducer of the people. To guide them to the truth, Christ asked them, “What do you think about Christ? Whose son is He?” They answered Him: “Son of David.”
Luke 20:42. And David himself says in the book of Psalms: “The Lord said to my Lord: sit at my right hand,
Luke 20:43. until I make Your enemies your footstool.”
Luke 20:44. And so David calls Him Lord; how then is He his son?
Sonship was defined only as an external connection by flesh of Christ with David, while a well-known psalm (Ps. 109:1) shows that David calls Christ (the Messiah) his Lord, who sits at the right hand of God. Thus they should have understood that Christ’s kingdom is not earthly, but heavenly; not realizing this, the learned scribes and lawyers were evidently quite ignorant of what the true dignity of the Messiah consisted. If they understood it, they would see that the signs of the Messiah find a complete correspondence in the person of Jesus of Nazareth whom they were persecuting.
Luke 20:45. And when all the people were listening, He said to His disciples:
“when all the people were listening”. See Mark 12:38-40. The difference between Mark and Luke here is that, according to the former, the Lord’s warning was spoken before and for the people, while according to Luke, it was addressed to Christ’s disciples. This difference can be reconciled in the following way: the Lord spoke in this case aloud to the multitude (Mark), but addressed himself directly to His disciples (Luke).
Luke 20:46. beware of the scribes, who love to walk disguised and love greetings in the marketplaces, front seats in the synagogues, and first places at banquets,
Luke 20:47. who devour widows’ houses, and hypocritically pray long; they will receive a heavier sentence.
“devour the widows’ houses”, i.e. filling his belly and wasting beyond measure. And this is done under a seemingly reverent occasion. Because under the pretext of prayer and spiritual benefit, they teach not fasting, but drunkenness and gluttony, and therefore, says the Lord, “they will receive a heavier sentence”, because they not only do evil, but also cover it up with prayer. Their appearance is reverent, and they turn virtue into a pretext for cunning. Therefore they deserve the greater condemnation, because for their sake the good is condemned. Widows are to be pitied, and they enter their houses, ostensibly to bless them with long prayers. At the same time the widows are forced to incur such expenses on account of their visitation that they are thus ruined. (Blessed Theophylact).
Source in Russian: Explanatory Bible, or Commentaries on all the books of the Holy Scriptures of the Old and New Testaments: In 7 volumes / Ed. prof. A.P. Lopukhin. – Ed. 4th. – Moscow: Dar, 2009. / T. 6: Four Gospels. – 1232 pp. / Gospel of Luke. 735-959 p.
Ukraine war remains the most disturbing topic in Europe. French President Macron’s recent statement about his country’s possible direct involvement in the war was a sign of possible further escalation.
Pope Francis recently called for an immediate ceasefire. We are also seeing growing concern at the UN about further possible ceasefire and negotiation initiatives.
Last Wednesday, the Greek Parliament hosted a conference on ways to achieve peace in Ukraine. Four prominent members of parliament presented their vision on how to stop the war: Alexandros Markogiannakis, Athanasios Papathanassis, Ioannis Loverdos and Mitiadis Zamparis.
Calls for Diplomacy and Peace Intensify as Ukraine War Rages On 6
MP Athanasios Papathanassis has expressed an opinion of many Greeks regarding the need for peace: “Ukraine has been the bridge between Europe and Russia and the desire for its control and influence has led to geopolitical confrontations with a global impact. In this disastrous context collective effort and diplomatic flexibility is necessary for promoting and establishing peace”.
The situation was analysed insightfully by the renowned political scientist and media personality Professor Frederic ENCEL . He expressed scepticism about the chances of peaceful UN involvement and suggested that both sides of the conflict come together to reach a solution. Encel elaborated on France’s policy towards Russia, which has been friendly and balanced for many decades. Now we are in for a change due to fears that Donald Trump’s possible impending victory in the US presidential election will lead to a weakening of NATO.
A special call for peace came from Athens Vice Mayor Elli Papageli. She called for an immediate end to the war through diplomatic means. Vice-Mayor Papageli expressed fears of nuclear war and spoke of its disastrous economic consequences for Europe.
Former CIA analyst and State Department counter-terrorism expert Larry Johnson criticised NATO expansion and European arms supplies to Ukraine. His idea of a peaceful settlement was based on his view that the West was misinterpreting Russia’s intentions. Johnson was critical of Europe and the US and called for “not pouring petrol on the fire”.
Manel Msalmi, president of the European Association for the Defence of Minorities, emphasised the plight of women and children during the war and the need to restore peace. She recalled that during the UN assembly, the UN Secretary General called for peace in the country. She praised Athens as a model of democracy and quoted Aristotle: “Peace cannot be maintained by force, it can only be achieved by understanding.”
She noted that “increasingly, sensible politicians such as the Italian Defence Minister are talking about the start of peace talks, but at the moment the EU is preparing a €50 billion financial aid plan for Ukraine and peace is out of the question in the near future.“
Another issue of concern is the growing corruption in Ukraine, which is directly linked to the war.Ukraine tries to fight against corruption but it is a long and a complicated process. Neither the US nor the EU has developed an effective mechanism to control how this money is spent.”
All this makes diplomatic efforts to end the war simply necessary. For the sake of Europe and the world. The call for peace through diplomacy of ms. Msalmi was warmly welcomed by all the participants.
