Mark 12, Part Two

The question regarding the resurrection (vs. 18-27)—From my comments at Matthew 22:23-33: “Next, it was the Sadducees turn to try Jesus: “Teacher, Moses said that if a man dies, having no children, his brother shall marry his wife and raise up offspring for his brother” (v. 24). This is true. In fact, it was culturally true even before the Law of Moses. God killed a man named Onan in Genesis 38:10 because he wouldn’t do it. But then the Sadducees came up with an absurd example. A man marries a woman, but dies with no children. His brother marries her, but then he dies with no children. There are seven brothers. They all marry her, in turn, but none of them have any children. So, “in the resurrection, whose wife of the seven will she be? For they all had her” (v. 28). Interesting question.

The Sadducees were the “modernists” of their time. They did not believe in angels, a spirit world, or in a resurrection after death. Hence, the conundrum they propose to Jesus. If there is a resurrection, since all seven brothers were married to this woman, who’s she going to be married to in the next life?

Jesus responded, “Ye do err, not knowing the scriptures, nor the power of God” (v. 29). There were two things wrong with the Sadducees’ position. Number one, “in the resurrection they neither marry, nor are given in marriage, but are as the angels of God in heaven” (v. 30), so there will be no problem about whose wife that woman would be. But the real point Jesus wanted to make was in opposition to the Sadducees’ doctrine of “no resurrection,” and it’s a very remarkable argument Christ makes: “But as touching the resurrection of the dead, have ye not read that which was spoken unto you by God, saying, ‘I am the God of Abraham, and the God of Isaac, and the God of Jacob?’ God is not the God of the dead, but of the living” (vs. 31-32). Who did Jehovah say that to? He said it to Moses in Exodus 3:6, at least 300 years after Jacob was dead. And yet, “I am the God of Abraham,” not “I was.” In other words, Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob were still alive in Moses’ day—though they were, of course, dead to this earth. Jesus’ argument is based on the tense of a verb. No wonder, “when the multitudes heard this, they were astonished at His teaching” (v. 33).” Mark has Jesus’ concluding statement as “ye do greatly err” (Mark 12:27).

The greatest commandments (vs. 28-34)—While Matthew also records this event, there is a significant addition in Mark’s account that must be noted. “One of the scribes” asked Jesus, “"Which is the first commandment of all?”, or “most important” (v. 28). Jesus answered that to love God with all one’s heart, soul, mind and strength constitutes the greatest commandment, and then adds that the second is like it, to love one’s neighbor as one’s self. “There is no other commandment greater than these” (v. 31). The scribe answered Him, “"Well said, Teacher. You have spoken the truth, for there is one God, and there is no other but He. And to love Him with all the heart, with all the understanding, with all the soul, and with all the strength, and to love one's neighbor as oneself, is more than all the whole burnt offerings and sacrifices" (vs. 32-33). Jesus “saw that he answered wisely,” and said to him “’You are not far from the kingdom of God’” (v. 34). This scribe had perceived a very important truth that most of the Jews missed. Too many of them believed that sacrificial offerings, in and of themselves, were sufficient to please God. Be a Jew, perform the rituals and ceremonies punctiliously, and God will be pleased. But one can carry out the externals of a religion without exercising the internal—rituals can be practiced mechanically, with no emotion or deep love for God. But one cannot love the Lord and neglect the externals! This scribe understood that loving God came first—before the burnt offerings and sacrifices. If one loves God, he will obey Him—and that means submitting to Jesus, too. Thus, the man was "not far from the kingdom of God,” much closer than the Pharisees, the sum of whose religion was external and self-righteous. It’s a brilliant, and noteworthy, section.

Christ as the son of David (vs. 35-37)—From Matthew 22:41-45: “Christ had answered all of their queries, now He throws one at them: “What do you think about the Christ? Whose Son is He?" (v. 42). “"The Son of David" (v. 43). Jesus then poses a perplexing problem: "How then does David in the Spirit call Him 'Lord,' saying: The LORD said to my Lord, Sit at My right hand, Till I make Your enemies Your footstool? "If David then calls Him 'Lord,' how is He his Son?" (vs. 43-45). Nobody knew the answer, which is found in the dual nature of the Messiah. In His human nature, He was descended from David, which the Jews well knew. But in His divine nature, He is obviously David’s Lord. What this whole chapter demonstrates, as Jesus takes on all comers and puts them to flight, is Christ’s superior understanding and wisdom. None of His opponents could match Him. The multitudes saw it. The Pharisees couldn’t handle it. They had two options: join Him or kill Him. And we know which choice they made.”

Beware of the scribes (vs. 38-40)—The fellow in verses 28-34 excepted, most of the scribes were self-righteous hypocrites. The vast majority of them were Pharisees. These people, however, were considered by most people as the religious elite and leaders of the time. Thus, they were very dangerous because, if people followed them, then they, too, would be hypocritical and self-righteous. Pharisaic, scribal religion is not true religion, and Jesus wanted His followers to be aware of that.

The widow’s two mites (vs. 41-44)—It’s interesting that Jesus was sitting close to the treasury and observing how much people put in it. The rich “put in much” (v. 41). But here comes a poor widow who tossed in all she had—two mites. “Mites” were the smallest coin used by the Jews. Its current value cannot now be easily estimated, probably less than a penny. But, according to Jesus, she gave more than all the rich, “for they all put in out of their abundance, but she out of her poverty put in all that she had, her whole livelihood" (v. 44). She gave the Lord everything she had, and then trusted Him to take care of her. Jesus definitely notices when we do that.  Indeed, one could say it sums up what our total response to God should be.