122. Chapter 9 - The End of the Debate

Chapter 9 - The End of the Debate Matthew 22:34-46;Mark 12:28-37;Luke 20:41-47 The Greatest Commandment

Two questions closed the exciting encounter between Jesus and the national leaders: one question came from a Pharisee; the other, from Jesus. The motives of the Pharisee, who asked the question as to which is the greatest commandment in the law, are not clear. Matthew 22:34 indicates that the question was part of the general attack of the enemies of Jesus, but there was an air of fairmindedness and sincerity about this questioner which is most surprising. Since the Jewish rulers had been exposed as hypocrites and their plans to trap Jesus had failed, they were now glad to put forward a man of some integrity who really had a problem he sincerely desired to solve. If the arrangements for him to ask the question had all been made before the exciting events of the day started, the man, as he listened to the marvelous replies of Jesus, may have changed his own attitude during the course of the day’s struggle. McGarvey says of him: “Never was a would-be captivator more completely captivated.” The question represents a distinct anticlimax in the hostile efforts to overthrow Jesus, but it seems the only thing they can now think of asking. It is not clear what the Pharisees hoped to gain by this move unless it was the vague hope that Jesus might be entangled in some revolutionary statement against the law. They also may have hoped that the statement of the Scripture that God is one might arise so that Jesus’ claim to deity might be contradicted. Matthew says that the lawyer was “trying” Jesus. The former efforts had been definite traps; this was more of a testing of the real depth of Jesus’ mastery of divine truth and human life. Among the Pharisees there had been some who had dared to speak up in approval of Jesus’ devastating reply to the Sadducees: “Then certain of the scribes answering said, Master, thou hast well said” (Luke 20:39). The favorable impact of Jesus’ reply to the Sadducees upon this lawyer, who now asks a question, is recorded by Mark: “And one of the scribes came, and having heard them reasoning together, and perceiving that he had answered them well...” (Mark 12:28). This question had been discussed widely by the Pharisees, and often had received frivolous replies typical of their hair-splitting system of religion. Even though all the law was binding, it was a matter of importance to attempt to analyze and determine which was the most central and significant command. In His denunciation of the Pharisees which followed (Matthew 23:1-39), Jesus condemned them for keeping the minute regulations of the law and neglecting the weightier commands. Jesus had discussed the question of the greatest commandment in the law on a former occasion (Luke 10:25-37) in a different setting. How frequently He may have discussed it in different sections of the country, or whether the lawyer’s answer (in Luke 10:26, Luke 10:27) arose from his own study or from having heard of Jesus’ teaching on the subject, we cannot tell. The Jewish scholars had perceived the magnificence and importance of the first of the passages (Deuteronomy 6:4-9), and the Pharisees had selected it as one of four passages which they wore on their phylacteries. “Hear, O Israel: The Lord our God is one Lord” was the central proposition of the Old Testament as distinguished from the pagan religions of the world which were polytheistic. The oneness of God, His eternal and unchangeable character, is the basis of all contact with Him, all progress in life, and all assurance for the future. The Greeks and Romans represented Jupiter and Juno (Zeus and Hera) at war with one another and Venus, Minerva, Apollo, and the other mythical gods as joining in the continued conflict to make the confusion more confounded. Chadwick says of the principle of God’s unity: “It was the parent of the fruitful doctrine of the unity of nature which underlies all the scientific victories of the modern world.” But above the invention of mechanical devices, it is the broad basis for the universality and the eternality of the Christian gospel which offers redemption from the one God to all men. Paul declares: “Is God the God of Jews only? is he not the God of the Gentiles also? Yea, of the Gentiles also: if so be that God is one” (Romans 3:29, Romans 3:30). The command to love God with all thy heart, soul, mind, and strength, introduces terms which are not mutually exclusive, but overlap. The “heart” is used in the Scripture to mean the whole intellectual and spiritual faculties — the understanding, the emotions, and the will. The “soul” is differentiated by some scholars from spirit : the soul is held to be the physical life, and the spirit, the divine or eternal element. But both Greek words used in the Scripture (pneuma and psyche) are defined in the standard lexicons as meaning both soul and spirit, and the two terms are generally synonymous in the Scripture. Passages such as Matthew 10:28 give the most profound contrast between soul and body. But Matthew 10:39 and Mark 10:45 show a context where psyche must be rendered “life” rather than “soul.” In Matthew 16:25, Mark 8:35, and Luke 9:24 it must be rendered “life.” But the very next verses in Matthew and in Mark find psyche translated “soul” in the a.v. While the a.s.v. has “life” in these verses, it is obvious that “life” is used with the eternal content inherent in the word. When discussing our love for God, both the versions render “with all thy soul” (Matthew 22:37 : Mark 12:30; Luke 10:27). Pneuma can mean “wind,” “breath,” or “spirit,” but of the 285 times it appears in the New Testament, it is only translated “wind” once (John 3:8 — both a.v. and a.s.v.). Psyche can mean the “breath of life,” “life,” or “soul.” Hebrews 4:12 is usually cited as a place where discrimination is made between “soul” and “spirit,” but the passage may mean the dividing asunder which the Holy Spirit does is between the spiritual nature (soul and spirit) and the physical body (joints and marrow). The emphatic overlapping of terms in Matthew 22:37 and Mark 11:30 — “heart,” “soul,” “mind,” and “strength,” — fits completely the mysterious, inextricable, vital elements in human personality. “Mind” is not mentioned in the Old Testament passage. Its introduction here by Jesus emphasizes the intellectual faculties and the necessity for true and deep convictions. “Strength” joins together the might of heart, soul, and mind in the practical task of living and dying for the Lord. “Strength” emphasizes the function of the will as well as the actual achievements of the individual.

It is not hard to see why this is the first and greatest commandment: because of the pre-eminence of God Himself. He is the source of all goodness and virtue — of life itself. Love is the highest experience of man and the controlling impulse of life. The love of God for man is the noblest thing we know; the love of man for God, the noblest experience we attain. It is the foundation of all that is best in life. Love does not exhaust itself in thinking or feeling, but controls the conduct. Since the commandment emphasizes the whole realm of man’s life as controlled by God and devoted to Him, nothing could come before this.

While we may wonder how the lawyer of Luke 10:1-42 came to associate Leviticus 19:18 with Deuteronomy 6:4-9, the very life as well as the teaching of Jesus perfectly combines and illumines these two fundamental commands. Religion, which comes before morals since morals rise out of our knowledge of God and His righteousness, cannot be separated from morals. Morals without true religion is as barren as religion without true morals is base. The love of God is the perfect example, the source, and the directing power of our love for our fellowmen. Every man is expected to love himself, but he should love his neighbor as himself. The uniqueness of the teaching of Jesus was sensed even by His enemies: the meaning He gave to these two commands, especially the interpretation of the word “neighbor,” and the emphasis He placed upon them in saying that all the law hung upon these two, as a cloak hanging from a hook. All the law hangs from these two commandments, for the two cover the whole realm of religion and morals, the relation of man to God and of man to man. Everything else in the law can be arranged under these two headings. They all take their origin from these two basic principles. The man’s keen discernment and sincere desire to know the truth, which overcame any baser ideas or motives, enabled him to realize the magnificent depth of Jesus’ reply and to voice a noble reply as he repeated the commands and affirmed that the sacrifices in the temple were secondary to the actual, living devotion of the soul to God and one’s loving service to his fellow men. When we reflect upon the utter fury of the onslaught which was being made upon Jesus, the conviction and courage of this Pharisee in commending Jesus publicly for His reply become the more remarkable. How like the infinite mercy of God is the calm, gentle, forgiving response of Jesus: “Thou art not far from the kingdom of God.” The Final Question The Master now closed decisively the period of controversy by asking the most important question which could be asked then or ever. The questions they had asked had been significant; here was one that capped the climax. It not only constituted a direct attack on the position of His enemies, pressing the advantage now that they had failed in their attacks, so that the multitudes might see clearly how false and futile was their leadership, but it was also a further effort to save the Jewish leaders themselves. It sought to make them perceive the divine character of the predicted Christ and understand the deity of Jesus before they rushed on to destroy Him. He had just emphasized the oneness of God; He now sets forth the Father and Son as sharing the throne of heaven, and proves from the Old Testament that there is no contradiction between the oneness of God and the deity of His Son. The question “What think ye of Christ? Whose Son is he?” has been the text of countless sermons on the deity of Christ. The use of the text has often been criticized as bad homiletics since the answer to the question was, “The Son of David,” whereas the answer of the sermon is, “The Son of God.” But the criticism is hardly well-founded, for the real heart of the question and the full answer was to prove to the Pharisees that David himself had predicted the Messiah would be more than his son — his Lord.

Since the Old Testament had made it clear by so many prophecies that the Messiah should be born of the line of David (2 Samuel 7:8-29; Isaiah 9:5-7; Isaiah 11:1-10; Jeremiah 23:5-8; Micah 5:2), the Pharisees were able to answer this question as readily as they had years before given answer as to the place of the Messiah’s birth (Matthew 2:3-6). In the Psalm of David which Jesus quoted, three words stand out significantly: (1) Lord; (2) Throne; (3) Enemies. The point of His question shows the profound emphasis which underlies the first of these: “The Lord (God) said unto my (David’s) Lord (i.e., the Christ). Now explain the use of this title ‘Lord’ when applied by David to his own descendant. How could the Christ be David’s son and David’s Lord?” The Old Testament is filled with unexplainable predictions, if one denies the deity of Jesus. This picture of the Messiah sharing the throne of God in heaven and bringing all His enemies underneath His feet furnishes a thrilling background to the dark plots of His enemies to crucify Him, and one that was calculated to make them shrink back from their desperate intentions. To all the ages it throws a divine light upon the person of Christ and the divine character of the love which led Him to the cross. The declaration of the eternal reign of the Messiah by the side of God confirms the use of the title “Lord” and shows that the title was not misapplied by the speaker or misunderstood by Jesus as He quoted it.

“The Great Day of Questions” is usually considered the occasion when so many questions were asked of Jesus by His enemies. But it is worthy of note that Jesus asked more questions of them on this occasion than they did of Him. They were unable or unwilling to answer His questions. The answers they gave proved disastrous. Of the sixteen questions recorded in this debate, the Jewish leaders asked five, and Jesus asked eleven.

It is most interesting to see how the two questions they asked at the start of the debate, are answered over and over in the course of the discussion. Jesus took the position that since they refused to answer His question on the authority of John’s baptism, He was not compelled to answer their questions as to His authority and the One from whom it had been received. This was the impressive manner in which Jesus concentrated attention on their hypocrisy. But as the Parable of the Wicked Husbandmen was delivered, Jesus plainly declared that He was the Son. He further showed that they themselves recognized this, deep-down in their hearts, even though they refused to admit it. The husbandmen are represented as saying: “This is the heir; come, let us kill him, and let us seize on his inheritance” (Matthew 21:38). Here is His authority and its source from their own lips. When they condemn the wicked husbandmen, they condemn themselves as in rebellion against God and seeking to destroy God’s Son. Their dreadful fate is, according to their own decision, justified. In the final parable of the Wedding Feast, it was the King’s Son to whose wedding they were invited. The implication of His deity is clear. The siege and fall of Jerusalem are depicted as the King sends armies to burn the city of the murderers. The final question of Jesus faces point-blank their original challenge. What authority? From whom? Is the Messiah declared in the Old Testament to be a supernatural Being? Does the Old Testament affirm that the Christ is to be the Son of God? Is He called “Lord”? Jesus presses them with questions which they refuse to answer. It may seem surprising that Jesus did not quote Isaiah 9:6 : “For unto us a child is born, unto us a son is given; and the government shall be upon his shoulder; and his name shall be called Wonderful, Counsellor, The Mighty God, The Everlasting Father, The Prince of Peace.” In this passage the Messiah is clearly declared to be God. But just as He had surprised the Sadducees with His quotation from the Pentateuch instead of one from the later prophets such as Daniel, so now He turns back to the Psalms of David for this basic assertion of the deity of the Messiah. It is a most appropriate quotation for this hour because it answers their questions as to His authority. David pictures the Messiah: He is addressed by God as “Lord,” and He reigns with God. He also introduces the enemies of the Messiah and predicts their doom.