MATTHEW 22
Structure of the chapter
| (a) | Verses 1-10 | Parable of the wedding invitation |
| (b) | Verses 11-14 | Parable of the wedding garment |
| (c) | Verses 15-22 | Question about tribute to Caesar |
| (d) | Verses 23-33 | Question about resurrection |
| (e) | Verses 34-40 | Question about the great commandment |
| (f) | Verses 41-45 | Question from Christ about Himself |
(a) Verses 1-10
Parable of the wedding invitation
22:1
And Jesus answered and spake unto them again by parables, and said,
And Jesus answered- at the end of the previous chapter, the chief priests and Pharisees sought to lay hands on Him. The Lord knew their hearts, however, and answered their hatred of Him with two warning parables.
And spake unto them again by parables, and said- one parable has to do with an invitation to an important feast, and the other to do with someone who was at the feast but not suitably clothed.
22:2
The kingdom of heaven is like unto a certain king, which made a marriage for his son,
The kingdom of heaven is like unto a certain king- the kingdom of heaven is the sphere of those who profess to be in touch with God. The parable exposes whether that claim is genuine or not.
Which made a marriage for his son- the test of the claim is the reaction to an invitation to celebrate the marriage of the king’s son. This will show whether they are sympathetic to the king or not. It is not difficult to see in the king, God Himself, and in the king’s son, Christ Himself. It was customary for the head of the house to arrange who his children married, as we see in the case of Abraham, Genesis 24. This was specially important to a king, for it determined who was incorporated into the royal line. The bride does not feature in the parable.
22:3
And sent forth his servants to call them that were bidden to the wedding: and they would not come.
And sent forth his servants to call them that were bidden to the wedding- the king had decided who was to be at the celebrations, sent out invitations, and now he sends his servants to tell the guests that the feast-time is come. We may see in this the action of God in sending John the Baptist to the nation, and he announced that the kingdom of heaven was at hand, for the Old Testament prophets had likened Messiah’s kingdom to a wedding feast, and John the baptist was the last of the prophets. Through him the near approach of the kingdom was announced. He also spoke of Christ as the bridegroom, John 3:27-29.
And they would not come- sadly, many of those in authority in Israel were not prepared to respond to John’s call for repentance in view of the coming of the king. Luke writes, “But the Pharisees and lawyers rejected the counsel of God against themselves, being not baptized of him”, Luke 7:20.
John described himself as the friend of the bridegroom, John 3:29, and as such he was responsible for asking the maiden concerned if she is willing to marry the man (which John attempted to do by preparing the way as he preached before Christ appeared); he then acts as intermediary between the man and his betrothed wife, (which John did by introducing Christ to the nation at His baptism); his last duty was to preside at the marriage ceremony, (which has not happened yet because the nation refused the proposal offer).
22:4
Again, he sent forth other servants, saying, Tell them which are bidden, Behold, I have prepared my dinner: my oxen and my fatlings are killed, and all things are ready: come unto the marriage.
Again, he sent forth other servants, saying, Tell them which are bidden, Behold, I have prepared my dinner: my oxen and my fatlings are killed, and all things are ready- notice that more details are given now, and the good things in store are listed. Moreover, there will be no delay once they have come, for all was ready and waiting.
Come unto the marriage- so it was that first Christ, then His apostles, and then seventy more were sent to Israel to tell them the king was present, and all was ready for the joy of the kingdom wedding feast to be enjoyed.
22:5
But they made light of it, and went their ways, one to his farm, another to his merchandise:
But they made light of it- they made light of the invitation because they made light of the king’s son who was to be married. As the prophet foresaw, “He is despised and rejected of men, a man of sorrows and acquainted with grief…we esteemed him not”, Isaiah 53:3.
And went their ways, one to his farm, another to his merchandise- just as two and a half tribes refused to enter Canaan, preferring the pasture-lands of Gilead, and the opportunity for profit they represented, Numbers 32:1-19, so these prefer material things and personal profit to the things of God’s kingdom. Little did they realise that to reject the king’s son was such a serious matter that it would result in their city being destroyed.
22:6
And the remnant took his servants, and entreated them spitefully, and slew them.
And the remnant took his servants, and entreated them spitefully, and slew them- not only were many marked by indifference, the remaining ones were marked by hostility. Not only did the coming of Christ expose their lack of appreciation of spiritual things, it also showed their hatred of the righteousness and holiness He showed in His life, which contrasted with their evil hearts and deeds.
In the parable the hostility was towards the servants, but in reality, as the Lord said, “If they have persecuted me, they will persecute you”, John 15:20.
22:7
But when the king heard thereof, he was wroth: and he sent forth his armies, and destroyed those murderers, and burned up their city.
But when the king heard thereof, he was wroth- the apostle Paul wrote to the Thessalonians, “For ye, brethren, became followers of the churches of God which in Judea are in Christ Jesus: for ye also have suffered like things of your own countrymen, even as they have of the Jews: who have both killed the Lord Jesus, and their own prophets, and have persecuted us…for the wrath is come upon them to the uttermost”, 1 Thessalonians 2:14-16.
John the Baptist also warned those who believed not on Christ that the wrath of God abode on them, John 3:36.
And he sent forth his armies, and destroyed those murderers, and burned up their city- this might seem an extreme response to the refusal to come to a feast, but we must remember that on a natural level it was a feast provided by the king, therefore to refuse it was a serious matter. Plus the important fact that a murder had been committed. As far as the meaning of the parable is concerned, the king was God, who is jealous for the honour of His Son, hence the severity of the punishment for refusal.
The meaning of the parable is clear, for the nation of Israel largely rejected the offer of the kingdom, and as a result their city, the city of Jerusalem, was destroyed in AD 70.
22:8
Then saith he to his servants, The wedding is ready, but they which were bidden were not worthy.
Then saith he to his servants, The wedding is ready, but they which were bidden were not worthy- the king is determined to fill the banqueting hall with guests to honour his son.
The ingratitude of those invited showed they would not be suitable guests at the feast, for they were not in sympathy with the king and his wish to honour his son.
22:9
Go ye therefore into the highways, and as many as ye shall find, bid to the marriage.
Go ye therefore into the highways, and as many as ye shall find, bid to the marriage- here we find that those who had not had a formal invitation are now invited to the feast. As the Acts of the Apostles proceeds, we find that God turns to the Gentiles to offer them blessing.
22:10
So those servants went out into the highways, and gathered together all as many as they found, both bad and good: and the wedding was furnished with guests.
So those servants went out into the highways, and gathered together all as many as they found, both bad and good- in obedience to the command to go, the servants widened their search for guests. Before He ascended, the Lord said to His apostles, “Go ye into all the world, and preach the gospel to every creature”, Mark 16:15. This they did, following the pattern marked out for them by the Lord when He said, “ye shall be witnesses unto me both in Jerusalem, and in all Judaea, and in Samaria, and unto the uttermost part of the earth”, Acts 1:8. See the next verse about the expression “bad or good”.
And the wedding was furnished with guests- it would be out of character for God to fail in His desire to honour His Son, so He finds a way to fill the banqueting hall, despite the refusal of the ones originally invited. Writing to the Roman believers, the apostle Paul asked the question about Israel, “Have they stumbled that they should fall? God forbid: but rather through their fall salvation is come unto the Gentiles, for to provoke them to jealousy”, Romans 11:11.
(b) Verses 11-14
Parable of the wedding garment.
22:11
And when the king came in to see the guests, he saw there a man which had not on a wedding garment:
And when the king came in to see the guests, he saw there a man which had not on a wedding garment- this second part of the parable is a commentary on the words, “bad and good”. It is not within the ability of the servants as they preach the gospel to discern whether a person has merely professed faith, (is “bad”, being still in their sins), or is genuine, (is “good”, having repented and been reckoned righteous).
It was the custom for the one who arranged the feast to provide the invited guests with a suitable garment to wear. This corresponds to the fact that God makes sinners fit for His presence.
22:12
And he saith unto him, Friend, how camest thou in hither not having a wedding garment? And he was speechless.
And he saith unto him, Friend, how camest thou in hither not having a wedding garment? And he was speechless- instead of being speechless because of his sin when he heard the gospel, (for the apostle Paul declares that every mouth is stopped, Romans 3:19), the man is now speechless with embarrassment.
22:13
Then said the king to the servants, Bind him hand and foot, and take him away, and cast him into outer darkness, there shall be weeping and gnashing of teeth.
Then said the king to the servants, Bind him hand and foot, and take him away, and cast him into outer darkness- the punishment of this man is described in more severe terms than the punishment of those who refused the invitation. He has brought shame on the name of God by associating, as a sinner, with the God who is holy.
Notice that no blame attaches to the servants for the fact that a “bad” person is present at the feast. Evangelists can only admit into the kingdom of heaven, the sphere of profession.
There shall be weeping and gnashing of teeth- the Lord Jesus warned men very clearly of the pain of eternal punishment. The unsaved will be reunited with their body at the resurrection of the unjust, and shall suffer the fires of the lake of fire for ever. In the mercy of God warning is given beforehand, and news of a Saviour is proclaimed abroad so that none need perish.
22:14
For many are called, but few are chosen.
For many are called, but few are chosen- there were many called in these three stages of invitation to the wedding, but the majority of those who were invited did not come. And even after the feast had started one needed to be expelled. So there were many invited, but few showed that they were fit to be at the feast because they were sympathetic to the king and his son, and welcomed the opportunity to honour them. The chosen ones were the ones who, by their genuine faith, showed that they had been chosen in Christ before the foundation of the world, Ephesians 1:4. See also 1 Thessalonians 1:3-8, for the signs of a truly “chosen” person.
(c) Verses 15-22
Question about tribute to Caesar
22:15
Then went the Pharisees, and took counsel how they might entangle him in his talk.
Then went the Pharisees, and took counsel how they might entangle him in his talk- they had see the point of the parables, and felt the keen edge of the truth as it cut away their hypocrisy and unbelief. They now try to cover up their discomfort by presentig a series of questions which, they hope, will discredit Him amongst the people, and limit His popularity with them, for they thought of Him as a prophet, 21:46.
22:16
And they sent out unto him their disciples with the Herodians, saying, Master, we know that thou art true, and teachest the way of God in truth, neither carest thou for any man: for thou regardest not the person of men.
And they sent out unto him their disciples with the Herodians- so the Pharisees and Herodians combine, and then the Saducees come forward, the three main parties in Israel. Zechariah spoke of cutting off three shepherds in one month, Zechariah 11:8, and this is what the Lord is about to do, as He shows up the falseness of the men who claimed to be shepherds in Israel. The Pharisees were the ritualists, the legal party; the Saducees the rationalists, the liberal party; the Herodians were the activists, the political party, seeking to advance the cause of Herod, the puppet of Rome. The Lord had already warned His disciples of the leaven of the Pharisees and Sadducees, Matthew 16:6, and also the leaven of Herod, Mark 8:15., by which He meant their evil doctrines.
Saying, Master, we know that thou art true, and teachest the way of God in truth, neither carest thou for any man: for thou regardest not the person of men- if they really believed these things, why did they oppose Him? The fact is that they are trying to flatter Him to put Him off His guard.
Their doctrines were leaven; His doctrine was like the fine flour of the meal offering, but they are seeking to add honey to it, and this was forbidden, Leviticus 2:11. Honey and olive oil may appear to be similar, but one represnts human sentiment, the other, spiritual power.
If we could strip away their sarcasm and their flattery, the things they say here are indeed true, for He was genuine, He did teach the way of God accurately, and He was not swayed by the opinions of men, but on their lips the testimony is worthless.
22:17
Tell us therefore, What thinkest thou? Is it lawful to give tribute unto Caesar, or not?
Tell us therefore, What thinkest thou? Is it lawful to give tribute unto Caesar, or not? The Pharisees and the Herodians were opposed to one another regarding the throne of Israel. The Pharisees insisted that a descendant of David should sit upon it, whereas the Herodians thought that it would be best if Herod ruled by permission of the Romans. Though against one another on this point, they are agreed in their opposition to Christ.
By their question they hope to trap Him into either saying they should not pay the tribute, (in which case they can report Him to Pilate the Governor), or saying they should pay it, (and accuse Him of not being in favour of Israel being a self-governing nation, and therefore lose His popularity with the people).
22:18
But Jesus perceived their wickedness, and said, Why tempt ye me, ye hypocrites?
But Jesus perceived their wickedness, and said, Why tempt ye me, ye hypocrites? His enemies must learn that He can read their hearts, for He is equal to the one who said, “I the Lord search the heart, I try the reins, even to give every man according to his doings”, Jeremiah 17:10.
The Lord had been tempted directly by the Devil at the beginning of His ministry, and he had left Him, defeated. Now he returns, but this time in the form of religious leaders. Not only were they tempters, but hypocrites as well, as the Lord is about to show. If there was to be no honey of sentiment in the meat offering, there was certainly to be the salt of truth.
22:19
Shew me the tribute money. And they brought unto him a penny.
Shew me the tribute money. And they brought unto him a penny- the tribute money by its very name indicated that the Jews were a subject people, and as such had to pay tribute to their Roman masters. Moreover, they were required to pay this tax with Roman coinage, a further humiliation for them.
We should not see this request to be shown a penny as a sign of the poverty of the Lord Jesus, as if He had no penny of His own but had to borrow one. He was indeed a man of faith, dependant on His Father for all things, but we should remember that there were those who “ministered to him of their substance”, Luke 8:2,3, so He was poor, but not poverty-stricken. His Father saw to it that He was provided for. The point is that they produced the penny out of their own purse, thus admitting that they used it in everyday transactions.
22:20
And he saith unto them, Whose is this image and superscription?
And he saith unto them, Whose is this image and superscription? They are being forced to answer their own question. On the coin they had produced would be an image of Caesar, so the coin represented Caesar. On the coin also would be a superscription of some sort in praise of Caesar, so the use of the coin represented an admission of Caesar’s claims.
22:21
They say unto him, Caesar’s. Then saith he unto them, Render therefore unto Caesar the things which are Caesar’s; and unto God the things that are God’s.
They say unto him, Caesar’s- painful as it was for them, they had to admit that it was Caesar’s coin they were using. By doing this they were acknowledging that Caesar had a claim over them.
Render therefore unto Caesar the things which are Caesar’s- so to pay tribute was indeed the right thing to do under the circumstances. Christ did not come to bring about an upheaval of the social order. He will do this when He comes to reign. At the present time those who believe are required to submit themselves unto the powers that be, knowing that they are placed in positions of authority to maintain law and order and to encourage those who behave responsibly. Christians represent no threat to any political system. Indeed, the gospel makes better citizens of all who practice it.
The language of the epistle to the Romans is as follows: “Let every soul be subject unto the higher powers. For there is no power but of God: the powers that be are ordained of God. Whosoever therefore resisteth the power, resisteth the ordinance of God: and they that resist shall receive to themselves damnation. For rulers are not a terror to good works, but to the evil. Wilt thou then not be afraid of the power? do that which is good, and thou shalt have praise of the same: For he is the minister of God to thee for good. But if thou do that which is evil, be afraid; for he beareth not the sword in vain: for he is the minister of God, a revenger to execute wrath upon him that doeth evil. Wherefore ye must needs be subject, not only for wrath, but also for conscience sake. For for this cause pay ye tribute also: for they are God’s ministers, attending continually upon this very thing. Render therefore to all their dues: tribute to whom tribute is due; custom to whom custom; fear to whom fear; honour to whom honour”, Romans 13:1-7.
And unto God the things that are God’s- this does not simply mean “Pay the temple tax”. This is a general statement that men have a responsibility to God as the supreme authority, as well as to those in lesser authority. The first thing man should render is recognition of God’s greatness, and following on from this will be repentance for offending such a great God. Faith in Him will result in the imputation of Divine righteousness, giving the ability to act righteously towards Him and to fellow-men. This will fit for the rendering to God and to men their dues. It is interesting to note that Romans 13 is preceded by a chapter full of advice as to how we may give God His place, starting with the presenting of the body as a living sacrifice.
22:22
When they had heard these words, they marvelled, and left him, and went their way.
When they had heard these words, they marvelled, and left him, and went their way- the simplicity and logic of His words amazed them. How easy it was to decide their question, and they thought He would be baffled. They do not realise that a greater than Solomon was in their midst.
Sadly, they do not respond to His words, but simply leave and go their way, a way that they seem to have no intention of changing.
(d) Verses 23-33
Question about resurrection
22:23
The same day came to him the Sadducees, which say that there is no resurrection, and asked him,
The same day came to him the Sadducees, which say that there is no resurrection, and asked him- these were the rationalists in the nation, who only accepted the books of Moses. Their question centres on what is known as the Law of Levirite, where if a man died childless, his brother was required to marry his widow and raise up children to his brother. They think they have a question which will support their contention that there is no resurrection. Luke tells us that “the Sadducees say there is no resurrection, neither angel, nor spirit”, Acts 23:8.
22:24
Saying, Master, Moses said, If a man die, having no children, his brother shall marry his wife, and raise up seed unto his brother.
Saying, Master, Moses said, If a man die, having no children, his brother shall marry his wife, and raise up seed unto his brother- they summarise correctly the substance of Deuteronomy 25:5.
22:25
Now there were with us seven brethren: and the first, when he had married a wife, deceased, and, having no issue, left his wife unto his brother:
Now there were with us seven brethren: and the first, when he had married a wife, deceased, and, having no issue, left his wife unto his brother- whether this was a real or imagined scenario does not affect the question. They recount it as if it is real-life.
22:26
Likewise the second also, and the third, unto the seventh.
Likewise the second also, and the third, unto the seventh- highly unlikely as this is, the Lord, (who knows whether they are telling the truth or not), does not comment.
22:27
And last of all the woman died also.
And last of all the woman died also- the story is building up to this climax, with its apparent consequences. So all eight persons are in eternity.
22:28
Therefore in the resurrection whose wife shall she be of the seven? for they all had her.
Therefore in the resurrection whose wife shall she be of the seven? for they all had her- these men are pouring scorn on the idea of resurrection, and think they have found an example which shows it is not reasonable. They have forgotten that the law of marriage only applies to a couple as long as both of them are alive. When one dies, the marriage has ended. So the quick answer to their question is “None of them”. But the Lord will expose the folly of their thinking and their ignorance.
22:29
Jesus answered and said unto them, Ye do err, not knowing the scriptures, nor the power of God.
Jesus answered and said unto them, Ye do err, not knowing the scriptures, nor the power of God- there were three matters the Lord dealt with. First, that they erred in the matter of their denial of resurrection, when it was clearly spoken of even in the Old Testament. See, for instance, the faith of Abraham that Isaac would return with him from the top of the mountain, Genesis 22:5, for he accounted that God was able to raise his son from the dead, Hebrews 11:19. Job believed that even if worms destroyed his body in the grave, in his flesh he would see God, Job 19:26. David spoke of the Messiah when he wrote, “For thou wilt not leave my soul in hell; neither wilt thou suffer thy holy one to see corruption. Thou wilt shew me the path of life”, Psalm 16:10,11, Acts 2:31. Daniel was told that many of those who slept in the dust of the earth shall awake, some to everlasting life, and some to shame and everlasting contempt, Daniel 12:2. He himself was assured that he would “stand in his lot”, that is, would occupy a place in the territory of the land of Judah in the kingdom, verse 13.
Such was the belief of Israel, for the apostle Paul could declare, “And now I stand and am judged for the hope of the promise made of God unto our fathers: unto which promise our twelve tribes, instantly serving God day and night, hope to come. For which hope’s sake, king Agrippa, I am accused of the Jews. Why should it be thought a thing incredible with you, that God should raise the dead?” Acts 26:6-8. All the promises about the nation of Israel entering the kingdom under the Messiah were underpinned by the truth of resurrection. If they are not raised to enjoy Messiah’s kingdom, God’s word has failed.
Second, that they did not know the scriptures. They had alluded to one part of scripture, but were ignoring another part. Third, they had not a right appreciation of the power of God, and what He is able to do. Soon He will raise His Son from the dead “according to the working of his mighty power, which he wrought in Christ, when he raised him from the dead”, Ephesians 1:19,20. That will answer all questions about whether resurrection is possible.
22:30
For in the resurrection they neither marry, nor are given in marriage, but are as the angels of God in heaven.
For in the resurrection they neither marry, nor are given in marriage- given that death ends a marriage, for the situation the Sadducees have described to be true, and for the woman to have a husband, there must be marrying again when the resurrection body has been given. There cannot be marrying in the intermediate state between death and resurrection, for a person must have a body to marry.
So their first error is corrected by a direct statement from Christ, thus setting His word on an equal level with the scriptures of the Old Testament.
Marrying is done by men on earth, and being given in marriage is done by women on earth, but the situation in heaven, (the place of the departed spirits of the just), is the same as with the angels of God, for they do not marry at all. They have not the bodily attributes of humans, and being deathless, do not have to replenish their number by marrying and producing offspring.
Note the mention of the angels of God in heaven, leaving room for the idea that angels that rebelled with Lucifer may indeed find a way to marry the daughters of men, Genesis 6:1,2.
22:31
But as touching the resurrection of the dead, have ye not read that which was spoken unto you by God, saying,
But as touching the resurrection of the dead- the Lord has dealt with their example by a word from Himself in contrast to their error, and now He will turn to speak of the scriptures and the power of God. Notice He does not enter into a dialogue with these men about resurrection, but simply asserts that it will happen.
Have ye not read that which was spoken unto you by God, saying- since they only accepted the books of Moses, the Lord will prove His point by reference to them. He expresses surprise that they had not seen the meaning of the passage He is about to quote. He is not surely suggesting that they had never come across these words in their reading of the Law. He is pointing out that they had not read with discernment, especially as the writing gave the words of God “unto you”.
22:32
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.
I am the God of Abraham, and the God of Isaac, and the God of Jacob? This is the statement of God to Moses as He spoke to him out of the burning bush, Exodus 3:6. Actually, He also said, “I am the God of thy father”, but the Lord Jesus omits that as not being relevant, for Moses’ father may still have been alive at that time. Or, if he was not still alive, had not received promises from God personally as Abraham, Isaac and Jacob had.
Even though the word “am” is in italics, it is necessary to give the sense. In fact, it shows that even italicised words are part of the word of God.
The point is that even though Abraham had died many years before, God was still his God. It follows from this that all God had promised to Abraham would come to pass, or else he could not be called his God any more. The patriarchs died without having received the fulfilment of all that God had promised to them. But they will eventually do so, showing that they must rise from the dead, for God promised Abraham that he would possess the land of Canaan eventually. If God is a man’s God, then He is true to him. And by the same token, if God is a man’s God, the man will live his life in reference to Him.
God is not the God of the dead, but of the living- in one sense Abraham, Isaac and Jacob were dead, but in another real sense they were still alive. As believers in God they had eternal life, and even though their bodies were dead, their spirits lived on in fellowship with Him. So God is the God of His people, even if they have died as to the body. But if dying does not separate from God, then nothing will, and resurrection is sure. The apostle Paul wrote to believers and said, “For none of us liveth to himself, and no man dieth to himself. For whether we live, we live unto the Lord; and whether we die we die unto the Lord: whether we live therefore, or die, we are the Lord’s. For to this end Christ both died, and rose, and revived, that he might be Lord both of the dead and the living”, Romans 14:7-9.
22:33
And when the multitude heard this, they were astonished at his doctrine.
And when the multitude heard this, they were astonished at his doctrine- again, there is no response from the ones who asked the question. The logic of Christ’s answer, based as it was on Scriptures they recognised, was too much for them. Their whole position was undermined. Sadly, however, they continued in their unbelief. The people, however, were intelligent as to what He was saying. As is often the case, the men with the doctorates and degrees are unbelieving, but the ordinary folk are ready to believe. As scripture says, “God hath chosen the foolish things of the world to confound the wise”, 1 Corinthians 1:27.
(e) Verses 34-40
Question about the great commandment
22:34
But when the Pharisees had heard that he had put the Sadducees to silence, they were gathered together.
But when the Pharisees had heard that he had put the Sadducees to silence, they were gathered together- these men are not earnest seekers after the truth, but are trying to score points over one another to further their party. The Pharisees were linked with the Herodians when it suited them, verse 16, but now they are trying to take advantage of the defeat the Sadducees have just suffered.
22:35
Then one of them, which was a lawyer, asked him a question, tempting him, and saying,
Then one of them, which was a lawyer- having been outwitted on the question of tribute to Caesar, they bring forward a lawyer to question the Lord about the law of Moses. This not only shows how despereate they are, but also will serve to test the Lord’s authority to the extreme.
Asked him a question, tempting him, and saying- since he was tempting him, the lawyer is clearly hostile to Him at first, but if we read Mark’s account we see a different aspect, for the Lord commends him afterwards for his comment about the law, Mark 12:28-34, telling him that he was not far from the kingdom of God. Perhaps we should see this tempting in the milder sense of testing.
22:36
Master, which is the great commandment in the law?
Master, which is the great commandment in the law? This is a fundamental question, and one which exercised the minds of the lawyers constantly. The question is designed to test the wisdom of the Lord, and also to see if He will side with any particular party in Israel.
22:37
Jesus said unto him, Thou shalt love the Lord thy God with all thy heart, and with all thy soul, and with all thy mind.
Jesus said unto him, Thou shalt love the Lord thy God with all thy heart, and with all thy soul, and with all thy mind- this is a straightforward quotation from the Old Testament, in Deuteronomy 6:5, giving the words of God Himself. It sums up man’s duty to God in a very concise way. Man’s heart is the inner spring of his being; his soul is his person as it expresses what he feels about God; his mind is his intellect as it is engaged in thoughts Godward. All of man’s faculties are to be directed towards God and the furtherance of His interests. What could be a greater command than this?
Notice that this great command involved love to God on the part of men. The current age is marked by the fact that God has showed His general love to the world in the historic event of Christ’s death on Calvary. This needs to happen because man is basically selfish, and always withholds from God the total surrender of his person to God that He demands. Only the true believer has the ability to seek to love God in this way.
22:38
This is the first and great commandment.
This is the first and great commandment- it is not that it is the greatest, as if there is a competition between the commandments for the first place. This is how the lawyers looked at the matter. It is the first command because it is totally God-centred. It is great because it is all-embracing.
22:39
And the second is like unto it, Thou shalt love thy neighbour as thyself.
And the second is like unto it, Thou shalt love thy neighbour as thyself- this is a quotation from Leviticus 19:18, and comes in the context of not hating one’s brother, nor avenging him, nor bearing any grudge against him.
So the great commandment of love to God encompasses the idea of love to men. As the apostle John wrote, “If a man say, ‘I love God’, and hateth his brother, he is a liar: for he that loveth not his brother whom he hath seen, how can he love God whom he hath not seen? And this commandment have we from him, ‘That he who loveth God love his brother also'”, 1 John 4:20,21.
We need to notice two words in particular that the apostle uses here. First, the word “see”. It means to see clearly, either physically or mentally. But since it is used of seeing God, it must be the latter sense that is relevant here. (The Lord Jesus used this word when He said to Philip, “He that hath seen me hath seen the Father”, John 14:9). So John is telling us of a professed believer who has seen clearly, with mental insight, certain features displayed in a believer which, because they are spiritual features, are expressed only by those who have life from God. The man’s reaction to this is to not love him, for those spiritual features are a rebuke to him, just as the life of Christ is a rebuke to men, whether when He was upon earth, or currently, as the gospel records are read.
Now we come to the word “can”. It means to have the power to do something. John is emphasising, not that this man is unwilling to love God, although that is no doubt true of him, but that he cannot love God. And why cannot he love God? The answer is that he does not love the one he claims is his brother, and therefore he is not a believer. As such he has no power to love God, for he does not have eternal life, and that life enables a man to know God in a spiritual way, and to love Him.
We can see that the answer to this question by the Lord Jesus was a real challenge to His questioners. They would all claim to love God, but if they did not love their brother, including Christ, their claim was not valid.
This answer is also a real challenge to believers today, for although not under the law, the righteous requirement of the law should be fulfilled in us, as we see from the apostle John’s words just quoted.
There is no friction between loving God wholly, and loving one’s neighbour, for love to God may be expressed in love to others. Nor is there any harm in loving oneself, as long as we love others to the same degree.
22:40
On these two commandments hang all the law and the prophets.
On these two commandments hang all the law and the prophets- every other command takes its rise from one or other of these two commands, and the second takes its rise from the first. Only by being in relationship with the God who is love in essence can a man love as is commanded here. This in itself would give pause for thought, for the natural man has no cpacity to love like this, and therefore must cast himself on the mercy of God. This is why the apostle John wrote, “Herein is love, not that we loved God, but that he loved us, and sent his Son to be the propitiation for our sins”, 1 John 4:10. It is only those who know the applied value of the work of Christ for sins that can then go on to comply with the next verse, which reads, “Beloved, if God so loved us, we ought also to love one another”, verse 11.
(f) Verses 41-45
Question from Christ about Himself
22:41
While the Pharisees were gathered together, Jesus asked them,
While the Pharisees were gathered together, Jesus asked them- in verse 33 we find the only response to Christ’s answer to the Sadducees was from the multitude. The Sadducees have no response, and seem to have disappeared. The Pharisees have congregated, however, giving Christ an opportunity to ask them a question. Normally they would have relished the chance to show off their knowledge, if the question was from one of the common people, but they must have been very apprehensive when the Lord asked them something.
22:42
Saying, What think ye of Christ? whose son is he? They say unto him, The son of David.
Saying, What think ye of Christ? whose son is he? They must have been relieved that He asked them such a simple question, one they could easily answer.
They say unto him, The son of David- they knew from God’s word to David that David’s throne would be occupied by one of David’s seed, 2 Samuel 7:12. Initially this was Solomon, but since God promised that the kingdom should last for ever, then it must have extended well beyond Solomon. The people understood this, for when Christ rode into Jerusalem they hailed Him as the Son of David, Matthew 21:9. But there were many descendants of David alive at the time, and even His legal father was greeted as this by an angel, Luke 1:20. But that the crowds as they welcomed Him saw in Him more than a descendant of David is clear, for they also hailed Him as the King of Israel, John 12:13.
22:43
He saith unto them, How then doth David in spirit call him Lord, saying,
He saith unto them, How then doth David in spirit call him Lord, saying- as with the Sadducees, the appeal is to the Old Testament. But instead of the books of Moses, reference is now made to the book of Psalms. Here, the statement is said to be in David’s spirit, meaning that as a believer he fully accepted what he was writing.
22:44
The Lord said unto my Lord, Sit thou on my right hand, till I make thine enemies thy footstool?
The Lord said unto my Lord- there are two words for “Lord” here. The first is Jehovah, the covenant-keeping God of Israel, who because He is, and was, and is to come, (the meaning of the word), is always present to maintain what He has promised. The second is Adon, meaning one who is the Sovereign, and the Possessor and Proprietor. Both of these titles are used for God. So David calls someone else Lord in the same sentence as he gives the God of Israel the title of Lord.
Sit thou on my right hand, till I make thine enemies thy footstool? The apostle Peter will make much of this statement on the day of Pentecost, to show that Jesus of Nazareth has been elevated to the very throne of God, Acts 2:34,35. That the position given to this one is opposed by some is seen in the reference to enemies, and this is a warning to the Pharisees.
At present the Messiah is seated on His Father’s throne, but one day He shall sit on His own throne on earth, which is in fact the throne of David, and His enemies shall be the footstool of that throne. This is another way of saying that His enemies shall be subdued under Him.
When Joshua defeated the kings of Canaan, he instructed the captains of his army to put their feet on the necks of those kings as a sign of their complete defeat, Joshau 10:24. David also, after he had defeated all his enemies could say, “Thou hast also given me the necks of mine enemies, that I might destroy them that hate me”, Psalm 18:40.
22:45
If David then call him Lord, how is he his son?
If David then call him Lord, how is he his son? Of course it is true that the word lord is used of ordinary people in the scriptures. For example, Sarah called Abraham by this name, Genesis 18:12. But this instance is different, for it is in the context of the fact that David also called his God Lord as well. To put the two lordships side by side was very significant.
We should remember that David was not inventing these ideas, for Mark tells us that David was speaking “by the Holy Ghost”, Mark 12:36.
The clear implication of David’s words is that there is a person whom David can rightfully call his Lord, (without displacing God as Lord), yet who is at the same time the predicted Messiah, the Son of David, for the psalm goes on to describe some of the exploits of the Messiah. So the Son of David is a real man, and He is also truly God, for as Lord He is the originator of David, and superior to David.
The Lord Jesus put these things together when He described Himself as “the root and the offspring of David”, Revelation 22:16. As the root of David He was his Creator, and as the offspring of David He was his son.
22:46
And no man was able to answer him a word, neither durst any man from that day forth ask him any more questions.
And no man was able to answer him a word- just as the Sadducees had been confounded by truth that lay in the words of scripture they were familiar with, so the Pharisees found the same. They had no answer for Him, for the reasoning behind His words was indisputable.
Neither durst any man from that day forth ask him any more questions- durst is an old form of the word “dare”. The risk of being further humiliated in the eyes of the people was too great for their pride to bear.