Mark 12:35-37

7. JESUS-' QUESTION ABOUT THE SON OF DAVID 12:35-37

TEXT 12:35-37

And Jesus answered and said, as he taught in the temple, How say the scribes that the Christ is the son of David? David himself said in the Holy Spirit, The Lord said unto my Lord, Sit thou on my right hand, Till I make thine enemies the footstool of thy feet. David himself calleth him Lord; and whence is he his son? And the common people heard him gladly.

THOUGHT QUESTIONS 12:35-37

677.

Why did Jesus raise this question? i.e. at this particular time and place.

678.

What would be a synonym for the Christ of Mark 12:35?

679

Why was it important that the Christ should be of the lineage of David?

680.

Is Jesus saying the Psalms were divinely inspired? Of what importance is this?

681.

Who are the two Lords of Mark 12:36?

682.

How does the promise of Mark 12:36 relate to the Jewish nation?

683.

In what sense was the Messiah to be both the son of David and the Lord of David? i.e. how was this possible?

684.

Why were the people so responsive to the teaching of Jesus?was it the subject?was it the place?was it the people?

COMMENT

TIME.A.D. 30. Tuesday, April 4.
PLACE.The temple area, probably the court of the Gentiles.

PARALLEL ACCOUNTSMatthew 22:41-46; Luke 20:41-44.

OUTLINE,1. The scribes say the Messiah is David's Son, Mark 12:35. Mark 12:2. David said the Messiah was his Lord, Mark 12:36. Mark 12:3. How do these views find agreement? Mark 12:37.

ANALYSIS

I.

THE SCRIBES SAY THE MESSIAH IS DAVID'S SON, Mark 12:35.

1.

This question was asked in connection with what had just preceded.

2.

This question was asked amid His teaching while in the Temple court.

II.

DAVID SAID THE MESSIAH WAS HIS LORD, Mark 12:36.

1.

He said this under the impulse of the Holy Spirit.

2.

God addressed this word to the Messiah.

3.

It included a promise of Lordship over all the world.

III.

HOW DO THESE VIEWS FIND AGREEMENT, Mark 12:37.

1.

If the Messiah is David's Son, in what sense can He also be his Lord?

2.

The people heard His teaching with genuine relish.

EXPLANATORY NOTES

I.

THE SCRIBES SAY THE MESSIAH IS DAVID'S SON.

Mark 12:35. Thus far our Lord's position had been wholly a defensive one; but now he turns the tables and asks a question in his turn, not merely for the purpose of silencing his enemies, but also with a view to the assertion of his own claims as the Messiah, Answering, retorting their interrogations, While he taught, literally, teaching, not in private conversation, but in the course of his public and official instructions. In the temple, i.e. in its area or enclosure. How, in what sense, upon what ground, or by what ground, or by what authority. Say, i.e. officially, or ex cathedra, here equivalent to teach. The scribes, as the expounders of the law and the religious teachers of the people. The Christ, the Messiah, Greek and Hebrew synonyms, both meaning Anointed, and applied to the Prophet, Priest and King of Israel, predicted by the prophets, and expected by the people. Is, in the doctrine of the scriptures, or is to be, in point of fact. Son, descendant, heir, of David, as the first and greatest theocratical sovereign.

II.

DAVID SAID THE MESSIAH WAS HIS LORD.

Mark 12:36. For assigns the reason of the question or the ground of the objection which it states; but the latest critics have expurged the particle. In the Holy Spirit, i.e. in intimate union with and under the controlling influence of that divine person. My Lord, i.e. David'S, as our Saviour explicitly declares in the passages already cited; yet not of David merely as a private person, nor even as an individual king, but as representing his own royal race and the house of Israel over which it reigned. The person thus described as the superior and sovereign of David and his house and of all Israel, could not possibly be David himself, nor any of his sons and successors except one who, by virtue of his twofold nature, was at once his sovereign and his son. See Romans 1:3-4. That the Lord here meant was universally identified with the Messiah by the ancient Jews, is clear, not only from their own traditions, but from Christ's assuming this interpretation as the basis of his argument to prove the Messiah's superhuman nature, and from the fact that his opponents, far from questioning this fact, were unable to answer him a word, and afraid to interrogate him further (Matthew 22:46.) The original form of expression, in the phrase Sit at my right hand, is the same as in Psalms 109:31. A seat at the right hand of a king is mentioned in the Scriptures as a place of honour, not arbitrarily, but as implying a participation in his power, of which the right hand is a constant symbol. See Psalms 45:10, and compare Matthew 19:28. The sitting posture is appropriate to kings, who are frequently described as sitting on their thrones. (Compare Psalms 29:10). In this case, however, the posture is of less moment than the position. Hence Stephen sees Christ standing at the right hand of God (Acts 7:55-56), and Paul simply says he is there (Romans 8:34). The participation in the divine power, thus ascribed to the Messiah, is a special and extraordinary one, having reference to the total subjugation of his enemies. This idea is expressed by the figure of their being made his footstool, perhaps with allusion to the ancient practice spoken of in Joshua 10:24. This figure itself, however, presupposes the act of sitting on a throne. It does not imply inactivity, as some suppose, or mean that Jehovah would conquer his foes for him, without any intervention of his own. The idea running through the whole psalm is, that it is in and through him that Jehovah acts for the destruction of his enemies, and that for this very end he is invested with almighty power, as denoted by his session at the right hand of God. This session is to last until the total subjugation of his enemies, that is to say, this special and extraordinary power of the Messiah is then to terminate, a representation which agrees exactly with that of Paul in 1 Corinthians 15:24-28, where the verse before us is distinctly referred to, although not expressly quoted. It is therefore needless, though grammatical, to give the until an inclusive meaning, namely, until then and afterwards, as in Psalms 112:8, etc. This verse, it has been said, is more frequently quoted or referred to, in the New Testament, than any other in the Hebrew Bible. Besides the passages already cited, it lies at the foundation of all those which represent Christ as sitting at the right hand of the Father. See Matthew 26:64, 1 Corinthians 15:25, Ephesians 1:20-22. Philippians 2:9-11, Hebrews 1:3; Hebrews 1:14; Hebrews 8:1; Hebrews 10:12-13, 1 Peter 3:22, and compare Revelation 3:21.

III.

HOW DO THESE VIEWS FIND AGREEMENT?

Mark 12:37. Therefore, or so then, David calls him Lord, i.e. his own superior or rather sovereign. Whence, from what source, or by what means? How is he at once his superior and inferior, his son and sovereign? The only key to this enigma is the twofold nature of the Messiah as taught even in the Old Testament, and applied to the solution of this very question in the beginning of the epistle to the Romans (Romans 1:3-4.) But this doctrine had been lost among the Jews, and more especially among the scribes or spiritual leaders, so that to them the question was unanswerable. They still held fast however to the doctrine, that he was to be the Son of David, which indeed became a reason for their giving up the doctrine of his higher nature, as being incompatible with what the scripture taught so clearly as to his descent and lineage. It is an instructive instance of perverted ingenuity, that one of the most eminent of modern German critics and interpreters maintains that Jesus, far from admitting that the scribes were right in making Christ the Son of David, teaches here that he was not! The effect of this unanswerable question upon those to whom it was addressed, or at whom it was aimed, is said by Matthew (Matthew 22:46) to have been that no one could answer him a word, nor did any one dare from that day any more to question him. There is of course no inconsistency between this statement and the one in Mark 12:34, above, as both occurrences took place upon the same day; and as it has been well said, while Mark exhibits him as silencing their questions. Matthew goes further and describes him as silencing their very answers. On the other hand, Mark here describes the impression which his teaching made upon the masses. And the common people (literally, the much or great crowd) heard him gladly, sweetly, pleasantly, with pleasure. (J. A. Alexander)

FACT QUESTIONS 12:35-37

794.

In what way did our Lord turn the tables on His opponents?

795.

What purpose did He have?

796.

Who were the scribes, i.e. in official capacity?

797.

Who was David's Lord?

798.

What is implied in the request to sit at His right hand?

799.

Sitting does not imply inactivitywhat does it imply?

800.

Show how 1 Corinthians 15:24-28 relates to Mark 12:35-37.

801.

Mention at least three more places where this reference is referred to in the New Testament.

802.

Show how Romans 1:3-4 answers the question of Jesus.

803.

Give two results to this question of Jesus.