35 37<\/strong>. Our Lord’s Counter-Question<\/p>\n 35<\/strong>. And Jesus answered and said<\/em> ] He seemed to have turned to a number of the Pharisees (Mat 22:41<\/span>) who had collected together, to converse probably over the day’s discomfiture. The great counter-question is brought forward by St Matthew in all its historic importance as the decisive concluding interrogation addressed to the Pharisees. St Mark points out by the words “ Jesus answered<\/em> ” that the statement contained a reply to some question already put.<\/p>\n See the notes at Mat 22:41-46<\/span>.<\/P> Mar 12:37<\/B><\/span><\/P> The common people heard him gladly – <\/B>The success of the Saviour in his preaching was chiefly among the common or the poorer class of people. The rich and the mighty were too proud to listen to his instructions. So it is still. The main success of the gospel is there, and there it pours down its chief blessings. This is not the fault of the gospel. It would bless the rich and the mighty as well as the poor, if they came with like humble hearts. God knows no distinctions of men in conferring his favors; and wherever there is a poor, contrite, and humble spirit – be it clothed in rags or in purple – be it on a throne or on a dunghill – there he confers the blessings of salvation.<\/P> <\/p>\n Verse 35. How say the scribes<\/B><\/I>] See Mt 22:41<\/span>, &c.<\/P><\/p>\n See Poole on “Mat 22:41<\/span>“, and following verses to Mat 22:46<\/span>. Matthew saith that Christ spake this to the Pharisees, who were very far from acknowledging Christ God man, or indeed expecting a Messiah that should be so. Had they owned Christ, and the hypostatical union of the two natures in him, the answer had been easy. <\/P> <\/p>\n 35. And Jesus answered and said,while he taught in the temple<\/B>and “while the Phariseeswere gathered together” (Mt22:41<\/span>). <\/P> How say the scribes thatChrist is the son of David?<\/B>How come they to give it out thatMessiah is to be the son of David? In Matthew (Mt22:42<\/span>), Jesus asks them, “What think ye of Christ?” orof the promised and expected Messiah? “Whose son is He [to be]?They say unto Him, The son of David.” The sense is the same. “Hesaith unto them, How then doth David in spirit call Him Lord?”(Mat 22:42<\/span>; Mat 22:43<\/span>).<\/P><\/p>\n And Jesus answered and said<\/strong>,…. To the Pharisees that were gathered together about him; [See comments on Mt 22:41]<\/span>.<\/p>\n While he taught in the temple<\/strong>; Whilst he was in the temple, and as he was teaching the people there; among other things in his doctrine, he put this question,<\/p>\n how say the Scribes, that Christ is the son of David<\/strong>? Not that Christ meant to deny or invalidate the truth of this; for the Messiah was certainly to be the son of David, and was; but he wanted to know, inasmuch as they commonly said, and instructed the people to believe, and it was in general believed by them, that he was David’s son, how they could reconcile this to his being the Lord of David: or how they could give out, that he was only and merely the Son of David, when he was David’s Lord. Matthew relates the matter thus; that Christ first put these questions to them, what they thought of the Messiah, and whose son he was; and that they immediately replied, he was the son of David: wherefore this question seems to be put upon that, with another along with it,<\/p>\n how then doth David in spirit call him Lord<\/strong>?<\/p>\n [See comments on Mt 22:42]<\/span>,<\/p>\n [See comments on Mt 22:43]<\/span>.<\/p>\n Christ the Son and Lord of David.<\/SPAN><\/SPAN><\/I><\/span><\/P> <\/TD> <\/TR> 35 And Jesus answered and said, while he taught in the temple, How say the scribes that Christ is the Son of David? 36 For David himself said by the Holy Ghost, The LORD<\/B> said to my Lord, Sit thou on my right hand, till I make thine enemies thy footstool. 37 David therefore himself calleth him Lord; and whence is he then<\/I> his son? And the common people heard him gladly. 38 And he said unto them in his doctrine, Beware of the scribes, which love to go in long clothing, and love<\/I> salutations in the marketplaces, 39 And the chief seats in the synagogues, and the uppermost rooms at feasts: 40 Which devour widows’ houses, and for a pretence make long prayers: these shall receive greater damnation.<\/P> Here, I. Christ shows the people how weak and defective the scribes were in their preaching, and how unable to solve the difficulties that occurred in the scriptures of the Old Testament, which they undertook to expound. Of this he gives an instance, which is not so fully related here as it was in Matthew. Christ was teaching in the temple:<\/I> many things he said, which were not written; but notice is taken of this, because it will stir us up to enquire concerning Christ,<\/I> and to enquire of him;<\/I> for none can have the right knowledge of him but from himself;<\/I> it is not to be had from the scribes,<\/I> for they will soon be run aground.<\/P> 1. They told the people that the Messiah was to be the Son of David<\/I> (v.<\/I><\/span> 35<\/span>), and they were in the right; he was not only to descend from his loins, but to fill his throne (Luke i. 32<\/span>); The Lord shall give him the throne of his father David.<\/I> The scripture said it often, but the people took it as what the scribes said; whereas the truths of God should rather be quoted from our Bibles than from our ministers, for there is the original of them. Dulcius ex ipso fonte bibuntur aqu–The waters are sweetest when drawn immediately from their source.<\/I><\/P> 2. Yet they could not tell them how, notwithstanding that it was very proper for David, in spirit, the spirit of prophecy, to call him his Lord,<\/I> as he doth, Ps. cx. 1<\/span>. They had taught the people that concerning the Messiah, which would be for the honour of their nation–that he should be a branch of their royal family; but they had not taken care to teach them that which was for the honour of the Messiah himself–that he should be the Son of God, and, as such, and not otherwise, David’s Lord.<\/I> Thus they held the truth in unrighteousness,<\/I> and were partial<\/I> in the gospel, as well as in the law, of the Old Testament. They were able to say it, and prove it–that Christ was to be David’s son; but if any should object, How then doth David himself call him Lord?<\/I> they would not know how to avoid the force of the objection. Note, Those are unworthy to sit in Moses’s seat, who, though they are able to preach the truth, are not in some measure able to defend it when they have preached it, and to convince gainsayers.<\/P> Now this galled the scribes, to have their ignorance thus exposed, and, no doubt, incensed them more against Christ; but the common people heard him gladly,<\/I> v.<\/span> 37<\/span><\/U><\/I><\/span>. What he preached was surprising and affecting; and though it reflected upon the scribes, it was instructive to them, and they had never heard such preaching. Probably there was something more than ordinarily commanding and charming in his voice and way of delivery, which recommended him to the affections of the common people; for we do not find that any were wrought upon to believe<\/I> in him, and to follow<\/I> him, but he was to them as a lovely song of one that could play well on an instrument;<\/I> as Ezekiel was to his hearers, Ezek. xxxiii. 32<\/span>. And perhaps some of these cried, Crucify him,<\/I> as Herod heard John Baptist gladly, and yet cut off his head.<\/P> II. He cautions the people to take heed of suffering themselves to be imposed upon by the scribes, and of being infected with their pride and hypocrisy; He said unto them in his doctrine, “Beware of the scribes<\/I> (v.<\/I><\/span> 38<\/span>); stand upon your guard, that you neither imbibe their peculiar opinions, nor the opinions of the people concerning them.” The charge is long as drawn up against them in the parallel place (Matt. xxiii.<\/span>); it is here contracted.<\/P> 1. They affect to appear very great;<\/I> for they go in long clothing,<\/I> with vestures down to their feet,<\/I> and in those they walk about the streets,<\/I> as princes, or judges, or gentlemen of the long robe. Their going in such clothing was not sinful, but their loving<\/I> to go in it, priding themselves in it, valuing themselves on it, commanding respect by it, saying to their long clothes, as Saul to Samuel, Honour me now before this people,<\/I> this was a product of pride. Christ would have his disciples go with their loins girt.<\/I><\/P> 2. They affect to appear very good;<\/I> for they pray, they make long prayers,<\/I> as if they were very intimate with heaven, and had a deal of business there. They took care it should be known that they prayed, that they prayed long, which, some think, intimates that they prayed not for themselves only, but for others, and therein were very particular and very large; this they did for a pretence,<\/I> that they might seem to love prayer, not only for God’s sake, whom hereby they pretended to glorify, but for their neighbour’s sake, whom hereby they pretended to be serviceable to.<\/P> 3. They here aimed to advance<\/I> themselves: they coveted applause, and were fond of it; they loved salutations in the marketplaces,<\/I> and the chief seats in the synagogues, and the uppermost rooms at feasts;<\/I> these pleased a vain fancy; to have these given them, they thought, expressed the value they<\/I> had for them, who did know them, and gained them respect for those who did not.<\/P> 4. They herein aimed to enrich<\/I> themselves. They devoured widows’ houses,<\/I> made themselves masters of their estates by some trick or other; it was to screen themselves from the suspicion of dishonesty, that they put on the mask of piety; and that they might not be thought as bad as the worst, they were studious to seem as good as the best. Let fraud and oppression be thought the worse of for their having profaned<\/I> and disgraced<\/I> long prayers; but let not prayers, no nor long prayers,<\/I> be thought the worse of, if made in humility and sincerity, for their having been by some thus abused. But as iniquity, thus disguised with a show of piety, is double<\/I> iniquity, so its doom will be doubly heavy; These shall receive great damnation;<\/I> greater than those that live without prayer, greater than they would have received for the wrong done to the poor widows, if it had not been thus disguised. Note, The damnation of hypocrites will be of all others the greatest damnation.<\/P> <\/p>\n How say the scribes <\/B> ( <\/SPAN><\/span>). The opponents of Jesus are silenced, but he answers them and goes on teaching (<\/SPAN><\/span>) in the temple as before the attacks began that morning (11:27<\/span>). They no longer dare to question Jesus, but he has one to put to them “while the Pharisees were gathered together” (Mt 22:41<\/span>). The question is not a conundrum or scriptural puzzle (Gould), but “He contents himself with pointing out a difficulty, in the solution of which lay the key to the whole problem of His person and work” (Swete). The scribes all taught that the Messiah was to be the son of David (Joh 7:41<\/span>). The people in the Triumphal Entry had acclaimed Jesus as the son of David (Mt 21:9<\/span>). But the rabbis had overlooked the fact that David in Ps 110:1<\/span> called the Messiah his Lord also. The deity and the humanity of the Messiah are both involved in the problem. Mt 22:45<\/span> observes that “no one was able to answer him a word.” <\/P> <\/p>\n <\/strong><\/p>\n JESUS QUESTIONS THE PHARISEES ABOUT THE MESSIAH,<\/strong><\/p>\n V. 35-40<\/p>\n <\/strong><\/p>\n 1) “And Jesus answered and said,”<\/strong> (kai apokritheis ho lesous elegan) “And Jesus responding said,” as He was questioned while later teaching in the temple in Jerusalem.<\/p>\n 2) “While He taught in the temple,”<\/strong> (didaskon en to heiro) “As He taught (while teaching) in the temple, with a large audience present,” including His now disheartened Jewish opponents in controversy,<\/p>\n 3) “How say the scribes,” <\/strong>(pos legousin hoi grammateis) “How do the scribes say,” or in what sense do the scribes understand this? the writers, archives keepers, index-file, librarian keepers of the law-directed to the Pharisees, Mat 22:41<\/span>.<\/p>\n 4) “That Christ is the son of David?”<\/strong> (hoti ho Christos huios David estin) “That the Christ (the anointed one, the Messiah) is (exists as) a son or heir of David?” A son of David only, no more than that? Rom 1:3-4<\/span>.<\/p>\n When Jesus was liberated from the entrapping questions, He became a questioner Himself. He wanted them to explain how and why David referred to Him as Lord.<\/p>\n CRITICAL AND EXEGETICAL NOTES<\/em><\/p>\n Mar. 12:35<\/span>. Jesus answered<\/strong>.For the earlier part of the conversation see Mat. 22:41-42<\/span>.<\/p>\n MAIN HOMILETICS OF THE PARAGRAPH.<\/em>Mar. 12:35-37<\/span><\/em><\/p>\n (PARALLELS: Mat. 22:41-46<\/span>; Luk. 20:41-44<\/span>.)<\/p>\n Our Lords question concerning the Messiah<\/em>.<\/p>\n I. The place where He propounded His question<\/strong>.Why did He choose such a public place as the Temple to oppose the scribes opinion and doctrine? That by putting them to silence in such open manner He might bring the greater shame and disgrace upon them and their doctrine, they being malicious enemies of the truth; and withal that He might gain the more credit and authority with the people to His own person and doctrine. <\/p>\n 1. In that Christ used so much to frequent the Temple, being a public place, whither all sorts of people much resorted, to the end He might there have occasion of doing the more good, both by His doctrine and miracles, as also by reforming abuses there, and by opposing and refuting errors: hence observe that we also ought to take the best opportunities of time, place, and persons, where and amongst whom we may do most good, and bring most glory to God, in our place and calling. 3. In that Christ did not only teach and deliver sound doctrine in the Temple at this time, but did also oppose erroneous doctrine: hence gather that ministers of the Word are not only in their public ministry to teach true and sound doctrine, but also to oppose and confute contrary errors, as occasion is offered (Tit. 1:9<\/span>; Tit. 1:11<\/span>).<\/p>\n II. The manner of Christs opposing and confuting the opinion of the scribes<\/strong>.<\/p>\n 1. He propounds their opinion and questions the truth of it. (3) The ground or cause of Christs advancement to this glory, viz. the eternal purpose and decree of God the Father, ordaining and appointing Him unto it. OUTLINES AND COMMENTS ON THE VERSES<\/em><\/p>\n Mar. 12:35-36<\/span>. Faith can reconcile apparent opposites<\/em>.Faith alone, which knows what Christ is by His Divine nature, and what He is become by His mercy, knows how to reconcile the seeming contradictions which are in this Divine compound, God-man: Son of David, by His birth according to the flesh; and Lord of David, by His eternal birth in God His Father, as also by the rights of His third birth, namely, His resurrection, which placed Him at the right hand of His Father.P. Quesnel<\/em>.<\/p>\n A counter-question<\/em>.Thus the Saviour intimates it is not robbery to claim equality with God, and intimates that no merely human Saviour would meet the deep wants of man.<\/p>\n I. In all ages men have longed for a Divine and human Saviour<\/strong>,one who, as man, would be near and sympathetic; as God, omnipotent and enduring. Davids psalm is a clear expression of what all religious men have dreamed of. An incarnation of a helpful God is the hope of the Hindoo peoples.<\/p>\n II. None less than God can be a spiritual and eternal Saviour<\/strong>.We want a son of David, but one whose name is Lord, and whose natural seat is at Gods right hand.R. Glover<\/em>.<\/p>\n Mar. 12:37<\/span>. Christs popularity with the masses<\/em>All through the Gospels there are indications of Christs popularity with the masses as distinguished from the classes. Why? Where lay the charm? In the aspect, the matter, the spirit of the Man? Perhaps in all together. It is difficult to give a full account of popularity, to explain why one man can do what he wills with an audience, while another is utterly helpless. There may be subtle physical causes at work, as well as intellectual and moral ones. But the thing is not altogether a mystery; the teachers power can be explained in part. Looks count for somethingthe kindling eye, the play of thought and emotion in the face. A genial manner goes a long way to conciliate favour, revealing itself in a kindly smile and a warm, hearty tone of utterance. But the secret of power lies mainly in what a man saysin his thoughts as a revelation of himself, his convictions embodied in speech. Eloquence is not an affair of manner or of style or of gesture; it is the whole manall that is withinspeaking out: the mind, heart, soul, spirit, finding utterance for itself in words. It is this on which the Evangelists remark in reference to Christs power over His audience (see Luk. 4:22<\/span>; Mat. 7:28-29<\/span>).A. B. Bruce, D.D.<\/em><\/p>\n 7. JESUS QUESTION ABOUT THE SON OF DAVID 12:35-37<\/strong><\/p>\n TEXT 12:35-37<\/strong><\/p>\n 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.<\/p>\n THOUGHT QUESTIONS 12:35-37<\/strong><\/p>\n 677.<\/p>\n Why did Jesus raise this question? i.e. at this particular time and place.<\/p>\n 678.<\/p>\n What would be a synonym for the Christ of Mar. 12:35<\/span>?<\/p>\n 679<\/p>\n Why was it important that the Christ should be of the lineage of David?<\/p>\n 680.<\/p>\n Is Jesus saying the Psalms were divinely inspired? Of what importance is this?<\/p>\n 681.<\/p>\n Who are the two Lords of Mar. 12:36<\/span>?<\/p>\n 682.<\/p>\n How does the promise of Mar. 12:36<\/span> relate to the Jewish nation?<\/p>\n 683.<\/p>\n In what sense was the Messiah to be both the son of David and the Lord of David? i.e. how was this possible?<\/p>\n 684.<\/p>\n Why were the people so responsive to the teaching of Jesus?was it the subject?was it the place?was it the people?<\/p>\n COMMENT<\/strong><\/p>\n TIME.A.D. 30. Tuesday, April 4. PARALLEL ACCOUNTSMat. 22:41-46<\/span>; Luk. 20:41-44<\/span>.<\/p>\n OUTLINE,1. The scribes say the Messiah is Davids Son, Mar. 12:35<\/span>. 2<\/span>. David said the Messiah was his Lord, Mar. 12:36<\/span>. 3<\/span>. How do these views find agreement? Mar. 12:37<\/span>.<\/p>\n ANALYSIS<\/strong><\/p>\n I.<\/p>\n THE SCRIBES SAY THE MESSIAH IS DAVIDS SON, Mar. 12:35<\/span>.<\/p>\n 1.<\/p>\n This question was asked in connection with what had just preceded.<\/p>\n 2.<\/p>\n This question was asked amid His teaching while in the Temple court.<\/p>\n II.<\/p>\n DAVID SAID THE MESSIAH WAS HIS LORD, Mar. 12:36<\/span>.<\/p>\n 1.<\/p>\n He said this under the impulse of the Holy Spirit.<\/p>\n 2.<\/p>\n God addressed this word to the Messiah.<\/p>\n 3.<\/p>\n It included a promise of Lordship over all the world.<\/p>\n III.<\/p>\n HOW DO THESE VIEWS FIND AGREEMENT, <\/span>Mar. 12:37<\/span>.<\/p>\n 1.<\/p>\n If the Messiah is Davids Son, in what sense can He also be his Lord?<\/p>\n 2.<\/p>\n The people heard His teaching with genuine relish.<\/p>\n EXPLANATORY NOTES<\/strong><\/p>\n I.<\/p>\n THE SCRIBES SAY THE MESSIAH IS DAVIDS SON.<\/p>\n Mar. 12:35<\/span>. Thus far our Lords 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.<\/p>\n II.<\/p>\n DAVID SAID THE MESSIAH WAS HIS LORD.<\/p>\n Mar. 12:36<\/span>. 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. Davids, 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 Rom. 1:3-4<\/span>. 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 Christs assuming this interpretation as the basis of his argument to prove the Messiahs 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 (Mat. 22:46<\/span>.) The original form of expression, in the phrase Sit at my right hand, is the same as in Psa. 109:31<\/span>. 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 Psa. 45:10<\/span>, and compare Mat. 19:28<\/span>. The sitting posture is appropriate to kings, who are frequently described as sitting on their thrones. (Compare Psa. 29:10<\/span>). In this case, however, the posture is of less moment than the position. Hence Stephen sees Christ standing at the right hand of God (Act. 7:55-56<\/span>), and Paul simply says he is there (Rom. 8:34<\/span>). 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 Jos. 10:24<\/span>. 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 1Co. 15:24-28<\/span>, 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 Psa. 112:8<\/span>, 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 Mat. 26:64<\/span>, 1Co. 15:25<\/span>, Eph. 1:20-22<\/span>. <\/span>Php. 2:9-11<\/span>, Heb. 1:3<\/span>; Heb. 1:14<\/span>; Heb. 8:1<\/span>; Heb. 10:12-13<\/span>, 1Pe. 3:22<\/span>, and compare Rev. 3:21<\/span>.<\/p>\n III.<\/p>\n HOW DO THESE VIEWS FIND AGREEMENT?<\/p>\n Mar. 12:37<\/span>. 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 (Rom. 1:3-4<\/span>.) 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 (Mat. 22:46<\/span>) 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 Mar. 12:34<\/span>, 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)<\/p>\n FACT QUESTIONS 12:35-37<\/strong><\/p>\n 794.<\/p>\n In what way did our Lord turn the tables on His opponents?<\/p>\n 795.<\/p>\n What purpose did He have?<\/p>\n 796.<\/p>\n Who were the scribes, i.e. in official capacity?<\/p>\n 797.<\/p>\n Who was Davids Lord?<\/p>\n 798.<\/p>\n What is implied in the request to sit at His right hand?<\/p>\n 799.<\/p>\n Sitting does not imply inactivitywhat does it imply?<\/p>\n 800.<\/p>\n Show how 1Co. 15:24-28<\/span> relates to Mar. 12:35-37<\/span>.<\/p>\n 801.<\/p>\n Mention at least three more places where this reference is referred to in the New Testament.<\/p>\n 802.<\/p>\n Show how Rom. 1:3-4<\/span> answers the question of Jesus.<\/p>\n 803.<\/p>\n Give two results to this question of Jesus.<\/p>\n (35) While he taught in the temple.<\/strong>The locality is named by St. Mark only, but it is all but implied in the other two Gospels.<\/p>\n A Comparison of the Son of David with the Messiah (12:35-37).<\/p>\n <\/strong><\/p>\n The context of this incident is not given by Mark apart from saying that He was teaching in the Temple, but it does seal off what has previously been said about Him as being the Son of David, and expands on it. Matthew sees it as partly addressed to the group of Pharisees who had sent the Rabbi just mentioned to question Him (Mat 22:41<\/span>). We must presume therefore that they were part of the crowd gathered round, eager to see how it went. In Luke they are described as a vague ‘them’. Perhaps Mark wants us to see His words as being partly directed at the Rabbi who was ‘not far from the Kingly Rule of God’. The point, however is that having made clear that Jesus is ‘the Son’ he now wants to clarify in men’s minds as to how that ties in with Jesus’ Messiahship, as Jesus Himself had done.<\/p>\n The context is revealing. To the Sadducees Jesus has stressed that God is the unique God of Abraham and that He is the God of the living. In enunciating the two great commandments Jesus has stressed that ‘God is one’, and the Scribe’s reply has brought out His oneness, and stressed Jesus’ belief in it. The context is thus very much that of the oneness of the living God, portraying a high view of God. It must therefore be seen as significant that Jesus now introduces a remarkable statement that makes the reader and the crowds see another side of things, and that is that the coming Christ (‘Anointed One’) is not just the son of David, but is also David’s Lord. And all knew Who David’s Lord was.<\/p>\n His question may be directed at a Rabbinic idea that the Christ was ‘merely the son of David’ and therefore not superior to David, nor to the religious leadership, thus making him purely political and secondary. Or it may simply indicate a statement of fact. But Jesus certainly wanted to bring out that the Messiah was not only superior to David, but was of a totally higher status. In fact that David addressed Him as ‘my Lord’.<\/p>\n Analysis.<\/p>\n a <\/strong> And Jesus answered and said as He taught in the Temple (Mar 12:35<\/span> a).<\/p>\n b <\/strong> “How do the Scribes say that the Christ is the son of David?” (Mar 12:35<\/span> b).<\/p>\n c <\/strong> “David himself said in the Holy Spirit, ‘The Lord said to my Lord’ ” (Mar 12:36<\/span> a).<\/p>\n d <\/strong> ‘You sit on my right hand until I make your enemies the footstool of your feet’ (Mar 12:36<\/span> b).<\/p>\n c <\/strong> “David himself calls him Lord” (Mar 12:37<\/span> a).<\/p>\n b <\/strong> “In what sense then is He his son?” (Mar 12:37<\/span> b).<\/p>\n a <\/strong> And the common people heard Him gladly (Mar 12:37<\/span> c).<\/p>\n Note that in ‘a’ He taught in the Temple, and in the parallel the people heard Him gladly. In ‘b’ He asked how (in view of the Scripture that He will now point to) the Scribes can say that he is merely the son of David, and in the parallel asks how that can be so. In ‘c’ He stress that David called Him Lord, and in the parallel declares the same. Centrally in ‘d’ He emphasises the exaltation by God of the Messiah in order that He might express His Sonship by sitting Him at His right hand.<\/p>\nFuente: The Cambridge Bible for Schools and Colleges<\/b><\/i><\/h4>\n
Fuente: Albert Barnes’ Notes on the Bible<\/b><\/i><\/h4>\n
Fuente: Adam Clarke’s Commentary and Critical Notes on the Bible<\/b><\/i><\/h4>\n
Fuente: English Annotations on the Holy Bible by Matthew Poole<\/b><\/i><\/h4>\n
Fuente: Jamieson, Fausset and Brown’s Commentary Critical and Explanatory on the Whole Bible <\/b><\/i><\/h4>\n
Fuente: John Gill’s Exposition of the Entire Bible<\/b><\/i><\/h4>\n
<\/P>
<\/P> <\/TD> <\/TR> <\/TABLE> Fuente: Matthew Henry’s Whole Bible Commentary<\/b><\/i><\/h4>\n
Fuente: Robertson’s Word Pictures in the New Testament<\/b><\/i><\/h4>\n
Fuente: Garner-Howes Baptist Commentary<\/b><\/i><\/h4>\n
2. In that Christ was now teaching in the Temple, and so used to be much and often at other times to teach the people there publicly: hence learn whither to resort if we would hear Christ and be partakers of His doctrine, viz. to the public place of Gods worship. <\/p>\n
(1) That He might by this means take occasion to confute and overthrow that common and gross error held not only by the scribes and Pharisees, but also by the greatest part of the other Jews, touching the person of the Messiah.
(2) That by this means He might have occasion to confirm the faith of His disciples in the truth and doctrine of His Godhead.
(3) Having lately commended one of the scribes for answering discreetly, therefore now He takes occasion to propound this question, thereby to stir up both that scribe and others also to a diligent search after the true knowledge of the Messiah.
2. He objects against them a place of Scripture.
(1) All errors, and erroneous opinions and doctrines of men, in matters of faith and religion, are to be opposed and confuted by Scripture, and by grounds and reasons taken from thence.
(2) The prophets of the Old Testament spoke of Christ the true Messiah, and of His kingdom and glory, and the manifestation of it, long before it was fulfilled.
(3) The writers of Holy Scripture were extraordinarily directed and assisted by the Holy Ghost.
3. He applies those words of David to His purpose.
(1) The Person who is said here to have called and advanced Christ to this high degree of glory and authority, viz. God the Father.
(2) The Person called and advanced to this gloryChrist the true Messiah. (a<\/em>) There is a distinction of Persons in the Godhead, though but one God in nature and essence. (b<\/em>) The truth of Christs Godhead, in that David calls Him his Lord. (c<\/em>) The nature of true faithto make particular application of Christ to the believer. My Lord. (d<\/em>) How we ought to receive and embrace Christnot only as Redeemer and Saviour, but also as Lord and Master. <\/p>\n
(4) The advancement itself. (a<\/em>) To the highest degree of glory, honour, and dignity, next unto God the Father. (b<\/em>) To the full possession and administration of His kingdom and government over the world, and especially over His true Church.G. Petter<\/em>.<\/p>\nFuente: The Preacher’s Complete Homiletical Commentary Edited by Joseph S. Exell<\/b><\/i><\/h4>\n
PLACE.The temple area, probably the court of the Gentiles.<\/p>\nFuente: College Press Bible Study Textbook Series<\/b><\/i><\/h4>\n
Fuente: Ellicott’s Commentary for English Readers (Old and New Testaments)<\/b><\/i><\/h4>\n