Mark 12:1–12

Mark 12:1–12 (ESV): The Parable of the Tenants

Passage

In the last passage the religious leaders had questioned Jesus’ authority to do the things he was doing and say the things he was saying, but he turned the question around on them and showed that they had relinquished their own responsibility as leaders by not behaving as they should in spiritual leadership of the people. This parable continues this point.

This is a fairly straightforward parable, I think, the link above to the passage will bring you to the text, but it helps to have the “cast of characters” in your head as you read it:

• The man who planted the vineyard is God
• The vineyard is the nation of Israel
• The tenants are the Jewish religious leaders
• The servants which were sent are, I think, the Old Testament prophets
• The man’s son is, of course, Jesus

And I’ve talked before that when the Bible talks about “fruit,” it’s talking about good works. In the Old Testament context, that would mainly mean obedience to God’s laws and precepts.

With this in mind, we have a very straightforward telling of the history of Israel:

God created a nation, and put in charge religious leaders to guide the nation and help them obey God. When God sent His prophets to inquire about this obedience the religious leaders beat or killed the prophets, or otherwise sent them away empty-handed. Finally God sent his own Son, but the religious leaders still didn’t produce the obedience they were meant to produce—instead they killed the Son. And for this reason God is taking the nation of Israel away from the Jewish religious leaders, and giving it to others. (Spiritually speaking.)

The religious leaders definitely saw this meaning, or something like it, because they want away after this parable seeking to have Jesus arrested, knowing that he had told it against them.

Thoughts

The one additional thought I had was on the phrasing in verse 6 (ESV):

“He had still one other, a beloved son. Finally he sent him to them, saying, ‘They will respect my son.’”

It probably goes without saying, but this is not indicating that God was taken by surprise when He sent Jesus into the world, thinking that the religious leaders would accept Him and then suddenly realizing that, “Oh no—they’re going to kill him!” The man in the parable talks that way for the sake of telling the story; in the real version, God knew—and intended!—all along what would happen to Jesus. It was the plan from the beginning.

Mark 11:27–33

Mark 11:27–33 (ESV): The Authority of Jesus Challenged

Passage

In this passage Jesus and his disciples return once again to the temple, where it turns out that the religious leaders have had enough: They demand to know by whose authority Jesus is doing and saying the things he’s doing and saying. But rather than answering directly Jesus decides to give them a test: if they can tell him whether the baptism of John the Baptist was from heaven or from man—in other words whether it was ordained by God—then he’ll tell them under whose authority he is acting.

The religious leaders discuss it amongst themselves, and have a bit of a dilemma: they can’t say the baptism came from God, or Jesus’ response will be that they should therefore have believed John, but they are afraid to say that the baptism only came from man because the Jewish people believe that John really was a prophet, and the religious leaders are afraid of the people’s response. So they wimp out and tell Jesus that they don’t know the answer, and so he refuses to tell them by what authority he does the things he does.

Thoughts

There is a bit more than just clever word games going on in this section. What Jesus is really pointing out—to the people more than to the religious leaders, I think—is that the religious leaders have given up their moral authority. They clearly believe that John the Baptist was a false prophet, but if they, as religious leaders, truly believe that, then they should stand up and say so. For the sake of their own consciences, as well as for the sake of the people! If John was a false prophet then it would be up to the religious leaders to protect the people from his false teachings.

So one of two things is going on here: either the religious leaders aren’t able to discern whether John was a true or false prophet, or they have made a determination but are unwilling to stand up and say so. Either way, they are not suited to be religious leaders of the people of Israel.

Mark 11:12–25

Mark 11:12–25 (ESV): Jesus Curses the Fig Tree, Jesus Cleanses the Temple, The Lessen from the Withered Fig Tree

Passage

I’m combining three ESV sections together into one post, because the episode with the fig tree is broken up into two pieces, with another passage in between.

In the last passage we read about Jesus’ triumphal entry into Jerusalem, actively proclaiming himself as king, though, as I’m always so quick to point out, not the type of king the crowd was expecting. (“You’re God, the Creator of all the universe? Who cares, I just want you to defeat the Romans!”) But when he arrived in the city it was late, so they just looked around a bit and left for Bethany. In this passage Jesus and the Apostles are coming back from Bethany to Jerusalem, and on the way Jesus notices a fig tree in leaf so he goes in search of figs but finds none because it’s not the season for figs. He then says to the tree, “May no one ever eat fruit from you again” (verse 14 (ESV)).

They then continue on to Jerusalem, whereupon Jesus enters the temple and starts driving out the people who are buying and selling there and overturning the tables of the money changers and people selling pigeons. Of course, he tells them why:

And he was teaching them and saying to them, “Is it not written, ‘My house shall be called a house of prayer for all the nations’? But you have made it a den of robbers.” (verse 17 (ESV))

The chief priests and scribes don’t share his zeal for “cleansing” the temple, however, and try to figure out a way to “destroy” him because they are afraid of how astonished the crowd is at his teaching.

At the end of the day Jesus and his disciples leave Jerusalem again, and when they come back the next morning they pass by the same fig tree, now withered completely, which Peter points out to Jesus. As usual, Jesus takes the opportunity to take things to a deeper level:

And Jesus answered them, “Have faith in God. Truly, I say to you, whoever says to this mountain, ‘Be taken up and thrown into the sea,’ and does not doubt in his heart, but believes that what he says will come to pass, it will be done for him. Therefore I tell you, whatever you ask in prayer, believe that you have received it, and it will be yours. And whenever you stand praying, forgive, if you have anything against anyone, so that your Father also who is in heaven may forgive you your trespasses.” (verses 22–25 (ESV))

Thoughts

Once again, the ESV Study Bible notes have helped me understand a passage with context I didn’t have; the episode with the fig tree is more laden with symbolism than I had realized. Even though it is not the season for figs, the appearance of leaves on the tree should have indicated that there was fruit on the tree, but there was not. I’ll quote the rest of their note on verses 13–14, since they put it much better than I ever could:

Jesus’ actions here have symbolic importance, signifying the hypocrisy of all who have the appearance that they are bearing fruit but in fact are not. The specific reference, though, is to Israel, since in the OT the fig tree often serves as a metaphor for Israel and its standing before God (e.g., Jer. 8:13 (ESV); Hos. 9:10 (ESV), 16 (ESV); Joel 1:7 (ESV)). Here the cursing of the fig tree signifies the judgment of God on the “fruitless” Jewish people (cf. Mark 7:6 (ESV)), who had turned away from God into empty ritual and legalism (cf. Hos. 9:10–17 (ESV)). It is a visual parable to signify Jesus’ unrequited search for the true fruit of worship, prayer, and righteousness in the Jewish nation and its religious practices.

Then Jesus gets to the temple and throws out all of the people who are there making money off of God’s work, and the reaction of the religious leaders shows their true hearts. In this blog there have been times when I’ve done my best to see their point of view, and there are times when I think they are truly trying to do the right thing. They misunderstand the Scriptures at times, obviously there is never a case where I think they’re right and Jesus is wrong, but there is a difference between honestly trying to do the right thing but being wrong and not even trying to do the right thing. This passage is definitely a case of the latter, not the former. People in the temple are clearly profiting off of the worship of God, and the religious leaders should have a problem with that, but they don’t seem to. What they do have a problem with is the fact that people are listening to Jesus, and rather than thinking about whether Jesus actually has a point, they’re only worried about getting rid of him so that they won’t lose their influence with the people.

So what is Jesus so angry about? I wrote about this a bit when I posted on Matthew 21:12–17, but the short answer is that people are buying and selling in God’s temple, where He is supposed to be worshipped. Worship of God should never be a source of wealth. (Oh, how readers in North America will react against that statement.) I notice especially verse 15 (ESV) where it describes Jesus overturning tables of money-changers as well as “the seats of those who sold pigeons.” When the Old Testament rules for sacrifice were handed down there were certain animals that had to be sacrificed for certain reasons, but sometimes special provisions were made for the poor who couldn’t afford a particular sacrifice; for example, Leviticus 12 talks about offerings to be made after a child was born, and allows either pigeons or doves to be used, and then further allows birds to be used instead of a lamb. (When Jesus was born, Mary and Joseph offered pigeons, which indicated that they were not well off.) When someone was in the temple making a profit off pigeons that person was directly targeting the poor.

I struggle with how to talk about verses 20–25 (ESV), when Jesus talks about having faith in God and receiving what you ask for. It would be easy to come away from a surface reading of this passage thinking that what Jesus is telling us is that you just have to “believe hard enough,” and you can get whatever you want. Based on wider context of the New Testament I don’t think this is what Jesus is really saying—but at the same time I definitely do not want to detract from this passage, or remove anything that is being said here.

The key, however, is the very first thing Jesus says to them: “Have faith in God.” In the Bible, “faith” is not just believing that something is true, and having faith in God is not just believing that He exists. The Bible’s definition of “faith” is much more than that. I think it’s pretty clear (based on the context of the rest of the New Testament) that when Jesus says to the disciples “have faith in God,” he is not saying to them, “have faith that God will give you whatever you want like a magic genie,” he is saying “Believe God is who He says He is, listen to His Word, and do all that it commands of you. Be like Him.” When you read the word “faith” like that, reading a passage that says, “Have ‘faith’ in God, and then if you pray for something and truly believe it will happen, it will,” takes on a whole different meaning. If you have proper, New Testament-style faith in God, what are you going to pray for? Jesus talks about mountains jumping into the sea to make a point, that nothing is too big for God to do, but when you’re really in tune with God, I doubt that’s what you’ll be praying for. Neither will you be praying for lots of money or a fancy car. You’ll be praying, “Lord, now that I know you, help me to know you even more.”