CHAPTER 12
PARABLE OF THE WICKED TENANTS
He then began to speak to them in parables: “A man planted a vineyard. He put a wall around it, dug a pit for the winepress and built a watchtower. Then he rented the vineyard to some farmers and went away on a journey.” Mark 12:1
As we have said previously, Mark mostly emphasizes the person of Jesus and his actions. So far in the book we have only had one other major parable, and that was found back in chapter four.1 Now we have another parable section. There is an unwritten rule of interpretation that a parable should never be treated as an allegory and that we should be careful in trying to seek meaning in every detail. This parable seems to be an exception to the rule. Barclay sees it as a kind of hybrid between an allegory and a parable, since many of the details have meaning.2
It is easy to perceive that the owner is God himself. The vineyard is the house of Israel. The cultivators are the rulers of Israel. The servants are the many prophets who came to warn and minister to Israel. The last one to come is Jesus, God’s Only Begotten Son.
The picture of the vineyard was not a new picture to Israel. We see far back in Isaiah 5:1-7, which is the setting for this parable (cf. Psa. 80:8-16). We are told that the Lord planted the vineyard of Israel on a very fertile hillside. God went to a lot of effort in preparing the vineyard. He dug it up and gathered out all the stones. Then he planted it with a choice vine. In addition he put a watchtower in it and cut out a winepress. After all his effort he waited, and waited for the vineyard of Israel to produce fruit. Finally he was disappointed that it brought forth only bad fruit.
To really understand Mark’s parable we need to make ourselves aware of the agricultural situation of the Holy Land in Jesus’ time. There were many absentee landlords who lived far off in the cities. They had to depend on middle men as their tenants.3 We also need to be aware that a vineyard represented much capital investment and labor by the owner. In this parable he did all the things the Lord did in Isaiah 5, and he also put a wall around the vineyard. We also know from Leviticus 19:23-25, that for a Jewish owner, it would be at least as long as five years before he could collect the fruit.4
The owner had a lot of liability regarding a vineyard. It had to be cared for properly, irrigated, pruned, guarded, or else all his labor and investment could easily come to ruin. There was actually a legal problem involved too. In various countries today there are still laws regarding the actual use of land. In the US there is the law of “adverse possession.” By this law a person who openly possesses a portion of land and uses it for a certain number of years may be able to get title to it in the courts. “Squatter’s rights” is a kind of adverse possession. It seems that there was some law of this nature in ancient Israel.5 For an owner to maintain title he would have to appear occasionally and reestablish his ownership. This of course could be done by making a claim for his share of the fruits.
“At harvest time he sent a servant to the tenants to collect from them some of the fruit of the vineyard. But they seized him, beat him and sent him away empty-handed” (12:2-3). We realize here that there were several tenants involved and that they were quite powerful. Evans tells us that it was common in intertestamental papyri for tenant farmers (Gk. georgoi) to be not just individual peasants but groups of large and wealthy commercial farmers.6 This would explain some of the trouble the owner had in collecting his rents. Clearly, we see in this parable that the tenants were resolved to claim the land for themselves.
Since the owner was apparently not living in the area, the servant was sent to collect the fruits owed to him. It was understood that “fruits” meant money.7 Instead of receiving money the servant received a severe beating. The word for “beating” is edeiran in the Greek means literally to “skin” or to “flay.” 8 When we think of beatings today we certainly do not picture the severity of beatings in ancient times.
“Then he sent another servant to them; they struck this man on the head and treated him shamefully” (12:4). When we look back over the history of Israel there was hardly a prophet that the people did not mistreat in some way. In Jeremiah 7:25-26 it is written: “From the time your ancestors left Egypt until now, day after day, again and again I sent you my servants the prophets. But they did not listen to me or pay attention. They were stiff-necked and did more evil than their ancestors.” We can see that the tenants were becoming more and more aggressive since this servant was wounded in the head.
“He sent still another, and that one they killed. He sent many others; some of them they beat, others they killed” (12:5). We think here of Elijah the prophet. He complained to God: “…The Israelites have rejected your covenant, torn down your altars, and put your prophets to death with the sword. I am the only one left, and now they are trying to kill me too” (1 Kings 19:10). We are caused to think here of the great persistence, faithfulness, longsuffering and love of God.
“He had one left to send, a son, whom he loved. He sent him last of all, saying, ‘They will respect my son’” (12:6). This verse reminds us again of Isaiah 5:4, where God asks, “What more could have been done for my vineyard than I have done for it?…” Here the question is answered. There was one more thing to be done. The owner could send his son. After all, the son was the only other person beside the father who possessed legal claim over the property. 9 Here the parable makes it very clear that Jesus is none other than the Son of God. It was an unmistakable message to Israel’s leaders. Also, in the Bible the fourth year was the time when the fruit was offered up to God (Lev. 19:24). The Beloved Son, God incarnate, had come to receive what was his. 10
The great English Baptist “prince of preachers,” Charles Haddon Spurgeon, remarked here, “No one else can be sent; heaven itself contains no further messenger. If Christ be rejected, hope is rejected.” 11
“But the tenants said to one another, ‘This is the heir. Come, let’s kill him, and the inheritance will be ours.’ So they took him and killed him, and threw him out of the vineyard” (12:7-8). What an incredibly clear picture of the gospel account. The leaders of Israel seemed to have sensed that Jesus was the Son and the heir. Almost from the outset of his ministry they had determined to kill him. They had only lacked the opportunity to do so. Coffman sees in this verse proof that the Jewish hierarchy really did recognize Jesus as the true Messiah of Israel.12 They valued their vested political and religious interests too much to turn loose of their power and publicly acknowledge him as the real ruler of Israel.
We sense a total disrespect here for the son. He was murdered and then simply thrown out of the vineyard. They did not even give him the esteem of a proper burial. How clearly this parallels the gospel account. They crucified Jesus outside the city wall and they did not provide him a burial. Had it not been for wealthy Joseph of Arimathea, Jesus would not have had a burial place (Mk. 15:43-46).
“What then will the owner of the vineyard do? He will come and kill those tenants and give the vineyard to others” (12:9). Matthew’s version is more specific. He says, “Therefore I tell you that the kingdom of God will be taken away from you and given to a people who will produce its fruit” (Matt. 21:43). Matthew thus gives us an extremely clear picture that God would take the kingdom from Israel and would give his salvation to the Gentiles.13 God would work with a humble people who would obey his word. These would become the apostles and evangelists who would complete God’s will and take the gospel to the ends of the earth.
This is an awesome parable. It really pictures the problem humanity has had through all the ages. Men and women have sought to get rid of God so they themselves can take the place of God.14 This idea surely culminated in the late twentieth century as Friedrich Nietzsche’s “God is dead” philosophy came into prominence. Before the century ran out even some theologians were parroting this idea in their “God is dead theology.” On the cover of its April 8, 1966 issue, Time Magazine even asked the question, “Is God Dead?” We can understand the rage with which the Father will come to such godless people.
“Haven’t you read this scripture: ‘The stone the builders rejected has become the capstone; the Lord has done this, and it is marvelous in our eyes’?” (12:10-11). The Jewish builders or leaders in Jerusalem had somehow rejected the most important stone of all. This probably has reference to the capstone that is very important in completing an arch or it could also have reference to a capital or a pinnacle of a building.15 Jesus was God’s Beloved Son (Aramaic ‘ben’). He was also the most important keystone (Aramaic ‘eben’). Pett feels there is probably a word play intended and he notes that the Targum follows suite and translates “stone” as “son.” 16
Several commentators have noted how the early Christians seemed to be fascinated with the subject of the “stone.” Jesus was the stone rejected by the builders. Peter was a stone also and Christians were referred to as being like living stones. The subject is dealt with in several places such as in Acts 4:11; 1 Peter 2:4-7; Romans 9:32-33; and Ephesians 2:20.17 Unfortunately for Israel, Jesus became a “stone of stumbling” and a “rock of offense just as the prophet Isaiah had predicted (Isa. 8:14; 28:16; cf. 1 Pet. 2:8).
“Then the chief priests, the teachers of the law and the elders looked for a way to arrest him because they knew he had spoken the parable against them. But they were afraid of the crowd; so they left him and went away” (12:12). “The dilemma the authorities faced was whether to ignore Jesus, only to have him whip up a rebellion, or to seize Jesus, only to ignite the very rebellion they feared…In plotting Jesus’ destruction , they unwittingly lived up to their characterization in the parable as murderers.” 18 Israel’s proud rulers slinked away because they were afraid of the crowd.
SHOULD TAXES BE PAID TO CAESAR?
Later they sent some of the Pharisees and Herodians to Jesus to catch him in his words. They came to him and said, “Teacher, we know that you are a man of integrity. You aren’t swayed by others, because you pay no attention to who they are; but you teach the way of God in accordance with the truth. Is it right to pay the imperial tax to Caesar or not?” Mark 12:13-14
This was meant to be a trap for Jesus. The Pharisees and Herodians were by no means friends with each other. They came together for one purpose, to snare Jesus with his words and hopefully to bring about his judgment and death. These two groups were full of conniving and deceit. They began their approach with great flattery toward Jesus. No doubt they felt like they had a fool proof question that Jesus could not answer without causing great damage to himself.
The question was whether or not taxes should be paid to Caesar. If Jesus answered “yes,” the crowds would likely jeer him. If he answered no, the Herodians would no doubt hurry off and report him to the government as a seditionist. It was a “no-win” question.
Perhaps it would be good for us to understand the political situation in the land of Israel at this time. The Romans had two classes of provinces. If a province required no troops and was peaceful, it was governed by the Roman senate and ruled by a proconsul. If a province had many troubles and required troops it was placed under direct rule of the emperor and was governed by a procurator. The southern portion of Israel’s land fell in the latter category and therefor tribute was paid to the emperor directly.19
There were three types of taxes paid to the Romans. First, there was the ground tax which amounted to one-tenth of all grain harvested and one-fifth of wine and fruit. Next, there was an income tax and this amounted to one percent of a person’s income. Last, there was the poll tax which amounted to a denarius. This was the daily wage of a working person.20 It is the poll tax which was under discussion here.
The Pharisees and Herodians were insistent with their question: “‘Should we pay or shouldn’t we?’ But Jesus knew their hypocrisy. ‘Why are you trying to trap me?’ he asked. ‘Bring me a denarius and let me look at it’” (12:15). “Paying tribute, especially the ‘poll tax’ (tax per head), was seen by the Jews as something to be done grudgingly, and by some extremists even as treason. The majority, however, paid it but hated it.” 21 How could Jesus answer such a trick question? As the two groups of antagonists awaited in smug satisfaction at their question, Jesus asked them to produce a denarius. Apparently, the Master did not have one of his own.
“They brought the coin, and he asked them, ‘Whose image is this? And whose inscription?’ ‘Caesar’s,” they replied” (12:16). It is a widely held view that the denarius given to Jesus was one that had been minted by the Emperor Tiberius sometime in the 20s. Its legend probably read like this, TI CAESAR DIVI AVG F AVGVSTVS, “Tiberius Caesar Augustus, Son of Divine Augustus.” 22 The face of the denarius even displayed the bust of Caesar Tiberius upon it.
No doubt all waited in breathless silence for Jesus’ answer as he pondered the coin’s inscription. “Then Jesus said to them, ‘Give back to Caesar what is Caesar’s and to God what is God’s.’ And they were amazed at him” (12:17). Obviously, every Jew knew beyond a doubt that he or she was made in the image of God, as Genesis 1:26-27 recounts. Jesus was saying simply that they should give their coins to Caesar and themselves to God. This is a tremendously powerful teaching. In it Jesus acknowledges the authority of human governments and governmental systems such as taxation. However, he also acknowledges that there is a higher government ruling over humankind. It is the obligation of humans to be submissive to both. As the early church father, Tertullian said: “You give to Caesar only money. But to God, give yourself.” 23
Some years later, the Apostle Paul in Romans chapter 13 would sort out the full implications of Jesus’ statement. Paul would say, “Let everyone be subject to the governing authorities, for there is no authority except that which God has established. The authorities that exist have been established by God” (Rom. 13:1). In almost the same breath Paul would also say, “Give everyone what you owe him: If you owe taxes, pay taxes; if revenue, then revenue; if respect, then respect; if honor, then honor” (Rom. 13:7).
It is amazing that Jesus would command people to give taxes to Caesar, who was at best a cruel oppressor. Jesus no doubt knew that the troops of Caesar would shortly pierce his hands and feet on a cross.24 Later, Paul also probably knew that he would likely meet his end under the cruel hand of Caesar. When we look at Jesus’ statement and the statements of Paul there will surely be no reason left why we should not submit ourselves to the governing authorities that God has set up. But at the same time we must know that we should submit our lives to God.
Clarke says here: “This answer is full of consummate wisdom. It establishes the limits, regulates the rights, and distinguishes the jurisdiction of the two empires of heaven and earth.” 25
MARRIAGE AND THE RESURRECTION
Then the Sadducees, who say there is no resurrection, came to him with a question. Mark 12:18
This is the only appearance of the Sadducee party in the book of Mark. This group probably had its beginning in the second century BC. The name “Sadducee” can possibly be traced to the name of Zadok (2 Sam. 8:17), or to the word “saddiq” (Heb. righteous).26 This group was mostly made up of priests and it is thought that the office of high priest was regularly held by a Sadducee. The Sadducees only accepted the Torah or the written law (the five books of Moses) as authoritative. They were the elite and wealthy of Israelite society. It is of note that they did not believe in angels, spirits, or even in immortality.27 Of course, many Sadducees were members of the Sanhedrin, the great religious court of the Jews. Since they were closely connected to the temple, their sect perished with its destruction in AD 70.
We cannot miss the fact that Jesus is dealing with each group that made up the Sanhedrin, or the governing body of Israel. In the last section he dumbfounded the Pharisees regarding the matter of paying taxes to Caesar. Now he will take on the Sadducees.
“‘Teacher,’ they said, ‘Moses wrote for us that if a man’s brother dies and leaves a wife but no children, the man must marry the widow and raise up offspring for his brother’” (12:19). We have mentioned earlier how a divorced or widowed woman had little status in ancient societies. The loving God of Israel was greatly concerned for such as these. He was also concerned about the continuation of family lines and that property remain within the family group. Therefore, God issued laws concerning what is called Levirite Marriage (Gen. 38:8-10; Deut. 25:5-10). “Levirite” was a later term taken from the Latin word “levir” meaning “brother-in-law.” 28
Through the laws of Levirite Marriage, when a husband died without producing a son, the brother was required to marry the widow and produce a son or an heir to his brother in order that the family line could continue and the inheritance rights to property might remain intact and in the family.
“Now there were seven brothers. The first one married and died without leaving any children. The second one married the widow, but he also died, leaving no child. It was the same with the third. In fact, none of the seven left any children. Last of all, the woman died too” (12:20-22). The Sadducees must have sat up all night thinking up this shrewd test for Jesus. In Jewish history there had been a couple of instances that slightly resembled this story.29 Perhaps they got part of their inspiration from these. On the surface, their story seems a little bit weird and concocted.
Now that the Sadducees had spun their ingenious stratagem they presented their clinching question that they thought would surely stump Jesus. They asked: “At the resurrection whose wife will she be, since the seven were married to her?” (12:23). This question was designed to be a real brain teaser. We can imagine how the Sadducees must have also sat back with smug looks on their faces. They were no doubt intent on watching Jesus squirm.
“Jesus replied, ‘Are you not in error because you do not know the Scriptures or the power of God?’” (12:24). This reply must have stunned the Sadducees. They had spent their entire lives absorbed with the temple and with God’s word. “Scripture (the Torah) and power (the Sanhedrin) were precisely the Sadducees’ stock-in-trade, the two matters which they majored.” 30 How could Jesus dare tell them they were wrong! The problem was that the Sadducees were such gross materialists that they were overlooking the spiritual world and missing it entirely. Things in the spiritual world just do not work like things in the natural world. It would be a little like a Medieval peasant trying to understand the postmodern cyber realm. It would be like the old pioneers traveling across the American west in a covered wagon trying to imagine doing the trip in three hours by modern jet plane.
“When the dead rise, they will neither marry nor be given in marriage; they will be like the angels in heaven” (12:25). Here, Jesus the Son of God gives us some very new revelation about the afterlife. Earth’s most dear and closest relationship will be entirely eclipsed by the heavenly bliss. There will be no marriage in heaven. “Marriage is ordained to perpetuate the human family; but as there will be no breaches by death in the future state, this ordinance will cease.” 31 We all have the tendency to create heaven in the image of earthly things. For instance, today the Moslem terrorists see heaven as a place where they will each be rewarded with 70 dark-eyed virgins. This is all pure nonsense of course.
Those in heaven will be like the angels. They will not actually be angels since humans were created to ultimately be higher than the angels (Jn. 17:22-24; 1 Jn. 3:1-2).32 Some have suggested that they would be sexless but this is not borne out in scripture. We should understand that although there will be no marriage in heaven there will certainly be a recollection of former marriages on earth.33 The Bible tells us that in the heavenly state we shall understand all things fully. Paul says in 1 Corinthians 13:12, “For now we see only a reflection as in a mirror; then we shall see face to face. Now I know in part; then I shall know fully, even as I am fully known.”
As we can see, Jesus is methodically chipping away at the faulty theology of the Sadducees. He continues: “Now about the dead rising— have you not read in the book of Moses, in the account of the burning bush, how God said to him, ‘I am the God of Abraham, the God of Isaac, and the God of Jacob’? He is not the God of the dead, but of the living. You are badly mistaken!” (12:26-27). Jesus displays much shrewdness in quoting from Exodus 3:6. This was the very part of the scripture which was fully accepted by the Sadducees. We note here something very important about Jesus. He really believed and accepted as true and relevant every word of God. As he had replied to the devil some years before, “…It is written: ‘Man shall not live on bread alone, but on every word that comes from the mouth of God’” (Matt. 4:4). We must note the expression every word.
We can also see in this passage that the Sadducees and all those gathered around Jesus accepted every word of God as true and relevant. The Sadducees and those listening were devastated by the power and correctness of Jesus’ answer. Jesus slew them with a single word of God. He demolished their argument and their whole theology with the single word, “am.” God said “I am the God of Abraham, the God of Isaac, and the God of Jacob.” He didn’t say, “I was the God of Abraham before he died.” God is living and he is the God of the living. The Sadducees had missed one important word in the Bible and that error caused them to go astray. We might think of how this applies to our day when even some great Bible scholars handle the word carelessly and in fact do not really believe it.
The Bible had hinted at life after death in many places (cf. Isa. 26:19; Ezek. 37:1 ff.; Dan. 12:2; Psa.73:23). In Psalm 23 David had stated that he would dwell in God’s house forever. Long before him Job had said, “I know that my Redeemer lives, and that in the end he will stand on the earth. And after my skin has been destroyed, yet in my flesh I will see God; I myself will see him with my own eyes— I, and not another. How my heart yearns within me!” (Job 19:25-27). Had the Sadducees only opened their eyes to the word of God they would have understood about the wonderful life to come. As Edwards says, “God’s power to create and restore life bursts the limits of both logic and imagination.” 34
WHAT IS THE GREATEST COMMANDMENT?
One of the teachers of the law came and heard them debating. Noticing that Jesus had given them a good answer, he asked him, “Of all the commandments, which is the most important?” Mark 12:28
This scribe must have been truly impressed with Jesus’ teaching, however both Matthew and Luke say that he was still trying to “test” Jesus (Matt. 22:35; Lk. 10:25). His question seemed to be an honest one and not a trick question as the others had asked. In those days it was quite popular to try and condense Bible teaching into a short summary. The great sage, Rabbi Hillel, was once asked by a proselyte to condense the whole law of God while he remained standing on one foot. Hillel said to him, “What thou hatest for thyself, do not to thy neighbor. This is the whole law, the rest is commentary.” 35
“‘The most important one,’ answered Jesus, is this: ‘Hear, O Israel, the Lord our God, the Lord is one. Love the Lord your God with all your heart and with all your soul and with all your mind and with all your strength.’ The second is this: ‘Love your neighbor as yourself.’ There is no commandment greater than these” (12:29-31). To answer the scribe’s question Jesus simply recited the Shema (Heb. to hear) —“Sh-mah Yis-ra-el A-do-nai, El-o-he-nu A-do-nai e-chad…” This ancient prayer is taken from Deuteronomy 6:4-9. It is still recited at least twice daily by devout Jewish people all over the world. In addition to the Shema Jesus added a portion of scripture from Leviticus 19:18. Apparently, no one had put these scriptures together before.36
We note here that Jesus adds a fourth response. People are not to just love God with all their heart, soul and strength as Deuteronomy 6:5 commands. They must love God with all their mind as well (cf. Matt.22:37; Lk. 10:27).37 Not only did Jesus expand the original Shema, but we see in Luke 10:29-37, that he drastically expanded the idea of the neighbor to include anyone in need.
What a succinct statement of real religion. First we must love God with everything in us, with heart, soul, mind and strength. Next, we must love our neighbors as we love ourselves. The love of God must always be first and primary. If it is not, all other love will be like sounding brass or clanging symbols. If we do not truly love God we will be powerless to love our neighbors. If we do not love our neighbors it will be impossible to love God.
“‘Well said, teacher,’ the man replied. ‘You are right in saying that God is one and there is no other but him. To love him with all your heart, with all your understanding and with all your strength, and to love your neighbor as yourself is more important than all burnt offerings and sacrifices’”(12:32-33). Apparently, although this man began with some hint of malevolence, he was overwhelmed and changed by the great wisdom of Jesus’ answer. He ended up in total agreement with the Master.
Barnes remarks here: “This shows that a proper understanding of the Old Testament, of its laws and requirements, would prepare the mind for Christianity, and fit a man at once to embrace it when presented.” 38 This man was open to God’s truth. He was a sincere seeker and by no means hypocritical as the others had been. When we really open our hearts to God and cry out for wisdom God will surely give it.
“When Jesus saw that he had answered wisely, he said to him, ‘You are not far from the kingdom of God.’ And from then on no one dared ask him any more questions” (12:34). “What does it mean when a person is ‘not far from the kingdom of God’? It means he or she is facing truth honestly and is not interested in defending a ‘party line’…People close to the kingdom have the courage to stand up for what is true even if they lose some friends and make some new enemies.” 39
We do not know if this scribe became a follower of Jesus or not. If he chose to do so, the price would have been extremely high. He would no doubt have been cast out of his scholarly position and would have been a persona non grata around the temple. Today, the price is still just as high as it was then.
WHO JESUS REALLY IS
While Jesus was teaching in the temple courts, he asked, “Why do the teachers of the law say that the Messiah is the son of David?” Mark 12:35
Ralph Martin says here, “After a day of questions comes the question of the day.” 40 It is now Jesus’ time to ask a question and he asked them a real zinger. In Jewish circles of that time the Messiah was expected to be the Son of David. To complicate this matter a bit, we see that Jesus was indeed the Son of David in the flesh. We see this clearly in a number of Old Testament prophetic sections such as Jeremiah 23:5; 33:15, and Isaiah 11:1. The genealogy of Jesus makes it crystal clear that he was born from the line of David. We see this in Matthew 1:1; Luke 1:32; 3:23-31; and in Romans 1:3. It is also quite clear that Jesus was referred to as the Son of David by many people in the New Testament (i.e. Matt. 9:27; 12:23; 15:22; 20:30; and 21:9).
“David himself, speaking by the Holy Spirit, declared: ‘The Lord said to my Lord: ‘Sit at my right hand until I put your enemies under your feet’” (12:36). Jesus is here quoting from Psalm 110. This Psalm became very popular with the early Christians in New Testament times. In fact, it is the most frequently quoted portion of the Old Testament found in the New Testament.41 Jesus is saying that although the statement about him is true biblically speaking, it is not his whole title. He is also David’s Lord.
Barclay helps us untangle this difficult passage saying: “He is not denying that the Messiah is the Son of David, nor is he saying that he himself is not the Son of David. What he is saying is that he is the Son of David— and far more, not only David’s son but David’s Lord…Jesus was saying that the title Son of David, as it was popularly used, is quite inadequate description of himself.” 42
“‘David himself calls him ‘Lord.’ How then can he be his son?’ The large crowd listened to him with delight” (12:37). It is thought by some that this verse was interpreted Messianically in the period just before Christ’s coming. After his coming the rabbis seemed to have dropped this interpretation. Interestingly, the interpretation reappears in Jewish writings by AD 250, after Jewish Christian relations had passed their first century crisis.43
In Matthew’s version it is added here, “No one could say a word in reply, and from that day on no one dared to ask him any more questions” (Matt. 22:46).
AVOIDING LONG ROBES AND LONG PRAYERS
As he taught, Jesus said, “Watch out for the teachers of the law. They like to walk around in flowing robes and be greeted with respect in the marketplaces, and have the most important seats in the synagogues and the places of honor at banquets.” Mark 12:38-39
After totally demolishing much of the Sanhedrin’s theology with his quick wit and sharp answers, Jesus went on to expose some of their hypocritical practices. It appears that the teachers of the law or scribes liked to walk around in fancy long robes and receive lavish greetings such as “hail my great one (Rabbi).” 44 Of course, the New Testament assures us that it is much better to clothe ourselves with the Lord (Rom.13:14), with compassion (Col. 3:12), and with humility (1 Pet. 5:5).
The scribes or teachers of the law also liked to take the choice seats in the synagogues and at important meetings. In the ruins of the synagogue at Korazin near the Sea of Galilee, the archaeologists found a special stone seat which is on display there today. It is called “Moses’ Seat,” and such a seat is apparently mentioned by Jesus in Matthew 23:2. It was no doubt a great privilege to sit in that seat and be honored as a great teacher by the people.
The scribes also liked to take the most important seats at banquets. The best spot in biblical times was to the immediate right of the host. The second most important seat was on the left of the host.45 Jesus tells his followers to always take the least important seat at the table and if the host thinks we need to go higher he will arrange that (Lk. 14:8-11). The leaders of Israel were doing many evil and hypocritical things. In this section Matthew and Luke relate that Jesus brought many charges and woes against these leaders (Matt. 23:1-36; Lk. 20:45-47).
Years ago my wife and I went to what was billed as a prayer breakfast in Jerusalem. There were many “important” Christian dignitaries seated on the stage before us. We were amazed that after the breakfast was over, most all the time was spent by the moderator in telling about all the important people who were present. One man was somehow left out of the spotlight and was seen passing a note to the moderator. Quickly, the moderator made a long acknowledgement of that important fellow. When all was said and done, there was a lot more said than done. My wife and I were sure that the total praying time that morning was something less than twenty minutes. No doubt the Lord was amused by it all.
“They devour widows’ houses and for a show make lengthy prayers. These men will be punished most severely” (12:40). The scribes must have liked prayer meetings. They really enjoyed making long prayers. Long ago the pastor of my home church once droned on so long at the morning prayer that he finally got distracted and absent-mindedly blurted out, “Lord we thank you for this food.” Jesus prayed long, but we do not have much evidence that he prayed long prayers, at least in public. When he taught his disciples to pray the model prayer, it must have lasted all of about 30 seconds (Matt. 6:9-13). It was extremely short but it covered all the bases.
Long prayers seemed not to have much merit if done in public. We can pray all we wish in the secrecy of our closet though (Matt. 6:6). Long public prayers can certainly bore people to tears and even put them to sleep. Coffman tells us about a couple of extremely long public prayers. When the Democratic Convention nominated Franklin D. Roosevelt to be the US President, a Christian faith healer led the prayer for 31 minutes and 15 seconds. The Catholic Cardinal who gave the inaugural prayer at the installation of President John F. Kennedy prayed for fourteen minutes. He reminded the Lord about the date of the occasion four different times during his prayer. 46
Jesus in other places warns us about babbling like pagans (Matt. 6:7). Apparently the pagan priests of Baal prayed and babbled all morning in the contest with Elijah. It is said in 1 Kings 18:26, “…Then they called on the name of Baal from morning till noon. ‘Baal, answer us!’ they shouted. But there was no response; no one answered. And they danced around the altar they had made.”
Some of these religious leaders in Jerusalem did not just have long robes and make long prayers, they also had long noses as well. They looked down their noses on others. In Luke 18:11, Jesus told the story of a Pharisee with a long nose: “The Pharisee stood up and prayed about himself: ‘God, I thank you that I am not like other people— robbers, evildoers, adulterers— or even like this tax collector.’”
The hypocritical nature of these scribal prayers was the fact that they were a cover up for cheating poor widows out of their properties. The scribes (teachers or lawyers) were not wealthy like the Sadducees. They largely depended upon gifts from worshippers and could not receive pay for their teaching. This did not keep them from flattery and from manipulating gifts from widows and others who could least afford them.47 Barnes adds that this might have also been accomplished by supposed counseling of the widows in the matters of law and in the management of their estates.48
THE WIDOW AND HER OFFERING
Jesus sat down opposite the place where the offerings were put and watched the crowd putting their money into the temple treasury. Many rich people threw in large amounts. Mark 12:41
The scribes and other leaders not only made a show of their praying but they apparently also made a show of their giving. The rich people gave some large amounts that day. No doubt some waited for a suitable admiring crowd to gather before they dropped their large gifts into the treasury (Matt. 6:1).
That day some other eyes were watching. The Master was looking on at what must have been an interesting religious show. Apparently, this show took place near the Court of the Women and the Gate Beautiful. In that area there were thirteen collection boxes installed. These boxes were called “the Trumpets,” because this was their shape.49 Into the mouths of these trumpets people could cast their offerings.
“But a poor widow came and put in two very small copper coins, worth only a few cents” (12:42). The Greek scholar Robertson tells us that the language here is emphatic, indicating that her poverty-stricken condition was manifest from her dress and wasted look. 50. This poor widow dropped in two very small coins (Gk. lepta). The two thin copper coins would have made up a Jewish pruta (the smallest Jewish coin), and ten of these would have bought a loaf of bread in those days.51 Pett imagines that with this small gift “the trumpets of heaven blared, and the angels stopped what they were doing and looked at each other (even though the woman never knew). For here was a gift that was almost worthy of God.” 52
“Calling his disciples to him, Jesus said, ‘I tell you the truth, this poor widow has put more into the treasury than all the others. They all gave out of their wealth; but she, out of her poverty, put in everything— all she had to live on’” (12:43-44). Jesus was really excited about this small gift. This poor widow had given more than all the others put together. How was that so? Chrysostom said, “The Lord paid no attention to the amount of her money but only to the abundance of her generosity.” 53
Coffman relates a story from the days when the Statue of Liberty was being erected in New York harbor. “The City of New York was participating in a campaign among the immigrant poor of the great city to raise funds for the construction of the pedestal and supporting tower upon which Bartholdi’s Statue of Liberty would be erected. The campaign was lagging until a poor woman sold her bed for $13.00 and contributed the money. Inspired by that, the people quickly responded and gave more than was needed.” 54
We will never know what the small gift of the widow in our story has inspired throughout Christian history. There is no telling how many church buildings, evangelistic programs, literature crusades and God knows what else, have been inspired by this widow’s small gift so long ago.