Chapter 22

We continue in the temple discourse with the third rejection parable, verses 1-15.

“And Jesus answered and spake unto them again by parables, and said.” The word “parable” is a compound noun in the Greek — parabolh. Para is the preposition of immediate source; bolh means to cast, to throw, to toss. In other words, it finally comes to mean to give out a narrative. So what we have is a simple narrative that anyone can understand, that’s the bolh. Para is the immediate source and it also means alongside of. You take this narrative and you put it alongside a bit of doctrine, you make a deduction from the narrative to a point of doctrine. The parables do not establish doctrine, they illustrate or confirm doctrine. So a parable is a simple story and everyone understands the story, but you have to be aware of certain points of doctrine in order to make the deduction.

Verse 2 — “The kingdom of heaven is like unto a certain king.” The kingdom of heaven is the kingdom of regenerate individuals on the earth. It is called the kingdom of heaven because a relationship is established with heaven by every believer but the kingdom is actually on earth. The “certain king” here refers to God the Father; “which made a marriage for his son.” The marriage is a reference to phase one of God’s plan: salvation. The son is the Lord Jesus Christ and the bride to be is the regenerate of Israel.

Verse 3 — the custom in the ancient world was to send out invitations. “And he sent forth his servants [the patriarchs, the prophets, the priests, the judges and everyone who disseminated doctrine in the ancient world] to call them [Israel, and specifically to unsaved Israel which is invited to believe in Christ — invited to the wedding] that were bidden to the wedding.” Throughout the Age of Israel every generation of Jews were invited to accept Christ as saviour; “and they would not.” This is the imperfect tense and it should be translated, “they kept on not desiring salvation,” that is the concept. In Old Testament times a maximum number of Gentiles were saved but a minimum number of Jews. What did the Jews do with the scriptures? They rejected Christ, accepted the ritual and set up a system of religion. Religion is spawned out of taking the truth and distorting it into a system of legalism and, with that, a ritual. When you have the truth and you face the truth and then go on negative signals, then negative signals plus the truth of the gospel always creates religion and legalism.

Verse 4 — “Again, he sent forth other servants [including such as John the Baptist and the disciples], saying, Tell them which are bidden, Behold, I have prepared my dinner: my oxen and my fatlings are killed, and all things are ready: come unto the marriage.” Repeated invitation to accept Christ as saviour.

Verse 5 — “But they made light of it, and went their ways,” reference to the two systems which were developed: the Pharisees to the road of religion and legalism, the Sadducees to the road of rationalism and politics. The Sadducees said, We can establish in our land a nation free from the Roman empire in which we will give maximum freedom to everyone. The Pharisees said, We will establish a religious kingdom. The Sadducees said, We will establish a political kingdom. Both of them wanted a kingdom apart from the cross, they by-passed the cross in order to attain their end, a kingdom with freedoms. In one case the Pharisees would rule with a religious hierarchy and in the other the Sadducees would rule with a philosophical, rationalistic hierarchy. In this temple discourse these groups are going to be refuted. By the time we reach the end of chapter 22, neither the Pharisees or the Sadducees will ever ask Jesus any more questions. They know they cannot face Him in open debate, in open discussion. Their questions are designed to discredit Him but Jesus completely blows apart their arguments.

Verse 6 — “And the remnant [the rest who did not depart] took his servants, and entreated them spitefully, and slew them.” So there was antagonism from all groups toward the servants of the Lord.

Verse 7 — “But when [the word “when” does not occur] the king [“heard thereof” does not occur] was very angry,” the King was God the Father, “he sent forth his armies [in this case the armies of Rome], and destroyed those murderers [the siege of Jerusalem in which all of these people were eliminated], and burned up their city [destruction of Jerusalem in 70 AD].” This is the beginning of the fifth cycle of discipline. So this rejection parable emphasises the fact that the rejection of Christ destroys Israel as a nation, any hope the Jews had is eliminated, and they are under the fifth cycle of discipline.

Verse 8 — Note that verse 7 takes us down to the rejection of Christ leading to the fifth cycle of discipline; verse 8 picks up in the Tribulation. The Church Age is skipped here. “Then he saith to his servants [the 144,000 Jews of the Tribulation who represent the Lord Jesus Christ], The wedding is ready” — the wedding will occur at the second advent when Christ will fulfil to Israel the four unconditional covenants; “but they which were bidden [the religious Jews who rejected Christ] were not worthy.”

Verse 9 — evangelism in the Tribulation. “Go ye therefore into the highways, and as many as ye shall find, bid to the marriage.”

Verse 10 — “So those servants [144,000 Jews] went out into the highways and gathered together all as many as they found, both bad and good [it doesn’t make any difference what kind of person you are, it is whosoever]: and the wedding was furnished with guests.” The guests who are at the wedding at the second advent are all those who are alive at the moment of the second advent. Christ comes back to the earth and there is a regathering of the Jews. The saved Jews will go into the Millennium, the unsaved Jews will be cast out. So the unsaved Jews are brought back too, and now they are found to be without a wedding garment, i.e. +R, imputed righteousness. So there is a separation of the guests which is the baptism of fire.

Verse 11 — “And when the king came in [the second advent of Christ] to see his guests, he saw there a man which had not a wedding garment [the unsaved Jew who has been regathered with the others].”

Verse 12 — “And he said unto him, Friend, how camest thou hither not having a wedding garment? And he was speechless.” So here is the separation of the wheat and the tares. Ezekiel chapter 22 actually gives the details of this separation of the sheep and the goats, the wheat and the tares, and so on.

Verse 13 — “Then said the king to his servants, Bind him hand and foot, and take him away, and cast him into outer darkness; there shall be weeping and gnashing of teeth [expressing frustration: hearing the gospel many times and rejecting it, and realising the implications at the point of judgement].”

Verse 14 the principle. “For many are called, but few are chosen” .Many: the Jews, all Israel; called: invited to the wedding. All are invited to be saved. But few are chosen, few actually respond.

The great religion debate covers the rest of this chapter — verses 16-46.

Verses 16-22, Jesus refutes the Herodians.

Verse 16 — “And they [the Pharisees] sent out unto him their disciples with the Herodians.” There were actually two parties that had been developed in Judaism. One of these parties was made up of the scribes who were the theologians of the country. They were trying to maintain the Mosaic law and the customs of the Jews. The scribes had a party called the Pharisees. The second group was made up of the priests. The priests were no longer priests in the religious or spiritual sense but they were the actual political rulers of the land. The priests had become a political party and they were pro-Hellenic, and they had a party called the Sadducees. The Pharisees believed in the Old Testament scriptures as authoritative, plus a few thousand traditions they had added to it. They were legalistic, religious, supposedly for liberty but actually very bigoted. They persecuted anyone who opposed them and they were self-righteous to the core. On the other hand the Sadducees were very aristocratic, very smart politically, and did not accept anything religious. They rejected the resurrection, angels, life after death, and so on.

When it says “they sent out” it refers here to the Pharisees. They originated after the Jews came back from the captivity. The word “Pharisee” is derived from the fact of separation. They demanded the purity of the law and they separated themselves from everything they could. This is how they developed their self-righteousness. The Pharisees represented religion and religion is the worst thing that has ever happened to this world. Religion is Satanic in origin, Satanic in operation, Satanic in concept. Christianity, of course, is not a religion but a relationship with God through Jesus Christ. “They sent out” means they sent out some of their students with the Herodians; “their disciples” refers to some of the students who were studying to be Pharisees. The interesting thing here is that while the Herodians and the Pharisees were antagonistic one toward another they joined forces in order to get rid of the Lord Jesus Christ.

“with the Herodians” — this is the Herodian’s Party. They are going to somehow try to get rid of the Lord Jesus Christ, prove Him erroneous, and discredit Him in the eyes of the Jews.

The word Herodian

“With the Herodians” represents a union of religion and state. The Herodians were strictly a political party backing Herod against the Roman empire and against everything else. They favoured Herod ruling the entire Middle East. They were in favour of Herod against Rome, Herod against the Jews, Herod against everything. So we have here religion combined with politics in order the get rid of the Lord Jesus Christ. The Herodians had seen the demonstrations of Messiahship (the miracles), they had heard the things that Jesus said, and they recognised one thing: that He was the true heir to the Davidic throne, that He was the son of David, that He had a right to rule, and they were opposed to Him because the claims of Jesus Christ would remove Herod’s family from any possibility of ruling in Palestine.

The Pharisees, on the other hand, were strictly a religious party. They were not opposed to getting control of Palestine politically but they primarily emphasised religion, and when they joined forces with the Herodians they were saying in effect that they accepted the principle of the union of religion and state. Whenever you have the union of religion and state you always destroy human freedom, it always results in slavery of one sort or another.

In this particular verse they come to the Lord Jesus Christ, “saying, Master.” “Master” indicates they are unbelievers. They recognise Him academically; they do not recognise Him as the God-Man, as saviour. Those who recognised Christ as saviour called Him “Lord,” which in the Greek is the word for deity, kurioj. Then they start out with a very interesting statement: “we know,” and the “we” should be emphasised for one simple reason, and that is that they are very proud of their knowledge and their position in life and they now express it in this way. “We know” is a condescending phrase here [We know that you know a few things but we know more and we are going to prove it in a minute!]

“thou art true” — this doesn’t mean a thing by itself. This is just a lot of hypocrisy. It simply means that they are now getting ready to lower the boom and they want to take Him off guard; “neither carest thou for any man.” This doesn’t mean He doesn’t care for people but it means that He is not a respector of persons. In other words, He doesn’t respect someone for his office or what they can do for Him. The Lord Jesus Christ cared for people, He went to the cross and died for them, but his is a phrase which means something else; “for thou dost not regard the person of men.” This means “you do not regard the face of men. In other words, he is not influenced by people who can do something for Him or people who have status symbols. This is flattery designed to soften up the Lord Jesus Christ, because they are trying to get Jesus to make a strong and clear statement against the Roman empire. This is the objective of the Herodians who want the Roman empire out of the way so that Herod can have an independent kingdom between Parthia and Rome. Therefore, in order to do that they want to get Jesus against the Roman empire and then let Rome get rid of Jesus. The flattery trap is to obscure the truth of the gospel and the importance of Bible doctrine, and to get the Lord Jesus Christ to make a wild statement whereby they can go to Rome and accuse Him of being a revolutionist.

Verse 17 — “Tell us therefore, What thinkest thou? [What is your opinion?] Is it lawful to give tribute to Caesar, or not?” This means taxation. Remember that Judah is controlled by Rome; Rome is in effect the divine institution #4 to the area of Judaea. They are asking if it is right to pay taxes or not. Caesar represents the Roman empire. This is a loaded question. They are not seeking information, they are seeking to destroy the Lord Jesus Christ. They are trying to put the Lord Jesus Christ in conflict with the fourth divine institution which, in this case, would be the Roman empire. If they can get Him into conflict with Rome then they can get Rome to turn on Him.

Now the answer of Jesus must be understood within the framework of divine institution number four. The big principle is now being raised and it is one that we have to face today: Is there a conflict between the nation in which we live and the spiritual kingdom called the Church, i.e. those who are born again and are believers in the Lord Jesus Christ? The point is: can a spiritual kingdom coexist on the earth with a political kingdom? In other words, is the Church in conflict with divine institution #4 and, if not, what is the relationship between divine institution #4 and the Church? For example, in time of war should a believer respond to his country’s call to defend it or should he be a so-called conscientious objector. (Note: There is no place in the Word of God for a “conscientious objector”) As long as you have freedoms in a divine institution then the believer in that divine institution has a responsibility to the country. But in a communist country you do not have this freedom. To the communists religion and the state are the same thing. If you were a believer living under communism you would have the right, Biblically, to refuse military service. But if you live in a nation where there is a separation of religion and state, and therefore freedom in this area, then you have a responsibility to that nation. All of it is brought out here, not by military service, but by taxation. Taxation is legitimate and a believer has the responsibility of paying it.

Verse 18 — all they wanted Jesus to say was that He did not believe He should have to pay a cent of tax to the Romans and they would accuse Him to the Romans. They are not enquiring, nor are they interested. Jesus recognised their hypocrisy, He could read their minds. If Jesus declares the union of religion and state He fails to recognise the principle of divine institution #4 and, therefore, He would be in opposition to the Roman empire. But if Jesus declares Himself in competition with the Roman empire then his questioners would run and tell.

“But Jesus perceived their wickedness” — they were trying to discredit that which is absolute truth, the one who spoke absolute truth, the God-Man. Wickedness is what you think, not only what you do; “and said, “Why tempt me, ye hypocrites?” He laid it on the line to them. When you are dealing with false doctrine this is the way it should be done. John the Baptist called these same people a generation of vipers, poisonous snakes. When you are dealing with false doctrine you call a spade a spade.

Verse 19 — “Shew me the tribute money.” The Herodians were carrying Roman money in their pockets. This gave further indication of their hypocrisy because the Herodians were opposed to the Roman empire but they didn’t mind using the currency of the Roman empire. They enjoyed the benefits of Roman protection. Isn’t that the way with hypocrites? We have people in this country who enjoy the benefits of the protection of the country, and yet they run it down all of the time, and from the standpoint of the things that make it great. “And they brought him a penny [denarius].”

Verse 20 — “And he saith unto them, Whose is this image and superscription?”

Verse 21 — “They say unto him, Caesar’s .Then saith he unto them, Render [pay] therefore unto Caesar the things which are Caesar’s.” He is saying in effect that the citizens of a national entity where freedom exists have the right and the privilege of supporting that national entity. In other words, divine institution #4 is legal; “and unto God the things that are God’s.” “Render unto Caesar” is the principle of separation of religion and state: both have a place in the Biblical concept and therefore they do not have to be in conflict. Every believer has a responsibility to God; every believer has a responsibility to his national entity.

Verse 22 — “When they had heard these words, they marvelled, and left him, and went their way.” When it says “they marvelled” it means they were absolutely astounded. Jesus didn’t get into the situation of saying only one kingdom should exist. If He had taken a stand for the spiritual kingdom then they would have said He is against Rome; if He had taken a stand for Rome then He would be against religion. Their question was loaded.

Summary

1. Jesus made a clear distinction between religion and state (we could use the words church and state as it applies today).

2. Jesus indicated Christian responsibility to the state which maintains this distinction.

3. In Judaea, Rome was the state and the Jews were permitted religious freedom, so it applied right there. Rome permitted Judaism to operate so Jesus was talking to people who enjoyed the benefits of freedom.

4. Until Christ personally returns to the earth, i.e. until the second advent, there can be no bona fide union between church and state. There will be in the Millennium and that is because of the personal reign of Christ.

5. In the meantime two kingdoms coexist, operating in their respective spheres. The first is the state, divine institution #4 ordained by God for the maintenance of law and order and to permit maximum evangelism — bona fide evangelism where there can be freedom to respond to the gospel.

The state exists in order to curtail internationalism. There should be a large number of national entities, and if these have the concept of freedom then that means there can be maximum evangelism. The gospel can be taken freely to these nations and the people have freedom to respond: they can say yes or no. But when you destroy these lines of demarcation and have internationalism there is no freedom to respond, even as there is no freedom to disseminate the gospel. Remember that Satan is the ruler of this world and internationalism means Satan rules. So nationalism is designed by God to make it possible to evangelise the human race in any generation.

The second entity is the Church, the spiritual kingdom of all who are born again.

6. Where a state does not follow the concept of divine institution #4 — this would be the case where freedom is curtailed — then the regenerate person must choose for God rather than man, just as Peter did in Acts chapter 5.

7. In this way when the Church and the state can’t coexist, and when the state opposes so that there is no longer freedom, the believer by taking a stand for God, continues to make the issue of salvation clear and he helps his state.

8. In His answer, Jesus clearly defines Christian responsibility to God as well as to state. This personal responsibility to state includes such things as taxation, military service, voting, declaration of Bible doctrine, disseminating information which has divine viewpoint.

9. The Church should support good government but the Church must never become that government.

10. If Jesus had answered the question of verse 17 by either yes or no He would have been trapped into a false position. Again, the true answer lies in the declaration of Bible doctrine. In declaring the answer Jesus did not condone the evil practices of the Roman empire, neither did He declare the permanence of the Roman empire, but rather He condoned the principle of divine institution #4 because divine institution #4 is the basis of evangelism. True evangelism can only exist where there is some system of law and order.

Beginning in verse 23, Jesus refutes the Sadducees. This is a part of the temple discourse and in it every group which represents the Jews in the land is refuted.

Verses 23-33, Jesus refutes the Sadducees.

Verse 23 — “The same day came to him the Sadducees.” Remember the Sadducees are the aristocrats of the land. They are taken primarily from the priesthood whereas the Pharisees are recruited from the scribes. The Pharisees are religious, the Sadducees are rationalist and political and they run the land with one of their objectives being to have an independent Israel, independent of the Roman empire and independent of Herod. The Sadducees have rejected the Old Testament scriptures as authoritative. They do not believe in any kind of an after life, they do not believe in angels or resurrection. Now they have come and they are going to try to discredit Jesus just as the Pharisees and the Herodians had tried.

“which say there is no resurrection.” This is mentioned because they are going to come with a question about resurrection and they are going to try to use it to discredit Him. The Old Testament scriptures teach resurrection. For example: Daniel 12:2; Isaiah 26:19; 53:10; Job 19:26ff; Psalm 16:10,11. The Sadducees are now going to approach Jesus with the idea that the resurrection introduces unsolvable problems, therefore it does not exist — a typical rationalistic stunt. They are saying: We can’t accept resurrection because it has problems that are unsolvable and since the problems are unsolvable it cannot exist. They are also going to use ridicule to discredit Jesus. If they had come and taken an open stand against Christ the people would be against them but if somehow they can show their hostility and opposition with their typical philosophical calm, with their aristocratic snobbishness, and somehow use a little ridicule then they will get people on their side. So they seek to solve man’s problems actually by politics and therefore they have by-passed the Word of God as having any solution to anything.

Verse 24 — “Saying, Master.” Notice that each one of these groups comes to Jesus Christ using the vocative, “Master,” indicating they have not accepted Christ as saviour. They recognise Him as having academic status but they do not accept Him as God. Now they immediately quote the Old Testament, which they reject: “Moses [used for the first five books of the Old Testament] said.” They are going to quote from Deuteronomy 25:5,6, a passage which has something to do with resurrection or afterlife. They do not believe in afterlife and therefore they are going to use this passage. “If [third class condition, introducing a hypothetical case] a man die, having no children, his brother shall marry his wife, in order to raise up seed unto his brother.”

Verse 25 — “Now there were with us seven brothers: and the first, when he had married a wife, deceased, and, having no issue, he left his wife unto his brother.”

Verse 26 — now it gets ludicrous. “Likewise the second also, and the third, unto the seventh.”

Verse 27 — “And last of all the woman died also.”

Verse 28 — “Therefore.” Here comes the question which is loaded with ridicule. They are going to try to ridicule away the doctrine of resurrection and in this way discredit the Word of God, the Old Testament scriptures as they existed at that time, and therefore discredit Jesus Christ who has been teaching from the Old Testament; “in the resurrection whose wife shall she be of seven? for they all had her.” Now they think they have the Lord Jesus in a corner.

Verse 29 — “Jesus answered and said to them.” Notice how He answers them, “Ye do err.” This is a present active indicative meaning you’re always wrong and you never have been right. That is a little stronger than appears in the English and Jesus brings out into the open the issue of their hostility; “not knowing the scriptures” — the reason they are never right — “nor the power of God.” You can’t understand the power of God until you know the Word of God. You have to understand doctrine before you can understand power.

Verse 30 — “For in the resurrection they neither marry, nor are given in marriage.” In other words, there is a type of love which exists between the members of the Godhead of which we are the recipients but we only, as it were, see the light through a crack in the door. It is greater than any love in life; “but are as the angels of God.” Jesus is saying several things here. First of all that angels do not have the ability to have sexual relationship with the human race as they did before Genesis 6, and in the second place He is saying that in heaven there is a greater type of love than any love that has ever existed on earth. Divine institution #2 is for time, not for eternity, and eternity is an improvement on time.

Verse 31 — “But as touching the resurrection of the dead, have ye not read.” The aorist tense means in a point of time when it has been exegeted. The word to read means to gather exact knowledge from a dissertation or a lecture based on exegesis. He quotes now, Exodus 3:6, “that which was spoken unto you by God, saying,”

Verse 32 — “I am” is present active indicative, linear aktionsart, absolute status quo: I keep on being forever; “the God of Abraham, and the God of Isaac, and the God of Jacob? God is not the God of the dead, but of the living.” This particular quotation, a common phrase used in Israel in many ways, has the strongest resurrection implications of any statement. It indicates that Abraham, Isaac and Jacob are alive in God’s presence. He is the God of those who are alive. They question Him with ridicule; Jesus answers them with sarcasm. And this is a direct attack, of course, upon the doctrine of the Sadducees who say there is no resurrection.

Verse 33 — “And when the multitude heard this, they were astonished at his doctrine.” Notice what astonished them: His doctrine.

Verse 34 — “But when the Pharisees had heard that he had put the Sadducees to silence [literally, put them down], they were gathered together.” Remember that the Pharisees were religious rather than rationalists, and they adhered to the Mosaic law and had added many things to it. Now they come in to set down the Lord Jesus Christ. They gathered together first to decide how they would approach Him.

Verse 35 — “Then one of them a lawyer [literally, a scribe, a theologian], asked, tempting him,” — they hoped to find some weak link whereby they could set him down.

Verse 36 — “Master, which is the great commandment in the law?” The purpose of this question again is to discredit the Lord Jesus Christ, and so of course any way that He answers this (they have figured it out in their meeting before hand) they will set Him down, they will refute Him. They will discredit Him no matter which law He mentions. The believe He has got to mention one of the ten commandments, that is why it says at the end of verse 34, “they were gathered together” .The Greek actually says, they mustered their thinking forces. They had worked out an airtight system right through all of the ten commandments as to how they would answer Him no matter what He said. And they sent their most brilliant spokesman.

Now you have to remember that the whole structure of the Mosaic law is designed for a proper relationship with God. Codex #1 proves that man is a sinner and needs a saviour, codex #2 presents Jesus Christ, codex #3 describes blessing from the Lord and protection in time. But the whole purpose of the law is relationship, so Jesus is going to answer with the basic concept of the law in mind.

Verse 37 — “Jesus said unto him, Thou shalt love the Lord thy God with all thy heart and with all thy soul, and with all thy mind,” quotation from Deuteronomy 6:5 plus Leviticus 19:18. The word “love” here is a Hebrew word for relationship. The Pharisees did not have a relationship with the Lord. This is taken up in John 3 where Jesus said to a Pharisee, Ye must be born again. So the love here indicates a relationship as well as a mental attitude and none of the ten commandments as such describe that relationship. But there is an overall verse that covers the principle of them and the principle is what Jesus gives. This is a love which expresses not only mental attitude but relationship in three areas: heart [frontal lobe], the thinking part of the mind; the soul, the soul is used in contrast to the mind because the soul has something else: volition; the mind, the perceptive part or the result of learning. Mind is having doctrine, heart is applying doctrine [thinking it], volition is making decisions on the basis of it. So all of these three words add up to a relationship with God which they do not have.

Verse 38 — “This is the first and great commandment.”

Verse 39 — now He quotes Leviticus 19:18. Once you are straight with God you can be straight with man. “And the second in like unto it, Thou shalt love thy neighbour [fellow man] as thyself.”

The Pharisees are now really on the spot. The whole principle on which they operate goes back to operation fig leaves, Adam and Eve. Right after they sinned neither one of them thinks about God. What do they do? They look at each other and they say: “Nakedness.” So they reached over and covered themselves with fig leaves; they try to clothe themselves. And what is the idea behind operation fig leaves? If they are right with each other this makes them automatically right with God. And that is the whole idea of the Pharisees. The Pharisees are doing all of these things for their fellow man, they are giving alms and praying and all kinds of activity. In other words, if they are doing the right thing by their fellow man God has to accept it; God has to accept our works — fig leaves are works. But when Adam and the woman stood there in their fig leaves and Christ came in the Garden, they heard Him coming and they had to hide. They were not capable of having relationship with God, they were spiritually dead. And the Pharisees are spiritually dead and so Jesus gives the second commandment, not so that they can run around and practice love, but simply so that they will understand that operation fig leaves is never acceptable to God — Titus 3:5.

Verse 40 — Jesus explains that this is the principle of the entire Old Testament, not just the Mosaic law. “On these two — Deuteronomy 6:5; Leviticus 19:18 — hang all the law and the prophets” “The law”: the Pentateuch; “the prophets”: the rest of the Old Testament.

Verse 41 — Jesus now presents the issue of salvation in the most brilliant way for a Pharisee. The Pharisees accepted the scriptures as the Word of God, they accepted them as authoritative. But these are not seeking Pharisees, these are critical Pharisees. To the seeking Pharisee [Nicodemus in John 3] He said, ye must be born again; to the critical Pharisees He now gives one of the most beautiful pictures of how to witness to people. “While the Pharisees were gathered together, Jesus asked them” — they were all standing there with their mouths open.

Verse 42 — “Saying, What think ye of Christ?” Jesus hit them with sarcasm to refute them; He neutralises them with great genius. But just as soon as He has their backs against the wall He stops all that and comes right to the gospel: What think ye of Christ? In other words, this is the determining factor. Where they will spend eternity is determined by their attitude toward Christ — “whose son is he? They say unto him, of David,” i.e. Christ is from the source of David. They understood the Messianic line, the understood the Davidic covenant, and so their answer emphasises the humanity of Christ. “Of David” emphasises His humanity. Jesus Christ in His humanity is the son of David but Jesus Christ in His deity is the Son of God. In emphasising the humanity of Christ, which is important because the humanity of Christ died, they are missing the boat as to the total picture because He is the God-Man. Theirs was only half an answer and half an answer is wrong as far as the Word is concerned.

Verse 43 — since the Pharisees emphasise humanity they are missing the boat. How do we know? Because Jesus now hits them with deity. “He saith unto them, How then doth David in the spirit call him Lord, saying,” David was in the Spirit when he wrote Psalm 110:1.

Verse 44 — “The Lord [Jehovah] said unto my Lord [Adonai].” The Greek says: “Kurioj said unto my kurioj.” This leaves no doubt as to what is meant in Psalm 110:1. God is saying to God, kurioj is the word for deity. But then, God is saying to God, “Sit down,” and God doesn’t sit down. “Sit thou on my right hand,” but God is omnipresent. Sitting down is the posture of human beings.

Note: When the Pharisees answered they answered with a correct answer, Messiah is the son of David, but it is an answer that ignores the saviourhood of Christ. As saviour He is not a man, he is the God-Man [hypostatic union] and so if you are going to approach this from the standpoint of His saviourhood you start from the fact that He is God. He was God long before He was man.

When God says to God, Sit down, then obviously the God who is to sit down has to be more than God, He must have a human resurrection body. And when did God say this? He said it after the cross. After the ascension the humanity of the Lord Jesus Christ was told to sit at the right hand of the Father because His humanity was acceptable. His deity was always omnipresent and never changes, and when you are emphasising salvation and the only person who provides salvation you never start with His humanity you always start with His deity which existed eternally. When God the Father said, Sit down, it was the humanity of Christ which sat down, but since the deity and humanity are linked forever He says it to the one who is God. So Jesus is the God-Man, undiminished deity and true humanity in one person forever, and you have then the doctrine of the hypostatic union as the key to recognition of the saviour. He is the Son of God before He is the son of David and here is as close as some of those Pharisees would ever get to the truth.

Point: If you are not witnessing to a stranger you have to know the person to whom you are witnessing. Jesus used different approaches. There is no inspired system for witnessing but one thing is important: you have to know the person to whom you are witnessing because there is more than one way to present the gospel. You have to present the gospel one way to one person and another way to another.

“till I make thine enemies [Satan and the fallen angels] thy footstool.” So between the session of Jesus Christ and the second advent of Christ the enemies, Satan and the fallen angels, are being made the footstool of Christ [the resolving of the angelic conflict].

Verse 45 — Jesus has quoted the verse and now He hits them with the big question: “If David then called him Lord [kurioj, deity], how is he his son?” If they can answer this they are saved! David called him Lord because He is God; He can be David’s son for one reason: because He is in the line of David in His humanity. To be the saviour of the world He had to be God and He had to be man, only man could be judged on the cross.

Verse 46 — But the Pharisees continued their negative volition; “And no man [the Pharisees] was able to answer him a word, neither durst [had the nerve] any man from that day forth ask him any more questions [interrogate Him].”

Notice that all the way through the temple discourse in this chapter that the Herodians, the Sadducees and then the Pharisees in turn attacked Jesus Christ, they tried to discredit Him. Then, secondly, Jesus attacks them with the gospel. But they demonstrate negative volition and because of this Jesus will in the next chapter attack religion. Jesus is going to castigate religion.