Jesus, the scribe, and the first command.

Jesus, the scribe, and the first command.



The next bit in Mark is told again in Matthew—from a very different point of view.In Mark, right after Jesus answered the Sadducees crazy hypothetical resurrection story, he took one more question. A scribe really liked his answer to the Sadducees, and wanted to know what was the greatest command. He also really liked Jesuss answer to his question, and said so; to which Jesus approvingly responded, “Youre not far from Gods Kingdom.” vT('Mk 12.34','g')In Matthew, same background: The Sadducees asked Jesus their resurrection poser; Jesus skilfully parried them. But this time, the Pharisees gathered together for the purpose of testing Jesus, and turned loose their Law-expert in order to challenge him. There was no mutual admiration in this story at all. Just hostility.So… which story is what really happened? I know: If you firmly believe the bible has no errors, youre gonna pursue some convoluted explanation which permits both stories to be true. Heres a popular spin: Perhaps the Pharisees recruited this scribe to challenge Jesus, as Matthew said; but deep down, the scribe kinda admired Jesus, and so their exchange was a lot more friendly, as Mark said. The gospel-authors simply skipped all the other details, and as a result this only looks like disharmony.Heres the problem with this idea. It makes both authors out to be biased liars: Matthew only wanted to slam Pharisees, and deleted any sympathetic ones; Mark only wanted to portray some of them as friendly, and in this story skipped the hostile ones. So neither told the truth. The only way we discover it is by reading both gospels together. But since the authors never expected their gospels to be read together, it means one, or both, intended to deceive. (Probably Matthew, since he quoted Mark in many places.) In defending inerrancy, you create a way bigger problem.Whats more likely? Simple: The authors were biased. (Thats not necessarily a bad thing. Both were biased in favor of Jesus being Messiah, you know.) They both had the raw story: Someone asked Jesus about the first command, and Jesus replied. But Matthew happened to read his own pessimism into the story, and Mark chose to read his own optimism into it. It means neither was lying, although one or the other (or both) was a little short-sighted. Like Mark has it, some scribes and Pharisees were sympathetic to Jesus. And like Matthew has it, some Pharisees were totally out to get him. Whether this guy really was, we have evidence both ways…meaning we dont definitively know where he stood.Its like any contradictory idea in the bible: If you cant balance out the ideas, suspend judgment. Me, Im an optimist, so Im admittedly slanted towards Mark. But who knows?—maybe Matthew is correct. Still: Suspend judgment.Well, lets read the stories.
The noble scribe.Standing there, listening to the discussion, was one of the scribes. Recognizing how well Jesus answered the Sadducees, he asked him, “Which command is first of all?”Jesus gave this answer: “First is, Listen, Israel: Our god is the Lord; the Lord is One; and you must love your god the Lord with all your heart, life, purpose, and might. v('Dt 6.4-5') Second is, Love your neighbor like yourself. v('Lv 19.18') No command is higher than these.”The scribe told him, “Excellent, Teacher. You speak the truth: Theres One, and theres no other but him. And to love him with all ones heart, intelligence, and might; and to love ones neighbor as oneself? Its greater than every burnt offering and sacrifice.”Jesus, seeing how wisely he answered, told him, “Youre not far from Gods Kingdom.”No one else submitted questions to him.—vF('Mark 12.28-34','g')The question “Whats the first command?”—meaning whats the one we oughta follow first of all, more than the others, not which command God literally gave first, like “Let there be light”—wasnt a question the Pharisees came up with on the spot. Its actually one of the more famous questions the Pharisees taught their students.Jesus answered with the Shemá, which the Pharisees used as a creed and recited twice a day. Its called the Shemá because it begins with that word: Shemá Yisraél: YHVH elohénu, YHVH ekhád. (Although Hebrew-speakers tend to use adonái/“my LORD” instead of YHVH/“Jehovah,” out of respect for Gods name.) The Shemá is the first verse of this passage:Listen, Israel: The LORD is your god. The LORD is One. Love your god, the LORD, in all your heart, life, and everything.
—Moses, vF('Deuteronomy 6.5-6','h')Jesus added to it another scripture the Pharisees were fond of: Loving ones neighbor as oneself. In the Babylonian Talmud theres this story about Shammai and Hillel, the greatest rabbis of the Pharisees.At another time, a certain pagan happened to come to Shammai and told him, “Make me a convert—on the condition you teach me the whole Law while I stand on one foot.” Shammai drove him out with the yardstick in his hand.So he went to Hillel. Hillel told him, “Dont do to your neighbor what you find hateful. Thats the whole Law. The rest is its commentary. Go learn it.”—Sabbath 31aHillels version of “Love your neighbor as yourself” comes a lot closer to Jesuss “Do for others” v('Mt 7.12') —its passive, not active—but its generally the same idea. Love your neighbor. As Hillel said the rest of the Law is its commentary, Jesus said in Matthew: “The whole Law and Prophets hang from these two commands.” So the Pharisees would automatically agree the Shemá, plus “Love your neighbor,” was the right answer.Some Christians get very annoyed when I point out the Pharisees already had an answer to this question, and Jesus restated it. They prefer the idea they grew up with: Somehow the Pharisees didnt know the answer, cause they were great big hypocrites who thought the greatest command must have to do with animal sacrifice or something. But then wise, omniscient Jesus clued em in, and told them it was about love. Cue the Beatles song: “All you need is love, love; love is all you need.” They hate the idea Jesus mightve taken the answer from Pharisees, of all people.But truth is truth, no matter where you get it from. Revelation is revelation, no matter who proclaims it. The high priest, corrupt as he was, rightly called it about Jesuss death. v('Jn 11.50-51') And from what we know of Hillel, he understood grace, mercy, and love a lot better than Christians expect any Pharisee would. Likely he had a relationship with God; and if so, it stands to reason hed understand the supreme importance of “Love God” and “Love your neighbor.” Dont fault him for his wayward followers who later opposed Jesus.Likewise the scribe who asked Jesus the question: He immediately recognized the truth of Jesuss answer, and how much more valuable the commands were than sacrifice—as the LORD and his prophets stated time and again in the scriptures. He, too, likely had a relationship with God. Hence Jesus said of him, “Youre not far from Gods Kingdom.”Ive heard pessimistic preachers (who, it seems, had Matthew in mind) take that statement of Jesuss and flip it over: “Not far from the Kingdom,” they claim, means “Not in the Kingdom—and you arrogantly thought you were in the Kingdom, didnt you? You self-righteous hypocrite.” Which is wholly inappropriate. Jesus paid this scribe a compliment; he didnt unkindly bash him, as if his praise of Jesuss answer was some form or sarcasm. This is just another example of people reading their ill-will into another persons statement, instead of accepting it at face value. Both the scribe and Jesus meant to be kind to one another. We have to read it that way—much as wed rather condemn Pharisees (not that Mark ever identified this guy as a Pharisee) or try to make the Mark version illegitimately jibe with Matthew.But now lets turn to Matthew.
The less-noble Law-expert.The Pharisees, hearing Jesus had silenced the Sadducees, gathered together. One of them, a Law-expert, asked a question to test him: “Teacher, which is the greatest command in the Law?”Jesus answered him, “Youll love your god, the Lord, with all your heart, life, and purpose. v('Dt 6.5') This is the greatest and first command. Likewise the second: Youll love your neighbor like yourself. v('Lv 19.18') The whole Law and Prophets hang from these two commands.”—vF('Matthew 22.34-40','g')Lukes version of the first command has some similar language to Matthew. But it comes out of the Law-experts mouth instead of Jesuss, and instead of following the Sadducees question, it led into the story of the good Samaritan. I include it here, just to be comprehensive.Look, a certain Law-expert got up to test Jesus, saying, “Teacher, what action will help me inherit eternal life?”Jesus told him, “Whats written In the Law? How do you interpret it?”In reply the Law-expert said, “Youll love your god, the Lord, with all your heart, life, might, and purpose. v('Dt 6.5') And your neighbor like yourself.” v('Lv 19.18')Jesus told him, “Correct answer. Do this and live.”—vF('Luke 10.25-28','g')Nitpickers want to get at all the different ways the gospels translated Deuteronomy—so are we to follow God with our heart, life, and purpose; or our might too, as in Mark and Luke?—and miss the point. Were to love the LORD with everything.Were to love him with our leváv/“hearts,” which in that day meant our intellect, not our emotions; emotions were in the guts. Were to love him with our nefésh/“life-force” (Greek psykhí), or soul, or life: Our actions and lifestyle need to reflect the love of God. Were to love him with our meód/“exceedingness,” which Greek-speakers struggled to translate, just as English-speakers do, so the best they came up with are diánoia/“purpose” and iskhýs/“might”: We need to put our entire being into the love of God. Its not enough to just approve of him, or like him, or agree that Jesus is Lord while ignoring his commands. We have to purpose to follow him, and do so with all our might.Matthew skipped the scribes praise of Jesuss answer, and Jesuss praise of the scribe, and leapt right to the “How can Davids son be Davids master?” lesson. But in his version of the story, theres no praise to give: This was a test of Jesuss orthodoxy. You know how Jesus tended to teach, “Youve heard it said… but I tell you,” v('Mt 5.21-22, 27-28, 31-32') as a way to straighten out the nutty things the Pharisees taught, and replace them with his own commentary on the Law. Here, the Pharisees were looking to see what sort of respect Jesus even had for the Law: Would his priorities in the Law be different from theirs? Turns out no: Jesus recognized love came before everything else. Thing is, even though the Pharisees taught love for God and neighbors comes first, too many of them didnt practice love for God and neighbors first. Cause you know, hypocrites.And that should be a warning to us Christians as well: Do we practice love for God and neighbors first? Or do we do as the pagans, and practice love for self first? Love for our own first? Love for family and friends first? No love for strangers, for those who are different from us, for those who are still full of sin and evil? No love for God, cause we dont even try to obey him; we just do our own thing and figure grace takes care of our deficiencies? Do we follow Jesuss first commands, first?