Some people have an amazing ability to walk into a foreign situation and immediately take charge of it. The recent Stephen Spielberg movie Catch Me If You Can is about a guy who’s like that. Catch Me If You Can is based on the real life story of Frank Abagnale, Jr. Frank Abagnale has one of those charismatic personalities that enabled him to charm his way into virtually any situation. That ability made Frank Abagnale one of the most famous con men in history. Before his 18th birthday, he had posed as a pediatrician for a year, the co-pilot for a major airline for a year and an attorney for a year. He cashed over $2.5 million in fraudulent checks in every state and 26 different countries. He was finally captured in France, and after spending five years in prison, he was released to become a consultant for the FBI. In fact, he’s still a security consultant to this day.
Frank Abagnale has an extraordinary gift of being able to walk into any situation and take it over. He used this gift to live a life of adventure and deception. Other people use the same kind of gift to lead people astray into religious lies. I think about people like cult leaders David Koresh and Marshall Applewhite, founder of the Heaven’s Gate suicide cult.
These guys also had an incredible ability to charm people. They were able to persuade the people around them to do things and believe things that under normal circumstances would seem irrational. Whether you call people like this sociopaths, con men, or whatever, the world is filled with them.
And that’s pretty much how the religious leaders 2000 years ago viewed Jesus. They believed he was a deceiver, a con man, a self-proclaimed messiah who was leading people astray. Virtually everyone who came in contact with Jesus during his public ministry on this earth, at some point asked himself, "Who is this guy?"
We’ve been in a series through the New Testament book of Mark called Following Jesus in the Real World. The last few weeks we’ve been looking at the events of what Christians sometimes call "holy week." Holy Week is the final week of Jesus Christ’s life on this earth before his resurrection. Today we’re going to look at the third day of holy week, as we see Jesus debate some religious leaders in the temple. So turn to Mark 11:27 and take out your outline. Today we’re going to go from Mark 11:27 to 12:12.
1. The Debate In the Temple Courts (Mark 11:27-33)
Let’s look at Jesus debating with the religious leaders in the temple courts in vv.27-33. This debate comes on the heels of one of the most radical things Jesus did during his lifetime. I’m talking about Jesus driving the money changers out of the temple, causing the temple sacrifices to come grinding to a halt. That event had red-flagged Jesus as a dangerous man, a potential threat.
So an official delegation of religious leaders come to Jesus, demanding to know who authorized him to make a scene in the temple courts. Now this group was a delegation from the official ruling body within the temple. The chief priests were the clergy, the professional ministers who drew their income from the temple. The teachers of the law were the Bible scholars and theologians. They were the guardians of orthodoxy, the appointed experts in understanding and applying the Bible. The elders were the lay leaders, most of them part of a renewal group called the Pharisees. So you might think of this group as the equivalent of today’s pastors, Bible scholars, and lay elders.
Now the official ruling body over the temple was a group called the Sanhedrin. The Sanhedrin was composed of 71 members, and each member was either a priest, a teacher of the law or an elder. This group had absolute authority in the temple, and they also served as a buffer organization between the Roman government and the Jewish people.
Their question of Jesus is a set up, intended to make Jesus vulnerable to accusation. By publicly demanding Jesus’ authority for his scene in the temple, they’re showing the crowds that they didn’t authorize Jesus’ action. You see, everything that happened in the temple was under their authority, and by publicly demanding to know where Jesus got his authority, they’re telling people that they didn’t give Jesus the authority to do what he did. This was a clever move on their part to discredit Jesus without accusing him outright.
And if Jesus didn’t have any human authority behind his actions, that could only mean that he’s claiming to act with God’s own authority. You see, these religious leaders know that for Jesus to claim to override human authority and act with God’s authority was a very dangerous claim to make. Only someone claiming to be Israel’s true king could do that, which made Jesus vulnerable to the Roman authorities. So by sending an official delegation to publicly question Jesus’ authorization, the Sanhedrin is distancing themselves from Jesus and setting him up for trouble with the Romans.
But Jesus’ response is totally different than what they expect. By refusing to answer their question until they answer his question, Jesus takes charge of the situation. His question of them is an implicit statement of his authority (Evans 204). Instead of being the accused on the defensive, Jesus becomes the interrogator on the offensive.
Now his question about John the Baptist’s ministry is important. Remember John was Jesus’ cousin, and the book of Mark began by connecting John’s ministry with the predictions of the ancient prophets.
"The beginning of the gospel about Jesus Christ, the Son of God. It is written…I will send my messenger ahead of you, who will prepare your way" [Malachi 3:1]--a voice of one calling in the desert, ’Prepare the way for the Lord, make straight paths for him’ [Isaiah 40:3]." So John came, baptizing in the desert region and preaching a baptism of repentance for the forgiveness of sins" (Mark 1:1-4 NIV).
Mark cites two ancient Hebrew prophecies to describe John. According to Mark, John’s baptism is a fulfillment of these ancient promises.
Now in ancient Judaism, Jewish people believed that God wouldn’t forgive your sins unless you went to the Jewish temple in Jerusalem and offered a sacrifice for those sins. So for John to proclaim forgiveness on the basis of repentance expressed in a water baptism would’ve been viewed as undermining the importance and authority of the temple.
Now the key to why Jesus refers back to John is the Malachi 3 passage. If you read the rest of Malachi 3:1, it makes sense of why Jesus appeals to John.
"See I will send my messenger, who will prepare the way before me. Then suddenly the Lord you are seeking will come to his temple" (Malachi 3:1 NIV).
The promised messenger who prepares the way will be followed by an arrival of God himself in the Jewish temple. Thus if John was the fulfillment of the first half of the promise, Jesus is the fulfillment of the second half. That’s where Jesus gets his authority to make a scene in the temple, because Jesus is the Lord who follows the forerunner John.
The response of the religious leaders to Jesus’ question is deeply troubling. Notice they never stop to ask themselves what the true answer to Jesus’ question is. Instead, like cynical politicians, they debate how their answer will make them look to others. If they admit that John’s baptism was ordained by God, then Jesus will ask, "Why didn’t you believe him then?" Believing in John’s ministry was more than admitting that he was a prophet, but it was submitting to John baptism of repentance. You see, John’s message was unique because he was challenging Jewish people to do something that was normally only required of non-Jewish people converting to Judaism. When a non-Jewish person converted to Judaism, that person underwent a kind of baptism. So when John called Jewish people to be baptized as an expression of their repentance, he was telling them that they had to be converted, just like a non-Jew converting to Judaism. You can see why the religious leaders didn’t like John.
But if they said what they really thought, that John’s ministry was self appointed, then they’d look bad with the crowd.
So they take the path of non-commitment. They feign ignorance, pretending that they don’t know. Of course what they really mean is, "We don’t want to tell you what we really think, because it will make us look bad." And Jesus sees through their answer, and says, "Then I won’t tell you where I get my authority." If they rejected John’s ministry, they’ve already rejected Jesus. It’s like a row of dominoes, and by rejecting the first domino of John, all the other dominoes fall, leading to a rejection of Jesus, the final domino.
Now this debate continues into the next chapter with a parable in vv. 1-12 of chapter 12. This parable has traditionally been called "The parable of the wicked tenants." I think I’d call this parable "the parable of the renters from hell." This parable is a landlord’s greatest fear come true.
A land owner builds a vineyard to grow grapes. He leases out the land to some farmers, and then he goes away on a long journey. Now the practice of sharecropping was very common in ancient Palestine. The land owner and the farmers would’ve agreed on a percentage of the profits that would go back to the owner. At harvest time, the owner sends his servant to collect his share of the profits. But instead of giving the servant the owner’s cut, the renters grab the servant, beat him up, and send him back empty handed. This leads to an escalation of violence that gets worse and worse, until the renters actually kill a servant. Finally the land owner sends his own son to collect. Now part of his reason for this is that the servants didn’t have the legal authority to evict a tenant, but a son did have that legal authority. So if they refused to cough up the owner’s money to the son, the son could legally evict them from the land. But instead of listening to the son, they conspire to murder him. They somehow figure that if they get rid of the son that they’ll be able to keep the property for themselves. They’re no longer content to keep all the profits now, but now they want to keep the land itself.
Jesus asks these religious leaders what the owner would do, and by now his listeners would be infuriated by actions of the renters. In fact, Matthew’s gospel tells us that someone blurts out, "He will bring those wretches to a wretched end" (Matt 21:41). Indeed, the owner will bring horrible judgment on these renters who’ve not only exploited his property and mistreated his servants, but who’ve also murdered his son.
Then Jesus quotes a passage from Psalm 118 in the Old Testament. It’s a passage about the stone initially rejected by the builders becoming the capstone for the building. The Jewish people in Jesus’ day understood this verse from Psalm 118 to be speaking about the ancient Jewish king David. Although David was initially rejected by the religious leaders as king, ultimately God overruled this initial rejection and established David as the king. And not only did God establish David as Israel’s true king, but he also established David’s dynasty. David was the rejected stone, who ultimately became Israel’s capstone, it’s greatest king. Now Jesus is coming as a descendant of David, as the true heir to David’s throne.
By this point, the religious leaders realize that Jesus is indicting them, that they’re the renters in the parable. They are the wicked tenants, the builders rejecting the stone that would become the capstone.
Now the elements of this parable are pretty clear. The vineyard represents the nation of Israel. In fact, the parallels between this story and a passage from the book of Isaiah are remarkable. And in that "song of the vineyard" in Isaiah 5:1-7 the vineyard itself stands for the nation of Israel.
The farmers renting the land represent Israel’s religious leaders. And that’s exactly who Jesus is telling this parable to, the pastors, the Bible scholars, and the lay leaders. They’re the renters who cheat out the owner, mistreat the servants, and ultimately murder the owner’s son. It’s important to mention that Jesus isn’t indicting all of Israel, but he’s indicting the religious leaders of his generation. Some people have taken this parable out of context to justify hatred against Jewish people. Clearly that’s not Jesus’ point here.
The owner represents God. God is the master who sends the servants, the one who owns the nation of Israel.
The servants represent the Hebrew prophets, culminating in John the Baptist. The servants represent the ancient Hebrew prophets who came to Israel’s leaders with warnings from God. They represent people like Isaiah and Jeremiah, Elijah and Amos. And John came as the final prophet, the final prophet who comes to give one final chance.
Finally, the beloved son of the land owner represents Jesus himself. Jesus isn’t just another prophet, but he’s uniquely different. Jesus comes as the true Son of God, in a category all by himself. And the shameful treatment of the son in the story foreshadows Jesus’ arrest, beating and execution in just a few days.
It’s amusing to me that so many modern day historians and scholars debate who Jesus thought he was and what he was trying to do when he made a scene in the temple. Some people claim that he came as a social reformer, upset by the way the rich were treating the poor. Others claim that he came as a revolutionary, and that he hoped others would join him in taking over the temple by violence. Still others claim that he came as a prophet, denouncing the establishment like the ancient Hebrew prophets from years earlier.
But from this story, clearly Jesus believes himself to be unique. Jesus believed himself to be the beloved Son, the unique messenger who comes from God who’s more than a prophet, more than a reformer, certainly more than a revolutionary. He comes with a unique authority as the beloved Son of God.
Now from this dialogue with the religious leaders who had authority over the temple, we find some very important principles for our own lives.
OUR LEADERS ARE STEWARDS, NOT OWNERS.
The mistake the renters in the parable made was thinking that the vineyard belonged to them. And the mistake made by the religious leaders was in thinking that they owned the temple and had ultimate authority for what happened there.
They should’ve seen themselves as stewards, not owners. A steward is a person entrusted with someone else’s property. A steward is a manager, not an owner. Stewards must prove themselves trustworthy, and stewards are accountable for how they discharge their trust.
When our leaders begin to think that they own the church, they’ve become no different from the renters in the parable. When we start to say, "This is our church. This is our property. These are our facilities," we’ve made the same mistake the religious leaders in Jesus’ day made.
It’s easy to think that the church belongs to us. It’s easy to think that these facilities exist for our needs and our families rather than to impact other people outside our ministry. It’s tempting to think that the youth ministry exists to care for our kids rather than reaching unchurched students in our community. It’s easy to forget that we’re stewards, not owners of everything in this ministry. And it’s especially hard when our leaders forget that fact.
We also learn here that OUR AUTHORITY IS ALWAYS UNDER GOD’S AUTHORITY.
Maybe you’ve heard the story of ship’s captain who was sailing late at night and he saw a light on a collision course with his own course. He told the signaler to send the message, "Alter your course ten degrees south." The message came back, "Alter your course ten degrees south." The captain got mad and signaled back, "Alter your course ten degrees south; I’m a commander." The response was, "Alter your course; I’m a seaman third-class." By then the captain was furious, and signaled back, "Alter your course; I’m a battleship." The response was, "Alter your course; I’m a lighthouse."
God’s authority is like that lighthouse, it doesn’t move. No matter how much authority we have in life, God’s authority trumps our authority. Either we alter our course, getting our lives in line with God’s authority, or we crash onto the rocks of life. This means that no government, no family member, no nation, no court, and no church can trump God’s authority.
Don’t get me wrong: God wants us to live under proper authority in our lives. He wants children to respect their parents, people to respect the law of their land, athletes to respect referees, employees to respect bosses, and so forth. Authority is an important part of our lives, and without it total anarchy would break out in our communities. But our ultimate allegiance is always to God first.
Can you imagine how God viewed these religious leaders who were trying to assert their authority over the authority of God’s beloved Son? They had some legitimate authority, as priests, as Bible scholars, and as lay leaders. But when they tried to assert that authority over the authority of God’s Son, they overstepped their boundaries. And they crashed onto the rocks by refusing to alter their course.
All human authority ultimately comes from God, and because of that none of us possess that authority apart from our creator. My authority as a parent over my children, ultimately comes from God. So if I were to demand that my boys do something that goes against God’s authority, my boys would be perfectly justified in refusing to obey me. The same thing is true of my authority as a pastor, as a supervision, and so forth.
Sometimes we’re faced with circumstances where a person in authority over us demands that we do something that goes against God’s authority in our lives. I think of an accountant who’s told to adjust the books by the company CFO so the earnings look more favorable than they really are. I think of the Christian woman in China who gets pregnant and is by the government that she must end that child’s life with an abortion.
Sometimes we’re faced with circumstances where a person in authority forbids us from doing something God has clearly commanded. In some cultures Christians are forbidden to meet for public worship. To abandon public worship with other Christians clearly contradicts what God has said for Christians in his Bible. To obey that law would be to reject God’s authority in our lives.
All human authority ultimately stands under God’s authority, and when we try to use our authority against God’s authority, we’re making the same mistake the religious leaders in Jesus’ day made. This debate with the religious leaders shows us about true authority in our lives.
Finally, we learn here that OUR PLACE IN GOD’S COMMUNITY IS DETERMINED BY OUR RESPONSE TO JESUS.
In ancient Judaism people believed your place in God’s community was determined by your bloodline. If you were born to Jewish parents, you were automatically part of God’s community of Israel. And the way you maintained your place in that community was by living up to the conditions of the covenant God had made with Israel through Moses. So by obeying the laws, offering sacrifices in the temple, and studying the Hebrew scriptures you maintained your place in God’s community.
In fact, you could summarize ancient Judaism as the three "t’s": Torah, territory, and temple. The torah describes the Hebrew scriptures, especially the laws of Moses. Studying and obeying the torah was at the center of ancient Judaism, as it still is in modern day orthodox Judaism. In addition to the torah, ancient Judaism was focused on the territory we know of as Palestine. Every time Israel had abandoned the torah, they lost their territory. When Israel obeyed the torah, they regained their territory. God promised Israel the land of Palestine, but each generation’s possession of the land was conditional on their obedience to the torah. Finally, the temple, the place of worship, the place of sacrifice for forgiveness of sins. We talked a lot about the temple last week. These three "t’s" of torah, territory, and temple were the center of ancient Judaism.
And Jesus claims to displace all three as the center of faith. Jesus is the new torah, and his teachings are more authoritative even than the ten commandments. His teachings reinterpret and reapply the torah in new ways for his people. That’s why the New Testament makes a distinction between the law of Moses and the law of Jesus, because the teachings of Jesus are the interpretive grid through which we as Christians apply the Old Testament laws. Jesus says the time of territory has past--at least for that generation--and that the people will be sent back into exile by the Romans. And Jesus is the new temple, the new place of worship, the new place where forgiveness of sins is found. Jesus claimed to topple the three pillars of ancient Judaism and replace them with himself.
Jesus claims to be the stone the builders rejected that has now become the capstone. Even though these religious leaders were part of Israel, they’ll no longer be part of the community of God unless they respond to Jesus in faith. And indeed just four decades after Jesus said this, the Roman armies would march into Jerusalem and lead the chief priests, teachers of the law, and elders off in chains. They’d be executed by the Roman government, and Israel would be driven into exile, in fulfillment of the parable Jesus told.
And for now the nation of Israel is put on hold and God is working out his kingdom purposes through the Christian Church. God hasn’t rejected Israel forever, but for now God is working out his plan through the Church. And a person becomes part of the Christian Community by responding to Jesus Christ. Jesus is the beloved Son sent by the Father, the final revelation of God’s goodness and love. And for those of us who respond to that Son with faith, becoming followers of Jesus, we become part of God’s new community. It’s a community where where you’ve been doesn’t matter, where your failures don’t disqualify you to be part of it, where it doesn’t matter whether you’re wealthy or poor, whether you’re old or young, where it doesn’t matter what your race is, it’s a community where there’s neither Jew nor non-Jew, slave or free, male or female, a community where we’re all one through our faith in Jesus Christ. This community is found in virtually every country on the map. It’s a community of different languages and cultures, a community of different voices singing to the same God.
And when you trust in Jesus, you become part of this community.
Conclusion
Jesus is God’s beloved Son sent for us. He’s not just another prophet, social reformer, or revolutionary. He’s unique, in a category all by himself.
And responding to Jesus is the most important decision you’ll ever make in your life. Your life is like the vineyard God created. And God’s been sending his servants to you throughout your life, calling you to a relationship with him. And then he sent his Son, to die for your sins. Your response to that offer is the most important decision you can make in your life.
