Download an outline here: https://humble-sidecar-837.notion.site/Mark-12-13-27-Session-47-Mark-Rightly-Divided-724328eb457e4302ac8153d508f2f588?pvs=4

Mark 12:13-27 | Session 47 | Mark Rightly Divided

----------

Mark 12:13-17 | Paying Taxes to Caesar

Verse 13 -

See note on Mark 3:6 for information on the Pharisees and the Herodians.

The religious leadership sent a select group of Pharisees and Herodians “to catch him in his words.” This has to be the interpretive grid for understanding both the question and the answer. It would be good to be reminded that a trick question is likely not going to provide an answer that should become doctrine for all time.

Verse 14 -

The introduction to the question is like setting bait for a trap. Just as a fisherman uses bait to attract fish, humanity uses "bait" to lure their prey. In this case, they assumed Jesus would be softened by the "kind" words. We will see His response in the next verse.

After their empty words of praise, they get to the point: “Is it lawful to give tribute to Caesar, or not?” This is a politically charged question in any age, aimed at building an "insurrection" case. Political enemies can always twist statements and actions of opposition into "insurrection," and this is their plan. If Jesus says it is lawful to pay tribute, it could anger those who opposed Roman rule, while saying it is unlawful could be seen as rebellion against Roman authorities.

Verses 15-17 -

Jesus recognized their hypocrisy and asked for a coin. He inquired whose likeness and inscription were on it. When they responded that it was Caesar's, Jesus told them to give back to Caesar what is Caesar’s and to God what is God's. This response astonished them and left them with no grounds to accuse him.

This was a middle-of-the-road non-answer, not a doctrine for all time. It is an answer that does nothing but elicit questions: What is Caesar's and what is God's? The answer is not much more measurable than His answer to the elders in Mark 11:33.

Mark 12:18-27 | Another Trap

Verse 18 -

For the first time, we are introduced to the Sadducees. Biblically, what we know about them is summarized in Acts 23:8: "For the Sadducees say that there is no resurrection, neither angel, nor spirit: but the Pharisees confess both." Outside of this, we know that they were strict Torah observers, adhering only to what was written in the Torah (the first five books of Moses). They did not recognize the Writings and the Prophets as biblical texts. Because of this limited scriptural canon, they rejected certain theological concepts that were developed later, such as the resurrection. Additionally, they rejected Pharisaic Judaism, which included an extensive oral tradition that provided interpretations and applications for every biblical instruction.

Both here and Acts 23:8 we are told that they do not believe in the resurrection. This information is necessary for understanding the setting.

Verse 19 -

The Sadducees start their trap by referencing scripture, much like the Pharisees and Herodians did with kindness in verses 15-17. They mention a scenario from Deuteronomy 25:5-6 about the death of a brother. This passage forms the basis for the kinsman-redeemer doctrine. Note that this biblical reference is a setup to their fictitious question, which begins in verse 20.

Verses 21-23 -

The hypothetical (and mostly silly) question posed by the Sadducees is designed to mock the resurrection. They use the tool of exaggeration to prove something false, a rhetorical method known as “reductio ad absurdum”. This technique takes an argument to its logical extreme to demonstrate its absurdity.

Verse 24 -

Jesus was abrupt and clear: you Sadducees are wrong. He accused them of not knowing the scriptures nor the power of God. This is most likely a reference to their rejection of the writings and prophets, which Jesus called scriptures in addition to the Torah. For instance, in Luke 24:44, Jesus said, "These are the words which I spake unto you, while I was yet with you, that all things must be fulfilled, which were written in the law of Moses, and in the prophets, and in the psalms, concerning me."

When a person does not know the entirety of scripture, they are often misguided and misapply the parts they do know. Similarly, even if one knows the whole of scripture but does not understand the interrelation between the various parts, they are prone to the same misapplications.

If the Sadducees had known the entirety of the scriptures, they would have encountered clear references to the resurrection:

1. Isaiah 26:19:

• "Thy dead men shall live, together with my dead body shall they arise. Awake and sing, ye that dwell in dust: for thy dew is as the dew of herbs, and the earth shall cast out the dead."

  2. Daniel 12:2:

• "And many of them that sleep in the dust of the earth shall awake, some to everlasting life, and some to shame and everlasting contempt."

3. Job 19:25-26:

• "For I know that my redeemer liveth, and that he shall stand at the latter day upon the earth: And though after my skin worms destroy this body, yet in my flesh shall I see God."

The best thing we can do in life is to know the scriptures and rightly divide them (2 Tim. 3:16).

Verse 25 -

Verse 25 contains a well known message and a little-known dilemma. It is one of those passages that “we think” we know what it means. But do we?

The problem arises with Ezekiel 44:22, which gives instruction for millennial priests and marriage. What do we do with that?

• One could say that Ezekiel was wrong or that he was not describing the millennium. To do so would reject the trustworthiness of Scripture to be accurate and communicate clearly.

• One could somehow create a scenario in which these priests were not in their resurrected bodies, but such a position would be almost impossible Biblically.

• One could say that when Jesus spoke of no marriage “when they shall rise from the dead,” He was referring to the day of resurrection, not the ongoing state after the resurrection.

The verb, “shall rise” is in Mark 12:25 is in the aorist subjunctive tense, which points to the action of resurrection as a single event. While the perfect tense would have indicated a completed action with ongoing results, the aorist tense focuses on the occurrence of the event itself. Therefore, one could argue that Jesus is speaking about the resurrection as an event (Resurrection Day), emphasizing what happens at the moment of rising from the dead rather than the continuous state afterward. This interpretation is consistent with the context of addressing the Sadducees' question.

This opens the possibility that those in the resurrection may be married and that they choose their spouse (as would have to happen in the given scenario). As strange as this sounds to us, this strangeness is due to holding an illusion of truth rather than the truth. We should remember that God said, “it is not good that the man should be alone” (Gen. 2:18). Does this reality cease to exist with the resurrection? That does not seem plausible.

So, maybe there is marriage in the millennium after all! In truth, we must say, “now we see through a glass darkly” (1 Cor. 13:12).

Verses 26-27 -

The Lord continues His explanation supporting the doctrine of the resurrection by referring to Exodus 3:6, where God said to Moses, "I am the God of Abraham..." This, of course, was hundreds of years after Abraham. The Lord continued with a doctrinal interpretation based on this statement, "He is not the God of the dead, but the God of the living" (v. 27). Then Jesus came out bluntly and said, "ye therefore do greatly err" (v. 27). This is some of the most direct attack on wrong theology Jesus gave in all of scripture, and the only attack against His accusers up to this point.

By stating that God is the God of the living, not the dead, Jesus emphasizes that the patriarchs must be alive in some form. This implies that there must be a resurrection to fulfill God's promise of being their God eternally. Without the resurrection, God's statement would be meaningless, therefore, the resurrection is an essential doctrine.