The Challenged Christ - Mark 11:27-12:12

Sermon Series: Spare Me the Details - Just Give Me Jesus

Have you ever seen the movie, The Sandlot?  The movie is primarily about a boy named Scotty, who is a self-professed ‘egg-head.’  When Scotty moves to a new town at the beginning of summer he feels like he has no opportunity to make any friends for the summer because school has already let out.  But one day, having been instructed by his mother to go make new friends he follows a couple of the boys that he has seen in his lower-middle class neighborhood to a sandlot where he spends the day watching these boys unite and play around a love that they all have in common – baseball.  When Scotty finally works up the courage to see if he can join in, both he and the other boys realize that he may be the most un-athletic boy they know.  While most of the boys opt at first to make fun of him, one of the boys, Benny, believes they can teach Scotty what he needs to know.  Before long, Scotty has begun to pick up both the knowledge and skills that he needs and finds himself a part of the team.

There are a couple of other sub-plots that take place in the movie.  One that I want us to consider this morning occurs when some boys from another neighborhood show up on the sandlot.  Scotty, Benny, and the other boys on their team are from lower-middle class families.  They all have gloves and they have a bat or two.  But they have no money for extra resources like fancy catcher’s equipment, uniforms, and even balls.  One day while they are practicing several boys from an upper-middle class neighborhood show up on the sandlot.  They all come riding on their bikes (something we never see Scotty or the other boys on his team in possession of) and the first thing the viewer notices is that these boys look the part of a real baseball team.  They have matching uniforms, they have really nice equipment, and they also play baseball on a real baseball diamond – not an unused sandlot.  These boys show up at the sandlot to condescendingly challenge Benny, Scotty, and the others to a game of baseball.  The boys accept the challenge and head to the baseball diamond for their game.  By the looks of things, it’s the boys from the upper-middle class neighborhood who appear to be the real ball players; their uniforms, equipment, and field look the part.  But after Benny, Scotty, and the other boys from the sandlot whip them in the game, the viewers realize that looks can be very deceiving.

Like many people who have viewed this movie and made wrong assumptions, many of us have wrongly used appearances to draw wrong conclusions about who Jesus is.  We often do this in two different ways.  Some of us have looked at Jesus with a very limited knowledge of the Bible and have come to the conclusion that Jesus wasn’t all that impressive.  Others of us like to look at ourselves in a very self-righteous light.  In our minds we look the part of a good and able person.  And if that is the case, we don’t see any need for some Jewish guy who lived 2000 years before.  Either way, when we see no need for Jesus, but hear that we ought to surrender control of our lives to Him, worship Him, and obey Him, our natural tendency is to challenge that.  But I’m going to argue from our text that challenging Jesus isn’t the way we ought to approach Him.  In this section of Mark’s gospel we will see how Jesus responds to challenges of His authority and be able to infer what a more appropriate way of approaching Him might be.

As we begin examining our text this week the first thing we notice is that Jesus is back in the temple.  As He was walking through the temple (probably with His disciples and another crowd) He was approached by a very noteworthy group of men.  Mark says that some of the scribes, elders, and chief priests came to Jesus.  These men were considered the religious elite among the Jews, but they were also the ones who had been given charge over the temple.  In their minds Jesus was on their turf, both now and the day before when He had been in the temple driving out merchants and their livestock, and the money changers.  You can only imagine how angry these men must have been and how much they must have been stewing on this anger after the events of the previous day.  Now they are coming to Jesus and they are looking for answers.  These men ask Jesus in verse 28, “By what authority are you doing these things, or who gave you this authority to do them?”  These men who were representatives from the Sanhedrin were interested in more than just the events of the previous day.  Jesus overturning tables and driving out livestock was offensive to them, but so were other things Jesus had done, such as His presumption to forgive sin, His acceptance of sinners and tax collectors as friends and His understand of the Sabbath.  James Edwards says that, “The clearing of the temple . . . was not a momentary aberration of Jesus but a characteristic expression of His authority.”  But what seems to be bothering these men more than anything is not what Jesus did, but rather what His right to do such things was.  It appears that the chief priests, scribes, and elders had recognized in Jesus a certain power and authority, but they could not figure out who had given Him His authority to do and to act as He was.  These men probably thought that they were asking Jesus a clever question that would ultimately condemn Him.  The only one who could really give Jesus the authority to do these types of things was God, Himself, but in their minds God had granted them power and authority over the temple.  So if Jesus answered that His authority came from someone other than God they would condemn Him for acting on someone else’s authority.  If, on the other hand, Jesus answered that God had given Him His authority then they would condemn Him for blasphemy.  These men believed that Jesus needed to be challenged and they believed that they had come up with a perfect question to do that.

In verse 29 Jesus answers this group of religious leaders with a question (a common practice among rabbis at the time).  He says that He will answer their question, but it was conditional upon them first answering His question.  Then Jesus asked them, “Was the baptism of John from heaven or from man?”  Let me quickly insert a note of some importance.  Some Jews out of reverence to the divine name of God would avoid mentioning God by name and would instead substitute the word ‘Heaven.’  Jesus seems to be going along with this tradition and is therefore asking if the baptism of John is from God or men.  In verse 31 these men begin to discuss the question with one another but realize that it isn’t a question that they are willing to take a stance on.  They reason that if they say “from Heaven” (i.e. from God) then they will have to give another reason for why they did not believe John and what he said.  On the other hand, if they reason that the baptism of John was “from man” then the people will rise up against them because they firmly believed that John was a prophet.  These Jewish leaders may have had some idea about who Jesus was, but what’s so revealing in these verses is that don’t do seem willing to discover the truth.  Jesus is standing there in their presence.  If they had honest questions they could have asked Him.  But these men were not willing to do so.  They were not willing to discover who Jesus really was and to commit themselves to that answer.  They were willing to challenge His authority but they were not willing to invest themselves in discovering the truth.  So Mark reveals the answer of the challenged Christ to these men, “Neither will I tell you by what authority I do these things.”  Jesus refuses to commit Himself to those who refuse to make a commitment to Him.

Consider the text of Matthew 7:15-23.  Jesus is warning His listeners to beware of false prophets.  In verses 15-20 he uses imagery like that of the fig tree we talked about in the last set of verses we covered.  While those who were serving in the temple were carrying out practices that had the appearance of worship, they were not really leading the people to worship with genuine and sincere hearts.  And we saw in the last set of verses that Jesus spoke judgment on the temple and those who were given charge of it.  Then in verses 21-23 Jesus talks about those who ‘call’ on his Name.  While many profess to be followers of God (just like those in charge of the temple would have), they live lives that challenge both the Father and His Son.  And the truth that seems to come to the surface of Matthew 7:15-23 is that Jesus doesn’t commit Himself to those who are not faithfully committed to following after Him.  Jesus demands first place in our lives.  He doesn’t settle for anything less.

We have many individuals in our culture today who are more than willing to challenge who Jesus is.  Some are more vocal in their challenges and don’t hesitate to state their defiance and objections.  Others are less vocal and challenge the person of Christ more in the practical application of their lives.  They live for themselves, pursuing the things that they believe will delight their hearts and fulfill them as individuals.  And in so doing they are proclaiming that they have been given rule and authority over their own lives, much like the chief priests, scribes, and elders believed that they had been given charge over the temple.  But while many will challenge who Jesus is, we have very few who are willing to invest themselves in discovering the truth.  The scary reality that becomes clear after examining this text is that Jesus has no intention of committing Himself to those who won’t commit to Him.

After Jesus gives an answer to the question challenging His authority He begins to tell these chief priests, scribes and elders a parable.  But before we examine the parable we have to put ourselves in the shoes of these representatives of the Sanhedrin.  Each of these men was an expert in the OT and would have been familiar with the content, stories, and analogies within it.  One of the books that they would have been especially familiar with was the book of Isaiah.  So, let’s put ourselves in the shoes of these men and take a quick glance at Isaiah 5:1-7 so that we might familiarize ourselves with one of the texts that these men most certainly would have known well.  Isaiah 5:1-2 says, “Let me sing for my beloved (Who is Isaiah’s beloved?  The answer is God, Himself.) my love song concerning His vineyard: My beloved had a vineyard on a very fertile hill.  He dug it and cleared it of stones, and planted it with choice vines; he built a watchtower in the midst of it, and hewed out a wine vat in it; and he looked for it (NASB – expected it) to yield grapes, but it yielded wild grapes (i.e. bad fruit, NASB – worthless ones).”  A quick read through verse 7 will continue to help us understand some of the metaphor that Isaiah uses.  Isaiah says that God had planted a vineyard, which was supposed to represent Israel (vs. 7), and that after doing everything that He could do for the vineyard (vs. 4) He expected it to produce good grapes (which were supposed to represent good disciples of God), but it only produced bad, or worthless ones (i.e. bad disciples of God).  In Isaiah’s passage, God, Himself, the beloved, is the only main character, and so when He asks at the end of verse 4 why the vineyard produced worthless grapes, the assumption is that it was either a coincidence or something that He had or had not done.  In Isaiah’s text there aren’t any other players that could take responsibility for the bad grapes.  Keep this imagery in mind, and now consider the parable that Jesus tells these experts of the OT.  Jesus begins His parable in chapter 12 by saying, “A man planted a vineyard, and put a fence around it and dug a pit for the winepress and built a tower. . .”  Stop right there.  As an expert in the OT, what is this story sounding like?  Isaiah 5, right?  And can you imagine the insult these men must have felt when they thought that Jesus was trying to teach them something about the book of Isaiah.  These men knew the text well, they knew that God had planted a vineyard and that the grapes of the vineyard had turned out worthless.  But what Jesus said next must have completely caught them off guard, because Jesus introduced new characters into the metaphor when He said, “and leased it to tenants and went into another country.”  Tenants were those who, while not the owners of the vineyard, were given charge of it to tend it, look after it, and to help ensure a good harvest.  So if we continue to interpret Jesus’ parable in light of Isaiah 5, then these tenants are individuals who have been given charge over Israel, to tend to her, look after her, and to help ensure a good harvest.  So who might those tenants be?  They were the chief priests, scribes, and elders.  Then notice what happens in the parable - the tenants begin to assume ownership and right to the vineyard.  So when the owner sends some of his servants (i.e. prophets) to check on the vineyard and to collect some of the produce the tenants take them, beating many, treating many shamefully and even killing some.  In His parable Jesus has introduced new characters and these tenants are individuals who have forgotten their roles as overseers and managers and have begun to challenge the real owner by assuming control over the vineyard and beating and killing those who are faithful servants of the owner.  Then in verse 6 Jesus introduces one more character.  Jesus says that the owner of the vineyard had one son and that the owner of the vineyard was going to send him to claim what was his father’s and what was his, as the heir to his father.  Again, consider this imagery in light of Isaiah 5.  The owner of the vineyard, God, has a Son who He is going to send.  The son in the parable that Jesus introduces can be none other than the coming Messiah.  This should be extraordinary news!  The owner has an heir who is coming.  But note the response of the tenants in verse 7 – they began to conspire to kill this son.  Now look back at Mark 11:18 after Jesus overturned the tables of the money changers in the temple and drove out the merchants and their livestock.  It says, “And the chief priests and the scribes heard it and were seeking a way to destroy Him.”  In Jesus’ parable the tenants conspired together and sought a way to kill the son of the vineyard owner.  And we observed in Mark’s gospel, those given charge and oversight over all of Israel were conspiring together to destroy and kill the Son of God.  In verse 8 Jesus continues His parable, revealing that those tenants who were conspiring against the son, did indeed carry out their plan, taking the son, killing him, and throwing him out of the vineyard.  This of course foreshadowing what the chief priests, scribes, and elders would have done to Jesus.  Then Jesus concludes the parable with the response of the owner.  Jesus says that the owner will come and destroy, not the vineyard, but the tenants, and then give oversight of the vineyard to others.  The focus of Jesus’ parable had not been centered on the produce of the vineyard, like Isaiah 5, but rather on the caregivers of the vineyard.  And in Jesus’ parable the tenants were not individuals faithfully committed to the owner.  Instead they were those who challenged the owner and his son, standing in opposition to them, and assuming ownership and control of what was not theirs.  In Jesus’ parable, those who challenge the father and the son are destroyed.  And we noted in the verses that ended chapter 11 that Jesus refused to commit Himself to those who challenged Him and were unwilling to commit themselves to Him.

One question that begs to be asked of us, contemporary readers of Mark’s gospel, is what any of this has to do with us.  There isn’t any longer a temple in Jerusalem where worship through sacrifices is to take place.  There are no longer chief priests, scribes, and elders who are responsible for giving oversight to our souls.  So why is this important to us?  That’s a great question that has a very good answer.  Consider what Paul says in 1 Corinthians 6:19, “Or do you not know that your body is a temple of the Holy Spirit within you, whom you have from God?”  Did you hear that?  For believers in Jesus our individual bodies are considered temples, for the Holy Spirit resides in each individual believer.  And if our bodies are temples, then who is it that is given charge over them?  Each of us, individually is responsible for making sure that we are growing in Christ and striving to be good disciples of and followers of Him.  We are to make sure that we develop good spiritual fruit within us.  And if that’s the case, then this parable has great application for each of us today as well.

Clearly challenge and opposition to Jesus were on the forefront of Mark’s mind as he was writing this part of his gospel account.  And what becomes clear to the reader is that this challenge of and opposition to Jesus is not the intended response to Jesus.  So what is? Today (Easter Sunday) offers us a great reminder of what one of our ‘right’ responses to Jesus should be.  In the parable we are reminded of the reality of Jesus’ death.  But today, more so than any other day, we celebrate the resurrection of Jesus and His victory over sin, death, and Satan.  So one of the appropriate responses to Jesus is to celebrate Him as the One who conquered sin, death, and Satan.  Another response we can draw from the text is that we ought to commit to Jesus.  It’s the opposite of what it means to stand in opposition to and in challenge of Christ.  Instead we need to recognize Him as Savior and Lord and commit our lives to Him.  Commitment to Christ is a daily surrender to Him, giving Him first place before every other thing, including ourselves.  A third appropriate response to Jesus is to worship Him.  Celebrating Jesus and committing to Him are good things.  But both of those responses are incomplete.  We aren’t rightly approaching Jesus unless we come with a heart of worship, recognizing Him as God and being resolved to make much of Him in all we do.  The chief priests, scribes, and elders approached Jesus with challenge and found themselves with no commitment from Jesus.  How will you approach Him?  Will you come in pride and arrogance, believing in your own goodness and abilities?  If you do, this passage of Mark’s gospel offers you no hope.  But if you will come in humility, celebrating Jesus, committing to Him, and worshiping Him, we can have the hope of salvation and the hope that He will be committed to us as well.  The choice is yours.  But it’s not a choice you can waffle on.  For even in waffling, your making a choice not to commit to and follow after Him.

Small Group Questions for Discussion

1. Read Mark 11:27-33.  As we examined these verses we emphasized the answer of the challenged Christ.  A representative group from the Sanhedrin approached Jesus and challenged Him in regards to His authority to do some of the things He had been doing (i.e. cleansing the temple, forgiving sins, giving new understanding of the Sabbath, etc.).  Jesus tells them that He will answer their question, but that they must first answer a question of His.  When this group of men refuses to provide an answer to Jesus, Jesus answers them that neither will He give them an answer.  We emphasized the truth that when we challenge Christ and refuse to make a commitment to Him, that He will not commit to us either.  How do you think most people who believe in God feel about the statement, "When we challenge Christ and refuse to make a commitment to Him, He will not commit to us either."  Why do so many people have a difficult time believing that?  What do they believe instead?

2. Consider the text of Matthew 7:15-23.  Verses 15-20 talk about identifying false prophets by their fruit, mentioning specifically figs and grapes.  Those fruits should call to mind for us images of what we have seen take place the last few weeks in Mark's gospel.  Jesus cursed the fig tree that had no fruit and told a parable that was similar in many regards to the passage in Isaiah 5 about God planting a vineyard and the vineyard producing bad grapes.  Jesus judged the temple and it's authorities because they were supposed to be producing spiritual fruit, but they doing that well.  They were failing to produce good followers of God.  Verses 21-23 then talks about those who believe they have good standing with God because of their works that appear on the surface to be works of the Kingdom.  But Jesus says to them that on the day of judgment they will be sent away because He did not ever know them.  How do these verses help re-inforce what we saw taking place in Mark 11:27-33?  Why won't Jesus commit HImself to those who do religious works alone?  What's the difference between religious works and real commitment to Christ?

3. Read Mark 12:1-12.  As we examined these verses we emphasized the parable of the challenged Christ.  Jesus told a parable that was similar in many ways to the text of Isaiah 5.  In the parable Jesus paints a picture of tenants who were given oversight of a vineyard that was not their own, but who challenged the owner of His rightful possession by beating and killing the servants that he sent to collect some of the produce and finally killing his only son who he sent for the same reason.  Paul says of believers in Christ in 1 Corinthians 6:19 that our bodies are the temple of Christ.  In many ways we are now like a tenant farmer, given charge over the temple that is our bodies.  Are there times when we forget that we are just given oversight of our bodies and when we seem to challenge God in regards to His rights of ownership of them.  What are some of the circumstances in which we are most likely to do that?  What about our church, are there times when we seem to challenge God in regards to His right of ownership to our church?  What are some of the circumstances in which we are most likely to do that? 

4. What step of faith does this passage of Scripture require us to take as individuals and as a small group?  How do we work this out on mission?