MARK 11 COMMENTARYEDITED BY GLENN PEASE

Jesus Comes to Jerusalem as King

1 As they approached Jerusalem and came to

Bethphage and Bethany at the Mount of Olives,

Jesus sent two of his disciples,

CLARKE, "He sendeth - two of his disciples - This was done but a few days before the passover. See our Lord’s entry into Jerusalem illustrated, on Matthew 21:1-17 (note).

GILL, "And when they came nigh to Jerusalem,.... The Syriac and Ethiopic versions read, "when he came nigh"; that is, Jesus; though not without his disciples, nor the multitude:

unto Bethphage and Bethany; two places so called, near Jerusalem: Bethphage began where Bethany ended, and reached to the city itself. The Vulgate Latin only makes mention of Bethany; See Gill on Mat_21:1.

At the Mount of Olives; near which, the above places were:

he sendeth forth two of his disciples; perhaps Peter and John.

HENRY, "We have here the story of the public entry Christ made into Jerusalem, four or five days before his death. And he came into town thus remarkably, 1. To show that he was not afraid of the power and malice of his enemies in Jerusalem. He did not steal into the city incognito, as one that durst not show his face; no, they needed not send spies to search for him, he comes in with observation. This would be an encouragement to his disciples that were timorous, and cowed at the thought of their enemies' power and rage; let them see how bravely their Master sets them all at defiance. 2. To show that he was not cast down or disquieted at the thoughts of his approaching sufferings. He came, not only publicly, but cheerfully, and with acclamations of joy. Though he was now but taking the field, and girding on the harness, yet, being fully assured of a complete victory, he thus triumphs as though he had put it off.

JAMIESON, "Mar_11:1-11. Christ’s triumphal entry into Jerusalem, on the first day of the week. ( = Mat_21:1-9; Luk_19:29-40; Joh_12:12, Joh_12:19).

1

See on Luk_19:29-40.

BARCLAY, "THE COMING OF THE KING (Mark 11:1-6)

11:1-6 When they were coming near to Jerusalem, to Bethphage and to Bethany,

Jesus despatched two of his disciples, and said to them, "Go into the village

opposite you, and as soon as you come into it, you will find tethered there a colt,

on which no man has ever yet sat. Loose it and bring it to me. And if anyone says

to you, 'Why are you doing this?' say, 'The Lord needs it,' and immediately he

will send it." And they went away and they found the colt tethered, outside a

door, on the open street, and they loosed it. And some of those who were

standing by said to them, "What are you doing loosing this colt?" They said to

them what Jesus had told them to say, and they let them go.

We have come to the last stage of the journey. There had been the time of

withdrawal around Caesarea Philippi in the far north. There had been the time

in Galilee. There had been the stay in the hill-country of Judaea and in the

regions beyond Jordan. There had been the road through Jericho. Now comes

Jerusalem.

We have to note something without which the story is almost unintelligible.

When we read the first three gospels we get the idea that this was actually Jesus'

first visit to Jerusalem. They are concerned to tell the story of Jesus' work in

Galilee. We must remember that the gospels are very short. Into their short

compass is crammed the work of three years, and the writers were bound to

select the things in which they were interested and of which they had special

knowledge. And when we read the fourth gospel we find Jesus frequently in

Jerusalem. (John 2:13, John 5:1, John 7:10.) We find in fact that he regularly

went up to Jerusalem for the great feasts.

There is no real contradiction here. The first three gospels are specially

interested in the Galilaean ministry, and the fourth in the Judaean. In fact,

moreover, even the first three have indications that Jesus was not infrequently in

Jerusalem. There is his close friendship with Martha and Mary and Lazarus at

Bethany, a friendship which speaks of many visits. There is the fact that Joseph

of Arimathaea was his secret friend. And above all there is Jesus' saying in

Matthew 23:37 that often he would have gathered together the people of

Jerusalem as a hen gathers her chickens under her wings but they were

unwilling. Jesus could not have said that unless there had previously been more

than one appeal which had met with a cold response.

This explains the incident of the colt. Jesus did not leave things until the last

moment. He knew what he was going to do and long ago he had made

arrangements with a friend. When he sent forward his disciples, he sent them

with a pass-word that had been pre-arranged--"The Lord needs it now." This

was not a sudden, reckless decision of Jesus. It was something to which all his life

had been budding up.

Bethphage and Bethany were villages near Jerusalem. Very probably Bethphage

means house of figs and Bethany means house of dates. They must have been

2

very close because we know from the Jewish law that Bethphage was one of the

circle of villages which marked the limit of a Sabbath day's journey, that is, less

than a mile, while Bethany was one of the recognized lodging--places for pilgrims

to the Passover when Jerusalem was full.

The prophets of Israel had always had a very distinctive method of getting their

message across. When words failed to move people they did something dramatic,

as if to say, "If you will not hear, you must be compelled to see." (compare

specially 1 Kings 11:30-32.) These dramatic actions were what we might call

acted warnings or dramatic sermons. That method was what Jesus was

employing here. His action was a deliberate dramatic claim to be Messiah.

But we must be careful to note just what he was doing. There was a saying of the

prophet Zechariah (Zechariah 9:9), "Rejoice greatly, O daughter of Zion. Shout

aloud, O daughter of Jerusalem. Lo, your king comes to you; triumphant and

victorious is he, and riding on an ass and upon a colt the foal of an ass." The

whole impact is that the King was coming in peace. In Palestine the ass was not a

despised beast, but a noble one. When a king went to war he rode on a horse,

when he came in peace he rode on an ass.

G. K. Chesterton has a poem in which he makes the modem donkey speak:

"When fishes flew ind forests walk'd

And figs grew upon thorn,

Some moment when the moon was blood

Then surely I was born.

"With monstrous head and sickening cry

And ears like errant wings,

The devil's walking parody

Of all four-footed things.

"The tatter'd outlaw of the earth

Of ancient crooked will;

Starve, scourge, deride me, I am dumb,

I keep my secret still.

"Fools! For I also had my hour,

One far fierce hour and sweet;

3

There was a shout about my ears,

And palms before my feet."

It is a wonderful poem. Nowadays the ass is a beast of amused contempt, but in

the time of Jesus it was the beast of kings. But we must note what kind of a king

Jesus was claiming to be. He came meek and lowly. He came in peace and for

peace. They greeted him as the Son of David, but they did not understand.

It was just at this time that the Hebrew poems, The Psalms of Solomon, were

written. They represent the kind of Son of David whom people expected. Here is

their description of him:

"Behold, O Lord, and raise up unto them their king, the son of

David,

At the time, in the which thou seest, O God, that he may

reign over Israel, thy servant.

And gird him with strength that he may shatter unrighteous rulers,

And that he may purge Jerusalem from nations that trample

her down to destruction.

Wisely, righteously he shall thrust out sinners from the

inheritance,

He shall destroy the pride of sinners as a potter's vessel.

With a rod of iron he shall break in pieces all their substance.

He shall destroy the godless nations with the word of his

mouth.

At his rebuke nations shall flee before him,

And he shall reprove sinners for the thoughts of their

hearts.

"All nations shall be in fear before him,

For he will smite the earth with the word of his mouth forever."

4

(Wis 17:21-25, 39.)

That was the kind of poem on which the people nourished their hearts. They

were looking for a king who would shatter and smash and break. Jesus knew it--

and he came meek and lowly, riding upon an ass.

When Jesus rode into Jerusalem that day, he claimed to be king, but he claimed

to be King of peace. His action was a contradiction of all that men hoped for and

expected.

COFFMAN, "The Gospel of Mark condensed a great detail of material into the

remaining six chapters, and not all of it is in strict chronological sequence.

However, in this eleventh chapter, there are three successive days designated

(Mark 11:11:11; Mark 11:11:12; Mark 11:11:20; and Mark 11:11:27). In the

designed brevity of the gospel, it was inevitable that some events would be

recorded with many details omitted and that some things would be omitted

altogether. The sections of this chapter are devoted to: the triumphal entry

(Mark 11:1-11), withering of the fig tree (Mark 11:12-14 and Mark 20:25), the

second cleansing of the temple (Mark 11:15-19), and the question concerning the

authority of Jesus (Mark 11:27-33).

THE TRIUMPHAL ENTRY

This event is recorded in all four of the gospels, a testimony of the great

importance attached to it. The four accounts are independent, historical, and

exceedingly significant, each in its own right. There is absolutely no ground

whatever for making any one of them the "original" in its relation to the others.

All are original in the sense of being founded on the event itself and bearing the

most convincing evidence of being truthful accounts of the facts related.

One grows weary of the knee-jerk repetition in so many of the commentaries, as,

for example, in these lines from Cranfield: "The Markan account provides

vividness of detail with the most notable restraint regarding Messianic

colour."[1] Cranfield said this with reference to the event of the triumphal entry,

despite the simple fact that Mark provided less "vividness of detail" than any of

the other sacred authors. Here are the details supplied from the other three

gospels which Mark omitted:

The mother of the colt was a necessary part of the whole event; the colt would

not have followed without her!

Both animals were brought to Jesus.

Garments were spread on both of them.

Jesus sat on both animals (his feet probably on the colt).

The colt was unbroken, unusable except in connection with its mother.

5

The dramatic descent from the Mount of Olives.

The hailing of Jesus as the King of Israel.

The request of the Pharisees that Jesus rebuke such exclamations.

The presence of two converging multitudes, one from the city coming out to meet

Jesus, the other following from Bethany.

The element of the resurrection of Lazarus stimulating the size of both

converging multitudes.

The stirring up of the whole city.

Christ's reply to the Pharisees that, if the multitudes should remain silent, the

very stones would cry out.

The frustration of the Pharisees who said, "Behold how ye prevail nothing; lo,

the world is gone after him."SIZE>

The astounding fact of the Gospel of Mark is not "vividness of detail," as so

monotonously alleged, but rather an astounding lack of detail as in the instance

before us. The significance of this is that the "vividness of detail" allegedly found

in Mark is the principal prop of the so-called Markan theory. This pattern of

Mark's omission of details supplied by the other gospels extends throughout the

gospel, the few instances in which he gave more details being utterly outweighed

by those in which, as here, he gave far less. Therefore, it may be dogmatically

affirmed that Mark's overwhelming superiority in the matter of "vivid details"

is a scholarly conceit void of all Scriptural support. The "greater vividness of

details" assertion is contradicted by the very size of the gospel itself, being by far

the shortest. Furthermore, there is the fact, already noted, that Mark's style is

somewhat verbose, using more words to convey fewer thoughts. Note the

following:

MARK 8:11

And the Pharisees came forth, began to question with him, asking of him a sign

from heaven, tempting him.

MATTHEW 16:1

And the Pharisees and Sadducees came, and tempting him, asked him to show

them a sign from heaven.

In the above, Matthew with one less word gives all of the facts recorded by

Mark, plus the added information that the Pharisees were accompanied by the

Sadducees. This is characteristic throughout the gospels.SIZE>

ENDNOTE:

6

[1] C. E. B. Cranfield, The Gospel according to St. Mark (Cambridge: The

University Press, 1966), p. 347.

And when they draw nigh unto Jerusalem, unto Bethphage and Bethany, at the

mount of Olives, he sendeth two of his disciples. (Mark 11:1)

Bethphage, meaning "place of figs." and Bethany, meaning "place of dates,"

were two villages almost adjacent to Jerusalem, being in fact nestled into the

Mount of Olives, a 2,600-foot elevation lying along the eastern boundary of

Jerusalem.

He sendeth two of his disciples ... It is not known who these were.

BURKITT, "The former part of this chapter acquaints us with our Saviour's

solemn and triumphant riding into the city of Jerusalem: he who in all his

journies travelled like a poor man on foot, without noise, and without train; now

he goes up to Jerusalem to die for sinners, he rides, to show his great

forwardness to lay down his life for us: the beast he rides on is an ass, as the

manner of kings and great persons anciently was, and to fulfil that prophecy,

Tell ye the daughter of Zion, Behold thy king cometh riding upon an ass

Zechariah 9:9. It was also an ass upon which never man sat before; signifying

thereby, that the most unruly and untamed creatures become obsequious to

Christ.

Grotius observes, that such animals as had not been employed in the use of man,

were wont to be chosen for sacred uses. Even heathens adjudged those things

most proper for the service of the gods, which had never been put to profane

uses. Thus in 1 Samuel 6:7. we read that the Philistines returned the ark in a new

cart, drawn by heifers never before put into the yoke; they thinking them

polluted by being put to profane work. Our Saviour here chooses an ass which

had never been backed before; and that the colt should so patiently suffer Christ

to ride upon him, was miraculous. And this was a borrowed ass, whereby our

Saviour right to all the creatures was manifested; and accordingly he bids his

disciples tell the owner that the Lord hath need of him.

Observe lastly, What a clear and full demonstration Christ gave of his divine

nature; of his omnisciency in foreseeing and foretelling the event; of his

omnipotency, in inclining the heart, and overruling the will, of the owner to let

the colt go; and of his sovereignty, as he was Lord of the creatures, to command

and call for their service when he needed them.

CONSTABLE, "The village opposite was evidently Bethphage, the one the

disciples would have encountered after leaving Bethany for Jerusalem. The colt

was a young donkey. The Mosaic Law specified that an animal devoted to a

sacred purpose had to be one that had not been used for ordinary purposes

(Numbers 19:2; Deuteronomy 21:3). Jesus told the disciples to bring both the colt

and its mother to Him (Matthew 21:2). The "Lord" is simply a respectful title

here referring to Jesus whom the owner evidently had met previously or knew

about. If the owner was a believer in Jesus, "Lord" may have had a deeper

7

meaning for him.

The colt was unbroken, and Jesus was able to ride on it comfortably. These facts

suggested that Jesus might be the sinless Man who was able to fulfill the Adamic

Covenant mandate to subdue the animals (Genesis 1:28; cf. Matthew 17:27), the

Second Adam.

BI 1-11, "And when they came nigh to Jerusalem, unto Bethphage and Bethany, at the Mount of Olives.

The triumphal entry

I. The occasion of this homage.

II. The scene of this homage. Scene of-

1. His ministry.

2. His martyrdom.

III. The offerers of this homage.

IV. By what actions this homage was expressed.

V. The language in which this homage was uttered. (J. R. Thomson.)

Christ entering Jerusalem

I. The story presents to view Christ’s sovereignty over all men.

II. This story also exhibits Christ’s foreknowledge of all ordinary events. He tells the disciples, as they set forth to do this errand, just what will happen.

III. Then again, this story discloses Christ’s power over all the brute creation (Luk_19:35). No other instance of Jesus’ riding upon an animal of any sort has been recorded in His history; and of all, this must have been a beast most difficult to employ in a confused pageant.

IV. Once more: this story illustrates Christ’s majesty as the Messiah of God. Two of the evangelists quote at this point the Old Testament prophecy concerning this triumphal entry into Jerusalem (Zec_9:8-9). (C. S. Robinson, D. D.)

Christ entering Jerusalem

What is the meaning of the day? What was the purpose of the demonstration? The suggestions that Jesus lost control of either Himself or of the people, so as to be carried away by their enthusiasm, are unworthy of His former history and of His subsequent teachings.

I. The day is memorable for its surprises and reversals of judgment. Jesus only judged rightly; next to Him the children in the temple. The hopes and visions of the people and disciples were wide of the mark and doomed to disappointment. This day to them promised a throne, but hastened the cross and a tomb. The fears and hates of the Pharisees and rulers were surprised and reversed. Jesus made no attempt at temporal power and offered no resistance.

II. This day emphasizes spirituality as the only key to a right understanding of persons and providences. Christ was revealed as a king, but not of this world. After

8

the gift of the Spirit the apostles clearly perceived the prediction of prophecy, the prediction of providence, in the songs of praise.

III. What the day teaches of the child-like spirit should not escape.

IV. We shall not be too bold in pronouncing this day memorable as a prophecy. The meaning of it was projected into the future. It is prophetic of the entrance into the heavenly Jerusalem, when, indeed, souls shall give Him homage. That triumphal entry into the city of David was followed by crucifixion. This triumphal entry into the city of God shall be consummated in coronation. (J. R. Danford.)

“Who is this?”

I. Let us investigate the different feelings which gave birth to this inquiry.

1. With many it was a feeling of thoughtless wonder.

2. Angry jealousy prompted the question in some.

3. There was yet another class of questioners, whose state of mind may properly be described as that of irresolute doubt.

II. The true answer to the question.

1. Go to the multitude by whom Jesus is surrounded, and ask, “Who is this?”

2. Go to the ancient prophets and ask, “Who is this?” (Zec_9:9).

3. Go to the apostles after they were enlightened by the Holy Spirit.

4. Go to the experienced believer. (J. Jowett, M. A.)

Honouring Christ

I. Consider the meaning of the incident itself, the spirit and truth which it expresses. It was, in fact, an expressive illustration of His claims as the Messiah. It was a spontaneous heart offering. It indicates Christ’s influence on His own age. The truth does get honoured at times, even in its own time. The prophet is not without his reward. A noble life will touch the hearts of the people.

II. Consider some of the lessons which are to be drawn from the conduct of the multitude. The reputation of Christ was great. The multitude was lashed into enthusiasm. But then came disappointment. He assumed no royal dignity. “Crucify Him!” It was the fickle element that helps to constitute public opinion. We should, therefore, consider the grounds and motives from which we honour Christ. He demands more than our fickle, transient homage. He is not truly honoured by mere emotions. Men get glimpses of Christ’s beauty and power. His sacrifice in its incidents moves to tears; but the real spirit and significance of it all are missed. Christ needs more than good resolutions under the influence of emotional excitement. We have to honour Him by our perfect self-surrender and trust; and by our actions amid the mire, and toil, and dust of daily traffic. Real honour must be faithful and persistent, like that of the loving women who, when Peter meanly shrank, stood at the last hour by His cross, and were, on the first dawn of Easter Day, at His sepulchre. There will necessarily be variations in religious moods. But uplifting moments should leave us higher when they pass. Christ asks more than public honours. Professional respectabilities not enough. He wants individual honour and homage. The true heart’s sacrifice more than the hosannas of the thoughtless hollow

9

crowd.

III. Consider the significance of this transaction in its relations to Christ Himself. It reveals His true glory. He despised the earthly crown. Outward glory was not His object. He manifested the internal, spiritual, eternal. The kind of triumph here symbolized. That was one to be reached through sorrow, agony, death; a triumph of self-sacrificing love. It was not the coronation of sorrow, but victory through death. There is no real victory which does not partake of the qualities of the Lord’s. Obedient, submissive, self-sacrificing love is in our appointed path to the upward heights of glory. You may share Christ’s victory. Then honour Him in a kindred spirit of sympathy and self-renunciation. My Lord and my God! Let every heart honour Him! (E. H. Chaplin, D. D.)

2 saying to them, “Go to the village ahead of

you, and just as you enter it, you will find a colt

tied there, which no one has ever ridden. Untie

it and bring it here.

CLARKE, "Whereon never man sat - No animal was allowed to be employed in sacred uses, even among the heathen, that had previously been used for any domestic or agricultural purpose; and those which had never been yoked were considered as sacred. See several proofs of this in the note on Num_19:2 (note), and add this from Ovid: -

Bos tibi, Phoebus ait, solis occurret in arvis,Nullum passa jugum curvique immunis aratri

Met. lib. iii. v. 10

The Delphic oracles this answer give: -Behold among the fields a lonely cow,Unworn with yokes, unbroken to the plough.

GILL, "And saith unto them, go your way into the village,.... Either of Bethany or of Nob. The Ethiopic version renders it "the city", and so reads a copy of Stephens's: some have thought the city of Jerusalem is intended, but without any reason; See Gill on Mat_21:9;

over against you. The Syriac and Persic versions read, "over against us": the sense is the same; for Christ and his disciples were together: this suits with either of the above mentioned places:

and as soon as ye be entered into it; are come to the town's end, and to one of the first houses in it,

10

ye shall find a colt tied: Matthew says, "an ass tied, and a colt with her", Mat_21:2; both no doubt true:

whereon never man sat; which had never been backed and broke, and which makes it the more wonderful, that Christ should choose to ride upon it, and that that should quietly carry him:

loose him, and bring him; that is, away to me.

HENRY, "I. The outside of this triumph was very mean; he rode upon an ass's colt, which being an ass, looked contemptible, and made no figure; and, being but a colt, whereon never man sat, we may suppose, was rough and untrimmed, and not only so, but rude and ungovernable, and would disturb and disgrace the solemnity. This colt was borrowed too. Christ went upon the water in a borrowed boat, ate the passover in a borrowed chamber, was buried in a borrowed sepulchre, and here rode on a borrowed ass. Let not Christians scorn to be beholden one to another, and, when need is, to go a borrowing, for our Master did not. He had no rich trappings; they threw their clothes upon the colt, and so he sat upon him, Mar_11:7. The persons that attended, were mean people; and all the show they could make, was, by spreading their garments in the way (Mar_11:8), as they used to do at the feast of tabernacles. All these were marks of his humiliation; even when he would be taken notice of, he would be taken notice of for his meanness; and they are instructions to us, not to mind high things, but to condescend to them of low estate. How ill doth it become Christians to take state, when Christ was so far from affecting it!

II. The inside of this triumph was very great; not only as it was the fulfilling of the scripture (which is not taken notice of here, as it as in Matthew), but as there were several rays of Christ's glory shining forth in the midst of all this meanness. 1. Christ showed his knowledge of things distant, and his power over the wills of men, when he sent his disciples for the colt, Mar_11:1-3. By this it appears that he can do every thing, and no thought can be withholden from him. 2. He showed his dominion over the creatures in riding on a colt that was never backed. The subjection of the inferior part of the creation to man is spoken of with application to Christ (Psa_8:5, Psa_8:6, compared with Heb_2:8); for to him it is owing, and to his mediation, that we have any remaining benefit by the grant God made to man, of a sovereignty in this lower world, Gen_1:28. And perhaps Christ, in riding the ass's colt, would give a shadow of his power over the spirit of man, who is born as the wild ass's colt, Job_11:12. 3. The colt was brought from a place where two ways met (Mar_11:4), as if Christ would show that he came to direct those into the right way, who had two waysbefore them, and were in danger of taking the wrong. 4. Christ received the joyful hosannas of the people; that is, both the welcome they gave him and their good wishes to the prosperity of his kingdom, Mar_11:9. It was God that put it into the hearts of these people to cry Hosanna, who were not by art and management brought to it, as those were who afterward cried, Crucify, crucify. Christ reckons himself honoured by the faith and praises of the multitude, and it is God that brings people to do him this honour beyond their own intentions.

COFFMAN, "As to which village was meant, there is no certain way to

determine it; but Matthew's mention of their coming to Bethphage with no

mention of Bethany suggests that the latter was the "village over against" them.

Mark and Luke writing at a later date than Matthew threw in the name of the

village where they got the colt. This writer is aware that this contradicts the

notions regarding Mark's being the first gospel; but this is only one of a hundred

11

examples in the text itself suggesting the priority of Matthew, a position which

this writer accepts as far more likely to be true. The historical fact of Matthew's

being the first book in the New Testament is of immense weight.

A colt tied ... The mother would not depart from the colt if the latter was tied,

hence it was unnecessary to tie both animals. Tying the mother, on the other

hand, would not restrain the colt from wandering off. Both were tied.

MACLAREN, "A ROYAL PROGRESS

Two considerations help us to appreciate this remarkable incident of our Lord’s triumphal entry into Jerusalem. The first of these is its date. It apparently occurred on the Sunday of the Passion Week. The Friday saw the crosses on Calvary. The night before, Jesus had sat at the modest feast that was prepared in Bethany, where Lazarus was one of the guests, Martha was the busy servant, and Mary poured out the lavish treasures of her love upon His feet. The resurrection of Lazarus had created great popular excitement; and that excitement is the second consideration which throws light upon this incident. The people had rallied round Christ, and, consequently, the hatred of the official and ecclesiastical class had been raised to boiling-point. It was at that time that our Lord deliberately presented Himself before the nation as the Messiah, and stirred up still more this popular enthusiasm. Now, if we keep these two things in view, I think we shall be at the right point from which to consider the whole incident. To it, and not merely to the words which I have chosen as our starting-point, I wish to draw attention now. I am mistaken if there are not in it very important and practical lessons for ourselves.

I. First, note that deliberate assumption by Christ of royal authority.

I shall have a good deal to say presently about the main fact which bears upon that, but in the meantime I would note, in passing, a subsidiary illustration of it, in the errand on which He sent these messengers to the little ‘village over against’ them; and in the words which He put into their mouths. They were to go, and, without a word, to loose and bring away the colt fastened at a door, where it was evidently waiting the convenience of its owner to mount it. If, as was natural, any objection or question was raised, they were to answer exactly as servants of a king would do, if he sent them to make requisition on the property of his subjects, ‘The Lord hath need of him.’

I do not dwell on our Lord’s supernatural knowledge as coming out here; nor on the fact that the owner of the colt was probably a partial disciple, perhaps a secret one-ready to recognise the claim that was made. But I ask you to notice here the assertion, in act and word, of absolute authority, to which all private convenience and rights of possession are to give way unconditionally. The Sovereign’s need is a sovereign reason. What He requires He has a right to take. Well for us, brethren, if we yield as glad, as swift, and as unquestioning obedience to His claims upon us, and upon our possessions, as that poor peasant of Bethphage gave in the incident before us! But there is not only the assertion, here, of absolute authority, but note how, side by side with this royal style, there goes the acknowledgment of poverty. Here is a pauper King, who having nothing yet possesses all things. ‘The Lord’-that is a great title-’hath need of him’-that is a strange verb to go with such a nominative. But this little sentence, in its two halves of authority and of dependence, puts into four words the whole blessed paradox of the life of Jesus Christ upon earth. ‘Though He was rich, yet for our sakes He became poor’; and being Lord and Owner of all things, yet owed His daily bread to ministering women, borrowed a boat to preach from, a house

12

wherein to lay His head, a shroud and a winding-sheet to enfold His corpse, a grave in which to lie, and from which to rise, ‘the Lord of the dead and of the living.’

Not only so, but there is another thought suggested by these words. The accurate, or, at least, the probable reading, of one part of the third verse is given in the Revised Version, ‘Say ye that the Lord hath need of him, and straightway he will send him back hither.’ That is to say, these last words are not Christ’s assurance to His two messengers that their embassy would succeed, but part of the message which He sends by them to the owner of the colt, telling him that it was only a loan which was to be returned. Jesus Christ is debtor to no man. Anything given to Him comes back again. Possessions yielded to that Lord are recompensed a hundredfold in this life, if in nothing else in that there is a far greater sweetness in that which still remains. ‘What I gave I have,’ said the wise old epitaph. It is always true. Do you not think that the owner of the patient beast, on which Christ placidly paced into Jerusalem on His peaceful triumph, would be proud all his days of the use to which his animal had been put, and would count it as a treasure for the rest of its life? If you and I will yield our gifts to Him, and lay them upon His altar, be sure of this, that the altar will ennoble and will sanctify all that is laid upon it. All that we have rendered to Him gains fragrance from His touch, and comes back to us tenfold more precious because He has condescended to use it.

So, brethren, He still moves amongst us, asking for our surrender of ourselves and of our possessions to Him, and pledging Himself that we shall lose nothing by what we give to Him, but shall be infinitely gainers by our surrender. He still needs us. Ah! if He is ever to march in triumph through the world, and be hailed by the hosannas of all the tribes of the earth, it is requisite for that triumph that His children should surrender first themselves, and then all that they are, and all that they have, to Him. To us there comes the message, ‘The Lord hath need of you.’ Let us see that we answer as becomes us.

But then, more important is the other instance here of this assertion of royal authority. I have already said that we shall not rightly understand it unless we take into full account the state of popular feeling at the time. We find in John’s Gospel great stress laid on the movement of curiosity and half-belief which followed on the resurrection of Lazarus. He tells us that crowds came out from Jerusalem the night before to gaze upon the Lifebringer and the quickened man. He also tells us that another enthusiastic crowd flocked out of Jerusalem before Jesus sent for the colt to the neighbouring village. We are to keep in mind, therefore, that what He did here was done in the midst of a great outburst of popular enthusiasm. We are to keep in mind, too, the season of Passover, when religion and patriotism, which were so closely intertwined in the life of the Jews, were in full vigorous exercise. It was always a time of anxiety to the Roman authorities, lest this fiery people should break out into insurrection. Jerusalem at the Passover was like a great magazine of combustibles, and into it Jesus flung a lighted brand amongst the inflammable substances that were gathered there. We have to remember, too, that all His life long He had gone exactly on the opposite tack. Remember how He betook Himself to the mountain solitudes when they wanted to make Him a king. Remember how He was always damping down Messianic enthusiasm. But here, all at once, He reverses His whole conduct, and deliberately sets Himself to make the most public and the most exciting possible demonstration that He was ‘King of Israel.’

For what was it that He did? Our Evangelist here does not quote the prophecy from Zechariah, but two other Evangelists do. Our Lord then deliberately dressed Himself by the mirror of prophecy, and assumed the very characteristics which the prophet had given long ago as the mark of the coming King of Zion. If He had wanted to

13

excite a popular commotion, that is what He would have done.

Why did He act thus? He was under no illusion as to what would follow. For the night before He had said: ‘She hath come beforehand to anoint My body for the burial.’ He knew what was close before Him in the future. And, because He knew that the end was at hand, He felt that, once at least, it was needful that He should present Himself solemnly, publicly, I may almost say ostentatiously, before the gathered nation, as being of a truth the Fulfiller and the fulfilment of all the prophecies and the hopes built upon them that had burned in Israel, with a smoky flame indeed, but for so many ages. He also wanted to bring the rulers to a point. I dare not say that He precipitated His death, or provoked a conflict, but I do say that deliberately, and with a clear understanding of what He was doing, He took a step which forced them to show their hand. For after such a public avowal of who He was, and such public hosannas surging round His meek feet as He rode into the city, there were but two courses open for the official class: either to acknowledge Him, or to murder Him. Therefore He reversed His usual action, and deliberately posed, by His own act, as claiming to be the Messiah long prophesied and long expected.

Now, what do you think of the man that did that? If He did it, then either He is what the rulers called Him, a ‘deceiver,’ swollen with inordinate vanity and unfit to be a teacher, or else we must fall at His feet and say ‘Rabbi! Thou art the Son of God; Thou art the King of Israel.’ I venture to believe that to extol Him and to deny the validity of His claims is in flagrant contradiction to the facts of His life, and is an unreasonable and untenable position.

II. Notice the revelation of a new kind of King and Kingdom.

Our Evangelist, from whom my text is taken, has nothing to say about Zechariah’s prophecy which our Lord set Himself to fulfil. He only dwells on the pathetic poverty of the pomp of the procession. But other Evangelists bring into view the deeper meaning of the incident. The centre-point of the prophecy, and of Christ’s intentional fulfilment of it, lies in the symbol of the meek and patient animal which He bestrode. The ass was, indeed, used sometimes in old days by rulers and judges in Israel, but the symbol was chosen by the prophet simply to bring out the peacefulness and the gentleness inherent in the Kingdom, and the King who thus advanced into His city. If you want to understand the meaning of the prophet’s emblem, you have only to remember the sculptured slabs of Assyria and Babylon, or the paintings on the walls of Egyptian temples and tombs, where Sennacherib or Rameses ride hurtling in triumph in their chariots, over the bodies of prostrate foes; and then to set by the side of these, ‘Rejoice! O daughter of Zion; thy King cometh unto thee riding upon an ass, and upon a colt the foal of an ass.’ If we want to understand the significance of this sweet emblem, we need only, further, remember the psalm that, with poetic fervour, invokes the King: ‘Gird Thy sword upon Thy thigh, O Most Mighty, and in Thy majesty ride prosperously . . . and Thy right hand shall teach thee terrible things. Thine arrows are sharp in the heart of the King’s enemies; the people fall under Thee.’ That is all that that ancient singer could conceive of the triumphant King of the world, the Messiah; a conqueror, enthroned in His chariot, and the twanging bowstring, drawn by His strong hand, impelling the arrow that lodged in the heart of His foes. And here is the fulfilment. ‘Go ye into the village over against you, and ye shall find a colt tied . . . And they set Him thereon.’ Christ’s kingdom, like its King, has no power but gentleness and the omnipotence of patient love.

If ‘Christian’ nations, as they are called, and Churches had kept the significance of that emblem in mind, do you think that their hosannas would have gone up so often for conquerors on the battlefields; or that Christian communities would have been in complicity with war and the glorifying thereof, as they have been? And, if Christian

14

churches had remembered and laid to heart the meaning of this triumphal entry, and its demonstration of where the power of the Master lay, would they have struck up such alliances with worldly powers and forms of force as, alas! have weakened and corrupted the Church for hundreds of years? Surely, surely, there is no more manifest condemnation of war and the warlike spirit, and of the spirit which finds the strength of Christ’s Church in anything material and violent, than is that solitary instance of His assumption of royal state when thus He entered into His city. I need not say a word, brethren, about the nature of Christ’s kingdom as embodied in His subjects, as represented in that shouting multitude that marched around Him. How Caesar in his golden house in Rome would have sneered and smiled at the Jewish peasant, on the colt, and surrounded by poor men, who had no banners but the leafy branches from the trees, and no pomp to strew in his way but their own worn garments! And yet these were stronger in their devotion, in their enthusiastic conviction that He was the King of Israel and of the whole earth, than Caesar, with all his treasures and with all his legions and their sharp swords. Christ accepts poor homage because He looks for hearts; and whatever the heart renders is sweet to Him. He passes on through the world, hailed by the acclamations of grateful hearts, needing no bodyguard but those that love Him; and they need to bear no weapons in their hands, but their mission is to proclaim with glad hearts hosannas to the King that ‘cometh in the name of the Lord.’

There is one more point that I may note. Another of the Evangelists tells us that it was when the humble cortège swept round the shoulder of Olivet, and caught sight of the city gleaming in the sunshine, across the Kedron valley, that they broke into the most rapturous of their hosannas, as if they would call to the city that came in view to rejoice and welcome its King. And what was the King doing when that sight burst upon Him, and while the acclamations eddied round Him? His thoughts were far away. His eyes with divine prescience looked on to the impending end, and then they dimmed, and filled with tears; and He wept over the city.

That is our King; a pauper King, a meek and patient King, a King that delights in the reverent love of hearts, a King whose armies have no swords, a King whose eyes fill with tears as He thinks of men’s woes and cries. Blessed be such a King!

III. Lastly, we have the Royal visitation of the Temple.

Our Evangelist has no word to speak about the march of the procession down into the valley, and up on the other side, and through the gate, and into the narrow streets of the city that was ‘moved’ as they passed through it. His language sounds as if he considered that our Lord’s object in entering Jerusalem at all was principally to enter the Temple. He ‘looked round on all things’ that were there. Can we fancy the keen observance, the recognition of the hidden bad and good, the blazing indignation, and yet dewy pity, in those eyes? His visitation of the Temple was its inspection by its Lord. And it was an inspection in order to cleanse. To-day He looked; to-morrow He wielded the whip of small cords. His chastisement is never precipitate. Perfect knowledge wields His scourge, and pronounces condemnation.

Brethren, Jesus Christ comes to us as a congregation, to the church to which we belong, and to us individually, with the same inspection. He whose eyes are a flame of fire, says to His churches to-day, ‘I know thy works.’ What would He think if He came to us and tested us?

In the incident of my text He was fulfilling another ancient prophecy, which says, ‘The Lord shall suddenly come to His Temple, and . . . sit as a refiner of silver . . . like a refiner’s fire and as fuller’s soap . . . and He shall purify the sons of Levi. . .. Then shall the offering of Jerusalem be pleasant, as in the days of old.’

15

We need nothing more, we should desire nothing more earnestly, than that He would come to us: ‘Search me, O Christ, and know me. And see if there be any wicked way in me, and lead me in the way everlasting.’ Jesus Christ is the King of England as truly as of Zion; and He is your King and mine. He comes to each of us, patient, meek, loving; ready to bless and to cleanse. Dear brother, do you open your heart to Him? Do you acknowledge Him as your King? Do you count it your highest honour if He will use you and your possessions, and condescend to say that He has need of such poor creatures as we are? Do you cast your garments in the way, and say: ‘Ride on, great Prince’? Do you submit yourself to His inspection, to His cleansing? Remember, He came once on ‘a colt, the foal of an ass, meek, and having salvation.’ He will come ‘on the white horse, in righteousness to judge and to make war’ and with power to destroy.

Oh! I beseech you, welcome Him as He comes in gentle love, that when He comes in judicial majesty you may be among the ‘armies of heaven that follow after,’ and from immortal tongues utter rapturous and undying hosannas.

3 If anyone asks you, ‘Why are you doing this?’

say, ‘The Lord needs it and will send it back

here shortly.’”

CLARKE, "And straightway he will send him hither - From the text, I think it is exceedingly plain, that our Lord did not beg, but borrow, the colt; therefore the latter clause of this verse should be understood as the promise of returning him. Is not the proper translation the following? And if any one say to you, Why do ye

this? Say, the Lord hath need of him, and will speedily send him back hither - και�

ευθεως�αυτον�αποστελλει��δε. Some eminent critics take the same view of the passage.

GILL, "And if any man say unto you,.... As very likely they would, and it would be strange if they should not say something to them, especially the owners of it:

why do ye this? Why do ye untie the ass, and attempt to carry it away, when it is none of your own, and it belongs to another man?

Say ye that the Lord hath need of him; our Lord and yours, the Lord of heaven and earth, and all things in it; it looks as if this title, "the Lord", was what Jesus was well known by; see Joh_11:28; unless it can be thought, that the owners of the colt were such, that believed in Christ, as is not improbable; and so would at once understand by the language who it was for, and let it go:

and straightway he will send him, hither; as soon as ever he hears that the Lord, by whom he would presently understand Jesus, wanted him for his present purpose; he will send him with all readiness and cheerfulness, without the least hesitation, or making any dispute about it.

16

COFFMAN, "The Lord hath need of him ... Jesus here referred to himself as

"Lord," a term that cannot, in context, be separated from a claim of divinity on

Jesus' part.

And straightway he will send him back hither ... The Greek word here rendered

"hither" is actually "here";[2] it is thus a reference to the place where Jesus was

standing when he gave this order. The word "back" is thus not a reference to

taking the animal back but to the coming "back" of the disciples with the colt.

Translators and commentators have a great difficulty with this rather unusual

mode of expression; but the meaning is absolutely clear in Matthew: "And

straightway he will send them" (Matthew 21:3), meaning the owner would

straightway send the requested colt (and its mother) to Jesus. The notion that

Jesus was here promising to send the animal back promptly is ridiculous, as if

the Lord would need to promise any such thing in order to procure an animal

which he already knew would be promptly given without any such promise. The

appearance of this event in all three synoptic gospels is proof enough that the

supernatural knowledge of the Lord regarding where the colt would be found,

the fact of its being tied and being with its mother: and the fact of the owner's

willingness to allow the Lord to use them that supernatural knowledge is the

main point of the narrative, along with the element of fulfilling prophecy.

ENDNOTE:

[2] Nestle Greek Text (Grand Rapids, Michigan: Zondervan Publishing House,

1972.

MACLAREN, "CHRIST'S NEED OF US AND OURS

You will remember that Jesus Christ sent two of His disciples into the village that looked down on the road from Bethany to Jerusalem, with minute instructions and information as to what they were to do and find there. The instructions may have one of two explanations-they suggest either superhuman knowledge or a previous arrangement. Perhaps, although it is less familiar to our thoughts, the latter is the explanation. There is a remarkable resemblance, in that respect, to another incident which lies close beside this one in time, when our Lord again sent two disciples to make preparation for the Passover, and, with similar minuteness, told them that they would find, at a certain point, a man bearing a pitcher of water. Him they were to accost, and he would take them to the room that had been prepared. Now the old explanation of both these incidents is that Jesus Christ knew what was going to happen. Another possible explanation, and in my view more probable and quite as instructive, is, that Jesus Christ had settled with the two owners what was to happen. Clearly, the owner of the colt was a disciple, because at once he gave up his property when the message was repeated, ‘the Lord hath need of him.’ Probably he had been one of the guests at the modest festival that had been held the night before, in the village close by, in Simon’s house, and had seen how Mary had expended her most precious possession on the Lord, and, under the influence of the resurrection of Lazarus, he, too, perhaps, was touched, and was glad to arrange with Jesus Christ to have his colt waiting there at the cross-road for his Master’s convenience. But, be that as it may, it seems to me that this incident, and especially these words that I have read for a text, carry very striking and important lessons for us, whether we look at them in connection with the incident itself, or whether we venture to give them a

17

somewhat wider application. Let me take these two points in turn.

I. Now, what strikes one about our Lord’s requisitioning the colt is this, that here is a piece of conduct on His part singularly unlike all the rest of His life.

All through it, up to this last moment, His one care was to damp down popular enthusiasm, to put on the drag whenever there came to be the least symptom of it, to discourage any reference to Him as the Messiah-King of Israel, to shrink back from the coarse adulation of the crowd, and to glide quietly through the world, blessing and doing good. But now, at the end, He flings off all disguise. He deliberately sets Himself, at a time when popular enthusiasm ran highest and was most turbid and difficult to manage, at the gathering of the nation for the Passover in Jerusalem, to cast an effervescing element into the caldron. If He had planned to create a popular rising, He could not have done anything more certain to bring it about than what He did that morning when He made arrangements for a triumphal procession into the city, amidst the excited crowds gathered from every quarter of the land. Why did He do that? What was the meaning of it? Then there is another point in this requisitioning of the colt. He not only deliberately set Himself to stir up popular excitement, but He consciously did what would be an outward fulfilment of a great Messianic prophecy. I hope you are wiser than to fancy that Zechariah’s prophecy of the peaceful monarch who was to come to Zion, meek and victorious, and riding upon a ‘colt the foal of an ass,’ was fulfilled by the outward fact of Christ being mounted on this colt ‘whereon never man sat.’ That is only the shell, and if there had been no such triumphal entry, our Lord would as completely have fulfilled Zechariah’s prophecy. The fulfilment of it did not depend on the petty detail of the animal upon which He sat when He entered the city, nor even on that entrance. The meaning of the prophecy was that to Zion, wherever and whatever it is, there should come that Messianic King, whose reign owed nothing to chariots and horses and weapons of war for its establishment, but who, meek and patient, pacing upon the humble animal used only for peaceful services, and not mounted on the prancing steed of the warrior, should inaugurate the reign of majesty and of meekness. Our Lord uses the external fact just as the prophet had used it, as of no value in itself, but as a picturesque emblem of the very spirit of His kingdom. The literal fulfilment was a kind of finger-post for inattentive onlookers, which might induce them to look more closely, and so see that He was indeed the King Messiah, because of more important correspondences with prophecy than His once riding on an ass. Do not so degrade these Old Testament prophecies as to fancy that their literal fulfilment is of chief importance. That is the shell: the kernel is the all-important thing, and Jesus Christ would have fulfilled the r? that was sketched for Him by the prophets of old, just as completely if there never had been this entrance into Jerusalem.

But, further, the fact that He had to borrow the colt was as significant as the choice of it. For so we see blended two things, the blending of which makes the unique peculiarity and sublimity of Christ’s life: absolute authority, and meekness of poverty and lowliness. A King, and yet a pauper-King! A King claiming His dominion, and yet obliged to borrow another man’s colt in order that He might do it! A strange kind of monarch!-and yet that remarkable combination runs through all His life. He had to be obliged to a couple of fishermen for a boat, but He sat in it, to speak words of divine wisdom. He had to be obliged to a lad in the crowd for barley loaves and fishes, but when He took them into His hands they were multiplied. He had to be obliged for a grave, and yet He rose from the borrowed grave the Lord of life and death. And so when He would pose as a King, He has to borrow the regalia, and to be obliged to this anonymous friend for the colt which made the emphasis of His claim. ‘Who, though He was rich, yet for our sakes became poor, that we through His

18

poverty might be rich.’

II. And now turn for a moment to the wider application of these words.

‘The Lord hath need of him.’ That opens the door to thoughts, that I cannot crowd into the few minutes that I have at my disposal, as to that great and wonderful truth that Christ cannot assume His kingdom in this world without your help, and that of the other people whose hearts are touched by His love. ‘The Lord hath need’ of them. Though upon that Cross of Calvary He did all that was necessary for the redemption of the world and the salvation of humanity as a whole, yet for the bearing of that blessing into individual hearts, and for the application of the full powers that are stored in the Gospel and in Jesus, to their work in the world, the missing link is man. We ‘are fellow-labourers with God.’ We are Christ’s tools. The instruments by which He builds His kingdom are the souls that have already accepted His authority. ‘The Lord hath need of him,’ though, as the psalmist sings, ‘If I were hungry I would not tell thee, for all the beasts of the forest are Mine.’ Yes, and when the Word was made flesh, He had need of one of the humblest of the beasts. The Christ that redeemed the world needs us, to carry out and to bring into effect His redemption. ‘God mend all,’ said one, and the answer was, ‘We must help Him to mend it.’

Notice again the authoritative demand, which does not contemplate the possibility of reluctance or refusal. ‘The Lord hath need of him.’ That is all. There is no explanation or motive alleged to induce surrender to the demand. This is a royal style of speech. It is the way in which, in despotic countries, kings lay their demands upon a poor man’s whole plenishing and possession, and sweep away all.

Jesus Christ comes to us in like fashion, and brushes aside all our convenience and everything else, and says, ‘I want you, and that is enough.’ Is it not enough? Should it not be enough? If He demands, He has the right to demand. For we are His, ‘bought with a price.’ All the slave’s possessions are his owner’s property. The slave is given a little patch of garden ground, and perhaps allowed to keep a fowl or two, but the master can come and say, ‘Now I want them,’ and the slave has nothing for it but to give them up.

‘The Lord hath need of him’ is in the autocratic tone of One who has absolute power over us and ours. And that power, where does it come from? It comes from His absolute surrender of Himself to us, and because He has wholly given Himself for us. He does not expect us to say one contrary word when He sends and says, ‘I have need of you, or of yours.’

Here, again, we have an instance of glad surrender. The last words of my text are susceptible of a double meaning. ‘Straightway he will send him hither’-who is ‘he’? It is usually understood to be the owner of the colt, and the clause is supposed to be Christ’s assurance to the two messengers of the success of their errand. So understood, the words suggest the great truth that Love loosens the hand that grasps possessions, and unlocks our treasure-houses. There is nothing more blessed than to give in response to the requirement of love. And so, to Christ’s authoritative demand, the only proper answer is obedience swift and glad, because it is loving. Many possibilities of joy and blessing are lost by us through not yielding on the instant to Christ’s demands. Hesitation and delay are dangerous. In ‘straightway’ complying are security and joy. If the owner had begun to say to himself that he very much needed the colt, or that he saw no reason why some one else’s beast should not have been taken, or that he would send the animal very soon, but must have the use of him for an hour or two first, he would probably never have sent him at all, and so would have missed the greatest honour of his life. As soon as I know what Christ wants from me, without delay let me do it; for if I begin with delaying I shall probably end with declining. The Psalmist was wise when he laid emphasis on the swiftness of his

19

obedience, and said, ‘I made haste and delayed not, but made haste to keep Thy commandments.’

But another view of the words makes them part of the message to the owner of the colt, and not of the assurance to the disciples. ‘Say ye that the Lord hath need of him, and that straightway (when He has done with him) He will send him back again.’ That is a possible rendering, and I am disposed to think it is the proper one. By it the owner is told that he is not parting with his property for good and all, that Jesus only wishes to borrow the animal for the morning, and that it will be returned in the afternoon. What does that view of the words suggest to us? Do you not think that that colt, when it did come back-for of course it came back some time or other,-was a great deal more precious to its owner than it ever had been before, or ever could have been if it had not been lent to Christ, and Christ had not made His royal entry upon it? Can you not fancy that the man, if he was, as he evidently was, a disciple and lover of the Lord, would look at it, especially after the Crucifixion and the Ascension, and think, ‘What an honour to me, that I provided the mount for that triumphal entry!’? It is always so. If you wish anything to become precious, lend it to Jesus Christ, and when it comes back again, as it will come back, there will be a fragrance about it, a touch of His fingers will be left upon it, a memory that He has used it. If you desire to own yourselves, and to make yourselves worth owning, give yourselves to Christ. If you wish to get the greatest possible blessing and good out of possessions, lay them at His feet. If you wish love to be hallowed, joy to be calmed, perpetuated, and deepened, carry it to Him. ‘If the house be worthy, your peace shall rest upon it; if not,’ like the dove to the ark when it could find no footing in the turbid and drowned world, ‘it shall come back to you again. Straightway He will ‘send him back again,’ and that which I give to Jesus He will return enhanced, and it will be more truly and more blessedly mine, because I have laid it in His hands. This ‘altar’ sanctifies the giver and the gift.

4 They went and found a colt outside in the

street, tied at a doorway. As they untied it,

BARNES, "Two ways met - A crossroads. A public place, probably near the center of the village.

GILL, "And they went their way,.... The two disciples went to the village, where Christ sent them, without objecting any difficulties that might present, in the execution of these orders:

and found the colt tied by the door without; in the street, fastened to the door of the owner's house, at the town's end:

in a place where two ways met; to go into and out of the village; at the corner house, where two ways met; so that the place was very public, and such an affair could not be transacted, without being seen:

20

and they loose him; as soon as ever they came to the place, they immediately began to untie the colt, and were going away with him.

COFFMAN, "It should be noted that the disciples found the colt exactly where

Jesus said they would find it, that it was tied, and that they encountered exactly

the same questioning of what they were doing that Jesus had anticipated. No

wonder such an event persisted in the memory of all and found its way into all

three synoptics. Who but God could have exhibited such foreknowledge as this?

Commentators who suppose that Jesus must have set this up in advance, or that

the owner was in Jesus' company on that occasion, are not interpreting anything

in the Bible but expressing their own unbelief. Significantly, it appears that the

people questioning the disciples were merely bystanders, and not the owner; and

it would have been impossible to have set up such a thing in advance.

5 some people standing there asked, “What are

you doing, untying that colt?”

BARNES, "What do ye, loosing the colt? - Or, why do ye do this? What authority have you for doing it?

See this passage illustrated in the notes at Mat. 21:1-16.

GILL, "And certain of them that stood there,.... The Ethiopic version reads, who walked there; who were either standing hard by, or walking about the place, being inhabitants of it; and either the owners of the colt, or their servants, or both:

said unto them, what do ye loosing the colt? What do ye mean by it? do you intend to take the colt away? what business have you with it? what right have you to do so? and what is your end in it?

6 They answered as Jesus had told them to, and

the people let them go.

CLARKE, "And they let them go - Having a full assurance that the beast should be safely and speedily restored.

GILL, "And they said unto them,.... The very express words,

21

even as Jesus had commanded: not that these were the words they said, but "the Lord hath need of him": upon which they said no more, were satisfied and contented, that they should untie the colt, and take it with them:

and they let them go; and the colt with them, very freely; See Gill on Mat_21:6.

7 When they brought the colt to Jesus and

threw their cloaks over it, he sat on it.

GILL, "And they brought the colt to Jesus,.... Where he was,

and cast their garments on him; their clothes to be instead of a saddle, for Christ to sit upon:

and he sat upon him; or "Jesus rode on him", as the Syriac version renders it. The Ethiopic version reads, "they made him to mount him"; that is, the disciples assisted him in getting upon it, and having mounted it, he sat on it without any trouble, though it had never been backed before, and rode on his way to Jerusalem; See Gill on Mat_21:7.

BARCLAY, "HE THAT COMETH (Mark 11:7-10)

11:7-10 They brought the colt to Jesus, and they put their garments on it, and

mounted him on it. Many of them spread their garments on the road. Others cut

branches from the fields and spread them on the road. And those who were

going before and those who were following kept shouting, "Save now! Blessed is

the coming kingdom of our father David! Send thy salvation from the heights of

heaven!"

The colt they brought had never been ridden upon. That was fitting, for a beast

to be used for a sacred purpose must never have been used for any other

purpose. It was so with the red heifer whose ashes cleansed from pollution

(Numbers 19:2, Deuteronomy 21:3).

The whole picture is of a populace who misunderstood. It shows us a crowd of

people thinking of kingship in the terms of conquest in which they had thought

of it for so long. It is oddly reminiscent of how Simon Maccabaeus entered

Jerusalem a hundred and fifty years before, after he had blasted Israel's enemies

in battle. "And he entered into it the three and twentieth day of the seventh

month, in the hundred, seventy and first year, with thanksgiving and branches of

palm trees, and with harps, and cymbals, and viols, and hymns and songs,

because there was destroyed a great enemy out of Israel." (1 Maccabees 13:51.)

It was a conqueror's welcome they sought to give to Jesus, but they never

22

dreamed of the kind of conqueror he wished to be.

The very shouts which the crowd raised to Jesus showed how their thoughts

were running. When they spread their garments on the ground before him, they

did exactly what the crowd did when that man of blood Jehu was anointed king.

(2 Kings 9:13.) They shouted, "Blessed is he who comes in the name of the

Lord!" That is a quotation from Psalms 118:26, and should really read a little

differently, "Blessed in the name of the Lord is he who comes!"

There are three things to note about that shout.

(i) It was the regular greeting with which pilgrims were addressed when they

reached the Temple on the occasion of the great feasts.

(ii) "He who comes" was another name for the Messiah. When the Jews spoke

about the Messiah, they talked of him as the One who is Coming.

(iii) But it is the whole origin of the Psalm from which the words come that

makes them supremely suggestive. In 167 B.C. there had arisen an extraordinary

king in Syria called Antiocheius. He had conceived it his duty to be a missionary

of Hellenism and to introduce Greek ways of life, Greek thought and Greek

religion wherever he could, even, if necessary, by force. He tried to do so in

Palestine.

For a time he conquered Palestine. To possess a copy of the law or to circumcise

a child were crimes punishable by death. He desecrated the Temple courts. He

actually instituted the worship of Zeus where Jehovah had been worshipped.

With deliberate insult he offered swine's flesh on the great altar of the burnt-

offering. He made the chambers round the Temple courts into brothels. He did

everything he could to wipe out the Jewish faith.

It was then that Judas Maccabaeus arose, and after an amazing career of

conquest, in 163 B.C. he drove Antiocheius out and re-purified and re-

consecrated the temple, an event which the Feast of the Dedication, or the Feast

of Hanukah, still commemorates. And in all probability Psalms 118:1-29 was

written to commemorate that great day of purification and the battle which

Judas Maccabaeus won. It is a conqueror's psalm.

Again and again we see the same thing happening in this incident. Jesus had

claimed to be the Messiah, but in such a way as to try to show that the popular

ideas of the Messiah were misguided. But the people did not see it. Their

welcome was one which befitted, not the King of love, but the conqueror who

would shatter the enemies of Israel.

In Mark 11:9-10 there is the word Hosanna. The word is consistently

misunderstood. It is quoted and used as if it meant Praise; but it is a simple

transliteration of the Hebrew for Save now! it occurs in exactly the same form in

2 Samuel 14:4 and 2 Kings 6:26, where it is used by people seeking for help and

protection at the hands of the king. When the people shouted Hosanna it was not

23

a cry of praise to Jesus, which it often sounds like when we quote it. It was a cry

to God to break in and save his people now that the Messiah had come.

No incident so shows the sheer courage of Jesus as this does. In the

circumstances one might have expected him to enter Jerusalem secretly and to

keep hidden from the authorities who were out to destroy him. Instead he

entered in such a way that the attention of every eye was focussed upon him. One

of the most dangerous things a man can do is to go to people and tell them that

all their accepted ideas are wrong. Any man who tries to tear up by the roots a

people's nationalistic dreams is in for trouble. But that is what Jesus deliberately

was doing. Here we see Jesus making the last appeal of love and making it with a

courage that is heroic.

BURKITT, "Observe here, The obedience of his disciples. First, They did as

Jesus had commanded, they do not dispute their Lord's commands, nor raise

objections, nor are afraid of dangers: when our call is clear, our obedience must

be speedy; what Christ commands we are not to dispute, but to obey.

Observe, 2. The actions of the multitude in acknowledging Christ to be their

King; they cast their garments on the ground for him to ride upon, according to

the custom of princes when they ride in state; and do not only disrobe their

backs, but expend their breath in joyful acclamations, and loud hosannas,

wishing all manner of prosperity to their meek but mighty King. In this princely,

yet poor and despicable pomp, doth our Saviour enter the famous city of

Jerusalem.

O how far was our holy Lord from affecting worldly greatness and grandeur! He

despised that glory which worldly hearts fondly admire; yet because he was a

King, he would be proclaimed such, and have his kingdom confessed, applauded,

and blessed. But that it might appear that his kingdom was not of this world, he

abandons all worldly magnificence. O glorious, yet homely pomp! O meek, but

mighty Prince!

CONSTABLE, "The disciples made a saddle for Jesus from their outer

garments. Jesus' decision to enter Jerusalem this way fulfilled the messianic

prophecy in Zechariah 9:9. It also indicated that He entered as a servant ruler,

not as a political conqueror. When Israel's rulers wanted to present themselves

as servants of the people, they rode donkeys (e.g., Judges 10:4; Judges 12:14).

When they acted as military leaders, they rode horses. Normally pilgrims to

Jerusalem entered the city on foot. [Note: Ibid., p. 393.] Placing one's garment on

the ground before someone was a sign of royal homage (cf. 2 Kings 9:12-13; 1

Maccabees 13:51).

8 Many people spread their cloaks on the road,

while others spread branches they had cut in the

24

fields.

GILL, "And many spread their garments in the way,.... Instead of carpets to ride on, and in honour to him as a king:

and others cut down branches off the trees, and strawed them in the way; in token of joy, as at the feast of tabernacles; See Gill on Mat_21:8.

COFFMAN, "Cranfield's allegation says this "demonstration was quite a small

affair."[3] Such a comment is shocking, not because of any possible truth in it,

but because it is almost incredible that an intelligent man would make it. As

these lines are being written, President Richard M. Nixon has just enjoyed a

triumphal reception in Egypt where over two million people enthusiastically

hailed him; but does anyone suppose for a moment that nineteen centuries

afterward people will be studying that entry into Egypt by an American

president? This entry of Jesus Christ into Jerusalem is still hailed by millions

some two thousand years after the fact. It was immortalized by four historical

records, hated to be sure, but still true, still standing as fact, still received as the

word of God to mankind, still loved, honored, and revered by people of all

nations. That such results could have flowed out of some "very small affair" is

utterly impossible of belief. On this day, the palm branch became forever

afterward a symbol of victory, which, as Dummelow said, was a thing unknown

to the Jews.[4] Some "small affair"!

This great outpouring of Jerusalem to welcome Jesus our Lord was a vast

spontaneous demonstration in which the great masses of the people participated

with Hosannas and praises and the casting of their clothes in the street before the

Lord (they didn't even do that for Nixon). The King had indeed come to his

people, and they hailed him as "the King of Israel" and as "the Son of David."

The priests were furious, saying, "Lo, the world has gone after him" (John

12:19). As a matter of fact, it had!

[3] C. E. B. Cranfield, op. cit., p. 353.

[4] J. R. Dummelow, Commentary on the Whole Bible (New York: The

Macmillan Company, 1937), p. 694.

9 Those who went ahead and those who followed

shouted,

“Hosanna![a]”

25

“Blessed is he who comes in the name of the

Lord!”[b]

GILL, "And they that went before, and they that followed,.... They that came from Jerusalem to meet him, and they that followed him from Jericho and other parts; which two bodies, the one went before him, and the other followed after him: and

cried, saying, Hosanna, blessed is he that cometh in the name of the Lord; See Gill on Mat_21:9.

HENRY, "They welcomed his person (Mar_11:9); Blessed is he that cometh, the

ho�erchomenos, he that should come, so often promised, so long expected; he comes in

the name of the Lord, as God's Ambassador to the world; Blessed be he: let him have our applauses, and best affections; he is a blessed Saviour, and brings blessings to us, and blessed be he that sent him. Let him be blessed in the name of the Lord, and let all nations and ages call him Blessed, and think and speak highly and honourably of him.

COFFMAN, "They that went before, and they that followed ... Here are the two

great multitudes, one following Jesus from Bethany, many of them being

eyewitnesses of the raising of Lazarus and all of them shouting that fact as they

followed, and another coming out from Jerusalem, having heard that the man

who raised Lazarus was coming, and hastening out to greet him. Thus, Mark's

brief words here give the basic fact of those two great masses of people

converging upon Jesus.

The balance of these two verses are rich with messianic implications, the mention

of David, so long dead and buried, having no other possible meaning except as a

reference to the Son of David, Israel's long-expected Messiah.

For comment upon the fulfillment of Zechariah 9:9, and with regard to many of

the spiritual overtones of this wonderful entry, see my Commentary on Matthew,

Matthew 21:1-11. No triumphal entry ever known at any time or place could be

compared with that of the world's true Light on the last Sunday preceding his

resurrection from the dead; and the truly wonderful thing about Jesus' triumph

is that it is still going on!

The exclamations of the multitudes hailing Jesus' entry into the city are variously

reported by the four gospels: Matthew has "Hosanna to the Son of David;

blessed is he that cometh in the name of the Lord: Hosanna in the highest"

(Matthew 21:9); Mark has "Blessed is the kingdom that cometh, the kingdom of

our father David: Hosanna in the highest" (Mark 11:9,10); Luke has "Blessed is

the King that cometh in the name of the Lord; Hosanna in the highest" Luke

19:38); and John has "Hosanna: Blessed is he that cometh in the name of the

Lord, even the King of Israel" (John 12:13). Such accounts are exactly what one

26

should have expected in view of the undeniable truth that such multitudes would

have shouted MANY THINGS. The four samplings which have come down to us

outline quite clearly the nature and intent of their exclamations. Critics who

select the least extensive of these four records and then shout that "this is all that

was said by those multitudes" betray not merely their lack of knowing the

Scriptures but also their phenomenal ignorance of crowds such as that which

hailed the Lord.

CONSTABLE, "The people hoped Jesus would be their Messiah. "Hosanna" is

the transliteration of a Greek word that transliterated the Hebrew hosi ah na (lit.

"O save us now," Psalms 118:25 a). It was an exclamation of praise calling for

deliverance.

"Blessed is he who comes in the name of the Lord" is a quotation from Psalms

118:26 that was part of the liturgy the Jews used during the Passover. This was a

common greeting for visitors to Jerusalem. [Note: Wessel, p. 725.] However on

this occasion it took on new meaning (cf. Genesis 49:10).

The peoples' reference to the coming Davidic kingdom shows that they hoped for

its establishment soon (2 Samuel 7:16; Amos 9:11-12). Some in the crowd

acknowledged Jesus as the Son of David (Matthew 21:9).

"Hosanna in the highest" meant "O, you who lives in heaven, save us now." This

was a call to God to deliver His people. The chiastic structure of the peoples'

words shows that they were chanting antiphonally, as was customary at

Passover.

Someone who knew nothing about Jesus might have concluded from witnessing

this procession that it was just a part of the traditional Passover celebration.

Often when pilgrims caught sight of the temple for the first time, coming from

the east over the Mount of Olives, they burst out in jubilant praise. [Note: Lane,

p. 397.] It did not provoke action from the Roman soldiers.

10 “Blessed is the coming kingdom of our father

David!”

“Hosanna in the highest heaven!”

CLARKE, "In the name of the Lord - Omitted by BCDLU, some others, and several versions. Griesbach leaves it out.

Hosanna in the highest! - See on Mat_21:9 (note).

27

GILL, "Blessed be the kingdom of our father David,.... It was more usual with the Jews to call Abraham their father; but, because the Messiah was David's son, therefore, with respect to him, they here call him their father: and their meaning is, let the kingdom promised to our father David, and to his seed for ever,

that cometh in the name of the Lord; which is now coming, and appears in the auspicious reign and government of his son, the Messiah, who is clothed with majesty and authority; be prosperous and successful and be established, and endure for ever; to the glory and happiness of him as king, and of all the subjects of it. Unless the words should be rendered, as by their situation they may be, thus, "blessed be the kingdom that cometh in the name of the Lord, of our father David"; and the sense be, let the kingdom of the Messiah, which is now come, and is set up in his name, who, as God, is David s Lord, greatly flourish, and long continue; may its king be blessed, and all its subjects happy. The Vulgate Latin, Syriac, Arabic, and Persic versions, leave out the clause, "in the name of the Lord"; it is also left out in Beza's ancient copy, and in another; but the Ethiopic version retains it, reading it "in the name of God". It is added,

Hosanna in the highest: See Gill on Mat_21:9.

HENRY, " They wished well to his intent, Mar_11:10. They believed that, mean a figure as he made, he had a kingdom, which should shortly be set up in the world, that it was the kingdom of their father David (that father of his country), the kingdom promised to him and his seed for ever; a kingdom that came in the name of the Lord, supported by a divine authority. Blessed be this kingdom; let it take place, let it get ground, let it come in the power of it, and let all opposing rule, principality, and power, be put down; let it go on conquering, and to conquer. Hosanna to this kingdom; prosperity be to it; all happiness attend it. The proper signification of hosanna is that which we find, Rev_7:10. Salvation to our God, that sitteth on the throne, and to the Lamb; success to religion, both natural and revealed, Hosanna in the highest. Praises be to our God, who is in the highest heavens over all, God blessed for ever; or, Let him be praised by his angels, that are in the highest heavens, let our hosannas be an echo to theirs.

11 Jesus entered Jerusalem and went into the

temple courts. He looked around at everything,

but since it was already late, he went out to

Bethany with the Twelve.

BARNES, "Into the temple - Not into the edifice properly called “the temple,” but into the “courts” which surrounded the principal edifice. Our Saviour, not being of the tribe of Levi, was not permitted to enter into the holy or most holy place; and when, therefore, it is said that he went into the “temple,” it is always to be

28

understood of the “courts” surrounding the temple. See the notes at Mat_21:12.

And when he had looked round about upon all things - Having seen or examined everything. He saw the abominations and abuses which he afterward corrected. It may be a matter of wonder that he did not “at once” correct them, instead of waiting to another day; but it may be observed that God is slow to anger; that he does not “at once” smite the guilty, but waits patiently before he rebukes and chastises.

The eventide - The evening; the time after three o’clock p. m. It is very probable that this was before sunset. The religious services of the temple closed at the offering of the evening sacrifice, at three o’clock, and Jesus probably soon left the city.

CLARKE, "When he had looked round about upon all things - He examined every thing - to see if the matters pertaining to the Divine worship were properly conducted; to see that nothing was wanting - nothing superfluous.

And now the eventide was come - The time in which he usually left Jerusalem, to go to Bethany.

GILL, "And Jesus entered into Jerusalem,.... this public manner, riding upon an ass, with the multitude attending hin, some going before, and others after, crying, "Hosanna" to him:

and into the temple; which he rode up directly to; the Vulgate Latin, Syriac, Persic, and Ethiopic versions, leave out the copulative "and"; his great concern being there; and having dismounted, and dismissed the colt, and sent it by proper persons to the owner of it, he went into the temple, into the court of the Gentiles; where he found and overturned the tables of the money changers, and the seats of them that sold doves, and healed the lame and the blind:

and when he had looked round about upon all things; that is, in the temple, as the Lord and proprietor of it; and made a thorough visitation of it, and search into it, and corrected what was amiss in it:

and now the eventide was come, he went out unto Bethany with the twelve; having spent great part of the day in reforming abuses in the temple, in healing diseases, and disputing with the chief priests and Scribes: the evening being come, he did not think fit, for some reasons, to stay in the city; but went out to Bethany, which was near two miles off, and lodged there; See Gill on Mat_21:17.

HENRY, "Christ, thus attended, thus applauded, came into the city, and went directly to the temple. Here was no banquet of wine prepared for his entertainment, nor the least refreshment; but he immediately applied himself to his work, for that was his meat and drink. He went to the temple, that the scripture might be fulfilled; “The Lord whom ye seek, shall suddenly come to his temple, without sending any immediate notice before him; he shall surprise you with a day of visitation, for he shall be like a refiner's fire, and like fuller's soap,” Mal_3:1-3. He came to the temple, and took a view of the present state of it, Mar_11:11. He looked round about upon all things, but as yet said nothing. He saw many disorders there, but kept silence, Psa_50:21. Though he intended to suppress them, he would not go about the doing of it all on a sudden, lest he should seem to have done it rashly; he let things be as they were for this night, intending the next morning to apply himself to the necessary reformation, and to take the day before him. We may be confident that God sees all the wickedness that is in the world, though he do not presently reckon

29

for it, nor cast it out. Christ, having make his remarks upon what he saw in the temple, retired in the evening to a friend's house at Bethany, because there he would be more out of the noise of the town, and out of the way of being suspected, a designing to head a faction.

JAMIESON, "JAMIESON, "Mar_11:11-26. The barren fig tree cursed with lessons from it - Second cleansing of the Temple, on the second and third days of the week. ( = Mat_21:12-22; Luk_19:45-48).

And Jesus entered into Jerusalem, and into the temple: and when he had looked round about upon — surveyed.

all things, and now the eventide was come, he went out into Bethany with the twelve — Thus briefly does our Evangelist dispose of this His first day in Jerusalem, after the triumphal entry. Nor do the Third and Fourth Gospels give us more light. But from Matthew (Mat_21:10, Mat_21:11, Mat_21:14-16) we learn some additional and precious particulars, for which see on Luk_19:45-48. It was not now safe for the Lord to sleep in the city, nor, from the day of His Triumphal Entry, did He pass one night in it, save the last fatal one.

CALVIN, "There is a difference between Matthew and Mark in their narrative

of the withering of the fig tree; for Matthew says that it was on the day after that

Christ made a public appearance as King, while Mark appears to throw it back

to the following day. (9) But the solution is easy; for they agree in this respect,

that Christ, on the day after that he made his solemn entrance into the city,

cursed the tree; only Mark states what Matthew had omitted, that the

occurrence was observed by the disciples on the following day., So then, though

Mark has stated more distinctly the order of time, he makes no contradiction.

He appears to differ more openly both from Matthew and from Luke in the

narrative of chastising the traders; (10) for while both of them declare that

Christ, as soon as he entered into the city and temple, drove out those who sold

and bought, Mark simply says that he looked around on all things, but has

thrown back the driving of them out till another day. (11) But I reconcile them in

this way, that Mark, not having spoken about the purifying of the temple,

afterwards inserts it, though not in its proper place. He relates that, on the first

day, Christ came into the temple, and there looked round on all things. (12) Now

why did he look so earnestly, except for the purpose of correcting something that

was wrong? For, having been formerly accustomed to pay frequent visits to the

temple, it was not the novelty of the sight that affected him. Now as Mark ought

immediately to have added, that those who sold and bought in the temple were

driven out of it, he says that Christ went out of the city; but, having omitted what

was worthy of being related, he inserts it afterwards.

But perhaps some will be more inclined to believe that, in this narrative also,

Mark observed the order of time, which the other two Evangelists had

disregarded; for though they appear to indicate an uninterrupted succession of

events, yet as they do not name a particular day, there would be no impropriety

in dividing what we find to be connected in their writings. For my own part,

however, I prefer the conjecture which I stated first; for it is probable that this

demonstration of his power was made by Christ in presence of a large multitude.

30

But any one who will consider how little care the Evangelists bestowed on

pointing out dates will not stumble at this diversity in the narrative.

COFFMAN, "Luke recorded that Jesus went "every night" to the mount of

Olives (Luke 12:37), but, of course, Bethany was on the mount of Olives. All such

variations are due to the independence of the narratives.

THE WITHERING OF THE FIG TREE

This is one of the most interesting of Jesus' great wonders, exceedingly rich with

moral significance, and, in context, a miracle of great mercy and power. Like a

bat in a cave at night, however, the unbeliever sees nothing at all in such an event

as this. First, we shall note a few "objections" which have been offered.

Jesus is accused of "blasting fruit trees simply because they did not have fruit

ready for him at the moment."[5] Such a canard as this, like Satan's lie in Eden,

is merely a denial of what the sacred text SAYS. He did not wither the tree for

fruitlessness but for FALSENESS, exhibiting leaves (which appeared AFTER

the fruit, normally) yet having no fruit and being also an out-of-season freak.

Another is "the unfavorable light in which it seems to put the judgment or

common sense of Jesus."[6] To the contrary, nineteen centuries of the history of

Israel (the actual object of this miracle) have confirmed and vindicated the

Lord's perfect judgment and prophetic insight into the consequences of their

rejection of the Messiah.

Manson called this miracle "a tale of miraculous power wasted in the service of

and quipped that such power would have "been more usefully expended in

forcing a crop of figs out of season."[7] If Manson had ever read the account of

Jesus' temptation, he should have known that Jesus never performed a miracle

purely for the benefit of himself. Such objections as these just cited are not to be

taken seriously. They ignore the sacred records themselves, have no

understanding of Jesus' purpose in performing this wonder, and are actually

only spiteful reactions against hated truth.

The antagonism of some against this miracle is actually directed against it

because it contradicts the popular, stereotyped image of Jesus which views our

Lord as loving everything and everybody, a view which is true enough in the

highest sense, but which in the perverted application of it makes Jesus a namby-

pamby weakling willing to accept anything that evil men may do and yet giving

them eternal life no matter what deeds of blood and shame mar their lives.

Cranfield commented on the question of whether "this miracle of destruction"

should be viewed "as inconsistent with the rest of what we know of Jesus."[8]

The view here is that Jesus did this wonder for the very purpose of correcting the

false view that might have prevailed if no destructive miracle had ever been

wrought. That God will not destroy is a false view. Ask Sodom and Gomorrah,

Babylon and Nineveh, Tyre and Sidon. Ask Israel. All of the great writers of the

New Testament were fully conscious of the ultimate judgment against sin which

God will bring upon the world, as, for example, in the words of Paul in 2

31

Thessalonians 1:7-10. In the last analysis, it is sinful man's rebellion against any

such judgment that underlies the cavil directed against this miracle of withering

the fig tree.

Inherently, the miracle is one of gracious mercy and forbearance. The rejection

of Jesus Christ was dramatically associated with this wonder by the manner of

Mark's placement of the second cleansing of the temple right in the middle of it;

which, of course, is the exact chronological. sequence of its occurrence; Israel

was in the process of rejecting the Lord Jesus Christ, but they yet might have

repented and accepted Christ after the resurrection. In view of that hope, which

was indeed seized by many of them, their long-deserved judgment would be

deferred until a whole generation after the resurrection; but it was absolutely

necessary that Israel be made aware that eventually the judgment would fall.

This miracle made that clear; for the leafy, barren fig tree could not possibly

stand for anything else in heaven or upon earth except self-righteous Israel,

pretending a fruit they did not have, and out of season (for the Messiah had not

come; the sacrifice which alone could save men had not been offered),

prematurely professing a righteousness that was not even possible under the law.

But note: Instead of striking the Pharisees blind, instead of destroying the whole

nation, as the vast majority of them deserved, instead of blasting the hypocrites

in the Sanhedrin with the total destruction they so richly deserved - rather than

this, Jesus pronounced their doom, promised that God would send his armies

and destroy their temple and their city, and put them to death, and showed

symbolically the certainty of that judgment by what was here done to a fig tree,

which by some freak of nature (or providence) was the exact paradigm of that

wicked nation. How full of mercy was the warning! Making the judgment to fall

upon an inanimate object still permitted those being judged the opportunity of

repentance and salvation. To emphasize the mercy and restraint of such a deed,

we recall the words of an old preacher who said that when he was a boy and first

read of the mockery of Jesus in the court of Israel's high priest, he threw the

Bible down and said, "Why did not God strike the place with lightning?" That

would have been the human thing to do; the miracle of the fig tree was the

heavenly thing to do, and Jesus did it.

[5] Branscomb, as quoted in The Interpreter's Bible (New York: Abingdon

Press, 1951), Vol. VII, p. 828.

[6] Ibid.

[7] Manson, as quoted by Cranfield, op. cit., p. 356.

[8] C. E. B. Cranfield, op. cit., p. 354.

BARCLAY, "THE QUIET BEFORE THE STORM (Mark 11:11)

11:11 And he came into Jerusalem into the Temple. After he had looked round

everything, when it was now late, he went out to Bethany with the Twelve.

This simple verse shows us two things about Jesus which were typical of him.

32

(i) It shows us Jesus deliberately summing up his task. The whole atmosphere of

the last days was one of deliberation. Jesus was not recklessly plunging into

unknown dangers. He was doing everything with his eyes wide open. When he

looked round everything, he was like a commander summing up the strength of

the opposition and his own resources preparatory to the decisive battle.

(ii) It shows us where Jesus got his strength. He went back to the peace of

Bethany. Before he joined battle with men he sought the presence of God. It was

only because each day he faced God that he could face men with such courage.

This brief passage also shows us something about the Twelve. They were still

with him. By this time it must have been quite plain to them that Jesus was

committing suicide, as it seemed to them. Sometimes we criticize them for their

lack of loyalty in the last days, but it says something for them, that, little as they

understood what was happening, they still stood by him.

THE FRUITLESS FIG-TREE (Mark 11:12-14; Mark 11:20-21)

11:12-14,20-21 When, on the next day, they were coming out from Bethany,

Jesus was hungry. From a distance he saw a fig-tree in leaf, and he went to it to

see if he would find anything on it. When he came to it he found nothing except

leaves, for it was not yet the season of figs. He said to it, "Let no one eat fruit

from you for ever." And the disciples heard him say it.... When they were going

along the road early in the morning, they saw the fig-tree withered from the

roots. Peter remembered what Jesus had said the day before and said, "Teacher!

Look! The fig-tree which you cursed has withered away!"

Although the story of the fig-tree is in Mark's gospel divided into two we take it

as one. The first part of the story happened on the morning of one day, and the

second part on the morning of the next day, and, chronologically, the cleansing

of the Temple came in between. But, when we are trying to see the meaning of

the story, we are better to take it as one.

There can be no doubt that this, without exception, is the most difficult story in

the gospel narrative. To take it as literal history presents difficulties which are

well-nigh insuperable.

(i) The story does not ring true. To be frank, the whole incident does not seem

worthy of Jesus. There seems a certain petulance in it. it is just the kind of story

that is told of other wonder-workers but never of Jesus. Further, we have this

basic difficulty. Jesus had always refused to use his miraculous powers for his

own sake. He would not turn the stones into bread to satisfy his own hunger. He

would not use his miraculous powers to escape from his enemies. He never used

his power for his own sake. And yet here he uses his power to blast a tree which

had disappointed him when he was hungry.

(ii) Worse, the whole action was unreasonable. This was the Passover Season,

that is, the middle of April. The fig-tree in a sheltered spot may bear leaves as

early as March, but never did a fig-tree bear figs until late May or June. Mark

says that it was not the season for figs. Why blast the tree for failing to do what it

33

was not possible for it to do? It was both unreasonable and unjust. Some

commentators, to save the situation, say that what Jesus was looking for was

green figs, half-ripe figs in their early stages, but such unripe fruit was

unpleasant and was never eaten.

The whole story does not seem to fit Jesus at all. What are we to say about it?

If we are to take this as the story of something which actually happened, we must

take it as an enacted parable. We must in fact take it as one of those prophetic,

symbolic, dramatic actions. If we take it that way, it may be interpreted as the

condemnation of two things.

(i) It is the condemnation of promise without fulfillment. The leaves on the tree

might be taken as the promise of fruit, but there was no fruit there. It is the

condemnation especially of the people of Israel. All their history was a

preparation for the coming of God's Chosen One. The whole promise of their

national record was that when the Chosen One came they would be eager to

receive him. But when he did come, that promise was tragically unfulfilled.

Charles Lamb tells of a certain man called Samuel le Grice. In his life there were

three stages. When he was young, people said of him, "He will do something." As

he grew older and did nothing, they said of him, "He could do something if he

tried." Towards the end they said of him, "He might have done something if he

had tried." His life was the tale of a promise that was never fulfilled. If this

incident is an enacted parable it is the condemnation of unfulfilled promise.

(ii) It is the condemnation of profession without practice. It might be taken that

the tree with its leaves professed to offer something and did not. The whole cry of

the New Testament is that a man can be known only by the fruits of his life.

"You will know them by their fruits." (Matthew 7:16.) "Bear fruits that befit

repentance." (Luke 3:8.) It is not the man who piously says, "Lord, Lord," who

will enter into the Kingdom but the man who does God's will. (Matthew 7:21.)

Unless a man's religion makes him a better and more useful man, makes his

home happier, makes life better and easier for those with whom he is brought

into contact, it is not religion at all. No man can claim to be a follower of Jesus

Christ and remain entirely unlike the Master whom he professes to love.

If this incident is to be taken literally and is an enacted parable, that must be the

meaning. But, relevant as these lessons may be, it seems difficult to extract them

from the incident, because it was quite unreasonable to expect the fig-tree to bear

figs when the time for figs was still six weeks away.

What then are we to say? Luke does not relate this incident at all, but he has the

parable of the fruitless fig-tree (Luke 13:6-9). Now that parable ends

indecisively. The master of the vineyard wished to root up the tree. The gardener

pled for another chance. The last chance was given; and it was agreed that if the

tree bore fruit it should be spared, and if not it should be destroyed. May it not

be that this incident is a kind of continuation of that parable? The people of

Israel had had their chance. They had failed to bear fruit. And now was the time

34

for their destruction. It has been suggested--and it is quite possible--that on the

road from Bethany to Jerusalem there was a lonely blasted fig-tree. It may well

be that Jesus said to his disciples, "You remember the parable I told you about

the fruitless fig-tree? Israel is still fruitless and will be blasted as that tree." It

may well be that that lonely tree became associated in men's minds with a saying

of Jesus about the fate of fruitlessness, and so the story arose.

Let the reader take it as he will. To us there seem insuperable difficulties in

taking it literally. It seems to us to be in some way connected with the parable of

the fruitless tree. But in any event the whole lesson of the incident is that

uselessness invites disaster.

BURKITT, "Some move the question here, how Christ came to curse a tree for

want of that fruit which the season afforded not? It is answered, that naturalists

observe, that the fig-tree puts forth her fruit as soon as her leaf; that tree is

always bearing; and while one fig is ripe, another is green. And whereas it is

said, that the time of figs was not yet; the meaning is, "That the time of in-

gathering of figs was not yet," but the tree having leaves, showing it might have

fruit: accordingly Christ goes in expectation of it having fruit; but finding none,

either ripe or green, he curses the tree for totally disappointing his expectation.

Besides, Christ was wont not only to speak, but to work parables; and this action

of his was typical, an emblem of Jerusalem's destruction in general, and of every

person's in particular, that satisfies himself with a withered profession; bearing

leaves only, but no fruit; as this fig-tree was, so are they, nigh unto cursing.

From whence note, That all such as content themselves with a fruitless profession

of religion, are in geat danger, of having God's blasting added to their

barrenness.

CONSTABLE, "Having entered Jerusalem the crowd seems to have disbursed

quickly, and Jesus proceeded to the temple area (Gr. hieron). He had been there

many times before. He looked around and noted that the temple needed

cleansing again (cf. John 2:13-22). Since the hour was late-the city gates closed at

sunset-He departed for Bethany with the disciples to spend the night there.

"On the whole, it seems to be the most probable conclusion that the entry in this

peculiar fashion into Jerusalem was deliberate on the part of our Lord, and was

meant to suggest that, though He was indeed the Messiah and 'Son of David,' yet

the Messiahship which He claimed was to be understood in a spiritual and non-

political sense, in terms of the prophecy of Zechariah, rather than in terms of the

'Son of David' idea as interpreted by contemporary expectation (e.g., in the

Psalms of Solomon). The time had in fact come for our Lord to put forward His

Messianic claims, and to make His appeal to Jerusalem in a deliberately

Messianic capacity. He does so, however, in a manner which is suggestive rather

than explicit, and which was so calculated as to afford the minimum of pretext

for a charge of quasi-political agitation." [Note: Rawlinson, p. 151.],

SBC, "The Silent Looks of Christ.

35

I. The Lord is always looking. He looketh from heaven and beholdeth the children of men. The Lord looked to see if there were any that feared Him and that honoured His name. There is no protection from His eye. This is a terrible statement to be delivered to the bad man! You are never alone. When you think you are alone, your solitude is but relative. "Whither shall I flee from Thy presence?" The question is unanswered and unanswerable. God fills the universe, overflows infinitude, and thou canst not escape His eye. The eyes of the Lord are very terrible, flames of fire are the only symbols by which they can be likened among us; but they are also gentle, melting with dewy tenderness, yearning with unutterable pity; looking out for us; watching our homecoming, looking over the hills and along the curving valleys, if haply they may see somewhat of the shadow of the returning child.

II. If such be the looks of the Father and the Son, how should we return looks that are so full of significance and purpose? Hear the word of the Lord: "Look unto Me and be ye saved, all ye ends of the earth." How? Look not with the eyes of the body, not with curiosity; but with reverence, with eagerness of heart, with determination of love, with all the urgency and importunity of conscious need. He asks us to look; to look at Himself; not on the throne of judgment, but in His capacity as Redeemer and Saviour of the world. We shall have to look; the only question is, How? Are we prepared for His coming? How are we prepared for His fan? By going to His cross. He proposed that we should meet Him in His weakness. He appoints the place. He says, "Meet Me where I am weakest; where My right hand is maimed, and my left; where My feet are pierced with iron, and My side is gashed with steel, and My temples are crushed with cruel thorns—meet Me there!" Then, having met Him there, when the Son of Man shall come in His glory, and all His holy angels with Him, He will be the same Saviour, as gentle and as pitiful as ever. And now the Lord’s hands are His again, He will use them for the opening of the door of His kingdom, and the lifting up of all who put their trust in Him.

Parker, The Ark of God, p. 180.

Jesus Curses a Fig Tree and Clears the Temple

Courts

12 The next day as they were leaving Bethany,

Jesus was hungry.

GILL, "And on the morrow,.... The next day early in the morning,

when they were come from Bethany; Christ, and his twelve disciples. The Syriac and Persic versions read, "when he came out of Bethany"; though not alone, but with the twelve disciples, who went with him there, and returned with him, as appears from Mar_11:14, as he and they came out of that place early in the morning, having ate nothing, before they came from thence,

36

he was hungry; See Gill on Mat_21:18.

HENRY, "Here is, I. Christ's cursing the fruitless fig-tree. He had a convenient resting-place at Bethany, and therefore thither he went at resting-time; but his work lay at Jerusalem, and thither therefore he returned in the morning, at working-time; and so intent was he upon his work, that he went out from Bethany without breakfast, which, before he was gone far, he found the want of, and was hungry(Mar_11:12), for he was subject to all the sinless infirmities of our nature. Finding himself in want of food, he went to a fig-tree, which he saw at some distance, and which being well adorned with green leaves he hoped to find enriched with some sort of fruit. But he found nothing but leaves; he hoped to find some fruit, for though the time of gathering in figs was near, it was not yet; so that it could not be pretended that it had had fruit, but that it was gathered and gone; for the season had not yet arrived. Or, He found none, for indeed it was not a season of figs, it was no good fig-year. But this was worse than any fig-tree, for there was not so much as one fig to be found upon it, though it was so full of leaves.

JAMIESON, "Mar_11:12-14. The barren fig tree cursed.

And on the morrow — The Triumphal Entry being on the first day of the week, this following day was Monday.

when they were come from Bethany — “in the morning” (Mat_21:18).

he was hungry — How was that? Had he stolen forth from that dear roof at Bethany to the “mountain to pray, and continued all night in prayer to God?” (Luk_6:12); or, “in the morning,” as on a former occasion, “risen up a great while before day, and departed into a solitary place, and there prayed” (Mar_1:35); not breaking His fast thereafter, but bending His steps straight for the city, that He might “work the works of Him that sent Him while it was day?” (Joh_9:4). We know not, though one lingers upon and loves to trace out the every movement of that life of wonders. One thing, however we are sure of - it was real bodily hunger which He now sought to allay by the fruit of this fig tree, “if haply He might find any thing thereon”; not a mere scene for the purpose of teaching a lesson, as some early heretics maintained, and some still seem virtually to hold.

COFFMAN, "He hungered ... Jesus' hunger was the occasion of his seeking fruit

on the fig tree, the showy leaves of which normally indicated fruit. What

followed was not a mere peevish reaction of Jesus due to his frustrated desire to

eat, but the sudden realization on his part that here was a God-given example of

the nation of Israel. It was not even the time of figs, the first days of Passover

being far too early for that fruit to have matured, Jesus in his complete humanity

having at first been unaware of that fact. As a man, he had unconsciously

accepted the pretensions of that fig-tree as true; and, being hungry, he had gone

to it in expectation of eating; nor does this in any manner reflect upon the deity

of Christ, a deity most conspicuously present within him as the immediate events

proved. Suddenly, the freakish fig tree appeared to Jesus as the exact type of

Israel, and accordingly he judged it. As Cranfield said:

The most satisfactory explanation of this difficult (miracle) is surely that which is

given by the earliest extant commentary on Mark, that of Victor of Antioch, viz.,

that the withering of the fig tree was an acted parable in which Jesus used the fig

tree to set forth the judgment which was about to fall on Jerusalem.[9]

Then let those who cavil at the miracle deny, if they can, the judgment upon

37

Jerusalem which it prophesied. If God did that, why should his harmless

warning of it be considered otherwise than as a merciful foretelling of the fate of

the chosen people with a view to restraining them and leading them to faith and

salvation?

ENDNOTE:

[9] Ibid., p. 356.

SBC 12-14, "The Barren Fig-tree.

Consider:—

I. What is "fruit." The fruit of a tree is that which the sap formed in the branch; the sap, springing out of the root, passes through the stem, circulating through every little spray and tendril, deposits there the germ of fruit; and that fed by the same sap, warmed by the sun that shines on it, and strengthened by the wind, gets stronger and grows larger, till ripe and fit for the gathering. This is the operation in the kingdom of nature. Now look at that in the kingdom of grace. The Spirit of God is always flowing from the roots of the everlasting covenant of the Father’s love, and it all flows through the Lord Jesus Christ. With those who are grafted into Christ there is a passage by which the Spirit may come to them. The sunshine of mercy and the wind of trial come, and these, operating together, soften and strengthen, and the individual takes the savour of the Spirit that flows into it; it sweetens, it grows, it fructifies. It is like that from which it comes; it is fit for the Father’s use, and this is "fruit." Therefore, you see how much is required to make the action really pleasing to God. (1) First, you must be a member of the Lord Jesus Christ, or else you are cut off from any interest in the love of God. In Christ alone is life—you must be a branch. (2) The action must take its existence, its strength, its colour, its character, from God’s own Spirit. (3) The action, which is single, must have in it the flame of God’s love.

II. As it is the intention of nature that everything shall be subservient to the production of fruit, the leaves are only to minister to the fruit. The plant produces fruit, first that it may bear fruit, and then the leaves protect the fruit after it is formed. So in grace, a thousand things a man may make ends which were never intended to be ends. And one is holiness of life. It is a beautiful leaf, like the longing of the soul; but the fruit is when you carry away a mind more humble under the truth, a mind more active for the service of God. Or perhaps your familiarity with Divine subjects increases, so that you are able to grasp the Word; understanding more its meaning, its mysteries being more unfolded to your view. It is well! These things feed the soul; but it is only a leaf, unless the heart thereby has taken a firmer hold upon Christ, and been watered in Divine things.

J. Vaughan, Fifty Sermons, 2nd series, p. 36.

The Barren Fig-tree.

I. When our Lord pronounced His curse upon the barren fig-tree, He taught men a great lesson by an acted parable. It was was not about fig-trees that He really spake. Doth the Lord take care for fig-trees? or saith He it altogether for our sakes? For our sakes, no doubt, this is written; and the lesson that it teaches is that what He requires of His people is reality, not profession; truth in the inward heart, not outward

38

appearance of goodness; not a fair show which man can see, while God sees that the inside is very different from that show; fruit—the real fruit of true holiness and inward devotion to God—not leaves; not the semblance and reputation and outward character only, without any corresponding clinging of the heart in faith and good works to God.

II. There can be no doubt that the first application of this very significant act of our Lord was to the Jewish nation. It was like a fair-looking fig-tree, full of leaves. The hill of Sion was a fair place and the joy of the whole nation. But there came One who, seeing afar this fine-looking tree having such a profusion of leaves, came nearer, if haply He might find the fruit thereon which those leaves should have indicated. Alas for the nation! The temple was doomed; not one stone, ere fifty years had passed, should be left standing on another. Under all the thick, fine, flourishing leaves not a single fruit was to be found; no faith, no love, no Divine knowledge, no real understanding of the Scriptures, nor of the prophets, read in their synagogues every Sabbath day.

III. The case of the barren fig-tree applies also to individuals. We too each one of us, have to look to it very seriously, as in the sight of God, that our religion be not fair-seeming leaves only, but fruit too; not only outward show, but true earnest, inward reality. God forbid that we should be satisfied with ourselves. God forbid that we should rest in the consciousness that, in the sight of man or in our own overweening thoughts, we put out fair leaves and a good show; when in fact and as God sees us, there is no fruit of holy, humble, self-distrusting love; no good fruit of that sacred fear of God which alone keeps the heart of man watchful and sober and faithful in Christ until the end.

G. Moberly, Parochial Sermons, p. 169.

CONSTABLE, "The next day was Tuesday, which Hoehner dated as March 31,

A.D. 33. [Note: Hoehner, Chronological Aspects . . ., pp. 91, 143.] Apparently the

events of "Palm Sunday" really took place on a Monday. The incident that Mark

recorded next, beginning in Mark 11:12, occurred as Jesus and His disciples

walked from Bethany to Jerusalem on Tuesday morning (Matthew 21:18).

Normally, the fruit appeared on the fig tree before the leaves. [Note: Edersheim,

The Life . . ., 2:374.] The leaves on this tree suggested that it had already borne

fruit, but it had not. Mark explained that it was not the season for figs, for his

non-Palestinian readers. Matthew did not add this explanation. Evidently this

tree was in leaf earlier in the season than normal.

13 Seeing in the distance a fig tree in leaf, he

went to find out if it had any fruit. When he

reached it, he found nothing but leaves, because

it was not the season for figs.

39

CLARKE, "For the time of figs was not yet - Rather, For it was not the season of gathering figs yet. This I am fully persuaded is the true sense of this

passage, ου�γαρ�ην�καιρος�συκων. For a proof that καιρος here signifies the time of

gathering the figs, see the Lxx. in Psa_1:3. He bringeth forth his fruit, εν�καιρω�αυτου,

in his season; i.e. in the time in which fruit should be ripe, and fit for gathering. See

also Mar_12:2 : - And at the season, τ��καιρ�, the time of gathering the fruits of the

vineyard. Mat_21:34 : - When the time of the fruit drew near; ��καιρος�των�καρπων,

the time in which the fruits were to be gathered, for it was then that the Lord of the vineyard sent his servants to receive the fruits; i.e. so much of them as the holder of the vineyard was to pay to the owner by way of rent; for in those times rent was paid in kind.

To the above may be added, Job_5:26 : - Thou shalt come to thy grave in Full Age,

like as a shock of corn cometh in his season; κατα�καιρον, in the time in which it

should be reaped.

When our Lord saw this fig tree by the way-side, apparently flourishing, he went to it to gather some of the figs: being on the way-side, it was not private, but public property; and any traveler had an equal right to its fruit. As it was not as yet the time for gathering in the fruits, and yet about the time when they were ready to be gathered, our Lord with propriety expected to find some. But as this happened about five days before that passover on which Christ suffered, and the passover that year fell on the beginning of April, it has been asked, “How could our Lord expect to find ripe figs in the end of March?” Answer, Because figs were ripe in Judea as early as the passover. Besides, the fig tree puts forth its fruit first, and afterwards its leaves. Indeed, this tree, in the climate which is proper for it, has fruit on it all the year round, as I have often seen. All the difficulty in the text may be easily removed by considering that the climate of Judea is widely different from that of Great Britain. The summer begins there in March, and the harvest at the passover, as all travelers into those countries testify; therefore, as our Lord met with this tree five days before the passover, it is evident, - 1st. That it was the time of ripe figs: and, 2ndly. That it was not the time of gathering them, because this did not begin till the passover, and the transaction here mentioned took place five days before.

For farther satisfaction on this point, let us suppose: -

I. That this tree was intended to point out the state of the Jewish people.

1. They made a profession of the true religion.

2. They considered themselves the peculiar people of God, and despised and reprobated all others.

3. They were only hypocrites, having nothing of religion but the profession -leaves, and no fruit.

II. That our Lord’s conduct towards this tree is to be considered as emblematical of the treatment and final perdition which was to come upon this hypocritical and ungodly nation.

1. It was a proper time for them to have borne fruit: Jesus had been preaching the doctrine of repentance and salvation among them for more than three years; the choicest influences of Heaven had descended upon them; and every thing was done in this vineyard that ought to be done, in order to make it fruitful.

40

2. The time was now at hand in which God would require fruit, good fruit; and, if it did not produce such, the tree should be hewn down by the Roman axe.

Therefore,

1. The tree is properly the Jewish nation.

2. Christ’s curse the sentence of destruction which had now gone out against it; and,

3. Its withering away, the final and total ruin of the Jewish state by the Romans.

His cursing the fig tree was not occasioned by any resentment at being disappointed at not finding fruit on it, but to point out unto his disciples the wrath which was coming upon a people who had now nearly filled up the measure of their iniquity.

A fruitless soul, that has had much cultivation bestowed on it, may expect to be dealt with as God did with this unrighteous nation. See on Mat_21:19 (note), etc.

GILL, "And seeing a fig tree afar off,.... By the wayside, at some distance from him:

having leaves; very large and spreading, which made a great show, as if there might be fruit on it:

he came; unto it; either he went out of his way to it, or having seen it before him a good way off, at length came up to it

if haply he might find any thing thereon; that is, any fruit; for he saw at a distance, there were leaves upon it; and which was the more remarkable, since it was the time of the fig tree just putting forth its tender branches, leaves, and fruit:

and when he came to it, he found nothing but leaves; no fruit at all upon it, contrary to his expectation as man, and the promising appearance the tree made:

for the time of figs was not yet; or, "for it was not the time of figs"; for the word "yet", is not in the text: and the words seem rather to be a reason, why Christ should not have expected fruit on it, than that he should: but the sense is, either because the time of gathering figs was not come; and since therefore they were not gathered, he might the rather hope to find some on it; or because it was not a kind season for figs, a good fig year; and this tree appearing in such a flourishing condition, might raise his expectation of finding fruit, yet he found none but leaves only; because it was so bad a season for figs, that even the most promising trees had none upon them: or this, tree being of an uncommon sort, though Christ expected to find no fruit on other trees, because the time of common: figs was not come, yet he might hope to, find some on this. Some critics neglecting the accents, render the words, "where he was, it was the season of figs"; See Gill on Mat_21:19.

COFFMAN, "Having leaves ... This was the basis of Jesus' expectation, because

the leaves were normally preceded by the fruit.

Nothing but leaves ... This freakish fig tree, all leafed out, and out of season also,

was a perfect type of Israel; but it is in one particular a type of all who profess

faith in God without exhibiting any of the fruit that should accompany such

41

faith. This cannot be, however, the full meaning of this fig tree, because in this

dispensation it IS the time of figs (spiritually). It is in this differentiation that the

unique correspondence of the fig tree to Israel is most evident. Despite this, the

spiritual application of the wonder to all who profess and do not is valid.

COKE, "Mark 11:13. And seeing a fig-tree, &c.— The time of the year when this

event happened, was undoubtedly three or four days before the passover at

which our Saviour was crucified; and the passover that year fell in the beginning

of April. Upon this it is inquired, "How would Christ expect to find figs on the

tree at that season of the year? And what is the meaning of the Evangelist's

saying, the time of figs was not yet?" I. In the first place it is asked, "How could

Christ expect to find ripe figs on the tree in the latter end of March?" The plain

answer is, because figs are ripe so soon in Judea; all the difficulty here has arisen

from men's not considering the difference of the climate. Judea is a country

vastly hotter than England, and there the fruits are brought forth and ripened

much sooner than they are in our colder climate. The barley in Judea was ripe in

March, and the wheat in April; we cannot therefore wonder if there were ripe

figs in the beginning of April too. But this is not all; it can be directly proved,

concerning fig-trees in particular, that in Judea they brought forth good figs,

which were ripe as early as the passover, in the beginning of April. The proof, in

short, is this: figs were ripe before summer,—summer is harvest-time,—harvest-

time began at the passover,—therefore figs were ripe before the passover. Each

of these propositions shall be briefly proved. I. Figs were ripe before summer.

That there are two seasons of the year for figs is plain from hence, that the

Scripture mentions the first time of figs, Hosea 9:10. Micah 7:1. These first ripe

figs were fully ripe, for they would fall from the tree, if it was shaken by the

wind, as it is written Nahum 3:12. That these first ripe figs were very good, we

are informed by the prophet Jeremiah 24:2. These fig-trees had leaves before the

summer in that country, as it is expressly said, Matthew 21:19. But concerning

the fig-tree it should be noted, that it puts forth its fruit first, and its leaves

afterwards; consequently, if its leaves, much more does its fruit come forth

before summer; and that the fig-tree in Judea brought forth fruit before, is

expressly said, Song of Solomon 2:11-13. Isaiah is more express, Isaiah 28:4

where what our translators call the hasty fruit, is the first ripe fruit, as they have

well translated the same word in the places before quoted. Thus it appears, that

the first ripe figs were very good, were fit to be eaten, and were ripe before

summer. 2. The word summer, in Scripture, signifies the time of harvest.

Compare Jeremiah 8:20 and Daniel 2:35. Those who have travelled into Egypt,

the next country to Judea, inform us, that the summer in Egypt begins in March;

whence we may conclude, that the summer in Judea began about the same time

of the year. They then in Egypt cut down their corn, and immediately thrashed

it; and that they immediately thrashed it also in Judea, is plain from their having

loaves made of new corn for an offering at Pentecost. 3. That the harvest in

Judea began at the passover is plain, because the Jews were required, on the

second day after the passover, to bring a sheaf of the first fruits of their barley

harvest, for an offering to God, Leviticus 23:10-11. Seven weeks after the

passover was Pentecost, in the beginning of which seven weeks, it is expressly

said, the corn began to be reaped, Deuteronomy 16:9. See also Leviticus 23:15-17

and Ruth 2:23. 4. From all this it follows, that figs in Judea were ripe before the

42

passover; for figs were ripe and good before the summer or harvest began at the

passover; therefore figs were ripe and good before the passover;—as was to be

proved. Hence it appears, that the disciples might reasonably expect to find good

ripe figs on a fig-tree three days before the passover; and our Lord appeared to

expect them, that he might have the opportunity of strengthening his disciples'

faith by the present miracle, and of affording them, and the church in after-ages,

all the useful lessons resulting therefrom. It was the usual time for the first ripe

figs, and therefore it was natural to expect that there should be figs upon this

tree; and this was the more natural, because, as the Evangelist observes, there

were leaves upon the tree, before which leaves the fruit always came forth, if the

tree bore any fruit at all. The leaves then were naturally a token that fruit was to

be found on the tree also, and thus it was natural to expect it. II. We now easily

see how to account for the expression of St. Mark before us, which has been

thought so extremely difficult; for the time of figs was not yet. While it was

supposed that this expression signified "the time for trees to bring forth fruit was

not yetcome," it looked very unaccountable that Christ should reckon a tree

barren, though it had leaves, and curse it as such, when he knew that the time of

bearing figswas not yet come: it seemed unaccountable that Christ should come

to seek figs on this tree, when he knew that figs were not used to be ripe so soon

in the year. But since the true sense of the phrase, "The time of figs," has been

discovered to the world by the learned Bishop Kidder, the matter is easy. The

expression does not signify the time of the coming forth of figs, but the time of

gathering in ripe figs, as is plain from the parallel expressions. Thus the time of

the fruit, Matthew 21:34 most plainly signifies the time of gathering in ripe

fruits, since the servants were sent to receive those fruits for their master's use.

St. Mark and St. Luke express this same matter only by the word time, or

season;—At the season he sent a servant, &c. that is, at the season or time of

gathering in ripe fruit, Ch. Mark 12:2. Luke 20:10. In like manner, if any one

should say in our language the season of fruit—the season of apples,—the season

of figs,—every one would understand him to speak of the season or time of

gathering in these fruits when ripe. When therefore St. Mark says, that the time

or season of figs was not yet, he evidently means, that the time of gathering ripe

figs was not yet come; and if the gathering time was not come, it was natural to

expect figs upon all those trees which were not barren; whereas after the time of

gathering figs, no one would expect tofind figs on a fig-tree, and its having none

then would be no sign of barrenness. St. Mark, by saying, for the time of figs was

not yet, does not design to give a reason for what he said in the immediately

following clause,—he found nothing but leaves; but he gives a reason for what he

said in the clause before that, He came, if haply he might find any thing thereon;

and it was a good reason for our Saviour's coming and seeking figs on the tree,

because the time of gathering them in was not come. We have other like instances

in the Gospels, and indeed in the writings of all mankind, of another clause

coming in between the assertion and the proof. Thus, in this very Evangelist,—

Ch. Mark 16:3-4 they said among themselves, who shall roll away the stone from

the door of the sepulchre? and when they looked, they saw the stone was rolled

away, for it was very great; where, its being very great is not assigned as a reason

of its being rolled away, but of the women's wishing for some one to roll it away

for them. See Hallet's notes on Scripture, vol. 2: p. 114 and Witsius's

Meletemata.

43

MACLAREN, "NOTHING BUT LEAVES

The date of this miracle has an important bearing on its meaning and purpose. It occurred on the Monday morning of the last week of Christ’s ministry. That week saw His last coming to Israel, ‘if haply He might find any thing thereon.’ And if you remember the foot-to-foot duel with the rulers and representatives of the nation, and the words, weighty with coming doom, which He spoke in the Temple on the subsequent days, you will not doubt that the explanation of this strange and anomalous miracle is that it is an acted parable, a symbol of Israel in its fruitlessness and in its consequent barrenness to all coming time.

This is the only point of view, as it seems to me, from which the peculiarities of the miracle can either be warranted or explained. It is our Lord’s only destructive act. The fig-tree grew by the wayside; probably, therefore, it belonged to nobody, and there was no right of property affected by its loss. He saw it from afar, ‘having leaves,’ and that was why, three months before the time, He went to look if there were figs on it. For experts tell us that in the fig-tree the leaves accompany, and do not precede, the fruit. And so this one tree, brave in its show of foliage amidst leafless companions, was a hypocrite unless there were figs below the leaves. Therefore Jesus came, if haply He might find anything thereon, and finding nothing, perpetuated the condition which He found, and made the sin its own punishment.

Now all that is plain symbol, and so I ask you to look with me, for a few moments, at these three things-(1) What Christ sought and seeks; (2) What He found and often finds; (3) What He did when He found it.

I. What Christ sought and seeks.

He came ‘seeking fruit.’ Now I may just notice, in passing, how pathetically and beautifully this incident suggests to us the true, dependent, weak manhood of that great Lord. In all probability He had just come from the home of Mary and Martha, and it is strange that having left their hospitable abode He should be ‘an hungered.’ But so it was. And even with all the weight of the coming crisis pressing upon His soul, He was conscious of physical necessities, as one of us might have been, and perhaps felt the more need for sustenance because so terrible a conflict was waiting Him. Nor, I think, need we shrink from recognising another of the characteristics of humanity here, in the limitations of His knowledge and in the real expectation, which was disappointed, that He might find fruit where there were leaves. I do not want to plunge into depths far too deep for any man to find sure footing in, nor seek to define the undefinable, nor to explain how the divine inosculates with the human, but sure I am that Jesus Christ was not getting up a scene in order to make a parable out of His miracle; and that the hunger and the expectancy and the disappointment were all real, however they afterwards may have been turned by Him to a symbolical purpose. And so here we may see the weak Christ, the limited Christ, the true human Christ. But side by side, as is ever the case, with this manifestation of weakness, there comes an apocalypse of power. Wherever you have, in the history of our Lord, some signal exemplification of human infirmity, you have flashed out through ‘the veil, that is, His flesh,’ some beam of His glory. Thus this hungry Man could say, ‘No fruit grow on thee henceforward for ever’; and His bare word, the mere forth-putting and manifestation of His will, had power on material things. That is the sign and impress of divinity.

But I pass from that, which is not my special point now. What did Christ seek? ‘Fruit.’ And what is fruit in contradistinction to leaves? Character and conduct like His. That is our fruit. All else is leafage. As the Apostle says, ‘Love, joy, hope, peace,

44

righteousness in the Holy Ghost’; or, to put it into one word, Christ-likeness in our inmost heart and nature, and Christ-likeness, so far as it may be possible for us, in our daily life, that is the one thing that our Lord seeks from us.

O brethren! we do not realise enough for ourselves, day by day, that it was for this end that Jesus Christ came. The cradle in Bethlehem, the weary life, the gracious words, the mighty deeds, the Cross on Calvary, the open grave, Olivet with His last footprints; His place on the throne, Pentecost, they were all meant for this, to make you and me good men, righteous people, bearing the fruits of holy living and conduct corresponding to His own pattern. Emotions of the selectest kind, religious experience of the profoundest and truest nature, these are blessed and good. They are the blossom which sets into fruit. And they come for this end, that by the help of them we may be made like Jesus Christ. He has yet to learn what is the purpose and the meaning of the Gospel who fixes upon anything else as its ultimate design than the production in us, as the results of the life of Christ dwelling in our hearts, of character and conduct like to His.

I suppose I ought to apologise for talking such commonplace platitudes as these, but, brethren, the most commonplace truths are usually the most important and the most impotent. And no ‘platitude’ is a platitude until you have brought it so completely into your lives that there is no room for a fuller working of it out. So I come to you, Christian men and women, real and nominal, now with this for my message, that Jesus Christ seeks from you this first and foremost, that you shall be good men and women ‘according to the pattern that has been showed us in the Mount,’ according to the likeness of His own stainless perfection.

And do not forget that Jesus Christ hungers for that goodness. That is a strange, and infinitely touching, and absolutely true thing. He is only ‘satisfied,’ and the hunger of His heart appeased, when ‘He sees of the travail of His soul’ in the righteousness of His servants. I passed a day or two ago, in a country place, a great field on which there was stuck up a board that said, ‘—’s trial ground for seeds.’ This world is Christ’s trial ground for seeds, where He is testing you and me to see whether it is worth while cultivating us any more, and whether we can bring forth any ‘fruit to perfection’ fit for the lips and the refreshment of the Owner and Lord of the vineyard Christ longs for fruit from us. And-strange and wonderful, and yet true-the ‘bread’ that He eats is the service of His servants. That, amongst other things, is what is meant by the ancient institution of sacrifice, ‘the food of the gods.’ Christ’s food is the holiness and obedience of His children. He comes to us, as He came to that fig-tree, seeking from us this fruit which He delights in receiving. Brethren, we cannot think too much of Christ’s unspeakable gift in itself and in its consequences; but we may easily think too little, and I am sure that a great many of us do think too little, of Christ’s demands. He is not an austere man, ‘reaping where He did not sow’; but having sowed so much, He does look for the harvest. He comes to us with the heart-moving appeal, ‘I have given all to thee; what givest thou to Me?’ ‘My well-beloved hath a vineyard in a very fruitful hill; and he fenced it and planted it, and built a tower and a wine-press in it’-and what then?-’and he looked that it should bring forth grapes.’ Christ comes to each of you professing Christians, and asks, ‘What fruit hast thou borne after all My sedulous husbandry?’

II. Now note, in the next place, what Christ found.

‘Nothing but leaves.’ I have already said that we are told that the habit of growth of these trees is that the fruit accompanies, and sometimes precedes, the leaves. Whether it is so or no, let me remind you that leaves are an outcome of the life as well as fruit, and that they benefit the tree, and assist in the production of the fruit which it ought to bear. And so the symbol suggests things that are good in themselves,

45

ancillary and subsidiary to the production of fruit, but which sometimes tend to such disproportionate exuberance of growth as that all the life of the tree runs to leaf, and there is riot a berry to be found on it.

And if you want to know what such things are, remember the condition of the rulers of Israel at that time. They prided themselves upon their nominal, external, hereditary connection with a system of revelation, they trusted in mere ritualisms, they had ossified religion into theology, and degraded morality into casuistry. They thought that because they had been born Jews, and circumcised, and because there was a daily sacrifice going on in the Temple, and because they had Rabbis who could split hairs ad infinitum, therefore they were the ‘temple of the Lord,’ and God’s chosen.

And that is exactly what hosts of pagans, masquerading as Christians, are doing in all our so-called Christian lands, and in all our so-called Christian congregations. In any community of so-called Christian people there is a little nucleus of real, earnest, God-fearing folk, and a great fringe of people whose Christianity is mostly from the teeth outward, who have a nominal and external connection with religion, who have been ‘baptized’ and are ‘communicants,’ who think that religion lies mainly in coming on a Sunday, and with more or less toleration and interest listening to a preacher’s words and joining in external worship, and all the while the ‘weightier matters of the law’-righteousness, justice, and the love of God-they leave untouched. What describes such a type of religion with more piercing accuracy than ‘nothing but leaves’? External connection with God’s Church is a good thing. It is meant to make us better men and women. If it does not, it is a bad thing. Acts of worship, more or less elaborate-for it is not the elaboration of ceremonial, but the mistaken view of it, that does the harm-acts of worship may be helpful, or may be absolute barriers to real religious life. They are becoming so largely to-day. The drift and trend of opinion in some parts of so-called Christendom is in the direction of outward ceremonial. And I, for one, believe that there are few things doing more harm to the Christian character of England to-day than the preposterous recurrence to a reliance on the mere externals of worship. Of course we Dissenters pride ourselves on having no complicity with the sacramentarian errors which underlie these. But there may be quite as much of a barrier between the soul and Christ, reared by the bare worship of Nonconformists, or by the no-worship of the Society of Friends. If the absence of form be converted into a form, as it often is, there may be as lofty and wide a barrier raised by these as by the most elaborate ritual of the highest ceremonial that exists in Christendom. And so I say to you, dear brethren, seeing that we are all in danger of cleaving to externals and substituting these which are intended to be helps to the production of godly life and character, it becomes us all to listen to the solemn word of exhortation that comes out of my text, and to beware lest our religion runs to leaf instead of setting into fruit.

It does so with many of us; that is a certainty. I am thinking about no individual, about no individuals, but I am only speaking common sense when I say that amongst as many people as I am now addressing there will be an appreciable proportion who have no notion of religion as anything beyond a more or less imperative and more or less unwelcome set of external observances.

III. And so, lastly, let me ask you to notice what Christ did.

I do not need to trouble myself nor you with vindicating the morality of this miracle against the fantastic objections that often have been made against it; nor need I say a word more than I have already said about its symbolical meaning. Israel was in that week being asked for the last time to ‘bring forth fruit’ to the Lord of the vineyard. The refusal bound barrenness on the synagogue and on the nation, if not absolutely

46

for ever, at all events until ‘it shall turn to the Lord,’ and partake again of ‘the root and fatness’ from which it has been broken off. What thirsty lips since that week have ever got any good out of Rabbinism and Judaism? No ‘figs’ have grown on that ‘thistle.’ The world has passed it by, and left all its subtle casuistries and painfully microscopic studies of the letter of Scripture-with utter oblivion of its spirit-left them all severely and wisely alone. Judaism is a dead tree.

And is there nothing else in this incident? ‘No man eat fruit of thee hereafter for ever’; the punishment of that fruitlessness was confirmed and eternal barrenness. There is the lesson that the punishment of any Bin is to bind the sin upon the doer of it.

But, further, the church or the individual whose religion runs to leaf is useless to the world. What does the world care about the ceremonials and the externals of worship, and a painful orthodoxy, and the study of the letter of Scripture? Nothing. A useless church or a Christian, from whom no man gets any fruit to cool a thirsty, parched lip, is only fit for what comes after the barrenness, and that is, that every tree that bringeth ‘not forth good fruit is hewn down and cast into the fire.’ The churches of England, and we, as integral parts of these, have solemn duties lying upon us to-day; and if we cannot help our brethren, and feed and nourish the hungry and thirsty hearts and souls of mankind, then-then! the sooner we are plucked up and pitched over the vineyard wall, which is the fate of the barren vine, the better for the world and the better for the vineyard.

The fate of Judaism teaches, to all of us professing Christians, very solemn lessons. ‘If God spared not the natural branches, take heed lest He also spare not thee.’ What has become of the seven churches of Asia Minor? They hardened into chattering theological ‘orthodoxy,’ and all the blood of them went to the surface, so to speak. And so down came the Mohammedan power-which was strong then because it did believe in a God, and not in its own belief about a God-and wiped them off the face of the earth. And so, brethren, we have, in this miracle, a warning and a prophecy which it becomes all the Christian communities of this day, and the individual members of such, to lay very earnestly to heart.

But do not let us forget that the Evangelist who does not tell us the story of the blasted fig-tree does tell us its analogue, the parable of the barren fig-tree, and that in it we read that when the fiat of destruction had gone forth, there was one who said, ‘Let it alone this year also that I may dig about it, . . . and if it bear fruit, well! If not, after that thou shalt cut it down.’ So the barren tree may become a fruitful tree, though it has hitherto borne nothing but leaves. Your religion may have been all on the surface and in form, but you can come into touch with Him in whom is our life and from whom comes our fruitfulness. He has said to each of us, ‘As the branch cannot bear fruit of itself, except it abide in the vine, no more can ye, except ye abide in Me.’

BI 13-14, "And seeing a fig tree afar off having leaves.

Nothing but leaves

I. There were many trees with leaves only upon them and yet none of these were cursed by the Saviour, save only this fig tree. Here are some of the characters who have leaves but no fruit.

1. Those who follow the sign and know nothing of the substance.

2. Those who have opinion but not faith, creed but not credence.

47

3. Those who have talk without feeling.

4. Those who have regrets without repentance.

5. Those who have resolves without action.

II. There were other trees with neither leaves nor fruit and none of these were cursed. There are many characters who are destitute of both religion and profession.

III. We have before us a special case begin with the explanation of this special case.

1. In a fig tree fruit comes before leaves.

2. Where we see the leaves we have a right to expect the fruit.

3. Our Lord hungers for fruit.

4. There are some who make unusual profession and yet disappoint the Saviour in His just expectations.

IV. Such a tree might well be withered. Deception is abhorred of God. It is deceptive to man. It committed sacrilege upon Christ. It condemned itself. (C. H. Spurgeon.)

Jesus a Judge

As if to show that Jesus the Saviour is also Jesus the Judge, one gleam of justice must dart forth. Where shall mercy direct its fall? The curse, if we may call it a curse at all, did not fall on man or beast, or even the smallest insect; its bolt falls harmlessly upon a fig tree by the wayside. It bore upon itself the signs of barrenness, and perhaps was no one’s property; little, therefore, was the loss which any man sustained by the withering of that verdant mockery, while instruction more precious than a thousand acres of fig trees has been left for the benefit of all ages. (C. H. Spurgeon.)

Doctrine without practice

I am sick of those cries of “the truth,” “the truth,” “the truth,” from men of rotten lives and unholy tempers. There is an orthodox as well as a heterodox road to hell, and the devil knows how to handle Calvinists quite as well as Armenians. No pale of any Church can insure salvation, no form of doctrine can guarantee to us eternal life. “Ye must be born again.” “Ye must bring forth fruits meet for repentance.” (C. H. Spurgeon.)

Leaves without fruit

When Christ came it was not the time of figs. The time for great holiness was after the coming of Christ, and the pouring out of the Spirit. All the other nations were without leaves. Greece, Rome, all these showed no signs of progress; but there was the Jewish nation covered with leaves. You know the curse that fell on Israel. (C. H. Spurgeon.)

Profession without possession

Like Jezebel with her paint, which made her all the uglier, they would seem to be what they are not. As old Adam says, “They are candles with big wicks but no tallow,

48

and when they go out they make a foul and nauseous smell,” “and they have summer sweating on their brow, and winter freezing in their hearts.” You would think them the land of Goshen, but prove them the wilderness of sin. (C. H. Spurgeon.)

Nothing but leaves

Most readers of the Pilgrim’s Progress will remember that the Interpreter took Christiana and her family into his “significant rooms,” and showed them the wonders he had formerly exhibited to Christian; and then the story runs on thus: “When he had done, he takes them out into his garden again and had them to a tree whose inside was all rotten and gone, and yet it grew and had leaves.” Then said Mercy, “What means this? This tree,” said he, “whose outside is fair, and whose inside is all rotten, is that to which many may be compared that are in the garden of God; who with their mouths speak high in behalf of God, but indeed will do nothing for Him; whose leaves are fair, but their heart good for nothing but to be tinder for the devil’s tinder box.” This was John Bunyan’s way of putting into an allegory what he had preached in his famous sermon on the “Barren Fig tree.” It shows the force with which the narrative now coming under our study fastens itself in the popular imagination.

I. Let us begin with the observation that God cherishes a reasonable expectation of fruitfulness from all His creatures. Christ once told His disciples that He had chosen them and ordained them that they should go and bring forth fruit, and that their fruit should remain (Joh_15:16).

1. This story teaches that what the Almighty expects is only what is befitting and appropriate to the nature of the being He has made and endowed with a soul.

2. Then, next to this, the story suggests that what God expects is that every individual shall bring forth his own fruit. It is not vineyards that bear clusters, but vines. It is not orchards that produce figs, but trees. The all-wise One does not anticipate that one man or one woman, or that a few women and a few men, shall do the whole work in each community or in each parish. For there is nothing clearer in the Scripture than the declaration that every Christian is held accountable personally, and cannot be lost in a crowd.

3. The story also teaches that God expects a proportionate quantity of fruit from each person. And this would have to be reckoned according to circumstances. Suppose one fig tree is standing a little better in the sunshine than another; suppose one receives somewhat more of refreshing moisture than another; suppose one has deeper soil for its roots than another; the rule will be,-the higher the favour, the richer must be the fruit. The principle of the gospel is all in a single formula: “Unto whomsoever much is given, of him shall be much required.” Superior advantages extend the measure of our responsibility for usefulness.

4. Once more: the story teaches that the Master looks for fruit in the proper time for fruit. In the case of this tree, “the time was not yet.” Figs come before leaves on that kind of tree. So the appearance of leaves assumed the presence of fruit underneath them; but none was there. For some phenomenal reason this fig tree was a hypocrite. Hence, Jesus caught it for a parable with which to teach His disciples, and warn them off from mere profession without performance. God does not in any case come precipitously demanding fruit, as soon as trees are planted; He seems to respect the laws of growth and ripening. He never hurries any creature of His hand. But He gives help to the end He proposes. He certainly

49

puts realities before shows; figs previous to leaves. And He has no patience or complacency for those who are always making ready, and preparing, and getting started, and setting about things, without any accomplishments or successes.

II. This leads to a second observation suggested by an analysis of the narrative: God is sometimes mocked by the proffer of mere professions instead of fruitfulness. He comes for figs, but He finds “leaves only” (Mat_21:19).

1. It is possible to put all one’s religious experience into mere show. That is to say, it is possible to feign, or to imitate, or to counterfeit, all the common tokens of a genuine Christian life, and yet possess no realities underneath the pretence. Men may be traitors, heady, high-minded, lovers of pleasures more than lovers of God; having a form of godliness, but denying the power thereof. All this is predicted of these latter times (2Ti_3:1-7). Professors of religion may appear to love the Church of the Redeemer, and be nothing but sectarians. They may pray lengthily for a pretence, and devour widows’ houses meanwhile. They may “repent” like King Saul, and “believe” like Simon Magus. They may speak “with the tongues of men and angels,” and be no better in charity than a cymbal that tinkles. They may cry “Lord, Lord,” and yet not do a single thing which the Lord has commanded. And with all this amount of loathsome hypocrisy in the world, the patient God forbears.

2. The sin of fruitlessness is always aggravated by the bold imposture of hypocritical cant. The Scriptures startle a timid student sometimes with their daring demand for clear issues, no matter where they will lead. Christ Himself is represented as saying, “I would thou wert cold or hot” (Rev_3:15-16). Elijah cries out, “If Baal be God, follow him” (1Ki_18:21). It is the temporizing, compromising spirit of Naaman which destroys the historic picture of him (2Ki_5:17-18). And the higher up into conspicuous assumption of sainthood one rises, when his heart is bad, the more offensive are his character and public professions in the sight of a truth-loving God.

“For sweetest things turn sourest by their deed;

Lilies that fester smell far worse than weeds.”

III. Thus we reach our third observation: God will in the end assert Himself and visit on all false professors a fitting retribution (Mar_11:21). At last the retribution is sure to come. The settled, calm, solemn decision is pronounced, from which there is no appeal. (C. S. Robinson, D. D.)

The fruitless life

The verdict against the tree is, “nothing but leaves.”

1. It is a remarkable description. It is the least offensive way of describing barrenness. Nothing but words, forms, profession.

2. It is an expression of disappointment. Leaves are promises. Christian profession is a promise to God and man.

3. It is a declaration of uselessness. There is

(1) nothing to do credit to anyone-to the garden, owner, soil, root;

(2) nothing to be of use to anyone.

4. It is a sentence of doom. “Nothing but leaves.”

50

1. Then our creed is vain.

2. Our religion is vain.

3. Our Bible reading is vain.

4. Our churchmanship is vain.

5. Our faith and hope are vain.

6. Our life is vain. (H. Bonar, D. D.)

The barren fig tree

The incident, is full of instruction.

I. As to our Lord’s being. It reminds us of the inseparable union between His humanity and His Divinity.

1. He was hungry, and came looking for something which did not exist; it bespeaks His liability to that which was common to man.

2. He cursed the tree by the fist of an irresistible will, and nature was arrested, and the fountain of life dried up. It marks the possession of a power which is shared by no mortal creature, but is the sole prerogative of Almighty God.

II. As to the Jewish nation. Jesus had often taught by word. Here He arrests attention by a parable in action. It was the sequel of the parable of the barren fig tree (St. Luk_13:6); a rehearsal, as it were, of the execution of the judgment then denounced upon the Jewish nation if they continued to bear no fruit. This tree had been refreshed by the dews of heaven; the sunshine had warmer it with genial rays; the sheltering hill, perhaps, had warded off the chilling blasts, and all the seasonable influences of Providence had ministered to its growth, but only to bring forth an ostentatious show of unproductive leaves. And, as with that hapless tree, so with the nation. All the care and culture of the Great Vine dresser had been bestowed in vain; there was nothing but a deceptive and pretentious display; they were forever giving promise of fruit, but yielding none; there was no return for unremitting attention; they cumbered the soil, their end was to be burned, they were nigh to cursing. (H. M. Luckock, D. D.)

The penalty of barren professions

Yesterday Christ wept over the fate of Israel, today He will warn them of it. And at once accordingly He utters His warning on barrenness. It takes the form of a parabolic action. Deeds speak louder than words, and, therefore, for the sake of a greater impression, Christ places before everyone’s eyes the penalty of barrenness, especially of barrenness concealed by hypocritical profession. He pronounces a curse on the tree, which at once, in all its greenness and glory, begins to wither away.

1. Barrenness is a very common and grievous sin. It is very common, because we think there is no particular harm in it. If we avoid committing actual wrong, we think it no great matter if we neglect the discharge of duty. Accordingly, many who would be shocked at being “sinful” are quite unconcerned at being useless. There may, however, be the greatest guilt in uselessness. “Ye gave Me no meat,” “ye gave Me no drink,” “ye took Me not in,” are words which accuse of nothing but neglect, yet are followed by the doom, “Depart from Me, ye cursed.” Sins of

51

commission slay their thousands, but sins of omission their tens of thousands.

2. The sin of barrenness is often accompanied and greatly aggravated by great professions. Performance and profession are apt to be in the inverse ratio of each other, for performance comes from a high standard, and a high standard never permits complacency or boasting; while a low standard permits poor performance, and sanctions complacency along with it. In human trees the combination is very frequent of pretentious foliage and poor fruitage.

3. All barrenness leads to destruction. Nothing is permitted to exist except on condition that it employs its powers. Unused faculties decay; and unemployed opportunities are withdrawn.

4. The penalty of wilful barrenness is judicial barrenness. The punishment of uselessness which is voluntary, is such withdrawal of grace as makes it fixed and absolute. Wrong is wrong’s penalty. Going further astray is the penal result of going astray. (R. Glover.)

The fruitless fig tree

I. Its symbolic significance.

1. Reasons for regarding it in a symbolic sense.

(1) Neither its fruitlessness nor its leafiness was a thing of its own volition, therefore the tree was not blameworthy.

(2) But as a symbol it was full of instruction.

(a) As a correct representation of the heirarchical party in Jerusalem, adorned with the leaves of a pretentious piety, but utterly barren of the real fruit of a holy life, or reverence for God’s Son.

(b) As a correct representation of all pretension to piety.

II. Reasons for regarding its doom symbolic.

1. There was neither conscience nor heart in the tree to be hurt by its withering.

2. Fall of significance, however, as the type of the doom that awaits all those whom its fruitlessness represented.

III. Reasons for regarding its symbolic doom just.

1. As a fig tree in good situation and covered with leaves, fruit was reasonably expected.

(1) So with the Jewish people, as taught in the parable of the wicked husbandmen.

(2) The fruitlessness of those whom the tree represented was blameworthy, and their guilt enhanced by their pretension. (D. C. Hughes, M. A.)

He found nothing but leaves: a fruitless life

Christ’s miracles were unspoken sermons. Here He sees a fig tree growing by the wayside, and full of leaves; He draws near looking for fruit, but finds none-only leaves. It was not indeed the time for figs, but neither was it the time for leaves. The tree was making a false pretence. Jesus cursed the fruitless tree, and it withered

52

away. It was a symbolic act.

I. A lesson for the Jews. They were full of the leaves of profession: proud of their religious ordinances, frequent fasts, long prayers, sacrifices; but they bore no fruit of holiness, meekness, gentleness, love. Nothing but leaves.

II. A lesson for all, warning us of the doom of a fruitless life. Our blessings-what have we done to deserve them? We all remember what we have done for ourselves, how we have made our way in the world; but what have we done for God? Our religious professions-are they sincere, or are they kept for Sunday use only? Our talents-how are we employing them? Our time, intellect, bodily strength, wealth, influence? (H. J. Wilmot Buxton, M. A.)

The time of figs was not yet

Trees have their seasons at certain times of the year, when they bring forth fruit; but a Christian is for all seasons-like the tree of life, which bringeth forth fruit every mouth Christ looked for fruit on the fig tree when the time of fruit was not yet. Why? Did He not know the season for fruit? or, did He it “altogether for our sakes?” For our sakes, no doubt, He did it, to teach us that Christians must always be fruitful; the whole time of our life is the season for fruitfulness. (Bp. Brownrig.)

Warnings of Scripture

Cowper, speaking of his distressing convictions, says, “One moment I thought myself shut out from mercy by one chapter, and the next by another.. The sword of the Spirit seemed to guard the tree of life from my touch, and to flame against me in every avenue by which I attempted to approach it. I particularly remember that the parable of the barren fig tree was to me an inconceivable source of anguish; and I applied it to myself, with a strong persuasion in my mind, that when our Saviour pronounced a curse upon it, He had me in His eye, and pointed that curse directly at me.”

14 Then he said to the tree, “May no one ever

eat fruit from you again.” And his disciples

heard him say it.

GILL, "And Jesus answered and said unto it,.... The fig tree; a Jewish way of speaking, often used when nothing before is said; the Syriac, Arabic, and Persic versions, leave out the word "answered", as they do also the word "Jesus"; and which is likewise omitted by the Vulgate Latin, though the other is retained:

no man eat fruit of thee hereafter for ever; which is all one, as if he had said, as the other evangelist does, let no fruit grow on thee; for where no fruit is, none can be had, or eaten of. This tree may not only be an emblem of the Jewish people, who

53

made a great show of religion, and enjoyed a great many privileges; and from whom, speaking after the manner of men, the fruits of good works, righteousness, and holiness, might have been hoped and looked for; when instead thereof, there was nothing but talk about them, and an observance of some insignificant rites and traditions of the "elders"; on which account, utter ruin and destruction ensued; but also of any outward professor of religion, who enjoying the means of grace, and making great pretensions to devotion and piety, it might be expected that he should do good works, well pleasing to God, and bring forth fruit to the glory of his name: whereas he only talks of good works, but does none; at least, no fruits of grace and righteousness are to be found on him; and at the last day, he will be cast as dry wood, as a withered branch, into everlasting burnings, being fit fuel for them.

And his disciples heard it; "this saying", as the Persic version adds, and took notice of it, being in company with him.

HENRY, "However, Christ was willing to make an example of it, not to the trees,but to the men, of that generation, and therefore cursed it with that curse which is the reverse of the first blessing, Be fruitful; he said unto it, Never let any man eat fruit of thee hereafter for ever, Mar_11:14. Sweetness and good fruit are, in Jotham's parable, the honour of the fig-tree (Jdg_9:11), and its serviceableness therein to man, preferable to the preferment of being promoted over the trees; now to be deprived of that, was a grievous curse. This was intended to be a type and figure of the doom passed upon the Jewish church, to which he came, seeking fruit, but found none(Luk_13:6, Luk_13:7); and though it was not, according to the doom in the parable, immediately cut down, yet, according to this in the history, blindness and hardnessbefell them (Rom_11:8, Rom_11:25), so that they were from henceforth good for nothing. The disciples heard what sentence Christ passed on this tree, and took notice of it. Woes from Christ's mouth are to be observed and kept in mind, as well as blessings.

JAMIESON, "And Jesus answered and said unto it, No man eat fruit of thee hereafter for ever — That word did not make the tree barren, but sealed it up in its own barrenness. See on Mat_13:13-15.

And his disciples heard it — and marked the saying. This is introduced as a connecting link, to explain what was afterwards to be said on the subject, as the narrative has to proceed to the other transactions of this day.

COFFMAN, "For ever ... Bickersteth wrote:

These words, in their application to the Jewish nation, have a merciful

limitation - a limitation that lies in the original words rendered "for ever," which

literally mean "for the age," (meaning) ... until the times of the Gentiles be

fulfilled.[10]

For further comment upon the hardening of Israel and the duration of it, see my

Commentary on Romans, Romans 11. For comment on the parallel account of

this wonder in Matthew, see my Commentary on Matthew, Matthew 21:18.

THE SECOND CLEANSING OF THE TEMPLE

Only by a denial of the historical gospels is it possible to suppose that only one

cleansing of the temple occurred. The first cleansing (John 2:13-22) occurred

54

quite early in Jesus' ministry and was marked by Jesus' order to those profaning

the temple that they should cease and desist from their profaning action. This

second cleansing, coming in the last week of the Lord's ministry, contained no

such order, because it was too late, the day of grace already having expired. This

cleansing, here recorded totally within the narrative of cursing the fig tree,

appears as a primary basis of the divine judgment against Israel. In the first,

there was no statement that the leaders had made the house of God a den of

thieves and robbers; but that charge was bluntly associated with the second

cleansing.

ENDNOTE:

[10] E. Bickersteth, The Pulpit Commentary (Grand Rapids, Michigan: William

B. Eerdmans Publishing Company, 1962), Vol. 16, p. 121.

CONSTABLE, "Jesus saw an opportunity to teach His disciples an important

truth using this tree as an object lesson. As a prophet Jesus performed a

symbolic act (cf. Isaiah 20:1-6; Jeremiah 13:1-11; Jeremiah 19:1-13; Ezekiel

4:1-15). He cursed the tree to teach them the lesson, not because it failed to

produce fruit. The tree was a good illustration of the large unbelieving element

within the nation of Israel. God had looked to that generation of Israelites for

spiritual fruit, as Jesus had hoped to find physical fruit on the fig tree (cf.

Jeremiah 8:13; Hosea 9:10; Micah 7:1; Nahum 3:12; Zechariah 10:2). Israel's

outward display of religious vitality was impressive, like the leaves on the tree,

but it bore no spiritual fruit of righteousness. It was hypocritical (Mark 7:6;

Mark 11:15-19; Mark 11:27; Mark 12:40).

"Jesus was on the eve of spiritual conflict with a nation whose prime and patent

fault was hypocrisy or false pretense, and here he finds a tree guilty of the same

thing. It gives him his opportunity, without hurting anybody, to sit in judgment

on the fault." [Note: Gould, pp. 211-12.]

"In Mark's story world, hypocrisy exists where there is a discrepancy between

appearance and underlying truth." [Note: Kingsbury, p. 15.]

This is the only destructive miracle that the Gospel writers attributed to Jesus,

and it involved a tree. The healing of the Gadaran demoniac resulted in the

destruction of pigs (Mark 5:13), but that miracle itself was positive in that it

healed the man.

15 On reaching Jerusalem, Jesus entered the

temple courts and began driving out those who

were buying and selling there. He overturned

the tables of the money changers and the

55

benches of those selling doves,

CLARKE, "And they come - Several MSS. and versions have παλιν, again. This

was the next day after our Lord’s triumphant entry into Jerusalem; for on the evening of that day he went to Bethany, and lodged there, Mar_11:11, and Mat_21:17, and returned the next morning to Jerusalem.

GILL, "And they came to Jerusalem,.... The Ethiopic version reads, "he came"; that is, Christ; but not alone, for his disciples were with him: Beza says, that, one exemplar he had met with, adds "again", and so one of Stephens's copies; for they had been there the day before:

and Jesus went into the temple: the Syriac and Persic versions add, "of God"; into the court of the Gentiles, as he did the preceding day:

and began to cast out them that bought and sold in the temple, and overthrew the tables of the money changers, and the seats of them that sold doves; which was done, as Matthew relates, the same day that he made his public entry into Jerusalem: wherefore it is highly probable, that upon Christ's leaving the city, they returned "again", and were the next morning sitting and doing business in the temple as before; and were drove out again by Christ, who, upon his return, found them there. They "that bought and sold in the temple", were those that bought and sold lambs for the passover, which was now at hand; and the sheep and oxen for the "Chagiga", or feast the day following; as well as doves hereafter mentioned, for new mothers, and such as had fluxes: and that part of the temple where this business was carried on, was in a large space within the area of the temple, where shops were built for that purpose: and by "the money changers", whose "tables" are said to be "overthrown", are meant, such as sat at tables to receive the half shekel, who changed those that brought whole shekels, or foreign money: and who had so much for changing, which was called "Kolbon"; from whence they had the name of "Collybistae", in the text: and "doves", as before observed, were the offering of the poorer sort of women after birth, at the time of their purification, and of profluvious persons; of which many came from all parts, at the time of the passover: upon which account, there was a great demand for these creatures; and many sat upon seats to sell them, which Christ overturned; See Gill on Mat_21:12.

HENRY, "II. His clearing the temple of the market-people that frequented it, and of those that made it a thoroughfare. We do not find that Christ met with food elsewhere, when he missed of it on the fig-tree; but the zeal of God's house so ate him up, and made him forget himself, that he came, hungry as he was, to Jerusalem, and went straight to the temple, and began to reform those abuses which the day before he had marked out; to show that when the Redeemer came to Zion, his errand was, to turn away ungodliness from Jacob (Rom_11:26), and that he came not, as he was falsely accused, to destroy the temple, but to purify and refine it, and reduce his church to its primitive rectitude.

1. He cast out the buyers and sellers, overthrew the tables of the money-changers(and threw the money to the ground, the fitter place for it), and threw down the seats of them that sold doves. This he did as one having authority, as a Son in his own house. The filth of the daughter of Zion is purged away, not by might, nor by power,

56

but by the spirit of judgment, and the spirit of burning. And he did it without opposition; for what he did, was manifested to be right and good, even in the consciences of those that had connived at it, and countenanced it, because they got money by it. Note, It may be some encouragement to zealous reformers, that frequently the purging out of corruptions, and the correcting of abuses, prove an easier piece of work than was apprehended. Prudent attempts sometimes prove successful beyond expectation, and there are not those lions found in the way, that were feared to be.

JAMIESON, "Mar_11:15-18. Second cleansing of the Temple.

For the exposition of this portion, see on Luk_19:45-48.

SBC, "Look:

I. At the place where the market was held. It is called a temple. But you are not to think that it was actually a temple, properly so called; this would be to do the Jews great injustice. They were wonderfully scrupulous about their temple, and would never have actually held a market in any place which they themselves accounted sacred. It was in the outer court—the court of the Gentiles—that the sheep and oxen and doves were sold, and the money-changers had their tables. As the Jews did not regard this court as having any legal sanctity, they permitted it to be used as a market, the temple of those who came thither to worship.

II. There is too much reason for supposing that it was on purpose to show their contempt for the Gentiles, that the Jews allowed the traffic which Christ interrupted. And here, as we believe, you may find the true cause of our Redeemer’s interference. It was not as a simple man, acting under the passions and upon the principles of men, but it was exclusively as a prophet and a teacher sent from God to inculcate great truths, that Jesus drove out the buyers and sellers. When Christ entered the court of the Gentiles, and found, in place of the solemnity which should have pervaded a scene dedicated to worship, all the noise and tumult of a market, He had before Him the most striking exhibition of that vain resolve on the part of His countrymen, and which His Apostles strove in vain to counteract, the resolve of considering themselves as God’s peculiar people, to the exclusion of all besides; and the refusing to unite themselves with converts from heathenism in the formation of one visible Church. Christ declared, as emphatically as He could have done in words, that the place where the strangers worshipped was to be accounted as sacred as that in which the Israelites assembled, and that what would have been held as a profanation of the one, was to be held a profanation of the other. To ourselves, at all events, this is manifestly the import of the symbolical action; it is prophetic of God’s gracious purposes towards the Gentiles. It was our church, if we may so express it, for it was the church of the Gentiles, within whose confines the oxen were stabled, and the money-changers plied their traffic. They were our rights which the Redeemer vindicated, our privileges which He asserted when He made a scourge of small cords and said, "Is it not written, My house shall be called of all nations a house of prayer? but ye have made the court of the Gentiles a den of thieves."

H. Melvill, Penny Pulpit, No. 1,589.

BARCLAY, "THE WRATH OF JESUS (Mark 11:15-19)

11:15-19 They came into Jerusalem, and when Jesus had come into the sacred

precincts, he began to cast out those who sold and bought in the sacred place,

and he overturned the tables of the money-changers and the seats of those who

57

sold doves, and he would not allow that anyone should carry their gear through

the sacred precincts. The burden of his teaching and speaking was, "Is it not

written, My house shall be called a house of prayer for all nations, but you have

made it a brigands' cave?" The chief priests and the experts in the law heard

him, and they sought a way to destroy him, for they were afraid of him, for the

whole crowd was astonished at his teaching.

And when evening came he went out of the city.

We will visualize this far better if we have in our mind's eye a picture of the lay-

out of the Temple precincts. There are two closely connected words used in the

New Testament. The first is hieron (Greek #2411), which means the sacred place.

This included the whole temple area. The temple area covered the top of Mount

Zion and was about thirty acres in extent. It was surrounded by great walls

which varied on each side, 1,300 to 1,000 feet in length. There was a wide outer

space called the Court of the Gentiles. Into it anyone, Jew or Gentile, might

come. At the inner edge of the Court of the Gentiles was a low wall with tablets

set into it which said that if a Gentile passed that point the penalty was death.

The next court was called the Court of the Women. It was so called because

unless women had come actually to offer sacrifice they might not proceed

farther. Next was the Court of the Israelites. In it the congregation gathered on

great occasions, and from it the offerings were handed by the worshippers to the

priests. The inmost court was the Court of the Priests.

The other important word is naos (Greek #3485), which means the Temple

proper, and it was in the Court of the Priests that the Temple stood. The whole

area, including all the different Courts, was the sacred precincts (hieron, Greek #

2411)). The special building within the Court of the Priests was the Temple

(naos, Greek #3485).

This incident took place in the Court of the Gentiles. Bit by bit the Court of the

Gentiles had become almost entirely secularised. It had been meant to be a place

of prayer and preparation, but there was in the time of Jesus a commercialised

atmosphere of buying and selling which made prayer and meditation impossible.

What made it worse was that the business which went on there was sheer

exploitation of the pilgrims.

Every Jew had to pay a temple tax of one half shekel a year. That was a sum of

6p. It does not seem much but it has to be evaluated against the fact that the

standard day's wage for a working man was 3p. That tax had to be paid in one

particular kind of coinage. For ordinary purposes Greek, Roman, Syrian,

Egyptian, Phoenician, Tyrian coinages were an equally valid. But this tax had to

be paid in shekels of the sanctuary. It was paid at the Passover time. Jews came

from an over the world to the Passover and with all kinds of currencies. When

they went to have their money changed they had to pay a fee of lp., and should

their coin exceed the tax, they had to pay another lp. before they got their

change. Most pilgrims had to pay this extra 2p. before they could pay their tax.

We must remember that that was half a day's wage, which for most men was a

58

great deal of money.

As for the sellers of doves--doves entered largely into the sacrificial system

(Leviticus 12:8, Leviticus 14:22, Leviticus 15:14). A sacrificial victim had to be

without blemish. Doves could be bought cheaply enough outside, but the temple

inspectors would be sure to find something wrong with them, and worshippers

were advised to buy them at the temple stalls. Outside doves cost as little as 3p a

pair, inside they cost as much as 75p. Again it was sheer imposition, and what

made matters worse was that this business of buying and selling belonged to the

family of Annas who had been High Priest.

The Jews themselves were well aware of this abuse. The Talmud tells us that

Rabbi Simon ben Gamaliel, on hearing that a pair of doves inside the temple cost

a gold piece, insisted that the price be reduced to a silver piece. It was the fact

that poor, humble pilgrims were being swindled which moved Jesus to wrath.

Lagrange, the great scholar, who knew the East so well, tells us that precisely the

same situation still obtains in Mecca. The pilgrim, seeking the divine presence,

finds himself in the middle of a noisy uproar, where the one aim of the sellers is

to exact as high a price as possible and where the pilgrims argue and defend

themselves with equal fierceness.

Jesus used a vivid metaphor to describe the temple court. The road from

Jerusalem to Jericho was notorious for its robbers. It was a narrow winding

road, passing between rocky defiles. Amidst the rocks were caves where the

brigands lay in wait, and Jesus said, "There are worse brigands in the temple

courts than ever there are in the caves of the Jericho road."

Mark 11:16 has the odd statement that Jesus would not allow anyone to carry his

gear through the temple court. In point of fact the temple court provided a short

cut from the eastern part of the city to the Mount of Olives. The Mishnah itself

lays down, "A man may not enter into the temple mount with his staff or his

sandal or his wallet, or with the dust upon his feet, nor may he make of it a short

by-path." Jesus was reminding the Jews of their own laws. In his time the Jews

thought so little of the sanctity of the outer court of the temple that they used it

as a thoroughfare on their business errands. It was to their own laws that Jesus

directed their attention, and it was their own prophets that he quoted to them.

(Isaiah 56:7 and Jeremiah 7:11.)

What moved Jesus to such wrath?

(i) He was angry at the exploitation of the pilgrims. The Temple authorities were

treating them not as worshippers, not even as human beings, but as things to be

exploited for their own ends. Man's exploitation of man always provokes the

wrath of God, and doubly so when it is made under the cloak of religion.

(ii) He was angry at the desecration of God's holy place. Men had lost the sense

of the presence of God in the house of God. By commercialising the sacred they

were violating it.

59

(iii) Is it possible that Jesus had an even deeper anger? He quoted Isaiah 56:7,

"My house shall be called a house of prayer for all peoples." Yet in that very

same house there was a wall beyond which to pass was for the Gentile death. It

may well be that Jesus was moved to anger by the exclusiveness of Jewish

worship and that he wished to remind them that God loved, not the Jews, but the

world.

COFFMAN, "The similarity between the two cleansings resulted from the fact

that the profaners of the temple had not altered in any manner their desecration

of the house of God. The court of the Gentiles had been turned into a

merchandising mart; and, in the providence of God, that very court had been

intended for use by devout Gentiles who worshipped God.

The double gouging of the multitudes who came to worship God was a lucrative

abuse on the part of the temple concessionaires. Certain animals (or doves for

the poor) were required in the Jewish sacrifices; but the difficulty of

transporting livestock made it more convenient to purchase them in the temple.

Moreover, "Temple dues had to be paid in the Tyrian coinage, the Tyrian shekel

being the nearest equivalent to the Hebrew shekel."[11] Thus, through control of

the available supply of animals, and of the money required for their purchase,

exploitation of the multitudes was brazenly accomplished.

ENDNOTE:

[11] C. E. B. Cranfield, op. cit., p. 357.

BURKITT, "No sooner had our blessed Saviour entered Jerusalem, but his first

walk was to the temple, and his first work there was to purge and reform. All

reformation of manners must begin at the house of God.

Yet observe, Our Lord's business at the temple was not to ruin , but reform it

only. Places dedicated to public worship, if profaned and polluted, ought to be

purged from their abuses, not pulled down and destroyed, because they have

been abused. But what was the profanation of the temple, which so offended our

Saviour; I answer, in the outward court of the temple there was a public mart or

market kept, where were sold oxen, sheep, and doves, for sacrifice. Many of the

Jews coming an hundred miles to the temple, it was burdensome to bring their

sacrifices so far with them; wherefore the priests ordered that sheep and oxen,

meal and oil, and such other requisites for sacrifice, should be had for money

close by the altar, to the great ease of the offerer; nothing could be more

plausible than this plea. But the fairest pretences cannot bear out a sin with God.

Therefore our blessed Saviour, in a just indignation, whips out these chapmen,

casts down their tables, and vindicates the honour and reputation of his Father's

house.

Learn hence, That there is reverence due to God's house, for the owner's sake,

and for the service sake. Nothing but holiness can become the place where God is

worshipped in the beauty of holiness.

60

Observe lastly, The reason which our Saviour gives for this act of his: Is it not

written, says he, my house shall be called the house of prayer? Where by prayer

is to be understood the whole worship and service of God, of which prayer is an

eminent and principal part. That which gives denomination to an house is

certainly the chief work to be done in that house. Now God's house being called

an house of prayer, certainly implies, that prayer is the chief and principal work

to be performed in his house. Yet take we heed, that we set not the ordinances of

God at variance, we must not idolize one ordinance, and vilify another, but

reverence them all.

CONSTABLE, "A market atmosphere existed in the court of the Gentiles, the

outermost courtyard within the temple enclosure (Gr. hieron, cf. Mark 11:17).

During Passover season pilgrims could buy sacrificial animals and change their

money on the Mount of Olives, so there was no need to set up facilities to do these

things in the temple courtyard, which Caiaphas had done. [Note: Lane, pp.

403-4. See also V. Eppstein, "The Historicity of the Gospel Account of the

Cleansing of the Temple," Zeitschrift für die Neutestamentliche Wissenschaft 55

(1964):42-58.] Jesus' literal housecleaning represented His authority as Messiah

to clean up the corrupt nation of Israel. Mark 11:16, unique in Mark, shows the

extent to which Jesus went in purifying the temple. By doing this, Jesus was

acting as a faithful servant of the Lord and demonstrating zeal for God's honor.

"The court of the Gentiles should have been a place for praying, but it was

instead a place for preying and paying." [Note: Wiersbe, 1:151.]

BI 15-18, "And Jesus went into the Temple, and began to cast out them that sold.

The Temple cleansed: or, Christ the purifier of religion

When we are told that this took place “in the temple” we are not to suppose that the Holiest of all is meant, but the Court of the Gentiles. It was this portion of the sacred enclosure that was converted into a market. It was doubtless a convenient arrangement, and a profitable one; but it was a bold offence, and drew down the severe condemnation of Christ. Men may buy and sell in the temple, so to speak, without the presence of the articles and actual proceedings of commerce. How many of you are busy, in God’s house, with the secularities of everyday life! Many do in spirit what these men did in fact. There is no need to call in the aid of miracle to account for the consequences of Christ’s interference. Holy will is strong, especially when dealing with sinful consciences which are weak. Wrong felt the presence of Divine right, and departed. Strange to say, this action of Christ has been objected to. There are periods when logical arguments and gentle persuasions are out of place, and reason and righteousness assume their right of direct appeal, in word and act, to the inmost sense and conscience of men. Christ was thus severe only with corruption: He had nothing but tenderness for simply evil; He poured His hot displeasure only on the hardened wretches that covered their real sin with seeming sanctity. We see an under meaning in this incident: Christ standing in thy temple of universal humanity, and by His word of power redeeming it from the desecrations of sinful corruption and abuse, rescuing it to the honour of its slighted Lord.

I. The temple of God is desecrated and defiled.

1. Look at the heathen world; behold there the strength of the corruption. The religious sentiment strong amongst them is abused; at least it operates through

61

fear, distrust, and hate, instead of love, hope, and faith; at worst it is the tool of craft and lust. Thus the highest endowments bring about the lowest degradation.

2. Thus has it been with every mode of revealed religion. Thus it was with Judaism. The life-giving spirit had perished; its very form had become corrupt. Does Christianity present an exception to this desecration? What is the religion of many of you but a buying and selling in the temple! Self-interest has its office in religion, but it is not an element of religion itself. Indeed, there is no juster distinction between true and false religion than this: In true religion, self-interest is made the means of what is spiritual; in false religion, what is spiritual is made the means of self-interest. When religion appears as a ladder set up between heaven and earth for all God’s angels to descend and minister to man, but not for aspirations and holy communions to ascend from man to God; when Christianity is contemplated as a scheme of political economy, and the Lord of all is regarded chiefly as the most useful being in existence, we make our hearts the scenes of degrading traffic.

II. This desecration and defilement of the temple of God should create holy and vehement indignation. What is there in the scene we have surveyed to call for holy wrath?

1. It involves the abuse of what is best and highest-“My house,” etc. His Father’s house was polluted. The highest view to take of sin is always that it dishonours God; the man who dishonours God also dishonours himself. When is God more dishonoured than when the many gifts by which He may be felt, known, served, frustrate His purposes and misrepresent His being? As when faculties, whose sphere is spirit, feed and flatter the flesh.

2. It involves the promotion of the worst and lowest things-“A den of thieves.” They who rob God can scarcely be expected to be very scrupulous in their dealings with men. The best things when abused become the worse; there is no devil like a fallen angel. The reasons are not far to seek. The best things are the strongest. The best things when abused have a natural tendency to exceed in evil. Still further, good when it is abused hardens the moral feeling.

III. Jesus Christ appears before us as the cleanser of the temple of God. How does He effect it?

1. He comes into the temple of God as the living representative of Divine things. He appears as the Son of God in His “Father’s house.”

2. He makes an effective appeal to men on the true character and design of Divine things-“Is it not written, My house shall be called,” etc. He draws attention to the nature and object of the sacred place. He forbids what is auxiliary to the condemned abuse. He “would not suffer that any man should carry any vessel through the temple.” The purification of humanity is slow, but sure. (A. J. Morris.)

Pickpockets in the synagogue

Our Paris correspondent telegraphs:-Complaints having been made to the police that the synagogue of the Rue de la Victoire had become a house of call for pickpockets, several detectives were set there on watch, who last Saturday caught a man in the act of stealing a purse from one of the congregation. Henceforth a couple of inspectors will be on duty during the service and, it is to be hoped, will render personal property secure in the synagogue. The name of the man arrested is Jules Henrilien. He refuses

62

to name his accomplices. (Daily News.)

The expulsion of the money changers from the temple

It would appear from a comparison of the different evangelists, that there were two occasions upon which Christ displayed His indignation at the traffic by which His Father’s house was defiled. Those who yielded to the supernatural power with which our Lord acted, returned to their unlawful practices when that power was withdrawn. It was one thing to drive the wicked from the temple, but quite another to drive wickedness from their heart. This was a miracle upon mind.

I. The place where the market was held. It was not the temple properly so called; the Jews were scrupulous about their temple. Where, then, was the market? We will endeavour to explain this to you. In the time of our Saviour, the temple, properly so called, had three courts, each surrounding one another. These courts, with the building they encompassed, made up what was known under the general name of the temple. In the first of these courts stood the altar of burnt offering, and to this came none but the priests and Levites. The second, surrounding that of the priests, was the great hall which, though the Jews assembled to worship, was also open to those proselytes who had been circumcised, and had thus taken upon themselves the whole ritual of Moses. But the outer court of the three was called the court of the Gentiles, and was appropriated to such proselytes as had renounced idolatry, but who, not having been circumcised, were still accounted unclean by the Jews. The two first of these courts were accounted holy, but no sanctity appears to have been attached to the third; it was considered a part of the temple, but had no share in that sacredness which belonged to all the rest. And in this outer court-the court of the Gentiles-it was, that the sheep, and oxen, and doves were sold, and the money changers had their tables. As the Jews did not regard this court as possessing any legal sanctity, they permitted to be used as a market the temple of those who came thither to worship. If you have followed me in this there is good reason for supposing that it was on purpose to show their contempt for the Gentiles, that the Jews allowed the traffic which Christ interrupted. When Christ entered the court of the Gentiles, and found in place of the solemnity which should have pervaded a scene dedicated to worship, all the noise and tumult of a market, He had before Him the most striking exhibition of that fatal resolve on the part of His countrymen, and which His apostles strove in vain to counteract-the resolve of considering themselves as God’s peculiar people, to the exclusion of all besides; and the refusing to unite themselves with converts from heathenism in the formation of one visible Church. Was not this, then, an occasion upon which to exercise the prophetic office? Was there not here an opportunity of inculcating a truth which, however unpalatable to the Jews, required, of all others, to be set forth with clearness, and maintained with constancy-the truth, that though God for a time had seemed neglectful of the great body of men, and bestowed all His carefulness upon a solitary tribe; yet were the Gentiles watched over by Him in their long alienation, and about to be gathered within the borders of His Church. And this truth we suppose it to have been which Christ set Himself to teach by the significant act of driving from the court of the Gentiles the merchants with their merchandise. He declared, as emphatically as He could have done in words, that the place where the strangers worshipped was to be accounted as sacred as that in which the Israelites assembled, and that what would have been held as a profanation of the one, was to be held a profanation of the other. By thus vindicating the sanctity of the spot appropriated to the Gentiles, as worthy of as much veneration as that appropriated to the Jews, when He expelled the merchants and money changers, He went far towards putting Jew and Gentile on the same level, and

63

announcing the abolition of ceremonial distinctions. The Jews had allowed the desecration of the court of the Gentiles, because they regarded the Gentiles as immeasurably inferior to themselves, and defiled through the want of circumcision; and, therefore, unable to offer to God any acceptable worship. What, then, was meant by the resistance, on Christ’s part, to this desecration of the court of the Gentiles, except that the Jews had fallen into the grossest of errors, in so supposing that the Gentile had been overlooked by God, or excluded from His mercies? The ground on which he stood to pray was as hallowed as that on which the sanctuary rose, and, therefore, he might himself be as much approved and accepted as anyone of that family which seemed for centuries to engross the notice of heaven. And when this has been determined, it is scarcely possible but to feel that the prophecy may glance on to future occurrences. We need not point out to you how little progress has yet been made, notwithstanding the struggles and the advancings of Christianity, towards the announced consummation that God’s “house shall be a house of prayer for all people.” “All people” have not yet flocked to its courts; but, on the contrary, the great mass of the human population bow down in the temple of idols. True, indeed, that the doors of the sanctuary have been thrown open, and the men of every land been invited to enter; but the prophecies in question speak of more than a universal offer of admission; they speak of what shall yet take place-the general acceptance of the offer; the pressing of all nations into the Church of the Redeemer. Consider, then, whether the expulsion of the buyers and sellers, as figuring the first accomplishment of the prophecy, when the Gentiles were admitted into the visible Church, may not also be significative of what shall occur at the close of the dispensation when Christianity shall be diffused throughout the earth. We have succeeded to the place of the Jews; for Christians are now the peculiar people of God, and what the Gentiles were to the Jews, that are the heathen to us-a race divided from us by external privileges, and not admitted into the same covenant with the Almighty. And what is it that Christian nations have done and are doing for the heathen? In our intercourse with lands where idolatry and superstition still hold the ascendency, has it been our main endeavour to introduce the pure gospel of Christ? or have we striven, where there was no room for direct assault upon the fabric of error, to exhibit Christianity in its purity, and beauty, and majesty? Alas, might it not be said, we have planted our markets rather than our churches in the court of the Gentiles; that we have crowded that court with our merchandise, but taken little pains to gain room within its area for the solemnities of truth; that even when the voice of the preacher has been heard, it has been overborne by the din of commerce, or contradicted by the lives of those professing Christianity? Indeed, we much think that putting, as we are bound to do, the Christian into the place of the Jew, there is little or no difference between the present aspect of the court of the Gentiles, and that which it wore when Christ was on earth-the same, at least, in a great degree; for what portion do our efforts bear either to our ability or the urgency of the case? The same inattention to those not born to our privileges; the same persecution; the same neglect or disregard of the interests of religion; the same supercilious notion of superiority in the midst of the non-improvement of our many advantages; and if Christ were now to return to the earth, as we believe He shall at the close of the dispensation, what measure could Christendom expect at His hands but that awarded to the Jews? It is in exact accordance with those delineations of Scripture which relate to the second coming of Christ, that we should consider the expulsion of the traffickers from the temple figurative of what will be done with the great mass of nominal Christians. We could almost think that in this, and other respects, the transaction represented how Christ would proceed in cleansing the temple of the heart. He comes into the courts of this temple-the heart of any amongst ourselves whom He desires to consecrate to Himself; and He finds it occupied by worldly things-carnal passions, ambitious

64

projects, the affections all fastening on the creature, to the exclusion of the Creator. And there must be an expulsion from the temple of whatsoever defiles it, that it may indeed become a sanctuary fit for the indwelling of the Lord of the whole earth. But the purifying process is gradual. Nothing unclean can be suffered to remain; but it is not all at once that what pollutes is removed. The first assault, as it were, is on the oxen, and the sheep, and the tables of the money changers, as the more prominent of the occasions and causes of profanation. And with these He is vehement and forcible. Sensuality, covetousness, pride-these are for the scourge and the indignant expostulation; and no quarter can be allowed, no, not for an instant. But it is not only the oxen, and the sheep, and the tables of the money changers, which desecrate the temple of the heart. There are the doves-the gentler and kindlier affections of our nature; and these-even these-contaminate when God is not their first object, but their fervour and their freshness given to the creature. But it is in gentleness, rather than in harshness, that the Lord of the temple proceeds with us in effecting this part of the purification. It is not with the doves, as with the sheep, and the oxen, and the tables of the money changers-the scourging and the overthrowing, but rather by the mild expostulation-“Take these things hence,” that He attempts the removal of what He cannot suffer to remain. Harshness might injure or destroy the affections themselves, just as the driving out the doves would have caused their being lost; but by continually setting before us the goodness of God, whether as manifested in creation or redemption, by teaching us how much more precious becomes every object of love when we love it not so much for its own sake as for the sake of the Giver-this cleanses the heart, and gradually inclines us to the substituting for affections chained to the finite, affections centering on the infinite; and thus persuades us to take away the dove on whose plumage is the dust of the earth, but only that its place may be occupied by one such as the Psalmist describes-“whose wings are covered with silver, and her feathers with yellow gold.” The cleansing of the heart is not complete till God is supreme in its affections. It is not enough to mortify corrupt passions, and resist imperious lusts: this is but expelling the sheep and the oxen. We must give God the heart, delighting in Him as the “chief good;” ay, my brethren, we must act on the consciousness, and God grant that we all may!-we must act on the consciousness that the gentle dove may profane God’s house, as well as the flocks whose pastures are of the earth; and that if the one-the sheep and the oxen-must be altogether ejected, the other-the dove-must be trained to the soaring upwards, and bathing in the free light of heaven. (H. Melvill, B. D.)

Profanation of holy places

Who will venture to deny the exceeding enormity of that offence which a prince deems it right to punish with his own hand? God drove our guilty first parents from the garden; but it was done by the intervention of an angel. He chased the Canaanites from their land; but He did it by an army of hornets. By the hand of an angel He struck down the army of the Assyrians, and brought low the pride of Herod when he assumed Divine honour to himself. Only in the case of those who profane sacred places do I see Christ-Him, that is, who on all other occasions was so mild and gentle-coming forth and taking the rod in His own hand. What a monstrous, what an intolerable crime must this be-the profanation of holy places! (Segneri.)

Desecration of the temple

The circumstances which led to the profanation were these. The Jews who came up to the Feasts from a distance would obviously find it more convenient to purchase

65

their sacrificial victims on the spot, and cattle markets were held in the city; but in lapse of time, when the authorities of the temple began to grow mercenary, they determined to have such a large source of profit in their own hands. The Court of the Gentiles was always held in little respect by the Jews, and it seemed to them quite justifiable to utilize it for their purpose. For about twenty days before the Feast the corridors and arcades and outer walls of the sacred enclosure were commonly occupied by cattle pens; and the solemn stillness of the precincts was broken by the unseemly confusion of the lowing of herds, and the wrangling of drovers and pilgrims bargaining for their price. Besides these there were the money changers. After the captivity the Jews of the dispersion, when they came up to the Feasts, in common with those who dwelt in Palestine, made each their offering for the temple service. There was only one coin in which this offering might be paid into the treasury-the half-shekel piece. It was intended as a safeguard to prevent the Korban being desecrated by the introduction of pieces of money upon which heathen emblems were stamped. Those pilgrims, therefore, who came from countries where non-Jewish money was current, as Babylon, Alexandria, Greece, or Rome, were compelled to procure the half-shekel by exchange. It was not only a fruitful source of gain to the bankers, who demanded an exorbitant discount; their extortion kindled the indignation of our Lord, and His ears were pained by the clinking of money and weights and balances, and the strife of words and angry recriminations, mingling with the prayers and praises of the sanctuary. But this was not all. Even the offerings of poor women, and others, whose very poverty might have exempted them from fraudulent imposition, were included in the market. The whole scene was such as would raise the righteous anger of anyone who was jealous for the honour of God’s house. It was almost a worse profanation than that which made our cathedrals and churches scenes of riot and desecration in the times of Edward VI, when St. Paul’s was turned into a stock exchange for merchants, and its aisles were used as common thoroughfares for both man and beast. (H. M. Luckock, D. D.)

Cleansing of the Temple

I. God has many temples;

(1) Temple of Israel;

(2) Temple of nature;

(3) Christian church;

(4) Saved souls.

II. We are too ready to defile them. We mix self-interest with religion, or trade with religion, for our own profit.

1. Preaching in order to get money.

2. Sale of livings.

3. Going to certain churches because it may be good for business.

III. However the Saviour may seem to ignore such pollution, a time will come when He will resent and purge it away. (R. Glover.)

Thieves in the Temple

Religion must not be exploited for money. The church is not a shop. The kind of

66

spiritual outrage attacked by Christ is one that repeats itself. There was nothing wrong in selling outside the temple, or any other church, things which were necessary for the temple service. We sell hymn books in our vestries; abroad they sell candles and breviaries and crosses at the doors of the cathedrals. It is a question of degree and intention. But I have seen, at the time of a church celebration abroad, the whole street blocked with booths. Noisy sellers of sweetmeats, toys, and provisions, pushing their bargains, and touting even in the church porch, and on the threshold of the sanctuary. There was the den of thieves. Your miracle mongers, who set up their winking statues and healing saints’ bones with the one view of fleecing the people-are thieves. Your idle clergy, especially certain Roman cathedral clergy, who fatten on the sins of the faithful, never preach, seldom hear confessions, never visit the sick; simply do nothing but mumble mass on saints’ days-they are thieves. Your English clergy, who are hale and hearty non-residents on £500 a year, and put in a man at £80 to look after their parishes-are thieves. Wherever or whenever God’s church and service is made the pretext first and foremost for getting money, then and there the spiritual outrage chastised by Christ with whip and expulsion is committed afresh: the house of prayer has been made a den of thieves; and at such an hour as they wet not of, the Lord will suddenly come to His temple and purify it. (H. R. Haweis, M. A.)

Right looking upon wrong

As it is said that ferocious animals are disarmed by the eye of man if he but steadily look at them, so it is when right looks upon wrong. Resist the devil and he will flee from you; offer him a bold front and he runs away. (Dr. Bushnell.)

16 and would not allow anyone to carry

merchandise through the temple courts.

BARNES, "Any vessel - Any vessel used in cooking, or connected with the sale of their articles of merchandise.

CLARKE, "Should carry any vessel - Among the Jews the word כלי keli, vessel, had a vast latitude of meaning; it signified arms, Jer_21:4; Eze_9:1; clothes, Deu_22:5, and instruments of music, Psa_71:22. It is likely that the evangelist uses

the Greek word σκευος in the same sense, and by it points out any of the things which

were bought and sold in the temple.

GILL, "And would not suffer that any man,.... He was more strict and severe than the day before; and gave orders, that they should be so far from being allowed to sit and trade in that sacred place, that no man

should carry any vessel through the temple; should make a, thoroughfare of it, by carrying through to any other place, any vessel that was for common use, or any sort of burden whatever: and this they could not well find fault with, nor complain of,

67

since it was agreeable to one of their own canons; for they say (h),

"a man may not go into the mountain of the house, with his staff (in his hands); nor with shoes (on his feet); nor with his girdle, and his money in it; nor with a bag

thrown over his shoulders; nor with dust upon his feet; nor might he make it, קפנדריא,

"a thoroughfare", and much less spit in it.''

HENRY, "2. He would not suffer that any man should carry any vessel, any sort of goods or wares, through the temple, or any of the courts of it, because it was the nearer way, and would save them the labour of going about, Mar_11:16. The Jews owned that it was one of the instances of honour due to the temple, not to make the mountain of the house, or the court of the Gentiles, a road, or common passage, or to come into it with any bundle.

17 And as he taught them, he said, “Is it not

written: ‘My house will be called a house of

prayer for all nations’[c]? But you have made it

‘a den of robbers.’[d]”

GILL, "And he taught, saying unto them, is it not written,.... In Isa_56:7.

My house shall be called of all nations, the house of prayer? For not only the Jews went up to the temple to pray, see Luk_18:10, but the Gentiles also, who became of the Jewish religion, and had a court built for that purpose; and so the whole temple, from hence, was called an house of prayer: and the meaning is, not only that it should be called so by the Gentiles, but that it should be so to them, and made use of by them as such. Jarchi's note on the clause in Isa_56:7 is, "not for Israel only, but also for the proselytes."

But ye have made it a den of thieves; for no other, in our Lord's esteem, were the buyers and sellers of sheep, oxen, and doves, and the money changers, and the priests that encouraged them, and had a profit out of them: now these had their seats, shops, and tables, within the mountain of the house; and even in that part of it, which was assigned to the Gentiles, the nations of the world, who became proselytes, and came up to Jerusalem to worship there at certain times; See Gill on Mat_21:13.

HENRY, " He gave a good reason for this; because it was written, My house shall be called of all nations, The house of prayer, Mar_11:17. So it is written, Isa_56:7. It shall pass among all people under that character. It shall be the house of prayer to all nations; it was so in the first institution of it; when Solomon dedicated it, it was with an eye to the sons of the strangers, 1Ki_8:41. And it was prophesied that it should be yet more so. Christ will have the temple, as a type of the gospel-church, to be, (1.) A house of prayer. After he had turned out the oxen and doves, which were things for sacrifice, he revived the appointment of it as a house of prayer, to teach us that when

68

all sacrifices and offerings should be abolished, the spiritual sacrifices of prayer and praise should continue and remain for ever. (2.) That it should be so to all nations,and not to the people of the Jews only; for whosoever shall call upon the name of the Lord, shall be saved, though not of the seed of Jacob, according to the flesh. It was therefore insufferable for them to make it a den of thieves, which would prejudice those nations against it, whom they should have invited to it. When Christ drove out the buyers and sellers at the beginning of his ministry, he only charged them with making the temple a house of merchandise (Joh_2:16); but now he chargeth them with making it a den of thieves, because since then they had twice gone about to stone him in the temple (Joh_8:59; Joh_10:31), or because the traders there were grown notorious for cheating their customers, and imposing upon the ignorance and necessity of the country people, which is no better than downright thievery. Those that suffer vain worldly thoughts to lodge within them when they are at their devotions, turn the house of prayer into a house of merchandise; but they that make long prayers for pretence to devour widows' houses, turn it into a den of thieves.

COFFMAN, "Here Christ quoted from Isaiah 56:7 and Jeremiah 7:11. For

discussion of the messianic implications of what Jesus did in both these

cleansings, see comment in my Commentary on John, John 2. What Jesus did in

each of these cleansings was to present a dramatic claim upon his own behalf as

God's Messenger who had suddenly come to his temple. One may only be

amused at a comment like that of Grant who said that "`Den of thieves' ... does

not necessarily imply extortion on the park of the merchants!"[12] Is such a

commentator ignorant of the fact that Jesus here used the word "robbers" (not

"thieves"),[13] and does he have any explanation of how robbers may be held

"not guilty" of extortion?

[12] Frederick C. Grant, Interpreter's Bible (New York: Abingdon Press, 1951),

Vol. VII, p. 830.

[13] Nestle Greek Text (Grand Rapids, Michigan: Zondervan Publishing House,

1972), p. 189

CONSTABLE, "The Isaiah prophecy was a prediction yet unfulfilled as well as a

statement of God's perennial intent for the temple. In Jesus' mouth it was also a

prophecy of conditions in the messianic kingdom (cf. Zechariah 14:21).

Mark added "for all the nations," which Matthew omitted from Isaiah 56:7. The

phrase has special significance for Gentile readers. God permitted Gentiles to

come and worship Him in the temple court of the Gentiles indicating His desire

to bring them into relationship with Himself.

The Jewish leaders, however, had made this practically impossible by converting

the only place Gentiles could pray in the temple complex into a market where

fraud abounded. They had expelled the Gentile worshippers to make room for

Jewish robbers.

Jesus was claiming that the temple belonged to Him rather than to the Jewish

leaders by cleaning it up. The quotation He cited from Isaiah presented the

temple as God's house. Thus Jesus was claiming to be God.

69

"The third stage in the progressive disclosure of Jesus' identity [to the reader]

focuses on the secret that he is the Son of God." [Note: Kingsbury, p. 46. Cf.

8:27-30; 10:46-11:11 and 12:35-37.]

18 The chief priests and the teachers of the law

heard this and began looking for a way to kill

him, for they feared him, because the whole

crowd was amazed at his teaching.

BARNES, "All the people were astonished - He became popular among them. The Pharisees saw that their authority was lessened or destroyed. They were therefore envious of him, and sought his life.

His doctrine - His teaching. He taught with power and authority so great that the multitudes were awed, and were constrained to obey.

GILL, "And the Scribes and chief priests heard it,.... The reproof he gave to the money changers, and buyers, and sellers in the temple; and his strict prohibition that none should carry any vessels through it; and the argument he used from the prophecy of Isaiah, and the sharp rebuke he gave for the profanation of the holy place:

and sought how they might destroy him: they took counsel together to take away his life, for they hated reformation:

for they feared him; lest he should go on to make great changes and alterations among them, which would affect their credit and character, and their gains also, and draw the people after him:

because all the people were astonished at his doctrine; both as to the matter of it, which were such words as never man spake; and, as to the manner of it, being with such majesty, power, and authority, as the Scribes and Pharisees taught not with; and also at the miracles, by which it was confirmed, as well as at the reformation and discipline he was introducing; which was done with such an air of sovereignty and power, as was amazing.

HENRY, ". The scribes and the chief priests were extremely nettled at this, Mar_11:18. They hated him, and hated to be reformed by him; and yet they feared him,lest he should next overthrow their seats, and expel them, being conscious to themselves of the profaning and abusing of their power. They found that he had a great interest, that all the people were astonished at his doctrine, and that every thing he said, was an oracle and a law to them; and what durst he not attempt, what could he not effect, being thus supported? They therefore sought, not how he might

70

make their peace with him, but how they might destroy him. A desperate attempt, and which, one would think, they themselves could not but fear was fighting against God. But they care not what they do, to support their own power and grandeur.

COFFMAN, "Note that it is not stated here that they "decided" to destroy him;

that decision had already been made more than three years previously (John

5:18). Furthermore, Jesus, at the first cleansing, had associated his action with a

veiled prophecy of his death and resurrection (John 2:19). Without doubt, Jesus'

action in the two cleansings was a prime source of the motivation of the enemies

who decided to destroy him. The principal concern of the chief priests, as

revealed here, was exactly how they could bring about his death. Mark's very

next verse suggests the possibility that they might have assassinated Jesus if he

had not withdrawn from the city every night. That they really preferred secret

murder to any public act against him is plain from Matthew 26:4.

CONSTABLE, "Jesus' action and words had threatened the reputation and

resources of the Sanhedrin members. They plotted to kill Him (cf. Mark 3:6).

The intensity of their hatred becomes clear later (Mark 11:27 to Mark 12:37).

Mark alone recorded that they feared Jesus. The reason was the impact His

teaching was having on the multitudes that gathered from all over the ancient

world for Passover (cf. Mark 1:22; Mark 6:2; Mark 7:37; Mark 10:26).

At evening, Jesus and the disciples again left Jerusalem and spent the night on

Mt. Olivet (Luke 21:37), probably in Bethany (Mark 11:11).

"If the Lord Jesus were to show up in our house of worship, what changes would

He make?" [Note: Wiersbe, 1:151.]

19 When evening came, Jesus and his

disciples[e] went out of the city.

GILL, "And when even was come, he went out of the city. Of Jerusalem, as he did the evening before, and for the same reasons: probably he went to Bethany, where he had lodged the last night, with Lazarus, Martha, and Mary; or to the Mount of Olives, where he sometimes spent the night in prayer: the Syriac version renders it, "they went out"; for Christ took his disciples with him, as is evident from the following verse.

HENRY, "III. His discourse with his disciples, upon occasion of the fig-tree's withering away which he had cursed. At even, as usual, he went out of the city (Mar_11:19), to Bethany; but it is probable that it was in the dark, so that they could not see the fig-tree; but the next morning, as they passed by, they observed the fig-tree dried

71

up from the roots, Mar_11:20. More is included many times in Christ's curses than is expressed, as appears by the effects of them. The curse was no more than that it should never bear fruit again, but the effect goes further, it is dried up from the roots.If it bear no fruit, it shall bear no leaves to cheat people. Now observe,

COFFMAN, "In addition to the reason for Jesus' leaving the city each night and

staying either in Bethany or in some secluded place on the slopes of the Mount of

Olives, which was cited under the above verse, there was also the evident

purpose of our Lord to avoid identification, as much as possible, with any of the

places previously accounted sacred. His sitting by Jacob's well (John 4:6)

dignified a place not mentioned in the Old Testament, it being nowhere stated

therein that Jacob ever dug a well. Nazareth, Cana, Bethany, Bethsaida-Julius,

and the majority of the places made memorable by Jesus were simply not

identified among the Jews as having any notability. Jesus' refusing to stay all

night in Jerusalem was fully compatible with the obvious design of his whole life,

which was to show that no place, or person, was so obscure or unimportant as to

deny it or him a participation in the mercy which God sent to all.

20 In the morning, as they went along, they saw

the fig tree withered from the roots.

GILL, "And in the morning, as they passed by,.... The fig tree; when they returned the next morning from Bethany, or the Mount of Olives, or the place, wherever it was, they had been that night:

they saw the fig tree dried up from the roots; they did not see it immediately wither as it did, nor could they see it, as they went from Jerusalem to this place, because it was then in the evening; but in the morning, as they came along, they observed it; not only that the tender branches and boughs of it, but the trunk and body of the tree, and even the roots of it, were all dried up; so that it was entirely dead, and there was no room ever to expect it would revive, and bear any more fruit.

JAMIESON, "Mar_11:20-26. Lessons from the cursing of the fig tree.

And in the morning — of Tuesday, the third day of the week: He had slept, as during all this week, at Bethany.

as they passed by — going into Jerusalem again.

they saw the fig tree dried up from the roots — no partial blight, leaving life in the root; but it was now dead, root and branch. In Mat_21:19 it is said it withered away as soon as it was cursed. But the full blight had not appeared probably at once; and in the dusk perhaps, as they returned to Bethany, they had not observed it. The precision with which Mark distinguishes the days is not observed by Matthew, intent only on holding up the truths which the incident was designed to teach. In Matthew the whole is represented as taking place at once, just as the two stages of Jairus’ daughter - dying and dead - are represented by him as one. The only difference is between a more summary and a more detailed narrative, each of which only confirms

72

the other.

BURKITT, "The blasting and sudden withering of the fig-tree at the word of

Christ, plainly shewed his divine power, and by this miraculous operation, our

Saviour designed to shew his disciples the mighty power of faith; that is, a full

persuasion of the power of God, that he is able, and of the goodness of God, that

he is willing, to grant whatever we ask according to his will, that has a tendency

to his glory and our good.

Learn hence, That faith is a necessary and principal ingredient in prayer praying

without faith, is like to a man's shooting without a bullet; it makes a noise, but

doth no execution.

Secondly, That whatsoever good thing God had made the matter of his promise,

shall be given to good men in a way of perfromance, provided they pray in faith.

Whatsoever ye desire, believe that ye receive them, and ye shall have them.

21 Peter remembered and said to Jesus, “Rabbi,

look! The fig tree you cursed has withered!”

BARNES, "Thou cursedst - To curse means to devote to destruction. This is its meaning here. It does not in this place imply blame, but simply that it should be destroyed.

GILL, "And Peter, calling to remembrance,.... Not so much the tree, and its spreading leaves, and the greatness of it, and the flourishing condition it was in, the other day, as the imprecation of Christ upon it:

saith unto him, Master, behold, the fig tree which thou cursedst is withered away; which he observed, as matter of astonishment, and as an instance of Christ's surprising power and authority; See Gill on Mat_21:20.

HENRY, "1. How the disciples were affected with it. Peter remembered Christ's words, and said, with surprise, Master, behold, the fig-tree which thou cursedst is withered away, Mar_11:21. Note, Christ's curses have wonderful effects, and make those to wither presently, that flourished like the green bay-tree. Those whom he curseth are cursed indeed. This represented the character and state of the Jewish church; which, from henceforward, was a tree dried up from the roots; no longer fit for food, but for fuel only. The first establishment of the Levitical priesthood was ratified and confirmed by the miracle of a dry rod, which in one night budded, and blossomed, and brought forth almonds (Num_17:8), a happy omen of the fruitlessness and flourishing of that priesthood. And now, by a contrary miracle, the

73

expiration of that priesthood was signified by a flourishing tree dried up in a night; the just punishment of those priests that had abused it. And this seemed very strange to the disciples, and scarcely credible, that the Jews, who had been so long God's own, his only professing people in the world, should be thus abandoned; they could not imagine how that fig-tree should so soon wither away: but this comes of rejecting Christ, and being rejected by him.

JAMIESON, "And Peter calling to remembrance saith unto him — satisfied that a miracle so very peculiar - a miracle, not of blessing, as all His other miracles, but of cursing - could not have been wrought but with some higher reference, and fully expecting to hear something weighty on the subject.

Master, behold, the fig tree which thou cursedst is withered away — so connecting the two things as to show that he traced the death of the tree entirely to the curse of his Lord. Matthew (Mat_21:20) gives this simply as a general exclamation of surprise by the disciples “how soon” the blight had taken effect.

COKE, "Mark 11:21. Behold the fig-tree, &c.— Our Lord had said, Mark 11:14.

No man eat fruit of thee hereafter for ever. This St. Peter, according to the

Jewish manner of speaking concerning things that are barren, calls cursing the

fig-tree; (see Hebrews 6:8.) and some ill-disposed readers, not apprehending the

proper force of the words, are apt to form a very unbecoming notion of our

adorable Lord from this action; but they do so without the least cause, since

every thing that he said on this occasion was consistent with the most perfect

decency, even in their sense of the word. Moreover, the transaction itself was

emblematical and prophetic, prefiguring the speedy ruin of the Jewish nation, on

account of its unfruitfulness, under greater advantages than any other people

enjoyed at that day; and, like all the rest of his miracles, it was done with a

gracious intention, namely, to alarm his countrymen, and induce them to repent.

It is observable, that the destruction of the swine, and thisblasting of the fig-tree,

are the only instances of punitive miracles in the whole course of our Saviour's

ministry, notwithstanding they do not appear to have been injurious. The case of

the swine we have already considered; and with respect to the fig-tree, St.

Matthew informs us, Matthew 21:19 that it was in the way, that is, in the

common road, and therefore, probably, no particular person's property; but if it

was, being barren, the timber might be as serviceable to the owner as before. So

that here was no real injury; but Jesus was pleased to make use of this innocent

miracle for the valuable purposes above suggested, as well as to teach his

disciples the efficacy of a strong and lively

22 “Have faith in God,” Jesus answered.

BARNES, "Have faith in God - Literally, “Have the faith of God.” This may mean, have strong faith, or have confidence in God; a strong belief that he is able to

74

accomplish things that appear most difficult with infinite ease, as the fig-tree was made to wither away by a word.

CLARKE, "Have faith in God - Εχετε�πι̣ιν�θεου is a mere Hebraism: have the

faith of God, i.e. have strong faith, or the strongest faith, for thus the Hebrews expressed the superlative degree; so the mountains of God mean exceeding great mountains - the hail of God, exceeding great hail, etc.

GILL, "And Jesus answering, saith unto them,.... To all the disciples; for what Peter said, he said in the name of them all; and according to Matthew, the disciples said, "how soon is the fig tree withered away?" To which this is an answer; though the Arabic version renders it, "to him"; as if the words were directed particularly to Peter:

have faith in God; or "the faith of God", so the Vulgate Latin, Syriac, Persic, and Ethiopic versions; that is, exercise, and make use of that faith which has God for its author, which is the work of God, and of his operation, a free grace gift of his; and which has God for its object; and is supported by his power, and encouraged by his goodness, truth, and faithfulness: and so the Arabic version renders it, "believe in God"; not only that such things may be done, as the drying up a fig tree, but those that are much greater.

HENRY, "2. The good instructions Christ gave them from it; for of those even this withered tree was fruitful.

(1.) Christ teacheth them from hence to pray in faith (Mar_11:22); Have faith in God. They admired the power of Christ's word of command; “Why,” said Christ, “a lively active faith would put as great a power into your prayers, Mar_11:23, Mar_11:24. Whosoever shall say to this mountain, this mount of Olives, Be removed, and be cast into the sea; if he has but any word of God, general or particular, to build his faith upon, and if he shall not doubt in his heart, but shall believe that those things which he saith, according to the warrant he has from what God hath said, shall come to pass, he shall have whatsoever he saith

JAMIESON, "(Mar 11:22) And Jesus answering saith unto them, Have faith in God.

BARCLAY, "THE LAWS OF PRAYER (Mark 11:22-26)

11:22-26 Jesus answered, "Have faith in God. This is the truth I tell you--

whoever will say to this mountain, 'Be lifted up and be cast into the sea,' and who

in his heart does not doubt, but believes that what he says is happening, it will be

done for him. So then I tell you, believe that you have received everything for

which you pray and ask, and it will be done for you. And whenever you stand

praying, if you have anything against anyone, forgive it, so that your Father who

is in heaven may forgive you your trespasses."

We return now to sayings which Mark attaches to the story of the blasting of the

fig-tree. We have noticed more than once how certain sayings of Jesus stuck in

men's minds although the occasion on which he said them had been forgotten. It

is so here. The saying about the faith which can remove mountains also occurs in

Matthew 17:20 and in Luke 17:6, and in each of the gospels it occurs in a quite

75

different context. The reason is that Jesus said it more than once and its real

context had often been forgotten. The saying about the necessity of forgiving our

fellow-men occurs in Matthew 6:12; Matthew 6:14 again in a quite different

context. We must approach these sayings as not so much having to do with

particular incidents, but as general rules which Jesus repeatedly laid down.

This passage gives us three rules for prayer.

(i) It must be the prayer of faith. The phrase about removing mountains was a

quite common Jewish phrase. It was a regular, vivid phrase for removing

difficulties. It was specially used of wise teachers. A good teacher who could

remove the difficulties which the minds of his scholars encountered was called a

mountain-remover. One who heard a famous Rabbi teach said that "he saw Resh

Lachish as if he were plucking up mountains." So the phrase means that if we

have real faith, prayer is a power which can solve any problem and make us able

to deal with any difficulty. That sounds very simple, but it involves two things.

First, it involves that we should be willing to take our problems and our

difficulties to God. That in itself is a very real test. Sometimes our problems are

that we wish to obtain something we should not desire at all, that we wish to find

a way to do something we should not even think of doing, that we wish to justify

ourselves for doing something to which we should never lay our hands or apply

our minds. One of the greatest tests of any problem is simply to say, "Can I take

it to God and can I ask his help?"; Second, it involves that we should be ready to

accept God's guidance when he gives it. It is the commonest thing in the world

for a person to ask for advice when all he really wants is approval for some

action that he is already determined to take. It is useless to go to God and to ask

for his guidance unless we are willing to be obedient enough to accept it. But if

we do take our problems to God and are humble enough and brave enough to

accept his guidance, there does come the power which can conquer the

difficulties of thought and of action.

(ii) It must be the prayer of expectation. It is the universal fact that anything

tried in the spirit of confident expectation has a more than double chance of

success. The patient who goes to a doctor and has no confidence in the prescribed

remedies has far less chance of recovery than the patient who is confident that

the doctor can cure him. When we pray, it must never be a mere formality. It

must never be a ritual without hope.

James Burns quotes a scene from Leonard Merrick's book, Conrad in Quest of

His Youth. "Do you think prayers are ever answered?" inquired Conrad. "In

my life I have sent up many prayers, and always with the attempt to persuade

myself that some former prayer had been fulfilled. But I knew. I knew in my

heart none ever had been. Things that I wanted have come to me, but--I say it

with all reverence--too late...." Mr. Irquetson's fine hand wandered across his

brow. "Once," he began conversationally, "I was passing with a friend through

Grosvenor Street. It was when in the spring the tenant's fancy lightly turns to

coats of paint, and we came to a ladder leaning against a house that was being

redecorated. In stepping to the outer side of it my friend lifted his hat to it. You

76

may know the superstition. He was a 'Varsity man, a man of considerable

attainments. I said, 'Is it possible you believe in that nonsense?' He said, 'N-no, I

don't exactly believe in it, but I never throw away a chance'." On a sudden the

vicar's inflexion changed, his utterance was solemn, stirring, devout, "I think,

sir, that most people pray on my friend's principle--they don't believe in it, but

they never throw away a chance."

There is much truth in that. For many people prayer is either a pious ritual or a

forlorn hope. It should be a thing of burning expectation. Maybe our trouble is

that what we want from God is our answer, and we do not recognize his answer

when it comes.

(iii) It must be the prayer of charity. The prayer of a bitter man cannot penetrate

the wall of his own bitterness. Why? If we are to speak with God there must be

some bond between two people who have nothing in common. The principle of

God is love, for he is love. If the ruling principle of a man's heart is bitterness, he

has erected a barrier between himself and God. If ever the prayer of such a man

is to be answered he must first ask God to cleanse his heart from the bitter spirit

and put into it the spirit of love. Then he can speak to God and God can speak to

him.

COFFMAN, "This reply must have astonished the apostles as much as it has the

people who have been reading of it ever since it happened. There was not a word

of the symbolical meaning of the destructive wonder (Christ would shortly

foretell the destruction of Jerusalem and the temple, and from that they would

be able to deduce the meaning of the fig tree). Jesus' reply did, however, stress

the fact and efficacy of prayer in relation to his wonderful signs. (See John 9:31;

11:41.) Although clear enough in John, this clear witness in Mark is illuminating.

All of Jesus' works were accomplished through Jesus' oneness with the Father, a

oneness that was not expressed independently but always through and after

prayerful communication with God. Thus, as always, one is obligated to see the

will and purpose of the Almighty in this work of the Son.

Say unto this mountain ... This promise of Jesus is not to be construed as

granting his followers, nor even his apostles, blanket authority to perform

monstrous and unreasonable miracles such as might be imagined by some

conjurer. It was, on the other hand, a most valid and precious promise that the

most awesome and overwhelming difficulties which they were to face would be

removed through their faithful prayers. The literal words of these verses are

another example of hyperbole which Jesus often used to emphasize his words.

Another example is that of the camel and the needle's eye (Mark 10:25).

COKE, "Mark 11:22. Have faith in God.— Or, a divine faith; literally, the faith

of God. And who could find fault, if the Creator and Proprietor of all things

were to destroy, by a single word of his mouth, a thousand of his inanimate

creatures, were it only to imprint this important lesson more deeply on one

immortal spirit? See on Matthew 17.

Inferences drawn from our Lord's cursing the fruitless fig-tree. When our

77

Saviour had rode through the streets of Jerusalem, that evening he lodged not in

the city; whether it was that he would not, lest, after the public acclamations of

the people, suspicions of plotting, or of a desire of popularity, might be raised

against him; or whether he could not for want of an invitation. Hosannahs were

more cheap than an entertainment; and accordingly he goes that evening,

without eating, from Jerusalem. O unthankful citizens, do you thus part with

your no less meek than glorious King; whose title was not more proclaimed in

your streets, than was your own ingratitude! There is no wonder in men's

unworthiness; but there is more than wonder in thy mercy, O Saviour of men,

who wouldst yet return thither on the morrow; and if thou mayest not spend the

night with them, wilt yet spend with them the day.

Thou, that givest food to all things living, art thyself hungry, (Mark 11:12.):

Martha, Mary, and Lazarus, kept not so poor a house, but that thou mightst

have eaten something at Bethany: whether thy haste outran thine appetite, or

whether on purpose thou forbarest any repast, to afford opportunity for thy

ensuing miracle, I neither presume to resolve nor conjecture. This was not the

first time that thou wast hungry; as thou wouldst be a man, so thou wouldst

suffer those infirmities which belong to humanity. Hence thou knowest to pity

what thou hast felt. Are we pinched with want? we endure but what thou didst,

and have reason to be patient: thou enduredst what we do; we have reason to be

thankful.

But what shall we say to this thine early hunger? The morning, as it is privileged

from excess, so likewise from need; the stomach is not used to rise with the body;

surely, as thine occasions were, no season was exempted from thy want. Thou

hadst spent the day before in the holy labour of thy reformation; after a

supperless departure, thou spendest the night in prayer; no meal refreshed thy

toil. Why do we think much to forbear a morsel, or to break a sleep for thee, who

didst thus neglect thyself for us?

As if meat were no part of thy care, as if any thing would serve to stop the mouth

of hunger, thy breakfast is expected from the next tree, Mark 11:13. A fig-tree

grew by the way-side, full-grown, well-spread, thick-leaved, and such as might

promise enough to a remote eye; thither thou camest to seek that which thou

didst not find; and not finding what thou soughtest, as displeased with thy

disappointment, didst curse that plant which deluded thy hopes; thy breath

instantly blasted that deceitful tree; what then could it do,—otherwise than the

whole world must needs do under thy malediction,—but wither and die away.

O Saviour, I would rather wonder at thine actions, than discuss them. If I should

say that, as man, thou either didst not know, or didst not consider this

fruitlessness, it could no way prejudice thy divine Omniscience. It were no

greater disparagement to thee to grow in knowledge, than in stature; nor was it

any more disgrace to thy perfect humanity, that thou, as man, knewest not all

things at once, than that thou wert not in thy childhood at thy full growth. But

herein I doubt not to say, it is more likely thou camest purposely to this tree, and

fore-resolving the event; thus to found the occasion of so instructive a miracle:

like as thou knewest Lazarus was dying, was dead, yet wouldst not seem to take

78

notice of his dissolution, that so thou mightst more gloriously display thy power

in his resurrection.

Besides, I have learned that thou, O Saviour, wert accustomed not to speak only,

but to work parables; and what was this but a real parable of thine? All the

while thou hadst been in the world, thou hadst given many proofs of thy mercy;

the earth was full of thy goodness: but now, immediately before thy passion, thou

thoughtst fit to give a double demonstration of thy just austerity; how else should

the world have seen that thou canst be severe, as well as meek and merciful? And

why mightst not thou, who didst make all things, freely destroy a plant for thy

own glory! Wherefore were thy best creatures created, but for the praise of thy

mercy and justice! What great matter was it, if thou, who once saidst, Let the

earth bring forth the herb yielding seed, and the tree yielding the fruit of its own

kind, shalt now say, Let this fruitless tree wither?

Yet was all this done in figure: in this act of thine, I see both an emblem and a

prophesy. How didst thou therein mean to teach thy disciples how much thou

hatest an unfruitful profession, and what judgment thou meanedst to bring upon

that barren generation? Once before hadst thou compared the Jewish nation to a

fig-tree in the midst of thy vineyard, which, after three years' expectation and

culture yielding no fruit, was by thee, the owner, doomed to a speedy destruction.

Now thou actest, what then thou saidst. Scarce any tree abounds more with

leaves and shade; no nation abounded more with ceremonial observances, and

semblances of piety. Outward profession, where there is want of inward truth

and real practice, does but help to draw down and to aggravate judgment: had

this tree been utterly bare and leafless, it had perhaps escaped the curse. Hear

this, ye vain hypocrites, who, only solicitous for a fair outside show, never care

for the sincerity of a conscientious obedience; and thus with your own hands,

draw and help forward the curse upon you!

That which was the fault of this tree, was also the punishment of it,—

fruitlessness, Mark 11:30. Had the boughs been appointed to be torn down, and

the body split in pieces, the doom had been more easy; the juicy plant might yet

have recovered, and have lived to recompence this deficiency. Now it shall be,

what it was, fruitless. Horrible state of that church, or that soul, which is

punished with her own sin! Outward plagues are but favour, in comparison of

spiritual judgments.

Our Lord's malediction might have been perfectly consistent with a long

continuance; the tree might have lived long, though fruitless; but behold! no

sooner is the word passed, than the leaves droop and turn yellow,—the branches

wrinkle and shrink,—the bark changes colour,—the root dies,—the plant

withers.

O God! what creature is able to abide the blasting of the breath of thy

displeasure? Even the most great and glorious angels of heaven could not stand

one moment before thine anger, but perished under thy wrath everlastingly.

How irresistible thy power! how dreadful thy judgments! Lord, chasten my

fruitlessness, but punish it not: at least, if thou punishest, oh curse it not; lest I

79

wither, and be consumed!

REFLECTIONS.—1st, The last week of the life of Jesus is now come, and we see

him entering Jerusalem in triumph, not terrified with the fears of his enemies, or

cast down by the sufferings that he was about to undergo.

1. He enters Jerusalem amid the hosannas of the people. He ordered his disciples,

when he drew near the city, to bring an ass's colt from the opposite village,

directing them to the spot, and delivering a message from him, if any questioned

them for what they did. Accordingly they went as Jesus had commanded them;

and when the owners of the colt demanded why they loosed him, they told them

the Lord hath need of him; and they contentedly let him go. Seated on this mean

animal did Jesus enter the city, while, to express their gladness, his poor

followers spread their garments in the way, and cut down branches from the

trees as at the feast of tabernacles, surrounding him with hosannas, wishing

prosperity to the long-expected Messiah, now bringing salvation to his people;

praying that his reign may be long and happy who comes to sit on his father

David's throne, invested with divine authority; calling on the angels to join their

praises, and begging God to pour down the best of blessings on the Messiah and

his people.

2. He went directly to the temple: that was his palace: he aimed not at a temporal

but spiritual dominion. And looking round to observe what was done there, and

to take notice of the abuses which called for his correction, and, as appears from

Matthew 21:12-13 casting out those who trafficked there, he retired in the

evening to Bethany with the twelve, the place that he chose for his abode. Note;

The eye of Jesus is upon his temple, to see what the priests do there: it is upon

the living temple of his people's heart, observing every rising thought of evil.

How watchful then need we be!

2nd, We have,

1. The cursing of the barren fig-tree, the type of the destruction of the Jewish

nation. Our Lord, on his return from Bethany to the temple in the morning,

being hungry, seeing a very flourishing fig-tree, came, expecting to find some figs

thereon; for the time of figs was not yet, or the time of figs, when they should be

gathered in, was not yet, and therefore he might expect fruit on the tree; but,

finding none, he cursed the tree in the hearing of his disciples, who took

particular notice of it. For the curses of the Lord are fearful, and never fall in

vain.

2. He purges the temple of the buyers and sellers, who had made that sacred

place a house of merchandize. It appears from Matthew 21:12 that he had done

the same the preceding day; but, probably supported and encouraged by the

priests, the traders had returned to their former traffic the next day, and were

thus again expelled. And, to vindicate his procedure, he quoted the words of the

prophet, Isaiah 56:6-7 where God, speaking of the sons of the stranger, the

proselytes, undertakes to welcome them to his house, which should be a house of

prayer to all nations. But the court, which was appropriated to the service of the

80

Gentiles, they had profaned by turning it into a market; and made it by their

knavery and extortion a den of thieves.

3. The priests and scribes, incensed at what they saw and heard, especially at

those severe rebukes which reflected so deeply on their characters, were bitterly

exasperated; and, being determined to murder him, sought only how they might

do it without exposing themselves to the fury of the populace; for they were

afraid openly to use violence, the people in general expressing such a veneration

for Christ's person, and such respect and reverence for his doctrine. Note; Envy

and malice naturally lead to murder; and it is only the fear of men that in a

multitude of instances deters the wicked from the very act.

4. In the evening they returned to Bethany; and the next morning, in their way to

the city, the disciples took notice with surprise of the withering of the fig-tree;

and Peter, pointing to the tree, observed to his Master how it was withered away

in consequence of the curse that he had pronounced upon it. Thence Christ took

occasion to encourage them confidently to exercise faith in God at all times: and,

especially in the exertion of the miraculous powers with which he had furnished

them, they should find nothing impossible, not even to remove the mountain on

which they stood, and cast it into the sea, if they had an unshaken trust in the

divine power and promises, and looked up to God, nothing doubting: for

whatever they should ask in prayer, which should be for his glory to give, and

they were warranted from his word to expect, should certainly be given them.

And on this occasion, as what would be essential to their obtaining an answer to

their prayers, he inculcates fervent love and mutual forgiveness: when they stood

praying for forgiveness, they must be ready to grant that pardon to others which

they themselves sought at God's hand. But if, under the spirit of

uncharitableness, they refuse to forgive their brother his trespasses, their

prayers would be in vain, and they must never hope for the pardon which

themselves sought at the hands of their heavenly Father. Note; (1.) Faith is the

conquering grace that overcomes the world, and bears down all obstacles before

it. If at any time we are terrified by guilt, or enslaved by corruption, it is through

our want of faith in God. (2.) Nothing can be a more powerful argument to

engage our charity and forgiveness towards others, than what arises from our

own prayers.

3rdly, Vexed at the heart to behold the respect paid to Jesus, and impatient to

revenge his rebukes, which they construed into reproaches, we have,

1. The demand of the chief-priests and elders, challenging Christ to produce his

authority for what he had said and done the preceding days, as if he had been

lord and master of the temple.

2. He answers their question by another. By what authority did John preach and

baptize? give me a direct reply. The answer was easy; but the difficulties in

which on either side it involved them were great. They saw that to confess his

mission divine, was to own all that Jesus claimed, John having borne testimony

to him; on the other hand, to deny that the Baptist was sent of God, and to brand

him as a pretender and impostor, would instantly enrage the people to rise up,

81

perhaps, and stone them, all men in general being persuaded of John's prophetic

character; therefore, after reasoning on the matter, they are forced to conceal

under a lie a truth which they dared not own, and to pretend ignorance of what

they knew, as the only way to evade the answer that Christ demanded of them.

He therefore was fully justified in refusing them farther information, when it

evidently appeared that they sought not conviction of the truth, but merely his

destruction. Note; (1.) It is a mercy to be able to put to silence the ignorance of

foolish men, and at last to confound those who refuse to be convinced. (2.) They

who wilfully choose to be ignorant, are justly abandoned to judicial blindness.

CONSTABLE, "Rather than explaining the symbolic significance of the cursing

of the fig tree, Jesus proceeded to focus on the means by which the miracle

happened. This was an important discipleship lesson that Jesus had taught

before (cf. Matthew 6:13-14; Matthew 7:7; Matthew 17:20; Matthew 18:19; Luke

11:9; Luke 17:6), but it appears only here in Mark. The point was that

dependent trust in God can accomplish humanly impossible things through

prayer (cf. James 1:6).

God is the source of the power to change. Moving a mountain is a universal

symbol of doing something that appears to be impossible (cf. Zechariah 4:7).

Jesus presupposed that overcoming the difficulty in view was God's will. A true

disciple of Jesus would hardly pray for anything else (Matthew 6:10). The person

praying can therefore believe that what he requests will happen because it is

God's will. He will neither doubt God's ability to do what he requests, since God

can do anything, nor will he doubt that God will grant his petition, since it is

God's will. He will not have a divided heart about this matter. [Note: See David

DeGraaf, "Some Doubts about Doubt: The New Testament Use of Diakrino,"

Journal of the Evangelical Theological Society 48:8 (December 2005):744-49.]

Why did Mark not explain what Jesus assumed, namely, that disciples would

pray for God's will to happen? Evidently when he wrote, his original readers

were committed Christians. The Roman Empire then weeded out simply

professing Christians much more than is true today, at least in the West. The

idea that a Christian would want anything but the will of God to happen was

absurd in a world where identifying oneself as a Christian meant severe

persecution and possibly death.

BI, "Have faith in God.

Have faith in God

I. What faith is.

1. Taking God at His word, about things unknown (Heb_11:7), unlikely (Heb_11:17-19), untried (Heb_11:28).

2. Trusting Jesus at His invitation. Trust your soul to His care; your sins to His cleansing; your life to His keeping.

II. Whence faith comes.

1. From God’s grace (Eph_2:8; Rom_12:3)

82

2. From God’s Word (Rom_10:17; 2Ti_3:15).

3. From God’s working (1Jn_5:1; Col_2:12).

4. Out of the heart (Rom_10:10).

III. How faith works.

1. It overcomes the world (1Jn_5:4).

2. It purifies the heart (Act_15:8-9).

3. It works by love (Gal_5:6). (J. Richardson, M. A.)

Have faith in God-God will not desert those who trust in Him

Many years ago, when in my country charge, I returned one afternoon from a funeral, fatigued with the day’s work. After a long ride, I had accompanied the mourners to the churchyard. As I neared my stable door, I felt a strange prompting to visit a poor widow who, with her invalid daughter, lived in a lonely cottage in an outlying part of the parish. My natural reluctance to make another visit was overcome by a feeling which I could not resist, and I turned my horse’s head towards the cottage. I was thinking only of the widow’s spiritual needs; but, when I reached her little house, I was struck with its look of unwonted bareness and poverty. After putting a little money into her hand, I began to inquire into their circumstances, and found that their supplies had been utterly exhausted since the night before. I asked them what they had done. “I just spread it out before the Lord!” “Did you tell your case to any friend?” “Oh no, sir; nobody knows but Himself and me. I knew He wouldn’t forget, though I didn’t know how He would help me, till I saw you coming riding over the hill, and then I said, ‘There’s the Lord’s answer.’” Many a time has the recollection of this incident encouraged me to trust in the loving care of my heavenly Father. (G. Macdonald, D. D.)

One winter morning, a poor little orphan boy of six or eight years begged a lady to allow him to clean away the snow from her door. “Do you get much to do, my little boy?” said the lady. “Sometimes I do,” he replied, “but often I get very little.” “And are you never afraid that you will not get enough to live on?” The child looked perplexed a moment, and then answered, “Don’t you think God will take care of a boy if he puts his trust in Him, and does the best he can?”

Have faith in God

Gotthold saw several sailors step into a boat to cross a river. Two took the oars, and, as usual, turned their backs upon the shore to which they intended to sail. A third stood and kept his face unaverted on the place where they wished to land, and which they very speedily reached. “See here,” he said, to those about him, “what may well remind us of our condition. Life is a mighty river, rapidly flowing into the ocean of eternity, and returning no more. On this river we are all afloat in the bark of our vocation, which we must urge forward with the oars of industry and toil. Like these sailors, therefore, we ought to turn our back upon the future, put our confidence in God, who stands at the helm, and by His mighty power steers the vessel to where happiness and salvation await us, and diligently labour, unconcerned about anything else. We would smile, were these men to turn round and pretend that they could not row blindfold, but must needs see the place to which their course was directed; and it is no less foolish in us to insist on apprehending, with our anxieties and thoughts, all

83

things, whether future or at hand. Let it be our part to ply the oar and toil and pray; but let us leave it to God to steer and bless and govern. O my God, be with me in my little bark, and bless it according to Thy good pleasure! I will turn my face to Thee, and, as Thou shalt enable me, I will diligently and faithfully labour; for all else Thou wilt provide.”

The orphan’s prayer

A little child, whose father and mother had died, was taken into another family. The first night she asked if she might pray, as she used to do. They said, “Oh, yes.” So she knelt down, and prayed as her mother had taught her; and when that was ended, she added a little prayer of her own: “O God, make these people as kind to me as father and mother were.” Then she paused, and looked up, as if expecting an answer, and then added, “Of course you will.” How sweetly simple was that little one’s faith; she expected God to “do”; and, of course, she got her request.

Have faith in God-Never give up in despair

An industrious tradesman had fallen on bad times; his business would not prosper, and he lost heart. His wife, however, kept cheerful; she went on praying, and tried to hearten up her husband. But it was no use; he kept on saying there was no hope for him, and he might as well go out of life, for there was nothing good to be looked for. One morning the cheery wife came down with a face as sad as her husband’s. “What’s the matter?” said he. “Oh,” she replied, with a shudder, “I’ve had such a dreadful dream. I dreamt God was dead, and all the angels were going to His funeral!” “What nonsense!” said her husband. “How can you be so silly? Don’t you know God can’t die?” She thought a moment, and then brightened up. “That’s true,” she answered. “But, oh, husband! if He can’t die, He can’t change, either. He has taken care of us all our lives: why should we begin to think He has forgotten us now? It’ll only be a passing cloud, may be, that’s hiding the sun, just to try us. Let us trust Him through it all.” “You’re right, wife,” said the man. “Seems to me I’ve believed in God without trusting Him. Let us ask Him to forgive me this sin of mistrust May be my ill luck has been a punishment for that same, sent to open my eyes.” However that may have been, the tide did turn, and neither man nor wife ever mistrusted God again.

Have faith in God-Wonder-working faith

It is not only to faith, as a general spiritual force of boundless potency and value, that our Lord here directs our thoughts; but also, and more particularly, to the faith which sees what things are useless and ready to die, and puts them out of the way; the faith which confronts obstacles as big as solid mountains, and yet is sure that it can remove or surmount them; the faith which faints at no difficulty, no apparent impossibility even, but attacks even the greatest of them with courage and good hope. This is the faith to which Christ here invites us-the faith which He Himself exercised, not only when He banned the fig tree, but also when He set Himself to save and raise the world against its will, and had therefore to face a world in arms. It is the faith which believes truth to be stronger than error, righteousness than unrighteousness, good than evil, even though all the world should have espoused the losing cause. It is the faith which believes not only that spiritual energies are stronger than material forces, but also that the good spiritual forces of the universe are stronger than its evil forces, and are sure to overcome them in the end. Nothing seems more doubtful to us at times than the victory of faith over the world; yet nothing is more certain. The whole history of the world is one long continuous testimony to the fact, that it is by faith in great principles that men are really swayed. What is the history of every great movement by which the world, or any portion of it, has been raised, purified, reformed, and renewed, but just this: Faith in some great truth or principle-faith in justice, faith in freedom, faith in wise laws and deep

84

convictions-has grown to enthusiasm in a few hearts; and in the power of this faith they have spoken and toiled, facing and gradually beating down all opposition, detecting signs of decay in the most venerable and solidly established institutions, customs, statutes, and dooming them to perish; encountering whole mountains of obstacle and difficulty, yet taking them up and at last casting them into the sea. (S. Cox, D. D.)

Faith in God

1. There is Christ’s command itself.

2. God’s own character demands this faith.

3. God’s gifts claim and warrant faith.

4. The way in which we specially honour Him is by having faith in Him.

5. Unbelief profits nothing.

6. Faith has dons wonders in time past, and it can do wonders still. (H. Bonar, D. D.)

23 “Truly[f] I tell you, if anyone says to this

mountain, ‘Go, throw yourself into the sea,’ and

does not doubt in their heart but believes that

what they say will happen, it will be done for

them.

GILL, "For verily I say unto you, that whosoever shall say unto this mountain,.... The Mount of Olives, at, or near which they now were,

be thou removed, and be thou cast into the sea; that is, of Galilee, which was nearest, and yet many miles off:

and shall not doubt in his heart, but shall believe that those things which he saith shall come to pass; not only as to removing a mountain, and casting it into the sea, but any thing equally difficult;

he shall have whatsoever he saith: whatever he commands shall be done; See Gill on Mat_21:21.

JAMIESON, "For verily I say unto you, That whosoever shall say unto this mountain, Be thou removed ... he shall have whatsoever he saith — Here is the lesson now. From the nature of the case supposed - that they might wish a mountain removed and cast into the sea, a thing far removed from anything which

85

they could be thought actually to desire - it is plain that not physical but moral obstacles to the progress of His kingdom were in the Redeemer’s view, and that what He designed to teach was the great lesson, that no obstacle should be able to stand before a confiding faith in God.

BURKITT, "There are two qualifications requisite in prayer, if we expect to find

acceptance with God, namely, faith and love; to the first Christ had spoken in

the former verse, to the latter in this. When ye shall stand praying, forgive. It

was ordinary for the Jews to pray standing, yet in their solemn days of fasting

they did kneel, and prostrate themselves before the Lord; but the Christians

usually kneeled down and prayed, Acts 9:40.

Now the command here to forgive those that offend us before we pray, shews,

1. That no resentments of what our brother doth, should stick long upon our

spirits, because they indispose us for that duty we are to be continually prepared

for.

2. That there is some sort and kind of forgiveness to be exercised towards an

offending brother before he asks it, and though he doth not shew any token of

repentance and sorrow for it; because I am to pray for him out of love to him,

and must lift up pure hands, without wrath.

Learn hence, That they who are sueing for, and expecting forgiveness from, God,

must exercise forgiveness towards others, or else their prayers are a sort of

imprecations on themselves.

2. Observe, Christ speaks indefinitely; When ye pray, forgive. He doth not say,

your brethren, but men: If we forgive men their trespasses Matthew 6:14; that is,

all men, good and bad, friends and enemies; if we forgive one another freely, our

heavenly Father will forgive us fully. Our forgiving one another is the

indispensible condition of God's forgiving us, and of hearing the prayers which

are put up by us.

24 Therefore I tell you, whatever you ask for in

prayer, believe that you have received it, and it

will be yours.

GILL, "Therefore I say unto you,.... For encouragement in prayer more particularly, without which nothing should be attempted, and especially which is above the power of nature, and is of a miraculous kind:

whatsoever things ye desire when ye pray; that is, according to the revealed

86

will of God, is for the confirmation of his Gospel, and for the glory of his name:

believe that ye receive them, and ye shall have them; the petitions that are desired, and the things asked in them: that is, be as much assured of having them, as if you had already received them, and you shall have them; for the sense can never be, that they should believe they received them before they had them; this would be a contradiction in terms; and Beza's ancient copy, and one of Stephens's copies read it, "believe that ye shall receive", as in Mat_21:22, and so the Vulgate Latin version; with which agree the Arabic and Ethiopic versions, which render it, "believe that ye shall enjoy", or "obtain"; and the Syriac version, "believe that ye are about to receive"; and great faith it is so to believe; and this is the prayer of faith; see 1Jo_5:14.

HENRY, ".” Through the strength and power of God in Christ, the greatest difficulty shall be got over, and the thing shall be effected. And therefore (Mar_11:24), “What things soever ye desire, when ye pray believe that ye shall receive them; nay, believe that ye do receive them, and he that has power to give them, saith, Ye shall have them. I say unto you, Ye shall, Mar_11:24. Verily I say unto you, Ye shall,” Mar_11:23. Now this is to be applied, [1.] To that faith of miracles which the apostles and first preachers of the gospel were endued with, which did wonders in things natural, healing the sick, raising the dead, casting out devils; these were, in effect, the removing of mountains. The apostles speak of a faith which would do that, and yet might be found where holy love was not, 1Co_13:2. [2.] It may be applied to that miracle of faith, which all true Christians are endued with, which doeth wonders in things spiritual. It justifies us (Rom_5:1), and so removes the mountains of guilt, and casts them into the depths of the sea, never to rise up in judgment against us, Mic_7:19. It purifies the heart (Act_15:9), and so removes mountains of corruption, and makes them plains before the grace of God, Zec_4:7. It is by faith that the world is conquered, Satan's fiery darts are quenched, a soul is crucified with Christ, and yet lives; by faith we set the Lord always before us, and see him that is invisible, and have him present to our minds; and this is effectual to remove mountains, for at the presence of the Lord, at the presence of the God of Jacob, the mountains were not only moved, but removed, Psa_114:4-7.

JAMIESON, "Therefore I say unto you, What things soever ye desire, when ye pray, believe that ye receive them, and ye shall have them — This verse only generalizes the assurance of Mar_11:23; which seems to show that it was designed for the special encouragement of evangelistic and missionary efforts, while this is a directory for prevailing prayer in general.

COFFMAN, "This important passage sheds light upon the manner of Jesus'

teaching the Twelve. A comparison with Matthew 6:15, where portions of this

are conspicuous in the Sermon on the Mount, and with Matthew 18:35, where

almost the same words were used to conclude the parable of the unmerciful

servant, shows that Jesus repeated over and over many basic truths, introducing

them in various contexts. Significantly, this undercuts absolutely the conceit of

some of the critics and their doodlings with regard to where, exactly, such and

such a statement belongs. The lines in the sacred gospels "belong" wherever one

finds them; and, if they occur several times, then they "belong" several times!

Forgive, if ye have aught against any one ... This prerequisite of all divine

87

forgiveness of human transgression was most dogmatically stressed by the Son of

God. (See extensive comment on this principle in my Commentary on Matthew -

Matthew 6:14-15; 18:21ff).

BI, "What things soever ye desire when ye pray.

Combined action of prayer and faith

The apostles, when the Lord was taken away from them, would have to commend His doctrine to the world by miracles. To this end it was needful that their faith in God, as the Bestower of all power to do such things, should be raised. For the real doer of every miracle or sign was God, and God only. When the apostles healed suddenly any sick person, or cast out any evil spirit, it was by the combined exercise of prayer and faith. They secretly or openly called upon God, and they implicitly believed that He would accompany their word with His power. Now, being men totally ignorant of science, and so unable to form a conception of the kind or amount of power put forth in the performance of any miracle, they would naturally look upon it as a matter of size, or weight, or extension. They would, as a matter of course, look upon the removal of the Mount of Olives as a far greater thing, demanding far greater power, than the sudden drying up of the life juices of a single fig tree; but it may not really be greater by any means. On the contrary, the sudden touching and arresting the springs of life in the living thing may require far more knowledge of the greatest secret of all-the secret of life, and far more real power in applying that knowledge, than the removal of the most stupendous mass of dead matter. Now the apostles, though they could not understand this, must yet act as if it were so. They must not judge by the sight of their eyes of the difficulty or easiness of anything which they felt moved by the Spirit to perform. They must think of nothing but the almighty power of God, and His pledge to accompany their prayers or words with that power. (M. F. Sadler, M. A.)

The miracle of faith

True prayer is sure power.

I. Look at the text to see the essential qualities necessary to any great success in prayer. There must be-

1. Definite things prayed for. No rambling, or drawing the bow at a venture. Use no mock modesty with God. Be simple and direct in your pleadings. Speak plainly, and make a straight aim at the object of your supplications.

2. Earnest desire. Plead as for your life. There was a beautiful illustration of true prayer addressed to man in the conduct of two noble ladies, whose husbands were condemned to die and were about to be executed, when they came before George I and supplicated for their pardon. The king rudely and cruelly repulsed them. But they pleaded again and again; and could not be got to rise from their knees; and they had actually to be dragged out of court, for they refused to leave till their petition was granted. That is the way we must pray to God. We must have such a desire for the thing we want that we will not rise until we have it,-but in submission to His Divine will, nevertheless.

3. Faith. No questioning whether God can or will grant the prayer. The prayers of God’s people are but God’s promises breathed out of living hearts; and those promises are the decrees only put into another form and fashion. When you can plead His promise, then your will is His will.

88

4. A realizing expectation. We should be able to count over the mercies before we have got them, believing that they are on the road.

II. Look about you and judge by the tenor of the text.

1. Public meetings for prayer. How often, at these meetings, does this advice of an old preacher need to be remembered: “The Lord will not hear thee because of the arithmetic of thy prayers; He does not count their numbers: nor because of their rhetoric; He does not care for the eloquent language in which they are couched: nor for their geometry; He does not compute them by their length or their breadth: nor yet will He regard thee because of the music of thy prayers; He cares not for sweet voices and harmonious periods. Neither will He look at thee because of the logic of thy prayers-because they are well arranged and excellently comparted. But He will hear thee, and He will measure the amount of the blessing He will give thee, according to the divinity of thy prayers. If thou canst plead the person of Christ, and if the Holy Ghost inspire thee with zeal and earnestness, the blessings thou askest will surely come to thee.”

2. Your private intercessions. There is no place that some of us need to he so ashamed to look at as our closet door. Shame on our hurried devotions, our lip services, our distrust. See to it that an amendment be made, and God make you more mighty and more successful in your prayers than heretofore.

III. Look above and you will see enough to make you-

1. Weep. God has given us a mighty weapon, and we have let it rust. If the universe were as still as we are where should we be? God gives light to the sun, and he shines with it. To the winds He gives force, and they blow. To the air He gives life, and it moves, and men breathe thereof. But to His people He has given a gift that is better far than force, or life, or light, and yet they neglect and despise it! Constantine, when he saw that on the coins of the other emperors their images were in an erect position, triumphing, ordered that his image should be struck kneeling, for, said he, “This is the way in which I have triumphed.” The reason why we have been so often defeated, and why our banners trail in the dust, is because we have not prayed.

2. Rejoice. For, though you have sinned against God, He loves you still. You may not as yet have gone to the fountain, but it still flows as freely as ever.

3. Amend your prayers from this time forth. Look on prayer no longer as a romantic fiction or an arduous duty, but as a true power and a real pleasure. When philosophers discover some latent power they delight to put it in action. Test the bounty of the Eternal. Take to Him all your petitions and wants, and see if He does not honour you. Try whether, if you believe Him, He will not fulfil His promise, and richly bless you with the anointing oil of His Spirit, by which you will be strong in prayer. (C. H. Spurgeon.)

Lessons on prayer

I. God hears prayers of any magnitude; much wrong might have been prevented or cured, much good done, if only we had prayed.

II. Success for prayer depends on goodness; without the soul health of trust and love we cannot pray.

III. Let our unanswered prayers be a mirror in which we see our faults. (R. Glover.)

89

If our doubts do not prevail so far as to make us leave off praying, our prayers will prevail so far as to make us leave off doubting. (H. Hickman.)

Prayer a key

Prayer is a key which, being turned by the hand of faith, unlocks God’s treasures. (Anon.)

The sum and substance of every prayer should be the will of God

The exercise of prayer can only be a blessing to our souls when our own will is entirely merged in the will of our heavenly Father. If we only knew the truth, we should find that prayer is more connected with the discipline of the will than we generally imagine. Our will is not naturally in harmony with God’s. The carrying out of our own will, when bent on some desired object, is what invariably characterises us. It becomes habitual to us. We carry it, more or less, as a habit into the presence of God. It must not be, however. Wilfulness is not a characteristic of one of God’s children. He is but a child, and he must know it. The Father’s will is best; the child must know no will but His. It must be crossed, however painful it may be. To subdue that will, to blend it with His, and to make us perfectly happy under the conviction that our own is not to be carried out, is the only true explanation of many an unanswered prayer, many a bitter cup still unremoved, and many a thorn still left rankling in the flesh. But when the heart has been brought into that state when it can, with happy, confiding trust, look up and say, “Father, not my will, but Thine, be done!” then will relief come. The thorn, indeed, may not be extracted, the cup may not be removed, but there will appear the strengthening angel from heaven enabling us to bear it. (F. Whitfield.)

Scope and limit of prayer

In other places the promise is considerably qualified, We shall receive, not whatever we ask, but the Holy Spirit, i.e., we are to spread out our case, our needs, our desires, before God, for that is the way to come into close relations with Him; He will do the rest. The answer shall be the gift we ask for, and our demand shall be the needful link in the chain of causes which brings us and our heart’s desire together; in other words, the answer shall be the “Holy Spirit,” who shall mould our wills into accord and illuminated acquiescence with His good will. In any case, prayer is seen to be the ways and means of bringing us into communication with One who is above all, and over all, and through all. Direct demands are the most obvious, simple, childlike forms of prayer; but the spiritual value of prayer is, after all, not this-to get exactly what we want, when we want it, like the magic ring in the fairy tale; but this-to bring the human into close relation with the Divine. (H. R. Haweis, M. A.)

The foundation of faithful prayer

I remember asking an old friend of mine, who is now between seventy and eighty years of age, and who, I think, as far as I have been permitted to know Christian men, is mightier with God than almost any man I have met, “Do tell me the secret of your

90

success in prayer.” He said, “I will tell you what it is. I say to myself, Is that which I am asking for promised? Is it according to the mind of God? If it is, I plant my foot upon it as upon a firm rock, and I never allow myself to doubt that my Father will give me according to my petition.” (Bp. Bickersteth.)

The links that unite earth and heaven

Give me these links;

(1) sense of need;

(2) desire to get;

(3) belief that, though He withhold for a while, He loves to be asked;

(4) belief that asking will obtain-give me these links, and the chain will reach from earth to heaven, bringing all heaven down to me, or bearing me up into heaven. (T. Guthrie, D. D.)

Faith and prayer

Faith is to prayer as the feather is to the arrow; faith feathers the arrow of prayer, and makes it fly swifter and pierce the throne of grace. Prayer that is faithless is fruitless. (T. Watson.)

Earnestness in prayer

The arrow that is shot from a loose cord drops powerless to the ground, but from the tightly-drawn bowstring it springs forward, soars upward, and reaches the object to which it is directed. So it is not the loose utterance of attempted prayer that is effectual, but the strong earnestness of the heart sending its pointed petition to heaven, that reaches the Divine ear and obtains the desired blessing. (Bowden.)

Perseverance in prayer

I saw the other day a man attempting to split a rock with a sledge hammer. Down came the sledge upon the stone as if it would crush it, but it merely rebounded, leaving the rock as sound as before. Again the ponderous hammer was swung, and again it came down, but with the same result. Nothing was accomplished. The rock was still without a crack. I might have asked (as so many are disposed to ask concerning prayer) what good could result from such a waste of time and strength. But that man had faith. He believed in the power of that sledge. He believed that repeated blows had a tendency to split that rock. And so he kept at it. Blow after blow came down; all apparently in vain. But still he kept on without a thought of discouragement. He believed that a vigorously swung sledge “has great power.” And at last came one more blow and the work was done. That is the way in which we ought to use prayer. God has told us that “the earnest prayer of the righteous man has great power.” We ought to believe it, just as that man believed that his sledge had power. And believing it, we ought to use prayer for the attainment of spiritual results with just such confidence of success as that man used his sledge. We may not secure our answer at once. That rock was not split at the first blow, or the second. But that man believed that if he continued his blows, he was more likely to succeed every blow

91

he struck. So we are to believe that there is a spiritual power in prayer, just as there was a physical power in that sledge; and that, the more perseveringly and earnestly we use it, the more certain are we to accomplish something by it.

Ye shall have them: Divine answers to prayer

Is the direct Divine answer to prayer a reality? Call the witnesses and let them testify. Let the martyrs of the early church answer, from their exile, from the prisons where they were chained, from the amphitheatre whose sands were crimsoned with their blood, from the chariots of flame in which they swept up to glory. Let the Covenanters, kneeling on the heather, or hiding in the grey fastnesses of the crags; let the Pilgrims, with their faces vet with the cold, salt spray, and the gloom of the wilderness overshadowing them; let Christian heroes everywhere-missionaries passing through belts of pestilence, women in army hospitals, philanthropists in jails and lazar houses-let all these testify whether prayer has anything more than a “reflex influence.” Let thousands of death beds answer. Let the myriad homes of sorrow, wrapped in darkness that may be felt, answer. Let every man or woman who has ever really prayed, answer. From each and all comes one and the same testimony: “The Lord is nigh unto all that call upon Him, unto all that call upon Him in truth.” (Ed. S. Attwood.)

Expecting answer to prayer

A few years ago there was a time of much dryness in a certain part of England. No rain had fallen for several weeks, and it seemed as if the crops would all perish for want of moisture. A few pious farmers who believed in the power of prayer asked their minister to make a special supplication on a particular Sunday for the needed blessing of rain. The day came, and was as bright and cloudless as those which had preceded it. Among the congregation the minister noticed a little Sunday scholar, who carried a large old-fashioned umbrella. “Why, Mary,” he exclaimed, “what could have induced you to bring an umbrella on such a lovely morning as this?” “I thought, sir,” answered Mary, “that as we were going to pray for rain I should be sure to want the umbrella.” The minister patted her cheek good naturedly and the service began. Presently the wind rose, the clouds gathered, and at length the long-desired rain fell in torrents. Mary and the minister went home together under the umbrella, while the rest of the congregation reached their dwellings well drenched. Let us follow Mary’s example, and always pray, not only hoping that God may hear, but believing that He does hear, and will send us what we ask if it is good for us.

The most mighty force

Thou hast power in prayer, and thou standest today amongst the most potent ministers in the universe that God has made. Thou hast power over angels, they will fly at thy will. Thou hast power over fire and water, and the elements of earth. Thou hast power to make thy voice heard beyond the stars; where the thunders die out in silence thy voice shall make the echoes of eternity. (C. H. Spurgeon.)

Power of prayer

Oh, God, thou hast given us a mighty weapon, and we have permitted it to rust. Would it not be a vile crime if a man had an eye given him which he would not open, or a hand that he would not lift up, or a foot that grew stiff because he would not use it. (C. H. Spurgeon.)

92

Pleading prayer

It was said of John Bradford that he had a peculiar art in prayer, and when asked for his secret he said: “When I know what I want I always stop on that prayer until I feel that I have pleaded it with God, and until God and I have had dealings with each other upon it. (C. H. Spurgeon.)

The limit of prayer

I. Prayer’s limit. “All things soever ye desire, believe and ye shall have them.” The boundary line of desire and of faith.

1. The boundary line of faith. Faith is vast, recognizes the covenant of the promises, and whatever comes outside the promises for which she can find anywhere a direct engagement of Almighty God to do. Faith is the turning of an infinite future, into a present real receiving; it can go confidently when it treads on Scripture ground. So the Bible becomes, in a measure, prayer; you must try to bring prayer up to the mind of God in it.

2. Desire has a gracious limit. A man well acquainted with God’s Word lives under the teaching of the Holy Spirit, and his mind is conformed to the mind of God, and his desires gradually blend with the wishes of the Almighty.

II. Prayer’s reach.

III. Prayer’s warrant. The blood of Christ and the worth of this warrant.

1. It is personal.

2. It is present.

3. It is absolute. (J. Vaughan, M. A.)

GREAT TEXTS OF THE BIBLE, "Believe and receive

Therefore I say unto you, All things whatsoever ye pray and ask for, believe that

ye have received them, and ye shall have them.—Mar_11:24.

1. Here we have a summary of the teaching of our Lord on prayer. Nothing will

so much help to convince us of the sin of our remissness in prayer, to discover its

causes, and to give us courage to expect entire deliverance, as the careful study

and then the believing acceptance of that teaching. The more heartily we enter

into the mind of our blessed Lord, and set ourselves to think about prayer as He

thought, the more surely will His words be as living seeds. They will grow and

produce in us their fruit—a life and practice exactly corresponding to the Divine

truth they contain.

2. Yet the promises to prayer in the twenty-third and twenty-fourth verses of this

eleventh chapter of St. Mark are so wonderful, that we are almost compelled to

fall back before them, and ask ourselves whether we can have heard, or can have

understood, aright. At the first sound, they surround our imaginations as with

an air of fairyland; they seem to be something out of relation with the severities

93

of the things that are: something out of relation with the necessary stringencies

of a moral life. Then, if we feel that there is in our first sense something wrong,

and begin to limit, to qualify, to explain, often it is not merely any childish

misunderstanding of the promise, it is the promise itself that is slipping away

from us; the solemn declaration of Christ begins to mean—nothing very definite

or distinguishable: or, worse still, men find ground for pleasant mockery at the

hollowness of a religious aspiration so transparently unreal. Do the words mean

what they say, or do they not? or what do they mean?

I

The words mean first of all that we are to pray and ask for things. Now this

involves (1) the recognition of our need of them, and (2) the utterance of that

need.

i. That we recognise our Need

1. This seems to be expressed in the text itself according to the Authorized

Version—“What things soever ye desire, when ye pray.” There, however, the

word “desire” is used in the sense of request, just as we find it again in Joh_

12:21, where we are told that certain Greeks who came up to worship at the feast

came to Philip, “and desired him, saying, Sir, we would see Jesus,” and as

Shakespeare has it in The Merchant of Venice (IV. i. 402): “I humbly do desire

your grace of pardon.” Yet the sense of need is undoubtedly one of the conditions

of prayer, and Dr. Andrew Murray1 [Note: The Ministry of Intercession, 106.] is

quite entitled to write as though the word “desire” in the Authorized Version

were used in that sense. “What things soever ye desire,” he quotes, and then

says: Desire is the secret power that moves the whole world of living men, and

directs the course of each. And so desire is the soul of prayer, and the cause of

insufficient or unsuccessful prayer is very much to be found in the lack or

feebleness of desire. Some may doubt this: they are sure that they have very

earnestly desired what they ask. But if they consider whether their desire has

indeed been as whole-hearted as God would have it, as the heavenly worth of

these blessings demands, they may come to see that it was indeed the lack of

desire that was the cause of failure. What is true of God is true of each of His

blessings, and is the more true the more spiritual the blessing: “Ye shall seek me,

and find me, when ye shall search for me with all your heart” (Jer_29:13). Of

Judah in the days of Asa it is written, “They sought him with their whole desire”

(2Ch_15:15). A Christian may often have very earnest desires for spiritual

blessings. But alongside of these there are other desires in his daily life occupying

a large place in his interests and affections. The spiritual desires are not all-

absorbing. He wonders that his prayer is not heard. It is simply that God wants

the whole heart. “The Lord thy God is one Lord, therefore thou shalt love the

Lord thy God with all thy heart.”

2. The best illustration that we are likely to find—and it is an illustration not

only of this point but of the whole text—is furnished by the story of the ten lepers

(Luk_17:11-14): “And as he entered into a certain village, there met him ten men

that were lepers, which stood afar off: and they lifted up their voices, saying,

94

Jesus, Master, have mercy on us. And when he saw them, he said unto them, Go

and shew yourselves unto the priests. And it came to pass, as they went, they

were cleansed.”

The facts to notice in this incident are these: (1) they knew that they were lepers

and needed cleansing; (2) they asked Jesus to cleanse them; (3) when He said

“Go and shew yourselves unto the priests,” although they felt and saw no

difference in themselves, they took His word for it that they were cleansed, and

acted upon it; (4) afterwards, as they were on the way to the priests, they knew

that they were cleansed. That they did not know till they had gone some distance

is evident, for we are told that one of them, as soon as he saw that he was healed,

turned back, and thanked Jesus. We have reached as yet, however, only the first

of these four facts—the recognition of a need.

We have wants, and we feel them: honest wants of body as of soul, wants

personal, wants domestic, as well as all such aspirations as may seem to be of

wider or higher scope. Are not these things true and proper subjects of prayer?

“Thy will be done in earth as it is in heaven “is not, after all, the whole of the

Lord’s Prayer. Is it not followed at once by the more material—“Give us this day

our daily bread”? Yes, most true indeed. Every need for body or soul, for

ourselves or our children, our friends or our neighbours, in all the detail and

variety which belong to vivid personal interest; it is all most true and holy

subject-matter for prayer.1 [Note: R. C. Moberly.]

All things whatsoever. At this first word our human wisdom at once begins to

doubt and ask: This surely cannot be literally true? But if it be not, why did the

Master speak it, using the very strongest expression He could find: “All things

whatsoever”? And it is not as if this were the only time He spoke thus; is it not

He who also said, “If thou canst believe, all things are possible to him that

believeth”; “If ye have faith, nothing shall be impossible to you”? Faith is so

wholly the work of God’s Spirit through His word in the prepared heart of the

believing disciple, that it is impossible that the fulfilment should not come; faith

is the pledge and forerunner of the coming answer.1 [Note: Andrew Murray.]

ii. That we give Utterance to it

1. The desire of the heart must become the expression of the lips. Our Lord more

than once asked those who cried to Him for mercy, “What wilt thou?” He

wanted them to say what they desired. To speak it out roused their whole being

into action, brought them into contact with Him, and wakened their expectation.

To pray is to enter into God’s presence, to claim and secure His attention, to

have distinct dealing with Him in regard to some request, to commit our need to

His faithfulness and to leave it there; it is in so doing that we become fully

conscious of what we are seeking.

It may help to give definiteness to our thought, if we take a definite request in

regard to which we would fain learn to pray believingly. Why should we not take

as the object of desire and supplication the “grace of supplication,” and say, I

want to ask and receive in faith the power to pray just as, and as much as, my

95

God expects of me?2 [Note: Ibid.]

2. This is the second fact that we noticed in the story of the ten lepers. They

asked for cleansing—“They lifted up their voices, saying, Jesus, Master, have

mercy on us.” Would they have been cleansed if they had not asked for it? At

any rate, Jesus lays down the rule: “Ask, and ye shall receive.” And when

Bartimæus was brought before Him, He insisted upon the blind man expressing

his need, although it was perfectly evident what he needed. “What wilt thou that

I should do unto thee? The blind man said unto him, Rabboni, that I may receive

my sight.”

As God feeds “the birds of the heaven” (Mat_6:26), not by dropping food from

heaven into their mouths, but by stimulating them to seek food for themselves, so

God provides for His rational creatures by giving them a sanctified common

sense, and by leading them to use it. In a true sense Christianity gives us more

will than ever. The Holy Spirit emancipates the will, sets it upon proper objects,

and fills it with new energy. We are therefore not to surrender ourselves

passively to whatever professes to be a Divine suggestion (1Jn_4:1): “Believe not

every spirit, but prove the spirits, whether they are of God.” The test is the

revealed word of God (Isa_8:20): “To the law and to the testimony! if they speak

not according to this word, surely there is no morning for them.”1 [Note: Isaac

Taylor, Natural History of Enthusiasm.]

I kindle a fire in my grate. I only intervene to produce and combine together the

different agents whose natural action behooves to produce the effect I have need

of; but the first step once taken, all the phenomena constituting combustion

engender each other, conformably to their laws, without a new intervention of

the agent; so that an observer who should study the series of these phenomena,

without perceiving the first hand that had prepared all, could not seize that hand

in any especial act, and yet there is a preconceived plan and combination.2

[Note: P. Janet, Final Causes.]

II

We are to believe that God has answered our prayer. This belief rests on three

things: (1) Faith in God as a fountain of good; (2) the harmony of our request

with His will; (3) His freedom in the use of ways and means.

i. Faith in God as the Source of all that is Good

1. In the first place we know that God is an ocean of boundless resources. And

then we also know that prayer is His chosen channel for the application of those

resources. This is everywhere the teaching of the New Testament, and it has been

corroborated in the experience of the prayerful of every generation since. Lord

Tennyson never had a truer thought given him from “the heavenlies” than this:

“Prayer is like opening a sluice between the great ocean and our little channels;

when the great sea gathers itself together and flows in at full tide.”3 [Note: Lord

Tennyson: A Memoir, i.]

96

The summer before last I happened to be spending a part of my vacation in

Scotland, and found my way up into the Highlands. At one point in the journey I

came across a lovely little Highland loch, the name of which at this moment I

forget. I noticed that some engineering works had been erected at the narrower

end of the loch, so I inferred that the water was being made use of in some way,

as indeed it was. My companion informed me that it had now become the

drinking supply of a lowland town some distance away, and that the work had

had to be done suddenly. It appears that during a season of severe drought there

had been some danger of a water famine in the district referred to. All the wells

ran dry. Neither the people in the houses nor the cattle in the fields could live

without water, so it actually had to be carted from other districts at great

expense. Then some one thought of the highland loch, many miles away. All

difficulties were got over, and a tiny supply pipe was run the whole distance

from the loch to the thirsty township. Later on, this temporary expedient for

preventing disaster was replaced by works of a more efficient and costly

character. But the interesting point about the matter is this: here was a whole

population suffering for lack of something that was only waiting to be drawn

upon, and had been in existence thousands of years before the township itself.

Long before there was any thirst, the water was there to quench it. All that was

required was the vision of the man who first conceived the project of bringing

the water to the valley. After the vision came the labour—not to create but to

distribute the life-giving element which flowed downward in obedience to its own

law. Is not this a fairly apt figure of the dealings of God with His children?

“Your Father knoweth what things ye have need of before ye ask him.” But we

have to ask before the gift can be part of ourselves.1 [Note: R. J. Campbell.]

In this same time our Lord shewed me a spiritual sight of His homely loving. I

saw that He is to us everything that is good and comfortable for us: He is our

clothing that for love wrappeth us, claspeth us, and all encloseth us for tender

love, that He may never leave us; being to us all-thing that is good, as to mine

understanding.2 [Note: Julian the Anchoress.]

2. The great reason of our lack of faith is our lack of knowledge of God and

intercourse with Him. “Have faith in God,” Jesus said when He spoke of

removing mountains. It is as a soul knows God, is occupied with His power, love,

and faithfulness, comes away out of self and the world, and allows the light of

God to shine on it, that unbelief will become impossible. All the mysteries and

difficulties connected with answers to prayer will, however little we may be able

to solve them intellectually, be swallowed up in the adoring assurance, this God

is our God: He will bless us. He does indeed answer prayer. And the grace to

pray which we are asking for He will delight to give.

To know God simply as an absolute Sovereign, bowing to His doings merely

because they are His, receiving His commands merely because He commands,

this is not to know God as a fountain of life. Unless the character of God, and not

merely the fact that there is a God, be apprehended, there is nothing known of

God upon which the soul can feed. See then what a fresh well-spring of life it is,

that this is the very truth concerning God, that “He willeth all men to be saved

and to come to the knowledge of the truth”; that as God is good, He delights in

97

men’s deliverance from evil; as He is holy, He delights in men’s deliverance from

sin; as He is true, He delights in men’s deliverance from unbelief and ignorance

and belief of a lie, for all unbelief is the belief of a lie.

Why does the man in charge of a Chinese temple bang the drum and pommel the

bell morning and evening? And why do millions of Chinese in their houses tinkle

a cast-iron pot when they worship? It is to call the god to attention. And when

they pray for riches, sons, and long life (the “three manys” which sum up all

their subjects of prayer, in most cases), it is to coax the god into willingness to

help them. For those who thus worship, and call it “prayer,” know not of a

majestic Mother-Love in the heavens, and around them, which always longs ever

so much to help and to bless.1 [Note: W. A. Cornaby.]

One sunny morning, after a spell of dismal weather, a little girl of six came

running up to some one I know, exclaiming: “Look, father, how bright it is! I

prayed God last night to send us a bright morning sometime”—cautious child!—

“and isn‘t it bright now?” The reply was: “Yes, indeed, my child, and you know

it is bright every morning if we only go high enough. For the sun up yonder is

always shining—always.”2 [Note: Ibid.]

Lord, what a change within us one short hour

Spent in Thy presence will prevail to make!

What heavy burdens from our bosoms take,

What parched grounds refresh as with a shower!

We kneel, and all around us seems to lower;

We rise, and all the distant and the near

Stands forth in sunny outline, brave and clear.

We kneel how weak! We rise how full of power!

Why, therefore, should we do ourselves this wrong,

Or others—that we are not always strong;

That we are ever overborne with care;

That we should ever weak or heartless be,

Anxious or troubled, when with us is prayer,

And joy and strength and courage are with Thee?1 [Note: R. C. Trench, Poems,

134.]

98

ii. Our Request must be in Harmony with the Will of God

1. It is plain that there is a manner in which we can not apply the words of St.

Mark, a sense in which they would not be true. So much at least the rebuke of St.

James says clearly, “Ye ask and receive not, because ye ask amiss.” Christian

prayer is not a thing wild, capricious, unlimited. Christian prayer, the genuine

uplifting of the heart of a man to his God:—this cannot be as random or as

reckless as all the random impulses of the mind of a man. It has limits; it has

conditions; it has laws. There are things which may be asked in prayer, and

there are things which may not. There are ways of asking aright, and there are

ways of asking amiss. The mind that is really prayerful is a mind trained and

disciplined. And we, too, if we would grasp the secret and blessing of prayer,

must learn to conform ourselves to its conditions; we must rightly learn its spirit,

its method, its rules; we must pray, in one word, not amiss, but right.

There is an old legend of two sheikhs of the desert. The one sheikh had many

date palms. He insisted on having his own way with the trees. When the boughs

seemed dry, he asked for rain, and the rain fell. When the boughs seemed too

moist, he asked for sunshine, and the fierce heat came. When the trees seemed to

bend under the wind, he asked for frost that the trunks might be strengthened.

So what with much asking and changing the trees died. Fearing starvation the

sheikh journeyed across the desert. One day he came to a grove of date palms,

and found the owner thereof. The owner explained all by saying, “God has

blessed my trees abundantly.” “But,” answered the discouraged sheikh, “I too

have date palms. I asked God for rain, and He sent showers. I asked for

sunshine, and He sent heat. I asked for frost, and He sent cold. Lo, all my trees

are dead.” “And I,” answered the other, “said unto God, ‘For my date palms,

Thou knowest what is best,’ and lo, the trees have brought forth fruit

abundantly, and they live for your hunger.”

2. Prayer is not the effort of a man to bend or win to himself the will of God.

There is in it no effort, no desire, no thought against, or apart from, God. Rather

it is man’s most deliberate and perpetual effort, through the power of God the

Spirit in the Name of God the Son—not against but towards—the realisation of

the will and life of God. Make Thy will my will; and my will into Thy will! If the

voice of prayer in its moment of supreme distraction reaches its simplicity only in

tones which are wrung with anguish, “nevertheless not my will but Thine be

done,” remember that the perfectness of prayer, not its cessation, is realised in

fruition of perfect communion. In agony, or in victory, the perfectness of praying

is the praying of the Son of God.

Do we ask for relief—for ourselves or for our dear ones—from sickness, from

anxiety, from bereavement? Do we ask for strength, for livelihood, for guidance,

for success? It is well. Yet we recognise that, if we could learn aright, our greater

longing, even in these, would be for the perfectly unthwarted consummation of

God’s divinely wise and loving will. In so far as these things, which in detail we

ask for, are, or may be, within the divinely beneficent will of God; in so far as

any tormenting influence of evil is, or may be, in the withholding of them,

thwarting the highest perfectness of Divine benevolence; so far we entreat Him,

99

by the uniting of our earnest will with His will for all good, to let us taste in these

things His perfect love.

“Oh, Amma! Amma! do not pray! your prayers are troubling me!” We all looked

up in astonishment. We had just had our Band Prayer Meeting, when a woman

came rushing into the room, and began to exclaim like this. She was the mother

of one of our girls.… Now the mother was all excitement, and poured out a

curious story. “When you went away last year I prayed. I prayed and prayed,

and prayed again to my god to dispel your work. My daughter’s heart was

impressed with your words. I cried to my god to wash the words out. Has he

washed them out? Oh no! And I prayed for a bridegroom and one came, and the

cart was ready to take her away, and a hindrance occurred; the marriage fell

through. And I wept till my eyes well-nigh dissolved. And again another

bridegroom came, and again an obstacle occurred. And yet again did a

bridegroom come, and yet again an obstacle; and I cannot get my daughter

‘tied,’ and the neighbours mock, and my Caste is disgraced”—and the poor old

mother cried, just sobbed in her shame and confusion of face. “Then I went to

my god again, and said, ‘What more can I offer you? Have I not given you all I

have? And you reject my prayer!’ Then in a dream my god appeared, and he

said, ‘Tell the Christians not to pray. I can do nothing against their prayers.

Their prayers are hindering me!’ And so, I beseech you, stop your prayers for

fourteen days—only fourteen days—till I get my daughter tied.”1 [Note: Amy

Wilson-Carmichael, Things as they are, 267.]

iii. We recognise God’s right to answer Prayer in the way He sees to be best

Christ’s prayer, “Let this cup pass away from me” (Mat_26:39), and Paul’s

prayer that the “thorn in the flesh” might depart from him (2Co_12:7-8), were

not answered in the precise way requested. No more are our prayers always

answered in the way we expect. Christ’s prayer was not answered by the literal

removal of the cup, because the chinking of the cup was really His glory; and

Paul’s prayer was not answered by the literal removal of the thorn, because the

thorn was needful for his own perfecting. In the case of both Jesus and Paul,

there were larger interests to be consulted than their own freedom from

suffering.

Be not afraid to pray—to pray is right.

Pray, if thou canst, with hope; but ever pray,

Though hope be weak, or sick with long delay;

Pray in the darkness, if there be no light.

Far is the time, remote from human sight,

When war and discord on the earth shall cease;

Yet every prayer for universal peace

100

Avails the blessed time to expedite.

Whate’er is good to wish, ask that of Heaven,

Though it be what thou canst not hope to see;

Pray to be perfect, though material leaven

Forbid the spirit so on earth to be:

But if for any wish thou darest not pray,

Then pray to God to cast that wish away.1 [Note: Hartley Coleridge, Poems,

“Prayer.”]

III

We shall know that we have obtained what we asked—first, when we act on the

belief that we have obtained it; and next, when we see that we have obtained it.

i. We act on the belief that we have obtained what we asked

So did the ten lepers. When Jesus said, “Go and shew yourselves to the priests,”

they turned and went. They did not wait to feel that they were cleansed; they did

not wait to see the signs of it in their hands and faces. They simply took Him at

His word and went.

1. Faith is very far from being a mere conviction of the truth of God’s word, or a

conclusion drawn from certain premises. It is the ear which has heard God say

what He will do, the eye which has seen Him doing it, and, therefore, where there

is true faith, it is impossible that the answer should not come. If we only see to it

that we do the one thing that He asks of us as we pray: Believe that ye have

received, He will see to it that He does the thing He has promised: “Ye shall have

them.” The key-note of Solomon’s prayer (2Ch_6:4), “Blessed be the Lord God

of Israel, who hath with his hands fulfilled that which he spake with his mouth to

my father David,” is the key-note of all true prayer: the joyful adoration of a

God whose hand always secures the fulfilment of what His mouth has spoken.

Signor Prochet, of the Waldensian Church, tells a story of a long-continued

drought in the valleys of North Italy, which threatened to ruin the harvest. The

pastor of one of the little congregations arranged to hold a special prayer-

meeting to pray for rain to save the crops, and on the day of the meeting groups

of people were seen wending their way along the valley, or clambering down the

steep hillsides, to join the devotions. As the minister was nearing the church a

little girl passed him. He was much struck by the size of the umbrella she was

carrying, and laughingly called out: “I fear you will not have much need of your

umbrella this weather.” “Oh, sir,” replied the child, “I brought it because we

were going to ask God for rain to-day, and I will be sure to need it before I get

101

home.” The minister pondered the words, and rebuked himself for his lack of

faith. He had been going to pray for rain, but without any expectation that his

prayer would be answered. The faith of the child put new life and power into the

prayer-meeting. Before the close there was a sound of abundance of rain, and the

minister was glad to share the shelter of the big umbrella on his way home.

2. Faith has to accept the answer, as given by God in heaven, before it is found or

felt upon earth.—This point causes difficulty, and yet it is of the very essence of

believing prayer, its real secret. Spiritual things can only be spiritually

apprehended or appropriated. The spiritual heavenly blessing of God’s answer

to your prayer must be spiritually recognised and accepted before you feel

anything of it. It is faith that does this. A soul that not only seeks an answer, but

seeks first the God who gives the answer, receives the power to know that it has

what it has asked of Him. If it knows that it has asked according to His will and

promises, and that it has come to and found Himself to give it, it does believe that

it has received. “We know that he heareth us.”

There are eases in which the blessing is ready to break through at once, if we but

hold fast our confidence, and prove our faith by praising for what we have

received, in the face of our not yet having it in experience. There are other cases

in which the faith that has received needs to be still further tried and

strengthened in persevering prayer. God alone knows when everything in and

around us is fully ripe for the manifestation of the blessing that has been given to

faith. Elijah knew for certain that rain would come; God had promised it; and

yet he had to pray seven times. And that prayer was no show or play; there was

an intense spiritual reality in the heart of him who lay pleading there, and in the

heaven above where it had its effectual work to do. It is “through faith and

patience we inherit the promises.” Faith says most confidently, I have received it.

Patience perseveres in prayer until the gift bestowed in heaven is seen on earth.1

[Note: Andrew Murray.]

In 1886, the China Inland Mission under the care of Dr. Hudson Taylor had a

force of two hundred missionaries. In a conference for Bible study and united

prayer these missionaries were led to unite in prayer that God would, within a

year, send one hundred additional workers to their assistance. So great was the

faith of this little band of faithful workers that, before the conference closed, one

of them suggested that they hold a praise meeting thanking God for answering

their prayer, for, said he, “We shall not be all able to come together for that

purpose next year.” They did so. During the following year the Mission received

no less than six hundred applications, and by the end of the year one hundred of

these had been selected and sent out to Inland China.

3. The receiving from God in faith, the believing acceptance of the answer with

the perfect, praising assurance that it has been given, is not necessarily the

experience or subjective possession of the gift we have asked for. At times there

may be a considerable, or even a long, interval. In other cases the believing

supplicant may at once enter upon the actual enjoyment of what he has received.

It is specially in the former case that we have need of faith and patience: faith to

rejoice in the assurance of the answer bestowed and received, and to begin and

102

act upon that answer though nothing be felt; patience to wait if there be for the

present no sensible proof of its presence. We can count upon it: Ye shall have, in

actual enjoyment.

I never was deeply interested in any object, I never prayed sincerely and

earnestly for anything, but it came; at some time—no matter at how distant a

day—somehow, in some shape, probably the last I should have devised—it came.

And yet I have always had so little faith! May God forgive me, and while He

condescends to use me as His instrument, wipe the sin of unbelief from my heart!

2 [Note: Adoniram Judson.]

O soul, be patient: thou shalt find

A little matter mend all this;

Some strain of music to thy mind,

Some praise for skill not spent amiss.3 [Note: Robert Bridges.]

ii. We shall know that we have obtained our request

So did the lepers. It came to pass, as they went, they were cleansed. And one of

them, when he saw that he was cleansed, returned, and fell down at Jesus’ feet,

giving Him thanks.

The work began when first your prayer was uttered,

And God will finish what He has begun.

If you will keep the incense burning there,

His glory you shall see, sometime, somewhere.1 [Note: Mrs. Browning.]

The question: “Does prayer really help you?” put to a prayerful Christian, is

about as easy to answer as a certain question once put to a Chinese boatman of

the river Han. The current was fairly strong, and, spite of much poling and

rowing, we made little headway. Up to a certain point the journey was

tediousness itself. Then, having performed a very simple operation, the boatmen

sat at their ease, and we sped along grandly.

In a tone of innocent ignorance, I asked the skipper at the stern: “Does putting

up that sail really help you to get along?” He made no reply, but grinned,

wondering what was coming next. “I suppose you say it catches the power of

something no one has ever seen—I believe you call it ‘wind’ or something like

that. But how can an unseen power make this heavy wooden boat to move up-

stream? That is what I want to know!” His broad grin exploded into thunderous

laughter, and his two assistants said in confidence: “Foreign funny-words!”

But I had a purpose in view. “I say, old chum, have you heard that we Christians

103

pray to an unseen God—an unseen God, mind you—to be made better men and

women?”

“Aye, that I have, sir. I know that Christians are folks who believe in praying for

that. Does it answer at all?”

“Now, old chum, be fair, you know! I just asked you a question easy to answer,

and you only laughed at me. Suppose I just laugh at you now. I asked you in

plainest Chinese: “Does your putting up that sail answer at all?”

“Well, sir, everybody knows it does, of course. Look how we’re going ahead!”2

[Note: W. A. Cornaby.]

“Well, everybody who knows God as a Father, the Lord Jesus as Rescuer, and

who really puts up the sail of his heart—that’s what prayer really is—knows

quite as surely that it does answer. Our prayers just catch hold of the unseen

power of God, like a fair wind always blowing; and however the ‘world customs

flow downwards,’ we need not be ‘down-drifting men.’ It helps our boat grandly

up-stream.”

My sorrow pierced me through, it throbbed in my heart like a thorn;

This way and that I stared, as a bird with a broken limb

Hearing the hound’s strong feet thrust imminent through the corn,

So to my God I turned: and I had forgotten Him.

Into the night I breathed a prayer like a soaring fire;—

So to the wind-swept cliff the resonant rocket streams,

And it struck its mark, I know; for I felt my flying desire

Strain, like a rope drawn home, and catch in the land of dreams.

What was the answer? This—the horrible depth of night,

And deeper, as ever I peer, the huge cliff’s mountainous shade,

While the frail boat cracks and grinds, and never a star in sight,

And the seething waves smite fiercer;—and yet I am not afraid.1 [Note: A. C.

Benson.]

104

25 And when you stand praying, if you hold

anything against anyone, forgive them, so that

your Father in heaven may forgive you your

sins.”

BARNES, "And when ye stand praying - When ye pray. It seems that the posture in prayer was sometimes standing and sometimes kneeling. God looks upon “the heart” rather than upon our position in worship; and if the heart be right, any posture may be proper. It cannot be doubted, however, that in private, in the family, and wherever it can be conveniently done, the kneeling posture is more proper, as expressing more humility and reverence, and more in accordance with Scripture examples. Compare Psa_95:6; 2Ch_6:13; Dan_6:10; Luk_22:41; Act_7:60; Act_9:40. Yet a subject like this may be made of too much consequence, and we should be careful that anxiety about a mere form should not exclude anxiety about a far more important matter - the state of the soul.

Forgive ... - See the notes at Mat_6:12, Mat_6:25.

CLARKE, "When ye stand praying - This expression may mean no more than, When ye are disposed, or have a mind, to pray, i.e. whenever ye perform that duty. And it is thus used and explained in the Koran, Surat. v. ver. 7. See on Mat_21:20-22(note). But the Pharisees loved to pray standing, that they might be seen of men.

GILL, "And when ye stand praying,.... Are about to engage in that work, or are engaged in it, performing it in such a posture; for standing was an usual posture in praying; See Gill on Mat_6:5;

forgive, if ye have ought against any, that your Father also in heaven may forgive you your trespasses. The sense is, that if, while a man is praying, it comes into his mind that such an one has committed a trespass against him, has done him an injury, of which he has just reason to complain; but instead of complaining of it before God, and calling upon him to avenge his cause, he should immediately in his heart, and from his heart, forgive him, even though he is not present to acknowledge his sin, and ask his pardon; and such an one may expect forgiveness of God, and a manifestation of it to his soul; which is one the things he is constantly praying for, as his daily case makes it necessary: not that it is to be understood as though his for, giving the person that has offended him, is the cause, or condition, of his receiving remission of sin at the hand of God; for then it would not be through the blood of Christ, and according to the riches of his grace; but this points at a temper and disposition of mind well pleasing to God, and describes persons who may expect this favour from him; See Gill on Mat_6:14.

HENRY, " To this is added here that necessary qualification of the prevailing prayer, that we freely forgive those who have been any way injurious to us, and be in charity with all men (Mar_11:25, Mar_11:26); When ye stand praying, forgive. Note, Standing is no improper posture for prayer; it was generally used among the Jews;

105

hence they called their prayers, their standings; when they would say how the world was kept up by prayer, they expressed it thus, Stationibus stat mundus - The world is held up by standings. But the primitive Christians generally used more humble and reverent gesture of kneeling, especially on fast days, though not on Lord's days. When we are at prayer, we must remember to pray for others, particularly for our enemies, and those that have wronged us; now we cannot pray sincerely that God would do them good, if we bear malice to them, and wish them ill. If we have injured others before we pray, we must go and be reconciled to them; Mat_5:23, Mat_5:24. But if they have injured us, we go a nearer way to work, and must immediately from our hearts forgive them. [1.] Because this is a good step towards obtaining the pardon of our own sins: Forgive, that your Father may forgive you; that is, “that he may be qualified to receive forgiveness, that he may forgive you without injury to his honour, as it would be, if he should suffer those to have such benefit by his mercy, as are so far from being conformable to the pattern of it.” [2.] Because the want of this is a certain bar to the obtaining of the pardon of our sins; “If ye do not forgive those who have injured you, if he hate their persons, bear them a grudge, meditate revenge, and take all occasion to speak ill of them, neither will your Father forgive your trespasses.” This ought to be remembered in prayer, because one great errand we have to the throne of grace, is, to pray for the pardon of our sins: and care about it ought to be our daily care, because prayer is a part of our daily work. Our Saviour often insists on this, for it was his great design to engage his disciples to love one another.

JAMIESON, "And when ye stand praying, forgive, if ye have aught against any; that your Father also which is in heaven may forgive you your trespasses, etc. — This is repeated from the Sermon on the Mount (see on Mat_6:12); to remind them that if this was necessary to the acceptableness of allprayer, much more when great things were to be asked and confidently expected.

BI 25-26, "But if ye do not forgive.

Prayer and forgiveness

1. The first lesson here taught is that of a forgiving disposition. God’s full and free forgiveness is to be the rule of ours with men.

2. There is a second and more general lesson. Our daily life in the world is made the test of our intercourse with God in prayer. Life does not consist of so many loose pieces, of which now the one, then the other, can be taken up. My drawing nigh to God is of one piece with my intercourse with men. Failure here will cause failure there.

3. We may gather these thoughts into a third lesson. In our life with men the one thing on which everything depends is love. The spirit of forgiveness is the spirit of love. The right relations to the living God above me, and the living men around me, are the conditions of effectual prayer. (A. Murray.)

Forgiving foes

I. We should forgive our enemies and all who have injured us, because of the Divine example. Let us learn to act like our Father in heaven, who forgives us without any merit on our part.

II. We should forgive because it is needful for our own peace. Revenge cherished is

106

like a thorn in the flesh.

III. Forgiveness is one of the most important signs and essentials of spiritual growth.

IV. We should forgive one another because it is the condition of our own forgiveness. (Anon.)

Forgive

He that cannot forgive others breaks down the bridge over which he must pass himself; for everyone has need to be forgiven. As when the sea worm makes a hole in the shell of the mussel, the hole is filled up with a pearl; so, when the heart is pierced by an injury, forgiveness is like a pearl, healing and filling up the wound. (Anon.)

Generous and magnanimous minds are readiest to forgive; and it is a weakness and impotency of mind to be unable to forgive. (Bacon.)

Forgive and forget

Whilst wrongs are remembered, they are not remitted. He forgives not, that forgets not. When an inconsiderate fellow had struck Cato in the bath, and afterwards besought his pardon, he replied, “I remember not that thou didst strike me.” Our Henry VI is said to have been of that happy memory, that he never forgot anything but injuries. (J. Trapp.)

Forgive

A wealthy planter in Virginia, who had a great number of slaves, found one of them reading the Bible, and reproved him for neglect of his work, saying, there was time enough on Sundays for reading the Bible, and that on other days he ought to be in the tobacco house. On the offence being repeated, he ordered the slave to be whipped. Going near the place of punishment soon after its infliction, curiosity led him to listen to a voice engaged in prayer; and he heard the poor black implore the Almighty to forgive the injustice of his master, to touch his heart with a sense of his sin, and to make him a good Christian. Struck with remorse, he made an immediate change in his life, which had been careless and dissipated, and appears now only to study bow he can render his wealth and talents useful to others.

Forgiveness by those forgiven

A great boy in a school was so abusive to the younger ones, that the teacher took the vote of the school whether he should be expelled. All the small boys voted to expel him, except one, who was scarcely five years old. Yet he knew very well that the bad boy would probably continue to abuse him. “Why, then, did you vote for him to stay?” said the teacher. “Because if he is expelled, perhaps he will not learn any more about God, and so he will be more wicked still.” “Do you forgive him then?” inquired the teacher. “Yes,” said the little fellow; “papa and mamma and you all forgive me when I do wrong; God forgives me too and I must do the same.”

Why prayers sometimes fail

I. Let us, in the first place, enter upon an intelligent exposition of the verses just as

107

they stand. It will be quite as necessary for us to be sure what they do not mean, as what they do mean; for the declaration has been somewhat abused.

1. It is easy to show what our Lord does not teach in His repeated counsels on this point. The new revision gives a very interesting turn to the form of expression by throwing the verb into the past tense: “forgive us our debts, as we also have forgiven our debtors.” This intensifies the admonition, and enforces the condition that ensures success in our praying; for it demands that our pardon of injuries shall have taken place previous even to our coming to the mercy seat for ourselves. It cannot be that the passage we are studying means that our forgiveness of others is in any sense the ground for our remission of sins from God. It cannot be that the passage means that our forgiveness of others is to furnish the measure of our own pardon from God.

2. What then does our Lord mean when He gives this warning? How is a forgiving spirit connected with our prayers? If our having pardoned those who have injured us be not a ground for our own pardon nor a measure of Divine grace, what is it? For one thing, it may be used as a token. It can be looked upon as a hopeful sign that our transgressions have been removed, and that we are now heirs of the kingdom. “For, if ye forgive men their trespasses your heavenly Father will also forgive you.” Such a token can be employed very easily. If used faithfully, it would set at rest many a doubt concerning religion in one’s heart. For another thing, this passage may serve as an admonition. And it is likely that it will have in this its widest use. The petition of the great universal prayer cannot be pressed without its comment. In this demand for a forgiving spirit, there is nothing less than a permanent reminder that when we come asking for pardon, we must be prepared to exercise it likewise; if not, we are to turn on our track and seek preparation.

II. This being the exposition of the verses, and the conclusion having been inevitably reached that we cannot even pres without the spirit of forgiveness, it is evident that we must move forward to a higher plane of Christian experience in this one particular. So we inquire, in the second place, concerning the reach and the limit of the doctrine of forgiveness.

1. The reach of it is indicated in an incident of Simon Peter’s life (Mat_18:21-22).

2. But now, with a sober sense of inquiry, and a sincere wish to be reasonable, some of us are ready to ask after the limit as well as the reach of this counsel. (Luk_17:3-4.) Before this question can be plainly answered, we must be careful to see that forgiveness does not imply that we approve, condone, or underrate the injurious acts committed; we forgive the sinner, not the sin-the sin we are to forget. Nor does forgiveness imply that we are to stifle all honest indignation against the wickedness of the injury. Nor is it settled that we are to take the injurious man into constant companionship if we forgive him; Jacob and Esau will do better apart. What, then, are we to do? We are, in our very heart of hearts, to cease forever from the sore sense of a hurt; we are to shut our souls against all suggestions of requital or future revenge; we are to use all means for furthering the interests of those who have done us harm; we are to illustrate the greatness of God’s pardoning love by the quickness of our own. All this before our wrongs have been atoned for; before our honest acts and decent deeds have been shown! It does seem a little difficult; but think over Augustine’s searching question: “Do you who are a Christian desire to be revenged and vindicated, and the death of Jesus Christ has not yet been revenged, nor his innocence vindicated?” It is related of the chivalric leader, the great Sir Tristam, that his stepmother tried twice to poison him. He hurried to the king, who honoured him as he honoured

108

none other, and craved a boon: “I beseech you of your mercy that you will forgive it her! God forgive it her, and I do! For God’s love, I require you to grant me my boon!” (C. S. Robinson, D. D.)

Forgiveness of injuries

A young Greenlander said to a missionary, “I do love Jesus-I would do anything for Him; how good of Him to die for me!” The missionary said to him, “Are you sure you would do anything for our dear Lord?” “Yes, I would do anything for Him. What can I do?” The missionary, showing him the Bible, said, “This Book says, ‘Thou shalt do no murder.’” “Oh, but that man killed my father.” “Our dear Lord Himself says, ‘If ye love Me, keep My commandments,’ and this is one of them.” “Oh,” exclaimed the Greenlander, “I do love Jesus! but I-I must-” “Wait a little, calm yourself; think it well over and then come and let me know.” He went out, but presently came back, saying, “I cannot decide; one moment I will, the next I will not. Help me to decide.” The missionary answered; “When you say, ‘I will kill him,’ it is the evil spirit trying to gain the victory; when you say, ‘I will not,’ it is the Spirit of God striving within you.” And so speaking, he induced him at length to give up his murderous design. Accordingly the Greenlander sent a message to the murderer of his father, telling him to come and meet him as a friend. He came, with kindness on his lips, but treachery in his heart. For, after he had stayed with him a while, he asked the young man to come and visit him on this side of the river. To this he readily assented, but, on returning to his boat, found that a hole had been pierced in the boat, and cleverly concealed by his enemy, who hoped thereby to destroy him. He stopped the hole, and put off in his boat, which to the surprise and wrath and indignation of the other, who had climbed a high rock on purpose to see him drown, did not sink, but merrily breasted the waves. Then cried the young man to his enemy, “I freely forgive you, for our dear Lord has forgiven me.”

[26] [g]

CLARKE, "At the end of this verse, the 7th and 8th verses of Matthew 7. Ask and ye shall receive, etc., are added by M, and sixteen other MSS. The 26th verse is wanting in BLS, seven others, some editions, the Coptic, one Itala, and Theophylact.

GILL, "But if ye do not forgive,.... Freely and fully, such as have trespassed against you, remit the debts they owe, and pass by the offences and injuries done you, and put up with every affront and indignity:

neither will your heavenly Father forgive your trespasses; that is, such persons do not appear to have any true, or right notions of forgiveness; nor is there any evidence that their hearts are duly affected, or truly impressed with a sense of it; nor can they, upon their own principles and conduct, expect it: not but that to whomsoever God stands in the relation of a Father, and they are his children by adopting grace; these he pities and pardons, Christ's sake; the same covenant which contains the blessing of adoption, provides for pardoning mercy, and a non-remembrance of sin; the same persons that are predestinated to the adoption of children by Christ, and whom he has redeemed, that they might receive it, have the forgiveness of their sins, according to the riches of God's grace; for redemption and

109

forgiveness of sins go together; and as many as are the children of God by faith in Christ, by the same faith receive the remission of sins; and without a view of pardon through the blood of Christ, a child of God cannot draw nigh to its heavenly Father, with that boldness, and cheerfulness, and filial fear it should; but there is forgiveness with him, that he may be feared; to whomsoever God stands in the relation of a Covenant God and Father, to them he manifests himself as a God pardoning iniquity, transgression, and sin: unless the word "father" here not to be taken for such a special relation of grace, but only as expressive of him as the God of nature and providence, who has made; and takes care of all his creatures; in which sense he is the Father of all: as it is said, "have we not all one Father? hath not one God created us?" Mal_2:10; and so "our heavenly Father", or "our Father" which is in heaven, may be so called only from the place where he dwells; and not from the grace he bestows on men, making them partakers of his heavenly gifts and calling, and blessing them in heavenly places, or things in Christ Jesus: in the former view of him it will not necessarily follow, that he does forgive sin, whereas under the latter consideration of him it will; for forgiveness is one of the heavenly gifts and things which he blesses his children with; See Gill on Mat_6:15.

HENRY, " Because the want of this is a certain bar to the obtaining of the pardon of our sins; “If ye do not forgive those who have injured you, if he hate their persons, bear them a grudge, meditate revenge, and take all occasion to speak ill of them, neither will your Father forgive your trespasses.” This ought to be remembered in prayer, because one great errand we have to the throne of grace, is, to pray for the pardon of our sins: and care about it ought to be our daily care, because prayer is a part of our daily work. Our Saviour often insists on this, for it was his great design to engage his disciples to love one another.

The Authority of Jesus Questioned

27 They arrived again in Jerusalem, and while

Jesus was walking in the temple courts, the chief

priests, the teachers of the law and the elders

came to him.

GILL, "And they come again to Jerusalem,.... The Persic and Ethiopic versions read, "he came", which must be understood with his disciples; for they never parted from him till he was apprehended in the garden. Luke says, Luk_20:1, that it was "on one of those days"; and the Persic version here reads, "on another day": it was the day after the cursing of the fig tree, and two days after his public entrance into Jerusalem:

and as he was walking in the temple; not alone, but his disciples with him, and a multitude of people, whom he was teaching and preaching the Gospel to, as he

110

walked to and fro; and whilst he was there employed,

there come to him the chief priests, and the Scribes, and the elders: the Jewish sanhedrim; for of these that great council of the nation consisted; See Gill on Mat_21:23.

HENRY, "We have here Christ examined by the great Sanhedrim concerning his authority; for they claimed a power to call prophets to an account concerning their mission. They came to him when he was walking in the temple, not for his diversion, but teaching the people, first one company and then another. The Peripatetic philosophers were so called from the custom they had of walking when they taught. The cloisters, or piazzas, in the courts of the temple, were fitted for this purpose. The great men were vexed to see him followed and heard with attention, and therefore came to him with some solemnity, and did as it were arraign him at the bar with this question, By what authority doest thou these things? Mar_11:28. Now observe,

JAMIESON, "Mar_11:27-33. The authority of Jesus questioned - His reply. ( = Mat_21:23-27; Luk_20:1-8).

See on Mat_21:23-27.

SBC 227-28, "I. There is something just and legitimate in the words of Christ’s enemies. The idea of a Divine revelation is inseparable from the idea of authority. Jesus to the scribes is a person without authority. For them authority is wholly in the priestly institution. Now Jesus did not belong to the tribe of Levi and to the descent of Aaron. He had not received the official consecration, He had not demanded the investiture of the synagogue. He was without authority. Christ lived in their sight; they had been able, day after day, to look on His conduct and to scrutinise His acts. The whole of His life had been holiness and mercy. The scribes saw that, and it did not move them. It was not a question with them to know of Christ’s accomplished works of holiness, but in virtue of what authority He did them. Holiness, justice and mercy may burn with a superhuman brilliancy, may inspire a sublime teaching, may bring forth magnificent works, all will be nothing; rather than that they will prefer a parchment of the synagogue conferring on its possessor all the rights of authority.

II. A grand teaching comes out of this scene. Let us never put questions of hierarchy and of the Church above the truth. That is a miserable narrowness which we must hold in abhorrence. The sectarian spirit is not peculiar to small sects, as is too readily believed. Perhaps nowhere does it grow and develop with more intensity and in a more unconscious manner than in the shelter of great institutions and ancient traditions. There is a moment when it becomes a crime; it is when it shuts its eyes to the light, it is when it judges with disdainful pride all that is done outside of its regulations, it is when it attributes to Beelzebub the most manifest works of the Spirit of God. We must choose between the Pharisaical spirit that says to Christ, "By what authority doest Thou these things?" and the spirit of truth which, when it sees the light, comes to the light, and says, God is here.

E. Bersier, Sermons, 2nd series, p. 61.

BARCLAY, "A CUNNING QUESTION AND A PIERCING ANSWER (Mark

11:27-33)

11:27-33 Once again they came to Jerusalem, and, when Jesus was walking in the

Temple, the chief priests and the experts in the law and the elders came to him,

and said to him, "By what kind of authority do you do these things? Or, who

111

gave you authority to do these things?" Jesus said, "I will put one point to you,

and, if you answer me, I will tell you by what kind of authority I do these things.

Was the baptism of John from heaven? or was it from men? Answer me!" They

discussed the matter among themselves. "If," they said, "we say, 'From heaven,'

he will say, 'Why did you not believe in it?' But, are we to say, 'From men'?"--

for they were afraid of the people, for all truly held that John was a prophet. So

they answered Jesus, "We do not know." So Jesus said to them, "Neither do I

tell you by what kind of authority I do these things."

In the sacred precincts there were two famous cloisters, one on the east and one

on the south side of the Court of the Gentiles. The one on the east was called

Solomon's Porch. It was a magnificent arcade made by Corinthian columns 35

feet high. The one on the south was even more splendid. It was called the Royal

Cloister. It was formed by four rows of white marble columns, each 6 feet in

diameter and 30 feet high. There were 162 of them. It was common for Rabbis

and teachers to stroll in these columns and to teach as they walked. Most of the

great cities of ancient times had these cloisters. They gave shelter from the sun

and the wind and the rain, and, in point of fact, it was in these places that most

of the religious and philosophic teaching was done. One of the most famous

schools of ancient thought was that of the Stoics. They received their name from

the fact that Zeno, their founder, taught as he walked in the Stoa Poikile, the

Painted Porch, in Athens. The word stoa (Greek #4745) means porch or arcade

and the Stoics were the school of the porch. It was in these cloisters in the

Temple that Jesus was walking and teaching.

To him there came a deputation of the chief priests and the experts in the law,

that is the scribes, rabbis and elders. This was in reality a deputation from the

Sanhedrin, of which these three groups formed the component parts. They asked

a most natural question. For a private individual, all on his own, to clear the

Court of the Gentiles of its accustomed and official traders was a staggering

thing. So they asked Jesus, "By what kind of authority do you act like that?"

They hoped to put Jesus into a dilemma. If he said he was acting under his own

authority they might well arrest him as a megalomaniac before he did any

further damage. If he said that he was acting on the authority of God they might

well arrest him on an obvious charge of blasphemy, on the grounds that God

would never give any man authority to create a disturbance in the courts of his

own house. Jesus saw quite clearly the dilemma in which they sought to involve

him, and his reply put them into a dilemma which was still worse. He said that

he would answer on condition that they would answer one question for him,

"Was John the Baptist's work, in your opinion, human or divine?"

This impaled them on the horns of a dilemma. If they said it was divine, they

knew that Jesus would ask why they had stood out against it. Worse than that--if

they said it was divine, Jesus could reply that John had in fact pointed all men to

him, and that therefore he was divinely attested and needed no further authority.

If these members of the Sanhedrin agreed that John's work was divine, they

would be compelled to accept Jesus as the Messiah. On the other hand, if they

said that John's work was merely human, now that John had the added

112

distinction of being a martyr, they knew quite well that the listening people

would cause a riot. So they were compelled to say weakly that they did not know,

and thereby Jesus escaped the need to give them any answer to their question.

The whole story is a vivid example of what happens to men who will not face the

truth. They have to twist and wriggle and in the end get themselves into a

position in which they are so helplessly involved that they have nothing to say.

The man who faces the truth may have the humiliation of saying that he was

wrong, or the peril of standing by it, but at least the future for him is strong and

bright. The man who will not face the truth has nothing but the prospect of

deeper and deeper involvement in a situation which renders him helpless and

ineffective.

COFFMAN, "THE QUESTION OF JESUS' AUTHORITY

This confrontation with the religious apparatus in the Jewish capital actually

concerned the second cleansing of the temple, which had just occurred; and their

motives were inspired by the hope of finding some pretext for condemnation.

By what authority ... Their question was indeed a proper one. In a sense, this is

as important a question as may ever be raised regarding the life and ministry of

the Son of God. The fact that the questioners themselves supposed that Jesus had

no authority, and knowing that he had none from THEM, does not diminish the

importance of the question, had it been asked in sincerity, there is no reason to

suppose that Jesus would have refused an answer, but their vicious motives

precluded such a thing.

BURKITT, "The Pharisees having often questioned our Saviour's doctrine

before, they call in question his mission and authority now, although they might

easily have understood his divine mission by his daily miracles; for Almighty

God never impowered any to work miracles that were not sent by him.

Our blessed Saviour understanding their design, answers them one question by

asking them another: says Christ, The baptism of John, was it from heaven or of

men? Was it of divine institution, or of human invention? Implying very plainly,

that the calling of such as call themselves the ministers of God: ought to be from

God: No man ought to take that honour upon himself, but he that is called of

God, as was Aaron Hebrews 1:4.

The Pharisees reply, They could not tell whence John had his mission and

authority; this was manifest untruth. By refusing to tell the truth, they fall into a

lie against the truth; one sin ensnares and draws men into the commission of

many more. Such as will not speak exact truth, according to their knowledge, fall

into the sin of lying against their knowledge and their conscience.

Our Saviour answers them, Neither tell I you by what authority I do these

things. He doth not say, I cannot, or I will not tell you, but I do not, I need not

tell you; because the miracles which I work before you are a sufficient

demonstration of my divine commission, that I am sent of God amongst you; for

113

God never set the seal of his omnipotence to a lie, nor impowered an impostor to

work real miracles.

CONSTABLE, "The chief priests, teachers or scribes, and elders constituted the

three components of the Sanhedrin. This was a very official inquiry prompted by

Jesus' presence and made necessary by His cleansing of the temple. Israel's

official leaders wanted to know about Jesus' credentials and who gave Him the

right to say and do what He did. They questioned the nature and source of His

authority. Their questions were legitimate since they were responsible for

supervising Israel's religious life. Yet their question was a challenge to Jesus'

honor. [Note: See Joseph H. Hellerman, "Challenging the Authority of Jesus:

Mark 11:27-33 and Mediterranean Notions of Honor and Shame," Journal of

the Evangelical Theological Society 43:2 (June 2000):213-28.]

"The essence of the depiction of the opponents [of Jesus in Mark] lies in that they

are self-serving; that is, they are preoccupied with preserving their power, their

importance, their wealth, and their lives." [Note: Rhoads and Michie, p. 121.]

28 “By what authority are you doing these

things?” they asked. “And who gave you

authority to do this?”

GILL, "And say unto him, by what authority dost thou do these things?.... Enter into the temple, as if he was Lord of it; and correct in such a magisterial way every thing he thought an abuse in it; do the miracles he did, as healing the lame, and blind; and take upon him to instruct the people, a work he was now engaged in:

and who gave thee this authority to do these things? See Gill on Mat_21:23.

HENRY, "By what authority doest thou these things? Mar_11:28. Now observe,

I. How they designed hereby to run him aground, and embarrass him. If they could make it out before the people, that he had not a legal mission, that he was not duly ordained, though he was ever so well qualified, and preached ever so profitably and well, they would tell the people that they ought not to hear him. This they made the last refuge of an obstinate unbelief; because they were resolved not to receive his doctrine, they were resolved to find some flaw or other in his commission, and will conclude it invalid, if it be not produced and ratified in their court. Thus the Papists resolve their controversy with us very much into the mission of our ministers, and if they have but any pretence to overthrow that, they think they have gained their point, though we have the scripture ever so much on our side. But this is indeed a question, which all that act either as magistrates or ministers, ought to be furnished with a good answer to, and often put to themselves, By what authority do I these things?For how can men preach except they be sent? Or how can they act with comfort, or confidence, or hope of success, except they be authorized? Jer_23:32.

114

BI 28-33, "By what authority doest Thou these things?

Christ’s authority and the way to discern it

I. From the side of the questioners and their question. “By what authority doest Thou these things,” etc. Christ’s power was a new power in the world at that time. It was different from the authority of the scribes, priests, elders, and Sanhedrim. They had a right to put this question, but were chargeable with negligence in not having settled it long before. They were Israel’s shepherds, and had a responsibility for the people over whom they were set. Year by year, and we may almost say day by day, there is some power or another growing up in society which in process of time will make itself felt, and which will gradually weaken and uproot all authority which is held in a wrong spirit, and which is exercised in a wrong way. And it has often made great way before its progress is observed. Christianity began by appealing to the hearts of men, to what men felt to be true. It began in Christ’s life and teaching. It pandered to no prejudice. It rested not till it brought every man, with his faults, into the presence of God. To these facts the priests and scribes were blind. There are men who will do nothing but by tradition and rule; they set form above substance. They slumbered whilst new forces were rising all around them. So like Christ there are men who strive to do good, striking, out a course for themselves, who look at what has to be done, if not in the old way, in one which will accomplish the object. These leave it to critics and cavillers to settle as best they can by what authority this work is done.

II. Look at the passage from the side of Christ. It was not His custom to be silent when men wished to learn. He received Nicodemus by night; reasoned with the Samaritan woman; Zaccheus. Christ says, “Neither will I tell you.” These words are not mere resolution on His part to withhold information; but in their being unable to receive what He might tell them. On another occasion the Jews came to Christ and said, “If Thou be the Christ, tell us plainly.” Christ’s answer was, “I have told you before, and ye did not believe.” In like manner the rulers had been virtually told before by what authority Christ had done these things. His words and works were His authority. This want of power to see the truth and to know it is the natural result of a spirit of unfaithfulness to former light and present convictions. Many people overlook this law of their spiritual being; they think that by neglect or carelessness they are at the most missing some advantage for a short season, and that when they please they can regain what has been lost. They forget that the loss is within, in the soul, character, and life, and that it is irreparable. When they wrong their inward convictions, they not merely defile their honour, but destroy the very powers of discerning right and wrong, truth and error. Each time that a man is unfaithful to the light within him he is laying a thicker film upon the spiritual eye. It is marvellous how men with an honest love of the truth are guided into it, and are led out of the labyrinth of darkness and perplexities which surround them. (A. Watson, D. D.)

Christ’s works His authority

His works were His authority, His teaching was His authority. Just as the discovery of a principle in science is the authority for accepting it, as the discovery of a law of nature is the authority for following it, as the invention of a piece of mechanism is the authority for using it, as the healing power of a new medicine is the authority for applying it so, one would think, there was no need to ask for the authority by which the sorrowful were comforted, or the ignorant taught, or the wicked reformed, or the worldly made spiritual. These works themselves showed whose authority they had. If you cannot see authority in an act of mercy or kindness, how can any words show it?

115

If you cannot see the authority of a wise act, or of a true word, or of a good life, how can any assertions prove it? If a man is righteous, you do not ask him his authority for being just; or benevolent, you do not question his authority for kindness of heart: and if a man, by reading the hearts and consciences of men, succeeds in producing in them a purer and better life, in calming the passionate, in changing the idle into the industrious, the intemperate into the sober, the unholy into the chaste and virtuous-these changes themselves are for you the assurance of an authority which no man may deny. (A. Watson, D. D.)

The question of authority

There is something just in the words of Christ’s enemies. The idea of Divine revelation is inseparable from the idea of authority. If God speaks He will speak with authority. That authority will have nothing violent or arbitrary in it; it will be persuasive, it will set free instead of enthralling. Individual illumination becomes a dream if it claims to raise itself above God’s revelation. God, who has given revealed truth to men, has given them at the same time the institutions which preserve it. But we must make a fundamental distinction between the Divine truth and the institutions destined to preserve it. The authority of the first is direct; the authority of the second only derived. What is the aim of religious institutions? To preserve life. If the authority of the institution is put above that of the truth itself, if the form is put above the foundation, it is a perversion of the Divine order. Jesus to the Scribes is a person without authority. For them authority is wholly in the priestly institution. These men would have said to the sun, “By what right dost thou shine at an hour we have not chosen? Prove to us that thou hast permission to give us light.” Therefore they shut their eyes to the light. Let us never put questions of hierarchy and of the church above the truth. I am not indifferent to these things, the form here touches very closely the reality. I distrust a soldier that turns up his nose at his flag. We must, love and defend the church to which we belong. But we must know how to recognize everything outside of it that God makes beautiful, and by means which are not at its direction. We must choose between the pharisaical spirit that says to Christ, “By what authority doest thou these things?” and the spirit of truth which, when it sees the light, comes to the light, and says, “God is here.” (E. Bersier, D. D.)

The official religionist challenges the Prophet on a point of order

The method is always popular-plausible; it appeals to every commonplace instinct, and is flattering even to the lowest intelligence. “By what authority?” Who shall fathom the depth of Divine scorn in the Saviour’s glance ere He replied? In truth, by what authority did Nathan stand in the presence of David, and, after arraigning before him in his tale a black criminal, cry, “Thou art the man”? By what authority did Elijah confront Ahab and denounce him as the “troubler of Israel”? By what authority did Paul, the prisoner at the bar, stand before Felix, and reason with him “concerning righteousness, temperance, and judgment to come”? By what authority in all ages and everywhere does the spiritual man judge the carnal man; the heavenly assert supremacy over the earthly, sensual, and devilish? Before we listen to the question which Jesus in His turn puts to His questioner by way of answer, read the situation between the lines; let us pause to take in the full meaning of His searching, indignant gaze. “You,” it seems to say, “you who question My authority, then, are the religious teachers. It is your business to know about spiritual things; to judge between the things of God and the things of man; to judge spiritual and carnal conduct; to protect religion; to guard the temple; to be the ministers and stewards of

116

the mysteries. Is that so? Well, let Me see if you are fit for such duties-if you in the least understand them. If you do, you will have a right to question My action, not otherwise. Prove to Me your authority, I will prove to you Mine. The baptism of John, was it from heaven or of men?” A silence-dead silence. The eyes of the crowd are on the Pharisees; they notice them whispering together. They are overheard muttering, “If we say, ‘of heaven,’ He will say, ‘Why, then, did you not believe Him?’ if, ‘of men,’ all the people will stone us, for they be persuaded that John was a prophet.” Then at last these teachers, these judges of spiritual action, reply out loud, “We cannot tell.” Cannot tell-great doctors of the law-whether John was a charlatan or not; cannot tell the difference between true and false teaching-real and sham religion! Well, if they cannot tell about John, what is the value of their opinion about Christ? They are not ashamed to dub themselves imbeciles-incapables. Had they expressed an adverse opinion, it would have still been respectable; had they proclaimed John and Christ, fanatics, enthusiasts, or impostors, they would have found supporters, as everyone does who has the courage of his opinions. But no-“We cannot tell.” It was enough; they were answered out of their own mouths. There are some things it is quite useless to tell people who “cannot tell”; there are some things which, if not felt, can never be explained. (H. R. Haweis, M. A.)

Authority and presumption

I. Where the action is unquestionably right, some will censure the agent.

II. They who require reasons should be ready to give reasons.

III. Truth should be the first question with men, not consequences.

IV. Incompetency may be exposed, and assumption resisted, for the sake of truth. (J. H. Godwin.).

29 Jesus replied, “I will ask you one question.

Answer me, and I will tell you by what authority

I am doing these things.

GILL, "And Jesus answered and said unto them,.... Being not in the least intimidated by such a body of men:

I will also ask of you one question; or "one word", or "one thing"; λογος, here

answers to the Hebrew word דבר, which signifies both "word" and "thing":

and answer me, and I will tell you by what authority I do these things; See Gill on Mat_21:24.

COFFMAN, "The question in Jesus' reply was a valid one. Let these hypocrites

who pretended to have all authority for determining what was from God or what

117

was from men give a ruling on a case already before them, and one that had

already been on the docket a long time: the baptism of John; was it from God or

from men? As always, the hierarchy appeared ineffective and unable to prevail

against Jesus in open debate. This question stopped their mouths completely.

CONSTABLE, "Essentially Jesus asked these leaders if they believed God was

behind John's ministry. John had taught that God was behind Jesus' ministry. If

the critics said they believed God was behind John's ministry, they would have

had to agree that God was behind Jesus' ministry. Jesus challenged them to

respond. "Answer me" (Mark 11:30) is unique in Mark and reflects Jesus

superiority to these men.

"As on the earlier question of Sabbath observance (Mark 2:23 to Mark 3:6), the

counterquestion [sic] implies that Jesus stands not under the Sanhedrin but over

it. His counterquestion demonstrates the authority about which he is

questioned." [Note: Edwards, p. 226.]

30 John’s baptism—was it from heaven, or of

human origin? Tell me!”

GILL, "The baptism of John,.... The doctrine of which he was the first preacher, and the ordinance of which he was the first administrator:

was it from heaven, or of men? was it of divine or of human institution?

answer me; directly and plainly, without any shuffling, or evasion: it is a fair question, and may be answered; and the answer to it our Lord suggests would naturally lead to a proper one to their question; See Gill on Mat_21:25.

HENRY, "II. How he effectually ran them aground, and embarrassed them, with this question, “What are your thoughts concerning the baptism of John? Was it from heaven, or of men? By what authority did John preach, and baptize, and gather disciples? Answer me, Mar_11:30. Deal fairly and ingenuously, and give a categorical answer, one way or the other.” By this resolve of their question into this, our Saviour intimates how near akin his doctrine and baptism were to John's; they had the same original, and the same design and tendency - to introduce the gospel kingdom. Christ might with the better grace put this question to them, because they had sent a committee of their own house to examine John, Joh_1:19. “Now,” saith Christ, “what was the result of your enquiries concerning him?”

They knew what they thought of this question; they could not but think that John Baptist was a man sent of God. But the difficulty was, what they should say to it now. Men that oblige not themselves to speak as they think (which is a certain rule) cannot avoid perplexing themselves thus.

1. If they own the baptism of John to be from heaven, as really it was, they shame themselves; for Christ will presently turn it upon them, Why did ye not then believe

118

him, and receive his baptism? They could not bear that Christ should say this, but they could bear it that their own consciences should say so, because they had an art of stifling and silencing them, and because what conscience said, though it might gall and grate them a little, would not shame them; and then they would do well enough, who looked no further than Saul's care, when he was convicted, Honour me now before this people, 1Sa_15:30.

31 They discussed it among themselves and said,

“If we say, ‘From heaven,’ he will ask, ‘Then

why didn’t you believe him?’

GILL, "And they reasoned with themselves saying,.... Privately; perhaps, they withdrew at a little distance for a short time, and consulted among themselves what answer to return; and the amount of their reasonings were this;

if we shall say from heaven, he will say, why then did ye not believe him? that is, should they say that John had a divine commission for what he said and did, they were aware that Christ would reply, why did not ye give credit to him? and had you done so, seeing he testified of me, you would have had no occasion to have put the above question; See Gill on Mat_21:25.

HENRY, "And they reasoned with themselves saying,.... Privately; perhaps, they withdrew at a little distance for a short time, and consulted among themselves what answer to return; and the amount of their reasonings were this;

if we shall say from heaven, he will say, why then did ye not believe him? that is, should they say that John had a divine commission for what he said and did, they were aware that Christ would reply, why did not ye give credit to him? and had you done so, seeing he testified of me, you would have had no occasion to have put the above question; See Gill on Mat_21:25.

CONSTABLE, "Verses 31-33

The critics' concern for their own position rather than for the truth is obvious in

their refusal to answer Jesus. Clearly they rejected both John and Jesus as God's

authorized prophets. Jesus had already answered their question in a veiled way

by claiming that His authority was the same as John's. He refused to give them a

more obvious answer knowing that they were trying to discredit Him. Their

failure to reply to Him released Him from His promise to reply to them (Mark

11:29). Rejection of revelation shut the door on further revelation.

"In his assault on the demonic, forgiveness of sins, supremacy over Torah and

temple, speech about God as Father, and grounding pronouncements about

matters in which God is sovereign in his own authority, Jesus exercises an

authority that is God's prerogative.... Coming from anyone else it would have

119

signaled utter madness-as it did in the eyes of his enemies. What the devout Jew

saw in Torah, or perhaps in the temple, the gospels see in Jesus, for Jesus

replaces Torah and temple as the locus Dei [place of God]. When questioned

about the source of his authority, Jesus points to his baptism by John, wherein

the voice declaring Jesus Son of God and the Spirit empowering him as servant

of God confer on him the exousia [authority] of God.

"Thus in the gospel of Mark, as in John, Jesus appears as God incarnate in his

bearing, speech and activity. This astonishes, baffles, and even offends his

contemporaries, from his closest circles outward. The religious leaders in

particular regard his laying claim to a realm that belonged properly to God as

the gravest possible trespass. Jesus gives the distinct impression, however, that

he is not a trespasser but is entering into his rightful property." [Note: Ibid., pp.

232-33.]

32 But if we say, ‘Of human origin’ …” (They

feared the people, for everyone held that John

really was a prophet.)

CLARKE, "They feared the people - Or rather, We fear, etc. Instead of εφοβουντο,

they feared; the Codex Bezae, seven others, later Syriac, Arabic, Coptic, Ethiopic,

Armenian, Vulgate, and all the Itala, read φοβουµεν, or φοβουµεθα. The common

reading appearing to me quite improper.

We fear the people. Εαν, if, before ειπωµεν, we shall say, is omitted by

ABCEFGHLS, and more than fifty others. Bengel leaves it out of the text, and puts a

note of interrogation after Εξ�ανθρωπων; and then the whole passage reads thus: But

shall we say, Of men? They feared the people, etc. This change renders the adoption

of φοβουµεν, we fear, unnecessary. Several critics prefer this mode of distinguishing

the text. However the critics may be puzzled with the text, the scribes, chief priests, and elders were worse puzzled with our Lord’s question. They must convict themselves or tell a most palpable falsehood. - They told the lie, and so escaped for the present.

1. Envy, malice, and double dealing have always a difficult part to act, and are ultimately confounded by their own projects and ruined by their own operations. On the other hand, simplicity and sincerity are not obliged to use a mask, but always walk in a plain way.

2. The case of the barren fig-tree which our Lord cursed has been pitifully misunderstood and misapplied. The whole account of this transaction, as stated above, I believe to be correct; it is so much in our Lord’s usual manner that the propriety of it will scarcely be doubted. He was ever acting the part of the philosopher, moralist, and divine, as well as that of the Savior of sinners. In his hand, every providential occurrence and every object of nature, became a means of instruction: the stones of the desert, the lilies of the field, the fowls of

120

heaven, the beasts of the forest, fruitful and unfruitful trees, with every ordinary occurrence, were so many grand texts, from which he preached the most illuminating and impressive sermons, for the instruction and salvation of his audience. This wisdom and condescension cannot be sufficiently admired. But shall the example of the fruitless fig tree be lost on us as well as on the Jews? God forbid! Let us therefore take heed, lest having been so long unfruitful, God should say, Let no fruit appear on thee hereafter for ever! and in consequence of this, we wither and die away! See Clarke on Mar_11:27(note).

GILL, "But if we shall say, of men,.... That John's baptism was an human invention, and he had no authority from God to preach and administer it,

they feared the people; lest being enraged thereby they should, at once, rise up, and destroy them:

for all men counted John, that he was a prophet indeed; a real prophet, one truly sent from God, and had his commission and credentials from him: this was the general sentiment of the people; See Gill on Mat_21:26.

HENRY, "If they say, “It is of men, he was not sent of God, but his doctrine and baptism were inventions of his own,” they expose themselves, the people will be ready to do them a mischief, or a least clamour upon them; for all men counted John that he was a prophet indeed, and therefore they could not bear that he should be reflected on. Note, There is a carnal slavish fear, which not only wicked subjects but wicked rulers likewise are liable to, which God makes use of as a means to keep the world in some order, and to suppress violence, that it shall not always grow up into a rod of wickedness. Now by this dilemma to which Christ brought them, (1.) They were confounded and baffled, and forced to make a dishonourable retreat; to pretend ignorance - We cannot tell (and that was mortification enough to those proud men), but really to discover the greatest malice and wilfulness. What Christ did by his wisdom, we must labour to do by our well doing - put to silence the ignorance of foolish men, 1Pe_2:15. (2.) Christ came off with honour, and justified himself in refusing to give them an answer to their imperious demand; Neither tell I you by what authority I do these things. They did not deserve to be told; for it was plain that they contended not for truth, but victory; nor did he need to tell them, for the works which he did, told them plainly that he had authority from God to do what he did; since no man could do those miracles which he did unless God were with him. Let them wait but three or four days, and his resurrection shall tell them who gave him his authority, for by that he will be declared to be the Son of God with power, as by their rejecting of him, notwithstanding, they will be declared to be the enemies of God.

33 So they answered Jesus, “We don’t know.”

Jesus said, “Neither will I tell you by what

authority I am doing these things.”

121

GILL, "And they answered and said unto Jesus,.... Being reduced by this dilemma to the greatest streight and difficulty;

we cannot tell: they could, if they would, but they did not care to tell; they knew if they did, they should expose themselves one way or other:

and Jesus answering, saith unto them, neither do I tell you by what authority I do these things; See Gill on Mat_21:27.

HENRY, "Christ came off with honour, and justified himself in refusing to give them an answer to their imperious demand; Neither tell I you by what authority I do these things. They did not deserve to be told; for it was plain that they contended not for truth, but victory; nor did he need to tell them, for the works which he did, told them plainly that he had authority from God to do what he did; since no man could do those miracles which he did unless God were with him. Let them wait but three or four days, and his resurrection shall tell them who gave him his authority, for by that he will be declared to be the Son of God with power, as by their rejecting of him, notwithstanding, they will be declared to be the enemies of God.

COFFMAN, "We know not ... This, on the part of the religious leaders, may be

taken in only two ways. If it was true that they knew not, as alleged by Grant,

that "they could not answer,"[14] then in such a circumstance they should have

confessed their ignorance, resigned their pretensions as interpreters of the will of

God, and cast themselves at Jesus' feet. On the other hand, if what they said

about not knowing was a falsehood (and Mark left no doubt at all that it was a

falsehood), then those evil men thereby forfeited the last vestiges of any respect

to which they might have been entitled had mere ignorance been their fault. By

their denial of what they certainly did know, namely, that John's baptism was of

God, they fully identified themselves with Satan; but even an effective satanic

witness they declined to make through cowardice prompted by fear of the

people. Their appearance in this event is as contemptible as that of any other

assembly of sons of the devil in all history. One may only marvel at "scholars"

who defend the reputation of such men.

Neither tell I you by what authority I do these things. Jesus did not say "I cannot

tell," but that "I will not tell." Such questioners were in no wise entitled to any

factual reply.

ENDNOTE:

[14] Frederick C. Grant, op. cit., p. 835.

122