The Lord Jesus' Authority and the OT Law - Ministry Exchange (MX)

Click to hide HTML preview

Microsoft Word - Jesus' Lordship and the OT Law _Mark 2.23-36, Mark 7.1-23,.

John S. Bayon, Jr.

December 6, 2004

The Lord Jesus' Authority and the Law
An Exegetical and Contextual Examination of Three Critical Texts
Mark 2:23-3:6; Mark 7:1-23; and Mt 5:17-20

Main Thesis
Jesus Christ is Lord. This is the central affirmation of God's people throughout the
history of Jesus' incorporated church. Jesus, as authoritative Lord interacts regularly in the
gospels with Scripture, the Old Testament Law. His engagement of the Law recorded in the
gospels is consistently intermingled with several controlling realities. My discussion in this
work will seek to answer the question of what was the Lord Jesus' relationship to the Law
particularly regarding the interplay between his authority as Lord and the Law. I will argue
that as Jesus interacted with the Law his unwavering modus operandi for doing so was as one
who was completely and uniquely lord over it. Even in his submission to the Law's teaching,
evident throughout his ministry, his submission was an act of one sovereign over the Law
willingly submitting to its edict. Otherwise stated, he treats the Law not as one simply ruled
by its teachings but one who both submits to Scripture and may sovereignly expand,
reinterpret or terminate portions of it.
My tact for discussing the intricate interplay between Jesus and the Law will be to posit
firstly that he interacted with the Law as one who exercised authority over it. Mark 2:23-3:6
serves as an exclamation upon the beginning of Jesus' ministry announced in Mark 1:15, "The
time is fulfilled, and the kingdom of God is at hand; repent and believe in the gospel."1 and his
unique claims to authority recognized by wider recipients of his teachings, his own disciples
and antagonists alike. "They were astonished at his teaching, for he taught them as one who
had authority, and not as the scribes." (Mk 1:22) I will examine this apex of Jesus' exercise
of authority and conclude that it clearly extended over the Law. Of particular importance is
his claim within this final passage of being "Lord over the Sabbath". I will examine this
claim within the wider explication by Mark of Jesus' authority within the opening scene of his
ministry, Mark 1:14-3:6. Additionally I will argue from Mark 7 that Jesus' teaching on dietary
Laws and his abrogation of them further bolsters the argument that he acts as one who claims
authority over the Law.
Moving from Mark 3:1-6 and Mark 7:1-23 where the gospel writer displays Jesus'
lordship over the Law through correcting his antagonists' misuse of it, I secondly will
examine the ways that Jesus clarifies the intent of the Law in the Sermon on the Mount (Mt
5:17-20) and how his unique understanding of it clarifies his role as the Law's authoritative
teacher and interpreter. I will argue that essentially he exercises his authority by clarifying the
Law for his followers, acting as one who perfectly understood its meaning and intent.
Lastly, the combination of Jesus authority and his clarion insight into the Law led him to
frequently submit himself to the Law uniquely expressed and interpreted through his own
teaching. I will close this work by arguing that humble submission to the words of Jesus
readily leads his disciples to place themselves beneath the Law as the Lord of the Law
understood it. Submission to the Law is a paradigm graciously offered to Jesus' own disciples
as a pattern of living beneath his lordship.
In this paper I will argue that these three controlling factors--Christ's lordship over,
insight into, and submission toward the Law, are essential to understanding how the Lord

1The Holy Bible : English Standard Version. 2001 . Standard Bible Society: Wheaton. All other Scripture
quotes, unless noted, are from the English Standard Version. My original translations in this paper will be in
italics.

1

tradition sets itself in direct conflict with God's clear command to honor one's parents
through elevating a vow above a command. "Jesus sees here an example of Pharisaic
tradition going against the word of God...possibly [the vow] is a case of addressing parents
contemptuously."31 The Law of course is not in conflict when Jesus upraises honoring parents
above such vows because vows were not intended for such corrupt selfishness. Intriguingly,
this may have been partly what Mark was alluding to when earlier, in Mark 6:14ff., he
included Herod's rash promise to give anything to his step-daughter in return for her seductive
dance. Herod's unwise promise coupled with his concern for his reputation before his guests
leads him to contradict his prior pledge to protect John. It is not a stretch to conclude that
both are examples of oaths contrary to God's clear commands, not to murder or to dishonor
parents.
Intertwined with Jesus' clarification of the meaning and purpose of God's command is his
authoritative and universal declaration of the cleanliness of all foods coupled with an ongoing
elucidation of the locus of uncleanliness, the human heart. (Mk 7:15-23) Witherington sees
that Jesus is "actually changing things by pronouncement."32 He combines his authority to
make pronouncements that alter food restrictions with a familiar pattern of instruction through
parables. His question to the disciples in vs. 18 is likely a commentary on their understanding
rather than a rebuke, since he has already encouraged them to ask him such questions and then
encourages their questioning with a clarifying explanation (see Mk 4:11).
His answer that it is what comes from within a person that makes him unclean and not that
which comes from without has several important ramifications for our study. Firstly, his
authoritative pronouncement about foods being clean further opens the way for his growing
ministry to the Gentiles. Table fellowship was one of the central ways that Jews frequently
separated from Gentiles. Jesus' declaration regarding food cleanliness further unencumbers
his long-term ministry to Gentiles. Secondly, he is commenting upon the precarious spiritual
state of the Pharisees. It is their practice of Halakah rules that persuades Jesus that they are in
danger of building with each new fence an ever-increasing distance from the heart of the Law.
Jesus insightfully points out they have themselves become unclean by estranging themselves
from God.33 Lastly, Jesus clarifies the central source of uncleanliness, elucidating the true
source of impurity for his foes and followers alike. Thus Jesus displays a singular ability to
understand the meaning and import of the Law.
Jesus' combined work of authoritative declaration and illuminating the Law is similarly
displayed in a key preface statement to teaching on the moral and ethical requirements of life
in his kingdom in Matthew 5. In the chapters preceding Matthew 5, the author appears intent
to show, through his repeated Old Testament references, that Jesus' ministry was both based
upon Scriptural predictions and dependent upon the Law for sustaining his ministry in trial
and temptations. Just subsequent to Matthew 5, Jesus has called his initial disciples as well as
attracted a host of other curious followers.
His teaching in the Sermon on the Mount begins with his multiple declaration of the
blessedness of those who follow the pathway of self-effacement towards disinterested costly
service of the kingdom (Mt 5:2-12). "The fact and the coming of the reign of God calls for an

31 Westerholm, Jesus and Scribal Authority, 76.
32 Witherington, Mark, 231.
33 Salyer, "Rhetoric, Purity, and Play", 162.

9

Works Cited
Kenneth E. Bailey, Poet and Peasant and Through Peasant Eyes, (combined edition), (Grand
Rapids, MI: Eerdmans, 1976).

Robert Banks, "Matthew's Understanding of the Law: Authenticity and Interpretation in
Matthew 5:17-20" in Journal of Biblical Literature, vol. 93, no. 2, (June 1974), 226-242.

D.A. Carson, The Expositors Bible Commentary-Matthew 1-12, (Grand Rapids, MI:
Zondervan, 1995).

. "Jesus and the Sabbath in the Four Gospels" from From Sabbath to Lord's Day, D.A.
Carson, ed., (Grand Rapids, MI: Zondervan, 1982), 57-97.

J. Daryl Charles, "The Greatest or the Least in the Kingdom: The Disciple's Relationship to
the Law (Matt 5:17-20)" in The Trinity Journal, 13:2 (Fall, 1992), 139-162.

Fredrick W Danker, A Greek-English Lexicon of the New Testament and Other Early
Christian Literature-3rd Edition (BDAG), (Chicago: University of Chicago, 2000).

James D. Dunn, Jesus, Paul and the Law, (Louisville: Westminster, 1990).

W.A., Elwell and P.W. Comfort's entry "Corban" in The Tyndale Bible Dictionary, Tyndale
Electronic Reference Library (Wheaton, IL: Tyndale House Publishers, 2001).

W.A., Elwell and P.W. Comfort's entry "Halakah" in The Tyndale Bible Dictionary, Tyndale
Electronic Reference Library (Wheaton, IL: Tyndale House Publishers, 2001).

J. Jeremias, New Testament Theology, (New York: Scribner, 1971).

William L. Lane, The Gospel According to Mark, (Grand Rapids, MI: Eerdmans, 1974).

William Loader, Jesus' Attitude Towards the Law-A Study of the Gospels, (Grand Rapids, MI:
Eerdmans, 2002).

Douglas J. Moo, "Jesus and the Authority of the Mosaic Law" from Journal for the Study of
the New Testament, no. 20, (1984), 3-49.

Leon Morris, The Gospel According to Matthew, (Grand Rapids, MI: Eerdmans, 1992).

Robin Nixon, "Fulfilling the law: The Gospels and Acts" in Law, Morality and the Bible, eds.
Bruce Kaye and Gordon Wenham, (Downers Grove, IL: Inter-Varsity Press, 1978), 55-
71.

E.P. Sanders, Jesus and Judaism, (Philadelphia: Fortress Press, 1985).

13

Gregory Salyer, "Rhetoric, Purity, and Play-Aspects of Mark 7:1-23" from Semeia, , vol. 4,
(1993), 139-169.

Daniel B. Wallace, Greek Grammar, Beyond the Basics, (Grand Rapids, MI: Zondervan,
1996).

Stephan Westerholm, Jesus and Scribal Authority, (doctoral thesis at Lund University 1978).

Ben Witherington III, The Gospel of Mark-A Socio-Rhetorical Commentary, (Grand Rapids,
MI: Eerdmans, 2001).

N.T. Wright, Jesus and the Victory of God, (Minneapolis: Fortress Press, 1996).

14