Matthew 22 sees Jesus address Jewish legal debates. In the process, he makes disticntions between the Law and Gospel.
Reading through the Evangelists, we delight to see Jesus best his opponents not only because he’s our champion, but also because he does it through wondrous illuminations of the gospel.
Matthew 22:34-46 offers a sterling example of Jesus scoring a disputation win while revealing the decisive way one should interpret the Scriptures.
Linking this passage together is the unbroken presence of the Pharisees.[1] Matthew begins by commenting that the Pharisees have heard that Jesus successfully silenced the Sadducees (that takes place in vv. 23-33). This is significant since these two groups—Pharisees and Sadducees—historically were antithetical toward one another. They possessed different visions of God’s kingdom, different approaches to the Romans, and a different assessment of what constituted God’s Word itself. In every respect, they were political and theological opponents. Except in the case of John the Baptist and Jesus. Setting aside their differences, they become allies in their opposition to both, especially to Jesus, whom they perceive to be a greater threat to their political power and sway over the people. For the Sadducees, Jesus threatened to destabilize their self-serving relations with the Romans, who would blame them for not handling the “Nazarene problem.” For the Pharisees, Jesus was leading the masses away from their agenda of triggering the covenant promises of God (and so liberation and triumph over the Romans) through collective obedience to the law. Jesus challenged their hold on Israel and so must be challenged himself.
But when the Sadducees, who rejected the resurrection of the body and all other texts outside of the Torah as canonical, decided in Mathew 22:23-33 to chasten Jesus by exposing his theological naiveté, it was they who were humiliated by his appeal to the Torah’s present tense identification of YHWH: “I am the God of Abraham, and the God of Isaac, and the God of Jacob” (22:23). Then Jesus dispatches them for good by adding, “He is not the God of the dead, but of the living.” With the Sadducees shut down, shut up, and shut out, they’re not so much as even mentioned again by Matthew. Indeed, so decisive is this retort that the Sadducees literally disappear from existence before the end of the first century — forever lost to the sands of time.
Since these allies in this conflict with Jesus have failed, it’s now up to the Pharisees to entrap Jesus, to ambush him with a self-incriminating answer. Behind the question of this law expert is a united front of opposition to Jesus: this lawyer speaks on behalf of both Sadducees and Pharisees asking: “Which commandment is the greatest in the Torah?” (v.36). It’s not a benign question; it’s a trap.
With the Sadducees shut down, shut up, and shut out, they’re not so much as even mentioned again by Matthew. Indeed, so decisive is this retort that the Sadducees literally disappear from existence before the end of the first century — forever lost to the sands of time
But Jesus’ answer “was so traditional that nobody could challenge him on it, and so deeply searching,” says N.T. Wright, “that everyone else would be challenged by it.”[2] It’s the kind of response only one greater than Solomon could offer without hesitation and about which no one could trump.
Picture this scene: the Sadducees have retreated, staggered to the background and the Pharisees have elbowed to the foreground, crowding around Jesus. The tension is thick. Each moment is volatile. And they will launch their attack on the same grounds as the Sadducees—biblical interpretation—taking as their approach not which Scriptures are legitimate to discern the will of God (as it was for the Sadducees), but which commandment unlocks the entire Scriptures as they knew it. They want to keep Jesus on the defensive. At a climactic moment they have presented to Jesus what they believe is the most important question for understanding the Scriptures: “Teacher, which is the great commandment in the Law?” (22:37). Jesus answers and his answer is unassailable. Then Jesus launches him offensive.
“While the united front is still gathered,” observes Jeffrey Gibbs, “Jesus brings to the fore what he thinks is the most important question for understanding the Scriptures: How should one most fully or most appropriately confess the identity of the long-awaited Messiah?”[3] Is the Messiah David’s son or David’s master or both? Their questions have been about the Law. Jesus’ question pertains to the crux of the Gospel. The burning issue concerns how and through what lens the Scriptures are to be interpreted. And we see that the scribes and Pharisees operate in a different orbit than Jesus. He presses them further in v 42: What does it seem to you about the Christ? Whose son is he? Wright notes that “They’d never been asked the question like that before and they didn't know the answer, even though God’s Messiah was standing in front of them in flesh and blood.”[4] And they should’ve known if they rightly interpreted the very Scriptures with which they were scrutinizing Jesus. His entrance into the city was hailed as the Son of David; his lineage through Joseph and Mary was Davidic; his ministry everywhere evidenced the reality that YHWH had come to rescue his flock and regain his kingdom but in accordance with the promises of the gospel, texts found in Genesis 3, 12, and 14, Isaiah 52-53, Psalm 22, Ezekiel 34, and Jeremiah 31, to mention just a few.
In this ensnaring moment, they want to know how he relates to the Law, meanwhile Jesus tells them how he relates to the Gospel in fulfillment of the law
This will be the Pharisees final challenge to Jesus concerning hermeneutics — how he interprets the Scripture. He’s been interpreting it as one with authority, indeed, with authority that only the Author of the Word could possess. So, it isn’t just his interpretation that challenges them, but the posture by which he does so. In this ensnaring moment, they want to know how he relates to the Law, [5] meanwhile Jesus tells them how he relates to the Gospel in fulfillment of the law. Their response will either align them with his kingdom announcement or their interpretation of the Law. Wright again helps to clarify the contrast:
The next occasions when Jesus will meet his opponents will be in the garden when they arrest him, in the counsel when they accuse him, and on the holy cross when they mock him. Each time they will know, he will know, and we as Matthew’s readers will know, that he knows the answers to these questions while they do not. And he also knows, and Matthew wants us to know as well, that his arrest, trial and crucifixion are precisely the way in which Jesus is fulfilling the two great commandments, and the way in which he is being enthroned as David's son, the true king of Israel, and David's master, David's Lord.[6]
As the Son of God, the divine-messiah melded to the Davidic line of regents, Jesus has come to rescue his people and reclaim His earthly kingdom. That is what these questions are all about — “everything written about me in the Law of Moses and the Prophets and the Psalms must be fulfilled” (Luke 24:44). It is a great contest between who actually knows, owns, and is in the process upbringing about God’s kingdom on Earth as it is in heaven. In sum, it’s a question about God’s faithfulness — will it be through Pharisaical obedience to the Law or through the Gospel of the Messiah’s fulfillment of the Law of Moses and the Prophets and the Psalms?
The Pharisee’s opening question has significance, too. “Many Jewish teachers posed the question as to which was the greatest of all the 613 commandments in the law of Moses,” explains one commentator. “Many would’ve agreed substantially with the answer Jesus gave. Equally important, though, these commandments were not simply among the things that the Jews were supposed to do. They formed a part of the prayer that every devout Jew prayed every day, in the tradition continues unbroken to the present time.”[7] The prayer, of course, is the famous Shema from Deuteronomy 6:4, traditionally recited twice a day, as part of the morning (Shacharit) and evening (Arvit) services, and followed by 6:5 cited by Jesus.
In sum, it’s a question about God’s faithfulness — will it be through Pharisaical obedience to the Law or through the Gospel of the Messiah’s fulfillment of the Law of Moses and the Prophets and the Psalms?
The problem, however, was not whether or not this prayer-commandment was on the lips of the Jews, but in their hearts. Jesus has been laboring the point that the heart needed to be supernaturally renewed by God. According to Jeremiah 31:31-34 and Ezekiel 36:22-32, the renewing of hearts is bound up with the gospel of God’s kingdom and the forgiveness of sins. In other words, Jesus cites this verse not as confirmation of their agenda but in condemnation of it. The divine standard requires perfection in obedience, not mere recitation. And just in case they thought there was wiggle room, Jesus adds a derivative of the Great Commandment from Leviticus 19:18: “You shall love your neighbor as yourself.” The law does not have only one great commandment. It has two, and together they are the touchstone for everything else that Israel’s God requires of His people. While uncontroversial, as far as referencing it as part and parcel of the Great Commandment is concerned, nonetheless Jesus exposes any pretensions that they are even beginning to fulfill this dual commandment on which “depend all the Law and the prophets” (Matthew 22:40). In Jesus’ thinking, there can be no divorce between love for God and love for one’s neighbor, between sacrifice and mercy. And, so, everything they say and do will be judged by the two-pronged Great Commandment. Their only recourse, then, should be to faith in God to save them by His Messiah or, put differently, to Jesus’ interpretation of the Scriptures and announcement of the Gospel of God.
Recalling the lawyer meant to tempt Jesus, his effort was a singular failure. Jesus drags them all in with a question into a proper interpretation of the entire Word of God with his own question that not only entraps them but exposes them, giving them again saving recourse to Himself as the fulfillment of God’s Law and Gospel.
The scene develops. Having received this unassailable and deflating answer from Jesus, there’s perhaps movement to disburse. And as they’re turning away, Jesus springs this question on them and in doing so turns the tables on them so that they are sitting in the docket and their answer will either condemn or vindicate them. Jesus is on the offensive. Imagine a look of surprise on their faces when he questions them — the one whose authority they questioned now questions the authorities themselves.
Since he first entered the city, the most important question has been the same: “Who is this?” The crowds held Jesus to be a prophet, but he had acted as one who claim to be much more than that. The children had cried out that Jesus was the rightful heir to the throne of Israel, David’s royal son, but the leaders wouldn’t receive any of this. Standing in defiance of Jesus’s authority, the leaders heard and understood well enough the import of his parables directed against them. They are being exposed. They are being judged. And they don’t like it one bit. They stand accused by Jesus of refusing the reign of God announced to them by John and manifested in Jesus himself and by his authority. These wicked overseers of God’s Vineyard are walking the path to murdering the very Son of the Owner, and they will face destruction when the rejected Son will in turn be exalted over them to the highest honor. The leaders are in danger of dishonoring their true king and his royal son. Though the wedding feast has begun, they’ll have not of it but rather criticize that “this man receives sinners and eats with them” (Luke 15:2). And so they have attacked Jesus under the guise of questions about Caesar’s taxation, the future resurrection, and the greatest commandment of the law. None of these are the real issues. They know it. And Jesus knows it. And as Matthew’s readers, we know it, too.
The real issue is the identity of Jesus, who claims divine and regal authority. It follows then that as important as the temptation–question was from the Pharisees, there is another, more important question to answer from the Holy Scriptures; a question that presses upon all who hear the words of this testimony and the faithful witness of the Church to the truth about God in Christ. It is the question of the Messiah and his identity. Is it in fact Jesus of Nazareth or not? Is he in fact the son of David, born of the Virgin Mary, and true eternal Son of God? Matthew’s readers know this is the real question.
In a way the answer provided by Jesus’ opponents is, like Jesus’ own initial response regarding the greatest commandment, noncontroversial and correct. The Messiah or Christ is David’s son. And, as Jeffrey Gibbs explains, “both Jesus himself and Matthew would except this as a valid as far as it goes.” But is this “the most profound, the most true, and the most important way to think of the Sonship of the Messiah?” asks Gibbs. “The answer of both Jesus and the evangelist Matthew is no. Davidic Sonship is important. But divine Sonship is more important still, and Jesus now shows how Christ’s identity as God’s own unique son is established from the very Scriptures of Israel itself.”[8]
What follows is another of Jesus’ examples on how to rightly understand the Scriptures, namely christologically. So he challenges them to interpret the Holy Spirit-inspired text of Psalm 110:1: “The Lord said to my Lord, ‘Sit at my right hand until I put your enemies under your feet’” (Matthew 22:44). On its face, the Law cannot interpret this text. Something else, someone else does. It is clear that the first “Lord” in this citation refers to the God of Israel. What remains to be puzzled out, however, is the identity of the second figure, whom David names “my Lord” and who is invited in an unparalleled fashion to be seated at the very right hand of God on high, who humiliates and defeats his enemies. The self-evident answer calls out: The Messiah! But there’s silence, absolute silence from the Pharisees on this hermeneutical challenge. Jesus has exposed their failure again: Not only do they not keep the Law, but they have nothing to say regarding the prophetic hope of God’s kingdom and the forgiveness of sins. Jesus’ point is that the Messiah of God fulfills the Scriptures, both Law and prophesy. Standing in their midst, Jesus claims this Psalm as his own. And so, their silence condemns them as silence about him. Only faith in Christ justifies, and faith confesses Jesus as Christ.
Jesus has exposed their failure again: Not only do they not keep the Law, but they have nothing to say regarding the prophetic hope of God’s kingdom and the forgiveness of sins
Jesus makes it clear that it is not sufficient to say, as these Pharisees have, only that the Messiah is David’s son. It’s a minimalist response and, as such, it’s inadequate. In the first place, Jesus has come to be the Son of David in ways that contradict the expectation of many in his day. That’s their interpretative failure. As Matthew’s account moves toward its goal and Jesus’ cruciform enthronement, the Christ of God will reign through service and sacrifice, through the giving of his life in the pouring out of his blood as the ransom for many, not spilling the blood of many. Through this means of reconciliation — blood atonement and representative law-fulfillment — God will reign on Earth in Jesus with the power of forgiveness and the Holy Spirit renewing the hearts of people. The Law leads to Jesus, and Jesus leads into the kingdom.
Jesus makes it clear that it is not sufficient to say, as these Pharisees have, only that the Messiah is David’s son. It’s a minimalist response and, as such, it’s inadequate
In citing Psalm 110, Jesus claims that God’s plan and God’s Son cannot be opposed forever with impunity. The rejection of the Son will itself be rejected, and God’s Son will be glorious and exulted in a way that is barely able to be imagined. The voice of the Father in 110:1 speaks to the Messiah, inviting him to the place of highest conceivable honor and repose and vindication, while his enemies are subjected and disgraced under his feet buying inescapable and overwhelming judgment. The builders will reject the Stone, cast out the vineyard owner’s son and kill him. But the Son, the Stone, the Christ, will be exalted and raised from the dead to assume the place of honor at God’s right hand that only he deserves to occupy by virtue of his obedient Sonship in the Father’s name. Meanwhile the rotten tree isn’t able to bear good fruit. It is hewn down and thrown into the fire.
None of this was lost on the Pharisees or Sadducees. They’ve been bested. They’ve been exposed. They stand on the precipice of judgment. The lesson was stinging. “And no was able to answer him a word, nor from that day did anyone dare to ask him any more questions” (Matthew 22:46). But they have also been handed the key to the Scriptures and confronted by the kingdom-bearer himself — the Messiah. In other words, they have been exposed by the Gospel by him who is the Gospel, and so have been handed the Gospel.
Just in case we, as Matthew’s readers might miss the point about rightly interpreting the Scriptures and where the Gospel may be found, chapter 23 follows hard on 22:23-46, redirecting all readers and Jesus’ present day auditors away from religious interpretations focused on human performance and pretensions of doing the Law to himself and himself alone (the Christological interpretation) who fulfills all for us unto justification and endows with new hearts by the Holy Spirit, so that his people may walk obediently in the ethic of God’s kingdom: “Neither be called instructors, for you have one instructor, the Christ” (Matthew 22:10).
[1] Jeffrey A. Gibbs, Matthew 21:1—28:20, Concordia Commentary (St. Louis: Concordia Publishing House, 2018), 1154.
[2] Wright, Matthew for Everyone: Part 2, Chapters 16-28 (London: SPCK, 2002), 93.
[3] Gibbs, Matthew 21:1—28:20, 1155.
[4] Cf. Wright, Matthew for Everyone, 93.
[5] Cf. Gibbs, Matthew 21:1—28:20, 1156.
[6] Ibid., 93-94.
[7] Ibid., 94.
[8] Gibbs, Matthew 21:1—28:20, 1159.
