In my Bible study yesterday, I worked through Mark 12, and Verses 28-34 of that chapter contain a conversation between Jesus and a scribe who asked Him a question about which was the first commandment. The Gospel of Matthew also records this conversation, but only the first part (it's in Matthew 22:35-40). Mark goes into more details. So for this post, I'll mostly stick with Mark's version. Although I will note that Matthew calls the man a "lawyer" (much the same thing as a scribe). Anyway, I just wanted to share a couple of interesting things I gleaned from my study of this particular passage. Of course, it's not my first time reading this part of the Bible - I've read all the Gospels many times. But one of the joys of Bible study, I find, is how you can learn new things even from passages you're very familiar with.
Before I share what I have learned this time around, here is the passage (Mark 12:28-34) in its entirety:
And one of the scribes came, and having heard them reasoning together, and perceiving that he had answered them well, asked him, Which is the first commandment of all? And Jesus answered him, The first of all the commandments is, Hear, O Israel; The Lord our God is one Lord: And thou shalt love the Lord thy God with all thy heart, and with all thy soul, and with all thy mind, and with all thy strength: this is the first commandment. And the second is like, namely this, Thou shalt love thy neighbour as thyself. There is none other commandment greater than these. And the scribe said unto him, Well, Master, thou hast said the truth: for there is one God; and there is none other but he: And to love him with all the heart, and with all the understanding, and with all the soul, and with all the strength, and to love his neighbour as himself, is more than all whole burnt offerings and sacrifices. And when Jesus saw that he answered discreetly, he said unto him, Thou art not far from the kingdom of God. And no man after that durst ask him any question.
As I say, Matthew records the first part of this conversation, but Mark records the response of the scribe/lawyer. And it was in this response that I learned the things I want to share. Firstly, while the scribe appears to echo the words Jesus spoke, there is one word he says differently. He talks about loving God with all the heart, soul and strength, just as Jesus did, but instead of mind, the scribe uses the word understanding. What I think is going on (but I could be misunderstanding!) is that a correlation is being drawn between understanding and the mind. We generally understand things with our minds. When we're lost, our minds are polluted by the world's philosophies and our own sinful inclinations. This gives us some extremely faulty understanding when it comes to the Bible. Even after we're saved, our minds can still be pretty messed up for a while. But studying the Word of God helps to renew the mind (Romans 12:2). A renewed mind gets proper understanding of the Word. And when you love God with all your mind (as well as the other three things you're supposed to love Him with), He gives you ever more understanding. But also, we need to love Him with as much understanding as we currently have. And as we do that, He rewards us with more in due course.
I hope that's making sense. It was just interesting to me how "mind" and "understanding" were being associated there, and something I hadn't noticed before. The second thing that stood out to me (although this is something that I have noticed before) is how the scribe says that loving God and your neighbour is "more than all whole burnt offerings and sacrifices". Under the Law of Moses, burnt offerings and sacrifices were mandatory, but many people did them as a show of piety than out of any real love for God. It's a bit like how some people today go to church every week for no other reason than to create a false impression of holiness. One person in the Old Testament who puts up a false front of godliness is the Proverbs 7 woman. In Proverbs 7:14, she says, I have peace offerings with me; this day have I payed my vows. That is the very first thing she says. It's almost like she's trying to make herself feel better about what she's got planned, or even about what she says next. "Sure, I'm committing adultery and cheating on my husband here, but hey, I did my sacrifices like Moses said to, so I'm a good person, really!" And of course, Saul tries to justify his disobedience in not fully obeying God's commands to him by saying he wanted the best of the Amalekites' animals for a sacrifice. So those are a couple of examples of people using the old system of sacrifices to try and make themselves appear better than they actually were. And while we don't have those sacrifices today (because Jesus paid the final sacrifice on the cross - amen!), there are other ways people do the same sort of thing (like the aforementioned attending church buildings regularly, or observing modern holidays with their pagan, man-made traditions and so on).
In my personal notes on the verse where the scribe says this (made on an earlier occasion when I studied Mark 12), I cross-reference two Old Testament passages. One is 1 Samuel 15:22, And Samuel said, Hath the LORD as great delight in burnt offerings and sacrifices, as in obeying the voice of the LORD? Behold, to obey is better than sacrifice, and to hearken than the fat of rams. (That is the riposte to Saul's excuse.) The other is Proverbs 21:3, To do justice and judgment is more acceptable to the LORD than sacrifice.. Interestingly, the verse in 1 Samuel addresses love for God (obeying Him is an act of love for Him), while the one in Proverbs has more to do with loving one's neighbour. (I actually just realised that as I'm writing this!) So what the scribe says in Mark's Gospel ties in very well with those OT verses.
The other thing I want to touch on is Jesus saying "Thou art not far from the kingdom of God". I think this means that the scribe wasn't saved, but he was heading in the right direction. He's "not far" from the kingdom of God, but he's not actually IN the kingdom (not born again yet). Another indication that the man was not yet saved is found in the Matthew account, where Matthew 22:35 says that he was "tempting" Jesus by asking Him the question. Whenever people try to "tempt" Jesus in the Bible, they're usually trying to trip Him up in some way. They're certainly not on His side. So the impression I have of this man is that he was a bit like how I used to be. He had some good understanding, more than a lot of lost people, but still lacked something (perhaps, as in my case, a repentant heart). I think though that he was a bit more sincere than the Pharisees and Sadducees who had previously questioned Christ in the same chapter of Mark had been. Hopefully he did go on to be saved.
So I hope this was interesting and edifying, and please do share any additional thoughts you may have, or make corrections as need be. After a very busy two months (caused by a single large translation project, which I'm very thankful to the Lord for as it provided me with some much-needed income), I am enjoying a little lull in work, so it means I have a little more time to post on here. I guess other people have been busy with various things too, because it's been very quiet here in recent times. And I could well get busy myself again soon (the same translation project I've been working on all this time may yet have more to it), and not have time to post much, so thought I would take advantage of this opportunity to contribute something while I had some down time. If the down time continues long enough, I'll try to be a little more active (without going crazy or anything). I'm particularly keen to do more Bible study and discussion, but I'll post wherever I can add something of use.
