The Grace Commentary – Your free verse-by-verse Bible commentary Mark 12

Mark 12:1

And he began to speak to them in parables: “A man planted a vineyard and put a wall around it, and dug a vat under the wine press and built a tower, and rented it out to vine-growers and went on a journey.

(a) Parables. A parable is a short story or word picture with a hidden or parabolic meaning. See binnenkomst for Matt. 13:3.

(b) A man. The man or landowner is God. This would have been obvious to any Jewish listener. The Jews had been raised on the teachings of prophets and rabbis who frequently spoke of Israel as being God’s vineyard (e.g., Is. 5:1–7).

(c) The vineyard represents the people of God, which in Old Testament times meant Israel. “The vineyard of the Lord is the house of Israel” (Isa. 5:7; see also Ps. 80: 8–9, Jer. 2:21).

The Jews were God’s chosen people, called to shine a heavenly light in a dark and depraved world. They were tenants or stewards of God’s favor, earthly representatives of his kingdom. But the sons of the kingdom rebelled and lost their favored position at Abraham’s table (Matt. 8:12). As a result, God gave the vineyard to others (Matt. 21:43).

(d) The wall, winepress and tower represent the blessings of protection, prosperity and peace given to the people of God. These blessings were promised to the descendants of Abraham and are ours in Christ (Gal. 3:14, 29).

This good landowner provides his tenants with many good things. He digs a pit, builds a wall, and erects a tower. The tenants don’t have to do a thing except tend the vines and reap the harvests. “What more was there to do for my vineyard that I have not done in it?” (Is. 5:4). In the same way, God shows great favor to us. He watches over us, provides for us, and gives us peace. We don’t have to do a thing except receive the harvest of grace.

(e) The vine-growers or tenants were sharecroppers who tended the vineyard and paid an annual rent in crops. If the vineyard represents Israel, the tenants were Israel’s leaders, namely the chief priests, the elders, Pharisees and the other members of the ruling Sanhedrin who are standing in front of Jesus (see Matt. 21:23, 45).

The Lord entrusted the care of the nation to the priestly caste. The priests’ job was to elevate the word of God and cultivate the fruit of faith. If they had done their job, the nation would have been ready to receive the Messiah when he came. But they disobeyed God, mistreated his prophetic messengers, and then killed the Son he sent.

(f) Journey. There is no special significance to the journey other than to indicate the owner’s absence. According to Luke the landowner was gone a long time (Luke 20:9).

At the foot of Mt. Sinai, the Jews had an encounter with the Lord (Ex. 19:17–20). But since then he had been hardly sighted. It was as though he had gone on a journey. In their minds he had been gone a long time.

Mark 12:2

“At the harvest time he sent a slave to the vine-growers, in order to receive some of the produce of the vineyard from the vine-growers.

(a) Harvest time was when the landowner sent slaves to collect the annual rent from the vine-growers.

(b) Slave. The three slaves mentioned here and in verses four and six represent the Old Testament prophets, wise men and scribes (Matt. 23:34) who regularly challenged Israel’s leaders and encouraged the Jews to turn to God in faith.

(c) His produce. The fruit that God seeks is faith. Jesus said, “When the Son of Man comes, will he find faith on the earth?” (Luke 18:8).

For three years Jesus had been encouraging people to repent and believe the good news of the kingdom. A few believed, but many didn’t because the religious leaders hindered them (Matt. 23:13, Luke 11:52). Instead of proclaiming, “Jesus is the Messiah we’ve been waiting for,” they opposed him at every turn and persecuted those who followed him.

A few hours earlier, Jesus had cursed a fruitless fig tree (Matt. 21:18–19). It was a symbolic act done in response to Israel’s faithlessness. The withered fig tree and the wicked vine-growers represent the unbelieving Jews and their fruitless leaders.

(d) The vine-growers; zie vorig vers.

Mark 12:3

“They took him, and beat him and sent him away empty-handed.

Beat him; zie je wel binnenkomst for Mark 12:5.

Mark 12:4

“Again he sent them another slave, and they wounded him in the head, and treated him shamefully.

(a) Slave; zie je wel binnenkomst for Mark 12:2.

(b) Wounded him; see next verse.

(c) Shamefully. Het oorspronkelijke woord (atimazo) is used to describe how the religious Jews dishonored Jesus (John 8:49) and the apostles (Acts 5:41).

Mark 12:5

“And he sent another, and that one they killed; and so with many others, beating some and killing others.

(a) Another. Although Israel mistreated the prophets, God did not stop trying to warn them.

(b) Beating… killing. Jesus rebuked the scribes and Pharisees for their part in the ill treatment of God’s men before prophesying that they would continue to persecute and kill those he sent them (see Matt. 23:34).

God’s prophets were often mistreated by the rulers of Israel (Heb. 11:37). The Old Testament records occasions when the Lord’s prophets were rejected (2 Chr. 24:19, Jer. 7:25–27, 25:4), beaten (1 Kgs. 22:24, Jer. 20:2), killed (Neh. 9:26, Jer. 26:20–23; see also Matt. 23:34–35, Luke 13:34), and stoned (2 Chr. 24:20–21).

At this point in the story, the landowner faces a dilemma. In Luke’s account he asks, “What shall I do?” (Luke 20:13). He could send in the sheriff and have the wicked tenants run off his land. But he doesn’t do that because he is a good landowner who cares for his tenants who still hopes for the best. Instead of punishing them for their transgressions, he makes his boldest move yet.

Mark 12:6

“He had one more to send, a beloved son; he sent him last of all to them, saying, ‘They will respect my son.’

(a) One more to send. For the landowner to send his son to these thugs seems madness. What was he thinking? Yet it is an act of stunning vulnerability, meant to shame the tenants out of their wickedness. The landowner hopes to inspire a change of heart.

In sending his son the landowner risks everything. He does this not merely to save his vineyard, but to save their tenants from themselves. It is an astounding act of good faith.

(b) A beloved son. This is a direct reference to Jesus, the beloved Son of God. See binnenkomst for Matthew 3:17.

(c) Respect. Het oorspronkelijke woord (entrepo) means to invert or turn in on oneself in a sense of shame. (The word is sometimes translated as shame, e.g., 1 Cor. 4:14, 2 Th. 3:14.)

Mark 12:7

“But those vine-growers said to one another, ‘This is the heir; come, let us kill him, and the inheritance will be ours!’

(a) The heir. Jesus is the heir of all things (Heb. 1:2).

In the parable of the Prodigal Son, the younger son essentially wished his father dead so that he might enjoy his inheritance (Luke 15:12). In the same way, the tenants wished to be rid of the absent landowner even though he had been like a father to them. By killing his son they thought they could sever the relationship and go their own way.

(b) Let us kill him. It was an open secret that the religious leaders were keen to kill Jesus (John 7:25), and Jesus certainly knew the murderous intentions of their hearts (John 7:19, 25). The chief priests wanted Jesus dead because he threatened their position as the rulers of Israel (John 11:48).

(c) The inheritance will be ours. Kill the son, keep the vineyard. This line of thinking is so crazy that it beggars belief, yet it perfectly captures the motive behind the plot to assassinate Jesus.

The Sanhedrin was controlled by a former high priest called Annas. Annas had five sons and one grandson who became high priest after him, and Caiaphas, the current high priest, was his son-in-law (see binnenkomst for John 18:13). The House of Annas ruled the ruling council that ruled Israel. But Annas et al. felt threatened by Jesus. Just the previous day, Jesus and his followers had shut down the temple (Mark 11:15–16). Who knew what Jesus might do next?

If Jesus was not stopped, the House of Annas might lose its grip on power. To protect their position – their inheritance – Annas, Caiaphas, and the other chief priests decided to kill the Son.

Mark 12:8

“They took him, and killed him and threw him out of the vineyard.

Out of the vineyard. Matthew and Luke say the son was taken outside the vineyard and then killed (Matt. 21:39, Luke 20:15).

Mark 12:9

“What will the owner of the vineyard do? He will come and destroy the vine-growers, and will give the vineyard to others.

(a) What will the owner of the vineyard do? Here and in Luke’s account of the story, Jesus answers the question himself (Luke 20:16). But in Matthew’s version, Jesus puts the question to the temple leaders and they answer him (Matt. 21:41).

(b) Destroy the vine-growers. The tenants’ fate is similar to what happens to the murderers in the parable of the Wedding Banquet. They are thoroughly destroyed in a cataclysmic act of judgment (see binnenkomst for Matt. 22:7). The landowner’s righteous wrath tells us how God will ultimately deal with those things that are opposed to him (Rom. 1:18).

(c) Give the vineyard to others. God’s vineyard will be offered to all, both Jews and Gentiles alike (see Eph. 2:11–13). Anyone who comes to God in faith will become part of God’s chosen people and his holy nation (1 Pet. 2:9). But those who reject God’s Son will lose their place having cut themselves off through unbelief (Rom. 11:20).

From Luke’s account we learn that the listening Jews were horrified by the thought that God might share their vineyard with the Gentiles. “May it never be!” (Luke 20:16). Jesus responds by saying, “This is exactly what is going to happen” (Matt. 21:43).

Mark 12:10–11

“Have you not even read this Scripture: ‘The stone which the builders rejected, this became the chief corner stone; this came about from the lord, and it is marvelous in our eyes’?”

(a) The Scriptures. Jesus concludes the parable by quoting Psalm 118:22–23.

(b) Stone. The rejected son is compared to a rejected stone that is exalted to the highest place. Jesus, the Son the Jews rejected, became the foundation stone for God’s new covenant habitation (Is. 28:16, Eph. 2:20).

(c) The builders who rejected the stone were the tenants who rejected the son. Jesus is still talking about the religious leaders who questioned his authority.

The religious leaders were as proud of their temple as they were of their religion. In their minds, they had built something that would impress the Lord. But they had no place for Jesus. The Living Stone not cut with human hands (1 Pet. 2:4, Dan. 2:34) did not fit in their manmade edifice.

(d) Chief corner stone. The corner stone is the first stone laid in a new structure. It sets a mark for the rest of the building. Jesus is the corner stone on which God’s house is being built (Eph. 2:20).

(e) Marvelous. What Satan meant for evil (the rejection and removal of Jesus), God would re-purpose for good.

The corrupt chief priests conspired to murder the Son of God in one of the most wicked schemes ever concocted. Yet their rotten plot became the basis of God’s salvation plan. It’s a sign to make us wonder.

Mark 12:12

And they were seeking to seize him, and yet they feared the people, for they understood that he spoke the parable against them. And so they left him and went away.

(a) They. The chief priests, scribes and elders who were questioning Jesus (Mark 11:27).

(b) They were seeking to seize him that very hour (Luke 20:19). The religious leaders would have killed Jesus there and then if they could (John 5:18, 11:53).

(c) Feared the people. The leaders’ attempts to arrest Jesus was thwarted by the temple crowds, so they waited for a more private moment. Two days later, and accompanied by 500 armed men, they seized him under the cover of night in the Garden of Gethsemane (see binnenkomst voor Johannes 18:3).

(d) Parable. A parable is a short story or word picture with a hidden or parabolic meaning. See binnenkomst for Matt. 13:3.

(e) Against them. The religious leaders were not confused about the meaning of the parable. They understood that Jesus was speaking about them and their refusal to recognize him as the Son of God (John 5:18, 19:7).

(f) They left him alone for the time being. But two days later, and accompanied by 500 soldiers, they arrested Jesus late at night in the Garden of Gethsemane (see binnenkomst voor Johannes 18:3).

Markus 12:30

EN U ZULT DE HERE, UW GOD, LIEFHEBBEN MET HELE HARTE, EN MET HELE ZIEL, EN MET HELE GEEST, EN MET AL UW KRACHT.'

(a) Heb de Heer lief. Under the old law-keeping covenant, you were commanded to love the Lord your God with all your heart (Deut. 6:5, 10:12). The flow was from you to the Lord. But in the new covenant of grace, we love because he first loved us (1 John 4:19). It is because we know the love of Christ (Eph. 3:19) that we are able to walk in his love (Eph. 5:2), keep ourselves in his love (Jude 1:21), and remain in his love (John 15:9, 10, 1 John 4:12, 16).

(b) Heel je ziel. Het oorspronkelijke woord voor ziel is psuche, waaruit we ons woord psychologie halen. Dit woord wordt soms in de Schrift gebruikt om het zieleleven te beschrijven dat we van Adam hebben geërfd, in tegenstelling tot de zoë– of geestelijk leven dat we van Jezus ontvangen. Zie je wel binnenkomst voor Nieuw Leven.

Markus 12:31

"Het tweede is dit: 'JE ZULT JE BUURT HOUDEN ALS JEZELF.' Er is geen ander gebod groter dan deze.”

(a) Heb je naaste lief. This law, which comes from the law of Moses (Lev. 19:18), was quoted by Jesus more than once (Matt. 19:19, 22:39, Luke 10:27). James called it the royal law (see binnenkomst for Jas. 2:8).

(b) Als jezelf. “Anderen liefhebben als jezelf” kan worden gecontrasteerd met “Anderen liefhebben zoals ik jou heb liefgehad” (zie binnenkomst for John 13:34).

Under the old covenant, you provided the love and whatever else was needed to fulfil the law. But in the new covenant, we are able to love others because of the love we have from God (1 John 4:19). Under the old, you were the supply, but in the new, God supplies all our needs according to his glorious riches in Christ Jesus (Php. 4:19).

Mark 12:34

When Jesus saw that he had answered intelligently, He said to him, “You are not far from the kingdom of God.” After that, no one would venture to ask Him any more questions.

The kingdom of God is synonymous with the kingdom of heaven; see binnenkomst for Matt. 3:2.

Mark 12:35

And Jesus began to say, as He taught in the temple, “How is it that the scribes say that the Christ is the son of David?

(a) Taught in the temple. Jesus often taught and preached the gospel in the temple (Matt. 26:55, Luke 20:1). He did this because that’s where people congregated (Luke 21:38) and to fulfill the words of the prophet Malachi: “the Lord, whom you seek, will suddenly come to his temple” (Mal. 3:1).

(b) Scribes; zie je wel binnenkomst for Matt. 5:20.

The significance of David in the gospel message is that God promised David that the Messiah would come from his line (2 Sam. 2:12–13, Ps. 132:11). This promise was confirmed in the prophets (Is. 9:6–7, Jer. 23:5–6) and fulfilled in the Gospels (Matt. 1:1, 22:42, Luke 1:32, John 7:42).

Mark 12:36

“David himself said in the Holy Spirit, ‘THE LORD SAID TO MY LORD, “SIT AT MY RIGHT HAND, UNTIL I PUT YOUR ENEMIES BENEATH YOUR FEET.”’

(a) The Holy Spirit is also known as the Spirit of God or the Spirit of Christ; see binnenkomst for John 14:26.

(b) The Lord. Jesus quoted Psalm 110:1 to show that David referred to the Messiah as Lord.

(d) Enemies; zie je wel binnenkomst for Matt. 22:44.

Mark 12:37

“David himself calls Him ‘Lord’; so in what sense is He his son?” And the large crowd enjoyed listening to Him.

Lord. Fathers don’t call their sons Lord, yet David referred to the Messiah as Lord. How can he be both? The Pharisees could not answer (Matt. 22:46), but the implication was clear: The Messiah is more than David’s descendent, he is David’s Lord. He is more than the Son of David, he is the Son of God.

Mark 12:40

who devour widows’ houses, and for appearance’s sake offer long prayers; these will receive greater condemnation.”

Greater condemnation. Jesus is not saying there are levels to God’s judgment. Condemnation of any sort is self-inflicted (Matt. 12:37, John 3:18). The greater condemnation is that inflicted by the hardened and grace-resistant heart. See binnenkomst for Matt. 23:14.

Mark 12:41

And He sat down opposite the treasury, and began observing how the people were putting money into the treasury; and many rich people were putting in large sums.

Opposite the treasury. The temple of Jerusalem was divided into courts. The inner court was called the Court of Israel, the outer court was the Court of Gentiles, and separating these two courts was the Court of the Women. When Jesus sat outside the treasury making remarks about widows and their mites, he was sitting in the Women’s Court. When he debated with the Pharisees and religious leaders, he was in the Court of Israel, because that’s where religious men hung out. And when Jesus overturned the tables, he was in the Court of the Gentiles, because that’s where the money changers and sacrificial animals were kept. There was no Court of the Women in the original temple; it was added to the second temple built by Herod. Sometime between Solomon and Herod, religious men decided that the temple designed by God could be improved if women were kept out of it. The religious leaders never taught in the Courts of the Gentiles and Women, but Jesus did because he wanted everyone to know how much God loves us.

Markus 12:43

Hij riep zijn discipelen bij zich en zei tegen hen: 'Voorwaar, ik zeg u, deze arme weduwe heeft meer in de schatkist gestort dan al het geld;

Deze arme weduwe. Perhaps Jesus was not so much commenting about the widow’s generosity as he was marvelling at the rich who steal from the poor and “devour widows’ houses” (Matt. 23:14). The power of religion to enrich itself by stealing from the poorest of the poor was offensive to Jesus.

Verder lezen: “Jezus is jouw tiende”

Markus 12:44

want ze stopten er allemaal in van hun overschot, maar zij, uit haar armoede, stopte alles in wat ze bezat, alles wat ze had om van te leven.”

Het enige waar ze van moest leven, betekende dat ze niets meer had om voor eten te betalen. Weduwen uit de eerste eeuw kregen geen uitkering.

The Grace Commentary is a work in progress with new content added regularly. Sign up for occasional updates below. Got a suggestion? Please use the terugkoppelingbladzijde. Gebruik het onderstaande reactieformulier om typefouten of verbroken links op deze pagina te melden.

“The Grace Commentary is full of God’s love notes to us.” We’re building the world’s first grace-based Bible commentary. Join the team and your support will help us complete the Grace Commentary and offer versions in multiple formats and languages.

Markeer 12