Introduction
If you haven’t finalized your Reformation Day bulletin, I hope that you consider preaching on Matthew’s Gospel this year rather than the John text. I think there is so much that can be talked about here that will mean a lot for our people whether focusing on Reformation or not.
I love this interaction from a narrative viewpoint. Matthew has closely followed Mark’s outline of this temple scene (with addition of several parables) and this interaction continues in Mark’s footprint but Matthew strays away in the end. Now, part of me really loves Mark’s version, because in that one, the scribe is genuinely asking Jesus this question and sincerely seeking his answer.
In Matthew, the lawyer is not sincere, and it is treated as a continuation of this testing scene. And while it may not be as heartwarming as Mark’s telling, it is still a wonderful scene for the context of Matthew.
Context
We are continuing the temple testing. We have heard from the Chief priests and elders, the Pharisees’ disciples and the Herodians, we skipped the question on resurrection by the Sadducees, and now we have the Pharisees, with a lawyer asking another question, “What is the greatest commandment?”
First, this question is not a bad one. This was a typical rabbinical question. With 613 commands in the Torah, what should take priority? It’s a fair conversation and a fair debate. R. Alan Culpepper recounts two good stories of this. There is the famous story of Hillel. “When a gentile challenged Hillel, saying that he would become a proselyte if Hillel could teach him the whole law while he stood on one foot, Hillel replied, ‘What you yourself hate, do not do to your neighbor: this is the whole Torah, while the rest is the commentary thereof; go and learn it’ (b. Šabb. 31a; cf. Matt 7:12).”
And another, “Similarly, the oral tradition of the Pharisees records that Simeon the Just used to say, ‘By three things is the world sustained: by the Law, by the [Temple-]service [or worship], and by deeds of lovingkindness” (m. Abot 1.2).”[1]
These are cherished stories, and the Hillel story in particular is supposed show wisdom and make you chuckle, right? The absurdity of the challenge is met with almost flippant simplicity.
This is clearly the trajectory that Mark takes. The scribe is sincere in this question, wanting to know Jesus’ take in this matter and it follows closely in this tradition that we hear in the two accounts above.
But Matthew is taking a different trajectory. The lawyer is not sincere. This is a questioning competence, and it is a question of heresy. Is Jesus attempting to destroy the Law?
Matthew, being very cognizant of Jewish interpretation, is illustrating this to be an insulting question. Because I believe that is what Matthew is probably facing too. By being a follower of Jesus, have you just thrown away everything? Have you thrown away the Law and all that has come before?
While Matthew is building to the Great Commission and a mission to Gentiles, he always stays close to tradition and never encourages leaving it behind. As I mentioned back in the beginning of the year, the Sermon on the Mount is not a new Law, but a continued and renewing interpretation of the Law.
This question for the Pharisee is not for the purpose of debate or intellectual argument, it is for the purpose of proving that Jesus is a heretic who betrays and breaks the law.
And so while we so often read his response and it just washes over us as the “Golden Rule,” this answer from Jesus is supposed to deeply connect us to tradition and every word of it matters.
The First Commandment
37He said to him, ““You shall love the Lord your God with all your heart, and with all your soul, and with all your mind.’
Jesus begins by opening with the most well-known scripture verse at his time, the Shema (Deut 6:4-9). Culpepper writes, “Moses instructed the Israelites to keep these verses in their hearts, discuss them with their children, and recite them morning and evening. Although the practice of reciting the Shema daily originated much earlier, the earliest reference to it is in Let. Aris. 160 (2nd c. BCE; see Josephus, Ant. 4.212). All men and boys above the age of twelve were expected to observe this practice, which was later followed by the recitation of the eighteen benedictions.”[2]
Jesus responds to the insult with the most traditional verse in scripture. He returns to the words that every person in that room could have started to say with him. It would be like someone asking, ‘what is the most important prayer’ and we began with Our Father, who art in heaven. There is no more traditional word that Jesus could have chosen.
But what’s interesting is that the wording of the Shema varies in each of the three synoptic gospels.
Deuteronomy uses the three-word formula of “Heart, Soul, and Might.”
Mark uses a three-word formula, “Heart, Understanding, Strength.”
Luke uses a four-word formula, “Heart, Soul, Strength, Mind.”
And Matthew uses a three-word formula, “Heart, Soul, Mind.”
I highly encourage you to read commentaries (Culpepper is a very good one) that reflect on the traditional interpretation of each of these words. But I want to highlight a couple. Quickly, heart reflects the innermost part of a person. Soul is a person’s total being, their life.
Matthew then chooses the word mind rather than strength. Ulrich Luz sees in Matthew and Mark “an intellectual impulse for the love of God such as one sees already in the Hellenistic Jewish tradition.”[3] Culpepper writes, “‘Mind’ or ‘understanding’ (dianoia) denotes ‘the power of thought.’ For Philo, it is, ‘What distinguishes man from the beasts and mediates to him divine likeness (Plant. 40 and 42).’”[4] Immediately we should start to think about Jesus’ response to the coin with Caesar on it. Our minds reflecting the divine likeness, just as our personhood does.
I believe Matthew’s lack of the use of “strength” or “might” directly relates to his use of mind and reflects some of my commentaries on the previous parables and the violence within them. From the Hellenistic perspective, our mind is what separates us from beasts. It is a declaration of our divine likeness to seek peace and different approaches to conflict rather than enter into hostility and violence. While “strength” traditionally could mean possessions and resources (all that you have), I believe Matthew is making a point about use of physical strength. For the purpose of this command, it is our mind and intention of thought that truly honors God. This will stand in contrast to Herod’s rule and to the crowd and the religious authorities call for violence.
The Second Commandment
38This is the greatest and first commandment. 39And a second is like it: ‘You shall love your neighbor as yourself.’
Unlike Mark, Matthew is intensifying this second portion by including the words, “is like it.” Culpepper writes, “‘Like it’ means a commandment ‘equally great’ or important.”[5] Again, this “Golden rule” is not new. It comes from Leviticus 19:18. This is a continuation of tradition. However, this is not something distinctly separate from the first command.
Connecting last week’s gospel again, we are made in the divine image. And to love God with our whole mind is to see the divine image of God within ourselves. Therefore, to love our neighbor as ourselves means to see the divine image of God within them.
The Summary
40On these two commandments hang all the law and the prophets.”
Culpepper writes, “This statement does not mean that the law is replaced; instead, these commands clarify the true end of the law… The effect of these changes [from Mark] is that Matthew affirms the continuing authority of the law, emphasizes serving God out of love, expands the basis for one’s ethic to include the prophets, and makes the command to love one’s neighbor an expression of one’s love for God and the norm by which one is to determine what is of the greatest importance.”[6]
As Jesus is questioned on his competence and for heresy, he gives a flippantly simple response that combines some of the deepest traditions of the faith with some of the most beautiful theological foundations for seeing God among us.
Preaching Possibilities
If you continue in my Word… That’s what many people will be preaching on this week, but I think Matthew is saying the very same thing in this text.
There is something profoundly important on this Reformation Day for us to remember that Jesus’ teachings did not come out of nowhere. Jesus did not invent the Shema or the Golden rule. Jesus is leaning into this long and beautiful tradition. Jesus is a continuation of the prophetic tradition. God’s Word was at the beginning and continues to this day.
Additionally, this week is another week when we can focus on the image of God within one another. As division and violence escalate day-by-day, what does it mean to love our neighbors as ourselves? What does it mean to see God within one another and love each other with our whole heart, soul, and mind?
[1] R. Alan Culpepper, Matthew, 431.
[2] Culpepper, 431.
[3] Ulrich Luz, 82-83.
[4] Culpepper, 432.
[5] Culpepper, 433.
[6] Culpepper, 434.
Micah Krey 
Leave a comment