The Gospel of Mark #30 - A Warning to the Unreceptive
The Gospel of Mark #30:
A Warning to the Unreceptive
Text: Mark 11:27-12:12
Thesis: To stress the importance of receiving Jesus as King today.
(1) What if someone traveled a great distance and spent a considerable amount of money to come and see you? Would you receive that person into your home?
(2) Jesus left heaven and sacrificed everything to come to visit all mankind; however, some people were/are unwilling to receive Him into their lives.
I. The Story:
A. On Jesus’ 3rd day in Jerusalem, the “powers that be” came to question His authority.
1. “ ‘These things’ probably refers to the clearing of the temple, the public entry into Jerusalem, and Jesus’ teaching in the temple” (Brooks 187).
2. “They were not seeking truth; they were looking for evidence to use to destroy Him” (Wiersbe 1:151).
B. Jesus countered their question with His own question about John’s baptism.
1. This reply “was a common rabbinic custom, especially in the context of debate” (Lane 413).
2. The point was that “if John’s message had God’s approval, then Jesus and his message also had to have divine authority because of John’s inspired attestation” (Brooks 187).
C. They replied to His question by saying that they didn’t know the source of John’s authority.
- “By their reply they revealed that they did not care whether John’s baptism was from God or not. They were not interested in that truth. They were not willing to answer that question. They only cared about serving their own interests” (Schubert 217).
D. Jesus then proceeded to tell the parable of the wicked vinedressers.
1. A man rented out his vineyard to several vinedressers.
2. When the “rent” was due, the owner of the vineyard sent servants to collect the “rent;” however, the vinedressers mistreated and even killed the servants. [Note: “The word ‘servant’ is a frequent designation in the Old Testament for the prophets whom God sent to the people” (Garland 452)].
3. Finally, the owner of the vineyard sent his son, but the vinedressers also killed him thinking that they could then own the vineyard.
- “In sending the servants the owner appealed to the integrity of the tenants; in sending his son he appeals to the right of law, for the son was the only person, save himself, who possessed legal claim over the vineyard” (Edwards 358).
4. The owner of the vineyard then came and destroyed the wicked vinedressers and rented it out to other vinedressers.
E. After telling the parable, Jesus then made the application.
1. The vineyard represented Israel (cf. Isa. 5:1-7; Psa. 80:8-16).
2. Israel had a history of rejecting God’s prophets.
3. Now, they were about to reject God’s Son.
a. In verses 10-11, Jesus quoted Psalm 118:22-23, which was/is a Messianic psalm.
b. ‘The stone’ was a Messianic symbol (Exod. 17:6; Dan. 2:34; Zech. 4:7).
c. Verse 11 “rings with a strong providential note, that the human rejection of God’s ‘cornerstone’ was not only foreseen but used by God for his glory” (Edwards 360).
4. The “powers that be” knew the implications of Jesus’ parable, but because of the crowd, they left.
II. The Application:
A. Jesus’ authority comes from God; thus, He is the Son of God.
B. God is longsuffering and has sent His Son to us.
C. If we don’t receive Jesus, then one day we will face God’s wrath.
(1) Jesus is knocking at the door of your heart today.
(2) Will you let Him in and be saved?