By what Authority - Matt 21:23-27; Mark 11:27-33; Luke 10:1-8

The clearing of the temple and Jesus’ subsequent healing and teaching took up the rest of the second day of the week and afterward, He returned to Bethany. On the third day, while traveling from Bethany to Jerusalem, they came across the fig tree that the day before the Savior had condemned, and it was withered up and dead. The disciples marveled, but we already talked about the lesson on faith that Jesus taught to them concerning the tree. Upon reaching the temple in Jerusalem, “the chief priests and the elders of the people came unto him as he was teaching.” Questioning Jesus while he taught in the temple assured the Jewish leadership of a full audience for the spectacle they were planning.

From the article “By What Authority?” Ray Stedman gives some background saying, “Now these were no second-rate individuals who came to Jesus. This was a very imposing delegation made up of Caiaphas, the high priest, and Annas, his father-in-law, who was regarded as virtual high priest; and the scribes, the body of men who interpreted the Law of Moses; and the elders, those who were officially appointed to serve in the Sanhedrin, the ruling body of the nation. This was an imposing, august council- the Jewish heads of state, under the overarching rule of Rome-who came to Jesus with this question.” I guess I’ve always logically understood that defying the Jewish leadership was “dangerous” for Jesus, but I’ve never felt exactly how big of a deal it was until I read that explanation. I guess I kind of equivocated it to being called to testify in front of Robert Mueller’s investigation. The amount of power and influence that these Jewish leaders had was enough to spell bad news for anyone, but the big problem was that they had so much to lose by letting the people fall in love with Jesus that they were willing to do anything to keep that from happening.

The Jewish leadership comes to reassert their authority over the temple and asks Jesus “by what authority does thou these things? And who gave thee this authority?” An article on the subject published on dailyexegesis.blogspot.comexplains, “Authority is an important concept, and central to the idea of Jesus’ identity and the work of the Holy Spirit in the world. By what authority can Jesus preach when He has not trained with a famous rabbi, has not come from a recognized background of formal education? Faith or trust in Christ does not come from worldly authority and credentials, but from the perception of faith, the spiritual eyes and ears He has so often preached are necessary for real salvation.”

They thought that by coming en mass and confronting Jesus in front of his admirers, they were going to trick him into admitting that he was a fraud and had made everything up. They knew he couldn’t say “I studied with the great rabbi so and so for 20 years,” or “I was educated by this or that school,” etc. They knew he couldn’t claim those sources as his authority, what other source could there be? That’s where the irony comes in, the only other source of authority would be God, which is where they were supposed to get their authority from, but they had basically kicked God out of the church leadership and relied solely on degrees and credentials for position. On the other hand, if he claims authority from God, then they can condemn and arrest His for blasphemy.

Jesus replies with a proposition, he knows exactly what they are trying to do, and says, “I also will ask you one thing, which if ye tell me, I in like wise will tell you by what authority I do these things.” Seems like a fair trade, though I’m sure that they didn’t see it like that. Jesus continues, “The baptism of John, whence was it? From heaven, or of men?” I’ve never really understood what this meant, my guess is that Jesus is asking, “who gave John authority to baptize, God or did he make it up?” They knew that John, like Jesus, was not taught in the upper ecclesiastical circles, the only reasonable answer was “from God.” But they ran into a problem there because they realized, “if we shall say, From heaven; he will say unto us, Why did ye not then believe him?” They couldn’t admit that John was a prophet sent from God because they had rejected him for the same reasons that they rejected Jesus.

There was also a flip side to that answer though, “But and if we say, Of men; all the people will stone us: for they be persuaded that John was a prophet.” They would either be revealed as hypocrites or as enemies of the people, so they were stuck. JTC comments, “In spite of their boasted learning, they answered as puzzled school-boys might do when they perceive hidden difficulties in what at first seemed but a simple problem. ‘We cannot tell’ said they. Then Jesus replied, ‘neither tell I you by what authority I do these things.’” Before realizing that Jesus had set his terms at the beginning of the conversation, I thought the “well then I’m not going to tell you” answer was rather petty, but having read the full account now, I understand that the Savior had set his terms in the beginning and His questioners had accepted those terms by replying to His question, so his answer was fair. Interestingly, Ray Stedman notes, “By their answer they revealed that they really did not care whether John’s baptism was from God or not. They were not interested in the truth, nor were they willing to answer that question at all, they only cared about serving their own interests. Thus they revealed themselves as being opposed to God’s authority, acting only out of the intrigues and craftiness of men.” Not only did the Jewish leadership not get Jesus to admit that he was a fraud, they actually exposed their own deception, kind of like the whole “he who digs a hole for his neighbor will actually fall into it himself.”