article2greatcommandments

Related Articles

Other

The Great Commandment
Wendell Willis

The discussion between Jesus and a questioner about what is the greatest commandment in the Law of Moses is common to all three synoptic Gospels. Matthew and Mark are more like each other than either one is like Luke.

In Mark, Jesus is asked, "Which commandment is first of all?" (Mark 12.28). That is, of all the commandments in the Law, which one has priority? Matthew gives a similar but briefer account. Matthew’s version seems to stress that the "great and first commandment," is not one that has priority, but one that is all-inclusive. Some suggest that Luke really diminishes the importance of the discussion of the great commandment in order to emphasize the story of the Good Samaritan.

Level I Level II Level III

In Mark this story is the third of four controversy accounts from the last week of Jesus’ life. The questioner asks, "Which commandment is first of all?" (Mark 12.28), that is, of all the commandments in the Law, which one has priority or is the most important? Jesus replies by quoting Deuteronomy 6.4-6, which is known as the Shema. But Jesus then adds a second biblical text, Leviticus 19.18, to the "first" commandment. He says, "There is no other commandment (singular, showing that the first commandment necessarily includes the second) greater than this one" (Mark 12.29-31). Thus Jesus insists that these two commands together form the "chief" commandment about which the scribe had asked.

Only in Mark does the scribe agree with Jesus’ statement and actually extend it (12.32-33). It is the scribe who concludes that these two commands are "much more than all whole burnt offerings and sacrifices."

Matthew follows Mark in both the content and location of this story, but gives a considerably briefer account. Unlike Mark, Matthew does not suggest that the questioner, a lawyer of the Pharisees, is impressed by Jesus’ replies. Rather, he represents the Pharisees in their attack on Jesus because he asks Jesus the question "to test him" (Matt 22.35).

Before and after the writing of Matthew, there was an ongoing discussion among Jewish teachers. Which of the 613 commandments in the Law of Moses was "greatest?" Matthew’s version seems to stress that the "great and first commandment," is not one that has priority, but one that is all-inclusive.

The other place in Matthew where Jesus talks about what is equal to the Law and the Prophets is at Matthew 7.12, known as the "Golden Rule." It is part of Matthew’s Sermon on the Mount and is unprovoked by any questioner. There are many similar statements in Jewish sources. In the famous story about Rabbi Hillel and his pagan questioner, Hillel says that treating others as one would like to be treated is the "whole of the Torah."

Among the differences found in Luke alone are: (1) The question has to do with "What shall I do to inherit eternal life?"; (2) Jesus is the one who brings up the reference to the Law; (3) The questioner is the one who gives the correct answer and refers to Leviticus 19; and (4) There is no reference to the "first" or "great" commandment. Some suggest that Luke really diminishes the importance of the discussion of the great commandment in order to emphasize the story of the Good Samaritan. For Luke the punch line is not Jesus’ formulation of the commandment, which the man already knows, but Jesus’ urging action, which is also clear at the conclusion of the parable of the Good Samaritan (10.37).

Jesus concludes his parable with the pointed question, "Which one proved neighbor to the one who fell among thieves?" The lawyer replies, "The one who did (poihvsa) mercy to him." Jesus responds with the sharp imperative, "Go and you do (poivei) likewise." The repeated forms of "to do" (poievw), coupled with the lawyer’s correct understanding of the Law, make clear that what is standing between himself and eternal life is action.

Level I Level II Level III

The parable of the Good Samaritan is unique to the Gospel of Luke, but the discussion immediately preceding it is necessary for understanding the parable as Luke presents it. This discussion between Jesus and a questioner about what is the greatest commandment in the Law of Moses is common to all three synoptic Gospels, although Matthew and Mark are more like each other than either one is like Luke.

Contemporary scholarship on the synoptic Gospels most often operates with the hypothesis of Mark being the first canonical Gospel and both Luke and Matthew using Mark to write their Gospels. Based on this assumption, one should ask if Luke has taken this story from Mark, and if so, what changes has he made in the story and for what reasons. There are numerous scholars, however, who think that Luke did not derive his account of the story of the Great Commandment from Mark but took it from a hypothetical collection of Jesus’ teachings called "Q" or even from his own special source called "L." Even if this is the case, a comparison of the treatment of the story in all three Synoptics is still important. This essay, therefore, will compare the accounts of the discussion of the great commandment in each of the synoptic Gospels.

Mark 12.28–34

Assuming that Mark is the earliest of the Synoptics, we begin with his account, which is also the longest of the three.

In Mark (as well as in Matthew) this story is the third of four controversy accounts from the last week of Jesus’ life. In each of the first three accounts, Jesus’ adversaries seek to find weaknesses that can be used to expose him as a fraud. Although the general controversial nature of these encounters is retained in Mark, the questioner in this account does not manifest hostility but a genuine openness in his dialogue with Jesus (he is said to be impressed that Jesus "answered them well"). The form of this story in Mark is characterized as a scholastic debate of the type often found in both Jewish and Hellenistic writings.

The questioner asks, "Which commandment is first of all?" ( Mark 12.28), that is, of all the commandments in the Law, which one has priority or is the most important? Jesus replies by quoting Deuteronomy 6.4-6, which is known as the Shema. Only in Mark is the Shema fully stated, perhaps because he is writing to a Gentile audience. Mark seems to follow the Septuagint while reading dianoiva" for dunavmew" and adding kai; ejx o{lh" th'" ijscuvo" sou "and with all your strength." But Jesus appends a second biblical text, Leviticus 19.18 (quoted verbatim from the Septuagint), to the "first" commandment and says, "There is no other commandment (singular, indicating that the first commandment necessarily includes the second) greater than this one" ( Mark 12.29–31). Thus Jesus insists that these two commands together form the "chief" commandment about which the scribe had asked.

Only in Mark is there an affirming response by the scribe, who agrees with Jesus’ statement and also extends it (12.32–33). It is the scribe who concludes that these two commands are "much more than all whole burnt offerings and sacrifices," a statement in agreement with previous prophetic teaching such as 1 Samuel 15.22 and Hosea 6.6. Jesus in turn compliments the scribe’s answer ("seeing that he answered wisely") and concludes, "You are not far from the Kingdom of God" (a rhetorical form called litotes, which states negatively what is intended positively, that is, "You are very close to the Kingdom of God").

Matthew 22.34–40

Matthew follows Mark in both the content and location of this story, but gives a considerably briefer account. Unlike Mark, Matthew does not suggest that the questioner, a lawyer of the Pharisees, is impressed by Jesus’ replies, but rather that he represents the Pharisees in their attack on Jesus because he asks Jesus the question "to test him" ( Matthew 22.35).

Jesus is addressed as "Teacher" (didavskale); in Matthew a concept related to "Rabbi"; see 23.7-8), which implies that this question is seeking his answer as one who presents himself as an authoritative teacher of God’s people. The question is stated in a slightly different manner from Mark in that what is sought is "the great commandment in the Law." That the commandment sought is in the Law of Moses is only implied in Mark (the word "law" does not appear), but it is explicit in Matthew. So the lawyer is asking Jesus’ judicial evaluation of Jewish Law.

Matthew does not have Jesus cite the words of Deuteronomy 6.4 ("Hear O Israel, the LORD our God, the LORD is one") but only the demand to love God totally, although Matthew lacks "with all your strength" as given in Mark. Jesus makes clear that this command to love God is the "great and first commandment," but he goes on to say that "a second is like it" ("like" oJmoiva, that is, of the same, equal) and then cites Leviticus 19.18. Matthew concludes the account with Jesus’ summary, "On these two commandments depend all the Law and the Prophets." There is no exchange between Jesus and his questioner. In form, then, Matthew is a controversy story, not a scholastic dialogue.

Before and after the writing of Matthew, there was an ongoing discussion among Jewish teachers about which of the 613 commandments in the Law of Moses was "greatest." Matthew’s summary statement (22.40) makes clear that this is what Jesus’ reply is meant to give, so that unlike Mark, the answer as to the "great and first commandment" does not mean "has priority" but "is all inclusive." What the lawyer seeks is Jesus’ view on the rabbinical debate about which one of the laws given in Scripture can be said to implicitly include all others—so that to keep it one must do everything else commanded. (See the article on "Summary Statements of the Law.") Jesus’ reply gives his suggestion and really more, in that it tells how one reads rightly the Law, how to interpret it (see Matt 9.13 and 12.7).

The designation of Jesus’ teaching of the double commandment as inclusive of all the Law and the Prophets points the reader to Matthew 7.12, the other place in Matthew where the writer gives Jesus’ words about what is equal to the Law and the Prophets (a peculiarly Matthean phrase), which helps with the interpretation of Matthew 22.34–40.

Jesus’ statement in Matthew 7.12, which is known as the "Golden Rule," is proverbial. It is part of Matthew’s Sermon on the Mount and is unprovoked by any questioner. In the Sermon, Matthew presents Jesus as a determined upholder of the demands of the Law ( 5.17–18, which also discusses "the Law and the Prophets") who expects as much from his followers. Indeed, the Golden Rule is stated in a legal form ("If A, then B" just as in "If an eye…, then an eye…"). There are many similar statements in Jewish sources. In the famous story about Hillel and his pagan questioner, the principle of treating others as one would like to be treated ( bT Shab. 31a) is also presented as the "whole of the Torah," that is, it encompasses all that the Torah seeks to secure.

These two passages in Matthew are complementary in function to summarize what God approves as the right understanding of the Law and the Prophets. From the comparison it is clear that Matthew presents Jesus as evaluating the focus of the Law in the double commandment, and the appropriate way of reading it.

Luke 10.25–28

In Luke this story does not occur in the same setting as it does in Matthew and Mark, namely, the last week of Jesus’ life in Jerusalem. There are also many specific differences between Luke and Mark and Matthew that have led some scholars to suggest that Luke 10.25–28 is not a parallel to Matthew 22.34–40 and Mark 12.28–34. In fact, some have suggested that Luke retains best the version of the hypothetical source Q, which he shared with Matthew.

Among the differences found in Luke alone are: (1) The question has to do with "What shall I do to inherit eternal life?"; (2) Jesus is the one who brings up the reference to the Law; (3) The questioner is the one who gives the correct answer and refers to Leviticus 19; and (4) There is no reference to the "first" or "great" commandment. In addition, Luke has integrally attached the parable of the Good Samaritan to the story about the great commandment, so that each story is interpreted by the other. It has been suggested that Luke really diminishes the importance of the discussion of the great commandment in order to emphasize the story of the Good Samaritan.

As in Matthew, the questioner is a lawyer who addresses Jesus as "teacher" and seeks to test him ( Luke 10.25). Thus in Luke, as in Matthew, this is a controversy story in form. However, as with Mark, the discussion in Luke does not seem to be argumentative, and Jesus’ response to the man is positive.

In Luke’s version, this story does not tell one how to interpret the Scripture or the relative importance of these commands in comparison with sacrificial worship. The lawyer’s question is about what "to do" to have eternal life. This very same question ("What must I do to inherit eternal life?") is also found in Luke 18.18 in the story of the rich young ruler. But in the accompanying discussion it is equated with "entering the kingdom of God" ( 18.25) and "being saved" ( 18.26). By comparison with the story in Luke 18, it is clear that the lawyer’s question in Luke 10 is not about the primary commandment in the Mosaic Law, but with "being saved." In both stories, however, the discussion is connected with the Decalogue.

Jesus responds to the lawyer’s question in Luke 10.25 by asking his own question: What has this man learned from Scripture about the requisite conduct to have eternal life—what does he think is important? The man, in fact, does know what Scripture teaches ( 10.27), and Jesus challenges him to act on his correct knowledge ( 10.28). For Luke the punch line is not Jesus’ formulation of the commandment, which the man already knows, but Jesus’ urging action, which is also clear at the conclusion of the parable of the Good Samaritan ( 10.37). It is noteworthy that in Luke there is no enumeration or distinction between the "first" and "second" commandments, which is also Matthew’s viewpoint. But only in Luke are the two commands so closely joined that it is unclear that they come from different portions of Scripture.

If Luke had stopped at this point, the conversation could appear to be a positive discussion between two teachers (as in Mark), ending with Jesus’ reminder to act upon the correct knowledge his questioner already possessed. But by tying this story to the following parable, Luke makes clear that the man’s motivation was "to justify himself " ( 10.29). It was in response to this self-promotion that Jesus tells the famous parable (10.30–36). He concludes with the pointed question, "Which one proved neighbor to the one who fell among thieves?" to which the lawyer replies, "The one who did (poihvsa") mercy to him." Jesus responds with the sharp imperative, "Go and you do (poivei) likewise." The repeated forms of "to do" (poievw), coupled with the lawyer’s correct understanding of the Law, make clear that what is standing between himself and eternal life is action. Thus the story in Luke is used as an exhortation to the lawyer and, of course, to Luke’s readers to action.

Joining the question of the great commandment with the parable of the Good Samaritan actually reverses the position with which the story began. It began with the lawyer, as the person in control, giving Jesus a test about the key issue of religion. The lawyer feels confident in his knowledge ( 10.27) and apparently in his action on that knowledge, since by his question he seeks to "justify himself," that is, show himself to be righteous. But the story ends with Jesus in control, and the lawyer is exposed as failing to act upon the command to be a neighbor. The combining of these two stories in Luke moves from a theoretical discussion of priorities in biblical interpretation to a challenge to concretize the demand for neighbor love. The problem is not one of correct identification of "neighbor" but of obedient performance to the known commands of God.

In conclusion, it is clear that the story about the great commandment has different functions in each of the synoptic Gospels. In Mark it expresses the correct priorities in religion in contrast with sacrificial practices. In Matthew it presents Jesus’ answer to an in-house argument among Jewish teachers about which of the Law’s commandments is most inclusive and can serve as the hermeneutical key to Scripture. In Luke this story is greatly compressed, because the real emphasis is the accompanying parable of the Good Samaritan, when Jesus urges the questioner to act upon his knowledge of the path that leads to eternal life.