UPDV Bible Header

UPDV Updated Bible Version

Matthew Chapter 23 — The Jerusalem Controversies

Overview

UPDV chapter 23 covers the tribute question (23:1-8), the Sadducees' challenge on resurrection (23:9-18), the greatest commandment (23:19-23), the question about David's son (23:24-26), and a warning about the scribes (23:27-29). This material comes from Matt 22:15-46, Mark 12:13-40, and Luke 20:40.

The chapter presents Jesus at the height of his rhetorical powers, fielding hostile questions from every faction in turn — Pharisees, Herodians, Sadducees, scribes — and silencing them all. The UPDV's editorial work here is largely a matter of restoring Markan readings that the compiler replaced with his own formulations. Two changes stand out. First, the greatest commandment pericope is transformed: the compiler's hostile lawyer "testing" Jesus becomes Mark's friendly scribe genuinely asking; the Shema is restored; and the question shifts from "which is the great commandment in the law?" to "what commandment is the first of all?" Second, the compiler's 39-verse woes discourse (canonical Matt 23:1-39) is absent — its Q components were placed earlier in the UPDV at chapter 15 (following their Lukan position at Luke 11:37-54), and Mark's three-verse warning about the scribes (12:38-40) stands in its place.

Tribute to Caesar (23:1-8)

"Then they send to him certain of the Pharisees and of the Herodians, that they might catch him in his talk." The tribute question (23:1-8) follows Matt 22:15-22 with revisions drawn from Mark 12:13-17.

The UPDV opens with Mark's simpler introduction. The compiler built an elaborate setup at Matt 22:15 — "Then the Pharisees went, and took counsel how they might ensnare him in his talk" — followed by sending "their disciples, with the Herodians." D&A note that the compiler "rewrote Mark by assimilating to 12:14 = Mk 3:6" and "eliminating ambiguity (who are 'they'?) so that the Pharisees are clearly in charge." Mark 12:13 is more direct: unnamed authorities "send" certain Pharisees and Herodians to trap Jesus. The UPDV follows Mark's form.

The most telling revision is at 23:4. The compiler has "But Jesus perceived their wickedness, and said, Why do you make trial of me, you hypocrites?" (Matt 22:18). Mark 12:15 has "But knowing their hypocrisy, he said to them, Why do you make trial of me?" D&A explain that the compiler split Mark's single reference to "hypocrisy" into two elements: the narrator says Jesus perceived their "wickedness" (πονηρίαν, ponērian), while Jesus himself addresses them as "hypocrites" (ὑποκριταί, hypokritai) — a vocative that D&A say "prepares for chapter 23," the compiler's woes discourse. Since the UPDV does not have the woes discourse in this position, the vocative loses its function. The UPDV restores Mark's single reference: "But Jesus perceived their hypocrisy, and said, Why do you make trial of me?"

Lane provides historical context for the tribute question. The κῆνσος (kēnsos, the Roman poll tax) had been a source of resentment ever since its imposition on Judea in AD 6, when Judas the Galilean led an uprising against the census that preceded it. "The Zealots resolutely refused to pay the tax because it acknowledged Caesar's domination over them. The Pharisees resented the humiliation implied in the tax but justified its payment, while the Herodians supported it on principle." The question was designed to put Jesus on the horns of a dilemma: an affirmative answer would discredit him with the crowd, while a negative answer would invite Roman reprisals. Lane notes that the denarius of Tiberius bore the inscription "Tiberius Caesar Augustus, Son of the Divine Augustus" and "Pontifex Maximus" — both the image and inscription were "rooted in the imperial cult and constituted a claim to divine honors." Jesus' answer — "Render to Caesar the things that are Caesar's; and to God the things that are God's" — was, as Evans puts it, deliberately ambiguous: "For the zealot, what belonged to Caesar was nothing and what belonged to God was everything. For the moderate, what belonged to Caesar was tribute and what belonged to God was worship and fidelity to the covenant."

Resurrection and the Sadducees (23:9-18)

"And there came to him Sadducees, those who say that there is no resurrection: and they asked him." The resurrection debate (23:9-18) follows Matt 22:23-32 with Jesus' answer switched to Mark 12:24-27.

The compiler made three changes to Mark's version of Jesus' response, and the UPDV reverses all three.

First, tone. Mark 12:24 opens with a question: "Is it not for this cause that you err, that you don't know the Scriptures, nor the power of God?" (οὐ διά τοῦτο πλανᾶσθε μή εἰδότες τάς γραφάς μηδέ τήν δύναμιν τοῦ θεοῦ; ou dia touto planasthe mē eidotes tas graphas mēde tēn dynamin tou theou?). The compiler flattened this into a blunt accusation: "You err, not knowing the Scriptures, nor the power of God" (Matt 22:29). D&A note that "Matthew's flat accusation is stronger than Mark's query." The UPDV restores the question form, preserving the rhetorical force of Jesus drawing the Sadducees into their own refutation.

Second, the resurrection state. Mark 12:25 has "when they rise from the dead" (ὅταν ἐκ νεκρῶν ἀναστῶσιν, hotan ek nekrōn anastōsin) — a vivid, Semitic formulation. The compiler replaced this with the abstract "in the resurrection" (ἐν τῇ ἀναστάσει, en tē anastasei), which D&A identify as the compiler's preference for the technical theological term. The UPDV restores Mark's phrase.

Third and most significant, the scriptural argument. Mark 12:26 has Jesus say: "Have you not read in the Book of Moses, in the place concerning the Bush, how God spoke to him, saying..." The compiler replaced this with "Have you not read that which was spoken to you by God, saying..." (Matt 22:31). D&A explain: the compiler "personalized the observation: the word is 'for you'" — a characteristic Matthean technique of making Scripture address the audience directly. But the effect is to lose Mark's specificity. Mark names the book (Moses), names the passage (the Bush), and describes a scene (God speaking to Moses) — all details that anchor the argument in narrative. Lane notes that Mark's specificity is significant: Jesus cites the Pentateuch because this was "that part of Scripture acknowledged by the Sadducees to be authoritative." The Sadducees rejected the Prophets and Writings; an argument from Exodus was the only kind they would accept. The UPDV restores Mark's formulation, preserving both the narrative concreteness and the rhetorical strategy.

The argument itself turns on Exodus 3:6: "I am the God of Abraham, and the God of Isaac, and the God of Jacob." Lane explains: "If God has assumed the task of protecting the patriarchs from misfortune during the course of their life, but fails to deliver them from that supreme misfortune which marks the definitive and absolute check upon their hopes, his protection is of little value." The present tense — "I am," not "I was" — implies the patriarchs are still alive to God. Collins cites a rabbinic parallel: "Whence do we learn resurrection from the Torah? — From the verse, 'And I also have established my covenant with them, to give them the land of Canaan': 'to give you' is not said, but 'to give them' personally" (b. Sanhedrin 99b).

Mark closes the exchange with πολύ πλανᾶσθε (poly planasthe, "you are greatly mistaken," Mark 12:27b) — an inclusio with the opening "you err" (πλανᾶσθε) that brackets the entire response. The compiler dropped this closing rebuke, and the UPDV follows the compiler here (23:18 = Matt 22:32). The source chart assigns this verse to the compiler's text, and the loss of Mark's inclusio is minor.

The Greatest Commandment (23:19-23)

"And one of the scribes came, and heard them questioning together, and having seen that he answered them well, asked him, What commandment is the first of all?" The greatest commandment (23:19-22) is the chapter's most consequential revision. The UPDV switches entirely from the compiler's version (Matt 22:34-40) to Mark's (12:28-31), transforming the pericope from a hostile confrontation into a genuine theological exchange.

The compiler made four changes to Mark's account, each serving his polemical program.

First, the questioner's character. In Mark 12:28, "one of the scribes" approaches Jesus after observing the debates, impressed that "he answered them well," and asks his question out of genuine interest. In Matt 22:34-35, the Pharisees gather when they hear Jesus has silenced the Sadducees, and "one of them, a lawyer, asked him a question, testing him." D&A are explicit about the transformation: "The 'tempting' of 22:35 and the absence of both the lawyer's concurrence and Jesus' commendation of him turn a successful scholastic dialogue with friendly participants into a controversy narrative." France observes that Mark's friendly scribe "stands in significant contrast to the γραμματεῖς taken as a whole" — "one openminded scribe symbolises what might have been, but he stands alone." The UPDV restores Mark's friendly scribe.

Second, the Shema. Mark 12:29 has Jesus begin: "The first is, Hear, O Israel; the Lord our God, the Lord is one" — the opening of the Shema (Deuteronomy 6:4), recited by every pious Jew morning and evening. The compiler omitted these words entirely. D&A note this is an agreement between Matthew and Luke against Mark, and they entertain the possibility that Mark added the Shema rather than Matthew removing it. But Lane argues that the Shema's presence in Mark is original: "Their use by the pious Jew as a prayer and a confession of faith every morning and evening dates very probably to the second century B.C. The first words of the formula were of such importance that their omission in the Jewish milieu presupposed in the Marcan narrative would be scarcely intelligible." The Shema establishes that the command to love God flows from his nature as the one God — monotheism is the foundation of ethics. The UPDV restores it.

Third, the question's framing. The compiler asks "which is the great commandment in the law?" (ποία ἐντολή μεγάλη ἐν τῷ νόμῳ, poia entolē megalē en tō nomō, Matt 22:36) — a question about ranking within the Torah. Mark asks "what commandment is the first of all?" (ποία ἐστίν ἐντολή πρώτη πάντων, poia estin entolē prōtē pantōn, Mark 12:28) — a question about absolute priority. The distinction matters. The compiler's question invites a legalistic answer about the Torah's internal hierarchy; Mark's question invites a theological answer about what matters most in all of life. The UPDV follows Mark.

Fourth, the conclusion. The compiler added Matt 22:40: "On these two commandments the whole law hangs, and the prophets." D&A trace this to Matt 7:12b (the golden rule as "the law and the prophets") and suggest the compiler "simply added the final three words, 'and the prophets,' thus gaining a favourite expression." Mark 12:31 ends with "There is no other commandment greater than these" — a simpler and more absolute statement. The UPDV follows Mark, and the compiler's summation is omitted.

The most conspicuous absence is Mark 12:32-34 — the scribe's response. In Mark, the scribe affirms Jesus' answer: "Well said, Teacher, you have spoken truly, that he is one, and there is no other besides him; and to love him with all the heart and with all the understanding and with all the strength, and to love one's neighbor as oneself, is more than all burnt offerings and sacrifices." Jesus responds: "You are not far from the kingdom of God." This exchange — the only place in the Synoptic tradition where a scribe and Jesus mutually commend each other — is absent from the UPDV. The source chart maps 23:22 to Mark 12:31 and 23:23 to Luke 20:40, skipping 12:32-34 entirely. D&A note that Bornkamm "has made a strong case" that Mark 12:32-34, "in which the scribe repeats Jesus' declaration, is secondary." The scribe's response restates what Jesus has already said, adding the sacrifice-comparison from Hosea 6:6 and 1 Samuel 15:22 — material that may reflect Hellenistic Jewish-Christian theologizing rather than historical reminiscence. The UPDV's omission aligns with this assessment.

Verse 23:23 — "And no man after that dared ask him any question" — comes from Luke 20:40 rather than either Mark 12:34b or Matt 22:46. This is a synthetic editorial transition that should be acknowledged as such. Matt 22:46 places the silencing after the David's son question, which in the UPDV comes later (23:24-26); it also has an unwieldy two-part construction ("no one was able to answer him a word, nor did anyone dare from that day on to ask him any more questions"). Mark 12:34b places the silencing after the greatest commandment — the right structural position — but it is embedded within the "not far from the kingdom" commendation that the UPDV omits. In Luke's Gospel, 20:40 follows the resurrection debate (Luke skips the greatest commandment entirely, having placed it earlier at 10:25-28). The UPDV borrows Luke's phrasing and repositions it to cap the greatest commandment pericope — a structural choice that produces a clean transition but does not correspond to any single source's arrangement. Luke 20:40 provides the cleanest standalone form: a single sentence that marks the transition from the controversy dialogues to Jesus taking the offensive.

David's Son (23:24-26)

"And as Jesus taught in the temple, he said, How do the scribes say that the Christ is the son of David?" The David's son question (23:24-26) follows Mark 12:35-37, replacing the compiler's version at Matt 22:41-46.

The compiler transformed Mark's public teaching into a private interrogation of the Pharisees. D&A identify the editorial strategy: the compiler "turned a monologue addressed to the multitude regarding an opinion of the scribes into a scholastic dialogue between Jesus and the Pharisees." In Mark, Jesus teaches in the temple and poses a question about what the scribes say; in Matthew, Jesus questions the Pharisees directly ("What do you think of the Christ? Whose son is he?"), and they answer, "The son of David." The UPDV restores Mark's form: a public question addressed to no one in particular, which is rhetorically more powerful precisely because it demands reflection rather than a factual answer.

The substance of the question is the same in both versions: David, speaking "in the Holy Spirit" (Mark) or "in the Spirit" (Matthew), calls the Messiah "Lord" in Psalm 110:1. If the Messiah is David's son — a subordinate — why does David call him Lord? Lane clarifies the rhetorical point: "Those questions are calculated to provoke thoughtful reflection upon the character of the Messiah in the perspective of the OT witness to his lordship." Jesus is not denying Davidic descent but subordinating it: the Messiah is David's son genetically but David's Lord functionally. Evans puts it directly: "Jesus evidently defined his messiahship in terms of the 'son of man' described in the vision of Daniel 7... His authority had eclipsed that conferred upon David his ancestor."

Mark closes with "And the large crowd heard him gladly" (23:26b) — a detail the compiler dropped in favor of his silencing formula. The UPDV restores it. The crowd's delight is important: it establishes that Jesus' authority, though rejected by the leaders, is recognized by the people. This sets up the passion narrative's tragic irony.

Beware of the Scribes (23:27-29)

"And in his teaching he said, Beware of the scribes, who desire to walk in long robes, and to have salutations in the marketplaces, and chief seats in the synagogues, and chief places at feasts: those who devour widows' houses, and for a pretense make long prayers; these will receive greater condemnation." The warning about the scribes (23:27-29) follows Mark 12:38-40.

These three verses are all that remains of the compiler's 39-verse woes discourse (canonical Matt 23:1-39). D&A confirm that "the impetus for constructing 23:1-39 was Mk 12:38-40, which follows the question about David's son and offers criticism of the scribes. Thus upon three verses in Mark Matthew built a lengthy monologue." The compiler combined Mark's brief warning with Q material (paralleled in Luke 11:37-54) and M material to create his denunciatory climax. D&A believe the compiler "conflated" Q with "an independent series of woes" from M.

The UPDV handles these components separately. The Q woes — including the cup-and-platter woe, the tithing woe, the tombs woe, and the heavy burdens woe — appear at UPDV chapter 15, following their Lukan position at Luke 11:37-54. The M material (the swearing-by-the-temple woes, the proselyte woe, the lament over Jerusalem) is omitted as M — material lacking a Synoptic parallel cannot be structurally verified or placed in a reconstructed sequence. What remains here is Mark's original three-verse warning, which Lane reads as the close of Jesus' public ministry: "By terminating the public ministry with this account the evangelist points to the sharp opposition between Jesus and the Jewish authorities which led inevitably to events recalled in the passion narrative."

The UBS Handbook notes an important grammatical point about Mark 12:38. The participle τῶν θελόντων (tōn thelontōn, "who desire") is attributive — it defines and particularizes which scribes Jesus means. "In essence Jesus is warning his disciples to watch out for those particular scribes who like to walk about, etc.: he is not, according to the wording of the text, accusing all scribes of ostentation and hypocrisy." This nuance, present in Mark's Greek, is lost in the compiler's wholesale denunciation.

What the UPDV Removes from This Section

  • Matt 22:15 — revised: the compiler's elaborate "Pharisees took counsel how they might ensnare him" replaced by Mark 12:13's simpler "they send to him certain of the Pharisees and of the Herodians."
  • Matt 22:18 — revised: "their wickedness" (πονηρίαν) restored to Mark's "their hypocrisy" (ὑπόκρισιν); the vocative "you hypocrites" dropped. D&A: the compiler split Mark's single hypocrisy reference into two elements, preparing for the woes discourse.
  • Matt 22:22 — revised: "and left him, and went away" dropped. The UPDV retains only "they marveled."
  • Matt 22:29 — revised: the compiler's flat accusation "You err" replaced by Mark 12:24's question form "Is it not for this cause that you err?"
  • Matt 22:30 — revised: the compiler's abstract "in the resurrection" replaced by Mark 12:25's "when they rise from the dead."
  • Matt 22:31 — revised: the compiler's "that which was spoken to you by God" replaced by Mark 12:26's "in the Book of Moses, in the place concerning the Bush, how God spoke to him."
  • Matt 22:33 (multitudes astonished at his teaching): Omitted. Compiler's editorial transition with no Markan function in the UPDV's sequence.
  • Matt 22:34-36 — revised: the compiler's hostile Pharisee conspiracy and "lawyer testing him" replaced by Mark 12:28's friendly scribe who "heard them questioning together" and "having seen that he answered them well."
  • Matt 22:37 — revised: the Shema restored from Mark 12:29 ("Hear, O Israel; Yahweh our God, Yahweh is one"); "with all your strength" restored from Mark 12:30.
  • Matt 22:38 ("This is the great and first commandment"): Absorbed into the Markan form at 23:20, where Jesus identifies the Shema as "the first."
  • Matt 22:40 ("On these two commandments the whole law hangs, and the prophets"): Omitted. D&A: partially traditional, but the compiler added "and the prophets" to gain a favorite expression. Mark 12:31's "There is no other commandment greater than these" replaces it.
  • Mark 12:32-34 (scribe's affirmation and Jesus' "not far from the kingdom of God"): Omitted. D&A cite Bornkamm's argument that the scribe's repetition of Jesus' words is secondary.
  • Matt 22:41-45 — revised: the compiler's private interrogation of the Pharisees replaced by Mark 12:35-37's public teaching. The compiler "turned a monologue addressed to the multitude into a scholastic dialogue" (D&A).
  • Matt 22:46 — revised and relocated: the compiler's two-part silencing formula replaced by Luke 20:40's cleaner "And no man after that dared ask him any question," repositioned after the greatest commandment (23:23) rather than after David's son.
  • Matt 23:1-39 (woes discourse): Not present in this chapter. Q components placed at UPDV chapter 15 (following Luke 11:37-54). M components omitted. D&A: "the impetus for constructing 23:1-39 was Mk 12:38-40... upon three verses in Mark Matthew built a lengthy monologue."

References

  • Davies, W. D. and Dale C. Allison Jr. A Critical and Exegetical Commentary on the Gospel according to Saint Matthew. 3 vols. International Critical Commentary. Edinburgh: T&T Clark, 1988–1997.
  • Lane, William L. The Gospel according to Mark. New International Commentary on the New Testament. Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1974.
  • Evans, Craig A. Mark 8:27–16:20. Word Biblical Commentary 34B. Nashville: Thomas Nelson, 2001.
  • France, R. T. The Gospel of Mark: A Commentary on the Greek Text. New International Greek Testament Commentary. Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 2002.
  • Collins, Adela Yarbro. Mark: A Commentary. Hermeneia. Minneapolis: Fortress, 2007.