Augustine of Hippo — Commentary on Scripture

Mark 10:46 · 2 passages

And they came to Jericho: and as he went out of Jericho with his disciples and a great number of people, blind Bartimaeus, the son of Timaeus, sat by the highway side begging.

Mark has recorded both the name of Bartimaeus and of his father, a circumstance which scarcely occurs in all the many cases of healing which had been performed by the Lord.… Consequently there can be little doubt that this Bartimaeus, the son of Timaeus, had fallen from some position of great prosperity, and was now regarded as an object of the most notorious and the most remarkable wretchedness, because, in addition to being blind, he had also to sit begging.

(de Con. Evan. ii. 65) It is for this reason that Mark wished to relate his case alone, because his receiving his sight had gained for the miracle a fame, illustrious in proportion to the extent of the knowledge of his affliction. But although Luke relates a miracle done entirely in the same way, nevertheless we must understand that a similar miracle was wrought on another blind man, and a similar method of the same miracle. It goes on: And when he heard that it was Jesus of Nazareth, he began to cry out, and say, Jesus, thou Son of David, have mercy upon me.

Mark 11:4

And they went their way, and found the colt tied by the door without in a place where two ways met; and they loose him.

“His disciples did not understand this at first; but when Jesus was glorified, then they remembered that this had been written of him and had been done to him,” that is, when he had manifested the power of his resurrection.… In short, mentally comparing with the contents of Scripture what was accomplished both prior to and in the course of our Lord’s passion, they found this also in Scripture, that it was in accordance with the utterance of the prophets that he sat on an ass’s colt.

Mark 11:5-6

And certain of them that stood there said unto them, What do ye, loosing the colt?

(de Con. Ev. ii. 66) Matthew says, an ass and a colt, the rest however do not mention the ass. Where then both may be the case, there is no disagreement, though one Evangelist mentions one thing, and a second mentions another; how much less should a question be raised, when one mentions one, and another mentions that same one and another. It goes on: And certain of them that stood there said unto them, What do ye, loosing the colt? And they said unto them even as Jesus had commanded, and they let them take it, that is, the colt.

Mark 11:7

And they brought the colt to Jesus, and cast their garments on him; and he sat upon him.

The master of humility is Christ who humbled himself and became obedient even to death, even the death of the cross. Thus he does not lose his divinity when he teaches us humility.… What great thing was it to the king of the ages to become the king of humanity? For Christ was not the king of Israel so that he might exact a tax or equip an army with weaponry and visibly vanquish an enemy. He was the king of Israel in that he rules minds, in that he gives counsel for eternity, in that he leads into the kingdom of heaven for those who believe, hope, and love. It is a condescension, not an advancement for one who is the Son of God, equal to the Father, the Word through whom all things were made, to become king of Israel. It is an indication of pity, not an increase in power.

Mark 11:9

And they that went before, and they that followed, cried, saying, Hosanna; Blessed is he that cometh in the name of the Lord:

“Hosanna,” however, is a word of supplicating, as some say who know the Hebrew language, more declaring a feeling than signifying something. Just as in the Latin language there are words which we call interjections, as when in sorrow we say, Heu! Or when we are delighted, we say, Vah! Or when we are amazed, we say, “Oh, what a great thing!” For then oh signifies nothing except the feeling of one who is amazed.

Mark 11:12 · 2 passages

And on the morrow, when they were come from Bethany, he was hungry:

Did Christ really want physically to relish and consume fruit himself when he sought the fruit of this fig tree? And if he had found it there, would he then even have eaten it? Did he really want to drink water when he said to the woman of Samaria, “Give me a drink”? When he was on the cross saying “I thirst,” was this really all about his physical thirst? For what does Christ hunger more than our good works? For what does Christ thirst more than our faithful response? On the Psalms

Mark, on his side, has recorded in connection with the second day what he had omitted to notice as occurring really on the first—namely, the incident of the expulsion of the sellers and buyers from the temple. On the other hand, Matthew, after mentioning what was done on the second day—namely, the cursing of the fig tree as he was returning in the morning from Bethany into the city—has omitted certain facts which Mark has inserted, namely, his coming into the city, and his going out of it in the evening, and the astonishment which the disciples expressed at finding the tree dried up as they passed by in the morning; and then to what had taken place on the second day, which was the day on which the tree was cursed, he has attached what really took place on the third day—namely, the amazement of the disciples at seeing the tree’s withered condition, and the declaration which they heard from the Lord on the question of the power of faith.

Mark 11:13

And seeing a fig tree afar off having leaves, he came, if haply he might find any thing thereon: and when he came to it, he found nothing but leaves; for the time of figs was not yet.

Some who witnessed Christ’s miracles did not understand what they meant, and how they spoke to those who knew they had special meaning. They wondered only at the miracles themselves. Others both marvelled at the miracles, and attained some preliminary understanding of them. For this we must come to the school of Christ himself. Those fixed only upon the plain sense of Scripture tend to focus merely upon miracle for miracles’ sake. Hence they may prematurely conclude that Jesus himself was ignorant of the time of the year, something any ordinary farmer could discern. For it was not yet the season for the tree to bear fruit. Nevertheless, since he was hungry, he looked for fruit on the tree. Does this imply that Christ knew less than what every peasant could easily discern? Surely not. Wouldn’t you expect the maker of the fig tree to know what the ordinary orchard worker would know in a snap? So when he was hungry he looked for fruit on the tree, but he seemed to be looking for something more from this tree. He noted that the tree had no fruit, but was full of leaves. It was at that po…

Some who witnessed Christ’s miracles did not understand what they meant, and how they spoke to those who knew they had special meaning. They wondered only at the miracles themselves. Others both marvelled at the miracles, and attained some preliminary understanding of them. For this we must come to the school of Christ himself. Those fixed only upon the plain sense of Scripture tend to focus merely upon miracle for miracles’ sake. Hence they may prematurely conclude that Jesus himself was ignorant of the time of the year, something any ordinary farmer could discern. For it was not yet the season for the tree to bear fruit. Nevertheless, since he was hungry, he looked for fruit on the tree. Does this imply that Christ knew less than what every peasant could easily discern? Surely not. Wouldn’t you expect the maker of the fig tree to know what the ordinary orchard worker would know in a snap? So when he was hungry he looked for fruit on the tree, but he seemed to be looking for something more from this tree. He noted that the tree had no fruit, but was full of leaves. It was at that point that he cursed it, and it withered away. So what terrible thing had the poor tree done simply in not bearing fruit? Could the tree reasonably be faulted for its fruitlessness? No. But human beings who by their own free will decide not to bear fruit—that is a different matter. Those found wanting in accountability in this case are those who had the benefit of the law, which was meant to bear fruit, but they had no fruit to show for it. They had a full growth of leaves (the law), yet they bore no fruit (works of mercy).

Mark 11:15-17 · 2 passages

And they come to Jerusalem: and Jesus went into the temple, and began to cast out them that sold and bought in the temple, and overthrew the tables of the moneychangers, and the seats of them that sold doves;

(de Con. Evan. lib. ii. 67) John, however, relates this in a very different order, wherefore it is manifest that not once only, but twice, this was done by the Lord, and that the first time was related by John, this last, by all the other three.

(de Con. Evan. lib. ii. 68) In this again Mark does not keep the same order as Matthew; because however Matthew connects the facts together by this sentence, And he left them, and went out of the city into Bethany, (Matt. 21:17) returning from whence in the morning, according to his relation, Christ cursed the tree, therefore it is supposed with greater probability that he rather has kept to the order of time, as to the ejection from the temple of the buyers and sellers. Mark therefore passed over what was done the first day when He entered into the temple, and on remembering it inserted it, when he had said that He found nothing on the fig tree but leaves, which was done on the second day, as both testify.

This account of the many sellers who were cast out of the temple was reported by all the Evangelists, including John, but in his case he introduces it in a completely different order.… John proceeds to tell us that he went up to Jerusalem at the season of the Jews’ passover, and when he had made a scourge of small cords drove out of the temple those who were selling in it. This makes it evident that this act was performed by the Lord not on a single occasion, but twice over. Only in the first instance was it recorded by John, but in the last by the other three.

Mark 11:18

And the scribes and chief priests heard it, and sought how they might destroy him: for they feared him, because all the people was astonished at his doctrine.

De Con. Evan, ii, 67: John, however, relates this in a very different order, wherefore it is manifest that not once only, but twice, this was done by the Lord, and that the first time was related by John, the last, by all the other three. de Con. Evan, ii, 68: In this again, Mark does not keep the same order as Matthew; because however Matthew connects the facts together by this sentence, “And He left them, and went out of the city into Bethany,” returning from whence in the morning, according to his relation, Christ cursed the tree, therefore it is supposed with greater probability that he rather has kept to the order of time, as to the ejection from the temple of the buyers and sellers. Mark therefore passed over what was done the first day when He entered into the temple, and on remembering it inserted it, when he had said that He found nothing on the figtree but leaves, which was done on the second day, as both testify. Wherefore it is added, “For they feared Him, because all the people were astonished at His doctrine. For He taught themas one having authority, and not as the Sc…

De Con. Evan, ii, 67: John, however, relates this in a very different order, wherefore it is manifest that not once only, but twice, this was done by the Lord, and that the first time was related by John, the last, by all the other three.
de Con. Evan, ii, 68: In this again, Mark does not keep the same order as Matthew; because however Matthew connects the facts together by this sentence, “And He left them, and went out of the city into Bethany,” returning from whence in the morning, according to his relation, Christ cursed the tree, therefore it is supposed with greater probability that he rather has kept to the order of time, as to the ejection from the temple of the buyers and sellers. Mark therefore passed over what was done the first day when He entered into the temple, and on remembering it inserted it, when he had said that He found nothing on the figtree but leaves, which was done on the second day, as both testify. Wherefore it is added, “For they feared Him, because all the people were astonished at His doctrine. For He taught themas one having authority, and not as the Scribes” and Pharisees, as is said elsewhere.

Mark 11:20-21

And in the morning, as they passed by, they saw the fig tree dried up from the roots.

(de Con. Evan. ii. 68) The meaning is not that it dried up at the time, when they saw it, but immediately after the word of the Lord; for they saw it, not beginning to dry up, but completely dried up; and they thus understood that it had withered immediately after our Lord spoke.

Mark 11:23

For verily I say unto you, That whosoever shall say unto this mountain, Be thou removed, and be thou cast into the sea; and shall not doubt in his heart, but shall believe that those things which he saith shall come to pass; he shall have whatsoever he saith.

Note that Jesus said “for him,” not “for me,” and not “for the Father.” Yet it is certain that no human being does such a thing without God’s gift and workings. Mark well that even if no actual instances of perfect righteousness may be found among humans, that does not rule out perfect righteousness as if it were formally impossible. For it might have been realized if only sufficient responsive willing had been applied, enough to suffice for so great a deed.

Mark 11:28

And say unto him, By what authority doest thou these things? and who gave thee this authority to do these things?

Fearing a stoning, but fearing more an admission of the truth, they answered the truth with a lie, reminiscent of the Scripture: “injustice has lied within herself.” For they said, “We know not.” And because they had shut themselves up against him, by asserting that they did not know what they knew, the Lord did not open up to them because they did not knock. For it has been said, “Knock and it will be opened to you.” But they not only had not knocked that it might be opened, but by their denial they barricaded the door itself against themselves. And the Lord said to them, “Neither do I tell you by what authority I do these things.”

Mark 12:7

But those husbandmen said among themselves, This is the heir; come, let us kill him, and the inheritance shall be ours.

But how will you insure that the inheritance will be yours? Merely because you killed him? Hold on! You in fact did kill him, yet the inheritance is still not yours. Do you not recall the Psalm which says: “I lie down and sleep,” and then adds, “I wake again”? did you miss that point? While you were gloating that you had killed him, he was sleeping. The Psalm says: “I slept.” Just while they were raging and would kill me, what was I doing? “I slept.” And if I had not willed it, I would not even have slept, for “I have power to lay down my life, and I have power to take it up again.” So let the oppressors rage. Let the earth even be “given into the hands of the wicked,” let the flesh be left to the hands of persecutors, let them suspend him on wood with nails transfixed, pierced with a spear. The one who lies down and sleeps simply adds: “I rise again.”

Mark 12:9

What shall therefore the lord of the vineyard do? he will come and destroy the husbandmen, and will give the vineyard unto others.

(de Con. Evan. ii. 70) Matthew indeed subjoins that they answered and said, He will miserably destroy those wicked men, (Matt. 21:41) which Mark here says was not their answer, but that the Lord after putting the question, as it were answered Himself. But we may easily understand either that their answer was subjoined without the insertion of, they answered, or they said, which at the same time was implied; or else, that their answer, being the truth, was attributed to the Lord, since He also Himself gave this answer concerning them, being the Truth.

Mark 12:16

And they brought it. And he saith unto them, Whose is this image and superscription? And they said unto him, Caesar's.

The image of the Emperor appears differently in his son and in a piece of coin. The coin has no knowledge of its bearing the image of the prince. But you are the coin of God, and so far highly superior, as possessing mind and even life, so as to know the One whose image you bear.

Mark 12:17 · 2 passages

And Jesus answering said unto them, Render to Caesar the things that are Caesar's, and to God the things that are God's. And they marvelled at him.

Caesar seeks his image; render it. God seeks his image; render it. Do not withhold from Caesar his coin. Do not keep from God his coin. To this they could not think of anything to answer. For they had been sent to slander him. And they went back saying: No one could answer him. Why? Because he had shattered their teeth in their mouth.

We are God’s money. But we are like coins that have wandered away from the treasury. What was once stamped upon us has been worn down by our wandering. The One who restamps his image upon us is the One who first formed us. He himself seeks his own coin, as Caesar sought his coin. It is in this sense that he says, “Render to Caesar the things that are Caesar’s, and to God the things that are God’s,” to Caesar his coins, to God your very selves.