Mark 12:37Meaning & Commentary from the Church Fathers

Because Christ was coming to His Passion, He corrects a false opinion of the Jews, who said that Christ was the Son of David, not his Lord; wherefore it is said, And Jesus answered and said, while he taught in the temple.

What perished was not the essence through which Mary was formed; it was rather the substance from which she was made that experienced death. The eternal nature of divinity remained unharmed; only the frailty of the flesh succumbed. He responded in a manner that would allow believers to grasp the distinction between His identity and the means by which He came into being. The Divine, the Master of both heaven and earth, came forth from the woman who is His mother. As the Sovereign of all creation, He is also the Sovereign of Mary. The Creator of the universe is likewise the Creator of Mary. In keeping with the scripture, "Born of a woman, born under the law" (Gal. 4:4), He is indeed the Son of Mary. The One who is both the Lord of Mary and her Son, who is also her Creator, is born of her.

In the one Lord, assign the sublime aspects to the divine essence and nature, which transcends the afflictions of the body, while ascribe the earthly aspects to His humanity, recognizing that for our benefit He lowered Himself and took on human form.

That is, He openly speaks to them of Himself, that they may be inexcusable; for it goes on: How say the Scribes that Christ is the Son of David?

But the putting own of His enemies by the Father, does not shew the weakness of the Son, but the unity of nature, by which One works in the Other; for the Son also subjects the Father’s enemies, because He glorifies His Father upon earth.

During these discussions, the subject of the Messiah's identity was brought up. The Lord posed a question to the Pharisees present: ‘How is it that David, inspired by the Spirit, refers to the Messiah as both the son of David and his Lord?’ This inquiry was likely intended by the Lord to affirm through Scripture His teaching on the Messiah’s supreme and Divine nature, which had been dismissed by the rigid interpreters of the law—much like during the Feast of Tabernacles and the temple's restoration. However, the inquiry went unanswered. Just as they refrained from responding about John to avoid self-contradiction, they similarly chose not to answer the question regarding the Messiah Himself.

With this inquiry, Jesus Christ clearly aims not to dispute the widely held belief among the Jews that the Messiah must be a descendant of David. Instead, He seeks to refine and elevate their understanding of His identity. The Pharisees, followed by the entire nation, failed to recognize that the Messiah, as affirmed by David's own divinely inspired declaration, is also his Lord, the Son of God. The impetus for Christ's question likely arose from the Pharisees recalling God's testimony about Himself as the Son of God and wanting Him to reaffirm this declaration in order to accuse Him of blasphemy.

Certainly, here’s a paraphrase of the provided text:

Indeed, you perceive Christ merely as a descendant of David, viewing Him solely as a human. Yet how can David refer to Him as his Lord? Have you not seen how David, in his Psalm, speaks eloquently about Christ: "The Lord said to my Lord: sit at my right hand" (Psalm 109:1)? If He is indeed Lord to David and existed when David penned this, how could He be a descendant of David who had not yet come into being? The Pharisees, hindered by a rigid interpretation of Scripture and having overlooked the key to its true meaning, failed to grasp that Christ the Messiah, as the God-Man, is in His divine nature the Son of God and in His human nature a descendant of David. They anticipated the Messiah to be one who would liberate the Jews from Roman rule and dominate all nations. With such misaligned expectations, they were unable to respond to Jesus' inquiry.

They responded by identifying Him as ‘the son of David.’ However, this notion of sonship was solely based on a physical lineage between Christ and David. Yet, it is clear from a well-known psalm (Psalms 109:1) that David also refers to Him as his Lord, who occupies the position at God's right hand. Therefore, the kingdom of Christ transcends earthly realms; the learned scribes and legal experts failed to comprehend the true majesty of the Messiah. Had they grasped this, they would have recognized that the qualities of the Messiah resonated perfectly within the person of Jesus of Nazareth, whom they had persecuted. The crowd listened to this exchange with great interest, while the Pharisees and scribes chose to remain obstinately silent, seething with frustration over their defeat and their inability to silence the preacher they detested.

The issue regarding the identity of Christ as to whose son he is placed the scribes in an uncomfortable predicament, which is overlooked in the Gospel of Luke. This inquiry about Christ's lineage, which greatly troubled the scribes, is presented in both Mark and Matthew in a similar manner. The sole distinction is that Mark, adhering to his style, transforms a statement into a dialogue format (see Mark 12:9). In Matthew, the inquiry posed to the scribes is, "Whose son do you believe Christ is?" When they respond that He is the son of David, He then reiterates the question that had confounded them previously. In Mark, the question is framed more broadly, reflecting that the scribes acknowledged Christ as the son of David and so forth.