Luke 6:1-5 EXEGESIS
OVERVIEW: Though on the surface, it seems that the issue in Luke 6:1-11 is the law and tradition surrounding the prohibitions for the Sabbath, the real issues are cultural and theological. The actions that Jesus performed on the Sabbaths in this passage were allowed in certain situations by certain people. So when Jesus performs these actions-or instructs His disciples to do so-He is not violating the Sabbath law, or even the oral tradition about the law, but is instead making a startling claim about Himself, His ministry, and His followers. When understood this way, the two events in Luke 6:1-11 starkly reveal the new wine that Jesus brings, and the new wineskins He puts it in (cf. Luke 5:33-39). Jesus shows how His interpretation and application of the Jewish Torah for His disciples is different than that of the Pharisees and John the Baptist. He does this by taking one of the key, identifying laws of Jewish life, the law of the Sabbath in Exodus 20:8-11, and interprets the law in such a way that does not break or abolish it, but fulfills and expands it for the benefit of all mankind. Luke 6:1-5 will be considered here, and 6:6-11 in the next section.
6:1. Of critical importance to understanding Luke 6:1-5 is the difficult phrase at the beginning of the passage, on the second Sabbath after the first. This may be the most difficult and most discussed textual problem in the Gospel of Luke. The Greek phrase is sabbatō deuteroprōtō, and literally means "the second-first Sabbath." Since deuteroprōtō is found nowhere else in Scripture or Greek literature, some believe it is a scribal error, and should be removed from the Greek text (cf. NIV, NAS; Bock 1994:534; Metzger 2002:116). Doing so, however, robs the passage of its force.
• Among those who retain it, the word is usually translated as in in the NKJV, the second Sabbath after the first but this does not clarify which Sabbath is in view. Most scholars believe it doesn't matter, and the events could have happened on any Sabbath of the year. This view notes that in the account that follows, the disciples of Jesus violate several of the 39 prohibited acts on the Sabbath as contained in the oral Torah, and based on this, the point of the passage is to show that Jesus followed the written Torah (the Pentateuch) but not the oral Torah (the Mishnah).
• The point argued below, however, is quite different. Once it is determined which Sabbath Luke is referring to, it becomes clear that Jesus was not disobeying the oral Torah, but was in fact following it, and in so doing, made a provocative point about Himself and His ministry. To arrive at this conclusion, it must first be determined which Sabbath deuteroprōtō has in view.
• A study of the Jewish background and the various views indicates that the Sabbath in question was Shavuot, the fiftieth day after Passover (see "What's On Second? Who's on First? Deuterōprotō in Luke 6:1"). According to the instructions in the Torah, the Feast of Weeks (Shavuot) Sabbath, like the Passover Sabbath, is not a weekly Saturday Sabbath, but is a holiday Sabbath, and can fall on any day of the week (Lev 23:21). This was the second of three Feasts which required pilgrimage to Jerusalem (Deut 16:16-17). During the Feast of Weeks, travelers would bring seven different kinds of first fruit offerings to the temple: wheat, barley, grapes, figs, pomegranates, olives, and dates (Deut 8:8). Several special ceremonies were conducted as these offerings were brought in to the temple and presented before the Lord.
• But there was another offering for this day that was prepared and brought specifically by the temple priests. It was twin loaves made from new wheat flour. These loaves were specially made and prepared by the priests, and most curious of all, they were the only loaves ever brought into the temple that contained leaven (Leviticus 23:17). A special ceremony was conducted to prepare these loaves. On the day of Shavuot, the priests would enter a field specifically chosen for this ceremony, and would harvest three seahs (about 24 liters) of stalks of wheat. After harvesting the stalks, the wheat had to be prepared in a way the differed from the usual way of separating wheat from the chaff. Usually, when wheat was harvested, the grain and chaff were separated through the process of threshing and winnowing. But the preparation of the wheat for the twin loaves used a special procedure known as "rubbing and beating." The wheat that had been harvested was rubbed in the palm of the hands and then beaten with the fist in the other hand, though some say the beating could be done with the foot on the ground (Neusner 988:745, Mishna, Menahot 6:5). Later tradition required that the wheat be rubbed 300 times and beaten 500 times, but this was probably not in practice at the time of Jesus. These actions were performed, even though it was the Sabbath (Neusner 1988:756, Mishna, Menahot11:1-3). Finally, after the wheat had been threshed and winnowed by hand in the field, it was brought into the temple, where it was made into bread with leaven, before being presented before the Lord as an offering.
• Two things are unique about this offering. First, it is the only offering that is presented to the Lord with leaven. Leaven, or yeast, is always a symbol for sin in Scripture, and so no other offering ever contained leaven. Second, this was the only offering that was prepared and shaped by the hands of men. Every other time, when grain or an animal was brought into the temple as an offering, it was offered just as it was. Yes, the grain might be roasted over a fire, and the animal would be slaughtered before it too was roasted, burned, or boiled, but no other actions of forming, shaping, or molding the offerings were to be performed. Only the two loaves on the Feast of Weeks were formed in such a way.
• So in this context, what does the term deuteroprōtō mean? As stated, both the Feast of Unleavened Bread and the Feast of Weeks included offerings of the first-fruits. In Hebrew, the seven first fruit offerings of Shavuot are referred to as bikkurim, which is translated in the Greek Septuagint asprōtogenēmatōn (lit., "first ones." Cf. Neusner 1988:168, 172, Mishnah, Bikkurim 1:6; 3:2). It is during the Feast of Weeks that the second first-fruits offering is brought into the temple (cf. Exodus 23:19; 34:22; Lev 2:14; 23:17, 20; Nehimiah 10:35; Ezekiel 44:30). So this seems to be the most likely explanation of deuteroprōtō. Deuteroprōtō is an abbreviated form of deuteroprōtogenēmatōn. The first first-fruits offering is the day after the first Sabbath of the Feast of Unleavened Bread, and the second first-fruits offering is fifty days later on the Sabbath of the Feast of Weeks.
• All of this is significant due to what Luke records next, that on this particular Sabbath, Jesus and the disciples went through the grainfields. This should be read quite literally. They were not on a path or road that went through the grainfields, but were walking off the path, through the midst (Gk.diaporeuomai) of the grainfields.
• As they walked, they plucked the heads of grain (Gk. stachus, lit., "ears, stalks"). While this word can be used to refer to any kind of plant that produces stalks or ears, such as corn, barley, or wheat, in the New Testament, it always refers to wheat (Louw-Nida "stachus," cf. also NET). The disciples are not plucking barley (Gk. krithē, cf. John 6:9, 13; Rev. 6:6), but wheat. Certainly, there is a more specific word for "wheat" (Gk. sitos) that could have been used, but Luke is not as concerned with the wheat as he is with what the disciples are doing with it.
• He writes that after they plucked the ears, they ate them, rubbing them in their hands. Though this could be just a description of what they did with the grain (Bock 1994:522), it seems more likely that Luke points out their actions because of the symbolism of these actions on this particular day. These actions clearly resemble the actions of the priests as they harvest the grain and rub them in their hands to prepare the flour for bread.
6:2. The fact that some of the Pharisees were nearby and saw what the disciples of Jesus were doing shows that this was not just any grainfield, but was one specially tended and prepared for temple use on this day. If it were any random grainfield, one would have to conclude that the Pharisees were following Jesus around, or had coincidentally come upon Him as the disciples were picking grain (cf. Bock 1996:171).
Seeing what the disciples are doing, they ask them, "Why are you doing what is not lawful to do on the Sabbath?" The word Sabbath is plural, which may indicate that that the holiday Sabbath that year fell on Friday, causing back-to-back Sabbaths. But the issue of primary concern is why the Pharisees were questioning the disciples of Jesus.
• Initially, people of western categories of thinking believe that the disciples of Jesus are stealing the wheat. The field was not theirs, nor was the wheat, and yet they plucked and ate of it as they walked along. But such is not the case. Land owners were required by Jewish law to let the poor and hungry eat from their fields. The poor could eat as much as they wanted as long as they did not do any harvesting, or collecting the grain in baskets. Even when it came time to harvest the field, the landowners were expected to leave the corners of the field uncut so that the poor could still eat (Lev 23:22; Deut 23:24-25). This was a form of practical welfare, and is seen in action in the book of Ruth.
• So the Pharisees are not concerned that the disciples are eating grain that is not theirs. They are concerned that the disciples are plucking and eating this particular grain, in this grainfield, on this Sabbath. There were Jewish laws against thirty-seven types of work on a Sabbath, including harvesting, threshing, winnowing grain, and preparing food (Neusner 1988:187, Mishnah Shabbat 7:2). The disciples were technically doing all of these.
• Sometimes priests could perform some of these prohibited acts on a holiday Sabbath if the holiday required it (Neusner 1988:756, Mishnah, Menahot 11:2-3; cf. Henry 1991:1671). For example, harvesting the firstfruits of barley for Passover was done on the holiday Sabbath by the temple priests (Neusner 1988:753, Mishnah, Menahot 10:3). Similarly, harvesting the firstfruits of wheat and preparing the twin loaves of bread could be performed by the priests on the holiday Sabbath (Babylonian Talmud, Shabbat 131a). So on both Passover and the Feast of Weeks (Shavuot, or Pentecost), the priests would enter into a field by the temple, harvest some grain, and then bring it into the temple to prepare as an offering.
• It seems possible that the disciples were going through this particular grainfield on this particular holiday Sabbath, and performing actions that only temple priests were allowed to perform. The Pharisees, who are watching over the field, challenge the disciples for an explanation.
6:3. It is Jesus who answers the Pharisees, which may indicate that the disciples were acting on His instructions. As an answer, Jesus does not exactly defend the disciples or explain their actions, but provides a precedent from Israelite history. The account He chooses is when David...was hungry, he and those who were with him.
6:4. The account that Jesus refers to occurs in 1 Samuel 21. In 1 Samuel 20, King Saul's son, Jonathan, told David to flee for his life because Saul wanted to kill him. In chapter 21, David and his companions have been on the run for three days, and have run out of food. After arriving in the town of Nob, David visits a priest in the house of God (this was before the temple was built), and asks the priest for five loaves of bread for him and his men. The priest tells David that the only bread he had was the holy bread, the showbread. The priest tells David that he can have the bread, if the men have not recently slept with women.
• It is not important in this context why the priest required David and his men to have kept themselves from women, except to say that the showbread was holy and was intended for people who were ritually clean, as the priests usually were. What is important is that the priest recognized that according to the letter of the law, it was not lawful for any but the priests to eat the bread, the intent and purpose of the law enabled the priest to give the showbread to David and his men.
• What did David and the priest know which Jesus also knew, but the Pharisees did not? The answer begins with understanding why the priests were given the bread in the first place. When God initially ordained the priesthood, He did not arrange for them to be paid. They did not receive a salary, a stipend, or any sort of monetary payment for their services. Nor were the priests allowed to own land. They were not given a portion of the land of Israel to grow crops or raise animals.
• Instead, God provided for the needs of the priests through the grain and animal sacrifices of the people. When Israelites brought grain and animals to the tabernacle or the temple as an offering, a portion of it would be burned on the altar as an offering to God and the rest was usually reserved for the priests and their families.
• Every week, to provide for their bread, the priests made twelve loaves of showbread (for more on the showbread, see Edersheim 1994:142). The loaves for the priests were made from the offerings of the first-fruits (which were stored in temple storehouses to last for the entire year), and any priest who had kept himself clean could eat of this bread (Numbere 18:11-13; 1 Sam 21:4-5). This bread for the priests was referred to as Terumah (or Terumah Gedolah) and is usually a food item given to the Priests as a gift. It is listed as one of the twenty-four priestly gifts.
• These twelve loaves represented the twelve tribes of Israel, and were placed on a table in the Holy Place of the Tabernacle (Exodus 25:23-30). Every Sabbath, new loaves replaced the loaves from the previous week, and the priests could then eat the loaves that had been removed (Leviticus 24:5-9).
• The consumption of Terumah is guarded by numerous Torah-based restrictions and could be eaten by priests, their families, and their servants, as long as those who ate of these gifts were in a state of ritual purity. Interestingly, Terumah gifts were given to Elisha in 2 Kings 4:42, who gave them to other people who were in more need than he. While in this instance the loaves were made from barley, the point is still made that while the Terumah were generally reserved for priests, they could also be given to others who were in need. The intent and purpose of this law then, was to provide food for the priests, who had no other way of obtaining food.
• When David came along, and he and his men were hungry, the priest recognized that at the core of this law, was God's desire to provide food for those who did not have any. Even when the wheat was harvested for bringing it into the temple, God stated that some of the wheat be left in the field to provide for those who were poor and hungry (Leviticus 23:22). At this point in David's life, he was both poor and hungry, and he was only asking for five loaves, which left seven for the priest, one for each day of the week.
• So in 1 Samuel 21:5, David affirms that he and his men have kept themselves from women, and then goes on to point out that although the bread was consecrated in the vessel that very day, it had become common. This means that the day which David went to ask the priest for bread was a Sabbath day. The bread was changed every Sabbath. The fresh consecrated loaves were brought into the Holy Place and set upon the table, and the loaves from the previous week were brought out for consumption by the priests. The loaves that David was asking for were "in the vessel this day" which means that they had been brought out that very day, a Sabbath day.
• Which raises the two points Jesus is making with this story: (1) the showbread was to be replaced early Saturday morning with freshly baked loaves. In order for the priests to accomplish this, they had to make the bread on the Sabbath. "The Sabbath-Law was not merely of rest, but of rest for worship. The Service of the Lord was the object in view. The priests worked on the Sabbath, because this service was the object of the Sabbath" (Edersheim 1988:v2,58). The Pharisees were allowed to do the work of baking bread on the Sabbath so that the loaves could be put out fresh on the table in the morning of the Sabbath. (2) second point is that the loaves were intended as a provision for those who were hungry and in need (Pentecost 1981:165). Usually, this was the priestly family, but, as in the case of the priest giving the bread to David, the priest could give the loaves to those who were hungry or who were also in the service of the Lord. Though David was not yet king, the priest recognized that David was the anointed of the Lord, just as Jesus claimed about Himself and His disciples. Jesus, like David, "is waiting for the time when this kingship will come true. He too, is on the move with his odd little group of followers" (Wright 2004:67).
• Both of these points relate to what Jesus and His disciples are doing in this grainfield on the Sabbath. By reminding the Pharisees of 1 Samuel 21, Jesus is implying that if the priests can make and exchange the loaves on the Sabbath, eat the old bread to satisfy their hunger, and give the bread to David who is also hungry, and none of this broke any of the Jewish law, then the disciples of Jesus can certainly eat a little grain on the Sabbath in order to satisfy their own hunger (cf. Matt 12:1). Jesus is saying that God's law never intended to exclude people from basic needs, like eating, and David is an example of what the law really meant. In effect, if the Pharisees condemn the disciples, then they also condemn David and this priest who gave him the bread (cf. BKC 1983:219; Beale 2007:294; Wiersbe 1989:190).
• Furthermore, if it is true, as argued above, that this Sabbath was the holiday Sabbath of the Feast of Weeks, then the actions of the disciples resembled that of the temple priests, who were not only allowed to perform these actions on this Sabbath, but were required to do so (cf. Henry 1991:1671). Jesus had His disciples perform similar actions to show that He was instituting a renewed Israel with a priesthood of all believers who did not require the mediation of temple or its sacrifices of sheep, bulls, and goats. Jesus was foreshadowing a means of direct access to God through Himself. This is the point of verse 5 (cf. the similar point in 5:20-21; Radmacher 1999:1260; Wright 2004:67).
• Jesus was acting as a priest in providing food for His followers. This action had precedent in the example of David in providing similar food for His men. Furthermore, by having the disciples pick the grain and rub it in their hands, Jesus was foreshadowing the renewal of Israel and the creation of a Kingdom of Priests. Jesus was not simply trying to provoke an argument with the Pharisees about the nature and restrictions of the Sabbath. Rather, He was trying to teach an important lesson to His disciples about the His own nature, and the purpose behind His mission. Jesus is saying that in Him are fulfilled the temple worship, the dwelling place of God with man (cf. Matt 12:6). In Jesus and His followers are the new priesthood, the new sacrificial system, and new center for the worship of God.
6:5. Though this final statement of Jesus has caused much consternation among scholars, the statement is simplified by understanding that Jesus is not claiming to be God, or that He has the infallible interpretation of the Torah. Though He is God, and does have an infallible interpretation of the law, his is not what He is stating in Luke 6:5 (contra EBC 8:887). Rather, His statement is just another way of saying what He says elsewhere, that the Sabbath was made for man, not man for the Sabbath. In other words, man is to rule over the Sabbath; the Sabbath is not to rule over man.
• In the Gospels, when Jesus speaks of The Son of Man, while He is referring primarily to Himself, He is also speaking of all humanity (cf. Mark 2:27). The phrase is the preferred title of Jesus for Himself. In using it, Jesus is not claiming to be a man (though of course He was human), but was making a claim to be the representative of all humanity (Pentecost 1981:162). He was the son of Adam (Hebrews, ben Adam), the new man. Just as Adam represented all mankind when he sinned in the Garden of Eden, so Jesus also represents all mankind in His life, death, burial, and resurrection (see Romans 5:12-21).
• Based on this understanding then, when Jesus says that the Son of Man is Lord of the Sabbath, He is saying, "I, and all humanity with me, is Lord of the Sabbath." In other words, humanity rules over the Sabbath; the Sabbath does not rule over humanity. Or, to put it another way, "People control Shabbat and not the other way around" (Stern 1992:89).
• Yet some forms of Jewish tradition had made the laws and regulations of the Sabbath too difficult and demanding. Keeping the Sabbath had become too much work. The purpose of the Sabbath was to give mankind a day of rest, reflection, and rejoicing in God, one another, and creation. But instead, it had become a burden, exactly the opposite of what it should have been. Jesus, as the representative of all humanity, was showing how the Sabbath was truly to be kept. Many of the Jewish leaders would have been in full agreement with Jesus in this. A passage from the Talmud says: Rabbi Yonatan ben-Yosef said, "For it [Shabbat] is holy unto you" (Exodus 31:14). That is, it is committed into your hands, not you into its hands! (Yoma 85b).
• A final comment from J. W. Shepard is appropriate here: God made man and adapted the Sabbath to his use. It is a human necessity met by divine mercy. Man is more than any institution, whatever it may be. The state was made to serve man. Every institution of the church divinely founded is for the proper service of mankind. The Sabbath should serve man's body, mind, and spirit. It should not be a day of pain, sorrow, and burdensome fear; but one of refreshment, peace, and joy (Shepard 1939:163).
∆ The point of this entire passage then, is "not to pit the alleged legalism of the Pharisees (and scribes) over against the libertinism of Jesus" (Green 1997:252). Instead, it is simply to show that Jesus is living and acting within a particular form of Judaism which viewed mankind as the reason and ruler of the Sabbath, rather than the other way around. It serves us; we do not serve it. The same holds true with all other institutions, even those created by God. "Jesus is less concerned with abrogating Sabbath law, and more concerned with bringing the grace of God to concrete expression in his own ministry, not least on the Sabbath" (Green 1997:252). Divinely inspired institutions are given by God to man to help us live life to the full. They are not given as a means to gauge personal faithfulness to God.
Luke 6:6-11 EXEGESIS
OVERVIEW: After the surprising claim of Jesus in Luke 6:1-5 that He and His followers are the new priesthood, the new sacrificial system, and the new center for the worship of God, Jesus reiterates this point through a dramatic healing in a Synagogue on the Sabbath. As with the account in 6:1-5, the issue of what is allowed on the Sabbath is secondary to the theological and practical point Jesus makes in 6:6-11. Truth and law are to help free people in life and in their worship of God; not hinder them. A proper understanding and application of God's law will not result in the development of roadblocks to God, but will open up access for all people.
6:6. Jesus, as was His custom on the Sabbath, went to the synagogue to teach. Sabbath teaching in the synagogue usually focused on a particular passage of Scripture, with a few Rabbis reading, translating, explaining, and applying the text (cf. Luke 4:14-16). In this account, the focus is not so much on what Jesus teaches from the words of Scripture, but on how He interacts with the people who are present, and what He teaches through His actions.
• On this particular Sabbath, there was a man present whose right hand was withered. The termwithered is a medical term used by Luke to describe a hand that is atrophied or paralyzed (Shepard 1939:164). Some speculate that the Pharisees had brought this man in order to trap Jesus (cf. v 7; McGee 1983:IV,271), but it is just as likely Jesus brought the man to teach the Pharisees and His disciples something. If the latter option is true, then the man with the withered hand could have been the object lesson for the teaching of Jesus that Sabbath. However, it is not likely that Jesus would use people this way, so the most likely option is that the man just came to the synagogue that day. Maybe he was a regular attender; maybe he was just visiting. The point is that he was there.
• Early second century commentaries on this passage indicate that the man was a mason, and so his paralyzed hand kept him from performing his work, and therefore, providing for his family (Barclay 1975:72; Evans 2003:241).
6:7. The scribes and Pharisees were also present at the synagogue, listening to and participating in the Sabbath teaching. But on this day, they were more interested in what Jesus did than what He said. They watched Him closely. There are numerous words for watching, looking, and seeing in Scripture, but the one Luke uses here (Gk. paratēreō), means "to spy on" or "to watch out of the corner of one's eye" (cf. Ps. 36:12 LXX; Bock 1996:178; ZIBCC 1:375). It carries the idea of watching someone with malicious intent. Luke puts this word first in the verse, to give it emphasis.
• So the scribes the Pharisees are not in the synagogue to learn, but to find an accusation against Jesus. They wanted to discover some way to charge Jesus with wrongdoing. Jesus knew the Pharisees were trying to find fault with Him, but He does not shy away from the conflict. Instead, He seems to head directly toward it. "He does not back away. The opposition may be secretive; but Jesus is open" (Bock 1994:529).
6:8. Jesus knew their thoughts, that they were trying to trap Him, and so He said to the man who had the withered hand, "Arise and stand here." Frequently, synagogues followed many of the rules and regulations found in the Temple. Since teaching and discussion Scripture was considered to be a priestly duty, many of the laws and regulations about the priesthood were loosely applied to those who taught and discussed Scripture in the synagogue on the Sabbath. One such rule restricted people with a physical deformity such as a broken foot or broken hand (cf. Lev 21:19).
• The deformity of the withered hand would have kept this man out of the Scripture discussion. Though he could attend and listen, he could not speak.
The fact that he was seated reveals his exclusion. In a typical synagogue of the time, the teaching Rabbi would sit, and those who were allowed to teach and interact with the Rabbi would stand near the front. Women, children, Gentile visitors, and those unqualified to participate in the dialogue, would sit in the back of the synagogue and around the edges of the room. Since this man was sitting, he was not being allowed to participate.
• Yet, in obedience to Jesus, the man arose and stood. Jesus could have healed the man while he was sitting, but by asking the man to stand, Jesus indicates that the man is about to participate in the teaching.
6:9. Once the man had risen, Jesus said to the Scribes and Pharisees, "I will ask you one thing: Is it lawful on the Sabbath to do good or to do evil, to save life or to destroy?" To save life in this context has nothing to do with receiving eternal life, but is about restoring a man to full health so that he can use his hand. Such an action would indicate to all that the kingdom of God had arrived, and that God was at work through Jesus to redeem and restore the nation (cf. Evans 2003:241; Bock 1994:529). "In the wider Greco-Roman world of Luke's day, 'salvation' had to do with 'a general manifestation of generous concern for the well-being of others, with the denotation of rescue from perilous circumstances' including, but hardly limited to the healing of physical malady" (Green 1997:256). This term was related to the hoped-for restoration of Israel which the Messiah would bring. In His actions toward the man with the withered hand, Jesus was hinting at His desire to bring healing and restoration to the withered land of Israel (Green 1997:256)..
• The opposite of saving a life is to destroy (Gk. apollumi) it. This does not necessarily mean to kill someone, but can mean "to ruin, harm, or hinder." To behave toward them in such a way that they cannot live life in a meaningful and productive way, fulfilling their potential within the Kingdom of God (cf. Schweizer 1984:113). But in asking the question as He did, Jesus shows that there is no neutral ground. By framing the question as an either-or question-you can either save a life or destroy it-Jesus reveals that there are only two options when it comes to helping other people, and being part of the Kingdom of God. There is no neutral ground, and religious people are not always on the side they imagine. If someone refrains from helping another, it is the same has hurting them. "If any illness is left unattended when healing can be provided, evil is done by default." (EBC 8:887).
• But the question of Jesus is much deeper than this. The Jewish religious leaders had laws which essentially said the same thing that Jesus has just indicated. Jesus was not asking this question to teach them. He was not even asking this question to see if they knew the answer. Jesus was not asking the question because He thought they had never thought about it before. He asked the question to show them that neither the question nor the answer really mattered.
• The question Jesus raises was very similar to a question which the Pharisees already answered in one of their many books on how to keep the law. When it came to the law, the Jewish religious leaders left no stone unturned. Every question had been asked and answered. They had considered all aspects of what could and could not be done on the Sabbath.
One of the questions in their books on the Sabbath was whether or not it was permitted to heal on the Sabbath. Here is the answer they had come up with in one of their books of Sabbath regulations:
• That was answer of the Jewish experts to the question of Jesus. Yet Jesus did not ask the question because
He was ignorant of their answer, nor did He ask it because He thought they didn't know the answer. He asked because He knew the answer, and He hated it.
• It is not that the answer was wrong. It was technically the right answer. It was logical and consistent with the rest of Jewish law. It helped maintain the purity and sanctity of the Jewish Sabbath. But in this instance, Jesus doesn't care about having the right or wrong answer to a theological question, nor does He want to debate with them about what is or is not work on the Sabbath.
• In asking the question, Jesus is showing that the question itself is the problem. Neither the answer, nor the question, is what matters. What does matter? The person standing in front of them all is what matters. The man with the withered hand is what matters. It is not the time to develop theological answers to questions about human need and suffering when a person is standing in front of you who is suffering. At such times, debate and discussion is not helpful, but is only destructive and harmful. At such times, theological questions about what sort of people we can help, and when or why we can help them, are nothing more than theological excuses for a failure to help someone in need. "Law must submit to need. Put another way: law is not designed to prevent one from meeting needs" (Bock 1994:512).
• This was why Jesus asked the question. The religious leaders had all the right answers for why this man with the withered hand should be seated in back, kept quiet, and relegated to second-class citizenship within Israel. But Jesus wanted to show that their theological answers to the problem of human suffering did not help people, but hindered them. Their answers did not saves lives, but destroyed them.
6:10. After asking His pointed question, Jesus looked around at them all. This is an interesting detail that Luke includes. It is as if Jesus was challenging anyone to answer His question while the suffering man was standing in their presence. As Jesus looked around, it would be interesting to know if the other teachers averted their gaze.
• Jesus was probably also looking upon them with sorrow. They had all the truth one could ask for, but none of the love. Yet truth, if it is properly understood, leads to love. After looking around the room, Jesus spoke to the man saying, "Stretch out your hand." When the man did so, his hand was restored as whole as the other. There is a strong sense of irony in the statement by Jesus and the healing of the man. "Note the amount of labor involved in the healing: Jesus merely speaks a sentence" (Bock 1994:530). Undoubtedly, a lot of talking and speaking about the Scriptures had already taken place that day, while the man with the withered hand sat there, unattended, unhelped, and possibly judged. Jesus only says a few more words, but in so doing, heals the man.
• Commentaries are often divided as to whether Jesus actually broke a Sabbath-day law here or not. Most argue that Jesus did break the Pharisaical understanding of the Sabbath law, but not any specific command of God. Some of these commentaries brought out how the Pharisees probably had some difficulty accusing Jesus here of any wrongdoing, since He didn't actually grind any herbs or use any medicine. All Jesus did was command the man to stretch out His hand, which is not technically breaking the law.
• One commentary rightfully points out that in the parallel passages of the other Gospels, and on other Sabbath-day conflicts, Jesus provides five reasons why He is allowed to heal on the Sabbath. (1) The reason, which Jesus gives in Matthew 12, is that the manmade laws of the Pharisees are not the same as the God-given laws of the Hebrew Scriptures. Although Jesus has broken man's laws, He has not broken God's laws. (2) even according to the opinion of some Jewish leaders, it was okay to rescue a sheep who had fallen into a hole on the Sabbath (Evans 2003:242). Jesus argues that if it okay to rescue a sheep, it is definitely okay to heal a man (cf. Matt 12:9-14). (3) Third, Jesus says in numerous places that the Sabbath was made for man; not man for the Sabbath. This means that God has given the law to help man better serve and glorify God, not to enslave man and require him to glorify the rules. (4) Fourth, Jesus states in other contexts that "My Father has been working until now, and I too am working." This means that God works every day, even on the Sabbath, and if God can do it, so can Jesus. (5) Finally, another Jewish rule allowed circumcision on the Sabbath. Jesus argues that if circumcision is okay, then healing on the Sabbath should also be allowed (Bock 1994: 528; Stern 1992:117).
• While all of these arguments are true, they still miss the entire point of the actions of Jesus. It is not about who has the better argument, who knows the law better, or who can present the most logical case. It is not about whether Jesus broke the Sabbath, or changed the Sabbath, or really wanted to teach anything about the Sabbath at all.
• Jesus wanted the Pharisees and His disciples to see the man. Jesus saw the man and his need, and had compassion on Him to heal him. He saw something good to do for somebody, and He did it. He did not allow the finer points of legal and theological debate keep Him from helping another person in need. Breaking the rules to help others in need is better than keeping the rules and failing to lift a hand.
• It can be argued that if our interpretation of the law keeps us from helping someone in need, then our interpretation and application of the law is at fault. Jesus shows the entire goal and purpose of the law: to help people love one another. If the law does not lead us to love, it has not been properly understood or applied. The truth of this is revealed by its opposite in the following verse.
6:11. After seeing that the man's hand had been healed, the scribes and Pharisees were filled with rage. The word for rage (Gk. anoia) is where we get the English word "annoy," but is much stronger than it's English descendant. In Greek, it is describes irrational anger, even pathological rage (Bock 1994:531; 1996:179; Radmacher 1999:1260; ZIBCC 1:376). The Pharisees were livid at Jesus.
• This reveals that they never did see the man. In their minds, he was only a good illustration for a theological argument. But beyond this, they also missed out on seeing God at work. The religious leaders knew that healing only came from God. In John 3, the Pharisee Nicodemus says to Jesus that they all know no man can do the things Jesus does unless God is with Him. Yet the Pharisees, so intent on keeping the Sabbath, won't even allow God Himself, who gave them the Sabbath, to go against their manmade traditions about the Sabbath and show love and mercy toward another human being.
• One reason for the anger of the Pharisees is something Jesus said which Luke does not record, that the healing was accomplished because God was at work in Jesus to perform it (John 5:17-18). This was, after all, the only way a miracle could be performed. Therefore, God Himself works on the Sabbath. The miracle was therefore God's endorsement of Jesus and His actions on this Sabbath day (Bock 1994:530).
• But the worst part about this verse, is what they decide to do with Jesus. Luke records that discussed with one another what they might do to Jesus. In His initial question in v 9, Jesus asked if it was lawful on the Sabbath to do good or to do evil, to save life or to destroy? In such a way, He revealed that there is no middle ground. One who fails to do good, ends up doing evil. One who fails to save a life, destroys it.
• The Pharisees prove this point when they get upset at Jesus for healing the man on the Sabbath. Though their regulations forbade them from helping the man, they were still allowed by the same law to plot how they might kill Jesus (cf. Mark 3:6). In rejecting to do the good in front of them, they ended up plotting evil.
It is clearly debatable if Jesus did any official "work" on this Sabbath, and so at most, Jesus would have been lightly reprimanded. The reaction of the Pharisees in seeking capital punishment for Jesus is a definite over reaction to the law (Exodus 31:14; 35:2). This marks the beginning of the controversy that Jesus has with the religious leaders.
• The escalating controversy also marks the beginning of Jesus showing His followers that He is starting a new people with new rules and a new way of living. In the following verses, Luke selects twelve men who will lead the way in forming the "new Israel." This new people will be defined by their loyalty to Jesus in the new age that was dawning. They would no longer be bound to many of the laws and regulations of the age that was passing away, as that part of the old creation was drawing to a close (Wright 2004:69).
Luke 6:1-11 commentary
What is the Sabbath? I want to offer you two definitions:
"Biblical Sabbath is a twenty-four-hour block of time in which we stop work, enjoy rest, practice delight, and contemplate God." The Emotionally Healthy Leader by Peter Scazzero
"Saturday; the holy day when Jewish people were commanded not to work." Luke 1-12 For You by Mike McKinley
Our first definition is more modern, and explains how the Sabbath matters for us. Our second definition goes back to the original context of Sabbath, and how it mattered for the nation of Israel thousands of years ago. Both definitions are good, but does the Bible have a definition? Let's turn to the Ten Commandments.
Exodus 20:8-11 "Remember the Sabbath day by keeping it holy. Six days you shall labor and do all your work, but the seventh day is a sabbath to the Lord your God. On it you shall not do any work, neither you, nor your son or daughter, nor your male or female servant, nor your animals, nor any foreigner residing in your towns. For in six days the Lord made the heavens and the earth, the sea, and all that is in them, but he rested on the seventh day. Therefore the Lord blessed the Sabbath day and made it holy. (NIV®)
Why do we throw out this commandment? We don't do that with any of the other 10 Commandments. The Bible says Jesus perfectly obeyed the law, but that doesn't mean we can now murder or steal (Matthew 5:17-18). Jesus kept Sabbath, and as a follower of Jesus, I believe we're called to keep a day of Sabbath rest still. In our passage today, Jesus doesn't end the practice of Sabbath, but clarifies it. He doesn't say, "You should no longer do this" but rather, "This is how you should do it." In one sense, Jesus offers us his own definition by first tellings us what the Sabbath is not, and then what it is.
The Sabbath is not... a day for burdensome rules. (Luke 6:1-2)
Luke 6:1-2 One Sabbath Jesus was going through the grainfields, and his disciples began to pick some heads of grain, rub them in their hands and eat the kernels. Some of the Pharisees asked, "Why are you doing what is unlawful on the Sabbath?"
When the Pharisees see the disciples picking and eating heads of grain on the Sabbath, they believe they have broken the Sabbath law. They counted the act of plucking as reaping, the act of rubbing as threshing, and the act of eating as preparing a meal, all of which are work. They did all this to get a small gooey pellet of food, which I'm sure tasted like something you can buy at Whole Foods.
For a long time the nation of Israel broke God's sabbath laws and this is one of the reasons God sent Israel into exile (2 Chronicles 36:21). So as the Jewish people came back to Israel, they created extra rules to prevent themselves from breaking the Sabbath again. If there's a fence around the Sabbath, they created a fence around the fence so that they wouldn't come close to breaking the Sabbath. They did this by forbidding 39 activities on the Sabbath, and that day the disciples broke at least four of their rules.
But if you look at the restrictions around the Sabbath in the Bible, there aren't that many. You're not supposed to work, collect, prepare food, or start a fire, you're supposed to rest, and a few others. It doesn't say you can't write or erase two letters, but their list of 39 rules said that.
When we add rules to God's way, we create religion. What a religion based on rules does is create fear, guilt, and anxiety. In the grainfield that day, Jesus challenges their additional rules and the guilt it creates.
There's a very simple application for us here. The Sabbath is not a day for burdensome rules. As Christians, God gives us a day of rest each week. This is not a day to worry about if you're doing Sabbath rest right or wrong. Trying to do Sabbath right should not stress you out. However, neither should we use our conviction of Sabbath rest to lord it over others and to look like a superior religious person.
The Sabbath is not... a day for burdensome rules. But does that mean it's a day for no rules at all? The Bible itself gives some rules for Sabbath rest. Should we just ignore them now because Jesus obeyed them each perfectly on our behalf? Or perhaps, is part of what it means to follow Jesus to have a day of Sabbath rest like him? Some might argue that Sabbath is optional based on Romans 14:5-6a where Paul says to be fully convinced in your own mind about whether one day is special or not. I respect that view, but I still think God provides a day of Sabbath rest, with healthy (not burdensome) boundaries, for our good.
Let's go back to the fence illustration. Trail Ridge Road is near the town I grew up in, Estes Park Colorado. This road is the "highest continuous paved road in the United States, reaching an elevation of 12,183 feet." When you drive that road, do you think you feel safer on the stretches of roadway that have a guardrail or the stretches that don't have a guardrail? You feel much safer when there's a guardrail. God gives us guardrails for our Sabbath days. The key is to discern his guardrails and not to place our own where we shouldn't put them.
The Sabbath is... a day for boundaries that liberate. (Luke 6:3-11)
Here we find three boundaries (or principles) of keeping Sabbath rest. We don't have a story in the Bible of Jesus encountering an overworked individual who never takes a Sabbath. Maybe it's because most Jews were trying to keep it. I still think we can draw out principals that apply to us who have trouble stopping.
1) Sabbath is a day to have our needs met. (Luke 6:3-4)
Luke 6:3-4 Jesus answered them, "Have you never read what David did when he and his companions were hungry? He entered the house of God, and taking the consecrated bread, he ate what is lawful only for priests to eat. And he also gave some to his companions."
In 1 Samuel 21:1-6, David is fleeing from King Saul. Saul wants to kill David because God chose David to be king instead of him. But David and his men quickly run out of provisions and the only food available is consecrated bread that only the Priests were supposed to eat. The priest agrees to give David the bread, and they take and eat it. Jesus is pointing back to this story for two reasons. First, if David used consecrated bread to meet his needs, we can use a Sabbath day to meet our needs.
Mark 2:27 Then he said to them, "The Sabbath was made for man, not man for the Sabbath.
When we think about our Sabbath day, we should think about it as a day to meet our spiritual, emotional, and physical needs. If I am a glass of water that is poured out over the course of a week, how can I be filled back up on my day of rest?
The Sabbath is a day to have our needs met. The Second reason Jesus tells this story is because King David foreshadowed a greater king to come. King David was a Messianic figure, and so he has special authority. But he wasn't the true Messiah, God's final chosen King. Jesus is, and so he claims even greater authority than King David. He is Lord of the Sabbath, which leads us to our second boundary.
2) Sabbath is a day to commune with Christ. (Luke 6:5)
Luke 6:5 Then Jesus said to them, "The Son of Man is Lord of the Sabbath."
There's only way to truly experience Sabbath rest, and that's in Christ. Back in Genesis, at the end the creation account God rested on the seventh day. We read about this in Exodus 20:11. God created the world in six days, but entered into a special divine rest on the seventh day. The Bible never tells us God left that state of spiritual rest. In fact, the very first people, Adam and Eve, were supposed to share in this eternal rest with God, but they sinned and separated themselves from God's rest.
Hebrews 4:9-10 There remains, then, a Sabbath-rest for the people of God; for anyone who enters God's rest also rests from their works, just as God did from his.
So how can we enter into this rest? Through Christ! That's why Christ came, to restore our access to our Sabbath rest with our Heavenly Father.
Matthew 11:28 "Come to me, all you who are weary and burdened, and I will give you rest.
We all spend our whole lives looking for this Sabbath rest. We want peace and happiness, but no matter how many vacations we take, or how much exercise we get, or how many football games we watch, we still feel unrested and unsatisfied. See, we can't find lasting rest in things or experiences, but in a person, Jesus.
Jesus Christ is our Sabbath rest. Jesus stepped down out of heaven and into our unrest. He took the chaos of our sin upon himself on the cross and died. He didn't stay dead. He rose and ascended into perfect heavenly rest. Now he invites us to come and join him in this rest. He offers us his perfect spiritual rest for our imperfect spiritual unrest. By confessing our sins and believing in him, he gives us his rest. He makes it so that we no longer have to be perfect to please God, so that we're no longer slaves to sin, and so that we are children of God. We have so much rest in Jesus!
Our day of Sabbath rest is a symbol for a much greater rest. Just like the local church is the visible manifestation of the universal church, a day of Sabbath rest is the visible manifestation of our eternal Sabbath rest. When we stop for a day to be in communion with Christ, we tell the world we don't have to work hard for God to love us. We won't know full rest until eternity, but we can begin to taste that rest today through a spending a day in relationship with him.
Question. Do you spend time communing with Christ on your Sabbath? Is he Lord of your Sabbath? I've included a Sabbath assessment quiz in the bulletin that I'd like you to take after the service. It will give you a good idea of whether or not you're taking a Sabbath rest with Christ or not. First, Sabbath is a day to have our needs met. Second, Sabbath is a day to commune with Christ. Third...
3) Sabbath is a day to do good things. (Luke 6:6-11)
On another Sabbath, Jesus enters the synagogue and there's a man there with a withered hand. He has some sort of disability that made it so he can't move or use his right hand. The Pharisees, who loved rules, think that maybe Jesus is going to break another one of their rules by healing on the Sabbath. They said you weren't supposed to do this except for life threatening emergencies.
Luke 6:9 Then Jesus said to them, "I ask you, which is lawful on the Sabbath: to do good or to do evil, to save life or to destroy it?"
Jesus goes on to heal the man, proving that the Sabbath is a day on which we can do good things, and this makes the Pharisees so mad they are "filled with fury" and begin plotting against Jesus.
Sometimes I feel mad at Jesus for asking me to do good things on my Sabbath day. Like I really don't like doing home improvement projects or manual labor on Sundays, my Sabbath day. I don't really like helping people move, but sometimes Jesus asks me to do those good things. And you know what? I've had people come help me on their days off, which I'm so grateful for.
The Sabbath is not a day for burdensome rules... But, the Sabbath is a day for boundaries that liberate. There's a tension here. We don't want to be burdened by legalism on our Sabbath day, but we could still use some guidance for how to treat this special day. There's a paradox here.
I want us to take a moment and run everything we've learned through a case study. Joshua has always had trouble knowing if he is doing Sabbath right, and because he is more left-brained, more type a, more analytical and organized, he has written down his Sabbath boundaries. He doesn't want to be a legalistic Pharisee, but he also doesn't want to ruin the day of rest God has given him. So he has asked us as a church to review what he has put together. First he wrote down his goal for his Sabbath:
Goal: Rest from work, feel refreshed, and spend time with Jesus, family, and friends.
Based on what I understand of the Sabbath, I think Joshua has a good goal. Next he decides when it will be.
Duration: Our Sabbath day starts at church Saturday at 5pm and lasts till Sunday at 5pm.
Of course, Joshua goes to the greatest church in the world, Cornerstone Congregational Church, so he kicks off his day of Sabbath rest by going to church on Saturday evening, even serving with the welcome team. Then he writes down his boundaries for what his family's Sabbath is, and what it is not.
Our Sabbath is:
1.
When I look at these boundaries, I see spiritual, emotional, an physical needs being met. I see intentional communion with Christ, but also communion with Christ throughout the day, and I see lot's of good things. I do see a danger that if every Sabbath is an opportunity to serve and love others, then you may never rest or spend time with family. Of course, any of these could become Pharisaical rules, so they should all be held loosely. Now let's look at what his family's Sabbath is not.
Our Sabbath is not:
1.
I think it's harder to come up with boundaries you won't do on your Sabbath day, as it's easy to become legalistic. Joshua doesn't find home improvement projects relaxing and enjoyable, but some of you may. He tends to work too much, so he needs to remind himself to stay away from email. These boundaries may need to be broken on occasion. Joshua may have to finish work because a deadline is looming, but if a deadline is looming every week, it's time for him to change jobs. Joshua may also need to prepare for his Sabbath day. The Jews took a day of preparation to get their house clean and food prepared. What can he do to prepare for his Sabbath day? (prepare a meal, do the dishes, take out the trash)
I hope these boundaries don't feel like legalism to you. Many of you know how to rest naturally and don't need them. But what I like about them is they actually set Joshua free and they can set us free too. I don't have to check email today! I don't have to strain my eyes sitting in front of a computer all day! I don't have to do dishes! So I want to encourage you to go home, talk with your family, and create your own Sabbath plan to help you enjoy the liberation Christ gives you on this day. Here's my closing big idea.
The Sabbath is a day of need, a day of communion, a day of good things.
We're going to close by singing "Resting Place." The first verse says this, "My faith, has found, a resting place. Not in my work or deed. I trust, the ever living One. His wounds, for me, shall plead." We can take a day of rest with Christ because we already have a day of eternal rest in Christ. When we rest, we say, "It's not about my work" but his. The Sabbath is a day of need, a day of communion, a day of good things.
Luke 6:1-11 Jesus and Sabbath controversy.
A. (1-2) The source of the controversy: the disciples are accused of "harvesting" on the Sabbath.
Now it happened on the second Sabbath after the first that He went through the grainfields. And His disciples plucked the heads of grain and ate them, rubbing them in their hands. And some of the Pharisees said to them, "Why are you doing what is not lawful to do on the Sabbath?"
a. Now it happened on the second Sabbath: If the unnamed first Sabbath was the one mention in Luke 4:31, Luke gave this time marker to show how busy Jesus had been in the two weeks (second Sabbath) since the Sabbath mentioned in Luke 4:31.
i. Clarke, along with others, believe this phrase refers to the first Sabbath after the Passover. There are some textual complications here as well, and the idea may simply be "on the Sabbath."
b. His disciples plucked the heads of grain and ate them, rubbing them in their hands: There was nothing wrong with what they did. Their gleaning was not considered stealing, according to the provision for the poor of the land given in Deuteronomy 23:25.
c. Why are you doing what is not lawful to do on the Sabbath? The problem was with the day on which they did it. The Rabbis made an elaborate list of "do" and "don't" items relevant to the Sabbath and this violated one of the items on this list.
i. When the disciples did what they did, in the eyes of the religious leaders they were guilty of reaping, threshing, winnowing, and preparing food. There were therefore four violations of the Sabbath in one mouthful.
ii. This approach to the Sabbath continues today among Orthodox Jews. In early 1992, tenants let three apartments in an Orthodox neighborhood in Israel burn to the ground while they asked a rabbi whether a telephone call to the fire department on the Sabbath would violate Jewish law. Observant Jews are forbidden to use the phone on the Sabbath, because doing so would break an electrical current, which is considered a form of work. In the half-hour it took the rabbi to decide "yes," the fire spread to two neighboring apartments.
iii. At this time, many rabbis filled Judaism with elaborate rituals related to the Sabbath and observance of other laws. Ancient rabbis taught that on the Sabbath one was forbidden to tie a knot - except a woman could tie a knot in her girdle. So, if a bucket of water had to be raised from a well, one could not tie a rope to the bucket, but a woman could tie her girdle to the bucket and then to the rope.
2. (3-5) Jesus responds to the accusation with two important principles.
But Jesus answering them said, "Have you not even read this, what David did when he was hungry, he and those who were with him: how he went into the house of God, took and ate the showbread, and also gave some to those with him, which is not lawful for any but the priests to eat?" And He said to them, "The Son of Man is also Lord of the Sabbath."
a. Have you not even read this: This was a not-so-subtle rebuke to the religious leaders (the Pharisees of Luke 6:2) who were confident in their knowledge of the Scriptures. This had the effect of Jesus questioning whether or not they ever read or understood their Bibles; He implied that they were ignorant of the essential point of the following Old Testament event.
i. "It is possible to read scripture meticulously, to know the Bible inside out from cover to cover, to be able to quote it verbatim and to pass any examination on it - and yet completely miss its real meaning." (Barclay)
b. What David did when he was hungry: The reference to David's use of the holy bread (showbread, or Bread of the Presence) in 1 Samuel 21:1-6 showed the first principle: human need is more important than religious ritual.
i. This is exactly what many people, steeped in tradition, simply cannot accept.
ii. "Any application of the Sabbath Law which operates to the detriment of man is out of harmony with God's purpose." (Morgan)
iii. The incident with David was a valid defense, because:
c. The Son of Man is also Lord of the Sabbath: The second principle was even more dramatic. Jesus said that He is the Lord of the Sabbath, and the Lord of the Sabbath was not offended by His disciple's actions, then these religious leaders should not have been offended.
i. This was a direct claim to Deity. Jesus said that He had the authority to know if His disciples broke the Sabbath law, because He is the Lord of the Sabbath.
3. (6-8) Jesus enters the synagogue and sees the man with the withered hand.
Now it happened on another Sabbath, also, that He entered the synagogue and taught. And a man was there whose right hand was withered. So the scribes and Pharisees watched Him closely, whether He would heal on the Sabbath, that they might find an accusation against Him. But He knew their thoughts, and said to the man who had the withered hand, "Arise and stand here." And he arose and stood.
a. He entered the synagogue: Luke showed the rising resistance to Jesus and His followers. Yet, Jesus still attended synagogue services and did not forsake the gathering together of God's people - even when we might think He had reason to.
b. The scribes and Pharisees watched Him closely, whether He would heal on the Sabbath: By their very actions, the Pharisees admitted that Jesus had the power of God to work miracles, yet they sought to trap Him. It was as if a man could fly and the authorities arrested him for not landing at airports.
i. The religious leaders watched Jesus closely, but with no heart of love for Him. We can watch Jesus, but still be far from our hearts from Him.
ii. "It may even be that they purposely set Jesus up by bringing the man into the synagogue." (Pate) Perhaps they had a greater expectation that Jesus would do such a miracle than the followers of Jesus had.
4. (9-11) The Lord of the Sabbath heals on the Sabbath.
Then Jesus said to them, "I will ask you one thing: Is it lawful on the Sabbath to do good or to do evil, to save life or to destroy?" And when He had looked around at them all, He said to the man, "Stretch out your hand." And he did so, and his hand was restored as whole as the other. But they were filled with rage, and discussed with one another what they might do to Jesus.
a. Is it lawful on the Sabbath to do good or to do evil, to save life or to destroy? In His question to the religious leaders, Jesus emphasized the truth about the Sabbath. There is never a wrong day to do something truly good.
i. In the legalistic approach taken by the religious leaders of Jesus' day (which went beyond the commands of the Bible itself), they clearly neglected acts of compassion and love to the needy. "Surely, there is no desecration of divine ordinances so powerful as that which clogs the stream of compassion." (Morgan)
ii. The modern Christian has the challenge of displaying love and compassion to all, and faithfully upholding God's clearly stated moral standard on matters of social controversy.
b. Stretch out your hand: When Jesus commanded the man "stretch out your hand," He commanded the man to do something impossible in his current condition. But Jesus gave both the command and the ability to fulfill it, and the man put forth the effort and was healed.
c. They were filled with rage: The reaction of the religious leaders was shocking, but true. When Jesus did this miracle on the Sabbath, He met the needs of simple people and broke the petty religious traditions of the establishment. Obviously, their rage and plotting of murder (discussed with one another what they might do to Jesus) were far greater violations of the Sabbath than the healing of the man's withered hand.
i. Jesus often rebuked the religious leaders of his day for this kind of heart. He said of them, laying aside the commandment of God, you hold the tradition of men...all too well you reject the commandment of God, that you may keep your tradition...making the word of God of no effect through your tradition. (Mark 7:8-9, 7:13)
i. Jesus wasn't trying to reform the Sabbath. He tried to show that in their understanding of the Sabbath, they missed the whole point. A legalist wants to debate the rules; but the point wasn't which rules were the correct rules; the point was the basic way to approach God. We emphasize that it is based not on what we do for Him, but it is based on what He has done for us in Jesus Christ.
