Jesus Lord of the Sabbath (The Danger of Religion)

(Luke 6:1-11)

There's are some huge pitfalls when it comes to the issue of religion. I think most people when they think of religion, think of it as being a help and support to people as they journey through life. Maybe for some, but there's a sense in which religion can be a hindrance, a real block to people being able to relate as individuals to God. 

What I'd like to do today is demonstrate that fact from several incidences in the life of Christ and to do that we will being to look at a new chapter in The Gospel of Luke, chapter 6.

We're going to look at two episodes in the life of Christ I'm going to begin reading with verse one.

1: 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. 2: And some of the Pharisees said to them, “Why are you doing what is not lawful to do on the Sabbath?”

3: 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: 4: 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. 5: And He said to them, “The Son of Man is also Lord of the Sabbath.”

 (Luke 6: 1-5 N.K.J.V.)

In a peculiar way, the two episodes are entirely distinct, yet a common thread runs through them, linking them, and binding Luke's narrative together. It is their association with breaking the Sabbath that is the key issue here. This passage, to me, serves as an instructive exploration into the potential impact, negative or positive that religion can have on people's thinking.

So, let's carefully navigate through these two episodes. 

The first, in verse one, states, "Now it happened on the second Sabbath after the first." Upon reading this, one might wonder about the significance of the first and second Sabbaths. It is understood that this refers to the Passover, with the second Sabbath occurring after the initial observance. If the Passover lasted a week, this second Sabbath marked the beginning of the second week after the initial one. But what is crucial here, it is emphasizing that it took place on the Sabbath.

The text informs us that they walked through grain fields." While we don't precisely know the type of grain it was.

It certainly wasn't corn, which did not exist in the 1st century. Some argue it was wheat, while others remain uncertain. Nonetheless, this detail isn't critical to the story. The disciples, while walking through these fields (or along a path through the field they plucked heads of grain, rubbed them in their hands, and ate them. This detailed description raises the question of whether such minutiae of detail is necessary. Significantly, the three actions—plucking, rubbing, and eating—are highlighted. We shall see in a moment that this detail is relevant and important.

In verse two, some Pharisees confront them, questioning why they engage in what is deemed unlawful on the Sabbath. Evidently, there were Pharisees nearby, religious people known for their meticulous adherence to religious laws. Laws that extended way beyond Moses' command to keep the Sabbath day holy. 

By the time of Jesus, their regulations were so extensive that, according to them, plucking, rubbing, and eating amounted to violating the Sabbath. The Pharisees saw these actions as encompassing reaping, threshing, winnowing, in other words a form of food preparation on the sabbath and therefore disallowed. Simultaneously. Jesus' disciples, in their eyes, committed four distinct Sabbath breaches in one act. The Pharisees challenge them, asserting that what they're doing is unlawful on the Sabbath.

However, it's essential to question who defines what is unlawful. The disciples did not, in fact, violate Mosaic law; instead, they transgressed Pharisaic traditions and the religious rules they had created.

The Pharisees' objection arises from their preconceived religious notions. They considered the mere acts of plucking, rubbing, and eating as work. It was this preconceived and deeply religious idea that shapes their reaction. It's crucial to keep their preconceived religious perspective in mind as we proceed through the story. 

In verse 3, Jesus responds, saying, "Have you not ever read 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 gave some to those who were with him, which is not lawful for any but the priest to eat." 

Jesus draws attention to an incident involving David from 1 Samuel 21. At this point, the tabernacle constructed by Moses is still present, with its courtyard, altar, and the holy place containing a table with showbread. Only priests were allowed to eat this bread.

Referring to this account in 1 Samuel 21, Jesus points out that David, when hungry, entered the holy place and ate the showbread, an act restricted to the priests. 

Luke's recording of what Jesus says here, parallels the situation with the Pharisees' complaint about Jesus' disciples, emphasizing that David and those with him did exactly the same thing.

The Pharisees, although deeply religious, failed to grasp the significance of this scriptural event. Despite their knowledge of the story, they missed its meaning. 

A profound truth to grasp here is that it is entirely possible to know the Scriptures thoroughly, quote them accurately, and still miss their true meaning of what they say.

The Pharisees' religious preconceptions blinded them to the spiritual truth within the scripture. Their rigid ideas prevented them from understanding the essence of the narrative and what it actually meant.

So, what is the solution if that's their problem what's the solution. When we read scripture, we must not proof text, by looking at it to back up or try and make it agree with what we already think. It should be a case, “speak Lord for you servant is listening not the other way round.

The individual who comes with no sense of need always misses the deep meaning of scripture which only that sense of need awakens. 

The predicament lies in the Pharisees' religious mindset, which closed their minds with preconceived ideas, rendering it impossible for them to perceive the truth of God. Their intense focus on certain religious rules prevented them from having an open mind or recognizing their spiritual need.

In verse 5, Jesus provides another response to their lack of understanding, asserting, "The Son of Man is also Lord of the Sabbath." This title, "Son of Man," is a messianic designation derived from Daniel 7. By proclaiming himself as, ‘Lord of the Sabbath’, Jesus conveys his authority over the Sabbath. It's a significant statement, emphasizing his role as the Messiah and his supremacy over the Sabbath, the high point if you will of the religious rules and rituals.

Mark adds a clarifying detail in his gospel account, adding that Jesus also said, "The Sabbath was not made for man, but man for the Sabbath." 

This underscores the proper order of things: God created man first, and then the Sabbath was established for his benefit and rest. However, the Pharisees, as Jesus points out, had it backward; they believed that God made man to fit the Sabbath. This misunderstanding highlights the danger of misinterpreting scripture, leading to a distorted perspective.

Moving to the second episode in verse 6, it also occurs on another Sabbath in a synagogue where Jesus respond a teaching out of a particular situation that presents itself.

6: On another Sabbath he went into the synagogue and was teaching, and a man was there whose right hand was shrivelled. 7: The Pharisees and the teachers of the law were looking for a reason to accuse Jesus, so they watched him closely to see if he would heal on the Sabbath. 8: But Jesus knew what they were thinking and said to the man with the shrivelled hand, “Get up and stand in front of everyone.” So, he got up and stood there.

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?”

10: He looked around at them all, and then said to the man, “Stretch out your hand.” He did so, and his hand was completely restored. 11: But the Pharisees and the teachers of the law were furious and began to discuss with one another what they might do to Jesus.

(Luke 6: 1-11)

So, Jesus is teaching and a man with a withered right hand is present. The Pharisees, still harbouring critical intentions, closely watch Jesus to see if he would heal on the Sabbath, intending to use it as an accusation against him.

This situation underscores the contrast between the Pharisees' critical mindset and Jesus' compassionate actions, of responding to a situation of need. While in the synagogue on the Sabbath, the Pharisees focus on finding fault, emphasizing the risk of any of us choosing to sometimes attend religious gatherings with a critical spirit rather than a desire for worship, understanding, or spiritual growth.

I am sure this observation resonates particularly with pastors who often witness some people who attend church with the intent to find fault in other rather than seeking spiritual nourishment. It serves as a reminder of the importance of approaching religious gatherings with an open heart and a genuine desire to understand and apply the teachings, avoiding the trap of criticism over compassion.

In the synagogue of their day, their primary purpose should have been to engage with the teachings of the scripture. However, the Pharisees attended on this day with the intention of finding fault with Jesus. This situation again parallels with some individuals today who seem predisposed to criticize rather than seeking spiritual growth.

Joseph Parker, a renowned preacher in London, exemplifies the challenge of dealing with those who focus on pointing out errors rather than grasping the broader message. Parker’s response was always brilliant, and I have used it myself on occasion. I simply ask, "And what else did you get out of the message?" This serves as a timely reminder of why we are meant to be there, and is also a fitting rebuke for those overly critical individuals who miss the overall essence of the teachings.

The negative spirit of consistently finding fault is detrimental to us  as individuals and to our wider Christian communities and it's advisable not to get too close to such individuals. The narrative emphasizes the importance of approaching religious gatherings with an open heart and a sincere desire to understand the teachings, rather than merely seeking opportunities to criticize.

In the synagogue, Jesus, being aware of their thoughts but as the Son of God, uses a situation where a man with a withered hand is present to bring comfort and compassion to someone while at the same time teaching a valuable lesson.

Rather than immediately healing him, Jesus instructs the man to stand up, creating a moment of anticipation. Jesus then poses a question not to the man, but to the Pharisees, challenging their legalistic views on Sabbath rules.

Jesus asks whether it is lawful on the Sabbath to do good or to do evil, to save a life or to destroy. This question confronts head on their rigid interpretation of the Sabbath laws and highlights the Pharisees' hypocritical stance. Jesus exposes the inconsistency in their thinking.

Following this, Jesus looks around at the Pharisees and the crowd, and then instructs the man to stretch out his hand, and upon doing so, the withered hand is miraculously restored.

However instead of recognizing the goodness and compassion in this act, the Pharisees react with rage and discuss among themselves how to attack and cause harm to Jesus.

This episode exemplifies the clash between Jesus' compassionate actions and the legalistic mindset of the Pharisees, emphasizing the importance of understanding the true intent behind religious rules and embracing the spirit of compassion over rigid adherence to tradition.

This narrative highlights the perils of rigid religious thinking, particularly when it results in a lack of compassion, and on this occasion even anger. The Pharisees, staunch adherents to their preconceived ideas, became incensed when their interpretation of Sabbath rules was challenged by Jesus' compassionate act of healing a man on the Sabbath.

It's worth noting that according to some very early Historical writing the man's condition, according to Jerome's interpretation, had practical implications also. He was a mason, and his withered hand hindered him from earning a livelihood. 

So, instead of rejoicing in the restoration of the man's hand and recognizing the compassion behind the act, the Pharisees were blinded by their rigid religious views. Their anger stemmed from the perceived violation of Sabbath rules, showcasing the pitfalls of adhering strictly to religious dogma.

This story echoes experiences where individuals become irate over disagreements in theological positions or practices. The Pharisees' fury is a sad reminder of how religion, when driven by preconceived ideas, can lead to a closed heart and a lack of compassion.

The lesson from this episode is clear: approach scripture with an open mind, expecting an interpretation that matches the compassion of God. When preconceived notions dominate, it can blind individuals to spiritual truths and lead to unnecessary anger when those notions are challenged. The narrative emphasizes the importance of maintaining a warm heart, rooted in love for God and others.

As Jesus highlighted, the greatest commandments are to love God and love your neighbour as yourself. 

If one truly possesses the truth of God, it should manifest in a love that extends beyond rituals and rules. John's writings, as mentioned, emphasize the correlation between understanding God's truth and expressing love for others.

Religion, when reduced to mere rituals and rule-following, can lead to a lack of sympathy, a reluctance to worship, and an insensitivity to the needs of others. The cautionary tale here is to avoid the main danger, the pitfall of religion that blinds one to the light of God's truth and diminishes the essence of compassion and love.

The Jesus religion was about love expressed and service offered, it was the love of God and the love of men appearing in love in action. To Jesus the most important thing in the world was not the correct performance of a ritual of the spontaneous response to the cry of human heart for an intervention expressing the compassion of God.