Lord of the Sabbath

Scene 1: Grain Fields

Mark 2:23–28 CSB

On the Sabbath he was going through the grainfields, and his disciples began to make their way, picking some heads of grain. The Pharisees said to him, “Look, why are they doing what is not lawful on the Sabbath?” He said to them, “Have you never read what David and those who were with him did when he was in need and hungry— how he entered the house of God in the time of Abiathar the high priest and ate the bread of the Presence—which is not lawful for anyone to eat except the priests—and also gave some to his companions?” Then he told them, “The Sabbath was made for man and not man for the Sabbath. So then, the Son of Man is Lord even of the Sabbath.”

The Question

So here we have a situation where Jesus and His disciples are walking through a grainfield on the Sabbath day. They’re workin their way through a grain field, and the language of “the disciples began to make their way” implies that they are traveling through a field, but not on an existing path, but rather making a path as they go. As they walk they pluck heads of grain from the stalks they are pushing aside. The Pharisees are walking with him, since that’s what you do with Rabbis, especially when it’s the Sabbath and you’re walking towards the synagogue. That’s the scene.

If you’re unfamiliar with the concept of the Sabbath, God had commanded the Israelites that every week they were to observe a day of no work. From sundown on Friday to sundown on Saturday, no work was to be done. This command was one of the Ten Commandments, and it is tied to God’s work in creation. God worked for six days to create the universe, the world, and all that is in them, and then He rested on the seventh day. The Israelites were to follow that example.

At different points in Israelite history, however, the people had failed to observe this command, which led to the Lord’s discipline upon them in various forms.

((The 70 in Babylon were likely due to failing to observe the Sabbath years; 490 years worth of neglect))

So this was something the religious leaders of the day took very seriously, and rightfully so; breaking the Sabbath was punishable by death under Old Testament Law.

So to say to a rabbi, “hey buddy, you’re disciples here....why are they breaking the Sabbath” was not just a passing comment. This is not a minor offense like speeding, or even petty theft. This is a capitol offense!

So it’s not “Look, why are they doing what is not lawful on the sabbath”

its “LOOK! Why are they doing that! That’s illegal on the Sabbath! Jesus, why aren’t you stopping them!?”

Now, in our context today, we might wonder why the issue is on violating the Sabbath, and not on the issue of taking from someone else’s grain field. There is a simple reason for that: The law actually permitted this, provided you used your hands and not a sickle.

Notice there is no issue with them picking the heads of grain by itself. The law permitted this, provided you used your hands and not a sickle.

Deuteronomy 23:25 CSB

When you enter your neighbor’s standing grain, you may pluck heads of grain with your hand, but do not put a sickle to your neighbor’s grain.

Duet

So the disciples weren’t doing anything wrong in that regard. The issue for the Pharisees is that the disciples were doing what the Pharisees considered work: picking heads of grain, rolling it in their hands to break the individual grains free from the head, and eating them. That’s work, and must not be permitted.

The Three-Part Answer:

Before we get into Jesus’ answer there is something we need to understand about the Pharisees and the Sabbath Laws.

First, as we have already discussed, breaking the Sabbath was a capitol offense.

Second, the Law does forbid work on the Sabbath day.

Third, in order to protect the sanctity of the Sabbath Day, the Pharisees and other religious leaders argued at length over what actually constituted work and what was permissible. The Old Testament Law doesn’t say anything about how far you’re allowed to travel on a Sabbath day, but the Pharisees stipulated that you can go no further than 1,999 paces. The Old Testament ruled that you couldn’t carry a burden out of your house. The Pharisees stipulated what was and wasn’t a burden, and didn’t allow anyone to carry objects that weighed more than a dried fig. The sad part is that there were a few loopholes in their law. For example, if you wanted to move a sheaf of wheat on the Sabbath, you could put a spoon in it. Then you would be moving the spoon, not the sheaf. Or you can’t tie any knots…unless you could untie that knot which just one hand. It’s ridiculous!

So the situation is that the Pharisees had added so much to the Law and were jumping on the disciples for breaking the Law, but the disciples weren’t actually breaking the Old Testament Law, but rather just the Pharisaical rules that the religious leaders had imposed upon the people as safeguards to avoid breaking the Law. And that’s a very important distinction. During my days as a student at Calvary Bible College, I wanted to know why Jesus seemed to intentionally break the Sabbath so much in the gospels. So I wrote a research paper on the topic and I discovered the Jesus never, not once, broke the actual Sabbath laws as recorded in the Old Testament. He consistently broke the rules the religious leaders set up, but he never broke the Sabbath.

That’s important because for Jesus to be the Messiah, for Him to be the perfect sacrifice, for Him to be the King, He must have kept the law perfectly. There must not be any blemish in His works. He Himself said that He did not come to abolish the Law, but to fulfill it! and fulfilling the law necessitated keeping it perfectly. Jesus maintained the integrity of the Law and His own personal integrity in the area of the Sabbath.

However, while it is true that Jesus didn’t break the real Sabbath Laws, when confronted on this issue of plucking grain, He doesn’t defend His disciples by saying “well, they actually aren’t breaking the Law”

No, he takes a much more interesting approach to this discussion. He appeals to David, the purpose of the Law, and His own personal authority, which ends up being a much more effective reply than getting into an argument about what is and isn’t stipulated by the Law. So let’s look at these things.

1. The Precedent of David

In answering this question, Jesus refers to an Old Testament passage about David. This passage comes from . In this passage, David is running from King Saul who is hell-bent on killing David. So David is literally running for his life. The priest did not know of the particulars of the strained relationship between Saul and David, so when David asks for food, the priest agrees to give him the consecrated bread. The issue here is that it that Law was clear that only the priests were to eat this bread. It was consecrated for them and for anyone else to eat this bread was a violation of the Law.

Now, I do want to briefly address an issue here. In Mark, Jesus says David “entered the house of God in the time of Abiathar, the high priest.” The issue is that when we turn to and read what it says, it names Ahimelech as the high priest. So how are we to resolve this issue? It seems like a contradiction. Did Jesus make a mistake? Did Mark make a mistake?

Fortunately there is an answer. The key phrase is “in the time of” or “in the days of” Abiathar. Abiathar was Ahimelech’s son, and would eventually become the high priest, so when Jesus says “in the time of” or “in the days of” this does not necessarily mean that Abaithar was the high priest at the time of the incident with David, only that the incident occured during the time when Abiathar was alive. Though it might seem strange to us today to refer to time periods like this, it wasn’t unheard of in the culture of the day. So no, Mark didn’t make a mistake and Jesus didn’t make a mistake. We simply need to understand the text properly.

Now that we understand that, we need to understand why Jesus is appealing to this slightly obscure passage from the Old Testament about David eating bread that was consecrated for the priests. What is going on here?

First, we need to understand the significance of who David is in the history of Israel. David stands as a type of Christ in the Old Testament. What that means is that David foreshadows Christ at different points in his life. God makes a covenant with David that will ultimately come to be fulfilled in Jesus Christ. David is a good and faithful king, which anticipates Christ as the The Good and Most Faithful King. The Jews were waiting for a Davidic King to sit on the throne of David and rule. Jesus showed up announcing the Kingdom and inviting all who hear to enter into the Kingdom by faith.

So Jesus when He is appealing to this passage about David is pointing to the highest regarded king Israel ever had. So the point is not about what David did, per se, but rather its about the fact that it was David that did it. (France)

R.T. France, a respected scholar wrote

The New International Greek Testament Commentary: The Gospel of Mark ‘Lord of the Sabbath’ (2:23–3:6)

The logic of Jesus’ argument therefore implies a covert claim to a personal authority at least as great as that of David.

France, R. T. (2002). The Gospel of Mark: a commentary on the Greek text (p. 145). Grand Rapids, MI; Carlisle: W.B. Eerdmans; Paternoster Press.

The New International Greek Testament Commentary: The Gospel of Mark ‘Lord of the Sabbath’ (2:23–3:6)

The focus of the scriptural allusion is not therefore so much on what David did, as on the fact that it was David who did it

The New International Greek Testament Commentary: The Gospel of Mark ‘Lord of the Sabbath’ (2:23–3:6)

The focus of the scriptural allusion is not therefore so much on what David did, as on the fact that it was David who did it

The New International Greek Testament Commentary: The Gospel of Mark ‘Lord of the Sabbath’ (2:23–3:6)

The focus of the scriptural allusion is not therefore so much on what David did, as on the fact that it was David who did it

David had personal authority by virtue of who he was as God’s anointed. He was in need when he approached the priest for food and the urgency of the situation and human need outweighed the letter of the Law.

Jesus is David’s Lord. Jesus is on a mission that carried a greater urgency than even David fleeing for his life, for Jesus’ mission is that of proclaiming the Gospel.

If David carries that much personal authority and his situation allows for his actions, how much more so does the Christ, the Messiah, the Davidic King who is himself greater than David, how much more does He carry personal authority to violate the Pharisees’ imposed code religious behavior?

It’s important to recognize that Jesus isn’t using David as an excuse to break the Law (especially since Jesus isn’t actually breaking the Law, just the Pharisees’ rules), but rather appeals to David as having set a precedent. It’s not “Well, David did that, so I can do this” but rather Jesus appeals to the precedent set by David, an appeal that implies there is great personal authority within Himself as well, an implication that will be made explicit shortly.

2. The Purpose of the Sabbath

After talking about David, Jesus makes a statement about the purpose of the Law.

The Pharisees has taken the Law and turned it into the huge burdensome thing that weighed on the people. They turned the whole purpose of the Sabbath backwards and upside down.

Jesus says

Mark 2:28 CSB

So then, the Son of Man is Lord even of the Sabbath.”

Mark 2:27 CSB

Then he told them, “The Sabbath was made for man and not man for the Sabbath.

Man wasn’t created to serve the religious Laws. the Law wasn’t created to enslave the Israelites. But under the Pharisees, this is exactly what happened! On Sabbath days you had to tiptoe around and hope no one was watching when you fed your animals, wrote more than one letter, sewed more than one stitch, or walked just a little too far. Jesus says, you’re missing the point.

We can do this today too can’t we? We can add rules to ourselves to try to protect ourselves from sinful activities, and then end up trying to impose those on others and judge them when they don’t measure up. This is legalism, and it can be a dangerous false gospel. We can enslave ourselves to our own rules and end up missing the point of what the Bible actually commanded to begin with. This can be done with church, what you eat or drink, finances, media choices, and more.

Jesus says the whole point of the Sabbath was to be a blessing to the people. It was to provide a day of rest, a day where mankind could recoup from the week and be refreshed. It was to be a time of spiritual richness of reflecting on and rejoicing in what God had done for them. Man wasn’t made to serve the Sabbath, but rather the Sabbath was made to be a service for man.

This would have been a radical redefinition of the understanding of what the Sabbath was. The people were so used to the Pharisaical understanding, that even though Jesus was going back to the intent behind the Law, it would have seemed like groundbreaking thought, a fundamental redefinition.

This makes us ask the question, who does Jesus think He is that He can just chuck the conventional wisdom of the day and redefine the significance of the Sabbath?

Jesus first gives us a principle: Sabbath was made for man, not man for the Sabbath, then he gives us by what authority he can made that declaration.

3. The Prerogative of Jesus

David did what was not lawful, but he’s David so its fine.

David did what was not lawful, but he’s David so its fine.

I am greater than David, so I have authority

The New International Greek Testament Commentary: The Gospel of Mark ‘Lord of the Sabbath’ (2:23–3:6)

The focus of the scriptural allusion is not therefore so much on what David did, as on the fact that it was David who did it,

Jesus’ first argument was an appeal to the precedent set by David, and we talked about how that was an implicit claim to personal authority. Then he gives us a principle, the purpose of the Law. Well, now Jesus is going to make an explicit claim to authority.

Mark 2:28 CSB

So then, the Son of Man is Lord even of the Sabbath.”

Mark

First thing to notice is the connection between the principle he gives and this statement. The connection is made with the words “so then” or “therefore”. Jesus makes the connection between setting forth the principle, and having the authority to say it.

Jesus uses a title for Himself that only He uses throughout the book of Mark. Last time we saw it, he used it to declare he has authority to forgive sins. Here He used it as he declares that he has authority even over the Sabbath itself.

These first couple of chapters of Mark, as we have seen, are placing a very high emphasis on the authority of Jesus Christ. We have seen how he has authority to teach, authority to cast out evil spirits, authority to heal various illnesses and diseases, and authority to forgive sins. And now we see Jesus declaring that He has authority over the very Law itself! Once again, Jesus is declaring Himself to be God, for only God is Lord over the Law because God gave the Law!

We cannot gloss over this. Here is France again:

The New International Greek Testament Commentary: The Gospel of Mark ‘Lord of the Sabbath’ (2:23–3:6)

he is being progressively revealed as κύριος in his teaching and action, in relation to spiritual powers and physical illness, in the declaration of the forgiveness of sins, and now even (καί) in relation to that most sacred of divine institutions, the sabbath. The christological stakes could hardly be pitched higher than this.

And this was not lost on the Pharisees. As we will see in the next section, the Pharisees have officially taken a dislike to this Jesus character.

This was not lost on the Pharisees.

The Sabbath was never intended to be a burden, but a blessing

The New International Greek Testament Commentary: The Gospel of Mark ‘Lord of the Sabbath’ (2:23–3:6)

When the negative element overwhelms the positive, as it has done repeatedly in the observance of the Christian Sunday as well as of the Jewish sabbath, something important has been lost.

This again, was an issue of authority.

Scene 2: Synagogue

It’s unfortunate that there is a chapter break here, because these two passages really work together.

Mark 3:1–6 CSB

Jesus entered the synagogue again, and a man was there who had a shriveled hand. In order to accuse him, they were watching him closely to see whether he would heal him on the Sabbath. He told the man with the shriveled hand, “Stand before us.” Then he said to them, “Is it lawful to do good on the Sabbath or to do evil, to save life or to kill?” But they were silent. After looking around at them with anger, he was grieved at the hardness of their hearts and told the man, “Stretch out your hand.” So he stretched it out, and his hand was restored. Immediately the Pharisees went out and started plotting with the Herodians against him, how they might kill him.

Tension in the air

Tension in the air

Pharisees followed Jesus from the fields to the synagogue and notice how the text describes them. It says they watched him closely. Why? In order to accuse Him. That’s a purpose clause. The Pharisees weren’t watching so they could enjoy a show, they weren’t watching so they could learn from this Rabbi. No. They watched him for the express purpose of wanting a reason to accuse Him. They heard what he said about having authority to forgive sins, and considered it blasphemy. They heard what He just said on the way to the synagogue about being Lord of the Sabbath. It’s time to get this guy out of the picture. We can’t have Him saying these things anymore, his words have the potential to upset the balance of the entire religious and political system.

Pharisees followed Jesus from the fields to the synagogue

They watched him. waiting for a slip-up. Oh! Here’s a man with a withered hand. What will Jesus do about this? Will he do what would obviously be work by healing the man, or will he let him go?

Jesus doesn’t seem to be afraid of the drama. He knew what was going on. Imagine being there. You just walked with Jesus and heard what he said and now you’re in the synagogue waiting for things to get started. You can see the Pharisees over in the corner whispering to each other. They don’t seem happy. You follow their gaze and see the man with the shriveled hand. Then Jesus stands up. What is He going to say? What is He doing to do? The Pharisees start to grin. If Jesus heals this man, it would be a deliberate violation of the accepted code. It seems like this is just what they’ve been waiting for. You want to cry out “It’s a trap!”

But Jesus doesn’t need a warning. He knows what’s going on. He stares down the Pharisees. He calls the man forward. “Stand before us” Wonder what was going on in that guy’s head. Was he afraid? This would have terrified many. Maybe he was excited! Jesus has already done some amazing things in this synagogue, remember? This is where he taught with authority and cast out an evil spirit. So maybe this guy thought this was his lucky day! Perhaps he had no idea what was brewing and simply recognized that this man is a Rabbi, and you do what Rabbis tell you to do.

Here’s where things get interesting. The religious leaders had their arguments and their rules for what should and shouldn’t be done on the Sabbath. Jesus cuts right to the heart of the issue. What Jesus is about to say is going to expose the inherent illogic of the pharisaical system.

Confrontation of Jesus

Here’s where things get interesting. The religious leaders had their arguments and their rules for what should and shouldn’t be done on the Sabbath. Jesus cuts right to the heart of the issue. What Jesus is about to say is going to expose the inherent illogic of the pharisaical system.

Mark 3:4 CSB

Then he said to them, “Is it lawful to do good on the Sabbath or to do evil, to save life or to kill?” But they were silent.

haha. I mean, what are you supposed to say to that? If you’re the pharisee, and you’re all wrapped up in what you can and cannot do by the letter of the law, and it’s your position that you can’t carry anything larger than a dried fig out of your house, or walk more than 1,999 paces, and Jesus bypasses all of that, he ignores the debate on what is “work” and what is a “burden” and instead asks the moral question. Now the first part of the question is obviously in reference to the disabled man. To do good is to heal him. To do evil is to not heal him.

But the second part of the question, that’s where the surprise pops in. “to save a life or to kill?” whoa whoa whoa. Who said anything about killing? No one advocating killing the man with the shriveled hand, are they? No, but this part of the question does not speak of the disabled man, but rather of Jesus. Jesus knows what is going on in the hearts of the Pharisees and he knows they want to accuse him. This question is aimed at them. In effect he is saying “Are you going to tell me that I can’t do good to this man on the Sabbath, but you can plot to kill me on the very same Sabbath???” How do they respond?

They can’t answer. To say to do good, they just lost the entire battle and have to concede to Jesus. If they say to do evil…why would you say that? It’s never the right day to do evil! So they’re stuck. They know they’re stuck, but instead of admitting it, instead of repenting of their rejection and humbly submitting before Jesus, they keep their mouths shut. And their silence speaks volumes.

Notice how Jesus responds. Looking around at them with anger. Anger. You know, we get anger at things and sin in our anger. Our anger tends to be selfish. Jesus gets angry, and it’s 100% righteous anger. He knows what is in the hearts of these pharisees and it makes him angry. They are choosing to wilfully reject the Lord of the Sabbath. But he isn’t just angry. He is grieved.

He is grieved at the hardness of their hearts. If we were to trace this phrase through the NT, we would find that it used for people who either cannot or will not see the truth. It is used most commonly of Israel’s reject of Jesus as their Messiah. (France) That is exactly what is going on here. The Pharisees are wilfully rejecting the truth of Jesus as being The Messiah, the anointed one, the one who was to come. And this grieves Jesus. It angers Him, and it grieves him.

Jesus doesn’t draw the scene out anymore. He’s made his point. But he isn’t going to not heal the man. He’s made it clear that it’s the right thing to do regardless of what day it is, and regardless of what the Pharisees say is okay.

And how do those Pharisees respond? Turns out Jesus’ anger and grief is justified.

Rejection of the Pharisees

Verse 6.

Progression of the pharisees:

The Phaisees choose to reject the Messiah. They had have enough of the claims to authority, enough of his healings, enough of Him. Time for him to go. You know it’s interesting how quickly things escalate for the Pharisees here. We are just into chapter three and they already want to kill him! We’ve got 14 more chapters to go, slow down a little! But notice the progression of the pharisees through the interactions with Jesus just from chapter two and this first section in chapter three.

They move from silent questioning, to open hostility in a matter of a chapter. Notice the progression

Mark 2:6 CSB

But some of the scribes were sitting there, questioning in their hearts:

Mark 2:16 CSB

When the scribes who were Pharisees saw that he was eating with sinners and tax collectors, they asked his disciples, “Why does he eat with tax collectors and sinners?”

Mark 2:24 CSB

The Pharisees said to him, “Look, why are they doing what is not lawful on the Sabbath?”

Mark

Mark 3:2 CSB

In order to accuse him, they were watching him closely to see whether he would heal him on the Sabbath.

Mark 6:6 CSB

And he was amazed at their unbelief. He was going around the villages teaching.

Though the Pharisees ar

Mark 3:6 CSB

Immediately the Pharisees went out and started plotting with the Herodians against him, how they might kill him.

Question in their hearts --> ask his disciples --> ask him --> watch to accuse --> plot to kill

They are choosing to reject the Messiah. This is devastating. The very ones who wanted to prevent him from doing good are now plotting to kill him. All because they reject his authority. How tragic.

ask his disciples

As we sit here today, it might be tempting to shake our heads at the Pharisees. “What were you thinking??” But there is a bit of the pharisaical spirit in all of us, isn’t there?

How do YOU Reject His Authority?

ask him

In regard to the Sabbath, Jesus was not advocating the abolition of the Sabbath here. Jesus fulled the Law, He did not abolish it. Does that mean we are obligated to observe the Sabbath today? No. Here’s why: the Sabbath Law was part of the covenant that God made with Israel. We are not under that covenant, but under a new and better covenant.

watch to accuse

plot to kill

Unfortunately, this doesn’t stop many Christians from viewing Sunday and viewing church attendance as a kind of “Christian Sabbath”. Now don’t get me wrong, I’m a firm believer in attending church and would argue that as much as possible, Christians should delight in gathering together to worship God together. It’s part of what mature Christians do.

However, Christian gatherings are not an end in themselves. Christians gatherings were made for Christians, not Christians for the gatherings. If you miss church one week because you’re sick, you’re not sinning. Are there sinful reasons for skipping church? Absolutely! There were sinful ways to violate the Sabbath. Jesus isn’t saying there are no Laws, He isn’t antinomian. But he’s also not a legalist. Christians do belong in church, but we aren’t to make artificial boundaries around that teaching. Every time we add to God’s instruction and create extra rules to impose upon ourselves and others, and declare it sin to violate those rules, we are rejecting Jesus’ authority. It’s effectively saying “Jesus, you’re commands aren’t good enough, here I’ve made some adjustments to follow instead” It’s a rejection of authority.

But there are so many other ways we can reject His authority as well.

If you’re here today and you’ve never repented of your sins, you’ve never trusted in who Jesus is and what He has done, then you are living in rejection of His authority. You might say “I haven’t rejected it, I just haven’t accepted it.” and I’m sorry, but that’s a lie. If someone rings your doorbell and you look through the peep hole to see who it is, and then just stand there without opening the door, you can’t say “I haven’t left them outside, I just haven’t let them in”. That’s ridiculous. Every moment that you don’t let them in, you’ve left them out! When you’re confronted by the truth of who Jesus, every moment that you live without embracing Jesus and His authority is rejection of Him and His authority. There is no in between. Jesus said you are are either for me or against me. And life the Pharisees, this rejection both angers Him…and grieves him. Do not continue in rejection. Repent and trust the savior.

Now, if we are Christians, we can be tempted to say this passage doesn’t apply to us! We have placed our trust in Him, we aren’t rejecting His authority, right? For us, there is always the danger of legalism that I’ve already mentioned. But it’s so much wider than that. Even though we may have the Spirit within us, every time we choose to sin, we reject Jesus’ authority over our lives. Every time we violate God’s commands, we are choosing our way over and against his, and that is rejection. Every time you gripe about other drivers on the road, every time you call people names for having different politics than you, every time you sit in front of a computer and visit websites you have no business visiting, is a rejection of Jesus’ authority. Jesus I don’t care about what you have said about loving my neighbor, I don’t care what you have said about personal purity and holiness, I am going to choose to reject that and do what I want to do.

It’s serious business. Jesus is both angered and grieved when we reject him in that way.

As we move through this Gospel of Mark, we are going to come across passages that will challenge us and force us to make a decision. Jesus has demonstrated through various means that He has authority to teach us, authority over our religious practice. That foundation has been laid. So when we come to challenging passages, we can choose to submit to His rightful authority, or reject it. What will it be for you?