Sermon Tone Analysis

The Lord of the Sabbath.

Coming to a close this Sunday in the conflict between Jesus and the religious leaders and their tradition.

What they held to and forced upon men by their man made regulations.

This week we are going to see where these conflicts turn into a head on collision with the religious leaders that sends them away seeking to kill Him.

The specific conflict this week is over the Sabbath observance.

Jesus is quite the rebellious man.

First it begins with Him claiming to have authority to forgive Sins which he does, then it goes to Him eating with sinners, not oberving their fasts like they would have him to, which was a modern sign of righteousness, and lastly didnt observe according to their regulations.

.

Pray.

The offense:

Now it happened that He went through the grainfields on the Sabbath…Plucked heads of grain…And the pharisees said to Him, “Look why do they do what is not lawful on the Sabbath?”

The question we must ask first when dealing with the text is why are they so offended by this action?

Is it because they have stolen from someones field?

Or is there some other offense that has occured?

Upon what basis is this conviction so strong against Christ and His disciples?

Deuteronomy 23:25

What we find here is in the Old Testament instruction it did alot for men that were hungry and walking by his neighbors field to pluck grain that they may eat.

With the exception that they may not use a sickle.

The verse prior to this one allowed a man to get his fill why going through a vineyard but not allowed to put any in a container.

A provision being made for the hungry to eat but not to take beyond what their fill would be, for then it would be stealing.

We do not see Jesus and His disciples using a sickle on their neighbors wheat.

So the offense then that these religious leaders were having was not against the picking of grain in someone elses field as thought they were stealing.

So then what was the offense:

Exodus 20:8-

Exodus

So the sabbath day was suppose to be a day of rest.

Where no work should be performed.

Otherwise the penalty was death for those who did not honor this day.

Here we begin to see in part the accusation that was being raised against Him was whether or not he was doing that which was lawful work on the sabbath.

This becomes the same basis as there accusation against Christ in the second account.

Where Gods word ended the religious leaders were happy to pick up and define what exactly this meant.

Mark 3:

So they watched Him closely that they may bring accusation.

But according to whose standards?

Gods or Mans?

The scribes enumerated thirty-nine kinds of work that were prohibited, and the third of these was reaping.

The Pharisees interpreted picking a few heads of grain as reaping!

The scribes enumerated thirty-nine kinds of work that were prohibited, and the third of these was reaping.

The Pharisees interpreted picking a few heads of grain as reaping!

Despite being open for 14% fewer days a year than competitors, Chick-fil-A is dominating the fast-food industry.

The chain's same-store sales grew by 16.7% in 2018, according to Nation's Restaurant News data; internal sales figures shared with Business Insider indicate that same-store sales have been up by more than 16% so far in 2019 as well.

Brooks, J. A. (1991).

Mark (Vol.

23, p. 65).

Nashville: Broadman & Holman Publishers.

We see Jesus’ response to their accusations

Illustration of David and the showbread.

This was at a time that Saul was seeking the life of David.

This is when Saul sought to kill David.

The argument is reasonable: if a hungry king and his men were permitted to eat the holy bread from the tabernacle (), then it was right for the Lord of the Sabbath to permit His men to eat the grain from His fields.

David broke a definite law given by Moses, for the showbread was for the priests only (); but the disciples had violated only a man-made tradition.

God is surely more concerned with meeting the needs of people than He is with protecting religious tradition.

The Pharisees had their priorities confused.

Wiersbe, W. W. (1996).

The Bible exposition commentary (Vol. 1, p. 118).

Wheaton, IL: Victor Books.

In relation to this man who was healed by Jesus.

Then He testifies of Himself that He is the LORD of the Sabbath.

Man was not made for the Sabbath but rather the Sabbath for the man.

On that same Sabbath Day, Jesus went into the synagogue to worship; and while He was there, He deliberately healed a man.

Certainly He could have waited one more day, but once again He wanted to challenge the pharisaical legalistic traditions.

This time the Pharisees () were expecting Him to heal, so they kept their eyes wide open.

Our Lord’s questions in were never answered by His enemies.

Since evil is at work every day, including the Sabbath Day, why should good not be at work as well?

Death is always at work, but that should not hinder us from seeking to save life.

Jesus could see “the hardening of their hearts” (literal translation), and their sin made Him angry.

Our Lord never became angry at the publicans and sinners, but He did express anger toward the self-righteous Pharisees ().

They would rather protect their traditions than see a man healed!

The man, of course, knew little about this spiritual conflict.

He simply obeyed our Lord’s command, stretched out his hand, and was healed.

Wiersbe, W. W. (1996).

The Bible exposition commentary (Vol. 1, pp. 118–119).

Wheaton, IL: Victor Books.

They had turned the Sabbath rest into a burdensome observance governed by mans rules and regulations.

You can see their hypocrisy here in this text.

Luke 13:10-

These were a people that they thought they had it all figured out yet could not see their own hypocrisy in their passion zeal to uphold the Law to only find what they were upholding was hypocrisy.

This is where you see Christs anger aroused in chapter 3 of Mark.

Mark 3:3-

He asked a question yet they refused to answer for they were caught either way they would answer.

By his question Jesus lifted the issue of Sabbath observance above a list of prohibitions to the higher general principle.

No one would claim that it was “lawful” or right to do evil or kill on the Sabbath.

The obvious alternative is that it must be right to do good and save life.

To heal is to do good; to do nothing is to do evil.

To heal is to “save” a life; not to heal is the equivalent of killing.15

For Mark merely not doing work and resting on the Sabbath or the Lord’s Day was not enough.

The day must be used for all kinds of good things.

By his question Jesus lifted the issue of Sabbath observance above a list of prohibitions to the higher general principle.

No one would claim that it was “lawful” or right to do evil or kill on the Sabbath.

The obvious alternative is that it must be right to do good and save life.

To heal is to do good; to do nothing is to do evil.

To heal is to “save” a life; not to heal is the equivalent of killing.15

For Mark merely not doing work and resting on the Sabbath or the Lord’s Day was not enough.

The day must be used for all kinds of good things.

The Pharisees were silent because whatever answer they gave to Jesus’ question would have undermined their position on Sabbath observance

Brooks, J. A. (1991).

Mark (Vol.

23, p. 68).

Nashville: Broadman & Holman Publishers.

They would have rather kept their tradition than see the man healed.

Whats interesting in relation to Jesus’ question they went away on the Sabbath plotting to Kill Him.