Whose Sabbath?
Mark 2:18 - 3:6
|
Back to Basics The
New Testament Witness of the Apostle
Peter |
Max
A Forsythe | |
We have quite a lot going on here within these few verses. Calvin Keener both observe that the Pharisees or their spies are keeping a close eye upon Jesus and His disciples. Evidentially, these agents even attempt to provoke a dispute between the followers of John the Baptist and those of Jesus by drawing comparative observations between the two groups.
Certainly we know from Scripture that John the Baptist discovered who Jesus was and encouraged the people of his ministry to follow after the Christ. And yet, we read in history that for almost three hundred years, some of the Baptist's followers went their own way and considered the Baptist as their Messiah. We had thought that the matter ended in that ancient time, however, during Operation Desert Storm some CNN reporters stumbled on a small family group that claimed to be the last remnants of the Baptist's followers in Iraq! How firmly people remain entrenched in their fondest fantasies of false religion. Yet, as we consider our text today, I say this only to help us understand the intransigence of the Pharisees in their own religious fantasy world.
At issue in these first few verses are the ordinary fasting habits of the Jewish religious groups. While the Law only required fasting for the Day of Atonement, many many more "holidays" and occasions had been created and established by the religious leadership in the Old Covenant Church. Why doesn't Jesus and His disciples follow everyone else in these matters is the question being raised. Such a small thing to take exception too! Calvin observes that: "Satan has a wonderful dexterity, no doubt, in laying those snares; and it is an easy matter to distress us about a trifle. But we ought especially to beware lest the unity of faith be destroyed, or the bond of charity broken, on account of outward ceremonies. Almost all labor under the disease of attaching undue importance to the ceremonies and elements of the world, as Paul calls them, ( Galatians 4:3 Colossians 2:8;) and accordingly they do not hesitate, for the most part, to prefer the merest rudiments to the highest perfection. This is followed by another evil arising out of fastidiousness and pride, when every man would willingly compel the whole world to copy his example. If any thing pleases us, we forthwith desire to make it a law, that others may live according to our pleasure".
Oh the utter humanity here described that is all too common in every age and place. I am reminded of the differences in the administration of communion that have become all to evident within our own Presbytery in the last year and a half. It is sad indeed that some members of that body cannot take communion because several brethren on the cutting edge of institutional growth seem to be in a hurry to reintroduce Romish practices. Unfortunately, those of us who are put off by that reintroduction are being very careful in our words and reactions to avoid any label of being Pharisaic. However, profound differences in worship and communion are evolving whether we like them or not.
Sadly, as the innovators gleefully point out, the practices they are challenging are not part of those chapters which are constitutionally binding. Herein lies the difficulty, like the traditions of the elders in the time of Christ, we have to be very cautious in our practical expectations of brethren within the faith. A time of studied reflection is well in order before complaints or admonishment are considered.
Well could the Church leaders of Jesus time considered their calling in this trivial matter of fasting. And to their question, one of my commentators describes the two levels on which Jesus reacts to their pettiness. First and foremost He raises the issue of the time at hand. Here He is, the long promised Messiah - visibly and physically present within the Old Covenant community. The Bridegroom has come to visit His Bride - the Church. Shouldn't the Church react in the same way described in the Song of Solomon - where that relationship is explored centuries before? Here is the Lord of Life, the long expected Son of Man. How should the church react in His presence? Is gloom and doom the appropriate response? "Fasting is, (as Commentator Alan Cole reminds us) in the Bible, either a sign of disaster or of voluntary abasement of the spirit." Just as Jesus implies in verse twenty "The sorrow which finds expression in fasting will come soon enough ..., when the fellowship is broken."
Instead, Jesus encourages celebration of His visible presence and there are reports enough, as well as criticism that meals there were in plenty among those whose hearts were drawn to the long expected Messiah. Jesus even increases the joyous celebration at the wedding where He miraculously provides the finest of new wine for that feast.
And yet, as Dr Cole suggests, there is something more profound going on in this discourse that will not be appreciated or understood until the Apostles are forced out of the Old Covenant Temple. The New Administration of Christ cannot be held within the Old Covenant Church. "A new spirit must find new forms of expression; that is the lesson of the parable," which is proven in the book of Acts where Christianity and Judaism finally go their separate ways.
One more thought before we continue. Dr Cole notes that not only the Judaizers within the early church but also the Jewish Christian congregations known to Eusebius died out in later centuries. That comment reminded me how uncomfortable I have always been when I have read or heard of Messianic Jewish Churches - where ethnicity is played up so heavily. And in case you think me being unkind, I must also consider the Scot's rites of administering communion which have long been the way we always did communion in many Presbyterian congregations. The Presbyterian Churches here in America have in the last century grown far beyond the ethnic boundaries that once framed and preserved these institutions!
Now don't get me wrong, when we celebrate the Lord's Supper at the end of the month I'm not going to surprise you all and dunk the bread in a vat of grape juice for communion. I still have a lot of reservations whether or no that practice can even be considered communion. And I do not intend to share communion with those whose conscious would return them to that ritual of Roman communion practice from whence we broke four hundred and some years ago. After all there was within the Reformation a movement not unlike that instituted by Christ in His relationship with an administratively heavy hand of religious activity that accomplished nothing and would turn men's hearts away from God Almighty to self fulfillment and aggredization.
Since, I have alluded so often this morning to these communion differences within our beloved Presbyterian Church in America, I ought to state my firm conviction that the innovations I have seen in the last two years are more likely a means to the end of speeding up communion where large numbers of people are assembled. McCommunion I would appropriately describe it - to be in tune with all the attributes that increase institutional growth.
Whether or not these methods and means prove to be the new wine or the old wineskin must remain for the Lord to prove as He continues to build up and increase His own Church. And in His analogy here of Bridegroom, and His challenge of the Old Covenant Community, He is certainly laying claim to what is His own. This Lordship is proven even more in the following verses, where once again Jesus and the Pharisees lock their horns over the appropriate understanding of the Lord's Sabbath.
Time was here in America, when small towns and the farming communities all appreciated the seventh day rest. It was as natural a cycle as any in nature. And a cycle that helped upset the worst aspects of the French Revolution when the atheistic leaders imposed a ten day cycle upon great and small alike. Nothing that they had done created such a stir as that attempt to steal that which was laid down by the Creator seven to ten thousand years ago.
Now, we well understand that the habits of a lifetime die hard, when change is in the air. So we may presume that the disciples as defended by Christ in these last few verses of chapter two have not taken it upon themselves to harvest a field of grain. In fact it seems that they are very scrupulous to not take even a whole stalk of wheat, but are content to take a seed here and another there to chew on. Since Jesus was often in the habit of staying overnight in remote places, are they more than a Sabbath Day's journey from the nearest town and thus find it necessary to stave off pangs of hunger with such minimal feed? I am only asking, I am not so bold as my commentators to believe that they must have been within walking distance of food so that their accusers may obey their own precepts of the law.
Wherever they were located, these gleanings are at the very least a minimal violation of rural property or sacred ceremonial laws. Jesus certainly defends the actions of His men by applying an Old Covenant text to show that hunger may indeed be relieved without violation of sacred standards. The text He refers to has to do with the ritual Shrowbread in the Tabernacle that was always placed before the Lord. When David's men were in need the son of the priest freely consented to feed the outlaws who were being hunted by Saul. Then, most amazingly, the Lord of Life lays claim to the Sabbath. It is His to administer and to cherish from the first week of Creation.
Such petty attacks, you would think that the Old Covenant Administrators could have risen above all the insignificant charges that they ever laid against the Lord's Anointed! Yet, as we see in our last section this morning, they would charge Him even when He was well within the Law they protested too much!
Again we read, there He was, on a Sabbath, in the synagogue. Once more they would accuse Him if they could. Knowing of course what they were thinking, Jesus calls the crippled man forward. Then He asks the Pharisees "Is it lawful on the Sabbath to do good or to do evil, to save life or to kill?" Of course everyone knew the answer to that. Even pious old Stonewall Jackson would fight on a Sabbath if necessary. The Law of God was fluid enough to allow all that Jesus asks them. Yet, they remain silent. Then Jesus commands the man to "Stretch out your hand." And the man was instantly healed.
Whether or not these three events happened near in time or not is not important. What is important is the state of the hearts of those who would oppose Christ. More than anything else, I would guess that they were flabbergasted at the fact that none of their pet methods of proving religion would be acknowledged by Him! Here they were, a group of religious leaders who had built up and over the laws of God a petty set of man made rituals which were more important in their mind than anything designed by the Creator. Ever and anew have corrupt leaders within the Churches of Christ proved that we are all heirs to Adam's sinful and corrupt nature.
Just this week I was reminded of my own descent from Adam. The Drudge Report on the web linked to an article about one of the great enemies of my military years. Red Jane, we called her then in the sixties. She who supported our enemies and gave them comfort and encouragement during the conflict in Viet Nam. Well, if the reports are true, she and husband have separated because he cannot abide the spiritual rebirth she has supposedly experienced. Now I do not mean to be unkind in using supposition here, Matt Drudge is not a Gospel writer, but neither is he a gossip columnist.
Time will tell as the truth of this story is explored. I wrestled with this report for a day or so until I realized ever and anew, that the God of heaven may decide these things. Both we and all of creation belong to Him and He may save whomever He will. So be it, and even if He does the unexpected - may we all within Christ's Church accept the wondrous miracles of salvation which He is well able to accomplish. I will not be so stubborn and foolish as the Pharisees reported by Mark. Even for staying within their precious law, the leaders of Jerusalem would not have Christ under any circumstances.
They would, even as we read here, conspire with the Herodians to work out His ultimate destruction on a cross! Even at that cross, where there were two other criminals crucified with him, on accosted him, but the other admitted that he died for just reasons, but Jesus did not, He was without sin and the whole crucifixion was a miscarriage of justice. Even the Roman Procreator washed his hands of the whole mess, and Josephus, a Jewish historian tells us that the Pharisaic crowd were the most wicked and evil men to ever own power of the religion of the Old Covenant Community.
Let us consider carefully our own calling and that spiritual calling of our Lord and Savior who may chose whomever He would, even people that we might wonder publicly about! At bottom, as we conclude, we must learn from this passage that Christ is not contained by our churches, neither are we the final arbitrator of His laws, means or methods of administering His Church. We as the bride of Christ are called to wait patiently for His final coming and to rejoice in Him as we worship and adore Him on the Day which is His own, even as are we and all of creation. May we rejoice, give thanks and sing His praises today and ever more. Amen.
|
Resources Used | |
|
Cole, Alan. |
Tyndale New Testament
Commentaries: |
|
Keener, Craig S. |
The IVP Bible Background Commentary:
|
|
Pringle, William. |
Calvin's New Testament
Commentaries: |
|
The
New Geneva Study Bible
(NKJV) | |
|
Mrk02c |
09 January 00 |