It is but natural to inquire how Jesus looked at the question of faith and reason in his dealings with the people of the times. Although Jesus was all for complete faith in God and in himself from those who approached him , he never made light of the role of reason in our relation to God and people. He knew that discarding reason in the name of faith was the sure means to mislead people to superstitions and practices irreconcilable with true faith in God. There are instances when Jesus questioned the practices of the Jews of the time declaring them not in conformity with reason, although they were believed to be coming from Moses and therefore from God Himself. Among such practices, the pride of place is to be given to the duty of every Jew to observe the Sabbath without any excuse whatever. The interpretation of this obligation at the hands of the Jewish authorities had gone to such an extent that Jesus had no choice but to challenge their concept of the Sabbath and revert it to its original meaning intended by God Himself.
We have in Matthew 12: 1-14 two instances of breaking the Law of Sabbath by Jesus in violation of its understanding by the Jewish authorities who were the acknowledged interpreters of the Law of Moses. Jesus did not claim to use divine authority in his teachings and therefore had to resort to reason in explaining his actions seemingly contrary to the established laws and practices. Thus we have the justifications for a different view of the very meaning of Sabbath introduced by Jesus. The Jews could not understand how a pious Jew could pluck the corns and eat them on the Sabbath, although eating by itself was permitted. Jesus countered their argument by citing history in what David did when he was hungry and the current practice of serving at the altar by the priests without breaking the Law of Sabbath. The whole point of Jesus has its compelling force from what he said about the presence of something greater than the temple right in their midst referring not only to himself but to the whole humanity subsumed under the title of Son of Man. As against those who would still insist on the inviolability of the revelation of God concerning Sabbath, Jesus challenged them to go and learn the meaning of a very important piece of revelation expressed through the prophet Hosea in chapter 6:6 "I require mercy, not sacrifice". In the light of the above reasons, Jesus laid down the rule about Sabbath observance that contained its real inner meaning thus: "He also said to them, 'The Sabbath was made for the sake of man and not man for the Sabbath: therefore the Son of Man is sovereign even over the Sabbath'" (Mark, 2:27-28). Matthew's Gospel adds a warning to the Jews that if they knew the meaning of the text in Hosea, they would not have condemned the innocent.
In the next incident about the healing of the withered hand of a man in the Synagogue on a Sabbath, the three Evangelists have slightly differing versions. In Mark and Luke we see the Jews waiting to see if Jesus would cure the man on the Sabbath so that they could frame charges against him (Mark, 3: 1-6; Luke, 6: 6-11). Matthew 12: 9-14 presents the incident in a better pedagogical manner, the reason for its difference from the other two Gospels, where it is the Jews who took initiative in asking the all-important question about the legitimacy of healing on the Sabbath. Here again, like in other Gospels, their intention was to frame a charge against Jesus, added as a side remark by Matthew. Their question elicited a counter question from Jesus, one of his usual methods of teaching, about a sheep owned by someone falling into a ditch on a Sabbath. He asked them whether there was one among them who would not catch hold of that sheep and lift it out on a Sabbath. Next Jesus made the cutting edge remark that surely a man was worth far more than a sheep! The conclusion , therefore was that it was permitted to do good on the Sabbath. In Mark and Luke it is Jesus who asks the question whether it was lawful to do good or to do evil on the Sabbath, to save life or to destroy it. The Jews held their peace and Mark adds that Jesus looked round at them with anger and sorrow at their obstinate stupidity, proceeding to heal the man of his withered hand on the Sabbath. We shall see in the next Post how Jesus corrected the false way of practicing the Sabbath through its violation in order to teach its true practice.
We have in Matthew 12: 1-14 two instances of breaking the Law of Sabbath by Jesus in violation of its understanding by the Jewish authorities who were the acknowledged interpreters of the Law of Moses. Jesus did not claim to use divine authority in his teachings and therefore had to resort to reason in explaining his actions seemingly contrary to the established laws and practices. Thus we have the justifications for a different view of the very meaning of Sabbath introduced by Jesus. The Jews could not understand how a pious Jew could pluck the corns and eat them on the Sabbath, although eating by itself was permitted. Jesus countered their argument by citing history in what David did when he was hungry and the current practice of serving at the altar by the priests without breaking the Law of Sabbath. The whole point of Jesus has its compelling force from what he said about the presence of something greater than the temple right in their midst referring not only to himself but to the whole humanity subsumed under the title of Son of Man. As against those who would still insist on the inviolability of the revelation of God concerning Sabbath, Jesus challenged them to go and learn the meaning of a very important piece of revelation expressed through the prophet Hosea in chapter 6:6 "I require mercy, not sacrifice". In the light of the above reasons, Jesus laid down the rule about Sabbath observance that contained its real inner meaning thus: "He also said to them, 'The Sabbath was made for the sake of man and not man for the Sabbath: therefore the Son of Man is sovereign even over the Sabbath'" (Mark, 2:27-28). Matthew's Gospel adds a warning to the Jews that if they knew the meaning of the text in Hosea, they would not have condemned the innocent.
In the next incident about the healing of the withered hand of a man in the Synagogue on a Sabbath, the three Evangelists have slightly differing versions. In Mark and Luke we see the Jews waiting to see if Jesus would cure the man on the Sabbath so that they could frame charges against him (Mark, 3: 1-6; Luke, 6: 6-11). Matthew 12: 9-14 presents the incident in a better pedagogical manner, the reason for its difference from the other two Gospels, where it is the Jews who took initiative in asking the all-important question about the legitimacy of healing on the Sabbath. Here again, like in other Gospels, their intention was to frame a charge against Jesus, added as a side remark by Matthew. Their question elicited a counter question from Jesus, one of his usual methods of teaching, about a sheep owned by someone falling into a ditch on a Sabbath. He asked them whether there was one among them who would not catch hold of that sheep and lift it out on a Sabbath. Next Jesus made the cutting edge remark that surely a man was worth far more than a sheep! The conclusion , therefore was that it was permitted to do good on the Sabbath. In Mark and Luke it is Jesus who asks the question whether it was lawful to do good or to do evil on the Sabbath, to save life or to destroy it. The Jews held their peace and Mark adds that Jesus looked round at them with anger and sorrow at their obstinate stupidity, proceeding to heal the man of his withered hand on the Sabbath. We shall see in the next Post how Jesus corrected the false way of practicing the Sabbath through its violation in order to teach its true practice.
No comments:
Post a Comment