.jpg)
Have you not read what David did
when he and his companions were hungry,
how he went into the house of God and ate the bread of offering,
which neither he nor his companions
but only the priests could lawfully eat?
Jesus was the messiah, and therefore the rightful heir to David. David had been fleeing from Saul and his band who desired to prevent him from ascending to the throne. Jesus was being pursued by the Pharisees who similarly did not want to see him succeed in his own mission. David's mission was not merely political. Since he had been anointed by Samuel to succeed Saul, it was at least in part divine. He and his companions was thus permitted to share in the priestly privilege of eating the bread of presence. Jesus was true high priest and King of kings. David's own mission was a prototype of that of Jesus. It thus foreshadowed the coming together of the priestly and the kingly in order to bring about a kingdom where right worship would be perpetually offered to God. In Jesus, in whom the roles of priest, prophet, and king were perfectly united, the normal expression of the rules about the Sabbath did not apply. The Sabbath was, after all, about communion between man and God. But such communion could only be perfectly established by the fulfillment of the mission of Jesus, the perpetual sacrifice of his Body and Blood that he would go on to institute.
Or have you not read in the law that on the sabbath
the priests serving in the temple violate the sabbath
and are innocent?
It was appropriate for temple priests to work on the sabbath, because such work was not a distraction from God, but rather done for his sake. Even more so, then, was it appropriate for the disciples of Jesus to be exempt from the demands of the sabbath for the sake of the one whom they served. The temple was a sign that pointed to God's presence. Jesus was himself that presence on earth. It is hard to imagine a more fitting activity for the sabbath than being together with him, and taking whatever steps are necessary to help facilitate abiding with him. Thus do the priests of the Church of Jesus continue to do work on Sunday, the new sabbath, in order to help his modern day disciples to enjoy communion with him and to experience the true sabbath rest that only he can give.
I say to you, something greater than the temple is here.
Mic drop. This can be nothing other than a claim by Jesus of his own divinity. After all, what is greater than the temple except the God for whose worship the temple exists? More to it, who else but the Lord of all could claim to be the Lord of the sabbath? Only the one who himself commanded the observance of the sabbath could possibly be justified in calling himself its Lord. But Jesus claimed precisely this. He thus possessed the wisdom to direct people toward the sabbath rest he intended for them, whereas the Pharisees only used it as a weapon to make things more difficult for Jesus, and to attempt to hinder his plan. They doubtlessly didn't like being implicitly associated with Saul and his men. And they certainly couldn't stomach the rationale Jesus gave for why they were wrong about the meaning of the sabbath. God himself was revealing that their excessive mean spirited rigor was not what he himself desired, but rather that mercy.
If you knew what this meant, I desire mercy, not sacrifice,
you would not have condemned these innocent men.
Even when we know the right answers genuinely, and not in a distorted way like the Pharisees, we must not abuse this knowledge. From a higher vantage point the truth is always meant to open out to mercy, not to be used as a weapon, or as a vehicle of condemnation. This is not to say we are to ever compromise with falsehoods or partial truths. And yet the more we focus on being doctrinally correct the more we tend forget that we are dealing with real people who are not intellectual obstacles but fellow men and women made in God's image, brothers and sisters in potential if not in fact. So let us keep our focus where Jesus directed it: himself as Lord, and mercy as his desire.
when he and his companions were hungry,
how he went into the house of God and ate the bread of offering,
which neither he nor his companions
but only the priests could lawfully eat?
Jesus was the messiah, and therefore the rightful heir to David. David had been fleeing from Saul and his band who desired to prevent him from ascending to the throne. Jesus was being pursued by the Pharisees who similarly did not want to see him succeed in his own mission. David's mission was not merely political. Since he had been anointed by Samuel to succeed Saul, it was at least in part divine. He and his companions was thus permitted to share in the priestly privilege of eating the bread of presence. Jesus was true high priest and King of kings. David's own mission was a prototype of that of Jesus. It thus foreshadowed the coming together of the priestly and the kingly in order to bring about a kingdom where right worship would be perpetually offered to God. In Jesus, in whom the roles of priest, prophet, and king were perfectly united, the normal expression of the rules about the Sabbath did not apply. The Sabbath was, after all, about communion between man and God. But such communion could only be perfectly established by the fulfillment of the mission of Jesus, the perpetual sacrifice of his Body and Blood that he would go on to institute.
Or have you not read in the law that on the sabbath
the priests serving in the temple violate the sabbath
and are innocent?
It was appropriate for temple priests to work on the sabbath, because such work was not a distraction from God, but rather done for his sake. Even more so, then, was it appropriate for the disciples of Jesus to be exempt from the demands of the sabbath for the sake of the one whom they served. The temple was a sign that pointed to God's presence. Jesus was himself that presence on earth. It is hard to imagine a more fitting activity for the sabbath than being together with him, and taking whatever steps are necessary to help facilitate abiding with him. Thus do the priests of the Church of Jesus continue to do work on Sunday, the new sabbath, in order to help his modern day disciples to enjoy communion with him and to experience the true sabbath rest that only he can give.
I say to you, something greater than the temple is here.
Mic drop. This can be nothing other than a claim by Jesus of his own divinity. After all, what is greater than the temple except the God for whose worship the temple exists? More to it, who else but the Lord of all could claim to be the Lord of the sabbath? Only the one who himself commanded the observance of the sabbath could possibly be justified in calling himself its Lord. But Jesus claimed precisely this. He thus possessed the wisdom to direct people toward the sabbath rest he intended for them, whereas the Pharisees only used it as a weapon to make things more difficult for Jesus, and to attempt to hinder his plan. They doubtlessly didn't like being implicitly associated with Saul and his men. And they certainly couldn't stomach the rationale Jesus gave for why they were wrong about the meaning of the sabbath. God himself was revealing that their excessive mean spirited rigor was not what he himself desired, but rather that mercy.
If you knew what this meant, I desire mercy, not sacrifice,
you would not have condemned these innocent men.
Even when we know the right answers genuinely, and not in a distorted way like the Pharisees, we must not abuse this knowledge. From a higher vantage point the truth is always meant to open out to mercy, not to be used as a weapon, or as a vehicle of condemnation. This is not to say we are to ever compromise with falsehoods or partial truths. And yet the more we focus on being doctrinally correct the more we tend forget that we are dealing with real people who are not intellectual obstacles but fellow men and women made in God's image, brothers and sisters in potential if not in fact. So let us keep our focus where Jesus directed it: himself as Lord, and mercy as his desire.
No comments:
Post a Comment