Jesus and the Sabbath/Lord's Day issue (Part Four)

Jesus and the Sabbath/Lord's Day Issue (Part Four)

Series Part One     Series Part Two       Series Part Three   

We will take for granted that it is on the Lord's day Christians set aside a day for worship out of remembrance for the Lord's bodily resurrection from the dead, therefore we will focus on how Jesus himself observed the sabbath (technically at this point in history his bodily resurrection will not have happened yet).  This being said, what Jesus did is important for at least some of the following reasons (descriptive/or prescriptively is another matter):

1)  Many within evangelicalism function as though the "red letters" by the publisher are actually more authoritative than the surrounding "black letters."
2)  Many withing evangelicalism extract a great deal of their proof-texting for mercy and healing ministries, kingdom-now views from the gospels (well at least not the raising the dead part).
3)  Related to (number one), what Jesus actually did and said is exactly how God (in-flesh) would respond to these issues (we must remember Jesus is the second-person of the Godhead, John 1:1, 14).
Whether these views are right/wrong is not the point. The fact that people (in the church age) draw commands and/or principles from the four gospels does at least demand some attention be given to how Jesus handled the sabbath observance.

Are there principles and/or practices that are applicable for how we govern our activities on the Lord's Day?  We will consider one text in the gospels: Matthew 12.  Matthew 12 focuses on an issue of hunger and healing on the sabbath.  In a similar fashion, John 5 relates to Christ healing a man on the sabbath.  We will focus on the context of Mt 12 and hopefully extrapolate principles from this text (none of which are unique to me or to our current church situation in 2016).  No matter which text is the focus, the point is the same, Jesus actually did something on the sabbath and the Jewish leadership did not like it at all.

First, from a broader context, the gospel of Matthew neatly breaks down into five distinct discourse sections.  The most famous of these discourses being the sermon on the mount (ch. 5-7) and the olivet discourse (ch. 24-25).  Our text under consideration is found in one of the narrative sections (ch. 11-12).  We know this because the previous section ended with Mt 11:1, "when Jesus had made an end of commanding his twelve disciples."  Our concern is the first thirteen verse which breaks down into the two topics of discussion: plucking grain (vv. 1-9) and healing a man's hand (vv. 10-13).

The first section, (vv. 1-9) highlights what is commonly called "works of necessity."  Eating is a necessity to continue living.  The scenario is simple.  The disciples were hungry and plucked some corn to eat on the sabbath which was noticed by the Pharisee to be in violation of their own practices (tradition) (vv. 1-2).  Jesus responses to their question with two distinct Old Testament examples: David eating food (not explicitly forbidden but only when for profit, Dt 23:25), when he was hungry (vv. 3-4) and then the activity of priests on the sabbath (v. 5).  Jesus changes the focus with a contrasting conjunction "but" switching the focus to higher and more internal heart matter.  Jesus claims deity in this passage, "the Son of man is Lord even of the sabbath" (v. 8).  This directly relates to the two previous verses: one, he is the "greater" one present and two, the changed heart condition had priority over external worship.  What needs to be noted is that Christ does not abolish the sabbath as a day of rest but instead declared himself to be it's Lord.  In this first example, works of necessity is the focus under Christ's authority over this day.

So if we draw in principles what could they be?

1) Can we at least acknowledge Jesus is Lord of the Sabbath?
2) Can we at least acknowledge Jesus healed sick people on the Sabbath?
3) Can we at least acknowledge Jesus pointed people to himself on the Sabbath?

Historically, when people mention works of mercy or necessity, do they have fair ground to do so?

Compare this to today: (any number of illustrations will make the point)

1)  Should we go out to eat at a restaurant on the Lord's day?
2)  Should I mow the grass, hunt, fish, or trap, on the Lord's day?
3)  Should I spend hours of time involved with sporting adventures on the Lord's day?

Rarely are people actually concerned about working on the Lord's day.  Yes we could even talk about heart issues and motivations as well.  Personally, I'm glad there are police officers, firemen, and doctors who care for others seven days a week.  They are doing works of mercy and necessity for you and me (give them your thanks for it).

Are these liberty issues?  You decide.  Not matter what the example.  Someone and somewhere will always have a name to call you for anything you choose to do or not do?

May we enjoy a good Lord's day of worship each week (another topic for another thread).

These issues will have to be addressed later in liberty issues.
Hope this helps some in this issue.
Comments encouraged.