Jesus Declares War: Operation Sabbath Freedom -- Mark Chapter 2

By David L. Miner

Mark, in his Gospel, ties an event with some interesting teaching that, on its face, seems unrelated to the event. In truth, I believe this passage is a subtle but powerful declaration of war on the Pharisees and especially on the established religious belief system enforced by the Pharisees. I believe Jesus, in this passage, subtly announced that he was here to more than just upset the apple cart!

In chapter one of Mark's Gospel, Jesus is recorded as teaching and healing at several times. Casting out evil spirits falls under both teaching and healing, as Jesus indicated, and he does some of both.

The result of all this is that by the end of the first chapter, Jesus is thronged by crowds every time he comes into town, and in chapter two, even while he is still out of town.

In chapter two, Jesus is confronted by a man with "the palsy," which was almost certainly some form of paralysis. Four friends brought the man before Jesus in a unique manner that was sure to attract his attention - they destroyed part of the roof in Peter's house, or maybe his mother-in-law’s house, and let the man down from above. Jesus was really impressed by the faith of the man's friends. As a result, Jesus said, "Son, thy sins be forgiven thee.” [Mark 2:5, KJV]

And this act caused certain teachers of the Law to claim that Jesus was speaking blasphemy, saying, "Who can forgive sins but God only?"

Jesus responds with a question: "Which is easier to say to the paralytic, 'Your sins are forgiven,' or to say, 'Get up, take your mat and walk?'" [Mark 2:9, NIV]

The scribes and the Pharisees knew the importance of that question! In Jewish tradition, if a Jew loved and served God, he was blessed by God in his finances or his health or both. If a Jew rebelled against God and sinned, he was punished by God in his finances or his health or both. To these people, this man was paralyzed so it was clear that he had sinned. Since he was STILL paralyzed it was clear that he was STILL in his sins, and had not been forgiven by God. Certain church leaders still preach this error today.

So, if God forgave the man, according to this traditional doctrine, then the man would become healed. Because of this, Jesus forgave the man of his sins since this would result in his healing, according to their beliefs.

Hence, Jesus asked, "Which is more difficult?" Either way, Jesus implied that traditional Jewish doctrine said one could not happen without affecting the other. And to underscore what was REALLY happening here, Jesus DID BOTH!

Brothers and sisters, THIS WAS HUGE!

The fact that Jesus was healing people implied their sins were forgiven. But as long as no one raised this issue, the Pharisees could ignore it, sort of. But Jesus forced the issue, and the religious leaders had to respond with accusations of blasphemy.

So Jesus left town and headed for the lakeside. As he toured the fishing boats and the small villages near the shore, he walked among the carts and booths which were selling the sorts of things sold in every fishing village throughout time. Including one thing that nobody wanted to see - the local tax collector.

Mark records the event where Jesus recruits Levi, the tax collector, into his increasing team of close disciples. In an act of celebration and welcome, they had a dinner party at the house of the new disciple. As always, there were scribes and Pharisees around to closely observe Jesus in the hopes of catching him in the act of teaching or doing something, anything, contrary to established interpretations of the Law.

Naturally, a disparity, or at least a distinction, came to light:

And the disciples of John and of the Pharisees used to fast: and they come and say to him, Why do the disciples of John and of the Pharisees fast, but thy disciples fast not? [Mark 2:18, KJV]

Then Jesus launched into three apparently unrelated stories, even parables, which he offered as if they were answers to the question.

The question now becomes, how do these three apparently unrelated stories relate to the original question? And HOW do they answer the question? And maybe, DO they answer the question?

In other words, was Jesus simply avoiding the question?

Jesus starts his "answer" with a short discussion of the typical wedding celebration, and asks a question: Can the friends of the bridegroom give up food and drink while they are partying with the groom?

He then goes on with a short story about the lack of foresight when patching a tear in an old coat with a piece of new material.

And Jesus finishes his "answer" with a warning against pouring new wine into an old wine skin, because the final stages of fermentation, which finish off the wine properly, will produce expansion. A new wine skin has some stretch in it, but an old wine skin does not.

So now the original question becomes, at least for us and almost certainly for the Pharisees: What is it about these three unrelated stories that answers the question?

As we look more closely at this new question, there sneaks into the back of my mind something else: is Jesus actually trying to answer the question? Or is he really trying to answer a question more fundamental, closer to what Christ wants the Pharisees to see is really at issue here? I submit that Jesus was really trying to redirect attention away from what the Pharisees wanted and onto what Jesus wanted.

If we take the time to research formal Jewish weddings of that day, we will easily find dozens of publications on the shelves of a good Jewish library, ranging from pamphlets to chapters in a book to entire books. An overview of them will show a plethora of customs, requirements, restrictions, and traditions. And each variant of Jewish practice has its own library of publications.

There were so many details to a formal Jewish wedding, and each of these details was tied to varying degrees of "required" rules and traditions, that a serious and formal wedding all but required a professional wedding planner just to keep the wedding within the approval of the traditional sensitivities and Pharisaic approval. And a simple review of the formal Jewish wedding showed a week-long “celebration” and then the infamous wedding night. You might want to read again the first miracle by Jesus at the wedding feast running short of wine part way through that week, as recorded in Chapter 2 of John's Gospel.

With all the complexities in a formal wedding to draw from in answer to the question, Jesus chose to focus on the fun part, the portion of the week-long ceremony that relates to the groom's partying, and tells the Pharisees that the groom's friends don't give up food and drink for a week while the groom is still around celebrating his coming wedding night! It would appear that this was the only part of the long wedding ceremony that the Pharisees didn't consider. They were well aware of the requirements and restrictions and customs of wedding feasts, because they were always around to enforce them, but they most likely had given little thought to the party aspect during that week-long wedding feast.

It was almost as if Jesus was treating a serious and formal question on an important issue as if it was a party. Jesus was on the edge of an insult, and disguised it as an answer to the question they asked.

And if the Pharisees weren't irritated enough at that, Jesus took things a couple steps further.

Jesus brought out two parables that took something old and established, and implied that the old cannot be added to, modified, or fixed, but required something entirely new:

- A tear in an old coat can't be fixed by patching it with new material

- An old wine skin can't be used to contain new wine

For the fast-thinking Pharisee, and they were all fast thinking, Jesus just implied that the established complexities of rabbinical teaching about the Law was not as important as the joy and fellowship between the groom and his friends. Further, and perhaps even more important, any attempt to fix the old teachings or use them differently will just make things worse. Jesus was claiming that the old system must be thrown away and the new teachings must be wholly adopted.

It is important to note the fact that Jesus chose to do these things on the Sabbath. And then he followed his words with what might be the most powerful part of Christ's declaration of war. Jesus was challenging everything the Pharisees believed in, and the restrictions regarding the Sabbath were the cornerstone of the religion demanded by the Pharisees.

Jesus was challenging everything the Pharisees believed in, and the restrictions regarding the Sabbath were the cornerstone of the religion demanded by the Pharisees. 

There was no tighter control or more clear restrictions than what the Pharisees demanded of the Jews concerning the Sabbath. And Jesus took direct aim on that issue and fired his best and most powerful shot.

The Pharisees were saying to Him, "Look, why are they doing what is not lawful on the Sabbath?" And He said to them, "Have you never read what David did when he was in need and he and his companions became hungry; how he entered the house of God in the time of Abiathar the high priest, and ate the consecrated bread, which is not lawful for anyone to eat except the priests, and he also gave it to those who were with him?" Jesus said to them, "The Sabbath was made for man, and not man for the Sabbath. So the Son of Man is Lord even of the Sabbath." [Mark 2:24-28 (NASB)]

Jesus referred to himself as the Son of Man some 80 times in the four Gospel accounts. And each time Jesus referred to the Son of Man, he added to the meaning and the role of the Son of Man in a collective description, clearly making references to the Messiah and at times to the Son of God. Add all those references up and the composite picture is definitely that of God coming to the earth as a man, and very definitely Jesus claiming to be that man.

And his first reference to himself as the Son of Man was to establish his power and authority over the Sabbath. Jesus was not starting his battle with the Pharisees with a bang. Jesus was starting it with a huge explosion.

Allow me to explain.

Jesus was claiming something so powerful that it ultimately got him killed. Jesus here was claiming that the Son of Man, and through him ALL mankind, was not under the requirements and the restrictions of the Sabbath. Jesus was claiming that he was not so much breaking the Sabbath as he was redefining it. Jesus was proclaiming that the requirements and the restrictions of the Sabbath no longer controlled mankind's relationship with God. That role had been taken over by Jesus, the Son of Man.

The Pharisees had made the Sabbath, with its requirements and its restrictions, the focus – the centerpiece – of man's relationship with God. And Jesus was showing them that the Sabbath was never intended to be the centerpiece. Jesus was making himself the centerpiece of man's relationship with God. And in doing so, he was teaching that man no longer had to be subject to the Sabbath; that man no longer had to be subject to the Law; that man had to be subject to the Son of Man, the only Begotten Son of the Living God.

Jesus was establishing a new religious system, knowing that in doing so these Pharisees would seek his death. Jesus was subtly and not too gently trying to say, "Out with the old and in with the new" because the old was just too complex and inflexible and cumbersome to update.

This was a warning from Jesus of what was to come. Earlier in this chapter, Jesus had already thrown in front of the Pharisees his ability to heal and his authority to forgive sins by equating them and then doing BOTH right in front of them. See Mark 2:1-12. This was not only novel, but it was blasphemous in the eyes of the Pharisees. Yet Jesus didn't seem the least bit concerned about that.

And Jesus was about to heal a man's deformed hand on the Sabbath, thereby violating the Pharisees' understanding of Sabbath restrictions. Taken together, Jesus crossed the Pharisees so drastically that they plotted with the Herodians to kill him in the near future.

Mark portrayed in his Gospel account that Jesus was not so much willing to rock the boat as he was intending to sink the boat and obtain a sleek new catamaran.

And we are only in Chapter two!