Chapter # 3 Paragraph # 1 Study # 2
September 10, 2019
Moss Bluff, Louisiana
(Download Audio)

⁽¹⁰³⁾

Thesis:   At the very core of the "loyalty" issue of sabbath observance is the major issue: What is the One, to whom the loyalty is given, actually like?

Introduction:   In this final story of the developing conflict, Mark presents Jesus [earlier self-declared to be "Lord of the Sabbath"] as deliberately challenging the "hateful Theology" of the synagogue. The issues are stark: violating the sabbath was a capital crime (Numbers 15:32-36) with a history of the determination of a "God with a long memory" (2 Chronicles 36:21) to enforce it. That God was deadly serious about this "loyalty" issue is now beyond dispute.

However, there is an underlying issue of a super-critical nature: What is it about this "deadly serious God" that made sabbath observance a capital crime and brought about a catastrophic explosion of wrath after an extended period of what appeared to be a "tolerant patience" toward the disloyal? The 490 year absence of explosive divine hostility "appeared" to signal that God was, after all, not so deadly serious about something that had its roots in the ignorant dismissiveness of men even before David and Solomon ruled over God's kingdom in His stead.

Mark, in the passage before us, addresses at least a part of the answer: This "deadly serious God" has the very "loyalty" toward men that He requires that they have toward Him. For this "deadly serious God", man's "loyalty" to Him is not to be rooted in a commitment to His rules over a commitment to Him just as His loyalty to them is not rooted in the rules, but in their real needs. Jesus declared, as "Lord of the Sabbath", that His rules are "for" the true needs of men and they, and their needs, are not to be made into "slaves of the rules".

This evening we are going to see how Jesus forced this reality into the equation.

• I. The Larger Context.
  • A. The heart of the demonic doctrinal distortion of the synagogue.
    • 1. The fundamental demonic determination is "Life" through "superiority over others" (Isaiah 14:13) and the corollary of "exaltation in the eyes of others" (Matthew 23:5 compared with 1 John 2:16).
    • 2. The fundamental demonic distortion of "Law" into "regulation" is so that those who "obey" gain for themselves "positive recognition by others" (Matthew 6:1 and following).
    • 3. The filtered-down impact upon the issues of sabbath loyalties are...
      • a. The subversion of the order of men and rules: men were made for the sabbath so that there is no tolerance of "unlawful" behavior for any reason.
      • b. This brought about a subtle shift of "loyalty to the rules" from "loyalty to the God of the rules".
        • 1) It is true that God demanded the "loyalty of sabbath keeping" of men; but it is not true that God gains any "life" from their loyalty.
        • 2) It is true that God seeks for men to "do all things to His glory"; but it is not true that He gains any "Life" from the glory-giving.
  • B. The malaise in the hearts of men created by this demonic distortion.
    • 1. There are only three ways any man can "adjust" to this distortion.
      • a. One is to turn a blind eye to one's own failings by steadfastly fixing one's view upon the failings of others [the Pharisees].
      • b. Another is to be so focused upon one's own failings that there is a gradual build-up of the rage of despair (the inherent rage of being compelled to do what cannot be done) [Levi].
      • c. The third is to simply "shut down" and go with the flow (mindless living with the consequences of flawed choices and actions while participating in the religious games) [the man with a withered hand attending the synagogue].
    • 2. The majority of humanity functions in this malaise of mindless living.
• II. The Current Context.
  • A. Jesus deliberately goes to the synagogue on the sabbath, having declared Himself to be "Lord of the Sabbath".
    • 1. This was "customary" behavior for Jesus (Luke 4:16).
    • 2. But His claim to be "Lord of the Sabbath" also directly meant that He was the One Who had established the sabbath as an issue of "loyalty".
      • a. This directly means that He was looking for true sabbath loyalty in the synagogue, knowing the facts of the magnitude of the distortion.
      • b. The Pharisees were sitting in judgment upon Him totally ignorant of the actual fact of His sitting in judgment upon them (they thought they were in control and He knew He was).
  • B. There was there a man who had a hand that had withered.
    • 1. He was a participant in the mindlessness of those who see themselves as under the displeasure of God, but still function as if they hope to assuage that displeasure by trying to be "loyal".
    • 2. His only "qualification" for this story is his withered hand (no mention of any "faith" on his part, or any other issue).
  • C. The "Distorters" were watching Jesus like a hawk to see what He would do in the face of the fact of the withered hand.
    • 1. They had no interest in the man except as an opportunity to find some accusation against Jesus that would "stick".
    • 2. They were fully invested in the demonic elevation of the rules over those whose lives were to be blessed by those rules.
• III. Jesus' Deliberate Provocation.
  • A. He deliberately made the man with the withered hand the focus of the attention of everyone.
  • B. He, then, challenged the Pharisaical "Theology" of the synagogue.
    • 1. He focused upon what is "lawful" so that the issue was the character of the Law-giver.
    • 2. The challenges.
      • a. Is it lawful to do good on sabbath days (with a clear understanding of the true meaning of "sabbath loyalty" as revealed by Isaiah 58:13 and Luke 13:15 and 14:5 in view of 1 Corinthians 9:9).
        • 1) This is expanded by the next phrase, "to save a soul".
        • 2) This is asked in spite of the fact that many times "good" can be put off a day or two.
      • b. Is it lawful to do harm on sabbath days (with a clear understanding of the strong implications of the Feast of Dedication; a commemoration of the success of the Maccabean revolt against Antiochus Ephiphanes by deciding they could "kill" on the sabbath).
        • 1) This "permission" to do harm on sabbath days was enshrined into acceptability by the annual feast.
        • 2) The Pharisees could not argue against Jesus without "losing face" (a totally unacceptable result for those demonically energized).
        • 3) And, again, many times the doing of harm can be put off a day or two.
    • 3. The automatic assumption of Jesus' challenge is that the Pharisees saw men as "tools of the rules" for self-exaltation purposes, otherwise "to Hell with them".

(return to the top of the article)


This is article #104.
If you wish, you may contact Darrel as darrelcline at this site.