 |
| The Damascus Gate in Jerusalem |
In contrast to Pharisaic righteousness, Messianic righteousness had a narrow
gate. Only those who accepted Jesus as
the Messiah could enter. His followers were
on a firm foundation: “Whoever hears these sayings of Mine, and does them, I
will liken him to a wise man who built his house on the rock”.[1]
Messianic righteousness was a narrow way, a way of faith
and love.
A way of
faith: “Now if God so clothes the grass of the field, which today is, and
tomorrow is thrown into the oven, will
He not much more clothe
you, O you of little faith? Therefore do not worry, saying, What shall we eat?
or What shall we drink? or What shall we wear? For after all these things the
Gentiles seek. For your heavenly Father knows that you need all these things.
But seek first the kingdom
of God
And a way of
love: “I say to you, love your enemies, bless those who curse you, do good to
those who hate you, and pray for those who spitefully use you and persecute you”[3]; “You shall love the Lord your God with all your heart, with all your
soul, and with all your mind. This is the
first and great commandment. And the
second is like it: You shall love your neighbour as yourself.
On these two commandments hang all the Law and the Prophets.”[4].
Stage of Interrogation (Continued)
Returning now to the stage of
interrogation, delegates from the Sanhedrin were required to observe the life
and ministry of the claimant, and if they thought any action or teaching was
questionable they could voice their concerns.
When dealing with Jesus of Nazareth, the objections of the Sanhedrists
were almost exclusively in the area of the oral law, with questions concerning the
Sabbath the most frequent, since they had given ‘Sabbath keeping’ such a high
profile. The fourth command of the
decalogue had been expanded by hundreds of additional rules and regulations
regarding Sabbath observance to cover most eventualities. For example, the Shabbat section in the
Mishnah begins with the detail of those acts of transporting objects from one
domain to another, some of which violate the Sabbath. It reads:
1:1 A. [Acts of] transporting
objects from one domain to another [which violate] the Sabbath
(1) are two, which [indeed] are four [for one who is]
inside,
(2)
and two which are four [for one who is] outside.
B.How so?
I C. [If on the Sabbath] the beggar
stands outside and the householder inside,
D.[and] the beggar stuck his hand inside and put [a
beggar’s bowl] into the hand of the householder,
E. or if he took [something] from inside it and brought
it out,
F.
the beggar is liable, the householder is exempt.
II G.[If] the householder stuck his hand
outside and put [something] into the hand of the beggar,
H. or if he took [something] from it and brought it
inside,
I.the
householder is liable, and the beggar is exempt.
III J. [If] the beggar stuck
his hand inside, and the householder took [something] from it,
K. or if [the householder] put something in it and he
[the beggar] removed it,
L.
both of them are exempt.
IV M. [If] the householder
put his hand outside and the beggar took [something] from it,
N. or if [the beggar] put something into it and [the
householder] brought it back inside,
O. both of them are exempt.[5]
Jesus condemned this legalism with the words, “You
blind guides, who strain out a gnat and swallow a camel!”[6] At the time of Jesus, questions as to what is
proper on the Sabbath constantly occupied the minds of the legalists. If a Pharisee was asked, “Why did God make Israel
Each of the synoptics records the incident when
Jesus’ hungry disciples plucked the ears of corn to provide sustenance. Since it was on the Sabbath, the
investigating Sanhedrists raised it as an issue: “And when the Pharisees saw it, they said to Him, Look,
Your disciples are doing what is not lawful to do on the Sabbath!”[7] The Pharisees themselves would not normally
walk through a field in case they accidentally uprooted a wayward stalk of
grain, thereby becoming guilty of reaping on the Sabbath.
Jesus responded to the question by giving pertinent
examples from the T’nach. The first was
of David who, when in need, ate of the bread that by law was reserved for the
priests. The second was of the priests themselves whose work substantially
increased on the Sabbath because of the higher number of offerings. Neither the actions of David, nor the
activities of the priests, received the disapproval of the interpreters of the
law. Jesus took the first example from the period of David’s rejection, when the
officers of a dying dynasty were hounding him. The selection of this event
seems to suggest that Jesus knew already that the Sanhedrin would officially
reject Him. The second example related
to the killing of sacrificial lambs in the Temple
While the delegation involved in
assessing His Messianic credentials were mostly Pharisees, there were others on
the Sanhedrin that had an interest in the investigation and decision. They were the Chief Priests - Sadducees who rejected
the immortality of the soul, and attributed all human activity to free will and
none to providence. Because they did not believe in the resurrection, they
expected neither reward nor punishment after death. Therefore, with no restraint placed on their
actions by their religious beliefs, they exercised power, not for the good of
the nation, but for their own individual gain. Influenced by Greek culture, they
cultivated good relations with Rome Temple Temple
More Next Time
No comments:
Post a Comment