The Kingdom of Heaven is at Hand, 1:1-28:20

The Galilean Ministry, 8:1-18:35

Reception Of the Messiah: Rising Opposition, 11:2-13:53

Response To The Messiah, 11:2-12:50 (Ash Wednesday; Sixteenth Sunday after Pentecost)

Sabbath Conflicts, 12:1-14

JESUS AND THE SABBATH: SITUATION ETHICS

Mat 12:1-; Mar 2:23-28; Lu 6:1-

Reading: Joh 14:15; cf. 15:9-14; 1Jo 5:2-3; see also: Ja 2:8-13

INTRODUCTION
  1. Have you ever been in a situation where you knew what normally would be the correct decision but because of the circumstances you were left wondering if what was correct fit the situation? Life is a process of constant decision making and there are decisions we may have to make which will require clear-cut standards in order to alleviate the stress of making the proper decision.
  2. Ro 13:1-2 tells us to obey governing authorities, which would include speed limits on the road, yet, is it okay for us to drive faster than the speed limit for an emergency
  3. Purposely ending the life of another person is normally and morally called murder. In Chicago, Rudy Lineras, after two attempts finally succeeded in disconnecting the food support system from his baby Sammy in order to cause his death. Lineras said he didn't want Sammy to suffer any longer. This is called euthanasia. The Supreme Court refused to charge Lineras with murder. Why? The circumstances of the situation were seen as an exception to the laws concerning murder. Like women who cry out for abortions on the basis that they should be permitted to have the last say as to what they do or don't do with their bodies (even though the unborn baby is not their body), baby Sammy was seen as a piece of property over which his father had the last say as to whether the baby should continue to live longer or not. Let's imagine we are on a sinking ship and there are too many people for the life boats. Is it morally all right to abandon the sick, handicapped and elderly to the sinking ship in order that the healthy, strong and young might at least survive?
  4. When the decisions making process becomes a debate over a standard for moral law verses the situation, it is called situation ethics. When a I moral decision must be made, to what do we appeal. Joseph Fletcher in his book , "Situation Ethics" set out three approaches to moral decision making: legalism - appealing to law as supreme and preeminent over all other considerations; situationism - the only law there is, is love and it is the law that is applied in every situation; antinomianism - no moral law, each is free to do whatever impulses dictate at any given moment. Situationism teaches that written codes of law are really only guidelines or general principles which may or may not reveal the right or wrong response for a given situation. With situationism, therefore, what is "right" has no reference because it may vary with differing situations. The problems is, many people have a blurred perception of right or wrong. With situationism, there would exit in life times in which what is considered the morally correct response would be set aside for a contradictory response. During those times decisions wold be based upon expediency, opinion or personal feelings as well as the seriousness of a given situation. In addition, what one person might consider correct for a given situation might not be shared by others. Therefore, in serious circumstances, what that person wanted done, may not get done.
  5. For Christians ethics is a subject which encompasses all areas of decision making in our lives. For Christians, decision making always involves making decisions based on consideration of what God has revealed to us. However, in the Bible we can read that Rahab, lied to protect the men of Israel in her home and is listed among the heroes of faith, Josh. 2:1-7; Heb. 11:31; Jud. 4:17-24. Does God permit lying if it results in good? We know the worldly teach situation ethics but does the Bible also teach it? Let’s examine the Bible to see whether or not is so.

F. Let’s take a look at what Jesus taught regarding changing the standard of what is morally correct to fit various situations.

Theme: Does the Bible teach situation ethics?

  1. DID JESUS SUPPORT SITUATION ETHICS FOR HARDSHIP, 12:1-5?
    1. on the sabbath … his disciples were hungry and began to pluck ears and to eat …, 12:1-2; Mar 2:23; Lu 6:1-2

1 ¶ At <1722> that <1565> [time KJV] season <2540> Jesus <2424> went <4198> (5675) on the sabbath day <4521> through <1223> the [corn KJV] grainfields <4702>; and <1161> his <846> disciples <3101> were [an hungred KJV] hungry <3983> (5656) and <2532> began <756> (5662) to pluck <5089> (5721) [the KJV] ears [of corn KJV] <4719> and <2532> to eat <2068> (5721).

2 But <1161> [when KJV] the Pharisees <5330>, when they saw <1492> (5631) it, [they KJV] said <2036> (5627) unto him <846>, Behold <2400> (5628), thy <4675> disciples <3101> do <4160> (5719) that which <3739> is <1832> <0> not <3756> lawful <1832> (5748) to do <4160> (5721) upon <1722> the sabbath day <4521>.

1 en <1722> {AT} ekeinw <1565> tw <3588> {THAT} kairw <2540> {TIME} eporeuyh <4198> (5675) o <3588> {WENT} ihsouv <2424> {JESUS} toiv <3588> {ON THE} sabbasin <4521> {SABBATH} dia <1223> {THROUGH} twn <3588> {THE} sporimwn <4702> oi <3588> de <1161> {CORN FIELDS;} mayhtai <3101> autou <846> {AND HIS DISCIPLES} epeinasan <3983> (5656) {WERE HUNGRY,} kai <2532> {AND} hrxanto <756> (5662) {BEGAN} tillein <5089> (5721) {TO PLUCK THE} stacuav <4719> {EARS} kai <2532> {AND} esyiein <2068> (5721) {TO EAT.}

2 oi <3588> de <1161> {BUT THE} farisaioi <5330> {PHARISEES} idontev <1492> (5631) {HAVING SEEN} eipon <2036> (5627) {SAID} autw <846> {TO HIM,} idou <2400> (5628) oi <3588> {BEHOLD,} mayhtai <3101> sou <4675> {THY DISCIPLES} poiousin <4160> (5719) {ARE DOING} o <3739> ouk <3756> {WHAT} exestin <1832> (5904) {IT IS NOT LAWFUL} poiein <4160> (5721) {TO DO} en <1722> {ON} sabbatw <4521> {SABBATH.}

      1. Sabbath - The English word "Sabbath" and the Greek word sabbaton are transliterated from the Hebrew word shabbath (shab-bawth').
      2. The Law of the Sabbath condemned work on the Sabbath (Nu 15:32-36), but it did not condemn eating.
        1. The focus of the disagreement was not hunger since the texts mentions they were picking the heads of grain to eat as they moved through the fields (Mar 2:23) much as boys grabbing a piece of grass and putting in their mouths as they move through the fields.
        2. This was allowed under the law, cp. Ex. 12:16; De 23:24-25; see 5:14.
        3. The Pharisees must have viewed what the disciples were doing as work (reaping) and since it was on the Sabbath, they disagreed with doing it.
      3. Besides, let’s take a look at what Jesus said in reply.
    1. Have ye not read what David did," 12:3-4; Mar 2:24-28; Lu 6:3-5?

3 But <1161> he said <2036> (5627) unto them <846>, Have ye <314> <0> not <3756> read <314> (5627) what <5101> David <1138> did <4160> (5656), when <3753> he <846> was [an hungred KJV] hungry<3983> (5656), and <2532> they <3326> that were with him <846>;

4 [How KJV] how <4459> he entered into <1525> (5627) <1519> the house <3624> of God <2316>, and <2532> [did eat KJV] ate <5315> (5627) the [shewbread KJV] showbread <740> <4286>, which <3739> it was <2258> (5713) not <3756> lawful <1832> (5752) for him <846> to eat <5315> (5629), neither for <3761> them which <3326> were with him <846>, but <1508> only <3441> for the priests <2409>?

  1. o <3588> de <1161> {BUT HE} eipen <2036> (5627) {SAID} autoiv <846> {TO THEM,} ouk <3756> {NOT} anegnwte <314> (5627) {YE HAVE READ} ti <5101> {WHAT} epoihsen <4160> (5656) {DID} dabid <1138> {DAVID,} ote <3753> {WHEN} epeinasen <3983> (5656) {HE HUNGERED} autov <846> {HIMSELF} kai <2532> {AND} oi <3588> {THOSE} met <3326> {WITH} autou <846> {HIM?}
  2. pwv <4459> {HOW} eishlyen <1525> (5627) {HE ENTERED} eiv <1519> {INTO} ton <3588> {THE} oikon <3624> tou <3588> {HOUSE} yeou <2316> {OF GOD,} kai <2532> {AND} touv <3588> {THE} artouv <740> {LOAVES} thv <3588> {OF THE} proyesewv <4286> {PRESENTATION} efagen <5315> (5627) {HE ATE,} ouv <3739> {WHICH} ouk <3756> {NOT} exon <1832> (5901) {LAWFUL} hn <2258> (5713) {IT WAS} autw <846> {FOR HIM} fagein <5315> (5629) {TO EAT,} oude <3761> {NOR} toiv <3588> {FOR THOSE} met <3326> {WITH} autou <846> ei <1487> {HIM,} mh <3361> {BUT} toiv <3588> {FOR THE} iereusin <2409> {PRIESTS} monoiv <3441> {ONLY?}
      1. Did Jesus put aside the law for hardship cases, cp. He 5:8-9; 10:7?
        1. Does hunger override law?
        2. Can a man person steal to eat?
      1. Does sound like Jesus is saying, "Well others did /do it?"
        1. Just because others do things in error it does not justify our doing the same?
        2. David certainly seemed inconsistent with the law, Ex 25:30-33; 39:36; Le 24:5-9; 1Sa 21:1-6.
          1. David entered the tabernacle, cf. Ex 23:19; Jud 18:31; 1Sa 1:7, 24; 3:15; 2Sa 12:20; Ps 5:7.
          2. After lying to the about their mission to the priests, both David and his companions ate the bread which should have only been eaten by the priests.
          3. It is possible by Jesus use and scripture, that the incident took place on the Sabbath, since it would seem the priests were changing the consecrated bread, cp. 1Sa 21:5-6.
          4. If it was on the Sabbath other than the priests should not have eaten it and if it was not on the Sabbath, the bread should not have been changed.
        1. Jesus was not justifying David, only pointing out that the Pharisees justified David's wrongful actions yet, they condemned the disciples for doing what was acceptable.
      1. The charge the Pharisees made was in error.
        1. The Pharisees were furious with the disciples not from their violation of the Sabbath law but because the disciples were breaking the man-made laws the Phaisees attached to the law , which they placed on the same level with the Word of God.
          1. The Talmud, the book of Jewish traditions has 24 chapters listing various Sabbath laws:
          2. no travel more than 3,000 feet from your house;
          3. carry anything that weighed more than a dried fig, but if the object weighed half that amount you could carry it twice
          4. You couldn't throw something with one hand and catch it with another.
          5. You couldn't take a bath lest some of the water splash on the floor and wash it.
          6. The Sabbath was so difficult that the people worked harder at not working on the Sabbath than they did at their jobs the other 6 days of the week. No wonder Jesus called them "heavy laden" (11:28).
        2. The Sabbath was never meant to restrict necessities, cp. Lu 14:1-6
    1. have ye not read in the law, that on the sabbath the priests … profane the sabbath, 12:5?
  1. Or <2228> have ye <314> <0> not <3756> read <314> (5627) in <1722> the law <3551>, [how KJV] that <3754> on the sabbath [days KJV] <4521> the priests <2409> in <1722> the temple <2411> profane <953> (5719) the sabbath <4521>, and <2532> are <1526> (5748) [blameless KJV] [innocent ]guiltless <338>?

5 h <2228> ouk <3756> {OR} anegnwte <314> (5627) {HAVE YE NOT READ} en <1722> {IN} tw <3588> {THE} nomw <3551> {LAW,} oti <3754> {THAT} toiv <3588> {ON THE} sabbasin <4521> {SABBATHS} oi <3588> {THE} iereiv <2409> {PRIESTS} en <1722> {IN} tw <3588> {THE} ierw <2411> {TEMPLE} to <3588> {THE} sabbaton <4521> {SABBATH} bebhlousin <953> (5719) {PROFANE,} kai <2532> {AND} anaitioi <338> {GUILTLESS} eisin <1526> (5748) {ARE?}

      1. The answer was found in the law - God's revealed word.
      2. The answers to any of our moral dilemmas are found in God’s word.
      3. God's word is God’s word and God is God. The morals he gives us in our covenant with him, by which to base our decisions are standards and do not change with the situation.
      4. The problem the Pharisees had, was they misunderstood the law of the Sabbath.
      5. God did not command that nothing could be done on it, cp. Lu 13:14-16; 16:1-6; Joh 7:22-23.
      6. Had Jesus permitted a violation of his law for hardship, anyone could easily justify refusing to suffer in Christ ‘s name or to practice self-denial on a similar basis.

Transition: Besides the law, Jesus was greater then the law.

  1. DID JESUS SUPPORT SITUATION ETHICS FOR IMPORTANT PEOPLE, 12:6?
    1. I say unto you, That in this place is one greater than the temple, Lu 6:5.
  1. But <1161> I say <3004> (5719) unto you <5213>, That <3754> in this place <5602> is one <2076> (5748) greater than <3187> the temple <2411>.

6 legw <3004> (5719) de <1161> {BUT I SAY} umin <5213> {TO YOU,} oti <3754> tou <3588> {THAT} ierou <2411> {THAN THE TEMPLE} meizwn <3187> {A GREATER} estin <2076> (5748) {IS} wde <5602> {HERE.}

 

      1. Was he temporarily suspending his law for the situation?
      2. We live in a time when money and esteem can make one more equal in the justice system than others.
      3. Would Jesus put aside the law for VIPs, important people?
    1. Jesus was not saying that because he was God therefore he was free to change his own laws to fit the need of a situation.
      1. He was saying and rightly so according to the law of the Sabbath, if God could command his servants in the temple, the priests, to work in the temple on the Sabbath, than certainly he could allow other people to prepare for eating on the Sabbath or to do other necessary activities.
  1. DID JESUS SUPPORT SITUATION ETHICS FOR LOVE, 12:7-8.
    1. I will have mercy, and not sacrifice …, 12:7-8; Mar. 2:27-28
  1. But <1161> if <1487> ye had known <1097> (5715) what <5101> this meaneth <2076> (5748), I will have <2309> (5719) mercy <1656>, and <2532> not <3756> sacrifice <2378>, ye would <302> not <3756> have condemned <2613> (5656) the guiltless <338>.
  2. For <1063> the Son <5207> of man <444> is <2076> (5748) Lord <2962> [even <2532> KJV] of the sabbath [day KJV] <4521>.

7 ei <1487> de <1161> {BUT IF} egnwkeite <1097> (5715) {YE HAD KNOWN} ti <5101> {WHAT} estin <2076> (5748) {IS,} eleon <1656> {MERCY} yelw <2309> (5719) {I DESIRE} kai <2532> {AND} ou <3756> {NOT} yusian <2378> {SACRIFICE,} ouk <3756> an <302> {NOT} katedikasate <2613> (5656) {YE HAD CONDEMNED} touv <3588> {THE} anaitiouv <338> {GUILTLESS.}

8 kuriov <2962> gar <1063> {FOR LORD} estin <2076> (5748) {IS} kai <2532> {ALSO} tou <3588> {OF THE} sabbatou <4521> {SABBATH} o <3588> {THE} uiov <5207> tou <3588> {SON} anyrwpou <444> {OF MAN.}

      1. Does love take precedence over obeying God?
      2. Was Jesus saying love or compassion was greater than God’s will or word?
      3. Jesus commanded giving (Mat 5:42) yet in another passage Paul seemed to ignore the command in cases of lazy people, 2Thess. 3:10-12. Was Paul practicing situation ethics?

         

        1. The answer is NO!

           

        2. The Lord commands giving but even at that he sets the limits of our obligations to the command.
      4. "For this is the love of God, that we keep his commandments," Joh 14:15; 1Jn. 5:2-5; cp. Mt. 5:17-20.
        1. God does not support or teach situation.
        2. Love does not dictate God's moral code it perceives it through God's revealed word.
    1. What Jesus was teaching the Pharisees was, where the Sabbath law conflicted with the welfare of mankind, the welfare of mankind took precedence.
    2. The only things violated were the traditions of men, Mt. 15:1-9.

CONCLUSION

Preached:

Preached: Caney, KS 25, November, 1990.

Fargo, ND 9,May 99

Bibliography:

Steve Parsons, Situation Ethics and Christian Ethics: A Comparison, Firm Foundation, 18, June, 1974.

 

Further info on sabbath and further information concerning law
Secure SFTP anywhere, FREE Go FTP Client