1 At that time Jesus went on the sabbath day through the corn; and his disciples were an hungred, and began to pluck the ears of corn, and to eat. 2 But when the Pharisees saw it, they said unto him, Behold, thy disciples do that which is not lawful to do upon the sabbath day.
This chapter relates several criticisms the Jews threw at Christ concerning His new Kingdom. The first criticism involved the law of the Sabbath. Luke specifies that this was the second sabbath after the first (Luke 6:1), which many think is a reference to the week of the Passover. The first day of the feast of Unleavened Bread (sometimes called the Passover) was fixed to be the 15th Nisan and that day was to be a holy Sabbath day regardless of whether it fell upon a Saturday or not. The second sabbath after the first would be the normal sabbath which followed that first sabbath of 15 Nisan. In the year that Jesus died, the normal sabbath fell exactly upon 15th Nisan. The coincidence of the two sabbaths upon the same day made it a high day. (John 19:31). The second sabbath after the first was important in the Judaic religion because it was fixed the beginning of the mandated countdown of seven sabbaths unto the feast of Pentecost.
Though the KJV says corn, it was probably barley. The Greek word means simply “grain.” The disciples were hungry because they were poor and this Sabbath day found them eating raw grain from a field as they walked to synagogue perhaps. The Pharisees charged that the disciples had broken the Sabbath by “harvesting grain” on that day.
3 But he said unto them, Have ye not read what David did, when he was an hungred, and they that were with him; 4 How he entered into the house of God, and did eat the shewbread, which was not lawful for him to eat, neither for them which were with him, but only for the priests?
David was held by the Jews in highest esteem, so Jesus’ argument could not be easily dismissed. The shewbread was a sacred bread made once a week which was placed in the Temple. The Law specified that only the priests were permitted to eat it. In a time of great need however, David asked the priest to give him this bread, probably on the sabbath day (1Sam 21:1-7), for the Law commanded that the old bread in the holy place be replaced with fresh bread each sabbath (Ex 24:5-9). The priest would have given David the one-week old shewbread he had just removed from the Holy Place.
Now, if David was held innocent although having eaten holy shewbread on the sabbath day, how can the disciples possibly be held guilty for eating kernels of grain on the sabbath?
5 Or have ye not read in the law, how that on the sabbath days the priests in the temple profane the sabbath, and are blameless? 6 But I say unto you, That in this place is one greater than the temple.
The duties of the priests required them to work on the sabbath – killing and butchering lambs, kindling fires, offering sacrifices, etc. In a sense, there was no Sabbath for the Temple priests, for they did not follow that law. This fact shows that the Temple and its work were more important than the law of the Sabbath. Yet, something greater than the Temple itself was then present in Israel – the very Lord of the Temple. Was it not appropriate then, that His “priests” attend Him on the Sabbath?
By proclaiming Himself to be greater than the Temple, in effect Jesus was saying that He was God, for the Temple was the dwelling place of God. See a similar declaration later in this chapter (Mat 12:41-42). This was the basis for the the unbelieving Pharisees to hold counsel against Him, how they might kill Him (v14).
7 But if ye had known what this meaneth, I will have mercy, and not sacrifice, ye would not have condemned the guiltless.
Jesus had given the Pharisees some homework to do in Mat 9:13, when He told them to learn what their prophet Hosea meant when he wrote those words some 500 years earlier (see Hos 6:6). The Old Covenant had many ceremonial laws, but God’s real interest was man’s heart. The prophet Micah understood this clearly when he contrasted mercy (the law of love) with sacrifice: Wherewith shall I come before the LORD, and bow myself before the high God? shall I come before Him with burnt offerings, with calves of a year old? Will the LORD be pleased with thousands of rams, or with ten thousands of rivers of oil? shall I give my firstborn for my transgression, the fruit of my body for the sin of my soul? He hath shewed thee, O man, what is good; and what doth the LORD require of thee, but to do justly, and to love mercy, and to walk humbly with thy God? (Mic 6:6-8).
The Pharisees had not learned mercy and integrity from Hosea and Micah. They were thoroughly guilty of rigidly enforcing sacrifice, ritual and burdensome rules while neglecting the greater works of justice, mercy and humbly worshipping God. The OT sacrifices and rituals were meant to stimulate these greater spiritual fruits, but they had become the end rather than the means. May we learn a lesson from their sad behavior.
Ye would not have condemned the guiltless. The Pharisees, in accordance with their legalistic judgment, condemned the disciples for breaking the Law of the Sabbath, but according to Christ they had not broken that Law.
8 For the Son of man is Lord even of the sabbath day.
If the Father has delivered all things to the Son (Mat 11:27), then the Son has the authority to set the rules of the Law. A greater than the temple and a greater than the Sabbath was present, indeed the very One who had designed them both. The fourth commandment of the decalogue is to remember the Sabbath (seventh) day to keep it holy (Ex 20:8). The Ten Commandments are fundamentals of God’s unchanging moral law, which is repeated in the New Testament. Under the New Covenant, the Lord’s Day (Rev 1:10), is the seventh day we reserve to worship the God of heaven and His Son, Jesus Christ.
Actually, Jesus was not challenging the law of the Sabbath, but the Jews’ relatively new interpretation of that law. The Pharisees had added an immense burden of exceedingly strict regulations to this commandment. They had formulated a long, detailed list of what could and could not be done on the Sabbath. Jesus was not impressed with these additions to the Law. While Jesus and His disciples kept the Law of the Pharisees (Mat 23:1-4), on several occasions He exposed their poor and arbitrary applications that often went counter to other laws of the Old Testament. In the Pharisees’ judgment, to pick grain and eat it as one walked along was violating the Sabbath. The disciples were plainly doing servile work (Lev 23:7)! Jesus however, says they were guiltless in this matter (v7). The Law said you could pluck the ears with thine hand while passing through a field (Deut 23:25), but according to the Pharisaical interpretation that could not be done on a Sabbath.
It is a lesson for churches today that to ignore or misunderstanding the spirit and intent of a divine commandment is an error with consequences. The Pharisees held so rigidly to their form of the sabbath law that they missed its blessing entirely. It grew into a giant burden that killed the spiritual meaning for which it had been created.
Alexander Bruce writes: “This difference between Christ’s mode of regarding the Sabbath and the pharisaic involves of necessity a corresponding difference in the spirit and the details of its observance. Take Christ’s view, and your principle becomes: That is the best way of observing the Sabbath which is most conducive to man’s physical and spiritual well-being-in other words, which is best for his body and for his soul; and in the light of this principle, you will keep the holy day in a spirit of intelligent joy and thankfulness to God the Creator for His gracious consideration towards His creatures. Take the pharisaic view, and your principle of observance becomes: He best keeps the Sabbath who goes greatest lengths in mere abstinence from any thing that can be construed into labor, irrespective of the effect of this abstinence either on his own well-being or on that of others. In short, we land in the silly, senseless minuteness of a rabbinical legislation, which sees in such an act as that of the disciples plucking and rubbing the ears of corn, or that of the healed man who carried his bed home on his shoulders, or that of one who should walk a greater distance than two thousand cubits, or three-fourths of a mile, on a Sabbath, a heinous offence against the fourth commandment and its Author.” (The Training of the Twelve)
The following article is complementary to the topic.
Sunday or Saturday Worship?
And let us consider one another to provoke unto love and to good works: not forsaking the assembling of ourselves together, as the manner of some is; but exhorting one another: and so much the more, as ye see the day approaching (Heb 10:24-25).
Christians need the encouragement and exhortation of other Christians. Surely that was a primary reason that God instituted the local church body as the basis of Christian brotherly love and worship. And according to this verse, end-time church fellowship is particularly essential to motivate one another, to hear sound exhortation and to warn against the deceptions of heresy, apostasy, apathy and following the wisdom of man. Unfortunately, some Christians disregard the Apostle’s charge, perhaps thinking the local body is unimportant, or maybe to avoid the accompanying responsibilities and duties that dedicated membership requires. The Scriptural rule is quite clear – the meetings of the faithful are not optional.
The general practice has long been that churches formally meet on Sunday, but in the twentieth century increasing numbers of Christians began reject that tradition in favor of meeting on Saturday. This paper endeavors to summarize the arguments of both groups and will propose a Scriptural solution. I do not attempt to “convert” sabbath-worshippers, but intend to establish the good reasons for worshipping on Sunday.
One of the most important commandments in Judaism was to remember the Sabbath day, to keep it holy (Ex 20:8). In giving the Law to Moses, God further explained that the seventh day is the sabbath of the LORD thy God: in it thou shalt not do any work (Ex 20:10). This rule was enforced by strict penalty of death (Ex 35:2). The Hebrew noun shabbath, which means “a rest,” first appears in Exodus 16:23, and its verb form, shabath, first appears in Gen 2:2. Besides being a name for the seventh day of the week, shabbath was also used to refer to special holy days and particular years in the Law (Lev 23:32; 25:4). The Jews named the days of the week according to number: first day, second day, third day, etc, but the seventh day had an additional name: shabbath. Other than the Sabbath, only the sixth day of the week was privileged with a name, it being called, “the preparation” since certain work needed to be done on that day in preparation for the Sabbath (John 19:31).
The present practice of using names for the days of the week is not that ancient, having originated around 100 A.D. in the Greco-Roman culture. They named the days after the seven visible luminaries in the night sky (Sun, Moon, Mercury, Venus, Mars, Jupiter, Saturn). These names were apparently not yet in common use when the New Testament Scriptures were written, but they do appear in second century church writings. Saturday corresponds to the seventh day of the Jewish week, and Sunday is the first day of the week.
From the time they left Egypt until Christ’s resurrection, true Israelites kept every seventh day as a holy rest day in obedience to the Old Covenant. It was not an easy transition. At first, some went out to gather food on the Sabbath in spite of God’s command (Ex 16:27), and one man was put to death for gathering sticks on the Sabbath (Lev 15:33). In the time of Christ though, the Sabbath laws were widely known and strictly kept by every believing Jew and proselyte.
How and when did the churches of Christ begin to meet on the first day of the week instead of the seventh day? Those who argue for Sabbath-keeping argue that, in a major compromise with pagan Sun-worshippers, the Roman Catholic Church unilaterally changed the day of worship to Sunday, the first day of the week. Many say this change is the fulfillment of the mark of the beast prophesied in Revelation 13 and that those who worship on Sunday are worshipping the Beast! According to Sabbath-keepers, it is a grave sin against God to not keep Saturday holy unto the Lord.
While it may be true that the Catholic Church officially recognized Sunday as the universal day of worship, it is not true that they changed the worship day from Saturday to Sunday. From the very beginning, even before Jesus’ ascension, the Apostles and disciples met for worship and Communion on Sunday. They never wavered in that custom.
Somewhat surprisingly however, the New Testament Scriptures do not specifically command the churches of God to meet upon Sunday, or Saturday, or any other day of the week. Nevertheless, every time a day of the week is mentioned in connection to the assembling of the church, it is always Sunday, the first day of the week. The Apostles would often attend the Jewish synagogues for the sake of evangelism, but the weekly Communion took place on Sunday.
The simple reason the people of God now meet to worship Him on the Lord’s Day instead of Moses’ Sabbath is potently compelling – it is that greatest event in the history of the world, the resurrection of the Son of God. For Jesus rose from the dead very early in the morning the first day of the week (Mark 16:2; Luke 24:1; Mat 28:1; John 20:1). And from the very beginning, His disciples commemorated that momentous event by gathering together on Sunday for the Communion ceremony. The very first Sunday meeting was the evening of Lord’s resurrection, when He appeared to them all except for Thomas (John 20:19). The following Sunday, the Apostles were again gathered together. This time Thomas was also present when Jesus appeared to them a second time (John 20:26).
The third appearance of Christ to the Apostles almost certainly took place the following Sunday at the conclusion of a famous fishing trip, although the Scriptures do not actually state the day. After Thomas’ encounter, the Apostles obeyed Christ’s order to travel to Galilee, a few days journey away. There they waited awhile until Peter’s restless declaration: I go a fishing! There would not seem to be time for the Apostles to go fishing before that week’s Sabbath, so the timing is perfect for a Saturday night fishing trip that ended early Sunday morning when Jesus appeared for the third time after that He was risen from the dead (John 21:14).
At that meeting Jesus presided over the first post-resurrection Communion service on record. Only the book of John describes that beautiful scene of a brotherhood in fellowship. Jesus is waiting on the shore with bread and fish cooking over a bed of coals and He invites His disciples to Come and dine. The details paint a storybook-like setting: a freshly-grilled breakfast served early in the calm of morning on the shores of Lake Galilee with the sun’s first rays lightening the waters. Brothers and loved ones are there to share it and Jesus Himself is serving the bread and fish, presumably in much the same manner that He had broken the bread at the Last Supper two weeks prior. What a wonderful meeting!
Whether this reunion took place on Sunday or not, from here on the Scriptures show the churches meeting on the first day of the week. There is not even one passage hinting that they met together on Saturday and that is true even into the earliest writings of the primitive church.
The next important event in the Scriptural record was the formal coming of the Holy Spirit, which took place at Pentecost seven weeks after Jesus’ resurrection. The Mosaic Law of Pentecost was written by God so that its dual ceremonies always fell upon a Sunday (Lev 23:15). Again we find the disciples gathered with one accord in one place (Acts 2:1), even though there was no reason to meet that particular Sunday (the Pentecost rituals were priest-only affairs). Nevertheless, the disciples had already established the custom of meeting on Sunday, so on the morning of Pentecost they were congregated to commemorate Jesus’ resurrection upon that day and at that very time of day (Acts 2:15). The Pentecost ritual is just one of many strong indications that the New Covenant would feature a change in the manner and day of worship.
The fledgling Church was, however, made up entirely of Jews who had no idea of beginning a new religion. The Apostles and disciples continued to observe the Jewish customs, keep the Sabbath and attend the festivals. This only began to change after God revealed to Peter His great plan to extend mercy to the Gentiles (Acts 10:28). The Apostles, Paul in particular, would use the Jewish Sabbath as an opportunity to preach (Acts 16:13; 17:2; 18:4), but the Christian meeting was held on Sunday….upon the first day of the week, when the disciples came together to break bread (Acts 20:7; 1Cor 16:2). Again, the ceremony of Communion, the Lord’s supper, was a central reason for this weekly church meeting (1Cor 11:17-34).
The earliest church writers, without exception, describe the normal meeting of the churches upon the first day of the week:
- “But every Lord’s day, do ye gather yourselves together, and break bread…” (Didache, ca 80 AD).
- “…[Jewish Christians] who were brought up in the ancient order of things have come to the possession of a new hope, no longer observing the Sabbath, but living in the observance of the Lord’s Day, on which also our life has sprung up again by Him and by His death ” (Ignatius, ca 100 AD).
- “Wherefore, also, we keep the eighth day with joyfulness, the day also on which Jesus rose again from the dead” (Epistle of Barnabas, ca 100 AD).
- “And on the day called Sunday, all who live in cities or in the country gather together to one place, and the memoirs of the apostles or the writings of the prophets are read…Sunday is the day on which we all hold our common assembly…” (Justin Martyr, ca 130 A.D, First Apology, ch67). “For we too would observe the fleshly circumcision, and the Sabbaths, and in short all the feasts, if we did not know for what reason they were enjoined you” (Dialogue with Trypho the Jew, ch18).
- “We devote Sunday to rejoicing, from a far different reason than Sun-worship” (Tertullian, ca 200 AD).
These are powerful, early evidences that the churches of Christ were accustomed to meeting on Sunday. Proponents for Saturday worship are forced to either impugn these testimonies and/or somehow make the Lord’s day to be a reference to Saturday. Yet in his writing, Ignatius separated the Sabbath from the Lord’s Day, which he names as the day that Jesus rose from the dead. Additionally, John was in the spirit on the Lord’s day when the Lord met him once again and communicated the Apocalypse (Rev 1:10). By the time the Revelation was written (ca 96 A.D.), the first day of the week had probably already come to be called the Lord’s day, in recognition of His resurrection. This doesn’t mean that the Apostles or early church did not recognize the Sabbath at all, but that the Christian meeting was held on Sunday.
Unfortunately, many who advocate Sabbath-keeping are really not interested in honestly seeking the truth – they just want to “prove” their belief. This has given rise to a lot of misinformation due to highly biased manipulation of the texts and specious interpretations thereof, for the Sabbathites only recourse is to enter into complex arguments explaining why the writings do not really mean what they plainly say, and why certain words do not actually mean what they appear to mean! Unhappily, their best argument is to undermine and cast doubt upon the authenticity of the ancient texts. We live in a day where sensational age-old “truths” are supposedly being newly discovered, but at the expense of much distortion, spin and new interpretation of very clear texts. I am truly amazed at the lengths that many will go to overturn the plain and simple reading of the Scriptures themselves, the saddest example of that being the complete nullification of Col 2:16 by grammatical tricks and nuances.
While on this topic, let us recognize that we use the early church writings to understand what the early churches believed and practiced, not to establish doctrines of the Bible. The Scriptures alone are authoritative for doctrine and instruction in righteousness (2Tim 3:16). Much of the squabbling about what the early church believed or didn’t believe is a distraction from the real issue at hand and those who initiate it are content with that diversion. Do not be detoured from the real search to determine what the New Testament teaches concerning the keeping of the Sabbath. We will find that it is not silent on that topic.
The real posture of Sabbath-keepers is to elevate the Old Testament commandments above the New Testament. Likely they would protest against that assessment, but I stand firm in it. Genesis 2:3 is their foremost proof-text: And God blessed the seventh day, and sanctified it because that in it He had rested from all His work which God created and made. They argue that this early truth is universally in effect and forever fixed. Since this command of God even predates the Law, it MUST rule for all time, they say. Why then do they not follow the law of circumcision? It too was given long before the Law as an everlasting covenant (see Paul’s argument in Rom 4). We will return to examine Genesis 2:3 later, but recognize here that this argument is the old bait-and-switch tactic. By quoting the Old Testament they make us appear to be arguing against the Scripture, yet we too believe that Genesis 2:3 is good, true and right, along with the fourth commandment of Exodus 20:8-11. Yet even the Ten Commandments, which constitute the foundational unchanging moral law of God for mankind, are not rigidly static laws. A key feature of Jesus’ Sermon on the Mount was the expansion and refitting of those Ten Commandments for appropriate usage in the New Covenant. So we believe the fourth commandment continues in force along with the other nine, but will show conclusively that all ten have been re-applied conducive to the purposes of the New Covenant. The Old Covenant is just that – old (Heb 8:13).
Today we obey the Ten Commandments as they are explained by Jesus in the New Testament. Under the Old Covenant, Thou shalt not kill, did not have the same meaning as it does under the New. Thou shalt not commit adultery is newly defined to include lust and immoral thoughts. Thou shalt not bear false witness now extends to every idle word that man shall speak. When the Old Covenant said, Thou shalt not take the name of the Lord thy God in vain, it meant that oaths given in God’s name were to be strictly performed and kept, but in the New Covenant it means to refrain from all oaths. Under the New Covenant, bowing down to a graven image is not just literal idolatry, but extends to the worship of material possessions: he that layeth up treasure for himself, and is not rich toward God. Each of the Ten Commandments have been newly expanded and redefined in the spirit and intent of the New Covenant. For the priesthood being changed, there is made of necessity a change also of the Law (Heb 7:12).
All of the Ten Commandments are addressed in the Gospels and most are recited virtually verbatim. The fourth commandment however, is a special case. It is not really repeated in the New Testament and is notably absent from Jesus’ answer to the young Jew who asked Him which commandments he should keep in order to inherit eternal life: Thou shalt do no murder, Thou shalt not commit adultery, Thou shalt not steal, Thou shalt not bear false witness, Honour thy father and thy mother: and, Thou shalt love thy neighbour as thyself (Mat 19:18-19). One would expect Jesus to have included, Remember the Sabbath day to keep it holy, if it is so essential and important to God as the sabbath-keepers claim.
Due to the absence of a direct injunction, some say the fourth commandment has been completely discarded in the New Testament. I was once of that opinion. The general rule followed by most Anabaptist groups is that we do not follow Old Testament rules and laws unless they are repeated in the New, and we will search in vain therein for any clear declaration of the fourth commandment. Some passages even speak against keeping the Sabbath (Col 2:16, for example).
Several facts have caused me to reconsider. First, while Jesus may not have distinctly repeated the commandment, neither did He pronounce its end, even when presented with several golden opportunities (see Luke 6, for example). Instead, as with the other commandments, He gave it additional meaning. Second, the general rule of periodically setting aside one day to honor the God of all grace is a reasonable service of the redeemed. It would seem highly inappropriate to entirely annul that form. Third, the Scriptures do enjoin formal meetings of the church body and it is only natural that these are undertaken upon a set day of the week. In sum, we believe that the body of New Testament Scripture indicates that the spirit of the fourth commandment continues, but that the letter of it has ended (2Cor 3:6).
It is commonly thought that one reason God instituted the New Covenant is because the Old Law was too difficult for Man to keep. That is false. The truth is that no law is so high and lofty, so stringent and strict, so exceedingly difficult to keep, as the one Jesus laid out in the Gospels! It is altogether the highest code of conduct and worship ever proposed to mankind and it can only have originated in the mind of God (see Mat 5:20; Rom 8:4). The Law of Christ speaks first to the heart of man, who then must act in the world according to those precepts. This basic and foremost premise applies to all of the Ten Commandments. Unfortunately, some well-meaning churches fail to appreciate this truth and attempt to promote spirituality by legislation.
So we do not have to reject either Genesis 2:3 or Exodus 20:8 in order to follow the Apostles’ example of meeting on Sunday. That, however, has apparently escaped the notice of many who claim to be following the commandment of remembering the Sabbath day to keep it holy and yet inconsistently do not obey the rules as they are set forth in the Scriptures! Instead, they have made a Sabbath law all of their own. They typically refrain from remunerated work beginning very strictly on the evening of each Friday in accordance to the Jewish Law’s reckoning of days, but then they ignore the rest of that Law and prepare food, kindle fires and do all manner of personal work and recreation on that day. Consistency dictates that one either follow the Sabbath as detailed in the Old Covenant, or eschew it entirely in favor of the New Covenant precept.
Moreover, many Sabbath-keepers that argue the meanings of words in the texts of the Scripture and early church writings have overlooked the fact that beyond changing the day, the Apostles and early church also stopped keeping any day holy as defined by Judaism. In other words, they didn’t just change the day from Saturday to Sunday but go on following the same sabbath law. For one example, see Tertullian’s, Of the Observance of the Sabbath.
As already mentioned, Saturday-worship proponents argue that the Sabbath commandment was in force before it was commanded in the Mosaic law. Citing Genesis 2:3, they teach that from Adam unto Moses the faithful patriarchs kept the seventh day holy to the Lord. There is no affirmative indication of that statement anywhere in the Scriptures, but even conceding the point our position is unaffected: the Old Testament commandments were refitted by Jesus Christ to correspond with a New Covenant that God has made with His people. The laws of the Old have been fulfilled and completed in Christ, who did not destroy the Law, but inaugurated a new one to take its place (Mat 5:17). It is a better Covenant that builds upon the Old, but with new and better promises (Heb 8:6).
Sabbath-keepers propose that the first rule God made after creating the Universe was to require Man to keep the Sabbath day holy. It would seem the fourth commandment is the most important of all laws! It is far more likely that Genesis 2:2-3 is God’s communication to Moses some 2,000 years later so that he might give better foundation to the sabbath law that He instituted at the time of the Jewish exodus. In fact, God Himself said the Sabbath was given to the Jews after their bondage: I caused them to go forth out of the land of Egypt, and…I gave them my sabbaths, to be a sign between me and them, that they might know that I am the LORD that sanctify them (Eze 20:10-12). This should put an end to all arguments that keeping Saturday holy is a universal, timeless law of God.
Nevertheless, let’s suppose Genesis 2:2 actually is intended for us today. How are we to keep it holy? There’s nothing in it about worship, about not working, or about what time of day it began and ended. The bare fact is that the Old Testament shows God establishing a pattern in Genesis that was incorporated into the Jewish Covenant many years later. However, I am inclined to agree that God’s blessing continues upon every seventh day, although I am more influenced by its inclusion in the Ten Commandments than by its appearance in the Creation Account. Nevertheless, it is logical that it be reapplied in the New Covenant along with the other nine.
Exactly how has the fourth commandment been affected in the revamping of the Covenants? First, in keeping with the core difference between the two Covenants, the spiritual aspects of keeping the day holy is emphasized over the bodily, physical aspects. Under the Old Covenant, keeping the Sabbath holy and observing the rite of circumcision were the most important mandates of the Law. They were identity markers, or constant reminders to the Israelite nation of God’s covenant with them. And they were formulated using very strict applications to the physical world. Under the New Covenant, setting aside one day of the week to publicly honor God may serve a similar purpose, but the final result is to worship Him in spirit and truth (John 4:24); it is time set apart for sacred communion between God and the human soul (Rev 1:10).
The Fourth Commandment reads as follows: Remember the Sabbath day to keep it holy. Six days shalt thou labour, and do all thy work: But the seventh day is the sabbath of the LORD thy God: in it thou shalt not do any work, thou, nor thy son, nor thy daughter, thy manservant, nor thy maidservant, nor thy cattle, nor thy stranger that is within thy gates (Ex 20:8-10). The Law defined “work” to include all physical exercise (Ex 16:29), even to preparing food (Ex 16:23) and making a fire (Ex 35:3). Jesus however, did not follow the sabbath Law – at least in the way the Pharisees interpreted it. Neither did He reaffirm it verbally. On several occasions the Jewish leaders confronted Christ for not keeping the Sabbath according to the Law. The Son of Man is Lord even of the sabbath, He responded (Mat 12:8). It is lawful on the sabbath days to do good (Luke 6:9). The sabbath was made for man, and not man for the sabbath (Mark 2:27). These are the principles that teach the new meaning of the Sabbath and they come straight from the lips of our Leader Himself.
While Jesus did not challenge the validity of the sabbath law, it is clear that He did change the spirit of the law such that it conflicted with Jewish practice. Yet in saying, The Son of Man is Lord even of the Sabbath, He proclaimed that He had the right to redefine it! Jesus taught that in the New Covenant, the Sabbath would be for the benefit of man. It would become the best time for the spiritual man to work in doing good. Jesus made clay on the sabbath to anoint a blind man’s eyes (John 9); He told the cripple to carry his bed on the sabbath (John 5); His disciples picked corn on the sabbath (Mat 12:1-2); He healed a withered hand in the synagogue on the sabbath (Mat 12). And the coup-de-grace took place on a certain sabbath when, under the disapproving eyes of the Jews, He said, I must work the works of Him that sent Me, and then He healed a man blind from his birth (John 9). Indeed, the many clashes between Jesus and the Jews over the Sabbath day makes it seem like Jesus purposely picked that day to work miracles. Certainly He was teaching us something.
According to Jesus, the new spirit of the command to keep the seventh day holy is not to burden man with cumbersome duties, but to benefit him and others in body and soul. In the New Covenant, one day set aside to rest from the labors of life is a privilege and a blessing! And yet, keeping the day holy is a voluntary act, a personal expression of our commitment and love for Christ. Under the Old Covenant, the law of the tithe required giving a portion of one’s belongings to God, while the law of the Sabbath required giving a portion of one’s time to God. Both are not repeated as commandments under the New Covenant because the rule has become stricter! Now we give all our possessions to God and all of our time. Justin Martyr, who we quoted earlier, reasoned similarly to the Jews of his day: “The new law requires you to keep perpetual sabbath, and you, because you are idle for one day, suppose you are pious, not discerning why this has been commanded you” (Dialogue with Trypho, ch12).
Perhaps you are thinking, “Ok, maybe Jesus did change the spirit of the sabbath law, but He didn’t change the day from Saturday to Sunday.” Well, maybe not in so many words, but in practical example He did much to effect that change. For some reason, He chose to work on the Sabbath, to rise from the dead on the day following the Sabbath, and to appear again and again to His disciples on Sunday.
The epistles of the Apostles are even more emphatic in exalting the Lord’s Day over the Sabbath. Hebrews 4 explains that the Old Testament Sabbath rest pre-figures the New Testament believer’s continual spiritual rest in Christ: We which have believed do enter into rest (Heb 4:3). However, a future, eternal sabbath rest awaits in the heavens: There remaineth therefore a rest to the people of God (Heb 4:9). Those who wish to keep the Sabbath rest on earth do not recognize that they are in effect living in the past, for the core difference between the two covenants is dramatically illustrated by the fourth commandment. The Old Covenant was ordained in such fashion that a man “worked” to gain a promised future rest, but the Christian begins his week by resting in what Christ has worked for him. The Old Covenant proved that man cannot gain salvation by his own works (Rom 8:3). In the New Covenant, we work because of our salvation (Eph 2:10).
In keeping with these grand differences, it is only appropriate that a new seventh day be observed and it is natural that it be the Lord’s Day, Sunday, the day that our Savior rose from the dead. How natural that we begin the week by resting in His work of love and worshipping Him for that unspeakable grace! Then we use the other six days to labor in His vineyard. In the New Covenant, we might paraphrase Genesis 2:3 as follows: “God blessed the eighth day and sanctified it, because that on it He had raised Jesus Christ from the dead.” Notice that by saying this we do not change the fundamental pattern of Genesis 2:2, that every seventh day is a day of rest, sanctified and holy for the Lord. How blessed it is!
The Law had many Sabbaths. Besides the seventh-day Sabbath, there were feast-day Sabbaths, seventh year Sabbaths and fiftieth year Sabbaths (Lev 25:4-12). All of these were a shadow of things to come. They have been fulfilled in Christ and have not been reaffirmed as mandates under the New Covenant. That does not mean the fourth commandment has been abolished, but that its earlier purpose has been fulfilled. As with all the Ten Commandments, it has been refitted for good purposes in the New.
- Ye observe days, and months, and times, and years. I am afraid of you, lest I have bestowed upon you labour in vain (Gal 4:10-11).
- Let no man therefore judge you in meat, or in drink, or in respect of an holyday, or of the new moon, or of the sabbath days: which are a shadow of things to come; but the body is of Christ (Col 2:16-17).
- One man esteemeth one day above another: another esteemeth every day alike. Let every man be fully persuaded in his own mind. He that regardeth the day, regardeth it unto the Lord; and he that regardeth not the day, to the Lord he doth not regard it (Rom 14:5-6).
These verses are emphatically against Sabbath-keeping, at least in the form and practice of Judaism. Only by sleight of grammar and mind can they be taken any other way (2Pet 3:16). However, while the Old Testament rules concerning the Sabbath are no longer in effect, I cannot think that there is no purpose for the fourth commandment under the New Covenant. The preceding warnings must be taken alongside the warning not to forsake the assembly of the church (Heb 10:25).
The Ten Commandments are underpinned by two greater, immutable Laws: Thou shalt love the Lord thy God, and, Thou shalt love thy neighbor as thyself (Mat 23:37-40). The first four of the Ten Commandments pertain to the former and the last six pertain to the latter. In the Old Covenant, those two laws were primarily concentrated upon physical actions but in the New Covenant, they are first aimed at the spiritual heart of man, who then puts them into physical action.
Strict enforcement of form and practice tends to obscure the spirit of any rite or ordinance, a fact which explains the sharp change from very detailed Old Covenant rites to unregulated New Covenant ordinances. Baptism and Communion are hallowed ordinances in Christianity, but the Bible leaves their exact pattern of observance astonishingly undefined. Very sadly, many churches ignore this striking fact and have forced these ordinances into molds that may not be varied on pain of dis-fellowship and charges of heresy. Such strict and literal requirements do nothing for the Church of Christ and heavily detract from the deeper spiritual purpose of these beautiful types. This is acutely true for sabbath-keeping. Forcing all to worship on Saturday and further defining it in stringent detail misses, to great detriment, the spirit of the commandment.
This was the chief error of Jewish legalism and Jesus severely reprimanded them for it (see Mat 23). Legalism ignores the context, or accompanying situation, and demands unbending obedience to the rule even when it conflicts in principle with another rule. Liberty recognizes and submits to the rule of law, but remembers that context and situation also matter and that other rules may be at play. The legalism of the Pharisees found a way to negate the command to honor one’s parents by invoking the command to tithe (Mark 7:10-13). Jesus’ example in keeping the law of the Sabbath is according to the law of liberty and not legalism. Obviously, there are many New Testament laws that circumstances can neither affect nor qualify. It’s much like the laws of mathematics, in which 4+4=8 without fail, but 2x+3y=12 has an infinite number of combinations for x and y that will yield the same answer of twelve.
Given that the fourth commandment is not declared to be a Law in the same fashion as 4+4=8, I believe that God expects us to wisely decide how to keep holy the Lord’s seventh day – note by a set of unchanging rules that define what is sinful and what isn’t, but by guidelines which are not over-ruled by other rules and circumstances. Deciding to avoid traveling on Sunday is not legalistic, but dictating that it is unlawful to ever travel on Sunday may be entering too far along the path of the Pharisees. Deciding to avoid buying things on Sunday is not legalistic, but making it to be a sin requiring church confession no matter the circumstances seems equally unwise. This view may not find popular agreement in some Anabaptist communities, but I believe it does follow Jesus’ own example in dealing with the Jews on their Sabbath.
I am not arguing for libertarianism, relativism, or the unimportance of church guidelines. The rule of law is based firmly on Scriptural authority. And let us remember that the only Judge who counts is weighing not just the outward actions, but our very thoughts and motives. If there is any idea of using this liberty as an opportunity for the flesh, think again! The point I am attempting to make is that in the course of our lives we will be presented with many diverse situations and opportunities. Let us follow the wise, good example of Christ and not the dead legalism of the Pharisees.
Why then did the Apostle warn to let no man judge us concerning the keeping of the Sabbath? (Col 2:16). If this paper has been successful, the answer is not that difficult: the old manner of remembering the Sabbath day has been updated to fit New Covenant precepts. There is no purpose to following old laws and rituals that have been fulfilled in Christ and His Kingdom. The epistle to the Galatians warns that to keep the OT law is to deny Christ (Gal 5:2).
And yet, the Apostle recognizes that, One man esteemeth one day above another: another esteemeth every day alike. Let every man be fully persuaded in his own mind. (Rom 14:5). The context of that passage involves sincere Jews who had converted to Christianity but were still keeping various Jewish traditions, such as not eating certain meats and keeping the Sabbath as prescribed by the Law. It warns against judging our brother’s conscience, and asks that the believing Jews and Gentiles accept each other in the Lord. For whatsoever is not of faith is sin (Rom 14:23).
This is the New Testament solution to those who worship the Lord. Let us not judge those whose consciences lead them to keep the Sabbath on Saturday (Rom 14:5). And we urge them in turn to not judge us in meats, drink, holy days, or Sabbaths (Col 2:16-17). The Apostle concludes his exhortation, Let us therefore follow after the things which make for peace, and things wherewith one may edify another (Rom 14:19). That seems a fitting conclusion to this examination.
Questions for thought:
- If Sabbath-keeping is for the Christian, why is it not commanded in the New Testament?
- Why did the early church meet on the first day of the week?
- Is it sensible to return to Old Covenant rules that are not repeated in the New Testament?
- Does Sabbath-keeping bring more glory to Christ, or less?
- Why did Christ schedule His appearances with the Apostles for Sundays?
- Why did the Apostles warn against keeping the Jewish Sabbath?
- What is my motive for choosing to worship on Saturday or Sunday?
The Ten Commandments in the book of Matthew:
- Thou shalt not have any other gods before Me ……………………(Mat 4:10; 6:24)
- Thou shalt not take the name of the Lord thy God in vain…….(Mat 5:33)
- Thou shalt not make unto thee any graven image………………..(Mat 19:21)
- Remember the Sabbath day to keep it holy ………………………….(Mat 12:1-12)
- Honor thy father and mother ……………………………………………….(Mat 15:4)
- Thou shalt not kill …………………………………………………………………(Mat 5:21)
- Thou shalt not commit adultery …………………………………………..(Mat 5:27)
- Thou shalt not steal………………………………………………………………(Mat 19:18)
- Thou shalt not bear false witness …………………………………………(Mat 5:33)
- Thou shalt not covet …………………………………………………………….(Mat 23:11-12; Luke 12:15)
9 And when he was departed thence, he went into their synagogue: 10 And, behold, there was a man which had his hand withered. And they asked him, saying, Is it lawful to heal on the sabbath days? that they might accuse him. 11 And he said unto them, What man shall there be among you, that shall have one sheep, and if it fall into a pit on the sabbath day, will he not lay hold on it, and lift it out? 12 How much then is a man better than a sheep? Wherefore it is lawful to do well on the sabbath days. 13 Then saith he to the man, Stretch forth thine hand. And he stretched it forth; and it was restored whole, like as the other.
This account is a further example of the Pharisees’ extreme legalism, for it shows just how little they sought for the real spirit of the Law of God. How could healing a withered hand on the sabbath possibly be construed as servile work? Just speaking the word violated their sabbath-laws! Yet unwittingly, they testify to the skeptic even today that Jesus’ miracles were truly great works of healing and not just empty words and sleight of hand.
This occasion is one of the few times the Gospels note Jesus’ emotions. Being grieved at the hardness of their hearts, Jesus looked about Him with anger (Mark 3:5). It did not bother the Pharisees that a suffering man must continue in that condition so that their man-made rules concerning the sabbath would not be broken. It did bother Jesus. See the parallel passages in Mark 3:1-6 and Luke 6:6-11.
14 Then the Pharisees went out, and held a council against him, how they might destroy him.
The Jews had so hardened their hearts to the truth that they were filled with madness, and went out plotting how they might destroy Him (Luke 6:11; John 5:18). Their hardened hearts were entirely unmoved by this beautiful miracle of healing a poor, lame person! They provide a perfect example of Jesus’ words, that false prophets are discovered by examining their fruit (Mat 7:16). A true prophet does not do bad things, but a false prophet does – maybe not always and on every occasion, but often enough to betray himself to the wise follower of Christ. The contrast between Jesus and the Jewish leaders as true and false prophets is notably evident in this account.
When men continue to resist the truth, a point is reached where even hearing it will fill them with madness and they will do all in their power to destroy it. Witness the present attacks of the intellectual and societal world against Christianity. These self-appointed shamans of society and philosophy are filled with madness against Christ and Christianity. They will not be content until they have purged America of any mention of God. They hold council against Him, conniving new ways to destroy His laws and His Word of Truth.
15 But when Jesus knew it, he withdrew himself from thence: and great multitudes followed him, and he healed them all; 16 And charged them that they should not make him known: 17 That it might be fulfilled which was spoken by Esaias the prophet, saying,
Here again Jesus asked the healed not to testify that He was the Messiah (see note on Mat 8:4). The Jews were plotting to kill Him and the multitudes were trying to make Him their king, but Jesus was dedicated to performing the strange work (Is 28:21) for which He had been sent. And that required walking a careful path. The parallel passage in Mark 3:7-12 adds some interesting details.
Matthew further notes that this attitude of Jesus fulfilled the Messianic prophecy of Is 42:1-4. Jesus did not argue with the Jews about their erroneous ideas of the sabbath law, but left quietly. He did not seek the praise and recognition of the masses, nor did He call them to revolt in the streets. Instead, He withdrew Himself from thence. It was not yet His hour (John 8:20).
18 Behold my servant, whom I have chosen; my beloved, in whom my soul is well pleased: I will put my spirit upon him, and he shall shew judgment to the Gentiles.
In this prophecy, God is speaking to the world in general. “Behold, take note of the Servant that I have chosen to proclaim My truth to the nations.” Although the Son of God, He took upon Him the form of a servant (Php 2:7) to do the will of the Father (John 5:30). The Greek words for “servant” in these two passages are different. In Matthew the word is pais, which also means a young boy (see Luke 2:43), while Paul’s word is doulos, a bond-servant. God calls Jesus, My Beloved.
Isaiah describes God with a spirit and soul, and His Servant is a man with the Spirit of God in Him who would shew judgment to the Gentiles (Is 42:1). Though the Jews did not understand it yet, this is a clear prophecy that the Messiah’s laws and precepts would be proclaimed in Israel and beyond, in every nation under heaven. Isaiah concludes, He shall not fail nor be discouraged till He have set judgment in the earth, and the isles shall wait for His law (Is 42:4). The mission of the Messiah was not complete until Peter, as Christ’s chosen instrument, opened the door of salvation to all people.
19 He shall not strive, nor cry; neither shall any man hear his voice in the streets.
Jesus did not come as a fiery leader of the people. He was not actively in the streets, gathering followers with provocative speeches of rebellion and violence. True, His miracles and teaching always drew huge crowds of admirers, but every time He would quietly remove Himself and travel on to a new place. That is exactly the picture of this prophecy, but the Jews and even the disciples, simply did not understand. They had been taught to believe that their Messiah would be a powerful political leader (like David) who would return Israel to her former glory days as chief among the nations.
Isaiah however, often described a humble and gentle Servant (Is 53:7), a Man with no pretensions to leadership nor aspirations for fame and power. And Jesus Himself expressed the same: I am meek and lowly in heart (Mat 11:29). These characteristics caused great confusion, even among His sincere and God-fearing followers, as they tried to mold Jesus the Nazarene into the Messiah they had developed in their minds. No less than John the Baptist even expressed doubts as to whether He was the Messiah (Mat 11:2-3).
20 A bruised reed shall he not break, and smoking flax shall he not quench, till he send forth judgment unto victory.
As if to dispel any doubts concerning the prophecy of the Messiah proclaiming judgment to the Gentiles, the Scriptures give a further testimony of His overwhelming kindness, mercy and gentleness. He is a King, but meek (Mat 21:5) and moved with compassion (Mat 14:14). He is peaceable and filled with love and understanding. He will not crush even the lowest ember of faith, nor will He answer with violence the vitriolic attacks of His enemies.
A bruised reed, perhaps meaning a tender young plant, signifies a life that could be easily crushed. Smoking flax, perhaps the wick of an oil-lamp, signifies the same – a low, flickering flame that is in imminent danger of being snuffed out by the slightest breeze. These poetic figures are applied to the human soul and spirit so delicately contained in the innermost parts of a human being. Isaiah 35:1-10 describes the joy of those who recognize and accept Jesus as the Messiah. Come unto Me…and ye shall find rest unto your souls.
Judgment unto victory. The culmination of Jesus’ earthly ministry was the destruction of him that had the power of death (Heb 2:14). This great victory over Satan came by way of judging the prince of this world and casting him from his place of power (John 12:31; 16:11). A few verses later, Jesus will speak allegorically of that event (v29).
21 And in his name shall the Gentiles trust.
It wasn’t until after His death that was this prophecy realized. The extension of salvation to the Gentiles was the greatest event of the Gospel (not counting Jesus’ death and resurrection), yet it was actually enacted and nourished by His disciples several years after His death. It is one of the greater works that Jesus prophesied His followers would perform after He returned to His heavenly Father (John 14:12). Today, throughout all nations of the world there are followers of Christ, men and women who trust in the name of Jesus for salvation. What began as a Jewish religion, has grown into a great mountain of Gentile believers that has filled the whole earth (Dan 2:35). Jews by birth are astonishingly critical of this peerless religion, even though it was begun by their own greatest prophet and is contained prophetically and typologically in all of their own sacred Scriptures! The times of the Gentiles (Luke 21:24) will continue until the Second Coming of Christ at the end of the world.
22 Then was brought unto him one possessed with a devil, blind, and dumb: and he healed him, insomuch that the blind and dumb both spake and saw. 23 And all the people were amazed, and said, Is not this the son of David?
This man was possessed of a demon which made him blind and unable to talk, but when Jesus cast out the demon the man was able to see and speak (see Luke 11:14). The miracle amazed the multitude, who looked to their recently arrived leaders from Jerusalem (Mark 3:22) and asked, Is not this the son of David? The envious and self-righteous Pharisees however, answered in unthinkable blasphemy: “This fellow casts out demons by the power of Satan.” Or as Mark’s gospel, “He hath Beelzebub – He is demon-possessed – He hath an unclean spirit ” (Mark 3:22; 3:30).
In this case, the man’s physical sickness was attributed to the work of demons. See note on Mat 8:28 for thoughts on demon-possession. Perhaps there is a typological lesson in this miracle which is coupled to Isaiah’s prophecy of the Gentiles trusting also in the name of the Messiah. For long centuries the Gentile world was blind, dumb and possessed by devils, but the Gospel of Christ came and so miraculously healed them that all the people were amazed. The Jews however, deny Jesus Christ as their Messiah even down to the present day.
24 But when the Pharisees heard it, they said, This fellow doth not cast out devils, but by Beelzebub the prince of the devils.
The parallel passages are found in Mark 3:22-30 and Luke 11:15-20. The unbelieving Pharisees were in an impossible situation. They must either accept Jesus’ wonderful power and acknowledge Him as the Messiah, or find some excuse for rejecting Him. Yet, that an amazing miracle had just taken place they could not deny, for they had just witnessed a work of power beyond the abilities of any man. But to accept this man as their Messiah they could never do, for they were children of Satan (John 8:44). So they took the low option and attributed His powers to the Beelzebub, or Satan. It is a ridiculous charge and Jesus goes on to demolish their argument. Beelzebub is simply another name for Satan and is transliterated from the Hebrew language (Mat 10:25; Mark 3:22).
25 And Jesus knew their thoughts, and said unto them, Every kingdom divided against itself is brought to desolation; and every city or house divided against itself shall not stand: 26 And if Satan cast out Satan, he is divided against himself; how shall then his kingdom stand? 27 And if I by Beelzebub cast out devils, by whom do your children cast them out? therefore they shall be your judges. 28 But if I cast out devils by the Spirit of God, then the kingdom of God is come unto you.
Any Kingdom must be united in goal and action. If the works of Christ overthrow the kingdom of Satan, it is certain that He is not of that kingdom! Even this clear fact did not change the Pharisees’ opinion of Him, for they had already determined to reject and disbelieve the works of Jesus Christ, no matter how powerful, good and holy they might be.
By whom do your children cast them out? After showing the absurdity of Satan casting out Satan, Jesus goes on to utterly destroy the Jews’ argument, for they too professed to be able to cast out demons: He points out, “If by casting out demons one is a Satan-follower, then you must be satanists too!” The reasoning is inescapable. How foolish to think that Satan would give a man special power to be used against him.
The plain and obvious could not be ignored. Jesus’ words were powerful and theirs were feeble grasping after the wind. They cannot deny that He did indeed cast out the demons, so they say that His power comes from evil rather than good. Read what happened to some vagabond Jews who thought to cast out demons without having the Spirit of God in Acts 19:13-16. After Jesus proved the logic of the Pharisees to be in error, He firmly planted the conclusion that must follow: that the Kingdom of God has come unto you. They ignored Him.
29 Or else how can one enter into a strong man’s house, and spoil his goods, except he first bind the strong man? and then he will spoil his house.
After exposing the fallacy of the Pharisees’ charge that He was on Satan’s side, Jesus explains the real way Satan is defeated. His words are prophetic, albeit hidden in a simple parable until the day that it could be known. Satan is the strong man and Christ is the One who will bind him, enter his house and spoil his goods. This of course, happened with the death and resurrection of the Son of God. Only a greater power can defeat the strong man, that is what Jesus is telling the Pharisees. Satan is the prince and power of the air (Eph 2:2) and goes about as a roaring lion (1Pet 5:8); he is the anointed cherub created in the holy mountain of God (Eze 28:14). There is only one power stronger than he and that is the very God who has cast him out of heaven with a spectacular victory over sin and death (Rev 12:7-9). The Synoptics give this account similarly, using only slightly different language (Mark 3:27; Luke 11:21-22).
The tremendous spiritual victory that Christ achieved over Satan when He overcame death and rose victorious from the grave is the greatest, most important event in the salvation of Mankind. For a time, Satan rejoiced when he saw the Son of God crucified and dying upon a tree; he was certain that he had finally won (1Cor 2:8). O how death was swallowed up in victory! For God delivered His own soul from the grave and then Jesus spoiled Satan’s house. He descended into the lower parts of the earth and wrested from Satan’s power in Hades every righteous soul, carrying them away to Paradise to be forever with Him (Eph 4:8-10). This great war took place in the spiritual world and in it Satan was defeated and his power on earth and in heaven was greatly restricted (Heb 2:14).
Irenaeus wrote: “For as in the beginning he [Satan] enticed man to transgress his Maker’s law, and thereby got him into his power; yet his power consists in transgression and apostasy, and with these he bound man; so again, on the other hand, it was necessary that through man himself he should, when conquered, be bound with the same chains with which he had bound man, in order that man, being set free, might return to his Lord, leaving to him (Satan) those bonds by which he himself had been fettered, that is, sin. For when Satan is bound, man is set free; since “none can enter a strong man’s house and spoil his goods, unless he first bind the strong man himself.”….the Word bound him securely as a fugitive from Himself, and made spoil of his goods,— namely, those men whom he held in bondage, and whom he unjustly used for his own purposes. And justly indeed is he led captive, who had led men unjustly into bondage; while man, who had been led captive in times past, was rescued from the grasp of his possessor, according to the tender mercy of God the Father, who had compassion on His own handiwork, and gave to it salvation, restoring it by means of the Word—that is, by Christ” (Against Heresies, Bk5 Ch21).
30 He that is not with me is against me; and he that gathereth not with me scattereth abroad.
There are only two roads and they lead to vastly different destinations. This statement of Christ contradicts the philosophers and religious leaders of our day, who try to say that there are many roads leading to the heavenly destination. A person is either on God’s side, or he is working to advance the devil’s agenda. Many, like the Pharisees, think they are on God’s side when in fact they are working against Him. The imagery of this verse is of a sower going out to sow the seed (Mat 13:18). Some Christians however, are sowing discord instead (Pro 6:19), scattering the seed abroad instead of in the hearts of men.
We hold in our hands every Sunday the safeguard against error. Cling to the Bible though all else be taken, follow its teachings and live by faith in its promises. That is how we know and keep to the road that leads unto life. Be not deceived, the devil knows the power of Scripture. Therefore he continues to do everything to deny it, to change it, to undermine it and to diminish it. Many strong men have been cast down by his terrible devices to make the Bible to be less than what it is, the very words of God communicating His will for mankind. Satan ever attempts to sow doubt in the Holy Scriptures. He wants us to believe the intellectual critics, that a scribal error or doubtful quotation means the Book cannot have been authored by a perfect God. They might be the work of genius, but they are not God’s words, they say. Like the Pharisees, they dismiss the powerful proofs and tremendous inspirations unto goodness and mercy by manufacturing reasons it is “false.” How sad that many, like the ordinary Jews of old, believe these men simply because they are smart, learned and of high repute.
31 Wherefore I say unto you, All manner of sin and blasphemy shall be forgiven unto men: but the blasphemy against the Holy Ghost shall not be forgiven unto men. 32 And whosoever speaketh a word against the Son of man, it shall be forgiven him: but whosoever speaketh against the Holy Ghost, it shall not be forgiven him, neither in this world, neither in the world to come.
The unpardonable sin this has been called, the sin every Christian fears most. But exactly what is it? And does a person know when he has committed it? The rest of Scripture is silent on this topic, except for two possible references: 1John 5:16 speaks of the man who has committed a sin unto death, and for that the brethren should not intercede in prayer. And Heb 6:4-6 describes the condition of a man who has so fallen away from the faith that repentance is impossible.
Jesus’ words here were prompted by the slanderous statements of the scribes and Pharisees: “He has an unclean spirit and casts out demons by the power of Satan” (Mark 3:22, 30). They were rejecting the only way to forgiveness, for it is the Holy Spirit who calls, convicts and convinces men of sin (John 16:8). To reject the voice of conviction results in an eternal sin which can never be forgiven. By rejecting the evidences of God and ascribing His power to the Devil, the Pharisees were speaking against that Spirit of God by whom Jesus cast out devils (v28). This sin, then as now, is a rational and knowledgeable decision to reject the Spirit of Truth and calling it wicked and false.
Who should be concerned about this sin today? If it be true that the Pharisees were guilty of this sin, and that does appear to be the case, then here we have an example. The Pharisees had so long rejected the Spirit that their hearts and actions were utterly apostate and closed to Him (see note on Mark 3:5). Nothing would change their minds. No miracle was great enough nor evidence sufficient; no, not even if one were to rise from the dead (Luke 16:31). As the ultimate proof that they were complete reprobates, they went out and plotted the murder of an innocent Man even though they knew Him to be virtuous, sinless and possessing the powers of God. So it is today, the one who rejects the Spirit of God will be evidenced by wickedness, hypocrisy and above all, an implacable and unjustifiable enmity against the Kingdom of Christ (Heb 6:7-8).
Does the unpardonable sin fall upon a single event of rejection, or upon an accrued record of rejection? It does not seem to be in the character of God to decree that a single rejection will separate one eternally from Him. If so, surely all of us would be guilty of this sin, for blaspheming the Holy Spirit is essentially rejecting His voice. God alone determines when that rejection is terminal. Like the Pharisees, a person can think himself to be Godly and yet be guilty of the unpardonable sin. Also like the Pharisees, such persons are opposed to the work of the Kingdom of Christ and their decisions and actions will show that. The next verses describe those people. Paul exhorted the Ephesian Christians to grieve not the Holy Spirit of God (Eph 4:30), which indicates that there is a rejection or ignoring of the Spirit that is forgivable.
A repentant person that sorrows for his sins has not committed the unpardonable sin. If the Spirit is still calling and a man is still responding, hope of eternal life exists. God forgives seventy times seven. It is when a man does not respond to the Spirit that there remaineth no more sacrifice for sins, but a certain fearful looking for of judgment and fiery indignation (Heb 10:26-27). Christians rightly fear the unpardonable sin. We must always and immediately heed the voice of the Spirit, never once rejecting His convicting voice, lest like the Pharisees we end up passing that invisible line of no return known only to God.
Note that all manner of sin and blasphemy shall be forgiven except blasphemy against the Spirit. Even blasphemy against the Son is forgivable. Is the Spirit more holy or more divine than the Son or the Father? No, for the Father, Son and Spirit are one. But the work of the Spirit is to call men to the Son, and if we reject or disregard that call there remains no more offering for sin. Thus, the unpardonable sin is quenching the Spirit until He no longer speaks and repentance is impossible. Paul calls these “reprobate” (Rom 1:21-32), for they are past conviction. If now and then they do feel a twinge of guilt, it is quickly forgotten. Hebrews 6 also describes the condition of one who has committed the unpardonable sin, and there it is said that he is “putting Christ to an open shame.” By living in an apostate, unrepentant condition he is rejecting the sacrifice of Christ and agreeing with the Jews that He deserved to die. On the other hand, if a person feels guilt, desires repentance and prays sincerely to Christ for deliverance, he cannot have committed the unpardonable sin. The writer of Heb 6:4-6 almost certainly was thinking of Jesus’ words in Mat 12:31-32, for he follows up with a similar analogy describing the condition of those who have indeed committed this sin (compare Heb 6:7-8 with Mat 12:33).
Again, all manner of sin is forgivable and Christ is in the business of forgiving sins. Yet the warning remains. Do not abuse this grace! The Spirit will not always strive with man. Continuing in unrepentant sin is rebellion against God and is quenching the Spirit’s voice. At some point, the Spirit will leave and will no longer convict and call him to the cross of Christ. Later in this chapter we read of such a person (Mat 12:43-45).
33 Either make the tree good, and his fruit good; or else make the tree corrupt, and his fruit corrupt: for the tree is known by his fruit.
The lives of those who have committed the sin of blasphemy against the Holy Ghost are evidenced by corruption and wickedness. By the context, it is clear that the Pharisees are the primary characters being described. Rejecting the call of the Spirit leads to increasing wickedness and corruption. These men will fall deeper and deeper into sin, rebellion and perversion. A similar analogy is found in Mat 7:17-18.
34 O generation of vipers, how can ye, being evil, speak good things? for out of the abundance of the heart the mouth speaketh. 35 A good man out of the good treasure of the heart bringeth forth good things: and an evil man out of the evil treasure bringeth forth evil things.
The Pharisees had just made the most irrational, blasphemous charge imaginable: ascribing the works of the Spirit to the power of Satan. Such slanderous words expose the extremity of their wickedness. They had become a veritable generation of vipers.
A good man will speak good and righteous things because his heart is good. An evil man will speak evil things because his heart is evil. Take note Christian! Injurious, slanderous speech by church members reveal the inner condition of their hearts. The kind man, out of the good treasures of his heart, will speak healing and kindness (Mat 15:17-19; Luke 6:43-45). The word treasure in this principle of truth implies a life of being good. The good man brings out of his store-house good things because he put them there during his life of being good (Mat 6:19-21). It is likewise with the evil person, who responds with evil because of a life-time accustomed to being evil.
36 But I say unto you, That every idle word that men shall speak, they shall give account thereof in the day of judgment. 37 For by thy words thou shalt be justified, and by thy words thou shalt be condemned.
The Greek word here translated idle means lazy, vain, without use, empty (1Tim 5:13; Tit 1:12; Mat 20:6). Being found in the context of the good man bringing forth good things out of a heart that has been righteously conditioned by a lifetime of being good, the contrast forms an extremely strong warning. Each person will be called to give account before God of every lazy, vain and empty word that he has spoken! The man who cannot bridle his tongue from speaking evil is deceived (James 1:26). The good man will not talk evil, nor talk empty and worthless words. He will not speak carelessly, nor say things that are not firmly based in fact. This truth is a sobering and important one to take to heart and do, for many Christians do not live this way. From gossip to slander, from white lies to bald untruths, from flattery to deceiving, from self-defense to self-promotions, what our tongues say reflect what is in our hearts.
On that final and great day of Judgment, when all the world will be called to give account of themselves before the omnipotent, omniscient Judge, the history of the speeches and words we said in Life will be used as evidence for or against God’s decision to gift us salvation. That does not mean our actions will not be used as criteria, for that would contradict verses like 2Cor 5:10, which declare that our deeds will be judged. Rather, it strongly implies that our words and actions rise and fall together. A good man will produce good fruit, both in word and deed; an evil man will produce corrupt fruit, both in word and deed.
38 Then certain of the scribes and of the Pharisees answered, saying, Master, we would see a sign from thee. 39 But he answered and said unto them, An evil and adulterous generation seeketh after a sign; and there shall no sign be given to it, but the sign of the prophet Jonas:
The Jews won’t believe without a miraculous sign, and the Gentiles are only convinced by reason (1Cor 1:22). Yet Jesus had given them countless signs! He had healed the blind, the paralyzed, the demon-possessed, the lame, and had even raised the dead to life. If they would not believe those signs, neither would they believe a sign from heaven (Mat 16:1), whatever that might be. By asking Him for another sign, they were tempting Him (Mark 8:11). See our notes on tempting God in Mat 4:7, and more on signs in John 6:30.
While Jesus refused to give a sign to these reprobate Pharisees, He did give a sign for true seekers throughout the world and history. However, He hid it from the scoffers and insincere by answering with a prophetic riddle, a sign which would only be understood after His death and resurrection. It speaks powerfully today, because the fact of Jesus’ death and resurrection is central to the Christian hope. We believe that our mortal bodies will be quickened together with Christ because Jesus proved that is possible by His own resurrection. The Jewish majority did not accept this sign even after it was so gloriously fulfilled a year or so later.
The Jews were an evil and adulterous generation that had left the true covenant of God and made their own religion. Throughout the Gospels, Jesus strongly condemned their traditions and actions. See note on Mat 24:34.
40 For as Jonas was three days and three nights in the whale’s belly; so shall the Son of man be three days and three nights in the heart of the earth.
Many have struggled to reconcile the time period of this prophecy with the Gospel accounts from which we deduce the time that Jesus lay in the grave. The historical record is that Jesus was buried at dusk on Friday evening and rose at first light on Sunday morning. Yet this indicates that Jesus was dead for three days and two nights (counting each partial day as one day). Concerned by this discrepancy, some have proposed that Jesus was not crucified on Friday, but on Thursday. But that would mean Jesus was dead for four days and three nights. Finding this proposal little better, some adjust the argument to propose that Jesus died on Thursday and resurrected during Saturday night, thus making His period of death three days and three nights. Still others argue for a literal 72 hour period of three days and nights, and so require that Jesus died on Wednesday afternoon and rose again on Saturday afternoon. The official Jewish day ended at sundown, but in this case the text counts days and nights.
None of the above options fit the record of the Gospels better than the traditional view that Jesus died on Friday and rose again on Sunday. In my opinion they are much harder to defend, for the traditional belief has the additional benefit of having the full support of the early Church writers. However, the whole issue is easily resolved by removing an unnecessary assumption that many impose upon this passage, which is that the prophecy describes the time that Jesus was physically dead. And yet, the real beginning of Jesus’ hour of suffering began the night before His death (see my note Mat 26:36). That terrible night in Gethsemane, when Jesus was delivered into cruel hands and tried before the Sanhedrin, was His greatest temptation and sorrow, as He wrestled with what He knew was God’s will. It marked the beginning of His greatest work, as well as the beginning of that time in which He was delivered up to evil, earthly hands (Mat 20:19; Mark 9:31; Luke 24:7). Three days and three nights later, early on Sunday morning, Jesus rose from the grave. An interesting detail of this approach is that very nearly 40 hours, the symbolic number of testing, elapsed between Jesus’ death and His resurrection.
Note that Jesus did not say He would be dead for three days and three nights, but that He would be in the heart of the earth for three days and three nights. Some require a narrow and strictly physical meaning of that enigmatic phrase; namely, either that it denotes 1) the time interval between His death and resurrection, or 2) the time that His body was in the grave. I add a third option: it signifies the time that He was delivered unto the control of the earthly realm as opposed to the heavenly one (John 3:31), thereby correlating to the Messianic prophecy of Ps 2:2. The Greek word translated earth (ge) literally means the land or ground, but is used figuratively in both testaments to describe the worldly people of the earth (Is 34:1; Jer 22:29; Col 3:2; Rev 6:8; 16:2), and that accurately matches the Biblical record that Jesus yielded Himself up unto wicked men for three days and three nights. Throughout His ministry, Jesus manifested His God-powers infallibly and invincibly, but in one moment that changed. That night in Gethsemane He laid aside His authority and yielded Himself to “the hour of the power of darkness” (Luke 22:53). The darkness endured until His equally sudden resurrection. This spiritual definition of the heart of the earth is consistent with other passages which depict Satan as the prince of this world (John 12:31; 14:30) and the god of this world (2Cor 4:4), and it provides appropriate context to verses like Gal 1:4, which describe the triumph of Christ over this present evil world. Other references include 1Cor 15:47, 2:6; Mat 24:35; Eph 6:12. This interpretation best fits the Gospel and historical records, and measures exactly three days and three nights.
Jesus compared His coming trial with Jonah’s experience, who although as good as dead, did not actually die. In the spiritual sense, Jesus’ soul did not die either. Another point of comparison, which might be the principle reason that Jesus chose this analogy, is that Jonah was delivered from the belly of hell (Jonah 2:2), the pit of Sheol. And that curious phrase, the heart of the earth, finds its counterpart in Jonah: the earth with her bars was about me for ever (Jonah 2:6). One of the great works of Christ after His death was to descend into Hades and deliver those souls Satan had held captive since that first death (Abel) unto the last one under the Old Covenant (Zacharias, see note Mat 23:35). At that moment, every soul that Christ chose to redeem ascended with Him up on high (Eph 4:8-9). It is doubtful that time even exists in the spirit world, so to require Christ to be in Hades for 3 days and nights is a stretch. In likewise detail, Jonah had no way of counting days in the utter darkness of the whale’s belly.
A further problem with the secondary opinion that Jesus died on Thursday and rose again Saturday night is that the Scriptures say on multiple occasions that He rose the third day, and a Saturday night resurrection greatly complicates their proposal. Also, if the body of Lazarus had begun to stink after four days in the tomb, it is extremely unlikely that the women would go to Jesus’ tomb to anoint His body four days later. If it were only three days, actually only about 36 hours, their plans to visit the tomb on the morning He rose from the dead make sense. The Gospels convincingly describe Jesus’ resurrection at first light on Sunday, at the same hour that the priest in the temple was observing the offering of Firstfruits, which is a prophetic symbol designed into the Old Testament rituals by God to typify His resurrection.
In conclusion, the Friday crucifixion/Sunday resurrection has vigorous Scriptural support on many points, the lone exception being this single phrase. A simple and logical resolution exists! Don’t be tempted to re-write the rest of the Gospel to justify inferring from this passage something it does not intend to say. Jesus entered the heart of the earth at that moment when, in the black of night, He crossed the Kidron River (a type of filth and sin), and in some unfathomable way began to bear the sins of the world (see my note John 18:1).
41 The men of Nineveh shall rise in judgment with this generation, and shall condemn it: because they repented at the preaching of Jonas; and, behold, a greater than Jonas is here. 42 The queen of the south shall rise up in the judgment with this generation, and shall condemn it: for she came from the uttermost parts of the earth to hear the wisdom of Solomon; and, behold, a greater than Solomon is here.
The greater than Solomon is Jesus Christ! He speaks today as clearly as He did then, through the Scriptures, the Spirit and the Sciences. He spoke to this generation, which refers either to the Jews living at the time Jesus spoke, or to the historical Jewish race (Mat 11:16). Both applications are adequately supported by history. Jonah simply preached to the wicked, non-Jewish Ninevites and they repented in sackcloth and ashes. The works and doctrine of Christ exceeded by far the testimony of Jonah the prophet, yet Jesus was rejected and called a satanist.
At the resurrection and final judgment of the world, even the ancient Gentile people groups will rise in judgment with this generation and condemn it. The sins of the Jews are worse than the sins of Nineveh and Sheba because the Jews had been entrusted with the very oracles of God. They had been instructed in the way of the Lord for centuries. He had sent them prophets and signs, worked miracles on their behalf, fought their battles and given them blessing upon blessing. Yet they rejected those Godly prophets and stoned them. And then, when the Wisdom of the Ages appeared, their own long-prophesied Messiah, they ridiculed and killed Him.
This lesson applies to churches of today as well, for to whom much is given, much will be required (Luke 12:48). At the end, let not the same be found true for Gentile Christianity as has been true for Jewish Christianity for millennia.
43 When the unclean spirit is gone out of a man, he walketh through dry places, seeking rest, and findeth none. 44 Then he saith, I will return into my house from whence I came out; and when he is come, he findeth it empty, swept, and garnished. 45 Then goeth he, and taketh with himself seven other spirits more wicked than himself, and they enter in and dwell there: and the last state of that man is worse than the first. Even so shall it be also unto this wicked generation.
Given the context, this analogy incriminates the nation of Israel, whose last state is predicted to be worse than the first. And certainly that has been true of that adulterous generation down through the centuries of time. Presently, Jews are much more likely to be atheists than Gentiles and it is rare indeed to find a Jew that believes in Christ. Perhaps that will change; 2Cor 3:16 might contain the barest hint that Jews may turn to Christ before the end of time. Then again, that verse is probably speaking of individual Jews accepting Jesus Christ. Regardless, the analogy of this passage describes the apostate condition of this wicked generation, the Jews (v45). Whether this took place at the end of the Jewish religion or is to be fulfilled at the end of the world is another question (Mat 12:45).
Empty, swept, and garnished – meaning nicely cleaned and decorated. The word is used in reference to the Pharisees in Mat 23:27-28. The Kingdom was taken from Israel and given to a nation bearing better fruit (Mat 21:43). Then the empty house became filled with evil spirits of every description.
By this analogy it seems clear that demons can enter humans. When an unclean spirit leaves a person, it will try to find another place of habitation. And if it cannot find one it will return to the previous man and seek entrance. If he finds the place empty and suitable, he will dwell there again, taking with him as many other evil spirits that wish to live with him. A key warning in these verses is to not allow our souls to be empty and receptive to spirits. If it is filled with the Holy Spirit, demons cannot enter. See 2Pet 2:20 and Mat 27:25.
46 While he yet talked to the people, behold, his mother and his brethren stood without, desiring to speak with him. 47 Then one said unto him, Behold, thy mother and thy brethren stand without, desiring to speak with thee. 48 But he answered and said unto him that told him, Who is my mother? and who are my brethren? 49 And he stretched forth his hand toward his disciples, and said, Behold my mother and my brethren! 50 For whosoever shall do the will of my Father which is in heaven, the same is my brother, and sister, and mother.
The parallel passage in Mark 3:31-35 explains that His kinsmen were trying to speak with Him for selfish motives. They thought He was mad, beside himself, and they wanted to lay hold on Him and carry Him away (Mark 3:21; John 10:20). Apparently they were concerned that He would disgrace the family name and bring ruin to their house, however humble and meager it might have been.
Brethren (adelphos) is a common expression for near kinsmen in the NT, so these were probably not brothers only, but uncles, cousins and siblings. While Jesus’ actions may seem to disrespect His kinsfolk, remember that they had not come to listen to His message. They stood without, waiting to ask Him to leave His work and submit unto their better plans for Him. Jesus was merely following His own teaching that the one who is not willing to forsake home and parents is not worthy of Christ (Luke 14:26). Jesus was always considerate of His mother, asking the Apostle John to care for her when He was dying on the cross (John 19:25-27), but here she earned His rebuke by her lack of faith and misguided attempts at counsel.
Jesus used this opportunity to teach a spiritual truth. The family of Christ is not of blood, but of spiritual affinity; of love, faith and hope. Those that do the will of My Father are closest to the heart of Christ. They are His brethren, His family, His friends (John 15:4). Note also the omission of father from His rhetorical questions (Mat 23:9). Christ’s only father is God! He had no earthly father.