New Thoughts (4/20/06-5/7/06)
Why is it Abiathar specifically who is mentioned? Critics make much of the fact that it was not actually Abiathar, but his father who was high priest on that specific day. Hah! They say, here is an error! The Scriptures are not inerrant after all! Oh, there is error, to be sure, but the error lies not in the text but in their comprehension. One might note that the giving of that showbread was pretty much the closing act of Ahimelech’s career, as he was murdered by Saul shortly thereafter. Others have pointed out that it may well have been Abiathar, as a son in the high priest’s household and a priest himself, who physically handed the showbread to David. If so, it is a fact that would be utterly impossible to confirm, a fact known only to God.
For those who would attack the Scriptures under the veil of seeking the Truth, one hears two versions. Those who wish to preserve for Jesus a bit of honor will declare that the error lies not with His words, but with Mark’s (or Peter’s) recollection and recording of them. By this, they think to have escaped a trap and upheld the holiness of God. Yet, they still attribute the error to God in spite of their efforts, for it is He who inspired the ones who recorded His revelation to man. The only other possibility for these critics is that they are rejecting the Scripture’s own declaration that its every word is ‘God-breathed’. If, then, they have so utterly set aside belief in the Gospel they claim to protect, what reason have we to put any belief in them?
The other line of attack is at least more forthright. They lay the blame for error plainly on Jesus. By this, these so-called Christians seek to undermine the faith from within. These men who claim to represent the Christ and the interests of God work to destroy the Truthfulness of God by destroying the truthfulness of His Son. Again, the claims of seeking after Truth are but a deceptive cover from which to wreak havoc on the faithful. They seek not Truth. They seek to so malign Truth that none will believe it. They seek to promote their own deceptions as Truth rather than promoting Truth as their own guide.
The question is not who erred. The question is why did Jesus knowingly choose to mention Abiathar? He was not then, nor is He now a fool. He was not then, nor is He now lacking in knowledge. He is very God, and as such He is omniscient. There is no lack, no failure in His knowing, nor has there been, ever. What He speaks, He speaks from the Wisdom that is God. He is the express Word of God, and what He speaks, He speaks purposefully and truly. He has a reason for having used Abiathar’s name here, for He is speaking with the scholars of Scripture. He is the Expert speaking to experts. He surely knew that Abiathar was not high priest until after his father was murdered. He also could be certain His hearers knew this. He is making a point, and rather than laugh at the misstep, we must seek to know what point He was making.
We must consider what we know of Abiathar, because in his story, there is a point Jesus is seeking to make. There is, as usual, the clear point that His chosen example makes, but there is something more here. The clear point is that the Law, particularly the ritual of Law, must be set aside when the needs of the moral Law conflict. Life is sacred in God’s eyes, and ritual and ceremony must give way for the preservation of life. That action which preserved David’s life was not cause for condemnation in God’s eyes, only in Saul’s. In whose footsteps must the Pharisees see themselves by this comparison?
This much is clear in the example Jesus has chosen, yet it would still have been clear if He had spoken of Ahimelech rather than Abiathar. That name changes nothing in the basic message. Therefore, we must dig deeper to find the message that lies in that name. What we find there is the story of a man with a mixed record. He is first introduced to us as he flees the murder of his father and his fellow priests, joining David at the cave in Adullum. In spite of the dire circumstances he has fled, he thought to bring the ephod with him. There he remained, serving as David’s intermediary in seeking God’s will. His presence with David did wonders for David’s reputation, particularly in light of Saul’s outrage against the Church.
Later, Abiathar is present as one of the bearers of the Ark, during David’s second attempt to bring the Ark to Jerusalem. He had been an important part of David’s team during the long wait for Saul’s demise, as important as the mighty men of battle. When the kingdom was put in David’s hands, Abiathar was soon set in his place as high priest, a position for which he was fitted by his lineage. However, it seems there was already a high priest, the one Saul apparently appointed after wiping out the official order. He, too, was a legitimate son of Aaron, and well-qualified. As David sought to consolidate the nation in loyalty to himself, he had to make some political moves. It would not do to simply toss out the current high priest. That office was not intended to be ruled over by the king. Yet, Zadok, the ‘other’ high priest must have been somewhat of an unknown factor for David. He needed an intermediary he could trust, for he would not suffer his relationship with God to be damaged. So, both would serve.
At the start, though both were in office, the primary duties fell to Abiathar. However, it seems that over time Zadok showed himself as devoted to David as was Abiathar, if not more so. This did not escape the king’s attention, and it seems David’s preference began to shift. Zadok was, perhaps, more in tune with what the king was doing. It’s hard to say. What is reasonably clear is that by the time of Absalom’s rebellion, Zadok was thoroughly committed to David’s cause, rushing to bear the Ark into exile with the king, whereas Abiathar came along later, and simply stood by the Ark watching the exiles depart. He had, it seems, become rather impassive to David’s fate. This could be read as a more complete devotion to God, keeping him impartial to the affairs of man and state, except that God’s hand upon David’s house was clear. In that time, devotion to God must surely encompass support of and devotion to God’s chosen king. His ambivalence seems to indicate that something had already begun to shift in him. Yet, he retained David’s trust alongside Zadok. He continued to hold them both as faithful to his cause, and left them in the camp of his rebel son to keep him informed of what transpired.
The change that is only just showing in Abiathar during this crisis becomes a wholesale break when Adonijah seeks to establish himself as David’s heir. Right along side him in this is Joab, the one who commanded David’s troops for so long. He, too, had been replaced in a rather political move on David’s part. He, too, had been hurt as he did what he thought best for his king only to suffer rebuke and demotion for his troubles. It seems these two were kindred spirits in this regard, feeling snubbed by the one they had done so much to support. So, they go against him in this quiet way, seeking to choose his successor when his own choice was known to be another. They would force his hand, but there remained those who were faithful to David: notably, Zadok stood with him, and there, too, was Nathan. So, prophet, priest and king stood as one, in declaring Solomon the heir apparent. At news of this, Adonijah’s dream of power quickly collapsed. It had fallen to Abiathar’s son, who had so often brought news of Absalom’s treachery to David’s camp, to bring news of David’s triumph to this traitor’s camp. How completely had the roles reversed!
Now, there are a few experiences in Abiathar’s life that seem particularly significant in light of his shifted allegiances. First, we might go back to that day when he joined David, bearing news of the death of so many holy men. David’s response was typically open. He grieved for the loss, and took personal responsibility for it, feeling he should have done something to prevent what transpired. It was exactly this accountability in their leader that led to such devotion to him. It was his deep concern for every man in his charge that made his men so fearless in pursuing whatever he so much as suggested, showing no regard for the dangers. Yet, to a man who had just witnessed the death of his own father in most brutal fashion, and knew that death had come in response to helping this same David, mightn’t that open confession of responsibility have carried a slightly different message? True, he served David faithfully and well, but in the confession, perhaps the seed of resentment was already planted. It only needed the watering of Zadok’s promotion to blossom in full.
Consider, also, the danger his own son had been placed in during Absalom’s rebellion. Together with Zadok’s son, his son served to bear messages out of the heart of the rebel camp. It was a mission that was bound to be fraught with risk, and we have the record that risk almost caught up with these young men. But for the righteous duplicity of one faithful woman, they would surely have been killed by Saul, just as Abiathar’s father had been. This, too, must have played on the father’s emotions. Perhaps he began to wonder to himself just how many in his family would be sacrificed to David’s cause. Perhaps the cost of loyalty was beginning to feel too high, particularly when he wasn’t feeling that same loyalty in return. If the king is so pleased with this upstart Zadok, let them have each other.
Add to this the words of prophecy. It is suggested in Fausset’s Encyclopedia that this, too, played into Abiathar’s rebellion. For, not all that long ago, the word had come to Eli that his line would be cut off because of what his sons had done to the priesthood. Here was Abiathar, descendant of that very line. His father was dead. His son had nearly been killed by the same murderous king. Both events had happened as these men served God’s anointed. Now comes Zadok on the scene, and Abiathar is perhaps feeling the prophetic fulfillment drawing in on him. Now, when Solomon finally ascended to the throne, he saw to it that Abiathar, whom David had never seen fit to fully punish for his treachery, was removed from all official duties. He would not destroy the man, for in spite of his failure, he had indeed done marvelously in support of David up to that point. He had, in Solomon’s words, been “afflicted in everything with which my father was afflicted.” But, he would not be suffered to continue in his duties any longer. He may have continued to bear the title of high priest (thou art a priest forever), but he would have none of the power.
Thus, we are told, was the prophecy against Eli’s house fulfilled (1Ki 2:26-27). That prophecy came in Samuel’s youth, in response to the behavior of Eli’s sons. They had made the service of God into and extortion ring, making themselves fat on the people’s repentance. God declared that the house of Eli was being cut off, though not entirely. His sons Hophni and Phinehas would die on the same day, Eli was told. Then, comes the close of this particular prophecy. “I will raise up a faithful priest for myself, one who does as My heart and My soul desires. I will build him a house that endures, and he will walk in My anointing forever. Further, whoever is left in your house will come begging at his feet, longing to be given an office amongst the priests that they might not starve” (1Sa 2:35-36). It is the ascendancy of this new order that the author of the books of the Kings declares fulfilled, as Zadok is appointed to the office of high priest in earnest.
What I find confusing in all this is that I thought Zadok was Abiathar’s uncle. However, I must note that in the records of the Chronicler, it becomes clear that there were multiple Ahitubs, multiple Zadoks, and quite probably multiple Phinehases. Apparently, then, Zadok was not of the line of Eli. There is, perhaps, a clue to be found in David’s appointing of the priestly divisions. There, it is noted that that the divisions toggled between those descended from Eleazar’s line and those from Ithamar’s (1Chr 24:6). These were the surviving sons of Aaron, and it would appear that Abiathar was from Ithamar’s line while Zadok was from Eleazor’s. From the record, I cannot say this with absolute certainty, for Ithamar’s line of descendants are not recorded, nor is it stated from whom Eli derives. What can be seen is the linkage from Eleazar to Zadok, and that Eli does not appear in that linkage.
So, once again, I return to the question of why. Why did Jesus choose to make note of Abiathar here? He must know that amongst the Pharisees and their companions the history of Abiathar would be known. Here were the scholars, the ones who poured over the Scriptures for knowledge. If they did not recollect Abiathar’s story immediately, they would know how to search it out. I think Jesus intended for that to transpire, for in Abiathar’s story was a declaration of the present day. The message lies in the story of Abiathar and Zadok. Abiathar represented an old order, long faithful to God’s purpose, but turning from Him in the end. Zadok, too, stood as representative of an order long faithful to God. His line, however, remained true. In the period of David’s rule, the line of Abiathar began in power, but ended in shame. The line of Zadok began in obscurity, but rose to honor.
Thinking on this in light of David being a type of Christ, this takes on even greater significance. In that moment of Adonijah’s rebellion, the prophet, the priest and the king stood firm. I would note that according the usage of tradition, and the standards of the blessing of the firstborn, Adonijah had cause to expect that the kingdom should come to him at David’s death. He knew his father, though, and knew God did not always follow that tradition. After all, had he done so, David would not be on the throne himself! That conflict over the succession was, in its own way, a battle between the governance of tradition and the governance of God. Abiathar, “my father is mighty”, stood as the head of religious tradition. Zadok, “righteous”, stood as the head of God-centered religion. He stood with Nathan, “giver”, and David, the “beloved”.
What a message in that triumvirate! Prophet, priest and king stood together against the rebellion of tradition, and in that foreshadowing of the coming King of kings, hear the message in their names: The Messiah is the Beloved of God, He is Righteous, and He is the Giver of righteousness. Over against this triune Lord stands the “my father is mighty,” stands ‘look at my lineage.’ Righteousness trumps lineage!
There is a great message of hope for every child of a broken family. There is God’s answer to all those plagued by generational curses. Righteousness, the Gift of the Son, trumps your lineage. If it trumped the lineage of God’s own chosen servants, how much more shall it trump yours, you who were but a servant before He adopted you as a son! The Righteousness of Christ, given to you, has become your lineage. Your earthly past, good or bad, no longer bears on who you are. Regardless of your personal history, you are now, as a child of God, provided with this simple truth: “I have a Father. I have a Brother.” That is the only lineage that will ever matter!
Tradition points back down the line of history, deriving its legitimacy from a past that no longer is. There is certainly a tradition worth clinging to. It is that tradition that rests solidly upon the Word of God, holding fast to sound doctrine against every wind of popular thought and trend. But, the real legitimacy comes in that simple claim: “I have a Father, and I am His beloved.” When tradition runs counter to what my Father declares, tradition must step aside. Righteousness will prevail.
Here was the message to the Pharisees. It is simply that Righteousness has come. The righteousness they sought in their tradition was no righteousness, it was simply tradition, and leaning on lineage. Knowing the future course of the Church, it is easy to see that while the piety of the Jews had come to depend in large part on the simple, physical reality of being a Jew, the real piety would depend on Righteousness. Tracing your genealogy back to Moses himself would not render one righteous, nor declare that one a child of God’s kingdom. The declaration of that citizenship is righteousness alone, and that Righteousness will prevail against every machination of tradition.
On a more combative level, there is another message to be heard in the choice of Abiathar. Abiathar was the end of his line. It is noteworthy that he was not destroyed, only removed from position. When the time came to set the priests in their divisions, his son was still in service as priest, although Abiathar had been forced into retirement as it were. Here, too, is a message to the Pharisees. Your time as the paragons of righteousness is done. Your time as the leaders of God’s people is done. You are retired from your post, and commanded back to your own properties. Yet, you will not be destroyed. You will not be cut off entirely. But, you are no longer in charge of the true faith. Because of the rebellion of the Pharisees against God’s Messiah, they would indeed be removed from power, although they continue to exist as a movement today.
There is another piece of this message that only Mark provides. That piece comes out in Mark 2:27, and what a wonderful declaration it is to hear. “The Sabbath was made for man, not man for the Sabbath.” First, let me point out that the Sabbath was made. It was created, created from nothing by God Who alone can create from nothing. It came into existence because He saw that it was good for man. It was created for our benefit. We, on the other hand, though also created from nothing by Him, were not created for the Sabbath, not brought into being to serve it.
There is a more general message to take from this. The Law which God set forth was set down for our benefit. All of God’s commands can be seen in this same light. They do not come to beat us down. They do not come to enslave us. They come to benefit us if we will abide by them. The message in this is twofold. On the one hand, if we become so rigid in our application of the Law as to make it the cause of misery, we have utterly missed His purpose. The Law is given to benefit man, not to punish. That simple truth provides the other side of the message. The Law is for our benefit. Therefore, to ignore the Law can only be to our detriment. Put even more simply, the message becomes, “Use some sense!”
You must never take such a stand on the observance of ritual that you end up making the good and holy purpose of God a means of misery and terror. This was the error the Pharisees had fallen into, and it is an error that the Church has dealt with in its time as well. Arguably, all of those worst excesses and offenses of the Church can be placed in this category. The excesses of the Crusades, the whole movement of the Inquisition, perhaps even the somnolence of the present day; these all have at their root a problem of promoting the good Law of God in the form of slavish observance of rite and ceremony, transforming it from its good nature into either a terror or a soporific, as the times suggest.
So, the pendulum swings, and inevitably, it seems, it overshoots as badly in the opposite direction as it has at the first. So concerned are we of becoming legalistic, of falling into our own ritualistic trap, that we shun every least bit of restraint. The Law is cast aside entirely. If ritual and law are a danger to us, then we will simply have nothing to do with them, and thereby find ourselves safe. Again comes the message. “Use some sense!” The Law was created for your benefit. How, then, can it benefit you to cast it aside? This can only hurt you, you who insist on pursuing such an antinomian agenda! You have not avoided the trap, you have merely stepped into it from behind.
Man was not created to be the slave of the Law. This is particularly stated of the Sabbath observances, but the examples by which Jesus makes His point should make it clear that the application is more general. All of this was set up to benefit us: all that was typified in the order of worship in the Temple was set forth to benefit us. In the first case, it was set out to prepare us for the real heavenly order of worship in the real heavenly Temple. It was laid out, as was the whole history of Israel, to point the way to Messiah, to prepare us to recognize Him when He came, when He comes. In the second case, it was laid out so that at His coming He would find His people prepared, holy and acceptable. It was laid out to keep us ever mindful of what real righteousness looked like, to be a constant, unchanging standard against which we might measure our own progress, and by which we might recognize and acknowledge our own need for the Deliverer.
Thirdly, it was laid out to keep us safe and strong. A look at the dietary Law makes it clear that the people of God were being steered clear of such things as were likely to carry disease. They were being instructed as to what sorts of foods were not only edible, but beneficial. Simultaneously, they were being set aside in their habits. Their preparations would not take on the forms common to the idolatrous, sacrificial nature of meals prepared by the nations amongst whom they would dwell. So much of this sort of regulatory nature in Scripture is geared to that end: Do not look like the world, particularly in regards to the things that serve as the world’s worship. You must eat, but do not eat in a fashion that resembles theirs, for theirs is a sacrificing to idols, and you must not seem to condone such practices. Do not allow your womenfolk to run about with hair shorn and head uncovered. It is not that we find it necessary to dominate and subjugate woman, it is that these are the practices of the seers, the oracles, the ‘prophetesses’ of the pagan idol-gods. We must not seem to condone their practices in our liberty.
Listen, the Law of Christ has assuredly set you free. Rather, it has set you at liberty. Yet, liberty knows its boundaries and respects them. Liberty is free precisely because of those well-understood boundaries. Freedom knows no bounds, accepts no bounds. It is freedom that insists that our state of grace allows us to partake of the world’s sinful habits with immunity. It is liberty that recognizes that while all things are permissible, not all things are beneficial. It is liberty that recognizes where God has placed a protective boundary at the limits of the beneficial, and therefore refuses to go further. The Law is for our benefit, not our subjugation.
The example of David’s men eating the showbread is indication that what Jesus says of the Sabbath has wider application. In Matthew’s account, though, He addresses the Sabbath more directly. Every priest and Levite that ever served in the Temple of a Sabbath must necessarily have broken the Sabbath (Mt 12:5). Otherwise, how could they serve? Yet, they are not deemed guilty in the sight of God, nor of their fellow priests, nor even in the eyes of these same Pharisees. There would be other occasions for Jesus to point out their inconsistency in this regard. In particular, there was one of those times Jesus had chosen to heal on the Sabbath, and the Pharisees, as usual, took offense at Him. Their utter hypocrisy in this was made evident in Jesus’ response. Were it a child who had reached his eighth day, you would gladly set aside the Sabbath Law to preserve the Mosaic rite of circumcision. Yet, here am I healing the whole man, not just setting a sign upon his flesh, and you are offended by this (Jn 7:23).
Now, when we look back to the institution of the Sabbath, there is great cause to honor it, indeed. There is also strong evidence that even those who seek most to honor the Sabbath have largely watered down their compliance to comfortable levels. Hear the Law as it was declared: You have six days for your own work, and these you should use to the full. But on the seventh day, your labors shall cease, so that your beasts of burden may rest, and your slaves and servants may rest. Even the stranger who is with you may on that day refresh himself (Ex 23:12). The clear implication of this is, ‘no wheedling out of it.’ It is not OK to gain your rest by pushing your labors onto another’s shoulders. If it is a day of rest, it is a day of rest for all.
Even today, one will find conservative Jews anxiously returning home from their workplaces on Friday afternoon to beat the sundown deadline. They carefully, scrupulously avoid work of any sort all day Saturday, in some cases even refusing to turn on a light in their house lest it be seen as lighting a fire – which would be work. Oh, but they are comfortable enough having somebody come to their house and turn the light on for them! It’s OK, in their book, to have another labor on their behalf, just so it’s not them doing the work. Confronted with the commandment as it is written, they can muster no defense for their behavior. Yet, it is not in slavish obedience, however sincere, that righteousness is found. It is in the desire of the heart, a desire that comes only as the Christ Himself imparts His righteousness to us. Because He has brought our pardon and because He has declared us legally righteous in the sight of God Who is Judge over all, we who have received such undeserved blessing can now desire nothing more than to live in such fashion as will show God’s judgment true.
His judgment is true! It shall be true regardless of any activity on our part. The point is not that our living consistent with His declaration makes His declaration true. The point is that such consistent living manifests the Truth of His declaration. It manifests our love and awed reverence for the God Who has done so much for us. It manifests our gratitude for what He has done. It is respect and love for God, not fear of retribution that moves us to do our utmost for Him.
Isn’t it interesting to discover that God sets down His rule by His own example? He is the perfect example of leadership in this. He commands His people to give not only themselves, but all who are with them rest on the Sabbath. As I read the reiteration of the Law in Deuteronomy 5:14, I find Him making the point that it is a Sabbath of His. That word ‘Sabbath’ means simply rest. When I read that ‘the seventh day is a Sabbath of the LORD,’ I read that He is declaring it His day of rest. It is the day on which He rests from the labor of creation, and as He commands His children so He does Himself. He commands that they share in His rest, all who are with Him, His sons and daughters, His servants and laborers, and even those strangers who dwell amidst His family. All are to rest as well as He does. That is implicit in His declaration that His children’s servants and coworkers are to rest as well as themselves. He sets the example.
Yet, it might be noted that God does not cease from the work of upholding His creation one day out of each week. It is in Him that we live and move and have being (Ac 17:28). He is, in a very real sense the reason we breathe. He may not be the air I breathe, but without Him I could not draw a single breath. If God were ever to take such a thorough and complete rest from upholding creation, creation would cease in that moment. Imagine! If a day of the Lord is as a thousand years in our experience, and God truly set aside His concern and care for creation for one day in seven, then for every six thousand years of existence, there must be one thousand years of not just barrenness, but nothingness. No, His rest is not of that sort. He will not step away from the cause of life. Neither does He require His own to refuse to uphold life because of their observance of His day of rest.
This is in part the point made in Matthew 12:5. The priests do not cease even from their professional labors on the Sabbath, yet they have no guilt before God on that account. They are, after all, doing as the Lord commands for them. The Pharisees, in their efforts at codifying righteousness, failed to distinguish between what was done to feed the body and what was done to feed the accounts. One cannot serve God and money, Jesus taught (Mt 6:24). That’s the labor that is forbidden on the Sabbath. It is a day as any other in many regards. The necessities of life and health continue. For those directly in His service, it is perhaps even the busiest day of the week, far removed from what we commonly consider rest. The Sabbath Law is not against feeding yourself, however. It is against pursuing your commercial interests rather than your spiritual interests. You have six days to earn your living. The seventh is for pursuit of Me. Certainly, you may prepare and eat your meals. Of course it is acceptable to work at making yourself clean and presentable, much appreciated even. Absolutely, you may hop in your cars and come to My house, or walk if you care to. No, I don’t mind the distance you come. Your thoughts are on Me, and that is the point. You have set aside the cares of making a living (as if you made your living) and come this day to consider Him who makes your life a life. In this He is well pleased.
He Whom you seek to please with this devotion, though, has not ceased from all He does to uphold you and those like you. He has not even ceased from maintaining the life of His enemies. He is still entirely active in keeping men and animals healthy. He is still actively doing good indiscriminately to one and all. What are His children doing? Jesus said that as the Father works until now, so did He (Jn 5:17). This, too, was said of the Sabbath. My Father is working, so I am working. Can we say the same?
Truly, as Paul wrote, no man can be my judge or yours as regards issues of food and drink, or even as regards the Sabbath (Col 2:16). This is not to say there is no judge, for one Judge stands over all and it is He who is Lord of the Sabbath. By Word and by example, He has shown you, oh man, what is required of you in regards to His rest. The strictures of man cannot bind your conscience, but as one set within the Liberty of Christ, your conscience should surely be bound by Him. As My Father works, so I work. I do not pursue my own living or even my own interests, but His interests and concerns. As He upholds life even in His rest, so, too, must I do what I can to uphold life. To do otherwise is to disavow the God I say I worship. What are you doing this Sunday?
That, I suspect, is the question God would ask His church today. Certainly, we will come together in worship at His house. Certainly, we shall spend time learning of Him, learning of His significance and impact on our lives. Then, the majority of us will go home, have a nice meal, and ‘rest.’ Some will go out to dinner so that mom won’t have to work. And, like the Pharisees before us, we will somehow convince ourselves that this fits the spirit of the Law, in spite of that ‘and the stranger among you’ clause. Among us are those who will take that rest concept very seriously as it applies to ourselves. We will find in it such a fine excuse to avoid doing this or that. Yet, how many will actually stop to consider what work the Father accomplishes in His rest? How many will stop to recall what the Son did in His rest? How many of us will actively seek to promote life amongst the dying come Sunday afternoon? I ask this to my own shame, I know, for I recognize myself too well in what I’ve described. All of these things I have done, the meal, the restaurant, the excuse to just lie about.
That part of resting is important. Indeed, that is a part of what God intended the Sabbath to provide, a time for recharging. Yet, it’s also a time to turn our eyes more fully upon His interests, to expend some energy pursuing His agenda. It is a day when we can stop being so wrapped up in providing our own livelihood, recall that He has already provided, and go out to be His hand of provision in bringing life to another. That’s what the Church is supposed to be training us for, after all! To go out. How few among us are willing, though, to use the training we have received.
Lord, I hear the challenge. Indeed, I am more and more challenged with each passing day, not only in this area, but in all that righteousness entails. I am here, this morning, in clear knowledge of my need for repentance before You. I have not represented You as I ought, nor have I pursued Your purposes in the situations of my day. Father, forgive me, and more than that, by the Spirit that dwells within me, cause me to improve day by day. There are so many ways that I feel as though I am falling behind, losing ground. Lord, this ought not to be. Come, lift me from this valley. Restore what has washed away from the work You are doing in me, and build upon what You have begun. I know, my God, that You are faithful to complete it. Yes, yet I am saddened to see that I have lengthened the term of Your effort by my foolishness.
In the near term, my God, grant me the grace to make right what I made wrong yesterday. That, and the wisdom and guidance to keep from making the same mess all over again. Beat down in me that prideful need to be right, and allow Your peace, Your wisdom to stand me in good stead this day and always.
More than that, though, make me a laborer for life, one who can and will bear the Life that is the Light of the world into the dark places of need.
Now, I want to come back to Matthew’s account. “Something greater than the Temple is here” (Mt 12:6). What a statement that was to make, and how necessary! It seems that there is something in the nature of fallen man that cannot help but make the symbol to be of greater import than that which it symbolizes. There are any number of examples of this in the record of Scripture. Places where God had moved began to take on greater significance in the minds of the Israelites than the God who had moved there. Moses obeys God’s command and raises up an emblem of the snakes that were plaguing Israel, and in a very few years, that same emblem has to be destroyed because the Israelites have fallen into worshiping it. They have once again traded the worship of the Creator for worship of created things, once again fall into practices their own prophets had ridiculed. One half of the log they burn, the other have they bow down before.
By the time Jesus was born to Mary, the Temple had reached this status in the national spirit. God would never allow His Temple to be destroyed. Therefore, the people of Israel could do what they will, could ignore God’s Law for them and His claim upon them, for His Temple being in their midst would surely turn His hand from sending calamity. Right up to about AD 70, they continued to believe this, in spite of having brought their bloody political strife into the very courts of the Temple, in spite of turning the courts of the Temple into a military camp, shedding blood in the very precincts of the Holy One.
Something greater is here. This was nigh on blasphemy in their ears, yet it was so utterly true. Something of far greater worth than the Temple was there, not foreshadowing the kingdom to come, but representing the kingdom that is come. The One who was typified by all that Israel had been commanded to do in worship, Whose life had been predicted in the very story of Israel, was now standing here, manifesting to Israel and to the world what God’s kingdom was about. And, what was the reaction? They would have nothing to do with the real thing. Types and shadows for us, please! Let’s not make it too real.
We are hardly immune from this. We get all excited whenever we see a church building spared the destruction that has transpired all around it. In some wise, we are doubtless right to do so. Yet, we fall into thinking that the church will necessarily keep us safe. We fall into thinking that the presence of the Church in America will somehow ensure the safety of America. In particular, we fall into thinking that because His Church is still here, He will continue to bless and guard America no matter what atrocities may be committed with impunity by our nation. In spite of the fact that more worship at the altars of Molech the child-slayer today than in the house of God, we think He shall nevertheless stand as our nation’s protector. Who do we think He is, that He should wink at our sins? What sort of holiness do we suppose defines Him that He would not mind His spokesmen promoting as acceptable the things He has declared an abomination? What is there about us that we think He should want to protect?
You have something greater here in your midst. Yet, like so many before you, you are unwilling to accept the correction of the Real God, preferring your cheap imitation gods. You have made up your comfortable religion, and clothed it with the name of Christianity, but the Christ defines what Christianity is, not your comfort. You have a Living and Eternal King, yet the question remains: will you hear and heed His command? The Israel of 30 AD answered with a resounding, “No!” Much of what was once Christendom today shares their opinion. What of you, what of me? We claim title to His name, do we display fealty? Do we even understand fealty? What are we doing this Sunday?
I come now to the closing verse of this particular declaration from Jesus: The Son of Man is Lord of the Sabbath. This is the conclusion to be drawn from all He has said before. The Sabbath and all the associated rites of religion were made to benefit man, not that man might be enslaved to them. The Temple is served by men who break the Sabbath to do so, yet God finds them innocent for they serve the Temple. Now, something of much greater import than the Temple is here, and those who serve Him are likewise innocent in the eyes of God, for He Whom they serve is the Lord of the Sabbath they break. To obey that One is greater than all the sacrifices.
Now, I must admit that as I was writing that I understood the connection between the mention of the priests and the point that something greater had come as I had not before. I had somehow made these two distinct points in my thinking, leaving the matter of working priests more immediately connected with the example from David’s life. But, that’s wrong. The connection is with the something greater. Teaching on this section last night, I made note of the connecting thread of life in those things that Jesus and God condone as works legitimately done during the Sabbath rest. Healing, feeding the hungry, ministering the Gospel; all these are in support of life. Here, I find a second connecting thread. They are all done, whether intentionally or not, in support of God’s purpose.
As I have said already, God supports life even in His day of rest. He feeds the animals even on the Sabbath. He continues causing the sun to rise and set even as He rests. The things Jesus was doing, as they reflected the nature of what God was doing, were more than acceptable. They were exemplary. The priests in the Temple, offering the sacrifices of the people were doing what the Lord commanded of them. They were obedient to the Lord of the Temple, and this was the greater good. Their obedience was of greater worth than the sacrifices they offered in their obedience.
The implication of that, “But I say to you,” is that these men are likewise in obedient service to the Lord. This is how that thought segues into mention of the Son of Man as Lord of Sabbath. As the priests in the Temple serve the Lord of the Temple, so these men, in doing the will of their teacher, are serving the Lord of the Sabbath they are considered to be breaking.
The Son is Lord. We know well enough what man is, what it means to be mankind. We are also reasonably familiar, now, with what the Sabbath entails. It is rest. It is God’s rest that we are called to share in. I find it interesting in this regard to recollect a comment I read recently that noted that the seventh day in the creation account, unlike all the others, never came to a close. Combining that thought with what I have been studying here, it is wonderful indeed to recognize that we are called to share in an eternal rest that has already begun. It is also a call to action, for the Father who does not cease from supporting and promoting life in His rest has called us to the same diligent support. Every day is a Sabbath to us, for that first Sabbath has never really ended. Every day is a fit day to be about the Lord’s work. Every day is a day worthy to be spent in pursuit of His purposes.
I had commented last night on the point that work and ministry were never intended to be separate concepts. Our vocation, what we call work, is no different at its root than the vocation of the minister. It is our calling. That is what a vocation is, a calling. The world has trained us to think of the workplace as some religion-free zone, where we are not to discuss or express belief. The Lord of the Calling, however, says that His children should inform their vocations and every aspect of life with the very real presence of the Lord Himself. He who abides in us ought have every chance to express and manifest His presence in and through us. He is not just for Church, not just for times of fellowship amongst believers. He is to be brought into every situation. Blessed be His glorious name!
Now I am understanding, I think, why the word I received last Sunday came in the midst of this particular study. I have not recorded this in writing as yet, but it seems to apply in this present line of thought. God is looking for Calebs and Joshuas. He sees His children standing at the edge of Canaan once again, looking in but afraid to go in. To our great shame, we stand on the edge of a Canaan we have mostly given away to the enemy. The halls of education, long entrusted to the hands of the godly and largely intended to promote the faith that is unto salvation, were given into the hands of atheists and worse. The efforts of science, long sought by those who saw in its principles a means to better understand God and who thought their efforts not to be in vain because they knew an orderly God lay behind what they examined, have been handed into men who seek nothing more than to explain God out of the picture. The realm of the arts, by which men of faith had created works that attempted to display the beauty of God’s handiwork, to express all that is lovely, all that is praiseworthy, has been handed over to a culture that speaks death into every expression of ‘artistic’ endeavor. Francis Schaeffer wrote of that descent into despair that marks all the pursuits of modern man. It is a Canaan we have abandoned to the enemy and his despair. Rather than stand and inform the arenas of human endeavor, we have run away from them, left them to be disparaged.
It is time this ended. It is time we recognize that learning isn’t bad, bad learning is bad. It is time we recognized that this form or that form of music isn’t bad, it’s the message it carries that is bad. Science is not some great evil, baseless, amoral scientists who set themselves as moral judges in spite of having no basis to judge by are bad. It is time we ceased from abandoning the battlefield. We don’t seek to inform education, to restore purpose to learning. We simply set up a new system on the side, remove ourselves from the picture and hope the giants in our Canaan will leave us alone. We don’t seek to bring credible and intelligent theorists back into the sciences, we simply shy away from science as the great Satan, and refuse to look. We don’t want our children to grow up to be musicians, for they might get caught up in the evils of modern art. So instead, we set up our own alternative marketplace, where heathens fear to tread. We think we have done well by protecting our delicate psyches, but all we have done is abandon the battlefield.
I heard somebody, probably R.C. Sproul, commenting the other day that it has become impossible for a Christian author to have the sort of impact that a JRR Tolkien or a C.S. Lewis, or even a G.K. Chesterton once had. The reason is simply that having our own marketplace has not only protected us from the miasma of modern culture, it has also ‘protected’ modern culture from the light. Fences are ever and always dual purpose in that sense. If they keep out, they also keep in.
So, God cries out, ‘Where is Caleb? Where is Joshua?’ In my sense of this, it was more Caleb than Joshua, though. Perhaps it is worth a bit of prayer and researching to understand why that would be. Before I turn to that, though, I want to finish looking at this marvelous declaration Jesus has made.
He tells us that it is because the Sabbath was created to benefit man that He who is the Son of Man is Lord – and note this: even – of the Sabbath. That critical word, as well as the explanatory note, are again exclusively covered by Mark’s account. The same thought, though, is echoed in Matthew’s coverage. The priests serve the Lord of the Temple on the day of rest, and are therefore legal in the Lord’s sight. Something greater is here. This is, He is saying, that Lord of the Temple Whom they serve that stands before you now. The Son of Man is Lord of the Temple, and even of the Sabbath, for He is indeed Lord of all creation. Now, yesterday I had started to consider this wonderful declaration of Lordship, but did not finish the thought. Today, I want to briefly consider the two offices Jesus claims for Himself here.
First, He declares Himself the Son of Man. Here, he uses huios, the same word by which He is described as the Son of God. He is a son, as opposed to a child, because He has a strong relationship with man. He was not born of the flesh to remain a stranger to the life of the flesh. He was born of the flesh that He might experience not only the blessings of this life, but all of its temptations (Heb 4:15). In other words, He came in order to deepen His understanding of what it means to be man. He came to develop a deep and abiding affinity with us, although He differs from us in that He remain sinless. He came that He might be recognized as a legitimate and very real human being, with a legitimate and very real experience so very much like our own that His unique sinlessness would likewise be legitimate in the eyes of heaven. Apart from this, the second Adam accomplishes nothing towards correcting the failure of the first.
In claiming that title as Son of Man, He also indicates that He has a close connection with mankind, as indeed the federal head of mankind must. Yet, He was not the federal head by simple ‘accident’ of history, as Adam might be thought to be. He was federal head by choice. He chose to be the Son of Man, because He chose to develop this close connection, this intimate relationship with the mankind He created. He chooses to draw near to us, the better to serve in the second role He claims to Himself.
He is Lord. That alone is enough to establish His position. He is Lord, in particular, of the Sabbath. What He is declaring, then, is that He is Lord over the very thing that the Pharisees considered so inviolably holy. He is Lord over that Rest which is so carefully observed by all the people. He is that same Lord, then, who sees the priests as innocent in their Sabbath labors. Furthermore, if He is Lord over the Sabbath, He is most assuredly Lord over the Pharisees!
I still find it intriguing that Mark records this as saying that He is Lord even of the Sabbath, and Jesus says this is the case because the Sabbath was made for man. It was created for man. It was initiated for our benefit, as was the whole of the Law that came later. Now, what becomes interesting here is that unique way in which the word Lord indicates possession. One is lord over what belongs to him. You have authority over that which belongs to you, and you hopefully use that authority for good purposes. To do otherwise would make one a tyrant rather than a lord.
So, hear the claims in that title of Lord. I own even the Sabbath – and in that even I hear the claim extended to the mankind it was created to benefit. The fact that it was made for our good, for our benefit, is proof that He exercises His office as Lord rather than tyrant. The Rest belongs to Me, these of whom you are complaining belong to Me, and though you will not have it, you belong to me. It’s all Mine because I created it all! Because I created it, and I own it, I have the authority to determine everything about it.
That is the second claim. I AM Authority. As nothing that was created was created apart from Him, He has and exercises the full right of ownership over everything. Nothing is excluded from this claim. Even the day, even the night, even the meanest of men are His, and as such they exist by His will and at His pleasure. End of story. If there are rebels in His ranks, it is because He has determined in Himself to tolerate them for a time. If there is an end to that toleration and an imposition of the demands of Justice upon the rebels, He is well within His rights to do so, for He is Authority whether mankind chooses to acknowledge this or not. That is the way of Authority.
Finally, there is the point of that ‘consequently.’ The Sabbath, the whole of the Lord’s established rule for man is set down for man’s benefit. Thus, the whole of God’s commandment to man is for man’s good, not his harm. The whole of God’s commandment, then, stands as a proof that He is Lord over His creation, not Tyrant. He IS Authority, and His ways prove that He exercises Authority for good. There is an interesting message. The Law is not simply a declaration of His holiness, it is a proof of His goodness.
My God, I am drawn to confess yet again that You are indeed my Lord. That authority which I acknowledge (never grant, for how could I grant You what is Yours already?) I also declare has so clearly been exercised for my benefit. You are no tyrant God, insisting on Your ways or else. You are Lord God, ever using Your authority over my life to better me, ever giving proof that Your plans for me are indeed for good, not evil. Even in the trials, even in the frustrations and disappointments of life, You are working towards my good. Even when it doesn’t feel that way, I can rest assured that the Lord of my life, the Lord of all Creation, is working all things for good, even as You has promised.
So help me, my Lord, to recognize the good and beneficial nature of the things You require of me. Help me to see them as You intend them, not as a burdensome restriction, but as a beneficent boundary. You are the gate in this sheepfold of faith, and I thank You for that. You have set my boundaries round about that I might know the limits, that I might know where I can roam without fear. Yes, and should I approach the exit, there You are, lovingly pointing me back into the place of security, the place of Your will. Blessed be Your glorious Name, my God, my King, my Lord.
