previous lesson | table of contents | final lesson
Objective of this lesson: to stress that the highest form of obedience rises from God's character, priorities, and values.
On a Sabbath, Jesus and his disciples walked by a grain field on at least one side of the path. This was the day of the week that the Jews honored God by not working [see Exodus 20:8-11]. The Jewish people spent serious effort determining the appropriate definition of work. They wished neither to consciously nor unknowing dishonor God through an act of work on the Sabbath. In ancient ages and economic conditions, refusing to work honored God because daily work often was necessary to survive that day. Ultimate dependence on God in Israel in the ancient times was declaring each week, "I can depend on God's care. I depend on it so much that I honor God by doing nothing a day a week. That is a measure of my faith in God. He Who delivered my ancestors from Egyptian slavery certainly will provide for me each Sabbath. I honor You God as You directed. You rescued my ancestors from slavery and gave my people Canaan." The Sabbath was not a manipulation of God. It was a declaration of personal trust in God.
Stress God's original intent for the Sabbath was a declaration of Israel's dependence on God. Also stress that obeying the Sabbath's divine directive to cease all "work" made it essential to define "work." Having an appropriate understanding of the divine concept of work was essential to obeying the Sabbath instruction. We Christians of the restoration movement in recent decades often use human definitions to determine the expectations of divine concepts.
Unfortunately, commonly people find ways to reduce religious relationship into religious rules and regulations. If "I" keep the "correct" rules and follow the "correct" regulations, "I" obligate God to behave as "I" want "because I did the 'right things.'" Thus, if we are not honest with ourselves, obedience acquires the objective of manipulating God rather than serving God. From this perspective, obedience is an attempt to manipulate rather than to appreciate.
If Christians reduce a relationship with God to rules and regulations, they encounter the same disastrous results of people who reduce a relationship in marriage or parenting to mere rules and regulations. Rules often are used to control and manipulate. Relationships commonly appreciate, cherish, and cover flaws. It is impossible for humans to manipulate God through keeping rules and regulations. If you want to see the problem in practical terms, consider some Christians' reactions when they endure the loss of job, poverty, the loss of health, or the premature and accidental death of a family member or close friend. Note the number of Christians who feel abandoned by God if something unacceptable happens.
If you think that God did not want a relationship of love with Israel, read Deuteronomy. Read Deuteronomy passages such as 4:37-40; 5:8-10 with 7:9, 10; 6:4-9; 7:12-16; 10:12-22; 11:1, 13-17, 22, 23; 13:1-3; 19:7-10; and 30:6, 15-20. Note two things: (1) the frequency that obedience is coupled with showing love for God and (2) God's desire for a "heart" relationship--not mere control!
There is a tremendous emphasis in Deuteronomy on the importance of "love" and "the heart" as Israel obeyed God. God wanted a willing relationship of appreciation from Israel, not a "divine control by rules and regulations." Israel's motives in their behavior was extremely important to God.
As Jesus and his disciples took their Sabbath walk [the distance a Jew could walk on Saturday was regulated by Sabbath laws], some Pharisees followed them. They followed Jesus and his disciples to observe. The objective was not an attempt to learn or understand. The objective was to find fault. They who declared obedience's importance followed to criticize. When the hungry disciples stripped heads of grain from stalks almost ready for harvest, the Pharisees condemned their act.
The Pharisees sought opportunity to condemn, not to understand or encourage. Jesus' approach to scripture and their approach to scripture was entirely different. Jesus and the Pharisees understood meaning and emphasis in scripture in totally different ways. Both accepted scripture to be authoritative and from God, yet they were radically different in determining meaning.
The Mishnah interpreted and applied Jewish laws to changing situations. Many of its statements are regarded as reflecting first century positions. The Mishnah contains a definition of work by dividing acts of work into thirty-nine categories [Mishnah, Shabbath 7.2] Among these categories in Herbert Danby's translation (Oxford University Press, 1964) is reaping [harvesting]. The Pharisees' accusation was this: Jesus' disciples violated Sabbath regulations against work by reaping [harvesting].
The intent of the Pharisees and their predecessors was good. The end result was horrible. They intended to define work so God's command could be obeyed. The end result was human rules that they considered divinely authoritative.
Their accusation is quite relevant to our understanding of obedience. Consider the progression. (1) Acts of work unquestionably violate Exodus 20:8-11. (2) However, work must be defined if Exodus 20:8-11 is to be obeyed. (3) As passing time increased ways to perform work, the definitions must be broad enough to cover anticipated changes. (4) The human interpretation of work [the definitions attacked to the concept of work] in time was accepted as being as authoritative as God's directive not to work. (5) Violation of human definitions was equated with a violation of God's directive.
Take a careful, honest look at the progression. It is amazing how easily we substitute human definitions for divine directives, and then divide over our definitions.
If we observe the progression of human efforts to be true and accurate to biblical instructions, we do not observe a march toward unity but a march toward division. Humans invent hundreds of ways to be divisive in their declaration, "We seek to be true to the Bible." However, if we examine the divisions honestly, in the majority of instances we divide over human interpretations or applications of God's directives, not over the validity of God's directive itself. We ask two things: (1) What does that God-given directive mean, and (2) how is that God-given directive applied in this situation? Often human evaluation, not God-given directive, divides us.
It is distressing to see how often efforts to return to scripture result in division instead of unity. Often we attribute the responsibility to divide to God's will. Though Jesus stressed oneness, we stress division.
Jesus' response is fascinating. Basically, Jesus said the Pharisees' concept of obedience to God's directive was much too small. He cited two examples to illustrate their thinking was too small. (1) He cited the example of David [the man after God's own heart] who asked a priest for provisions (1 Samuel 21:1-6). The only bread available to give David was the bread of presence that only priests were to eat (Leviticus 24:5-9). Yet, God did not condemn David for taking and eating that bread. (2) He cited the example of priests offering temple sacrifices on the Sabbath. The temple did not cease its functions on the Sabbath! Sacrificial worship did not cease on the Sabbath! By the Pharisees' own concept, the priests violated Sabbath regulation! Butchering animals, preparing dead animals for sacrifice, and offering sacrifices is work! Yet, the priests were innocent.
Jesus challenged the Pharisees' concept of obedience! He said their concept was too small! He cited two illustrations that demanded they rethink their concept. Typically religious people would much rather defend than rethink!
We never would have quoted Hosea 6:6 to emphasize God's values! Maybe we would quote a scripture from Exodus, Leviticus, or Deuteronomy as "the law" regarding obedience. But a quote from a smaller writing of a prophet--never! I can hear our argument: "Our quote from 'the law' trumps your quote from a prophet." Yet, Jesus quoted a prophet's small writing: "I [God] desire compassion [or mercy], and not a sacrifice (Hosea 6:6). Jesus' answer was based on God's priorities arising from His character--not on human interpretations of God's directive.
This is what we of today would regard as using an unimportant scripture to address an extremely important concept. While the law (or Pentateuch) often invoked responsibility, the prophets often dealt with motive.
Was sacrifice commanded in Israel? Certainly! Examine the first seven chapters of Leviticus. Then what was Jesus' point? Not all commands are equal [which the Pharisees and Jewish people understood]. Among the most important commands from God are those (1) that arise from His character, (2) reflect His priorities, and (3) are based on His values. Worship is not the most important form of human praise and glorification of God. Honoring God by observing His priorities based on His acts that arise from His character are more important than acts of worship.
This is not an attempt to say worship is unimportant. It is an attempt to recognize what scripture says. There is a first command and a second. The Jews said there were over 360 commands in the Old Testament, and they frequently debated the rank of each commandment. While all of God's commands are important, those that reflect His character, priorities, and values are more important.
Should both be done? Certainly! However, when we conclude we can substitute acts of "appropriate" worship for human acts of devotion to God's priorities, our concept misses obedience's objective. Jesus said if they correctly understood the meaning of Hosea 6:6, they would not have condemned his innocent disciples. Stripping the raw heads of grain as they walked by did not dishonor God by breaking His priorities!
The Christian is devoted to both godly behavior and worship. Never will he or she seek to substitute one for the other. The objective of obedience is to become more godlike, not to evade godly responsibility.
We should find it sobering to realize people whose lives are dedicated to being religious can and do misunderstand the concept of obedience.
It should be sobering to realize that we can be quite devoted to being religious and misunderstand basic concepts.
For Thought and Discussion:
They were seeking opportunity to criticize [and through criticism attack Jesus' popularity with those who listened to him].
The two examples Jesus used were (1) David receiving the bread of presence for provisions and (2) the priests offering sacrifices on the Sabbath.
There will be numerous good insights shared. Those insights may be as numerous as you have students in your class. Listen well and encourage. Among the insights, be certain this is included: We must not allow instructions from God that focus on His character, His priorities, and His values go unnoticed. We must never seek to substitute acts of worship for daily godly living. Daily godly living gives meaning and substance to our worship.
Link to Student Guide
Lesson 13
previous lesson | table of contents | final lesson