previous lesson | table of contents | final lesson
The objective of this lesson: to emphasize that Jesus' concept of hypocrisy includes misrepresenting God's priorities and concerns.
A major conflict between Jesus and Israel's leaders focused on his "violation" of Sabbath rules and regulations every devout Israelite was expected to honor. In the Ten Commandments God gave Israel at Sinai [shortly after Israel was delivered from Egypt], God instructed Israel to keep the Sabbath [Saturday] holy. They were to keep the Sabbath holy by doing no work on that day. The command was specific: "Six days you shall labor and do all your work, but the seventh day is a Sabbath of the Lord your God" (Exodus 20:9,10). On the seventh day [Saturday] no one in the nation was to work: not the Israelite, not the Israelite's servant, not the Israelite's livestock, not the Israelite's visitor. Interestingly [to us], Israel kept the seventh day holy by staying at home and doing no work (see Luke 23:56). Worship was not the means of keeping the Sabbath holy. Regardless of the time of the year, regardless of what was in progress [even the harvest!] (see Exodus 31:12-17; Exodus 35:1-3; Nehemiah 10:31; Nehemiah 13:15-18; Jeremiah 17:19-23; Leviticus 25:1-7), Israelites declared their dependence on God by honoring the Sabbath as a time of rest.
One primary way that Israel honored God's holiness was to declare humble dependence on God by doing no work on each Sabbath [Saturday]. For a people who are dependent on agriculture for daily survival, who had none of the technology we regard to be a part of daily life, and who could not preserve food by canning or freezing, spending an entire day each week not working significantly declared trust. It declared, "I have confidence in God's ability and willingness to care for me."
Israel's Sabbath rules and regulations began as a sincere, well intentioned effort to obey God.
Through the centuries, Israel developed rules and regulations to be certain no work was done on the Sabbath. Consider some examples. They defined work. A person must not have access to the tool of his trade [a tailor could not carry a needle, nor a school teacher read]. Strict regulations forbade cooking. There were correct ways to allow lamps to burn on the Sabbath. There were regulations about deaths on Sabbaths and about rescues from accidents on Sabbaths. There were even regulations about a house fire on a Sabbath! Such regulations controlled how far an Israelite could walk on a Sabbath [a Sabbath day's journey--see Acts 1:12]. Sabbath regulations were extremely important religious expressions in Israel. In Jesus' ministry, his actions on Sabbaths often distressed religious leaders (see Matthew 12:1, 2; Luke 14:1-3; Deuteronomy 5:12-15). A failure to observe these regulations guaranteed the Israelite offender would be subjected to the wrath of religious leaders.
A devotion to "doing no work" is a complex devotion. Is it "work" to tie a shoe? To cook? To bathe? To respond to emergencies? To take a walk? To take a necessary journey? For a priest to offer a sacrifice on behalf of a person or the nation? Does an act of worship make "work" not to be "work"? To obey the command not to work requires the word and the concept of "work" be defined. Numbers 15:32-36 illustrates the problem [they did not know how to regard the man's gathering sticks]. Again, the origin of the rules and regulations likely began as a sincere desire to obey God's commandment.
In our text, note (1) the miracle took place on a Sabbath in a synagogue; (2) the synagogue official was offended and upset by Jesus' miracle; (3) it was not the miracle that upset the synagogue official, but the "violation" of the Sabbath. Jesus' justification of the miracle was not primarily a defense of his miracle. It was primarily a questioning of long accepted Sabbath priorities. Jesus aroused the indignation of the synagogue official because his actions violated long established and accepted understandings! He dared point out (1) common Sabbath priorities were not God's Sabbath priorities, and (2) Israelite officials were inconsistent in applying their own Sabbath priorities.
Emphasize the three things to note and the two things Jesus dared point out.
The incident involved the physical affliction of a woman who was stooped. As Jesus taught, he observed a woman in the synagogue audience who was "bent double" for eighteen years by a spirit sent by Satan. For a long time it had been impossible for her to straighten up! Jesus miraculously freed the woman from her sickness. When he laid his hands on her, she was immediately erect and began glorifying God.
Stress the woman's need. Think about the difficulties she endured for eighteen years. Remember, she lived in what we regard to be primitive conditions when common people survived by doing difficult manual labor on a daily basis. Water must be carried. Food must be cooked "from scratch." Clothing among the poor likely had to be made.
Also note the healing occurred instantly.
The synagogue official was indignant! Please note he allowed Jesus to teach in that synagogue, but Jesus was not to heal on the Sabbath! Again, the issue is not a matter of power, but a matter of time. The fact that Jesus had the power to do this was insignificant. The fact that Jesus "worked on the Sabbath" was of primary importance because he "violated" Sabbath regulations. This was the reasoning: "The woman has been sick for eighteen years. Her life is not in jeopardy! This is a miracle that can wait a day! Heal her tomorrow, on Sunday, not today on the Sabbath! This healing directly violates of one of the Ten Commandments God gave Israel! Heal on work days, not on Sabbath days!"
Make certain the class realizes why the synagogue official was indignant. He was not upset with the fact that Jesus healed. He was upset with the fact that Jesus healed on the Sabbath day. He regarded the healing an act of work. In his view, the woman's life was not in jeopardy, so the healing should have occurred the next day. There were six days to do work in, and one day in which no work was to occur. Heal on a work day! His reaction was not, "Do not heal!" His reaction was, "Do not heal on a Sabbath day!"
It is difficult for American Christians to understand the problem because American Christians are unfamiliar with a day of rest that exists to humbly declare dependence on God. If we are not careful, we view "the problem" in the incident as a power issue rather than a time issue. For us, holiness is primarily expressed through worship, not through the rest of dependence.
The reason for stressing what the problem was and was not is because the problem is unfamiliar to most American Christians. When we think of honoring God's holiness, we think in terms of worship acts.
Jesus classified the indignation of the synagogue official as hypocrisy. He used the plural "hypocrites" in responding to the man's reaction. The problem was much bigger than the individual reaction of one synagogue official. The problem was centered in the national acceptance of the Sabbath's purpose and the meaning of holiness.
Emphasize this fact: Jesus stressed the guilt of more than this one official. The official merely expressed the prevailing emphasis and understanding commonly held by religious leaders. The problem was expressed by this official, but it was much bigger than this one official. It was a national problem, not a "one man problem."
First, Jesus focused their attention on the inconsistency of their Sabbath regulations. To halter domesticated livestock in a stall and lead thirsty animals to water on a Sabbath day would be an act of work in violation of the Sabbath. However, to untie domestic animals and allow them to roam from the stall to the water was not considered an act of work. Therefore, that course of action did not violate a Sabbath. The objective was identical--get thirsty animals to water. One merely had to achieve it in the proper manner.
Their concept of work gave more consideration to a thirsty animal than it did to a sick woman. Please note correctness was determined by procedure (methods) and not by need. The implication became that God was more concerned about the "how" than the "what." That is a terrible, degrading concept of God. Showing concern for people is a primary way humans honor and glorify God.
Second, Jesus focused their attention on their Sabbath priorities. This Jewish woman was sick for eighteen years as a result of Satan's initiative. Was it a violation of a day devoted to God's holiness to rescue an Israelite woman from Satan's physical control? If you can untie a thirsty ox to go get a drink on the Sabbath, can I untie the woman from enduring Satan's control on a Sabbath? Are not suffering people of greater importance then thirsty animals? In God's priorities, is holiness expressed in the day or in concern for suffering people?
God's priority is people. He loved people so much that He sent His son to die for their redemption. When a system of priorities emphasizes other physical realities or creatures above people, those priorities do not fully represent God's concerns. Humans honor the holiness of God by recognizing and responding to the needs of people. Christians never forget that people were made in the image and likeness of God.
The end result was more than the healing of a sick woman. The miracle combined with Jesus' emphasis humiliated Jesus' opponents. The combination caused the people to rejoice for two reasons: (1) a sick woman was healed, and (2) God's priorities were championed. People saw Jesus' actions and teachings as appropriate and good. Opponents were frustrated and irritated.
Stress the impact of this incident on (1) Jesus' opponents and (2) the people. The opponents saw Jesus' good act as an evil opposition to God's commandment. The people saw Jesus' good act as a good deed full of thoughtfulness and compassion, as a wonderful declaration of the nature of a caring God.
With an incorrect focus, we who are devoted to God's command can distort God's priorities. It is possible to be obedient in technicalities and to misrepresent God at the same time. To do such is to practice hypocrisy.
To misrepresent God's concerns and priorities is to engage in hypocrisy. Such acts declare, "We are devoted to obeying God's authority," when actually such acts of devotion oppose God's nature and character. The synagogue official was genuinely convinced that he was championing God's priorities and values. In his thinking he was showing God the respect He truly deserves. Yet, he had a basic misunderstanding of God.
Thought Questions
Jesus' concerns and emphases were often in contrast with or opposition to Sabbath rules and regulations. There were fundamental differences in Jesus' statement of God's priorities and concerns and the religious leaders' interpretations of God's priorities and concerns. The concept of obedience was not the same in Jesus' understanding and the religious leaders' understanding. In the religious leaders' eyes, Jesus' Sabbath acts were acts of work in violation of the Sabbath.
The synagogue official regarded Jesus' act of healing to be an act of work. In his thinking, if it was an act of work, it was a violation of the Sabbath.
Jesus stressed that a sick Israelite woman was of greater value than a thirsty animal. If it was "the right thing to do" to untie and free a thirsty animal to drink, it was the "right thing to do" to unbind and free the woman from her sickness.
The synagogue official was not disturbed by Jesus' power to heal. It was when the healing occurred that disturbed him. He did not see a compassionate response to a long-standing human need. He saw only an act of work on a day designed to honor God's holiness by doing no work.
He regarded his attitude to be an accurate portrayal of God's attitude. He had the entire situation accurately "figured out." His priorities were God's priorities. He was so focused on "the accepted definitions" and "the accepted concepts concerning God" that he could not have his understanding challenged. There was no "enlightenment" or "increased understanding" resulting from Jesus' teaching and healing, only a defensive reaction. When we share the synagogue official's defensive attitude, we share in his hypocrisy. It is much easier to judge than it is to be compassionate.
Link to Student Guide
Lesson 13
previous lesson | table of contents | final lesson