Jesus has broken the Sabbath

[Leaf473]

Where did you get the idea that I think everything in our minds was put there by God? In my opinion that's the silliest assertion I've ever seen you post.

God places His principles in our minds through His word if we allow Him .

And that's exactly right, God puts his principles in our hearts/minds!

 

[Gary K]

From this earlier post


If words existing in our minds doesn't proof that God put them there, then we're back to this, I believe

So because I said God writes His law in our minds you think I mean God is responsible for everything in our minds? Yeah, as if God puts the devil's propagandas in our minds that we're bombarded with every day in our culture. Like I said it's the silliest assertion I've ever seen you post. And you did it not once, but twice. I am deeply saddened by this as I like you because you're a nice guy who is never rude or condescending to anyone.

 

[HIM]

This is a foolish argument, Here is why. We come to the knwledge of the commandments by reading the Bible. That means that knowledge is stored in our minds. What is the heart. It's not a physical entity and part of it is our minds where the law is stored from when we read it. Our

So God's law has to be written in English? What happens if a person is Chinese and can't understand English?

I think I finally understand what you're trying to get to, Yes the law is written in our hearts in whatever language we read and write. Why? Because we read God's law in the Bible. That's where we learn about it. And no, it's not some ethereal concept written in the heart. Faith cometh by hearing and hearing by the word of God.

conscience is located in our minds. Our emotions are found in our minds as that is where everything we are as a person is located. All our thoughts, memories, learning etc.... In essence what it means to be human is stored there.

God's words are written on your heart, like, actual letters? Not principles, but particular words?

If so, then I ask you the same kind of questions I asked @Gary K:
What language are the words in? Are they translated into English?

That is funny. Are you of the camp that says, “you shall not surely die”

 

[Leaf473]

So because I said God writes His law in our minds you think I mean God is responsible for everything in our minds?

No, because of the logic you were using.

I thought you were attempting to show that actual letters were written in My heart by asking me to quote the two greatest commandments.

I quoted them, and I understood you to be thinking that was proof that they were written on my heart.

God's law is written on my heart, but not in actual letters

Yeah, as if God puts the devil's propagandas in our minds that we're bombarded with every day in our culture. Like I said it's the silliest assertion I've ever seen you post. And you did it not once, but twice. I am deeply saddened by this as I like you because you're a nice guy who is never rude or condescending to anyone.

 

[Leaf473]

You are funny. Are you if the camp that says, “you shall not surely die”

I'm not sure what you're talking about.

To me, the strange thing is saying that actual letters are written on our heart/mind.

It seems obvious to me that it's principles.

If things I post sound strange, I think it's because I'm attempting to follow out a strange idea... The strange idea being an actual letters are written in our hearts/minds.

 

[Gary K]

No, because of the logic you were using.

I thought you were attempting to show that actual letters were written in My heart by asking me to quote the two greatest commandments.

I quoted them, and I understood you to be thinking that was proof that they were written on my heart.

God's law is written on my heart, but not in actual letters

I don't understand. I have been saying God writes His laws in our minds for a bunch of posts now so I'm puzzled as to how tou took it thar I was speaking of your heart.

 

[Gary K]

I'm not sure what you're talking about.

To me, the strange thing is saying that actual letters are written on our heart/mind.

It seems obvious to me that it's principles.

If things I post sound strange, I think it's because I'm attempting to follow out a strange idea... The strange idea being an actual letters are written in our hearts/minds.

I think HIM is referring to our conversation about God writing His law in our minds.

Principles are expressed using words so how else could they be written in our minds?

 

[Leaf473]

I don't understand. I have been saying God writes His laws in our minds for a bunch of posts now so I'm puzzled as to how tou took it thar I was speaking of your heart.

I don't think mind or heart is really the issue.

The issue is principles or letters.

Bible Gateway passage: Jeremiah 31:33-34 - New American Standard Bible

“For this is the covenant which I will make with the house of Israel after those days,” declares the LORD: “I will put My law within them and write it on their heart; and I will be their God, and they shall be My people. They will not teach again, each one his neighbor and each one his brother...

www.biblegateway.com

I think that's talking about God putting the principles of his law in our heart/mind. I don't think it means he puts actual letters there

 

[Leaf473]

I think HIM is referring to our conversation about God writing His law in our minds.

I was talking about this.

Are you if the camp that says, “you shall not surely die”

I wouldn't want to leap to the conclusion that he was asking if I was in cahoots with Satan.

Principles are expressed using words so how else could they be written in our minds?

I think the idea of writing is metaphorical in that passage.

The same principles can be described using a variety of words. I don't think God puts specific words, meaning the same words, in all of our hearts/minds.

When Jeremiah talks about God putting the law in our hearts/minds, law there is Torah, I believe. We tend to think of that as law, but I think in Hebrew it's much broader.

God puts his principles, directions, ways, into our hearts/minds.

 

[Gary K]

I don't think mind or heart is really the issue.

The issue is principles or letters.

Bible Gateway passage: Jeremiah 31:33-34 - New American Standard Bible

“For this is the covenant which I will make with the house of Israel after those days,” declares the LORD: “I will put My law within them and write it on their heart; and I will be their God, and they shall be My people. They will not teach again, each one his neighbor and each one his brother...

www.biblegateway.com

I think that's talking about God putting the principles of his law in our heart/mind. I don't think it means he puts actual letters there

So now you deny that our heart is in our mind?

 

[Gary K]

I was talking about this.

I wouldn't want to leap to the conclusion that he was asking if I was in cahoots with Satan.


I think the idea of writing is metaphorical in that passage.

The same principles can be described using a variety of words. I don't think God puts specific words, meaning the same words, in all of our hearts/minds.

When Jeremiah talks about God putting the law in our hearts/minds, law there is Torah, I believe. We tend to think of that as law, but I think in Hebrew it's much broader.

God puts his principles, directions, ways, into our hearts/minds.

That is not what I was referring to. I was referring to HIM quoting part of our discussion.

 

[Leaf473]

So now you deny that our heart is in our mind?

No, I don't deny that.

 

[Leaf473]

That is not what I was referring to. I was referring to HIM quoting part of our discussion.

When I wrote this

I'm not sure what you're talking about.

I was referring to something that HIM had written to me

 

[Gary K]

When I wrote this

I was referring to something that HIM had written to me

Good,

 

[daq]

John 5:18
For this reason therefore the Jews were seeking all the more to kill Him, because He not only was breaking the Sabbath, but also was calling God His own Father, making Himself equal with God.

I am aware that most commentators are of the opinion that Jesus did not break the Sabbath and that the Jews had falsely accused him, but if you look at it more closely, the Jews were actually right in their accusation that Jesus broke the Sabbath.

Reason:
The law says you shall not bear any burden on the Sabbath (Jeremiah 17:21-22). That this commandment is to be understood in exactly this way can be seen from the fact that God had a man stoned to death for carrying only wood on the Sabbath (Numbers 15:32-36). Jesus broke this commandment by commanding the healed man to carry his bed (John 5:10-11). The Jews were right in their accusation in this regard. And the clear proof that Jesus broke the Sabbath lies in the fact that John the author of the Gospel agrees with this in verse 18. If Jesus had not broken the Sabbath, he would not have expressed himself in this way but would have made it clear that the Jews were lying.

The reason why Jesus broke the ceremonial commandments like the Sabbath was not because he was a sinner for he is sinless but because he wanted to show that these commandments are to be understood spiritually. The Sabbath was never to be the seventh day of the week. The Sabbath was Jesus Christ, who is the true rest in which we should enter, as Paul said. Paul also said that God never wanted animal sacrifices, but that the true sacrifice is Jesus. The Old Testament is only a shadow, the New Testament is the fulfilment and the reality.

If one does not see and understand the sacred calendar day in Gen 1-2:3, (not to be confused with the civil calendar day in Numbers 7), and if one does not understand the true Torah calendar being taught in the Gospel accounts by the Master and later by his apostles in their writings: then neither will the same understand the passage in question here in your OP. Moreover the Gospel of John builds up to the events in John 5 by laying the ground work for what happens in the passage in question.

The point is that it is too much to try to expound and explain to someone who hasn't studied these things mentioned herein above and many more things unmentioned which are related. The apparent blatant contradiction is there on purpose: but the purpose is to force the reader to study the scripture and therefore know Elohim better and better, (and to be taught of Elohim by His Word, not of men). The purpose is not so that people can say, "Yay, Jesus broke the Sabbath", "the law is abolished", and go along their merry own way.

The answer begins here:

John 5:17 T/R-N/A-W/H
17 ο δε [ιησους] απεκρινατο αυτοις ο πατηρ μου εως αρτι εργαζεται καγω εργαζομαι

εως αρτι ~ until right now, until this very moment, until just now, etc., etc.

They had the wrong timing for the Shabbat hour of the day, (sacred calendar day), because they set a hedge about the time so as to insure that no one broke the Shabbat. In other words they were half an hour early because of their addition hedges which they themselves added to the commandments, but the Shabbat hour of the day commenced just as the Master spoke to them and said the words quoted above in John 5:17, and the Master himself makes it very plain for anyone who understands the Torah and the calendar taught therein: the Shabbat commenced exactly when he said it did in the passage, that is, "right now", (as he spoke).

The first crumb in a trail of clues back-tracking through this Gospel account:

John 4:21-23 KJV
21 Jesus saith unto her, Woman, believe me, the hour cometh, when ye shall neither in this mountain, nor yet at Jerusalem, worship the Father.
22 Ye worship ye know not what: we know what we worship: for salvation is of the Jews.
23 But the hour cometh, and now is, when the true worshippers shall worship the Father in spirit and in truth: for the Father seeketh such to worship him.

The bold red portion in the above statement marks the changeover to a particular hour of the day, and he specifically marks the hour, saying, "But the hour comes, and now is", right in the middle of their conversation. The hour before this appointed time is mentioned at the opening of the passage, that is, it was about the sixth hour when he sat down at the well, (John 4:6), and therefore the hour changes over to the seventh hour in John 4:23, right in the midst of their conversation.

And what follows in the next event at the end of this chapter? The nobleman's son is healed, and a particular hour of the day is mentioned, and of course it was the seventh hour of the day when his son was healed.

 

[DamianWarS]

John 5:18
For this reason therefore the Jews were seeking all the more to kill Him, because He not only was breaking the Sabbath, but also was calling God His own Father, making Himself equal with God.

I am aware that most commentators are of the opinion that Jesus did not break the Sabbath and that the Jews had falsely accused him, but if you look at it more closely, the Jews were actually right in their accusation that Jesus broke the Sabbath.

Reason:
The law says you shall not bear any burden on the Sabbath (Jeremiah 17:21-22). That this commandment is to be understood in exactly this way can be seen from the fact that God had a man stoned to death for carrying only wood on the Sabbath (Numbers 15:32-36). Jesus broke this commandment by commanding the healed man to carry his bed (John 5:10-11). The Jews were right in their accusation in this regard. And the clear proof that Jesus broke the Sabbath lies in the fact that John the author of the Gospel agrees with this in verse 18. If Jesus had not broken the Sabbath, he would not have expressed himself in this way but would have made it clear that the Jews were lying.

The reason why Jesus broke the ceremonial commandments like the Sabbath was not because he was a sinner for he is sinless but because he wanted to show that these commandments are to be understood spiritually. The Sabbath was never to be the seventh day of the week. The Sabbath was Jesus Christ, who is the true rest in which we should enter, as Paul said. Paul also said that God never wanted animal sacrifices, but that the true sacrifice is Jesus. The Old Testament is only a shadow, the New Testament is the fulfilment and the reality.

Jesus is Lord of the Sabbath which means he has authority over it. The Sabbath is inferior to Christ and Christ superior to the Sabbath. The Sabbath gives glory to Christ by design.

So there is two things going on here. The one with authority over the law positionally cannot break it, as they can only break something that has authority over them.

The other thing going on here is since Christ is the author of the Sabbath he knows it's purpose and although may not keep the letter he keeps the purpose and in doing so keeps the law. Christ says in Mat 12:12 that it is lawful to do good on the Sabbath. His explicit example is about saving sheep showing that we may break our rest to do so.

Since Christ has perfect interpretation of the law, although by asking the healed man to carry his mat violates the letter, we must assume the request was still driven at the purpose of the commandment and the Sabbath was kept.

My understanding would be that we may carry a mat if the purpose of carrying that mat is to give glory to God. And yes that applies to all things, we may break our Sabbath rest through noble cause driven at giving glory to God including through good deeds (like cutting your neighbours grass)

This empowers the Sabbath to be more active and outward focused, connecting with people, than passive and inward focused more about self. The 4th commandment itself speaks of not just rest for yourself, but your whole household including animals and servants as well as foriengers. So all those in our care are to enjoy Sabbath, and if the purpose of Sabbath is about spiritual rest (salvation through Christ) over physical rest than our focus today may be about reaching all those in our care with the Sabbath message, which is the gospel. Who is in our care? I believe Jesus answers this when he is asked "who is my neighbour?"

 

[Yekcidmij]

Since Christ has perfect interpretation of the law, although by asking the healed man to carry his mat violates the letter, we must assume the request was still driven at the purpose of the commandment and the Sabbath was kept.

It's not clear that telling the man to carry a mat violated the Law even in the letter. The prohibitions in the Torah which could have been debated on the matter were open to interpretation. One couldn't do "work" and you couldn't "go out" or take things in or out on the Sabbath per the Law's explicit instruction, but exactly what that entailed was up for debate.

In early Rabbinical debates carrying a man on a stretcher was permitted (m. Shab 10.5) because it was considered necessary for the man on the stretcher. But could you carry a stretcher by itself? There certainly isn't an explicit command in the Torah about any of this, and the Mishnah appears to be concerned with carrying objects from one domain to another - like taking things from inside your home to public space or vice versa. So I think you can't say Jesus violated the letter of the Law. Possibly he violated the Pharisees interpretation on the issue, but even here it's not clear the Pharisees would have been in complete agreement among themselves or that Jesus' decision would have been disputed by all Pharisees.

Arguably, the man wasn't carrying the mat "out" since he had been living in (or was already in) public spaces and carried the mat around in public space (just like you could carry a mat in your home on the Sabbath as long as you stayed in your home). Maybe they could have argued that the man violated a prohibition against lifting the mat, but you won't find this in the Law either and I think you'd be hard pressed to find it in Rabbinical literature.

I guess I don't see how Jesus violated the letter of the Law, and I think he may not have necessarily violated Pharisee interpretations on the matter. There may have been some Pharisees who took strict interpretations, and his opponents appear to have been such people, but so what? Just because some Pharisees took strict interpretations didn't make their interpretation correct or valid.

 

[dwb001]

Do you think the one who made the Sabbath would break the spirit of the Sabbath?

Man made additions to the Sabbath are fine to ignore.

 

[DamianWarS]

It's not clear that telling the man to carry a mat violated the Law even in the letter.

It's clear that Christ's interpretation of the law is perfect

 

[daq]

It's clear that Christ's interpretation of the law is perfect

And one may know that his interpretation of the sacred calendar day is hidden in the foundation of the world, (opening creation account, Matthew 13 parables, (cf. Mat 13:35, Psa 78:1-2 LXX)). If therefore the Pharisees had added a half hour before and after the daily Shabbat hour, so as to put a hedge about the commandment, he then did not break the commandment by telling the man to take up his mat and carry it because, as the passage says, "My Father works until right now", meaning he only violated their added hedge because his command to the healed man occurred during the half hour hedge before the Shabbat which the Pharisees had added to the Shabbat. He didn't break the Shabbat but merely violated their hedge which they had added to the Torah so as to supposedly protect the Shabbat and prevent people from violating it.