“He not only was breaking the Sabbath”
A Sabbath in a Synagogue
(Lk. 6:6−11; Mt. 12:9−14; Mk. 3:1−6)
In all the synoptic gospels, this Sabbath episode follows the one we have just studied in the previous chapter. Each account varies somewhat from the others, but the thrust of the teaching is the same in all three. I will quote the account as found in Luke and then add the additional material found in Matthew and Mark.
And it came about on another Sabbath, that He entered the synagogue and was teaching; and there was a man there whose right hand was withered. And the scribes and Pharisees were watching Him closely, to see if He healed on the Sabbath, in order that they might find reason to accuse Him. But He knew what they were thinking and He said to the man with the withered hand, “Arise and come forward!” And he arose and came forward. And Jesus said to them, “I ask you, is it lawful on the Sabbath to do good, or to do evil, to save a life, or to destroy it?” And after looking around at them all, He said to him, “Stretch out your hand!” And he did so; and his hand was completely restored. But they themselves were filled with rage, and discussed together what they might do to Jesus (Lk. 6:6−11).
Matthew states that the Pharisees were questioning Jesus instead of Jesus questioning them (Mt. 12:10). Luke records that Jesus, “knowing their thoughts,” questioned the Pharisees. This is not a contradiction, as the Pharisees could have been questioning Jesus in their thoughts. Matthew also records the reasoning of Jesus.
What man shall there be among you, who shall have one sheep, and if it falls into a pit on the Sabbath, will he not take hold of it, and lift it out? Of how much more value then is a man than a sheep! So then it is lawful to do good on the Sabbath (Mt. 12:11,12).
Mark’s account adds more detail regarding Jesus’ reaction to the people in the synagogue and the anger He felt toward their hardness of heart.
And after looking around at them with anger, grieved at their hardness of heart, He said to the man, “Stretch out your hand ” (Mk. 3:5).
This story deals specifically with Sabbath behavior. The Jewish rabbis had interpreted healing, caring for the sick, as work and therefore a violation of Sabbath law. However, they had modified this so that one could care for those who were in a life-threatening situation.1 It is obvious that the man with a withered hand was not in a life-threatening condition. This incident appears to be a direct confrontation by Jesus upon the commonly accepted interpretation of Sabbath law.
Jesus showed His attitude by “looking around at them with anger, grieved at their hardness of heart.” Then he demonstrated His authority to interpret the Sabbath law by openly calling the man to the front and healing him.
Jesus asks the question “Is it lawful to do good on the Sabbath?” Then He follows up His own question with action and heals the man. The result of this open confrontation with the accepted interpretation of Sabbath law was that the Pharisees immediately counseled with the Herodians and set out to “destroy Him.”
As we pointed out in the last chapter, when the disciples of Jesus were accused of Sabbath violation, Jesus carefully laid out five reasons why He and His disciples did not come under the authority of Sabbath law. In this account He demonstrated His authority and lordship over the Sabbath laws (as they were currently interpreted) in an open, public confrontation with the leaders of Judaism.
Summary of a Sabbath in a synagogue
- Jesus specifically stated that it was lawful to do good on the Sabbath.
- Jesus openly and publicly confronted the Jewish leaders regarding the commonly accepted interpretation of Sabbath law.
- Jesus healed a man whose condition was not life threatening on the Sabbath.
- Jesus was openly angry and grieved at the hardness of the Pharisees’ hearts.
A Sabbath Dinner with the Pharisees
(Luke 14:1−6)
And it came about that when He went into the house of one of the leaders of the Pharisees on the Sabbath to eat bread, they were watching Him closely. And there in front of Him was a certain man suffering with dropsy. And Jesus answered and spoke to the lawyers and Pharisees, saying, “Is it lawful to heal on the Sabbath, or not?” But they kept silent. And He took hold of him, and healed him, and sent him away. And He said to them, “Which one of you shall have a son [some manuscripts read donkey] or an ox fall into a well, and will not immediately pull him out on the Sabbath day?” And they could make no reply to this.
This episode is very much like the one we just studied with the exception that this one is planned by the Pharisees. One gets the idea that the Pharisees and lawyers invited Jesus to dinner for the one purpose of documenting evidence they could use against Him in regard to the violation of the Sabbath. It appears they “planted” this person with dropsy so that he was sitting right in front of Jesus.
Jesus accepted their challenge but first asked them if it was lawful to heal on the Sabbath. Like schemers running a sting operation, they kept silent. Jesus then healed the man and justified His actions by referring to their own Sabbath behavior in relationship to their animals, implying that a man is more valuable than an animal, and thus deserving of greater Sabbath privileges.
Summary of a Sabbath dinner with the Pharisees
- It appears that this episode was set up by the Jewish leaders to entrap Jesus:
- The man with dropsy just happened to be there in front of Him.
- The Pharisees and lawyers did not answer Jesus’ question, probably for fear that Jesus would disclose their true motives.
- Jesus healed the man with dropsy on this Sabbath day.
- Jesus justified His Sabbath behavior on the basis of how the Pharisees, and the others present, took care of their animalson the Sabbath.
A Sabbath at Bethesda
(John 5:1−18; 7:14−24)
The gospel of John was written later than the other gospels and was clearly written to express certain theological perspectives. John takes for granted that his readers have access to the other gospel accounts and is not concerned with merely giving his account of the events which are recorded in the other gospels unless these events fit his overall goals that the reader “may believe that Jesus is the Christ, the Son of God; and that believing you may have eternal life” (Jn. 20:31).
Not only this, but John includes events in the life of Jesus which the other gospel writers did not record, because from John’s perspective in time these events contribute to the theological needs of his day. There is good evidence that John is distancing himself from the “Jewish” understanding of things. We see this in statements like “the Jewish day of preparation” (Jn. 19:42). If Sabbath observance were a Christian requirement, and if the Sabbath were celebrated according to biblical guidelines when this gospel was written, then we would expect John simply to write, “the day of preparation.” The fact that he calls it “the Jewish day of preparation” was a clear message to his readers. Likewise, John calls the Passover “the feast of the Jews” (Jn. 6:4). This is evidence that the New Testament church was moving away from the Sabbath and other ritual laws of the old covenant. For this reason we believe John included certain Sabbath episodes which are not recorded by the other gospel writers.
This Sabbath incident is very involved and warrants our careful attention. We will divide the text, and our study of it, into three sections.
After these things there was a feast of the Jews; and Jesus went up to Jerusalem. Now there is in Jerusalem by the sheep gate a pool, which is called in Hebrew Bethesda, having five porticoes. In these lay a multitude of those who were sick, blind, lame, withered…And a certain man was there, who had been thirty-eight years in his sickness. When Jesus saw him lying there, and knew that he had already been a long time in that condition, He said to him, “Do you wish to get well?” The sick man answered Him, “Sir, I have no man to put me into the pool when the water is stirred up, but while I am coming, another steps down before me.” Jesus said to him, “Arise, take up your pallet, and walk” (Jn. 5:1− 9).
We should note again this was not a life-threatening emergency. This man had already been there thirty-eight years and a few more days would probably have done him no harm. Jesus initiated the conversation and in His healing command ordered this man to arise, lift up his bed, and walk.
This healing took place on the Sabbath. The question has often been asked if Jesus commanded this man to break the Sabbath. Without question, Jesus asked him to openly break the Halakah, the rabbinical laws which were an interpretation of the biblical laws.2 This man’s “pallet” probably consisted of a pad to protect him from the hard stone floor and several blankets to keep him warm during the cold Jerusalem nights. In other words, his “pallet” probably consisted of what would normally be the covers on a bed. Having personally backpacked several hundred miles with modern, lightweight equipment, it is my conclusion that this man’s “pallet” would have constituted a “load,” which was forbidden to be carried on the Sabbath (Jer. 17:27).
It should also be noted that there was no good reason we can think of why this man had to carry his “pallet” that day. Jesus could have healed him on the Sabbath and then asked him to go back after sundown, or on the next day, and carry away his bed. One gets the idea that Jesus purposefully chose to heal this man on the Sabbath and deliberately asked him to do something which would be considered a violation of Sabbath law.
If we take the position that Jesus did command this man to break the Sabbath, it raises theological questions which must be answered. The only suitable answer is that Christ considered the Sabbath to be a ritual law that pointed forward to the rest He would bring and now it had little, if any, value. If we hold the Sabbath to be a moral law, then we are faced with either trying to make this act fit within biblical Sabbath law or charging Christ with sin. What we can say for certain, however, is that the people of Christ’s day understood the actions of this man as breaking the Sabbath law as they perceived it.
And immediately the man became well, and took up his pallet and began to walk. Now it was the Sabbath on that day. Therefore the Jews were saying to him who was cured, “It is the Sabbath, and it is not permissible for you to carry your pallet.” But he answered them, “He who made me well was the one who said to me, ‘Take up your pallet and walk.’” They asked him, “Who is the man who said to you, ‘Take up your pallet, and walk.’” But he who was healed did not know who it was; for Jesus had slipped away while there was a crowd in that place. Afterward Jesus found him in the temple, and said to him, “Behold, you have become well; do not sin any more, so that nothing worse may befall you.” The man went away, and told the Jews that it was Jesus who had made him well. And for this reason the Jews were persecuting Jesus because He was doing these things on the Sabbath. But He answered them, “My Father is working until now, and I Myself am working.” For this cause 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 (Jn. 5:9−18).
Looking at these verses in Greek adds additional insight. In verse 18 we read, “because He not only was breaking the Sabbath…” “Was breaking” is in the continuous tense in Greek, implying that Jesus was repeatedly involved in such activity.3 The Greek verb here is eluen, which comes from the root luo, and has the idea of “destroy.” This same verb is used by John in the following verses: “Destroy this temple, and in three days I will raise it up” (Jn. 2:19). “The Son of God appeared for this purpose, that He might destroy the works of the devil” (1 Jn. 3:8). Kittel’s Theological Dictionary of the New Testament gives the following possible meanings to this verb as used in the context of John 5:18: “to break up,” “to destroy,” “to dismiss,” “to set aside,” “to invalidate.”4 Therefore, a correct alternate translation would be “because He was not only destroying the Sabbath…”
This passage says that the Jews were persecuting Jesus because He was destroying, or invalidating, the Sabbath. We should not be too hasty to denounce the Jews. Old covenant Sabbath law clearly required that a person who openly broke the Sabbath was to be put to death (Ex. 31:14,15; 35:2). The Pharisees had the old covenant record of the man who was caught gathering sticks on the Sabbath and was stoned to death at the express command of God for this violation (Num. 15:32−36). They also had the later scriptural interpretations of Sabbath law to prohibit carrying a load on the Sabbath (Jer. 17:27). One could excuse the man carrying sticks before he could excuse a man carrying his bedroll except for the fact that he did it at the express command of Jesus. It is assumed that the man gathering sticks was doing so to meet some kind of human need, perhaps for warmth or to cook food, while there was no good reason mentioned in the story why this man had to carry his bed away that day. Therefore, when limiting oneself to the Old Testament Sabbath laws the Jewish leaders seemed to be doing the very thing the law required: setting about to put to death one whom they understood to have openly and purposefully set aside Sabbath law.
Next we should note Christ’s defense of His Sabbath activities. “But He answered them, My Father is working until now, and I Myself am working.” It is very important to note that Jesus did not try to prove that His healing activities or His command to “Arise, take up your pallet, and walk” were within the scope of Sabbath law. Rather He boldly states that His Father and He are working— something clearly forbidden in Sabbath law. Jesus then moved the discussion away from the violation of Sabbath law to His close association with His Father. The Jewish rabbis had correctly concluded that the rest which God entered on the seventh day after creation did not apply to God’s work of upholding the universe.5 We remember from our study of Genesis that God began the “work” of redemption immediately after the fall of Adam and Eve. It was this “work” that Jesus was continually doing which caused the Jewish leaders to persecute Him. As upholding creation is above the rest of Sabbath law, so is Christ’s work of redemption. This work far supersedes the Sabbath laws of the Pharisees and even the letter of the Old Testament Sabbath laws. It is the goal of redemption to restore the conditions which existed on that first seventh day when God rested.
Look carefully at the whole of verse 18. These are the words of the Gospel writer, John.
For this cause the Jews were seeking all the more to kill Him, because He not only was breaking [or destroying] the Sabbath, but also was calling God His own Father, making Himself equal with God (Jn. 5:18).
Were these accusations correct? Throughout the gospel of John the divinity of Jesus is portrayed as a major theme. “The Word was God…The Word became flesh” (Jn. 1:1−3,14). “Before Abraham was, I AM” (Jn. 8:58), etc. The clear wording and the literary structure force us to conclude that both of these statements (that Jesus was breaking or destroying the Sabbath and calling God His own Father) were true, and because they were true, they were the reasons the Jews sought all the more to kill Jesus.
In the next few verses Jesus gives thirteen reasons which prove two things. First, they show the close association between Himself and His Father, confirming the fact that Jesus is indeed equal with the Father. Second, they show why He, like His Father, must continue to work, even if His work was a violation of Sabbath law.
- He does only what the Father does (Jn. 5:19).
- The Son gives (eternal) life to whom He wishes (Jn. 5:21).
- The Father has given all judgment to the Son (Jn. 5:22).
- All are to honor the Son just as they honor the Father (Jn. 5:23).
- The one who believes (in Jesus) is not judged (Jn. 5:24).
- The Son of God will raise the dead (Jn. 5:25).
- The Son has life in Himself (Jn. 5:26).
- As the Son of Man, Jesus has the authority to executejudgment (Jn. 5:27).
- Jesus’ judgment is just (Jn. 5:30).
- Jesus’ authority is backed by two witnesses (to make it legalaccording to Jewish law), the Father and John the Baptist(Jn. 5:31−33).
- The purpose of Jesus’ taking all authority is for the Jews’salvation (Jn. 5:34).
- If they reject the witness of John, which the Jewish leadersdid, then the two legal witnesses are the Father and the veryworks of Jesus (Jn. 5:35−37).
- The Scriptures also testify of Jesus (Jn. 5:39).
At this point Jesus, as the Son of Man who has authority to sit in judgment, takes the judgment seat and confronts the Pharisees by saying:
Do not think that I will accuse you before the Father; the one who accuses you is Moses, in whom you have set your hope. For if you believed Moses, you would believe Me; for he wrote of Me. But if you do not believe his writing, how will you believe My words? (Jn. 5:45−47).
These last few verses give additional insight regarding the Sabbath. First, they corroborate what we have concluded before: Jesus, by virtue of His divinity, is above the letter of ritual Sabbath law. Secondly, Jesus, in the context of this Sabbath incident, says that Moses wrote of Him. Could it be that Jesus was saying that the Sabbath, as set forth in the old covenant, was an institution which was to point forward to the coming of Jesus and His work? Could it be that the Sabbath, which was a memorial of a finished creation also pointed forward to a finished redemption? Could it be that the redemption from Egyptian bondage also foreshadowed the true redemption in Christ? Could it be that the Sabbath which pointed back to the open fellowship Adam had with God before sin entered, also pointed forward to the open fellowship a justified believer can have with God? Could it be that the laws of the Sabbath, over which the Pharisees were stumbling, were the very laws which should have directed them to the only One who could bring in the true rest of God? Could it be that the true Sabbath is in Christ!?
Two chapters later, in John 7, Jesus refers back to this Sabbath incident. Notice His comments.
Jesus answered and said to them, “I did one deed [Greek is ‘work’], and you all marvel. On this account Moses has given you circumcision (not because it is from Moses, but from the fathers), and on the Sabbath you circumcise a man. If a man receives circumcision on the Sabbath that the Law of Moses may not be broken, are you angry with Me because I made an entire man well on the Sabbath? Do not judge according to appearance, but judge with righteous judgment” (Jn. 7:21−24).
Jesus is defending His previous act of healing the man at the pool of Bethesda. It is of interest to note that He does not focus on the man’s carrying his bedroll, but on the healing. Notice His two arguments. First, He shows that in Jewish law circumcision took precedence over the Sabbath. From our previous study of the old covenant we saw why this was so. The Sabbath was a sign between God and the “sons of Israel” (Ex. 31:17). However, to become a “son of Israel” a male had to be circumcised. It was then and then only that the Sabbath law applied. Jesus’ first argument draws a parallel between the Jewish practice of circumcising on the eighth day, even if it fell on the Sabbath, and His “work” of making an entire man well on the Sabbath.
The first argument is based upon old covenant law. The second argument is based upon a different reference point. The Jews saw, and judged, the actions of Jesus from the reference point of the old covenant law. They were judging “according to appearance.” Jesus, on the other hand, has a different reference point: “judge with righteous judgment.” What is “righteous judgment”? He told them in the last part of Chapter 5:
For not even the Father judges any one, but He has given all judgment to the Son (Jn. 5:22). He gave Him [the Son] authority to execute judgment, because He is the Son of Man (Jn. 5:27). My judgment is just; because I do not seek My own will but the will of Him who sent Me (Jn. 5:30).
Here, Jesus asserts His deity by showing that He will be the one who sits as Judge in the final judgment. And because of this, His conduct is above question.
It appears Jesus openly and willfully commanded this man to do something which the Jewish leaders would consider to be a violation of biblical Sabbath law as Jesus continued His “work” of redemption. Jesus did this in order that He might show them who He really was and thus move their reference point of life and judgment from the old covenant laws to Himself. He was seeking to help them make a transition from the old covenant (Sinai laws) to the new covenant (His words). Jesus was showing the Jewish leaders that He, as the Son of Man, was now the true reference point for all life and judgment. Further, these Jewish leaders stood condemned by the very Sabbath laws which they were using to condemn Jesus, because a primary purpose of ritual Sabbath law was to point them to the coming Messiah. The “work” of the Messiah was to bring redemption by deliverance from the bondage of sin and to restore Eden’s rest of intimate fellowship with God. Jesus was seeking to move the Jewish leaders away from old covenant ritual Sabbath law which pointed forward to Him. This would happen only as the people acknowledged His authority as greater than the authority of the old covenant.
Jesus took great personal risk by commanding this man to take up his bed and walk on the Sabbath. His Sabbath activities were the foundation of a major part of the hatred that developed between Jesus and the Jewish leaders which ultimately led to His crucifixion. Jesus knowingly and purposefully took this risk to bring redemption and the true “rest” of God where man once again would be at peace with his Creator.
It seems clear from the wording of this incident that we must understand Sabbath law as ritual law and not moral law. To conclude otherwise one must do a number of questionable hermeneutical gymnastics.
Summary of a Sabbath at Bethesda
1. The man Jesus healed was not in a life-threatening situation.
- Jesus purposely commanded this man to carry his pallet which the Jews understood to be a violation of Old Testament Sabbath law.
- The story gives no reasons why this man had to carry his pallet on the Sabbath.
- When accused of Sabbath breaking, Jesus’ answer was, “My Father is working until now, and I Myself am working.”
- The Greek verb used in Jn. 5:18 indicates that Jesus was continually involved in activities which the Jews considered to be breaking, destroying or invalidating the Sabbath.
- John reflects the Pharisees’ charge against Jesus by saying that Jesus was breaking or destroying the Sabbath and making Himself equal with God, both of which were true.
- Because of Jesus’ Sabbath breaking and His claim to equality with God, the Jewish leaders sought all the more to kill Him.
- Rather than explaining how this healing incident fit within Sabbath law, Jesus established His own authority by showing the close association between Himself and the Father and why He must continue to work.
- He did only what the Father was continually doing.
- He gives eternal life to whom He wishes.
- The Father had given all judgment to the Son.
- All should honor the Son just as they honor the Father.
- The one who believes in Jesus is not judged.
- The Son of God will raise the dead.
- The Son has life in Himself.
- As the Son of Man He has authority to execute judgment.
- His judgment is just.
- His authority is legal because it is backed by two witnesses: John the Baptist and His Father.
- The purpose of Jesus’ taking authority is for their salvation.
- If they didn’t accept John’s witness, then He had two more: His own works and the Scriptures.
- The Scriptures testify of Jesus.
- Jesus took His prerogative as the Son of Man, who is to execute judgment, by telling His accusers Moses would accuse them, for Moses wrote of Him. It can be assumed, by considering the context of this Sabbath incident, that Jesus is referring to the Sabbath as the means by which Moses spoke of Jesus.
- It seems evident that Jesus considered the Sabbath a ritual, or ceremonial law that pointed forward to Him and thus it had fulfilled its purpose.
- When considering this incident as a whole, it appears that Jesus was purposefully seeking to move the Jewish leaders’ reference point of life and judgment from the old covenant laws to Himself.
- Jesus took great personal risk in this attempt to show Himself as the reference point of life and judgment in the new covenant.
- This incident is strong evidence that Jesus considered the Sabbath as a ritual law pointing forward to the redemption which He would bring.
Endnotes
- Rowland, “A summary of Sabbath Observance in Judaism at the Beginning of the Christian Era”, in From Sabbath to Lord’s Day, p. 46
- D. A. Carson, “Jesus and the Sabbath in the Four Gospels”, in From Sabbath to Lord’s Day, p. 81.
- Leon Morris, The New International Commentary of the New Testament, The Gospel of John, (Wm. B. Eerdmans Publishing Co, Grand Rapids, MI, 1971), p. 307.
- Kittel, Theological Dictionary of the New Testament, (Wm. B. Eerdmans Publishing Co., Grand Rapids, MI, 1967), Vol. IV, p. 336.
- D. A. Carson, Commentary on John, (Wm. B. Eerdmans Publishing Co., Grand Rapids, MI, 1991), p. 247.
- 11. Sabbath Conflicts - May 22, 2025
- In Times Like These Will Your Anchor Hold? - May 15, 2025
- 10. Lord of the Sabbath - May 15, 2025