The Gospel of Luke 6:1-11

Luke

6:1-11

The mission of the Messiah, 1:5-9:50

3. The signs of the Messiah, 4:3-6:11

vi] Sign of the Sabbath - Lord of the Sabbath

Synopsis

Luke now records two Sabbath day incidents which give us further insight into Jesus' messianic credentials, as well as a right understanding of the law. First, it is harvest time, and Jesus and his disciples are walking past a field and so the disciples pick a few ears to eat. The Pharisees make an issue out of this, claiming that the disciples are working on the Sabbath - they are technically reaping. Jesus counters with a rather notable precedent, reminding his accusers of the day David ate the shewbread in the temple when he was hungry. Jesus then adds, irrespective of precedents, that the Son of Man / messiah is Lord of the Sabbath.

In the second Sabbath-day incident, Jesus is teaching in a synagogue and there is a man in attendance with a withered arm. Some of the religious authorities were present, watching to see if Jesus might break the Sabbath and heal someone. Jesus knows what they were thinking and so brings the disabled man to the front of the congregation. He then asks, "Is it lawful on the Sabbath to do good or to do harm?" The question silences the authorities. So, Jesus heals the man, and as for the religious authorities, they are left fuming and wondering what they should do in response.

Teaching

In the dawning of the messianic age of the kingdom of God, the messiah, the Lord of the Sabbath, fulfils the covenant promises, putting God's law in the minds of his people and writing it on their hearts, cf., Jer.31:33.

Issues

i] Context: See 4:31-44. The two Sabbath day stories serve as the final episode of six in the section The signs of the Messiah which, by focusing on his acts, reveals the nature of his authority, 4:31-6:11. Jesus does what only God can do. This episode is the last of a group of three conflict stories.

ii] Background: Under Rabbinic Law, a person may glean from a field, but at the same time, the work involved in reaping is forbidden on the Sabbath, cf., Ex.20:8-11, 31:14-15, 35:2, Deut.5:12-15. Of course, the rules do not apply in a dire situation, but the disciples were not starving to death. As for Jesus' David illustration, this was viewed as an exception to the rule.

iii] Structure: The sign of the Sabbath:

Reaping on the Sabbath, 6:1-6:

Setting, v1;

The religious authorities question the disciples' actions, v2;

Jesus responds, v3-5.

The example of David, v3-4;

Saying: "The Son of man is Lord .......", v6

Healing the man with the withered hand on the Sabbath, 6:7-11:

Setting, v6-7;

Jesus poses a question, v8-9;

The healing, v10,

The response of the religious authorities, v11.

iv] Interpretation:

Bock takes the view that the three conflict stories together reveal Jesus' messianic authority ("even over something as sacred as the Sabbath"), an authority that "creates a reaction and meets with rejection." In simple terms, "The Son of Man is Lord of the Sabbath" - "One greater that David has come who is not controlled by Sabbath regulation, but instead controls the Sabbath itself", Stein.

Moving beyond the revelation of Jesus' messianic identity, the two episodes before us reveal something about the law in the new age of the kingdom of God. If we were following Matthew's thematic approach to the gospel, we would, by now, understand that Jesus fulfils / completes the law, both revealing it in perfection, and in doing it. We would now know that we are the fools who have heard the law, but not done it; that we have built our house on sand, and now face the great crash. We would know that our only hope of possessing a righteousness that exceeds that of the Scribes and Pharisees, lies with resting in faith on the one good man who has heard and done; it lies with finding our security in the one who has built his house on rock, and whose door is always open to us.

The two episodes before us tell us something more about the law in the new age of the kingdom. First, they well illustrate the incompatibility of this age with the new messianic age, of old wineskins and new. Jesus realises / fulfils the eschatological hope of God's rest, the Jubilee, of which the Sabbath day anticipates. This is an age when the disabled are enabled; the slave is set free. Such proclaims the inauguration / realisation of the kingdom of God.

Also, these two episodes move us from law to grace, exposing the true nature of God's law, namely, that it is shaped by the prime directive of love / compassion. "Law is not designed to prevent one from meeting needs ......... It is designed to aid and serve people ....... It was not designed to restrict one's ability to love people and meet their basic needs", Bock. The law's ultimate intention is to the benefit of humankind, cf,, Marshall. "The Sabbath is God's gift to humankind", Nolland - it provides respite in a world infested with thorns and thistles, where we have to "sweat to earn a living."

In making the move from law to grace, "Jesus is less concerned with abrogating Sabbath law, and more concerned with bringing the grace of God to concrete expression in his own ministry, not least on the Sabbath", Green. As Black puts it in his commentary, "Whereas the Pharisees in these stories seem to be very concerned with the letter of the law, Jesus is much more concerned with the spirit of, or intention of the law, that is, the reason it was given in the first place."

v] Synoptics :

See 3:1-20. Both Sabbath-day episodes stand together in the three synoptic gospels, positioned after the question on fasting. The episodes are similar, with the usual stylistic differences.

Matthew expands on the example of David, 12:5-7, and Mark adds a second saying, "the Sabbath was made for man ........", to "The Son of Man is the Lord of the Sabbath." Why would Luke leave out such an insightful saying if he was following Mark? Fitzmyer notes four minor differences between Luke and Mark, three where Luke agrees with Matthew.

On the healing of the disabled man, Matthew illustrates the saying "Is it lawful on the Sabbath to do good or to do harm?", 12:11-12. Fitzmyer notes six unique details in Luke that are not in Mark, although most are assumed. Most are clarifications of the tradition, eg., Matthew and Mark have Jesus attending a synagogue, but Luke specifies the obvious, namely, "on another Sabbath." Both Matthew and Mark stress the intention of the religious authorities to "destroy" Jesus, whereas Luke tells us that they enter into discussions with one another as to what they might do to Jesus. Has Luke softened the received tradition at this point for chronological purposes, given that the murderous plans of the authorities come later in Jesus' ministry?

vi] Exposition: A simple exposition of this passage may be found in the linked pew-level Sermon Notes.

Text - 6:1

The sign of the Sabbath - The Son of Man is Lord of the Sabbath, v1-11: i] Reaping on the Sabbath, v1-6. While walking through (beside??) the grain fields, the disciples glean some grain to eat, cf., Deut.23:24-25.

egeneto de "-" - but/and it came about, happened. Transitional; See egeneto, 1:8.

en + dat. "on" - on [a sabbath]. Temporal use of the preposition. Variant adjective deuteroprwtw/, "next."

diaporeuesqai (diaporeuomai) pres. mid. inf. "was passing through" - [he] to pass through [through grain fields]. Culy classifies this infinitive as a substantive, introducing a nominal phrase, subject of the indefinite verb "it happened", "he was passing through grain fields on the Sabbath happened." Thompson suggests that it modifies egeneto, best classified as adjectival, epexegetic, specifying what happened; "It happened that he was passing through the grain fields", TH. "He", auton, is the accusative subject of the infinitive. Note the stylistic repetition of the spatial prepositional prefix dia of the verb "to pass through."One Sabbath day it happened that Jesus was making his way through fields of corn, and his disciples fell to plucking some for themselves", Cassirer.

ywconteV (ywcw) pres. part. "rub" - [and the disciples of him were plucking and eating the heads of grain] rubbing them. The participle is probably adverbial, expressing means, "and began to eat by rubbing the heads of grain with their hands."

taiV cersin (r roV) dat. "in their hands" - in the hands. The dative is instrumental, expressing means, "with their hands", CEV.

Unlike Mark and Matthew, Luke notes that it is tineV, "certain, some", Pharisees who are critical of the behaviour of the disciples. Luke also has included Jesus in the criticism; "why are you doing (poieite, plural) .....?" - a teacher is responsible for the behaviour of his disciples. In Mark, the criticism is directed toward the disciples. Such evidences the hand of a historian in recording an extant tradition.

twn Farisaiwn (oV) gen. "of the Pharisees" - [but/and some] of the pharisees [said]. The genitive is adjectival, partitive.

o} rel. pro. "what" - [why are you doing] what = that which. The pronoun introduces a relative clause which has no antecedent, ie., a headless relative clause.

toiV sabbasin (ou) dat. "on the Sabbath" - [is not right, permissible by the law to do] on the sabbaths? The dative is adverbial, temporal.

Jesus references the time when David and his men were hungry, and so, entering the Tabernacle, they ate the consecrated bread of the presence, v3-4. Luke adds monouV, "only" to the Markan tradition - bread that is only for the priests to eat. "If David was free from the restraints of the law on that occasion, how much more the Son of Man", Stein. Luke, like Matthew, does not add Mark's "When Abiathar was high priest" (a problamatic reference, given that the high priest at the time was Ahimelech; see Abiaqar, Mk.2:26).

aokriqeiV (apokrinomai) aor. pas. part. "answered" - [and jesus] having answered [said toward them]. Attendant circumstance participle; See apokriqeiV, 1:19. Note again Luke's use of proV + acc. for an indirect object, instead of a dative.

touto pro. "-" - [have you read not] this. Demonstrative pronoun, accusative direct object of the verb "to read", referencing forward to wJV, "how .....", v4. The negation oude, used in a question, expects an affirmative answer.

oJte "when" - [what david did] when [he was hungry]. Temporal conjunction introducing a temporal clause. "Have you not read what David and his friends did when they were hungry?"

oiJ "-" - [and] the ones [with him]. The article serves as a nominalizer turning the prepositional phrase "with him" into a substantive, coordinate subject of the verb "to be hungry."

onteV (eimi) "-" - being. The variant participle is possibly added for clarification, so Thompson, possibly even drawn from Mark 2:26. With oiJ it would form a substantive, subject of the verb "to be hungry"; "and the one's being hungry with him."

wJV "-" - how. Here introducing a epexegetic clause specifying touto, "this"; "have you not read this, .........., namely that he entered into ......."

labwn (lambanw) aor. part. "taking" - [he entered into the house of god and] having taken. Attendant circumstance participle expressing action accompanying the verb "to eat"; "he took and ate the bread of the Presence." Possibly adverbial, temporal, "and after taking the bread of the Presence, he ate and gave it to those with him", so TH.

thV proqesewV (iV ewV) gen. "[the] consecrated [bread]" - [the loaves] of the presentation. The NIV takes the genitive as adjectival, attributive, limiting "loaves".

fagein (esqiw) aor. inf. "to eat" - [which is not right, possible = permissible] to eat. The infinitive serves as the subject of the indefinite verb "it is not possible"; "which to eat is not permissible." The accusative subject of the infinitive is ou}V, "which". "These being the loaves which no one but the priests are permitted to eat", Cassirer.

ei mh "-" - if not = except [only the priests]. Introducing a exceptive phrase which establishes a contrast by designating an exception.

toiV dat. "to his [companions]" - [and he gave] to the ones [with him]. The article serves as a nominalizer, turning the prepositional phrase "with him" into a substantive, dative of indirect object of the verb "to give."

In the Markan tradition, Jesus' saying is "The Sabbath was made for humankind, and not human kind for the Sabbath", NRSV, 2:27, then in the next verse Mark records the saying before us as if an editorial comment, either retained within the tradition, or added by Mark himself. His introductory wJste is probably inferential, serving to draw a logical conclusion to validate the first saying. Both Matthew and Luke simplify the tradition by recording only the saying "the Son of Man is Lord of the Sabbath." Mark's record has more going for it, but none-the-less, the Son of Man saying gets to the nub of the issue, namely that "he who is man's Lord and Representative has authority to determine its laws and use", Taylor.

autoiV dat. pro. "to them" - [and he said] to them. Dative of indirect object.

tou anqrwpou (oV) gen. "of man" - [the son] of man. The genitive is adjectival, relational. For "Son of Man" see oJ uiJoV tou anwrwpou, 5:24.

tou sabbatou (oV) gen. "of the Sabbath" - [is lord] of the sabbath. The genitive is adjectival, attributive, idiomatic / subordination, "over the Sabbath."

ii] The healing of the man with the withered hand on the Sabbath, 6:6-11. Luke adds to the Markan tradition "and on another Sabbath" to make sure that the reader gets the connection with the preceding episode. A member of the congregation that morning has a paralysed hand. Luke tells us that it was his right hand, the most important hand for the majority of people.

egeneto de "-" - but/and it became, happened. Transitional, indicating a step in the narrative to a new episode; See egeneto, 1:8.

en + dat. "on" - on [another sabbath]. Temporal use of the preposition.

eiselqein (eisercomai) aor. inf. "he went into" - [he] to enter [into the synagogue and to teach]. The syntax as for diaporeuesqai, "to pass through", v1; "and it happened that he went into a synagogue (aorist, punctiliar event) and taught (present, linear event)", TH. The accusative subject of the infinitive is auton, "he".

xhra adj. "shrivelled" - [and there was a man there and the hand of him, the right one, was] withered. Predicate adjective; "was paralysed", HCSB.

By now, the religious authorities know that Jesus is well able to heal someone, so what they want to know is where does Jesus gets his power from; is it from God or Satan? If God is the source of Jesus' power, then his life will evidence godliness; Jesus will be a law-abiding man. Here lies the problem, in the eyes of the religious authorities, Jesus tends to disregard the most sacred of God's laws, the Sabbath. So, on this day, they watch Jesus closely for further evidence so that they can bring a charge against him, for only in the case of mortal illness is medical help permissible on the Sabbath (so they say!).

iJna + subj. "for a reason" - [but/and the scribes and the pharisees were watching closely] that [they might find]. Probably serving to introduce a final clause expressing purpose, "in order that they might find ......"

kathgorein (katagorew) pres. inf. "to accuse" - a legal ground upon which to accuse. Introducing an object clause / dependent statement of perception, expressing what they were looking for.

autou gen. pro. "Jesus" - him. The genitive is adjectival, verbal, objective.

ei "if [he would heal]" - if = whether [he heals / will heal]. Here serving to introduce an indirect question. Culy notes the variant future verb qerapeusei, giving the sense "Will he heal on the Sabbath?", as opposed to the present tense qeapeuei, "Does he heal on the Sabbath?"

en + dat. "on" - on [the sabbath]. Temporal use of the preposition.

Jesus confronts his opponents and acts in accord with God's law. Luke, adding to the Markan tradition, notes that Jesus' is able to read what the religious authorities are up to. This ability is not necessarily miraculous, but it is certainly highly developed.

autwn gen. pro. "[what] they [were thinking]" - [but/and he knew the thoughts] of them. The genitive is adjectival, possessive, "their thoughts", or verbal, subjective, as NIV.

tw/ andri (r roV) dat. "to the man" - [but/and said] to the man. Dative of indirect object.

econti (ecw) dat. pres. part. "with" - having [the withered hand]. The participle is adjectival, attributive, limiting "man"; "the man who had the withered hand."

anastaV (anisthmi) aor. part. "so he got up" - [rise and stand into the middle, and] having risen up [he stood]. Attendance circumstance participle expressing action accompanying the verb "to stand"; "And he rose up and stood there", ESV. The connective kai, "and", may be consecutive, "so that"", or inferential, "so", as NIV; "Whereupon the man did rise to his feet and took up his stand", Cassirer.

The ethical principle offered by Jesus transcends legal regulations. The law is fulfilled in doing good, rather than evil. Doing nothing is evil, cf., Jam.4:17. There is no better day than the Sabbath to display goodness, for not only is it a day when we can ponder God's goodness, it anticipates the goodness of the messianic age, cf., Deut.5:12-15, Isa.56:2.

de "then" - but/and. Transitional, indicating a step in the narrative, here a change in subject, from the disabled man to Jesus. We do need to note that Luke's use of de is often less defined, eg., as a connective, sometimes coordinate, at other times adversative / contrastive.

proV + acc. "to [them]" - [jesus said] toward [them]. Lukes' use of this preposition instead of a dative of indirect object. "'I will put a question to you', Jesus said", Barclay.

ei "-" [i ask you] if = whether. Often used to introduce an indirect question, here direct, rhetorical, although as Culy notes, it may only serve "to add rhetorical force to a direct question."

agaqopoihsai (agaqopoiew) aor. inf. "to do good" - to do good [or to do evil, to save life or destroy life] is right, possible = permissible [on the sabbath]? The infinitive, along with "to do evil", "to save", and "to destroy", serves as a substantive, subject of the impersonal verb "it is permissible", but see grayai, 1:3.

v10

Jesus' opponents are obviously stunned by his ethical comment and so are left speechless. It is interesting how Luke's account doesn't mention Jesus' emotional response at this point; "Jesus looked around at them with anger and was grieved at the hardness of their heart", Mk.3:5. If Luke had a copy of Mark before him, would he leave out such a colourful fact?

peribleyamenoV (periblepw) aor. mid. part. "he looked around" - [and] having looked around [at all them]. The NIV takes this participle as attendant on the verb "to say", "looked around .... and said", but it may also be adverbial, temporal, "Then he looked around ......", Cassirer.

autw/ dat. pro. "to the man" - [he said] to him [stretch out the hand of you]. Dative of indirect object.

de "-" - but/and [he did and the hand of him was restored]. Transitional, indicating a change in subject from Jesus to the man. "And his band hand became completely well", CEV.

v11

This concluding comment probably applies to both Sabbath episodes.

anoiaV (a) gen. "were furious" - [but/and they were filled] of anger, fury, mindless rage. The genitive is adjectival, attributive, idiomatic / content; "filled full of anger."

proV + acc. "with [one another]" - [and they were discussing] toward [one another]. Here expressing association, as NIV.

a]n + opt. "-" - [they might do]. This particle, with an optative, introduces an indirect potential question, BDF #386[1], Zerwick #346.

tw/ Ihsou (oV) dat. "to Jesus" - [what] to jesus. Dative of indirect object.

Luke Introduction

TekniaGreek font download

Exegetical Commentaries

lectionarystudies.com