MOST POPULAR POSTS

Friday, June 28, 2024

SEVENTH-DAY ADVENTISTS ANSWERED VERSE-BY-VERSE ON JOHN 5:18: "JESUS BREAKING THE SABBATH": WHY ISN'T JUST AN ACCUSATION FROM THE JEWS?"


John 5:18 (ESV)
"This was why the Jews were seeking all the more to kill him, because not only was he breaking the Sabbath, but he was even calling God his own Father, making himself equal with God."



SEVENTH-DAY ADVENTISTS ARGUMENTS:

#1.) From Ellen G. White

"Jesus claimed equal rights with God in doing a work equally sacred, and of the same character with that which engaged the Father in heaven. But the Pharisees were still more incensed. He had not only broken the law, according to their understanding, but in calling God “His own Father” had declared Himself equal with God. John 5:18, R. V. DA 207.3"[1]

#2.) From SDA Bible Commentary

"5:18 broke the Sabbath. “The Jews” in John’s Gospel are unreliable witnesses. This charge is false (see note on v. 10). making … God. The “making” part of this charge is also false."[2]


#3.) From SDA Debaters

"Jesus broke only the Jewish halakhic interpretation of the Sabbath of the Rabbis, not the Biblical Sabbath"

ANSWER:

The SDAs use many arguments to deny that Jesus truly broke the Sabbath in John 5:18. At first glance, their efforts seem commendable and noble because it is natural for Christians to believe that the Lord Jesus would naturally be obedient to His Father's will in heaven. For the SDAs, anyone who says that Jesus broke the Sabbath according to John 5:18 is on the side of the Jews who persecuted Jesus and is an ally of God's enemies. On the other hand, the SDAs believe they are on Jesus' side, and this, according to them, is strong evidence that the true followers of Jesus today are the Seventh-day Adventists because they side with Jesus and not with His enemies regarding the Sabbath issue. They use certain Bible texts to counter the conclusion that Jesus broke the Sabbath according to John 5:18. For example Matthew 5:17 (ESV): 

Do not think that I have come to abolish the Law or the Prophets; I have not come to abolish them but to fulfill them."

Initially, their argument about Matthew 5:17 appears valid. However, a closer examination reveals a misinterpretation of the text. Jesus is not referring to the Ten Commandments or the Sabbath in this verse. Instead, He speaks of fulfilling the prophecies and writings about Him in the Old Testament Scriptures. Notice what Jesus says at the beginning of Matthew 5:17: "Do not think that I have come to abolish the Law or the Prophets." In this verse, Jesus did not mention the Sabbath or the Ten Commandments. Instead, He referred to "the Law or the Prophets." SDAs often misinterpret this passage, stopping at "Law" and not continuing to "or the Prophets," implying that Jesus would not abolish the Ten Commandments, particularly the Sabbath. However, this is not what He was saying. The question now is, what did Jesus mean by the words "the Law or the Prophets"? According to the SDA Bible Commentary, "the Law or the Prophets" was a technical term commonly used by Jews during Jesus' time to refer to the Old Testament Scriptures: "The expression 'the law and the prophets' represents a twofold division of the OT Scriptures."[4] When Jesus said He would fulfill and not abolish, He was not specifically referring to the Ten Commandments or the Sabbath but rather to the entire Old Testament Scriptures.

Many prophecies about Jesus have yet to be fulfilled and will happen in the future, such as His second coming. This is why He said in verse 18: "For truly, I say to you, until heaven and earth pass away, not an iota, not a dot, will pass from the Law until all is accomplished" (Matthew 5:18, ESV). Only "Law" is mentioned here, not "Law or the Prophets," but it still refers to the Old Testament Scriptures. This is connected to the argument in verse 17 about "Law or the Prophets," which refers to the Old Testament Scriptures. This is called synecdoche, a figure of speech in which a part represents the whole.[5]

Accusation by the Jews?

Another argument frequently used by the SDAs to defend the interpretation that Jesus did not break the Sabbath according to John 5:18 is that this was merely an accusation by the Jews. They argue that what Jesus actually broke was their incorrect interpretation of how to observe the Sabbath according to their traditions, which were not supported by the Scriptures. When I was an SDA apologist, my argument was to point out that Jesus did not break the biblical Sabbath but challenged their additional interpretations of how the Sabbath should be observed. The frequent clashes between Jesus and the Jewish leaders were indeed about the proper way to observe the Sabbath, not the Sabbath itself. To understand what I mean, let's examine the context of the controversial text in John 5:18. It concerns a man who had been an invalid for 38 years and was healed by the Lord Jesus at a place called Bethesda near the Sheep Gate in Jerusalem. 

Let's read the events in John 5:6-10:

John 5:6-10 (ESV) 6 When Jesus saw him lying there and knew that he had already been there a long time, he said to him, “Do you want to be healed?” 7 The sick man answered him, “Sir, I have no one to put me into the pool when the water is stirred up, and while I am going another steps down before me.” 8 Jesus said to him, “Get up, take up your bed, and walk.” 9 And at once the man was healed, and he took up his bed and walked. Now that day was the Sabbath. 10 So the Jews said to the man who had been healed, “It is the Sabbath, and it is not lawful for you to take up your bed.”

The man who was once considered invalid does not claim that carrying his bed on the Sabbath is allowed, nor does Jesus argue that the Jews have misinterpreted the Sabbath law. John explicitly states that Jesus was breaking the Sabbath (John 5:18). Both Jesus and the healed man were in violation of the Sabbath, as Jesus instructed the man to carry the bed. This scenario signifies a conflict of authority between Jesus and the Mosaic law, rather than between Jesus and the Jewish interpretation. The man's bed likely included a pad for comfort and multiple blankets for warmth, similar to typical bedding. This bed would qualify as a "load," which is prohibited on the Sabbath according to Jeremiah 17:27, based on the Mosaic law, not the Jewish Halakha.

Jeremiah 17:27 (ESV) "But if you do not listen to me, to keep the Sabbath day holy, and not to bear a burden and enter by the gates of Jerusalem on the Sabbath day, then I will kindle a fire in its gates, and it shall devour the palaces of Jerusalem and shall not be quenched."

There seems to be no valid reason for carrying it on that day; Jesus could have healed him and instructed him to retrieve it after sunset. This suggests that Jesus intentionally chose to heal on the Sabbath and asked the man to perform an action that violated Sabbath law. The Pharisees had knowledge of the ancient covenant story where a man was found gathering sticks on the Sabbath and was stoned to death as a consequence of God's command for this offense (Numbers 15:32-36). One might justify a man carrying sticks before justifying a man carrying his pallet, but the latter becomes inexcusable because he did it under the direct command of Jesus. It is believed that the man gathering sticks was likely doing so out of human necessity, such as staying warm or preparing food. In contrast, the story does not provide a valid reason for why the man had to carry his bed away on the Sabbath day. Therefore, when strictly following the Old Testament Sabbath laws, the Jewish leaders seemed to be upholding the exact requirements of the law.

It's important to highlight that Jesus did not attempt to justify his acts of healing or his instruction to “Get up, take up your bed, and walk.” within the confines of Sabbath law. Instead, he boldly affirmed that both he and his Father were working—a clear violation of Sabbath law. Jesus then shifted the focus of the discussion from Sabbath transgression to his close relationship with his Father. The Jewish rabbis correctly understood that God's rest on the seventh day of creation did not preclude his ongoing work of sustaining the universe.

Now it is clear that Jesus intentionally chose to heal the man who had been invalid for 38 years on the Sabbath day. Furthermore, Jesus also deliberately instructed the healed man to carry his mat and walk home on the same Sabbath day, which, according to the Jews, violated the Sabbath based on Mosaic law (Jeremiah 17:27) and their oral tradition (Mishnah Shabbat 7.2). This clearly disproves the Seventh-day Adventists' belief that Jesus' violation of the Sabbath in John 5:18 was merely an accusation by the Jews and not true.  We also understand that our conclusion about John 5:18 does not contradict their frequent claim that Christ would not "abolish" the "law" but fulfill it. What Jesus meant by fulfilling the law until heaven and earth pass away refers to the prophecies in the Old Testament Scriptures concerning Him.


Reasons why Jesus need to "Break" the Jewish Sabbath

1.) The Jewish weekly Sabbath is merely a ceremonial law.

There are a few important points to consider to understand that the Sabbath is a ceremonial law, not a moral law. Christ used examples of ceremonial laws to defend His "breaking" of the Sabbath.

a.) David and his companions ate the "bread of the Presence" placed in the Holy Place of the Temple. According to the law of Moses, only priests were allowed to eat it. However, David and his companions eating it was not considered a sin (Matt.12:3-4).

b.) The priests violate the Sabbath every time they serve in the Temple due to the quantity and weight of their duties. However, they are not considered guilty for doing so. (Matt. 12:5)

In this instance, I want to emphasize that Jesus did indeed break the Sabbath because He used examples of God's servants in the Old Testament who also transgressed the law but, like Christ, remained without sin. In simpler terms, Jesus justified his breaking of the Jewish Sabbath, asserting that he did not sin, much like David and the priests who transgressed the law without incurring sin. Essentially, Jesus said to the Pharisees, "Why do you judge me for breaking the Sabbath law when David also transgressed the law, and likewise, the temple priests violated the Sabbath, yet you do not accuse them of sin?"

In the context of John 5:18, it is crucial to highlight that Jesus did not seek to justify his healing actions or his command to "Get up, pick up your mat, and walk" as compliant with Sabbath law. Instead, he confidently affirmed that both He and His Father were actively working, actions explicitly prohibited by Sabbath law (John 5:16-18). Jesus then shifted the focus from the violation of Sabbath law to his intimate relationship with His Father. The Jewish rabbis correctly understood that God's rest on the seventh day after creation did not encompass His ongoing task of sustaining the universe. Just as the work of sustaining creation exceeds the demands of Sabbath law, so does Christ's work of redemption transcend the Pharisees' Sabbath regulations and the literal interpretation of Old Testament Sabbath laws.

The purpose of redemption is to restore the conditions that existed on the initial seventh day when God rested. The explicit language and literary style lead us to affirm that both assertions—that Jesus was breaking or disregarding the Sabbath and referring to God as His own Father—were accurate. These truths were the reasons why the Jews were resolutely determined to kill Jesus.

2.) The Jewish weekly Sabbath is merely a shadow

Jesus' breaking of the Sabbath serves to prepare the minds of both the Jews and his disciples that the Sabbath they have long observed is merely a temporary shadow, part of the ceremonial aspect of Moses' law in the Old Covenant that is soon to pass away. As the promised Messiah in the Old Covenant, the Lamb of God who takes away the sins of the world (John 1:29; Colossians 2:16-17). 

Colossians 2:16-17 (TLB) "16 So don’t let anyone criticize you for what you eat or drink, or for not celebrating Jewish holidays and feasts or new moon ceremonies or Sabbaths. 17 For these were only temporary rules that ended when Christ came. They were only shadows of the real thing—of Christ himself."

Jesus will offer them true daily rest for their souls and deliverance from sin. This is clearly illustrated in the Scriptures by how Jesus prepares the minds of the people, as seen in the context of Matthew 12 and Mark 2. Before Matthew recounts the encounter of Jesus and his disciples with the Pharisees regarding plucking grains on the Sabbath (Matt. 12:1-2), he first describes the rest that Jesus offers to people in Matthew 11:28-30:

Matthew 11:28 - 12:2 (ESV) 28 Come to me, all who labor and are heavily laden, and I will give you rest. 29 Take my yoke upon you, and learn from me, for I am gentle and lowly in heart, and you will find rest for your souls. 30 For my yoke is easy, and my burden is light.” 1 At that time Jesus went through the grainfields on the Sabbath. His disciples were hungry, and they began to pluck heads of grain and to eat. 2 But when the Pharisees saw it, they said to him, “Look, your disciples are doing what is not lawful to do on the Sabbath.”

In Mark's gospel account, before he details the encounter of Jesus with the Pharisees in the grainfield on the Sabbath, he first presents Jesus' teachings on New Wine and Old Wineskins. 

Mark 2:21-24 (ESV) 21 No one sews a piece of unshrunk cloth on an old garment. If he does, the patch tears away from it, the new from the old, and a worse tear is made. 22 And no one puts new wine into old wineskins. If he does, the wine will burst the skins—and the wine is destroyed, and so are the skins. But new wine is for fresh wineskins.” One Sabbath he was going through the grainfields, and as they made their way, his disciples began to pluck heads of grain. 24 And the Pharisees were saying to him, “Look, why are they doing what is not lawful on the Sabbath?”

According to the SDA Bible Commentary, "new wine" represents the gospel, while "old wineskins" refers to the teachings of Judaism.

"The representation of the gospel by “new wine” and its work by the process of fermentation resembles in essence the parable of the leaven but emphasizes a different result (see Matt. 13:33). The “new wine” represents the vital truth of God at work in the hearts of men ... Jesus’ revolutionary teachings could not be reconciled with the reactionary dogmas of Judaism. Any effort to contain Christianity within the dead forms of Judaism, that is, to unite the two by forcing Christianity to take the shape of, and be reconciled to it, would prove in vain. ...The attempt to unite the new with the old would result in two-fold destruction. The “wine” of the gospel would be “spilled,” and the “bottles” of Judaism would be “marred." [6]

The theologians of the Seventh-day Adventist Church explain that Jesus' point about New Wine and Old Wineskins clearly illustrates the lack of harmony and compatibility between the teachings of the New Testament and the doctrines of Judaism, including the broader law and specific observances like the Sabbath. They emphasize that "Jesus’ radical teachings could not coexist with the conservative doctrines of Judaism." Therefore, it should come as no surprise that Jesus continued to challenge ceremonial requirements such as the weekly Sabbath. This is why Jesus invited heavily burdened Jews, including those bound by the yoke of the Mosaic Law, including the Sabbath (Acts 15:10), to find spiritual rest that is only available through Him (Matthew 11:28-30). This invitation also extends to our beloved Seventh-day Adventists, who have yet to fully embrace the truth of the New Testament gospel of Christ.

Conclusion: 

Upon thorough examination of the Scriptures, we understand that John 5:18 indicates that Jesus did indeed violate the Jewish Sabbath and it is not a mere Jewish accusation. Drawing from Jesus's actions and arguments, it is evident that Jesus purposefully chose to heal the man who had been invalid for 38 years on the Sabbath day. Additionally, Jesus instructed the healed man to carry his bed and walk home on the same Sabbath day, actions perceived as Sabbath violations by the Jews according to Mosaic law (Jeremiah 17:27) and their oral tradition (Mishnah Shabbat 7.2). Jesus defended these Sabbath violations by referencing instances such as the priests' activities on the Sabbath, which did not amount to sin (Matt. 12:5).

Our Seventh-day Adventist friends need to understand that we do not claim Jesus sinned by breaking the Sabbath. That is not our assertion. If the priests in the temple can perform their duties on the Sabbath without sinning, then certainly Jesus Christ, who is greater than the Temple and the Lord over the Sabbath, did not sin. 

My prayer is that Seventh-day Adventists may grasp this truth and realize that accepting Jesus ended the weekly Sabbath allows them to focus on the Savior of their souls without sinning.

Jesus clearly regarded the Sabbath as a ritual or ceremonial law that foreshadowed Him, fulfilling its intended purpose. Examining this incident holistically, it appears Jesus aimed to redirect the focus of Jewish leaders from old covenant laws to Himself as the new reference point for life and judgment. In doing so, Jesus undertook significant personal risk to establish Himself as the central figure for life and judgment in the new covenant.


Footnotes:

[1] Ellen Gould White, The Desire of Ages, (Mountain View, CA: Pacific Press Publishing Association, 1898), 207.

[2] Dybdahl, Jon L., editor. Andrews Study Bible Notes. Andrews University Press, 2010, p. 1386.

[3] Also used by Dr. Samuele Bacchiocchi in his book Sabbath Under Crossfire p. 154

[4] Nichol, Francis D., editor. The Seventh-Day Adventist Bible Commentary. Review and Herald Publishing Association, 1980, p. 331.

[5] Friberg, Timothy, and Barbara Friberg. Analytical Lexicon of the Greek New Testament.  2023.

[6] Seventh-day Bible Commentary Volume 5 on Mark 2:21-22



No comments:

Post a Comment