I HAVE a variety of questions once I read this passage. Some are straightforward matters of data: (Q) What is the “bread of the Presence”? (A) Weekly sabbath offerings of bread within the sanctuary of the Temple; (Q) Who are the Herodians? (A) No one really knows. Other questions are more interpretative: How can Jesus be indignant and grieved at the identical time (3.5)?
As they walk along, the disciples begin to pluck grain and eat it. They achieve this despite the undeniable fact that Mark has already drawn attention to the day of the week — a sabbath. So, the disciples are doing something that they knew was “unsuitable”. Jesus didn’t tell them to do it. Had he done so, we might need to conclude that he was engineering a possibility to denounce his opponents for legalism. The disciples commit this apparent sin all by themselves.
But then, like a supportive friend, Jesus stands up and takes their side. He acts as their leader, taking responsibility for his or her actions besides defending them. The Pharisees acknowledge as much once they complain to Jesus, as a substitute of on to the disciples. After all, Mark has not told us that Jesus, too, ate the grain.
But Jesus defends them by quoting scripture, and the best way during which he does this confirms that he takes responsibility for his or her actions. Perhaps he has been teaching the disciples what he now declares to the Pharisees: that “the Son of Man is lord even of the sabbath.” Perhaps he has chosen this very moment to place a principle into practice.
Now that the problem Jesus is confronting has been identified (breaking the sabbath, Exodus 20.8), Mark moves on to a second event. Reading his account is like encountering a series of prophetic “sign-actions” (have a look at Jeremiah 19 or 27-28, for examples). First, we must accept that Jesus is the Son of Man, a title that he first claimed only a couple of verses before (2.10).
The term “son of man” is utilized in the Old Testament/Hebrew Bible to mean “human being”. Isaiah and Jeremiah each use the phrase only occasionally, whereas Ezekiel does so regularly. So, when Jesus says to his critics that “the Son of Man is lord even of the sabbath,” he couldm perhapsm be referring to human beings basically having the suitable to interpret the sabbath law to suit themselves.
Whatever we make of the term “son of man” within the prophets, Mark is using it to discover one individual: namely, Jesus. By making this claim, Jesus is encouraging his critics to react to him and his ministry.
Christians consider that Jesus was (and is) the Son of Man and, subsequently, has the suitable to forgive sins; so he’s justified in making this claim and demonstrating it by his power to heal. But it continues to be surprising that he claims it so frankly. It seems odd when set beside the constant theme of the “messianic secret” — Mark’s ever-present warning to the few to not share the Lord’s wonders and signs with others, with the numerous.
Having staked a claim to be Lord of the sabbath, Jesus now proceeds to disclose a bit of what which means in practice. The man who has a withered hand will still have a withered hand the subsequent day unless any individual, in some way, helps him. So there are really two questions within the little story. First, why does Jesus heal the person? Second, why does he heal him there after which, as a substitute of waiting until the sabbath is over?
We shouldn’t confuse Jesus’s emotions along with his reasons. Yes, he’s each indignant and sad since the Pharisees cannot explain their attitude but still cling to it. But the rationale that he heals the person shouldn’t be to make a theological point, but to set a fellow human being free from suffering.
Luke gives the same picture of Jesus’s reasoning within the story of a lady who had been crippled for a few years: “Ought not this woman, a daughter of Abraham whom Satan certain for eighteen long years, be let loose from this bondage on the sabbath day?” (13.16).
Jesus responds immediately. He refuses to let laws that were designed as a blessing for humankind turn into, as a substitute, a burden. Finally, his opponents no less than have the grace to be ashamed.
