Sermon Tone Analysis

COMPASSION 19

COMPASSION VERSUS THE LAW

Matthew 12:1-8

(cmpas19.doc)

In our last message on compassion, we analyzed the tremendous compassion of Jehovah God, which He demonstrated towards sinners in the ministry of Jesus Christ.

In that message, we covered one of the two places where the Greek word /eleos/ is translated "compassion."

This particular word is translated "compassion" only one other time in the Bible:  in Matthew 12:1-8.

Turn there with me please?

Here we shall see the Pharisees trying to trap Jesus again.

Follow along with me in your Bibles as I read this for us.

/(Let's use our narrative format to plumb the depths of this story.

First of all let's consider:)/

 

I.

THE CIRCUMSTANCES (OR SETTING).

"At that time" must refer to the time when He was preaching and giving the great invitation of Matthew 11:28.

It is hard to ascertain exactly what time Matthew is referring to, but it is unimportant because the situation is classic.

At whatever time this is, Jesus and His disciples were passing through some grainfields on the Sabbath.

As they were passing through, His disciples became hungry and began to pick the heads of grain and eat them.

The most important thing to know here is that they were picking heads of grain on the Sabbath.

/(We now know the circumstances, but we need to know:)/

 

II.

THE CHARACTERS.

The two main characters of any story are usually the protagonist or hero and the antagonist or villain.

1.

The Protagonist Is Jesus Christ.

He is portrayed through His own words and thoughts.

He defended the actions of the disciples.

He explained their actions in the light of historical, religious, and Biblical precedence.

He stated His own importance, and He rebuked the Pharisees.

/(But all of this will have little meaning if you do not understand the antagonists in this story.)/

\\ 2.      The Antagonists Are The Pharisees.

The Pharisees were a religious party or school among the Jews at the time of Christ.

The word `Pharisee' means `separated'.

The Pharisees believed in being separated from anything that was common or unclean.

They were the legalists.

They multiplied the laws surrounding the Ten Commandments until there were approximately 613 minute laws to deal with.

Who could remember 613 laws, much less obey them.

The Pharisees were in violent opposition to the ministry and claims of Jesus Christ.

They were trying to discredit Jesus and refute His claim to being the Messiah, The Son of God.

They tried to do this by complaining to Jesus about the behavior of His disciples.

They asserted that what His disciples were doing was unlawful to do on the Sabbath day.

They were saying, in essence, "If you are the Son of God, you should know the Law; and if you know the Law, you should not allow your disciples to break the Law of the Sabbath."

/(Can't you feel the suspense rising?

Alright, we know the circumstances and the characters, so we are ready to explore:)/

 

III.

THE CONFLICT (ACTION OR PLOT).

Interest is generated in this story by the suspense surrounding how Jesus will respond to the Pharisees' accusation.

They were accusing the disciples, and hence Jesus, of working by picking heads of grain on the Sabbath day.

The law that they are referring to is found in

 

Exodus 20:8-10, "Remember the Sabbath day, to keep it holy.

Six days you shall labor and do all your work, but the seventh day is a Sabbath of the Lord your God; /in it/ you shall not do any work, you or your son or your daughter, your male or female servant or your cattle or your sojourner who stays with you."

But the disciples were not doing anything wrong by picking their neighbor's grain, because this is covered in

 

Deuteronomy 23:25, "When you enter you neighbor's standing grain, then you may pluck the heads with your hand, but you shall not wield a sickle in your neighbor's standing grain."

Yet the Pharisees, obviously, interpreted the disciples plucking heads with their hands as wielding the sickle on standing grain, or that even plucking heads of grain on the Sabbath Day was forbidden.

\\ /(As we did in our last message, we can learn more about the conflict of this narrative by reviewing the various classes of conflict in a narrative.

Before us we see:)/

 

1.

Character Conflict.

Here before us is a classic character conflict.

The conflict is between the disciples of Jesus and the Pharisees.

They were in constant opposition to all that Jesus Christ was and did in His life on earth.

We will have people like that in our lives, if we engage in worthwhile ministry.

/(We also see here:)/

 

2.

Moral~/Spiritual Conflict.

The moral~/spiritual conflict here is between the law and mercy, it is between sacrifice versus compassion.

Even though modern Christians often overlook this important element of their lives, we face the same moral~/spiritual conflict every day of our lives!

In this case morality and spirituality are equal, because the moral thing to do is likewise the spiritual thing to do.

This is not always the case.

In some cases human morality does not attain to or match up with Biblical spirituality, but it does in this case.

Every day of our lives we face a conflict between law and mercy, sacrifice and compassion.

We shall explore this more in a minute.

/(We can also see:)/

 

3.

Choice Or Test Conflict.

Before us is a mental or psychological test.

The Pharisees continually tested Jesus with questions and accusations about the Law of Moses - concerning which they were the supposed experts.

They were looking for some way to trap or discredit Jesus and His ministry.

Jesus defends the actions of His disciples with three arguments:

 

Argument #1:      He draws His first argument from the actions of David and his companions when they were hungry and on the run from Saul.

They entered the house of God and ate the shewbread, which only the priests were supposed to eat.

The principle is that extreme need overruled this particular law.

The priests of the house of God understood this and allowed the action.

\\         When will we understand that extreme need should overrule some legalistic practices?

I know that many of us don't believe in helping other people out.

We believe what Paul said, "If you don't work, you don't eat?"

But the extreme need of people around you should at times overrule your legalism and impress you to be merciful!

This does not mean sinning against the laws of God, but understanding that some laws are outdated and updated by grace!!!  Sometimes we bend church rules, when extreme need is indicated.

Compassion is a greater principle than keeping the law, when extreme need is present.

Argument #2:      A second illustration shows that the law of Sabbath rest was not absolute, for the priests were required by the very same law to work on the Sabbath (Numbers 28:9-10).

If the priests can be guiltless in working on the Sabbath for the furthering of temple worship, how much more are the disciples guiltless in using the Sabbath for the work of Christ, who is the reality to which the Temple pointed.

(Wycliffe)

        "The observance of the Sabbath is, in great measure, /ceremonial/, or Jesus would not have drawn an argument from the /shewbread/.

The Priests were especially bound to maintain the law, yet in this matter are especially excepted or exempted."

(Bengal)  Why?

Because the Sabbath laws gave way to the temple.

What was being done in the temple was greater that what was being done on the Sabbath.

The worship in the temple was greater than the ritual of the Sabbath.

The argument of Jesus is that even as the Sabbath gives way to the temple, the literal temple on earth gives way to the true, spiritual Temple, Jesus Christ.

Something greater than the earthly temple was on earth at the time, and that was Jesus Christ the true, spiritual Temple to which the earthly temple was pointing.

The earthly temple which housed the Presence of God in the Holy of holies, must give way to the real temple or permanent dwelling place of God.

Therefore, the laws of the earthly temple were abrogated, made null and void by the True Temple, Jesus Christ.

The type gives way to the antitype.

The picture gives way to the object.