Sabbath, why the change in the sacredness of the Sabbath?

by jam 7 Replies latest jw friends

• 

  jam

  You may recall a poor fellow was put to death for

  gathering sticks on the Sabbath. Numbers 15:32 the LORD

  told Moses, "the man shall be put to death, the congregation

  brought him outside the camp and pummeled him to death with stones.

  A little extreme don,t you agree, the poor guy was just gathering sticks,

  it,s not like he was building the Golden Calf.

  Ok, now we come to Jesus, Matt 2:23-28. Jesus working on the

  Sabbath but because he is the Son of man is lord even of the sabbath.

  Fine I understand that, the sabbath doesn,t apply to him, but he

  speaks about David (1 Samuel 21;1-6) David enter the house of God

  on the sabbath and ate the bread of the Presence which was not lawful

  to eat.

  So we go from getting stone to death for picking up sticks on the sabbath,

  eating sacred bread on the sabbath and openly working in the fields

  gathering food on the sabbath.

  What happen, why did God change? Look folks it,s no big deal to

  work on the sabbath.

  In so many ways, the God of the Bible is just like the borg, today

  you may get DF for some offense but 5 years down the line the

  same offense is a conscience matter.
• 

  NeonMadman

  My sense about the guy gathering sticks on the Sabbath is that an example was being made. The penalty for breaking the Sabbath had been established as being death (Ex. 31:15). This was the first violation that we are aware of; I think it probable that the letter of the Law was carried out to demonstrate the seriousness with which the Law needed to be taken. We also don't know the extent of the violation. Was the man picking up a few sticks that he needed for an individual fire, or was he doing a day's work, ignoring the Sabbath entirely? Either was prohibited, but the latter might have presented an aggravating factor.

  A similar case might be that of Ananias and Sapphira. Clearly, liars are not routinely stricken down by God, but this was a case of a flagrant deception at the very beginning of the Christian church, and an example needed to be made so as to generate a proper fear of violating God's laws.

  Throughout the history of Israel, the Law tended to be often forgotten. There were long periods when the festivals such as the Passover and Feast of Tabernacles were not even celebrated. As JWs, we tended to think that the Law was enforced fairly consistently throughout Israel's history, but this was not the case. Times where the Law was consistently kept were few and far between.

  By the time of Christ, the Roman Empire had removed the right of the Jews to impose the death penalty for the violation of their laws (John 18:31). Any capital case had to be brought before the Roman authorities. So there would be no executing of anyone for Sabbath-breaking alone.

  When Jesus called Himself "Lord of the Sabbath," I don't believe that He was simply saying that He was not subject to the Law; He was saying that He was the God who had given the Sabbath and the other Laws to Israel in the first place. A JW would never read it that way, of course. As such, Jesus was more qualified than anyone else to speak about what the intent of the Law was. And He said, "The Sabbath was made for man, not man for the Sabbath." The Sabbath was never intended as a burdensome religious ritual (as the Pharisees had made it) but as a time of rest and refreshment and of worship. The ritualistic aspect of the Sabbath was not of more importance than human life. As David and his men had eaten the otherwise forbidden showbread in a time of extreme need, it was permissible for Jesus' disciples to pick heads of grain (note - not doing harvest labor, just picking what they needed for their immediate survival). The Pharisees had made nit-picky laws about the Sabbath that would have prohibited even this minor effort, but those man-made laws exceeded what the Law of Moses required. Jesus, as the true authority - the Lawgiver - was within His authority to pronounce what the requirements of the Law actually were. It wasn't that the Law was different now, it was that the Jews had added many detailed ritualistic rules that were never part of the Law to begin with.

  As an aside, one familiar with JW teaching might gain some insight on the taking of blood transfusions from this principle regarding the Sabbath.
• 

  jam

  Thanks NeonMadman for your opinion, but the point

  I was trying to make you touched on it. By the time of Christ

  the right of the Jews to impose the death penalty for the violation

  of the Laws were removed by the Roman Empire.

  God was very clear on this matter, no exception, you die for

  what ever reason. Somewhere down the line someone realize

  the sabbath was not of more importance than human life.(thank God).

  Did the Roman Empire think, look folks you can not kill people

  because they work on the Sabbath, that,s barbaric, insane.

  So who changed the law, the Romans? Maybe that,s why you

  did not have many converts to Judaism, barbaric religion.
• 

  mP

  Because like all good xians, JW, xians pick which ever scriptures they want to read and ignore the dumb ones. Even Jesus said in Mat 5:18 that the Mosaic Law was perfect and would last forever, nobody remembers that.
• 

  NeonMadman

  Just ran across this on one of the blogs I follow:

  Death Penalty for Picking Up Sticks?
• 

  wha happened?

  They stated sticks, so obviously he was going to cook something. Is that work to? Providing for one's self = death. This is what the WT uses as an excuse to tell people not to work, or get an edumacification. God kills those who help themselves.
• 

  Emery

  I prefer to read about the God of the New Testament. The OT God is very insecure, jealous, and narcissistic. The Old Testament portrayal of Yahweh displays a more human personality, that which you find among dictators. No wonder Marcion of Sinople said the OT God couldn't have been the God of Jesus, it doesn't add up. You either are love, or you are not. Your history either backs up love and forgiveness or it doesn't. Of course I am agnostic and have lost my faith in much of the bible, but I do respect and live by many of it's christian principles.
• 

  Sulla

  I would think Designs has some sort of useful observation, given his association with rabbis of various stripes.