For example, the Rule of Law as given to Moses by God when genuinely followed by ancient Israelites was a noble and beneficial concept originally given as an instrument for establishing and maintaining right relationships between God and his people and among the people themselves. But pushed to the fanatical extreme to which the Pharisees pressed it—whereby the Rule of Law was transformed into an arid, crippling, and hypocritical legalism—it became a barrier, not a means, to right relations with God and a burden instead of a boon to the people—the very opposite of the results that it was originally intended to produce.
With respect to Sabbath observance, Jesus dealt with the extreme interpretations and practices of the Pharisees in three distinct ways.
First, he demonstrated his personal disapproval of and opposition to the Pharisaic teachings and practices of Sabbath observance by personally violating certain of their teachings on this subject and defending his followers for doing likewise. For example, on five separate occasions as recorded in the Gospels, Jesus deliberately and publicly performed acts of healing on the Sabbath despite the accusations and protestations of the Pharisees that this constituted Sabbath breaking.87 On another occasion, he stoutly defended the actions of his disciples, who had plucked some ears of grain on the Sabbath day to satisfy their hunger, again over the objections of the Pharisees that this constituted “work” and was therefore to be condemned.88
Second, Jesus drew a distinction between the spirit and the letter of the law, maintaining that acts of mercy (healing) and acts of necessity (satisfying hunger) were completely within the spirit of the law, which the Pharisees were violating and quenching by their extreme interpretations and extensions of the letter of the law.
Third, he taught that the proper practice of Sabbath observance required an understanding of the original design and purpose of such practices and the need for adjustments to conserve that design and purpose under changing circumstances.
Original Design and the Necessity of Change in Order to Conserve
Concerning the original purpose of the Sabbath, Jesus taught his early followers that “the Sabbath was made for man, not man for the Sabbath” and that “it is lawful to do good on the Sabbath.”89
As Bruce observed,
The key to all Christ’s teaching on the Sabbath, therefore, lies in His conception of the original design of that divine institution … His doctrine was this: The Sabbath was meant to be a boon to man, not a burden; it was not a day taken from man by God in an exacting spirit, but a day given by God in mercy to man—God’s holiday to His subject; all legislation enforcing its observance having for its end to insure that all should really get the benefit of the boon—that no man should rob himself, and still less his fellow-creatures, of the gracious boon.90
Jesus also claimed the right for himself, and ultimately for his followers, to alter the practice of the Sabbath to ensure that it continued to serve its original purpose.91 Such alterations eventually included opposing any man-made regulations that diverted the Sabbath from that purpose, expanding its observance to Gentile believers, giving it a new name, and even changing the day of its observance.
In dealing with Sabbath observance in this way, Jesus practised and illustrated one of the most important principles of managing orderly and constructive change—conserving the original rationale and purpose of a practice or institution while simultaneously changing it in certain ways to accommodate new demands and circumstances. At first blush, we may think that the idea of conserving something by changing it is illogical and contradictory. But Jesus, particularly in relation to Sabbath observance, teaches us that conservation and change can be, and in some instances must be, complementary.
In criticizing the Pharisaic approach to the law (including laws governing the Sabbath), Jesus made it clear that it was not his intention to destroy the Law; rather it was his intention, by reinterpreting and changing its application, to fulfill the Law.92 Achieving and maintaining this balance between conservation and change are more easily done if the defenders of the old and the advocates of the new recognize and appreciate their respective roles in conserving and adapting the institution to changing conditions, i.e., see their roles as complementary rather than adversarial.
As Bruce plaintively asks, “When will young men and old men, liberals and conservatives, broad Christians and narrow, learn to bear with one another; yea, to recognize each in the other the necessary complement of [their] own one-sidedness?”93
Implications for Us
1. Unlearning and learning
When we come to Jesus we should be open to unlearning and learning under his tutelage. The disciples all had their faults, but to their immense credit they were teachable, open to the unlearning and learning that Jesus had to offer. Which raises the question, are we? Most of us are much more highly and broadly educated than the disciples. This should be a blessing, but it may also render us less open to the teaching and influence of Jesus because we think we know. Unlearning often needs to precede learning on both the religious and political fronts.
In my own case, for example, I grew up with a fairly narrow conception of what the Christian faith was about, namely that it was primarily the means to my own personal spiritual well-being and salvation. If I had been one of the disciples and held this one-dimensional conception of faith, my unlearning and learning under the tutelage of Jesus would likely have included,
• Unlearning the narrowness and singularity of this vertical perspective of faith without in any way abandoning the importance and necessity of a personal relationship to God through Jesus.
• Learning to expand my conception and experience of the faith to include its horizontal and social dimensions, i.e., adding the crossbar of the cross to my vertical upright.
On the other hand, if you grew up with a conception of the faith that focused exclusively on its social and horizontal dimension but with little or no appreciation of the necessity of attending to your own personal relationship to God through Christ, your learning and unlearning experience under his tutelage might be the reverse but equally necessary.
2. Visiting the dark side of the moon
As previously mentioned, Jesus’ approach to guarding his initial followers against the extreme teachings and practices of the Pharisees illustrates the merit of taking a hard look at the dark side of the moon—the image and results of pushing any philosophy of life to its extreme—and utilizing that visualization as a warning and a caution to avoid the negative and destructive aspects of that extreme.
Jesus’ use of this approach provides us with an excellent example of how to guard religious believers today against the extremes to which we in our age are susceptible. But this approach is also highly applicable to guarding political ideologues and activists against the dangers of political extremism.
Political pragmatists, for example, proud of not being committed to any ideology or fixed set of principles and striving only to do the right thing under the