Was Jesus a Rule Breaker?
![]() |
Pic by Jakayla Toney |
IT'S HARD TO ARGUE that Jesus didn't break any rules in his day―breakages
he never apologised for. Some of his more well-known misdemeanours involved forbidden
Sabbath activities.
So
the Jewish leaders said to the man who had been healed,
“It
is the Sabbath; the law forbids you to carry your mat.”’
But
he replied, “The man who made me well said to me,
‘Pick
up your mat and walk.’” -John 5
Halakha
(Jewish law) identifies thirty-nine categories of activity prohibited on the
Sabbath. Jesus broke several of these getting both himself and his followers in
troubles with the boys who liked to think they had more authority to wield then
what God had given to them. We see his disciples following his lead after Christ
had left the scene in the years following. When the civic leaders of Jerusalem
told the disciples to stop holding their large meeting outside the temple, they
replied, ‘We must obey God rather than man.’
Compliant Christ?
But just
before you think Jesus was trying to be the bad boy of early rabbinic Judaism,
we see he also obeyed laws when he didn’t have to. In Matthew 17.24, the
disciples encounter a tax that Jesus seems to say is illegitimate. Yet Jesus
pays it anyway. Why? ‘So that we may not offend.’
What
should we make of this? First, Jesus questions the legitimacy of this tax. Then
he pays it because he doesn’t want to offend. Is this the same Jesus who offended
numerous other times in breaking the hand washing, grain picking, and healing rules?
Why break those but not this one? Why cause offence in one situation but not in
another?
One
might also call to mind Paul who, upon his return from a foreign mission trip,
submitted to a burdensome one-week quarantine in the temple in order not to offend
certain Jews (Acts 21.24-26). Is this the same Paul who caused riots elsewhere?
Are Paul and Jesus inconsistent?
What’s
more, where does this leave Christians? When the government misuses its authority
(or presumes more than what God has granted it) should Christians comply or
resist?
Discernment
Discernment
comes with maturity. Spiritual maturity is more than age or years lived as a Christian. This maturity is produced by a history of right responses to the Holy Spirit. When
we have this maturity, the prioritises of God’s Kingdom become our priorities.
When faced with a decision of whether to comply with or resist a law, we look to see what
is best for the Kingdom. Sometimes it’s best not to offend. At other times, offensive rulebreaking might be best for the advance of the gospel.
Scripture
says to ‘honour the king’. We always want to speak well of the Prime Minister
or President even when we, in good conscience, cannot comply with a particular law.
We might think of Daniel, who refused to eat the king’s food, but who respectfully
expressed this decision. We don’t join the social media mobs in mocking authority
figures. We obey magistrates when doing so doesn’t interfere with the calls
Christ gives us.
When
civil law interferes with the calls of Christ, however, we put Christ first. Even
respectful Daniel's friends were thrown into the fire pit shortly after the food incident for
failing to comply with a law about kneeling to a statue.
Paul
and Jesus sometimes broke the rules because those rules stood in the way of
gospel advancement. Jesus saw some of these laws as ‘heavy burdens’ (Matt
23.4) put on the people that kept them from joining in the Father’s work. At other
times, however, both Jesus and Paul complied with numbskull rules because doing
so opened doors for the gospel.
The
questions we now face are: what is best for the gospel? Are the current governmental
laws that extend to church worship too burdensome? Do they hinder us in
obedience to the God of Scripture? Does resisting or complying help us better
call people to repentance?
The answers
may depend on our country or state. But, if we discern that the path of Christ cuts across the dictates of certain civil dictates, then may we be prepared to pay whatever prices are necessary to do so.
(Download a FREE e-copy of our book: Elijah Devotional)
_______________________________________________________
Honestly exciting. A rebellion in therfield, sealed with a song.
ReplyDeleteBam!
DeleteNice blog. I’d like to add two points as follow.
ReplyDeleteFirst, we cannot confuse Rabbinical law or in context with Judaism, the Talmud, laws that are human-made addition to God’s law. The Talmud added laws to further restrict people or as noted by Rabbinical writers to better reflect (expand, explain) God's law within Biblical authority of the God-given Law in the Torah (e.g., Deut., Lev.).
Second, Jesus did not break laws of man that were contrary to God’s law or is noted to not offend ((Acts 21.24-26). The important part is that Jesus was holy or sinless (1 Peter 2:22, 2 Corinthians 5:21, Hebrews 4:15, Luke 1:35, 1 John 3:5, Matthew 27:24. John 19:4, John 8:29, Isaiah 53:9. 1 Peter 1:18-19), We tend to only quote a short part of Hebrews 4:15, noting that although Jesus was tempted as we are He was nonetheless “without sin."
Blessings,
Owen