1. Luke 6:1-5 New Revised Standard Version (NRSV)
1One Sabbath while Jesus was going through the grainfields, his disciples plucked some heads of grain, rubbed them in their hands, and ate them. 2 But some of the Pharisees said, “Why are you doing what is not lawful to do on the Sabbath?” 3 Jesus answered, “Have you not read what David did when he and his companions were hungry? 4 He entered the house of God and took and ate the bread of the Presence, which it is not lawful for any but the priests to eat, and gave some to his companions?” 5 Then he said to them, “The Son of Man is lord of the Sabbath.”
2. When thinking about this text I immediately see this as an act of civil disobedience. I see this as an act of civil disobedience …show more content…
Below, I have included quotations from different commentaries that help to answer questions that I have regarding this text. Likewise, these commentaries also provide further insight around claims that I make which will be used in throughout the sermon. In Interpretation, commentators suggest that “These incidents from the life of Jesus present him in conflict with Jewish leadership over practices that were central to piety and to identity as God’s people.” This supports my claim that what Jesus and his disciples were doing on the Sabbath was countercultural and even life threatening for them. The Anchor Biblical Commentary deals with my questions surrounding why Jesus uses the example of David and refers to himself as Son of Man. It reads, “The joining of this example of David (from 1 Sam 21:1-6) of the pronouncement in 6:5, “The Son of Man is the lord of the Sabbath,” not only forestalls a retort from the Pharisees that after all he is not David, but provides a basis for Jesus’ defense of his disciples. It is an implicit Christological affirmation: he is greater than David, for he is lord of the Sabbath. His “lordship” is now added to his power and his authority, and he is “lord” precisely as Son of Man.” Interestingly, I learned why what Jesus and the disciples were doing was considered work on the Sabbath in The New Interpreters Bible Commentary. The commentary states, “Luke’s addition of the phrase “rubbed them in their hands” describes what one would do with an ear of grain in order to separate it from the chaff before eating it. Both reaping and threshing, however, were considered to be forms of work forbidden on the Sabbath. The preparation of food was also forbidden on the Sabbath.” Initially, I did not consider why they were accused of working on the Sabbath. I assumed it was because they picked the grain and ate it, not because they rubbed it in their hands. This changes the way I approach the sermon because I now have to deal with the fact that