Sunday, we considered Jesus’ interpretation and application of the law of God using a hermeneutic of love. Given Jesus’ application of the Sabbath, how should we understand the following story in Numbers 15:32-36:
32 While the people of Israel were in the wilderness, they found a man gathering sticks on the Sabbath day.
33 And those who found him gathering sticks brought him to Moses and Aaron and to all the congregation.
34 They put him in custody, because it had not been made clear what should be done to him.
35 And the LORD said to Moses, "The man shall be put to death; all the congregation shall stone him with stones outside the camp."
36 And all the congregation brought him outside the camp and stoned him to death with stones, as the LORD commanded Moses.
Does this represent a biblical contradiction? Or did Jesus change or disregard the law?
The situation in Numbers is precisely the kind of situation for which the sabbath law was given. God gave man the sabbath as a gift of rest. Ultimately, it was intended to be a time of reflection on the creation and anticipation of the new creation, when man would be given final rest in Christ. Because of what the day represented, God made it holy. Man would never engage in such rest and reflection on his own, so God mandated it. Reflection on the coming rest in Christ—the great hope of mankind—was so crucial that violating it carried the death penalty. The pronouncement of the death penalty gave great weight to this day and what it meant.
The man in Numbers 15 was essentially thumbing his nose at this command of God, thinking little of the rest afforded him and the coming rest of eternity, which the sabbath represented. It was a flagrant violation of God’s Word. Gathering sticks is not a life-saving activity. It is common work that can be put off until tomorrow or could have been done yesterday. The man failed to keep the sabbath holy.
Jesus’ interpretation and application of this law in Mark 2 simply recognized that the sabbath was not intended to deprive people of food. It was intended to give them rest. Jesus and his disciples didn’t have any food, so they plucked heads of grain and put them into their mouths. They were not turning away from God’s good gift, but sustaining their own lives as they engaged in the work of telling others about the coming rest in Christ. Jesus didn’t change the law or disregard it. He rightly interpreted and applied it.
So as we seek to do as Jesus does, our question should not be, “When is it appropriate to disregard a command of God?” Rather, we should strive by the Holy Spirit’s help to understand the intent of God’s commands in their context. As mentioned on Sunday, the danger comes when the law becomes a thing unto itself, removed from its contextual intent of love and approached with a heart devoid of love.
______________________________
Another question may arise from those reading the Numbers 15 story in its context. The early part of the same chapter briefly reminds the people of the sacrifices available to atone for sin. So if there were sacrifices available to provide for the forgiveness of sin, why wasn’t the man who collected sticks given the opportunity to offer a sacrifice? Why did he receive an immediate death sentence?
A significant feature of the sacrifices prescribed in the law of Moses is that they covered unintentional sins. That is, they offered cover for infractions of the law that we would think of as accidents. (For example, accidentally touching a dead animal and thereby becoming unclean—Lev 5:2). Unintentional sins were distinguished from “high-handed” sins, or sins done in willful defiance. There were no sacrifices offering atonement for sins committed with a high hand:
“But the person who does anything with a high hand, whether he is native or a sojourner, reviles the LORD, and that person shall be cut off from among his people. Because he has despised the word of the LORD and has broken his commandment, that person shall be utterly cut off; his iniquity shall be on him.” (Num 15:30-31)
In other words, violations of the Ten Commandments, all of which require willful intentionality, could not be covered by any sacrifices. Rather, those violators were said to “bear their iniquity” (Lev 5:1; 20:17, 24:15). The man collecting sticks on the sabbath fell into this category. It was a high-handed sin. There was no sacrifice available to cover him.
Incidentally, the lack of a provision to atone for high-handed sins points to the superiority of the new covenant in Christ’s blood. He makes perfect those who draw near to Him (Heb 10:1, 12-14). All of this points to the great necessity (and joy!) of reading the whole bible through a Christological lens. Jesus is the hermeneutical key to everything!
Comments