Read the Passage: Luke 5:27–6:11

Listen to the Redeemed Mind Podcast: Luke 5:27–6:11

Fasting (5:27–39)

When Jesus chose a tax-collector to be one of His disciples, it was surely alarming to the religious elite. Yet, for Matthew, Christ’s command, “Follow Me” (Luke 5:27), was all that he needed to pursue Jesus. Perhaps out of gratitude for Christ’s work in his own life, Matthew “gave Him a great feast in his own house” (Luke 5:29). The presence of many tax-collectors at this meal caused the scribes and Pharisees to criticize Jesus for eating and drinking with sinners. Given this grumbling by the religious leaders, Christ taught that He came not “to call the righteous, but sinners, to repentance” (Luke 5:32). With this teaching, Jesus was not saying that tax-collectors are sinners, while scribes and Pharisees are righteous. Rather, Christ was explaining that tax-collectors often recognize they are sinners in need of salvation, while the religious elite imagine themselves to be righteous on account of their good works.

At Luke 5:33 the religious leaders asked Jesus why the followers of John the Baptist, as well as those of the Pharisees, fasted and prayed, while His disciples ate and drank. In response, Christ gave both a plain answer and a simple parable. First, Jesus plainly taught that His disciples ate and drank just because He was with them. Here Christ utilized the example of a wedding feast to illustrate the appropriateness of joy among His followers—specifically between the bridegroom and his friends. Second, in Luke 5:36–39, Jesus gave a simple parable as He appealed to the idea of putting a piece of new fabric on an old garment or pouring new wine into an old wineskin. Of course, no one would performs these acts, for both the garment and the wineskin would be destroyed. Rather, new fabric is put on new garments, and new wine is poured into new wineskins. The idea here is that the religious leaders were desperately holding on to old rituals, thus they could not accept Jesus’ new teachings.

Sabbath-Keeping (6:1–5)

Throughout the gospels, Jesus performed several miracles on Sabbath days and He taught on the topic more than once. Here in Luke 6:1–5, on a certain Sabbath, Christ and His disciples “went through the grainfields and His disciples plucked heads of grain and ate them” (Luke 6:1). Observe that Deut. 23:25 afforded them the right to do so, as it reads, “When you come into your neighbor’s standing grain, you may pluck the heads with your hand, but you shall not use a sickle on your neighbor’s standing grain.” While harvesting grain on the Sabbath was indeed prohibited (cf. Exod. 34:21), the disciples’ causal eating of the heads of grain as they passed by the fields did not constitute harvesting. Nevertheless, the Pharisees accused Jesus and His disciples as they asked, “Why are you doing what is not lawful to do on the Sabbath?” (Luke 6:2). Yet, the disciples were not breaking the moral law of God, just the Pharisees’ misinterpretation of the law.

Jesus’ response to the Pharisees’ charge of law-breaking is instructive. Christ could have cited passages such as Exod. 34:21; Deut. 23:25 and explained how His disciples’ act of “rubbing [grain] in their hands” (Luke 6:1) did not constitute harvesting. Likewise, Jesus could have commented on the foolishness of the religious leaders’ pious and self-righteous additions to law. Yet, Christ’s tactic was to appeal to an entirely different passage of Scripture—that is, the account of David and Ahimelech in 1 Sam. 21:1–9. In this passage, David ate the holy bread from before the Tabernacle on one of the occasions when he was fleeing from Saul. While the ceremonial law specified that this bread was to be eaten by the priests (cf. Lev. 24:5–9), out of necessity and mercy, David and his men consumed the holy bread without sinning. Jesus’ implicit teaching here, which is explicitly stated in parallel passages, is that the law was made for man, not man for the law.

Healing (6:6–11)

One problem with legalism is that it places distorted ideas of law-keeping above those to whom the law was given. Another problem with legalism is that it ignores the fact that “The Son of Man is also Lord of the Sabbath” (Luke 6:5). Here in this passage Jesus intentionally confronts the religious leaders by healing a man with a withered hand on the Sabbath. Of course, Jesus could have healed this man on a different day, or even have healed the man on the Sabbath in a less public manner. Yet, Christ engineered the healing of the man with a withered hand in such a way so as to confront the scribes and Pharisees with their sin. This is clear, as before healing the man, Jesus asked the religious leaders, “Is it lawful on the Sabbath to do good or to do evil, to save life or to destroy?” (Luke 6:9; cf. John 7:23). The grievous response of the scribes and Pharisees, however, is that “They were filled with rage” (Luke 6:11).

Application Questions:

1. Why were the religious leaders so focused on external acts, such as fasting and Sabbath-keeping?
2. In the Christian life, how can we discern between that which is merely traditional and that which is truly biblical?
3. Are Christians required to keep the Sabbath? If so, what activities are required or forbidden on this day?
4. Why is legalism such an attractive teaching to many? Have you found yourself guilty of legalistic tendencies in the past?
5. How should Christians think about those who have jobs that do not allow for regular church attendance?