Topic 4: Conflict and Opposition to Jesus

Section 1: Sabbath Controversies in

Luke and Mark
Texts :
Mark 2 (23-28):

Jesus Is Lord of the Sabbath

23
One Sabbath Jesus was going through the grainfields, and as his disciples walked
along, they began to pick some heads of grain. 24 The Pharisees said to him, “Look,
why are they doing what is unlawful on the Sabbath?”
25
He answered, “Have you never read what David did when he and his companions
were hungry and in need?26 In the days of Abiathar the high priest, he entered the
house of God and ate the consecrated bread, which is lawful only for priests to eat.
And he also gave some to his companions.”
27
Then he said to them, “The Sabbath was made for man, not man for the Sabbath.
28
So the Son of Man is Lord even of the Sabbath.”

Luke 6 (6-11):
6
On another Sabbath he went into the synagogue and was teaching, and a man was
there whose right hand was shriveled. 7 The Pharisees and the teachers of the law
were looking for a reason to accuse Jesus, so they watched him closely to see if he
would heal on the Sabbath. 8 But Jesus knew what they were thinking and said to the
man with the shrivelled hand, “Get up and stand in front of everyone.” So he got up
and stood there.
9
Then Jesus said to them, “I ask you, which is lawful on the Sabbath: to do good or
to do evil, to save life or to destroy it?”
10
He looked around at them all, and then said to the man, “Stretch out your hand.”
He did so, and his hand was completely restored. 11 But the Pharisees and the
teachers of the law were furious and began to discuss with one another what they
might do to Jesus.
Luke 13 (10-17):

Jesus Heals a Crippled Woman on the Sabbath

10
On a Sabbath Jesus was teaching in one of the synagogues, 11 and a woman was
there who had been crippled by a spirit for eighteen years. She was bent over and
could not straighten up at all. 12 When Jesus saw her, he called her forward and said
to her, “Woman, you are set free from your infirmity.” 13 Then he put his hands on her,
and immediately she straightened up and praised God.
14
Indignant because Jesus had healed on the Sabbath,the synagogue leader said to
the people, “There are six days for work. So come and be healed on those days, not
on the Sabbath.”
15
The Lord answered him, “You hypocrites! Doesn’t each of you on the Sabbath
untie your ox or donkey from the stall and lead it out to give it water? 16 Then should
not this woman, a daughter of Abraham, whom Satan has kept bound for eighteen
long years, be set free on the Sabbath day from what bound her?”
17
When he said this, all his opponents were humiliated,but the people were delighted
with all the wonderful things he was doing.

Questions:
1. Examine all three passages.

A• What is similar and different about each one? :

Similar:

● Jesus helps others (by either healing them or backing the

opposition towards them)
● Opposition and Anger towards Jesus’ deeds
● Jesus’ emphasis on the actual , foundational and true
meaning of Sabbath. That, it was made for mankind not the
other way around. That Sabbath does not mean the
prevention of a work that would bring benefit to others or
themselves like Jesus’ healing of others and the feeding of
others following Jesus.
 ● Jesus’ replies to the opposition from those who sought to
have him arrested. He replied by quoting scripture or
through a symbolic example.

Differences:

● In Mark 2 , Jesus is eating food with His disciples while

they were in the cornfields
● In Luke 6, Jesus enters the synagogue and heals the man
already inside there
● In Luke 13, Jesus was teaching and already present in the
synagogue when the woman he would heal appears.

B• Why is the Sabbath such a big issue in the gospels?:

● The Jewish Religious Leaders had a strict interpretation
of the Law including that of the Sabbath. Its correct
observance was essential to them and any deviances from
it were considered to be acts of violation like Jesus’
healing etc.
● Jesus’ approach towards the Sabbath was distinct and
different from the traditional methods. They were
considered to be challenging to the ‘actual’ interpretation
according to the JRLs.

C. Discuss whether Jesus should have been less ‘obvious’

about his actions on the Sabbath. :
● Jesus’ coming was for change (more or less). He came as a
transformer. Jesus’ doing of miracles and deeds on the
Sabbath was deliberate. He needed to correct the
misleading and incorrect beliefs and interpretations of the
Law that the Jews believed were true and right. One of
them included the belief that no work whatsoever was to
be done on the Sabbath day e.g. if there was a hungry
 person on the verge of death , the Jews would never feed
him on Sabbath by bringing or preparing food for that
person as it would violate the rules. Jesus’ deliberate and
just actions were a message , were a lesson that Sabbath
is made for the humans and not the other way
around.Therefore, Jesus should not have been any less
obvious if not more as His actions were necessary to
correct the incorrect point of views towards the Jewish
Law.
● Some people might say that Jesus could have been less
obvious in what he did on the Sabbath to avoid arguments
and problems with the religious leaders. They might think
that if Jesus had been quieter about it, things could have
gone more smoothly. Instead of openly going against the
usual Sabbath rules, he could have followed them quietly.
This way, he might not have upset the Pharisees and
scribes as much. This approach could have helped him keep
a lower profile and carry on with his teachings without so
much resistance from those who disagreed with him.
● Agreement: View A

2.A) Discuss the issue of whether Christians need a

Sabbath today and why. :
● It is extremely essential for the Christians to have a
Sabbath day: 1. In the modern world of now, there is a
hectic schedule that each of us has to follow for
materialistic growth for physical survival where more
commonly the hunger and need for spiritual growth can be
less. This is the reason for which the Christians of today
need a dedicated day to grow in bond with their Heavenly
Father, to satisfy their spiritual hunger that they might
seem to not have but need as without being fulfilled
 spiritually the slavery of sin overcomes the humans. The
Sabbath’s dedicated day would give us a break from our
busy lifestyle to connect and spend time with God. 2. We
need a Sabbath day as even The Almighty Father rested
after 6 whole days of work. If God wanted He could go on
with whatever He wished to do , what could ever stop the
One with Almighty Power and Divinity but God’s resting on
the 7th day was a instruction to humanity that we need to
rest too , to continue in our struggle against sin , in our
work towards the ultimate rest that God wants us to
experience.
● However, some Christians think we should be more flexible
about how we follow the Sabbath today. They say that
resting and worshipping are still important, but sticking
strictly to a particular day might not make sense in today's
busy and diverse world. These people believe we should be
more adaptable, giving individuals the freedom to pick a
day that works for them or include Sabbath ideas in their
weekly routines. They think it's more about the spirit of
resting on the Sabbath than following a specific day. This
way, more people can join in, and it can fit better with our
modern lives.
● Agreement: View A, because we need to adapt ourselves,
our lifestyles to work like how God did and how His work
rounded up to a singular day , like how Jesus’ Resurrection
was timed to be in action after a whole week of work , pain
and struggle after which came fulfilment with Jesus’
ultimate miracle of raising Himself from the dead (Which
was the first week of the day , the day we Christians
celebrate as Sabbath)

2.B) Explain that Sunday has become the Christian

Sabbath because it is the day of the resurrection. If
you feel it is important to have a Sabbath, what would
make people break these rules?:
● There can be several reasons for this. 1. Like the
hecticness of our schedules that we make ourselves that
causes us to work even on Sabbath . 2.Then, also one of
the 7 deadly sins known as Sloth or more commonly called
Laziness to go and attend Mass on Sabbath. 3.Also, the
lack of acknowledgment to the importance of this day can
cause us not consider it to be of great significance if not
any.

Section 2: The Opposition from Pharisees to Jesus

Texts :
Matthew 16 (1-12):

The Demand for a Sign

16 The Pharisees and Sadducees came to Jesus and tested him by asking him to
show them a sign from heaven.
2
He replied, “When evening comes, you say, ‘It will be fair weather, for the sky is
red,’ 3 and in the morning, ‘Today it will be stormy, for the sky is red and overcast.’
You know how to interpret the appearance of the sky, but you cannot interpret the
signs of the times. 4 A wicked and adulterous generation looks for a sign, but none
will be given it except the sign of Jonah.” Jesus then left them and went away.

The Yeast of the Pharisees and Sadducees

5
When they went across the lake, the disciples forgot to take bread. 6 “Be careful,”
Jesus said to them. “Be on your guard against the yeast of the Pharisees and
Sadducees.”
7
They discussed this among themselves and said, “It is because we didn’t bring any
bread.”
8
Aware of their discussion, Jesus asked, “You of little faith, why are you talking
among yourselves about having no bread? 9 Do you still not understand? Don’t you
remember the five loaves for the five thousand, and how many basketfuls you
gathered? 10 Or the seven loaves for the four thousand, and how many basketfuls
you gathered ? 11 How is it you don’t understand that I was not talking to you about
bread? But be on your guard against the yeast of the Pharisees and Sadducees.” 12
Then they understood that he was not telling them to guard against the yeast used in
bread, but against the teaching of the Pharisees and Sadducees.

Questions:
1. Recall topic 1 and the differences in beliefs between
the Pharisees (and Sadducees) and Jesus. What further
does this passage add to the issue? :
1.The Pharisees were a group of people in the old times who
followed God's rules very carefully. They not only followed the
written laws but also had many extra rules passed down through
spoken stories, called oral tradition. They believed it was crucial
to understand and use God's rules in their everyday lives. Unlike
some others, the Pharisees also believed in life after death and
that people would come back to life, known as resurrection. This
idea was not common among all Jewish people back then. The
Pharisees were very serious about following all the religious laws
and traditions, paying close attention to external actions and
rituals to show their devotion to God.

2.The Sadducees were another group in the old times who

followed the rules but had different beliefs. They liked sticking
closely to the written laws in the Torah and didn't believe in the
extra stories passed down by talking, unlike the Pharisees. The
Sadducees were skeptical about life after death, and they
didn't believe in things like coming back to life (resurrection),
angels, or spirits, which was different from what the Pharisees
believed. Also, the Sadducees were big on the Temple in
Jerusalem and were often linked with the priests. They focused
a lot on the rituals and functions that happened in the Temple
as a significant part of their religious practices.

Matthew 16:1-12 and Jesus' Interaction with the Pharisees: In

this passage, the Pharisees and Sadducees come to Jesus,
testing him by asking for a sign from heaven. Jesus responds,
pointing out their ability to interpret weather signs but their
failure to understand the signs of the times. He uses the
metaphor of the yeast of the Pharisees and Sadducees,
cautioning his disciples to beware of their teachings.

● This part of the story doesn't talk directly about the

Sadducees, but it shows that Jesus was worried about the
Pharisees and others who were similar. He gives a warning
about something called the "yeast" of the Pharisees and
Sadducees. This might mean that Jesus was concerned
about the influence of both these groups. It's like a bigger
warning about being careful and understanding the
spiritual side of things instead of just following strict
rules and rituals. Jesus often told both the Pharisees and
Sadducees that they were missing the more important
spiritual ideas. In the part from Matthew 16, Jesus is
telling his followers to be careful and not just follow the
teachings of these groups without understanding the
deeper spiritual meaning behind them.

2. Imagine you were a Jewish bystander at this event.

What might your reaction have been? Explore different
possible answers – you must back these up with
evidence. :

1. Faithful Pharisee Perspective:

 ○ Reaction: If I were a Pharisee or someone closely
aligned with their beliefs, I might feel defensive or
challenged by Jesus' warnings.
○ Evidence: Pharisees were known for their dedication
to strict adherence to religious laws and traditions.
Jesus' criticism of the yeast of the Pharisees could
be seen as a direct challenge to their way of
interpreting and practising Judaism.
2. Concerned about Legalism:
○ Reaction: If I were someone who felt burdened by
the legalistic approach of the Pharisees, I might feel
relieved or supported by Jesus' warning.
○ Evidence: Jesus often critiqued the Pharisees for
their emphasis on external rules and rituals. His
caution could resonate with those who were seeking a
more spiritually focused and compassionate
understanding of their faith.
3. Open to Jesus' Teachings:
○ Reaction: If I were open to Jesus' teachings and saw
him as a wise and compassionate figure, I might feel
validated and encouraged to explore his message
further.
○ Evidence: Throughout the Gospels, Jesus emphasises
love, mercy, and deeper spiritual truths. A bystander
open to these ideas might see Jesus as offering a
more profound and meaningful understanding of their
faith.
4. Skepticism or Confusion:
○ Reaction: If I were skeptical of both the Pharisees
and Jesus, I might feel confused or unsure about
whom to trust.
○ Evidence: The Pharisees and Jesus had different
approaches, and someone observing from a more
 neutral standpoint might find it challenging to discern
which perspective aligns more closely with their own
beliefs.
5. Curiosity and Interest:
○ Reaction: If I were curious and interested in
exploring different perspectives within Judaism, I
might find Jesus' teachings intriguing and worth
further investigation.
○ Evidence: Jesus often presented ideas that
challenged conventional thinking. A curious bystander
might be drawn to the novelty and depth of his
teachings.

Section 3: Expectation of Opposition in Christian

life today Via examples:
The cleansing of The temple,
Conflict against Jesus.
Texts :
Mark 11 (15-18):
15
On reaching Jerusalem, Jesus entered the temple courts and began driving out
those who were buying and selling there. He overturned the tables of the money
changers and the benches of those selling doves, 16 and would not allow anyone to
carry merchandise through the temple courts. 17 And as he taught them, he said, “Is it
not written: ‘My house will be called a house of prayer for all nations’[c]? But you have
made it ‘a den of robbers.’[d]”
18
The chief priests and the teachers of the law heard this and began looking for a
way to kill him, for they feared him, because the whole crowd was amazed at his
teaching.

Matthew 26 (1-5):

The Plot Against Jesus

26 When Jesus had finished saying all these things,he said to his disciples, 2 “As you
know, the Passover is two days away—and the Son of Man will be handed over to
be crucified.”
3
Then the chief priests and the elders of the people assembled in the palace of the
high priest, whose name was Caiaphas, 4 and they schemed to arrest Jesus secretly
and kill him. 5 “But not during the festival,” they said, “or there may be a riot among
the people.”

Questions:
1. Read the passage of the cleansing of the Temple.

A.i)• Was Jesus making a point with an acted parable or

displaying righteous anger?:

(Is it an acted parable, if so, What is Jesus teaching

here): Jesus is trying to say people have gone far from actual
faith. He tries to teach us to keep the place of worship clean,
pure, holy, sinless, sacred and that it should be held in honour
and respect.

(Is it Jesus’ righteous anger ? Then how and why): Jesus

had the right to be angry as He was the Son of God, and this
misuse of His Father’s house angered Him. This display of anger
is rare in the events involving Jesus but it intends to show His
human side)

A.ii)• Does it matter?: it does not matter how we interpret

this event, whether considering it to be as unique parable or
Jesus’ righteous anger as the message He wanted to convey and
teach is the same in both ways that people have gone away,
astray from God and more into materialism to an extent where
God Himself is made a source of which and that we need to
focus our basic faith , repent and go back to God in its complete
sincerity and faithfulness.
2.Examine/Discuss the passage about the plot to kill
Jesus. :
In Matthew 26:1-5, the passage discusses the plot against
Jesus, foreshadowing the events that lead to his arrest and
crucifixion. Here's a brief examination:

Overview:

The passage begins by stating that, as Jesus finished his words

to his disciples, he forewarned them about his impending
betrayal, arrest, and crucifixion. Simultaneously, the chief
priests and elders of the people gathered in the palace of the
high priest, Caiaphas, to devise a plan to arrest Jesus secretly
and put him to death.

Key Points:

1. Timing of the Plot: The chief priests and elders planned to

arrest Jesus, but they wanted to avoid doing it during the
Passover feast, fearing a public uproar among the people.
This reveals their strategic approach to timing the arrest
for a less tumultuous moment.
2. Collaboration with Judas: The plot indicates collaboration
with one of Jesus' disciples, Judas Iscariot, who
approached the chief priests and offered to betray Jesus
in exchange for thirty pieces of silver. This collaboration
sets the stage for the fulfilment of prophecy and the
ultimate betrayal.
3. Motivation of the Plotters: The chief priests and elders,
threatened by Jesus' growing influence and challenging
teachings, sought to eliminate him to maintain their own
status and authority. Their fear of a potential uprising
 during the Passover influenced their decision to delay the
arrest.

3. Draw all learning together from all texts studied so

far to discuss opposition to Jesus.

A• Was it possible to avoid this conflict? :

● (It was possible): Jesus could have continued His ministry,

teaching in a more secret manner like at times He actually
did. He could have refrained from certain actions that the
Jews would consider violating the Law. Jesus’ ultimate goal
was not avoiding the conflict but to proclaim the Word of
God , God’s kingdom and call people to repent which could
have been executed in a way suitable to the societal and
religious beliefs of Jesus’ time.
● (It was not possible): Jesus needed to change the narrow
minded perspectives on following the Law. Jesus needed to
teach us through these conflicts that, we need to follow
the actual Law with a broad mindset and literally (at
sometimes though it is required). He knew His teachings
would be opposed but He was committed to fulfilling God’s
will and His mission no matter what. Therefore, the
conflict could not have been avoided as then Jesus’ role as
the completion of the prophecies would not come into play
(it was prophesied that the Saviour , the Messiah would be
rejected and opposed).

B• Would it have been easier to avoid with some groups

over others?:
1. Pharisees and Sadducees:
○ Nature of Opposition: Both the Pharisees and
Sadducees opposed Jesus for various reasons. The
Pharisees took issue with his challenging to their
legalistic interpretations, while the Sadducees were
skeptical of his teachings and threatened by his
popularity.
○ Possibility of Avoidance: Given the fundamental
differences in beliefs, especially regarding oral
traditions, the afterlife, and their respective
legalistic and literalistic approaches, avoiding conflict
with these groups would have been challenging.
2. Chief Priests and Elders:
○ Nature of Opposition: The chief priests and elders,
representing the religious establishment, were
threatened by Jesus' growing influence and his
challenge to their authority. They played a significant
role in orchestrating his arrest and crucifixion.
○ Possibility of Avoidance: Given their vested interests
in maintaining the existing religious order, avoiding
conflict with the religious elite would have been
difficult unless Jesus completely refrained from
challenging their practices.
3. Common People and Disciples:
○ Nature of Opposition: While not all common people
opposed Jesus, there were moments when the crowds
were swayed by the influence of religious leaders,
leading to opposition. Even among his disciples, there
were moments of doubt and betrayal (e.g., Judas).
○ Possibility of Avoidance: Jesus' message resonated
with many, but his teachings challenged conventional
thinking, and some were not ready to embrace his
radical ideas. The diverse reactions among the
 common people and disciples made complete avoidance
of conflict challenging.

4. People Cured by His Miracles:

● Nature of Opposition: The crowds often celebrated Jesus

for his miracles, but their expectations sometimes led to
misunderstandings and conflict when they sought a
conquering Messiah rather than a suffering servant.
● Possibility of Avoidance: Avoiding conflict with this group
might have been possible by clarifying Jesus' mission and
redirecting their expectations through continued teaching.

5. Gentiles and Samaritans:

● Nature of Opposition: The Samaritans and Gentiles, while

not explicitly opposed, were often distant or unfamiliar
with Jesus' teachings due to cultural and religious
differences.
● Possibility of Avoidance: With Gentiles and Samaritans,
the potential for conflict avoidance depended on effective
communication and cultural understanding. Jesus did
engage positively with Samaritans in some instances.

6. Those Who Had Seen His Wisdom:

● Nature of Opposition: Some who witnessed Jesus' wisdom

might have been conflicted due to their existing beliefs or
societal norms.
● Possibility of Avoidance: Avoiding conflict with this group
could have been facilitated by continued wise teachings
 and dialogue, offering a bridge between their existing
beliefs and Jesus' message.

2. Did Jesus deliberately provoke the authorities? If he

did, for example, the cleansing of the temple, good
other deeds of his Said to be proactive. :

● In the gospels we see opposition and conflict to Jesus

several times. Jesus needed to teach the people of Israel
to broaden their mindset to look at the law. He did this
through various teachings, which at times required the
Jewish Law’s beliefs, along with the religious authorities’
beliefs to be challenged
● If we say that Jesus did actually try to provoke the
authorities, we may examine the passage of ‘The cleansing
of the temple’. do it was a reactive doing of Jesus e.g. to
throwaway tables and selling carts, showing his human
anger, it was really just to teach the people that they have
gone far from faith may see Jesus deliberately provoking
authorities over here.
● In Jesus’ other deeds and doings, we are completely
proactive Jesus, like when Jesus was accused of
blasphemy, he first remains silent then replied, also when
the soldiers mocked him, humiliated him, beat him, he kept
silent.
● Furthermore, in some other instances, Jesus is yet again
reactive person, giving bold responses to his opposes, like
in Luke 6 when the Pharisees opposed him of doing unlawful
on sabbath, he replied, almost instantly and questions
them, ”have you not read what David did when his
companions were hungry”. In addition, in Luke 13, when
Jesus healed the woman on the sabbath, the people
 opposed him of healing on sabbath, to whom Jesus boldly
confronts , “You hypocrites!”. We yet again, see how Jesus
was reactive, but with all good faith.
● At last Jesus’ other deeds than the cleansing of temple
can be seen as somewhat proactive as Jesus thought,
remained silent before he did something, but other deeds,
like during the opposition to him on sabbath, including the
cleansing of the temple could be seen as reactive, as we
see Jesus’ bold and instant doings and replies. So, Jesus in
some acts can be seen as deliberately provoking the
authorities, whereas others being proactive, and then,
after all He was a Messiah, a Leader, and one of the
foremost qualities of a leader, is his brave stance to
express the truth, and make others aware of the truth,
and many a times a leader may resort to fiery words and
language to bring home the true message.

5. Using local examples where possible, discuss the

extent to which modern Christians should expect
opposition (and should welcome it). Class debate this and
write their own judgements. Discuss also the opposition
that comes from different worldviews, e.g. science,
humanism, etc. :

1. Local Examples:

● In some regions, modern Christians may face opposition

based on differing religious beliefs or political ideologies.
For instance, in areas where a dominant religious tradition
is prevalent, Christians might experience challenges due to
minority status. Additionally, opposition may arise when
 Christian values clash with certain political or social
movements.
● On the other hand, in more diverse and pluralistic
societies, Christians may encounter openness and
acceptance. The extent of opposition can vary widely based
on the local cultural and religious landscape.

2. Opposition from Different Worldviews:

● Science: Some modern Christians face opposition from

those who adhere strictly to scientific perspectives,
particularly in debates over the origins of life, evolution,
and climate change. Navigating these discussions requires
an openness to scientific understanding while also holding
onto one's religious convictions.
● Humanism and Secularism: In regions with a strong
humanist or secular worldview, Christians may encounter
opposition to religious influence in public spheres, such as
education or legislation. Engaging in constructive dialogue
becomes crucial to finding common ground and fostering
mutual respect.

3. Should Christians Welcome Opposition:

● Yes, to Promote Understanding: Some argue that

Christians should welcome opposition as it provides an
opportunity to engage in meaningful conversations, share
their beliefs, and promote mutual understanding. It can
also be an avenue for personal growth and refinement of
one's faith.
● No, to Preserve Peace: Others may argue against actively
seeking opposition, emphasising the importance of
fostering peace and coexistence. They might suggest that
while engagement with different worldviews is essential,
proactively welcoming opposition may lead to unnecessary
conflict.