I am not a fan of the man described in Luke 13:14. He was a synagogue leader who had just witnessed the Lord’s healing a woman who had been bent over for eighteen years. The healing took place in a worship setting. It should have been a time of great joy. Not surprisingly, that is how the woman responded (13:13).
But the synagogue leader was indignant. The Greek word translated “indignant” means he was angry. He was angry because he saw something he thought was unrighteous. He explained why he felt that way.
He believed Jesus had sinned because the Lord had healed this woman on the Sabbath. The synagogue leader held to a religious tradition that said the woman should not have been healed on that day. God established the Sabbath as a day of rest, and Jesus had to do work in order to heal this woman. He had to speak and then lay His hands on her. The leader cloaked his words in religious terminology. He saw himself as the holy one in this encounter.
Jesus could have pointed out that the man had misunderstood the meaning of the Sabbath, which He did on another occasion (Mark 2:27). Here, He simply points out the hypocrisy of this man and his religious-sounding tradition.
The Jewish tradition this man held dear allowed for loopholes when it came to working on the Sabbath. He and other “holy” Jews could help a donkey or ox if the animal had a physical need. Specifically, they could lead such animals from their stall to a place where they could drink water (v 15). In other words, if the leader had an animal that helped him earn a living, he could care for it. A donkey was very valuable and important for business. God would not expect its owner to neglect it. If it needed something in order to function properly, it would be cruel and stupid not to provide it.
No wonder the Lord called the man a hypocrite (v 15). His hypocrisy was multi-layered. He felt it was OK to show mercy to an animal, but not a woman—a daughter of Abraham (v 16). A donkey could be given what it needed to function physically, but not this woman. A donkey could not be expected to suffer thirst for one day, but it was OK for this woman to suffer for eighteen years.
But there was another way this man’s tradition was hypocritical. He thought Jesus was a sinner since He worked on the Sabbath but excused his own work. He could pick and choose what kind of work was acceptable. If he did something that he would consider sin in others, he could overlook it in himself. But he was quick to observe and point out what he considered the sins of others. He would condemn others, but not himself.
Of course, Jesus did not sin in this case, or any other case. But hypocrites exist in every era. They can easily spot the sins of others while being oblivious to their own. Jesus warned His disciples of this ability (Matt 7:3-5).
Today this hypocrisy exists in every teacher who says a person’s works or sins will keep them out of the kingdom of God. Some of these teachers say that if a believer sins too much, he will lose his salvation. Others say that if he sins too much, he was never a believer to begin with. They can see the sins in others that, in their opinion, disqualify them for eternal life.
But they cannot see their own sin. Or, they minimize it. Their traditions tell them that sins exclude us from the kingdom, so they excuse their own sins. They consider what they do as being justifiable. Others’ sins are worse than theirs. Of course, a thirsty donkey needs to drink on the Sabbath, but if people need help, they can do without.
Such teachers do not see the depth of their sin. Their hypocrisy can hide the obvious. Just as I’m not a fan of the synagogue leader, I’m not a big fan of these guys either.
