UPDV Bible Header

UPDV Updated Bible Version

Matthew Chapter 5 — The Sabbath Controversies

Overview

UPDV chapter 5 presents two Sabbath controversy stories — plucking grain on the Sabbath (5:1-6) and healing a man with a withered hand (5:7-12) — followed by a summary of the growing crowds (5:13-14). This material comes from canonical Matthew 12:1-14 (itself based on Mark 2:23-3:12), restored to the Markan chronological sequence immediately after the fasting question that closed chapter 4.

These two controversies form a tightly paired unit in Mark, and the compiler of Matthew preserved that pairing. What the compiler changed was not the sequence but the content: he replaced Mark's original arguments with his own theological expansions — a priestly Torah argument, the Hosea 6:6 citation, and a sheep-in-pit parable. The UPDV strips these editorial additions and restores the Markan originals, producing a sharper, more confrontational pair of Sabbath disputes.

Plucking Grain on the Sabbath (5:1-6)

"At that season Jesus went on the Sabbath day through the grainfields; and his disciples were hungry and began to pluck ears and to eat." The Pharisees challenge that this violates the Sabbath, and Jesus responds with the precedent of David eating the showbread (1 Samuel 21:1-6) — an argument present in all three Synoptics and firmly traditional.

The compiler's text is used for this pericope (5:1-4, 5:6), including one notable choice: canonical Matthew omits Mark's reference to "when Abiathar was high priest" (Mark 2:26), probably because the historical high priest at that time was actually Ahimelech, not Abiathar — a well-known difficulty in Mark's text. Because this omission is a simple editorial abbreviation — compressing the narrative without altering its argument or structure — the UPDV retains it.

However, what the compiler did in the middle of the argument was not abbreviation but editorial substitution. In canonical Matthew 12:5-7, the compiler deleted Mark 2:27 and replaced it with three of his own theological additions: a priestly argument ("have you not read in the Law how on the Sabbath the priests in the temple profane the Sabbath and are guiltless?"), the declaration "something greater than the temple is here," and a second citation of Hosea 6:6 ("I desire mercy, and not sacrifice") — the same text the compiler inserted at 9:13, one of his signature editorial additions. Davies and Allison confirm all three are Matthean additions to the Markan source.

In their place, the UPDV restores Mark 2:27: "The Sabbath was made for man, and not man for the Sabbath." This is one of the most striking sayings attributed to Jesus in the Sabbath tradition — a direct declaration of the Sabbath's purpose that the compiler chose to delete and replace with his own more elaborate theological arguments. The saying leads naturally into the conclusion both Gospels share: "so that the Son of Man is Lord even of the Sabbath" (5:6). In Mark's version, the logic flows from principle to authority — the Sabbath exists for human benefit, therefore the Son of Man has authority over it. The compiler's replacement broke this logical chain by substituting arguments that, while theologically sophisticated, are his own editorial construction.

The Man with the Withered Hand (5:7-12)

The second Sabbath controversy follows immediately, as in Mark. A man with a withered hand is in the synagogue, and Jesus' opponents watch to see if he will heal on the Sabbath "so that they might accuse him" (5:8). This surveillance detail comes from Mark 3:2 — the compiler of canonical Matthew replaced it with a direct question: "Is it lawful to heal on the Sabbath?" (Matt 12:10), setting up his sheep-in-pit parable.

The UPDV restores Mark's version of Jesus' response: "Is it lawful on the Sabbath day to do good, or to do harm? To save a life, or to kill?" (5:9). This is dramatically different from the compiler's sheep analogy (Matt 12:11-12a). Mark's Jesus issues a stark moral challenge that frames the question in absolute terms — good versus harm, life versus death — forcing his opponents into silence: "But they held their peace" (5:10). The compiler replaced this confrontational exchange with a more moderate, rabbinic-style argument about the relative value of sheep and humans (Matt 12:11-12a). While this analogy has a parallel elsewhere in Luke (Luke 14:5, where Jesus asks "which of you, having a son or an ox that has fallen into a well on a Sabbath day, will not immediately pull him out?"), it did not originate in this Markan setting. The compiler took a floating piece of tradition and substituted it here to replace Mark's original, harsher dialogue. Davies and Allison identify this substitution as a Matthean editorial addition to the Markan source. The UPDV removes the displaced analogy and restores the original Markan confrontation.

The healing itself follows in both versions: Jesus commands the man to stretch out his hand, and it is restored. The Pharisees then go out and conspire to destroy him (5:12). The UPDV follows the compiler's text for the conclusion, which abbreviates Mark's "with the Herodians" (Mark 3:6) — another example of editorial condensation rather than addition.

The Crowds Gather (5:13-14)

"And Jesus withdrew from there: and great multitudes from Galilee and Decapolis and Jerusalem and Judea and from beyond the Jordan followed him. And the report of him went forth into all Syria: and they brought to him all who were sick, held with diverse diseases and torments, and possessed with demons, and epileptic, and palsied; and he healed them."

This summary requires a note about its placement. In the canonical Gospel, this geographical description of the crowds appears at Matthew 4:24-25, where the compiler placed it as part of an editorial summary (4:23-25) that Davies and Allison identify as "a redactional summary which draws on Mark 1:39 and 3:7-12." That summary was removed in chapter 4 because it served as the opening half of an inclusio — a literary bracket — with 9:35, framing the compiler's sermon-and-healing architecture.

However, the underlying tradition — the notice that crowds gathered from across the region — comes from Mark 3:7-12, where it falls immediately after the withered-hand controversy. The UPDV restores it to this Markan position. The compiler did not invent the crowd tradition; he drew heavily on Mark 3:7-12, expanding the geographical roll-call to include "Syria" and adding "Decapolis." He then relocated this summary to serve his editorial architecture. Removing the artificial placement and restoring the summary to its Markan chronological position is consistent with the methodology applied throughout: strip the compiler's architectural framework while preserving the traditional material itself.

What the UPDV Removes from This Section

  • Matt 12:5-7 (priestly argument, "greater than the temple," Hosea 6:6): Editorial additions to the Markan Sabbath grain story. The Hosea 6:6 citation is one of the compiler's signature insertions, appearing also at 9:13.
  • Matt 12:10b-12a (sheep-in-pit argument): Editorial substitution replacing Mark's original confrontational question. The analogy has a parallel in Luke 14:5, but was displaced by the compiler into this Markan setting.
  • Matt 12:15-21 (Servant formula quotation, Isaiah 42:1-4): Davies and Allison call this "the key formula quotation" — the compiler's longest, inserted into Mark's withdrawal summary. Editorial, following the standard formula-quotation pattern.

References

  • Davies, W. D. and Dale C. Allison Jr. A Critical and Exegetical Commentary on the Gospel according to Saint Matthew. 3 vols. International Critical Commentary. Edinburgh: T&T Clark, 1988–1997.