THE HIDDEN FEAST
by Jeremy Chance Springfield
3/1/2025
A mysterious feast is embedded in the ministry of the Messiah. The Gospel text does not openly identify which feast it was that the evangelist felt the need to mention was occurring.
Yeshua’s attendance at festivals was intentional and usually related to the spiritual concepts inherent in the particular appointed time. He timed his presence at such gatherings to maximize the reach of his mission. This inclusion of information allows the reader to appreciate the harmony of observance and the prophetic underpinnings connecting that moment to the Messiah’s ministry.
Yeshua’s attendance at festivals was intentional and usually related to the spiritual concepts inherent in the particular appointed time. He timed his presence at such gatherings to maximize the reach of his mission. This inclusion of information allows the reader to appreciate the harmony of observance and the prophetic underpinnings connecting that moment to the Messiah’s ministry.
The feast’s lack of identification presents a puzzle for the reader to unravel.
The information is recorded in John 5:1.
The information is recorded in John 5:1.
|
After these was a feast of the Yihudaye, and Yeshua ascended to Urishlem. |
|
The passage as it reads from the Aramaic of the Peshitta text is that this was an ADIDA DIHUDAYE “feast of the Jews.”
This phrase, despite how apparently direct it may be, is actually notable in that it appears here and nowhere else in the New Testament text.
The phrase ADIDA DIHUDAYE does appear in modified forms elsewhere in the Aramaic text, where we see it in the format of the following phrases:
The phrase ADIDA DIHUDAYE does appear in modified forms elsewhere in the Aramaic text, where we see it in the format of the following phrases:
Only in John 5:1 is a celebration of the Jews mentioned that curiously lacks an identification. Thankfully, by assessing the content of the passage in which it is found, as well as the surrounding information, the classification of this enigmatic memorial can be arrived at to a satisfying degree and the interactions chronicled in this passage will take on new meaning and appreciation for the believer.
The first major clue in the mystery of the feast is actually found in a detail recorded after the conclusion of this passage, found in John 6:4.
The first major clue in the mystery of the feast is actually found in a detail recorded after the conclusion of this passage, found in John 6:4.
|
Yet, the feast of the Petzcha of the Yihudaye had drawn close. |
This verse includes the evidence that Passover was the next feast after the one hidden in John 5. This detail alone is sufficient to hone-in on which feast was most likely being referenced, for the nearest Jewish celebration prior to Passover is exactly one month before it--on Purim! It would thus seem that this is the obvious answer to the feast’s identity.
This feast being an anonymous “feast of the Jews” should serve as a significant sign to its identity, since the book of Esther is famous for never explicitly referencing the Creator in the text by name or title—He is effectively anonymous in the Purim account. This hidden aspect is a result of a prophecy in the Torah of how the Creator would punish Israel if they engaged in stubborn disobedience, as mentioned in Deuteronomy 31:17-18.
This feast being an anonymous “feast of the Jews” should serve as a significant sign to its identity, since the book of Esther is famous for never explicitly referencing the Creator in the text by name or title—He is effectively anonymous in the Purim account. This hidden aspect is a result of a prophecy in the Torah of how the Creator would punish Israel if they engaged in stubborn disobedience, as mentioned in Deuteronomy 31:17-18.
17 And My wrath shall be kindled against him in that day, and I shall abandon them, and I shall hide My face from them, and they shall be consumed, and abundant evils and afflictions shall come on them, and they shall say in that day, ‘Is it not because our Deity is not in our midst that these evils have come upon us?’
|
18 And hiding, I shall hide My face on that day over all the evil which they have done, for they turned to other deities!
|
|
Also, one of the major themes in Esther is the concept of being “hidden”—[Queen Vashti refuses to appear for the king; the Jewish people exist unconsidered among the Persian population; Haman hides the historical reason he has for eliminating the Jews; Esther conceals her Jewish identity from the king; Mordecai’s life-saving deed for the king is long overlooked; Esther’s banquet request has an ulterior motive, etc.]. It thus makes sense for the feast of Purim in the New Testament to also be introduced in an anonymous manner.
This hidden factor contains another notable detail. While the book of Esther does not write out the name or title of the Creator, it does include the four-letter Divine Name—often designated as the Tetragrammaton—in embedded letter skipping in several places.
The following images from a scroll of Esther show those four letters highlighted.
Esther 1:20 has the four letters of the Divine Name as if written backwards—left to right.
Esther 1:20 has the four letters of the Divine Name as if written backwards—left to right.
Esther 5:4 has the four letters of the Divine Name as if written forwards—right to left.
Esther 5:13 again has the four letters of the Divine Name written backwards.
Esther 7:7 again has the four letters of the Divine Name written forwards.
This odd inclusion of the Divine Name in Esther is relevant to the passage in John 5 and its Purim link in that the Divine Name is also embedded in the Gospel’s Aramaic text in equidistant letter skips of 12 (except for one of 11).
John 5:1-2 has the Divine Name hidden in it, its letters shown highlighted below in an ancient manuscript of the Peshitta, appearing in Aramaic script (same Hebrew letters, just constructed differently to allow for a more cursive-type script).
If the Divine Name were to be written out in Aramaic (which is never done in the Aramaic of the Peshitta’s text), it would appear as such:
The oddity of the Divine Name embedded in almost equidistant letter skips in the Aramaic of the Peshitta in this specific passage cannot be ignored. As to why the letter skipping is imperfect, one can only surmise that a deeper truth lay in it—perhaps due to the fact that the Messiah never actually utters the Divine Name during His ministry, and specifically teaches His followers to refrain from doing so when He sculpts a prayer for us to follow. In it, He blatantly says to “sanctify” the Divine Name—that is, to set it apart [see: Matthew 6:9].
With this evidence linking Purim to John 5, let us return to it and contemplate its events to see how this context makes sense in the details of the account.
John 5:2-4 presents the initial information of the situation.
John 5:2-4 presents the initial information of the situation.
|
2 Yet, there was there in Urishlem one place of immersion, that is called [in] Ewrayith Beth-Khesda, and there was in it five porticoes. 3 And in these were cast many people who were ill, and the blind, and the lame, and the withered. And they waited for the moving of the waters, 4 for an angel at certain times descended to the immersion-place and disturbed for them the waters, and he who first descended from after the moving of the waters was healed of all the illness that was for him. |
The scene is at a pool famous for a feature of five porticoes. The evangelist calls it Beth-Khesda--Bethesda in the English, which he says is a Hebrew name.
This is actually the Aramaic pronunciation, not Hebrew—and reflects a subtlety in this Gospel, where whenever he presents a place-name and calls it “Hebrew,” it is actually Aramaic [see also: John 19:13 and 19:17]. The obfuscated appellation may be a hint to the hidden aspect of the passage’s link to Purim.
The site itself is worth focusing upon to accurately assess the role it plays in the account. It was identified by archaeologists, but its precise function has been debated. The Aramaic text says it was a place of MAMUDITHA “immersion-place.”
The site itself is worth focusing upon to accurately assess the role it plays in the account. It was identified by archaeologists, but its precise function has been debated. The Aramaic text says it was a place of MAMUDITHA “immersion-place.”
The term is used in a generic sense as a place of washing, but it is also used of a Torah-based cleansing, as seen in John 9:7, where it references the immersion-place of Siloam, which was a site known to function specifically as a Jewish MIKVEH “pool,” which is specific for commanded washings in the Torah.
Due to this single connection, the site of Bethesda has often been interpreted as a Jewish place of ritual cleansing. It is understandable why this would be the conclusion arrived at from a cursory investigation of it the location.
Further research, however, strongly suggests instead that it was a place that was not considered a sanctioned MIKVEH by Torah any standards. The distinction is important for us to understand its role in the account.
Further research, however, strongly suggests instead that it was a place that was not considered a sanctioned MIKVEH by Torah any standards. The distinction is important for us to understand its role in the account.
Firstly, it is located in an area that was originally outside the walls of Jerusalem and very near the Roman Fortress of Antonia. It would be odd for a site of Jewish cleanliness to be in such proximity to a ritually unclean Roman garrison outpost.
Secondly, the description of the site matches how the ancient worshipers of the Roman idol of healing named Asclepius / Asklepios often built his shrines, called Asklepieions / Asclepions. The porticoes mentioned in the Gospel are significant, as the late archaeologist Alice Walton, in The Cult of Asklepios, wrote:
Secondly, the description of the site matches how the ancient worshipers of the Roman idol of healing named Asclepius / Asklepios often built his shrines, called Asklepieions / Asclepions. The porticoes mentioned in the Gospel are significant, as the late archaeologist Alice Walton, in The Cult of Asklepios, wrote:
Additionally, the ancient Greek geographer Strabo, writing in the early years of the 1st century, described the general appearance of an Asclepion, and it largely matches the description given in the Gospel.
While the Gospel is silent on votives at Bethesda, actual votives of Asclepions, as well as fragments of Romanesque statuettes and Greek inscription have been excavated from the complex of Bethesda, causing many to the conclude that this was most definitely a Roman Asclepion rather than a Jewish MIKVEH site.
Thirdly, while one may protest that a pagan sanctuary actively healing the sick could exist near the holy city of Jerusalem, the truth is that the Jewish believer of the era was candid about the legitimate presence and uncomfortable efficacy of some pagan shrines, as seen in the Talmud Bavli, tractate Avodah Zarah 55a.
Thirdly, while one may protest that a pagan sanctuary actively healing the sick could exist near the holy city of Jerusalem, the truth is that the Jewish believer of the era was candid about the legitimate presence and uncomfortable efficacy of some pagan shrines, as seen in the Talmud Bavli, tractate Avodah Zarah 55a.
To view this pool as pagan would also accord with the definition of an idolatrous site in Hebrew, which is BEIT AVODAH ZARAH “house of strange worship.”
The simple fact is that there is no specific pool recognized in Scripture as a site of healing. The only MIKVEH having curative power in the Word is the Jordan River, as mentioned in 2nd Kings 5 with the account of the Syrian military captain named Naaman, who was commanded to wash there for his healing. It is important to clarify that the Jordan River served in this function just once, however, and was never especially regarded for its restorative waters.
Therefore, to have a pool venerated for its therapeutic waters in the general vicinity of the Roman encampment in Jerusalem that was not supported historically by the Jewish population as having any special curative powers would be the very definition of “strange worship.”
Therefore, to have a pool venerated for its therapeutic waters in the general vicinity of the Roman encampment in Jerusalem that was not supported historically by the Jewish population as having any special curative powers would be the very definition of “strange worship.”
|
It would also seem that the “angel” mentioned here who disturbed the pool’s waters only at certain times was likely not engaged in glorifying the Creator, whose holy Temple stood not many meters away and in which was the Source for true healing for the afflicted. This ethereal angel was instead most certainly a pagan power acting only to further shackle the sick and wounded to the idolatrous waters of the cult of Asclepius, preventing them from seeking out the Holy One who could truly heal them of their diseases.
Additionally, while the majority of the texts record the waters being moved by an “angel” (as mentioned in the Peshitta’s Aramaic of the passage provided herein), only a few variant texts in the Greek include that it was an angel “of the Lord”—manuscripts A K L Y, and a few others. There is no reason to assume that this angel was operating in a holy manner. |
|
With this clarification addressed, we can now return to the Gospel passage and consider again how these details support the unnamed feast as being Purim.
|
5 Yet, there was there one man who, for thirty and eight years had been with an illness. 6 Yeshua saw this [one] who was cast [there], and knew that a long time he had been [such], and said to him, “Do you desire that you should be healed?” 7 The ill [one], he replied, and said, “Yes, my master, yet there is not for me a man who, when that the waters are disturbed, shall cast me into the immersion-place. But while I am coming, another from before me descends.” 8 Yeshua said to him, “You must arise! You must take up your bed and walk!” |
The passage tells of Yeshua healing a paraplegic man. This action is abnormal. Typically, he is the one who is approached by the sick. The fact he takes it upon himself to give the man what he needs parallels the Biblical Purim custom of finding someone in need and giving them a gift—as decreed in Esther 9:22. This gift, however, accomplishes more than a custom, as the text of Shenei Luchot HaBerit explains.
This Purim custom is a festive codification of the Torah’s command to be generous to your kinsmen when he needs help, as seen in Leviticus 25:35.
|
And if your brother diminishes, and his hand falls with you, then you shall sustain him—the sojourner and the inhabitant—and he shall live with you.
|
|
This singling-out of one among many surrounding the pool at Bethesda also supports the notion that the locale was mainly frequented by Gentiles, and not normally Jews. Otherwise, it would be odd for Yeshua to ignore all who were also afflicted and only bestow mercy to one among them if this were a legitimate Jewish MIKVEH. However, it makes sense to focus on him alone if the others present were pagan devotees of Asclepius, and this Jewish man was there out of a long-standing desperation for a healing he was unable to obtain elsewhere.
Another detail in John 5:6 linking to Purim is the man’s age: he was 38 years old.
Only one other mention of a timespan of “38 years” is found in Scripture, in Deuteronomy 2:13-14, of Israel’s duration in the wilderness after leaving Sinai.
Another detail in John 5:6 linking to Purim is the man’s age: he was 38 years old.
Only one other mention of a timespan of “38 years” is found in Scripture, in Deuteronomy 2:13-14, of Israel’s duration in the wilderness after leaving Sinai.
13 “Now you must arise, and cross over yourselves the wadi Zared!” And we crossed over the wadi Zared.
|
14 And the days in which we traveled from Kadeish Barneia, until when we crossed over the wadi Zered were thirty and eight years—until was completed the entire generation of the men of war from among the camp, as which YHWH had sworn to them [would happen].
|
The Midrash of Bemidbar Rabbah 19:24 discusses this detail of time and that the reason they did not cross it was not insignificant.
The Holy One effectively paralyzed their feet from being able to cross over a body of water that could otherwise have been stepped over without any effort! This thirty-eight-year inability to move across a body of water parallels John 5:2-7, where the paraplegic was unable to physically make it to the pool.
Consider also that the Torah commands at the end of the 38 years: KUMU “you must arise” and cross the wadi Zared / Zered.
This command in Torah to get up and move is amazingly echoed in John 5:8 in Yeshua’s word to the paralytic man of KUM “You must arise!”
The two terms are identical, differing only in that the Hebrew is conjugated in the plural--to a people [an imperative in the second person, masculine plural], and the Aramaic is conjugated in the singular--to one man [an imperative in the second person, masculine singular]. Had the Hebrew been in the singular, it would have been completely identical to the Aramaic term spoken by Yeshua.
Although these connections are significant, the question remains: How do these details relate to Purim? The answer is preserved in the wording of Esther 9:21 about the establishment of Purim as a binding feast among the Jewish people.
Although these connections are significant, the question remains: How do these details relate to Purim? The answer is preserved in the wording of Esther 9:21 about the establishment of Purim as a binding feast among the Jewish people.
|
And they raised up upon them to perform the fourteenth day of the month Adar, and the fifteenth day of it, in each and every year…
|
|
The Hebrew text here has the term KAYYEIM “they raised up,” being a conjugated form of the aforementioned term KUMU / KUM. The meaning is substantially different in that one is a physical rising up of a person, and the usage in Esther is a conceptual raising up of a new edict to be followed. This connection, yet in a distinction of meaning, is significant, for it offers a segue into the rest of John 5 and maintains the thematic link to Purim.
This detail begins to be seen as the account resumes in John 5:9.
This detail begins to be seen as the account resumes in John 5:9.
|
And in the son of an hour the man was healthy. And he rose, took up his bed, and walked. And that day was the Sabbath. |
The paralytic is healed immediately and picks up his bed to leave—and the text notes this was on the Sabbath. The sages decreed a prohibition on certain types of labor being done on the Sabbath, and among them is one relating directly to what Yeshua told the man to do, as recorded in the Mishnah, Shabbat 7:2.
The healed man acted solely in obedience to the words of Yeshua, which were: “You must take up your bed…” This command blatantly disregards the edict, and therefore it must be asked: How could Yeshua have commanded this of the man? This question leads to some amazing insights into the details of this account and its relationship to the feast of Purim.
The core of the issue at play lay in the very authority of the sages to decree an edict that is not specified in the Torah. This is seen in Deuteronomy 17:8-13.
The core of the issue at play lay in the very authority of the sages to decree an edict that is not specified in the Torah. This is seen in Deuteronomy 17:8-13.
|
8 For a matter extraordinary for you to judge—between blood and blood, between strife and strife, and between blow and blow—matters of dispute in your gates, then you stand up and ascend to the place which YHWH your Deity shall choose. 9 And you shall come to the priests, the Levi’im, and to the judge who is in those days, and inquire, and they shall tell you the matter of the judgment. |
10 And you shall do concerning the mouth of the matter which they tell you from that place which YHWH shall choose, and you shall guard to do according to all which they instruct you.
11 Concerning the mouth of the Torah which they shall instruct you and concerning the judgment which they shall speak to you, you shall do. Do not turn aside from the word which they shall tell you—to the right or left.
12 And the man who shall act arrogantly on account of not listening to the priest who stands to minister there [to] YHWH your Deity, or to the judge, then that very man shall die, and you shall consume the evil from Yisra’el.
13 And all the people shall hear, and they shall fear, and shall not be arrogant further.
11 Concerning the mouth of the Torah which they shall instruct you and concerning the judgment which they shall speak to you, you shall do. Do not turn aside from the word which they shall tell you—to the right or left.
12 And the man who shall act arrogantly on account of not listening to the priest who stands to minister there [to] YHWH your Deity, or to the judge, then that very man shall die, and you shall consume the evil from Yisra’el.
13 And all the people shall hear, and they shall fear, and shall not be arrogant further.
This is one of several passages that allot Torah-based authorities the permission to enact extra-Torah edicts that are to be strictly followed by the people. The interested reader should consider carefully examining my study: THE THRONE OF MOSES for a comprehensive treatment of a vital, but misunderstood, topic.
Suffice it to say, this power given to the sages moved them to clarify the scope of what constituted the general categories of “work,” and so Yeshua’s direction to carry a bed contradicts their prohibition. The healed man, in an arguably surprising act, obeys Yeshua, lifts up his bed, and leaves the pool of Bethesda.
The man is later questioned for his actions by concerned Jews in John 5:10-13.
The man is later questioned for his actions by concerned Jews in John 5:10-13.
|
10 And the Yihudaye, they said to him who was healed: “This is the Sabbath! It is not authorized for you to carry your bed.”
11 Yet, he replied, and said to them, “He who made me whole—he said to me: ‘…take up your bed and walk!’” 12 and they asked him, “Who is this fellow who said to you to ‘take up you bed and walk?’” 13 Yet, he who had been healed did not know who it was, for Yeshua had been hidden in the great crowd that was in that place. |
|
In an amazing detail, we find that Yeshua hid immediately after healing the paralytic man, and so he was unable to put a name to the one who restored him and then gave the unlikely order to carry his bed away from the place. This is an obvious further connection to Purim in the passage, for it was the identity of the Jews—in particular, Esther—which was hidden in the Purim account.
However, the passage also explains that the man encountered Yeshua later in the Temple, discovered his true identity, and told the inquiring Jews who it was who had given him such a strange command [see: John 5:14-15].
However, the passage also explains that the man encountered Yeshua later in the Temple, discovered his true identity, and told the inquiring Jews who it was who had given him such a strange command [see: John 5:14-15].
The Torah’s sentence for disobeying the decrees of the judges is execution, as mentioned above in Deuteronomy 17:12, and Yeshua’s opponents sought to hold him accountable for precisely that, as seen in John 5:16.
|
And on account of this it was that the Yihudaye persecuted Yeshua, and they searched to execute him—that these he had done on the Sabbath. |
|
In spite of his deliberate declaration for the man to disobey the decree against carrying on the Sabbath, Yeshua did so from a surprising place of authority. That unique position, as it shall soon make sense, aligns amazingly well with the Purim account in Esther.
The passage resumes with Yeshua engaging in a debate with his opponents, and then he makes an important statement in John 5:19.
The passage resumes with Yeshua engaging in a debate with his opponents, and then he makes an important statement in John 5:19.
|
Yeshua replied, and said to them, “Truly, truly I say to you: The son is unable to do a thing from his own desire, except [the] thing that he sees the Father do. For those which the Father does, even the son likewise does.” |
This claim is profoundly in the context of Purim, for the basis of the book of Esther is about sin causing the Creator to hide Himself from the people, as was previously mentioned in this study as being revealed in the unique wording of Deuteronomy 31:17-18. By Yeshua saying he only does what he sees the Father in heaven doing, is another way of saying that he is not actually in sin for his flagrant order against the normal commands of the sages.
This he alludes to the Deuteronomy 31 judgment again in John 5:37 by suggesting that his opponents are those to whom is hidden the Creator’s face.
|
And the Father who sent me—He witnesses concerning me. His voice you have never heard, and neither His appearance have you seen. |
He develops this special position of merit he possesses in his words recorded in John 5:22.
|
For the Father does not judge a man, but rather, all judgment He has given to the son. |
|
This claim is an incredible point Yeshua was making that was in line with the account of Esther and the edict that created Purim. Yeshua’s defense of his actions involving the paralytic man are justified by a claim that the Holy One has given Yeshua the right to enact judgments.
In these words exist the link to the Purim account. Esther and Mordecai were authorized to enact new decrees based on the fact that Mordecai himself was not just a Jewish citizen, but rather, in a very special position of authority among the nation, based on the evidence of Esther 2:21.
In these words exist the link to the Purim account. Esther and Mordecai were authorized to enact new decrees based on the fact that Mordecai himself was not just a Jewish citizen, but rather, in a very special position of authority among the nation, based on the evidence of Esther 2:21.
|
In those days when Mordechai was seated in the gate of the king…
|
The detail of “Mordechai sat at the gate of the King” is telling us that Mordecai was a judge—a member of the Sanhedrin, whom Torah commands were to be appointed and were to sit in the gates, as mentioned in the Deuteronomy 17 passage quoted previously. In fact, that setup was a common one throughout the ancient Middle East—including even in Persia: men of high judicial rank and judges recognized by royalty would sit in the massive gate complexes and hear and decide all manner of legal matters.
This factor of Mordecai’s recognized judicial authority among Israel was recognized in the Talmud Bavli, Kallah Rabbati 2:15.
These details are important to clarify to understand why Mordecai’s institution of the observance of Purim constituted a binding decree for the entire nation.
Yeshua’s actions went beyond the typically accepted decrees of the sages, commanding an act that would normally be a violation of the Torah-appointed judges. The connection to Purim in all of this is that just as Esther and Mordecai decreed a new observance with the feast, so also had they previously authoritatively ordered a fast to be observed by the entire Jewish population.
The timing of the fast, however, is where things become interesting, for the detail in Esther 3:12 sets a vital timeframe for the events of the book.
Yeshua’s actions went beyond the typically accepted decrees of the sages, commanding an act that would normally be a violation of the Torah-appointed judges. The connection to Purim in all of this is that just as Esther and Mordecai decreed a new observance with the feast, so also had they previously authoritatively ordered a fast to be observed by the entire Jewish population.
The timing of the fast, however, is where things become interesting, for the detail in Esther 3:12 sets a vital timeframe for the events of the book.
|
And the scribes of the king, they were called on the first month, on the thirteenth day of it…
|
|
The genocide of the Jewish population of Persia was ratified by the royal scribes on the thirteenth day of the first month—the month of Nisan. Hearing this news made Mordecai make frantic contact with Queen Esther in order for her to rectify their impending doom. Her response, as stated above, was to enact a special fast, and in its span is where it becomes relevant to John 5.
Her fast decree to Mordecai is as such in Esther 4:16.
|
You must go! You must assemble all of the Jews who are found in Shushan, and you must fast on my account, and you shall not eat, and you shall not drink three days—night and day. Even I and my maidens shall fast thusly. And as such I shall go to the king, which is not according to law, and when I am lost, I am lost…
|
With the genocide order decreed on the thirteenth of Nisan, and the subsequent fast by Esther decreed for three days, that means the people would be fasting during Passover and the first special sabbath day of Unleavened Bread, as well.
This timeframe presents a very real problem, for the believer’s behavior during a feast is hinted at by the Torah in Deuteronomy 16:14.
This timeframe presents a very real problem, for the believer’s behavior during a feast is hinted at by the Torah in Deuteronomy 16:14.
|
And you shall rejoice in your feast… |
|
This attitude of rejoicing is understood by the sages to mean that fasting is not allowed during any Torah-mandated feast. Therefore, when Esther decreed a three-day fast at that very time, it was a flagrant flouting of the festival attitude everyone should have been endeavoring to express.
This situation and its effect is cited in the ancient text of Esther Rabbah 8:7.
This situation and its effect is cited in the ancient text of Esther Rabbah 8:7.
This text quotes Esther 4:16 and then 4:17 to convey an important idea: that the prohibition against fasting on Pesach (Passover) was transgressed because the life of the people was held in the balance. The text was interpreting the Hebrew of Esther 4:17—VAYA’AVOR “crossed over” instead as “transgressed,” as its root term of AVAR can indeed mean either definition.
This is the same situation Yeshua beheld in the man at the pool of Bethesda: his life was in danger as a paraplegic who was desperate enough to look for healing at the shrine of Asclepius. Abrogating a prohibition against carrying an object was far more reasonable to remove him from the situation and send him back into the arms of faith—as evidenced by Yeshua’s later meeting with the healed man in the Temple. Yeshua was authorized like Esther and Mordecai to sit as a judge and pronounce a binding decree that—while deliberately disobeying a previous decree—was necessary for the sustaining of a Jewish life. He transgressed an edict appointed by the sages because he also stood in a very special placement of judgment, and therefore, his command did not involve directing the healed man to sin, but to save his own life.
He clarifies this further in John 5:26-27.
He clarifies this further in John 5:26-27.
|
26 For as the Father has life in His own nature, thus He has given also to the son, that he is to have life in his nature, 27 and authorized him that he should also perform judgment. |
Yeshua acted within the divine authority he was given to authorize an act that would otherwise be forbidden. The intent was never to arrogantly ignore the edicts of the sages who came before him, but to temporarily suspend a decree in order that a life could be removed from immediate spiritual danger. His opponents could not see the hidden merit he held, but it was present and allowed him to legitimately heal a man who knew no other option but to sit among idol worshipers and hope that some strange supernatural power might have mercy upon him. Yeshua’s actions at Bethesda show he stepped in and took control of the situation when the paralytic could not take a step towards healing.
In all of these details we see that the feast of Purim is repeatedly alluded to in incredible ways in the Gospel text. Over and over again the passage from John 5 shows that the context is that of Purim, and the only way to properly appreciate what is preserved in that intriguing account of healing is to identify the hidden feast in the Messiah’s ministry of spiritual authority.
All study contents Copyright Jeremy Chance Springfield, except for graphics and images, which are Copyright their respective creators.