Is God Above His own Law?

[HammerStone]

And the Muslim community was largely left out of those processes. It's only been relatively recently that some of them have been brought into those processes. Further, let's not limit ourselves to just the Crusades and Inquisition. Slavery in the US was very much justified in Christian terms and eagerly practiced by Christians, as was Jim Crow laws and a host of other social policies we now look back on with disgust. Nowdays we have abortion clinic bombers and murderers of doctors (both of which receive a fair bit of support from other Christians). Take a day or two sometime and look through the Southern Poverty Law Center's list of hate groups and other organizations and see how many claim to be Christian and/or Bible-based.

And that is part of the geopolitical melting pot that has left the area unstable. Some of it is indeed their "fault" for lack of political organization and a religious strain which tends towards violence and authoritarianism, but much of it is also the result of badly drawn political boundaries that crossed diverse peoples because the westernized world that created them did not know enough.

Slavery is the easy one to name, but again, slavery was a condition that had to be overcome. It historically had not been viewed as such an evil. Even the Bible more or less condones it, admonishing slaves to be good slaves because that was the culture. To look back on slaveholders now and simply dismiss them as wrong is a naive assumption made by a world where state-sanctioned slavery has been rightly eradicated.

As for the SPL, I am aware of the list where they also include hate groups like the American Family Association because of their ideology.

Not one person has said that.

It's called an implication. Unfortunately you possess the frustrating habit of not simply stating what you believe about folks, you just step all around actually saying it.

Funny how that works. When Christian groups want to make their missionary work look good, they cite these Africans as converts to the faith. But when they start behaving badly, suddenly "Ah...they're not true Christians". And you're also not factoring in some of the more extreme policies that American Christian groups are helping African countries draft up and implement (e.g., the death to gays laws). Are those American Christian groups not true Christians?

There are a mixture of "good" Christians and "bad" Christians like anywhere else. There are a number of orthodox Christians in Africa doing great things like Pastor Mbewe and countless others.

The problem with your ideology is you find an issue of disagreement and you write the person off as a bigot. Very few Christians support that particular law, and it's an egregious wrong. Some of those groups are not true Christians, others are misguided.

I wonder....have you ever read any Islamic apologetics?

Heard a few of them speak and debate and I've perused some of the apologetic websites/blogs/schools out there.

Exodus 22:18 "Thou shalt not suffer a witch to live". Where does it say anywhere around that verse that the command from God to kill witches only applies to some of us?

The whole other half of the Bible, particularly Matthew 5:43-48. Upon any cursory reading of the Bible as a unit, it becomes pretty evident that the spirit of the law was not to root out witchdoctors for fun, but to keep the souls away from destruction who would be seduced or deceived. The provisions in the Quran are everyone else that lives and doesn't submit, not those who were an internal threat.

Geez, do you pay attention to fundamentalist Christianity at all? You don't think "Israel fighting for its life" is part of their end times scenario?

I'm in the breadbasket River. Chances are I know more about it than you because I see it all of the time. Not to mention, I kinda run a Christian forum...

Of course Israel is overdone (see Ted Cruz). However, Israel also has rockets being lobbed into it.

And again you just don't seem to have the ability to see anything from a different perspective. If a Muslim told you, "Yes, the Quran does offer justification for killing babies, but only if Allah commands it. And we don't believe Allah would ever command such a thing.", would you accept that? If not, then how can you expect anyone to accept the same thing from you?

Because I'm not in an ISIS Christian counterpart. And yes, I would (and do) accept that from Muslims who don't. I don't believe all of Islam is ISIS, and much of the speaking out we would expect to hear against ISIS is not there because of Muslim culture. It's not 1-D and oversimplified.

And you seem to be completely unable to understand how a Muslim can make that exact same argument.

Because those commands aren't associated with certain periods and cultures. They're repeated throughout. The Muslims don't have a Jesus figure to balance their version of an Old Testament.

And Christianity went through its own period of "kill all the unbelievers", which your only excuse seems to be "But that was a while ago".

No, my "excuse" is that Islam has never stopped because it's endemic.

Yeah, I've kind of noticed that. Like I said, some people just seem to be completely unable to see things from any other perspective than their own.

Or, as is at work here, your own objectivism is just light-years ahead of mine because you're closer to perfection. ;) I get it.

 

[aspen]

Hi Hammerstone,

I do not think one has to go back too far in Church history to find examples of Church sanctioned violence - during the 90s Serbs were murdering Bosnian Muslims. Ireland has endured centuries of Catholic / Protestant fighting. Israel believes it is completely justified in the violent sanctions it imposes on Gaza and the West Bank. America made up the term Manifest Destiny to conquer Native tribes in North America - Spain conquered Central and South America with the blessings of the King and the Vatican.

I think the issue for me in this discussion, is the idea that Christian/Jewish genocide/war/colonization/murder is often justified or explained away - Suhar's posts demonstrate this; while Muslim violence is condemned and considered a foundational principle in Islam. I believe it is a double standard and an example of eye/plank/sand. In my opinion, people are violent for many reasons and they use religion as a moral justification for carrying out atrocities - oppressed people and people with a persecution complex do so more often.

It seems to me that maligning religion and the majority of nonviolent followers of any religious system is inaccurate and counterproductive. All it does is alienate people and provide a false sense of security and self righteousness for the opposition. Admittedly, this seems obvious to me and I find it difficult to get past the fact that others cannot see it as hypocrisy. Perhaps I just need to agree to disagree?

 

[HammerStone]

Aspen, I get what you're saying and I don't think we are quite as far apart as it may seem. I try hard to take a more moderated stance because I have met good and peaceful Muslims, and understanding more about their culture yields some understanding as to why voices don't speak out as strongly against other Muslims. Dr. James White gets the credit for opening my eyes somewhat on this in his various debates and discussions.

However, of all people, I think Bill Maher made a point recently in his rant about Islam. 80-82% of Muslims in Egypt (often considered a somewhat moderated country) believe that someone who leaves the faith should be put to death. And that is nothing at all like Christianity. You may get some fundamentalists who say dumb and hurtful things to people, but you're not going to get that level of answer as a serious answer.

Maher then quoted a Pew poll held in Egypt a few years ago, noting that 82 percent of respondents said stoning is the appropriate punishment for adultery, and over 80 percent thought death was the appropriate punishment for leaving the Muslim religion.

I mean I am sorry, but that sentiment is not Christianity and decidedly not fundamentalist Christianity.

I think the issue for me in this discussion, is the idea that Christian/Jewish genocide/war/colonization/murder is often justified or explained away - Suhar's posts demonstrate this; while Muslim violence is condemned and considered a foundational principle in Islam. I believe it is a double standard and an example of eye/plank/sand. In my opinion, people are violent for many reasons and they use religion as a moral justification for carrying out atrocities - oppressed people and people with a persecution complex do so more often.

I understand the frustration, but I think the point being made is that Islam's central figure (imperfect analogy: their Jesus, give or take some things) was a figure who launched the faith out of violence. Islam has its moments of beauty and learning, but it is plagued by a constant impulse of ISIS-like groups unlike Christianity. Unfortunately, some have started to "objectively" suggest that because Christians believe in the divine inspiration of the Old Testament to a greater degree, they are just like ISIS which we find just as frustrating.

Also, to add on to my previous post to River Jordan, I came across this article from First Things. Peter Enns' interpretation would be more akin to hers while I find Peter Leithart more along the lines of what I would believe/say. There is a certain sense of dissonance between the two "camps" - I think it can be put aside, but like Leithart I am not certain it can be rectified:

http://www.firstthings.com/blogs/leithart/2014/10/the-bible-tells-me-so

As you said, Aspen, we may just agree to disagree. There's room for that, and I don't desire your head for believing different. ;)

 

[River Jordan]

Hi Hammerstone,

I do not think one has to go back too far in Church history to find examples of Church sanctioned violence - during the 90s Serbs were murdering Bosnian Muslims. Ireland has endured centuries of Catholic / Protestant fighting. Israel believes it is completely justified in the violent sanctions it imposes on Gaza and the West Bank. America made up the term Manifest Destiny to conquer Native tribes in North America - Spain conquered Central and South America with the blessings of the King and the Vatican.

I think the issue for me in this discussion, is the idea that Christian/Jewish genocide/war/colonization/murder is often justified or explained away - Suhar's posts demonstrate this; while Muslim violence is condemned and considered a foundational principle in Islam. I believe it is a double standard and an example of eye/plank/sand. In my opinion, people are violent for many reasons and they use religion as a moral justification for carrying out atrocities - oppressed people and people with a persecution complex do so more often.

It seems to me that maligning religion and the majority of nonviolent followers of any religious system is inaccurate and counterproductive. All it does is alienate people and provide a false sense of security and self righteousness for the opposition. Admittedly, this seems obvious to me and I find it difficult to get past the fact that others cannot see it as hypocrisy. Perhaps I just need to agree to disagree?

Couldn't have said it better myself. Thanks for putting a bow on this conversation.

 

[KingJ]

Hi Hammerstone,

I do not think one has to go back too far in Church history to find examples of Church sanctioned violence - during the 90s Serbs were murdering Bosnian Muslims. Ireland has endured centuries of Catholic / Protestant fighting. Israel believes it is completely justified in the violent sanctions it imposes on Gaza and the West Bank. America made up the term Manifest Destiny to conquer Native tribes in North America - Spain conquered Central and South America with the blessings of the King and the Vatican.

I think the issue for me in this discussion, is the idea that Christian/Jewish genocide/war/colonization/murder is often justified or explained away - Suhar's posts demonstrate this; while Muslim violence is condemned and considered a foundational principle in Islam. I believe it is a double standard and an example of eye/plank/sand.1. In my opinion, people are violent for many reasons and they use religion as a moral justification for carrying out atrocities - oppressed people and people with a persecution complex do so more often.

2. It seems to me that maligning religion and the majority of nonviolent followers of any religious system is inaccurate and counterproductive. All it does is alienate people and provide a false sense of security and self righteousness for the opposition. Admittedly, this seems obvious to me and I find it difficult to get past the fact that others cannot see it as hypocrisy. Perhaps I just need to agree to disagree?

1. Correct. Religion is dragged into wars. Soldiers will not die unless they feel God is on their side. This was a classic problem in the hundred years war between France and Britain.

2. Terribly wrong. I would not be a Christian if Jesus told me to chop off the enemies fingertips and head. I would not be a Christian if Jesus raped a nine year old girl. If we were pitting Christianity up against Bhuddhism you would have more of a point. But not Islam. Why is this so hard to understand?

Why are you (and River) Christian and not another religion............?

 

[heretoeternity]

1st John says "sin is transgression of God's law"...does God sin? Of course NOT!
We are mere humans only function on the levels God gave us. How can we possibly understand the power of our Creator, who is all powerful, all knowledgeable, all over the place, who can manifest himself as a human being, while still be in control in Heaven? We cannot..we are but like tiny ants, running around trying to understand, and function, and think we can understand everything God, understands..Wrong, we are but litte grains of sand..God created us, and loves us all, and some day those who He takes to the New Heaven and New Earth as spirit beings will begin to understand..until then, we should be content to follow His Holy word, and Commandments, as Jesus outlined for us in the New Covenant, Gospels..read and absorb His every word!

Couldn't have said it better myself. Thanks for putting a bow on this conversation.

You are very accurate in your submission..Jesus stressed how true Christians are supposed to behave..Love your enemies, pray for your enemies..the Gospel of Peace...
Unfortunately when the anti christs got involved as per the writings of Apostle John 1,2,3 John, he perverted the teachings of Jesus in the Gospels, and false religions sprang up, which taught otherwise..the Roman church comes to mind..they had not problem with their armies doing the crusades, inquistions, and promoting lethal force in getting recruits to their perverted "christian" religion....the breakaway protestant religions are not much better. They got sucked into this violence as well, for two thousand years, and they think it is the correct thing to do..wrong..as you have indicated, we have to follow the Gospel teachings of Jesus, and the actions of Him and His disciples/Apostles, who all followed peaceful recruiting of members, even unto their own deaths...without violence.

 

[KingJ]

You are very accurate in your submission..Jesus stressed how true Christians are supposed to behave..Love your enemies, pray for your enemies..the Gospel of Peace...
Unfortunately when the anti christs got involved as per the writings of Apostle John 1,2,3 John, he perverted the teachings of Jesus in the Gospels, and false religions sprang up, which taught otherwise..the Roman church comes to mind..they had not problem with their armies doing the crusades, inquistions, and promoting lethal force in getting recruits to their perverted "christian" religion....the breakaway protestant religions are not much better. They got sucked into this violence as well, for two thousand years, and they think it is the correct thing to do..wrong..as you have indicated, we have to follow the Gospel teachings of Jesus, and the actions of Him and His disciples/Apostles, who all followed peaceful recruiting of members, even unto their own deaths...without violence.

So you would say that there is never a case for Christians to wage war? We are wrong to bomb ISIS?

Islam is a violent religion that brings war to us.

Why don't you go to ISIS and tell them about your views. I am sure they will have your ear...and fingertips and head.

Rom 12:8 If it is possible, as far as it depends on you, live at peace with everyone. Christians have followed that. You think Muslims / teachings of Muhammad have only been a problem these days?

Only around 3 000 died from the inquisitions which ran for about 800 years. I do not disagree that that was wrong and extremely cruel. I have no clue what scripture they used to justify those acts.

 

[heretoeternity]

So you would say that there is never a case for Christians to wage war? We are wrong to bomb ISIS?

Islam is a violent religion that brings war to us.


Why are you so hung up on Muslims..got a lot of hate in your heart..you better pray and try and get rid of it..you do not display a christian attitude with the attitude you are expressing...time you tried to mellow out on the subject..don't forget..you want to live by the sword (violence) you will die by the sword (violence) Get rid of your prejudices and hatred, don't forget they are created in God's image as well as yourself!

 

[KingJ]

Why are you so hung up on Muslims..got a lot of hate in your heart..you better pray and try and get rid of it..you do not display a christian attitude with the attitude you are expressing...time you tried to mellow out on the subject..don't forget..you want to live by the sword (violence) you will die by the sword (violence) Get rid of your prejudices and hatred, don't forget they are created in God's image as well as yourself!

Don't confuse stupidity with love and self defense with hatred my friend.

 

[KingJ]

..

 

[Wormwood]

I don't have time to read through all of the conversation. However, from what I have seen, it seems this question is framing the discussion in the wrong direction.

God's law was not for God but for his creatures. Is God "bound" by his Law? No, God is bound by no law. He is God. God is only bound by those things which would limit or minimize his goodness or greatness. The Law is for humanity and the Law reflects God's character...and we all agree that the Law is "good." It was given to human beings so they could understand righteousness and to amplify their own sin so they would seek God's righteous salvation.

So for those who would look at a text in the Bible and accuse God's actions as evil are basing that on a law structured by God's own character. This seems nonsensical to me. God gives life and God can take life away. All have sinned and the wages of that sin is death. God owes no person life. The Lord gives and the Lord takes away. Suggesting that God is evil by snuffing out a life for his own divine purposes are essentially telling the potter that he is wrong in what he does with HIS OWN lump of clay. Essentially, such an argument supposes that human life is of greater value than God's sovereignty.

Moreover, it is fraught with presumptions. First, it presumes that we know much more than we do about the situation in the Scripture and the purposes of God in such acts. Second, it presumes that we understand eternity and the fate of infants and other human beings. These are things we simply cannot comprehend and those who would wag their finger and accuse God of evil are doing so on the very measure he has given them in dealing with one another. Its is simply nonsensical. God could flood the whole world (as he did in the days of Noah) and be totally justified in doing so. However, I cannot do so because I am man, and not the Judge of all things. To put God on man's level is sheer blasphemy.

 

[HammerStone]

I'm reading through Dante, and I could not help but think of this thread several times.

In Canto III, the inscription to hell reads:

Through me you go to the grief wracked city;
Through me you go to everlasting pain;
Through me you go a pass among lost souls.
Justice inspired my exalted Creator:
I am a creature of the Holiest Power,
of Wisdom in the Highest and of Primal Love.
Nothing till I was made was made, only eternal beings.
And I endure eternally.
Abandon all hope — Ye Who Enter Here

The problem is we only have the benefit of a rather shallow and encapsulated view of history coupled with the same contemporaneous perspective. We have no way to predict the future, much less analyze it. The core Christian claim is a God that knows intimately the same thing in the beginning as he does in the end.

A smaller hard drive will never fully contain the contents of a larger hard drive. This methodology is inherent when we begin to speak about God. God is presumed to be smarter than us by virtue of being God.

The rub here comes in that for some, taking this viewpoint is indistinguishable from an Islamic claim made by, say, ISIS.

 

[River Jordan]

I don't have time to read through all of the conversation. However, from what I have seen, it seems this question is framing the discussion in the wrong direction.

God's law was not for God but for his creatures. Is God "bound" by his Law? No, God is bound by no law. He is God. God is only bound by those things which would limit or minimize his goodness or greatness. The Law is for humanity and the Law reflects God's character...and we all agree that the Law is "good." It was given to human beings so they could understand righteousness and to amplify their own sin so they would seek God's righteous salvation.

So for those who would look at a text in the Bible and accuse God's actions as evil are basing that on a law structured by God's own character. This seems nonsensical to me. God gives life and God can take life away. All have sinned and the wages of that sin is death. God owes no person life. The Lord gives and the Lord takes away. Suggesting that God is evil by snuffing out a life for his own divine purposes are essentially telling the potter that he is wrong in what he does with HIS OWN lump of clay. Essentially, such an argument supposes that human life is of greater value than God's sovereignty.

Moreover, it is fraught with presumptions. First, it presumes that we know much more than we do about the situation in the Scripture and the purposes of God in such acts. Second, it presumes that we understand eternity and the fate of infants and other human beings. These are things we simply cannot comprehend and those who would wag their finger and accuse God of evil are doing so on the very measure he has given them in dealing with one another. Its is simply nonsensical. God could flood the whole world (as he did in the days of Noah) and be totally justified in doing so. However, I cannot do so because I am man, and not the Judge of all things. To put God on man's level is sheer blasphemy.

I don't believe anyone has said that God is evil. The point is, the OT describes the Israelites committing genocide, and doing so because "God commanded it". If we accept those accounts as 100% true, then we must therefore believe that God could, at any time, command us to commit genocide, or even command someone else to commit genocide against us.

Is that really what we want to believe as Christians? Is that what we tell the world..."Yeah, God just might command us to kill every man, woman, and baby in Iraq...and if He does, we'll do it"?

 

[HammerStone]

Ananias and Sapphira seem to corroborate the notion that God does inflict punishment consistently from the Old to New Testament.

Let's flip the field a bit and ponder this question. If indeed accounts such as those you speak of and the Ananias & Sapphire episode of Acts should be discounted or understood as fiction, then what epistemological basis do you have for believing anything the Bible says? In other words, why don't I just reason God out in my own mind and construct the ideal God?

 

[logabe]

I don't have time to read through all of the conversation. However, from what I have seen, it seems this question is framing the discussion in the wrong direction.

God's law was not for God but for his creatures. Is God "bound" by his Law? No, God is bound by no law. He is God. God is only bound by those things which would limit or minimize his goodness or greatness. The Law is for humanity and the Law reflects God's character...and we all agree that the Law is "good." It was given to human beings so they could understand righteousness and to amplify their own sin so they would seek God's righteous salvation.

So for those who would look at a text in the Bible and accuse God's actions as evil are basing that on a law structured by God's own character. This seems nonsensical to me. God gives life and God can take life away. All have sinned and the wages of that sin is death. God owes no person life. The Lord gives and the Lord takes away. Suggesting that God is evil by snuffing out a life for his own divine purposes are essentially telling the potter that he is wrong in what he does with HIS OWN lump of clay. Essentially, such an argument supposes that human life is of greater value than God's sovereignty.

Moreover, it is fraught with presumptions. First, it presumes that we know much more than we do about the situation in the Scripture and the purposes of God in such acts. Second, it presumes that we understand eternity and the fate of infants and other human beings. These are things we simply cannot comprehend and those who would wag their finger and accuse God of evil are doing so on the very measure he has given them in dealing with one another. Its is simply nonsensical. God could flood the whole world (as he did in the days of Noah) and be totally justified in doing so. However, I cannot do so because I am man, and not the Judge of all things. To put God on man's level is sheer blasphemy.

Couldn't have said it better.

What a God! What a Plan!

Logabe

 

[hopeingod]

I believe that God is limited by his own character from which his morality proceeds ... that's why James can say,

" ... the Father of lights with whom there is no variation or shadow due to change" James 1:17

Why is there no variation (NIV- change) ? ... because God abides by his own standards/law/morality.

And it's from this standpoint that God acts.

Great verse. I'm thinking "with whom there is no variableness nor shadow of turning" (KJV, by memory). I should have given more thought to that verse over the years. It's full of revelation and insight regarding the Lord's character.

 

[Wormwood]

River,

A couple of thoughts on your concerns. First, most Christians believe in a closed canon. The Gospel has been fully revealed to mankind. Jesus was the complete Word of God spoken to us and all we need for life and godliness is contained in the Scriptures. Thus, we are not like the Mormons who believe in ever-going revelation by which God may permit polygamy, murder, etc. on special occasions.

Also, yes, the text of the BIble is accurate. To suggest that it is errant because of our failure to fully comprehend a situation or that we find something distasteful is to open up Pandora's box...theologically speaking. Ultimately, rather than the Word of God judging and dividing bone, flesh, soul and spirit, etc...we become the ones who judge the Word. This is happening all over Christianity today. We dont like the verses on homosexuality...must be an interpolation. I want to have women preachers....lets subtract those verses about submission and male headship. I want a theology of health and prosperity, lets ignore the verses about suffering and the dangers of riches. The list goes on and on. I think you have to make a decision. Either the Bible is God's Word and is authoritiative and trustworthy, or it is not. If we cannot trust the Bible, or we have to filter it by modern sensitivies, we have essentially stripped it of its power. We become the shaping force of the BIble rather than it being the shaping forces of our lives. The Bible is clear throughout that those who change, alter or minimize God's Word will be subject to judgment. I cannot imagine standing before the Lord saying, "Well, I knew the Bible said that...but I just didnt think it was right..so I ommitted it." Good luck with that!

Finally, God is the final Judge. There are areas in the OT and NT that I admit I find puzzling and do not fully comprehend. However, what is very clear is that God is a loving God who wants all to be saved and come to a knowledge of the truth. He is also a judge who judges righteously with finality. It SHOULD make us uneasy that God snuffs out life and even destroys the entire world with a flood because of human sin and wickedness. It is why we need a Savior. I think you are blunting the sharpness and power of the Bible's teaching if you strip away such judgements. I think we see that while children are not guilty of the parent's sin, all sin has an impact on people...even children. Children are impacted by sin in the world. Tornados, birth defects, still born, abuse, propensity toward anger..etc. I dont fully understand the command to wipe out a entire people group....however, I do read that many of these cultures were unbelievibly brutal and evil. Some of these groups worshipped Molech by heating up a bronze idol and putting their babies in its glowing hot hands. Some continually raided, raped neighbors and gutted pregnant women. Some were entire nations like ISIS who were bent on oppressing and brutalizing everyone around them for the sake of their gods. God's desire was that these evil practices be entirely eliminated and that no remnant of these people our their practices would survive to impact his people. I think this has lessons for us as Christians as well as insight into the situation of Israel. The fact that they often ignored God's directives in this regard caused the deaths and suffering of countless more people. Again, there is a difference between a zelot group killing people because of a false religion and false beliefs and a God directed judgment. Remember, God caused the Babylonians to slaughter the Israelites too....so its not a one way street. God's judgment goes both ways. Holiness matters to God, not flesh and blood. Its not about genocide, but truth and righteousness. The difference between God's judgment and the evils of ISIS is that one is based on truth and the other is not. If you are unsure about whether the BIble is truth...which seems to be your question...then that is ultimately a matter of faith. I dont know that there is much of an answer there for you other than to either accept the Bible or dont. Either Christ is your "Lord" or you are your own lord. There isnt really a middle ground. If that makes you uneasy, then I would encourage you to reread Christ's calls to discipleship.

 

[River Jordan]

Hammerstone & Wormwood (sounds like an English detective team ),

All I can say is, not everyone subscribes to the "you have to take every letter of the Bible as 100% literally true, or else throw it away as useless" mindset. To some of us, that seems unnecessarily all-or-none. Oh, and I'd be careful throwing around claims about "what most Christians believe". It's not as black/white as you make it seem.

 

[Xhavon]

Does God define His own morality through His actions or is He limited by His character and morality?

Morality, laws and rules are for His creation. The creator needs no morality because there is no fault in Him. He is perfection and everything He does is perfect. There is no one who has enough information or power to Judge Him.

 

[rockytopva]

1 At that time Jesus went on the sabbath day through the corn; and his disciples were an hungred, and began to pluck the ears of corn and to eat.
2 But when the Pharisees saw it, they said unto him, Behold, thy disciples do that which is not lawful to do upon the sabbath day.
3 But he said unto them, Have ye not read what David did, when he was an hungred, and they that were with him;
4 How he entered into the house of God, and did eat the shewbread, which was not lawful for him to eat, neither for them which were with him, but only for the priests?
5 Or have ye not read in the law, how that on the sabbath days the priests in the temple profane the sabbath, and are blameless?
6 But I say unto you, That in this place is one greater than the temple.
7 But if ye had known what this meaneth, I will have mercy, and not sacrifice, ye would not have condemned the guiltless.
8 For the Son of man is Lord even of the sabbath day. - Matthew 12


"For the Son of man is Lord even of the sabbath day." This indicates that God is indeed above his own law.