What did Jesus say about animals?

'Behold the fowls of the air; for they sow not, neither do they reap, nor gather into barns; yet your heavenly Father feedeth them. Are ye not much better than they?' (v. 26). The Lord Jesus points His disciples to the fowls of the air as example of God's care in feeding His creatures. The fowls do not sow, neither reap, nor gather into barns. But this does not imply that we (that is men) are not in need of doing it. Already in Proverbs 6:6 the sluggard is presented the ant as a picture of diligence. The fowls also have to look for their food. But they do not know any sorrow. And yet, God who feedeth them (Psa. 147:9), is not called 'their' but 'your heavenly Father'. He is here not called the Father of all men not to mention of all animals, but he is called the heavenly Father of His children (see Matt. 5:16;45;48).

tsippor, στρουθίον. It is supposed that various kinds of small birds are alluded to by these names, being so called because of their 'chirping,' which would include the sparrow. The Hebrew word is often translated 'bird,' but only twice 'sparrow.' It is alluded to in the Psalms as a lonely one upon the housetop, and as such finding a house in the courts of God's house. Ps. 84:3; Ps. 102:7. In Palestine sparrows are plentiful, and five were sold for two farthings, and yet the Lord said not one fell without His Father's knowledge, adding "Ye are of more value than many sparrows." If God cares for the birds (and here the diminutive is employed), surely He will care for His own beloved ones. Matt. 10:29, 31; Luke 12:6-7. There are several species of sparrow in Palestine, the Passer cisalpinus, etc. The Petrocossyphus cyaneus, or blue thrush, may be alluded to.

A man is present with a withered hand. They desire now to find some new ground of accusation again Him. Their first attempt had failed. He had read their evil thoughts, and by His answer He had shown that He anticipated the question they now put to Him, "Is it lawful to heal on the Sabbath?" Awful motive, which stands alongside of the question, showing the depths of Satan "that they might accuse Him." The question also discloses the fact that they believed in His healing power. We may well imagine the scene in that synagogue. The Lord in His divine calmness, the unfortunate man with the withered hand, the malicious, accusing Pharisees with their Satanic desire. And now the stillness broken by His voice, "What man shall there be of you who has one sheep, and if this fall into a pit on the Sabbath, will not lay hold of it and raise it up?" There was no answer; of course none could stand up and declare he would not deliver his one sheep out of the pit. "How much better then is a man than a sheep! So that it is lawful to do well on the Sabbath." What a divine logic! How unanswerable this statement!

The ruler had freedom to express himself. Now the Lord speaks again: "Ye hypocrites," so we should read — for a class was addressed and not that ruler only, who was but the mouthpiece of others — "Ye hypocrites: doth not each one of you on the Sabbath loose his ox or his ass from the stall, and lead him away to watering? And ought not this woman, being a daughter of Abraham" (therefore of the privileged race), "whom Satan has bound, lo, these eighteen years, to have been loosed from this bond on the Sabbath-day?" (13:15-16). How preposterous to urge the sanctity of the day against delivering a human creature from Satanic power, when that sanctity was not infringed upon in their eyes by caring for the wants of their animals! Was it wrong to do the latter? By no means. Then à fortiori, it could not be so to do the former. Their practice, where their own temporal interests were concerned, showed the unreality of the ruler's objection, and the groundlessness of his indignation. How easily, and how effectually, did the Lord refute the hypocrites! The effect is noticed. "All His adversaries were ashamed: and all the people rejoiced for all the glorious things that were done by Him." That ruler gained nothing by his move. The people rejoiced, whilst that ruler's hypocrisy, and that of all who supported him, was unmasked, in a way the most illiterate could understand. A moral question that ruler tried to raise in order to condemn the Lord before all. A very old device, which here signally failed. There was a moral question, and it came out, into the light of day, as rank hypocrisy was unmasked, and those convicted of it were put to shame. Works of mercy they owned could be lawfully done on that day. Was that woman not better than an ox or an ass? Was the devil to afflict a poor creature because it was the Sabbath? "Satan has bound," it should be remarked, the Lord said. Yet it was a spirit of infirmity from which she suffered. A demon had possessed her, not the devil, for demons are an order of beings distinct from him who fell. We read not that they fell. But we have it here on the highest authority that they are under Satan's directions, for what they do is said to be done by him.

But grace will not stay its work or withhold the truth to please men: Jesus was there to make known God and do His will. "And behold, there was a certain dropsical [man] before Him." No religious forms can shut out the ruin that is in the world through sin, and our Lord, filled with the good that was in His heart, answers their thoughts before they uttered them, speaking to the lawyers and Pharisees with the question, "Is it lawful to heal on the sabbath?" His question was an answer to their evil judgments. It was impossible to deny it. Hardened as man was and habituated to evil, he could not say that it was unlawful to heal on the Sabbath day. Yet they really wished that it should be so, and, as we know, made it repeatedly a ground of the most serious accusation against the Lord. However, here He challenges those who were ostensibly the wisest and most righteous in Israel, the lawyers and Pharisees; but "they were silent." The Lord then takes the dropsical man, heals him, and lets him go. Then He answers them further by the question: "Of which of you shall an ass† or an ox fall into a well and he doth not straightway pull him up on the sabbath day?" (Cf. Matt. 12:11.) This is a little different from His reply to the ruler of the synagogue in the chapter before. There it was more the need of the animal, the ordinary supply of his wants. But here it is a more urgent case. It was not simply that the animal needed watering and must be led to it, but "of which of you shall an ass or an ox fall into a well and he doth not straightway pull him up on the sabbath day?" It was lawful, therefore, to look after the good of an animal on that day. They proved it where their own interests were concerned. God had His interests and love: therefore was Jesus in this world, therefore was He in the Pharisee's house. He had meat to eat that they knew not of. It was not the Pharisee's bread, but to do the will of His Father. In healing the dropsical man He was glorifying His Father. He was boldly acting upon that which even they durst not deny — the right of healing on the Sabbath day. If they could relieve on that day their animals from their pain or danger, what title had they to dispute God's right to heal the miserable among men, among Israel? "On the sabbath." Edd. here add "or not," following ℵBDL, 1, 69, Syrcu Memph. The words are not in AEXΔ, etc., cursives in general (33), Syrsin Amiat. Arm., etc. They are attested by some Old Lat. and not by others. †"An ass": so ℵKLXΠ, etc., 1, 33, Syrrsin hier (sin.: "ox or ass"), Memph. Arm. Aeth. D: πρόβατον (as Matthew). Edd. adopt "a son," after ABEGH and later uncials, many cursives, Syrrcu pesch hcl Sah. Cyril. Alex. The balance of Latt. favours "ass." — D has "sheep." See W.H., App., p. 62, also note 368 in Part II. of this volume.

It is an arresting word, "take no thought for your life," whether in regard to daily food or necessary clothing. Though necessary, these things must not be allowed to occupy time and thought as though they were vital matters. We have far more than this to live for. The birds are a pointed object lesson for us. They make no preparations for obtaining meals, yet God the Father has provided this necessity for them in such a way that they simply obtain their food as they need it. True it is that we could not exist in the same way, but faith may nevertheless count upon God to provide through giving employment, health, strength, or whatever is required to take care of these things. Faith in a living God is the vital matter here, faith that does not degenerate into anxiety. Man, who is capable of a conscious knowledge of, and communion with, his Creator, is of much more value to God than the birds.

The Lord appeals to the disciples, in view of the creature subjected to man, against personal anxiety. It is humbling but wholesome for them to draw lessons of dependence thence. And first, He points to the winged class, familiar everywhere to human eyes, as objects of divine care and dependent on His beneficent provision. How much more are not His own in their incomparably higher and nearer relationship to Him! and how powerless too is their anxiety to effect relief!

"Look at the birds of the heavens, that they sow not, nor reap, nor gather into barns; and your heavenly Father feedeth them. Are not ye of much more value than they? And which of you by being anxious can add one cubit to his stature?" (vers. 26, 27.)

In the instance at Gadara the fate of the swine forms a plain and unmistakable example of the tendencies and objects of Satan and his demons. The violent end of the beasts was but an analogy of the ultimate end of those who are under the direction and power of darkness. Only in the absence of that superior nature which man possesses in contrast with the brutes, destruction followed immediately after the entrance of the demons into the swine. They at once rushed to their death. In the case of man the end is similar though it may be reached more slowly. Whatever men may be deceived to think, the object of the evil one is to destroy, while that of the Holy One of God is to deliver and save.

The sheep showed its activity in wandering, and in wandering far away. The shepherd's activity was displayed in going after it to bring it back. No pains too great, no distance too far for him to go. To find it was the shepherd's settled purpose. He rested not, he stopped not, till then. And laying it on his shoulders rejoicing, he carried it home. His joy was demonstrated, a joy which, as far as the parable goes, never ends. For, reaching home, he called all his friends and neighbours to rejoice with him, who had found his sheep which was lost. A picture of course this is of that which might be seen in natural life. It is also a revelation on the part of the Lord of what was, and is, still going on, sinners sought and found by Him, and He rejoicing over them with joy unceasing. All that we read of the sheep is its wandering, not a word of its feelings when found. Attention is directed solely to those of the shepherd, and that by Him who had come to seek and to save the lost. The murmuring Pharisees understood not what it was that was going forward. They divined not why the publicans and sinners were attracted to the Lord, nor did they enter into His joy in such people finding their way to Him.

The Lord could say to His disciples, as though it was so obvious they must all know it perfectly well: "Ye are of more value than many sparrows." Here was Jonah placing a higher value on a gourd (more worthless than a sparrow), than on a city that was so immense that there were a hundred and twenty thousand tiny children in it (notice the Lord had counted the little children — He knew them each one), "and also much cattle."