Jesus did not break the Sabbath commandment

Before reading this, keep in mind that I actually like the Pro and he has defeated me in debate before, fair and square. He's a cool cat, as far as I can tell, and he's not allergic to good arguments and valid points. I'm attacking his argument, not him. I am going to alphabetize questions to the Pro which I believe he cannot adequately answer. Seriously, Pro, all you need to do is type the letter, a dot, and a short explanation. Rebuttal: 1) Nowhere did I claim that it was not permissible to pluck heads of grain. My claim was --- as with the Pharisees --- that it was not permissible to do so on the Sabbath. Deuteronomy 23:25 only specifies that it is lawful to do so. It does not mention if it is lawful to do so on the Sabbath. Pro, do you concede that: a. Deuteronomy 23:25 does not specify that this act can be done upon the Sabbath day? If not, say why. b. That I nowhere claimed that plucking heads of grain was, in itself, unlawful (provided it is not done on the Sabbath day, if prohibited by the legal authorities of Israel)? If not, say why. 2) As I pointed out, the priests and judges of Israel have the full legal authority to determine what may or may not be done on the Sabbath. "Ets" may not be a type of corn, but if the judges of Israel say not to pluck corn or grain on the Sabbath, then their ruling is Torah. c. Do you concede that if the priests and judges of Israel rule that corn/grain is not to be plucked on the Sabbath, that "thou shalt do according to the sentence"? If not, say why. 3) The Pro here admits that David broke the Torah by eating the consecrated bread, although justifying it for the sake of preserving life. Therefore, Jesus, by using David breaking the Torah as an example, implying that his presence as a Rabbi while his disciples were plucking corn was a breaking of the Torah in itself. The Pro then resorts to the Mishnah to justify his claim. d. If you reject the authority of the priests and judges of Israel, why would you even bring up the Mishnah? e. Are you implying that Jesus and his disciples were on the verge of starvation? f. Let me get this straight: they were on the verge of starvation with a guy who can feed an entire crowd with a few loaves of bread and some fish? I would argue they were not in danger of dying and, therefore, even the Mishnah would not countenance their actions --- unless, of course, the Mishnah specifies that what they did was permissible on the Sabbath. 4) The Pro claims that the Pharisees (by implication, priests and judges of Israel) are in violation Deuteronomy 4:2, which reads: "Ye shall not add unto the word which I command you, neither shall ye diminish ought from it, that ye may keep the commandments of the LORD your God which I command you." That's fine. Now: Did Moses add or take away from the Torah in issuing the death sentence to the Sabbath stick gatherer? No. What did he do? He took the principles of the Torah and made a sentence. He had no choice but to do so according to Deuteronomy 17:8-13 If the Pro believes interpreting the Torah is adding to and taking away from the Torah, then he is implying the Torah contradicts itself. g. Explain how a legal ruling on the definition of what constitutes "work" on the Torah is "adding" to it, when the judges of Israel, in order to fulfil the Torah, must interpret it and issue judgments. 5) Lastly, the Pro is clearly making the argument that since Jesus is God, he can do what he wants. If that's the case, he doesn't need to justify Jesus not breaking the Sabbath, because Jesus can't possibly break the Sabbath! The entire debate is flawed, because it can be won on a technicality. It's like asking the guy who programmed Mario 3 is Mario can fly without getting that raccoon head thing. Technically, according to the rules of the game, Mario can't do it, but if the programmer wants to make a cheat code, sure Mario can! The Pro has resorted to a theological Game Genie (which only us people born in the 80s know about). But, no game is fun if you're playing it in God-mode, unless you're some kind of sadist who just wants to kill as many creatures as possible, without strategy or danger. Similarly, if we say Jesus is God so he can't break the Sabbath, why even have the debate? Jesus could do anything he wants and he's still "sinless". He could totally kick a puppy in the face and it's just dandy. This doesn't work, and it absolute failure of the Pro's arguments. 6) Now, to address a side issue, did God invalidate the judges of Israel through the quote from Hosea? Let's look at the verse: "For I desired mercy, and not sacrifice; and the knowledge of God more than burnt offerings." (Hosea 6:6) If the Pro is correct in his interpretation, then this means God is nullifying the Torah himself, and doing so during the time of Hosea which was the 8th century B.C. h.Also, if the 1st chapter of Hosea means that God has done away with the Israelite judges and priesthood in 8th century B.C., then why is Ezra re-establishing the whole deal in the 5th century B.C.? i. And why did Mary and Joseph go "to offer a sacrifice according to that which is said in the law of the Lord, A pair of turtledoves, or two young pigeons" (Luke 2:24)? Clearly, all God is saying is that he wants people to end a dry, ritualistic attitude, and not the doing away with the entire Torah. To summarize (with Roman Numerals now): I. The Pro has not demonstrated from the Torah that the judges of Israel had no right to make rulings on what can or cannot be done on the Sabbath. II. Therefore, we have every reason to believe that, according to the Torah itself, the judges' of Israel's ruling was as binding as the Torah itself. III. The Pro has not demonstrated that Jesus even denied breaking the Torah --- he merely said that breaking it was justified because of the example of David, the priests working on the Sabbath and because he was God. Therefore, we can safely conclude: IV. The judges of Israel during the time of Christ had the authority to forbid plucking grain or corn or whatever on the Sabbath and there ruling was legally binding on all Jews, including Jesus. V. Jesus violated the Sabbath or, at the least, stood by while his disciples did so, without reprimending them. Or, VI. If Jesus didn't violate the Sabbath, Pro hasn't done a good enough job proving it. Someone else might be able to, or the Pro himself might even be able to do so in a few weeks, but not during this debate. The end.