Matthew 12:3

But he said unto them, Have ye not read what David did, when he was an hungred, and they that were with him; BUT HE SAID UNTO THEM, HAVE YE NOT READ [or as Mark has it, "Have ye never read"] what David did (1 Samuel 21:1), when he was an hungered, and they that were with him;...

Matthew 12:3._Have you not read what David did? _Christ employs five arguments to refute their calumny. _First, _he apologizes for his disciples by pleading the example of _David, _(1 Samuel 21:6.) While David was fleeing from the rage of Saul, he applied for provisions to the high-priest Ahimelech; and there being no ordinary food at hand, he succeeded in obtaining a part of the holy bread. If David’s necessity excused him, the same argument ought to be admitted in the case of others. Hence it follows, that the ceremonies of the Law are not violated where there is no infringement of godliness. (77) Now Christ takes for granted, that David was free from blame, because the Holy Spirit bestows commendation on the priest who allowed him to partake of the holy bread. When he says, tha

1-8 Being in the corn-fields, the disciples began to pluck the ears of corn: the law of God allowed it, Deuteronomy 23:25. This was slender provision for Christ and his disciples; but they were content with it. The Pharisees did not quarrel with them for taking another man's corn, but for doing it on the sabbath day. Christ came to free his followers, not only from the corruptions of the Pharisees, but from their unscriptural rules, and justified what they did. The greatest shall not have their lusts indulged, but the meanest shall have their wants considered. Those labours are lawful on the sabbath day which are necessary, and sabbath rest is to froward, not to hinder sabbath worship. Needful provision for health and food is to be made; but when servants are kept at home, and families become a scene of hurry and confusion on the Lord's day, to furnish a feast for visitors, or for indul...

Verse Matthew 12:3. _HAVE YE NOT READ WHAT DAVID DID_] The original history is in 1 Samuel 21:1. _WHEN HE WAS AN HUNGERED_] Here hearken to _Kimchi_, producing the opinion of the ancients concerning this story in these words: _"Our_ _rabbins of blessed memory say, that he gave him the shew-bread,_ _c._ The interpretation also of the clause, _Yea, though it were_ _sanctified this day in the vessel_, is this: _It is a small thing to_ _say, that it is lawful for us to eat_ THESE LOAVES, _taken from_ _before the Lord, when we are hungry for it would be lawful to eat_ _this very loaf which is now set on, which is also sanctified in_ _the vessel, (for the table sanctifieth), it would be lawful to eat_ even this

BUT HE SAID UNTO THEM ... - To vindicate his disciples, he referred them to a similar case, recorded in the Old Testament, and therefore one with which they ought to have been acquainted. This was the case of David. The law commanded that twelve loaves of bread should be laid on the table in the holy place in the tabernacle, to remain a week, and then to be eaten by the “priests only.” Their place was then supplied by fresh “bread.” This was called the “showbread,” Leviticus 24:5. David, fleeing before Saul, weary and hungry, had come to Ahimelech the priest; had found only this bread; had asked it of him, and had eaten it contrary to the “letter” of the law, 1 Samuel 21:1. David, among the Jews, had high authority. This act had passed uncondemned. It proved that in “case

EXPOSITION MATTHEW 12:1 The opposition that our Lord met with (1) from his enemies (Matthew 12:1); (2) from his relations (Matthew 12:46-40); ,and the manner in which he dealt with it. MATTHEW 12:1 (1) _Opposition from his enemies._ (A) Conscious and wilful opposition (Matthew 12:1). (α) As regards the sabbath ...

BUT HE SAID UNTO THEM, HAVE YE NOT READ,.... If they had not read the Scriptures, they were very unfit persons either to be teachers, or censurers of others, and must have been very slothful and negligent; and if they had, they could not but have observed the case of David, which Christ produces in vindication of his disciples: WHAT DAVID DID WHEN HE WAS AN HUNGRED; which was the case of the disciples, and is therefore mentioned; it being also the circumstance which could, and did excuse what was done by David and his men: and the Jews themselves own, that in case of hunger the showbread might be eaten, by those that were not priests; not only that which was removed from the table, but that which was upon it; yea, even when there was none to put in its room l; and that David was in the utmost distress, and therefore desired it, and it was granted him on that account. They represent him...

WHAT DAVID DID Jesus' action (Matthew 12:1) is highly significant. "What David did" refers to the time of his rejection and persecution by Saul. (1 Samuel 21:6). Jesus here is not so much the rejected Saviour as the rejected King; hence the reference to David....

9. THE REJECTION CONSUMMATED AND THE BROKEN RELATIONSHIP. CHAPTER 12 1. The Hungry Disciples and the Accusing Pharisees. (Matthew 12:1 .) 2. The Man with the Withered Hand Healed.(Matthew 12:10 .) 3. The Hatred of the Pharisees.(Matthew 12:14 .) 4. The King in Rejection. (Matthew 12:15 .) 5. The Demon Possessed Man Healed. (Matthew 12:22 .) 6. The Blasphemy of the Pharisees and the King's Answer. (Matthew 12:24 .) 7. The Sign of Jo

SABBATH OBSERVANCE (Mark 2:23 *, Luke 6:1). The incident shows that the disciples were learning their Master's teaching. Deuteronomy 23:25 allowed the practice, but the Rabbinical objection to it on the Sabbath was that it was reaping. The variations from Mk. are not important, except the omission of the mistaken reference to Abiathar, and the addition of Matthew 12:5 as a further and stronger historic exception. Various kinds of Sabbath work were not only permitted but commanded to the priests. Matthew 12:6 f. perhaps belonged originally to another occasio