Scripture: Matthew 12:1-8

1 At that time Jesus went through the grainfields on the Sabbath; his disciples were
hungry, and they began to pluck heads of grain and to eat. 2 But when the Pharisees saw
it, they said to him, "Look, your disciples are doing what is not lawful to do on the
Sabbath." 3 He said to them, "Have you not read what David did, when he was hungry,
and those who were with him: 4 how he entered the house of God and ate the bread of the
Presence, which it was not lawful for him to eat nor for those who were with him, but
only for the priests? 5 Or have you not read in the law how on the Sabbath the priests in
the temple profane the Sabbath, and are guiltless? 6 I tell you, something greater than the
temple is here. 7 And if you had known what this means, `I desire mercy, and not
sacrifice,' you would not have condemned the guiltless. 8 For the Son of man is lord of
the Sabbath."
Meditation: What does the commandment "keep holy the Sabbath" require of us? Or
better yet, what is the primary intention behind this command? The religious leaders
confronted Jesus on this issue. The "Sabbath rest" was meant to be a time to remember
and celebrate God's goodness and the goodness of his work, both in creation and
redemption. It was a day set apart for the praise of God, his work of creation, and his
saving actions on our behalf. It was intended to bring everyday work to a halt and to
provide needed rest and refreshment. Jesus' disciples are scolded by the scribes and
Pharisees, not for plucking and eating corn from the fields, but for doing so on the
Sabbath. In defending his disciples, Jesus argues from the scriptures that human need has
precedence over ritual custom: In their hunger, David and his men ate of the holy bread
offered in the Temple. Jesus also quoted of the Sabbath work involved in worship in the
Temple. This kind of work was usually double the work of worship on weekdays. Jesus
then quotes from the prophet Hosea (6:6): I desire mercy, and not sacrifice. While the
claims of ritual sacrifice are important to God, mercy and kindness in response to human
need are even more important. Do you honor the Lord in the way you treat your neighbor
and celebrate the Lord's Day?

"Lord, make us to walk in your way: ‘Where there is love and wisdom, there is neither
fear nor ignorance; where there is patience and humility, there is neither anger nor
annoyance; where there is poverty and joy, there is neither greed nor avarice; where there
is peace and contemplation, there is neither care nor restlessness; where there is the fear
of God to guard the dwelling, there no enemy can enter; where there is mercy and
prudence, there is neither excess nor harshness'; this we know through your Son, Jesus
Christ our Lord." (Prayer of Francis of Assisi, 1182-1226)

Matthew 12:1-8
Ronny Milliner
Indianapolis, Indiana
What does fornication, murder, lying, abortion, adultery, instrumental music in
worship to God, and church supported orphan homes have in common? There
might be a number of things you might be able to think of, but one thing that
these things have in common is an abuse of Matthew 12:1-8.
Individuals who believe that they can engage in the above practices have often
used this passage of Scripture as a "proof text." We want to examine their abuse
and see exactly what is found in this passage.
Abuses By Modern False Teachers
Those who are familiar with situation ethics are probably aware of this passage
being used to justify everything from murder to lying to fornication and more.
Joseph Fletcher, author of Situation Ethics, wrote, "The plain fact is that love is
an imperious law unto itself. It will not share its authority with any other laws,
either natural or supernatural. Love is even capable of desecrating the Holy of
Holies, the very tabernacle of the altar, if human hunger cries for help . . . . The
periscope Matt. 12:1-8 . . . left no doubt about Jesus' willingness to follow the
radical decisions of love. He puts his stamp of approval on the translegality of
David's . . . act" (p. 85). Of course, Fletcher's application is that anything could
be permissible, depending on the situation in which one found himself.
An author associated with the Christian Church used this passage to ridicule our
idea of the silence of the Scriptures. He wrote, "But this theory of . . . 'law of
prohibitive silence' contradicts Jesus here, since God had not expressly stated
anywhere that any others than priests could eat that bread and live, much less
live and be justified by Jesus' (sic). This is a case where not the letter but the
real spirit behind the letter was observed in careful conformity to God's intention
and will" (Harold Fowler, The Gospel of Matthew, p. 610). If this argument be so,
then there would be nothing wrong with playing instruments in worship to God.
Plus, anything else that was not specifically prohibited would be permissible.
In an article entitled "The Exception-Making God," brother Michael Hall writes,
"The hunger of David and his men, the need of Jesus and His 12-member staff,
the need of the physically maimed who sought to be healed on the Sabbath
(Luke 13:11-17), etc., are all examples of human need that necessitated an
exception to some rule . . . . God is flexible about His rules because he does care
about men. That's why the Bible is not a legal document, but a book of principles
. . . everything is not as cut and dry as you might think!" (Ensign, January 1978,
pp. 14,13). So the conclusion could be made that due to the physical needs of
orphans, that we can set aside any rule that might be found in the Bible dealing
with the matter in order to meet the needs of the orphans. In other words, the
situation sets aside any law of God.
The Allegations Against The Disciples
The Pharisees accused the Lord's disciples of breaking the Sabbath law. The
violation as viewed by these Jews was in the act of the disciples' plucking the
heads of grain. The Pharisees would have called this action harvesting, thus
work.
But were the disciples really breaking God's law or were they just violating one
of the many traditions of the Jewish fathers? The Law of Moses certainly
prohibited harvesting on the Sabbath (Ex. 34:21). But that same law made a
distinction between harvesting with a sickle and the simple plucking of a few
heads of grain by hand (Deut. 23:25).
Actually, the Pharisees seem to have had the same problem that our Baptist
friends have concerning the word "work." When the Law commanded no "work"
on the Sabbath, was all work or just some types of work forbidden? A study of
the passages on the following chart shows that not all "work" was forbidden.
THE SABBATH COMMANDMENT
NOT PERMITTED PERMITTED
1. Plowing and harvesting (Ex. 1. Holy convocation - worship to God (Lev.
34; 21). 23:3; Ezek. 46:3; Lk. 4:16-30.
2. Gathering sticks (Num. 2. Afflict God's punishment (Num. 15:32-36).
15:32-36).
3. Kindling a home fire (Ex. 3. Circumcision (Jn. 7:22-23).
35:3).
4. Baking and boiling (Ex. 4. Work of the Temple (Num. 28:9-10; Lev.
16:23). 24:8; Mt. 12:5).
5. Treading, hauling and trading 5. Good works (Mt. 12:9-14).
(Neh. 13:15-18).
WORKS OF PROFIT WORKS OF GOD

Thus, the disciples had only violated the Pharisees' interpretation of the Law, not
the Law itself. The Pharisees should "not have condemned the guiltless" (Mt.
12:7).
The Arguments Of Jesus
In answering the charge of the Pharisees, Jesus uses five arguments. His first
argument is the case of David eating the shewbread. The Pharisees would not
have wanted to condemn their great king David. Jesus, in appealing to this
situation, does not justify or condemn David. He simply appeals to these Jews on
their own ground. R.C. Foster, in his Studies in the Life of Christ, comments, "it
is the 'argumentum ad hominem' - the argument based upon that which the
opponent accepts. The Jews did not criticize David for eating the shewbread
under such trying circumstances, why critize the disciples when they were but
breaking the Pharisees interpretation of the Sabbath law?" (p. 457).
Jesus' second argument concerned the work of the priests in the Temple. They
had a number of duties in the Temple. For example, they were to double the
daily sacrifices on the Sabbath. Would the Pharisees' condemn the priests as
violating the Law? Jesus adds, "But I tell you, there is something greater than
the temple here!" (Mt. 12:6, Williams Translation). The priests worked in the
service of the Temple, but the apostles worked in the greater service of Christ.
Argument number three was based on Hosea 6:6, "For I desire mercy and not
sacrifice, and the knowledge of God more than burnt offerings." Actually this
statement is a Hebraism called "the limited negative," and could be translated, "I
desire not only sacrifice but also mercy." God was not saying He had no desire
for sacrifices, for it was He who had commanded sacrifices. But He also
commands mercy. The work of Jesus, and so the work of His apostles, was the
 work of mercy.
The fourth argument is found in Mark's gospel of this account. Mark 2:27 reads,
"And He said to them, The Sabbath was made for man, and not man for the
Sabbath." The Sabbath was not made to be a burden on man. It was designed to
give man a time to get away from his physical labors. He would thus have time
to reflect on things spiritual and engage in the works of God. The Pharisees did
not have the proper understanding of the Sabbath.
Finally Jesus shows this question is a matter of authority and that He "is Lord
even of the Sabbath" (Mt. 12:8). J.W. McGarvey summarized this last argument
when he wrote, "As Lord of the day Jesus had right to interpret it and to apply it,
and to substitute the Lord's day for it. In asserting his Lordship over it, Jesus
takes the question outside the range of argument and brings it within the range
of authority" (The Fourfold Gospel, p. 213).
Conclusion
If this view that the human need takes precedence over any law of God is
correct, then there would be no need to suffer for Christ. Every martyr that died
for His Lord died needlessly if this view is so. Another consequence of this
doctrine is that the will of man would be above the will of God. What God stated
could only be applied by the will and situation of man. Every one would have
their own interpretation in their situation making the law of God meaningless.
Disobeying even so-called "ceremonial law" carried grave consequences. Ask
Nadab and Abihu (Lev. 10:1-2). Instead of teaching a setting aside of divine law,
Jesus taught that even the least commandment must be obeyed (Mt. 5:17-20;
23:23). We leave these modem thinkers with this question: Would Jesus have
been justified in obeying the Devil by turning stones into bread, because of the
"human need" for food (Mt. 4:1-4)? We think not.
Guardian of Truth XXVIII: 17, pp. 527-528
September 6, 1984
Home Page | Top of Page | © Guardian of Truth Foundation

So it was not sin for the one Jesus told to take up his bed and walk to do so on the
Sabbath. For one, it was not for personal pleasure or monetary gain, which is the
work that is breaking of the Sabbath. Yet, God didn’t count it as sin against David for
he and his men eating the showbread that was only for the priests, because of the
circumstances. Man was not made for the Commandments or laws of God, but they
for man. God puts life above such laws. There is a time and place for all things
according to Ecclesiastes 3:1 “To every thing there is a season, and a time to
every purpose under the heaven.” That is scripture no one wants to believe today.
We can’t accept that the same God who said don’t hate or kill, tells us there is a time
to kill, a time to hate, a time for war. But many professing believers today deny that
any war or killing is acceptable, as capital punishment because they don’t know God
or His Word and don’t want to believe Him.
And keeping the Sabbath, keeping a day of rest is one thing they don’t want to do,
even if they do go to church on Sunday, most of the day is still following their own
pleasures or working, rather than believing and obeying God.

At that time - Luke Luk 6:1 fixes the time more particularly. He says that it was "the second
Sabbath after the first." To understand this, it is proper to remark that the "Passover" was
observed during the month "Abib," or Nisan, answering to the latter part of March and the
first of April. The feast was held seven days, commencing on the fourteenth day of the month
Exodus 12:1-28; Exodus 23:15, on the "second" day of the paschal week. The law required
that a sheaf of "barley" should be offered up as the first-fruits of the harvest, Leviticus 23:10-
11. From this day was reckoned seven weeks to the feast of "Pentecost" Leviticus 23:15-16,
called also the feast of weeks Deuteronomy 16:10, and the feast of the harvest, Exodus
23:16. This second day in the feast of the Passover, or of unleavened bread, was the
beginning, therefore, from which they reckoned toward the Pentecost. The Sabbath in the
week following would be the "second Sabbath" after this first one in the reckoning, and this
was doubtless the time mentioned when Christ went through the fields. It should be further
mentioned, that in Judea the barley harvest commences about the beginning of May, and
both that and the wheat harvest are over by the twentieth. Barley is in full ear in the
beginning of April. There is no improbability, therefore, in this narrative on account of the
season of the year. This feast was always held at Jerusalem.

Through the corn - Through the "barley," or "wheat." The word "corn," as used in our
translation of the Bible, has no reference to "maize," or "Indian corn," as it has with us. Indian
corn was unknown until the discovery of America, and it is scarcely probable that the
translators knew anything about it. The word "corn" was applied, as it is still in England, to
wheat, rye, oats, and barley. This explains the circumstance that they "rubbed it in their
hands" Luke 6:1 to separate the grain from the chaff.

Clarke's Commentary on the Bible

At that time Jesus went on the Sabbath-day through the corn - "The time is determined by
Luke in these words, εν σαββατω δευτεροπρωτω, that is, on the Sabbath from the second-
first.

"Provision was made by the Divine law that the sheaf of first-fruits should be offered on the
second day of the pass-over week, Leviticus 23:10, Leviticus 23:11. On the morrow after the
Sabbath, the priest shall shake (or wave) it. Not on the morrow after the ordinary Sabbath of
the week, but the morrow after the first of the pass-over week, which was a Sabbatic day,
Exodus 12:16; Leviticus 23:7. Hence the seventy, επαυριον της πρωτης, the morrow of the
first day; the Chaldee, the morrow after the holy day. The rabbins, Solomon and Menachen,
have it, On the morrow after the first day of the pass-over feast; of which mention had been
made in the verses foregoing.

"But now, from the second day of the pass-over solemnity, wherein the sheaf was offered,
were numbered seven weeks to pentecost: for the day of the sheaf, and the day of pentecost
did mutually respect each other; for on this second day of the pass-over, the offering of the
sheaf was supplicatory, and by way of prayer, beseeching a blessing upon the new corn,
and leave to eat it, and to pot in the sickle into the standing corn. Now, the offering of the
first-fruit loaves on the day of pentecost, (Leviticus 23:15-17), did respect the giving of
thanks for the finishing and housing of the barley-harvest. Therefore, in regard of this
relation, these two solemnities were linked together, that both might respect the harvest; that,
the harvest beginning; this, the harvest ended: this depended on that, and was numbered
seven weeks after it. Therefore, the computation of the time coming between could not but
carry with it the memory of that second day of the pass-over week; and hence pentecost is
called the feast of weeks, Deuteronomy 16:10. The true calculation of the time between
could not otherwise be retained, as to Sabbaths, but by numbering thus: this is σαββατον
δευτεροπρωτον, the first Sabbath after the second day of the pass-over. This is
δευτεροδευρερον, the second Sabbath after that second day. And so of the rest. In the
Jerusalem Talmud, the word ‫ שבת פרוטוגמייא‬shebeth protogamiya, the Sabbath,
πρωτογαμιας, of the first marriage, is a composition not very unlike." Lightfoot.

His disciples were an hungered - Were hungry. The former is a mode of expression totally
obsolete. How near does the translation of this verse come to our ancient mother-tongue, the
Anglo-Saxon! - The Healer went on rest-day over acres: truly his learning knights hungred,
and they began to pluck the ear and eaten - We may well wonder at the extreme poverty of
Christ and his disciples. He was himself present with them, and yet permitted them to lack
bread! A man, therefore, is not forsaken of God because he is in want. It is more honorable
to suffer the want of all temporal things in fellowship with Christ and his followers, than to
have all things in abundance in connection with the world.

Gill's Exposition of the Entire Bible

At that time Jesus went on the sabbath day through the corn,.... That is, the corn fields, as
the other evangelists express it. It being on a sabbath day, it is very probable, that Christ and
his disciples were going to some public place of worship, the way to which lay through some
fields of corn, which were now ripe: for Luke says, it was on the "second sabbath after the
first", or rather "the first sabbath after the second"; that is, the first sabbath after the second
day of the passover, when the sheaf of the first fruit was offered, and harvest was begun.
And his disciples were an hungered; it being in the morning before they had broke their fast;
and this circumstance is mentioned to show the reason of the following action, and to excuse
it: at which the Pharisees were so much offended, and of which they accused them, as
having done what was very criminal:

and began to pluck the ears of corn, and to eat; Luke adds, "rubbing them in their hands";
and so here in the Syriac, Arabic, and Persic versions, it is rendered, "they began to rub": as
they passed along, they plucked off the ears of corn, either barley or wheat, and rubbed
them in their hands, to get the grain clear of the husk, or beard, and eat them; contenting
themselves with such mean and unprepared food, when the Jews on that day fed on the
best of dainties (e).

(e) Vid. Maimon. Hilch. Sabbat, c. 30. sect. 7, 8, 9, 10.

Vincent's Word Studies

Time (καιπω)͂ͅ

Rev., season. The word implies particular time; as related to some event, a convenient,
appropriate time; absolutely, a particular point of time, or a particular season, like spring or
winter.

Corn (σποριμων)

From σπειρω, to sow. Properly, as Rev., corn-fields.

Geneva Study Bible

At {1} 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.

(1) Of the true sanctifying of the sabbath, and the breaking of it.

People's New Testament

12:1 The Pharisees Take Counsel Against and Seek to Destroy Jesus

SUMMARY OF MATTHEW 12:

Jesus Accused of Sabbath Breaking. The Son of Man Lord of the Sabbath. Healing the
Withered Hand. The Pharisees Take Counsel to Destroy Jesus. The Tenderness of Christ. A
Dumb and Blind Demoniac Healed. Accused of Help from the Devil to Cast Out Demons. A
Divided Kingdom. Blasphemy Against the Holy Spirit. Shall Give Account for Idle Words. The
Sign of Jonah. The Queen of the South. His Mother and Brethren. Who Are My Mother and
Brethren?.

At that time. Compare Mr 2:23-28 Lu 6:1. About the time when grain begins to ripen in
Judea, that is, not far from the first of May.

Through the corn fields. Wheat or barley. The paths, the only roads, led and still lead through
the grain fields in Palestine.

Began to pluck. Permitted by Moses (De 23:25).

Wesley's Notes

12:1 His disciples plucked the ears of corn, and ate - Just what sufficed for present
necessity: dried corn was a common food among the Jews. Mark 2:23; Luke 6:1.

Scofield Reference Notes

[3] sabbath

(1) The sabbath ("cessation") appears in Scripture as the day of God's rest in the finished
work of creation. Gen 2:2,3. For 2500 years of human life absolutely no mention is made of
it. Then the sabbath was revealed Ex 16:23 Neh 9:13,14, made a part of the law Ex 20:8-11
and invested with the character of a "sign" between Jehovah and Israel, and a perpetual
reminder to Israel of their separation to God Ex 31:13-17. It was observed by complete rest
Ex 35:2,3 and by Jehovah's express order a man was put to death for gathering sticks on the
sabbath day. Num 15:32-36. Apart from maintaining the continued burnt-offering Num 28:9,
and its connection with the annual feasts Ex 12:16 Lev 23:3,8 Num 28:25 the seventh day
sabbath was never made a day of sacrifice, worship, or any manner of religious service. It
was simply and only a day of complete rest for man and beast, a humane provision for man's
needs. In Christ's words, "The sabbath was made for man, and not man for the sabbath." Mk
2:27.

(2) Our Lord found the observance of the day encrusted with rabbinical evasions Mt 12:2 and
restrictions, wholly unknown to the law, Song that He was Himself held to be a sabbath
breaker by the religious authorities of the time. The sabbath will be again observed during
the kingdom age Isa 66:23.

(3) The Christian first day perpetuates in the dispensation of grace the principle that one-
seventh of the time is especially sacred, but in all other respects is in contrast with the
sabbath. One is the seventh day, the other the first. The sabbath commemorates God's
creation rest, the first day Christ's resurrection. On the seventh day God rested, on the first
day Christ was ceaselessly active. The sabbath commemorates a finished creation, the first
day a finished redemption. The sabbath was a day of legal obligation, the first day one of
voluntary worship and service. The sabbath is mentioned in the Acts only in connection with
the Jews, and in the rest of the N.T. but twice. Col 2:16 Heb 4:4. In these passages the
seventh day sabbath is explained to be to the Christian not a day to be observed, but a type
of the present rest into which he enters when "he also ceases from his own works" and trusts
Christ.

Jamieson-Fausset-Brown Bible Commentary

CHAPTER 12

Mt 12:1-8. Plucking Corn Ears on the Sabbath Day. ( = Mr 2:23-28; Lu 6:1-5).

The season of the year when this occurred is determined by the event itself. Ripe corn ears
are found in the fields only just before harvest. The barley harvest seems clearly intended
here, at the close of our March and beginning of our April. It coincided with the Passover
season, as the wheat harvest with Pentecost. But in Luke (Lu 6:1) we have a still more
definite note of time, if we could be certain of the meaning of the peculiar term which he
employs to express it. "It came to pass (he says) on the sabbath, which was the first-
second," for that is the proper rendering of the word, and not "the second sabbath after the
first," as in our version. Of the various conjectures what this may mean, that of Scaliger is the
most approved, and, as we think, the freest from difficulty, namely, the first sabbath after the
second day of the Passover; that is, the first of the seven sabbaths which were to be
reckoned from the second day of the Passover, which was itself a sabbath, until the next
feast, the feast of Pentecost (Le 23:15, 16; De 16:9, 10) In this case, the day meant by the
Evangelist is the first of those seven sabbaths intervening between Passover and Pentecost.
And if we are right in regarding the "feast" mentioned in Joh 5:1 as a Passover, and
consequently the second during our Lord's public ministry (see on [1268]Joh 5:1), this
plucking of the ears of corn must have occurred immediately after the scene and the
discourse recorded in Joh 5:19-47, which, doubtless, would induce our Lord to hasten His
departure for the north, to avoid the wrath of the Pharisees, which He had kindled at
Jerusalem. Here, accordingly, we find Him in the fields-on His way probably to Galilee.
1. At that time Jesus went on the sabbath day through the corn-"the cornfields" (Mr 2:23; Lu
6:1).

and his disciples were an hungered-not as one may be before his regular meals; but
evidently from shortness of provisions: for Jesus defends their plucking the corn-ears and
eating them on the plea of necessity.

and began to pluck the ears of corn, and to eat-"rubbing them in their hands" (Lu 6:1).

Matthew Henry's Concise Commentary

12:1-8 Being in the corn-fields, the disciples began to pluck the ears of corn: the law of God
allowed it, De 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 indulgence, the case is very different. Such
things as these, and many others common among professors, are to be blamed. The resting
on the sabbath was ordained for man's good, De 5:14. No law must be understood so as to
contradict its own end. And as Christ is the Lord of the sabbath, it is fit the day and the work
of it should be dedicated to him.

Plucking grain out of the fields for personal consumption on the Sabbath day - "No! No!"
said the Pharisees and demanded an explanation. Jesus refers them back to I Samuel
21:3-6 (see notes) when David and his men were fed by the high priest from the
loaves of consecrated bread. In that passage, there was no indication that God was at all
displeased with this action. Furthermore, the Pharisees were overly embellishing the law
of reaping on the Sabbath. The disciples weren't reaping; they were only taking
advantage of the provisions of the law based upon Deuteronomy 23:25 (see notes),
"When thou comest into the standing corn of thy neighbour, then thou mayest pluck the
ears with thine hand; but thou shalt not move a sickle unto thy neighbour’s standing
grain." Reaping would have been "moving a sickle" upon the grain. And then here's that
"Son of man" phrase again in Mark 2:28, "Therefore the Son of man is Lord also of the
sabbath."
I should point out that the KJV rendering of "corn" for the Greek noun "stachus" might
be a little confusing to those who know the history of our American corn. The "corn" in
this passage is the 17th-century description of grain. The actual product in the fields
would have been wheat or barley, not our American maize (aka corn).

Matthew records a second example by Jesus to these Pharisees in Matthew 12:5-6 - the
fact that the Mosaic Law assigns priests in the tabernacle/temple duties that they are
required to perform on the Sabbath as seen in Numbers 28:9-10 (see notes). Both of these
examples are designed to show the Pharisees that their oral additions to the Law of Moses
were not capturing its essence; these Pharisees were missing the mark. Jesus then quotes
from Hosea 6:6 (see notes) in Matthew 12:7, "But if ye had known what this meaneth, I
will have mercy, and not sacrifice, ye would not have condemned the guiltless." Hosea
prophesied during the time when the Northern Kingdom fell. His point then and that of
Jesus on this occasion is that they had missed the real point of the Law of Moses.
Keeping the law in its deviated form had become their object over an actual
relationship with God. Incidentally, Jesus had quoted Hosea 6:6 (see notes) on a
previous occasion back in Matthew 9:13 (see notes).