Matthew 12:3–13

The ark was at Kirjath-jearim, while the tabernacle was at Nob, where the priests were as well. David came there, on the run from the king's anger and starving with hunger. He arrived on the Sabbath day, when the priests had changed the twelve loaves of showbread ("the bread of the face," or "of the presence"). God had told them to place these loaves on the golden table in the holy place every Sabbath. David asked the priest for some of the old loaves for himself and his companions. This was a bold thing to ask. The holy bread was unleavened, anointed with pure frankincense, and one of the most holy fire offerings to Jehovah. Only the priests ate it, and only in the holy place.

This was not a doubtful point. It was not a question of human additions to the law, or of how people read the law. It was direct opposition to the statute in Leviticus. But how, then, could the Lord justify this? Was it just because they were hungry? Were they so far from any other help that setting aside the law was justified in their case? And was every hungry man entitled, along with David here, to set it aside?

Strictly speaking, it was unlawful for David and his men to eat this bread, for it was the property of priests only. But there are matters that make a difference. First, the priesthood had seriously failed in Israel. Second, the tabernacle service was in the wrong place, not the place God had chosen. Third, the ark was not present. And fourth, the true king was in exile and hungry because of persecution. This last matter alone was reason for Ahimelech's giving the bread to David. The question of genuine need takes precedence over mere formal exactness.

David was rejected and on the run. Then the holy things belonging to the ceremonies God gave Israel stopped being holy. The sin was David's rejection, and this made the consecrated showbread common... The rejection of God's anointed had profaned all. This is the thought our Lord expressed to the Pharisees. They had rejected Him. They had no love for Him nor cared for Him. These hypocrites talked about keeping the Sabbath while they were rejecting the Lord of the Sabbath. How ridiculous!

Was this a sin? It was Saul's and the people's sin that there was no bread for David. It was their sin that the true anointed was an outcast. Their wickedness made common the bread that was holy at a holy time. If it had no sanctity in the presence of a rejected David, how much less in the presence of a rejected Christ?

The elect king is now rejected. He goes to the priest, who gives him the holy bread. This is the sovereign grace of God. God rises above the ordinances connected with blessing when that blessing is rejected — when He Himself is rejected in His chosen one, and in the power of His testimony. When this is the case, He sets faith above ordinances in His sovereign grace.

Even this rule had to give way before the pressing need of David, the Lord's anointed... The true Lord's Anointed is "greater than the temple," even though that temple and its arrangements were important. David was in rejection when the incident took place, and our Lord was the rejected One when He spoke in Matthew 12. In these circumstances the needs of the Lord's Anointed came before legal regulations.

The human way of answering the objections of the Pharisees would have been to tell them that there was no law forbidding the deed done by the disciples. In a few words He might have informed them not only that their traditions had no authority, but also that they had sinned by adding to the Word of God. However, this is not the way divine wisdom chooses to silence their accusations... He wields once more the Sword of the Spirit and answers their unscriptural objections by His scriptural assertions.

The priestly service of sacrifice did not stop on the sabbath. The morning and evening sacrifices were even increased (Num. 28:9-10). Here man's sin was the cause, but it was also the grace of God that provided for that sin. This whole sacrificial system was a picture of what was coming. It was much older than the law, going right back to the gate of Eden. When the legal system was set up, the sacrifices were built into it, but they stayed a constant, though hidden, witness to the grace running through every earlier age. Wherever the two clashed, the "sign" of the legal covenant gave way to it, as here... The temple itself called for this breaking of the Sabbath, for the glory of Him whose home it was, and for the sake of people who could be kept in relationship with Him only in this way.

The priests did a very important work upon that day. They offered sacrifices on that day because there was sin. The people's sin demanded work that, by the letter of the law, would look to a Pharisee like a breach of it. Whatever the law may claim at other times, if God's people have sinned, the sacrifice cannot wait.

On top of this, the priests worked on the Sabbath Day to offer sacrifices. They were blameless in doing so, even though by the legal reasoning of the Jews they would have been guilty of profaning the day.

If the law and the first day of the seventh month come together, as here — if the service of the Temple, and the Sabbath are in collision — the claim of the law must give place to that of that mystic day, and the Sabbath yield to the Temple — as we learn from Matthew 12:5.

In those days the Temple set the Sabbath aside. That is, the priest did the work of the Temple on the Sabbath day. In other words, the service of grace won out over the demands of law.

The Lord's answer is remarkable. He does not rebuke the Pharisees here, as He does elsewhere. Instead He shows that the sabbath and other ceremonial rules had been set aside for good reason, and that someone greater than any duty of the sabbath was standing there. Could God say, I am greater than a moral commandment? Would that be a divine way of putting things if it were a question of hating a brother or coveting another man's wife? Such a thought would revolt at once. But that is the Lord's reasoning as to the sabbath.

Or had they never considered that on the sabbath days the priests carried out the work assigned to them in the temple? In fact, their work was a picture of the work of Christ Himself, God's great high Priest. They did not know Him, or His truth and grace, and they had no excuse for it. For One had come among them whom they should have recognized as being, not only greater than the sabbath, but greater than the temple.

Had they not also considered that the priests carried out their appointed work in the temple on the Sabbath? In fact, their work pictured the work of Christ Himself, God's great High Priest. They had no excuse for their ignorance of Him, of His truth and of His grace. For One had come among them whom they should have recognised. He was greater not only than the Sabbath, but greater than the temple. This is a tremendous statement, because God appointed the temple as His dwelling. Only God Himself is greater than His dwelling.

I suppose the verse shows us this. If the temple's own claims required breaking the Sabbath, they would never have judged the Lord, who was greater than the temple, had they seen His true glory. "Greater than the temple" means the glory of His person. The glory is what gave the temple its importance, and the glory coming back is what will give it importance in the future. But here was God present with them, manifest in flesh.

And now we have the PERSON Himself walking there, wonderful beyond compare. Shall we have the priests paying homage to the One greater than the temple, greater than the sacrifices, greater than the types and shadows? All this that lay before His eye was only the shadow. He was the SUBSTANCE. Without Him they would never have existed, just as a shadow could not exist without the substance that casts it.

There are three "greater" passages in this chapter: "greater than the temple" (v. 6), "greater than Jonah" (v. 41), and "greater than Solomon" (v. 42). He was "greater than the temple" because the revelation of God was shining out from Him at that moment. The display of light is the thought in the temple. "Greater than Jonah" relates to the effect of His death, and "greater than Solomon" to the glory that resulted as the fruit of His death.

As the rejected one — though God's anointed king — David had to enter the house of God and do what was not lawful for him to do... When David was rejected and on the run, the holy things tied to the ceremonies God gave Israel stopped being holy. The sin was David's rejection, and this made the consecrated showbread common... The rejection of God's anointed had made everything common. This is the thought our Lord expressed to the Pharisees. They had rejected Him. They had no love for Him and did not care for Him. How ridiculous for these hypocrites to speak of Sabbath-keeping when they were rejecting the Lord of the Sabbath!

He Himself was greater than the temple; and He was also Lord of the Sabbath. So even if His disciples were guilty — which they were not — He was above the rules and principles they claimed such zeal for. They were His followers, and He would deal with them. Mercy was not in their thoughts at all... It is the same today. People press a zeal for position and principle in a spirit that is the very opposite of Christ, and the very opposite of the character and nature of God.

Both Ephraim and Judah (Hosea 5, 6) had badly corrupted themselves. Yet at the same time they seem to have been very careful to keep their sacrificial ceremonies, as if outward forms could win God's favour. "Therefore," says the prophet, speaking in Jehovah's name, "… I desired mercy, and not sacrifice; and the knowledge of God more than burnt offerings." (Hosea 6:5-6.) That is, character and state counted for more before God than outward observances. And that character and state came from knowing Jehovah as a God of mercy. The observances were worthless unless they showed a spiritual condition.

God had promised that when man had no resource left, He would use His right to show mercy. So the Lord was among Israel not to receive sacrifice, but to show mercy. Some see the passage as a rebuke to religious formality and ceremony. This promise of mercy, rather than that rebuke, seems to be what it means.

He reminded them of what David and his companions did when they were hungry. He also reminded them that the temple service even made the priests break the Sabbath, and yet they were blameless. Further, He Himself was greater than the temple, and He was also Lord of the Sabbath. So even if His disciples were guilty — which they were not — He was above the rules and principles they claimed such zeal for. They were His followers, and He would deal with them. Mercy was not in any of their thoughts.

When David was rejected and on the run, the holy things of the ceremonies God gave to Israel stopped being holy. The sin was David's rejection. That is what made the consecrated bread common, as David told the High Priest (1 Sam. 21:5). The rejection of God's anointed had made everything common. This is the thought our Lord expressed to the Pharisees. They had rejected Him. How ridiculous for these hypocrites to talk about Sabbath-keeping when they were rejecting the Lord of the Sabbath!

See here how hollow and worthless man's Sabbath keeping is! Those religious guides would rather let the disciples starve than have anyone touch their Sabbath. They would let a man carry his withered hand to the grave rather than have him healed on their Sabbath. Sadly, it was indeed their Sabbath, and not God's. His rest could never fit with hunger and withered hands… They did not understand one thing: legal rules must give way when God's grace meets human need.

"But go and learn what this means, I will have mercy, and not sacrifice." There is the keynote to all God's ways. Did you think God wanted something from you to put things right?… Now go a little further. You find it comes out in the twelfth chapter, where He was blessing and healing on the Sabbath Day.

How easy it is for us, who live in the full light of grace today, to fall into the same mistake. How easy to forget that we are called to show God's heart of grace among people who claim His name, and before an evil world.

Remember, this Lordship meant more than Adam's rule over the lower creation. This was Lordship over a divine institution, which Adam never had. The Son of man had power on earth to forgive sins. He also had power on earth to regulate the sabbath, for, as Peter said to Cornelius, "He is Lord of all."

He accepts His rejection. But He defends His disciples in front of men who boasted and argued about the Sabbath, while they were dishonouring the Lord of the Sabbath… This is the glory of His person as the rejected, suffering Man. As such, and not only as God, He is above the Sabbath Day — its Lord.

The Son of man holds dominion over all men, according to Psalm 8. So He must be Lord of the sabbath, and free to deal with it as He wills. Who were the Pharisees to challenge His right to do this? — even though He had come among men in the form of a Servant.

He is not only greater than the temple. He who in grace became the Son of man is Lord also of the sabbath. If He is Lord, then He is the One to regulate and to order, and to say what should and should not be. David was the anointed king. If he was in a position where he had no food, what was the showbread worth to God while His own "anointed" was in need? If that was true of the picture, what of the Lord Himself?

So with a rejected Messiah, the old things were gone. The Son of man was Lord of the sabbath. God was working in grace, and the old things really had passed away… For the rejected Messiah the sabbath was gone, and rest was over for the world. God worked in grace and mercy, and He took no rest while man was in sorrow. The Son of man, the glorious One, was above the rules of the sabbath, its Lord, the head of the new creation.

The ideal sabbath is still to come. In the letter to the Hebrews, the apostle first shows that God's rest did not arrive in Old Testament times. Then he declares, "So then, there remains a Sabbath rest for the people of God" (Heb. 4:9). The Son of man is Lord of that Sabbath rest, for He is the true Joshua, who leads His own into that rest and keeps them in it.

But on the very next sabbath the Lord Himself acts; it is not merely that He defends His disciples. He goes into the synagogue, and in front of the whole congregation singles out a man with a withered hand. There He heals the man in front of them all. This convicted the hypocrites who would have condemned Him once more, hating Him for the grace that always flowed out to the miserable. And He went further. He told the man to do an act which could have been left undone, had there not been a divine purpose in view.

He "went throughout all Galilee, preaching in their synagogues"; there His ministry began. This drew Him into conflict with Satan, and His power showed in casting out demons. Notice that it is always "their synagogues." He went among a people He was separate from, and that was their state. He was a Servant, but in His own power among them.

It was the Sabbath day; and, as His custom was, our Lord went to the synagogue. Synagogues were not places of worship. Israel had only one such place — God's temple in Jerusalem. They were simply buildings that held copies of the Scriptures, in the care of an official. His duty was to let the people read them and explain them to one another.

In a word, by this second case He shows that Israel was a guilty people toward the true Beloved. And He shows more. If they knew their own condition, they would admit they were like the man with the withered hand, in need of His mighty power. He was there in grace to do all the healing that was needed. The Lord pressed their dismal condition on them. Before God the whole nation was as morally withered as that man's hand was withered in body. Sadly, unlike him, they were not willing to be healed... In the grainfield the Lord proves Israel's guilt against the holiness of the sabbath; here He declares that He is present to work restoration even on the sabbath. This account matters, because the Lord is, as it were, tearing up the outward letter of the bond between Him and Israel, and the sabbath day was a special sign of that bond.

Faith answers to His Word, and he stretches it out, and it was restored sound as the other... The man with the withered hand is a type of poor, withered Israel, withered spiritually and nationally. He had come to restore, but, unlike the man, Israel had no faith. Yet the day is coming when Israel will answer in faith and healing will follow.

The scribes and Pharisees were zealous for their own laws. They watched for an occasion to accuse the Lord, above all because the man was there with a withered hand. Knowing their thoughts, He made an issue of this serious matter. He could have avoided a confrontation by meeting the man in private and healing him there. But He had to face the callous religious prejudice of the Pharisees in the open.

They kept silent, but with malice to the utmost. He looked round at them with anger, distressed at the hardening of their heart. What right had selfish, murderous men against God's grace? That is what they showed themselves to be. They went out of the synagogue to plot against the Son of God — Pharisees and Herodians together, deadly enemies of each other.

Many of us suffer from withered hands at this hour. Sin has so paralysed us that we can do nothing for God. But there is salvation in what Christ has done. His precious atoning sacrifice is enough for all our need... One result of His blessing is this: the hand that was withered can now do something for Him in a burdened and suffering creation.

They want to find some new ground of accusation against Him. Their first attempt had failed. He had read their evil thoughts. By His answer He had already shown that He saw the question coming: "Is it lawful to heal on the Sabbath?" An awful motive stands beside that question, showing the depths of Satan — "that they might accuse Him." The question also shows that they believed in His healing power.

The Lord accepted the challenge... Of course they would deliver the poor sheep out of the pit, because it was their own sheep. They had no conscience about doing what was to their own advantage because it was the Sabbath day. And the Lord does not blame them. But He presses this most pointed conclusion on them — "Of how much more value is a man than a sheep! So it is lawful to do good on the Sabbath."

Grace had come, God Himself was present in grace; and this grace was free to do good on the Sabbath. The Lord's true rest is the exercise of His love in the middle of evil. The Pharisees thought nothing of doing evil, as long as they kept their traditions. God held Himself free to do good. That is why the Lord heals the withered hand, and He draws the Jews' attention to this great principle in a formal way.

Why is this recorded here as happening on the Sabbath — especially in connection with the incident in the cornfield?... It is an account of the greatest importance, because the Lord is, as it were, tearing in pieces the outward letter of the bond between Him and Israel, and the Sabbath day was its special sign.

The natural heart loves formality... Religious people have always been ready to fight hard for religious rules as they themselves understand them. They will fight even at the risk of hindering God's work of grace... Nothing deceives the heart like religion without a conversion of the heart to God. Nothing else leads people into such glaring inconsistency. The men who quibbled about our Lord healing on the Sabbath day saw no wrong in plotting on that day to murder Him.

By this second case He shows that Israel was a guilty people toward the true Beloved. He shows more than that. If they knew their own condition, they would own that they were like the man with the withered hand, in need of His mighty power. He was there in grace to do all the healing that was needed. The Lord pressed their dismal condition on them. Before God the whole nation was as withered in soul as that man's hand was in body. But sadly they would not let Him heal them as He healed the man.

A type of poor, withered Israel, withered in spirit and as a nation... Yet the day is coming when Israel will answer in faith and healing will follow.

Is not your case still more deplorable than his of the withered hand? Is not your heart withered towards God?... Yet for you Jesus, the Son of God, came; for you He died. And He died not for any imaginary good in you, but for your sins, too many and too real. Do not be afraid, then, to commit yourself, just as you are, to the Saviour.

They wanted to find some new ground of accusation against Him. Their first try had failed. He had read their evil thoughts. His answer showed that He already knew the question they now put to Him: "Is it lawful to heal on the Sabbath?" A terrible motive stands beside that question and shows the depths of Satan — "so that they might accuse Him." The question also reveals that they believed in His healing power.

They were contesting God's right to show mercy. Having the man stand forth, He asked them a simple question that was fully to the point. Did the law allow a person to do good on the Sabbath days or to do evil? — to save life or to kill? As far as they were concerned, they would rather see someone die on the Sabbath than see him healed.

Of course they would rescue the poor sheep out of the pit, because it was their own sheep. They had no conscience about doing what was to their own advantage, even on the Sabbath day. And the Lord does not blame them. But He presses this piercing conclusion on them — "Of how much more value is a man than a sheep! So it is lawful to do good on the Sabbath."

A man knows by instinct that leaving a poor animal to suffer would not be of God. But their selfishness also comes out — it is their own sheep. Both counts condemn them. What a beautiful subject this is for preaching the gospel! We were in the pit, and the Lord went down into a horrible pit to rescue us.

For them to rescue a sheep out of a pit was certainly harder physical work than for Him to heal, yet they would do this on a Sabbath day. If they treat a sheep with such care, how much more should they treat a man, who is worth far more! He finishes with the firm statement, "it is lawful to do good on the Sabbath." What honest man could dare to object to this?

It is useless for His people to plead the Sabbath against Him who is Lord of it. It is even more useless to forbid His active goodness toward needy, suffering people on that day. The Sabbath did not stop the poorest Jew from getting his sheep out of the pit. God had compassion, if they had none, for their brother who had fallen into a worse trouble. And here was the One anointed by the Lord to bind up the broken-hearted, no matter how the Pharisees raged and plotted.

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.

The man with the withered hand was like Israel, powerless to do anything rightly. What value was there in outwardly keeping the Sabbath when there was no power for God? Surely, if it is right to pull a fallen sheep out of the pit, it is better to heal a fallen man.

Who were they, then, to object to His showing mercy to a man on the Sabbath? The Lord showed that mercy at once. Yet their hearts were so hard that His mercy only stirred up thoughts of murder in them. From that moment they decided on His death.

They wanted to find some new ground of accusation against Him. Their first attempt had failed... "Is it lawful to heal on the Sabbath?" Beside that question stood a terrible motive: "that they might accuse Him." It showed the depths of Satan. The question also shows that they believed He could heal.

Instinctively a man would know that it would not be of God to leave a poor animal suffering. But their selfishness also comes out: it is their own sheep. On both counts they are condemned... In preaching the gospel, what a beautiful subject this is! We were in the pit, and the Lord went down into a horrible pit to rescue us.

Pulling a sheep out of a pit was certainly harder physical work than healing. Yet they would do that on a Sabbath day.

There was no answer; of course none could stand up and declare he would not deliver his one sheep out of the pit. "Of how much more value is a man than a sheep! So it is lawful to do good on the Sabbath." What divine logic! How unanswerable this statement!

To condemn doing good that relieves suffering marks out a class whom the Lord compares to vipers. Their moral sense was so deadened that they put the animal before a fellow man... Could hatred go further than to try to tie the hand of God down to a rule, and then seek to kill God's Son for doing good?

The question was not, as they supposed, one between acting and not acting. It was between doing good and doing harm. It was between saving a life and destroying a life by refusing to save it. The law of God was given to hold back evil, not to hold back good... Indeed, to hold back from doing good when the opportunity is there is to show unlikeness to God.

The Sabbath was the sign of the rest of creation. But sin had entered the world. And man had rejected Jesus, who had come into its sorrow. So there could be no rest of creation in connection with the first Adam... He answers with a moving revelation of grace. That grace could not find its rest where sin and misery were. But it could begin to work where everything lay in ruins: "My Father is working until now, and I am working." We can rest neither in sin nor in sorrow. But we can work in grace where both are.

The man with the withered hand was like Israel, powerless to do anything right. What was the value of outwardly keeping the Sabbath when there was no power for God? If it is right to pull a fallen sheep out of the pit, it is surely better to heal a fallen man. And by implication, to heal the fallen people, if only they had been ready for it.

"Stretch out your hand." How could a man with a dead hand stretch it out? The living One who spoke the word gave the power. In front of the furious Pharisees, the man's hand became whole.

The Lord asked the man to stretch out his hand. That request would have been pointless if the man had no responsibility to listen to His words and act on them. He could and should do it. In himself he did not have the ability to do so, but that is not the point. The point is that he was to obey the Lord's command.

Read these verses carefully, along with the parallel accounts in Matthew 12 and Luke 6. You will notice that it never says the Lord (or God) made this hand well. Each time it says the same thing: "and it was restored." Was this restoration the result of God's work? Yes, without question, for only God can heal in such a miraculous way. Does that mean it was not the result of the man's faith? No, it was also the result of his faith, because God uses the faith of men to do His will.

By this second case He shows two things. Israel was a guilty people about the true Beloved. And if they knew their own condition, they would admit they were like the man with the withered hand, in need of His mighty power. He was there in grace to do all the healing needed. The Lord pressed their dismal condition on them. Before God the whole nation was as withered in heart as that man's hand was in body. Sadly, unlike him, they did not want healing.

The hand stands for fresh, living power to serve God. This man pictures an Israel that had lost that power and become withered and decayed.

Grace had come, God Himself was present in grace; and this grace was free to do good on the sabbath. The Lord's true rest is His love at work while evil is all around. The Pharisees thought nothing of doing evil, as long as they kept their traditions. God held Himself free to do good. That is why the Lord heals the withered hand. He calls the Jews' attention to this great principle in a formal way.

Simple caution would have avoided giving them the smallest excuse. But grace does not mind giving people something to seize on, if they are looking for it. Grace is bent on pleasing God, whether people like it or not.

How did this man with a withered hand come to be in Israel? It was through sin somewhere, and it was a clear sign of misery. Could God rest where either of these ruled?

They held a council to destroy Him, but the Lord went on with His works of mercy. They were on the line of murder, He in the way of mercy.

Nothing deceives the heart like religion without a heart turned to God. Nothing else leads men into such open inconsistency. The men who quibbled about our Lord healing on the Sabbath day saw no wrong in plotting on that day to murder Him.