If You Had Known What the Words Mean — Week 1
By Ruth McCane, Former Executive Director, International Women’s Ministries

The disciples were walking with Jesus through the “cornfields” on the Sabbath (Matthew 12:1-8).  Being hungry they picked the standing corn as they passed.  “Rubbing it in their hands” (Luke 6:1)they ate the grain.  As they “began” to eat, the eager Pharisees, apparently at their heels, call out to Jesus.  “Behold this dreadful crime.”

Although such use of the corn was expressly sanctioned in (Deuteronomy 23:25), the “picking” and “rubbing” necessary before eating the corn, was considered by the Pharisees to be the same as “reaping” and “threshing.”  They accused them of a “secondary” violation of the commandment not to do any work on the Sabbath (Deuteronomy 20:8-10, NIV).  They saw the disciples eating corn, but nothing is said of the fact that they were hungry.

This accusation is in effect against Jesus.  “Look!  Your disciples are doing what is unlawful on the Sabbath.”  If they cared as much for men’s necessities as finding fault, they could have given them food.  The corn would have been “lawful” to eat but this was not the way of the Pharisees.

JESUS ALWAYS GIVES PERFECT ANSWERS ON PERSONAL GROUND.

Jesus’ reply to the Pharisees’ attack corresponded in every respect. …  Only the disciples had been blamed, affirmed and defended.  The Pharisee’s question implied that the disciples had broken the law and were guilty.  Notice Jesus’ words that He used twice to answer their question.  “Haven’t you read (v3) or haven’t you read in the Law that…” (v5).  

The Savior, in His method of proof, appealed to the correct way of understanding the law.  Here He reminded them of one of their most pious and revered ancestors, David the king.  He had the full sanction of the priests of his day.  David and his companions were hungry…“on the Sabbath the priests in the temple desecrate the day and yet are innocent? (Matthew 12:3; 1 Samuel 21:3-6).

Jesus reveals because of hunger, they were innocent.  David had done exactly what the disciples were doing—a strict ceremonial observance was set aside to preserve life.  The clear principle of what David did before was not to be regarded as rebellion of the law, which is to be avoided.  The exact principle applied vindicates the disciple’s actions.  

The Lord answered His opponents with a quotation from Hosea which was often on His lips:  “For I desire mercy, not sacrifice, and acknowledgment of God rather than burnt offering (Hosea 6:6).  Their murmuring came not from pure religion, but from less love. Perhaps Jesus gave voice to a question we all should be asking in our hearts, “Do I really know what the Word of God means?”

All of this was the Pharisees’ attempt to get Jesus within the rules of the law.  He appeals to the natural sense of compassion to confirm this principal:  Sabbath observances must give way to the duty of providing relief for others (Mark 2:27, 28).  Knowing God’s Word prevents rash judgment.  Jesus doesn’t say, “It is lawful to heal” (Matthew 9-13).  This principle widens the scope of Jesus’ answer.  He was saying, “It is lawful to do well.”  To Jesus’ disciples, and to us, Jesus spoke words applicable to all generations.  In essence He was saying to the Pharisees, “If you had known the law you would not have condemned the guiltless.”

“It is good to perpetually remind ourselves the difference between things sacred and things profane are not that in things sacred God is present and that from things secular God is absent.  Yet there is a difference between the sacred and the secular.  There is a difference in reading our Bible and reading a novel, between talking politics and saying our prayers, between going to a concert and going to church.  One set of actions belongs distinctly to a lower category than the other.  We need to recognize that the lower category of life is God’s.  He cares for and uses both.  None of all the notes of life can sound truly except when they are sounded in the atmosphere of God.  The showbread will be all the more holy when proved it is not too holy to fill the hunger of a hungry man” (Phillips Brooks, D.D.).

Site by WinWorld