Exegetical and Hermeneutical Commentary of Matthew 12:4

How he entered into the house of God, and did eat the shewbread, which was not lawful for him to eat, neither for them which were with him, but only for the priests

4. the shewbread ] Literally, bread of setting forth, i. e. bread that was set forth in the sanctuary. It was also called “continual bread” as being set forth perpetually before the Lord, hence the Hebrew name, “bread of the presence.” Twelve loaves or cakes were placed in two “piles” (rather than “rows,” Lev 24:6) on the “pure table” every Sabbath. On each pile was put a golden cup of frankincense. See Exo 25:30; Lev 24:6-8; Josephus, Ant. iii. 10. 7.

Fuente: The Cambridge Bible for Schools and Colleges

How he entered into the house of God – That is, the tabernacle, the temple not being then built.

Have ye not read in the law? – In the law, or in the books of Moses.

Profane the Sabbath – He referred them to the conduct of the priests also. On the Sabbath days they were engaged, as well as on other days, in killing beasts for sacrifice, Num 28:9-10. Two lambs were killed on the Sabbath, in addition to the daily sacrifice. The priests must be engaged in killing them, and making fires to burn them in sacrifice, whereas to kindle a fire was expressly forbidden the Jews on the Sabbath, Exo 35:3. They did that which, for other persons to do, would have been profaning the Sabbath. Yet they were blameless. They did what was necessary and commanded. This was done in the very temple, too, the place of holiness, where the law should be most strictly observed.

Fuente: Albert Barnes’ Notes on the Bible

Verse 4. See Clarke on Mt 12:3.

Fuente: Adam Clarke’s Commentary and Critical Notes on the Bible

4. How he entered into the house ofGod, and did eat the showbread, which was not lawful for him to eat,neither for them which were with him, but only for the priests?Noexample could be more apposite than this. The man after God’s ownheart, of whom the Jews ever boasted, when suffering in God’s causeand straitened for provisions, asked and obtained from the highpriest what, according to the law, it was illegal for anyone save thepriests to touch. Mark (Mr 2:26)says this occurred “in the days of Abiathar the high priest.”But this means not during his high priesthoodfor it was under thatof his father Ahimelechbut simply, in his time. Ahimelech was soonsucceeded by Abiathar, whose connection with David, and prominenceduring his reign, may account for his name, rather than his father’s,being here introduced. Yet there is not a little confusion in what issaid of these priests in different parts of the Old Testament. Thushe is called both the son of the father of Ahimelech (1Sa 22:20;2Sa 8:17); and Ahimelech iscalled Ahiah (1Sa 14:3), andAbimelech (1Ch 18:16).

Fuente: Jamieson, Fausset and Brown’s Commentary Critical and Explanatory on the Whole Bible

How he entered into the house of God,…. Not the temple, which was not then built; but the tabernacle, which was then at Nob, the city of the priests, and which probably adjoined to Abimelech’s house:

and did eat the shewbread; for that this is meant by the hallowed bread, in 1Sa 21:6 is certain; though R. Joseph Kimchi n thinks it was the bread of the thank offering; to which R. Levi ben Getsom o seems to incline: but the general sense of the Jewish doctors p is, that it was the showbread; and which is very clear from that text, and is rightly affirmed by Christ;

which was not lawful for him to eat, neither for them which were with him, but only for the priests: see Le 24:5 and so the Jews say that this bread , “is forbidden to strangers” q; that is, to any but the priests, which, after the burning of the frankincense, was divided equally among them: that course of priests that came into the service had six cakes, and that which went out six; though the high priest had a right to half himself, but he did not use to take it, it being judged not to his honour to do so r. No hint is here given, nor in the history, in 1Sa 21:1 that it was on the sabbath day that David came to Ahimelech, and ate the showbread; but this is observed, and disputed, by the Jewish writers. Some indeed are in a doubt about it; but others s readily give into it, that it was on the sabbath day, which he chose to flee in, for the greater safety and preservation of his life: and indeed it seems reasonable it should be on that day; since on that day only the showbread was removed from the table, and other loaves put in the room. One of their writers t says,

“that showbread was not to be eaten, but on the day, and night of the sabbath day; and on the going out of the sabbath day; and on the going out of the sabbath David came there.”

Now our Lord’s argument stands thus, that if David, a holy, good man, and, the men that were with him, who were men of religion and conscience, when in great distress, through hunger, ate of the showbread, which was unlawful for any to eat of but priests, the high priest himself assenting to it; then it could not be criminal in his disciples, when an hungred, to pluck, rub, and eat a few ears of corn, which were lawful for any man to eat, even though it was on the sabbath day: and for the further vindication of them, he adds,

n Apud R. David Kimchi in 1 Sam. xxi. 6. o In ib. p T. Bab. Menachot, fol. 95. 2. R. David Kimchi, Abarbinel & Laniado in 1 Sam. xxi. 6. q Laniado & Abarbinel in ib. r Maimon. Hilch. Tamidin, c. 4. sect. 12. 14. s Bemidbar Rabba Parash. 23. fol. 231. 9. Laniado Cli Jaker, fol. 226. 4. & 227. 2, 3, 4. & Jelammedenu in ib. t R. Isaiah in 1 Sam. xxi. 5.

Fuente: John Gill’s Exposition of the Entire Bible

1) “How he entered into the house of God,” (pos eiselthen eis ten ton oikon tou theou) “How that he entered into the very house of God,” not merely a cornfield. par

2) “And did eat the shew bread,” (kai tous artous tes protheseos ephagon) “And he ate the loaves of the setting forth,” the loaves of sacred shewbread, the consecrated -bread, Lev 24:5-6; Exo 25:30.

3) “Which was not lawful for him to eat,” (ho ouk ekson en auto phagein) “Which it was not lawful for him (not being a priest) to eat,” because he was not of the priestly tribe or caste, Lev 24:9.

4) “Neither for them which were with him,” (oude tois met’ autou) “Neither was it lawful for those who were with him,” since they were perhaps not priests.

5) “But only for the priests?” (ei me heire usin monois) “Except (but) it was lawful for the priests only to eat it,” the chief of whom gave it to them to eat; Mr 2:26 states that this occurred in the time that Abiathar was high priest.

Fuente: Garner-Howes Baptist Commentary

(4) How he entered into the house of God.Strictly speaking, it was in the tabernacle at Nob, where Ahimelech (possibly assisted by Abiathar, Mar. 2:26) was ministering as high priest (1Sa. 21:6). The shewbread, or bread of oblation, consisted of twelve loaves, in two rows of six each, which were offered every Sabbath day (Exo. 25:30; Exo. 40:23; Lev. 24:5-9), the loaves of the previous week being then removed and reserved for the exclusive use of the priests. The necessity of the case, however, was in this instance allowed to override the ceremonial ordinance, and our Lord teaches men through that single instance to see the general principle that when positive commands and necessities involving the good of man come into collision, the latter, not the former, must prevail.

Fuente: Ellicott’s Commentary for English Readers (Old and New Testaments)

4 . That Sunday is the “Lord’s day,” is clear from early Christian history; that it is the weekly holy day of the Christian dispensation is clear, because this day is alone mentioned as a sacred day after the resurrection; it is not identical with the overlaid Jewish Sabbaths, for they are abolished. It is, therefore, by necessity identical with the universal creational Sabbath, which is perpetual in its obligations.

Fuente: Whedon’s Commentary on the Old and New Testaments

4 How he entered into the house of God, and did eat the shewbread, which was not lawful for him to eat, neither for them which were with him, but only for the priests?

Ver. 4. And did eat the shewbread ] The bread of proposition, a as the Greek text hath it; the face bread, as the Septuagint call it; or that which was daily set before the Lord, to remind him, as it were, of the twelve tribes by those twelve loaves; and to teach us to labour every day in the week (and not on the Sabbath only) for the bread that endureth to everlasting life; which the Son of man will give to every hungry David, Joh 6:27 .

a , .

Fuente: John Trapp’s Complete Commentary (Old and New Testaments)

4. ] , in the construction, is not for , but belongs to , and retains its proper meaning of except.

Fuente: Henry Alford’s Greek Testament