Matthew 12:1-8 At that time Jesus went on the sabbath day through the corn; and his disciples were an hungered… The Pharisaic Jews are, in the previous chapter, upbraided for their obstinate impenitence. We find the same people here condemning the disciples of Christ as sabbath-breakers because they plucked ears of corn to satisfy their hunger. The manner in which Jesus defends his disciples shows - I. THAT RITUAL IS NO SUBSTITUTE FOR MORALS. 1. The Pharisees were stringent ritualists. (1) Their formality was seen in their dress. In their observance of ceremonies. In their scrupulous tithing of mint and anise and cummin. (2) The ritual of sabbath observance in like manner they zealously respected. So far did they carry this, that they refused to defend themselves in the wars with Antiochus Epiphanes and the Romans on the sabbath. It was through this superstition that Pompey was enabled to take Jerusalem. (3) The ritual of sabbath observance with them was intensified by the interpretations of the elders. Thus reaping was admitted to be a servile work; and so was threshing. But according to the rabbins plucking ears of corn was "a kind of reaping," and rubbing them in their hands was "a kind of threshing." 2. But they were lax in morals. (1) It is common for men of corrupt minds to attempt to atone for the looseness of their morals by zeal for the outward services of religion. So the Pharisees "made void the commandment of God through their traditions." While they scrupulously paid tithe upon trifles, they "neglected the weightier matters of the Law - judgment, mercy, and truth." (2) So in their zeal for the externals of sabbath observance they missed its spirit of worship. They failed to see that the sabbath is truly observed in its spirit, which is the spirit of heaven, mercy and love, justice and truth. (3) This spirit they violated in the harshness of their judgment. In condemning the action of the hungry disciples they would sacrifice mercy to ceremony. 3. They inverted the order of God. (1) The cud of the Law is love. (2) Ritual is instituted as a means to that end. (3) When ritual interferes with love it must give place. Hence when the law of commandments contained in ordinances ceased to point men to Christ the Saviour of sinners, it was abrogated as a useless burden. II. THAT RITUAL MAY GIVE WAY TO NECESSITY. 2. This principle was sanctioned by David. (1) Necessity was with him a sufficient reason for setting aside the letter of the law relating to the shewbread (cf. Leviticus 10:10; Leviticus 24:5-9; 1 Samuel 21:1-6). (2) Note: This action of David was parabolic. The shewbread is admitted to have been a type of Christ, who appears in the presence of God for the nourishment and life of the spiritual priesthood. Since part of the frankincense put in the bread was burnt on the altar for a memorial, the merit of the sacrifice of Christ is represented. The hunger of David and his men constituted their particular claim to set forth the verity that those who hunger after righteousness are the persons to be satisfied with the goodness of God's house (cf. 1 Peter 2:5; Revelation 1:6; Revelation 5:10; Revelation 20:6). 2. This principle was sanctioned by Moses. (1) For his Law requires the profaning of the sabbath by the priests in the temple. They were required to prepare the sacrifices, offer them, and attend to the other services of the temple on the sabbath as on common days (see Exodus 29:38; Numbers 28:9). (2) This legislation interprets the words, "Thou shalt not do any work," in the fourth commandment, to mean secular work, or work for personal pleasure or temporal advantage. The works done about the holy things in the temple were scarcely "service;" for they were done unto the Lord. (3) The argument from the temple was conclusive against the Pharisees, whose traditions invested the sabbath law with excessive stringency. 3. This principle was sanctioned by the prophets. (1) In their practice. For they set aside the Levitical rule that all sacrifices should be offered at the door of the tabernacle or temple, as when Elijah offered his sacrifice upon Carmel. In this he had the high sanction of Heaven. (2) In their precept. An example is here cited from Hosea, who declares that God prefers mercy to sacrifice (cf. Hosea 6:6; Micah 6:6-8). (3) The Lord prefers mercy through the sacrifice of Christ to the sacrifice of the sinner in the coming day of vengeance (see Zephaniah 1:7, 8; Ezekiel 39:17, 18; Revelation 19:17). 4. This principle is sanctioned by Christ. (1) The hungry disciples had the sanction of Christ for plucking, the corn and rubbing it in their hands upon the sabbath day. He did not reprove them. On the contrary, he defended them. (2) He defended them not only upon the authority of David, of Moses, and the prophets; but upon his own authority, which he asserted to be Divine. This was the meaning of his declaration, "I say unto you, That in this place is One greater than the temple." For the rabbins acknowledged none but God to be greater than the temple (cf. Galatians 3:1; Mark 14:58-64; Hebrews 3:3). He asserted his Divinity in claiming to be the Lord of the sabbath (see Gem 2:3). As the sabbath yielded to the temple, and the temple to Christ, so must the sabbath also yield to Christ (see John 7:21-23). (3) Jesus, who claims to be "Lord of the sabbath day," appears to have exercised his prerogative in changing it from the seventh to the first day, and hence the first day is now distinguished as "the Lord's day" (see Revelation 1:10). (4) The Lordship of the Son of man is the Lordship of mercy. Those who are engaged in the service of Jesus Christ enjoy greater liberty than those who were engaged in the service of the temple. The gospel is in all things superior to the Law. III. THAT NECESSITY CANNOT BE PLEADED AGAINST MORALS. 1. There is no good precedent to sanction it. (1) When our Lord sanctioned the plucking of the ears of corn in the field, he did not sanction theft under the plea of necessity. The Law sanctioned this liberty (see Deuteronomy 23:24, 25). The permission was intended to teach humanity and kindness. (2) Our Lord's defence of his disciples in relation to the question of the sabbath did not touch the moral obligation of the institution, which is the devotion of our time to the worship and service of God. The spirit of the sabbath should be in the week. (3) The change of the day brings into it the motives of the resurrection and the ascension of the Lord, and the gift of the Holy Spirit, by which we are in spirit brought nearer to the rest of heaven. 2. Morals are themselves the highest necessity. (1) They are a spiritual necessity. As the spirit is superior to the body, so is a spiritual necessity more important than a bodily necessity. (2) They are a universal necessity. The needs of an individual must give way to those of a community. The interests of all the worlds cannot be sacrificed or compromised to suit individual urgency. (3) They are an eternal necessity. They are founded in the nature of the everlasting God. They belong to the immortal soul. The law of the ages cannot be set aside to meet the necessity of a moment. (4) A man is not forsaken of God because he is in want. The disciples may suffer hunger in the very presence of Jesus. It is more honourable to want in fellowship with Christ than to abound in fellowship with the world. Jesus knows how to lead his hungry disciples through the corn-fields. - J.A.M. Parallel Verses KJV: At 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. |
    |