Rukia maudhui

Luke 6:4

“The Disciples Pluck Grain on the Sabbath”· Luke 6:1–5Read in context
King James Version
How he went into the house of God, and did take and eat the shewbread, and gave also to them that were with him; which it is not lawful to eat but for the priests alone?
KJV (with Strong's)
How G5613 he went G1525 into G1519 the house G3624 of God G2316, and G2532 did take G2983 and G2532 eat G5315 the shewbread G740 G4286, and G2532 gave G1325 also G2532 to them that were with G3326 him G846; which G3739 it is G1832 not G3756 lawful G1832 to eat G5315 but for G1508 the priests G2409 alone G3441?
Complete Jewish Bible
He entered the House of God and took and ate the Bread of the Presence" -- which no one is permitted to eat but the cohanim.
Berean Standard Bible
He entered the house of God, took the consecrated bread and gave it to his companions, and ate what is lawful only for the priests to eat.”
American Standard Version
how he entered into the house of God, and took and ate the showbread, and gave also to them that were with him; which it is not lawful to eat save for the priests alone?
World English Bible Messianic
how he entered into God’s house, and took and ate the show bread, and gave also to those who were with him, which is not lawful to eat except for the priests alone?”
Geneva Bible (1599)
Howe he went into the house of God, and tooke, and ate the shewbread, and gaue also to them which were with him, which was not lawful to eate, but for the Priests onely?
Young's Literal Translation
how he went into the house of God, and the loaves of the presentation did take, and did eat, and gave also to those with him, which it is not lawful to eat, except only to the priests?'
Kiswahili · Neno
Aliingia ndani ya nyumba ya Mungu, akaichukua na kuila ile mikate iliyowekwa wakfu, ambayo ni halali kuliwa na makuhani peke yao. Naye pia akawapa wenzake.”
Translation
See on the biblical-era map
All Luke Sites (Jerusalem)
All Luke Sites (Jerusalem) View full PDF
All Luke Sites (Levant)
All Luke Sites (Levant) View full PDF
All Luke Sites (Eastern Mediterranean)
All Luke Sites (Eastern Mediterranean) View full PDF

Map © Biblica Open Bible Maps · CC BY-SA 4.0

In the KJVVerse 25,151 of 31,102 · 80.9%

Study this verse

Summary

In Luke 6:4, Jesus confronts the Pharisees' legalistic accusation against His disciples for plucking grain on the Sabbath by invoking the biblical precedent of King David. He recounts how David, in a time of dire necessity, entered the sacred house of God and consumed the consecrated shewbread, sharing it with his companions—an act explicitly forbidden to all but the priests. This rhetorical question serves as a powerful challenge to the Pharisees' rigid interpretation of the law, asserting that human need and divine mercy can, in certain circumstances, transcend strict ceremonial regulations.

Context

Literary Context

This verse is embedded within a broader narrative in Luke 6:1-11, where Jesus engages in a series of confrontations with the religious authorities over the proper observance of the Sabbath. The preceding verses (Luke 6:1-2) describe Jesus' disciples plucking and eating grain on the Sabbath, prompting the Pharisees to accuse them of violating the law. Jesus' response in Luke 6:3-5, which includes the reference to David and the shewbread, directly addresses this accusation. This incident immediately precedes Jesus' healing of a man with a withered hand on the Sabbath (Luke 6:6-11), further illustrating His authority over the Sabbath and His emphasis on compassion over rigid legalism. The entire section highlights Jesus' role as the authoritative interpreter and Lord of the Sabbath.

Historical & Cultural Context

The Sabbath was a foundational institution in Israel, commemorating God's rest after creation and His deliverance of Israel from slavery. By the time of Jesus, various interpretations and traditions had developed, particularly among the Pharisees, who sought to meticulously define and enforce Sabbath observance through numerous oral laws (halakha). The "shewbread" (Hebrew: lechem panim, "bread of the presence") was a sacred offering in the Tabernacle and later the Temple, consisting of twelve loaves placed weekly before the Lord (as detailed in Leviticus 24:5-9). These loaves were considered holy and, once replaced, were to be eaten only by the priests in a holy place. Jesus' reference to 1 Samuel 21:1-6 recalls a time when David, fleeing from King Saul and in extreme hunger, received and ate this bread from Ahimelech the priest. This act, while a technical violation of ceremonial law, was justified by the extraordinary circumstances of necessity, a principle Jesus leverages against the Pharisees' unyielding legalism.

Key Themes

This passage powerfully introduces and reinforces several key themes that run throughout Luke's Gospel and Jesus' ministry. Firstly, it underscores the theme of mercy over ritual, demonstrating that God's heart prioritizes human need and compassion over strict adherence to ceremonial regulations. Jesus implies that the spirit of the law, which is love, outweighs the letter when human well-being is at stake. Secondly, it highlights Jesus' authority as the ultimate interpreter of God's law and the true "Lord of the Sabbath." By drawing a parallel between His disciples and David, a revered figure and an anointed king, Jesus implicitly elevates His own status and authority, suggesting that if David, God's anointed, could transgress a ceremonial law due to necessity, then Jesus, the Son of God, has even greater authority to interpret and apply the law. This sets the stage for His explicit declaration in Luke 6:5 that "the Son of Man is Lord of the Sabbath."

Exposition and Analysis

Key Word Analysis

went eisérchomai' G1525

This verb (G1525) means "to enter" or "to come in." In this context, it signifies David's physical entry "into the house of God," referring to the Tabernacle at Nob. The act of entering this sacred space, combined with his subsequent actions, underscores the gravity of the situation and the perceived violation of religious protocol that Jesus is challenging.

did take lambánō' G2983

This verb (G2983) means "to take," "to receive," or "to grasp." Here, it describes David's active acquisition of the shewbread. The emphasis is not merely on eating, but on the deliberate act of taking something consecrated and reserved, highlighting the extraordinary nature of his circumstances and the priest's willingness to provide for his dire need.

not lawful ou and éxesti' G3756

The combination of the negative particle ou (G3756, "not") and the verb éxesti (G1832, "it is right," "it is permissible," "it is lawful") unequivocally states the legal prohibition. Jesus' rhetorical question hinges on this very point: the Pharisees themselves knew it was "not lawful" for anyone but priests to eat the shewbread, yet David, a hero of faith, did so without divine condemnation. This challenges their rigid application of the law without considering context or necessity.

Verse Breakdown

"How he went into the house of God,"

Jesus begins his rhetorical question by recalling David's entry into the Tabernacle at Nob. This immediately sets the scene in a sacred context, emphasizing that David's actions took place within the very sphere of God's presence, making any transgression of ritual law particularly noteworthy.

"and did take and eat the shewbread,"

This clause describes the specific action that was legally problematic. David not only took the consecrated bread but also consumed it. The emphasis is on the actual consumption of the holy bread, which was reserved for priestly consumption after its removal from the table of presence.

"and gave also to them that were with him;"

This detail adds another layer to the "unlawful" act, as David extended the consumption of the shewbread to his hungry companions. This demonstrates David's compassionate leadership and further highlights the principle that human necessity can supersede ritualistic exclusivity.

"which it is not lawful to eat but for the priests alone?"

This concluding rhetorical question explicitly states the legal prohibition from Leviticus 24:5-9. By posing this as a question, Jesus forces the Pharisees to acknowledge the well-known precedent of David's actions, implicitly challenging their own rigid interpretation of the law and their condemnation of His disciples.

Literary Devices

Luke 6:4 masterfully employs several literary devices to convey Jesus' profound theological argument. The primary device is a Rhetorical Question, posed by Jesus to the Pharisees. This question is not meant to elicit information but to make a forceful point, compelling the listeners to consider the implications of a well-known biblical event. Coupled with this is Allusion, as Jesus directly references the narrative of David and the shewbread found in 1 Samuel 21:1-6. This allusion serves as a powerful Analogy or Argument from Precedent, where Jesus draws a parallel between David's actions, justified by necessity, and His disciples' actions on the Sabbath. By citing David, a revered figure in Jewish tradition, Jesus uses an example that the Pharisees could not easily dismiss, thereby turning their own esteemed history against their legalistic condemnation. There is also an element of Irony, as the very people who prided themselves on their knowledge of the Law are shown to have missed its deeper, merciful intent, exemplified by one of their greatest heroes.

Theological and Thematic Connections

Luke 6:4 serves as a pivotal moment in Jesus' ministry, challenging the prevalent legalism of His day and revealing a deeper understanding of God's law. Theologically, this passage underscores the principle that divine mercy and human necessity can, at times, take precedence over the strict letter of ceremonial law. Jesus' argument implies that the Sabbath, like the shewbread regulations, was made for humanity's benefit, not as an oppressive burden. God's ultimate desire is for compassion and love, not rigid adherence to rituals that neglect human flourishing. This aligns with the prophetic tradition, as seen in passages like Hosea 6:6, which Jesus Himself quotes elsewhere (e.g., Matthew 12:7). By citing David, Jesus also subtly asserts His own authority as one greater than David, capable of interpreting and fulfilling the law, ultimately declaring Himself "Lord of the Sabbath" (Luke 6:5).

Reflection and Application

This passage profoundly challenges us to examine our own understanding and application of God's commands. Are we prone to legalism, prioritizing rigid rules over genuine compassion and love for others? Jesus' example with the shewbread reminds us that God's laws are ultimately designed for human flourishing and to reveal His character, which is abundant in mercy and grace. True faith seeks to understand the spirit behind the law, recognizing that love for God and neighbor is the greatest commandment. It calls us to exercise discernment, ensuring that our adherence to religious practices never becomes a stumbling block to meeting legitimate human needs or expressing divine compassion. We are invited to trust in Jesus' authority as the ultimate interpreter of God's will, whose example consistently prioritized grace and truth.

Questions for Reflection

  1. Where in my life or my community might I be tempted to prioritize rigid rules over compassion and human need?
  2. How does Jesus' example in this passage challenge my understanding of what it means to truly obey God?
  3. In what ways can I cultivate a heart that seeks mercy and love, rather than merely adhering to external regulations?

FAQ

Why did Jesus reference David's actions with the shewbread, and what was the significance of that event?

Jesus referenced David's actions from 1 Samuel 21:1-6 to counter the Pharisees' accusation that His disciples had broken the Sabbath law by plucking grain. The significance lies in several points:

  • Necessity Overrides Ritual: David and his men were in dire hunger and fleeing for their lives. The priest Ahimelech, recognizing their extreme need, permitted them to eat the consecrated shewbread, which was strictly reserved for priests according to Leviticus 24:5-9. This demonstrated that in extraordinary circumstances, human necessity and mercy could take precedence over ceremonial law.
  • David's Status: David was God's anointed king, a figure highly revered by the Pharisees. By citing David, Jesus used a precedent from their own sacred history that they could not easily dismiss. If David, a man after God's own heart, was justified in his actions, then Jesus' disciples, acting under His authority, were also justified.
  • Jesus' Authority: Ultimately, Jesus uses this example to assert His own authority. Just as David, as king, had a certain prerogative, Jesus, as the true King and Messiah, possesses even greater authority over the Law and the Sabbath. This sets the stage for His declaration in Luke 6:5 that "the Son of Man is Lord of the Sabbath," implying His right to interpret and define its true purpose.

Christ-Centered Fulfillment

Luke 6:4, with its allusion to David and the shewbread, points profoundly to the person and work of Jesus Christ. Jesus is presented as the greater David, not merely a king, but the Messiah, whose authority surpasses all human and religious institutions. Just as David, in his need, accessed the sacred bread, Jesus Himself is the true "Bread of Life" (as declared in John 6:35), offered to satisfy the deepest hunger of humanity. He is the ultimate fulfillment of all temple rituals and sacrificial laws, embodying the mercy and compassion that God desires above mere sacrifice (Matthew 9:13). Furthermore, Jesus, as our Great High Priest (as described in Hebrews 4:14-16), not only has access to the holy things but is Himself the means by which we can approach God's throne of grace with confidence. His declaration as "Lord of the Sabbath" in the immediate context (Luke 6:5) signifies His divine prerogative to redefine and fulfill the Sabbath's purpose, shifting its focus from rigid legalism to rest, restoration, and the abundant life found in Him, who is the true rest for our souls (Matthew 11:28-30).

Copy as

Public-domain commentary

Matthew Henry

From his Commentary on the Whole Bible. Henry comments on passages, not single verses — this entry covers Luke 6:1–11. His two-level outline is real structure in the source text, so it is rendered as structure.

1662–1714 · 11 verses
Passage under commentLuke 6:1–11
I. II. Main points1. 2. Sub-points

These two passages of story we had both in Matthew and Mark, and they were there laid together (Mat 12:1; Mar 2:23; Mar 3:1), because, though happening at some distance of time from each other, both were designed to rectify the mistakes of the scribes and Pharisees concerning the sabbath day, on the bodily rest of which they laid greater stress and required greater strictness than the Law-giver intended. Here,

I.Christ justifies his disciples in a work of necessity for themselves on that day, and that was plucking the ears of corn, when they were hungry on that day. This story here has a date, which we had not in the other evangelists; it was on the second sabbath after the first (Luk 6:1), that is, as Dr. Whitby thinks is pretty clear, the first sabbath after the second day of unleavened bread, from which day they reckoned the seven weeks to the feast of pentecost; the first of which they called Sabbaton deuteroprōton, the second deuterodeuteron, and so on. Blessed be God we need not be critical in this matter. Whether this circumstance be mentioned to intimate that this sabbath was thought to have some peculiar honour upon it, which aggravated the offence of the disciples, or only to intimate that, being the first sabbath after the offering of the first fruits, it was the time of the year when the corn was nearly ripe, is not material. We may observe,

1.Christ's disciples ought not to be nice and curious in their diet, at any time, especially on sabbath days, but take up with what is easiest got, and be thankful. These disciples plucked the ears of corn, and did eat (Luk 6:1); a little served them, and that which had no delicacy in it.

2.Many that are themselves guilty of the greatest crimes are forward to censure others for the most innocent and inoffensive actions, Luk 6:2. The Pharisees quarrelled with them as doing that which it was not lawful to do on the sabbath days, when it was their own practice to feed deliciously on sabbath days, more than on all other days.

3.Jesus Christ will justify his disciples when they are unjustly censured, and will own and accept of them in many a thing which men tell them it is not lawful for them to do. How well is it for us that men are not to be our judges, and that Christ will be our Advocate!

4.Ceremonial appointments may be dispensed with, in cases of necessity; as the appropriating of the showbread to the priests was dispensed with, when David was by Providence brought into such a strait that he must have either that or none, Luk 6:3, Luk 6:4. And, if God's own appointments might be thus set aside for a greater good, much more may the traditions of men.

5.Works of necessity are particularly allowable on the sabbath day; but we must take heed that we turn not this liberty into licentiousness, and abuse God's favourable concessions and condescensions to the prejudice of the work of the day.

6.Jesus Christ, though he allowed works of necessity on the sabbath day, will notwithstanding have us to know and remember that it is his day, and therefore is to be spent in his service and to his honour (Luk 6:5): The Son of man is Lord also of the sabbath. In the kingdom of the Redeemer, the sabbath day is to be turned into a Lord's day; the property of it is, in some respects, to be altered, and it is to be observed chiefly in honour of the Redeemer, as it had been before in honour of the Creator, Jer 16:14, Jer 16:15. In token of this, it shall not only have a new name, the Lord's day (yet not forgetting the old, for it is a sabbath of rest still) but shall be transferred to a new day, the first day of the week.

II.He justifies himself in doing works of mercy for others on the sabbath day. Observe in this,

1.Christ on the sabbath day entered into the synagogue. Note, It is our duty, as we have opportunity, to sanctify sabbaths in religious assemblies. On the sabbath there ought to be a holy convocation; and our place must not be empty without very good reason.

2.In the synagogue, on the sabbath day, he taught. Giving and receiving instruction from Christ is very proper work for a sabbath day, and for a synagogue. Christ took all opportunities to teach, not only his disciples, but the multitude.

3.Christ's patient was one of his hearers. A man whose right hand was withered came to learn from Christ. Whether he had any expectation to be healed by him does not appear. But those that would be cured by the grace of Christ must be willing to learn the doctrine of Christ.

4.Among those who were the hearers of Christ's excellent doctrine, and the eye-witnesses of his glorious miracles, there were some who came with no other design than to pick quarrels with him, Luk 6:7. The scribes and Pharisees would not, as became generous adversaries, give him fair warning that, if he did heal on the sabbath day, they would construe it into a violation of the fourth commandment, which they ought in honour and justice to have done, because it was a case without precedent (none having ever cured as he did), but they basely watched him, as the lion does his prey, whether he would heal on the sabbath day, that they might find an accusation against him, and surprise him with a prosecution.

5.Jesus Christ was neither ashamed nor afraid to own the purposes of his grace, in the face of those who, he knew, confronted them, Luk 6:8. He knew their faults, and what they designed, and he bade the man rise, and stand forth, hereby to try the patient's faith and boldness.

6.He appealed to his adversaries themselves, and to the convictions of natural conscience, whether it was the design of the fourth commandment to restrain men from doing good on the sabbath day, that good which their hand finds to do, which they have an opportunity for, and which cannot so well be put off to another time (Luk 6:9): Is it lawful to do good, or evil, on the sabbath days? No wicked men are such absurd and unreasonable men as persecutors are, who study to do evil to men for doing good.

7.He healed the poor man, and restored him to the present use of his right hand, with a word's speaking, though he knew that his enemies would not only take offence at it, but take advantage against him for it, Luk 6:10. Let not us be drawn off, either from our duty or usefulness, by the oppression we meet with in it.

8.His adversaries were hereby enraged so much the more against him, Luk 6:11. Instead of being convinced by this miracle, as they ought to have been, that he was a teacher come from God, - instead of being brought to be in love with him as a benefactor to mankind, - they were filled with madness, vexed that they could not frighten him from doing good, or hinder the growth of his interest in the affections of the people. They were mad at Christ, mad at the people, mad at themselves. Anger is a short madness, malice is a long one; impotent malice, especially disappointed malice; such was theirs. When they could not prevent his working this miracle, they communed one with another what they might do to Jesus, what other way they might take to run him down. We may well stand amazed at it that the sons of men should be so wicked as to do thus, and that the Son of God should be so patient as to suffer it.

Copy as

Historical interpretation

Seven Centuries of Reception

10 surviving comments on this verse. Each one is dated, so this reads as a timeline rather than a list.

10 quotes · AD 373–1107
Post-NiceneEarly MedievalMedieval
40050060070080090010001100

Select a marker to jump to its quote. Markers stagger vertically where authors wrote within a few decades of each other.

AD 373Ephrem the SyrianPost-NiceneSourceCOMMENTARY ON TATIAN’S DIATESSARON 5.23
“Behold, your disciples are doing what is not lawful to do on the sabbath.” Our Lord had instructed them in advance and trained them in the truth of the just, so that whenever he dispensed from the law fully, they would not be alarmed. His Father had also dispensed from sabbaths to show that the sabbath was of his own making. He was also continuing to dispense from it that he might show that these were discerning remedies, proposed by the skilled physician for the pain which stretches from the sole of the foot to the head.
AD 397Ambrose of Milanas quoted by Aquinas, AD 1274Post-NiceneSourceCatena Aurea by Aquinas
Not only in the form of expression, but in His very practice and mode of action, did the Lord begin to absolve man from the observance of the old law. Hence it is said, And it came to pass that he went through the corn fields, &c.

But the Lord proves the defenders of the law to be ignorant of what belongs to the law, bringing the example of David; as it follows, And Jesus answering said to them, Have ye not read so much as this, &c.

But herein is a great mystery. For the field is the whole world, the corn is the abundant harvest of the saints in the seed of the human race, the ears of corn are the fruits of the Church, which the Apostles shaking off by their works fed upon, nourishing themselves with our increase, and by their mighty miracles, as it were out of the bodily husks, plucking forth the fruits of the mind to the light of faith.

Now the Jews thought this unlawful on the Sabbath, but Christ by the gift of new grace represented hereby the rest of the law, the work of grace. Wonderfully has He called it the second-first sabbath, not the first-second, because that was loosed from the law which was first, and this is made first which was ordained second. It is therefore called the second sabbath according to number, the first according to the grace of the work. For that sabbath is better where there is no penalty, than that where there is a penalty prescribed. Or this perhaps was first in the foreknowledge of wisdom, and second in the sanction of the ordinance. Now in David escaping with his companions, there was a foreshadowing of Christ in the law, who with His Apostles escaped the prince of the world. But how was it that the Observer and Defender of the law Himself both eat the bread, and gave it to those that were with Him, which no one was allowed to eat but the priests, except that He might show by that figure that the priests' bread was to come over to the use of the people, or that we ought to imitate the priests' life, or that all the children of the Church are priests, for we are anointed into a holy priesthood, offering ourselves a spiritual sacrifice to God. (1 Pet. 2:5.) But if the sabbath was made for men, and the benefit of men required that a man when hungry (having been long without the fruits of the earth) should forsake the abstinence of the old fast, the law is surely not broken but fulfilled.
The Lord Jesus begins to divest man [people] of the observation of the old law and clothes him with the new covering of grace not only through the understanding of words but also through the very usage and appearance of actions. Already on the sabbath, he leads him through the cornfields, that is, he brings him to what abounds in fruit. What the sabbath, the standing corn, and the ears mean to him is no small mystery. The field is this whole world, and the standing corn of the field is an abundant fruitfulness of saints in the sowing of the human race. The ears of the field are the fruits of the church that the apostles scattered with their works and on which they fed, sustaining themselves on our progress. The corn was already standing rich in abundant ears of virtues. The fruits of our merit are compared with these, because they also wither in a shower or are parched by the sun or soaked by the rain or shattered by storms or hoarded by the reapers in the storehouses of the blessed granaries. The earth has already received the Word of God, and the nourishing field sown with heavenly seed has brought forth abundant fruit. The disciples hungered for the salvation of humankind, and by the splendid miracles of their works they plucked as if from the husks of their bodies fruits of their minds to the light of faith. The Jews thought that this was not permitted on the sabbath, but Christ through the gift of new grace designated the idleness of the law as a work of grace.
AD 403Epiphanius of Salamisas quoted by Aquinas, AD 1274Post-NiceneSourceCatena Aurea by Aquinas
(cont. Hær. l. i. Hær. xxx. 32.) On the sabbath day then they were seen passing through the corn fields, and eating the corn, showing that the bonds of the sabbath were loosened, when the great Sabbath was come in Christ, Who made us to rest from the working of our iniquities.
AD 407John Chrysostomas quoted by Aquinas, AD 1274Post-NiceneSourceCatena Aurea by Aquinas
(Hom. 39. in Matt.) For there was a double feast; one on the principal sabbath, another on the next solemn day succeeding, which was also called a sabbath.

(ut sup.) And mark, that whenever the Lord speaks for His servants, (i. e. His disciples,) He brings forward servants, as for example David and the Priests; but when for Himself, He introduces His Father; as in that place, My Father worketh hitherto, and I work. (John 5:17.)

(ubi sup.) But Mark declares that He uttered this of our common nature, for He said, The sabbath was made for man, not, man for the sabbath. It is therefore more fitting that the sabbath should be subject to man, than that man should bow his neck to the sabbath.
AD 444Cyril of Alexandriaas quoted by Aquinas, AD 1274Post-NiceneSourceCatena Aurea by Aquinas
But the Pharisees and Scribes not knowing the Holy Scriptures agreed together to find fault with Christ's disciples, as it follows, And certain of the Pharisees said unto them, Why do ye, &c. Tell me now, when a table is set before you on the sabbath day; do you not break bread? Why then do you blame others?

As if He said, Whereas the law of Moses expressly says, Give a righteous judgment, and ye shall not respect persons in judgment, (Deut. 1:16, 17.) how now do ye blame My disciples, who even to this day extol David as a saint and prophet, though he kept not the commandment of Moses?
AD 444Cyril of AlexandriaPost-NiceneSourceCOMMENTARY ON LUKE, HOMILIES 21-22
Now although David acted contrary to what the law approves, he is rightly and justly esteemed by us as worthy of all admiration because he was truly a saint and prophet. Since the law of Moses expressly commands justice and does not consider the person being judged, “how,” he says, “do you condemn my disciples while you still admire as a saint and prophet the blessed David, although he did not keep Moses’ command?”There is clearly indicated to us by the loaves of the showbread the bread that comes down from heaven to be set upon the holy tables of the churches and all the furniture of the table. Bread used for the performance of its mystical service was a plain type of the divine treasures. Spiritually the bread signifies the twelve apostles, of whom we shall speak in due order when our comments reach the disciples themselves.
AD 450Isidore of Pelusiumas quoted by Aquinas, AD 1274Post-NiceneSourceCatena Aurea by Aquinas
(Isidore. l. i. Ep. 110.) He says, On the second-first, because it was the second day of the Passover, but the first of unleavened bread. Having killed the passover, on the very next day they kept the feast of unleavened bread. And it is plain that this was so from the fact, that the Apostles plucked ears of corn and ate them, for at that time the ears are weighed down by the fruit.
AD 735Bedeas quoted by Aquinas, AD 1274Early MedievalSourceCatena Aurea by Aquinas
For His disciples having no opportunity for eating because the multitudes thronged so, were naturally hungry, but by plucking the ears of corn they relieved their hunger, which is a mark of a strict habit of life, not seeking for prepared meats, but mere simple food.

But some say that these things were objected to our Lord Himself; they might indeed have been objected by different persons, both to our Lord Himself and His disciples, but to whomsoever the objection is made, it chiefly refers to Him.

For they bruise the ears in their hands, because, when they wish to bring others over into the body of Christ, they mortify their old man with its acts drawing them away from worldly thoughts.
AD 1107Theophylact of Ohridas quoted by Aquinas, AD 1274MedievalSourceCatena Aurea by Aquinas
Now He says, on the second sabbath after the first, because the Jews called every feast a sabbath. For sabbath means rest. Frequently therefore was there feasting at the preparation, and they called the preparation a sabbath because of the feast, and hence they gave to the principal sabbath the name of the second-first, as being the second in consequence of the festival of the day preceding.

But he reproves them in another way, as it is added, And he said unto them, that the So of man is Lord also of the sabbath. As if he said, I am the Lord of the sabbath, as being He who ordained it, and as the Legislator I have power to loose the sabbath; for Christ was called the Son of man, who being the Son of God yet condescended in a miraculous manner to be made and called for man's sake the Son of man.
Source: Quotations drawn from early Church Fathers and historical Christian theologians (AD 100–1500). Some quotes address the surrounding passage context rather than this verse alone.
Copy as

Continue studying Luke 6:4 across the web’s major study libraries — every link below opens this exact verse, chapter, or book on the destination site.

TrulyRandomVerse is not affiliated with these sites and doesn’t control their content. They’re linked because they’re genuinely useful.

Related study articles8