Matthew 12:2
“Jesus is Lord of the Sabbath”Matthew 12:1–8
Bible text: King James Version (1769 Blayney text) · Public domain
Bible text: King James Version with Strong's numbers · Public domain
Bible text: Berean Standard Bible · Public domain
Bible text: American Standard Version (1901) · Public domain
Bible text: World English Bible, Messianic edition · Public domain
Bible text: Geneva Bible (1599) · Public domain
Bible text: Young's Literal Translation · Public domain
- οἱhoi[the]G3588T-NPMDefinite article Nominative Plural Masculine
- δὲdeAndG1161CONJConjunction
- ΦαρισαῖοιPharisaioithe PhariseesG5330N-NPM-TNoun Nominative Plural Masculine Title
- ἰδόντεςidonteshaving seenG1492V-2AAP-NPMVerb 2nd Aorist Active Participle Nominative Plural Masculine
- εἶπανeipanthey saidG2036V-2AAI-3PVerb 2nd Aorist Active Indicative 3rd Plural
- αὐτῷ·autōto HimG846P-DSMPersonal pronoun Dative Singular Masculine
- ἰδοὺidouBeholdG2400INJInterjection
- οἱhoitheG3588T-NPMDefinite article Nominative Plural Masculine
- μαθηταίmathētaidisciplesG3101N-NPMNoun Nominative Plural Masculine
- σουsouof YouG4771P-2GSPersonal pronoun Genitive 2nd Singular
- ποιοῦσινpoiousinare doingG4160V-PAI-3PVerb Present Active Indicative 3rd Plural
- ὃhowhatG3739R-ASNRelative pronoun Accusative Singular Neuter
- οὐκouknotG3756PRT-NNegative Particle Negative
- ἔξεστινexestinit is lawfulG1832V-PAI-3SVerb Present Active Indicative 3rd Singular
- ποιεῖνpoieinto doG4160V-PANVerb Present Active Infinitive
- ἐνenonG1722PREPPreposition
- σαββάτῳsabbatōSabbathG4521N-DSNNoun Dative Singular Neuter
English is a literal word-by-word gloss of the Greek, not the KJV's wording. Why?
This is the original text the KJV's translators worked from — each Greek word with its own literal English meaning in this verse, prepared by scholars at Tyndale House, Cambridge. The KJV translates whole sentences, not word by word, so its wording differs: one Greek word can become several English words, and the KJV may choose “charity” where the gloss reads “love”. Both are faithful — they answer different questions. For the KJV's own rendering, switch to the KJV text.
Words in [ ] are added by the English.
Details
See on the biblical-era maps



Study this verse
Public-domain commentary
Matthew Henry
From his Commentary on the Whole Bible. Henry wrote on whole passages, and this entry covers Matthew 12:1–13. He set out his notes in a four-level outline, kept here as he numbered it.
The Jewish teachers had corrupted many of the commandments, by interpreting them more loosely than they were intended; a mistake which Christ discovered and rectified (ch. 5) in his sermon on the mount: but concerning the fourth commandment, they had erred in the other extreme, and interpreted it too strictly. Note, it is common for men of corrupt minds, by their zeal in rituals, and the external services of religion, to think to atone for the looseness of their morals. But they are cursed who add to, as well as they who take fRom. the words of this book, Revelation 22:16, Revelation 22:19; Proverbs 30:6.
Now that which our Lord Jesus here lays down is, that the works of necessity and mercy are lawful on the sabbath day, which the Jews in many instances were taught to make a scruple of. Christ's industrious explanation of the fourth commandment, intimates its perpetual obligation to the religious observation of one day in seven, as a holy sabbath. He would not expound a law that was immediately to expire, but doubtless intended hereby to settle a point which would be of use to his church in all ages; and so it is to teach us, that our Christian sabbath, though under the direction of the fourth commandment, is not under the injunctions of the Jewish elders.
It is usual to settle the meaning of a law by judgments given upon cases that happen in fact, and in like manner is the meaning of this law settled. Here are two passages of story put together for this purpose, happening at some distance of time from each other, and of a different nature, but both answering this intention.
I.Christ, by justifying his disciples in plucking the ears of corn on the sabbath-day, shows that works of necessity are lawful on that day. Now here observe,
1.What it was that the disciples did. They were following their Master one sabbath day through a corn-field; it is likely they were going to the synagogue (Matthew 12:9), for it becomes not Christ's disciples to take idle walks on that day, and they were hungry; let it be no disparagement to our Master's house-keeping. But we will suppose they were so intent upon the sabbath work, that they forgot to eat bread; had spent so much time in their morning worship, that they had no time for their morning meal, but came out fasting, because they would not come late to the synagogue. Providence ordered it that they went through the corn, and there they were supplied. Note, God has many ways of bringing suitable provision to his people when they need it, and will take particular care of them when they are going to the synagogue, as of old for them that went up to Jerusalem to worship (Psalm 84:6, Psalm 84:7), for whose use the rain filled the pools: while we are in the way of duty, Jehovah-jireh, let God alone to provide for us. Being in the corn-fields, they began to pluck the ears of corn; the law of God allowed this (Deuteronomy 23:25), to teach people to be neighbourly, and not to insist upon property in a small matter, whereby another may be benefited. This was but slender provision for Christ and his disciples, but it was the best they had, and they were content with it. The famous Mr. Ball, of Whitmore, used to say he had two dishes of meat to his sabbath dinner, a dish of hot milk, and a dish of cold, and he had enough and enough.
2.What was the offence that the Pharisees took at this. It was but a dry breakfast, yet the Pharisees would not let them eat that in quietness. They did not quarrel with them for taking another man's corn (they were no great zealots for justice), but for doing it on the sabbath day; for plucking and rubbing the ears of corn of that day was expressly forbidden by the tradition of the elders, for this reason, because it was a kind of reaping.
Note, It is no new thing for the most harmless and innocent actions of Christ's disciples to be evil spoken of, and reflected upon as unlawful, especially by those who are zealous for their own inventions and impositions. The Pharisees complained of them to their Master for doing that which it was not lawful to do. Note, Those are no friends to Christ and his disciples, who make that to be unlawful which God has not made to be so.
3.What was Christ's answer to this cavil of the Pharisees. The disciples could say little for themselves, especially because those who quarrelled with them seemed to have the strictness of the sabbath sanctification on their side; and it is safest to err on that hand: but Christ came to free his followers, not only from the corruptions of the Pharisees, but from their unscriptural impositions, and therefore has something to say for them, and justifies what they did, though it was a transgression of the canon.
(1.)He justifies them by precedents, which were allowed to be good by the Pharisees themselves.
[1.]He urges an ancient instance of David, who in a case of necessity did that which otherwise he ought not to have done (Matthew 12:3, Matthew 12:4); "Have ye not read the story (1 Samuel 21:6) of David's eating the show-bread, which by the law was appropriated to the priest?" (Leviticus 24:5-9). It is most holy to Aaron and his sons; and (Exodus 29:33) a stranger shall not eat of it; yet the priest gave it to David and his men; for though the exception of a case of necessity was not expressed, yet it was implied in that and all other ritual institutions. That which bore out David in eating the show-bread was not his dignity (Uzziah, that invaded the priest's office in the pride of his heart, though a king, was struck with a leprosy for it, 2 Chronicles 26:16, etc.), but his hunger. The greatest shall not have their lusts indulged, but the meanest shall have their wants considered. Hunger is a natural desire which cannot be mortified, but must be gratified, and cannot be put off with any thing but meat; therefore we say, It will break through stone walls. Now the Lord is for the body, and allowed his own appointment to be dispensed with in a case of distress; much more might the tradition of the elders be dispensed with. Note, That may be done in a case of necessity which may not be done at another time; there are laws which necessity has not, but it is a law to itself. Men do not despise, but pity, a thief that steals to satisfy his soul when he is hungry, Proverbs 6:30.
[2.]He urges a daily instance of the priests, which they likewise read in the law, and according to which was the constant usage, Matthew 12:5. The priests in the temple did a great deal of servile work on the sabbath day; killing, flaying, burning the sacrificed beasts, which in a common case would have been profaning the sabbath; and yet it was never reckoned any transgression of the fourth commandment, because the temple-service required and justified it. This intimates, that those labours are lawful on the sabbath day which are necessary, not only to the support of life, but to the service of the day; as tolling a bell to call the congregation together, travelling to church, and the like. Sabbath rest is to promote, not to hinder, sabbath worship.
(2.)He justifies them by arguments, three cogent ones.
[1.]In this place is one greater than the temple, Matthew 12:6. If the temple-service would justify what the priests did in their ministration, the service of Christ would much more justify the disciples in what they did in their attendance upon him. The Jews had an extreme veneration for the temple: it sanctified the gold; Stephen was accused for blaspheming that holy place (Acts 6:13); but Christ, in a corn-field, was greater than the temple, for in him dwelt not the presence of God symbolically, but all the fulness of the Godhead bodily. Note, If whatever we do, we do it in the name of Christ, and as unto him, it shall be graciously accepted of God, however it may be censured and cavilled at by men.
[2.]God will have mercy and not sacrifice, Matthew 12:7. Ceremonial duties must give way to moral, and the natural, royal law of love and self-preservation must take place of ritual observances. This is quoted from Hosea 6:6. It was used before, Matthew 9:13, in vindication of mercy to the souls of men; here, of mercy to their bodies. The rest of the sabbath was ordained for man's good, in favour of the body, Deuteronomy 5:14. Now no law must be construed so as to contradict its own end. If you had known what this means, had known what it is to be of a merciful disposition, you would have been sorry that they were forced to do this to satisfy their hunger, and would not have condemned the guiltless. Note, First, Ignorance is the cause of our rash and uncharitable censures of our brethren. Secondly, It is not enough for us to know the scriptures, but we must labour to know the meaning of them. Let him that readeth understand. Thirdly, Ignorance of the meaning of the scripture is especially shameful in those who take upon them to teach others.
[3.]The Son of man is Lord even of the sabbath day, Matthew 12:8. That law, as all the rest, is put into the hand of Christ, to be altered, enforced, or dispensed with, as he sees good. It was by the Son that God made the world, and by him he instituted the sabbath in innocency; by him he gave the ten commandments at mount Sinai, and as Mediator he is entrusted with the institution of ordinances, and to make what changes he thought fit; and particularly, as being Lord of the sabbath, he was authorized to make such an alteration of that day, as that it should become the Lord's day, the Lord Christ's day. And if Christ be the Lord of the sabbath, it is fit the day and all the work of it should be dedicated to him. By virtue of this power Christ here enacts, that works of necessity, if they be really such, and not a pretended and self-created necessity, are lawful on the sabbath day; and this explication of the law plainly shows that it was to be perpetual. Exceptio firmat regulam - The exception confirms the rule.
Christ having thus silenced the Pharisees, and got clear of them (Matthew 12:9), departed, and went into their synagogue, the synagogue of these Pharisees, in which they presided, and toward which he was going, when they picked this quarrel with him. Note, First, We must take heed lest any thing that occurs in our way to holy ordinances unfit us for, or divert us fRom. our due attendance on them. Let us proceed in the way of our duty, notwithstanding the artifices of Satan, who endeavours, by the perverse disputings of men of corrupt minds, and many other ways, to ruffle and discompose us. Secondly, We must not, for the sake of private feuds and personal piques, draw back from public worship. Though the Pharisees had thus maliciously cavilled at Christ, yet he went into their synagogue. Satan gains this point, if, by sowing discord among brethren, he prevail to drive them, or any of them, from the synagogue, and the communion of the faithful.
II.Christ, by healing the man that had the withered hand on the sabbath day, shows that works of mercy are lawful and proper to be done on that day. The work of necessity was done by the disciples, and justified by him; the work of mercy was done by himself; the works of mercy were his works of necessity; it was his meat and drink to do good. I must preach, says he, Luke 4:43. This cure is recorded for the sake of the time when it was wrought, on the sabbath.
Here is, 1. The affliction that this poor man was in; his hand was withered so that he was utterly disabled to get his living by working with his hands. St. Jerome says, that the gospel of Matthew in Hebrew, used by the Nazarenes and Ebionites, adds this circumstance to this story of the man with the withered hand, that he was Caementarius - a bricklayer, and applied himself to Christ thus; "Lord, I am a bricklayer, and have got my living by my labour (manibus victum quaeritans); I beseech thee, O Jesus, restore me the use of my hand, that I may not be obliged to beg my bread" (ne turpiter mendicem cibos). Hieron. in loc. This poor man was in the synagogue. Note, Those who can do but little, or have but little to do for the world, must do so much the more for their souls; as the rich, the aged, and the infirm.
2.A spiteful question which the Pharisees put to Christ upon the sight of this man. They asked him, saying, Is it lawful to heal? We read not here of any address this poor man made to Christ for a cure, but they observed Christ began to take notice of him, and knew it was usual for him to be found of those that sought him not, and therefore with their badness they anticipated his goodness, and started this case as a stumbling-block in the way of doing good; Is it lawful to heal on the sabbath-day? Whether it was lawful for physicians to heal on that day or not, which was the thing disputed in their books, one would think it past dispute, that it is lawful for prophets to heal, for him to heal who discovered a divine power and goodness in all he did of this kind, and manifested himself to be sent of God. Did ever any ask, whether it is lawful for God to heal, to send his word and heal? It is true, Christ was now made under the law, by a voluntary submission to it, but he was never made under the precepts of the elders. Is it lawful to heal? To enquire into the lawfulness and unlawfulness of actions is very good, and we cannot apply ourselves to any with such enquiries more fitly than to Christ; but they asked here, not that they might be instructed by him, but that they might accuse him. If he should say that it was lawful to heal on the sabbath day, they would accuse him of a contradiction to the fourth commandment; to so great a degree of superstition had the Pharisees brought the sabbath rest, that, unless in peril of life, they allowed not any medicinal operations on the sabbath day. If he should say that it was not lawful, they would accuse him of partiality, having lately justified his disciples in plucking the ears of corn on that day.
3.Christ's answer to this question, by way of appeal to themselves, and their own opinion and practice, Matthew 12:11, Matthew 12:12. In case a sheep (though but one, of which the loss would not be very great) should fall into a pit on the sabbath day, would they not lift it out? No doubt they might do it, the fourth commandment allows it; they must do it, for a merciful man regardeth the life of his beast, and for their parts they would do it, rather than lose a sheep; does Christ take care for sheep? Yes, he does; he preserves and provides for both man and beast. But here he says it for our sakes (1 Corinthians 9:9, 1 Corinthians 9:10), and hence argues, How much then is a man better than a sheep? Sheep are not only harmless but useful creatures, and are prized and tended accordingly; yet a man is here preferred far before them. Note, Man, in respect of his being, is a great deal better, and more valuable, than the best of the brute creatures: man is a reasonable creature, capable of knowing, loving, and glorifying God, and therefore is better than a sheep. The sacrifice of a sheep could therefore not atone for the sin of a soul. They do not consider this, who are more solicitous for the education, preservation, and supply of their horses and dogs than of God's poor, or perhaps their own household.
Hence Christ infers a truth, which, even at first sight, appears very reasonable and good-natured; that it is lawful to do well on the sabbath days; they had asked, Is it lawful to hear? Christ proves it is lawful to do well, and let any one judge whether healing, as Christ healed, was not doing well. Note, There are more ways of doing well upon sabbath days, than by the duties of God's immediate worship; attending the sick, relieving the poor, helping those who are fallen into sudden distress, and call for speedy relief; this is doing good: and this must be done from a principle of love and charity, with humility and self-denial, and a heavenly frame of spirit, and this is doing well, and it shall be accepted, Genesis 4:7.
4.Christ's curing of the man, notwithstanding the offence which he foresaw the Pharisees would take at it, Matthew 12:13. Though they could not answer Christ's arguments, they were resolved to persist in their prejudice and enmity; but Christ went on with his work notwithstanding. Note, Duty is not to be left undone, nor opportunities of doing good neglected, for fear of giving offence. Now the manner of the cure is observable; he said to the man, "Stretch forth thy hand, exert thyself as well as thou canst;" and he did so, and it was restored whole. This, as other cures Christ wrought, had a spiritual significancy.
(1.)By nature our hands are withered, we are utterly unable of ourselves to doing any thing that is good.
(2.)It is Christ only, by the power of his grace, that cures us; he heals the withered hand by putting life into the dead soul, works in us both to will and to do.
(3.)In order to our cure, he commands us to stretch forth our hands, to improve our natural powers, and do as well as we can; to stretch them out in prayer to God, to stretch them out to lay hold on Christ by faith, to stretch them out in holy endeavours. Now this man could not stretch forth his withered hand of himself, any more than the impotent man could arise and carry his bed, or Lazarus come forth out of his grave; yet Christ bid him do it. God's commands to us to do the duty which of ourselves we are not able to do are no more absurd or unjust, than this command to the man with the withered hand, to stretch it forth; for with the command, there is a promise of grace which is given by the word. Turn ye at my reproof, and I will pour out my Spirit, Proverbs 1:23. Those who perish are as inexcusable as this man would have been, if he had not attempted to stretch forth his hand, and so had not been healed. But those who are saved have no more to boast of than this man had of contributing to his own cure, by stretching forth his hand, but are as much indebted to the power and grace of Christ as he was.
Historical interpretation
Eight Centuries of Reception
11 surviving comments on this verse. Each one is dated, so this reads as a timeline rather than a list.
Select a marker to jump to its quote. Markers stagger vertically where authors wrote within a few decades of each other.
Figuratively; First consider that this discourse was held at that time, namely, when He had given thanks to the Father for giving salvation to the Gentiles. The field is the world, the sabbath is rest, the corn the ripening of them that believe for the harvest; thus His passing through the corn field on the sabbath, is the coming of the Lord into the world in the rest of the Law; the hunger of the disciples is their desire for the salvation of men.
The Pharisees, who thought that the key of the kingdom of heaven was in their hands, accused the disciples of doing what was not lawful to do; whereon the Lord reminded them of deeds in which, under the guise of facts, a prophecy was concealed; and that He might show the power of all things, He further added, that it contained the form of that work which was to be, Had ye known what that meaneth, I will have mercy; for the work of our salvation is not in the sacrifice of the Law, but in mercy; and the Law having ceased, we are saved by the mercy of God. Which gift if they had understood they would not have condemned the innocent, that is His Apostles, whom in their jealousy they were to accuse of having transgressed the Law, where the old sacrifices having ceased, the new dispensation of mercy came through them to the aid of all.
(Hon. xxxix.) Why then did He lead them through the corn fields on the sabbath, seeing He knew all things, unless He desired to break the sabbath? This he desired indeed, but not absolutely, therefore He broke it not without cause, but furnished a sufficient reason; so that He both caused the Law to cease, and yet offended not against it. Thus in order to soften the Jews, He here introduces a natural necessity; this is what is said, And his disciples being an hungred, began to pluck the ears of corn, and to eat. Although in things which are manifestly sinful, there can be no excuse, he who kills another cannot plead rage, nor he who commits adultery, lust, or any other cause; yet here saying that the disciples were hungry, He delivers them from all accusation.
Here admire the disciples, who are so limited in their desires, that they have no care of the things of the body, but despise the support of the flesh; they are assailed by hunger, and yet they go not away from Christ; for had not they been hard pressed by hunger, they would not have done thus. What the Pharisees said to this is added, The Pharisees seeing it said unto Him, Behold, thy disciples do what is not lawful to do on the sabbath.
To clear His disciples, He brings forward the instance of David, whose glory as a Prophet was great among the Jews. Yet they could not here answer that this was lawful for him, because he was a Prophet; for it was not Prophets, but Priests only who might eat. And the greater was he who did this, the greater is the defence of the disciples; yet though David was a Prophet, they that were with him were not.
But some one will say, How is this instance applicable to the question in hand? For David did not transgress the sabbath. Herein is shown the wisdom of Christ, that He brings forward an instance stronger than the sabbath. For it is by no means the same thing to violate the sabbath, and to touch that sacred table, which is lawful for none. And again, He adds yet another answer, saying, Or have ye not read in the Law, that on the sabbath days the Priests in the temple profane the sabbath, and are blameless?
But that you should not say to me, that to find an instance of another's sin is not to excuse our own—indeed where the thing done and not the doer of it is accused, we excuse the thing done. But this is not enough, He said what is yet more, that they are blameless. But see how great things He brings in; first, the place, in the Temple; secondly, the time, on the sabbath; the setting aside the Law, in the word profane, not merely break; and that they are not only free from punishment but from blame; and are blameless. And this second instance is not like the first which He gave respecting David; for that was done but once, by David who was not a Priest, and was a case of necessity; but this second is done every sabbath, and by the Priests, and according to the Law. So that not only by indulgence, as the first case would establish, but by the strict law the disciples are to be held blameless. But are the disciples Priests? yea, they are yet greater than Priests, forasmuch as He was there who is the Lord of the Temple, who is the reality and not the type; and therefore it is added, But I say unto you, one greater than the Temple is here.
And because what He had said seemed hard to those that heard it, He again exhorts to mercy, introducing His discourse with emphasis, saying, But had ye known what that meaneth, I will have mercy and not sacrifice, ye would never have condemned the innocent.
Observe again how in leading the discourse towards an apology for them, He shows His disciples to be above the need of any apology, and to be indeed blameless, as He had said above of the Priests. And He adds yet another plea which clears them of blame, For the Son of Man is Lord also of the sabbath.
What then do the Pharisees? "When they saw it," it is said, "they said unto Him, Behold, Thy disciples do that which is not lawful to do upon the Sabbath day."
Now here indeed with no great vehemence yet surely that would have been consistent in them)-nevertheless they are not vehemently provoked, but simply find fault. But when He stretched out the withered hand and healed it, then they were so infuriated, as even to consult together about slaying and destroying Him. For where nothing great and noble is done, they are calm; but where they see any made whole, they are savage, and fret themselves, and none so intolerable as they are: such enemies are they of the salvation of men.
(V2.) But the Pharisees, seeing this, said to him: Behold, your disciples do what is not lawful for them to do on the Sabbath. Note that the first apostles of the Savior destroy the letter of the Sabbath against the Ebionites, who, while accepting the other apostles, reject Paul as a transgressor of the law.
As we read in another Evangelist, they had no opportunity of taking food because of the thronging of the multitude, and therefore they hungred as men. That they rub the ears of corn in their hands, and with them satisfy themselves, is a proof of an austere life, and of men who needed not prepared meats, but sought only simple food.
Observe, that the first Apostles of the Saviour broke the letter of the sabbath, contrary to the opinion of the Ebionitesa, who receive the other Apostles, but reject Paul as a transgressor of the Law. Then it proceeds to their excuse; But he said unto them, Have ye not read what David did, when he was an hungred? To refute the false accusation of the Pharisees, He calls to mind the ancient history, that David flying from Saul came to Nobba, and being entertained by Achimelech the Priest, asked for food; (1 Sam. 21.) he having no common bread, gave him the consecrated loaves, which it was not lawful for any to eat, but the Priests only and Levites; esteeming it a better action to deliver men from the danger of famine than to offer sacrifice to God; for the preservation of man is a sacrifice acceptable to God. Thus then the Lord meets their objection, saying, If David be a holy man, and if you blame not the high-priest Achimelech, but consider their excuse for their transgression of the Law to be valid, and that was hunger; how do ye not approve in the Apostles the same plea which you approve in others? Though even here there is much difference. These rub ears of corn in their hands on the sabbath, those ate the Levitical bread, and over and above the solemn sabbath it was the season of new moon, during which when sought for at the banquet he fled from the royal palace.
Observe that neither David nor his servants received the loaves of show-bread, before they had made answer that they were pure from women.
As though He had said, Ye bring complaints against my disciples, that on the sabbath they rub ears of corn in their hands, under stress of hunger, and ye yourselves profane the sabbath, slaying victims in the temple, killing bulls, burning holocausts on piles of wood; also, on the testimony of another Gospel (John 7:23.), ye circumcise infants on the sabbath; so that in keeping one law, ye break that concerning the sabbath. But the laws of God are never contrary one to another; wisely therefore, wherein His disciples might be accused of having transgressed them, He shows that therein they followed the examples of Achimelech and David; and this their pretended charge of breaking the sabbath He retorts truly, and not having the plea of necessity, upon those who had brought the accusation.
The word Hic is not a pronoun, but an adverb of place here, for that place is greater than the Temple which contains the Lord of the Temple.
What I will have mercy, and not sacrifice, signifies, we have explained above. The words, Ye mould never have condemned the innocent, are to be referred to the Apostles, and the meaning is, If ye allow the mercy of Achimelech, in that he refreshed David when in danger of famishing, why do ye condemn My disciples?
(De Op. Monach. 23.) The Jews rather charged the Lord's disciples with the breach of the sabbath than with theft; because it was commanded the people of Israel in the Law (Deut. 23:25.), that they should not lay hold of any as a thief in their fields, unless he sought to carry ought away with him; but if any touched only what he needed to eat, him they suffered to depart with impunity free.
(cont. Faust. xvi. 28.) He did not forbid His disciples to pluck the ears of corn on the sabbath, that so He might convict both the Jews who then were, and the Manichæans who were to come, who will not pluck up a herb lest they should be committing a murder.
For where nothing great or noble happens, the Pharisees remain quiet. But where they see certain people being healed, they are more offended than anyone else. In this way they are the enemies of humanity’s salvation and without understanding of the sacred writings. If the new covenant announced of old by Jeremiah differs from the first covenant, it ought by all means to make use not of old laws but of new ones. But the Pharisees, not willing to comprehend this, lay snares for the holy apostles and say about them to Christ: “Look here, we see those you’ve schooled opposing themselves to the stipulations of the law. For where the law commands everyone to rest on the sabbath and to touch no manner of work, your disciples pluck ears of wheat with their hands.” But tell me, O Pharisee, when you have set the sabbath table for yourself, don’t even you break the bread? Why then do you blame others?
He calls Himself the Son of Man, and the meaning is, He whom ye suppose a mere man is God, the Lord of all creatures, and also of the sabbath, and He has therefore power to change the law after His pleasure, because He made it.
They pluck the ears of corn when they withdraw men from devotion to the world; they rub them in their hands when they tear away their hearts from the lusts of the flesh; they eat the grain when they transfer such as are amended into the body of the Church.
This they do on the sabbath, that is in the hope of eternal rest, to which they invite others. Also they walk through the corn fields with the Lord, who have delight in meditating on the Scriptures; they are hungry while they desire to find the bread of life, that is the love of God, in them; they pluck the ears of corn and rub them in their hands, while they examine the testimonies to discover what lies hid under the letter, and this on the sabbath, that is, while they are free from disquieting thoughts.
(ord.) Having related the preaching together with the miracles of one year before John's enquiry, He passes to those of another year, namely after the death of John, when Jesus is already in all things spoken against, and hence it is said, At that time Jesus passed through the corn fields on the sabbath day.
Continue studying Matthew 12:2 across the web’s major study libraries — every link below opens this exact verse, chapter, or book on the destination site.
Read & Compare
- BibleGatewayThis verse in more than 200 translations and 70 languages.
- Bible.comThe YouVersion reader — hundreds of translations, reading plans, and highlights.
- ESV.orgCrossway's official English Standard Version reader.
- NET BibleThe NET translation with 60,000+ translators' notes on every rendering decision.
- STEP BibleTyndale House's free study tool — original text, vocabulary, and scholarly resources.
- BibliaLogos Bible Software's free web reader.
- USCCBThe New American Bible (Revised Edition) with the U.S. bishops' study notes.
Commentaries
- BibleHub CommentariesDozens of classic commentaries on this verse, gathered on one page.
- StudyLightMore than 100 commentary sets — the largest collection on the web.
- BibleRefPlain-English commentary on what this verse means, verse by verse.
- Enduring WordDavid Guzik's free commentary on this chapter, widely used by Bible teachers.
- Bible Study ToolsVerse commentary alongside Greek and Hebrew study aids.
Original Language & Research
- BibleHub InterlinearThe verse word by word — original language, transliteration, and English.
- BibleHub LexiconEvery word's original-language definition and Strong's entry.
- Blue Letter BibleDeep-study tools — Strong's numbers, concordance, and word studies.
- CNTR CollationThe earliest Greek manuscripts of this verse, collated letter by letter.
Sermons, Hymns & Audio
TrulyRandomVerse is not affiliated with these sites and doesn’t control their content. They’re linked because they’re genuinely useful.
Written with AI assistance. Always check it against Scripture.
This verse
The Pharisees see the disciples plucking grain and bring the charge to Jesus, calling it unlawful on the Sabbath by the measure of their own tradition.
“But when the Pharisees saw it,”
The Pharisees, Pharisaîos, were watching Jesus and his followers closely.
“they said unto him,”
They speak to Jesus, who is answerable for his disciples, so the charge is aimed at him.
“Behold, thy disciples do that which is not lawful to do upon the sabbath day.”
Idoú, “behold”, points to the act. Éxesti with ou says it is forbidden. In their tradition plucking counted as reaping, one of the kinds of work forbidden on the Sabbath.
Passage studyMatthew 12:1–8
Jesus Is Lord of the Sabbath
Summary
On a Sabbath, Jesus’ disciples are hungry and pluck grain as they walk through a field, and the Pharisees tell Jesus that this is unlawful. Jesus answers them from Scripture. David ate the holy bread when he was hungry, and the priests work in the temple every Sabbath and are blameless. Then he speaks about himself: one greater than the temple is here, God desires mercy before sacrifice, and the Son of man is Lord even of the Sabbath day.
Why plucking grain on the Sabbath caused a dispute
“At that time” ties this scene to what Jesus has just said, his invitation to all who labour and are heavy laden to come to him for rest (Matthew 11:28–30). Chapter 12 then opens with the first of several clashes with the religious leaders, and the healing of a man with a withered hand on the Sabbath follows straight after it. Mark and Luke tell the same event (Mark 2:23–28, Luke 6:1–5).
The word for the Sabbath, sábbaton, comes from the Hebrew Shabbat, “rest” or “ceasing”. It was the weekly day of rest from ordinary work, set apart for God in the Ten Commandments (Exodus 20:8–11), and it ran from Friday sunset to Saturday sunset. It remembered God’s rest after creation (Genesis 2:2–3) and Israel’s deliverance from slavery (Deuteronomy 5:12–15). The Sabbath was a sign of God’s covenant with Israel and a mark of Jewish identity.
The law forbade work on that day and left most particular acts undefined. Over the centuries the teachers of Israel, and the Pharisees above all, built up a body of oral tradition, the Halakha, that defined work in close detail. It was meant as a “fence around the Torah”, to keep people from breaking a command by accident. This tradition was later written down in the Mishnah, which lists 39 kinds of forbidden work, among them reaping, threshing and preparing food. By that reckoning, plucking ears of grain was reaping, and rubbing them in the hands was threshing.
The disciples “were an hungred”. The verb peináō means to be hungry, and here it is plain bodily hunger. They “began to pluck”, tíllō, which means to pull off, so they were stripping heads of grain from the stalks as they walked. The law of Moses allowed exactly this. A person passing through a neighbour’s standing grain could pluck ears by hand and eat them on the spot, though he could take none away (Deuteronomy 23:25). The act itself was lawful, and the whole dispute was about the day.
What “corn” means here
In the KJV, “corn” is the general word for any cereal grain, such as wheat or barley, which were the staple crops of ancient Israel. Maize, which American English calls corn, was unknown in the Middle East at that time. The disciples were eating heads of wheat or barley.
The charge the Pharisees bring
The name Pharisee, Pharisaîos, comes from a Hebrew root meaning “to separate”. The Pharisees were a leading Jewish party of the Second Temple period, zealous for the law of Moses and for the oral traditions they believed explained it. Their concern for holiness and for the law was genuine. Their error lay in setting the detail of their rules above the mercy the law was given to serve.
They bring the charge to Jesus, since a teacher answered for his disciples, and so it is a challenge to him. “Behold”, idoú, points at the offence. “Not lawful” is the verb éxesti, “it is permitted” or “it is lawful”, with the plain negative ou. The law they had in view was the Sabbath command as their tradition had defined it.
Did the disciples break God’s law?
The disciples were guiltless, and that is Jesus’ own word for them in verse 7. The rule they crossed was the Pharisees’ tradition, while God’s command stood unbroken. They did what Deuteronomy permitted, and they did it because they were hungry. In Mark’s account Jesus adds the principle behind his whole answer: “The sabbath was made for man, and not man for the sabbath: Therefore the Son of man is Lord also of the sabbath” (Mark 2:27–28). God gave the Sabbath for our good, as a day of rest and worship.
Jesus answers from what David did
“But he said unto them” opens with the small connective dé, “but”, which turns from the charge to the reply. Jesus then asks, “Have ye not read?” The verb anaginṓskō means simply to read, and a question put this way in Greek expects the answer yes. The Pharisees had read the story many times. What they lacked was an understanding of what it meant for the case in front of them, so the question is a gentle rebuke to men who were the teachers of Scripture.
The story is in 1 Samuel 21:1–6. David, Dabíd in Greek, was the man God called “a man after mine own heart” (Acts 13:22), and at that time he was fleeing from Saul. He came hungry to the priest Ahimelech at Nob, where the tabernacle stood. Jesus calls it “the house of God”, from oîkos, “house”, and theós, “God”, and says David “entered into” it, eisérchomai, the ordinary verb for going in. Ahimelech made sure that David and his men were ritually clean, and then he gave them the holy bread.
That bread was the shewbread, in Greek ártos, “bread”, with próthesis, “a setting forth”. It is also called the bread of the Presence, in Hebrew lechem panim. Twelve unleavened loaves, one for each tribe of Israel, lay on a table in the Holy Place before the LORD. They were replaced every Sabbath, and the loaves taken away were eaten by the priests in a holy place (Leviticus 24:5–9). The bread spoke of God’s presence among his people and his provision for them.
Jesus states the difficulty plainly. The bread “was not lawful” for David to eat, where ou and ēn, “was”, stand with the same verb éxesti that the Pharisees had just used. It was for the priests “only”, mónos, and the word for priests is hiereús. David and his men were laymen. Yet the priest gave them the bread, and Scripture records it without a word of blame. David’s hunger and the disciples’ hunger are named with the same verb, peináō, and that is the link Jesus draws. If God’s anointed was held guiltless when need set aside a ceremonial rule that God himself had given, then hungry disciples who cross a tradition of men are guiltless too. Mercy and the preserving of life were always part of what the law was for.
There is a further point in the choice of David. Jesus is the greater Son of David and the true King, and the men with him are in the company of one who has a higher claim than David had.
The priests who work on the Sabbath and are blameless
The second example comes from the law itself. Every Sabbath the priests offered the sacrifices God had commanded for that day (Numbers 28:9–10), which meant slaughtering animals, preparing offerings and tending the altar. Anywhere else this would have been work.
Jesus says the priests “profane” the Sabbath. The verb bebēlóō means to treat as common what is holy, and it comes from a root that pictures stepping across a threshold. He chooses the strong word on purpose. By the Pharisees’ own measure of work, the priests desecrate the Sabbath every week. Yet they are “blameless”, anaítios, which means innocent or guiltless, because God himself commanded their work. So the law that gave the Sabbath also shows that its rest gives way to the service of God in his house.
Jesus reasons in a similar way in Luke 14:5, where he asks which of his hearers would leave an ass or an ox in a pit on the Sabbath day.
One greater than the temple is here
“But I say unto you” brings in dé again with légō, “I say”, and Jesus now speaks on his own authority. “That” is hóti, which introduces what he declares. “In this place” is hōde, “here”. “Is” is estí. “Greater” is meízōn, the comparative that means larger or greater. The word for temple, hierón, takes in the whole sacred precinct with its courts and buildings, where naos would mean the inner sanctuary alone.
The temple in Jerusalem was the centre of Israel’s faith and national life. It was the dwelling place of God’s presence, the place where every sacrifice for sin was offered, and the great sign of God’s covenant with his people. For a man standing in a grain field to say that one greater than the temple was present was a shocking claim, and to many who heard it, it was blasphemy. Jesus says it of himself. He makes no open statement here that he is the Messiah or that he is God, yet the claim reaches that far, since the only thing greater than the house where God dwells is God’s own presence.
The claim also completes the argument about the priests. If those who serve the temple are blameless in their Sabbath work, the disciples who serve the one greater than the temple are blameless as well.
How Jesus is greater than the temple
Jesus is what the temple pointed to. In him “the Word was made flesh, and dwelt among us” (John 1:14), so that God’s presence came to live among us in a person. He spoke of his own body as the temple that would be destroyed and raised in three days (John 2:19–21). The law with its sacrifices was a shadow of good things to come (Hebrews 10:1–4). Jesus is the great high priest (Hebrews 4:14) who entered the true, heavenly sanctuary by his own blood and obtained eternal redemption (Hebrews 9:11–14), and his offering was made once for all (Hebrews 10:10). He is “the Lamb of God” (John 1:29).
This is the fulfilment he spoke of when he said that he came to fulfil the law and the prophets (Matthew 5:17), and “I say unto you” carries the same authority here that it carries through the Sermon on the Mount (Matthew 5:21–48). Since his coming, worship is offered “in spirit and in truth” through him (John 4:23–24), and those who belong to him are themselves temples of the Holy Ghost (1 Corinthians 6:19–20).
I will have mercy, and not sacrifice
Jesus now quotes the prophet Hosea: “For I desired mercy, and not sacrifice; and the knowledge of God more than burnt offerings” (Hosea 6:6). In Hosea’s day God was rebuking Israel for worship that kept up the offerings while the heart was far from him. Jesus had already quoted the same words to the Pharisees when they objected to his eating with sinners (Matthew 9:13).
“Mercy” is éleos, compassion that acts for someone in need. In Hosea it stands for the Hebrew chesed, God’s steadfast love and covenant faithfulness. “Sacrifice” is thysía, an offering, and above all the animal offerings of the law. God is telling his people which of the two lies nearer his heart.
“If ye had known” uses ginṓskō, to know or to understand. The Pharisees had Hosea’s words and had missed their meaning, and the result was serious: they “condemned the guiltless”. A reading of the law that leaves out mercy ends in condemning people whom God does not condemn. Micah says the same thing about what God asks: “He hath shewed thee, O man, what is good; and what doth the LORD require of thee, but to do justly, and to love mercy, and to walk humbly with thy God?” (Micah 6:8).
Does God no longer want sacrifice or obedience?
God commanded the sacrifices himself, and he always meant them to be brought with a repentant heart and a righteous life (Psalm 51:16–17). Hosea’s words set an order of priority. When a rule of ritual and an act of mercy pull in different directions, mercy comes first, because the commands were given out of God’s love for people. Jesus honours the law here, and he shows what it was for.
Jesus is also the mercy this verse speaks of. Through his whole ministry he showed compassion to the sick, the lowly and the outcast, and at the cross he gave himself as the one perfect sacrifice, so that in him mercy and sacrifice meet.
The Son of man is Lord even of the sabbath day
“For”, gár, gives the reason behind everything Jesus has said. The disciples are guiltless because of who their Master is.
“Son of man” joins huiós, “son”, with ánthrōpos, “man”. It is the name Jesus most often uses for himself in the Gospels. It speaks of his true humanity and his oneness with us, and it also recalls Daniel’s vision of one like the Son of man who is given dominion, glory and a kingdom that shall never pass away (Daniel 7:13–14). The title is humble in sound and royal in meaning.
“Lord” is kýrios, a master, one who is supreme in authority. With estí, “is”, Jesus says what he is now, standing in that field. “Even” is kaí, and it marks how far his lordship reaches. The Sabbath was among the most sacred things Israel had, a command written by God into the Ten Commandments, and Jesus says that it too is under him. God made the Sabbath, so the one who is its Lord is claiming what belongs to God. It is his to say what the day is for.
Do Christians have to keep the Sabbath?
The rest that the Sabbath pointed to is found in Christ himself. Hebrews says, “There remaineth therefore a rest to the people of God” (Hebrews 4:9–10), and the one who enters it has ceased from his own works. Paul calls the sabbath days “a shadow of things to come” whose body is Christ, and tells believers to let no one judge them over such days (Colossians 2:16–17). He also writes of one believer esteeming one day above another while another esteems every day alike, each doing so to the Lord (Romans 14:5–6).
So Jesus fulfils the Sabbath. He is the one who says, “Come unto me”, and gives rest to the weary. In the new covenant God writes his law on the heart (Jeremiah 31:33), and we stand in the liberty with which Christ has made us free (Galatians 5:1). Rest and worship remain good gifts, and it is wise for believers to set aside time for gathering to worship and for rest. Believers differ on how far a weekly day of rest still binds us as a command, and they agree that its Lord is Christ and that true rest is in him.
What the Lord of the Sabbath gives us
This passage shows us who God is. He is the God who lets a hungry man eat, who fed David from his own table, and who says through his prophet that he desires mercy. His commands are given for our good. When we handle his word, the passage gives us a test for our reading of it: an understanding of Scripture that leaves us quick to condemn has missed something that Hosea and Jesus both say plainly.
It also shows us Jesus. The men in the field were safe because of whom they were walking with, and the same is true of all who follow him. He is greater than the temple, so in him we have God’s presence and a finished sacrifice. He is Lord of the Sabbath, so in him we have rest. And the one who defended his hungry disciples later said, “I am the bread of life: he that cometh to me shall never hunger” (John 6:35). The hunger of that Sabbath morning points to a deeper hunger, and he is the one who satisfies it.
Matthew 12:1
“At that time Jesus went on the sabbath day through the corn;”
The scene follows Jesus’ invitation to come to him for rest. The day, sábbaton, is named at once because the whole dispute turns on it. “Corn” is grain, wheat or barley.
“and his disciples were an hungred,”
Peináō, real hunger. This is the reason for what they do, and Jesus builds his defence on it.
“and began to pluck the ears of corn, and to eat.”
Tíllō, to pull off. Deuteronomy allowed a traveller to pluck grain by hand and eat it, so the act was lawful on any other day.
Matthew 12:2 This verse
“But when the Pharisees saw it,”
The Pharisees, Pharisaîos, were watching Jesus and his followers closely.
“they said unto him,”
They speak to Jesus, who is answerable for his disciples, so the charge is aimed at him.
“Behold, thy disciples do that which is not lawful to do upon the sabbath day.”
Idoú, “behold”, points to the act. Éxesti with ou says it is forbidden. In their tradition plucking counted as reaping, one of the kinds of work forbidden on the Sabbath.
Matthew 12:3
“But he said unto them,”
Dé turns from accusation to answer.
“Have ye not read”
Anaginṓskō, to read. They had read it, and the question expects them to admit as much.
“what David did,”
Dabíd, the king Israel honoured most, whose example the Pharisees could hardly set aside.
“when he was an hungred, and they that were with him;”
The need is the point of comparison. David and his men were hungry as the disciples were.
Matthew 12:4
“How he entered into the house of God,”
Eisérchomai, to go in. The house of God, oîkos of theós, was the tabernacle at Nob, where David came while fleeing from Saul.
“and did eat the shewbread,”
Ártos of the próthesis, the twelve loaves set before the LORD and changed each Sabbath.
“which was not lawful for him to eat, neither for them which were with him,”
Ou with ēn and éxesti. Jesus grants fully that the law kept this bread from laymen.
“but only for the priests?”
Mónos, only, and hiereús, priest. Leviticus gave the bread to the priests, to be eaten in a holy place.
Matthew 12:5
“Or have ye not read in the law,”
A second question, now from the law of Moses itself.
“how that on the sabbath days the priests in the temple profane the sabbath,”
Bebēlóō, to treat the holy as common. The Sabbath offerings required the priests to labour on the day of rest.
“and are blameless?”
Anaítios, guiltless. The law that commands rest also commands this work, so the priests carry no blame.
Matthew 12:6
“But I say unto you,”
Dé and légō. Having cited Scripture, Jesus adds his own word to it.
“That in this place is one”
Hóti introduces the claim, hōde means “here”, and estí is “is”. He is speaking of himself, present with his disciples in the field.
“greater than the temple.”
Meízōn, greater, and hierón, the whole temple precinct. Jesus is the reality the temple pointed to, the place where God’s presence dwells.
Matthew 12:7
“But if ye had known what this meaneth,”
Ginṓskō, to know or understand. They knew the sentence and had missed its sense.
“I will have mercy, and not sacrifice,”
Hosea 6:6. Éleos, mercy, answers to the Hebrew chesed, and thysía is a sacrifice. God places mercy first when the two are set against each other.
“ye would not have condemned the guiltless.”
Jesus declares his disciples innocent. A failure to understand God’s mercy had led the Pharisees to judge wrongly.
Matthew 12:8
“For the Son of man”
Gár gives the ground of the whole answer. Huiós and ánthrōpos form the title Jesus uses for himself, with Daniel 7 behind it.
“is Lord”
Kýrios, master, with estí. He rules the Sabbath and has the right to say what it means.
“even of the sabbath day.”
Kaí, “even”. His authority reaches to the day God himself set apart.
Last revised