TRV
See on the biblical-era map
Study This Verse
Public-domain commentary
Matthew Henry
From his Commentary on the Whole Bible. Henry comments on passages, not single verses — this entry covers Matthew 12:1–13. His four-level outline is real structure in the source text, so it is rendered as structure.
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, Rev 22:16, Rev 22:19; Pro 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 (Mat 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 (Psa 84:6, Psa 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 (Deu 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 (Mat 12:3, Mat 12:4); "Have ye not read the story (Sa1 21:6) of David's eating the show-bread, which by the law was appropriated to the priest?" (Lev 24:5-9). It is most holy to Aaron and his sons; and (Exo 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, Ch2 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, Pro 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, Mat 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, Mat 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 (Act 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, Mat 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 Hos 6:6. It was used before, Mat 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, Deu 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, Mat 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 (Mat 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, Luk 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, Mat 12:11, Mat 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 (Co1 9:9, Co1 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, Gen 4:7.
4.Christ's curing of the man, notwithstanding the offence which he foresaw the Pharisees would take at it, Mat 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, Pro 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
Eleven 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.
He therefore said: "You wash the outside of the cup," that is, the flesh, "but you do not cleanse your inside part," that is, the soul; adding: "Did not He that made the outside," that is, the flesh, "also make the inward part," that is to say, the soul?-by which assertion He expressly declared that to the same God belongs the cleansing of a man's external and internal nature, both alike being in the power of Him who prefers mercy not only to man's washing, but even to sacrifice. For He subjoins the command: "Give what ye possess as alms, and all things shall be clean unto you.
"But," say they, "God is `good, 'and `most good, ' and `pitiful-hearted, 'and `a pitier, 'and `abundant in pitiful-heartedness, ' which He holds `dearer than all sacrifice, ' `not thinking the sinner's death of so much worth as his repentance', `a Saviour of all men, most of all of believers.
In order to show that this appearance of his work anticipated all the power of things to come, he added, “If you understood what the saying means: ‘I want mercy, not sacrifice,’ you would never have condemned the blameless.” The business of our salvation lies not in sacrifice but in mercy. When law is made void, we are saved by the goodness of God. If they had understood the grace of this statement, they would never have condemned the blameless. They would not have condemned the apostles whom they were going to accuse falsely, out of envy, of transgressing the law. When the ancient practice of sacrifices was stopped, the strangeness of mercy became more clearly known. Had this been known, they would not have thought that the Lord of the sabbath was confined by the law of the sabbath.
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.
Then, because to the hearers it would seem harsh, He quickly draws a veil over it, giving His discourse, as before, a lenient turn, yet even so expressing Himself with a rebuke. "But if ye had known what this meaneth, I will have mercy and not sacrifice, ye would not have condemned the guiltless."
Seest thou how again He inclines His speech to lenity, yet again shows them to be out of the reach of lenity? "For ye would not have condemned," saith He, "the guiltless." Before indeed He inferred the same from what is said of the priests, in the words, "they are guiltless;" but here He states it on His own authority; or rather, this too is out of the law, for He was quoting a prophetic saying.
(Verse 7.) But if you knew what this means, 'I desire mercy, and not sacrifice,' you would not have condemned the guiltless. What it means, 'I desire mercy, and not sacrifice,' we have already explained. But what follows, 'You would not have condemned the guiltless,' refers to the apostles. And the meaning is this: If you approved of Achimelech's mercy, because he refreshed David and his men who were in danger of starvation, why do you condemn my disciples, who have done nothing similar?
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?
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 12:7 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.
Summary
In Matthew 12:7, Jesus directly challenges the legalistic condemnation of the Pharisees, who accused His disciples of violating the Sabbath. By quoting Hosea 6:6, Jesus reveals God's profound preference for active compassion and genuine human well-being over rigid, external adherence to religious rituals. This verse serves as a pivotal statement on the true nature of divine law and the heart of God, exposing the Pharisees' spiritual blindness and their misapplication of the very Scriptures they claimed to uphold.
Context
Literary Context
This verse is situated within a series of Sabbath controversies in Matthew 12. The immediate preceding verses (Matthew 12:1-2) describe Jesus' disciples plucking grain on the Sabbath because they were hungry, an act the Pharisees deemed unlawful work. Jesus defends them first by citing the actions of David, who ate the consecrated showbread when he and his companions were hungry (Matthew 12:3-4, referencing 1 Samuel 21:1-6). He then appeals to the priests' blameless work in the Temple on the Sabbath (Matthew 12:5), arguing that something "greater than the temple" is present (Matthew 12:6). Matthew 12:7 then serves as the theological linchpin of His argument, directly quoting the Old Testament to expose the Pharisees' fundamental misunderstanding of God's priorities.
Historical & Cultural Context
The Sabbath was a foundational institution in Israel, a sign of the covenant and a day of rest dedicated to the Lord (Exodus 20:8-11). By Jesus' time, particularly under the influence of the Pharisees, the Sabbath laws had been meticulously elaborated with numerous oral traditions and interpretations, often obscuring the original intent of rest and worship. Plucking grain was considered a form of harvesting, which was prohibited work on the Sabbath. The Pharisees, as zealous guardians of the Law, were particularly focused on outward conformity to these detailed regulations. Their accusation against Jesus' disciples highlights a common tension in first-century Judaism between the written Torah and the oral traditions (Halakha), and between legalistic observance and the spirit of the Law.
Key Themes
The passage powerfully articulates several key themes. First, it underscores the supremacy of mercy and compassion over rigid ritualism. Jesus' quotation of Hosea 6:6 reveals that God values a heart of active love and kindness (Hebrew: chesed) more than mere ceremonial sacrifice. Second, it highlights the true purpose of the Sabbath, which was designed for humanity's benefit and flourishing, not as an oppressive burden (Mark 2:27). Third, the passage emphasizes Jesus' authority as Lord of the Sabbath (Matthew 12:8), indicating His right to interpret and fulfill the Law's true meaning. Finally, it exposes the spiritual blindness of the Pharisees, who, despite their devotion to the Law, failed to grasp God's heart and condemned those whom God considered "guiltless."
Exposition and Analysis
Key Word Analysis
This word implies more than mere intellectual acquaintance; it signifies an experiential, intimate knowledge or understanding. Jesus suggests that if the Pharisees had truly "known" God's heart and priorities, not just superficially understood the words, their actions would have been different.
This refers to compassion, particularly active compassion, whether human or divine. It denotes a practical, tangible expression of pity and kindness towards those in need. In the context of Hosea 6:6, it translates the Hebrew chesed, which embodies steadfast love, loyalty, and covenant faithfulness.
This term refers to animal offerings or the act of offering sacrifices. In the Old Testament, sacrifices were prescribed rituals for atonement, worship, and fellowship. Here, Jesus contrasts the external, ritualistic act of sacrifice with the internal, relational quality of mercy, indicating God's preference for the latter when the former is devoid of true devotion.
Verse Breakdown
"But if ye had known what this meaneth"
Jesus implies a profound lack of understanding on the part of the Pharisees. They possessed the Scriptures, but they had failed to grasp the deeper spiritual truth and intent behind the Mosaic Law, particularly as expressed in the prophetic tradition. Their knowledge was intellectual and superficial, not an experiential discernment of God's character.
"I will have mercy, and not sacrifice"
This is a direct quotation from Hosea 6:6. It does not mean God rejects all sacrifices, but rather that He prioritizes a heart of compassion, steadfast love, and obedience over mere external religious rituals, especially when those rituals are performed without genuine devotion or at the expense of human well-being. It highlights the ethical and relational dimensions of the Law as superior to its ceremonial aspects when the two are in conflict.
"ye would not have condemned the guiltless"
This is the direct consequence of the Pharisees' spiritual ignorance. Because they misunderstood God's priorities, they wrongly judged and condemned Jesus' disciples, who were "guiltless" in the eyes of God. Their actions were driven by hunger (necessity) and did not violate the spirit of the Sabbath, which was intended for man's benefit.
Literary Devices
The verse employs several potent literary devices. Quotation is central, as Jesus directly cites Hosea 6:6. This demonstrates His mastery of the Old Testament and His ability to apply its core principles to contemporary situations, challenging His opponents on their own turf. The use of this specific prophecy, originally a rebuke to Israel for their superficial worship, serves as a powerful analogy to the Pharisees' legalism. There is a clear contrast established between "mercy" and "sacrifice," highlighting God's preference for the former when the latter is divorced from genuine compassion. This is not an abolition of sacrifice but a reordering of priorities. Finally, the phrase "if ye had known" functions as a hypothetical condition that underscores the Pharisees' spiritual blindness and the tragic outcome of their ignorance: the condemnation of the innocent.
Theological and Thematic Connections
This verse profoundly impacts our understanding of God's character and the nature of true righteousness. It reveals that God is not primarily concerned with rigid adherence to external rules for their own sake, but with the internal disposition of the heart—a heart that reflects His own compassionate nature. True worship and obedience flow from a deep understanding of God's desire for active love and justice, rather than mere ritualistic performance. The Pharisees' error was not in valuing the Law, but in elevating its ceremonial aspects above its moral and relational spirit, leading them to condemn those God deemed blameless. This passage reminds us that the essence of God's law is love for God and love for neighbor, and that genuine piety manifests in acts of mercy and compassion.
Reflection and Application
Matthew 12:7 serves as a timeless mirror for believers, challenging us to examine our own priorities and practices. Are we, like the Pharisees, prone to elevating traditions, external performances, or rigid interpretations of rules above the core principles of love, compassion, and human flourishing? This verse calls us to cultivate a heart that genuinely seeks to understand and embody God's mercy in our daily lives. It urges us to prioritize the well-being of people, especially the vulnerable and needy, and to extend grace rather than quick condemnation. True faith is not about a checklist of religious duties, but about a transformed heart that reflects the character of Christ, demonstrating active compassion and seeking justice in all interactions. It reminds us that God desires genuine relationship and ethical living over mere outward displays of piety.
Questions for Reflection
FAQ
Why did Jesus quote Hosea 6:6 in this context?
Jesus quoted Hosea 6:6 to expose the Pharisees' spiritual blindness and their misapplication of the Law. In Hosea, God was rebuking Israel for their superficial worship, emphasizing that He desired a heart of steadfast love (chesed, often translated as mercy or lovingkindness) and the true knowledge of God more than mere animal sacrifices. By quoting this, Jesus showed that the Pharisees, despite their meticulous observance of Sabbath laws, had missed the very spirit and purpose of God's commands, which were rooted in compassion and care for humanity. Their legalism led them to condemn the innocent, demonstrating their lack of true understanding of God's priorities.
What does it mean that the disciples were "guiltless"?
The disciples were "guiltless" in the eyes of God because their actions were not born of rebellion or disregard for the Sabbath, but of necessity (hunger) and did not violate the spirit of the Law. Jesus had already established that the Sabbath was made for man, not man for the Sabbath (Mark 2:27). Their act of plucking grain, while technically "harvesting" in the Pharisees' rigid interpretation, was a minor act to satisfy hunger, which falls under the principle of mercy and human need. The Pharisees' condemnation, therefore, was based on an overly strict and unmerciful application of the law, making their judgment unjust.
Does this verse mean that God no longer desires sacrifice or obedience to His laws?
No, this verse does not abolish sacrifice or obedience to God's laws. Rather, it clarifies God's priority. God desires obedience that flows from a heart of love and mercy, not mere external performance devoid of genuine devotion. In the Old Testament, sacrifices were commanded by God, but they were always meant to be accompanied by a repentant heart and righteous living (Psalm 51:16-17). Jesus is emphasizing that when the letter of the law conflicts with the spirit of mercy, mercy takes precedence. He is calling for a deeper, more holistic understanding of God's will that prioritizes compassion and human well-being.
Christ-Centered Fulfillment
Matthew 12:7 finds its ultimate fulfillment in Jesus Christ, who perfectly embodies the mercy that God desires. He is the living manifestation of God's chesed, demonstrating compassion to the sick, the marginalized, and the outcast throughout His ministry. While the Old Testament sacrifices pointed to the need for atonement, they were ultimately insufficient to deal with sin comprehensively (Hebrews 10:4). Jesus, as the Lamb of God, offered Himself as the one, perfect, and final sacrifice, rendering the ceremonial animal sacrifices of the Old Covenant obsolete (Hebrews 9:11-14). Through His atoning work, He fulfilled the Law's demands and provided the ultimate act of mercy, making a way for humanity to be reconciled to God. Furthermore, as the "Lord of the Sabbath" (Matthew 12:8), Jesus reveals that true rest and liberation from the burden of legalism are found in Him (Matthew 11:28-30). He frees His followers from the condemnation of rigid rules, inviting them into a relationship based on grace and a life characterized by the very mercy He exemplified.