Chapter # 2 Paragraph # 4 Study # 2
August 27, 2019
Moss Bluff, Louisiana
(100)
1901 ASV
25 And he said unto them,
Did ye never read what David did, when he had need, and was hungry, he, and they that were with him?
26 How he entered into the house of God
when Abiathar was high priest, and ate the showbread, which it is not lawful to eat save for the priests, and gave also to them that were with him?
27 And he said unto them, The sabbath was made for man, and not man for the sabbath:
28 so that the Son of man is lord even of the sabbath.
- I. Jesus' Response to the Pharisees.
- A. Fundamental to the Pharisees is their "theology" of "performance salvation".
- 1. This automatically means they are "critical of behavior flaws", particularly in others (Luke 18:9), but not so much in themselves (Matthew 23:3; "...they say and do not do...").
- 2. This also automatically means they have no interactive, beneficial, relationship with God even though they "sit in the seat of Moses" (Matthew 23:2) and are to be treated with a degree of "respect" in so far as "following their instructions" means "respect".
- 3. Their fatal flaw is expressed in the words, "...all their works they do for to be seen of men..." (Matthew 23:5). This is the explanation of Pilate's observation in Mark 15:10.
- B. Thus, it is inherent in their "question" to Jesus that they are making an indirect accusation.
- C. Thus, Jesus' words are to be understood as a rejection/rebuke of their "theology", "attitude", and "motivation".
- 1. His "saying" to them, as well as their "saying" to Him, is couched in the meaning of lego.
- a. This signals a "bottom line" in terms of "speaking doctrine as truth".
- b. The Pharisees are making an accusation of a capital crime (Exodus 31:14) and Jesus is answering as a "defense attorney" (1 John 2:1).
- 2. Jesus' answer.
- a. "Have you never read..." is a "jab" at their "pride" regarding their understanding of the words of inspired Scripture (John 7:49).
- 1) The word He used is found in four of Mark's texts (2:25; 12:10; 12:26; and 13:14). The most informative is the last ("...let him that reads understand...") in that it indicates that "reading" is not the same thing as "understanding".
- 2) When Jesus questioned whether they had ever "read" the account of David's behavior, He was not suggesting that they had never "read" it, but He was suggesting that they had no idea of its actual meaning; thus, it was as if they had never "read" it because their "reading" was completely ineffectual.
- b. "...what David did...".
- 1) David was highly exalted in the eyes of the Pharisees and the people of Judea (even though the reality of his participation in fallen humanity was not hidden) so that Jesus put them at an enormous disadvantage by appealing to the action he took in the text which they had "read" many times but never "understood".
- 2) Since the roots of the Pharisees' "theology" rested upon human performance issues, Jesus trotted out a "doing" of David.
- a) By this action, Jesus put the Pharisees in the unenviable position of either having to denounce David, or accept the legitimacy of Jesus and His disciples.
- b) Because the Pharisees did all things "to be seen of men" (Matthew 23:5; as quoted above), this put them between the proverbial "rock and hard place": if they denounced David, their audience would not only forsake them, it might even stone them (Mark 11:30-33 and, especially, Luke 20:6), but if they did not denounce David, Jesus and His disciples would "skate" (i.e., walk away exonerated).
- c. "...when he had a need and hungered -- himself and those with him..."
- 1) The event to which Jesus pointed is recorded in 1 Samuel 21:1-7.
- 2) It is an interesting record because of its roots in David's deceitfulness.
- a) He lied to Ahimelech.
- b) He later accepted the blame for the deaths of not only 85 priests, but also the destruction of Nob (1 Samuel 22:18-22).
- c) But he also wrote a Psalm about Doeg (Psalm 52) and castigated Doeg for his great wickedness.
- d) But note 1 Samuel 22:6 where Saul is "under a tamarisk tree" when he commanded the destruction of the priests and 1 Samuel 31:13 where Saul is buried "under a tamarisk tree" after his beheading and significant shame at the hands of the Philistines.
- 3) Jesus' selection of this particular record of David's "doings" presses the Pharisees who typically find great fault with others and regularly excuse their own (greater) faults.
- a) They refuse to "find fault with" David (because it is too dangerous for them to do so) and, by that refusal, are forced to let Jesus and His disciples "off the hook".
- b) But, Jesus also does not "fault" David for his "unlawful" behavior, but, rather, simply uses his behavior to "justify" putting "needs" above "sabbatical restraints" (an issue that comes to the fore in force in the very next paragraph).
- i. How does Jesus not find fault with both deceit and violations of the restrictions upon the eating of the Bread of the Presence?
- ii. He does it on the basis of "extenuating circumstances". There is an "allowance" of "deceit" in war/conflict settings (as in setting an ambush by making one's enemy think one thing is true while another thing is actually true). There is also an "allowance" of Ahimelech's giving The Bread (and Goliath's sword) to David because of the serious danger to David and his men.
- D. Jesus claims a better "understanding" of Sabbatical Law.
- 1. God's purpose in the restraint imposed upon Israel regarding the Sabbath was "on account of man"; i.e., because of man's neediness.
- 2. The issues of observance of the Sabbath are issues of "loyalty to the Covenant" of "Love" (both for God and one's neighbor) which sometimes requires "unlawful" activities.
- 3. The Son of The Man is "Lord" of The Sabbath: He can observe "Love" even when it goes against "the rules".
