Matthew 12:2, commentary and pictures

On the Sabbath the hungry disciples walking through the grainfield plucked heads of grain, rubbed out the kernels and ate to satisfy hunger, and the Pharisees who were closely watching Jesus seized on this to accuse them of doing what was unlawful on the Sabbath. Their charge rested not on God's law but on added human restrictions that treated gathering as reaping and rubbing as threshing, obscuring mercy and the purpose of the Sabbath. The law of Moses permitted a hungry traveler to take grain by hand from a neighbor's field to satisfy hunger, so their act accorded with that provision. The accusation was false and blind, for their necessary act did not break God's Sabbath law but was in harmony with it, and they were guiltless. As Maker and Lord of the Sabbath Christ defended them, showing the Sabbath was made to give rest and good and not burden, so meeting human need is lawful on the Sabbath.

Accusation and Setting

On the Sabbath the disciples were hungry after a long day spent in teaching and healing work, and as they walked through a grainfield they plucked heads of grain, rubbed the kernels in their hands, and ate them to satisfy hunger. The grain they handled in this way was wheat, called corn, eaten simply by rubbing it out and taking the kernels.

The Pharisees were continually following Christ and closely scrutinizing Him to oppose His healing of the sick and His preaching of the gospel to the poor. On seeing what the disciples did they charged that the disciples did what was not lawful to do upon the Sabbath day, a charge that could be used to condemn Jesus Himself as a Sabbath-breaker.

Their charge did not rest on God's law but on added human restrictions and a narrow, tradition-bound reading of the law. The rabbis treated gathering as reaping and rubbing as threshing, and so made the act a double offense in their interpretation. Those traditions obscured God's mercy and the purpose of the Sabbath and led to a blind misreading of its requirements.

The law of Moses permitted a hungry traveler to take grain by hand from a neighbor's field to satisfy hunger, and gave the same permission regarding fruit from an orchard or vineyard, so the disciples' act in plucking and eating the standing grain accorded with that provision. The verse belongs to the account of going through the grainfield that continues with the healing of the withered hand. In connection with it, Christ's leading His disciples out by the lakeside on the Sabbath to teach them shows that Sabbath teaching need not be confined within walls and that walking outdoors on the Sabbath is not wrong.

Sabbath Vindicated by Christ

The charge was false and blind, for the disciples' necessary act of rubbing grain and eating to satisfy hunger did not break God's Sabbath law but was in harmony with the Sabbath commandment, and they were guiltless. Jesus denied the accusation and declared that in condemning them the Pharisees had condemned the guiltless. The accusation therefore did not establish any transgression of the Sabbath.

The Sabbath was made for people to bring rest and peace and good, not pain or burden, and not as a yoke of bondage. Meeting human need on that day, including hunger and fatigue after long labor in teaching and healing, and sustaining strength for God's service, is lawful. The disciples' eating met a need for food and sustained them for service, and was guiltless.

Christ defended them by appealing to David's hunger and the eating of the sacred bread, teaching that sustaining need and service to God are lawful on the Sabbath. He told His accusers that they did not understand God's mercy. His declaration that He is Lord of the Sabbath established His authority over it and His right to acquit them.

As the Maker of the Sabbath who spoke the law at Sinai and as its Lord, Christ kept the Sabbath according to God's law and did not break it. He rejected human rules that distorted its observance, despite the hostility of the rabbis. The charge was aimed also at Him as an accusation of transgression against the Lord who made the Sabbath, made blindly.

That accusation against the greatest Teacher exposes the folly and weakness of human judgment. His works were in perfect harmony with God's law, and His human life of perfect obedience showed that the law can be kept. The charge that He Himself broke the Sabbath could not be sustained, so that if it could have been proved His accusers would not have needed to hire false witnesses against Him.