The Fallible Study Bible

The Fallible · Synthetic · Study Bible

Matthew12:1–8

The Lord of the Sabbath

✦ Public-domain source — quoted & attributed⚙ AI synthesis — generated, verify

Matthew 12:1–8 — The Lord of the Sabbath. Each verse below carries the full apparatus: the Berean Standard Bible, the vocalized original (tap any word), and a parsed breakdown of every term transcribed from the interlinear. Synthesized commentary, canonical threads, and the reading of Christ gather at the end, over the whole unit.

1

At that time Jesus went through the grainfields on the Sabbath. His disciples were hungry and began to pick the heads of grain and eat them.

Berean Standard Bible · CC0

Greek — tap a word ↓

En ekeinō tō kairō ho Iēsous eporeuthē dia tōn sporimōn tois sabbasin de autou hoi mathētai epeinasan kai ērxanto tillein stachyas kai esthiein

Word by word23 · parsed
ἘνEnAtG1722
√ ἐν — "in," at, (up-)on, by, etcPreposition
ἐκείνῳekeinōthatG1565
√ ἐκεῖνος — that one (or (neuter) thing)Demonstrative PronounDative Masculine Singular
τῷtōG3588
√ ὁ — the (sometimes to be supplied, at others omitted, in English idiom)ArticleDative Masculine Singular
καιρῷkairōtimeG2540
√ καιρός — an occasion, iNounDative Masculine Singular
kairos: an occasion, a season Not duration but opportunity. Matthew's "in that kairos" links this scene backward to 11:25, where the same phrase opened the Father's hiding of these things from the wise and revealing them to infants. The Sabbath controversy that follows is the working out of exactly that division: the learned read the Law and miss it, the hungry are called guiltless.
ὁhoG3588
√ ὁ — the (sometimes to be supplied, at others omitted, in English idiom)ArticleNominative Masculine Singular
ἸησοῦςIēsousJesusG2424
√ Ἰησοῦς — Jesus (iNounNominative Masculine Singular
ἐπορεύθηeporeuthēwentG4198
√ πορεύομαι — to traverse, iVerbAorist Indicative Passive3rd Person Singular
poreuomai: to traverse, to journey Aorist passive in form, active in sense. The subject of the sentence is Jesus alone; the disciples enter in the next clause as those who follow and go hungry doing it.
διὰdiathroughG1223
√ διά — through (in very wide applications, local, causal, or occasional)Preposition
τῶνtōntheG3588
√ ὁ — the (sometimes to be supplied, at others omitted, in English idiom)ArticleGenitive Neuter Plural
σπορίμωνsporimōngrainfieldsG4702
√ σπόριμος — sown, iAdjectiveGenitive Neuter Plural
sporimos: sown, standing grain An adjective used as a noun, "the sown places." Barnes is careful that the English "corn" of the older versions never meant maize: "The word 'corn' was applied, as it is still in England, to wheat, rye, oats, and barley." Benson and JFB both reason from barley's ripening to a date near Passover.
τοῖςtoison theG3588
√ ὁ — the (sometimes to be supplied, at others omitted, in English idiom)ArticleDative Neuter Plural
σάββασινsabbasinSabbathG4521
√ σάββατον — the Sabbath (iNounDative Neuter Plural
sabbaton: the Sabbath The word around which the whole unit turns, occurring seven times in eight verses and shifting grammatical role each time: dative of time here and at 12:5, dative again in the accusation at 12:2, accusative object of the priests' profaning at 12:5, and finally genitive of possession at 12:8. That movement is the argument in miniature. The day begins as the circumstance of an action, becomes the thing supposedly injured, and ends as something owned. Strong's records the Greek form as borrowed from the Hebrew, which is why it keeps a plural shape for a single day and the number wobbles across the unit without any change of sense.
δὲdeG1161
√ δέ — but, and, etcConjunction
αὐτοῦautouHisG846
√ αὐτός — the reflexive pronoun self, used (alone or in the comparative G1438 (ἑαυτοῦ)) of the third person , and (with the proper personal pronoun) of the other personsPersonal / Possessive PronounGenitive Masculine 3rd Person Singular
οἱhoiG3588
√ ὁ — the (sometimes to be supplied, at others omitted, in English idiom)ArticleNominative Masculine Plural
μαθηταὶmathētaidisciplesG3101
√ μαθητής — a learner, iNounNominative Masculine Plural
ἐπείνασανepeinasanwere hungryG3983
√ πεινάω — "pine")VerbAorist Indicative Active3rd Person Plural
peinaō: to hunger, to be famished Aorist: they came to be hungry. JFB insists this is not appetite but want: "not as one may be before his regular meals; but evidently from shortness of provisions: for Jesus defends their plucking the corn-ears and eating them on the plea of necessity." The same verb returns in 12:3 for David, and that repetition is the hinge of the whole argument.
καὶkaiandG2532
√ καί — and, also, even, so then, too, etcConjunction
ἤρξαντοērxantobeganG756
√ ἄρχομαι — to commence (in order of time)VerbAorist Indicative Middle3rd Person Plural
archomai: to begin Aorist. Cambridge reads the timing as prosecutorial: the Pharisees "seem to have been watching their opportunity" and object "as soon as the disciples began" the act.
τίλλεινtilleinto pickG5089
√ τίλλω — to pull offVerbPresent Infinitive Active
στάχυαςstachyas[the] heads of grainG4719
√ στάχυς — a head of grain (as standing out from the stalk)NounAccusative Masculine Plural
stachys: a head of grain A rare noun, found in only four verses. Benson notes it "may indifferently signify ears of any kind of grain; but probably barley is here intended, that being first ripe in those parts." Its rarity makes the verbal tie to Mark 2:23 unusually firm.
καὶkaiandG2532
√ καί — and, also, even, so then, too, etcConjunction
ἐσθίεινesthieineat [them]G2068
√ ἐσθίω — used only in certain tenses, the rest being supplied by G5315 (φάγω)VerbPresent Infinitive Active
esthiō: to eat The plucking alone would have been a trespass question; the eating makes it a hunger question, and Jesus answers only the hunger question. Deuteronomy 23:25 permits the plucking outright, as Henry, Barnes, JFB, Poole and Pulpit all note in chorus.
2

When the Pharisees saw this, they said to Him, “Look, Your disciples are doing what is unlawful on the Sabbath.”

Berean Standard Bible · CC0

Greek — tap a word ↓

hoi de Pharisaioi idontes eipan autō Idou sou hoi mathētai poiousin ho ouk exestin poiein en sabbatō

Word by word17 · parsed
οἱhoiG3588
√ ὁ — the (sometimes to be supplied, at others omitted, in English idiom)ArticleNominative Masculine Plural
δὲde[When]G1161
√ δέ — but, and, etcConjunction
ΦαρισαῖοιPharisaioi[the] PhariseesG5330
√ Φαρισαῖος — a separatist, iNounNominative Masculine Plural
Pharisaios: a separatist Strong's gloss is itself the indictment: the name means the set-apart ones. Ellicott places them as part of the deputation "that had come down from Jerusalem to watch and accuse the new Teacher," linking this scene to John 5:10, 16. Gill says plainly they "were employed to make observation on his words and actions."
ἰδόντεςidontessaw [this]G3708
√ ὁράω — by extension, to attend toVerbAorist Participle ActiveNominative Masculine Plural
horaō: to see, to attend to Aorist participle. Seeing is the whole of their contribution to the scene; they never approach the disciples' hunger, only the disciples' hands.
εἶπανeipanthey saidG2036
√ ἔπω — to speak or say (by word or writing)VerbAorist Indicative Active3rd Person Plural
αὐτῷautōto HimG846
√ αὐτός — the reflexive pronoun self, used (alone or in the comparative G1438 (ἑαυτοῦ)) of the third person , and (with the proper personal pronoun) of the other personsPersonal / Possessive PronounDative Masculine 3rd Person Singular
ἸδοὺIdouLookG2400
√ ἰδού — used as imperative lo!VerbAorist Imperative Active2nd Person Singular
idou: behold! Imperative in form. It demands that Jesus look where they are looking, and the rest of the unit is his refusal to do so: he looks instead at David, at the priests, at Hosea, and at himself.
σουsouYourG4771
√ σύ — thouPersonal / Possessive PronounGenitive 2nd Person Singular
οἱhoiG3588
√ ὁ — the (sometimes to be supplied, at others omitted, in English idiom)ArticleNominative Masculine Plural
μαθηταίmathētaidisciplesG3101
√ μαθητής — a learner, iNounNominative Masculine Plural
ποιοῦσινpoiousinare doingG4160
√ ποιέω — to make or do (in a very wide application, more or less direct)VerbPresent Indicative Active3rd Person Plural
poieō: to do, to make Present indicative, twice in this verse (10, 14). Pulpit weighs the tense: "Do. At this moment." The charge is framed as a crime in progress, caught in the act, which is why the aorist "began" in 12:1 matters.
ὃhowhatG3739
√ ὅς — the relatively (sometimes demonstrative) pronoun, who, which, what, thatPersonal / Relative PronounAccusative Neuter Singular
οὐκoukvvvG3756
√ οὐ — the absolute negative (compare G3361 (μή)) adverbAdverb
ἔξεστινexestinis unlawfulG1832
√ ἔξεστι — so also neuter present participle of the same (with or without some form of G1510 (εἰμί) expressed)VerbPresent Indicative Active3rd Person Singular
exesti: it is permitted The verb of permission, not of statute. Poole exposes how small the alleged crime is: "The plucking of a few ears of corn, and rubbing them, could hardly be called servile labour, especially not in the sense of the commandment." Gill documents the rabbinic rule that made plucking "a derivative of reaping" and so capital.
ποιεῖνpoiein. . .G4160
√ ποιέω — to make or do (in a very wide application, more or less direct)VerbPresent Infinitive Active
ἐνenonG1722
√ ἐν — "in," at, (up-)on, by, etcPreposition
σαββάτῳsabbatō[the] SabbathG4521
√ σάββατον — the Sabbath (iNounDative Neuter Singular
sabbaton: the Sabbath Singular here. The Verifier ties this verse's vocabulary (σάββατον with Φαρισαῖος) to Mark 2:24, Luke 6:2 and Luke 14:3, the other scenes where the same party keeps watch on the same day.
3

Jesus replied, “Have you not read what David did when he and his companions were hungry?

Berean Standard Bible · CC0

Greek — tap a word ↓

de Ho eipen autois Ouk anegnōte ti Dauid epoiēsen hote kai hoi met’ autou epeinasen

Word by word15 · parsed
δὲdeG1161
√ δέ — but, and, etcConjunction
ὉHoG3588
√ ὁ — the (sometimes to be supplied, at others omitted, in English idiom)ArticleNominative Masculine Singular
εἶπενeipen[Jesus] repliedG2036
√ ἔπω — to speak or say (by word or writing)VerbAorist Indicative Active3rd Person Singular
αὐτοῖςautoisG846
√ αὐτός — the reflexive pronoun self, used (alone or in the comparative G1438 (ἑαυτοῦ)) of the third person , and (with the proper personal pronoun) of the other personsPersonal / Possessive PronounDative Masculine 3rd Person Plural
ΟὐκOukvvvG3756
√ οὐ — the absolute negative (compare G3361 (μή)) adverbAdverb
ἀνέγνωτεanegnōteHave you not readG314
√ ἀναγινώσκω — to know again, iVerbAorist Indicative Active2nd Person Plural
anaginōskō: to know again, to read A pointed verb to use against professional readers of Scripture. Gill draws the obvious edge: if they had not read it, "they were very unfit persons either to be teachers, or censurers of others." Jesus does not dispute their reading; he disputes that reading produced knowing, which is exactly the charge he will press home with the pluperfect of ginōskō in 12:7.
τίtiwhatG5101
√ τίς — an interrogative pronoun, who, which or what (in direct or indirect questions)Interrogative / Indefinite PronounAccusative Neuter Singular
ΔαυὶδDauidDavidG1138
√ Δαβίδ — Dabid (iNounNominative Masculine Singular
Dauid: David The name is the argument. Barnes: "David, among the Jews, had high authority. This act had passed uncondemned." Ellicott calls it an argument a fortiori pressed on the ground the Pharisees thought strongest: to convict the disciples they must first convict David.
ἐποίησενepoiēsendidG4160
√ ποιέω — to make or do (in a very wide application, more or less direct)VerbAorist Indicative Active3rd Person Singular
poieō: to do The same verb the Pharisees used of the disciples in 12:2 ("your disciples are doing"). Jesus answers doing with did: what David did, and no one arraigned him.
ὅτεhotewhenG3753
√ ὅτε — at which (thing) too, iAdverb
καὶkai{he} andG2532
√ καί — and, also, even, so then, too, etcConjunction
οἱhoihis companionsG3588
√ ὁ — the (sometimes to be supplied, at others omitted, in English idiom)ArticleNominative Masculine Plural
ho: the (as pronoun) Function word: the article carries "those with him," the anonymous men whose hunger has no standing of its own.
μετ’met’. . .G3326
√ μετά — properly, denoting accompanimentPreposition
αὐτοῦautou. . .G846
√ αὐτός — the reflexive pronoun self, used (alone or in the comparative G1438 (ἑαυτοῦ)) of the third person , and (with the proper personal pronoun) of the other personsPersonal / Possessive PronounGenitive Masculine 3rd Person Singular
ἐπείνασενepeinasenwere hungryG3983
√ πεινάω — "pine")VerbAorist Indicative Active3rd Person Singular
peinaō: to hunger Singular verb, plural company. Gill works hard on whether anyone was actually with David, since 1 Samuel 21:1 says he was alone, and concludes the men were left at a distance and shared in the bread. The rabbinic maxim he quotes in the same breath is the one Jesus is arguing: danger to life sets the Sabbath aside.
4

He entered the house of God, and he and his companions ate the consecrated bread, which was not lawful for them to eat, but only for the priests.

Berean Standard Bible · CC0

Greek — tap a word ↓

pōs eisēlthen eis ton oikon tou Theou kai ephagon tous artous tēs protheseōs ho ēn ouk exon autō oude tois met’ autou phagein ei mē monois tois hiereusin

Word by word28 · parsed
πῶςpōsG4459
√ πῶς — an interrogative particle of mannerConjunction
pōs: how, in what manner Parsed here as a conjunction: the verse is a subordinate clause of the question begun in 12:3, not a fresh sentence.
εἰσῆλθενeisēlthenHe enteredG1525
√ εἰσέρχομαι — to enter (literally or figuratively)VerbAorist Indicative Active3rd Person Singular
εἰςeis. . .G1519
√ εἰς — to or into (indicating the point reached or entered), of place, time, or (figuratively) purpose (result, etcPreposition
τὸνtontheG3588
√ ὁ — the (sometimes to be supplied, at others omitted, in English idiom)ArticleAccusative Masculine Singular
οἶκονoikonhouseG3624
√ οἶκος — a dwelling (more or less extensive, literal or figurative)NounAccusative Masculine Singular
oikos: a dwelling, a house "House of God" at Nob, not the temple, which did not yet exist. Ellicott: "Strictly speaking, it was in the tabernacle at Nob, where Ahimelech (possibly assisted by Abiathar, Mark 2:26) was ministering as high priest." Benson takes a different line, that David entered not the tent itself but the high priest's adjoining house, citing 1 Samuel 3:15 for the usage. The commentators disagree here and the text does not settle it.
τοῦtouG3588
√ ὁ — the (sometimes to be supplied, at others omitted, in English idiom)ArticleGenitive Masculine Singular
ΘεοῦTheouof GodG2316
√ θεός — figuratively, a magistrateNounGenitive Masculine Singular
καὶkaiandG2532
√ καί — and, also, even, so then, too, etcConjunction
ἔφαγονephagon[he and his companions] ateG5315
√ φάγω — to eat (literally or figuratively)VerbAorist Indicative Active3rd Person Plural
phagō: to eat Plural. The men who had no title to the bread ate it, and the high priest handed it over. That is the precedent: not that David was above the law, but that hunger was.
τοὺςtoustheG3588
√ ὁ — the (sometimes to be supplied, at others omitted, in English idiom)ArticleAccusative Masculine Plural
ἄρτουςartousconsecrated breadG740
√ ἄρτος — bread (as raised) or a loafNounAccusative Masculine Plural
artos: bread, a loaf Twelve of them, for the twelve tribes, replaced every Sabbath (Leviticus 24:5-9). Benson: "It consisted of twelve loaves, representing the twelve tribes of Israel, and was set every sabbath day, by the priest who served that week, on the golden table that was in the holy place." The holy bread was itself a Sabbath transaction, which is why Poole can argue the meal probably fell on a Sabbath.
τῆςtēs. . .G3588
√ ὁ — the (sometimes to be supplied, at others omitted, in English idiom)ArticleGenitive Feminine Singular
προθέσεωςprotheseōs. . .G4286
√ πρόθεσις — a setting forth, iNounGenitive Feminine Singular
prothesis: a setting forth, a placing before The noun names the loaves by what was done to them, not by what they were made of. Its other New Testament career is theological: the same word carries God's purpose, his setting-forth of a plan. Matthew does not press that, and neither should we; but the grammar of the word is placement before God, and that is what David's men consumed.
ὃhowhichG3739
√ ὅς — the relatively (sometimes demonstrative) pronoun, who, which, what, thatPersonal / Relative PronounAccusative Neuter Singular
ἦνēnwasG1510
√ εἰμί — I exist (used only when emphatic)VerbImperfect Indicative Active3rd Person Singular
οὐκouknotG3756
√ οὐ — the absolute negative (compare G3361 (μή)) adverbAdverb
ἐξὸνexonlawfulG1832
√ ἔξεστι — so also neuter present participle of the same (with or without some form of G1510 (εἰμί) expressed)VerbPresent Participle ActiveNominative Neuter Singular
exesti: it is permitted Present participle. The third of five occurrences of this root in the unit (12:2, 12:4 twice, with the question of permission running under 12:5 and 12:8 as well). The whole dispute is about who holds the power to permit.
αὐτῷautōfor [them]G846
√ αὐτός — the reflexive pronoun self, used (alone or in the comparative G1438 (ἑαυτοῦ)) of the third person , and (with the proper personal pronoun) of the other personsPersonal / Possessive PronounDative Masculine 3rd Person Singular
οὐδὲoude. . .G3761
√ οὐδέ — not however, iConjunction
τοῖςtois. . .G3588
√ ὁ — the (sometimes to be supplied, at others omitted, in English idiom)ArticleDative Masculine Plural
μετ’met’. . .G3326
√ μετά — properly, denoting accompanimentPreposition
αὐτοῦautou. . .G846
√ αὐτός — the reflexive pronoun self, used (alone or in the comparative G1438 (ἑαυτοῦ)) of the third person , and (with the proper personal pronoun) of the other personsPersonal / Possessive PronounGenitive Masculine 3rd Person Singular
φαγεῖνphageinto eatG5315
√ φάγω — to eat (literally or figuratively)VerbAorist Infinitive Active
εἰeibutG1487
√ εἰ — if, whether, that, etcConjunction
μὴmē. . .G3361
√ μή — (adverb) not, (conjunction) lestAdverb
μόνοιςmonoisonlyG3441
√ μόνος — remaining, iAdjectiveDative Masculine Plural
τοῖςtoisfor theG3588
√ ὁ — the (sometimes to be supplied, at others omitted, in English idiom)ArticleDative Masculine Plural
ἱερεῦσινhiereusinpriestsG2409
√ ἱερεύς — a priest (literally or figuratively)NounDative Masculine Plural
hiereus: a priest Dative plural with μόνοις, "for the priests alone." Gill documents from the Mishnaic tradition how the loaves were divided between the outgoing and incoming priestly course. The word returns in the next verse, where the priests are no longer the limit of the exception but the proof of it.
5

Or haven’t you read in the Law that on the Sabbath the priests in the temple break the Sabbath and yet are innocent?

Berean Standard Bible · CC0

Greek — tap a word ↓

Ē ouk anegnōte en tō nomō hoti tois sabbasin hoi hiereis en tō hierō bebēlousin to sabbaton kai eisin anaitioi

Word by word20 · parsed
ἪĒOrG2228
√ ἤ — disjunctive, orConjunction
οὐκoukvvvG3756
√ οὐ — the absolute negative (compare G3361 (μή)) adverbAdverb
ἀνέγνωτεanegnōtehaven’t you readG314
√ ἀναγινώσκω — to know again, iVerbAorist Indicative Active2nd Person Plural
anaginōskō: to read The second "have you not read" in three verses, and Pulpit notes the deliberate order: the first sent them to the history, this one to the Law itself, "beyond which there is no appeal."
ἐνeninG1722
√ ἐν — "in," at, (up-)on, by, etcPreposition
τῷtōtheG3588
√ ὁ — the (sometimes to be supplied, at others omitted, in English idiom)ArticleDative Masculine Singular
νόμῳnomōLawG3551
√ νόμος — law (through the idea of prescriptive usage), genitive case (regulation), specially, (of Moses (including the volume)NounDative Masculine Singular
nomos: law, prescriptive usage Jesus argues from the Law against the fence around the Law. The Law that commands Sabbath rest also commands Sabbath labour of the priests, and therefore cannot mean by rest what the Pharisees mean by it. Cambridge, quoting Stier, states the leverage: the Law itself ordains Sabbath labour as a duty.
ὅτιhotithatG3754
√ ὅτι — demonstrative, that (sometimes redundant)Conjunction
τοῖςtoison theG3588
√ ὁ — the (sometimes to be supplied, at others omitted, in English idiom)ArticleDative Neuter Plural
σάββασινsabbasinSabbathG4521
√ σάββατον — the Sabbath (iNounDative Neuter Plural
οἱhoitheG3588
√ ὁ — the (sometimes to be supplied, at others omitted, in English idiom)ArticleNominative Masculine Plural
ἱερεῖςhiereispriestsG2409
√ ἱερεύς — a priest (literally or figuratively)NounNominative Masculine Plural
hiereus: a priest Nominative plural, now the subject rather than the exception. Gill lists the operations involved: killing, flaying, jointing, laying on the altar, cutting wood, kindling the fire, and kindling fire is itself named as forbidden in Exodus 35:3.
ἐνeninG1722
√ ἐν — "in," at, (up-)on, by, etcPreposition
τῷtōtheG3588
√ ὁ — the (sometimes to be supplied, at others omitted, in English idiom)ArticleDative Neuter Singular
ἱερῷhierōtempleG2411
√ ἱερόν — a sacred place, iNounDative Neuter Singular
hieron: a sacred place, the temple precinct The place is what licenses the labour. Gill records the rabbinic principle in its own words, that what is forbidden on the Sabbath is permitted in the sanctuary, and reads Jesus as arguing on exactly that ground.
βεβηλοῦσινbebēlousinbreakG953
√ βεβηλόω — to desecrateVerbPresent Indicative Active3rd Person Plural
bebēloō: to desecrate, to profane The most violent word in the unit, and Jesus is the one who uses it, of priests, approvingly. He does not say the priests only appear to profane; he grants the profanation and denies the guilt. That is the move the Pharisees cannot follow, and it is the move that makes 12:6 and 12:8 necessary: if labour can be innocent by the authority of a place, it can be innocent by the authority of a person.
τὸtotheG3588
√ ὁ — the (sometimes to be supplied, at others omitted, in English idiom)ArticleAccusative Neuter Singular
σάββατονsabbatonSabbathG4521
√ σάββατον — the Sabbath (iNounAccusative Neuter Singular
sabbaton: the Sabbath Accusative here, the object of the profaning. Twice in this verse the Sabbath appears, first as the time of the act (plural dative) and then as the thing acted upon.
καὶkaiand yetG2532
√ καί — and, also, even, so then, too, etcConjunction
εἰσινeisinareG1510
√ εἰμί — I exist (used only when emphatic)VerbPresent Indicative Active3rd Person Plural
ἀναίτιοίanaitioiinnocentG338
√ ἀναίτιος — innocentAdjectiveNominative Masculine Plural
anaitios: without charge, unaccusable A forensic acquittal, not a character reference. Barnes: "They did what was necessary and commanded. This was done in the very temple, too, the place of holiness, where the law should be most strictly observed." The word is the bridge to 12:7, where the same adjective names the disciples and turns the Pharisees into the accused.
6

But I tell you that One greater than the temple is here.

Berean Standard Bible · CC0

Greek — tap a word ↓

de legō hymin hoti meizon tou hierou estin hōde

Word by word9 · parsed
δὲdeButG1161
√ δέ — but, and, etcConjunction
λέγωlegōI tellG3004
√ λέγω — properly, to "lay" forth, iVerbPresent Indicative Active1st Person Singular
legō: to lay forth, to say First person singular, present. The only first-person verb in the unit besides the quoted "I desire" of Hosea in 12:7, and the two stand together: God says what he desires, and Jesus says what is here.
ὑμῖνhyminyouG4771
√ σύ — thouPersonal / Possessive PronounDative 2nd Person Plural
ὅτιhotithatG3754
√ ὅτι — demonstrative, that (sometimes redundant)Conjunction
μεῖζόνmeizonOne greater thanG3173
√ μέγας — big (literally or figuratively, in a very wide application)AdjectiveNominative Neuter SingularComparative
megas: great (comparative: greater) Neuter comparative. The commentators split honestly. Barnes takes it of the person: "Here the Saviour refers to himself, and to his own dignity and power." Gill allows the neuter and offers three candidates: the human nature in which the Godhead dwells, the health of the disciples, or the apostolic ministry. Pulpit suggests the neuter is chosen either as a sharper contrast to ἱερόν or "as being more weighty than the masculine," and adds that it was "less defined and more mysterious. He could not reveal to them the secret of his presence." We record all three readings and settle none.
τοῦtoutheG3588
√ ὁ — the (sometimes to be supplied, at others omitted, in English idiom)ArticleGenitive Neuter Singular
ἱεροῦhieroutempleG2411
√ ἱερόν — a sacred place, iNounGenitive Neuter Singular
hieron: the temple precinct The standard of comparison. Pulpit notes what it costs to say this at all: "Observe the use, even at this stage in his ministry, of words implying the decadence of the temple service."
ἐστινestinisG1510
√ εἰμί — I exist (used only when emphatic)VerbPresent Indicative Active3rd Person Singular
ὧδεhōdehereG5602
√ ὧδε — in this same spot, iAdverb
hōde: in this same spot The adverb that relocates holiness. The priests were guiltless because of where they stood; the disciples are guiltless because of who stands with them.
7

If only you had known the meaning of ‘I desire mercy, not sacrifice,’ you would not have condemned the innocent.

Berean Standard Bible · CC0

Greek — tap a word ↓

Ei de egnōkeite ti estin thelō Eleos kai ou thysian an ouk katedikasate tous anaitious

Word by word15 · parsed
ΕἰEiIfG1487
√ εἰ — if, whether, that, etcConjunction
δὲdeonlyG1161
√ δέ — but, and, etcConjunction
ἐγνώκειτεegnōkeiteyou had knownG1097
√ γινώσκω — to "know" (absolutely) in a great variety of applications and with many implications (as follow, with others not thus clearly expressed)VerbPluperfect Indicative Active2nd Person Plural
ginōskō: to know Pluperfect. The whole unit has been a reading test; this is the grade. Gill states the double charge: Jesus "taxes the Pharisees both with ignorance of the Scriptures, in which they pretended to be very knowing... and with inhumanity." Reading without mercy is, on this grammar, not knowledge at all.
τίtivvvG5101
√ τίς — an interrogative pronoun, who, which or what (in direct or indirect questions)Interrogative / Indefinite PronounNominative Neuter Singular
ἐστινestinthe meaning ofG1510
√ εἰμί — I exist (used only when emphatic)VerbPresent Indicative Active3rd Person Singular
θέλωthelōI desireG2309
√ θέλω — to determine (as an active option from subjective impulseVerbPresent Indicative Active1st Person Singular
thelō: to determine, to will Present, first person: God's standing will, not a past preference. Strong's notes the verb carries active option and choice, which is why "I desire" is better than "I like."
ἜλεοςEleosmercyG1656
√ ἔλεος — compassion (human or divine, especially active)NounAccusative Neuter Singular
eleos: compassion, active mercy The word Matthew has already put in Jesus' mouth at 9:13 from the same prophet. Twice in this Gospel he makes Hosea 6:6 the key to a dispute about who may eat with whom, first with tax collectors and now with the hungry. Ellicott calls mercy and its opposite "moral and not positive duties," and says the teachers had "inverted the right relation of the two."
καὶkaiG2532
√ καί — and, also, even, so then, too, etcConjunction
οὐounotG3756
√ οὐ — the absolute negative (compare G3361 (μή)) adverbAdverb
θυσίανthysiansacrificeG2378
√ θυσία — sacrifice (the act or the victim, literally or figuratively)NounAccusative Feminine Singular
thysia: sacrifice, the act or the victim The temple word again, one verse after the temple was outranked. The Pharisees had made a sacrifice of the disciples' breakfast to the honour of the day; Hosea says God will not take that offering.
ἂνanvvvG302
√ ἄν — (what-, where-, wither-, who-)soeverParticle
an: (particle marking contingency) Function word: with the aorist indicative it marks the sentence as contrary to fact. They did not know, and so they did condemn.
οὐκoukvvvG3756
√ οὐ — the absolute negative (compare G3361 (μή)) adverbAdverb
κατεδικάσατεkatedikasateyou would not have condemnedG2613
√ καταδικάζω — to adjudge against, iVerbAorist Indicative Active2nd Person Plural
katadikazō: to adjudge against, to condemn A rare verb (five verses). Its other occurrences form a pointed cluster: Matthew 12:37 (by your words you will be condemned), Luke 6:37 (do not condemn, and you will not be condemned), Acts 25:15 (the chief priests asking for sentence against Paul), James 5:6 (you have condemned, you have murdered the righteous one). Every one of them is about the danger of the judge, not the judged.
τοὺςtoustheG3588
√ ὁ — the (sometimes to be supplied, at others omitted, in English idiom)ArticleAccusative Masculine Plural
ἀναιτίουςanaitiousinnocentG338
√ ἀναίτιος — innocentAdjectiveAccusative Masculine Plural
anaitios: unaccusable, without charge The same adjective that acquitted the priests in 12:5, now transferred to the disciples. The verdict is not leniency; it is a finding of no case. Cambridge frames the underlying principle: "That love allowed the act of David, and the labour of the priests. 'Shall it not permit My disciples to satisfy their hunger?'"
8

For the Son of Man is Lord of the Sabbath.”

Berean Standard Bible · CC0

Greek — tap a word ↓

gar ho Huios tou anthrōpou estin kyrios tou sabbatou

Word by word9 · parsed
γάρgarForG1063
√ γάρ — properly, assigning a reason (used in argument, explanation or intensificationConjunction
gar: for (assigning a reason) Function word bearing the whole argument's weight: the verdict of 12:7 rests on the identity claimed in 12:8.
ὁhotheG3588
√ ὁ — the (sometimes to be supplied, at others omitted, in English idiom)ArticleNominative Masculine Singular
ΥἱὸςHuiosSonG5207
√ υἱός — a "son" (sometimes of animals), used very widely of immediate, remote or figuratively, kinshipNounNominative Masculine Singular
huios: a son The title Jesus never once, in Poole's count, applies to anyone but himself. Poole rejects the reading that takes it as "man" generally: "it is very improper to call any lord of a thing, because he hath the use of it... I cannot see but we may as well make man lord of the whole ten commandments as of one of them." Gill agrees and sends the reader to Daniel 7:13 for the messianic sense.
τοῦtouofG3588
√ ὁ — the (sometimes to be supplied, at others omitted, in English idiom)ArticleGenitive Masculine Singular
ἀνθρώπουanthrōpouManG444
√ ἄνθρωπος — from G3700 (ὀπτάνομαι))NounGenitive Masculine Singular
anthrōpos: man, human being Ellicott presses the choice of title: what is claimed here is claimed "by Him as the representative of humanity, acting, as it were, in its name." Pulpit supplies the missing link from Mark 2:27, that the Sabbath was made for man, so that the lordship runs through his humanity and not around it.
ἐστινestinisG1510
√ εἰμί — I exist (used only when emphatic)VerbPresent Indicative Active3rd Person Singular
κύριοςkyriosLordG2962
√ κύριος — supreme in authority, iNounNominative Masculine Singular
kyrios: supreme in authority, owner The verse's last theological claim and its sharpest. JFB defines the lordship by what it does not mean: "Not surely to abolish it—that surely were a strange lordship, especially just after saying that it was made or instituted for MAN—but to own it, to interpret it, to preside over it, and to ennoble it." Gill takes it further than JFB, to a power "of dispensing with it, and even of abolishing it," citing Colossians 2:16. The commentators in this brief genuinely divide on what lordship over a day permits, and the text itself asserts the lordship without spelling out its exercise.
τοῦtouof theG3588
√ ὁ — the (sometimes to be supplied, at others omitted, in English idiom)ArticleGenitive Neuter Singular
σαββάτουsabbatouSabbathG4521
√ σάββατον — the Sabbath (iNounGenitive Neuter Singular
sabbaton: the Sabbath The seventh and last occurrence in the unit, and the first in which it appears as a possession. The chapter began with a day that owned men; it ends with a Man who owns the day.

The verse-by-verse work is done. What follows gathers the whole unit. All three layers below are machine-generated (⚙). Weigh them; they have no authority.

⚙

Grand Commentary — the unit, read whole

synthesis · verify

AI synthesis — woven from the public-domain voices above and the original text; generated and fallible.

i. A lawful act on the wrong day — 12:1-2

Everything in the charge depends on a distinction the accusers never state. Henry, Barnes, JFB, Poole and Pulpit all note in chorus that the plucking itself was expressly permitted by Deuteronomy 23:25; Barnes: "On any other day this would have been clearly lawful, for it was permitted." What converts a permitted act into a capital one is the calendar, and behind the calendar a chain of rabbinic inference that Ellicott lays out in one line: "To pluck the ears was to reap, to rub the husks from the grain was to thresh." Gill supplies the ruling itself from the Mishnaic tradition, that plucking ears is a derivative of reaping and punishable as its primitive. Cambridge insists the prohibition is "a Pharisaic rule not found in the Mosaic Law," and draws the consequence: "If sabbatical observances prevented men satisfying hunger, the Sabbath was no longer a blessing but an injury to man." ⚙ Note the Greek's small pressures. The disciples ἐπείνασαν (aorist: they became hungry), and JFB reads real want in it, not appetite. They ἤρξαντο, they had only begun, which is why Pulpit says "they could therefore hardly have eaten much when the complaint was made." And the accusers open with Ἰδοὺ, an imperative: look where we are looking. Jesus will spend six verses refusing to.

ii. Three readings the readers had missed — 12:3-7

The reply is built on a repeated verb: ἀνέγνωτε, "did you read," in 12:3 and again in 12:5. Pulpit reads the order as deliberate and rabbinic in method: first the history (1 Samuel 21, the former prophets in the Hebrew division), "as teaching by example that holy things are of secondary importance compared with the benefit of God's people," then the Law itself, "beyond which there is no appeal." Ellicott calls the first an argument a fortiori: to convict the disciples they must first convict David of sacrilege. Poole presses the parallel to its sharpest edge, making holy time and holy bread the same kind of thing: "The time of the sabbath is not more holy than the shewbread." The second argument is stronger still, and Cambridge, quoting Stier, states why: it is not that the history records exceptions, but that "the Law itself ordains labour on the Sabbath as a duty." Benson counts the priests' Sabbath workload as double the weekday's; JFB lists the offerings and the fresh showbread that "could not be prepared and presented every sabbath morning, without a good deal of servile work." ⚙ The decisive word is Jesus' own: he says the priests βεβηλοῦσιν, they desecrate the Sabbath, and then calls them ἀναίτιοι, unchargeable. He does not soften the first term to save the second. Then comes Hosea, and with it the verdict reversed: the pluperfect ἐγνώκειτε says the reading never became knowing, and κατεδικάσατε says the accusers have convened a court. Gill names the double charge, "ignorance of the Scriptures, in which they pretended to be very knowing... and with inhumanity."

iii. The greater thing standing in the field — 12:6, 12:8

Twice the argument leaves the page and stands up. At 12:6 the comparative is neuter, μεῖζόν, "something greater," and the brief's commentators are unanimous on the grammar and divided on its meaning. Ellicott renders it "Here is something greater than the Temple" and takes it of the body of the Son of Man, "the truest, highest temple of God." Gill offers three candidates and prefers the human nature in which the Godhead dwells. Barnes goes straight to the person and to its implication: "None but God can authorize people to do a thing contrary to the divine laws." Pulpit is the most careful, suggesting the neuter is chosen as "less defined and more mysterious. He could not reveal to them the secret of his presence." JFB states the structure without deciding the referent: "The ordinary rules for the observance of the sabbath give way before the requirements of the temple; but there are rights here before which the temple itself must give way." ⚙ The argument's ladder is then visible: temple outranks Sabbath, this outranks temple, therefore this outranks Sabbath, and 12:8 names the rung at the top. Poole and Gill both reject the reading that makes "son of man" mean humanity at large, Poole calling it "dangerous and unscriptural," Gill sending the reader to Daniel 7:13. Ellicott holds the other end honestly: the title is chosen so that what is claimed is claimed "as the representative of humanity, acting, as it were, in its name." Both are needed. A man claims it, and no mere man could.

Read under Sola Scriptura — this tool’s own fallible reading (⚙)

⚙ This is the tool's own fallible reading, offered to be tested. The dispute is not about the Sabbath at all; it is about who is allowed to be hungry in front of God. The Pharisees have a coherent case and the disciples have an empty stomach, and Jesus answers the case with three precedents in which need outranked ritual and then, having won the legal argument, refuses to rest on it. He says instead that something greater is here. That order matters: he does not use his authority to escape the Law, he uses the Law to expose what the fence around it had cost, and only then names the authority. What he claims at 12:8 is not permission to ignore the seventh day but ownership of it, and ownership of a gift is exercised by giving it. So the acquittal in 12:7 is not leniency: ἀναίτιος means there is no charge to answer, and Jesus uses the very word he had just used of working priests. The disciples in that field are, by his ruling, doing temple service. What we would test this reading against is Hosea, since Matthew has now quoted the same line twice (9:13 and here) in defence of people the religious found it easy to condemn, and both times mercy is not an exception granted to the Law but the thing the Law was for. The line offered below is our own synthesis, not a verse of Scripture.

The Sabbath was never a fence God set around himself; it was a table he set for the hungry, and the Son who set it cannot be arraigned for eating at it.

⚙

Canonical Threads — out to the whole of Scripture

cross-refs · verify

AI-generated connections. Each carries a verification badge with a recorded basis; contested links are flagged.

The same grainfield in three Gospels verbal / quotation: confirmed

The scene stands in all three synoptics, and the Verifier's strongest evidence is a rare noun: στάχυς (G4719, heads of grain) occurs in only four verses of the Greek New Testament, and two of them are this verse and Mark 2:23. Around it sit μαθητής and σάββατον in both parallels, and ἐσθίω in Luke 6:1. Mark and Luke each preserve detail Matthew drops: Ellicott notes "St Mark's stronger phrase, 'to make a path, plucking the ears,' and St Luke's description that they ate them, 'rubbing them in their hands.'" JFB and Barnes both wrestle with Luke's "first-second sabbath" and reach no agreement, JFB preferring Scaliger's reading, Barnes the older "second sabbath after the first." The most consequential omission is Mark 2:27, "the sabbath was made for man," which JFB calls "a glorious and far-reaching maxim" and which Matthew simply does not have.

Mark 2:23 · Luke 6:1 · Mark 2:27

basis: Verifier: shared Greek lexemes G4719 στάχυς (rare, in 4 vv) with G3101 μαθητής (247 vv) and G4521 σάββατον (62 vv) at Mark 2:23; G2068 ἐσθίω (55 vv) with the same two at Luke 6:1. All three refs are Greek New Testament, so shared Strong's numbers are a real verbal basis. Mark 2:27 is added on the commentators' testimony (JFB, Barnes, Pulpit all cite it here), not on a computed lexeme.

Profaning the holy: the word Jesus uses without flinching verbal / quotation: confirmed

βεβηλόω (G953, to desecrate) appears in only two verses of the Greek New Testament. Here Jesus says the priests profane the Sabbath and are unchargeable. At Acts 24:6 Tertullus tells Felix that Paul "even tried to profane the temple," and the Verifier records ἱερόν shared alongside it: the same verb, the same sacred precinct, opposite verdicts. ⚙ The pairing is worth sitting with. In Acts the word is the whole accusation, and the accusation is false. In Matthew the word is granted, and the accused are acquitted anyway. Jesus does not defend the priests by denying that their work profanes; he redefines what profanation can be charged against, which is precisely what the Sanhedrin's advocate will refuse to do to Paul. This is a lexical tie, not a citation: Luke is not quoting Matthew and Matthew is not anticipating Luke.

Acts 24:6

basis: Verifier: shared Greek lexemes G953 βεβηλόω (rare, in 2 vv) and G2411 ἱερόν (67 vv). Both refs are Greek New Testament, so the shared Strong's numbers stand as a verbal basis. Recorded as lexical, not citational: no quotation is claimed in either direction.

The rare verb of the courtroom: who ends up condemned verbal / quotation: confirmed

καταδικάζω (G2613, to adjudge against) occurs in only five verses of the Greek New Testament, and the Verifier finds every one of the others: Matthew 12:37, Luke 6:37, Acts 25:15, James 5:6. ⚙ Read together they form a single warning. Here the Pharisees condemn the guiltless; twenty-five verses later in the same chapter Jesus says "by your words you will be condemned"; Luke's Sermon says "do not condemn, and you will not be condemned"; Acts has chief priests asking Festus for sentence against Paul; James has the rich condemning and murdering the righteous man who does not resist. In not one of the five is the verb used of a just sentence. Pulpit notes that in Matthew 12:7 the word is formal and official: the Pharisees have not grumbled, they have ruled. Every other occurrence tells them what happens to a court that rules like that.

Matthew 12:37 · Luke 6:37 · Acts 25:15 · James 5:6

basis: Verifier: shared Greek lexeme G2613 καταδικάζω (rare, in 5 vv) at all four refs, which together with Matthew 12:7 exhaust its New Testament occurrences. All refs are Greek New Testament. The shared motif (the peril of the judge) is our own ⚙ reading laid over the computed lexical basis.

David at Nob, and the bread no layman could touch structural / thematic: confirmed

Matthew 12:3-4 retells 1 Samuel 21:1-6 and appeals to the showbread statute of Leviticus 24:5-9. Cambridge fixes the scene: "Ahimelech, the priest at Nob, gave David and his companions five loaves of the shewbread." Barnes notes that the act "had passed uncondemned" in Israel's memory, which is the leverage. The commentators disagree on details and the disagreement is instructive: Ellicott places David inside the tabernacle at Nob, while Benson insists he cannot have entered the tent itself and must have gone into the high priest's adjoining house, citing 1 Samuel 3:15. Poole and Gill both argue, from the weekly replacement of the loaves, that the meal probably fell on a Sabbath, which would make the precedent exact rather than merely analogous; the biblical text does not say so. ⚙ The link is recorded as structural because it cannot be otherwise: Matthew's Greek and Samuel's Hebrew share no Strong's numbers, and Matthew is narrating, not quoting.

1 Samuel 21:1-6 · Leviticus 24:5-9 · Deuteronomy 23:25

basis: Cross-Testament (Greek New Testament to Hebrew Old Testament), so no shared Strong's lexeme can be computed and no verbal tier is possible. Basis is the explicit narrative appeal in the text itself: Matthew 12:3-4 recounts the events of 1 Samuel 21:1-6 and the statute of Leviticus 24:5-9, and every commentator in the brief (Ellicott, Benson, Barnes, JFB, Poole, Gill, Cambridge, Pulpit) identifies the same passages. Deuteronomy 23:25 is added as the permission behind the plucking itself, cited by Henry, Barnes, JFB, Poole, Pulpit and Ellicott.

The Law's own command to work on the day of rest structural / thematic: confirmed

The second argument appeals to Numbers 28:9-10, the two extra lambs commanded for every Sabbath. Barnes spells out the labour: "The priests must be engaged in killing them, and making fires to burn them in sacrifice, whereas to kindle a fire was expressly forbidden the Jews on the Sabbath, Exodus 35:3." Benson computes the result, that the priests' servile work "was that day double of what it was on the other days of the week." JFB adds the fresh showbread of Leviticus 24:5 and 1 Chronicles 9:32, and circumcision when the eighth day fell on a Sabbath. Cambridge, quoting Stier, states the leverage most exactly: the Law does not merely record exceptions, it "ordains labour on the Sabbath as a duty." ⚙ Benson is careful that Jesus is not quoting words: "He does not mean that the words following were to be found in the law." The appeal is to what the Law requires, inferred from its own statutes.

Numbers 28:9-10 · Exodus 35:3 · 1 Chronicles 9:32

basis: Cross-Testament (Greek to Hebrew), so shared Strong's numbers are unavailable and a verbal tier is excluded. Basis is Matthew 12:5's own appeal "in the Law," which the brief's commentators unanimously identify as Numbers 28:9-10 (Ellicott, Benson, Barnes, JFB, Poole, Gill). Exodus 35:3 is Barnes's supporting citation, 1 Chronicles 9:32 is JFB's. No verbatim quotation is claimed: Benson states explicitly that the words are not found in the Law.

"Mercy I desire, and not sacrifice": Hosea twice in one Gospel structural / thematic: confirmed

Matthew 12:7 quotes Hosea 6:6, and it is the second time in this Gospel: Cambridge flags it, "Quoted a second time, see ch. Matthew 9:13," and Gill, Poole and Pulpit all send the reader back there. JFB widens the ground to Micah 6:6-8. ⚙ The two Matthean uses are worth holding together, because both are spoken in defence of people at a meal: at 9:13 tax collectors and sinners eating with Jesus, here hungry disciples eating in a field. Both times the objection is ceremonial, both times the answer is a prophet, and both times the quoted line ranks mercy above ritual without abolishing ritual. Benson and Poole both insist on the comparative force ("God prefers mercy before sacrifice"), against a flat reading that would cancel the sacrificial system outright. Ellicott says the teachers "had inverted the right relation of the two."

Hosea 6:6 · Matthew 9:13 · Micah 6:6-8

basis: This is an explicit Old Testament citation, but the link is cross-Testament (Matthew's Greek to Hosea's Hebrew), so no shared Strong's lexeme exists to compute and the verbal tier is excluded by rule. Basis is the quotation itself plus the internal Matthean repetition at 9:13, which Cambridge, Gill, Poole and Pulpit all record. Micah 6:6-8 is JFB's added parallel, not a second citation.

Son of Man: the title that carries the claim typological

Gill anchors the phrase at 12:8 in Daniel 7:13, "which is the constant sense of this phrase in the New Testament, and is a character of the Messiah in the old." Poole independently rules out the rival reading that would make it mean humanity generally, on the ground that Jesus uses the term "more than threescore times in the gospel" and always of himself. Pulpit supplies the link Matthew omits and Mark preserves, that the Sabbath was made for man (Mark 2:27), and reasons that the lordship therefore runs through his humanity, touching Genesis 1:28 and Matthew 8:20. ⚙ We record this as typological rather than verbal for two reasons: the Daniel link is Aramaic to Greek and so unavailable to any shared-lexeme test, and the identification of Daniel's figure with the speaker here is an interpretation, however ancient and however widely held.

Daniel 7:13 · Mark 2:28 · Genesis 1:28

basis: Cross-Testament and cross-language (Greek to Daniel's Aramaic), so no shared Strong's lexeme is computable and no verbal tier is possible. Attestation is ancient and widely held: Gill cites Daniel 7:13 directly, Poole argues the title is always self-referential in the Gospels, Ellicott reads it as a representative title. Mark 2:28 is the synoptic parallel (Greek to Greek, but not returned among the Verifier's candidates for this unit, so it is recorded on the commentators' citation rather than on a computed basis). Genesis 1:28 is Pulpit's supporting reference for the dominion argument.

⚙Christ in the Unittypology · verify

AI-generated reading; weigh it against the text.

Something greater than the temple, standing in a field ancient/widely-held

⚙ The comparative at 12:6 is neuter, and the commentators in this brief will not let it be tamed. Ellicott takes it of "the body of the Son of Man," "the truest, highest temple of God," and hears behind it the gesture of John 2:19, "destroy this temple." Gill reaches the same place by another road, "the Lord and Proprietor of the temple, and in his human nature the antitype of it," and cites John 2:19 as well. Poole is the bluntest: "The temple was but a type of me." Barnes draws the inference the others imply, that authority to license what the divine law forbids can only be divine. ⚙ What we would add is the location. The priests' innocence in 12:5 was granted by a place: they were in the temple, and Gill quotes the rabbinic rule that what is forbidden on the Sabbath is lawful in the sanctuary. If the greater thing is here, in a grainfield, then the sanctuary has moved, and the men rubbing barley in their hands are standing where the priests stand. Pulpit catches the tremor in this: "Observe the use, even at this stage in his ministry, of words implying the decadence of the temple service." The apostolic reading of Christ as the true temple is old and widely held; the specific reading of 12:6 as relocating priestly immunity to wherever he is, is our own extension of Ellicott's line.

John 2:19-21 · Matthew 12:5-6 · 1 Corinthians 6:19

Lord of the day he made for man ancient/widely-held

⚙ The final claim is ownership: κύριος τοῦ σαββάτου, and κύριος is the word the Greek Old Testament uses for the divine Name. The commentators split honestly on what such lordship does. JFB defines it by what it excludes: "Not surely to abolish it—that surely were a strange lordship, especially just after saying that it was made or instituted for MAN—but to own it, to interpret it, to preside over it, and to ennoble it." Gill reads the same title as carrying power "of dispensing with it, and even of abolishing it," citing Colossians 2:16. Benson speculates further still, that the phrase "may, perhaps, also refer to that signal act of authority which Christ afterward exerted over it, in changing it from the seventh to the first day of the week." ⚙ We flag JFB's and Benson's step to the Lord's Day as inference, not exegesis: Matthew 12:8 says who owns the day and does not say what he will do with it. What the text does give is the order of the argument, and the order is the theology. The lordship is asserted only after the mercy has been demonstrated. A Lord of the Sabbath who first fed his hungry men and then named himself is claiming a different kind of sovereignty from the one his accusers were defending.

Matthew 12:8 · Mark 2:27-28 · Colossians 2:16-17

The anointed king, his hungry men, and the holy bread novel

⚙ The commentators in this brief use David as a legal precedent: a case of necessity that went uncondemned, therefore a principle. None of them, in the entries we were given, reads the episode figurally. We do, and we mark the reading as ours. Consider what the precedent actually contains: a man already anointed king and not yet reigning, driven out by the reigning power, arriving hungry with a handful of followers who have no claim to anything, and being given the bread that had stood before the face of God. Matthew's Jesus is at that moment an anointed king not yet reigning, walking out of a field with followers who have no claim to anything, and the charge against him will grow from this day until 12:14, where Matthew says the Pharisees took counsel to destroy him. Ellicott's phrase for the title in 12:8, that Christ acts "as the representative of humanity, acting, as it were, in its name," is the same grammar as the singular verb in 12:3: David hungered, and his men ate. ⚙ We hold this loosely. The a fortiori argument is what the text asserts; the figure is what we think the text is shaped like, and a reader is free to find only the argument there.

1 Samuel 21:1-6 · Matthew 12:3-4 · Matthew 12:14

Apparatus & Provenance

The biblical text is the Berean Standard Bible (BSB), public domain (CC0). Hebrew/Greek text, transliteration, morphology and Strong’s are transcribed from the Berean interlinear (CC0) + Strong’s lexicons (PD); the literal renderings, divergence notes, word notes and all synthesis are this tool’s own work (⚙) — fallible; verify them.

Named voices, quoted verbatim from public-domain works:

  • Albert Barnes, Notes on the Bible (1834)
  • Cambridge Bible for Schools and Colleges, — (1880s)
  • Charles Ellicott, Commentary for English Readers (1878)
  • Geneva Study Bible, Marginal Notes (1599)
  • Jamieson, Fausset & Brown, Commentary Critical and Explanatory (1871)
  • John Gill, Exposition of the Entire Bible (1746–63)
  • Joseph Benson, Commentary on the Old and New Testaments (1810s)
  • Matthew Henry, Concise Commentary on the Whole Bible (1706)
  • Matthew Poole, Annotations upon the Holy Bible (1685)
  • The Pulpit Commentary, Spence & Exell, eds. (1880s)

Text. Scripture is the Berean Standard Bible; the Greek, parsing and Strong's numbers come from the Berean interlinear as supplied in the brief. One textual question touches the sense directly: at 12:6 the adjective μεῖζόν is neuter in the manuscripts the modern editors follow, giving "something greater" rather than "one greater." Ellicott says the neuter stands "in the better MSS."; JFB calls it "the reading which is best supported"; Gill knows it as a variant ("Some copies read 'something greater'"). BSB prints the masculine sense. We have kept the neuter in the literal rendering and recorded the disagreement about its referent rather than resolving it.

What is uncertain. The date of the episode is not recoverable: Luke's "second-first sabbath" defeated Ellicott ("we are again at sea in attempting to construct a harmony"), Barnes, JFB and Pulpit alike, and no two of them agree. Whether David's meal at Nob fell on a Sabbath is asserted by Gill and Poole from the weekly replacement of the loaves and from rabbinic sources, but 1 Samuel 21 does not say so; the argument works either way, and we have not leaned on it. Whether David entered the tabernacle itself or the high priest's adjoining house divides Ellicott from Benson. Pulpit judges Lightfoot's quotation from Maimonides ("There is no sabbatism at all in the temple") to rest on a misunderstanding, while Gill cites a close cousin of the same maxim approvingly; we have recorded both and endorsed neither.

Sources. Henry's entry is a single block covering 12:1-8 and is repeated in the brief under each verse; we have drawn from it once rather than pretending it comments verse by verse. Barnes's note on 12:4 and 12:5 is likewise one block. Benson at 12:5-6 is partly quoting Macknight, and Cambridge at 12:5 is quoting Stier; both attributions are marked in the voices. Gill's rabbinic citations are given with his own footnote markers in the source and we have not repaired them.

Thread bases. The four Greek-to-Greek threads rest on Verifier-computed shared Strong's lexemes, with the rare ones (G4719 in 4 verses, G953 in 2, G2613 in 5) carrying the verbal tier. Every link to the Hebrew Bible, including the explicit citation of Hosea 6:6, is tiered structural or typological: Greek and Hebrew share no Strong's numbers, so no verbal basis can be computed across the Testaments, however plain the quotation is. Mark 2:27 and Mark 2:28 appear in threads on the commentators' citation rather than on a computed basis, since the Verifier did not return them among this unit's candidates.

⚙ marks our own work. The movements, the sola reading, the pullquote (which is not Scripture), the thread commentary and the third christ entry are synthesis and fallible. The David typology in particular is not found in the commentary entries supplied to us and is marked novel.

✦ = human, public-domain source, quoted and named. ⚙ = machine synthesis, to be verified. Flagged cross-references are left visible on purpose — the verifier working in the open. “Search the Scriptures daily, whether those things were so.” (Acts 17:11)