The scene set before us is difficult for most of us to comprehend today. Jesus’ disciples pluck and eat grain and Jesus heals on the Sabbath. The hyper-strict Sabbaterianism of first century Judaism found these activities objectionable and controversy ensued. An earlier generation of English-speaking Christians would have understood the issues. The biblical background is the fourth commandment requiring one holy and restful day in seven (Ex 20:8-11). Our Protestant forefathers in particular were careful about their activities on Sunday, eliminating the secular and restricting themselves to the sacred. Sabbatarian sensibilities cut across all denominational lines, being shared by Presbyterians, Episcopalians, Methodists, and Baptists alike. Today, Sunday, the Lord’s Day, what our ancestors called the “Christian Sabbath,” has all but vanished, not merely among unbelievers, but among professing Christians as well. First century Judaism had taken Sabbath observance to an unwarranted extreme. Yet today we have allowed the pendulum to swing to the other extreme, to our detriment. By way of contrast, Anglican bishop J. C. Ryle (1816–1900) claimed, typically of previous generations, that the Sabbath was “the best safeguard” of the Christian religion’s status in a given nation, and that “much of our spiritual prosperity depends, under God, on the manner in which we employ our Sundays.”[1] The Puritan tradition, of which we as Protestants are the spiritual heirs, referred to the Sabbath as “the market day of the soul,” the day when we exclusively tend to our spiritual business.[2]

Jesus already has been criticized for not practicing separation from “sinners” (5:27-32), for not fasting, and, perhaps, for not practicing a thrice daily prayer regime (5:33-39). Now we find Him encountering another hallmark of first century Jewish piety: strict Sabbath observance. A detailed Sabbath discpline was among the important signs of religious devotion, and was expected of serious believers. The rabbis compiled a list of 39 prohibited activities on the day of rest. These were further divided into 1529 rules governing behavior on the Sabbath. Forbidden were such trivial activities as unfastening a button, lifting more weight than a single dried fig, or even leaving milk to curdle (lest the milk work). One was not allowed to comfort the sick or cheer the sorrowful or even wipe a wound. That which was meant to be a blessing, rest from one’s labors and spiritual refreshment, had become a great burden. Jesus violates the rabbi’s norms and is criticized. As He answers His detractors, He maps out for us the true intent of the Sabbath, as well as its permissible tasks.[3]

First Incident

On a Sabbath, while he was going through the grainfields, his disciples plucked and ate some heads of grain, rubbing them in their hands. But some of the Pharisees said, "Why are you doing what is not lawful to do on the Sabbath?"

Cross references:

1. Luke 6:2 : Matt 9:11
2. Luke 6:2 : Exodus 20:9-11

 (Lk 6:1,2)

It is noteworthy that certain of the Pharisees are in a position to observe what Jesus’ disciples do as they pass through grain fields. Clearly Jesus enemies are now spying on Him! “Picking and eating” grain by passers-by was permitted according to Old Testament law (Deut 23:25). Unlike the strawberry fields around the home in which I was reared in Southern California, where Farmer John would have us arrested if we so much as looked at his ripening fruit, eating standing grain was legal and approved. The objection raised in verse 2 is not to the activity itself, but to the day on which it occurs. Old Testament law forbade work on the Sabbath (Ex 20:8-11), even during harvest (Ex 34:21). For the Pharisees, plucking grain represented harvesting and rubbing it in the hands in order to separate the grain from the chaff represented threshing, both forbidden work on the Sabbath. Further, throwing away the husks may have represented winnowing and eating may have represented food preparation. “Four distinct breaches of the Sabbath in one mouthful,” Morris exclaims.[4] We can well understand why it might be said that the rabbinic rules for the Sabbath were “elaborate and repressive.”[5]

Consequently, their response to the disciples’ “misdeeds” follows,

But some of the Pharisees said, "Why are you doing what is not lawful to do on the Sabbath?" (Lk 6:2)

The issue that they raise is what is “lawful” or “permitted” (exestin), not so much according to Scripture itself, but according to the extra-biblical tradition of first century Judaism. Jesus, for His part, responds from Scripture, recalling an example of David doing that which also was not “lawful.”

And Jesus answered them, "Have you not read what David did when he was hungry, he and those who were with him: how he entered the house of God and took and ate the bread of the Presence, which is not lawful for any but the priests to eat, and also gave it to those with him?" (Lk 6:3,4)

The error of the Pharisees begins with the fact that they know too little Bible, not too much.[6] Or, another way of putting it is that they do not understand what they think they know. “Have you not read?,” Jesus asks. Jesus does here what He always does in His disputes with the scribes and Pharisees. He does not abolish or abandon the teaching of the Law and Prophets, but rather reaffirms their authority, down to the “jot and tittle,” until “heaven and earth pass away” (Mt 5:17-19). What He does do is correct the false interpretations of His opponents (Mt 5:20-48). They limit the sixth commandment to murder; Jesus applies it to the attitudes that lead to murder, anger and hatred, thereby deepening and broadening its application (Mt 5:21,22). They limit the seventh commandment to adultery and congratulate themselves on their achievement in avoiding it. Jesus identifies its intent to deal with the attitudes that lead to adultery, applying it to lust (Mt 5:27-32). He corrects their limited, superficial interpretation in both cases and provides the correct interpretation according to the comprehensive intent of the commands. Technical compliance with the eighth commandment (stealing) and ninth commandment (bearing false witness) is useless if one is cheating another through subterfuge, if one’s yes is not yet and one’s no is not no (Mt 5:33-37). Even the lex talionis is not repudiated (“eye for an eye”) but rather placed in a proper context and interpreted in light of the command to love one’s neighbor (Mt 5:38ff). Similarly, Jesus does not repudiate the fourth commandment; rather He corrects the distortion of it by first century rabbis.

Jesus reminds the Pharisees of the incident recorded in 1 Samuel 21:3-6, when David ate bread meant only for the service of the temple, the “bread of the Presence,” the “consecrated bread” (NASB), or “shewbread” (KJV). Every Sabbath morning twelve freshly baked loaves of bread, one for each tribe, was set before the Lord in the temple, in the Holy Place. Once presented, it was designed for the use of the priests, as described in Leviticus 24:5-9. David’s action was a breach of that requirement, though strictly speaking, other use was not specifically prohibited. However,normally eating it was not considered “lawful,” yet David and his companions ate it.

What lesson is to be drawn from this incident?

And he said to them, "The Son of Man is lord of the Sabbath." (Lk 6:5)

Jesus declares Himself to be the “lord of the Sabbath.” “This is a staggering claim,” as Morris points out.[7] The Sabbath was of divine institution. A mere man cannot supersede the authority of a divine institution. However, the “Son of Man,” Jesus’ favorite Messianic title (Dan 7:13,14), can.[8]There are times when ritual law may be suspended for the sake of human need, and Jesus, the Lord of the Sabbath, can declare when such an occasion is present. Ordinarily no one but priests would eat the shewbread. However, there were exceptions to the rule and David’s case proves it. What David can do without guilt, also can the Son of Man. 

Mark’s gospel adds these words not found in Luke: “the Sabbath was made for man, not man for the Sabbath” (Mk 2:27). What is the intent of the Sabbath? It is for the benefit and well-being of humanity. Matthew’s gospel adds these, Jesus quoting Hosea 6:6:

And if you had known what this means, 'I desire mercy, and not sacrifice,’  you would not have condemned the guiltless. (Mt 12:7)

Luke omits these words, instead focusing on Jesus’ authority as the Son of Man. He is the Lord of the Sabbath and therefore able to declare authoritatively its right interpretation and purpose. The point of Jesus’ additional words in Mark and Matthew is that the Pharisees consistently failed to take into consideration the intent of God’s laws when applying them, and so interpreted them as ends in themselves. By doing so they “twist(ed) God’s Law into an alien meaning,” as Calvin puts it.[9]The intent of Sabbath law was to bless humanity. It was given for our good. Likewise the intent of the law regarding the shewbread was to provide for priests, not force the needy to suffer. Jesus says the ritual laws of “sacrifice” do not supersede the necessity of showing mercy. Consequently, God’s laws were not violated when David’s men were fed. Neither were they violated when Jesus’ disciples plucked grain. Why? Because God’s laws were not meant to prohibit these actions. The Pharisees, Jesus says, had “condemned the guiltless,” the “innocent” (Mt 12:7, NASB). Consecrated bread had a purpose in the divine economy.[10] However, that purpose broadens when confronted with human suffering or the need for provision in the service of God.[11] As Morris puts it, “Human needs must not be subjected to barren legalism,” particularly in connection with ceremonial rather than moral law.[12] Ordinary use may be set aside in exceptional circumstances that comply with the law’s larger intent.[13] Even more so is this the case with human traditions that go beyond the laws of God. Traditions which affect that which is the opposite of the law’s central intent must be wrong.  

Because Jesus is “Lord of the Sabbath,” His reading of Sabbath law and His interpretation of all of God’s laws is authoritative and trustworthy. When He interprets and applies the sixth, seventh, eighth, and ninth commandments, His understanding is normative for us (Mt 5:21-48). What He believes we believe. His interpretation is our interpretation. When the Lord of the Sabbath declares that His Sabbath is for our good we must believe Him and keep it according to His design if we are to receive that good. Never was this more true than today. By all means we must avoid the excesses of the Pharisees. Yet neither should we disregard the Sabbath altogether, as so many have today. Our 24/7 pace is killing us. We need rest. Relentless secular concerns overwhelm us. We need relief from worldly activity on Sunday and time for the nurturing of the soul.

Do not blithely dismiss the Christian Sabbath as something of a bygone day. The Sabbath pattern of one in seven is a creation ordinance, built, one might say, into the fabric of creation (Gen 2:1-13; Ex 20:8-11). We need its benefits. The Pharisees erred in becoming absolutely rigid in their definitions of the permissible and the forbidden. We err in abandoning the categories altogether and endorsing a Sunday free-for-all. No, Jesus is the Lord of the Sabbath and governs its observance. It is still a day of worship and rest, and for our good, not in its breech, but in its observance. It is not a golf day, or family day, or travel day. It’s not the Lord’s morning or (worse) the Lord’s hour. It is the Lord’s Day, dedicated to the worship and service of God. Secular, weekday activities are to cease. Are there exceptions? Yes. The shewbread demonstrates that there can be exceptions discerned through understanding the intent of the commandment. Yet we also can speak of what wenormally are to do. What ought to be our ordinary practice? About this there can be no question. We are to devote the whole of the day to the things of God. We should attend the services of the church. We should devote time to private devotions. We should refrain from “worldly employments and recreations,” as the Shorter Catechism calls them (Q 60). We are to “remember,” or commemorate through religious observance, the mighty acts of God, and “keep it holy,” that is, set apart and sacred.

Second Incident

As we move along to the second incident we are able to see more clearly the nature of the exceptions to the Sabbath laws. These exceptions are those actions or behaviors that the fourth commandment never was meant to prohibit. We repeat: Jesus is not abolishing the Sabbath. He is correcting its misapplication and establishing its true and original intent. We would err greatly if we were to think that Jesus’ point was that we are free to ignore the fourth commandment We have no such freedom. Rather, what we must do is obey God’s commands according to their original intent. This requires that we grasp the purpose of God’s laws, particularly the positive principle behind the negative prohibitions.

On another Sabbath, he entered the synagogue and was teaching, and a man was there whose right hand was withered. (Lk 6:6)

On a subsequent Sabbath, a second incident occurs. Jesus, following His regular pattern, is teaching on the Sabbath in a synagogue. A man is present who suffers from a “withered” hand. Only Luke, who has an eye for medical details, tells us that it was his right hand. Apparently this man suffered from some form of muscular atrophy. It would not have been unusual for Jesus to heal him. In Luke 4:31-37 Jesus healed on the Sabbath without opposition. However, the report of His doing so spread (4:37) and attracted closer scrutiny (5:17-39).

And the scribes and the Pharisees watched him, to see whether he would heal on the Sabbath, so that they might find a reason to accuse him. (Lk 6:7)

The scribes and Pharisees are present in the synagogue in order to catch Jesus in a Sabbath violation. They wish to “accuse” Him. Sadly, “they were interested in the accusation, not the healing,” as Morris points out.[14] The rabbis permitted healing activity if a life was in danger. However, if this was not the case, if the circumstances lacked urgency, healing was not allowed.

But he knew their thoughts, and he said to the man with the withered hand, "Come and stand here." And he rose and stood there. (Lk 6:8)

Jesus “knew what they were thinking.” Jesus knows our thoughts. Jesus, who upheld the authority of the priests in 5:14, now defies them. He calls the afflicted man forward, and by so doing concentrates everyone’s attention on the man’s shriveled hand.[15] It also focuses attention on the issue at hand. Is the Sabbath law meant to prevent healing and prolong suffering when a way of relief is at hand? Or is restorative activity appropriate and well-suited to a day whose design is restorative?

And Jesus said to them, "I ask you, is it lawful on the Sabbath to do good or to do harm, to save life or to destroy it?" (Lk 6:9)

Jesus states the issue starkly. One can either do “good” by ending suffering or “harm” by prolonging it. Doing nothing is not an option. Doing nothing is a sin of omission. Doing nothing is to do “evil” (NASB) when one is in a position to help because it perpetuates the misery of one who otherwise would experience relief.

Jesus appeals to basic morality, arguing that any elaboration of Sabbath law that conflicts with the central moral principles behind God’s laws must be wrong. He doesn’t ask, “Is it right to heal on the Sabbath,” but is it right “to do good.” He looks to the moral principle behind the commands. All of God’s commands, including the fourth commandment, have as their central purpose promoting the good, as God defines good. Doing good is always allowed. In Matthew’s gospel he adds this question:

He said to them, "Which one of you who has a sheep, if it falls into a pit on the Sabbath, will not take hold of it and lift it out?” Cross references:

1. Matthew 12:11 : Exodus 23:4, 5; Deut 22:4

 (Mt 12:11)

The question is rhetorical. The common practice was to help the animal out of the pit. “You do good. You relieve suffering,” Jesus is saying. Of course, then, a man in need should be helped.

And after looking around at them all he said to him, "Stretch out your hand." And he did so, and his hand was restored. (Lk 6:10)

Jesus gave them an opportunity to answer. He looked around at them all. Mark adds that He looked “with anger, grieved at their hardness of heart” (Mk 3:5). Why? Because they lacked basic compassion. Because they lacked common sense. Because they lacked basic understanding of the meaning of the Sabbath. The Sabbath was given that we might be restored and healed and refreshed. That which relieves suffering and benefits humanity is permitted. Ironically, Jesus heals him with a word. His “work” is but the words, “Stretch out your hand,” is all He says. Yet that little bit was too much.

But they were filled with fury and discussed with one another what they might do to Jesus. Cross references:

1. Luke 6:11 : 2 Tim 3:9 (Gk)

 (Lk 6:11)

The opposition is “filled with fury,” with anoias, a mindless “rage” (NASB). Matthew and Mark add that they from that point “counseled together against Him, as to how they might destroy Him” (Mt 12:14; Mk 3:6).

Intent and activity

What kind of activity does Jesus’ plucking and eating grain and  healing of the afflicted indicate the Lord of the Sabbath approves of on His Sabbath? Some activities are meant to be restricted. Others are not. The Reformed faith typically has identified three categories of doing “good.”[16]

First, works of mercy. It is lawful to do good, to heal, to preserve life. Returning to Matthew’s account, Jesus asks,

He said to them, “Which one of you who has a sheep, if it falls into a pit on the Sabbath, will not take hold of it and lift it out? Of how much more value is a man than a sheep! So it is lawful to do good on the Sabbath.” (Mt 12:11,12)

If the Sabbath regulations allow one to help a sheep out of a pit, how much more so does it allow helping humanity, made in the image of God? If Jesus heals on the Sabbath, we also may engage in healing activity. Doctors, nurses, pharmacists, and all the healing professions may work, lest suffering be perpetuated and extended. Needy neighbors, hurting friends, afflicted strangers may all be helped when our inaction would perpetuate needless suffering.

Second, works of necessity may and must be attended to. In addition to the above works of mercy, necessary work, such as that of police, firemen, military personnel may work. Food preparation, bathing, grooming, changing diapers, milking cows, running power plants are all necessary work if hardships are to be avoided.

Third, works of piety are permitted. Jesus asks in Matthew’s account,

Or have you not read in the Law how on the Sabbath the priests in the temple profane the Sabbath and are guiltless? (Mt 12:5)

Did they really “profane” the Sabbath? No, Jesus is adopting the classifications of the rabbis’ in order to disprove them. By their narrow, twisted conception of things one would have to conclude that the priests “profane” the Sabbath, but of course they don’t. They are “guiltless,” or “innocent” (NASB). Ministers, choirmasters, Sunday School teachers, custodians, and other church personnel all work and technically “break the Sabbath,” but they are “innocent” because the Sabbath law was never meant to prohibit religious work.

The Pharisees and scribes serve as a warning to us. Their concerns were backwards. Their priorities were upside down. They were obsessively concerned with their traditional and ritual minutia while missing the big picture, love of God and love of neighbor, and especially, the presence of the Messiah whom they purported to anticipate with longing, who stands before them. Putting the matter simply, they were content with the external shape of religion while neglecting the internal essence. They focused on form and ignored the substance. They emphasized rules while neglecting both the means and motive. This is why they could congratulate themselves on their self-righteousness while being guilty of all manner of unrighteousness. These same Pharisees dishonored mother and father (Mt 15:3-6; Mk 7:10-12), were notorious for covetousness, neglected justice, mercy, and faithfulness, strained gnats while swallowing camels. They were whitewashed tombs, clean on the outside but inside full of death and uncleanness (Mt 23:23-28). Let them ever be a warning to us not to lose the forest in the trees; not to condemn the specks in the eyes of others while condoning the planks in our own (Mt 7:1ff). God is primarily concerned with the heart, with our intent, with motives, with love. He primarily is concerned with the salvation of our souls through faith in Christ. Once that is settled He is concerned about the way we obey Him, that is, that our intent be to please and honor Him.

At the same time, we mustn’t make the mistake of dumping out the proverbial baby with the bathwater. Jesus is Lord of the Sabbath. He would have us understand the meaning of the Sabbath and the proper motive for keeping it. The day has moved from the seventh day of the week to the first day of the week, it is now called the Lord’s Day, though it is not improper to refer to it as the “Christian Sabbath” (as in the Westminster Confession of Faith, XX1.7). We always must keep God’s redemptive and healing and restorative purposes in view as we assess our activities on the Lord’s Day. Jesus is the Lord of the Sabbath, and I am not. As we’ve seen,  Jesus did not abolish the Sabbath (Mt 5:17,18). Jesus did not abrogate the fourth commandment. He corrected the Pharisees’ distorted teachings with respect to it, as He did with respect to all of God’s laws (Mt 5:21-48). He criticized their heartless and distorted views. But He did not attack the Sabbath itself.[17]

Consequently, we still are to observe a day devoted to sacred things and rest. We still are to devote a day to the things of God. We still are to lay aside secular activities of work and recreation and devote ourselves to “holy rest.” We are to do this, not with warped Pharisaic priorities or with scribal cruelty, but with Isaiah, we are to “call the Sabbath a delight,” and “the holy day of the Lord honorable” (Isa 58:13).[18]