HOW 1 SAMUEL 21: 6-7 IS USED IN MATTHEW 12: 3-4

INTRODUCTION

Amidst all other exegetical implications surrounding the book of Samuel, it has essentially the historical character of Israel’s monarchical system. Given from New Jerome’s Commentary, the text of 1 Samuel 21 constitutes a part in the beginning of the Kingdom in the land of Israel, an open rupture and desire of Saul in killing David. The action of David and his companions in 1 Samuel 21: 6-7 was referred to by Jesus in Matthew 12: 3-4 in explaining the implications of the law of Sabbath. This work is aimed to see how 1 Samuel 21: 6-7 was used in Matthew 12:3-4.

THE EXEGETICAL CONTENT OF 1 SAMUEL 21: 6-7

The content of this chapter as mentioned above exposes David’s desire to escape Saul’s sting of sword. The episode of this passage which began from verse 2, noted David’s’ consumption of the consecrated bread which is illegal for him. Nevertheless, this was not counted for him as sin owing to the ill conditions met by David before that incident. It is noted that David was in continuous wandering and hiding for about 3 days for his house is been watched by Saul’s Army. (cf 1 Sam 19:14-21:1) Hence, he might be in dire need of food and weapons. The additional legislation of Leviticus 24:5-9 clearly stipulated that it is only Aaron and his sons that are entitled to consecrated bread and should be eaten in a sacred place. Exception to this law was admitted in the time of David, but ritual purity was essential and that’s why the criterion of verse 4 was allowed by Ahimelech the priest. (cf 1 Sam 21:4)

THE OVERVIEW CONTENT OF MATTHEW 12:3-4

The episode of the above chapter explicated in details Jesus’ attitude to the Jewish law. He came not to abolish the law but to fulfill it. Unlike the accounts of Mark and Luke, Matthew incorporated the fact of the basic necessity of food. Some scholars do not find hunger as an excuse for transgressing a law.

 It is good to note that they were not accused of stealing for it is allowed in the torah (Deut. 23:25), they were accused of neglecting the sabbath regulations. Jesus pointed the inconsistencies of the Jewish law by exonerating David on the account of necessity of food but could not exonerate his disciples for same reason.

HOW 1 SAMUEL 21: 6-7 IS USED IN MATTHEW 12: 3-4

The usage of I Sam 21: 6-7 in Matthew was didactic, direct and comparable. The actions the two parties that is David and Jesus’ disciples were related. One party was exonerated, while the other party was faulty. He condemns the unequal approach by Pharisees.

On another note, it becomes clearer that Jesus was not anti-torah or anti-sabbath but would try to condemn the particular notion of overdevelopment of the Sabbath laws to the point that human dignity is degraded. He quoted David’s action in order to show that necessity of life transcends the Sabbath. Laws are made for the improvement of Life which is a foundational good. It is on this reason that Jesus came not to abolish the law and the prophet but to fulfill them. In the fulfillment of this law, Human life is the first service of law.

The deed of David was quoted by Jesus to assert three things: new mode of worshipping God (in spirit and in truth not in mere practices), mercy is preferred than sacrifice, and the son of God is the master of Sabbath. Jesus remarked the necessity of love and in protecting human life created in the image of God even on Sabbath. Christ, by justifying his disciples in plucking the ears of corn on the sabbath-day, shows that works of necessity and mercy are lawful on that day.

CONCLUSION

In love and mercy, Sabbath is best fulfilled. Jesus tried to dismiss externalism in the religious of his people to adequate relationship with God. David is a clear model of this approach. David values integrity, justice and love, for this he is called God’s beloved. Jesus is greater than David and the temple, He is the son of God. He desires mercy, love and repentance.