How he went into the house of God and took and ate the bread of proposition and gave to them that were with him, which is not lawful to eat but only for the priests?
ως εισηλθεν εις τον οικον του θεου και τους αρτους της προθεσεως ελαβεν και εφαγεν και εδωκεν και τοις μετ αυτου ους ουκ εξεστιν φαγειν ει μη μονους τους ιερεις
8 Church Fathers comment on this verse · 9 commentaries
In his escape from Saul, he approached the high priest Abiathar and misled him by claiming that the king had entrusted him with an important task. Driven by greed, he took the consecrated bread from the priest, which consisted of twelve loaves presented daily during the holy meal, six on each side. He also obtained Goliath's sword. The Lord uses this account to bring shame upon them, highlighting David's actions.
The loaves represent the bread that descended from heaven, intended to be placed on the sacred altars of the churches; the entire arrangement of the table used in the sacred service is an evident symbol of divine riches. In a spiritual context, the bread signifies the twelve apostles, whom we will discuss in the order of their prominence when we reach the topic of the disciples. However, God has declared, "I desire mercy, not sacrifice, and the knowledge of God more than burnt offerings." What does mercy entail? And what does sacrifice signify? Mercy refers to justification and grace in Christ, which is received through faith. We are not justified by our own deeds according to the law, but rather by His abundant mercy. Sacrifice, in this context, pertains to the law of Moses.
David acted in opposition to the precepts of the law, and thus, rightly commands our respect, for he was indeed a righteous man and a prophet. If the Mosaic law explicitly states, "Judge the offence righteously, and be not facetious in judgment" (Lev 19:15), then how is it, Jesus questions, that you have condemned my disciples while still holding David in high regard as a righteous man and a prophet, even though he did not adhere to Moses' command? This illustrates that through these loaves, we are pointed to the bread from heaven, which will be offered in the sacred gatherings of the churches. The many vessels utilized for the meal in the sacramental rite likely represent the abundant divine resources. Spiritually, they symbolize the twelve Apostles, a topic we will explore further when our message reaches the disciples themselves.
It is important to note that within the law, the Lord foreshadows future events and challenges those who are zealous for the law while remaining ignorant of its true meaning. He refers to the example of David, who, when he and his companions were in need, entered the house of God, took the consecrated loaves, ate them, and shared them with those who were with him (Luke 6:3-4). This serves as a powerful and prophetic illustration! It emphasizes that we should prioritize what is eternal and beneficial over what is merely temporary in the law. Moreover, David, who fled from King Saul, symbolizes Christ, who similarly seeks refuge with His disciples from the ruler of this world.
Why did this esteemed advocate of the law consume and distribute the sacred loaves, which were reserved exclusively for priests (Luke 6:4)? Was it not to signify that the priestly provisions would be shared with all nations? Or to convey that we are all called to lead a priestly life? Or to affirm that all members of the Church are part of the royal priesthood? Indeed, we are consecrated for the holy priesthood by offering ourselves to God as living sacrifices (1 Peter 2:5).
Thus, Christ's teachings transcend the law, complementing it rather than nullifying it (Luke 6:6), because He honors the Sabbath. The Sabbath was established for humanity's benefit, and it is only right that a hungry individual, long deprived of nourishment, should be relieved from their suffering; therefore, the law is not negated but fulfilled. Can one blame the Lord for actions that would not be ascribed to a servant? Throughout this narrative, there is a profound imagery at play. When David approached Abimelech the priest, not even the threat of mortality deterred the faithful minister from extending hospitality to the wanderer (1 Samuel 21). The virtue of hospitality is so significant that it compels us to embrace the risks that others may carry.
This account conveys not just a moral lesson but also a hidden prophetic command: even in the face of death, devoted ministers of God should offer their souls as refuge to the true David. It teaches that in the presence of any minister, Christ shall always find a welcoming home, and it prophesies that He will prevail over unclean spirits (Ephesians 6:12) by claiming their spoils and armaments. Indeed, anyone who welcomes Christ conquers the unseen giant, disarming him in the process.
Do you not grasp the significance of what follows? In the house of Abimelech, David requested five loaves but ultimately took only one, illustrating that the nourishment for the faithful would not derive from the Pentateuch, but from the body of Christ, ensuring that none who believe would ever go hungry. Doeg (1 Samuel 21:7), the keeper of the mules, also serves as a prophetic type, as only a shepherd of a barren flock could represent Judah. Because of the hospitality shown to David, Saul sought to destroy the entire household of Abimelech, sparing only Abiathar, the High Priest at that time (1 Samuel 22:18-22); thus, this act prophetically indicates that no harm can come to the one true High Priest, Christ (Hebrews 5:10).
In this chapter, a detailed account of these matters can be discovered.
* See Matthew 12:2-4.
During the following Sabbaths, the significance of the Sabbath and the sanctity of its rest, previously obscured due to new disputes with the Pharisees, became much more apparent and was thoroughly clarified. The initial instance occurred when the Lord's disciples, while traveling back from Jerusalem and feeling hungry, ventured through a grain field. In their need, they plucked ears of grain, rubbing them in their hands to eat. Another moment arose when the Lord healed a man with a withered hand in the synagogue, accomplishing this solely by His word without any physical actions. This latter event took place in Galilee.
In defense of His disciples' actions and the miraculous healing of the man with the withered hand, the Lord highlighted precedents from Scripture that illustrated how righteous individuals, in dire situations, had at times disregarded certain laws. For example, David, on the run from Saul, sought out Abiathar to eat the consecrated bread with his companions (1 Sam. 21:6). The Lord noted that the Pharisees themselves violated the Sabbath by permitting a beast that had fallen into a pit to be rescued, and even the priests could not strictly observe the commandment of rest while performing their sacrificial duties, especially on ordinary days.
The Lord emphasized that He embodies something greater than the temple. Thus, by fulfilling a higher calling, His disciples do not violate the temple, which is a temporary dwelling of the Almighty, nor His laws that are transient. The Lord also reminded them of God's words through the prophet: “I desire mercy, and not sacrifice” — showing that compassion, such as healing the man's hand, holds greater value than simply maintaining idle rest. It is crucial to remember that the Sabbath is made for humanity, not humanity for the Sabbath. The Sabbath, like all time, is intended for doing good, not evil, and neglecting an opportunity to do good for others also counts against the true spirit of the day. Finally, the Lord reiterated what He previously affirmed in Jerusalem: the Son of Man is Lord of the Sabbath.
The Saviour, demonstrating true divine insight, recognized the treachery of those who questioned Him and promptly defended His followers. He reaffirmed His position as the Lord of the Sabbath and referenced instances from biblical history to elucidate the true essence of the Sabbath. "Have you not read," He challenged the Pharisees and learned scribes, thereby revealing their ignorance of the Scriptures they claimed to understand, "what David did when he was in need and hungry, along with those who were with him? How he entered the house of God on the Sabbath and ate the consecrated bread, which was only lawful for the priests to eat?" (Mark 2:25-26, 1 Sam. 21:1-6).
If David, esteemed as their great king and saint, could disregard the letter of the law out of necessity and not be condemned, then why should the disciples face reproach for engaging in a harmless act to quell their hunger?
He did not seize the showbread on a whim; rather, he received it from the high priest after asking for it, taking it only when it was offered to him.
In His defense against criticism from His contemporaries, Jesus Christ directed their attention to David, a revered figure among the Israelites, highlighting the principles of sacred acts which were applicable even on the Sabbath, the precedence of acts of compassion over mere ritual observance, and the true essence of the Sabbath itself. “Have you not read what David did when he was in need and hungry, along with those who were with him?
How did he enter the house of God during Abiathar the high priest's time, and eat the consecrated bread, distributing it also to his companions, even though it was not lawful for anyone except the priests to consume it?” In the Tabernacle, priests, as established by the Law of Moses (Leviticus 24:5-9), placed twelve loaves of pure wheat on a special table, known as the bread of the Presence (Exodus 40:23), which were renewed every Sabbath. In a time of peril and hunger, David sought refuge in Nob, where the Tabernacle was located, and, with the permission of Ahimelech, the high priest, he took these holy loaves to quell his hunger (1 Samuel 21:1-6). Although David did not violate the Sabbath, he acted out of necessity and transgressed legal customs, yet he faced no condemnation for his actions. As St. John Chrysostom notes, “The Lord upheld His disciples against the Pharisees’ reproach by invoking a prophet who had acted similarly.” The Evangelist Mark refers to Abiathar instead of Ahimelech (1 Kings 23:6), which can be understood as Abiathar, being the rightful heir, retaining the title of high priest while his father was still alive. Regarding the Sabbath, Jesus continued, “Have you not read in the law that on the Sabbath the priests in the temple violate the Sabbath and remain blameless?” He pointed out that the concept of the temple had changed. Although the law prohibited kindling fire in dwellings on the Sabbath (Exodus 35:3), it also mandated the offering of two lambs in addition to the daily sacrifices on this day (Numbers 28:9). During this time, the priests were required to slaughter, prepare, and burn the sacrificial offerings—actions seemingly at odds with Sabbath rest, yet these were permissible because they occurred in the context of worship as ordained by God Himself. “For the same reasons God upholds the priests, He acquits His disciples from any wrongdoing; if the priests are innocent, how much more so are the disciples? They are not only disciples but also priests, and indeed greater than the priests, as here stands the Lord of the temple Himself” (St. John Chrysostom).
Passages read together with this verse.
Greek text, 28 words with lemma, transliteration and Strong’s number. Tap to expand.
THEOSIS