4The priest answered David, and said, “I have no common bread, but there is holy bread; if only the young men have kept themselves from women.”
5David answered the priest, and said to him, “Truly, women have been kept from us as usual these three days. When I came out, the vessels of the young men were holy, though it was only a common journey. How much more then today shall their vessels be holy?”6So the priest gave him holy bread; for there was no bread there but the show bread that was taken from before Yahweh, to put hot bread in the day when it was taken away.
4 The priest answered David, and said, “I have no common bread, but there is holy bread; if only the young men have kept themselves from women.”
5 David answered the priest, and said to him, “Truly, women have been kept from us as usual these three days. When I came out, the vessels of the young men were holy, though it was only a common journey. How much more then today shall their vessels be holy?”
6 So the priest gave him holy bread; for there was no bread there but the show bread that was taken from before Yahweh, to put hot bread in the day when it was taken away.
KJVKing James Version
4 And the priest answered David, and said, There is no common bread under mine hand, but there is hallowed bread; if the young men have kept themselves at least from women.
5 And David answered the priest, and said unto him, Of a truth women have been kept from us about these three days, since I came out, and the vessels of the young men are holy, and the bread is in a manner common, yea, though it were sanctified this day in the vessel.
6 So the priest gave him hallowed bread: for there was no bread there but the shewbread, that was taken from before the LORD, to put hot bread in the day when it was taken away.
Show all 3 translations
JPSJPS Tanakh (1917)
4 (21-5) And the priest answered David, and said: 'There is no common bread under my hand, but there is holy bread; if only the young men have kept themselves from women.'
5 (21-6) And David answered the priest, and said unto him: 'Of a truth women have been kept from us about these three days; when I came out, the vessels of the young men were holy, though it was but a common journey; how much more then to-day, when there shall be holy bread in their vessels?'
6 (21-7) So the priest gave him holy bread; for there was no bread there but the showbread, that was taken from before the LORD, to put hot bread in the day when it was taken away. —
Luke 6:3-4(v6)Jesus, answering them, said, “Haven’t you read what David did when he was hungry, he, and those who were with him; how he entered into…
Leviticus 24:5-9(vv4, 6)“You shall take fine flour, and bake twelve cakes of it: two tenths of an ephah shall be in one cake. You shall set them in two rows, six…
Matthew 12:3-4(vv4, 6)But he said to them, “Haven’t you read what David did, when he was hungry, and those who were with him; how he entered into God’s house,…
Exodus 19:15(v4)He said to the people, “Be ready by the third day. Don’t have sexual relations with a woman.”
Mark 2:25-27(v6)He said to them, “Did you never read what David did, when he had need, and was hungry—he, and those who were with him? How he entered into…
Show all 15 cross-references
Exodus 25:30(v4)You shall set bread of the presence on the table before me always.
1 Samuel 21:6(v4)So the priest gave him holy bread; for there was no bread there but the show bread that was taken from before Yahweh, to put hot bread in…
Zechariah 7:3(v4)and to speak to the priests of the house of Yahweh of Armies, and to the prophets, saying, “Should I weep in the fifth month, separating…
1 Corinthians 7:5(v4)Don’t deprive one another, unless it is by consent for a season, that you may give yourselves to fasting and prayer, and may be together…
Leviticus 8:26(v5)and out of the basket of unleavened bread that was before Yahweh, he took one unleavened cake, one cake of oiled bread, and one wafer, and…
Leviticus 24:9(v5)It shall be for Aaron and his sons. They shall eat it in a holy place; for it is most holy to him of the offerings of Yahweh made by fire…
Acts 9:15(v5)But the Lord said to him, “Go your way, for he is my chosen vessel to bear my name before the nations and kings, and the children of Israel.
1 Thessalonians 4:3-4(v5)For this is the will of God: your sanctification, that you abstain from sexual immorality, that each one of you know how to control his own…
2 Timothy 2:20-21(v5)Now in a large house there are not only vessels of gold and of silver, but also of wood and of clay. Some are for honor, and some for…
1 Peter 3:17(v5)For it is better, if it is God’s will, that you suffer for doing well than for doing evil.
15 distinct cross-references across this passage (17 total citations).
Cross-references from openbible.info (CC BY 4.0)
Explain this passage (17 sources)
Historical commentary, presented as a primary source — not an endorsement.
Geneva Bible translators1599 · Public DomainOn vv4–5If they have not accompanied with their wives.
If they have not accompanied with their wives.
Geneva Bible (1599) marginal notes — public domain.
John Trapp1656 · Public DomainOn vv4–51Sa 21:4 And the priest answered David, and said,…
1Sa 21:4 And the priest answered David, and said, [There is] no common bread under mine hand, but there is hallowed bread; if the young men have kept themselves at least from women.
Ver. 4. There is no common bread under mine hand.] He kept house at Anathoth, where doubtless he had common bread; but David’s haste called for present supply.
Read full note →
If the young men have kept themselves at least from women.] From companying with their wives; which, though lawful enough, {Heb 13:4} yet through men’s corruption, it sometimes is not without sin; and some legal uncleanness was contracted by it. See Lev 15:18 Exo 19:15. Howbeit this was not a sufficient impediment to David and his followers in this necessity: and therefore Jerome saith that this was a ridiculous and preposterous objection.
John Trapp, A Commentary or Exposition upon All the Books of the Old and New Testament (1647–1656) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword module.
Matthew Poole1685 · Public DomainOn vv4–6Under mine hand, to wit, here in the tabernacle;…
Under mine hand, to wit, here in the tabernacle; though doubtless he had enough of that and of other provisions in his house; but David was in great haste, and in fear of Doeg, whom he saw and knew there, 1Sa 22:22, and therefore would not stay till any thing could be fetched thence.
Hallowed bread; the shew-bread, which was appropriated to the priests; of which see Exo 25:30; Lev 24:5.
Read full note →
At least from women; either from uncleanness by women, which might be divers ways contracted; or from conjugal converse with their wives; which though it did not defile them, yet he thought might debar them from the participation of such very sacred things; which he gathered by the analogy of that precept, Exo 19:15. There was a double impediment to the giving of this bread to them:
1. Its sacredness in itself; which the priest implies, and David answers, 1Sa 21:5, and the priest was satisfied therein by David’s extraordinary occasions and great necessities.
2. The purity and abstinence from all women, which he supposeth should be in those that use it; concerning which he now inquires. And though he mention this only concerning David’s young men, and out of modesty and reverence to David forbears to name him; yet he is also included in the number, as David’s answer shows.
Matthew Poole's English Annotations on the Holy Bible (1683–1685) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword/MySword module.
John Gill1763 · Public DomainOn vv4–6And the priest answered David, and said, there is…
And the priest answered David, and said, there is no common bread under mine hand,.... In the tabernacle, though he might have such in his own house; which was common for any man to eat of, even such as were not priests; but he had none there, and David was in haste to be gone because of Doeg, and could not stay till such was fetched:
but there is hallowed bread; such as was devoted to sacred use. Kimchi's father thinks this was the bread of the thank offering, to which Ben Gersom inclines; otherwise the Jewish writers in general understand it of the shewbread; and it is clear it was that from Sa1 21:6 and from what our Lord says, Mat 12:4. Now this the priest had under his hand, being just taken off of the shewbread table, and was the perquisite of the priests; and which, though it was not lawful for any but priests to eat of, yet in this case of necessity he seemed willing to give it to David and his men, on this condition: if the young men have kept themselves at least from women; from their wives or others, and from any pollution by them, in any way or manner; but as this was also only of a ceremonial kind, it might as well have been dispensed with, had this been the case, as the other.
John Gill's Exposition of the Whole Bible (1746–1763) — public domain (CC PDM 1.0). Text via the HelloAO Bible API.
John Wesley1765 · Public DomainOn vv4–5There is, &c. - Here in the tabernacle: though…
There is, &c. - Here in the tabernacle: though doubtless he had other provisions is his house; but David was in great haste, and in fear of Doeg whom he saw, and knew and therefore would not stay 'till any thing could be fetched thence. There was a double impediment to the giving this bread to them;
1. Its sacredness in itself; which the priest implies, and David answers ver. 5, and the priest was satisfied therein by David's great necessities.
Read full note →
2. The abstinence from all women, which he supposed should be in those that use it; concerning which he now inquires. And though he mentions this only concerning David's young men, and out of reverence forbears to name him; yet he is also included in the number, as David's answer shews.
John Wesley, Explanatory Notes Upon the Whole Bible (1754–1765) — public domain. Text via the GEBible commentary corpus.
Adam Clarke1810 · Public DomainOn v6Verse 6. So the priest gave him hallowed bread]…
Verse 6. So the priest gave him hallowed bread] To this history our Lord alludes, Mr 2:25, in order to show that in cases of absolute necessity a breach of the ritual law was no sin. It was lawful for the priests only to eat the shew-bread; but David and his companions were starving, no other bread could be had at the time, and therefore he and his companions ate of it without sin.
Adam Clarke's Commentary on the Bible (1810–1826) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword/MySword module.
Joseph Benson1811 · Public DomainOn v51Sa 21:5. About these three days — As long…
1Sa 21:5. About these three days — As long as the law required, Exo 19:15. And so long, it seems, David and his men had hid themselves for fear of Saul, whereby they were kept both from their wives and from food convenient for them. The vessels of the young men are holy — That Isaiah , 1 st, Either their garments, or other utensils for their journey; or, 2d, Their bodies. The bread (Hebrew, והוא, vehu, and this) is in a manner common — That is, the bread which had been taken away from before the Lord, to make room for new bread to be placed there. For though, for a season, while it stood before the Lord, it was so holy that the priest himself might not eat it; yet afterward it was eaten by the priest and his whole family, and David pleads that it might be eaten by him and his young men in their necessitous circumstances. Yea, though it were sanctified this day in the vessel — This translation renders the passage obscure. The Hebrew may be translated, as by Le Clerc and in some other versions, Furthermore, or, forasmuch as it (namely, bread) is sanctified this day in the vessel; that is, there was new bread sanctified to be set before the Lord; and therefore this, which had been taken away from before him, was, in some degree, become common. For the law ordained, (Lev 24:8-9,) that the show, or hallowed bread, should be removed every sabbath day from the table before the Lord, and fresh set on.
Joseph Benson's Commentary on the Old and New Testaments (1811–1818) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword module.
Albert Barnes1834 · Public DomainOn vv4–5Common - As opposed to holy. (See the marginal…
Common - As opposed to holy. (See the marginal references, and compare the use of the word in Act 10:14-15, Act 10:28.) It gives an idea of the depressed and poor condition of the priesthood at that time, that Ahimelech should have had no bread at hand except the showbread.
Albert Barnes' Notes on the Bible (1834–1885) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword/MySword module.
Haydock's Catholic Bible Commentary1859 · Public DomainOn vv4–5If the young men be clean, &c. If this…
If the young men be clean, &c. If this cleanness was required of them that were to eat that bread, which was but a figure of the bread of life which we receive in the blessed sacrament [the Eucharist]; how clean ought Christians be when they approach to our tremendous mysteries? And what reason hath the Church of God to admit none to be her ministers, to consecrate and daily receive this most pure sacrament, but such as devote themselves to a life of perpetual purity. (Challoner) --- Women. God required this on many occasions, Exodus xix. 15. Urgent necessity determined Achimelech to grant the loaves, as our Saviour intimates, though it is probable that he first consulted the Lord, chap. xxii. 16. (Calmet) --- David perhaps went to Nobe on purpose to ask advice. (Menochius) --- We have here an example of a dispensation, and of the distinction between lay, or common, and holy bread. (Worthington)
George Leo Haydock (1774–1849), Haydock's Catholic Family Bible and Commentary, 1859 edition — public domain. Excludes Psalms (Douay-Rheims chapter numbering differs from Protestant) and Deuterocanonical books (Catholic canon only).
Robert Jamieson, A. R. Fausset & David Brown1871 · Public DomainOn vv4–6there is hallowed bread--There would be plenty of bread…
there is hallowed bread--There would be plenty of bread in his house; but there was no time to wait for it. "The hallowed bread" was the old shew-bread, which had been removed the previous day, and which was reserved for the use of the priests alone (Lev 24:9). Before entertaining the idea that this bread could be lawfully given to David and his men, the high priest seems to have consulted the oracle (Sa1 22:10) as to the course to be followed in this emergency. A dispensation to use the hallowed bread was specially granted by God Himself.
Jamieson, Fausset & Brown — Commentary Critical and Explanatory on the Whole Bible (1871) — public domain (CC PDM 1.0). Text via the HelloAO Bible API.
Daniel D. Whedon1874 · Public DomainOn vv4–64. Common bread — Bread not consecrated; such as…
4. Common bread — Bread not consecrated; such as might lawfully be eaten by ordinary persons.
Hallowed bread — That is, the showbread, which it was unlawful for any but the priests to eat. Exo_29:32; Lev_24:9.
Read full note →
If the young men have kept themselves… from women — If they take of the hallowed bread, it is necessary that they should be at least ceremonially clean in the matter here specified. Sexual intercourse made a person unfit for contact with holy things. Exo_19:15; Lev_15:16. Thus the high priest judges that in a case of necessity, the requirements of the law regarding this bread might be set aside. Compare Mat_12:4, and Mar_2:26.
Daniel D. Whedon (gen. ed.), Commentary on the Old and New Testaments (1874–1909) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword module.
The Cambridge Bible for Schools and Colleges1878 · Public DomainOn vv4–64. common] Lit. profane or unholy, i.e. unconsecrated. Vulg.…
4. common] Lit. profane or unholy, i.e. unconsecrated. Vulg. “laicos panes.”
The Cambridge Bible for Schools and Colleges (gen. ed. J. J. S. Perowne; Cambridge University Press, 1878–1918) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword module.
Ellicott's Commentary for English Readers1878 · Public DomainOn vv4–5(4) There is no common bread.—The condition of the…
(4) There is no common bread.—The condition of the priests in these days of Saul was evidently a pitiable one. The terrible massacre related in the next chapter seems not to have excited the wail of indignation and woe which such a wholesale murder of the priests of the living God should naturally have called out from the entire people. They were evidently held in little esteem, and their murder was regarded at the time, not as an awful act of sacrilege, but simply as an act of political vengeance—of punishment for what the king was pleased to style treason. Here the almost destitute condition of the ministers of the principal sanctuary of Israel appears from the quiet answer of the high priest to David, telling him they had positively no bread but the stale bread removed from before “the Presence” in the holy building.
This “hallowed bread,” or shewbread, five loaves of which David petitioned for, consisted of twelve loaves, one for each tribe, which were placed in the Tabernacle fresh every Sabbath Day. The law of Moses was that this bread, being most holy, could only be eaten by the priests in the holy place. It is probable that this regulation had been relaxed, and that the bread was now often being carried away and eaten in the homes of the ministering priests, and on urgent occasions, perhaps, was even given to the “laity,” as in this case, the proviso only being made that the consumers of the bread should be ceremonially pure. Our Saviour, in Mat_12:3, especially uses this example, drawn from the Tabernacle’s honoured customs, to justify a violation of the letter of the law, when its strict observance would stand in the way of the fulfilment of man’s sacred duty to his neighbour.
Read full note →
The natural inference from this incident would be that such a violation of the Mosaic Law was not an uncommon occurrence, as Ahimelech at once gave him the hallowed bread, only making a conditional inquiry about ceremonial purity—a condition which came out so readily that we feel it had often been made before. The Talmud, however, is most anxious that this inference should not be drawn, and points out in the treatise Menachoth, “Meat-offerings” (Seder Kodashim), that this bread was not newly taken out of the sanctuary, but had been removed on some previous day, and that as, after a week’s exposure, it was stale and dry, the priests ate but little of it, and the rest was left. (See Treatise Yoma, 39.) It also points out that had such violation of the Levitical Law been common, so much importance would not have been attached to this incident.
A Bible Commentary for English Readers, edited by Charles John Ellicott (1878–1897) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword module.
The Pulpit Commentary1880 · Public DomainOn vv5–6Vers. 5, 6. About these three days since I…
Vers. 5, 6. About these three days since I came out. This exactly agrees with the time during which David had lain concealed, (1Sa_20:24, 1Sa_20:27, 1Sa_20:35) and explains the hunger under which he was suffering, as he had no doubt taken with him only feed sufficient for his immediate wants, he wishes, however, the high priest to believe that he had been engaged with his men during this time on public business, whereas they had been at home and some of them possibly were unclean. The whole chapter sets David before us in a very humiliating light. Just as some books of Homer are styled "the prowess" of some hero, so this chapter might be called David"s degradation. The determined hatred of Saul seems to have thrown him off his balance, and it was not till he got among the hills of Judah, wherein was the cave of Adullam, that he recovered his serenity. The vessels of the young men. Their scrips, in which they would carry the bread, and their baggage generally. The bread is in a manner common, etc. The word bread is supplied by the translators, to give some sense to this most difficult passage. Literally translated, the two last clauses are, "And the way is profane, although it be sanctified today in the vessel." Among the numerous interpretations of these words the following seems the best: "And though our journey be not connected with a religious object, yet it (the bread) will be kept holy in the vessel (in which it will be carried)." There is no difficulty in supplying bread in the last clause, as the shewbread was the subject of the conversation, and a nominative is constantly supplied by the mind from the principal matter that is occupying the thoughts of the speakers. David"s argument, therefore, is that both his attendants and their wallets were free from legal defilement, and that though their expedition was on some secular business, yet that at all events the bread would be secure from pollution. The shewbread that was taken from before Jehovah. The Talmud ("Menach.," 92, 2) points out that this bread was not newly taken out of the sanctuary, but, as the last clause shows, had been removed on some previous day. As after a week"s exposure it was stale and dry, the priests, we are told, ate but little of it, and the rest was left (see Talmud, "Tract. Yom.," 39, 1). It also points out that, had such violations of the Levitical law been common, so much importance would not have been attached to this incident.
The Pulpit Commentary (1880–1919), ed. H.D.M. Spence-Jones & Joseph S. Exell — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword module.
C. I. Scofield1917 · Public DomainOn v6(See Scofield "Exo 25:30").
shewbread
(See Scofield "Exo 25:30").
The Scofield Reference Bible (1917 edition), notes by C. I. Scofield — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword module.
unfoldingWord translationNotes2017 · CC BY-SA 4.0On v5women have been kept from us
women have been kept from us
This can be translated in active form. AT: "we have kept ourselves from women" (See: Active or Passive)
Read full note →
three days
"3 days" (See: Numbers)
when I set out
"when I begin a journey"
The things belonging to the men have been set apart
This can be translated in active form. AT: "The men have set what belongs to them apart" (See: Active or Passive)
How much more today will what they have be set apart
This is a statement, not a question. It can be translated in active form. AT: "It is especially true today that they will set apart what they have" (See: Active or Passive)
the bread that was set apart
This can be translated in active form. AT: "the bread that the priests had set apart" (See: Active or Passive)
which was removed from before Yahweh, in order to put
This can be translated in active form. AT: "which the priests had removed from before Yahweh so that they could put" (See: Active or Passive)
Tyndale Open Study Notes2022 · CC BY-SA 4.0On vv4, 621:4 Only priests were permitted to partake of holy…
21:4 Only priests were permitted to partake of holy bread (see Exod 25:22-30; Lev 24:5-9), and only within the sacred precincts. • slept with any women: The consecrated bread was to be eaten only by the ritually pure, so the priest verified that David’s men were free from ritual impurity caused by sexual activity (see Lev 15:16-18). Typically, such bread would not be available for consumption by laity. The priest made an exception in this case probably because he sensed the men’s physical needs and he believed they were on a royal mission.
Geneva Bible translators 1599 · Public Domain On vv4–5 If they have not accompanied with their wives.
If they have not accompanied with their wives.
Geneva Bible (1599) marginal notes — public domain.
John Trapp 1656 · Public Domain On vv4–5 1Sa 21:4 And the priest answered David, and said,…
1Sa 21:4 And the priest answered David, and said, [There is] no common bread under mine hand, but there is hallowed bread; if the young men have kept themselves at least from women.
Ver. 4. There is no common bread under mine hand.] He kept house at Anathoth, where doubtless he had common bread; but David’s haste called for present supply.
Read full note →
If the young men have kept themselves at least from women.] From companying with their wives; which, though lawful enough, {Heb 13:4} yet through men’s corruption, it sometimes is not without sin; and some legal uncleanness was contracted by it. See Lev 15:18 Exo 19:15. Howbeit this was not a sufficient impediment to David and his followers in this necessity: and therefore Jerome saith that this was a ridiculous and preposterous objection.
John Trapp, A Commentary or Exposition upon All the Books of the Old and New Testament (1647–1656) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword module.
Matthew Poole 1685 · Public Domain On vv4–6 Under mine hand, to wit, here in the tabernacle;…
Under mine hand, to wit, here in the tabernacle; though doubtless he had enough of that and of other provisions in his house; but David was in great haste, and in fear of Doeg, whom he saw and knew there, 1Sa 22:22, and therefore would not stay till any thing could be fetched thence.
Hallowed bread; the shew-bread, which was appropriated to the priests; of which see Exo 25:30; Lev 24:5.
Read full note →
At least from women; either from uncleanness by women, which might be divers ways contracted; or from conjugal converse with their wives; which though it did not defile them, yet he thought might debar them from the participation of such very sacred things; which he gathered by the analogy of that precept, Exo 19:15. There was a double impediment to the giving of this bread to them:
1. Its sacredness in itself; which the priest implies, and David answers, 1Sa 21:5, and the priest was satisfied therein by David’s extraordinary occasions and great necessities.
2. The purity and abstinence from all women, which he supposeth should be in those that use it; concerning which he now inquires. And though he mention this only concerning David’s young men, and out of modesty and reverence to David forbears to name him; yet he is also included in the number, as David’s answer shows.
Matthew Poole's English Annotations on the Holy Bible (1683–1685) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword/MySword module.
John Gill 1763 · Public Domain On vv4–6 And the priest answered David, and said, there is…
And the priest answered David, and said, there is no common bread under mine hand,.... In the tabernacle, though he might have such in his own house; which was common for any man to eat of, even such as were not priests; but he had none there, and David was in haste to be gone because of Doeg, and could not stay till such was fetched:
but there is hallowed bread; such as was devoted to sacred use. Kimchi's father thinks this was the bread of the thank offering, to which Ben Gersom inclines; otherwise the Jewish writers in general understand it of the shewbread; and it is clear it was that from Sa1 21:6 and from what our Lord says, Mat 12:4. Now this the priest had under his hand, being just taken off of the shewbread table, and was the perquisite of the priests; and which, though it was not lawful for any but priests to eat of, yet in this case of necessity he seemed willing to give it to David and his men, on this condition: if the young men have kept themselves at least from women; from their wives or others, and from any pollution by them, in any way or manner; but as this was also only of a ceremonial kind, it might as well have been dispensed with, had this been the case, as the other.
John Gill's Exposition of the Whole Bible (1746–1763) — public domain (CC PDM 1.0). Text via the HelloAO Bible API.
John Wesley 1765 · Public Domain On vv4–5 There is, &c. - Here in the tabernacle: though…
There is, &c. - Here in the tabernacle: though doubtless he had other provisions is his house; but David was in great haste, and in fear of Doeg whom he saw, and knew and therefore would not stay 'till any thing could be fetched thence. There was a double impediment to the giving this bread to them;
1. Its sacredness in itself; which the priest implies, and David answers ver. 5, and the priest was satisfied therein by David's great necessities.
Read full note →
2. The abstinence from all women, which he supposed should be in those that use it; concerning which he now inquires. And though he mentions this only concerning David's young men, and out of reverence forbears to name him; yet he is also included in the number, as David's answer shews.
John Wesley, Explanatory Notes Upon the Whole Bible (1754–1765) — public domain. Text via the GEBible commentary corpus.
Adam Clarke 1810 · Public Domain On v6 Verse 6. So the priest gave him hallowed bread]…
Verse 6. So the priest gave him hallowed bread] To this history our Lord alludes, Mr 2:25, in order to show that in cases of absolute necessity a breach of the ritual law was no sin. It was lawful for the priests only to eat the shew-bread; but David and his companions were starving, no other bread could be had at the time, and therefore he and his companions ate of it without sin.
Adam Clarke's Commentary on the Bible (1810–1826) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword/MySword module.
Joseph Benson 1811 · Public Domain On v5 1Sa 21:5. About these three days — As long…
1Sa 21:5. About these three days — As long as the law required, Exo 19:15. And so long, it seems, David and his men had hid themselves for fear of Saul, whereby they were kept both from their wives and from food convenient for them. The vessels of the young men are holy — That Isaiah , 1 st, Either their garments, or other utensils for their journey; or, 2d, Their bodies. The bread (Hebrew, והוא, vehu, and this) is in a manner common — That is, the bread which had been taken away from before the Lord, to make room for new bread to be placed there. For though, for a season, while it stood before the Lord, it was so holy that the priest himself might not eat it; yet afterward it was eaten by the priest and his whole family, and David pleads that it might be eaten by him and his young men in their necessitous circumstances. Yea, though it were sanctified this day in the vessel — This translation renders the passage obscure. The Hebrew may be translated, as by Le Clerc and in some other versions, Furthermore, or, forasmuch as it (namely, bread) is sanctified this day in the vessel; that is, there was new bread sanctified to be set before the Lord; and therefore this, which had been taken away from before him, was, in some degree, become common. For the law ordained, (Lev 24:8-9,) that the show, or hallowed bread, should be removed every sabbath day from the table before the Lord, and fresh set on.
Joseph Benson's Commentary on the Old and New Testaments (1811–1818) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword module.
Albert Barnes 1834 · Public Domain On vv4–5 Common - As opposed to holy. (See the marginal…
Common - As opposed to holy. (See the marginal references, and compare the use of the word in Act 10:14-15, Act 10:28.) It gives an idea of the depressed and poor condition of the priesthood at that time, that Ahimelech should have had no bread at hand except the showbread.
Albert Barnes' Notes on the Bible (1834–1885) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword/MySword module.
Haydock's Catholic Bible Commentary 1859 · Public Domain On vv4–5 If the young men be clean, &c. If this…
If the young men be clean, &c. If this cleanness was required of them that were to eat that bread, which was but a figure of the bread of life which we receive in the blessed sacrament [the Eucharist]; how clean ought Christians be when they approach to our tremendous mysteries? And what reason hath the Church of God to admit none to be her ministers, to consecrate and daily receive this most pure sacrament, but such as devote themselves to a life of perpetual purity. (Challoner) --- Women. God required this on many occasions, Exodus xix. 15. Urgent necessity determined Achimelech to grant the loaves, as our Saviour intimates, though it is probable that he first consulted the Lord, chap. xxii. 16. (Calmet) --- David perhaps went to Nobe on purpose to ask advice. (Menochius) --- We have here an example of a dispensation, and of the distinction between lay, or common, and holy bread. (Worthington)
George Leo Haydock (1774–1849), Haydock's Catholic Family Bible and Commentary, 1859 edition — public domain. Excludes Psalms (Douay-Rheims chapter numbering differs from Protestant) and Deuterocanonical books (Catholic canon only).
Robert Jamieson, A. R. Fausset & David Brown 1871 · Public Domain On vv4–6 there is hallowed bread--There would be plenty of bread…
there is hallowed bread--There would be plenty of bread in his house; but there was no time to wait for it. "The hallowed bread" was the old shew-bread, which had been removed the previous day, and which was reserved for the use of the priests alone (Lev 24:9). Before entertaining the idea that this bread could be lawfully given to David and his men, the high priest seems to have consulted the oracle (Sa1 22:10) as to the course to be followed in this emergency. A dispensation to use the hallowed bread was specially granted by God Himself.
Jamieson, Fausset & Brown — Commentary Critical and Explanatory on the Whole Bible (1871) — public domain (CC PDM 1.0). Text via the HelloAO Bible API.
Daniel D. Whedon 1874 · Public Domain On vv4–6 4. Common bread — Bread not consecrated; such as…
4. Common bread — Bread not consecrated; such as might lawfully be eaten by ordinary persons.
Hallowed bread — That is, the showbread, which it was unlawful for any but the priests to eat. Exo_29:32; Lev_24:9.
Read full note →
If the young men have kept themselves… from women — If they take of the hallowed bread, it is necessary that they should be at least ceremonially clean in the matter here specified. Sexual intercourse made a person unfit for contact with holy things. Exo_19:15; Lev_15:16. Thus the high priest judges that in a case of necessity, the requirements of the law regarding this bread might be set aside. Compare Mat_12:4, and Mar_2:26.
Daniel D. Whedon (gen. ed.), Commentary on the Old and New Testaments (1874–1909) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword module.
The Cambridge Bible for Schools and Colleges 1878 · Public Domain On vv4–6 4. common] Lit. profane or unholy, i.e. unconsecrated. Vulg.…
4. common] Lit. profane or unholy, i.e. unconsecrated. Vulg. “laicos panes.”
The Cambridge Bible for Schools and Colleges (gen. ed. J. J. S. Perowne; Cambridge University Press, 1878–1918) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword module.
Ellicott's Commentary for English Readers 1878 · Public Domain On vv4–5 (4) There is no common bread.—The condition of the…
(4) There is no common bread.—The condition of the priests in these days of Saul was evidently a pitiable one. The terrible massacre related in the next chapter seems not to have excited the wail of indignation and woe which such a wholesale murder of the priests of the living God should naturally have called out from the entire people. They were evidently held in little esteem, and their murder was regarded at the time, not as an awful act of sacrilege, but simply as an act of political vengeance—of punishment for what the king was pleased to style treason. Here the almost destitute condition of the ministers of the principal sanctuary of Israel appears from the quiet answer of the high priest to David, telling him they had positively no bread but the stale bread removed from before “the Presence” in the holy building.
This “hallowed bread,” or shewbread, five loaves of which David petitioned for, consisted of twelve loaves, one for each tribe, which were placed in the Tabernacle fresh every Sabbath Day. The law of Moses was that this bread, being most holy, could only be eaten by the priests in the holy place. It is probable that this regulation had been relaxed, and that the bread was now often being carried away and eaten in the homes of the ministering priests, and on urgent occasions, perhaps, was even given to the “laity,” as in this case, the proviso only being made that the consumers of the bread should be ceremonially pure. Our Saviour, in Mat_12:3, especially uses this example, drawn from the Tabernacle’s honoured customs, to justify a violation of the letter of the law, when its strict observance would stand in the way of the fulfilment of man’s sacred duty to his neighbour.
Read full note →
The natural inference from this incident would be that such a violation of the Mosaic Law was not an uncommon occurrence, as Ahimelech at once gave him the hallowed bread, only making a conditional inquiry about ceremonial purity—a condition which came out so readily that we feel it had often been made before. The Talmud, however, is most anxious that this inference should not be drawn, and points out in the treatise Menachoth, “Meat-offerings” (Seder Kodashim), that this bread was not newly taken out of the sanctuary, but had been removed on some previous day, and that as, after a week’s exposure, it was stale and dry, the priests ate but little of it, and the rest was left. (See Treatise Yoma, 39.) It also points out that had such violation of the Levitical Law been common, so much importance would not have been attached to this incident.
A Bible Commentary for English Readers, edited by Charles John Ellicott (1878–1897) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword module.
The Pulpit Commentary 1880 · Public Domain On vv5–6 Vers. 5, 6. About these three days since I…
Vers. 5, 6. About these three days since I came out. This exactly agrees with the time during which David had lain concealed, (1Sa_20:24, 1Sa_20:27, 1Sa_20:35) and explains the hunger under which he was suffering, as he had no doubt taken with him only feed sufficient for his immediate wants, he wishes, however, the high priest to believe that he had been engaged with his men during this time on public business, whereas they had been at home and some of them possibly were unclean. The whole chapter sets David before us in a very humiliating light. Just as some books of Homer are styled "the prowess" of some hero, so this chapter might be called David"s degradation. The determined hatred of Saul seems to have thrown him off his balance, and it was not till he got among the hills of Judah, wherein was the cave of Adullam, that he recovered his serenity. The vessels of the young men. Their scrips, in which they would carry the bread, and their baggage generally. The bread is in a manner common, etc. The word bread is supplied by the translators, to give some sense to this most difficult passage. Literally translated, the two last clauses are, "And the way is profane, although it be sanctified today in the vessel." Among the numerous interpretations of these words the following seems the best: "And though our journey be not connected with a religious object, yet it (the bread) will be kept holy in the vessel (in which it will be carried)." There is no difficulty in supplying bread in the last clause, as the shewbread was the subject of the conversation, and a nominative is constantly supplied by the mind from the principal matter that is occupying the thoughts of the speakers. David"s argument, therefore, is that both his attendants and their wallets were free from legal defilement, and that though their expedition was on some secular business, yet that at all events the bread would be secure from pollution. The shewbread that was taken from before Jehovah. The Talmud ("Menach.," 92, 2) points out that this bread was not newly taken out of the sanctuary, but, as the last clause shows, had been removed on some previous day. As after a week"s exposure it was stale and dry, the priests, we are told, ate but little of it, and the rest was left (see Talmud, "Tract. Yom.," 39, 1). It also points out that, had such violations of the Levitical law been common, so much importance would not have been attached to this incident.
The Pulpit Commentary (1880–1919), ed. H.D.M. Spence-Jones & Joseph S. Exell — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword module.
C. I. Scofield 1917 · Public Domain On v6 (See Scofield "Exo 25:30").
shewbread
(See Scofield "Exo 25:30").
The Scofield Reference Bible (1917 edition), notes by C. I. Scofield — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword module.
unfoldingWord translationNotes 2017 · CC BY-SA 4.0 On v5 women have been kept from us
women have been kept from us
This can be translated in active form. AT: "we have kept ourselves from women" (See: Active or Passive)
Read full note →
three days
"3 days" (See: Numbers)
when I set out
"when I begin a journey"
The things belonging to the men have been set apart
This can be translated in active form. AT: "The men have set what belongs to them apart" (See: Active or Passive)
How much more today will what they have be set apart
This is a statement, not a question. It can be translated in active form. AT: "It is especially true today that they will set apart what they have" (See: Active or Passive)
the bread that was set apart
This can be translated in active form. AT: "the bread that the priests had set apart" (See: Active or Passive)
which was removed from before Yahweh, in order to put
This can be translated in active form. AT: "which the priests had removed from before Yahweh so that they could put" (See: Active or Passive)
translationWords
David
priest
bread
Yahweh
unfoldingWord translationNotes — © Distant Shores Media and the Door43 World Missions Community, licensed CC BY-SA 4.0. Source: git.door43.org/Door43/en_tn.
Tyndale Open Study Notes 2022 · CC BY-SA 4.0 On vv4, 6 21:4 Only priests were permitted to partake of holy…
21:4 Only priests were permitted to partake of holy bread (see Exod 25:22-30; Lev 24:5-9), and only within the sacred precincts. • slept with any women: The consecrated bread was to be eaten only by the ritually pure, so the priest verified that David’s men were free from ritual impurity caused by sexual activity (see Lev 15:16-18). Typically, such bread would not be available for consumption by laity. The priest made an exception in this case probably because he sensed the men’s physical needs and he believed they were on a royal mission.
Tyndale Open Study Notes — © Tyndale Open Resources, licensed CC BY-SA 4.0. Text via the HelloAO Bible API.