how he entered into God’s house, and took and ate the show bread, and gave also to those who were with him, which is not lawful to eat except for the priests alone?”
Parallel Translations
-
how he entered into God’s house, and took and ate the show bread, and gave also to those who were with him, which is not lawful to eat except for the priests alone?”
-
how he went into the housse of God and toke and ate the loves of halowed breed and gave also to them which were with him: which was not laufull to eate but for the prestes only.
-
Howe he went into the house of God, and tooke, and ate the shewbread, and gaue also to them which were with him, which was not lawful to eate, but for the Priests onely?
Examined in Scripture Analysis
Contradictions (1)
Questions where the Bible appears to say two different things, with the passages on each side set together.
Cross-references (1)
Passages linked to Luke 6:4 in the Treasury of Scripture Knowledge, ordered by reader-vote popularity; verse text shown in World English Bible.
- Leviticus 24:5-9 “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 on a row, on the pure gold table before Yahweh. You shall put pure frankincense on each row, that it may be to the bread for a memorial, even an offering made by fire to Yahweh. Every Sabbath day he shall set it in order before Yahweh continually. It is an everlasting covenant on the behalf of the children of Israel. 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 by a perpetual statute.”
Cross-references from openbible.info (CC BY 4.0)
Explain this verse (6 sources)
Historical commentary, presented as a primary source — not an endorsement.
Private notes
Saved on this device only — never synced or sent anywhere.
John Trapp 1656 · Public Domain 4 How he went into the house of God,…
4 How he went into the house of God, and did take and eat the shewbread, and gave also to them that were with him; which it is not lawful to eat but for the priests alone?
Ver. 4. See Mat 12:3-4 Mar 2:24.
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.
John Wesley 1765 · Public Domain 1 Sam. xxi, 6.
1 Sam. xxi, 6.
John Wesley, Explanatory Notes Upon the Whole Bible (1754–1765) — public domain. Text via the GEBible commentary corpus.
Adam Clarke 1810 · Public Domain Verse 4. After this verse, the Codex Bezae and…
Verse 4. After this verse, the Codex Bezae and two ancient MSS. quoted by Wechel, have the following extraordinary addition:
Τῃ αυτῃ ἡμερᾳ θεασαμενος τινα εργαζομενον τῳ σαββατῳ, ειπεν αυτῳ, Ανθρωπε, ει μεν οιδας τι ποιεις μακαριος ει; ει δε μη οιδας επικαταρατος, και παραβατης ειτου νομου.
Read full note →
On the same day, seeing one working on the Sabbath, he said unto him, Man, if indeed thou knowest what thou dost, blessed art thou; but if thou knowest not, thou art cursed, and art a transgressor of the law. Whence this strange addition proceeded, it is hard to tell. The meaning seems to be this: If thou now workest on the Jewish Sabbath, from a conviction that that Sabbath is abolished, and a new one instituted in its place, then happy art thou, for thou hast got Divine instruction in the nature of the Messiah's kingdom; but if thou doest this through a contempt for the law of God, then thou art accursed, forasmuch as thou art a transgressor of the law. The Itala version of the Codex Bezae, for παραβατης, transgressor, has this semi-barbaric word, trabaricator.
Adam Clarke's Commentary on the Bible (1810–1826) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword/MySword module.
Daniel D. Whedon 1874 · Public Domain 4. How—After this verse two or three ancient manuscripts…
4. How—After this verse two or three ancient manuscripts have a remarkable addition in the following words: “On the same day, seeing one working on the Sabbath, He said unto him, Man, if indeed thou knowest what thou dost, blessed art thou; but if thou knowest not, thou art accursed and a transgressor of the law.”
By this anecdote Jesus is made to assume that under his dispensation the Sabbath is abolished. If the man does not know this abolishment, and so is purposing to violate the Sabbath, he is, in heart and will, a transgressor. If, however, he knows what he is doing, namely, working under a dispensation without a sabbath, he is then a Christian, and works in accordance with conscience, right, and law. But as no such assumption of the abolition of the Sabbath is founded on any thing that Jesus ever taught, we hold the passage as not containing a genuine saying of Jesus.
Read full note →
(1.) We have said in our introduction to this volume, p. 6, that very few traces exist of our Lord’s sayings outside of our canonical gospels. Mr. Westcott, in his Introduction to the New Testament, pp. 445-453, has made a collection of all such sayings and doings to be found either in the canonical epistles or in the early Christian writers. The entire number, including those that appear to be variations of gospel passages, is thirty two. Very few of these could be accepted as genuine. The only one incontestably genuine is found in Act_20:35.
(2.) In regard to this present passage we fully agree with Grotius (against Van Oosterzee) that it was “interpolated by some Marcionite.”
Marcion was a so-called heretic, living near the close of the apostolic day. He was an anti-Judaic ultraist, who not only, with St. Paul, rejected the necessity of keeping the Mosaic law for salvation, but even contemned not only the Mosaic law, but the God of the Old Testament, as an evil being. The Ebionites and Marcionites were opposite extremes. (See note on Luk_6:20.)
Marcion accepted the Gospel of Luke, (being the most Gentile of the four,) but mutilated it to suit his own purposes. (See note on Mat_5:17.) Now the assumption that the Sabbath is abrogated under the New Testament is not only unsustainable and false, but; as being a repudiation of the law, even during the life of Jesus, and by Jesus, is truly Marcionite in its character. And being an interpolation, we believe Grotius was right in saying, “I think it was inserted by some Marcionite.”
But the passage, though spurious, strikingly illustrates how rectitude depends upon the interior motive, view, or purpose. If the man knew not the sabbath law to have been abolished, it was his purpose to break the law; and of that intentional transgression he was guilty. The law existed for him. Whatever is not of faith is sin.
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 4. did take and eat] St Mark says that…
4. did take and eat] St Mark says that this was “in the days of Abiathar the high priest.” The priest who actually gave the bread to David was Ahimelech, the father of Abiathar.
the shewbread] Literally, ‘loaves of setting forth;’ “continual bread,” Num_4:7. “Bread of the Face,” i.e. set before the Presence of God, Lev_24:6-7. Comp. “Angel of the Face” Lev_24:6-8; Exo_25:30; Exo_29:33. They were twelve unleavened, loaves sprinkled with frankincense set on a little golden table.
Read full note →
which it is not lawful to eat but for the priests alone] “It shall be Aaron’s and his sons: and they shall eat it in the holy place: for it is most holy unto him,” Lev_24:9. Thus David, their favourite saint and hero, had openly and fearlessly violated the letter of the Law with the full sanction of the High Priest, on the plea of necessity,—in other words because mercy is better than sacrifice; and because the higher law of moral obligation must always supersede the lower law of ceremonial. This was a proof by way of fact from the Kethubim or sacred books (Hagiographa); in St Matthew our Lord adds a still more striking argument by way of principle from the Law itself. By its own provisions the Priests in the laborious work of offering sacrifices violated the Sabbath and yet were blameless. Hence the later Jews deduced the remarkable rule that “there is no sabbatism in the Temple,” (Num_28:9). And Jesus added “But I say to you there is something greater (μεῖζον) than the Temple here.” The appeal to their own practice is given in Luk_14:5.
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.
C. I. Scofield 1917 · Public Domain (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.