“Have you not read what David did when he and the men with him got hungry?

Matthew 12:3-8.

Christ was referring to the incident when David and his men, fleeing from murderous King Saul, went to High Priest Ahimelech at Nob. David indicated that he was on a secret assignment from the king and asked for bread. “There is no ordinary bread under my hand,” Ahimelech told him, “but there is holy bread; provided that the young men have at least kept themselves from womankind.” He meant the showbread (or, loaves of presentation), consisting of twelve unleavened cakes placed weekly on a table in the Holy of the tabernacle. As fresh cakes were presented each sabbath, the older ones were removed and ‘became Aaron’s and his sons’, to eat in a holy place.’ David explained that his men were ceremonially clean, and he implied that they were in a sense holy, being on a mission from Jehovah’s anointed king. So Ahimelech “gave him what was holy, . . . the showbread that had been removed from before Jehovah.”​—1 Samuel 21:1-6; Leviticus 24:5-9.

In the light of all of this, what about the view that God’s commands can be ignored ‘if life is at stake’? Persons have reasoned: ‘God overlooked David’s breaking a serious command when his life was in danger; also Jesus condoned violating the sabbath and said that you could do good and save a soul on the sabbath.’ (Luke 6:9; Matthew 12:11, 12) Yet, such thinking proves to be deceptive and contrary to the Bible.

For example, this reasoning assumes that you accept the premise that David and Jesus’ disciples were in ‘life or death’ situations. But were they? The Bible does not say that David and his men were on the verge of starving to death because there was no other food to be found. In fact, according to geographical authorities, Nob was just north of the Mount of Olives, within a few miles of Jerusalem and many towns. A direct reading of the account allows for the conclusion that David and his men were basically hungry and seeking a meal from someone whom they trusted. Similarly, the Bible tells us that when Jesus’ disciples “got hungry” on the sabbath they gleaned and ate some grain. They must have eaten on the previous day, and on the day after the sabbath they could buy food in surrounding villages. (John 4:8; Matthew 14:15) So, if an individual wants to use these incidents to show when God’s laws can be broken, he might as well say that at any time people ‘get hungry’ it is all right to violate Jehovah’s commands. Obviously that is not correct.

We still need to know, however, what is the meaning of Matthew 12:1-8. Jesus was exposing the Pharisees’ narrow, legalistic view. We can better appreciate this by giving thought to the object of the sabbath, and by noting carefully Jesus’ explanation.

Why were Israelites not to work on the sabbath? Was the object simply to forbid work? No. It was so that secular pursuits, such as working for food and clothing, would not consume all the people’s time and attention. The sabbath arrangement advanced true worship by assuring that the people would have time for worship without being distracted by normal work. (Exodus 20:8-11; Isaiah 58:13) Jesus encouraged this understanding rather than the narrow view of the Pharisees.

Also, it was technically ‘not lawful for David to eat’ the showbread because the Law said that this was for the priests. Yet Jehovah’s high priest gave it to David. On what basis? The loaves removed from the showbread table were “holy,” not to be treated as ordinary, such as by being given to a common laborer or eaten on a pleasure outing. They were to be used as food for the priests, men engaged in God’s service. So when David came on what apparently was a special mission from God’s anointed king, and the high priest determined that the men were ceremonially clean, it was not wrong to share the showbread. That was in accord with the basic use that God designated for it.