Did David Sin By Eating The Showbread?

In the books of Samuel, David is introduced as God's anointed one, King of Israel. In 1 Samuel 17, David is described as actively engaging in the Lord's holy war, and his victory over Goliath makes his name well known throughout Israel. The reigning King Saul is initially impressed with young David, but soon becomes jealous of his popularity and tries to kill him. This begins the narrative of David attempting to flee from Saul, while recognising and respecting his persecutor as the rightful King of Israel. In 1 Samuel 21, David and his men come to the Tabernacle seeking food. The only food the priest Ahimelech has to offer is the holy showbread, which was reserved for the priests to eat. However, Ahimelech asks them if they have kept ritually clean by staying away from women, to which David replies that they have. Thus, Ahimelech gives them the showbread.

In the New Testament, Jesus cites the story of David and his men eating the showbread as a precedent for what he and his disciples are doing – plucking and eating grain on the Sabbath. The Pharisees accuse Jesus' disciples of breaking the Law of Moses, to which Jesus responds by asking them if they have read what David did when he was hungry. He points out that David entered the house of God and ate the showbread, which was not lawful for him to eat, but only for the priests. Jesus is making the point that he and his disciples are priests, and thus permitted to do things on the Sabbath that would not be allowed for non-priests. He is establishing a new priesthood, centred around himself and his disciples.

Jesus uses the incident to highlight the Pharisees' hypocrisy

Jesus' main point seems to be that the Pharisees' opinion of David versus their treatment of Jesus, the Son of David, is hypocritical. If the Pharisees justified David in eating the showbread because of the "greater good," then they should have no problem with what Jesus did. If they justified David on the premise that God could have given him special permission, then they should have no problem with Jesus, the Lord of the Sabbath, who had the authority to make exceptions. If they had no problem with David, a flawed man doing something unlawful, then they should have no problem with David's greater Son doing something they did not like but which was legal.

David was on a special assignment from King Saul

Saul, Israel's first king, failed to reach a decisive victory against an enemy tribe, the Philistines. God sent the Prophet Samuel to Bethlehem and guided him to David, a humble shepherd and talented musician. He brought the young man to Saul's court, where his harp was so soothing that Saul called for David whenever he was vexed by an “evil spirit” sent by God. Saul was so taken with this young man that he appointed David his armour-bearer.

Soon thereafter, a major Philistine battle loomed. This time, the Philistines fielded a fearsome new weapon: a giant named Goliath, carrying a huge bronze spear. The Israelites were frozen in fear—except young David. Armed with only a sling, he picked a stone from a riverbed and slung it at Goliath’s head. David’s aim was true; the stone struck the giant and killed him, prompting the Philistines to flee. The Israelites were jubilant. Saul was compelled to place young David at the head of his army.

Even though David then married Saul’s daughter Michal and became a close friend of Saul’s son Jonathan, an intense rivalry developed between the young new general and the king. Saul even began to plot to kill him. David had little choice but to flee to enemy territory.

Saul was jealous of David's success and popularity, and so he sought to kill him. David was forced to flee for his life, and during this time, he wrote many of his best-known psalms.

David and his men were hungry

Despite this, Ahimelech gave the bread to David and his men, who ate it. This was against the law, as Jesus later confirmed when he referred to this incident in response to the Pharisees' accusation that his disciples had broken the Sabbath by plucking heads of grain on the Sabbath.

Jesus's point was not that it was sometimes okay to break the law, but that he and his disciples, like David and his men, were acting as priests, and therefore permitted to do things on the Sabbath that would not be allowed for non-priests.

David and his men were ceremonially clean

The concept of "clean" and "unclean" is prevalent in the Bible, most often in ceremonial or ritualistic contexts. Ceremonial cleansing was a removal of defilement that resulted in someone or something being declared "pure" in a formal, religious sense. To be ceremonially unclean was to be defiled in some way or to cause defilement in something else.

In the Old Testament Law, animals were either "clean" or "unclean" based on their suitability for sacrifice and for eating. The same was true for places, things, and people.

David and his men were deemed to be ceremonially clean by Ahimelech the priest, a grandson of Eli. Ahimelech gave the bread to David to keep him from starving on his journey. Jesus would later say that this was not a violation of the law. The law was meant to preserve life, not to deny it.

David and his men had "kept themselves from women" (1 Samuel 21:4–5), as sexual relations would have made them ceremonially unclean for the day.

Jesus uses the incident to illustrate the Pharisees' unduly rigid application of the Sabbath law

Jesus uses the incident of David eating the showbread to highlight the Pharisees' hypocritical behaviour and their unduly rigid application of the Sabbath law.

Jesus' disciples were accused of breaking the Sabbath law by plucking heads of grain and eating them as they walked through a field. In response, Jesus cites the incident of David eating the showbread, which was reserved exclusively for the priests. Jesus points out that David broke the law, but he was still considered a great hero by the Pharisees. In contrast, Jesus' disciples were doing something lawful, as they were simply satisfying their hunger and were not harvesting grain.

Jesus uses this example to illustrate the Pharisees' undue rigidity in interpreting and applying the Sabbath law. He argues that the Sabbath was made for the benefit of people, not the other way around. Jesus emphasizes that alleviating human suffering and showing mercy are more important than strict adherence to ritual laws. He also asserts his authority as the Lord of the Sabbath, highlighting that he has the power to make exceptions to the law.

Jesus' main point in this incident is to expose the hypocrisy of the Pharisees, who were more concerned with ritual details than with helping those in need. By comparing the actions of David and his disciples, Jesus highlights the inconsistency and selectiveness of the Pharisees' condemnation.

Frequently asked questions