Mateo 12:9

Filipino Cebuano Bible

9 Ug sa nakalakaw na siya gikan didto, siya misulod sa ilang sinagoga.

Bible Verse Review
  from Treasury of Scripure Knowledge

he went: Mark 3:1-5, Luke 6:6-11

Reciprocal: Matthew 4:23 - teaching

Gill's Notes on the Bible

And when he was departed thence,.... From the corn fields, where the disciples had plucked the ears of corn, and this conversation passed between Christ and the Pharisees about the violation of the sabbath, he went into their synagogue; not on the same sabbath day, as one might be led to conclude from the account of this evangelist, but on another sabbath, as Luke expresses it, Luke 6:6. He might indeed directly go into one of their synagogues the same day, where he and his disciples seem to have been going, and stay in the city the week following; and then, as it is said in Mark 3:1 he entered again into the synagogue; not being afraid of the Pharisees, who sought an advantage against him; nor deterred by them from doing good to men; and willing to take another opportunity of exposing their ignorance and malice.

Barnes' Notes on the Bible

The account contained in these verses is recorded also in Mark 3:1-5, and Luke 6:6-10.

Matthew 12:10

A man which had his hand withered - This was probably one form of the palsy. See Barnes Mt 4:24.

Mark and Luke have mentioned some circumstances omitted by Matthew. They say that Jesus addressed the man, and told him to stand forth in the midst. He then addressed the people. He asked them if it was lawful to do good on the Sabbath day? This was admitted by all their teachers, and it could not be denied. They were therefore silent. He then appealed to them, and drew an argument from their own conduct. A man that had a sheep that should fall into a pit on the Sabbath day would exercise the common offices of humanity, and draw it out. If a man would save the life of a sheep, was it not proper to save the life of a man ? By a reference to their own conduct, he silenced them. Mark adds, that he looked on them with anger; that is, with strong disapprobation of their conduct. Their envy and malignity excited feelings of holy indignation. See Barnes Mr 3:5.

Matthew 12:12

How much, then, is a man better than a sheep? - Of more consequence or value.

If you would show an act of kindness to a brute beast on the Sabbath, how much more important is it to evince similar kindness to one made in the image of God!

It is lawful to do well on the Sabbath days - This was universally allowed by the Jews in the abstract; and Jesus only showed them that the principle on which they acted in other things applied with more force to the case before him, and that the act which he was about to perform was, by their own confession, lawful.

Matthew 12:13

Then saith he to the man, Stretch forth thine hand - This was a remarkable commandment.

The man might have said that he had no strength - that it was a thing which he could not do. Yet, “being commanded,” it was his duty to obey. He did so, and was healed. So the sinner. It is his duty to obey whatever God commands. He will give strength to those who endeavor to do his will. It is not right to plead, when God commands us to do a thing, that we have no strength. He will give us strength, if there is a disposition to obey. At the same time, however, this passage should not be applied to the sinner as if it proved that he has no more strength or ability than the man who had the withered hand. It proves no such thing: it has no reference to any such case. It may be used to prove that man should instantly obey the commands of God, without pausing to examine the question about his ability, and especially without saying “that he can do nothing.” What would the Saviour have said to this man if he had objected that he could not stretch out his hand?

It was restored whole - Christ had before claimed divine authority and power Matthew 12:6-9, he now showed that he possessed it. By his “own power” he healed him, thus evincing by a miracle that his claim of being Lord of the Sabbath was well founded.

These two cases determine what may be done on the Sabbath. The one was a case of “necessity,” the other of “mercy.” The example of the Saviour, and his explanations, show that these are a part of the proper duties of that holy day. Beyond an “honest” and “conscientious” discharge of these two duties, people may not devote the Sabbath to any secular purpose. If they do, they do it at their peril. They go beyond what His authority authorizes them to do. They do what he claimed the special right of doing, as being Lord of the Sabbath. They usurp His place, and act and legislate where God only has a right to act land legislate. People may as well trample down any other law of the Bible as that respecting the Sabbath.