A Review of the Rationale for Jesus’ Use of David’s Example in Matthew 12: 3-4 in Contemporary Scholarly Debate
John Appiah and Daniel Berchie
Issue: Vol.9 No.7 July 2023 Issue Article 3 pp. 281-287
DOI : https://doi.org/10.38159/erats.2023973 | Published online 3rd July 2023.
© 2023 The Author(s). This is an open access article under the CCBY license (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/).
The rationale for Jesus’ use of David’s story in Matt 12:3-4 has attracted varied views in biblical scholarship. The text records Jesus’ use of David’s example in the first Sabbath conflict in Matthew’s Gospel. This article attempted to sample prominent scholarly views on the Matt 12:3-4. This article adopted a descriptive and evaluative approach to sample views of contemporary scholars in Jesus’ use of David’s example, Matt 12:3-4, in the first Sabbath conflict. The aims were to describe and evaluate contemporary scholarly views on why Jesus used David’s story in Matthew 12:3-4. This article used the descriptive and evaluative qualitative method of research. This article surveyed the literature on the hermeneutical appraisal of David’s example in Matt 12:3-4. It centered on scholarly arguments and appraisal of the rabbinic hermeneutics of Matt 12:1-8. Two prominent views on Jesus’ methodology are identified as: (1) rabbinic hermeneutics and (2) typological hermeneutics. Scholarly arguments centered mainly on the Christological and authority approaches to the text. The authors concluded that the above postulations of scholars do not adequately explains why Jesus used the example of David in answering the Pharisaic query. Hence, a critical look at the text requires a hermeneutical review of the arguments advanced by scholars for these approaches. As such, further study to explore the possible reason why Jesus used David’s example in Matt 12:3-4 would be in order. This research has contributed to scholarship on the Sabbath controversy in Matt 12:1-8.
Keywords: David’s story in Matt 12:3-4, Jesus’ Methodology, Rabbinic Hermeneutics, Typological Hermeneutics, Christology.
Battey, N. Covenant Faithfulness: An Examination of Matthew 12:1-14. Independent Publisher, 2020. https://books.google.com.gh/books?id=pxZ_zQEACAAJ.
Boring, E.M. The Gospel of Matthew. Nashville, TN:Abingdon Press, 1994.
Carson, Donald A. “Matthew. The Expositor’s Bible Commentary.” Grand Rapids: Zondervan (1984).
Cohn-Sherbok, Dan, Stanley E Porter, and Craig A Evans. “An Analysis of Jesus’ Arguments Concerning the Plucking of Grain on the Sabbath.” The Historical Jesus, 1995, 131–39.
Cohon, Samuel S. “The Place of Jesus in the Religious Life of His Day.” Journal of Biblical Literature, 1929, 82–108.
Cosgrove, Charles H. “Case-Precedent in John Chrysostom’s Interpretation of” Plucking Grain on the Sabbath”(Matt 12.1–8).” Journal of Early Christian Studies 30, no. 1 (2022): 59–88.
Daube, David. “Responsibilities of Master and Disciples in the Gospels.” New Testament Studies 19, no. 1 (1972): 1–15.
———. The New Testament and Rabbinic Judaism. Wipf and Stock Publishers, 2011.
Davies, W D, and D C Allison. Matthew: Volume 2: 8-18. Critical and Exegetical Commentary on The Gospel According to Saint Matthew / by W.D. Davies and Dale C. Allison. Bloomsbury Academic, 1999. https://books.google.com.gh/books?id=xj8dHdRZ7msC.
France, R T. Jesus and the Old Testament: His Application of Old Testament Passages to Himself and His Mission. Regent College Publishing, 2000. https://books.google.com.gh/books?id=ElHZj7OyJDoC.
Garland, D E. Reading Matthew: A Literary and Theological Commentary on the First Gospel. Reading the New Testament Series. Smyth & Helwys Pub., 2001. https://books.google.com.gh/books?id=8CKue4eT83gC.
Hagner, D A. Matthew 1-13. Word Biblical Commentary. Word Books, 1993.https://books.google.com.gh/books?id=14ERAQAAIAAJ.
Hare, Douglas R A. Matthew. Westminster John Knox Press, 1993.
Hicks, John Mark. “The Sabbath Controversy in Matthew: An Exegesis of Matthew 12: 1-14.”Restoration Quarterly 27, no. 2 (1984): 79–91.
Hill, David. “On the Use and Meaning of Hosea vi. 6 in Matthew’s Gospel.” New Testament Studies 24, no.1 (1977): 107–19.
King, Linda. “Jesus Argued like a Jew.” Leaven 19, no. 2 (2011): 5.
Meier, J P. Matthew. Michael Glazier Book. Liturgical Press, 1980.https://books.google.com.gh/books?id=G4YYYsn9FW0C.
Moulton, James Hope, Wilbert Francis Howard, and Nigel Turner. A Grammar of New Testament Greek. T. and T. Clark, 1949.
Spencer, F Scott. “Scripture, Hermeneutics, and Matthew’s Jesus.” Interpretation 64, no. 4 (2010):368–78.
Viljoen, Francois P. “Sabbath Controversy in Matthew.” Verbum et Ecclesia 32, no. 1 (2011): 1–8.
Yang, Yong-Eui. Jesus and the Sabbath in Matthew’s Gospel. Vol. 139. A&C Black, 1997.
John Appiah, PhD is is an Associate Professor of New Testament at Valley View University, Oyibi,Accra, Ghana. Email:john.appiah@vvu.edu.gh
Daniel Berchie, PhD is an Associate Professor of New Testament at Valley View University, Oyibi, Accra, Ghana. Email:dberchie@vvu.edu.gh
Appiah, John & Berchie, Daniel, “A Review of the Rationale for Jesus’ Use of David’s Example in Matthew 12: 3-4 in Contemporary Scholarly Debate,” E-Journal of Religious and Theological Studies, 9 no.7 (2023): 281-287. https://doi.org/10.38159/erats.2023973
© 2023 The Author(s). Published and Maintained by Noyam Journals. This is an open access article under the CCBY license (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/).
Featured
Patterning Constitutional Conflicts in the Church of Christ in Zimbabwe
The Hidden Bones Apocalypse: The Marker, Its Message, and their Hiddenness
The Enigmatic Presence of “Evil” in the World and Delivery from It: A Critical Look at Matthew 6:13
The Hidden Bones Apocalypse: The Marker, Its Message, and their Hiddenness
Others
