Never Right to Do Wrong

Reflections on 1 Sam. 21:1-9

When I was a child, I remember vainly trying to explain to Dad why I had done something he had forbidden. No matter how I justified what I had done, my fate was always sealed by his concluding statement, “It is never right to do wrong.” DAVID’S UNLAWFUL ACT. On this occasion, David had been fleeing from Saul and was hungry. He asked Ahimelech the priest for some food, but the priest had only the consecrated bread which had just been replaced in the tabernacle (cf. Lev. 24:8-9). The priests ate this bread, but people outside of the priest’s family, including guests, were forbidden to eat it (Lev. 22:10-16). Nevertheless, after some hesitation, the priest gave some of this bread to David and his companions to eat. When Jesus referred to this incident (Matt. 12:4), He said that David “ate the bread of the Presence, which it was not lawful for him to eat nor for those who were with him, but only for the priests.”

THE UNLAWFUL ACT NOT CONDEMNED. Jesus was defending his apostles against the charge of breaking the Sabbath when he cited David’s act. His point was that though David did what was unlawful, he was innocent just as the priests who desecrated the Sabbath by working in the temple on that day were innocent. He concluded his defense of the apostles with these words: “If you had known what this means, ‘I desire mercy, and not sacrifice,’ you would not have condemned the guiltless” (Matt. 12:7 ESV). Even while asserting that what David did was “not lawful,” Jesus pointed out that David remained guiltless.

TRUE TO THE LAW’S INTENT. So why was David considered innocent? The debate Jesus had with the Jewish leaders over the Sabbath provides an answer. The Sabbath rest was God’s provision of mercy to his people, and they were to grant that same mercy to their servants and animals (Deut. 5:12-15). Accordingly, a man could rescue his sheep from a pit on the Sabbath, though he could not tend flocks on the Sabbath because by so doing he was showing mercy to his sheep (Matt. 12:11). Failure to rescue the sheep for fear of breaking the law would show a fundamental misunderstanding of the law. Similarly, the priests made intercession for the people on the Sabbath, and in so doing “profaned” the Sabbath, but they were considered guiltless (Matt. 12:5) because the Sabbath law was never intended to interfere with the greater purpose of the Law, which was to reconcile people to God.

NEED FOR RIGHT JUDGMENT. Jesus cited another example: “Moses gave you circumcision (not that it is from Moses, but from the fathers), and you circumcise a man on the Sabbath. If on the Sabbath a man receives circumcision, so that the law of Moses may not be broken, are you angry with me because on the Sabbath I made a man’s whole body well? Do not judge by appearances, but judge with right judgment” (John 7:22-24 ESV). Jesus affirmed that God does not condemn what appears “unlawful” when it is in obedience to the primary intent of the law as a whole. Thus, Jesus affirmed that it was lawful to do good on the Sabbath (Matt. 12:12). Strangely, the Jewish leaders forgot that the Sabbath law was inseparable from God’s overall desire that compassion be shown to others (Mark 2:27; Deut. 5:12-15).

DANGERS OF IMPROPER JUDGMENT. Some will argue that to justify the “unlawful” opens the door to excuse all kinds of sin. Unfortunately, many have used such arguments to justify the selfish desires of their own deceitful hearts. Nevertheless, we must recognize that to ignore the teaching of Jesus promotes a sterile, Pharisaic, religion that closes our eyes to the problems of real people in a lost world. If a child is sick, we could insist that mothers leave the child at home alone so that she might not forsake the assembling of the saints, but better judgment would say that she should show compassion to the child. If there is an automobile accident, we could insist that a passing motorist continue his journey uninterrupted lest he miss the appointed time to meet at the Lord’s Table, but better judgment would say that the motorist should assist the injured. In neither case does better judgment intend to avoid responsibilities toward God. Rather, it always acts with the intention to fulfilling those responsibilities. To make improper judgment and neglect the ill or injured would violate the law of God at a fundamental level.

THE CASE OF THE CONSECRATED BREAD. Now, back to Ahimelech and David. David had asked Ahimelech for food, but the only food the priest had was the consecrated bread reserved for priests. (Perhaps God’s law was intended to guarantee support for the priests who had no inheritance in Israel.) So the question became, “Does the law concerning consecrated bread prevent a priest from showing mercy to the hungry?” Ahimelech evidently struggled with the question because he was concerned that the bread not be treated with contempt, but he decided in favor of showing mercy. Accordingly, neither Ahimelech nor David were condemned for this decision.

So, is it ever right to do wrong? No, it is never right to do wrong. Furthermore, it is never wrong to do right. Jesus said it this way before healing a man on the Sabbath: “It is lawful to do good on the Sabbath” (Matt. 12:12).