Chinese Simplified CUNPSS Script Union (新标点和合本, 神版)
耶稣对他们说：「 经上记着 大卫 和跟从他的人饥饿之时所做的事，连这个你们也没有念过吗？
这是什么意思？
In this verse from Luke 6:3, Jesus is speaking to some people who criticized him and his followers for picking grain on the Sabbath. He asks if they haven't read about how David took bread meant only for priests when he was hungry.
儿童解释
Imagine you're really hungry and there's a snack that someone says isn’t for kids, but it’s all you have to eat. Jesus is saying sometimes rules can be bent if the situation calls for it, just like in a story about David from long ago.
历史背景
This passage was written by Luke, an early Christian historian and physician, around 60-80 AD. He wrote to a primarily Greek-speaking audience familiar with Jewish customs but also interested in understanding Jesus’ teachings within their broader historical context.
今日应用
Imagine you're working on a project that's due at midnight. You’re trying to finish up when your boss calls it an emergency and asks for immediate help. This verse shows how sometimes, the rules can be set aside if there’s a compelling need or circumstance.
主题
faithrulescompassionnecessitySabbath lawsDavid's story
Jesus uses this example from the Old Testament where David took food meant for priests because he was hungry. He argues that in certain situations, the spirit of the law can be more important than a strict interpretation.
What is the point Jesus is making to his critics?
Jesus is defending his followers who were picking grain on the Sabbath. By referring to David's situation, he argues that in urgent circumstances, the rigid application of rules can be set aside for compassion and necessity.
How does this relate to our modern understanding of rules?
This verse teaches us that while we should respect rules, there are times when flexibility is necessary. It encourages us to consider the spirit behind the rule rather than just following it blindly.
Why might Jesus have chosen David as an example?
David was a respected figure in Jewish history. By using his story, Jesus appeals to a familiar narrative to support his argument and demonstrate that breaking rules for necessity is not unprecedented.