And, behold, there was a man which had his hand withered. And they asked him, saying, Is it lawful to heal on the sabbath days? that they might accuse him.

and behold, a man having a withered hand. And they asked him, saying, Is it lawful to heal on the sabbath day? that they might accuse him.

And behold there was a man who had a withered hand, and they asked him, saying: Is it lawful to heal on the sabbath days? that they might accuse him.

And behold, there was a man having his hand withered. And they asked him, saying, Is it lawful to heal on the sabbath? that they might accuse him.

And behold, there was a man who had his hand withered. And they asked him, saying, Is it lawful to heal on the sabbath? that they might accuse him.

and lo, there was a man having the hand withered, and they questioned him, saying, 'Is it lawful to heal on the sabbaths?' that they might accuse him.

where there was a man with a shrivelled arm. And they questioned Him, "Is it right to cure people on the Sabbath?" Their intention was to bring a charge against Him.

And there was a man with a dead hand. And they put a question to him, saying, Is it right to make a man well on the Sabbath day? so that they might have something against him.

And behold, there was a man who had a withered hand, and they questioned him, so that they might accuse him, saying, "Is it lawful to cure on the Sabbaths?"

and there he saw a man with a withered hand. Some people asked Jesus whether it was allowable to work a cure on the Sabbath – so that they might have a charge to bring against him.

They asked him, saying. Mark and Luke say only that they watched what our Lord would do; but Matthew states more clearly that they also attacked him by words. It is probable, that some others had been previously cured on Sabbath-days; and hence they take occasion to ask if he believes it to be lawful for him to do again what he had formerly done. They ought to have considered whether it was a work of God, or of man, to restore a withered hand by a mere touch, or by a single word. When God appointed the Sabbath, he did not lay down a law for himself, or impose upon himself any restraint from performing operations on the Sabbath, when he saw it to be proper, in the same manner as on other days. It was excessive folly, therefore, to call this in question, and thus to prescribe rules for God himself, and to restrain the freedom of his operations.

The very hairs of your head are all numbered - That is, each one has exercised the care and attention of God.
He has fixed the number; and, though of small importance, yet he does not think it beneath him to determine how few or how many they shall be. He will therefore take care of you.

A man which had his hand withered - Probably through a partial paralysis. The man's hand was withered; but God's mercy had still preserved to him the use of his feet: He uses them to bring him to the public worship of God, and Jesus meets and heals him there. How true is the proverb - It is never so ill with us, but it might be much worse!

And behold, there was a man which had his hand withered,.... Or dry; the juices were dried up, the nerves and sinews contracted, so that it was of no manner of use to him: Luke says, it was his right hand, which was so much the worse; and means not only his hand, but the whole arm. Such a case is mentioned in the Talmud (a), "it happened to one, "wewrz hvbyv, that his arm was dry, or withered. Jerom says (b), in the Gospel which the Nazarenes and Hebionites used, this man is said to be a plasterer, and so might possibly come by his misfortune through his business; and being a man that got his bread by his hand labour, the case was the more affecting. This account is introduced with a "behold!" it being remarkable that such a case should offer so opportunely, of showing his divine power in healing such a disorder; and of his authority, as the Son of man, over the sabbath; and of putting to silence his enemies, the Pharisees: and who, upon seeing such an object, put the following question to him;
and they asked him, saying, is it lawful to heal on the sabbath day? and which was put, not for information sake, as willing to be instructed in this point; for their determinations were, that healing was not lawful on such a day; nor were any means to be made use of for that purpose: if a man received a cure accidentally, it was very well; but no methods were to be taken with intention: as for instance (c);
"if a man had an ailment in his throat, he might not gargle it with oil, but he might swallow a large quantity of oil, "and "if he was healed, he was healed" (i.e. it was very well, it was no breach of the sabbath); they may not chew mastic, nor rub the teeth with spice, on the sabbath day, , "when it is intended "for healing"; but if it is intended for the savour of his mouth, it is free.''
There are several things they allowed might be done on the sabbath; but then they did not reckon them to come under the notion of healing.
"Three (d) things R. Ishmael bar Jose said he had heard from R. Matthia ben Charash; they might let blood for the stranguary on the sabbath day; one that was bit by a mad dog, they might give him hog's liver to eat; and he that had an ailment in his mouth, they might put spice to it on the sabbath day: but the wise men say of these, that there is not in them , anything of medicine.''
Indeed, in case of extreme danger of life they did admit of the use of medicine, by the prescription of a physician (e).
"Danger of life drives away the sabbath; wherefore, if there is any danger in a sick person, it is lawful to kindle a fire for him, &c. and they may kill, and bake, and boil: and though there may be no apparent danger, only a doubt of danger; as when one physician says there is a necessity, and another physician says there is none, they may profane the sabbath for him.''
Hence it is very clear with what view the Pharisees asked Christ this question; and that it was, as the evangelist says, that they might accuse him: either of cruelty and weakness, should he answer in the negative, that either he was not able to heal the poor man before him, or wanted compassion; or should he answer in the affirmative, as they expected, and act upon it, then they might have wherewith to charge him before the sanhedrim as a violator of the sabbath, and of their canons concerning it.
(a) T. Hieros. Yoma, fol. 40. 1. (b) In loc. (c) Maimon. Hilchot Sabbat, c. 21. sect. 24. (d) T. Bab. Yoma, fol. 84. 1. Vid. Misn. Yoma, e. 8. sect. 7. (e) Kotsensis Mitzvot Tora pr. neg. 65. Maimon. in Misn. Sabbat, c. 18. sect. 3.

A man which had his hand withered. That is, dried up from a deficient absorption of the nutriment. Luke says his "right hand." The disease here indicated results in a loss both in size and in power of the arm; for it there is no remedy known to man. Compare Mark 3:1-6 and Luke 6:6-11.
And they asked him. Luke says it was the scribes and Pharisees.
Is it lawful to heal on the Sabbath? In the opinion of the Pharisees, to kindle or extinguish a fire on the Sabbath was a great desecration of the day, nor was even sickness allowed to violate rabbinical rules. It was forbidden to give an emetic on the Sabbath, to set a broken bone, or put back a dislocated joint. Of course, they had added all this to the law of Moses.
That they might accuse him. Not in the conversation merely, but before the local judge, the officers of the synagogue, or the council.