Bosanquet, C., “The Man after God's Own Heart” (1875).
Brown, C., The Birth of a Nation (1908), 178.
Callaway, C., King David of Israel (1905).
Chandler, S., A Critical History of the Life of David (1853), 236.
Cheyne, T. K., Aids to the Devout Study of Criticism (1892), 16, 43.
Davidson, A. B., Waiting upon God (1904), 55.
Dods, M., Why be a Christian? (1896), 38.
Fleming, J. D., Israel's Golden Age (1907), 112.
Foakes-Jackson, F. J., The Biblical History of the Hebrews (1903), 186.
Kent, C. F., The Founders and Rulers of United Israel (1909), 180.
Kingsley, C., David: Four Sermons (1865).
Kittel, R., A History of the Hebrews, ii. (1896) 138.
Krummacher, F. W., David, the King of Israel.
Lewis, H. E., in Men of the Old Testament: Cain to David (1904), 287.
Liddon, H. P., Sermons on the Old Testament (1891), 124.
Little, W. J. K., David, the Hero-King of Israel (1903).
McClure, J. G. K., Living for the Best (1903), 31.
Matheson, G., The Representative Men of the Bible, i. (1902) 261.
Meyer, F. B., David (1910).
Taylor, W. M., David, King of Israel (1894).
Thomson, P., The Life of David (1881), 87.
Wharton, M. B., Famous Men of the Old Testament (1903), 187.
Whitham, A. R., Old Testament History (1912), 258.
Whyte, A., Bible Characters: Gideon to Absalom (1898), 103.
Williams, I., The Characters of the Old Testament (1870), 183.
The Character of David
The Lord hath sought him a man after his own heart.- 1Sa_13:14.
1. The character of David has been very variously estimated, exaggerated praise naturally producing a revulsion to the opposite extreme. Undue weight has often been attached to the description of David as “a man after God's own heart.” The phrase, which occurs only in 1Sa_13:14 (quoted thence in Act_13:22), may be seen in the original context to denote one according to God's mind or purpose, one who possesses the necessary qualities for a ruler of God's people.
This character has been thought by some writers to denote the highest degree of moral purity, and that therefore it could not, with truth or justice, be ascribed to David, who was certainly guilty of some very great offences, and has been plentifully loaded with others which he was entirely free from. It is evident here that the “man after God's own heart” stands in opposition to the character of Saul, who is described as acting foolishly by breaking the commandment of God by His prophet, and rejected by Him, i.e. deprived of the succession to the crown in his family, on account of his folly, presumption, and disobedience. And it therefore means one who should act prudently, and obey the commandments of God delivered him by His prophets, and whom therefore God would thus far approve and continue to favour. There are therefore two senses which are evidently implied in this character of the man after God's own heart; a man who should faithfully execute the will of God according as he was commanded, and who, on that account and so far, should be the object of His approbation.1 [Note: S. Chandler, A Critical History of the Life of David, 236.]
2. It has been more difficult to do justice to David on account of the different representations found together in the Bible but belonging to very different dates. The picture in Chronicles of a Jewish saint has led many to censure unfairly the warrior king of a rude age. But if a critical examination of our authorities compels us to reject as unhistorical some pious deeds or noble words attributed to David, on the other hand it affords a more trustworthy standard by which to measure David's position among his contemporaries. We may sometimes gain a little, sometimes lose a little, by setting aside the later idealizing additions that have gathered like an aureole round his head; but the main outlines of his character are well defined, and the most faithful scrutiny of the record only serves to bring out more clearly the real excellences of this gifted king.
What a many-coloured career that was which began amidst the pastoral solitudes of Bethlehem, and ended in the chamber where the dying ears heard the blare of the trumpets that announced the accession of Bathsheba's son! None of the great men of Scripture pass through a course of so many changes; none of them touched human life at so many points; none of them were so tempered and polished by swift alternation of heat and cold, by such heavy blows and the friction of such rapid revolutions.1 [Note: A. Maclaren, The Life of David, as Reflected in his Psa_1:1-6; Psa_3:1-8.]
We have pictures of strikingly good men; we have pictures of singularly bad men; we have pictures of men who are half good and half bad. None of these designations will cover David. Measured by a Christian standard, he is no saint. Measured by a heathen standard, he is no sinner. Measured by any standard, he is no mixture-he never exhibits a blending of good and bad. The David of to-day is often a direct contrast to the David of yesterday; but for his face and form we should not recognize him. Yesterday, he had one pure spiritual friendship-the devotion to Jonathan; to-day, he has many sensuous loves. Yesterday, he was modest and retiring; to-day, through vanity, he vaunts the number of his fighting men. Yesterday, he was open and confiding; to-day, he deceives his benefactor Achish. Yesterday, he was chivalrous to his enemies; to-day-if the passage be genuine-he denies forgiveness to his greatest general. Yesterday, he saved the life of Saul, his foe; to-day, he takes the life of Uriah, his friend. David has in his veins the strength of two conflicting streams of heredity; yet his deepest sense is that of his own nothingness. His name has become almost a synonym for the conviction of personal sin. To the city of his habitation he was led by a rough way, because the rough way was for him the only right way; his mission was to proclaim the heart's need of God.2 [Note: G. Matheson, The Representative Men of the Bible, i. 274.]
