Online Resource Library
Commentary Index | Return to PrayerRequest.com | DownloadLange Commentary - 1 Samuel 16:1 - 16:13
(Show All Books | Show All Chapters)
This Chapter Verse Commentaries:
The Decline Of Saul’s Kingdom, And The Elevation Of David. From Saul’s Rejection To His Death
1 Samuel 16-31
_____________________
FIRST SECTION
Early History of David, the Anointed of the Lord
1 Samuel 16
I. Choice and Anointing of David as King through Samuel. Chap: 1Sa_16:1-13
1Sa_16:2. Heretofore Samuel had grieved for Saul—now he fears him: How can I go? if Saul hear it he will slay me.—This protest against the plain direction of the voice of God rests naturally on the fact that Saul was still, notwithstanding the divine sentence of rejection, rightful king of Israel, and would regard the designation of another to the office (if it could not be kept concealed from him) as an act of treachery and revolt, even though Samuel should plead the divine command in his justification. “He will kill me,”—to explain these words, therefore, we need not suppose that the evil spirit had already driven Saul to madness. Even if that were the case, Saul might in his seasons of quiet also resolve to slay the betrayer of the kingdom.—This fear of Samuel is overborne by inspired direction as to what he is to do to conceal the act; he is to go to hold a sacrificial feast, and so announce himself. This divine command supposes that Samuel did not confine his circuits to certain holy places (1Sa_7:16) where the people appeared in large numbers, but visited other places to hold public divine service, and that Jesse consequently could not be surprised at his appearing in Bethlehem for such a purpose. Berl. Bib.: “People must have been accustomed to Samuel’s coming to this place and the other to sacrifice, which was very proper for a prophet, especially at the time when Shiloh was desecrated.” This throws a new light on Samuel’s combination of priestly work with prophetical.—No shade of untruthfulness rests on this command. As Saul’s anointing (1Sa_10:16) was concealed, so David’s anointing also is, according to the divine will, yet to remain a secret. Samuel was to keep this secret. Its concealment behind the sacrifice was not a lie. Calvin: “It is to be observed that he practiced no simulation, but said what was true, namely, that he had come to sacrifice; but he put fraud on no one, he deceived no one, he used no bad arts, but conformed to the divine command, because it was not meet to publish God’s design, when as yet God wished it to be concealed;—here lurked no falsehood, and the end was good, unconnected with fraud or treachery, but God wished David’s anointing to be carefully kept as a secret deposit, so to speak, and a pledge.”
1Sa_16:3. The performance of the divine commission in the sacrificial feast. Three directions are to be distinguished: 1) Samuel is to invite Jesse to the sacrificial meal; it is a slain-offering ( æֶáַç ) that is spoken of, with which was connected a feast; he is to be associated with Jesse in the feast in the narrower circle of the family. “Call in the sacrifice” is construct. prœgn. for “call to take part in the sacrifice;” 2) Samuel is to await direction from above. “I will tell thee what thou shalt do.” This exhibits the specifically divine factor (of which Samuel is to be organ) in the choice of the new king of Israel; 3) He is to anoint as king him whom God shall name.
1Sa_16:4. And Samuel did, etc. The troubled condition of soul which could not accept God’s thoughts and ways disappeared before the strict obedience of the will, which bowed before the Lord’s will. The elders of Bethlehem came tremblingly to meet him with the question: Comest thou in peace? (The Sing. åַéֹּàîֶø “said,” because one spoke in the name of all. Comp. Jdg_8:6; Num_32:25). This question does not mean “Has a misfortune occurred, as the cause of thy coming?” nor does it express fear of punishment for some special misdoing (in the pillaging) in the Amalekite war, but it is the involuntary utterance of the fear which Samuel’s sudden, unexpected appearance produced; for though he no longer formally held the office of judge, he yet appeared here and there (as formerly in his judicial circuits) to make unexpected visitation and exercise his watch-office as prophet. On such occasions it was his principal care to administer earnest rebuke, and to remove the evil that he found. To this refers the fright of the elders at meeting him, and the question whether he came in peace or for good?
1Sa_16:5. He answers the question in the affirmative and so quiets the Bethlehemites, declares the purpose of his coming to be to institute a sacrifice for the people of Bethlehem, and directs them to sanctify themselves and take part with him in the sacrifice. The “sanctifying” means the consecration of the person to the service of God by washing the body and putting on clean garments as symbol of the cleansing of the soul for communion with the holy God. Comp. Gen_35:2; Exo_19:10; Exo_19:22. (The same pregnant construction here as in 1Sa_16:3). While directing the elders to take part in the offering, Samuel gives a special invitation to Jesse and his sons (by the same direction, to sanctify themselves) to partake of the sacrificial meal with him. [It is to be observed that the Heb. text here makes no difference between the invitation to Jesse’s family and the general invitation to the elders. The Sept. and the Chald. make the former refer to the sacrifice and the latter to the sacrificial meal. It seems that there was a special meeting with Jesse and his sons, but it is not so stated in the text. After 1Sa_16:5, indeed, nothing more is said of the sacrifice, the narrative taking this for granted, and going on to the main occurrence.—Tr.].—After the ark was removed from the Tabernacle and Shiloh had thus ceased to be the place of worship and sacrifice for Israel, there were several places where altars for sacrifices were erected. The offering of the sacrifice is here to be put after 1Sa_16:5, and not (Then.) after the words “in the midst of his brethren” 1Sa_16:13, for the “coming” in 1Sa_16:6 refers to the feast, as appears from the words in 1Sa_16:11, “we will not sit down,” and from the general connection. Samuel thought (lit., said) that Jesse’s eldest son, Eliab, was surely the Lord’s anointed.
1Sa_16:7. The difference is sharply stated between the divine thoughts and human judgment according to human standards. The voice of God inwardly teaches Samuel two things: 1) in respect of Eliab’s person, he is not to infer from his imposing exterior that he was the chosen of the Lord. With this humbling correction, which connects itself with 1Sa_16:1-2, he is taught 2) a general truth respecting the difference between divine and human modes of thought and judgment: Not what man sees—to which we must supply the words “sees the Lord.” This ellipsis is not so hard as to require us to suppose (Then.) that these words have fallen out of the text. The thought naturally fills itself out from what precedes. The ground of the truth, that human judgment and divine judgment are not the same but different, is now declared.—For man looks on the eyes, but the Lord looks on the heart, that is, man judges according to the outward appearance,—the expression “the eyes” is not (with Sept.) to be exchanged for “countenance,” but to be retained as signifying the outward appearance, which concentrates itself in the eyes, in contrast with the heart or the centre of the inner life, whence springs man’s will and his whole spiritual frame. Not according to the agreeable appearance which commends itself to the eyes, but according to the moral worth hidden in the depths of the heart, according to the disposition of soul that pleases Him does the Lord judge, who proveth the heart and the reins.
1Sa_16:8. The same decision is announced with reference to the second son, Abinadab. And so 1Sa_16:9 as to the third, Shammah. Thus Jesse made seven of his sons pass before Samuel. But Samuel’s decision, according to the voice of God within him, is always negative. The “he said” in 1Sa_16:8-9 refers to Samuel, and = “he thought.” We are, therefore, not thence to suppose that Samuel had communicated to Jesse the object of his mission. It is not till 1Sa_16:10 that the words “to Jesse” are added, expressly indicating an address of Samuel to him: the Lord hath not chosen these. It does not, however, follow, even from these words, that Samuel made Jesse a sharer in the divine secret. According to the following narrative none of the family (David’s father and brothers), know anything of David’s high destiny. That address to Jesse is merely a negative declaration that the divine selection, with which Samuel was concerned, and which in the absence of express intimation of its nature, might refer to the prophetic office, rested on none of these seven sons. Samuel’s word was by reason of its indefiniteness a riddle, whose solution Jesse was to attain only from the following development of the history of his youngest son.
1Sa_16:11. To Samuel’s question whether these are all the young men, Jesse answers that the youngest yet remains. The prophet of the Lord is not satisfied with the presentation of the seven sons; he bids the father send for the youngest, before they sit down to the sacrificial meal. ðָñֹá = “we will not surround,” namely, the table, we will not sit around it to eat till he come. So De Wette, Ewald, Maurer. The explanation: “we will not turn about, namely, to proceed to something else, but will remain here waiting” (Then., Bött.) does not suit the situation as given by the context.
1Sa_16:12. David’s appearance, ruddy, of the color of the hair, red hair being regarded in the East (as contrasting with the usual black color) as especially beautiful. òִí (as 1Sa_17:42; Ecc_2:16) used adverbially = “at the same time,” “withal;” beautiful of eyes and good, pleasing in appearance. In this youngest son were united the beauty of the oldest, and that which is well-pleasing to the Lord, what “the Lord looks on,” a heart and mind after the will and good pleasure of the Lord (1Sa_16:7). And so the divine decision is announced to Samuel: Arise, anoint him, for this is he. He is thus freed from all doubts and suspicions. Sure of his course, Samuel (1Sa_16:13) performs the ceremony of anointing David (the object and meaning of the act being still an enigma to Jesse and his other sons) in the midst of his brethren or from among [Germ. unter] his brethren; the Heb. preposition ( áְּ÷ֶøֶá ) may mean either. Thenius adopts the latter on the ground that the brothers had gone away, but this is not required by the narrative. Samuel’s words in the second half of 1Sa_16:11 rather imply that they were all there. [Abarbanel and Philippson also adopt this view of the word, “among” his brethren, that is, “he alone of his brethren,” because this better explains their after ignorance.—Tr.]. In any case the special significance, which God designed this anointing to have, was hidden from them. Anointing was always a symbol of the divine impartation of the Spirit from above on the Anointed. The impartation began immediately for David: The Spirit of the Lord came upon David from that day forward.—This could not have happened, if the religious-ethical conditions had not been present in David’s heart. This impartation of the Spirit was (along with the general gift of the divine Spirit) the special endowment with gifts and powers for the special theocratic royal calling, to which David was chosen and consecrated by this anointing according to divine decree and will. The word “from that day forward” denotes the continuity of the impartation of the Spirit to David’s inner life, and indicates its unbroken development under the guidance of the divine Spirit to full fitness and capacity for the royal calling. Keil properly calls attention to the fact that nothing is here said of any explanatory word of Samuel touching this point, as in Saul’s anointing, 1Sa_10:1. Whether David was now informed by Samuel of the meaning of the act is uncertain. Most probably he was not informed, since it was performed in the presence of the brothers, and its object was (according to the will of God) to remain concealed from them and the people. [It seems likely that a royal destiny for David would be the last thing in the minds of his brothers, for his higher intellectual and spiritual gifts were apparently at this time unknown to them. Gradually the course of events led them and the people (so Abigail 1Sa_25:30) and probably Saul (1Sa_28:17) to look on David as Saul’s successor, and David would receive intimations concerning his destiny from Samuel. There is, therefore, no serious difficulty in understanding the silence of the brothers in the succeeding history.—Tr]. Samuel went to Ramah. That David was in constant communication with him (and perhaps with the prophetic school there) is quite certain from the following history. Comp. 19, 20 sq. In this intercourse with the prophet of the Lord he learned the meaning of Samuel s enigmatical act, and, under the progressive occupation and enlightenment of his inner life by the Spirit from above, received the knowledge of the duties of his royal calling and the preparation to fulfill them. For the present his election and anointing to be king of Israel remained a divine secret.
2. Samuel’s grief for Saul, transgressing the bounds set by God and thus displeasing to Him, is easily explicable psychologically not merely from natural human feeling, but also from Samuel’s theocratic calling and prophetic official interest. Considered from this point of view also it is not in conflict with Samuel’s immovable prophetic opposition to Saul and his sentence of rejection, but is at the same time the most striking refutation of the false conception of Samuel’s relation to Saul in this prophetic-judicial bearing towards him, which makes the latter a pitiable sacrifice to priestly jealousy and one-sidedness (see the literature in Winer, to which is to be added M. Dunker, Geschichte des Alterthums I.).
3. The concealing of the truth, when there is no design to deceive, when its utterance is required by no duty, and when the interests of the moral order of the world and of the kingdom of God are in no wise injured, is far from being untruthfulness, much less falsehood; it is rather duty and obedience to the divine will.
4. The beginnings of David’s theocratic life, as they present themselves in his election and calling to be king of Israel, have their roots (when we look back in the light of the divine history of revelation) in the consecrated ground of a family in Judah distinguished in history for piety and godliness, which belonged with its traditions to the shepherd-city of Bethlehem. The family whence Jesse sprang was from the beginning one of the most prominent in the tribe of Judah. One of its ancestors, Nahshon, stood at the head of the whole tribe in the march through the wilderness (Rth_4:20; Num_1:7; Num_2:3). “How remarkably the noblest and loveliest theocratic piety was nourished in this family, even in the degenerate times of the Judges, appears in the history of Ruth and Boaz; the latter a type of theocratic integrity, the former a truly consecrated flower of heathendom turning longingly to the light of divine revelation in Israel” (Kurtz in Herz. III., 299). Jesse, the son of Obed, was the grandson of this Boaz. His intimacy with Samuel speaks for his piety and that of his family. David was the noblest scion of this family, far excelling his brothers (1Sa_16:7; 1Sa_16:10) in heart-piety and theocratic feeling. His posture of heart, which stood the divine test and was well-pleasing to God, was the fruit of the piety of his father’s house, whence sprang the humble, consecrated disposition in which, after his anointing, he ripened more and more in soul under the guidance of God’s Spirit to his high calling of theocratic royalty, coming by manifold experiences to a constantly clearer knowledge of this calling, and so guided by the Lord that not only the riddle of his dumb consecration was ever approaching solution, but also “from the course of events (connected with Samuel’s former words to Saul) others, as Jonathan, and even Abigail, concluded that David was destined to be king, 1Sa_23:17; 1Sa_20:30” (v. Gerl.).—But also, when we look forward in the light of divine revelation, the early part of David’s consecrated life contains many typical elements as factual prophecies or prefigurations of the future. His shepherd-life, continued after he was anointed, in which on the one hand self-consecrated he immerses himself in the contemplation of God’s revelation in nature and in His word, and on the other hand must be ready at any moment to meet the greatest dangers and exhibit boldness and prowess (1Sa_17:34-37), presents on these two sides types of his religious life as king, the Spirit of God developing on the basis of this double natural ground two sides of his character, which not merely co-exist, but are interwoven with each other: 1) intensively the innermost concentration and immersion of his thoughtful, meditative heart into the depths of God’s revelation of His power, grace, and wisdom in nature, word, history, and into the depths of the sinful human heart, whence sprang in his psalms partly the inspired praise of God with furtherance and deepening in every direction of the knowledge of God, partly advance in the knowledge of the natural grace-lacking condition of the human heart; 2) extensively his admirable energy and heroic courage in the life of conflict, which he had evermore to lead. In the hiddenness of his royal calling from the people, the gradual ripening of his inner life for his office and the lowliness of the sphere whence he was raised to the throne, he is a type of Christ who, sprung from him according to the flesh, and by the prophets called “Son of David” and “Sprout of Jesse” (Isa_11:1; Isa_11:10), passes his holy youth in privacy, gradually develops therein for his Messianic calling, and then at the end of this divine-human development steps forth from the lowliness of a natural-human life as the king of Israel, who completes in his person and work God’s revelations for the establishment of His kingdom on earth, and therein enters on the war of subjugation against the ungodly world. From David’s quiet anointing in the modest family-circle at Bethlelem to be King David, up to the birth, in the obscurity of a stall at Bethlehem, of the “Son of David,” the “King of the Jews,” there is an unbroken series of divine revelations, the beginning and end of which are bound together by the descent of the Saviour of the world from the Tribe of Judah “according to the flesh.” And as heathendom entered the principal line of the tribe of Judah (whence came Jesse’s house and David) in three distinguished women, thus sharing in the derivation of the Messiah from Jesse’s family,—and so the impulse implanted (by the fundamental blessing, Gen_12:3) in the seed of Abraham towards union with heathendom, which takes mostly a thoroughly perverted direction in all Israel’s early history, showed itself in this family (consciously or unconsciously) in a normal and truly theocratic way—so we see, at the end of this development of the kingdom of God in Israel which goes from Bethlehem to Bethlehem, heathendom approaching in Bethlehem the new-born king of the Jews (having a natural right in Him because of its natural God-ordained share in His incarnation) in order to pay Him its homage. [This last statement expresses a parallelism, not a typical relation. That certain heathen women accepted the God of Israel, and that certain heathen astronomers believed in the divinely-sent king of the Jews are both facts illustrative of the promise to Abraham, but we cannot call them type and antitype, since they express not an essential principle, but a concomitant phenomenon of the fact of redemption. So the numerous cases in which God raised His servants from low to high position (as in David’s life) are illustrations of a mode of divine action, and thus parallel to our Lord’s history, but the relation of the events in the Old and New Covenants is not that of type and antitype, since they express an incidental and not an essential spiritual principle. David, as prophet and king, is a type of the true prophet and king, and his experiences as a spiritual-minded man answer to the experiences of the man Jesus; but we cannot apply the term typical (without an unworthy lowering of its meaning) to all the outward resemblances between their lives.—Tr.]
5. The word: “Man looks on the eyes, God looks on the heart,” like that other: “Obedience is better than sacrifice” (1Sa_15:22) refers to the right condition of heart in a truly pious, humble disposition towards God the Lord. As we see clearly the difference between God’s word and man’s, between God’s thoughts and man’s, when Samuel says to himself “this or that one is the chosen one,” and the Spirit from above says to his heart “no,” and points him to one of whom he had not thought,—so we see according to their different standards the difference between divine and human judgment. The natural man judges according to the outward and visible; God, who proves and knows the heart and the reins (Psa_139:1-2; Psa_44:22 [21]), judges according to the character of the heart and the direction of the will, according to the disposition of soul.
1Sa_16:2 sqq. Starke: Faint-heartedness and feebleness is found even in the best saints, Mat_8:26.—[Henry: From this it appears 1. That Saul was grown very wicked. 2. That Samuel’s faith was not very strong.—Tr.]—S. Schmid: In doubtful, trying and perilous circumstances it is best to ask God for counsel.—Cramer: A wise man is silent until he sees his time; but a fool cannot wait for the time, Eccl. 20:7; Ecc_3:7; Genesis 37.; Jdg_16:16.—J. Lange: There is a great difference between an untruth, when one says what is false, and silence, when one prudently keeps to himself what it is not necessary for others to know, 1Sa_10:15-16.—[We are not bound to tell everything unless we profess to be so doing, or the person asking has such peculiar relations to us as to warrant his expecting it. From failing to distinguish between deception and concealment, some persons condemn concealment and many justify deception. See an excellent discussion, with particular reference to this passage, in Thornwell’s “Discourses on Truth.”—Tr.]—Berl. Bible: Samuel speaks the truth, though he does not speak all the truth, but partly conceals and partly reveals, according to his present design.
1Sa_16:5. J. Lange: So too the worthy appropriation of the atonement of Christ unto salvation must, according to the evangelical covenant of grace, be made with real inner purification, Isa_1:16.
1Sa_16:6. S. Schmid: Human wisdom, however great, may yet be easily deceived accordingly even the wisest men must take care not to be too hasty in deciding.
1Sa_16:7. Cramer: God looks not at the outward work, but at the heart, and judges according to what His eyes see, Isa_11:3; Act_10:34.—Berl. Bible: Men decide only according to the appearance, and so are commonly deceived; but the Lord looks to the depths of the heart, its most delicate movements, and our character, which is all clear to Him, and better known than we are to ourselves, Psa_7:10; Psalms 139.; Heb_4:12-13.—True, deep-grounded humility of heart is the only “appearance” in man that pleases God (Isa_57:15); to this He looks as the ground of all virtues, for in it His fear has place. But where there is hidden pride, the fear of God is easily neglected.—[W. M. Taylor: We must not undervalue attention to the symmetrical discipline of the physical frame. Yet muscularity is not Christianity, and bodily beauty is not holiness. The character, therefore, ought to be the principal object of attention.—Tr.]—Osiander: Christians too must not be judged by the outward walk, since commonly, through the infirmities of their flesh, they have a bad appearance, while hypocrites, on the contrary, make a good show in their life, 2Ti_3:5; Mat_7:15; Rom_2:20.—[This is true as regards a mere plausible exterior; but Christians should be judged by their actions, Mat_7:20.—Tr.]
1Sa_16:9 sqq. S. Schmid: God knows how to try, often and long, the patience of believers to their good, that He may confirm them in their faith and patience.
1Sa_16:11. God is wont to exalt the lowly, that they may always remember their lowliness, and not be proud, but glory only in God who has exalted them, 1Co_1:27 sqq., 1Co_1:31. [Scott: Nor does He favor our children according to our fond partialities; but often most honors and blesses those who have been the least regarded.—Tr.]
1Sa_16:13. Cramer: Christians are temples and dwellings of the Holy Ghost, 1Co_6:19.—S. Schmid: When we have done our duty as commanded by God, we have to leave the rest to God’s government, Mat_10:23.
1Sa_16:1-13. F. W. Krummacher: Call and anointing of the shepherd-youth: 1) By what this was occasioned, 2) How it was performed.—[1Sa_16:7. Henry: “The Lord looketh on the heart.” 1. He knows the heart. 2. He judges of men by the heart.—Tr.]—J. Disselhoff (The History of King David, 14 sermons): The secret of the choice: 1) The Lord does not choose those who by peculiar gifts of nature are distinguished above others, but 2) He chooses those who faithfully profit by the greater or less measure of God’s grace which is granted them, 3) Who show this faithfulness by pure zeal and obedience in the labor entrusted to them, and 4) Those who even after some success in their labor do not boastfully press themselves forward, but remain in silent humility and quiet seclusion till the Lord brings them forth.
[1Sa_16:1. Remedies for improper mourning: 1) Submission to the will of God (“I have rejected him”); 2) Diligence in present work for God (“fill thy horn and go”); 3) Hope that God will bring a better future (“I have provided me a king”).
1Sa_16:4. Why do men so shrink from religious teachers?
1Sa_16:6-12. Difficulty of selecting men for important positions: 1) Causes: a) Intrinsic difficulty of properly estimating character. b) Management of partial friends. 2) Lessons: a) To avoid haste in deciding. b) To make diligent inquiries. c) To seek special Divine guidance.
1Sa_16:12. The youth of David. Handsome, energetic, brave, talented and accomplished, of good family, devout—faithfully pursuing an humble calling which developed manliness, and trusting God for the unknown future—O the glorious possibilities of youth! (Comp. Kitto, “Saul and David,” p. 197 sqq., Maurice, “Prophets and Kings,” p. 38 sq.)—Tr.]
Footnotes:
[1Sa_16:1. Literally “seen.” For similar use of øàä see Gen_22:8; Deu_33:21.—Tr.]
[1Sa_16:3. Chald. has “sacrificial meal,” perhaps simply as a connected fact, perhaps to avoid apparent infringement on priestly functions. Vulg. has victimam, other VSS. as Heb.—Tr.]
[1Sa_16:4. Sept.: “all that the Lord spake to him.”—Tr.]
[1Sa_16:4. It is better to give a uniform rendering to òִéø , the distinction between “town” and “city” not being found in Heb.—Tr.]
[1Sa_16:4. Literally: “is thy coming peace? and he said, peace.” Sept. inserts at the end of the verse the words “O Seer.”—Tr.]
[1Sa_16:5. Sept.: “and rejoice with me to-day,” probably a free reference to the festive character of the sacrificial meal; so Chald has “meal” instead of “sacrifice.”—Tr.]
[1Sa_16:7. îַøְàֵäåּ , Sept. ὄøéí , Erdmann “gestalt,” properly the whole personal appearance. Vulg. vultum, whence perhaps Eng. A. V. Luther, “gestalt.”—Tr.]
[1Sa_16:7. These words wanting (but understood) in the Heb., are found in the Sept. “God seeth,” and are for clearness better retained. Chald. and Syr. omit as Heb.; Vulg. supplies the words: ego judico.—Tr.]
[1Sa_16:10. Sept. (Vat. but not Alex.) omits “unto Jesse.” perhaps (Wellhausen) because Jesse was supposed not to know Samuel’s purpose. In 1Sa_16:6 Samuel’s “said” is equivalent to “thought.”—Tr.]
[1Sa_16:12. This word àַãְîðִֹé is found only here, 1Sa_17:42 and Gen_25:25, and in the two last passages seems to refer to the color of the skin. The ancient VSS. do not decide. Chald. and Syr. use same word here as in Gen_25:25; Vulg. rufus, Sept. ðõῥῤÜêçò . Some moderns render “red-haired.” Levy renders the Chald. “red-eyed.”—Tr.]
[1Sa_16:12. Sept.: “goodly in appearance to the Lord,” and “for he is good,” to preserve the moral aspect of the act in reference to 1Sa_16:7.—Tr.]
[On the obvious political reason for this secresy see Bib. Comm. and Wordsworth in loco.—Tr.]
[See Psa_7:9; 1Ch_28:9; Luk_16:15.—Tr.]
[In 1Ch_2:13-15 only seven sons of Jesse are mentioned; one may have died in youth. The Syr. and Arab. write Elihu (1Ch_27:18) as seventh and David as eighth.—Tr.]
[That is to say, the instruction and example of his father’s house was God’s means of developing this disposition in him. Piety is never inherited, but is always the direct creation of the Holy Spirit of God (Joh_3:6).—Tr.]
[The care of the flocks, perhaps an honorable occupation in earlier times (Jacob, Moses), was in later times usually given to inferiors, as servants and younger children.—Tr.]
[Tamar (Genesis 38), Rahab (Mat_1:5). Ruth (Rth_4:13), to which some add Bathsheba (or, Bathshua), but this is uncertain.—Tr.]