Online Resource Library
Commentary Index | Return to PrayerRequest.com | DownloadPulpit Commentary - 2 Samuel 1:1 - 1:27
(Show All Books | Show All Chapters)
This Chapter Verse Commentaries:
Now it came to pass. During the last few days events had been crowding fast upon one another. Living as fugitives at Ziklag, in the land of the Philistines, David and his men, unfit for the peaceful occupations of agriculture, had been driven to seek their maintenance by raids upon the wild tribes in the desert. Of these the chief were the Amalekites, whose home was the bare region lying between the south of Judah and Egypt. We have ample proof that this race was utterly hostile to all order and quietness; it lived by the plunder of others, and, sheltering itself in the recesses of the wilderness, broke out thence on every opportunity to carry, ravage and ruin into all the neighbouring districts. The Amalekite was thus every man's enemy, and the object of universal dislike; and the cruelty which he habitually practised would justify to David's mind the barbarity with which he put to death all whom he found, man and woman alike. But his object was not justice. His cruelty was the result of selfish motives. For it was necessary for him to keep tidings of his real doings from the ears of Achish, who naturally would not approve of David's military activity. He very probably had put him there upon the borders to protect his realm from incursions; but David in the Amalekite war was the assailant, and was, moreover, practising his men for ulterior objects. Achish most probably received a share of the captured cattle; but his inquiries were met with an equivocation (1Sa_27:10-12), which made him suppose that David, with the usual bitterness of a renegade, had been harrying his own tribesmen. And the falsehood soon entangled David in most painful consequences; for Achish, nothing doubting of his fidelity, and of his bitter hatred of Saul. determined to take him with him in the grand army of the Philistines, which was slowly moving northward for the conquest of the land of Israel. David had God's promise of ultimate safety, and he ought not to have deserted his country. As a deserter to the Philistines, he had to descend to falsehood, and now treason seemed inevitable. His only choice lay between betraying his country or the king who had given him so hospitable a refuge. The jealousy, or rather the good sense, of the Philistine lords (1Sa_29:4) saved him from this dreadful alternative, and he was sent back, to his great joy, to Ziklag. But it was a dreadful sight which there met his view. With strange mismanagement, he had left no portion of his men to guard his little city, and the Amalekites had made reprisals. The news of the Philistine army upon its march upwards would be quickly carried through the desert, and the wild tribes would be sure to take the opportunity for gathering plunder far and wide. So undefended: was the whole country, that they met nowhere with resistance. And David saw, on his return, only the smoking ruins of the little city where for many months he had dwelt. His wives, Ahinoam and Abigail, the wives and children of his men, had all been carried away for the Egyptian slave market. So secure were the Amalekites, that they had no fear about encumbering their march with a vast multitude of children and cattle. And to add to his distress, his men, indignant, and not without reason, at David's want of precaution, were threatening to stone him as an alleviation for their distress. Never had David's fortunes fallen so low as at that moment; but quickly they were to rise again. By energetic action he not only recovered the spoil and the captives taken from Ziklag, but also won the immense wealth gathered by the Amalekites in a wide raid made at a time when there was no one to resist them. His own share of the spoil was so large that he was able to send valuable presents of sheep, oxen, and camels to his friends in Judaea, probably not without some prescience that the way to his return might be opened by the events of the war between the Philistines and Saul. The dangerous issues of that war could not be hidden from him; but he would find solace for his anxieties in the active work of restoring order at Ziklag, and in providing hasty shelter for the women and children whom he had brought back to their desolated homes. But his suspense did not last long. For when David had abode two days in Ziklag, news came which confirmed his worst fears. The battle had Been fought; Israel had been routed; and Saul and Jonathan, the friend who had been to him more than a brother, lay among the slain.
2Sa_1:2
On the third day. This means the third day after David's return with the spoil and captives recovered from the Amalekites. If we study the data, we find that David had marched with Achish as far as Aphek in the plain of Jezreel (1Sa_29:1), opposite to which, on the rising ground near Gilboa, Saul had posted his army. A march of three days had brought him back to Ziklag (1Sa_30:1), and after the shortest possible delay he had started in pursuit of the Amalekites. The rapidity of his movements is proved by so large a proportion of his hardy men falling out of the ranks at the brook Besor; but nevertheless some time must have been lost at Ziklag in discovering the greatness of their disaster, in searching for any who might possibly have escaped, in getting food, and in mustering again together for the pursuit. Near the brook they seem to have found the Egyptian slave who became their guide, and who had been abandoned three days before David found him. It follows, therefore, that the Amalekites were then three days' march in advance, and however rapidly the pursuit was urged on, we cannot allow less than five days for it, and one for the battle (2Sa_1:12, 2Sa_1:13, 2Sa_1:17). The march homeward would take a longer time, as David was now encumbered with flocks and herds, women and children. If it took eight days, the time occupied in it by the Amalekites, the whole period that had elapsed since David was sent away from Aphek by the Philistine lords would be eighteen or nineteen days; and it is thus evident that the Amalekites were plundering Ziklag at the very time when he was being dismissed, half angry, half rejoicing, at the slight put upon him, but little thinking of the sad need there was for his presence elsewhere. Now, the messenger from Gilboa, if an active runner, weald easily traverse in two days the distance which David and his men had travelled in three. And thus it follows that the battle at Gilboa was fought on the very day of David's happy return from the pursuit, and about nineteen days after the review at Aphek. If the word "tomorrow" in 1Sa_28:19 seems to imply a more rapid march of events, we must remember that the meaning of the word in Hebrew is more indefinite than with us (comp. Gen_30:33; Exo_13:14). With his clothes rent, and earth upon his head. Though the Amalekite came out of the camp, yet we are not to suppose that he had been one of the combatants. Every army is followed by a vast number of vagabonds, intent upon gain, purchasing of the troops their booty, plundering wherever they have the chance, and carrying on a lucrative but illicit trade. He was more probably a sort of gipsy sutler than, as many suppose, the slave of some Israelite. He professes, however, to be upon Israel's side, and appears with the usual marks of sorrow. By so doing he hoped to commend himself to David, whom he knew to be too patriotic to rejoice at the defeat of his countrymen, though he doubted not that he would hear with joy of the death of so inveterate a personal enemy as Saul. On this account, and because the way would now stand open to David's ambition, he evidently felt sure of receiving a large guerdon for his news. There is, moreover, a further interest in his conduct; for it demonstrates the existence of a widespread popular feeling that David was destined to be Israel's king. It was this conviction which made him give David kingly honour; for he fell to the earth, and did obeisance. And all Israel, on the morrow after the defeat, would probably have done the same, but for David's own conduct. Israel was too high-spirited a nation to take at once for a king a man who had marched with their enemies to fight against them, even though they knew that the voice of prophecy had appointed him to inherit Saul's throne.
2Sa_1:3
Out of the camp of Israel am I escaped. Non-combatants would hang about the army, watching, as soon as the battle had begun, the fortunes of the day, and immediately that they saw the impending defeat of their own side, would think chiefly of their personal safety. But for an active young man the opportunity would then have come for booty. The Philistines, in pursuit of the enemy, would soon leave the battlefield in their rear, and multitudes would quickly prowl about it to plunder the dead. While so busied, the Amalekite falsely represents himself as having come by chance upon the wounded, but still living, Saul.
2Sa_1:6
As I happened by chance upon Mount Gilboa. The story of the Amalekite is at variance with the account of Saul's death given in the last chapter of the preceding book. There, sore pressed and wounded by archers, hopeless of escape, and unable to make any further resistance, in sore distress at the death of his sons and the loss of the battle, Saul and his armour bearer fall upon their own swords. Here, closely pursued by chariots and horsemen, the king is so utterly deserted by all his body guard that he cells to a vagabond prowling about for booty to slay him. Naturally, Ewald and his followers, who regard the books of the Bible as mere patchwork, find here the marks of different narrators, whose stories the compiler of the Book of Samuel pieced together without having the shrewdness to observe that they were utterly irreconcilable. Some modern commentators have, however, attempted to harmonize them with little success. Really, the story of the Amalekite is a most improbable fiction, and utterly untrue. He knew nothing as to the manner of Saul's death, but found the body, probably some time after the king had fallen; and he was able to strip it because the pursuing Philistines were hurrying forward to make their victory complete, without being aware of what was the crowning glory of their success. As the pursuit advanced it would soon become safe for the Amalekite and others like him to try and secure some of the booty before the Philistines returned. Archers shooting from a distance might easily so distress Saul as to make him despair of escape—and it appears from the first narrative that they had not recognized him; for Saul is afraid lest they should do so, and, having taken him alive, should "abuse," or make a mock of him. Here chariots and horsemen are in close pursuit, and the king faces them grimly; nevertheless, they allow a stranger, who would not have dared to mix himself up with the battle, to rob them of their prize. We may feel sure that it was not until the tide of battle had moved onward in pursuit that the Amalekite ventured upon the field to rob the dead. When so occupied he came upon a corpse, now for some brief space dead, and at once recognized the tall form of the king, whose identity was made more plain by the golden circlet upon his helmet. At Once he saw the chance of larger gains, and hastily tearing off the royal crown and the bracelet from the fallen monarch, without a thought of rescuing the remains from the indignities which the Philistines were sure to inflict upon them, he hurried away with his tidings. Of course, he knew nothing of David's recent conduct, nor that for some time he had accompanied the invading army, nor that Ziklag had just experienced rough treatment from his own countrymen. Still, if he had told the truth, he would have fared well; for he brought news of great importance. But truth was not a virtue much practised in those days, and, fancying that the treatment he had met with from Saul would fill David's heart with bitter rancour against him, the Amalekite invented this story of his having slain the king with his own hands, in the expectation that it would win for him a double reward.
2Sa_1:9
Anguish. This word, which occurs only in this place, comes from a root signifying to entwine or knot together. On this account Jewish commentators explain it of cramp, which often follows upon loss of blood; but it is equally possible that it means vertigo, or giddiness, when things seem to dance or interweave themselves together before the eyes. The next words signify, For yet is my life whole within me, and give the reason why Saul asked the Amalekite to slay him. The story is at least plausible. It represents the king as deserted by his army, even to the last man, and with the Philistine cavalry and chariots in close pursuit. He is not mortally wounded, but, as giddiness prevents his escape, there is danger of his falling alive into the enemy's hand; and as they would probably not have killed him, but carried him in triumph through their cities, the way would still have been blocked against David's succession. The fear of this indignity would account for Saul's earnest appeal to the Amalekite to slay him, and, so requested, it seemed right to put him to death, instead of trying to carry him off to a place of safety. But all this was merely to keep up appearances, and in his heart he doubted not that David would regard it as a signal service that his enemy was put out of the way.
2Sa_1:10
After that he was fallen; Hebrew, after his fall; that is, his defeat; for Saul was standing and supporting himself with his spear. The crown, probably, was a narrow band of gold encircling the royal helmet. Bracelet. We read of "bracelets" in Num_31:50, in the enumeration of the spoil taken from the Midianites, and there too apparently they were the ornaments of warriors. In the Assyrian monuments chiefs are generally represented with ornaments upon their wrists and arms (see Layard, 'Nineveh,' etc; pl. 18).
2Sa_1:12
They mourned, and wept, and fasted. The sight of Saul's royal insignia was clear proof of Israel's disaster; and this sorrow of David and his men shows how true their hearts were to their country, and how unbearable would have been their position had not the prudence of the Philistine lords extricated them from the difficulty in which they had been placed by David's want of faith. But David had other reasons besides patriotism for sorrow. Personally he had lost the truest of friends, and even Saul had a place in his heart for he would contrast with his terrible death the early glories of his reign, when all Israel honoured him as its deliverer from the crushing yoke of foreign bondage, and when David was himself one of the most trusty of his captains. Otto von Gerlach compares David thus weeping over the fall of his implacable enemy with David's Son weeping over Jerusalem, the city whose inhabitants were his bitter foes, and who not only sought his death, but delivered him up to the Romans, to be scourged and spitefully intreated, and slain upon the cross.
2Sa_1:15
Go near, and fall upon him. This was no hasty sentence, for they had "fasted until even." And before pronouncing it David asks, "Whence art thou?" that is, he makes more full inquiry into his condition and previous doings. He knew that he was an Amalekite, and most probably had seen clearly enough that his whole story was false; but before deciding upon his fate, he desired fuller information as to the man's previous life. His question elicits from him that he was a subject of Saul. For the word "stranger" means a settler, who had withdrawn from his own country and joined himself to Israel. Moreover, it was the Amalekite's father who had done this, and probably he was one of many, who, finding their old nomad life too dangerous, had sought a home in the southern districts of Judah; but when the war broke out, the old instinct of these Bedaween made them follow the army for pilfer and trade in spoil. But as the son of a settler, the Amalekite owed by birth allegiance to Saul, and, should the occasion arise, was bound to render him loyal aid. Now, according to his own account, he had found Saul in no immediate danger of death, "for his life was still whole within him." Escape was at least possible with the Amalekite's aid, but he is eager to hill him. And David's question, "How wast thou not afraid …to destroy the Lord's anointed?" virtually means, "How wast thou not afraid to kill thy own king?" The Lord, that is, Jehovah, was no name of power to any outside the covenant people, nor in settling in Judea did the Amalekites accept the national religion. But the words would show even to a stranger that Saul was Israel's lawful and consecrated king. Commentators, with strange perverseness, have found in these words an outbreak of selfishness on David's part, and have supposed that he wished to guard his own person against future treason by making a wholesome example. But this is both to misunderstand the examination of the culprit summed up in 2Sa_1:13, 2Sa_1:14, and also to put aside all account of the deep and agonizing sorrow which was rending David's heart. What would have been an Englishman's feelings if news had come that we had lost, for instance, the battle of Waterloo, and if the fugitive who brought the information had said that he had killed the wounded commander-in-chief? In David's case, besides deep distress at the disaster which had befallen his country, there was personal grief for the death of Jonathan and of Saul's other sons, who were David's brothers-in-law; and the words really prove his loyalty to Saul himself. He was still Jehovah's anointed, whatever his conduct might have been; and we have found David on previous occasions actuated by the same generous respect for duty when clearly it was contrary to his own interests (see, for instance, 1Sa_26:9). David put the wretch justly to death for meanly murdering one whom he might possibly have saved. And the man's very purpose was to suggest to David, in a covert way, that escape really was possible, but that he had made all things sure, and so deserved a large reward. As a matter of fact, he had not killed Saul, but had invented the story because, judging David by his own immoral standard, he had supposed that he would regard the crime as a valuable service.
2Sa_1:17
David lamented with this lamentation. The Hebrew word for "lamentation" is kinah, a technical term for an elegy or poem commemorative of the dead. Thus Jeremiah wrote a kinah in memory of King Josiah (2Ch_35:25); and there is little doubt that the "lamentations" there spoken of were a collection of dirges, in which probably this ode written by David held an honoured place. In 2Sa_3:33, 2Sa_3:34 we have a short kinah in Abner's honour, which possibly formed part of a longer poem, of which those two verses only are quoted as sufficing to prove, not only David's innocence, but also his indignation at Joab's foul deed. In both these places we have remains of David's secular poetry, and find it marked by the same strong emotion and the same sublimity of thought as distinguish his psalms. We observe also the nobleness of David's nature in his total silence concerning himself, and his generous eulogy, not of Jonathan only, but also of Saul. The mean envy and the implacable jealousy of the latter are no more remembered, and he sees in him, not the personal foe, but the brave king who has fallen in his country's cause.
2Sa_1:18
Also he bade them teach the children of Judah [the use of] the bow. The old view is that given by the inserted words, and is well put by Ephrem Syrus in his commentary upon the passage. He says that, as Israel's defeat at Gilboa was the presage of a long struggle, and as the Philistines had gained the victory there by their skill in archery, David used his utmost authority with his own tribe to get them to practise this art for their protection in future wars. This explanation would be plausible were it not that we have reason for believing that the Israelites were already skilful in the use both of the sling and the bow, in both of which the Benjamites especially excelled (1Ch_12:2). The modern view is that given in the Revised Version, where the inserted words are "the song of" the bow. "The Bow" is thus the name of the elegy, taken from the allusion to Jonathan's skill in the use of that weapon; and the meaning is that David made his own tribesmen, who were probably ill disposed to Saul and his family, learn this dirge, not so much for its preservation, as to make them give the fallen king due honour. Similarly Exo_3:1-22. is called "The Bush" in Mar_12:26. The book of Jasher. See on this book Jos_10:13, where the Syriac Version calls it "The Book of Canticles," and understands by it a collection of national ballads commemorative of the brave deeds of Israelite heroes. Jasher literally means "upright," and the Book of Jasher would be equivalent to "Hero book," the Hebrews always looking to the moral rather than the physical prowess of their great men.
2Sa_1:19
The beauty of Israel. The word zebi means both "beauty" and also "the gazelle." Ewald takes it in the second sense, and explains it of Jonathan. "everywhere the first in courage, in activity, and speed; slender also and of well-made figure, and whose personal beauty and swiftness of foot in attack or retreat gained for him among the troops the name of 'the gazelle.' The Syriac Version also translates 'gazelle,'" but Ephrem says that the whole Israelite nation is meant, the flower of whoso manhood lay slaughtered on Mount Gilboa. Which signification we take must really depend upon the meaning we attach to the words, "thy high place;" and these in the Authorized Version have nothing to refer to, and so become unmeaning. The Revised Version follows the Vulgate in taking Israel as a vocative, sad renders, "Thy glory, O Israel, is slain upon thy high places." The sense would thus be that given by Ephrem, Israel's glory being its "mighty" men or heroes, its warriors slain upon Mount Gilboa with their king. But 2Sa_1:25 makes it plain that the "high places" are Jonathan's, and not those of the nation; and the more correct rendering is "O beauty [or, 'gazelle'] of Israel, slain upon thy high places! how are the heroes fallen!" Thus Jonathan is certainly meant, and the heroes are the young, prince and his father; and as the hunted antelope is said to return to its lair in the mountains, and there await its death, "gazelle" is probably the right rendering. In a dirge in honour of Saul and Jonathan we may be pretty sure that Jonathan would be referred to in its opening words, and the camp name of his friend would bring back to David's mind many a brave feat wrought together, and many a pleasant hour of companionship in past years.
2Sa_1:20
Gath … Askelon. By thus localizing the triumph, and bringing before the mind the thought of multitudes in these well-known places rejoicing with dance and song over the news of their victory, a more affecting picture is produced by the contrast with Israel's distress than could have been effected by mere generalizations. Probably, too, there was present in David's mind the remembrance of scenes which he had witnessed in these towns. In course of time, "Tell it not in Gath" became a proverb (Mic_1:10). The daughters. It is the custom in the East for the women to celebrate the prowess of the nation's warriors (Exo_15:20; 1Sa_18:6; Psa_68:11 Revised Version). Uncircumcised. For some unknown reason, this word is used as a term of reproach, especially of the Philistines (1Sa_14:6; 1Sa_17:26).
2Sa_1:21
Fields of offerings; Hebrew, fields of terumoth. The terumoth were heave offerings (Le 2Sa_7:14, 32), and the Vulgate, regarding these as thank offerings, translates, "Fields of firstfruits." The sense would thus be, "Fields of corn such as was used for heave offerings." Still, this gives us no suitable meaning; for Gilboa was not a place fit for the growth of corn; and Theodoret, in his version, has preserved a different reading, which is probably right, namely, "Ye fields and mountains of death." The shield … is vilely east away. This rendering contains a classical idea derived from the Greeks and Romans, among whom it was a disgrace for a soldier to return without his shield. But this imputes personal cowardice to Saul—a reproach which is entirely undeserved; for he did not east away his shield, but remained steadfast unto death. The right translation is, "For there the shield of heroes, yea, the shield of Saul, was defiled," stained, that is, with blood. We have no proof whatsoever that the Israelites had the same notion as the Greeks, and if they had, David would certainly not have put such a stigma upon the fallen king. [As though he had] not [been] anointed with oil. By rejecting the inserted words, we get the original, with all its simplicity, but with all its difficulty.
"There the shield of the heroes was defiled:
The shield of Saul not anointed with oil."
The interpretation put upon these words in the Authorized Version is taken from the Vulgate, no mean authority, but it is one which cannot be reconciled with the Hebrew, where it is not Saul, but his shield, which is referred to. It was a Jewish custom to anoint the shield with oil before a battle (Isa_21:5), in order probably to make the missiles of the enemy glance off from it without injury. And bearing this in mind, David now contrasts the sad issue of the battle with the hopes with which the warrior had in old times gone forth to war. Then his shield glistened brightly; now it was defiled with blood. In the Revised Version the rendering, "vilely cast away," is retained, the Revisers not having perceived that "defiled," which they have placed in the margin, is absolutely required for the text by the contrast with "the shield not anointed with oil."
2Sa_1:22
From the blood of the slain. In old time, Saul and Jonathan had been victorious warriors, who had returned from the battlefield stained with the blood of their enemies: from this battle they return no more, and their weapons have lost their old renown.
2Sa_1:23
Lovely and pleasant. The words of the Authorized Version contain a beautiful antithesis, which, however, does not exist in the Hebrew, which celebrates the close union of father and son in life as well as in death.
"Saul and Jonathan, the lovely and pleasant,
Neither in their lives nor in their death were they divided."
Notwithstanding Saul's rash vow, Jonathan had ever been his father's faithful friend and companion, nor had his affection for David made him untrue to the ties of natural affection. And David generously commends his friend for thus acting.
2Sa_1:24
Ye daughters of Israel. In old time, the women of Israel had celebrated Saul's triumphs (2Sa_1:20), but now it is their sad office to bewail his death. And a touching reason is given for their sorrow. During Saul's reign the condition of the women had greatly improved. When a nation is in the miserable plight described in 1Sa_13:19-22, there is neither safety nor comfort for the weak; but when the strong arm of Saul had won freedom for Israel, the women were the first to reap the benefit, and "their scarlet clothing with delights," that is, their delightful or delicate clothing of bright colours and their golden ornaments, prove that the nation had made a great advance in prosperity and culture during the happier years of Saul's reign.
2Sa_1:26
Thy love to me was wonderful. Never was there a purer friendship than that of Jonathan for David. It began just after the combat with Goliath, when the young prince, instead of seeing in David a rival, who had equalled his own feat of valour, took him to his heart, put upon him his own robe and armour, and thus presented him to the army as his friend and brother. Nor did his father's hatred of David, nor the knowledge that David was to inherit the kingdom, interfere with his love. He remained a dutiful son to his father, and accepted his inferior position with magnanimity, without once seeing in David cause for blame; and it surpassed the love of women, because, to requite their devotion, they look for protection and homage, the more delightful because it is paid by the strong to the weak. But here the lives of the two friends could not combine in one happy fusion of mutual union. Their hearts were bound together, but a hard fate, of which they were fully aware, made the ruin of the one the certain result of the happiness of the other. Nevertheless, Jonathan, with everything to lose, and David with everything to gain, remained true and loyal friends.
2Sa_1:27
How are the mighty fallen! This lament, which occurs three times, is the central thought of the elegy. Glorious and noble in their pest lives, the heroes had now fallen, not as Wolfe fell at Quebec, with the shout of victory in his ears, but in the lost battle. And David seeks relief for his distress in dwelling upon the sad contrast between the splendid victories which Saul had won for Israel when first chosen to be king, and the terrible defeat by which life and kingdom had now been lost.
The facts of this section may be stated thus:
1. David having retired to Ziklag during the conflict between Israel and the Philistines, a messenger from the seat of war comes to pay him homage.
2. David, being as yet in ignorance of the event on Gilboa, and being impressed by the signs of mourning on the stranger, is prompted to ask whence he came.
3. Eager to ascertain further information, he learns from the Amalekite, not only that Saul and Jonathan were dead, but that, according to the stranger's story, the former had been killed by the hand of the narrator.
4. In evidence of the truth of his story, the man produces Saul's crown and bracelet.
I. DEEP CONVICTION OF BEING DEVOTED TO A HOLY CAUSE. Life is devoted to a Divine, not a merely human, purpose. This was pre-eminently characteristic of David at this time. He was conscious of being personally identified with the working out of God's holy purpose towards mankind. He had passed out of the realm of self-seeking into the kingdom of God, and in public and private lived for God. Here lies the beginning of our right and privilege to wait on Providence. As our Lord's life was a nobler instance of consecration to a holy cause than was David's, so now ours may be an instance less conspicuous than his, though in our measure as real. It is possible for us to be one with Christ and his kingdom—absorbed, amidst even private and domestic life, with the purpose dear to his heart. Our life gains power and glory only in proportion as we are enabled to cherish a well-founded conviction that we are not living for merely temporal and material considerations, but for God, and in that sense are his chosen servants for specific purposes, as truly as was David when, in retirement at Ziklag, he knew he was the chosen King of Israel.
II. FREEDOM FROM SELFISH AND MALEVOLENT DESIRES. David desired not elevation for the sake of personal gratification; nor did he desire disaster for Saul that a great obstacle to his own advance might be put aside. Men consecrated to God are open to the subtle temptation of desiring events to move on so as to promote their own personal ease at the cost of much that is sacred. Under plea of greater usefulness, we may long for Providence to open a pathway for us, when, if motives are severely scrutinized, there is discovered a secret longing for personal gratification. The interlacings of human life are such that the displacement of one may be a prerequisite to the freer action and wider usefulness of another; and one whose course is hampered by obstacles may almost unconsciously cherish the wish that some event may happen which, by the trouble and loss it brings to another, will promote his own interests. No one truly waits on Providence who cherishes this spirit. The man of business who, amidst difficulties, looks out eagerly for the downfall of others as a means of his own improved chance in competition, must not flatter himself that all along he has been quietly waiting on Providence. It often requires very high religious principle to labour on in obscurity, blessed by apparently few results, with a calm trust in God untainted by the desire that others, possibly less worthy in character, may be swept away by resistless events to make more room for ourselves. David's sentiments towards Saul, who stood in his pathway, are full of instruction to all.
III. RECOGNITION OF GOD'S CEASELESS CONTROL OVER OBSTACLES, AND OF HIS STEADILY UNFOLDING PURPOSES. Most probably David's followers, knowing as they did that Saul stood between him and the throne, often marvelled at his patient inactivity. But by a keener spiritual vision than they possessed, he recognized the perfect control of the God he served, and had amazing faith in the sure though slow unfolding of his purposes. Hence he could wait and be still. This quality has always entered largely into the character of those who have done great service in the interests of truth and righteousness. Our Saviour, during his earthly life, was a conspicuous instance. He was despised, rejected, of the people there were none with him, and events seemed to the minds of his disciples (Joh_14:1; Joh_16:19-22; Luk_24:21) to be disastrous to his cause; and yet all through he never distrusted the Father, and in fulness of confidence could anticipate the results of a steady unfolding of the Divine purpose (Joh_10:16). So likewise we in secular and spiritual affairs may be said to wait on Providence when, in spite of difficulties that almost crush out our life, we, being conscious of oneness with Christ, stagger not in our belief in the all-controlling wisdom and power, and rest in the certainty of an order of things which is being directed towards the realization of the Divine purposes with which our entire life is identified. "Have faith in God." He slumbers not; he sleeps not; he works, and who shall let?
IV. HEADINESS FOR ACTION, REGULATED BY RESOLVE ONLY TO ACT IN HARMONY WITH HIGHEST LAW. David was ready to act whenever occasion offered; but he would not create occasion, and that because he saw that, in the continuance of Saul's life and reign, there was involved a great principle. For had he not been chosen by God? and was not God now allowing him to work out his own chastisement in harmony with far-reaching moral laws? David could only act in harmony with the Divine law which seemed to be expressed in Saul's sad life—namely, the removal of the unworthy by a natural process. There was a reserve of power in Christ during his life among men which could have accomplished startling results had he put it forth—just as David could have precipitated events by putting forth his strength against Saul—but he restrained himself. He was patient, and abstained from any action that would run counter to the moral and physical laws by which God was then governing mankind. On the same principle he now carries on his work in the world. Men do not understand him when they look for an extension of Christianity in violation of the laws of moral and social life which God has ordained. We are entrusted with more power than it is fit to put forth. Its exercise is to be regulated by regard to law. Especially in embarrassed circumstances, when it seems as though, in our business, our domestic affairs, or Church action, we could make marked advance by a vigorous effort in a given direction, does it become us to ask whether such action would be in harmony with the law of righteousness. During the sorrows of the Church (Luk_21:9-21), when it seemed as though active resistance by the sword was essential to self-preservation, the disciples were to be patient, and not run counter to the law of the gospel by endeavouring to maintain a kingdom of peace by carnal weapons. We must wait for God, be ready to act when action will harmonize with the holy laws of God's government.
V. JUDICIOUS USE OF TIME, AS JUSTIFIED BY THE CIRCUMSTANCES OF OUR POSITION. David could not act against Saul; he could not benefit Israel by seeking to rid them of an unworthy ruler; but he could seek to remedy the evils caused by the Amalekites at Ziklag (1Sa_30:1, 1Sa_30:26), and also discipline and organize his adherents (1Ch_12:1-40.), and so put himself and his men in a position to move towards Palestine when God opened the way. The disciples of Christ were powerless to act on the world for some weeks after his death, but they cherished faith in their Lord, and, till the time appointed by Providence came, they wisely kept together for prayer and mutual encouragement (Act_1:14; cf. Act_2:1-13). The Christian Church may believe itself called to enter on a great missionary enterprise in an at present inaccessible country. It must not violate the laws of God by rushing into disaster under plea of promoting a good cause, hut must gather up materials and become ready to enter in when a higher power opens the way. The same principle applies to our extension of business, our entering on new or wider professions, and especially if we are ambitious to consecrate ourselves to the work of the Christian ministry. Those who, after the example of David, wait on Providence, will find in the end that the ways of God, though apparently slow and often trying to patience, are indicated by the issue.
I. THEY MAY SPRING FROM UNLOOKED FOR SOURCES, AND SO TAKE US OFF OUR GUARD. Who would have supposed that an Amalekite—a man whose tribe had been in conflict with David—would have appeared before him as bearer of news most momentous as affecting his future career? The apparent disinterestedness of one who could not be a partisan would render David open to the natural effect of the tidings on an ordinary heart. So in our life subtle temptations, calling us to no ostensible act of wrong, spring up we know not how, and take us by surprise. It may be an evil thought is suddenly obtruded in a line of ordinary thought; or a friend hints at a possibility without suggesting a deed or a feeling; or a set of facts start before the observing faculty, conveying, by their convergence on a matter of special interest to us, an impulse to cherish a definite class of feelings which, when examined in cool moments, is found to be essentially unholy. "Watch and pray, lest ye enter into temptation," was an exhortation based on a profound knowledge of the manifold avenues along which subtle promptings to evil may enter into and possess the soul.
II. THEY MAY NOT CALL TO ANY DEFINITE ACTION. In this case David was even relieved, by the fact of the tidings, from the pressure that had so long been on him to take action for his own advancement. Whatever appeal there was in the temptation was simply to the seat of feeling. The constitutional weakness of man is to feel satisfaction when an enemy is removed, and, though conventional custom may lead us to say that that satisfaction is tempered by sadness, it is to be feared that in this there is more of form than reality. Many men would not see any temptation in this narrative. They cannot see that character lies in feeling cherished, more than in acts that manifestly violate some law of God or man. Incitements to deeds of open vice do not form the most dangerous evils of our lot. Satan ruins more by undermining than by direct assault. The weakening of the inner seat of purity and kindliness alone need not involve any deed or word known to our fellow creatures.
III. THEY MAY PRESENT THEMSELVES UNDER COVER OF CONSIDERATIONS OF EXPEDIENCY. Judging from the standard that governs the lives of most men, the Amalekite imagined that his story would gratify David for two reasons—one, that hopes long cherished of being of service to Israel were soon to be realized; the other, that Saul was set aside by other hands than his own. There can be no doubt but that, in proportion to the strength of his hope of some day being the means of raising Israel from the sorrows which had come by the misrule of Saul, so would be the tendency to rejoice in its speedy realization; and this he knew would be legitimate. Hence, although, as a kindly good man, he might well abstain from cherishing any secret satisfaction at the disaster which had befallen Saul, yet, in view of the beneficial issues about to flow from the event, would there not be valid ground for so doing? Was not the welfare of the nation of more importance than sentiment for an individual? And could he not distinguish between malicious joy, and satisfaction in the rising of public good out of personal disaster? It is thus easy for one nation to find, by a swift process of thought, plausible pretext for satisfaction in the calamities of another nation. Possibly our Church life is not free from the subtle temptation, when we observe, in the decay of rival parties or denominations, a probable increase to the strength of our own. Business men may argue that benefits to society arise from the downfall of houses trading on an insecure basis, and so cover the real character of the personal satisfaction entertained. We need to be much on our guard when the reasoning powers are stimulated to justify sentiments which in their simple nakedness would be instinctively abhorred by a very holy and loving nature. In moral matters the first judgments are safest.
IV. THEY DO NOT REVEAL OR SUGGEST THE IMMEDIATE AND REMOTE CONSEQUENCES OF YIELDING. The point of the temptation, as it fell on David's nature, was simply to develop a certain feeling of satisfaction that, as he could not and would not raise a hand against Saul, some one else, in a natural course of events, had been permitted by Providence to do so, and thus had secured the opening of the door for which he had been waiting. Now, this feeling, so natural to many men, so commonly cherished under kindred circumstances, even though a human weakness, was simply a private transitory sentiment passing over the inner life, and forming no feature in conduct. It seemed to begin and end there and then. Its presence, if permitted, was a trifle, and inflicted no injury on society. Thus, while other temptations on presentation startle the ordinary mind by being associated at once with damage to social position, or to family or nation, temptations of this class do not reveal or suggest at the time their consequences. Of course, evil is to be resisted as evil apart from effects; and a pure mind will immediately detect the essentially immoral nature of any internal incitement to transitory impurity of sentiment. But it is easier to many to detect and resist temptations of the other class. No doubt every deterioration of feeling does issue in disastrous consequences, as surely as do open acts of vice, only the subtle process escapes notice. Consequently many good men, forgetting this, often entertain suggested transitory feelings of evil, which, did they hut duly consider the necessary deterioration of their entire life which thereupon sets in, they would carefully watch against and resist.
PRACTICAL LESSONS.
1. We ought to act at all times under the influence of the fact that at no hour are we free from the possibility of being subjected to very subtle temptations.
2. The more cultivated and tried our piety, the more likely is it that the trials of our religious purity will come in forms not suggestive of open acts of transgression.
3. Whenever the reasonings of expediency come in to justify the indulgence of sentiments of which doubt may have arisen as to their moral quality, we may safely be suspicious of fallacy, and so should close the debate at once.
4. It is very possible that a long season of persistent temptation to actual wrong, as in the case of David for years past, may culminate in a temptation more severe, because more difficult of detection, and which, if yielded to, would virtually undo the work of years of resistance. Therefore we need to be specially watchful when the end of our trials is near.
2Sa_1:11-27
The facts of the section are:
1. Having become assured, through the testimony of the Amalekite, of the defeat of Israel in the death of Saul and Jonathan, David and his men spent the rest of the day in mourning.
2. On the morrow David examines the Amalekite as to the particulars of Saul's death, and being shocked at the sin and shame of slaying the Lord's anointed, he condemns the man to death.
3. Being left to his own reflections on the sad event which had happened to Israel, he composes an elegy, as an expression of his own feelings and for the use of Israel, in which he refers in impassioned language to
(1) the greatness of the calamity;
(2) its possible humiliation and shame to Israel should it become freely known in Philistine cities, and its future mournful associations with the locality in which it occurred;
(3) the better qualities of Saul and Jonathan in their relation to their country and to each other;
(4) the reason for sorrow even among the non-fighting members of the community, as they reflect on the improved Personal comforts incident to Saul's reign; and
(5) his special friendship with Jonathan, as the joy and solace of bygone years. The teaching of these facts and expressions of feeling may be summarized by embracing the public act of mourning for Saul and the poetic lament under one conception, and unfolding the various truths thus contained. But, in order to secure more consecution in dealing with those two items, we may consider first the teaching embodied in the conduct of the Amalekite in its contrast with that of David; and this can perhaps be best expressed by retting forth a contrast of states of mind. Hence notice—
I. IN WHAT SECULARITY AND SPIRITUALITY OF MIND RESPECTIVELY CONSIST, AND HOW THEY EXPRESS THEMSELVES.
1. The one consists mainly in the tendency to look at things out of their spiritual relations, and the other to look at them in those relations. As a matter of fact, we know that, consequent on the existence of a supreme Being and a moral government which he exercises over spiritual beings, the whole universe is comprised of two distinct yet interrelated spheres—the material and perishable on the one hand, and the spiritual and imperishable on the other. As men necessitated to work out the first lines of our destiny under material conditions, and therefore in incessant contact with the perishable, we are, through the bluntness of our superior perceptions, superinduced by sin, prone to regard all events as pertaining to our fleeting earthly experience. This is secularity of mind—the mind that sees only the lower side of man's life, and takes no note of the higher destiny of which he is capable. On the other hand, spirituality of mind, while recognizing the value and Divine source of our common lot as creatures of struggle under material conditions, perceives the reality of the higher invisible sphere, and estimates all things in the lower according to its relation to the great facts and dominating laws of the higher. The Amalekite looked on Saul as simply a man belonging to a mundane order of things, in which other men were striving for the mastery with him. David saw the existence, alongside the mundane order, of an invisible kingdom, and he recognized in Saul an embodiment of a Divine principle—an institution of Divine authorization. For was he not the Lord's anointed? Was there not more in his existence than was comprised in range of Amalekite vision? Here lies the dividing line between the two great classes of men. The one sees a passing age, with its wants and struggles appropriate to that age; the other sees an invisible and enduring spiritual order, and that man is to be viewed in relation to that order. The one, therefore, is carnal, restricted in range, utilitarian, and in league with practices that "pay;" the other is religious, wide as infinity in range, pervaded by conscious supremacy of holy principles, and in alliance with only what is pure and pleasing before God.
2. In accordance with their essential nature, they will respectively manifest themselves at times, the one in a use of sacred things for personal gain, and the other in self-abnegation out of reverence for what is Divine. It was the purely secular mind of the Amalekite that led to his endeavour to make gain out of the death of the Lord's anointed, and that, too, without supposing that he was doing anything remarkable. It was David's high-toned spirituality that led him to ignore all the wrongs he had experienced at the hand of Saul, and to pass by the faults and follies of the unhappy monarch, and, instead of finding pleasure in prospect of his own coming promotion, to feel as though in the act done by the Amalekite a violence had been perpetrated against the most holy of institutions. So has it been in all ages, and is still. Men can barter religious professions for gain; or calmly and irreverently handle sacred subjects as though of common import; or behave in the presence of sacred realities as though treading on unhallowed ground. Judas, Simon Magus, the revilers at the cross, have their counterparts in those who seek gain by complying with the will of godless authorities, professional zealots for Christianity, and cynics who make sport of sacred things.
3. But, also, it is a tendency which in each case gives colour to the entire life. It was not a new thing for the Amalekite thus to think and feel concerning Saul and his relation to Israel and David; for all along Saul had been to him simply one of many rulers among men, and the conflict of the past years had been only a trial of human strength and skill. And, also, David's profound reverence for the Divine idea in Saul's kingship, and his faith in the reality of a Divine purpose for men being incorporated with it, had permeated his life during the weary days of exile. The two men were always governed by their respective tendencies. The one life was narrowed, rendered gross and hard by persistent secularity; the other was broadened, refined, and beautified by constant communion with the unseen and eternal. The whole domestic and private as well as public life of men is affected for the worse or better as they are secular or spiritual in tone. Spirituality is favourable to every phase of human experience. Secularity means debasement. Were society pervaded by so pure, unselfish, and spiritually perceptive a temper as was David's, and more so, David's greater Son, how smoothly would the machinery of life move on, and what music would there be in its roll!
II. THE FINAL RESULT OF INDULGING IN THESE OPPOSITE STATES OF MIND. AS a fact, the Amalekite's zeal brought him disappointment—death. David's fine perception of the sanctities of life, his habitual reverence for Divine institutions as seen in all his relations to Saul, his consciousness that God was establishing his own kingdom in his own way,—all this issued in elevation to a position where spirituality of mind could be exercised for the greater good of Israel. Prophetic is this of the end of all secularity and spirituality. The one must end in disappointment—in loss of those things which it was thought would be gained, and even in judicial separation from the pure in heart (Mat_16:26; Mat_7:21-23). The other is an education by which we become qualified to rise in the kingdom of God, to exercise over others a higher and wider influence than otherwise could be obtained (1Jn_3:2, 1Jn_3:3; Mat_25:23; 1Ti_6:11, 1Ti_6:12; Rom_3:21).
GENERAL LESSONS.
1. It is a dangerous thing to form our estimate of what others may do from the ideas and feelings that govern our own actions. The Amalekite could not conceive of any one not rejoicing in the death of a foe.
2. Dull perception of spiritual realities is a real impoverishment of life, as truly as is an affliction of blindness or deafness.
3. Regard for Divine institutions is to be cultivated irrespective of the imperfect character of men who act in connection with them.
4. The exposure of a base spirit is sure to be the result of a direct judgment of the Son of David when we are called to stand before him.
5. Any attempt to court the favour of the chosen King in Zion by deeds and spirit not in harmony with the holy laws of his kingdom, will inevitably end in banishment from his presence (Luk_6:46; Luk_13:25-27).
I. FAILURE IN LIFE'S MISSION IS THE GREAT DISASTER OF LIFE. David knew that death came to all men, and that the removal from earth of one who has figured before our vision disturbs the whole current of feeling. Had Saul died under some circumstances David would have sorrowed, but the pang of this his sorrow would not have been experienced. He had known Saul as the chosen of God, equipped for high enterprise in the kingdom of God, and in a position to prepare the pathway for the coming of a mightier king. Splendid opportunities arose; strong influences were brought to bear; but all in vain. Life's mission failed. The noble work was not done. Fine abilities were wasted. Dishonoured, abandoned by God, covered with shame—the shame of an abortive life—he passed away. Simple death would have been glory and blessing as compared with this. What was true of Saul may be true of others and, unhappily, is too often the fact. God has a purpose in the life of every human being, and our business in this world is to comprehend the nature of that purpose and realize it in our experience. It is an unutterable disaster if, knowing why we are here, and possessing all the appliances and means of carrying out God's will, we nevertheless pass away as unprofitable servants (Mat_25:26-30). There are instances of frequent occurrence in which splendid abilities, robust health, excellent social position, fine openings for usefulness, are all wasted by the dominance of unholy passions, and men have to witness the sad spectacle of early promise issuing in a dishonoured name and premature grave. Those who believe that all who are born amidst Christian influences are sent into the world to work out for themselves and others a pure and blessed destiny, and that this can only be secured by our personally falling in the line of Chri