Exegetical and Hermeneutical Commentary of 1 Samuel 24:1
And it came to pass, when Saul was returned from following the Philistines, that it was told him, saying, Behold, David [is] in the wilderness of En-gedi.
Ch. 1Sa 24:2. upon the rocks of the wild goats ] On precipitous cliffs scarcely accessible except to the ibex and chamois. Wild goats and antelopes still abound on the heights above Ain-Jidy.
Fuente: The Cambridge Bible for Schools and Colleges
29 24:8. David spares Saul’s life in the cave at En-gedi
This narrative and that in ch. 26 are regarded by some commentators as different accounts of the same event. See Note VII. p. 243, and the notes on ch. 26.
Psalms 57, 142 are referred by their titles to the time when David fled from Saul in the cave; but whether this occasion or his sojourn in the cave of Adullam is meant, must remain uncertain.
Fuente: The Cambridge Bible for Schools and Colleges
CHAPTER XXIV
Saul is informed that David is at En-gedi, and goes to seek him
with three thousand men, 1, 2.
He goes into a cave to repose, where David and his men lay hid;
who, observing this, exhort David to take away his life: David
refuses, and contents himself with privily cutting off Saul’s
skirt, 3-7.
When Saul departed, not knowing what was done, David called
after him; showed him that his life had been in his power;
expostulates strongly with him; and appeals to God, the Judge
of his innocence, 8-15.
Saul confesses David’s uprightness, acknowledges his obligation
to him for sparing his life; and causes him to swear that, when
he should come to the kingdom, he would not destroy his seed,
17-21.
Saul returns home, and David and his men stay in the hold, 22.
NOTES ON CHAP. XXIV
Verse 1. Saul was returned] It is very probable that it was only a small marauding party that had made an excursion in the Israelitish borders, and this invasion was soon suppressed.
Fuente: Adam Clarke’s Commentary and Critical Notes on the Bible
And it came to pass, when Saul was returned from following the Philistines,…. Having, as it should seem, got the victory over them, and driven them out of his country, and pursued them to their own:
that it was told him, saying, behold, David [is] in the wilderness of Engedi; in the strong holds of it, the high rocks and mountains in it, 1Sa 23:29.
Fuente: John Gill’s Exposition of the Entire Bible
Whilst Saul had gone against the Philistines, David left this dangerous place, and went to the mountain heights of Engedi, i.e., the present Ain-jidy (goat-fountain), in the middle of the western coats of the Dead Sea (see at Jos 15:62), which he could reach from Maon in six or seven hours. The soil of the neighbourhood consists entirely of limestone; but the rocks contain a considerable admixture of chalk and flint. Round about there rise bare conical mountains, and even ridges of from two to four hundred feet in height, which mostly run down to the sea. The steep mountains are intersected by wadys running down in deep ravines to the sea. “On all sides the country is full of caverns, which might then serve as lurking-places for David and his men, as they do for outlaws at the present day” (Rob. Pal. p. 203)
1Sa 24:1-2 When Saul had returned from his march against the Philistines, and was informed of this, he set out thither with three thousand picked men to search for David and his men in the wild-goat rocks. The expression “ rocks of the wild goats ” is probably not a proper name for some particular rocks, but a general term applied to the rocks of that locality on account of the number of wild goats and chamois that were to be found in all that region, as mountain goats are still (Rob. Pal. ii. p. 204).
1Sa 24:3 When Saul came to the sheep-folds by the way, where there was a cave, he entered it to cover his feet, whilst David and his men sat behind in the cave. V. de Velde ( R. ii. p. 74) supposes the place, where the sheep-folds by the roadside were, to have been the Wady Chareitun, on the south-west of the Frank mountain, and to the north-east of Tekoah, a very desolate and inaccessible valley. “Rocky, precipitous walls, which rise up one above another for many hundred feet, form the sides of this defile. Stone upon stone, and cliff above cliff, without any sign of being habitable, or of being capable of affording even a halting-place to anything but wild goats.” Near the ruins of the village of Chareitun, hardly five minutes’ walk to the east, there is a large cave or chamber in the rock, with a very narrow entrance entirely concealed by stones, and with many side vaults in which the deepest darkness reigns, at least to any one who has just entered the limestone vaults from the dazzling light of day. It may be argued in favour of the conjecture that this is the cave which Saul entered, and at the back of which David and his men were concealed, that this cave is on the road from Bethlehem to Ain-jidy, and one of the largest caves in that district, if not the largest of all, and that, according to Pococke ( Beschr. des Morgenl. ii. p. 61), the Franks call it a labyrinth, the Arabs Elmaama, i.e., hiding-place, whilst the latter relate how at one time thirty thousand people hid themselves in it “to escape an evil wind,” in all probability the simoom. The only difficulty connected with this supposition is the distance from Ain-jidy, namely about four or five German miles (fifteen or twenty English), and the nearness of Tekoah, according to which it belongs to the desert of Tekoah rather than to that of Engedi. “ To cover his feet ” is a euphemism according to most of the ancient versions, as in Jdg 3:24, for performing the necessities of nature, as it is a custom in the East to cover the feet. It does not mean “to sleep,” as it is rendered in this passage in the Peschito, and also by Michaelis and others; for although what follows may seem to favour this, there is apparently no reason why any such euphemistic expression should have been chosen for sleep. “ The sides of the cave:” i.e., the outermost or farthest sides.
1Sa 24:4 Then David’s men said to him, “ See, this is the day of which Jehovah hath said to thee, Behold, I give thine enemy into thy hand, and do to him what seemeth good to thee.” Although these words might refer to some divine oracle which David had received through a prophet, Gad for example, what follows clearly shows that David had received no such oracle; and the meaning of his men was simply this, “Behold, to-day is the day when God is saying to thee:” that is to say, the speakers regarded the leadings of providence by which Saul had been brought into David’s power as a divine intimation to David himself to take this opportunity of slaying his deadly enemy, and called this intimation a word of Jehovah. David then rose, up, and cut off the edge of Saul’s cloak privily. Saul had probably laid the meil on one side, which rendered it possible for David to cut off a piece of it unobserved.
1Sa 24:5 But his heart smote him after he had done it; i.e., his conscience reproached him, because he regarded this as an injury done to the king himself.
1Sa 24:6 With all the greater firmness, therefore, did he repel the suggestions of his men: “ Far be it to me from Jehovah (on Jehovah’s account: see at Jos 22:29), that ( , a particle denoting an oath) I should do such a thing to my lord, the anointed of Jehovah, to stretch out my hand against him.” These words of David show clearly enough that no word of Jehovah had come to him to do as he liked with Saul.
1Sa 24:7 Thus he kept back his people with words ( , verbis dilacere ), and did not allow them to rise up against Saul, sc., to slay him.
Fuente: Keil & Delitzsch Commentary on the Old Testament
| David Spares Saul in the Cave. | B. C. 1057. |
1 And it came to pass, when Saul was returned from following the Philistines, that it was told him, saying, Behold, David is in the wilderness of Engedi. 2 Then Saul took three thousand chosen men out of all Israel, and went to seek David and his men upon the rocks of the wild goats. 3 And he came to the sheepcotes by the way, where was a cave; and Saul went in to cover his feet: and David and his men remained in the sides of the cave. 4 And the men of David said unto him, Behold the day of which the LORD said unto thee, Behold, I will deliver thine enemy into thine hand, that thou mayest do to him as it shall seem good unto thee. Then David arose, and cut off the skirt of Saul’s robe privily. 5 And it came to pass afterward, that David’s heart smote him, because he had cut off Saul’s skirt. 6 And he said unto his men, The LORD forbid that I should do this thing unto my master, the LORD‘s anointed, to stretch forth mine hand against him, seeing he is the anointed of the LORD. 7 So David stayed his servants with these words, and suffered them not to rise against Saul. But Saul rose up out of the cave, and went on his way. 8 David also arose afterward, and went out of the cave, and cried after Saul, saying, My lord the king. And when Saul looked behind him, David stooped with his face to the earth, and bowed himself.
Here, I. Saul renews his pursuit of David, 1Sa 24:1; 1Sa 24:2. No sooner had he come home safely from chasing the Philistines, in which it should seem he had good success, than he enquired after David to do him a mischief, and resolved to have another thrust at him, as if he had been delivered to do all these abominations, Jer. vii. 10. By the frequent incursions of the Philistines, he might have seen how necessary it was to recall David from his banishment and restore him to his place in the army again; but so far is he from doing this that now more than ever he is exasperated against him, and, hearing that he is in the wilderness of En-gedi, he draws out 3000 choice men, and goes with them at his feet in pursuit of him upon the rocks of the wild goats, where, one would think, David should not have been envied a habitation nor Saul desirous of disturbing him; for what harm could he fear from one who was no better accommodated? But it is not enough for Saul that David is thus cooped up; he cannot be easy while he is alive.
II. Providence brings Saul alone into the same cave wherein David and his men had hidden themselves, v. 3. In those countries there were very large caves in the sides of the rocks or mountains, partly natural, but probably much enlarged by art for the sheltering of sheep from the heat of the sun; hence we read of places where the flocks did rest at noon (Cant. i. 7), and this cave seems to be spoken of as one of the sheep-cotes. In the sides of this cave David and his men remained, perhaps not all his men, the whole 600, but only some few of his particular friends, the rest being disposed of in similar retirements. Saul, passing by, turned in himself alone, not in search of David (for, supposing him to be an aspiring ambitious man, he thought to find him rather climbing with the wild goats upon the rocks than retiring with the sheep into a cave), but thither he turned aside to cover his feet, that is, to sleep awhile, it being a cool and quiet place, and very refreshing in the heat of the day; probably he ordered his attendants to march before, reserving only a very few to wait for him at the mouth of the cave. Some by the covering of the feet understand the easing of nature, and think that this was Saul’s errand into the cave: but the former interpretation is more probable.
III. David’s servants stir him up to kill Saul now that he has so fair an opportunity to do it, v. 4. They reminded him that this was the day which he had long looked for, and of which God had spoken to him in general when he was anointed to the kingdom, which should put a period to his troubles and open the passage to his advancement. Saul now lay at his mercy, and it was easy to imagine how little mercy he would find with Saul and therefore what little reason he had to show mercy to him. “By all means” (say his servants) “give him the fatal blow now.” See how apt we are to misunderstand, 1. The promises of God. God had assured David that he would deliver him from Saul, and his men interpret this as a warrant to destroy Saul. 2. The providences of God. Because it was now in his power to kill him, they concluded he might lawfully do it.
IV. David cut off the skirt of his robe, but soon repented that he had done this: His heart smote him for it (v. 5); though it did Saul no real hurt, and served David for a proof that it was in his power to have killed him (v. 11), yet, because it was an affront to Saul’s royal dignity, he wished he had not done it. Note, It is a good thing to have a heart within us smiting us for sins that seem little; it is a sign that conscience is awake and tender, and will be the means of preventing greater sins.
V. He reasons strongly both with himself and with his servants against doing Saul any hurt. 1. He reasons with himself (v. 6): The Lord forbid that I should do this thing. Note, Sin is a thing which it becomes us to startle at, and to resist the temptations to, not only with resolution, but with a holy indignation. He considered Saul now, not as his enemy, and the only person that stood in the way of his preferment (for then he would be induced to hearken to the temptation), but as God’s anointed (that is, the person whom God had appointed to reign as long as he lived, and who, as such, was under the particular protection of the divine law), and as his master, to whom he was obliged to be faithful. Let servants and subjects learn hence to be dutiful and loyal, whatever hardships are put upon them, 1 Pet. ii. 18. 2. He reasons with his servants: He suffered them not to rise against Saul, v. 7. He would not only not do this evil thing himself, but he would not suffer those about him to do it. Thus did he render good for evil to him from whom he had received evil for good, and was herein both a type of Christ, who saved his persecutors, and an example to all Christians not to be overcome of evil, but to overcome evil with good.
VI. He followed Saul out of the cave, and, though he would not take the opportunity to slay him, yet he wisely took the opportunity, if possible, to slay his enmity, by convincing him that he was not such a man as he took him for. 1. Even in showing his head now he testified that he had an honourable opinion of Saul. He had too much reason to believe that, let him say what he would, Saul would immediately be the death of him as soon as he saw him, and yet he bravely lays aside that jealousy, and thinks Saul so much a man of sense as to hear his reasoning when he had so much to say in his own vindication and such fresh and sensible proofs to give of his own integrity. 2. His behaviour was very respectful: He stooped with his face to the earth, and bowed himself, giving honour to whom honour was due, and teaching us to order ourselves lowly and reverently to all our superiors, even to those that have been most injurious to us.
Fuente: Matthew Henry’s Whole Bible Commentary
First Samuel – Chapter 24
David Spares Saul’s Life, vs. 1-8
Saul treated the invasion of the Philistines as a temporary interference in his campaign to capture David. As soon as he had disposed of that matter, and having heard that David was wandering in the wilderness of En-gedi, he mustered his men to go after him. His army was a specially chosen one, consisting of three thousand able soldiers. He intended to take David by all means this time.
En-gedi was about halfway down the coast of the Salt (Dead) Sea, on its west shore. The wilderness around it was full of caves and strewn with rocks. The town itself was the site of a spring rising in the mountain six hundred feet above the Sea. It was noted for the wild goats which roamed over it. Some commentators say En-gedi is the place meant by the city of palm trees” (Gen 14:7), though others think the term refers to the city of Jericho.
The sheep cotes to which Saul came in his search were caves where sheep were penned. Saul went into the caves to “cover his feet”, or to relieve himself. In so doing he laid aside his robe, thus making it easy for David to take it in the darkness without Saul being aware of it. He could easily be seen by David’s men, who had him between themselves and the light of the cave’s mouth while Saul’s own eyes would have been dimmed by coming out of the daylight into the darkness of the cave.
On the surface of things it looked as though the Lord was putting Saul in the cave where David and his men were hiding so that they could dispose of him. Thus David could succeed to the kingship as the Lord intended that he should. David’s men urged him to slay the king, and it seems that David may have contemplated doing that very thing momentarily, in that he cut off the skirt of Saul’s robe which he had laid aside. Immediately, though, David was conscience-smitten and by his oath disclaimed any further thought of such. It was the Lord who had Saul anointed as king of Israel, and the Lord had not removed him. Therefore David should not take into his own hands the removal of Saul.
So David prevented his men from harming Saul, and the king went out of the cave still unaware of his close call with death. Soon thereafter David followed calling to the king. When Saul looked about and saw him, David bowed before him with his face to the ground. David demonstrated great boldness in this act. Saul was there with three thousand men to take David and slay him, but David exercised faith in the Lord in coming thus into Saul’s presence.
Fuente: Garner-Howes Baptist Commentary
CRITICAL AND EXPOSITORY NOTES
1Sa. 24:2 Rocks of the wild goats, or ibex-rocks. Probably not a name for any particular rock, but a general term applied to the locality on account of the number of ibexes, or wild goats, found there.
1Sa. 24:3. Sheepcotes. These are still to be seen at the mouth of the caves in this region, and are made by piling up stones in a circle and covering them with thorns. To cover his feet, i.e., to obey a call of nature, when Orientals usually cover their feet. (Keil, Erdmann, and others.) There are many caves in this district where men might easily remain concealed from the view of a person entering. The largest cave, says Lieut. Lynch (American Exploration of the Dead Sea), that we entered at Engedi could contain thirty men, and has a long low and narrow gallery running from one side, which would be invisible when the sun does not shine through the entrance.
1Sa. 24:4. Behold the day, etc. This can here be understood only in the general sense of the Divine ordering of a favourable opportunity. A reference to a definite Divine declaration is not in the words themselves. Some cite 1Sa. 16:23; 1Sa. 16:1-12; and also 1Sa. 20:15; 1Sa. 23:17; but it is not probable that Davids men would know this. Of any other promise we have no mention. (Langes Commentary.) Sauls robe. His long outer mantle (meil), probably laid aside by Saul when he entered the cave.
1Sa. 24:6. The Lord forbid. Literally, far be it from me from Jehovah, i.e., on Jehovahs account. It is a religious ground which restrains David. (Erdmann.)
MAIN HOMILETICS OF THE PARAGRAPH.1Sa. 24:1-7
DAVID SPARES SAUL IN THE CAVE
I. Here is an example of the power of hatred to sustain the zeal of the wicked. We often speak of the power of righteous convictions and emotions to sustain men in a course of righteous action in the face of much opposition and many defeats, and we rejoice to think that history furnishes us with many bright illustrations of this truth. But we cannot deny that wicked men have also shown much courage and patience in the pursuit of their evil designs, impelled by the power of evil passions and principles. And of all these passions, perhaps hatred, and especially hatred of those whom the hater has wronged, is the most potent. This is the motive power that keeps alive the zealous activity of the great adversary of the human race. Satan first wronged man by tempting him to sin, and throughout all the ages since has been unceasing in his hatred to the creatures whom he has wronged and untiring in his efforts to compass their ruin. Such a passion possessed Saul at this time. His hatred of David was not appeased by the wrong which he had done him in the past, but seemed to gather strength with every fresh crime committed against him, and sustained him in his purpose to take his life if possible, notwithstanding all the checks and hindrances hitherto received. Since the day when he mistrusted Davids motive of action in the defeat of Goliath, he had found in his malice inspiration sufficient to keep him ever eager to compass his destruction, and he could not have set about this new pursuit with more determination and energy if God, instead of having constantly checkmated him in the past, had given him a Divine commission to seek and to destroy the son of Jesse. The untiring zeal of such a man under the influence of such a motive, ought to read a lesson to all who, professing to be animated by love to men and zeal for righteousness, often become weary and faint-hearted if they meet with repeated disappointments.
II. An example of the power of faith in God to abide Gods time of vindication. To a man who harboured a spirit of revenge such an opportunity as now presented itself to David to take the life of his adversary could hardly have been resisted. But revenge and retaliation are more frequently found in alliance with guilt than with innocence. The man who is wrongfully accused is generally more ready to forgive his accuser than the man who is guilty of the crime laid to his charge, because the latter is, as a rule, more likely to be governed by passion, and the former to be ruled by conscience. But the temptation here presented to David by the peculiar circumstances of the case, and seconded by the persuasions of his followers, did not take the form of an act of private revenge. We do not know what took place in Davids spirit when he found Saul so completely in his power, but if there arose within him any sudden impulse to take action against his persecutor, we may safely conclude that it sought to justify itself on the same ground as that urged by his men, viz., that in so doing he would be only taking a lawful advantage of a remarkable providence. And it was this which formed the strength of the temptation. As we saw in the preceding chapter (see on 1Sa. 24:7-12) men are at all times prone to interpret circumstances in accordance with their own inclinations, rather than by the light of Divine laws, and nothing but a strong faith in God could have saved David at this time from falling into this snare. The man who was now at his mercy was avowedly seeking his life, and might it not therefore be lawful to slay him in self-defence, nay, might he not have been given into his hand for this very purpose? This was not the argument of one man only, but of many, and numbers strengthen the weight of argument. Then David knew, what his men did not know, that he was also the anointed of the Lord, and was destined by Jehovah to succeed Saul as king of Israel. Was not the time now come when by Sauls death peace might be restored to the kingdom which he neglected to gratify his private enmity? And would not David bring a blessing to the entire nation by executing the sentence which had long since been pronounced against the man who had proved so faithless to the great trust committed to him? Such questions and arguments from within and without came up for solution in the short space of time given to David for decision, but a man who, like David, lives a life of dependence upon God and of confidence in Him, does not find it so difficult after all to find out what he ought to do and to do it. The key to Davids conduct in these circumstances is found in his firm persuasion that his cause was in the hands of the Divine and Righteous Ruler of all men, who would not suffer wrong to prevail over right in the end. The Lord judge between me and thee, and see and plead my cause. This was the shield of faith upon which David turned aside the darts of temptation which now assailed him.
OUTLINES AND SUGGESTIVE COMMENTS
1Sa. 24:3. If Saul had known his own opportunities, how David and his men had interred themselves, he had saved a treble labour of chase, of execution, and burial; for had he but stopped the mouth of that cave, his enemies had laid themselves down in their own graves. The wisdom of God thinks fit to hide from evil men and spirits those means and seasons which might be, if they had been taken, most prejudicial to his own. We had been oft foiled if Satan could but have known our hearts. Sometimes we lie open to evils, and happy it is for us that He only knows it who, pities instead of tempting us. Bp. Hall.
1Sa. 24:4. Providential purpose, apparent and real.
1. What was here the apparent purpose of God? To give an injured man the opportunity of delivering and avenging himself.
2. How did he know that such could not be the purpose of Providence? Because it would involve his doing what would be wrong in itself. An enlightened and tender conscience must check our interpretations of Providence.
3. What was the real Providential purpose? As usual, it was manifold: we can see the following points; (a). To make him more conscientious by obeying conscience under sore temptation (1Sa. 24:5-6). (b). To present a noble example to his rude followers and the people at large (1Sa. 24:6; 1Sa. 24:10). (c). To furnish a most convincing proof that he was wrongly accused (1Sa. 24:9-11). (d). To give him ground for a confident appeal to Providence in future (1Sa. 24:12 sq.; comp. 1Sa. 26:23-24). (e). To heighten his reputation for loyalty and magnanimity, and smooth the way to his finally becoming king.Langes Commentary.
1Sa. 24:5. His conscience, which keeps court in every faculty of the soul, checked him, such was his tenderness then. Bee-masters tell us that those are the best hives that make the greatest noise; so is that the best conscience that checketh for the smallest sins. Good men are afraid of the least show of sin, being jealous over themselves with a godly jealousy.Trapp.
1Sa. 24:7. Revenge is unquestionably one of the strongest and most impetuous, as it is plainly one of the darkest passions in the heart of man. Of all the tragedies of which this earth has been the scene, the wildest have sprung from the exercise of revenge; of all the crimes that have disgraced humanity, the darkest have had this foul passion for their mother; and perhaps the bitterest remorse with which mans bosom has ever been torn, is that which has followed the deeds of revenge. Dark and dreadful, too, though this passion be, nothing comes less welcome than the call to check it; and once it is fairly roused, life itself would often be parted with more readily than the savage gratification which it craves. Nowhere have its frightful fruits been more clearly shown than in that beautiful island of the Mediterranean celebrated as the birthplace of the first Napoleon. For hundreds of years Corsica has sustained a lofty reputation for its patriotism and dauntless valour; age after age has produced fresh crops of heroes, worthy of being ranked with those of any land; but in spite of the richness of its soil, the beauty of its climate, and the fearless spirit of its people, the country is most miserable; its plains are uncultivated, its inhabitants are kept in constant misery by family feuds that never heal, and that are constantly breaking out with fresh vehemence, through the influence of an organised system of revenge, that under the name of the vendetta has become one of the institutions of the country. It is only when we think of such awful fruits of the spirit of revenge that we become truly alive to the singular excellence of the spirit of forbearance which David remarkably displayed. We see the striking contrast between nature and gracebetween the heart of man as sin has made it, and the heart of man as grace renews it. Yet while we freely award the tribute of admiration, let us not forget that the field is one upon which similar victories are always to be won.Blackie.
1Sa. 24:8. David follows Saul from the cave more joyous now than after the conquest of Goliath. Indeed, this last victory was the more glorious onethe spoils were more precious, the trophies more honourable. Then, he had needed a sling, stones, and battle array; this time his reason had been a sufficient weaponwithout arms he had won the victory, without having shed blood he had erected the trophy. He came forth, therefore, not carrying the head of a Philistine, but a mortified heart, a conquered anger; and it was not to Jerusalem that he consecrated his spoils, but to heaven, to the city on high. We see no women coming forth to meet him with songs of praise, but the angels applauded his deed and admired his wisdom and piety. For he returned after having given many wounds to his adversary; not to Saul, whom he had saved, but to his real enemy, the devil, whom he had pierced through with many thrusts. For as our anger and lust and our mutual collisions rejoice the devil, so peace and concord and victory over passion grieve and conquer him who hates peace and is the father of jealousy. David comes forth, then, from the cavern with a crown upon his head it is not the diadem of Saul, but the crown of justice which adorns himit is not the royal purple which enwraps him, but a wisdom more than human, before which the most gorgeous robe becomes pale.Chrysostom.
Fuente: The Preacher’s Complete Homiletical Commentary Edited by Joseph S. Exell
Sauls Life Spared by David, 1Sa. 24:1-22.
David Spares Sauls Life. 1Sa. 24:1-7
And it came to pass, when Saul was returned from following the Philistines, that it was told him, saying, Behold, David is in the wilderness of En-gedi.
2 Then Saul took three thousand chosen men out of all Israel, and went to seek David and his men upon the rocks of the wild goats.
3 And he came to the sheepcotes by the way, where was a cave; and Saul went in to cover his feet: and David and his men remained in the sides of the cave.
4 And the men of David said unto him, Behold the day of which the Lord said unto thee, Behold, I will deliver thine enemy into thine hand, that thou mayest do to him as it shall seem good unto thee. Then David arose, and cut off the skirt of Sauls robe privily.
5 And it came to pass afterward, that Davids heart smote him, because he had cut off Sauls skirt.
6 And he said unto his men, The Lord forbid that I should do this thing unto my master, the Lords anointed, to stretch forth mine hand against him, seeing he is the anointed of the Lord.
7 So David stayed his servants with these words, and suffered them not to rise against Saul. But Saul rose up out of the cave, and went on his way.
1.
Who told Saul where to find David? 1Sa. 24:1
No mention is made of the party or parties who told Saul that David was over in En-gedi. Since the Ziphites had informed Saul on previous occasions, they were probably the ones who gave this information to Saul. Again Saul may have left certain of his servants in the land of Judah to keep him informed of Davids whereabouts. Although Saul was forced to leave the area himself in order to drive out the invading Philistines, he did not want to lose contact with David.
2.
What were the rocks of the wild goats? 1Sa. 24:2
Wild goats ran on the sides of the cliffs which dropped down to the Dead Sea from the mountain of Judah in the vicinity of En-gedi. It was in one of these caves on the west side of the Dead Sea just a little farther to the north that the Dead Sea Scrolls were found by a goat-herd. The man was looking for some of his lost animals when he came upon the mouth of one of these caves. Thinking that perhaps his animals were down in the cave, he himself entered it and found the sealed earthen vessels which contained the fabulous scrolls which have been acclaimed as the most important archaeological discovery of recent times. As far as Bible lands are concerned, wild goats made many tracks only a foot wide all through this area. This expression should not be taken as a proper name for some particular rocks, but as a general term applied to the rocks of the location on account of the number of goats which are to be found in the region.
3.
Why was David in a cave? 1Sa. 24:3
Since caves were throughout the length and breadth of the area, they afforded a natural hiding place for David and his band of 600 men. The men of Israel hid themselves in the caves earlier when the Philistines attacked their land (1Sa. 13:6). Lot had asked permission to hide in a cave when Sodom and Gomorrah were destroyed (Gen. 19:30). Probably David and his men went into the caves to sleep, finding this to be a more secure place to hide than out in the open field.
4.
Why did Saul come into the cave? 1Sa. 24:3
It is said that Saul went into the cave to cover his feet. The exact meaning of this expression is debated, and some take it to be a euphemism. The expression occurs also in Jdg. 3:24 when Eglons servants were afraid to disturb him as they thought he had gone into his chamber to cover his feet. Those who understand this as a euphemism believe that it describes Sauls performing the necessities of nature, since it was a custom in the East to cover the feet at such a time. The Peshitta, an ancient version of the Bible, translates this Hebrew phrase as meaning to sleep. What follows seems to favor this. David must have gone into the cave to rest, and Saul found the spot to be suitable to his needs as well.
5.
How did Davids men view the situation? 1Sa. 24:4
Davids men thought that this was an opportune time for David to kill Saul. They said, Behold the day of which the Lord said unto thee . . . No record is made of Davids ever having received a prophecy that God would deliver Saul into his hand. David was not out to kill Saul, although Saul accused him of lying in wait for him (1Sa. 22:8; 1Sa. 22:13). Gad, the prophet, was with David, but there is no record of his having brought such an announcement to David. Davids men must have therefore been referring to their interpretation of Gods providences. It appeared to them that God had been saying through the transpiring events that eventually David would prevail over Saul. They could see no outcome of the situation except that David would overcome Saul and succeed him on the throne.
6.
What was Davids view? 1Sa. 24:5
David did nothing more than to arise and cut off the skirt of Sauls robe while he was sleeping. Afterward his conscience hurt him about this. He looked upon Saul as Gods anointed. David had great respect for Gods anointed leaders, and he was ashamed of the fact that he had humiliated Saul by marring his robe.
Fuente: College Press Bible Study Textbook Series
(1) When Saul was returned.How intent Saul was on his bloody purpose with regard to his supposed rival is clear, for no sooner was the Philistine raid repulsed than with sleepless animosity he at once set forth with a force, as the next verse relates, of considerable magnitude to hunt down his foe. Saul was encouraged in this fresh enterprise by the offer of the Ziphites (see preceding 1Sam 1Sa. 24:19-22). These bitter enemies of David, in the interval of the Philistine waraccustomed to the passes and mountains of the barren region of the south of Canaancomplying with the kings request (1Sa. 23:23), had taken careful knowledge of the lurking-places where David was hiding, and were now prepared to act as guides to the well-equipped and disciplined forces under Saul in its marches and counter-marches in the deserts bordering on the south of Judah.
En-gedi.David and his band were now wandering along a lofty plateau, upon the tops of cliffs some 2,000 feet above the Dead Sea. En-gedistill known as Ain-jedy, the Fountain of the Kidis a beautiful oasis, in the barren wilderness to the south of Judah. Its original name was Hazazon TamarThe Palm Wood (see 2Ch. 20:2)and was once an ancient settlement of the Amorites (see Gen. 14:7). It has in all ages been a favourite spot with the possessors of the land. King Solomon appears to have paid peculiar attention to this garden of the wilderness. He planted the hills round it with vines; from the fountain flows a warm limpid stream, delicious to the taste. The remains of ancient gardens tell us that in the golden days of the kings En-gedi was probably a favourite resort of the wealthy citizen of Jerusalem. Solpmon, in his Song of Songs, writes of it in a strain which shows how he loved it, when he compares his beloved to a cluster of camphire in the vineyards of En-gedi.Son. 1:14. Its present condition, as described by modern travellers, more nearly resembles the En-gedi when Saul hunted David among the rocks and caverns than the En-gedi the resort of the Jerusalem citizens, beautiful with gardens and vines of Solomon.Conder: Tent Life. Dean Stanley and others have described the spot with great care, and left us a vivid picture of the scene. They tell us of the long and weary journey-across the desolate valleys and precipitous barren heights, and of the enchanting scene which lay before them when once Ain-jedy was reached. They describe in flowing language the plentiful and rich vegetation, the trees and fruits, the ruins of the ancient gardens, and remains of the beautiful groves, still inhabited by a multitude of singing birds. In the limestone cliffs are numerous caves, some of them very large and deep, well calculated to be the temporary shelter of large bodies of men.
Fuente: Ellicott’s Commentary for English Readers (Old and New Testaments)
DAVID AND SAUL IN THE WILDERNESS OF EN-GEDI, 1Sa 24:1-22.
1. When Saul was returned from following the Philistines This was another of those bitter contests with that enemy against whom Saul was obliged to carry on war all his days, (1Sa 14:52😉 but how long this war with the Philistines lasted, and of its relative importance, we are not informed.
En-gedi The modern Ain-Jidy, situated about the middle of the western coast of the Dead Sea. Its name was transferred from a fountain near the sea to the whole neighbouring wilderness on the west, which is full of deep ravines, rocky ridges and dark caverns.
Fuente: Whedon’s Commentary on the Old and New Testaments
DAVID’S FLIGHT TO RAMAH, AND SAUL’S PURSUIT, 1Sa 19:18 to 1Sa 24:18.
David fled to Samuel Whither could he better go for help and counsel at a time like this? Surely, he thinks, Samuel will defend me against Saul.
He and Samuel went and dwelt in Naioth Naioth is not to be regarded as a proper name. The word means habitations, dwelling places, and refers to the dwellings of the band of prophets over whom Samuel presided. The plural is used because of the number of cells or huts in this locality. The Targum renders the word house of instruction, and Ewald defines it as studium, or school. Here these disciples of Samuel dwelt, and disciplined themselves in holy exercises. How long David enjoyed this society of Samuel and these prophets before Saul ascertained whither he had fled we cannot determine, but probably not long.
Fuente: Whedon’s Commentary on the Old and New Testaments
Saul Unwittingly Puts Himself At David’s Mercy ( 1Sa 24:1-7 ).
Even in Engedi David was not safe from a vengeful Saul, for once he had driven back the Philistines, Saul gathered three thousand of Israel’s best fighting men and made tracks for Engedi, in order to finally finish him off. Yet there he was able to find no trace of David, because the huge caves provided adequate shelter, and there were too many to search in safety. As he and his men looked them over their empty mouths must have appeared like a death trap which lure them in and swallow up all who entered them.
Analysis.
a
b Now David and his men were abiding in the innermost parts of the cave (1Sa 24:3 b).
c And the men of David said to him, “Look, the day of which YHWH said to you, “Behold, I will deliver your enemy into your hand, and you will do to him as it will seem good to you.” Then David arose, and cut off the hem of Saul’s robe secretly (1Sa 24:3-4).
d And it came about afterward, that David’s heart smote him, because he had cut off Saul’s hem (1Sa 24:5).
c And he said to his men, “YHWH forbid that I should do this thing to my lord, YHWH’s anointed, to put forth my hand against him, seeing he is YHWH’s anointed.” (1Sa 24:6).
b So David tore into his men with these words, and would not let them rise against Saul. (1Sa 24:7 a).
a And Saul rose up out of the cave, and went on his way (1Sa 24:7 b).
Note that in ‘a’ Saul came among the caves of Engedi and selected what seemed a safe cave where he could relieve himself, and in the parallel he leaves the cave safely unaware of how close to death he has been. In ‘b’ David’s men were in hiding in the cave and in the parallel David has to firmly dissuade them From killing Saul. In ‘c’ his men urge that YHWH has delivered Saul into his hands, and in the parallel David refuses to lift up a hand against him because he is YHWH’s anointed. Centrally in ‘d’ David is even conscience stricken at having cut the hem off Saul’s outer robe.
1Sa 24:1
‘ And it came about that, when Saul was returned from following the Philistines, it was told him, saying, “Look, David is in the wilderness of Engedi.” ’
As soon as Saul returned from driving back the Philistines, his spies informed him that David and his men were now in hiding in the wilderness of Engedi. This wilderness was a desolate and barren limestone desert on the western side of the Dead Sea, a desolation and barrenness only relieved by the oasis at Engedi (meaning ‘spring of the kid’) which gave the area its name. It was an area full of caves which went deep into the limestone cliffs, and a regular hiding place for bandits who could disappear into the caves without trace. Some caves were at ground level and others higher up the cliff face. These cliffs were the haunt of wild goats who could scamper along the narrow paths in a way that caused men to speak with admiration of the ‘surefootedness of a mountain goat’. The caves at ground level would sometimes be used as a shelter in bad weather for sheep, and the shepherds would build a rough wall round the entrance for the purpose, turning them into a sheepcote.
1Sa 24:2
‘ Then Saul took three thousand chosen men out of all Israel, and went to seek David and his men on the rocks of the wild goats.’
It was in this barren and desolate area that Saul, with three thousand chosen troops, began his search for David, no doubt traversing the goat tracks on the cliffs at the risk of their lives as they searched the caves. But they discovered nothing. It began to look as though David and his men had moved on.
1Sa 24:3
‘ And he came to the sheepcotes by the way, where was a cave, and Saul went in to cover his feet. Now David and his men were abiding in the innermost parts of the cave.’
Coming to a group of caves at ground level which had clearly been used by shepherds as sheepcotes Saul reckoned it was safe to enter one in order to relieve himself. As king he seems to have felt that it was below his dignity to perform this function in front of his men. But what he did not know was that he had actually chosen the very cave where David was in hiding with some of his men. These caves were very large with many recesses and side passages, and were pitch black to any who entered them from the sunlight, although once men had been in them a few hours and had become attuned to the darkness, and were looking towards the mouth of the cave, they could see more clearly. Thus Saul would have been able to see nothing, while the men in the cave, of whom he was unaware, were very much aware of his presence.
1Sa 24:4
‘ And the men of David said to him, “Look, the day of which YHWH said to you, “Behold, I will deliver your enemy into your hand, and you will do to him as it will seem good to you.” Then David arose, and cut off the hem of Saul’s robe secretly.’
Recognising that the person who had entered the cave was an unguarded Saul David may well have turned to his men in the recesses of the cave and explained the situation, with the result that they came to him in the pitch blackness and whispered triumphantly in his ears that YHWH had delivered Saul into David’s hands, ‘as He said to you’.
Their words they cited were, ‘“Behold, I will deliver your enemy into your hand, and you will do to him as it will seem good to you.” We have no record of these words but it is quite possible here that they had in mind some unrecorded Psalm that David had regularly sung to them in anticipation of some such event as he sought to keep up their spirits. It may possibly even have been based on a prophecy spoken by Samuel or Gad. Alternately it might simply have been their own interpretation of something that David had sung, suitably adapted by them, especially in the last part, so as to say what they themselves felt. The words certainly to some extent reflect similar ideas found in his recorded Psalms where deliverance from his enemies and his vindication over them are predicted, and his men may well in a general way have applied the wording in Jdg 16:24 to them (‘our God has delivered into our hand our enemy’). See, for example, Psa 25:2-3; Psa 25:19-20; Psa 31:15; Psa 54:7; Psa 59:10; Exo 23:22 for fairly parallel ideas.
David then appears to have crept over to where Saul was in the pitch darkness and have cut part of the hem, or possibly a tassel, off Saul’s robe. It may be that Saul had laid the robe aside while he was relieving himself, or it may have been that David did it extremely carefully so that Saul was unaware that it was happening. If Saul did feel anything he may simply have thought that his robe had momentarily caught on a rock. We must remember that he did not suspect that anyone was in the cave, and that from his point of view it was pitch black. (In so short a time he would not have had time to accommodate his vision to the darkness in the cave).
As we have seen earlier there are indications that the hem of the robe was seen as of some significance. In the case of the king he would have a hem connected with the royal authority of the wearer so that such an act may well have been intended specifically to contribute towards the downfall of his kingdom by a kind of prophetic ‘magic’, as well as it acting to remind Saul and his men that he was rejected by God (compare 1Sa 15:26-28; 1Ki 11:29-30). This would explain why David felt so guilty about it afterwards.
1Sa 24:5
‘ And it came about afterward, that David’s heart smote him, because he had cut off Saul’s hem.’
Having done what he did David’s conscience was smitten. It is possible that he felt that he had tried to put YHWH on the spot by trying to force Him to act against Saul against His will. Or it may simply be that he felt convicted for touching, with an intention of doing hurt to him, the very person of YHWH’s anointed. He may well have felt that it was almost like touching YHWH himself. For in Israel this man represented YHWH, and David was very religiously sensitive. To him what he had done was therefore like touching something which was ‘very holy’, and was forbidden, such as the Ark. We can compare what happened later to the man who touched the Ark of God YHWH (2Sa 6:6-7). Perhaps David felt similarly about Saul.
1Sa 24:6
‘ And he said to his men, “YHWH forbid that I should do this thing to my lord, YHWH’s anointed, to put forth my hand against him, seeing he is YHWH’s anointed.” ’
His men probably were probably continuing to urge him to take advantage of this opportunity to get rid of Saul, with the result that he felt that he had to speak to them very firmly, (tear into them’), in order to prevent them taking further action (verse 7). He forbade what they were suggesting in the Name of YHWH on the grounds that Saul was ‘YHWH’s anointed’, in other words, one who was holy to YHWH and therefore untouchable. It is clear that David felt that to attack his person was to attack YHWH. It says much for the respect that his men had for him that they did agree to restrain themselves even though they probably did not feel the same way as he did.
1Sa 24:7 a
‘So David tore into his men with these words, and would not let them rise against Saul.’
The belligerence of his men against Saul (for they had suffered much as a result of his activities) meant that David had to speak to them very strongly. He had to use all his authority in order to prevent them from ‘rising against Saul’.
This brings out that one of the main purposes of this passage and its later parallel is in order to emphasise David’s total loyalty, and to demonstrate that he was in no way at fault in his approach to the kingship, taking no steps towards taking the crown until YHWH gave it to him. He patiently awaited YHWH’s time, and when that came he wanted to b sure that his appointment was wholly by YHWH without his needing to resort to force of arms. (Even Ishbosheth’s death was not of his doing).
1Sa 24:7 b
‘And Saul rose up out of the cave, and went on his way.’
But the final result was that Saul was able to leave the cave quite unaware of how close to death he had been and of the tumult that he had left behind him. His complacency did not, however, last for long.
Fuente: Commentary Series on the Bible by Peter Pett
1Sa 24:6 And he said unto his men, The LORD forbid that I should do this thing unto my master, the LORD’S anointed, to stretch forth mine hand against him, seeing he is the anointed of the LORD.
1Sa 24:6
1Sa 26:11, “The LORD forbid that I should stretch forth mine hand against the LORD’S anointed : but, I pray thee, take thou now the spear that is at his bolster, and the cruse of water, and let us go.”
1Sa 26:16, “This thing is not good that thou hast done. As the LORD liveth, ye are worthy to die, because ye have not kept your master, the LORD’S anointed . And now see where the king’s spear is, and the cruse of water that was at his bolster.”
1Sa 26:23, “The LORD render to every man his righteousness and his faithfulness: for the LORD delivered thee into my hand to day, but I would not stretch forth mine hand against the LORD’S anointed .”
2Sa 1:14, “And David said unto him, How wast thou not afraid to stretch forth thine hand to destroy the LORD’S anointed ?”
2Sa 1:16, “And David said unto him, Thy blood be upon thy head; for thy mouth hath testified against thee, saying, I have slain the LORD’S anointed .”
1Sa 24:12 The LORD judge between me and thee, and the LORD avenge me of thee: but mine hand shall not be upon thee.
1Sa 24:12
1Sa 24:17 And he said to David, Thou art more righteous than I: for thou hast rewarded me good, whereas I have rewarded thee evil.
1Sa 24:17
1Sa 24:22 And David sware unto Saul. And Saul went home; but David and his men gat them up unto the hold.
1Sa 24:22
Fuente: Everett’s Study Notes on the Holy Scriptures
Saul in the Cave
v. 1. And it came to pass, when Saul had returned from following the Philistines, v. 2. Then Saul, v. 3. And he came to the sheepcotes by the way, v. 4. And the men of David said unto him, v. 5. And it came to pass afterward that David’s heart smote him, v. 6. And he said unto his men, The Lord forbid that I should do this thing unto my master, the Lord’s anointed, to stretch forth mine hand against him, seeing he is the anointed of the Lord. v. 7. So David stayed his servants with these words,
Fuente: The Popular Commentary on the Bible by Kretzmann
DAVID IN THE WILDERNESS OF ENGEDI (1Sa 23:29 -35-24).
EXPOSITION
DAVID SPARES SAUL‘S LIFE IN A CAVE (1Sa 24:1-7).
1Sa 24:1
The wilderness of En-gedi. Finding no safety on the western side of the desert of Judah, where the Ziphites were ever watching his movements, David now boldly crossed this arid waste, and sought shelter in the remarkable oasis of En-gedi, on the shore of the Dead Sea. The word may signify either the Fountain of Luck or the Kid’s Spring, the latter being the meaning of the name Ain-Jadi, which it still bears. In 2Ch 20:2 it is identified with Hazazon-Tamar, the Palm Wood, an ancient seat of the Amorites, and evidently famous from of old for its fertility (Gen 14:7). Conder (‘Tent Work,’ 2:126) describes the country over which David would have to travel as almost impassable, so that in four and a half hours of hard riding be and his party advanced only six miles, so deep were the valleys which they were obliged to cross. From a lofty peak on their way the view was most extraordinary. On every side were other ridges, equally white, steep, and narrow; their sides seamed by innumerable torrent beds, their summits sharp and rugged in outline. Not a tree was visible, and the whole region was like the dry basin of a former sea, scoured by the rains, and washed down in places to the hard foundation of metamorphic limestone which underlies the whole district. But the desert once crossed, “there is no scene,” he says, “more vividly impressed on my memory than that of this magnificently rocky and savage pass, and the view from the spring below.” He had encamped on a plateau upon the top of the cliffs, which rise to a height of 2000 feet above the Dead Sea; and 1340 feet below him the warm spring of En-gedi, 83 F; rises from under a great boulder, and dashing down the rest of the descent, flows across the plate at the foot of the cliffs, which is about half a mile square. All around are the ruins of ancient gardens and thickets, among which he saw the beautiful black grackles with gold-tipped wings, bulbuls, and thrushes. Solomon seems to have delighted in the spot, and to have covered the hills with vines; for he compares his beloved to a “cluster of camphire in the vineyards of En-gedi” (So 2Ch 1:14). Neither palm nor vine is to be found there now, but there is still a rich vegetation, and groves of trees. According to Thomson the sides of the ravines leading to En-gedi are full of natural and artificial caves and sepulchres.
1Sa 24:2
Chosen. See on this word 1Sa 9:2. The rocks of the wild goats. Apparently this was the proper name of some cliffs near En-gedi, so called from their being frequented by the ibex, or Syrian chamois, an animal which, according to Thomson is still found there. It shows Saul’s pertinacious hatred of David, that no sooner was the war with the Philistines over, than he pursues him with 3000 picked warriors into these lonely fastnesses. Comp. Psa 57:4, written, according to the title, upon the occasion recorded in this chapter.
1Sa 24:3
He came to the sheepcotes. Rather, “to sheepcotes,” there being no article in the Hebrew. Such sheepcotes were common in Palestine; for Thomson says, “I have seen hundreds of these sheepcotes around the mouth of caverns, and indeed there is scarcely a cave in the land, whose location will admit of being thus occupied (i.e. by the flocks), but has such a “cote” in front of it, generally made by piling up loose stones into a circular wall, which is covered with thorns, as a further protection against robbers and wild beasts. During cold storms, and in the night, the flocks retreat into the cave, but at other times they remain in this enclosed cote …. These caverns are as dark as midnight, and the keenest eye cannot see five paces inward; but one who has been long within, and is looking outward toward the entrance, can observe with perfect distinctness all that takes place in that direction. David, therefore, could watch Saul as he came in, and notice the exact place where he “covered his feet,” while Saul could see nothing but “impenetrable darkness.” To cover his feet. The Syriac understands this of sleeping; more correctly the Vulgate and Chaldee take it as in Jdg 3:24, margin.
1Sa 24:4, 1Sa 24:5
Behold the day of which Jehovah said unto thee, etc. David’s men regard this deliverance of Saul into their band as providential, and the fulfilment of the promises made in David’s favour, with which, no doubt, they were well acquainted. But with a noble self-control he refuses to take the matter into his own hand, and leaves unto God in trusting faith the execution of his purposes. To prove, nevertheless, to Saul his innocence, to soften his bitterness, and refute the suspicion that he was lying in wait to murder him, he cuts off the cornerHebrew, wingof his meil (see 1Sa 2:19). Even for this his heart smote him. So tender was his conscience that he condemned himself for even deviating so slightly from the respect due to the anointed king.
1Sa 24:6, 1Sa 24:7
Seeing he is the anointed of Jehovah. David bases his allegiance to Saul on religious grounds. He was Jehovah’s Messiah, and as such his person was sacred. To this principle David steadfastly adhered (see 1Sa 26:9; 2Sa 1:16). The Lord forbid. Hebrew, “Far be it from me from Jehovah,” i.e. for Jehovah’s sake. So David stayed his servants. The verb is a strong one, and means to crush down. It shows that David had to use all his authority to keep his men, vexed by Saul’s pursuit, from killing him.
TEMPORARY RECONCILIATION OF SAUL AND DAVID (1Sa 24:8-22).
1Sa 24:8
Saul apparently had withdrawn from his men, and David seizes the opportunity of proving to him his innocence, and quieting the king’s fears. He goes out, therefore, and calls after him, saying, My lord the king, addressing him thus as his master, to whom his obedience was due. He also pays him the utmost reverence, bowing his face to the earth and making obeisance. By this lowly bearing David showed that, so far from being a rebel, he still acknowledged Saul’s lawful authority, and was true to his allegiance.
1Sa 24:9, 1Sa 24:10
In his address David complained of Saul’s listening to men’s words, which slanderously represented him as lying in wait to kill the king. In answer to their calumnies he now pleads Saul’s own experience of his deeds. Some bade me kill thee. Hebrew, “he bade to kill thee.” The literal rendering is, “Jehovah delivered thee today into my hand, and bade kill thee.” The A.V. supplies some, or, more exactly, “one said.” This is supported by the Syriac and Chaldee, but the literal rendering is probably the right one. Had David killed Saul, it would have seemed as if it were ordered by Providence so to be, and as if by putting Saul into his power God had intended his death. But what seem to us to be the leadings of Providence are not to be blindly followed. Possibly David’s first thought was that God intended Saul to die, and so the Vulgate, “I thought to kill thee. But immediately a truer feeling came over his mind, and he recognised that opportunities, such as that just given him, may be temptations to be overcome. The highest principles of religion and morality do not bend to external circumstances, but override them.
1Sa 24:11-13
My father. David thus salutes Saul not because he was actually his father-in-law, but as a title indicative of the respect due from an inferior to his superior (2Ki 5:13). So David calls himself Nabal’s son (1Sa 25:8). In the rest of the verse he contrasts his refusal to slay Saul, when it might have seemed as if it were Providence that had put him into his power, with Saul’s determined pursuit of him. Thou huntest my soul to take it. Thou perpetually usest every artifice and stratagem against me for the confessed purpose of killing me, and pursuest me as eagerly as the hunter pursues his game. Hence David commits his cause to Jehovah, in the sure confidence that he will avenge him, and with the firm determination never himself to raise his hand against one who, though his enemy, was also the king. In proof of the impossibility of his ever seeking the king’s hurt, he quotes an ancient proverb, “From the wicked goeth out wickedness.” Had David harboured evil intentions he would have executed them when so fair an opportunity offered, but as he has no such purposes “his hand will never be” upon Saul.
1Sa 24:14, 1Sa 24:15
Finally, David makes a pathetic appeal to Saul, contrasting him in his grandeur as the king of Israel with the fugitive whom he so relentlessly persecuted. In calling himself a dead dog he implies that he was at once despicable and powerless. Even more insignificant is a flea, Hebrew, “one flea,” “a single flea.” The point is lost by omitting the numeral. David means that it is unworthy of a king to go forth with 3000 men to hunt a single flea. As the king’s conduct is thus both unjust and foolish, David therefore appeals to Jehovah to be judge and plead his cause, i.e. be his advocate, and state the proofs of his innocence. For deliver me out of thy hand, the Hebrew is, “will judge me out of thy hand,” i.e. will judge me, and by doing so justly will deliver me from thy power.
1Sa 24:16
This address of David produced a lively effect upon Saul. Philippson says of it, “The speech of David has so much natural eloquence, such warmth and persuasiveness, that it can be read by no one who has any feeling for the simple beauties of the Bible without emotion. The whole situation, moreover, has much of sublimity about it. We see David, standing on the summit of some rock in the wilderness, raising on high the trophy of his magnanimity, while addressing the melancholy Saul, whom he loved as a father, obeyed as king, and honoured as the Lord’s anointed, but who nevertheless hated him without reason, and followed him with unremitting energy to put him to death; using his opportunity of touching the heart of his enemy with words hurried, but expressive of his innermost feelings, and showing himself full of humility, oppressed by unutterable sorrows, bowed down by the feeling of his powerlessness, yet inspirited by the consciousness of a noble deed.” So affected is Saul by David’s words that he breaks into team, affectionately addresses David as his son, and acknowledges his innocence and the uprightness of his cause.
1Sa 24:19
Will he let him go well away? Hebrew, “will he let him go on a good way?” i.e. will he let him go on his way in peace, unhurt? As David, nevertheless, had let his enemy go unharmed, Saul, touched momentarily by his generosity, prays that Jehovah will reward him for what he had done.
1Sa 24:20-22
I know well that thou shalt surely be king. Jonathan had expressed a similar conviction (1Sa 23:17), and probably there was a growing popular belief that David was the person in whom Samuel’s prophetic words (1Sa 15:28) were to be fulfilled. Something may even have been known of the selection of David and his anointing at Bethlehem; not perhaps by the king, but in an indistinct way by the people. As for Saul himself, he must long have felt that God’s blessing had departed from him, and, brooding perpetually over Samuel’s words, it required but little discernment on his part to make him see that the kingdom which he had forfeited was to be bestowed upon one so worthy of it, and so manifestly protected and blessed by God. He therefore makes David swear that he will not cut off his seed after him (see on 1Sa 20:15); and so they part. Saul returns to Gibeah, while David and his men gat them up unto the hold. The word gat up, mounted, suggests that the hold, or fastness, was their previous haunt at Hachilah: They would go down to En-gedi, and the difficulty of obtaining food there for 600 men would be insurmountable, except for a very short period. On the other side of the desert they were in a pastoral country, and the large flock masters there probably from time to time sent them supplies. The position of David was thus improved for the present by Saul s reconciliation with him.
HOMILETICS
1Sa 24:1-7
Instruction in caves.
The facts are
1. Saul, having repelled the incursion of the Philistines, returns to pursue David in the wilderness of Engedi.
2. Saul, entering privately into a cave while David and his men lie concealed there, comes unwittingly within the power of David.
3. David’s men, referring to a Divine prediction, urge him to slay Saul.
4. Apparently to indicate how entirely Saul was within his power, David stealthily cuts off the skirt of his coat.
5. Reproaching himself for the levity thus displayed in treating the Lord’s anointed, he at once justifies his refusal to touch Saul’s life, and also restrains his men. It is observable how the sacred narrative of this period is entirely occupied with the conflict between Saul and David; not a word being said of the social and spiritual state of the nation, its commerce and agriculture, its hopes and fears, or even of the nature and degree of influence being exerted by Samuel and the prophetic schools. The specialty of sacred history lies in the concentration of all thought in the development of the chain of events by which the original promise to Adam and Abraham is traceable to fulfilment in Christ. This principle will account for countless omissions of fact which might reasonably be expected in a nation’s annals, and for the prominence given to persons and circumstances otherwise of no public significance. It is because men do not consider the spiritual principle on which the Old Testament is evidently constructed that they mistake much of its meaning, fail to see its exquisite teaching, and regard as heterogeneous what is pervaded by a marvellous unity. The incidents of this stage in the history not only reveal the gradual process by which Providence was working out great issues for Israel and all mankind, but also suggest several topics of far wider range than the individual life of David. Caves. from Machpelah, the centre of solemn and tender interests (Gen 23:1-9; Gen 25:9; Gen 35:29; Gen 1:13), on to the hiding place of a weary-hearted prophet (1Ki 19:9), to Plato’s imaginary scene for illustrating the limitations of human knowledge and the hiding places of persecuted saints (Heb 12:1-29 :38), have figured in human affairs, and the cave of Engedi certainly merits attention. It reminds us of
I. THE DOMINANCE OF AN EVIL PASSION. In reply to the inquiry, How is it that the king of Israel is here away from his ordinary seat of government, and exposed to peril of life? the answer must be, Because the passion of cruel envy has gained dominion over his entire nature. Any considerations of policy or prudence wherewith he may have sought to justify his conduct in pursuing David were mere fictions created by a perverted will under the control of a masterful envy of one better them himself. The history traces the growth of this feeling. The dire evil, like a repressed torrent, seemed to gain force by the check given by Samuel and the prophets (1Sa 19:18-24), until at last it gained such ascendancy over Saul’s life that the entire energy of his mind and the ordinary administration of his kingdom were made subordinate to its expression. He was the slave of an evil once consisting in a sudden feeling of ill will, which, had it been dealt with as every unhallowed feeling should the moment it appears, might have been crushed in the germ. The case of Saul is not unlike that of many men, although the governing feeling may be different. Men are more entirely dominated by some powerful disposition than they, in their neglect of introspection and consequent lack of self-knowledge, imagine. The reality is seen in the instance of persons given up to intemperance, dissoluteness of life, and cruelty; and ordinary observers may be able to trace the process from slight indulgence in the sin to its complete mastery over the life. Others, who look at life more closely and estimate its value by the Scriptural standard, can also see the same enslavement, brought on by degrees, in the instance of persons who pursue wealth, worldly fame, or personal enjoyment as the chief end of life. The Pharisees thought it shocking to have killed the prophets, and were not disposed to admit their own enslavement to evil feelings deadly in character. The positive antagonism of men to Christ means the gradual growth in them of aversion to his holy restraints until they become its slaves. There is a proud but delusive sense of independence attaching to this enslavement to evil. “We were never in bondage to any man” (Joh 8:33). It is a device of the devil to make his captives content with their chains or to blind them to their reality. “Are we blind also?” (Joh 9:40). And as in the case of Saul the domination of the evil only drew him on and on to deeper trouble, till at last all was lost, so, unless our ruling evils are destroyed by prompt submission of will to Christ’s yoke, and consequent subjection of the life to his purifying grace, sin will “bring forth death.”
II. THE INFLUENCE OF HUMAN FEELING IN THE INTERPRETATION WHICH MEN PUT UPON REVELATION AND PROVIDENCE. Different opinions may be entertained as to the sense attached to the words of David’s men (1Sa 24:4), and accordingly the practical lessons deducible will vary with the choice we make.
(1) On the supposition that they were here quoting a specific communication conveyed to David through Samuel or Gad, and probably divulged in course of conversation with them, we have raised the question of, the fact of revelations having been made in past ages to holy men which, serving for their personal guidance and comfort, have not been incorporated in the ordinary records, which conserve only what has been deemed necessary to the connected history of redemption, and the general instruction of mankind. If this be so, it is obvious obscurities might cease to be obscurities to us did we but know what those immediately concerned in the events recorded may have been familiar with.
(2) On the supposition that the language of these men was the interpretation which they put upon the predictions contained in 1Sa 15:28; 1Sa 16:1, 1Sa 16:12, and on the avowed beliefs of Jonathan (1Sa 20:15; 1Sa 23:17), which by this time may have become current, we have raised the question of the influence of a cherished state of feelingits extent and legitimacyon the interpretation which men put upon the teachings of Scripture in reference to doctrine, history, and worship.
(3) On the supposition that their words were simply intended to be the sense they put upon the indications of Providence as then working out in favour of David’s cause, we have the question of the proneness of men to view passing events in the light of their own tendencies, and, therefore, to make Providence mean what it was never designed to suggest. Apart from controversy on the forementioned points, it is possible to generalise the teaching of the passage by saying that there is a prevailing tendency in men to prejudice the interpretation both of Divine words and providential events by undue regard to their own wishes. It is clear that these men wanted David to slay Saul. Being less spiritual and generous than he, not having risen to his lofty conception of the kingdom of God, and restive under the restraints which kept them from positions of power under the coming king, they easily believed it was God’s will that David should force on the issue by the death of his enemy. Passing event or spoken word in the past would have no other meaning for them.
1. This fact should be remembered in relation to controversies and diversities of opinion on matters of sacred history, doctrine, and worship. The existence of such diversities is no evidence against a revealed religion, as some suppose, but just the reverse; for in the nature of the case men view the truth through the medium created by their own cherished moral condition. The final supremacy of truth is not to be attained in violation of laws which govern the operations of the human mind, but by means of them. That men so diverse in opinion and in worship should nevertheless have so much in common that is fundamental, and should be under the mighty influence of it, is a sign that the truth is one and of God, while the error is of man and is manifold. No student of human nature can be surprised that men should seek to eliminate the supernatural from Scripture history; for only let a desire be cherished to see a revelation harmonise with what a man thinks would be a proper way of giving it to the world,namely, by just such an absence of supernatural manifestations as characterises an era when no new revelation is longer needed,and it will be as easy for him to see only naturalism in Scripture events as for David’s men to see in words and events an authorisation to slay Saul. It is a suggestive circumstance that men of diverse temperaments and emotional or esthetic tendencies gravitate towards certain ecclesiastical organisations; nor can we overlook the fact that it is rare for men to pass over from a system in which their tastes have been formed to another, the advocates of which claim to represent the truth.
2. The fact should variously affect our conduct in relation to our fellow men and to the truth. It should induce a distrust of our own judgment in so far as, on severe self-examination, it is seen to be associated with our wishes. Every one is bound to “search the Scriptures,” to “see whether these things are so,” and to “hold fast what is true.” No surrender of this great duty and privilege to an order of men can be pleaded on the ground that possibly feeling may distort the vision of truth in the private individual; for men acting for others are men still, and cannot escape the conditions of human nature, while the aid of the Holy Spirit is as available for one sincere heart as for another. Our duty is to bring the most vigorous powers we can command to bear on our understanding of the will of God, and in so far as we do so in dependence on the Holy Spirit we may calmly rest in our conclusions, with the proviso that they, however good, are not coextensive with truth, and that we have purged our hearts of all human preference and prejudice. It should induce charity towards others. The exercise of charity in matters of opinion is not identical with a surrender of our own judgment to a superior, nor a denial of the importance of fundamental truth and the possibility of its attainment, nor a blindness to the serious consequences resulting from error, but an exercise of kindly consideration for those who differ from us, proceeding from the consciousness that our own views may be in some degree affected by our subjective moral condition, and that our superiority to others depends on the belief we have in the comparative freedom of our judgment from personal bias. It is a characteristic of the interaction of feeling with thought that in so far as feeling has become habitual we are, by a well known psychological law, less conscious of its presence as an element in the formation of judgment; and consequently we may, as may others, be very sincere though in error. This by no means justifies error, or renders men safe from its consequences; but it does demand mutual consideration, and imposes on every man the solemn responsibility of so guarding the beginnings of his life that no unholy feeling or form of self-will shall gain ascendancy in his nature. They are wise who in a kind and tender spirit seek to bring men to a higher form of spiritual life. It is in lovethe pure love of Godthat truth is to be seen. It should induce us to seek for ourselves and others more of the purifying grace of the Holy Spirit. Possibly while on earth men will not entirely rise above the disturbing or perverting influence of tastes and sentiments inwrought with their early education, and unconsciously fostered as years advance; for by the mental law of association we are, while in the body, in some measure subject to bondage. Yet the truth is clear that in so far as we do become pure in heart and like as a little childwith a nature open to receive what God may teach, and not furnished with wishes by which truth is to be judgedwe shall rise to a correct view of God’s word and providence. Pure souls are quick in spiritual perception and responsive to all that is Divine, and, on the other hand, sensitive to the faint appearance of evil. The more fully the Church becomes sanctified, the more unity will be created in a discernment of all that constitutes fundamental truth. The eras in which men have paraded opinions alien to the faith once delivered to the saints, priding themselves on their skill and ability, have not been distinguished by extreme dependence on the sanctifying power of the Holy Spirit; nor perhaps has the Church ever, since apostolic days, sufficiently associated growth in spiritual knowledge with his blessed indwelling.
III. THE MEANS OF SUCCESS AS VIEWED BY MEN OF DIVERSE CHARACTER. All the men in the cave were one with David in the cause on which he was embarked. But followers do not always enter into the lofty aspirations of their leaders, or share equally with them the responsibility of the position assumed, while they often outstrip them in apparent zeal for the completion of their work. Hitherto the chief obstacle in the way of success was Saul, and now that Providence had manifestly put him within the power of David, what more conclusive evidence to ardent followers of the true road to success could be forthcoming? Let David smite his persecuting foe, and the cause is won! Such was the road to success suggested by policy, self-interest, usages of Eastern warfare, and restless impatience of the ways of God. Against this David protests. It is his duty to abide God’s time for entrance on his royal dignities. Even the slight liberty which David, on the impulse of the moment, took with the king in spoiling his garment became on reflection an occasion of self-reproach. Respect for office is a power in social life, being one form of reverence for law and order, and contributing to the easy maintenance of lawful authority; and therefore the levity of finding amusement for himself and others at a king’s expense was inconsistent with the true Hebrew culture which indicates its regard for the finer sentiments of life by such prohibitions as, “Thou shalt not seethe a kid in its mother’s milk;” “Thou shalt not speak evil of the ruler of thy people.” It should be remembered generally that there is a seeming way to rapid success which is not the true way, and, vice versa, a tedious, painful way which is the right. David’s superior discernment was fortunate for him, though doubtless his adherents were annoyed at his apparent timidity and, as they supposed, fastidiousness. Lot ungenerously made choice of the richest district in haste to be rich, but his uncle eventually was most successful (Gen 13:8-11; Gen 14:11, Gen 14:12). On the other hand, Moses refused the temptation to become possessed of the honours and riches of Egypt, and finally was raised to the highest position a servant of God could occupy (Heb 11:24-26). Our Saviour might have gained a vast following and been regarded by the authorities of Jerusalem as their Messiah had he only accommodated his standard a little to their wishes; but now he is Lord of millions. The apostles constantly resisted inducements to achieve an immediate success by lowering their standard of preaching to the tastes of men, and so lost some (Gal 3:1-4) disciples; but the result has been most blessed. In Church organisation, modes of worship, and methods of labour it is possible to devise means by which at first a large accession shall be made to the ranks of nominal Christians, yet at the same time wrong may be done to the claims of order, purity, reverence, and truth, which wrong will be avenged in years to come by corruption of manners, low spiritual tastes, and possibly apostasy from the truth. In matters of business men often see an easy way by which wealth may be speedily won, and, in preference to the slow and steady process of honest toil, it may be chosen to the ruin of the soul. Simple, earnest waiting on Providence, doing daily work as it comes, not seeking to force matters by any act that conscience would condemn, is the course suggested by the conduct of David and all who fear God.
1Sa 24:8-15
Discrimination in relation to men, truth, and vocation.
The facts are
1. David follows Saul out of the cave and pays him homage.
2. He remonstrates against Saul heeding the lies of slanderers, and declares to him how he had just spared his life.
3. Exhibiting the skirt of the robe in evidence of his words, and appealing to God, he protests his innocence of purpose.
4. He, while admitting his own insignificance, commends his cause to the justice of God, and prays for deliverance. If we take into account what human nature is under provocation, and the rough and painful life of David at this period, we shall not fail to admire the generous, highly spiritual tone of his conduct on this occasion. It is a remarkable instance of real conformity of spirit with Christian requirements among those in ancient times not blessed with our advantages. It is also a remarkable testimony to the value of these virtues that men, without dissent, admire the beautiful spirit of David, even though in many instances they have not the will to act likewise in analogous situations. But the general teaching of the section may be arranged in the following order:
I. DISCRIMINATION OF CHARACTER IS A PRODUCT OF TRUE GOODNESS, and is ESSENTIAL TO SUCCESS IN DEALING WITH MEN amidst the difficulties of life. David was a man of valour, of deep piety, and of keen discernment. His intense love of righteousness was not attended by a hasty and harsh condemnation of Saul’s conduct, evil as it was. While keenly alive to the wrong Saul was doing him, and recognising that One above visits every evil doer, he nevertheless in his first words to Saul recognises the fact, which doubtless through Jonathan and others he had ascertained, that there were greater sinners in this sad business than Saul. “Wherefore hearest thou men’s words, saying, Behold, David seeketh thy hurt?” He knew how the unhappy king had departed from God, and subsequently had become melancholy, and at times almost insane, and he understood how the original wicked envy was associated with this sad fall from God’s favour; and hence, apart from the reverence cherished for the office of king, he could not but commiserate his persecutor. Saul, in the judgment of David, was now but a mere tool in the hands of cunning, unscrupulous men at court, who basely roused the enmity of the unfortunate monarch by inventing lies concerning the intentions of David. Discrimination of character may find abundant scope in every man’s life. How much it is lacking is obvious when we reflect on the wholesale condemnation often passed on individuals and communities. Accidental association in public life is frequently the sole basis of a common judgment. Much of the faulty training of families and imperfect education in schools is to be ascribed to this source, while errors in this particular are the cause of manifold mistakes and disastrous failures in private life. It is due to others, as also safe for ourselves, that we act on our Saviour’s exhortation, “Judge righteous judgment.” David was just to Saul in regarding him as the weak instrument of stronger wills; as was our Saviour just to a misled people when he charged the scribes and Pharisees with hindering them from obeying the gospel (Mat 23:13). A certain development and balance of the intellectual faculties are requisite to discriminate character. It is to be feared that very little attention is paid to this kind of culture in many homes and schools, and consequently there are thousands in a far worse position for the great conflict of life than they need be. But where ordinary capacities for discernment exist, true piety will insure their right and just exercise; for religion raises the whole moral tone of a man, and gives a superior moral element to our judgments on the motives and conduct of men. The gift of “discerning spirits” is of much value still in the Church of God and in daily affairs.
II. OUR JUDGMENT ON THE LANGUAGE OF THE BIBLE SHOULD BE REGULATED BY REGARD TO THE SPECIFIC KNOWLEDGE ON WHICH IT IS BASED. David discriminates between the weak and sinful Saul and the cunning, determined men who used him as a tool for their wicked schemes. The language employed by him here in reference to Saul is mild and tenderrecognising wrong, but expressive of the conviction that his actions were now not responsible in the same degree as when he disobeyed the command of God through Samuel. In the Psalms we have other languagestrong, severe, witheringintended for “men set on fire, sons of men whose teeth are spears and arrows, and their tongue a sharp sword” (Psa 57:4). “Deceit,” “fraud,” “lying lips,” “poison of adders,” tongues “set on fire,” that “wrest words” and “love all devouring words,” are the terms used to indicate the motives and purposes of the men prompting the action of Saul. Now as we find the explanation of the mild language in the intimate knowledge which he had of the weakness of his enemy, and the use which stronger wills were making of him, so, by the same rule of interpretation, ought we to allow an appropriateness of other and more severe language to men so utterly vile as these were known to be, and to whom he alludes in verse 9 and 1Sa 26:19. Too often Christian men, and especially unbelievers, read the strong language of the Psalms as though it were expressive of sentiments ordinarily entertained towards any who might differ from David; and it is viewed as in contrast with his address to Saul and the precepts of Christ. The unreasonableness of this judgment is evident when we only consider what David knew these men to be, and to be aiming at. They were deliberate, calculating liars, knowing by his deeds, by Samuel’s approval, and by his pure and useful life, that he was a chosen man of God, and yet endeavouring by false representations to blast his reputation, to incite a moody king to slay him on account of his vileness of intention, and, in fact, to frustrate the purpose which God had announced through Samuel, and of which Jonathan, Gad, Abiathar, and others were aware. A baser, more cruel and cowardly conspiracy against character, life, and national welfare can hardly be imagined. The knowledge of these specific facts renders David’s wrath and indignation most holy, and, in view of what would be the calamity to Israel should they succeed in annulling the purpose of God as declared to Samuel and made known to David and others, the Church can say Amen to the Psalms. This principle of interpretation is wider than the case before us. None of us dare use towards others the severe language of Christ’s denunciation of the scribes and Pharisees, because we have not the minute knowledge of motive and internal, irreclaimable deceitfulness which was clear to his eye; but his view of what is hidden from us rendered his words just and good. Also, the language used with reference to the necessity of atonement, the manner in which it is made, and the conditions on which it becomes available for those made acquainted with it, should be considered reverently, as being founded on an intimate knowledge on the part of God of very many facts pertaining to moral existence, the interrelation of all moral beings, and the administration of a government stretching through all time and place, which necessarily at present escape our observation. The same principle may apply to much of the language in reference to the future condition of the wicked. Even the right interpretation of historical matter in many dubious cases may depend on facts which to the writers were well known, but to us are unknown. It would be useful to direct attention to the conditions of a right understanding of the Bible, embracing in the purview moral health, attained by the quickening of the Holy Spirit, caution, reverence, regard to its spiritual aims, its fragmentary character, its progressive teachingespecially sympathy with its purpose.
III. A MAN‘S VOCATION IN LIFE EXERCISES A POWERFUL INFLUENCE IN DETERMINING HIS MORAL QUALITIES. The moral qualities of consideration, forbearance, magnanimity, and candour so prominent in David during this interview with Saul met with little sympathy among his followers at the time, though subsequently they would see the wisdom of his conduct. Like others, they judged of what should be done by what from their lower moral position they were inclined to do. The superior conduct of David was not due simply to tenderness of natural disposition, nor to the presence of piety considered per se, but largely to the educating influence on his generally pious character of his calling in life. He perfectly understood that, as servant of God, he was called to be future ruler of Israel, and meanwhile so to live and act that no deed of his should touch his personal reputation in Israel or create the impression on the mind of Saul that he sought his removal from the throne to gratify private ambition. Virtually he was already a royal personage. His actions and words were therefore public property. The building up of national character and development of national resources were matters of deepest concern. The consciousness of this drew him nearer to God, attached responsibility to his deeds, imparted dignity and grace to his bearing, put a restraint on the flow of private feelings, and, though uncrowned, made him royal in his magnanimity. David as a coming king was morally a more developed man than would have been David as a simple citizen. A consideration of the influence of calling on character would afford much instruction in relation to social habits, mental and moral development, Christian excellence and degeneracies, national and provincial characteristics and tendencies, domestic comfort and discomfort, personal antagonisms and aversions, and the need for a large charity in estimating conduct different from our own, as also for profound thought in reference to the best means of remedying some evils incident to a highly developed civilisation, in which the comforts and luxuries of one class are procured by avocations of another chess that tell perniciously on their mental and moral development. Christians are especially exhorted to walk worthy of their high calling; and, apart from direct influence of the Holy Spirit in the formation of character, it would be helpful to all to study the natural influence over the entire man of a calling to be “kings and priests unto God.” “What manner of persons ought ye to be?” “As he which hath called you is holy, so be ye holy in all manner of conversation” (1Pe 1:15).
IV. THE COMMITTAL OF OUR INTERESTS TO GOD IS THE PROPER SEQUEL TO A CONSCIENTIOUS DISCHARGE OF DUTY. David had done all an honest man could do to clear himself of guilt and to pacify Saul, and with strong faith in an overruling Providence he leaves his cause with God. Personal retaliation for injuries done is no part of our duty. “Vengeance is mine, I will repay, saith the Lord.” Whether we succeed in a difficult work is not our business. To have done right is the chief concern. Our Saviour has set us an example of fulfilling all righteousness and then committing himself and his cause to the “righteous Father.” There is that in the conscience of men which bows before such appeals to the “Judge of all the earth.” The name of God is a power over men because they are moral beings. It is a refuge for the oppressed and a terror to the wicked.
General lessons:
1. The real guilt of men is to be estimated both by the intrinsic evil of their intentions and the influence they seek to exercise over others.
2. Men who desire to find the Bible faulty in its language can have their desire easily gratified by reasoning as though they knew all concerning its production and contents; while a different disposition will lead to suspension of judgment or minute search for hidden facts.
3. The moral influence of a calling on character should guide us in our arrangements for our sons and daughters.
4. Deeds are the tests and signs of principles; for as wickedness is the natural outcome of the wicked man, good actions, as in the generous sparing of Saul’s life, are the product of a righteous soul (verse 13).
1Sa 24:16-22
Tenderness transitory and truth suppressed.
The facts are
1. Saul, subdued by the magnanimity of David, weeps and admits his own wrong in contrast with David’s kindness.
2. Acknowledging his belief that David is to be king, he pleads with him to be merciful to his seed.
3. David, granting the request, returns to his stronghold, and Saul to his home. Good actions soon begin to authenticate their Divine mission in the world. The noble self-vindication from the calumnies of slanderers and the rare display of generosity to a persistent foe told at once even on the obdurate nature of Saul, and in the effect produced we have an instance of two facts often observable among men and of some significance in their experience.
I. THE TRANSITORY TENDERNESS OF SINFUL MEN. Saul’s heart was softened, and he wept. Words of tenderness and of frank confession of guilt came forth with all sincerity. The terrible encrustation formed by years of transgression and disobedience seemed to be broken, and the true man reasserted itself from within. The power of kindness received a conspicuous illustration. Wickedness could no longer confront goodness. And yet, as we know from the subsequent care of David to escape from Saul, the tenderness was only as “the morning cloud and early dew.”
1. There are seasons of tenderness even in the lives of the most impenitent of men. This might be inferred from our necessary knowledge of the conflicting principles at work in all moral beings, and from our observation that it requires enormous effort to kill outright all the better qualities of our humanity; but the fact comes before us in history, biographical confessions, and in the intercourse of daily life. Who has not seen a hardened sinner subdued by a reminder of a mother’s prayers, or the mention in gentle tones of the Saviour’s name, or the kindly gaze of a Christian eye? In the vilest abodes of sin, and among the proudest sceptics, there are those who sometimes weep in secret or relent in their rebellion against God.
2. The causes of this tenderness are often ascertainable. In the case of Saul we see a combination of causes. The display of magnanimity was impressive because of its very rarity; it came homo to his sense of right; it was in vivid contrast with his own conduct; it was in its logic so conclusive as to the goodness of the man he was persecuting; it brought out the fact that all along he had known David to be good, but had forced the fact out of thought; it was a revelation of his bondage to vile men, to whose character he could not be quite blind; and it could not but call up to memory days once bright and happy, when he was a young man unburdened by present guilt and care. Varied are the causes which enable the remnant of good in men to assert itself for awhile; some lie deep in the hidden processes of thought, where the association of ideas is made subservient to the force of Scriptural truth learnt in early years and to the unconscious influence of the Spirit of God; while others arise in the events of daily life, such as sickness, casual words of kindness, presence of a beautifully holy life that suggests a contrast, mention of the words of Jesus, or the open grave.
3. The import of these seasons of tenderness deserves consideration. Is there not some hope for such men in spite of their past and present surroundings? Is there not a basis on which Christians may work in wisdom? Have we not here the secret on the human side of the mighty power of the truth of God? Is it not important to make such men believe that there is some germ worth caring for in their otherwise sad and wretched life? Does not the transitoriness of the tenderness often arise from the absence of some wise friend to encompass the self-condemned heart with love? Ought not Christians to go among men with the conviction that they are all reclaimable, and that it is largely a question of gaining access to the tender place in their nature and caring for them as a wise physician would for a patient desperately ill? There are many ways in which the Church may apply the thoughts thus awakened in our endeavours to win to Christ even the most abandoned. Immense power is gained over men when they know us to be cognizant of any transitory feeling of tenderness; and half the battle is won when they begin to look on us as friends to be trusted.
II. THE FORCED SUPPRESSION OF TRUTH. Saul was evidently sincere in saying, “Now, behold, I know that thou shalt surely be king;” but the confession was also a revelation of the fact that all through these persecutions he had more than surmised that David was the coming king. Had he been anxious to know the actual truth before as surely as he professed now to have attained it, the course was clear enough. But these words confirm the teaching of the entire historythat he was aware not only of his own rejection, but that this slayer of the lion and bear, and conqueror of Goliath, and protege of Samuel, and friend of Jonathan, was the chosen servant of God. The course adopted by Saul can only be explained on the supposition that he suppressed the truth. It is in the nature of truth to assert its power over the life by convincing the understanding and constraining the will, and only the rebellious spirit that refused to submit to the sad punishment announced by Samuel, sustained by cherished envy of David, and wrought upon by cunning slanderers, could have rendered the facts clear to Saul so nugatory in their influence over his life. Well would it have been if this were a solitary instance of suppression of truth! Every man persisting in a sinful course has to force out truth from thought. The internal war consists partly in crushing the free evidence of knowledge. Men know more than they like to admit and act upon; and all kinds of devices are resorted to, to explain away or to divert attention from what is manifestly true. The suppressions of truth in controversy are denounced as very wicked, but in relation to personal moral conduct and religion it is possible for the advocates of candour to shut their eyes to much that is out of harmony with their wishes. It is a truth that self is sinful before God, that efforts to find true rest apart from Christ are unavailing, that the chosen life of sin is “hard,” that the holy are happier than the sinful, and that Christ is waiting to be gracious, and yet this truth is constantly put away from view as unwelcome, troublesome. Doubtless, also, many who under the influence of stronger wills are bold in their denial of Christ’s authority know in their secret heart that he is Lord and will establish his kingdom. Sin makes men dishonest to themselves; under its power they are not of the truth. They prefer darkness because their deeds are evil.
General lessons:
1. In the issue goodness will be recognised by those who despise it, and generosity is always influential.
2. The anguish of wrong doing occasionally felt is fearfully suggestive of the future experience of the unrepenting.
3. The occasional triumphs of the good over all their slanderers and oppressors are intimations of the final triumph of Christ in the establishment of his kingdom.
4. Vows and promises in reference to future acts in so far as they embrace the quality of mercy may be freely and at all times made (1Sa 24:21).
HOMILIES BY B. DALE
1Sa 24:1-7. (ENGEDI.)
David’s forbearance toward Saul.
“Would it not be manly to resent it?” said one, on receiving an affront. “Yes,” was the reply, “but it would be Godlike to forgive it.” In the spirit of this answer David acted when he spared Saul in the cave at Engedi, and thereby proved that he was guiltless of the design which the latter in his delusion attributed to himof aiming at his throne and his life (1Sa 22:8). Saul himself had shown generosity toward enemies in the earlier part of his career (1Sa 11:12); but his character had fearfully deteriorated since that time, and his generosity toward others was far surpassed by that of David toward him. “Generosity toward his enemies was a part of David’s very being. And he alone is the true hero who, like David, forces involuntary recognition and friendship even from his bitterest foe” (Ewald). Observe that
I. HE WAS STRONGLY TEMPTED TO AVENGE HIMSELF. He had been bitterly hated and grievously wronged; “was a man of like passions with ourselves;” and the temptation came to him, as it comes to others, in
1. A favourable opportunity to take revenge. His enemy was entirely in his power, and his life might be taken away at a stroke.
“O, Opportunity, thy guilt is great;
‘Tis thou that execut’st the traitor’s treason;
Thou set’st the wolf where he the lamb may get;
Whoever plots the sin, thou point’st the season;
‘Tis thou that spurn’st at right, at law, at reason;
And in thy shady cell, where none may spy him,
Sits sin, to seize the souls that wander by him”
(Shakespeare).
2. A plausible argument used by others. David’s men not only desired to see the deed done and sought permission to do it (1Sa 24:7, 1Sa 24:10), but also said,” See, this is the day of which Jehovah hath said to thee, Behold, I give thine enemy into thine hand,” etc. “The speakers regarded the leadings of Providence by which Saul had been brought into David’s power as a Divine intimation to David himself to take this opportunity of slaying his deadly enemy, and called the intimation a word of Jehovah” (Keil). Men are apt to interpret the Divine purpose of events according to their own interests and inclinations (1Sa 23:7), and it is often the exact reverse of what they imagine it to be. It was not that David should slay Saul, but (among other things) that he should be tried, and by sparing him vindicated, blessed and made a blessing. What is meant for good is by a deceived heart turned to evil. “And those temptations are most powerful which fetch their force from the pretence of a religious obedience” (Hall).
3. A sudden thought tending in the direction of revenge (1Sa 24:10, Vulgate: “And I thought to kill thee”). He did not cherish it or form a distinct purpose to carry it into effect, but came perilously near doing so in the indignity he offered to the king. “He does not seem to have been quite free from the temptation to kill Saul. The words (1Sa 24:5) are only intelligible on the supposition that, on cutting off Saul’s skirt, his thoughts were not directed only to the use which he afterwards made of it, at least in the beginning, but that his object was rather to prove the goodness of his thoughts at the first weak beginning he made to carry them into effect. But his better self soon awoke; all impure thoughts fled; his eye became clear; with horror he put the temptation from him” (Hengstenberg). “Blessed is the man that endureth temptation,” etc. (Jas 1:12).
II. HE COMPLETELY OVERCAME THE TEMPTATION. By
1. The possession of a tender conscience, which enabled him to perceive the will of God, shrank from sin, and smote him for his “thought of foolishness” (Pro 24:9) and irreverent act. “It is a good thing to have a heart within us smiting us for sins that seem little; it is a sign conscience is awake and tender, and will be a means to prevent greater sins” (M. Henry).
2. Regard to the Divine will, which directed him not to avenge himself, but to leave vengeance with the Lord; to honour the king, and love his neighbour as himself. His regard for it was lowly, reverent, and supreme. The purpose of providential events must be interpreted in harmony with conscience and the moral law. How often do the Scriptures enjoin forbearance and forgiveness toward enemies! (Pro 20:22; Pro 25:21, Pro 25:22; Mat 5:44; Rom 12:19-21; Col 3:13).
3. Repression of evil thought and impulse; immediate, firm, and entire. “The better to know how to guard against the wiles of the enemy, take it for a certain rule that every thought which discourages and removes thee from growing in love and trust towards God is a messenger of hell; and, as such, thou must drive him away, and neither admit him nor give him a hearing” (Scupoli). David repressed such a thought in himself and in his men, became the protector of Saul, was not overcome of evil, but overcame evil with good, and was made by means of temptation stronger and more illustrious. “Temptation is the greatest occasioner of a Christian’s honour; indeed, like an enemy, it threatens and endeavours to ruin him, but in conquest of it consists his crown and triumph” (Hales, ‘Golden Remains’).
As aids to the practice of forbearance
1. Consider the “goodness, forbearance, and long suffering of Gad.”
2. Contemplate the example of Christ.
3. Watch against the first thought of evil.
4. Pray for the spirit of patience, forgiveness, and love.D.
1Sa 24:8-12. (ENGEDI.)
Calumny.
“Wherefore hearest thou men’s words, saying, David seeketh thy hurt?” (1Sa 24:9). Saul’s hatred and persecution of David were stirred up by slanderers; and, in vindication of himself from the charge of seeking his hurt, David referred to them on this and on a subsequent occasion (1Sa 26:19). One of them seems to have been Cush the Benjamite (see Kitto, ‘D.B. Illus.’), on account of the calumnies of whom he wrote Psa 7:1-17; ‘The righteous judgment of God’ (see inscription):
“Jehovah my God, in thee have I found refuge;
Save me from my persecutors and deliver me!”
How much he felt the wrong which they had done him, and how intensely his zeal burned against their sin against God and man, appears in many of his psalms (Psa 24:1-10 :13; Psa 35:11; Psa 52:2; Psa 56:5; Psa 57:4; Psa 59:7, etc.). Good men are often exposed to the calumnious attacks of men of similar character.
“Be thou as chaste as ice, as pure as snow,
Thou shalt not escape calumny.”
I. IT IS ONE OF THE MOST ODIOUS OF VICES. It is “the uttering of false (or equivalent to false, morally false) speech against our neighbour in prejudice to his fame, his safety, his welfare, or concernment in any kind, out of malignity, vanity, rashness, ill nature, or bad design” (Barrow, Ser. 18.); and it is exhibited in an endless variety of ways.
1. It is marked by falsehood, folly, injustice, malice, and impiety.
2. It exerts a most pernicious influence. The tongue on which it dwells is like a fire, which (though at first but a single spark) may set a whole forest in a blaze (Jas 3:5); is “full of deadly poison,” and sends forth “arrows, firebrands, and death.” In private reputations, domestic life, social intercourse, the Church and the world, what mischief it works!
3. It is frequently forbidden and condemned in the word of God (Le 19:16; Pro 10:31; 1Co 6:9). “I say unto you that every idle (empty, insincere, wicked, and injurious) word,” etc. (Mat 12:36, Mat 12:37). “God is angry (with the wicked) every day” (Psa 7:11).
II. IT OUGHT NEVER TO BE COUNTENANCED. “Wherefore hearest thou?” No one should listen to it; for by doing so
1. He encourages the wicked in their wickedness (Pro 25:23). “When will talkers refrain from evil speaking? When listeners refrain from evil hearing” (Hare).
2. He injures himself; becomes a tool of designing men, and is led to do things which his better nature cannot approve; whilst, at the same time, he manifests his own unreasonableness and sinful disposition.
3. He makes himself “partaker of their evil deeds,” and exposes himself to the same condemnation. Although incited by others, Saul was not guiltless in “hunting after” the soul of David “to take it” (Psa 7:11).
III. IT SHOULD ALWAYS BE MET IN A RIGHT MANNER by those who are calumniated; as by
1. An open assertion of innocence, direct denial and rebuke of false statements, and faithful remonstrance against their being entertained. “Whose mouths” “must be stopped” (Tit 1:11).
2. A clear proof of innocence afforded by becoming, righteous, and merciful actions (Psa 7:10, Psa 7:11; compare Psa 7:3, Psa 7:4).
3. A sincere appeal to God as the Vindicator of the innocent; lowly submission to his will and firm confidence in the manifestation of his righteous judgment. “The justice of God is a refuge and comfort to oppressed innocency” (M. Henry). “The Lord judge between me and thee,” etc. (Psa 7:12).
“Jehovah judgeth the people.
Judge me, O Jehovah, according to my righteousness,
And according to my integrity be it done to me.
Oh let the wickedness of the wicked come to an end,
And establish thou the righteous;
For thou that triest the hearts and reins art a righteous God.
My shield is with God,
Who delivers the upright in heart” (Psa 7:8, Psa 7:9, Psa 7:10).
Learn
1. To use the gift of speech in speaking well, and not ill, of others.
2. To rely on God more than on your own efforts for your vindication when evil spoken of.
3. The blessedness of those against whom men “say all manner of evil falsely” for Christ’s sake.D.
1Sa 24:13-15. (ENGEDI.)
A proverb of the ancients.
“Wickedness proceedeth from the wicked (1Sa 24:13). Proverbs are brief and apt sayings expressive of the general experience of men. They have been described as “the wisdom of many and the wit of one” (Russell); and, more poetically, “jewels five words long, which on the stretched forefinger of time sparkle forever” (Tennyson). The most valuable of “the words of the wise” were uttered by Solomon, and are contained in the Book of Proverbs. But this saying was already ancient in the days of David. It is also “true and faithful” and very instructive. Consider
I. ITS MEANING. “Ill men do ill things.” “Actions usually correspond to the quality of the mind” (Grotius).
1. An evil disposition is possessed by some men. The ancients noticed the distinction between evil actions (as well as good) and evil character (as well as good). There is in some men, in contrast to others, a selfish and bad disposition. All men, it is true, are sinful; but some, instead of striving against sin and overcoming it, are the slaves of sin; their supreme affection is set upon unworthy objects, and the ruling principle of their life is wrong. This is due to many causesprevious voluntary acts, wilful neglect of Divine aid, etc.; but the fact is certain. Their nature differs from that of good men just as (though not so necessarily or to the same extent) the serpent from the dove, and the thistle from the vine.
2. An evil disposition expresses itself in corresponding actions. It uses power and opportunity according to its nature (verse 19), and turns to evil the same circumstances which a good disposition turns to good (verse 6). This is in harmony with the established order of things in the world. “A good tree bringeth not forth corrupt fruit; neither doth a corrupt tree bring forth good fruit” (Luk 6:43). “Do men gather grapes of thorns? “etc. (Mat 6:16-20; Mat 12:35). “Doth a fountain send forth at the same place sweet water and bitter?” etc. (Jas 3:11-13; Pro 13:16).
3. An evil disposition is plainly proved by evil actions. It is so especially when they are performed deliberately, habitually, and on occasions of decisive trial. “By their fruits ye shall know them.” The proof is perfectly reliable, easily perceivable, and generally applicable.
II. ITS APPLICATION (verse 11). “But my hand shall not be upon thee” (verses 12, 13). “David means to say that if he had been guilty of conspiracy against the king he would not have neglected this favourable opportunity to kill him, since men usually indulge their feelings, and from a mind guilty of conspiracy nothing but corresponding deeds could come forth” (Clericus). The application may be made to the conduct of others, but it should be made first and chiefly to our own; and it should lead us
1. To test our character by our actions, and to prove to others when it is suspected and calumniated that it is good, and not evil. As wickedness proceedeth from the wicked, so goodness proceedeth from the good.
2. To feel increased aversion to evil, to act according to the integrity we assert of ourselves, to resolve to do nothing wrong, and to endeavour to prevent others from doing wrong (verse 14).
3. To appeal to God, who searches the heart, and, in the consciousness of sincerity and innocence, to put confidence in his righteous and merciful aid (verse 15). “Beloved, if our heart condemn us not, then have we confidence toward God” (1Jn 3:21).
In the review of the subject let us bear in mind that
1. Men are responsible for the character they possess.
2. An evil character may be transformed into a good one by the power of Divine grace and the use of proper means. “I will give you a new heart.” “Make you a new heart.”
3. We ought to strive continually to attain the highest degree of virtue and goodness possible.
“Such is this steep ascent,
That it is ever difficult at first,
But more’ a man proceeds less evil grows.
When pleasant it shall seem to thee, so much
That upward going shall be easy to thee,
As in a vessel to go down the tide,
Then of this path thou wilt have reached this end.
There hope to rest thee from thy toil” (‘Purg.’ 4.).D.
1Sa 24:16-22. (ENGEDI.)
The goodness of bad men.
“And Saul lifted up his voice and wept” (1Sa 24:17). The opportunity given to David to avenge himself on Saul was a severe test of principle, but by the use he made thereof it became a means of his further advancement. His forbearance was also another test of the character of Saul, over whom Divine mercy still lingered, and toward whom it was in such forbearance shown afresh. Igor was it without effect. The heart of the man who had ordered the massacre of eighty-five priests and was bent on the destruction of his most faithful servant relented at the words addressed to him; his voice trembled with emotion, tears flowed down his cheeks, he wept aloud, acknowledged his guilt, and turned from his purpose. It seemed as if he had undergone a sudden transformation and become a new man. But his heart remained unchanged. And his goodness, as on former occasions, was like that of those to whom the prophet said, “Your goodness” (fits of piety) “is as the morning cloud, and as the early dew it goeth away” (Hos 6:4). Concerning such goodness, notice that
I. IT IS NOT UNFREQUENTLY DISPLAYED. There is in the worst of men some capacity of moral and spiritual impression; and those who might be least expected to be moved are often most powerfully affected by
1. The force of a powerful appeal, in which the truth is set before their minds and brought home to their hearts and consciences (1Sa 24:9-15). They walk in the darkness of error and illusion, and the light breaks suddenly upon them, revealing what they could not or would not see before. It is made so plain that they are unable to deny its reality or resist its impression.
2. The exhibition of unusual generosity and superior excellence, which shows by contrast their own defects, shames and subdues them, overcomes not only them, but also, in some degree, the evil that is in themtheir envy, hatred, and sin. “The simple self-presentation and self-witness of moral purity and truth has a great missionary power, and often makes a mighty impression on spiritually darkened and morally perverted natures, in such wise that the Divine in them is freed from the binding power of evil, and the religious moral element of the conscience, which is concealed deep under religious moral corruption, breaks freely forth, at least in some bright and good moments, in order to point to the way of salvation and show the possibility of deliverance, provided the man is willing to he saved and renewed” (Erdmann).
3. The apprehension of an extraordinary escape from danger and death (1Sa 24:18). Saul had been placed by the hand of God within reach of the stroke of death, and if David had acted as men would ordinarily have done he would not have been now alive (1Sa 24:19). The heart must be hard indeed if it be not melted by such things as these.
II. IT IS APPARENTLY GENUINE; the proof of a radical change of disposition. In tears and words and actions there is
1. The presence of strong emotion. It is evidently not simulated, but real.
2. The operation of an awakened conscience (1Sa 24:17), which produces the recognition of what is right, the vindication of one who has been wronged, the confession of sin, and prayer for the blessing of God on one who has been regarded as an enemy (1Sa 24:19).
3. The conviction of the Divine purpose. “And now, behold, I know well,” etc. (1Sa 24:20). That purpose had been indicated to Saul by Samuel and by the course of events; but he refused to recognise it, sought to change it, and fought against it. Now he acknowledges its inevitable fulfilment on the ground of the superior worth of David (1Sa 15:28), submits to it without complaint, and even seeks a solemn pledge of forbearance toward his house on its accomplishment (1Sa 24:21). He says in effect, “The will of the Lord be done.”
4. The abandonment of evil designs. His amendment goes beyond good resolutions, and appears in his actually leaving off the pursuit of David and returning home to Gibeah (1Sa 24:22). When good actions follow good words, what more can be needed? Yet Saul among the saints, like Saul among the prophets, was Saul still.
III. IT IS REALLY WORTHLESS. Although the signs of repentance and reformation in Saul were greatly valued, they were not absolutely relied upon by David, who had experience of his impulsive and changeable nature, and “knew what was in man.” The most promising signs may be, and often are, connected with a goodness which is
1. Superficial; the depth of the heart being still hard and stony.
2. Defective, in hatred of sin, renunciation of self, return to God, surrender of the will, true faith, inward renewal, and spiritual strength to resist temptation.
3. Transient. “They soon forgat his works,” etc. (Psa 106:13). Not long afterwards Saul was again in pursuit of David, and his heart was more obdurate than ever (1Sa 26:1). Transient goodness issues in permanent destruction. “Water that riseth and fioweth from a living spring runneth equally and constantly, unless it be obstructed or diverted by some violent opposition; but that which is from thunder showers runs furiously for a season, but is quickly dried up. So are those spiritual thoughts which arise from a prevalent internal principle of grace in the heart; they are even and constant unless an interruption be put upon them for a season by temptations. But those which are excited by the thunder of convictions, however their streams may be filled for a season, they quickly dry up and utterly decay” (Owen, ‘Spiritual-Mindedness’).
Consider that
1. Men may be near the kingdom of God and yet never enter into it.
2. We are liable to be deceived by the appearance of goodness in others, and even in ourselves.
3. Whilst we should “search and try our hearts,” we should also pray, “Search me, O God,” etc. (Psa 139:23, Psa 139:24). “Create in me a clean heart,” etc. (Psa 51:10).D.
HOMILIES BY D. FRASER
1Sa 24:16, 1Sa 24:17
Evil overcome by good.
Recent passages of this history have shown more of David s weakness than of his strength. But here he is again a hero. The fine points of his character shine outhis self-control, his magnanimity, and his reliance on the justice of God to vindicate his integrity. To this. period is ascribed the seventh Psalm, in which the son of Jesse appeals against the slanders with which he was assailed, and looks to God for solace and deliverance. The situation strikes both the imagination and the heart. The young chief stands at the mouth of the cavern, holding up the proof of his generous forbearance, and protesting with picturesque eloquence against Saul’s hot pursuit. The king amazed, ashamed, and subdued; the sternness fading from his face, the haughty anger in his eyes drowned in tears. So evil was for the time overcome by good. David was helped to this noble behaviour at Engedi by his recent meeting with Jonathan in the forest of Ziph. At and through that meeting he had been encouraged in God. So in the hour of temptation he abstained from revenge, confided to God the vindication of his innocence and the preservation of his life, would not lift a hand, or let one of his officers lift hand, against the king. With what thankfulness and joy must Jonathan have heard of the sparing of his father’s life by his friend! Their meeting had borne fruit very soon. Their prayers were heard. Perhaps we have a happy meeting with a friend, or a strengthening and refreshing service at church, and the reason why is not at once apparent; but soon we fall into stone temptation or danger, and then we are helped by the recent confirmation of our faith to endure with patience. Our “good time” in the wood of Ziph is meant to prepare us for the hour of temptation in the cave of Engedi.
I. MARK THE RESTRAINT OF GOD UPON THE PERSECUTOR. Saul seemed to have every facility for gaining his object. No one disputed his will. Armed men by thousands followed him in pursuit of David; and Saul knew how to lead men, and how to fight. He had spies to track out the fugitive. The country was small, and the inhabitants, both at Keilah and at Ziph, showed their readiness to help the king. Yet he could never reach David to arrest or to smite him. More than once he had thrown the javelin at him, but missed. In the highlands of Judah he was more than once close upon his steps, but still missed him. He went on one side of a hill while David moved round the other side. He had almost caught him when he was called off to repel a sudden inroad by the Philistines. He actually entered the cave in which David and his men lay hid, and did not see them. This was no mere luck. It was God who preserved David and baffled the malice of Saul. And in the tragical history of persecution the restraining hand of God has often been shown. As Saul was allowed to kill the priests but not to kill David, so has the Lord allowed many a tyrant to go so far, but no farther. Jezebel could make away with Naboth, but not with Elijah. Herod could kill St. James, but not St. Peter. The Roman Catholic persecutors could burn Huss, but not Wickliffe; George Wishart, but not John Knox. There has been a cord of Divine control round every oppressor, and whenever God saw meet he has simply drawn that cord, and so has restrained the remainder of wrath, defeated the devices of cruelty.
II. DISTINGUISH BETWEEN A RELENTING MOOD AND A REPENTING HEART. An evildoer may be thrown into a fit of shame and grief over his own misconduct, promise amendment with tears, and yet never truly repent. The generous conduct and appeal of his son-in-law overwhelmed the king with confusion, and woke lingering echoes of good feeling in his troubled breast. He even wept before all, and, with the hot tears pouring from his eyes, confessed that he was in the wrong, praised the noble forbearance of David, acknowledged that the young captain was destined to fill the throne, and even asked him to swear that on his accession he would not exterminate the royal family. David swore, and they parted. Saul went home, but David did not attend him, for he was too shrewd to trust to the altered mood of the king. Well for him that he was so cautious, for Saul had only relented for a little while, not really repented of his malignant purpose. Softened feeling is one thing, repentance in mind and purpose another thing. This is familiar to those who try to reclaim criminals. They find them melt under kind words, bewail their misconduct, promise to lead lives of honesty and sobriety, and yet after all this fall very soon under temptation, and not only renew, but increase, their wickedness. It is because they have only a gush of feeling, not a grasp of principle, and are sorry for themselves, but not penitent towards God. It is often illustrated in persons who have succumbed to the infatuation for strong drink. One has allowed this vice to grow insensibly, and does not know how far it has mastered him, till at last there comes an exposure of drunkenness which covers him with shame. A friend speaks to him about it seriously and kindly, and tears come promptly to his eyes, expressions of poignant regret and promises of the utmost caution flow from his lips. He is quite surprised that he should have been so foolish, hopes that no more will be said about it, and is quite sure that nothing of the kind will ever happen again. But there is little disturbance of conscience, no grave sense of sin, no humbling of self before God with petitions for pardon and for help to cease from this insidious vice. So in a little while the shame is gone, the good promises are forgotten, the friend who spoke so kindly is hated for his pains, and the perverse man succumbs to temptation, and goes on to a drunkard’s disgrace, goes down to a drunkard’s grave. There are many other instances of this folly without descending to gross vice. Men have twinges of compunction and gusts of admirable feeling, and so resolve to lead better lives. But there it ends. They mean well, but somehow cannot carry out their intention. It is for want of repentance toward God.
III. RECOGNISE THE SUPERIOR STRENGTH OF MORAL WEAPONS. Whatever good is done to those who are going astray is effected by moral means and weapons only. David might have fought Saul and beaten him, but that would not have brought even a temporary relenting to his heart. It would probably have hardened him. David smote him with the moral power of truth and love, and so disarmed him for the time, and subdued him to unwonted tenderness. So now we can best benefit our fellow men by using the moral influences of probity and kindness. So may our nation influence other nations as a Christian people ought to do, not by vaunting our power to go where we like and kill whom we please, but by showing righteousness and good will towards all mankind. Physical weapons of destruction are not worthy to be compared with the moral weapons that reach the conscience and the heart.
IV. RISE TO THE THOUGHT OF GOD‘S MAGNANIMITY TO US. Though we have conceived in our minds enmity against him, he does not crush us by the might of his arm, or willingly slay us as with the edge of a glittering sword. The gospel conveys to us the sublime appeal of his truth, righteousness, and pardoning love. We enter no cave where God is not. We are never beyond his reach; and if he should smite, who is there that could deliver out of his hand? But he has no pleasure in our death. Much as we have provoked him, he has compassion, he spares, he even pleads with us to be reconciled to him. Let us consent to his proposals of grace not with mere evanescent feeling, but with inward repentance and cordial faith. Then we shall not part from our God, as did Saul from David, but abide and “walk together as those that are agreed.”F.
Fuente: The Complete Pulpit Commentary
1Sa 24:1. In the wilderness of En-gedi The word En-gedi signifies in the Hebrew, the kid’s fountain; from whence the neighbouring region took its name, probably because there they watered their flocks. Eusebius places it on the confines of the Dead Sea, to the west. With him, it is famous for excellent balm, and with Solomon, in his song, for vineyards. Son 1:4. It is now called An-guedi: see Thevenot’s Travels, part 1: chap. 47.
Fuente: Commentary on the Holy Bible by Thomas Coke
VI. David in the Wilderness of Engedi. He spares Saul in the cave. His conversation with Saul
Chap. 24. [Eng. A. V. 1Sa 23:29 to 1Sa 24:22]
29(1) And David went up from thence and dwelt in [ins. the] strongholds at [of] 1(2) Engedi.1 And it came to pass, when Saul was returned from following the Philistines, that it was told him, saying, Behold, David is in the wilderness 2(3) of Engedi. Then [And] Saul took three thousand chosen men [men chosen] out of all Israel; and went to seek David and his men upon the rocks of the 3(4) wild goats.2 And he came to the sheep-cotes by [on] the way, where [and there] was a cave, and Saul went in to cover his feet;3 and David and his 4(5) men remained [were abiding] in the sides of the cave. And the men of David said unto him, Behold the day of which the Lord [Jehovah] said unto thee, Behold, I will deliver thine enemy into thine hand, that thou mayest do to him as it shall seem good unto thee. Then [And] David arose, and cut 5(6) off the skirt of Sauls robe privily. And it came to pass afterward that 6(7) Davids heart smote him because he had cut off Sauls skirt.4 And he said unto his men, The Lord [Jehovah] forbid5 that I should do this thing unto my master [lord], the Lords [Jehovahs] anointed, to stretch forth mine 7(8) hand against him, seeing [for] he is the anointed of the Lord [Jehovah]. So [And] David stayed6 his servants [men] with these [om. these] words, and suffered them not to rise against Saul. But [And] Saul rose up out of the cave, and went on his way.
8(9) David also [And David] arose afterward and went out of the cave and cried after Saul, saying, My lord the king. And when [om. when] Saul looked behind him, [ins. and] David stooped with his face to the earth and 9(10) bowed himself. And David said to Saul, Wherefore hearest7 thou mens 10(11) words, saying, Behold, David seeketh thy hurt? Behold, this day thine eyes have seen how that the Lord [Jehovah] had [om. had] delivered thee to-day into my hand in the cave, and some bade8 me kill thee; but [and] mine eye spared thee, and I said, I will not put forth my hand against my lord, for Hebrews 11(12) is the Lords [Jehovahs] anointed. Moreover [And] my father,9 see, yea see the skirt of thy robe in my hand; for, in that I cut off the skirt of thy robe and killed thee not, know thou and see that there is neither evil nor transgression in mine hand, and I have not sinned against thee; yet thou huntest10 12(13) my soul to take it. The Lord [Jehovah] judge between me and thee, and the Lord [Jehovah] avenge me of thee; but my hand shall not be upon thee. 13(14) As11 saith the proverb of the ancients, Wickedness proceedeth from the wicked. 14(15) But my hand shall not be upon thee. After whom is the king of Israel come out? after whom dost thou pursue? after a dead dog, after a [one]12 flea. 15(16) The Lord therefore [And Jehovah] be judge, and judge between me and thee, and see, and plead my cause, and deliver [judge]13 me out of thine hand.
16(17) And it came to pass, when David had made an end of speaking these words 17(18) unto Saul, that Saul said, Is this thy voice, my son David? And Saul lifted up his voice and wept. And he said to David, Thou art more righteous than I, for thou hast rewarded [done]14 me good, whereas [and] I have rewarded 18(19) [done] thee evil. And thou hast showed this day how that thou hast dealt well with me,15 forasmuch as when the Lord [Jehovah] had [om. had] delivered 19(20) me into thine hand, thou killedst me not. For, if a man find his enemy, will he let him go well away? wherefore the Lord [Jehovah] reward 20(21) thee good for that [what] thou hast done unto me this day.16 And now, behold I know well [om. well] that thou shalt surely be king,17 and that the kingdom of Israel shall be established in thine hand. Swear now therefore unto me by the Lord [Jehovah] that thou wilt not cut off my seed after me, 22(23) and that thou wilt not destroy my name out of my fathers house. And David sware unto Saul. And Saul went home [to his house], but [and] David and his men gat them up into18 the hold.
EXEGETICAL AND CRITICAL
1Sa 24:1-8 [2927]. Davids abode in Engedi and his meeting there with Saul in a cave.
1Sa 24:1 [1Sa 23:29]. Engedi the present Ain Jidy (Jeddi), Fountain of the kid (, , Ptol. 5, 16, 8), about the middle of the west shore of the Dead Sea, about thirteen miles north-east of Maon on the border of the wilderness of Judah, in a mountainous region with limestone-soil, with precipitous rocks and deep gorges which run towards the Dead Sea, and with many caves in the limestone-hills. It belonged to the then few very fruitful regions of the wilderness of Judah.[For a good account of Engedi with its magnificent scenery, its frightful and dangerous rock-passes and its many roomy caverns, see Bib. Com. in loco. Thomson, in The Land and the Book, speaks of the wild goats still to be found there.Tr.]
1Sa 24:2 [1Sa 24:1] sq. The obstinacy of Sauls adherence to his bloody plan against David appears in the fact that immediately after his campaign against the Philistines, perhaps even before they were completely overthrown, he again sends out spies against David, and sets out with a large body of warriors (3000) in order to seize him. He sees in him a rival king, against whom he must march fully equipped, and whom he must destroy by a superior force of disciplined troops. The ibex-rocks, so called by the people perhaps, because from their steepness and wildness the ibexes or wild-goats could subsist there. See Rob. II. 432 [Am. Ed. I. 500]. Mountain-goats still abound there. In the hardly accessible gorges and caves Saul with his men sought David and his followers, rightly supposing that the latter, being few in number, would seek to hide in this region so full of hiding-places. There were and are caves there wherein thousands might hide.The words: The sheepcotes on the way indicate (like the ibex-rocks) a well-known locality, which from its fruitfulness in this otherwise waste region served for the abode of flocks. [Thomson saw many sheepfolds at the mouths of caves; they were made by piling stones up in a circle and covering them with thorns.Tr.]. Saul looks out a cave in the vicinity to cover his feet, that is, to obey a call of nature, when the Orientals usually cover their feet (the ancient Vss. [except Syr.], Keil, Then.), not: to sleep (Mich., Ew. [Syr.]). David and his men abode within or in the back of the cave [1Sa 24:4 (3)], while Saul was in front not far from the entrance. The description supposes a very large cave, of such as are numerous there. But whether this cave is to be identified (as Van de Velde supposes) with the one near the village Chareitun in the Wady of the same name southwest of the Frank Mountain and north-east of Tekoa (it is a limestone arch with many side-passages and wide dark rear-spaces) is uncertain, inasmuch as the latter on account of its proximity to Tekoa would be reckoned to the wilderness of Tekoa rather than to the wilderness of Engedi, and besides is from fourteen to nineteen miles from Engedi, which does not seem to have been the case with the one here described. [De Saulcy (B. Com.) suggests Bir-el-Mauquouchieh near Wady Hasasa as the place.Tr.].
1Sa 24:5 [4]. Davids men advise him to seize this opportunity, given him, as they think, by God, to rid himself of his deadly foe. See, this is the day of which the Lord said to thee.The Lords saying can here be understood only in the general sense of the divine ordering of this favorable opportunity. This day, with its fortunate meeting, seemed to them a hint and direction from God. A reference to a definite divine declaration,19 given to David through a prophet (Clericus: There would come a time when, his enemies all conquered and prostrate, he would peacefully govern Israel) is not in the words themselves.Saul had laid aside his upper garment [robe] for his present purpose [or, remaining on him, it may have been spread out.Tr.]. The situation was such that David could, without being observed, cut off a corner of the upper garment. David wished to have in hand this sign that Saul had been defenceless in his power, and that he could have killed him, in order to use it with Saul at the proper time. His heart smote him, not with fright at the bold undertaking (Then., Ew.), for the deed was already done, but in the ethical sense: his conscience smote him. From what follows it is clear that David regarded Sauls person as sacred; he reproached himself with having secretly cut off a piece of his garment, and thus failed in reverence for his person. Cler.: David was afraid that Saul would take this, though a clear sign of (Davids) magnanimity, in bad part, and regard it as a violation of his royal majesty.
1Sa 24:7 [6]. The decisive and solemn rejection of the advice of the warriors to assail Saul. Be it far from me from the Lord, that is, on the Lords account; it is a religious ground which restrains him from following the advice of his men. For Gods sake he will not do it, because Saul is the anointed of the Lord, a person made sacred by the Lord. And therefore also David could not have received command from the Lord to deal with Saul according to his good pleasure.
1Sa 24:8 [7]. David cut down his men with words ( to rend, cut to pieces, then figuratively cut down with words verbis dilaceravit), Luther beat back (abweisen), too weak [so Eng. A. V. stayed.Tr.]; Berl. Bib. better: pulled away (abreissen). David was obliged to hold back his men with reproving words from taking bloody vengeance on Saul. We must suppose that Saul went alone into the cave at a distance from his people, and did not suspect that such a body of men lay immediately behind his back.
1Sa 24:9-22 [822]. The conversation of David and Saul at a distance.
1Sa 24:9 [8]. David uses this God-given opportunity to assure his persecutor of his innocence, and to lodge a sting in his conscience. His words are a declaration (wrung out by suffering) from heart to heart, from conscience to conscience. The address: My Lord, O king! indicates the double point of view whence David in what follows declares by deed and by word his relation and attitude to Saul. He recognizes and honors Saul as his lord to whom he feels himself bound to be subject; in calling him his lord he declares himself guiltless of insurrection against him. In the king he sees the anointed of the Lord, the bearer of the holy theocratic office, in which character he was inviolable. In calling him king he affirms that he is far from attacking his person and working him harm. To this address corresponds Davids behaviour, his gesture of deepest reverence: he bent his face to the earth and bowed himself.
1Sa 24:10 [9]. David refers first to the calumnies by which he had been blackened to Saul as his enemy seeking his destruction. Compare the title of Psalms 7., which refers to the present situation; there were calumniating go-betweens, one of whom was the otherwise unknown Benjamite Cush, who stood, therefore, in the same category with the Ziphites and Doeg. Saul hearkened to these slanders and believed them, because his heart was full of mistrust and hate against David.
1Sa 24:11 [10]. David expressly represents it as a divinely ordered circumstance that Saul was put into his power. He also expressly affirms that the temptation to kill him was presented to him ( one said as in 1Sa 23:22), but at the same time declares that he spared him; to the spared of the Heb. supply my eye [so Eng. A. V.Tr.], as in Gen 45:20; Deu 7:16 (so most expositors) or my hand or my soul (Cler.). He further gives the reason which deterred him from laying hand on Saul, his lord: for he is the Lords anointed.By the royal anointing, as a divine act, Sauls person was for him sacred, inviolable.
1Sa 24:12 [11]. And my father; with this address David passes from his relation to Saul as king to the divinely ordered relation which he occupied towards him as father. To this my father answers Sauls my son. David calls Saul father not (as Grotius thinks) because he was his father-in-law, but to indicate the pious20 feeling which so fills his heart as he speaks, that he involuntarily breaks out into this address. See 1Sa 24:17 [16] and 1Sa 26:17.See, yea see.A lively introduction of the factual proof of what he had just said that Saul had been given into his hand so that he could have done to him what he would. The yea () is here intensive, not merely copulative (Ges. 155, 2 a). The skirt of the upper garment in Davids hand is to be at the same time ocular proof that David is innocent of the wicked accusations brought against him by the calumniators. With his innocence, set forth in heaped up words: in my hand is no evil nor transgression, and I have not sinned against thee, he next contrasts (with the adversative phrase and thou and in curt, incisive words) Sauls criminal conduct towards him: Thou workest after my soul, properly huntest my soul; Cler.: A very suitable phrase concerning a man whom his enemy was pursuing like a beast over mountains and forests; Sept.: bindest, with allusion to the nets of the hunter, and so, in accordance with this figure, it is added: to take it, Vulg. ut auferas eam.
1Sa 24:13 [12] is similarly to be taken from the point of view that he has no evil design against Saul.The Lord will judge between me and thee, that is, though the Lord gave thee into my hand, I attempted, and shall attempt nothing against thee, because I leave the decision wholly to the Lord. Here speaks submission to Gods will, leaving to him the decision concerning right and wrong, innocence and guilt. And the Lord will avenge me of thee,the expression of Davids confidence that for his guilty conduct towards his (Davids) innocence Saul will not go unpunished, that against him will be manifested the weight of the divine punitive justice.But my hand shall not be against thee, as I have hitherto been, so I will continue to be pure from crime against thee; Gods hand will punish thy injustice towards me, my hand shall not touch thee.
1Sa 24:14 [13]. David grounds this declaration of innocence on the reference to its inner foundation and root by means of an old proverb: from the evil comes evil, evil doing springs from an evil heart. Cler. well explains: David means to say that if he had been guilty of conspiracy against the king, he would not have neglected this favorable opportunity to kill him, since men usually indulge their feelings, and from a mind guilty of conspiracy nothing but corresponding deeds could come forth. Compare the Greek proverb: [from a bad raven a bad egg, see Mat 7:15-20.Tr.]Grotius: Actions usually correspond to the quality of the mind. The repetition of the words: but my hand shall not be against thee, after the proverb is the declaration of innocence: I am not wicked and criminal, and, therefore, according to the old proverb, I shall undertake and do nothing evil against thee, wreak no vengeance on thee.
1Sa 24:15 [14] David points out how foolish, superfluous and unroyal is Sauls persecuting campaign against a mean, undangerous man like him. Grot.: A very pathetic appeal and a proof of Davids very great modesty. Comp. Psalms 131. The king of Israel is with special emphasis made to follow the after whom? in contrast with the position and significance of the person persecuted by him. With the king of Israel adorned with honor and power David contrasts himself under the figure of a dead dog: 1) as a despised, lowly, qualitatively insignificant man, comp. 1Sa 17:43; 2Sa 3:8, where the figure of a dog represents a man despicable in the eyes of one who is, or is supposed to be of high standing; 2) as a harmless, or in no wise dangerous man, comp. the figure of the dead dog, 2Sa 9:8; 2Sa 16:9.The comparison with the flea adds the idea of the quantitatively petty, mean, comp. 1Sa 26:20. Wherefore, would David say, O thou mighty king of Israel, dost thou summon thy army against so little and insignificant a man? Berl. Bib.: against a single flea, which is not easily caught, and easily escapes, and if it is caught, is poor game for a royal hunter. No more than a dead dog can harm, and a flea endanger thee, am I, apart from the fact that I have no wish thereto, in position to work thee destruction.
1Sa 24:16 [15]. Thereforebecause Saul persecutes him unjustly as an innocent man, and foolishly as an undangerous man, because he, David, is unjustly slandered and persecuted as a malicious enemy of Saulhe appeals to the Judge who alone is just and gives success to a righteous cause. Two things David here says: 1) he repeats his appeal to the judicial decision of the Lord (1Sa 24:13 [12]), and 2) declares his firm conviction that the Lord will by such decision help him to his rights against Saul: He will conduct my cause, that is, the just God, before whom I am not only consciously, but really innocent, will be my advocate, undertake my cause; and do me justice from thy hand, I shall be delivered out of thy hand, freed from the sufferings which thou preparest me. A zeugmatic construction.[Rather a pregnant construction: will judge me (and thus deliver me) from thy hand.Tr.]21
1Sa 24:17 [16]. Sauls answer to these words of David shows that they deeply and powerfully impressed his mind and sharply pricked his conscience. The address: Is that thy voice, my son David? indicates by its soft, mild tone that Davids words, issuing from a deeply-moved heart, and in the my father and thou king of Israel, my lord, expressing profound piety and reverence, had struck a chord in Sauls inner life on the side of feeling and disposition, which he could not help letting sound forth in this address counter to the fierceness and hate that otherwise possessed him. The sign of this sudden awakening of nobler feeling is Sauls weeping aloud. There is no hypocrisy or pretence here. Saul, tossed powerless hither and thither by fierce passions without self-control and without harmony of soul-life, is here laid hold of in a hidden corner of his heart, where he was still accessible to the power of truth, and involuntarily yields to this nobler arousing of his soul, though it is not destined to be permanent.
1Sa 24:18 [17]. On this psychologically so significant address follows the ethically so important confession: Thou art more righteous than I, for thou hast done me good, and I have done thee evil.This proves that his conscience was touched by Davids word, which had so sharply contrasted innocence and baseless persecution, righteousness and unrighteousness. Saul must do honor to the truth; the overwhelming force of Davids words, founded in truth, forces this confession from him; though a thorough and permanent change for the better is not thereby effected in his heart. Grotius: The confession is unwillingly extorted, the mind being nothing bettered. But we see from this of how high a degree of good Saul was capable, if he had been willing to deny himself. The mode in which Davids word so struck his conscience that he was compelled involuntarily to acknowledge his innocence and the justice of his cause is indicated by his own words; it was his perception of the glaring contrast between his evil, destructive operations against David, and the wholly opposite conduct of the latter, who did only good to the hostile king: The requital of evil with good. Saul thinks of all the good that David had done him by his faithful service. By right moral conduct, absolutely accordant with Gods holy will, and simple avowal springing from truth and from the heart, a deep impression for the better may under certain circumstances be made on the corruptest and most hardened nature.
1Sa 24:19 [18]. In proof of this affirmation Saul adduces Davids present behaviour, which is distinguished from the preceding: thou hast done me good.And thou hast to-day showed, hast given a proof of what good thou hast done to me, namely therein, that the Lord had delivered me into thy hand;22 Saul also here recognizes the fact that it was Gods hand that had to-day delivered him into Davids hand, in contrast with his previous declarations that God had given David into his hand, 1Sa 23:7.But thou didst not kill me, thou didst not use the opportunity given thee by Gods providence, because thou wishest not to avenge thyself on me, and thinkest only good towards me. All this is a splendid justification of David and confirmation of the assertions that he made to Saul.
1Sa 24:20 [19]. Thenius, from the Sept., Syr. and Arab., undertakes to restore the supposed original text of this verse as follows: 1) after his enemy, we are to hold, stood originally in straits (). Thenius thinks this reading necessary, since one might find his enemy without having opportunity to hurt him; but this opportunity is especially afforded when he finds him in angustiis, in straits. But this is a hair-splitting and far-fetched argument, since the connection does not leave it doubtful what is meant by finding the enemy. Find here as in 1Sa 23:17; Psa 21:9 [8]; Isa 10:10, means so to come upon as to affect with suffering or punishment,=get into ones power. 2) After [Eng. A. V. after well away.Tr.] Then, supposes the Lord will reward him good to have fallen away, and 3) instead of the last words of the verse, to have originally stood: the Lord reward thee good for what thou hast to-day done to me. But the authority of the versions is the less decisive here, because their purpose is obvious, to avoid a harshness and produce conformity. They included the whole sentence in the protasis: if one find his enemy and send him away, and there was no apodosis. To supply this apodosis and correspondingly to express the good which Saul afterwards wishes David, they added: the Lord will reward him good.The words, as they stand in the text, give even according to Thenius a tolerable sense; yea more, they give a satisfactory sense if we translate: If one find his enemy, will he let him go on a good way (a peaceful, unimperilled way)? that is, it is usual, when one has his enemy in his power, not to let him go in peace untouched. In the lively feeling with which Saul speaks, the omission of the intermediate thought, the expression of which might be expected, namely, so hast thou not acted towards me, is quite natural. The negative answer to this question is omitted (an omission psychologically easily understood), and immediately follows the wish: The Lord reward thee good for what thou hast this day done to me. (So Maur., De Wette, Buns., Keil.) That Saul at this moment truly and honestly meant these words, is beyond doubt; it is the witness not only of a bright, but also of a good moment in his inner life, though indeed no deep and permanent improvement followed. Under the influence of Davids presence and words the evil spirit had for a moment yielded to the good.
1Sa 24:21 [20] sq. Following the better impulse of his heart Saul sees clearly that the theocratic kingship will pass from him and his house to David, and only through him as its future bearer be permanently established. How did Saul come to this knowledge which he here expresses, and which Jonathan had already affirmed that his father had (1Sa 23:17)? Not through direct divine revelation, but by the observation that all his undertakings against David were unsuccessful, and that David in respect to his persecutions was under special divine protection, coupled with the recollection of what Samuel had once said to him in the name of God respecting his rejection for disobedience. The declaration of his conscience: Thou art rejected by God was confirmed by the manifest signs of divine guidance and protection in Davids life, and by the imposing moral power of Davids conduct. Cler.: From this great magnanimity of David he concluded that a man who was much superior in soul to kings could not but reign. Two things he says: 1) Thou wilt become king, and 2) in thy hand the kingdom will be permanently established, not will be raised up, grow, increase (Gramb.). So far has the dark cloud of envy and hate passed away from Sauls soul, that he not only recognizes and affirms Davids future kingship, but to him as future king prefers a request in the form of an adjuration, that he would show royal kindness and mercy to his house and name. David gave him the promise in an oath that he would not after his death exterminate his posterity, as was often the case in changes of dynasty in the East, and, as Keil well points out, repeatedly occurred also in the kingdom of the Ten Tribes. 1Ki 15:28 sq.; 1Sa 16:11 sq.; 2 Kings 10. Similar request by Jonathan 1Sa 20:15. [Bib.-Com.: The deep genealogical feeling of the Israelites breaks out here as so often elsewhere. Sauls declaration as to Davids future kingship is not divine prophecy, but human foresight.Tr.]
1 Samuel 24:23 [22]. The description of the interview, so significant for both parties to it, concludes with the statement that Saul went to his residence, while David with his men went up into the strong and secure mountain-heights. The latter did not return home, because he could not expect that Saul would retain this disposition and essentially change his bearing towards him.Cler.: He knew Sauls changeable and perfidious nature, and was afraid of his snares. [Nor, apparently, did Saul invite or expect him to go home. His presence at court would have been embarrassing; his training in the fields is to continue yet some time.Tr.]
HISTORICAL AND THEOLOGICAL
1. This incident of Davids life in 1 Samuel 24 (not 26) forms the basis of Psalms 7 (of which he is the author), which is rich in references to this event and whose title: Shiggaion of David which he sang to the Lord concerning the words of Cush the Benjaminite, giving the slanderous accusations of this man as the occasion of the Psalm, presents a situation identical with that of 1Sa 24:10 [9] of 1 Samuel 24. There were men who, by all sorts of slanders, blackened David with Saul, and inflamed his hate against him. Among these, according to the title, was the Benjaminite Cush. The Benjaminites, on account of the tribal relationship, were pronounced adherents of Saul, and he had bound them to him by all sorts of favors (comp. 1Sa 22:7). Cush is not a symbolical name for a man of black wickedness, namely here for Saul (to whose fathers name Kish, Hengstenberg and Kimchi see an allusion), but the proper name of a Benjaminite man, one of those slanderers and go-betweens, whose mention in the title of this Psalm (the situation in which accords throughout with that in 1 Samuel 24) is a supplement to the allusion in 1Sa 24:10. How the content of the Psalm is based on Davids assertion of innocence and confident appeal to God which is given here in 1 Samuel 24. is clear from the train of thought: After the singers introductory cry for help, 1Sa 24:2-3 [1, 2] follows the affirmation of freedom from revenge and of innocence as to the accusations made against him (pointing to 1Sa 24:5-8; 1Sa 24:18-19 [47, 17, 18]), 1Sa 24:4-6 [35]. On this is based (see 1Sa 24:13-16 [1215]) the appeal to the Lord for execution of His judgment, to which he submits in firm confidence and good conscience, 1Sa 24:7-10 [69]. To this is added (see 1Sa 24:16 [15]) avowal of trust in the help of the righteous God, and in the self-prepared destruction of the unrighteous, 1Sa 24:11-17 [1016]. In conclusion the vow of thanksgiving [1Sa 24:17.]What Delitzsch excellently says of the character of the Psalm: It is the most solemn pathos of lofty self-consciousness, that here speaks,anxious unrest, defiant self-trust, triumphant upsoaring, confident trust, prophetic certainty, all these tones find expression in the irregular strophe-sequence of this Davidic dithyramb, all this is found substantially in Davids words to Saul.Hengstenbergs statement of the didactic content of the Psalm: There is a twofold didactic element in the Psalm: 1) it is a necessary condition of divine help that one lift up pure hands to God, and 2) this condition being fulfilled, the divine righteousness vouches for the absolute certainty of the deliverance, answers precisely in both points to the two fundamental thoughts of Davids address (1 Samuel 24) to Saul: 1) I am innocent, and therefore sure of divine help, and 2) Gods justice will bring my innocence to light, and punish my unrighteous persecutors.
2. As fundamental traits in the religious-moral character of David appear in this section the following: magnanimous forbearance towards his enemy providentially given into his hand, decided repulse of the temptation to revenge on him, tenderness of conscience whereby his heart smote him for appropriating a piece of Sauls garment, frank and bold affirmation of his innocence against slanders and persecutions, reverent piety towards the sacred person of the Lords chosen and the de facto theocratic king, the confidence of a good conscience, and the patient waiting of a mind resigned to Gods dispensations in respect to the severe sufferings appointed him, and the expected decision of the divine justice, love of enemies which not only puts far away revenge, but repays evil with good, firm confidence in Gods justice (having its root in humility), with which in the consciousness of innocence he appeals to the highest tribunal, clear knowledge of the ways of the divine justice, whose aim is the maintenance of the divinely-appointed holy order of his kingdom (namely, that the unrighteously introduced evil be punished), and hope in the saving help of God founded on faith in Gods justice. That David was magnanimous towards enemies, that, when his foe was through chance in his hands, instead of satiating his vengeance, he sent him reverently away, is wholly in keeping with his nature, and in the song Psa 7:5 [4] is referred to by him briefly and incidentally, but clearly enough; that to Saul himself, even when there would have been the most favorable opportunity to inflict grievous injury on him, he could do no bodily harm, follows immediately from the idea itself of the Anointed of God which filled his soul (Ew., III., 130).
3. The old proverb: From the evil comes evil (1Sa 24:14 [13] expresses the truth that the moral character of the man necessarily determines his conduct; the ethical actus is always the expression of the ethical habitus; the precise nature of the inner life, whether in good or in evil, the ethical character of the personality shows itself in the mans outward doing. It is the same truth which is expressed in the New Test. declaration: As the tree so the fruit (Mat 7:17).
4. The simple self-presentation and self-witness of moral purity and truth (as here in David in word and deed) has a great missionary power, and often makes a mighty impression on spiritually darkened and morally perverted natures (as Sauls here) in such wise that the divine in them is freed from the binding power of the evil, and the religious-moral element of the conscience, which is concealed deep under religious-moral corruption, breaks freely forth, at least in some bright and good moments, in order to point to the way of salvation and show the possibility of deliverance, provided the man is willing to be saved and renewed.
HOMILETICAL AND PRACTICAL
1Sa 24:3 [2]. S. Schmid: How much it were to be wished that the pious would apply as much diligence to the practice of good as the ungodly do to the practice of evil (Rom 6:19).
1Sa 24:5 [4]. Wuert. Bib.: It happens quite often that men seek to mislead us by an apparent application of the Word of God; let us therefore prove all things and hold fast that which is good (Mat 4:6). [Hall: Those temptations are most powerful which fetch their force from the pretence of a religious obedience.Tr.]
1Sa 24:6-7 [5, 6]. Cramer: It is a praiseworthy virtue to be able to conquer ones self, and he that ruleth his spirit is better than he that taketh a city (Pro 16:32).Schlier: David really gained a greater victory at this moment than formerly in the fight against Goliath.Let us be master over ourselves, let us fight against our anger and overcome the enemy in our own heart. It is a wonderful, every way instructive and shame-inspiring sight, the fugitive David protecting his deadly foe against the hand of his friends. [Chrysostom remarks that David had reason to fear lest his men should rebel and do violence to him if he spared their common enemy; also that they were very cunning in not suggesting revengeto which they knew David would not inclinebut the pious recognition of Gods hand.Taylor: No doubt it might be said that God had rejected Saul, and had caused David to be anointed in his room; but that had not given to David the right to deal summarily with Saul; it had only indicated that when, in the course of Providence, Saul should be removed, David would be set upon his throne. For this, therefore, David would wait. He would not take Providence into his own hands. He would bide Gods time, and it should not be said for him that he had come into the kingdom by the assassination of his predecessor. Even his cutting off a portion of Sauls robe caused him some misgivings of heart, the rather as perhaps after he had done it, his men, emboldened by his example, might have felt themselves at liberty to go farther, and lay hands on the king himself. If any such disposition was manifested by them, it was immediately repressed by their leader.Tr.]Hall: Tender consciences are moved to regret at those actions, which strong hearts pass over with a careless ease.
1Sa 24:8 [7]. Schmid: What one cannot himself do with a good conscience, he must also not permit those to do whom he has to command. [This holds good only within certain limits.Tr.]Starke: We must not yield even to our dearest and best friends when they desire from us something wrong.
1Sa 24:9 [8]. Schlier: How instructive is this union of reverence with genuine manly spirit! It is a servant of the Lord who speaksa servant of the Lord filled with fear of God.Modesty and respect are becoming to a Christian in all cases. But that does not exclude us from also telling the truth, with all modesty, to be sure, but yet with all candor.
1Sa 24:10 [9]. Osiander: One must not lay his hand on even an ungodly ruler.
1Sa 24:12 [11]. S. Schmid: That is the highest love towards God and ones neighbor, when any one restrains himself from revenge in such a manner that he returns his enemy good for the highest wrong (Rom 12:21).Berl. Bib.: As men are, so are their actions. As the tree, so is the fruit. What the heart is full of, the mouth runs over with and the hands work at and accomplish. 1Sa 24:16 [15]. Osiander: God is advocate, judge, avenger and protector for those who suffer for righteousness sake.
1Sa 24:17 [16]. Starke: A good word finds a good reception often even with the most corrupt men.
1Sa 24:18 [17]. Berlenburg. Bible: See how Davids patience works upon Saul, and how one may heap coals of fire upon the heads of his enemies (Pro 25:22). Try this means on thy unfriendly and perverse neighbor or relative (Rom 12:20).
1Sa 24:20 [19]. Cramer: A mighty thing is the truth. Therefore, if thy brother sins against thee, go and rebuke him between thee and him alone (Mat 18:15).S. Schmid: The ungodly, too, must at last confess that it is right for God to requite the righteous according to their righteousness.
1Sa 24:21-22 [2022]. Cramer: To be able to constrain and win an enemy with good words, gentleness and modesty, is the noblest victory (Pro 15:1).Osiander: Enemies are often overcome much sooner by good deeds than by force.S. Schmid: What God has according to His wise counsel designed for His pious and upright servants, must become theirs, although the ungodly with all their powers set themselves against it and begrudge it to them; yea, at last the ungodly must themselves confess that their efforts against it are in vain.Schlier: How often we think, too, as soon as good thoughts and feelings stir in us, that already it is all done; how often we think with a couple of good purposes and resolutions to get to the end! O believe it though: before all things there must be a change towards the living God, before all things must we bow before God, before all things confess our sins to Him; the first thing and the most necessary of all is repentance! That is the only way there can be a real and thorough change. (See above Hist. and Theolog.)
[1Sa 24:4. Providential purpose, apparent and real. 1) What was here the apparent purpose of God? To give an injured man opportunity for delivering and avenging himself. He was strongly tempted: a) It was indeed a special providence of an extraordinary and very striking kind (comp. 1Sa 5:10). b) He had been cruelly wronged, by friend (1Sa 23:12) and foe, and there seemed no other hope of deliverance from this perpetual persecution, c) His followers insisted on his embracing the tempting opportunity, and might rebel if he refused. 2) How did he know that such could not be the purpose of Providence? Because it would involve his doing what was wrong in itself (1Sa 24:5-6; 1Sa 24:10). An enlightened and tender conscience must check our interpretations of Providence. 3) What was the real Providential purpose? As usual, it was manifold: we can see the following points: a) To make him more conscientious by obeying conscience under sore temptation (1Sa 24:5-6). b) To present a noble example to his rude followers and the people at large (1Sa 24:6; 1Sa 24:10). c) To furnish a most convincing proof that he was wrongly accused (1Sa 24:9-11). d) To give him ground for a confident appeal to Providence in future (1Sa 24:12 sq.; comp. 1Sa 26:23-24). e) To heighten his reputation for loyalty and magnanimity, and smooth the way to his finally becoming king (comp. 1Sa 24:20).
[1Sa 24:1-15. Davids magnanimity. (Group homiletically the materials indicated in Hist. and Theol., No. 2.)
[1Sa 24:13. A Bible proverb before Solomon: 1) Habitual bad conduct proves bad character. 2) Habitual good conduct, notwithstanding tempting occasions for wickedness, proves that the character is not bad. 3) It is well when one can appeal to his actions as supporting his words and proving the purity of his motives.
[1Sa 24:9-15. A good man defending himself against suspicion and slander: 1) He remonstrates against listening to slanderous accusers (1Sa 24:9). 2) He sets forth his actions as showing that the charges are false (1Sa 24:10-11; 1Sa 24:13). 3) He declares the persecution of him to be utterly unbecoming in a person of high position (1Sa 24:14). 4) He solemnly appeals to God: a) to plead his cause, b) to deliver him, c) to punish his persecutor, which he will not himself do (1Sa 24:12; 1Sa 24:15; comp. Psalms 7.).
1Sa 24:16-22. Temporary amendment in a fallen man: 1) Its occasionan exhibition of magnanimous kindness touches his better feelings. 2) Its signs. a) Bitter weeping, b) Frank confession (1Sa 24:17). c) Prayer that a man he has been wronging may be blessed of God (1Sa 24:19). d) Acknowledgment that this man is not only better than himself, but has a righteous cause (1Sa 24:20). e) Abandonment of his attempts to wrong the other. 3) Why the amendment proves only temporary: a) It is only matter of feeling, not of principle (1Sa 24:16). b) He is thinking more of his own interests than of justice to another (1Sa 24:21). c) He does not really return to God, but only softens towards a man. d) Sooner or later comes a fresh temptation (1Sa 26:1 sq.).Tr.]
Footnotes:
[1][1Sa 23:29 (1). See the various VSS. in this verse as an illustration of the uncertainty in proper names.Tr.]
[2][1Sa 24:2 (3). On the face of the rocks. Possibly we have here a proper name, the Jeelim or ibex-rocks.Tr.]
[3][1Sa 24:3 (4). Explained in all the VSS. as = (so Erdmann), except Syr., which has to sleep.Tr.]
[4][1Sa 24:5 (6). All ancient VSS., except Chald,, read: the skirt of Sauls robe, and so some MSS. In the present Heb. text we should expect the Art. before , and, apparently, we should either supply the Art., or adopt the reading of the VSS.Tr.]
[5][1Sa 24:6 (7). Literally: a profane thing be it to me from Jehovah.Tr.]
[6][1Sa 24:7 (8). This word is variously rendered by the VSS.: , , , , Chald. quieted (), Syr. caused to repent, turned aside (so Eng. A. V.), Arab. threateningly admonished, Vulg. confregit. Levy suggests as the reading of the Vat. Sept. (). The Heb. word contains a strong figure (so Gesen. and Erdmann) cut up = hindered, restrained.Tr.]
[7][1Sa 24:9 (10). Or: hearkenest thou to.Tr.]
[8] [1Sa 24:10 (11). , indefinite as in 1Sa 23:22 (Maurer), so Syr., Arab., Chald. The phrase, however, presents some difficulties. It is objected (Bib. Com.) that the subject of in the present Heb. text is naturally Jehovah, so that it would read: and Jehovah said (commanded) to kill thee; but this is not necessarily required by the grammar, and is in Davids mouth impossible (Bib. Com.). Thenius rejects the sense of command here as belonging to later Heb. (but it is found in 2Sa 1:18; 2Sa 16:11), and adopts the reading ,
I did not wish, after the Sept. , adding that the Heb. text is most readily explained from the Vulg.: et cogitavi ut occiderem te, whence Heb. (so Bib. Com.). Both these readings (and with Impf.) Wellhausen rejects, and reads after Sept. (as in 1Sa 8:19), which is more probable from the form (the present Heb. might easily come from it), and gives a good sense. We cannot infer anything as to the text from Josephus omission of this clause.Tr.]
[9][1Sa 24:11 (12). The mutilation of the Sept. here loses the expression of excitement which is so natural to the occasion.Tr.]
[10]1Sa 24:11 (12). Sept. =bindest in toils=huntest.Tr.]
[11][1Sa 24:13 (14). Wellhausen holds this verse to be an interpolation because its last clause is identical with the last clause of the preceding verse; but would not this repetition here be very natural?Tr.]
[12][1Sa 24:14 (15). The rendering one for is more lively, yet not linguistically necessary; the numeral is sometimes used as Indef. Art., as in 1Sa 1:1.Tr.]
[13][1Sa 24:15 (16). Of the three words here rendered judge the second and third are the same in the Heb. (, indicating the act of a governor-judge) and the first different from these (= a judicial officer).Tr.]
[14][1Sa 24:17 (18). The sense of retribution is sometimes, but not always found in this word ().Tr.]
[15][1Sa 24:18 (19). This clause seems awkward. We would expect: thou hast showed thy willingness to deal well, or simply: thou hast dealt well, for the showing and the dealing are identical in content; nor does the Sept. help. Perhaps we should render: Thou hast showed this day that thou dealest well, that is, that such is thy purpose and policy.Tr.]
[16][1Sa 24:19 (20). On this text see Erdmann in the Exposition.Tr.]
[17][1Sa 24:20 (22). Here one MS. and Arab. add , after me, an obvious supplement.Tr.]
[18][1Sa 24:22(23). Heb. , upon, but thirty MSS. read , to.Tr.]
[19][Some cite 1Sa 15:28; 1Sa 16:1; 1Sa 16:12, and also 1Sa 20:15; 1Sa 23:17, but it is not probable that Davids men would know these. Of any other promise we have no mention.Tr.]
[20][That is the reverence, the pietas of the Romans.Tr.]
[21][Philippson: This address of David has so much natural eloquence, so much glow, and such a tone of conviction, that no one who has any sense for the simple beauties of the Bible can read it without being moved. The whole situation, too, is noble: David, standing on the rocky height in the desert, holding on high the trophy of his magnanimity, looking at and addressing the melancholy Saul, whom he loved as a father, honored as king, revered as the Lords Anointed, who yet without ground hated him and persecuted him with relentless and deadly zealusing the opportunity with rapid words, which expressed his deepest feelings, to touch the heart of his enemyhe himself full or humility, oppressed by indescribable suffering and weighed down by the feeling of powerlessness, yet inspired by the consciousness of a noble deed.Tr.]
[22][On this verse and its translation see Text. and Gram.Tr.]
Fuente: A Commentary on the Holy Scriptures, Critical, Doctrinal, and Homiletical by Lange
CONTENTS
The history of Saul’s pursuit of David, is continued in the opening of this chapter. But, in this pursuit, the Lord brought Saul into David’s hand: his followers advise David to avail himself of the advantage; but David refuses. He takes occasion, however, to remonstrate with Saul, by bidding him take notice what he might have done, and how he forbore. Saul seems pricked to the heart, in the relation: confesses his sin to David, and obtains from David, a promise of kindness to his house. They part.
Fuente: Hawker’s Poor Man’s Commentary (Old and New Testaments)
(1) And it came to pass, when Saul was returned from following the Philistines, that it was told him, saying, Behold, David is in the wilderness of Engedi. (2) Then Saul took three thousand chosen men out of all Israel, and went to seek David and his men upon the rocks of the wild goats.
What an awful view doth the character of Saul afford, of the desperately wicked state of the heart of man by nature, void of grace. With what unremitting, unabated fury, doth Saul hunt after the life of David. Reader! recollect the instance of the Jews hunting after the life of Jesus, of whom, in this point no doubt David was a type.
Fuente: Hawker’s Poor Man’s Commentary (Old and New Testaments)
A Providence Or a Temptation?
1Sa 24:10
The touching and picturesque incident here related is an extract from the life of an outlaw. It took place amid the wild deep ravines that overhang the oasis of Engedi. This spot, situate about halfway down the western shore of the Dead Sea, owes its name, as it does its luxuriant growth of vegetation, to a fountain which rises from the limestone rock and falls in long silver ribbands to the sloping plain below. There were many reasons why David should take refuge here. The deep gorges and bleak hills were safe. Wood and water abounded. The solitude had its own charm. But no long time elapsed till the solitude was broken rudely by the warlike invasion of King Saul. With a fierce band of troops he had hurried out to seize the fugitive alive or dead, for just then there burned in him a fever-heat of malignant envy. Too often the prey had escaped his grasp, but this time he would make sure. This time the expedition must finish its work. It was a skilful plan, likely enough to be successful, if man were the only partner in the transaction. But God cannot safely be forgotten in our schemings; and although He may not always melt the heart of men like Saul, He finds many ways of tying their hands. So this chapter has lessons worth pondering by all who move amid the changing passions of human life.
Note the greatness of David’s temptation. To let Saul escape would be madness and impiety; what had happened was as good as a command to rise and strike home. Deal him the fatal blow here and now. Creep up behind him where he lies unconscious, and smite him to the heart.
It was a temptation all but overwhelming. Particularly for an Eastern mind, it did look extremely like a Divinely given opportunity. David had a long list of grievances to settle, and one thrust of a dirk would pay them all.
But what is the principle that rules his action, curbing both the savage purposes of those around him and the hot fever racing in his own veins? What but this, that men!must not go faster to their goal than the will of God permits? Do not take short cuts to happiness, if to do it you have to leave the high road of rectitude and mercy. It was a promise of God to David that one day he should wear the crown, but he would not step up to it over Saul’s dead body. He would not be king before God’s time at such a price as that! How often men ruin their lives by, as we say, ‘playing Providence’ to their own career. What looks like Providence may be a snare of the devil. So beware of that policy on which you can embark only by soiling your clear sense of right. Beware of side-paths that lead through the mire. Stick to the highway of the King, and leave the future issues in His keeping. Wave back the eager or contemptuous arguments of others when they plead for your real worldly interest, or cry that you are a fool to be so scrupulous; and say with brave Nehemiah, and in his reliance on a higher will, ‘So did not I, because of the fear of God’.
H. R. Mackintosh, Life on God’s Plan, p. 256.
References. XXV. 1. W. M. Taylor, David King of Israel, p. 110. XXV. 10, 11. H. J. Wilmot-Buxton, The Children’s Bread, p. 113. XXVI. W. M. Taylor, David King of Israel, p. 95. XXVII. Spurgeon, Sermons, vol. viii. No. 439. XXVII.-XXXI. W. M. Taylor, David King of Israel, p. 199.
Fuente: Expositor’s Dictionary of Text by Robertson
The Reconciliation of Saul
1Sa 24:16
WE have considered the discipline of the anointed man. Without attempting to cover the whole ground of David’s trials, we laid down a few general principles showing that men need to be taught their weakness as well as their power. David, the deliverer of Israel, was hated and pursued by the very man who should have honoured and loved him most. “Saul said, I will smite David even to the wall;” “Saul said, Let the hand of the Philistines be upon him;” “Saul thought to make David fall by the hand of the Philistines;” “Saul became David’s enemy continually;” “Saul spake to Jonathan his son, and to all his servants, that they should kill David;” and whensoever Saul heard of the course of David’s wandering, his heart burned with the fury of vengeance. This is a glimpse of the life of an anointed man. Truly, there be mysteries in human life which seem to shut out as with a wall of darkness the whole idea of God and spiritual government. In winter it is difficult to believe that in a few weeks the land will blush with the glowing colour of sweet flowers; in the blackness of night it is not easy to suppose that presently there will be a great flame in the heavens, and the sunny air will be full of singing birds. It is so with our poor life. God gives one great conquest into our hands, and then drives us away as with a furious wind of anger or contempt a wind which often blows out the lamp of our hope, or throws down the tree whose shadow promised rest. It is in such hours that the heart’s pain is turned into questions, and those questions are made bitter by the hopelessness, not of philosophical, but of experimental atheism. David says to us: Study my life; look how God dealt with me; put your trials into one scale, and mine into the other. “I sought the Lord, and he heard me, and delivered me from all my fears.” “This poor man cried, and the Lord heard him, and saved him out of all his troubles.” Thus one man lives for many, and the sorrow of one soul gathers up the felt but unspoken woe of many generations. Let us try to find out something in the bitterness of David’s experience which will help us more manfully and hopefully to live out our own few days.
1. Whilst the good man sees his own perils, let him also see the restraints which are put upon the wicked. Saul is mighty; Saul has servants; Saul is accustomed to dip his sword in human blood; yet he cannot hit David! Saul’s javelin is shivering in the wall there. He meant it to pierce David’s head. Saul was just on the point of slaying David, but that fact shows the nearer presence of spiritual defence. “When Herod would have brought him forth, the same night Peter was sleeping between two soldiers, bound with two chains: and the keepers before the door kept the prison. And, behold, the angel of the Lord came upon him, and a light shined in the prison: and he smote Peter on the side, and raised him up, saying, Arise up quickly. And his chains fell off from his hands.” Why should we always look at the peril? Why not look at the escape, and find in its very narrowness the clearest proof of divine care?
2. Let the bad man put to himself some serious questions respecting the restraints which limit his power. Saul should have learned a good deal from the failures which followed each other in rapid succession. If enmity could have killed the Church, where would the Church have been this day? Fire, sword, bondage, hunger, torture, darkness all have been tried. “Others had trial of cruel mockings and scourgings, yea, moreover of bonds and imprisonment: they were stoned, they were sawn asunder, were tempted, were slain with the sword: they wandered about in sheepskins and goatskins; being destitute, afflicted, tormented.” And still their life rose up before men, a temple of God’s building, beautiful as light, high as heaven. Why do the heathen so furiously rage? Evil is a gigantic failure; is there not a cause?
3. Though mediation may fail in carrying out its purposes, yet let no wise mediator suppose that his work is in vain. Jonathan was mediator between Saul and David. Mark his repeated and severe discouragements. Looking at it on one side, he might well have abandoned his work as a failure. What of its influence upon David? How it cheered him like a light! How it soothed him like the music of a better world! Be some man’s true friend. No word of love is lost. No true ministry is a failure, though it may have aspects which are discouraging.
4. Observe the infinite superiority of power that is moral, as compared with power that is physical. Saul went to seek David upon the rocks of the wild goats. In his pursuit he came to the sheepcotes where there was a cave, and into that cave he entered, little knowing who was there (chap. xxiv.). Read the story. Saul lifted up his voice, and wept. What a difference between this and a mere fight of hostile weapons! (1) In the worst men there is something that may be touched; (2) in every life there is at least one opportunity of showing the real quality of the heart. David seized it. This is the sublime appeal of the Gospel. God does not crush us by mere power. Love, truth, persuasion, these are the weapons of God’s warfare.
Day by day we are in the power of God. We enter no cave where he is not: on the high, silent mountain, in the deep, shadowy valley, in the den of the wild beast, and in the nest of the eagle, there he is. When the lightning flashes, he says to the wicked man, See, with this I could have struck thee blind. When the storm howls madly across sea and desert and forest, he says: See, with this I could throw down thy dwelling-place, and bury thee in its ruins. But “as I live, saith the Lord God, I have no pleasure in the death of the wicked; but that the wicked turn from his way and live: turn ye, turn ye from your evil ways; for why will ye die?”
Prayer
Almighty God, seeing that we are reconciled to thee by Jesus Christ, thy Son, our infinite Saviour, we will be glad in the house of thy choice, and sing aloud in the quiet sanctuary. Thy mercies surround us like a water of defence, and as streams that nourish the soul’s life. Where they are, no drought can ever be. We praise thee for goodness upon goodness, higher than the great mountains; for blessing upon blessing, like the waves of the deep sea. Thou nourishest us; therefore are we strong: thou watchest us; therefore the enemy is kept at bay. When we sin against thee, thou dost weep over us like a grieved parent; and when we do that which is right, thou beamest upon our hearts more than the sun beameth in his strength. We praise thee; we love thee; our love is even deeper than our sin; purify us by the blood of the One Sacrifice, and fill our whole life with the sanctifying power of God the Holy Ghost Amen.
Fuente: The People’s Bible by Joseph Parker
XIII
DAVID AND HIS INDEPENDENT ARMY; THE END
1Sa 23:1-26:25
This section is very thrilling, containing many stirring adventures and hairbreadth escapes, showing the play of the mighty passions of love and hate, and treachery and loyalty. It contains the farewell between David and Jonathan in their last interview; the farewell between David and Saul: the death of Samuel and the engaging story of David and Abigail. No novel that I have ever read has incidents so romantic in nature as this section.
The turn in the fortunes of David comes at the Cave of Adullam. He is no longer a solitary fugitive. His helpers were:
1. An armed corps, small indeed in number, but unequaled in history as a mobile fighting force, who had gathered around him. Never before nor since have more heroes and champions been found in a band of 400, rapidly recruited to 600. As is quite natural, some of them are both desperate and evil characters. They harbor in caves or sleep under rocks, and from the mountaintops, like eagles in their eyries, survey all the mountain passes, ready to swoop down on their Philistine prey or to make timely escape from Saul’s forces, which they will not fight through David’s loyalty.
2. The son of the high priest with Ephod, fleeing from Saul’s murderous slaughter of his brethren at Nob, has turned to David, supplying his greatest need, that is, a means of communication with Jehovah, now forever denied to Saul. Through this means he easily learns what no earthly wisdom or system of espionage could discover the very hearts and secret purposes of his enemies.
3. The school of the prophets, Jehovah’s mouthpieces, are for him, and Gad, their great representative, acts as his daily counselor Gad who shall become one of the historians of his life.
David at this time evinced the most exalted patriotism. Though pursued by Saul’s relentless hate, he never at any time, employs his fighting force against Israel, nor ever harms Saul’s person, though it is twice within his power, but ever watching, he protects defenseless cities of his people by smiting their Philistine invaders, preserves the exposed farms and folds of the villages from their marauding bands. Not all Saul’s army is such a defense of Israel as David’s immortal 600. And this he did continuously, though every blow he struck for his people only advertised his whereabouts to Saul, and brought on immediately a man-hunt by Saul and his army. There is no parallel to these facts in history. If, when the “swamp-fox,” Francis Marion, by creeping out of his secret places of retirement advertised his whereabouts by smiting a British or Tory force, Washington, Gates, Greene, or Morgan had detached a flying column to cut off Marion, then that would have been a parallel.
An example of this patriotism of David, and the ungrateful return to him is found in this section. From it we learn that when David, at a hazard so great that his own dauntless champions advised against it, under the guidance of Jehovah left the safer territory of Judah and braved with his 600 the whole Philistine army to rescue Keilah, Saul, informed of his presence there, summoned his whole army to besiege David in that city, and only through timely knowledge, communicated through the high priest’s Ephod, did David escape the enmity of Saul and the purposed treachery of the men of Keilah whom he had Just preserved.
A parallel in later days shows that information from Jehovah concerning the secret purposes of men eclipsed all knowledge to be derived from spies, and so saved the king of Israel. This parallel we find in 2Ki 6:8-12 . The king of Syria, at war with the king of Israel (by Israel in that place is meant the ten tribes that went off from Rehoboam), in private counsel with his officers, would designate a place where be would’ establish his camps in order to entrap the king of Israel. As soon as he had designated where these trap-camps would be placed, Elisha, God’s prophet, sent information to the king of Israel to beware of these places, and thus more than twice the king of Israel was saved. The king of Syria supposed that there was a traitor in his own camp, and wanted to know who it was that betrayed every movement that he made. One of his counselors replied that there was no traitor in his camp, but that Elisha, God’s prophet, knew every secret thought of the king’s bed-chamber.
I now call attention to the text difficulty in 1Sa 23:6 . The text here says that Abiathar, the son of Ahimelech, had joined David at Keilah, but 1Sa 22:20-23 shows that Abiathar had previously joined David at the Cave of Adullam. The context just above 1Sa 23:6 shows that David had inquired of the high priest as to whether he should go to the rescue of Keilah. The word, “Keilah,” in 1Sa 23:6 ought therefore to be struck out, or else ought to follow the text of the Septuagint, which reads this way: “And it came to pass when Abiathar, the son of Ahimelech, fled to David, that he went down with David to Keilah with the Ephod in his hand.” That makes complete sense and retains the word “Keilah.” David’s next refuge from Saul, the description of Saul’s pursuit, and Jehovah’s deliverance, are described in just two verses of the text, 1Sa 23:14-15 : “And David abode in the wilderness in strongholds and remained in the wilderness of Ziph, and Saul sought him every day, but God delivered him not into Saul’s hands. And David saw that Saul was come out to seek his life, and David was in the wilderness of Ziph in a wood.” That does not mean any big trees. It means thick brush scrubby brush as may be seen on West Texas mountains shin-oak thickets. I have seen them so thick it looked like one couldn’t stick a butcher knife in them, and woe to the man who tried to ride through them!
Just here comes Jonathan’s last interview with David, which is given in three verses, 1Sa 23:16-18 . While Saul is every day beating that brush to find David and can’t find him, Jonathan finds him and comes to show him that he has no part in this murderous pursuit of his friend; comes to tell him that both he and his father know that David will triumph and become king, and to make a covenant with him again that when he is king he will remember Jonathan’s house.
Let us now take up David’s first escape from the treachery of the Ziphites, and how that escape was commemorated. Saul couldn’t find David in the wood, but the Ziphites (for it was in the wood of Ziph) knew where be was, and they told Saul where he was, and so Saul, guided by these treacherous Ziphites, summoned an army, completely surrounded the whole country, and at last got David, as it were, in a cul-de-sac. That French phrase means) to follow a road where all egress is blocked, forward or sideways. So there was just a mountain between Saul and David, and Saul’s army was all around and closing in. The deliverance comes providentially. Word is brought to Saul that the Philistines are striking at some place in his territory, and he has to call his army off just before he closes up the trap around David and go and fight the Philistines; and your record says that place is renamed in commemoration this simple word, “Selahammahlekoth,” which means the rock of escape. If you were to visit the place the guide will show you today “Selahammahlekoth ” the rock of escape.
David’s next refuge from Saul was at the town of Engedi. The name is today preserved in the Aramaic form, “Ain Jidy.” It is thought to be the oldest town in the world. The Genesis record of the days of Abraham says that Chedorlaorner led his army by Engedi. It was a town whose inhabitants saw the destruction of Sodom and Gomorrah, lying right below in the valley. It has been passed by a thousand armies. It means the fountain of goats. Bursting out of the mountainside is a spring of considerable volume, and from that flows the stream, Engedi, which, with two others, makes a little oasis there just above the Dead Sea one of the most beautiful in the world; the finest vines, the most beautiful palm trees, and right up above the mountainside, are hundreds of caves, some of them so deep that they are as dark as the pit right at the mouth. A man standing in the light at the entrance cannot see anything within, but one hidden back a little distance can see distinctly anybody coming in. Nearly everybody that visits the Holy Land makes a pilgrimage to these famous caves, and if you are disposed to read the results of modern research with reference to the place you will find some very fine references in the following books: Thompson’s Land and the Book, from which we have had quotations; Robinson’s Researches in Bible Lands; Tristram’s Land of Israel; and one of the best is McGarvey’s Lands of the Bible. McGarvey is a Disciples theologian in Kentucky, and his is about the best book on the Holy Land extant. You will also find a very graphic account of these caves in Stanley’s Sinai and Palestine. The record tells us that Saul, in pursuit of David, while his army is scattered about searching for him, comes to one of these caves, and enters in, and David is in there at the time with some of his bravest men, and he, being in the dark, can see Saul plainly, and slips up and cuts off a piece of Saul’s cloak. One of his men wants him to kill Saul: “Now is your chance; this is the chance God has promised you; your enemy is in your power; smite him.” But David would not do so. When Saul goes out of the cave David slips to the front, and from a high rock holds up that piece of skirt and calls to Saul, your text telling better than I can the thrilling way he reproached Saul for his pursuit of him, that he has never done him any harm, and that Saul was pursuing him to death without any cause.
We now come to a strange but certainly true thing. I will read what David said and Saul’s reply. It is Saul’s reply that I want you particularly to notice. David said, “Wherefore hearest thou men’s words saying, Behold David seeketh thy hurt,” then closes up by saying, “The Lord judge between me and thee, and the Lord avenge me of thee, but my hand shall not be upon thee.” Listen at Saul’s reply: “Thou art more righteous than I” standing there weeping now and saying this “for that thou hast rewarded me good, whereas I have rewarded thee evil; and thou hast showed this day how that thou hast dealt well with me, forasmuch as when the Lord had delivered me into thy hand thou killedst me not; for if a man findest his enemy, will he let him go well away; wherefore the Lord reward thee good for what thou hast done unto me this day. And now, behold I know well that thou shalt surely be king and that the kingdom of Israel shall be established in thine hand; swear thou therefore, unto me by the Lord that thou wilt not cut off my seed after me, and that thou wilt not destroy my name out of my father’s house.” That sounded like penitence, but it was not. If it was, you would not see Saul pursuing him again, but it was temporary remorse, such as wicked men often evince. It is an Oriental custom that when a new king comes in he kills all the family of the one he succeeds, and that is what Saul fears, and David never did kill any of them after he became king.
It is evident from 1Sa 24:9-26:19 that some persistent, insidious slander, ever at Saul’s side, kept his wrath stirred up against David, and like a sinister Iago played upon Saul’s weakness, ever fanning by whisperings the flame of his jealousy. You would never know the name of this secret assassin of character from the history. But his name and character are pilloried in the immortal song of his would-be victim, and all the vileness of his demoniacal nature memorialized to the end of time. What is his name, and in what song commemorated? Just at this juncture Samuel, the great prophet the greatest man next to Moses since Abraham’s day, dies. Later we will have an analysis of his character.
An example of David’s protection of the villages and farms is seen in the case of the rich man named Nabal (“Nabal” means “fool”), about whom his wife says later, “His name is Nabal and he is Nabal.” There wouldn’t have been a sheep left in his flock nor a cow left to give him milk but for the protection extended by David’s band. The herdsmen say, “David’s band has been a wall about us.” David’s men never took any of his property. Hungry though they were, they never killed one of his sheep nor one of his cattle. Passing bands of marauders would have swept away every vestige of his property, but David’s men beat them off.
Now, on a festival, sheep-shearing day, David’s men, being weary and hungry, David sends ten men to Nabal, giving him an opportunity at least to feed one time the men that had protected him for the year, and Nabal’s reply is: “What is the son of Jesse to me that I should take my property and feed his straggling crowd?” There are such rich men now, and no wonder they are hated. There was a time in the early history of Texas when volunteer rangers protected all the exposed settlements with their flocks and herds. A man whose home and stock had been so preserved, who would deny hospitality to the unpaid rangers would have been held as infamous. Indeed, in all our West Texas history there never was one Nabal. These ten men went back and reported to David, and this time he didn’t consult either priest or prophet, but, boiling over in wrath, announced his purpose of not leaving a man alive in Nabal’s entire household, and goes to smite him with 400 of his picked men. One of the servants of Nabal had apprehended Just such a state of affairs and had told Abigail, the wife of Nabal, whereupon she, recognizing David as God’s anointed, as the champion of Israel, as the one about whom all true souls should be thinking, having faith in the promises of God concerning him, took a magnificent donation and hurried with it and met David coming blazing in wrath. The woman leaped down from the beast she was riding and made a speech that has never yet had an equal.
You remember how I called your attention to the famous speech in Scott’s Heart of Midlothian by Jeanie Deans, but this beats that. I haven’t time to analyze the speech; you have the record of it before you, but there never was more wisdom put into a few words. She shows David that the wrong done is inexcusable, but tells him to charge it to her, although she had nothing to do with it; tells him that so great a man as he is, God’s vicegerent) should not take vengeance in his own hands; that the day will come in his later life when he will look back with regret at the blood on his hands if he takes such a vengeance, and asks him to leave Nabal’s punishment to God. David was charmed with her and did everything she said. She went back home sad at heart, as many a good woman married to a bad man has to do. Nabal was on a spree. She didn’t tell him anything until the next morning, and as she told him what had transpired God smote him with apoplexy and a few days later about ten days smote him again so that he died, whereupon David sends for Abigail and marries her and at the same time marries another woman, plurality of wives prevailing in that day. Many preachers have preached sermons, some of them foolish and some of them really great, on “Nabal, the churl.”
The incidents of the last meeting of Saul and David are pathetic. The Ziphites conspire again against David, and tell Saul where to find him. David sends out his spies and learns of Saul’s approach and easily evades him; then, taking just one man with him, Abishai, the fiery son of his sister Zeruiah, his nephew (you will hear about him oftentimes later), goes into the camp of Saul with his 3,000 picked veterans. Saul is sleeping, and Abner, his great general, sleeping by him, and Abishai following his nature, says, “Now let me kill him.” David says, “No, you shall not strike him; he is the anointed king; leave him to God,” and simply took Saul’s spear and cruse his water vessel and when he had got out of the camp he cried out to Abner and mocked him: “What a guardian of your king, that you let somebody come right into your camp and come right up to the person of your king! Behold the spear and cruse of Saul! You ought to be ashamed of yourself.” Saul hears David, and now comes that strange language again. I want you to notice it again: “And Saul knew David’s voice, and said, ‘is this thy voice, my son David?’ (as you know, David was his son-in-law). And David said, ‘it is my voice, my lord, O king.’ And he said, ‘Wherefore doth my lord pursue after his servant? for what have I done? or what evil is in mine hand? Now therefore, I pray thee, let my lord the king hear the words of his servant. If Jehovah hath stirred thee up against me let him accept an offering: but if it be the children of men, cursed be they before Jehovah.’ “
Now comes a passage that we will have to explain in the next chapter: “For they have driven me out this day from abiding in the inheritance of Jehovah, saying, Go, serve other gods. Now therefore, let not my blood fall to the earth before the face of Jehovah, for the king of Israel is come to seek a flea, as when one doth hunt a partridge in the mountains.” This is a very undignified thing for a king to do to go out flea hunting; go to chasing a partridge. “Partridge” there is what we call a “blue quail.” They seldom fly, but they can run, and anyone who hunts them has to be very fast; hence the beauty of the illustration. Saul says, “I have sinned.” (You remember he said that to Samuel.) “Return, my son David, for I will no more do thee harm, because my soul was precious in thine eyes this day, and behold I have played the fool, and have erred exceedingly.” David didn’t trust him. Saul concludes, “Blessed be thou, my son, David; for thou shall both do great things and also shalt prevail.” So David went his own way, and Saul returned to his place. They never meet again. The pursuit is ended. We end this chapter with the end of the duel between Saul and David.
QUESTIONS
1. What is the interest of this section?
2. From what point and place comes the turn in the fortunes of David, and who were his helpers?
3. How does David at this time evince the most exalted patriotism?
4. What parallel in history of these facts?
5. Cite an example of this patriotism of David, and show the ungrateful return to him?
6. Cite a parallel in later days to show that information from Jehovah concerning the secret purposes of men eclipsed all knowledge to be derived from spies, and so saved the king of Israel.
7. Explain the text difficulty in 1Sa 23:6 .
8. Where was David’s next refuge from Saul, what the description of Saul’s pursuit, and what Jehovah’s deliverance?
9. Describe Jonathan’s last interview with David.
10. Describe David’s first escape from the treachery of the Ziphites, and how that escape was commemorated.
11. What was David’s next refuge from Saul, what the history of the place, and what has modern research to say about it?
12. What the events there, and what illustrations therefrom?
13. What man, greatest next to Moses since Abraham’s day, dies at this juncture?
14. Cite an example of David’s protection of the villages and farms, giving the main incidents in the thrilling story of David and Abigail, and illustrate by Texas free rangers.
16. Describe the incidents of the last meeting of Saul and David.
Fuente: B.H. Carroll’s An Interpretation of the English Bible
1Sa 24:1 And it came to pass, when Saul was returned from following the Philistines, that it was told him, saying, Behold, David [is] in the wilderness of Engedi.
Ver. 1. It was told him, saying. ] They that told him knew what would please him – they found him out some new game: they knew his implacable spirit fraught with malice, and fomented it. Mithridates was so mad a hunter that, taken with that sport, for seven years’ space, neque urbis neque ruris tecto sit usus, saith the historian, he came not within any house in city or country. Saul was as madly set against David, whom he had lately seen must strangely snatched out of his hands.
Fuente: John Trapp’s Complete Commentary (Old and New Testaments)
Behold. Figure of speech Asterismos. App-6.
Fuente: Companion Bible Notes, Appendices and Graphics
Chapter 24
Now it came to pass, when Saul was returned from the Philistines, they told him, David’s in Engedi. So Saul took three thousand of his chosen men out of all of Israel, they went to seek David and his men upon the rocks of the wild goats. [Engedi means, “wild goats”.] And he came to the sheepcotes by the way, where there was a cave, and Saul went in to cover his feet: [That is to go to sleep.] and David and his men remained in the sides of the cave. [So David was hiding in this cave, and Saul came to, and you know went to sleep in the very cave where David and his men were hiding up in the sides of the thing.] And the men of David said unto him, [Aha,] Behold, the day of which the Lord said unto you, Behold, I will deliver your enemy into your hand, that you may do to him as it seems good unto thee. So David arose, and cut off the skirt of Saul’s robe secretly. Now it came to pass after, that David’s heart smote him, because he had cut off Saul’s skirt. [He did it and then he thought, “Oh that’s not right. This guy’s a king and shouldn’t have his skirt cut off.” and he felt bad about it.] And David said, The Lord forbid that I should do this thing to my master, the Lord’s anointed, to stretch forth my hand against him, seeing he is anointed of the Lord. So David stayed his servants with these words, and he would not allow them to rise against Saul. But Saul rose up and went out of the cave and went his way. [The men of course wanted to do Saul in, and David forbid them to do it.] And after Saul had gotten down the hill away, David arose also afterward, and he went after Saul, saying, My lord the king. And when Saul looked behind, David stooped with his face to the earth, and bowed himself. And David said to Saul, Why do you listen to men’s words, saying, Behold, David is seeking to hurt you? Behold, this day your eyes have seen that the Lord delivered you today in my hand in the cave: and some of them were begging me to kill you: but I said, I will not put forth my hand against my lord; for he is the Lord’s anointed. Moreover, my father, see, here is the skirt of your robe in my hand: for in that I cut off the skirt of your robe, and I didn’t kill you, you ought to know, and see that I have neither evil nor transgression in my hand, I’ve not sinned against you; and you’re hunting my soul to take it. And the Lord judged between me and thee, and the Lord avenged me of thee: but my hand shall not be upon thee. As saith the proverb of the ancients, Wickedness proceedeth from the wicked: but my hand shall not be upon thee ( 1Sa 24:1-13 ).
Here’s an interesting proverb. “Wickedness proceedeth from the wicked.” It is the same as saying, “A man sins because he is a sinner.” You see we often think, “Because I sin, I am a sinner.” No. Because I’m a sinner, I sin. You say well what difference-it’s an important difference. Only horsethieves steal horses. If you were not a horsethief you couldn’t steal a horse, no matter what the circumstances are. Stealing a horse doesn’t make you a horsethief. It only proves you are. If you weren’t a horsethief to begin with, you could never have stolen it. The same with sin; sinning doesn’t make you a sinner; it only proves that you are. I am a sinner by nature. If I try to deny the sinful nature, I’m calling God a liar. His truth isn’t in me. All of us are sinners by nature, and because we are sinners by nature, sin is the fruit, or the effect, or the result of what I am. I sin because I’m a sinner.
Now even so in Christ Jesus, I am now righteous, therefore the righteousness that I do doesn’t make me righteous, I do it because I am righteous. Because of God’s work in my life in making me righteous, I do now the deeds of righteousness. But we’ve got to keep in our minds from this fallacy of thinking, “Because I do deeds of righteousness, I am righteous.” Not so. “But wickedness proceeds from the wicked.” If you’re wicked, wickedness is gonna proceed from your life. It doesn’t make you wicked, it only proves that you are wicked. So it’s an interesting proverb of the ancients. It is a true proverb indeed. It’s in keeping with the basic doctrines of the scriptures.
After whom [David said] is the king of Israel come out? who are you pursuing? you’re looking for a dead dog, you’re looking for a flea. The Lord therefore be judge, and judge between me and you, and see, and plead my cause, and deliver me out of your hand. It came to pass, when David had made an end of his speech, that Saul said, Is this the voice, of my son David? And Saul lifted up his voice, and wept. [“Oh my son David, oh my son.”] And he said to David, You are more righteous than I: for you have rewarded me good, whereas I have rewarded you evil. And you have shewed this day how that you have dealt well with me: forasmuch as when the Lord had delivered me into your hand, you did not kill me. For if a man finds his enemy, will he let him go away well? wherefore the Lord reward thee good for thou hast done unto me this day. And now, behold, I know well that thou shalt surely be king, and that the kingdom of Israel shall be established in your hand ( 1Sa 24:14-20 ).
He knew it and yet he sought to fight it all the way. He knew what God’s will was and still he sought to fight the will of God. The Bible says, “Woe unto him who strives with his Maker”( Isa 45:9 ). How many times people are trying to fight what they know to be the will of God. Sad but true. Saul expresses now, “I know that some day God’s gonna make you king, the kingdom’s gonna be established in your hands.”
Swear now therefore by the Lord, that you will not cut off my children after me, and that you will not destroy my name out of my father’s house. And so David sware unto Saul. And Saul went home; but David and his men went into the hold ( 1Sa 24:21-22 ). “
Fuente: Through the Bible Commentary
At last Saul was in David’s power. It would have been perfectly easy for him to have taken his life. He did not do so, but, withholding his hand, uttered a strong protest against Saul’s persecution. There is the passion of the true poet in the wording of the protest, and the changing moods of the human heart are manifest as it proceeds. Beginning with the judicial statement of his innocence of all evil intention, he merged into pleading tones in which memories of old and happier days are evident. These tones, however, almost immediately changed into accents of agony as he declared that Jehovah would avenge him, but that he himself would not lay a hand on Saul. He finally appealed scornfully to the king that he should spend time and strength upon hunting him, one lonely man. The degeneracy of Saul was manifest in the weak and maudlin sentiment with which he addressed David.
Fuente: An Exposition on the Whole Bible
Returning Good for Evil
1Sa 24:1-15
Engedi is situated on the western shore of the Dead Sea. As Saul entered the cave, a very insidious temptation presented itself to David. Why not rid the kingdom of this cruel and oppressive monarch? Would it not confer a public benefit? Had not Samuel promised David the kingdom? Even if he himself did not strike the blow, why not let his men, who were not so squeamish, do so!But the man of God must not yield to such suggestions. He insisted on waiting the Lords own time. He would not anticipate, by a single hour, the fulfillment of the great word on which he had been taught to rest through these weary years. The sensitiveness of his conscience was indicated in his compunction at having cut off a piece of the royal robe.
Never forget that opportunity does not make a wrong thing right. That the ship was waiting to sail to Tarshish did not make it right for Jonah to take passage. Our actions must not be determined by the opening of the door of circumstance, but by conscience, faith, obedience, and the high sense of Christian honor.
Fuente: F.B. Meyer’s Through the Bible Commentary
1Sa 24:1-2
(with Son 1:14)
Engedi means the fountain of the wild goat or rather, as we should say, of the ibex, the Syrian chamois, or the antelope. Among these wild but beautiful solitudes David, with his young men, established himself. Engedi itself was on a perpendicular cliff, hanging fifteen hundred feet above the Dead Sea. The palms have all gone, the vineyards all gone; the trenna, the beautiful wild flower supposed to be that called the camphire, abounds still. The crags and cliffs are thronged with doves, and upon a shelf of the mountain there is a little lakelet or fountain, breaking forth into a stream and tumbling on, no great torrent, but a thread of silver, for four hundred feet below.
I. Here, to David’s retreat by the fountain of the wild goat, came Saul, “the deceitful and unjust man.” But the cumbrous and heavy Saul could do nothing against the lithe stripling, David. There is even a sportive humour in the very acts by which David shows his superiority to his foe. Altogether, the sublime, the pathetic, the humorous and the graphic mingled together in the various adventures of David, the outlaw of Engedi.
II. With this spot too, no doubt, we are to associate the inditing of many of the imprecatory Psalms; for here, hunted as a bird through the wilderness, he said “I shall one day perish by the hand of Saul.”
III. During his stay at Engedi, David was not a wild bandit; among the hills the law of his God was in his heart; not wreaking on society his revenge, but flying to the spot where, if he could be most securely screened from invasion, he would also be farthest removed from the possibility of inflicting injury; and there he waited, nursing his great soul amidst the solitudes of the eternal hills. Among the rocks of Engedi, David “endured as seeing Him who is invisible.”
E. Paxton Hood, The Preacher’s Lantern, vol. iii., p. 605.
References: 1Sa 24:4.-F. W. Krummacher, David the King of Israel, p. 149; J. Van Oosterzee, Year of Salvation, vol. ii., p. 442. 1Sa 24:11.-T. Coster, Christian World Pulpit, vol. xxi., p. 20. 1Sa 24:16.-Parker, vol. vii., p. 41. 1Sa 25:1.-W. M. Taylor, David King of Israel, p. no; J. R. Macduff, Sunsets on the Hebrew Mountains, p. 78. 1Sa 25:1-36.-Homiletic Quarterly, vol. ii., p. 272. 1Sa 25:3.-T. Coster, Christian World Pulpit, vol. xxi., p. 51. 1Sa 25:10.-H. Melvill, Penny Pulpit, No. 2654. 1Sa 25:10, 1Sa 25:11.-F. W. Robertson, Sermons, 1st series, p. 245. 1Sa 25:8.-F. W. Krummacher, David the King of Israel, p. 168. 1Sa 25:18.-Parker, vol. vii., p. 76. 1Sa 25:29.-H. J. Wilmot-Buxton, The Children’s Bread, p. 113; F. W. Krummacher, David the King of Israel, p. 168. 1Sa 25:32.-J. Van Oosterzee, Year of Salvation, vol. ii., p. 445. 1Sa 26:6.-F. W. Krummacher, David the King of Israel, p. 187. 1Sa 26:25.-Parker, vol. vii., p. 44. 1Sam 26-W. M. Taylor, David King of Israel, p. 95. 1Sa 27:1.-Spurgeon, Sermons, vol. viii., No. 439; Ibid., Morning by Morning, p. 291; F. W. Krummacher, David the King of Israel, p. 199. 1Sam 27-31.-W. M. Taylor, David King of Israel, p. 123. 1Sa 23:3.-C. J. Vaughan, Sunday Magazine, 1872, p. 777. 1Sa 28:3-19.-G. Mason, A Pastor’s Legacy, p. 429. 1Sa 28:6.-Homiletic Magazine, vol. x., p. 139. 1Sa 28:7.-Parker, vol. vii., p. 47. 1Sa 28:7-25.-Expositor, 2nd series, vol. iii., p. 424, and vol. iv., p. 111. 1Sa 28:11.-B.J. Snell, Christian World Pulpit, vol. xiv., p. 140; J. M. McCulloch, Sermons on Unusual Subjects, p. 13. 1Sam 28-W. Hanna, Sunday Magazine, 1865, p. 609.
Fuente: The Sermon Bible
CHAPTER 24
1. In the wilderness of En-gedi (1Sa 24:1-8)
2. Davids words to Saul (1Sa 24:9-15)
3. Sauls answer to David (1Sa 24:16-22)
Saul continues in the pursuit of David and with 3000 chosen men he sought David at the rocks of the wild goats. It was in En-gedi, which means the fountain of the young goat. There were wild rocks and the fountains of water and here David had found his refuge and strongholds. God trained him also amidst the hardships and difficulties suggested by the rocks, while the fountain suggests the refreshing which was also his blessed portion. Perhaps in that trying wilderness he poured out his heart in the way as recorded in Psalm 63. It is certain that he developed constantly in his faith and trust in God. And a test is now permitted to come upon him. Saul had entered a cave. David and his men were in the sides of the cave. But a few steps between him and the unsuspecting Saul! An uplifted sword, one stroke and Sauls career would have been ended. Is he going to do it? Will he take his case out of the hands of the Lord and become his own avenger? And his men remind him of an unrecorded word, which the Lord had spoken to David (verse 4) which David might have used to justify the slaying of Saul. Faith conquers. He looks upon Saul as being still the Lords anointed and only cut off a part of the skirt of Sauls garment. What magnanimity it was! And even for this his tender conscience smote him. A marvellous, eloquent address to King Saul was delivered by David. He tells him all what he had done and what is in his heart and thus shows the purpose of his soul to leave it all with the Lord. This is faiths language. The Man of God who walks by faith can await the Lords own time. And thus the case was not Saul against David, but Saul fighting Davids Lord. The outcome is obvious. And Saul? His reply, given in the voice of weeping, acknowledged the wrong he had done and the righteous cause of David as well as the future of David, that he would receive the Kingdom of Israel. He also made David swear not to cut off his seed. He is broken down and deeply moved. Yet his heart is unchanged.
Fuente: Gaebelein’s Annotated Bible (Commentary)
when Saul: 1Sa 23:28, 1Sa 23:29
following: Heb. after
it was told: 1Sa 23:19, Pro 25:5, Pro 29:12, Eze 22:9, Hos 7:3
the wilderness: 1Sa 23:29
Reciprocal: Son 1:14 – Engedi Heb 11:38 – wandered
Fuente: The Treasury of Scripture Knowledge
1Sa 24:1. En-gedi was adjacent to the dead sea. Strabo, speaking of the caverns in Syria and Iturea, says, there is one which will hold four thousand men. Lib. 16.
1Sa 24:3. Saul went in to cover his feet; a modest phrase for easing nature; and laying aside his robe, David now approached and cut off a small part.
1Sa 24:4. I will deliver thine enemy into thy hand. Rabbi Lyranus says, that Samuel had told him this when his wife had aided his escape from the executioners sent by Saul.
1Sa 24:20. Thou shalt surely be king. It was the general opinion in the army and nation, that David should succeed to the throne.
REFLECTIONS.
The destruction of David being the leading passion of Saul, he scarcely allowed himself time to check the Philistines, before he returned to the most dishonourable pursuit of the best of men. Malice, when rooted in the heart, is the most awful of human passions.
Saul was subtle as well as malicious; and so much so, that the vigilant David was in a manner surprised a second time. But behold him, who laid a snare for another, fall into a mortifying snare which no man had laid for his feet. While the army marched on, Saul alone approached the cave, being watched by David and his friends. The king, not suspecting the presence of an enemy, ventured to enter and enjoy the shade. And Davids friends, on Sauls approach, had not been wanting to remind him that the promise by Samuel or Gad, was now accomplished, that God would deliver his enemy into his hand. Yea, David himself could not forget the spear twice thrown to pierce him; nor would Abiathar be wanting to plead for the just vengeance of his fathers blood, and the blood of all his brethren. But a servant of God must never do an action unworthy of his holy name. A son must never conspire against a father. No crown becomes a virtuous prince but a crown of righteousness.
Saul, unconscious Saul, had scarcely retired from the cave, before a voice cried after him, My lordmy father! He turned and saw David, sometimes bowing to the earth, and sometimes holding up the shred of his robe. He wondered and listened to the defence of his son. Struck for the moment with the risk he had run, and amazed to find in David a protector, his soul softened; the tears flowed, and truth raised her voice above prejudice and passion. He acknowledged his errors, and the superior rectitude of his son. Now the friends of Saul and of David gather round to hear the extraordinary conversation; now the two armies approach, but not to fight. It is not to destroy David, but to contract a covenant with him, and to do him homage as the king of Israel.
But how shall Doeg show his face at this interview? How shall he meet the eyes of David, and of Abiathar? How shall all the liars, and all the flatterers of Saul, who had whispered in the royal ear a thousand treasons against David, lift up their head? The shred of the robe makes them all afraid: and the eyes of one innocent man covers the countenance of a thousand culprits with confusion. And how, we may farther ask, will this guilty world, who have made light of Christ and his gospel, and who have offered ten thousand indignities to his name and to his church, dare to see him on his throne? By and by their feet will fall into the cave; and happy if they may find a David to let his enemies go. Let the christian be instructed by this interview concerning the weapons of his warfare; they are not carnal, but mighty through grace. Yesterday it was rebel David, traitor David, and a price was set on his head. To-day, it is my son David. The live coal had thawed the heart of Saul.
Saul, defective in virtue and often imprudent, was not defective in common sense. He acknowledged David as the successor to the crown; and wisely stipulated for the protection of his house. This was a measure of consummate policy, and happy in its effects. So he parted from David grateful that he had shed tears, not blood. He returned humbled indeed, and branded in his robe, but that was far better than to have it stained with innocent blood.
If Saul was prudent, David was still more so. He still preferred his hold, which secured a partial safety, and a retreat at pleasure to the desert, to a mansion in the court. He preferred the goats and sheep for neighbours rather than Sauls courtiers; he was but too well acquainted with the variable temper of the king. He wisely feared that the tears of Saul were only as the giving of a frosty day, when acted upon by the warmth of noon; in the evening the cold prevails with a greater power than before. Hence we should endeavour to live peaceably if possible with wicked men, but not to put ourselves in their power. We should also learn, that transient tears for past faults are no marks of genuine repentance, unless they are followed by the correspondent fruits of faith, obedience and love.
Fuente: Sutcliffe’s Commentary on the Old and New Testaments
1 Samuel 24. David Spares Saul at Engedi (E).Chs. 24 and 26 give two versions of the same story, located at different places. Probably both versions are early. It is not clear which is the earlier, but it is often considered that 26 has the more primitive flavour. It is not necessary to suppose that either story has been developed from the other; they are probably independent developments from the actual facts.
1Sa 24:1-7. Saul resumes the pursuit of David; under the stress of a necessity of nature, he goes alone into a cave, in the recesses of which David and his men are hidden. His followers urge him to slay Saul, but he contents himself with secretly cutting off the skirt of his robe; and even then he has qualms of conscience as to taking this liberty with his master, the Anointed of Yahweh. Saul goes out, unconscious of his danger.
1Sa 24:8-15. David calls after Saul, tells him what has happened, and protests his innocence.
1Sa 24:14. Commonly regarded as an editorial addition.
1Sa 24:16-22. Saul is touched, and acknowledges Davids consistent loyalty, of which his recent conduct has been the climax. He induces David to swear that when he becomes king he will not put to death Sauls family. They separate.
Fuente: Peake’s Commentary on the Bible
Having 600 men with him, David could not easily be hidden, and Saul gets the report of his being in the wilderness of En-gedi. Not being exactly a brave man himself, Saul required 3000 chosen men of Israel (five times as many men as were with David) to go with him to seek David and his men. Thus the army, maintained at the expense of the people of Israel, is used by their king, not for the benefit of Israel, but for the king’s personal wicked enterprise! He would allow nothing to stand in the way of his killing David.
On his way Saul finds sheep-folds with a cave nearby. Likely the folds were build there because the cave would provide shelter for shepherds when they put their sheep in the folds for the night. Saul would of course not know how large the cave was. He left his men in order to have a nap in the cave. Certainly it was the Lord who arranged this, for David and his men were inside the cave. Little did Saul think he was putting himself into the hands of the man he considered his enemy!
When Saul entered the cave alone and lay down to sleep, some of David’s men who were in the cave were in favor of killing Saul. They appealed to the fact that God had intimated that David would be king, but they interpret the facts in a way that was not precisely right (v.4). We have no record that God had told David He would deliver Saul into his hands, that David could do with him as seemed good. Yet there was no doubt that God had done this. To David’s men it seemed good that he should kill Saul. If the tables had been reversed certainly Saul would have been glad to kill David. But David remembered to give respect to the man God had first anointed to be king. He would not kill him, though he cut off the skirt of his robe. Even then this was an irritation to his conscience: his heart smote him even because of this indignity done to God’s anointed king.
There is a lesson here that every believer should learn. When we suffer unjustly it is natural (not spiritual) that we should want to retaliate. God may give us grace to resist this temptation, so that we are kept from any spirit of fighting for our own rights. Yet we may even then take advantage of an opportunity to expose our adversary to the eyes of others, so that they will know we are in the right. But if we are walking with God we should want to avoid even this. Faith can depend on Him to eventually bring everything to its proper level. It is wiser that we do not seek to put anyone in a bad light because of his opposition to us. If God exposes him, this is a different matter. David’s words in verse 6 express the sober exercise of genuine faith. He still considered Saul to be his master and would not dare to harm him.
However, this occasion gives David opportunity for making a personal appeal to Saul. When Saul is a little distance away, David calls to him, “My lord the king” (v.8). Saul turned and David stooped and bowed himself as was befitting to his position as the king’s servant. Then David asks why Saul was listening to men’s words to the effect that David was seeking to harm Saul. David was letting Saul down easily in his saying this, because it was Saul’s own imagination that had conceived these thoughts (though possibly others had dishonestly added fuel to the fire).
David further pressed on Saul what Saul knew was true, that though the Lord had delivered Saul into David’s hand in the cave, yet David had not harmed him. He says that some had urged him to kill Saul, but he would not do this to the Lord’s anointed. He shows Saul the skirt of his robe, emphasizing that in his only cutting this off he was proving he was not Saul’s enemy, in spite of which Saul was seeking to kill him (v.11).
He appeals to the Lord as judge between them, and expects the Lord to avenge him rather than taking vengeance himself (v.12). He is decisive in saying, “my hand shall not be against thee.” Quoting an ancient proverb, he tells Saul, “Out of the wicked comes forth wickedness.” David would not stoop to practices of wickedness, though he does not say how Saul would be classified in application of the truth of this proverb!
In effect he tells Saul he was pursuing a dead dog or a flea, something from which he could expect not the slightest danger. His final appeal therefore is to the Lord to be judge in this matter and deliver David out of Saul’s hand (v.15).
Saul’s conscience is seriously affected. He calls David his son, and weeps. His confession to David seems sincere, though it is sad that later circumstances showed it to be all on the surface. He tells David he was more righteous than Saul, but this implied that Saul was righteous, only less so than David. Nevertheless he acknowledge that David had done good to him while he had done evil to David. This illustrates the fact that one who is not born of God is still capable of recognizing what is good in contrast to what is evil and capable also of acknowledging his own wrongs. He knew it was not natural for one to allow his enemy to go fully free when he had him in his power (v.19), so that the grace of David’s heart was far superior to the vindictive attitude of Saul. He seems to mean it too when he expresses the desire that the Lord will reward David good for the good he had done to Saul. Yet he makes not the slightest suggestion that he himself would reward good to David!
Saul makes a most striking confession to David to the effect that he knew well that David would certainly be king, with the kingdom of Israel established under his rule (v.29). Samuel had told Saul that God had chosen another man to be king, and all the evidence pointed to David. If even at this time Saul had found grace to willingly give up his authority into the hand of David, how much brighter would have been the rest of his life! But though he knew David would eventually reign, Saul was determined to reign just as long as he could. Many men of the world know that the Lord Jesus Christ is the one ruler whom God has ordained to reign eventually, but they will not bow to Him now!
Selfishly Saul asked David to swear to him by the Lord that he would not cut off his family or destroy Saul’s name out of Israel Why did he ask this? Because Saul himself had the desire to cut David off, and he expected that David might have the same attitude. The position was such that it ought to have been Saul swearing to David that he would not seek his life, but Saul’s self-centeredness rendered him undiscerning as to the simplest moral principles. Yet David was willing to give his oath to Saul. He more than fulfilled this in his kindness to Mephibosheth when reigning (2Sa 9:1-13).
Saul then goes home, making not even a suggestion that he would restore David to a place of honor in the kingdom. David also evidently had no confidence that Saul’s attitude was permanently changed, for he returned to his refuge in the mountains.
Fuente: Grant’s Commentary on the Bible
24:1 And it came to pass, when Saul was returned from following the Philistines, that it was told him, saying, Behold, David [is] in the wilderness of {b} Engedi.
(b) A city of Judah, Jos 15:62.
Fuente: Geneva Bible Notes
3. David’s goodness to two fools chs. 24-26
". . . chapters 24-26 form a discrete literary unit within 1 Samuel. Chapters 24 and 26 are virtually mirror images of each other, beginning with Saul’s receiving a report about David’s latest hiding place (1Sa 24:1; 1Sa 26:1), focusing on David’s refusal to lift a hand against Saul, ’the Lord’s anointed’ (1Sa 24:6; 1Sa 24:10; 1Sa 26:11), and concluding with the words of a remorseful Saul and his returning home from his pursuit of David (1Sa 24:17-22; 1Sa 26:21; 1Sa 26:25). The two chapters form a frame around the central chapter 25, where the churlish Nabal functions as an alter ego of the rejected Saul. In addition, divine protection that keeps David from shedding innocent blood runs as a unifying thread through all three chapters." [Note: Youngblood, p. 745.]
Saul, who had disregarded God’s Law, became a deadly threat to David (1Sa 23:19-28). However, David, who regarded God’s Law, became a source of life to Saul (1Sa 23:29 to 1Sa 24:22) and to others in Israel (ch. 25).
In the previous section, Saul sought the opportunity to take David’s life. In this one (1Sa 23:29 to 1Sa 24:22), given the opportunity to take Saul’s life, David spared him.
David’s first sparing of Saul’s life ch. 24
The incident recorded in this chapter concerns "cutting off" (1Sa 24:4-5; 1Sa 24:11; 1Sa 24:21). David had the opportunity and received encouragement to cut off Saul’s life but chose to cut off only his robe hem. He ended up promising not to cut off Saul’s descendants and name.
"The verb ’cut off’ forms something of a recurring theme, a leit-motiv, in 1 Samuel 20-24." [Note: Baldwin, p. 146. Cf. 15:28; 20:14-17; 24:4.]
Fuente: Expository Notes of Dr. Constable (Old and New Testaments)
David’s cutting off of Saul’s hem 24:1-7
Engedi lay near the Dead Sea’s western shore close to its mid-point north to south. Even today it is a refreshing oasis with waterfalls, pools, tropical plants, and wild goats. The Hebrew word means "spring of the kid." It may have been while David was hiding in this cave that he wrote Psalms 57 and or Psalms 142 (see their titles; cf. 1Sa 22:1).
Saul pursued David with 3,000 of his finest soldiers, which gave him a five-to-one advantage over David, who had only 600 men (1Sa 23:13). The "Rocks of the Wild Goats" was evidently a local site, which archaeologists have not yet identified. There Saul discovered a sheepfold that evidently encircled the mouth of one of the caves in those limestone hills. The king entered the cave to relieve himself, unaware of the mortal danger in which he was placing himself because David and his men were hiding in the recesses of the same cave.
David’s men interpreted Saul’s vulnerable position as a divine provision whereby David could free himself from his enemy (1Sa 24:4). There is no record in the text that God had indeed told David what they said He had. He may have told David that he would overcome his enemy, but certainly He had not given David permission to assassinate His anointed, King Saul. David’s advisers seem to have been resorting to pious language to urge David to follow their counsel (cf. 1Sa 23:7). We must always evaluate the advice of friends in the light of God’s Word even when they claim divine authority. Their counsel moved David to take some action against Saul, which he soon regretted.
The hem or edge of a person’s garment in the ancient Near East made a statement about his or her social standing. A king’s hem was especially ornate and identified him as the king. [Note: See Milgrom, pp. 61-65.] By cutting off this piece of Saul’s robe, which Saul may have laid aside as he relieved himself (1Sa 24:3), David suggested that he could cut off Saul’s reign just as easily (cf. 1Sa 24:21). His act constituted mild rebellion against Saul’s authority. [Note: D. J. Wiseman, "Alalakh," in Archaeology and Old Testament Study, p. 128.]
Almost immediately David realized that his clever trick was inappropriate. Since Saul was the king, David had no right to tamper with his clothing. Furthermore, David realized that any attempt to take the kingdom from Saul, as he had taken the symbol of that kingdom, was contrary to God’s will. Since Saul was God’s anointed (1Sa 24:6) it was God’s place to remove him, not David’s.
This little incident provides another window into David’s thinking. David was acknowledging Yahweh’s sovereignty by submitting to His authority in setting Saul up as king (cf. Pro 24:21). David refused to take revenge for the trouble that Saul had caused him.
"Perhaps no greater example of wisdom practice is found than in David’s response to Saul." [Note: Heater, "Young David . . .," p. 54. Cf. Proverbs 24:21.]
It is interesting that God prevented David’s enemies from assassinating him later when he was Israel’s king (cf. Gal 6:7). Compare also Jesus’ refusal to take vengeance on His enemies (Luk 23:34).
Fuente: Expository Notes of Dr. Constable (Old and New Testaments)
CHAPTER XXXI.
DAVID TWICE SPARES THE LIFE OF SAUL.
1Sa 24:1-22; 1Sa 26:1-25.
THE invasion of the Philistines had freed David from the fear of Saul for a time, but only for a time. He knew full well that when the king of Israel had once repelled that invasion he would return to prosecute the object on which his heart was so much set. For a while he took refuge among the rocks of Engedi, that beautiful spot of which we have already spoken, and which has been embalmed in Holy Writ, as suggesting a fair image of the Beloved One – “My beloved is unto me as a cluster of camphire in the vineyards of Engedi” (Son 1:14). The mountains here and throughout the hill country of Judea are mostly of limestone formation, abounding, like all such rocks, in caverns of large size, in which lateral chambers run off at an angle from the main cavity, admitting of course little or no light, but such that a person inside, while himself unseen, may see what goes on at the entrance to the cave. In the dark sides of such a cave, David and his men lay concealed when Saul was observed by him to enter and lie down, probably unattended, to enjoy the mid-day sleep which the heat of the climate often demands. We cannot fail to remark the singular providence that concealed from Saul at this time the position of David. He had good information of his movements in general; the treacherous spirit which was so prevalent, greatly aided him in this; but on the present occasion, he was evidently in ignorance of his situation. If only he had known, how easy it would have been for him with his three thousand chosen men to blockade the cave, and starve David and his followers into surrender!
The entrance of the king being noticed by David’s men, they urged their master to avail himself of the opportunity of getting rid of him which was now so providentially and unexpectedly presented to him. We can hardly think of a stronger temptation to do so than that under which David now lay. In the first place, there was the prospect of getting rid of the weary life he was leading, – more like the life of a wild beast hunted by its enemies, than of a man eager to do good to his fellows, with a keen relish for the pleasures of home and an extraordinary delight in the services of God’s house. Then there was the prospect of wearing the crown and wielding the sceptre of Israel, – the splendours of a royal palace, and its golden opportunities of doing good. Further, there was the voice of his followers urging him to the deed, putting on it a sacred character by ascribing to it a Divine permission and appointment. And still further, there was the suddenness and unexpectedness of the opportunity. Nothing is more critical than a sudden opportunity of indulging an ardent passion; with scarcely a moment for deliberation, one is apt to be hurried blindly along, and at once to commit the deed. With all his noble nature, Robert the Bruce could not refrain from plunging his dagger into the heart of the treacherous Comyn, even in the convent of the Minorite friars. The discipline of David’s spirit must at this time have been admirable. Not only did he restrain himself, but he restrained his followers too. He would neither strike his heartless enemy, nor suffer another to strike him. On the first of the two occasions of his sparing him – recorded in the twenty-fourth chapter – he might naturally believe that his forbearance would turn Saul’s heart and end the unjust quarrel. On the second occasion of the same sort – recorded in the twenty-sixth chapter – he could have had no hope of the kind. It was a pure sense of duty that restrained him. He acted in utter contempt of what was personal and selfish, and in deepest reverence for what was holy and Divine. How different from the common spirit of the world! Young people, who are so ready to keep up a sense of wrong, and wait an opportunity of paying back your schoolfellows, study this example of David. Ye grown men, who could not get such-a-one to vote for you, or to support your claim in your controversy, and who vowed that you would never rest till you had driven him from the place, how does your spirit compare with that of David? Ye statesmen, who have received an affront from some barbarous people, utterly ignorant of your ways, and who forthwith issue your orders for your ships of war to scatter destruction among their miserable villages, terrifying, killing, mutilating, no matter how many of the wretches that have no arms to meet you in fair fight – think of the forbearance of David. And think too of many passages in the New Testament that give the idea of another treatment and another species of victory: – “Therefore, if thine enemy hunger, feed him; if he thirst, give him drink; for in so doing thou shalt heap coals of fire on his head. Be not overcome of evil, but overcome evil with good.”
The special consideration that held back the arm of David from killing Saul was that he was the Lord’s anointed. He held the office of king by Divine appointment, – not merely as other kings may be regarded as holding it, but as God’s lieutenant, called specially, and selected for the office. For David to remove him would be to interfere with the Divine prerogative. It would be so much the more inexcusable as God had many other ways of removing him, any one of which He might readily employ. “David said furthermore, As the Lord liveth, the Lord shall smite him; or his day shall come to die; or he shall descend into battle, and perish. The Lord forbid that I should stretch forth mine hand against the Lord’s anointed.”
Let us briefly follow the narrative on each of the two occasions.
First, when David saw Saul asleep at the entrance of the cave near Engedi, he crept towards him as he lay, and removed a loose piece of his garment. When Saul rose up and proceeded on his way, David boldly followed him, believing that after sparing the king’s life he was safe from attack either from him or his people. His respectful salutation, drawing the king’s attention, was followed by an act of profound obeisance. David then addressed Saul somewhat elaborately, his address being wholly directed to the point of disabusing the king’s mind of the idea that he had any plot whatever against his life. His words were very respectful but at the same time bold. Taking advantage of the act of forbearance which had just occurred, he demanded of the king why he listened to men’s words, saying, Behold, David seeketh thy hurt. He protested that for himself nothing would induce him to stretch forth his hand against the Lord’s anointed. That very day, he had had the chance, but he had forborne. His people had urged him, but he would not comply. There was the skirt of his garment which he had just cut off: it would have been as easy for him, when he did that, to plunge his sword into the heart of the king. Could there be a plainer proof that Saul was mistaken in supposing David to be actuated by murderous or other sinful feelings against him? And yet Saul hunted for his life to take it. Rising still higher, David appealed to the great Judge of all, and placed the quarrel in His hands. To vary the case, he quoted a proverb to the effect that only where there was wickedness in the heart could wickedness be found in the life. Then, with the easy play of a versatile mind, he put the case in a comical light: did it become the great king of Israel to bring his hosts after one so insignificant – “after a dead dog, after a flea”? Was ocean to be tossed into tempest “to waft a feather or to drown a straw”? Once more, and to sum up the whole case, he appealed solemnly to God, virtually invoking His blessing on whoever was innocent in this quarrel, and calling down His wrath and destruction on the party that was really guilty.
The effect on Saul was prompt and striking. He was touched in his tenderest feelings by the singular generosity of his opponent. He broke down thoroughly, welcomed the dear voice of David, “lifted up his voice and wept.” He confessed that he was wrong, that David had rewarded him good and he had rewarded David evil. David had given him that day a convincing proof of his integrity; though it seemed that the Lord had delivered him into his hand, he killed him not. He had reversed the principle on which men were accustomed to act when they came upon an enemy, and had him in their power. And all these acknowledgments of David’s superior goodness Saul made, while knowing well and frankly owning that David should be the king, and that the kingdom should be established in his hand. One favour only Saul would beg of David in reference to that coming time – that he would not massacre his family, or destroy his name out of his father’s house – a request which it was easy for David to comply with. Never would he dream of such a thing, however common it was in these Eastern kingdoms. David sware to Saul, and the two parted in peace.
How glad David must have been that he acted as he did! Already his forbearance has had a full reward. It has drawn out the very best elements of Saul’s soul; it has placed Saul in a light in which we can think of him with interest, and even admiration. How can this be the man that so meanly plotted for David’s life when he sent him against the Philistines? that gave him his daughter to be his wife in order that he might have more opportunities to entangle him? that flung the murderous javelin at his head? that massacred the priests and destroyed their city simply because they had shown him kindness? Saul is indeed a riddle, all the more that this generous fit lasted but a very short time; and soon after, when the treacherous Ziphites undertook to betray David; Saul and his soldiers came again to the wilderness to destroy him.
It has been thought by some, and with reason, that something more than the varying humour of Saul is necessary to account for his persistent efforts to kill David. And it is believed that a clue to this is supplied by expressions of which David made much use, and by certain references in the Psalms, which imply that to a great extent he was the victim of calumny, and of calumny of a very malignant and persistent kind. In the address on which we have commented David began by asking why Saul listened to mens words, saying, Behold, David seeketh thy life? And in the address recorded in the twenty-sixth chapter (1Sa 26:19) David says very bitterly, “If they be the children of men that have stirred thee up against me, cursed be they before the Lord; for they have driven me out this day from abiding in the inheritance of the Lord, saying, Go, serve other gods.” Turning to the seventh Psalm, we find in it a vehement and passionate appeal to God in connection with the bitter and murderous fury of an enemy, who is said in the superscription to have been Gush the Benjamite. The fury of that man against David was extraordinary. Deliver me, O Lord, “lest he tear my soul like a lion, rending it in pieces when there is none to deliver.” It is plain that the form of calumny which this man indulged in was accusing David of ”rewarding evil to him that was at peace with him,” an accusation not only not true, but outrageously contrary to the truth, seeing he had “delivered him that without cause was his enemy.” It is not unlikely therefore that at Saul’s court David had an enemy who had the bitterest enmity to him, who never ceased to poison Saul’s mind regarding him, who put facts in the most offensive light, and even after the first act of David’s generosity to Saul not only continued, but continued more ferociously than ever to inflame Saul’s mind, and urge him to get rid of this intolerable nuisance. What could have inspired Gush, or indeed any one, with such a hatred to David we cannot definitely say; much of it was due to that instinctive hatred of holy character which worldly men of strong will show in every age, and perhaps not a little to the apprehension that if David did ever come to the throne, many a wicked man, now fattening on the spoils of the kingdom through the favour of Saul, would be stript of his wealth and consigned to obscurity.
It would seem, then, that had Saul been left alone he would have left David alone. It was the bitter and incessant plotting of David’s enemies that stirred him up. Jealousy was only too active a feeling in his breast, and it was easy to work upon it, and fill him with the idea that, after all, David was a rebel and a traitor. These things David must have known; knowing them, he made allowance for them, and did not suffer his heart to become altogether cold to Saul. The kindly feelings which Saul expressed when he dismissed from his view all the calumnies with which he had been poisoned, and looked straight at David, made a deep impression on his rival, and the fruit of them appeared in that beautiful elegy on Saul and Jonathan, which must seem a piece of hypocrisy if the facts we have stated be not kept in view: Saul and Jonathan were pleasant and lovely in their lives, and in their death they were not divided.”
In the second incident, recorded in the twenty-sixth chapter, when David again spared the life of Saul, not much more needs to be said. Some critics would hold it to be the same incident recorded by another hand in some earlier document consulted by the writer of 1 Samuel, containing certain variations such as might take place at the hand of a different historian. But let us observe the differences of the two chapters, (1) The scene is different; in the one case it is near Engedi, in the other in the wilderness, near the hill Hachilah, which is before Jeshimon. (2) The place where Saul was asleep is different; in the one case a cave; in the other case a camp, protected by a trench. (3) The trophy carried off by David was different; in the one case the skirt of his garment, in the other a spear and cruse of water. (4) The position of David when he made himself known was different; in the one case he went out of the cave and called after Saul; in the other he crossed a gully and spoke from the top of a crag. (5) His way of attracting attention was different; in the one case he spoke directly to Saul, in the other he rallied Abner, captain of the host, for failing to protect the person of the king. But we need not proceed further with this list of differences. Those we have adverted to are enough to repel the assertion that there were not two separate incidents of the same kind. And surely if the author was a mere compiler, using different documents, he might have known if the incidents were the same. If it be said that we cannot believe that two events so similar could have happened, that this is too improbable to be believed, we may answer by referring to similar cases in the Gospels, or even in common life. Suppose a historian of the American civil war to describe what took place at Bull Run. First he gives an account of a battle there between the northern and southern armies, some incidents of which he describes. By-and-bye he again speaks of a battle there, but the incidents he gives are quite different. Our modern critics would say it was all one event, but that the historian, having consulted two accounts, had clumsily written as if there had been two battles. We know that this fancy of criticism is baseless. In the American civil war there were two battles of Bull Run between the same contending parties at different times. So we may safely believe that there were two instances of David’s forbearance to Saul, one in the neighbourhood of Engedi, the other in the neighbourhood of Ziph.
And all that needs to be said further respecting the second act of forbearance by David is that it shines forth all the brighter because it was the second, and because it happened so soon after the other. We may see that David did not put much trust in Saul’s profession the first time, for he did not disband his troop, but remained in the wilderness as before. It is quite possible that this displeased Saul. It is also possible that that inveterate false accuser of David from whom he suffered so much would make a great deal of this to Saul, and would represent to him strongly that if David really was the innocent man he claimed to be, after receiving the assurance he got from him he would have sent his followers to their homes, and returned in peace to his own. That he did nothing of the kind may have exasperated Saul, and induced him to change his policy, and again take steps to secure David, as before. Substantially, David’s remonstrance with Saul on this second occasion was the same as on the first. But at this tune he gave proof of a power of sarcasm which he had not shown before. He rated Abner on the looseness of the watch he kept of his royal master, and adjudged him worthy of death for not making it impossible for anyone to come unobserved so near the king, and have him so completely in his power. The apology of Saul was substantially the same as before; but how could it have been different? The acknowledgment of what was to happen to David was hardly so ample as on the last occasion. David doubtless parted from Saul with the old conviction that kindness was not wanting in his personal feelings, but that the evil influences that were around him, and the fits of disorder to which his mind was subject, might change his spirit in a single hour from that of generous benediction to that of implacable jealousy.
But now to draw to a close. We have adverted to that high reverence for God which was the means of restraining David from lifting up his hand against Saul, because he was the Lord’s anointed. Let us now notice more particularly what an admirable spirit of self-restraint and patience David showed in being willing to bear all the risk and pain of a most distressing position, until it should please God to bring to him the hour of deliverance. The grace we specially commend is that of waiting for God’s time. Alas! into how many sins, and even crimes, have men been betrayed through unwillingness to wait for God’s time! A young man embarks in the pursuits of commerce; but the gains to be derived from ordinary business come in far too slowly for him; he makes haste to be rich, engages in gigantic speculation, plunges into frightful gambling, and in a few years brings ruin on himself and all connected with him. How many sharp and unhandsome transactions continually occur just because men are impatient, and wish to hurry on some consummation which their hearts are set on! Nay, have not murders often taken place just to hasten the removal of some who occupied places that others were eager to fill? And how often are evil things done by those who will not wait for the sanction of honourable marriage?
But even where no act of crime has been committed, impatience of God’s time may give rise to many an evil feeling that does not go beyond one’s own breast. Many a son who will succeed to an inheritance on the death of his father, or of some other relative, is tempted to wish, more or less consciously, for an event the last to be desired by a filial heart. You may say, it is human nature; how could anyone help it? The example of David shows how one may help it. The heart that is profoundly impressed with the excellence of the Divine will, and the duty and privilege of loyally accepting all His arrangements, can never desire to anticipate that will in any matter, great or small. For how can any good come in the end from forcing forward arrangements out of the Divine order? If, for the moment, this brings any advantage in one direction, it is sure to be followed by far greater evils in another. Do we all realize the full import of our prayer when we say, “Thy will be done on earth as it is in heaven”? Of one thing you may be very sure, there is no impatience in heaven for a speedier fulfillment of desirable events than the will of God has ordained. There is no desire to force on the wheels of Providence if they do not seem to be moving fast enough. So let it be with us. Let us fix it as a first principle in our minds, as an immovable rule of our lives, that as God knows best how to order His providence, so any interference with Him is rash and perilous, and wicked too; and with reference both to events which are not lawfully in our hands, and the time at which they are to happen, let us realize it as alike our duty and our interest to say to God, in the spirit of full and unreserved trust-“Not our will, but Thine be done.”