Exegetical and Hermeneutical Commentary of 1 Samuel 25:3

Now the name of the man [was] Nabal; and the name of his wife Abigail: and [she was] a woman of good understanding, and of a beautiful countenance: but the man [was] churlish and evil in his doings; and he [was] of the house of Caleb.

3. Nabal ] The name means Fool. It is the word used in Psa 14:1; Pro 30:22; &c.

churlish ] Lit. hard. Cp. Mat 25:24, where the same Greek word is used as in the Sept. here ( ).

of the house of Caleb ] Who settled at Hebron (Jos 15:13). Cp. “the south of Caleb” in ch. 1Sa 30:14. The Sept. rendering “dog-like” ( ), referring to his character, is not to be followed.

Fuente: The Cambridge Bible for Schools and Colleges

1Sa 25:3

Now the name of the man was Nabal, and the name of his wife Abigail.

Nabal, the churl

I. Nabal, the churl. What an apt thumbnail sketch is given of the whole race of Nabals in the confidential remark passed between his servant and his wife, He is such a son of Belial that one cannot speak to him!

1. He was very great. There are four kinds of greatness; young men, choose the best for your life aim! It is little to be great in possessing; better to be great in doing; better still to conceive and promulgate great thoughts; but best to be great in character.

2. He was a fool, his wife said. He surely must have sat for the full length portrait of the fool in our Lords parable, who thought his soul could take its ease and be merry because a few big barns were full.

3. He was a man of Belial, his servant said. He seems to have had no compunction for his churlish speeches: no idea of the consequences they might involve. As soon as the words were spoken, they were forgotten; and in the evening of the day on which they were spoken we find him in his house, holding a feast, like the feast of a king, his heart merry with wine, and altogether so stupid that his wife told him nothing less or more till the morning light.

II. David, precipitate and passionate. One of the most characteristic features in Davids temper and behaviour through all these weary years was his self-control. But the rampart of self-restraint built by long habit went down, like a neglected sea wall, before the sudden paroxysm of passion which Nabals insulting words aroused. At this hour David was on the brink of committing a crime which would east a dark shadow on all his after years. In calmer, quieter, holier hours it would have been a grief to him. From this shame, sorrow, and disgrace he was saved by that sweet and noble woman, Abigail.

III. Abigail, the beautiful intercessor. She was a woman of good understanding and of a beautiful countenance–a fit combination. Her character had written its legend on her face. There are many beautiful women wholly destitute of good understanding; just as birds of rarest plumage are commonly deficient in the power of song. It is remarkable how many Abigails get married to Nabals. God-fearing women, tender and gentle in their sensibilities, high-minded and noble in their ideals, become tied in an indissoluble union with men for whom they can have no true affinity, even if they have not an unconquerable repugnance. To such an one there is but one advice–You must stay where you are. The dissimilarity in taste and temperament does not constitute a sufficient reason for leaving your husband to drift. It may be that some day your opportunity will come, as it came to Abigail. In the meantime do not allow your purer nature to be bespotted or besmeared. Nabals servants knew the quality of their mistress, and could trust her to act wisely in the emergency which was upon them; so they told her all. She immediately grasped the situation, despatched a small procession of provision bearers, along the way that David must come, and followed them immediately on her ass. She met the avenging warriors by the covert of the mountain, and the interview was as creditable to her womans wit as to her grace of heart. Frank and noble as he always was, he did not hesitate to acknowledge his deep indebtedness to this lovely woman, and to see in her intercession the gracious arrest of God. What a revelation this is of the ministries with which God seeks to avert us from our evil ways! They are sometimes very subtle and slender, very small and still. (F. B. Meyer, B. A.)

Fuente: Biblical Illustrator Edited by Joseph S. Exell

Verse 3. The name of the man was Nabal] The word nabal signifies to be foolish, base, or villanous; and hence the Latin word nebulo, knave, is supposed to be derived.

The name of his wife Abigail] The joy or exultation of my father. A woman of sense and beauty, married to the boor mentioned above, probably because he was rich. Many women have been thus sacrificed.

Of the house of Caleb] vehu Chalibbi, “he was a Calebite.” But as the word caleb signifies a dog, the Septuagint have understood it as implying a man of a canine disposition, and translate it thus, , he was a doggish man. It is understood in the same way by the Syriac and Arabic.

Fuente: Adam Clarke’s Commentary and Critical Notes on the Bible

This is added to aggravate his crime, that he was a degenerate branch of that noble stock of Caleb, and consequently of the tribe of Judah, as David was.

Fuente: English Annotations on the Holy Bible by Matthew Poole

3. he was of the house of Calebofcourse, of the same tribe with David himself; but many versionsconsider Caleb (“dog”) not as a proper, but a common noun,and render it, “he was snappish as a dog.”

Fuente: Jamieson, Fausset and Brown’s Commentary Critical and Explanatory on the Whole Bible

Now the name of the man [was] Nabal,…. Which signifies a “fool”; one would think his parents should not give him this name, though it is a name proper enough to men in common; and Kimchi thinks this was a nickname, which men gave him agreeably to his genius and conduct, and which is not improbable:

and the name of his wife Abigail; which signifies “my father’s joy”, he delighting in her for her wit and beauty, as follows:

and [she was] a woman of good understanding, and of a beautiful countenance; she was not only of a good understanding in things natural, civil, and domestic, but in things spiritual, as her speech to David shows, and which, with her external form, completed her character, and greatly recommended her; which is the character Aelianus u gives of Aspasia, wise and fair:

but the man [was] churlish and evil in his doings; morose and ill natured in the temper and disposition of his mind, and wicked in his conversation, and fraudulent and oppressive in his dealings with men:

and he [was] of the house of Caleb; or he was a Calebite w, a descendant of that great and good man Caleb the son of Jephunneh; which was an aggravation of his wickedness, that he should be the degenerate plant of such a noble vine: some interpret it, he was as his heart, as his heart was bad, so was he; some men, their outside is better than their inside; but this man was no hypocrite, he was as bad outwardly as he was inwardly: the word “Caleb” sometimes signifies a dog; hence the Septuagint version renders it, a doggish man, a cynic; and to the same purpose are the Syriac and Arabic versions; and so some Jewish writers interpret it; but the Targum, Jarchi, and Kimchi, supply it as we do, that he was of the house or family of Caleb, and so of the tribe of Judah, as David was.

u Var. Hist. l. 12. c. 1. w “keri” “Calibita”, Pagninus, Montanus; “Calebita” Tigurine version, Junius & Tremcilius, Piscator.

Fuente: John Gill’s Exposition of the Entire Bible

MADNESS OF UNEQUAL MARRIAGES

1Sa 25:3

I AM to speak to you this evening on a subject that is as old as Eves creation, and yet as new and interesting to young life as the latest and most beautiful bridemarriage! My text leads me naturally to a phase of that subject, which, while it may not be so agreeable to contemplate, must be taken into account, or else men, and more often women, make fools of themselves; namely,

The madness of unequal marriages. Nabal and Abigail are only one instance where marriage was marred by the inequality and incongruity of contracting parties. The daily reports of our divorce courts are a fearful commentary on our subject, and they serve to emphasize some of the evident suggestions of this text. The question, Is marriage a failure? is often raised in jest, and by some seriously. Schopenhauer affirmed with evident sincerity that the man who marries is a fool because he halves his rights and doubles his responsibilities. But Schopenhauer was a pessimist and so, poorly fitted to determine serious questions for the most optimistic among us. George Eliotts statement appeals to many: What greater thing is there for two human souls than to feel that they are joined for life, to strengthen each other in labor, to rest on each other in sorrow, to minister to each other in pain, to be one with each other in silent, unspeakable memories, to the moment of the last parting. But such a wedded life must not be expected when people are guilty of the madness of so unequal a marriage as that our text describes.

The story is told that a female orator stormed her audience with an eloquent appeal for womans rights, and in stentorian tones asked, Where would man be but for woman? to which an evil urchin in the gallery shouted out, In paradise, mum I We can hardly agree with the lad. This world would be a weary place without woman, but it is a perdition with her when she is bad, and it is no better a place for woman when wedded to such a husband as Nabal.

Let us attend to certain suggestions:

Some equality of social station is essential to successful marriage. In saying this, we are solicitous not to be misunderstood. We do not mean by equality in social station what many employ that sentence to express. We do not mean that they should have equal wealth; we do not mean their blood should be equally red or blue; we do not mean that their youths should have known equally tender breeding. All these things determine little or nothing. The girl of poor birth may easily become the social equal of the son of a multi-millionaire. Common, country ancestors may easily become the social superior of the bluest blooded daughter of old Virginias first family; the roughly bred Lincoln may be a superior suitor for the hand of the most daintily reared child of the land. What we mean by social equality is those features of life that leave two persons on the same common, moral and intellectual level. They enjoy similar things, participate in lifes privileges with kindred graces, and are, in the judgment of competent critics, fit companions.

History has its tragic illustrations of the evil of marriages that disregard alike social station and tastes. You remember how little happiness Madame Roland had in her husband. When, as the beautiful and brilliant girl, Marie Jeanne Philipon, she gave her hand in marriage to the cold, hard-natured Roland, she laid the foundation alike of her marital wretchedness, and her martyr death. Her sorrowful experience ought to speak to every girl in the land in the language of Amos, Can two walk together, except they be agreed?

In the second place, some equality in moral character is essential to marital bliss. There is no more pernicious idea abroad than that which is so prevalent; namely, that a mans moral character is not to be reckoned a decisive thing when young women select husbands. The notion that Caesars wife must be above suspicion, but Caesar himself can wallow in the mire when he likes, is a death blow to every hope of wedded happiness. Abigail was a great fool for ever giving her heart and hand to Nabal, if she knew much of him in advance of the wedding day. Our text says, He was churlish and evil in his doings.

Probably his property position blinded her to his putrid character. He had great possessions in Carmel and so seemed a great catch. Those three thousand sheep and one thousand goats very likely got into Abigails mothers eye, and she couldnt see any other fellow fit enough for her girl. Ah, gold is the wretched gloss over the moral gangrene of many a mans life that blinds mothers and daughters alike to leprosy! Truly, a dollar held close to the eye is large enough to shut out the great desert of woe that lies just beyond the wedding day, and a few hundred thousand dollars will so distemper the vision that a Sahara-waste is seen only in the magic forms of a mirage. But a few feet beyond the bridal altar, where woman gives a pure heart in exchange for stained gold, suffices to lift the veil and let in the white light of truth, and nothing but desolation and despair sweeps out on every side, clean to lifes horizon.

Young women, dont exchange your hearts affections for the promise of gay dress, costly jewels, splendid equipages and courtly castles. If you are once married to a man whose life is leprous and full of rot, your heart will hurt no less than Romolas did when she looked on Titos beauty, or upon the splendid comforts he provided her, but thought on his dual and dreadful life of lust.

It is known that they used to wrap the horns of the ox selected for sacrifice to Jupiter with gay ribbons, and adorn his neck with rare flowers when they led him toward the temple. But, said Dr. Talmage, the floral and ribboned decoration did not make the stab of the butchers knife less deathful, and all the brilliant chandeliers you hang over the woman wedded to an immoral man, all the rich robes with which you enwrap her, and all the costly ribbons with which you adorn her, and all the bewitching charms with which you embank her footsteps, are the ribbons and flowers of a horrible butchery.

But another who despises the thought of marrying for money boasts that she is marrying for love. But the man of her choice is given to wine and women, and she knows it. In explanation of her act she says she expects to reform him. That is the most colossal of all fools errands. A man who wont quit drink in courting days is dead certain to continue with the cups when the honeymoon has passed. And the man who once leads a licentious life is not in the least likely to be ever free again. He may profess reformation, but like deathbed repentance, it stands for nothing when he gets abroad. You are not unacquainted with that mongrel, yet expressive verse, that speaks such truth:

The devil was sick,

The devil a monk would be;

The devil was well,

The devil a monk was he.

The ethical code of a young woman is likely to determine the moral character of the man she marries* If she likes him best who lives in defiance of righteous laws, and delights in his license, then her bleeding heart and disrupted house, and the eventual clouds of despair, are all consequences of her own folly. But if she has no countenance for his immoralities, then the marriage may be defeated, but she saves her own body and soul, not to speak of the wider circle that wedding effects.

Why did you not take my brothers arm last night? said one girl to another. Because I know him to be licentious, and I didnt like to touch him, was the candid reply. Nonsense! replied the first. If you refuse the attentions of all such, youll go begging a beaux, I assure you. Then I will go begging, as my resolution on that is unalterably fixed! Would we could increase her kind! There might be fewer flirtations, fewer marriages, but there would be purer men, more virtuous women, more happy homes and more healthy children more of heaven here below, in consequence.

Our last remark is:

An ideal marriage should! be characterized by some equality of spiritual habits and natures. The Bible is explicit on that point. By the Old Testament teaching, Israelites might not be married to heathen about them; and the New Testament injunction is, Be ye not unequally yoked together with unbelievers. Paul, in his Letter to the Corinthians, advises those who are married to unbelievers to live with them in love and peace, and adds, For what knowest thou, O wife, whether thou shalt save thy husband? or how knowest thou, O man, whether thou shalt save thy wife? But to the unmarried, the injunction, Be ye not unequally yoked with unbelievers. The wisdom of that injunction finds in the daily suffering of Christian women, wedded to unbelievers, a thousand illustrations.

It is not a pleasant thing for the wedded one to go to church alone forever. I meet husbands every now and then who boast themselves most liberal toward the woman that loves them. They say, I have no objection to her attending church. Ah, but to go and leave him at home, thats the mistake. To do so once is no cross, but to continue doing that for twenty or forty years becomes almost an unbearable burden. To have the Lords daythat best emblem of the holy heavenseparate us from those that we love, is so suggestive of final separation as to start a hundred pains in the sensitive and tender heart. I know scores of wives, and a few husbands, who walk through this world with a hand over the aching heart as the spirits in the hall of Eblis covered theirs, trying to hide from curious eyes the sorrow felt over the indifference to religion of those related to them by that sacred and tender tie.

It is not a pleasant thing to bring up children under contradictory teaching. It confuses and distresses them, while it results in clash of argument and unkindly feeling between those who ought to be unto them perfect examples of love. It must superinduce doubts, if it does not set adrift the soul altogether. When Ethan Allen was dying, his beautiful daughter came to him with tear-stained, distressed face, and said, Papa, you have always taught me that the Bible was a Book of myths, and God a creature of the imagination, while mother believes in the Divinity of both. What shall I believe? He answered, so it is said, Accept your mothers teaching, child, it is more likely true! But that is a poor time and a pitiable occasion for undoing the doubt that a whole life has fastened upon a young and affectionate heart.

Finally, there is much pain in the thought of an eternal separation. One day I read the Scripture which teaches that in Heaven we are neither married nor given in marriage, and my wife, then a bride, heard it, and it took on new meaning to her. That night, with tearful eyes, she asked if that Scripture meant what it said, and added, If in the hereafter you are not my husband, then there is no Heaven for me.

We may laugh at the needless alarm of the bride, but the thought itself is a serious one. If you took away from the Christian his hope, Biblically based, of a reunion with loved ones in the hereafter, you would rob heaven of one of its chief joys, and come near making immortality meaningless.

Fuente: The Bible of the Expositor and the Evangelist by Riley

(3) Nabal.The word Nabal means fool, connected with naval, to fade away. The name was probably a nickname given him on account of his well-known stubborn folly.

Abigail.The famous beautiful woman who afterwards became Davids wife seems to have been, as Stanley calls her, the good angel of the household of the ill-starred, boorish southern chieftain. Her name, too, which signifies whose father is joy, was most likely given her by the villagers on her husbands estate, as expressive of her sunny, gladness-bringing presence. Her early training, and the question respecting the sources whence she derived her wisdom and deep, far-sighted pietyapparently far in advance of her ageis discussed further on in the chapter.

The house of Caleb.In the original Kalibi, i.e., of the house or family of Caleb. Thus the word is read in the Hebrew Bible. There is, however, an alternative readingKlibiwith different vowel-points in the written text, which would be read according to his heart. Josephus, the LXX., and the Arabic and Syriac Versions understand it as derived from kelev, a dog, and renderand he was a cynical man (that is, one of a dog-like characteranthrpos keunikos). The Chaldee e domo Caleb, and Vulgate de genero Caleb, follow the text which is read in the Hebrew Bible, and translated in our version, of the house of Caleb, which seems, on the whole, the preferable and most likely meaning.

Fuente: Ellicott’s Commentary for English Readers (Old and New Testaments)

3. Churlish Harsh, stern, cross, and surly.

Of the house of Caleb Who inherited Hebron. Jos 14:13; Jos 15:13. The Septuagint renders , Calebite, by , doggish.

Fuente: Whedon’s Commentary on the Old and New Testaments