Exegetical and Hermeneutical Commentary of 1 Samuel 26:21
Then said Saul, I have sinned: return, my son David: for I will no more do thee harm, because my soul was precious in thine eyes this day: behold, I have played the fool, and have erred exceedingly.
21. I have sinned, &c.] Compare and contrast 1Sa 24:16 ff.
Fuente: The Cambridge Bible for Schools and Colleges
1Sa 26:21
I have played the fool.
Playing the fool
The greatest and most difficult problem which the Church of God has had to face in all ages, and has had to try and solve is this–how to prevent men and women playing the fool. Thank God all down history there have been those who were bold enough to put out a protest, who, in spite of tremendous difficulties, were bold enough to call upon the fools not to deal so foolishly, and to the wicked not to set up their horn. And, believe me, the protest is stiff required. In spite of all our advance, in spite of our free education, there is still a vast number of those who walk in the ways of folly. Education is not enough to prevent a man playing the fool. You find men gambling away fortunes honest men have made, and you find men who try to drown their sorrows in what is called the sparkling cup–forgetting all the time that they are drowning their souls in perdition. You have no right to charge at Gods door the things that you ought to charge at the door of your own folly. It is always being done–the Lord this, and the Lord that; it is you.
1. The folly of banishing God from life. Well, now; I find in Gods Word that, there are three very special forms of folly which He there points out. I dont know whether you have observed that Psa 14:1-7 and Psa 53:1-6 are word for word the same; and in both there is this statement: The fool hath said in his heart, There is no God. Literally in the Hebrew that is not just the idea of the writer. It is, The fool hath said in his heart, No God–that is, No God for me. The folly here spoken of is a much more common folly–I mean the folly of the man that says, I do not want God in my life, I do not want God in my home, I do not want God to rule and control in my heart.
2. The envious fool. Furthermore, you find another description of a foolish person in Psa 73:1-28 –the foolishness that is envious at the prosperity of the wicked. It is an old problem.
3. The money-grubbing fool. Another definition of a fool that I must not omit tonight comes in connection with our Blessed Lords ministry, and that is Luk 12:1-59 –Thou fool! What does it mean? Oh, it means that to put much emphasis on temporal things, and to neglect eternal things, and to set much value on things that pass away, and neglect the things that do not pass away, is the act of a fool.
4. The self-important fool. We dwell upon the special foolishness which attached to Saul, King of Israel. His foolishness lay in this, that he had an overweening estimate of his own importance. Saul was head and shoulders above his people, a pity for him, because it turned his head. Oh, it is a dreadful thing to be over-conscious of your own importance. God can do nothing with a man like that till He has brought him down, down, down, down. He bringeth down the mighty from their seats, He exalteth the humble and meek. Then there was another great mistake Saul made, he fought against David. He knew that David was indeed the Lords anointed; he knew that David ought to have the throne; he knew that David had been infinitely kind to him. But Saul determined, in the pride of his heart, to have Davids life; there was a confederacy against him, the Lords chosen.
5. Gods remedy for folly. It would be sorry work to talk about the follies of men and women if one could not tell of a remedy. The fool requires two things. He requires a revelation of wisdom, to meet his folly; and he requires a revelation of power, to overcome his weakness. Is there such a revelation? Yes, here, and nowhere else than in that book. (Marcus Rainsford.)
Playing the fool
Now, if Sauls folly mainly consisted in yielding to the impulses of passion, and obeying the dictates not of duty but of a selfish heart, with no regard to the consequences, certainly he has no lack of successors. A few choice specimens have come under my personal notice. My album has some rare portraits: and the first I shall name is
I. The idler. If the world contains a genuine fool, it is the young man who wastes his time. Some things God gives often, others only once. Youth belongs to the latter category, and if it be thrown away is beyond recovery. Idleness is always demoralising. Almost all the moral havoc that is wrought amongst young men is effected after the office door is closed. Few men go wrong when they are busy at work. Tell me how a youth spends his evenings and his half-holidays, and I shall have a good idea of his character. The worst thing you can do of an evening is to do nothing. You may easily predict a mans future when you know how he spends his hours of leisure. The next portrait I have to present, is
II. The buffoon. There are many who seem incapable of a serious thought. They jest at everything. They live in an atmosphere of hilarity. They treat life as if it were a great joke. There is scarcely a trace of gravity or good sense in them. They are to society only what bells are to horses, making plenty of jingle, but not assisting to draw. It is a poor ambition this; the habitual jester is an empty fribble. Such men have no reverence in their nature. They have not a conception of the dignity of manhood. They have scarcely respect even for religion, and some profane quotation from Holy Writ is enough to set them in a roar. Let all such characters awaken within you a feeling of revulsion. Do not associate with them. Admissible they might be in a menagerie, but life is too serious to tolerate them. The next page of my album introduces to us:
III. The worldling. The next on my list is:
IV. The sensualist. I mean the man who is a slave to his baser passions and wallows in the mire of bestiality. The pure shrink from his touch; his breath blights every innocent thing.
V. The persistent unbelieverse (J. Thain Davidson, D. D.)
Playing the fool
I. Sauls history justifies this expression, inasmuch as his public life was marked by a continued attempt at thorough independence of God. Here is discoverable the great secret of Sauls downfall. This was his folly, here he erred. He made the attempt to get on without God.
1. This was folly–first, because it was subversive of all that reason and wisdom suggested. For the very being of a God is of itself a fact sufficiently indicative of the place which the creatures of that God should occupy. It was attempting to alter the relative positions of the Universal Sovereign and of His subjects–the relative position of the Great Proprietor of all and of those who are entirely at His disposal. The laws of nature, in regard to matter, allow no interference with them which would subvert the relative conditions of strength and weakness, independence and dependence, without such results as expose the folly of the attempt. Let the lighter materials, of which the superstructure may be safely built, be employed for the foundation, and let the heavy blocks–the solid masses–of which the foundation should consist, be used for the superstructure, and the builder will soon have to say, I have played the fool, and have erred exceedingly. Attempt to frame a raft of some substance whose specific gravity is greater than that of water, and the moment you launch it on the waves it will sink, and imminent peril will ensue, and you will just have been playing the fool. Or come to natures laws as regards moral beings–indulge a course of Action which subverts these. Let the rule be that the childs will shall take precedence of the parents, the servants of the masters, that superior and inferior should change places, and would not the results in families and households soon prove that all this was but erring exceedingly? And shall there be any success where man, dependent man, thus takes or attempts to take the place of independence? Can he rid himself of God, when, at the utmost stretch of self-will, he is asking, Who is Lord over me?
2. Besides, if it be against all reason to put our own will into the place of Gods, it is not less against our interest to do so. Saul, indeed, attempted to do as well without God as with Him; but did he succeed? Did he get on as well without God as with Him? And did ever the history of a single individual justify the supposition that this was possible? It is only the blessing of the Lord which maketh rich, and he added no sorrow with it.
II. Applicable as the sentence was to the whole retrospect of his history, it was preeminently appropriate to this portion of it. In many respects he had thus erred; in one respect most especially and distressingly so. He was now addressing David, a man whom on every ground, he ought to have loved, for he was lovely in himself, and he had done Saul good service; and, moreover, he stood in very near relationship to him–the husband of his daughter, the bosom friend of his son. It is not difficult to gather the reasons of this verdict pronounced upon himself; and they demand our attention, because they expose to our view points of possible error in our own conduct. His folly and error consisted in treating a man as his enemy who was, in reality, his best friend. Have you ever, like Saul in reference to David, felt the risings of dislike to your friend, because, in some form or another, he seemed to stand in the way of your cherished plans and self-gratifying projects? Beware how you listen to the suggestions of the evil spirit. Sauls folly consisted, not simply in treating as an enemy the man who was really his best friend, but in attempting, by this very conduct towards David, to fly in the face of those Divine arrangements to which, however humiliating their character, he was bound, in meekness, to have submitted. God had assigned the kingdom to David: Saul was determined to keep it for himself and his family. It was the one purpose of Sauls life to defeat Gods arrangement; and nothing promised so readily and directly to accomplish his object as the death of David, and this became, therefore, the one great point at which he aimed. Yet never does a man commit himself to a harder, and at the same time more fruitless, enterprise than when he fights against Gods providential arrangements–when, for instance, God is evidently calling on him to give up some plan of his own–when God is requiring him to take a humbler level, and he will grasp tightly and hold tenaciously the position which everything combines to tell him is not for himself nor his family, but for another. Their folly shall be made manifest to all men; and not less shall it be felt by themselves. Submission, which they would not render voluntarily to One who has a just right to claim it, will be wrung out of them reluctantly by One against whom none ever hardened himself and prospered. Saul, alas! admitted his error, but took no steps to turn his confession to practical advantage. Let us be careful against such a neglect. Let us proceed at once, by Gods blessing, to act out our convictions. (J. A. Miller.)
The folly of man
This is not the kind of thing a man would say if he gave himself time to think. It is not a statement made after preparation. Men do not speak in this wise after thought and preparation, and that fact makes the utterance the more valuable, for it is under such stress of circumstances that men often reveal the ever present, but habitually hidden, consciousness. It was so with Saul on this occasion.
1. This man was a man of good family and position in life. His father was Kish, a mighty man of valour, and the marginal reading most strikingly catches the thought of the original word–a mighty man of substance; a wealthy man.
2. Notice, also, that he was a man of splendid physique–a choice man is the word, a goodly man, a man standing head and shoulders above his fellows, handsome and strong. Let no man ever put any false value upon incompetency in the physical realm. Saul started with the magnificent capital of a strong physique.
3. Again, he was a man of simple life, living at home, interested in his fathers affairs, by no means a prodigal.
4. He was, moreover, a man of modest disposition.
5. And then, once again, he was a man of courage, not the courage that vaunts itself, which is of the very essence of cowardice, not the courage that talks, but the courage that farms until his nation is insulted, and then strikes. Now, this is the man that says in the words of my text, I have played the fool!
Notice Sauls opportunities.
1. He is the chosen of God; the choice is Divinely, definitely stated. He had opened before him a door, passing through which he should find the life–simple, and modest, and strong, and beautiful, that had been preparing in the past–put into a place of activity and of service, of which he had never dreamed. What scope for his powers in the kingly office! What chances to bless his fellow men! This was his opportunity.
2. Then notice another fact proving how great that opportunity was. He had the friendship of Samuel, a man of God, a seer, the leader of the people.
3. Then remember this also, in speaking of his opportunity. It is said of him that there went with him a band of men whose hearts God had touched. This man with such glorious opportunities is the one who, coming near the end of life, surprised in a crisis, cries out, I have played the fool!
This is not the story of a man who made final shipwreck in the early years of his life, or the story of a man who had no chance in life, who inherited forces that damned him, but the story of a man who seems to have had everything in his favour at the beginning–his own person and character were magnificent, his surroundings highly favoured and privileged, and yet this man came at last to say that he had played the fool.
1. I find the first point of that failure on the day when Samuel had come with the hosts of the people for the crowning of the man whom God had chosen to be king. Where was he? Hiding away. A man has no business to be modest when. God has anointed him for work. There is a modesty that is blasphemous. It is of the very essence of a self-centred life, and if God has anointed a man to be king, that man sins when he allows modesty to hold him back from the kingly office. What was it? Failure to follow God at all costs and against all inclinations. Here is the beginning of all the trouble that wrecked this mans character and life, that spoiled his opportunities, that drew from him that which was at once an awful confession and a wail of anguish. Behold! I have played the fool!
2. From that day pass over the years, and come to the day of impatient waiting at Gilgal. Samuel did not come, as he was expected, and Saul arrogated to himself the right to offer a sacrifice, an act that was not lawful to him. Underlying that act is the spirit of rebellion, the rebellion of a self-centred life.
3. Follow him still further, and notice the degeneration of character. The man who began by hiding away, and then became self-dependent, and then fell into disobedience and lying, now becomes rash, and takes an oath upon him which jeopardises the life of the fairest man in his kingdom, his own con Jonathan.
4. Mark the process still further, and see him at last. In the early years he was himself among the prophets, speaking by the inspiration of the wind of God that passed across his soul. See him now creeping in the darkness of the night to the witch of Endor, asking for some occult subtle revelation of secrets because the light of day is blotted from his life. And the–What then? Suicide! You may call it anything you like, but if I ask a man to slay me, and because he refuses I fall upon my sword, what is it, if not suicide? What are the causes? First, as we have said, lack of loyalty to God. Life makes shipwreck of itself except when the hand of God is upon the helm; no matter how fair and glorious and beautiful the promise of morning, night will bring disaster and defeat, unless there is the loyal handing over of the will of man to the will of God. But mark how this works out in life; see how the man, when once his life is taken out of the Divine government and control, neglects his beat friends, Samuel, David, Jonathan; mark how he fails to understand the opportunity of his kingship. A man who seems only to have seen in kingship an opportunity for fighting and victory and possession, forgets the greater fact, that the king is to be shepherd also, to provide for his people, protecting them from harm, feeding and leading them like a flock.
Let us in a few closing words gather up what seem to be the lessons of that life.
1. First, advantages do not ensure success. The fact of your family, the fact of your disposition, the fact of your physical power, the fact of your courage, all these things are to be valued, but none of them will ensure success. I pray you, do not undervalue the fact that your father believed in God and your mother prayed. The young man that undervalues such facts is already playing the fool, and unless he learns ere it be too late the infinite value of that possession, he will do so to the end of time. Your parents gave you no capital to start in life with, do I hear you tell your friend? It is not true; your father gave you an example of cleanness and honour, your mother of devotion and prayer, and the man who wants any other capital than that should go to the workhouse and stay there! Where would some of us be if God had not barred the way for us by a mothers prayer and a fathers godly life? A man may have all these, and play the fool at the end. Your disposition may be in your favour–you are the very man that will make shipwreck if you do not mind. It is not the cold, cynical man that is in danger of making shipwreck so much as the man of laughter and life, the man who is the centre of every social circle. That is the man the devil is after, because he is the man that God loves.
2. Again let me remind you that opportunities do not crown men. God may have called you to a great opportunity in life, and you may even enter upon the opportunity and yet miss it. How, then, says one man, can I live so as not to play the fool? Hear this. The fear of the Lord is the beginning of wisdom. Surrender to God, loyalty, obedience; these are the things that ensure a man against folly and against failure. You can never achieve the possibilities that slumber in your personality until you have exercised the kingship of your being, by putting the crown of your manhood upon the brow of the Man of Nazareth. Find your way in humility and loneliness to the Cross, and looking into the face of the worlds God and King say, Oh, Nazarene! Thou hast conquered; then you will begin to live. No man can make shipwreck if Christ he King. No man can be lost in the swelling flood if the Pilot with the pierced hand is at the helm. Yield to Him, man, tonight. Yield to Him who alone is able to realise the possibilities of your being, and bring them at last to Gods consummation. (G. Campbell Morgan, D. D.)
.
Fuente: Biblical Illustrator Edited by Joseph S. Exell
1Sa 26:21-25
Then said Saul, I have sinned.
Sauls second reconciliation
When a man like Saul has wept, and spoken words so morally noble, it is but fair to credit him with sincerity and permanence. At the time of his reconciliation he meant every word he said. Yet in a brief period we find Saul going down to the wilderness of Ziph with three thousand chosen men to seek David, who had been reported as hiding himself in the hill of Hachilah. Then came the gush of emotion upon the part of Saul. The weapon which conquered him in the first instance conquered him also in the second. Forbearance was mightier than weapons of war. The sword has slain its countless thousands, but love holds the universe in sweet and glad captivity.
I. It is proved that the deepest and sincerest emotion may be transient in its moral effects. We left Saul reconciled; we find him again in arms. There are two things which are often mistaken for Christian feeling.
1. Selfish gratitude for unexpected preservation.
2. Admiration of moral nobleness in others. See bow this is applicable to hearers of the Gospel. Men hear of Jesus Christs sympathy, love, beneficence, etc. Feeling may be exhausted. Past feeling.
II. It is shown that self-control is in proportion to the estimate formed of the Divine element that is in man. How was it that David withheld his hand when Saul was delivered over to him as lawful prey? Human nature said, Strike; another voice said, Forbear! Twice David might have slain Saul, and twice he spared his life. We want to know the secret of this marvellous self-control. We find it pithily stated in the interview between Abishai and David. Abishai said, Thine enemy. David said, The Lords anointed. Two different views of the same man! The one narrow, selfish, superficial; the other profound and true. So it is with every man: he is not to be measured merely by his personal relations to ourselves. Pray to see the highest and divinest aspect of every mans character. We shall thus be enabled:
1. To hope something even of the worst; and
2. to do something in the negative work of sparing, even where we cannot do anything in the positive work of reclaiming.
Paul had respect even for a weak man, not because he was weak, but because Christ died for him. By taking the highest view of man, he was enabled to do many things for the sake of the Christ that was in him. But when ye so sin against the brethren, and wound their weak conscience, ye sin against Christ.
III. It is shown how much better it is to trust our interests to the working out of Divine laws than to care for them with narrowness of spirit. As the Lord liveth, the Lord shall smite him, etc. Why fight with thy own poor weak fist? etc. Why prefer murder to Divine retribution? Why narrow down bureau life to a paltry duel? etc. The battle is not yours, but Gods. Shall not God avenge His own elect which cry day and night unto Him, though He bear long with them?
IV. It is clearly shown that flight from danger is perfectly compatible with the highest courage. David was never chargeable with cowardice, yet he escaped like an affrighted man. If they persecute you in one city, etc. There is a time to fight (Goliath); there is a time to fly (Saul). The one was an uncircumcised Philistine, the other was the Lords anointed. Understand that there are differences of conquest. David conquered Saul as surely as he conquered Goliath. God sees His own image in us. To recover it he sent His Son. (J. Parker, D. D.)
Fuente: Biblical Illustrator Edited by Joseph S. Exell
Verse 21. I have sinned] Perhaps the word chatathi, “I have sinned,” should be read, I have erred, or, have been mistaken. I have taken thee to be a very different man from what I find thee to be. Taken literally it was strictly true. He often purposed the spilling of David’s blood; and thus, again and again, sinned against his life.
Fuente: Adam Clarke’s Commentary and Critical Notes on the Bible
He not only confesseth, but aggravateth his fault, because his conscience was fully convinced, though his heart was not changed.
Fuente: English Annotations on the Holy Bible by Matthew Poole
Then said Saul, I have sinned,…. Which is more than he acknowledged before, and yet, it is to be feared he had no true sense of his sin, and real repentance for it; but, like Pharaoh, his guilty conscience for the present forced this confession from him; see Ex 9:27;
return, my son David: meaning to his own house, or rather to his palace, since he had disposed of his wife to another man:
for I will no more do thee harm: or seek to do it by pursuing him from place to place, as he had done, which had given him a great deal of trouble and fatigue:
because my soul was precious in thine eyes this day; and therefore spared, when he could have taken it away; which showed that his life was dear to him, of great worth and value in his account; and therefore he would neither take it away himself, nor suffer another to do it:
behold, I have played the fool, and erred exceedingly: in seeking after his life, and pursuing him again, when he had such a convincing proof of his sincerity and faithfulness, and of his cordial affection for him, when he only cut off the skirts of his garment in the cave, and spared his life.
Fuente: John Gill’s Exposition of the Entire Bible
Moreover, Saul could not help confessing, “ I have sinned: return, my son David; I will do thee harm no more, because my life was precious in thine eyes that day.” A good intention, which he never carried out. “He declared that he would never do any more what he had already so often promised not to do again; and yet he did not fail to do it again and again. He ought rather to have taken refuge with God, and appealed to Him for grace, that he might not fall into such sins again; yea, he should have entreated David himself to pray for him” ( Berleb. Bible). He adds still further, “ Behold, I have acted foolishly, and have gone sore astray;” but yet he persists in this folly. “There is no sinner so hardened, but that God gives him now and then some rays of light, which show him all his error. But, alas! when they are awakened by such divine movings, it is only for a few moments; and such impulses are no sooner past, than they fall back again immediately into their former life, and forget all that they have promised.”
1Sa 26:22-23 David then bade the king send a servant to fetch back the spear and pitcher, and reminded him again of the recompense of God: “ Jehovah will recompense His righteousness and His faithfulness to the man into whose hand Jehovah hath given thee to-day; and (for) I would not stretch out my hand against the anointed of the Lord.”
1Sa 26:24-25 “ Behold, as thy soul has been greatly esteemed in my eyes to-day, so will my soul be greatly esteemed in the eyes of Jehovah, that He will save me out of all tribulation.” These words do not contain any “sounding of his own praises” (Thenius), but are merely the testimony of a good conscience before God in the presence of an enemy, who is indeed obliged to confess his wrong-doing, but who no longer feels or acknowledges his need of forgiveness. For even Saul’s reply to these words in 1Sa 26:25 (“Blessed art thou, my son David: thou wilt undertake, and also prevail:” , lit. to vanquish, i.e., to carry out what one undertakes) does not express any genuine goodwill towards David, but only an acknowledgment, forced upon him by this fresh experience of David’s magnanimity, that God was blessing all his undertakings, so that he would prevail. Saul had no more thoughts of any real reconciliation with David. “David went his way, and Saul turned to his place” (cf. Num 24:25). Thus they parted, and never saw each other again. There is nothing said about Saul returning to his house, as there was when his life was first spared (1Sa 24:22). On the contrary, he does not seem to have given up pursuing David; for, according to 1Sa 27:1-12, David was obliged to take refuge in a foreign land, and carry out what he had described in 1Sa 26:19 as his greatest calamity.
Fuente: Keil & Delitzsch Commentary on the Old Testament
| Saul Relents. | B. C. 1056. |
21 Then said Saul, I have sinned: return, my son David: for I will no more do thee harm, because my soul was precious in thine eyes this day: behold, I have played the fool, and have erred exceedingly. 22 And David answered and said, Behold the king’s spear! and let one of the young men come over and fetch it. 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. 24 And, behold, as thy life was much set by this day in mine eyes, so let my life be much set by in the eyes of the LORD, and let him deliver me out of all tribulation. 25 Then Saul said to David, Blessed be thou, my son David: thou shalt both do great things, and also shalt still prevail. So David went on his way, and Saul returned to his place.
Here is, I. Saul’s penitent confession of his fault and folly in persecuting David and his promise to do so no more. This second instance of David’s respect to him wrought more upon him than the former, and extorted from him better acknowledgements, v. 21. 1. He owns himself melted and quite overcome by David’s kindness to him: “My soul was precious in thy eyes this day, which, I thought, had been odious!” 2. He acknowledges he has done very wrong to persecute him, that he has therein acted against God’s law (I have sinned), and against his own interest (I have played the fool), in pursuing him as an enemy who would have been one of his best friends, if he could but have thought so. “Herein (says he) I have erred exceedingly, and wronged both thee and myself.” Note, Those that sin play the fool and err exceedingly, those especially that hate and persecute God’s people, 1Sa 26:19; 1Sa 26:28. 3. He invites him to court again: Return, my son David. Those that have understanding will see it to be their interest to have those about them that behave themselves wisely, as David did, and have God with them. 4. He promises him that he will not persecute him as he has done, but protect him: I will no more do thee harm. We have reason to think, according to the mind he was now in, that he meant as he said, and yet neither his confession nor his promise of amendment came from a principle of true repentance.
II. David’s improvement of Saul’s convictions and confessions and the evidence he had to produce of his own sincerity. He desired that one of the footmen might fetch the spear (v. 22), and then (v. 23), 1. He appeals to God as judge of the controversy: The Lord render to every man his righteousness. David, by faith, is sure that he will do it because he infallibly knows the true characters of all persons and actions and is inflexibly just to render to every man according to his work, and, by prayer, he desires he would do it. Herein he does, in effect, pray against Saul, who had dealt unrighteously and unfaithfully with him (Give them according to their deeds, Ps. xxviii. 4); but he principally intends it as a prayer for himself, that God would protect him in his righteousness and faithfulness, and also reward him, since Saul so ill requited him. 2. He reminds Saul again of the proof he had now given of his respect to him from a principle of loyalty: I would not stretch forth my hand against the Lord’s anointed, intimating to Saul that the anointing oil was his protection, for which he was indebted to the Lord and ought to express his gratitude to him (had he been a common person David would not have been so tender of him), perhaps with this further implication, that Saul knew, or had reason to think, David was the Lord’s anointed too, and therefore, by the same rule, Saul ought to be as tender of David’s life as David had been of his. 3. Not relying much upon Saul’s promises, he puts himself under God’s protection and begs his favour (v. 24): “Let my life be much set by in the eyes of the Lord, how light soever thou makest of it.” Thus, for his kindness to Saul, he takes God to be his paymaster, which those may with a holy confidence do that do well and suffer for it.
III. Saul’s prediction of David’s advancement. He commends him (v. 25): Blessed be thou, my son David. So strong was the conviction Saul was now under of David’s honesty that he was not ashamed to condemn himself and applaud David, even in the hearing of his own soldiers, who could not but blush to think that they had come out so furiously against a man whom their master, when he meets him, caresses thus. He foretels his victories, and his elevation at last: Thou shalt do great things. Note, Those who make conscience of doing that which is truly good may come, by the divine assistance, to do that which is truly great. He adds, “Thou shalt also still prevail, more and more,” he means against himself, but is loth to speak that out. The princely qualities which appeared in David–his generosity in sparing Saul, his military authority in reprimanding Abner for sleeping, his care of the public good, and the signal tokens of God’s presence with him–convinced Saul that he would certainly be advanced to the throne at last, according to the prophecies concerning him.
Lastly, A palliative cure being thus made of the wound, they parted friends. Saul returned to Gibeah re infecta–without accomplishing his design, and ashamed of the expedition he had made; but David could not take his word so far as to return with him. Those that have once been false are not easily trusted another time. Therefore David went on his way. And, after this parting, it does not appear that ever Saul and David saw one another again.
Fuente: Matthew Henry’s Whole Bible Commentary
Saul Acknowledges David’s Preeminence, vs. 21-25
Saul shows more humiliation and remorse at his treatment of David on this occasion, which turned out to be the last meeting of the two men. Saul again confessed that he had sinned, as he did previously when David spared his life in the cave at En-gedi. This time he also explicitly promises that he will no longer seek the harm of David, because David has again spared his life when he was wholly within his power. He goes on to admit that he has done the fool’s part and made an exceeding error in his pursuit of David.
David makes no further comment concerning Saul’s promises, but it is apparent that he no longer placed any trust in what he said. He had learned long before that the king was subject to sudden changes of temperament. He simply informed Saul that he should send one of his young men for his spear. Once again he bespeaks his willingness to leave the entire affair to the out-working of the Lord’s will. He prays that the Lord will render righteousness and faithfulness to those who are submissive to him, as he had been in the case of Saul. He asks that the Lord treat David’s life as precious in His eyes as David had treated the life of Saul, (Psa 34:7).
Saul and David part with Saul’s expression of beatitude on David and his prediction of great deeds and prevailing success in his life. David continued in his flight, and Saul returned to his home.
Learn from chapter twenty-six: 1) Men without God may make good resolutions, but cannot keep them; 2) one can be bold when he knows he is in the Lord’s will; 3) the bravest and most dedicated are still not able to keep one who is out of the will of God; 4) one who repeatedly breaks promises will always be suspected of insincerity.
Fuente: Garner-Howes Baptist Commentary
Saul Again Repents. 1Sa. 26:21-25
21 Then said Saul, I have sinned: return, my son David: for I will no more do thee harm, because my soul was precious in thine eyes this day: behold, I have played the fool, and have erred exceedingly.
22 And David answered and said, Behold the kings spear! and let one of the young men come over and fetch it.
23 The Lord render to every man his righteousness and his faithfulness: for the Lord delivered thee into my hand today, but I would not stretch forth mine hand against the Lords anointed.
24 And, behold, as thy life was much set by this day in mine eyes, so let my life be much set by in the eyes of the Lord, and let him deliver me out of all tribulation.
25 Then Saul said to David, Blessed be thou, my son David: thou shalt both do great things, and also shalt still prevail. So David went on his way, and Saul returned to his place.
13.
What was Sauls decision? 1Sa. 26:21
Once again Saul said that he had sinned. He gave permission for David to return to his place unmolested. He promised him that he would do him no harm. Saul admitted that he had acted like a fool, He had made a grave mistake, Saul parted from David after pronouncing a benediction upon him (1Sa. 26:25). He predicted that David would go on to accomplish outstanding feats and that he would eventually prevail over him. David was allowed to go on his way unmolested and Saul went back to his home in Gibeah.
Fuente: College Press Bible Study Textbook Series
(21) I have played the fool.There seems something more in these words of Saul than sorrow for the past. He seems to blame himself here, as the Dean of Canterbury well suggests, for putting himself again in Davids power through overweening confidence in his own strength. He reproaches himself with the unguarded state of his camp, but he pledges himself to do no harm to David for the future. He even begs that he will return to his court. But in these words, and also in his blessing of David (1Sa. 26:25), there is a ring of falseness; and this was evidently the impression made on the outlaw, for he not only silently declined the royal overtures, but almost immediately removed from the dominions of Saul altogether, feeling that for him and his there was no longer any hope of security in the land of Israel so long as his foe, King Saul, lived.
Here the two whom Samuel had anointed as kingsthe king who has forfeited his crown, and the king of the golden futureparted for ever. They never looked on each others faces again; not even when the great warrior Saul by dead was his former friend able to take a farewell look at the face he once loved so well. The kindest services his faithful subjects of Jabesh Gilead could show to their kings dishonoured remains, for which they had risked their lives, was at once, with all solemnity and mourning, to burn the disfigured body, and to draw a veil of flame over the mutilated corpse of Saul.
Fuente: Ellicott’s Commentary for English Readers (Old and New Testaments)
1Sa 26:21. Then said Saul, I have sinned Bayle has endeavoured to prove that this event, and that related in chap. 24: are but one and the same. To destroy this seeming identity, it will not be unseasonable to attend to the following circumstances, which prove the events to be different. In the first, David was in the wilderness of En-gedi; in the second, he was in the wilderness of Ziph. In the first, Saul went to seek David on the rocks of the goats; in the second, Saul pitched his camp in Hachilah. In the former, Saul was alone; in the latter, he was encamped with his soldiers. In the first, he was in a cave to cover his feet; in the second, he lay asleep in his camp. In the former, David was in the same cave with Saul, though unseen, and his men were with him in the cave; in the latter, Saul was in the hill of Hachilah, but David with his men abode in the wilderness, and when he went to Saul he was accompanied only by Abishai. In the former, David’s men instigate him to kill Saul; in the latter, Abishai exhorts him to destroy him. In the former, David cuts off the skirt of Saul’s robe, and when he came out of the cave, he cries after Saul, and tells him that he found him in a cave; in the latter, David takes the spear and cruse of water from Saul’s bolster, cries to the people, and to Abner, and tells him that there came one of the people into the camp to destroy the king. In the former event, David only shewed Saul the skirt of his robe; but in the latter, he shews the king’s spear, and desires him to send one of his attendants to fetch it. Who ever saw any one thing in the world look more like two things, or rather two separate, distinct, and different transactions?
REFLECTIONS.We have here,
1. Saul melted down under David’s remonstrance. He sees now how precious his life was in David’s sight, and therefore how sinful it was against God to persecute the innocent, as well as foolish to drive so faithful a servant from him. He owns the aggravation of his sin, and that he has erred exceedingly; invites him to return to court, and solemnly promises never more to attempt his harm. Note; Sin is the greatest folly, and will appear so at last.
2. David enforces the conviction of his innocence; desires the king to send for his spear and cruse; prays to God to deal with him according to his uprightness before him; assures Saul that his hand would never be against him, as that day’s experience would testify; the anointing oil would be his sacred guard; and he refers himself to God for the same protection, preservation, and deliverance, as that day he had shewn to Saul. Note; (1.) God is a righteous judge, and all his dispensations prove him to be so. (2.) They who shew mercy, may hope to find mercy.
3. Saul is quite overcome, blesses his son, acknowledges, before his army, his righteous dealing, and predicts his greatness and prevalence over all his enemies. Note; God will at last make his enemies bow at the feet of his persecuted people, and know that he hath loved them. Rev 3:9.
4. Saul and David part to meet no more: Saul returns to Gibeath, David to his fastnesses, unwilling to trust to promises which had been so often broken. Note; It is folly to trust a second time those who have once deceived us.
Fuente: Commentary on the Holy Bible by Thomas Coke
(21) Then said Saul, I have sinned: return, my son David: for I will no more do thee harm, because my soul was precious in thine eyes this day: behold, I have played the fool, and have erred exceedingly.
We have here once more the king of Israel’s honest confession of the injury he had done David, and his promise that he would do so no more. But not a word of his sorrow for his sin against God. That repentance which begins not in God’s grace, is never to be depended upon in man’s mercy. Alas! Saul knew not his own heart! He was compelled from the moment to say as he said, but his heart remained the same.
Fuente: Hawker’s Poor Man’s Commentary (Old and New Testaments)
1Sa 26:21 Then said Saul, I have sinned: return, my son David: for I will no more do thee harm, because my soul was precious in thine eyes this day: behold, I have played the fool, and have erred exceedingly.
Ver. 21. For I will no more do thee harm. ] No more till next time. Saul’s good affections and resolutions were so far from being like the Persian decrees, unalterable, that they were more like the Polonian laws, which, they say, last but three days.
Behold, I have played the fool, and have erred exceedingly.
Fuente: John Trapp’s Complete Commentary (Old and New Testaments)
1 Samuel
LOVE AND REMORSE
1Sa 26:5 – 1Sa 26:12
It is fashionable at present to regard this incident and the other instance of David’s sparing Saul, when in his power, as two versions of one event. But it if not improbable that the hunted outlaw should twice have taken refuge in the same place, or that his hiding-place should have been twice betrayed. He had but a small choice of safe retreats, and the Ziphites had motive for a second betrayal in the fact of the first, and of its failure to secure David’s capture. The whole cast of the two incidents is so different that it is impossible to see how the one could have been evolved from the other, and either they are both true, or they are both unhistorical, or, at best, are both the product of fancy working on, and arbitrarily filling up, a very meagre skeleton of fact. Many of the advocates of the identity of the incident at the bottom of the two accounts would accept the latter explanation; we take the former.
Saul had three thousand men with him; David had left his little troop ‘in the wilderness,’ and seems to have come with only his two companions, Ahimelech and his own nephew, Abishai, to reconnoitre. He sees, from some height, the camp, with the transport wagons making a kind of barricade in the centre-just as camps are still arranged in South Africa and elsewhere,-and Saul established therein as in a rude fortification. A bold thought flashes into his mind as he looks. Perhaps he remembered Gideon’s daring visit to the camp of Midian. He will go down, and not only into the camp, but ‘to Saul,’ through the ranks and over the barrier. What to do he does not say, but the two fierce fighters beside him think of only one thing as sufficient motive for such an adventure. Abishai volunteers to go with him; no doubt Ahimelech would have been ready also, but two were enough, and three would only have increased risk. So they lay close hid till night fell, and then stole down through the sleeping ranks with silent movements, like a couple of Indians on the war-trail, climbed the barricade, and stood at last where Saul lay, with his spear, as the emblem of kingship, stuck upright at his head, and a cruse of water for slaking thirst, if he awoke, beside him. Those who should have been his guards lay sleeping round him, for a ‘deep sleep from Jehovah was fallen upon them.’ What a vivid, strange picture it is, and how characteristic of the careless discipline of unscientific Eastern warfare!
The tigerish lust for blood awoke in Abishai. Whatever sad, pitying, half-tender thoughts stirred in David as he looked at the mighty form of Saul, with limbs relaxed in slumber, and perhaps some of the gloom and evil passions charmed out of his face, his nephew’s only thought was,’ What a fair mark! what an easy blow!’ He was brutally eager to strike once, and truculently sure that his arm would make sure that once would be enough. He was religious too, after a strange fierce fashion. God-significantly he does not say ‘Jehovah’; his religion was only the vague belief in a deity-had delivered Saul into David’s hands, and it would be a kind of sin not to kill him. How many bloody tragedies that same unnatural alliance of religion and murderous hate has varnished over! Very beautifully does David’s spirit contrast with this. Abishai represents the natural impulse of us all-to strike at our enemies when we can, to meet hate with hate, and do to another the evil that he would do to us.
David here, though he could be fierce and cruel enough sometimes, and had plenty of the devil in him, listens to his nobler self, which listens to God, and, at a time when everything tempted him to avenge himself, resists and overcomes. He is here a saint after the New Testament pattern. Abishai had, in effect, said, ‘Thou shalt love thy neighbour, and hate thine enemy.’ David’s finely-tuned ear heard, long before they were spoken on earth, the great Christian words, 11 say unto you, Love your enemies; do good to them that hate you.’ He knew that Saul had been ‘rejected,’ but he was ‘Jehovah’s anointed,’ and the unction which had rested on that sleeping head lingered still. It was not for David to be the executor of God’s retribution. He left himself and his cause in Jehovah’s hands, and no doubt it was with sorrow and pitying love, not altogether quenched by Saul’s mad hate, that he foresaw that the life which he spared now was certain one day to be smitten. We may well learn the lesson of this story, and apply it to the small antagonisms and comparatively harmless enmities which may beset our more quiet lives. David in Saul’s ‘laager,’ Stephen outside the wall, alike lead up our thoughts to Jesus’ prayer,’ Father, forgive them; for they know not what they do.’
The carrying off of the spear and the cruse was a couch of almost humour, and it, with the ironical taunt flung across the valley to Abner, gives relief to the strain of emotion in the story. Saul’s burst of passionate remorse is morbid, paroxysmal, like his fits of fury, and is sure to foam itself away. The man had no self-control. He had let wild, ungoverned moods master him, and was truly ‘possessed.’ One passion indulged had pushed him over the precipice into insanity, or something like it. Let us take care not to let any passion, emotion, or mood get the upper hand. ‘That way madness lies.’ ‘He that hath no rule over his own spirit is like a city that is broken down, without walls.’
And let us not confound remorse with repentance ‘The sorrow of the world worketh death.’ Saul grovelled in agony that day, but tomorrow he was raging again with more than the old frenzy of hate. Many a man says, ‘I have played the fool,’ and yet goes on playing it again when the paroxysm of remorse has stormed itself out. David’s answer was by no means effusive, for he had learned how little Saul’s regrets were to be trusted. He takes no notice of the honeyed words of invitation to return, and will not this time venture to take back the spear and cruse, as he had done, on the previous occasion, the skirt of Saul’s robe. He solemnly appeals to Jehovah’s righteous judgment to determine his and Saul’s respective ‘righteousness and faithfulness.’ He is silent as to what that judgment may have in reserve for Saul, but for himself he is calmly conscious that, in the matter of sparing Saul’s life, he has done right, and expects that God will deliver him ‘out of all tribulation.’ That is not self-righteous boasting, although it does not exactly smack of the Christian spirit; but it is faith clinging to the confidence that God is ‘not unrighteous to forget’ his servant’s obedience, and that the innocent will not always be the oppressor’s victim.
What a strange, bewildered, self-contradictory chaos of belief and intention is revealed in poor, miserable Saul’s parting words! He blesses the man whom he is hunting to slay. He knows that all his wild efforts to destroy him are foredoomed to failure, and that David ‘shall surely prevail’; and yet he cannot give up fighting against the inevitable,-that is, against God. How many of us are doing the very same thing-rushing on in a course of life which we know, when we are sane, to be dead against God’s will, and therefore doomed to utter collapse some day!
Fuente: Expositions Of Holy Scripture by Alexander MacLaren
sinned. Hebrew. chata’. App-44.
soul = life. Hebrew. nephesh. App-13.
erred. Hebrew. shagah. App-44.
Fuente: Companion Bible Notes, Appendices and Graphics
I have sinned: 1Sa 15:24, 1Sa 15:30, 1Sa 24:17, Exo 9:27, Num 22:34, Mat 27:4
I will no: 1Sa 27:4
my soul: 1Sa 26:24, 1Sa 18:30, Psa 49:8, Psa 116:15
Reciprocal: Exo 10:16 – I have Jos 7:15 – wrought 2Sa 19:19 – did perversely 2Sa 24:10 – foolishly 2Ki 1:14 – let my life 1Ch 21:8 – I have done Psa 7:4 – without Psa 36:3 – The words Psa 62:9 – of high Pro 19:19 – man Jer 34:11 – General Rom 12:20 – if thine
Fuente: The Treasury of Scripture Knowledge
1Sa 26:21. Then said Saul, I have sinned This second instance of Davids tenderness wrought more upon Saul than the former. He owns himself melted, and quite overcome by Davids kindness to him. My soul was precious in thine eyes which I thought had been odious. He acknowledges he had done very ill to persecute him: I have acted against Gods law; I have sinned: and against my own interest; I have played the fool In pursuing thee as an enemy, who wast, indeed, one of my best friends. And herein I have erred exceedingly Have wronged both thee and myself. Nothing can be more full and ingenuous than this confession. God surely now touched his heart. And he promises to persecute him no more: nor does it appear that he ever attempted it afterward.
Fuente: Joseph Bensons Commentary on the Old and New Testaments
26:21 Then said Saul, I have sinned: return, my son David: for I will no more do thee harm, because my soul was {k} precious in thine eyes this day: behold, I have played the fool, and have erred exceedingly.
(k) Because you saved my life this day.
Fuente: Geneva Bible Notes
David’s trust in God 26:21-25
Saul again confessed that he had sinned, as he had done when he had sacrificed at Gilgal (1Sa 26:21; cf. 1Sa 15:24; cf. 1Sa 15:30) and when David had spared his life in the cave (1Sa 24:17). Nevertheless he seems to have failed again to follow through with genuine repentance (cf. 1Sa 27:1). He also admitted that he had played the fool (similar to Nabal) and had committed a serious error. Contrast Paul’s testimony in 2Ti 4:7. The writer did not record Saul as having gone this far in admitting his faults in the preceding chapters. Even though Saul’s words went further in confession, his behavior continued unchanged
David returned Saul’s spear to him (1Sa 26:22), the symbol of the right to rule. Perhaps David did not return the jug of water to remind Saul that he still had the power to end Saul’s life. He felt confident that God would repay each of them eventually, and he determined to wait for Him to do so (1Sa 26:23). David acknowledged that Yahweh was his real deliverer (1Sa 26:24). This may have been the occasion when David composed Psalms 54 (see its title) the last verse of which ascribes David’s deliverance from his enemies to Yahweh. Saul could have overwhelmed David’s smaller band of followers. Instead he departed with a prophetic declaration of David’s final success (1Sa 26:25; cf. 1Sa 24:20). The text does not record another meeting of David and Saul before Saul died.
The main lesson of chapter 26 appears in 1Sa 26:23: "the Lord will repay" (cf. Pro 20:22; Pro 24:29; Rom 12:17; Rom 12:19). The Lord Jesus Christ is our greatest example of one who trusted the Father to vindicate Him (cf. Luk 23:46). Our vindication does not always come in this lifetime, as David’s did. Sometimes it comes after death, as Jesus’ did. Another great revelation is God’s patience with Saul. God gave him many opportunities to repent and to experience God’s blessing within the sphere of his judgment (cf. 1Sa 15:26), but Saul did not repent.
David had borne witness twice to Saul’s guilt before God (chs. 24 and 26; cf. Num 35:30). God proceeded to put him to death not long after this (ch. 31). David became God’s instrument in passing judgment on Saul for his sin and so became a blessing to all Israel.