Exegetical and Hermeneutical Commentary of 1 Samuel 16:1

And the LORD said unto Samuel, How long wilt thou mourn for Saul, seeing I have rejected him from reigning over Israel? fill thine horn with oil, and go, I will send thee to Jesse the Bethlehemite: for I have provided me a king among his sons.

Ch. 1Sa 16:1-13. The choice of Saul’s successor

1. Jesse the Beth-lehemite ] Grandson of Ruth the Moabitess, and belonging to the tribe of Judah through the line of his male ancestors (Rth 4:18-22).

Fuente: The Cambridge Bible for Schools and Colleges

1Sa 16:1

How long wilt thou mourn for Saul.

Overmuch sorrow, and its aura

In one of the visions of the prophet Ezekiel, a man with a writers inkhorn in his hand was commissioned to set a mark upon the foreheads of the men that sigh and cry for all the abominations that be done in the midst of Jerusalem. Samuel was one who sighed and cried for the abominations which were done by Saul in his day. But sorrow, however reasonable and becoming, may be carried too far. It may be indulged until it unfits us for duty, or darkens our hope in God; it may disturb our peace and weaken our energies; it may be made an occasion of our halting, and of our neglecting public duty. The very tenderness of Samuels heart and his jealousy for God had bedimmed his faith, and kept him bewailing the case of the king. There is a lesson in this of very great practical importance. We may have lost a bosom friend or we may have witnessed a son of many prayers despising parental counsel, and rushing headlong to eternal ruin. Gods wisdom is infallible, and in its developments in Providence is always pared by His love to us. His removal of any of the objects of your affection is now beyond recall. You have duties to God, to your own soul, and to others, which cannot afford the consumption of your energies in sorrow. In the obedience of His will your griefs will be assuaged and sanctified. Samuel was summoned from his vale of tears to undertake a new commission and provide a new leader for the chosen people. A new care is to occupy the prophets mind, a new friend is to draw forth his affection, and new objects of labour and of love are to engage him. The sense of personal and relative responsibility is made by God to rebuke and cure a sorrow deemed inconsolable. Those whose spirits were burdened by heavy grief, caused by losses or by crimes, took up a pilgrims staff and made a journey to the Holy Land. It was generally believed that a pilgrimage, or a soldiership in the holy wars, was penance sufficient to expiate sin and remove the burden of a sorrowful spirit. But there is a pilgrimage and a cross-bearing eminently serviceable to heal a sorrowful spirit, and to this every mourner is personally called. How long wilt thou mourn? . . . Fill thine horn with oil, and go, I will send thee. Yes, mourner, take your staff and go. You have rested long enough at Marah, and drank enough of its bitter water. Circumstances call upon you to journey in the service of the Lord. Your regrets and melancholy indicate need of further conformity to the Lord Jesus. Your grief will be moderated by the satisfaction of obedience to Christ.

1. There is a duty to the Lord. Like Samuel, you are in His service, and have vowed to do His will and to acquiesce in His ways. David lay upon the earth, fasted, and prayed, while affliction was upon his child; but when he learned the issue–that the child was dead–he arose from the earth. God does yet forbid tears, but He expects obedience in resignation and the discharge of duty.

2. There is a duty to your own soul. Why go I mourning? Why art thou east down, O my soul? And why art thou disquieted within me? Hope thou in God; for I shall yet praise Him, Who is the health of my countenance, and my God. The greatest cause for mourning in this world is conviction of personal guilt in the sight of God. The effect of Gods truth upon the conscience is to calf forth bitter sorrow. The convicted sinner repents and wrings his soul in sorrow, and often in tears. In the Puritan revivals of the seventeenth century this was no less characteristic of the awakening appeals of Baxter and of Flavel, of Owen and of Howe, of Rogers and of Bunyan, of Welch and of Dickson, of Rutherford and of Blair. Deep sorrow for sin marked all awakened souls in that extensive reformation of religion. At such a time many do not know what to do to obtain peace. They cry with the Jews of old, Men and brethren, what shall we do? and with the jailer, What must I do to be saved? There is oil of joy for such mourning. Relief must come from without. It is not to be got by brooding over your guilt and sorrow, but by arising and going to the Saviour.

3. There is a duty to others. Samuel had something more to live for than his own interest. He was an important member of the Hebrew commonwealth. His grief was a public calamity. The sorrow into which he was plunged might do injury. When there are others to care for, sorrow must not be immoderate. Our friends make demands upon our anxieties, and prayers, and labours. No partial affection for those who are lost can excuse neglect of those who are spared. No regret for the dead can apologise for inattention to the living. How strong an appeal is this to moderate and sanctify sorrow! Labourers for Christ! you may have to mourn over disappointed hopes and lost opportunities, and you may be ready to give way to melancholy at the retrospect of your want of success. But this mourning is ill-judged, sinful, and disastrous. Arise, fill your horn with oil and go to work again. (R. Steel.)

Mourning for the living

We generally mourn for a man when the light has gone from his eye and his form is still in death. But Saul was worth a good many dead men. He did not pass to his fathers for twenty-three years after the time these words were spoken concerning him. And yet with Saul in the very prime of manhood, God said unto Samuel, How long wilt thou mourn for Saul? Samuel had seen with sorrow the kings lack of high purpose and endurance. He had seen the stress of life tearing the anchor from the rock. Judging by the subsequent life of the ex-king, the rejection was a deeper sorrow to Samuel than to Saul. Samuel knew that in the chosen king was that spark of goodness that needed but to be fanned to become a flame; he knew also that Saul by his own acts was extinguishing even that spark. In the life that men saw, Saul was enriched: in the life that God saw, he was impoverished. And when the inevitable judgment came–in the removal of the sceptre–Samuel mourned for Saul. Of what truths does the story of the royal castaway remind us?

I. That a man may be dead while yet alive. All around us we see men dumb to Divine questionings, deaf to human pleadings, blind to the uplifting vision, men whose Bible is the ledger, whose only church is the shop, whose one god is gold. Such men are dead while yet alive. Samuel of old mourned for the living, and the living still causes hearts to mourn. A mothers tears for her prodigal son may be more bitter than those which fall upon his coffin. A fathers anguish for his daughters sin may be more intense than the anguish born of her passing into the Unseen. The presence of the dead is physically harmful to the living, but the spiritually dead are more harmful. Physical death is inevitable, but it is not the worst thing that can befall a man. The death of the soul causes the very angels to weep.

II. That to live truly is to live triumphantly. And to be victorious in all things is one of the natural and inherent desires of the human heart. Men desire to be mighty, but the might of man must be based upon the eternal right of God. Triumph cannot be divorced from truth, for God has joined them in an indissoluble bond. There was no hope for Saul as a king, but there was hope for him as a man. The old adage, While theres life theres hope, is profoundly true. If we will but, stand still, we shall see the salvation of God. The very atmosphere in which we live and move and have our being is charged with resurrection power. Awake thou that sleepest, and Christ shall give thee light. (F. Burnett.)

I have rejected him.

The root of national faults illustrated in the life of Saul

The character of Saul would be by itself sufficient to arrest the attention of the most heedless reader of the annals of human nature; but seen by the side of David, it is more remarkable still. The contrast between the two is strong and lucid at every point. Saul is the man of the world in every respect. He is the Roman hero, shot with the colours of the despotic East; the kind of man who ever has been the hero and demi-god of the worlds idolatry and worship, and ever will be; while David in but few particulars would obtain the admiration of mankind. There is just the difference between the two that there is between the natural and spiritual man; between him who is governed by natural religion, and him who is governed by the grace of God. But while this is the case with Saul as an individual, he resembles in a striking manner the character of nations. While he embodies the spirit of Rome, and the philosophic Greek, and bears the strong impress of the Asiatic despot he gathers up into himself the leading features of our own nation. He is very Saxon. The errors which we as a nation are constantly making, are, in all their leading features, those of the King of Israel. We are inclined nationally to embody the elements which form Sauls character, and to worship the result. We are inclined as a nation, in each circle of our society, educated and uneducated, to despise those elements which form Davids.

1. The character of Saul:–Sauls appearance was in his favour: men always are favourably impressed by personal advantages. Height, power, and beauty are ever weights thrown into the descending scale in the hand of the world. Facility is half the man.

2. He was reserved; and every man who has the power of reserve gains two steps to the one gained by him who speaks his feelings; simply because the tongue is the first instrument of hurried conviction, and the rapid speaker makes many slips. To have perception, feeling, and discernment, but to be able to hold them all in check, is one of our greatest powers. But the same force which Saul could use over his private feelings of this kind, he was also able to use over his affections. The world has ever admired this kind of trait, from Brutus downwards; but after all it may be an over-rated virtue. Saul valued religion. With no religious faith, he knew the value of religion.

5. Saul, too, was proud, intensely proud. Saul bad no vanity; but he had genuine pride.

6. Then he was generous; and generosity is ever valued by the world.

7. But the determination to recognise the externals of religion led him often into something very like dissimulation. But dissimulation in certain things is a virtue in the world; it is so with matters to do with religion.

8. But there is a second stage in Sauls Career which is highly significant. God gave up Saul, and the difference was manifest; the evil spirit occupied him at once.

9. Then came the third stage,–strikingly consistent, however paradoxical, with the others–the stage of superstition. The large-minded infidel becomes narrowed to the small compass of the superstitious, and he for whom God and His Church were not wide enough, satisfies himself with the Witch of Endor. He who found the priesthood too confined a means to attain his end, and the sacrifices too formal, bowed before an incantation, and shivered before a ghost. The only truly wide-minded man is he whose thought and soul are limited by the Word and Will of Gad. His death was worthy of him. The Roman philosopher fell upon his sword; and Saul strove to perish by suicide.

II. But Saul is best seen in contrast. The key to Sauls character is self-seeking: that unlocks each portion of his being. Davids soul was fixed on seeing God. He was absorbed in the Being in Whom he lived, died, and had his being. The world cannot appreciate this; and if the world cannot, still less the infidel.

1. Saul, I said, delighted in reserve: David expressed everything. His heart was full, and out of the abundance of his heart his mouth spake. Saul delighted to show independence of everyone, and contempt of those on whose aid he might be supposed to rely. Far otherwise with the son of Jesse. He was ever bewailing the conduct of the sons of Zeruiah, courting Abner, or pacifying Joab. He seemed to delight in showing his real dependence on all who surrounded his throne.

3. Saul calmly swore that Jonathan should die, and the entreaty of a people and a devoted army could hardly rescue him from his hands; and yet what son deserved more at a fathers hands than Jonathan? David wept for Absalom, a rebel and a hardened libertine.

4. With Saul, sacrifices, priests, and prophets were but useful unrealities, figures of a clever fiction, dramatis personae of the stage on which he happened to be acting: with David they were powerful realities.

5. Saul reserved the prey and spoil for himself, and made his own compromise with God. Davids obedience was entire; his own wail was that it was not more perfect than it was. Saul never committed himself before the people; David often did. He never strove to conceal the feeling which worked within him.

6. One feature in Sauls character I have not mentioned–his regard for aristocracy and wealth. Agag and the flocks were saved, and that at the expense of Gods Will and word. The son of Jesse found delight equally with the poor and lowly, as with the sons of kings and the hereditary princes of foreign lands.

7. Saul became the slave of Satan, and his heart the dismal scene of the operations of evil spirits; David became the man after Gods own heart.

8. Sauls soul narrowed as he advanced: the temple in which it at last worshipped was the Witchs Cave at Endor. Davids daily widened. The Temple of Jerusalem was the design of his old age; and the expansive knowledge of God and His Law is recognised in many a Psalm. Saul lived to establish and elevate self. Proud, independent, and ironical, he moved over a plane of his own. But he left no crown to his son His very descendants were extirpated. David had no such aim; he never thought of aggrandisement or of self; but his son sat on his throne, and that to many generations. And the Son of David occupies the throne of eternity. He shall reign forever and ever Lord of lords and King of kings. The two are placed in such singular juxtaposition and contrast, that they must be intended to be viewed together.

III. The striking application of the character of Saul to our own nation and race. Is there not among us an inclination to view the Church as a means rather of keeping the people in subjection, and a great and efficient instrument for education, than as having a real and intrinsic power of its own–a sacramental energy, which is there, whether we use it or no? Is there no tendency, too, besides that very superstition, when we are religious, which marks the impression of unreality as clinging to all the great external observances of Christianity?

1. We have national traits of pride, independence and reserve, which remind us of the clever king. When his election was in hand, he hid himself among the stuff, and he could not be found. It was the affectation of reserve. His contemptuous silence at the neglect of the men of Belial, and those other occasions referred to above, show the same tendency. Our reserve as a nation goes far, and shows itself in many ways. There is a lurking disposition to suppress the expression of distinctive Christianity, and to use the parlance of natural religion in preference to that of the Christian. Is it not true that that very suppression of natural impulses which society is inclined to admire and almost to deify, is after all often a cloak for a more subtle form of self-seeking and proud independence? We see the inclination to suppress natural affections from an early age. The schoolboy scarcely likes to own his mother, and is not sure whether he ought not to be ashamed of his sister. This state of things belongs especially to my own country. It is not found in the same way on the continent. The natural emotions of the heart are more recognised and honoured among other people than among ourselves. We may rate the subjugation of natural affections too highly; we may be passing by some other tendency, in whose discipline we shall gain a higher standing.

2. But there is a still more striking parallel in the case of Saul. His tendency was aristocratic and avaricious. He obeyed Gods order in invading the territory of Amalek. But he preserved the king and the sheep. The soft yet imperious call of kindred sovereignty were too much for the lowly-born monarch. For this he sacrificed his obedience to God. The tinkle of the ornaments which sounded on the camels neck of the Amalekite prince, were more attractive than the approval of the Prophet. May we here, too, find no parallel with ourselves? Though we are proud of the free access to high position offered to the lowliest born of those whose circumstances are most humble; and while a popular government guarded by the restraints of a monarchical and aristocratical influence is our often-repeated boast among the nations of the earth; still, is there not a singular inclination to covet the smile and favour of the nobly-born, and a constant recognition of the fact that we would sacrifice distinctive Christianity rather than the approval and countenance of a court? We worship respectability. Its forms peer in the background of all our professions.

3. But more, Saul saved the sheep. Money is sometimes the cry of a nation, and the amassing wealth, or standing high in a commercial reputation, frequently transcends the homage paid to God Himself.

4. But a graver evil still is suggested by Sauls character. His religious belief was broken. It rung to the touch of the world outside; but it had no substance. It was not faith. Religion and the Church were machines with him available for important State purposes, but here they stopped. The ministry of the Church may be represented as, and treated like, a foible, with no commission beyond the civil appointment. The Church herself is looked upon as a State machine, to be curtailed or amplified at no higher bidding than that of the earthly sovereign. And yet with all this the respect paid to those who occupy ecclesiastical position and office reminds us at every turn of Sauls homage to Samuel, while he laughed at the effort made by the Prophet to establish anything more than a conventional position. The day may come, and that soon, when this momentous question may sever man from man with a wrench, for which Church history in this country has scarcely a parallel. The day when men must say whether there be anything or nothing in the Holy Eucharist; whether the ministry be an order which holds its charter from heaven; and whether the Church herself, be descended by Divine appointment through successive ages, the Bride of Christ and the instrument of salvation to man; or whether she be merely the best arrangement existing to carry out the ends of the politician and the legislator. These things are either anything or nothing.

5. But the end of Saul was singular. From the dreams of unrealities and shams he betook himself to the pursuit of the figures of superstition. He forsook the boundless expanse of scepticism to pen himself up in the dark and confined cell of superstition. In pursuing the parallel we must see whether, as a nation, we may not be yielding to superstition, while we reject religion. The attendance at church on Sunday morning performed as an act of expiation for the sins of the week past, and palliation of the intended laxity of the week to come; the subscription offered to the swelling list of benefactions for this public charity or the other; the mite offered from the ample fortune to the Church to justify the alienation of the remainder of fortune to self; are really acts of superstition. Saul perished on the field of battle. It may be that by a fall from the pride of military glory nations of similar characters to the Israelitish king may have yet to learn that it is not in the bow, or in the horse, or in princes is the safe trust, but only in the Lord our God. Men tell us we must have a fall. The world at large have detected British pride. It may be magnificent, it may be successful, it may draw down admiration, or fear, or awe; it may compel homage; it may dazzle the eye of the observer, lest he detect flaws which really exist; but it must be offensive to God, it must have a fall. It is the meek who will inherit the earth. (G. Monro.)

The true and the counterfeit

as the Bible may be called Gods Picture Gallery so the Holy Spirit frequently bangs up side by side two portraits which bear much resemblance to each other, and yet have points of striking difference. I think it is plainly one of Gods great purposes to help us to discriminate between the true and the false. Judas and Peter both act basely; but one is a traitor, while Peter, with all his sin, is a genuine disciple. The same contrast, again, we observe in the ease of Demas and Luke. For, says St. Paul, Demas hath forsaken me, having loved this present world, and is departed to Thessalonica: Only Luke is with me. One more contrast let me remind you of. In the eighth chapter of the Acts we read of Simon Magus, how he was astonished, believed, and was baptised; but he was not converted; his heart was not right in the matter; and Peter tells him, Thou art in the gall of bitterness, and in the bond of iniquity. But at the close of that chapter we have in the Ethiopian eunuch a beautiful instance of honest search after truth, and simple belief.

I. The sad story of Sauls life. I think we shall be led to observe the dramatic effect produced in the arrangement of the First Book of Samuel. As in the earliest chapters the pious childhood of Samuel is contrasted with the profligate career of the sons of Eli, so, as we dwell upon the later chapters, our minds are continually divided between admiration of Davids fortitude, charity, and holy faith; and pity for the sinful course and evident misery of the once noble king of Israel.

1. There is certainly much about Sauls early conduct which is very captivating. He was a very fine young man; taller by a head and shoulders than any of the people, and there seems to have been, at first, a very pleasing humility in him; he said nothing to his uncle of his prospects. Then he was a man of warm affections. Again, he was a man who had evidently received some religious impressions. Still I think we are warranted in saying that there was no work of grace in his soul. It is said indeed of Saul, that God gave him another heart, and that the Spirit of God came upon him; but as God never calls to a work without giving the power to perform it, this only refers to his qualifications for government.

2. Notice, next, the steps in his decline. While he was in humble life he had a humble spirit, but prosperity was too much for him: with wraith and power came spiritual decline. Oh, beware of ambition: beware how you seek great things for yourselves. You are thinking of advancement, perhaps, desiring promotion, or laying up a fortune. Look at Saul; look at Solomon; and I think you will pray, in the words of our Litany, In all time of our wealth, Good Lord, deliver us. Sauls prosperity was his ruin. David says, It is good for me that I have been afflicted: nay, I am inclined to think that even in his ease there is a beautiful simplicity of character, and steadfastness of faith, a singleness of eye, during the times of his affliction, which we often look for in vain when things went well with him. Next, we observe in Saul what is sure to come with pride and ambition, a want of faith, and an impatience, which led him to offer the sacrifice, instead of waiting for Samuel. Prosperity had been too much for him: he had begun to depart from God. When faith in the unseen is weak, and heavenly things do not occupy the soul, it almost always falls a prey to covetousness: and hence his sin on this occasion; the spoil was too tempting, and he seizes upon it like Achan.

II. Your duty towards mere professors–towards those who, while in many respects they resemble Christs disciples, are not really the people of God. It is said that one use that is being made of the metal called aluminium, is the manufacture of sovereigns so nearly resembling the current coin that it is extremely difficult, to distinguish between them. The stamp is in all respects perfect, the colour is the same, they are even of the same weight, and the application of some acids produces no results. Still there is a difference in value, and of course they will be able to discover it at the banks. Satan is very clever; he has been able to produce, in all ages of the Church, splendid hypocrites, such as have deceived some even of the elect. Still, there is a difference at heart between every child of God and every child of the devil. How shall I know a Judas from a Peter, a Demas from a Luke, a Saul from a David? Contemplate Jesus: let His perfect term continually fill your eye: walk yourself habitually with Him; and then you will not long be deceived.

1. There is a duty of separation. It became Samuels duty to separate from his friend; and we read that Samuel came no more to see Saul until the day of his death. Are you as particular about this as you should be? You must not be too lax in your judgments. Those first six verses of Mat 7:1-29, show you that while it is not your duty to condemn, it is your duty to discriminate.

2. Yet there is one more duty which we learn from Samuels conduct towards Saul. Samuel mourned for Saul And so we have the picture of the one man going on from bad to worse, adding sin to sin; and his friend, who, from duty to God, felt constrained to keep aloof from him, still mourning over and praying for him: even as Jesus wept over Jerusalem. (C. Bosanquet, M. A.)

Vindication of the sentence on Saul

Saul was a man, an Israelite, a king, the first king of Israel; under these heads let us group our observations.

1. He was a man. Is this a great thing? Yes, very. There are so many of us that we think lightly of our kind. But what lofty dignity there is in manhood! What marvellous responsibilities cluster about it! Crowned with a kingly immortality how sublimely important is each individual! Gods claims are on that heart. Each instance of withdrawal or suspension of its homage, nay, even the independent action of its powers without reference to heavenly supremacy, is an act of disloyalty. If this earth contained but one rebel how would his loyal fellows stare at the prodigy! But no familiarity with sin can, in Gods estimate, take away its first offensiveness. How preposterously foolish to quarrel with the Great King when, in any instance, He makes the line of judicial infliction in temporal things approach the line of the sinners deservings!

2. Saul was an Israelite. As such, the claims of God, and his own responsibilities were largely increased. The will of God pressed with peculiar force on the conscience of every member of that nation. The Jew who neglected, or interfered to modify the Divine will was doubly culpable. Still further aggravated would be the offence if that will were plainly laid before the mind and emphatically pressed upon the conscience. Precisely such was the case of that offender whose conduct we are reviewing.

3. Saul was king of Israel. As such, he was vicegerent of God. Gods lieutenant and the asserter of Israels rights ought to have set himself promptly to the completion of the case against Amalek by avenging upon them the dishonour of God, and the damage done to His people. See we not here that insubmissiveness of will, that independence of aim and action which form the germ of all the evil that has intruded upon Gods holy universe. Nor is it a valid plea, palliating deviation from the strict and full performance of his commission, that it involved a dreadful sacrifice of human life. And if his heart recoiled more violently from the execution of the king than from the carnage of the whole nation, this only adds another touch to the outline of his vanity. It would be a rare triumph for him to lead about the captured king of their oldest and bitterest enemies.

4. Saul was the first king of Israel. The nation had just passed through an important crisis. The change of government was the permitted consequence of national unfaithfulness to God. His holy presence, as their immediate Ruler, was irksome to their criminal independence, and alarming to their conscience. When their king fully develops his character, he is found to be animated by the same views and feelings. Here, then, are most critical circumstances. The people have drifted far into the region of disloyalty to God and indifference to Divine things, and the change of Government which this ungodliness introduced has added new force to the current of growing degeneracy. The king has connived at disobedience. Most perilous precedent! Doubly so at the commencement of a new regime which it must help to mould. If knighthood, in its early days, be permitted with impunity to tamper thus with the behests of God, and vaunt itself in the spoils of authority reft from the majesty of heaven, what shall the end be? The case is urgent. A preventive, however terrible, must be applied. (P. Richardson.)

Fuente: Biblical Illustrator Edited by Joseph S. Exell

CHAPTER XVI

Samuel is sent from Ramah to Bethlehem, to anoint David, 1-13.

The Spirit of the Lord departs from Saul, and an evil spirit

comes upon him, 14.

His servants exhort him to get a skilful harper to play before

him, 15, 16.

He is pleased with the counsel, and desires them to find such a

person, 17.

They recommend David, 18.

He is sent for, comes, plays before Saul, and finds favour in

his sight, 19-23.

NOTES ON CHAP. XVI

Verse 1. Fill thine horn with oil] Horns appear to have been the ancient drinking vessels of all nations; and we may suppose that most persons who had to travel much, always carried one with them, for the purpose of taking up water from the fountains to quench their thirst. Such a horn had Samuel; and on this occasion he was commanded to fill it with oil, for the purpose of consecrating a king over Israel from among the sons of Jesse.

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

How long wilt thou mourn for Saul, and pray for his restitution? which the following words imply that he did.

I have rejected him from reigning over Israel: the manifestation of my peremptory will should make thee submit to my pleasure.

Fill thine horn with oil; which was used in the inauguration of kings, as 1Sa 10:1; 1Ki 1:39. But here it is used in the designation of a king, though David was not actually made king by it, but still remained a subject, as is evident from 1Sa 24:6. And the reason of this anticipation was, partly the comfort of Samuel, and other good men, against their great fears in case of Sauls death, of which they expected every day to hear; and partly the assurance of Davids title, which otherwise would have been very doubtful. For the prevention of which doubts, it was very meet that the same person and prophet who had anointed Saul, might now, upon Gods rejection of Saul, anoint David to succeed him upon his death; and because Samuel was now not far from his death, and was to die before Saul, it was fit that Davids anointing should be hastened and done before its proper time.

I have provided me a king: this phrase is very emphatical, and implies the difference between this and the former king. Saul was a king of the peoples providing, he was the product of their inordinate and sinful desires; they desired him for themselves, and for their own glory and safety, as they supposed; but this is a king of my own providing, one that I have spied out, one of that tribe to which I have allotted the kingdom, Gen 49:10. A king for me; not one to gratify the peoples desires, but to fulfil all my will, as is said, Act 13:22, and to serve my glory. Or, my king; the Hebrew phrase, to me, or for me, being commonly used for the word mine.

Fuente: English Annotations on the Holy Bible by Matthew Poole

1. the Lord said unto Samuel, Howlong wilt thou mourn for SaulSamuel’s grief on account ofSaul’s rejection, accompanied, doubtless, by earnest prayers for hisrestitution, showed the amiable feelings of the man; but they were atvariance with his public duty as a prophet. The declared purpose ofGod to transfer the kingdom of Israel into other hands than Saul’swas not an angry menace, but a fixed and immutable decree; so thatSamuel ought to have sooner submitted to the peremptory manifestationof the divine will. But to leave him no longer room to doubt of itsbeing unalterable, he was sent on a private mission to anoint asuccessor to Saul (see on 1Sa 10:1).The immediate designation of a king was of the greatest importancefor the interests of the nation in the event of Saul’s death, which,to this time, was dreaded; it would establish David’s title andcomfort the minds of Samuel and other good men with a rightsettlement, whatever contingency might happen.

I have provided me a kingThelanguage is remarkable, and intimates a difference between this andthe former king. Saul was the people’s choice, the fruit of theirwayward and sinful desires for their own honor and aggrandizement.The next was to be a king who would consult the divine glory, andselected from that tribe to which the pre-eminence had been earlypromised (Ge 49:10).

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

And the Lord said unto Samuel,…. In a vision or dream, or by an articulate voice: how long wilt thou mourn for Saul? he does not blame him for mourning, but for mourning so long; but how long that was cannot be said; and though his affection for him might cause him to indulge to it, yet it was in vain, seeing the sentence was irreversible:

seeing I have rejected him from reigning over Israel? that is, his posterity; for he himself reigned as long as he lived, though in a very inglorious manner:

fill thine horn with oil; with common oil; for that this was the holy anointing oil kept in the tabernacle, as the Jewish writers generally suppose, with which they say David and Solomon, and the kings of Judah, were anointed, there is no reason to believe; since the tabernacle, where this oil was, was at a distance from Samuel, and which seems to have been only for the anointing of the priests. This was not a phial he was bid to take, as when he anointed Saul; but an horn, denoting the abundance of gifts bestowed on David, and the firmness and duration of his kingdom:

and go, and I will send thee to Jesse the Bethlehemite; the son of Obed, whom Boaz begat of Ruth the Moabitess, Ru 4:21

for I have provided me a king among his sons; but which he says not; this was reserved for an later discovery; however God had in his own mind picked him, whom he would hereafter make known; this was a king for himself, raised up to fulfil his will; Saul was chosen by him, but then it was at the request of the people, and so he was rather their king than his; but this was not at their desire, nor with their knowledge, but of his own good will and pleasure; the one was given in wrath, and the other in love; the one was to the rejection of God as King, the other to the rejection of Saul by the will of God.

Fuente: John Gill’s Exposition of the Entire Bible

Anointing of David. – 1Sa 16:1. The words in which God summoned Samuel to proceed to the anointing of another king, “ How long wilt thou mourn for Saul, whom I have rejected, that he may not be king over Israel? ” show that the prophet had not yet been able to reconcile himself to the hidden ways of the Lord; that he was still afraid that the people and kingdom of God would suffer from the rejection of Saul; and that he continued to mourn for Saul, not merely from his own personal attachment to the fallen king, but also, or perhaps still more, from anxiety for the welfare of Israel. He was now to put an end to this mourning, and to fill his horn with oil and go to Jesse the Bethlehemite, for the Lord had chosen a king from among his sons.

1Sa 16:2-3

But Samuel replied, “ How shall I go? If Saul hear it, he will kill me.” This fear on the part of the prophet, who did not generally show himself either hesitating or timid, can only be explained, as we may see from 1Sa 16:14, on the supposition that Saul was already given up to the power of the evil spirit, so that the very worst might be dreaded from his madness, if he discovered that Samuel had anointed another king. That there was some foundation for Samuel’s anxiety, we may infer from the fact that the Lord did not blame him for his fear, but pointed out the way by which he might anoint David without attracting attention (1Sa 16:2, 1Sa 16:3). “ Take a young heifer with thee, and say (sc., if any one ask the reason for your going to Bethlehem), I am come to sacrifice to the Lord.” There was no untruth in this, for Samuel was really about to conduct a sacrificial festival and was to invite Jesse’s family to it, and then anoint the one whom Jehovah should point out to him as the chosen one. It was simply a concealment of the principal object of his mission from any who might make inquiry about it, because they themselves had not been invited. “There was no dissimulation or falsehood in this, since God really wished His prophet to find safety under the pretext of the sacrifice. A sacrifice was therefore really offered, and the prophet was protected thereby, so that he was not exposed to any danger until the time of full revelation arrived” (Calvin).

1Sa 16:4

When Samuel arrived at Bethlehem, the elders of the city came to meet him in a state of the greatest anxiety, and asked him whether his coming was peace, or promised good. The singular may be explained on the ground that one of the elders spoke for the rest. The anxious inquiry of the elders presupposes that even in the time of Saul the prophet Samuel was frequently in the habit of coming unexpectedly to one place and another, for the purpose of reproving and punishing wrong-doing and sin.

1Sa 16:5

Samuel quieted them with the reply that he was come to offer sacrifice to the Lord, and called upon them to sanctify themselves and take part in the sacrifice. It is evident from this that the prophet was accustomed to turn his visits to account by offering sacrifice, and so building up the people in fellowship with the Lord. The reason why sacrifices were offered at different places was, that since the removal of the ark from the tabernacle, this sanctuary had ceased to be the only place of the nation’s worship. , to sanctify one’s self by washings and legal purifications, which probably preceded every sacrificial festival (vid., Exo 19:10, Exo 19:22). The expression, “ Come with me to the sacrifice,” is constructio praegnans for “Come and take part in the sacrifice.” “ Call to the sacrifice ” (1Sa 16:3) is to be understood in the same way. is the slain-offering, which was connected with every sacrificial meal. It is evident from the following words, “ and he sanctified Jesse and his sons,” that Samuel addressed the general summons to sanctify themselves more especially to Jesse and his sons. For it was with them that he was about to celebrate the sacrificial meal.

1Sa 16:6-7

When they came, sc., to the sacrificial meal, which was no doubt held in Jesse’s house, after the sacrifice had been presented upon an altar, and when Samuel saw the eldest son Eliab, who was tall and handsome according to 1Sa 16:7, “ he thought ( lit. he said, sc., in his heart), Surely His anointed is before Jehovah,” i.e., surely the man is now standing before Jehovah whom He hath chosen to be His anointed. But Jehovah said to him in the spirit, “ Look not at his form and the height of his stature, for I have rejected him: for not as man seeth (sc., do I see); for man looketh at the eyes, and Jehovah looketh at the heart.” The eyes, as contrasted with the heart, are figuratively employed to denote the outward form.

1Sa 16:8-10

When Jesse thereupon brought up his other sons, one after another, before Samuel, the prophet said in the case of each, “ This also Jehovah hath not chosen.” As Samuel must be the subject to the verb in 1Sa 16:8-10, we may assume that he had communicated the object of his coming to Jesse.

1Sa 16:11

After the seventh had been presented, and the Lord had not pointed nay one of them out as the chosen one, “ Samuel said to Jesse, Are these all the boys? ” When Jesse replied that there was still the smallest, i.e., the youngest, left, and he was keeping the sheep, he directed him to fetch him; “ for,” said he, “ we will not sit down till he has come hither,” , to surround, sc., the table, upon which the meal was arranged. This is implied in the context.

1Sa 16:12-13

When David arrived, – and he was ruddy, also of beautiful eyes and good looks ( , used to denote the reddish colour of the hair, which was regarded as a mark of beauty in southern lands, where the hair is generally black. is an adverb here = therewith), and therefore, so far as his looks and figure were concerned, well fitted, notwithstanding his youth, for the office to which the Lord had chosen him, since corporeal beauty was one of the outward distinctions of a king, – the Lord pointed him out to the prophet as the chosen one; whereupon he anointed him in the midst of his brethren. Along with the anointing the Spirit of Jehovah came upon David from that day forward. But Samuel returned to Ramah when the sacrificial meal was over. There is nothing recorded concerning any words of Samuel to David at the time of the anointing and in explanation of its meaning, as in the case of Saul ( 1Sa 10:1). In all probability Samuel said nothing at the time, since, according to 1Sa 16:2, he had good reason for keeping the matter secret, not only on his own account, but still more for David’s sake; so that even the brethren of David who were present knew nothing about the meaning and object of the anointing, but may have imagined that Samuel merely intended to consecrate David as a pupil of the prophets. At the same time, we can hardly suppose that Samuel left Jesse, and even David, in uncertainty as to the object of his mission, and of the anointing which he had performed. He may have communicated all this to both of them, without letting the other sons know. It by no means follows, that because David remained with his father and kept the sheep as before, therefore his calling to be king must have been unknown to him; but only that in the anointing which he had received he did not discern either the necessity or obligation to appear openly as the anointed of the Lord, and that after receiving the Spirit of the Lord in consequence of the anointing, he left the further development of the matter to the Lord in childlike submission, assured that He would prepare and show him the way to the throne in His own good time.

Fuente: Keil & Delitzsch Commentary on the Old Testament

Samuel Goes to Bethlehem.

B. C. 1065.

      1 And the LORD said unto Samuel, How long wilt thou mourn for Saul, seeing I have rejected him from reigning over Israel? fill thine horn with oil, and go, I will send thee to Jesse the Bethlehemite: for I have provided me a king among his sons.   2 And Samuel said, How can I go? if Saul hear it, he will kill me. And the LORD said, Take a heifer with thee, and say, I am come to sacrifice to the LORD.   3 And call Jesse to the sacrifice, and I will shew thee what thou shalt do: and thou shalt anoint unto me him whom I name unto thee.   4 And Samuel did that which the LORD spake, and came to Bethlehem. And the elders of the town trembled at his coming, and said, Comest thou peaceably?   5 And he said, Peaceably: I am come to sacrifice unto the LORD: sanctify yourselves, and come with me to the sacrifice. And he sanctified Jesse and his sons, and called them to the sacrifice.

      Samuel had retired to his own house in Ramah, with a resolution not to appear any more in public business, but to addict himself wholly to the instructing and training up of the sons of the prophets, over whom he presided, as we find, ch. xix. 20. He promised himself more satisfaction in young prophets than in young princes; and we do not find that, to his dying day, God called him out to any public action relating to the state, but only here to anoint David.

      I. God reproves him for continuing so long to mourn for the rejection of Saul. He does not blame him for mourning on that occasion, but for exceeding in his sorrow: How long wilt thou mourn for Saul? v. 1. We do not find here that he mourned at all for the setting aside of his own family and the deposing of his own sons; but for the rejecting of Saul and his seed he mourns without measure, for the former was done by the people’s foolish discontent, this by the righteous wrath of God. Yet he must find time to recover himself, and not go mourning to his grave, 1. Because God has rejected him, and he ought to acquiesce in the divine justice, and forget his affection to Saul; if God will be glorified in his ruin, Samuel ought to be satisfied. Besides, to what purpose should he weep? The decree has gone forth, and all his prayers and tears cannot prevail for the reversing of it, 2Sa 12:22; 2Sa 12:23. 2. Because Israel shall be no loser by it, and Samuel must prefer the public welfare before his own private affection to his friend. “Mourn not for Saul, for I have provided me a king. The people provided themselves a king and he proved bad, now I will provide myself one, a man after my own heart.” See Psa 89:20; Act 13:22. “If Saul be rejected, yet Israel shall not be as sheep having no shepherd. I have another in store for them; let thy joy of him swallow up thy grief for the rejected prince.”

      II. He sends him to Bethlehem, to anoint one of the sons of Jesse, a person probably not unknown to Samuel. Fill thy horn with oil. Saul was anointed with a glass vial of oil, scanty and brittle, David with a horn of oil, which was more plentiful and durable; hence we read of a horn of salvation in the house of his servant David, Luke i. 69.

      III. Samuel objects the peril of going on this errand (v. 2): If Saul hear it, he will kill me. By this it appears. 1. That Saul had grown very wicked and outrageous since his rejection, else Samuel would not have mentioned this. What impiety would he not be guilty of who durst kill Samuel? 2. That Samuel’s faith was not so strong as one would have expected, else he would not have thus feared the rage of Saul. Would not he that sent him protect him and bear him out? But the best men are not perfect in their faith, nor will fear be wholly cast out any where on this side heaven. But this may be understood as Samuel’s desire of direction from heaven how to manage this matter prudently, so as not to expose himself, or any other, more than needed.

      IV. God orders him to cover his design with a sacrifice: Say, I have come to sacrifice; and it was true he did, and it was proper that he should, when he came to anoint a king, ch. xi. 15. As a prophet, he might sacrifice when and where God appointed him; and it was not all inconsistent with the laws of truth to say he came to sacrifice when really he did so, thought he had also a further end, which he thought fit to conceal. Let him give notice of a sacrifice, and invite Jesse (who, it is probable, was the principal man of the city) and his family to come to the feast upon the sacrifice; and, says God, I will show thee what thou shalt do. Those that go about God’s work in God’s way shall be directed step by step, wherever they are at a loss, to do it in the best manner.

      V. Samuel went accordingly to Bethlehem, not in pomp, or with any retinue, only a servant to lead the heifer which he was to sacrifice; yet the elders of Bethlehem trembled at his coming, fearing it was an indication of God’s displeasure against them and that he came to denounce some judgment for the iniquities of the place. Guilt causes fear. Yet indeed it becomes us to stand in awe of God’s messengers, and to tremble at his word. Or they feared it might be an occasion of Saul’s displeasure against them, for probably they knew how much he was exasperated at Samuel, and feared he would pick a quarrel with them for entertaining him. They asked him, “Comest thou peaceably? Art thou in peace thyself, and not flying from Saul? Art thou at peace with us, and not come with any message of wrath?” We should all covet earnestly to stand upon good terms with God’s prophets, and dread having the word of God, or their prayers, against us. When the Son of David was born king of the Jews all Jerusalem was troubled, Matt. ii. 3. Samuel kept at home, and it was a strange thing to see him so far from his own house: they therefore concluded it must needs be some extraordinary occasion that brought him, and feared the worst till he satisfied them (v. 5): “I come peaceably, for I come to sacrifice, not with a message of wrath against you, but with the methods of peace and reconciliation; and therefore you may bid me welcome and need not fear my coming; therefore sanctify yourselves, and prepare to join with me in the sacrifice, that you may have the benefit of it.” Note, Before solemn ordinances there must be a solemn protestation. When we are to offer spiritual sacrifices it concerns us, by sequestering ourselves from the world and renewing the dedication of ourselves to God, to sanctify ourselves. When our Lord Jesus came into the world, though men had reason enough to tremble, fearing that his errand was to condemn the world, yet he gave full assurance that he came peaceably, for he came to sacrifice, and he brought his offering along with him: A body hast thou prepared me. Let us sanctify ourselves, that we may have an interest in his sacrifice. Note, Those that come to sacrifice should come peaceably; religious exercises must not be performed tumultuously.

      VI. He had a particular regard to Jesse and his sons, for with them his private business lay, with which, it is likely, he acquainted Jesse at his first coming, and took up his lodging at his house. He spoke to all the elders to sanctify themselves, but he sanctified Jesse and his sons by praying with them and instructing them. Perhaps he had acquaintance with them before, and it appears (ch. xx. 29, where we read of the sacrifices that family had) that it was a devout religious family. Samuel assisted them in their family preparations for the public sacrifice, and, it is probable, chose out David, and anointed him, at the family-solemnities, before the sacrifice was offered or the holy feast solemnized. Perhaps he offered private sacrifices, like Job, according to the number of them all (Job i. 5), and, under colour of that, called for them all to appear before him. When signal blessings are coming into a family they ought to sanctify themselves.

Fuente: Matthew Henry’s Whole Bible Commentary

First Samuel – Chapter 16

David Anointed, vs. 1-13

An indeterminate time succeeded Samuel’s parting from Saul,

during which the prophet continued to mourn for the king’s failure. Eventually the Lord came to Samuel with a rebuke for his continued mourning, reminding him of the need to anoint a new king for the nation. Samuel’s continued mourning was manifest disapproval of the Lord’s rejection of Saul. Samuel should have been content, knowing that the

Lord had rejected him. He is now told to take his horn of anointing oil and set forth to anoint a king whom the Lord had provided for himself. This king would be according to the Lord’s specifications rather than those of the people of Israel. He would be taken from the sons of Jesse, a prominent man of Bethlehem, in the tribe of Judah.

The lineage of David went back through Boaz and Ruth, Salmon and Rahab, to Perez, the son of the incestuous union of Judah and his daughter-in-law (Rth 4:17-22; Mat 1:5; Gen 38:12 ff), and of course they were all in the ancestry of Christ. The law provided that descendants of the illegitimate should not enter the congregation of the Lord to the tenth generation (De 23:2). David was the tenth beginning from Perez, which indicates that God’s readiness for a king over his people was not until the generation of David (Gen 49:10).

It will soon appear that Saul was becoming mentally deranged because of his rejection. There is intimation here that it is already known and feared. Saul was fully capable of murdering the prophet Samuel if he should learn of his mission to Bethlehem. Furthermore it is seen that the people of Bethlehem greatly feared at the coming of Samuel; perhaps they were aware of Saul’s antagonism toward the old prophet. Samuel bespoke this fear to the Lord. He was told to take a heifer and call a sacrifice and feast in the town. .

The people of Bethlehem seem to have been calmed by Samuel’s explanation of his sudden, unannounced arrival. Nothing is told of the feast except that Jesse and his sons were guests there. The choice of the heir of Saul seems not to have been public. In fact, had it been known, it would doubtless have brought the raging vengeance of Saul upon Jesse’s family. The description of the choosing indicates it was carried out privately.

As soon as Samuel saw Eliab, Jesse’s oldest, he felt that the new king was found. He resembled Saul in his stature and good looks, and in his soldierly carriage. Samuel was still thinking like the Israelites and not seeing through God’s eyes. But the Lord quickly informed Samuel Eliab is not the man. Man sees only the outside, which may look quite good, while the Lord looks into the heart, which may be black with sin. Abinadab and Shammah, numbers two and three, were also speedily rejected, as were numbers four, five, six, and seven as well. Perhaps Jesse was thinking that Samuel had his directions mixed up.

But Samuel inquired and found that the youngest son was still out with the sheep and had evidently not even been considered in the selection. Samuel informed Jesse that he must send for David, for they would not sit down to the feast until he arrived in their presence. As soon as David appeared the Lord told Samuel to rise up and anoint him, for he was indeed God’s choice.

David was probably about seventeen years of age. He had the ruddy glow of a lad of the outdoors. He was handsome, too, though not a strong soldier type like his older brothers, for he was still somewhat immature. The Lord’s Spirit possessed David from that day in a special manner, never to depart from him as He had from Saul, for there was an evident difference in the condition of the two hearts. Samuel returned to his home in Ramah.

Fuente: Garner-Howes Baptist Commentary

CRITICAL AND EXPOSITORY NOTES

1Sa. 16:1. How long wilt thou mourn, etc. These words show that the prophet had not yet been able to reconcile himself to the hidden ways of the Lord; that he was still afraid that the people and kingdom of God would suffer from the rejection of Saul, and that he continued to mourn for Saul, not merely from his own personal attachment to the fallen king, but also, and perhaps still more, from anxiety for the welfare of Israel. (Keil). Thine horn. A different word from the vial spoken of at 1Sa. 10:1 (Biblical Commentary.) Horns were anciently used for holding liquors, which were sometimes drunk out of them. They were hung up on the walls of rooms or the poles of tents (Jamieson.) Jesse the Bethlehemite. The genealogy of Jesse is traced to Boaz (Rth. 4:18-21). But the object was merely to prove that he was a link in the Messianic chain of descent, and it is left quite unknown whether Jesse was the eldest of Obed and Boazs family, or a younger son. (Jamieson.) I have provided. The language is remarkable and seems to imply a difference between this and the former king. Saul was the peoples choice, the next was to be of Gods nomination. (Jamieson.)

1Sa. 16:2. How can I go, etc. The sacred historian does not conceal the fact that Samuel was afraid here is an evidence of veracity. (Wordsworth.) This fear on the part of the prophet, who did not generally show himself either hesitating or timid, can only be explained, as we may see from 1Sa. 16:14, on the supposition that Saul was already given up to the power of the evil spirit, so that the very worst might be dreaded from his madness if he discovered that Samuel had anointed another king. That there was some foundation for Samuels anxiety, we may infer from the fact that the Lord did not blame him for his fear, but pointed out the way by which he might anoint David without attracting attention. (Keil.) Say, I am come to sacrifice, etc. There is here an appearance of duplicity sanctioned by Divine authority which it is important for us to examine. It was the purpose of God that David should be anointed at this time as Sauls successor, and as the ancestor and type of His Christ. It was not the purpose of God that Samuel should stir up a civil war by setting up David as Sauls rival. Secrecy, therefore, was a necessary part of the transaction. But secrecy and concealment are not the same as duplicity and falsehood. Concealment of a good purpose for a good purpose is clearly justifiable, e.g. in war, in medical treatment, in State policy, and in the ordinary affairs of life. In the providential government of the world, and in Gods dealings with individuals, concealment of His purpose till the proper time for its development is the rule rather than the exception, and must be so. (Biblical Commentary.)

1Sa. 16:4. The elders trembled, etc. The anxious inquiry of the elders presupposes that even in the time of Saul the prophet Samuel was frequently in the habit of coming unexpectedly to one place and another, for the purpose of reproving and punishing wrong-doing and sin. (Keil.) They might have been conscious of secret guilt, and supposed that Samuel coming among them as the judicial vicegerent of God, was about to investigate and punish the commission of some crime. The inhabitants of this place have long been proverbial for their refractory spirit; for even in modern times they have been often at variance with the reigning power. (Hardys Notices of the Holy Land.)

1Sa. 16:5. I am come to sacrifice unto the Lord. It is evident from this that the prophet was accustomed to turn his visits to account by offering sacrifices, and so building up the people in fellowship with the Lord. (Keil.) Sanctify yourselves. By the preparation prescribed in Exo. 19:14-15. He sanctified Jesse, etc., i.e., he took care that they were sanctified.

MAIN HOMILETICS OF THE PARAGRAPH.1Sa. 16:1-5

SAMUELS VISIT TO BETHLEHEM

I. God helps man to a better condition by the instrumentality of man. Those parts of the earth that are by nature useless to man, may by cultivation be made to minister to his comfort. Weeds and unfruitful trees may be uprooted, and trees yielding fruit and herbs for the service of man may take their place. But man himself must work the change. If the desert is to rejoice and blossom as the rose, human instrumentality must exert itself. And so is it in matters relating to mans spiritual and moral well-being. If a moral wilderness is to be transformed into a garden of the Lord, God uses men, or a man, to do the work. Israel was now suffering from the misrule of a king who would not be ruled by God, and God purposed to bring about a change, to inaugurate a new and brighter era for the people, both materially and spiritually. And He chose a man to indicate His rejection of the king who had brought no blessing to the nation, and to point out him who was to lift it to a higher condition of prosperity both morally and commercially. Samuel, in the hand of God, was the man who uprooted the fruitless tree and planted in its place one which was to bear fruit for Israels sustenance and growth. So the higher and more blessed rule of the gospel dispensation was proclaimed to humanity by man. The state of man by nature is a state of moral misruleof spiritual unfruitfulness; and to man was entrusted the work of proclaiming to the world deliverance from the dominion of the powers of darkness and the advent of a new King of men, under whose beneficent rule first the wilderness of individual hearts, and then by degrees all the moral wastes upon the face of the earth shall break forth into spiritual fruitfulness and beauty. When Our Lord commissioned His Apostles to Go into all the world and preach the Gospel to every creature (Mar. 16:15), He commanded them to proclaim the accession of a new Sovereign, under whose government all the subjects of all the kingdoms of the world might, if they were willing, be lifted into the glorious liberty of the children of God. He has ordained that by human lips this new era shall be made known to manthat by human instrumentality men shall learn who it is that is Gods Anointed One.

II. Those who are instruments of good to man sometimes shrink from the work which God calls them to do. And Samuel said, How can I go? Gods methods of making His children instruments of good to others are often most perplexing and painful to them, and tasks are given them to perform from which they draw back in fear and trembling. Joseph was made an instrument of great blessing both to the nation of Egypt and to his own family, but the way in which he became such a benefactor was a very rough one, and if he could have seen it lying before him without seeing the goal to which it would bring him, he would probably have asked Samuels question, How can I go? When Moses was called by God to go and stand before Pharaoh, he drew back from the mission with which God charged him with such persistency that the anger of the Lord was kindled against him (Exo. 4:13), although in his case the reluctance apparently arose rather from a sense of his own inability than from fear of evil to his own person. Yet in his case as in that of Samuel the cause of the shrinking back was the same, viz., a momentary failure of that full confidence in God which was an eminent feature in the characters of both these good men. The hesitation in both was but a transient cloud which only dimmed for a very short season the almost perfect obedience which each of them rendered to their God. It sufficed to show that both were men of like passions and infirmities with ourselves, and links them with Gods honoured servants in all ages, all of whom have their hours of faithlessness and consequently of fear.

III. The true servants of God in such circumstances tell out their perplexity and fear to God Himself. This is a certain cure for attacks of cowardice arising from mistrust of Gods power and wisdom. When Jonah was entrusted with a distasteful and perilous task there is no record that he made known to God his weakness and fear. He took counsel with no one but himself, and the result was ignominious defeat. But neither Moses nor Samuel seek, like the son of Amittai, to flee from the presence of the Lord (Jon. 1:3), but to the Lord Himself they make known their fears and their reasons for wavering. And the result in both cases is the sametheir faith rises to the emergency, and in the protection and help afforded to them in performing the duty enjoined upon them they have a fresh proof that God never sends His servants to warfare at their own charges.

IV. Those who are instruments of good to their fellow-creatures are often regarded by them with distrust and suspicion. No man in the land of Israel could have had any reason to regard Samuel in any other light than in that of a true friend, yet the elders of the town meet him with the question, Comest thou peaceably? A consciousness of guilt is often at the bottom of this distrust and dislike. The entrance of a faithful man of God into some circles or localities is unwelcome because his very presence arouses in the ungodly a sense of their guilt. The feeling may not be very clearly defined even to themselves, but it is the cause which makes them dislike the company of such a man. The officer of justice, whether he be clothed in a policemans uniform or a judges ermine, is regarded by an innocent man as a minister of God for good (Rom. 13:4). But the guilty man does not feel at rest in his presence. Samuel was a man of God whose very presence was enough to arouse in guilty men a sense of their deserts, and he was also a judge in Israel whose visit to Bethlehem might have been regarded with fear by the villagers, because they knew that they had been guilty of outward acts of disobedience to the law of God. Or their distrustful reception of Samuel might have arisen from a suspicion that he was to be the instrument of a change of rule in Israel. Men are often so little alive to their true interests, and so averse to any change, that they resent any disturbance in the existing order of things, even although it would bring much blessing to themselves. The Bethlehemites might have been certain that any change which came to them from God through Samuel would be for good, and not for evil, and yet fear of Saul and an unwillingness to be disturbed might have made them prefer the rule of their present unworthy monarch to a new order of government. A fear of immediate unpleasant consequences and a cowardly and unworthy content with things as they are has often made men regard with suspicion and with positive hatred those who have desired to bring them under a better rulethose who have endeavoured to free them individually from the tyranny of Satan, or, nationally from bondage to Satans emissaries. The reformers of all ages, both in the Church and in the State, have been coldly welcomed by the majority of those to whom God has made them instruments of blessing. But this need not be a matter of either surprise or discouragement when we remember that those whom the Son of God came to make free indeed (Joh. 8:36) cried, Crucify Him! crucify Him! and that His great apostle whose hearts desire and prayer was for the salvation of his fellow-countrymen (Rom. 10:1) received from them this sentence, Away with such a fellow from the earth, for it is not fit that He should live (Act. 22:22).

OUTLINES AND SUGGESTIVE COMMENTS

1Sa. 16:1. It is an unnatural senselessness not to be affected with the dangers, with the sins, of our governors. God did not blame this sorrow, but moderated it. It was not the affection He forbade but the measure. In this is the difference betwixt good men and evil; that evil men mourn not for their own sins, good men do so mourn for the sins of others that they will hardly be taken off. If Samuel mourn because Saul hath cast away God by his sin, he must cease to mourn because God hath cast away Saul from reigning over Israel in His just punishment. A good heart hath learned to rest itself upon the justice of Gods decree, and forgets all earthly respects when it looks up to heaven.Bp. Hall.

The affairs of the kingdom of God go their way without break or halt according to Gods high thoughts and decrees, though human sin and its attendant judgment (as in Sauls case), or human weakness (as in Samuels inordinate grief for Saul), may seem to hinder the plans of the Divine wisdom. But it is also precisely by human sin and foolishness that the history of Gods kingdom under the guidance of the Divine wisdom and providence receives new occasions and impulses to wider and higher development according to the aims which God sets before Himself.Langes Commentary.

God demands in the souls He sets apart for Himself and for the guidance of others, such a dying to all things that He does not allow them to regard any other interest than His, whatever reason may be alleged.Berlenberger Bible.

Remedies for improper mourning.

1. Submission to the will of God (I have rejected him).
2. Diligence in present work for God (Fill thy horn and go).
3. Hope that God will bring a better future (I have provided me a king)Translator of Langes Commentary.

In the providence of God, there is a blessed arrangement by which the new duties and cares which are occasioned by bereavements, losses, or disappointments become the means of alleviating distress and improving the soul. Persons in public positions are summoned from their humiliation and melancholy, induced by the defeat of favourite schemes, to endeavour to retrieve their influence, and do some good before they die. The sense of personal and relative responsibility is thus made by God to rebuke and cure a sorrow deemed inconsolable.

1. There is a duty to the Lord. It would not be reverent to quarrel with His providence: it would be disobedient and impious

2. There is a duty to your own soul. Fill thine horn with oil, and go to the new duties to which you are called, that it may be well with yourself.

3. There is a duty to others. Samuel had something more to live for than his own interest. His grief was a public calamity. The sorrow into which he was plunged might do injury. When there are others to care for, our grief must not be immoderate.Steel.

1Sa. 16:2. Perhaps desire of full direction drew from him this question, but not without a mixture of diffidence; for the manner of doing it doth not so much trouble him as the success. It is not to be expected that the most faithful hearts should be always in an equal height of resolution: God does not chide Samuel, but instruct him.Bishop Hall.

1Sa. 16:4. Hundreds of years after this, when the heavenly light was seen in the same place by the shepherds, they too were sore afraid; but there was as little to fear in the one case as in the other; for in both there was a provided sacrifice, and in both the mission was one of peace; yea, as Samuel came to anoint David to be a king, so the angel-heralded Jesus appeared to make us kings and priests unto our Lord and His Father.Dr. W. M. Taylor.

Fuente: The Preacher’s Complete Homiletical Commentary Edited by Joseph S. Exell

David chosen as Sauls Successor, 1Sa. 16:1-18.

Samuel Goes to Bethlehem. 1Sa. 16:1-6

And the Lord said unto Samuel, How long wilt thou mourn for Saul, seeing I have rejected him from reigning over Israel? fill thine horn with oil, and go, I will send thee to Jesse the Beth-lehemite: for I have provided me a king among his sons.
2 And Samuel said, How can I go? if Saul hear it, he will kill me. And the Lord said, Take a heifer with thee, and say, I am come to sacrifice to the Lord.

3 And call Jesse to the sacrifice, and I will show thee what thou shalt do: and thou shalt anoint unto me him whom I name unto thee.

4 And Samuel did that which the Lord spake, and came to Beth-lehem. And the elders of the town trembled at his coming, and said, Comest thou peaceably?
5 And he said, Peaceably: I am come to sacrifice unto the Lord: sanctify yourselves, and come with me to the sacrifice. And he sanctified Jesse and his sons, and called them to the sacrifice.
6 And it came to pass, when they were come, that he looked on Eliab, and said, Surely the Lords anointed is before me.

1.

Why did Samuel mourn for Saul? 1Sa. 16:1

Samuel loved Saul. Samuel had addressed Saul with love when he first saw him (1Sa. 9:19 ff). He had described Saul as the one for whom all Israel desired (1Sa. 9:20). The very coronation of Saul was filled with emotion. Samuel had felt rejected by the people. God had assured Samuel that the people had rejected God himself. Samuel had promised to pray for the people. He had anointed Saul, and it was very natural that he should be grieved at the ignominious failure of the first king.

2.

Whose son was David? 1Sa. 16:2

David was the son of Jesse, the Bethlehemite. The name, Jesse, belongs to this man alone in the Old Testament. Its etymology is obsure. Bethlehem is a well-known town of Judah, and it was located five miles south of Jerusalem on a site where a town still flourishes under its ancient name. David had seven brothers, all of whom were considered by the prophet as he came to select one for anointing king over Israel. At the close of the Book of Ruth, a note is made that David was a great-grandson of Ruth. In this passage we note that Boaz, the husband of Ruth, begat Obed; Obed begat Jesse; Jesse begat David (Rth. 4:18-22).

3.

Why was Samuel afraid of Saul? 1Sa. 16:2

Saul was still king and could execute his enemies. His nature had changed. He was no longer the humble young man who had hid himself in the baggage when the people came to anoint him king. He was more like King Herod, whose nature was such that all Jerusalem was afraid when the wise men had caused the king to fear (Mat. 2:1 ff).

Saul might be possessed of evil spirits and seek to kill Samuel even as he later threw his javelin a number of times at David. Samuel loved Saul, and Saul had clung to Samuel when they parted. There was no way for Samuel to know, however, if Saul would be kindly disposed towards him.

4.

Did God tell Samuel to lie? 1Sa. 16:2 b

Samuel was afraid of going to Bethlehem to anoint David as king. He was afraid that Saul might try to kill him as he later tried to kill David. Edward J. Young, in his Introduction to the Old Testament, says that it might appear that the Lord (1Sa. 16:2) commanded that Samuel tell a lie as to his purpose in going to Bethlehem, but Samuel was, as a matter of fact, going to Bethlehem to sacrifice. There was no need to tell the entire truth upon this occasion. If Samuel had been asked, Are you going to Bethlehem in order to anoint David as king, and in answer had said to Saul, I am going only to sacrifice, then Samuel would have been guilty of dissimulation and so also would be the Lord. Such, however, was not the case. There is a vast difference between dissimulation or acting under false pretenses and not telling the entire truth. There was no point in Samuels revealing at this time the principal object of his mission. Dr. Young goes on to quote a passage from Calvins Commentary where Calvin said that there was no dissimulation or falsehood in this since God really wishes his prophet to find safety under the pretense of the sacrifice. The sacrifice was therefore really offered, and the prophet was protected, thereby so that he was not exposed to any danger until the time the full revelation arrived. Once we admit, as we are compelled to, the genuineness of the Lords intention for Samuel to sacrifice, the difficulty disappears. It is of the very nature of God not to lie. God himself cannot lie (Heb. 6:18), and God never commands any of His servants to lie. God can kill and has on a number of occasions struck people dead. God may command His servants to kill their enemies, but He never will command His servants to lie. God himself does not lie, and He does not wish those who believe in Him to lie.

5.

Where was Bethlehem? 1Sa. 16:4

Bethlehem was in the hill country of Judah. It was about ten miles south of the city of Jerusalem. It lay on a hill that made it visible for miles around as travelers came to it. Later it was the place of the inn where Mary gave birth to the Christ-child. It was the home of Naomi, who had gone with her husband, Elimelech, to the land of Moab when it was a time of famine in their own land in the days of the judges (Rth. 1:1 ff).

Bethlehem was the home of Boaz, who married Ruth, the widow of Mahlon, and daughter-in-law of Naomi. It was Ruth who gave birth then to Obed by Boaz, and Obed was the father of Jesse. This is the old home of the family of David.

6.

Why were the elders afraid? 1Sa. 16:4 b

The elders of the city came out to meet Samuel, and they were trembling. They asked him if he were coming in peace. These elders would be afraid because a visit from the judge of Israel might mean that there was trouble stirring. When Elijah went to the widow of Zarephath, she accused him of coming to bring her sins to remembrance (1Ki. 17:18). This is a natural reaction of sinful people when they stand in the presence of one who is righteous and holy. Quite often the judge or the prophet would come to a community to pronounce judgment upon them. This must have been the thought of the elders of Bethlehem when the came out to meet Samuel.

7.

In what ways did Samuel sanctify Jesse and his sons? 1Sa. 16:5

Gods people never enter lightly into an act of worship. When the people of Israel came to Mt. Sinai under the leadership of Moses, they were given three days to prepare for the receiving of the law. On that occasion we read, And Moses went down from the mount unto the people, and sanctified the people; and they washed their clothes. And he said unto the people, Be ready against the third day: come not at your wives (Exo. 19:14-15). Not every occasion would be as filled with meaning as the receiving of the Ten Commandments, but every act of worship is a time to meet the Holy God; and it should not be entered into lightly. No doubt Samuel urged the men of Jesses house to prepare their hearts, minds, and bodies for the sacrifice which they were to offer. The preparations may well have included the washing of their garments and even the abstaining from connubial relations. When the people of Israel were preparing to cross over into the promised land under the leadership of Joshua, they were given a similar three-day period in which to prepare victuals themselves (Jos. 1:11). Of course, it would be necessary for the household of Jesse to prepare the sacrificial animals as they were getting ready for the sacrifice. All of this would be a part of sanctification of Jesse and his sons.

8.

Who was Jesses oldest son? 1Sa. 16:6

Eliab was the name given to Jesses oldest son in the book of Samuel. In the book of I Chronicles (1Ch. 27:18), however, he is called Elihu. The word Elihu means, He is my God, and the name is given to a number of different people in the Old Testament, including one of Jobs friends (Job. 32:3). Eliab is a word meaning, God is father. It is generally supposed that the name Elihu is given to him after he became known and officially recognized as the head of the tribe of Judah. This is noted in the passage of Chronicles.

This oldest brother of David made such a good appearance that Samuel thought surely this one was the one whom God had chosen. He is quite active in the later history recorded in the Bible. He was contemptuous of David when David went down to the camp of the army (1Sa. 17:28). His daughter, Abigail, married her second cousin, Rehoboam, and bore him three children (2Ch. 11:18-19).

9.

What is the meaning of the Lords anointed? 1Sa. 16:6 b

The Greeks translated this word with the word which is the background for the English word christ. It would not be amiss to say that this is the Lords christ. God had exalted the kingship by anointing the kings as the priests had been anointed earlier. Later we find that the prophets were anointed. These are the chosen men of God, and point forward to Him who is indeed the Lords AnointedProphet, Priest, and King.

Fuente: College Press Bible Study Textbook Series

(1) How long wilt thou mourn for Saul?The constant references to the influence Saul acquired, and the love and admiration he attracted, is a striking feature in this most ancient Book of Samuel, where the fall and ruin of the first Hebrew king is so pathetically related.

Though it tells us how Saul was tried, and found utterly wanting, still the record, which dwells on the evil qualities which ruined the great life, never loses an opportunity of telling how men like Samuel and David mourned for Saul, and how heroes like Jonathan loved the king who might have been so great. The ordinary reader of the story, but. for these touches of feeling, would be tempted to condemn with far too sweeping a condemnation the unhappy Saul, whose sun, as far as the world was concerned, set amidst clouds and thick darkness. Is it too much to think that for Saul the punishment ended here? that the bitter suffering caused by the solemn anger of his prophet friend, the gloomy last years of unhappiness and distrust, and the shame and defeat of the last campaign, purged away from the noble soul the scars left by the self-will and disobedience? The Divine Voice, so well-known to the seer, at length roused him from his mourning inactivity. Though that instrument, prepared with so much care, was broken, the work of God for which this instrument was created must be done. If Saul had failed, another must be looked for. and trained to fill the place of the deposed disobedient king.

Fill thine horn with oil.Heb., the oil; probably, as Stanley suggests, the consecrated oil preserved in the Tabernacle at Nob. (On the use to be made of this sacred oil, see Note on 1Sa. 16:3.)

Jesse the Beth-lehemite.From this day forward the village of Bethlehem obtained a strange notoriety in the annals of the world. David loved the village, where his father, most probably, was the sheik, or head man. The future king never forgot the flavour, as Stanley graphically reminds us, of the water of the well of Bethlehem (1Ch. 11:17). It was Bethlehem, the cradle of the great ancestor, that was selected in the counsels of the Most High as the birthplace of Jesus Christ.

This Jesse was evidently a man of some wealth, Mohammedan tradition speaks of him as one who, in addition to his farming pursuits, was famous for his skill in making hair-cloths and sack-cloths.

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

THE ANOINTING OF DAVID, 1Sa 16:1-13.

We are now about to be introduced to him who figures in the following history as one of the most interesting and honoured personages of the olden time that neighbour of Saul, (1Sa 15:28,) that man after Jehovah’s heart, (1Sa 13:14,) who is to succeed Saul on the throne of Israel, and be the brightest star in all the host of kings. Soon after his anointing he is providentially introduced into the royal household, and still later, by his victory over Goliath, he suddenly becomes the idol of the nation’s heart. But from that proud day until the death of Saul he is persecuted by the jealous king, and flies from the court and from his home, and wanders up and down as an exile and outlaw.

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

1. How long wilt thou mourn for Saul Samuel’s affectionate nature passed through a bitter struggle before he could become reconciled to the will of Jehovah. He had loved Saul, and done his utmost to preserve him. All night he had cried unto the Lord for him, (1Sa 15:11,) and when he thought of his sad fall, and the wrath of God against him, he trembled for the safety of the kingdom.

Fill thine horn with oil For the purpose of anointing another king. See note on 1Sa 10:1.

Jesse The only one who bears this name in Scripture. His genealogy is given Rth 4:18-22, and 1Ch 2:5-12.

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

The Anointing of David As Prospective King Over Israel. The Spirit Of YHWH Comes Mightily On Him ( 1Sa 16:1-13 ).

It is a sad reflection on what Saul’s reign had become that the elders of Bethlehem were apprehensive at the thought of the arrival of Samuel. This suggests that there were murmurings among the people at this time against Saul’s behaviour, with a good deal of political support being thrown behind Samuel, so much so that the elders did not know quite what Samuel’s intentions were in coming to Bethlehem. Samuel was still a power in the land religiously speaking and it is quite probable that Saul, while still fearing Samuel as a prophet, had made known what would happen to anyone who sought to use his name to cause an uprising.

Saul would undoubtedly have been feeling very bitter against Samuel, and we are shortly to learn that things had got worse than that, and that his rejection by Samuel and YHWH had so affected him that it had caused deep clinical depression to develop, and probably even schizophrenia. The dopamine content of his brain became unstable, and he began to manifest symptoms such as violent mood swings, paranoia and delusion.

It will be noted that 1Sa 16:1 and 1Sa 16:13 act as an inclusio for this passage. In verse 1 Samuel is to fill a horn with oil in order to approve one of Jesse’s sons as king, and in verse 13 Samuel takes the horn of oil and anoints David in the midst of his brothers.

Analysis.

a And YHWH said to Samuel, “How long will you mourn for Saul, seeing I have rejected him from being king over Israel? Fill your horn with oil, and go. I will send you to Jesse the Bethlehemite, for I have provided for myself a king among his sons” (1Sa 16:1).

b And Samuel said, “How can I go? If Saul hear it, he will kill me.” And YHWH said, “Take a heifer with you, and say, I am come to sacrifice to YHWH. And call Jesse to the sacrifice, and I will show you what you will do, and you will anoint unto me him whom I name to you” (1Sa 16:2-3).

c And Samuel did what YHWH said, and came to Bethlehem. And the elders of the city came to meet him apprehensively (trembling), and said, “Do you come peaceably?” And he said, “Peaceably. I am come to sacrifice to YHWH. Sanctify yourselves, and come with me to the sacrifice.” And he sanctified Jesse and his sons, and called them to the sacrifice (1Sa 16:4-5).

d And it came about, when they were come, that he looked on Eliab, and said, “Surely YHWH’s anointed is before him.” But YHWH said to Samuel, “Do not look on his appearance (countenance), or on the height of his stature, because I have rejected him, for YHWH does not see as man sees, for man looks on the outward appearance, but YHWH looks on the heart” (1Sa 16:6-7).

d Then Jesse called Abinadab, and made him pass before Samuel. And he said, “Neither has YHWH chosen this one” (1Sa 16:8).

d Then Jesse made Shammah pass by. And he said, “Neither has YHWH chosen this one” (1Sa 16:9).

d And Jesse made seven of his sons pass before Samuel. And Samuel said to Jesse, “YHWH has not chosen these” ’(1Sa 16:10).

c And Samuel said to Jesse, “Are all your children here?” And he said, “There remains yet the youngest, and, see, he is keeping the sheep.” And Samuel said to Jesse, “Send and fetch him, for we will not sit down until he come here” (1Sa 16:11).

b And he sent, and brought him in. Now he was ruddy, and with it all of a beautiful appearance, and handsome (goodly) to look on.” And YHWH said, “Arise, anoint him. For this is he” (1Sa 16:12).

a Then Samuel took the horn of oil, and anointed him in the midst of his brothers, and the Spirit of YHWH came mightily on David from that day forward. So Samuel rose up, and went to Ramah (1Sa 16:13).

Note that in ‘a’ Samuel is to take with him his horn anointing oil, and in the parallel he uses it to anoint David. In ‘b’ YHWH will show him whom to anoint, and in the parallel He shows him David. In ‘c’ he calls Jesse and his sons to the sacrifice, and in the parallel they may not partake of the sacrifice until David comes, who should also have been invited. Centrally in ‘d’ we have the selection process, with each being rejected because they are not YHWH’s chosen.

1Sa 16:1

‘ And YHWH said to Samuel, “How long will you mourn for Saul, seeing I have rejected him from being king over Israel? Fill your horn with oil, and go. I will send you to Jesse the Bethlehemite, for I have provided for myself a king among his sons.” ’

It would seem that Samuel mourned Saul’s fall from grace for some considerable time. He had nothing further to do politically, and had plenty of time to think over and watch the consequences of Saul’s failure. And to him it seemed a tragedy. Moreover the fact that Saul had become suspicious of possible rivals for his throne is suggested by Samuel’s fear that if he was even suspected of anointing someone to replace Saul it was quite likely that Saul would act rapidly and have him put to death. Thus he had much to mourn and to grieve over.

So when YHWH called him to task because of his mourning, asking him how long he was going to carry on with it in view of the fact that He, YHWH Himself, had rejected Saul from being king over Israel, he found himself at a standstill. Then YHWH told him what he had to do which was positive. He must fill his horn with oil and go and see Jesse in Bethlehem (‘house of bread’), where YHWH had provided for Himself a replacement for Saul.

“Jesse, the Bethlehemite.” He was the grandson of 1sa the Moabitess, and of the house of Judah (1Sa 4:18-22).

1Sa 16:2

‘ And Samuel said, “How can I go? If Saul hear it, he will kill me.” And YHWH said, “Take a heifer with you, and say, I am come to sacrifice to YHWH.” ’

Samuel, who was aware of Saul’s present moods and disposition, was not enamoured with the suggestion. He knew that if even a hint of his doing such a thing reached Saul’s ears he himself would become the victim. It was better not to get involved with possible rivals to Saul’s throne. It is a significant indication of Saul’s downward slide that even Samuel feels that he is not safe.

YHWH, however, assured him that there would be no problem. All he had to do was arrange for a sacrifice in Bethlehem to YHWH. This kind of thing was expected of him from time to time and would cause no suspicion, especially as he could genuinely say that he had received a word from YHWH to do it. The suggestion was not one which involved deceit. The sacrifice was to be a genuine one. It was to be an offering of praise and thanksgiving. But only Samuel knew the depths of the praise and thanksgiving that was due because the anointed of YHWH was to be revealed.

The fact that YHWH had revealed Himself to him and had told him to do it puts this sacrifice into the class of Exo 20:24 sacrifices. It does not therefore indicate that Samuel felt able to offer sacrifices anywhere, although of course YHWH did record His Name before Samuel in many places..

1Sa 16:3

“ And call Jesse to the sacrifice, and I will show you what you will do, and you will anoint unto me him whom I name to you.”

Then he was to call Jesse to participate in the sacrifice, at which point He Himself would tell him what he had to do. It was at this point that he would then be required to anoint the person whom YHWH named to him.

1Sa 16:4

‘ And Samuel did what YHWH said, and came to Bethlehem. And the elders of the city came to meet him apprehensively (trembling), and said, “Do you come peaceably?” ’

However, when Samuel did arrive in Bethlehem, no doubt having made his purpose of sacrificing there widely known, the elders of the city met him rather apprehensively. This may have been because they were aware that when Samuel offered special sacrifices it usually indicated that there was trouble expected from the Philistines, or it may have been that they were expecting a prophetic rebuke for some failing in Bethlehem that Samuel knew of. But in view of the link with Samuel’s own fear in verse 2 it may well suggest that Saul’s reign had become somewhat more tyrannous as he grew more and more suspicious. Thus they may have feared that the sacrifice was to be a signal by Samuel to arouse men to civil war, something which could only bring Saul’s wrath down on Bethlehem. Possibly Saul’s actions taken against any town about which there were rumours had become well known. (We only have to think of what he was later willing to do to the innocent priests at Nob to recognise what he was capable of doing – 22:11-19).

1Sa 16:5

‘ And he said, “Peaceably. I am come to sacrifice to YHWH. Sanctify yourselves, and come with me to the sacrifice.” And he sanctified Jesse and his sons, and called them to the sacrifice.’

But Samuel assured them that he had come with peaceful intentions that should not give them any concern. All they had to do was prepare themselves for participation in the sacrificial feast by sanctifying themselves. They would do this by washing their clothes and possibly themselves (Gen 35:2; Exo 19:10; Exo 19:14), and presumably also by abstaining from sexual relations which could render them unclean (1Sa 21:4; Lev 15:16-18). At the same time he sanctified Jesse and his sons and called them to join them at the sacrifice. This participation in the sanctification of this particular family provided him with a good reason for being in Jesse’s house, and later returning to eat with them. What follows could have taken place at this time of ‘sanctifying’, or alternatively at the sacrificial meal following the offering of the sacrifices.

1Sa 16:6

‘ And it came about, when they were come, that he looked on Eliab, and said, “Surely YHWH’s anointed is before him.” ’

“When they were come” may mean, when they had come to Samuel to be sanctified, or it may mean when they had come for the sacrificial meal after sacrificing, for the anointing would certainly seem to have taken place in private. Eliab (‘God is father’), the eldest, was the first to meet Samuel and one look at him suggested to Samuel that this was the one who was to be YHWH’s anointed (he was probably the Elihu of 1Ch 27:18). He was a strapping fellow and appeared a suitable choice.

1Sa 16:7

‘ But YHWH said to Samuel, “Do not look on his appearance (countenance), or on the height of his stature, because I have rejected him, for YHWH does not see as man sees, for man looks on the outward appearance, but YHWH looks on the heart.”

Samuel was to learn a lesson that day, and that was that while men looked at the outside and the general appearance, YHWH looked at the heart. If the heart was right YHWH could do the rest. Thus while Eliab was both tall and handsome, he was not the one. We can in fact compare this description of Eliab with the previous description of Saul (1Sa 9:2). Here we have described man’s choice for a king. But the difference was that this time YHWH was determined to give to the people someone whose heart is right. This time they were not to have ‘a king like the nations’.

1Sa 16:8

‘ Then Jesse called Abinadab, and made him pass before Samuel. And he said, “Neither has YHWH chosen this one.” ’

The second son to come up for inspection was Abinadab (‘my father is willing’). But Samuel recognised that YHWH had not chosen him.

1Sa 16:9

‘ Then Jesse made Shammah pass by. And he said, “Neither has YHWH chosen this one.” ’

The third son to pass before him was Shammah. The individual mention of three sons indicates the completeness of the search. We should also note that these were the three sons of fighting age in the family (17:13). But still this was not YHWH’s choice.

1Sa 16:10

‘ And Jesse made seven of his sons pass before Samuel. And Samuel said to Jesse, “YHWH has not chosen these.” ’

In the end seven sons passed before him, the seven indicating divine completeness. But still YHWH’s chosen had not been found. We can now imagine Jesse getting a little disheartened as each son was rejected and even Samuel must have been getting puzzled.

1Sa 16:11

‘ And Samuel said to Jesse, “Are all your children here?” And he said, “There remains yet the youngest, and, see, he is keeping the sheep.” And Samuel said to Jesse, “Send and fetch him, for we will not sit down until he come here.” ’

Once he had had to reject all Jesse’s sons who were present he knew instinctively that there must be another son. For he knew that YHWH would not have misled him. So he turned to Jesse and asked him whether all his sons were there. The reply came that the only one that was left was the youngest who was looking after the sheep. So Samuel declared that he must be fetched, and that they would not sit down for their meal until he had arrived.

1Sa 16:12

‘ And he sent, and brought him in. Now he was ruddy, and with it all of a beautiful appearance, and handsome (goodly) to look on.” And YHWH said, “Arise, anoint him. For this is he.” ’

So Jesse sent for his youngest son and brought him in. He was ‘ruddy’ probably means that he had reddish hair which was unusual for Israelites, for they usually had black hair. He was also radiant and handsome. But what was most important was that YHWH said, ‘Arise and anoint him, for this is he.’ Here was the chosen one of YHWH.

1Sa 16:13

‘ Then Samuel took the horn of oil, and anointed him in the midst of his brothers, and the Spirit of YHWH came mightily on David from that day forward. So Samuel rose up, and went to Ramah.’

So Samuel took his horn of oil and anointed David in the midst of his brothers. We are not told whether they knew what the significance was of what he was doing. Perhaps only Jesse knew, for it was not after all something that could be allowed to get out. But all that really mattered was that YHWH knew. David himself may simply have seen it as a sign of God’s promised blessing. Samuel could tell him later of its full significance.

But the most important thing was that as a result ‘the Spirit of YHWH came mightily on David from that day forward’. In this lies the explanation for all his future exploits about to be outlined. From this day on he was totally God’s man, and God accompanied him in all that he did, and arranged for him to receive the training necessary for him to be a good and effective king. David may well have felt nothing, and not even have known that it had happened. It was the future that would bring it out.

Then, his responsibility fulfilled, Samuel returned to Ramah. He had no real appreciation of quite what he had accomplished, but he knew that the future was now secure. It was all left in the hands of YHWH.

Fuente: Commentary Series on the Bible by Peter Pett

1Sa 16:1-13 Samuel Anoints David In 1Sa 16:1-13 the prophet Samuel anoints young David to be the next king. However, David’s journey to kingship will be a long journey with many trials to test and strengthen his faith in the God of Israel. David has known God in his times of worship. He will soon fight Goliath and learn that God is also Lord of Hosts, a God of war. He will begin by playing the harp before King Saul, then be promoted to the kings armour bearer. There David will learn of God’s ways in battle. In a strange twist of event, David will flee into exile for a period of time. During this most difficult period in his life David will write some of his greatest psalms, as he sees God’s hand of divine providence and provision. It is an important time in David’s journey to kingship, helping him to develop humility and strength of character. In God’s divine providence King Saul is slain by the sword and David take leadership over his tribe Judah. Still David’s faith is tested for another seven years as he learns to honour all twelve tribes on Israel. The day finally comes when the entire kingdom will be placed into his hands. But this will not be the same young David that was anointed by the prophet Samuel many years earlier. David is now a man of war, seasoned in God’s ways and walking in a godly character before God and his nation.

1Sa 16:2  And Samuel said, How can I go? if Saul hear it, he will kill me. And the LORD said, Take an heifer with thee, and say, I am come to sacrifice to the LORD.

1Sa 16:2 “And Samuel said, How can I go? if Saul hear it, he will kill me” Comments – This shows the wickedness of Saul, as seen by Samuel.

1Sa 16:10  Again, Jesse made seven of his sons to pass before Samuel. And Samuel said unto Jesse, The LORD hath not chosen these.

1Sa 16:10 Comments – Notice the number seven in this verse. The number seven represents completeness. Under the Mosaic Law, a person was declared unclean seven days. But the eighth day, he was made clean. A slave was in bondage seven years, but in the eighth year, he was made free. God judged a nation seven years, but in the eighth years, the nation was free. Thus, the number eight represents a time of new beginnings and freedom from bondage.

Since David is a type and figure of Christ, he was numbered as the eighth son. This eighth son is a symbol of the fact that Christ came to bring man out of bondage into a new beginning.

1Sa 16:12  And he sent, and brought him in. Now he was ruddy, and withal of a beautiful countenance, and goodly to look to. And the LORD said, Arise, anoint him: for this is he.

1Sa 16:12 “ Now he was ruddy” Word Study on “ruddy” Gesenius says the Hebrew word “ruddy” ( ) or ( ) (H132) means, “Red, i.e., red haired, used of Esau and of David.” Strong says it means, “reddish (of the hair or the complexion),” and comes from ( ) (H119), which means, “to show blood (in the face), i.e., flush or to turn rosy.” Holladay and HALOT say it means, “reddish.” Webster says the English word “ruddy” means, “Having a red, healthy appearance or complexion.”

Note other uses of this Hebrew word:

Gen 25:25, “And the first came out red , all over like an hairy garment; and they called his name Esau.”

1Sa 16:12, “And he sent, and brought him in. Now he was ruddy , and withal of a beautiful countenance, and goodly to look.”

1Sa 17:42, “And when the Philistine looked about, and saw David, he disdained him: for he was but a youth, and ruddy , and of a fair countenance.”

Comments – When Jesse Duplantis was being interviewed by Benny Hinn on This Is Your Day, he said that he was caught up in a heavenly visitation in 1988. During this visitation, he met King David. Duplantis said that he was red-headed. [31]

[31] Jesse Duplantis, interviewed by Benny Hinn, This is Your Day (Irving, Texas), on Trinity Broadcasting Network (Santa Ana, California, July 16, 2002), television program.

1Sa 16:13  Then Samuel took the horn of oil, and anointed him in the midst of his brethren: and the Spirit of the LORD came upon David from that day forward. So Samuel rose up, and went to Ramah.

1Sa 16:13 “the spirit of the Lord came upon David fro that day forward” Comments – This is the reason David was able to kill the lion and the bear (1Sa 17:36) and Goliath (1Sa 17:5).

1Sa 17:36, “Thy servant slew both the lion and the bear: and this uncircumcised Philistine shall be as one of them, seeing he hath defied the armies of the living God.”

1Sa 17:51, “Therefore David ran, and stood upon the Philistine, and took his sword, and drew it out of the sheath thereof, and slew him, and cut off his head therewith. And when the Philistines saw their champion was dead, they fled.”

David becomes mighty in battle (1Sa 16:18; 1Sa 18:7).

1Sa 16:18, “Then answered one of the servants, and said, Behold, I have seen a son of Jesse the Bethlehemite, that is cunning in playing, and a mighty valiant man, and a man of war, and prudent in matters, and a comely person, and the LORD is with him.”

1Sa 18:7, “And the women answered one another as they played, and said, Saul hath slain his thousands, and David his ten thousands.”

1Sa 16:13 Comments – Saul is our example of a man anointed king and filled with Holy Ghost, but he was lifted up with pride and the Holy Spirit taken from him (1Sa 16:14), and he died in battle against the enemy (1Sa 31:4-6). This is a type of believer who can turn in disobedience against God with pride and put the blood of Christ to open shame, with which God removes His Spirit from him and the latter end becomes worse than before believing, as was Saul’s latter end. Saul was troubled by an evil spirit in the end (1Sa 16:14). See Heb 6:4-6 and Heb 10:26-29.

1Sa 16:14, “But the Spirit of the LORD departed from Saul, and an evil spirit from the LORD troubled him.”

1Sa 31:6, “So Saul died, and his three sons, and his armourbearer, and all his men, that same day together.”

1Sa 16:13 Comments – David was anointed king and filled with the Holy Ghost long before he received his crown. He patiently endured persecution before Saul’s death This is figurative of us as Christians being anointed as kings and priests by the anointing of the Holy Ghost (Rev 1:6, Act 2:38), but we are to endure persecution until God destroys the enemy and we receive our heavenly crowns. (See 1Co 9:25, 2Ti 4:8, Jas 1:12 , 1Pe 5:4, Rev 2:10; Rev 3:11)

Rev 1:6, “And hath made us kings and priests unto God and his Father; to him be glory and dominion for ever and ever. Amen.”

Act 2:38, “Then Peter said unto them, Repent, and be baptized every one of you in the name of Jesus Christ for the remission of sins, and ye shall receive the gift of the Holy Ghost.”

1Co 9:25, “And every man that striveth for the mastery is temperate in all things. Now they do it to obtain a corruptible crown; but we an incorruptible.”

2Ti 4:8, “Henceforth there is laid up for me a crown of righteousness, which the Lord, the righteous judge, shall give me at that day: and not to me only, but unto all them also that love his appearing.”

Jas 1:12, “Blessed is the man that endureth temptation: for when he is tried, he shall receive the crown of life, which the Lord hath promised to them that love him.”

1Pe 5:4, “And when the chief Shepherd shall appear, ye shall receive a crown of glory that fadeth not away.”

Rev 2:10, “Fear none of those things which thou shalt suffer: behold, the devil shall cast some of you into prison, that ye may be tried; and ye shall have tribulation ten days: be thou faithful unto death, and I will give thee a crown of life.”

Rev 3:11, “Behold, I come quickly: hold that fast which thou hast, that no man take thy crown.”

David blessed Saul like we are commanded to do in Mat 5:43-45.

Mat 5:43-45, “Ye have heard that it hath been said, Thou shalt love thy neighbour, and hate thine enemy. But I say unto you, Love your enemies, bless them that curse you, do good to them that hate you, and pray for them which despitefully use you, and persecute you; That ye may be the children of your Father which is in heaven: for he maketh his sun to rise on the evil and on the good, and sendeth rain on the just and on the unjust.”

Fuente: Everett’s Study Notes on the Holy Scriptures

David Anointed by Samuel

v. 1. And the Lord said unto Samuel, How long wilt thou mourn for Saul, seeing I have rejected him from reigning over Israel? Samuel had yielded to excessive grief over the condition of affairs, for his anxiety concerning the welfare of Israel and his worry over Saul’s hardness of heart had put him out of sympathy with God’s hidden ways; hence the reproof. Fill thine horn with oil, and go, I will send thee to Jesse, the Bethlehemite; for I have provided me a king among his sons, Jehovah had looked them over and chosen one of them.

v. 2. And Samuel said, How can I go? If Saul hear it, he will kill me, since he would consider the act as treachery and revolt, believing himself still to be the rightful king of Israel. And the Lord said, Take an heifer with thee, and say, I am come to sacrifice to the Lord, for apparently it was nothing unusual for the prophet to hold divine services in various parts of Israel, especially now that Shiloh was desecrated.

v. 3. And call Jesse to the sacrifice, inviting him to take part in the sacrificial meal as his own special guest, and I will show thee what thou shalt do, give him immediate directions, reveal His will at the time; and thou shalt anoint unto Me him whom I name unto thee. This involved no falsehood, but its chief object was to conceal the main reason of Samuel’s coming from such as had no authority to know of it.

v. 4. And Samuel did that which the Lord spake, and came to Bethlehem. And the elders of the town trembled at his coming, and said, Comest thou peaceably? Samuel had evidently held visitations from time to time and earnestly rebuked any wrongs and evil conditions which he found.

v. 5. And he said, Peaceably, he had no special occasion to rebuke them; I am come to sacrifice unto the Lord; sanctify yourselves, and come with me to the sacrifice, the celebration being intended to strengthen the people’s fellowship with Jehovah. And he sanctified Jesse and his sons, addressing this admonition to them in particular, so they would be sure to wash themselves and put on clean garments, and called them to the sacrifice, as his own special guests.

v. 6. And it came to pass, when they were come, that he looked on Eliab, the first-born, and, being impressed by his appearance and bearing, said, Surely the Lord’s anointed is before Him, this thought immediately arose in his heart.

v. 7. But the Lord said unto Samuel, giving an answer to his spirit, Look not on his countenance or on the height of his stature, on the fact that he was a handsome, stalwart young man; because I have refused him; for the Lord seeth not as man seeth, He has different standards of judgment; for man looketh on the outward appearance, judging from what he can see, but the Lord looketh on the heart, judging by the disposition of the soul, proving the heart and the reins. This is a general truth which applies to the relation of God to men at all times. God, knowing the inward thoughts of men, is unfailing in His judgment.

v. 8. Then Jesse called Abinadab and made him pass before Samuel, for the purpose of careful inspection. And he said, Neither hath the Lord chosen this.

v. 9. Then Jesse made Shammah to pass by. And he said, Neither hath the Lord chosen this.

v. 10. Again, Jesse made seven of his sons to pass before Samuel, that is, a total of seven, including the three oldest. And Samuel said unto Jesse, The Lord hath not chosen these.

v. 11. And Samuel said unto Jesse, Are here all thy children? And he said, There remaineth yet the youngest, and, behold, he keepeth the sheep. As the youngest he had to stand back and take charge of the chores, while his older brothers made ready to go to the sacrificial feast. And Samuel said unto Jesse, Send and fetch him; for we will not sit down, literally, “surround,” namely, the table, to partake of the meal, till he come hither.

v. 12. And he sent and brought him in. Now, he was ruddy, said of the red color of his hair, which is unusual in the Orient, and withal of a beautiful countenance, with bright eyes and a clear look, and goodly to look to, handsome and stalwart of body as well. And the Lord said, announcing His decision to the thoughts of Samuel, Arise, anoint him; for this is he, chosen by the Lord in spite of his youth.

v. 13. Then Samuel took the horn of oil and anointed him in the midst of his brethren, they were witnesses of the solemn act; and the Spirit of the Lord came upon David from that day forward, he received a special endowment with gifts and powers for his royal calling, so that he was gradually led forward to full development, to complete fitness for his life’s work. So Samuel rose up and went to Ramah, back to his home. It is probable that the significance of the ceremony was not made known to the other sons of Jesse, who may have been under the impression that David was simply to be regarded as a pupil of the great prophet. But the Lord’s will went forward in due time. It happens quite often that the Lord chooses men for His work who are without honor before men. But just such instruments He fills with His Spirit, making them fit to perform the work of their high calling.

Fuente: The Popular Commentary on the Bible by Kretzmann

DAVID ANOINTED AS THE FUTURE KING, AND HIS FIRST INTRODUCTION TO SAUL. (1Sa 16:1-23)

EXPOSITION

CHOICE OF DAVID AS SUCCESSOR TO SAUL (1Sa 16:1-13).

1Sa 16:1

How long writ thou mourn? The grief of Samuel was prolonged almost to a sinful extent, nor can we wonder at it. We who see Saul’s whole career, and know how deeply he fell, are in danger of discrediting his high qualities; but those who were witnesses of his military skill and prowess, and saw him and his heroic son raising the nation from its feebleness and thraldom to might and empire, must have given him an ungrudging admiration. Both David’s dirge (2Sa 1:19-27) and Samuel’s long mourning, and the unqualified obedience which he was able so quickly to extort from a high-spirited people unused to being governed, bear decisive testimony to his powers as a ruler and commander in war. But God now warns Samuel to mourn no longer. Saul’s rejection has become final, and God’s prophet must sacrifice his personal feelings, and prepare to carry out the purpose indicated in 1Sa 13:14; 1Sa 15:28. We must not, however, conclude that Samuel’s sorrow had only been for Saul personally; there was danger for the whole nation in his conduct. If wilfulness and passion gained in him the upper hand, the band of authority would be loosed, and the old feebleness and anarchy would return, and Israel become even more hopelessly a prey to its former troubles. Samuel, therefore, is to go to Bethlehem and anoint there a son of Jesse. As this place lay at some distance from Ramah, and out of the circuit habitually traversed by Samuel as judge, he probably had but a general knowledge of the family. Evidently he had no acquaintance with David (1Sa 15:11, 1Sa 15:12); but as Jesse was a man of wealth and importance, his reputation had probably reached the prophet’s ears.

1Sa 16:2

And Samuel said, How can I go? if Saul hear it, he will kill me. Saul was actually king, and the anointing of another in his stead would be regarded as an act of open treason, and the stirring up of civil war. This was not indeed intended. The anointing of David was a prophetic indication of the man whom God, in his own way and at his own time, would place upon Saul’s throne, without either scheming or action thereto on the part either of Samuel or of David. Its value would chiefly lie in the careful training he would receive from Samuel; but when David was king, it would also greatly strengthen his position; for it would be known that from his boyhood he had been marked out for his high office. Never did man mount a throne with purer hands than David; and if Saul would have permitted it, he would have been a faithful and loyal servant to the last. It was Saul really who thrust the kingdom upon David. As regards Samuel’s fears, headstrong as Saul was, he owed too much to the prophet to have put]aim to death; but he would have visited the act upon Jesse and his family with revengeful violence, and Samuel would henceforward have lost all freedom of action, even if he were not cast into prison, or banished from the land. God therefore commands him to take an heifer with him, and say, I am come to sacrifice to Jehovah. The question has been asked, Was there in this any duplicity? In answer we may ask another question: Is it always necessary, or even right, to tell in all cases the whole truth? If so, quarrels and ill-feeling would be multiplied to such an extent that social life would be unendurable. All charitable, well disposed persons suppress much, and keep a guard over their lips, lest they should stir up strife and hatred. Now here there was to be no treason, no inciting to civil war. David, still a child, was to be set apart for a high destiny, possibly without at the time fully knowing what the anointing meant, and certainly with the obligation to take no step whatsoever towards winning the crown that was to descend upon his head. This was his probation, and he bore the trial nobly. And what right would Samuel have had, not merely to compel David to be a traitor, but to place Jesse and his family in a position of danger and difficulty? To have anointed David publicly would have forced Jesse to an open rupture with the king, and he must have sought safety either by fighting for his life, or by breaking up his home, and fleeing into a foreign land. David in course of time had thus to seek an asylum for his parents (1Sa 22:3, 1Sa 22:4), but it was through no fault of his own, for he always remained true to his allegiance. Even when David was being hunted for his life, he made no appeal to Samuel’s anointing, but it remained, what it was ever intended to be, a secret sign and declaration to him of God’s preordained purpose, but of one as to which he was to take no step to bring about its fulfilment. It was a pledge to David, and nothing but misery would have resulted from its being prematurely made known to those who had no right to know it. God wraps up the flower, which is in due time to open and bear fruit, within many a covering; and to rend these open prematurely is to destroy the flower and the fruit that is to spring from it. And so to have anointed David openly, and to have made him understand the meaning of the act, would have been to destroy David and frustrate the Divine purpose.

1Sa 16:3-5

Call Jesse to the sacrifice. The word used is zebach, and means a sacrifice followed by a feast, at which all the elders of the town, and with them Jesse and his elder sons, would be present by the prophet’s invitation. It is plain that such sacrifices were not unusual, or Saul would have demanded a reason for Samuel’s conduct. As the ark remained so long in obscurity at Kirjath-jearim, and the solemn services of the tabernacle were not restored until Saul at some period of his reign removed it to Nob, possibly Samuel may have instituted this practice of occasionally holding sacrifices, now at one place and now at another, to keep alive a sense of religion in the hearts of the people; and probably on such occasions he taught them the great truths of the law, thus combining in his person the offices of prophet and priest. Nevertheless, the elders of the town trembled at his coming. More literally, “went with trembling to meet him.” Very probably such visitations often took place because some crime had been committed into which Samuel wished to inquire, or because the people had been negligent in some duty. And though conscious of no such fault, yet at the coming of one of such high rank their minds foreboded evil. He quiets, however, their fears and bids them sanctify themselves; i.e. they were to wash and purify themselves, and abstain from everything unclean, and put on their festal garments. It is added, He sanctified Jesse and his sons, i.e. he took especial care that no legal impurity on their part should stand in the way of the execution of his errand.

1Sa 16:6-10

When they were come. I.e. to the house of Jesse, apparently in the interval between the sacrifice and the feast. The latter we learn in 1Sa 16:11 did not take place until after David had been sent for. But many hours would elapse between the sacrifice and the feast, as the victim had to be skinned and prepared for roasting, and finally cooked. This interval was spent in Jesse’s house; and when he saw there Eliab, the first born, and observed his tall stature and handsome face, qualities which Samuel had admired in Saul, he said, i.e. in himself, felt sure, that the goodly youth was Jehovah’s anointed (see on 1Sa 2:10, 1Sa 2:35; 1Sa 10:1, etc.), but is warned that these external advantages do not necessarily imply real worth of heart; and as Jehovah looketh on the heart, his judgment depends, not on appearances, but on reality. As Eliab is thus rejected, Jesse makes his other sons pass before the prophet. Next Abinadab, who has the same name as a son of Saul (1Sa 31:2); then Shammah, so called again in 1Sa 17:13, but Shimeah in 2Sa 13:3, and Shimma in 1Ch 2:13, where, however, the Hebrew is exactly the same as in 2Sa 13:3. After these four other sons follow, of whom one apparently died young, as only seven are recorded in 1Ch 2:13-15, whereas these with David make eight. To all these seven the Divine voice within Samuel gave no response, and he said unto Jesse, Jehovah hath not chosen these.

1Sa 16:11, 1Sa 16:12

Are here all thy children? The word literally is lads, na’arim. The elder sons must have been nearly or quite grown up, but David was probably a mere boy, and as such had not been thought worthy of an invitation, but had been left with the servants keeping the sheep. The prophet now orders him to be summoned, and marks his value in God’s sight by saying, We will not sit down till he come hither. The verb literally means, we will not surround, i.e. the table, though at this time the Jews did sit at meals, instead of reclining on couches, as in the days of Amos and our Lord. We gather, moreover, from Samuel’s words that the selection of the son that was to be anointed took place while the preparations were being made for the feast. At the prophet’s command David is fetched from the flock, which was probably near the house, and on his arrival the prophet sees a ruddy boy, i.e. red-haired, correctly rendered in the Vulgate rufus, the colour loved by all painters of manly beauty, and, from the delicacy of complexion which accompanies it, especially admired in the East, where men are generally dark-haired and sallow-faced. Moreover, he was of a beautiful countenance. The Hebrew says, “with beautiful eyes,” and so the Syriac and Septuagint rightly. He was also goodly to look to, i.e. to look at. These last words give the general idea of the beauty of his face and person, while his bright hair and delicate complexion and the beauty of his eyes are specially noticed in the Hebrew.

1Sa 16:13

Then Samuel took the horn of oil, and anointed him in the midst of his brethren. Did he or they understand the meaning of the act? We think not. Certainly Eliab (1Sa 17:28) had no idea of any special greatness being in store for his brother. Most probably both Jesse and his sons regarded David as simply selected to be trained in Samuel’s schools; and there can be little doubt that he was so trained. Samuel gave unto David that which Saul had not receivedlong and careful training; and David profited by it, and at Naioth in Ramah perfected his skill, not only in reading and writing, but in poetry and music. Saul and David were both men of extraordinary natural ability; but the one is always shy, awkward, and with all the defects of an uneducated man; while David is altogether the contrary. But Samuel gave his youthful pupil something better than accomplishmentshe carefully educated him in the law of God, and led his mind onward to all that was good. It was Samuel’s last and crowning work. Prophecy and monarchy were both of his institution, as orderly elements of the Jewish state; he also trained the man who more nearly than any other approached unto the ideal of the theocratic king, and was to Israel the type of their coming Messiah. It was Samuel’s wisdom in teaching his young men music which gave David the skill to be the sweet singer of the sanctuary; and we may feel sure also that when David arranged the service of the house of God, and gave priests and Levites their appointed duties (1Ch 23-26.), the model which he set before him was that in which he had so often taken part with Samuel at Ramah. As Eliah, Abinadab, and Shammah were but lads (1Sa 16:11), David must have been very young, and many years have elapsed between his anointing and his summons to Saul’s presence and combat with Goliath; and they were thus well spent in the prophet’s company, whence at, proper intervals he would return to his father’s house and resume his ordinary duties. The Spirit of Jehovah came upon David from that day forward. In modern language we should say that David’s character grew and developed nobly, both intellectually and morally. With far more ethical truth the Israelites saw in the high qualities which displayed themselves in David’s acts and words the presence and working of a Divine Spirit. It was a “breathing of Jehovah” which moved David onward, and fostered in him all that was morally great and good, just as it was “the breath of God” which at the creation moved upon the face of the waters to call this earth into being (Gen 1:2). Samuel rose up and went to Ramah. His mission was over, and he returned to his ordinary duties; but, doubtless, first he made arrangements that David should in due time follow him thither, that he might be trained for his high office under Samuel’s direct influence and control.

DAVID‘S INTRODUCTION TO KING SAUL (1Sa 16:14-23).

1Sa 16:14, 1Sa 16:15

From this time forward David is the central figure of the history. Saul has been rejected, and though, as being the actual king, he must still play his part, more especially as his decline goes on side by side with David s growth in every kingly quality, yet the record of it is no longer given on Saul’s account. Interesting, then, as may be the information concerning the mental malady with which Saul was visited, yet the object of this section is to acquaint us with the manner in which David was first brought into connection with him. From the description given of David in 1Sa 16:18 it is evident that there has been a considerable interval of time between this and the previous section. David is no longer a child, but a “mighty valiant man.” The connection is ethical, and lies in the contrasted moral state of the two men, as shown in the two parallel statements: “the Spirit of Jehovah came upon David;” “the Spirit of Jehovah departed from Saul.” There was a gradual decline and debasement of his character; and as David grew from a child into a hero in war and a scholar in peace, so Saul, from being a hero, degenerated into a moody and resentful tyrant. An evil spirit from Jehovah troubled him. Really, as in the margin, terrified him; that is, San] became subject to fits of intense mental agony, under which his reason gave way, and temporary insanity, accompanied by outbreaks of violence, came on. It is very difficult for us with our richer language to give the exact force of the Hebrew; for the word rendered spirit is literally wind, air, breath. A student of Hebrew can trace the word ruach through all its modifications, from its physical signification as the material wind, to its metaphysical meaning as an influence from God; and then still onward up to the beings who minister before God, and of whom the Psalmist says, “He maketh his angels to be winds” (Psa 104:4); till finally we reach up unto the third person of the blessed Trinity: and then, as with this full knowledge of the Divine nature we read backward, we find the presence of the Holy Ghost indicated, where to the Israelite probably there was mention only of a material agency. Jost, in his ‘History of the Jews since the time of the Maccabees,’ vol. 1. p. 12, says that Saul suffered under that form of madness called hypochondria, and that the Jews gave this the name of bad air, the words translated here “evil spirit;” for they held, he says, that “the devil inhabited the air.” So St. Paul speaks of the “wicked spiritual beings that are in high places,” i.e. in the loftier regions of the atmosphere (Eph 6:12). A study of Saul’s character makes it probable that, as is often the case with men of brilliant genius, there was always a touch of insanity in his mental constitution. His joining in the exercises of the prophets (1Sa 10:10-12) was an outburst of eccentric enthusiasm; and the excitement of his behaviour in the occurrences narrated in 1Sa 14:1-52. indicate a mind that might easily be thrown off its balance. And now he seems to have brooded over his deposition by Samuel, and instead of repenting to have regarded himself as an ill-used man, and given himself up to despondency, until he became a prey to melancholy, and his mind was overclouded. His servants rightly regarded this as a Divine punishment, but their words are remarkable. Behold, an evil spirit from God terrifieth thee. And so again, in 1Sa 14:16, the evil spirit from God, as if they were unwilling to ascribe to Jehovah, their covenant Deity, the sending of this evil “influence,” while rightly they saw that evil as well as good must come from the Almighty, inasmuch as all things are in his hand, and whatever is must be by his permission. The writer of the book has no such scruples; he calls it “an evil spirit from Jehovah,” because it was Jehovah, their own theocratic King, who had dethroned Saul, and withdrawn from him his blessing and protection.

1Sa 16:16-18

A cunning player on an harp. Literally, one skilful in striking the chords on the harp. In Saul’s case music would have a soothing influence, and turn the current of his thoughts. His officers suggest, therefore, that search should be made for an expert musician, and Saul consents; whereupon one of the servants recommended the son of Jesse. The word used here is not the same as that found in 1Sa 16:15, 1Sa 16:16, 1Sa 16:17. There we have Saul’s officers; here it is na’arim, “young men.” Thus it was a youth of David’s own age, who had probably been with him at Naioth in Ramah, that described him to Saul. The description is full and interesting, but it has its difficulties. David is not only skilful in music, of which art he would have had ample scope to manifest his powers in the service of the sanctuary at Ramah, but he is also a mighty valiant man, and a man of war, and prudent in matters, or, rather, intelligent in speech, as well as handsome and successful. Nevertheless, in 1Sa 17:33-36 David appears as a youth about to make his first essay in fighting; and though the two exploits mentioned there, of killing the lion and the bear, might justify his friend in calling him a mighty valiant man, literally, “a hero of valour,” they do not justify the words a man of war. It is strange, moreover, that Saul should be so entirely ignorant of David’s person and lineage as he is represented in the narrative in 1Sa 17:1-58, if thus David was court musician, though reference is made there to this visit of David to Saul in 1Sa 17:15. Possibly, however, David and this youth may have served together in repelling some marauding expedition of the Philistines, and though David may not have actually done much,nothing, at all events, so well worth repeating to Saul as the combats with the wild beasts,yet he may have achieved enough to convince his friend that he had in him the qualities of a man of war, i.e. of a good soldier. For the rest, we must conclude that this first visit of David was a very short one, and that after playing before Saul and being approved of, he then returned home, ready to come again whenever summoned, but that Saul’s malady did not immediately return, and so a sufficient interval elapsed for Saul not to recognise him when he saw him under altered circumstances. Saul’s question, “Whose son is this stripling?” (1Sa 17:56) seems to imply that he had a sort of confused idea about him, without being able exactly to recall who he was. The ultimate consequences of this introduction to Saul, as well as its immediate effect, are all narrated here after the usual manner of Old Testament history (see 1Sa 7:13).

1Sa 16:19, 1Sa 16:20

Saul sent messengers to fetch David, the description of him as a brave soldier being even more to the king’s liking (see 1Sa 14:52) than his skill in music. As a great man might not be approached without a present (1Sa 9:7; 1Sa 10:4), Jesse sends one consisting of produce from his farm. It consisted of an ass of breada strange expression; but there is little doubt that a word has been omitted, and that we should read, with the Syriac, “And Jesse took an ass, and laded it with bread, and a skin of wine, and a kid.” It was not an ass laden with bread, as in the A.V; but all three things were placed upon the animal.

1Sa 16:21-23

David came to Saul, and stood before him. The latter phrase means, “became one of his regular attendants.” This, and his being appointed one of Saul’s armour bearers, happened only after the lapse of some time. The armour bearer, like the esquire in the middle ages, had to carry his lord’s lance, and sword, and shield, and was always a tried soldier, and one whom the king trusted. It was apparently after the combat with Goliath that Saul sent to Jesse, and asked that David might be always with him; and until his jealousy burst forth David was very dear to him, and his music exercised a soothing influence upon his melancholy. At first, probably, these fits of insanity came upon Saul only at distant intervals, but afterwards more frequently, and with such loss of self-control that he more than once tried to murder David, and even Jonathan, his own son. We have, then, here a summary of the relations of Saul to David until the unfortunate day when the king heard the women ascribe to the youthful soldier the higher honor (1Sa 18:7); and thenceforward these friendly feelings gave way to a growing dislike which deprived Saul of a faithful servant, and finally cost him his crown and life on Mount Gilboa.

HOMILETICS

1Sa 16:1-5

The progression of Providence.

The facts are

1. Samuel is aroused from his sorrow for Saul by a command from God to anoint a son of Jesse.

2. Being in fear, be is directed to go and offer sacrifice and await further instructions.

3. Arriving at Bethlehem, he quiets the trembling elders and makes preparation for the sacrifice. It was natural for Samuel in his retirement to cherish sorrow for Saul; and his brooding over disappointment would become more habitual as no active measures were as yet taken to provide a successor. The section before us introduces a new phase in the development of God’s purposes. The part which Samuel was called on to play, and the spirit in which he set about it, bring out some truths of general import.

I. PROVIDENCE PROCEEDS IN ITS ORDERLY COURSE IRRESPECTIVE OF PERSONAL DISAPPOINTMENTS AND FAILURES. Saul was a failure; Samuel was disappointed; and to human appearance a pause of very uncertain duration must be made in the progress of events. The attitude of Samuel was one of sorrowful waiting. He could only nurse his grief. To man it was as though a break had occurred in the continuous unfolding of the Divine purposes in relation to the Messianic kingdom. But this was only in appearance. God will not have his great purpose in Christ arrested in realisation by the failure of one or the brooding grief of another. During the separation of Samuel from Saul the unseen hand had been guarding and guiding a youth at Bethlehem, and now that his age and the circumstances of the family were ripening for action, the sorrowing prophet must rouse himself to share actively in the coming order of events. In every age God has his purposes to fulfil, and they continue to unfold notwithstanding the unfaithfulness of some and the complaining voice of others. The changes experienced by men are only incidents of a moment; the providence of God is one and continuous. In the process of establishing the Messianic kingdom, one by one men and kingdoms rose and disappeared,the people raged and submitted, wept and rejoiced, were now true and now false,but all the while the one Will was working on to the setting of the true King in Zion. In the history of the Christian Church, men of the type of Saul have been discarded and others of Samuel’s spirit have wept in solitude; but neither the failure nor the protracted sorrow have been allowed to arrest the silent, sure progression towards the goal of human existence. A careful survey shows, that as the wholesome economy of the globe is preserved and its ultimate issue being attained amidst and even by the storms of life, so there is a wise and merciful Providence working on in unbroken lines towards the realisation of the promise made to Abraham: “In thy seed shall all the nations of the earth be blessed.”

II. GOD‘S SERVANTS SHOULD ADAPT THEMSELVES TO THE PROGRESSION OF HIS PROVIDENCE. Men of Samuel’s type must rouse themselves and join freely and confidently in the blessed progression. New conditions are daily arising. The instruments for the realising of the Divine purpose are limited only by his creative power. The earth is his, and he raises up a David when a David can best furnish the next link in the unbroken chain. Faculties and aptitudes need only circumstances to develop them into direct forces in the Messianic line. Samuel must brace himself to this aspect of things, and share in the honour and the toil of covering the failures of some by drawing out the better qualities of others. We must guard against the tendency to settle down into a mournful, inactive mood because, forsooth, the lines of Providence seem to us to be involved and past all disentanglement. There are men whose delight it is always to sing in the minor key. They overlook the fact that God’s will is being wrought out in spite of necessarily imperfect creatures. There is a voice calling on all such to arise, to cease to feed their soul on regrets, to believe that the “covenant is ordered in all things, and is sure.”

III. WE SHOULD AVOID A PREJUDGMENT OF GOD‘S WAYS BASED ON PARTIAL KNOWLEDGE. The fear of Samuel finds its counterpart in the fear of many when called to undertake arduous duties. In his case it was based on partial information, and, therefore, while natural, was unreasonable. He appears to have concluded beforehand that he was to go and at once set up an actual king, and summon Israel to turn their allegiance from Saul to the new monarch. No doubt this would be exasperating to Saul, and by many might be regarded as treason. His reference to Saul’s killing him would not, therefore, express mere fear of death so much as his view of consequences which it was desirable to avoid by a less obtrusive policy. Samuel had no right to prejudge the appointment of God. He was simply told to go to Bethlehem with his horn of oil, for that a king was to be forthcoming from the sons of Jesse. We possess only partial information concerning many of the purposes and methods of God. We are not justified in forming a judgment of all his acts by what is made known to us. The morality of all he commands is ever the same, whatever the future developments may be. Every day will bring its light. We must not put more into God’s words than he intends. If he says, “Fill thine horn with oil and go to Jesse,” we must not make that mean that we are to raise a standard of rebellion and place ourselves in peril. Men do put into Scripture what is not there, and then see consequences which arouse anxiety.

IV. DUTY REQUIRES THAT WE PLACE OURSELVES IN A POSITION TO OBTAIN FURTHER LIGHT. Samuel, instead of dwelling on his fear, arising from an unwise prejudgment of God’s acts, was directed to go and do the one thing, and then look out for what next to do (1Sa 16:3). He was to obey, and so be in a position to learn whether the next step was to raise publicly a standard of rebellion around a new king, or privately to anoint the coming man and let him await the removal by death of the people’s leader. We have here an important practical rule. By doing each duty fully as it comes we qualify for more light and greater aptitude for succeeding duties. When bent on the performance of duty, which in its issues may involve consequences serious and untraceable, it is well to associate religious exercises with them. It is as true for us as for Samuel that, in our sphere, the Lord will show us what next to do. Faithfulness day by day in small things will make us keen to recognise the Divine voice with reference to greater things.

1Sa 16:6-13

Human and Divine judgments contrasted.

The facts are

1. Samuel, being impressed with the appearance of Eliab, concludes that he is the coming king.

2. An intimation is given that Eliab is not the man, and the reason assigned for the imperfect judgment of Samuel is, that man looks on the outward appearance, but God on the heart.

3. It being found that the other sons were not chosen of God, inquiry is made concerning the absent one.

4. On the youngest being brought, Samuel at once recognises him as the chosen of God, and, in obedience to the voice of God, anoints him in the midst of the family.

5. Henceforth the Spirit of the Lord rests on David. We have here the introduction of an entirely new feature in the development of Israel’s mission in the world. The former choice of a king was virtually man’s. The initiation of the choice was taken in the desire to have a king to embody their idea of government (1Sa 8:5, 1Sa 8:19, 1Sa 8:20). In this case the people are not consulted or heeded. God selects the man according to his knowledge of what is best. The human device had failed; the Divine choice can now come in with impressiveness. Yet human instrumentality brings to pass God’s purpose. Samuel, however, is influenced by the appearance of things, and has to learn that even the judgment of the wise and good is liable to err. The essential imperfection of man s judgment as compared with God’s is explained by the fact that man’s knowledge does not enter into the realities of things as does God’s.

I. LIFE IS A SERIES OF JUDGMENTS. In every act of perception there is involved an intuitive judgment; and in every comparison of different objects, as also in every course of silent reasoning, a decision is arrived at which helps to form the stock of ideas constituting our knowledge. Thus do we acquire opinions respecting the value of men and things. In some persons there is a tendency to criticise human actions and words, and to proceed from what is clear to the senses to a deliberate judgment on the invisible; but in all there is a necessity of nature by which, apart from criticism, some estimate is formed of every one coming under our observation. This necessity of our nature is full of advantage. It is the means of enrichment to the mind; it furnishes a basis for friendship; it preserves from treachery; it facilitates the intercourse of life; and when the series of judgments is formed, under the guidance of such light as Christ gives, it constitutes an imperishable fount of enjoyment when this life is past.

II. GOD ALSO HAS HIS JUDGMENT OF THINGS. It is not correct to speak of God’s knowledge in the terms applicable to man; for he does not pass from the small to the great, the obscure to the clear, the sensible to the invisible. Yet it may be said of God that there is in his mind a clear judgment respecting each, as to what it essentially is, and what its value in the great economy of the universe. To say that God knows us altogether is another way of saying that he has a judgment of our character and position. It is a solemn fact for us that the Eternal adjudges our actions and thoughts one by one as they arise (Rev 20:12), and the day of judgment will be a summary of the judgments passed on our actions one by one as they occur. If men only had more faith in God, and did but let a knowledge of his estimate of actions influence their lives, what wonders we should see!

III. MAN‘S JUDGMENT AND GOD‘S JUDGMENT ARE OFTEN VERY DIFFERENT. Possibly, while the distinction between infinite and finite exists, there can never he a perfect coincidence of the human and Divine judgment, in the strictest sense of the term. But apart from this there are several aspects of the truth affirmed and illustrated in the case of Samuel.

1. The constitution of things. We know and judge only of the appearance of things. The material universe, even when subjected to the scrutiny of the most correct scientific appliances, and reduced to the last analysis of elements, is only known on the outside. What the ultimate relation of the primary forces to the one almighty Power, and why they work in certain observed lines to which we give the name “laws,” we know not. The same is true of mind. It is a vast world, on the outer fringe only of which we at present can gaze. Not so God’s. As Author and Upholder of all, he has an estimate of the internal, essential constitution of things more perfect than our estimate of the outward appearance. Hence the folly of men professing to say what cannot be; or that the universe, as seen by us in operation, is to be and has been always thus. Hence the wisdom of submitting to the revealed truth of God when it touches on his relation to the order of things and the mysteries of his own ineffable Being (Mat 28:19; Joh 7:28).

2. The worth of lines of action. Man’s judgment is freely expressed in reference to certain lines of action pursued by what are called the “great.” The heroes of the world have often won admiration for deeds which, had man’s judgment been based on a finer perception of what constitutes greatness, would have been buried in oblivion. Have not the most costly monuments been raised to warriors? Is not the world’s idea of “glory” that of conquering by force of arms, or the enjoyment of wealth and splendour? The judgment of God is not thus. Be looks on the heart of things. True greatness lies in saving, healing, curing, elevating, purifying, binding in bonds of peace and goodwill. Imagine Jesus Christ raising an Arc de Triomphe! Imagine him conferring highest honours on men of great and bloody victories I Imagine him pointing to wealth as the goal of a youth’s ambition! The noblest men are those who best reproduce the spirit and deeds of the Son of God.

3. Human character. Man’s judgment of character is necessarily imperfect; for words are not always a revelation of the inner man, but the reverse, and the seat of motive is not pierced by the human eye. There is often a worse heart than appears on the surface of a man’s conduct, and, also, a better heart than a marl sometimes gets credit for, We are too apt to be influenced by prejudice, social considerations, personal interests, and to estimate the principles of others by the narrow standard of our own. Some men are suspicious, or self-righteous, or limited in their area of observation, and therefore they can never be sure of their judgment of other men. Others are easily caught by what is fair and conformable to custom, and, like Samuel, they spring to hasty conclusions. It is better often to fall into the hands of God than of man. On the other hand, God’s judgment of us is perfect. The most secret avenue of thought and feeling is naked and open to his eye. He reads us entirely. His knowledge is not inferential from words and actions, but is that of the disposition and hidden motive (Psa 139:1-24.).

4. Fitness for position. Samuel was in error in supposing that the qualities which might be inferred from his outward appearance to exist in Eliab would enable him to perform the part required of a true king in Israel. God alone knew the high spiritual work to be done by the coming king, and he alone could see the latent qualities in David by which it could be performed. At best our judgment is guess work. We especially feel this in seeking to fill up secular offices, and more so when making appointments to spiritual duties (Act 1:24; 1Ti 5:22).

General lessons:

1. There is abundant scope in life for caution, patience, charity in our estimate of others.

2. The best qualities of life are not always those which come to the surface on first acquaintance.

3. It should be an effort to be inwardly such as God will approve, and then all else will follow in due course.

4. Reticence in reference to the character of others is the sign of a proper estimate of our powers.

5. It should be a spring of comfort to the sincere that God knows them and approves when man errs in judgment.

1Sa 16:12, 1Sa 16:13

The coming king.

The facts are

1. The personal appearance of David is pleasing.

2. Samuel is instructed to anoint him as the chosen of God.

3. Subsequent to the anointing the Spirit of God rests on David.

4. Samuel, having performed this important duty, retires to Ramah.

Samuel, like many a servant of God in public affairs, carried in his heart a great secret. He sought the coming king, but not a word was said to indicate to the family of Jesse the specific object of his mission. For anything they knew, the selection of one of the family might be designed for some purpose connected with Samuel’s work not yet made plain. The command to anoint was based, not on any discovery of qualities from mere outward appearance, though these were not unfavourable, but on God’s knowledge of the inner life. Man’s king had been chosen because of his being an average representative of the age, and an embodiment of the physical and mental qualities agreeable to the people. The coming king was chosen because God knew him to be the best representative of the spiritual vocation of Israel in the world. The coming king may be regarded as

I. A TYPE. Events under the Old Testament dispensation were so ordered of God as to shadow forth the Christ, and both Old and New Testaments especially speak of David as the type of the true King in Zion. This is seen in several respects.

1. In qualities. Of course no man, no words, no institutions can adequately set forth the qualities of the “express image” of the Father’s person. But, in comparison with others, David certainly shadowed forth more than any one some of the features of character so prominent in Christ. Negatively, there was an absence of the qualities on which men were accustomed to depend. Great physical strength, lofty stature, overpowering physique were not his. And so in Christ there was an absence of the outward form which men of tow type count powerful. He was not apparently competent to subdue the world by the only force which men take count of. But, positively, there was in this coming king an adumbration of the higher spiritual qualities which shone so brightly in Christ. The allusions to his personal appearance are both to indicate that he was not the embodiment of mere physical force, and that he did possess what was of more value, namely, vigour and freshness, capable of buoyant effort in any good endeavour; grace of spiritgentle, approachable, one of whom the poor and needy need not be afraid; sincerity and ingenuousness of mind, free from double motives and self-seeking; love of what is right and good because right and good, uncorrupted by long and dubious association with the world’s business; sympathy with God that finds joy in quiet fellowship with him by prayer or holy psalm; aspirations after the future elevation of mankind to a holier life; subordination of spirit to a higher will, for the working out of the covenant made with his people. He who sees not as man sees knew that these qualities were actually or germinally in the youngest son of Jesse. How fully the same were in Christ is evident from his life and words and sacrificial work.

2. In object. Saul’s reign was a failure in so far as concerned the elevation of the nation to its proper position. The object for which the coming king was anointed was to deliver Israel from thraldom, fear, and degradation, and enable them to more worthily subserve the ulterior spiritual ends of their existence as a nation. In large measure David did this. In this he was certainly a type of him who was chosen for the deliverance of a larger community from worse evils; and that, too, with reference to a permanent order of things stretching beyond the day of judgment (Joh 17:1-26.; 1Co 15:1-58.).

3. In call and preparation. Leaving out the fact that Bethlehem was the place of birth to David and Christ, we may notice two or three correspondences. This youth was specially chosen of God irrespective of popular voice; he grew up in quietude, awaiting the opening of events before entering on his predestined work; and was anointed with the abiding presence of the Holy Spirit, and so gradually became qualified for his important duties. Emphatically, Christ was “the Chosen One,” “Elect,” “Precious;” in youth he grew in wisdom and stature, far removed from the worries of public business, and received the anointing of the Spirit “without measure.”

II. A MODEL. Confining attention to the qualities of this coming king, and the objects that in due course he set before himself, he may be regarded as the model king. It had been well for Israel had all subsequent kings shared these qualities and kept before them the same lofty spiritual ends. And although civilisation in the West differs from that of the East in David’s age, yet it would be a great boon to the nations if all kings and queens would adopt and manifest the same principles, and seek to harmonise all the people’s habits and aspirations with Messiah’s kingdom. Likewise, as each Christian is to be a “king” unto God (Rev 1:5), we may see in the qualities and aspirations of this model king what manner of persons we ought to be.

III. A CONTRAST. This is obvious. Saul was man’s man; David was God’s. Saul was man’s device for saving the people (1Sa 8:5, 1Sa 8:19, 1Sa 8:20); David was God’s provision for raising them to the Messianic standard. Man’s device failedthe instrument partook too largely of the weaknesses of the people to be raised; God’s provision succeeded, in so far as related to national freedom, higher spiritual elevation, and actual furtherance of Messianic purposes. The contrast is suggestive of a wider expedient and a more blessed provisions. Mankind was in need of deliverance from the evils consequent on sin. During long ages the human expedient of “wisdom” was tried, but in vain. But “after that in the wisdom of God the world by wisdom knew not God, it pleased God by the foolishness of preaching to save them that believe.” The CHRIST has become the Deliverer. His gospel is the power of God unto salvation. By him the highest and most blessed issues are wrought out for mankind. The contrast may be traced, also, in respect to our personal deliverance and elevation to the loftiest position attainable by human nature. Our bare human reason, human morality, human force of will must issue in trouble. We need the Anointed One, the God given Saviour. He transfusing our natural powers with his glorious energy, will make us “more than conquerors.”

General lessons:

1. Great natures may be nurtured in lowly places while engaged in quiet pursuits.

2. Amidst the intricacies of life God keeps his eye on his loved ones, and calls them forth in due time.

3. Aspirations are awakened, but insight into the future is not perfected at once. David was stimulated, but knew not all at first.

4. Full confidence is felt when God reveals his call: then the “horn,” not the vial (1Sa 10:1), may be used.

5. To God’s true servants the Holy Spirit comes as abiding Helper, to teach, sanctify, comfort, and elevate.

1Sa 16:14-23

Disquietude caused by sin.

The facts are

1. Saul, being left to himself, is troubled by an evil spirit from the Lord.

2. His servants, in their concern for his peace, suggest music as an alleviation, and obtain permission to provide it.

3. David, being famed for music, is sent for, and finds favour with Saul.

4. The music of David brings relief to Saul’s troubled spirit. The narrative relates the effect of God’s judicial abandonment of Saul to the impenitent spirit he had deliberately cherished (1Sa 15:23-29). The transaction between him and Samuel in reference to his sin and rejection had been private, and during the interval from the departure to Ramah (1Sa 15:34) up to the date of the reference in 1Sa 16:14, the secret knowledge of this fact had wrought its subjective effect on the mind of Saul. The secrecy of the business is a clue to much that follows. It matters not to our purpose what sense be put on “an evil spirit from the Lord;” the fact is clear that disquietude of mind follows on transgression duly brought home to conscience yet not repented of, and that this disquietude is aggravated by secrecy.

I. THE CAUSES OF MENTAL DISQUIETUDE. There are instances of mental disquietude (Psa 42:5; Joh 12:27; Joh 14:1) differing in character and cause from that before us. In the case of Saul there was a strange blending of sullen remorse, despondency, instability, passion, fear, and desperation. He was sometimes beyond self-control, and his outbursts aroused the apprehensions of his attendants. The manifestations of a disquieted spirit will be partly determined by natural temperament, and partly by external conditions, and partly by bodily health. But of the class of which Saul’s is an example, the general causes are akin to those which operated in him.

1. A secret consciousness of sin. That Saul had done wrong in the matter of the sacrifice (1Sa 13:13), the rash vow (1Sa 14:45), and the Amalekites (1Sa 15:18, 1Sa 15:19) he knew full well; that the people knew that something was amiss with him is evident from their deliverance of Jonathan and Samuel’s slaying of Agag; but that their knowledge of Saul’s conduct was coextensive with his own is not probable. The more private interviews with Samuel had brought him face to face with sin as it appeared to the Lord. His admission, “I have sinned” (1Sa 15:24), being a conviction without true repentance, remained in his memory after his final separation from Samuel. The fact that his people did not know all only served to make the sad secret of guilt more distressing. Now it is impossible for a man’s spirit to be at ease when he carries with him at home and abroad a thorough conviction of being guilty before God. His sin haunts him as a ghost. It creates a desire to flee from himself. It causes him to feel theft he is a disgraced, degraded being, the bearer of a dark secret, the subject of a remorse that will not die.

2. Knowledge of loss of a goodly heritage. Saul’s mind dwelt much in the past. He remembered the comparative innocence of rural life, when seeking his father’s asses; the unexpected honour shadowed forth by the prophet; the private anointing; the bestowment of special gifts that won the confidence of the sons of the prophets; the high and elevating intercourse concerning the manner of the kingdom, and the solemn proclamation of his kingship over the chosen race. Now all that was gone. It was of the past in a double sense. The splendid prospects had faded; the rejection by God had been privately announced by one whose word never failed. But the future had to be feared, and Saul, when daring to look into it, saw and felt that Providence was against him. The same elements of disappointment, bitter regret, and fearful foreboding enter into the life of others. How many a man in crowded cities is forced by conscious secret guilt to look back on a splendid heritage of good gone forever! How many feel that, though friends and the world may flatter, God has turned away his face, and that, being bent on their secret guilty way, the whole force of Providence is against them in the future!

3. Fear of exposure. Samuel took no steps to dethrone Saul or to alienate the people from him.. He kept the secret of rejection, and expressed the Divine will only in ceasing to hold official intercourse with Saul, and in quietly selecting David as one favoured of God. Saul knew his coming doom in rough outline. The dread of this was foreshadowed in the prayer that Samuel would not openly dishonour him before the people (1Sa 15:30). A moody temperament, naturally subject to impulse, would easily be urged, under this dread, now to desponding and melancholy, and now to the sudden grasping at a shadow of hope; and the alternations of hope and despair could not but induce a nervous condition which, while a guilty secret was covered, might express itself in painful irritability. The fear of exposure drives men in upon themselves, and induces an abnormal condition of mind and nerve. Guilty men, who will not sincerely repent and seek rest in Christy know that judgment is coming, but they take care to hide that truth from others, and often bear a terrible strain on their spirits.

4. Secret persistence in wrong. Saul had said, “I have sinned,” but he never repented. No doubt he regretted the consequences that flowed from his preference of self to the will of God; but he still loved to have his own way. The spirit that prompted to set aside God’s command for his own choice was unchanged. It in itself was a state of war; but still it was restive, unsubdued; it chafed under restraint and conviction of rejection, and sometimes would break out in fury that its preferences should thus be chastised. “As a bullock unaccustomed to the yoke.” It is this element of cherished sin, this persistent continuance in the original state of mind that contracted guilt, which poisons the entire life. It sets the whole man at war with God, and renders irksome what to a penitent, lowly heart would be meekly borne. Truly when men sin, and “will have it so,” they are so far left to themselves as to work out in their life all manner of miseries.

II. TEMPORARY ALLEVIATIONS OF MENTAL DISQUIETUDE. The servants of Saul were true philosophers in seeking diversion for their master. In cases of trouble, diversion from self and the causes of trouble always affords relief. This is recognised by guilty men, who seek diversion in business, or pleasure, or public affairs. It is a rule with some wicked men to plunge more deeply into .public or private business in proportion as conscience has to be quieted. The diversion was of a nature to soothe the nervous system. Music has in it something refined and pure and remote from the turmoil and confusion of sinful life. As a curative or alleviative element in certain sicknesses its power has not been sufficiently developed. Saul felt the charm, and for a while the irritation consequent on internal conflict was toned down. The diversion would have increased effect if associated with spiritual song. There is evidence that David cultivated psalmody in his early years; and who can tell the subduing influence on the restless Saul as David poured forth to his harp strains of love and trust and hope in God! We see constantly that even the boldest of impenitent sinners are touched by sweet, simple hymns, which seem to call back a lost purity, and open up a gleam of hope for the most depraved. The songs of Zion are as the echo to many of long lost music. Their power over men should be diligently used. But in all cases of mere diversion the benefit is transitory. The old enmity remains. The old fears come back in force. The true remedy has not been sought.

III. THE RADICAL CURE IS ONE AND CONSTANT. What would have been the course of Providence had he truly repented we know not. But looking at his sin and the rejection from the kingdom in the light of Scripture, we can see what would have been the safe and happy course. Had Saul been true to the passing impulse of tenderness, he would have ceased in his persistence in sin, and have humbled himself before God, and sought mercy in the appointed way. Retirement to private life would then have been no great burden, but rather a willing, loving homage to the holiness of God. The troubled spirit would have found rest. The cure for the internal miseries of men lies in self-renunciation and placing the soul at the mercy of the great Saviour. We must cease to seek rest and peace apart from his loving embrace.

General lessons:

1. We should faithfully search out how much of our restlessness in daily life is due to unforgiven sin.

2. In all our efforts to alleviate mental distress we should pay due regard to moral causes.

3. The longer the delay in repenting of sin, the more difficult it becomes.

HOMILIES BY B. DALE

1Sa 16:1. (BETHLEHEM.)

David’s parentage and education.

(References:Family register1Ch 1-3.

I. Early life: shepherd, harper, championchs, 16, 17.

II. Courtier and outlaw life1Ch 18:1-17 -31; 2Sa 1:1-27.

III. Royal life in Hebron and Jerusalem2Sa 2-24; 1Ki 1:1-53, 1Ki 2:1-46; 1Ch 10-29.)

While Saul pursued his own way at Gibeah, and Samuel mourned for him at Ramah, there dwelt at Bethlehem (twelve miles from the latter place) a shepherd youth who was destined to attain peerless renown as “a man of war,” a ruler over men, an inspired poet and prophet, and (because of his fulfilling the idea of a truly theocratic king more perfectly than any other) a type of One to whom is given “a name which is above every name.” Once and again the prophet had declared that Saul would be replaced by a worthier successor (1Sa 13:14; 1Sa 15:28); but who that successor should be he knew not until the inner voice said, “Arise, anoint him: for this is he” (1Ch 29:12). DAVID (the beloved) was sixteen or eighteen years of age. His personal appearance is minutely described. In comparison with the gigantic Saul, and even his eldest brother, he was of short stature (1Ch 29:7). He had reddish or auburn hair, and a fresh, florid complexion, which were rare among his black locked and swarthy countrymen; a pleasing countenance, keen, bright eyes, and a graceful form. He also possessed great physical strength, courage, intelligence, sagacity, and power of expression (1Ch 29:18); above all, a firm trust in God and ardent love toward him. Many influences combined to make him what he was, and to develop his extraordinary gifts; which, after his anointing, advanced rapidly towards perfection. “It is impossible to draw a line of distinction between his life before and after his designation by Samuel; but we may well believe that those elements of character were already forming which began to shine forth when the Spirit of Jehovah came upon him.” “Royalty was inborn in him.” Among the formative influences referred to were those of

I. FAMILY RELATIONSHIP.

1. He belonged to one of the most honourable families in Judah, the foremost tribe of Israel. His ancestor, Nahshon, was prince of the tribe (Num 2:3; Num 7:12); another, Salmon, married Rahab, “who received the spies in peace” (Mat 1:5); another, Boaz (great-grandfather of David), married Ruth the Moabitess, “a truly consecrated flower of heathendom turning longingly to the light of Divine revelation in Israel” (Rth 4:17). His father, Jesse (Isa 11:1), who would often speak of them, had attained “a good old age” (1Sa 17:12), was in prosperous circumstances, had eight sons, of whom David was the youngest, and two daughters-in-law (2Sa 17:25), whose childrenAbishai, Joab, and Asabel (sons of Zeruiah), and Amass (son of Abigail)were old enough to be his companions. Peculiar physical, mental, and moral qualities often characterise certain families, are transmitted from one generation to another, and are sometimes concentrated in a single individual; and great family traditions tend to excite noble impulses and aspirations.

2. He was connected (through Tamar, Rahab, Ruth) with several Gentile races. This served to enlarge his sympathies, and accounts for his friendly intercourse with them (1Sa 22:3; 1Ki 5:1). “No prince of Israel was ever on such friendly, intimate terms with the heathen about him” (‘Expositor,’ Rth 2:9).

3. He received a godly training. Jesse was a man of simple piety (verses 1, 5; 1Sa 20:6); his mother (whose name has not been recorded) was a “handmaid of Jehovah” (Psa 86:16; Psa 116:16). “How much David owed to her we cannot doubt. The memory of it abode with him through all the trials and all the splendours of his subsequent career; and hence, whilst nowhere does he mention his father, he seems in these passages to appeal to the memory of his mother’s goodness, as at once a special token of the Divine favour to himself, and an additional reason that he should prove himself the servant of God” (W.L. Alexander).

II. ORDINARY OCCUPATION. Whilst his brothers cultivated fields and vineyards on the slopes of Bethlehem, he kept his father’s sheep “in the wilderness” of Judah (1Sa 17:28), and his lowly occupation

1. Was adapted to nurture physical strength, agility, and endurance; to call forth energy, self-reliance, and courage amidst numerous perils in a wild country, from beasts of prey and hill robbers (1Ch 7:21); to make him expert in the use of the sling, like the neighbouring Benjamites (Jdg 20:16; 1Sa 17:50; 1Ch 12:9.); and to prepare him to rule over men by developing a sense of responsibility, and leading him to seek the welfare and study the increase and improvement of the flock (Psa 78:70-72).

2. Left him much alone, and afforded him leisure for meditation and the cultivation of a taste for music, by playing on the hand harp, which he could easily carry with him when he “followed the flock,” and the rare gift of song, in both of which he may have greatly improved, after his anointing, by attendance at the school of the prophets at Ramah (1Sa 19:18). To his musical skill he owed his first introduction to the court of Saul, and by its means he became “the sweet singer of Israel.” “With his whole heart he sang songs, and loved him that made him” (Ec 47:8).

3. Furnished him with the suggestive imagery of many of his psalms, especially Psa 23:1-6.’The Divine Shepherd.’ “It is the echo of his shepherd life, and breathes the very spirit of sunny confidence and of perfect rest in God.”

III. THE NATURAL CREATION. To him the visible universe was a manifestation of the glory of the invisible, immanent, ever-operating God (Psa 104:1-35.). He regarded nature “not as an independent and self-subsisting power, but rather as the outer chamber of an unseen Presencea garment, a veil, which the eternal One is ever ready to break through” (Shairp, ‘Poetic Inter. of Nature’). Brought into direct and constant communion with it, he felt a boundless delight in contemplating

“The silence that is in the starry sky,
The sleep that is among the lonely hills;”

in listening to its mysterious voices, and watching its ever varying aspects; and poured forth the thought and feeling of his heart in songs of adoration and praise; as in Psa 19:1-13‘The heavens by day;’ Psa 8:1-9.’The heavens by night; Psa 29:1-11.’The thunderstorm.’ “What we call the love of nature is in fact the love and admiration of the Deity (so far forth as he is perceived in external nature). The enthusiasm with which men survey the endless vicissitudes which the spectacle of the universe exhibits is nothing else than the devotional temper, moderated and repressed by the slight veil which sensible objects interpose between us and their author” (D. Stewart).

IV. HISTORIC REVELATION. He was instructed in “the law of the Lord” (Psa 19:7-14‘The moral law’), and in the wonderful works which he had wrought on behalf of his people in past time (Psa 105:1-45.); whilst the scenes amidst which his life was spent formed a pictorial Bible, by which they were more deeply impressed on his memory. His acquaintance with the contents of the sacred records then existing would be greatly increased under the teaching of Samuel. “Thy creatures have been my books, but thy Scriptures much more” (Bacon).

V. PROVIDENTIAL PRESERVATION. The same special care which had been exercised by Jehovah over Israel he was taught to recognise in the lowly course of his own individual life. Once and again he was preserved in imminent danger (1Sa 17:37), and thus his faith in the ever watchful presence and providence of the Great Shepherd grew strong. “Every Hebrew might consider himself alone in the presence of God; the single being to whom a great revelation had been made, and over whose head an exceeding weight of glory was suspended. His personal welfare was infinitely concerned with every event that had taken place in the miraculous order of Providence His belief in him could not exist without producing, as a necessary effect, that profound impression of passionate individual attachment which in the Hebrew authors always mingles with and vivifies their faith in the Invisible” (A.H. Hallam).

VI. RELIGIOUS INSPIRATION. Led by Divine grace from his earliest years into direct and loving communion with Jehovah, he was endowed with unusual spiritual power, which, as he faithfully surrendered himself to it, wrought in him more and more mightily, and prepared him for his high destiny. And all true spiritual life, as well as the peculiar endowments of the prophets and apostles, is a Divine inspiration (Joh 3:8; Act 2:17). “The morning of his day this extraordinary man spent not in colleges nor camps nor courts, but in following, the sheep among the pastures of Bethlehem. There, under the breathings of spring and the blasts of winter; there, in fellowship with fields and flocks and silent stars; there, with the spirit of nature and of God fresh upon him; there, in the land of vision, miracle, and angelsthere it was that his character was formed, a character which afterwards exhibited so rare a combination of simplicity and grandeur, sensibility and power” (C. Morris).

Application (to the young):

1. The morning of life is the appropriate season for educationphysical, mental, moral. If neglected, the evil cannot be repaired.

2. No educational advantages can be of service without your own diligent cooperation.

3. All circumstancesadverse as well as propitious, solitude and society, work and recreationmay be helpful to your highest progress.

4. “Have faith in God,” the secret of all David’s greatness.D.

1Sa 16:4-13. (BETHLEHEM)

David chosen and anointed.

“Arise, anoint him: for this is he” (1Sa 16:12). In the exercise of his prophetic office Samuel appears to have been accustomed to visit one place or another, rebuking crime and sin. Hence his presence at Bethlehem (clad in a mantle, his white hair flowing over his shoulders, holding a horn of consecrated oil in his hand, and attended, perhaps, by a servant), driving before him a heifer for sacrifice, filled the elders with consternation. Having quieted their fears, he showed special honour to Jesse and his sons by inviting them to be his principal guests at a sacrificial feast. By the express direction of God he allowed his seven sons, who were introduced to him, to pass by without any mark of distinction; and, having delayed the feast until his youngest son came, poured upon his head the sacred oil, and “anointed him from amongst his brethren.” “As far as outward appearances go he simply chooses him as his closest companion and friend in the sacrifice” (Ewald). The act may have been regarded as “somehow connected with admission to the schools of the prophets, or more probably with some work for God in the future, which at the proper time would be pointed out.” Its main significance was known only to the prophet, and was not revealed by him at the time to any one else. Consider the Divine choice of David (representing that of others) to eminent spiritual service and honour, as

I. DIFFERING FROM THE NATURAL JUDGMENT OF MEN (1Sa 16:6, 1Sa 16:7). They are accustomed

1. To judge according to the “outward appearance,” which alone is clearly perceived, which is often deemed of greater worth than properly belongs to it, and which is erroneously supposed to be united with corresponding inward reality. On this account Saul suited the popular desire.

2. To prefer the eldest before the youngest; an arrangement which is an imperfect one, and often set aside by the choice of God, who thus exhibits his superior knowledge and maintains his sovereign right.

3. Even the oldest and wisest of men fall into error when left to themselves. Not only did Jesse and the brethren of David look upon him as unfit for anything but the lowliest occupation (1Sa 17:28), and unworthy to be called to the sacred feast, but Samuel himself thought at first that in Eliab the Lord’s anointed was before him. The stone which the builders refuse becomes (by the operation of God, and to the surprise of men) “the head stone of the corner.”

II. DETERMINED BY A RIGHT STATE OF HEART, which

1. In the sight of God is of greater value than anything else, and essential to the worth of everything else.

2. Implies such qualities as sincerity, humility, trust, fidelity, courage, purity? and unselfish, generous, entire devotion, which were eminently displayed by David.

3. Renders capable of noble service, prompts to it, and prepares for the highest honour. “Is thy heart right?” (2Ki 10:15). Whatever great things may lie in the future, right heartedness is the first condition of attaining them. “My son, give me thine heart.”

III. DISTINGUISHING ITS OBJECT IN A SPECIAL MANNER (1Sa 16:11, 1Sa 16:12).

1. By his separation from others, and by directing their attention to his worth, which had been previously unrecognised. “We will not sit down till he come hither.” Circumstances often constrain attention to those who have been despised. “The stone which is fit for the building will not be left in the road.”

2. By indications of his being providentially destined to future eminence. David did not himself understand the chief purpose of his anointing, but he must have inferred from it that he was not always to continue in “the sheepfolds” (Psa 68:1-35 :70), and have been impelled to look forward to a higher service on behalf of Israel. Possibly it was afterwards explained to him by Samuel in more familiar intercourse.

3. By communications of Divine grace and strength to his inner life. “And the Spirit of Jehovah came upon David from that day forward.” It is recorded of Samson that “the Spirit of Jehovah began to move him at times in the camp of Dan;” it was the same in the case of David (1Sa 17:34), and in a much higher manner (see 1Sa 10:1, 1Sa 10:10; 1Sa 11:6). “The natural basis for this symbolism of oil is its power to dispense light and life, joy and healing; by which it sets forth the Spirit’s dispensation of light and life, and the gifts and powers therein contained” (Bahr).

IV. DELAYED IN THE FULFILMENT OF ITS ULTIMATE AIM. Many years must sometimes elapse before one who is chosen by God for a special work is fully called to its performance. Why such delay? For

1. The removal of obstacles that lie in his path. Saul must be suffered to go to the natural termination of his melancholy career.

2. The occurrence of circumstances that make it necessary and cause it to be generally desired. The people must learn by experience the folly of their former choice, and their need of another and different kind of ruler.

3. His own instruction, discipline, and preparation. The proper course for him who is impelled to higher service is patiently to bide his time in the humble and faithful discharge of the duty that lies immediately before him. “David’s peculiar excellence is that of fidelity to the trust committed to him; a firm, uncompromising, single-hearted devotion to the cause of God, and a burning zeal for his honour. This characteristic virtue is especially illustrated in the early years of his life. Having borne his trial of obedience well, in which Saul had failed, then at length he was intrusted with a sort of discretionary power to use in his Master’s service” (J.H. Newman).D.

1Sa 16:7 (BETHLEHEM)

God’s regard to the heart.

“The heart is the centre of

(1) the bodily life;

(2) the spiritual-psychical lifewill and desire, thought and conception, the feelings and the affections; and

(3) the moral life, so that all moral conditionsfrom the nighest mystical love of God to the self-deifying pride and the darkening and hardeningare concentrated in the heart as the innermost life circle of humanity”. The declaration that “Jehovah looketh on the heart” is profitable for

I. THE CORRECTION OF ERRORS into which we too commonly fall in relation to others.

1. The adoption of an imperfect standard of human worth:”the outward appearance,” personal strength and beauty; wealth and social position; cleverness, education, and refinement of manners; external morality, ceremonial observances, and religious zeal. These things are not to be despised, but they may exist whilst the chief thing is wantinga right state of heart. “One thing thou lackest.”

2. The assumption that we are competent judges of the character and worth of others. But we cannot look into their hearts; and what we see is an imperfect index to them, and liable to mislead us.

3. The formation of false judgments concerning them. How common this is our Lord’s words indicate (Mat 7:1).

II. THE INCULCATION OF TRUTHS which are often forgotten in relation to ourselves.

1. That we are liable to be deceived concerning the real state of our hearts, and to think of ourselves “more highly than we ought to think” (Rom 12:3).

2. That the heart of each of us lies open to the inspection of God: certainly, directly, completely, and constantly. He beholds its deepest motive, its supreme affection and ruling purpose. However we may deceive ourselves or others, we cannot deceive him (1Ch 28:9; Psa 44:21; Pro 15:11; Jer 17:9, Jer 17:10; Luk 16:15; Rev 2:23).

3. That only a right state of heart can meet with his approval. It is the effect of his grace, and he cannot but take pleasure in his own work; but “the heart of the wicked is little worth” (Pro 10:20).

III. THE ENFORCEMENT Or DUTIES which ought to be diligently fulfilled in relation both to ourselves and others.

1. To seek supremely that our own hearts be set right; and kept rightby self-examination, self-restraint, and fervent prayer to him “who searcheth the reins and the hearts” (Psa 51:10; Psa 139:23, Psa 139:24; Jer 31:33).

2. To endure patiently the wrong judgments that others may form and utter concerning us. If we sometimes judge wrongly of them, need we wonder that they should judge wrongly of us? “Unto God would I commit my cause” (Job 5:8).

3. To judge charitably of their motives, character, and worth. A judgment must sometimes be formed (Mat 7:15-20); but “let all your things be done with charity” (1Co 16:14).D.

1Sa 16:14-16. (GIBEAH.)

Mental and moral effects of transgression.

The soul is an arena where light and darkness, good and evil, heaven and hell, strive for mastery. But it is not an unconscious scene or passive prize of the conflict. It is endowed with the power of freely choosing right or wrong, and, with every exercise of this power, comes more or less under the dominion of the one or the other. Saul was highly exalted, but by his wilful disobedience sank to the lowest point of degradation. His sin was followed by lamentable effects in his mental and moral nature, and (since soul and body are intimately connected, and mutually affect each other) doubtless also in his physical constitution. His malady has been said to be “the first example of what has been called in after times religious madness” (Stanley). His condition was, in many respects, peculiar; but it vividly illustrates the mental and moral effects which always, in greater or less degree, flow from persistent transgression, viz.:

I. THE WITHDRAWAL OF THE DIVINE SPIRIT. “And the Spirit of Jehovah departed from Saul” (1Sa 16:14; 1Sa 10:10).

1. His presence in men is the source of their highest excellence. What a change it wrought in Saul, turning him into “another man.” It imparts enlightenment, strength, courage, order, harmony, and peace; restrains and protects; and, in the full measure of its influence, quickens, sanctifies, and saves (Isa 11:2; Gal 5:22; Eph 5:9).

2. His continuance in them depends on the observance of appropriate conditions. He is often compared with the wind, water, and fire, the most powerful forces of the natural world; and as there are conditions according to which they operate, so there are conditions according to which he puts forth his might. These are, humble and earnest attention to the word of the Lord, sincere endeavour to be true, just, and good, and believing and persevering prayer.

3. His departure is rendered necessary by the neglect of those conditions. “They rebelled and vexed his Holy Spirit,” etc. (Isa 63:10; Act 7:51; Eph 4:10; 1Th 5:19). And with his departure the effects of his gracious influence also depart. Hence David prayed so fervently, “Take not thy Holy Spirit from me.”

II. SUBJECTION TO AN EVIL INFLUENCE. “And an evil spirit from Jehovah troubled him.” The expression is only used once before (Jdg 9:23),”God sent an evil spirit between the men of Abimelech and the men of Shechem” (producing discord, treachery, and strife),and denotes a breath, influence, agency, or messenger (1Ki 22:22) which

1. Prevails only after the withdrawal of the Divine Spirit. When the soul ceases to be governed by God, it lies open to the power of evil, and comes under its dominion.

2. Is sent in just retribution for sin. “No man living needs a heavier chastisement from the Almighty than the letting his own passions loose upon him” (Delany). But the expression means more than this. “It is a spiritual agency of God, which brings to bear upon Saul the dark and fiery powers of Divine wrath which he has aroused by sin” (Delitzsch). Even that which is in itself good becomes evil to those who cherish an evil disposition. As the same rays of the sun which melt the ice harden the clay, so the same gospel which is “a savour of life unto life” in some is “a savour of death unto death” in others (2Co 2:16). And it is God who appoints and effectuates the forces of retribution. “The punitive justice of God is a great fact. It is stamped on all the darker phenomena of human lifedisease, insanity, and death. It is in the nature of sin to entail suffering, and work itself, as an element of punishment, into all the complicated web of human existence” (Tulloch).

3. Implies the domination of the kingdom of darkness. Josephus, speaking according to the common belief of a later age, attributes the malady of Saul to demoniacal agency. “It was probably a kind of possession, at least at times, and in its highest stage. As a punishment for having given himself willingly into the power of the kingdom of darkness, he was also abandoned physically to this power” (Henstenberg). How fearful is that realm of rebellion, evil, and disorder to which men become allied and subject by their sin!

III. THE EXPERIENCE OF UNCONTROLLABLE FEAR; “troubled him”terrified, choked him.

1. In connection with the working of peculiar and painful thoughts: brooding over the secret of rejection, which might not be revealed to any one; the sense of disturbed relationship with God, and of his displeasure, the removal of which there was no disposition to seek by humble penitence and prayer.

2. In the darkening aspect of present circumstances and future prospects; suspicion and “royal jealousy, before which vanish at last all consistent action, all wise and moderate rule” (Ewald).

3. In occasional melancholy, despondency, and distress, irrational imaginations and terrors (Job 6:4), and fits of violent and ungovernable passion (1Sa 18:10, 1Sa 18:11). “There are few more difficult questions in the case of minds utterly distempered and disordered as his was than to determine where sin or moral disease has ended, and madness or mental disease has begun” (Trench). Sin not only disturbs the moral balance of the soul, but also disorders the whole nature of man. It is itself a kind of madness, from which the sinner needs to “come to himself” (Luk 15:17). “Madness is in their hearts,” etc. (Ecc 9:3; 2Pe 2:6).

IV. THE TENDENCY TO RAPID DETERIORATION.

1. In the case of the malady occasioned by sin there is no self-healing power in man, as in many bodily diseases, but it tends to become worse and worse.

2. Its fatal course may often be distinctly marked. “These attacks of madness gave place to hatred, which developed itself in full consciousness to a most deliberately planned hostility” (Keil). His courage gave place to weakness and cowardice; general fear and suspicion fixed on a particular object in envy and hatred, displayed at first privately, afterwards publicly, and becoming an all-absorbing passion. “The evil spirit that came upon him from or by permission of the Lord was the evil spirit of melancholy, jealousy, suspicion, hatred, envy, malice, and cruelty, that governed him all the after part of his life; to which he gave himself up, and sacrificed every consideration of honour, duty, and interest whatsoever” (Chandler).

3. It is, nevertheless amenable to the remedial influences which God, in his infinite mercy, has provided.

“All cures were tried: philosophy talked long

Of lofty reason’s self-controlling power;

He frowned, but spake not. Friendship’s silver tongue

Poured mild persuasions on his calmer hour:

He wept; alas! it was a bootless shower

As ever slaked the desert. Priests would call

On Heaven for aid; but then his brow would lower

With treble gloom. Peace! Heaven is good to all;

To all, he sighed, but one,God hears no prayer for Saul.

At length one spake of Music” (Hankinson).

D.

1Sa 16:19, 1Sa 16:20. (BETHLEHEM.)

Setting out in life.

David, setting out from his father’s house at Bethlehem to go to the court of Saul at Gibeah (a distance of about ten miles), presents a picture of many a youth leaving home for more public lifeto enter a profession, learn a business, or occupy a responsible position. Notice

I. THE PECULIAR CHARACTER of the step.

1. Some such step is necessary. A young man cannot always continue under the paternal roof. He must go forth into the world, be thrown on his own resources, and make his own way.

2. Its nature and direction are commonly determined by his ability and tastes, and the use he makes of early advantages (1Sa 16:18).

3. It is also greatly influenced by the wishes of others. David was sent for by Saul, and sent to him by his father.

4. It is ordered by Divine providence. This was plainly the case with David. And we are as truly the children of providence as he was. God has a purpose concerning each of us.

“There’s a Divinity that shapes our ends,
Rough hew them as we will.”

5. It opens a wider field for the exercise of natural or acquired abilities, and the attainment of desired objects.

6. It determines in most instances, the subsequent course of life. It is like the commencement of a river; or like the rolling of a stone down the mountain side, the course of which is determined by the direction and impulse which it first receives.

II. THE PROPER SPIRIT in which it should be taken.

1. Due consideration; not thoughtlessly or rashly.

2. Lowly and loyal obedience to rightful claims.

3. Cheerful anticipation of new scenes, duties, and enjoyments.

4. Not unmingled with misgiving and self-distrust at the prospect of new difficulties and trials, and watchfulness against new and strong temptations.

5. Simple trust in God and fervent prayer for his guidance.

6. Firm determination to be true to oneself faithful to God, and useful to men.

“Now needs thy best of man;

For not on downy plumes, nor under shade
Of canopy reposing, fame is won;
Without which whosoe’er consumes his days
Leaveth such vestige of himself on earth
As smoke in air, or foam upon the wave”

(Dante, ‘Inferno,’ 24.).

Consider

1. That life itself is a setting out in a course which will never terminate.

2. That the manner in which this step is taken will decide your future destiny.D.

1Sa 16:23. (GIBEAH.)

The soothing influence of music.

All men, with rare exceptions, are susceptible to the influence of music; some men peculiarly so. It was thus with Saul (1Sa 10:10; 1Sa 19:23); and on this account, perhaps, his servants suggested the sending for a skilful musician to soothe his melancholy. The visit of David had the desired effect, and he “went and returned” (was going and returning) “to feed his father’s sheep at Bethlehem” (1Sa 17:15, 1Sa 17:55-58; 1Sa 16:21, 1Sa 16:22a general, and to some extent prospective, summary of his early relations with Saul). Consider the soothing influence of music as

I. PROVIDED BY DIVINE PROVIDENCE. It is one of the manifold indications of the goodness of God in the adaptation of man to his surroundings so as to derive enjoyment from them. The world is full of music. In trouble and agitation especially it soothes and cheers. “It brings a tone out of the higher worlds into the spirit of the hearer” (Koster). Its direct influence is exerted upon the nervous system, which is intimately connected with all mental activity. As the condition of the brain and nerves is affected by it, so also it affects the state of the mind.

“There is in souls a sympathy with sounds;
Some chord in unison with what we hear
Is touched within us, and the heart replies” (Cowper).

“Pythagoras quieted the perturbations of the mind with a harp” (Seneca, ‘On Anger’). Elisha, when chafed and disturbed in spirit, called for a minstrel, and was prepared by the soothing strains of his harp for prophetic inspiration (2Ki 3:5). Divine providence ordered the visit of David to Saul, over whom mercy still lingered. He was not only freed from the immediate pressure of fear and despondency, but also restored to a mental condition which was favourable to repentance and return to God. Music is a means of grace, and when rightly used conveys much spiritual benefit to men. It is “one of the fairest and most glorious gifts of God, to which Satan is a bitter enemy; for it removes from the heart the weight of sorrow and the fascination of evil thoughts” (Luther). “It is a language by itself, just as perfect in its way as speech, as words; just as Divine, just as blessed. All melody and all harmony, all music upon earth, is beautiful in as far as it is a pattern and type of the everlasting music which is in heaven” (C. Kingsley).

II. PRODUCTIVE OF EXTRAORDINARY EFFECTS. “Saul was refreshed, and was well, and the evil spirit departed from him.” “The music was more than a mere palliative. It brought back for the time the sense of a true order, a secret, inward harmony, an assurance that it is near every man, and that he may enter into it” (Maurice).

“He is Saul, ye remember in glory,ere error had bent
The broad brow from the daily communion; and still, though much spent
Be the life and the bearing that front you, the same, God did choose,
To receive what a man may waste, desecrate, never quite lose”

(Browning, ‘Saul’).

Many other instances of a similar nature, both in ancient and modern times, have been recorded. One of the most noteworthy is that of Philip V. of Spain, who was restored from profoundest melancholy by the magical voice of Farinelli (see Bochart; Burton, ‘Anat. of Mel.;’ Kitto, ‘D.B. Illus.;’ Jacox, ‘Script. Texts Illus.;’ Bate, ‘Cyc. of Illus.’). “Psalmody is the calm of the soul, the repose of the spirit, the arbiter of peace. It silences the wave and conciliates the whirlwind of our passions. It is an engenderer of friendship, a healer of dissension, a reconciler of enemies. It repels the demons, lures the ministry of angels, shields us from nightly terrors, and refreshes us in daily toil” (Basil).

III. PERFECTED BY SPECIAL ENDOWMENTS possessed by the musician. David’s harp was the accompaniment of his voice as he sang “psalms and hymns and spiritual songs” (see Josephus), expressive of the sympathy, confidence, hope, and joy of his soul; “the prelude to the harpings and songs which flowed from the harp of the future royal singer.” His musical and poetic gifts were great, and they were consecrated (as all such gifts should be) to the glory of God and the good of men. “Did the music banish the demon? Not so. But the high frame of mind into which the king was brought by it sufficed to limit at least the sphere of the operation of the evil spirit within him; while the full, clear, conscious life of faith on the part of Saul would have altogether destroyed the power of the wicked one. Besides, the silent intercessions of David sent up to heaven on the wings of the music of his harp must have contributed not a little to the results with which his melodies were crowned” (Krummacher). “The Lord was with him” (1Sa 16:18).

IV. PARTIAL AND TEMPORARY IN ITS WHOLESOME POWER. Saul was not completely cured of his malady. A breathing space was afforded him for seeking God, and if he had faithfully availed himself of it he might have been permanently preserved from its return. But he failed to do so. On the indulgence of envy, “the evil spirit from God came upon him” again (1Sa 18:10; 1Sa 19:10) with greater power than before (Mat 12:45), and that which formerly calmed and gladdened him now excited him to demoniacal frenzy and murderous passion. “It is said that the evil spirit departed, but not that the good spirit returned. Saul’s trouble was alleviated, but not removed. The disease was still there. The results of David’s harp were negative and superficial. So is it with the sinner still. There are many outward applications which act like. spiritual chloroform upon the soul. They soothe and calm and please, but that is all; they do not go below the surface, nor touch the deep seated malady within. Our age is full of such appliances, literary and religions, all got up for the purpose of soothing the troubled spirits of men. Excitement, gaiety, balls, theatres, operas, concerts, ecclesiastical music, dresses, performances, what are all these but man’s appliances for casting out the evil spirit and healing the soul’s hurt without having recourse to God’s remedy” (Bonar, ‘Thoughts and Themes’).

Learn

1. That the excellent gift of music should excite our admiration of the Giver, “the First Composer,” and our devout thankfulness to him.

2. That it ought not to be perverted from its proper intention, and employed, as it too frequently is, in the service of sin (Isa 5:12; Amo 6:5).

3. That the soothing and elevating effect of a “concord of sweet sounds” must not be mistaken for the peace and joy of true religion.

4. That nothing but the gospel of Christ and the power of his Spirit can effect the moral and spiritual renewal of man, and restore him to “his fight mind” (Mar 5:15).D.

HOMILIES BY D. FRASER

1Sa 16:12, 1Sa 16:13

The chosen one.

The Lord is never without resource. If Saul fail, the God of Israel has another and a better man in training for the post which Saul discredited. This new personage now appears on the page of history, and he will occupy many pages. It is David, the hero, the musician, the poet, the warrior, the ruler, a many-sided man, a star of the first magnitude.

1. Not chosen according to the thoughts of men. Samuel, who at first hesitated to go to Bethlehem on so dangerous an errand as the Lord prescribed to him? when he did go was inclined to be over hasty. Assuming that a new king who should supplant Saul ought to be not inferior to him in stature and strength, the prophet at once fixed on Eliab, the eldest son in Jesse’s family, as the one who should be the Lord’s anointed. Here was a man able to cope with, or worthy to succeed, the almost gigantic son of Kish. But the Lord corrected his servant’s mistake. The time was past for choosing a leader on the score of “outward appearance.” The Lord sought for the regal position a man whose heart would be true and obedient. Now Eliab’s heart, as the next chapter shows, was small, though his body was large; his temper was vain and overbearing. So he had to pass; and all his brothers who were present at the feast had to pass. Not one of them had such a heart as the Lord required; and it is a significant fact that we never read of any of these men in after years as playing any honourable or memorable part in the history of their country, unless the Septuagint reading of 1Ch 27:18 be right, and the Eliab here mentioned held the office of a tribal chief under his royal brother.

2. Chosen according to the thoughts of God. When the young shepherd, being sent for by his father, entered the chamber with his bright hair and fair countenance, fresh from the fields, the Lord bade Samuel anoint him. “This is he.” The selection of the youngest son is in keeping with what we find in many Bible stories. Divine choice traversed the line of natural precedence. The Lord had respect to Abel, not to Cain; to Jacob rather than to Esau; to Joseph above his eider brethren. Ephraim was blessed above Manasseh; Moses was set over Aaron; Gideon was the youngest in his father’s house. In this there is something so pleasing to the imagination that it has passed into the tales and legends of many nations. Of three brothers, or seven brothers, it is always the youngest who surpasses everyone, accomplishes the difficult task, and rises to be a king. David’s superiority to his brothers was intrinsic, and the result not of luck, but of grace. The Lord had drawn his heart to himself in the days of youth. Accordingly, where such men as Saul and Eliab were weak David was strong. He revered and loved the Lord, and could therefore be depended on to do God’s will. “To whom also,” says Stephen, “he gave testimony, and said, I have found David the son of Jesse, a man after mine own heart, who shall fulfil all my will.” The last clause in this extract shows what is intended by the one which goes before. David was a man after the Lord’s heart in loyally doing his will. He was not without fault; he certainly displeased God more than once; but he thoroughly apprehended what Saul never could understandthat a king of Israel must not be an autocrat, but should without question or murmur carry out the paramount will of God. In this respect David never failed. He had many trials and temptations, afflictions that might have made him discontented, and successes that might have made him proud; but he continued steadfast in his purpose of heart to be the Lord’s, to consult the Lord about everything, and carry out his revealed will.

3. Prepared in retirement for future eminence. There is a sort of augury of his career in his father’s words, “Behold, he keepeth the sheep.” Saul first came before us going hither and thither in search of asses that were astray, and not finding them. So, as a king, he went up and down, restless and disappointed. But David kept the flock intrusted to him, and, as a king, he shepherded the flock of God. “So he fed them according to the integrity of his heart, and guided them by the skilfulness of his hands.”

(1) As a shepherd David formed habits of vigilance. He had to think for the flock, lead the sheep to pasture, see that they were regularly watered, watch that none strayed or were lost, and look well after the ewes and the tender lambs. All this served to make him in public life wary, prudent, thoughtful for others, a chieftain who deserved the confidence of his followers. Saul bad little or none of this. He went to and fro, and fought bravely, but evinced none of that unselfish consideration for his people which marks a kingly shepherd. David showed it all through his career. He watched over his subjects, thought for them, instructed and led them. Near the end of his reign he committed an error which brought disaster on Israel; and it is touching to see how the true shepherd’s heart was grieved that the flock should suffer through his fault. He Cried to the Lord, “Lo, I have sinned, and have done wickedly; but these sheep, what have they done?”

(2) As a shepherd David proved and improved his courage. Shepherds in Palestine, in those days, were obliged to protect their flocks from prowling beasts of prey. How many encounters of this kind David may have had we do not know; but we learn from himself that, while yet a stripling, he had fought and slain both a lion and a bear rather than give up one lamb or kid of the flock. His was the best sort of couragenatural intrepidity of a true and brave spirit, sustained and elevated by unquestioning trust in God. While encountering the wild beasts in defence of his flock David was being fitted, though he knew it not, to face an armed giant in behalf of Israel, and in many battles afterwards to beat down the enemies of his country. The springs of his courage were in God. “Jehovah is my light and my salvation: whom shall I fear? Jehovah is the strength of my life: of whom shall I be afraid?”

(3) As a shepherd David had leisure for music and poetry. As he kept the sheep he learned to play on his harp with a skill which was the occasion of his first rise from obscurity; and he composed and sang sweet lyrics, pious and patriotic. Whether he looked up to the sky, or looked round on the hills and valleys, or recalled to mind famous passages of his nation’s history, everything gave him a song to Jehovah. Every poet writes juvenile pieces, which, though defective, show the bent of his genius; and in after years, if he has not rashly published them, he is able to recast them into new and more perfect forms as his mind grows and his skill improves. So, doubtless, the son of Jesse, in the pastoral solitude at Bethlehem, began to compose lyrics which in more mature life, under the guidance of the Holy Spirit, he threw into the forms of those Psalms which carry down his fame to the end of time. What a contrast to the unhappy son of Kish! Saul had the impulse of music and song upon him more than once; but he had to be acted on by others, and his own spirit had no inward harmony. As the years advanced his life became more and more unmelodious and out of tune; whereas David’s early addiction to devout song and minstrelsy prepared him to be something better than a gruff warrior in his manhood. Born with genius and sensibility, he grew up a man of some accomplishment, and when called to the throne, elevated the mental and spiritual tone of the nation, and was, through a long reign, himself a very fountain of musical culture and sweet poetic thought.

4. Anointed without and within. Samuel anointed the youth outwardly, pouring oil over his head; Jehovah anointed him inwardly, for “the Spirit of the Lord came upon David from that day forward.” The old prophet is a figure of John the Baptist, another Nazarene, and one who came to prepare the way of the King. David suggests Another, a descendant of his own, born in the same Bethlehem, and, like himself, lightly esteemed. As Samuel poured oil on the head of David, so John poured water on the head of Jesus, the Good Shepherd. Then Samuel retired from view. So John too retired, and made way for him whom he had baptized. “He must increase, but I must decrease.” The parallel goes still further. David had been a child of grace, but on that day the Spirit of the Lord came upon him, and he got what Samuel could not imparta Divine qualification for the work and dignity to which he was destined. Jesus had been holy, harmless, and undefiled from his mother’s womb; but on the day of his baptism the Spirit, as a dove, descended and rested upon him, and he got what John could not impartthe Divine qualification of his humanity for the work and dignity to which he was destined as the Christ, the Lord’s Anointed. “Now know I that the Lord sayeth his anointed.” Therefore He will save us who follow the King. Only let the name of the King be our watchword, his righteousness our righteousness, his strength our strength, his mind our mind, his anointing our anointing. So shall we see him and be with him in his kingdom and glory.F.

1Sa 16:23

The king and the minstrel.

I. THE COMPLICATION OF MENTAL AND MORAL DISORDER. Saul was the victim of cerebral disease, but not an innocent victim. His unhingement of mind was due in large measure to causes for which he was morally responsible. The expression, “an evil spirit from the Lord was upon him,” is just an Old Testament way of saying that the state into which he fell, as a result mainly of his own misconduct, bore the character of a Divine retribution. From the beginning there seems to have been a morbid tendency in the mind of Saul. He was at once very impulsive and very obstinate; and as his troubles and anxieties increased, the original weakness or unhealthiness of his brain became more and more apparent.

He had an evil conscience because of his disobedience to Divine commands, and though faithfully reproved by the prophet Samuel, he does not appear to have ever sought pardon or healing. Thus the purpose of God to give the kingdom to another and a better man weighed on him as a dreadful secret, and his native melancholy deepened. The thing preyed on his mind till he became wretchedly suspicious and jealous, and at times gave way to homicidal mania. For considerable periods, as during the active struggle with the Philistines, this evil spirit left the king; but he fell back into his passionate gloom. As we trace his course, the better lines of his character fade away, and the worse become deeper and more obvious.

II. THE REMEDY APPLIEDITS SUCCESS AND ITS FAILURE. In so far as there was mental disease, the case called for medical treatment; in so far as it was complicated with and grounded on moral disorder, it needed a moral corrective. But even if there had been any scientific treatment of insanity known at the period, it would have been difficult to apply it to King Saul, and it occurred to his attendants to try the soothing charm of music. This might be the opiate to assuage the anguish of the spirit

“The soft insinuating balsam, that
Can through the body reach the sickly soul.”

So David was brought to the court to allay, if he could not cure, the malady of the king by his skilful minstrelsy. It was a wise experiment. From the readiness of Saul to catch the fervour and join in the strains of the sons of the prophets, and from the fact that in his frenzy he “prophesied in the midst of the house,” we infer that his temperament was peculiarly open to musical impression, and are not surprised that the sounds of David’s lyre and voice, especially when chanting some Divine and lofty theme, affected and in some degree controlled the unhappy king. As he listened his spirit became more tranquil, and wicked thoughts and jealousies lifted from off him, as clouds lift from a mountain for a while, even though they gather again. The refining and calming effect of music and song no wise man will disparage. It is not religion, but it may legitimately and powerfully conduce to moral and religious feeling. Elisha called for a minstrel, that his mind might be attuned and prepared to receive the prophetic impulse. Martin Luther found the inspiration of courage in the same manner. “Next to theology,” he said, “I give the first place and the greatest honour to music.” Milton, too, delighted in such musical service

“As may with sweetness, through mine ear,
Dissolve me into ecstasies,
And bring all heaven before mine eyes.”

David sang before the clouded face of Saul, and “played with his hand.” So let sweet and sacred minstrelsy confront the sin and sorrow of the world. It is better than the fabled power of Orpheus, who, when he touched his lyre, moved the very trees and rocks, and gathered the beasts of the forest to listen to his notes. Another myth regarding Orpheus has indeed a noble meaning beneath the surface of the story. When the Argonauts passed the island of the sirens, Orpheus, on board their ship, loudly chanted the praises of gods and heroes, so as to drown the voices from the shore, and so he and his comrades passed the fatal spot in safety. The moral is obvious. The sirens represent pleasures of sense, which begin with blandishment, but end in cruel destruction; and a powerful resistance to sensual temptation is to be found in preoccupation of mind and heart with holy and heroic song. Yet the moral power thus exerted has its limit, and we see this clearly in the case of Saul. The king was acutely sensitive to the influence of David’s minstrelsy, but he was only charmed, not cured; and even while the youth played before him he attempted his life in a paroxysm of jealousy. So is many a man thrilled with delight by sacred music wedded to holy words in an oratorio or in Church service who is not delivered thereby from some evil spirit or base passion that has mastered him. Alas, how many men of musical taste and sensibility, some of them of poetic capacity also, have been quite unable to shake off the yoke of that most conspicuous evil spirit of our time and nation, the love of strong drink! This infatuation may be quieted or checked for a time, but it is not expelled by music ever so good and true. The harp, even David’s harp, cannot subdue the power of sin. This requires the power of David’s God. There is need of a prayer of David, such as Saul seems never to have offered up: “Create in me a clean heart; Lord, renew a right spirit within me.” There is need to apply to the Son of David, who cast out unclean spirits by his word, and brought men to their right mind, and now in the power of the Holy Spirit not only controls, but corrects and cures all the evils which prey on the mind or defile the heart of man. The blackness of envy, the foulness of hatred, the demons of deceit, avarice, intemperance, and cruelty are expelled by nothing less than the grace of Christ.

“And his that gentle voice we hear,

Soft as the breath of even,

That checks each fault, that calms each fear,

And speaks of heaven.”F.

Fuente: The Complete Pulpit Commentary

THIRD DIVISION

The Decline Of Sauls Kingdom, And The Elevation Of David. From Sauls Rejection To His Death
1 Samuel 16-31
_____________________

FIRST SECTION
Early History of David, the Anointed of the Lord

1 Samuel 16

I. Choice and Anointing of David as King through Samuel. Chap: 1Sa 16:1-13

1And the Lord [Jehovah] said unto Samuel, How long wilt thou mourn for Saul, seeing I have rejected him from reigning over Israel? Fill thine horn with oil, and go, I will send thee to Jesse the Bethlehemite, for I have provided1 me a king 2among his sons. And Samuel said, How can I go? If Saul hear it, he will kill me. And the Lord [Jehovah] said, Take an heifer with thee, and say, I am come 3to sacrifice to the Lord [Jehovah]. And call Jesse to the sacrifice,2 and I will show thee what thou shalt do; and thou shalt anoint unto me him whom I name 4unto thee. And Samuel did3 that which the Lord [Jehovah] spake, and came to Bethlehem. And the elders of the town [city]4 trembled at his coming [went 5tremblingly to meet him], and said, Comest thou peaceably [in peace]?5 And he said, Peaceably [In peace]; I am come to sacrifice unto the Lord [Jehovah]; sanctify yourselves, and come with me to the sacrifice.6 And he sanctified Jesse and 6his sons, and called them to the sacrifice. And it came to pass, when they were come, that he looked on Eliab and said, Surely the Lords [Jehovahs] anointed Isaiah 7 before him. But [And] the Lord [Jehovah] said unto Samuel, Look not on his countenance [appearance],7 or [nor] on the height of his stature, because [for] I have refused him; for the Lord [Jehovah] seeth8 not as man seeth, for man looketh 8on the outward appearance, but the Lord [Jehovah] looketh on the heart. Then [And] Jesse called Abinadab, and made him pass before Samuel. And he said, 9Neither hath the Lord [Jehovah] chosen this [him]. Then [And] Jesse made Shammah to pass by. And he said, Neither hath the Lord [Jehovah] chosen this 10[him]. Again, [And] Jesse made seven of his sons to pass before Samuel. And 11Samuel said unto Jesse,9 The Lord [Jehovah] hath not chosen these. And Samuel said unto Jesse, Are here all thy children [the young men]? And he said, There remaineth yet the youngest, and behold, he keepeth the sheep. And Samuel said 12unto Jesse, Send and fetch him, for we will not sit down till he come hither. And he sent and brought him in. Now [And] he was ruddy,10 and [om. and] withal of a beautiful countenance [with beautiful eyes withal], and goodly11 to look to 13[at]. And the Lord [Jehovah] said, Arise, anoint him, for this is Hebrews 11 Then [And] Samuel took the horn of oil, and anointed him in the midst of his brethren. And the Spirit of the Lord [Jehovah] came upon David from that day forward. So [And] Samuel rose up and went to Ramah.

EXEGETICAL AND CRITICAL

1Sa 16:1, exhibiting Samuel in deep grief for Saul, connects itself immediately with 1Sa 15:35. We find him here in the same sorrow in which we left him. Samuel mourned for Saul in view of the great gifts of grace which he had received, but had nullified and lost by his disobedience and impenitence, in view of the Lords honor, which he had violated, and in view of the people, for whom he had by his conduct turned Gods blessing into a curse. Samuels grief was an expression of the same love which drove him to intercession for Saul and at the same time filled him with holy anger (1Sa 15:11). It was sorrow for Sauls rejection, but there was not (Brenz, Tremellius) connected with it prayer for the restoration of Saul to his former relation to God and for the renewal of his kingdom, of which nothing is said.The question: How long? contains a divine reproof, indicating (so the words: seeing I have rejected him from being king over Israel) that Samuel by his deep, long-continued grief over Sauls condition (a lamentable one under all circumstances and evermore) was out of sympathy with God and Gods decrees and ways, which are clearly announced in these words and in 1Sa 15:35. Calvin: The excellent prophet here displays something of human weakness. Samuel here looked on a vessel made by the invisible hand of God Himself utterly broken and minished, and his emotion thereat shows his pious and holy affection,yet he is not without sin; not at all that the feeling is evil, but because it is excessive. From his own sad thoughts and feelings Samuel is directed through the Spirit of the Lord to the thoughts and the will of the Lord in respect to the Theocracy, as organ of which Saul is rejected. [Comp. the similar dealing with Elijah, 1 Kings 19Tr.]. The Lord commands him to enter into His ways, which are to lead to the choice and consecration of another as instrument of the royal authority of God over His people. The divine command is: Go and anoint one of the sons of Jesse the Bethlehemite, whom I have chosen to be king over Israel.This command presupposes an exact acquaintance on Samuels part with Jesse and his house, and the presence in his family of the conditions necessary for the theocratic kingdom. That the family was a wealthy one is certain from 1Sa 16:11. That true godliness and piety reigned in it appears from Samuels acquaintance and intercourse with it, and the sacrifice which he held in the house.

1Sa 16:2. Heretofore Samuel had grieved for Saulnow he fears him: How can I go? if Saul hear it he will slay me.This protest against the plain direction of the voice of God rests naturally on the fact that Saul was still, notwithstanding the divine sentence of rejection, rightful king of Israel, and would regard the designation of another to the office (if it could not be kept concealed from him) as an act of treachery and revolt, even though Samuel should plead the divine command in his justification. He will kill me,to explain these words, therefore, we need not suppose that the evil spirit had already driven Saul to madness. Even if that were the case, Saul might in his seasons of quiet also resolve to slay the betrayer of the kingdom.This fear of Samuel is overborne by inspired direction as to what he is to do to conceal the act; he is to go to hold a sacrificial feast, and so announce himself. This divine command supposes that Samuel did not confine his circuits to certain holy places (1Sa 7:16) where the people appeared in large numbers, but visited other places to hold public divine service, and that Jesse consequently could not be surprised at his appearing in Bethlehem for such a purpose. Berl. Bib.: People must have been accustomed to Samuels coming to this place and the other to sacrifice, which was very proper for a prophet, especially at the time when Shiloh was desecrated. This throws a new light on Samuels combination of priestly work with prophetical.No shade of untruthfulness rests on this command. As Sauls anointing (1Sa 10:16) was concealed, so Davids anointing also is, according to the divine will, yet to remain a secret. Samuel was to keep this secret. Its concealment behind the sacrifice was not a lie.12 Calvin: It is to be observed that he practiced no simulation, but said what was true, namely, that he had come to sacrifice; but he put fraud on no one, he deceived no one, he used no bad arts, but conformed to the divine command, because it was not meet to publish Gods design, when as yet God wished it to be concealed;here lurked no falsehood, and the end was good, unconnected with fraud or treachery, but God wished Davids anointing to be carefully kept as a secret deposit, so to speak, and a pledge.

1Sa 16:3. The performance of the divine commission in the sacrificial feast. Three directions are to be distinguished: 1) Samuel is to invite Jesse to the sacrificial meal; it is a slain-offering () that is spoken of, with which was connected a feast; he is to be associated with Jesse in the feast in the narrower circle of the family. Call in the sacrifice is construct. prgn. for call to take part in the sacrifice; 2) Samuel is to await direction from above. I will tell thee what thou shalt do. This exhibits the specifically divine factor (of which Samuel is to be organ) in the choice of the new king of Israel; 3) He is to anoint as king him whom God shall name.

1Sa 16:4. And Samuel did, etc. The troubled condition of soul which could not accept Gods thoughts and ways disappeared before the strict obedience of the will, which bowed before the Lords will. The elders of Bethlehem came tremblingly to meet him with the question: Comest thou in peace? (The Sing. said, because one spoke in the name of all. Comp. Jdg 8:6; Num 32:25). This question does not mean Has a misfortune occurred, as the cause of thy coming? nor does it express fear of punishment for some special misdoing (in the pillaging) in the Amalekite war, but it is the involuntary utterance of the fear which Samuels sudden, unexpected appearance produced; for though he no longer formally held the office of judge, he yet appeared here and there (as formerly in his judicial circuits) to make unexpected visitation and exercise his watch-office as prophet. On such occasions it was his principal care to administer earnest rebuke, and to remove the evil that he found. To this refers the fright of the elders at meeting him, and the question whether he came in peace or for good?

1Sa 16:5. He answers the question in the affirmative and so quiets the Bethlehemites, declares the purpose of his coming to be to institute a sacrifice for the people of Bethlehem, and directs them to sanctify themselves and take part with him in the sacrifice. The sanctifying means the consecration of the person to the service of God by washing the body and putting on clean garments as symbol of the cleansing of the soul for communion with the holy God. Comp. Gen 35:2; Exo 19:10; Exo 19:22. (The same pregnant construction here as in 1Sa 16:3). While directing the elders to take part in the offering, Samuel gives a special invitation to Jesse and his sons (by the same direction, to sanctify themselves) to partake of the sacrificial meal with him. [It is to be observed that the Heb. text here makes no difference between the invitation to Jesses family and the general invitation to the elders. The Sept. and the Chald. make the former refer to the sacrifice and the latter to the sacrificial meal. It seems that there was a special meeting with Jesse and his sons, but it is not so stated in the text. After 1Sa 16:5, indeed, nothing more is said of the sacrifice, the narrative taking this for granted, and going on to the main occurrence.Tr.].After the ark was removed from the Tabernacle and Shiloh had thus ceased to be the place of worship and sacrifice for Israel, there were several places where altars for sacrifices were erected. The offering of the sacrifice is here to be put after 1Sa 16:5, and not (Then.) after the words in the midst of his brethren 1Sa 16:13, for the coming in 1Sa 16:6 refers to the feast, as appears from the words in 1Sa 16:11, we will not sit down, and from the general connection. Samuel thought (lit., said) that Jesses eldest son, Eliab, was surely the Lords anointed.

1Sa 16:7. The difference is sharply stated between the divine thoughts and human judgment according to human standards. The voice of God inwardly teaches Samuel two things: 1) in respect of Eliabs person, he is not to infer from his imposing exterior that he was the chosen of the Lord. With this humbling correction, which connects itself with 1Sa 16:1-2, he is taught 2) a general truth respecting the difference between divine and human modes of thought and judgment: Not what man seesto which we must supply the words sees the Lord. This ellipsis is not so hard as to require us to suppose (Then.) that these words have fallen out of the text. The thought naturally fills itself out from what precedes. The ground of the truth, that human judgment and divine judgment are not the same but different, is now declared.For man looks on the eyes, but the Lord looks on the heart, that is, man judges according to the outward appearance,the expression the eyes is not (with Sept.) to be exchanged for countenance, but to be retained as signifying the outward appearance, which concentrates itself in the eyes, in contrast with the heart or the centre of the inner life, whence springs mans will and his whole spiritual frame. Not according to the agreeable appearance which commends itself to the eyes, but according to the moral worth hidden in the depths of the heart, according to the disposition of soul that pleases Him does the Lord judge, who proveth the heart and the reins.13

1Sa 16:8. The same decision is announced with reference to the second son, Abinadab. And so 1Sa 16:9 as to the third, Shammah. Thus Jesse made seven of his sons pass before Samuel. But Samuels decision, according to the voice of God within him, is always negative. The he said in 1Sa 16:8-9 refers to Samuel, and = he thought. We are, therefore, not thence to suppose that Samuel had communicated to Jesse the object of his mission. It is not till 1Sa 16:10 that the words to Jesse are added, expressly indicating an address of Samuel to him: the Lord hath not chosen these. It does not, however, follow, even from these words, that Samuel made Jesse a sharer in the divine secret. According to the following narrative none of the family (Davids father and brothers), know anything of Davids high destiny. That address to Jesse is merely a negative declaration that the divine selection, with which Samuel was concerned, and which in the absence of express intimation of its nature, might refer to the prophetic office, rested on none of these seven sons. Samuels word was by reason of its indefiniteness a riddle, whose solution Jesse was to attain only from the following development of the history of his youngest son.

1Sa 16:11. To Samuels question whether these are all the young men, Jesse answers that the youngest yet remains.14 The prophet of the Lord is not satisfied with the presentation of the seven sons; he bids the father send for the youngest, before they sit down to the sacrificial meal. = we will not surround, namely, the table, we will not sit around it to eat till he come. So De Wette, Ewald, Maurer. The explanation: we will not turn about, namely, to proceed to something else, but will remain here waiting (Then., Btt.) does not suit the situation as given by the context.

1Sa 16:12. Davids appearance, ruddy, of the color of the hair, red hair being regarded in the East (as contrasting with the usual black color) as especially beautiful. (as 1Sa 17:42; Ecc 2:16) used adverbially = at the same time, withal; beautiful of eyes and good, pleasing in appearance. In this youngest son were united the beauty of the oldest, and that which is well-pleasing to the Lord, what the Lord looks on, a heart and mind after the will and good pleasure of the Lord (1Sa 16:7). And so the divine decision is announced to Samuel: Arise, anoint him, for this is he. He is thus freed from all doubts and suspicions. Sure of his course, Samuel (1Sa 16:13) performs the ceremony of anointing David (the object and meaning of the act being still an enigma to Jesse and his other sons) in the midst of his brethren or from among [Germ. unter] his brethren; the Heb. preposition () may mean either. Thenius adopts the latter on the ground that the brothers had gone away, but this is not required by the narrative. Samuels words in the second half of 1Sa 16:11 rather imply that they were all there. [Abarbanel and Philippson also adopt this view of the word, among his brethren, that is, he alone of his brethren, because this better explains their after ignorance.Tr.]. In any case the special significance, which God designed this anointing to have, was hidden from them. Anointing was always a symbol of the divine impartation of the Spirit from above on the Anointed. The impartation began immediately for David: The Spirit of the Lord came upon David from that day forward.This could not have happened, if the religious-ethical conditions had not been present in Davids heart. This impartation of the Spirit was (along with the general gift of the divine Spirit) the special endowment with gifts and powers for the special theocratic royal calling, to which David was chosen and consecrated by this anointing according to divine decree and will. The word from that day forward denotes the continuity of the impartation of the Spirit to Davids inner life, and indicates its unbroken development under the guidance of the divine Spirit to full fitness and capacity for the royal calling. Keil properly calls attention to the fact that nothing is here said of any explanatory word of Samuel touching this point, as in Sauls anointing, 1Sa 10:1. Whether David was now informed by Samuel of the meaning of the act is uncertain. Most probably he was not informed, since it was performed in the presence of the brothers, and its object was (according to the will of God) to remain concealed from them and the people. [It seems likely that a royal destiny for David would be the last thing in the minds of his brothers, for his higher intellectual and spiritual gifts were apparently at this time unknown to them. Gradually the course of events led them and the people (so Abigail 1Sa 25:30) and probably Saul (1Sa 28:17) to look on David as Sauls successor, and David would receive intimations concerning his destiny from Samuel. There is, therefore, no serious difficulty in understanding the silence of the brothers in the succeeding history.Tr]. Samuel went to Ramah. That David was in constant communication with him (and perhaps with the prophetic school there) is quite certain from the following history. Comp. 19, 20 sq. In this intercourse with the prophet of the Lord he learned the meaning of Samuel s enigmatical act, and, under the progressive occupation and enlightenment of his inner life by the Spirit from above, received the knowledge of the duties of his royal calling and the preparation to fulfill them. For the present his election and anointing to be king of Israel remained a divine secret.

HISTORICAL AND THEOLOGICAL

1. The affairs of the kingdom of God go their way without break or halt according to Gods high thoughts and decrees, though human sin and its attendant judgment (as in Sauls case), or human weakness (as in Samuels immediate grief for Saul) may seem to hinder the plans of the divine wisdom. In the history of Israel the concealing curtain of human purpose and action is lifted, and the thus unveiled, all-moving and all-guiding hand of Him of whom it is written, He worketh all things according to the counsel of his own will (Eph 1:11), appears therein (F. W. Krummacher, David, p. 1). But it is also precisely by human sin and foolishness that the history of Gods kingdom under the guidance of the divine wisdom and providence receives new occasions and impulses to wider and higher development according to the aims which God sets before Himself.

2. Samuels grief for Saul, transgressing the bounds set by God and thus displeasing to Him, is easily explicable psychologically not merely from natural human feeling, but also from Samuels theocratic calling and prophetic official interest. Considered from this point of view also it is not in conflict with Samuels immovable prophetic opposition to Saul and his sentence of rejection, but is at the same time the most striking refutation of the false conception of Samuels relation to Saul in this prophetic-judicial bearing towards him, which makes the latter a pitiable sacrifice to priestly jealousy and one-sidedness (see the literature in Winer, to which is to be added M. Dunker, Geschichte des Alterthums I.).

3. The concealing of the truth, when there is no design to deceive, when its utterance is required by no duty, and when the interests of the moral order of the world and of the kingdom of God are in no wise injured, is far from being untruthfulness, much less falsehood; it is rather duty and obedience to the divine will.
4. The beginnings of Davids theocratic life, as they present themselves in his election and calling to be king of Israel, have their roots (when we look back in the light of the divine history of revelation) in the consecrated ground of a family in Judah distinguished in history for piety and godliness, which belonged with its traditions to the shepherd-city of Bethlehem. The family whence Jesse sprang was from the beginning one of the most prominent in the tribe of Judah. One of its ancestors, Nahshon, stood at the head of the whole tribe in the march through the wilderness (Rth 4:20; Num 1:7; Num 2:3). How remarkably the noblest and loveliest theocratic piety was nourished in this family, even in the degenerate times of the Judges, appears in the history of Ruth and Boaz; the latter a type of theocratic integrity, the former a truly consecrated flower of heathendom turning longingly to the light of divine revelation in Israel (Kurtz in Herz. III., 299). Jesse, the son of Obed, was the grandson of this Boaz. His intimacy with Samuel speaks for his piety and that of his family. David was the noblest scion of this family, far excelling his brothers (1Sa 16:7; 1Sa 16:10) in heart-piety and theocratic feeling. His posture of heart, which stood the divine test and was well-pleasing to God, was the fruit of the piety of his fathers house, whence sprang the humble, consecrated disposition15 in which, after his anointing, he ripened more and more in soul under the guidance of Gods Spirit to his high calling of theocratic royalty, coming by manifold experiences to a constantly clearer knowledge of this calling, and so guided by the Lord that not only the riddle of his dumb consecration was ever approaching solution, but also from the course of events (connected with Samuels former words to Saul) others, as Jonathan, and even Abigail, concluded that David was destined to be king, 1Sa 23:17; 1Sa 20:30 (v. Gerl.).But also, when we look forward in the light of divine revelation, the early part of Davids consecrated life contains many typical elements as factual prophecies or prefigurations of the future. His shepherd-life,16 continued after he was anointed, in which on the one hand self-consecrated he immerses himself in the contemplation of Gods revelation in nature and in His word, and on the other hand must be ready at any moment to meet the greatest dangers and exhibit boldness and prowess (1Sa 17:34-37), presents on these two sides types of his religious life as king, the Spirit of God developing on the basis of this double natural ground two sides of his character, which not merely co-exist, but are interwoven with each other: 1) intensively the innermost concentration and immersion of his thoughtful, meditative heart into the depths of Gods revelation of His power, grace, and wisdom in nature, word, history, and into the depths of the sinful human heart, whence sprang in his psalms partly the inspired praise of God with furtherance and deepening in every direction of the knowledge of God, partly advance in the knowledge of the natural grace-lacking condition of the human heart; 2) extensively his admirable energy and heroic courage in the life of conflict, which he had evermore to lead. In the hiddenness of his royal calling from the people, the gradual ripening of his inner life for his office and the lowliness of the sphere whence he was raised to the throne, he is a type of Christ who, sprung from him according to the flesh, and by the prophets called Son of David and Sprout of Jesse (Isa 11:1; Isa 11:10), passes his holy youth in privacy, gradually develops therein for his Messianic calling, and then at the end of this divine-human development steps forth from the lowliness of a natural-human life as the king of Israel, who completes in his person and work Gods revelations for the establishment of His kingdom on earth, and therein enters on the war of subjugation against the ungodly world. From Davids quiet anointing in the modest family-circle at Bethlelem to be King David, up to the birth, in the obscurity of a stall at Bethlehem, of the Son of David, the King of the Jews, there is an unbroken series of divine revelations, the beginning and end of which are bound together by the descent of the Saviour of the world from the Tribe of Judah according to the flesh. And as heathendom entered the principal line of the tribe of Judah (whence came Jesses house and David) in three distinguished women,17 thus sharing in the derivation of the Messiah from Jesses family,and so the impulse implanted (by the fundamental blessing, Gen 12:3) in the seed of Abraham towards union with heathendom, which takes mostly a thoroughly perverted direction in all Israels early history, showed itself in this family (consciously or unconsciously) in a normal and truly theocratic wayso we see, at the end of this development of the kingdom of God in Israel which goes from Bethlehem to Bethlehem, heathendom approaching in Bethlehem the new-born king of the Jews (having a natural right in Him because of its natural God-ordained share in His incarnation) in order to pay Him its homage. [This last statement expresses a parallelism, not a typical relation. That certain heathen women accepted the God of Israel, and that certain heathen astronomers believed in the divinely-sent king of the Jews are both facts illustrative of the promise to Abraham, but we cannot call them type and antitype, since they express not an essential principle, but a concomitant phenomenon of the fact of redemption. So the numerous cases in which God raised His servants from low to high position (as in Davids life) are illustrations of a mode of divine action, and thus parallel to our Lords history, but the relation of the events in the Old and New Covenants is not that of type and antitype, since they express an incidental and not an essential spiritual principle. David, as prophet and king, is a type of the true prophet and king, and his experiences as a spiritual-minded man answer to the experiences of the man Jesus; but we cannot apply the term typical (without an unworthy lowering of its meaning) to all the outward resemblances between their lives.Tr.]

5. The word: Man looks on the eyes, God looks on the heart, like that other: Obedience is better than sacrifice (1Sa 15:22) refers to the right condition of heart in a truly pious, humble disposition towards God the Lord. As we see clearly the difference between Gods word and mans, between Gods thoughts and mans, when Samuel says to himself this or that one is the chosen one, and the Spirit from above says to his heart no, and points him to one of whom he had not thought,so we see according to their different standards the difference between divine and human judgment. The natural man judges according to the outward and visible; God, who proves and knows the heart and the reins (Psa 139:1-2; Psa 44:22 [21]), judges according to the character of the heart and the direction of the will, according to the disposition of soul.

HOMILETICAL AND PRACTICAL

1Sa 16:1. Berlenb. Bible: We may indeed have compassion upon every one who is wretched because of his sin; but when Gods rejection is seen in continual hardening, that man must be given over to Gods righteous judgment.God demands in the souls He sets apart for Himself and for the guidance of others, such a dying to all things, that He does not allow them to regard any other interest than His, whatever reason may be alleged.Schlier: The Lord reproves Samuel, who had indeed meant well, but had not thought rightly; even a Samuel had to subject himself to Gods will, and with his whole mind and life send himself forward in Gods ways.

1Sa 16:2 sqq. Starke: Faint-heartedness and feebleness is found even in the best saints, Mat 8:26.[Henry: From this it appears 1. That Saul was grown very wicked. 2. That Samuels faith was not very strong.Tr.]S. Schmid: In doubtful, trying and perilous circumstances it is best to ask God for counsel.Cramer: A wise man is silent until he sees his time; but a fool cannot wait for the time, Eccl. 20:7; Ecc 3:7; Genesis 37.; Jdg 16:16.J. Lange: There is a great difference between an untruth, when one says what is false, and silence, when one prudently keeps to himself what it is not necessary for others to know, 1Sa 10:15-16.[We are not bound to tell everything unless we profess to be so doing, or the person asking has such peculiar relations to us as to warrant his expecting it. From failing to distinguish between deception and concealment, some persons condemn concealment and many justify deception. See an excellent discussion, with particular reference to this passage, in Thornwells Discourses on Truth.Tr.]Berl. Bible: Samuel speaks the truth, though he does not speak all the truth, but partly conceals and partly reveals, according to his present design.

1Sa 16:5. J. Lange: So too the worthy appropriation of the atonement of Christ unto salvation must, according to the evangelical covenant of grace, be made with real inner purification, Isa 1:16.

1Sa 16:6. S. Schmid: Human wisdom, however great, may yet be easily deceived accordingly even the wisest men must take care not to be too hasty in deciding.

1Sa 16:7. Cramer: God looks not at the outward work, but at the heart, and judges according to what His eyes see, Isa 11:3; Act 10:34.Berl. Bible: Men decide only according to the appearance, and so are commonly deceived; but the Lord looks to the depths of the heart, its most delicate movements, and our character, which is all clear to Him, and better known than we are to ourselves, Psa 7:10; Psalms 139.; Heb 4:12-13.True, deep-grounded humility of heart is the only appearance in man that pleases God (Isa 57:15); to this He looks as the ground of all virtues, for in it His fear has place. But where there is hidden pride, the fear of God is easily neglected.[W. M. Taylor: We must not undervalue attention to the symmetrical discipline of the physical frame. Yet muscularity is not Christianity, and bodily beauty is not holiness. The character, therefore, ought to be the principal object of attention.Tr.]Osiander: Christians too must not be judged by the outward walk, since commonly, through the infirmities of their flesh, they have a bad appearance, while hypocrites, on the contrary, make a good show in their life, 2Ti 3:5; Mat 7:15; Rom 2:20.[This is true as regards a mere plausible exterior; but Christians should be judged by their actions, Mat 7:20.Tr.]

1Sa 16:9 sqq. S. Schmid: God knows how to try, often and long, the patience of believers to their good, that He may confirm them in their faith and patience.

1Sa 16:11. God is wont to exalt the lowly, that they may always remember their lowliness, and not be proud, but glory only in God who has exalted them, 1Co 1:27 sqq., 1Co 1:31. [Scott: Nor does He favor our children according to our fond partialities; but often most honors and blesses those who have been the least regarded.Tr.]

1Sa 16:13. Cramer: Christians are temples and dwellings of the Holy Ghost, 1Co 6:19.S. Schmid: When we have done our duty as commanded by God, we have to leave the rest to Gods government, Mat 10:23.

1Sa 16:1-13. F. W. Krummacher: Call and anointing of the shepherd-youth: 1) By what this was occasioned, 2) How it was performed.[1Sa 16:7. Henry: The Lord looketh on the heart. 1. He knows the heart. 2. He judges of men by the heart.Tr.]J. Disselhoff (The History of King David, 14 sermons): The secret of the choice: 1) The Lord does not choose those who by peculiar gifts of nature are distinguished above others, but 2) He chooses those who faithfully profit by the greater or less measure of Gods grace which is granted them, 3) Who show this faithfulness by pure zeal and obedience in the labor entrusted to them, and 4) Those who even after some success in their labor do not boastfully press themselves forward, but remain in silent humility and quiet seclusion till the Lord brings them forth.

[1Sa 16:1. Remedies for improper mourning: 1) Submission to the will of God (I have rejected him); 2) Diligence in present work for God (fill thy horn and go); 3) Hope that God will bring a better future (I have provided me a king).

1Sa 16:4. Why do men so shrink from religious teachers?

1Sa 16:6-12. Difficulty of selecting men for important positions: 1) Causes: a) Intrinsic difficulty of properly estimating character. b) Management of partial friends. 2) Lessons: a) To avoid haste in deciding. b) To make diligent inquiries. c) To seek special Divine guidance.

1Sa 16:12. The youth of David. Handsome, energetic, brave, talented and accomplished, of good family, devoutfaithfully pursuing an humble calling which developed manliness, and trusting God for the unknown futureO the glorious possibilities of youth! (Comp. Kitto, Saul and David, p. 197 sqq., Maurice, Prophets and Kings, p. 38 sq.)Tr.]

Footnotes:

[1][1Sa 16:1. Literally seen. For similar use of see Gen 22:8; Deu 33:21.Tr.]

[2][1Sa 16:3. Chald. has sacrificial meal, perhaps simply as a connected fact, perhaps to avoid apparent infringement on priestly functions. Vulg. has victimam, other VSS. as Heb.Tr.]

[3][1Sa 16:4. Sept.: all that the Lord spake to him.Tr.]

[4][1Sa 16:4. It is better to give a uniform rendering to , the distinction between town and city not being found in Heb.Tr.]

[5][1Sa 16:4. Literally: is thy coming peace? and he said, peace. Sept. inserts at the end of the verse the words O Seer.Tr.]

[6][1Sa 16:5. Sept.: and rejoice with me to-day, probably a free reference to the festive character of the sacrificial meal; so Chald has meal instead of sacrifice.Tr.]

[7][1Sa 16:7. , Sept. , Erdmann gestalt, properly the whole personal appearance. Vulg. vultum, whence perhaps Eng. A. V. Luther, gestalt.Tr.]

[8][1Sa 16:7. These words wanting (but understood) in the Heb., are found in the Sept. God seeth, and are for clearness better retained. Chald. and Syr. omit as Heb.; Vulg. supplies the words: ego judico.Tr.]

[9][1Sa 16:10. Sept. (Vat. but not Alex.) omits unto Jesse. perhaps (Wellhausen) because Jesse was supposed not to know Samuels purpose. In 1Sa 16:6 Samuels said is equivalent to thought.Tr.]

[10][1Sa 16:12. This word is found only here, 1Sa 17:42 and Gen 25:25, and in the two last passages seems to refer to the color of the skin. The ancient VSS. do not decide. Chald. and Syr. use same word here as in Gen 25:25; Vulg. rufus, Sept. . Some moderns render red-haired. Levy renders the Chald. red-eyed.Tr.]

[11][1Sa 16:12. Sept.: goodly in appearance to the Lord, and for he is good, to preserve the moral aspect of the act in reference to 1Sa 16:7.Tr.]

[12][On the obvious political reason for this secresy see Bib. Comm. and Wordsworth in loco.Tr.]

[13][See Psa 7:9; 1Ch 28:9; Luk 16:15.Tr.]

[14][In 1Ch 2:13-15 only seven sons of Jesse are mentioned; one may have died in youth. The Syr. and Arab. write Elihu (1Ch 27:18) as seventh and David as eighth.Tr.]

[15][That is to say, the instruction and example of his fathers house was Gods means of developing this disposition in him. Piety is never inherited, but is always the direct creation of the Holy Spirit of God (Joh 3:6).Tr.]

[16][The care of the flocks, perhaps an honorable occupation in earlier times (Jacob, Moses), was in later times usually given to inferiors, as servants and younger children.Tr.]

[17][Tamar (Genesis 38), Rahab (Mat 1:5). Ruth (Rth 4:13), to which some add Bathsheba (or, Bathshua), but this is uncertain.Tr.]

Fuente: A Commentary on the Holy Scriptures, Critical, Doctrinal, and Homiletical by Lange

CONTENTS

This chapter is the first in the history of David. And as this man forms so distinguishing a character in the word of God, in every point of view, as a patriarch, prophet, writer, warrior, king, and above all, as a type of the Lord Jesus, everything respecting him becomes interesting and important. The history doth not open with the birth of David, but takes up the relation with his anointing by Samuel, as king of Israel, and the successor to Saul. Here is related in this chapter, the Lord’s sending Samuel to Bethlehem to anoint one of the sons of Jesse. All the sons of Jesse are made to pass before Samuel. David is chosen. Samuel pours the horn of oil upon him: Samuel returns to Ramah. An evil spirit from the Lord troubles Saul. David is sent for, as one that played well upon an instrument, to divert him.

1Sa 16:1

(1) And the LORD said unto Samuel, How long wilt thou mourn for Saul, seeing I have rejected him from reigning over Israel? fill thine horn with oil, and go, I will send thee to Jesse the Bethlehemite: for I have provided me a king among his sons.

If we compare what was said of Samuel in the close of the foregoing chapter, with what is said of Samuel (in 1Sa 19:20 ) presiding over the younger prophets, it should seem that the man of God had retired from court, and all public services, excepting the sanctuary, to attend to the instruction of the college. But the Lord now calls him to another commission, and this seems to have been the last, and which was to go in quest of Saul’s successor among the sons of Jesse. I detain the Reader to mark in this verse, the expression fill thine horn with oil: and then beg him to remember the opening of the hymn of Zecharias, in allusion to the Lord Jesus when under the teaching of the Holy Ghost, he declared that glorious event of the coming Saviour, to be, that he had raised up an horn of salvation for his people in the house of his servant David. See Luk 1:67-69 .

Fuente: Hawker’s Poor Man’s Commentary (Old and New Testaments)

A Young Man From the Country

1Sa 16:18

King Saul wished to engage a court minstrel. There is not a single historical personage before the Christian era of whom we know so much as we do of David. In our passage we meet with him as still but a young man; and there are five distinct things mentioned about him, which you may find it interesting and useful to consider.

I. The Bible is emphatic in telling us that he was a remarkably good-looking young man. A splendid fellow, thoroughly manly in his bearing. There was nothing effeminate about him. The body, no doubt, is but the tabernacle, the shell; but do not despise it; it bears the stamp and image of God.

II. His Pastime. Every sensible man must have some pastime. We cannot always be working. Well, David’s pastime was music. He had evidently quite a genius for it. David consecrated this great gift of his to the highest ends, and he found music to be most enjoyable when it was linked with sacred themes. Sacred music is the grandest of all music.

III. His Patriotism. If ever a man loved his country, it was he. His heroic fearlessness of danger was constantly put to the proof. Where his country’s interests were at stake, his life was at its service. No mere ambitious self-seeker was David; he was as genuine a patriot as ever lived. A healthy and unselfish public spirit needs to be cultivated. The first and most obvious duty which a man owes to the commonwealth is to see that he is no burden to it. In fact, it is in vigilant industry and sound common sense, employed about a man’s daily calling, that he makes his first contribution to the nation’s wealth and weal.

IV. His Prudence. The text describes him as ‘prudent in matters,’ ie. a young man of sound judgment, of sterling common sense. This is a wonderful recommendation to a man, no matter what kind of office he has to fill. Next to piety there is no endowment more valuable than what in England goes by the name of good common sense.

V. His Piety ‘the Lord is with him’. This was his noblest recommendation; he carried God with him into all the minutest details of life. No one can intelligently read his sacred songs without seeing that the central spring of his religious life was humble dependence upon the Divine Deliverer who was one day to suffer and die for the sins of men.

J. Thain Davidson, The City Youth, p. 18.

The Character of David

1Sa 16:18

How manifold are the ways of the Spirit, how various the graces which He imparts; what depth and width is there in that moral truth and virtue for which we are created! Contrast one with another the Scripture saints; how different are they, yet how alike! how fitted for their respective circumstances, yet how unearthly, how settled and composed in the faith and fear of God! As in the Services, so in the patterns of the Church, God has met all our needs, all our frames of mind. ‘Is any afflicted? let him pray; is any merry? let him sing Psalms.’ Is any in joy or in sorrow? there are saints at hand to encourage and guide him. There is Abraham for nobles, Job for men of wealth and merchandise, Moses for patriots, Samuel for rulers, Elijah for reformers, Joseph for those who rise into distinction; there is Daniel for the forlorn, Jeremiah for the persecuted, Hannah for the downcast, Ruth for the friendless, the Shunammite for the matron, Caleb for the soldier, Boaz for the farmer, Mephibosheth for the subject; but none is vouchsafed to us in more varied lights, and with more abundant and more affecting lessons, whether in his history or in his writings, than he whose eulogy is contained in the words of the text, as cunning in playing, and a mighty valiant man, and prudent in matters, and comely in person, and favoured by Almighty God.

J. H. Newman.

Davids Music and Its Influence on Saul

1Sa 16:23

Dr. Blaikie says: ‘Of the influence of music in remedying disorders of the nerves there is no want of evidence. “Bochart has collected many passages from profane writers which speak of the medicinal effects of music on the mind and body, especially as appeasing anger and soothing and pacifying a troubled spirit” ( Speaker’s Commentary ). A whole book was written on the subject by Caspar Loescherus, Professor of Divinity at Wittenberg (a.d. 1688), Kitto and other writers have added more recent instances. It is said of Charles IX of France that after the massacre of St. Bartholomew his sleep was disturbed by nightly horrors, and he could only be composed to rest by a symphony of singing boys. Philip V of Spain, being seized with deep dejection of mind that unfitted him for all public duties, a celebrated musician was invited to surprise the king by giving a concert in the neighbouring apartment to his majesty’s with the effect that the king roused himself from his lethargy and resumed his duties.’

David’s Harp

1Sa 16:23

In truth, the great Elements we know of are no mean comforters: the open Sky sits upon our senses like a sapphire crown the Air is our robe of State the Earth is our throne; and the Sea a mighty minstrel playing before it able, like David’s harp, to make such a one as you forget almost the tempest cares of life.

Keats (to Jane Reynolds, 1817).

References. XVII. 36. S. Gregory, How to Steer a Ship, p. 56. Spurgeon, Sermons, vol. xxi. No. 1253. XVII. 37. E. A. Askew, Sermons Preached in Greystoke Church. J. Keble, Sermons for Sundays After Trinity, part i. p. 105. XVII. 42. W. Brock, Midsummer Morning Sermons, p. 173. XVII. 47. H. J. Wilmot-Buxton, Sunday Lessons for Daily Life, p. 61. XVII. 48. J. M. Neale, Sermons Preached in Sackville College Chapel, vol. i. p. 192. XVII. R. Lorimer, Bible Studies in Life and Truth, p. 211. W. M. Taylor, David King of Israel, p. 26. XVII. 50. R. Hiley, A Year’s Sermons, vol. ii. p. 254. XVII. 55. E. A. Askew, Sermons Preached in Greystoke Church, p. 189.

Fuente: Expositor’s Dictionary of Text by Robertson

David Anointed

1Sa 16:12

SAMUEL, the venerable and almost outworn prophet, would have made a mistake upon this occasion. When he looked upon Eliab, he said, “Surely the Lord’s anointed is before him.” It is clear, therefore, that even inspired and honoured prophets were not, in themselves, infallible. It would further appear that their inspiration was occasionally suspended. Now and again natural judgment interposed its opinion. Now and again the natural sense spoke first, without allowing the spiritual sense to lead the way. So when Samuel saw Eliab, he was struck by the natural nobleness and majesty of the young man’s appearance, and said, “Surely this is the king of the Lord’s choice.” This notion of Samuel’s is most instructive. He saw the king in Eliab’s form, and he inferred that the kingliness of his stature came from the kingliness of his soul. It ought to be, surely, that outward greatness should be the expression of inward greatness; otherwise how horrible a contradiction man may become! Evidently so. A man towering in stature, yet pining away in soul! A fine, noble, manly bearing, inspired, if inspired at all, by a spirit which has cut itself off from the divine and eternal! The man thus becomes a Jiving lie. He becomes, too, the occasion of many mistakes on the part of others. Young men, fascinated by his outward appearance, infer that it must be safe to follow the lead of such a noble. Unsuspecting men, looking upon his openness and candour of countenance, may say, “Surely this man was made to be trusted;” others may be caught by the same reasoning, and so a man of certain form and aspect may be unconsciously misleading and seriously injuring his fellows.

Appearances ought to mean something. If a man has a noble physical appearance, that appearance ought to carry with it some moral significance. If it does not, the man himself should retire into his own heart, and ask himself a plain question or two. Did God fashion palaces for dwarfs? The man should inquire whether God intended that his outward nobleness of form and aspect should be inconsistent with his inner and better life? Ought not the natural to be the expression of the spiritual? Ought a man to have a noble head, and nothing in it great physical power, and no power of soul an open, beautiful countenance, yet the heart of a hypocrite or the soul of a villain? As with personal appearance, so with social appearance. Our outward figure in society ought to mean something good; something according to the measure of its greatness, and the intensity of its splendour. Shall a man live in a great house, and be surrounded by all the signs of luxury and advanced civilisation, and yet that appearance fail to denote that the inhabitant of that house and the owner of that property is a man of the noblest charity, and that what is round about him is but a poor figure and dim emblem of the reality of his spirit, and the inexhaustibleness of his love? A man ought not to feel himself at liberty to be inconsistent, to exhibit a daily discrepancy between his appearance and his reality, whether it be his personal appearance or his social appearance. If he has been gifted, either in one Way or another, with great and notable outward blessings, those gifts ought to lead him to the consideration of questions of intellectual and moral culture; so that the outward, however great and impressive, may be but a feeble indication of inward wealth, the richness of his knowledge, the depth and truth, the purity and gentleness, of his soul!

On the other hand, there is a higher law. There is a law which takes us clear out of the realm of appearances. All men have not Eliab’s kingliness of image, and majesty of bearing. There are dwarfs, cripples, deformed men, men whose figure is against them, whose outward appearance may lead people to form the most erroneous conclusions regarding the quality and temper of their souls. So we come for our relief and teaching to this higher law which says, “Look not on his appearance. The Lord seeth not as man seeth; man looketh on the outward appearance, but the Lord looketh on the heart.” So, whilst our subject appeals to those who are favoured with outward beauty and external majesty, it also has a message for those who have no such physical and external advantages. It says, True beauty is beauty of the heart; true greatness is greatness of the mind; abiding majesty is moral majesty; what thou art in reality, thou art in thy soul! The bloom shall be taken off thy cheek, the lustre shall be dimmed in thine eye; the sap shall be taken out of thy bodily strength: moral elements, spiritual qualities, spiritual beauties, these survive all wrecks, these grow, these increase in lustre, beauty, and worth; these, partaking of the very nature and quality of God, shall abide through the ages of his own eternity!

Turning specially to the anointing of David, we shall regard it in its bearing upon the divine law of election, which is so mysteriously, yet so certainly and inexorably working amidst the affairs of men. Looking at that law within the limits of the present instance, two things are plain. It is plain, first, that the law of divine election pays no regard to human prejudices. There is, for example, a prejudice in favour of appearance. Samuel himself was the subject of that prejudice. When a man of towering physical stature, great breadth, and sublime aspect came before him, he, though a spiritual man, and a specially called prophet of the Lord, said, “Surely this kingly man must be the king of the Lord’s choice.” We may, too, have prejudices as respects age. We rightly say that age should speak, that a multitude of days should teach wisdom, that a man who has come to maturity, or grey hairs, has a right to a certain measure of social supremacy. There is, too, a prejudice as regards employment. We infer that because a man has been brought up in a lowly employment, therefore he is not qualified for high rule, for supreme command. Now as Samuel had the one prejudice, Jesse had the other. When Samuel asked if there was not another son, Jesse said to him, “that the youngest yet remained,” pronouncing perhaps the word youngest so as to throw suspicion into the bare conjecture that one so young should be at all likely to ascend the throne of Israel. Not only did Jesse describe David as the youngest, but he described him also as keeping sheep. “He was but a shepherd, he watched his father’s flock;” and to the mind of Jesse it seemed an impossible thing that a man could step from the shepherd’s office to a royal position. Yet the Lord said of David, coming in fresh from the mountains, ruddy as the morning, strong as a youth sent down from heaven, “Arise, anoint him: for this is he;” thus setting aside human prejudices, and working according to a law which never has been sanctioned by the merely natural reason of mankind.

By calling unlikely men to the front, God humbles human judgment. No man can arise and say, “This is the Lord’s chosen one,” or “That ought to be the specially honoured servant of the Most High.” Not the keenest, wisest, strongest of us is entitled to say who shall be sent on the Lord’s errands. We are ruled by prejudices, we are oftentimes victims of appearances. We see form, not soul, hands, not hearts. We draw conclusions from things seen and temporal. God hushes all our voices, and says, “I am the Lord; I will send by whom I will send: the work is mine, and the Master must choose the servants.” So again and again we are thrown back from our most cautious reasoning, our most prudent conclusions, and God is every day in the Church and elsewhere giving our proud intellect the lie; saying to our penetration, “Thou art blind;” saying to our judgment, “Thou art foolish, thou knowest not the measure of the case; and when thou hast pronounced thine own opinion, thou hast but betrayed thine own incapacity and folly!”

God also keeps the world in constant expectation by calling unlikely men to do the chief of his work in society. We know not who may be called. “What I say unto one, I say unto all, Watch.” We cannot tell but that the man who has been sitting on the outside, year after year, may be the very next to be called to the front, entrusted with high commissions, inspired to do the Lord’s work amongst men. We ought, therefore, to live as those who are expecting messages from the Most High. At any moment he may speak to us by combinations of events which may take place with startling suddenness. He can alter our position in society, so that the man who was yesterday obscure may to-morrow be set on the very pinnacle of the social fabric, and he whose opinion was yesterday despised may rule the judgment of men to-morrow. Our life is thus redeemed from monotony, and saved from suicidal insipidity. The Lord is round about us, and at any moment he may charge us with his messages, and clothe us with his power!

By calling unlikely men to the front, God equalises the conditions of society. Suppose for one moment that all men were called from one class. What a change would take place in our social relations! What pride would inspire some people what despair would chill and darken others! But God is continually working by a sovereign law, which we cannot understand, but which always vindicates its own mercifulness, as well as shows its infinite wisdom. Are the rich and the mighty and the noble always called to do the chief work in society? Has not God sometimes gone forth that he might call the gatherer of sycamore fruit to do his work in Israel; that he might call Elisha from the plough to speak the messages of his wisdom and love; and that he might call great men from lowliest and obscurest positions to do some great work for him? Thus society is equalised. One man is born to great social position; he rules and sways. Another, born in poverty and obscurity, is called to discover, to enter upon great projects, to develop sublime schemes. Thus God equalises one aristocracy with another, and daily teaches us that no man is to be despised; that in the lowliest of his creatures he can set up his temple, if he will!

See then the graciousness of the law of sovereign election. We lay the whole stress of the emphasis in this sentence upon the word graciousness. We do not speak of the majesty, the grandeur, the impressiveness, and sublimity of the law. But in this law of sovereign election, daily at work amidst the affairs of men, we discover infinite graciousness, beneficence, compassion. The law has not only a sublime side, but a side which appeals to our emotions, to our gratitude, to our confidence. God’s strength is the measure of God’s love. So the Christian should say: Had I any choice in the matter, I should prefer that God should elect to rule according to his own counsel without ever consulting me. In so far as I believe that he is infinite in wisdom, in power, in love, in righteousness, in so far would I disclaim any right to participate in his counsels, and should shrink from the responsibility of having anything to do with determining my own life, merely as a question of selfish calculation and policy; whilst with my whole heart would I say to my Father in heaven, “Thy will be done!” I would pray him to save me from consultation; I would appeal to him not to make me a party to a decision; I would be his servant, his agent, his son. I am but an insect born yesterday. What shall I say to the eternal and infinite God? I say, “Do not ask me; do not consult me; thou knowest all; let me find my liberty in thy sovereignty; let me find my freedom in thy rule; what thou doest, infinite, living One, must be best! I will not ask to be taken into the secret place of thy tabernacle, to be consulted; only fill me with thy light, and inspire me with thy love.” Thus the great law of election is not a terror, nor does it disclose mere arbitrariness of will. It shows that there can be but one Lord; and in so far as we can say, “The Lord reigneth,” our life is a continual sabbath!

It is plain from this instance, in the second place, that the law of divine election proves itself in spiritual gifts. We read, “The Spirit of the Lord came upon David from that day forward.” The same thing we see in the case of Saul, upon whom the Spirit of the Lord came, and of whom we read, “The Lord gave him another heart.” So it was with Joshua: “And the Lord said unto Moses, Take thee Joshua the son of Nun, a man in whom is the Spirit, and lay thine hand upon him.” In like manner we read that “the Spirit of the Lord came upon Jephthah.” So with Samson the strong man: “The Spirit of the Lord began to move Samson at times in the camp of Dan.” It is of supreme importance that this side of the doctrine be understood; so that the law of divine election may be saved from abuse. The law of divine election vindicates itself in spiritual expression on the part of those who are divinely elected. How is a man to show his election? Not by pretension. The most solemn assertion on his part that he is called of God to do the work, amounts to nothing, considered in itself. A man may declare most solemnly and resolutely that he has a charge from God to reveal certain truths, to undertake certain offices, to do a specific work; and yet his emphatic asseveration may go for nothing. How, then, is a man to prove his divine election? Not by contemptuous treatment of other workers. Whatever be our gifts, we are not at liberty to treat with contempt those who are doing Christian work, or right work of any kind whatsoever, in Church or State, in the market-place, or in the household. The divinely elected man is a magnanimous man. He rarely has recourse to contempt; when he is contemptuous, it is for moral, not for merely personal, reasons; when he resorts to irony, banter, sarcasm, and contempt, it is in a spirit of righteousness not that he enjoys the exercise, but that he sees by a vision, quickened and strengthened by God the Holy Ghost, that no other weapons could so successfully do the work to which he is called.

How, then, is a man to prove that he is called of God to do a special work, or to occupy a special position? We answer, distinctly and emphatically, by the purity and force of his spiritual qualifications. Only so far as he has the Holy Ghost is he the elect servant, the representative of God! What of his spirituality? What of his calculation of things that are round about him, things seen and temporal? what of his ideas of truth? Is he at home in the spiritual region has he keen, piercing insight into things, true, living, heavenly insight into them? By so much is he the called and crowned servant of the living God! He must declare his election by his speech, by its purity, spirituality, heavenliness. When we come near him, we must feel that, though on earth, he is yet in heaven; that though he speaks the language of men, he speaks it in a tone and with an accent which he could only have learned of Jesus Christ and of God the Father! There must be something about him that is not merely physically distinctive, but spiritually distinctive, separating him from all other men, and giving him a bearing and force which could only be derived from long-continued loving fellowship with the unseen, ever-living Lord! “Beloved, believe not every spirit: but try the spirits, whether they are of God.” “Many shall come in my name, saying, I am Christ, and shall deceive many.” “Of your own selves shall men arise, speaking perverse things to draw disciples after them.” Hence we see that assertion is nothing; great, bold claim is nothing; sublimity of appearance is nothing. The whole question turns upon this: How much of the Holy Ghost is in the heart of a man, who claims to be a teacher sent from God, or a king of men?

An intelligent appreciation of this law of divine sovereign election would be attended by the happiest consequences. Life would no longer be looked upon as an irregular warfare. If we lose grasp of this doctrine life becomes a scramble; the strongest wins, the weakest is knocked to the wall; and as for the spiritual man, the soul that has not lost its sensibility, the man that has ideas of righteousness, truth, and honour such men must be trampled in the dust. Lay hold of this doctrine, that God is at the centre, God is on the throne, marshalling all forces, and ruling all events; and how confused soever may be present appearances, we shall find a law working itself out which will justify every one who is good, vindicate every righteous claim, confound the wicked, and bear them away upon the whirlwind of divine indignation. Not only will this result follow; but responsibility will be felt to be measurable by proper limitations. All men are not equally responsible before God. Some require to be comforted upon this point, because this great question of responsibility is so heavy to carry; it troubles and overweights them till they can hardly get along at all, so grievous is their sense of personal responsibility. Tell a man that God gives to every one a certain number of talents, five, two, or one. Tell him that from one to whom much has been given, much will be required, and that from one to whom little has been given, little will be required; then he begins to feel the justness, the equity, and graciousness of the living Lord. God gave us our original dowry, and from that point we must work out the sum of our responsibility. Our one talent will not be expected to be multiplied into ten; our five talents will be expected to grow in proportion to their original number and quality. So there is righteousness at the heart of things. God’s judgment-seat is a judgment-seat of light, truth, and equity; and no man hath occasion to fear it, who has served God, and worshipped him in spirit and in truth. There will also be another result. Mutual honour will be unmingled with personal envy. We are not all equal, to begin with. God intended some to have great talents, and others to have but feeble gifts. God called some men to work at the front, and he intended other men to do a lowly, obscure, unseen work. God created yonder singing, shining poet, and God set another man down amongst the prosaic thinkers, men who could see no further than a fact, and had little power of coming far into the empire of truth; yet who were firm and sound within the limit and region of fact. Shall we envy the great man? Surely not. He was made of God; he is honoured of our Father, we will glorify God in him. Such will be the conclusion to which we shall come, if we believe with all our heart that God is on the throne; and that he doeth in all these things, which are beyond our control, according, not only to the pleasure of his will, but the infinitude of his righteousness.

No man is elected to badness of character. God never called a man to wickedness. The whole tone of biblical teaching is against a theory so monstrous. We read of election to righteousness, of calls to high offices and noble functions, but we never read of God electing a man to hell! As to this matter of election, we would to God that some who object to it were as common-sense in this question as they are in the daily actions of ordinary life! We ask no higher degree of common-sense. Let us assume that a purse has been lost a purse containing a thousand guineas; and whoever finds it may keep it. “Ha!” we say, “well, only one can find it; therefore what is the use of a thousand seeking it? Only one can have it; and if I am elected to be the man, it will come in my way.” We never heard people reasoning so with regard to an affair of that kind. Though only one may have it, ten thousand would strive for it, if they know the conditions. There is a prize to be given in a school. It is one prize; there are five hundred scholars in the school. The boys say, “Well, only one of us can get it, why should five hundred of us be toiling and fagging for it?” Another boy says, “I know if I am to have the prize, I shall get it; so I shall read no books, and make no preparation.” You would not allow a boy to reason so. Yet there are men who say this, “If we are called to heaven, we’ll get to heaven; if we are elected to be saved, we need not make any effort about it.” “Thou wicked and slothful servant: out of thine own mouth I condemn thee;” the whole action of thy evil life shall be thy answer on the day of judgment, and thou shalt be condemned to an ignominious silence because of a self-accusing conscience.

With God upon the throne, why should we be distressed by unhappy appearances and unwelcome rumours? The Lord reigneth; that is enough. Seated above all forms and all forces, holding the royal sceptre, is the God and Father of our Lord Jesus Christ. The armies of heaven are his loving servants. The forces of creation are measured and controlled by his gracious power. Children of earth cannot go beyond the line he has marked. He maketh the wrath of man to praise him, and the remainder of the wrath of men he doth restrain. Such thoughts bring the soul into holy quietness. They sustain our hope when the day is cloudiest and the night is filled with darkness. They rebuke our impatience and murmuring, and bid us nestle closer to our Father’s heart. The sovereignty of the Lord is the security of all goodness. Destroy sovereignty and you inaugurate confusion. What would be our poor human life, were God to leave the throne, and allow us to go our own way, and do our own bidding? Truly then we should be far away on the wild waters, without captain or friend, and without hope of home. Blessed One, known to us through the great cross, leave not the throne; but rule us, work in us, have us in thy holy keeping!

Prayer

Almighty God, thou art always showing us thy goodness. We have said in many a song of adoring praise, “Goodness and mercy have followed us all the days of our life.” Saying this, the whole earth has become the house of the Lord. We have consecrated every part of the habitable globe by songs of praise and by utterances of adoration and trust. “Behold, this is none other than the house of God,” we have said, as great religious emotions have arisen in our hearts and ennobled our whole spirit by their pathos. We will now sing of judgment and mercy; we will make mention of thy lovingkindness; and thy providential care shall be the subject of our song. Thou hast watched our uprising and our down-sitting, our going out and our coming in, and from the high hills thou hast sent us help every day, so that we have been lifted out of the low place, amid the cold wind and the stifling cloud, right up into bright places and into the sunlight and the music of better worlds. Thou hast disappointed our fear, as surely as thou hast exceeded our hope. We have not recognised our little prayer in thy great answer. Thou hast swallowed up our poor cry in all the bounteousness of thy great response. If our prayer was sown a little seed, thine answer has come to us as a great tree. Behold, how good thou art! How infinite in tenderness! How eternal in patience! How mighty is the delivering arm of God! We will comfort ourselves with these words, being entitled to apply them by the grace that is in our Lord Jesus Christ, by whom alone we have come to know thee in all the loftiest and tenderest aspects of thy character. He has taught us to call thee Father, Father in heaven, and he has given to us visions of thy bounty and love which put out the brightness of the sun by their infinite glow. So we stand as children at home in the presence of the Father, and the table of his bounty, confessing our unworthiness; but whilst the confession is yet staining our lips, behold, thou art arraying us in the best robe and making our finger rich with the ring of thy love. “How good is the Lord!” our souls will say, startled into the gracious exclamation by many a sacred surprise. The high hill has been brought within easy ascent when we have come to it because of. the presence of the Lord, and the rest of soul by which that presence has been testified. The stone has been rolled away from the door of the sepulchre when we have come to it; for who can outrun the angels, and be first at the scene of battle? Behold, thou art always first. We can but be second, for we are the creatures of thy hand, we arc the sheep of thy pasture. Thou didst dwell in eternity; thou didst come up from the infinite spaces; by new names hast thou come down to us; by the Lord and by Jehovah have we known thee, and then by Father merciful, pitiful and Redeemer revealed in thy Son. We will trust thy mercy, goodness, compassion, and love. There we feel a sense of security; there our souls fall into sweet peace; and as for the mysteries which darken around the horizon, we leave them to thee. Thou hast light enough to burn out their darkness, and to fill them with grace and glory. We will think of the past, but not too tearfully, lest we blind ourselves to its best lesson. We will call up the dead, until we know that they are more truly living than we are a larger life, blessed with celestial liberty. We will look forward with confidence, for all our yesterdays are promises of all our to-morrows, and the Lord who has been known to us by many a name will find a new revelation for every dawning day. We will remember before thee our sick ones. Thou canst heal them with the poor health of time and the eternal health of heaven. Thou wilt remember our travelling friends, tossed on the sea, wandering in new lands, surrounded by unfamiliar associations. Their hearts are here, and yet there, with a divided attention, with a scattered and yearning love. The Lord feed them, lead them, sustain them, wherever they are, and bring them back to their desired haven with new blessings and the sense of new consecration to the living Owner of all souls. We remember the little ones, who can hardly speak their own request or tell their own necessities. We remember all classes and conditions of human life, from the lowest to the highest, from the most plebeian to the most imperial and royal, praying that all may feel themselves to be but men in the Lord’s presence, and yet men even in his sight. The Lord send a fire amongst us that shall burn, but not consume. Open our mouths in blessing, in fearless, triumphant praise, and give us a deepening love, a more intense zeal for God, and a clearer view of the cross as the only answer to sin, and the only way to heaven. Amen.

Fuente: The People’s Bible by Joseph Parker

X

DAVID CHOSEN AS SAUL’S SUCCESSOR,

AND HIS INTRODUCTION TO THE COURT OF SAUL

1Sa 16:1-17:54

The rejection of King Saul introduces as his successor the most remarkable man of the Hebrew monarchy, or of any other monarchy. Apart from the history of David, we cannot understand the Psalms, and apart from the Psalms, we cannot understand the history. A great number of these Psalms, written by David himself, reflect and expound his own life experiences, and forecast the experiences of Christian people of all subsequent generations. Most of the others were written by his singers and their successors. There is for every Psalm an historic occasion and background.

Again, apart from David’s history, we cannot understand the marvelous development of the messianic hope from his time on. In like manner, in his own time and later, the great prophetic utterances root in his history, with their promises and foreshadowings. Indeed, the proofs of a high order of spiritual life in the old dispensation, and of the spiritual import of the Mosaic law are most abundant in David’s life, his worship, and the literature arising therefrom.

To take away the history of David, removes in an important sense, the foundation of the New Testament. This connection with the New Testament may be abundantly found in references to the history of David, and the exposition of it by our Lord and his apostles. Fortunately for the preachers of our day, there is a rich and trustworthy literature concerning this most notable king of history. Indeed, in view of this literature, so easily obtained, that preacher is inexcusable who remains in ignorance concerning David. No exigency of life, whether arising from poverty, sickness, or any other cause, can excuse the preacher who fails to study, in a thorough and systematic manner, the life of David.

The reader will recall the books recommended when we commenced this harmony; not a multitudinous and costly list for great scholars, but a list for students of the English Bible, all cheap, all good, all easily obtained, and it was stated at that time that when we came to the history of David, other books of like character would be named. Some, indeed, of the very best of these we reserve until we come to the study of the Psalter. The preacher who has in his library choice books on the law, the Psalter and the prophets is equipped for Old Testament exposition, and prepared to undertake the study of the New Testament. Every Sunday school teacher and every layman engaged in any public activity of kingdom-service should have these books. Now to these already named, to wit: Josephus, Edersheim, Dean, Geikie, Stanley, Hengstenberg, and to the three commentaries Kirkpatrick on Samuel in the Cambridge Bible, Blaikie on Samuel in the Expositor’s Bible, and Murphy on 1 Chronicles we will add and especially commend a little book entitled David King of Israel , by W. M. Taylor, author also of the famous book of the parables. It will be observed that the textbook has for its third part of Saul’s reign this appropriate heading: “The Decline of Saul and the Rise of David,” and that this history is found in 1 Samuel 16-31, supplemented by only five passages from Chronicles (1Ch 10:1-14 ; 1Ch 11:13-14 ; 1Ch 12:1-7 ; 1Ch 12:16-18 ; 1Ch 12:19-22 ) only thirty verses in all.

There are special items of interest touching David, which appear in the various genealogical tables of both Testaments, to wit:

1. His ancestry is clearly traced back to Adam, and his posterity forward to our Lord.

2. Twice is his descent marked from one of twins struggling in the mother’s womb, the history in each case remarkable. You will find the history in Gen 25:21-26 ; Gen 38:1-30 .

3. On the maternal side are two foreigners, Rahab the Canaanitess and Ruth the Moabitess, thus connecting both David and our Lord with the Gentiles.

4. He came in the line of all the promises from Adam to his own time.

5. He came in the royal line according to the prophecy of his dying ancestor, Jacob: The sceptre shall not depart from Judah, Nor the Ruler’s staff from between his feet, Until Shiloh comes: And unto Him shall the obedience of the peoples be.

6. His birthplace and home is Bethlehem, and it was the birthplace of his greater son, our Lord.

There is some difficulty in determining his place in the family, that is, whether he was the seventh or the eighth son of Jesse. The scriptures that furnish an explanation of statements that he was the seventh son and the eighth son are 1Sa 16:10-11 ; 1Sa 17:12 ; 2Sa 17:25 ; 1Ch 2:15 ; 1Ch 27:18 . This section presents eight sons, of whom David is declared to be the youngest, and in the next chapter it expressly says that Jesse had eight sons, and again affirms that David was the youngest; but 1Ch 2:15 makes David the seventh. A careful examination of all these passages yields this explanation: He was the seventh son of Jesse by his first wife, but younger than another son of Jesse by his second wife; therefore he was the seventh son in the sense meant, and yet he was the eighth and the youngest son of Jesse.

As we progress in the history, we will find other members of David’s kindred becoming quite prominent in the history, and some of them adding much to the troubles and tragedies of his life. His three oldest brothers are mentioned in this section as being in Saul’s army, and Elihu, another brother, when David organized the kingdom, becomes captain of the tribe of Judah. Amasa, the son of his sister, Abigail, is a very prominent figure in the history, and with Abishai, Joab, and Asahel, sons of his sister, Zeruiah, have much more to do with his history. One of his uncles, Jonadab, becomes an occasional counselor in his reign, and one of his brothers becomes a mighty champion.

Our story commences under the following conditions: First, Saul, under two great tests, failed to comply with the kingdom charter, losing the dynasty by the first, and his personal right to reign by the second, but he is yet king de facts though not de jure. That means he is king in fact, but not in right. Jehovah has utterly withdrawn from any communication with him, and an evil spirit is leading him to ruin. The Philistines still wage war against him. Samuel, the aged prophet, has withdrawn from him, and is teaching in his school of the prophets at Ramah. Jehovah has already announced to Saul, not only the loss of the throne to his dynasty and his personal rejection as king, but that the Lord hath sought him a man after his own heart, and commanded him to be captain over his people; but so far there has been no designation of this man, and you must particularly note that after the designation his rule does not commence until Saul has wrought out his own ruin.

The section opens with Jehovah’s designation of the man by lot, and his anointing by Samuel. Samuel’s fear that Saul will kill him if he anoints a successor is assuaged by Jehovah’s directions as to the method and purpose of the anointing. It is not the divine purpose to bring about a division of Israel under rival kings; therefore Samuel must go to Bethlehem to offer sacrifices, which would not attract Saul’s attention; then the designation by lot there, with the anointing, are private acts. The object of this is to begin the preparation of David for the kingly office, which he is not to assume until the time designated by Jehovah. At no time while Saul lives does either the Spirit impress David to assume the kingly office for which he has been anointed, nor does David of his own motion conspire against Saul, or in any way seek to weaken his authority. This time the basis of God’s choice is not physical stature and strength, as in Saul’s case, but the state of the heart in God’s sight.

The choice surprises everybody but God. Neither Samuel nor the family, nor David himself would have judged as Jehovah judged. Seldom indeed can parents, brother or sister point out the member of the family who shall become illustrious, nor does the illustrious one himself always anticipate his future honor and position. A boy often aspires to great things, and imagines most vividly the glories that shall rest on him when he shall have the world in a sling, and vividly pictures to himself a homecoming when all the other members of his family shall find shelter under his wings, and all the neighbors who had failed to recognize his budding genius shall stand with mouths agape, while salvos of artillery, unfurled banners, flower-decked streets proclaim his honor, while bands are playing “See, the Conquering Hero Comes!” But time, the great revealer, shows these egotistical fancies to be as “the airy nothings” of a dream.

A boy in East Texas offered to take me from one preaching place to another, in order, as he stated, to tell me that he would be the governor of Texas, but I haven’t heard from him since. Shakespeare says, “Some men are born great; some achieve greatness, and some have greatness thrust upon them,” but being born to a high honor, or having it thrust upon you, will only add to your unfitness and make your failure more conspicuous, if you have not the character and training to wear it well.

It may be that some one of my readers, in casting his horoscope, has seen himself a preacher cutting a wide swath, salary of $10,000 a year, no building able to hold his congregations, and glaring headlines in the great dailies announcing that he is “shaking the foundations of hell and opening the portals of heaven.”

Some of my admiring friends, judging from my great knowledge of the history of wars, predicted that I would at least become a corps commander, should a war arise in my time. A war came and left me a high private, while only such “little” men as Lee, Jackson, Stuart, and the Johnstons on one side, and Grant, Sherman, Sheridan, and Thomas on the other side, wrote their names in the niches of the temple of fame but these “little” men were all trained at West Point.

The history we are studying makes it evident that Saul had neither the character nor the training to become a great ruler, but David had both. Woe to any of us who under-estimate the knowledge of these three things: (1) a right state of heart toward God, (2) the discipline of preparation and training, and (3) dependence on the power of the Holy Spirit.

Only men of great heart, great preparation, and great power with God achieve anything worth while in the ministry. David’s early life in the fields and valleys and mountains, with its isolation and loneliness given to meditation and reflection, put him near to nature’s heart and impressed him with the fact that an individual man is insignificant in the scheme of God’s great universe, and hence taught him to sing: “When I consider thy heavens, the work of thy fingers, the moon and the stars, which thou hast ordained; what is man, that thou art mindful of him, and the son of man that thou visitest him?” and also taught him to sing, “The heavens declare the glory of God; and the firmament showeth his handiwork. Day unto day uttereth speech, and night unto night showeth knowledge.” His occupation gave him the shepherd’s heart, and evoked that sweetest of all hymns: “The Lord is my Shepherd, I shall not want,” and that same shepherd office called out high courage that made him triumph in solitary grapple with the lion and the bear that would prey upon his flock, and gave him a matchless skill with the sling that would one day smite down a boasting giant.

The hardships of this calling in such a field gave him toughness of fiber and power of endurance. He could bear hunger and cold and heat without fainting. He himself says that he became as “fleet of foot as a wild gazelle,” and could conquer a goat in climbing a mountain. His association with the school of the prophets gave him devotion of spirit, and developed that natural cunning of fingers that struck the strings of a harp in a way never equalled by any other hard. His music would not only charm a serpent, soothe a savage breast, drive away melancholy, but would dispossess the devil, and above all things, with his anointing, the Spirit came upon him, and was never taken away from him. Only once he let Satan prompt him to do a disastrous thing, and once only through sin was he constrained to pray, “Take not thy Holy Spirit from me, and renew a right spirit within me.”

Apart from this early life preparation, before he appears in public and begins to reign so long and so well, there awaits him a novitiate of training under sufferings and persecutions such as seldom fall to the lot of man. His personal appearance is described in 1Sa 16:12 and 1Sa 17:2 , as ruddy of face, brilliant of eye, very handsome in his person. We are able to distinguish the Spirit’s power that came on David from the same power on Saul. In Saul’s case, it was only occasional, and finally utterly withdrawn; in David’s case, the “Spirit abode on him from that day forward.” An old writer thus distinguishes between a sinner and a saint: “The Spirit visits a sinner, but dwells with a saint; and conversely, Satan visits a saint, but dwells with a sinner.” A very fine thought. Here we come upon a controversy: What was the occasion of David’s first introduction to the court of Saul? Was it the harp-playing of 1Sa 16:14-23 , or was it the slaying of Goliath and the consequent victory, as told in 1Sa 17 ? If the first, how do you account for Saul’s ignorance of David when he appears on the second occasion, 1Sa 17:55-58 , that is, Saul’s asking Abner, “Who is this young stripling?” and Abner’s saying, “I don’t know.” They don’t seem ever to have heard of him. Some critics contend that 1 Samuel 16-17 are from different historic sources, and that they contradict each other flatly and irreconcilably in giving the occasion of David’s introduction to the court of Saul. Moreover, they say that if the harp-playing precedes the other, then the ignorance of not only Saul himself, but of the whole court concerning David and his father, is inexplicable, especially as in the nature of the case there could be no great interval of time between the two events, since David is, in the second, twice called a “stripling.”

The possibility of two sources is conceded, but not the certainty of it. It is the custom of inspired writers to repeat on new occasions enough of the past history to make clear the context. The court of Saul was ignorant of David and his family on both occasions. The first time, only one of the servants knows anything about David and his family, and his skill of song and speech, and Jehovah’s presence with him. The servant’s word about David, and his family would make no great or lasting impression on Saul and his court. The chief thing with them was the curing of Saul, and when after several harp playings, the cure seems permanent, the human helper returns to the care of his flocks and is swiftly forgotten. You will understand their ignorance from the fact that Samuel’s anointing of David was not in the public eye, but in private, and the spiritual endowment that followed would be known only by a few neighbors having knowledge of David’s shepherd life; none of it was known abroad. His ministrations and harp playing were in the sick room and not before the court. Moreover, Saul himself, while possessed of an evil spirit, suffered from mental aberration, which naturally impaired his memory, and while the record of the harp playing shows that Saul loved the healer, we all know by experience how grateful to the physician is every patient in the moment of relief, but if we continue well, how easily the physician passes out of our memory and life, until we get sick again. It is somewhat like the old proverb: When the devil is sick, The devil & saint would be; When the devil is well, The devil of a saint is he!

Solomon says in his penitential book, “There is no remembrance of former generations,” (Ecc 1:11 ). But there is no need to quote this general reflection of Solomon, since one of the most striking characteristics of human courts is that presence only keeps one in mind. Absence obliterates you from the memory of the great, to whom yesterday is a “long time ago,” and with whom the new man or the new event fills all the vision. As an illustration of the characteristic of kings to forget their benefactors, the great Earl of Stratford, himself a notable illustration of this fact, said, when his death warrant was signed by the ungrateful Charles I, “Put not your trust in princes,” so we needn’t concern ourselves about the contradictions the critics are so ready to find.

In all literature no book can be found more natural, more true to life, more vivid and simple in its records of past events, than 1 Samuel. Each event is recorded as by an eyewitness in its own independent setting, absolutely devoid of any strain to appear consistent with previous statements. Any lawyer will tell you that the evidence of a witness is to be distrusted when he labors to harmonize one statement with another. He is sure to tell a lie when he does that.

Our conclusion, then, is fixed that the harp-playing preceded the Goliath incident. Indeed, the evidence is positive that David did not continue at Saul’s court on his first introduction. You were told in 2Sa 17:12 that he would only come when there was the sickness, and then go back to his home; but after his second introduction, as you learn from 1Sa 18:2 , Saul did not allow him to go home any more.

Sir Walter Scott, in one of his romances, makes the harp playing of a beautiful girl drive away the temporary madness of a highland chief. In which romance is this incident related? I will ask also, What did Shakespeare say about the man devoid of music? Can you answer that? The question also arises: How do you explain the healing of Saul? The answer is obvious. The Spirit of the Lord in David’s music was greater than the demon possessing Saul.

Other items on the designation and anointing of David we need not discuss further, nor the healing of Saul by David’s playing the harp, but something should be said about the fight with Goliath and the victory that ensued.

We have before us a giant indeed, and we learn from other parts of the Bible that there was a family of these giants. This man was not the only one of the family. You would have a hard time carrying his spear, and you would be unable to carry his armor. The two armies came face to face, with just a ravine between, one on each hill. The one that advances has the task of going down hill under fire, and coming up a hill under charge; therefore Goliath, the giant, according to custom, steps out and challenges anybody in Israel to test the fate of the two nations on a single combat, and in order to provoke a response, he, according to the usual custom, curses the gods of the people that he challenges. This happens for forty days in succession. Israel is humbled; the Philistines triumph. About that time, Jesse wants to send some rations to his three boys in the army, just like parents sometime send provisions to students in school, and David is appointed to carry them, and when he gets there, he hurriedly puts the provisions with the baggage of the army, and rushes to the front. He wants to see the fight, and he hears a shout and beholds that giant come out and repeat his insulting and blasphemous challenge, and he inquires why somebody had not responded. His older brother says, virtually, “You had better go back and be tied again to your mother’s apron string. What’s a little boy like you doing on a battlefield where men only ought to be?” David responds that nothing he has said was out of place, and leaves the brethren, who did not believe in him, as the brothers of our Lord did not believe in him, and goes and mixes around among the soldiers and urges that somebody in the name of Jehovah could smite that giant, and that he is willing to undertake it.

Saul, who had offered an immense reward to anyone who would accept the challenge and defeat the giant, including even his own daughter for a wife, hears of David’s offer and sends for him. He is surprised to see a boy a mere stripling and he says: “You? You can’t fight this giant.” David says, “Sire, I can. I am the shepherd of my father’s flock, and when a bear and a lion came out to prey on the flock, I fought them unarmed, and when they reared up against me, I took them by the mane and slew them.” Saul was a much bigger man than David. He said, “I am willing to let you go if you will put on my armor.” David put it on and took it off, saying that he could not fight in Saul’s armor. What a text for the preacher! ever try to fight as some other man fights. Don’t try to preach like Brother Truett. You can’t do it. Don’t imitate him.

So David marches down against Goliath with nothing but a sling. He picks up in that ravine five pebbles. It excites the scorn of the giant that a boy unarmed should be sent against him, and he says, “Come up here and let me give your flesh to the fowls of the air,” and again curses Jehovah. David never stops, but runs to meet him, puts a stone in the sling, whirling it around; it flies and smites the giant in the middle of the forehead, and buries itself in his brain.

The text says that the giant so struck fell on his face. Why did not he fall backwards? It is a notable fact, witnessed a thousand times on the battlefield, and in executing men by shooting, that when the firing squad fires and the bullets enter the man’s heart, he always falls on his face, never backwards. It is one of these natural things that continually creep into Samuel’s narrative that makes one know it is a true story. I have seen thousands of men fall in battle, and I never saw a man shot through the brain or heart that did not fall forward. David rises up, takes Goliath’s sword and cuts his head off, places the head at Jerusalem for the present, puts the armor in his tent, and here comes the question that you may answer: When does Goliath’s sword appear again in the history? What did he do with it, and where does it come to light again? With the fall of the giant the Philistines are panic-stricken and the Israelites encouraged, and the fight joins, and it is in the book of Chronicles that we learn a fact not stated in Samuel. That passage about Shammah does not belong there where the harmonist puts it, but the one about Eleazar may be rightly placed. The fight was waged in a plat of ground full of barley. Eleazar stands with him and does great exploits, and so they put the Philistines to rout, and Eleazar afterwards, when David becomes king, is one of his mighty men. The victory is very great, and David returns and Saul appropriates him. He is never more allowed to go back to his father’s house.

QUESTIONS

1. What is the general theme of the Harmony’s third part of the reign of Saul?

2. What part of 1 Samuel covers the theme?

3. How much does 1 Chronicles supplement?

4. What is the present section?

5. What new book is commended?

6. What is the importance of the history of David, and its relation to the Psalm, the Mosaic law, the larger messianic hope, the prophets, and the New Testament?

7. What is the richness of the literature on David, and the preacher’s duty concerning it?

8. What items of special interest in genealogical tables of both Testaments concerning David?

9. Where is his birthplace and home?

10. Was he the seventh or eighth son of Jesse, and what scriptures, when compared, answer the question?

11. Name other members of David’s family, some of them quite prominent in the subsequent history, who add to the troubles and tragedies of his later life.

12. State the conditions under which the story of his life opens.

13. What are the divisions of this section?

14. Give the story of Jehovah’s designation of David, and his anointing in such a way as to show they were both private.

15. What is the basis of the choice of king this time, and who were surprised at it, and why?

16. What is the author’s observations on this point?

17. What three things should a preacher never underestimate?

18. What are the elements of David’s preparation to be king, arising from his early life and office?

19. What says Shakespeare of the man devoid of music?

20. What is David’s highest qualification immediately following his anointing, and contrast it with Saul’s like qualification.

21. What is an old-time preacher’s distinction on this point between a saint and sinner?

22. What apropos proverb concerning the devil?

23. What is David’s personal appearance?

24. How do you dispose of the apparent contradiction between 1Sa 16:14-23 and 1Sa 17:12-58 as to the occasion of David’s first introduction to the court of Saul; and if you say the harp-playing was the first, then explain the ignorance of David and his family manifested by Saul and his court on the second introduction,

25. How do you explain David’s healing of Saul by music?

26. In what romance does Sir Walter Scott give the story of a highland chief’s madness being dispelled by a girl’s harp-playing?

27. What is the relative position of the opposing armies of Saul and the Philistines?

28. What is the nature of Goliath’s challenge, and why does he curse Jehovah?

29. What is Saul’s offer for reward for a champion who would defeat him?

30. What is the occasion of David’s presence on the battlefield?

31. Why his indignation that no Israelite responded to the challenge, and his oldest brother’s rebuke?

32. Show from his interview with Saul that faith and not immodesty prompted him to accept the challenge.

33. Why did he reject Saul’s armor, and rely upon his shepherd’s sling?

34. Why did Goliath, when smitten, fall on his face?

35. What is the effect of the fall of Goliath on the two armies?

36. What hero stood by David in the fight, before the main body army arrives?

37. Tell the history of David’s disposition of Goliath’s head, armor, and sword, and when again does the sword appear in the history?

Fuente: B.H. Carroll’s An Interpretation of the English Bible

1Sa 16:1 And the LORD said unto Samuel, How long wilt thou mourn for Saul, seeing I have rejected him from reigning over Israel? fill thine horn with oil, and go, I will send thee to Jesse the Bethlehemite: for I have provided me a king among his sons.

Ver. 1. How long wilt thou mourn for Saul? ] Mourn he might, but it was too long that he mourned. Est modus in rebus: It is not fit to wash stables with sweet water. Ad ignem charitatis incalescente pectore liquefactus intus pietatis adeps foras emanabat per oculos, saith Bernard, a speaking of Samuel’s mourning.

Fill thine horn with oil. ] See 1Sa 10:1 . See Trapp on “ 1Sa 10:1 “

I will send thee to Jesse the Bethlehemite. ] First, Samuel was told that God had found him out a man after his own heart; 1Sa 13:14 now, that this man shall be one of the sons of Jesse the Bethlehemite; and lastly, that it should be David, after a refusal of his other brethren. God oft revealeth not his will to men, but at sundry times, and by various degrees. So the Messiah was made known to the Church: first, that he should be the seed of the woman; then, that he should be of the posterity of Abraham; then, of the tribe of Judah; then, of the house of David; then, that he should be born of a virgin. Isa 7:14

a Serm. xii. in Cantic.

Fuente: John Trapp’s Complete Commentary (Old and New Testaments)

1 Samuel

THE SHEPHERD-KING

1Sa 16:1 – 1Sa 16:13 .

The chief purpose in these verses is to bring out that the choice of David was purely God’s. The most consummate art could have taken no better way of heightening the effect of his first appearance than that adopted in this perfectly unartificial story, which leads us up a long avenue to where the shepherd-boy stands. First, we have Samuel, with his regrets and objections; then Jesse with his seven stalwart sons; and at last, when expectation has been heightened by delay and by the minute previous details, the future king is disclosed,-a stripling with his ruddy locks glistening with the anointing oil, and his lovely eyes. We shall best catch the spirit by simply following the letter of the story.

I. We have Samuel and his errand to Bethlehem. After that sad day at Gilgal, he and Saul met no more, though their homes were but a few miles apart, and it must have been difficult to avoid each other. Samuel yearned over the man whom he had learned to love, and it must have been pain to him to see the shattering of the vessel which he had formed. However natural his mourning, and however indicative of his sweet nature, it was wrong, because it showed that he had not yet reconciled himself to God’s purpose, though his conduct obeyed. The mourning which submits while it weeps, and which interferes with no duty, is never rebuked by God. He never says,’ How long dost thou mourn?’ unless sorrow has deepened into accusation of His providence, or tears have blinded us to the duty that ensues. But the true cure for overmuch sorrow is work, and, for vain regrets after vanished good, the welcome to the new good which God ever sends to fill the empty place. His resources are not exhausted because one man has failed. ‘There are as good fish in the sea as ever came out of it.’ Saul has been rejected, but a king shall be found; and Samuel is to dry his tears and anoint him. He evidently had no thought of a successor to Saul till this command came; and when it comes, how little it tells him! He gets light enough for the next step, but no more. That is always God’s way. Duty opens by degrees, and the way to see farther ahead is to go as far as we see.

Samuel’s sorrow and the incomplete command show plainly that he was but an instrument. At every step the view is confuted which makes him a far-seeing statesman who inaugurated and carried through a peaceful revolution. The history, which is our only source, tells another story, and makes God the actor, and the prophet only a tool in His hands. If we cut the supernatural out of the story, the fragments do not hang together, and no reason is forthcoming why they should be any more true than are the rejected pieces. Samuel does not show to advantage in either of the two things mentioned about him here. In neither was he true to his early vow, ‘Speak, for Thy servant heareth.’ But there was much reason for his fear, if once God was left out of the account; for Saul’s ever-wakeful suspicion had become a disease, and it was not wonderful that he should be on the watch for any act which looked like putting the sentence of deposition into effect. If ever a man lived with a sword hanging by a hair over him, it was this unhappy king, who knew that he was dethroned, and did not know when or by whom the divine rejection would be made visible to all men. But Samuel had faced worse dangers without a murmur; and no doubt his alarm now, which makes him venture all but flatly to refuse to obey, indicates that, to some extent, he had lost his hold of God by his indulgence in his sorrow. If he had been true to his high calling, he would have ‘filled his horn,’ and gone on God’s errand, careless of a hundred Sauls or a hundred deaths. But it is easy for us, who have never perilled anything for obedience, to sit in judgment on him. ‘Wherein thou judgest another, thou condemnest thyself.’ God judges him mercifully, and provides a shelter for his weakness, which he should not have needed. To hide his true errand behind the cloak of the sacrifice was second-best, and only permitted in consideration of his fear which had a touch of sin in it. He was not, at the moment, up to treading the heroic plain path; and God opened an easier one for him. It is sometimes allowable to use an avowed purpose to conceal the real one, but it is a permission which should be very sparingly used.

II. We have Samuel at Bethlehem, with Jesse and his sons. An old man is suddenly seen coming up the hill to the gate of the little city on foot, driving or leading a heifer, and carrying a horn in his hand. In such humble fashion did the prophet travel; but reverential awe met him, and his long years of noble service surrounded him as with a halo. Apparently, Bethlehem had not been included in his usual circuits, and the village elders were somewhat scared by his sudden appearance. Their question may give a glimpse into the severity which Samuel sometimes had to show, and is a strange testimony to the reality of his power: ‘Comest thou peaceably?’ One old man was no very formidable assailant of a village, even if he did not come with friendly intent; but, if he is recognised as God’s messenger, his words are sharper than any two-edged sword, and his unarmed hand bears weapons mighty to ‘pull down strongholds.’ Why should the elders have thought that he came ‘with a rod’? Because they knew that they and their fellow-villagers deserved it. If men were not dimly conscious of sin, they would not be afraid of God’s messenger or of God.

The narrative does not tell whether or not the sacrifice preceded the review of Jesse’s sons. Probably it did, and the interval between it and the feast was occupied in the interview. It is evident that Samuel kept the reason of his wish to see Jesse’s sons to himself; for disclosure would have brought about the danger which he was so anxious to avoid. It appears, too, from 1Sa 16:13 , that only the family of Jesse were present. So we have to fancy the wondering little cluster of burly husbandmen with their father surrounding the prophet, and: one by one, bracing themselves to meet his searching gaze. Again the choice is emphatically represented as God’s, by the mention of Samuel’s hasty conclusion, from the look of the eldest, that he was the man. Had not Samuel had enough of kings of towering stature? Strange that he should have been in such a hurry to fix on a second edition of Saul! The most obedient waiters on God sometimes outrun His intimations, and they always go wrong when they do. Samuel has to learn two lessons, as he is bidden to repress the too quick thought: one, that he is not choosing, but only registering God’s choice; and one, that the qualifications for God’s king are inward, not bodily. In these old days, the world’s monarchs had to be men of thews and sinews, for power rested on mere brute force: but God’s chosen had to rule, not by the strength of his own arm, but by leaning on God’s. The genius of the kingdom determined the principle of selection of its king. Samuel does not again attempt to forecast the choice; but he lets the other six pass, and, hearing no inward voice from God, tells Jesse, as it would seem, that the Lord has not chosen them for whatsoever mysterious purpose was in His mind.

III. We have ‘the Lord’s chosen.’ Samuel was staggered by the apparent failure of his errand. God had told him that he had provided a king from this family, and now they had passed in review before him, and none was chosen. Again he is made to feel his own impotence, and his question, ‘Are here all thy children?’ has a touch of bewilderment in it. God seldom shows us His choice at first; and both in thought and practice we get at the precious and the true by a process of exclusion, having often to reject ‘seven’ before we find in some all-but-forgotten ‘eighth’ that which we seek. David’s insignificance in Jesse’s eyes was such that his father would never have remembered his existence but for the question, and his answer is a kind of assurance to the prophet that he need not take the trouble to see the boy, for he will never do for whatever he may have in view. His youth and occupation put him out of the question. We know, from the other parts of his story, that his brothers had no love for him; nor does his father seem to have had much. Probably the lad had the usual lot of genius,-to grow up among uncongenial, commonplace people, understanding him little, and liking him less. It is a hard school; but where it does not sour, it makes strong men. His solitary shepherd life taught him many precious lessons, and, at any rate, gave him the priceless gift of solitude, which is the nurse of poetry, heroism, and religion. The glorious night-piece in Psa 8:1 – Psa 8:9 , and its companion day-piece in Psa 19:1 – Psa 19:14 , may bear the impress of the shepherd life; which is idealised and sanctified for ever in the immortal sweetness of Psa 23:1 – Psa 23:6 There were many worse schools for the future king than a solitary shepherd’s life on the bare hills round Bethlehem.

The delay of the feast and the pause of idle waiting heighten the expectation with which we look for David’s coming. When he does come, what a bright young figure is lovingly painted for us! He is ‘ruddy, and withal fair of eyes, and goodly to look upon,’-of fair complexion, with golden hair rare among these swarthy Orientals, and with lustrous poet’s eyes. What a contrast to Saul’s grim face and figure,- like a sunbeam streaming athwart a thunder-cloud seamed with its own lightning! Silently the divine voice spoke, and silently, as it would seem, Samuel poured the oil on the boy’s bowed curls. No word of the purpose escaped his lips, and the awestruck youth was left to wonder for what high destiny he was chosen. One can fancy the looks of his brothers as they bitterly watched the anointing with hearts full of envy, contempt, and rage. 1Sa 17:28 shows what they felt to David.

What was the use of this enigmatical anointing for an undisclosed purpose? It is Samuel’s last act, and his last appearance, except for the mention of David’s flight to him from the court of Saul, and that weird scene of Saul prophesying and lying naked before Samuel and David for a day and a night. It was therefore the solemn final act of the prophet,-transferring the monarchy; but it was for David the beginning of his training for the throne, in two ways, ‘The Spirit of the Lord came upon David from that day forward.’ There was an actual communication of divine gifts fitting him for his unknown office, and he was conscious of a new spirit stirring in him. Beside this, the consciousness of a call to unknown tasks would mature him fast, and bring graver thoughts, humbler sense of weakness, and clinging trust in God who had laid the burden on him; and the necessity for repressing his dreams of the future, in order to do his obscure present duties, would add patience and self-control to his youthful ardour. What a whirl of thoughts he carried back to his flock, and how welcome would the solitude be!

The great lesson here is the one so continually reiterated in Scripture, from Isaac downwards, that God ‘chooses the weak things of the world to confound the things that are mighty,’ and thereby magnifies both the sovereign freedom of His choice and the power of His Spirit, which takes the stripling from the sheepcotes and qualifies him to be the antagonist of the grim Saul, and the king of Israel. There are subsidiary lessons, especially for young and ardent souls confined for the present to lowly tasks, and feeling some call to something higher in a dim future. Patience, the faithful doing of to-day’s trivial tasks, the habit of self-repression, the quiet trust in God who opens the way in due time,-these, and such like, were the signs that David was called to a throne, and that God’s Spirit was preparing him for it. They are the virtues which will best prepare us for whatever the future may have in store for us, and will be in themselves abundant reward, whether they draw after them a high position, which is a heavy burden, or, more happily, leave us in our sheltered obscurity.

Fuente: Expositions Of Holy Scripture by Alexander MacLaren

the LORD. Hebrew. Jehovah. App-4.

I have rejected. Note here Jehovah’s sovereignty.

I have provided. Note Jehovah’s sovereignty in this choice of’ the youngest. It is this choice that makes David the “man after Jehovah’s heart”; not David’s personal character or conduct.

Fuente: Companion Bible Notes, Appendices and Graphics

Chapter 16

So God said to Samuel, How long are you gonna mourn for Saul, seeing I have rejected him from being the king, or reigning over Israel? [This change of attitude, “I’ve rejected him, now how long are you gonna mourn?”] fill your horn with oil, and go, and I will send you to Jesse the Bethlehemite: for I have provided a king from among his sons. And Samuel said, Lord if Saul hears I’ve gone down to anoint someone else to be king, he’ll kill me ( 1Sa 16:1-2 ).

Now that shows you how far Saul has strayed from the Lord, and the things of the Lord, he would actually kill the prophet of God. Samuel realized this, “This guy is really gone off the deep end. Lord if he hears I’m going to go down and anoint another king, he’s gonna kill me.”

And the Lord said, Well take with you a heifer, and [if they say, Where are you going?] just say, I’m going to offer a sacrifice. And then invite Jesse and his sons to come to the sacrifice. So Samuel came down to the house of Jesse, [and he said to Jesse] Jesse said to him, Have you come peaceably? And he said, Yes, I’ve come peaceably: I’ve come to sacrifice to the Lord: so sanctify yourselves, and come with me to the sacrifice. And he sanctified Jesse and his sons, called them to the sacrifice. And it came to pass, when the first son came in, Eliab, [he was a good-looking fellow,] and Samuel thought, Oh surely this good looking fellow is the one the Lord has chosen. [“This is God’s choice.”] And God spoke to Samuel, and said, Don’t look on the outward appearance, [because I don’t judge as men judge; men judge from the outward appearance. God said, I judge the heart. So don’t judge from just the outward appearance, I’m judging the hearts. Eliab is not the one.”] For the Lord sees not as man sees; man looks on the outward, God looks on the heart. So he called his next son Abinadab, the Lord said, [Nope.] And so he called Shammah. And the Lord said, [Nope.] And he made all seven sons to pass before Samuel. And the Lord said no to all of them. [Samuel said, “Uh oh, what’s going on here?”] Do you have any more sons? is that all? He said, Well the other one’s just a little boy, he’s out watching the sheep. Samuel said, Call him in. [And as David came in with the smell of the sheep and the fields upon him, as a little boy,] the Lord spoke to Samuel, now he was ruddy, [Had a good tan.] but withal he had a beautiful face, and he was just good looking. And the Lord said, Arise, and anoint him: for this is the one. And Samuel took the horn of oil, and anointed him in the midst of his brothers: and the spirit of the Lord came upon David from that day forward. So Samuel arose, and went back to Ramah ( 1Sa 16:2-13 ).

So here’s the anointing of David to be king over Israel. Now Saul was still on the throne, though David is now God’s anointed and God’s choice for king, still Saul is on the throne. We’re going to notice in the next few chapters that Saul is now gonna do his very best by force to hang on to that which is no longer rightfully his. In a true, rightful sense, David is king. He’s been anointed king. The anointing of God and the power of His Spirit and the anointing is resting upon David as king; however, Saul is still on the throne. Saul is gonna try to drive David out of the kingdom by force, the kingdom which is now rightfully his.

There’s the sequel to this. Jesus through His death upon the cross has redeemed the world back to God and is now the rightful King, God’s choice and God’s anointed. However, Satan is still upon the throne and Satan is doing his best to hold by force, that which is no longer rightfully his, doing his best to hold back the kingdom of God from the earth. But Jesus Christ is the rightful King, and we can claim His victory, and we can force the enemy off of His territory. But the enemy is stubborn. He only yields when he must; thus, your prayers must be specific.

Instead of “God save the world,” you’ve got to bring individuals before God, specific individuals, and say, “Lord, You died that You might reign as King in their lives, and they’re being held by the power of Satan and the power of darkness, but Jesus has defeated the powers of the enemy.

Colossians, chapter two, “He triumphed over these principalities and powers, through His cross making an open display of His victory.”

“Therefore, I claim the victory of Jesus Christ in this life, and I come against the power of Satan that is holding them captive. I come against the powers of darkness that have blinded their eyes to the truth. In Jesus’ name, release them from this blindness, from the prejudice that Satan has poisoned their minds against the Lord.” I can set them free from this power of Satan that they might have a freedom of choice.

Why do not men choose Christ? Because Satan has so controlled their mind and holds them under his grip so that they cannot have a free choice. They are actually being held captives by Satan who has taken them captive, even against their wills. The god of this world has blinded their eyes that they cannot see the truth, so my prayer has to be directed towards the enemy. Claiming the victory of Christ in that life, and claiming Christ’s victory until I see them set free from the blinding influence of Satan so that they can make a free choice. Any man when he can actually look at it with a free choice, without all the poison and prejudice that Satan has planted in their mind, would surely choose Jesus Christ. Only a fool would reject Him. So it is mine to bring them from the power and the captivity of Satan and set them free from this binding force, in order that they might make their choice for the true King. I can deliver people out of the power of darkness through prayer, this great spiritual weapon that God has made available to us.

But Satan is stubborn, he only yields when he must; therefore, your prayers have to be specific. He will counterattack as soon as you drive him off of his territory, he’ll counterattack and try and take it back. Therefore, prayers must be persisted in, even after you begin to see the first signs of victory. Many times we make a mistake, we say, “Oh, look they went forward. Oh praise the Lord. Now who are we gonna work on?” We’re no longer praying and holding that ground against the enemy, but Satan’s gonna counterattack and gonna try and take back the territory from which he’s been driven. Therefore we’ve got to hold it in prayer.

We are in a real warfare. “We wrestle not against flesh and blood, but against principalities and powers,” ( Eph 6:12 ) these forces of darkness. But though there is a tremendous battle that is going on between the forces of darkness and the forces of light, yet there is a decided victory already determined there at the cross, and it is ours to bring the victory of the cross into lives and into situations though prayer.

But Satan, as Saul, seeks to hold onto that which is no longer rightfully his. But when you come against him in the authority of the name of Jesus, he has to yield because he was defeated. But he is a brassy, stubborn guy. He’ll come in where he has no business being. He’ll take hold of that which he has no business having. Therefore, you have to deal with him very firmly in prayer. Not give place to him, not give him a place at all, but claim. Lay claim to the victories of Christ. You can have real victory in your life, you can bring victory to the lives of others around you through prayer.

So David was anointed to be king over Israel. Now at this particular point, we have an interesting scripture, difficult to understand, verse fourteen,

But the spirit of the Lord departed from Saul, and an evil spirit from the Lord troubled him ( 1Sa 16:14 ).

What does that mean “an evil spirit from the Lord?” Well, I guess it means an evil spirit from the Lord, but that is difficult for us to reconcile in our minds.

Now I don’t want you all to get up and leave in a huff because I say something that may sound very radical. But I am convinced that in a unique and unusual kind of a way, Satan is actually serving God. He is serving purposes of God. If it were not for Satan then we would have no power of choice. If we had no power of choice, then God wouldn’t know if you really loved Him or not.

Satan could not exist unless God allowed him to exist, and the very fact that God allows him to exist means that he must be serving a purpose for God, otherwise there would be no reason of having Satan around at all. If he were not serving a purpose of God then God surely wouldn’t allow him his freedom today. But because he is serving a purpose of God, in order that you might be tested, in order that your love for God might indeed be a love of free choice, God has allowed Satan the liberty for he serves a purpose of God.

So in a broad sense all of creation is still serving the purposes of God. Even Satan, in his rebellion, for God has a purpose in that. You see, to give us the power of choice, and yet if there is no choice to make, what value is it to have a power of choice? “Here choose what book you want out of my hand.”

“Well there is no choice.”

In order to exercise choice there has to be the opposing side. So God has allowed Satan’s rebellion, has allowed Satan to go on, has allowed Satan the freedom, has allowed Satan the freedom to come and to tempt you and to hassle you, and to work on you, and to make it difficult for you to serve God. So that as you serve God, it is because of choice of serving God in spite of the obstacles, in spite of the difficulties. “God, I do love You.” My love for God is more or less proved by my choice to love Him in spite of the difficulty and obstacles that are placed in my way. Thus, God is assured that my love is genuine and my love for Him is true.

If I would say to my son, “Stay in the backyard while I go downtown.” and I go out and chain him to the big tree. When I get home, I go in the backyard and unlock him and say, “Aha, I’m proud of my boy; he’s obedient to his dad. Stayed right there in the backyard. Good boy.” Proud father.

My neighbors say, “You should’ve heard him cursing and screaming trying to get free.” He had no choice. There has to be the open door, the possibility, the opportunity to disobey in order that obedience is meaningful.

God wants from you meaningful love. Therefore, the choice must be given. Thus “an evil spirit from the Lord” or God allowed, perhaps, if that fits you better, an evil spirit to come, the spirit of the Lord.

Now I am convinced when the Spirit of God departs from your life, the door is open for evil spirits to really come. So an evil spirit allowed by the Lord, at least, came and began to harass Saul. The Spirit of God departed from him. What a sad time in a person’s life when God’s Spirit departs from his life. “And an evil spirit began to move in, and it troubled him.”

And Saul’s servants said, You need to find someone that’s skillful of playing the harp, and when you get in these bad moods, [Then of course, that’s actually what it was, he’d get mean, get sullen, and when these sullen mean streaks come on you,] then let him play on the harp skillfully, and let the beautiful music soothe you. And Saul said, Provide me a skillful harp player. And one of the servants said, I’ve seen a son of Jesse, he is a skillful player, he is a valiant man, a man of war, prudent in matters, he’s a beautiful person, and the Lord is with him. [These qualifications of David capped off by “the Lord is with him”, I love that.] Wherefore Saul sent messengers to Jesse, and he said, Send David your son, which is with the sheep. And Jesse took a donkey that was laden with bread, a bottle of wine, a young goat, and he sent them by David his son to Saul. And David came to Saul, and stood before him: and he loved him greatly; and he became his armourbearer ( 1Sa 16:15-21 ).

Actually, David had a great admiration for Saul. Of course just a young boy, and he was at that hero age, and Saul, big, tall, handsome fellow became sort of a hero in David’s eyes. David always respected Saul right to his death and even after his death. David never lost his respect for this man.

And Saul said to Jesse, saying, Let David, I pray thee, stand before me; for he has found favour in my sight. And it came to pass, when the evil spirit from God was upon Saul, that David took the harp, and he played with his hand: so Saul was refreshed, and was well, and the evil spirit departed from him ( 1Sa 16:22-23 ).

Now how long this went on we are not told. But this beautiful relationship was soon to be shattered as we get into chapter seventeen. Because of the time, we’ll wait until next week and we’ll start with chapter seventeen next Sunday night.

Shall we stand?

Listen in next week, same time, same station a continuation. Again may God grant to you a special blessing to you tonight as you drive home. May the Lord be with you even as He was with David. May your heart and life be open to the things of God’s Spirit, and may you have blessed communion with the Lord through the week. May God bless you especially for the sacrifices that you have made to gather together in obedience to His command, of not forsaking the assembling of ourselves together in these last days. May the strength of the Lord, and the joy of the Lord be your portion for this week, as you walk in beautiful fellowship with Him. “

Fuente: Through the Bible Commentary

We now come to the third section of this Book, throughout which David is the principal figure. It would seem that Samuel had given himself over to the sadness occasioned by Saul’s failure. Jehovah rebuked him. Perfect conformity to the will of God forbids any kind of prolonged mourning over human failure. If Saul had failed, God had not, and Samuel was now commissioned to arise and anoint His king.

This time the choice was to be made on an entirely new basis. Israel had had a king of physical magnificence, one likely to appeal to their desire for conformity to the ideals of surrounding nations. Jehovah would now appoint a man after His own heart.

The deterioration of Saul became more marked. The chronicler tells us that “an evil spirit from Jehovah troubled him.” This is naturally a very arresting and remarkable statement. Its meaning, however, is perfectly clear in its revealing of God’s sovereignty of the fact that all the forces of evil, whether they will or no, are still under the government of God.

In preparation for his work as king in the economy of God, David found his way to the court. The occasion of his coming there was the melancholy of the king and his own musical ability. The principal value of this story is its clear revelation of the authority and activity of God in government. Under that government all things are seen moving toward the accomplishment of the divine purpose.

Fuente: An Exposition on the Whole Bible

Gods Choice of His Anointed

1Sa 16:1-13

The anointing of the young shepherd, with his ruddy cheeks and deep, poetic eyes, is a beautiful episode, in very marked contrast to the events preceding. He had already given proof of his indomitable courage, 1Sa 17:34. They had to fetch him from his sheep, which he was pasturing beside the still waters and on the hillside. God had found him beforehand, Psa 89:20. He chose David also His servant, and took him from the sheepfolds to feed Jacob His people, and Israel His inheritance, Psa 78:70-71.

The procession of Davids brethren before Samuel was very impressive. They probably remembered that Saul had been chosen for his splendid physique, and each held himself high and proud. Surely, said Jesse to himself, one of them will captivate the prophets eye. But no! God chooses by the inward temper and disposition. He knew that David was a man after His own heart. The lad had been faithful in a few things and was now to be made ruler over many. The anointing oil reminds us of the anointing for service which was communicated to our Lord at His baptism. In Davids case it was accompanied by a glorious Pentecost, 1Sa 16:13.

Fuente: F.B. Meyer’s Through the Bible Commentary

1Sa 16:1

Consider:-

I. The reason of Saul’s rejection from the throne of Israel. Saul’s failure may be traced to three things. (1) He was a disobedient king. (2) He was an untruthful king. (3) He was a hypocritical king.

II. The manner of David’s appointment to the throne of Israel. The want of the age was a truly devout man, with a strong hand and a brave heart. Three things in this undertaking of Samuel’s claim attention. (1) It was a dangerous mission. (2) It was a responsible mission. (3) It was a successful mission.

III. The declaration of David’s fitness for the throne of Israel. “I have provided Me a king among his sons.” The secret of David’s success is explained by three things. (1) There was a Divine choice. (2) There was a Divine preparation. (3) There was a Divine calling. God makes the choice, qualifies the man, and appoints the office.

Parker, City Temple, vol. i., p. 23.

References: 1Sa 16:1.-F. M. Krummacher, David the King of Israel, p. 1; R. Lorimer, Bible Studies in Life and Truth, p. 93. 1Sa 16:1-13.-W. M. Taylor, David King of Israel, p. 1; Sunday Magazine, 1886, p. 28.

1Sa 16:7

I. God’s knowledge of human nature, according to the passage before us, is immediate and direct.

II. Being immediate and direct, God’s knowledge of man is perfect.

III. Because God’s knowledge is direct and perfect, it surpasses men’s knowledge of each other and of themselves.

Consider: IV. The life-lessons yielded by the text. (1) The folly of permitted self-delusion. (2) The utter uselessness of all hypocrisy. (3) The exposed position of all our sins. (4) The duty of being passive under Divine discipline. (5) The reasonableness of our acting on God’s judgment of men. (6) A motive to diligence in keeping the heart.

S. Martin, Westminster Chapel Pulpit, 5th series, No. xxiii.

There is something in the character of Eliab which makes him unfit for the office of king. Eliab seems to have become a great man afterwards. We read of him as a prince of the tribe of Judah, and of his daughter or his granddaughter as the queen of Rehoboam. But, though the eldest son of the house and of the tribe, there was wanting in him the especial spirit of David; he showed, though in less degree, the fault of Saul, and the very next thing we find him doing is exhibiting the contrary character to Samuel’s and David’s, and saying and doing exactly what Saul might have done. It is an instance of envy, of harsh, uncharitable judgment. When David came down with a message from his father, Eliab, utterly misunderstanding the case, caring nothing to know the rights of it, heedless of justice or of feeling, forgets that the boy has been sent by his father, sent for his good and sent at a risk, and he shows penetration, as he thinks, in accusing David of coming down merely to see the battle. How prone we all are to ascribe our neighbour’s act to self-seeking and self-conceit and self-indulgence, while for our own faults we find excuses, justifications, easy assertions. There are pleasures greater than triumphs, clearer insight than worldly penetration. Let us rejoice over each other’s good and discern each other’s goodness, because “charity envieth not, seeketh not her own, thinketh no evil.”

Archbishop Benson, Boy Life: Sundays in Wellington College, p. 74.

Consider the necessity we lie under, if we would be Christians indeed, of drawing our religious notions and views, not from what we see, but from what we do not see and only hear, or rather the great mistake under which men of the world lie of judging religious subjects merely by what the experience of life tells them. We must believe something; the difference between religious men and others is, that the latter trust this world, the former the world unseen. Both of them have faith, but the one have faith in the surface of things, the other in the word of God.

I. We see this truth in a doctrine much debated, much resisted, at this day-the doctrine of baptismal regeneration. Here we find that experience is counter to the word of God, which says that except a man be born of water and of the Spirit, he is no member of Christ’s kingdom. We have here a trial of faith-the faith which alone overcomes the world.

II. Another trial of faith is the success which attends measures or institutions which are not in accordance with the revealed rule of duty. In every age and at all times, the Church seems to be failing and its enemies to be prevailing.

III. Another instance in which experience and faith are opposed to each other is to be found in the case of those who deny the doctrine of the Trinity, or the Incarnation, or the Atonement, or original sin.

IV. A fourth instance is the difficulty of believing the words of Scripture that the impenitent shall go into fire everlasting. We feel it a hard saying that even the most wicked should be destined to eternal punishment. But we must accept the truth, as an act of faith towards God and as a solemn warning to ourselves.

J. H. Newman, Sermons on Subjects of the Day, p. 63.

References: 1Sa 16:7.-Parker, vol. vii., p. 71; A. F. Reid, Dundee Pulpit, 1872, p. 92; Bailey, Contemporary Pulpit, vol. vi., p. 53; J. Van Oosterzee, Year of Salvation, vol. ii., p. 427; S. Baring-Gould, One Hundred Sermon Sketches, p. 84. 1Sa 16:11.-Outline Sermons for Children, p. 39; T. Coster, Christian World Pulpit, vol. xix., p. 150; Clergyman’s Magazine, vol. viii., p. 345. 1Sa 16:11, 1Sa 16:12.-J. Vaughan, Sermons to Children, 5th series, p. 1.

1Sa 16:13

David was not only the topmost man of his century, but also the climax of the best life of the chosen people of God, the consummate flower of the religion of Moses in its best days. He was a man of striking mental and moral opulence; rich in gifts and richer in achievements; a poet and a politician; a chief of brigands and a champion of the armies of God; a vassal of the Philistines and the creator of the Hebrew fatherland; simple as a child in his hunger for love, in beautiful humility, and in frank self-avowal, but prudent, cautious, and self-controlled in the thick onset of danger; tender-hearted, even to folly, as a father, but wise, sagacious, and powerful as a ruler of men, as is proved by his knitting together the scattered tribes of Israel into an invincible unity. What then is the full tale of this man’s upbuilding?

I. Remember: (1) Man is a spirit. (2) “That which is born of the flesh is flesh.” Spirit builds spirit; soul makes soul. The Hebrew historian accounts for David-for all he was and all he did-by the simple and comprehensive statement, “The Spirit of the Lord came upon David from that day forward.”

Whatever David is that is spiritual and Godlike is due to that benignant advent, and whatever he accomplishes that advances the well-being of Israel results from that invisible presence.

II. Why is it that David, of all the sons of Jesse and of all the children of Israel, is elected by the prophet for this special consecration to kingly place and power? The answer is that God sees in that lad the Tightness of heart which is the only basis for the building up of a true character, the manifest “set” of the inward life in its faith and hope, its yearning and passion, towards God and goodness, which is before all things the qualification for a redeeming and renewing career amongst men. Evermore God’s unseen educating ministry goes forward. He is always preparing the world’s kings. True rulers are never absent. When the clock of time strikes, and their hour is come, they take their place and do their work, and we are debtors all.

III. Nothing more eradicably rooted itself in David’s mind or found more pathetic expression in his songs than the immense educational influence of his family and shepherd life. That influence was the salt of his career. It brought him face to face with reality, and developed an inwardness of being that brought peace and power for evermore.

J. Clifford, Daily Strength for Daily Living, p. 163.

References: 1Sa 16:13.-Bishop Walsham How, Plain Words to Children, p. 68; J. M. Neale, Sermons in Sackville College, vol. ii., p. 39.

1Sa 16:14

Saul, self-willed and capricious, had shown himself unfit for his position, so the Spirit of God was taken from him, and an evil spirit from the Lord terrified or troubled him.

Notice:-

I. Men must either have the Spirit of God or an evil spirit. (1) God loves to dwell in the human heart. That is His chosen temple. The sky is vast, and its canopy is thick with worlds, but that is not the temple that God seeks. The earth is beautiful and sublime, but God does not choose that temple. Man rears lofty piles, but God’s chosen temple is not there. His temple is in the lowly heart, in the bosom of the meanest of the sons of men who cries out for God. (2) But if man will not have God, he cannot shut the door of his heart against other visitors. Spirit cannot isolate itself from spirit, any more than matter can from matter. But the spirit can decide whether it will ally itself with the good or the evil. If God is not received, evil spirits enter, being invited by the sympathies and affinities of the soul. Man is like a house situated between two winds. Every one must decide to which side he is going to open. Both doors cannot be shut. You can only get the dismal, fatal door shut by opening wide the door that looks to the sea of eternity and the sunshine of God. The wind blowing in through this open door keeps the door of ruin shut.

II. The stress of inward temptation and trouble is often peculiarly fitted and evidently intended to drive men to God.

Of temptations and troubles which have this adaptation in a marked degree may be mentioned first: (1) Melancholy. Saul’s was a very conspicuous and overmastering melancholy. Melancholy is essentially the feeling of loneliness, the sense of isolation, of having a great burden of existence to bear. It is the soul’s fear, and shrinking, and chill in the vast solitude of its house. It has driven many souls to God. (2) A feeling of the vanity of existence is another great temptation and trouble. This is the cause of much feebleness of purpose, and want of principle, and bitterness, and cynicism. There is no remedy for it but in faith in God and an eternal future. (3) The mystery of life weighs on others-what Wordsworth calls “the weight and mystery of all this unintelligible world.” When the night of mystery comes down and closes round us, let us press close to Christ. (4) The gloom and desolation of doubt and unbelief constrain men to turn to God. (5) Fierce temptations to evil drive many souls to God.

J. Leckie, Sermons Preached at Ibrox, p. 244 (see also Contemporary Pulpit, vol. iv., p. 25).

References: 1Sa 16:14.-Phillips Brooks, Twenty Sermons, p. 297; F. W. Hook, Parish Sermons, p. 44; I. Williams, Characters of the Old Testament, p. 171; R. D. B. Rawnsley, A Course of Sermons for the Christian Year, p. 281. 1Sa 16:14-23.-W. M. Taylor, David King of Israel, p. 13.

1Sa 16:18

In this passage we meet with David when he was still but a young man, and there are five distinct things mentioned about him which we may find it useful to consider.

I. Notice first his person, his pleasing and attractive presence or address. He had an admirable physique, had his head screwed on the right way, and was of immense strength and agility. The prominent feature about him was his manliness. There was nothing little about him. As we read the story of his life we smell the breath of the new-mown hay, and hear the bleatings on the Bethlehem hills.

II. His pastime. David’s favourite pastime was music. He consecrated that great gift of his to the highest ends, and found music to be most enjoyable when linked with sacred themes. We should learn from him, not only to cultivate our faculties, but to employ them in the service and for the glory of God.

III. His patriotism. David’s courage and chivalry were not confined to camps and battlefields, but characterised his whole life. No mere ambitious self-seeker was David; he was as genuine a patriot as ever lived. A healthy and unselfish public spirit needs to be cultivated. The first and most obvious duty which a man owes to the commonwealth is to see that he is no burden to it. It is in vigilant industry and sound common-sense, employed about a man’s daily calling, that he makes his first contribution to the nation’s wealth and weal.

IV. His prudence. The text describes him as “prudent in matters”-i.e., a young man of sound judgment and of sterling common-sense. Even as a mere lad he showed singular judgment. Many a youth would have fairly lost his head when taken from the sheepfolds to the palace. David did not. Three times over it is declared of him that “he behaved himself wisely.”

V. His piety. “And the Lord was with him.” This was his noblest recommendation; he carried God with him into all the minutest details of life. He was “a man after God’s own heart.” Learn from his life to decide what the principles of your life are to be, and stand by them at any cost.

J. Thain Davidson, The City Youth, p. 19.

David displays in his personal character that very temper of mind in which his nation, or rather human nature itself, is especially deficient. Pride and unbelief disgrace the history of the chosen people, the deliberate love of this world which was the sin of Balaam, and the presumptuous wilfulness which was exhibited in Saul. But David is conspicuous for an affectionate, a thankful, a loyal, heart towards his God and Defender, a zeal which was as fervent and as docile as Saul’s was sullen, and as keen-sighted and pure as Balaam’s was selfish and double-minded.

I. Consider what was, as far as we can understand, David’s especial grace, as faith was Abraham’s distinguishing virtue, meekness the excellence of Moses, self-mastery the gift especially conspicuous in Joseph. From the account of David’s office in Psa 78:70-72, it is obvious that his very first duty was that of fidelity to Almighty God in the trust committed to him. Saul had neglected his Master’s honour, but David, in this an eminent type of Christ, “came to do God’s will.” As a viceroy in Israel, and as being tried and found faithful, he is especially called “a man after God’s own heart” David’s peculiar excellence is that of fidelity to the trust committed to him.

II. Surely the blessings of the patriarchs descended in a united flood upon “the lion of the tribe of Judah,” the type of the true Redeemer who was to come. He inherits the prompt faith and magnanimity of Abraham; he is simple as Isaac; he is humble as Jacob; he has the youthful wisdom and self-possession, the tenderness, the affectionateness, and the firmness of Joseph. And as his own especial gift, he has an overflowing thankfulness, a heroic bearing in all circumstances, such as the multitude of men see to be great, but cannot understand.

J. H. Newman, Parochial and Plain Sermons, vol. iii., p. 44.

References: 1Sa 16:23.-F. W. Krummacher, David the King of Israel, p. 20; T. Coster, Christian World Pulpit, vol. xix., p. 166 S. Cox, The Bird’s Nest, p. 99.

Fuente: The Sermon Bible

III. DAVID, THE KING AFTER GODS HEART–His EXILE AND SUFFERING

1. David Anointed King and the Departure of the Spirit from Saul

CHAPTER 16

1. David anointed king (1Sa 16:1-13)

2. The Spirit departs from Saul and David with Saul (1Sa 16:14-23)

The king after the peoples heart has failed and is set aside, and now Jehovah brings forth His king after His own heart. That king like Jonathan, a man of faith, is devoted to Jehovah and in perfect subjection unto Him. Furthermore, from the tribe of Judah (Judah means praise) he is a worshipper through whom the Spirit of God pours forth the sweetest strains of praise and worship. He prospers into a great kingdom and Jehovah makes an oathbound covenant with him (2 Sam. 7). That covenant points us to the true King, who according to the flesh is of the seed of David. Saul could not foreshadow that King. There is absolutely nothing in Saul which could remind us of the King who is yet to rule over this earth in righteousness. It is different with the life and reign of David. Everywhere we may discover most blessed types of our Lord Jesus Christ, the son of David. Because this king after Gods own heart is to give a typical vision of the coming true King, David had to pass through suffering first before he could receive the kingdom and its glory. From now on in this book we shall follow the sufferings of the king after Gods heart.

Samuel is interrupted in his mourning for Saul by a new command to fill his horn with oil for the anointing of another king. That king is to be chosen from the sons of Jesse the Bethlehemite. A sacrificial feast is appointed in connection with the approaching anointing of the son of Jesse, and Samuel is obedient and went to Bethlehem. Then he called Jesse and his sons to the feast. Then the seven sons of Jesse pass by, but the chosen one is not among them. Only one was left, the youngest who kept the sheep. He is brought in. Now he was ruddy (literally, reddish, perhaps referring to auburn hair) and withal of a beautiful countenance and goodly to look upon; and the LORD said, Arise, anoint him, for this is he. David the son of Jesse was anointed and the Spirit of the Lord came upon him. And so David became the Lords anointed. David means beloved; he is a shepherd, typifying the Beloved One, the good, the great and the chief Shepherd. What a contrast with Saul!

An evil spirit from the Lord began then to trouble Saul after the Spirit of the Lord had departed from him. What a sad spectacle he now presents! When he had been anointed, the Spirit also came upon him and he became another man. His pride, self-will, disobedience and stubbornness we have followed, and now the Spirit departs and in judgment upon the deposed King an evil spirit was permitted to come upon Saul. Evil as well as good has its commission from God,–not its existence, but its liberty to act, and the limits of its action. It was no doubt a case of demon possession. He had rejected the Word of God and was given over into the hands of a demon. Such is also the case in the days of apostasy which are now upon Christendom. They depart from the faith and follow seducing spirits and doctrines of demons. Doctrinal apostasy and the moral evils following such an apostasy is the work of demons. God still permits as an act of judgment that demons possess those who are disobedient and rebel against Him. Then David is called in to sing to the afflicted King and to soothe him. And he loved him greatly and David became his armour bearer. And it came to pass, when the evil spirit from God was upon Saul, that David took an harp, and played with his hand; so Saul was refreshed, and was well, and the evil spirit departed from him. Here we have a beautiful type of the Lord Jesus Christ. His sweet words, the ministrations of His Spirit refresh the soul and drive out the evil spirit. When the unhappy king had been quieted and the ministry of the young shepherd-king was no longer needed, he returned to his home and to his shepherd life; to feed his fathers sheep (1Sa 17:15).

No discrepancy exists between 1Sa 16:19-23 and the question which Saul subsequently asks: Whose son is this youth? (1Sa 17:55-58) The king had not been previously anxious to become intimately acquainted with the origin and family-connections of one who merely bore his arms and served as his harper, but when the latter is on the point of becoming his son-in-law, it is naturally a matter of interest to him to acquire a more accurate knowledge of the personal history of David.

Fuente: Gaebelein’s Annotated Bible (Commentary)

am 2941, bc 1063, An, Ex, Is, 428

How long: 1Sa 15:11, 1Sa 15:35, Jer 7:16, Jer 11:14

seeing: 1Sa 16:15, 1Sa 16:23, 1Sa 13:13, 1Sa 13:14, 1Sa 15:23, 1Sa 15:26, Jer 6:30, Jer 14:11, Jer 14:12, Jer 15:1, 1Jo 5:16

horn with oil: 1Sa 9:16, 1Sa 10:1, 2Ki 9:1, 2Ki 9:3, 2Ki 9:6

Jesse: 1Sa 13:14, Gen 49:8-10, Rth 4:18-22, 1Ch 2:10-15, Psa 78:68-71, Psa 89:19, Psa 89:20, Isa 11:1, Isa 11:10, Isa 55:4, Act 13:21, Act 13:22, Rom 15:12

Reciprocal: Jos 7:10 – wherefore Jdg 12:8 – Bethlehem Rth 4:22 – Jesse 1Sa 2:10 – he shall 1Sa 17:12 – David 1Sa 21:11 – the king 1Sa 27:1 – And David 2Sa 3:9 – as the Lord 2Sa 3:18 – for the Lord 2Sa 5:2 – feed 2Sa 6:21 – chose 2Sa 15:7 – forty years 1Ki 8:16 – I chose David 2Ki 17:20 – rejected 1Ch 2:12 – Jesse 1Ch 5:2 – the chief ruler 1Ch 10:14 – turned 1Ch 11:2 – Thou shalt 1Ch 11:3 – anointed 1Ch 11:10 – according 1Ch 12:23 – according 1Ch 28:4 – the house of Judah 2Ch 6:6 – chosen David 2Ch 13:5 – to David Psa 18:50 – Great Psa 75:7 – he putteth Pro 8:15 – By Hos 13:11 – General Zec 4:14 – These Mat 1:6 – Jesse Mat 2:5 – General Luk 2:4 – unto Joh 7:42 – where Act 7:46 – found Rom 10:1 – my heart’s Heb 11:32 – David

Fuente: The Treasury of Scripture Knowledge

Subdivision 1. (1Sa 16:1-23; 1Sa 17:1-58; 1Sa 18:1-30; 1Sa 19:1-24; 1Sa 20:1-42; 1Sa 21:1-15; 1Sa 22:1-23; 1Sa 23:1-29; 1Sa 24:1-22; 1Sa 25:1-44; 1Sa 26:1-25; 1Sa 27:1-12; 1Sa 28:1-25; 1Sa 29:1-11; 1Sa 30:1-31; 1Sa 31:1-13.)

The obedience of the destined king.

For the king after God’s heart suffering must precede glory. He must obey before he can rule; and, like his Antitype, learn obedience by the things that he suffers. But the need and manner of learning are as different as the persons are different. Here we must look beyond David to learn what David’s history means.

In Christ there could be no need of the discipline of suffering. Trial did not perfect Him in obedience, but showed Him perfect. Yet “perfected through suffering” He was, but as the “Captain of salvation,” the “Author and finisher of faith,” the One who goes before on and initiates the path upon which He victoriously leads His followers.* For this in all things it behooved Him to be made like unto His brethren, “tempted in all things, like as we are, sin apart.” (Heb 4:15, Gk.) How wondrous, how inspiring, such an example! God Himself become man to lead our feet in obedience on the path His own have trodden! In the peculiar sufferings of the cross He has gone beyond us, where none could follow; in all else we are called to enter into the “fellowship of His sufferings,” and that as the way to share with Him, through His grace, the crown also: it is “if we suffer, we shall also reign with Him.” (2Ti 2:12.)

{*Arkegos is the word for “Captain” and “Author” both. -(Heb 2:10; Heb 12:2.)}

The sufferings of David take up many chapters of the record here, -sufferings which exalt him in our thoughts much more than his after glories. We need, as knowing the deeper reality of which they speak, to search into them with special earnestness, and prayerfulness of spirit, and with the precious assurance that it is of Christ that the spirit of prophecy speaks through him: expecting ourselves, therefore, to find shining through the type the true David, God’s “Beloved.” The veil for us has been here, as elsewhere, really taken away: may there be not a remnant even of darkening veil over our hearts!

1. The first thing that we are called to see in David is his unique sufficiency for the hour of Israel’s need. In the valley of Elah, even Jonathan, the hero of Michmash, has no help. All Israel are alike trembling and helpless in the presence of the Philistine champion, and David becomes indeed the captain of their salvation. The meaning of this we shall look at presently. Before it we are called to see him as the elect of God, qualified of the Spirit of God for the work before him. For it is never man simply that can accomplish anything: the creature was not meant to live apart from the Creator; man apart is man fallen, and in the ruin of that fall; his glory is to be nigh God, with God, and thus Christ is the only full and adequate thought of him as in the mind of God from the beginning; not an after-thought, but that to which creation from the beginning pointed.

(1) If we have David before us, we shall not even mourn for Saul. This is what is contained in Jehovah’s reproof of Samuel. It is not, of course, that he was wrong in manifesting such sorrow as the Lord Himself had over Jerusalem. It can never be aught but fellowship with Him, to weep the Redeemer’s tears over human obduracy and its inevitable results. But put a Saul at his best outwardly, -and his best was but outward, -who could weep to see him displaced by a David on the throne of Israel? And much more when, as to man in general, we would lament for the crown of creation fallen from his head, -how can we do this when we see Christ assume it?

Samuel is bidden then to fill his horn with oil and go to Bethlehem, and anoint there one of the sons of Jesse to be king. The horn is the familiar type of power, as oil is of the Spirit: it is from Him who has power that the anointing comes, from Him who will make good all that it implies, and whose king must be not simply naturally but spiritually qualified, -with whom power will be, therefore, power with God, that is, spiritual power. Bethlehem we know well as the “house of bread”; and its connection with Him who is the “living bread” makes very plain its meaning. How plainly, also, for Israel was David to be the minister of sustenance for faith, as well as for God’s people at all times! Christ’s power for us has been manifested in more precise ministry. From the Father’s house, the true “house of bread,” He came, to open the stores of it, and meet earth’s famine with the bounty of God. Thus Jesse the Bethlehemite witnesses in his name that “Jehovah exists.” Man has sunk down low enough; hope in him rightfully there is none: the more completely that is cut off; the more surely we come to the Omnipotent and self-sufficing God, ever living, and out of whom all that is lost may be restored.

Samuel fears this errand; for Saul’s character is but too well known. He is told, therefore, to take a heifer and go and sacrifice, and call Jesse to the sacrifice. Nor are we to look at this as merely a protecting veil thrown mercifully around the weakness of His servant. We have already seen such a sacrificial feast spread in connection with Saul’s anointing, and know it as the sign of peace and communion between God and man. This is where Saul had failed so utterly. For him, too, all had been prepared, and he was an invited guest; but into the reality of this he had never entered. David therefore was to be now the guest, and to make up for Saul’s deficiency. And the true King, when He comes, is more than David; for He is not only partaker of but spreads the feast.

Samuel goes, therefore, to Bethlehem, but the elders tremble at his coming. Things are out of course in Israel, and an uneasy conscience finds in the approach of one who walks with God a cause of distress. But Samuel quiets this, and calls them to the sacrifice, for which also he sanctifies Jesse and his sons.

They seem alone to have been present at the sacrificial meal that follows, when David is anointed. As the prophet sees the stately and striking form of Eliab, the eldest son, he imagines for the moment that this must be the one intended of the Lord; but Jehovah rebukes the thought. “Man looketh on the eyes,” -the deepest well of thought and feeling to him, -“but Jehovah looketh on the heart.” Abinadab next comes before him, and then Shammah, and so seven of Jesse’s sons, but all to be rejected; and there is only one remaining, away with the sheep. When he is brought, at once the voice of the Lord is heard by the prophet, Arise, anoint him”; and David is anointed in the presence of all his brethren.

Can we gain anything from this, save that the Lord sees deeper than man, and that he chooses often for His instruments those little among men? That is true, and also important, for we are prone to forget it: but is that all that we are to learn from these details given? If not, shall we be over-bold in seeking to find meanings somewhat deeper than the surface? For here is a great type surely, and a question raised, which, if we think a little, we shall find occupies men today: Who is God’s coming King of men? And what principle does He stand for or represent? Or what is the message that He brings with Him when He comes? If it is said, perhaps, It is a principle, and not a person, that men are expecting, even so it will be found that principles also wait for introduction by a person, who identifies himself with these, and is identified with them; and that men think this a valid and important subject of inquiry still. It should not be strange, then, if God have a Person in His mind who is to bring in the reign of truth and righteousness and peace which still men look for, though it be so long delayed; and that He is identified with principles of infinite importance, of which God’s heart is full, -so full that it has been overflowing to communicate them, before there were ears open even to receive the report, or the time had come in which it could be fairly uttered.

Saul is yet upon the scene, and potent in his way too, we see, but doomed to be set aside. The man of the people has failed utterly under the test of God.

His principle has been independence of God, reason such as he deems it unimpeded by revelation, the pursuit of his own ends by his own means, since God plainly cannot be trusted to secure these. Alas, all this is easily understood and confidently acted on all the world over, and will be, surely, (for at least there is no sign of change,) as long as human nature is what it is, or God does not come in to change by divine power the course of things.

Kings have failed, so that it is the glory of the present age to have either superseded or taken in hand to fetter them. Aristocracy fails, for it is only a diluted and more moderate kingship, many-headed and less easily made responsible in proportion as its power is less direct. And democracy also fails, both because the more complete it is the less really is it what it assumes to be, the more multitudinous the less available as power, the more heterogeneous, All forms of government that man has tried or that are available to him, are but the endeavor to balance contradictory self-interests, and to restrain the spirit of the wild beast ever seeking to be loose. And this is the scriptural picture: the vision of the powers of the earth which the prophet sees, and representing them until the Son of man comes in the clouds of heaven, is of four wild beasts (Dan 7:1-28). “Man being in honor, and understanding not, is like the beasts that perish.” (Psa 49:20.)

What, then, is the remedy? Nothing, plainly, but the Son of man from heaven. Laws, the best and the worst, fail to execute themselves, and thy sons of men have no hope in them, so long as heaven is still and intervenes not. The Son of man from heaven is the only answer to the long unanswered question. “All judgment committed unto Him, because He is the Son of man” -perfectly intelligent and sympathetic as to man; but come to earth out of the open doors of heaven, in perfect sympathy up there, and so bringing heaven and earth into sympathetic union.

And why has the remedy been so long delayed? It was offered almost two millennia since, and was rejected! offered with amplest demonstration of its reality; rejected with the practical unanimity of all sorts and conditions of men: heaven’s gift, earth’s King, hung up in the face of heaven in utter scorn and face to face rejection! “He saved others,” they shouted, “let Him save Himself! He trusted in God: let Him deliver Him!” And so the world has had its free field for experiments in political economy ever since. They are nearly ended now. The Son of man, thank God, is coming back again, and it will not be left any more to the world’s arbitrament, whether they will have Him.

David’s history shows us both these things, “the sufferings of Christ and the glories that shall follow.” True history, it takes its place in the books of the former prophets,” and is prophetical, as indeed in some sense all true history is. But there is less of this than we are willing to admit, available to our inspection: in that day when the books shall be open we shall find the true.

The Christ? but who is the Christ? Saul, the man of the people, for faith is passed away. Which of this long family of Jesse is worthy to succeed? Eliab is the first-born, and has a beautiful name and a stately presence. Eliab means “God” -or, “my God, is Father,” and we have had the name before in the captain of Zebulon’s host in the wilderness, and in very different connection as the father of that Mahan and Abiram who were conspirators with Korah against Moses. “My God is Father” is a glorious reality, which may be on the other hand most terribly abused. As Creator He is the “Father of spirits,” and men are in general in that sense “His offspring.” Undoubtedly also He would have all men know Him in such endeared relationship. Yet if we take our stand on the ground of creation we ignore the fall; and such was the sin of the sons of Eliab in the wilderness. Granting there be a Christ, is He to be, can He be, Head of the old creation, restorer of the old relationship within the old limits? Notice, again, that this Eliab is the first-born, David at the other end, the eighth: but this is against Eliab, though his goodly presence may appeal even to a prophet. He comes under the law of Genesis, and exemplifies the rule, “first, that which is natural, and afterward that which is spiritual.” (1Co 15:46.) But there is no natural Christ, nor therefore of the old creation; the eighth speaks of the new, and Eliab must give place to David.

Abinadab therefore also is foredoomed; although as the second son, he speaks suggestively of help or of salvation. His name too is good, and in accord with this, “my father is a liberal giver.” And why, man argues, should not God, who is good and the Father of men, freely, of His mere good pleasure, remit sin? Why must the Christ be a David, an eighth son, owning in Himself the ruin of man, and descending to the depth of his condemnation to redeem him? But it cannot be: for sin is the dark and fundamental opposite of God, and He cannot dwell with it. To ignore is not to remove it, but to go on with it, and Abinadab can therefore be no sufficient Saviour.

Shammah is the third son of Jesse, but his name is variously interpreted. It is also differently given in Chronicles (1Ch 2:13) as Shimeah, or Shimma. This last word is near akin to Shimeon (Simeon), and should have the same meaning, “hearing,” or “hearkening,” which is often equivalent to “obedient.” But Shammah is from another root, and means “desolation.” If there be no mistake in the text, -and in the next chapter it is given again as here, -this, under the number that speaks of holiness, would naturally imply that the alternative of what Eliab or Abinadab expresses must be desolating judgment; but most certainly the Christ-King could not represent such a thought as this.

No other names are given till the last is reached in David, the “beloved,” the eighth, taken from the shepherd’s place to fill the kingly one, -in God’s thoughts still the Shepherd’s. As eighth, he shows us Christ as Head of new creation, as we have seen: God’s holiness thus expressed in the link with a new life received from Him, itself the condemnation of the old. But the King is no less the One in whom the Divine Love is shown out toward men. The “Beloved” must be indeed the King after God’s own heart, and in Him of whom the type speaks here the higher and lower kingdoms come entirely together.

David is anointed, and the Spirit of Jehovah comes upon him from henceforth. He is the king designate of God, although the road to the kingdom may be yet a long one, and lead deeply down into the valley of humiliation.

(2) But the Spirit of the Lord departs from Saul, and an evil spirit from Jehovah troubles him. Evil as well as good has its commission from God, -not its existence, but its liberty to act, and the limits of its action. So we see in Job in early times, and in Ahab’s case later; and comfort it is indeed to know this. It is thus the wrath of man is made to praise Him, and the remainder of it He restrains. Nothing can escape from the divine government by the fact or avowal of its being evil. How should it? Thus alone can we be at peace, assured that no waves can rise higher than the footstool of His throne. The work of the evil spirit with Saul was the execution of penalty, and had it led to self-judgment would have proved mercy also. The relief granted, with its known source, was surely that goodness of God which leadeth to repentance. The character of it shows that it was the tempestuous working of Saul’s own spirit that gave the evil one his opportunity, -that brought Saul within the limit ordained him of God. David’s harp does not act directly upon. Satan, but upon Saul. By its strange power of softening and subduing, though but temporarily, the savage temper of the rejected king, the power that assails him is driven back and shut off; for the time he is set free.

The harp of David is the sign of nature even in its lowest and inanimate forms responsive and harmonious in the hand of man. It lies with him, the highest and intelligent creature of God, to bring out and express these harmonies, to make the silence vocal. If he take not his God-given place, the capacity of nature is not known, its depths are unsounded, God’s design and glory in it are obscured and misconstrued. What will be its awakening when the earth is put into the hands of the Second, the ideal Man? How will our David make all nature His harp of many strings, and lead in the anthem of praise from all creation!

But even now it is in His hand, obedient to Him alone, and so harmonious; and it is this, however little understood and realized, that alone checks and restrains the spirit of disorder and anarchy to which at times the powers ordained of God seem given up. Here, too, it acts by the power of that sweet mysterious charm of our David’s melody over themselves -strangers as they may be to Him personally. The Sauls do not become Davids, but they are under the influence of David; and the mere reflection of the glory that shall at last cast out the adversary of men prevails to baffle and turn him back. How vivid is the picture here, and how completely the history justifies itself as prophecy according to, though far beyond, the Jewish conception of these books as the former prophets.”

Saul and David will nevertheless yet separate, each to his final destiny: Saul to the fatal field of Gilboa, David to the thus emptied throne, which he will raise to its highest glory.

(3) We now come to the time of David’s manifestation as the deliverer of Israel, the one who alone can meet their need in the day of distress. As a history it is a simple but glorious lesson of faith, and of what it can achieve with no help but that of God; as a type it is a deep and instructive parable of the wondrous salvation which Christ has wrought for His people. It is such an one as by no means carries its meaning upon its face. There are difficulties in it which seem always to have hindered the satisfactory exposition of what has been generally felt must be in it by those who believe at all in any rightful allegorization of these histories. There is a mingling together of different lines of truth which easily becomes entanglement if we do not discern with care. And the remedy for this will be found, not in simply picking out what seems consistent with the meaning we have given it, and dismissing the rest as belonging to the necessary faultiness of such allegoric method, a kind of reasoning which must be the reproach and ruin of the method itself, if it is to be accepted, -but on the contrary, in a fair and full induction of all the facts. While we may not be able to see meaning everywhere, we must not turn away from unwelcome difficulties or accept what is really contradictory to the evidence as a whole.

Difficulties are plain when we look at what is the back-ground of a picture of Christ’s salvation. We find a Philistine war; the adversary met by David vaunting himself a Philistine, if perhaps in fact he be something more; but indeed his Anakite descent (Jos 11:22) does not emerge at all in the chapter before us. If the Philistines then be what we have represented them to be, and what so much scripture combines to assure us that they are, -the ritualistic and successional world-church, -how can it be a champion of this sort that Christ is seen here to meet and slay, and from which He delivers His people? The relation of David to Saul, and much else, if explicable, have yet at least to be similarly explained, before we have the elements of a proper exposition that can rightly challenge acceptance as to what is in the mind of God before us here. One thing is certain, if there be any truth whatever in the interpretation of this whole history as far as we have now arrived, then it is not against a blank wall that we have suddenly come: there is spiritual meaning here as elsewhere; and this belief will surely be justified as the result of the examination upon which we are entering.

(a) The Philistines are the enemies of Saul throughout his reign, and he perishes at last in conflict with them. At this we shall be called to look another time; but that ecclesiasticism as we have seen it in them is ever hostile to the “powers that be,” as represented in Saul, is evident. Always open war there is not, but it is always threatening, if not existent for the aim of the world-church is power on earth, and if it has an intoxicating cup for its kings, and can have wanton dalliance, even thus would it cast them down and prevail against them. “Her ways are changeable,” says the wise man, “that thou shouldst not know them;” but ever one purpose abides through all.

At the time we have reached, the Philistines are at open war with Israel, have invaded Judah, and are gathered together at Socoh in its territory, camping between Socoh and Azekah, in Ephesdammim, “the boundary of blood.” The names here may, though not beyond question as to their meaning, give us more than a glimmer of light. Socoh we have taken elsewhere (p. 103 n.) to mean, as in Lam 2:6, “his tabernacle,” and this is named as a principal point at which they aim, while their camp is between it and Azekah, the “fence” by which He would guard it.

Now this guard is by the maintenance of the truth (as we have seen in the place referred to) that there are “two gates,” “two ways,” and correspondingly two ends: Christ the gate and the way to life eternal, -no other way than Christ; but then, alas! a wide gate and a broad way trodden by the many, and by which there will as surely be reached another end than this. Such is the guard which God has appointed to His sanctuary, the holy conditions which the grace of the gospel affirms, not sets aside. But Philistinism, that is, ecclesiasticism, does set them aside. It has a gate and a way which are not Christ, but which assume His name; which are broader than the true, yet narrower; and by which they penetrate between God’s “tabernacle,” which they claim for themselves, and the guard which He has set about it. Sacraments are made to give the “life,” which He alone can give, and to sustain it. People are born of God by “water,” the “Spirit” being taken for granted, and made subject to the will of man -the officiating priest. Bread and wine by an equal magic become in his hands the very flesh and blood of Christ. Here, in this Babel of unrealities which pass for realities, where the depth of the mystery is only measured by its irrationality, where faith in a sensual superstition becomes a debasing credulity, -here is indeed the entrenched camp of Philistinism, between Socoh and Azekah, in Ephesdammim, the “boundary of blood:” for so thorough is the opposition between the grace of Christ and this legal ritualism that to cross the border-line is a question of life or death: “in her,” as the divine record is of Babylon, “was found the blood of prophets and of saints, and of all that were slain upon the earth.” (Rev 18:24.)

Saul and the army of Israel are encamped in the valley of Elah, or “the terebinth,” named like the oak from its strength, -if it be not rather the oak itself. Spiritually, the “valley” is indeed the place to find the power that is manifest in life. But it is one thing to be in the position, another to have realized the blessing of it, and this, under their failed head, the Israelites have not done. In the presence of the enemy they have no strength.

A formidable champion now makes his appearance on the side of the Philistines, no doubt one of the old Anakite race, some individuals of which we are expressly told, survived at Gath, the place from which Goliath comes. Spiritually apprehended, we shall find him a giant indeed, and needing, not the might of man, but the power of God to overcome. He is the champion of the Philistines, and must therefore represent them in what is prominent in the principles for which they stand; but he is more than merely a Philistine also: a darker shadow as of vapor from the pit is cast over the picture here.

The derivation of Goliath from galah has the consent of lexicographers; yet corresponding to the several meanings of the verb, there have been suggested several interpretations of the name, it being hard, as far as legitimacy goes, to decide between them. In such perplexity we are entitled to take that which brings light with it rather than what conveys no meaning. That which fits the lock will prove itself as ever to be the key of the lock, to those, at least, who are clear that there is a key somewhere.

Goliath means, then, we believe, “banishment, exile;” to which the city to which he belongs adds intensity of significance. Gath means the “wine-press;” and we have before connected it with what seems its only explanation here, the pregnant saying of the Apocalypse, “He treadeth the wine-press of the fierceness and wrath of almighty God.” “Banishment from God in His wrath,” we may take as the true thought conveyed by the threatening figure of Goliath of Gath.

Now the essence of Christianity lies in this, that as the fruit of accomplished redemption we are brought nigh to God. This is what the apostle contrasts with the powerlessness of the law of Moses, for which that was set aside: “There is therefore the disannulling of the commandment going before for the weakness and unprofitableness thereof (for the law made nothing perfect), and the bringing in of a better hope, by which we draw nigh to God.” (Heb 7:18-19, Gk.) As he goes on to show (Heb 9:1-28; Heb 10:1-39), the perfecting of the conscience so as to be able to stand in the presence of a holy God was thus what Judaism was wholly unable to effect. Of this the veil before the holiest bore constant witness. The work by which alone the conscience could be set at rest, was not yet done. But it is now done: “By one offering hath [Christ] perfected forever them that are sanctified.” Hence there is rest and nearness. Only unbelief can bring in distance between the soul and. God, for we are in Christ, “accepted in the Beloved” unchangeably.

But the knowledge of this is the destruction of Philistinism. The essential character of the false sacramental system is the revival of Judaism, the putting back under its shadows and into distance from God. Thus the church becomes the mediator between the unreconciled soul and God; the sacrifice and the priesthood, though with a juggle of Christian terms which are good for nothing but to conjure with, come back into the old place, but with a deadly falsehood now, such as in Judaism was not and could not be. The very essence of that was that it was predictive and preparatory: the old covenant was to give place to the new; there were “good things to come” that had not come: but this bastard Judaism claims itself to be that which was to come, connects itself with the precious realities of grace, only to degrade, contradict and displace them. It speaks of Christ, of His work, of His grace, ever to substitute its perversions for the truth, and in the name of the Lord rivet its chains upon the free. Here the Philistine leader becomes apparent. Goliath of Gath represents just the denial of reconciliation and nearness to God, which is so manifest in the modern Philistinism, with its Casluhite (p. 74) prate of forgiveness and grace, which is only the devil’s wile to take all meaning out of such blessed words. The essence of Romanism and of all Romanizing systems lies in this, that there is no known and effectual reconciliation. You need the Church, and all the priestly train on earth, -you need the host of saints and angels up in heaven, as intercessors to bring you nigh; and with all this labor, as they quote from the funeral book of the Old Testament for their purpose, “no man knoweth whether he is worthy of favor or hatred.” (Ecc 9:1, Douay Version.) The council of Trent condemned the assurance of salvation as the vain confidence of the heretics.” If you do not drop out of their hands into hell, you will certainly go to purgatory, and there pay to God the uttermost farthing for your sins.

“Exile from God because of His wrath:” this is indeed the champion of the Philistines. Heaven there is, but afar off, and with a dread uncertainty of ever reaching it. But how can the fear of this throw its shadow over the souls of the Israel of God? Alas! the type before us answers that sufficiently. Unbelief, the slighting of the word of God, the lack of any deep self-judgment, the mixture of the Church and the world: these are prominent and concurrent causes. Mid all the light that people vaunt today the shadows of superstition gather and their hosts stalk abroad, with the giant of Oath still champion of the host. Plain it is that it is the guilty conscience, ignorant of the power of the blood of Christ, that is the strength of all such systems. It is this that builds up priestly authority, and maintains the efficacy of sacramental “mysteries.” Peace with God known, accepted consciously in the soul, the terror of wrath is gone, the giant of superstition slain, the arm of Philistia is broken: and thus we are led directly to the apprehension of the conqueror here, who is David, the “Beloved.”

The height of the giant may be noted, six cubits and a span, though it is only the number which is plain as that of the full development of evil, and (we may add) unrest. He is in armor of brass, so often connected with the unyielding character of judgment; his heart is shut in with scales of brass: we are too little practised in divine symbolism to go safely further in the interpretation here. He proclaims himself emphatically “the Philistine,” as he truly is; and defies any one in the host of Israel to contend with him. And Saul and all the host shrink back in terror.

(b) The history returns to David, and the memory is refreshed as to who he is. All this we are to keep in mind. and carry with us. The three eldest of his brothers follow Saul; but David mind, returned from Saul to his accustomed and significant occupation as shepherd of the sheep. God’s king is in training, and not to be hastily detached from this.

Forty days the Philistine presents himself, morning and evening. The testing of ability to encounter him is to be fully made.

But now David, like Joseph of old -another type of royalty in Christ -is sent upon a mission. He is to seek out his brethren with food for their necessities, and see how they fare. Nor does our king yet disdain such service. He finds them in the ranks, going forth to the battle for which they have so little heart or competence, and sees the Philistine come forth, and hears his challenge. He is intensely and indignantly interested, and no wonder, and again and again questions the people there, “What shall be done to the man that smiteth this Philistine, and taketh away the reproach from Israel?” And again and again they tell him what the king will do.

If this is still to be applied typically, what is the meaning of it? What are we to say indeed of all this introduction of David into the reign of Saul and into the midst of such a conflict as has been already indicated between Israel and the Philistines? For all this has seemed, and with consistency hitherto, to speak of things that are or have been taking place in our own times and dispensation, and how could we introduce the Lord personally, as David would seem to represent Him, into scenes from which He is necessarily absent?

There is here a difficulty indeed, but not an insuperable one. Of course it is true that it would be insuperable, if we had to conceive of our Lord as being here in the body when we know that He is in heaven: this would be entirely inconsistent; yet it is said in the closing verses of the Gospel of Mark just after we have been told distinctly of His ascent into heaven and being seated on the right hand of God, -“And they went forth and preached every where, the Lord working with them, and confirming the word with signs following.” Thus still also, we are sure, the Lord works on; and this is no figure of speech, nor even a synonym for the Spirit’s work in men: there is a difference which it is well to be clear about, and which will make what we have here also clear.

Ministry is always under the Lord: “there are differences of administrations (ministries, marg.), yet but one Lord;” and this the apostle says just after he had said, “there are diversities of gifts, but the same Spirit.” (1Co 12:4-5.) The two things are widely different: the power is of the Spirit; rule, superintendence, belong to the Lord.

This title, Lord, is moreover, if we may say so, His David, His royal, title; for He is never called king in relation to the Church, but to Israel or the nations,* while in fact the authority which He claims and exercises “Lord” is fully royal. Thus we may rightly speak of His actings here, while He sits upon the Father’s throne above; and these will show Him of course in the character of His rule, and make us realize the joy of being subject to Him. Such views of Him we may expect to realize in that which is before us.

{* Rev 15:3, should read “King of nations.”}

As acting upon earth, it will be natural also, to find Him identified with and represented by the servants who serve Him, and even in their sufferings too. While we must carefully remember the limitations which types according to their very nature have, and take heed not to strain the application beyond these. But as to all this we must speak of it in detail as the individual types come before us, and furnish the occasion.

But it is plain therefore that the visit of David to his brethren at this time is not to be interpreted like that of Joseph, of the Lord’s assuming flesh and coming into the world. We must rather take it as applying to what men coldly call a providential visitation. If there took place for instance at the Reformation such a deliverance as we find here from the giant of the Philistines, -if at that time the revival of a gospel which gave assurance and peace to souls delivered men from the distance and estrangement from God which Romanism maintains, and by which it effects its conquests, -then we may rightly consider this to be such a gracious visitation. The true David, the son of Jesse, (of the living and unchanging God,) surely then visited His brethren with the bread of Bethlehem, the Father’s house of bread. Then was the question raised which received in result such unsatisfactory answer, “what shall be done to the man that smiteth this Philistine, and taketh away the reproach from Israel?”

The more this is examined, the closer will be found the application. Was not the answer too much in those days the assurance of what the king would do for Israel’s deliverer? The failure of the Reformation -blessed work of God as there truly was in it -was it not largely in this that Saul, the secular power, and his promises were trusted in, and the princes of the earth sought to as the nursing fathers of the church? But what will they do, what have they done, for the Christ who delivered them? Alas, they sought not spiritual deliverance but temporal, though the means that could alone deliver them were in fact spiritual. The Davids were the divinely raised up champions of the truth, who descended solitary into the valley while the Sauls, yea, and Israel too, cowered in their places of shelter and looked on, to see the victory accomplished for them. In reality this victory was but one, and of One, One Christ acting in His poor followers, whom the Eliabs might insult for pride, and as leaving the few sheep to be exposed in the wilderness, while the work was being done. Yet there was a cause; and they had but to wait to see the vain seeming words become mighty deeds, the giant dead, and the Philistine host in flight!

(c) The words of David are reported to Saul, and though half believing only, he grasps at them. Incredulously he gazes at the stripling whose strength, such as he sees it, is little enough to be measured with that of the Philistine warrior; but David is not dismayed. He has had already his experiences of Jehovah’s deliverances, and his conflict in behalf of the sheep of the flock: so the Lord trains in private those whom He brings forth at last for public use; “not a novice” is His rule for leaders; and David, young as he might be, was none. There was with him the shepherd’s heart which had made him venture his life, not before the eyes of many, nor for a great result, but for a single lamb only. How could he now shrink when the issue was so vast, and the people of God were looking vainly for a deliverer?

His measure of the situation is the measure of faith. Here we find nothing of the gigantic stature of his antagonist, nor of his brazen armor, nor of his practiced soldiership: this has nothing to do with the matter; he is an uncircumcised Philistine, and has defied the embattled hosts of the living God. A very partial induction, it might be said; but for him it was ample. Faith has but to make one inquiry, Where is God in this matter? and having found this, nothing whatever on the opposite side can weigh against this.

Even Saul has to own so plain an argument. He assents, and dismisses him with a pious wish, Go, and Jehovah be with thee! That, indeed, is the whole matter: Israel is not with him, nor Saul, nor anything that flesh values, or the world has confidence in; happy is he who in the face of all this can say, “The Lord is with me! is it not enough?”

(d) But Saul shows that he does not realize this, and must at least clothe David with his own armor, that the battle may be upon more equal terms. And indeed, though not as he meant it, this would have been the case. Saul’s armor was Philistine enough; and David clothed in it would have been novice enough. But he only puts it on to put it off again. He will not use what he has no acquaintance with. So he goes forth, a shepherd, not a warrior, not as one with whom war is a profession, though he may fight when the flock is in peril: with his staff and sling, and five smooth stones only, out of the brook.

The means we use will largely tell the spirit we are of. In themselves of small importance, our making much of them will in fact make them much, though in a different sense from that which we imagine. Paul came not among the Corinthians “with excellency of speech or of wisdom, declaring the testimony of God.” And in this there was not mere human weakness, but the distinct purpose that their “faith should not stand in the wisdom of men, but in the power of God.” All supplements of spiritual power necessarily carnalize the effect produced; and even where God is working, the result will show itself; perhaps not till after many days. Meanwhile, as with stung fruit, the ripening may seem quicker, while in fact the proper ripeness never is attained.

David had tested his means before the battle. This let us remember, but apply it rightly too. For the word of God is that which must test everything for us, if our experience even is to be of any value. Little should we count it, comparatively, when we have unfailing wisdom of Him who sees the end from the beginning, to whom all things are naked and opened. How we should rejoice, indeed, in the unspeakable blessing of His word -His mind made known to us! As to the weapons of David, we shall see what they mean directly; but we may notice that the five stones already speak in the number of man in relationship with God, which accomplished, as even the person of Christ bears witness for eternity, the issue of the conflict before us is not doubtful.

(e) The combatants now approach to the encounter, and the spirit of each is manifest. With David there is confident assurance, but it is in Jehovah, in whose name he acts, and who is with him, meaning to show Himself as the living God to all the earth, and to make Israel know that He saves neither by sword nor spear, but the issue of the battle is in His hand alone. So, indeed, has God wrought, and for such a purpose, in those great crises of human history in which His hand has been stretched out to break the power of the enemy and deliver men out of his grasp. But above all, when the deliverance has been from spiritual oppression and darkness, and the result of it the bringing of souls into the joy and peace of the gospel, how has God declared His being and name, and how clearly has victory been the result not of human effort or carnal means, but His handiwork alone!

(f) But we must now consider more particularly the means of the giant’s overthrow. This smooth stone from the brook, what is it? may we expect to find a definite meaning in it? It has evidently a most important place in the history: ought it not to have as much in the interpretation, if this is to be consistent, so as to have upon it the stamp of truth?

A smooth stone from the brook is one which has been fashioned by the stream of running (which in Scripture is the same as living) water; and this last we know as constantly a figure of the Spirit of God. Here should be a beginning of understanding for us.

Then a stone shaped by the Spirit of God would naturally make us think of the “living stones” of which Peter speaks, expanding for us the significance of his own name; stones built up into the spiritual house which is built upon the foundation of living stone, which is Christ Jesus. As stones, they are true and divine material for the house of God in contrast with Babel’s bricks of human manufacture (Gen 11:1-32), and are types of permanence and solidity. God’s living stones will abide in their God-given place forever, a sanctuary of praise that will never be taken down or cease to manifest His glory eternally.

If, then, we simply follow Scripture in interpreting Scripture, how well may this smooth stone from the brook in our David’s hand destroy the dread shadow of wrath and alienation from God which the giant of Gath expresses! The stone speaks of divine work and a divine position, of settled nearness to God and indwelling glory! What a salvation indeed is this, and what a triumph over all the power of the enemy! The giant falls, and is slain with his own sword; for by death Christ has destroyed him that had the power of death (Heb 2:14): here the work of the cross finds its place in this grand type; what victory can be accomplished without it? and how plain that every victory of this kind is really His, who alone could handle such a weapon!

At once the Philistines flee, and Israel has only to pursue a defeated foe. As has been said, the whole power of ecclesiasticism is broken for those who have seen the giant fallen. The apprehension of the true Church, and of our individual place in it, in abiding nearness to and joy in God, of necessity overthrows the would-be mediation of the false church with all its hosts of empty intercessors. The imposing array becomes at once but a routed rabble, who proclaim in their very creed their ignorance of God and of His Christ. Ominous now are the names of the places where the Philistine wounded fall, -Shaaraim, “two gates! “* Gath, the “wine-press” of wrath; Ekron, “rooting out.” Not a name here but has its tale to tell; the picture is complete even in its minutest features. And how much would the people of God learn of His mind, if they would but set themselves in faith to understand these histories as prophetic scriptures” (Rom 16:26. Greek.) given by Him who sees the end from the beginning, for our instruction and admonition, to whom all the ages are appointed to minister, but who alas, so little heed the wondrous grace of God!

{*See page 103, notes.}

In all this part we can see, whether Christ personally he before us or not, how it is He Himself governs all. If He be pleased to identify Himself with human instruments, yet they are only this, -the force, the power, is in Christ alone. Only so far as they hide themselves in Him can they fill their place or do their work at all. No wonder therefore if, just in the crises of the history, as here in the victory over Goliath, the Sun break through all veils, and the direct glory of the Lord shine on us. We think of the way of the Cross as the true valley of Elah, of him that had the power of death in the Philistine giant, of the resurrection as that which, enabling God to be with us, is the foundation of the Church itself, and the defeat of the foe, putting the sword of death into the Champion’s hand for death’s destruction. If we pursue this further we soon find the veil-cloud closing in again: yet here is the hiding of its power; and the connection with after events of human history only manifests this power as henceforth the ruling factor in the history of man. It is His own voice saying, as of old, “And behold, I am ever with you,” and the cloud is but His chariot, -the Christ once humbled is now seen as throned.

2. Between the true king thus manifested and the one rejected of God there cannot be, for a moment, any true fellowship. The nearer they are brought together the more must the essential opposition between them be manifest. On the side of Saul it ripens into enmity which soon breaks through all disguise, and David is obliged to flee from the man to whom he has rendered such important assistance, a wanderer and an outlaw. It is only one form of that spirit which has been in the world since the day of Cain of which the cross was the full, ripe fruit; and which, under whatever partial disguises in professedly Christian lands, exists today the same as ever. Saul may sacrifice to Jehovah, and fill the role of an Israelitish king; but a true Israelite, a “prince with God,” he cannot be. Christian governments today there are not, though they make their bow to Christianity and bring their offering: the true King and His representatives can never be in heart welcomed by them, though they may appreciate certain advantages received, and rejoice in some deliverances accomplished for them. These things we shall be called to consider in the fruitful history that lies before us.

(1) At first there is naturally a period of favor and acceptance. There has been undoubtedly a great deliverance, and there is on every side the joy of it. David is in honor with Saul himself. Such a time was realized when the gospel gained its great victories in Reformation times. The papal yoke was broken from the neck of kings and governments; and it seemed as if they must joyfully bow their necks to Christ’s yoke. Nations accepted evangelical creeds, and kings became protectors of the Church. It was not a sign for good, in reality; and yet it was quite natural to accept it as such. In fact, the Churches, in their zeal against popery and ill-considered enthusiasm over the favor of kings, assumed really the position with which the Philistine had reproached Israel, of being “servants to Saul.” Nor does Romanism fail still to fling the taunt in the face of Protestantism.

From the beginning, however, Saul shows how little David has been to him. Before the battle in the valley of Elah he had, as we know, been already debtor to him. His harp had broken the power of the evil one again and again, and set him free; and Saul, it was even said, had “loved him greatly.” But there is nothing, perhaps, of more various quality than love; and nothing that more takes its color from the subject of it. What need the apostle feels to define for Christians what true love is! We “love” those who please our tastes, -perhaps gratify our mere selfishness; and this love can turn into thorough enmity as soon as self has to be yielded up to it in any wise. True love, on the other hand, “seeketh not her own”: it is the very spirit of self-sacrifice; of such love Saul was not capable.

It is not intimated that he has forgotten David: he asks whose son he is. He had known that also, but it had slipped away from him, because he had valued him for his services merely, never had that personal interest in him which makes all belonging to one an interest. In such a case, how easy to forget!

If we think of the spiritual significance, Jesse’s name is full of meaning. The “living God” is indeed the One whom the princes of the earth willingly forget, and the relationship of Christ to Him fades quickly out of remembrance. Hence Christianity becomes for them, at the best, a lifeless orthodoxy; and the captain of the host knows nothing aright of the infinitely greater Captain of salvation.”

But the soul of Jonathan is at once knit to the soul of David. Here is a harmony of soul with soul, which of necessity brings such together; and for David Jonathan strips himself, -a type of true and devoted love. Saul may give David an honorable place, -advancing, of course, his own interests thereby; but Jonathan abases self to exalt him. “He must increase but I must decrease,” declares in the words of the Baptist the law which is written in the heart, according to the terms of the New Testament.

{*1Sa 18:10, Erdmann and others translate “raved.” The word is the identical one for “prophesying,” not necessarily as prediction of future events, but as speaking by inspiration, whether from God, or, as here, from an evil spirit.}

Typically, the ordination by God of the secular power, which Jonathan represents, has, as we know, respect to Christ: in its very failure bearing witness of Him who must needs to come to fill aright the throne on earth; stripping itself, as it were, to invest Him with royal garments. With Him is its covenant; and it perishes to make way for Him.

Meanwhile our David consents still to the servant’s place; and in that place serves wonderfully, even to the blessing and glory of the kings of the earth; doing battle for them, also in behalf of the people dear to Him, with whom He is ever “accepted,” sometimes also in the sight of Saul’s servants, but only as a “man of war.”

(2) Saul’s favor could not last long. His jealousy is awakened by the songs of the women, who exalt David in his deeds above himself. It was only the truth artlessly spoken, which is not because of that more agreeable to a jealous mind. What can he have more, except the kingdom? he argues. The anger of his soul exposes him once more to the attacks of the evil spirit, which for a while seem to have ceased, and now David’s harp has lost its power: Saul casts the javelin that was in his hand to smite him to the wall, and twice David escapes out of his presence. Then fear comes upon Saul: he realizes that Jehovah is with David, and not with himself, and he gives him an inferior place away from him; but thus he is brought still more before the people, and into favor and acceptance with them: and Saul fears the more.

All this may be difficult to interpret with exactness. The general thought it is not hard to see, -the jealousy which in fact the secular power has manifested of, the spiritual, to which it nevertheless owes a great deliverance. It is not within our aim to enter into the history, for instance, of the Reformation churches, which would prove this. Escaped from ecclesiastical control, the states which owed this to the gospel of Christ have speedily enough exhibited their jealousy of Christ’s word, and even in moments of insanity launched the javelin against those who, first of all, would obey Him. The annals of dissent from nationalism and subservience to the state are full of evidence of this, which all who care may find. After which has come uneasy toleration, and perhaps distant patronage, designed to promote state-interests, but at bottom leaving still the breach unhealed. Alas, to heal this, the world must cease to be the world, as Scripture characterizes it, by its passions and its lusts away from God.

(3) The next section has much greater difficulties. The first of these is: are we, or not, to see in David’s marriage to a daughter of Saul a lesson of failure? Is the type a type of that? That Saul meant it for evil is plainly stated, though the Lord did not suffer what he hoped to come to pass; but the after-history shows but little good. She is said to have “loved” David, and we find her shielding him shortly after from Saul; but her justification of herself in that matter is not calculated to raise her in one’s estimation. Her words might well leave Saul to conceive that there would be no obstacle found on her part to her union with another man; nor does anything that we hear of her lead us to imagine it. She is restored by Abner to David after years of dwelling with Phaltiel, only to be seen again mocking the king of Israel for his self-abasement before the ark, and to be heard of as under penalty for this for the rest of her life. On David’s part we do not realize special failure, it is true; but neither do we find God’s blessing on him in it: the history, with one exception, is one of evil and not of good. This being so, we naturally connect it, even as a type, with evil, and not with good.

And this again would prevent us seeing in it a type of the Lord Himself, though it must be assuredly of that or those linked with Him and representing Him in the time of His absence now; and here, alas, even abundant failure is readily conceivable.

Saul’s promise had been given before the victory to make a conqueror of the giant his son-in-law; but that seemed to be forgotten. He renews it only in his enmity against David, to bring about his death at the hands of the Philistines. Even so, his offer of Merab again falls through, and she is given to Adriel the Meholathite, a chapter in history with a terrible ending.

Merab, we know, means “increase,” and speaks not of what is spiritual, but of temporal prosperity, which is indeed much of the strength of the Sauls, the kings of the earth, wherever found. But this could not be united with our David, or with those standing for Him in the day of His rejection. Yet Adriel, to whom she is given, has a name which sounds well, signifying “the flock of God”; yet here we should expect as a type a woman and not a man. Christ is the Man; the Church espoused to Him the woman: even “Babylon the great” is that. If then the flock of God be represented here (and the meaning of the name is precise), there must be significance in this also: the woman stands for dependence, the man for independence; and independent indeed must that be which can receive its Merab from the kings of the earth, when she is taken also from the true David to be bestowed upon it.

To this we can add that Adriel is a Meholathite; and meholah signifies a “circling dance.” So that all seems to agree in conveying the thought of a church which, without being Philistine, has become separate in interest from and out of fellowship with a rejected Christ; and such as a Saul can afford to honor. Adriel is under no obligation to fight the Lord’s battles, to obtain the king’s daughter.

But Saul has another daughter, and for her he can yet make his bargain with David. There is much difficulty, however, as to what Michal stands for, or even the meaning of her name. Lexicographers in general give it that of “brook,” from 2Sa 17:20. But that is the only occurrence, and the meaning is only gathered from the context. According to its apparent derivation it might mean “what holds,” and then the word “water” following be needful to explain the application. A word, michla, near akin, means “sheepfold,” and such a significance for Michal would seem more appropriate to the type than any: for many a David has been seduced by such an offer of protection for the sheep of Christ, which many a Saul has made and sought to fulfill. But a fold of this kind would be but a snare, and its connection with David loose enough in result. The ambiguity of Michal’s name, which might be, interrogatively, “who can hold?” would thus have its appropriateness also.

Nor need this contradict the force or application of the word as given before, there vaguer and more general, here specific. The names of Scripture, as we have seen elsewhere, have often a fullness and sometimes an ambiguity of meaning that adds to their force. Here to “hold” and to “measure” are meanings near akin. To “hold” God’s sheep in the sense intended is in fact to “measure” them. Yet all this as to the interpretation of Michal is only put forth as suggestion; the difficulty of reading it consistently throughout is great, and this makes against it: verisimilitude is the only law of verification for a type.

That this offer necessitates another encounter with the Philistines is, however, quite congruous with this meaning, and scarcely needs to be explained. During all these wars, moreover, David must be ever the great conqueror. The gospel and those who are identified with it are alone able effectually to deal with modern Philistinism; and in this way, in a wider circle than that of true disciples David’s name is “much set by.”

(4) All this fails as a means of conciliation; and victories over the Philistines only inflame the king’s anger. He is soon openly plotting David’s death; though this is for the time stopped by the intercession of Jonathan, the true friend of both. Saul swears by Jehovah, the most solemn oath possible, that David shall not die; and again they are brought together. But a new victory over the Philistines arouses Saul once more, and the old scenes are repeated. David flees again from the murderous hand of Saul, and only escapes by the strategy of Michal, who deceives Saul’s messengers with an image in the bed. But David is now a wanderer, and a new phase of his history is that which is for long to occupy us.

3. Cast out by man, David is the more cast upon God, who appears for him, and identifies Himself with him more and more, as Saul also ripens into more open defiance of God. By the slaughter of the priests and the escape of Abiathar, the means of consulting the divine oracle come into David’s hands, of which he avails himself at Keilah and elsewhere. This time is one in which, as we know, many of his psalms were conceived and uttered, the fruit of exercise and manifold experiences, both of himself and of the goodness of God toward him; a time of truest sanctification and blessing therefore, the spiritual education of the King that is to be.* Here, typically, we shall assuredly find, with outshinings of the glory of Christ Himself, much of the spiritual history of those who have stood most truly for Him, in the day of His rejection: not a dispensational view probably, or the picture of any special period, but of what has been realized in the lives of those in all periods of Christianity faithful to the word of the Lord. And here, no doubt, the lessons will be best learned by those who have most the path to tread.

{*We shall not, however, attempt here to fit the psalms to the history. This needs an examination of the psalms themselves, which could not be given in this place. We must reserve it till, the Lord willing, we come to these.}

(1) At the first step upon it the power which is over Saul is plainly evidenced. David flees, naturally enough, in the first place to Samuel, by whom he had been anointed, and who stood forth before all men’s eyes in those days as, by his nearness to God, apart from all other men. Samuel, if any, had power to stand against Saul himself, and that he would do it there could be no question. Few characters in all Scripture equal Samuel’s for that consistent walk with God, and ability to act for Him, which beget confidence on the part of others. David therefore makes known to Samuel all that Saul has done; and Samuel comes with him to dwell at Naioth,* the collected “dwellings” of the prophets, who gathered around Samuel. The word is a plural, and signifies both dwellings “and “pastures,” suiting well therefore that thought of a prophetic “school” with which tradition ekes out the scanty notices of Scripture. Here we might imagine David’s language to be what he generalizes in the psalm as to all those that trust in God: “Thou shalt hide them in the secret of Thy presence from the pride of man; Thou shalt keep them secretly in a pavilion from the strife of tongues.” (Psa 22:20.) Yet hence he is driven, to realize a better “hiding-place” in God Himself. (Psa 32:7.) To his retreat Saul pursues him: after sending three times in vain his messengers, he follows them himself. But upon all alike the Spirit of God comes, subjecting them perforce to itself, so that they prophesy; and upon Saul before he has even reached the place, and with effect deeper and more lasting, -reviving the saying which had earlier gone forth about him, “Is Saul also among the prophets?”

{*Or, as in the Kethib (the “written” text), Nevaioth.}

And how must Saul’s mind also have gone back to those earlier days, before yet the Spirit had been grieved away from him, and when all the possibilities of the divine call to the throne of Israel were opening before him! What tender recollections to touch the heart with, and to bring, if it might be, this wanderer to himself! Then, how vain to contend with power such as this! Who ever hardened himself against God and prospered? On the other hand, what an assurance of One ready still to receive, -who would, even by force if it were possible, put Saul among the prophets! Yet against all this, as we know, Saul did harden himself, and became necessarily more evil in proportion to the grace resisted, according to the constant and inevitable law of cause and effect.

For David himself what an assurance of the eternal arms, though invisible, that were around him! Yet he goes forth, for deeper experiences of God’s living care, in the rough scenes beyond, than he could find even in that sheltered retreat, and in that atmosphere thrilling with His voice. Yet here we see for a moment, in a vivid picture, how brightly the spiritual life might manifest itself in Israel in a time such as this, and how near God drew even then to His people that sought Him. Is it too much to say,with the apostle’s words in view (1Co 14:1-40), that now, when Moses’ desire that “all the Lord’s people were prophets” has found its practicability of accomplishment in the fulfillment of its other part, -“that the Lord would put His Spirit upon them,” -there should be in every Christian assembly a display of divine power as great as this, and a glory of the divine presence fuller and nearer far? Oh that it were indeed so! Here we find that even then there were many more prophets than those whose voices have come down to us. Now that “ye may all prophesy” is limited only by the unbelief that cannot understand this, or the coldness of heart that has no response to it. Alas for the privileges unenjoyed that will one day rise up against us! Rather let us take now the reproach, and find in the grace of our God the available remedy.

The typical meaning is not so hard to understand, as the application may seem slight and trivial. But the secular power has, in fact, in its relation to the divine King, such different phases. It can prophesy falsely under evil inspiration, or truly under that which is of God: it can favor for the moment the true King and those identified with Him, or bitterly persecute them. All this is perfectly plain, -so plain we need not dwell upon it. It can even, under the spiritual impulse, strip itself of its royal robes, and prostrate itself as the feeble creature it is, in the dust before God. But its general course is little affected by this: the world abides still the world: it may be Protestant, -not Romanist; Israelite, -not Philistine; but still it is the world, and the man in honor in it is not the man after God’s heart, but the people’s, -away from God.

(2) A more sorrowful scene still is that which follows. The breach with Saul is realized to be no temporary one, and its effect is found in the separation of those who are brethren. The long account which fills a chapter of our Bibles shows how the Spirit of God would emphasize this. The fact is a very familiar one indeed: the sorrow of it every heart taught of God must realize.

Jonathan and David part! But what then does Jonathan stand for in this connection? Clearly if in the first place he represent, as we believe, that ordination of God by which the “powers that be” become the objects of recognition on the part of Christians, Jonathan would represent here those who make this recognition govern them in their position ecclesiastically. They love David, but they cling to Saul. They interpret God’s sanction of the civil power so as to make it in some sense a spiritual power as well. They use Jewish analogies to illustrate Christian relationships, and make a theocracy out of Nebuchadnezzar’s kingdom. The state-church Protestantism developed many Jonathans, whose hearts and consciences were in opposition to one another; and where the state church survives such will still be found.

Jonathan is forced to realize for himself the enmity of Saul against David, -not a momentary paroxysm of madness, but a malignant spirit, which would once more sacrifice Jonathan himself for thwarting its stubborn pride. He has to acquiesce in David’s departure, for the arrow does not fall within the limit of safety to him. So they part: Jonathan to place and honor, and then the fatal conflict at Gilboa; David, through present suffering and rejection, to a throne. The appointed path for us also is found here: “if we suffer we shall also reign with Him.”

(3) The next incident in David’s life is noticed in each of the synoptic gospels, as used by the Lord to illustrate and enforce His affirmation that “the Son of man is Lord also of the Sabbath.” (Luk 6:5.) Here David is lord of the show-bread, which, though holy according to the law, is, under the circumstances, common; and which he not only takes, but gives to those that are with him.* Everything was in ruin in Israel. Since the captivity of the ark in the Philistines’ land, it had never returned to the sanctuary, which had been itself shifted from place to place, till now it was at Nob, not even a priestly city according to the original designation of these by lot in Joshua’s time, and from which it was soon to be again violently dislodged. The absence of the ark involved that of the mercy-seat or “propitiatory” which covered it, and this again complete inability to carry out the ordinance of the day of atonement, all-important as this was for Israel’s acceptance with God. Nor does there seem to have been any realization of the greatness of their loss: “we inquired not at it” -the ark -says David himself, “in the days of Saul.” (1Ch 13:3.) Yet it was the throne of the Lord, where was His dwelling-place between the cherubim.

{*In the history these are not spoken of except by David himself and where he is bent upon misleading the high priest; but it does not therefore follow that this was part of the deceit, and the Lord’s assurance is warrant enough for every Christian.}

God had indeed raised up Samuel as an extraordinary link between the people and Himself. But Samuel too had been finally rejected by the people, as we have seen. Nor had Saul, the people’s choice, though permitted to them by God, ever stood even in Samuel’s place. He in turn having been rejected, David had become the anointed of the Lord; and now David was fleeing from the face of Saul, an outcast and a wanderer. In this state of things,what virtue could remain for them in the old institutions? Upon David alone everything now depended, and thus we can understand his words, enigma as they are still to most interpreters, “it” -the show-bread -“is in a manner common; yea, even when it is sanctified that day in the vessel.”* David says “in a manner common,” because after all God had not done with these institutions, which soon were to be revivified, and endure for the appointed time. They were “common,” as subject to his needs, just as, according to the Lord’s own comparison, the Sabbath ordinance was of no force to set aside the higher obligation of the temple services. (Mat 12:5.)

{*This has been also very variously rendered by translators and commentators in most strained and awkward fashion. “It is a hurried, excited sentence,” says the American editor of Lange, “almost utterly obscure.” Rather, it has been obscured by lack of intelligence on the part of the interpreter.}

The priest may only partially have understood David: we, however, can understand him without difficulty. But we can go far beyond even what David knew, and see in all these things shadows of things that were to come. We can see in David rejected the type of a greater, who as such has abrogated Jewish and legal ordinances in order to give His people that communion with Himself beyond these, of which the “bread of presence” speaks. But we must look at this more closely.

It is striking indeed that, while the show-bread is spoken of and commanded in the book of Exodus, we have to wait till nearly the end of Leviticus before it is particularly described. Where we should naturally expect to find it, it is omitted; and the place in which it is actually found is in that fifth part of the book, in which, as the Deuteronomy part, the ways of God are set before us. It comes, in fact, immediately after the typical account of those “set times” in Israel, which represent those dispensational “ways,” that, while they include Israel, go far beyond His purposes toward her. (Lev 23:1-44.)

But not only so, the institution itself, -most strangely, as it would seem, for an Israelitish ordinance, -is found in that chapter immediately following this, in which, in contrast with Israel’s rejection (seen in the punishment of the blasphemer), God’s maintenance of light and communion with Himself in Christianity is shown. (Lev 24:1-23, notes.) And the latter of these is what the show-bread represents! How plainly it is what our own rejected David may claim by special right!

When we come to look at the details, how fitly do they unite with such a thought! For we have seen how this “bread of presence” speaks of Christ for us on high, the true “corn of the land” upon which His people feed, and in whom they are brought to God and accepted of Him. “It is presence-bread, with the incense of His acceptability upon it, and the twelve loaves making us to know His representation of His people, their identification with Him before God.” But this is special Christian position, as well as communion. How justly again may our David distribute such bread as this among His own!

Thus the Lord vindicates the title of His followers, who follow Him in His poverty and rejection, to that which is indeed ennoblement and enrichment passing thought. Here we find the food with which faith, obedient to His call, is recruited and sustained; and it is received from the priest’s hand, who is Ahimelech, “the king’s brother.” In Christ the King and Priest are thus in close relationship, and such a ministry of blessing as we have been thinking of must of course come from the great High Priest. His mediatorial work is that from which of necessity all this comes.

Now we have noticed the presence of the enemy, the Edomite, whose name, if names have meaning, seems at first sight a strange enough one in such a connection. It is Doeg, “the fearful”; but are not our fears the greatest enemies that can be to our David and His followers when being Himself rejected, to follow Him means to share His rejection? Who is not conscious of it? Nor need we wonder to find him chief among such shepherds as a Saul might have. His presence, “detained before Jehovah,” not of his own free will we may be sure, will be found to have its disastrous effects on the future near to be. Meanwhile we can trace a more than superficial connection with what follows here, where David, in answer to his request for spear or sword, has put again into his hand Goliath’s sword, with which he had slain the giant. The death which has annulled death, and which abides in perpetual memory with God, what a defense is that for the people of God, in all the attacks of the enemy! What a weapon against fear itself! Thus they are both fed and furnished.

In all this nothing has been said of David’s deception, fraught with such evil consequences as we know it was to him who at this time succored him. The man whose life yields us, more perhaps than any other, the most fruitful types of the Lord Jesus Christ, shows himself thus how far removed from the perfection which he shadowed. But who is not? Upon such things Scripture itself in general makes no comment. Such is man! “Cease ye from man, whose breath is in his nostrils; for wherein is he to be accounted of”?

(4) And this is manifest in the next act of David: with the sword of the Philistine champion in his hand, he flees to the Philistines, and to Gath, the city of the giant, from the face of Saul.

The experience of weakness is one with which God would have us thoroughly well acquainted. It is the healthful condition of a creature, necessary to him as such, and no distress but the opposite, in proportion as we know God as the One in whom “we live and move and have our being.” Then we can be still and let Him show His might, and under the shadow of His wings find refuge. Sin has made such experience more than ever necessary for us, by the very fact that it has made distress of weakness, which could never be were the breach between us and God fully healed. Faith implies this healing; but we must know ourselves little indeed, if we know not how weak faith is. Every fresh need demonstrates it, and thus the manifold experiences are ordained to us, which, whatever shame they may cause us by the way, are to end in glorifying Him in all things, and thus in truest blessing for ourselves.

David is indeed now brought low, into just the place of glorious revelations of the living God, or painful revelations of the flesh in man. He finds for himself the latter, just by taking counsel of his own wisdom and his fears. We do not know by what strange or plausible arguments he succeeded in persuading himself that refuge was to be found in Gath, among the enemies of Israel, against whom he had gained all his victories and his fame. The human heart is so subtle an advocate that it can make its way through the plainest and most contradictory array of facts to its conclusion; but it cannot bring the event to harmonize with this. David thus finds at Gath his own history against him, and the glorious achievements of God by him his bill of impeachment in the court of Achish. What else could he expect? Could he even desire that they should accept him as an apostate from those convictions that had nerved his arm and strengthened his heart in those days but a short time past? or suppose that, this pressure over, he would not return to be the same enemy of the Philistines that he had been before? Yet what an account to give, that he must be a debtor to Philis tine compassion for that refuge which the God of Israel had failed to be to him? How inconsistent and miserable is unbelief! -only consistent in tending to gravitate to a continually lower depth. Is there possibly a place in which God is not sufficient? Thence it is easy to reach the question, Where is He then sufficient? Faith, to justify itself at all, must take and keep the highest level, -an omniscient, omnipresent, all-sufficient, ever available God; and then how does the nothingness of man only give occasion to the display of the power and glory of God!

But in a Philistine refuge to maintain faith at this level is not possible: there is inevitable, therefore, the collapse which follows. The mention of his own great deeds makes him sore afraid before Achish, king of Gath; and to save himself he sinks yet lower, acting the madman in the presence of them all, and escaping under cover of what in the East was considered in some sense a divine possession. Thus a real shame must be made to retrieve from a false shame, and a sham folly rescue from the consequences of the real one. Openly the Lord does not interfere: He cannot honor unbelief by doing so: yet to shame it is to give real help. Still there is no victory over the Philistine here: the victory is rather on his side.

(5) But David has escaped, and that every way: we find him next back again in Israel; and, though still a fugitive, yet with God, and gathering strength. At Adullam a company begin to gather round him, at first apparently as poor in character as bankrupt in resources; yet out of these are developed the mighty men of whose exploits by and by we shall hear much, and who encircle David when he rises to the throne. Disciplined by danger and strife and adversity, they go in and out with one who has the power of winning men to himself, and are won, and modeled upon the pattern of their great leader. What is represented here is simple enough for those who realize Christ to be still rejected by the world; to others it will not be. Scripture still, however, asserts, whether the days be changed or not, that “if we suffer, we shall also reign with Him”; and again, that we are “joint-heirs with Christ, if so be that we suffer with Him, that we may be also glorified together.” (2Ti 2:12; Rom 8:17.)

Thus, though Christ is gone from the earth, there is still possible, still necessary, a fellowship with Him in His sufferings, -a fellowship of those whose hearts have been won by Him in such sort as to make them practically associates with Him in a life not of the world, and with which the world therefore has no sympathy. It may be true that only exceptionally they are found now “in dens and caves of the earth,” and that the time is past when “witness” and “martyr” were but the same word, as implying the same thing. Satan changes his tactics without ceasing to be Satan; and the world may adopt the Christian dress without ceasing to be the world. Still, under whatever exterior, the essential opposition remains.

Adullam we have already taken to mean “a witness indeed,” and appropriate enough is such a meaning here. A witness that cave was to the state of things in Israel: the anointed king with such a poor little handful of followers round him, and these brought to him by their necessities. Yet here was the path with God, though of even the people of God but few indeed were there. How plain that majorities decide nothing in the things of God, -and that we must guard ourselves, at all costs, from being carried away with them! The faith that cannot walk independent of man has little indeed to evidence itself to be faith. And yet how sadly does the tendency to go in droves manifests itself among the people of God. Conscience thus loses its place as what is before God alone, and the whole character of life is lowered.

Once more David’s faith seems to waver now. His family has fled to him; and lives more precious to him than his own are in his hand. How often does this dependence of others upon us test more the simplicity of faith than anything simply affecting ourselves! The thought of Moab as a refuge for his father and mother would be most natural indeed to a descendant of Ruth; but her history, nevertheless, had a widely different lesson for him. Strikingly similar, in effect, are those two names -Elimelech, “my God is king,” and Jesse, “Jehovah exists.” Elimelech and Jesse, fugitives in Moab, how contradictory to the import of their names! And the Moabitess, who left her country to come into poverty and reproach in Bethlehem, would she have counseled a return to Moab? No; for the word is -David’s own word, when he had learned the lesson -“Dwell in the land, and verily thou shalt be fed.” (Psa 37:3, Heb.) The land was Israel’s inheritance, God’s gift, of which nothing therefore could deprive the faith that laid hold of it. Of this we have warning directly: for when he had safely deposited his father and mother with the Moabite king, how natural, when rest allures, and the cords of a new relationship are felt, for David to make himself also a “hold” there! But the prophet’s voice -a new prophet, whose name speaks of militant energy, Gad, like the patriarch’s -drives him forth again: “Abide not in the hold: depart, and get thee into the land of Judah.”*

{*Which shows that the “hold” was not at Adullam, which was in Judah.}

How readily we seek escape from trial! And indeed we do well not to seek trial, or brave it. Being what we are, the right prayer is naturally for us, “Lead us not into temptation.” Distrust of self is right, and a proper spirit to face trial itself with. Then if after all, He appoints this to us, we go into it clinging fast to Him, and we are safe and blessed: for “my brethren,” says James, “count it all joy, when ye fall into divers temptations: knowing this, that the trying of your faith worketh patience; but let patience have her perfect work, that ye may be perfect and entire, wanting nothing.” (Jam 1:2-4.) How wonderful a reward! -and how simple a way, apparently, when we know in Whose hands we are! But, ah, the many hands in which we seem to be, -the Sauls’, the Doegs’, the people of whom we have deserved quite other things! How hard to accept these cruel and remorseless hands as the tender hands of God! There lies the victory of faith for us; there is the inlet of rest and assurance into the soul. This is our true inheritance also, from which we may not be driven, and must not wander, our “land of Judah,” which is “praise.”

“And David departed, and came to the forest of Hareth:” Hareth means “cutting,” as of engravers’ work. It occurs but once in the Old Testament, and that with reference to the handwriting of God upon the tables of the covenant (Exo 32:16): a precious link of connection, surely; for thus was it that God was graving His law, His holy will for him, upon David’s heart. Slowly it might be, and painfully; for so the different material of the tables of the new covenant implies; but the work done will be the greater and more glorious.

(6) Saul in the meanwhile pursues the path to ruin; and by the massacre at Nob cuts off with a violent hand all that yet links him with God and the sanctuary. No doubt he believed in the treason of Ahimelech, for he was in no mood for due consideration or the weighing of evidence. He is possessed with enmity against David, and the uneasy sense that he is striving with the inevitable. Caution and reserve are gone. He freely imputes to others, even to those of his own tribe with whom he has surrounded himself, only the self-interest which alone he can appreciate. Of necessity he is not sure of them, and can only hope to keep them as long as he can make the better offer.

Of course he does not lack those who for their own gain will act as ears and hands for him, and nurse his suspicions into more assurance. He hears of David’s movements; he learns of his son’s covenant with him; he finds, through Doeg, how David has been succored at Nob. What a curse to one in Saul’s condition the ready sympathy with which it meets, -the many arms outstretched to pull down over the precipice one blindly seeking it! Such is the shadow that dogs the powerful, -the retribution that the world has for the sinner. With Saul now the kingdoms whose history is here before us are drifting far apart: until the end we have only to say to him as he crosses the path of David.

The massacre at Nob throws the priesthood with Abiathar upon the side of David. With him, therefore, prophet, priest, and anointed king are found together; as yet, however, rejected of the people. Divine resources are his, though the path of obedience is that of trial still; and that we are to find in a new series of trials.

4. We have thus seen David furnished for the path: he has followers to about the number of 600 now, by whom we shall soon find him doing service in Israel, and God is openly with him, according to His manner of showing this in the days we are looking back to. Yet he is not, on that account, spared the trial by which he is exercised and fitted to be the true Shepherd-King of Israel when the fullness of time is come. These experiences come now more fully before us, which, while putting before us Him who was in all things tempted like as we are, apart from sin, speak necessarily, therefore, also of those who tread the wilderness-path after, yet with, Himself. The history of David here is, of course, largely that of His followers also.

(1) First of all, we see the power that is his from God; but power only to be used against the enemies of Israel, and not against Israel themselves. The Philistines fight against Keilah, and rob the threshing-floors. The sanctuary “refuge,” which we have taken Keilah to figure (p. 107, n. ), will naturally be an object of attack by those whose whole power depends upon keeping the people of God out of their place of acceptance and blessing in Christ in heavenly places. No way so effectual, either, as that of robbing the threshing-floors! For the provision of bread being cut off, the word of God and He who is the true Word, being no longer ministered, this would of necessity starve them out even of such a vantage-ground. Saul, too, could not be expected to work any deliverance here: we do not find him even attempting it. A secularized religion scarcely favors more such blessedness than the ritualistic one would do. Thus David is evidently the whole resource of Keilah. By the Lord’s guidance, therefore, and with His assurance of success, he quiets the fears of his men, and leads them against the foe; and Keilah is delivered, -a glorious and important victory.

Saul soon hears that David has come to Keilah: nothing is heard or accounted of the essential service he has rendered there; for, in fact, Saul is quite ready to sacrifice Keilah itself, if only in this way he can gratify his hatred against David. David is the representative of that higher kingdom which Saul must obey or fall before it, and disobedience has become with him now a frenzy of despair, in which he maintains a hopeless fight with forces that are known to be beyond him utterly, though he will not own or act as if they were so. How solemn, how tremendous, is such a struggle of the creature with the Creator,where the creature puts forth all its power of self-deception to prevent for a little time the collapse that is inevitable, and which will only be in this way more utter and irretrievable when it comes!

David, on the other hand, is more than ever completely intelligent as to the Lord’s will, and in subjection to it; and for him the end is not doubtful, nor one that he must disguise from himself. The power that works through him is as much master of Saul as of the Philistine enemy; but it is power held back by long-suffering mercy. The shepherd-rod is the type as much of service as of authority; and the shepherd-ruler is the incarnation of self-sacrifice, as Saul is of self-seeking. The people are not yet ready for the kingdom that shall be, and the men of Keilah will, under pressure, deliver up their saviour. David and his men evacuate the city, therefore, to take up again their wandering life, going whither they may; and Saul is still, as it may seem, the master. But master he cannot be who is not, before all things, master of himself; nor he master of himself who has not God his master. God is the harmony of all things: in the first revolt against Him are unloosed the forces of intestine strife, the issue of which is dissolution.

(2) David has escaped his enemy once more, and is now at Ziph; not escaped from the trial which is needful, and which is, under God’s hand, carefully controlled for blessing, -a blessing which, in the Psalms, he acknowledges many times with a full heart. Ziph means, according to what we have before seen, “refining.” (See pp. 97, 113, n.) We shall find it in this place also answering to its name. The precious metals -the gold and the silver of this world -need such processes to display their character; and all the elect of God -save One, the chief Elect -need and undergo this process. In David we have to recognize, as often said, not simply the One who never needed purification, but also those who are identified with Him by His grace, and who, on their way to share with Him His kingdom and glory, share with Him too the sufferings that lead on to this. Thus the apostle, after giving us the precious examples of those who have “obtained a good report through faith,” and bidding us in like manner “run with patience the race set before us,” puts before us the absolutely perfect example, looking unto Jesus, the Author and Finisher of faith.” He does not say or mean “of our faith,” but that He it is who has led in and perfected in His own Person the whole course of faith: “who for the joy that was set before Him endured the cross, despising the shame, and is set down on the right hand of the throne of God.”

He goes on to inspirit us with His example: “for consider Him who endured such great contradiction of sinners against Himself, lest ye be weary and faint in your minds; ye have not yet resisted unto blood, striving against sin.”

With Him who was perfect, this sin against which He strove was something external to Himself, the very contradiction of sinners to the Holy One, the necessary contradiction of natures utterly opposed. But for those who but feebly follow Him in this path, and thus partake also of His sufferings, even the very opposition and persecution of men are overruled for a purpose which there could not be with Him; and so the apostle goes on: “And ye have forgotten the exhortation which speaketh unto you as unto children, My son, despise not thou the chastening of the Lord, nor faint when thou art rebuked of Him: for whom the Lord loveth He chasteneth, and scourgeth every son whom He receiveth.” (Heb 12:1-29.)

David thus could not represent the Lord in the “place of refining,” for in Him there was no mixture, no dross to be purged away; but there are those identified with Him on earth, witnesses for Him, and thus sharers of His sufferings, and who, even as this, do need their Ziph, and find it; aye, even, the foremost that have stood for and represented Him, and with whom He has stood. So that Ziph has its place in this picture.

In regard to its numerical position also, let us notice that “refining” is a process of separation, of division, for which the number stands; and so the conflict between good and evil tends to necessary separation of one from the other. Men and things come to show themselves according to their affinities: as here, a Jonathan for, a Saul against; and by reason of use we have our senses exercised to discern both good and evil. This discernment is the result of the light, the judgment that takes place in the presence of God, who is Light.

Accordingly, the story of Ziph divides into two parts, what is evidently for, what is apparently against. In reality, all is for, both the one and the other. But we begin with what is evidently so when, while Saul is seeking for his life, Jonathan comes into the wood where David is hidden, and strengthens his hand in God. How blessed is thus the meeting of faith with faith, and how great the confirmation which we can bring each other! This is mentioned first also, the strength of it being needed for the encounter soon to come. And this is part, too, of the process of refinement, the encouragement in God without which we could not so abide the separation and strife. A tender hand is laid upon this poor human material, to hold it steadfastly in the place of necessary testing.

The Ziphites are recreant Judeans; but they, too, do the work they are permitted. From the hill of Hachilah to the wilderness of Maon Saul pursues the object of his hatred, just being on the point, as it would seem, of getting him into his hand, when the Philistines become God’s hands to fence David around, and Saul turns from his prey at the “rock of divisions,” to go against the national enemy. Plainly not David’s “subtle dealing” has saved him, but a divine intervention; and this is of the greatest importance, not only for Saul, but for David himself. He has been brought to an end of all his own wisdom and power, to find himself held fast in the hand of God, and covered by the hand that holds him. And this realization of the nothingness of man and of the greatness of God, with the joy of knowing that this God is for us, what is it -stated, indeed, in its mere elements but that which every refining process is designed to bring us to?

(3) We next find David at Engedi, once more pursued by Saul, but who now falls into the hands of the one he persecutes, only to experience, however, from him the mercy he had never shown, and to be shamed into a confession of his sin, which for the time ends the pursuit.

Engedi means “the spring of the young goat,” the force of the latter word being really “leaper.” The spiritual thought has been already indicated (p. 117, n.); and there should be such agreement between the name and the history before us as we have been able to trace in similar cases. Engedi reminds us of how the wilderness and the hill of difficulty become, in the wisdom of God, schools of training and begetters of strength. The tread and leap of the wild goat are the very symbols of strength gained by practice and ready surmounting of difficulties; and the name is interpreted and emphasized for us where it is said that “Saul went to seek David and his men upon the rocks of the wild goats (climbers).” They were in the same circumstances with the same results. Trial and hardship were forming character, as we know, and mighty men were being produced, masters of themselves and of their circumstances, by the exigencies they were called to face from day to day.

This is, in fact, what we find as to David here. The unexpected visit of Saul to the cave, putting him so completely into his power, the murmured suggestion of his followers that here now was his God-given opportunity, the moment calling for the briefest possible decision, -all needed the alertness and self-command of habitual exercise, such as befitted the divinely appointed ruler of Israel. And David displays remarkably these qualities. You see the evident effect of continual waiting upon God, in the abhorrence of the thought of injuring Jehovah’s anointed, the tender conscience which smites him for even cutting off Saul’s skirt; while yet his heart throbs in the impassioned appeal which for a moment melts down all Saul’s pride and enmity, and might seem to have found beneath it a true and quite other man than the Spirit-forsaken, spirit-haunted despot of the past sad years.

And in all this David shows us also the source of this spiritual power which he manifests, or in the language of the symbols here, the “spring” at which the “leaper” has renewed his strength. One sees manifest in his utterance the supreme assurance that he has, that all things are absolutely subject to Him to whom he has committed himself entirely, who will in His own time and way act for him, and whose acts he will not anticipate. “Jehovah shall be judge, and judge between me and thee; and He shall see, and plead my cause, and do me justice from thy hand. My hand shall not be upon thee.” This seems but the lesson of Ziph learned, -a simple but a great one indeed; and the two sections are thus naturally connected.

Saul is more than touched; he is broken down, -seems, indeed, won: owns everything, realizes the mercy that has spared his life, declares his own conviction that David should be king, -engages him, even with an oath, not to cut off his seed after he is gone: alas, in a short time has forgotten all this, and is as if it had never been! How terrible is that process of self-hardening in a human soul, wherein “all things work together for” ruin and destruction, as they do for “good to them that love God”!

Spite of Saul’s confession, David can no more trust him, nor can Saul even expect him to do so: he abides still in the wilderness.

(4) David has gained a great victory: he has conquered Saul; he has done much more, -he has conquered himself also. Nay, he has shown the habitual self-mastery of one walking before God indeed. Alas, the next time we are called to contemplate him, it is as an example of thorough failure, and that in the very way in which he has just proved himself so strong and competent.

Saul was not only unmistakably his enemy, -he was a most powerful one; and David had suffered at his hand the loss of most things that men count dear. Nor had his will and power to inflict evil come to an end,when just now he had been so magnanimously spared, and dismissed in peace. Nabal, with whom he has now to do, is proud and niggard and insolent. But he cannot be considered in the same sense an enemy; and if he were, he is comparatively a contemptible one. David has no cause whatever to fear him, nor does he for a moment suppose he has. With such an one how easy to show the magnanimity that, in Saul’s case, cost so much to show! Yet it is precisely here that David fails entirely. He is not merely not magnanimous; he is terribly severe and unjust. Denied that to which he might have a moral but no legal claim, and his well-meant advances answered with insult, he blazes out into a passion of wrath which would involve with Nabal every male of his house in indiscriminate slaughter! Can this be the same man that we have been just admiring for his noble control and self-forgetfulness? Can this be the shepherd-king of Israel, the ruler in the fear of God, the man who himself has felt the unrighteousness of men, the man disciplined in the school of suffering? It is the same, and not the same. It is David, no longer under the control of the presence of God: and at once all that is sweet and gracious, all that is of God, all the fruit of His training, all the good of having been under His yoke, seems suddenly to have passed away. Is there, then, a Saul existing even beneath a David, ready to show itself as soon as the guard upon it is removed, unchanged from what it was before faith came? Yes, it is even so; and our best remedy is to be conscious of it, that we may realize our utter dependence at all times upon God. Not as sinners, but as saints it is that we are called to “have no confidence in the flesh.” Prayer is a constant necessity to us; and, waiting upon the Lord, our strength shall be renewed. What a lesson have we here in David! No ephod was needed or used when the four hundred started on their dread errand to Carmel! But the message he had not sought came to him from the faithful grace of God through the lips of a woman.

Yet everything now depended upon David: Samuel had just passed away, and at Ramah the watch of the prophet was kept no more. If our interpretation of Ramah has been In anywise correct, then the end of the long watch there must be as significant, typically, as the death of Samuel was, in fact, for the nation of Israel at the time. Samuel is Christ as Prophet, before the true King has come to His rights on earth; and thus, with his gatherings of prophets round himself, would correspond to David as the rejected King, with his gathering also of those who maintained his kingship: both in entire subjection to the will of God which ordained a time of patience and long-suffering. Both, therefore, look on to the present Christian times, as we have seen, when Christ, though not personally on earth, watches here with the company of His prophets, and is in the midst of those who confess Him Lord. Ramah, then, being gone, should imply the end of the present night-watch, which would imply also a related and yet far different change at hand for the confessors of Christ’s Lordship. His reign is now at hand, which they are to share with him; and the facts of the history answer to this.

David arises, therefore, and goes down to the wilderness of Paran, which has before been interpreted to mean “adornment.” (Num 10:12, n.) As to application, however, everything is different here from there; and in the line of things now before us we should naturally think of how “the wilderness and the solitary place shall be glad for them and the desert shall rejoice and blossom as the rose.” (Isa 35:1.) But this is only nearing, and not accomplished.

A very difficult part of the history is now before us, if we are still to find, as we ought ever to find, a spiritual meaning underlying the literal, and if this is to be traced also in consistent relation to the whole connection here. But such a meaning assuredly there is, and therefore we may go forward with confidence in the promise to him that seeks. The need of this consistency is as much a help as it is a safeguard to interpretation; and it were better to acknowledge entire failure than to wrest from its proper force the blessed word of truth.

We are now introduced to a man of Israel, who lives in Maon, and whose possessions are in Carmel, but who is Nabal, “a fool,” and is smitten for his folly. We shall find these places together in a portion of Judah which we have already taken as memorializing for us Israel’s blessedness, -Maon, “dwelling-place,” the habitation of God, and Carmel, “vineyard,” His place of fruit. But yet the man, though of the house of Caleb, has fallen away wholly from the character of Caleb. He is, as already said, Nabal, the word used where it is written, “The fool hath said in his heart, There is no God.” Indeed this is what in Scripture “folly” mostly connects or is identified with, just as, for Scripture also, “the fear of the Lord is the beginning of wisdom.”

{*1Sa 25:22. One might imagine an interpolation here, and the Septuagint omits “the enemies of”; the Vulgate and Chaldee versions, however, agree with the Hebrew, and indirectly the Syriac and Arabic. See Lange’s Commentary.}

In contrast with this apostate Israelite is his wife Abigail, the “father (or source) of joy,” as most would render it; but this, for its application, must look forward.

Nabal is shearing his sheep in Carmel, and indulging himself after his manner, when David sends ten messengers to salute him, and to seek from him an acknowledgment of the care which had been taken of his shepherds in the wilderness. Nabal answers, reviling David as a runaway servant, and his company as people of whom he knows nothing; and flatly refuses. David’s men return to convey the message and the insult to their master.

If we take all the surroundings here, the death of Samuel and the altered position of David, the character and connections of Nabal, we seem naturally to find in him a picture of Israel in its apostate condition in the last days. The demand of David’s messengers would then speak of the last divine testimony to them, which finds them in ignorance and rejection of Christ and of His claims, but which calls out from them, however, a remnant figured in Abigail, who, by their faith avert judgment from the nation, though divine judgment comes indeed on the apostate part. The remnant, severed thus from their old relation, are united to Christ as King of Israel.

That Abigail pictures the Christian Church is a view which has most of these points against it, while it seems to involve a dislocation of the period at which it is presented. Abigail has, in fact, much that reminds us of Ruth, widowed also by the judgment of God, and united to her deliverer, -while, of course, there are in either case features entirely different.

That there are no difficulties in this view one could not affirm, but they are found to the full as much in any application to the Christian Church, and are precisely the same difficulties. The principal one seems to be the failure so manifest in David on this occasion, and out of which Abigail is herself the means of his deliverance. This, in any view of this kind must, of course, be left out of all significance in relation to the type, as simple failure of the human representative. Such things we have elsewhere, though scarcely one, perhaps, where the failure comes into such prominence. And David must, of course, in this case stand for Christ personally, -could not represent any who might be identified with His claims on earth, -so that the incompatibility cannot in this way be accounted for.

The failure seems manifest in David, even to the end: the double marriage at the close cannot impress one favorably as to him, though here the type would not be affected by it. Ahinoam, the Jezreelitess, may, indeed, in this way, as in the case of other double types, confirm the significance. For here, again, we have the name of a city finding place with Maon and Carmel in the same section of Judah’s territory, and one which has a manifest relation to Israel’s restoration. Thus, when she is united to the Lord in the coming day, Ahinoam, the “kin of pleasure,” may be a not unsuited name, while Jezreel reminds us of the promise then to be fulfilled, “I will sow her to me in the earth.” To the Christian Church the latter could hardly apply.

The faith of Abigail recognizes in David, the king in Israel, his personal blamelessness, his zeal for Jehovah. She foresees his actual reign and the establishment of his house, with the destruction of all that would oppose itself. She prays to be remembered of him in that day. Nothing seems to indicate more than Jewish hopes.

The numerical division seems to be also in accordance with this, the number (4) being on the one hand that of testing and failure, while it is also that of the earth, and thus of the earthly people, Israel. Whatever the moral lessons, therefore, the typical application seems, after all, clear.

5. If the double marriage of David shadow the union of Israel with the Lord, then we have reached in it beyond the time of trial, and David’s sufferings would seem as if they should now end. But this they do not, although we do not find him in the same distress again. Still Saul once more pursues him, though now only to fall more openly into his hand, and to be braved and shamed in the very midst Of his people. We have, in fact, reached an end, and begin a new section with the twenty-sixth chapter, from which to the end of the thirty-first we have put before us, according to the Deuteronomic character of a fifth part, the results in divine government, this open shame and self-condemnation of Saul, with the corresponding justification of the man he persecutes, being but the first of these. The sojourn of David in the Philistines’ land, parallel with the full apostasy and judgment of Saul at the hand of the Philistines, claims, even as history, a new section for itself; and to this his last pursuit of David is clearly the preface. Even in his words to Saul he already speaks of being driven out from the inheritance of Jehovah among the worshipers of other gods, as it is immediately afterwards that his resolution to escape into the Philistines’ land is definitely announced; and this is the end of Saul’s pursuit of him.

The section as a whole is clearly retributive, and illustrative of the divine ways in government. Even Saul’s lapse into witchcraft is of this nature, and the end is so, beyond question. David, too, finds his discipline from God, though the end with him is tender mercy. As a direct type of Christ he does not appear in it, while even in his failure he may but too well typify those witnesses for Him upon earth with whom He identifies Himself ever, as in His words to a later Benjamite, “Saul, Saul, why persecutest thou ME?”

(1) David is hiding himself in the hill of Hachilah (“obscurity”?), and the Ziphites once more carry the news to the king. The sight of the messengers, with the memories connected, should have been enough to hinder Saul’s pursuit, but it does not; and this time, therefore, he is made to proclaim openly his own shame and David’s righteousness. The man he seeks seeks him in turn, and in the very midst of his camp has once again his life at his disposal; only again to spare it, however, while yet stripping him of his spear, the emblem of his sovereignty, and carrying off the pitcher of water at his head. What a realization for Saul of the vanity of the conflict in which he is engaged! -and what an anticipation of the time when the secrets of the heart, developed in and moulding the life, shall be exhibited in the light, -a light in which already he found himself thus revealed! One more attempt of divine mercy this to bring into subjection this human heart, but which, even while owning the folly which has possessed it, proves itself absolutely unreceptive of it, and thus unrepentant. Saul thus draws one step nearer to his doom, -when, indeed, unsceptred, and without water for his thirst, he must meet and give account to God! Alas, how can this be so forgotten?

For David, his righteousness is brought forth in the light, and proclaimed by his persistent enemy and accuser, in the ears of all the people. Fuller justification he could not get, with the spear and cruse also for a double witness on the other side. And God has wrought this, by means of the very persistency of the persecutor himself. How ought every fear to be now at rest when again He has manifested Himself after this manner!

(2) Again, however, after a signal triumph, and a wonderful display of God’s goodness to him, the faith of David collapses, and he sees nothing before him but one day perishing at the hand of Saul. He forms a resolution, therefore, in which certainly he is guided by no wisdom from God, and leaves the inheritance of the Lord for the land of their heathen enemy. He goes not even to Moab, but to Gath, the city of the giant he had overcome by faith, and where, also, he had once before, through unbelief; failed so pitiably: but from the higher height the deeper depth; and, once having given way to unbelief, one false step necessitates another, one lie another to confirm it; cruelty has to be added to deceit, many lives having to pay forfeit for the preservation of his own. How dastardly a thing is unbelief!

Details here may be difficult enough, while the moral lesson is unmistakable; and it is this which, in all this part, seems most to be emphasized. We may however, how a child of God away from God may be a very zealous destroyer of evils that are unquestionably such, -all the while remaining as far as ever away; nay, increased zeal against what is external to us often accompanies a state in which self-judgment is proportionately deficient.

David’s plea for himself we have already heard. He simply puts the blame of where he is upon others: “they have driven me out,” he says; and he has no consciousness of aught but truth in saying it. Yet while it was true that they had fully the responsibility of this, it is not true that a saint of God, walking with God, can be “driven” to anything. To be led of God and to be driven of men are two different, contrasted, and, in this case, incompatible things. It was but a dishonor done to the Lord’s care and love to imagine the possibility of falling into Saul’s hand, and perishing without coming to the kingdom, when the divine anointing, was upon his head. Saul himself, in his moments of sanity, knew better. The fruits of this lapse of faith did not fail to declare sufficiently its character; and mark it out, not as the sin of others, but his own.

Ziklag, “the pressure of the wave,” (p. 137, n.), becomes thus suitably his residence. Circumstances have, indeed, been too much for him: he, is not now an overcomer. Let him pursue but a little farther the road on which he has entered, and he shall be captain of the body-guard to a Philistine king forever!

(3) Meanwhile Saul, in terror of the gathering Philistines, and forsaken of God, sinks to the lowest, and consults one of those dealers with familiar spirits whom he had sought in time past to cut off out of the land. Disguised and under cover of the night, he steals with two others to the dwelling of the witch at Endor. Nor does he hesitate to swear by Jehovah Himself to protect her in the violation of Jehovah’s law. He bids her bring up to him Samuel; and to the woman’s own consternation Samuel in reality appears. This was beyond her art, and shows her plainly a higher power overmastering it: the “keys of hades” were in no witch’s hand; and while he appears alone to her, to her discomfiture, he speaks directly to Saul while he hides his face from him; and in brief judicial words announces his doom at hand. To-morrow would the Lord give Israel into the hand of the Philistines, and he and his three sons would be with him (in death). The kingdom torn from him would pass over to David, according to what had long since been pronounced,when he had openly disobeyed the divine word as to Amalek.

That the judgment of Amalek -that is, of the lusts of the flesh (Exo 17:1-16 n.) -is the test which that must abide which stands for true and divine government on earth, is so clear that there is no need to dwell very much upon it. Here “the powers that be” fail, and have failed from the beginning, although they are still a great mercy, and upheld of God as such. That with them also, as with Saul, much has come in upon the heels of this, there can be no right question either. The form and the extent of that opposition to Christ which has been manifested by them have varied with various times and various places, and will be judged of differently, according to individual standpoints, also. We have found such differences in the history of Saul himself, the precise application of which will be naturally correspondingly difficult. At the end Scripture distinctly shows that the kings of the earth will turn from God in a more direct and outward way, and seek to seducing spirits; Saul’s conduct here being only a hint, as it were, of the dread reality. This it would lead us too far to enter upon here: to those who are acquainted with the prophecies of the last days, however, it will be plain that Saul’s history will be in this respect more than re-enacted in that of the Gentile powers. That it is according to the principles of divine government that, turning away from God, men should fall of necessity into the power of Satan, is again plain, -plain as is the revival of demonism in many forms in our own days, and in that of necromancy especially, along with a decline of faith in the word of God too marked for any but the willingly blind to doubt. All this should make the close of Saul’s reign and life here exceedingly solemn for us.

(4) In the next chapter David, also, is seen once more in terrible failure. Actually starting out to accompany his leader to the war, the Philistine lords with keener instincts than the unsuspecting Achish, refuse point-blank such doubtful auxiliaries. Naturally enough they cannot believe that David is going to turn his back upon his whole history, nor doubt that he will take advantage of his opportunity to reconcile himself to his master with the heads of his allies. God has thus, in His mercy, opened to David a way of escape from the snare in which he has entangled himself; and with what fervent satisfaction might we expect to find him accepting it. How full of praise and thankfulness will he be for such a deliverance! Yet, alas, he is here nothing but a hypocrite. Israel are only the “enemies of my lord the king,” against whom it is his right and privilege to fight: and he dares to appeal to his unspotted conduct while with Achish, knowing the absolute insincerity of it all! But such is the saint away from God, and so easy it is to become hardened through the deceitfulness of sin”! Should not our constant cry be, “Search me, O Lord, and try me!”?

(5) Thus man is fully shown for what he is. David, no more than Saul, can claim anything on the ground of personal righteousness: grace can be alone his confidence, as with any child of man. Thus as to all Israel the new throne established in Zion is a throne of grace, though it be true that grace has not the dimensions which attach to it with us: in this way it is but a type; and, indeed, a faint one.

But if grace is to be shown, it must be according to holiness; there could be none apart from this. And so the government of God must act now in chastening; David must be searched out thoroughly, and made to realize his condition. Accordingly, there is an irruption from the south: some of that very tribe upon which God had pronounced judgment, a judgment which Saul had been deposed for not rightly executing, make a raid upon Israelites and Philistines alike, burn Ziklag while deprived of its defenders, and carry away everything in it. When we know what Amalek means, we can easily understand, the soul having wandered from God, this irruption of Amalek: and even in this way to such the outbreak of the lusts of the flesh may be used of Him to startle and convict the conscience; and so for recovery in the end. Absent in the Philistine camp, and while parading his mock zeal against the people of God, David little knew that the hand of the destroyer was upon his most cherished possessions, that the Amalekites had already stripped him bare, and all that were with him. He and they return to find but the blackened remnants of their city, and wives, children, and all that belonged to them, swept away. More than this, he has to prove that when not walking with God, the tie between man and man also is loosened: his own devoted followers, stung with the misery into which his late course had brought them, murmur about inflicting on him death by stoning, -the judgment of an Achan, -and he is, indeed, “in a great strait.”

But then it is, that out of its heavy stupor David’s soul awakes. Faith proves its power amid the wreck of nature. The very fact that the judgment is so manifestly of the Lord brings him back into the glorious Presence from which he has wandered, and it is -blessed be God -the old sweet familiar Presence. The surge of bitter distress has landed him in the haven of rest. The shadow has proved but the shadow of His wings; and David, humbled, and so purified, has become once more the master of his circumstances because of himself: “David encouraged himself in Jehovah his God.”

Immediately Abiathar and the ephod are his resource: “and David inquired of Jehovah, saying, Shall I pursue after this troop?” Nature had, of course, decided this already; but the man of faith will not move at the bidding of nature. Faith questions when all seems plain; as it finds a plain road, also, amid all perplexities. “Shall I pursue after this troop? Shall I overtake them?” He recognizes now the judgment of God: he must humbly ask of the depths of the divine compassion, Is it irrevocable? And how prompt and tender is the answer: “Pursue! for thou shalt surely overtake, and without fail recover.” Then at once he is a man of activity again, the energetic and courageous leader of men: by the time they have reached the brook Besor, one third of his little army are prostrate with the speed they make. They are but four hundred now, with the stamp of weakness upon them, therefore; and themselves, we may be sure, weary and way-worn; but the battle is to be Jehovah’s.

Now there is cast in the way an Egyptian, spent with hunger and thirst, whom they restore to life, and comfort with the assurance that he shall not be put back in bondage to the Amalekite, his master. A natural man brought anew to life at the brook of “good news” (Besor), and freed from the lusts of the flesh, which he has served, -this is the very one to guide the hand of judgment which falls now on the Amalekites. All is recovered out of their hand, as the divine oracle had promised; and with this they fall heirs to an immense booty besides: for in the goodness of God a mere recovery seems impossible. He brings us back to Himself with more than we had lost, -fruitful experiences and knowledge of God’s ways in government and in grace. All this is the law of restitution, according to God, -of the trespass-offering which Christ makes good to us.

So David and his four hundred return to the brook Besor. There those who were too exhausted to go over the brook had remained with the baggage. They come forth with joy to greet their victorious comrades; but here, untouched by the mercy they had experienced, there were those who refused to recognize their right to share the spoil. But the sense of grace is too strong to permit this.

(6) In contrast with David’s recovery and victory Saul perishes in Mount Gilboa, and Israel suffers a sore defeat. The Philistines take possession of the neighboring cities, and all is in complete collapse in the land. Three of the sons of Saul perish with him. There is now no anointed of the Lord but David. Typically it is the end of rule on earth as owned of God, and that in immediate anticipation of the true King, whose reign follows. Ishbosheth has no title, but is in distinct rebellion against the will of God, for all Israel knows that David is the true anointed: and thus will “man’s day” end upon earth, in open revolt “against the Lord, and against His Christ.” (Psa 2:2.)

That Philistinism has sought persistently the subjection of the powers of the earth is familiar history. That it will accomplish their final ruin is not, perhaps, plainly prophesied. Yet the view of the woman Babylon, which is given us in Rev 17:1-18, shows her riding upon the “beast” of civil empire, as the eleventh verse seems clearly to show, in its last form. But this last form (under the eighth head) is that in which it becomes openly apostate, and “goes into perdition”; and the woman’s supremacy over it then, though not preserved to the end, (for it finally throws off the woman and destroys her, ver. 16,) would seem at least quite consistent with the view of its having brought the former character of rule to an end, or helped essentially to do so. But I leave this now for the consideration of those who have understanding in the word of prophecy: at another time it may demand a fuller notice.

The lesson in divine government here is obvious. The body, in its ghastly dishonor, fastened to the wall of Bethshan, -quiet, indeed, at the “house of quiet,” -his armor in the house of their female deity, these things are the heathen satire upon such an end. Amid all this the prompt action of the men of Jabesh-Gilead is like the resurrection of a good deed from the mass of corruption. They save, however, but the bones for burial: the rest can only be given to the fire. Thus the hope of man in man comes to its end with Saul, -the “asked for,” the people’s choice. All now depends on David; but here, also, how poor a dependence, except as God is pleased to work with and through this feeble instrument. The crown brought to Ziklag (the Philistine guerdon for feigned unfaithfulness to the crown itself) speaks more loudly than the defeat at Gilboa, of human instability and untrustworthiness. Even so the light of a brighter dawn could shine through David, -a glory far beyond his own. For all these things happened unto them for types.”

Fuente: Grant’s Numerical Bible Notes and Commentary

1Sa 16:1. How long wilt thou mourn for Saul? And pray for his restoration, which the following words imply he did. Fill thy horn with oil Which was used in the inauguration of kings. But here it was used in the designation of a king; for David was not actually made king by it, but still remained a subject. And the reason of this anticipation was the comfort of Samuel, and other good men, against their fears in case of Sauls death, and the assurance of Davids title, which otherwise would have been doubtful. I have provided me a king This phrase is very emphatical, and implies the difference between this and the former king. Saul was a king of the peoples providing; he was the product of their sinful desires; but this is a king of my own providing, to fulfil all my will, and to serve my glory.

Fuente: Joseph Bensons Commentary on the Old and New Testaments

1Sa 16:7. The Lord said to Samuel. A cloud of proofs demonstrate, that the Eternal Word did personally accompany the holy prophets, and talk with them by voice in open vision. What nation had God so nigh unto them?

1Sa 16:13. Anointed him. David certainly knew that this was the regal unction, and he felt the Spirit accompany it. But critics agree that his brethren did not then so understand it.

1Sa 16:15. An evil spirit from the Lord troubled him. Afterwards, the evil spirit departed, or ascended from him: 1Sa 16:23. The LXX in both places have evil spirit, which is followed in the Latin and EnglishFrom God, Arabic, by the permission of God. The fathers say that this spirit was a demon, but the moderns think it was a demon exciting melancholy, fury, and anger; a spirit of fear and jealousy.

1Sa 16:23. David took a harp and played. Ovid celebrates the fame of Orpheus, who could so play on the lute and the harp, that the rivers stopped their courses to listen; the rocks, the woods and forests were moved, and joined in the song. The lions, the tigers and bears forgot their natural ferocity, and were tamed. Metam. 10. 11. The moral is, that Orpheus, by the powers of music and song, softened the hearts and ferocious manners of the Thracians. Birds and beasts are often affected by the powers of music.

REFLECTIONS.

Truly it is not of him that willeth nor of him that runneth. When God had a great work to do in the earth, he called the instruments from the treasures of his providence. Holy men had no hand in their call and elevation. The Lord fixed his eye on David, a youth ruddy in person; and in soul a man after his own heart. He was under twenty years of age, as appears from his not being numbered for war.

Mark the hallowed secresy with which heaven proceeded in its work. Samuels mourning is at last superseded by a revelation that God had elected a new king; and his fears are allayed by a command to sacrifice a peace-offering at Bethlehem. Here the dying prophet would revive. He would now see, according to Jacobs prediction, the sceptre invested in Judah, from whom it should not depart till the advent of the true Shiloh. Now Samuel would hope for his country, and hope for the church. Never did he take a journey with so willing a mind, or apparently with steps so light. He regarded this mission as the glorious and crowning act of all his tears and toils for Israel. He had seen little but a succession of troubles; little but darkness and clouds on his country; but now the morning star arose, and with a brilliancy which augured eternal day.

Samuel taking up his lodging with Jesse, contemplated his seven tall and hopeful sons. Happy fruits of Rahabs faith; happy progeny of virtuous Ruth; once aliens to the covenant, but honoured by piety above the freeborn virgins of the land. With the fine appearance of Eliab, in person not inferior to Saul, Samuel was particularly struck. Surely, said he, the Lords anointed is before him. Mark hence, that revelation was sparingly given; the wisest of prophets knew nothing of futurity but what the Lord revealed. Revelation by vision was totally distinct from the most abstracted course of thought; so much so that it counteracted all Samuels thoughts and prepossessions. It said, the Lord hath not chosen these. Then David, the youngest and the absent was enquired for; and so eager was Samuel to see him, that he averred he would not eat till he came. And oh the emotions which would swell the prophets soul, on a sight of the lovely youth! He saw farther than the wondering family: he saw in him Israels glory and salvation. He saw the Messiahs glory; but could not decypher the unutterable language of the Spirit. He therefore anointed him in presence of all his brethren; but his silence left them to learn in future the object of this unction. They would surmise that David was either to be a prophet or a judge, for they could not then have the most distant hope of the regal dignity.

This anointing of Samuel, it presently appeared, was richly attended with correspondent endowments of the Spirit; for music, and the composition of Psalms. Fear, in a manner, forsook him. While keeping his fathers flock, a lion came and took away a lamb, and in the ardour of his soul he smote and rent him in pieces. A bear he served in the same way; for God would gradually lead him to the exercise of courage, and the acquisition of glory. Yea, so much was he endowed with excellent gifts, that Eliab, excited to envy, reproached him with neglect of the flock, and ambition to see the battle. Thus, from the beginning, we see in David, that is, beloved, a figure of our Saviour in his name, in his profession, and in the place of his birth. But how very singular and instructive is the consideration, that as David rose, Saul sunk; as the one received the Spirit, the other lost it. A ferocious melancholy seized the soul of the guilty and desponding king, a melancholy of which Satan took particular advantage. The lives of his family, his courtiers and guards, were often insecure. The anointed youth was brought to the court, and introduced into those circles of society which contributed to his future elevation. He succeeded by the powers of music, in charming the king into a happier temper. All ancient nations have admitted its powers in the cure of various diseases, in composing anger, and affording pleasure in cases of melancholy. What a pity that Satan should almost wholly engross it to compose the guilty conscience, and to hold the dissipated by a fatal charm, till the vengeance of heaven transform its melody to mourning, and the bitter howlings of eternal woe.

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

1Sa 16:1-13. Samuel Anoints David (E2) or (R).A better division would be in the middle of 1Sa 15:35, so as to begin the new section with And Yahweh repented. etc. Many authorities regard this section as a late, possibly post-exilic, addition; but it seems the natural sequel to the preceding chapter, and may probably be referred to the same document.

By the direction of Yahweh Samuel goes to Bethlehem, ostensibly to sacrifice, but really to anoint a son of Jesse to the kingship. He sanctified Jesse and his sons, i.e. he made them perform certain ritual acts, such as washings. At the sacrifice, seven sons of Jesse passed before Samuel, but Yahweh gave no sign, then David was sent for, and came, and he was ruddy [or perhaps, red-haired], a youth with beautiful eyes and comely, as we should probably read and translate. At the bidding of Yahweh, Samuel anointed him, and the Spirit of Yahweh leaped upon him.

1Sa 16:13. David: the only Biblical character bearing this name; the etymology is uncertain; the name may be a contraction of Dodavahu, Beloved of Yahweh, or Yahweh is beloved (2Ch 20:37); or it may be connected with a deity: an Israelite sanctuary of DVDH, E. of Jordan, is mentioned on the Moabite Stone.

Fuente: Peake’s Commentary on the Bible

Samuel’s mourning for Saul was deep and real; nevertheless it must not be too long protracted. The Lord stirs him up now to some positive action. God has chosen a king from among the sons of Jesse, a Bethlehemite, and Samuel is told to go to anoint him. The boldness of Samuel’s faith wavers for the moment. He had been firm and decided in telling Saul that another would take his place as king yet now he is apprehensive that his anointing David will antagonize Saul to the point of killing Samuel. The Lord graciously answers this by the provision of the sacrifice of an heifer. This was not deception, but protection of Samuel. On this occasion the most important thing was the sacrifice, not the anointing. God’s honor must first be recognized, and the anointing was therefore sanctified by His presence. Samuel was told to call Jesse to the sacrifice, and to depend on God as to what to do and whom to anoint.

His coming to Bethlehem awakens fear among the elders of the town. Israel’s disobedience. has left an uneasy conscience: they knew of Samuel’s strong censure of Saul, and wonder if he has come to Bethlehem to take severe measures. But he answers them that he has come peacefully with the intention of sacrificing to the Lord, inviting them all to come to the sacrifice. He personally sanctified Jesse and his sons (by what process we are not told) and called them to the sacrifice. This was not a matter, however, for Jesse’s family alone, for the elders of Bethlehem at least were also present.

Eliab, apparently Jesse’s eldest son, seems to Samuel to be God’s choice for king. He was evidently tall and of a commanding appearance (as was Saul). But Samuel had not learned his lesson well enough as regards the impressive appearance of man in the flesh. As the Lord tells him, this does not decide anything, for the Lord looks on the heart, not at what appears on the surface.

Jesse then presents Abinabab, evidently the second son, then Shammah, then the rest of his seven sons, no doubt in order of age. But the Lord makes it clear to Samuel that He has chosen none of them. Do we not see here an analogy of the Lord passing by all those men who are seen in the Old Testament, not one of them being God’s choice for king? Jesse had not even considered his youngest son for such an honor, just as the Lord Jesus is the last man people think of as being the One to rule over them. The youngest was keeping the sheep. He was not considered of such significance to even be present at the sacrifice.

However, the typical meaning of keeping sheep is precious to God. This is in contrast to Saul who was looking for his father’s donkeys, which he never found. God’s thought of a king is to have one with a shepherd’s heart, who would genuinely care for the people. Samuel insists on the youngest being called, for he too must have part with them when they sat down to eat. When he comes he is seen to be “ruddy,” accustomed to the outdoors, “and besides of a lovely countenance and beautiful appearance.” Of course this is intended to remind us of the beauty of the Lord Jesus. David’s outward beauty was not the deciding factor, for God looks on the heart; but when the heart is right it is only normal that there should be outward beauty. Of course there may be genuine beauty where the natural man sees none. (Cf.Isaiah 53:2).

God gives His direct word to Samuel that this is His choice. Then Samuel “anointed him in the midst of his brethren.” It was not a private matter such as the anointing of Saul (ch.9:27-10:1), for David was a man after God’s heart, clearly a type of Christ, who is God’s conclusive choice for King. From that time we are told that the Spirit of the Lord came upon David. This was a special empowering that God gave him to enable him to act in a manner and with a wisdom suitable to kingly dignity. It was not long after that the people discerned that David was more qualified to reign than was Saul, and Saul become apprehensive because of this (ch.18:6-18).

On the other hand, the Spirit of the Lord departed from Saul, and an evil spirit from the Lord troubled him. God had graciously given Saul His Spirit to enable him to properly function as a king, but Saul had rebelled against God’s word, thinking he could rightly act independently of God. Therefore God removed His Spirit from him, to allow him to go ahead and act in his independent way.

Not only did God allow Saul to take his own headstrong way, but since Saul had refused the Spirit of God, he was left open to the opposite of this, an evil spirit. God allowed the evil spirit to trouble Saul in order to awaken him to the folly of his own self-will. Disobedience to God does not leave us in a merely negative state, but in a state of positive evil. This sobering fact ought to have driven Saul to seek the grace of God and to willingly give up his kingdom to the man of God’s choice; but he stubbornly persisted in his evil course until his tragic death.

His servants discerned that it was God who had allowed this evil spirit to trouble Saul. Their solution is not to go to the root of the matter, but to treat its symptoms. This is characteristic of men’s governments everywhere. A capable minstrel could so play the harp as to calm the spirit of the troubled king. Today we are acquainted with the well-known adage, “Music has charms to soothe the savage breast.” There is no doubt that music is a wonderful provision of God for mankind, often rightly used, though also often badly abused.

At Saul’s request for such a musician, one of his servants suggests a son of Jesse, who was none other than David, whom Samuel had anointed without Saul’s knowledge. His credentials were of a high order. First, he was a skillful musician, secondly, a valiant man, thirdly, a man of war, fourthly, skilled in speech, fifthly, presentable in his person, and last, but most important, the Lord was with him. How clearly he is a type of Christ.

It must have been to Jesse and to David a striking sign of God’s leading that Saul should require his service. In his coming he brings a present to Saul of bread, wine and a kid, all typical of Christ and His sacrifice. The character of David was such that Saul loved him greatly and employed him as his armor bearer. We shall see later, however, that his love was turned to virtual hatred when he realized that David was better qualified to be king than he was, specially as was discerned in the estimation of the women in their songs (ch.18:6-8).

At this time Saul asks Jesse that David may remain in his service; and the harping of David provides a soothing remedy for Saul’s distress occasioned by the evil spirit. This music is typical of the sweet music of the ministry of the Word of God, the harp of ten strings reminding us that scripture provides a lovely range of truth that is all necessary for the proper instruction and guidance of men. The lowest notes may tell us of the depths of sorrow and anguish to which the Lord Jesus descended in pure love for us: the highest notes, of the great glory to which He has been exalted, above all heavens, causing the highest, purest joy. Between these there is a range of other notes, all adding to the glorious harmony of the Word of God. We must learn it well, if we are to use it well.

That Word, when listened to, does have an effect upon people even unsaved people, just as Saul was refreshed and improved in his spirit when David played, so even men of the world will find themselves quieted and calmed when listening to the sweet strains of the Word of God from the lips of one who knows it well. If this does not lead them by faith to received the Lord Jesus, the effect is only temporary, as was told by God to Ezekiel, “And behold you are to them like a sensual song by one who has a beautiful voice and plays well on an instrument; for they hear your words, but they do not practice them” (Eze 33:32 — NASB).

In spite of this poor reception, the believer is to continue giving the ministry of the Word of God to all who will receive it. The Lord Jesus is the supreme example of this beautiful character. He continued speaking the Word to the people, even to Pharisees and scribes, as long as they would listen. David willingly played his harp for Saul when Saul desired it of him, though more than once Saul threw his javelin with the intention of killing David. Eventually he was driven from Saul’s presence, however. His ministry of music did not accomplish such a work as to change the attitude of Saul. We may well be saddened that souls who often hear the Word of God and seem to be favorably affected by it may at last turn away from it. But God has been honored in the declaration of His Word: it will not return to Him void.

Fuente: Grant’s Commentary on the Bible

16:1 And the LORD said unto Samuel, How long wilt thou mourn for Saul, {a} seeing I have rejected him from reigning over Israel? fill thine horn with oil, and go, I will send thee to Jesse the Bethlehemite: for I have provided me a king among his sons.

(a) Signifying that we should not show ourselves more pitiful than God, nor to lament those whom he casts out.

Fuente: Geneva Bible Notes

1. God’s selection of David for kingship ch. 16

"One of the many indications that the two halves (1Sa 16:1-23) of chapter 16 are closely related is that each section is framed by an inclusio: ’Horn with/of oil’ is found in 1Sa 16:1; 1Sa 16:13, and the phrase ’Spirit . . . departed from’ constitutes the first words of 1Sa 16:14 and the last words of 1Sa 16:23 . . ." [Note: Youngblood, p. 682.]

Fuente: Expository Notes of Dr. Constable (Old and New Testaments)

A. David’s Rise as the New Anointed 16:1-19:17

According to Chuck Swindoll, more was written in the Bible about David than about any other character-66 chapters in the Old Testament plus 59 references to his life in the New Testament. [Note: Charles R. Swindoll, David: A Man of Passion and Destiny, p. 4.] This large amount of material reflects his great importance for Bible readers.

Fuente: Expository Notes of Dr. Constable (Old and New Testaments)

David’s anointing 16:1-13

This time God’s choice was not a king for the people according to their desires, but a king for Himself (1Sa 16:1) who would put Yahweh first (1Sa 13:14; cf. Gal 4:4-5). Saul would have perceived Samuel’s act of anointing another man king as treason (1Sa 16:2). He continued to show more concern for his own interests than for the will of God. Evidently Samuel had gained a reputation as an executioner since he had killed Agag (1Sa 16:4; cf. 1Sa 15:33).

Samuel judged Jesse’s sons by their external qualities, just as the Israelites judged Saul acceptable because of those characteristics (1Sa 16:6). 1Sa 16:7 clarifies how God evaluates people, namely, on the basis of their hearts (affections), not their appearances or abilities (cf. Mat 3:17; Mar 10:31; 1Co 1:27). As He had done earlier in Scriptural history, God chose the son that was not the natural choice, showing that He does not bind Himself to what is traditional. It is unusual that Jesse did not have David present for Samuel’s inspection since he, too, was one of his sons. Jesse had eight sons (1Sa 17:12; cf. 1Ch 2:13-15; 1Ch 27:18). This may suggest that Jesse did not think as highly of David as he did of his other sons (cf. Psa 27:10, where David wrote of his parents forsaking him). Was David a neglected or even an abused child whom his father viewed more as hired help than as a son?

"It’s remarkable, isn’t it, how Jesse reveals two very common mistakes parents make. Number one, he didn’t have an equal appreciation for all of his children. And number two, he failed to cultivate a mutual self-respect among them. Jesse saw his youngest as nothing more than the one who tended the sheep." [Note: Swindoll, p. 20.]

"The shepherd/flock image is a kind of Leitmotif for David from this point on. . . . The book’s last story shows David deeply concerned for the flock [2Sa 24:17]." [Note: S. D. Walters, "The Light and the Dark," in Ascribe to the Lord: Biblical and Other Studies in Memory of Peter C. Craigie, p. 574, n. 17.]

A leitmotif, literally a leading or guiding theme, is a phrase or image that recurs with and represents a given character, situation, or emotion in a piece of literature or music. David (probably meaning "beloved of the Lord") was physically attractive (1Sa 16:12; cf. Isa 53:2). Nevertheless, God did not choose him for that reason, but because of God’s sovereign election and because of David’s heart attitude. God’s sovereign election to salvation does not depend on human initiative (Rom 9:16), but His sovereign election to service does (1Ti 1:12).

"What does it mean to be a person after God’s own heart? Seems to me, it means that you are a person whose life is in harmony with the Lord. What is important to Him is important to you. What burdens Him burdens you. When He says, ’Go to the right,’ you go to the right. When He says, ’Stop that in your life,’ you stop it. When He says, ’This is wrong and I want you to change,’ you come to terms with it because you have a heart for God." [Note: Swindoll, p. 6.]

David and his family were the first after Samuel to learn that he would be the next king, or perhaps that he would become Samuel’s successor, like Elisha became to Elijah. [Note: Young, p. 286.] In time, all Israel would learn that David would become the next king as he became the instrument through whom God blessed the nation. David became successful because God’s Spirit came on him, remained with him from then on, and empowered him for service (cf. Mat 3:16-17). [Note: On the significance of anointing, see my comments on 10:1.]

1Sa 16:13 records Samuel’s departure for his home in Ramah. At this point in the book he becomes a minor figure who no longer plays an active role in the progress of events. His anointing of David, therefore, was the climax and capstone of his career.

Fuente: Expository Notes of Dr. Constable (Old and New Testaments)

CHAPTER XXII.

DAVID ANOINTED BY SAMUEL.

1Sa 16:1-13.

THE rejection of Saul was laid very deeply to heart by Samuel. No doubt there many engaging qualities in the man Saul, which Samuel could not but remember, and which fed the flame of personal attachment, and made the fact of his rejection hard to digest. And no doubt, too, Samuel was concerned for the peace and prosperity of the nation. He knew that a change of dynasty commonly meant civil war – it might lead to the inward weakening of a kingdom already weak enough, and its exposure to the attacks of hostile neighbours that watched with lynx eyes for any opportunity of dashing against Israel. Thus both on personal and on public grounds the rejection of Saul was a great grief to Samuel, especially as the rejection of Saul implied the rejection of Jonathan, and the prophet might ask, with no small reason, where, in all the nation, could there be found a better successor.

It was not God’s pleasure to reveal to Samuel the tragic events that were to stretch Jonathan and his brothers among the dead on the same day as their father; but it was His pleasure to introduce him to the man who, at a future time, was to rule Israel according to the ideal which the prophet had vainly endeavoured to press upon Saul. There is a sharpness in God’s expostulation with Samuel which implies that the prophet’s grief for Saul was carried to an excessive and therefore sinful length. “How long wilt thou mourn for Saul, seeing I have rejected him from reigning over Israel?” Grief on account of others seems such a sacred, such a holy feeling, that we are not ready to apprehend the possibility of its acquiring the dark hue of sin. Yet if God’s children abandon themselves to the wildest excess for some sorrow which bears to them the character of a fatherly chastening; if they refuse to give effect in any way to God’s purpose in the matter, and to the gracious ends which He designs it to serve, they are guilty of sin, and that sin one which is greatly dishonouring to God. It can never be right to shut God out of view in connection with our sorrows, or to forget that the day is coming – impossible though it may seem – when His character shall be so vindicated in all that has happened to His children, that all tears shall be wiped from their eyes, and it shall be seen that His tender mercies have been over all His works.

It was to Bethlehem, and to the family of Jesse, that Samuel was to go to find the destined successor of Saul. The place was not so far distant from Ramah as to be quite beyond the sphere of Samuel’s acquaintance. Of Jesse, one of the leading men of the place, he would probably have at least a general knowledge, though it is plain he had not any personal acquaintance with him, or knowledge of his family. Bethlehem had already acquired a marked place in Hebrew history, and Samuel could not have been ignorant of the episode of the young Moabite widow who had given such a beautiful proof of filial piety, and among whose descendants Jesse and his sons were numbered. The very name of Bethlehem was fitted to recall how God honours those that honour Him, and might have rebuked that outburst of fear which fell from Samuel, whose first thought was that he could not go, because if Saul heard of it he would kill him. Well, it is plain enough that, with all his glorious qualities as a prophet, Samuel was but a man, subject to the infirmities of men. What an honest book the Bible is! its greatest heroes coming down so often to the human level and showing the same weaknesses as ourselves! But God, who stoops to human weakness, who fortified the failing heart of Moses at the burning bush, and the doubting heart of Gideon, and afterwards the weary heart of Elijah and the trembling heart of Jeremiah, condescends in like manner to the infirmity of Samuel, and provides him with an ostensible object for his journey, which was not fitted to awaken the jealous temper of the king. Samuel is to announce that his coming to Bethlehem is for the purpose of a sacrifice, and the circumstances connected with the anointing of a successor to Saul are to be gone about so quietly and so vaguely that the great object of his visit will hardly be so much as guessed by any.

The question has often been raised, Was this diplomatic arrangement not objectionable? Was it not an act of duplicity and deceit? Undoubtedly it was an act of concealment, but it does not follow that it was an act of duplicity. It was concealment of a thing which Samuel was under no obligation to divulge. It was not concealment of which the object was to mislead anyone, or to induce any one to do what he would not have done had the whole truth been known to him. When concealment is practiced in order to take an unfair advantage of any one, or to secure an unworthy advantage over him, it is a de- testable crime. But to conceal what you are under no obligation to reveal, when some important end is to be gained, is a quite different thing. “It is the glory of God to conceal a thing;” providence is often just a vast web of concealment; the trials of Job were the fruit of Divine concealment; the answers of our Lord to the Syrophoenician woman were a concealment; the delay in going to Bethany when He heard of the illness of Lazarus was just a concealment of the glorious miracle which He intended by-and-bye to perform. One may tell the truth, and yet not the whole truth, without being guilty of any injustice or dishonesty. It was not on Saul’s account at ail that Samuel was sent to anoint a king at Bethlehem. It was partly on Samuel’s account and partly on David’s. If David was here-after to fill the exalted office of king of Israel, it was desirable that he should be trained for its duties from his earliest years. Saul had not been called to the throne till middle life, till his character had been formed and his habits settled; the next king must be called at an earlier period of life. And though the boy’s father and brothers may not understand the full nature of the distinction before him, they must be made to understand that he is called to a very special service of God, in order that they may give him up freely and readily to such preparation as that service demands. This seems to have been the chief reason of the mission of Samuel to Bethlehem. It could not but be known after that, that David was to be distinguished as a servant of God, but no idea seems to have been conveyed either to his brothers or to the elders of Bethlehem that he was going to be king.

The arrangements for the public worship of God in those times – while the ark of God was still at Kirjath-jearim – seem to have been far from regular, and it appears to have been not unusual for Samuel to visit particular places for the purpose of offering a sacrifice. It would seem that the ordinary, though not the uniform, occasion for such visits was the occurrence of something blameworthy in the community, and if so this will explain the terror of the elders of Bethlehem at the visit of Samuel, and their frightened question, “Comest thou peaceably?” Happily Samuel was able to set their fears at rest, and to assure them that the object of his visit was entirely peaceable. It was a religious service he was come to perform, such a service as may have been associated with the other religious services he was accustomed to hold as he went round in circuit in the neighbourhood of Ramah. For this sacrifice the elders of Bethlehem were called to sanctify themselves, as were also Jesse and his sons. They were to take the usual steps for freeing themselves of all ceremonial uncleanness, and after the sacrifice they were to share the feast. A considerable interval would necessarily elapse between the sacrifice and the feast, for the available portions of the animal had to be prepared for food, and roasted on the fire. It was during this interval that Samuel made acquaintance with the sons of Jesse. First came the handsome and stately Eliab. And strange it is that even with the fate of the handsome and stately Saul full in his memory, Samuel leapt to the conclusion that this was the Lord’s anointed. Could he wonder at God’s emphatic No I Surely he had seen enough of outward appearance coupled with inward unfitness. One trial of that criterion had been enough for Israel.

But alas, it is not merely in the choice of kings that men are apt to show their readiness to rest in the outward appearance. To what an infinite extent has this tendency been carried in the worship of God! Let everything be outwardly correct, the church beautiful, the music excellent, the sermon able, the congregation numerous and respectable – what a pattern such a church is often regarded! Alas! how little satisfactory it may be to God. The eye that searches and knows us penetrates to the heart, – it is there only that God finds the genuine elements of worship. The lowly sense of personal unworthiness, the wondering contemplation of the Divine love, the eager longing for mercy to pardon and grace to help, the faith that grasps the promises, the hope that is anchored within the veil, the kindness that breathes benediction all round, the love that beareth all things, believeth all things, hopeth all things, endureth all things, – it is these things, breathing forth from the hearts of a congregation, that give pleasure to God.

Or look at what often happens in secular life. See how intensely eager some are about appearances. Why, it is one of the stereotyped rules of society that it is necessary “to keep up appearances.” Well-born people may have become poor, very poor, but they must live to outward appearance as if they were rich. Between rivals there may be a deadly jealousy, but they must, by courtesy, keep up the form of friendship. And in trade a substantial appearance must be given to goods that are really worthless. And often, men who are really mean and unprincipled must pose as persons very particular about the right and very indignant at the wrong. And some, meaner than the common, must put on the cloak of religion, and establish a character for sanctity.

The world is full of idolatries, but I question if any idolatry has been more extensively practiced than the idolatry of the outward appearance. If there be less of this in our day than perhaps a generation back, it is because in these days of sifting and trial men have learned in so many ways by hard experience what a delusion it is to lean on such a broken reed. Yes, and we have had men among us who from a point of view not directly Christian have exposed the shams and counterfeits of the age, – men like Carlyle, who have sounded against them a trumpet blast which has been echoed and re-echoed round the very globe. But surely we do not need to go outside the Bible for this great lesson. “Thou desirest truth in the inward parts, and in the hidden part Thou shalt make me to know wisdom;” “If I regard iniquity in my heart, the Lord will not hear me.” Or if we pass to the New Testament, what is the great lesson of the parable of the Publican and the Pharisee? The Publican was a genuine man, an honest, humble, self-emptied sinner. The Pharisee was a silly puffed-up pretender. The world seems to think that all high profession must be hollow. I need not say that such an opinion is utterly untenable. The world would have you profess nothing, lest you should not come up to it. Christ says, “Abide in Me, so shall ye bear much fruit.” It was on this principle that St. Paul professed so much and did so much. ”The life that I live in the flesh, I live by the faith of the Son of God, who loved me and gave Himself for me.”

There is nothing to be said of the other sons of Jesse. Only the youngest one remained, apparently too young to be at the feast; he was in the field, keeping the sheep. “And Jesse sent and brought him in. Now he was ruddy, and withal of a beautiful countenance” (marg. eyes), ”and goodly to look to. And the Lord said, Arise, anoint him, for this is he.” Though goodly to look at he was too young, too boyish to be preferred on the score of “outward appearance.” It was qualities unseen, and as yet but little developed, that commended him. Greatly astonished must Jesse and his other sons have been to see Samuel pouring on the ruddy stripling the holy oil, and anointing him for whatever the office might be. But it has often been God’s way to find His agents in unexpected places. Here a great king is found in the sheepfold. In Joseph’s time a prime minister of Egypt was found in the prison. Our Lord found His chief apostle in the school of Gamaliel. The great Reformer of the sixteenth century was found in a poor miner’s cottage. God is never at a loss for agents, and if the men fail that might naturally have been looked for to do Him service substitutes for them are not far to seek. Out of the very stones He can raise up children to Abraham.

But it was not a mere arbitrary arrangement that David should have been a shepherd before he was king. There were many things in the one employment that prepared the way for the other. In the East the shepherd had higher rank and a larger sphere of duties than is common with us. The duties of the shepherd, to watch over his flock, to feed and protect them, to heal the sick, bind up the broken, and bring again that which was driven away, corresponded to those which the faithful and godly ruler owed to the people committed to his sceptre. It was from the time of David that the shepherd phraseology began to be applied to rulers and their people; and we hardly carry away the full lesson that the prophets intended to teach in their denunciations of “the shepherds that fed themselves and not the flock” when we apply these exclusively to the shepherds of souls. So appropriate was the emblem of the shepherd for denoting the right spirit and character of rulers, that it was ultimately appropriated in a very high and peculiar sense to the person and office of the Lord Jesus Christ. But long ere he appeared King David had familiarized men’s minds with the kind of benefits that flow from the sceptre of a shepherd-ruler – the kind of blessings that were to flow in their fullness from Christ. Never did he write a more expressive word than this, “The Lord is my shepherd, I shall not want.” On the groundwork of his own earthly kingdom he had drawn the pattern of things in heavenly places, for describing which in after times no language could be found more suitable than that borrowed from his first occupation.

But in full harmony with the character of Old Testament typology, the glory of the thing symbolized was infinitely greater than the glory of the symbol. Much though the nation owed to the godly administration of him whom God ”took from the sheepfold, and brought from following the ewes great with young, to feed Jacob His people and Israel His inheritance,” these benefits were shadows indeed when compared with the blessings procured by the great “Shepherd of Israel,” “the good Shepherd that giveth His life for the sheep,” whose shepherd care does not terminate with the life that now is, but will be exercised in eternity in feeding them and leading them by living fountains of water, where God shall wipe away all tears from their eyes.

There are other points of typical resemblance between David and Christ that demand our notice here. If it was a strange-like thing for God to find the model king of Israel in a sheepcot at Bethlehem, it was still more so to find the Saviour of the world in a workshop at Nazareth. But again; King David was chosen for qualities that did not fall in with the ordinary conception of what was king-like, but qualities that commended him to God; and in the same manner the Lord Jesus Christ, God’s Elect, in whom His soul delighted, was not marked by those attributes which men might have considered suitable in one who was to gain the empire of the world. “He shall grow up as a tender plant, and as a root out of a dry ground; He hath no form nor comeliness, and when we shall see Him there is no beauty that we should desire Him.” In bodily form the Lord Jesus would seem to have resembled David rather than Saul. There is no reason to think that there was any great physical superiority in Christ, that He was taller than the common, or that He was distinguished by any of those physical features that at first sight captivate men. And even in the region of intellectual and spiritual influence, our Lord did not conform to the type that naturally commands the confidence and admiration of the world. He had a still, quiet manner. His eloquence did not flash, nor blaze, nor flow like a torrent. The power of His words was due more to their wonderful depth of meaning, going straight to the heart of things, and to the aptness of His homely illustrations. Our Lord’s mode of conquest was very remarkable. He conquered by gentleness, by forbearance, by love, by sympathy, by self-denial. He impressed men with the glory of sacrifice, the glory of service, the glory of obedience, obedience to the one great authority – the will of God – to which all obedience is due. He inspired them with a love of purity, – purity of heart, purity after the highest pattern. If you compare our blessed Lord with those who have achieved great conquests, you cannot but see the difference. I do not mean with conquerors like Alexander, or Caesar, or Napoleon. Napoleon himself at St. Helena showed in a word the vast difference between Christ and them. ”Our conquests,” said he, “have been achieved by force, but Jesus achieved His by love, and to-day millions would die for Him.” But look at some who have conquered by gentler means. Take such men as Socrates, or Plato, or Aristotle. They achieved great intellectual conquests – they founded intellectual empires. But the intellect of Jesus Christ was of another order from theirs. He propounded no theory of the universe. He did not affect to explain the world of reason. He did not profess to lay bare the laws of the human mind, or prescribe conditions for the welfare of states. What strikes us about Christ’s method of influence is its quiet homeliness. Yet quiet and homely though it was and is, how prodigious, how unprecedented has been its power! What other king of men has wielded a tithe of His influence? And that not with one class of society, but with all, not only with the poor and uneducated, but with thinkers and men of genius as well; not only with men and women who know the world, and know their own hearts and all their wants, and apprehend the fitness of Christ to supply them, but even with little children, in the simple unconsciousness of opening years. For out of the mouths of babes and sucklings He hath perfected praise.

Now let us mark this also, in conclusion, that besides being a King Himself Jesus makes all His people kings to God. Every Christian is designed to be a ruler, an unconscious one it may be, but one who exercises an influence in the same direction as Christ’s. How can you accomplish this? By first of all drinking into Christ’s spirit, looking out on the world as He did, with compassion, sympathy, self-sacrifice, and an ardent desire for its renovation and its happiness. By walking “worthy of the vocation wherewith you are called.” Not by the earthquake, or by the tempest, but by the still small voice. By quiet, steady, persistent love, goodness, and self-denial. These are the true Christian weapons, often little thought of, but really the armour of God, and weapons mighty to the pulling down of strongholds and the subjugation of the world to Christ.

Fuente: Expositors Bible Commentary

Disfruta de miles de canciones cristianas en exclusiva sólo en Bibles