Exegetical and Hermeneutical Commentary of 1 Samuel 17:49
And David put his hand in his bag, and took thence a stone, and slung [it], and smote the Philistine in his forehead, that the stone sunk into his forehead; and he fell upon his face to the earth.
1Sa 17:49
And David put his hand in his bag, and took thence a stone, and smote the Philistine in his forehead.
Faith working wisely
It would be interesting to dwell on the various personages that appear prominently in this historic scene. They are Saul, Eliab, Goliath, and David; the dismayed monarch, the envious brother, the scornful enemy, and the man of God. Whatever Sauls sins had been, he acted well on this occasion. He did not despise the rumour of Davids words but sent for him; and when he professed his readiness to fight the Philistine, Saul said unto David, Go, and the Lord be with thee. There is something very affecting in these words. Saul had violated the principles of the theocracy; he had been rejected by God, and the sentence of rejection bad gone forth; the Spirit of the Lord had departed from him; and yet he could recognise the workings of that Spirit, be touched with expressions of godly trust, and bid God-speed to another in an exploit forbidden to himself. Poor Saul! In Eliab we have a characteristic display of genuine human nature. Goliath stands before us as a type of brute power and blustering self-confidence. What shall we say of David? What simplicity and strength of heart appear throughout! what meekness before his angry brother, what modest dignity before Saul, what courage before Goliath, what humility and confidence before God!
I. David possessed a strong and unwavering confidence in God. From whatever grounds that assurance proceeded, he felt it; and it was the secret of his calmness and strength. The inquiry may occur to us, How came David to have this faith? We do not read of any Divine declaration made to him on the subject; it is not written that God told him that he should triumph: whence then did it proceed? was it holy trust, or vain presumption? It is possible to possess a sure confidence of success, and to succeed in consequence of that confidence, and yet to have no just grounds for it; and David might have felt securely and wrought gloriously without any reasonable basis for his trust. The only ground he himself assigned was past Providence. But in connection with something else, that deliverance would have a special argumentative force. Along with his predicted destiny it would be valuable. The Lord had said, Arise anoint him: for this is he. Thus set apart by the prophet, immunity was assured him; and the immunity already granted would justly bear the character, not of a mere fact, but of a kind of pledge and guarantee. And might there not be something more still? Is it unlawful to suppose Divine suggestion and impression? We are told, in connection with his selection as Sauls successor, that the Spirit of the Lord came upon David from that day forward. A like confidence may be possessed as to particular events. Who has not read of instances of strong presentiment in men having no religion, in relation to their worldly destiny, or the success of their enterprises? They were determined to reach a certain goal; they felt that they could reach it; and they did reach it: power and purpose became prophecy. The history of saints furnishes like instances.
II. Davids faith worked wisely. If he had confidence in God that victory would be his, he expected victory in the way of applying his own powers and resources. It was not a miracle, but a natural operation, that he looked to for triumph. God must be in it, but not in it so as to dispense with means. The opinion is very prevalent, and the impression still more so–though neither so prevalent as they used to be–that God is in the habit of employing unlikely instruments; that, for the purpose of revealing His all-sufficiency and bringing honour to Himself, He delights to contrast results with their secondary causes, and to disappoint the calculations founded on the supposed efficiency of human agents. To hear some men talk, you might conclude that God cannot be properly said to employ instruments at all; that in Nature, and still more in Providence, and most of all in grace, they are not so much instruments that He employs as obstacles, not so much things having a tendency and fitness to accomplish His designs as things altogether unsuitable and inappropriate. Now this belief or feeling is entirely erroneous and woefully mischievous. Many are the connections in which this important truth is lost sight of, and men imagine that they do honour to God by denying or ignoring it Sometimes the grand central truth of the Gospel is adduced as an illustration of important results brought about by unlikely means; and Pauls statements respecting the foolishness of preaching are made to sanction this use of the doctrine of the cross. Yet surely this is to mistake the matter altogether. We admit and maintain the need of Divine influence to render even this truth effectual–and that influence is one of the most glorious proofs of the virtue of Christs death–but we also assert that never was truth more adapted to produce the effects proposed, to open the deep fountain of human affections, than the truth of Christ; crucified. Much the same may be said of faith, as the appointed instrument end condition of spiritual blessing. The importance attached to faith in the Bible, and the marvellous virtue ascribed to it, are often regarded as a proof a mere arbitrariness on the part of God, having nothing to do with its inherent qualities and powers. And truly, if faith were what many deem it, a simple reception of historical facts or theological opinions, it might properly be so regarded. But if faith is, as any careful student of the New Testament may easily ascertain it to be, spiritual insight and sympathy as well as intellectual credence; if it is the reception of Gospel facts in their moral meaning and relations; it would be difficult to discover how anything except faith could realise the effects which Christ came into the world to secure. How can truth operate except by being believed? How can spiritual truth operate but through spiritual faith? The truth we are now asserting requires to be applied to spiritual human agency. Many need to be convinced of the propriety of this application of it; they do not see that the power of Christian workers has a regular relation to their qualifications. Doubtless in Greek and Roman and even Jewish eyes, the agency which Christ appointed and honoured was feeble and worthless, ridiculously so; considered simply as of the world, and in connection with merely worldly works and aims, it was foolish, weak, base, yea nothing at all: but that is very different from saying that in Gods eye, and according to spiritual laws, and for the production of spiritual effects, it was so. The doctrine we have in hand should be recognised in the sphere of physical and secular affairs. We are not perhaps in most danger here; it is in the department of Gods spiritual works that we cleave to the faith and expectation of the irregular and unusual: yet is there on some minds an impression that law does not preside over our material and worldly interests, and that God does interfere to avert the natural consequences of actions and conditions. David had confidence in God, the simplest and firmest, that he would overthrow Goliath, but in the strength of that confidence he employed his familiar weapons of offence. He did just what he would have done if he had sought the destruction of the giant without any confidence in God: but his confidence doubtless enabled him to do it better than with a faithless heart he could have done it; it was an inspiring, a strengthening principle. And true faith is always such. (A. J. Morris.)
Common things in capable hands
A short time ago a geologist heard of a builders yard where an enormous heap of stones might be purchased. The man of science bought the whole stock for a few pounds, and had the collection removed to his own premises. From the heap the geologist was able to discover many unique specimens of fossils, and today several of our leading museums have been enriched and smaller museums supplied with collections worth in all a large sum. Common weapons in the hand of a good man are often used by the Lord to achieve victory. God can use the simplest gifts of His workers if consecrated to His service. (Sunday Companion.)
Fuente: Biblical Illustrator Edited by Joseph S. Exell
Verse 49. Smote the Philistine in his forehead] Except his face, Goliath was everywhere covered over with strong armour. Either he had no beaver to his helmet, or it was lifted up so as to expose his forehead; but it does not appear that the ancient helmets had any covering for the face. The Septuagint however supposes that the stone passed through the helmet, and sank into his forehead: , “and the stone passed through his helmet, and sank into his skull.” To some this has appeared perfectly improbable; but we are assured by ancient writers that scarcely any thing could resist the force of the sling.
Diodorus Siculus, lib. v., c. 18, p. 287, edit. Bipont, says “The Baleares, in time of war, sling greater stones than any other people, and with such force, that they seem as if projected from a catapult. , , . , . Therefore, in assaults made on fortified towns, they grievously wound the besieged; and in battle they break in pieces the shields, helmets, and every species of armour by which the body is defended. And they are such exact marksmen that they scarcely ever miss that at which they aim.”
The historian accounts for their great accuracy and power in the use of the sling, from this circumstance: , … “They attain to this perfection by frequent exercise from their childhood; for while they are young and under their mother’s care, they are obliged to learn to sling; for they fasten bread for a mark at the top of the pole; and till the child hit the bread he must remain fasting; and when he has hit it, the mother gives it to him to eat.”-Ibid.
I have given these passages at large, because they contain several curious facts, and sufficiently account for the force and accuracy with which David slung his stone at Goliath. We find also in the , not miss the mark, of the historian, the true notion of , to sin, which I have contended for elsewhere. He who sins, though he aims thereby at his gratification and profit, misses the mark of present and eternal felicity.
Fuente: Adam Clarke’s Commentary and Critical Notes on the Bible
Either,
1. The stone pierced through his helmet; which such stones being slung would not seldom do; as even Diodorus Siculus relates. Or,
2. The stone might get in through one of those holes which are left in helmets, that he that wears it may see his way, and how to direct his blows. Or rather,
3. The proud giant had lift up that part of his helmet which covered his forehead; and that in contempt of David and his weapons, and by the singular direction of Gods providence.
Fuente: English Annotations on the Holy Bible by Matthew Poole
49. smote the Philistine in hisforeheadAt the opening for the eyesthat was the onlyexposed part of his body.
Fuente: Jamieson, Fausset and Brown’s Commentary Critical and Explanatory on the Whole Bible
And David put his hand in his bag,…. The shepherd’s scrip, in which he had put the five stones he took out of the brook:
and took thence a stone; and put it into his sling he had in his hand:
and slang [it], and smote the Philistine in his forehead; it is made a difficulty of how he should smite him on his forehead, when he had a helmet of brass upon his head, 1Sa 17:5; in answer to this Kimchi observes, that some say, that when David said he would give his flesh to the fowls of the air, at the mention of that he looked upwards, and what was upon his forehead fell backwards, and then David slung and smote him; or he might put back his helmet to talk with David, and hear and be heard the better; and having nothing to fear from an unarmed man, might neglect to put it forward again; or there might be some open space left in the helmet for him to look through, in at which the stone might pass; so the Targum renders it, he smote him in the house of his eyes, so the stone passed through the eye hole into his brain: but after all, supposing his forehead ever so well covered, as the stone slung by David was under a divine direction, so as to hit a person in motion, it came with a divine power, which nothing could resist; and supposing this, of which there need no doubt, it could as easily pass through the helmet of brass, as pierce into his forehead and sink there; nor can this be thought the least incredible, if what Diodorus Siculus m relates of the Baleares be true, that they were so dexterous at slinging, that they not only would sling stones bigger than others could, and were so directed, that they seldom missed their mark, being inured to it from their youth, but would even in battle break in pieces shields, helmets, and all kinds of armour, with which bodies were covered:
that the stone sunk into his forehead; and so into his brain, as a stone is immersed and sinks in water, when thrown into it; with such force did it go, and with so much ease did it make its way, through the direction and power of God:
and he fell upon his face to the earth; Jarchi observes, that it was most natural for him to have fallen backwards, being struck upon his forehead; but so it was, that David might have no trouble to cut off his head, for by this means he fell nearer to him.
m Bibliothec. l. 5. p. 298.
Fuente: John Gill’s Exposition of the Entire Bible
(49) And smote the Philistine in the forehead.The LXX. add the words through the helm The Greek translators could not understand the fact of the forehead being unprotected. But the head-pieces of the armour then do not appear to have possessed visors; the face was covered with the heavy shield, which was borne, we are told (1Sa. 17:7), before him. No doubt the Philistine, utterly despising his youthful unarmed antagonist, advanced towards him without using, as was customary, the face protection of the shield.
Slinging stones had been brought among the Israelites to an extraordinary perfection. Many years before this time we read that in the tribe of Benjamin were 700 chosen men left-handed; every one could sling stones at an hairs breadth, and not miss (Jdg. 20:16).
A work by W. Vischer, on Ancient Slings (Basel, 1866), quoted by Lange, speaks of slingers who could hit the part of the enemys face at which they aimed.
Fuente: Ellicott’s Commentary for English Readers (Old and New Testaments)
49. In his forehead The only unprotected portion of his body. According to the Septuagint, however, the stone passed through Goliath’s helmet.
Fuente: Whedon’s Commentary on the Old and New Testaments
1Sa 17:49 And David put his hand in his bag, and took thence a stone, and slang [it], and smote the Philistine in his forehead, that the stone sunk into his forehead; and he fell upon his face to the earth.
Ver. 49. And smote the Philistine in his forehead. ] That seat of pride and impudency; there being no other part of Goliath capable of danger; the rest of him was defenced with a brazen wall. This was the Lord’s own work, and it is justly marvellous in our eyes.
That the stone sunk into his forehead.
“ D , ” – Hom.
There lay the greatness af Goliath.
Fuente: John Trapp’s Complete Commentary (Old and New Testaments)
smote: 1Ki 22:34, 2Ki 9:24, 1Co 1:27, 1Co 1:28
Reciprocal: Jdg 4:21 – took Jdg 5:26 – she smote off Jdg 15:15 – slew Jdg 20:16 – sling stones 1Sa 2:9 – by strength 1Sa 7:13 – against 1Sa 19:5 – slew 2Sa 22:40 – girded 1Ch 12:2 – in hurling 2Ch 26:14 – slings to cast stones Psa 18:29 – by thee Psa 18:38 – General Psa 119:96 – I have seen