Exegetical and Hermeneutical Commentary of 1 Samuel 19:1
And Saul spoke to Jonathan his son, and to all his servants, that they should kill David.
Ch. 1Sa 19:1-7. Jonathan’s intercession with his father on David’s behalf
1. Saul spake, &c.] Perhaps in some outburst of passion like Henry the Second’s against Thomas Becket. No definite command seems to have been given.
Fuente: The Cambridge Bible for Schools and Colleges
CHAPTER XIX
Jonathan pleads for David before Saul, who is for the present
reconciled, 1-7.
David defeats the Philistines; and Saul becomes again envious,
and endeavours to slay him, but he escapes, 8-10.
Saul sends men to David’s house, to lie in wait for him; but
Michal saves him by a stratagem, 11-17.
David flees to Samuel, at Ramah, 18.
Saul, hearing of it, sends messengers three several times to
take him; but the Spirit of coming upon them, they prophesy,
19-21.
Saul, hearing of this, goes after David himself, and falls under
the same influence, 22-24.
NOTES ON CHAP. XIX
Verse 1. That they should kill David.] Nothing less than the especial interposition of God could have saved David’s life, when every officer about the king’s person, and every soldier, had got positive orders to despatch him.
Fuente: Adam Clarke’s Commentary and Critical Notes on the Bible
Saul spake to Jonathan; whom, though lately engaged in a league of friendship with David, he thought to oblige to it by sense of his own interest, as being the next heir of the crown, and likely to suffer most by Davids advancement. And to all his servants: what before he secretly designed, now he openly and impudently avowed.
Fuente: English Annotations on the Holy Bible by Matthew Poole
1. Saul spake to Jonathan his son,and to all his servants, that they should kill DavidThemurderous design he had secretly cherished he now reveals to a few ofhis intimate friends. Jonathan was among the number. He prudentlysaid nothing at the time, but secretly apprised David of his danger;and waiting till the morning, when his father’s excited temper wouldbe cooled, he stationed his friend in a place of concealment, where,overhearing the conversation, he might learn how matters really stoodand take immediate flight, if necessary.
Fuente: Jamieson, Fausset and Brown’s Commentary Critical and Explanatory on the Whole Bible
And Saul spake to Jonathan his son,…. Who was heir to his crown; and though he knew he loved David, and was in strict friendship with him, yet he might hope, that as his succession to the kingdom was in danger, as he thought, and that David was his rival in it, his mind would be alienated from him; and that he would listen rather to a father than a friend, and would see where his true interest lay, and abandon David, yea, seek his ruin, which Saul was intent upon
and to all his servants; who yet pretended to love David, and as he himself said they did, and some of them might; with these he might rather hope to succeed, as they were attached to him, and might be secretly enemies of David, and therefore to these, as well as to his son, he spake, and gave his orders:
that they should kill David; as if he was a traitor, and an usurper of his throne, and one that had a design upon that, and upon his life; finding he could do nothing by the schemes, and snares, and stratagems, he used in a private manner, he grew outrageous and furious, and openly declared his views, and laid his injunctions on his son and servants to take away David’s life, as a very dangerous person to his crown and government.
Fuente: John Gill’s Exposition of the Entire Bible
Jonathan warded off the first outbreak of deadly enmity on the part of Saul towards David. When Saul spoke to his son Jonathan and all his servants about his intention to kill David ( , i.e., not that they should kill David, but “ that he intended to kill him ”), Jonathan reported this to David, because he was greatly attached to him, and gave him this advice: “ Take heed to thyself in the morning; keep thyself in a secret place, and hide thyself. I will go out and stand beside my father in the field where thou art, and I will talk to my father about thee ( , as in Deu 6:7; Psa 87:3, etc., to talk of or about a person), and see what (sc., he will say), and show it to thee.” David was to conceal himself in the field near to where Jonathan would converse with his father about him; not that he might hear the conversation in his hiding-place, but that Jonathan might immediately report to him the result of his conversation, without there being any necessity for going far away from his father, so as to excite suspicion that he was in league with David.
Fuente: Keil & Delitzsch Commentary on the Old Testament
| Saul’s Jealousy of David; Jonathan’s Intercession for David. | B. C. 1058. |
1 And Saul spake to Jonathan his son, and to all his servants, that they should kill David. 2 But Jonathan Saul’s son delighted much in David: and Jonathan told David, saying, Saul my father seeketh to kill thee: now therefore, I pray thee, take heed to thyself until the morning, and abide in a secret place, and hide thyself: 3 And I will go out and stand beside my father in the field where thou art, and I will commune with my father of thee; and what I see, that I will tell thee. 4 And Jonathan spake good of David unto Saul his father, and said unto him, Let not the king sin against his servant, against David; because he hath not sinned against thee, and because his works have been to thee-ward very good: 5 For he did put his life in his hand, and slew the Philistine, and the LORD wrought a great salvation for all Israel: thou sawest it, and didst rejoice: wherefore then wilt thou sin against innocent blood, to slay David without a cause? 6 And Saul hearkened unto the voice of Jonathan: and Saul sware, As the LORD liveth, he shall not be slain. 7 And Jonathan called David, and Jonathan shewed him all those things. And Jonathan brought David to Saul, and he was in his presence, as in times past.
Saul and Jonathan appear here in their different characters, with reference to David.
I. Never was enemy so unreasonably cruel as Saul. He spoke to his son and all his servants that they should kill David, v. 1. His projects to take him off had failed, and therefore he proclaims him an out-law, and charges all about him, upon their allegiance, to take the first opportunity to kill David. It is strange that he was not ashamed thus to avow his malice when he could give no reason for it, and that knowing all his servants loved David (for so he had said himself, ch. xviii. 22), he was not afraid of provoking them to rebel by this bloody order. Either malice was not then so politic, or justice was not so corrupted as it has been since, or else Saul would have had him indicted, and have suborned witnesses to swear treason against him, and so have had him taken off, as Naboth was, by colour of law. But there is least danger from this undisguised malice. It was strange that he who knew how well Jonathan loved him should expect him to kill him; but he thought that because he was heir to the crown he must needs be as envious at David as himself was. And Providence ordered it thus that he might befriend David’s safety.
II. Never was friend so surprisingly kind as Jonathan. A friend in need is a friend indeed. Such a one Jonathan was to David. He not only continued to delight much in him, though David’s glory eclipsed his, but bravely appeared for him now that the stream ran so strongly against him.
1. He took care for his present security by letting him know his danger (v. 2): “Take heed to thyself, and keep out of harm’s way.” Jonathan knew not but that some of the servants might be either so obsequious to Saul or so envious at David as to put the orders in execution which Saul had given, if they could light on David.
2. He took pains to pacify his father and reconcile him to David. The next morning he ventured to commune with him concerning David (v. 3), not that night, perhaps because he observed Saul to be drunk and not fit to be spoken to, or because he hoped that, when he had slept upon it, he would himself revoke the order, or because he could not have an opportunity of speaking to him till morning.
(1.) His intercession for David was very prudent. It was managed with a great deal of the meekness of wisdom; and he showed himself faithful to his friends by speaking good of him, though he was in danger of incurring his father’s displeasure by it–a rare instance of valuable friendship! He pleads, [1.] The good services David had done to the public, and particularly to Saul: His work has been to thee-ward very good, v. 4. Witness the relief he had given him against his distemper with his harp, and his bold encounter with Goliath, that memorable action, which did, in effect, save Saul’s life and kingdom. He appeals to himself concerning his: Thou thyself sawest it, and didst rejoice. In that and other instances it appeared that David was a favourite of heaven and a friend to Israel, as well as a good servant to Saul, for by him the Lord wrought a great salvation for all Israel; so that to order him to be slain was not only base ingratitude to so good a servant, but a great affront to God and a great injury to the public. [2.] He pleads his innocency. Though he had formerly done many good offices, yet, if he had now been chargeable with any crimes, it would have been another matter; but he has not sinned against thee (v. 1), his blood is innocent (v. 5), and, if he be slain, it is without cause. And Jonathan had therefore reason to protest against it because he could not entail any thing upon his family more pernicious than the guilt of innocent blood.
(2.) His intercession, being thus prudent, was prevalent. God inclined the heart of Saul to hearken to the voice of Jonathan. Note, We must be willing to hear reason, and to take all reproofs and good advice even from our inferiors, parents from their own children. How forcible are right words! Saul was, for the present, so far convinced of the unreasonableness of his enmity to David that, [1.] He recalled the bloody warrant for his execution (v. 6): As the Lord liveth, he shall not be slain. Whether Saul swore here with due solemnity or no does not appear; perhaps he did, and the matter was of such moment as to deserve it and of such uncertainty as to need it. But at other times Saul swore rashly and profanely, which made the sincerity of this oath justly questionable; for it may be feared that those who can so far jest with an oath as to make a by-word of it, and prostitute it to a trifle, have not such a due sense of the obligation of it but that, to serve a turn, they will prostitute it to a lie. Some suspect that Saul said and swore this with a malicious design to bring David within his reach again, intending to take the first opportunity to slay him. But, as bad as Saul was, we can scarcely think so ill of him; and therefore we suppose that he spoke as he thought for the present, but the convictions soon wore off and his corruptions prevailed and triumphed over them. [2.] He renewed the grant of his place at court. Jonathan brought him to Saul, and he was in his presence as in times past (v. 7), hoping that now the storm was over, and that his friend Jonathan would be instrumental to keep his father always in this good mind.
Fuente: Matthew Henry’s Whole Bible Commentary
First Samuel – Chapter 19
Jonathan’s Intercession for David, vs. 1-7
As Saul’s attempts against David’s life became more frustrated he came out into the open in an effort to enlist others in his nefarious scheming. He orders Jonathan and all his servants that they should kill David. Saul possibly did not know that in confiding in his son, Jonathan, he was giving David a channel of information in the king’s very house. Once again it is apparent that Jonathan had the good of Israel at heart, as he did in the battle against the Philistines (1Sa 14:29-30), and he put that concern ahead of loyalty to the king, his father.
Jonathan had seen in David the man Israel needed for king and for his own part had abdicated any rights to the throne (see 1Sa 18:1; 1Sa 18:3-4). So he communicated at once with David, advising him to hide in the field until morning in a secret place. Jonathan would then intercede with his father in an attempt to effect a reconciliation toward David, whereupon he would inform David of the result.
True to his word Jonathan accosted his father on David’s behalf. In doing this Jonathan made several pointed arguments in David’s favor: 1) Saul was sinning against David, but David had not sinned against him; 2) all of David’s deeds had consisted of good for Saul; 3) David had risked his life in killing Goliath, and the king and all Israel had rejoiced in the feat; 4) to take David’s life would, therefore, be shedding innocent blood without cause.
Saul listened to reason this time and was persuaded by his son. Consequently he swore by the life of the Lord that David would not be slain. Jonathan then sought out David and delivered to him the good news. He brought David back into the family circle and things proceeded as they had been before Saul’s wrath was last aroused.
Fuente: Garner-Howes Baptist Commentary
CRITICAL AND EXPOSITORY NOTES
1Sa. 19:1. And Saul spake that they should kill David. Rather, that he intended to kill David.
1Sa. 19:2. Until the morning. Rather, in the morning.
1Sa. 19:3. In the field. David was to conceal himself in the field, near to where Jonathan would converse with his father about him; not that he might hear the conversation in his hiding-place, but that Jonathan might immediately report to him the result of his conversation, without there being any necessity for his going far away from his father, so as to excite suspicion that he was in league with David. (Keil.)
1Sa. 19:5. He did put his life in his hand. The Hebrew word means the palm or hollow of the handthe hand as receptacle, not as instrument. Perhaps alluding to Davids hand which swung the sling against the giant, upon the firmness and certainty of which his life depended. (Langes Commentary.)
MAIN HOMILETICS OF THE PARAGRAPH1Sa. 19:1-7
JONATHANS INTERCESSION FOR DAVID
I. The man who is related both to the offended person and to the offender is specially qualified to be a mediator between them. If a man would be a successful intercessor he must be acquainted with the nature and disposition of him with whom he intercedes, and he must have sympathy with the person for whom he intercedes. If he is linked by the ties of blood or friendship to one or both parties, he will know much better than a stranger how to frame his petitionhe will be acquainted with the arguments which will be most influential with the one on behalf of the other, and his own relationship to both and his consequent interest in both will of itself form a reason why his suit should be regarded. David was fortunate in having for his intercessor the man who, above all others in Israel, was most fitted to mediate between him and Saul. His love for David had brought him into such near fellowship with him that he was qualified to be a judge of the aims and motives which actuated him and to pronounce him innocent or guilty, and he was so near akin to Saul that he could approach him with freedom and without fear of being suspected of having any motive prejudicial to his fathers honour and welfare. Hence his appeal was listened to, and David was, at least for a time, restored to favour. The relation of Christ to men on the one hand, and to His Divine Father on the other, constitutes His special and peculiar qualification to be the Mediator between God and man. Having been made like unto His brethren, He can sympathise with human frailties and understand human needs, and as the only-begotten of the Father he can have access to Him as no finite creature can.
II. Those who truly love will find that in human life occasions of proving their love will not be wanting. So many and so great are human needs, and so varied the experiences through which most men are called to pass, that those who love us will often find opportunity of showing their unselfish regard, and of proving that they are friends indeed by being friends in need. And if the love is a reality it will be equal to the demand made upon it, and will rejoice in being able, by self-denial, to help its object in the day of adversity. Jonathan had made a covenant with David in the day when the young shepherd was the hero of the hour, and when Saul himself looked favourably upon him; but now the clouds are beginning to gather around him, and Jonathan finds an occasion to show his love in a manner which involves much more self-denial than the giving of his garments even to his sword and his bow. It needed much courage for even a son to face a man like Saul and to assert the innocence of him who had now begun to be an object of suspicion and jealousy. When men are so entirely governed by their passions and moods it is a dangerous thing to tell them that they are in the wrong, especially if they are in the possession of so much irresponsible power as an Eastern monarch is. Yet this Jonathan dared to do not only on this occasion but on others when his fathers temper was more implacable than even now, and he thereby proved that his love for his friend was real and very strong.
OUTLINES AND SUGGESTIVE COMMENTS
How good it is to hear such words as these spoken by Jonathan, which, in their peaceful, gentle tone, their reverential utterance, contradicting in nothing the duty of a child, and in their noble purpose breathe already something of the spirit of New Testament times. And yet, as John at a later period testifies in his Gospel, The Holy Ghost was not yet given,a truth which we ought particularly to keep in mind in all the opinions and estimates we form of the morals of the men of Old Testament times. The hereditary nature of man, fallen in Adam, had then allowed to it a much wider scope than in the post-pentecostal days of the New Covenant. The natural affections and passions shot forth, when once they broke through the barriers of the Divine commandments, into monstrous, gigantic manifestations and wild forms, which may be compared to the luxurious growth of the primeval forests. Saul, with his colossal hatred, and his jealousy breathing forth fire and flames, may be regarded as a witness of this fact. Yet it is undoubtedly true that, even during the Mosaic economy, individual personages appeared like shining meteors, lovely and rich in promise, who present themselves before us as prophetic types of believers of a future age. To this class belonged Abraham, Moses, Joshua, and certainly now also our Jonathan. The example of disinterested friendship, rooting itself in love to God, which the latter presents to us, remains at least as a fitting model for Christian times, wherein even its equal is not frequently to be found.Krummacher.
1Sa. 19:6. How could Saul say, he should die, whom he could accuse of nothing but faithfulness? Why should he design him to death, which had given life to all Israel? Ofttimes wicked mens judgments are forced to yield unto that truth against which their affections maintain a rebellion. Even the foulest hearts do sometimes entertain good motions: like as, on the contrary, the holiest souls give way sometimes to the suggestions of evil. The flashes of lightning may be discerned in the darkest prisons. But if good thoughts look into a wicked heart, they stay not there; as those that like not their lodging, they are soon gone: hardly anything distinguishes betwixt good and evil, but continuance. The light that shines into a holy heart is constant, like that of the sun, which keeps due times, and varies not his course for any of these sublunary occasions.Bishop Hall.
Draw from this the extreme danger of trifling with the name and attributes of Godof using imprecations and oaths, as mere expletives in ordinary conversation, without either reverence or meaning An irreverent familiarity with sacred things, as in all other instances, is but one step removed from contempt. Such, unhappily, was the case with Saul. As the Lord liveth, was an expression so frequently on his lips, that, it may be feared, its solemn import was soon but little felt or understood. Hence, we perceive in the chapter before us with what facility he disregarded the obligation of his oath, when exposed to temptation. He who is not afraid thus solemnly to trifle with his Maker, will not fear to violate the most sacred obligations towards his neighbour Beware, then, of destroying, or weakening in any degree, your reverence for God, which is the foundation of all religion and all morality. Be assured, there is no more certain way of effecting this, than a profane and inconsiderate use of His holy name.Lindsay.
Fuente: The Preacher’s Complete Homiletical Commentary Edited by Joseph S. Exell
Davids Final Flight from Sauls Court, 1Sa. 19:1-24.
Jonathan Intercedes for David. 1Sa. 19:1-7
And Saul spake to Jonathan his son, and to all his servants, that they should kill David.
2 But Jonathan Sauls son delighted much in David: and Jonathan told David, saying, Saul my father seeketh to kill thee: now therefore, I pray thee, take heed to thyself until the morning, and abide in a secret place, and hide thyself:
3 And I will go out and stand beside my father in the field where thou art, and I will commune with my father of thee; and what I see, that I will tell thee.
4 And Jonathan spake good of David unto Saul his father, and said unto him, Let not the king sin against his servant, against David; because he hath not sinned against thee, and because his works have been to thee-ward very good:
5 For he did put his life in his hand, and slew the Philistine, and the Lord wrought a great salvation for all Israel: thou sawest it, and didst rejoice: wherefore then wilt thou sin against innocent blood, to slay David without a cause?
6 And Saul hearkened unto the voice of Jonathan: and Saul sware, As the Lord liveth, he shall not be slain.
7 And Jonathan called David and Jonathan showed him all those things. And Jonathan brought David to Saul, and he was in his presence, as in times past.
1.
Who were Sauls servants? 1Sa. 19:1
Sauls servants would be his courtiers. They were his other armor-bearers, his captains of the army, and all those who had an office in his kingdom. Saul extended his personal scheme to include all those over whom he had any control. He embraced Jonathan, his son, in the order. All were expected to do whatever they could to catch David and kill him. Such a widespread plot made it necessary for David to be always on the defensive. Had it not been for Jonathan, Sauls plot may have been successful; but Jonathan told David of this extensive attempt on the part of Saul to kill him.
2.
What was Jonathans scheme? 1Sa. 19:3
Jonathan intended to make an opportunity to speak personally to his father about David. He found this opportunity as the two were in a field near the place where David was fighting. Jonathan spoke only good of David. His reasoning was good, and he reminded Saul of the good things David had done for him. Jonathan pointed out that David had not sinned against Saul. His activity had brought honor and glory to Saul and his kingdom. Jonathan reminded his father that David took his own life in his hands as he went out against Goliath. Jonathan believed that the Lord had worked in these instances and had brought about a great salvation for all Israel. Jonathan reminded Saul that he had seen this himself and rejoiced over it. Jonathan could see no reason for Sauls seeking to slay David. To Jonathan the killing of David would be the shedding of innocent blood.
3.
Why did Saul yield to Jonathans appeal? 1Sa. 19:6
When Saul was in full possession of his faculties, he must have known that he was wrong in trying to bring harm to David. Much of his fear of David must have come when he was in possession of the evil spirit. If Jonathan caught him at a time when he was rational, he could make his father understand what was right. Such must have been the case for Saul listened to Jonathan.
Fuente: College Press Bible Study Textbook Series
(1) That they should kill David.The literal translation of the original gives a much better sense: that he intended to kill David, or about killing David. The latter is the rendering of the LXX. and the Syriac. The murderous impulse of the unhappy Saul gradually increased in intensity. First, it showed itself only in the paroxysms of insanity, when the half distraught king would grasp and poise his heavy spear, as though he would hurl it at the kindly musician as he tried to calm the troubled spirit. Then it would plot and scheme against the hated life, trying to involve this young soldier in some enterprise fraught with deadly peril. Now he speaks openly to his heir and his counsellors of the risk incurred by suffering so dangerous a man to live.
Fuente: Ellicott’s Commentary for English Readers (Old and New Testaments)
JONATHAN’S INTERCESSION FOR DAVID, 1Sa 19:1-7.
Finding that the snares laid for David’s life all fail, Saul no longer conceals his dark designs. He instructs his servants, and, fortunately for David, he also instructs Jonathan, to destroy him Jonathan, his covenant friend, who loved David as his own soul, and who would therefore take speedy measures to frustrate the cruel intentions of his father. In his intercession for David we have a most touching exhibition of Jonathan’s tender, true, and loving heart. By judicious appeals and earnest persuasion he effects a reconciliation, and David walks again in the royal presence as before. It is probable that upon this reconciliation Saul immediately countermanded the orders he had previously given his servants to kill David.
Fuente: Whedon’s Commentary on the Old and New Testaments
Saul Is Determined That David Should Die, But Jonathan Intercedes For Him And His Father Alters His Position ( 1Sa 19:1-7 ).
While his followers did not fully appreciate how bad he was Saul was now a very sick man. He was seriously mentally unstable, an instability almost certainly brought on by his rejection by Samuel, even though there must have been a latent problem already there. Thus as he brooded on what in his view David was trying to do, he made it clear to his courtiers and advisers that it was becoming necessary for David to be called to account for his treasonable attitude towards the throne. No actual order appears to have been given. Indeed it would probably at this stage have been folly for him to issue one, because David was too popular. But he nevertheless made his view clearly enough known for Jonathan to be worried about it.
Stand-off situations like this between kings and powerful men are found throughout history in cases where a king wishes to get rid of a powerful noble but is unable to do it openly, because the noble has too much support. What the king therefore has to do is wait for the noble to put a foot wrong, or hope that someone will arrange for his assassination. But if the noble is wise he takes precautions and ensures that he is never in a position to be directly accused, and never lets himself be found in a situation where he is unprotected. This would appear to have been something like David’s position (he was now a powerful and influential man in Israel) with regard to Saul.
Meanwhile, seemingly at a time when he was thinking straight, Jonathan appealed to Saul on behalf of David, and brought about in him a change of mind. He declared in the strongest of terms that David should not die after all. In his medical innocence Jonathan no doubt thought that he had obtained from his father a rational decision that he would adhere to. What he, of course, did not realise was the nature of his father’s illness. He was not to know that from this time on no one could ever be sure what Saul would do next, because it all depended on his psychological state at the time, something especially affected by his excessive pride in his kingship and his paranoia about David.
Analysis.
a
b But Jonathan, Saul’s son, delighted much in David. And Jonathan told David, saying, “Saul my father seeks to slay you. Now therefore, I pray you, take heed to yourself in the morning, and remain in a secret place, and hide yourself, and I will go out and stand beside my father in the countryside where you are, and I will discuss you with my father, and if I see anything, I will tell you” (1Sa 19:1-3).
c And Jonathan spoke good of David to Saul his father, and said to him, “Do not let the king sin against his servant, against David, because he has not sinned against you, and because his works towards you have been very good, for he put his life in his hand, and smote the Philistine, and YHWH wrought a great victory for all Israel. You saw it, and you rejoiced. For what reason then will you sin against innocent blood, to slay David without a cause?” (1Sa 19:4-5).
b And Saul took note of the voice of Jonathan, and Saul swore, “As YHWH lives, he shall not be put to death.” And Jonathan called David, and Jonathan showed him all those things (1Sa 19:6-7 a).
a And Jonathan brought David to Saul, and he was in his presence, as previously (1Sa 19:7 b).
Note that in ‘a’ Saul speaks with Jonathan about the need for David to die, and in the parallel Jonathan brings about a reconciliation between Saul and David. In ‘b’ Jonathan tells David that he will plead with his father on his behalf, and will inform him of the result, and in the parallel, having pleaded successfully he informs David of the result. Central in ‘c’ is the argument that he puts before Saul which gives a clear summary of David’s virtues.
1Sa 19:1
‘ And Saul spoke to Jonathan his son, and to all his servants, indicating that they should slay David. But Jonathan, Saul’s son, delighted much in David.’
As we have suggested this was probably a statement made while Saul was in one of his ‘bad periods’, and was deluding himself. It may be that his servants (his courtiers) recognised this and therefore did little about it. Alternately it may have been that he called a council in which he put to his court the reasons why David needed to be dealt with. But Jonathan greatly loved David and he really could not understand his father’s attitude towards him. He had no idea of the intricacies of a deluded mind.
1Sa 19:2-3
‘ And Jonathan told David, saying, “Saul my father seeks to slay you. Now therefore, I pray you, take heed to yourself in the morning, and remain in a secret place, and hide yourself, and I will go out and stand beside my father in the countryside where you are, and I will discuss you with my father, and if I see anything, I will tell you.” ’
So when the opportunity came he took David on one side and warned him of what had been said. He was in fact also determined to speak to his father about it, but he wanted David to be aware of what was happening. Furthermore he wanted him to know about the outcome of his conversation with his father. So he told David to find somewhere where he could remain hidden, and then let him know where he was. Then he could take his father there and discuss the matter with his father, and pass on the result to David.
1Sa 19:4-5
‘ And Jonathan spoke good of David to Saul his father, and said to him, “Do not let the king sin against his servant, against David, because he has not sinned against you, and because his works towards you have been very good, for he put his life in his hand, and smote the Philistine, and YHWH wrought a great victory for all Israel. You saw it, and you rejoiced. For what reason then will you sin against innocent blood, to slay David without a cause?” ’
Following out his plan Jonathan spoke with Saul. He pleaded David’s innocence and begged his father not to commit an offence by acting against him. He pointed out all that David had done for Saul and for the people, especially with regard to the matter of Goliath, and how glad they had all been. Why then did his father seek to shed innocent blood without cause?
Note the fourfold defence:
“He has not sinned against you.”
“His works towards you have been very good” (for example in his playing of music for Saul even when it grew decidedly unpleasant).”
“He put his life in his hand and smote Goliath the Philistine.”
“Through him YHWH has wrought a great victory for all Israel.”
So David has not only not done Saul any harm, or even considered it, but has rather only done good to him, both in his personal life and in enabling the fulfilling of his responsibilities, and has indeed benefited all Israel.
1Sa 19:6
‘ And Saul took note of the voice of Jonathan, and Saul swore, “As YHWH lives, he shall not be put to death.” ’
On this occasion Saul took notice of Jonathan and was convinced sufficiently to swear that as YHWH lived David would not be put to death. David was thus safe until Saul had another bout of his illness.
1Sa 19:7
‘ And Jonathan called David, and Jonathan showed him all those things. And Jonathan brought David to Saul, and he was in his presence, as previously.’
Jonathan then called David and let him know the result of his conversation with Saul, after which he brought him to Saul in order that they might be reconciled, and David was thus once more able to take his place in the court, enjoying the king’s presence as before.
Fuente: Commentary Series on the Bible by Peter Pett
1Sa 19:18 So David fled, and escaped, and came to Samuel to Ramah, and told him all that Saul had done to him. And he and Samuel went and dwelt in Naioth.
1Sa 19:18
Fuente: Everett’s Study Notes on the Holy Scriptures
Jonathan Proves his Friendship for David.
v. 1. And Saul spake to Jonathan, his son, and to all his servants that they should kill David; v. 2. But Jonathan, Saul’s son, delighted much in David, v. 3. and I will go out and stand beside my father in the field where thou art, v. 4. And Jonathan, v. 5. For he did put his life in his hand, v. 6. And Saul hearkened unto the voice of Jonathan, v. 7. And Jonathan called David, and Jonathan showed him all those things,
Fuente: The Popular Commentary on the Bible by Kretzmann
SUCCESSIVE ATTEMPTS UPON DAVID‘S LIFE FRUSTRATED BY THE LOVE OF JONATHAN AND MICHAL, AND FINALLY BY FLIGHT (1Sa 19:1-24.).
EXPOSITION
JONATHAN‘S LOVE FOR DAVID (1Sa 19:1-7).
1Sa 19:1
Saul spake to Jonathan his son…that they should kill David. The translation of the last clause is untenable; it really means “about killing David,” and so both the Septuagint and the Syriac render it. The descent of men once full of noble impulses, as was the case with Saul, into open crime is gradual, and with many halts on the way. Saul first gave way to envy, and instead of struggling against his bad feelings, nourished them. Then, when scarcely accountable for his actions, he threatened David’s life; and next, with growing malice, encouraged him in dangerous undertakings, in the hope that in one of them he might be slain. And now he goes one step farther. He talks to Jonathan and his officers concerning the many reasons there were for David’s death; argues that without it there will be no security for himself and his dynasty; represents David probably as a traitor, with secret purposes of usurping the throne; and reveals what hitherto had been but the half-formed wishes of his heart. But even now, probably, he still spoke of David’s death as a painful necessity, and had many misgivings in his own mind. But he was really encouraging himself in crime, and by cherishing thoughts of murder he was gradually descending towards the dark abyss into which he finally fell.
1Sa 19:2, 1Sa 19:3
Until the morning. Rather, “in the morning.” Saul’s purpose was taking shape, and as there are always men too ready to commit crime at the bidding of a king, there was the danger that secret murder might be the quick result of Saul’s open communication of his wishes to his men of war. Jonathan, therefore, warns David of the king’s malice, and urges him to hide himself until he has made a last entreaty for him. This was to take place in the field, the open common land. There was no idea of David overhearing the conversation, but when the king took his usual walk Jonathan was to join him, and hold a conference with him apart in the unenclosed hill pastures. After probing his father’s real feelings he would continue his walk, and, without awakening any suspicions, would meet David and communicate to him the result. What I see, that I will tell thee. More exactly, “I will see what (he says), and will tell thee.”
1Sa 19:4-7
In the field Jonathan intercedes for David, assures his father of his friend’s innocence, reminds him of his noble exploit, and of Saul’s own joy at it, and beseeches him not to shed innocent blood. And Saul, fickle and selfish, yet not destitute of noble feelings, repents of his purpose, and with characteristic impetuosity takes an oath that David’s life shall be spared. Whereupon a reconciliation takes place, and David resumes his attendance upon the king’s person.
RENEWED ATTEMPT TO SLAY DAVID FRUSTRATED BY MICHAL (1Sa 19:8-17).
1Sa 19:8, 1Sa 19:9
Themore correctly anevil spirit from Jehovah. The friendly relations between Saul and David continued for some time; but when at length war broke out again, David acquitted himself with his usual ability and success, whereupon Saul’s envy and jealousy returned, and fits of melancholy, deepening into insanity, once again over. clouded his reason. It is no longer called “an evil spirit from God,” as in 1Sa 18:10, but from Jehovah, as in 1Sa 16:14, suggesting that it was no longer a natural influence, but that Saul, having broken his covenant relations with Jehovah, was now punished by him. While in this moody state the same temptation to slay David with his javelin came over him, but with such violence that he was no longer able to restrain his evil intent.
1Sa 19:10-12
Saul sought to smite David. The verb used here is not that rendered cast in 1Sa 18:11, where probably we had the record of a purpose threatened, but not carried out. Here Saul actually threw his javelin at David with such violence that it was fixed into the wall. But David, though playing some instrument of music at the time, was on his guard, and slipped away. And David fled, and escaped that night. As usual, the historian gives the ultimate results of Saul’s violence first, and then returns and gives the particulars; for plainly David first went home, and it was only when he found that the house was surrounded by Saul’s emissaries that he fled away to find refuge with Samuel. Saul also sent messengers. As is often the case, this outbreak of violence on Saul’s part broke down all the former restraints of upright feeling and conscience. He had lost his self-respect, was openly a murderer as regards everything but the success of his attempt, and he determined that.that should not be long wanting. He sends persons, therefore, to watch David’s house, with orders that when in the morning he came out, suspecting no danger, they should fall upon him and slay him. But Michal in some way or other became aware of her husband’s danger. Possibly she had been at her father’s house in the afternoon, and with quick observation had noticed that more than usual was going on, and seeing that her own house was the object of these preparations, had divined their intent; or possibly Jonathan may have given her information, and so she warned David of his danger. As the entrance was guarded, he was let down through a window, like St. Paul afterwards, and so began the weary life of wandering which lasted through so many troubled years.
1Sa 19:13
Michal took an image. Literally, “the teraphim,” a plural word, but used here as a singular. Probably, like the corresponding Latin word penates, it had no singular in common use. It was a wooden block with head and shoulders roughly shaped to represent a human figure. Laban’s tera-phim were so small that Rachel could hide them under the camel’s furniture (Gen 31:34), but Michal’s seems to have been large enough to pass in the bed for a man. Though the worship of them is described as iniquity (1Sa 15:23), yet the superstitious belief that they brought good luck to the house over which they presided, in return for kind treatment, seems to have been proof against the teaching of the prophets; and Hosea describes the absence of them as on the same level as the absence of the ephod (Hos 3:4). A pillow of goats’ hair for his bolster. More correctly, “a goat’s skin about its head.” So the Syriac and Vulgate. The object of it, would be to look at a distance like a man s hair. The Septuagint has a goat’s liver, because this was supposed to palpitate long after the animal’s death, and so would produce the appearance of a person’s breathing. But this involves a different reading, for which there is no authority; nor was Michal’s deception intended for close observation. She would of course not let any one disturb David, and all she wanted was just enough likeness to a man to make a person at a distance suppose that David was there. Soon or later her artifice would be found out, but her husband would have had the intervening time for effecting his escape. As the word rendered pillow, and which is found only here, comes from a root signifying “to knot together,” “to intertwine,” some commentators think that it means a network of goats’ hair, perhaps to keep off flies. But this is a mere guess, and not to be set against the combined authority of the two versions. With a cloth. Hebrew, beged. This beged was David’s every day dress, and would greatly aid Michal in her pious artifice. It was a loose mantle, worn over the close-fitting meil (see 1Sa 2:19). Thus Ezra (Ezr 9:3, Ezr 9:5) says, “I rent my beged and my meil,” which the A.V. with characteristic inexactness translates “my garment and my mantle.” In Gen 28:20, where it is rendered raiment, Jacob speaks of it as the most indispensable article of dress; and in Gen 39:12, where it is rendered garment, we find that it was a loose plaid or wrapper. In those simple days it was used for warmth by night as well as for protection by day, and it is interesting to find David in his old age still covered up for warmth in bed by his beged (1Ki 1:1), where it is translated clothes.
1Sa 19:14-17
When, after waiting till the usual hour for David’s appearance, he came not, the watchers send and inform Saul, who now orders his open arrest. But Michal despatches a messenger to tell her father that he is sick. Upon this Saul orders bed and all to be brought, that he may slay him. As an Oriental bed is usually a mere strip of carpet, this would be easy enough. But when the messengers force their way through, in spite of every obstruction which Michal can devise to waste time, and come up close to the sleeping figure, “Lo, teraphim in the bed, and a goatskin at its head.” They carry the news to Saul, who sends for Michal, and reproaches her for letting his enemy go. And she, afraid of bringing her father’s anger upon herself, answers with a falsehood, such as we find David also too readily having resort to; for she tells Saul that his flight was David’s own doing, and that she had taken part in it only to save her life. Why should I kill thee? She pretends that David had told her not to force him to kill her by refusing to give her aid in his escape. Saul, no doubt, saw that she had been a willing agent; but as she professed to have been driven to do what she had done by David’s threats, he could say no more.
DAVID‘S FLIGHT TO SAMUEL AT RAMAH (1Sa 19:18-24).
1Sa 19:18
David…came to Samuel. We have seen that there is every reason to believe that David had been taught and trained by Samuel among the sons of the prophets, and now, conscious of his innocence, he flees for refuge to his old master, trusting that Saul would reverence God’s prophet, and give credence to his intercession and his pledge that David was guiltless. He and Samuel went and dwelt in Naioth. Rather in Nevayoth, as in the written text. This is not the name of a place, but signifies “dwellings,” “lodgings,” and is always translated in the Chaldee “house of study,” i.e. student’s lodgings. Somewhere near to Ramah Samuel had erected buildings to receive his young men, who were called “sons of the prophets,” not because their fathers were prophets, but because they were under prophetic training, with prophets for their teachers, though not necessarily intended to be prophets themselves. At first Samuel, we may suppose, built one nevath, one simple hospice for his students, and then, as their numbers grew, another, and yet another, and so the plural, nevayoth, came into voile as the name of the students’ quarters.
1Sa 19:19, 1Sa 19:20
On hearing where David was, Saul sends messengers to arrest him, and we thus incidentally gain a most interesting account of the inner condition of Samuel’s schools. Evidently after Saul had become king Samuel devoted his main energies to this noble effort to raise Israel from the barbarous depths into which it had sunk; and when the messengers arrive they enter some hall, where they find a regularly organised choir, consisting not of “sons of the prophets,” young men still under training, but of prophets, men who had finished their preparatory studies, and arrived at a higher elevation. The Chaldee Paraphrast calls them scribes; and doubtless those educated in Samuel’s schools held an analogous position to that of the scribes in later days. And Samuel himself was standingnot as appointed over them; he was the founder and originator of these schools, and all authority was derived from him. What the Hebrew says is that he was “standing as chief over them,” and they, frill of Divine enthusiasm, were chanting psalms to God’s glory. So noble was the sight, that Saul’s messengers on entering were seized with a like enthusiasm, and, laying aside their murderous purpose, joined in the hearty service of the prophetic sanctuary. Instead of they saw the Hebrew has “he saw,” but as all the versions have the plural, it is probably a mere mistake. The Hebrew word for company is found only here. By transposing the letters we have the ordinary word for congregation, but possibly it was their own technical name for some peculiar arrangement of the choir.
1Sa 19:21-24
Saul sends messengers a second and even a third time with the same result, and finally determines to go in person. Having set out, he came to amore correctly thegreat well that is in Sechumore probably the cistern or tank there. From the value of water it was no doubt a well known spot at the time, but in the present ruined state of the country all such works have perished. Sechu, according to Conder (‘Handbook’), was probably on the site of the present ruin of Suweikeh, immediately south of Beeroth. Having there made inquiries whether Samuel and David were still at Ramah, courageously awaiting his craning, he proceeds on his way. But even before arriving in Samuel’s presence, with that extraordinary susceptibility to external impressions which is so marked a feature in his character, he begins singing psalms, and no sooner had he entered the Nevavoth than he stripped off his clotheshis beged and meiland lay down nakedi.e. with only his tunic upon himall that day and all that night. His excitement had evidently been intense, and probably to the chanting he had added violent gesticulation. But it was not this so much as the tempest of his emotions which had exhausted him, and made him thus throw himself down as one dead. And once again the people wondered at so strange an occurrence, and called back to mind the proverb, Is Saul also among the prophets? When first used (1Sa 10:11) Saul’s enthusiasm was an outburst of piety, genuine but evanescent, and which had long since passed away. What was it now? The Chaldee, as explained by Rashi, says he was mad. More probably, in the violent state of excitement under which Saul had for some time been labouring, the thought of seeing Samuel, from whom he had been so long separated, brought back to his mind the old days when the prophet had loved and counselled him, and made him king, and been his true and faithful friend. And the remembrance overpowered him. What would he not have given to have continued such as he then was! And for a time he became once again the old Saul of Ramah; but the change was transient and fitful; and after these twenty-four hours of agony Saul rose up, full perhaps of good intentions, but with a heart unchanged, and certain, therefore, very quickly to disappoint all hopes of real amendment, and to become a still more moody and relentless tyrant.
HOMILETICS.
1Sa 19:1-7
Open enmity and open friendship.
The facts are
1. Saul reveals his purpose to kill David.
2. This being made known to Jonathan, he arranges with David to let him learn the result of an effort to turn Saul from his purpose.
3. He pleads with Saul David’s good services and personal risks, God’s approval, and the king’s own joy therein.
4. Saul yields to persuasion, resolves not to shed “innocent blood,” and recalls David into his personal service. The historian traces the progress of Saul to ruin, and of David to royal honours, and here brings out the aroused hostility of Saul on the one side, and the open services of Jonathan’s friendship on the other. Father and son are at cross purposes concerning the life of one who in the providence of God is to supplant both. Each performs his part with perfect naturalness; and in the progress of the conflict between enmity and friendship there is a revelation not only of the individual characteristics of the men, but also of principles in constant operation. We have here an instance of
I. THE INEVITABLE GROWTH OF SECRET SIN. Except in occasional seasons of moodiness, Saul’s conduct towards David had not found formal expression. His servants probably set down his violence (1Sa 18:11) to irritability, and we have seen how cleverly Saul had striven to throw on Providence the slaying of David while he was doing him honour (1Sa 18:17-30). The frustration of these secret schemes brought out the fact that the sin so long cherished in the heart, and for very shame concealed, had, by that very nurture, gained such power over the entire man as to force its way into open day, regardless of all considerations of prudence and self-respect. The murder in intent became murder avowed. The ruling passion of the inner life now became the acknowledged master, and a public avowal of servitude to it is therefore voluntarily made. Saul’s experience is but an instance of the experience of multitudes. Progress in wickedness is from within outwards. Lust, when it hath conceived, brings forth sin (Jas 1:15). Every deliberate murder, theft, deed of adultery, fraud, and rebellion against Christ’s authority was at first germinal in the heart. Each stage of internal growth lessened the power of the will over its progress, till at last it revealed its evil nature in open acts. This psychological genesis of sin is an awful fact, and may well cause those to tremble whose dalliance with secret evil becomes habitual. Truly he who committeth sin is “the servant of sin,” and every consideration of duty and interest should urge us to cry daily for a “clean heart,” and that sin may have “no more dominion” over us (Psa 139:23; Rom 6:14).
II. THE STUPIDITY CONSEQUENT ON THE DOMINION OF SIN. Facts prove that all sin is a species of madness. Adam and Eve imagined that a thicket would hide them from God. Saul’s clearness of intellect suffered by his first public disobedience; and now that the evil passion had gained ascendancy, extreme stupidity appears in his soliciting the aid, in the execution of his cruel purpose, of Jonathan, David’s bosom friend (1Sa 18:1-4; 1Sa 19:1). If he knew nothing of their friendship, which is very improbable, he ought to have known enough of so good and devout a son as to be sure that he would be no party to a base and villanous deed. If he imagined that Jonathan was likely to be actuated by jealousy of a rival, he performed the stupid act, common to base men, of thinking that reasons which have force with themselves have force with others. In proportion to the power of sin over the will is the effect of it on the intellect. Even the most clever sinners, when seeking to cover their sin from man, manifest some infatuation or folly which affords the clue to their crime. But it is especially in relation to God and the future issues of sin that this stupefying effect appears. It is only this blinded spirit that explains the ease with which men read of the coming “terrors of the Lord” (2Co 5:10, 2Co 5:11; 2Co 4:3, 2Co 4:4; Heb 2:3).
III. THE DOMESTIC SORROWS CREATED BY SIN. It was with a sad, heavy heart that Jonathan had witnessed the gradual decay of his father’s character, but the saddest blow was when the father sought to make the son partaker in his sin. The grief of the son would be proportionate to his piety. To be tempted by a father, to have filial obedience tested in deeds of evil, to see the utter ruin of a parent’s moral character, was a bitter trial; and, as a true son, Jonathan could not but bear these sorrows as a fearful secret. In how many families are there sorrows of this kind! How many a child has to watch the decay of a father’s reputation, to bear inducements to sin, and to hide deeds and intentions of evil! A parent is far gone when children are prompted to wrong. A child is indeed a “child of sorrow” when compelled to carry on a pure heart the secrets of a sinful home.
IV. THE TRIUMPH OF RELIGIOUS FRIENDSHIP. It is scarcely likely that Saul would speak to Jonathan about killing David without pointing out how dangerous a rival he was to both father and son. It raised in Jonathan’s mind the conflict of worldly interest and fidelity to a friend. Not a few have yielded to such temptations. But Jonathan’s pure soul was equal to the occasion. His conduct was marked by exquisite delicacy of feeling and wisdom. He would not so degrade his father as to tell David that he had been asked to slay his friend, while be assured David of his real danger. While not assuming the tone of an advocate, he skilfully handled facts so as to achieve the end in view. The point of the temptation was to sacrifice friendship to private and public interests. There are persons still subject to the same trial. May we not also see something analogous to the common temptations of Christians to renounce the “anointed One” for reasons pertaining to earthly wealth and glory? Where there is real oneness of heart with Christ, no blandishments of sin, no prospect of greater worldly distinction, avail to break the sacred bond.
V. THE FORCE OF TRUTH ON THE CONSCIENCE. Jonathan simply, in a kindly, gentle way, conversed with his father on the matter, and called his attention to a few facts,David’s risks, services, and evident approval by God, and Saul’s own joy in his victories,and then asks whether such innocent blood should be shed. The effect even on the impenitent Saul is to soften his hard heart and draw forth the declaration that he shall be spared. Happy the son who has such influence with an unhappy, wicked father! In dealing with hardened sinners three things are necessary.
1. Truth to present to the conscience. That David was innocent Saul knew; but ordinarily passion blinded him to the due recognition of it. If we can hold forth “the word of life,” the actual truth concerning Christ, so that it shall shine straight in upon the conscience, men cannot but acknowledge its power, and it will exercise some restraint on their conduct.
2. A kindly, unaffected manner. It was the manner of Jonathan that secured an attentive hearing and disarmed Saul’s suspicion. Harsh language tends to arouse antagonism. The secret of success lies in so presenting the truth that it stands forth alone, unmixed with disturbing elements from our personality. “He that winneth souls is wise” (Pro 11:30).
3. Prayerfulness of spirit. We may be sure that Jonathan as well as David prayed in spirit on this occasion. The tone of our mind is wonderfully affected by prayerfulness. We then speak for God and man with a gentle force which guilty men cannot but feel.
General lessons:
1. More attention should be called to the importance of crushing out sinful feelings on their first appearance, and means suggested for so doing.
2. Parents and persons in positions of influence should be earnestly warned of the fearful crime of seeking to induce young persons to violate their sense of right and truth.
3. The good that is in us may be much more utilised if we strive to act with the “wisdom of the serpent and the harmlessness of the dove.”
1Sa 19:8-17
Revived sins and troubles.
The facts are
1. The fresh fame of David arouses the latent ill-will of Saul, who seeks in vain to smite him with a javelin.
2. David fleeing to his house, Saul sends men to lie in wait for and slay him.
3. Michal warns him of danger, and during the night aids his escape.
4. By a clever device she diverts his enemies from an immediate pursuit, and on being accused of aiding her father’s enemy, she pleads self-preservation. The troubles of life are but temporarily overcome. It was destined for David to smite the national enemy, since he went forth as none other did, strong in the “name of the Lord.” The fame of his exploits no sooner reached the ears of Saul than the effect of Jonathan’s recent endeavour to reconcile him to David was utterly lost; and hence arose a series of new troubles for persecutor and the persecuted. We see here
I. That A RADICAL CHANGE OF DISPOSITION IS THE ONLY GUARANTEE OF CONDUCT AND CHARACTER. The change wrought in Saul by Jonathan’s recent presentation of truth was only superficial. The old sin was loved and unrepented of. The nature of the man was alienated from the life of God; and hence on the slightest approach of temptation the old spirit broke forth. It is universally true that no intellectual recognition of truth, no acquiescence of conscience in the injustice of a course, no reformation consequent on human influence over the feelings or the intelligence, will make man, or enable him to be, what he ought to be. The fundamental disposition must be renewed. There are instances of this in Christian history. The lion becomes a lamb. A Saul of Tarsus becomes an apostle of Christ. It is in the nature of things that so it should be. For in the ordained subordination of the powers of the mind there is a ruling disposition to which all bend: if it be pure all will move in a holy direction; if it be impure the whole life will he stained. Out of the heart are the issues of life. It is the weakness of all systems of morality that they exalt virtue and teach the evils of vice, but furnish no adequate power to render the life virtuous in the highest sense of the term. Moralists may be immoral. The doing of truth is not involved in a knowledge of it. Here it is that the New Testament comes in to supplement man’s knowledge, and to perfect codes of morality. By the gift of the Holy Spirit it builds up outward character from within, and insures that at last sin shall have no dominion over us. There is danger of men overlooking this truth, especially when many run to and fro, and knowledge is increased. Civilisation, by securing a presentable exterior, diverts attention from the “hidden man of the heart.” The indirect effect of Christianity is to incorporate with the ordinary character many of the virtues nourished only by itself, and hence men imagine that society would be what it is without Christianity. It is extremely important, therefore, to insist on the New Testament teaching of the need of a radical change by the power of the Holy Spirit; to seek to bring our children early under his renewing power, and to pray constantly that men may be renewed and become new creatures in Christ Jesus.
II. That THE AFFLICTIONS OFTEN BEFALLING THE SERVANTS OF GOD PUT A SEVERE STRAIN ON THEIR FAITH. If Psa 59:1-17 was written in reference to this persecution, we can see the propriety of the assertion, “Not for my transgression, and not for any sin of mine” (Psa 59:3), do they “set themselves.” To a young man conscious of his integrity, and not without hope of being accepted of God, it must have seemed a strange providence which allowed his life to be so troubled. Could Samuel’s anointing really have a Divine significance? (1Sa 16:13). Was it not a mistake to have left the quiet sheepfold for the scene of conflict? (1Sa 17:20). Would it not be well even now to retire into private life? Why should an innocent, sincere soul have such constant reason to cry, “Awake to help me, and behold?” (Psa 59:4). The experience is not confined to David. One greater than David, when in pursuit of his higher work in the world, was a “Man of sorrows, and acquainted with grief.” And likewise for many a year his Church, when pursuing her holy and beneficent course, was exposed to relentless persecution. It is still true that “many are the afflictions of the righteous,” and that “through much tribulation “we enter the kingdom. But all this is not a matter of chance, nor an indication of imperfect wisdom and love. The world is evil, and goodness can only live in it by conflict. It is part of the great battle of the universe that sin shall be exterminated by endured sorrows. History proves that the purest lives and most beautiful virtues have flourished in times and by means of severe trial. Every sufferer knows how blessed it is to be driven nearer to God. The tribulation is only for a brief space, and works out a far more exceeding and eternal weight of glory. Hence faith can bear the strain; the more so as God does succour and delight the soul with his comforts (Psa 59:17; Psa 94:19).
III. That THOSE WHO DEVISE EVIL AGAINST THE SERVANTS OF GOD ARE SOMETIMES CAUGHT IN THEIR OWN DEVICES. In the exercise of his low cunning Saul gave Michal to David that she might be a snare to him (1Sa 18:21), her character and tendencies being such as might in his judgment bring him into trouble. It now turned out that the snare for David became a snare for Saul (Psa 7:14, Psa 7:15). Wicked men cannot always reckon safely on their instruments. Men laid snares for Christ, but were entangled in their own talk (Mat 22:15-22). Pharaoh thought he would find Israel “entangled in the land” (Exo 14:3), and he found himself ensnared therein to his own destruction. Snares are laid for the Church of God in modern times, and some of these will doubtless prove the reverse of the original intent. We are invited with persuasive voice to enter the pathway of severe historical criticism and of physical science, and it is hoped thereby to disenchant us of the fascination of a supernatural Christianity. Men are as confident of the result as was Saul when he gave Michal to David (1Sa 18:21); but we have nothing to fear, for criticism and science thus far only bring out the truth that the CHRIST is unexplainable on any hypothesis but that of the supernatural; and hence, on the ordinary principles of scientific research, men are bound to accept that hypothesis, or else declare themselves unscientific. “He must reign till he hath put all enemies under his feet” (1Co 15:25),
IV. That ALTHOUGH IMPERFECT MORAL CONDUCT MAY SUBSERVE THE INTERESTS OF GOD‘S SERVANTS, IT NEVERTHELESS IS DISHONOURING TO THEM. Michal acted a lie, and also told deliberate lies, in order to shield David and then herself. The issue was advantageous to David, as it put a wide distance between him and his pursuers. The statement of the facts in Scripture is by no means identical with approval of them. God’s purposes have sometimes been furthered by the actions of imperfect men, but the actions have been their own, and never have had Divine approval. It is true still that many a defective “earthen vessel” is the instrument of good. Indeed, were God to refrain from working out his blessed purposes of mercy till we were all pure as the angels, the prospects of the world would be dark enough. The safe rule is “not to do evil that good may come.” Good does come often in spite of evil, as when God’s truth is diffused in spite of the mixed motives and strifes of those engaged in his service, and when comfort and joy flow to the poor from money given even for purposes far from benevolent. The command of God is “Lie not one to another” (Le Psa 19:11). It is not for us to say that dangers will be avoided by occasional lies. The principle involved in truth speaking is of vast importance in all times and places, and is worth the sacrifice of much for its vindication. Suppose a man is slain rather than utter a lie, does not his martyrdom for truth, in the enduring moral sphere, bring greater good to moral beings and himself than could have come from trampling on a sacred principle for a present advantage? God, moreover, does not leave his servants when they do right. Had Michal stated the facts she would have saved her husband from slander, and there were ten thousand ways by which God could have frustrated the purpose of the men and shielded David. Our duty is to be true and leave consequences to God. God does not liewe are children of God; Christ did not liewe are followers of Christ. We may be sure that permanent good must ensue on our being conformed to Christ, the image of God. There is a gain which is loss, and a loss which is gain.
General lessons:
1. The influence of Christians may restrain the development of sin in some of its grosser forms, but it is an imperfect Christianity which rests in that.
2. The “wrath of man” is made to praise God, in that persecutions issue in greater spirituality of mind and fitness for permanent service (Rom 5:3-5).
3. We need not fret and be uneasy about the snares of the wicked if only we are in God’s service, as time is on our side (Psa 37:1-40.).
4. Christians should strive to put down all practical forms of falsehood prevalent in society, and train children in a severe love of truth at any cost.
1Sa 19:18-24
Saintly refuge and spiritual restraint.
The facts are
1. David takes refuge with Samuel at Naioth in Ramah.
2. The messengers sent by Saul to take David are restrained in the presence of Samuel and the prophets, and themselves begin to prophesy.
3. Other messengers come under the same influence.
4. Venturing to go himself, he, on approaching the place, also falls under the prophetic influence, and is utterly overcome by it in the presence of Samuel. Human wisdom may be almost confounded by the prominent facts of this section, but this must not be taken as proof of our infallibility, nor of the unfitness of the event with the order of Divine providence. Had it been left to man to invent and regulate the process by which the earth and life upon it arrived at the forms now familiar to us, would he have introduced some of those ancient physical conditions and changes which must have been so utterly unlike what now prevail? The convulsions, the transformations, the climatic conditions, the huge forms of life of some past ages are as much unlike the present facts as the spiritual manifestations of the prophetic schools are unlike the orderly course of Christian influence. It is only of late years that men have in some degree traced the naturalness of the physical process, and even now there is diversity of opinion on the subject. It is not to be wondered at, therefore, if, in man’s comparative ignorance of the unseen spiritual sphere in which the great development of God’s purpose in Christ really occurs, he should not be able to supply all the links connecting the spiritual manifestations of the era of Samuel with the rigid legal era of Moses and the more calm and orderly methods of the Christian dispensation.
“Blind unbelief is sure to err,
And scan his work in vain;
God is his own interpreter,
And he will make it plain.”
Looking at the teaching of the section, we see
I. As IMPORTANT SPIRITUAL POWER BEING NOURISHED AMIDST THE TURMOIL OF PUBLIC AFFAIRS. While battles were being fought, and the kingdom was troubled with the unsatisfactory condition of the court, Samuel was quietly gathering around himself a band of men who, devoting attention to the records of Israel’s history, the exercise of psalmody and music, and the spiritual interests of men, were becoming a power to influence the national life in days to come. The extent and strength of that influence cannot be minutely traced, because of its spiritual nature; but the higher tone of national life during the reigns of David and Solomon was doubtless largely due to it. Centres of spiritual influence are formed when the great political world is intent on its wars and intrigues. Notably, Christianity arose and found its first nourishment amidst the quiet valleys and hills of Palestine while Roman imperialism was intent on conquests and ignorant almost of its existence. The band of men and women who met for prayer in an upper room (Act 1:13, Act 1:14) cultivated there the power which afterwards penetrated into all parts of the Roman empire. The quiet retreats and colleges of the middle ages in some respects were the seats of an influence which the world could ill spare. During the close of the last century small bodies of Christians nourished here and there the missionary spirit which has since affected the destinies of millions in the East and South. Amidst all the conflicts of politics and controversies of science and worry of commerce there are quiet fellowships of Christians devoted to the nourishment of a life destined to conserve and elevate the national life. The Christian Church has need to form and sustain “schools of the prophets” to meet the demands of the age. Samuel’s course and the injunctions of Paul to Timothy (1Ti 3:1-7; 1Ti 5:21, 1Ti 5:22; 2Ti 2:4; cf. Eph 4:11-15) suggest that it is the duty of the Church as a whole, and not to be left as a private enterprise to a few zealous individuals, to provide for the training of men for spiritual service. Had more care been devoted to this in years past it had been well for the world.
II. THE SORROWFUL SOUL SEEKS REFUGE FROM THE CARES AND TROUBLES OF LIFE IN FELLOWSHIP WITH THE DEVOUT. It was a spiritual instinct that drew David to Samuel. The penalties of public life had already fallen heavily upon him. He had found, even in the beginning of his career of service to mankind, that “offences must needs come.” The whole tone of life around the throne was out of accord with his most cherished aspirations. He was conscious of being misunderstood and misrepresented. The earlier days of quiet service and holy communion with God were now but sweet memories, bringing the bitter realities of daily life into stronger relief. With bounding heart and rapid flight, therefore, did he seek consolation, counsel, and rest with the honoured man who once anointed him to some unexplained service. Many have been, and still are, in full sympathy with the troubled David. The devout heart is brave, and dares not shun to fight the holy battles of the Lord in daily life. Religion is to flourish in face of evil and care, and not away in solitude. The business of life must not be left to the greedy and the vile. The great prayer was not that the disciples should be taken from the world, but that they should be kept from its evil (Joh 17:15; cf. 1Co 5:10). Yet human nature cries out under the strain; the spiritual mind is disgusted with the sins it witnesses; the sense of belonging to a higher citizenship rises in force; sympathy with kindred spirits is longed for; the support of stronger natures is a pressing need; and opportunities for prayer and for contemplation on the loftier aims of life are earnestly desired. Under this common inspiration, Jacob and Moses and Elijah sought each his “Bethel,” and found strength for the coming trials and relief from present cares. It was in the same participation in human infirmities and sorrows that Christ loved to retire from the alien world to seek solace with his Father and with his people. For the same reason we love to retire from the turmoil of life to the fellowship of a pious home, a meeting for prayer and counsel, and the service of the sanctuary. It is helpful to court occasional retirement. The “communion of saints” should be more than an article in our creed.
III. A DIVINE RESTRAINT IS PUT ON THE ENEMIES OF GOD‘S SERVANTS. Saul’s wicked desperation was great when he sent to Naioth to take David, and at its highest pitch when, after three despatches of men, he ventured to go to the abode of Samuel on a cruel errand. Hitherto Saul appeared to be fighting solely against David; but now that the mysterious spirit of prophecy came upon his messengers and rendered them harmless, it ought to have been obvious to him that in persecuting David he was at war with God. The knowledge of this mysterious restraint on them could not but add to his mental confusion, though it was not sufficient to the subjugation of his wild passion. Yet Saul was not bereft of reason; and could he have travelled to Ramah on such an errand without passing in review events prior and subsequent to his last intercourse with Samuel? (1Sa 15:26-35). Must he not have gone back in thought to the fearful day when the prophet declared the doom of his reign; the earlier days when as king he received the cheers of the people and the instructions of the prophet (1Sa 10:24, 1Sa 10:25); and the still earlier time when, fresh from his anointing, on meeting a band of prophets, the spirit of prophecy came on him and turned him into another man? (1Sa 10:5-9). And now, after long separation, he was drawing near to that revered man of God and the company of the prophets, not the former Saul, full of hope and courage, but a man sinking deeper and deeper in sin, and with only the courage bred of remorse. If he was to be restrained and rendered harmless, what more natural methodmore in harmony with the characteristics of the age and locality, and the psychological factsthan that for a season the old prophetic excitement should come upon him? It is no solitary fact that the mental and moral atmosphere of a place exercises power over men. The main truth, however, is that God restrains. Divine restraint enters into all things. The nature of things is but their limit assigned by God. The original relation of forces in the physical world is so settled by God that their interaction shall be bounded by. definite results. To every effect wrought out in the development of the material universe it has been virtually said, “Thus far shalt thou go, and no farther.” Scripture makes known the restraint which God puts on’ hearts and on moral beings. Lions dare not touch a Daniel. Evil spirits beg permission of Christ before they can go forth. Men sent to seize the Saviour were unable to fulfil their mission (Joh 7:46), and soldiers were powerless in his presence (Joh 18:5-6). The history of the Church and of individual Christian life brings out instances of the restraining power which silently lays hold of man and renders his enmity innocuous. “It shall not come nigh thee” (Psa 91:7) has often been verified. In all these instances we have but glimpses of that unseen Power by which in due time all principalities and powers, and whatever opposeth itself to God and his Church, shall be either turned unto him or deprived of their power of injury (Isa 11:9; Isa 35:9, Isa 35:10; 1Co 15:24-26; Php 2:9-11; Col 1:19, Col 1:20; Rev 21:22-27).
HOMILIES BY B. DALE
1Sa 19:1-7. (GIBEAH.)
The proof of true friendship.
Adversity is the touchstone of friendship, as of many other things; and its experience, sooner or later, is certain. Notwithstanding the secret jealousy and plotting of Saul, the prosperity of David continued to increase; and at length, unable to endure the sight of it, he “spoke to Jonathan his son, and to all his servants, about killing David.” Persons in high places are generally attended by some men who, like Doeg (1Sa 21:7; 1Sa 22:22) and Cush (Psa 7:1-17; inscription), are ready to carry out their evil wishes. The danger of David was now imminent. And with the revelation of it to him by Jonathan his troubles began. Whilst adversity shows the insincerity and worthlessness of false friends, it also shows the sincerity and worth of true. “In adverse hours the friendship of the good shines most.” The proof of true friendship appears in
I. THE STEADFASTNESS OF ITS ATTACHMENT. “Jonathan delighted much in David.” Notwithstanding
1. Misrepresentation on the part of enemies. There can be no doubt that Saul spoke of David as treacherously aiming at the throne. The mouths of others were full of detraction and calumny, by which they sought to destroy him as with sharp swords (Psa 59:7).
2. Urgent claims on the part of friends and kindred. A father’s wishes are sometimes opposed to a friend’s welfare.
3. Self–interest. If David were spared Jonathan’s accession to the throne would be jeopardised (1Sa 21:13). But true friendship stands the test. It “thinketh no evil” of a friend, will do him no wrong, nor admit the least feeling of jealousy or envy. The wintry storm only serves to strengthen its attachment. “Yet these two charges of inconstancy and of weakness condemn most men: either in their prosperity they despise a friend, or in his troubles they desert him” (Cicero).
II. THE FAITHFULNESS OF ITS COMMUNICATIONS. “And Jonathan told David,” etc. (1Sa 19:2, 1Sa 19:3).
1. It reveals the whole truth and conceals nothing. “If you think any one your friend in whom you do not put the same confidence as in yourself you know not the real power of friendship” (Seneca).
2. It gives the best counsel in its power.
3. It promises aid as it may be needed.
III. THE SELF–DEVOTION OF ITS ENDEAVOURS. “And Jonathan spake good of David,” etc. (1Sa 19:4, 1Sa 19:5).
1. It undergoes personal risk in undertaking the cause of a friend.
2. It makes earnest entreaty on behalf of the absent one; asserting his innocence, enumerating his services, setting forth his claims upon gratitude and esteem, and remonstrating against his being injured “without cause” (1Sa 19:5; Joh 15:25).
3. It shows a prudent and respectful regard for those whom it wishes to influence. In Jonathan prudence and principle were combined. “Prudence did not go so far as to make him silent about the sin which Saul was purposing to commit; principle was not so asserted as to arouse his father’s indignation” (W.M. Taylor).
IV. THE VALUE OF ITS ACHIEVEMENTS. “And Saul hearkened,” etc. (1Sa 19:6, 1Sa 19:7). “How forcible are right words!” Even the heart of Saul is moved, and his better feelings gain the ascendancy. How often by a generous and prudent attempt at peace making is
1. A threatening evil averted.
2. A reconciliation, of the alienated effected.
3. Intercourse between friends renewed, “as in times past.” “Blessed are the peacemakers,” etc. (Mat 5:9). “There are four, young man” (says an Eastern sage), “who, seeming to be friends, are enemies in disguisethe rapacious friend, the man of much profession, the flatterer, and the dissolute companion These four, young man, are true friendsthe watchful friend, the friend who is the same in prosperity and adversity, the friend who gives good advice, and the sympathising friend” (‘Contem. Rev.,’ 27:421).D.
1Sa 19:8-18. (GIBEAH.)
David’s escape from court.
“And David fled, and escaped that night” (1Sa 19:10). “There was war again” (1Sa 17:1-58.; 1Sa 18:5, 1Sa 18:30), victory by David again, an evil spirit upon Saul again (1Sa 16:23; 1Sa 18:10); and, as David once more sat in the palace, “playing with his hand,” the king not merely brandished his spear as before, but hurled it at him. It was his last attempt of the kind. After what had taken place he might not be trusted again; and David fled, first to his own house, and during the night from the city. It is one of the memorable nights of the Bible.
1. That night was the commencement of his open persecution by Saul, and of the long and varied troubles he experienced as an outlaw. He had been at court some three or four years, and now at three and twenty went forth to his seven years’ wanderings (2Sa 5:5 : “He lived seventy years”Josephus).
2. That night was, as is commonly thought, the occasion of the composition of the first of David’s psalms. PSALM 59; ‘the refuge of the persecuted,’ “is perhaps the oldest of the Davidic psalms that have come down to us” (Delitzsch). It is not necessary to suppose that it was actually written on the night of his escape. The thoughts and feelings then entertained may have been penned subsequently; perhaps while he continued at Ramah with Samuel and “the prophets” (1Sa 19:18, 1Sa 19:20). Other psalms have been referred by some to the same occasionviz; Psa 6:1-10; Psa 7:1-17; Psa 11:1-7. “His harp was his companion in his flight, and even in the midst of peril the poet’s nature appears which regards all life as materials for song, and the devout spirit appears which regards all trials as occasions of praise” (Maclaren). How wide and deep was the stream of sacred song of which this was the commencement!
3. That night afforded one of the most remarkable instances of the protecting and guiding providence of God by which the life of David was manifestly ordered. Notice
I. HIS DANGER, and the anxiety and distress by which it was naturally attended (verses 11, 14, 17, compared with Psa 59:1-17.). Adversity
1. Often follows closely upon prosperity. In the morning David occupied a position of high honour as the king’s son-in-law, the successful general, the popular hero; at night he was hiding in secret and fleeing for his life. Vicissitude is the law of life; and none, however exalted, may boast of their security or continuance (Job 29:18).
2. Appears sometimes to fall most heavily upon the godly man. “Not for my transgression nor for my sin” (Psa 59:3). Why should it be permitted? To test, manifest, strengthen, and perfect his character. David had been tried by prosperity, he must also be tried by adversity.
3. Is due, in great measure, to the opposition and persecution of the ungodly. What a picture is here presented of the enemies of David, “when Saul sent messengers, and they watched the house to kill him”! (Psa 59:3, Psa 59:6, Psa 59:14). And what a revelation does it make of the wickedness of the human heart, which was consummated in the crucifying of the Lord of glory! “As then he that was born after the flesh,” etc. (Gal 4:29). The conflict is renewed in every age and in every individual life. “All that will live godly,” etc. (2Ti 3:12).
4. Leads the good man to more entire trust in God and more earnest prayer. This is one of its chief purposes.
“Deliver me from mine enemies, O my God!
O Jehovah, God of hosts, God of Israel! ….
O my Strength, on thee will I wait,
For God is my Fortress?’
5. Is never so bitter to him as trouble to the wicked, for he has peace within and undying hope. How different was it with David in this respect from what it was with Saul]
6. However long the good man may suffer from the persecution of the wicked, his deliverance is certain for “God is Ruler in Jacob,” etc. (Psa 59:13). “By him actions are weighed.”
II. HIS DELIVERANCE (verses 11, 12, 17, 18). The interposition of Providence, to which it was due
1. Is not made without the watchful and diligent use of appropriate means. David did not presumptuously wait in the palace or his own house, but availed himself of the opportunity of escaping. “When they persecute you,” etc. (Mat 10:23).
2. Is shown in turning to good what was meant for evil. The snare that was woven for his soul (1Sa 17:21; 1Sa 17:11; Psa 59:3) aided his escape.
3. Often fills the wicked with disappointment and confusion when most confident of success (verse 17).
4. Provides a home for the good man when driven out of their society. “Came to Samuel and told him all,” etc. That night he was received by his revered friend, to whose instructions he had doubtless often listened; and with whom else could he have found such sympathy and shelter?
5. Causes him to render praise to God.
“But, as for me, I will sing of thy strength,
Yea, I will shout aloud of thy mercy in the morning;
For thou hast been a Fortress to me,
And a Refuge in the day when I was in distress:
O my Strength, unto thee will I harp,
For God is my Fortress, my merciful God.”
6. Conduces to the benefit of many. These Psalms of Davidthe result (under “an unction from the Holy One”) of his distresses and deliverancesare among our greatest spiritual treasures. “They are for all time. They never can be outgrown. No dispensation while the world lasts and continues what it is can ever raise us above the reach or the need of them. They describe every spiritual vicissitude, they speak to all classes of minds, they command every natural emotion. They are penitential, jubilant adorative, deprecatory;they are tender, mournful, joyous, majestic;soft as the descent of dew; low as the whisper of love; loud as the voice of thunder; terrible as the almightiness of God [“(Binney, ‘Service of Song in the House of the Lord’).D.
1Sa 19:11-17. (GIBEAH.)
Michal.
The women mentioned in the Books of Samuel are, for the most part, distinguished for their eminent piety. But what shall be said of Michal, the wife of David? She was a daughter of Saul, inherited much of his temperament and disposition, and (unlike Jonathan) was without the religious principle by which they might have been controlled and sanctified. She was
1. Impressionable and impulsive. Fascinated by his personal appearance and popularity, the young princess “loved David,” and made no secret of her affection; but she does not appear to have perceived anything of his highest qualities. The relation of husband and wife, no less than that of friends, is firmest when sanctified by common faith and love toward God.
2. Capable of a noble action. Under the influence of strong feeling she warned David of his danger and aided his escape, at the risk of her own life.
3. Designing and deceptive. Her quick wittedness devised the means of escape, deceived the messengers of Saul to gain time, and invented a ready story to disarm her father’s wrath. Her fear of her father was greater than her love for truth; and her love for her husband greater than her hatred of sin. “She could tell lies for David, but she had not the courage and the faith to go with him into suffering, or to tell the truth for him” (W. M. Taylor).
4. Superstitious. Teraphim (1Sa 15:23). See Bible Dictionaries. It is not said that David knew of her possession of these idolatrous objects.
5. Changeable and wayward. During the wanderings of David she was given in marriage to Phalti, apparently without reluctance (1Sa 25:44); and (as appears when restored to David) “she had evidently gained his affections; he most likely had won hers” (2Sa 3:16).
6. Proud, jealous, and scornful. Proud of her birth and rank, jealous of her rivals, Abigail and Ahinoam, and scornful toward her husband. “She despised him in her heart.”
“Preceding the blest vessel, onward came,
With light dance leaping, girt in humble guise,
Israel’s sweet harper; in that hap he seemed
Less and yet more kingly. Opposite
At a great palace, from the lattice forth
Looked Michal, like a lady full of scorn
And sorrow” (Dante, ‘Purg.’ 10.).
7. Unspiritual, and destitute of sympathy with the feelings of boundless gratitude, joy, and adoration expressed before the Lord.D.
1Sa 19:20. (RAMAH.)
Samuel the president.
Of Samuel one more glimpse is afforded before his life closes. After his separation from Saul he appears to have devoted himself to the training of a body of younger men to carry on his prophetic work. The flight of David to him shows that an intimate relationship had previously subsisted between them. He went to him for counsel and sanctuary, and the intercourse of the young hero with the old prophet is full of suggestion. Samuel might have advised him to make armed resistance against the godless tyranny of Saul; in which, with his great popularity, he might have succeeded, but only at the cost of a long and ruinous civil war. As at the rejection of Saul he avoided violent measures m support of the theocracy, so now he counselled the same course, and took David with him from his own house to Naioth (dwellings), or the common residence of “the company of the prophets” (1Sa 10:10), in the neighbourhood of Ramah. It was the chief home of order, light, and religion; the centre of spiritual influence. “He found there only temporary safety, indeed, from Saul’s persecution, but abiding consolation and strength in the inspired prophetic word, in the blessings of the fraternal community, and in the consoling and elevating power of the holy poetic art, whereby he doubtless stood in peculiarly intimate connection with the community” (Erdmann). “God intended to make David not a warrior and a king only, but a prophet too. As the field fitted him for the first and the court for the second, so Naioth shall fit him for the third (Hall). How long he continued is not stated; but, on hearing of his refuge, Saul sent three times to take him by force, and ultimately went himself for the purpose. The messengers found an assembly (lahak, used here only, probably by a transposition of letters, i.q. kahalGesenius) of prophets engaged in religious exercises under the presidency of Samuel. It is not necessary to suppose that the service, which may have had a special character, was conducted in a large hall, though there may have been such; it was probably in the open air, and capable of being seen and heard from a distance (1Sa 19:22). With respect more particularly to Samuel, notice
I. HIS HONOURED POSITION“standing as appointed over them,” or as leader; not probably appointed by any official act of theirs, but generally recognised and honoured, and directing their holy exercises. The honour in which he was held was due to
1. The pre-eminent authority he possessed as a prophet of the Lord (1Sa 3:19).
2. The high character he had so long sustained in that office, and the course of labour he had pursued.
3. The special work he had accomplished in gathering around him such young men as seemed to be qualified by their gifts and piety to act as prophets in Israel, and forming them into a school or college of prophets. He was the venerable founder of their order, and reaped the reward of his labours in their reverence and affection, and still more in their devotion to Jehovah and their zeal for his honour.
II. HIS PROPHETIC ASSOCIATES. They were ‘”prophets,” not “sons” or disciples “of the prophets” (2Ki 2:3), who seem to have occupied in later times a more dependent and inferior position. They were a union or free association of men “endowed with the Spirit of God for the purpose of carrying on their work, the feeble powers of junior members being directed and strengthened by those of a higher class” (Kitto, ‘Cyc. of Bib. Lit.’). Among them probably were Gad (1Sa 22:5; 2Sa 24:11), Nathan (2Sa 7:2; 2Sa 12:1), and Heman, the grandson of Samuel (1Ch 6:33; 1Ch 25:5; “the king’s seer,” etc.).
1. They had been under his instruction in the knowledge of God and his law, and, as subservient to this, in reading and writing, poetry, music, and singing. “Education is not a panacea for all human ills, but it is an indispensable condition both of individual and of national progress” (‘Expositor,’ 3:344).
2. They were in sympathy with his purposes concerning the true welfare of the people of Israel, and strove to carry them into effect. They formed “a compact phalanx to stand against the corruption which had penetrated so deeply into the nation, and to bring back the rebellious to the law and the testimony” (Keil).
3. They were endowed, like Samuel himself, with a peculiar measure of the Divine Spirit for the accomplishment of their work. By his influence they were drawn together, variously gifted, and sometimes impelled to ecstatic utterances.
III. HIS DEVOUT OCCUPATION. He presided over the prophets, and took part with them in “prophesying,” or uttering with a loud voice the praises of God. His last recorded act was one of worship, and under his influence David’s intense love for public worship was probably acquired. The service was
1. Accompanied with music (as in 1Sa 10:10). “A principal part of their occupation consistedunder the guidance of some prophet of superior authority, and more peculiarly under the Divine influence, as moderator and preceptorin celebrating the praises of Almighty God, in hymns and poetry, with choral chaunts, accompanied by stringed instruments and pipes” (Lowth).
2. Edifying. Whilst their utterance expressed their inward feeling, it was also the means of teaching and exhorting one another, and of “awakening holy susceptibilities and emotions in the soul, and of lifting up the spirit to God, and so preparing it for the reception of Divine revelations.”
3. United. which tends by the power of sympathy to intensify feeling, strengthen faith, enlarge desire, and perfect those dispositions in connection with which worship is acceptable to God.
IV. HIS POWERFUL INFLUENCE. “The Spirit of God came upon the messengers,” etc. The immediate effect was to transform these men, to protect David from their power, and to afford a sign of the opposition of God to the designs of Saul. More generally, the influence of Samuel was put forth in and through the “company of prophets” for
1. The maintenance of the principle of the theocracy, which was imperilled by the conduct of Saul. The prophets were its true representatives and upholders in every subsequent age.
2. The elevation of the people in wisdom and righteousness. Their work was to teach, reprove, and exhort those with whom they came into contact; and “through such a diffusion of prophetic training the higher truths of prophecy must have been most rapidly diffused among the people, and a new and higher life formed in the nation” (Ewald).
3. The preparation of men for a better timethe advent of Christ, the outpouring of the Spirit, and the proclamation of the gospel. The prophets, not the priests, were the true forerunners of the gospel ministry.D.
1Sa 19:22-24. (RAMAH.)
The meeting of three remarkable men.
This appears to have been the only occasion on which Samuel, Saul, and David were present at the same time and place. The meeting was a notable one, and may be compared with others (Exo 10:16; 1Ki 18:16; Act 25:24). Besides the three men just mentioned, there was also present One infinitely greater, and, although invisible, his power was displayed in a marvellous manner. Considered in relation to the Divine power, the narrative sets before us
I. AN AGED PROPHET IMBUED WITH FEARLESS DIGNITY. His danger was great. What Saul might do may be judged from the fear which Samuel expressed on a former occasion (1Sa 16:2), and from what he actually did not long afterwards (1Sa 22:18, 1Sa 22:19). But the prophet went on with his holy service calm and undismayed. He was inwardly sustained by Divine power, as others have since been in danger and suffering (Act 16:25). Such fearlessness is possessed by God’s servants in connection with
1. A firm persuasion that they are in the path of duty. They have within “a peace above all earthly dignities, a still and quiet conscience.” If conscience “does make cowards of us all,” it also makes us heroes. And
“He that hath light within his own clear breast
May sit in the centre and enjoy bright day;
But he that hides a dark soul and foul thoughts
Benighted walks under the midday sun” (Milton, ‘Comus ‘).
2. A vivid realisation of the presence and might of the Lord. Faith “sees him who is invisible” and “the mountain full of horses and chariots of fire” (2Ki 6:17).
3. A strong assurance of deliverance from their adversaries.
II. A PERSECUTING MONARCH TURNED INTO A HARMLESS ENTHUSIAST. The Divine power was exerted first upon Saul’s messengers and then upon himself. In a somewhat similar manner, if not to the same extent, it is often exerted upon evil and persecuting men
1. In connection with the utterances of the praises of God by his servants (2Ch 20:22; Psa 149:6). Instances are not unknown in which “one that believeth not” has come into their assembly, and, hearing their praises, has fallen down on his face and worshipped God (1Co 14:24, 1Co 14:25). This was not the first time that Saul was so affected, and the recollection of his earlier experience had probably some influence upon him. But then it was a sign that the power of God was for him, now that it was against him.
2. In order to restrain the wicked from carrying out their evil designs. He who holds the hearts of men in his hand thereby says, “Do my prophets no harm” (1Ch 16:22).
3. In order to restore them to the right way. It was to Saul more than a warning that he was fighting against God. “He was seized by this mighty influence of the Spirit of God in a more powerful manner than his servants were, both because he had most obstinately resisted the leadings of Divine grace, and also in order that, if it were possible, his hard heart might be broken and subdued by the power of grace. If, however, he should nevertheless continue obstinately in his rebellion against God, he would then fall under the judgment of hardening, which would be speedily followed by his destruction” (Keil).
III. AN INNOCENT FUGITIVE RESCUED FROM IMPENDING DESTRUCTION. David was saved from the hand of Saul, and even (as it would appear) formally reconciled to him (1Sa 20:18, 1Sa 20:27). The putting forth of the power of God was to him
1. An indication of the varied and abundant resources of God to protect in the greatest peril.
2. An assurance of Divine approbation in the way of trust and obedience.
3. An encouragement to patient endurance. He might be tempted to reach the goal for which, as he was now probably fully aware, he was destined (1Sa 20:15; 1Sa 23:17) by violent measures; but ever as he thought on this scene, together with the counsel and the whole course of the venerable prophet, he would feel that “the way of order is the best.”
“The way of order, though it lead through windings,
Is the best. Right forward goes the lightning
And the cannon ball; quick, by the nearest path,
They come, opening with murderous crash their way
To blast and ruin! My son, the quiet road
Which men frequent, where peace and blessings travel,
Follows the river’s course, the valley’s bendings;
Modestly skirts the cornfield and the vineyard,
Revering property’s appointed bounds,
And leading safe, though slower, to the mark”
(Schiller, ‘Wallenstein’).
D.
HOMILIES BY G. WOOD
1Sa 19:18-24
Religious consolation and religious excitement.
The consolation was tasted by David; the excitement was shown by Saul.
I. CONSOLATION. We are not surprised to learn that David, when driven from his house by the deadly malice of the king, betook himself to the prophet Samuel at his residence in Ramah. In reporting the treatment he had received to the venerable prophet, he reported it to God, whose authority was represented by Samuel. The path of his life seemed to be blocked by the undeserved ill will of Saul. Was there any further instruction for him from the Lord? There is no evidence that Samuel had held any communication with David from the time of his visit to Bethlehem to anoint the young shepherd; but it may be assumed that he had kept a watchful eye on his career, and prayed much for a youth with so great a destiny. Some painter ought to show us their meeting: the aged prophet, his countenance traced with sorrow for his own unworthy sons, and not less for the untoward career of Saul, receiving with outstretched arms and ready sympathy the fugitive David, in the very perfection of his gallant youth, yet coining with weary steps and dejected visage. The old man took the young chief to shelter with him in Naioth, where was a settlement of prophetsa group of dwellings where servants of God lived in retreat and cultivated sacred song and fraternal fellowship. David was not to tarry long in such a refuge, but it was good for him to visit it. It solaced and strengthened his spirit in God. Undisturbed by the jealousies of the court and the dangerous frenzy of the king, surrounded by an atmosphere of devotion, mingling not merely with aged seers like Samuel, but also with young men of his own age whose time was spent in sacred study and brightened with music and song, David must have been in his best element. He was a good soldier, and happy at the head of his troops, charging the Philistines. But he was still more a thinker, a poet, a minstrel, a prophet, a man of fervent spirit toward God, and so must have been happier in the goodly fellowship of the prophets at Naioth than in the rush of battle and the pride of victory. There is no record of the words of consolation and counsel which Samuel spoke to him; but doubtless we have traces and echoes of them in those psalms in which David has discussed the afflictions of the servants of Jehovah, and sung of their ultimate deliverance and reward. Psa 59:1-17. is traditionally ascribed to the period when the armed men sent by Saul surrounded David’s house to put him to death. As it is highly artificial in structure, it can hardly have been composed on the spur of the moment. Very probably it was written at Naioth while the impression of the danger was fresh, and was sung among the prophets there. In the case of David we read of no agitation or excitement. It would be little surprising if he, fleeing for his life, had been overcome by emotion when he found himself in safeguard. But all we read of his bearing is rational and calm.
II. EXCITEMENT. It was in the servants of Saul, and subsequently in Saul himself, that a religious excitement appeared. Three successive bands were despatched by the king to seize his son-in-law, but with a strange result. As each band saw the venerated Samuel stand forth at the head of the prophets, they feared to do violence to one under such august protection. Nay, more; the spiritual enthusiasm of the prophets communicated itself to them and overmastered them, so that they forgot their errand and joined in the burst of holy song. King Saul himself, provoked by the failure of his emissaries, went to Naioth, and he was more completely overpowered than they. We have seen already that his temperament was exceedingly amenable to the impressions of music and song. We remember how he had flung himself among the prophets in the very outset of his history; and although sadly deteriorated in character, he still retained his early sensibilities. Indeed, through the very disorder of his faculties he had become more susceptible than ever of religious excitement; so when he reached Naioth he was quite beyond himself. The spiritual electricity of the place was too much for him, and he fell into a very paroxysm of enthusiasm. At first when, on the way to Naioth, he lifted his voice m some sacred chant, it was well, and the historian does not hesitate to say that “the Spirit of God was upon him.” But at Naioth he behaved like a fanatical devotee of some heathen god, or a wild dervish of the East. He threw off his royal tunic, and after long and exhausting exercise of body and spirit lay in nothing but his under dress, prone and probably motionless, on the ground for “all that day and all that night.” But though “among the prophets,” he was not of them. It was a mere fit of fervour soon to pass away. The heart of Saul was by this time hopelessly “jangled and out of tune.” The subject of temporary religious excitement needs to be carefully thought out and discreetly handled. But it can never be fully explainedat all events not till more is known of the action of the nervous system, and till more light falls on the mysterious question of contagious emotion and imitative cerebral stimulation. One or two things, however, are plain enough, and deserve to be noted; e.g.
1. There is a religious excitation which carries with it no moral influence whatever. It is not feigned or insincere. He who is the subject of it is really lifted up or carried along as with a rush of earnest feeling. He cries for mercy; he prays with strong supplication; or he sings of pardon and of unutterable joys. His emotions are all aglow, and his brain is stirred to unusual activity. This occurs the more easily if one who is constitutionally accessible to such gusts of feeling falls among others who are much in earnest. He finds himself where prayers burst forth from importunate souls, and hymns are sung with a swing of enthusiasm. At once he feels as those around him do. Yet there is no change of his moral nature; he is merely a person of susceptible or imitative constitution, who has caught the contagion of religion from others, yet has not come, and may never come, to repentance. It is not for a moment to be denied that in many cases a real moral and spiritual change is produced in the midst of much excitement; but the excitement is only an accompaniment of the changeperhaps necessary for some minds, hut always fraught with some degree of danger. The only thing of lasting value is the exercise of conscience, and the turning of the affections and will to God in Christ.
2. The degree in which new religious emotion overpowers the body is generally proportioned to the previous ignorance of the mind, or its estrangement from God. David at Naioth fell into no frenzy, lay in no swoon, because he was a man of God, and devout feeling flowed through him unimpeded, found in him a congenial heart. But Saul had been in an evil mood; envy and murder were in his breast. So, when a pure and sacred impulse came upon him, it met resistance; and there were bodily manifestations which, far from being marks of grace, were signs of a moral state at variance with the Spirit of God. This case should teach caution in ascribing any religious value to prostrations, trances, and long fasts. These things most frequently recur in cases of a morbid hysterical temperament, or in very ignorant persons who are disturbed and terrified, or in instances where religious feeling, suddenly flowing in on unprepared minds, encounters obstinate obstruction. When the mind is thoughtful and refined, or when the heart is gentle and open to any good influx, religious fervour seldom causes any disorder in the nervous system or the physical constitution. We may be reminded here that David could show no small excitement, for he danced before the ark in the sight of all Israel (2Sa 6:14). True; but in all the enthusiasm of that great occasion King David was sober minded and self-possessed. He had good reasons for leading the sacred processional dance, as may afterwards be shown; but, far from giving way to excitement, or losing his senses like Saul, he went calmly through the duties of an eventful and fatiguing day. He offered burnt offerings and peace offerings. Then he blessed the people, causing provisions to be distributed among them. And after all this “David returned to bless his house.” Such is the enthusiasm we desire. To be full of joy before the Lord, but at the same time to be of a healthy mind, ready for public or private duty hour by hour. But we see no good in nervous excitement or hysterical ecstasy. When we consider that the Bible is a collection of Eastern books, and that the East has always been the home of strange religious extravagances, we recognise in the well balanced sobriety of mind which pervades the Bible a new proof of its Divine inspiration. It takes notice of the varied phenomenal effects of strong religious feeling on the human frame; it tells of long prostrations, excited movements, and prophetic trances; but it always attaches moral significance and value not to such abnormal conditions, but to the effects which appear and remain in character and life. The greatest of all, the Man Christ Jesus, the Lord whom we are to love and follow, is shown to us full of a sublime enthusiasm, but full at the same time of meekness and of wisdom. The Scriptures teach us to be calm and fervent, fervent and calm. If rushes of devout emotion come upon us, be it so. If men who have no faith call us fanatical and mad, be it so. Such men said of our Master, “He rageth, and hath a demon;” and of Paul, “Thou art beside thyself.” But let the evidence of our Christian faith and principle be found not in any moods of excitement, but in the moral excellence we exhibit, the fruit of the Spirit we bring forth. So shall we find consolation and strength when others only expose their weakness; and every pause at Naioth, or the place of prayer and holy fellowship, will brace our spirits for the trials that must yet befall us before we are perfected.F.
Fuente: The Complete Pulpit Commentary
1Sa 19:1-2. Saul spake to Jonathan Jonathan, when Saul ordered him to kill David, disobeyed the command, and, instead of murdering him, pleaded his innocence and merits as reasons for saving him. He also disclosed to David his father’s design and fixed resolution to destroy him; and, in my judgment, neither was inconsistent with his duty and allegiance to his father and king. He who knows of a conspiracy against an innocent person’s life, and does not discover it, or who kills such a one by another’s instigation and command, is himself a murderer; and no duty to a father, nor allegiance to a prince, can oblige any one to shed innocent blood. Jonathan was, therefore, so far from acting contrary to his duty and allegiance, in refusing to become his father’s instrument in murdering David, that he gave a noble instance of filial piety, affection, and duty, in his repeated endeavours to preserve him from so unnatural and atrocious a crime; and piety and virtue will ever applaud him for the generous concern that he expressed for the honour of his father, and the preservation of his friend. The reader will observe, that Jonathan ever considers David as an innocent person, and pleads for him to his father, not as a rebel or notorious offender, to obtain his pardon, but as having never done any thing to forfeit Saul’s favour, or his own life; and therefore Jonathan must be commended in disobeying his father’s order, and doing all he can to prevent his purpose to kill him.
Fuente: Commentary on the Holy Bible by Thomas Coke
THIRD SECTION
Open Deadly Persecution of David by Saul, and Davids Flight from Saul
1 Samuel 19-27
I. Jonathan proves his friendship for David in Sauls open attempts on Davids life. Davids first flight from Sauls murderous attempts, and his escape by Michals help
1Sa 19:1-24
1And Saul spake to Jonathan his son, and to all his servants that they should 2kill [about killing1] David. But Jonathan, Sauls son, delighted much in David. And Jonathan told David, saying, Saul, my father, seeketh to kill thee; now, therefore, I pray thee [and now] take heed to thyself [ins. I pray thee] until the morning [to-morrow morning,2 om. until the], and abide in a secret place, and hide 3thyself.3 And I will go out and stand beside my father in the field where thou art, and I will commune [speak] with [to] my father of thee; and what I see [I 4will see what he says] that [and] I [om. I] will tell thee. And Jonathan spake good of David unto Saul his father, and said unto him, Let not the king sin against his servant, against David; because [for] he hath not sinned against thee, and 5because [om. because] his works have been to thee-ward very good. For [And] he did put his life in his hand, and slew the Philistine, and the Lord [Jehovah] wrought a great salvation for all Israel;4 thou sawest it and didst rejoice; wherefore, then, wilt thou sin against innocent blood, to slay David without a cause? 6And Saul hearkened unto the voice of Jonathan, and Saul sware, As the Lord 7[Jehovah] liveth, he shall not be slain.5 And Jonathan called David, and Jonathan showed him all these things. And Jonathan brought David to Saul, and he was in his presence as in times past.
8And there was war again, and David went out6 and fought with the Philistines, 9and slew them with a great slaughter, and they fled from him. And the [an] evil spirit from the Lord [Jehovah7] was upon Saul; as he sat [and he was sitting] in his house, with [and] his javelin [ins. was] in his hand, and David played [was 10playing] with his hand. And Saul sought to smite David even [om. even] to the wall with the javelin, but he slipped away [got away] out of Sauls presence, and he smote the javelin into the wall. And David fled, and escaped that night.8 11Saul also [And Saul] sent messengers unto Davids house to watch him, and9 to slay him in the morning; and Michal, Davids wife, told him, saying, If thou save 12not thy life to-night, to-morrow thou shalt be slain. So [And] Michal let David 13down through a [the] window, and he went and fled and escaped. And Michal took an image [the teraphim],10 and laid it in the bed, and put a pillow [the quilt] of goats hair for his bolster [at its head],11 and covered it with a cloth [the coverlet]. 14And when Saul sent messengers to take David, she12 said, He is sick. 15And Saul sent the messengers again [om. again] to see David, saying, Bring him 16up to me in the bed, that I may slay him. And when the messengers were come in [And the messengers came in and] behold, there was an image13 in the bed, with a pillow of goats hair for his bolster [behold the teraphim in the bed and the quilt 17of goats hair at its head14]. And Saul said unto Michal, Why hast thou deceived me so, and sent away mine enemy, that he is escaped? And Michal answered [said to] Saul, He said unto me, Let me go,15 why should I kill thee?
18And David fled and escaped and came to Samuel to Ramah, and told him all that Saul had done to him. And he and Samuel went and dwelt in Naioth.16 19, 20And it was told Saul, saying, Behold David is at Naioth in Ramah. And Saul sent messengers to take David; and when they saw the company17 of the prophets prophesying, and Samuel standing as appointed [as leader] over them, the Spirit of God was [came] upon the messengers of Saul, and they also prophesied. 21And when [om. when] it was told Saul, [ins. and] he sent other messengers, and they [ins. also] prophesied likewise [om. likewise]. And Saul sent messengers 22again the third time, and they prophesied also [also prophesied]. Then [And] went he also [he also went] to Ramah, and came to a [the] great well [cistern]18 that is in Sechu.19 And he asked and said, Where are Samuel and David? And 23one said, Behold, they be [are] at Naioth in Ramah. And he went thither to Naioth in Ramah; and the Spirit of God was [came] upon him also, and he went 24on and prophesied until he came to Naioth in Ramah. And he [ins. too] stripped off his clothes also [om. also] and [ins. he too] prophesied before Samuel in like manner [om. in like manner], and lay down naked all that day and all that night. Wherefore they say, Is Saul also among the prophets?
EXEGETICAL AND CRITICAL
1Sa 19:1-7. Warding off through Jonathans mediation of the first open outbreak of Sauls deadly enmity to David.
1Sa 19:1. Saul advances so far in his deadly hate towards David that he speaks openly to his courtiers of his purpose to kill him. The killing [Eng. A. V. is wrong, see Text. and Gram.Tr.] refers not to Jonathan and Sauls servants, but to Saul himself.
1Sa 19:2. Jonathan shows his friendship for David 1) in informing him of Sauls designs on his life, and counselling him to conceal himself, and 2) in interceding for him with Saul, and trying to turn away his anger (1Sa 19:3), in which he succeeds.In thus attempting to restore friendly relations between his father and David, Jonathans aim was to keep David at court for the welfare of his father and the people, because he saw in David a specially chosen instrument of the Lord for the welfare of Israel, as he expressly declares in 1Sa 19:4. ( with as in Psa 87:3; Deu 6:7 : to speak concerning one. Ew., 217, 2.)David is to hide in the field, as we infer from Jonathans saying that he will speak with his father in the field where David is. The place designated by Jonathan was perhaps one to which Saul used often to go, or where he was accustomed to hold confidential and private conversations. To what [see Text. and Gram.Tr.] we must supply he says or I hear (Vulg.: et quodcunque videro tibi nuntiabo [so Eng. A. V.]). Against De Wettes translation: what it is, Thenius properly urges that Jonathan already knew what Saul then had in mind. Against Thenius view that David was to hide near Saul in order to hear what he said is the fact that Jonathan himself says to David: I will tell thee. Rather we must suppose with Keil that Jonathan made this arrangement in order that he might tell David the result of the conversation immediately, without having to go far from his father, and thus awaken suspicion of an understanding with David.
1Sa 19:4-5. Jonathans statement to Saul is three-fold: 1) he spoke good of David, that is, he spoke favorably of him, pointing out his excellent qualities and his services to Saul and the nation; 2) on the ground of this he implored Saul not to sin against his servant. This designation of David as his servant accords with the foregoing reference to the good which David, as Sauls faithful servant, had done; 3) to this he adds two reasons, a negative: he hath not sinned against thee, that is, he has done nothing to call forth thy vengeance; and a positive: his works are very useful to thee, that is, far from doing thee harm, he hath done thee only great service by his deeds.The relation of 1Sa 19:5 to the latter part of 1Sa 19:4 is this, that Jonathan, continuing his mediation, here reminds his father of the deed which is specially to be taken into consideration, the slaying of the Philistine, and how he had therein ventured his life: he put his life in his hand20 (1Sa 28:21; Jdg 12:2), risked his life (perhaps alluding to Davids hand, which swung the sling against the giant, on the firmness and certainty of which his life depended).Jonathan then proceeds to point out how serviceable to Saul this deed of David was: and the Lord wrought a great salvation for all Israel; thou sawest it and didst rejoice. This reminder of Sauls joy at Davids exploit (seen with his own eyes) and its grand results, this vivid presentation of the situation at that time is the psychological stepping-stone to the ethical change which is brought about in Sauls attitude towards David by Jonathans pressing and yet modest supplication: Why wilt thou sin against innocent blood, to slay David without cause?Saul was changeable and uncertain in his unstable inner life, because there was yet in him a noble germ whence good fruit might yet come.
1Sa 19:6. Saul swore, a characteristic indication of his to go to one extreme or another. Davids life was now saved. [Some think that Saul swore insincerely, to put Jonathan off his guard; but this is not so probable as that he was here sincere, but fell again under the power of jealousy (1Sa 19:10).Tr.].
1Sa 19:7. Jonathan, having performed this friendly service for David, informs him of the result according to promise (1Sa 19:3), and David resumes his place at court. David was in Sauls presence as yesterday and the day before, that is, as in times past.
1Sa 19:8-17. Davids first flight in consequence of another murderous attempt on Sauls part, the result of envy and jealousy.
1Sa 19:8. The background of this narrative is formed by the military life which was connected with the continued wars with the Philistines. The went out is not to be changed into some other word (with Then. after Sept. ), but to be retained (as in 1Sa 18:5; 1Sa 18:16) as expressing Davids marching forth to battle.
1Sa 19:9. The ethical ground of Sauls new outburst of rage after Davids success is his envy and jealousy of Davids honor and glory, as is intimated by the preceding mention of the latters victory over the Philistines.We have two similar accounts of Sauls outbreaks (1Sa 18:10 sq. and 1Sa 19:9 sq.) simply because such outbreaks were really frequent (comp. especially 1Sa 18:18) and like one another (Ngelsbach in Herz. XIII. 403). An evil Spirit of Jehovah came upon Saul.While this evil spirit is in 1Sa 16:15 and 1Sa 18:10 referred to Elohim, the Deity in general, Jehovah is here affirmed to be its sender, because Sauls condition, which was there only ascribed in general to a higher divine causality in respect to his person, is here regarded as a judgment of the covenant-God of Israel on the reprobate king, who hardens his heart against God.Along with his military calling, David here again takes his old place as harpist. He did not abandon the post assigned him by the Lord, so long as the Lord did not through events command him to leave it, as was afterwards the case, cf. 1 Samuel 20.The Sept. took offence at the evil spirit of Jehovah and left out Jehovah.21 But the Genitive means nothing more than what is said in 1Sa 16:14, that the God of Israel sent an evil spirit on Saul, or gave him over to the power of the evil spirit.
1Sa 19:10. David escapes Sauls spear, which penetrates the wall. He flees the same night. (The Art. of the Pron. is lacking from similarity of sound, Ew. 392 a, and 70 c). The Sept. reads: and it came to pass that night that Saul sent (inserting and connecting with the following), looking to 1Sa 19:12, where the flight by night is first mentioned. Against this it is not necessary to insist that the narrator here in Hebrew fashion gives the result first by anticipation, and then details the immediate incidents; for Sauls attempt may have occurred in the evening, or, if it happened in the day-time, David may first have hidden in Sauls house, and then at night have fled to his own house. That David fled to his own dwelling and remained there till night, appears from 1Sa 19:11, according to which Saul sends messengers to his house to watch him and to kill him in the morning (that is, when he went out again). With this agrees exactly the fact that Michal, who acquainted him with the danger threatening him in his house, presses him to flee that night, because in the morning he would be slain. In the night of the same day on which the attempt on his life occurred, David fled from Sauls house to his own, and the same night by Michals means he fled from his own house. [Kitto: We may guess that only the fear of alarming the town, and of rousing the populace to rescue their favorite hero, prevented him from directing them to break into the house and slay David there. Others suggest the fear of alarming or injuring Michal. She could easily get notice of Sauls design from Jonathan or others.Tr.]
1Sa 19:12. Through the window, because the door was watched (1Sa 19:11) by Sauls men. For similar escapes through windows see Jos 2:15; Act 9:25; 2Co 11:33.With this flight of David began his weary fleeing before Saul, and the great sufferings and dangers which he encountered in this unsettled life.
1Sa 19:13. By a trick with the Teraphim Michal deceives Sauls catchpolls.The teraphim were the images of domestic or private gods (Penates) which the Israelites retained as the remnant of the idolatry brought from the Araman or Chaldean home (Gen 31:19; Gen 31:34) in spite of their removal after the entry of Jacobs family into Canaan (Gen 35:2 sq.) and of the absolute prohibition of idolatry in the Law, which reappear especially in the period of the Judges (Jdg 17:5; Jdg 18:14 sq.) and particularly meet us in the houses of Saul and David in spite of Samuels prophetic zeal against such idolatry (1Sa 15:23; comp. Hos 3:4; Zec 10:2). The Plu. here represents a single image, which it seems (1Sa 19:16) must have had the human form at least as to head and face, though the size may have varied, since (Gen 31:30 sq.) it was so small that Rachel could conceal it under the camel-saddle, while Michal here uses it to make Sauls men believe that David was in the bed. The teraphim which Laban calls his Elohim were probably originally tutelar deities, dispensers of domestic and family good fortune. On the derivation and meaning of the name see Rdiger in Ges. Thes. III. 1520, Hvernick on Ezek. p. 347 sq., and Delitzsch Gen. II. p. 220 [and Art. Teraphim in Smiths Bib. Dict.Tr.].22 On the meaning see particularly the Arts. in Winer and Herzog. Whether it was a wooden image is uncertain, as also, whether Michal had such domestic gods on account of her barrenness (Michaelis, Thenius, Keil). (which the Sept. read liver, whence Joseph says that Michal put a palpitating goat-liver into the bed to represent a breathing sick man) is from [to braid] and means woven-work or net [rendered quilt or mattress, Eng. A. V. pillow.Tr.]. The plural of goat () here = goats hair. The Def. Art. points to something which belonged to the furnishing of a couch or bed.23 She put it at his head, which may mean either that she put a woven cover under his head, or a hairy cover on or around his head. In any case Michals purpose was to make the head of the teraphim look as much as possible like a human head. The [with the coverlet] must, on account of the article, be understood of some piece of household stuff, therefore of the bed-cover. The word () means the upper garment of the Oriental, which is a wide cloth thrown around the person, and served also for bed-clothing.
1Sa 19:14. When Sauls messengers come the first time, Michal says to them that David is sick. [On this untruth see Histor. and Theolog. to this chap. at end.Tr.].
1Sa 19:15. Saul, determined to carry out his purpose orders David to be brought up to him on the bed, that is, to his house, which, therefore, was higher than Davids. Saul must therefore have resided in Gibeah on the height (Then.).
1Sa 19:16. The messengers come and discover the deceit. The express mention of the goat-hair cover at his head shows that this had materially contributed to the success of the deception. It appears from 1Sa 19:13 that to the words [of the Heb.]: behold teraphim in the bed, we must supply laid or placed.
1Sa 19:17. Saul demands an explanation of Michal. Why hast thou sent away my enemy?In these words appears all Sauls bitterness and blindness. It is a sort of persecuting mania that shows itself in Davids persecutor.Michals defence does not agree with the statement in 1Sa 19:11-12, that she herself urged David to flight. From fear of her father she tells a lie of necessity, saying: He said to me, send me away, why should I kill thee? She pretends that she wished to prevent his flight, but he threatened to kill her if she stood in his way. [To this deliverance is referred Psalms 59 by its title and Psalms 7 by some critics.Tr.]
1Sa 19:18-24. Davids flight to Ramah to Samuel.
1Sa 19:18. David told Samuel all that Saul had done to him.That David takes refuge in Samuels quiet seat of the prophets is explained by the intimate connection which David already had with Samuel and the prophetic school presided over by him, and especially by the official-theocratic connection which Davids anointing had brought about between the two men. Samuel now becomes Gods instrument for saving and preserving David as the Lords Anointed from the attempts of Saul. David dwelt at Naioth with Samuel, who went thither with him. Naioth is to be distinguished from Ramah, Samuels dwelling-place, and to be regarded as a place where Samuel stayed as long as David, who had at first reported to him at Ramah, was with him (comp. 1Sa 19:22-23). The Kethib has everywhere Nevaioth, Vulg. (with Qeri) Naioth. The appellative, signifying dwellings, became the proper name of the place where dwelt the prophets who gathered about Samuel as their head (comp. 1Sa 19:20). The plu. form indicates a colony consisting of several dwellings, a prophetic cenobium.24
1Sa 19:19-20. Saul, having been informed of Davids stay in this cenobium, sent messengers to fetch him.25 The prophets26, here appear 1) in an assembly, 2) therein engaged in prophesying, and 3) under the lead of Samuel. It is to be noted that we have here prophets, who in inspired discourse give forth their inner life filled with the Holy Ghost, not sons of the prophets, as in 2Ki 4:38; 2Ki 6:1, who as scholars and learners sit at the feet of their master and teacher. The prophetic community here, therefore, under Samuel as head is not yet a prophetic school, to educate young men for the prophetic calling, but is a prophetic seminary, in which, under Samuels guidance in an externally strictly ordered yet internally free association, the prophetic powers are practiced and strengthened, mutually incite, nourish, and further one another, and the prophetic charisma finds ever new nourishment and new growth by this common holy discipline. And the Spirit of God came upon the messengers of Saul; Spirit of God, not Spirit of Jehovah, because we here have not to do with the Spirit of the covenant-God, but with the supernatural principle of inspiration. And they too prophesied. Clericus: They sang divine praises, being seized on by a sudden afflatus which they could not resist (as Saul, 1Sa 10:10), so that they no longer had control over themselves. The condition of Sauls messengers is that of ecstatic ravishment, into which they were brought by the overpowering might of the inspired song or word of the prophets.
1Sa 19:21. Sauls second and third companies of messengers fall into a similar ravishment. [The repeated occurrence of this supernatural seizure adds greatly to the force and effectiveness of the narrative. The purpose of this in the divine providence, we may suppose, was to bring Saul himself.Tr.]
1Sa 19:22. Then went he also to Ramah and came (on the way thither) to the great cistern (well known, as the Art. shows) that was in Sechu,a now unknown region or locality near Ramah. The Sept. has cistern of the threshing-floor (), instead of great cistern, and on the hill (), instead of Sechu. But, though it is true that threshing-floors were usually on hills, there is no need here of a change of text.27 Saul, learning that David and Samuel were at Naioth in Ramah, went thither.
1Sa 19:23. While he was still in the way there happened to him what happened to his messengers. The Spirit of God came upon him also, and he went on and prophesied till he came to Naioth in Ramah. The difference between Saul and his messengers was simply that the inspiration came on him as he was approaching the residence of the prophet, and that it attained a higher grade and lasted longer, completely suppressing his self-consciousness.
1Sa 19:24, namely, relates: And he too stripped off his clothes, and he too prophesied before Samuel. The throwing off of the clothing was the effect of the heat of body produced by internal excitement. Abarbanel: because of inward warmth, and to spread the garments out. We may suppose that the messengers also cast away their garments (though it is not expressly so said), as the prophets in their times of excitement and heat may well have done. The he also is not found in the following sentence: he lay naked all day and all night. This does not necessarily mean complete nakedness (, 2Sa 6:20), because there was worn under the kethoneth or tunic a fine woven shirt of linen or cotton (, Jdg 14:12 sq.; Isa 3:23), and over it a long sleeveless outer garment (, 1Sa 18:4; 1Sa 14:5-12). Comp. Keil, Bibl, Arch., II., 39.Saul lay in his under-garment (a sort of shirt which was next to the body, but did not completely cover it) unconscious; so completely was he overcome by the ecstacy. Wherefore they say, Is Saul also among the prophets? See 1Sa 10:11-12, where the origin of this saying is related. Here we have not the origin, but the application of the already existing proverb.
HISTORICAL AND THEOLOGICAL
1. The picture of a true, faithful friend, already presented to us in Jonathan, is here completed in the account of his conduct towards Saul and David in individual significant traits and clear colors; but at the same time along with this picture of noble friendship we find one of an humble, reverent, childlike spirit towards the sinful purpose of his father. As soon as Jonathan has learned from his father the danger that threatened Davids life, he shows his faithful love for his friend by imparting to him the evil designs of his father, by enjoining on him to hide himself, by promising to soften if possible his fathers wrath, and by informing him how he (David) should soon learn the result of his effort at mediation and rescue. But Jonathans noble character appears in yet clearer light in his conduct towards his father. For his friends sake he dares, at the risk of his life, to oppose the rage and the sinister designs of his own father. Openly and frankly he represents to his father the great crime he would commit by slaying David. His heart is free from envy and jealousy while he sets before his father Davids great services to the royal house and the whole nation. His words and bearing show manly firmness and decision, and yet childlike piety, reverence, and obedience; no word not in keeping with the Fourth Commandment from his lips. And in addition to all this is his magnanimous self-denial, since he doubtless suspected that his friend would ascend the throne after his father. Though he himself possessed all the qualities which should adorn Gods Anointed on the throne, heroic courage, undisputed, universally acknowledged military renown, firm trust in the living God, and a noble disposition, he shows not the slightest trace of envy and unkindness towards David. Notwithstanding all this he was not only nobly ready, if the Lord should so command, to give up his birthright, but strove wisely and vigorously to defeat all that was conceived and undertaken against Gods decree, even at the risk of falling by his own fathers hand, a sacrifice to his piety and friendship (F. W. Krummacher). Jonathan is a character that rises on the platform of Old Testament-life in peculiarly noble, harmonious, ethical-sympathetic form, whether we regard him as the heroic warrior and leader, or as faithful, self-denying friend, or as humble, modest prince-royal, or as the frank, unshrinking denouncer of wrong and sin.
2. In Davids ethical-historical character, as presented to us in this section, we have to note in the first place his humble and obedient behaviour in the calling appointed him by the divine providence at the royal court, in spite of the quickly changing and fiercely outbreaking passionate moods of Saul, and in spite of the dangers which he saw threatened him. Every moment he put himself at the kings disposition, and was at his side to help him whenever it was necessary. He went quietly on the way which the Lord had appointed him. And therefore he was under Gods protection, and experienced the preserving help of his God.Yet this flight, in which his wifes faithful love was the Lords means of saving him, began the unbroken series of severe sufferings and trials by which David was to be confirmed in his faith and trained in a hard school for his royal calling. In this long life of suffering he had uninterrupted experience as a confirmed servant of God of the help, the consolation, the strengthening from above to which his Psalms bear testimony. Roos: Lay Davids good and bad fortune in the balances. A courtier and officer, who falls under the kings displeasure, whom the king with implacable rage seeks to kill, whom the courtiers and many others, to please the king, despise and persecute, a man who is compelled to flee, who in need and affliction must always conceal himself, who can often find no place on earth where to lay his head, such a man may well talk of misfortune, and is in this view a miserable person. But if we remember that God in his deepest needs vouchsafes gracious visitations to the soul of this man, lifts it, as it were, above all mists and clouds, grants it clearest insight into truth, refreshes it by undeceptive addresses and friendly consolations, and through it points all men to happiness, we must admit that this mans good fortune is greater than his bad fortune, that his honor is greater than his reproach, and that the good that he has super-abundantly makes up for all his outward want.
2. The title of the 59th Psalm refers its origin to Davids dangerous situation in Gibeah, when Saul sent and they watched the house to kill him. And in fact the recurring verses 7 and 15 [6 and 14] of this very artistically arranged Psalm point to ambushments which begin in the evening. But it is repeated ambuscades that are there spoken of. Since now in our history only one night is mentioned, it seems more appropriate not to refer this Psalm to those dangerous days in Gibeah (Delitzsch, Moll), but with Hengstenberg to find its occasion in Davids remembrance of the deliverance wrought that night through Michal, which was the beginning of the weary flight, wherein he encountered such unspeakable dangers and sufferings. Such being the importance of the fact, we should expect David to perpetuate its recollection by a Psalm (Hengst.). The Psalm was sung when he looked back on the long line of enemies snares and divine deliverances, of which the events of that evening and night were the beginning and type. We must not, however, confine ourselves to that event alone, but must include all Davids similar experiences of Sauls traps. From the Psalm it appears only that it was called forth by an attempt on the singers life; in other respects the circumstances are those which belong in general to the Saul-period (Hengst.).28
4. The teraphim-image, which Michal employs, shows that these Araman idols, these forms of strange gods which Rachel took secretly from her fathers house (Gen 31:19; Gen 31:34)in spite of their burial by Jacob (Gen 35:2 sq.), and their ordered removal by Joshua (Jos 24:22) and Samuels zealous opposition to them (1Sa 15:23)hid in the privacy of domestic life, whence in the time of the Judges they came openly forth (Judges 17 compared with 1Sa 18:14 sq.), still maintained themselves. As the teraphim were oracular deities in their old homes (so in Eze 21:21 Nebuchadnezzar inquires through them whether he shall march against Jerusalem or against Ammon), so also in Israel (Judg. 17:18; 1Sa 15:23; Hos 3:4; Eze 21:26; Zec 10:2) they were superstitiously used as oracles, counsel being asked through them concerning the future. Hvernick (on Eze 21:26): The use of the teraphim as oracles came no doubt through their connection with the Ephod (comp. Hos 3:4; Zec 10:2), the ancient general notion of their magical power passing over into the more special one of prediction. Under Josiah (2Ki 23:24) their removal was decreed in connection with other idolatrous abominations, but they kept their place till the Exile.
5. In respect to the history and theocratic significance of the so-called Schools of the prophets, we must distinguish the two periods in which, in point of fact, the only mention of them occurs. In the first place we meet with prophetic unions or prophetic communities in the age of Samuel, which are more exactly defined during his relations with Saul: first that band of prophets (1Sa 10:5; 1Sa 10:10), which in Gibeah descends from the sacrificial hill and meets Saul, prophesying with music and song. Perhaps this community resided in Gibeah, in support of which we may perhaps with Keil adduce the name Gibeah of God. In 1 Samuel 19 the prophetic community stands in a near relation to Samuel as the president. The members are called Nebiim (prophets]; they prophesy under Samuels lead; their inspiration (as in 1 Samuel 10) is so mighty that persons that do not belong to them, as Sauls servants and Saul himself, are seized and overpowered by it, and fall into a like ecstacy. David is closely connected with them, as is shown by his flight to them and stay with them. He found there only temporary safety indeed from Sauls persecutions, but abiding consolation and strength in the inspired prophetic word, in the blessings of the fraternal community, and in the consoling and elevating power of the holy poetic art, whereby he doubtless stood in peculiarly intimate connection with the community. The members of the body formed a Cenobium; their outward life of union symbolized their inward union under the mighty impulse of one and the same Spirit, the Holy Spirit, a union which they saw accomplished through this prophetic Spirit which informed them all. In point of fact we find certainly at this time such an organized prophetic community only in Ramah; whether Samuel, who was its president there in the latter part of his life, was also the establisher of the form of associated life, is doubtful; but in any case it may be confidently maintained that through the powerful influence which he exerted on his contemporaries by the prophetic Spirit which dwelt and worked in him, awakening and fashioning a new life, this Spirit, which in its essential nature tended to produce association, showed itself in such unions of prophetic men. The original power and vigor of this Spirit expresses itself in these extraordinary phenomena and overwhelming effects, just as in the Apostolic church they appear as the fruit of the outpouring of the Holy Spirit (Acts 2; 1 Corinthians 14). The theocratic significance of this association consisted in the fact that, along with Samuels lofty prophetical form, they were the centre and source of the reviving religious-moral life of the nation, after it had lost its theocratic centre in the national sanctuary, which was despoiled of the ark of the covenant. The prophetic men of this community, which is by no means to be regarded as an association of pupils, represent the manifold theocratic-prophetic influence on the people, which was first completely brought to bear by Samuels labors; they form, when Samuels life is approaching its end, the aftergrowth (nurtured by him) of the combined divinely-appointed theocratic office of prophet and judge (alongside of the royal office), as bearers of which we find the prophets in Davids time. In their midst originated and was cultivated the theocratic-prophetic writing of history, as representatives of which a Gad (comp. 1Sa 22:5) and a Nathan are mentioned along with Samuel (1Ch 29:29). Comp. Thenius on 1Sa 19:19; 1Sa 22:5On the prophetic schools under Samuel see Oehler in Herz. R.-E., s. v. Prophetenthum des A. T., XII. 214217.
The history is silent concerning the prophetic communities during the whole period from Samuel to the age of Elijah and Elisha. Not till the epoch in the development of the prophetic Order in Israel marked by the grand prophetic characters of Elijah and his successor Elisha do we again meet with these communities, and then only in the kingdom of the Ten Tribes at Gilgal, Bethel, and Jericho, in which places there was a numerous membership (2Ki 4:38; 2Ki 2:3; 2Ki 2:5; 2Ki 2:7; 2Ki 2:15-16; 2Ki 4:1; 2Ki 4:43; 2Ki 6:1; 2Ki 9:1); here, however, they are not called prophets as under Samuels lead, but sons of the prophets (1Ki 20:35), a name which indicates that they stood to the leaders and presidents of the communities in a dependent relation as scholars and disciples. They have their places of assembly and abode, designed for a large number, where they sit at the feet of their prophetic masters (comp. 2Ki 6:1 sq.), and receive prophetic instruction and cultivation. Only such can we properly call prophetic schools, whose prophetic presidents and leaders (as Elishas case shows) had to legitimate themselves by the power of the prophetic spirit dwelling in them. While under Samuels presidency the prophetic communities appear as freer associations of prophetic men for the exertion of united influence on the people, these later ones are distinct Unions, in which teachers and scholars, masters and disciples stand in a relation of mutual co-ordination [control and subordination]. The subject-matter of the instruction was the divine law and the history of the divine dealings with the covenant people; the aim of the instruction was the nurture and furtherance of the prophetic spirit by holy discipline in an organized God-serving life. The pupils were trained in unconditional obedience to the divine law, in living appropriation of the holy will of God as absolute norm for their own wills; from their Cenobia thus equipped they went forth among the people to testify of the living God, of His word and His righteous and gracious dealings, and with absolute obedience to perform the special tasks imposed on them by the masters with divine authority (comp. 1Ki 13:20 sq.). Besides this general theocratic significance these Unions had the special duty to form the centre of the service of God for the people in their separation from the sanctuary at Jerusalem (comp. 2Ki 4:23; 2Ki 4:42), and in the prophetical work of their members to oppose a solid power to the heathenism which pressed in on the people under an idolatrous government, and to maintain the honor of the living God. Comp. Oehler ubi supra, p. 220 sq.In respect to the historical continuity of such prophetic associated life in the interval between the prophetic communities of Samuel and these later schools of the prophets, nothing can be certainly determined, although, as Oehler shows against Keil (as above, p. 215), the great number of prophets, which, according to 1Ki 18:13, must have existed when Elijah appeared, seems to favor such continuity. Comp, on the other side Keils remarks in his commentary on 1 Samuel 19. p. 147 sq. [Eng. Transl., pp. 199205.]
[Michals deception in 1Sa 19:13) may be called a stratagem, her statement in 1Sa 19:14 is a falsehood carrying out the stratagem, and her answer to her father in 1Sa 19:17 is, as Erdmann terms it, a lie of necessity; that is, a lie held to be necessary, in order to save one from suffering or perplexity. Clearly this last is unjustifiable; when Saul demanded an explanation Michal ought to have answered that she thought it right to save her husband. Her stratagem (1Sa 19:13 may be defended on the ground that Saul, in assuming the position towards David of an open enemy (without legal warrant), having previously tried to kill him, had thus put himself out of ordinary relation with him, and was to be treated as a public enemy or a madman. Whether the statement in 1Sa 19:14 is then properly a part of the stratagem is not so easy to say. The decisive question is: Was it necessary to the success of the stratagem? was it based on Sauls abnormal, unnatural, criminal attitude towards David?Tr.]
HOMILETICAL AND PRACTICAL
1Sa 19:1-4. Berl. Bible: So far is Saul carried by self-love, which often transforms itself into fury against the friends of God, and it is incredible how far it can go wrong. Jonathan acted as a true friend to David, and presents therein a picture of a faithful and upright friend, who not only warns David of danger and gives him good counsel, but also at his own peril speaks to his father for him, declares his innocence and praises his noble services, and thereby brings him again into his fathers favor.Schlier: Even in grown persons there is nothing more beautiful than reverence for parents, and doubly beautiful is this ornament when one thing is understood, how to lead parents away from sin and yet in so doing always show modesty and respect, when one thing is understood, how to fulfil the Fourth Commandment in truth and love. [Taylor: Such a manifestation of prudence and principle combined. Prudence did not go so far as to make him silent about the sin which Saul was purposing to commit; principle was not so asserted as to arouse his fathers indignation.Tr.].
1Sa 19:6 sqq. Berl. Bible: A kindly and hearty, an humble but also righteous opposition is suited to turn away the evil that has been resolved on and hinder it from coming to the birth.Schlier: Open thy mouth for thy neighbor, and stand up for him, excuse him where thou canst, speak to his advantage wherever it is possible, let it be a joy to thee to bring to light his good side, be in earnest to promote peace wherever it is practicable.
1Sa 19:8. Berl. Bible: O my God, how wonderfully dost Thou lead Thy servants! Scarcely are they out of one trial when again Thou stirrest up for them another.
1Sa 19:9. Schlier: God the Lord allows the evil spirit no power over us, if we have not first called down punishment upon ourselves by our sins; he who is in the power of darkness and therefore does the works of darkness, has before given himself up to darkness.
1Sa 19:10. Berlenb. Bible: Temptation with men who are grudging and envious and cannot bear the righteousness of the child of God, does not last long, because such men condemn their unrighteousness.
1Sa 19:11. Krummacher: The Lord in every way takes care that His servant David, adorned with His laurels, shall not lift his head too high. In David, too, is richly verified the apostolical saying: Whom the Lord loveth He chasteneth, and scourgeth every son whom he receiveth.
1Sa 19:13-14. Cramer: In cases of urgent need, where there is no time for long reflection, a woman can often more quickly devise a plan, surpassing therein the male sex (Ecc. 25:19; Gen 31:35; Jos 2:6). [Hall: Who can but wonder to see how Sauls own children are the only means to cross him in the sin, and to preserve his guiltless adversary.Tr.].
1Sa 19:17. Schlier: A lie of necessity is never permissible, wrong can never become right; lying always remains wrong, and doubly wrong when the lie is spoken to a father. Truth is well-pleasing to God the Lord, and truth, spoken with an eye to the Lord, always finds the Lords protection.Cramer: There are three sorts of lies: lies of necessity (Exo 1:19; Gen 20:2; Gen 26:7; Jos 2:6); lies of sport (Gen 42:9; Gen 27:15; Jdg 9:8); shameful and hurtful lies. Guard against all three, and speak and love the truth from thy heart.[Taylor: Michals affection for David could not stand the strain of trial. It was not like that of Jonathan, because it had not, like Jonathans its root in devotion to the Lord. She could not and did not follow her husband through persecution, and exile, and danger, because she was not one with him in God. (An idolater perhaps without the cognizance of her husband). She could tell lies for David, but she had not the courage and the faith to go with him into suffering, or to tell the truth for him.Tr.]
1Sa 19:18. Osiander: Those who are in trouble should betake themselves to the assembly where Gods word is taught, and there seek consolation.Cramer: God always raises up for His people good friends and patrons, who must help them (1Ki 18:13).Schlier: Instead of any further answer, Samuel led David to his Naioth, into his school of the prophets; amid the songs of praise of his prophet-scholars, amid their common prayers and studies of Gods word it was good to dwell; there was consolation and peace, there was help to be found even for such a troubled heart as David had. Let not such an example be presented you in vain. Are you troubled, then seek the word of the Lord and prayer, seek it especially there where men are gathered to attend to Gods word and to pray. [Hall: God intended to make David not a warrior and a king only, but a prophet too. As the field fitted him for the first, and the court for the second, so Naioth shall fit him for the third.Tr.].
1Sa 19:20 sqq. Starke [from Hall]: It is good going up to Naioth, into the holy assemblies; who knows how we may be changed, beside our intention? Many a one hath come into Gods house to carp, or scoff, or sleep, or gaze, that hath returned a convert (1Co 14:24-25).As one coal kindles another, so it happens that where good is taught and heard, hearts also do not remain unmoved (Act 16:13-14).Berl. Bible: That is the blessing which God Often grants to devout assemblies, that many a one goes in with an evil, impure and hostile mind, and comes out again with quite another heart and mind.
1Sa 19:23-24. Wuert. Summ.: Sauls prophesying was more an irresistible work of divine power, than an evidence of divine grace. We see also by his example, that not all who prophesy, who exhibit extraordinary movements of spirit, are thereby shown to have the Spirit of God, and to stand in favor with Him. Many of them, according to the saying of Jesus (Mat 7:22-23), will on that day be found out and condemned as evil-doers.Schlier: In Saul we have an example how God follows a man till he either turns or hardens himself. How deep was Saul already sunken; yet God the Lord did not yet leave him, but again turned toward him. He felt the mighty hand of God, and yet he would not bow. Then Gods hand, which could not make him bow, must harden him more and more.When the Lords hand comes upon us, we wish to bow, we wish to enter into ourselves, and to humble ourselves. Well for him who lets himself be reproved and chastised, but woe to us if we shut ourselves up against the Lords hand.[Taylor: In reviewing this narrative, observe how diversified are the resources which Jehovah has at command for the protection of His people. Each time the means by which David was delivered are different. At first he is defended by Gods blessing on his own valor against the Philistines; then he is indebted for his safety to the mediation of Jonathan; then to the agency of Michal; and finally to the miraculous work of Gods own Holy Spirit, In the subsequent portion of the history we shall find that the same principle holds, and that in each new peril he is preserved by some new instrumentality.Tr.]
1Sa 19:11-12. F. W. Krummacher: A new storm: 1) By what David is threatened; 2) How he is delivered from the danger.
1Sa 19:18. David at Ramah: 1) He breathes the atmosphere of the communion of the saints; 2) He sees a new plan to murder him wonderfully frustrated.
[1Sa 19:4-7. An attempt at Peacemaking: 1) The means employed. Jonathan appeals, with tact and delicacy, to justice, gratitude, piety, memories of the past, conscience. 2) The apparent effect. Sauls better feelings revived, his conscience aroused. In his passionate way, he takes a solemn oath, no doubt with superficial sincerity. All seems restored as in times past, 3) The final result. Davids merits, at the call of Providence, shine forth with new lustre. Slumbering envy wakes, and the last enmity is worse than the first. (Comp. 1Sa 20:33-34). Lessons: (1) It is at any rate a consolation to have tried, and to have had even temporary success. (2) Peacemaking does not always fail. (3) We must fear for the results wherever the wrong-doer does not repent of the sin involved; the only sure peacemaking must begin in peace with God. (4) How deep-rooted and ruinous a sin is envy; it may swallow up the noblest feelings, break the most solemn promises, lead to madness and murder. And no wonder, for the envious man sins at once against himself, his neighbor, and his God.Tr.]
II. Jonathans faithful friendship proved by his last vain attempt at a reconciliation of Saul and David. Chapter 1Sa 20:1 to 1Sa 21:1 [Eng. A. V., 1Sa 20:42]
1. Conference between David and Jonathan as to the discovery of Sauls disposition towards the former and the mode of informing him thereof
Footnotes:
[1][1Sa 19:1. This is the literal rendering of the Heb., and so the ancient VSS., except Vulg., which makes they the subject of the killing (so Eng. A. V.), and Arab., which correctly makes he (Saul) the subject. The context shows that neither to Jonathan nor to the servants of Saul was charge given to slay David.Tr.]
[2][1Sa 19:2. Literally: in the morning. Sept. , which Thenius says is the rendering of Heb. ; but , as Wellh. points out, includes the notion early in the morning.Tr.]
[3][1Sa 19:2. Sept. reverses the order and reads: hide thyself and remain in secret, as if the hiding must precede the dwelling in secret; but the hiding may just as well be regarded as the consequence of dwelling in secret (against Wellh.).Tr.]
[4][1Sa 19:5. Sept.: all Israel saw and rejoiced, other VSS. as Heb. It is here more fitting and politic in Jonathan to refer to Sauls own knowledge of David.Tr.]
[5][1Sa 19:6. Sept., Syr. and some MSS. have Qal.: shall not die.Tr.]
[6][1Sa 19:8. Sept. , either an explanation (Schleusner), or they read (Wellh.); the Heb. is to be maintained.Tr.]
[7][1Sa 19:9. In this divine name the VSS. vary. The Vat. MS. has , Alex. has , text in Stier and Theiles Polygl. (which is an eclectic text) omits it, as does Arab.; the others as Heb. That is without the Art. is not decisive in favor of , for an evil spirit could as well come from Jehovah as from Elohim (i.e. the deity), and may as well be called a spirit of Jehovah. Elsewhere the Heb. has ; but it is at least as probable that the Vat. would change the text to secure uniformity as that the Masorites would change for no reason at all. See note on 1Sa 16:14.Tr.]
[8][1Sa 19:10. On this reading see Erdmann in the Exposition.Tr.]
[9][1Sa 19:11. Wellhausen (following Sept.) objects to the and on the ground that the two actions (of watching and killing) are not here co-ordinated, the killing not being entrusted to the watchers. This is perhaps an unnecessary refinement, 1Sa 19:14 being possibly a repetition of this statement, not necessarily a sending of additional messengers. Yet, as Saul sends in 1Sa 19:14 apparently to take, not to kill David, the reference of the killing here to Saul and the omission of the (which may have been repeated from the preceding word) give a good sense.Tr.]
[10][1Sa 19:13. Teraphim is a plu. word, but is here used in the Heb. as sing.Tr.]
[11][1Sa 19:13. The Eng. A. V. renders bolster to correspond to its above rendering pillow. The Heb. means simply at its head; the exact use which Michal made of the quilt is not clear.Tr.]
[12][1Sa 19:14. The Sept. has they said, that is, the people of the house, the servants, speaking with the messengers at the door. But the Heb. text is perfectly natural: either it means Michal sent word, that is, said through her servants, or, if she herself spoke with the messengers, she reported David sick to gain time, having meantime prepared the bed to deceive her own servants (whose fidelity she might doubt) or Sauls messengers in case they should go to look for David.The Vulg. has the indefinite responsum est.Tr.]
[13][1Sa 19:16. , teraphim. Chald., Syr., Arab., Vulg., render image. Sept. has , cenotaphs, empty tombs, a contemptuous designation of the vanity of the idols, Aq. gives or , the latter (meaning half figures) being important as bearing on the form of the teraphim.Tr.]
[14][1Sa 19:16. , from or by the local preformative . The plu. would be properly (see Jer 13:18) as from . Comp. Ew., Gr. 160 b, Frsts Concordance s. v.Tr.]
[15][1Sa 19:17. Or: send me away. The verb is fem. in many MSS. and Edd.Tr.]
[16]1Sa 19:18. So the Qeri, but the Kethib is Nevaioth.Tr.]
[17][1Sa 19:20. So universally taken (=). Lud. de Dieu, however, refers to the th. stem = crescere, whence he thinks our word may mean magnum numerum, or, senatum, presbyterium Prophetarum. In th. the word represents only magistracy, superiority (Dillmann, Lex. th.), which does not suit here.Tr.]
[18][1Sa 19:22. The word is anarthrous, and so far supports the Sept.: the cistern of the threshing floor (Wellh.), as this construction is unusual; but that it is not unexampled is shown by 2Sa 12:4; 1Ki 7:8; 1Ki 7:12, and would be not unnatural here in speaking of a well-known cistern, where might almost have the force of a proper name. The addition of Sept. at beginning of 1Sa 19:22 : and Saul became very angry, is suspicious because of its naturalness.Tr.]
[19][1Sa 19:22. Sept. , Ar. Ramah. The Heb. is to be preferred.Tr.]
[20][The Heb. () means the palm or hollow of the hand, as the proper place in which to put something, usually the hand as receptacle, not as instrument.Tr.]
[21][See Text. and Gram.Tr.]
[22][See other opinions in Pooles Synopsis on Gen 31:19, and in Patricks Comm. here.Tr.]
[23][On the character of the bed (here a separate couch, not the oriental divan) see Philippson in loco, and Works on Archology.Tr.]
[24][Chald. renders house of instruction, and in 1Sa 19:20 scribes. Smiths Bib.-Dict., Art. Naioth.Tr.]
[25]The Sing. is surprising. According to Ewald, 316 a, 1, the Verb or Adj., when it stands as one half of the sentence before the yet unnamed (and not clearly conceived) subject, may remain in the most indefinite Pers., the masc. sing., as in 1Ki 22:16; Jos 8:20; Gen 1:14; Mic 6:16 etc.; but when the subject has been named, this indefiniteness cannot exist. The Sing, must therefore be here regarded as a corruption, and we must read (with Ew., Then., and all vss.) the Plu.The word , which sounds remarkably like the preceding here from the connection = assembly = . It appears here only, and is to be regarded as a transposition (so the Greek and several Rabbis) of the word meaning assembly, occasioned by the similar sound of the preceding .
[26][Chald: They saw the company of the scribes praising and Samuel standing over them teaching.Tr.]
[27][See Text. and Gram. The Vat. Sept. reads Sephi, not on the hill.Tr.]
[28][The way in which this Ps. contrasts Israel and the heathen makes it difficult to refer it to this incident in Davids life; and it is the city, not the house that the enemy here surrounds. The title is not necessarily part of the inspired Psalm.Tr.]
Fuente: A Commentary on the Holy Scriptures, Critical, Doctrinal, and Homiletical by Lange
CONTENTS
The history of David, and Saul’s enmity against him, is prosecuted in this chapter. Saul throws of the mask, and openly commands his son and servants to kill David. Jonathan expostulates with his father on the subject, and for a time obtains a promise, that David shall not be hurt. But his malice breaks out afresh, and he is obliged to flee for his life. Saul pursues him; but his design is overruled, and David again escapes. These are the principal things contained in this chapter.
1Sa 19:1
(1) And Saul spake to Jonathan his son, and to all his servants, that they should kill David.
We should again remark in the character of Saul, the progress of sin. In his example indeed, it is most awful. Having not been able to accomplish his bloody design upon David by private stratagem, he now proceeds by open command. So Herod, in his intention to crush the Lord Jesus, desired the wise men, when they had found Christ, to tell him where he was, that he might go and worship him also; but when he found that scheme failed, he sent out an order to kill all children under two years old, concluding that that must subject the Lord Jesus to the power of the sword. Mat 2:16Mat 2:16 .
Fuente: Hawker’s Poor Man’s Commentary (Old and New Testaments)
Religious Enthusiasm, True and False
1Sa 19:18-24
This is a sort of subject that needs to be thought out and discreetly treated. And yet it can never be made quite plain. It goes off into mystery on every side; for the action of the nervous system is involved in this, and the whole question of contagious emotion which not the best physiologists thoroughly understand. But without going into physiological questions, there are here things very plain which ought to be known by all intelligent Christians.
I. There is a religious excitation or excitement which may not have any moral quality or influence whatever. It is not affected it is real. It is not insincere; it is sincere. I mean a person who really is lifted up and carried along with a rush of sacred enthusiasm. He cries for mercy, and he sings loudly of salvation. I do not say that all excitement is useless, but I say that there is an excitement that only amounts to this. God forbid that we should for a moment deny that there are cases in which people get real permanent good. But the excitement is only the accompaniment; it is not the change. The only thing of real value is the exercise of conscience, and enlightenment of the understanding, the turning of the affections and the will to God in Christ and to righteousness.
II. The degree in which religious emotion overpowers the body is generally proportioned to the ignorance of the mind, or to its alienation or estrangement from God. David joined the company of these prophets without any excitement or frenzy. Why was that? Because David had more of the matter in him than Saul. He was a man of God himself, and the religious emotions flowed through him without resistance found in him a congenial recipient. But Saul was in an evil mood. Envy and murder were in his heart, and when this pure sacred impulse came upon him it met with the stronger resistance. Then there was this bodily manifestation, this falling down upon the ground, which far from being a sign of grace, was rather indicative of the lower moral state in which the man was found, and the resistance that his mind and heart made to the spirit upon him.
III. If this is right, and surely this is right it is historical this case should teach those persons who have at various times made a great ado over prostrations and trances and long fastings as signs of the work of grace to be somewhat more cautious in their utterances. These things occur almost always in the case of a morbid hysterical temperament, in which case they are only a sign of disease, not of health; or in the case of a very ignorant person who is overwhelmed with things of which he has no intelligent conception; or in cases where there has been a very awful estrangement from God, and the Word of His grace finds an obstruction. The Bible teaches us to be calm and fervent, fervent and calm. Let the evidence of our Christian faith and character be found not in any passing mood of excitement, but in the moral excellence that we exhibit in the fruit of the light and of the spirit that we daily bring forth.
D. Fraser, British Weekly Pulpit, vol. II. p. 178.
References. XIX. 24. F. D. Maurice, Prophets and Kings, p. 14. Spurgeon, Sermons, vol. xxxi. No. 1870. XIX. W. M. Taylor, David King of Israel, p. 52.
Fuente: Expositor’s Dictionary of Text by Robertson
XI
THE WAR BETWEEN LOVE AND HATE
THE STORY OF A LOST SOUL
1Sa 18:1-19:17
This discussion commences at 1Sa 18:1 , and here we are confronted, first of all, by another text difficulty. We saw in a former discussion that about 27 verses of 1 Samuel 17 did not appear in the Septuagint, the Greek translation of the Old Testament, but we know that those omissions must have been in the original Hebrew, for Josephus follows the text of 1 Samuel 17 strictly in his history of the Jews, but when we come to the omissions in 1 Samuel 18 from the Septuagint, Josephus does not give them. I repeat that our present Hebrew text was derived from late manuscripts of about the ninth or tenth century. I do not mean to say that there were no Hebrew texts before that, for Jerome, who translated the whole Bible into Latin, the edition called the Vulgate, in the fourth century, had Hebrew texts before him, and in a Roman Catholic English Bible we find Jerome’s Latin Bible translated into English and called the Douay Bible , which contains every word of our text. There are about fourteen verses of 1 Samuel 18 that do not appear in any manuscript of the Septuagint which we have except the Alexandrian manuscript, and it seems to be added there. It is not in the Vatican manuscript of the Septuagint, but we may thoroughly rely upon everything set forth in 1 Samuel 17-18 as being a part of the Word of God.
Before commencing to expound this section I call attention to a word in 1Sa 18:27 , “tale” “a full tale.” That is an old English word not much used now. I give an example of its old English use. Milton in one of his poems, “L’Allegro,” uses this language: Every shepherd tells his tale, Under the hawthorne in the dale.
What is the meaning of the word, “tale”? Does it mean that every shepherd tells his story, or narrative? No; that is not the meaning of the old English word, “tale.” “Every shepherd tells his number, his reckoning of the sheep.” From that we get our English word, “tally.” The shepherds number their flocks in the evening to see if they have the same number ! that they took out in the morning. “Every shepherd makes his tally, under the hawthorne in the dale.” That is what’ Milton means. ;
There is another old English word in 1Sa 18:30 , “set,” I “much set by.” What does “set” mean there? The meaning: of “set” in such a connection is “esteem.” We say, “I set great , store by such a man,” which means, “I esteem him very much.”
Yet another English word in this section, where Jonathan’s , bow and arrows are called “artillery.” Our meaning of the word “artillery” is confined to cannon, but the original word; meant any implement of war. These remarks on “tale,” “set” and “artillery” are to show the changes that have taken place in the signification of words in the English language since the Bible was translated by the King James revisers. Paul says, “I purposed to come unto you, (but was let hitherto).” Now “let” means “permitted;” then it meant “hindered” “I was hindered hitherto.”
Having disposed of the reference to the text, and those four instances of the changed meaning of old English words, we will take up the discussion proper. I commence with this observation, that in 1 Samuel 18-26, we have a section of the history that ought to be studied at one sitting. It is a pity to break it up into fragments. The parts are so intimately related that we need to have the whole of the story before us in order to get in their relations certain great lessons. These lessons are: l. These nine chapters (1 Samuel 18-26) show a protracted conflict between hate and love, and love’s final triumph; Saul’s hate against David; the love of Jonathan, Michal, the people, the prophets, and the priests for David, warring against Saul’s bate of David, and we see Satan inspiring the hate and Jehovah inspiring the love. That is the first lesson of these nine chapters.
2. These chapters show that there is a conflict between folly and wisdom, for hate is folly and love is wisdom; therefore the hating man is showing himself to be a fool at every step of the history, and the loving man is showing himself to be wise at every step of the history. Not only is hate criminal, but it is the most foolish passion in which you can indulge. The remarkable wisdom and forbearance of David defeat all the folly of Saul’s hate. That is one of the most evident things in the nine chapters. Under similar conditions not one man in a million would imitate David; not one in any number of millions under similar conditions would do as David did unless he were influenced by the Holy Spirit of God. History abounds in lessons to show that men, under long, continued provocations, not only strike back, which David didn’t do, but they become traitors to their own countries when the persecuting one is the ruler of the country. If they are not under the influence of God, they will end in becoming traitors.
We have a signal example in Benedict Arnold. There was not a more valiant soldier and capable general in the army of the Revolution than Benedict Arnold. He was the bravest of the brave, but Congress not only showed lack of appreciation of him, but put one indignity on him after another. Then he acted unlike David he sold his country to the British and became a general in the British army.
In studying Roman history we see the same thing in Coriolanus. When the Romans mistreated this great general he went over to the enemy of Rome, the Volsci, and led a triumphant army to the very gates of Rome. The Romans in terror asked his mother to go and plead with him to spare Rome. She went out and appealed to his patriotism and to his love of family. He said, “Mother, you have saved Rome, but you have lost your son; for the Volsci will kill me unless I capture Rome,” and they did kill him when he refused to capture Rome.
When a man is not under the guidance of God’s Holy Spirit and injuries are put upon him, he will strike back and resort ultimately to any expedient to glut his vengeance.
3. The third great lesson is the historian’s graphic description of the progress of the passions, whether good or bad, ever developing until each one comes to a final crystallization. More than once I have told you that power of the historian in 1 Samuel in tracing developments.
4. The fourth lesson is that both hate and love recognize the will of Jehovah in the passing events. We see Saul’s hate discovering in David’s triumph that he is the rival whom God has appointed to succeed him, and we will see Jonathan’s love discovering the same thing.
5. The fifth lesson is the distinct stages of Saul’s remorse when under the influence of Jonathan’s counsel and David’s good will.
6. The sixth lesson is the progress in the attachment between David and Jonathan. There is nothing like it in the history of the world, though we find in the classics the remarkable love between Damon and Pythias. There are three distinct covenants between Jonathan and David.
7. The whole story shows that if God be for a man, neither man nor devil can be against him successfully, and that if God be against a man none can be successfully for him. As Paul puts it: “If God be for us, who can be against us?” Oftentimes we have to fight public opinion. Oftentimes we feel that we are isolated from our kind on account of the position that we are compelled to take as God’s representative, but let this comfort us, that if God be for us; if, indeed, we are on God’s side nothing ultimately will prevail against us.
8. The eighth lesson is that high above Saul, Jonathan, Michal) David, we see two worlds interested Satan endeavoring to thwart the establishment of the kingdom of God and using Saul and others as his instruments, and Jehovah proceeding to establish his kingdom and using David, Jonathan, and others as his instruments.
If we don’t recognize the fact that the world above and the world beneath touch human lives and have much to do with events, then we never can understand the history of any one man, much less one nation.
That was the trouble in Job’s mind. If he could have seen what the historian tells us about, that coming together of the angels, good and bad, when God held his stated meeting of angels, and knew that an evil angel was seeking to do him harm, and that he could not do this except as God permitted it, then he could have understood why undeserved afflictions came upon him, and why God permitted them. Homer, while holding to the wrong kind of gods, not only follows the true poetical idea, but he follows the true idea in representing all the gods and goddesses as interested in the Trojan War. I have studied it so much that when a war commences, say between Japan and Russia, I look for the devil’s tracks and also look for the tracks of Jehovah, and I can better understand the issue of wars when I do that.
These are the great lessons that are set forth in the nine chapters. We will commence now and discover these great lessons one after another as we take up the story seriatim, and we note first the progress of Saul’s hate. What was the origin of Saul’s hate? When he committed his first sin God announced to him that he had selected a man after his own heart to whom he would give the kingdom, and when Saul committed his second sin God again refers to his purpose to substitute for Saul a better man. That rankles in Saul’s mind. Always he carries that thought with him: “Somebody is to be put up to succeed me,” and hence he will be looking around, watching every arriving man “Maybe he is the one.” There we see the origin of it.
The first expression of it comes in this section, which says that after the great victory over the Philistines by David described in the last chapter, and the pursuit clear to the gates of the Philistine cities, that when the army returned home the women, according to a custom of that time and of this time, determined to celebrate the return of the victorious army, so they sang, antiphonally. It was like the responsive singing of Miriam and her choir in the paean of deliverance after the safe passage of the Red Sea. The record says that they sang antiphonally, and the first part of them would sing, “Saul hath slain his thousands” and the other part would respond, “But David hath slain his ten thousands.”
When these women sang that way it excited Saul’s wrath, and he instantly thought of what God had announced, and he says, “What more is there for him but the kingdom? Here is a man who has gained a great victory and the people are with him, and even the women are putting him above me,” hence the text says that from that day Saul eyed David. When a man looks at another sideways under lowered lids, that is what we call eyeing a man. He is under suspicion from that time on. That is the first expression of the hate of Saul, and you find it in 1Sa 18:8-9 .
We now come to a truth of very great importance. In a previous part of the book we have seen that God, in David’s music, could exorcise the demon in Saul, and did do it, and for quite awhile Saul was not under the possession of the demon, but here comes a word from our Lord fitting the case exactly. It is found in Mat 12:43-45 : “The unclean spirit, when he is gone out of the man, passeth through waterless places seeking rest, and findeth it not. Then he saith, I will return into my house whence I came out; and when he is come, he findeth it empty, swept, and garnished. Then goeth be and taketh with himself seven other spirits more evil than himself, and they enter in and dwell there: and the last state of that man becometh worse than the first.” That is pertinent to this case. A demon may be cast out once, then, as Jesus says to a man under similar conditions, “Go and sin no more, lest a worse thing befall thee.” Should that demon come back he cannot again be exorcised. The text here is the proof. When that evil spirit, taking advantage of Saul’s hate, re-entered Saul, they sent for the usual remedy David must come and play for him. But David plays and the spirit does not leave. On the contrary, he prompts Saul to thrust a javelin at the heart of David. That is the pivotal point in Saul’s case. There he passes the boundary line. There is a time, we know not when; A place, we know not where; That marks the destiny of men To glory or despair.
It is as if a man under the habit of drunkenness is cured at a sanitarium. Let him beware of ever falling into the habit again; the sanitarium won’t cure him the next time. In other words, a sinner that does not avail himself of the means of grace that are applied to him will ultimately get past feeling; like Pharaoh, his heart will be hardened until it never can be softened again. Like Ephraim, he will become wedded to his idols.
The most notable instance of this that ever came within my experience was at a meeting that I held in the old Providence Church in Burleson County. Ah! what a meeting! Seventy days and nights, until it seemed that every sinner in fifteen miles of the place was converted. One night when I made an appeal to see if we could find anybody that was unsaved, a white-haired old man got up and said, “I am the man. I have been watching your meetings. There was a time when such things moved my heart, but I kept trifling with the monitions of the Spirit of God that impelled me to turn to Christ and be saved, and in one meeting after another I resisted and said, ‘No, No, No,’ and at last, as if God had said to me, ‘Your no shall be forever,’ all feelings in that direction were taken away from me, and as I stand up here before you tonight telling you this experience, you see a man doomed, without hope of mercy, simply because the Spirit of God, who alone can lead a man to salvation, has departed from me forever.” It made a solemn impression.
We notice now that the spirit can’t be reached by music, even when God is in the music, and hence there is an attempt to destroy David’s life. The next step is found in 1Sa 18:12 . That tells us that Saul was afraid because God’s Spirit was on David, and had left him. This is one of the consequences that the Spirit of God has left fear. He was afraid, and he was afraid of David, so he takes another step to destroy David. He removed him from office near his person and gave him a position in the firing line of the army, not to honor David by that promotion, but the text tells us he did it in the hope that David might perish by the hands of the Philistines, in some of the fights. We have an old saying coming from Virgil, “Beware of the Greeks bringing gifts.” That was said when they left the Trojans that great wooden horse, which had 500 Greeks hidden in it. It was so large they could not bring it in through the gates, and had to break down the wall to get it in, and that night the Greeks came out of the horse and opened the gates and the city was taken. And that was Saul’s meaning when he promoted David to this high office in his service. He meant to destroy him by it.
The next step in the progress is in 1Sa 18:15 . When Saul saw that David acted very wisely in the new position he was “more afraid.” David didn’t get killed. God took care of him, and he acted so wisely in the administration of the new office that it increased Saul’s fear.
We come to 1Sa 18:17 , and ask what next Saul will do? What of this hate of his? To what expedient will he now resort? He approaches David secretly through his officers, as though he were conferring another great honor on him, and offers his daughter in marriage. He should be the son-in-law of the king if he will give not money for her dowry, for David did not have it but “Kill me 100 Philistines and bring evidence that you have killed them and complete the tally” that is, let the number be counted. Now what was his object? He didn’t want David in his family, but he would set a snare by the use of his own daughter, and the object of it would be to put David in a position of personal danger. Saul’s thought was that in fighting the 100 Philistines some one would kill him.
1Sa 18:20 shows progress again. “And when Saul saw it was Jehovah with David, and that all the people of Israel loved him, he was more afraid.” Your text says that Michal loved him. The real text is, “When Saul saw that Jehovah was with him and that all the people loved him he was more afraid.” Notice the progress, and that is this evil spirit in Saul increasing his madness, and they try the music remedy one more time. So David is sent for to play before Saul, and again the evil spirit prompts Saul, and he thrusts a javelin at him the second time. David saw that he could no longer fool with that kind of situation and he left and went to his own private house. There is a limit to the power of music. True, Shakespeare says, A man who has no music in his soul, Nor concord of sweet sound, Is fit for treason, stratagems and spoils.
The next step in the progress of that hate is in 1Sa 19 . Saul called Jonathan to him and certain of his officers and gave them a peremptory command to execute David. Jonathan says, “Father, what hath he done? He doesn’t deserve death. He hath never done you any harm. Why should David be slain?” The pleading of the beloved Jonathan prevails. When Jonathan so humbly pleads, Saul’s heart melts and David comes back and heads the whole army and wins another glorious victory over the Philistines. And now Saul’s hate will not respect the pleading of Jonathan, so David went to his home saying that he could not stay near Saul without provoking death.
Then follows an incident that David commemorates in the Psalms. They surround his house. One of the most despicable acts of tyranny is what is called “domiciliary visitation.” Man’s home is regarded as his castle, and when the privacy of his home is invaded by espionage or by an attempt to take life on his own hearthstone, there is no step beyond that a tyrant can go. Revolution comes when that is attempted. That is why the Huguenots left France; the dragoons were stationed ; in their homes, and the privacy of the home was violated. They could not even in private whisper to each other but the words were heard by some of these spies and reported. In the Declaration of Independence that is one of the accusations against the king that he had stationed troops in private houses without the consent of the people. It made a marvelous impression on David’s mind that night when he looked out ; and saw the sentinels all around his house. David’s wife helps , him that time. She says, “If you don’t escape tonight, tomorrow you will be a dead man,” and a woman when she is stirred up in a matter and puts her wits to work is not easy to thwart. So she puts a teraphim a wooden image in David’s bed and tied a wig or something over it and wrapped the image up to represent a man sleeping, and when the soldiers came in to arrest David she said, “You see he is sleeping,” and they waited till morning and David got away.
QUESTIONS
1. What textual difficulty is in 1Sa 18 , and what the discussion thereon?
2. What is the meaning of the old English word, “tale,” and what other English word is derived from it?
3. What is the meaning of the old English word, “set,” in the phrase, “much set by,” in 1Sa 18:30 ?
4. What is the meaning of the word “artillery,” as used in this connection?
5. What is the meaning of the word, “let,” as used by Paul in Romans 1-13 and what the lessons of these uses of the words, “tale,” “set,” “artillery,” and “let”?
6. What chapters of 1 Samuel should be studied as one section, and why?
7. What are the great lessons of these chapters?
8. In what two respects is David’s self-restraint under these persistent and murderous attacks of Saul without a parallel, and what two great men under less provocation became traitors to their native land?
9. What is the difficulty in Job’s mind, and what instance in the classics referred to in illustrating it?
10. What is the origin of Saul’s hate, and what the first expression of it?
11. What are the words which so graphically describe Saul’s hate, and the counter-progress of David’s wisdom?
12. What saying of our Lord shows the fearful state of a man who allows an exorcised demon to re-enter the soul?
13. Show by David’s music, Jonathan’s intercession, and the gift of prophesying that what expels the demon the first time will not avail the second time.
14. Quote the stanza given to illustrate the sin against the Holy Spirit.
15. Relate the incident given to illustrate this sin.
16. What are the steps of progress in Saul’s hate of David as revealed in his efforts to take his life?
17. What does Shakespeare say of a man who has no music in his soul?
18. In what Psalm does David commemorate the watching around his house at night?
19. How does David escape from that house, and what later and greater Saul escaped like David through a window?
20. What are the illustrations of this incident of watching around David’s house in later history?
Fuente: B.H. Carroll’s An Interpretation of the English Bible
1Sa 19:1 And Saul spake to Jonathan his son, and to all his servants, that they should kill David.
Ver. 1. And Saul spake to Jonathan his son. ] Detexit facinus fatuus et non implevit, saith Tacitus of one that was sent by the senate to kill another, but revealed it to one that disclosed and prevented it. Did Saul think that Jonathan would kill David whom he so dearly loved? How grossly mistaken was Saul! how shameless and impudent! This was in peius proficere: wicked men grow worse and worse, till wrath come upon them to the utmost.
And to all his servants.
That they should kill David.
a De Benef. lib. ii. cap. 21.
Fuente: John Trapp’s Complete Commentary (Old and New Testaments)
Chapter 19
Now in the nineteenth, we find Saul’s third attempt to kill David.
Saul spoke to Jonathan his son, to all of his servants, and he told him that they should kill David. But Jonathan because of his love for David: said to his father, or he said to David, David my dad seeks to kill you: I pray, take heed to yourself until the morning, and abide in a secret place, hide: And I will go out and stand beside my father in the field where you are, and I’ll commune with my father of thee; and what I see, I’ll tell you. [In other words, “Hide yourself until I can find out really what my dad is thinking.”] So Jonathan spoke good of David to Saul his father, and said, Let not the king sin against his servant, and against David; because he hath not sinned against you, and because his works have been very good towards you: For he did put his life in his own hand, and he slew the Philistine, and the Lord wrought a great salvation for all Israel: you saw it, and you did rejoice: why then will you sin against innocent blood, and slay David without a cause? So hearken to the voice of Jonathan, and Saul swear, As the Lord liveth, he shall not be slain ( 1Sa 19:1-6 ).
So there was an apparent change of attitude for a moment. Now Saul does manifest almost a schizophrenia. I would imagine if a psychiatrist would read the case history on Saul here, he would probably be classified as a schizophrenic. He would have these periods of great depression. He would have periods of remorse and periods of change. “Oh David, my son. You’re like a son to me.” And he’d speak great words of love, and then next day try to ram him through with a javelin again. So he was very vacillating.
Now Jonathan speaking these kind words to his dad about David, Saul responded and he said, “As the Lord liveth he’ll not be slain.”
So Jonathan called David, and Jonathan shewed him all of those things. And Jonathan brought David to Saul, and he was in Saul’s presence as in times past. And there was war again: and David went out, and fought with the Philistines, and slew them with a great slaughter; and they fled from him. And the evil spirit from the Lord was upon Saul, as he sat in his house with his javelin in his hand: and David played with his hand on the harp. And Saul sought to smite David even to the wall with the javelin; but David slipped out of Saul’s presence, and the javelin went into the wall: and David fled, and escaped that night. So Saul sent out messengers to David’s house, to watch him, and to slay him in the morning: and Michal David’s wife told him saying, Now if you don’t save your life tonight, tomorrow you’re gonna be dead. So Michal let David down through a window: and he fled, and escaped. And then she took the bed and put pillows under the blankets, so it looked like someone was lying there. And so in the morning when the messengers were gonna kill David, she said, Oh he’s sick. [They said, “We want to bring him to Saul.” They said, He’s sick he’s in bed. So they went to Saul and they said, “We can’t bring him, the guy’s sick in bed.”] He said, Bring him with the bed and all so we can slay him. So they went back to get David, and then they found out that it was just the pillows under the blankets, [David was gone.] So he got angry with his daughter Michal, he said, What are you doing turning against your own father, your own flesh and blood to protect David? So Michal said to her dad, he said, Let me go or I’m going to kill you. [So she lied her way out of it.] So David fled, and he came to Samuel there in Ramah, and he told him all that Saul had done to him. And Samuel went and dwelt in Naioth. And it was told Saul, saying, Behold, David is at Naioth in Ramah. And Saul sent messengers to take David: and when they saw the company of the prophets prophesying, and Samuel stand as appointed over them, the spirit of God came upon the messengers of Saul, and they all prophesied ( 1Sa 19:7-20 ).
So here is an interesting thing Samuel was there at Naioth, and David was there, and so they sent these guys out to take David in, and God’s Spirit just came on them. They just started prophesying.
So he sent out another group of messengers to get David, and as they came near where the spirit of God was working, the spirit of God came on them, they started prophesying. So he sent out a third company of messengers to get David, [and when they came into the scene, and all this going on] they began to prophesy. So Saul came down himself, and the spirit came on Saul, and he took off his clothes, and he lay there naked all night prophesying. So that they began to say, Is Saul among the prophets ( 1Sa 19:21-24 )?
Again that proverb that came out early in Saul’s career.
Chapter 19
Now in the nineteenth, we find Saul’s third attempt to kill David.
Saul spoke to Jonathan his son, to all of his servants, and he told him that they should kill David. But Jonathan because of his love for David: said to his father, or he said to David, David my dad seeks to kill you: I pray, take heed to yourself until the morning, and abide in a secret place, hide: And I will go out and stand beside my father in the field where you are, and I’ll commune with my father of thee; and what I see, I’ll tell you. [In other words, “Hide yourself until I can find out really what my dad is thinking.”] So Jonathan spoke good of David to Saul his father, and said, Let not the king sin against his servant, and against David; because he hath not sinned against you, and because his works have been very good towards you: For he did put his life in his own hand, and he slew the Philistine, and the Lord wrought a great salvation for all Israel: you saw it, and you did rejoice: why then will you sin against innocent blood, and slay David without a cause? So hearken to the voice of Jonathan, and Saul swear, As the Lord liveth, he shall not be slain ( 1Sa 19:1-6 ).
So there was an apparent change of attitude for a moment. Now Saul does manifest almost a schizophrenia. I would imagine if a psychiatrist would read the case history on Saul here, he would probably be classified as a schizophrenic. He would have these periods of great depression. He would have periods of remorse and periods of change. “Oh David, my son. You’re like a son to me.” And he’d speak great words of love, and then next day try to ram him through with a javelin again. So he was very vacillating.
Now Jonathan speaking these kind words to his dad about David, Saul responded and he said, “As the Lord liveth he’ll not be slain.”
So Jonathan called David, and Jonathan shewed him all of those things. And Jonathan brought David to Saul, and he was in Saul’s presence as in times past. And there was war again: and David went out, and fought with the Philistines, and slew them with a great slaughter; and they fled from him. And the evil spirit from the Lord was upon Saul, as he sat in his house with his javelin in his hand: and David played with his hand on the harp. And Saul sought to smite David even to the wall with the javelin; but David slipped out of Saul’s presence, and the javelin went into the wall: and David fled, and escaped that night. So Saul sent out messengers to David’s house, to watch him, and to slay him in the morning: and Michal David’s wife told him saying, Now if you don’t save your life tonight, tomorrow you’re gonna be dead. So Michal let David down through a window: and he fled, and escaped. And then she took the bed and put pillows under the blankets, so it looked like someone was lying there. And so in the morning when the messengers were gonna kill David, she said, Oh he’s sick. [They said, “We want to bring him to Saul.” They said, He’s sick he’s in bed. So they went to Saul and they said, “We can’t bring him, the guy’s sick in bed.”] He said, Bring him with the bed and all so we can slay him. So they went back to get David, and then they found out that it was just the pillows under the blankets, [David was gone.] So he got angry with his daughter Michal, he said, What are you doing turning against your own father, your own flesh and blood to protect David? So Michal said to her dad, he said, Let me go or I’m going to kill you. [So she lied her way out of it.] So David fled, and he came to Samuel there in Ramah, and he told him all that Saul had done to him. And Samuel went and dwelt in Naioth. And it was told Saul, saying, Behold, David is at Naioth in Ramah. And Saul sent messengers to take David: and when they saw the company of the prophets prophesying, and Samuel stand as appointed over them, the spirit of God came upon the messengers of Saul, and they all prophesied ( 1Sa 19:7-20 ).
So here is an interesting thing Samuel was there at Naioth, and David was there, and so they sent these guys out to take David in, and God’s Spirit just came on them. They just started prophesying.
So he sent out another group of messengers to get David, and as they came near where the spirit of God was working, the spirit of God came on them, they started prophesying. So he sent out a third company of messengers to get David, [and when they came into the scene, and all this going on] they began to prophesy. So Saul came down himself, and the spirit came on Saul, and he took off his clothes, and he lay there naked all night prophesying. So that they began to say, Is Saul among the prophets ( 1Sa 19:21-24 )?
Again that proverb that came out early in Saul’s career. “
Fuente: Through the Bible Commentary
Sauls enmity toward David grew, while the friendship between Jonathan and David increased. Saul did all in his power to set both Jonathan and the people against David. He even went so far as to charge them to slay David.
For a while he was persuaded by Jonathan to cease his unholy persecution of David. However, the underlying enmity quickly broke out again, and this time in a direct attempt on David’s life.
These were indeed days of bitter testing for the young man anointed to the kingly office, and it was perfectly natural that in the stress and strain of such experiences he should flee to Samuel.
Here he was protected by direct divine intervention of the most remarkable kind. Three companies of Saul’s messengers, and at last Sad himself, journeying with the express purpose of capturing David, were taken possession of by the Spirit of God and compelled to prophesy.
Fuente: An Exposition on the Whole Bible
Noble Intercession; Implacable Hate
1Sa 19:1-12
Not content with exchanging his dress and weapons with his friend, Jonathan pleaded Davids cause at court. He had the royal ear and spoke as Davids daysman. As he touched upon his brother-in-laws devotion, modesty and courage, the fathers heart relented. We must not, however, take Jonathans interposition as illustrating our Lords, because Jesus stands for us in the presence of One whose love requires no argument. But learn to abide in the secret place of the Most High, and hide thyself, until thou hast learned what thou should do, 1Sa 19:2.
While Sauls troops were watching the house on the outside, the psalmist was appealing to God as his strength, and hiding in Him as his strong tower. See Psa 59:9; Psa 59:17. Wait on God during the hours when your enemy is waiting for you. We must not only pray for Gods help, but expect and look out for it. All true waiting must be combined with singing. Sing, persecuted soul, in sure confidence that the glorious deliverance awaiting you is near at hand! Notice that Holy Scripture never conceals and never palliates wrong-doing. It does not excuse lies of necessity. See Lev 19:11; Col 3:9.
Fuente: F.B. Meyer’s Through the Bible Commentary
1Sa 19:11-12
In this passage there is a minute account of an appalling danger to which David was exposed.
I. God’s servants are frequently exposed to alarming dangers. (1) This danger came at an unexpected time. (2) This danger proceeded from a powerful enemy. (3) This danger assumed a most alarming aspect.
II. God’s servants are frequently warned of approaching danger. (1) David’s warning came from different sources. (2) David’s warning demanded immediate attention. (3) David’s warning led to decisive action.
III. God’s servants are frequently delivered from impending dangers. The context shows that God delivers His servants in four ways: (1) By friendly mediation. (2) By personal watchfulness. (3) By conjugal fidelity. (4) By Divine interposition.
Parker, City Temple, vol. i., p. 81.
References: 1Sa 19:11-12 and 1Sa 19:18.-F. W. Krummacher, David the King of Israel, pp. 68, 86. 1Sa 19:18-20.-G. B. Ryley, Christian World Pulpit, vol. xiii. p. 285; Payne-Smith, Bampton Lectures, 1869, p. 128.
1Sa 19:20
Prophecy, according to the notions popularly entertained of it, might be defined to be a mere prediction of future events, and the prophet one who utters such prediction. This definition, however, does not embrace the essentials of the thing defined. The prophet of former days was, in all substantial points, identical with the preacher of these. The commission of both prophet and preacher is to set forth the Divine oracles; to speak to their fellow-sinners the word which proceedeth out of the mouth of the Lord. Prediction and instruction are only different portions of the Divine word. Our text presents to us two great subjects for consideration. (1) A spiritual influence exerted upon certain persons. (2) The instrumentality employed in making this impression.
I. Both the messengers of Saul and Saul himself were constrained by a strange and irresistible influence to prophesy before Samuel. Saul stripping off his royal apparel and lying down in the dust before Samuel presents to us a picture of the sinner’s self-abasement, when the convicting and converting influences of the Holy Spirit first pour in upon his heart. It was marvellous that a hard and bad man should thus be absorbed into the vortex of a spiritual influence; that he should be turned aside from his purpose by the coming in upon him of a holy ecstasy, which rapt him into compliance with the suggestions of the Spirit.
II. It was the sight of the Church’s ministers uttering under the Spirit’s influences the mysteries of the Divine word, which made so great an impression on Saul and his messengers. It is not, however, by any mere power of moral persuasion that the alienated heart of man can be effectually turned to God. The Spirit must second the prophet’s testimony, putting life and energy into the preached word and causing it to penetrate into the springs of the character.
E. M. Goulburn, Occasional Sermons, p. 97.
Reference: 1Sa 19:22.-Parker, vol. vii., p. 72.
1Sa 19:24
We are not told any remarkable points in the character or early discipline of Saul; there were probably none to tell. As we have often had occasion to notice in the earlier Scripture narratives, a man not distinguished from his fellows by any peculiar gifts, merely a specimen of the ordinary human material, may nevertheless be brought most livingly before us; we may be compelled to feel that he is an individual man, one of ourselves, and as such to care for him.
I. There are moments in the mind of the dullest, most prosaic man, when unknown springs seem to be opened in him, when either some new and powerful affection, or quite as often the sense of a vocation, fills him with thoughts and causes him to utter words which are quite alien from his ordinary habits, and which have yet in them a pledge and savour of originality. It is a fact of this kind which the record discloses to us. “God gave him another heart-the Spirit of God came upon him”-these are the words which tell us what that prophetic impulse denoted. However unwonted might be the thoughts which stirred in him and the words which he poured forth, they could not have come from some irregular tumultuous excitement, they must have proceeded from the very spirit of calmness and order. Saul was among the prophets precisely because he confessed the presence of such a spirit of calmness and order.
II. Saul is no monster who has won power by false means and then plunges at once into a reckless abuse of it-no apostate who casts off the belief in God, and sets up some Ammonite or Phoenician idol. He merely forgets the Lord and the teacher who had imparted to him that new life and inspiration, he merely fails to remember that he is under a law and that he has a vocation. The calm spirit of trust and hope has been resisted and grieved, and there comes upon him an evil spirit from the Lord, an accusing conscience warning him of what he had been, throwing its dark shadow upon the present, making the future look dim and gloomy.
III. There are glimpses of light in the later life of Saul, which we refer at once to a Divine source, which it would be sinful to refer to any other. The love and loyalty of David, in sparing his life, were not unrewarded. They struck out sparks of love in him, they made it evident that there was something deeper and healthier beneath all his strangest distortions of mind. And that sacred inspiration, of which our text speaks, which recalled the almost forgotten question: “Is Saul among the prophets?” though it came mixed with a wild kind of insanity, yet proclaimed that God’s Spirit, which bloweth where it listeth, had not left this building to be a mere possession for the birds of night.
F. D. Maurice, Prophets and Kings of the Old Testament, p. 17.
References: 1Sa 19:24.-J. E. Vaux, Sermon Notes, 1st series, p. 90. 1Sa 20:3.-Spurgeon, Sermons, vol. xxxi., No. 1870; J. Sherman, Thursday Penny Pulpit, vol. v., p. 337. 1Sam 20-22.-W. M. Taylor, David King of Israel, p. 65.
Fuente: The Sermon Bible
4. Sauls Renewed Attempt and Davids Escape
CHAPTER 19
1. Saul and Jonathan (1Sa 19:1-7)
2. Sauls new attempt to kill David (1Sa 19:8-10)
3. Davids escape (1Sa 19:11-18)
4. Sauls pursuit and his helplessness (1Sa 19:19-24)
The lost King goes from bad to worse. First he tried to spear David; then he attempted to take his life through having him killed by the Philistines, and now he speaks openly to his own son and to all his servants that David must be killed. Therefore loving Jonathan warned David and he hid himself Then Jonathan persuades his father to desist and Saul uttered a meaningless oath As the Lord liveth, he shall not be slain. And Jonathan brought David to Saul.
Thus Jonathan is seen as a peacemaker.
But Davids great victory (verse 8) starts the kings hatred again and the javelin flies once more, but only strikes the wall from where he had slipped away. Then David fled and when he comes to his house his faithful wife tells him of the great danger and let him down through a window. They watched the house to kill him. The fifty-ninth Psalm throws interesting light upon this part of Davids history and has of course prophetically a wider application.
And Michal practised a deception. Like Rachel she possessed teraphim, the idol-images in so much use among the Chaldeans and other nations. These were forbidden by Jehovah and yet they were secretly used (Jdg 17:5; Jdg 18:14). Michals image must have been of considerable size; she arranged it in the bed and then said to messengers he is sick. When the deception is discovered she lies again and said that David threatened her life. That the Scriptures record these misdeeds is but an evidence of their genuineness, however the Holy Scriptures never sanction these things. In all these attempts on David we see a foreshadowing also of the attempts which were made on the life of our Lord.
And David fled to Samuel, who had a kind of a school for prophets at Naioth in Ramah. Sauls pursuit is in vain and he is helpless to touch the Lords anointed. Divine power was engaged in behalf of David, and Saul himself, stripped and naked, lying down all night and all day has to bear witness to it.
The schools of the prophets, which were placed under the direction of experienced and approved prophets, afforded to younger men an opportunity of becoming qualified to perform the duties of the prophetic calling. The selection and the admission of individuals who were suited for the prophetic office by their personal character, and who had a divine call, undoubtedly depended on the prophetic judgment of those who presided over these institutions. As prophecy was a gift and not an art, the instructions which were imparted probably referred merely to the study of the law, and were intended to awaken and cultivate theocratical sentiments, as well as promote a growth in spiritual life, for herein a suitable preparation for the prophetic office necessarily consisted. There are also indications found which authorize us to conclude that the revival of sacred poetry, as an art, and that theocratico-historical composition also, are to be ascribed to these religious communities as their source. Such schools existed in Ramah, Jericho, Beth-el, and Gilgal (1Sa 19:18; 2Ki 2:3; 2Ki 2:5; 2Ki 4:38) (J.H. Kurtz)
Fuente: Gaebelein’s Annotated Bible (Commentary)
And Saul: Saul’s enmity now burst forth, in the avowed purpose of putting David to death; and nothing less than the especial interposition of Providence could have saved David’s life, when every officer about the king’s person, and every soldier, had positive orders to dispatch him. 1Sa 18:8, 1Sa 18:9, Pro 27:4, Ecc 9:3, Jer 9:3, 2Ti 3:13
Reciprocal: Gen 37:18 – conspired Psa 59:3 – they
Fuente: The Treasury of Scripture Knowledge
1Sa 19:1. Saul spake to Jonathan, and all his servants When he could not destroy David by craft, he declares open enmity to him; and commands his son and his whole court to make him away; some of whom he thought would obey him. It is strange he should speak to Jonathan to murder David, if he knew the friendship he had for him; and he could not well be ignorant of it, since he had so publicly declared it, as we read chap. 1Sa 18:3-4. But he imagined his love to a father would overcome his love to a friend; and there was a great providence of God in his disclosing his mind so freely to Jonathan, as by that means David came to be certainly informed of his danger.
Fuente: Joseph Bensons Commentary on the Old and New Testaments
1Sa 19:11. Saul sent messengersto slay him. The Vulgate, lictors, executioners. They could not approach the bed of a princess till the morning.
1Sa 19:13. Michal took an image, a statue, or a bust, and put it in the bed. Though the Hebrew be teraphim, it cannot be understood of any image used for devotion. David never lifted up his hand to an idol.
1Sa 19:19. Naioth; that is, the house of doctrine. From this name, it is apparent, that Samuel had established here a little college or school of the prophets; and in this he aimed at the good of his country. It was a school under divine influences; a school in which the young men became prepared to go about the country to pray and prophesy; it was a school which commanded great respect from the nation, having Samuel for the father of the prophets. And how can the sanctuary be honoured, unless the preachers have the spirit of prophesy, the spirit which seizes all that hear them preach? And how can they support their honour, unless they are acquainted with languages, and the elements of knowledge? Assuredly, pious young men so called are worthy of all the aids that science can give to man. See 2 Kings 1:45.
REFLECTIONS.
In Jonathan we have a pattern of true friendship, pure and noble, the same towards David in adversity as in prosperity; friendship which nearly cost Jonathan his life, to save the life of his friend and brother. He argued forcibly, for grief is eloquent, that a man who had put his life in his hand should not have it taken away.
The errors of Saul in seeking, under these circumstances, to kill David, though we may make proper allowances for the evil influence under which he fell, place his character in the darkest shades, and number him with those foul and black souls which never calculate on the consequences of crime to assuage a wicked passion.
In Michal we see a woman doing all that she could, and doing it with success, to save the life of her husband. How preferable is that to swooning, fainting, and howling in the crisis of danger. The sublime passion of high female duty should take the lead of all the softer passions of the heart.
David fled to Samuel for counsel, comfort, and prayer. Here is a model for us to carry our troubles to a throne of grace, and to seek the advice and succour of the church of God.
We must next notice the power of religion on the mind. Samuel drew all these lictors in succession, and Saul himself to prayer, to psalmody and devotion. This was a masterly stroke, prompted by the Spirit of God, to engage all those persons in the exercises of devotion, as the best preservation from shedding innocent blood. Let the troubled and the persecuted be comforted. Who is he that shall harm you, if ye are followers of that which is good? Jesus can still force the lictors to say, Never man spake like this man.
Fuente: Sutcliffe’s Commentary on the Old and New Testaments
1Sa 19:1-7 (E). Saul bids Jonathan and his followers slay David, but Jonathan brings about a reconciliation.
1Sa 19:8-17 (E). It is uncertain whether 1Sa 19:11-17 is the sequel of 1Sa 19:8-10, or comes from a different source. In any case the whole of 1Sa 19:8-17 probably belongs to the ancient tradition.
Saul tries to kill David, but David escapes. Saul has his house watched, but Michal lets him down through the window and he escapes. She deceives Sauls messengers, by placing in the bed a dummy David, constructed out of the family teraphim (p. 100), with somethingit is not clear whatfor a pillow, and covering it up with a garment. ICC suggests that the Israelites, like the modern Arabs, may have covered their heads when they went to sleep.
Fuente: Peake’s Commentary on the Bible
When Saul told Jonathan and all his servants to put David to death, no sensible servant would have approved of this. Jonathan however, positively loved David and warned him of Saul’s intentions. Still, Jonathan thought He could reason with Saul and persuade him that David was not an enemy, but a true friend. He advised David to remain hidden from Saul, while Jonathan interceded for him with his father. Then Jonathan “spoke good of David to Saul his father” (v.4). How appropriate it is if we today will speak good of the Lord Jesus before others who oppose Him! He speaks of the negative fact that David had in no way harmed Saul, then of the positive fact that David’s works had been very good, including venturing his life against Goliath, which had caused Saul and all Israel to rejoice.
Jonathan urges his father that, since he had himself rejoiced in David’s victory over Goliath, he should surely not now change his mind and give orders for David’s death. He tells him that this is sin against innocent blood, for there was no cause. Jonathan’s reasoning is of course plain and right, and on this occasion has a good effect upon Saul. Not only does he give way but swears by the Lord that David would not be killed (v.6). Jonathan therefore brings David back again to his former position in Saul’s company. We may be sure that David would be continually on his guard at this time, for experience would teach him to be cautious.
Another war takes place (v.8). David leads the armies of Israel, accomplishing a great victory, with many Philistines slaughtered, the rest retreating in confusion. Instead of this causing Saul to appreciate and honor David, it rather incurred his deeper jealousy. His real enemy was only his own pride which opened the door to the evil spirit to influence him hatefully toward David. Yet it is again made clear that the evil spirit could not do this without God’s permission. God in His sovereign government allowed this because of Saul’s stubbornness. Saul had refused God’s Spirit, therefore he must learn by experience that he has actually chosen a spirit of evil. This experience ought to have awakened his conscience and driven him to the Lord, but he would not yield to God.
Again Saul threw his javelin at David, intending to kill him. What was the value of his sworn oath that David would not be killed (v.6)? This breaking of his oath shows Saul’s painful incapacity for ruling over men. David was on guard, however, and again dodged the javelin and escaped from Saul’s house (v.10).
Now he was not safe even in his own house. Michal knew that Saul had sent messengers to watch David’s house through the night and she realized that Saul had given them orders to kill David in the morning. She warned him to escape during the night and let him down (perhaps with a rope) through a window. He was able to avoid being seen by Saul’s servants and escaped for his life.
Michal, to gain time for David, had put a “teraphim” in David’s bed (v.13). This was a image in human form, actually idolatrous yet too often used by Israelites alongside of the worship of God. Poor Michal! She did not know the power of God, nor did she have real faith in His faithfulness. She thought it necessary to at least partly trust in idols! but we all may too easily become adept at practicing deception.
Michal did not gain her desired end by telling Saul’s messengers that David was sick. Saul was so determined to kill him quickly that he ordered his servants to bring David to Saul in his bed. Then of course they discovered the deception, and Saul was upset with his daughter because she had been helpful to her own husband! Instead of calling David HER HUSBAND, Saul calls him “my enemy,” which was not true, for David had no enmity toward Saul. He demanded of her why she had let David escape.
Why did Michal not tell Saul frankly that she did not want her husband to be killed? Evidently her love for David took second place to her fear of Saul. For she lied to her father, telling him that David had threatened to kill her if she did not let him go. What pathetic weakness was this, in contrast to her brother Jonathan’s bold defense of David before Saul (vs.4-5).
From this time David no longer served Saul in fighting his battles or in playing the harp for him. Mere jealousy had made Saul a cruel enemy of David, and David is practically driven away as a fugitive in the wilderness. He came to Samuel at Ramah and reported Saul’s activities against him. Samuel does nothing about this, not even sending a reproof to Saul, nor interceding with him for David. He knew that Saul had committed himself to his senseless course, and nothing would stop him. For the time, David lived with Samuel at Naioth, in the vicinity of Ramah.
News of David’s whereabouts reached Saul, who sent men to take him captive. However, they find Samuel in charge of a company of prophets, all of whom were prophesying. This was actually the work of the Spirit of God, who also influenced Saul’s messengers to prophesy rather than to arrest David.
When Saul learned that his messengers had come under the power of God’s prophetic Word, rather than having his conscience exercised to remember this had happened to him before (1Sa 10:10), he sent more messengers to apprehend David. But they too prophesied when they came to Samuel. Therefore Saul sent another group, who were also affected in the same way.
But even this did not reach Saul’s hardened conscience. Consequently he must learn by a humiliating experience. He went himself to Ramah, and asking directions found his way to Naioth where Samuel was, but before reaching Samuel he was laid hold of by the Spirit of God to prophesy as the others had. His weapons here were useless. In fact, he stripped off his clothes, at least his outer garments, and laid down without defense of any kind all that day and all night. God was showing Saul His superior power, not in judgment, but in kindness. Yet this rendered Saul helpless to do harm to David, for it was spiritual power. This ought to have spoken deeply to Saul’s conscience, and also ought to have encouraged David to realize that God’s sovereign hand could always be depended upon to provide protection for him.
Fuente: Grant’s Commentary on the Bible
19:1 And Saul spake to Jonathan his son, and to all his servants, that they should {a} kill David.
(a) Before Saul sought David’s life secretly, but now his hypocrisy grows to open cruelty.
Fuente: Geneva Bible Notes
Jonathan’s attempt to protect David 19:1-7
Saul now abandoned pretense (1Sa 18:22) and ordered Jonathan and his soldiers to put David to death (cf. 1Sa 19:11). He "went public" with his attacks against David feeling driven, like the Pharaoh of the plagues, to more desperate measures. This created a conflict of loyalties for Jonathan who needed to honor his father and king, but who also loved David (cf. 1Sa 18:1; 1Sa 18:3). Jonathan chose to tell David what Saul’s intentions were, but he also tried to honor his father by urging him not to kill David. He appealed to Saul logically and rationally. He reminded Saul that he was the king and that David was his servant, that he needed to be fair with David, and that it was in Saul’s best interest to let David live (1Sa 19:4). He also reminded Saul that David was the Lord’s instrument who had defeated Israel’s enemies and that Saul had rejoiced in his success. Moreover he appealed for justice since David’s death was unwarranted (1Sa 19:5). Jonathan’s words echo Saul’s own statement when he had freed Jabesh-gilead earlier in his reign (1Sa 11:12-15). Then Saul had generously refused to punish his detractors. Perhaps it was this memory that moved him to promise Jonathan that he would be merciful to David.
Jonathan’s appeal was successful, at least temporarily, and resulted in Saul solemnly vowing not to kill David (1Sa 19:6), which vow he broke shortly (1Sa 19:10). Later Jonathan was not as successful (1Sa 20:28-29). Nevertheless this time his appeal resulted in David’s restoration to the court and his continuing ministry to the king (1Sa 19:7).
Fuente: Expository Notes of Dr. Constable (Old and New Testaments)
CHAPTER XXVI.
SAULS FURTHER EFFORTS AGAINST DAVID.
1Sa 19:1-24.
ANEW Stage of his wicked passion is now reached by Saul; he communes with his servants, and even with his son, with a view to their killing David. Ordinary conspirators are prone to confine their evil designs to their own breasts; or if they do have confidants, to choose for that purpose persons as vile as themselves, whom they bind to secrecy and silence. Saul must have been sadly overpowered by his passion when he urged his very son to become a murderer, to become the assassin of his friend, of the man with whom God manifestly dwelt, and whom God delighted to honour. It is easy to understand what fine Saul would take with Jonathan. Heir to the throne, he was specially affected by the popularity of David; if David were disposed of, his seat would be in no danger. The generous prince did his utmost to turn his father from the horrid project: “He spake good of David unto Saul, and said unto him, Let not the king sin against his servant, against David; because he hath not sinned against thee, and because his works have been to thee-ward very good. For he did put his life in his hand, and slew the Philistine, and the Lord wrought a great salvation for all Israel: thou sawest it and didst rejoice: wherefore then wilt thou sin against innocent blood, to slay David without a cause? “For the moment the king was touched by the intercession of Jonathan. Possibly he was rebuked by the burst of generosity and affection, – a spirit so opposite to his own; possibly he was impressed by Jonathan’s argument, and made to feel that David was entitled to very different treatment. For the time, the purpose of Saul was arrested, and ”David was in his presence as in times past.” “Oft-times,” says Bishop Hall, ”wicked men’s judgments are forced to yield unto that truth against which their affections maintain a rebellion. Even the foulest hearts do sometimes retain good notions; like as, on the contrary, the holiest souls give way sometimes to the suggestions of evil. The flashes of lightning may be discerned in the darkest prison. But if good thoughts look into a wicked heart, they stay not there; as those that like not their lodging, they are soon gone; hardly anything distinguishes between good and evil but continuance. The light that shines into a holy heart is constant, like that of the sun, which keeps due times, and varies not his course for any of these sublunary occasions.”
But, as the heathen poet said, ”You may expel nature with a thunderbolt, but it always returns.” The evil spirit, the demon of jealousy, returned to Saul. And strange to say, his jealousy was such that nothing was more fitted to excite it than eminent service to his country on the part of David. A new campaign had opened against the Philistines. David had had a splendid victory. He slew them with a great slaughter, so that they fled before him. We may be sure that in these circumstances the songs of the women would swell out in heartier chorus than ever. And in Saul’s breast the old jealousy burst out again, and sprang to power. A fit of his evil spirit was on him, and David was playing on his harp in order to beguile it away. He sees Saul seize a javelin, he instinctively knows the purpose, and springs aside just as the javelin flies past and lodges in the wall. The danger is too serious to be encountered any longer. David escapes to his house, but hardly before messengers from Saul have arrived to watch the door, and slay him in the morning. Knowing her father’s plot, Michal warns David that if he does not make his escape that night his life is sure to go.
Michal lets him down through a window, and David makes his escape. Then, to give him a sufficient start, and prolong the time a little, she has recourse to one of those stratagems of which Rebecca, and Rahab, and Jeroboam’s wife, and many another woman have shown themselves mistresses – she gets up a tale, and pretends to the messengers that David is sick. The men carry back the message to their master. There is a peculiar ferocity, an absolute brutality, in the king’s next order, ”Bring him up to me in the bed that I may slay him.” Evidently he was enraged, and he either felt that it would be a satisfaction to murder David with his own hand when unable to defend himself, or he saw that his servants could not be trusted with the dastardly business. The messengers enter the house, and instead of David they find an image in the bed, with a pillow of goat’s hair for his bolster. When Michal is angrily reproached by her father for letting him escape, she parries the blow by a falsehood – ”He said unto me. Let me go; why should I kill thee?”
On this somewhat mean conduct of hers a light is incidentally shed by the mention of the image which she placed in the bed in order to personate David. What sort of image was it? The original shows that it was one of the class called “teraphim” – images which were kept and used by persons who in the main worshipped the one true God. They were not such idols as represented Baal or Ashtoreth or Moloch, but images designed to aid in the worship of the God of Israel. The use of them was not a breach of the first commandment, but it was a breach of the second. We see plainly that David and his wife were not one in religion; there was discord there. The use of the images implied an unspiritual or superstitious state of mind; or at least a mind more disposed to follow its own fancies as to the way of worshipping God than to have a severe and strict regard to the rule of God. It is impossible to suppose that David could have either used, or countenanced the use of these images. God was too much a spiritual reality to him to allow such material media of worship to be even thought of. He knew too much of worship inspired by the Spirit to dream of worship inspired by shapes of wood or stone. When we read of these images we are not surprised at the defects of character which we see in Michal. That she loved David and had pleasure in his company there is no room to doubt. But their union was not the union of hearts that were one in their deepest feelings. The sublimest exercises of David’s soul Michal could have no sympathy with. Afterwards, when David brought the ark from Kirjath-jearim to Mount Zion, she mocked his enthusiasm. How sad when hearts, otherwise congenial and loving, are severed on the one point on which congeniality is of deepest moment! Agreement in earthly tastes and arrangements, but disagreement in the one thing needful – alas, how fatal is the drawback! Little blessing can they expect who disregard this point of difference when they agree to marry. If the one that is earnest does so in the expectation of doing good to the other, that good is far more likely to be done by a firm stand at the beginning than by a course which may be construed to mean that after all the difference is of no great moment.
If the title of the fifty-ninth Psalm can be accepted as authentic, it indicates the working of David’s mind at this period of his history. It is called ”Michtam of David, when Saul sent, and they watched the house to kill him.” It is not to be imagined that it was composed in the hurried interval between David reaching his house and Michal sending him away. That David had a short time of devotion then we may readily believe, and that the exercises of his heart corresponded generally to the words of the psalm, which might be committed afterwards to writing as a memorial of the occasion. From the words of the psalm it would appear that the messengers sent by Saul to apprehend him were men of base and cowardly spirit, and that they were actuated by the same personal hatred to him that marked Saul himself. No doubt the piety of David brought to him the enmity, and the success of David the rivalry, of many who would be emboldened by the king’s avowed intention, to pour out their insults and calumnies against him in the most indecent fashion. Perhaps it is to show the estimate he formed of their spirit, rather than to denote literally their nationality, that the Psalmist calls on God to “awake to visit all the heathen.” Prowling about the city under cloud of darkness coming and going and coming again to his house, “they return at evening; they make a noise like a dog, and go about the city. Behold, they belch out with their mouth; swords are in their lips; for who, say they, doth hear?” Thus showing his estimate of his enemies, the Psalmist manifests the most absolute reliance on the protection and grace of God. “But Thou, O Lord, shalt laugh at them; Thou shalt have all the heathen in derision. Because of his strength will I wait upon Thee; for God is my defence. The God of my mercy shall prevent me; God shall let me see my desire upon mine enemies.” He does not ask that they may be slain, but he asks that they may be conspicuously dishonoured and humbled, and made to go about the city like dogs, in another sense – not like dogs seeking to tear upright men in pieces, but like those starved, repulsive, cowardly brutes, familiar in Eastern cities, that would do anything for a morsel of food. His own spirit is serene and confident – ”Unto Thee, O my strength, will I sing; for God is my defense, and the God of my mercy.”
It may be that the superscription of this psalm is not authentic, and that the reference is either to some other passage in David’s life, or in the life of some other psalmist, when he was especially exposed to the ravings of a murderous and calumnious spirit, and in the midst of unscrupulous enemies thirsting for his life. The psalm is eminently fitted to express the feelings and experiences of the Church of Christ in times of bitter persecution. For calumny has usually been the right-hand instrument of the persecutor. To justify himself, he has found it necessary to denounce his victim. Erroneous opinions, it is instinctively felt, are no such offence as to warrant the wholesale spoliation and murder which vehement persecution calls for. Crimes of a horrible description are laid to the charge of the persecuted And even where the sword of persecution in its naked form is not employed, but opposition and hatred vent themselves on the more active servants of God in venomous attacks and offensive letters, it is not counted enough to denounce their opinions. They must be charged with meanness, and double dealing, and vile plots and schemes to compass their ends. They are spoken of (as St. Paul and his companions were) as the offscourings of the earth, creatures only to be hunted out of sight and spoiled of all influence. Happy they who can bear all in the Psalmist’s tranquil and truthful spirit; and can sum up their feelings like him – ”I will sing of Thy power; yea, I will sing aloud of Thy mercy in the morning; for Thou hast been my defense and refuge in the day of my trouble.”
But let us return to David. Can we think of a more desolate condition than that in which he found himself after his wife let him down through a window? It is night and he is alone. Who could be unmoved when place’ in such a position? Forced to fly from his home and his young wife, just after he had begun to. know their sweets, and no prospect of a happy return! Driven forth by the murderous fury of the king whom he had served with a loyalty and a devotion that could not have been surpassed! His home desolated and his life threatened by the father of his wife, the man whom even nature should have inspired with a kindly interest in his welfare! What good had it done him that he had slain that giant? What return had he got for his service in ever so often soothing the nerves of the irritable monarch with the gentle warblings of his harp? What good had come of all his perilous exploits against the Philistines, of the hundred foreskins of the king’s enemies, of the last great victory which had brought so unprecedented advantage to Israel? Would it not have been better for him never to have touched a weapon, never to have encountered a foe, but kept feeding that flock of his father’s, and caring for those irrational creatures, who had always returned his kindness with gratitude, and been far more like friends and companions than that terrible Saul? Such thoughts might perhaps hover about his bosom, but certainly they would receive no entertainment from him. They might knock at his door, but they would not be admitted. A man like David could never seriously regret that he had done his duty. He could never seriously wish that he had never responded to the call of God and of his country. But he might well feel how empty and unprofitable even the most successful worldly career may become, how maddening the changes of fortune, how intolerable the unjust retributions of men in power. His ill-treatment was so atrocious that, had he not had a refuge in God, it might have driven him to madness or to suicide. It drove him to the throne of grace, where he found grace to help him in his time of need.
It was no wonder that the fugitive thought of Samuel. If he could get shelter with him’ Saul would surely let him alone, for Saul could have no mind to meddle with Samuel again. But more than that; in Samuel’s company he would find congenial fellowship, and from Samuel’s mature wisdom and devotion to God’s law learn much that would be useful in after life. We can easily fancy what a cordial welcome the old prophet would give the youthful fugitive. Was not David in a sense his son, seeing that he had chosen him from among all the sons of Jesse, and poured on him the holy oil? If an old minister has a special interest in one whom he has baptized, how much more Samuel in one whom he had anointed! And there was another consideration that would have great effect with Samuel. Old Christians feel very tenderly for young believers who have had hard lines in serving God. It moves them much when those on whom they have very earnestly pressed God’s ways have encountered great trials in following them. Gladly would they do any- thing in their power to soothe and encourage them. Samuel’s words to David would certainly be words of exceeding tenderness. They must have fallen like the dew of Hermon on his fevered spirit. Doubtless they would tend to revive and strengthen his faith, and assure him that God would keep him amid all his trials, and at last set him on high, because he had known his name.
From Ramah, his ordinary dwelling-place, Samuel had gone with David to Naioth, perhaps under the idea that they would elude the eye of Saul. Not so, however. Word of David’s place of abode was carried to the king. Saul was deeply in earnest in his effort to get rid of David, – surely a very daring thing when he must have known God’s purpose regarding him. Messengers were accordingly sent to Naioth. It was the seat of one of the schools of the prophets, and David could not but be deeply interested in the work of the place, and charmed with its spirit. Here, under the wing of Samuel, he did dwell in safety; but his safety did not come in the way in which perhaps he expected. Saul’s purpose was too deeply seated to be affected by the presence of Samuel. Nay, though Samuel in all likelihood had told him how God had caused him to anoint David as his successor, Saul determined to drag him even from the hands of Samuel. But Saul never counted on the form of opposition he was to encounter. The messengers went to Naioth, but their hearts were taken hold of by the Spirit who was then working in such power in the place, and from soldiers they were turned into prophets. A second batch of messengers was sent, and with the same result. A third batch followed, and still the same miraculous transformation. Determined not to be baffled, and having probably exhausted the servants whom he could trust, Saul went himself to Ramah. But Saul was proof no more than his servants against the marvelous spiritual force that swept all before it. When he came to Ramah, the Spirit of the Lord was upon him, and he went on and prophesied all the way from Ramah to Naioth. And there, stripping himself of his royal robes and accoutrements, he prophesied before Samuel in like manner, and lay down, just as one of the prophets, and continued so a whole day and night. It was a repetition of what had taken place at “the hill of God” when Saul returned from his search after the asses (1Sa 10:10-11), and it resuscitated the proverb that had been first used on that occasion, is Saul also among the prophets? Transformed and occupied as Saul was now, he was in no mood to carry out his murderous project against David, who in the view of this most unexpected form of deliverance might well sing, ”My safety cometh from the Lord, who made heaven and earth.”
The question cannot but press itself on us, What was the character of the influence under which Saul was brought on this remarkable occasion? Observe the phenomena so far as they are recorded. In the first place, nothing is said of any appeal to Saul’s reason and conscience. In the second place, no such conduct followed this experience as would have followed it, had his reason and conscience been impressed. He was precisely the same wicked man as before. In the third place, there is no evidence of anything else having taken place than a sort of contagious impression being produced on his physical nature, something corresponding to the effect of mesmerism or animal magnetism. In earnest religious movements of a very solid character, it has been often remarked that another unusual experience runs alongside of them; in some persons in contact with them a nervous susceptibility is developed, which sometimes causes prostration, and sometimes a state of trance; and it has been found that many persons are liable to the state of trance whose hearts and lives are in no way transformed by the religious impression. It seems to have been some such experience that befell Saul. He was entranced, but he was not changed. He was for the time another man, but there was no permanent change; after a time, his old spirit returned. Evidently he was a man of great nervous susceptibility, and it is plain from many things that his nerves had become weakened. He fell for the time under the strong influence of the prophetic company; but David did not trust him, for he fled from Naioth.
And yet, even if this was all that happened to Saul, there was something providential and merciful in it that might have led on to better results. Was it not in some sense a dealing of God with Saul? Was it not a reminder of that better way which Saul had forsaken, and in forsaking which he had come to so much guilt and trouble? Was it not a gracious indication that even yet, if he would return to God, though he could not get back the kingdom he might personally be blessed? Whatever of this kind there might be in it, it was trampled by Saul under foot. He had made his bed, and, thorny though it was, he was determined to lie on it. He would not change his life; he would not return to God.
Does not God, in His merciful providence, often deal with transgressors as he dealt with Saul, placing them in circumstances that make it comparatively easy for them to turn from their sins and change their life? Your marriage, a death in your circle, a change of residence, a change of fortune, forming a new acquaintance, coming under a new ministry, – oh! friends, if there be in you the faintest dissatisfaction with your past life, the faintest desire for a better, take advantage of the opportunity, and turn to God. Summon courage, break with your associates in sin (the loss will be marvelously small), give up your dissipated pleasures, betake yourselves to the great matters that concern your welfare evermore. Mark in the providence that gave you the opportunity, the kind hand of a gracious Father, sadly grieving over your erring life, and longing for your return. Harden not your heart as in the provocation in the day of temptation in the wilderness. Don’t drive the angel out of your way, who stands in your path, as he stood in Balaam’s, to stop your progress in the ways of sin. Who knows whether ever again you shall have the same opportunity? And even if you have, is it not certain that the disinclination you feel now will be stiffer and stronger then? Be a man, and face the irksome. Whatever you do, determine to do right. It is childish to stand shivering over a duty which you know ought to be done. “Whatsoever thy hand findeth to do, do it with thy might; for there is no work, nor device, nor knowledge, nor wisdom, in the grave, whither thou goest.”