For being secretly moved by Gods Spirit to undertake the combat, he speaks with divers persons about it, that so it might come to the kings ear. <\/P> <\/p>\n
And he turned from him towards another<\/strong>,…. From his brother Eliab, to another person right against him, and directed his discourse to him:<\/p>\n and spake after the same manner<\/strong>: as in 1Sa 17:26<\/span>; inquiring what encouragement would he given to a man that should attempt to kill the Philistine, and expressing his concern to hear the armies of the living God defied by such a wretch:<\/p>\n and the people answered him again after the former manner<\/strong>; telling him what gratuities and honours would be conferred on such a person, as in<\/p>\n 1Sa 17:25<\/span>; and the design of his talking to one, and to another, was, that what he had said might spread and reach to the ears of Saul, to whom in modesty he did not choose to apply himself.<\/p>\n <\/strong><\/p>\n A Match for Goliath, vs. 30-39<\/p>\n David looked around, speaking to others around him, to verify the words with which he replied to his brother. The people continued to emphasize the words of the king, and someone went off to tell the king that a champion for Israel had been found. Saul sent for David and had him appear before him. At what point he realized that it was his former court musician who was volunteering to fight Goliath is not apparent. David told the king no man’s heart should fail him for fear of the giant for he would go and fight with him.<\/p>\n Saul was not impressed with David’s ability to withstand the giant. David was only an untrained youth whereas Goliath was a mature warrior, trained in warfare from his youth. It was beyond reason that David could meet Goliath in hand to hand combat. However David had no qualms about defeating the enemy of the Lord and the Lord’s people.<\/p>\n He also claimed experience. In his keeping of Jesse’s sheep he had encountered lions and bears come to steal the sheep and had slain them. On one occasion the lion had roared against him seeking to attack David, but David had seized him by his beard and slain him.<\/p>\n David gave God the credit for delivering him out of the paw of the lion and the bear, and he believed the Lord would also deliver him out of the hand of the uncircumcised, pagan Philistine, Goliath. In fact, David had no doubt of the outcome, for the giant had defied the armies of the living God. At this Saul realized that it was only in the Lord that David could win, and that David had the faith in God to win, so he extended to him permission to go with the prayer that he would win.<\/p>\n Saul tried to prepare David as best he could for the encounter. He took off his own armor and put it on David, the whole panoply, brass helmet, coat of mail, and put upon him the king’s own sword. David could hardly move in it and immediately concluded that he could not fight the giant in this unproved armor. David would use the proven methods by which the Lord had given him previous victories over the lion and the bear.<\/p>\n CRITITCAL AND EXPOSITORY NOTES<\/strong><\/p>\n 1Sa. 17:1<\/span>. The Philistines gathered together their armies.<\/strong> Jamieson considers that this was twenty-seven years after their overthrow at Michmash. Shochoh,<\/strong> now Shuweikek<\/em>, a village in the hilly region between the mountains of Judah and the plain of Philistia, about eleven miles south-west of Jerusalem and of Bethlehem. Azekah.<\/strong> Not certainly identified, but probably the same as Zakariyeh, another site of ancient ruins, about two miles distant, on the same side of the valley. Ephes-dammim,<\/strong> now Damm<\/em>, four miles north-east of Shuweikek.<\/p>\n 1Sa. 17:2<\/span>. Valley of Elah,<\/strong> or the Terebiuth<\/em> Valley. A long, broad, depressed plain, lying between two parallel ranges of hills. The terebiuth<\/em>, the shittimwood<\/em> (the butin<\/em> of the Arabs): probably some remarkable tree of this species which grew there. It is now Wady-es-Sumt<\/em>, valley of the acacia tree, with which at present it abounds. This valley, formed by the junction of three lateral onesviz., Wady-el-Musrr from the east, Wady-es-Sr from the south, and another, name unknown, from the northopens into the great Wady-Srr, anciently the Valley of Sorek. It is a fertile plain flanked on the north and south by lowly hills, and abounding with grain produce, except in the spots covered by acacia thickets and olive plantations. Robinson states that the largest terebiuth he saw in all the country was in Wady-es-Sr, a little above the spot where it emerges into Wady-es-Smt. (Jamieson.)<\/em><\/p>\n 1Sa. 17:4<\/span>. Champion.<\/strong> Literally, the man in the midst<\/em>, the middleman<\/em>one who advances between two armies to decide the battle by single combat. Wordsworth renders it the mediator<\/em>. Six cubits and a span.<\/strong> The cubit is variously computed at eighteen or twenty-one inches. The height of Goliath cannot therefore be certainly estimated, but must have been from nine to ten-and-a-half feet. According to the calculation made by Thenius, about nine feet two inches Parisian measure; a great height no doubt, though not altogether unparalleled, and hardly greater than that of the great uncle of Iren, who came to Berlin in the year 1857. According to Pliny, the giant Pusia and the giant Secundilla, who lived in the time of Augustus, were ten feet three inches (Roman) in height; and a Jew is mentioned by Josephus who was seven cubits in height, i.e.<\/em>, ten Parisian feet, or if the cubits are Roman, nine-and-a-half. (Kiel.)<\/em><\/p>\n 1Sa. 17:5<\/span>. Coat of mail.<\/strong> Literally, a scale-corslet<\/em>. A corslet made of metal plates overlapping each other like the scale of a fish. Five thousand shekels.<\/strong> The copper shekel is estimated to have weighed about an ounce. According to Thenius, the cuirass of Augustus the Strong, which has been preserved in the historical museum at Dresden, weighed fifty-five pounds. (Kiel.)<\/em><\/p>\n 1Sa. 17:6<\/span>. Greaves.<\/strong> Boots for the defence of the leg, rising to nearly the knee, and without feet, terminating at the ankle; made of bulls hide, leather, wood, or in one plate of metal, but rounded to the shape of the leg, and often lined with felt or sponge. Some of the ancient greaves, however, did not come so far up as the knee. (Jamieson.)<\/em> Target.<\/strong> Rather a lance<\/em> or short spear. Thenius proposes to alter the expression between his shoulders, because it does not appear applicable to a spear or javelin, which Goliath must have suspended by a strap, but only to a small shield slung over his back But the difficulty founded upon the expression has been fully met by Bochart, in the examples which he cites from Homer, Virgil, etc., to prove that the ancients carried their own swords slung over their shoulders. And Josephus understood the expression in this way. Goliath had no need of any shield to cover his back, as this was sufficiently protected by his coat of mail. Moreover, the allusion to the same piece of armour in 1Sa. 17:45<\/span> evidently points to an offensive weapon, and not to a shield. (Kiel.)<\/em><\/p>\n 1Sa. 17:7<\/span>. Weavers beam.<\/strong> Rather under five feet long. (Jamieson.)<\/em> One bearing a shield.<\/strong> Rather, the<\/em> shield. In consequence of their great size and weight, the Oriental warrior had a trusty and skilful friend, whose office it was to bear the large shield. (Jamieson.)<\/em><\/p>\n 1Sa. 17:8<\/span>. Am I not a Philistine?<\/strong> Rather, the<\/em> Philistine. The meaning is, Why would you engage in battle with us? I am the man who represents the strength of the Philistines, and ye are only servants of Saul. If ye have heroes, choose one out, that we may decide the matter in a single combat. (Keil.)<\/em><\/p>\n 1Sa. 17:10<\/span>. I defy;<\/strong> or, I have mocked. (Keil.)<\/em> Goliaths scorn and contempt of Israel lay not merely in the reproach that they were Sauls slaves, and in the tone of his words, but in the challenge itself, because it was not answered. (Erdmann.)<\/em><\/p>\n 1Sa. 17:34<\/span>. A lion and a bear.<\/strong> At present lions do not exist in Palestine, although they must in ancient times have been numerous. The lion of Palestine was in all probability the Asiatic variety described by Aristotle and Pliny, as distinguished by its short, curly mane. It was less daring than the longer-maned species, but when driven by hunger it not only ventured to attack the flocks in the desert in the presence of the shepherd (Isa. 31:4<\/span>), but laid waste towns and villages (2Ki. 17:25-26<\/span>). The shepherds sometimes ventured to encounter the lion single-handed, and the vivid figure employed by Amos (1Sa. 3:12<\/span>), the herdsman of Tekoa, was but the transcript of a scene which he must have often witnessed. The variety of the Asiatic bear which inhabits the Himalayas is especially ferocious, and it is probable that the same species among the mountains of Armenia is the animal of Scripture. (Biblical Dictionary.)<\/em><\/p>\n 1Sa. 17:36<\/span>. Thy servant slew,<\/strong> etc. These useful feats of David seem to have been performed with no weapon more effective than the rude staves usually carried in the hand of an Eastern shepherd, particularly the iron-headed club (Psa. 23:4<\/span>). I have known, says Dr. Wilson (Lands of the Bible<\/em>) a shepherd in India encounter with it a tiger which he found mangling one of his goats. It is much in use among the Fellahin of Wady Msa, and the Arabs in general. (Jamieson.)<\/em><\/p>\n 1Sa. 17:38<\/span>. Saul armed David,<\/strong> etc. David must therefore have been near the stature of Saul, or he could not have worn his armour; it might, however, have been a loose corslet, or capable of a change by tightening.<\/p>\n 1Sa. 17:40<\/span>. His sling.<\/strong> The sling consisted of a double rope, with a thong, probably of leather, to receive the stone. The slinger held a second stone in his left hand. Shepherds in the East carry a sling and stones still for the purpose both of driving away and killing the enemies of the flock. It was and is a favourite weapon in Syria and Arabia. (Jamieson.)<\/em> Some of the Fathers of the Church, and a few modern commentators, see in this encounter of David and Goliath a type of our Lords encounter with Satan. Wordsworth says, So our David, the Good Shepherd, went forth to meet the enemy, not with sword or spear but with a pastoral staff, nor did He put forth His Divine power by any miraculous exercise of it against the tempter. He chose five stones out of the brook; He took the five books of Moses out of the flowing streams of Judaism, etc., etc.<\/p>\n 1Sa. 17:43<\/span>. Am I a dog,<\/strong> etc. The staff was ordinarily employed not against men but beasts. Similar are the scornful defiances which warriors of antiquity mutually gave at the beginning of a combat. (Erdmann.)<\/em><\/p>\n 1Sa. 17:45<\/span>. The Lord of Hosts,<\/strong> etc. Jehovah Sabaoth (see on 1Sa. 1:3<\/span>). The name<\/em> of the Lord is for David the totality of all the revelations by which the living God has made Himself known and named among His people. Of these elements, which form the conception of the name of God, he heresuitably to the situationadduces those which characterise Him in respect to His warlike and ruling power as captain and conqueror of His people. (Psa. 24:10<\/span>.) (Erdmann.)<\/em><\/p>\n 1Sa. 17:49<\/span>. The stone sunk.<\/strong> Wordsworth thinks that here a supernatural power was put forth.<\/p>\n 1Sa. 17:52<\/span>. The valley,<\/strong> etc. As no name is given to this valley, and as the Hebrew word for Gath is very similar, both Keil and Erdmann think that Gath ought to stand here, as in the following verse. This direction of the flight resulted from the nature of the country. The Wady Sumt, where the conflict took place, passes northward from Socoh, turns after two or three miles westward by the villiage Sakarieh<\/em>, emptying into the Wady Simchim. About a mile from this is the village of Aijur, which is held to he ancient Gath, and so the Philistines fled through that valley that Robinson also traversed when he journeyed from Jerusalem to Gath. Another portion of the Philistines remained in Wady Sumt and fled northward, where the Wady Sumt takes the name of Wady Surar, in which lies the present city Akir. (Sthelin<\/em>). (Travellers are not quite agreed as to the site of Gath).<\/p>\n 1Sa. 17:54<\/span>. And David took the head of the Philistine and brought it to Jerusalem,<\/strong> etc. The word translated tent is an antiquated term for dwelling place. The reference is to Davids house at Bethlehem, to which he returned with his booty after the defeat of Goliath. There is no anachronism in these statements, for the assertion made by some, that Jerusalem was not yet in the possession of the Israelites, rests upon a confusion between the citadel of Jebus upon Zion, which was still in the hands of the Jebusites, and the city of Jerusalem, in which Israelites had dwelt for a long time. (See Jos. 15:63<\/span> and Jdg. 1:8<\/span>). Nor is there any contradiction between this statement and 1Sa. 21:9<\/span>, where Goliaths sword is said to have been kept in the tabernacle at Nob: for it is not affirmed that David kept<\/em> Goliaths armour in his own home but only that he took it thither. Again, the statement in 1Sa. 18:2<\/span>, to the effect that after Davids victory over Goliath Saul did not allow him to return to his fathers house any more, is by no means at variance with this explanation of the verse before us. For the statement in question must be understood as signifying that from that time forward Saul did not allow David to return to his fathers house as he had done before. (Keil<\/em>).<\/p>\n 1Sa. 17:55<\/span>. Whose son is this youth?<\/strong> etc. Some critics regard these last four verses as an interpolation, as well as the paragraph between 1Sa. 17:12-31<\/span>. Their opinion is founded upon apparent in discrepancies in the narrative, most of which have been met in the comments. Keil and other commentators see no reason for doubting their genuineness. The following are their solutions of the apparent contradiction in this question of Saul, to the statement in 1Sa. 16:21-23<\/span>. It is only necessary to admit that Davids absence at home had been long (and there is no exact chronological datum); that Saul had rarely seen him except in moments of madness; that Abner had been absent from court when David was there; and that the personal appearance of the latter had changed (suppositions which, taken singly or together, are not improbable), and Sauls ignorance becomes natural. (Translator of Langes Commentary<\/em>.) Wordsworth likewise suggests that David now appeared, not as before in the costume of a courtier or warrior, but in the homely dress of a shepherd, and that Sauls question does not necessarily imply ignorance of David, as he asks not his name, but the name of his father. He had promised that whosoever killed the Philistine should have his own daughter in marriage, and he naturally wished to know the parentage of his future son-in-law. Dr. Jamieson adds to these the suggestion that the rumour of Samuels commission to anoint another king, and his journey to Bethlehem for that object, together with the fact that David had come from that village, and the suspicion, after the conquest of Goliath, which procured him so much glory throughout the nation, that David was destined for the throne, might have so excited his jealousy that he dissembled, and, pretending not to know him, kept his vigilant eye upon him with a view to accomplish the destruction of this young and formidable rival.<\/p>\n MAIN HOMILETICS OF THE PARAGRAPH.<\/em>1Sa. 17:1-11<\/span><\/em>; <\/em>1Sa. 17:30-58<\/span><\/em><\/p>\n FAITH IN THE SEEN AND IN THE UNSEEN<\/p>\n This narrative furnishes us<\/p>\n I. With examples of faith in the seen and temporal.<\/strong> Such was the faith<\/p>\n 1. Of Goliath<\/em>. The tendency of all men is to put confidence in that which they can apprehend with their sensesthat which appeals to their outward man. Physical strengthmaterial greatness of any kindanything that belongs to the seen and temporalare the objects of their trust. In their opinion the race is always to the physically swift and the battle to the strong; they believe with the first Napoleon that Providence is always on the side of great battalions, and in their estimate of things the unseen God goes for nothing because He is unseen. The faith of the Philistine was not in any unseen powernot even in the false gods of his own nationbut in his own arm of fleshin his own extraordinary size and bodily strength. In this he is but a type of the great majority of men in all ages and in all nationsnot only those who possess no written revelation of the unseen God, but of the far greater proportion of those who profess to believe in His existence. <\/p>\n 2. Of Saul<\/em>. Even Saul was dismayed when he heard the words of the Philistine (1Sa. 17:11<\/span>), even he sought to restrain the shepherd youth from going forth to meet the man of war, although he knew that the latter was an uncircumcised Philistine, and that Davids confidence was in the living God. One of the first duties of a man in Sauls position is to acquaint himself with the history of the nation whom he rules, and lay to heart the lessons to be gained from it. And it could not be that he was ignorant of the great heroes of Israel who had gone before himof Abraham, who with God for his shield had been able with three hundred men to put to flight the armies of the aliensof Moses, who forsook Egypt and led Israel through the Red Sea because he endured, as seeing Him who is invisibleof Gideon, of Barak, of Samson, and of Jephthah, who through faith subdued kingdoms and obtained promises<\/em> (Heb. 11:32-33<\/span>). How much was there in Gods dealings with his forefathers to inspire him with hope and confidence in the unseen Jehovah, and to remind him that two are enough for any conflict if one is the Living God. If Saul had been in any degree worthy of his title and his position he would have been the first to accept the challenge of the heathen, and would have rejoiced in the opportunity of adding his own name to the long roll of Hebrew heroes who had proved over and over again how much more there is on the side of him who trusts in the Unseen and Eternal than on the side of those whose confidence is in the seen and temporal. But instead of this he furnishes an example of cowardice which had its root in the unbelief which had been the curse of almost all his kingly life, and which had brought upon him his present misery. There had been a short bright spot in his career when he, too, had been conscious that it was the Lord who wrought salvation in Israel, and when he had fought and conquered in that assurance (1Sa. 11:11-13<\/span>). But the clouds of unbelief had long since obscured his vision of the unseen and the real, and made him a slave to the seen and the seeming. We cannot wonder that the armies of Israel manifested the same disposition. When the head is diseased the body will be affected also, when the well is poisoned the streams will be impure, and when the head of a community has no faith in God the moral disease is likely to run through all ranks and conditions of men beneath him. Seeing that unbelief in the unseen made Saul a coward, it is not surprising to find his army manifesting the same craven fear of the giant of Gath. We have<\/p>\n II. An example of faith in the unseen and eternal.<\/strong> <\/p>\n 1. This faith was founded upon an experience of Divine help in past dangers<\/em>. If a man has been in great peril of mind, body, or estate, and has in the day of his extremity been delivered by a friendly and powerful arm, he carries about with him ever after a consciousness of that deliverance and a faith in the person who saved him which nothing can destroy. If he is ever brought again into like circumstances or even into a more perilous position he will naturally turn again for help where he found it before. When a nation has been delivered from the hand of her enemies mainly by the courage of one heart and the skill of one ruling mind, she will instinctively confide in the same leader in her next time of danger. The eye of faith looks back upon past deliverances and sees in them the hand of Godthis being so, in the next day of peril and need she appeals for help to the same Almighty source and confidently expects to receive it. This is a most logical resolutionBecause thou hast been my help, therefore in the shadow of Thy wings will I make my refuge<\/em>. (Psa. 63:7<\/span>). If we have present confidence in an arm of flesh because of help afforded in the past, how much more should we have faith in an unchangeable God in a present time of need when we can recall instances of His gracious interposition in past necessities. This is the argument of David, and such has ever been and ever will be the argument of faith, The Lord that delivered me out of the paw of the lion, and out of the paw of the bear, He will deliver me out of the hand of the Philistine<\/em>. But only a man accustomed to discern an unseen hand in all the events of his life would have seen God in the deliverance from the lion and the bear, and only such an one therefore could have drawn hope and confidence from it for the present greater peril. Davids life had been a life of faith in the unseen, and such a man is ready for any emergency. All the deliverances of his past life had been referred to the living God, and therefore he was not now afraid to trust Him for a greater and more important victory. <\/p>\n 2. This faith adopted the means most likely to lead to a victorious issue<\/em>. The faith of David was not the faith of a fanatic nor of one who interprets all Gods promises without reference to conditions to be observed by man. He took a common-sense view of the matter, and used the best weapons within his reach to bring God into co-operation with his faith and his effort. The sling was the only weapon which was at all adapted to Davids use under the circumstances. It would have been madness and presumption for the shepherd youth to have attempted a close encounter with Sauls weapons or with any weapons of that kind. But he had been accustomed from his childhood to use the sling which was especially adapted for use at a long range, and with which an expert could take a most certain aim (Jdg. 20:16<\/span>). He had no need to come within reach of the Philistines sword or measure himself with him in a hand-to-hand combat. The very distance at which he stood would compensate for his inferior weight and add to the force of the blow, and the stone could be aimed at the only part of the giants body which was unprotected by armour, viz., his forehead. Although we may see a supernatural hand in the issue of the event, we must remember that the effort of David was in harmony with natural laws and not against them, and that his confidence in God did not lead him to neglect the use of means, and those the very best at his disposal. The men of the strongest faith are the least given to presumption, but always put forth well-directed effort.<\/p>\n III. Faith in the unseen and Eternal justified by results<\/strong>. The expectations and desires of faith rest upon a solid foundation. The faith of David rested upon the Divine promises looked at in the light of the Divine faithfulness, and it was so strengthened by his own experience that he ventured confidently to predict the result before it came to pass (1Sa. 17:26<\/span>). At this period of his history his desires were in entire sympathy with God, and he had therefore full ground for his confident prophecy that the Lord would deliver Israels enemy into his hand. And the result fully justified his strong confidence, and showed that God regards such a bold reliance upon Himself with especial favour. The faith of Gods children in all ages rests upon the same foundation, and whenever the Church of God is threatened by some apparently mighty foe they have the same warrant as David had for predicting beforehand that victory shall be on their side because they are on the side of God.<\/p>\n OUTLINES AND SUGGESTIVE COMMENTS<\/em><\/p>\n That the world hostile to Gods kingdom can long unpunished visit its scorn on the truth of the eternal and living God, is commonly a result of the inner weakness, disorder, and timidity of the members of the kingdom of God. When, therefore, there arises a man from their midst who, with mighty word and deed, encounters and conquers the foe, this is a direct interposition of Gods hand in the development of His kingdom, and such a man is His chosen instrument for the casting down of the haughty worldly powers, and for a new gathering together and elevation of His people.Langes Commentary<\/em>.<\/p>\n When we think of the tribal inheritance of Judah, still in a large degree retained by the Philistines, who ever and anon arose to reclaim it all, and sometimes nearly succeeded, we have a striking analogy to the heart of the believer, wherein divers sins and lusts do still contend for the mastery; and sometimes one of them, attaining Goliath-like proportions, threatens to enslave him altogether. Each of us has his own giant to fight, and here, too, it must be single combat, with no one to help us but He who went forth with the stripling David. Or, yet again, in contending with external evils, we may sometimes feel that they have assumed such magnitude as to appal us. Thus, which of us is not brought almost to a standstill when he surveys the ignorance, infidelity, etc., by which we are surrounded? It seems to us sometimes, in moments of depression, as if these evils were stalking forth defiantly before the armies of the Living God, and laughing them, Goliath-like, to scorn; and our courage is apt to cool as we contemplate this show of force. But the God of David liveth, and He will still give us success. The great danger that besets the Christian at such times is that of attempting to fight with the worlds weapons. The worldling will always overcome him when he does so, because the Christian in such armour is not at home. Let him go forth with the cross of Christ in his hand, and by that he will conquer; but if he seek a lower weapon, and try to fight with force of law, or with earthly philosophy, or with mere social expedients, he will inevitably fail. What Davids sling and stone were in the valley of Elah, that is the cross of Christ in the theological controversies, and social wranglings, and moral antagonisms of our age.Dr. W. M. Taylor<\/em>.<\/p>\n 1Sa. 17:10<\/span>. Degenerate professors of religion often receive just rebukes from most decided enemies. In human accomplishments the opposers of the truth of God have frequently possessed an undisputed superiority; confiding in this they have defied, and still do defy, the advocates of spiritual truth to engage with them.Scott<\/em>.<\/p>\n 1Sa. 17:11<\/span>. The time was when Saul slew forty thousand Philistines in one day, and perhaps Goliath was in that discomfiture; and now one Philistine is suffered by him to brave all Israel for forty days. Whence is this difference? The Spirit of God, the spirit of fortitude, was now departed from him. Saul was not more above himself when God was with him, than he is below others now that he is left of God. Valour is not merely of nature; nature is ever like itself; he that is once valiant should never turn coward. But now we see the greatest spirits inconstant He that is the God of Hosts gives and takes away mans hearts at His pleasure. Neither is it otherwise in our spiritual combats We have no strength but what is given us; and if the Author of all good gifts remit His hand for our humiliation, either we fight not, or are foiled.Bp. Hall<\/em>.<\/p>\n 1Sa. 17:32<\/span>. While base hearts are moved by example, the want of example is encouragement enough to an heroical mind; therefore is David ready to undertake the quarrel, because no man else dare to do it. Even so, O Saviour, when all the generations of men run away affrighted from the powers of death and darkness, Thou alone hast undertaken and confounded then.Bp. Hall<\/em>.<\/p>\n 1Sa. 17:37<\/span>. In this recognition of God and confidence in Him, with which David entered upon public life, we have the root of the difference between him and Saul. The tendency of Sauls life was towards himself; anything inconsistent with that in him, or about him, was but fitful and spasmodic. But it was just the reverse with David. The leaning of his soul was toward God, and though at times self and sin sadly and terribly asserted their power, yet these things were only occasional, and out of keeping with the usual course and current of his character. His sins, like Sauls impulses towards good things, were but occasional eruptions of that which it was the habit of his soul to repress; his piety, like Sauls impiety, was the principle of his life.Dr. W. M. Taylor<\/em>.<\/p>\n To God he ascribes, not only his success in life, but his physical prowess. And we must pause, ere we call such utterances mere Eastern metaphor. It is far more probable they were meant as, and were literal truths. David was not likely to have been a man of brute gigantic strength. So delicate a brain was probably coupled to a delicate body. Such a nature, at the same time, would be the very one most capable under the influencecall it boldly inspirationof a great and patriotic cause, of great dangers and great purposes; capable, I say, at moments, of accesses of almost superhuman energy, which he ascribed, and most rightly, to the inspiration of God.Kingsley<\/em>.<\/p>\n 1Sa. 17:39<\/span>. Let Sauls coat be never so rich, and his armour never so strong, what is David the better if they fit him not? It is not to be inquired how excellent anything is, but how proper. Those things which are helps to some may be encumbrances to others. An unmeet good may be as inconvenient as an accustomed evil. If we could wish another mans honour, when we feel the weight of his cares we should be glad to be in our own coat.Bp. Hall<\/em>.<\/p>\n History has presented many and diverse examples in the sphere of the spiritual life similar to this heroic march of David. Luther, in opposition to timid learned men, threw aside the heavy armour of scholastic wisdom, and stepping forward in freedom vanquished the giant of Rome with the five heads of his catechism. And other witnesses and combatants of the Church have with holy courage broken through the restraints of homiletic or liturgic forms, and in the free effusions and creations of their divinely anointed spirits, have given the tone to a new and more animating style of preaching, and thereby have opened the way to a new quickening and elevating of the life of the Church into greater fruitfulness.Krummacher<\/em>.<\/p>\n 1Sa. 17:44<\/span>. Was ever such a proof given of the sin and folly of boasting, as in the case of Goliath? And yet, as we would say, how natural it was in him! We can almost sympathise with his disappointment when he found that the champion who was to meet him was so little worthy of his steel. We can almost admire the chivalrous spirit that scattered defiance among a host of enemies. But just as it is so natural, and because it is so natural, is this spirit of boasting dangerous. In the spiritual conflict it is the surest presage of defeat. It was the Goliath spirit that puffed up the apostle Peter, when he said to his Master, Lord, I will go with Thee to prison and to death. It is the same spirit against which the apostle Paul gives his remarkable warning, Let him that thinketh he standeth, take heed lest he fall.Blaikie<\/em>.<\/p>\n 1Sa. 17:48-54<\/span>. The defeats which are prepared for the world by the kingdom of God:<\/em> <\/p>\n 1. Through what sort of combatants?<\/em> Through such as (a)<\/em>, like David, heroically lead the van<\/em> of Gods host and decide the conflict (1Sa. 17:48<\/span>), and (b)<\/em> such as bravely bring up the rear<\/em>, perseveringly pursuing the already smitten foe. <\/p>\n 2. With what sort of weapons? (a)<\/em> With weapons which they themselves<\/em> have according to their calling through Gods grace, and wield in reliance on Gods help (1Sa. 17:49<\/span>), and (b)<\/em> with weapons which they take from the foe, in order to give him the finishing stroke with his own weapon (1Sa. 17:50-51<\/span>). <\/p>\n 3. With what result?<\/em> Annihilation of his power on his own ground (1Sa. 17:52<\/span>), and in respect to the booty<\/em>, rich gains (1Sa. 17:53-54<\/span>).Langes Commentary<\/em>.<\/p>\n 1Sa. 17:51<\/span>. What needed David load himself with an unnecessary weapon? one sword can serve both Goliath and him. If Goliath had a man to bear his shield, David hath Goliath to bear his sword, wherewith that proud, blasphemous head is severed from his shoulders. Nothing more honours God than the turning of wicked mens forces against themselves. There are none of His enemies but carry with them their own destruction. Thus didst Thou, O Son of David, foil Satan with his own weapon: that whereby he meant destruction to Thee and us, vanquished him through Thy mighty power, and raised Thee to that glorious triumph and super-exaltation wherein Thou art, wherein we shall be with Thee.Bishop Hall<\/em>.<\/p>\n 1Sa. 17:54<\/span>. David brings the head of the Philistine champion in triumph to Jerusalem. Our David, Jesus Christ, ascended in triumph to the heavenly Jerusalem, bearing His trophies with Him, leading captivity captive (Psa. 68:18<\/span>; Eph. 4:8<\/span>.)Wordsworth<\/em>.<\/p>\n (30) And he turned from him toward another, and spake after the same manner: and the people answered him again after the former manner. (31) And when the words were heard which David spake, they rehearsed them before Saul: and he sent for him. (32) And David said to Saul, Let no man’s heart fail because of him; thy servant will go and fight with this Philistine.<\/p>\n<\/p>\n We may read this passage sweetly indeed, if we behold in it some faint outlines of Jesus, who in his gracious undertaking for our deliverance is represented by the prophet, who, when he saw that there was none to help in all the armies of Israel, and when all hearts gathered blackness, his own arm brought salvation, and of the people, there was none with him. Isa 63:3-5<\/span> .<\/p>\n 1Sa 17:30 And he turned from him toward another, and spake after the same manner: and the people answered him again after the former manner.<\/p>\n Ver. 30. And he turned from him toward another.<\/strong> ] When a man is provoked to wrath, and beginneth to kindle, it is wisdom to divert to some other company, place, and business: as did Jonathan, 1Sa 20:25 and Ahasuerus. Est 7:7 This is a cooler, and will slake the fire.<\/p>\n manner = word. <\/p>\n manner: Heb. word, 1Sa 17:26, 1Sa 17:27<\/p>\n 1Sa 17:30. He turned from him For, being secretly moved by Gods Spirit to undertake the combat, he speaks with divers persons about it, that it might come to the kings ear.<\/p>\n And he turned from him toward another, and spoke after the same manner: and the people answered him again after the former manner. For being secretly moved by Gods Spirit to undertake the combat, he speaks with divers persons about it, that so it might come to the kings ear. Fuente: English Annotations on the … Continue reading “Exegetical and Hermeneutical Commentary of 1 Samuel 17:30”<\/span><\/a><\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":1,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"","ping_status":"","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"footnotes":""},"categories":[1],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-7660","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-commentary"],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.biblia.work\/bible-commentary\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/7660","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.biblia.work\/bible-commentary\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.biblia.work\/bible-commentary\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.biblia.work\/bible-commentary\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/1"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.biblia.work\/bible-commentary\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=7660"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/www.biblia.work\/bible-commentary\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/7660\/revisions"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.biblia.work\/bible-commentary\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=7660"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.biblia.work\/bible-commentary\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=7660"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.biblia.work\/bible-commentary\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=7660"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}Fuente: John Gill’s Exposition of the Entire Bible<\/b><\/i><\/h4>\n
Fuente: Garner-Howes Baptist Commentary<\/b><\/i><\/h4>\n
Fuente: The Preacher’s Complete Homiletical Commentary Edited by Joseph S. Exell<\/b><\/i><\/h4>\n
Fuente: Hawker’s Poor Man’s Commentary (Old and New Testaments)<\/b><\/i><\/h4>\n
Fuente: John Trapp’s Complete Commentary (Old and New Testaments)<\/b><\/i><\/h4>\n
Fuente: Companion Bible Notes, Appendices and Graphics<\/b><\/i><\/h4>\n
Fuente: The Treasury of Scripture Knowledge<\/b><\/i><\/h4>\n
Fuente: Joseph Bensons Commentary on the Old and New Testaments<\/b><\/i><\/h4>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"