10<\/strong>. Whither<\/em> ] The Heb. word does not mean whither<\/em>, and must be emended. It is best to follow the Sept. and Vulg. in reading “against whom.”<\/p>\n have ye made a road<\/em> ] The same word as that translated “invaded” in 1Sa 27:8<\/em><\/span>. “Road” means a plundering excursion or raid, from A.-S. rd<\/em>, a riding. Compare the compound in- road<\/em>. “Him hee named, who at that time was absent, making roades<\/em> upon the Lacedemonians.” Sidney’s Arcadia<\/em>.<\/p>\n the Jerahmeelites<\/em> ] Descendants of Jerahmeel the son of Hezron (1Ch 2:9<\/span>; 1Ch 2:25<\/span>), who were settled on the southern frontier of Judah, apparently as an independent tribe. Cp. 1Sa 30:29<\/span>.<\/p>\n the Kenites<\/em> ] Who were in alliance with the Israelites. See on 1Sa 15:6<\/span>.<\/p>\n The Jerahmeelites – <\/B>i. e. the descendants of Jerahmeel, the son of Hezron, the son of Perez, the son of Judah (marginal references). They were therefore a portion of the south of Judah.<\/P> The Kenites – <\/B>See Num 24:21<\/span> note; Num 4:11<\/span>; and for their near neighborhood to Amalek, see 1Sa 15:6<\/span>.<\/P><\/p>\n Verse 10<\/span>. Whither have ye made a road today?<\/B><\/I>] He had probably been in the habit of making predatory excursions. This seems to be implied in the question of Achish.<\/P> <\/p>\n Against the south of Judah:<\/B> these and the following words are ambiguous; for they may be understood, either of the southern parts from Judah, &c., which he would have Achish understand; or of another country lying southward from Judah, &c., which David meant, and which was the truth. So though it was not a downright lie; yet it was an equivocation, with an intention to deceive, which is the formality of a lie, and was contrary to that simplicity which became David, both as a prince, and as an eminent professor of the true religion. <\/P> And against, <\/B>for that is against<\/I>; for in the following words he particularly expresseth what part of the south of Judah he went against, even that which was inhabited by the Jerahmeelites, and by the Kenites. <\/P> The Jerahmeelites; <\/B>the posterity of Hezron, a family of Judah, 1Ch 2:9<\/span>,25<\/span>. The <\/P> Kenites; <\/B>the posterity of Jethro, which chose to dwell in the south of Judah, Jdg 1:16<\/span>. See Num 24:21<\/span>. <\/P> <\/p>\n 10. Achish said, Whither have yemade a road to-day?<\/B>that is, raid,<\/I> a hostile excursionfor seizing cattle and other booty. <\/P> David said, Against the southof Judah, and against the south of the Jerahmeelites<\/B>Jerahmeelwas the great-grandson of Judah, and his posterity occupied thesouthern portion of that tribal domain. <\/P> the south of the Kenites<\/B>theposterity of Jethro, who occupied the south of Judah (Jdg 1:16<\/span>;Num 24:21<\/span>). The deceit practisedupon his royal host and the indiscriminate slaughter committed, lestany one should escape to tell the tale, exhibit an unfavorable viewof this part of David’s history.<\/P><\/p>\n And Achish said, whither have ye made a road today<\/strong>?…. Or whither had they rushed in, or poured in and spread themselves? or where had they made their excursion to fetch in the prey and booty they now brought?<\/p>\n and David said, against the south of Judah<\/strong>; he meant against some people that lay to the south of the land of Judah, without it; but expressed himself so, that Achish might think he meant the southern parts of Judah within the country; which, though not a downright lie, was an equivocation, and made with a design to deceive; and was by no means agreeably to the character of David, nor to be defended nor imitated:<\/p>\n and against the south of the Jerahmeelites<\/strong>; these were the descendants of Jerahmeel, the son of Hezron, the grandson of Judah, and so inhabited in the tribe of Judah, and very probably in the southern part of it, 1Ch 2:9<\/span>,<\/p>\n and against the south of the Kenites<\/strong>; the posterity of Jethro; these, at least some of them, at the first seating of the children of Israel in the land of Canaan, went with the children of Judah into the wilderness of Judah, which lieth in the south of Arad, Jud 1:16<\/span>.<\/p>\n Achish said, “ Ye have not made an invasion to-day, have ye?<\/em> ” , like , is an interrogative sense; the has dropped out: vid., Ewald<\/em>, 324, b. David replied, “Against the south of Judah, and the south of the Jerahmeelites, and into the south of the Kenites,” sc., we have made an incursion. This reply shows that the Geshurites, Gerzites, and Amalekites dwelt close to the southern boundary of Judah, so that David was able to represent the march against these tribes to Achish as a march against the south of Judah, to make him believe that he had been making an attack upon the southern territory of Judah and its dependencies. The Negeb of Judah is the land between the mountains of Judah and the desert of Arabia (see at Jos 15:21<\/span>). The Jerahmeelites are the descendants of Jerahmeel, the first-born of Hezron (1Ch 2:9<\/span>, 1Ch 2:25-26<\/span>), and therefore one of the three large families of Judah who sprang from Hezron. They probably dwelt on the southern frontier of the tribe of Judah (vid., 1Sa 30:29<\/span>). The Kenites were protgs of Judah (see at 1Sa 15:6<\/span>, and Jdg 1:16<\/span>). In 1Sa 27:11<\/span> the writer introduces the remark, that in his raid David left neither man nor woman of his enemies alive, to take them to Gath, because he thought “they might report against us, and say, Thus hath David done.” There ought to be a major point under , as the following clause does not contain the words of the slaughtered enemies, but is a clause appended by the historian himself, to the effect that David continued to act in that manner as long as he dwelt in the land of the Philistines. , the mode of procedure; lit. the right which he exercised (see 1Sa 8:9<\/span>).<\/p>\n (10) And David said, Against the south of Judah.<\/strong>The answer of David to his sovereign lord, the King of Gathfor he was now, to all intents and purposes, a vassal prince of Achishwas simply a falsehood. He had been engaged in distant forays against the old Bedaween enemies of Israel, far away in the desert which stretched to the frontier of Egypt; and from these nomadsrich in cattle and in other property, which they had obtained by years of successful plunderhe seems to have gained much booty, a share of which he brought to his suzerain, Achish. But David represents that the cattle and apparel had been captured from his own countrymen, whose territory he was harrying. The Jerahmeelites were descendants of Jerahmeel, the firstborn of Hezron (1Ch. 2:9<\/span>; 1Ch. 2:25-26<\/span>), and therefore one of the three large families of Judah who sprang from Hezron.Keil, <\/em>They dwelt, it is believed, on the southern frontier of the tribe of Judah. The Kenites were a race living in friendship with and under the protection of Judah.<\/p>\n 10<\/strong>. <\/strong> Jerahmeelites <\/strong> The family of Jerahmeel, the son of Hezron, and descendant of Judah. 1Ch 2:9 ; 1Ch 2:25<\/span>. <\/p>\n Kenites <\/strong> See note on 1Sa 15:6<\/span>. In making this reply to Achish, David uttered a deliberate lie, for which no apology can be offered.<\/p>\n 1Sa 27:10<\/span><\/em><\/strong>. <\/strong>Against the south, <\/em><\/strong>&c.<\/strong> The answer was true, but ambiguous; for all those people actually dwelt on the south of Judah. But Achish understood the answer as meaning that the incursion was made on Judah, on the Jerahmeelites and the Kenites themselves, though David asserted no such thing. David, therefore, did not utter a falsity, as some writers suppose, and labour to palliate or to condemn. If he was to blame, it was for giving an ambiguous answer to a question which he was not obliged to give a direct reply to. Achish well knew that David had made an incursion upon some of the neighbouring tribes, and in this David did not deceive him; but he thought he was no ways obliged to tell him who they were; and therefore said only, in general, that they were such as dwelt on the south of Judah. Dr. Delaney observes upon this deception which David appears to have passed upon Achish, “I will not stand up in a strict defence of this conduct. It was indeed a deception; but if it injured nobody, as I apprehend it did not, I must own that I am utterly at a loss what degree of guilt to charge upon it. This must be allowed, that all habits of deception have a natural tendency to bias the mind, and warp it from truth, and therefore ought carefully to be avoided, even where the deception is innocent,” or (I should rather have said,) harmless. <\/p>\n Note; <\/em>Let the sins of great and good men be looked upon, not as an exculpation for our imitation of them, but as an admonition to avoid them. <\/p>\n 1Sa 27:10 And Achish said, Whither have ye made a road to day? And David said, Against the south of Judah, and against the south of the Jerahmeelites, and against the south of the Kenites.<\/p>\n Ver. 10. Whither have ye made a road?<\/strong> ] Or, Whether have ye made, &c. <\/p>\n <\/p>\n Against the south of Judah.<\/strong> ] This was either a flat lie, or a foul equivocation, much misbecoming such a man’s mouth. The infirmities of God’s children never appear but in their tentations. David knew that <\/p>\n “ Nihil est vigilantius aure tyranni.<\/em> ” – Juvenal.<\/p>\n<\/p>\n <\/em><\/p>\n But that should not have made him thus to lie and dissemble: as the Priscillianists did of old, and the Jesuits do still, with their detestable equivocations, and mental reservations, which they teach and defend ad consolationem afflictorum Catholicorum<\/em> (their own words) et omnium piorum instructionem,<\/em> for the comfort of poor afflicted Catholics, and the instruction of all godly persons. a<\/em> That subtle answer of Tarlton, bishop of Winchester, is well known, Edwardum occidere nolito timere bonum est.<\/em> David had chosen the way of truth, Psa 119:30 and yet otherwhiles he deviated. <\/p>\n<\/p>\n a<\/em> Garnes. Blackwell.<\/p>\n Whither. Some codices, with Septuagint and Vulgate, read “against whom”. <\/p>\n road = raid. <\/p>\n south. Hebrew the Negeb or hill country south of Judah. <\/p>\n Whither: etc. or, Did you not make a road <\/p>\n And David: 1Sa 21:2, Gen 27:19, Gen 27:20, Gen 27:24, Jos 2:4-6, 2Sa 17:20, Psa 119:29, Psa 119:163, Pro 29:25, Gal 2:11-13, Eph 4:25 <\/p>\n Against: David here meant the Geshurites, and Gezrites, and Amalekites, which people occupied that part of the country which lies to the south of Judah. But Achish, as was intended, understood him in a different sense, and believed that he had attacked his own countrymen. David’s answer, therefore, though not an absolute falsehood, was certainly an equivocation intended to deceive, and therefore incompatible with that sense of truth and honour which became him as a prince, and a professor of true religion. From these, and similar passages, we may observe the strict impartiality of the Sacred Scriptures. They present us with the most faithful delineation of human nature; they exhibit the frailties of kings, priests, and prophets, with equal truth; and examples of vice and frailty, as well as of piety and virtue, are held up, that we may guard against the errors to which the best men are exposed. <\/p>\n the Jerahmeelites: 1Ch 2:9, 1Ch 2:25 <\/p>\n Kenites: 1Sa 15:6, Num 24:21, Jdg 1:16, Jdg 4:11, Jdg 5:24 <\/p>\n Reciprocal: Gen 13:1 – the south Jdg 16:7 – If they bind 1Sa 27:1 – into the land 1Sa 28:2 – Surely 1Sa 30:29 – Jerahmeelites<\/p>\n 1Sa 27:10. David said, Against the south of Judah, &c. David expressed himself thus ambiguously that Achish might suppose he had assaulted the land of Judah; whereas he had only fallen upon those people who bordered on that land. His words, therefore, though not directly false, (all those people actually dwelling on the south of Judah,) yet being ambiguous, and intended to convey an erroneous idea, were very contrary to that simplicity which became David, both as a prince and as an eminent professor of the true religion. The fidelity of Achish to him, and the confidence he put in him, aggravates his sin in thus deceiving him; which David seems peculiarly to reflect on when he prays, Remove from me the way of lying.<\/p>\n 27:10 And Achish said, Whither have ye made a road to day? And David said, Against the south of Judah, and against the south of the {e} Jerahmeelites, and against the south of the Kenites.<\/p>\n (e) A family of the tribe of Judah, 1Ch 2:9.<\/p>\n And Achish said, Whither have ye made a road today? And David said, Against the south of Judah, and against the south of the Jerahmeelites, and against the south of the Kenites. 10. Whither ] The Heb. word does not mean whither, and must be emended. It is best to follow the Sept. and Vulg. … Continue reading “Exegetical and Hermeneutical Commentary of 1 Samuel 27:10”<\/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-7952","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-commentary"],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.biblia.work\/bible-commentary\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/7952","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=7952"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/www.biblia.work\/bible-commentary\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/7952\/revisions"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.biblia.work\/bible-commentary\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=7952"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.biblia.work\/bible-commentary\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=7952"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.biblia.work\/bible-commentary\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=7952"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}Fuente: The Cambridge Bible for Schools and Colleges<\/b><\/i><\/h4>\n
Fuente: Albert Barnes’ Notes on the Bible<\/b><\/i><\/h4>\n
Fuente: Adam Clarke’s Commentary and Critical Notes on the Bible<\/b><\/i><\/h4>\n
Fuente: English Annotations on the Holy Bible by Matthew Poole<\/b><\/i><\/h4>\n
Fuente: Jamieson, Fausset and Brown’s Commentary Critical and Explanatory on the Whole Bible <\/b><\/i><\/h4>\n
Fuente: John Gill’s Exposition of the Entire Bible<\/b><\/i><\/h4>\n
Fuente: Keil & Delitzsch Commentary on the Old Testament<\/b><\/i><\/h4>\n
Fuente: Ellicott’s Commentary for English Readers (Old and New Testaments)<\/b><\/i><\/h4>\n
Fuente: Whedon’s Commentary on the Old and New Testaments<\/b><\/i><\/h4>\n
Fuente: Commentary on the Holy Bible by Thomas Coke<\/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
Fuente: Geneva Bible Notes<\/b><\/i><\/h4>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"