21<\/strong>. let there be no dew<\/em>, &c.] The language is poetical. Nature is as it were summoned to share in the mourning. The scene of such a terrible disaster should be unvisited by fertilizing dew and rain, and lie smitten with eternal barrenness. For the thought that nature can sympathize with man compare Eze 31:15<\/span>.<\/p>\n nor fields of offerings<\/em> ] An expansion of the preceding thought. Gilboa should no longer possess fruitful fields, to produce tithes and offerings for Jehovah. The greatest curse which can befall it is to be cut off from rendering service to Jehovah. Compare the description of extreme famine in Joe 1:9<\/span>.<\/p>\n is vilely cast away<\/em> ] This rendering seems to be an attempt to combine two possible meanings of the Heb. word, (a) was cast away, (b) was defiled<\/em> with blood and dust, of which the latter is probably right.<\/p>\n as though he had not<\/em> been anointed with oil<\/em> ] The original, which might be rendered exactly the shield of Saul unanointed with oil<\/strong>, leaves it uncertain whether the epithet anointed<\/em> belongs to the shield or to Saul. ( a<\/em>) Most commentators understand it to refer to the shield, left upon the battle-field, uncared for, uncleansed from the stains of the combat. Shields made of metal were oiled to polish them; those made of wood and leather, to preserve them, and make missiles glide off easily. Cp. Isa 21:5<\/span>; and Verg. Aen.<\/em> VII. 626:<\/p>\n “Pars leves clypeos et spicula lucida tergunt<\/p>\n Arvina pingui.”<\/p>\n “With unctuous lard their shields they clean,<\/p>\n And make their javelins bright and sheen.”<\/p>\n ( b<\/em>) On the other hand this term anointed<\/em> is everywhere else applied to persons in the books of Samuel always to the King and not to things, and it is certainly grammatically possible to connect it with Saul, as is done by the E. V. The sense thus gained is much more forcible. ‘There the shield of mighty heroes was defiled yea even the shield of Saul, whose consecrated person shared the common fate as though he had never been set apart as the Anointed of Jehovah.’<\/p>\n Let there be no dew … – <\/B>For a similar passionate form of poetical malediction, compare Job 3:3-10<\/span>; Jer 20:14-18<\/span>.<\/P> Nor fields of offerings – <\/B>He imprecates such complete barrenness on the soil of Gilboa, that not even enough may grow for an offering of first-fruits. The latter part of the verse is better rendered thus: For there the shield of the mighty was polluted, the shield of Saul was not anointed with oil, but with blood). Shields were usually anointed with oil in preparation for the battle Isa 21:5<\/span>.<\/P><\/p>\n 2Sa 1:21<\/span><\/p>\n Ye mountains of Gilboa, let there be no dew.<\/em><\/p>\n <\/em><\/p>\n The blood of Christ speaking better things than the blood of Saul<\/strong><\/p>\n These words form a part of that song of lamentation which David composed after that Saul, and Jonathan his son, had fallen in battle with the Philistines. The death of Saul was in the eyes of David an exceedingly grievous event; an event in connexion with which he considered that no small degree of guilt had been incurred; because Saul was the Lord’s anointed: and so grievous, and so guiltful, if we may use such an expression, was that event in the eyes of David, that in this solemn lamentation he imprecates Divine vengeance even upon the very place where the foul deed had been perpetrated; he prays, that henceforth on these mountains of Gilboa there might be neither dew nor rain nor fields of offering. We may take occasion from it to illustrate the enormity of that sin of which those were guilty who embrued their hands in our Saviour’s blood; and we may take occasion to draw a like contrast with that which the Apostle has drawn in the case of Abel; and we may dwell with delight upon the encouraging fact, that while the blood of Saul that was thus shed called for vengeance on the very spot where it was shed, the blood of Christ calls for nothing but blessings, the very opposite of these curses.<\/p>\n 1. <\/strong>What was the principal circumstance upon which David dwelt, but that <\/strong>Saul was the Lord’s anointed? But if it be said of Saul, that he was the Lord’s anointed, how much more may it be said of Christ, whose very name–Messiah, signifies the Anointed, or the Christ of God. It was indeed manifest to every unprejudiced mind, by the whole course of our Saviour’s history, that he was indeed the Lord’s Anointed–the Son of God. It is recorded of Saul, that he had on more than one occasion rejected the Lord, rejected the authority of that God who had caused him to be anointed king over Israel. What shall we say, therefore, in contrast, with reference to our blessed Saviour? He glorified and adorned the doctrines of his heavenly Father, by the most unreserved, entire, and continued obedience; so that the great adversary of man when he came to search and to sift him, could find nothing in him; yea, his very accusers had nothing that they could allege or prove against him, when they had arraigned him.<\/p>\n 2. <\/strong>David dwelt upon the disgrace connected with his death, as adding bitterness to the <\/strong>event–that he had been slain by the hands of the Philistines, the sworn enemies of the Children of Israel. If we turn to the history of our blessed Saviour we shall find that there were still more embittered circumstances in his history, which made His cup even still more cruel.<\/p>\n 3. <\/strong>If we turn again to the history of Saul, we shall find a variety of other particulars, all lessening the enormity of the guilt; and we shall find the contrast again heighten the guilt of our Saviour’s death.<\/p>\n 4. <\/strong>And whilst in the ease of Saul, we may observe, that it was made most manifest in the hour of his death, that he had not the fear of God before his eyes, it was made most manifest to all those who surrounded our Saviour as he hung upon the cross, that He was indeed the Son of God.<\/p>\n 1. <\/strong>It may be fairly admitted that the language of David is poetical where he prays, that there may be neither dew nor rain upon the mountains of Gilboa; Ye mountains of Gilboa, etc. And we may, therefore, at once turn to the striking, but all-important contrast which may be obtained as it respects the death of Christ. Had they been dealt with according to their descry-into, the vengeance would have come on those who were guilty of our Saviour’s death, and that without remedy.<\/p>\n 2. <\/strong>But we shall proceed a little further in this illustration, to show the excellence of the blood-shedding of Christ. And we may <\/strong>take encouragement from this fact, that it was at Jerusalem that the glad tidings of the forgiveness of sins, and of the Spirit of promise, were first to be made known. Surely, if they of Jerusalem–if many of the priests who had been foremost in stirring up the people to ask that Christ might be crucified, if many of these very priests received the dew and the rain of heaven–if many of these very persons were enabled to offer themselves up to God to be His servants for ever, through the merit of the atoning sacrifice of Christ, there are none but may hope that they also, approaching God in the same way, shall also be kept, shall be visited with that grace of the Holy Spirit, and shall be privileged to be numbered among the servants and the children of God. (A. Brandram, A. M<\/em>.)<\/p>\n Verse 21<\/span>. As though he had <\/B>not<\/B><\/I> been<\/B>] In stead of beli<\/I>, NOT, I read keley<\/I>, INSTRUMENTS.<\/P> <\/P> Anointed with oil.<\/B><\/I>] See the observations at the end.<\/P> <\/P> 2Sa 1:18<\/span>, c.: He bade them teach the children of Judah<\/I> the use of the bow<\/I>, kasheth<\/I>.<\/P> <\/P> The word kasheth<\/I> is to be understood of the title of the song which immediately follows, and not of the use of the bow, as our translation intimates.<\/P> <\/P> Many of David’s Psalms have titles prefixed to them some are termed Shosannim<\/I>, some Maschil, Nehiloth, Neginoth<\/I>, c., and this one here, Kadesh<\/I> or The Bow<\/I>, because it was occasioned by the Philistine archers. 1Sa 31:3<\/span>: “And the archers hit him.”<\/P> <\/P> But especially respecting the bow<\/I> of Jonathan, “which returned not back from the blood of the slain,” as the song itself expresses. And David could not but remember the bow<\/I> of Jonathan, out of which “the arrow was shot beyond the lad,” 1Sa 20:36<\/span>. It was the time when that covenant was made, and that affection expressed between them “which was greater than the love of women.”<\/P> <\/P> On these accounts the song was entitled Kasheth<\/I>, or The song of<\/I> the Bow<\/I>, and David commanded the chief musicians, Ethan, Heman, and Jeduthun, to teach the children of Judah to sing it.<\/P> <\/P> “It is written in the book of Jasher.” Sept<\/I>., , “in the book of the upright.”<\/P> <\/P> siphra deoraitha, “The book of the Law.” – Jonathan<\/I>.<\/P> <\/P> The Arabic<\/I> says, “Behold it is written in the book of Ashee this is the book of Samuel;” the interpretation of which is, “book of songs or canticles.”<\/P> <\/P> This lamentation is justly admired as a picture of distress the most tender and the most striking; unequally divided by grief into longer and shorter breaks, as nature could pour them forth from a mind interrupted by the alternate recurrence of the most lively images of love<\/I> and greatness<\/I>.<\/P> <\/P> His reverence for Saul and his love for Jonathan have their strongest colourings; but their greatness<\/I> and bravery<\/I> come full upon him, and are expressed with peculiar energy.<\/P> <\/P> Being himself a warrior<\/I>, it is in that character he sees their greatest excellence; and though his imagination hurries from one point of recollection to another, yet we hear him – at first, at last, everywhere – lamenting, How are the mighty fallen<\/I>!<\/P> <\/P> It is almost impossible to read the noble original without finding every word swollen<\/I> with a sigh<\/I> or broken<\/I> with a sob<\/I>. A heart pregnant with distress, and striving to utter expressions descriptive of its feelings, which are repeatedly interrupted by an excess of grief, is most sensibly painted throughout the whole. Even an English<\/I> reader may be convinced of this, from the following specimen in European characters: –<\/P> 19. Hatstsebi Yishrael al bamotheycha chalal;<\/P> Eych naphelu gibborim;<\/P> <\/P> 20. Al taggidu begath,<\/P> Al tebasseru bechutsoth Ashkelon;<\/P> Pen tismachnah benoth Pelishtim,<\/P> Pen taalozenah benoth haarelim.<\/P> <\/P> 21. Harey baggilboa al tal,<\/P> Veal matar aleychem usedey terumoth;<\/P> Ki sham nigal magen Gibborim.<\/P> Magen Shaul keley Mashiach bashshamen!<\/P> <\/P> 22. Middam chalalim, mecheleb gibborim,<\/P> Kesheth Yehonathan lo nashog achor;<\/P> Vechereb Shaul lo thashub reykam.<\/P> <\/P> 23. Shaul Vihonathan,<\/P> Hannee habim vehanneimim bechaiyeyhem,<\/P> Ubemotham lo niphradu.<\/P> Minnesharim kallu, mearayoth gaberu!<\/P> <\/P> 24. Benoth Yishrael el Shaul becheynah;<\/P> Hammalbishchem shani im adanim,<\/P> Hammaaleh adi zahab al lebushechen.<\/P> <\/P> 25. Eych naphelu gibborim bethoch hammilchamah!<\/P> Yehonathan al bamotheycha chalal!<\/P> <\/P> 26. Tsar li aleycha achi<\/P> Yehonathan, naamta li meod<\/P> Niphleathah ahabathecha li meahabath nashim!<\/P> <\/P> 27. Eych naphelu gibborim,<\/P> Vaiyobedu keley milchamah!<\/P> The three last verses in this sublime lamentation have sense<\/I> and sound<\/I> so connected as to strike every reader.<\/P> <\/P> Dr. Kennicott<\/I>, from whom I have taken several of the preceding remarks, gives a fine Latin version of this song, which I here subjoin: – <\/P> O decus Israelis, super excelsa tua MILES!<\/P> Quomodo ceciderunt FORTES!<\/P> Nolite indicare in Gatho,<\/P> Nolite indicare in plateis Ascalonis:<\/P> Ne laetentur filiae Philistaeorum,<\/P> Ne exultent filiae incircumcisorum.<\/P> Montes Gilboani super vos<\/P> Nec ros, nec pluvia, neque agri primitiarum;<\/P> Ibi enim abjectus fuit clypeus fortium.<\/P> Clypeus Saulis, arma inuncti olec!<\/P> Sine sanguine MILITUM,<\/P> Sine adipe FORTIUM.<\/P> Arcus Jonathanis non retrocesserat;<\/P> Gladiusque Saulis non redierat incassum.<\/P> Saul et Jonathan<\/P> Amabiles erant et jucundi in vitis suis,<\/P> Et in morte sua non separati.<\/P> Prae aquilis veloces!<\/P> Prae leonibus fortes!<\/P> Filiae Israelis deflete Saulem;<\/P> Qui coccino cum deliciis vos vestivit, Qui vestibus vestris ornamenta imposuit aurea! Quomodo ceciderunt FORTES, in medio belli!<\/P> O Jonathan, super excelsa tua MILES!<\/P> Versor in angustiis, tui causa,<\/P> Frater mi, Jonathan!<\/P> Mihi fuisti admodum jucundus!<\/P> Mihi tuus amor admodum mirabilis,<\/P> Mulierum exuperans amorem!<\/P> Quomodo ceciderunt fortes,<\/P> Et perierunt arma belli!<\/P> DISSERTATION I., p. 122.<\/P> In verse 21<\/span> I have inserted keley<\/I> for beli<\/I>. Dr. Delaney rightly observes that the particle beli<\/I> is not used in any part of the Bible in the sense of quasi non, as though not<\/I>, in which sense it must be used here if it be retained as a genuine reading: The shield of Saul as though it had not been<\/I> anointed with oil.<\/P> <\/P> In a MS. written about the year 1200, numbered 30 in Kennicott’s<\/I> Bible<\/I>, keley is found; and also in the first edition of the<\/I> whole Hebrew Bible<\/I>, printed Soncini<\/I> 1488. Neither the Syriac<\/I> nor Arabic<\/I> versions, nor the Chaldee<\/I> paraphrase, acknowledge the negative particle beli<\/I>, which they would have done had it been in the copies from which they translated. It was easy to make the mistake, as there is such a similarity between beth<\/I> and caph<\/I>; the line therefore should be read thus: The shield of Saul, weapons<\/I> anointed with oil.<\/P> <\/P> In verse 22<\/span> nashog, to obtain, attain<\/I>, seems to have been written for nasog<\/I>, to recede, return<\/I>. The former destroys the sense, the latter, which our translation has followed, and which is supported by the authority of 30 MSS., makes it not only intelligible but beautiful.<\/P> <\/P> In verses 19<\/span>, 22<\/span>, and 25<\/span>, and chalal<\/I> and chalalim<\/I> occur, which we translate the SLAIN, but which Dr. Kennicott<\/I>, I think from good authority, renders soldier<\/I> and soldiers<\/I>; and thus the version is made more consistent and beautiful.<\/P> <\/P> chalal signifies to bore<\/I> or pierce through<\/I>; and this epithet might be well given to a soldier, q.d., the PIERCER, because his business is to transfix<\/I> or pierce<\/I> his enemies with sword, spear, and arrows.<\/P> <\/P> If it be translated soldiers<\/I> in the several places of the Old Testament, where we translate it SLAIN or WOUNDED, the sense will be much mended; see Jdg 20:31<\/span>, Jdg 20:39<\/span>; Ps 89:11<\/span>; Pr 7:26<\/span>; Jer 51:4<\/span>, Jer 51:47<\/span>, Jer 51:49<\/span>; Eze 11:6-7<\/span>; Eze 21:14<\/span>. In several others it retains its radical signification of piercing, wounding<\/I>, c.<\/P> <\/P> AFTER these general observations I leave the particular beauties of this inimitable song to be sought out by the intelligent reader. Much has been written upon this, which cannot, consistently with the plan of these notes, be admitted here. See Delaney, Kennicott, Lowth<\/I>, &c. and, above all, let the reader examine the Hebrew<\/I> text.<\/P> <\/p>\n Let there be no dew, neither let there be rain, upon you:<\/B> this is no proper imprecation; which he had no reason to inflict upon those harmless mountains; but only a passionate representation of the horror which he conceived at this public loss; which was such, as if he thought every person or thing which contributed to it were fit to bear the tokens of Divine displeasure, such as this is, when the earth wants the blessed and necessary influences of dew and rain. <\/P> Nor fields of offerings, <\/B>i.e. fruitful fields, which may produce fair and goodly fruits fit to be offered unto God. <\/P> The shield of the mighty; <\/B>the shields of the valiant men of Israel. <\/P> Vilely<\/B> dishonourably; for it was a great reproach to any soldier to cast away or lose his shield. <\/P> Cast away<\/B> to wit, by themselves, that they might flee more swiftly away, as the Israelites did, and Saul with the rest; as is said, 1Sa 31:1<\/span>,2<\/span>. <\/P> As though he had not been anointed with oil; <\/B>as if he had been no more nor better than a common soldier: he was exposed to the same kind of death and reproach as they were. <\/P> <\/p>\n 21. let there be no dew, neither letthere be rain<\/B>To be deprived of the genial atmosphericinfluences which, in those anciently cultivated hills, seem to havereared plenty of first-fruits in the corn harvests, was specified asthe greatest calamity the lacerated feelings of the poet couldimagine. The curse seems still to lie upon them; for the mountains ofGilboa are naked and sterile. <\/P> the shield of the mighty isvilely cast away<\/B>To cast away the shield was counted a nationaldisgrace. Yet, on that fatal battle of Gilboa, many of the Jewishsoldiers, who had displayed unflinching valor in former battles,forgetful of their own reputation and their country’s honor, threwaway their shields and fled from the field. This dishonorable andcowardly conduct is alluded to with exquisitely touching pathos.<\/P><\/p>\n Ye mountains of Gilboa<\/strong>,…. On which fell Saul and his sons, and many of the people of Israel, 2Sa 1:6<\/span>;<\/p>\n [let there be] no dew, neither [let there be] rain upon you<\/strong>; which is not to understood as a real imprecation; for David would never curse any part of the land of Israel, for which he had so great a regard; but only as a poetical figure, expressing his concern for, and abhorrence of what happened on those mountains; much less did this in reality take place, as some have feigned, as if never dew nor rain descended on them t afterwards; which has been refuted by travellers, particularly Borchard u, who, speaking of this mountain, says, that as he was upon it, there was such a violent shower fell, that he was wet through his clothes; and in the year 1273, laying all night upon this hill, there was a great dew fell upon him:<\/p>\n nor fields of offerings<\/strong>; of heave offerings; the meaning is, that he could wish almost that those hills were not fruitful, and that they brought no fruit to perfection, so much as that heave offerings for the service of the sanctuary might be taken; which is expressive of great sterility and scarcity, see Joe 1:13<\/span>;<\/p>\n for there the shield of the mighty is vilely cast away<\/strong>; mighty men were obliged to cast away their shields and flee, which were greatly to their reproach and scandal, and to that of the whole nation: it was always reckoned very scandalous, and a great crime, even punishable with death, to cast away a shield, both with the Greeks and others w: yea, also<\/p>\n the shield of Saul, [as though he had] not [been] anointed with oil<\/strong>; as if he was not the anointed king of Israel, but a common soldier: or else this respects his shield, as if that was not anointed, as shields used to be, that they might be smooth and glib, and missile weapons, as arrows and others, might not pass through them, but slide off, see<\/p>\n Isa 21:5<\/span>; though Gersom gives a different turn, that Saul’s shield being in continual use, needed not to be anointed, as those did which for a time had been laid aside. Abarbinel interprets these words thus, that he, who was the shield of the mighty, even Saul himself, was vilely cast away, or become loathsome; and that his shield was anointed, not with oil, but with the blood of the slain, and the fat of the mighty, connecting them with the words following.<\/p>\n t Cippi Heb. p. 34. u Apud Hottinger not. in ib. see Bunting’s Travels, p, 131. w Isocrates de Pace, p. 364. Horat. Carmin. l. 2. Ode 7. Tacitus de Mor. German. c. 6. Alex. ab Alex. Genial. Dier. l. 2. c. 13.<\/p>\n Even nature is to join in the mourning. May God withdraw His blessing from the mountains upon which the heroes have fallen, that they may not be moistened by the dew and rain of heaven, but, remaining in eternal barrenness, be memorials of the horrible occurrence that has taken place upon them. is an address to them; and the preposition with the construct state is poetical: “mountains in Gilboa”<\/em> (vid., Ewald<\/em>, 289, b<\/em>.). In … the verb is wanting. The following words, , are in apposition to the foregoing: “and let not fields of first-fruit offerings be upon you,”<\/em> i.e., fields producing fruit, from which offerings of first-fruits were presented. This is the simplest and most appropriate explanation of the words, which have been very differently, and in some respects very marvellously rendered. The reason for this cursing of the mountains of Gilboa was, that there the shield of the heroes, particularly of Saul, had been defiled with blood, namely the blood of those whom the shield ought to defend. does not mean to throw away (Dietrich. ), but to soil or defile (as in the Chaldee), then to abhor. “Not anointed with oil,”<\/em> i.e., not cleansed and polished with oil, so that the marks of Saul’s blood still adhered to it. poetical for . The interpolation of the words “as though”<\/em> ( quasi non esset unctus oleo <\/em>, Vulgate) cannot be sustained.<\/p>\n (21) Nor fields of offerings.<\/strong>This somewhat obscure expression seems to mean, Let there not be upon you those fruitful fields from which may be gathered the offerings of first-fruits. Of course, this malediction upon the mountains of Gilboa is to be understood as it was meant, only in a poetical sense.<\/p>\n Vilely cast away.<\/strong>Another sense of this word is defiled. <\/em>The ancient versions, as well as modern commentators, adopt some one, and some the other meaning, either of which is appropriate.<\/p>\n As though he had not been anointed.<\/strong>This translation follows the Vulg., and makes a good sense = as though Saul had not been a king; but it is more than doubtful if the original can bear this construction. There is no pronoun in the Hebrew, and the word anointed refers to the shield, the shield of Saul not anointed with oil. It was customary to oil metal shields, as well as those of wood and leather, for their preservation, and the idea here is that Sauls shield was thrown away uncared for.<\/p>\n 21<\/strong>. <\/strong> Mountains in Gilboa <\/strong> “Even nature is to join in the mourning. May God withdraw his blessing from the mountains upon which the heroes have fallen, that they may not be moistened by the dew and rain of heaven, but, remaining in eternal barrenness, be memorials of the horrible occurrence that has taken place upon them!” Keil. <\/p>\n <\/em><\/p>\n Fields of offerings <\/strong> Fertile fields, producing the best and most suitable fruits for offering in sacrifice to God. <\/p>\n Vilely cast away the shield <\/strong> Ingloriously and with abhorrence cast away by the mighty heroes themselves upon realizing that it no longer defends them from the arrows of the enemy. <\/p>\n Not anointed with oil <\/strong> It is difficult to determine whether this refers to Saul or his shield. The English version, after the Vulgate, supplies the words as though, <\/em> and refers it to Saul. It favours this interpretation that the word is always elsewhere applied to persons, never to things. The Chaldee, Syriac, and Arabic omit the negative particle, and read: The shield of Saul who was anointed with oil. <\/em> But these versions evidently aimed to correct the Hebrew text. Some have thought to read , instruments, <\/em> for , not, <\/em> but this is mere conjecture. Others refer the epithet to the shield, and understand that Saul had not properly anointed his shield previous to the battle. Compare Isa 21:5<\/span>. Keil, on the other hand, supposes that the shield had not after the battle been polished with oil, so that the marks of Saul’s blood still adhered to it. We prefer, however, to refer the word anointed <\/em> to Saul, and understand David as implying that after the shield was vilely cast away, and Saul himself was ignobly fallen, he could no longer be regarded as the anointed of Jehovah. Thus: The shield of Saul, <\/em> (who, after his inglorious fall, is) not <\/em> (now the) anointed with oil. <\/em> Comp. Isa 51:21<\/span>. “Thou afflicted, and drunken, but not with wine.”<\/p>\n 2Sa 1:21<\/span><\/em><\/strong>. <\/strong>Ye mountains of Gilboa, let there be no dew, <\/em><\/strong>&c.<\/strong> Dr. Delaney renders this verse thus: Mountains of Gilboa, nor dew nor rain upon you, nor fields of waved offerings; for there the shield of the brave was cast away; the shield of Saul, the weapons of the anointed with oil: <\/em>and Houbigant thus: Mountains of Gilboa, let no dew descend upon you, nor<\/em> rain upon you, O ye fertile fields: <\/em>[such as afford in abundance first-fruits to be offered to God:] For there the shield of the brave was thrown away, the shield of Saul: nor is the anointed of the Lord any more upon thee. <\/em>Throwing away the shield, was matter of the highest reproach in all the accounts of antiquity; and this, in the practice of so brave a prince as Saul, was an example of terrible consequence, and therefore must not go unreproved, especially in a song which soldiers were to learn. David could not censure Saul. He was his prince and his enemy; the infamy, however, must fall somewhere. Be then the place it happened in, accursed. Poetry justifies this; and I do not scruple to say, that it is the most masterly stroke the art will admit. Here I cannot but observe, with what inimitable address David has conducted this reproach; for at the same time that the mountains are cursed for it, he has contrived to turn it into praise upon Saul: there the shield of the mighty was cast away: <\/em>no hint by whom. Dr. Delaney, instead of beli, <\/em>which we render by the periphrasis as though he had not been, <\/em>reads keli, weapons, <\/em>as in the last verse; which appears a very ingenious and excellent criticism. <\/p>\n 2Sa 1:21 Ye mountains of Gilboa, [let there be] no dew, neither [let there be] rain, upon you, nor fields of offerings: for there the shield of the mighty is vilely cast away, the shield of Saul, [as though he had] not [been] anointed with oil.<\/p>\n Ver. 21. Ye mountains of Gilboa.<\/strong> ] A poetical exclamation, together with a hyperbolical imprecation-which possibly was as effectual as that of our Saviour pronounced upon the barren fig tree – in monumentum tanti mali,<\/em> as a monument of this disastrous accident: the ground being clad in black as in mourning. Adrichomius and others say that these mountains of Gilboa are to this day rocky, dry, and barren: like unto which was Hesiod’s country Ascra: and St David’s in Wales is said to be a place neither pleasant, fertile, nor safe: for, as Giraldus Cambrensis reporteth of it, it is neither furnished with woods, watered with rivers, beautified with meadows, nor enriched with any kind of fruitful soil. <\/p>\n <\/p>\n Is vilely cast away.<\/strong> ] As either useless or cumbersome. <\/p>\n <\/p>\n As though he had not, &c.<\/strong> ] But either a usurper, or a common soldier. So it is a baleful business when God seemeth to cast off his people, as if they were nothing to him; not “holy,” or “partakers of the heavenly calling.” Heb 3:1 <\/p>\n The shield of Saul. Omit the italics that follow, and supply instead “the weapon of one anointed with oil”, the Hebrew k e li (or keli?) “weapons” being read instead of b e ll in the first edition of the Hebrew Bible, 1488, and the Syriac and Arabic Versions and Chaldee paraphrase. <\/p>\n mountains: 1Sa 31:1, 1Ch 10:1, 1Ch 10:8 <\/p>\n no dew: Jdg 5:23, Job 3:3-10, Isa 5:6, Jer 20:14-16 <\/p>\n offerings: Joe 1:9, Joe 2:14 <\/p>\n not: Instead of belee, “not,” we should probably, with Dr. Delaney and others, read keley, “weapons,” as it is found on one manuscript and in the first edition of the Hebrew Bible, printed at Soncini, 1488: “the shield of Saul; the weapons of the anointed with oil.” <\/p>\n anointed: 1Sa 10:1, Isa 21:5 <\/p>\n Reciprocal: Gen 27:28 – of the dew Deu 11:29 – General 1Sa 28:4 – Gilboa 2Sa 1:6 – mount 2Sa 21:12 – in Gilboa 2Ch 17:17 – armed men Job 38:28 – dew Psa 89:38 – wroth Isa 10:27 – because Isa 16:8 – the fields Isa 43:28 – I have Lam 4:20 – the anointed<\/p>\n 2Sa 1:21. Ye mountains of Gilboa, let there be no dew, &c. This is not an imprecation, but a passionate expression of the sorrow and horror which he felt at this public disgrace and loss, which were such as if he thought every person or thing which contributed to it ought to bear tokens of the divine displeasure, such as the earth does when it is deprived of the influence of dew and rain. Nor fields of offerings That is, fertile fields, which may produce fair and goodly fruits fit to be offered to God. For there the shield of the mighty is vilely (that is, dishonourably) cast away Throwing away the shield was a matter of the highest reproach in all the accounts of antiquity. And this in the practice of so brave a prince as Saul was an example of terrible consequence, and therefore must not go unreproved, especially in a song which soldiers were to learn. David could not censure Saul; he was his prince and his enemy; the infamy, however, must fall somewhere; let the place in which it happened be accursed. Poetry justifies this, and we need not scruple to say, it is the most masterly stroke the science will admit. And with what inimitable address has he conducted this reproach! For at the same time that the mountains are cursed for it, he hath contrived to turn it into praise upon Saul: There the shield of the mighty was cast away; no hint by whom.<\/p>\n 1:21 Ye mountains of Gilboa, [let there be] no dew, neither [let there be] rain, upon you, nor {i} fields of offerings: for there the shield of the mighty is vilely cast away, the shield of Saul, [as though he had] not [been] anointed with oil.<\/p>\n (i) Let their fertile fields be barren, and bring forth no fruit to offer to the Lord.<\/p>\n Ye mountains of Gilboa, [let there be] no dew, neither [let there be] rain, upon you, nor fields of offerings: for there the shield of the mighty is vilely cast away, the shield of Saul, [as though he had] not [been] anointed with oil. 21. let there be no dew, &c.] The language is poetical. … Continue reading “Exegetical and Hermeneutical Commentary of 2 Samuel 1:21”<\/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-8055","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-commentary"],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.biblia.work\/bible-commentary\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/8055","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=8055"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/www.biblia.work\/bible-commentary\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/8055\/revisions"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.biblia.work\/bible-commentary\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=8055"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.biblia.work\/bible-commentary\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=8055"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.biblia.work\/bible-commentary\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=8055"}],"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
I. <\/strong>The enormity of guilt contracted by those who shed the Saviour’s blood, as that guilt may be illustrated by the enormity of the guilt of the death of Saul.<\/p>\n
II. <\/strong>To draw an illustration from the case of Saul, and the vengeance of his death–in consequence of his having been the Lord’s anointed–the vengeance that was imprecated by David.<\/p>\nFuente: Biblical Illustrator Edited by Joseph S. Exell<\/b><\/i><\/h4>\n
<\/P>
<\/P> 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":"