1 samuel 26 commentary

1 SAMUEL 26 COMMENTARYEDITED BY GLENN PEASE

Introduction by Peter PettSaul Determines To Seek Out David Once More, And Once More Survives Because Of David’s Mercy (1 Samuel 26:1-25).

After his conflict with Nabal David appears to have returned to his encampment on the Hill of Hachilah, a move which may well have been with a view to furthering his romantic involvement with Abigail, who would not have been able to marry David immediately. Nabal would have had to be buried and a respectable period of mourning would then have been required of Abigail. Thus being on the Hill of Hachilah would have kept him in close touch with his prospective wife, until she was free to marry. It would, however, also have resulted in his once again offending the Ziphites, for it is very probable that, as previously, the presence of David and a large band of men was straining the resources of the area so that the Ziphites suffered accordingly. As a result, being unable themselves to do anything against such a large force, they would again have turned to Saul.

As it happened it would appear that Saul was at this time passing through one of his dark periods. This comes out in that he responded to the call. We should not be surprised at this. While no one at the time would have understood it, his illness was of such a nature that no one would know how he was going to react next, and medically speaking it should be no surprise that he went back on his previous decision. If his paranoia had once again thrust itself to the fore, and his perception of David had once again become twisted in his mind because of his illness, no moral considerations would even have come into play. His reaction would have been automatic. We cannot judge a person with his kind of illness in rational terms. Such a person is not thinking rationally. (We should, however, remember that his rejection for disobedience dates to before he became ill. It was not, therefore, for what he did in his illness that he was condemned by YHWH).

(Some have seen this passage as simply a duplicate of 1 Samuel 24 in view of the similarities between the two, but many others agree that, in the circumstances, those similarities were in fact to be expected as David continued in the same area, whereas they would maintain that it is the dissimilarities that are the most striking and reveal that 1 Samuel 24 and 1 Samuel 26 undoubtedly refer to two different

1

occasions. For further discussion of the question see the note at the end of the commentary on this passage).

Analysis of the chapter.

a David is declared to be encamped on the Hill of Hachilah (1 Samuel 26:1).

b Saul seeks after David with his army and encamps on the Hill of Hachilah (1 Samuel 26:2-4).

c While Saul and Abner sleep David comes with Abishai and steals his ceremonial spear and water vessel but refuses to slay the anointed of YHWH (1 Samuel 26:5-11).

d The reason that they were able to do it was because YHWH had caused a deep sleep from YHWH to fall on the camp (1 Samuel 26:12).

c David chides Abner for allowing two men to steal up to where Saul was sleeping and steal his ceremonial spear and water vessel, thus failing to protect the anointed of YHWH (1 Samuel 26:13-16).

b David asks Saul why he has come out to seek him and Saul admits his fault (1 Samuel 26:17-25 a).

a David returns to his camp and Saul to his own place (1 Samuel 26:25 b).

Note On The Question Of Whether The Incident In Chapter 26 Is Merely A Duplicate Of The Incidents In Chapters 23-24.

Superficially a strong case can be made out for the case that the incident in 1 Samuel 26 is merely a duplicate of the combined but different incidents in 1 Samuel

2

23-24. Consider for example the following:

· In both incidents Saul is alerted by the Ziphites (1 Samuel 23:19; 1 Samuel 26:1).

· Both refer to David’s connection with the Hill of Hachilah (1 Samuel 23:19; 1 Samuel 26:1).

· In both cases Saul seeks David in the wilderness with ‘three thousand’ men (1 Samuel 24:1-2; 1 Samuel 26:1-2).

· In both cases Saul is at David’s mercy (1 Samuel 24:3-7; 1 Samuel 26:3-12).

· In both cases David refrains from slaying him because he is YHWH’s Anointed (1 Samuel 24:3-7; 1 Samuel 26:3-12).

· In both cases David appropriates a symbol of Saul’s authority, in one case the hem of his robe, 1 Samuel 24:5-6; in the other his spear and water jug, 1 Samuel 26:12).

· In both cases David reveals himself to Saul after the event and displays what he has appropriated (1 Samuel 24:8-11; 1 Samuel 26:14-16).

· In both cases David pleads his case before Saul at some length (1 Samuel 24:9-15; 1 Samuel 26:17-20; 1 Samuel 26:22-24).

· In both cases David likens himself to a flea (a dead dog and a flea, 1 Samuel 24:14); a flea and a partridge (1 Samuel 26:20).

· In both cases Saul repents and speaks of coming success for David (1 Samuel 24:17-21; 1 Samuel 26:21; 1 Samuel 26:25).

3

At first sight the duplication appears impressive, but once the incidents are inspected in detail the coincidence actually becomes less impressive. Firstly we should notice that David spent some considerable time hiding in the wilderness area west of the Dead Sea, moving from area to area. It would not therefore be surprising if he went back to what may well have been a suitable encampment on the Hill of Hachilah a number of times. And once he had done so it is not surprising that, if at one of those times the Ziphites had complained to Saul with the result that David had been forced to depart, the next time they tried complaining to Saul again because they saw David and his men as a threat and a nuisance and hoped that he would be made to depart again. What is more significant, and counts against the idea of duplication, is that the first time David then fled to the wilderness of Maon, at which point Saul had to cease his search because of the Philistine threat, while the second time David only hides nearby and does not flee, and there is no suggestion that Saul’s withdrawal has anything to do with the Philistines. It should further be noted that in 1 Samuel 23-24 the appeal of the Ziphites and reference to the hill of Hachilah in 1 Samuel 23 strictly have no direct connection with Saul’s later search for David in 1 Samuel 24 which occurs because of anonymous information (1 Samuel 24:1). Thus we would have to suggest that 1 Samuel 26 unnecessarily conflated two narratives and totally ignored the true circumstances.

That Saul had three military units with him each time cannot be regarded as significant. It simply suggests that he constantly operated with three military units, compare also 1 Samuel 13:2.

That Saul was twice found to be at the mercy of an astute David is not really surprising, especially as, while the first time it was accidental, the second time it was specifically by the deliberate choice of David. What happened the first time may well have sparked off David’s adventure in the second. David knew from his experience in 1 Samuel 24 that this was one way in which he could persuade Saul to return home and leave his men alone. It was surely just common sense to try the same method again. But we should note that the place at which it happened was different (the cave of Engedi in the cliffs facing the Dead Sea compared with the Hill of Hachilah in the mountain range near Hebron some way from the Dead Sea), the circumstances were very different (accidentally in a pitch black cave, compared with by David’s choice in the centre of Saul’s camp at night), the objects taken were totally different, fitting in with the difference in each situation (the hem of the robe cut off in a pitch black cave compared with Saul’s ceremonial spear and water jug taken from his camp), the persons involved were very different (David’s men in hiding and then Saul alone, compared with David and two named men who have set off with the intention of spying on Saul’s camp, and then Abner and Saul seen as together) and the spirit in which it happened was very different (in the first case it was by coincidence because David and his men were hiding in a cave in some

4

trepidation, in the second it was a deliberate act of David as he acted fearlessly and decisively in order to bring the situation about).

That David spared Saul’s life both times is what we would expect if he genuinely saw Saul as YHWH’s Anointed (which suggests that he would spare Saul’s life whenever he saw him), and once David had in each case appropriated something of Saul’s which expressed his authority we would expect that the main events which followed would necessarily be duplicated. The whole point of appropriating the very different symbols of Saul’s authority was precisely in order to reveal them to Saul and have a conversation with him.

But even the very conversations are very different. In the first case Saul is obsessed with the question of the kingship, in the second case the idea of kingship does not arise at all. In the first case he discourses at length, in the second case he says little. The kingship does not seem to be a concern. In the first case he admits to his actions being evil compared with David’s good actions, in the second case he quite spontaneously admits that he has sinned and played the fool, and asserts that he will in future do David no more harm. To those who suggest that Saul could not have behaved in a way which was so against character by pursuing David a second time after what he had said the first time we can only point out that the nature of Saul’s illness was such that it is quite explicable. When they take over a person’s mind paranoia and delusion supply their own justification which always seems logical to the person at the time. That is a symptom of the illness. Nor would Saul be the first person who, having made a promise about something he felt deeply about, stewed over it for some time and reneged on that promise because the worst side of his nature got the better of him..

The dual references to a flea only indicate that David regularly saw himself in those terms (living in the circumstances that they did he and his men were probably very familiar with fleas), but in context both are in fact very different pictures. In the first case the flea is paralleled with a dead dog, as a symbol of what is unpleasant, in the second it is seen as hunted down and connected with a partridge in the mountains which was also hunted down.

And finally the emphasis of David is different in each case. In the first case David stresses that the fact that he has spared Saul is proof of his innocence, in the second he indignantly demands to know why Saul is pursuing him and considers that there is a remedy which should have been considered. In the first case he has no thought of leaving Israel, in the second he has clearly made up his mind to do so.

5

All these differences and different emphases count very strongly against these simply being duplicate narratives, for if they are they have been changed in every detail, while history is in fact full of examples of far greater ‘coincidences’ than these where the fact that different occasions were actually in mind is absolutely certain. We must therefore conclude that the narratives are not mere duplications but are dealing with two totally different incidents which occurred during the long years of Saul’s pursuit of David while he was in hiding in the wilderness areas west of the Dead Sea.

Robert Roe, "Today we are looking at I Samuel, Chapter 26. I do not agree with some of the commentators on this particular passage, so I present this interpretation to you as an option. Some of the commentators believe David was going to the hill of Hachilah to make Saul repent; that he was going with the idea of forcing Saul to come to terms. Looking at the passage, I do not agree. I believe David was going there in anger and fury. I think God was testing him; testing both Saul and David. I want to approach it from that viewpoint. I am offering this as an option. I believe it is a valid option. I will not be dogmatic about it, but I do not think a leopard ever changes its spots. David is a vindictive, hostile person. Just in the last chapter he intended to wipe out Nabal. From a human standpoint, Nabal deserved to be wiped out, but David intended to wipe out not only Nabal but all of his children plus any male servants in the household. When he is angry, David has a strong tendency to fly off the handle and take matters into his own hands. However, in Chapter 25 David repented of killing Nabal, made a confession and, in a sense, told God "No more."Saul is also a vindictive, violent man. You will remember in Chapter 24 that while chasing David (with God's permission), he was trapped in a cave with David and could easily have been slain, but David held off. Saul, therefore, swore repentance, confessed his sin, and told David, "No more."So in effect now, both men have made confessions regarding their sin of violence and revenge and have agreed their actions were wrong.But how can you tell a true confession? 1 John 1:9 says, "If I confess my sins [literally 'say with God,' agree with Him about my sins] God is faithful and righteous to forgive my sins and to cleanse me from all unrighteousness." He will always do it because He is faithful. He has to do it because He is righteous. In Chapter 24 Saul was sorry about his actions toward David and apparently confessed publicly. In Chapter 25 David was sorry about his actions toward Nabal and made a public confession in front of his 400 men and Abigail.A true confession requires repentance, and repentance means a change of mind, a turning around, some positive step to stop doing whatever was wrong. With that

6

kind of confession God forgives and God cleanses. However, if it is not that kind, God does not forgive and God does not cleanse. Understand this, the present state of mind or the present state of activity has nothing to do with eternal destiny. If you have received Christ as your Lord and your God, positionally you are forgiven in Christ. He died for all your sins, past, present and future. There is no question about that. What we are talking about here is experiencing God's forgiveness, His fellowship, fellowship with a Holy Being. For that we need to keep short accounts with God. We need to agree with him that we need forgiveness. Then we need to do something about our former way of life.While both Saul and David are already God's anointed, they are two men running in opposite directions, Saul in the flesh, David in the spirit. David has his ups and downs spiritually, but his general trend line is up. Saul also has spiritual ups and downs, but unfortunately his general trend line is down.We have just seen them both confess. Now God tests their confessions. For Saul, it is a tragic test and he fails it badly. According to Scripture, this is the end of testing for Saul. God takes him home. He does not, however, lose his salvation. We will later see him joined with Samuel.David, even though his trend line is up, is still tested. I think that is a key, so let's look at it.

David Again Spares Saul's Life

1 The Ziphites went to Saul at Gibeah and said, "Is not David hiding on the hill of Hakilah, which faces Jeshimon?"

Robert Roe, "David has gone into the realm of the Calebites, up around Carmel, Ziph, just to the west of Engedi which is right on the Dead Sea about its middle point. About 12 miles into Judah, is the area of Maon, Ziph and Hebron founded by sons of Caleb. These people are Judahites, David's tribe. David is there married to Abigail, who is from one of the leading families in that territory. He has also married Ahinoam of Jezreel, which is only 3 miles north of Carmel. She is probably from one of its powerful families too. David is a king, and he is making alliances for the future. So he has married into two powerful Calebite families right in this

7

territory.Because of these alliances, the one spot in Judah where David ought to be safe, is the area of the Ziphites, the Calebites. Well, not so Once before the Ziphites deliberately told Saul where David was hiding, after tricking him into an untenable spot,and except for God's intervention, David would have been lost. Now David is back, but this time he is family. Does that make a difference? No. The first thing the Ziphites do is travel all the way to Gibeah of Benjamin and tell Saul, "Hey, he's back again. Let's get him." If you were a red-headed, impulsive Irishman with a touch of Jewish blood, and inclined to get even, how would you respond when betrayed by your own family? How about David?BENSON, "1 Samuel 26:1-2. Doth not David hide himself with us? — The number of men whom David supported would not allow him to continue long in the same place, and therefore he was often obliged to shift his quarters for subsistence. We now find him again in the wilderness of Ziph. How much time had elapsed between his marriage of Abigail and his going thither, we are not informed, nor is it easy to determine, but it is probable it was considerable. Then Saul arose — Probably he would have pursued David no more if these Ziphites had not thus excited him.GILL the same place where he was when the Ziphites before gave information of him, (1 Samuel 23:10) ; here he might choose to be, supposing that the Ziphites now would not meditate anything against him, since Saul had declared he would be king after him, and had made him swear that he would not cut off his posterity; and as he thought it his wisdom to provide against the worst, knowing the inconstancy of Saul, he might judge this the most proper place of safety, and from whence he could, on occasion, easily retreat into the wilderness; and it may be also, because it was near to Abigail's estate and possessions, which were now a good resource for him.DEFFINBAUGH We have met the Ziphites before. In chapter 23, we are told that the Ziphites went up to Saul at his home in Gibeah, informing him of David’s whereabouts and promising to deliver him over to the king (23:19-20). Saul wanted to be certain not to let David slip through his fingers, and so he sent the Ziphite delegation home, with instructions to identify all of David’s hiding places so they would be certain of his capture on his next campaign (23:21-23). They returned home, and Saul soon came in hot pursuit of David. When David learned of Saul’s coming, he moved further south, where he was nearly trapped by Saul on a mountain in the wilderness of Maon. Had it not been for the timely arrival of a messenger with the report that the Philistines had attacked Israel, Saul would have captured David (23:24-29).These Ziphites, descendants of Caleb and thus of Judah, are fellow-Judahites with David, and yet they betray their future king to a Benjamite like Saul.

We see, in this, a striking similarity to the other time theZiphites revealed to Saul where David was. I Samuel 23:19 "Then came

8

up the Ziphites to Saul to Gibeah, saying, Doth not David hide himselfwith us in strong holds in the wood, in the hill of Hachilah, which[is] on the south of Jeshimon?" This does not, however, mean that Saulkept his oath, that he made to David earlier. Saul had spells when hewas insane. He always showed his madness in hate for David.Ray Pritchard, "With that we turn to the story which is introduced to us in verse 1: “The Ziphites went to Saul at Gibeah and said, ‘Is not David hiding on the hill of Hakilah, which faces Jeshimon?’” Jeshimon was the name for the desolate wilderness in the far southern reaches of Judah. There was a desert in that place called the Desert of Ziph and the Bedouins who lived there were called Ziphites. They were pro-Saul and anti-David. This wasn’t the first time they had turned David in (see I Samuel 23:19).For years David and his men have been on the run, burning by day, freezing by night, climbing on the rocks like goats, fighting, running, hiding, always staying one step ahead of Saul. Now he comes after them again. This time he takes the standing army of 3,000 men and begins combing the desert for David. At length he camps beside the road on the hill called Hakilah. Evidently there was a field nearby suitable for a bivouac with a deep valley on one side. Verse 4 tells us that when David heard Saul had come after him, he sent out scouts to find Saul’s precise location."We have seen in a previous study that the Ziphites had betrayed David to King Saul, causing King Saul to come and hunt for David. On the occasion before us the Ziphites evidently betrayed David to King Saul because they wanted to both stay on the king’s good side and perhaps also because they were now afraid of David since they knew that David knew they had previously betrayed David to the king.

BARNES, " The incident related in this chapter of the meeting between Saul and David bears a strong general resemblance to that recorded in 1 Sam. 24, and is of a nature unlikely to have occurred more than once. Existing discrepancies are explained by the supposition that one narrative relates fully some incidents on which the other is silent. On the whole the most probable conclusion is that the two narratives relate to one and the same event. (Compare the two narratives of the Creation, Gen. 1; Gen_2:4 ff; the two narratives of David’s war, 2 Sam. 8; and 2 Sam. 10; and those of the death of Ahaziah, 2Ki_9:27 ff; and 2Ch_22:9.)

CLARKE, "The Ziphites came - This is the second time that these enemies of David endeavored to throw him into the hands of Saul. See 1Sa_23:19.

K&D, "The repetition not only of the treachery of the Ziphites, but also of the sparing of Saul by David, furnishes no proof in itself that the account contained in

9

this chapter is only another legend of the occurrences already related in 1 Samuel 23:19-24:22. As the pursuit of David by Saul lasted for several years, in so small a district as the desert of Judah, there is nothing strange in the repetition of the same scenes. And the assertion made by Thenius, that “Saul would have been a moral monster, which he evidently was not, if he had pursued David with quiet deliberation, and through the medium of the same persons, and had sought his life again, after his own life had been so magnanimously spared by him,” not only betrays a superficial acquaintance with the human heart, but is also founded upon the mere assertion, for which there is no proof, that Saul was evidently no so; and it is proved to be worthless by the fact, that after the first occasion on which his life was so magnanimously spared by David, he did not leave off seeking him up and down in the land, and that David was obliged to seek refuge with the Philistines in consequence, as may be seen from 1Sa_27:1-12, which Thenius himself assigns to the same source as 1 Samuel 24. The agreement between the two accounts reduces it entirely to outward and unessential things. It consists chiefly in the fact that the Ziphites came twice to Saul at Gibeah, and informed him that David was stopping in their neighbourhood, in the hill Hachilah, and also that Saul went out twice in pursuit of David with 3000 men. But the three thousand were the standing body of men that Saul had raised from the very beginning of his reign out of the whole number of those who were capable of bearing arms, for the purpose of carrying on his smaller wars (1Sa_13:2); and the hill of Hachilah appears to have been a place in the desert of Judah peculiarly well adapted for the site of an encampment. On the other hand, all the details, as well as the final results of the two occurrences, differ entirely from one another. When David was betrayed the first time, he drew back into the desert of Maon before the advance of Saul; and being completely surrounded by Saul upon one of the mountains there, was only saved from being taken prisoner by the circumstance that Saul was compelled suddenly to relinquish the pursuit of David on account of the report that the Philistines had invaded the land (1Sa_23:25-28). But on the second occasion Saul encamped upon the hill of Hachilah, whilst David had drawn back into the adjoining desert, from which he crept secretly into Saul's encampment, and might, if he had chosen, have put his enemy to death (1Sa_26:3.). There is quite as much difference in the minuter details connected with the sparing of Saul. On the first occasion, Saul entered a cave in the desert of Engedi, whilst David and his men were concealed in the interior of the cave, without having the smallest suspicion that they were anywhere near (1Sa_24:2-4). The second time David went with Abishai into the encampment of Saul upon the hill of Hachilah, while the king and all his men were sleeping (1Sa_26:3, 1Sa_26:5). It is true that on both occasions David's men told him that God had given his enemy into his hand; but the first time they added, Do to him what seemeth good in thy sight; and David cut off the lappet of Saul's coat, whereupon his conscience smote him, and he said, “Far be it from me to lay my hand upon the Lord's anointed” (1Sa_24:5-8). In the second instance, on the contrary, when David saw Saul in the distance lying by the carriage rampart and the army sleeping round him, he called to two of his heroes, Ahimelech and Abishai, to go with him into the camp of the sleeping foe, and then went thither with Abishai, who thereupon said to him, “God hath delivered thine enemy into thy hand: let me alone, that I may pierce him

10

with the spear.” But David rejected this proposal, and merely took away the spear and water-bowl that were at Saul's head (1Sa_26:6-12). And lastly, notwithstanding the fact that the words of David and replies of Saul agree in certain general thoughts, yet they differ entirely in the main. On the first occasion David showed the king that his life had been in his power, and yet he had spared him, to dispel the delusion that he was seeking his life (1Sa_24:10-16). On the second occasion he asked the king why he was pursuing him, and called to him to desist from his pursuit (1Sa_26:18.). But Saul was so affected the first time that he wept aloud, and openly declared that David would obtain the kingdom; and asked him to promise on oath, that when he did, he would not destroy his family (1Sa_24:17-22). The second time, on the contrary, he only declared that he had sinned and acted foolishly, and would to David no more harm, and that David would undertake and prevail; but he neither shed tears, nor brought himself to speak of David's ascending the throne, so that he was evidently much more hardened than before (1Sa_26:21-25). These decided differences prove clearly enough that the incident described in this chapter is not the same as the similar one mentioned in 1 Samuel 23 and 24, but belongs to a later date, when Saul's enmity and hardness had increased.1Sa_26:1-2

The second betrayal of David by the Ziphites occurred after David had married Abigail at Carmel, and when he had already returned to the desert of Judah. On 1Sa_26:1 and 1Sa_26:2 compare the explanations of 1Sa_23:19 and 1Sa_24:3. Instead of “before (in the face of) Jeshimon” (i.e., the wilderness), we find the situation defined more precisely in 1Sa_23:19, as “to the right (i.e., on the south) of the wilderness” (Jeshimon).HAWKER, "The history of David's persecution by Saul is again opened, and continued through this Chapter. The Ziphites inform Saul against David. Saul goes in quest of him. David is favoured with another opportunity of slaying Saul, but will not avail himself of it. A similar interview takes place to what happened before between David and Saul; after which they depart one from the other.1 Samuel 26:1(1) ¶ And the Ziphites came unto Saul to Gibeah, saying, Doth not David hide himself in the hill of Hachilah, which is before Jeshimon?This is the second instance of the treachery of the Ziphites. (See 1 Samuel 23:19.) And what had David done to deserve it at their hands?ELLICOTT, " (1) The Ziphites came unto Saul.—There is grave difficulty connected with the recital contained in this chapter. Is it another account of the incident told in 1 Samuel 24, 26 by a different narrator? This is the opinion of some modern expositors of weight: for instance, Ewald and the Bishop of Bath and Wells

11

in the Speaker’s Commentary. The question at issue is as follows:—We have in this First Book of Samuel, in 1 Samuel 23, 24, 26, two recitals of David sparing his great adversary’s life, at first sight under very similar circumstances. For instance: in both these occurrences (1) it is the same people, the Ziphites, who call Saul’s attention to David’s presence in their neighbourhood; (2) in both, Saul comes from Gibeah with the same number of men, 3,000; (3) the general bearing of the incident is identical in both—viz., the persuasions of David’s followers to induce their leader to take Saul’s life when in his power resisted by the noble-minded chieftain; the taking of something personal by David from the sleeping king, as a proof that the royal life had been in his hands; the sequel, which describes the heartfelt temporary repentance of Saul for the past. But here the resemblance ends. The circumstances of the night raid by David and his companions into the camp of the sleeping Saul are, when examined closely, so entirely different from the circumstances of the midday siesta of Saul in the En-gedi cavern, where David and his band were dwelling, that it is really impossible to assume that they are versions of one and the same incident. We conclude, therefore, with some certainty, that the accounts contained in 1 Samuel 23, 24, , 26 refer to two distinct and separate events; and so Keil, Erdmann and Lange, Dean Payne Smith in the Pulpit Commentary, Wordsworth, &c. Bishop Hervey, in the Speaker’s Commentary, is, however, supported in his hypothesis of the two accounts referring to only one incident by Ewald, De Wette, and others. In the course of this exposition, the more striking agreements and divergencies will be discussed.There remains, however, a still graver question to be considered, the gravity and difficulty of which remains the same whether we assume, as we propose to do, that twice in the course of the outlaw life of David the king’s life was in his power, or that only once David stood over the sleeping king, sword in hand, and that the two accounts refer to one and the same event—For what purpose did the compiler of the First Book of Samuel insert in his narrative this twenty-sixth chapter—where either the old story of 1 Samuel 23, 24 is repeated with certain variations, or else an incident of a similar nature to one which has been told before in careful detail is repeated at great length? To this important question no perfectly satisfactory reply can be given. The object of one such recital in an account of the early life of the great founder of Israelitic greatness is clear, but we may well ask why was a second narrative of an incident of like nature inserted in a book where conciseness is ever so carefully studied? All we can suggest is, that everything which conduced to the glory of the favourite hero of Israel was of the deepest interest to the people, and the surpassing nobility and generosity of the magnanimity of David to his deadly foe was deemed worthy of these detailed accounts even in the necessarily brief compilation of the inspired writer of the history of this time.

PULPIT, "1Sa_26:1The Ziphites came unto Saul. There are so many points of similarity between this

12

narrative and that contained in 1Sa_23:19-24; 1Sa_24:1-22, that it has been argued that in these two accounts we have substantially the same fact, only modified by two different popular traditions, and not recorded until a late subsequent period, at which the narrator, unable to decide which was the true form of the story, determined upon giving both. The main points of similarity are—

(1) The treachery of the Ziphites (1Sa_26:1; 1Sa_23:19).(2) David’s position in the hill Hachilah (1Sa_26:1, 1Sa_26:3; 1Sa_23:19).(3) Saul’s march with 3000 men (1Sa_26:2; 1Sa_24:2).(4) The speech of David’s men (1Sa_24:4; 1Sa_26:8).(5) David’s refusal to lay hands on the anointed of Jehovah (1Sa_24:6; 1Sa_26:9, 1Sa_26:11).(6) Saul’s recognition of David’s voice (1Sa_24:16; 1Sa_26:17).(7) David’s comparison of himself to a flea (1Sa_24:14; 1Sa_26:20).

Besides these there are several remarkable verbal coincidences; but some other matters which have been enumerated are either such as must have happened, supposing the two events to have occurred, or are even points of difference. Of these there are many. Thus the first occasion on which David spared Saul’s life was in a cave at En-gedi; the latter was in Saul’s entrenched camp. In this second narrative David’s return to Maon was the natural result of his marriage with Abigail, and when the Ziphites report his presence there to Saul, which they were sure to do for fear of David’s vengeance for their former betrayal of him, he awaits Saul’s attack, whereas before he fled in haste, and was saved for the moment by the wonderful ravine which Conder has so unmistakably verified (see on 1Sa_23:26), and finally by an invasion of the Philistines. Mr. Conder’s visit to the ground, and the way in which the difficulties in the previous narrative are cleared up by what he saw, sets the historical credibility of that account above all reasonable doubt. Had there been a mountain between David and his pursuers, he would have been safe enough; but as it was he was in full sight of his enemies, and the ravine alone enabled him to escape from Saul’s vengeance. The number of Saul’s army, 3000, was the number of the chosen men whom he always had in attendance upon him (1Sa_13:2); and it is Saul who encamps on the hill Hachilah, while David, instead of being all but caught as before, had scouts to watch Saul’s movements, and was himself safe in the wilderness on the south. On the previous occasion Saul had withdrawn from his men, but here he lies in his camp surrounded by them, when David, accompanied only by Abishai, undertakes this bold enterprise, which was entirely in accordance with his growing sense of security. The argument, moreover, that Saul must have been a "moral monster" thus to seek David’s life after his generous conduct towards him keeps out of view the fact that Saul was scarcely accountable for his actions. We

13

have seen that he was subject to fits of madness, and that the form which it took was that of deadly hatred against David. Even this was but a form of the ruling passion which underlies all Saul’s actions, namely, an extreme jealousy of everything that in the slightest degree seemed to trench upon his royal prerogative and supremacy. To what an extreme length his ferocity was capable of proceeding in punishing what he regarded as an overt act of resistance to his authority we have seen in the account of the massacre of the priests at Nob with their wives and children (1Sa_22:18, 1Sa_22:19). No worse act is recorded of any man in history, and we may hope that Saul would not have committed such a crime had not his mental faculties been disturbed. Nor was Saul alone in his estimate of what was due to him as Jehovah’s Messiah; David had equally high views of Saul’s rights and position, and regarded them as fenced in by religious sanctions. But in Saul’s case the passion had grown till it had become a monomania, and as he brooded over his relations to David, and thought of him as one that was to usurp his crown, and was already a rebel and an outlaw, the sure result was the return of his hatred against David, and when news was brought him that his enemy was so near, he gladly welcomed another opportunity of getting him into his power. On the hill of Hachilah. See 1Sa_23:19. It is there said to be "on the right hand," but here "over against," i.e. facing the desert which lies on the northeastern coast of the Dead Sea.

JFB 1, 2. the Ziphites came unto Saul to Gibeah--This people seem to have thought it impossible for David to escape, and therefore recommended themselves to Saul, by giving him secret information (see on 1Sa 23:19). The knowledge of their treachery makes it appear strange that David should return to his former haunt in their neighborhood; but, perhaps he did it to be near Abigail's possessions, and under the impression that Saul had become mollified. But the king had relapsed into his old enmity. Though Gibeah, as its name imports, stood on an elevated position, and the desert of Ziph, which was in the hilly region of Judea, may have been higher than Gibeah, it was still necessary to descend in leaving the latter place; thence Saul (1Sa 26:2) "went down to the wilderness of Ziph."HENRY Here, 1. Saul gets information of David's movements and acts offensively. The Ziphites came to him and told him where David now was, in the same place where he was when they formerly betrayed him, 1 Samuel 23:19. Perhaps (though it is not mentioned) Saul had given them intimation, under-hand, that he continued his design against David, and would be glad of their assistance. If not, they were very officious to Saul, aware of what would please him, and very malicious against David, to whom they despaired of ever reconciling themselves, and therefore they stirred up Saul (who needed no such spur) against him, 1 Samuel 26:1. For aught we know, Saul would have continued in the same good mind that he was in (1 Samuel 24:17), and would not have given David this fresh trouble, if the Ziphites had not put him on. See what need we have to pray to God that, since we have so much of the tinder of corruption in our own hearts, the sparks of temptation may be kept far from us, lest, if they come together, we be set on fire of hell. Saul readily caught at the information, and went down with an army of 3000 men to the place where David

14

hid himself, 1 Samuel 26:2. How soon do unsanctified hearts lose the good impressions which their convictions have made upon them and return with the dog to their vomit!David gets information of Saul's movements and acts defensively. He did not march

out to meet and fight him; he sought only his own safety, not Saul's ruin; therefore he abode in the wilderness (1 Samuel 26:3), putting thereby a great force upon himself, and curbing the bravery of his own spirit by a silent retirement, showing more true valour than he could have done by an irregular resistance. (1.) He had spies who informed him of Saul's descent, that he had come in very deed (1 Samuel 26:4); for he would not believe that Saul would deal so basely with him till he had the utmost evidence of it. (2.) He observed with his own eyes how Saul was encamped, 1 Samuel 26:5. He came towards the place where Saul and his men had pitched their tents, so near as to be able, undiscovered, to take a view of their entrenchments, probably in the dusk of the evening.cofffman, "DAVID SPARED SAUL'S LIFE A SECOND TIMEThe critical canard that would relegate this chapter to the status of a "mere variation" of that other report of Saul's life being spared by David (1 Samuel 24) is an example of the same kind of "scholarship" that might identify the Battle of New Orleans with the Battle of Waterloo! Oh, but those battles were at different times, different places, involving different personnel and with different results. The same differences mark these two accounts of David's refusal to kill Saul when he had an excellent opportunity to do so. It is true, of course, that a limited number of the personnel participated in both events, those battles, and these two Biblical episodes, but that is no license to claim that these events are contradictory accounts of only one event or only one battle. The only alleged reason for this radical critical claim is that given by Canon Cook, "The incident is of a nature unlikely to have occurred more than once."[1] Indeed! If that was true, why would the Sacred Text have included both narratives?THE ZIPHITES BETRAYED DAVID A SECOND TIME"Then the Ziphites came to Saul at Gibeah, saying, "Is not David hiding himself on the hill of Hachilah, which is on the east of Jeshimon"? So Saul arose and went down to the wilderness of Ziph, with three thousand chosen men of Israel, to seek David in the wilderness of Ziph. And Saul encamped on the hill of Hachilah, which is beside the road on the east of Jeshimon. But David remained in the wilderness; and when he saw that Saul came after him into the wilderness, David sent out spies, and learned of a certainty that Saul had come. Then David arose and came to the place where Saul had encamped; and David saw the place where Saul lay, with Abner the son of Ner, the commander of his army; Saul was lying within the encampment, while the army was encamped around him."Porter stressed some remarkable differences here as contrasted with the event in 1

15

Samuel 24. "In the first encounter Saul went alone, unarmed and by chance, into a cave where David and his men were; here David and Abishai were reconnoitering in search of Saul, finding him at night where he was sleeping with Abner his commander. The first incident happened in the day time, this one at night. In the first event, David cut off part of Saul's robe; here they took Saul's spear and the jar of water that was beside him. The conclusion supported here is that there were two occasions."[2] D. F. Payne also supported "The historicity of both accounts."[3] "Jeshimon is the barren country between the hills of Judah and the dead sea. The Hill of Hachilah is perhaps El-kolah, six miles west of Ziph and on the eastern edge of the wilderness where it begins to fall toward the Dead Sea."[4]"With three thousand chosen men of Israel" (1 Samuel 26:2). "This is the number of men that Saul always had in attendance with him (1 Samuel 13:2; 24:2; 26:2)."[5] This so-called "similarity" between the two narratives is of no consequence. Saul always had that number of men with him."When he saw that Saul came after him" (1 Samuel 26:3). This is an idiomatic expression meaning that David had heard that Saul was coming after him. If he had seen Saul doing so, he would not have needed to send out spies."David sent out spies and learned of a certainty that Saul had come" (1 Samuel 26:4). David's reluctance to believe that Saul had actually come out with an army to hunt him on this occasion, and which he would not believe until his spies confirmed it, proves the truth of the previous narrative. After all that Saul had said then, David could hardly believe the reality of this additional attack."David saw the place where Saul lay, with Abner ... commander of his army" (1 Samuel 26:5). Willis suggested that David must have arrived in daylight; but as both the king and Abner were asleep, it appears more likely that a brilliant moonlight enabled, not David, but the spies he sent to come back with this report. The word "saw" here is idiomatic as in 1 Samuel 26:4. David did not enter Saul's camp until later in the night.constable, "Verses 1-5Saul"s encampment near the hill of HachilahThe Ziphites betrayed David a second time (cf. 1 Samuel 23:19). David was again hiding by the hill of Hachilah ( 1 Samuel 23:19). When Saul came down from Gibeah with his3 ,000 (or three military units of) soldiers, he camped near the main road. David had only600 men ( 1 Samuel 23:13; 1 Samuel 25:13). David evidently stayed on the other side of the hill ( 1 Samuel 26:3). Perhaps he went up on the hill at night to survey Saul"s encampment and there spotted Saul and Abner in the middle of the camp ( 1 Samuel 26:5). Saul should have been very secure, surrounded as he was by his men, but really he was very vulnerable (cf. 1 Samuel 26:12).

16

PETT, "Verses 1-4The Ziphites Inform Saul That David Has Returned to the Hill of Hachilah And Saul Again Pursues David (1 Samuel 26:1-4).The Ziphites were probably annoyed that David had again brought his men into their territory, partly because they saw it as their own preserve and disliked all intruders, partly because they were loyal to their king, and partly because it would result in diminishing resources being available for their own families. In such a wilderness six hundred men with their families could make a huge difference to what was available. They thus sent messengers to Saul informing against David.Saul, who was going through a period when his illness was accentuated, responded, and, as a result of his paranoia and obsession with the idea of maintaining his dynasty, again took the standing army of three military units and sought to root David out. But when he arrived at the Hill of Hachilah he discovered that David had decamped. It appears that by now David had an efficient system of spies (we remember how he had ‘heard’ about the sheep-shearing and about Nabal’s death).Analysis.a And the Ziphites came to Saul to Gibeah, saying, “Does not David hide himself in the hill of Hachilah, which is before the Waste (Jeshimon)?” ’ (1 Samuel 26:1).b Then Saul arose, and went down to the wilderness of Ziph, having three thousand chosen men of Israel with him, to seek David in the wilderness of Ziph (1 Samuel 26:2).c And Saul encamped in the hill of Hachilah, which is before the Waste (Jeshimon), by the highway (1 Samuel 26:3 a).b But David abode in the wilderness, and he saw that Saul came after him into the wilderness (1 Samuel 26:3 b).a David therefore sent out spies, and understood that Saul was definitely come (1 Samuel 26:4).Note that in ‘a’ Saul learns from the Ziphites that David is encamped on the Hill of Hachilah, and in the parallel learns that Saul has definitely come to the Hill of Hachilah. In ‘b’ Saul went into the wilderness (mentioned twice) and in the parallel David saw that Saul had come after him into the wilderness (mentioned twice). Centrally in ‘c’ Saul arrives with his army and encamps on the Hill on which David and his men had had their encampment.1 Samuel 26:1

17

‘And the Ziphites came to Saul to Gibeah, saying, “Does not David hide himself in the hill of Hachilah, which is before the Waste (Jeshimon)?” ’When David and his men returned to the Hill of Hachilah which was south of ‘the Waste’ (Jehimon), a hot and barren area of hills, peaks and precipices west of the Dead Sea (1 Samuel 23:19), he was back on what the Ziphites saw as ‘their territory’. Thus they immediately sent messengers to Saul, hoping thereby to rid themselves of the menace. They did not like trespassers in their area. It may also be that they were fiercely loyal to Saul. Tightly bound, more isolated groups with a strong sense of loyalty often have the strongest traditions of loyalty towards kings who do not bother them overmuch, whatever others may think about them.

2 So Saul went down to the Desert of Ziph, with his three thousand chosen men of Israel, to search there for David.

1. Robert Roe, "Before we go further, let's look at Saul's confession. Does it meet the test? In Chapter 24 Saul publicly confessed to David, "You are more righteous than I; for you have dealt well with me, while I have dealt wickedly with you." However, at the next opportunity to commit the same exact sin, Saul with an army of three thousand men travels all the way from Benjamin down to Ziphite territory to seek David out. Now you don't move an army of that size without a lot of thought and planning. There's no change of direction here, and Saul fails the test of a true confession."CLARKE Though they knew that David was but six hundred strong, yet Saul thought it was not safe to pursue such an able general with a less force than that mentioned in the text; and, that he might the better depend on them, they were all elect or picked men out of the whole of his army.GILL, "Then Saul arose,.... Immediately, glad of an opportunity to seize on David, having the same disposition towards him as ever; and perhaps had repented he had not laid hold on him when he followed him out of the cave: and went down to the wilderness of Ziph: or towards it: having three thousand chosen men of Israel; young men, so called, because usually

18

chosen for business, and for war particularly, rather than old men; the same number he took with him when he sought him at Engedi, 1Sa_24:2, to seek David in the wilderness of Ziph; where or whereabouts he was informed by the Ziphites he was.PULPIT, "1Sa_26:2-4Three thousand chosen men. Not chosen for this expedition, but the force which Saul always kept under arms (1Sa_13:2). By the way. The high road which led down to Arad. David abode in the wilderness. Hebrew, "abides." Instead of fleeing in haste as before, he remains apparently on the higher ground, as he speaks in 1Sa_26:6 of going down to Saul’s camp. And he saw. I.e. learned, was told. It was only when his scouts brought him their report that he knew that Saul was come in very deed, or "for a certainty" (see 1Sa_23:23).BI, "Doth not David hide himself in the hill of Hachilah.The reproach of the enemyDr. Maclaren is specially emphatic in connecting Psa_7:1-17 with this part of David’s history, and indicates its value in helping us to understand the rapid vacillations is Saul’s behaviour.

1. It is headed Shiggaion of David, which he sang unto the Lord. That is, it is an irregular ode; like a stream broken over a bed of rocks and stones, expressing by its uneven measure and sudden changes the emotion of its author. We have often to sing these Shiggaion metres; our songs are frequently broken with sighs and groans.Happy are they who can find themes for singing to the Lord in every sad and bitter experience!2. The title proceeds, concerning the words of Cush, a Benjamite. Who was this Cush? The word means black. It may possibly refer to the colour of the skin and hair, and been given as a familiar designation to some swarthy Benjamite. Some have supposed that it was David’s title for Saul. Others have referred it to Shimei, the Benjamite, whose furious abuse of the king, in the hour of his calamity, elicited such plaintive resignation from him, such passionate resentment from Abishai. If the psalm be carefully examined, it will be found to hear a close resemblance to the words spoken by David, when Saul and he held the brief colloquy outside the cave at Engedi, and afterwards at the hill Hachilah. On comparison of psalm and narrative it seems more than likely that, Cush was one of Saul’s intimate friends and constant companions, and that he was incessantly at work poisoning the king’s mind with malignant and deliberate falsehoods about David.

I. Search your heart to see if these slanders have foundation in fact. Perhaps those quick, envious eyes have discerned weaknesses in your character, of which your

19

closest friends are aware, but they have shrunk from telling you.II. If there is no basis for them, rejoice! How thankful we should be that God has kept us from being actually guilty of the things whereof we are accused! We might have clone them, and worse.III. Take shelter in the righteous judgment of God. We are his servants, and if He is satisfied with us, why should we break our hearts over what our fellow servants say? It is, after all, but a small matter with us to be judged of man’s judgment.IV. Abjure more completely the carnal life. Why do we smart under these unkind and slanderous words, which are as baseless as uncharitable? Is it not because we set too high a value upon the favour and applause of men?V. Leave God to vindicate your good name. (F. B. Meyer, B. A.)

PETT, "1 Samuel 26:2

‘Then Saul arose, and went down to the wilderness of Ziph, having three thousand chosen men of Israel with him, to seek David in the wilderness of Ziph.’

The result of the activity of the Ziphites was that Saul’s paranoia and delusion again took over and he gathered the three units of his standing army to seek for David in the wilderness of Ziph. He again sought his death.

HAWKER, "(2) Then Saul arose, and went down to the wilderness of Ziph, having three thousand chosen men of Israel with him, to seek David in the wilderness of Ziph. (3) And Saul pitched in the hill of Hachilah, which is before Jeshimon, by the way. But David abode in the wilderness, and he saw that Saul came after him into the wilderness.

Observe, how little effect the pretended contrition of Saul had left upon his mind. Alas! until grace makes a saving change upon the heart, there is neither real sorrow, nor true repentance, wrought in the soul.

GUZIK, "DAVID SPARES SAUL’S LIFE AGAINA. David’s second opportunity to kill Saul.

1. (1Sa_26:1-4) The Ziphites betray David again.Now the Ziphites came to Saul at Gibeah, saying, “Is David not hiding in the hill of Hachilah, opposite Jeshimon?” Then Saul arose and went down to the Wilderness of Ziph, having three thousand chosen men of Israel with him, to

20

seek David in the Wilderness of Ziph. And Saul encamped in the hill of Hachilah, which is opposite Jeshimon, by the road. But David stayed in the wilderness, and he saw that Saul came after him into the wilderness. David therefore sent out spies, and understood that Saul had indeed come.

a. Now the Ziphites came to Saul: The Ziphites - the people of the city of Ziph - had betrayed David’s whereabouts to Saul before (1Sa_23:19-23). Now, they try to gain King Saul’s favor again by helping Saul find David again.b. Saul went, having three thousand chosen men of Israel with him, to seek David. This means Saul has gone back on his previous repentance shown in 1Sa_24:16-21. At that time, David had opportunity to kill Saul, but did not take it. When David boldly demonstrated this to Saul, the king was greatly moved emotionally, and publicly repented for his murderous intentions toward David. Saul’s repentance was deep, sincere, and emotional - but it didn’t last very long.

i. Three thousand chosen men reminds us that Saul had a great numerical advantage. 3,000 against 600 is a significant advantage.

c. David therefore sent out spies: David, as wise and capable commander, constantly monitors the movements of Saul. David knows where Saul is, but Saul does not know where David is.

Now that is exactly what happened in study number five. He took three thousand men, he went down and started looking for David again. Now what happened the last time he did that? Do you remember after the robe was cut off and David comes out and says, “see, you were in my hands?” Remember what Saul said? Saul said, "I will never touch you, I love you, you are going to become king of the land, you can trust me, I will never do this again, and he weeps—is this my servant David. Remember all that? “David, please, make a covenant with me that you will not let my family be wiped out when you become king. It is all yielding to David. Now all of the sudden, all of this comes up again. Why? Saul is a man who never repented. It has been two years since that experience. And all of the sudden the Ziphites come up and what happens? Bam! The green-eyed monster of jealousy just rises up and engulfs him. So he grabs three thousand men and he heads down there and it is the same song, second verse, and it is always a whole lot louder and a whole lot worse when you come back to it again the second time. ELLICOTT, "(2) Then Saul arose, and went down to the wilderness of Ziph.—We

21

assume, then, that after the marriage of David with Abigail he and his armed band returned again to his old neighbourhood in the south—in the desert of Judah—the district named after the Hill of Hachilah being, no doubt, in all respects well adapted for the permanent encampment of such a large band as David’s now most certainly was. David, who had been forced on a previous occasion to leave it on account of the hot pursuit of Saul, aided by the Ziphites, who knew the country and its resources so well, probably now supposed, after the protestation of Saul at En-gedi, that he would now at least be left in peace. But he forgot with whom he had to do—forgot the state of mind of his determined foe, and how likely it was that the old mania would return with redoubled force. The Ziphites, however, who knew Saul, and the feeling respecting David which existed at the court of Saul, repeated their old tactics, and sent, as on a previous occasion, to suggest that with their help the obnoxious chieftain and his free lances could be destroyed. The temptation was too great to be resisted; so probably, with the advice of Abner, Saul took the field again. The 3,000 seem to have been the standing force which Saul kept round him in the Gibeah garrison. (See the first notice of this standing army in 1 Samuel 13:2.)

3 Saul made his camp beside the road on the hill of Hakilah facing Jeshimon, but David stayed in the desert. When he saw that Saul had followed him there,

Years ago, an employee in the butcher shop where I worked was caught stealing several hams. He defended himself by saying that he had earned them because he was underpaid. That was a flimsy reason for his sinful behavior.In 1 Samuel we read how David was being hunted by King Saul. One night, David and his companions went to Saul's camp and discovered that the king and his men were asleep. Abishai asked permission to kill Saul, saying that this opportunity had come from God. David could have easily agreed. He undoubtedly remembered the last time he spared Saul's life when he could have killed him. At that time Saul had wept when he learned of David's mercy. He had declared David's fitness to be Israel's next king, and had quit the chase (1 Samuel 24).But Saul had resumed his grim pursuit. David could have reasoned, "I spared him once. God is giving me this second opportunity." David rejected such thinking

22

because he believed it would be wrong to kill the man God had anointed to be Israel's king. So he refused to do it.When you are treated unjustly, it's easy to excuse your own hatred, impurity, dishonesty, and cruelty. But don't give in to the temptation. Like David, do what's right. —Herbert Vander Lugt (Our Daily Bread, Copyright RBC Ministries, Grand Rapids, MI. Reprinted by permission. All rights reserved)Injustices are hard to bear,They make us want to fight;But God knows what we're going through--In time He'll make things right. --SperIf you rationalize one sin, it becomes two.1 Samuel 26:1-26

Unexpected Kindness A missionary was teaching a class of young girls about kindness. She told them about Jesus, who said that a person who gives a cup of water in His name "will by no means lose his reward" (Mark 9:41).The next day the missionary watched as a group of weary men walked into the village square, removed their heavy backpacks, and sat down to rest. A few minutes later, several little girls shyly approached the surprised men and gave them all a drink. Then they ran to the missionary. "Teacher!" they shouted. "We gave those men a drink in Jesus' name."Although Mark 9:41 applies primarily to showing kindness to believers in Christ, we know that we are to "do good to all" (Galatians 6:10) and even give our enemy a drink (Romans 12:20).In today's Bible reading, David had the chance for revenge against King Saul (1 Samuel 26:9). But because David revered God, he showed kindness to the king.Showing unexpected kindness to strangers or enemies will not always change their hearts. But sooner or later someone will wonder why we were kind, and we will have an opportunity to tell about our Lord, who was kind even to His enemies (Romans 5:10).—Herbert Vander Lugt (Our Daily Bread, Copyright RBC Ministries, Grand Rapids, MI. Reprinted by permission. All rights reserved)Do a deed of simple kindness,Though its end you may not see;It may reach, like widening ripples,Down a long eternity. —Norris

23

One act of kindness may teach more about the love of God than many sermons.GILL. "And Saul pitched in the hill of Hachilah, which is before Jeshimon, by the way,.... To the wilderness; the very same place where the Ziphites suggested David was: but David abode in the wilderness; not in the hill of Hachilah, but in the wilderness of Ziph itself: and he saw that Saul came after him into the wilderness; he understood, by some information he had, that Saul had set out from Gibeah, and was coming to seek for him in the wilderness of Ziph; perhaps Jonathan had given him intelligence; however, he was not quite certain, as appears by what follows.HENRY, "David gets information of Saul's movements and acts defensively. He did not march out to meet and fight him; he sought only his own safety, not Saul's ruin; therefore he abode in the wilderness (1Sa_26:3), putting thereby a great force upon himself, and curbing the bravery of his own spirit by a silent retirement, showing more true valour than he could have done by an irregular resistance.

K&D 3-4, "But on the second occasion Saul encamped upon the hill of Hachilah, whilst David had drawn back into the adjoining desert, from which he crept secretly into Saul's encampment, and might, if he had chosen, have put his enemy to death (1Sa_26:3.). There is quite as much difference in the minuter details connected with the sparing of Saul. On the first occasion, Saul entered a cave in the desert of Engedi, whilst David and his men were concealed in the interior of the cave, without having the smallest suspicion that they were anywhere near (1Sa_24:2-4). The second time David went with Abishai into the encampment of Saul upon the hill of Hachilah, while the king and all his men were sleeping (1Sa_26:3, 1Sa_26:5). It is true that on both occasions David's men told him that God had given his enemy into his hand; but the first time they added, Do to him what seemeth good in thy sight; and David cut off the lappet of Saul's coat, whereupon his conscience smote him, and he said, “Far be it from me to lay my hand upon the Lord's anointed” (1Sa_24:5-8). In the second instance, on the contrary, when David saw Saul in the distance lying by the carriage rampart and the army sleeping round him, he called to two of his heroes, Ahimelech and Abishai, to go with him into the camp of the sleeping foe, and then went thither with Abishai, who thereupon said to him, “God hath delivered thine enemy into thy hand: let me alone, that I may pierce him with the spear.” But David rejected this proposal, and merely took away the spear and water-bowl that were at Saul's head (1Sa_26:6-12). And lastly, notwithstanding the fact that the words of David and replies of Saul agree in certain general thoughts, yet they differ entirely in the main. On the first occasion David showed the king that his life had been in his power, and yet he had spared him, to dispel the delusion that he was seeking his life (1Sa_24:10-16). On the second occasion he asked the king why he was pursuing him, and called to him to desist from his pursuit (1Sa_26:18.). But Saul was so affected the first time that he wept aloud, and openly declared that

24

David would obtain the kingdom; and asked him to promise on oath, that when he did, he would not destroy his family (1Sa_24:17-22). The second time, on the contrary, he only declared that he had sinned and acted foolishly, and would to David no more harm, and that David would undertake and prevail; but he neither shed tears, nor brought himself to speak of David's ascending the throne, so that he was evidently much more hardened than before (1Sa_26:21-25). These decided differences prove clearly enough that the incident described in this chapter is not the same as the similar one mentioned in 1 Samuel 23 and 24, but belongs to a later date, when Saul's enmity and hardness had increased.1Sa_26:3-4

When David saw (i.e., perceived) in the desert that Saul was coming behind him, he sent out spies, and learned from them that he certainly had come for a ,ֶאל־ָנֹכון)certainty, as in 1Sa_23:23).ELLICOTT, "(3) But David abode in the wilderness.—The former incident, when David spared Saul’s life, happened long after the information of the Ziphites brought the king to the hill “Hachilah, on the south of Jeshimon.” Then David, on hearing of the march of Saul and his army, retired into the wilderness of Maon. Saul pursued him, and David and his force were then only saved from destruction owing to the news of a formidable Philistine invasion. This intelligence called Saul’s forces away from the pursuit of David. David, unmolested, drew off his band, and sought refuge et En-gedi (1 Samuel 23). After the Philistine invasion had been repulsed, Saul again commenced operations against David; and marched his force to En-gedi, in one of the caves of which took place the scene where David for the first time spared the king’s life (1 Samuel 24). Now, after the information of the Ziphites had brought down Saul and his soldiers from Gibeah, David does not flee in haste to Maon, and thence to En-gedi, nor is Saul called away to any Philistine invasion; but David abides in the wilderness, and his scouts come and tell him that Saul in very deed (1 Samuel 26:4) was come after him in force.PETT, "1 Samuel 26:3‘And Saul encamped in the hill of Hachilah, which is before the Waste (Jeshimon), by the highway. But David abode in the wilderness, and he saw that Saul came after him into the wilderness.’David clearly had advanced notice of his movements, for he and his men moved from their encampment on the Hill of Hachilah before Saul’s arrival, and took refuge in the hot and deserted wilderness. His men would by now have become expert at moving under these conditions, and at fading into the background. Thus David was able to keep watch on the army that had come against him, as it also came into the wilderness to seek him. But the question was, was Saul with it?

25

The fact that the Hill of Hachilah was ‘by the highway’, the main route through the mountains, may explain why David and his men were there. It is quite possible that they robbed non-Israelite caravans as they made their way through the mountains. This may have given a further reason why Saul felt that he had to act against him. On the other hand it may simply be that they lived off game, but wanted to be in as close a touch with things as possible. David would not feel that he was simply surviving. He knew that he had a future in Israel, and would want to keep in touch.

4 he sent out scouts and learned that Saul had definitely arrived. [a]

David therefore sent out spies…To observe if he was coming or come, and where he was, that he might not be surprised by him; for though David knew the Lord was and would be his protection, he thought proper to be upon his guard, and to make use of means for his safety:GILL, "David therefore sent out spies,.... To observe if he was coming or come, and where he was, that he might not be surprised by him; for though David knew the Lord was and would be his protection, he thought proper to be upon his guard, and to make use of means for his safety: and understood that Saul was come in very deed; that he was most certainly come, and come to some certain place; which he himself went to reconnoitre, as in 1Sa_26:5.

HENRY, "He had spies who informed him of Saul's descent, that he had come in very deed (1Sa_26:4.); for he would not believe that Saul would deal so basely with him till he had the utmost evidence of it. (2.) He observed with his own eyes how Saul was encamped, 1Sa_26:5. He came towards the place where Saul and his men had pitched their tents, so near as to be able, undiscovered, to take a view of their entrenchments, probably in the dusk of the evening.

JAMISON, "David ... sent out spies ... and David arose, and came to the place where Saul had pitched — Having obtained certain information of the locality, he seems, accompanied by his nephew (1Sa_26:6), to have hid himself, perhaps disguised, in a neighboring wood, or hill, on the skirts of the royal camp towards night, and waited to approach it under covert of the darkness.

26

PETT, "1 Samuel 26:4‘David therefore sent out spies, and understood that Saul was definitely come.’David then specifically sent out scouts in order to discover whether Saul was with his troops, and as a result discovered that Saul really was among them. The impression given in 1 Samuel 23 & 1 Samuel 24 had been of David and his men in full flight before Saul. Here the impression is very different. David is depicted as confident and in control. It would appear that David’s spy system was now more organised, and that he and his men were now more sure of their ability to move around and keep the situation under control. Having been there for so long this was now his territory. It was rather Saul’s army who were unfamiliar with the terrain. David’s six small ‘military units’ (hundreds) may well also have grown considerably larger.

5 Then David set out and went to the place where Saul had camped. He saw where Saul and Abner son of Ner, the commander of the army, had lain down. Saul was lying inside the camp, with the army encamped around him.

In the first instance Saul had come into the cave, where Davidand his men were camped. This time, Saul is in his camp with his mengathered around him for protection. It seems, the captain of the host,Abner, was lying very near to Saul. Perhaps, this precaution wasbecause of the other incident. Saul felt he was safe from harm,because the 3,000 men were encamped around him.CLARKE Saul lay in the trenchThe word bammaegal, which we translate in the trench, and in the margin in the midst of his carriages, is rendered by some in a ring of carriages, and by others in the circle, i.e., which was formed by his troops. Luther himself translates it wagenburg, a fortress formed of wagons or carriages.

27

As agal signifies any thing round, it may here refer to a round pavilion or tent made for Saul, or else to the form of his camp. The Arabs, to the present day, always form a circle in their encampments, and put their principal officers in the centre. GILL and Saul lay in the trench;or circuit; not in the foss or ditch thrown up, in which an army sometimes lies entrenched; but this is to be understood either of the camp itself, so called, as Ben Gersom, Abarbinel, and Ben Melech think, because it lay in a circular form, that all comers to it on every side might be seen; or else a sort of fortress all around the camp, made of carriages joined together; and as the word signifies a carriage, cart or chariot, it may design the chariot in which Saul slept, as kings have been used to do when not in their houses; and to this the Septuagint agrees, which uses a word that Procopius Gazaeus says signifies one kind of a chariot, and is used of a chariot drawn by mules, in the Greek version of (Isaiah 66:20) ; Grotius observes, kings used to sleep in chariots where there were no houses; (See Gill on 17:20); though he rather seems to have slept, "sub die", in the open air: and the people pitched round about him;both for the sake of honour, and for his greater security; this shows it could not be the loss he laid in, for then they could not pitch around him.

HENRY, "He observed with his own eyes how Saul was encamped, 1Sa_26:5. He came towards the place where Saul and his men had pitched their tents, so near as to be able, undiscovered, to take a view of their entrenchments, probably in the dusk of the evening.JAMISON, "1Sa_26:5-25. David stays Abishai from killing Saul, but takes his spear and cruse.Saul lay in the trench, and the people pitched round about him — Among the nomad people of the East, the encampments are usually made in a circular form. The circumference is lined by the baggage and the men, while the chief’s station is in the center, whether he occupy a tent or not. His spear, stuck in the ground, indicates his position. Similar was the disposition of Saul’s camp - in this hasty expedition he seems to have carried no tent, but to have slept on the ground. The whole troop was sunk in sleep around him.

BENSON, :1 Samuel 26:5. David came to the place where Saul had pitched — Within sight of it; where he might observe how he lay. Saul lay in a trench — Hebrews במעגל bammanggal, in the carriage, or rather, within the circle of the carriages, that he might be safe from any sudden attack.

K&D 25-27, "1Sa_26:5-7Upon the receipt of this information, David rose up with two attendants (mentioned in 1Sa_26:6) to reconnoitre the camp of Saul.

28

When he saw the place where Saul and his general Abner were lying -Saul was lying by the waggon rampart, and the fighting men were encamped round about him - he said to Ahimelech and Abishai, “Who will go down with me into the camp to Saul?” Whereupon Abishai declared himself ready to do so; and they both went by night, and found Saul sleeping with all the people. Ahimelech the Hittite is never mentioned again; but Abishai the son of Zeruiah, David's sister (1Ch_2:16), and a brother of Joab, was afterwards a celebrated general of David, as was also his brother Joab (2Sa_16:9; 2Sa_18:2; 2Sa_21:17). Saul's spear was pressed (stuck) into the ground at his head, as a sign that the king was sleeping there, for the spear served Saul as a sceptre (cf. 1Sa_18:10).HAWKER, "Verses 5-7(5) And David arose, and came to the place where Saul had pitched: and David beheld the place where Saul lay, and Abner the son of Ner, the captain of his host: and Saul lay in the trench, and the people pitched round about him. (6) ¶ Then answered David and said to Ahimelech the Hittite, and to Abishai the son of Zeruiah, brother to Joab, saying, Who will go down with me to Saul to the camp? And Abishai said, I will go down with thee. (7) So David and Abishai came to the people by night: and, behold, Saul lay sleeping within the trench, and his spear stuck in the ground at his bolster: but Abner and the people lay round about him.This bold attempt probably was from some secret influence imparted to David's mind. The sequel of the history of it proves, how sweet a lesson he gathered from it, and therefore it seems not improbable, that the Lord inclined his heart to the undertaking. Reader! it is very profitable at times to observe, how graciously the Lord leads on the minds of his people to do what they themselves would otherwise have never been competent to perform.PULPIT, "1Sa_26:5David arose. It seems as if David could scarcely believe that Saul would thus a second time pursue him; but when the scouts informed him that it was really so, he went in person to reconnoitre Saul’s camp. From the opposite hill he was able to see that he lay in the trench, i.e. the barricade formed by the wagons. At night Saul’s place would be in the centre, with Abner near him, while the rest would lie sleeping around, but all of them within the rampart. When David reconnoitred them they would probably be arranging their wagons to

29

form this barricade.GUZIK 5-8, "(1Sa_26:5-8) David’s second opportunity to kill Saul.So David arose and came to the place where Saul had encamped. And David saw the place where Saul lay, and Abner the son of Ner, the commander of his army. Now Saul lay within the camp, with the people encamped all around him. Then David answered, and said to Ahimelech the Hittite and to Abishai the son of Zeruiah, brother of Joab, saying, “Who will go down with me to Saul in the camp?” And Abishai said, “I will go down with you.” So David and Abishai came to the people by night; and there Saul lay sleeping within the camp, with his spear stuck in the ground by his head. And Abner and the people lay all around him. Then Abishai said to David, “God has delivered your enemy into your hand this day. Now therefore, please, let me strike him at once with the spear, right to the earth; and I will not have to strike him a second time!”

a. Now Saul lay within the camp: The King James Version says that Saul lay within the trench. The translation is pretty literal from the Hebrew, but gives the wrong idea. The idea is that the perimeter of Israeli army camp was marked by the tracks of their wagons, and it was within the perimeter of the camp that Saul slept. Saul lay within the camp is a good translation of the idea.b. So David arose and came to the place where Saul had encamped: The last time David and Saul met, David was simply hiding from Saul, and Saul happened upon the place where David hid. This time, David actively seeks Saul out.

i. So David arose means that David himself went. He could have sent any of his 600 men to do this job, and from a military sense, it made more sense to send someone else. Why should David take on such a dangerous mission? The fact that David did this shows his boldness and courage; the outcome of it all shows God was leading him in it.c. David saw the place where Saul lay, and Abner the son of Ner, the commander of his army: As the entire army sleeps, Saul sleeps near the commander of his army. Then David, with a trusted assistant (Abishai the son of Zeruiah), secretly creeps down to where Saul and Abner sleep. With Saul’s spear stuck in the ground by his head, and all asleep, Saul is completely vulnerable.d. Then Abishai said to David, “God has delivered your enemy into your hand this day”: Here, David receives the same advice as on the previous occasion he had to kill Saul (1Sa_24:4). Each

30

time, David’s associates pointed out that this circumstance was not an accident, God designed it - and the design was for David to take righteous vengeance upon Saul.i. Abishai even makes it easy for David: Please let me strike at once with the spear. David would not raise his hand against Saul; Abishai would do it, and not feel bad about it in the slightest way. David could say to himself and everyone else, “I did not kill Saul.”ii. Abishai also weaves into the matter an element of poetic justice: the spear used to kill Saul would be the king’s own spear, stuck in the ground by his head. The spear that was thrown at David in attempted murder before (1Sa_18:10-11and 1Sa_19:9-10), would now be used as the instrument of the LORD’s righteous judgment! It all might have seemed to be perfectly given from the hand of God!

ELLICOTT, " (5) And David arose.—Immediately after the scouts informed him of the purpose of Saul, and of the near proximity of the royal army David seems to have resolved upon that night adventure which resulted in the episode told in this twenty-sixth chapter.In the trench.—The English Version (Margin) has, “in the midst of his carriages”; Keil renders, “by the wagon rampart”; The LXX. translate the Hebrew word by “covered chariots.” The meaning is, no doubt, that the king lay down within the barricade or rampart formed by the baggage wagons.DON ANDERSONBut you see what the Ziphites did? They stirred up this green monster of jealousy that had kind of been put to rest but had never been dealt with and here it jumps out all over again. Principle: If you do not judge sin properly in your life, it is going to come back worse the second time. 7 And for Saul the Ziphites stirred it up again. He is reliving two years ago all over again. He is right back to square one. Do you have any problems like that in your life -- lust, alcohol, anger, bitterness, or resentment? Have you gotten to the place now where you just excuse it? “Well, that is just the way I am. I am sorry, you are just going to have to learn to live with it.” You know, that’s a chicken’s way out. It is just a stubborn, bullheaded pride that keeps you failing in those areas. Rev. Arthur W. Pink points out, “The action of Saul here provides a solemn illustration of a well-known principle. If sin be not dethroned and mortified,

31

it will soon recover its strength and when a suitable temptation is presented, break out again with renewed force.” David comes into this situation and he surveys these three thousand guys down here in the valley, he is in fellowship with the Lord, and in the middle of it he sees Saul and Abner down there. MACLAREN 5-12It is fashionable at present to regard this incident and the other instance of David’s

sparing Saul, when in his power, as two versions of one event. But it if not improbable that the hunted outlaw should twice have taken refuge in the same place, or that his hiding-place should have been twice betrayed. He had but a small choice of safe retreats, and the Ziphites had motive for a second betrayal in the fact of the first, and of its failure to secure David’s capture. The whole cast of the two incidents is so different that it is impossible to see how the one could have been evolved from the other, and either they are both true, or they are both unhistorical, or, at best, are both the product of fancy working on, and arbitrarily filling up, a very meager skeleton of fact. Many of the advocates of the identity of the incident at the bottom of the two accounts would accept the latter explanation; we take the former.

Saul had three thousand men with him; David had left his little troop ‘in the wilderness,’ and seems to have come with only his two companions, Ahimelech and his own nephew, Abishai, to reconnoiter. He sees, from some height, the camp, with the transport wagons making a kind of barricade in the centre—just as camps are still arranged in South Africa and elsewhere,—and Saul established therein as in a rude fortification. A bold thought flashes into his mind as he looks. Perhaps he remembered Gideon’s daring visit to the camp of Midian. He will go down, and not only into the camp, but ‘to Saul,’ through the ranks and over the barrier. What to do he does not say, but the two fierce fighters beside him think of only one thing as sufficient motive for such an adventure. Abishai volunteers to go with him; no doubt Ahimelech would have been ready also, but two were enough, and three would only have increased risk. So they lay close hid till night fell, and then stole down through the sleeping ranks with silent movements, like a couple of Indians on the war-trail, climbed the barricade, and stood at last where Saul lay, with his spear, as the emblem of kingship, stuck upright at his head, and a cruse of water for slaking thirst, if he awoke, beside him. Those who should have been his guards lay sleeping round him, for a ‘deep sleep from Jehovah was fallen upon them.’ What a vivid, strange picture it is, and how characteristic of the careless discipline of unscientific Eastern warfare!

The tigerish lust for blood awoke in Abishai. Whatever sad, pitying, half-tender thoughts stirred in David as he looked at the mighty form of Saul, with limbs relaxed in slumber, and perhaps some of the gloom and evil passions charmed out of his face, his nephew’s only thought was,’ What a fair mark! what an easy blow!’ He

32

was brutally eager to strike once, and truculently sure that his arm would make sure that once would be enough. He was religious too, after a strange fierce fashion. God-significantly he does not say ‘Jehovah’; his religion was only the vague belief in a deity-had delivered Saul into David’s hands, and it would be a kind of sin not to kill him. How many bloody tragedies that same unnatural alliance of religion and murderous hate has varnished over! Very beautifully does David’s spirit contrast with this. Abishai represents the natural impulse of us all—to strike at our enemies when we can, to meet hate with hate, and do to another the evil that he would do to us.

David here, though he could be fierce and cruel enough sometimes, and had plenty of the devil in him, listens to his nobler self, which listens to God, and, at a time when everything tempted him to avenge himself, resists and overcomes. He is here a saint after the New Testament pattern. Abishai had, in effect, said, ‘Thou shalt love thy neighbour, and hate thine enemy.’ David’s finely-tuned ear heard, long before they were spoken on earth, the great Christian words, 11 say unto you, Love your enemies; do good to them that hate you.’ He knew that Saul had been ‘rejected,’ but he was ‘Jehovah’s anointed,’ and the unction which had rested on that sleeping head lingered still. It was not for David to be the executor of God’s retribution. He left himself and his cause in Jehovah’s hands, and no doubt it was with sorrow and pitying love, not altogether quenched by Saul’s mad hate, that he foresaw that the life which he spared now was certain one day to be smitten. We may well learn the lesson of this story, and apply it to the small antagonisms and comparatively harmless enmities which may beset our more quiet lives. David in Saul’s ‘laager,’ Stephen outside the wall, alike lead up our thoughts to Jesus’ prayer,’ Father, forgive them; for they know not what they do.’

The carrying off of the spear and the cruse was a couch of almost humour, and it, with the ironical taunt flung across the valley to Abner, gives relief to the strain of emotion in the story. Saul’s burst of passionate remorse is morbid, paroxysmal, like his fits of fury, and is sure to foam itself away. The man had no self-control. He had let wild, ungoverned moods master him, and was truly ‘possessed.’ One passion indulged had pushed him over the precipice into insanity, or something like it. Let us take care not to let any passion, emotion, or mood get the upper hand. ‘That way madness lies.’ ‘He that hath no rule over his own spirit is like a city that is broken down, without walls.’

And let us not confound remorse with repentance ‘The sorrow of the world worketh death.’ Saul groveled in agony that day, but tomorrow he was raging again with more than the old frenzy of hate. Many a man says, ‘I have played the fool,’ and yet goes on playing it again when the paroxysm of remorse has stormed itself out. David’s answer was by no means effusive, for he had learned how little Saul’s regrets were to be trusted. He takes no notice of the honeyed words of invitation to

33

return, and will not this time venture to take back the spear and cruse, as he had done, on the previous occasion, the skirt of Saul’s robe. He solemnly appeals to Jehovah’s righteous judgment to determine his and Saul’s respective ‘righteousness and faithfulness.’ He is silent as to what that judgment may have in reserve for Saul, but for himself he is calmly conscious that, in the matter of sparing Saul’s life, he has done right, and expects that God will deliver him ‘out of all tribulation.’ That is not self-righteous boasting, although it does not exactly smack of the Christian spirit; but it is faith clinging to the confidence that God is ‘not unrighteous to forget’ his servant’s obedience, and that the innocent will not always be the oppressor’s victim.

What a strange, bewildered, self-contradictory chaos of belief and intention is revealed in poor, miserable Saul’s parting words! He blesses the man whom he is hunting to slay. He knows that all his wild efforts to destroy him are foredoomed to failure, and that David ‘shall surely prevail’; and yet he cannot give up fighting against the inevitable,—that is, against God. How many of us are doing the very same thing—rushing on in a course of life which we know, when we are sane, to be dead against God’s will, and therefore doomed to utter collapse some day!COKE, ". And Saul lay in the trench— Within the trench, Houbigant; which appears to be the true meaning of the original word. The Chaldee renders it the same. This entrenchment is generally thought to have consisted of chariots joined together; and therefore Le Clerc renders it, not improperly, intra ambitum plaustrorum. The LXX with no great propriety read; in his chariot. The author of the Observations is of a different opinion from Houbigant. "One can hardly imagine," says he, "that the Hebrew word מעגל mangal, signifies a ditch and bank thrown up; as one would suppose our translators apprehended, from their using the word trench; for it appears from the history, that no precautions were taken against David. Nor does it seem to mean a ring of carriages, as it is supposed in the Margins of our Bibles, and as Buxtorf interprets the word; for, most probably, the parting of carriages was impracticable in that mountainous country. It seems then simply to mean the round which the troops formed, in the midst of whom, as in the place of honour, Saul slept. The view which D'Arvieux gives us of a modern Arab camp, agrees perfectly well with this account of Saul; only supposing that, for the sake of expedition, they carried no tents with them: for he tells us, that, when the disposition of the ground will permit, an Arab camp is always round, the prince being in the middle, and the Arabs about him, but so as to leave a respectful distance between them. Add to this, that their lances are fixed near them in the ground, all the day long, ready for action. When David is represented as sometimes secreting himself in the night, when he was with his armies, 2 Samuel 9-17:8 it is to be supposed to refer to his not lodging in the middle of the camp, which was a proper place for a king, the better to avoid any surprize from enemies." Observations, p. 347. See Hom. Iliad. ix. ver. 47. and Sil. Ital. lib. vii. ver. 291.REFLECTIONS.—Good impressions are quickly worn out, where the heart is not

34

truly turned to God.1. Saul returns to the pursuit of David, still retaining the old rancour, and perhaps instigated by the Ziphites, who, from their former ill behaviour to David, might be apprehensive of suffering for it, should he ever come to the throne. Note; (1.) One sin usually involves the soul in another, so connected is the chain of evil. (2.) A little instigation will revive an old grudge, where the reconciliation is not sincere.2. David gets information of Saul's motions, and, as before, trusts not to his sword, but to concealment, for his safety. So unwilling was he, under every provocation, to appear in arms against his sovereign. PETT 5-7. "Verses 5-7David Pays A Secret Visit To Saul And Enters His Camp (1 Samuel 26:5-7).David then took two of his best men with him and went to an eminence from which he could observe Saul’s camp, and from there he saw the lay out of the camp, and the place where Saul and Abner slept among the wagons. Then that night, taking one of his men, he evaded the guards and entered the camp, making his way stealthily towards the spot where Saul lay asleep, alongside Abner, his commander-in-chief. Stuck in the ground at Saul’s head was his ceremonial spear, the symbol of his kingship. The situation was totally different from the previous time when they had fled from Saul and been hiding in a cave, with Saul coming into their power by ‘accident’. Here David was in control, and Saul came into his power by design.Analysis.a And David arose, and came to the place where Saul had encamped, and David beheld the place where Saul lay, and Abner the son of Ner, the captain of his host, and Saul lay within the place of the wagons, and the people were encamped round about him (1 Samuel 26:5).b Then answered David and said to Ahimelech the Hittite, and to Abishai the son of Zeruiah, brother to Joab, saying, “Who will go down with me to Saul to the camp?” And Abishai said, “I will go down with you” (1 Samuel 26:6).a So David and Abishai came to the people by night, and, behold, Saul lay sleeping within the place of the wagons, with his spear stuck in the ground at his head, and Abner and the people lay round about him (1 Samuel 26:7).Note that in ‘a’ Saul was sleeping, along with Abner, among the wagons, with his people around him, and in the parallel he is described as being the same. Central in ‘b’ is David’s decision to enter the enemy camp. Note how the distinctive features of this venture are being accentuated by the use of small chiasmuses. This is the first stage, entry into the enemy camp.

35

1 Samuel 26:5‘And David arose, and came to the place where Saul had encamped, and David beheld the place where Saul lay, and Abner the son of Ner, the captain of his host, and Saul lay within the place of the wagons, and the people were encamped round about him.’Leaving his troops in hiding, David, more confident now than he had been when Saul had previously hunted for them, took two of his best men, Ahimelech the Hittite and Abishai, the son of Zeruiah (and therefore Joab’s brother), and led them to an eminence from which he could observe what was happening in Saul’s camp. From there he observed the lay out of the camp and exactly where Saul and Abner had their sleeping quarters. This was among the supply wagons, which were parked in the centre of the sleeping army.

6 David then asked Ahimelech the Hittite and Abishai son of Zeruiah, Joab's brother, "Who will go down into the camp with me to Saul?" "I'll go with you," said Abishai.

BARNES, "Ahimelech the Hittite - Only mentioned here. Uriah was also a Hittite.Abishai - He was son of Zeruiah, David’s sister, but probably about the same age

as David. He because very famous as a warrior 2Sa_23:18, but was implicated with his brother Joab in the murder of Abner in retaliation for the death of their brother Asahel 2Sa_3:30.

CLARKE, "Abishai the son of Zeruiah - She was David’s sister; and therefore Abishai and Joab were nephews to David.GILL, "Then answered David,.... Or addressed himself to the two following persons: and said to Ahimelech the Hittite; who was either an Hittite by birth, but was

36

become a proselyte, or he was an Israelite that had dwelt among the Hittites, and so had this name given him; the former seems most probable; some say (k) this was Uriah the Hittite: and to Abishai the son of Zeruiah, brother to Joab; Zeruiah was the sister of David, 1Ch_2:15; and these were two sons of hers, who very probably joined David at the cave of Adullam, 1Sa_22:1, saying, who will go down with me to Saul to the camp? that is, which of you two? and Abishai said, I will go down with thee; the other being timorous, or Abishai being most forward spoke first.

HENRY, "Here is, I. David's bold adventure into Saul's camp in the night, accompanied only by his kinsman Abishai, the son of Zeruiah. He proposed it to him and to another of his confidants (1Sa_26:6), but the other either declined it as too dangerous an enterprise, or at least was content that Abishai, who was forward to it, should run the risk of it rather than himself. Whether David was prompted to do this by his own courage, or by an extraordinary impression upon his spirits, or by the oracle, does not appear; but, like Gideon, he ventured through the guards, with a special assurance of the divine protection.PULPIT, "1Sa_26:6Ahimelech the Hittite. Though a portion of this once powerful people (Gen_15:20; Jdg_1:26) was reduced to the position of bondmen (1Ki_9:20), yet others had retained their independence, and their kings even are spoken of (ibid. 10:29; 2Ki_7:6). As Ahimelech is mentioned before Abishai, he must have held an honourable place with. David, as did subsequently another Hittite, Uriah (2Sa_11:3). Abishai the son of Zeruiah. Zeruiah is described in 1Ch_2:16 as sister to Jesse’s sons, but apparently only by adoption, as both she and Abigail seem to have been daughters of the king of Ammon (2Sa_17:25), whence probably the absence of any direct reference to their father. Abishai, who was probably about David’s age, and his two brothers were high in rank among David’s heroes (1Ch_11:6, 1Ch_11:20, 1Ch_11:26), and apparently he was one of the three captains who, when David was in the cave of Adullam, broke through the host of the Philistines to fetch him water from the well of Bethlehem. Who will go down? It is evident that David and his men remained upon the mountains, which extend from Maon far to the southwest. Saul’s camp, being "by the way," i.e. near the road, would be on the lower ground. David having personally examined it, and seen that the watches were ill kept, asks which of the two will accompany him for the more hazardous enterprise of penetrating into it. Ahimelech seems prudently to have declined, but Abishai at once offers his services.

37

BENSON "1 Samuel 26:6-7. Ahimelech the Hittite — A valiant man of that nation, who was a proselyte to the Jewish religion; and not only followed David, but was always near to his person. Abishai — Brother to Joab, the son of Zeruiah, David’s sister. His father is not named, either because he was now dead, or because he was an obscure person. Abishai said, I will go — Either Ahimelech declined it, as too hazardous an enterprise; or Abishai, being a forward young man, offered himself while the other stood deliberating. David and Abishai came to the people by night — A bold attempt for two men to come into the midst of an army of three thousand chosen men. But it should be considered, 1st, That David had a particular assurance that God would preserve him to the kingdom; and, 2d, That he probably had a particular impression from God, exciting him to this work, and, possibly, God might reveal to him that he had cast them into this deep sleep, in order that David might have this second opportunity of manifesting his innocence toward Saul.

ELLICOTT, " (6) Ahimelech the Hittite.—The Hittites were one of the old Canaanitish peoples; we hear of them round Hebron in the time of Abraham (Genesis 15:20). The conquering Israelites subdued, but did not exterminate them; and gradually, in the days of the weakness and divisions which succeeded the first conquest, the Hittites, in common with many other of the old tribes, seeem to have enjoyed the Land of Promise with the children of Israel in a kind of joint occupation. We find the Hittites ranking here among David’s trusted faithful men; and later we hear of another Hittite, Uriah, the husband of Bathsheba, filling an important post in the royal army, and possessing a house and an establishment in the capital city of Jerusalem. We do not hear again of this Ahimelech in the sacred record.

Abishai the son of Zeruiah.—Zeruiah was David’s sister. Abishai, later one of the famous generals of David, was brother to Joab, afterwards the captain of the royal host. Abishai was apparently nearly of the same age as David. There was a third younger brother also high in the favour of his kinsman David—Asahel, celebrated especially for his speed in running. Between these three sons of Zeruiah and Abner a blood feud seems to have existed. Abner, the near relative, and captain of the host of Saul throughout that monarch’s reign, is closely associated with the fortunes of Saul. It has been supposed, and with some probability, that he was among the determined foes of David. Dreading the advent of the son of Jesse to the throne, he saw in his elevation the signal of the downfall of all Saul’s family and friends. He, Abner, surely would no longer be captain of the host of Israel. The words of David to Abner in this chapter (1 Samuel 26:14-16) seem to point to the fierce hatred which existed between them. The bloody sequel to the feud between the great kinsman of Saul and the three brothers, the famous sons of David’s sister, is strictly in accordance with what we should expect in these fierce, wild days. Some time after Saul’s death Abner slew the young Asahel, who seems to have been passionately loved by his elder brother. Abner became reconciled to David, but the reconciliation

38

saved not the friend of Saul and the slayer of Asahel from the vengeance of Joab and Abishai, who murdered the illustrious Abner in cold blood.

And Abishai said, I will go down with thee.—Ahimelech seems to have backed out of the perilous night enterprise, but Abishai, the son of Zeruiah, with the reckless gallantry and the intense devotion to David which, with all their pride and self will, ever characterised these famous warrior kinsmen of the king, at once volunteered to go with his loved chief.

CONSTABLE, "Verses 6-12

Abishai"s offer to kill Saul

Ahimelech the Hittite may have been a foreign mercenary (cf. Uriah the Hittite, 2 Samuel 11:3). The writer may have mentioned his Hittite connection to show the extent of David"s appeal. Abishai was David"s nephew, one of the sons of his sister Zeruiah (cf. 1 Chronicles 2:15-16). Joab, who later became David"s commander-in-chief, was Abishai"s brother.

Saul had used his spear to attack David three times (cf. 1 Samuel 18:10; 1 Samuel 19:9-10; 1 Samuel 20:33). It was, therefore, an instrument of death. It was also the symbol of Saul"s rule, similar to a scepter (cf. 1 Samuel 22:6). Abishai"s viewpoint was carnal. He concluded that because God had given David the upper hand he should use it to do away with his rival ( 1 Samuel 26:8; cf. 1 Samuel 24:4). David had used similar words when he promised to kill Goliath (cf. 1 Samuel 17:46), as had Saul in describing how he would kill David with his spear (cf. 1 Samuel 18:11).

David believed, however, that since God had anointed Saul it was not his place to do him harm ( 1 Samuel 26:9; cf. 1 Samuel 24:6-7). His reply to Abishai begins ( 1 Samuel 26:9) and ends ( 1 Samuel 26:11) with the reason David would not permit Abishai to kill Saul: he was the Lord"s anointed. In the middle of this reply, David mentioned alternative ways by which God might terminate Saul"s life ( 1 Samuel 26:10). He might die from some physical affliction, as Nabal had (cf. 1 Samuel 25:38), or of natural causes, or in battle (cf. ch31). David reminded Abishai that God could deal with Saul without their help.

39

David"s reason for entering Saul"s camp was not to kill him but to teach him a lesson. By taking Saul"s spear, David would teach the king that he had the power of death, but chose to spare Saul"s life rather than take it. This symbolic act also communicated that the right to rule would be David"s eventually. By taking his water jug, a life-giving vessel since life in the Judean wilderness depended on drinking water, David taught him that he had the power to take Saul"s life. Perhaps the jug of water also symbolized that refreshment and blessing would also be David"s portion from the Lord. It was really the Lord who defended David by making Saul and all of his men sleep soundly ( 1 Samuel 26:12).

PETT, "1 Samuel 26:6

‘Then answered David and said to Ahimelech the Hittite, and to Abishai the son of Zeruiah, brother to Joab, saying, “Who will go down with me to Saul to the camp?” And Abishai said, “I will go down with you.” ’

There seems little doubt that Saul and Abner were so confident that David and his men would be fleeing from before them as they had before, that they took few, if any, extra precautions, being quite certain that they would be undisturbed. No doubt sentries were posted, but they felt able to sleep soundly, confident in the security of their camp. After all, who was there to bother them?

This situation was too tempting for a now more confident David. And determining to leave one of his men on watch, so that if necessary he could report back anything that might happen to the others, he asked which of the two men would like to join him on a visit by night to the enemy camp. It would obviously be a risky business but Abishai immediately responded and volunteered.

Ahimelech the Hittite was probably a Hittite native to Canaan, for groups of Hittites (sons of Heth) had been resident in Canaan since before the time of Abraham in this very region (Genesis 23). His familiarity with the region from birth may well have been why he was one of the party. Abishai was one of David’s mighty men. His mother Zeruiah was David’s sister. He was bother to Joab who would later become David’s commander-in-chief. He was not one of the first ‘Three’, but was head of the second ‘Three’ (2 Samuel 23:18-19). He may well have been seen as especially skilled at nocturnal adventures. He would later save David’s life during a battle with the Philistines (2 Samuel 21:17), and was one of the three who spectacularly

40

brought water to David when he was thirsty (2 Samuel 23:17). He was thus a skilled warrior and a daredevil.

Abishai the son of ZeruiahShe was David's sister; and therefore Abishai and Joab were nephews to David.Ray Pritchard, "Suddenly an idea hits David’s mind. He’s going to try to enter the camp. It’s an insane idea, a suicide mission. One man against 3,000. David turns to the two men with him—Abishai and Ahimelech—and says, “Who will go with me?” In the army you learn very quickly never to volunteer for anything, but Abishai lets his loyalty get the best of his common sense, and says, “I’ll go.”

DON ANDERSONNow you looked at that and you have a whole string of new characters and you got lost for a second. You might be thinking Ahimelech didn’t he get massacred at Nob? This is not the same Ahimelech. This is Ahimelech the Hittite. He evidently was a mercenary. There were several of those guys who came over and Hittites were fabulous military men. Some of the most courageous men on David’s army were Hittites. Who was the other Hittite that we are going to meetin the future? Uriah, the husband of Bathsheba, is also a Hittite. Now there are a couple of other guys here and some names that kind of threw you for a minute. Let’s see if we can get some information so we can put some flesh on these people. Who is Zeruiah? That is David’s sister. Can you imagine introducing your sister to somebody and saying, this is Zeruiah, my sister? Who in the world would name their daughter Zeruiah? But that is what Jesse and his wife called David’s sister. And she had three sons. My three sons—it is real easy to remember that—Joab, Abishai, and Asahel. You are going to meet 9 Asahel, he is going to slip into the picture in one of the studiesin part two and then he is going to be gone. Abishai and Joab you are going to love. Joab is the counterpart to David that Abner is to Saul. He is his military commander and general through most of David’s term of service as king. You are going to like Joab. Joab and Abishai are brothers. And you are going to love Abishai if you like guys who are always ready for a rumble. I mean Abishai every time he gets close he just wants to hack them. Shemia is cursing him in a future study and he just wants to lop his head off. You are going to

41

see him today in the same way. If you mess around with Abishai you are going to come out a loser. He is just that way. So David turns to these two guys and he says, you know, I am going down there, who will go down to the camp with me? Can you imagine how they are feeling? Looking at three thousand guys laying down there sacking out. And Abner and Saul are in the middle. And who is going to go? Ahimelech knows that it is better to be a live chicken than a dead duck so he just keeps his mouth shut, he just zips it quick and says nothing. 10 Abishai, he doesn’t care what the odds are, one against three thousand, right away he volunteers. Yeah, David, I will go with you. So we have an uncle and a nephew here getting ready to go down into this camp in this very precarious set of circumstances to teach Saul a lesson. DEFFINBAUGHDavid’s scouts locate Saul’s camp, and accompanied by at least two men, David goes to the campsite.125 Two men seem to be near David, Ahimelech the Hittite (not to be confused with Ahimelech the priest, who was killed by Saul) and Abishai the son of Zeruiah, who was the brother of Joab and Asahel (2 Samuel 2:18). David speaks to these two men, requesting that one of them go with him down to Saul’s camp. Ahimelech appears to remain silent, while Abishai volunteers.Imagine for the moment that you are Abishai. Saul has carefully positioned himself at the innermost part of the circle of his troops. Abner, a heroic warrior and Saul’s body guard, is lying right next to the king. You carefully pick your way through this maze of human bodies, fearing that at any moment someone will awaken. It seems impossible that someone among these 3,000 men is not on watch. You hear a soldier snoring very loudly and wonder if you should turn him on his side, lest he wake up the others. You step on a stick, and it snaps -- your heart nearly stops. You can hardly believe you have actually made it as you stand there with David, looking down at Saul sleeping peacefully, with Abner close by. Close to Saul’s head is his spear, thrust into the ground, and his water container.126If you are Abishai, it would not take long to figure out what should come next. Knowing from the incident in the cave that David is squeamish about killing Saul, Abishai whispers to David, “God has delivered Saul into your hand today. Now, then, let me finish Saul off with his own spear. It will only take one blow, I assure you.” Abishai reasons: “True, David refused to kill Saul in the cave, but he surely has learned his lesson by now. If David is reluctant to do it, I will. Surely David did not ask for volunteers to come down here with him, only to look at the king and then leave.” What an interesting debate it must have been between David and Abishai, as they strongly disagree, yet desperately try to keep from waking up Saul or any of his men.David forbids Abishai to kill Saul for essentially the same reasons he verbalized in the cave in chapter 24. No one can lift his hand against the Lord’s anointed without

42

incurring guilt.127 In verse 10, David goes beyond what he has said before. “As surely as God lives, He will be the one to remove Saul,” David assures Abishai. David does not know how, but after his experience with Nabal and Abigail, he knows that God can accomplish His will in any number of ways. He could strike Saul dead, Saul could die naturally, or he might be killed in battle. These are just some of the ways God could remove Saul, but in each case, it will not be by David’s hand, nor by the hand of any of his men.David has come for Saul’s spear and water container, and that is all. So he takes up Saul’s spear and water jug, instructing Abishai to come along with him. I can see Abishai shaking his head as they make their way back through that maze of bodies surrounding Saul and finally slip into the safety of darkness. “That was a suicide mission! All that only to take a spear and a water jug.” Whether they knew it or not, the author of our text informs us that this was not just a stroke of good luck, or even a good military maneuver. God had miraculously put these 3,000 men to sleep. David and Abishai could have been yelling at each another (Is it possible they were?), and no one would have awakened. Abishai could have stumbled and fallen upon a couple of these soldiers, and they still would have been safe. I wonder how many times in history men have assumed they had a really close call, or they did a spectacular job at some task, without ever knowing that behind it all was the hand of God.COFFMAN, "DAVID SPARED SAUL'S LIFE A SECOND TIME"Then David said to Ahimelech the Hittite, and to Joab's brother Abishai, "Who will go down with me into the camp to Saul"? And Abishai said, "I will go down with you." So David and Abishai went to the army by night; and there lay Saul sleeping within the encampment with his spear stuck in the ground at his head; and Abner and the army lay around him. Then said Abishai to David, "God has given your enemy into your hand this day; now therefore let me pin him to the earth, with one stroke of the spear, and I will not strike him twice." But David said to Abishai, "Do not destroy him; for who can put forth his hand against the Lord's anointed, and be guiltless"? And David said, "As the Lord lives, the Lord will smite him; or his day shall come to die; or he shall go down into battle and perish. The Lord forbid that I should put forth my hand against the Lord's anointed; but take now the spear that is at his head, and the jar of water, and let us go." So David took the spear and the jar of water from Saul's head; and they went away. No man saw it, or knew it, nor did any awake; for they were all asleep, because a deep sleep from the Lord had fallen upon them.""Ahimelech the Hittite" (1 Samuel 26:6). This man and Uriah are the only Hittites named in First Samuel. Esau had Hittite wives, whose names are not given. Those people were one of the seven great nations displaced by Israel in their occupation of Canaan."Abishai" (1 Samuel 26:6), along with Joab and Asahel were children of Zeruiah,

43

who according to 1 Chronicles 2:16 was a sister of David. David, being the youngest in the family of Jesse probably had a number of cousins his own age or older. "Abishai saved David's life in one of the Philistine wars (2 Samuel 21:17), was implicated in the murder of Abner (2 Samuel 3:30) and remained faithful to David during the rebellion of Absalom."[6]"There lay Saul, with his spear stuck in the ground at his head" (1 Samuel 26:7). "The lance standing upright is still the sign of the Sheik's quarters among the Arabs."[7]Abishai here eagerly wanted to kill Saul, but David forbade it, because Saul was "the Lord's anointed." This establishes the fact, as mentioned by Paul, that "The powers that be are ordained of God" (Romans 13:1), and regardless of how wicked and tyrannical a duly-authorized head of government may be, he should not be murdered by his subjects."The Lord shall smite him, or his day shall come to die" (1 Samuel 26:10). This from the mouth of David was a prophecy, fulfilled eventually in the death of Saul in battle. At this point in David's life, he was honoring the prohibition in the Pentateuch against one's taking vengeance into his own hands, a lesson which was emphasized in his ears by Abigail."A deep sleep from the Lord had fallen upon them" (1 Samuel 26:12). This was no ordinary sleep. It was God's providential protection of David. As Young said, "The same term is used of the sleep of Adam while the Lord created Eve from a rib taken from Adam's side while he slept."[8]A passage in one of the Psalms seems applicable to what happened here, although the usual interpretation applies it to the destruction of the army of Sennacherib.The stouthearted were stripped of their spoil;They sank into sleep;All the men of war were unable to use their hands.At thy rebuke, O God of Jacob,Both rider and horse lay stunned.- Psalms 76:5-6 (RSV)."How easily can God weaken the strongest, befool the wisest, and battle the most watchful! Let all of God's friends therefore trust him and all his enemies fear him."[9]

44

7 So David and Abishai went to the army by night, and there was Saul, lying asleep inside the camp with his spear stuck in the ground near his head. Abner and the soldiers were lying around him.

1. Rick Gillespie-MobleyDavid decided to forget about Saul and go on with his life. He found this beautiful woman by the name of Abigail and took her as his wife. No sooner than the two of them got together and before they could celebrate with a honeymoon, the Ziphites again went and he told Saul. King Saul, if you still want to get David, we know where he is. So in chapter 24 Saul was all forgiving. But by chapter 26 things had changed.King Saul’s hatred had the time to be stirred up again, so once again with his special private army of 3,000 choice soldiers he went after David. At first David could not believe that the king was coming after him again. “God we already been through this, what is the problem. Didn’t you see what I did the last time he came after me. God you have got to cut me some slack somewhere.” So David sent some spies to make sure Saul was definitely coming after him. When they got back, they said, “Oh yes brother, he is definitely coming after you.” David said, “Man I have to go see this thing for myself. There has to be a mistake.”Sometimes there is a mistake, but the mistake is on us. David felt, he had already demonstrated his willingness to not take matters in his own hand to become king. But do you know your victory over an area last week or last month does not mean you are going to easily conquer than area the next time it comes up.Most of us know what its like to have been tempted and came so close to falling, but we said no to it. We thanked God for saving us from it and promised not to get in that situation again. But then Satan came back in a slightly different way at a time when we were not quite as strong, and this time we took his bait and failed God and ourselves, simply because we thought since I won over it before, I’ll win over it again.What keeps us from sinning is not our trust in our ability to handle it, but rather the grace of God which always manages a door of escape for us if we would have taken it sooner. What area are you facing today in which deep inside, you know you are not letting God do it His way? Keep in mind, to stay in God’s will, timing is everything.

45

When David saw King Saul’s army that night surrounding the king, I don’t know what he was thinking. I don’t know if he was so tired of being chased that he was going to go in and surrender to the king. I don’t know if he was thinking, this is it we’re going to fight and settle this thing once and for all. I don’t know if he knew what he was going to do. But he asked Ahimelech and Abishai, “who will go down into the camp with me to Saul.”Abishai, quickly said, “ I’ll go with you.” I think if I had been there I would have been with Ahimelech and agreed to pray for them while they were gone. Two men against 3,000 trained warriors. What could they possibly hope to accomplish? Well they headed into the camp. They had to get all the way to the center of the camp to reach Saul, because the army was surrounding him. To their amazement, most of the soldiers are asleep along the path they have chosen to take. They finally get all the way to the center of the camp.GILL "So David and Abishai came to the people by night,.... Josephus (l) wrongly says, that he took with him both Abishai and Ahimelech; he chose to have but one, for the greater secrecy. This was a bold enterprise, for two men to go into a camp of three thousand men, though it was in the night; when though they might suppose the greater part of them were asleep, yet they could not well suppose this of all, and especially of the guards or sentinels; but no doubt David was moved to this, not merely by the dint of his natural courage, but by the Spirit of God, by whom he might be assured of protection, and that Saul and the people were cast into a deep sleep by the Lord, as they were, 1Sa_26:12; and this the Lord moved him to, that he might have an opportunity a second time to convince Saul of his innocence, and that he had no design upon his life: and, behold, Saul lay sleeping within the trench; See Gill on 1Sa_26:5, and his spear stuck in the ground at his bolster; ready to take up and defend himself, should he be surprised; or this was his sceptre, which he always carried about with him, as an ensign of royalty, and by which very probably David knew which was Saul's tent or couch, where he slept: but Abner and the people lay round about him; as in 1Sa_26:5.

HENRY, "The posture he found the camp in Saul lay sleeping in the trench, or, as some read it, in his chariot, and in the midst of his carriages, with his spear stuck in the ground by him, to be ready if his quarters should by beaten up (1Sa_26:7); and all the soldiers, even those that were appointed to stand sentinel, were fast asleep,1Sa_26:12. Thus were their eyes closed and their hands bound, for a deep sleep from the Lord had fallen upon them; something extraordinary there was in it that they should all be asleep together, and so fast asleep that David and Abishai walked and talked among them, and yet none of them stirred. Sleep, when God gives it to his beloved, is their rest and refreshment; but he can, when he pleases, make it to his enemies their imprisonment. Thus are the stout-hearted spoiled; they have slept their sleep, and none of the men of might have found their hands, at thy rebuke, O God of

46

Jacob! Psa_76:5, Psa_76:6. It was a deep sleep from the Lord, who has the command of the powers of nature, and makes them to serve his purposes as he pleases. Whom God will disable, or destroy, he binds up with a spirit of slumber, Rom_11:8. How helpless do Saul and all his forces lie, all, in effect, disarmed and chained! and yet nothing is done to them; they are only rocked asleep. How easily can God weaken the strongest, befool the wisest, and baffle the most watchful! Let all his friends therefore trust him and all his enemies fear him.PULPIT, "1Sa_26:7, 1Sa_26:8The two accordingly go by night, or "at night," as soon as night came on, and find Saul asleep within the trench, i.e. inside the wagon rampart, as in 1Sa_26:5, and his spear, the sign of his royal authority, stuck in the ground; not at his bolster, but "at his head; and so in 1Sa_26:11, 1Sa_26:12, 1Sa_26:16. The word literally signifies "the place where the head is." Like David’s men in 1Sa_24:4, Abishai sees in Saul’s defenceless condition a proof that it was God’s will that he should die, but there is a difference of language in the Hebrew which the A.V. does not represent. There the word rendered deliver is really give; here it is "hath locked up." At once. Hebrew, "once." Abishai would pierce him through with a single stroke so thoroughly that no second blow would be necessary. The purpose of this would be to prevent an outcry.

ELLICOTT, " (7) Within the trench.—As above, in 1 Samuel 26:5, “within the barrier of the wagons.”

His spear . . . at his bolster.—“Bolster,” literally, the place where his head is, better rendered at his head; and so in 1 Samuel 26:11-12; 1 Samuel 26:16. The same Hebrew word occurs in the narration of Jacob’s dream (Genesis 28:11); it is there rendered in our English Version, “his pillows.” It was the tall spear which ever seems to have been in Saul’s hand, or placed close to him. We read of it in battle in his hand, and in the council chamber and at the state banquet it was within his reach, and now it was evidently reared upright beside the sleeping king. “I noticed at all the encampments which we passed that the sheik’s tent was distinguished from the rest by a tall spear stuck upright in the ground in front of it; and it is the custom when a party set out on an excursion for robbery or for war, that when they halt to rest the spot where the chief reclines or rests is thus designated”—Thomson, Land and the Book.

COKE, "1 Samuel 26:7-12. So David and Abishai came to the people, &c.— This was a bold and hazardous undertaking, which would have been certain death to David had he been discovered. But David was bold and intrepid; and his and Abishai's gallantry in this affair deserves certainly to be no less celebrated than that

47

of Ulysses and Diomed, when they went as spies to the Trojan camp. But there is more in David to be commended than his gallantry. Who can help admiring his magnanimity and piety? What man, but David, with a crown so near in view, would have resisted the fair and inviting temptation? David rejects it with abhorrence, from the principles of religion and duty. Glorious moderation and fortitude of mind! Was ever resolution more generous and loyal? One stroke would have fixed his enemy dead on the spot, put an end to his fears, and mounted him on a throne: and yet, he starts back at the proposal of it: the prospect of a throne will not tempt him to a base, disloyal, and cruel action. Houbigant observes, that the sleep of Adam in Paradise is expressed in the same words as the present; whence he concludes that, as well as this, to have been supernatural. Some imagine, that the cruse mentioned in this 12th verse was a clepsydra, or one of those water watch measures used by the ancients in their camps; others, that it was only a vessel of water kept for washing, in case of legal pollutions; and others, that it was placed there for drink, in case of thirst; which the heat of the season might well cause, as it was about the time of sheep-shearing.

REFLECTIONS.—David, having observed the camp, resolves on a dangerous enterprize; though, it is to be presumed, he had some divine admonition for this step, which would otherwise appear rash and unwarrantable.

1. He goes down to Saul's camp in the night with Abishai, who offered to be his companion. A deep sleep from God had seized the host: Saul lay in the midst of the camp, and his army asleep around him, to the very sentinels. So soon can God disarm the mighty, and leave them a prey to the feeble.

2. Abishai, eager to improve the advantage which so remarkable a providence gave them, concludes that God designed Saul's destruction, and offers, at a stroke, to dispatch him.

3. David refuses the offer, and stays his hand. He uses the same arguments as before, viz. the sacred office with which Saul was invested, and the allegiance therefore due to him. He doubted not but God would avenge his quarrel by some sudden judgment; Saul would fall in battle, or die a natural death; and he is content to wait the Lord's leisure, rather choosing to suffer in the flesh for a while, than by such a blow to bring guilt on his conscience. Note; They who know the evil of sin, will think a crown too dearly purchased by the least transgression.

4. Though he will not hurt him, he takes away with him the evidences of his power 48

to have done so, his spear and cruse; and thus in safety they retire. Note; They are secure in the midst of danger, from whom God gives a charge to the angel of death to withhold his hand.

PETT, "1 Samuel 26:7

‘So David and Abishai came to the people by night, and, behold, Saul lay sleeping within the place of the wagons, with his spear stuck in the ground at his head, and Abner and the people lay round about him.’

The two then made their way into the enemy camp by night, successfully evaded the sentries, and making their way through the hillside camp, came to the spot where Saul was lying among the wagons with his ceremonial spear stuck in the ground at his head. It marked the spot where the king lay so that all the troops would know who lay there. It was the symbol of his authority and presence, just as royal standards would later indicate the same for later kings. Around him lay Abner, his commander-in-chief and cousin, no doubt with his other commanders, surrounded by the whole army.

(David and Abishai would know that hillside like the back of their hands, having been encamped there a number of times. They would thus know all its routes, even in the dark. And once past the sentries there was no reason why anyone should suspect two armed men walking through the encampment. No one was expecting anyone to attempt to enter the camp. There would only be danger for them when they came close up to those who knew them both well).

8 Abishai said to David, "Today God has delivered your enemy into your hands. Now let me pin him to the ground with one thrust of my spear; I won't strike him twice."

49

The best of friends can have different opinions about what is wise to do, and this friend of David is fully convinced that God has led them to this place and time to kill Saul end his reign of terror concerning David. It was so obvious to him, and yet David did not see it that way at all, and he was the one in command, and so his perspective prevailed. Saul could have easily been killed on the spot with one swift jab of the spear. Abiahai is so sure he would not need a second jab, and so we have an efficiency expert here when it comes to killing with a spear. He is assuring David that he will not wake up and give an alarm demanding a second spear through him. Here we have one man convinced that it was in the providence of God that Saul be

killed now, for how could the timing be better, and here we are ready and able to do what seems clearly to be the will of God. Yet David says the circumstances may be perfect, but it is still not our place to do what must be left to God. What this makes clear is that just because circumstances favor an action does not prove that it is wise or the will of God to do that action. You have to know the will of God by other means than circumstances to be sure something is his will. Favorable circustances are an important factor, but they are not the key factor in knowing God's will. David had a principle that said you do not take the life of one appointed by God to lead the nation. Assassination is not right even if the situation is right. This is a matter for God to bring about by other means than assassination. Ray Pritchard, "Verse 8 gives us Abishai’s reaction when he saw Saul fast asleep. “Today God has delivered your enemy into your hands. Now let me pin him to the ground with one thrust of my spear; I won’t strike him twice.” Abishai wants to play his favorite outdoor sport—pin the spear on Saul. He argues that it would virtually be a sin not to kill him since God has given David this great opportunity. Abishai represents the natural impulse in all of us, sort of the world’s Golden Rule: “Do unto others before they do unto you.”BENSON, "1 Samuel 26:8-9. Now, therefore, let me smite him — Although David would not kill him himself, when he had the like opportunity, 1 Samuel 24:4; yet Abishai thought he might give him leave to do it; and he pledged himself to nail him to the ground with his spear at one thrust, so that he should make no noise by crying out. And David said, Destroy him not — Saul having been made king by God’s special appointment, David looked upon it as a high crime to offer any violence to him: as if he had said, Though he be a tyrant, yet he is our lord and king; and I, although designed king, am yet his subject; and therefore I cannot kill him without sin, nor will I consent that thou shouldst do it.Rick Gillespie-Mobley, "There is King Saul, lying their snoring up a storm. David

looks at him. Here is the person whose dedicated his life to trying to kill David. Here’s the man that has him living out in the desert instead of enjoying life. With this man off the scene he could become the next King of Israel. He could move into the palace.He could give his wife the kind of life he felt she deserved to have. He could become

50

what God had told him he would become. He could have so many of the things his heart longed to have. Just one stroke of the spear. As he faces this temptation, a voice whispers to him from the lips of Abishai.“ Can’t you see that today, God has delivered your enemy into your hands. The time is ripe. You don’t have to do anything. Just let me pin him to the ground with my spear. I will not have to strike him twice and there won’t be a sound from him.” Abishai was ready to get rid of King Saul with a moment’s notice, and notice too that He said God was on his side. God has opened this door of opportunity for you.”Saints, there are plenty of opportunities which are going to come your way, but it’s not God’s will for you to take them. Some come as a test, others as a temptation.You may think, I can’t pass up this opportunity. Let me ask you this, if you take the opportunity will you be drawn closer to God? Will you be sacrificing your family because of no time or energy to give them? Will you be selling a little piece of your soul because of some compromise you have to make. If something is of God, God does not require you to sacrifice part of your relationship to him. Part of our problem is we think of what is convenient rather than what is best. Christians will often pledge their allegiance to Christ, but the first chance they get to obtain something they want, they will sacrifice in the name of “I might not get this opportunity again.”So often when we have a goal, we want to reach it as soon as possible. We often think that pain means we need to change our goal but sometimes a willingness to accept pain demonstrates our commitment to the goal. Most of the mornings I get up to go jogging, I don’t feel like jogging. But my goal is to have a healthy body and to look as good as I can for my wife.Almost every time I start jogging, My feet, knees or legs start to hurt. But after about five minutes my body adjusts and the pain is no longer there. Although I run 3 miles, I never try to run 3 miles. I run to that tree and just before I reach it, I aim at another tree, and then another and another until I get finished. I don’t jog 3 miles, I jog about 3 feet at a time.We look at our lives and deceive ourselves into thinking, I must have all this and have it now. But that’s not usually God’s way. Do you recall in the Lord’s prayer, Jesus said for us to pray, “Lord give us this day, our daily bread.” We would rather God give us today’s bread, tomorrow’s bread, and all the bread we need for the next 30 years right now.” No God has some bread in his timing for us today and some different bread for us tomorrow. Our problem is that we cannot see where the bread for tomorrow is coming from.David had to have been tempted to just go and take matters into his own hands. After all, there was this opportunity and it probably would not come again. Saints don’t listen to others tell you what a great opportunity you’re about to miss. I’ve seen many a great opportunity lead people right out of their relationship to God. The pursuit of material wealth, the pursuit of name recognition, and the desire to be loved all can be deadly opportunities for our spiritual lives. God has a timing for all of these things for our lives. If we are faithful to Him, he says He will give us the desires of hearts.David chose to believe, that if God had anointed him king, then God was able to make him king without him compromising his faith. So what if he would have to

51

wait a little longer in that miserable desert. Yes it would mean a smaller paycheck. Yes it would mean a smaller house. Yes it would mean giving up the right to get back at someone who had hurt him very badly. But his integrity in his relationship to God would still be there. How much is your relationship to God really worth today? Just a little bit. Just a little bit more. A lot more. A whole lot more. Our integrity to our God is demonstrated in the way we deal with the church, with our family and with world. Are we making the sacrifices God requires of us in each of those areas.David told Abishai, “Look, don’t put your hand on him because God chose him to be king and God will remove him when the time is right. God forbid that I will lay my hand upon him. Just take his spear and his jug of water and let’s go.” They did and they made it out of the camp.Now the only reason they made it in the camp and out of the camp is that the Lord had brought about this situation as a test for David. For verse 12 tells us, it was the Lord who had caused all of the soldiers to fall into a deep sleep. The only reason David took the spear and jug of water was to try to convince Saul once again, that even though the opportunity had presented itself, he still would not lay his hand against the King.This was the last time King Saul pursued David, but it was not because of a change on Saul’s part. David went to the land of the Philistines and Saul was afraid to pursue him in Philistine. Not long afterwards King Saul lost his life in the battle with the Philistines. God being faithful and true to His word, He made David King over Israel without David having to murder anyone to obtain the position.God has anointed each believer here today to be a child of God. All of us are facing different circumstances and trials. Your trial is not my trial and mine is not yours, but rest assured and know, there is some Christian somewhere who is going through the same dilemma you are. As Peter wrote in our New Testament reading, Dear friends, do not be surprised at the painful trial you are suffering, as though something strange were happening to you. 1 Peter 4:12 [NIV] God knows what you’re going through.God has already seen you coming out victorious on the other side. Before you try to use the opportunity before you, remember to ask, 1) will doing this draw me closer to God. 2) will doing this make my family a better family in terms of its relationships, 3) will choosing this path bring me more into the life of the church, and 4) will making this choice make me more in the image of Jesus Christ. If you’re getting No’s to your questions, then perhaps this opportunity is a test and not a door for you to enter.There is a time for God to provide us with what we need and what He has promised to give us. Satan always tries to make us have it all right now. He tempted Jesus with the offer of giving him all the wealth and name recognition he could possibly want with no suffering and no pain, if he would just bow down to him one time. Jesus told him, “My mind is made up to worship God and God alone. Get out of here Satan.” Jesus received all that Satan promised him, but He received it in God’s timing along with the suffering he endured. God’s way is always going to be the best way in the end. So whatever our problems may be today, let’s make up our minds to let the Lord bring about a solution and do it His way.

52

HAWKER, "Verse 8-9(8) Then said Abishai to David, God hath delivered thine enemy into thine hand this day: now therefore let me smite him, I pray thee, with the spear even to the earth at once, and I will not smite him the second time. (9) And David said to Abishai, Destroy him not: for who can stretch forth his hand against the LORD'S anointed, and be guiltless?Observe the different principles of nature and grace in the minds of Abishai and David. How lovely doth David appear in this instance. But for a more delightful instance look at the cross of Jesus. Luke 23:34.

CLARKE, "God hath delivered thine enemy into thine hand - Here Abishai uses the same language as did David’s men, when Saul came into the cave at En-gedi, (see 1Sa_24:4, etc.), and David uses the same language in reply.GILL, "Then said Abishai to David,.... Seeing Saul fast asleep, and a spear so near him: God hath delivered thine enemy into thine hand this day: or at this time, properly it was night: now therefore let me smite him, I pray thee, with the spear; with Saul's own spear, which was stuck in the ground at his bolster. He remembered that David would not put forth his hand to stay him before, when he had an opportunity; and since now another offered, he did not move it to him to do it, but begged leave to do it himself; which he might think would be granted, since there was such a remarkable hand of Providence in it, which seemed to direct to such a step: even to the earth at once, and I will not smite him the second time; signifying, that he would give such a home blow or thrust, that the spear should pierce through him, and fasten him to the ground, that there would be no need to repeat it.

JENRY, " Abishai's request to David for a commission to dispatch Saul with the spear that stuck at his bolster, which (now that he lay so fair) he undertook to do at one blow, 1Sa_26:8. He would not urge David to kill him himself, because he had declined doing this before when he had a similar opportunity; but he begged earnestly that David would give him leave to do it, pleading that he was his enemy, not only cruel and implacable, but false and perfidious, whom no reason would rule nor kindness work upon, and that God had now delivered him into his hand, and did in effect bid him strike. The last advantage he had of this kind was indeed but accidental, when Saul happened to be in the cave with him at the same time. But in this there was something extraordinary; the deep sleep that had fallen on Saul and all his guards was manifestly from the Lord, so that it was a special providence

53

which gave him this opportunity; he ought not therefore to let it slip.JAMISON, "Then said Abishai to David, God hath delivered thine enemy into

thine hand — This midnight stratagem shows the activity and heroic enterprise of David’s mind, and it was in unison with the style of warfare in ancient times.

let me smite him ... even to the earth at once — The ferocious vehemence of the speaker is sufficiently apparent from his language, but David’s magnanimity soared far above the notions of his followers. Though Saul’s cruelty and perfidy and general want of right principle had sunk him to a low pitch of degradation, yet that was no reason for David’s imitating him in doing wrong. Besides, he was the sovereign; David was a subject. Though God had rejected him from the kingdom, it was in every way the best and most dutiful course, instead of precipitating his fall by imbruing their hands in his blood and thereby contracting the guilt of a great crime, to wait the awards of that retributive providence which sooner or later would take him off by some sudden and mortal blow. He who, with impetuous haste was going to exterminate Nabal, meekly spared Saul. But Nabal refused to give a tribute to which justice and gratitude, no less than custom, entitled David. Saul was under the judicial infatuation of heaven. Thus David withheld the hand of Abishai; but, at the same time, he directed him to carry off some things which would show where they had been, and what they had done. Thus he obtained the best of victories over him, by heaping coals of fire on his head.

K&D "1Sa_26:8-11When Abishai exclaimed, “God hath delivered thine enemy into thy hand: now will

I pierce him with the spear into the ground with a stroke, and will give no second” (sc., stroke: the Vulgate rendering gives the sense exactly: et secundo non opus erit, there will be no necessity for a second), David replied, “Destroy him not; for who hath stretched out his hand against the anointed of the Lord, and remained unhurt?” ִנָּקה, as in Exo_21:19; Num_5:31. He then continued (in 1Sa_26:10, 1Sa_26:11): “As truly as Jehovah liveth, unless Jehovah smite him (i.e., carry him off with a stroke; cf. 1Sa_25:38), or his day cometh that he dies (i.e., or he dies a natural death; 'his day' denoting the day of death, as in Job_14:6; Job_15:32), or he goes into battle and is carried off, far be it from me with Jehovah (ֵמְיֹהָוה, as in 1Sa_24:7) to stretch forth my hand against Jehovah's anointed.” The apodosis to 1Sa_26:10 commences with far be it,” or “the Lord forbid,” in 1Sa_26:11. “Take now the spear which is“ ,ָחִליָלהat his head, and the pitcher, and let us go.”

Jim BomkampThis opportunity to kill King Saul must have been a great temptation for David. David knew that if the king were dead then so many of his difficulties would be removed. The king daily vexed the soul of David, keeping him from being able to settle peacefully in one place and enjoy the community and worship of God’s people. I’ll bet David spent many a sleepless night because of fretting and worrying about

54

King Saul hunting for him.4.2. David might have also been tempted to think that since the Lord had again opened a door for David to be able to kill King Saul that surely this must be God’s plan. However, the Lord had clearly revealed to David the evil of taking personal revenge, especially after our previous study in which Abigail had interceded and kept him from killing wicked Nabal who had defrauded and disrespected David. This was David’s third testing by the Lord to see if he would take his own personal revenge.We Christians must realize for ourselves that just because a door is open to us does not mean that we are necessarily to walk through it. Open doors sometimes appear before God’s children as a test to determine if they have really learned the principles and lessons that the Lord has sought to teach them from His word.We see in these verses that David and his nephew Abishai take only the king’s spear and his water jug, just enough equipment to prove to the king that David had been in the king’s camp and that the king’s life could have been taken, and then they walk quite a distance away and up on a mountain where David could speak down to the king and his men, however David could also easily escape if the king decided to pursue him.

PETT, "Verses 8-11

David Restrains Abishai From Smiting The Sleeping Saul Because Saul Is YHWH’s Own, And Instead Commands The Appropriation Of His Ceremonial Spear And Water Jar (1 Samuel 26:8-11).

Having arrived at dead of night by the sleeping Saul Abishai wished to take the opportunity to slay Saul, but David forbade him because Saul was the anointed of YHWH. Instead he commanded him to take his spear, the symbol of his kingship, and his water jar, the symbol of his life, as trophies which would demonstrate both that they could have taken his life, and that they would one day take his kingship (compare how previously this latter had been symbolised by taking part of the hem of Saul’s robe, a hem which signified his kingship- 1 Samuel 24:4; 1 Samuel 24:11).

Analysis.

a Then Abishai said to David, “God has delivered up your enemy into your hand 55

this day, now therefore let me smite him, I pray you, with the spear to the earth at one stroke, and I will not smite him the second time” (1 Samuel 26:8)

b And David said to Abishai, “Do not destroy him, for who can put forth his hand against YHWH’s anointed, and be guiltless?” (1 Samuel 26:9).

c And David said, “As YHWH lives, YHWH will smite him, or his day will come to die, or he will go down into battle and perish” (1 Samuel 26:10).

b “YHWH forbid that I should put forth my hand against YHWH’s anointed” (1 Samuel 26:11 a).

a “But now take, I pray you, the spear that is at his head, and the cruse of water, and let us go” (1 Samuel 26:11 b).

Note that in ‘a’ Abishai wishes to smite Saul with his own spear, taking his life, and in the parallel David rather commands him to steal Saul’s spear and his jar of water, symbolically taking his life. In ‘b’ David points out that Saul is YHWH’s anointed, and therefore inviolate to any but YHWH, and in the parallel stresses that to slay him was forbidden by God because he is YHWH’s anointed.

1 Samuel 26:8

‘Then Abishai said to David, “God has delivered up your enemy into your hand this day, now therefore let me smite him, I pray you, with the spear to the earth at one stroke, and I will not smite him the second time.” ’

Abishai was delighted to find a sleeping Saul at their mercy and pointed out to David in a quiet whisper that God had delivered Saul into their hands. Indeed he guaranteed that, if granted permission, he would at one stroke of the spear smite Saul so that he lay dead. He would not need to smite a second time. David’s men had by now become confident and highly trained warriors.

56

9 But David said to Abishai, "Don't destroy him! Who can lay a hand on the LORD's anointed and be guiltless?

Ray Pritchard, "If you think about it, David had at least five good reasons to kill Saul. First, he has the motive. Second, he has the opportunity. Third, he has the weapon. Fourth, he has the encouragement. Fifth, he has the track record—he has already killed Goliath. Everything argues in favor of letting Abishai do the dirty deed and then hightailing it out of there. No one would blame him if he did.But he didn’t. And that’s where this story gets interesting. In verses 9-11, David gives two reasons why he didn’t kill Saul. First, it wasn’t his place. “Who can lay a hand on the LORD’s anointed and be guiltless?” The answer is, no one can. Even though Saul was a moral degenerate, he was still God’s man and it wasn’t right for David to seek personal revenge against him. Second, it wasn’t the right time. “The LORD himself will strike him; either his time will come and he will die, or he will go into battle and perish. But the LORD forbid that I should lay a hand on the LORD’s anointed.”That is why the Bible forbids seeking personal revenge even though we have been greatly and repeatedly wronged. It’s not our place to seek revenge. And we can’t be sure the right time has come. God is perfectly able to take care of righting the wrongs done to us—but in his own time and in his own way."Hebrews 10:30 “For we know Him who said, ‘Vengeance is mine; I will repay,’ And again ‘The Lord will judge His people.” GILL, "And David said to Abishai, destroy him not,.... He laid his commands upon him not to hurt him: for who can stretch forth his hand against the Lord's anointed, and be guiltless? since Saul was king, and appointed to that office by the Lord, and was anointed by his order for it, and invested with it by him, his person was sacred, and not to be touched; nor could his life be taken away by any without being guilty of a very great crime indeed, which it might be justly expected the Lord would resent and punish.

HENRY 9-11, " David's generous refusal to suffer any harm to be done to Saul, 57

and in it a resolute adherence to his principles of loyalty, 1Sa_26:9. David charged Abishai not to destroy him, would not only not do it himself, but not permit another to do it. And he gave two reasons for it: - 1. It would be a sinful affront to God's ordinance. Saul was the Lord's anointed, king of Israel by the special appointment and nomination of the God of Israel, the power that was, and to resist him was to resist the ordinance of God, Rom_13:2. No man could do it and be guiltless. The thing he feared was guilt and his concern respected his innocence more than his safety. 2. It would be a sinful anticipation of God's providence. God had sufficiently shown him, in Nabal's case, that, if he left it to him to avenge him, he would do it in due time. Encouraged therefore by his experience in that instance, he resolves to wait till God shall think fit to avenge him on Saul, and he will by no means avenge himself (1Sa_26:10): “The Lord shall smite him, as he did Nabal, with some sudden stroke, or he shall die in battle (as it proved he did soon after), or, if not, his day shall come to die a natural death, and I will contentedly wait till then, rather than force my way to the promised crown by any indirect methods.” The temptation indeed was very strong; but, if he should yield, he would sin against God, and therefore he will resist the temptation with the utmost resolution (1Sa_26:11): “The Lord forbid that I should stretch forth my hand against the Lord's anointed; no, I will never do it, nor suffer it to be done.” Thus bravely does he prefer his conscience to his interest and trusts God with the issue.ELLICOTT, "(9) Against the Lord’s anointed.—David—taught, no doubt, by the prophet Samuel—looked upon the person of Saul as made sacred and inviolable by the royal anointing. Through the anointing Saul had become the possession of Jehovah; only Jehovah, then, could lawfully take away that sacred life. This he elaborates in the next verse. It is possible that these exalted sentiments respecting the Divine rights of kings were not uttered by David while standing in the dark night among Saul’s soldiers by the sleeping king, but subsequently, when he and Abishai were talking the incident over together.PULPIT, "1Sa_26:9-11David forbids the deed as before (1Sa_24:6), because of Saul’s office. As we there saw, this was an ingrained principle in David’s mind on which he constantly acted. Present with equal strength in Saul’s mind, it was the cause of moral ruin to the one, and of a noble forbearance and self-control to the other. David therefore leaves him in Jehovah’s hand, saying, As Jehovah liveth, Jehovah shall smite him; or his day, etc. Literally, "As Jehovah liveth (I will not smite him), but Jehovah shall smite him; either his day shall come and he shall die; or he shall go down into battle and perish." Whenever he falls, it shall be Jehovah’s doing, whether he die a natural death, or a violent one in battle. "The smiting of Jehovah" does not imply a sudden death. God smites men with disease (2Ki_15:5) and other troubles. What David means is that he will leave the matter entirely to God, but that if Saul’s death is to be a violent one, he must fall honourably, not by the hand of a subject, but in battle with Israel’s enemies. Jehovah forbid. The same phrase as in 1Sa_24:6. Cruse of

58

water. i.e. water bottle, as in 1Ki_19:6.GUZIK 9-12, "(1Sa_26:9-12) David’s response to the opportunity to kill Saul.And David said to Abishai, “Do not destroy him; for who can stretch out his hand against the Lord’s anointed, and be guiltless?” David said furthermore, “As the LORD lives, the LORD shall strike him, or his day shall come to die, or he shall go out to battle and perish. The LORD forbid that I should stretch out my hand against the Lord’s anointed. But please, take now the spear and the jug of water that are by his head, and let us go.” So David took the spear and the jug of water by Saul’s head, and they got away; and no man saw it or knew it or awoke. For they were all asleep, because a deep sleep from the LORD had fallen on them.

a. Do not destroy him; for who can stretch out his hand against the LORD’s anointed, and be guiltless: It wasn’t that David thought Saul was right. David knew more than anyone that Saul was deeply in sin. But David knew that even a sinning Saul was still the anointed king over Israel (1Sa_10:1). That would only change when God changed it; David would not stretch out his hand against the LORD’s anointed. He knew he would be guilty before God if he did.

i. We might think that at this time, David had more righteous reason than ever to kill Saul. Now, Saul had gone back on a previous promise to leave David alone. Many of us, if we were in David’s position, would have said “I showed love and let him off once before. I’m full of love, but I’m not stupid. Saul had his chance and he blew it; this time, this opportunity is from God!”ii. But love, at least in the eyes of the world, will sometimes act in what the world considers to be a stupid way. Jesus said that we should forgive, and forgive, and forgive again (Mat_18:21-22).iii. In addition, Saul’s sin against David did not make him less the anointed king of Israel. Though this was a trial that required supernatural endurance and love from David, it still would have been sin for him to kill Saul.iv. “Though Saul be a cruel tyrant, and rejected by God, yet he is our sovereign lord and king; and I, though designed king, as yet am but a private person, and his subject; and therefore cannot kill him without sin, nor will I consent that you shouldst do it.” (Poole)

b. The LORD shall strike him, or his day shall come to die, or he shall go out to battle and perish: David knew that it wasn’t “hard” for God to kill Saul. The LORD was more than able to kill Saul at any time He chose. Every breath Saul took was a gift from God. God could have allowed any wicked man to kill Saul at any time. When it came to striking down an anointed king of Israel, God did not need the services of a godly, righteous man like David!

59

i. “Vengeance is Mine, I will repay,” says the Lord (Rom_12:17-21). If vengeance belongs to God, it does not belong to us, so we are to love our enemies and never repay evil with evil.ii. We might even say that since Saul deserved it, it was the “right thing” to kill Saul. But if it was the “right thing,” this was the “wrong way.” Often when we have a right thing in front of us, we will be tempted to pursue it in a wrong way.iii. David’s greater Son, Jesus, showed us how to refuse to pursue the right thing the wrong way. Jesus rejected Satan’s shortcut to the cross (Luk_4:5-8). Jesus never did miracles just to promote Himself (Joh_6:30-33). Jesus went the way of the cross instead. Jesus shows us that God’s way may be more difficult - but it is always better.iv. David knew to seek first the kingdom of God and His righteousness, and all these things shall be added unto you (Mat_6:33). Our job is to seek first the kingdom of God, and He will bring things to pass as we do.

c. David took the spear and the jug of water by Saul’s head: David would not kill Saul, but he did take the spear and the jug of water as evidence that he had the opportunity to kill Saul. Probably, David noticed that a deep sleep from the LORD had fallen on them all, and knew there was a reason for it.

PETT, "1 Samuel 26:9

‘And David said to Abishai, “Do not destroy him, for who can put forth his hand against YHWH’s anointed, and be guiltless?” ’

But David would not permit it. He equally quietly forbade him to harm Saul, on the grounds that Saul was YHWH’s anointed. To strike one who was holy to YHWH, as a result of being set apart for Him by anointing, would be to incur the most grievous guilt. Such a one was in the hands of YHWH to live or to die, not in the hands of men. This is a reminder to us that the prime significance of anointing was that of being wholly dedicated to God. Any power subsequently received was for the purpose of fulfilling that dedication.

10 As surely as the LORD lives," he said, "the LORD himself will strike him; either his time will come and he will die, or he will go into battle and perish.

60

David wanted to see Saul die, but he wanted no part in making it happen. He left the time of his death entirely up to God's providence, and he refused to play a role in that decision as to when Saul would die. David is depending upon the LORD to kill him, as He did Nabal.David expresses, that under no circumstances, will he kill Saul. He isleaving that entirely up to God. He may die of old age, or he may diein battle, but it is up to God when he dies.David learned something last week. Remember when Nabal had a heart attack and ten days later he was dead? David learned that when you leave it in God’s hands and let Him take care of it, which is what we are supposed to do and let God handle it, He can handle it real well. And he basically tells Abishai, look, as far as Saul is concerned it is going to be over before too long and one of two things is going to happen. Either his time will run out and he will die or he will go into battle and perish. David is looking at it from the divine perspective now and that is really refreshing. Leave him alone. God will take care of Saul just like he did Nabal. I nearly made a mistake by trying to wipe out Nabal by putting on a sword and going over there. I learned my lesson and I will act accordingly. And so David passes the test and that is great. DON ANDERSON

CLARKE, "The Lord shall smite him - He shall die by a stroke of the Divine judgment; or his day shall come to die - he shall die a natural death; which in the course of things must be before mine, and thus I shall get rid of mine enemy; or he shall descend into the battle, and perish - he shall fall by the enemies of his country. These are the three ordinary ways by which man accomplishes, as a hireling, his day. Murder David could not consider to be lawful; this would have been taking the matter out of God’s hand, and this David would not do.GILL, "And David said furthermore,.... In order to make Abishai easy, and prevent his doing what he proposed: as the Lord liveth; which was the form of an oath, made to assure Abishai of the truth of what follows, and therefore he need not be hasty to put Saul to death, since it would not be long before he should die, in one or other of the three following ways: either the Lord shall smite him; suddenly, which the Jews call cutting off, or death by the hand of heaven, by the immediate hand of God: or his day shall come to die; the time appointed for him to die a natural death, of

61

some disease common to men: or he shall descend into battle, and perish; which was commonly reckoned death, casual or accidental, and in which last way Saul did die, 1Sa_31:3.

HENRY, " God had sufficiently shown him, in Nabal's case, that, if he left it to him to avenge him, he would do it in due time. Encouraged therefore by his experience in that instance, he resolves to wait till God shall think fit to avenge him on Saul, and he will by no means avenge himself (1Sa_26:10): “The Lord shall smite him, as he did Nabal, with some sudden stroke, or he shall die in battle (as it proved he did soon after), or, if not, his day shall come to die a natural death, and I will contentedly wait till then, rather than force my way to the promised crown by any indirect methods.” The temptation indeed was very strong; but, if he should yield, he would sin against God, and therefore he will resist the temptation with the utmost resolution (1Sa_26:11): “The Lord forbid that I should stretch forth my hand against the Lord's anointed; no, I will never do it, nor suffer it to be done.” Thus bravely does he prefer his conscience to his interest and trusts God with the issue.BENSON "1 Samuel 26:10-11. The Lord shall smite him, &c. — David leaves it to the sovereign will and pleasure of God to put an end to Saul’s life when he saw best; either by a sudden stroke, or in the course of nature, or by causing him to fall in battle. Take the spear — Which will show where we have been, and what we could have done. And the cruise of water — Set there either for Saul to drink, if he were thirsty, or to wash himself, as was prescribed to the Israelites by the law, for many accidental pollutions.HAWKER, "(10) David said furthermore, As the LORD liveth, the LORD shall smite him; or his day shall come to die; or he shall descend into battle, and perish.Was there not somewhat of a spirit of prophecy in those expressions of David, when we consider the close of Saul's life? 1 Samuel 31:4. See also Psalms 43:5; Psa_43:5.ELLICOTT, "(10) David said furthermore.—David suggests three possible cases in which the Divine arm might smite the “anointed of Jehovah.” The first, the Lord “shall smite him” by some sudden death from disease—no doubt, the recent death of Nabal was in his mind; the second by what is termed “natural death;” and the third by some blow received in battle. The idea of an arrow winged by some unseen hand was evidently here in the speaker’s thoughts.PETT, "1 Samuel 26:10‘And David said, “As YHWH lives, YHWH will smite him, or his day will come to die, or he will go down into battle and perish.”

62

David then made clear the reason for his decision. YHWH was the living God. Thus He was alone responsible for those who were His anointed. None other must touch them. The consequence was that the smiting of Saul, or otherwise, lay in YHWH’s hands. If YHWH chose he would be smitten, or he would die naturally, or he would perish in battle, the three ways in which a king might expect to die. But all was to be in the hands of YHWH (a sign of the authenticity and integrity of the whole book is that he does not suggest what in fact was Saul’s end, that he kill himself).

11 But the LORD forbid that I should lay a hand on the LORD's anointed. Now get the spear and water jug that are near his head, and let's go."

Jacox, " But David was inflexible in repudiating the regicide. Not for him was it to stretch forth a hand against the Lord's anointed. So Saul slept on, and the shadow of death passed away. Unaware of the peril that had approached him, his awaking was an ordinary awaking. But, to convict the watchers of unwatchfulness, if not to convince the king of a narrow escape and a generous foe, David took the spear and the cruse of water from Saul's bolster; and he and his companion gat them away unperceived-for no man saw it, nor knew it, neither awaked; for they were all asleep; because a deep sleep from the Lord was fallen upon them."don andersonv. 11 But the Lord forbid that I should lay a hand on the Lord’s anointed. Now get the spear and water jug that are near his head, and let’s go.” Now I know what you’re thinking how in the world can two guys stand there and have a conversation with three thousand men laying around? You know some of them are snoring but some of them are light sleepers. How can they do that? And then how can they sneak in there? Well I am glad you’re thinking. It is in verse 12. 13 GILL and the cruse of water;which stood in the same place, as appears by (1 Samuel 26:12) . Some take this to be a pot to make water in; others an hourglass, to know the time of night, in which not sand, but water, flowed for that purpose: but rather this was for his refreshment

63

should he be hot and thirsty in the night, or to purify him from any nocturnal pollution that might happen; for, according to Clemens of Alexandria {m}, it was a custom of the Jews often to purify themselves in bed: though Fortunatus Scacchus F14 thinks Saul had this pot or cup for a religious use; which he had with him, and with it gave thanks to God, the author of all good, whenever he sat down to a meal; such as the golden cup Philip king of Macedon always had under his pillow when he slept and let us go;and do nothing more; which would be sufficient to convince they had been there, and to show what was in their power to do, had they been so inclined.

HENRY, "The temptation indeed was very strong; but, if he should yield, he would sin against God, and therefore he will resist the temptation with the utmost resolution (1Sa_26:11): “The Lord forbid that I should stretch forth my hand against the Lord's anointed; no, I will never do it, nor suffer it to be done.” Thus bravely does he prefer his conscience to his interest and trusts God with the issue.HAWKER, "Verse 11-12(11) The LORD forbid that I should stretch forth mine hand against the LORD'S anointed: but, I pray thee, take thou now the spear that is at his bolster, and the cruse of water, and let us go. (12) So David took the spear and the cruse of water from Saul's bolster; and they gat them away, and no man saw it, nor knew it, neither awaked: for they were all asleep; because a deep sleep from the LORD was fallen upon them.This last verse becomes a clue for explaining this wonderful transaction, a sleep, from the Lord had sealed up their senses. Oh! what a volume of comfort ariseth out of this view, in the Lord's watchfulness over his people. How can the Lord seal, or how can the Lord open the faculties of our enemies, when either operation shall best promote the purposes of his glory and his people's welfare. See a sweet promise to this effect: Isaiah 54:16-17.ELLICOTT, " (11) The spear.—The spear was Saul’s especial sign of royalty. “This taking away of the spear from Saul’s head as he slept was an omen of the transfer of his royalty to David.”—Bishop Patrick, quoted by Wordsworth.And the cruse of water.—“A very ancient usage explains why the cruse of water is here brought into such special prominence. According to this custom, some high dignitary always had in keeping a costly ewer for the king’s necessary ablutions, and it was specially his duty to take it with him, and present it to the king during campaigns or other journeys, so that its disappearance would involve almost as great a disgrace to the king as the loss of his sceptre” (Ewald, in reference to Psalms 60:8, states his belief that this custom existed in the time of David).—Ewald, History

64

of Israel, “David,” ii. 3 (Note). The same scholar also writes that “there are many other instances of similar stories, in which the future conqueror and founder of a new dynasty is represented as having received at first some symbol of royalty from his predecessors by accident, as it were, or in sport. Thus Alexander at first takes the royal divining cup from Dârâ as if in sport: a story which in the Shâhnâmeh no longer appears in its original light; and in nothing was the belief in omens so strong as in the high affairs of state.”—“David,” ii. 3 (Note).PETT. "1 Samuel 26:11 a“YHWH forbid that I should put forth my hand against YHWH’s anointed.”David then recoiled in horror at the thought of putting out his hand against YHWH’s anointed. To do so would be sacrilege. It would be to despoil YHWH. It was God-forbidden. (Nor did he take a way out by allowing his men to do it. He was honest to his convictions).1 Samuel 26:11 b“But now take, I pray you, the spear that is at his head, and the cruse of water, and let us go.”Instead what they were to do was take Saul’s ceremonial spear, the symbol of his kingship, and his water jar, the symbol of his very life (see 2 Samuel 23:16-17), and then leave the camp while they were still safe.

12 So David took the spear and water jug near Saul's head, and they left. No one saw or knew about it, nor did anyone wake up. They were all sleeping, because the LORD had put them into a deep sleep.

God was cooperating with David in trying to teach Saul that David was a man led of God, and so it was fighting God to try and kill David. God chose to do a miracle here and keep them all in a deep sleep so David could prove a point to Saul.

65

Deffinbaugh, "Whether they knew it or not, the author of our text informs us that this was not just a stroke of good luck, or even a good military maneuver. God had miraculously put these 3,000 men to sleep. David and Abishai could have been yelling at each another (Is it possible they were?), and no one would have awakened. Abishai could have stumbled and fallen upon a couple of these soldiers, and they still would have been safe. I wonder how many times in history men have assumed they had a really close call, or they did a spectacular job at some task, without ever knowing that behind it all was the hand of God."CLARKE The spear, we have already seen, was the emblem of power and regal dignity. But it is usual, in Arab camps, for every man to have his lance stuck in the ground beside him, that he may be ready for action in a moment. The cruse of water resembled, in some measure, the canteens of our soldiers. In such a climate, where water was always scarce, it was necessary for each man to carry a little with him, to refresh him on his march.A deep sleep from the LordIt is the same word which is used, Genesis 2:21, to describe the sleep which God caused to fall upon Adam, when he formed Eve out of his side. GILL, "So David took the spear, and the cruse of water, from Saul's bolster,.... Abishai either refusing to take them, since he might not take away his life; or it may be rather David thought better of it, and took them himself, lest Abishai should be tempted, when so near to Saul, and his spear in his hand, and should thrust him with it; though David may be said to take them by the hands of Abishai: and they gat them away; with the above things along with them: and no man saw it, nor knew it; saw them in the camp, or knew what they did: neither awaked; at their talking together, at the motion of their feet, and taking away the spear and cruse: for they were all asleep; which was very extraordinary, that among three thousand men none should be awake, not even the sentinels; which might seem impossible in a natural way, but it is accounted for by what follows: because a deep sleep from the Lord was fallen upon them; or "a sleep of the Lord" (p); a very great one, an uncommon one; so great trees, mountains, &c. are called trees and mountains of God; or, according to our supplement, it was from the Lord, he was the cause and author of it; he cast them into this sleep, or caused it to fall upon them, and locked them up in it, that they might not hear David and his servant when they came among them.

HENRY, "The improvement he made of this opportunity for the further evidence 66

of his own integrity. He and Abishai carried away the spear and cruse of water which Saul had by his bed-side (1Sa_26:12), and, which was very strange, none of all the guards were aware of it. If a physician had given them the strongest opiate or stupifying dose, they could not have been faster locked up with sleep. Saul's spear which he had by him for defence, and his cup of water which he had for his refreshment, were both stolen from him while he slept. Thus do we lose our strength and our comfort when we are careless, and secure, and off our watch.

K&D, "1Sa_26:12They departed with these trophies, without any one waking up and seeing them,

because they were all asleep, as a deep sleep from the Lord had fallen upon them. ָׁשאּול ֵמַרֲאֹׁשֵתי stands for ׁש מ from the head of Saul,” with“ ,ִמְמַרֲאֹׁשֵתי dropped. The expression “a deep sleep of Jehovah,” i.e., a deep sleep sent or inflicted by Jehovah, points to the fact that the Lord favoured David's enterprise.PULPIT, "1Sa_26:12And no man saw it, etc. The Hebrew text describes the occurrence in a much more lively manner: "And none saw, and none knew, and none awaked." A deep sleep from Jehovah, etc. So surprising a fact as that two men could penetrate into the very centre of a considerable army, and remove the king’s sceptre and water bottle from his side, could only be accounted for by the interference of Providence in their behalf.

don andersonv. 12 So David took the spear and water jug near Saul’s head, and they left. No one saw or knew about it, nor did anyone wake up. They were all sleeping, because the Lord had put them into a deep sleep. Has that ever happened in the Bible before? Remember when they got ready to raise Jesus out of the grave? All the guards were asleep. How about in Acts 12 and Peter is incarcerated in prison and close to death. God caused a sleep to come upon the guards and he escapes. And so here in this situation God just lets them go into a deep sleep so this can take place because there is a lesson to be taught. ELLICOTT, " (12) No man saw it, nor knew it, neither awaked.—The Hebrew is more graphic: “And none saw, and none knew, and none awaked.”A deep sleep from the Lord.—The inference here, at first sight, certainly is that an unnatural, or rather, a supernatural drowsiness had fallen on the camp of Saul. Still, it is not absolutely necessary to suppose that a special miracle was wrought on this occasion. The memory of great carelessness and want of vigilance in the royal army was evidently in David’s mind when he sarcastically reproves the royal general Abner, in 1 Samuel 26:14-16. They were in a friendly district, and never

67

dreamed of a surprise, and possibly the rough soldiers on duty had been carousing. David too and Abishai, owing to their long experience in camp life, often flying before their enemies, were practised scouts, and in the dark night did their perilous work speedily and noiselessly.PETT, "Verses 12-16The Secret Of The Success Of Their Venture And David’s Rebuke of Abner For Failing To Watch Over Saul (1 Samuel 26:12-16).We now learn, in a verse which in one sense stands by itself, being itself central to the chiasmus of the whole passage as outlined above, why it was that they had been symbolically able to take both Saul’s kingship and his very life. It was because YHWH had caused a deep sleep to fall on the whole army. This whole situation was thus of YHWH’s doing, because David’s life was in the hands of YHWH. Even Saul’s attempt to hunt David down must therefore be seen as in the hands of YHWH and as contributing towards his own death and David’s reception of the kingship.This fact is then followed up by David’s taunting of Abner for failing in his responsibility to watch over Saul’s life as he illustrated by means of the spear and the water jar how close Saul had come to being slain.Analysis.a So David took the spear and the cruse of water from Saul’s head (1 Samuel 26:12 a).b And they took themselves away, and no man saw it, nor knew it, nor did any awake, for they were all asleep, because a deep sleep from YHWH was fallen on them (1 Samuel 26:12 b).c Then David went over to the other side, and stood on the top of the mountain afar off, a great space being between them, and David cried to the people, and to Abner the son of Ner, saying, “Do you not answer, Abner?” (1 Samuel 26:13-14 a).d Then Abner answered and said, “Who are you who cries to the king?” (1 Samuel 26:14 b).c And David said to Abner, “Are you not a valiant man? And who is like to you in Israel? Why then have you not kept watch over your lord the king? For there came one of the people in to destroy the king your lord” (1 Samuel 26:15).b “This thing is not good that you have done. As YHWH lives, you are worthy to die, because you have not kept watch over your lord, YHWH’s anointed” (1 Samuel 26:16 a).

68

a “And now see where the king’s spear is, and the cruse of water that was at his head” (1 Samuel 26:16 b).Note that in ‘a’ David takes the spear and jar of water from by Saul’s head , and in the parallel holds it aloft in order to illustrate what has happened. In ‘b’ YHWH had kept watch over David by causing Saul’s army to remain asleep, while in the parallel Abner had failed to keep watch over Saul who was YHWH’s anointed, illustrating that it is better to be watched over by YHWH than by man. In ‘c’ David calls to Abner and asks why he does not answer, and in the parallel describes what Abner has to answer for, his failure to keep watch over the king so that those who would destroy him were able to approach him. Central in ‘d’ is Abner’s question both illustrating their total ignorance of David’s presence, and emphasising the question, ‘who are you?’. Compare Nabal’s question, ‘who is David? (1 Samuel 25:10). The answer in both cases is that he is the one whom YHWH has chosen to be His champion and king of Israel after Saul.1 Samuel 26:12‘So David took the spear and the cruse of water from Saul’s head, and they took themselves away, and no man saw it, nor knew it, nor did any awake, for they were all asleep, because a deep sleep from YHWH was fallen on them.’As a result of their activities David was able to appropriate both Saul’s ceremonial spear, symbol of his kingship, and Saul’s water jar, symbol of his very life. And the two were then able to steal away, and none knew that they had come and gone, nor did any awake, because YHWH had put them all into deep slumber, a situation no doubt aided by the fact that they were exhausted after their long march in the hot sun. The writer, however, is concerned that we recognise that it was all YHWH’s doing, because YHWH was with David. It was for that reason that YHWH had placed Saul’s kingship and Saul’s life in David’s hands in order that all might know both of David’s loyalty to the king in spite of all, and of the fact that he himself would shortly receive the kingship..

13 Then David crossed over to the other side and stood on top of the hill some distance away; there was a wide space between them.

69

don andersonv. 13 Then David crossed over to the other side and stood on top of the hill some distance away; there was a wide space between them. David was going to give plenty of room when you have six hundred against three thousand, you give them plenty of space to move. v. 14 He called out to the army and to Abner son of Ner, “Aren’t you going to answer me, Abner?” Abner replied, “Who are you who calls to the king?” 14 Why does he speak to Abner and not to Saul? The reason David speaks to Abner is that Abner now has the place that belonged to David when he was the armor bearer. When you are the armor bearer your responsibility is to see to it that the king is always protected from his enemies. And you would lay down your life rather than let the life of the king be in jeopardy. And what he is going to do is teach Saul a lesson indirectly by showing him that he does not have any right out there chasing around for David because when David was the armor bearer he sure never let anything crummy like this happen. Some enemy come walking in and grab your spear and your water jug while you are lying there asleep. You cannot even sleep. Your armor bearer is not able to do his part. So he is reproaching Abner and in an indirect way teaching Saul a fantastic point in this whole lesson that David never did have those feelings and he has not changed. It is Saul that has changed. So he calls out, look what he says to him. DEFFINBAUGHDavid’s mama raised no fool. David waits to call out until he has crossed over what seems to be a valley. Then, standing far from Saul’s reach on top of a mountain, David cries out to the people in general and to Abner in particular. It is probably still in the dark of night, or in the dimly lit early morning hours. The soldiers of Saul are apparently awakened by the sound of David’s voice. Not seeing who is calling out, Abner does not recognize David’s voice.There is a reason David cries out to the soldiers and to Abner in particular. David indicts the entire group for not properly protecting their king. And for this, David insists that their failure should cost them their lives. As we read David’s words to Abner and the others, we begin to grasp the reasons behind David’s perplexing invasion of Saul’s camp. David did not go down to Saul’s camp frivolously, as a kind of spur-of-the-moment prank. He had a plan, which had worked out just as he had expected. When David asked for a volunteer, Abishai stepped forward, just as I suspect David anticipated. You see, Abishai was a mighty man of valor as described in 2 Samuel 23:18-19:COFFMAN, "DAVID REBUKED ABNER; SAUL'S GENERAL"Then David went over to the other side, and stood afar off on the top of the

70

mountain, with a great space between them; and David called to the army, and to Abner the son of Ner, saying, "Will you not answer, Abner"? Then Abner answered, "Who are you that calls to the king"? And David said to Abner, "Are you not a man? Who is like you in Israel? Why then have you not kept watch over your lord the king? For one of the people came in to destroy the king your lord. This thing that you have done is not good. As the Lord lives, you deserve to die, because you have not kept watch over your lord, the Lord's anointed. And now see where the king's spear is, and the jar of water that was at his head.""With a great space between them" (1 Samuel 26:13). Here is a very important difference from that other occasion of David's sparing Saul's life. There, David followed Saul out of the cave rather closely; here David took no such chance but called to Abner from the top of an adjoining mountain."Who are you that calls to the king?" (1 Samuel 26:14) David was not calling Saul, but Abner; but Abner apparently meant, "Who disturbed the king's repose"?[10] It is very remarkable that, just a little while previously David's conversation with Abishai had not awakened anyone; and now, the voice of a man far away on the top of a distant mountain is easily heard by Abner. This is proof enough that the sleep that enabled David's exploit here was due to the direct intervention of God who induced the sleep of Saul's army."Who is like you in Israel?" (1 Samuel 26:15) This was indeed a high compliment that David paid to Abner, and it was sincere, "Which is fully borne out by David's dirge at Abner's death (2 Samuel 3:31-34,38)."[11]"As the Lord lives, (Abner) you deserve to die." (1 Samuel 26:16) Of course, David very well knew that the hand of God was in Abner's failure; but, as Keil wrote, "These words were designed to show Saul (who heard them) that David was the most faithful defender of the king's life, even more faithful than his closest friend and most zealous servant."[12]CONSTABLE, "Verses 13-16David"s rebuke of AbnerDavid crossed a ravine to put some distance between himself and Saul. David addressed Abner because he was responsible for leaving the Lord"s anointed unprotected. The person who came to destroy Saul was Abishai ( 1 Samuel 26:15; cf. 1 Samuel 26:8). David, rather than Saul"s bodyguard Abner, was responsible for sparing his life. Abner deserved to die for his failure in duty, but David spared his life too. David more faithfully defended Saul"s life than even Saul"s most trusted servant.HENRYDavid having got safely from Saul's camp himself, and having brought with him

71

proofs sufficient that he had been there, posts himself conveniently, so that they might hear him and yet not reach him (1 Samuel 26:13), and then begins to reason with them upon what had passed. I. He reasons ironically with Abner, and keenly banters him. David knew well that it was from the mighty power of God that Abner and the rest of the guards were cast into so deep a sleep, and that God's immediate hand was in it; but he reproaches Abner as unworthy to be captain of the lifeguards, since he could sleep when the king his master lay so much exposed. By this it appears that the hand of God locked them up in this deep sleep that, as soon as ever David had got out of danger, a very little thing awakened them, even David's voice at a great distance roused them, 1 Samuel 26:14. Abner got up (we may suppose it early in a summer's morning) and enquired who called, and disturbed the king's repose. "It is I," says David, and then he upbraids him with his sleeping when he should have been upon his guard. Perhaps Abner, looking upon David as a despicable enemy and one that there was no danger from, had neglected to set a watch; however, he himself ought to have been more wakeful. David, to put him into confusion, told him, 1. That he had lost his honour (1 Samuel 26:15): "Art not thou a man? (so the word is), a man in office, that art bound, by the duty of thy place, to inspect the soldiery? Art not thou in reputation for a valiant man? So thou wouldst be esteemed, a man of such courage and conduct that there is none like thee; but now thou art shamed for ever. Thou a general! Thou, a sluggard!" 2. That he deserved to lose his head (1 Samuel 26:16): "You are all worthy to die, by martial law, for being off your guard, when you had the king himself asleep in the midst of you. Ecce signum--Behold this token. See where the king's spear is, in the hand of him whom the king himself is pleased to count his enemy. Those that took away this might as easily and safely have taken away his life. Now see who are the king's best friends, you that neglected him and left him exposed or I that protected him when he was exposed. You pursue me as worthy to die, and irritate Saul against me; but who is worthy to die now?" Note, Sometimes those that unjustly condemn others are justly left to fall into condemnation themselves. II. He reasons seriously and affectionately with Saul. By this time he was so well awake as to hear what was said, and to discern who said it (1 Samuel 26:17): Is this thy voice, my son David? In the same manner he had expressed his relentings, 1 Samuel 24:16. He had given his wife to another and yet calls him son, thirsted after his blood and yet is glad to hear his voice. Those are bad indeed that have never any convictions of good, nor ever sincerely utter good expressions. And now David has as fair an opportunity of reaching Saul's conscience as he had just now of taking away his life. This he lays hold on, though not of that, and enters into a close argument with him, concerning the trouble he still continued to give him, endeavouring to persuade him to let fall the prosecution and be reconciled. 1. He complains of the very melancholy condition he was brought into by the enmity of Saul against him. Two things he laments:-- (1.) That he was driven from his master and from his business: "My lord pursues after his servant, 1 Samuel

72

26:18. How gladly would I serve thee as formerly if my service might be accepted! but, instead of being owned as a servant, I am pursued as a rebel, and my lord is my enemy, and he whom I would follow with respect compels me to flee from him." (2.) That he was driven from his God and from his religion; and this was a much greater grievance than the former (1 Samuel 26:19): "They have driven me out from the inheritance of the Lord, have made Canaan too hot for me, at least the inhabited parts of it, have forced me into the deserts and mountains, and will, ere long, oblige me entirely to quit the country." And that which troubled him was not so much that he was driven out from his own inheritance as that he was driven out from the inheritance of the Lord, the holy land. It should be more comfortable to us to think of God's title to our estates and his interest in them then of our own, and that with them we may honour him then that with them we may maintain ourselves. Nor was it so much his trouble that he was constrained to live among strangers as that he was constrained to live among the worshippers of strange gods and was thereby thrust into temptation to join with them in their idolatrous worship. His enemies did, in effect, send him to go and serve other gods, and perhaps he had heard that some of them had spoken to that purport of him. Those that forbid our attendance on God's ordinances do what in them lies to estrange us from God and to make us heathens. If David had not been a man of extraordinary grace, and firmness to his religion, the ill usage he met with from his own prince and people, who were Israelites and worshippers of the true God, would have prejudiced him against the religion they professed and have driven him to communicate with idolaters. "If these be Israelites," he might have said, "let me live and die with Philistines;" and no thanks to them that their conduct had not that effect. We are to reckon that the greatest injury that can be done us which exposes us to sin. Of those who thus led David into temptation he here says, Cursed be they before the Lord. Those fall under a curse that thrust out those whom God receives, and send those to the devil who are dear to God. 2. He insists upon his own innocency: What have I done or what evil is in my hand? 1 Samuel 26:18. He had the testimony of his conscience for him that he had never done nor ever designed any mischief to the person, honour, or government, of his prince, nor to any of the interests of his country. He had lately had Saul's own testimony concerning him (1 Samuel 24:17): Thou art more righteous than I. It was very unreasonable and wicked for Saul to pursue him as a criminal, when he could not charge him with any crime. 3. He endeavours to convince Saul that his pursuit of him is not only wrong, but mean, and much below him: "The king of Israel, whose dignity is great, and who has so much other work to do, has come out to seek a flea, as when one doth hunt a partridge in the mountains," 1 Samuel 26:20--a poor game for the king of Israel to pursue. He compares himself to a partridge, a very innocent harmless bird, which, when attempts are made upon its life, flies if it can, but makes no resistance. And would Saul bring the flower of his army into the field only to hunt one poor partridge? What a disparagement was this to his honour! What a stain would it be on his memory to trample upon so weak and patient as well as so innocent an

73

enemy! James 5:6, You have killed the just, and he doth not resist you. 4. He desires that the core of the controversy may be searched into and some proper method taken to bring it to an end, 1 Samuel 26:19. Saul himself could not say that justice put him on thus to persecute David, or that he was obliged to do it for the public safety. David was not willing to say (though it was very true) that Saul's own envy and malice put him on to do it; and therefore he concludes it must be attributed either to the righteous judgment of God or to the unrighteous designs of evil men. Now, (1.) "If the Lord have stirred thee up against me, either in displeasure to me (taking this way to punish me for my sins against him, though, as to thee, I am guiltless) or in displeasure to thee, if it be the effect of that evil spirit from the Lord which troubles thee, let him accept an offering from us both--let us join in making our peace with God, reconciling ourselves to him, which may be done, by sacrifice; and then I hope the sin will be pardoned, whatever it is, and the trouble, which is so great a vexation both to thee and me, will come to an end." See the right method of peace-making; let us first make God our friend by Christ the great Sacrifice, and then all other enmities shall be slain, Ephesians 2:16,Pr+16:7. But, (2.) "If thou art incited to it by wicked men, that incense thee against me, cursed be they before the Lord," that is, they are very wicked people, and it is fit that they should be abandoned as such, and excluded from the king's court and councils. He decently lays the blame upon the evil counsellors who advised the king to that which was dishonourable and dishonest, and insists upon it that they be removed from about him and forbidden his presence, as men cursed before the Lord, and then he hoped he should gain his petition, which is (1 Samuel 26:20), "Let not my blood fall to the earth, as thou threatenest, for it is before the face of the Lord, who will take cognizance of the wrong and avenge it." Thus pathetically does David plead with Saul for his life, and, in order to that, for his favourable opinion of him.GILL, "Then David went over to the other side,.... To a hill on the other side, opposite to Hachilah, where Saul lay encamped; or "passed over the passage" (q), the valley that lay between the two hills, and perhaps passed over a brook that ran in the valley, which is not unusual; so Josephus (r) says, that he went over a brook and came to the top of a mountain: and stood on the top of an hill afar off; he chose the top of an hill, that his voice might be heard at a distance, as it might in a clear air, and still night; and to be afar off, that he might the better make his escape, should an attempt be made to pursue him: a great space being between them; a large valley lying between the two hills.

JAMISON, "Then David ... stood on the top of an hill afar off ... and cried to the people — (See on Jdg_9:7). The extraordinary purity and elasticity of the air in Palestine enable words to be distinctly heard that are addressed by a speaker from the top of one hill to people on that of another, from which it is separated by a deep

74

intervening ravine. Hostile parties can thus speak to each other, while completely beyond the reach of each other’s attack. It results from the peculiar features of the country in many of the mountain districts.

K&D, "“And David went over to the other side, and placed himself upon the top of the mountain afar off (the space between them was great), and cried to the people,” etc. Saul had probably encamped with his fighting men on the slope of the ill Hachilah, so that a valley separated him from the opposite hill, from which David had no doubt reconnoitred the camp and then gone down to it (1Sa_26:6), and to which he returned after the deed was accomplished. The statement that this mountain was far off, so that there was a great space between David and Saul, not only favours the accuracy of the historical tradition, but shows that David reckoned far less now upon any change in the state of Saul's mind than he had done before, when he followed Saul without hesitation from the cave and called after him (1Sa_24:9), and that in fact he rather feared lest Saul should endeavour to get him into his power as soon as he woke from his sleep.BENSON, "1 Samuel 26:13-14. And stood on the top of a hill — On such a rock or precipice that there was no coming to him but by taking a circuit round. So that it might be said, in respect of the way whereby only they could come to him, that he stood afar off, and that there was a great distance between them; and yet, though his person might thus be out of their reach, his voice might be distinctly heard, which in a clear air, and in the silence of the night, it might be at a considerable distance. David cried to the people — It is probable this was early in the morning.ELLICOTT, " (13) David went over to the other side.—That is to say, after taking the royal spear and cruse of water from beside the sleeping king, David with Abishai left the camp of Saul, then, crossing the deep ravine, re-ascended the opposite hill or mountain—there was then a deep gorge between him and the camp—and uttered his shrill cry, which awoke the sleeping sentinel, who seems at once to have roused Abner. Keil calls attention here to the special notice in the text that the mountain whence David spoke was afar off, not, as we should say, “as the crow flies,” but afar, because a deep steep ravine lay between the camp of Saul and the hill on which David and Abishai stood. “On the previous occasion when, in the cave of En-gedi, the son of Jesse cut off the skirt of the royal garment, David fearlessly cried to Saul when the king was still evidently quite close to the cave. Now, however, he seems to have reckoned far less upon any change in the state of Saul’s mind than he had done before . . . in fact, he rather feared lest Saul should endeavour to get him into his power as soon as he woke from his sleep.”

PULPIT, "1Sa_26:13-16The top of a hill. Hebrew, "the top of the hill," the particular mountain from which

75

David had reconnoitred Saul’s camp (1Sa_26:5). A great space being between them. At En-gedi Saul was alone, and had placed himself in David’s power; he therefore had followed him closely. Here Saul had his army round him, and David had entered his camp by stealth. It is not, therefore, till he had placed an ample interval between them that he calls to Abner, and asks in derision, Art thou not a man? The irony is enfeebled by the insertion of the word valiant. No special valour was needed any one worthy of the name of man ought to have guarded his master better. Who is like to thee—Hebrew, "who is as thou"—in Israel? Among all Saul’s subjects there was no one so powerful and highly placed as the commander-in-chief, and he ought to have shown himself worthy of his pre-eminence. Justly, therefore, for neglecting his duty and exposing the king to danger, he and his people were worthy to die. Hebrew, "sons of death" (see on 1Sa_20:31). Finally David bids him search for the king’s spear and water bottle, that he may understand how completely Saul had been in his power. It has been suggested that Abner was probably a personal enemy of David, with whom he could never have held the high position which he occupied with his near relative Saul. Possibly instead of dissuading Saul from persecuting David, he stirred up his ill feelings. Still absolutely there is nothing in this banter which was not justified by Abner’s official position.GUZIK, " David confronts Saul again with the evidence of his mercy.

1. (1Sa_26:13-16) David chides Abner, Saul’s body guard.Now David went over to the other side, and stood on the top of a hill afar off, a great distance being between them. And David called out to the people and to Abner the son of Ner, saying, “Do you not answer, Abner?” Then Abner answered and said, “Who are you, calling out to the king?” So David said to Abner, “Are you not a man? And who is like you in Israel? Why then have you not guarded your lord the king? For one of the people came in to destroy your lord the king. This thing that you have done is not good. As the LORD lives, you deserve to die, because you have not guarded your master, the Lord’s anointed. And now see where the king’s spear is, and the jug of water that was by his head.”

a. Are you not a man? And who is like you in Israel? Why then have you not guarded your lord the king? In this vivid scene, David implies that he cares more for Saul’s life than Abner does.b. See where the king’s spear is, and the jug of water that was by his head: This dramatic evidence - like the evidence of the corner of Saul’s robe in 1Sa_24:11 - was undeniable proof that David had the opportunity to kill Saul, but did not do it.

HAWKER, "Verses 13-20

76

(13) ¶ Then David went over to the other side, and stood on the top of an hill afar off; a great space being between them: (14) And David cried to the people, and to Abner the son of Ner, saying, Answerest thou not, Abner? Then Abner answered and said, Who art thou that criest to the king? (15) And David said to Abner, Art not thou a valiant man? and who is like to thee in Israel? wherefore then hast thou not kept thy lord the king? for there came one of the people in to destroy the king thy lord. (16) This thing is not good that thou hast done. As the LORD liveth, ye are worthy to die, because ye have not kept your master, the LORD'S anointed. And now see where the king's spear is, and the cruse of water that was at his bolster. (17) And Saul knew David's voice, and said, Is this thy voice, my son David? And David said, It is my voice, my lord, O king. (18) And he said, Wherefore doth my lord thus pursue after his servant? for what have I done? or what evil is in mine hand? (19) Now therefore, I pray thee, let my lord the king hear the words of his servant. If the LORD have stirred thee up against me, let him accept an offering: but if they be the children of men, cursed be they before the LORD for they have driven me out this day from abiding in the inheritance of the LORD, saying, Go, serve other gods. (20) Now therefore, let not my blood fall to the earth before the face of the LORD: for the king of Israel is come out to seek a flea, as when one doth hunt a partridge in the mountains.

Here is a similar interview to what passed, 1 Samuel 24:8. but here, David first calls to the servant of Saul, and afterwards to the master. The argument David makes use of in this conference is also stronger than in the former, he complains of being driven out of his inheritance; from the inheritance of the Lord; and as such, being tempted to mingle with the heathen and learn their works. But how beautiful is it to observe, that there is no railing against Saul, no accusation brought against him for a breach of his word and honor. When our Lord Jesus Christ was struck by one of the officers in the palace of the high priest, we find no answer of wrath, no charge, no crimination made by the Lamb of God; but only a justification of himself and a meek quest ion, Why smitest thou me? John 18:22-23.

PETT, "1 Samuel 26:13

‘Then David went over to the other side, and stood on the top of the mountain afar off, a great space being between them.’

David and Abishai then returned to Ahimelech waiting on the peak on the other side of the plateau or ravine that lay between the two mountain peaks, and having put a suitable space between himself and the enemy camp, turned in order to awaken the camp so as to inform them of what had happened while they all slept. (The space could not, however, have been too great for he expected to be seen and heard, and it would seem that there was probably a ravine between).

77

14 He called out to the army and to Abner son of Ner, "Aren't you going to answer me, Abner?" Abner replied, "Who are you who calls to the king?"

GILL, "And David cried unto the people,.... To the army of Saul with a loud voice, that he might be heard: and to Abner the son of Ner; particularly to him, because he was general of the army: saying, answerest thou not, Abner? it seems he had called to him more than once, and he had returned no answer; perhaps not being thoroughly awake, or not knowing whose voice it was, and from whence it came: then Abner answered and said, who art thou that criest to the king? but it does not appear that David called to the king, only to the people, and to Abner their general, and therefore may be better rendered, "by the king" (s); that is, near him, or "before him" (t), in his presence. Kimchi and Ben Melech explain it, upon the king, or over him; and the Targum is, at the head of the king; the meaning is, how he could act such a part as to call so loud within the king's hearing, as to disturb the king's rest, and awake him out of his sleep. HENRY, "He reasons ironically with Abner, and keenly banters him. David knew well that it was from the mighty power of God that Abner and the rest of the guards were cast into so deep a sleep, and that God's immediate hand was in it; but he reproaches Abner as unworthy to be captain of the lifeguards, since he could sleep when the king his master lay so much exposed. By this it appears that the hand of God locked them up in this deep sleep that, as soon as ever David had got out of danger, a very little thing awakened them, even David's voice at a great distance roused them, 1Sa_26:14. Abner got up (we may suppose it early in a summer's morning) and enquired who called, and disturbed the king's repose. “It is I,” says David, and then he upbraids him with his sleeping when he should have been upon his guard. Perhaps Abner, looking upon David as a despicable enemy and one that

78

there was no danger from, had neglected to set a watch; however, he himself ought to have been more wakeful. David, to put him into confusion, told him,WHEDON, " 14. David cried to the people — “The people in these mountainous countries are able, from long practice, so to pitch their voices as to be heard distinctly at distances almost incredible. They talk with persons across enormous wadies, and give the most minute directions, which are perfectly understood. In the stillness of evening, after the people have returned home from their distant fields, the public crier of villages on Lebanon ascends the mountain side, above the place, or to the roof of some prominent house, and gives forth his proclamation with such distinctness that all can hear and understand it.” — Thomson.PETT, "1 Samuel 26:14‘And David cried to the people, and to Abner the son of Ner, saying, “Do you not answer, Abner?” Then Abner answered and said, “Who are you who cries to the king?”’Yelling with a strident voice across the plateau David sought to awaken Abner in order to taunt him with his failure to watch over the king. ‘Do you not answer’ was a mocking question indicating that he was aware that Abner was asleep. Awoken as a result of the noise, and possibly also by the sentries, Abner, having been informed that someone was calling to them from another hilltop, asked who it was, informing the caller at the same time if he realised that he was actually awaking the king. It was an indication of the total lack of awareness of Saul and his men of the presence of David and his men so close at hand. They had probably assumed that he had fled southwards as he had done previously“Who are you who cries to the king?” The question is highly symbolic. We are reminded of how Nabal had asked, ‘Who is David, and who is the son of Jesse?’ Both are questions that the writer wanted answered. Abner meant his question to indicate to whoever it was who had awoken the camp that he should be silent in view of the king’s presence, unless he had something very important to say, his assumption being that whoever it was would not know that the king was there. But the writer intends us to see that the answer to the question was ‘David, the anointed of YHWH and successor to Saul in the kingship’.

15 David said, "You're a man, aren't you? And who is like you in Israel? Why didn't you guard your lord the

79

king? Someone came to destroy your lord the king.

David is being quite mean toward Abner here, and embarrassing him before the king and all his troops for failing to protect his king.Ray Pritchard, "David’s reply in verses 15-16 is one of the great pieces of sarcasm in the Old Testament. He essentially tells Abner, “You are a lousy guard. You fell asleep when you were supposed to be protecting the king. Where were you when I was there? You and all your men deserve to die. And if you don’t believe I was there, just look around. Where is the king’s spear? Where is his water jug?”What a slam it was on Abner and his men. And the message it sent was unmistakable: So far from being a threat to Saul, David was the most faithful defender of his life, more faithful than his own soldiers.GILL &c.] Or a man F21, a man of great fame for courage and valour, a man of great authority, who had the next post in the army under Saul, but had not behaved like a man, worthy of his character and office:and who [is] like to thee in Israel?none that bare so great a name, or was in so high an office, who therefore should have been careful to have acted according to both:wherefore then hast thou not kept thy lord the king?took care to have set a guard about his person while he slept; which perhaps was neglected through a contempt of David and his men, as being in no fear of them:for there came one of the people in to destroy the king thy lord;that is, there had been one in the camp that night, who had entered there with that view to have destroyed him, had he an opportunity, and which did offer; this was true of Abishai, who no doubt went down with David into the camp with that intent, though David did not, and therefore he says, "one of the people", not more; for though two went in, only one with that view: David observes to them the danger the king was in, his carefulness of him to preserve his life, to whom only it was owing, and the negligence of Abner, and those under his command.

HENRY, "That he had lost his honour (1Sa_26:15): “Art not thou a man? (so the word is), a man in office, that art bound, by the duty of thy place, to inspect the soldiery? Art not thou in reputation for a valiant man? So thou wouldst be esteemed, a man of such courage and conduct that there is none like thee; but now thou art shamed for ever. Thou a general! Thou, a sluggard!”

80

ELLICOTT, " (15) A valiant man.—The English translators have rightly emphasised the Hebrew ish here by rendering a “valiant” man. Ish was used not unfrequently in this “nobler” sense; so in Psalms 49:2, when the b’ne adam, as “the poor mean ones,” were contrasted with the b’ne ish, “the noble ones.” (See also Isaiah 2:9 : “mean men and great men.”)Wherefore then hast thou not kept?—The whole of this bitter sarcastic address seems to imply that a deadly feud existed between David and Saul’s captain and kinsman, Abner. If this be the case, the royal generosity and nobility of David’s character was well shown in his subsequent friendship with this Abner, and in his deep sorrow for the great captain’s untimely death. (See 2 Samuel 3)Deffinbaugh, " When David asked for a volunteer, Abishai stepped forward, just as I suspect David anticipated. You see, Abishai was a mighty man of valor as described in 2 Samuel 23:18-19:18 And Abishai, the brother of Joab, the son of Zeruiah, was chief of the thirty. And he swung his spear against three hundred and killed them, and had a name as well as the three. 19 He was most honored of the thirty, therefore he became their commander; however, he did not attain to the three.Abishai is a stouthearted soldier, a man who has no qualms about taking the life of another. David took Abishai along with him, knowing full well that he would want to kill Saul when they reached him in his camp.Those to whom David call out are soldiers. They are there to arrest David, whom some represented as a dangerous outlaw, determined to gain the throne by killing Saul. If this were the case (or even if it were not) they are Saul’s secret servicemen. David informs them they have failed their most important duty –protecting their king. David claims a would-be killer successfully penetrated their defenses and reached their king, fully intending to do him harm. Only because David stopped him (i.e., Abishai) is the king still breathing. David is right! While David did not approach Saul to kill him, this was surely Abishai’s intention. The only reason Abishai did not kill King Saul was that David stopped him. If any doubted one had come this close to Saul, look for the king’s spear and water jug. Imagine the dismay, especially for Abner, when they look at the ground, inches from Saul’s head, and see the hole where the head of the spear has been and the missing water jug, and perhaps a pair of footprints leading to the spear and back. David invites Saul’s security force to send a man up to him to retrieve the missing items. David has the spear, and he has made his point.In truth, David saved the king’s life. As commander-in-chief of Saul’s forces, Abner is responsible for this serious breach of security which endangered the life of the king. Abner is the man in charge. It was on his watch, so to speak, that Saul’s life was endangered. And it was Abner who lay next to the king, within easy reach of the

81

one who would have killed the king. Abner is the most renowned soldier in Saul’s army. What a blemish this incident puts on his record! But it is much worse than this, for failing to protect the king is a crime punishable by death. In this instance, not only Abner, but every one of the 3,000 soldiers is guilty of a most unpardonable sin.Someone told me of a news story they heard on the radio. Apparently there was an attempt on the life of Saddam Hussein’s son. His son was not killed, but for failing to protect him properly, all of the security men were executed. David is not speaking idle words, and every soldier standing near Saul must wonder what the king’s response will be.

CLARKE This is a strong irony. Ye are worthy to die; ye are sons of death-ye deserve death for this neglect of your king. And had not Saul been so deeply affected with David's generosity in preserving his life, he had doubtless put Abner and his chief officers to death; though they were not to blame, as their apparent neglect was the effect of a supernatural sleep.BENSON, "1 Samuel 26:15-17. Wherefore hast thou not kept, &c. — Observed better military discipline for the preservation of the king’s person? There came one of the people — Into the king’s camp, and had a fair opportunity to destroy him. Because ye have not kept your master — Guarded him better from any danger. It is probable they despised David’s small forces, and, therefore, were so negligent. It is my voice, my lord, O king — He still acknowledges Saul’s authority, and the allegiance he owed him, though he had done him so many injuries.COKE, "1 Samuel 26:15. David said to Abner, Art not thou, &c.— It may be asked, how could David make Abner and Saul hear, as it appears from the 13th verse that there was a great distance between them? The answer is easy. To ascend from one high hill to another, requires time; and in this sense, however adjacent, the two hills are remote. Time and pains are required to go from one to the other; but not so to make oneself heard. PETT, "1 Samuel 26:15‘And David said to Abner, “Are you not a real man? And who is like to you in Israel? Why then have you not kept watch over your lord the king? For there came one of the people in to destroy the king your lord.” ’David then taunted Abner with the fact that while he was certainly an able warrior, and in fact the highest authority in Israel after Saul, he had failed in that he had not kept proper watch over his lord, the king. Why he did not even appear to realise that there had been intruders in the camp, one of whom had wished to slay the king while they slept, and that when he was supposed to be arranging for watch to be kept.

82

16 What you have done is not good. As surely as the LORD lives, you and your men deserve to die, because you did not guard your master, the LORD's anointed. Look around you. Where are the king's spear and water jug that were near his head?"

1 Robert Roe, "He takes this opportunity to taunt Abner, the man who has been harassing him. This is a very tactical error. (Abner is now commander of the king's army. David used to be commander of Saul's army. Possibly there was rivalry between them even then.) Abner is quite a general, and David causes him to lose face in front of 3,000 of his troops. Abner is an oriental. How do you think Abner is going to respond? Poor old David just can not resist this kind of thing. When David, upon Saul's death, becomes king of Judah, Abner takes the remaining son of Saul, Ishbosheth, and with the ten northern tribes sets up his own kingdom in opposition to David. He does not return to David until Ishbosheth insults him and he loses face in Israel. Only then does he deliver Israel to David. David's little indulgence here may well have kept him from becoming king of all of Israel for several years. When you have a spiritual victory, don't push your luck. The retribution of God is always there. When you disobey God you will pay for it somewhere down the line. I think this incident is one of the basic reasons Abner refused to allow the ten tribes of Israel to join with Judah. under David as king.GILL This thing [is] not good that thou hast done…Yea, it was very bad, a great fault, and very blameworthy, if he had neglected to set a watch over the king, whose business it was as a general; the words are expressed in a figure called "meiosis", in which less is said than was intended:[as] the Lord liveth, ye [are] worthy to die, because ye have not keptyour master, the Lord's anointed;if a watch was set, and these had fallen asleep, and neglected their duty, or had deserted their post; which to do was a capital crime, and deserving of death; wherefore he does not say this of Abner, but of the watch:and now see where the king's spear [is], and the cruse of water that[was] at his bolster;

83

which he then held up as proofs and evidences of the truth of what be said, that one had been in the camp and had carried off these, and who could as easily have destroyed the king as to have taken these away; and as he came hither with an intent to destroy him, would have done it, had he not been prevented by David; all which likewise plainly proved the negligence of Abner, in not setting a watch about his master, or the negligence of the watch that was set. HENRY, "That he deserved to lose his head (1Sa_26:16): “You are all worthy to die,by martial law, for being off your guard, when you had the king himself asleep in the midst of you. Ecce signum - Behold this token. See where the king's spear is, in the hand of him whom the king himself is pleased to count his enemy. Those that took away this might as easily and safely have taken away his life. Now see who are the king's best friends, you that neglected him and left him exposed or I that protected him when he was exposed. You pursue me as worthy to die, and irritate Saul against me; but who is worthy to die now?” Note, Sometimes those that unjustly condemn others are justly left to fall into condemnation themselves.PETT, "1 Samuel 26:16“This thing is not good that you have done. As YHWH lives, you are worthy to die, because you have not kept watch over your lord, YHWH’s anointed. And now see where the king’s spear is, and the cruse of water that was at his head.”He then rebuked Abner for his failure, which he pointed out was not a very good thing at all. Indeed it was a sign of slackness (someone was no doubt later severely punished as a result). Thus he should recognise that he had made himself worthy of death as sure as YHWH was the living God, because he had failed to keep watch over what belonged to YHWH, even over Saul, YHWH’s anointed.He then produced Saul’s ceremonial spear and water jar in order to emphasise his point. These made clear that he, or one of his men, had actually approached Saul while he was asleep and had stolen them unobserved. By this he was emphasising that Saul’s kingship and very life had been at his mercy. David was no doubt hoping by this that he might once again persuade Saul to give up his search, and he also wanted it known that David and his men were no longer afraid of Saul and his army.

17 Saul recognized David's voice and said, "Is that your voice, David my son?"

84

David replied, "Yes it is, my lord the king."

HENRY, "He reasons seriously and affectionately with Saul. By this time he was so well awake as to hear what was said, and to discern who said it (1Sa_26:17): Is this thy voice, my son David? In the same manner he had expressed his relentings, 1Sa_24:16. He had given his wife to another and yet calls him son, thirsted after his blood and yet is glad to hear his voice. Those are bad indeed that have never any convictions of good, nor ever sincerely utter good expressions. And now David has as fair an opportunity of reaching Saul's conscience as he had just now of taking away his life. This he lays hold on, though not of that, and enters into a close argument with him, concerning the trouble he still continued to give him, endeavouring to persuade him to let fall the prosecution and be reconciled.

DEFFINBAUGH 17-20Saul slowly comes to his senses, groggy no doubt from his supernatural slumber. He overhears the conversation between Abner and a distant voice. Saul knows that voice; it is the voice of none other than David. He has already heard enough to soften him. “Is this your voice, my son David?”128 David acknowledges that it is indeed he. From here, David takes the lead, inquiring of Saul why he is pursuing him once again. He asks Saul what evil deed he has done to necessitate such action on Saul’s part. There is, of course, no good answer.What follows is even more intriguing. David pleads with Saul to listen to his words and to consider what he is about to say. It is wrong for Saul to seek to kill David, for he has done his king no wrong. Indeed, he has just saved the king’s life. But having pointed this out, David pursues the matter more deeply, in terms of its theological implications. In verses 19 and 20, God is prominent, and so are the spiritual consequences of Saul’s pursuit of David.Saul obviously believes that David is guilty of some wrongdoing so that he needs to be hunted down and eliminated. David shows that there can be only two sources from which Saul could arrive at such a conclusion. On the one hand, it is possible that David has truly sinned, and that the Lord has stirred Saul up to deal with this evil. If this is the case, Saul need only tell David what his sin is, and then David can obtain atonement for this sin by offering a sacrifice, which God will find acceptable. If this is the case, there is no need for Saul to pursue and punish David, since God has forgiven him.There is yet another possibility. If David is innocent, then there must be those who have wrongly accused David before Saul by characterizing him as a dangerous criminal, worthy of death. If this second possibility is true, then such false accusers

85

are under a curse before the Lord. It is not David who is worthy of death, but those who have wrongly accused David before Saul.15 He who justifies the wicked, and he who condemns the righteous, Both of them alike are an abomination to the LORD (Proverbs 17:15).20 Woe to those who call evil good, and good evil; Who substitute darkness for light and light for darkness; Who substitute bitter for sweet, and sweet for bitter! (Isaiah 5:20).The sin of such men goes even beyond making false accusations against David. In provoking Saul to pursue David, they have forced an innocent man to flee from his country. It is they, aided by Saul, who have driven David out of Israel. The spiritual implications of this are immense. To leave the country, as David has had to do, is to “have no attachment with the inheritance of the Lord” (verse 19). To force a true Israelite to leave this land is to so much as say, “Go, serve other gods” (verse 19).This is a very significant point, but one much harder for us to grasp than for an Old Testament Israelite like David. Let me attempt to explain. When God created the world and mankind, He put Adam and Eve in a special place, the Garden of Eden. It was here that He fellowshipped with them. When they sinned, they were driven out of this place of fellowship and blessing. When God chose Abraham, He set apart a man whom He would bless, and whose descendants He would bless as well. But He also set aside a place of blessing. It was to this place of blessing that Abraham was instructed to go, leaving his homeland and family behind. God also chose the land of Israel as the place where He would dwell in a special way.When Jacob deceived his brother Esau, he was virtually forced to leave this special place, Israel. As he was leaving Israel (or what became the land of Israel), headed for Paddan-aram, God gave Jacob a dream:12 And he had a dream, and behold, a ladder was set on the earth with its top reaching to heaven; and behold, the angels of God were ascending and descending on it. 13 And behold, the LORD stood above it and said, “I am the LORD, the God of your father Abraham and the God of Isaac; the land on which you lie, I will give it to you and to your descendants. 14 “Your descendants shall also be like the dust of the earth, and you shall spread out to the west and to the east and to the north and to the south; and in you and in your descendants shall all the families of the earth be blessed. 15 “And behold, I am with you, and will keep you wherever you go, and will bring you back to this land; for I will not leave you until I have done what I have promised you.” 16 Then Jacob awoke from his sleep and said, “Surely the LORD is in this place, and I did not know it.” 17 And he was afraid and said, “How awesome is this place! This is none other than the house of God, and this is the gate of heaven.” 18 So Jacob rose early in the morning, and took the stone that he had put under his head and set it up as a pillar, and poured oil on its top. 19 And he called the name of that place Bethel; however, previously the name of the city

86

had been Luz. 20 Then Jacob made a vow, saying, “If God will be with me and will keep me on this journey that I take, and will give me food to eat and garments to wear, 21 and I return to my father's house in safety, then the LORD will be my God. 22 “And this stone, which I have set up as a pillar, will be God's house; and of all that Thou dost give me I will surely give a tenth to Thee” (Genesis 28:12-22, emphasis mine).In this dream, God communicated a very important message to Jacob. The message was that Canaan was a very special place; it was the place where heaven and earth intersected, it was the place where God dwelt in a special way. It was a message that motivated Jacob to return to this place and not stay in Paddan-aram. Just as God chose a certain people, among whom He would dwell, God chose a certain place where He would dwell. It is because of this that Jacob was buried in the promised land, even though he died in Egypt (Genesis 47:27-31; 49:29-33). Joseph, likewise, instructed that his bones be taken to this land when the nation Israel returned (Genesis 50:22-26; Exodus 13:19).When the Israelites were ready to enter the promised land, God made it very clear to them that they were to worship Him only at the designated place in the promised land:5 “But you shall seek the LORD at the place which the LORD your God shall choose from all your tribes, to establish His name there for His dwelling, and there you shall come. 6 “And there you shall bring your burnt offerings, your sacrifices, your tithes, the contribution of your hand, your votive offerings, your freewill offerings, and the first-born of your herd and of your flock. 7 “There also you and your households shall eat before the LORD your God, and rejoice in all your undertakings in which the LORD your God has blessed you. 8 “You shall not do at all what we are doing here today, every man doing whatever is right in his own eyes; 9 for you have not as yet come to the resting place and the inheritance which the LORD your God is giving you. 10 “When you cross the Jordan and live in the land which the LORD your God is giving you to inherit, and He gives you rest from all your enemies around you so that you live in security, 11 then it shall come about that the place in which the LORD your God shall choose for His name to dwell, there you shall bring all that I command you: your burnt offerings and your sacrifices, your tithes and the contribution of your hand, and all your choice votive offerings which you will vow to the LORD. 12 “And you shall rejoice before the LORD your God, you and your sons and daughters, your male and female servants, and the Levite who is within your gates, since he has no portion or inheritance with you. 13 “Be careful that you do not offer your burnt offerings in every cultic place you see, 14 but in the place which the LORD chooses in one of your tribes, there you shall offer your burnt offerings, and there you shall do all that I command you” (Deuteronomy 12:5-14).To force David to flee from the land of Israel was to force him to flee from the place where God dwelt in a special way; it was to force him to leave the place where God

87

had provided for men to worship Him. Thus, to force one to flee from Israel was as much as to say, “Go, serve other gods.” Do you remember the story of Ruth? In the Book of Ruth, Naomi and her husband left Israel during a time of famine and went to the land of Moab. When her husband and two sons died, Naomi decided to return to the land of Israel. Her two daughters-in-law were Moabites. Naomi fully intended to leave these two women in their own land, while she went on alone to Israel. Notice what Naomi tells them, and how Ruth responds:12 “Return, my daughters! Go, for I am too old to have a husband. If I said I have hope, if I should even have a husband tonight and also bear sons, 13 would you therefore wait until they were grown? Would you therefore refrain from marrying? No, my daughters; for it is harder for me than for you, for the hand of the LORD has gone forth against me. “ 14 And they lifted up their voices and wept again; and Orpah kissed her mother-in-law, but Ruth clung to her. 15 Then she said, “Behold, your sister-in-law has gone back to her people and her gods; return after your sister-in-law.” 16 But Ruth said, “Do not urge me to leave you or turn back from following you; for where you go, I will go, and where you lodge, I will lodge. Your people shall be my people, and your God, my God. 17 “Where you die, I will die, and there I will be buried. Thus may the LORD do to me, and worse, if anything but death parts you and me” (Ruth 1:12-17, emphasis mine).In effect, by urging her daughters-in-law to remain in Moab rather than return to Israel with her, she was urging them to serve other gods. To leave Israel is to leave the land where one can worship God (because of His special presence there, particularly in conjunction with the ark of God and eventually the temple).In the Book of 2 Kings, we read of the healing and conversion of Naaman, the Syrian. When Naaman was about to return to his own country, he made a very unusual request of the prophet Elisha:17 And Naaman said, “If not, please let your servant at least be given two mules' load of earth; for your servant will no more offer burnt offering nor will he sacrifice to other gods, but to the LORD” (2 Kings 5:17).Naaman realized that the God of Israel was the only true God. He also recognized that He dwelt in a special way in Israel, and that He was to be worshipped there. What was Naaman to do? He asked for some Israelite soil to take back to Syria with him, so that He could worship the God of Israel on Israelite soil.129Later in Israel’s history, God would send His people into captivity, outside the land. This was a devastating blow, as can be seen by one of the Psalms written during the Jewish captivity in Babylon:1 By the rivers of Babylon, There we sat down and wept, When we remembered Zion. 2 Upon the willows in the midst of it We hung our harps. 3 For there our captors demanded of us songs, And our tormentors mirth, saying, “Sing us one of

88

the songs of Zion.” 4 How can we sing the LORD'S song In a foreign land? 5 If I forget you, O Jerusalem, May my right hand forget her skill. 6 May my tongue cleave to the roof of my mouth, If I do not remember you, If I do not exalt Jerusalem Above my chief joy (Psalm 137:1-6).David fled to Gath in Philistia (21:10-15) and then to Moab (22:3-4). I believe David was outside the land of Israel when the prophet Gad appeared to him, instructing him to leave the stronghold and to return to the land of Judah (22:5). We are not told why in that text, and I am inclined to think that David was not told either. But now I think he has figured it out. David has grasped a very important truth – that Israel is the special place in which God has chosen to dwell in a special way, and where He can be worshipped. It is indeed, the place where heaven and earth meet, just as in Jacob’s dream. David has also grasped the implications of this truth as it applies to his pursuit by Saul and his men, forcing him to flee the country. Those who have incited Saul against David have forced him to flee the country, and thus may might as well have said to him, “Go, serve other gods.” This is a crime worthy of death:6 “If your brother, your mother's son, or your son or daughter, or the wife you cherish, or your friend who is as your own soul, entice you secretly, saying, 'Let us go and serve other gods' (whom neither you nor your fathers have known, 7 of the gods of the peoples who are around you, near you or far from you, from one end of the earth to the other end), 8 you shall not yield to him or listen to him; and your eye shall not pity him, nor shall you spare or conceal him. 9 “But you shall surely kill him; your hand shall be first against him to put him to death, and afterwards the hand of all the people. 10 “So you shall stone him to death because he has sought to seduce you from the LORD your God who brought you out from the land of Egypt, out of the house of slavery. 11 “Then all Israel will hear and be afraid, and will never again do such a wicked thing among you” (Deuteronomy 13:6-11; see also verses 12-18).This accusing and pursuing of David is indeed a most serious matter. It is wrong because David is innocent. Those who pursue David have now placed themselves in a most dangerous position. On whose side do these men suppose God is? David has been able to come and go in their camp. He is able to reach Saul’s side and take his spear, without any resistance. If he had chosen to do so, he could have killed Saul. And yet it is David who saves the king’s life, and not the king’s own men. They have failed to protect their king! They, not David, are worthy of death. And since all these soldiers of Saul have failed to protect their king, they are guilty of a capital offense. They deserve to die. Not only do they deserve to die at the hand of Saul, they deserve to die at the hand of God. By accusing David and forcing him to flee the country, they are promoting the worship of false gods. They are condemned men. They are in a lot of trouble, with their king and with their God. This incident shows that it is not David whose life is in danger as much as those who pursue him, or who falsely accuse him to their king. Those guilty of this sin seem to be present on this very night. Saul’s spear is not thrust that night, but David’s words pierce the

89

very heart of every man.In verse 20, David pleads with Saul that his blood not be shed outside of the land, away from the presence of the Lord. There is no need for Saul to pursue him so vigorously. Searching for David is like searching for a single flea, like hunting a partridge in the mountains. It is a whole lot of work with very little benefit. It is a futile, if not a dangerous, task. Let the king forsake his pursuit and cease listening to those who pit him against David.ELLICOTT, "(17) And Saul knew David’s voice.—The account is most natural throughout. 1 Samuel 26:7 speaks of the enterprise being undertaken “by night,” when the soldiers of Saul had fallen into “a deep sleep” (1 Samuel 26:12). When David on his return stood on the opposite ridge, it was still, no doubt, the dawn of early morning. So Saul speaks of hearing that voice of David so well known to him, and which once he so dearly loved; he could not as yet discern the figure of his former friend.COFFMAN, "DAVID'S EARNEST APPEAL TO SAUL"Saul recognized David's voice, and said, "Is this your voice, my son David"? And David said, "It is my voice, my lord, O king." And he said, "Why does my lord pursue after his servant? For what have I done? What guilt is on my hands? Now therefore let my lord the king hear the words of his servant. If it is the Lord who has stirred you up against me, may he accept an offering; but if it is men, may they be cursed before the Lord, for they have driven me out this day that I should have no share in the heritage of the Lord, saying, `Go serve other gods.' Now therefore, let not my blood fall to the earth away from the presence of the Lord; for the king of Israel has come out to seek my life, like one who hunts a partridge in the mountains.""It is my voice my lord O king" (1 Samuel 26:17). There is a dramatic difference in David's reply to Saul here as contrasted with that other occasion at Engedi. There David addressed Saul as "My father" (1 Samuel 24:11), and Saul here sought the same kind of response from David, but David no longer used that terminology. Saul had given his wife Michal to Palti, and there were no grounds whatever, either for Saul's words, "My son," or for David's responding with, "My father." It was this, perhaps, that enabled David instantly to see that Saul's words were those of a confirmed hypocrite. There are many irreconcilable differences in these two accounts in which Saul's life was spared by David."They have driven me out ... that I should have no share in the heritage of the Lord." (1 Samuel 26:19) Every Jew felt that the presence of God pertained especially to the land of Israel, and no Hebrew wanted to die away from it, but, "It is unnecessary to infer that David believed that God was operative only in the land of Israel. Such a view is ruled out by 1 Samuel 30:7,8."[13] "Here David pleaded with Saul for some opportunity that would prevent his having to leave his own

90

people and the land of Israel."[14] The failure of Saul to provide any answer that David could trust was at once followed by David's leaving the land of Israel for that of the Philistines. This, of course, was a far different result from that which followed the first sparing of Saul's life by David."Like one who hunts a partridge in the mountains" (1 Samuel 26:19). The older versions use the word "flea" instead of "partridge" here, and critics love to cite this as one of the similarities with the event at Engedi, but, as H. P. Smith wrote, "This reading gives a sense more in accord with the context."[15]CONSTABLE, "Verses 17-20David"s appeal to SaulEvidently the realization that David or Abishai again could have killed him but did not, led Saul to respond to David tenderly, calling him his son ( 1 Samuel 26:17; cf. 1 Samuel 26:21; 1 Samuel 26:25). Indeed, David had behaved as a loyal son toward Saul. David, however, did not now address Saul as his father, as he had previously (cf. 1 Samuel 24:11). He had come to view Saul less affectionately since he continued to hound David without cause after repeated promises to stop doing so. Moreover Saul was no longer David"s father-in-law (cf. 1 Samuel 25:44).David said that if violation of the Mosaic Law had prompted Saul to hunt him down, he was ready to offer the sacrifice the Law prescribed to atone for it ( 1 Samuel 26:19). However, if David"s enemies had stirred up Saul"s hostility without cause, David prayed that God would judge them for that. Saul"s attacks had resulted in David"s separation from the Lord"s inheritance (i.e, the blessings God had given Israel, especially rest in the Promised Land) since he had to live as a fugitive. David"s enemies had in effect encouraged him to abandon Yahweh by driving him out of his home territory ( 1 Samuel 26:19). [Note: On the possibility that God had incited Saul to seek David"s life, and the larger issue of God"s use of deception to judge sinners, see Chisholm, "Does God Deceive?" pp11-12 , 19-21.] The common conception in the ancient Near East was that gods ruled areas. Evidently some people were saying that because David had departed from his area the Lord would not protect him. David appeared to be seeking the protection of other gods by living in areas that they supposedly controlled (e.g, Philistia and Moab). [Note: See Youngblood, Faith of Our Fathers, p84; and Daniel Isaac Block, The Gods of the Nations: Studies in Ancient Near Eastern National Theology.] This looked like David was violating the first commandment ( Exodus 20:3). Nevertheless David wanted to live and die in the center of God"s will and presence ( 1 Samuel 26:20).David again compared himself to a mere flea, essentially harmless but annoying to Saul ( 1 Samuel 26:20; cf. 1 Samuel 24:14). He was making a word play on Abner"s question, "Who are you who calls (Heb. qarata) to the king?" ( 1 Samuel 26:14) by referring to himself as a "partridge" ( 1 Samuel 26:20, Heb. haqqore, lit. caller-

91

bird). The partridge darts from one bush to another when a hunter pursues it, as David had been doing, though it tires fairly quickly and then can be caught easily. [Note: Youngblood, "1 , 2 Samuel ," p771.] David"s point in comparing himself to a partridge and a flea was that Saul"s search for such an insignificant person as David was beneath the king"s dignity.PETT, "Verses 17-25Saul’s Response (1 Samuel 26:17-25).The difference between this reply and that in 1 Samuel 24:17-21 is striking. In 1 Samuel 24:17-21 Saul had declared that David was more righteous than he because he had repaid good for evil, and admitted that he himself had been at fault in the matter and he expressed his gratitude that David had not killed him when he had had the opportunity. He had then declared his recognition that on his own death the kingship would go to David, and sought an oath that David would not slaughter all the males in his house when he did became king, thus cutting off the name of Saul’s family. He was clearly deeply concerned about the succession.Here in contrast in 1 Samuel 26:17-25 Saul admitted that he had erred and played the fool in treating David as he had, and expressed his thankfulness that his life was precious in David’s eyes. And he then blessed David and declared that he would do many things and succeed in them. It was as though he gave no hint that he thought that David might succeed him. Thus while he spoke of his coming successful life there was no mention of the kingship, nor specifically of David’s goodness, nor was there any mention of any required oath to do with the succession. Here it was as though Saul did not consider that David was a threat to the succession at all. This striking difference is explainable in terms of a Saul who was sometimes paranoid about the kingship when in his black moods, but was otherwise free from those fears when not in a black mood. It does not fit at all with the idea that they are duplicate narratives.Analysis.And Saul knew David’s voice, and said, “Is this your voice, my son David?” And David said, “It is my voice, my lord, O king” (1 Samuel 26:17).b And he said, “Why does my lord pursue after his servant? For what have I done, or what evil is in my hand?” (1 Samuel 26:18).c “Now therefore, I pray you, let my lord the king hear the words of his servant. If it be YHWH who has stirred you up against me, let him accept an offering, but if it be the children of men, cursed be they before YHWH, for they have driven me out this day that I should not cleave to the inheritance of YHWH, saying, “Go, serve other gods” (1 Samuel 26:19).

92

d “Now therefore, let not my blood fall to the earth away from the presence of YHWH, for the king of Israel is come out to seek a flea, as when one hunts a partridge in the mountains” (1 Samuel 26:20).e Then Saul said, “I have sinned, return, my son David, for I will no more do you harm, because my life was precious in your eyes this day. Look, I have played the fool, and have erred exceedingly” (1 Samuel 26:21).d And David answered and said, “See, the spear, O king! Let then one of the young men come over and fetch it” (1 Samuel 26:22).c And YHWH will render to every man his righteousness and his faithfulness; forasmuch as YHWH delivered you into my hand today, and I would not put forth my hand against YHWH’s anointed” (1 Samuel 26:23).b “And, behold, as your life was much set by this day in my eyes, so let my life be much set by in the eyes of YHWH, and let him deliver me out of all tribulation” (1 Samuel 26:24).a Then Saul said to David, “Blessed are you, my son David. You will both do mightily, and will surely prevail.” So David went his way, and Saul returned to his place (1 Samuel 26:25).Note that in ‘a’ Saul speaks of David as his son, and in the parallel does the same. In ‘b’ David asks what evil he has done, and in the parallel he confirms that he has behaved rightly towards Saul. In ‘c’ he asks whether YHWH has anything against him, and in the parallel declares that in fact he has behaved in such a way that YHWH cannot have anything against him. In ‘d’ David declares that he is as a flea or a partridge in contrast with the king, and in the parallel he humbly hands back to the king the ceremonial sceptre which represents his kingship. Centrally in ‘e’ Saul admits that he has done wrong by David and declares that he will do him no more harm. Saul is at this stage clearly in a good state mentally.1 Samuel 26:17‘And Saul knew David’s voice, and said, “Is this your voice, my son David?” And David said, “It is my voice, my lord, O king.” ’voice, addressing Saul as ‘my lord, O king’. He was taking no chances.

Recognising David’s voice Saul asked ‘is this your voice, my son David?’ The question did not mean that he was doubtful about the fact that it was David for he had asked the same question in 1 Samuel 24:17 when he knew perfectly well that it was David. It was rather an opening greeting indicating conciliation. David replied with great respect that it was indeed his

93

18 And he added, "Why is my lord pursuing his servant? What have I done, and what wrong am I guilty of?

DEFFINBAUGH Abishai is a stouthearted soldier, a man who has no qualms about taking the life of another. David took Abishai along with him, knowing full well that he would want to kill Saul when they reached him in his camp.Those to whom David call out are soldiers. They are there to arrest David, whom some represented as a dangerous outlaw, determined to gain the throne by killing Saul. If this were the case (or even if it were not) they are Saul’s secret servicemen. David informs them they have failed their most important duty –protecting their king. David claims a would-be killer successfully penetrated their defenses and reached their king, fully intending to do him harm. Only because David stopped him (i.e., Abishai) is the king still breathing. David is right! While David did not approach Saul to kill him, this was surely Abishai’s intention. The only reason Abishai did not kill King Saul was that David stopped him. If any doubted one had come this close to Saul, look for the king’s spear and water jug. Imagine the dismay, especially for Abner, when they look at the ground, inches from Saul’s head, and see the hole where the head of the spear has been and the missing water jug, and perhaps a pair of footprints leading to the spear and back. David invites Saul’s security force to send a man up to him to retrieve the missing items. David has the spear, and he has made his point.In truth, David saved the king’s life. As commander-in-chief of Saul’s forces, Abner is responsible for this serious breach of security which endangered the life of the king. Abner is the man in charge. It was on his watch, so to speak, that Saul’s life was endangered. And it was Abner who lay next to the king, within easy reach of the one who would have killed the king. Abner is the most renowned soldier in Saul’s army. What a blemish this incident puts on his record! But it is much worse than this, for failing to protect the king is a crime punishable by death. In this instance, not only Abner, but every one of the 3,000 soldiers is guilty of a most unpardonable sin.Someone told me of a news story they heard on the radio. Apparently there was an attempt on the life of Saddam Hussein’s son. His son was not killed, but for failing to protect him properly, all of the security men were executed. David is not speaking idle words, and every soldier standing near Saul must wonder what the king’s

94

response will be.HENRY, "1. He complains of the very melancholy condition he was brought into by the enmity of Saul against him. Two things he laments: - (1.) That he was driven from his master and from his business: “My lord pursues after his servant, 1Sa_26:18. How gladly would I serve thee as formerly if my service might be accepted! but, instead of being owned as a servant, I am pursued as a rebel, and my lord is my enemy, and he whom I would follow with respect compels me to flee from him.”PETT, "1 Samuel 26:18‘And he said, “Why does my lord pursue after his servant? For what have I done, or what evil is in my hand?”He then asked Saul why he was again pursuing after him. If he knew that he had done anything wrong, or that he intended evil to him, let him declare it. All David wanted to know was what his offence had been. He could never understand why Saul behaved as he did. (Even modern psychiatrists would have had problems with the question)

19 Now let my lord the king listen to his servant's words. If the LORD has incited you against me, then may he accept an offering. If, however, men have done it, may they be cursed before the LORD! They have now driven me from my share in the LORD's inheritance and have said, 'Go, serve other gods.'

Ray Pritchard, "When David asks that question, only two answers come to mind. Either he is actually guilty of some sin and God is using Saul to punish him, or evil men are inciting Saul to turn on David. Look at how David puts it in verse 19: “If the LORD has incited you against me, then may he accept an offering.” That means, “If I really am guilty, and God is behind all of this, then I am willing to confess my sin, make an offering, and have the matter settled.” Then the other side, “If,

95

however, men have done it, may they be cursed before the LORD!”GILL words of his servant…Whether David waited for an answer to his question is not certain; probably he did, and observing none returned, desired audience of what he had further to say:if the Lord have stirred thee up against me;if he had put it into his heart to persecute him after this manner, for some sin he had committed against him, though not against Saul: did that appear to be the case,let him accept an offering;my offering, as the Targum; or my prayer, as Jarchi; I would offer a sin offering according to the law, to make atonement for my offence, and might hope it would be accepted; or I would make my supplication to God, and entreat him to forgive mine iniquity, and so an issue be put to these troubles; or should it be a capital crime deserving of death he was guilty of, he was content to die, and satisfy for his fault in that way; or if both of them had sinned, in any respect, he proposed to join in an acceptable sacrifice to God, and so reconciliation be made, and matters adjusted in such a religious way; if it was the evil spirit from the Lord that had entered into Saul, or God had suffered a melancholy disorder to seize him, which had put him upon those measures, let an offering agreeable to the will of God be offered, or supplication made for the removal of it:but if [they be] the children of men;that incited him to such violent methods, as Abner his general, or Doeg the Edomite, and others:cursed [be] they before the Lord;an imprecation of the vengeance of God upon them:for they have driven me out this day from abiding in the inheritance ofthe Lord;meaning not from his own house and fatally, nor from the palace of Saul, but from the land of Canaan the Lord had given to his people Israel for an inheritance, and from the worship of God in it, which made it dear and precious to him; he knew if Saul went on pursuing him in this manner, he mast be obliged to quit the land, and go into a foreign country, as he quickly did; so the Targum renders it the inheritance of the people of the Lord: by being driven out of the land which was their inheritance, he should be deprived of their company and conversation, and of all social worship; the consideration of which was cutting to him, and caused the above imprecation from him on those who were concerned in it, and who in effect by their actions weresaying, go, serve other gods;for by being forced to go into an idolatrous country, he would be in the way of temptation, and be liable to be corrupted by ill examples, and to be persuaded and

96

enticed into idolatrous practices; and if he was kept from them it would be no thanks to them, they did all they could to lead him into them; and if he was preserved, it would be owing to the power and grace of God; the Targum is, ``go David among the people that worship idols;''the Jews have a saying, that he that dwells without the land of Israel, it is as if he had no God and as if he served an idol F17.

HENRY, "That he was driven from his God and from his religion; and this was a much greater grievance than the former (1Sa_26:19): “They have driven me out from the inheritance of the Lord, have made Canaan too hot for me, at least the inhabited parts of it, have forced me into the deserts and mountains, and will, ere long, oblige me entirely to quit the country.” And that which troubled him was not so much that he was driven out from his own inheritance as that he was driven out from the inheritance of the Lord, the holy land. It should be more comfortable to us to think of God's title to our estates and his interest in them then of our own, and that with them we may honour him then that with them we may maintain ourselves. Nor was it so much his trouble that he was constrained to live among strangers as that he was constrained to live among the worshippers of strange gods and was thereby thrust into temptation to join with them in their idolatrous worship. His enemies did, in effect, send him to go and serve other gods, and perhaps he had heard that some of them had spoken to that purport of him. Those that forbid our attendance on God's ordinances do what in them lies to estrange us from God and to make us heathens. If David had not been a man of extraordinary grace, and firmness to his religion, the ill usage he met with from his own prince and people, who were Israelites and worshippers of the true God, would have prejudiced him against the religion they professed and have driven him to communicate with idolaters. “If these be Israelites,” he might have said, “let me live and die with Philistines;” and no thanks to them that their conduct had not that effect. We are to reckon that the greatest injury that can be done us which exposes us to sin. Of those who thus led David into temptation he here says, Cursed be they before the Lord.Those fall under a curse that thrust out those whom God receives, and send those to the devil who are dear to God.BENSON, "1 Samuel 26:19. If the Lord hath stirred thee up against me — If he hath, by the evil spirit which he hath sent, or by his secret providence, directed thy rage against me for the punishment of thine or my sins; let him accept an offering — Let us offer up a sacrifice to him to appease his wrath against us. They have driven me — From the land which God hath given to his people for their inheritance, and where he hath established his presence and worship. Saying, Go, serve other gods — This was the language of their actions. For by driving him from God’s land, and the place of his worship, into foreign and idolatrous lands, they exposed him to the peril of being either insnared by their counsels or examples, or forced by their power to worship idols.

97

WHEDON, " 19. If the Lord have stirred thee up against me — That God sometimes impels men into evil actions is seen from 2 Samuel 16:10; 2 Samuel 24:1; but those very examples show that such instigation is but a part of the punishment of sins already committed. God tempts no man to sin, and the instigations to evil above referred to are not temptations, but judgments for sins already done and demanding punishment. David therefore tells the king that if the Lord has stirred him up to this evil persecution, then he (Saul) should regard himself as a sinner, and seek reconciliation by an offering.Let him accept an offering — Both at thy hands and at mine. David here implies that he himself is a sinner and may need atonement, but that fact does not lessen Saul’s sin.If… the children of men — Such as the Ziphites and Doeg the Edomite.Go, serve other gods — This was the effect of their driving him out of the inheritance of the Lord, that is, from among the chosen people, Israel. They thereby obliged him to be far away from the tabernacle and all the sacred services required by the law. Perhaps Psalms xlii and xliii were composed about this time.Jim BomkampDavid suggests that if this is the case then let those men be cursed because they have driven David out from fellowship with the community of God’s people and worship of the Lord, and now David is left to have to worship ‘other gods.’5.8.2.2. What bothered David the most about his exile and wanderings was that he was not able to serve the Lord with the community of God’s people, he wasn’t even able to make a sacrifice for his sins. We see this reflected in David’s writings in the Psalms, for instance, Psalm 42:1-7, “1 As the deer pants for the water brooks, So my soul pants for You, O God. 2 My soul thirsts for God, for the living God; When shall I come and appear before God? 3 My tears have been my food day and night, While they say to me all day long, “Where is your God?” 4 These things I remember and I pour out my soul within me. For I used to go along with the throng and lead them in procession to the house of God, With the voice of joy and thanksgiving, a multitude keeping festival. 5 Why are you in despair, O my soul? And why have you become disturbed within me? Hope in God, for I shall again praise Him For the help of His presence. 6 O my God, my soul is in despair within me; Therefore I remember You from the land of the Jordan And the peaks of Hermon, from Mount Mizar. 7 Deep calls to deep at the sound of Your waterfalls; All Your breakers and Your waves have rolled over me.”5.9. Then, David requests that his blood not fall apart from the presence of the Lord. This is as if to say that if King Saul is to kill him then he will kill him just as if David is hanging onto the very altar of God in the temple.

98

don andersonDavid is saying, if I am wrong, and the Lord has stirred you up against me to get me, then let us quick offer an offering because I am wrong and I want to be right with the Lord. Let’s get an offering and offer it right now. If the Lord has stirred you up to do this. “If, however, men have done it…” and in essence he could say those turkeys from Ziph are the ones who did it. Also David reminded Saul that he had driven David out from God’s inheritance, and that was just as good as saying that he should serve other gods. He was not allowed to come near the tabernacle and was hunted like a flea or a partridge.

CLARKE If God have stirred thee up against me, why, then, let him deliver my life into thy hand, and accept it as a sacrifice. But as the word is minchah, a gratitude-offering, perhaps the sense may be this: Let God accept a gratitude-offering from thee, for having purged the land of a worker of iniquity; for, were I not such, God would never stir thee up against me.

But if they be the children of menIf men have, by false representations, lies, and slanders, stirred thee up against an innocent man, then let them be cursed before the Lord. If I am guilty, I deserve to die; if not, those who seek my life should be destroyed.

Saying, Go, serve other gods.His being obliged to leave the tabernacle, and the place where the true worship of God was performed, and take refuge among idolaters, said in effect, Go, serve other gods.

COKE, "1 Samuel 26:19. If the Lord have stirred thee up against me, let him accept, &c.— That is, says Delaney, "If God have excited you against me, on the score of any guilt for which I deserve to die; behold, here I am, ready to be sacrificed in atonement for it." Others understand it as expressive of David's readiness to offer up any sacrifice, if he had been guilty of such a crime as could justly merit this persecution of Saul against him. See Witsius's Miscel. Sacr. tom. 1: p. 581. "But," continues David, "if they are the children of men, they are cursed before the Lord, for they have driven me out, &c. saying, Go, serve other gods."—"The adoption of the local gods of any nation," says Bishop Warburton, "as well as their rites, was so general, that David makes his being unjustly driven into an idolatrous land, the

99

same thing as being forced to serve idolatrous gods." To the same principle Jeremiah likewise alludes, chap. 1 Samuel 16:13.; by which is not meant, that they should be forced any otherwise than by the superstitious dread of divine vengeance for a slighted worship; for at this time civil restraint in matters of religion was very rare. It is very remarkable, that David here laments no present loss, or exclusion from just right, other than that of being shut out from the divine ordinances, and forced among the worshippers of idols.

ELLICOTT, " (19) Let him accept an offering.—The words here are difficult ones in a theological point of view. If, however, we are content to interpret them with Bishop Wordsworth according to the Arabic Version of the Chaldee Targum, the difficulty vanishes: “If the Lord hath stirred thee up against me for any fault of mine, let me know mine offence, and I am ready to make an offering for it to the Lord, that I may be forgiven.”—Wordsworth. But by far the greater number of scholars and expositors understand the words of David in what seems to be their plain literal sense, viz.: “If Jehovah has incited you to do this evil thing, let Him smell an offering.” The word for offering in the Hebrew is minchah, the meat offering, which signifies “sanctification of life and devotion to the Lord.” In other words, “If you think or feel that God stirs you up to take this course against me—the innocent one—pray to God that He may take the temptation—if it be a temptation—from thee.” This conception that the movement comes from God runs through the Old Testament. It is apparently expressed in such passages as “the Lord hardened Pharaoh’s heart,” and in such sayings as we find here in this Book of Samuel of an evil spirit from the Lord haunting Saul. “Some have explained the conception by referring it to the intensity with which the Israelites had grasped the idea of the omnipresence of the Deity, and of His being the one power by whose energy all things exist and all acts are done; alike evil and good come from God, for He alone is the source of all . . . but it does not follow that everything to which His providence seems to lead is therefore right for man to do; on the contrary, all leadings of Providence are to be judged by God’s immutable law.”—Dean Payne Smith. These seeming leadings must be tested by prayer offered by an earnest heart: that is the meaning of the offering (minchah) here. The conception—strange as it may seem at first—is a true one, as in the case of Pharaoh, and also—though with some important modifications—of Saul. The Holy Spirit had pleaded long, and had pleaded in vain. It is possible, we know, for us to weary, or, as St. Paul puts it, quench that Spirit of God pleading within us; then at length, wearied or quenched, it wings its flight away from the wicked soul. This spreading its wings in flight may be said to be God’s work. The sad and invariable result is, the deserted heart becomes hardened, as in the case of Pharaoh; the empty shrine becomes the swept and garnished home for the evil spirit, as in the case of Saul.

But if they be the children of men.—But David goes on to say, “If the cruel, unjust thoughts are the result of the envy and hatred of men who are my enemies, may God

100

punish them as they deserve; for see what they have done for me: they have by their calumnies—whispered in your ears—driven me into exile; they have violently bidden me to go and serve other and strange gods.” He means that, far away from the only country where Jehovah is loved and honoured, away from the influence of Jehovah’s prophets and beloved priests, he and his would be tempted to serve other gods, and to share in the foul and impious practice of the heathen nations.

PETT, "1 Samuel 26:19

“Now therefore, I pray you, let my lord the king hear the words of his servant. If it be YHWH who has stirred you up against me, let him accept an offering (literally ‘let YHWH smell sacrifice’) , but if it be the children of men, cursed be they before YHWH, for they have driven me out this day that I should not cleave to the inheritance of YHWH, saying, “Go, serve other gods.” ’

David then made what was to be his final plea to Saul. They would never meet again. He posited two possibilities. The first was that it was YHWH Who had stirred up Saul against him. If that were the case, and his sin was pointed out, he would gladly admit it, offer up a sin offering and thus deal with the problem once and for all. But if it was men who had maligned him, then let them be cursed before YHWH, for by their activities they had driven him to recognise that he must leave Israel, (‘the inheritance of YHWH’) and go and live in a foreign country where there was no institutional worship of YHWH. Thus they were basically telling him to go and worship other gods. (He did not, of course, have the intention of worshipping other gods. His faith and awareness of God as revealed in his Psalms indicated that he knew that he could worship YHWH wherever he was. But it was not the same thing as being able to worship at the Sanctuary with God’s people). It is clear that at this stage the decision recorded in 1 Samuel 27:1 had already been made.“Let YHWH smell sacrifice.” This is simply an anthropomorphic way of indicating God’s acceptance with pleasure of men’s offerings (compare Genesis 8:21). Some see in it a reference to the daily offerings made by Israel, others the possibility of a personal offering. The main point is that if YHWH has been offended He has made a way by which David could come back and be restored to His favour.

20 Now do not let my blood fall to the ground far from the presence of the LORD. The king of Israel has come

101

out to look for a flea—as one hunts a partridge in the mountains."

Robert Roe, "That is an intriguing metaphor. Remember before when David said, "You have come out to look for a dead dog and a single flea." Of course, dead dogs won't bite. A single flea is ridiculous when you are infested with Philistines. So he makes Saul look ridiculous, "You come out here to look for one single flea." Then he changes his metaphor because of what just happened. The Israelite partridge runs along the ground. It does not fly. It escapes by fleeing, by running. In the flat lands large coveys are chased until they become exhausted. Then the Israelites throw sticks along the ground, strike them in the legs, knock them to the ground, catch them, break their necks and eat them.So David says, "Saul, you are not being very bright. You are hunting a single partridge up in the mountains when there are coveys down there in the valley. There are Philistines everywhere, and in the mountains the partridge has the advantage. You can't chase him up and down hills very long. He can hide, and this particular partridge can turn around and bite you. Dead dogs may not bite, but a partridge named David can bite, and you just had a chance to see that."So David gives him this veiled warning, and Saul gets the message.CLARKE It is worthy of remark that the Arabs, observing that partridges, being put up several times, soon become so weary as not to be able to fly; they in this manner hunt them upon the mountains, till at last they can knock them down with their clubs.It was in this manner that Saul hunted David, coming hastily upon him, and putting him up from time to time, in hopes that he should at length, by frequent repetitions of it, be able to destroy him. See Harmer. GILL Now therefore let not my blood fall to the earth before theface of the Lord…For should it be spilled, God, who is omniscient, will see it, and take notice of it; and being righteous, and to whom vengeance belongs, he will avenge it: some render it, "my blood shall not fall to the earth before the face of the Lord" F18; I am continually under his eye and care, and he will protect and defend me; and in vain is it for thee to pursue after me; I shall never fall into thine hands, though I may be obliged to quit my country, and go into an idolatrous nation, against my will:for the king of Israel is come out to seek a flea;

102

which leaps from place to place and is not easily taken: or this may denote what a mean, poor, weak, insignificant person David was; and how much it was below Saul to come out with an army of chosen men in pursuit of him; so the Targum, ``the king of Israel is come out to seek one that is weak or feeble:''as when one doth hunt a partridge in the mountains;as kings for their delight used to do, as Abarbinel observes; but this being a business of pleasure, and this a bird of worth, some other is thought to be here intended. Indeed the is represented as worth no more than an "obolus", or five farthings, though fifty drachmas or drachms were ordered to be paid for one F19; the Septuagint renders the word an "owl": the word is "kore", and from the etymology of it one would think it was the raven or crow. Jarchi on (Jeremiah 17:11) takes it to be the cuckoo, though here the partridge as others; Bochart F20 will have it to be the woodcock, snipe, or snite F21. Some choose to read the words, ``as the kore or partridge on the mountains hunts;''which, it is said, hunts and seeks after the nests of other birds, and sits on their eggs F22: see (Jeremiah 17:11) ; so Saul hunted after David, though he could not take him; several naturalists F23 observe, that the partridge is very difficult to be taken by the hunter.

HENRY 18-20, "He insists upon his own innocency: What have I done or what evil is in my hand? 1Sa_26:18. He had the testimony of his conscience for him that he had never done nor ever designed any mischief to the person, honour, or government, of his prince, nor to any of the interests of his country. He had lately had Saul's own testimony concerning him (1Sa_24:17): Thou art more righteous than I. It was very unreasonable and wicked for Saul to pursue him as a criminal, when he could not charge him with any crime.

3. He endeavours to convince Saul that his pursuit of him is not only wrong, but mean, and much below him: “The king of Israel, whose dignity is great, and who has so much other work to do, has come out to seek a flea, as when one doth hunt a partridge in the mountains,” 1Sa_26:20 - a poor game for the king of Israel to pursue. He compares himself to a partridge, a vert innocent harmless bird, which, when attempts are made upon its life, flies if it can, but makes no resistance. And would Saul bring the flower of his army into the field only to hunt one poor partridge? What a disparagement was this to his honour! What a stain would it be on his memory to trample upon so weak and patient as well as so innocent an enemy! Jam_5:6, You have killed the just, and he doth not resist you.

4. He desires that the core of the controversy may be searched into and some proper method taken to bring it to an end, 1Sa_26:19. Saul himself could not say that justice put him on thus to persecute David, or that he was obliged to do it for the public safety. David was not willing to say (though it was very true) that Saul's own envy and malice put him on to do it; and therefore he concludes it must be

103

attributed either to the righteous judgment of God or to the unrighteous designs of evil men. Now, (1.) “If the Lord have stirred thee up against me, either in displeasure to me (taking this way to punish me for my sins against him, though, as to thee, I am guiltless) or in displeasure to thee, if it be the effect of that evil spirit from the Lord which troubles thee, let him accept an offering from us both - let us join in making our peace with God, reconciling ourselves to him, which may be done, by sacrifice; and then I hope the sin will be pardoned, whatever it is, and the trouble, which is so great a vexation both to thee and me, will come to an end.” See the right method of peace-making; let us first make God our friend by Christ the great Sacrifice, and then all other enmities shall be slain, Eph_2:16; Pro_16:7. But, (2.) “If thou art incited to it by wicked men, that incense thee against me, cursed be they before the Lord,” that is, they are very wicked people, and it is fit that they should be abandoned as such, and excluded from the king's court and councils. He decently lays the blame upon the evil counsellors who advised the king to that which was dishonourable and dishonest, and insists upon it that they be removed from about him and forbidden his presence, as men cursed before the Lord, and then he hoped he should gain his petition, which is (1Sa_26:20), “Let not my blood fall to the earth,as thou threatenest, for it is before the face of the Lord, who will take cognizance of the wrong and avenge it.” Thus pathetically does David plead with Saul for his life, and, in order to that, for his favourable opinion of him.BENSON, "1 Samuel 26:20. Before the face of the Lord — The Lord seeing it, and being the avenger. Remember, if thou dost it, God, the judge of all men, observes and will call thee to account for it, though I will not avenge myself. Is come out to seek a flea — Is come out for a purpose beneath him, and not of importance enough to deserve his trouble. As when one doth hunt a partridge — The Hebrew word קרא, kore, does not seem to be rightly translated partridge here. Rabbi Salomon renders it cuculus, cuckow, so called from its crying. It certainly must be the name of a bird of no value for food, or any other use; and therefore the pursuing it on the mountains, through difficult places, was a useless and insignificant labour.ELLICOTT, " (20) Before the face of the Lord.—Better rendered, far from the presence of the Lord. The same thought dwelt upon in the last verse is here enlarged. “If this savage persecution continues,” David goes on to say, “sooner or later I shall fall a victim to one or other of the countless perils to which one in my situation, as leader of a band of outlaws, is daily exposed. Let not such hard, cruel fate be mine—to die a violent death far away from the land which Jehovah loves.” It was the same thought which inspires so touchingly this last prayer he made to Saul which, ever present in his heart, made the bringing up of the Ark to a permanent sanctuary, where the visible symbol of the Eternal Presence should dwell for ever, the dream of David’s life. It was the same holy thought which induced him to spend so much time and to lay up such vast stores for the building of a glorious sanctuary. The passionate longing of the “man after God’s own heart” to worship his Eternal Master in a fitting house devoted to His service, and in the company of men who loved and honoured the Name of names, is to be found in some of the most soul-

104

searching of his psalms.To seek a flea.—The same humiliating comparison he had made once before on a similar occasion again occurs to him. Such repetition is of ordinary occurrence, as we well know, both in speeches and writings. The LXX. here substitute for “a flea” “my soul,” probably with the view of avoiding the repetition of the simile of a flea, which David had made use of on the previous occasion of his sparing the king’s life at En-gedi.A partridge in the mountains.—The LXX. needlessly alters “partridge” into “screech-owl,” and changes the sense: “as the screech-owl hunts on the mountains.” The meaning of the simile in the Hebrew original is well given by Erdmann, in Lange: “The isolated from God’s people, far from all association, a fugitive from their plots on the mountain heights, thou seekest at all cost to destroy, as one hunts a single fugitive partridge on the mountain, only to kill it at all costs, while otherwise, from its insignificance, it would not be hunted, since partridges are to be found in the field in coveys.” Conder (Tent Life in Palestine) especially tells us that partridges still tenant these wilds; and speaking of the precipitous cliffs overhanging the Dead Sea, he says: “Among the rocks of the wild goats the bands of ibex may be seen still bounding, and the partridge is still chased on the mountains, as David was followed by the stealthy hunter Saul.”WHEDON, " 20. Before the face of the Lord — Rather, At a distance from, or far off from, the face of the Lord. That is, in a distant land, or an enemy’s country.A flea — An insignificant insect. Compare 1 Samuel 24:14.As when one doth hunt a partridge in the mountains — Additional comparison, instead of dead dog, in 1 Samuel 24:14. The partridge does not so much frequent the mountains as the fields and lowlands; it would therefore be idle for one to hunt a single partridge far off on the mountains, when he could find flocks of them in the lower brushwoods and the fields.DON ANDERSONI am just an insignificant little servant like a flea. And you are coming out here and making such a big deal sending three thousand guys out here, using the military to find a flea. Now David said I am like a partridge. You are just throwing sticks and stones, you are just exhausting me, chasing me all over this place. And he has been doing this now for about six to eight years. And he is just flat tired and depressed. The sad thing about it is that it is going to be the partridge mentality that is going to blow David out of the tub in just a moment. Thinking that he is a partridge. Just the thought of that. That one little thought sown in his mind right now puts him into such a realm of self-pity and the pit of depression that he is going to foul it all

105

up in just a second. Just one little thought comes whipping through his mind. I am like a flea and like a partridge. That is the thing that is going to eat him up now. COKE, "1 Samuel 26:20. A partridge— The Hebrew word קרא kore, a partridge, occurs only here and Jeremiah 17:11 and has its name, according to Parkhurst, from the note that it utters in calling its young or mate; which cannot be better expressed in articulate sounds, than by קרא quera. Whoever reads with tolerable attention the Hierozoicon of Bochart, or even the 19th chapter of the first book, De Nominibus Anim. ab Adamo impositis, cannot doubt that the Hebrew names given by Adam to the animals, were intended to express some remarkable and eminent quality in each. See Parkhurst on the word, and Scheuchzer's Physique Sacree, tom. 5: The account that Dr. Shaw gives us of the manner in which the Arabs hunt partridges, is a lively comment on the place. "The Arabs have another and more laborious method of catching these birds; for, observing that they become languid and fatigued after they have been hastily put up twice or thrice, they immediately run in upon them, and knock them down with their zerwattys, or bludgeons, as we should call them." It was precisely in this manner that Saul hunted David, coming hastily upon him, and putting him up from time to time, in hopes that he should at length, by frequent repetitions of it, be able to destroy him. Observations, p. 172. PETT, "1 Samuel 26:20“Now therefore, let not my blood fall to the earth away from the presence of YHWH, for the king of Israel is come out to seek a flea, as when one hunts a partridge in the mountains.”So he pleaded that Saul would leave him along so that when he died his blood would fall on Israel’s soil, on the inheritance of YHWH. He did not want to die outside YHWH’s inheritance, and away from the Sanctuary where He had established His Name. After all surely he was simply the equivalent of a flea which men searched out because it was irritating them, or a partridge (a rock partridge) which men hunted in the mountains. Why then should Saul take such trouble over him when he was just a minor irritant? You did not call out the standing army of Israel to find a flea or a partridge. (Like all godly men David never fully recognised just how influential he was).The flea appears to have been a favourite description of David. Compare 1 Samuel 24:14. No doubt in their wilderness life he and his men suffered from fleas more than most and were aware of how much irritation they could cause. But note that in 1 Samuel 24:14 the flea is associated with a dead dog, not compared with a partridge.The mention of the partridge here was a word play on Abner's question, "Who are you who calls (Hebrew qarata) to the king?" (verse 14). David’s reply was that he was like a "partridge" hunted in the mountains (1 Samuel 26:20, Hebrew haqqore,

106

i.e. a caller-bird). Furthermore he and his men would no doubt have hunted many a rock partridge in the mountains in their search for food, but few who lived under normal conditions would have sought for partridge in the mountains, for there would be partridge much nearer to hand. Thus to look for a partridge in the mountains was to go to a great deal of effort for little reward.

21 Then Saul said, "I have sinned. Come back, David my son. Because you considered my life precious today, I will not try to harm you again. Surely I have acted like a fool and have erred greatly."

By his own confession he is a fool and he knows it, but he could not let his jealousy go, and so he still went on pursuing David to kill him. Darin Gary, "We see here in this passage an admission of Saul the King, to David,

that he was foolish in all of his attempts to take David’s life. This was the second time that (it appeared) Saul was delivered into David’s hands…The first was in a cave in the wilderness of En-gedi (just north of Jericho & near the western shore of the Dead Sea). Saul was stricken with the fact that God was surely on the side of David, so his conclusion was that it would be futile to go after him any longer. Saul came to an abrupt confrontation that all of his hatred, all of his anger, all of his murderous fantasies & all of his jealousies were for naught…he played the fool!When I examine & compare Saul’s foolish ways and Saul’s foolish decisions in life, I cannot help but see the comparison to many today. If you live this life of yours (which is extremely volatile & uncertain) like you are going to live this life forever, you are playing the fool! If you are duped into thinking that there must be another way to heaven (even amidst the knowledge of Jesus’ words that He is the only "Way"), then, you are playing the fool! If you come and go, service after service, time after time, all the while God extends His saving grace unto you, and you keep resisting His offer of salvation, then, you are playing the fool! If you are a young person, and you are deceived into thinking you have all of your life to get right with the Lord…Or, you think you want to have your fun now…Or, you, too, think that there must be another avenue to God & heaven; something that doesn’t require your all-in-all…then, you, too are playing the fool!"GILL Then said Saul, I have sinned…Which is more than he acknowledged before, and yet, it is to be feared he had no true sense of his sin, and real repentance for it; but, like Pharaoh, his guilty

107

conscience for the present forced this confession from him; see (Exodus 9:27) ;return, my son David:meaning to his own house, or rather to his palace, since he had disposed of his wife to another man:for I will no more do thee harm:or seek to do it by pursuing him from place to place, as he had done, which had given him a great deal of trouble and fatigue:because my soul was precious in thine eyes this day;and therefore spared, when he could have taken it away; which showed that his life was dear to him, of great worth and value in his account; and therefore he would neither take it away himself, nor suffer another to do it:behold, I have played the fool, and erred exceedingly:in seeking after his life, and pursuing him again, when he had such a convincing proof of his sincerity and faithfulness, and of his cordial affection for him, when he only cut off the skirts of his garment in the cave, and spared his life.

HENRY, "Here is, I. Saul's penitent confession of his fault and folly in persecuting David and his promise to do so no more. This second instance of David's respect to him wrought more upon him than the former, and extorted from him better acknowledgements, 1Sa_26:21. 1. He owns himself melted and quite overcome by David's kindness to him: “My soul was precious in thy eyes this day, which, I thought, had been odious!” 2. He acknowledges he has done very wrong to persecute him, that he has therein acted against God's law (I have sinned), and against his own interest (I have played the fool), in pursuing him as an enemy who would have been one of his best friends, if he could but have thought so. “Herein (says he) I have erred exceedingly, and wronged both thee and myself.” Note, Those that sin play the fool and err exceedingly, those especially that hate and persecute God's people, Job_19:28. 3. He invites him to court again: Return, my son David. Those that have understanding will see it to be their interest to have those about them that behave themselves wisely, as David did, and have God with them. 4. He promises him that he will not persecute him as he has done, but protect him: I will no more do thee harm.We have reason to think, according to the mind he was now in, that he meant as he said, and yet neither his confession nor his promise of amendment came from a principle of true repentance.

K&D, "Moreover, Saul could not help confessing, “I have sinned: return, my son David; I will do thee harm no more, because my life was precious in thine eyes that day.” A good intention, which he never carried out. “He declared that he would never do any more what he had already so often promised not to do again; and yet he did not fail to do it again and again. He ought rather to have taken refuge with God, and appealed to Him for grace, that he might not fall into such sins again; yea,

108

he should have entreated David himself to pray for him” (Berleb. Bible). He adds still further, “Behold, I have acted foolishly, and have gone sore astray;” but yet he persists in this folly. “There is no sinner so hardened, but that God gives him now and then some rays of light, which show him all his error. But, alas! when they are awakened by such divine movings, it is only for a few moments; and such impulses are no sooner past, than they fall back again immediately into their former life, and forget all that they have promised.” BENSON, "1 Samuel 26:21. Then said Saul, I have sinned — This second instance of David’s tenderness wrought more upon Saul than the former. He owns himself melted, and quite overcome by David’s kindness to him. My soul was precious in thine eyes — which I thought had been odious. He acknowledges he had done very ill to persecute him: I have acted against God’s law; I have sinned: and against my own interest; I have played the fool — In pursuing thee as an enemy, who wast, indeed, one of my best friends. And herein I have erred exceedingly — Have wronged both thee and myself. Nothing can be more full and ingenuous than this confession. God surely now touched his heart. And he promises to persecute him no more: nor does it appear that he ever attempted it afterward.PULPIT, "1Sa_26:21I have sinned. Saul’s answer here is very different from that in 1Sa_24:17-21, where the main idea was wonder that David should with such magnanimity spare the life of an enemy so manifestly delivered into his hand. Here a sense of vexation seems uppermost, and of annoyance, not merely because his purpose was frustrated, but because his own military arrangements had been so unsoldierlike. I have played the fool. His first enterprise had ended in placing his life in David’s power, and it was folly indeed a second time to repeat the attempt. But though the words of Saul convey the idea rather of vexation with himself than of sorrow for his maliciousness, yet in one point there is a sign of better things. He bids David return, evidently with reference to the grief expressed with such genuine feeling by David at being driven away from Jehovah’s land. It was of course impossible, as Saul had given David’s wife to another, and David had himself married two other women, but at least it expressed a right and kindly feeling.

HAWKER, "(21) ¶ Then said Saul, I have sinned: return, my son David: for I will no more do thee harm, because my soul was precious in thine eyes this day: behold, I have played the fool, and have erred exceedingly.

We have here once more the king of Israel's honest confession of the injury he had done David, and his promise that he would do so no more. But not a word of his sorrow for his sin against God. That repentance which begins not in God's grace, is

109

never to be depended upon in man's mercy. Alas! Saul knew not his own heart! He was compelled from the moment to say as he said, but his heart remained the same.

COFFMAN, "SAUL CONFESSED HIS SIN AND CALLED OFF THE PURSUIT OF DAVID

"Then Saul said, "I have done wrong; return, my son David, for I will no more do you harm, because my life was precious to you this day; behold, I have played the fool, and have erred exceedingly. And David made answer, "Here is the spear, O king! Let one of the young men come over and fetch it. The Lord rewards every man for his righteousness and his faithfulness; for the Lord gave you into my hand today, and I would not put forth my hand against the Lord's anointed. Behold, as your life was precious this day in my sight, so may my life be precious in the sight of the Lord, and deliver me out of all tribulation." Then Saul said to David, "Blessed be you, my son David! You will do many things and will succeed in them." So David went his way, and Saul returned to his place."

"Return, my son David" (1 Samuel 26:21). If one wonders why David did not trust Saul here, the answer lies in his hypocritical use of the words "my son," not only here, but in 1 Samuel 26:25. They were proof enough that Saul was lying in his teeth, and David instantly knew it.

"I have played the fool, and have erred exceedingly" (1 Samuel 26:21). There is nothing that resembles this response in that other occasion at Engedi. "This answer is very different from that of 1 Samuel 24:17-21. Here there is a sense of vexation and of annoyance, not only because his purpose had been frustrated but because his own military arrangements had been so unsoldierlike."[16] These expressions of Saul do not appear to be the words of one truly penitent.

ELLICOTT, " (21) I have played the fool.—There seems something more in these words of Saul than sorrow for the past. He seems to blame himself here, as the Dean of Canterbury well suggests, for putting himself again in David’s power through overweening confidence in his own strength. He reproaches himself with the unguarded state of his camp, but he pledges himself to do no harm to David for the future. He even begs that he will return to his court. But in these words, and also in his blessing of David (1 Samuel 26:25), there is a ring of falseness; and this was evidently the impression made on the outlaw, for he not only silently declined the royal overtures, but almost immediately removed from the dominions of Saul altogether, feeling that for him and his there was no longer any hope of security in

110

the land of Israel so long as his foe, King Saul, lived.

Here the two whom Samuel had anointed as kings—the king who has forfeited his crown, and the king of the golden future—parted for ever. They never looked on each other’s faces again; not even when the great warrior Saul by dead was his former friend able to take a farewell look at the face he once loved so well. The kindest services his faithful subjects of Jabesh Gilead could show to their king’s dishonoured remains, for which they had risked their lives, was at once, with all solemnity and mourning, to burn the disfigured body, and to draw a veil of flame over the mutilated corpse of Saul.

CONSTABLE, "Verses 21-25

David"s trust in God

Saul again confessed that he had sinned, as he had done when he had sacrificed at Gilgal ( 1 Samuel 26:21; cf. 1 Samuel 15:24; cf. 1 Samuel 15:30) and when David had spared his life in the cave ( 1 Samuel 24:17). Nevertheless he seems to have failed again to follow through with genuine repentance (cf. 1 Samuel 27:1). He also admitted that he had played the fool (similar to Nabal) and had committed a serious error. Contrast Paul"s testimony in 2 Timothy 4:7. The writer did not record Saul as having gone this far in admitting his faults in the preceding chapters. Even though Saul"s words went further in confession, his behavior continued unchanged

David returned Saul"s spear to him ( 1 Samuel 26:22), the symbol of the right to rule. Perhaps David did not return the jug of water to remind Saul that he still had the power to end Saul"s life. He felt confident that God would repay each of them eventually, and he determined to wait for Him to do so ( 1 Samuel 26:23). David acknowledged that Yahweh was his real deliverer ( 1 Samuel 26:24). This may have been the occasion when David composed Psalm 54 (see its title) the last verse of which ascribes David"s deliverance from his enemies to Yahweh. Saul could have overwhelmed David"s smaller band of followers. Instead he departed with a prophetic declaration of David"s final success ( 1 Samuel 26:25; cf. 1 Samuel 24:20). The text does not record another meeting of David and Saul before Saul died.

The main lesson of chapter26 appears in 1 Samuel 26:23 : "the Lord will repay" (cf. Proverbs 20:22; Proverbs 24:29; Romans 12:17; Romans 12:19). The Lord Jesus Christ is our greatest example of one who trusted the Father to vindicate Him (cf.

111

Luke 23:46). Our vindication does not always come in this lifetime, as David"s did. Sometimes it comes after death, as Jesus" did. Another great revelation is God"s patience with Saul. God gave him many opportunities to repent and to experience God"s blessing within the sphere of his judgment (cf. 1 Samuel 15:26), but Saul did not repent.

David had borne witness twice to Saul"s guilt before God (chs24,26; cf. Numbers 35:30). God proceeded to put him to death not long after this (ch31). David became God"s instrument in passing judgment on Saul for his sin and so became a blessing to all Israel.

GUZIK, "(1Sa_26:21) Saul apologizes to David.Then Saul said, “I have sinned. Return, my son David. For I will harm you no more, because my life was precious in your eyes this day. Indeed I have played the fool and erred exceedingly.”

a. I have sinned: The last time Saul was in this situation, he was overcome with emotion. His feelings seemed right, but his life was not changed (1Sa_24:16-21). This time, there is something cold and mechanical about Saul’s words. It feels that the words are right, but this time, the feelings aren’t even there.

i. On another occasion, Saul “repented” with the right words but no depth of heart. In 1Sa_15:24-25 and 1Sa_15:30, Saul said the words, “I have sinned,” yet he was still far more concerned about his image before the people than the condition of his heart and life before God.ii. Sometimes we know the right words to say - we know what sound spiritual and right - but our hearts really aren’t there. When we sense this in others, we are to love them, deciding to think the best and forgive them (as Jesus described in Luk_17:3-4). When we sense this in ourselves, we should be honest, then pray mightily that our heart would come into the same right place as our words!iii. “Good motions that fall into wicked hearts, are like some sparks that fall from the flint and steel into wet tinder; lightsome for the time, but soon out.” (Trapp)

b. For I will harm you no more . . . Indeed I have played the fool and erred exceedingly: This is a time when we really wish we could see and hear what happened, so we can see the expression on Saul’s face, and the tone and intonation of his words. It seems - both from the “feel” of the verse and Saul’s subsequent actions - that Saul isn’t repentant; rather, he simply has a bitter realization that David has got the better of him once again. His words in 1Sa_26:25 express this also: You shall both do great things and also still

112

prevail.i. “The Apostle makes a great distinction, and rightly, between the sorrow of the world and the sorrow of a godly repentance which needeth not to be repented of. Certainly Saul’s confession of sin belonged to the former; while the cry of the latter comes out in Psa_51:1-19, extorted from David by the crimes after the years.” (Meyer)

c. Morgan on I have played the fool: “In these words we have a perfect autobiography. In them the complete life-story of this man is told . . . There had been given to him the Spirit of God, the friendship of Samuel, and the devotion of men whose hearts God had touched. He had so acted that the Spirit departed from him; Samuel had been unable to help him; and the hearts of the people had been turned away from him. The whole secret was that he had leaned to his own understanding, had failed to obey, and so had become the evil-tempered man he was, mastered by hatred, and fighting against God.”

CHUCK SMITHPLAYING THE FOOL"I. A LOOK AT THE MAN. A. 9:2 - A choice young man and goodly. 1. Tremendous physique. 2. Looks aren't everything. B. Good family life - 9:5. C. Humble - 9:21.II. OPPORTUNITIES THAT CAME TO HIM. A. Opportunity to reign over God's people - 10:2. B. Spirit of God will come upon you - 10:6. C. Surrounded by band of men whose hearts God had touched - 10:26.III. MANIFESTATIONS OF FOLLY. A. Military pride - 13:2, conscripted army. 1. Jonathan smote the Philistines with a great slaughter and Saul blew the trumpet in Israel -13:3. B. Offering sacrifice at Gilgal - 13:9. 1. Samuel said, "You have done foolishly." C. His foolish vow - 14:24. D. Disobedience in failure to totally annihilate Amalakites. E. Jealousy of David - 18:7-8. F. Endeavor to kill David. G. Turning to witch for counsel - 28:7.

113

IV. WHAT WAS TRUE FOLLY? A. Failure to totally submit his life to God. 1. Any man who does not totally yield his life to God is playing the fool.V. WHAT DOES THIS STORY TEACH US? A. A man can have all kinds of natural advantages and still play the fool. B. A man may be given special opportunities and still end up playing the fool. C. Any man is foolish when he tries to hide from the call of God. 1. Lets pride master him. 2. Endeavors a service for God without being called. 3. Makes foolish vows. 4. Disobeys God's Word. 5. Allows jealousy to master him. 6. Turns against his godly friends. 7. Seeks advice from spirit world. D. A man is a fool when he does not yield his life completely to God. 1. You're a fool if you think you know what's better for your life than God.

Playing the FoolGreg LaurieThere are some interesting things written on tombstones that often will sum up a person's life. For example, recorded on the tombstone of Harry Edsel Smith, who lived from 1913 to 1942, are these words: "He looked up the elevator shaft to see if the car was on its way down. It was."If you were to come up with a phrase that summarized your life, what would you want it to say? Would it be different than what it ought to say?Saul, the first King of Israel, inadvertently summed up his life in this way: "Indeed I have played the fool and erred exceedingly" (1 Samuel 26:21). These words would have been a fitting epitaph for his tombstone.When you first read about him in the pages of Scripture, it would appear that Saul was destined to become another hero of the Bible. But early in his career as the King of Israel, Saul started to rebel against God.One day, the Philistines mounted an attack against Israel. The Philistine armies were huge, and the Israelites were paralyzed with fear. Saul was trying to rally the troops to go into battle, but the Lord told Saul to wait until the prophet Samuel showed up. He would present a burnt offering to the Lord, and then Saul would be

114

told what to do.Meanwhile, the Philistines were waiting. Saul was growing impatient. He thought, Why do I have to wait for some prophet? I know how to offer a burnt offering. I will do it myself. Surely God will make an exception under the circumstances. Saul directly disobeyed the Lord and offered the sacrifice. When Samuel arrived, he asked Saul, "What is this you have done?"Saul responded, "I saw my men scattering from me, and you didn't arrive when you said you would, and the Philistines are at Micmash ready for battle. So I said, 'The Philistines are ready to march against us, and I haven't even asked for the Lord's help!' So I felt obliged to offer the burnt offering myself before you came" (1 Samuel 13:11-12 NLT).Samuel told Saul that because he disobeyed the Lord's command, his dynasty would come to an end. In fact, he said that God had already chosen Saul's replacement. At first glance, this may seem a bit extreme on God's part. But we need to remember that God looks at the heart, while we look at actions. He could see that Saul's heart had already turned away.Tragically for Saul, he went from bad to worse. It wasn't long until David, his successor, emerged on the scene. Filled with paranoia and jealousy, Saul began to relentlessly hunt him down and tried to murder him on more than one occasion. Ultimately, Saul died a pathetic death on the battlefield. His life held so much promise, potential, and talent, yet it ended so tragically. Saul played the fool and threw his life away.How can we avoid making the same mistake with our lives? Here are a few principles from Saul's story to keep in mind.We play the fool when we disobey God in even the smallest matters. Saul's failure was not immediate, reminding us that spiritual decline is gradual. At first he was humble, but then pride took hold. Pride turned into envy, and Saul took matters into his own hands. He ignored what God told him to do. We are to obey God in even the smallest matters, because "small sins" turned into big sins for Saul.We play the fool when we attempt to justify the wrong we have done. More than once, Saul blamed others for his actions. When Samuel confronted him, he blamed the people. He wouldn't own up to his own sin. In Saul's mind, what people thought was more important than what God thought.We play the fool when we allow hatred to control our lives instead of love. Saul's jealousy ultimately destroyed him. He was jealous when God placed His hand on David and began to use him. Saul could have been a great leader, but pride and jealousy got in the way.

115

God has given each of us potential. God has given each of us certain talents and abilities. God will not ask us to do anything in this life that He will not give us the strength to do. Don't be disqualified in the race of life like Saul was. Don't play the fool. DON ANDERSONSomebody said the Saul of the New Testament said, “I have fought a good fight, I have finished the course.” The Saul of the Old Testament said, I have sinned. Whereas the Saul of the Old Testament says, “I have sinned...”, the Saul of the New Testament says, “I have fought the good fight; I have finished the course.” There are three things that Saul confesses himself to be guilty of here in verse 21: 1. I have sinned. 2. I have acted like a fool 3. I have erred greatly. Alan Redpath is classic on this. He said: “What is the use of saying ‘I have played the fool,’ if he goes on playing the fool? What use are his tears and confession before David if he doesn’t act upon his remorse? We sometimes see people streaming down the aisle in an evangelistic meeting with tear-stained faces. But what difference does emotion make if it does not lead to obedience? What profit is it that a heart has been stirred, unless from that moment the man lives in submission to the will of God. Indeed, it does make a difference, for if a man is emotionally upset as Saul was and awakens to his condition, but only weeps about it 19 and still doesn’t obey God, his second state is a thousand times worse than the first. Emotion that does not lead to action only leads deeper into sin and rebellion.” DEFFINBAUGHDavid does not use Saul’s spear against him, but Saul gets the point. Saul recognizes his own sin in his dealings with David. But the most significant word is “return”. Has Saul been a part of the sin of driving David out of the land, away from the opportunity to worship his God? Then he would now confess his sin, and give up his pursuit of David so that he may safely “return” to the place of worship. Because David regards Saul’s life as precious, Saul promises to regard David’s life as precious. Saul confesses that he has sinned, and that in his sin, he has been guilty of the very serious error to which David refers.In response to Saul’s confession and promise of amnesty, David shouts, “Behold the spear of the king! Now let one of the young men come over and take it.” It does appear, as some have observed, that the spear was a symbol of authority in the ancient world.130 David does not presume to keep the symbol of authority that belongs to Saul, and so he calls for one of Saul’s men to fetch it.Would some say David is a sinner, a traitor, and an enemy of Saul? David concludes his defense by asserting his righteousness in verses 23 and 24. It is the Lord who will

116

repay each person for his righteousness and faithfulness, David reminds his pursuers. This He does individually (“each man”). Although the Lord delivers Saul into David’s hand, David does him no harm, because he is the Lord’s anointed. David therefore looks to the Lord to reward him for his deeds this night.While Saul and his men put themselves in jeopardy by accusing and pursuing David as a sinner and a criminal, David is assured that his life is safe in the hands of his God. As David has highly valued the life of Saul, he knows that God will highly value his life, and thus he is assured God will indeed deliver him from all his distresses (verse 24).Saul’s final words are a pronouncement of blessing on David, with the assurance that he will accomplish great things and that, in the end, David will prevail (verse 25). With these words, the two men part company for the last time. They shall not meet again because the time of Saul’s death draws near. Saul returns to his place, but David goes on his way. David knows better than to think Saul’s repentance will last.ConclusionThere is a message here to those, like Saul and his men, who wrongly accused David. God defends His own. There is no way that God’s anointed can be removed before God’s time. This was true of Saul; it was also true of David. God defends the innocent, and He will bring about justice for the afflicted. In this brief period of time, God turned the tables on the enemies of David. It was not David who was in grave danger, but those who opposed him. Let the enemies of God’s chosen ones take note, and let His chosen ones take courage.For David, the events of this chapter are a high water mark for David’s grasp of God’s truth, and for the application of it in his life. David stood tall outside that cave in chapter 24, but he stands even taller here in chapter 26. He is confident of God’s protection and care, and of Him as the one who will reward his righteousness and judge his accusers. If in chapter 24 we see David gently rebuking his king, in chapter 26 we see him rebuking those who have set the king against him. David now sees his flight from his enemies in terms of its spiritual implications.If David has grown spiritually after the events of chapter 24, and this growth is evident in chapter 26, we must conclude that Abigail plays a significant role in this. The things David affirms as true in chapter 26 are the very things about which Abigail assures him. If David has any doubt that he will become the next king, Abigail assures him he will reign over Israel (25:30). Though David wants to take vengeance on his enemies (i.e. Nabal), Abigail reminds him that God will better handle such matters, and that leaving this to God will keep David from any regrets (25:31). Does David fear for his life? Abigail assures him that his life is safely in God’s hands (25:29). It is said that behind many great men, there is a great woman. Certainly that was true of David and Abigail.

117

Do some scholars agonize that chapter 26 is too similar to chapter 24? It is similar, because it is a kind of replay of chapter 24. When God wants to teach us a lesson, if we fail to learn that lesson through one experience, God will continue to bring experiences our way which confront us with the same basic test. I think the reason there is a second incident in chapter 26, so similar to the one described in chapter 24, is that God wanted David to retake the same test so that he received a higher score.Years ago I remember talking with a friend who was going through some problems in his life. As we talked, my friend mentioned that in addition to his current problems, he had faced many problems before. As I probed with a few questions, it became apparent that in each situation, the problems and the issues were very much alike. I then asked my friend, “Has it ever occurred to you that God keeps bringing you back to the same problem because you have not yet dealt with it as you should?” He acknowledged that this was probably the case. I think maybe it was also with David, and it may be the same for us. When we fail to deal with certain matters as we should, God persists at giving us further opportunities to do it right.Finally, I believe there is something for us to learn about the “place of blessing” for Christians today. For the Old Testament saint, as we have seen, dwelling in the land of Israel was a privilege and a source of blessing. Here, one could offer sacrifices and worship God freely and fully. Elsewhere, God could be worshipped and served, but with certain restrictions. One could, of course, be in the land and still distant from God due to unbelief and disobedience. And, one could be in a distant land and still have an intimate walk with God. But ideally, living in the land of Israel was to be in the place of God’s presence and blessing.What does that mean for us who are New Testament Christians, who live far from the promised land? The answer of the New Testament is very clear on this matter. In John 1, Jesus presents Himself as Israel’s Messiah. Jesus calls Philip to follow Him, and Philip then finds Nathaniel, telling him that the promised Messiah has come and that He is Jesus of Nazareth (John 1:43-44). When Nathaniel comes to Jesus, the Lord tells him, “Before Philip called you, when you were under the fig tree, I saw you” (1:48). Nathaniel is convinced and says to Jesus, “Rabbi, You are the Son of God; You are the King of Israel” (1:49). Our Lord’s words to Nathaniel are incredible:50 Jesus answered and said to him, “Because I said to you that I saw you under the fig tree, do you believe? You shall see greater things than these.” 51 And He said to him, “Truly, truly, I say to you, you shall see the heavens opened, and the angels of God ascending and descending on the Son of Man” (John 1:50-51).With these words, Jesus takes Nathaniel, and us, all the way back to Jacob’s dream in Genesis 28. In this dream, Jacob sees angels ascending and descending upon a ladder that goes to heaven, but rests on the earth. Jacob is most impressed with where the ladder stands – in Israel – and with the special nature of this place as the

118

dwelling place of God. Jesus now takes up this imagery as He speaks to Nathaniel. Nathaniel has just objected to Peter’s assessment of Jesus, based solely on the place Jesus has come from – Nazareth (John 1:46). Jesus now informs Nathaniel that while he is concerned about the place where the ladder was resting, Jesus is the ladder! The place is important, but the Person of Jesus is even more important. It is Jesus Christ whom God appointed as the means to join heaven and earth, to provide men with an access to heaven. It was not Israel, the place, but Israel, the person, who would save men from their sins and lead them to heaven.In the Gospel of Matthew, we read of the birth of our Lord Jesus, and then of the flight of Joseph and Mary and the child to Egypt. After the death of Herod, Joseph brings his family back to the land of Israel. When he does so, Matthew writes,14 And he arose and took the Child and His mother by night, and departed for Egypt; 15 and was there until the death of Herod, that what was spoken by the Lord through the prophet might be fulfilled, saying, “OUT OF EGYPT DID I CALL MY SON” (Matthew 2:14-15).These words, “OUT OF EGYPT DID I CALL MY SON,” are found in Hosea 11:1. They refer to the fact that God brought Israel, His “son” (see Exodus 4:22-23) out of Egypt. Now, by inspiration, Matthew applies them to the baby Jesus. Just as Israel was God’s “son,” whom He brought out of Egypt, so the baby Jesus is God’s “Son,” whom He also brought up from Egypt. In one Person, the Lord Jesus Christ, God has summed up all of Israel, and all of Israel’s hopes. Israel is the place where God meets with men, but Jesus is the “Son,” the person by whom God saves men. Israel is the place where the person of the Messiah came. And now that He has come, it is He that is to be preeminent, and not the place.When Jesus meets with the Samaritan woman, the matter of the “place” to worship God arises. I want you to take special note of what the woman says to Jesus and what our Lord says in response to her:19 The woman said to Him, “Sir, I perceive that You are a prophet. 20 “Our fathers worshipped in this mountain, and you people say that in Jerusalem is the place where men ought to worship.” 21 Jesus said to her, “Woman, believe Me, an hour is coming when neither in this mountain, nor in Jerusalem, shall you worship the Father. 22 “You worship that which you do not know; we worship that which we know, for salvation is from the Jews. 23 “But an hour is coming, and now is, when the true worshipers shall worship the Father in spirit and truth; for such people the Father seeks to be His worshipers. 24 “God is spirit, and those who worship Him must worship in spirit and truth.” 25 The woman said to Him, “I know that Messiah is coming (He who is called Christ); when that One comes, He will declare all things to us.” 26 Jesus said to her, “I who speak to you am He” (John 4:19-26).The Samaritan woman knows well the differences between the Samaritans and the Jews over the proper place of worship. She brings this matter up in her discussion

119

with Jesus. But Jesus does not talk with her about the “proper place” at all. He tells her that the issue of worship now centers on a Person, not a place. Those who would worship God “in Spirit and in truth” need to worship God through the coming Messiah. With this the woman agrees, but she mistakenly assumes He has not yet come. Jesus tells her, “I . . . am He.” Those who would worship God must worship Him through Jesus Christ. Worship is therefore no longer a matter of being in the right place, but of worshipping by means of the right Person.Since the coming of Jesus Christ, Israel’s Messiah, worshipping God is no longer a matter of being in the right place, but of being in the right Person. In John 15, Jesus speaks to His disciples about abiding in Him in terms of a branch abiding in a vine. In chapters 14 and 16, Jesus speaks to His disciples about the Holy Spirit who is to come. By means of the Holy Spirit, Jesus Christ promises to abide in every true believer. And so it is in the New Testament epistles that we find salvation, sanctification, and spiritual blessing described as the result of being “in Christ.”23 For all have sinned and fall short of the glory of God, 24 being justified as a gift by His grace through the redemption which is in Christ Jesus (Romans 3:23-24, emphasis mine).11 Even so consider yourselves to be dead to sin, but alive to God in Christ Jesus (Romans 6:11, emphasis mine).23 For the wages of sin is death, but the free gift of God is eternal life in Christ Jesus our Lord (Romans 6:23, emphasis mine).1 There is therefore now no condemnation for those who are in Christ Jesus (Romans 8:1, emphasis mine).38 For I am convinced that neither death, nor life, nor angels, nor principalities, nor things present, nor things to come, nor powers, 39 nor height, nor depth, nor any other created thing, shall be able to separate us from the love of God, which is in Christ Jesus our Lord (Romans 8:38-39).2 To the church of God which is at Corinth, to those who have been sanctified in Christ Jesus, . saints by calling, with all who in every place call upon the name of our Lord Jesus Christ, their Lord and ours (1 Corinthians 1:2, emphasis mine).4 I thank my God always concerning you, for the grace of God which was given you in Christ Jesus (1 Corinthians 1:4, emphasis mine).30 But by His doing you are in Christ Jesus, who became to us wisdom from God, and righteousness and sanctification, and redemption (1 Corinthians 1:30, emphasis mine).22 For as in Adam all die, so also in Christ all shall be made alive (1 Corinthians

120

15:22, emphasis mine).14 But thanks be to God, who always leads us in His triumph in Christ, and manifests through us the sweet aroma of the knowledge of Him in every place (2 Corinthians 2:14, emphasis mine).17 Therefore if any man is in Christ, he is a new creature; the old things passed away; behold, new things have come (2 Corinthians 5:17, emphasis mine).4 But it was because of the false brethren who had sneaked in to spy out our liberty which we have in Christ Jesus, in order to bring us into bondage (Galatians 2:4).I end this message on a bitter-sweet note. My friend and fellow-elder, Lee Crandell, died during the week after I preached this message. I remember his last words to me. He remarked how much he liked this message, and especially the application. I know what he meant. Lee loved the Lord Jesus Christ, and he loved hearing and proclaiming the message of the Gospel. He knew what it meant to be “in Christ.” Lee died, “in Christ”. What a comfort:13 But we do not want you to be uninformed, brethren, about those who are asleep, that you may not grieve, as do the rest who have no hope. 14 For if we believe that Jesus died and rose again, even so God will bring with Him those who have fallen asleep in Jesus. 15 For this we say to you by the word of the Lord, that we who are alive, and remain until the coming of the Lord, shall not precede those who have fallen asleep. 16 For the Lord Himself will descend from heaven with a shout, with the voice of the archangel, and with the trumpet of God; and the dead in Christ shall rise first. 17 Then we who are alive and remain shall be caught up together with them in the clouds to meet the Lord in the air, and thus we shall always be with the Lord. 18 Therefore comfort one another with these words (1 Thessalonians 4:13-18, emphasis mine).To be “in Christ” is to be forgiven of your sins. To be “in Christ” is to be a new creation, to have old things pass away, and all things to become new. To be “in Christ” is to have eternal life. To be “in Christ” is to be assured of resurrection from the dead, to spend eternity in the presence of Jesus Christ. My friend, Lee, was “in Christ.” If he were here today, he would ask you a simple question, “Are you ‘in Christ’?” Being saved, being a Christian, being assured of the forgiveness of sins and eternal life, is not a matter of being in the right place, but of being in the right Person. The way to be “in Christ” is to acknowledge your sin against God, and to trust in Jesus Christ alone as the means God has provided for your salvation. By faith in Him, His suffering and death pays the penalty for your sins. By His righteousness and resurrection from the dead, you are made righteous and raised to newness of life. If you have never trusted in the death, burial, and resurrection of Jesus Christ on your behalf, I urge you to do so this very moment. To be “in Christ” is to be in God’s appointed place of salvation and blessing forever.

121

123 See Dale Ralph Davis, Looking on the Heart: Expositions of the Book of 1 Samuel (Grand Rapids: Baker Books, 1994), vol. 2, p. 127.124 Let us recall that on more than one occasion David has spoken of those who wrongly incited Saul against him.125 One could easily assume that David and all his men went to Saul’s camp, but the text does not really say so. We are told that spies were sent out and found the place where Saul was camped (verse 4). Then we are told that David arises and comes to the place (verse 6). Only Ahimelech, the Hittite, and Abishai are mentioned as being with David. Were these two men the “spies”? It is not hard to reason that David would leave his troops behind. After all, sneaking up on Saul, and then disappearing into the night, is much easier for a couple of men than for 600 men. And since David did not intend to fight with Saul’s men or to kill Saul, there was no reason to take them along. Furthermore, he would only have to argue with more men about not killing Saul (see 24:4-8).126 A friend of mine quipped after this message that this is the first time in the text Saul has finally hit his target. If I had been Abner, I would have waited to lie down close to the king until after he had actually hit his mark.127 There is a certain subtlety here in David’s response to Abishai. He says, “The LORD forbid that I should stretch out my hand against the LORD’s anointed. . . .” It is as though Abishai has said to David, “All right, so you can’t find it in yourself to kill Saul; then let me do it.” And David responds in a way that sends the message to Abishai, “Even though you were to kill Saul, it would be my responsibility for letting you do so.” If David, as the commander in chief of his 600 men, allows anyone to kill Saul, it is really David who is held responsible.128 Not, as at other times, the more distant “son of Jesse.”129 This is why Abraham built a number of altars in the land of Canaan, but not in the land of Egypt or elsewhere outside Israel.130 “The spear was the symbol of authority in place of the scepter. This is the reason that the spear (‘javelin’ – A. V.) was at hand in the royal court of Saul (cf. 1 Sam. 18:8ff.; 19:9). This traditional sign of authority still exists among some bedouin Arabs today. A spear stuck in the ground outside the entrance distinguishes the tent of a sheik.” John J. Davis & John C. Whitcomb, Israel: From Conquest to Exile (Winona Lake, Indiana, BMH Books, [combined paper edition], 1989, p. 244.HENRY Here is, I. Saul's penitent confession of his fault and folly in persecuting David and his promise to do so no more. This second instance of David's respect to him wrought more upon him than the former, and extorted from him better acknowledgements, 1 Samuel 26:21. 1. He owns himself melted and quite overcome

122

by David's kindness to him: "My soul was precious in thy eyes this day, which, I thought, had been odious!" 2. He acknowledges he has done very wrong to persecute him, that he has therein acted against God's law (I have sinned), and against his own interest (I have played the fool), in pursuing him as an enemy who would have been one of his best friends, if he could but have thought so. "Herein (says he) I have erred exceedingly, and wronged both thee and myself." Note, Those that sin play the fool and err exceedingly, those especially that hate and persecute God's people, Job 19;28. 3. He invites him to court again: Return, my son David. Those that have understanding will see it to be their interest to have those about them that behave themselves wisely, as David did, and have God with them. 4. He promises him that he will not persecute him as he has done, but protect him: I will no more do thee harm. We have reason to think, according to the mind he was now in, that he meant as he said, and yet neither his confession nor his promise of amendment came from a principle of true repentance. II. David's improvement of Saul's convictions and confessions and the evidence he had to produce of his own sincerity. He desired that one of the footmen might fetch the spear (1 Samuel 26:22), and then (1 Samuel 26:23), 1. He appeals to God as judge of the controversy: The Lord render to every man his righteousness. David, by faith, is sure that he will do it because he infallibly knows the true characters of all persons and actions and is inflexibly just to render to every man according to his work, and, by prayer, he desires he would do it. Herein he does, in effect, pray against Saul, who had dealt unrighteously and unfaithfully with him (Give them according to their deeds, Psalms 28:4); but he principally intends it as a prayer for himself, that God would protect him in his righteousness and faithfulness, and also reward him, since Saul so ill requited him. 2. He reminds Saul again of the proof he had now given of his respect to him from a principle of loyalty: I would not stretch forth my hand against the Lord's anointed, intimating to Saul that the anointing oil was his protection, for which he was indebted to the Lord and ought to express his gratitude to him (had he been a common person David would not have been so tender of him), perhaps with this further implication, that Saul knew, or had reason to think, David was the Lord's anointed too, and therefore, by the same rule, Saul ought to be as tender of David's life as David had been of his. 3. Not relying much upon Saul's promises, he puts himself under God's protection and begs his favour (1 Samuel 26:24): "Let my life be much set by in the eyes of the Lord, how light soever thou makest of it." Thus, for his kindness to Saul, he takes God to be his paymaster, which those may with a holy confidence do that do well and suffer for it. III. Saul's prediction of David's advancement. He commends him (1 Samuel 26:25): Blessed be thou, my son David. So strong was the conviction Saul was now under of David's honesty that he was not ashamed to condemn himself and applaud David, even in the hearing of his own soldiers, who could not but blush to think that they had come out so furiously against a man whom their master, when he meets him, caresses thus. He foretels his victories, and his elevation at last: Thou shalt do great things. Note, Those who make conscience of doing that which is truly good may come, by the divine assistance, to do that which is truly great. He adds, "Thou

123

shalt also still prevail, more and more," he means against himself, but is loth to speak that out. The princely qualities which appeared in David--his generosity in sparing Saul, his military authority in reprimanding Abner for sleeping, his care of the public good, and the signal tokens of God's presence with him--convinced Saul that he would certainly be advanced to the throne at last, according to the prophecies concerning him. Lastly, A palliative cure being thus made of the wound, they parted friends. Saul returned to Gibeah re infecta--without accomplishing his design, and ashamed of the expedition he had made; but David could not take his word so far as to return with him. Those that have once been false are not easily trusted another time. Therefore David went on his way. And, after this parting, it does not appear that ever Saul and David saw one another again.MEYER 1 Samuel 26:21Then said Saul, I have sinned.The Apostle makes a great distinction, and rightly, between the sorrow of the world and the sorrow of a godly repentance which needeth not to be repented of. Certainly Saul’s confession of sin belonged to the former; whilst the cry of the latter comes out in Psalm 51, extorted from David by the crimes of after years.The difference between the two may be briefly summarized in this, that the one counts sin a folly and regrets its consequences; whilst the other regards sin as a crime done against the most Holy God, and regrets the pain given to Him. “Against Thee, Thee only, have I sinned, and done this evil in Thy sight.”Obviously Saul’s confession was of the former description, “I have played the fool.” He recognized the unkingliness of his behavior, and the futility of his efforts against David. But he stayed there, stopping short of a faithful recognition of his position in the sight of God, as weighed in the balances of eternal justice.Many a time in Scripture do we meet with this confession. The Prodigal, Judas, Pharaoh, David, and Saul, uttered it; but in what differing tones, and with what differing motives! We need to winnow our words before God; not content with using the expressions of penitence, unless we are very sure that they bear the mint-mark of heaven, and deserve the Master’s Beatitude, “Blessed are they that morn, for they shall be comforted.”When sin is humbly confessed, the Savior assures us: “Thy sins, which are many, are forgiven thee; go in peace.” “If we confess our sins, He is faithful and just to forgive us our sins, and to cleanse us from all unrighteousness.”PETT, "1 Samuel 26:21‘Then Saul said, “I have sinned, return, my son David, for I will no more do you

124

harm, because my life was precious in your eyes this day. Look, I have played the fool, and have erred exceedingly.” ’In contrast with 1 Samuel 24:16-21 Saul made no reference to the kingship or to his fears that David would take it from his house, which is all the more significant because the kingship was one of the writer’s emphases. Here Saul is seen as free from his paranoia and delusion. His illness has left him for a while, and he is no longer obsessed with the idea of kingship. Rather he now admitted that he had behaved wrongly, and that he had ‘played the fool and erred exceedingly’. Note the comparison with Nabal ‘the fool’ although the Hebrew word is a different one. David’s generosity in again sparing his life and therefore treating it as precious had, in his present state, moved him deeply, and had made him realise what a fool he had been. He probably did not even understand himself.“Return, my son David.” It was seemingly a promise to restore David to his former position. But it was not one that David was willing to take seriously. He knew how rapidly Saul’s mood could change. COKE, "1 Samuel 26:21. Then said Saul, I have sinned— Bayle has endeavoured to prove that this event, and that related in chap. 24: are but one and the same. To destroy this seeming identity, it will not be unseasonable to attend to the following circumstances, which prove the events to be different. In the first, David was in the wilderness of En-gedi; in the second, he was in the wilderness of Ziph. In the first, Saul went to seek David on the rocks of the goats; in the second, Saul pitched his camp in Hachilah. In the former, Saul was alone; in the latter, he was encamped with his soldiers. In the first, he was in a cave to cover his feet; in the second, he lay asleep in his camp. In the former, David was in the same cave with Saul, though unseen, and his men were with him in the cave; in the latter, Saul was in the hill of Hachilah, but David with his men abode in the wilderness, and when he went to Saul he was accompanied only by Abishai. In the former, David's men instigate him to kill Saul; in the latter, Abishai exhorts him to destroy him. In the former, David cuts off the skirt of Saul's robe, and when he came out of the cave, he cries after Saul, and tells him that he found him in a cave; in the latter, David takes the spear and cruse of water from Saul's bolster, cries to the people, and to Abner, and tells him that there came one of the people into the camp to destroy the king. In the former event, David only shewed Saul the skirt of his robe; but in the latter, he shews the king's spear, and desires him to send one of his attendants to fetch it. Who ever saw any one thing in the world look more like two things, or rather two separate, distinct, and different transactions?REFLECTIONS.—We have here,1. Saul melted down under David's remonstrance. He sees now how precious his life was in David's sight, and therefore how sinful it was against God to persecute the innocent, as well as foolish to drive so faithful a servant from him. He owns the aggravation of his sin, and that he has erred exceedingly; invites him to return to

125

court, and solemnly promises never more to attempt his harm. Note; Sin is the greatest folly, and will appear so at last.2. David enforces the conviction of his innocence; desires the king to send for his spear and cruse; prays to God to deal with him according to his uprightness before him; assures Saul that his hand would never be against him, as that day's experience would testify; the anointing oil would be his sacred guard; and he refers himself to God for the same protection, preservation, and deliverance, as that day he had shewn to Saul. Note; (1.) God is a righteous judge, and all his dispensations prove him to be so. (2.) They who shew mercy, may hope to find mercy.3. Saul is quite overcome, blesses his son, acknowledges, before his army, his righteous dealing, and predicts his greatness and prevalence over all his enemies. Note; God will at last make his enemies bow at the feet of his persecuted people, and know that he hath loved them. Revelation 3:9.4. Saul and David part to meet no more: Saul returns to Gibeath, David to his fastnesses, unwilling to trust to promises which had been so often broken. Note; It is folly to trust a second time those who have once deceived us.

22 "Here is the king's spear," David answered. "Let one of your young men come over and get it.

GILL, "And David answered and said, behold the king's spear!.... And which perhaps was his sceptre, and which David therefore would not keep, lest it should be thought or said that he had deprived him of an ensign of his royalty, and be interpreted as a token of his design to seize his crown and throne: and let one of the young men come over and fetch it; for notwithstanding the acknowledgment Saul had made of his sin and folly, David did not choose to carry the spear to him; not caring to trust him, and put himself into his hands, lest the evil spirit should return and come upon him suddenly, and alter his disposition and carriage; nor would he send any of his men with it, whose lives were dear to him, lest they should be seized as traitors, but desires one of Saul's men might be sent for it.

126

HENRY 22-23, " David's improvement of Saul's convictions and confessions and the evidence he had to produce of his own sincerity. He desired that one of the footmen might fetch the spear (1Sa_26:22), and then (1Sa_26:23), 1. He appeals to God as judge of the controversy: The Lord render to every man his righteousness. David, by faith, is sure that he will do it because he infallibly knows the true characters of all persons and actions and is inflexibly just to render to every man according to his work, and, by prayer, he desires he would do it. Herein he does, in effect, pray against Saul, who had dealt unrighteously and unfaithfully with him (Give them according to their deeds, Psa_28:4); but he principally intends it as a prayer for himself, that God would protect him in his righteousness and faithfulness, and also reward him, since Saul so ill requited him. 2. He reminds Saul again of the proof he had now given of his respect to him from a principle of loyalty: I would not stretch forth my hand against the Lord's anointed, intimating to Saul that the anointing oil was his protection, for which he was indebted to the Lord and ought to express his gratitude to him (had he been a common person David would not have been so tender of him), perhaps with this further implication, that Saul knew, or had reason to think, David was the Lord's anointed too, and therefore, by the same rule, Saul ought to be as tender of David's life as David had been of his.K&D, "1Sa_26:22-23

David then bade the king send a servant to fetch back the spear and pitcher, and reminded him again of the recompense of God: “Jehovah will recompense His righteousness and His faithfulness to the man into whose hand Jehovah hath given thee to-day; and (for) I would not stretch out my hand against the anointed of the Lord.” BENSON, "1 Samuel 26:22-24. Behold the king’s spear, &c. — He did not think it proper to put himself in Saul’s power by going and presenting it himself to him. The Lord render to every man his righteousness — In these words David shows the assurance he had that, however Saul dealt by him, the Lord would vindicate his cause on account of his integrity and righteous dealing. So let my life be much set by, &c. — He prays that God would spare his life as he had spared Saul’s, and show him similar mercy, and then he trusted that he should be delivered out of all his troubles. PULPIT, "1Sa_26:22-24Behold the king’s spear. Rather, "Behold the spear, O king." The other is an unnecessary correction of the Kri. Having restored to Saul this ensign of his authority, David prays that Jehovah may render to every man his righteousness, i.e.may requite David for his upright conduct towards Saul, and by implication punish Saul himself for his unjust conduct. And also his faithfulness, his fidelity, and steady allegiance. This refers exclusively to David, who gives as proof of his faithfulness to his king that he had spared his life when it was delivered into his power. In return for which act God, he affirms, will protect his life. 1Sa_26:24 would be better translated, "And behold, as thy life was great (in value) in my sight this day, so shall

127

my life be great (in value) in the sight of Jehovah, and he shall deliver me out of every strait," every narrowness and difficulty into which Saul’s persecution might drive him.

HAWKER, "Verses 22-25(22) And David answered and said, Behold the king's spear! and let one of the young men come over and fetch it. (23) The LORD render to every man his righteousness and his faithfulness: for the LORD delivered thee into my hand to day, but I would not stretch forth mine hand against the LORD'S anointed. (24) And, behold, as thy life was much set by this day in mine eyes, so let my life be much set by in the eyes of the LORD, and let him deliver me out of all tribulation. (25) Then Saul said to David, Blessed be thou, my son David: thou shalt both do great things, and also shalt still prevail. So David went on his way, and Saul returned to his place.David points out in this account one grand motive why he had been so favourable to Saul, in that he considered him, as the Lord's anointed. And had Saul considered David in the same light, his life ought to have been set by as equally sacred. It doth not appear by what follows in the history of Saul and David, that they ever conferred with one another, or saw the face of each other after this anymore. David went on his way, it is said, the way of grace and salvation; for Jesus was then as he was afterwards, and is now and ever will be, the way, the truth, and the life. Saul returned to his place. An awful account though short: for where is the place of the wicked, where in this life, and where in that which is to come? Judas, when he fell, went to his own place. Acts 1:25.PETT, "1 Samuel 26:22‘And David answered and said, “See, the spear, O king! Let then one of the young men come over and fetch it.” ’David responded by offering him back his ceremonial spear which was the symbol of his kingship, the equivalent of a royal sceptre. But he would not approach the king himself. He had suffered too much at Saul’s hands to trust the genuineness of his repentance. Let one of Saul’s young men come over and collect it. Thus he did not take the request for him to return as reliable.

GUZIK, "4. (1Sa_26:22-25) David explains to Saul why he did not kill him.And David answered and said, “Here is the king’s spear. Let one of the young men come over and get it. May the LORD repay every man for his righteousness and his faithfulness; for the LORD delivered you into my hand today, but I would not stretch out my hand against the Lord’s anointed. And indeed, as your life was valued much this day in my eyes, so let my life be valued much in the eyes of the LORD, and let Him deliver me out of all tribulation.” Then Saul said

128

to David, “May you be blessed, my son David! You shall both do great things and also still prevail.” So David went on his way, and Saul returned to his place.

a. May the LORD repay every man for his righteousness and his faithfulness: David trusts in the God who blesses the righteous and the faithful. David knew the truth of Heb_6:10 before it was written: For God is not unjust to forget your work and labor of love which you have shown toward His name.

i. David understood the principle Jesus spoke of in Mat_7:2: With the same measure you use, it will be measured back to you. David wanted the “extra big scoop” of God’s mercy given for himself, so David gave Saul the “extra big scoop” of mercy. That generous measure of mercy will be a great blessing to David later in his life.

b. So let my life be valued much in the eyes of the LORD: David wanted to fulfill his calling, to be the next king of Israel. But he wanted both the throne and the blessing of God. He refused to take the throne through murder or rebellion. He would wait until it came to him God’s way. In this, David trusted that God would protect him when he did eventually come to reign over Israel.

i. David knew that if he wanted God’s support when he became king, he must support Saul now.ii. David held on to this principle, and when he became king, he recognized that his righteousness was rewarded. The LORD rewarded me according to my righteousness; according to the cleanness of my hands He has recompensed me. For I have kept the ways of the LORD, and have not wickedly departed from my God. For all His judgments were before me, and I did not put away His statutes from me. I was also blameless before Him, and I kept myself from my iniquity. Therefore the LORD has recompensed me according to my righteousness, according to the cleanness of my hands in His sight. With the merciful You will show Yourself merciful; with a blameless man You will show Yourself blameless; with the pure You will show Yourself pure; and with the devious You will show Yourself shrewd. For You will save the humble people, but will bring down haughty looks. (Psa_18:20-27)

c. David went on his way: Saul invited David to return (1Sa_26:21), but David did not take the invitation. He would wait and see if the repentant words Saul spoke showed a genuine repentance in his life. But as David goes on his way, he is faced with the temptation he spoke of in 1Sa_26:19 - the temptation to flee Israel all together and live among the ungodly.

i. “Knowing Saul’s unstable and deceitful heart, he would not trust to any of his professions or promises, but kept out of his reach.” (Poole)ii. “Since now there is nothing more to be said, David and Saul part, never to see each other again.” (Youngblood)

129

23 The LORD rewards every man for his righteousness and faithfulness. The LORD delivered you into my hands today, but I would not lay a hand on the LORD's anointed.

Ray Pritchard, "The question might be framed this way: Why did David go out of his way to create an opportunity to spare Saul’s life a second time? I suggest the answer to the question is found in the very last thing David says to Saul in verse 24: “I valued your life today.” At first glance that might appear to mean that David was simply saying, “I didn’t kill you when I had the chance.” That’s true, but David didn’t have to go to all that trouble just to prove that. He already proved it in the cave at En Gedi. When David says, “I valued your life today,” he is explaining why he risked his life in the first place. To put it simply, David did what he did because he was concerned for Saul. He cared about what was happening to him. David went into the camp not to kill him but to turn him back to God. No matter how it might appear to us, taking the spear was not some teenage stunt. It was David’s way of saying, “Saul, God made you king and gave you the right to have this spear but you have turned away from God.” It was a picture of what had happened in Saul’s life.The final irony of this story is that despite all that Saul had done, David still loved him, and he was willing to risk his life to prove it.GILL, "The Lord render to every man his righteousness, and his faithfulness,.... Or recompense every man that deals justly and faithfully with others, as he had done with Saul; or the Lord, who is just and faithful to his promises, reward the men that act the good and upright part; and this was a prayer of faith; for David doubted not that, though Saul might fail, yet God could not: for the Lord delivered thee into my hand this day; or, "into an hand" (x) into the hand of Abishai, who had it in his power to slay him, when he went and took the spear that was at his bolster, and would have done it, but David suffered him not:

130

but I would not stretch forth my hand against the Lord's anointed; nor suffer another to stretch forth his hand against him; so careful and tender was he of his life. PETT, "1 Samuel 26:23‘And YHWH will render to every man his righteousness and his faithfulness; forasmuch as YHWH delivered you into my hand today, and I would not put forth my hand against YHWH’s anointed.”Instead of trusting in Saul’s repentance he would put his trust in YHWH. Let YHWH work out events and give to every man what he was worthy of. And he was confident that YHWH would reward his own righteousness and faithfulness in not putting out his hand against the one who was consecrated to YHWH

24 As surely as I valued your life today, so may the LORD value my life and deliver me from all trouble."

CLARKE There is a vast deal of dignity in this speech of David, arising from a consciousness of his own innocence. He neither begs his life from Saul, nor offers one argument to prevail upon him to desist from his felonious attempts, but refers the whole matter to God, as the judge and vindicator of oppressed innocence. Saul himself is speechless, except in the simple acknowledgment of his sin; and in the behalf of their king not one of his officers has one word to say! It is strange that none of them offered now to injure the person of David; but they saw that he was most evidently under the guardian care of God, and that their master was apparently abandoned by him. Saul invites David to return, but David knew the uncertainty of Saul's character too well to trust himself in the power of this infatuated king. How foolish are the counsels of men against God! When he undertakes to save, who can destroy? And who can deliver out of his hands?GILL Or "magnified" F25; and made great account of, as being the life of the king of Israel, and the Lord's anointed, and so spared:so let my life be much set by in the eyes of the Lord;he does not say in the eyes of Saul, as it should have been by way of retaliation, and as it might have been expected he would have said; but he had no dependence on

131

Saul, nor expected justice to be done him by him; but he prays that his life might be precious in the sight of Lord, and taken care of, and protected by him, as he believed it would:and let him deliver me out of all tribulation;for as yet he did not think himself quite out of it, notwithstanding all that Saul had said, but believed the Lord would deliver him in due time; from him alone he looked for it, and on him he depended. HENRY, "Not relying much upon Saul's promises, he puts himself under God's protection and begs his favour (1Sa_26:24): “Let my life be much set by in the eyes of the Lord, how light soever thou makest of it.” Thus, for his kindness to Saul, he takes God to be his paymaster, which those may with a holy confidence do that do well and suffer for it.

K&D, "1Sa_26:24-25“Behold, as thy soul has been greatly esteemed in my eyes to-day, so will my soul be

greatly esteemed in the eyes of Jehovah, that He will save me out of all tribulation.” These words do not contain any “sounding of his own praises” (Thenius), but are merely the testimony of a good conscience before God in the presence of an enemy, who is indeed obliged to confess his wrong-doing, but who no longer feels or acknowledges his need of forgiveness. For even Saul's reply to these words in 1Sa_26:25 (“Blessed art thou, my son David: thou wilt undertake, and also prevail:” ּתּוַכל lit. to vanquish, i.e., to carry out what one undertakes) does not express any ,ָיֹכלgenuine goodwill towards David, but only an acknowledgment, forced upon him by this fresh experience of David's magnanimity, that God was blessing all his undertakings, so that he would prevail. Saul had no more thoughts of any real reconciliation with David. “David went his way, and Saul turned to his place” (cf. Num_24:25). Thus they parted, and never saw each other again. There is nothing said about Saul returning to his house, as there was when his life was first spared (1Sa_24:22). On the contrary, he does not seem to have given up pursuing David; for, according to 1Sa_27:1-12, David was obliged to take refuge in a foreign land, and carry out what he had described in 1Sa_26:19 as his greatest calamity.PULPIT, "In return for which act God, he affirms, will protect his life. 1Sa_26:24would be better translated, "And behold, as thy life was great (in value) in my sight this day, so shall my life be great (in value) in the sight of Jehovah, and he shall deliver me out of every strait," every narrowness and difficulty into which Saul’s persecution might drive him.

PETT, "1 Samuel 26:24

132

“And, behold, as your life was much set by this day in my eyes, so let my life be much set by in the eyes of YHWH, and let him deliver me out of all tribulation.”

Indeed he applied to himself the maxim ‘what a man sows, that will he reap’ (Galatians 6:7; compare Proverbs 20:22; Proverbs 24:29). He asked that just as he had treated Saul’s life as important because he was the anointed of YHWH, so YHWH would treat his life as important because he too was the anointed of YHWH, even to such an extent that he would deliver him out of ‘tribulation’, that is, out of trouble and distress. He had a firm confidence that if he was faithful to YHWH, YHWH would be faithful to him.

25 Then Saul said to David, "May you be blessed, my son David; you will do great things and surely triumph." So David went on his way, and Saul returned home.

GILL thou shall both do great [things];he had done great things already, in slaying Goliath, obtaining victories over the Philistines, and escaping the hands of Saul, and keeping out of them with so small a force; and he should do greater things yet:and also shalt still prevail;against Saul and all his enemies; the Targum is, ``even in reigning thou shalt reign, and even in prospering thou shalt prosper;''he believed he would be king, so he had said before, (1 Samuel 24:20) ;so David went on his way:to the wilderness again very probably, putting no trust and confidence in Saul, knowing how fickle and unstable he was:

133

and Saul returned to his place;to Gibeah, where his palace was.

CLARK, "Thou shalt both do great things, and also shalt still prevail. - The Hebrew is גם עשה תעשה וגם יכל תוכל gam asoh thaaseh, vegam yachol tuchal; “Also in doing thou shalt do, and being able thou shalt be able; which the Targum translates, also in reigning thou shalt reign, and in prospering thou shalt prosper; which in all probability is the meaning.

There is a vast deal of dignity in this speech of David, arising from a consciousness of his own innocence. He neither begs his life from Saul, nor offers one argument to prevail upon him to desist from his felonious attempts, but refers the whole matter to God, as the judge and vindicator of oppressed innocence. Saul himself is speechless, except in the simple acknowledgment of his sin; and in the behalf of their king not one of his officers has one word to say! It is strange that none of them offered now to injure the person of David; but they saw that he was most evidently under the guardian care of God, and that their master was apparently abandoned by him. Saul invites David to return, but David knew the uncertainty of Saul’s character too well to trust himself in the power of this infatuated king. How foolish are the counsels of men against God! When he undertakes to save, who can destroy? And who can deliver out of his hands?

HENRY, "Saul's prediction of David's advancement. He commends him (1Sa_26:25): Blessed be thou, my son David. So strong was the conviction Saul was now under of David's honesty that he was not ashamed to condemn himself and applaud David, even in the hearing of his own soldiers, who could not but blush to think that they had come out so furiously against a man whom their master, when he meets him, caresses thus. He foretels his victories, and his elevation at last: Thou shalt do great things. Note, Those who make conscience of doing that which is truly good may come, by the divine assistance, to do that which is truly great. He adds, “Thou shalt also still prevail, more and more,” he means against himself, but is loth to speak that out. The princely qualities which appeared in David - his generosity in sparing Saul, his military authority in reprimanding Abner for sleeping, his care of the public good, and the signal tokens of God's presence with him - convinced Saul that he would certainly be advanced to the throne at last, according to the prophecies concerning him.

Lastly, A palliative cure being thus made of the wound, they parted friends. Saul returned to Gibeah re infectâ - without accomplishing his design, and ashamed of the expedition he had made; but David could not take his word so far as to return with him. Those that have once been false are not easily trusted another time. Therefore David went on his way. And, after this parting, it does not appear that ever Saul and David saw one another again.

JAMISON, "So David went on his way — Notwithstanding this sudden relenting of Saul, David placed no confidence in his professions or promises, but wisely kept

134

at a distance and awaited the course of Providence.BENSON "1 Samuel 26:25. Blessed be thou, my son David — Saul perceived that it was in vain to contend any longer against David, whom he saw God intended for great things. And so strong was his conviction now of this, as well as of his own sin and folly, that he could not forbear blessing him, foretelling his success, applauding him, and condemning himself, even in the hearing of his own soldiers. And this, it seems, was their last interview. After this they saw each other no more. PULPIT, "1Sa_26:25Thou shalt both do, etc. Better, "Thou shalt both do mightily, and thou shalt surely prevail." The words are very general as compared with those in 1Sa_24:20, 1Sa_24:21, where Saul expressed his conviction that David Would be king, and intrusted his family to his care. The poverty of sentiment here, and the mere vexation expressed in 1Sa_24:21, justify Keil’s remark that Saul’s character had deteriorated in the interval, and that he was more hardened now than on the previous occasion. And so they parted—David still leading the life of a fugitive, for Saul’s return in verse. 21 was the most evanescent of good purposes, while the king went back to his place, his home at Gibeah.

DeffinbaughFor David, the events of this chapter are a high water mark for David’s grasp of God’s truth, and for the application of it in his life. David stood tall outside that cave in chapter 24, but he stands even taller here in chapter 26. He is confident of God’s protection and care, and of Him as the one who will reward his righteousness and judge his accusers. If in chapter 24 we see David gently rebuking his king, in chapter 26 we see him rebuking those who have set the king against him. David now sees his flight from his enemies in terms of its spiritual implications.If David has grown spiritually after the events of chapter 24, and this growth is evident in chapter 26, we must conclude that Abigail plays a significant role in this. The things David affirms as true in chapter 26 are the very things about which Abigail assures him. If David has any doubt that he will become the next king, Abigail assures him he will reign over Israel (25:30). Though David wants to take vengeance on his enemies (i.e. Nabal), Abigail reminds him that God will better handle such matters, and that leaving this to God will keep David from any regrets (25:31). Does David fear for his life? Abigail assures him that his life is safely in God’s hands (25:29). It is said that behind many great men, there is a great woman. Certainly that was true of David and Abigail.Do some scholars agonize that chapter 26 is too similar to chapter 24? It is similar, because it is a kind of replay of chapter 24. When God wants to teach us a lesson, if we fail to learn that lesson through one experience, God will continue to bring

135

experiences our way which confront us with the same basic test. I think the reason there is a second incident in chapter 26, so similar to the one described in chapter 24, is that God wanted David to retake the same test so that he received a higher score.Years ago I remember talking with a friend who was going through some problems in his life. As we talked, my friend mentioned that in addition to his current problems, he had faced many problems before. As I probed with a few questions, it became apparent that in each situation, the problems and the issues were very much alike. I then asked my friend, “Has it ever occurred to you that God keeps bringing you back to the same problem because you have not yet dealt with it as you should?” He acknowledged that this was probably the case. I think maybe it was also with David, and it may be the same for us. When we fail to deal with certain matters as we should, God persists at giving us further opportunities to do it right.Finally, I believe there is something for us to learn about the “place of blessing” for Christians today. For the Old Testament saint, as we have seen, dwelling in the land of Israel was a privilege and a source of blessing. Here, one could offer sacrifices and worship God freely and fully. Elsewhere, God could be worshipped and served, but with certain restrictions. One could, of course, be in the land and still distant from God due to unbelief and disobedience. And, one could be in a distant land and still have an intimate walk with God. But ideally, living in the land of Israel was to be in the place of God’s presence and blessing.What does that mean for us who are New Testament Christians, who live far from the promised land? The answer of the New Testament is very clear on this matter. In John 1, Jesus presents Himself as Israel’s Messiah. Jesus calls Philip to follow Him, and Philip then finds Nathaniel, telling him that the promised Messiah has come and that He is Jesus of Nazareth (John 1:43-44). When Nathaniel comes to Jesus, the Lord tells him, “Before Philip called you, when you were under the fig tree, I saw you” (1:48). Nathaniel is convinced and says to Jesus, “Rabbi, You are the Son of God; You are the King of Israel” (1:49). Our Lord’s words to Nathaniel are incredible:50 Jesus answered and said to him, “Because I said to you that I saw you under the fig tree, do you believe? You shall see greater things than these.” 51 And He said to him, “Truly, truly, I say to you, you shall see the heavens opened, and the angels of God ascending and descending on the Son of Man” (John 1:50-51).With these words, Jesus takes Nathaniel, and us, all the way back to Jacob’s dream in Genesis 28. In this dream, Jacob sees angels ascending and descending upon a ladder that goes to heaven, but rests on the earth. Jacob is most impressed with where the ladder stands – in Israel – and with the special nature of this place as the dwelling place of God. Jesus now takes up this imagery as He speaks to Nathaniel. Nathaniel has just objected to Peter’s assessment of Jesus, based solely on the place

136

Jesus has come from – Nazareth (John 1:46). Jesus now informs Nathaniel that while he is concerned about the place where the ladder was resting, Jesus is the ladder! The place is important, but the Person of Jesus is even more important. It is Jesus Christ whom God appointed as the means to join heaven and earth, to provide men with an access to heaven. It was not Israel, the place, but Israel, the person, who would save men from their sins and lead them to heaven.In the Gospel of Matthew, we read of the birth of our Lord Jesus, and then of the flight of Joseph and Mary and the child to Egypt. After the death of Herod, Joseph brings his family back to the land of Israel. When he does so, Matthew writes,14 And he arose and took the Child and His mother by night, and departed for Egypt; 15 and was there until the death of Herod, that what was spoken by the Lord through the prophet might be fulfilled, saying, “OUT OF EGYPT DID I CALL MY SON” (Matthew 2:14-15).These words, “OUT OF EGYPT DID I CALL MY SON,” are found in Hosea 11:1. They refer to the fact that God brought Israel, His “son” (see Exodus 4:22-23) out of Egypt. Now, by inspiration, Matthew applies them to the baby Jesus. Just as Israel was God’s “son,” whom He brought out of Egypt, so the baby Jesus is God’s “Son,” whom He also brought up from Egypt. In one Person, the Lord Jesus Christ, God has summed up all of Israel, and all of Israel’s hopes. Israel is the place where God meets with men, but Jesus is the “Son,” the person by whom God saves men. Israel is the place where the person of the Messiah came. And now that He has come, it is He that is to be preeminent, and not the place.When Jesus meets with the Samaritan woman, the matter of the “place” to worship God arises. I want you to take special note of what the woman says to Jesus and what our Lord says in response to her:19 The woman said to Him, “Sir, I perceive that You are a prophet. 20 “Our fathers worshipped in this mountain, and you people say that in Jerusalem is the place where men ought to worship.” 21 Jesus said to her, “Woman, believe Me, an hour is coming when neither in this mountain, nor in Jerusalem, shall you worship the Father. 22 “You worship that which you do not know; we worship that which we know, for salvation is from the Jews. 23 “But an hour is coming, and now is, when the true worshipers shall worship the Father in spirit and truth; for such people the Father seeks to be His worshipers. 24 “God is spirit, and those who worship Him must worship in spirit and truth.” 25 The woman said to Him, “I know that Messiah is coming (He who is called Christ); when that One comes, He will declare all things to us.” 26 Jesus said to her, “I who speak to you am He” (John 4:19-26).The Samaritan woman knows well the differences between the Samaritans and the Jews over the proper place of worship. She brings this matter up in her discussion with Jesus. But Jesus does not talk with her about the “proper place” at all. He tells

137

her that the issue of worship now centers on a Person, not a place. Those who would worship God “in Spirit and in truth” need to worship God through the coming Messiah. With this the woman agrees, but she mistakenly assumes He has not yet come. Jesus tells her, “I . . . am He.” Those who would worship God must worship Him through Jesus Christ. Worship is therefore no longer a matter of being in the right place, but of worshipping by means of the right Person.Since the coming of Jesus Christ, Israel’s Messiah, worshipping God is no longer a matter of being in the right place, but of being in the right Person. In John 15, Jesus speaks to His disciples about abiding in Him in terms of a branch abiding in a vine. In chapters 14 and 16, Jesus speaks to His disciples about the Holy Spirit who is to come. By means of the Holy Spirit, Jesus Christ promises to abide in every true believer. And so it is in the New Testament epistles that we find salvation, sanctification, and spiritual blessing described as the result of being “in Christ.”23 For all have sinned and fall short of the glory of God, 24 being justified as a gift by His grace through the redemption which is in Christ Jesus (Romans 3:23-24, emphasis mine).11 Even so consider yourselves to be dead to sin, but alive to God in Christ Jesus (Romans 6:11, emphasis mine).23 For the wages of sin is death, but the free gift of God is eternal life in Christ Jesus our Lord (Romans 6:23, emphasis mine).1 There is therefore now no condemnation for those who are in Christ Jesus (Romans 8:1, emphasis mine).38 For I am convinced that neither death, nor life, nor angels, nor principalities, nor things present, nor things to come, nor powers, 39 nor height, nor depth, nor any other created thing, shall be able to separate us from the love of God, which is in Christ Jesus our Lord (Romans 8:38-39).2 To the church of God which is at Corinth, to those who have been sanctified in Christ Jesus, . saints by calling, with all who in every place call upon the name of our Lord Jesus Christ, their Lord and ours (1 Corinthians 1:2, emphasis mine).4 I thank my God always concerning you, for the grace of God which was given you in Christ Jesus (1 Corinthians 1:4, emphasis mine).30 But by His doing you are in Christ Jesus, who became to us wisdom from God, and righteousness and sanctification, and redemption (1 Corinthians 1:30, emphasis mine).22 For as in Adam all die, so also in Christ all shall be made alive (1 Corinthians

138

15:22, emphasis mine).14 But thanks be to God, who always leads us in His triumph in Christ, and manifests through us the sweet aroma of the knowledge of Him in every place (2 Corinthians 2:14, emphasis mine).17 Therefore if any man is in Christ, he is a new creature; the old things passed away; behold, new things have come (2 Corinthians 5:17, emphasis mine).4 But it was because of the false brethren who had sneaked in to spy out our liberty which we have in Christ Jesus, in order to bring us into bondage (Galatians 2:4).I end this message on a bitter-sweet note. My friend and fellow-elder, Lee Crandell, died during the week after I preached this message. I remember his last words to me. He remarked how much he liked this message, and especially the application. I know what he meant. Lee loved the Lord Jesus Christ, and he loved hearing and proclaiming the message of the Gospel. He knew what it meant to be “in Christ.” Lee died, “in Christ”. What a comfort:13 But we do not want you to be uninformed, brethren, about those who are asleep, that you may not grieve, as do the rest who have no hope. 14 For if we believe that Jesus died and rose again, even so God will bring with Him those who have fallen asleep in Jesus. 15 For this we say to you by the word of the Lord, that we who are alive, and remain until the coming of the Lord, shall not precede those who have fallen asleep. 16 For the Lord Himself will descend from heaven with a shout, with the voice of the archangel, and with the trumpet of God; and the dead in Christ shall rise first. 17 Then we who are alive and remain shall be caught up together with them in the clouds to meet the Lord in the air, and thus we shall always be with the Lord. 18 Therefore comfort one another with these words (1 Thessalonians 4:13-18, emphasis mine).To be “in Christ” is to be forgiven of your sins. To be “in Christ” is to be a new creation, to have old things pass away, and all things to become new. To be “in Christ” is to have eternal life. To be “in Christ” is to be assured of resurrection from the dead, to spend eternity in the presence of Jesus Christ. My friend, Lee, was “in Christ.” If he were here today, he would ask you a simple question, “Are you ‘in Christ’?” Being saved, being a Christian, being assured of the forgiveness of sins and eternal life, is not a matter of being in the right place, but of being in the right Person. The way to be “in Christ” is to acknowledge your sin against God, and to trust in Jesus Christ alone as the means God has provided for your salvation. By faith in Him, His suffering and death pays the penalty for your sins. By His righteousness and resurrection from the dead, you are made righteous and raised to newness of life. If you have never trusted in the death, burial, and resurrection of Jesus Christ on your behalf, I urge you to do so this very moment. To be “in Christ” is to be in God’s appointed place of salvation and blessing forever.

139

HAWKER, "Verse 25REFLECTIONSREADER! again the Holy Ghost calleth us to behold the implacable and unmerciful malice of Saul, and the gracious exercises of the mind of David, in a renewed instance of the evil designs of the one, and the deliverance God wrought for the other. Let us obey the sacred call, and pause over what we have read, in order to mark the different dispositions, of these men; and yet more especially to behold the gracious interposition of God, in defeating the evil schemes of Saul and prospering the hand of David.But may we not without violence to the subject, behold in the unremitting persecution of David by Saul, somewhat more than the mere jealousies of nature in the envy of Saul to David, respecting his succession in the kingdom? Are there not traces to be seen of the still greater envy arising in the mind of the unregenerate, in the view of the Lord's favour towards his people in a spiritual kingdom. Alas! what bitterness do the children of the wicked one manifest to the children of the kingdom? Like the corrupt stock from which they shoot, their very vine is of the vine of Sodom, and of the fields of Gomorrah. In this spiritual warfare what goings forth of the enemy, like Saul in the pursuit of David, are there every day to surprise by ambush, or to take by subtilty? And what Ziphites are there everywhere to join in the confederacy, to deliver the godly into the snare of the wicked. Ye soldiers of Jesus Christ, be strong in the Lord, and in the power of his might. Put on the whole armour of God. Remember your enemies are the enemies of our God and of his Christ. He will fight your battles. Stand still and you shall shortly see the salvation of God. He hath delivered you hitherto, and doth deliver, and therefore trust in him, and he will yet deliver. Ere long the battle will be finished. That promise is absolute. The God of peace shall bruise Satan under your feet shortly.PETT, "1 Samuel 26:25 a‘Then Saul said to David, “Blessed are you, my son David. You will both do mightily, and will surely prevail.”Saul humbly replied by blessing ‘my son David’, and assuring him that he would surely yet do mighty things, and would prevail in all to which he set his hand. That at least was sure.1 Samuel 26:25 b‘So David went his way, and Saul returned to his place.’And then they parted for the last time. David ‘went on his way’, for he had no

140

settled place to go to, while Saul returned to his palace-fortress at Gibeah.Note On The Question Of Whether The Incident In Chapter 26 Is Merely A Duplicate Of The Incidents In Chapters 23-24.Superficially a strong case can be made out for the case that the incident in 1 Samuel 26 is merely a duplicate of the combined but different incidents in 1 Samuel 23-24. Consider for example the following:· In both incidents Saul is alerted by the Ziphites (1 Samuel 23:19; 1 Samuel 26:1).· Both refer to David’s connection with the Hill of Hachilah (1 Samuel 23:19; 1 Samuel 26:1).· In both cases Saul seeks David in the wilderness with ‘three thousand’ men (1 Samuel 24:1-2; 1 Samuel 26:1-2).· In both cases Saul is at David’s mercy (1 Samuel 24:3-7; 1 Samuel 26:3-12).· In both cases David refrains from slaying him because he is YHWH’s Anointed (1 Samuel 24:3-7; 1 Samuel 26:3-12).· In both cases David appropriates a symbol of Saul’s authority, in one case the hem of his robe, 1 Samuel 24:5-6; in the other his spear and water jug, 1 Samuel 26:12).· In both cases David reveals himself to Saul after the event and displays what he has appropriated (1 Samuel 24:8-11; 1 Samuel 26:14-16).· In both cases David pleads his case before Saul at some length (1 Samuel 24:9-15; 1 Samuel 26:17-20; 1 Samuel 26:22-24).· In both cases David likens himself to a flea (a dead dog and a flea, 1 Samuel 24:14); a flea and a partridge (1 Samuel 26:20).· In both cases Saul repents and speaks of coming success for David (1 Samuel 24:17-21; 1 Samuel 26:21; 1 Samuel 26:25).At first sight the duplication appears impressive, but once the incidents are inspected in detail the coincidence actually becomes less impressive. Firstly we should notice that David spent some considerable time hiding in the wilderness area west of the Dead Sea, moving from area to area. It would not therefore be surprising if he went back to what may well have been a suitable encampment on the Hill of Hachilah a number of times. And once he had done so it is not surprising that, if at one of those times the Ziphites had complained to Saul with the result that David had been forced to depart, the next time they tried complaining to Saul again

141

because they saw David and his men as a threat and a nuisance and hoped that he would be made to depart again. What is more significant, and counts against the idea of duplication, is that the first time David then fled to the wilderness of Maon, at which point Saul had to cease his search because of the Philistine threat, while the second time David only hides nearby and does not flee, and there is no suggestion that Saul’s withdrawal has anything to do with the Philistines. It should further be noted that in 1 Samuel 23-24 the appeal of the Ziphites and reference to the hill of Hachilah in 1 Samuel 23 strictly have no direct connection with Saul’s later search for David in 1 Samuel 24 which occurs because of anonymous information (1 Samuel 24:1). Thus we would have to suggest that 1 Samuel 26 unnecessarily conflated two narratives and totally ignored the true circumstances.That Saul had three military units with him each time cannot be regarded as significant. It simply suggests that he constantly operated with three military units, compare also 1 Samuel 13:2.That Saul was twice found to be at the mercy of an astute David is not really surprising, especially as, while the first time it was accidental, the second time it was specifically by the deliberate choice of David. What happened the first time may well have sparked off David’s adventure in the second. David knew from his experience in 1 Samuel 24 that this was one way in which he could persuade Saul to return home and leave his men alone. It was surely just common sense to try the same method again. But we should note that the place at which it happened was different (the cave of Engedi in the cliffs facing the Dead Sea compared with the Hill of Hachilah in the mountain range near Hebron some way from the Dead Sea), the circumstances were very different (accidentally in a pitch black cave, compared with by David’s choice in the centre of Saul’s camp at night), the objects taken were totally different, fitting in with the difference in each situation (the hem of the robe cut off in a pitch black cave compared with Saul’s ceremonial spear and water jug taken from his camp), the persons involved were very different (David’s men in hiding and then Saul alone, compared with David and two named men who have set off with the intention of spying on Saul’s camp, and then Abner and Saul seen as together) and the spirit in which it happened was very different (in the first case it was by coincidence because David and his men were hiding in a cave in some trepidation, in the second it was a deliberate act of David as he acted fearlessly and decisively in order to bring the situation about).That David spared Saul’s life both times is what we would expect if he genuinely saw Saul as YHWH’s Anointed (which suggests that he would spare Saul’s life whenever he saw him), and once David had in each case appropriated something of Saul’s which expressed his authority we would expect that the main events which followed would necessarily be duplicated. The whole point of appropriating the very different symbols of Saul’s authority was precisely in order to reveal them to Saul and have a conversation with him.

142

But even the very conversations are very different. In the first case Saul is obsessed with the question of the kingship, in the second case the idea of kingship does not arise at all. In the first case he discourses at length, in the second case he says little. The kingship does not seem to be a concern. In the first case he admits to his actions being evil compared with David’s good actions, in the second case he quite spontaneously admits that he has sinned and played the fool, and asserts that he will in future do David no more harm. To those who suggest that Saul could not have behaved in a way which was so against character by pursuing David a second time after what he had said the first time we can only point out that the nature of Saul’s illness was such that it is quite explicable. When they take over a person’s mind paranoia and delusion supply their own justification which always seems logical to the person at the time. That is a symptom of the illness. Nor would Saul be the first person who, having made a promise about something he felt deeply about, stewed over it for some time and reneged on that promise because the worst side of his nature got the better of him..The dual references to a flea only indicate that David regularly saw himself in those terms (living in the circumstances that they did he and his men were probably very familiar with fleas), but in context both are in fact very different pictures. In the first case the flea is paralleled with a dead dog, as a symbol of what is unpleasant, in the second it is seen as hunted down and connected with a partridge in the mountains which was also hunted down.And finally the emphasis of David is different in each case. In the first case David stresses that the fact that he has spared Saul is proof of his innocence, in the second he indignantly demands to know why Saul is pursuing him and considers that there is a remedy which should have been considered. In the first case he has no thought of leaving Israel, in the second he has clearly made up his mind to do so.All these differences and different emphases count very strongly against these simply being duplicate narratives, for if they are they have been changed in every detail, while history is in fact full of examples of far greater ‘coincidences’ than these where the fact that different occasions were actually in mind is absolutely certain. We must therefore conclude that the narratives are not mere duplications but are dealing with two totally different incidents which occurred during the long years of Saul’s pursuit of David while he was in hiding in the wilderness areas west of the Dead Sea.

143

144