There are giants threatening every life and every land to-day, as Goliath threatened Israel greed, ambition, impurity, self-indulgence, militarism, etc. and still against the giants the battle must go on. Our resources are often so slender that defeat seems certain; but by the exercise of faith, self-control, sincerity, training, and prudence, the forces that threaten the higher life of our land will eventually be overthrown. nation, a fate from which he was saved by the ready wit of his wife. Chap. 20 continues the melancholy story of Saul's envenomed jealousy. It may be thus briefly summarized. David privately disclosed to the trusty Jonathan his father's murderous design against him. Jonathan, unwilling to believe it, yet vowed to do all he could for him in accordance with their plighted troth. They planned that David should go into hiding for a day or two, and that Jonathan July 11-Jonathan Befriends should pretend to his father that David (1 Samuel 20) From this point the story becomes one of growing tension and alienation between Saul and David. The song in which the women acclaimed the victory of Saul, "Saul has slain his thousands and David his ten thousands" (18:7), furnished material for the jealousy which was rising in the unhappy soul of Saul. We are not surprized to read in the following verse that "Saul was very wroth, and this saying displeased him." It is already beginning to be clear to him that David may some day be his rival for the throne-" What can we have more but the kingdom?" (18:8). This is the key to the subsequent conduct of Saul, charged as it is with murderous malice; and the ugly story is relieved only by the exquisite friendship of Jonathan and David. To appreciate the full force of chap. 20, the two preceding chapters should be carefully read, which recount the attempts of Saul to remove the too attractive and versatile David from his path. According to chap. 18, he twice sought to get rid of him by assigning him dangerous work, but good fortune continued to attend him; and according to chap. 19, he goes the length of inciting Jonathan and all his servants to remove him by assassi David had gone to Bethlehem, to keep with his clan the festival of the new moon-a day which seems to have been as important in ancient Israel as the Sabbath (cf. 2 Kings 4:23; Amos 8:5). When Saul missed him at table, this excuse would test his attitude toward David, and, by a preconcerted sign, Jonathan was to indicate to David whether to flee or stay. At Jonathan's plea for David's absence Saul's jealous anger blazed forth, and he cast a spear at his son, as on other occasions he had done to David (18:11; 19:10). In sorrow and wrath, Jonathan went forth and gave David the signal for instant flight. This chapter, like others that we already studied in Samuel, is not without its difficulties. After the painfully palpable.evidence furnished by chaps. 18 and 19 of Saul's jealousy, it is rather surprizing to find Jonathan still unsuspicious (20:2) and David unable to offer him any convincing proof of his father's hostility. This has led some scholars to believe that chap. 20 is really a duplicate of the preceding narrative-a phenomenon which we have already seen to be common in this book. But in both narratives the broad fact of Saul's morbid jealousy stands out in lurid and hideous colors. In 20:31. as in 188, the jealousy is expla by the fear that, through David dynasty which Saul had hoped to 30), he leaves the table in dignified found is doomed to perish. A special difficulty is created by the last three verses of the chapter, which describe the affectionate parting of the friends. The terms of verses 35-39, according to which Jonathan indicates his advice to David who is in concealment, by the words he addresses to the attendant 'boy, clearly imply that Jonathan dare not be seen in David's company: so there can be little doubt that the concluding verses are a later addition from the hand of one whose imagination was stirred to its depths at the thought of the parting of two such loyal friends. "The soul of Jonathan," we are told in 18: 1, "was knit with the soul of David, and Jonathan loved him as his own soul" (cf. 20:17). In this chapter we have an immortal picture of a perfect friendship, and from it we may learn something of the conditions and qualities of true friendship. (1) Friends must show themselves friendly in deed as well as in word. They must be ready to plan and do and dare for each other. Much that passes for friendship is passive rather than active, and is hardly worthy of the name will scarcely trouble to write a letter, far less to make a great and daring venture for friendship's sake. True friendship sharpens the wits-notice Jonathan's plan to give the needed intimation to David (verses 20-22 and 35-38); and it is ready to take risks-Jonathan is prepared to incur his father's displeasure. No man deserves friends, and no man in the long run will retain them, who is not willing to render a service which costs him some thing. The great Friend gave himself. (2) One friendship ought not to blind us to the claims of another. For all his love to David, Jonathan does not forget his duty to his father. He does not answer with insult the fiercely insulting words of Saul (verse silence (verse 34). He admits in verse 2 that his father had always been frank and open-hearted with him in the past, and, however angry, he does not now fail in the respect which is his. father's due. A later friendship should not incline us to be less than just to the claims of an earlier one. (3) Jonathan loved David as himself. This is an exquisite and, some one would add, an unattainable and impracticable ideal; but we must not forget that it is an ideal to which even the Old Testament summons us all (Lev. 19:18), tho it is a summons which receives infinite expansion in the interpretation of Jesus (Luke 10:27-37). The story of David and Jonathan illustrates practically the kind of affection that all men would cherish for each other in a truly human society. Almost even more than the World War, the class strife which is rending every nation to-day shows how unspeakably far society is yet from attaining this ideal. The attitude of class to class is more like that of Saul than of Jonathan to David. Jealousy and suspicion reign, with all their unlovely consequences in social strife and incipient anarchy. But there is room. and need for us all in the world. We should first cast out of our hearts the devils of envy, jealousy, and malice, which always lead to bitterness and confusion and sometimes to murder and war,.and we should work for that higher and fairer order of society, in which men will show to their neighbors something of that love which Jesus has showered upon us all. July 18-David Spares Saul's Life (1 Samuel 26) The chapters that follow the story of David's escape which we studied last week describe Saul's relentless persecution of him in the wilderness of Judah-the hilly and desolate land west of the Dead Sea. David is the great rival to the throne who must be caught and disposed of. But the most casual reader can not fail to be struck by the extraordinary similarity between chaps. 24 and 26. Both describe how the persecuted David has an opportunity of ending the persecution forever by taking the life of Saul, but chivalrously refuses, contenting himself by furnishing Saul with indisputable evidence of how completely he had him in his power. Both emphasize the the point that David is deterred not only by his native magnanimity, but by the respect he had for Saul as Jehovah's anointed (24:6, 10; 26:9, 11, 23). Had these been two independent incidents, we should very naturally have expected that, on the second occasion, David would have made some pointed allusion to the malevolence of Saul, which appeared all the more odious after David's chivalry in sparing him on the former occasion. But there is no such allusion. The most probable explanation of such silence is that here, as so often, we have duplicate narratives of the same event. There were two histories of David and Saul, each of which fastened on this outstanding illustration of the magnanimity of David and the vindictiveness of Saul. The story illustrates, however, David's courage as well as his magnanimity. When he has ascertained from his scouts the exact situation of Saul's camp, he goes, under cover of the night, with only one companion right into the very heart of it. We are given to understand that Providence was working for David, a supernaturally induced sleep having fallen on all the hostile camp. There lay his royal enemy sunk in the deep sleep from which he would never have woke again, had David been base enough to listen to the suggestion of Abishai; and there, stuck into the ground near Saul's head, was the famous spear which has figured more than once in the narrative (19:10; 20:33). But David resists the temptation. An ungenerous criticism has regarded his motive in abstaining as one of selfinterest; aspiring one day to be king himself, he wished, it is said, to create a precedent of respect for the person of the king, as Jehovah's anointed. But it is fairer to take David at his word. Four times within two short verses (10, 11) he names his God, as if he recognizes, in however primitive a way, that overshadowing, restraining presence; and he is content to leave his enemy in the hands of God. But he ironically taunts Abner with his poor guardianship of the king, and then remonstrates with the king for his persecution of himself. Saul confesses his guilt, and expresses his conviction of David's ultimate triumph. Verse 19 is of much interest from the point of view of ancient religion. David can account for Saul's attitude to him only on the assumption of some external influence. Either it is due to God, who is thus expressing his anger; if that be so, David is ready to appease him with an offering. Or it is due to men; in that case he calls down upon them a solemn curse. For the effect of what they have done is to drive him away from "the inheritance of Jehovah," i.e., from the soil of Israel, and that again meant that he would be driven from the God of Israel whose jurisdiction, as we saw in the story of Ruth, was supposed to cease at the borders of Israel: whosoever crossed these was practically obliged to "serve other gods." The moral of the story is obviousthe ugliness of the vindictive spirit, and the duty, the beauty, and the wisdom of magnanimity; but never in history has the need for this moral been more imperative than to-day. The war is over; but in many hearts in many lands the tempers which it produced are being maintained and even aggravated in the so-called peace which has followed. Many would wish to see the military war rereplaced by an economic war, and to secure that life in the lands of recent enemies be hampered by trade restrictions and crusht beneath intolerable economic burdens. But "if the mass of people," as Will Arnold Forster has recently said: "Truly realized for one moment what suffering economic war would bring and how utterly that suffering would outweigh almost every conceivable advantage that might be gained, then the world might live happily ever after." A happier and a safer world, we may be sure, will never be secured by embittering human hearts and perpetuating hatred between nations or men. Magnanimity will succeed where force will fail. Professor J. F. McFadyen has well said in his recent book on Jesus and Life (p. 192, Pilgrim Press): "There is only one way in which we can really conquer an enemy; that is, by turning him into a friend. To produce two hating hearts where before there was only one may be a triumph for the pagan; to drive all hatred out of the hating heart, to capture the affection of the aggressor, that is the triumph of the Christian. But, like all other victories worth having, it can be had only at a price. It is no effeminate submission that Jesus enjoins, but an ambitious, courageous, large-hearted striving that will be content with no revenge short of the complete surrender of the enemy, of his will to be an enemy." That is the true triumph which would restore peace and happiness to our broken world; and however little some statesmen and peoples understand that to-day, it was well under stood by David three thousand years ago. July 25-David Succeeds Saul as King (2 Samuel 2: 1-7; 5: 1-5) In the last lesson David was hunted outlaw, in this he becomes king-first of Judah, then of all Israel. For an intelligent idea of the way in which this transformation in his fortunes was effected it will be necessary to read the intervening chapters, whose story may be thus briefly summarized. For some time David and his band served as vassals of the Philistines, who were then at war with Israel (1 Sam. 27 and 29). David seized the opportunity of his Philistine connection to attack the plundering Bedouin tribes in the south, but he was providentially delivered from the necessity of taking any part in the war against his own people. In the decisive battle of Gilboa Israel was defeated by the Philistines and Saul took his own life (1 Sam. 31:4; but in 2 Sam. 1:10 an Amalekite claims to have killed him). As on that fateful day "Saul died, and his three sons" (1 Sam. 31:6), David was left with no one to dispute his power but Ishbaal (later called Ishbosheth), the only surviving son of Saul. But that power was not yet consolidated or formally recognized, and the little section 2: 1-4 tells us, all too briefly, how this was effected. A new stage in the career of David began with the death of Saul; so we find him characteristically consulting his God, doubtless by means of the oracle, whether he should go up from Ziklag, where he was, to any of the cities of Judah. The answer was in the affirmative, and the city selected was Hebron. The reason for this selection is worth considering. Bethlehem, as David's own city, might have seemed to be a natural choice: but Bethlehem was too dangerously near Jerusalem which was still a Canaanite stronghold, and also too near Benjamin which would be still controlled by influences favorable to.the friends of Saul. Hebron was no doubt selected partly because of its position in a the center and heart of Judah. It would be less exposed than Bethlehem to Philistine attacks. Here David would be surrounded by friends, whom more than once he had defended against the raids of neighboring nomad tribes (1 Sam. 27); and by his marriage with Abigail he was now definitely associated with the Calebites (25:3), one of the most powerful clans of Judah. There was every reason, then, for Judah to accord David a hearty welcome, and to second the ambitions which he may well have cherished, the more so as this would give the Judæans a chance to assert that leadership of Israel which had in Saul's lifetime been naturally more or less vested in Saul's own tribe of Benjamin. Apart from that, it would be dangerous to provoke or thwart a man so resourceful as David, who had many hardy and competent soldiers at his command. Besides, his power would be a guarantee of their guarantee of their security against external attack. attack. Nothing, then, was more natural than that the sheikhs of the various clans should offer their homage to David and set him upon the throne of Judah (2:1-4). Thus was reached the first step toward David's sovereignty over the whole people. sion of David's grandson, Rehoboam. The rapid rise and brilliant success of David are proof that he was a man of very exceptional gifts. Every fresh narrative adds to the impression of his resource, his versatility, his charm and mastery of men; but the spell which he wielded first over his immediate followers and then over the people at large-a spell which has kept his memory alive among both Jews and Christians and made his name a household word for ages-was due in large measure to his essential nobility of soul. This comes out in numberless little numberless little touches in his flaming indignation with the Amalekite who claimed to have destroyed Saul (2 Sam. 1: 11-16), and very conspicuously in the magnificent poem which he composed upon the death of Saul and Jonathan (1:19-27)—surely one of the noblest elegies that ever celebrated human worth. In this wonderful poem, Saul's relentless and implacable hostility is forgotten and lost in the depths of David's love for him. Something of this regality of spirit shines through 2:4-7 which forms part of to-day's lesson. After the fateful battle of Gilboa, the men of Jabesh-Gilead, who cherished a deepChaps. 2-4 describe the struggle ly grateful memory of the deliverance between David and Ishbaal, which Saul had wrought for them at the ended in the assassination of the very beginning of his career from the latter, and left open to David the way menace of the Ammonites (1 Sam. to a practically undisputed sover- 11), had bravely stolen his body from eignty over the north as well as the the wall of Bethshan where it was exsouth. The step by which that was posed to Philistine insults, and buried finally reached is described in 5:1-5, the bones in their own town with according to which the elders of mourning (1 Sam. 31: 11-13). This Israel (ie., the northern tribes as dis- reverent and heroic regard for Saul tinguished from Judah in the south) made a mighty appeal to the chivalcame to Hebron, exprest their homage rous heart of David. He not only to David, and anointed him king. thinks of his old enemy without aniIsrael and Judah now constitute to- mosity, but he loves his memory still, gether a single kingdom, of which and he honors those who had honored David is king, tho this united king- him, invoking the blessing of heaven dom was doomed to be disrupted upon the men who had done his rival again in little more than half a cen- this valiant and pious service at the tury (937 B.C.) soon after the acces- risk of their lives. |