Podcast: Play in new window | Download

Introduction

The miserable King Saul is now approaching the very end of his life, and he is terrified. In that terror, he casts about for a word of certainty, but what he is given provides no comfort for him.

The Text

“And it came to pass in those days, that the Philistines gathered their armies together for warfare, to fight with Israel. And Achish said unto David, Know thou assuredly, that thou shalt go out with me to battle, thou and thy men . . .” (1 Sam. 28:1-25).

Summary of the Text

The chapter begins with a Philistine determination to go to war with Israel (v. 1). Achish invites David to go, and David agrees. Achish then says that David will be his personal bodyguard (v. 2). We are then reminded that Samuel had died, and was buried. Further, Saul had suppressed the mediums and the necromancers (v. 3). The Philistines mustered their forces, and Saul gathered all his troops on Mt. Gilboa (v. 4). When Saul saw the Philistine army, he was terrified (v. 5). Saul then inquired of the Lord, but did not hear back—neither by dreams, nor by the Urim, nor by prophets (v. 6). So Saul asks his servants to find him a medium, and he is told that there is one at Endor (v. 7). So Saul took off his royal robe, disguised himself, and came to her and asked for her services (v. 8). The woman suspects a trap (v. 9). So Saul swore in the name of the Lord that she would be safe (v. 10). So she asked who she should summon, and Saul replies that Samuel should be brought up (v. 11). When the woman saw Samuel, she realized that her client was Saul (v. 12). Saul reassures her, and asks what she had seen. She replies she had seen a judge (lit. gods) coming up from Sheol (v. 13). When she describes him and his robe, Saul prostrates himself (v. 14). Samuel asks why he has been disturbed, and Saul tells him his dilemma (v. 15). “Why ask me?” Samuel asks (v. 16). The Lord is going to do what He spoke through me before (v. 17), only this time David is mentioned by name (v. 18). This all goes back to Amalek (v. 18). Within the next day, Israel will be defeated, and Saul and his sons will be with Samuel (v. 19). Saul collapsed at this information (v. 20). The witch appeals to him, asking him to eat (vv. 21-22). Saul initially refuses, but she and his servants prevail upon him (v. 23). She prepared a meal for them, they ate, and then departed (vv. 24-25).

Some Background

David is being set up—and it looks as though he might be in a really bad jam. But he is nevertheless trusting in the Lord. Saul is also in a dilemma. He tries to get help from the Lord, on his own terms, but when that fails, he turns away. The Lord did not speak to him by kingly means (dreams), or by priestly means (the Urim), or by prophets. These were lawful means of getting guidance and direction. Throughout Scripture, God gave Pharaoh, Nebuchadnezzar, and Solomon dreams—but for Saul nothing. And Saul had no access to the ephod, which was with David in Ziklag, and he had murdered all the priests of Nob. He used to have a prophet, Samuel, but would not do what Samuel said. Saul takes off his kingly robe in order to meet a dead Samuel, dressed in his prophetic robe. Samuel tells him that his kingly robe will be removed for good within a day.

The Bible and Magic

Saul had rightly suppressed the practice of witchcraft in the land (v. 9). But there was still a demand for their services—they were still around. The law clearly forbade this kind of thing (Lev. 19:31; 20:6, 27; Deut. 18:10-12; 1 Sam. 15:23). But what kind of thing was it? Mediums consulted the dead, and necromancers spoke on behalf of the dead. The two went together (Is. 8:19). There was a great deal of spookaloo special effects involved— Isaiah speaks of wizards who “chirp and mutter.” So the indications are that the “familiar spirit” that this woman had was simply a demon who impersonated the dead. When she got the real deal Samuel, she was astonished.

But Samuel here was a prophet—one who foretold the future when he was alive and when he was dead. He was identified by his robe, the robe that Saul had torn as a sign that he was going to have the kingdom torn from him.

In our rejection of this prohibited wizardry (which must be a robust rejection), we must not make the deadly mistake of thinking that it is a choice between occult miracles on the one hand and the natural laws of Jeffersonian Deism on the other. Moses split the Red Sea. Moses had a staff that turned into a snake that could eat other staves turned serpents. Elijah made meal and oil last way past their natural limits (1 King 17:16). Jesus turned water to wine, walked on water, and raised the dead. What should we call that? Certainly not magic in one sense—but certainly magical in another.

What is the distinction? The basic distinction is between autonomy, rebellion, disobedience and manipulation on the one hand, and obedience and wisdom on the other.

Point of No Return

Earlier in this series we considered the possibility that Saul was saved. He certainly wrecked his life and his reign through his disobedience, and he got to the point where he could not hold things together. He was a tyrant, and he never escaped the consequences of his sins. But there is another hint here—Samuel tells him that within a day, he and his sons will be with Samuel (v. 19). This could simply mean that he will be dead like Samuel. But Samuel came up out of the earth, indicating he was from Sheol (Hades). If Samuel was in “Abraham’s bosom,” then there is a possibility that Saul would join him there among the forgiven.

Saul ended his life trying to “hear” from Samuel, and then he partook of a table of demons. His attempts to manipulate and control came to a sorry end. He took an oath “as the Lord lives,” telling a medium that he would not obey the law of God in her instance. The result should not be surprising. Thus always to compromisers.

Read Full Article

Podcast: Play in new window | Download

Introduction

Under continued pressure from Saul, David is forced to leave Judah and take refuge with Achish, who was the king of Gath. He had complained in the previous chapter that certain men were trying to force him to serve other gods (1 Sam. 26:19) which he was unwilling to do. He was willing, however, to look like he was changing sides. During this time, David was playing a high-stakes double game.

The Text

“And David said in his heart, I shall now perish one day by the hand of Saul: there is nothing better for me than that I should speedily escape into the land of the Philistines; and Saul shall despair of me, to seek me any more in any coast of Israel: so shall I escape out of his hand . . .” (1 Sam. 27:1-12).

Summary of the Text

David said that if the situation continued unchanged, he would eventually be killed by Saul. This was not unbelief, but rather a knowledge of contingencies. If this, then that—knowing the final end result does not change the intermediate contingencies. As a result, David decided to take refuge with the Philistines (v. 1). When he sought refuge in Gath, it is likely that he negotiated this with Achish beforehand. Given that a couple thousand people were likely involved (the wives and families of 600 men), he probably didn’t just show up one day (vv. 2-3). The plan worked; Saul stopped hunting for him (v. 4). After a bit, David asked Achish to give him a town to live in (v. 5), and the king responded by granting him Ziklag. This is how Ziklag came to be a town in Judah (v. 6). This exile of David’s lasted for sixteen months (v. 7).

David began to raid three groups, enemies common to the Israelites and Philistines both (v. 8). One of the groups was the Amalekites, against whom God had required Saul to wage total war. But this was not “holy war,” or the ban, because David would bring back livestock. But he would kill all the adults, lest someone talk (v. 9). The other two groups were Geshurites and the Gezrites. The first group was mentioned in Josh. 13:2 as one still needing to be displaced, but we know nothing about the latter group. David would tell Achish that he had raided Israelites or their allies (v. 10), and he would leave no grown survivors (v. 11). Achish concluded that David had made himself utterly obnoxious to Israel, and that he would therefore remain the servant of Achish forever (v. 12). Achish thought that David had burned all his boats.

Some Background

Ziklag was a town that had been given to the tribe of Simeon (Josh. 19:5; 1 Chron. 4:30), and in Joshua 15:31, it is numbered among the towns of Judah. The town was about 25 miles southeast of Gath, which gave David the liberty of movement he needed.

Achish would of course have known about Saul’s pursuit of David, but would have had no reason whatever for suspecting David’s dogged loyalty to Saul. And David saw no reason why he should correct this assumption that Achish had naturally come to. Achish may have been a throne name and, if so, this may not have been the same king that David fooled with his pretended madness in chapter 21. After this exile of David’s, Israel had a curious relationship with Gath, which of course had been Goliath’s home town. After David became king, he was allied with Gath. When certain prophetic passages condemn the Philistines, the city of Gath is not mentioned in them (Amos 1:6-8; Zechariah 9; 2 Sam. 6:10). David was the kind of man who inspired loyalty everywhere he went, and a number of men followed him from Gath (2 Sam. 15:18). And Achish at one point takes an oath in the name of YHWH, which means that it is at least possible that he became a convert (2 Sam. 29:6,9).

The Grave of Exile

David, the future king of Israel, has to leave Israel first. Saul wants to kill him, but God intends to kill him a different way—a way that leads back to life. This is God’s way of doing things. Jesus was born in Bethlehem, but had to go down to Egypt first—out of Egypt God called His Son (Hos. 11:1). The fact that Jesus was the antitype of this kind of “exile and return” sheds light on all the types found in the Old Testament. Jacob had to leave the land he was to inherit, and then come back with his family. Joseph was sold into exile in Egypt, and was so invested in this pattern of promise that he saw to it that his bones were returned from exile (Heb. 11:22). All of Israel was taken into exile in Babylon, and Nehemiah and Ezra led the return. And in the first part of 1 Samuel, we saw that the ark of the covenant went into exile among the Philistines, just like David here, and was then brought back. As a true king over Israel, how could David not have to spend time in exile?

The Day of Odd Beginnings

We are taught in Scripture not to despise the day of small beginnings (Zech. 4:10). But if we are close readers of the scriptural narrative, we must also master the art of not despising the day of odd beginnings.

David was strong enough as a leader to be able to handle grumbling in the camp. But do you think that any of the men who had urged David to kill Saul in the cave had occasion to say privately that “if the king had only listened to us . . .” Do you think Abishai thought that the move to Ziklag vindicated David’s refusal to take Saul’s life when the two of them had the clear opportunity? I have urged you many times to “read the story you are in,” but part of this task is understanding the role of contrary readings. Other people are trying to get you to read differently. They point to the very things that you think are lining up with Scripture, and buttressing your faith, and they point to those very same things as refutations. Running around the countryside in mortal danger, declining God’s opportunities offered up on a silver platter, having to go into exile in Gath, and then taking up residence in Ziklag. I mean, Ziklag? Really?

But the center of the new Israel, the center of Israel’s glorious period of monarchy, was right there in Ziklag. Do not despise the day of odd beginnings . . . but only if it is a God beginning.

Read Full Article

Podcast: Play in new window | Download

Introduction

In this story, when Nabal was done with his drinking bout, it says that “the wine was gone out of ” him (v. 7). The Hebrew word for wineskin (what wine goes out of) is nebel. Nabal is a nebel, a deflated wineskin. God deals with him after David refrains from taking matters into his own hands, and God placed this story in the Bible as a cautionary tale—on many fronts. Nabal is a stand-in for Saul in this section—we have already seen how Saul is a Laban figure, and Nabal is Laban spelled backwards, in both Hebrew and English.

The Text

“And Samuel died; and all the Israelites were gathered together, and lamented him, and buried him in his house at Ramah . . .” (1 Sam. 25:1-44).

Summary of the Text

This is a fascinating story, masterfully told. The chapter begins with the death and burial of Samuel (v. 1). There was a man in the region of Carmel (not the mountain in the north), and he was very rich (v. 2). His name was Nabal (which means fool), which probably means that it was his nickname (v. 3). His wife was intelligent and beautiful, and her name was Abigail. David heard that Nabal was shearing his sheep (v. 4), and so he instructed ten young men to go to Nabal and to respectfully ask for sustenance, based on their respectful treatment of Nabal’s shepherds (vv. 5-8). This the young men did (v. 9). But Nabal answered true to form (v. 10), with a reply full of me-my-mine (v. 11). The young men returned to David with Nabal’s taunting reply (v. 12). David mustered 400 of his men, and they all strapped on their swords (v. 13). But one of Nabal’s servants told Abigail the story, and we learn more details about “the son of Belial” (vv. 14-17). So Abigail loaded up some donkeys with many provisions, sent them ahead of her (like Jacob with Esau), and she came after (v. 18). She did not tell her husband (v. 19), and then she came to meet David—one woman against 400 men with swords (v. 20). Now David had stated his complaint and vowed that he would slaughter any “that pisseth against the wall” (vv. 21-22). When Abigail saw David, she hurried, and bowed down to him (v. 23).

She took the blame for the whole thing (v. 24), and said that her husband’s name was about as appropriate as it gets (v. 25). She pleads with David to spare her husband, while at the same time pronouncing an imprecation on him (v. 26). Let her gift of provisions be accepted (v. 27). She states that the Lord will give David “a sure house” (v. 28)—he will be blessed and his enemies not (v. 29). And when he is king (v. 30), let him have no cause to regret at the top what he did to get to the top (v. 31). She asks to be remembered (v. 31). David blesses her and her wisdom, and received her gift (vv. 32-35). Abigail returned to Nabal, who was feasting and very drunk (v. 36). But in the morning, when the wine was gone out of him (remember he is a wineskin), she told him. His heart died, and he became like a stone (v. 37). Ten days later, the Lord struck Nabal and he died (v. 38). And so David blessed God who had vindicated him (v. 39), and he summoned Abigail to become his wife (vv. 39-40). She comes to David and marries him (vv. 41-42). David was apparently already married to Ahinoam (v. 43), and Saul had given Michal to another man (v. 44).

The Heart of this Story

Remember that in the previous chapter, David had identified himself as a son of Saul (1 Sam. 24:11). Saul had reciprocated (1 Sam. 24:16). Here he calls himself a son of Nabal (v. 8), but Nabal responds by contemptuously referring to him as the “son of Jesse” (v. 10). Lots of breakaway servants nowadays.

Abigail was both beautiful and wise (v. 3) and, as the event will show, decisive and courageous as well (v. 23). She simultaneously saves her current husband from the consequences of supreme doltishness and she saves her future husband from bloodguilt, saving two men at once. She knows David will be on the throne, and she knows that tormented consciences and thrones don’t go well together. When she bows (v. 23), and calls herself a “handmaid” (v. 24), and asks to be forgiven for her “trespass” (v. 28), don’t be fooled. She is using what God gave her with cunning and mastery. She works it, and is in complete control of the situation.

Miscellaneous Applications

There are a number of applications we can take away from this passage.

· The authority of a husband is not absolute. No human authority is. There is nothing here to indicate that Abigail was in the wrong, and much to show that she was in the right. She honored the lawful authority of her husband in much the same way that David honored the lawful authority of Saul—while knowing that God was going to change everything shortly. She honored Nabal more than Nabal did, which is how David treated Saul. She is a feminine counterpart to David. Biblical submission prohibits rendering to any creature the absolute submission that belongs only to God. And beware of men who demand absolute submission beneath them, and are scofflaws toward the authorities above. There are many men who want to reserve to themselves the right to be blockheads, and they also think biblical submission means that their wives are required to not notice.

· David vowed to slaughter Nabal and all the males of his house, and Abigail persuaded him to break that vow. It would have been a sin to keep that sinful vow. It is no sin to repent of having made one, provided the repentance includes the sinfulness of taking the vow. David repents of his sinful vow with another vow (v. 34).

· The law of God prohibits a king from multiplying wives (Dt. 17: 17), and David is moving toward a real problem here. He never takes as many wives as Solomon does, but he begets more sons than he can be a father to. By the time he became king in Hebron, he had six sons, all with different mothers (2 Sam. 3:2-5). Polygamous marriages are recognized as real marriages in Scripture, but they are nevertheless sub-creational (Gen. 2:18) and sub-Christian (Eph. 5:23; 1 Tim. 3:2), not to mention substandard. David was living below the creational norm, but I don’t believe this was a violation of Dt. 17 standard yet (2 Sam. 12:8-9).

· We are told that Abigail was beautiful and intelligent—but we are not given a photo of her, or her SAT scores. But the fact that we are told this means that relativism is out—this includes aesthetic relativism.

A Prophetic Warning

This story is not placed here as a romantic interlude. The chapter serves as a prophetic warning. David narrowly missed incurring bloodguilt in the previous chapter, and he misses it even more narrowly in this chapter. He is teetering dangerously. Previously, he stopped his men from killing Saul. Here Abigail stops him from killing the proxy stand-in for Saul. She becomes David, and he becomes his men. Abigail manages to prevent the death of Nabal from being a grief to David while on the throne—but she sadly does not prevent the death of Uriah from being a grief to David while on the throne. Uriah was another inconvenient husband who got between David and an attractive woman.

Read Full Article

Podcast: Play in new window | Download

Introduction

God has made it plain in many diverse ways that Saul has lost it, and what Saul has lost, David has been given. But all Saul does is double down in his disobedience. The irony is that, even after the Spirit had departed from him, and come upon David, the Spirit was still there at Saul’s court—until Saul drove him away with a spear.

The Text

“And it came to pass, when Saul was returned from following the Philistines, that it was told him, saying, Behold, David is in the wilderness of Engedi . . .” (1 Sam. 24:1-22).

Summary of the Text

When Saul returned from chasing (not fighting) the Philistines, he was told that David was in the wilderness of Engedi (v. 1) So Saul took three thousand men to hunt for David (v. 2). They came to a cave, which Saul needed to use for a bathroom. But David and his men were in the cave (v. 3). David’s men said that it was an invitation from God to kill Saul, but David only cut off a part of his robe (v. 4). His conscience then smote him that he had done even that much (v. 5), and he told his men this (v. 6). David kept his men from killing Saul, and Saul departed (v. 7). David called out after Saul, and bowed down to him (v. 8). David has as great a heart as Jonathan did. He asks why Saul listens to the slanders of men (v. 9). He recounts how some had wanted him to kill the king (v. 10). He proves his words by producing the piece of the robe he had cut off (v. 11). He calls Saul his father. May the Lord judge, but David will not judge (v. 12). David then cites an ancient proverb against the king (v. 13). Who are you chasing? David asks (v. 14). He again invites the Lord to judge between them (v. 15). Saul temporarily softened, calls David his son and weeps (v. 16). He acknowledges that David is in the right (vv. 17-19), and asks the Lord to reward David. Saul tells David openly that he knows that David will have the throne (v. 20). He seeks and obtains from David a promise that he will not cut off his seed (v. 21), which is much the same thing that David has promised Jonathan. David swears this oath, and they part company (v. 22).

A Divided Robe

Back in 1 Samuel 15, the tearing of Samuel’s robe was interpreted by the prophet as meaning that the kingdom was taken from Saul. How much more was it significant that Saul’s robe was “cut off ” by David? The robe was a symbol of royal authority, and to cut the robe was to symbolically attack the throne. This is why David’s conscience smites him for having done even this much. At the same time, he uses the piece of the robe he cut off to prove that he had no intention against the king’s person.

David’s rebuke of his men was fierce (v. 7). The verb for rebuke is actually a very strong one, meaning “to tear apart.” David lit into his men—self-appointed assassins—because he would not light into the king. When Saul tore Samuel’s robe, the result was that he lost the kingdom. He did not repent, but was rather trying to save face. When David cut Saul’s robe, he would have faced the same ignominious fate if he had not repented. But he did repent, and God still used that small piece of cloth.

A High Humility

When David comes out of the cave, he calls Saul his father. When David calls out to Saul, he bows himself to the ground—for Saul is his king. This is true humility. But humility is not craven. David respects Saul’s office (far more than Saul does, actually), but is more than willing to deliver a much needed rebuke. Twice he invites the Lord to judge between the two them, indicating that it will not go well for Saul if the Lord does so. Saul himself in this encounter acknowledges it. David receives this, but knows that Saul is still unreliable.

This situation is one that we should use to help us understand the apostle Paul’s teaching in Romans 13. Remember that he teaches us there that all authorities are established by God, and that the one who resists that authority is resisting God (Rom. 13: 2). Now let us ask this question. Did David respect the authority that God had established in Israel? The biblical answer would have to be absolutely, yes. He respected the Lord’s anointed in ways that stagger us whenever we think carefully about it. Now here is another question. Did David do whatever Saul wanted him to do? Did he stop running? Stop hiding? Did he turn himself in? Put those two answers together and you will see that respecting the authorities that God has established does not mean accepting their narrative of what is going on.

So David has to stand against two kinds of bloodthirstiness. He stands against Saul’s, obviously, by his singular lack of cooperation. And he also stands against his men, those who want to fight Saul with Saul-like tactics. They could read the story (perhaps with a degree of plausibility) as a story right out of Judges. Did not Ehud kill the king of Moab, a man named Eglon, and did not his servants think he was covering his feet? Why can’t we do the same? David knows—he sees the tyranny of Saul and he sees the wrong-headedness of some in the Adullam Militia. And, at the same time, he is identified with Saul (father), and he is identified with his men. He is not criticizing everybody from some very spiritual balcony seat.

The Glory Grab

Do not grab if God has not promised it—this was Saul’s problem. He was trying to grab what was not his to hold. When there is no promise, grabbing is futile. Do not grab if God has promised it—this was David’s great temptation. When there is a promise, grabbing is unnecessary—and counterproductive. When you grab tyranny away from tyrants, the result is just a name change, and not a category change. We get the red tyrant instead of the blue tyrant. Great. But what we want is for the throne to be established in righteousness (Prov. 16:12).

Read Full Article