DAVID A SECOND TIME SPARES SAUL'S LIFE (1 Samuel 26:1-25.).
EXPOSITION
SAUL, ON INFORMATION FROM THE ZIPHITES, AGAIN SEEKS TO DESTROY DAVID (1 Samuel 26:1-3).
1 Samuel 26:1
The Ziphites came unto Saul. There are so many points of similarity between this narrative and that contained in 1 Samuel 23:19-24; 1 Samuel 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—
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 1 Samuel 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 (1 Samuel 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 On the previous occasion Saul had withdrawn from his men, but here he lies in his camp surrounded by them, when David, accompanied only by Abishai, undertakes this bold enterprise, which was entirely in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 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 (1 Samuel 22:18, 1 Samuel 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 1 Samuel 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.
1 Samuel 26:2-4
Three thousand chosen men. Not chosen for this expedition, but the force which Saul always kept under arms (1 Samuel 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 1 Samuel 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 1 Samuel 23:23).
1 Samuel 26:5
David 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 form this barricade.
1 Samuel 26:6
Ahimelech the Hittite. Though a portion of this once powerful people (Genesis 15:20; 1:26) was reduced to the position of bondmen (1 Kings 9:20), yet others had retained their independence, and their kings even are spoken of (ibid. 10:29; 2 Kings 7:6). As Ahimelech is mentioned before Abishai, he must have held an honourable place with. David, as did subsequently another Hittite, Uriah (2 Samuel 11:3). Abishai the son of Zeruiah. Zeruiah is described in 1 Chronicles 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 (2 Samuel 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 (1 Chronicles 11:6, 1 Chronicles 11:20, 1 Chronicles 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.
1 Samuel 26:7, 1 Samuel 26:8
The 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 1 Samuel 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 1 Samuel 26:11, 1 Samuel 26:12, 1 Samuel 26:16. The word literally signifies "the place where the head is." Like David's men in 1 Samuel 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.
1 Samuel 26:9-11
David forbids the deed as before (1 Samuel 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 (2 Kings 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 1 Samuel 24:6. Cruse of water. i.e. water bottle, as in 1 Kings 19:6.
1 Samuel 26:12
And 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.
1 Samuel 26:13-16
The top of a hill. Hebrew, "the top of the hill," the particular mountain from which David had reconnoitred Saul's camp (1 Samuel 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 1 Samuel 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.
1 Samuel 26:17-19
Is this thy voice? So 1 Samuel 24:16. In the darkness the only way of recognising David was by his voice. If Jehovah have stirred thee up, etc. This is one of the many passages indicative of 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 (see on 1 Samuel 2:2). Alike evil and good come from God, for he alone is the source of all; but it does not therefore follow that everything which he makes possible, or to which his providence seems to lead, is therefore right for man to do (1 Samuel 24:4, 1 Samuel 24:6). On the contrary, all leadings of providence are to be judged by God's immutable law, and the conduct of a Shimei may be absolutely wrong and unjustifiable, even though "Jehovah had bidden him do it" (2 Samuel 16:11). If, indeed, an external command come by the hand of a properly accredited person, it may take the same high position as the published law of God, and so override the conscience; but Shimei's bidding came through the working of his own passions, and was no more binding than the mowng of David's mind by Jehovah to number Israel (2 Samuel 24:1). David, then, here sets forth the two only possible cases: first, Saul may be stirred up by Jehovah to persecute David, i.e. the temptation may come by the working of his own mind under those strong impulses which to the Israelite had in them always something Divine. But this was an impulse to break God's law, and was therefore to be resisted; and just as in modern phrase we should bid a person when strongly moved to some act to carry it to God's throne in prayer, so David urges Saul to seek for the quieting of his emotions in religion. Under holy influences these fierce passions would pass away, and Jehovah would accept an offering. Hebrew, "would smell it," because the offering, minchah, consisting of flour and frankincense, was burnt for a sweet odour before God. But, secondly, Saul might be stirred up by the calumnies of wicked men, in which case David prays that they may be cursed before Jehovah; because by forcing him to leave the covenant land of Israel they virtually say to him, Go, serve other gods. To a mind so intensely religious as David's, not only was the private devotion of the heart a necessity, but also the taking part in the public worship of the Deity (Psalms 42:2; Psalms 63:2; Psalms 84:2); and, therefore, to deprive him of this privilege and expel him from the inheritance of Jehovah, i.e. the earthly limits of Jehovah's Church, was to force him, as far as his enemies could do so, to be a heathen and a worshipper of strange gods.
1 Samuel 26:20
Let not my blood fall to the earth before the face of Jehovah. Hebrew, "far from the presence of Jehovah." The point of David's appeal is not that his life may be spared, but that he may not thus be driven far away from the land where Jehovah manifests himself; nor does he seem so much to contemplate Saul's putting him to death as the probability that sooner or later the life of an exile will be cut short by one or other of the many dangers by which he is surrounded. A flea. Hebrew, "a single flea," as in 1 Samuel 24:14. A partridge. Many emendations of the text have been proposed on the supposition that partridges are only to be found in plains. But Mr. Condor tells us that partridges are among the few living creatures which still tenant these wilds; and, speaking of the precipitous cliffs which overhang the Dead Sea, he says, Here, among "the rocks of the wild goats, the herds of ibex may be seen bounding, and the partridge is still chased on the mountains, as David was followed by the stealthy hunter Saul" ('Tent Work,' 2:90: see also 1 Samuel 23:19).
1 Samuel 26:21
I have sinned. Saul's answer here is very different from that in 1 Samuel 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.
1 Samuel 26:22-24
Behold 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. 1 Samuel 26:24 would 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.
1 Samuel 26:25
Thou 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 1 Samuel 24:20, 1 Samuel 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 1 Samuel 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.
HOMILETICS.
1 Samuel 26:1-12
The moral use of Biblical difficulties.
The facts are—
1. At the request of the Ziphites, Saul goes out in pursuit of David, who by spies ascertains his true position.
2. David, observing Saul's camp, goes to it by night with Abishai while all are asleep.
3. Abishai urges David to seize the opportunity to slay Saul, but is rebuked by the declaration that if Saul dies it shall be in such way as God may ordain, and not by the self-chosen hand of David.
4. David carries off Saul's spear and cruse of water. Expositors raise the question as to whether this narrative is identical in point of time and main circumstance with that of 1 Samuel 23:19-26; 1 Samuel 24:1-15. That question is dealt with elsewhere. Our business is with the fact of the difficulty and with the teaching it involves. We may therefore consider—
I. THE MORAL USE OF BIBLICAL DIFFICULTIES. The difficulty raised in reference to this section is only one of a class on which for ages much ingenuity and learning have been spent, and which have been the occasion of no little trouble and anxiety to certain minds in consequence of their supposed bearing on the reality of revelation and the authority of Scripture. The enemies of Christianity have not been slow to take advantage of any apparent discrepancies or confused statements. The following considerations may be of service from a practical point of view:—
1. These various difficulties teach us the vanity of our wisdom in relation to the unfolding of the purposes of God. God has certainly revealed his will to mankind, and wrought out a merciful purpose in Christ. None but those who reject plainest evidence can doubt that he has been pleased to give this revelation concerning his merciful purpose in the Bible as we have it. The presence of variations in narrative, as here and in Genesis 1:1-31 and Genesis 2:1-25, and in the Gospels, is the fact which causes great perplexity. Now had we the construction of a vehicle of revelation intended for man, our wisdom would have suggested its freedom from all such difficulties to its reception. Is not this the real feeling of many? Man would have left no room for hesitation. All should have been so clear that no adverse criticism should be possible. Facts, however, are against this wisdom. It is shown to be inadequate to deal with the vast problems of universal life. God's ways are not our ways.
2. These difficulties enable us to believe in the honesty of the writers of the sacred history. As soon as our wisdom is assessed we discern in the variations and free representations of the same or similar events clear evidence that the book could not have been the work of cunning men intent on making out a consistent theory of their own. For such men would have made each document to square in detail with the one preceding, and compilers intent on furthering a theory handed down by tradition would have been careful to exclude all separate documents not manifestly coherent with others.
3. We can use the Bible, with these variations in it, with deeper interest because of the intensely human character of its narratives. Had all been so sifted and reduced to such mathematical precision and sameness of statement as to eliminate any possible appearance of discrepancy, we should have felt the non-human character of the historic record. As it is, we see human life in its pages, and trace human idiosyncracies in its varieties of representation, and as "one touch of nature makes the whole world kin," so this human element in the Bible lays hold of men, and excites in them a greater interest in its narratives.
4. The careful reader also, by means of these variations, sees in stronger light the one spiritual purpose running through the whole. The great revelation of God in Christ is more conspicuous in its oneness and continuity by reason of the very diversities and sometimes irreconcilable differences of the narrative. Our appreciation of the spiritual is the higher because we see that not one great truth is in the slightest degree affected by any verbal, chronological, or historical difficulties. Admit them all, if need be, and the real saving truth is as clear as the sun at noonday.
5. The difficulties in question are a means of wholesome discipline. All historic studies furnish scope for the exercise of caution, discrimination, patience, reticence, and suspended judgment because of the necessary incompleteness of all historic records. This is especially true of the Bible, the more so as we do not always know the particular reason of the selection or omission of items, while we do know that we have not a thousandth part of the actual events associated with the unfolding in the long line of human history of the great purpose of God in Christ. The light thrown on obscure passages by advancing discoveries is an additional reason for the exercise of patience and cautious reserve. God is educating us by the intricate lessons, written often with an appearance of confusion, in the rocks that form the crust of the globe; and likewise in the peculiar manner in which he has been pleased to allow his revelation to man to be incorporated by human hands with narratives of events.
II. THE SPECIAL TRUTH EMBODIED IN THE FACTS WHICH CONSTITUTE THE DIFFICULTY OF THIS SECTION. The object of the narrative is evidently to point out that David was under a strong temptation to forestall the order of Providence by forcing events with his own hand, and that he, with true spiritual heroism, resisted the suggestions of expediency. As we have dwelt on this topic in treating of 1 Samuel 24:1-8, and 1 Samuel 25:36-44, it may suffice here to note how, in this triple reference to the same form of trial, the historian was impressed with the persistence of this peculiar temptation during this period of David s life. Doubtless other unrecorded instances of the same, in one form or another, occurred during the period of his persecution, but these three representations are enough to indicate the fact. The persistence of the temptation to desire the disposal of events to be in our own hands, by wishing something to be done which God does not do, or to take the disposal into our hands by actually doing what is not warranted by religious principle, but only by the rules of a contracted expediency, is real in the lives of many of God's servants. Our Saviour himself was tempted to it again and again. There is an hypothesis that even Judas was induced to betray Christ to force him to assert his power, and so hasten the establishment of his kingdom. The trims of the persecuted Church suggested the expediency of rising in armed endeavour to defend and extend their principles. The slow progress of Christianity suggests to some the adoption of methods other than apostolic. The safe rule for us is that of David—God carries on his cause on earth according to laws which he himself has ordained, and no improvement can be made on them, even though their working appears to us to be too slow and painful. Saul was anointed by God's command; David was chosen to succeed Saul He who appointed Saul had power to end his life; till he did this of his own will, and in his own way, David must wait as the coming king. So the laws of the human mind, of the social forces at work in the world, and of the spiritual agencies that operate on the soul of man are of God; the cause of Christ among men is to be established by action in harmony with these; we are to resist any temptation to seek to set them aside by the introduction of agencies not spiritual, and are not to wish that other agencies operating according to other laws were in existence. The principle of living and acting according to law will also apply to private life and enterprise.
General lessons:—
1. A reverent spirit will prove a good solvent of many Biblical difficulties, and will extract many lessons from them.
2. Where there is not concern for spiritual life the verbal and historical difficulties of the Bible will not assume great importance.
3. It is a matter of gratitude that the way of life is clear to the most unlettered of men (Isaiah 35:8).
4. While we are waiting and doing our best as God's servants, his providence is quietly at work to realise the purpose of our life.
5. In dealing with men who urge expediency, it is safe to appeal to God's word and his unceasing government of men.
6. No man ever regretted fidelity to principle; many have mourned over the bitter fruits of expediency.
1 Samuel 26:13-25
Afflictions and righteousness.
The facts are—
1. David seeks to arouse the attention of Saul by an appeal to Abner, blended with reproof of his negligence.
2. Saul, on recognising David's voice, is answered by him in terms expressive of loyal homage.
3. David appeals to Saul with respect to his conduct, pointing out its harshness and unreasonableness.
4. Saul, valuing his own life just spared, admits the force of the plea, and promises to desist from persecution.
5. David reasserts his integrity, and expresses the hope that God would accept his motives and actions.
6. Saul acknowledges the moral superiority of David, and professes to foresee his success in life. As the persistence of trial is set forth by the various items of the history, so the integrity of David is also variously illustrated. Afflictions and righteousness are most conspicuous features of his experience during the period prior to his accession to power; beautifully suggestive to us of the conditions of our attaining to fitness for the higher service of Christ (Acts 14:22). The general teaching of the section may be arranged under the following statements:—
I. That IT IS CONSISTENT WITH SUBMISSION TO THE WILL OF GOD TO ENDEAVOUR TO REMOVE THE HUMAN CAUSES OF TROUBLE. The life and writings of David prove his trust in God and acquiescence in his appointments; at the same time he spared no pains to get rid of the troubles of his life by removing the causes of them as existing in the mind of Saul. In this fresh appeal he declares to Saul that if God be the mover of his spirit to do these things (1 Samuel 26:19), he has no more to say, only let it be proved. His appeal to Abner was an additional effort to remove the trouble, since not Saul only, but the general and army would now see in his abstinence from violence the purity of his motives. The same course is proper for all in tribulation. Trials are permitted, and are blessed in their effects when rightly received (Hebrews 12:6-11); but we have to do with preventible causes, and may seek to remove them. Even the failure of effort to remove causes of trouble which, being human, ought not to operate, in becoming itself a trial is the more blessed in its effects because of our having done our duty. God's secret purposes and methods are not the rules of our action, and any fruitless action of ours performed in reverent submission to his unsearchable will is itself a means of grace, because of his turning it to spiritual profit.
II. That THERE IS A DOUBLE BASIS OF APPEAL TO MEN BENT ON A WRONG COURSE which should regulate our dealings with them. David addresses himself to Saul's sense of right and to his reasoning powers. "What have I done?" The answer was clear in Saul's conscience. "Now, therefore, I pray thee, let my lord the king hear the words of his servant." The reasoning powers of Saul gave heed and were convinced by the subsequent argument. In our private controversies, in our efforts to win men over to Christ, and in our treatment of the young, we are on safe ground when we address the moral and rational nature. A wise appeal to the two cannot be wholly lost. Man is compelled by force of his nature to recognise right when placed before the eye of conscience, and the laws of thought insure the acquiescence of reason when the argument is intrinsically as well as formally sound. It is this necessary recognition of truth and right which forms the philosophical ground for faith in the final triumph of Christianity, and wise teachers as well as private Christians may labour on in confidence as long as they present the truth of God in an earnest and prayerful spirit.
III. That THE DEFECTIVE MORAL CONDITION OF WEAK MINDS LAYS THEM OLDEN TO THE PERNICIOUS CONTROL OF BASE MEN OF STRONGER MIND. David hit the mark when he said, "If they be the children of men." The strong-willed men at the court of Saul, and referred to in the Psalms, had obtained influence over him, and by lies and slanders had embittered his spirit against David. But it was the decayed piety and persistently impenitent spirit in Saul which exposed him to this danger; for even a weaker intellect will resist the stronger in matters of moral conduct when the heart is sound in its spiritual tendencies. A man's moral condition has more to do with his superiority to the devices and urgencies of the strong and crafty than his knowledge or force of intellect. Moral affinities are powerful for good or evil, and moral repulsions are life's safeguards for the good. Hence the supreme importance of a new heart and a right spirit. Hence, also, the profound wisdom of the New Testament teaching and the mercy of the provision for our renewal. The bearing of this on our education of youth, on personal resistance of temptation, and on the means for counteracting the influence of powerful but unholy men, is obvious.
IV. That a RECOGNITION OF RIGHT AND WRONG IN CONDUCT MAY BE PERFECTLY SINCERE, BUT DESTITUTE OF GOVERNING POWER OVER THE LIFE. Under the appeal to conscience and reason Saul admitted his wrong and folly, and David's right and wisdom. Being just then keenly alive to the value of deliverance from death, he was prompted to let right and reason exercise a legitimate sway over his thoughts, and thus was honest in his declaration. Yet the recognition was, so to speak, intellectual, and not moral. It was admission of truth, not response to its power over the life. Men are not governed in conduct by thoughts, or propositions, or formal confessions of right and propriety, but by positive tendencies of their moral nature. And as Saul's tendencies were not altered by the interview with David, his recognition of right failed to become a power over his conduct in days hence. We often see how men delude themselves by regarding a recognition of right as tantamount to a healthy moral condition for the time being. Here again we come upon the fundamental truth that a radical change of nature is the only hope of salvation and safeguard of daily life.
V. That THE PAIN OF SEPARATION FROM THE PRIVILEGES OF WORSHIP IS ONE OF THE SEVEREST TRIALS OF GODLY MEN. Of hunger and thirst David said nothing, nor of loss of social position; but he dwelt with emphatic language on the grievous wrong of driving him from "the inheritance of the Lord," virtually saying, "Go, serve other gods." As the hart panteth after the water brooks, so did his soul pant after God (Psalms 41:1-4). As the patriot feels the anguish of exile, so more keenly does a servant of God feel banishment by man from the fellowship and hallowed joys of the sanctuary. Those in authority should be very careful lest by harsh conduct they drive away into godless regions of thought and association men of noble, reverent spirit. Origen, Luther, and others have shared the bitterness of David; and even our Lord was cast out from the Jewish Church, and was taunted with the suggestion of going to "teach the Gentiles" (John 7:35). Our love to the house of the Lord and for the communion of saints is a test of the reality of our piety.
VI. That INTEGRITY OF CONDUCT IS A CONDITION OF RECEIVING GOD'S BLESSING, AND MAY WITH ALL HUMILITY BE ASSERTED. David was most deeply conscious of being a loyal, loving subject, free from ambition or desire to do other than good to his king. He referred to his sparing Saul in evidence of this, and now, as in the presence of God, affirms that, so far as his conduct toward Saul was concerned, he was quite prepared to abide by the Divine rule of rendering' to every man "his righteousness and his faithfulness." So far as his own personal deliverance from tribulation was to be measured to him according to his treatment of Saul, he was quite satisfied that it would be complete. Here is no trusting to personal goodness for pardon and eternal life, no glorying in his own virtues; but a strong assertion of his integrity of conduct in one particular, and a belief that, so far as integrity in this case was a condition of being blessed, he would not come short of the blessing. The Old Testament is one with the New in the conditions of pardon and eternal life, and also in the condition of godly men being prospered in their way. When challenged with reference to a particular deed, it is legitimate to affirm our righteousness with all solemnity, and with a deep sense of our general unworthiness before God.