If you missed our previous introduction and first few series, you can go back and start at the beginning:
- Introductory guidance
- The Good, the Bad and the Ugly (4-part series)
- National (In)security (6-part series)
If you are just joining the Mythbuster series, here is where we have been thus far:
Today's session should take about 45 minutes.
So, as usual, find a quiet space. Sit down and take a few breaths.
Ready? Let's begin...
Section one. Do the Clothes Make the Man?
OK, let's read 1 Samuel 23:1-29, then click back here.
Several things to note right at the beginning. In verse 15, we see David's friend Prince Jonathan appear again, visiting David and his men on-the-run from Jonathan's father Saul. It is a poignant scene. Jonathan is being loyal to his father by remaining and fighting with him against other enemies. But he does not seek David or turn him in to his father. Jonathan's comments in verse 17 are almost prophetic: "Do not be afraid, because the hand of Saul my father will not find you, and you will be king over Israel and I will be next to you; and Saul my father knows that also." While David will be king, Jonathan will not eventually stand by David's side. The Hebrew term used to descibe Jonathan's visit: wayhazzeq 'et-yado beyah-weh, literally means "and strengthened his hand in YHWH". This is a phrase used in sacred scripture to mean "encourage", like it does in Nehemiah 6:9.
It is interesting that Keilah - a city in Judah (see Joshua 15) - is seen as being deep in Philistine territory by David's men. In the Amarna Letters - diplomatic correspondence between the Pharoah in Egypt and his vassals in Canaan and Amurru - Keilah is a dependency of the Jebusite city we call Jerusalem, David's eventual capital for the kingdom of Israel.
As we mentioned previously David has gained an advantage of getting a priest with the ephod, thus he can inquire of God. P. Kyle McCarter notes: "...an ephod. That is, an instrument of divination (see note at 14:3). The answers received in vv 11b and 12b below are essentially of the "yes" or "no" type, and we may assume that the Urim and Thummim are employed (cf. tye note at 14:40-42)."
Keith Bodner also gives us some insight with his comment: "This chapter begins with a disproportionate amount of "oracular" inquiry. Notably, this episode comes right after the massacre at Nob, where Saul is probably incensed by discussion of David receiving a divine oracle. This serves to underscore a growing subplot of "seeking divine knowledge" during David's fugitive era, and also highlights Saul's lack of divine response. Many commentators point out that an "oracle" answer is usually binary, "yes or no". Observe that in this chapter David receives some rather loquacious divine responses on a couple of occasions. There is a pointed contrast, then, between David and Saul during this narrative stretch, and the growing frustration and failure (that will culminate in chapter 28)."
Penn State professor Baruch Halpern raises an interesting question about this period: what happened to the ark of the covenant? Did the failure of the ark to achieve victory over the Philistines and capture and retun from the Philistines earlier cause it to become tainted as a "power object" in the eyes of the people?
1 Samuel 6:21-7:2 tells us that the ark of YHWH was being kept in the house of Abinadab in Keriath Jearim, a Gibeonite town, which is in the same basic territory as Saul's hometown. Why, if Saul was not too far away, did he not go to inquire before the ark of God? Halpern claims: "The ark's absence in Saul's day is significant...Since Saul spent a good deal of energy attacking Gibeonites, and since Qiryath Yearim was a Gibeonite town, it is more than conceivable that the ark of God was not acknowledged by the king at that time...Not coincidentally, Saul also eradicated the priests of Shiloh, to whom Samuel traces the ark, at Nob (in the A source). And this in turn means that the narrative not just of David's own life but of the introduction of the monarchy itself is conditioned by dynastic politics: one of the goals of 1 Sam. 4-6 was to present the ark as a precious pan-Israelite legacy that had slipped from Israel's grasp and was now recovered..."
Halpern also brings the co-related passages from 1 Chronicles into our view, which helps to illumine their perspective of what had happened (from a much more theological-historical perspective, I might add): "The Chronicler in fact attributes Saul's death in part to his failure to "seek Yahweh." So David's first act as king in Jerusalem is to recover the ark, "for we did not seek it in Saul's time." [see 1 Chronicles 10:13-14 and 1 Chronicles 13:3]
Now, let's read 1 Samuel 24:1-22, then return here.
We have noted several times how clothing and garments have helped us to understand more of the context and what is going on in this narrative. From Samuels' priestly ephod and prophetic me'il, to Saul's armour, then Jonathan's armour and clothing, this has been an important indicator of office, power, status or somehow been a clue for us to take note of what is going on in the story. Context is always helpful, as Deuteronomy 25:5-10 helps us understand the "removing the sandal" ritual which Boaz is involved in Ruth 4.
In chapter 24, clothing again comes to the fore and if we can understand it in context, just might explain some things which may have been confusing while you read the text. In verse 5, David cuts the hem of Saul's robe off, and our text says: "David's conscience bothered him because he had cut off the edge of Saul's robe."
We have witnessed in 1 Samuel 15:28, the tearing of Samuel's robe ended up being a prophetic pronouncement of God tearing the kingdom of Israel away from Saul. Thus here again, as biblical scholar Ora Horn Prouser notes: "1 Samuel 24 in which David cuts off the hem of Saul's cloak while hiding in a cave. This has been understood as symbolizing David's taking of the kingdom from Saul. Although David claims that this act is a sign that he has no designs to kill Saul and is thus being pursued for naught, the symbolic meaning of cutting the hem of a cloak is unmistakable. Saul even took this as a sign from God that his kingdom was being given over to David. This symbolism is inherent in the Bible since elsewhere the imagery of rending garments is used for receiving and losing the kingdom. The prophet Ahijah ripped a garment into twelve pieces and told Jeroboam to take ten of them since God had declared, "I am tearing the kingdom from Solomon and I am giving you the ten tribes." (1 Kings 11.31)...Samuel's 'cloak'...is both a princely garment and a symbol of his calling and dignity."
Here is where David's conscience bothers him: he knows the significance of secretly cutting off the hem of Saul's garment. And while Saul act of reaching out to take hold of Samuel's hem as an act of submission and repentance tears it, David is more calculating in this scene...and his conscience is bothered by his action.
Even as Saul goes into the cave to relieve himself, Robert Alter comments regarding the realism of geography and topography in this part of the narrative: "The topography is quite realistic, for the cliffs overlooking the Dead Sea in the region of En-gedi are honeycombed with caves. Power and powerlessness are precarious balanced in this episode. David and his men are in all likelihood hiding in the far end of the cave from Saul's search party. Had a contingent of soldiers entered the cave, they would have been trapped. Instead, Saul comes in alone, and he is in a double sense exposed to David and his men."
One last note on this chapter, in this exchange with Saul, we get David's longest speech, a whole 26 lines. What is the significance at this point? Robert Polzin is persuaded that in this dialogue, both David's and Saul's self-interest are made bare for us to know some of their more base motivations. Also note that David - even though being anointed as a youth by Samuel - still considers and calls Saul "YHWH's mashiach" or God's anointed. We'll talk more about this rather unusual loyalty after we deal with the next chapter.
Section two. A Fool and His Wife Are Easily Parted.
Now, let's read 1 Samuel 25:1-44, then return here.
Thus Samuel dies, and as a fitting tribute, all Israel gathers and mourns for their former leader and prophet of God.
Biblical commentator David Roper gives us some perspective on chapter 25: "Samuel's death and David's flight to the wilderness of Paran are linked together, as though one were caused by the other. Samuel had been David's confidant and counselor, the one to whom he had gone in times of need, probably the only person in Israel who would stand against Saul. When Samuel died, David realized that his last hope for reconciliation with Saul was gone. He fled from Engedi, along the coast of the Dead Sea, because it was too close for comfort to Saul's headquarters. He fled south to the wilderness of Paran, the area in the northern part of the Sinai peninsula where the nation of Israel had wandered for thirty-eight years. As he flees south the story of Abigail and Nabal takes place."
Abigail - from the Hebrew meaning "my father's delight" - is described here as a smart, capable and beautiful woman. As we see, she is married to a fool, Nabal. Nabal is wicked or crooked in his dealings, which seems to point to him being sort of a swindler. He is obviously very wealthy, as our text says he was a chieftain of the Caleb clan, the largest clan in the tribe of Judah.
Writer and scholar Steven McKenzie - who is suspicious of David - has this perspective on the events with Nabal and Abigail: "One of the estates that David and his band threatened was that belonging to "Nabal" and his wife Abigail. Nabal (meaning "fool"...) was a wealthy and probably chief of the Calebites, the leading clan of Judah. His death, described in 1 Sam 25 as God's doing, occurred at a most propitious moment for David, who married Abigail and assumed Nabal's property and socail position. It would have been a shortstep from the Calebite chieftaincy to kingship over Judah. David would rule from the Calebite capital of Hebron during his seven and one-half tears as king of Judah." The word that is translated "feast" in which Nabal is throwing for friends, is not the usual word for "feast", but rather is mishteh, which is really a 'drinking party'. Again, God acts scandalously and strikes Nabal dead. There may be some question about David's role here and Abigail's role in this whole episode. Our text clearly and scandalously states that God is behind all these mysterious and propitious events that add wealth and status to david, as he essentially becomes the leader of the powerful clan of Caleb in Judah (remembering that David is himself of the tribe of Judah too.) This solidified his position among his own relatives.
Later in 1 Samuel, when the Amalekites attack David's base at Ziklag and steal his possession and wives and children, David takes 400 men with him and leaves 200 behind. Here in coming against Nabal, David employs the same strategy 400 men come siwth him, 200 stay behind; the implication is of course, is that he is going to raid this place and kill Nabal, and as David himself admits, put to death every male in this house. Of course, Abigail prevents this terrible thing and prevents David from incurring blood-guilt, which David has been fairly careful to not incur thus far.
The list of David's wives at the end of this chapter give further details of David partaking in that ancient near eastern tradition of marriage to secure alliances and create powerful connection. Even though he claimed not to be worthy of marrying into the house of Saul, David's first wife - who we will meet later in 2 Samuel even though our text tells us Saul has now given her to another man - was Michal, daughter of the Israelite king Saul. Then in this episode we see David solidify a powerful position as chieftain within the tribe of Judah by marrying Abigail. Our text also notes his marriage to Ahinoam from Jezreel, which is in the north. Thus, David solidifies his prominence in the south (in Judah) but also has some support (in Jezre'el) in the north, and technically has connections to the midlands (land of Benjamin) through his first marriage with Michal, daughter of Saul.
Section three. Traitor in the Arms of the Enemy?
Read 1 Samuel 26:1-25, then return here.
So we see again - just like the scene in 1 Samuel 24 - David could have taken advantage of a situation and killed Saul, but instead - this time - he takes his spear. Keith Bodner helps us understand a key difference between the two encounters where David could have taken Saul's life, buit did not: "There are a number of ways in which chapters 24 and 26 can be compared and contrasted. Most obviously, in both episodes David has a "chance" to strike Saul, yet declines. In chapter 24, Saul arrived at the cave by "coincidence." In chapter 26, David seems more calculated, as Miscall (1986:158) notes: "This is no chance encounter at Hachilah, as it was at Engedi. David "saw that Saul had come after him into the wilderness; David sent spies, and he knew that Saul had come.' David's approach and view are described in the detail befitting a careful plan." Compare Alter's (1999:162) comment: "this story will prove to be an inversion of the earlier one, David discovering Saul instead of the other way around." So after David determines that Saul has indeed come after him, does he carefully plan his encounter with Saul? Is it his visual perspective that is provided when the reader is confronted with the following: "So David and Abishai came into the army at night, and look, Saul was laying down, sleeping in the trench. His spear was thrust into the ground near his head, with Abner and the troops lying all around him"? Ironically, the "spear of Saul" usually foreshadows danger to someone else, but on this occasion the threat of the "spear" is on Saul personally."
Although this movie adaptation blends the two incidents (chapter 24 and 26), and replaces the spear with a sword, take a look at these scenes from the movie King David:
This is a sad scene, and the last encounter of David and Saul. Robert Alter notes: "These words of fatherly blessing are the last ones Saul speaks to David: the two never meet again."
Let's end today by reading 1 Samuel 27:1-12, then return here.
Thus David finally turns to the bitter enemies of the Israelites for protection. He is witnessed as becoming a vassal of the chieftain-king of Philistine Gath, Achish, which in classicial Greek means: the Achaean, one of the collective names used by Homer in his Iliad of "the Greeks". David serving the enemy of Israel? Scandalous!
Imagine, if you can, someone like Colin Powell - a war hero and distinguished in the halls of power - leaving under the shadow of night in a cloud of suspicion and ending up working for the North Koreans. Ludicrous you might say. Surely, he would be branded a traitor of the worse kind, a "Benedict Arnold". Well, I think this illustration sheds light on the predicament of David, the beloved of God.
You see everyone who was anyone was there when the Israelite tribes anointed and affirmed God's choice of Saul as King over Israel. But they weren't there at David's private anointing and affirmation...nor did Samuel and David have a press conference after this secret affair. yet, David goes on to become a war hero and military man and a trusted aid in King Saul's administration. Even best friends with Prince Jonathan. Yet, from the people of Israel's perspective, the falling out of Saul and David was unclear. They probably just came to understand that David was fleeing Saul as a fugitive, even though it looks so suspicious, right?
Then later after years of pursuit, David and a small fighting force, end up working for their dreaded enemy the Philistines, and David and his men were were so successful in military service (bringing in captured goods from others to enrich Achish likely) that the Philistines give David his own town, Ziklag, and they give him a primary position of power, as a member of the royal bodyguard of Achish. And it is quite a long sojourn that David and his men live in Ziklag under Philistine-Gath vassalship (even while running military operations against Israel's - and especially Judah's - enemies to the south). In the most of the populations eyes, does this not look clearly traitorous? I think it does. I learned all this perspective in a class at the Baltimore Hebrew University. We have to be careful when we read our scriptures, because we miss significant things like this, mainly because we are given an historical perspective that clues us in on insider information. If we lived at that time in the people of Israel, liklely we would have thought of David as a traitor and fugitive of the King's justice.
Seeing the issues from this perspective opened my eyes to bigger issues of life lived right now. I need the discernment of the Lord - His perspective - for I can't know some of the secret, insider information and events that propel people's lives and force them into making certain choices. I need the movement and spark of the Holy Spirit in me, because the Spirit has that perspective...that wider, knowing vision. Let's all pray for that kind of vision today, and be careful not to judge people who are forced to make hard choices in life. Have grace for them, and we may yet be illumined and given the very perspective and heart of our Lord Jesus Christ.
Section four. Assignments.
- Have you ever had to take what others consider a scandalous position or course of action, bcause it was the right thing to do, even though it may be difficult and you had to suffer the consequences? God is scandalous in what He asks of us at-times, which we also see in Mary the mother of God, being pregnant with Jesus as an unwed teenage girl in the ancient world. Scandalous. Talk to God about this and journal your thoughts and what you think God is saying to you.
- This week, take time to meditate on Abigail's wise approach and intercession with David, and David's response, in 1 Samuel 25:18-35. How does this depict intercession for us nowadays? Journal your thoughts on this as well.
0 comments:
Post a Comment