{"collection":"scripture-revelation","full_text_available":true,"graph_url":"https://unchartedknowledge.5gfusion.net/v2/api/page/gutenberg_44619/graph","html_url":"https://unchartedknowledge.5gfusion.net/v2/page/gutenberg_44619","id":"gutenberg_44619","license":"Public Domain (US)","rights_basis":"gutenberg_metadata_copyright_false","source":"gutenberg","source_url":"https://www.gutenberg.org/ebooks/44619","summary":null,"tags":["Bible. Samuel, 2nd -- Commentaries","Category: History - Religious","Category: Religion/Spirituality"],"text":"THE EXPOSITOR'S BIBLE. Edited by Rev. W. R. NICOLL, D.D., Editor of\n      _London Expositor_.\n\n\n                         1ST SERIES IN 6 VOLS.\n\n  =MACLAREN, Rev. Alex.=--COLOSSIANS--PHILEMON.\n  =DODS, Rev. Marcus.=--GENESIS.\n  =CHADWICK, Rev. Dean.=--ST. MARK.\n  =BLAIKIE, Rev. W. G.=--SAMUEL, 2 VOLS.\n  =EDWARDS, Rev. T. C.=--HEBREWS.\n\n\n                         2D SERIES IN 6 VOLS.\n\n  =SMITH, Rev. G. A.=--ISAIAH, VOL. I.\n  =ALEXANDER, Bishop.=--EPISTLES OF ST. JOHN.\n  =PLUMMER, Rev. A.=--PASTORAL EPISTLES.\n  =FINDLAY, Rev. G. G.=--GALATIANS.\n  =MILLIGAN, Rev. W.=--REVELATION.\n  =DODS, Rev. Marcus.=--1ST CORINTHIANS.\n\n\n                         3D SERIES IN 6 VOLS.\n\n  =SMITH, Rev. G. A.=--ISAIAH, VOL. II.\n  =GIBSON, Rev. J. M.=--ST. MATTHEW.\n  =WATSON, Rev. R. A.=--JUDGES--RUTH.\n  =BALL, Rev. C. J.=--JEREMIAH. CHAP. I-XX.\n  =CHADWICK, Rev. Dean.=--EXODUS.\n  =BURTON, Rev. H.=--ST. LUKE.\n\n\n                         4TH SERIES IN 6 VOLS.\n\n  =KELLOGG, Rev. S. H.=--LEVITICUS.\n  =STOKES, Rev. G. T.=--ACTS, VOL. I.\n  =HORTON, Rev. R. F.=--PROVERBS.\n  =DODS, Rev. Marcus.=--GOSPEL ST. JOHN, VOL. I.\n  =PLUMMER, Rev. A.=--JAMES--JUDE.\n  =COX, Rev. S.=--ECCLESIASTES.\n\n\n                         5TH SERIES IN 6 VOLS.\n\n  =DENNEY, Rev. J.=--THESSALONIANS.\n  =WATSON, Rev. R. A.=--JOB.\n  =MACLAREN, Rev. A.=--PSALMS, VOL. I.\n  =STOKES, Rev. G. T.=--ACTS, VOL. II.\n  =DODS, Rev. Marcus.=--GOSPEL ST. JOHN, VOL. II.\n  =FINDLAY, Rev. C. G.=--EPHESIANS.\n\n\n                         6TH SERIES IN 6 VOLS.\n\n  =RAINY, Rev. R.=--PHILIPPIANS.\n  =FARRAR, Archdeacon F. W.=--1ST KINGS.\n  =BLAIKIE, Rev. W. G.=--JOSHUA.\n  =MACLAREN, Rev. A.=--PSALMS, VOL. II.\n  =LUMBY, Rev. J. R.=--EPISTLES OF ST. PETER.\n  =ADENEY, Rev. W. F.=--EZRA--NEHEMIAH--ESTHER.\n\n\n                         7TH SERIES IN 6 VOLS.\n\n  =MOULE, Rev. H. C. G.=--ROMANS.\n  =FARRAR, Archdeacon F. W.=--2D KINGS.\n  =BENNETT, Rev. W. H.=--1ST AND 2D CHRONICLES.\n  =MACLAREN, Rev. A.=--PSALMS, VOL. III.\n  =DENNEY, Rev. James.=--2D CORINTHIANS.\n  =WATSON, Rev. R. A.=--NUMBERS.\n\n\n                    8TH AND FINAL SERIES IN 7 VOLS.\n\n  =FARRAR, Archdeacon F. W.=--DANIEL.\n  =SKINNER, Rev. John.=--EZEKIEL.\n  =BENNETT, Rev. W. H.=--JEREMIAH.\n  =HARPER, Rev. Prof.=--DEUTERONOMY.\n  =ADENEY, Rev. W. F.=--SOLOMON AND LAMENTATIONS.\n  =SMITH, Rev. G. A.=--THE MINOR PROPHETS, 2 VOLS.\n\n\u261e About 400 pages in each Volume. Prices for either series, six\nvolumes, $6.00. (Orders for 2 or more series same rate will be sent\nby Express, prepaid.) (Separate vols. $1.50, postpaid.) Descriptive\ncircular sent on application.\n\n\n\n\n                            THE SECOND BOOK\n                                  OF\n                                SAMUEL.\n\n\n\n\n\n                         BY THE REV. PROFESSOR\n                      W. G. BLAIKIE, D.D., LL.D.,\n                        NEW COLLEGE, EDINBURGH.\n\n\n\n\n\n                               NEW YORK:\n                       A. C. ARMSTRONG AND SON,\n                  51 EAST 10TH STREET, NEAR BROADWAY,\n                                 1898.\n\n\n\n\n\n                               CONTENTS.\n\n\n                              CHAPTER I.\n\n                                                                 PAGE\n\n  DAVID'S LAMENT FOR SAUL AND JONATHAN                              1\n\n                              CHAPTER II.\n\n  BEGINNING OF DAVID'S REIGN AT HEBRON                             14\n\n                             CHAPTER III.\n\n  BEGINNING OF CIVIL WAR                                           26\n\n                              CHAPTER IV.\n\n  CONCLUSION OF CIVIL WAR                                          38\n\n                              CHAPTER V.\n\n  ASSASSINATION OF ABNER AND ISHBOSHETH                            50\n\n                              CHAPTER VI.\n\n  DAVID KING OF ALL ISRAEL                                         62\n\n                             CHAPTER VII.\n\n  THE KINGDOM ESTABLISHED                                          73\n\n                             CHAPTER VIII.\n\n  THE ARK BROUGHT UP TO JERUSALEM                                  85\n\n                              CHAPTER IX.\n\n  PROPOSAL TO BUILD A TEMPLE                                       97\n\n                              CHAPTER X.\n\n  FOREIGN WARS                                                    109\n\n                              CHAPTER XI.\n\n  ADMINISTRATION OF THE KINGDOM                                   121\n\n                             CHAPTER XII.\n\n  DAVID AND MEPHIBOSHETH                                          134\n\n                             CHAPTER XIII.\n\n  DAVID AND HANUN                                                 146\n\n                             CHAPTER XIV.\n\n  DAVID AND URIAH                                                 158\n\n                              CHAPTER XV.\n\n  DAVID AND NATHAN                                                169\n\n                             CHAPTER XVI.\n\n  PENITENCE AND CHASTISEMENT                                      181\n\n                             CHAPTER XVII.\n\n  ABSALOM AND AMNON                                               193\n\n                            CHAPTER XVIII.\n\n  ABSALOM BANISHED AND BROUGHT BACK                               205\n\n                             CHAPTER XIX.\n\n  ABSALOM'S REVOLT                                                217\n\n                              CHAPTER XX.\n\n  DAVID'S FLIGHT FROM JERUSALEM                                   229\n\n                             CHAPTER XXI.\n\n  FROM JERUSALEM TO MAHANAIM                                      241\n\n                             CHAPTER XXII.\n\n  ABSALOM IN COUNCIL                                              253\n\n                            CHAPTER XXIII.\n\n  ABSALOM'S DEFEAT AND DEATH                                      265\n\n                             CHAPTER XXIV.\n\n  DAVID'S GRIEF FOR ABSALOM                                       277\n\n                             CHAPTER XXV.\n\n  THE RESTORATION                                                 289\n\n                             CHAPTER XXVI.\n\n  DAVID AND BARZILLAI                                             301\n\n                            CHAPTER XXVII.\n\n  THE INSURRECTION OF SHEBA                                       314\n\n                            CHAPTER XXVIII.\n\n  THE FAMINE                                                      326\n\n                             CHAPTER XXIX.\n\n  LAST BATTLES AND THE MIGHTY MEN                                 338\n\n                             CHAPTER XXX.\n\n  THE SONG OF THANKSGIVING                                        350\n\n                             CHAPTER XXXI.\n\n  THE LAST WORDS OF DAVID                                         363\n\n                            CHAPTER XXXII.\n\n  THE NUMBERING OF ISRAEL                                         376\n\n                            CHAPTER XXXIII.\n\n  THE TWO BOOKS OF SAMUEL                                         388\n\n\n\n\n                              CHAPTER I.\n\n                _DAVID'S LAMENT FOR SAUL AND JONATHAN._\n\n                              2 SAMUEL i.\n\n\nDavid had returned to Ziklag from the slaughter of the Amalekites\nonly two days before he heard of the death of Saul. He had returned\nweary enough, we may believe, in body, though refreshed in spirit by\nthe recovery of all that had been taken away, and by the possession\nof a vast store of booty besides. But in the midst of his success,\nit was discouraging to see nothing but ruin and confusion where the\nhomes of himself and his people had recently been; and it must have\nneeded no small effort even to plan, and much more to execute, the\nreconstruction of the city. But besides this, a still heavier feeling\nmust have oppressed him. What had been the issue of that great battle\nat Mount Gilboa? Which army had conquered? If the Israelites were\ndefeated, what would be the fate of Saul and Jonathan? Would they be\nprisoners now in the hands of the Philistines? And if so, what would\nbe his duty in regard to them? And what course would it be best for\nhim to take for the welfare of his ruined and distracted country?\n\nHe was not kept long in suspense. An Amalekite from the camp of\nIsrael, accustomed, like the Bedouin generally, to long and rapid\nruns, arrived at Ziklag, bearing on his body all the tokens of a\ndisaster, and did obeisance to David, as now the legitimate occupant\nof the throne. David must have surmised at a glance how matters\nstood. His questions to the Amalekite elicited an account of the\ndeath of Saul materially different from that given in a former part\nof the history, \"As I happened by chance upon Mount Gilboa, behold\nSaul leaned upon his spear; and lo, the chariots and the horsemen\nfollowed hard after him. And when he looked behind him, he saw me and\ncalled unto me. And I answered, Here am I. And he said unto me, Who\nart thou? And I answered him, I am an Amalekite. And he said unto me,\nStand, I pray thee, beside me, and slay me, for anguish hath taken\nhold of me: because my life is yet whole in me. So I stood beside him\nand slew him, because I was sure that he could not live after that\nhe was fallen; and I took the crown that was upon his head, and the\nbracelet that was upon his arm, and have brought them hither to my\nlord.\" There is no reason to suppose that this narrative of Saul's\ndeath, in so far as it differs from the previous one, is correct.\nThat this Amalekite was somehow near the place where Saul Fell, and\nthat he witnessed all that took place at his death, there is no cause\nto doubt. That when he saw that both Saul and his armour-bearer\nwere dead he removed the crown and the bracelet from the person of\nthe fallen king, and stowed them away among his own accoutrements,\nmay likewise be accepted without any difficulty. Then, managing to\nescape, and considering what he would do with the ensigns of royalty,\nhe decided to carry them to David. To David he accordingly brought\nthem, and no doubt it was to ingratiate himself the more with him,\nand to establish the stronger claim to a splendid recompense, that\nhe invented the story of Saul asking him to kill him, and of his\ncomplying with the king's order, and thus putting an end to a life\nwhich already was obviously doomed.\n\nIn his belief that his pretended despatching of the king would\ngratify David, the Amalekite undoubtedly reckoned without his host;\nbut such things were so common, so universal in the East, that we\ncan hardly divest ourselves of a certain amount of compassion for\nhim. Probably there was no other kingdom, round and round, where\nthis Amalekite would not have found that he had done a wise thing in\nso far as his own interests were concerned. For helping to despatch\na rival, and to open the way to a throne, he would probably have\nreceived cordial thanks and ample gifts from one and all of the\nneighbouring potentates. To David, the matter appeared in a quite\ndifferent light. He had none of that eagerness to occupy the throne\non which the Amalekite reckoned as a universal instinct of human\nnature. And he had a view of the sanctity of Saul's life which the\nAmalekite could not understand. His being the Lord's anointed ought\nto have withheld this man from hurting a hair of his head. Sadly\nthough Saul had fallen back, the divinity that doth hedge a king\nstill encompassed him. \"Touch not mine anointed\" was still God's\nword concerning him. This miserable Amalekite, a member of a doomed\nrace, appeared to David by his own confession not only a murderer,\nbut a murderer of the deepest dye. He had destroyed the life of\none who in an eminent sense was \"the Lord's anointed.\" He had done\nwhat once and again David had himself shrunk from doing. It is no\nwonder that David was at once horrified and provoked,--horrified at\nthe unblushing criminality of the man; provoked at his effrontery,\nat his doing without the slightest compunction what, at an immense\nsacrifice, he had twice restrained himself from doing. No doubt he\nwas irritated, too, at the bare supposition on which the Amalekite\nreckoned so securely, that such a black deed could be gratifying to\nDavid himself. So without a moment's hesitation, and without allowing\nthe astonished youth a moment's preparation, he caused an attendant\nto fall upon him and kill him. His sentence was short and clear, \"Thy\nblood be upon thy head; for thy mouth hath testified against thee\nsaying, I have slain the Lord's anointed.\"\n\nIn this incident we find David in a position in which good men are\noften placed, who profess to have regard to higher principles than\nthe men of the world in regulating their lives, and especially\nin the estimate which they form of their worldly interests and\nconsiderations. That such men are sincere in the estimate they thus\nprofess to follow is what the world is very slow to believe. Faith in\nany moral virtue that rises higher than the ordinary worldly level is\nextremely rare among men. The world fancies that every man has his\nprice--sometimes that every woman has her price. Virtue of the heroic\nquality that will face death itself rather than do wrong is what it\nis most unwilling to believe in. Was it not this that gave rise to\nthe memorable trial of Job? Did not the great enemy, representing\nhere the spirit of the world, scorn the notion that at bottom Job\nwas in any way better than his neighbours, although the wonderful\nprosperity with which he had been gifted made him appear more ready\nto pay honour to God? It is all a matter of selfishness, was Satan's\nplea; take away his prosperity, and lay a painful malady on his body,\nhis religion will vanish, he will curse Thee to Thy face. He would\nnot give Job credit for anything like disinterested virtue--anything\nlike genuine reverence for God. And was it not on the same principle\nthe tempter acted when he brought his threefold temptation to our\nLord in the wilderness? He did not believe in the superhuman virtue\nof Jesus; he did not believe in His unswerving loyalty to truth and\nduty. He did not believe that He was proof at once against the lust\nof the flesh, and the lust of the eye, and the pride of life. At\nleast he did not believe till he tried, and had to retreat defeated.\nWhen the end of His life drew near Jesus could say, \"The prince of\nthis world cometh, but hath nothing in Me.\" There was no weakness in\nJesus to which he could fasten his cord--no trace of that worldliness\nby which he had so often been able to entangle and secure his victims.\n\nSo likewise Simon the sorcerer fancied that he only needed to offer\nmoney to the Apostles to secure from them the gift of the Holy Ghost.\n\"Thy money perish with thee!\" was the indignant rebuke of Peter. It is\nthe same refusal to believe in the reality of high principle that has\nmade so many a persecutor fancy that he could bend the obstinacy of the\nheretic by the terrors of suffering and torture. And on the other hand,\nno nobler sight has ever been presented than when this incredulous\nscorn of the world has been rebuked by the firmness and triumphant\nfaith of the noble martyr. What could Nebuchadnezzar have thought when\nthe three Hebrew children were willing to enter the fiery furnace? What\ndid Darius think of Daniel when he shrank not from the lions' den? How\nmany a rebuke and surprise was furnished to the rulers of this world\nin the early persecutions of the Christians, and to the champions of\nthe Church of Rome in the splendid defiance hurled against them by the\nProtestant martyrs! The men who formed the Free Church of Scotland were\nutterly discredited when they affirmed that rather than surrender the\nliberties of their Church they would part with every temporal privilege\nwhich they had enjoyed from connection with the State. Such is the\nspirit of the world; if it will not rise to the apparent level of the\nsaints, it delights to pull down the saints to its own. These pretences\nto superior virtue are hypocrisy and pharisaism; test their professions\nby their worldly interests, and you will find them soon enough on a\nlevel with yourselves.\n\nThe Amalekite that thought to gratify David by pretending that he had\nslain his rival had no idea that he was wronging him; in his blind\ninnocency he seems to have assumed as a matter of course that David\nwould be pleased. It is not likely the Amalekite had ever heard of\nDavid's noble magnanimity in twice sparing Saul's life when he had an\nexcellent pretext for taking it, if his conscience had allowed him.\nHe just assumed that David would feel as he would have felt himself.\nHe simply judged of him by his own standard. His object was to show\nhow great a service he had rendered him, and thus establish a claim\nto a great reward. Never did heartless selfishness more completely\noverreach itself. Instead of a reward, this impious murderer had\nearned a fearful punishment. An Israelite might have had a chance of\nmercy, but an Amalekite had none--the man was condemned to instant\ndeath. One can hardly fancy his bewilderment,--what a strange man was\nthis David! What a marvellous reverence he had for God! To place him\non a throne was no favor, if it involved doing anything against \"the\nLord's anointed!\" And yet who shall say that in his estimate of this\nproceeding David did more than recognize the obligation of the first\ncommandment? To him God's will was all in all.\n\nDismissing this painful episode, we now turn to contemplate David's\nconduct after the intelligence reached him that Saul was dead. David\nwas now just thirty (2 Sam. v. 4); and never did man at that age, or\nat any age, act a finer part. The death, and especially the sudden\ndeath, of a relative or a friend has usually a remarkable effect on the\ntender heart, and especially in the case of the young. It blots out all\nremembrance of little injuries done by the departed; it fills one with\nregret for any unkind words one may have spoken, or any unkind deeds\none may ever have done to him. It makes one very forgiving. But it must\nhave been a far more generous heart than the common that could so soon\nrid itself of every shred of bitter feeling toward Saul--that could\nblot out, in one great act of forgiveness, the remembrance of many\nlong years of injustice, oppression, and toil, and leave no feelings\nbut those of kindness, admiration, and regret, called forth by the\ncontemplation of what was favourable in Saul's character. How beautiful\ndoes the spirit of forgiveness appear in such a light! Yet how hard do\nmany feel it to be to exercise this spirit in any case, far less in all\ncases! How terrible a snare the unforgiving spirit is liable to be to\nus, and how terrible an obstacle to peaceful communion with God! \"For\nif ye forgive not men their trespasses, neither will your Father in\nheaven forgive your trespasses.\"\n\nThe feelings of David toward Saul and Jonathan were permanently\nembodied in a song which he composed for the occasion. It seems to\nhave been called \"The Song of the Bow,\" so that the rendering of\nthe Revised Version--\"he taught them the Song of the Bow,\" gives\na much better sense than the old--\"he taught them the use of the\nbow.\" The song was first written in the book of Jasher; and it was\nordered by David to be taught to the people as a permanent memorial\nof their king and his eldest son. The writing of such a song, the\nspirit of admiration and eulogy which pervades it, and the unusual\nenactment that it should be taught to the people, show how far\nsuperior David was to the ordinary feelings of jealousy, how full\nhis heart was of true generosity. There was, indeed, a political end\nwhich it might advance; it might conciliate the supporters of Saul,\nand smooth David's way to the throne. But there is in it such depth\nand fulness of feeling that one can think of it only as a genuine\ncardiphonia--a true voice of the heart. The song dwells on all that\ncould be commended in Saul, and makes no allusion to his faults. His\ncourage and energy in war, his happy co-operation with Jonathan, his\nadvancement of the kingdom in elegance and comfort, are all duly\ncelebrated. David appears to have had a real affection for Saul, if\nonly it had been allowed to bloom and flourish. His martial energy\nhad probably awakened his admiration before he knew him personally;\nand when he became his minstrel, his distressed countenance would\nexcite his pity, while his occasional gleams of generous feeling\nwould thrill his heart with sympathy. The terrible effort of Saul\nto crush David was now at an end, and like a lily released from a\nheavy stone, the old attachment bloomed out speedily and sweetly.\nThere would be more true love in families and in the world, more of\nexpansive, responsive affection, if it were not so often stunted by\nreserve on the one hand, and crushed by persecution on the other.\n\nThe song embalms very tenderly the love of Jonathan for David.\nYears had probably elapsed since the two friends met, but time had\nnot impaired the affection and admiration of David. And now that\nJonathan's light was extinguished, a sense of desolation fell on\nDavid's heart, and the very throne that invited his occupation seemed\ndark and dull under the shadow cast on it by the death of Jonathan.\nAs a prize of earthly ambition it would be poor indeed; and if ever\nit had seemed to David a proud distinction to look forward to, such\na feeling would appear very detestable when the same act that opened\nit up to him had deprived him for ever of his dearest friend, his\nsweetest source of earthly joy. The only way in which it was possible\nfor David to enjoy his new position was by losing sight of himself;\nby identifying himself more closely than ever with the people;\nby regarding the throne as only a position for more self-denying\nlabours for the good of others. And in the song there is evidence of\nthe great strength and activity of this feeling. The sentiment of\npatriotism burns with a noble ardour; the national disgrace is most\nkeenly felt; the thought of personal gain from the death of Saul\nand Jonathan is entirely swallowed up by grief for the public loss.\n\"Tell it not in Gath, publish it not in the streets of Askelon; lest\nthe daughters of the Philistines rejoice, lest the daughters of the\nuncircumcised triumph!\" In David's view, it is no ordinary calamity\nthat has fallen on Israel. It is no common men that have fallen, but\n\"the beauty of Israel,\" her ornament and her glory, men that were\nnever known to flinch or to flee from battle, men that were \"swifter\nthan eagles, and stronger than lions.\" It is not in any obscure\ncorner that they have fallen, but \"on her high places,\" on Mount\nGilboa, at the head of a most conspicuous and momentous enterprise.\nSuch a national loss was unprecedented in the history of Israel,\nand it seems to have affected David and the nation generally as the\nslaughter at Flodden affected the Scots, when it seemed as if all\nthat was great and beautiful in the nation perished--\"the flowers o'\nthe forest were a' weed awa'.\"\n\nA word on the general structure of this song. It is not a song that\ncan be classed with the Psalms. Nor can it be said that in any marked\ndegree it resembles the tone or spirit of the Psalms. Yet this need not\nsurprise us, nor need it throw any doubt either as to the authorship of\nthe song or the authorship of the Psalms. The Psalms, we must remember,\nwere avowedly composed and designed for use in the worship of God.\nIf the Greek term _psalmoi_ denotes their character, they were songs\ndesigned for use in public worship, to be accompanied with the lyre,\nor harp, or other musical instruments suitable for them. The special\nsphere of such songs was--the relation of the human soul to God. These\nsongs might be of various kinds--historical, lyrical, dramatical; but\nin all cases the paramount subject was, the dealings of God with man,\nor the dealings of man with God. It was in this class of composition\nthat David excelled, and became the organ of the Holy Ghost for the\nhighest instruction and edification of the Church in all ages. But it\ndoes not by any means follow that the poetical compositions of David\nwere restricted to this one class of subject. His muse may sometimes\nhave taken a different course. His poems were not always directly\nreligious. In the case of this song, whose original place in the book\nof Jasher indicated its special character, there is no mention of the\nrelation of Saul and Jonathan to God. The theme is, their services\nto the nation, and the national loss involved in their death. The\nsoul of the poet is profoundly thrilled by their death, occurring in\nsuch circumstances of national disaster. No form of words could have\nconveyed more vividly the idea of unprecedented loss, or thrilled\nthe nation with such a sense of calamity. There is not a line of the\nsong but is full of life, and hardly one that is not full of beauty.\nWhat could more touchingly indicate the fatal nature of the calamity\nthan that plaintive entreaty--\"Tell it not in Gath, publish it not\nin the streets of Askelon\"? How could the hills be more impressively\nsummoned to show their sympathy than in that invocation of everlasting\nsterility--\"Ye mountains of Gilboa, let there be no dew, neither let\nthere be rain upon you, or fields of offerings\"? What gentler veil\ncould be drawn over the horrors of their bloody death and mutilated\nbodies than in the tender words, \"Saul and Jonathan were loving and\npleasant in their lives, and in their deaths they were not divided\"?\nAnd what more fitting theme for tears could have been furnished to the\ndaughters of Israel, considering what was probably the prevalent taste,\nthan that Saul had \"clothed them with scarlet and other delights, and\nput on ornaments of gold upon their apparel\"? Up to this point Saul\nand Jonathan are joined together; but the poet cannot close without\na special lamentation for himself over him whom he loved as his own\nsoul. And in one line he touches the very kernel of his own loss, as\nhe touches the very core of Jonathan's heart--\"thy love to me was\nwonderful, passing the love of women.\" Such is the Song of the Bow.\nIt hardly seems suitable to attempt to draw spiritual lessons out of\na song, which, on purpose, was placed in a different category. Surely\nit is enough to point out the exceeding beauty and generosity of\nspirit which sought in this way to embalm the memory and perpetuate the\nvirtues of Saul and Jonathan; which blended together in such melodious\nwords a deadly enemy and a beloved friend; which transfigured one of\nthe lives so that it shone with the lustre and the beauty of the other;\nwhich sought to bury every painful association, and gave full and\nunlimited scope to the charity that thinketh no evil. _De mortuis nil\nnisi bonum_, was a heathen maxim,--\"Say nothing but what is good of the\ndead.\" Surely no finer exemplification of the maxim was ever given than\nin this \"Song of the Bow.\"\n\nTo \"thoughts that breathe and words that burn,\" like those of this\nsong, David could not have given expression without having his whole\nsoul stirred with the desire to repair the national disaster, and\nby God's help bring back prosperity and honour to Israel. Thus,\nboth by the afflictions that saddened his heart and the stroke of\nprosperity that raised him to the throne, he was impelled to that\ncourse of action which is the best safeguard under God against the\nhurtful influences both of adversity and prosperity. Affliction might\nhave driven him into his shell, to think only of his own comfort;\nprosperity might have swollen him with a sense of his importance, and\ntempted him to expect universal admiration;--both would have made him\nunfit to rule; by the grace of God he was preserved from both. He was\ninduced to gird himself for a course of high exertion for the good of\nhis country; the spirit of trust in God, after its long discipline,\nhad a new field opened for its exercise; and the self-government\nacquired in the wilderness was to prove its usefulness in a higher\nsphere. Thus the providence of his heavenly Father was gradually\nunfolding His purposes concerning him; the clouds were clearing off\nhis horizon; and the \"all things\" that once seemed to be \"against\nhim\" were now plainly \"working together for his good.\"\n\n\n\n\n                              CHAPTER II.\n\n                _BEGINNING OF DAVID'S REIGN AT HEBRON._\n\n                           2 SAMUEL ii. 1-7.\n\n\nThe death of Saul did not end David's troubles, nor was it for a\ngood many years that he became free to employ his whole energies\nfor the good of the kingdom. It appears that his chastisement for\nhis unbelieving spirit, and for the alliance with Achish to which\nit led, was not yet completed. The more remote consequences of that\nstep were only beginning to emerge, and years elapsed before its evil\ninfluence ceased altogether to be felt. For in allying himself with\nAchish, and accompanying his army to the plain of Esdraelon, David\nhad gone as near to the position of a traitor to his country as he\ncould have gone without actually fighting against it. That he should\nhave acted as he did is one of the greatest mysteries of his life;\nand the reason why it has not attracted more notice is simply because\nthe worst consequences of it were averted by his dismissal from the\nPhilistine army through the jealousy and suspicion of their lords.\nBut for that step David must have been guilty of gross treachery\neither in one direction or another; either to his own countrymen, by\nfighting against them in the Philistine army; or to King Achish, by\nsuddenly turning against him in the heat of the battle, and creating\na diversion which might have given a new chance to his countrymen.\nIn either case the proceeding would have been most reprehensible.\n\nBut to his own countrymen he would have made himself especially\nobnoxious if he had lent himself to Achish in the battle. Whether\nhe contemplated treachery to Achish is a secret that seems never to\nhave gone beyond his own bosom. All the appearances favoured the\nsupposition that he would fight against his country, and we cannot\nwonder if, for a long time, this made him an object of distrust and\nsuspicion. If we would understand how the men of Israel must have\nlooked on him, we have only to fancy how we should have viewed a\nBritish soldier if, with a troop of his countrymen, he had followed\nNapoleon to the field of Waterloo, and had been sent away from the\nFrench army only through the suspicion of Napoleon's generals. In\nDavid's case, all his former achievements against the Philistines,\nall that injustice from Saul which had driven him in despair to\nAchish, his services against the Amalekites, his generous use of\nthe spoil, as well as his high personal character, did not suffice\nto counteract the bad impression of his having followed Achish to\nbattle. For after a great disaster the public mind is exasperated;\nit is eager to find a scapegoat on whom to throw the blame, and it\nis unmeasured in its denunciations of any one who can be plausibly\nassailed. Beyond all doubt, angry and perplexed as the nation was,\nDavid would come in for a large share of the blame; his alliance with\nAchish would be denounced with unmeasured bitterness; and, probably\nenough, he would have to bear the brunt of many a bitter calumny in\naddition, as if he had instigated Achish, and given him information\nwhich had helped him to conquer.\n\nHis own tribe, the tribe of Judah, was far the friendliest, and the\nmost likely to make allowance for the position in which he had been\nplaced. They were his own flesh and blood; they knew the fierce and\ncruel malignity with which Saul had hunted him down, and they knew\nthat, as far as appearances went, his chances of getting the better\nof Saul's efforts were extremely small, and the temptation to throw\nhimself into the hands of Achish correspondingly great. Evidently,\ntherefore, the most expedient course he could now take was to establish\nhimself in some of the cities of Judah. But in that frame of recovered\nloyalty to God in which he now was, he declined to take this step,\nindispensable though it seemed, until he had got Divine direction\nregarding it. \"It came to pass, after this, that David inquired of the\nLord saying, Shall I go up to any of the cities of Judah? And the Lord\nsaid unto him, Go up. And David said, Whither shall I go up? And He\nsaid, Unto Hebron.\" The form in which he made the inquiry shows that\nto his mind it was very clear that he ought to go up to one or another\nof the cities of Judah; his advisers and companions had probably the\nsame conviction; but notwithstanding, it was right and fitting that no\nsuch step should be taken without his asking direction from God. And\nlet us observe that, on this occasion, prayer was not the last resort\nof one whom all other refuge had failed, but the first resort of one\nwho regarded the Divine approval as the most essential element for\ndetermining the propriety of the undertaking.\n\nIt is interesting and instructive to ponder this fact. The first\nthing done by David, after virtually acquiring a royal position, was\nto ask counsel of God. His royal administration was begun by prayer.\nAnd there was a singular appropriateness in this act. For the great\ncharacteristic of David, brought out especially in his Psalms, is\nthe reality and the nearness of his fellowship with God. We may find\nother men who equalled him in every other feature of character--who\nwere as full of human sympathy, as reverential, as self-denying, as\nearnest in their efforts to please God and to benefit men; but we\nshall find no one who lived so closely under God's shadow, whose\nheart and life were so influenced by regard to God, to whom God was\nso much of a personal Friend, so blended, we may say, with his very\nexistence. David therefore is eminently himself when asking counsel\nof the Lord. And would not all do well to follow him in this? True,\nhe had supernatural methods of doing this, and you have only natural;\nhe had the Urim and Thummim, you have only the voice of prayer; but\nthis makes no real difference, for it was only in great national\nmatters that he made use of the supernatural method; in all that\nconcerned his personal relations to God it was the other that he\nemployed. And so may you. But the great matter is to resemble David\nin his profound sense of the infinite value and reality of Divine\ndirection. Without this your prayers will always be more or less\nmatters of formality. And being formal, you will not feel that you\nget any good of them. Is it really a profound conviction of yours\nthat in every step of your life God's direction is of supreme value?\nThat you dare not even change your residence with safety without\nbeing directed by Him? That you dare not enter on new relations\nin life,--new business, new connections, new recreations--without\nseeking the Divine countenance? That endless difficulties, troubles,\ncomplications, are liable to arise, when you simply follow your own\nnotions or inclinations without consulting the Lord? And under the\ninfluence of that conviction do you try to follow the rule, \"In all\nthy ways acknowledge Him\"? And do you endeavour to get from prayer\na trustful rest in God, an assurance that He will not forsake you,\na calm confidence that He will keep His word? Then, indeed, you\nare treading in David's footsteps, and you may expect to share his\nprivilege--Divine direction in your times of need.\n\nThe city of Hebron, situated about eighteen miles to the south of\nJerusalem, was the place to which David was directed to go. It was a\nplace abounding in venerable and elevating associations. It was among\nthe first, if not the very first, of the haunts of civilised men in the\nland--so ancient that it is said to have been built seven years before\nZoan in Egypt (Numb. xiii. 22). The father of the faithful had often\npitched his tent under its spreading oaks, and among its olive groves\nand vine-clad hills the gentle Isaac had meditated at eventide. There\nAbraham had watched the last breath of his beloved Sarah, the partner\nof his faith and the faithful companion of his wanderings; and there\nfrom the sons of Heth he had purchased the sepulchre of Machpelah,\nwhere first Sarah's body, then his own, then that of Isaac were laid to\nrest. There Joseph and his brethren had brought up the body of Jacob,\nin fulfilment of his dying command, laying it beside the bones of\nLeah. It had been a halting-place of the twelve spies when they went\nup to search the land; and the cluster of grapes which they carried\nback was cut from the neighbouring valley, where the finest grapes\nof the country are found to this day. The sight of its venerable\ncave had doubtless served to raise the faith and courage of Joshua\nand Caleb, when the other spies became so feeble and so faithless. In\nthe division of the land it had been assigned to Caleb, one of the\nbest and noblest spirits the nation ever produced; afterwards it was\nmade one of the Levitical cities of refuge. More recently, it had\nbeen one of the places selected by David to receive a portion of the\nAmalekite spoil. No place could have recalled more vividly the lessons\nof departed worth and the victories of early faith, or abounded more\nin tokens of the blessedness of fully following the Lord. It was a\ntoken of God's kindness to David that He directed him to make this city\nhis headquarters. It was equivalent to a new promise that the God of\nAbraham and of Isaac and Jacob would be the God of David, and that his\npublic career would prepare the way for the mercies in the prospect of\nwhich they rejoiced, and sustain the hope to which they looked forward,\nthough they did not in their time see the promise realised.\n\nIt was a further token of God's goodness that no sooner had David\ngone up to Hebron than \"the men of Judah came and anointed him king\nover the house of Judah.\" Judah was the imperial or premier tribe,\nand though this was not all that God had promised to David, it was\na large instalment. The occasion might well awaken mingled emotions\nin his breast--gratitude for mercies given and solicitude for the\nresponsibility of a royal position. With his strong sense of duty,\nhis love of righteousness and hatred of wickedness, we should expect\nto find him strengthening himself in the purpose to rule only in the\nfear of God. It is just such views and purposes as these we find\nexpressed in the hundred and first Psalm, which internal evidence\nwould lead us to assign to this period of his life:--\n\n          \"I will sing of mercy and of judgment:\n           Unto Thee, O Lord, will I sing.\n           I will behave myself wisely in a perfect way.\n           O when wilt Thou come unto me?\n           I will walk within my house with a perfect heart.\n           I will set no base thing before mine eyes:\n           I hate the work of them that turn aside;\n           It shall not cleave to me.\n           A froward heart shall depart from me:\n           I will know no evil thing.\n           Whoso privily slandereth his neighbour, him will I destroy;\n           Him that hath an high look and a proud heart will not I\n               suffer.\n           Mine eyes shall be upon the faithful of the land that they\n               may dwell with me:\n           He that walketh in a perfect way, he shall minister unto me.\n           He that worketh deceit shall not dwell within my house;\n           He that speaketh falsehood shall not be established before\n               mine eyes.\n           Morning by morning will I destroy all the wicked of the land;\n           To cut off all the workers of iniquity from the city of the\n               Lord.\"[1]\n\nBy a singular coincidence, the first place to which the attention\nof David was called, after his taking possession of the royal\nposition, was the same as that to which Saul had been directed in\nthe same circumstances--namely, Jabesh-gilead. It was far away from\nHebron, on the other side of Jordan, and quite out of the scope of\nDavid's former activities; but he recognised a duty to its people,\nand he hastened to perform it. In the first place, he sent them a\ngracious and grateful message of thanks for the kindness shown to\nSaul, the mark of respect they had paid him in burying his body.\nEvery action of David's in reference to his great rival evinces\nthe superiority of his spirit to that which was wont to prevail in\nsimilar circumstances. Within the Scriptures themselves we have\ninstances of the dishonour that was often put on the body of a\nconquered rival. The body of Jehoram, cast ignominiously by Jehu,\nin mockery of his royal state, into the vineyard of Naboth, which\nhis father Ahaz had unrighteously seized, and the body of Jezebel,\nflung out of the window, trodden under foot, and devoured by dogs\nare instances readily remembered. The shocking fate of the dead body\nof Hector, dragged thrice round the walls of Troy after Achilles'\nchariot, was regarded as only such a calamity as might be looked for\namid the changing fortunes of war. Mark Antony is said to have broken\nout into laughter at the sight of the hands and head of Cicero, which\nhe had caused to be severed from his body. The respect of David for\nthe person of Saul was evidently a sincere and genuine feeling; and\nit was a sincere pleasure to him to find that this feeling had been\nshared by the Jabeshites, and manifested in their rescuing Saul's\nbody and consigning it to honourable burial.\n\nIn the next place, he invokes on these people a glowing benediction\nfrom the Lord: \"The Lord show kindness and truth to you;\" and he\nexpresses his purpose also to requite their kindness himself. \"Kindness\nand truth.\" There is something instructive in the combination of these\ntwo words. It is the Hebrew way of expressing \"true kindness,\" but\neven in that form, the words suggest that kindness is not always true\nkindness, and mere kindness cannot be a real blessing unless it rest\non a solid basis. There is in many men an amiable spirit which takes\npleasure in gratifying the feelings of others. Some manifest it to\nchildren by loading them with toys and sweetmeats, or taking them to\namusements which they know they like. But it does not follow that such\nkindness is always true kindness. To please one is not always the\nkindest thing you can do for one, for sometimes it is a far kinder\nthing to withhold what will please. True kindness must be tested by its\nultimate effects. The kindness that loves best to improve our hearts,\nto elevate our tastes, to straighten our habits, to give a higher tone\nto our lives, to place us on a pedestal from which we may look down on\nconquered spiritual foes, and on the possession of what is best and\nhighest in human attainment,--the kindness that bears on the future,\nand especially the eternal future, is surely far more true than that\nwhich, by gratifying our present feelings, perhaps confirms us in many\na hurtful lust. David's prayer for the men of Jabesh was an enlightened\nbenediction: \"God show you kindness and truth.\" And so far as he may\nhave opportunity, he promises that he will show them the same kindness\ntoo.\n\nWe need not surely dwell on the lesson which this suggests. Are\nyou kindly disposed to any one? You wish sincerely to promote his\nhappiness, and you try to do so. But see well to it that your\nkindness is true. See that the day shall never come when that which\nyou meant so kindly will turn out to have been a snare, and perhaps a\ncurse. Think of your friend as an immortal being, with either heaven\nor hell before him, and consider what genuine kindness requires of\nyou in such a case. And in every instance beware of the kindness\nwhich shakes the stability of his principles, which increases the\nforce of his temptations, and makes the narrow way more distasteful\nand difficult to him than ever.\n\nThere can be no doubt that David was moved by considerations of\npolicy as well as by more disinterested motives in sending this\nmessage and offering this prayer for the men of Jabesh-gilead.\nIndeed, in the close of his message he invites them to declare for\nhim, and follow the example of the men of Judah, who have made him\nking. The kindly proceeding of David was calculated to have a wider\ninfluence than over the men of Jabesh, and to have a conciliating\neffect on all the friends of the former king. It would have been\nnatural enough for them to fear, considering the ordinary ways of\nconquerors and the ordinary fate of the friends of the conquered,\nthat David would adopt very rigid steps against the friends of his\npersecutors. By this message sent across the whole country and across\nthe Jordan, he showed that he was animated by the very opposite\nspirit: that, instead of wishing to punish those who had served\nwith Saul, he was quite disposed to show them favour. Divine grace,\nacting on his kindly nature, made him forgiving to Saul and all his\ncomrades, and presented to the world the spectacle of an eminent\nreligious profession in harmony with a noble generosity.\n\nBut the spirit in which David acted towards the friends of Saul did\nnot receive the fitting return. The men of Jabesh-gilead appear\nto have made no response to his appeal. His peaceable purpose\nwas defeated through Abner, Saul's cousin and captain-general of\nhis army, who set up Ishbosheth, one of Saul's sons, as king in\nopposition to David. Ishbosheth himself was but a tool in Abner's\nhands, evidently a man of no spirit or activity; and in setting him\nup as a claimant for the kingdom, Abner very probably had an eye to\nthe interests of himself and his family. It is plain that he acted\nin this matter in that spirit of ungodliness and wilfulness of which\nhis royal cousin had given so many proofs; he knew that God had given\nthe kingdom to David, and afterwards taunted Ishbosheth with the\nfact (iii. 9); perhaps he looked for the reversion of the throne if\nIshbosheth should die, for it needed more than an ordinary motive to\ngo right in opposition to the known decree of God. The world's annals\ncontain too many instances of wars springing from no higher motive\nthan the ambition of some Diotrephes to have the pre-eminence. You\ncry shame on such a spirit; but while you do so take heed lest you\nshare it yourselves. To many a soldier war is welcome because it is\nthe pathway to promotion, to many a civilian because it gives for the\nmoment an impulse to the business with which he is connected. How\nsubtle and dangerous is the feeling that secretly welcomes what may\nspread numberless woes through a community if only it is likely to\nbring some advantage to ourselves! O God, drive selfishness from the\nthrone of our hearts, and write on them in deepest letters Thine own\nholy law, \"Thou shalt love thy neighbour as thyself.\"\n\nThe place chosen for the residence of Ishbosheth was Mahanaim, in\nthe half-tribe of Manasseh, on the east side of the Jordan. It is a\nproof how much the Philistines must have dominated the central part\nof the country that no city in the tribe of Benjamin and no place\neven on the western side of the Jordan could be obtained as a royal\nseat for the son of Saul. Surely this was an evil omen. Ishbosheth's\nreign, if reign it might be called, lasted but two short years. No\nsingle event took place to give it lustre. No city was taken from\nthe Philistines, no garrison put to flight, as at Michmash. No deed\nwas ever done by him or done by his adherents of which they might\nbe proud, and to which they might point in justification of their\nresistance to David. Ishbosheth was not the wicked man in great\npower, spreading himself like the green bay-tree, but a short-lived,\nshrivelled plant, that never rose above the humiliating circumstances\nof its origin. Men who have defied the purpose of the Almighty have\noften grown and prospered, like the little horn of the Apocalypse;\nbut in this case of Ishbosheth little more than one breath of the\nAlmighty sufficed to wither him up. Yes, indeed, whatever may be the\nimmediate fortunes of those who unfurl their own banner against the\nclear purpose of the Almighty, there is but one fate for them all in\nthe end--utter humiliation and defeat. Well may the Psalm counsel\nall, \"Kiss ye the Son, lest He be angry, and ye perish from the way,\nif once His wrath is kindled but a little. Blessed are all they that\nput their trust in Him.\"\n\nFOOTNOTE:\n\n[1] From the use of the expression \"city of the Lord,\" it has been\ninferred by some critics that this Psalm must have been written after\nthe capture and consecration of Jerusalem. But there is no reason\nwhy Hebron might not have been called at that time \"the city of the\nLord.\" The Lord had specially designated it as the abode of David; and\nthat alone entitled it to be so called. Those who have regarded this\nPsalm as a picture of a model household or family have never weighed\nthe force of the last line, which marks the position of a king, not\na father. The Psalm is a true statement of the principles usually\nfollowed by David in public rule, but not in domestic administration.\n\n\n\n\n                             CHAPTER III.\n\n                       _BEGINNING OF CIVIL WAR._\n\n                          2 SAMUEL ii. 12-32\n\n\nThe well-meant and earnest efforts of David to ward off strife and\nbring the people together in recognising him as king were frustrated,\nas we have seen, through the efforts of Abner. Unmoved by the solemn\ntestimony of God, uttered again and again through Samuel, that He had\nrejected Saul and found as king a man after His own heart; unmoved by\nthe sad proceedings at Endor, where, under such awful circumstances,\nthe same announcement of the purpose of the Almighty had been repeated;\nunmoved by the doom of Saul and his three sons on Mount Gilboa, where\nsuch a striking proof of the reality of God's judgment on his house\nhad been given; unmoved by the miserable state of the kingdom, overrun\nand humiliated by the Philistines and in the worst possible condition\nto bear the strain of a civil war,--this Abner insisted on setting up\nIshbosheth and endeavouring to make good his claims by the sword. It\nwas never seen more clearly how \"one sinner destroyeth much good.\"\n\nAs to the immediate occasion of the war, David was quite innocent,\nand Abner alone was responsible; but to a feeling and patriotic\nheart like David's, the war itself must have been the occasion of\nbitter distress Did it ever occur to him to think that in a sense\nhe was now brought, against his will, into the position which he had\nprofessed to King Achish to be willing to occupy, or that, placed as\nhe now was in an attitude of opposition to a large section of his\ncountrymen, he was undergoing a chastisement for what he was rash\nenough to say and to do then?\n\nIn the commencement of the war, the first step was taken by Abner.\nHe went out from Mahanaim, descended the Jordan valley, and came to\nGibeon, in the tribe of Benjamin, a place but a few miles distant from\nGibeah, where Saul had reigned. His immediate object probably was to\ngain such an advantage over David in that quarter as would enable\nhim to establish Ishbosheth at Gibeah, and thus bring to him all the\nprestige due to the son and successor of Saul. We must not forget that\nthe Philistines had still great influence in the land, and very likely\nthey were in possession of Gibeah, after having rifled Saul's palace\nand appropriated all his private property. With this powerful enemy\nto be dealt with ultimately, it was the interest of Abner to avoid a\ncollision of the whole forces on either side, and spare the slaughter\nwhich such a contest would have involved. There is some obscurity in\nthe narrative now before us, both at this point and at other places.\nBut it would appear that, when the two armies were ranged on opposite\nsides of the \"pool\" or reservoir at Gibeon, Abner made the proposal\nto Joab that the contest should be decided by a limited number of\nyoung men on either side, whose encounter would form a sort of play or\nspectacle, that their brethren might look on, and, in a sense, enjoy.\nIn the circumstances, it was a wise and humane proposal, although we\nget something of a shock from the frivolous spirit that could speak of\nsuch a deadly encounter as \"play.\"\n\nDavid was not present with his troops on this occasion, the management\nof them being entrusted to Joab, his sister's son. Here was another\nof the difficulties of David--a difficulty which embarrassed him for\nforty years. He was led to commit the management of his army to his\nwarlike nephew, although he appears to have been a man very unlike\nhimself. Joab is much more of the type of Saul than of David. He is\nrough, impetuous, worldly, manifesting no faith, no prayerfulness,\nno habit or spirit of communion with God. Yet from the beginning\nhe threw in his lot with David; he remained faithful to him in the\ninsurrection of Absalom; and sometimes he gave him advice which was\nmore worthy to be followed than his own devices. But though Joab was\na difficulty to David, he did not master him. The course of David's\nlife and the character of his reign were determined mainly by those\nspiritual feelings with which Joab appears to have had no sympathy. It\nwas unfortunate that the first stage of the war should have been in the\nhands of Joab; he conducted it in a way that must have been painful to\nDavid; he stained it with a crime that gave him bitter pain.\n\nThe practice of deciding public contests by a small and equal number of\nchampions on either side, if not a common one in ancient times, was,\nat any rate, not very rare. Roman history furnishes some memorable\ninstances of it: that of Romulus and Aruns, and that of the Horatii\nand the Curiatii; while the challenge of Goliath and the proposal to\nsettle the strife between the Philistines and the Hebrews according\nto the result of the duel with him had taken place not many years\nbefore. The young men were accordingly chosen, twelve on either side;\nbut they rushed against each other with such impetuosity that the whole\nof them fell together, and the contest remained undecided as before.\nExcited probably by what they had witnessed, the main forces on either\nside now rushed against each other; and when the shock of battle\ncame, the victory fell to the side of David, and Abner and his troops\nwere signally defeated. On David's side, there was not a very serious\nloss, the number of the slain amounting to twenty; but on the side of\nAbner the loss was three hundred and sixty. To account for so great\nan inequality we must remember that in Eastern warfare it was in the\npursuit that by far the greatest amount of slaughter took place. That\nobstinate maintenance of their ground which is characteristic of modern\narmies seems to have been unknown in those times. The superiority of\none of the hosts over the other appears usually to have made itself\nfelt at the beginning of the engagement; the opposite force, seized\nwith panic, fled in confusion, followed close by the conquerors, whose\nweapons, directed against the backs of the fugitive, were neither\ncaught on shields, nor met by counter-volleys. Thus it was that Joab's\nloss was little more than the twelve who had fallen at first, while\nthat of Abner was many times more.\n\nAmong those who had to save themselves by flight after the battle\nwas Abner, the captain of the host. Hard in pursuit of him, and of\nhim only, hastened Asahel, the brother of Joab. It is not easy to\nunderstand all the circumstances of this pursuit. We cannot but\nbelieve that Asahel was bent on killing Abner, but probably his hope\nwas that he would get near enough to him to discharge an arrow at\nhim, and that in doing so he would incur no personal danger. But\nAbner appears to have remarked him, and to have stopped his flight\nand faced round to meet him. Abner seems to have carried sword and\nspear; Asahel had probably nothing heavier than a bow. It was fair\nenough in Abner to propose that if they were to be opponents, Asahel\nshould borrow armour, that they might fight on equal terms. But this\nwas not Asahel's thought. He seems to have been determined to follow\nAbner, and take his opportunity for attacking him in his own way.\nThis Abner would not permit; and, as Asahel would not desist from his\npursuit, Abner, rushing at him, struck him with such violence with\nthe hinder end of his spear that the weapon came out behind him. \"And\nAsahel fell down there, and died in the same place; and it came to\npass that as many as came to the place where Asahel fell down and\ndied stood still.\" Asahel was a man of consequence, being brother of\nthe commander of the army and nephew of the king. The death of such\na man counted for much, and went far to restore the balance of loss\nbetween the two contending armies. It seems to have struck a horror\ninto the hearts of his fellow-soldiers; it was an awful incident of\nthe war. It was strange enough to see one who an hour ago was so\nyoung, so fresh and full of life, stretched on the ground a helpless\nlump of clay; but it was more appalling to remember his relation to\nthe two greatest men of the nation--David and Joab. Certainly war\nis most indiscriminate in the selection of its victims; commanders\nand their brothers, kings and their nephews, being as open to its\ncatastrophes as any one else. Surely it must have sent a thrill\nthrough Abner to see among the first victims of the strife which he\nhad kindled one whose family stood so high, and whose death would\nexasperate against him so important a person as his brother Joab.\n\nThe pursuit of the defeated army was by-and-bye interrupted by\nnightfall. In the course of the evening the fugitives somewhat\nrallied, and concentrated on the top of a hill, in the wilderness of\nGibeon. And here the two chiefs held parley together. The proceedings\nwere begun by Abner, and begun by a question that was almost\ninsolent. \"Abner called to Joab and said, Shall the sword devour for\never? knowest thou not that it will be bitterness in the latter end?\nhow long shall it be ere thou bid the people return from following\ntheir brethren?\" It was an audacious attempt to throw on Joab and\nJoab's master the responsibility of the war. We get a new glimpse of\nAbner's character here. If there was a fact that might be held to be\nbeyond the possibility of question, it was that Abner had begun the\ncontest. Had not he, in opposition to the Divine King of the nation,\nset up Ishbosheth against the man called by Jehovah? Had not he\ngathered the army at Mahanaim, and moved towards Gibeon, on express\npurpose to exclude David, and secure for his nominee what might be\ncounted in reality, and not in name only, the kingdom of Israel? Yet\nhe insolently demanded of Joab, \"Shall the sword devour for ever?\"\nHe audaciously applies to Joab a maxim that he had not thought of\napplying to himself in the morning--\"Knowest thou not that it will be\nbitterness in the latter end?\" This is a war that can be terminated\nonly by the destruction of one half of the nation; it will be a\nbitter enough consummation, which half soever it may be. Have you no\nregard for your \"brethren,\" against whom you are fighting, that you\nare holding on in this remorseless way?\n\nIt may be a marvellously clever thing, in this audacious manner, to\nthrow upon an opponent all the blame which is obviously one's own.\nBut no good man will do so. The audacity that ascribes its own sins\nto an opponent is surely the token of a very evil nature. We have no\nreason to form a very high opinion of Joab, but of his opponent in\nthis strife our judgment must be far worse. An insincere man, Abner\ncould have no high end before him. If David was not happy in his\ngeneral, still less was Ishbosheth in his.\n\nJoab's answer betrayed a measure of indignation. \"As God liveth, unless\nthou hadst spoken, surely then in the morning the people had gone up\nevery one from following his brother.\" There is some ambiguity in these\nwords. The Revised Version renders, \"If thou hadst not spoken, surely\nthen in the morning the people had gone away, nor followed every one\nhis brother.\" The meaning of Joab seems to be that, apart from any\nsuch ill-tempered appeal as Abner's, it was his full intention in the\nmorning to recall his men from the pursuit, and let Abner and his\npeople go home without further harm. Joab shows the indignation of\none credited with a purpose he never had, and with an inhumanity and\nunbrotherliness of which he was innocent. Why Joab had resolved to\ngive up further hostilities at that time, we are not told. One might\nhave thought that had he struck another blow at Abner he might have so\nharassed his force as to ruin his cause, and thus secure at once the\ntriumph of David. But Joab probably felt very keenly what Abner accused\nhim of not feeling: that it was a miserable thing to destroy the lives\nof so many brethren. The idea of building up David's throne on the dead\nbodies of his subjects he must have known to be extremely distasteful\nto David himself. Civil war is such a horrible thing, that a general\nmay well be excused who accepts any reason for stopping it. If Joab\nhad known what was to follow, he might have taken a different course.\nIf he had foreseen the \"long war\" that was to be between the house of\nSaul and the house of David, he might have tried on this occasion to\nstrike a decisive blow, and pursued Abner's men until they were utterly\nbroken. But that day's work had probably sickened him, as he knew it\nwould sicken David; and leaving Abner and his people to make their way\nacross the Jordan, he returned to bury his brother, and to report his\nproceedings to David at Hebron.\n\nAnd David must have grieved exceedingly when he heard what had taken\nplace. The slaughter of nearly four hundred of God's nation was a\nterrible thought; still more terrible it was to think that in a sense\nhe had been the occasion of it--it was done to prevent him from\noccupying the throne. No doubt he had reason to be thankful that when\nfighting had to be done, the issue was eminently favourable to him\nand his cause. But he must have been grieved that there should be\nfighting at all. He must have felt somewhat as the Duke of Wellington\nfelt when he made the observation that next to the calamity of\nlosing a battle was that of gaining a victory. Was this what Samuel\nhad meant when he came that morning to Bethlehem and anointed him\nin presence of his family? Was this what God designed when He was\npleased to put him in the place of Saul? If this was a sample of what\nDavid was to bring to his beloved people, would it not have been\nbetter had he never been born? Very strange must God's ways have\nappeared to him. How different were his desires, how different his\ndreams of what should be done when he got the kingdom, from this\nday's work! Often he had thought how he would drive out the enemies\nof his people; how he would secure tranquillity and prosperity to\nevery Hebrew homestead; how he would aim at their all living under\ntheir vine and under their fig-tree, none making them afraid. But\nnow his reign had begun with bloodshed, and already desolation had\nbeen carried to hundreds of his people's homes. Was this the work, O\nGod, for which Thou didst call me from the sheep-folds? Should I not\nhave been better employed \"following the ewes great with young,\" and\nprotecting my flock from the lion and the bear, rather than sending\nforth men to stain the soil of the land with the blood of the people\nand carry to their habitations the voice of mourning and woe?\n\nIf David's mind was exercised in this way by the proceedings near the\npool of Gibeon, all his trust and patience would be needed to wait\nfor the time when God would vindicate His way. After all, was not his\nexperience somewhat like that of Moses when he first set about the\ndeliverance of his people? Did he not appear to do more harm than\ngood? Instead of lightening the burdens of his people, did he not\ncause an increase of their weight? But has it not been the experience\nof most men who have girded themselves for great undertakings in the\ninterest of their brethren? Nay, was it not the experience of our\nblessed Lord Himself? At His birth the angels sang, \"Glory to God in\nthe highest; on earth peace; goodwill to men!\" And almost the next\nevent was the massacre at Bethlehem, and Jesus Himself even in His\nlifetime found cause to say, \"Think not that I am come to send peace\non the earth; I am not come to send peace, but a sword.\" What a sad\nevidence of the moral disorder of the world! The very messengers of\nthe God of peace are not allowed to deliver their messages in peace,\nbut even as they advance toward men with smiles and benedictions, are\nfiercely assailed, and compelled to defend themselves by violence.\nNevertheless the angels' song is true. Jesus did come to bless the\nworld with peace. \"Peace I leave with you; My peace I give unto\nyou; not as the world giveth give I unto you.\" The resistance of\nHis enemies was essentially a feeble resistance, and that stronger\nspirit of peace which Jesus brought in due time prevailed mightily\nin the earth. So with the bloodshed in David's reign. It did not\nhinder David from being a great benefactor to his kingdom in the\nend. It did not annul the promise of God. It did not neutralise\nthe efficacy of the holy oil. This was just one of the many ways\nin which his faith and his patience were tried. It must have shown\nhim even more impressively than anything that had yet happened the\nabsolute necessity of Divine direction in all his ways. For it is far\neasier for a good man to bear suffering brought on himself by his\nactions, than to see suffering and death entailed on his brethren in\nconnection with a course which has been taken by him.\n\nIn that audacious speech which Abner addressed to Joab, there occurs an\nexpression worthy of being taken out of the connection in which it was\nused and of being viewed with wider reference. \"Knowest thou not that\nit will be bitterness in the latter end?\" Things are to be viewed by\nrational beings not merely in their present or immediate result, but\nin their final outcome, in their ultimate fruits. A very commonplace\ntruth, I grant you, this is, but most wholesome, most necessary to be\ncherished. For how many of the miseries and how many of the worst\nsins of men come of forgetting the \"bitterness in the latter end\"\nwhich evil beginnings give rise to! It is one of the most wholesome\nrules of life never to do to-day what you shall repent of to-morrow.\nYet how constantly is the rule disregarded! Youthful child of fortune,\nwho are revelling to-day in wealth which is counted by hundreds of\nthousands, and which seems as if it could never be exhausted, remember\nhow dangerous those gambling habits are into which you are falling;\nremember that the gambler's biography is usually a short, and often\na tragic, one; and when you hear the sound of the pistol with which\none like yourself has ended his miserable existence, remember it all\nbegan by disregarding the motto, written over the gambler's path,\n\"Knowest thou not that it will be bitterness in the latter end?\" You\nmerry-hearted and amusing companion, to whom the flowing bowl, and the\njovial company, and the merry jest and lively song are so attractive,\nthe more you are tempted to go where they are found remember that\nrags and dishonour, dirt and degradation, form the last stage of\nthe journey,--\"the latter end bitterness\" of the course you are now\nfollowing. You who are wasting in idleness the hours of the morning,\nremember how you will repent of it when you have to make up your\nleeway by hard toil at night. I have said that things are to be viewed\nby rational beings in their relations to the future as well as the\npresent. It is not the part of a rational being to accumulate disaster,\ndistress, and shame for the future. Men that are rational will far\nrather suffer for the present if they may be free from suffering\nhereafter. Benefit societies, life insurance, annuity schemes--what are\nthey all but the devices of sensible men desirous to ward off even\nthe possibility of temporal \"bitterness in the latter end\"? And may\nnot this wisdom, this good sense, be applied with far more purpose to\nthe things that are unseen and eternal? Think of the \"bitterness in\nthe end\" that must come of neglecting Christ, disregarding conscience,\nturning away from the Bible, the church, the Sabbath, grieving the\nSpirit, neglecting prayer! Will not many a foretaste of this bitterness\nvisit you even while yet you are well, and all things are prospering\nwith you? Will it not come on you with overpowering force while you lie\non your death-bed? Will it not wrap your soul in indescribable anguish\nthrough all eternity?\n\nThink then of this \"bitterness in the latter end\"! Now is the\naccepted time. In the deep consciousness of your weakness, let your\nprayer be that God would restrain you from the folly to which your\nhearts are so prone, that, by His Holy Spirit, He would work in you\nboth to will and to do of His good pleasure.\n\n\n\n\n                              CHAPTER IV.\n\n                    _CONCLUSION OF THE CIVIL WAR._\n\n                          2 SAMUEL iii. 1-21.\n\n\nThe victory at the pool of Gibeon was far from ending the opposition\nto David. In vain, for many a day, weary eyes looked out for the dove\nwith the olive leaf. \"There was long war between the house of Saul\nand the house of David.\" The war does not seem to have been carried\non by pitched battles, but rather by a long series of those fretting\nand worrying little skirmishes which a state of civil war breeds, even\nwhen the volcano is comparatively quiet. But the drift of things was\nmanifest. \"David waxed stronger and stronger; but the house of Saul\nwaxed weaker and weaker.\" The cause of the house of Saul was weak in\nits invisible support because God was against it; it was weak in its\nchampion Ishbosheth, a feeble man, with little or no power to attract\npeople to his standard; its only element of strength was Abner, and\neven he could not make head against such odds. Good and evil so often\nseem to balance each other, existing side by side in a kind of feeble\nstagnation, and giving rise to such a dull feeling on the part of\nonlookers, that we cannot but think with something like envy of the\nfollowers of David even under the pain of a civil war, cheered as they\nwere by constant proofs that their cause was advancing to victory.\n\nAnd now we get a glimpse of David's domestic mode of life, which,\nindeed, is far from satisfactory. His wives were now six in number; of\nsome of them we know nothing; of the rest what we do know is not always\nin their favour. The earliest of all was \"Ahinoam, the Jezreelitess.\"\nHer native place, or the home of her family, was Jezreel, that part\nof the plain of Esdraelon where the Philistines encamped before Saul\nwas defeated (1 Sam. xxix. 12), and afterwards, in the days of Ahab,\na royal residence of the kings of Israel (1 Kings xviii. 46) and the\nabode of Naboth, who refused to part with his vineyard in Jezreel to\nthe king (1 Kings xxi.). Of Ahinoam we find absolutely no mention in\nthe history; if her son Amnon, the oldest of David's family, reflected\nher character, we have no reason to regret the silence (2 Sam. xiii.).\nThe next of his wives was Abigail, the widow of Nabal the Carmelite,\nof whose smartness and excellent management we have a full account in\na former part of the history. Her son is called Chileab, but in the\nparallel passage in Chronicles Daniel; we can only guess the reason\nof the change; but whether it was another name for the same son, or\nthe name of another son, the history is silent concerning him, and\nthe most probable conjecture is that he died early. His third wife\nwas Maachah, the daughter of Talmai the Geshurite. This was not, as\nsome have rather foolishly supposed, a member of those Geshurites in\nthe south against whom David led his troop (1 Sam. xxvii. 8), for it\nis expressly stated that of that tribe \"he left neither man nor woman\nalive.\" It was of Geshur in Syria that Talmai was king (2 Sam. xv.\n8); it formed one of several little principalities lying between\nMount Hermon and Damascus: but we cannot commend the alliance; for\nthese kingdoms were idolatrous, and unless Maachah was an exception,\nshe must have introduced idolatrous practices into David's house. Of\nthe other three wives we have no information. And in regard to the\nhousehold which he thus established at Hebron, we can only regret that\nthe king of Israel did not imitate the example that had been set there\nby Abraham, and followed in the same neighbourhood by Isaac. What a\ndifferent complexion would have been given to David's character and\nhistory if he had shown the self-control in this matter that he showed\nin his treatment of Saul! Of how many grievous sins and sorrows did\nhe sow the seed when he thus multiplied wives to himself! How many a\nman, from his own day down to the days of Mormonism, did he silently\nencourage in licentious conduct, and furnish with a respectable example\nand a plausible excuse for it! How difficult did he make it for many\nwho cannot but acknowledge the bright aspect of his spiritual life\nto believe that even in that it was all good and genuine! We do not\nhesitate to ascribe to the life of David an influence on successive\ngenerations on the whole pure and elevating; but it is impossible not\nto own that by many, a justification of relaxed principle and unchaste\nliving has been drawn from his example.\n\nWe have already said that polygamy was not imputed to David as a sin\nin the sense that it deprived him of the favour of God. But we cannot\nallow that this permission was of the nature of a boon. We cannot but\nfeel how much better it would have been if the seventh commandment\nhad been read by David with the same absolute, unbending limitation\nwith which it is read by us. It would have been better for him and\nbetter for his house. Puritan strictness of morals is, after all, a\nright wholesome and most blessed thing. Who shall say that the sum of\na man's enjoyment is not far greatest in the end of life when he has\nkept with unflinching steadfastness his early vow of faithfulness,\nand, as his reward, has never lost the freshness and the flavour\nof his first love, nor ceased to find in his ever-faithful partner\nthat which fills and satisfies his heart? Compared to this, the life\nof him who has flitted from one attachment to another, heedless of\nthe soured feelings or, it may be, the broken hearts he has left\nbehind, and whose children, instead of breathing the sweet spirit of\nbrotherly and sisterly love, scowl at one another with the bitter\nfeelings of envy, jealousy, and hatred, is like an existence of wild\nfever compared to the pure tranquil life of a child.\n\nIn such a household as David's, occasions of estrangement must\nhave been perpetually arising among the various branches, and it\nwould require all his wisdom and gentleness to keep these quarrels\nwithin moderate bounds. In his own breast, that sense of delicacy,\nthat instinct of purity, which exercises such an influence on a\ngodly family, could not have existed; the necessity of reining in\nhis inclinations in that respect was not acknowledged; and it is\nremarkable that in the confessions of the fifty-first Psalm, while\nhe specifies the sins of blood-guiltiness and seems to have been\noverwhelmed by a sense of his meanness, injustice, and selfishness,\nthere is no special allusion to the sin of adultery, and no\nindication of that sin pressing very heavily upon his conscience.\n\nWhether it be by design or not, it is an instructive circumstance\nthat it is immediately after this glimpse of David's domestic life\nthat we meet with a sample of the kind of evils which the system of\nroyal harems is ever apt to produce. Saul too had had his harem; and\nit was a rule of succession in the East that the harem went with the\nthrone. To take possession of the one was regarded as equivalent to\nsetting up a claim to the other. When therefore Ishbosheth heard that\nAbner had taken one of his father's concubines, he looked on it as a\nproof that Abner had an eye to the throne for himself. He accordingly\ndemanded an explanation from Abner, but instead of explanation or\napology, he received a volley of rudeness and defiance. Abner knew\nwell that without him Ishbosheth was but a figure-head, and he was\nenraged by treatment that seemed to overlook all the service he had\nrendered him and to treat him as if he were some second or third-rate\nofficer of a firm and settled kingdom. Perhaps Abner had begun to see\nthat the cause of Ishbosheth was hopeless, and was even glad in his\nsecret heart of an excuse for abandoning an undertaking which could\nbring neither success nor honour. \"Am I a dog's head, which against\nJudah do show kindness this day unto the house of Saul thy father,\nto his brethren, and to his friends, and have not delivered thee\ninto the hand of David, that thou chargest me to-day with a fault\nconcerning this woman? So do God to Abner, and more also, except, as\nthe Lord hath sworn to David, even so I do to him, to translate the\nkingdom from the house of Saul, and to set up the throne of David\nover Israel and over Judah from Dan even to Beersheba.\"\n\nThe proverb says, \"When rogues fall out, honest men get their own.\"\nHow utterly unprincipled the effort of Abner and Ishbosheth was is\nevident from the confession of the former that God had sworn to\nDavid to establish his throne over the whole land. Their enterprise\ntherefore bore impiety on its very face; and we can only account for\ntheir setting their hands to it on the principle that keen thirst\nfor worldly advantage will drive ungodly men into virtual atheism,\nas if God were no factor in the affairs of men, as if it mattered\nnot that He was against them, and that it is only when their schemes\nshow signs of coming to ruin that they awake to the consciousness\nthat there is a God after all! And how often we see that godless men\nbanded together have no firm bond of union; the very passions which\nthey are united to gratify begin to rage against one another; they\nfall into the pit which they digged for others; they are hanged on\nthe gallows which they erected for their foes.\n\nThe next step in the narrative brings us to Abner's offer to David to\nmake a league with him for the undisputed possession of the throne.\nThings had changed now very materially from that day when, in the\nwilderness of Judah, David reproached Abner for his careless custody\nof the king's person (1 Sam. xxvi. 14). What a picture of feebleness\nDavid had seemed then, while Saul commanded the whole resources of\nthe kingdom! Yet in that day of weakness David had done a noble\ndeed, a deed made nobler by his very weakness, and he had thereby\nshown to any that had eyes to see which party it was that had God\non its side. And now this truth concerning him, against which Abner\nhad kicked and struggled in vain, was asserting itself in a way not\nto be resisted. Yet even now there is no trace of humility in the\nlanguage of Abner. He plays the great man still. \"Behold, my hand\nshall be with thee, to bring about all Israel to thee.\" He approaches\nKing David, not as one who has done him a great wrong, but as one\nwho offers to do him a great favour. There is no word of regret for\nhis having opposed what he knew to be God's purpose and promise, no\napology for the disturbance he had wrought in Israel, no excuse for\nall the distress which he had caused to David by keeping the kingdom\nand the people at war. He does not come as a rebel to his sovereign,\nbut as one independent man to another. Make a league with me. Secure\nme from punishment; promise me a reward. For this he simply offers to\nplace at David's disposal that powerful hand of his that had been so\nmighty for evil. If he expected that David would leap into his arms\nat the mention of such an offer, he was mistaken. This was not the\nway for a rebel to come to his king. David was too much dissatisfied\nwith his past conduct, and saw too clearly that it was only stress\nof weather that was driving him into harbour now, to show any great\nenthusiasm about his offer. On the contrary, he laid down a stiff\npreliminary condition; and with the air of one who knew his place and\nhis power, he let Abner know that if that condition were not complied\nwith, he should not see his face. We cannot but admire the firmness\nshown in this mode of meeting Abner's advances; but we are somewhat\ndisappointed when we find what the condition was--that Michal,\nSaul's daughter, whom he had espoused for a hundred foreskins of the\nPhilistines, should be restored to him as his wife. The demand was\nno doubt a righteous one, and it was reasonable that David should be\nvindicated from the great slur cast on him when his wife was given to\nanother; moreover, it was fitted to test the genuineness of Abner's\nadvances, to show whether he really meant to acknowledge the royal\nrights of David; but we wonder that, with six wives already about\nhim, he should be so eager for another, and we shrink from the reason\ngiven for the restoration--not that the marriage tie was inviolable,\nbut that he had paid for her a very extraordinary dowry. And most\nreaders, too, will feel some sympathy with the second husband, who\nseems to have had a strong affection for Michal, and who followed her\nweeping, until the stern military voice of Abner compelled him to\nreturn. All we can say about him is, that his sin lay in receiving\nanother man's wife and treating her as his own; the beginning of the\nconnection was unlawful, although the manner of its ending on his\npart was creditable. Connections formed in sin must sooner or later\nend in suffering; and the tears of Phaltiel would not have flowed now\nif that unfortunate man had acted firmly and honourably when Michal\nwas taken from David.\n\nBut it is not likely that in this demand for the restoration of\nMichal David acted on purely personal considerations. He does not\nseem to have been above the prevalent feeling of the East which\nmeasured the authority and dignity of the monarch by the rank and\nconnections of his wives. Moreover, as David laid stress on the way\nin which he got Michal as his wife, it is likely that he desired to\nrecall attention to his early exploits against the Philistines. He\nhad probably found that his recent alliance with King Achish had\nbrought him into suspicion; he wished to remind the people therefore\nof his ancient services against those bitter and implacable enemies\nof Israel, and to encourage the expectation of similar exploits in\nthe future. The purpose which he thus seems to have had in view was\nsuccessful. For when Abner soon after made a representation to the\nelders of Israel in favour of King David and reminded them of the\npromise which God had made regarding him, it was to this effect: \"By\nthe hand of My servant David I will save My people Israel out of the\nhand of the Philistines and out of the hand of all their enemies.\" It\nseems to have been a great step towards David's recognition by the\nwhole nation that they came to have confidence in him in leading them\nagainst the Philistines. Thus he received a fresh proof of the folly\nof his distrustful conclusion, \"There is nothing better for me than\nthat I should escape into the land of the Philistines.\" It became\nmore and more apparent that nothing could have been worse.\n\nOne is tempted to wonder if David ever sat down to consider what would\nprobably have happened if, instead of going over to the Philistines, he\nhad continued to abide in the wilderness of Judah, braving the dangers\nof the place and trusting in the protection of his God. Some sixteen\nmonths after, the terrible invasion of the Philistines took place, and\nSaul, overwhelmed with terror and despair, was at his wits' end for\nhelp. How natural it would have been for him in that hour of despair to\nsend for David if he had been still in the country and ask his aid! How\nmuch more in his own place would David have appeared bravely fronting\nthe Philistines in battle, than hovering in the rear of Achish and\npretending to feel himself treated ill because the Philistine lords had\nrequired him to be sent away! Might he not have been the instrument of\nsaving his country from defeat and disgrace? And if Saul and Jonathan\nhad fallen in the battle, would not the whole nation have turned as\none man to him, and would not that long and cruel civil war have been\nentirely averted? It is needless to go back on the past and think how\nmuch better we could have acted if unavailing regret is to be the only\nresult of the process; but it is a salutary and blessed exercise if it\ntends to fix in our minds--what we doubt not it fixed in David's--how\ninfinitely better for us it is to follow the course marked out for us\nby our heavenly Father, with all its difficulties and dangers, than to\nwalk in the light of our own fire and in the sparks of our own kindling.\n\nIt appears that Abner set himself with great vigour to fulfil\nthe promise made by him in his league with David. First, he held\ncommunication with the representatives of the whole nation, \"the\nelders of Israel,\" and showed to them, as we have seen--no doubt to\nhis own confusion and self-condemnation--how God had designated David\nas the king through whom deliverance would be granted to Israel from\nthe Philistines and all their other enemies. Next, remembering that\nSaul was a member of the tribe of Benjamin, and believing that the\nfeeling in favour of his family would be eminently strong in that\ntribe, he took special pains to attach them to David, and as he was\nhimself likewise a Benjamite, he must have been eminently useful in\nthis service. Thirdly, he went in person to Hebron, David's seat,\n\"to speak in the ears of David all that seemed good to Israel and\nto the whole house of Benjamin.\" Finally, after being entertained\nby David at a great feast, he set out to bring about a meeting of\nthe whole congregation of Israel, that they might solemnly ratify\nthe appointment of David as king, in the same way as, in the early\ndays of Saul, Samuel had convened the representatives of the nation\nat Gilgal (1 Sam. xi. 15). That in all this Abner was rendering a\ngreat service both to David and the nation cannot be doubted. He was\ndoing what no other man in Israel could have done at the time for\nestablishing the throne of David and ending the civil war. Having\nonce made overtures to David, he showed an honourable promptitude\nin fulfilling the promise under which he had come. No man can atone\nfor past sin by doing his duty at a future time; but if anything\ncould have blotted out from David's memory the remembrance of Abner's\ngreat injury to him and to the nation, it was the zeal with which he\nexerted himself now to establish David's claims over all the country,\nand especially where his cause was feeblest--in the tribe of Benjamin.\n\nIt must have been a happy day in David's history when Abner set out\nfrom Hebron to convene the assembly of the tribes that was to call\nhim with one voice to the throne. It was the day long looked for come\nat last. The dove had at length come with the olive leaf, and peace\nwould now reign among all the tribes of Israel. And we may readily\nconceive him, with this prospect so near, expressing his feelings,\nif not in the very words of the thirty-seventh Psalm, at any rate in\nlanguage of similar import:--\n\n          \"Fret not thyself because of evil-doers,\n           Neither be thou envious against them that work\n               unrighteousness\n           For they shall soon be cut down like the grass,\n           And wither as the green herb.\n           Trust in the Lord and do good;\n           Dwell in the land, and follow after faithfulness.\n           Delight thyself also in the Lord,\n           And He shall give thee the desires of thine heart.\n           Commit thy way unto the Lord,\n           Trust also in Him, and He shall bring it to pass.\n           And He shall make thy righteousness to go forth as the light,\n           And thy judgment as the noonday.\n           Rest in the Lord and wait patiently for Him;\n           Fret not thyself because of him that prospereth in his way,\n           Because of the man who bringeth wicked devices to pass.\n           For evil-doers shall be cut off;\n           But those that wait on the Lord, they shall inherit the\n               land.\"\n\nBut a crime was now on the eve of being perpetrated destined for the\ntime to scatter all King David's pleasing expectations and plunge him\nanew into the depths of distress.\n\n\n\n\n                              CHAPTER V.\n\n               _ASSASSINATION OF ABNER AND ISHBOSHETH._\n\n                       2 SAMUEL iii. 22-39; iv.\n\n\nIt is quite possible that, in treating with Abner, David showed too\ncomplacent a temper, that he treated too lightly his appearance in\narms against him at the pool of Gibeon, and that he neglected to\ndemand an apology for the death of Asahel. Certainly it would have\nbeen wise had some measures been taken to soothe the ruffled temper\nof Joab and reconcile him to the new arrangement. This, however, was\nnot done. David was so happy in the thought that the civil war was to\ncease, and that all Israel were about to recognise him as their king,\nthat he would not go back on the past, or make reprisals even for the\ndeath of Asahel. He was willing to let bygones be bygones. Perhaps,\ntoo, he thought that if Asahel met his death at the hand of Abner, it\nwas his own rashness that was to blame for it. Anyhow he was greatly\nimpressed with the value of Abner's service on his behalf, and much\ninterested in the project to which he was now going forth--gathering\nall Israel to the king, to make a league with him and bind themselves\nto his allegiance.\n\nIn these measures Joab had not been consulted. When Abner was at\nHebron, Joab was absent on a military enterprise. In that enterprise\nhe had been very successful, and he was able to appear at Hebron with\nthe most popular evidence of success that a general could bring--a\nlarge amount of spoil. No doubt Joab was elated with his success, and\nwas in that very temper when a man is most disposed to resent his being\noverlooked and to take more upon him than is meet. When he heard of\nDavid's agreement with Abner, he was highly displeased. First he went\nto the king, and scolded him for his simplicity in believing Abner.\nIt was but a stratagem of Abner's to allow him to come to Hebron,\nascertain the state of David's affairs, and take his own steps more\neffectively in the interest of his opponent. Suspicion reigned in\nJoab's heart; the generosity of David's nature was not only not shared\nby him, but seemed silliness itself. His rudeness to David is highly\noffensive. He speaks to him in the tone of a master to a servant, or\nin the tone of those servants who rule their master. \"What hast thou\ndone? Behold, Abner came unto thee; why is it that thou hast sent him\naway, and he is quite gone? Thou knowest Abner the son of Ner, that\nhe came to deceive thee, and to know thy going out and thy coming in,\nand to know all that thou doest.\" David is spoken to like one guilty\nof inexcusable folly, as if he were accountable to Joab, and not Joab\nto him. Of the king's answer to Joab, nothing is recorded; but from\nDavid's confession (ver. 39) that the sons of Zeruiah were too strong\nfor him, we may infer that it was not very firm or decided, and that\nJoab set it utterly at nought. For the very first thing that Joab did\nafter seeing the king was to send a message to Abner, most likely in\nDavid's name, but without David's knowledge, asking him to return.\nJoab was at the gate ready for his treacherous business, and taking\nAbner aside as if for private conversation, he plunged his dagger in\nhis breast, ostensibly in revenge for the death of his brother Asahel.\nThere was something eminently mean and dastardly in the deed. Abner\nwas now on the best of terms with Joab's master, and he could not\nhave apprehended danger from the servant. If assassination be mean\namong civilians, it is eminently mean among soldiers. The laws of\nhospitality were outraged when one who had just been David's guest was\nassassinated in David's city. The outrage was all the greater, as was\nalso the injury to King David and to the whole kingdom, that the crime\nwas committed when Abner was on the eve of an important and delicate\nnegotiation with the other tribes of Israel, since the arrangement\nwhich he hoped to bring about was likely to be broken off by the news\nof his shameful death. At no moment are the feelings of men less to be\ntrifled with than when, after long and fierce alienation, they are on\nthe point of coming together. Abner had brought the tribes of Israel to\nthat point, but now, like a flock of birds frightened by a shot, they\nwere certain to fly asunder. All this danger Joab set at nought, the\none thought of taking revenge for the death of his brother absorbing\nevery other, and making him, like so many other men when excited by a\nguilty passion, utterly regardless of every consequence provided only\nhis revenge was satisfied.\n\nHow did David act toward Joab? Most kings would at once have put\nhim to death, and David's subsequent action towards the murderers\nof Ishbosheth shows that, even in his judgment, this would have\nbeen the proper retribution on Joab for his bloody deed. But David\ndid not feel himself strong enough to deal with Joab according to\nhis deserts. It might have been better for him during the rest\nof his life if he had acted with more vigour now. But instead of\nmaking an example of Joab, he contented himself with pouring out\non him a vial of indignation, publicly washing his hands of the\nnefarious transaction, and pronouncing on its author and his family\na terrible malediction. We cannot but shrink from the way in which\nDavid brought in Joab's family to share his curse: \"Let there not\nfail from the house of Joab one that hath an issue, or that is a\nleper, or that leaneth on a staff, or that falleth on the sword,\nor that lacketh bread.\" Yet we must remember that according to the\nsentiment of those times a man and his house were so identified that\nthe punishment due to the head was regarded as due to the whole. In\nour day we see a law in constant operation which visits iniquities\nof the parents upon the children with a terrible retribution. The\ndrunkard's children are woeful sufferers for their parent's sin; the\nfamily of the felon carries a stigma for ever. We recognise this as\na law of Providence; but we do not act on it ourselves in inflicting\npunishment. In David's time, however, and throughout the whole Old\nTestament period, punishments due to the fathers were formally\nshared by their families. When Joshua sentenced Achan to die for\nhis crime in stealing from the spoils of Jericho a wedge of gold\nand a Babylonish garment, his wife and children were put to death\nalong with him. In denouncing the curse on Joab's family as well as\nhimself, David therefore only recognised a law which was universally\nacted on in his day. The law may have been a hard one, but we are not\nto blame David for acting on a principle of retribution universally\nacknowledged. We are to remember, too, that David was now acting in\na public capacity, and as the chief magistrate of the nation. If he\nhad put Joab to death, his act would have involved his family in many\na woe; in denouncing his deeds and calling for retribution on them\ngeneration after generation, he only carried out the same principle\na little further. That Joab deserved to die for his dastardly crime,\nnone could have denied; if David abstained from inflicting that\npunishment, it was only natural that he should be very emphatic in\nproclaiming what such a criminal might look for, in never-failing\nvisitations on himself and his seed, when he was left to be dealt\nwith by the God of justice.\n\nHaving thus disposed of Joab, David had next to dispose of the dead\nbody of Abner. He determined that every circumstance connected\nwith Abner's funeral should manifest the sincerity of his grief at\nhis untimely end. In the first place, he caused him to be buried\nat Hebron. We know of the tomb at Hebron where the bodies of the\npatriarchs lay; if it was at all legitimate to place others in that\ngrave, we may believe that a place in it was found for Abner. In the\nsecond place, the mourning company attended the funeral with rent\nclothes and girdings of sackcloth, while the king himself followed\nthe bier, and at the grave both king and people gave way to a burst\nof tears. In the third place, the king pronounced an elegy over him,\nshort, but expressive of his sense of the unworthy death which had\ncome to such a man:--\n\n          \"Should Abner die as a fool dieth?\n           Thy hands were not bound, nor thy feet put into fetters;\n           As a man falleth before the children of iniquity, so didst\n               thou fall.\"\n\nHad he died the death of one taken in battle, his bound hands and his\nfeet in fetters would have denoted that after honourable conflict he\nhad been defeated in the field, and that he died the death due to\na public enemy. Instead of this, he had fallen before the children\nof iniquity, before men mean enough to betray him and murder him,\nwhile he was under the protection of the king. In the fourth place,\nhe sternly refused to eat bread till that day, so full of darkness\nand infamy, should have passed away. The public manifestations of\nDavid's grief showed very clearly how far he was from approving of\nthe death of Abner. And they had the desired effect. The people were\npleased with the evidence afforded of David's feelings, and the event\nthat had seemed likely to destroy his prospects turned out in this\nway in his favour. \"The people took notice of this, and it pleased\nthem, as whatsoever the king did pleased all the people.\" It was\nanother evidence of the conquering power of goodness and forbearance.\nBy his generous treatment of his foes, David secured a position in\nthe hearts of his people, and established his kingdom on a basis of\nsecurity which he could not have obtained by any amount of severity.\nFor ages and ages, the two methods of dealing with a reluctant\npeople, generosity and severity, have been pitted against each\nother, and always with the effect that severity fails and generosity\nsucceeds. There were many who were indignant at the clemency shown\nby Lord Canning after the Indian mutiny. They would have had him\ninspire terror by acts of awful severity. But the peaceful career\nof our Indian empire and the absence of any attempt to renew the\ninsurrection since that time show that the policy of clemency was the\npolicy of wisdom and of success.\n\nStill another step was taken by David that shows how painfully he\nwas impressed by the death of Abner. To \"his servants\"--that is, his\ncabinet or his staff--he said in confidence, \"Know ye not that there\nis a prince and a great man fallen this day in Israel?\" He recognised\nin Abner one of those men of consummate ability who are born to rule,\nor at least to render the highest service to the actual ruler of a\ncountry by their great influence over men. It seems very probable\nthat he looked to him as his own chief officer for the future. Rebel\nthough he had been, he seemed quite cured of his rebellion, and\nnow that he cordially acknowledged David's right to the throne, he\nwould probably have been his right-hand man. Abner, Saul's cousin,\nwas probably a much older man than Joab, who was David's nephew,\nand who could not have been much older than David himself. The loss\nof Abner was a great personal loss especially as it threw him more\ninto the hands of these sons of Zeruiah, Joab and Abishai, whose\nimpetuous, lordly temper was too much for him to restrain. The\nrepresentation to his confidential servants, \"I am weak, and these\nmen, the sons of Zeruiah, are too strong for me,\" was an appeal to\nthem for cordial help in the affairs of the kingdom, in order that\nJoab and his brother might not be able to carry everything their own\nway. David, like many another man, needed to say, Save me from my\nfriends. We get a vivid glimpse of the perplexities of kings, and of\nthe compensations of a humbler lot. Men in high places, worried by\nthe difficulties of managing their affairs and servants, and by the\nendless annoyances to which their jealousies and their self-will give\nrise, may find much to envy in the simple, unembarrassed life of the\nhumblest of the people.\n\nFrom the assassination of Abner, the real source of the opposition\nthat had been raised to David, the narrative proceeds to the\nassassination of Ishbosheth, the titular king. \"When Saul's son\nheard that Abner was dead in Hebron, his hands were feeble, and all\nthe Israelites were troubled.\" The contrast is striking between his\nconduct under difficulty and that of David. In the history of the\nlatter, faith often faltered in times of trouble, and the spirit of\ndistrust found a footing in his soul. But these occasions occurred\nin the course of protracted and terrible struggles; they were\nexceptions to his usual bearing; faith commonly bore him up in his\ndarkest trials. Ishbosheth, on the other hand, seems to have had\nno resource, no sustaining power whatever, under visible reverses.\nDavid's slips were like the temporary falling back of the gallant\nsoldier when surprised by a sudden onslaught, or when, fagged and\nweary, he is driven back by superior numbers; but as soon as he\nhas recovered himself, he dashes back undaunted to the conflict.\nIshbosheth was like the soldier who throws down his arms and rushes\nfrom the field as soon as he feels the bitter storm of battle. With\nall his falls, there was something in David that showed him to be\ncast in a different mould from ordinary men. He was habitually aiming\nat a higher standard, and upheld by the consciousness of a higher\nstrength; he was ever and anon resorting to \"the secret place of the\nMost High,\" taking hold of Him as his covenant God, and labouring to\ndraw down from Him the inspiration and the strength of a nobler life\nthan that of the mass of the children of men.\n\nThe godless course which Ishbosheth had followed in setting up a\nclaim to the throne in opposition to the Divine call of David not\nonly lost him the distinction he coveted, but cost him his life.\nHe made himself a mark for treacherous and heartless men; and one\nday, while lying in his bed at noon, was despatched by two of his\nservants. The two men that murdered him seem to have been among\nthose whom Saul enriched with the spoil of the Gibeonites. They were\nbrothers, men of Beeroth, which was formerly one of the cities of the\nGibeonites, but was now reckoned to Benjamin.\n\nSaul appears to have attacked the Beerothites, and given their\nproperty to his favourites (comp. 1 Sam. xxii. 7 and 2 Sam. xxi. 2).\nA curse went with the transaction; Ishbosheth, one of Saul's sons,\nwas murdered by two of those who were enriched by the unhallowed\ndeed; and many years after, his bloody house had to yield up seven of\nhis sons to justice, when a great famine showed that for this crime\nwrath rested on the land.\n\nThe murderers of Ishbosheth, Baanah and Rechab, mistaking the character\nof David as much as it had been mistaken by the Amalekite who pretended\nthat he had slain Saul, hastened to Hebron, bearing with them the head\nof their victim, a ghastly evidence of the reality of the deed. This\nrevolting trophy they carried all the way from Mahanaim to Hebron, a\ndistance of some fifty miles. Mean and selfish themselves, they thought\nother men must be the same. They were among those poor creatures who\nare unable to rise above their own poor level in their conceptions of\nothers. When they presented themselves before David, he showed all\nhis former superiority to selfish, jealous feelings. He was roused\nindeed to the highest pitch of indignation. We can hardly conceive the\nastonishment and horror with which they would receive his answer, \"As\nthe Lord liveth, who hath redeemed my soul out of all adversity, when\none told me saying, Behold, Saul is dead, thinking to have brought good\ntidings, I took hold on him and slew him in Ziklag, who thought that\nI would have given him a reward for his tidings. How much more when\nwicked men have slain a righteous person in his own house upon his bed!\nShall I not therefore require his blood at your hand, and take you away\nfrom the earth?\" Simple death was not judged a severe enough punishment\nfor such guilt; as they had cut off the head of Ishbosheth after\nkilling him, so after they were slain their hands and their feet were\ncut off; and thereafter they were hanged over the pool in Hebron--a\ntoken of the execration in which the crime was held. Here was another\nevidence that deeds of violence done to his rivals, so far from finding\nacceptance, were detestable in the eyes of David. And here was another\nfulfilment of the resolution which he had made when he took possession\nof the throne--\"I will early destroy all the wicked of the land, that I\nmay cut off all wicked doers from the city of the Lord.\"\n\nThese rapid, instantaneous executions by order of David have raised\npainful feelings in many. Granting that the retribution was justly\ndeserved, and granting that the rapidity of the punishment was\nin accord with military law, ancient and modern, and that it was\nnecessary in order to make a due impression on the people, still it\nmay be asked, How could David, as a pious man, hurry these sinners\ninto the presence of their Judge without giving them any exhortation\nto repentance or leaving them a moment in which to ask for mercy?\nThe question is undoubtedly a difficult one. But the difficulty\narises in a great degree from our ascribing to David and others the\nsame knowledge of the future state and the same vivid impressions\nregarding it that we have ourselves. We often forget that to those\nwho lived in the Old Testament the future life was wrapped in far\ngreater obscurity than it is to us. That good men had no knowledge\nof it, we cannot allow; but certainly they knew vastly less about\nit than has been revealed to us. And the general effect of this\nwas that the consciousness of a future life was much fainter even\namong good men then than now. They did not think about it; it was\nnot present to their thoughts. There is no use trying to make David\neither a wiser or a better man than he was. There is no use trying\nto place him high above the level or the light of his age. If it be\nasked, How did David feel with reference to the future life of these\nmen? the answer is, that probably it was not much, if at all, in his\nthoughts. That which was prominent in his thoughts was that they had\nsacrificed their lives by their atrocious wickedness, and the sooner\nthey were punished the better. If he thought of their future, he\nwould feel that they were in the hands of God, and that they would\nbe judged by Him according to the tenor of their lives. It cannot be\nsaid that compassion for them mingled with David's feelings. The one\nprominent feeling he had was that of their guilt; for that they must\nsuffer. And David, like other soldiers who have shed much blood, was\nso accustomed to the sight of violent death, that the horror which it\nusually excites was no longer familiar to him.\n\nIt is the Gospel of Jesus Christ that has brought life and\nimmortality to light. So far from the future life being a dim and\nshadowy revelation, it is now one of the clearest doctrines of the\nfaith. It is one of the doctrines which every earnest preacher of\nthe Gospel is profoundly earnest in dwelling on. That death ushers\nus into the presence of God, that after death cometh the judgment,\nthat every one of us is to give account of himself to God, that the\nfinal condition of men is to be one of misery or one of life, are\namong the clearest revelations of the Gospel. And this fact invests\nevery man's death with profound significance in the Christian's\nview. That the condemned criminal may have time to prepare, our\ncourts of law invariably interpose an interval between the sentence\nand the punishment. Would only that men were more consistent here!\nIf we shudder at the thought of a dying sinner appearing in all the\nblackness of his guilt before God, let us think more how we may\nturn sinners from their wickedness while they live. Let us see the\natrocious guilt of encouraging them in ways of sin that cannot but\nbring on them the retribution of a righteous God. O ye who, careless\nyourselves, laugh at the serious impressions and scruples of others;\nye who teach those that would otherwise do better to drink and gamble\nand especially to scoff; ye who do your best to frustrate the prayers\nof tender-hearted fathers and mothers whose deepest desire is that\ntheir children may be saved; ye, in one word, who are missionaries\nof the devil and help to people hell--would that you pondered your\nawful guilt! For \"whosoever shall cause any of the least of these to\noffend, it were better for him that a millstone were hanged about his\nneck and he were cast into the depths of the sea.\"\n\n\n\n\n                              CHAPTER VI.\n\n                      _DAVID KING OF ALL ISRAEL._\n\n                           2 SAMUEL v. 1-9.\n\n\nAfter seven and a half years of opposition,[2] David was now left\nwithout a rival, and the representatives of the whole tribes came to\nHebron to anoint him king. They gave three reasons for their act,\nnearly all of which, however, would have been as valid at the death\nof Saul as they were at this time.\n\nThe first was that David and they were closely related--\"Behold,\nwe are thy bone and thy flesh;\" rather an unusual reason, but in\nthe circumstances not unnatural. For David's alliance with the\nPhilistines had thrown some doubt on his nationality; it was not very\nclear at that time whether he was to be regarded as a Hebrew or as a\nnaturalized Philistine; but now the doubts that had existed on that\npoint had all disappeared; conclusive evidence had been afforded\nthat David was out-and-out a Hebrew, and therefore that he was not\ndisqualified for the Hebrew throne.\n\nThis conclusion is confirmed by what they give as their second\nreason--his former exploits and services against their enemies.\n\"Also, in time past, when Saul was king, thou wast he that leddest\nout and broughtest in Israel.\" In former days, David had proved\nhimself Saul's most efficient lieutenant; he had been at the head of\nthe armies of Israel, and his achievements in that capacity pointed\nto him as the fit and natural successor of Saul.\n\nThe third reason is the most conclusive--\"The Lord said to thee,\nThou shalt feed My people Israel, and thou shalt be a captain over\nIsrael.\" It was little to the credit of the elders that this reason,\nwhich should have been the first, and which needed no other reasons\nto confirm it, was given by them as the last. The truth, however, is,\nthat if they had made it their first and great reason, they would\non the very face of their speech have condemned themselves. Why, if\nthis was the command of God, had they been so long of carrying it\nout? Ought not effect to have been given to it at the very first,\nindependent of all other reasons whatsoever? The elders cannot but\ngive it a place among their reasons for offering him the throne;\nbut it is not allowed to have its own place, and it is added to the\nothers as if they needed to be supplemented before effect could be\ngiven to it. The elders did not show that supreme regard to the\nwill of God which ought ever to be the first consideration in every\nloyal heart. It is the great offence of multitudes, even among those\nwho make a Christian profession, that while they are willing to\npay regard to God's will as one of many considerations, they are\nnot prepared to pay supreme regard to it. It may be taken along\nwith other considerations, but it is not allowed to be the chief\nconsideration. Religion may have a place in their life, but not the\nfirst place. But can a service thus rendered be acceptable to God?\nCan God accept the second or the third place in any man's regard?\nDoes not the first commandment dispose of this question: \"Thou shalt\nhave no other gods before Me\"?\n\n\"So all the elders of Israel came to the king to Hebron; and King\nDavid made a league with them in Hebron before the Lord; and they\nanointed David king over Israel.\"\n\nIt was a happy circumstance that David was able to neutralise the\neffects of the murders of Abner and Ishbosheth, and to convince the\npeople that he had no share in these crimes. Notwithstanding the\nprejudice against his side which in themselves they were fitted to\ncreate in the supporters of Saul's family, they did not cause any\nfurther opposition to his claims. The tact of the king removed any\nstumbling-block that might have arisen from these untoward events.\nAnd thus the throne of David was at last set up, amid the universal\napproval of the nation.\n\nThis was a most memorable event in David's history. It was the\nfulfilment of one great instalment of God's promises to him. It was\nfitted very greatly to deepen his trust in God, as his Protector and\nhis Friend. To be able to look back on even one case of a Divine\npromise distinctly fulfilled to us is a great help to faith in all\nfuture time. For David to be able to look back on that early period\nof his life, so crowded with trials and sufferings, perplexities and\ndangers, and to mark how God had delivered him from every one of\nthem, and, in spite of the fearful opposition that had been raised\nagainst him, had at last seated him firmly on the throne, was well\nfitted to advance the spirit of trust to that place of supremacy\nwhich it gained in him. After such an overwhelming experience, it was\nlittle wonder that his trust in God became so strong, and his purpose\nto serve God so intense. The sorrows of death had compassed him, and\nthe pains of Hades had taken hold on him, yet the Lord had been with\nhim, and had most wonderfully delivered him. And in token of his\ndeliverance he makes his vow of continual service, \"O Lord, truly I\nam Thy servant; I am Thy servant and the son of Thine handmaid; Thou\nhast loosed my bonds. I will offer to Thee the sacrifices of praise,\nand will call upon the name of the Lord.\"\n\nWe can hardly pass from this event in David's history without\nrecalling his typical relation to Him who in after-years was to\nbe known as the \"Son of David.\" The resemblance between the early\nhistory of David and that of our blessed Lord in some of its features\nis too obvious to need to be pointed out. Like David, Jesus spends\nHis early years in the obscurity of a country village. Like him, He\nenters on His public life under a striking and convincing evidence\nof the Divine favour--David by conquering Goliath, Jesus by the\ndescent of the Spirit at His baptism, and the voice from heaven which\nproclaimed, \"This is My beloved Son, in whom I am well pleased.\"\nLike David, soon after His Divine call Jesus is led out to the\nwilderness, to undergo hardship and temptation; but, unlike David,\nHe conquers the enemy at every onset. Like David, Jesus attaches to\nHimself a small but valiant band of followers, whose achievements\nin the spiritual warfare rival the deeds of David's \"worthies\" in\nthe natural. Like David, Jesus is concerned for His relatives;\nDavid, in his extremity, commits his father and mother to the king\nof Moab: Jesus, on the cross, commits His mother to the beloved\ndisciple. In the higher exercises of David's spirit, too, there is\nmuch that resembles the experiences of Christ. The convincing proof\nof this is, that most of the Psalms which the Christian Church has\never held to be Messianic have their foundation in the experiences\nof David. It is impossible not to see that in one sense there must\nhave been a measureless distance between the experience of a sinful\nman like David and that of the Lord Jesus Christ. In the Divinity of\nHis person, the atoning efficacy of His death, and the glory of His\nresurrection, Jesus is high above any of the sons of men. Yet there\nmust likewise have been some marvellous similarity between Him and\nDavid, seeing that David's words of sorrow and of hope were so often\naccepted by Jesus to express His own emotions. Strange indeed it is\nthat the words in which David, in the twenty-second Psalm, pours out\nthe desolation of his spirit, were the words in which Jesus found\nexpression for His unexampled distress upon the cross. Strange,\ntoo, that David's deliverances were so like Christ's that the same\nlanguage does for both; nay, that the very words in which Jesus\ncommended His soul to the Father, as it was passing from His body,\nwere words which had first been used by David.\n\nBut it does not concern us at present to look so much at the general\nresemblances between David and our blessed Lord, as at the analogy in\nthe fortunes of their respective kingdoms. And here the most obvious\nfeature is the bitter opposition to their claims offered in both\ninstances even by those who might have been expected most cordially\nto welcome them. Of both it might be said, \"They came unto their own,\nbut their own received them not.\" First, David is hunted almost to\ndeath by Saul; and then, even after Saul's death, his claims are\nresisted by most of the tribes. So in His lifetime Jesus encounters\nall the hatred and opposition of the scribes and Pharisees; and even\nafter His resurrection, the council do their utmost to denounce His\nclaims and frighten His followers. Against the one and the other the\nenemy brings to bear all the devices of hatred and opposition. When\nJesus rose from the grave, we see Him personally raised high above\nall the efforts of His enemies; when David was acknowledged king by\nall Israel, he reached a corresponding elevation. And now that David\nis recognised as king, how do we find him employing his energies?\nIt is to defend and bless his kingdom, to obtain for it peace and\nprosperity, to expel its foes, to secure to the utmost of his power\nthe welfare of all his people. From His throne in glory, Jesus does\nthe same. And what encouragement may not the friends and subjects of\nChrist's kingdom derive from the example of David! For if David, once\nhe was established in his kingdom, spared no effort to do good to his\npeople, if he scattered blessings among them from the stores which he\nwas able to command, how much more may Christ be relied on to do the\nsame! Has He not been placed far above all principality and power,\nand every name that is named, and been made \"Head over all things for\nthe Church which is His body\"? Rejoice then, ye members of Christ's\nkingdom! Raise your eyes to the throne of glory, and see how God has\nset His King upon His holy hill of Zion! And be encouraged to tell\nHim of all your own needs and the troubles and needs of His Church;\nfor has He not ascended on high, and led captivity captive, and\nreceived gifts for men? And if you have faith as a grain of mustard\nseed, will you not ask, and shall you not receive according to your\nfaith? Will not God supply all your need according to His riches in\nglory by Christ Jesus?\n\n       *       *       *       *       *\n\nFrom the spectacle at Hebron, when all the elders of Israel confirmed\nDavid on the throne, and entered into a solemn league with reference\nto the kingdom, we pass with David to the field of battle. The\nfirst enterprise to which he addressed himself was the capture of\nJerusalem, or rather of the stronghold of Zion. It is not expressly\nstated that he consulted God before taking this step, but we can\nhardly suppose that he would do it without Divine direction. From\nthe days of Moses, God had taught His people that a place would be\nappointed by Him where He would set His name; Jerusalem was to be\nthat place; and it cannot be thought that when David would not even\ngo up to Hebron without consulting the Lord, he would proceed to make\nJerusalem his capital without a Divine warrant.\n\nNo doubt the place was well known to him. It had already received\nconsecration when Melchizedek reigned in it, \"king of righteousness\nand king of peace.\" In the days of Joshua its king was Adonizedek,\n\"lord of righteousness\"--a noble title, brought down from the days\nof Melchizedek, however unworthy the bearer of it might be of the\ndesignation, for he was the head of the confederacy against Joshua\n(Josh. x. 1, 3), and he ended his career by being hanged on a tree.\nAfter the slaughter of the Philistine, David had carried his head\nto Jerusalem, or to some place so near that it might be called by\nthat name; very probably Nob was the place, which, according to an\nold tradition, was situated on the slope of Mount Olivet. Often in\nhis wanderings, when his mind was much occupied with fortresses\nand defences, the image of this place would occur to him; observing\nhow the mountains were round about Jerusalem, he would see how well\nit was adapted to be the metropolis of the country. But this could\nnot be done while the stronghold of Zion was in the hands of the\nJebusites, and while the Jebusites were so numerous that they might\nbe called \"the people of the land.\"\n\nSo impregnable was this stronghold deemed, that any attempt that\nDavid might make to get possession of it was treated with contempt.\nThe precise circumstances of the siege are somewhat obscure; if we\ncompare the marginal readings and the text in the Authorized Version,\nand still more in the Revised Version, we may see what difficulty\nour translators had in arriving at the meaning of the passage. The\nmost probable supposition is that the Jebusites placed their lame\nand blind on the walls, to show how little artificial defence the\nplace needed, and defied David to touch even these sorry defenders.\nSuch defiance David could not but have regarded as he regarded the\ndefiance of Goliath--as an insult to that mighty God in whose name\nand in whose strength he carried on his work. Advancing in the same\nstrength in which he advanced against Goliath, he got possession of\nthe stronghold. To stimulate the chivalry of his men he had promised\nthe first place in his army to whoever, by means of the watercourse,\nshould first get on the battlements and defeat the Jebusites. Joab\nwas the man who made this daring and successful attempt. Reaping\nthe promised reward, he thereby raised himself to the first place\nin the now united forces of the twelve tribes of Israel. After the\nmurder of Abner, he had probably been degraded; but now, by his dash\nand bravery, he established his position on a firmer basis than\never. While he contributed by this means to the security and glory\nof the kingdom, he diminished at the same time the king's personal\nsatisfaction, inasmuch as David could not regard without anxiety the\npossession of so much power and influence by so daring and useful,\nbut unscrupulous and bold-tempered, a man.\n\nThe place thus taken was called the city, and sometimes the castle,\nof David, and it became from this time his residence and the capital\nof his kingdom. Much though the various sites in Jerusalem have been\ndebated, it is surely beyond reasonable doubt that the fortress\nthus occupied was Mount Zion, the same height which still exists in\nthe south-western corner of the area which came to be covered by\nJerusalem. This seems to have been the only part that the Jebusites\nhad fortified, and with the loss of this stronghold their hold of\nother parts of Jerusalem was lost. Henceforth, as a people, they\ndisappear from Jerusalem, although individual Jebusites might still,\nlike Araunah, hold patches of land in the neighbourhood (2 Sam.\nxxiv. 16). The captured fortress was turned by David into his royal\nresidence. And seeing that a military stronghold was very inadequate\nfor the purposes of a capital, he began, by the building of Millo,\nthat extension of the city which was afterwards carried out by others\non so large a scale.\n\nBy thus taking possession of Mount Zion and commencing those\nextensions which helped to make Jerusalem so great and celebrated\na city, David introduced two names into the sacred language of the\nBible which have ever since retained a halo, surpassing all other\nnames in the world. Yet, very obviously, it was nothing in the\nlittle hill which has borne the name of Zion for so many centuries,\nnor in the physical features of the city of Jerusalem, that has\ngiven them their remarkable distinction. Neither is it for mere\nhistorical or intellectual associations, in the common sense of\nthe term, that they have attained their eminence. It would not be\ndifficult to find more picturesque rocks than Zion and more striking\ncities than Jerusalem. It would not be difficult to find places more\nmemorable in art, in science, and intellectual culture. That which\ngives them their unrivalled pre-eminence is their relation to God's\nrevelation of Himself to man. Zion was memorable because it was\nGod's dwelling-place, Jerusalem because it was the city of the great\nKing. If Jerusalem and Zion impress our imagination even above other\nplaces, it is because God had so much to do with them. The very idea\nof God makes them great.\n\nBut they impress much more than our imagination. We recall the\nunrivalled moral and spiritual forces that were concentrated there:\nthe goodly fellowship of the prophets, the noble army of the martyrs,\nthe glorious company of the apostles, all living under the shadow of\nMount Zion, and uttering those words that have moved the world as they\nreceived them from the mouth of the Lord. We recall Him who claimed to\nbe Himself God, whose blessed lessons, and holy life, and atoning death\nwere so closely connected with Jerusalem, and would alone have made it\nfor ever memorable, even if it had been signalized by nothing else.\nUnless David was illuminated from above to a far greater degree than\nwe have any reason to believe, he could have little thought, when he\ncaptured that citadel, what a marvellous chapter in the world's history\nhe was beginning. Century after century, millennium after millennium\nhas passed; and still Zion and Jerusalem draw all eyes and hearts, and\npilgrims from the ends of the earth, as they look even on the ruins of\nformer days, are conscious of a thrill which no other city in all the\nworld can give. Nor is that all. When a name has to be found on earth\nfor the home of the blessed in heaven, it is the new Jerusalem; when\nthe scene of heavenly worship, vocal with the voice of harpers harping\nwith their harps, has to be distinguished, it is said to be Mount Zion.\nIs not all this a striking testimony that nothing so ennobles either\nplaces or men as the gracious fellowship of God? View this distinction\nof Jerusalem and Mount Zion, if you choose, as the result of mere\nnatural causes. Though the effect must be held far beyond the efficacy\nof the cause, yet you have this fact: that the places in all the world\nthat to civilized mankind have become far the most glorious are those\nwith which it is believed that God maintained a close and unexampled\nconnection. View it, as it ought to be viewed, as a supernatural\nresult; count the fellowship of God at Jerusalem a real fellowship, and\nHis Spirit a living Spirit; count the presence of Jesus Christ to have\nbeen indeed that of God manifest in the flesh; you have now a cause\nreally adequate to the effect, and you have a far more striking proof\nthan before of the dignity and glory which God's presence brings. Would\nthat every one of you might ponder the lesson of Jerusalem and Zion! O\nye sons of men, God has drawn nigh to you, and He has drawn nigh to you\nas a God of salvation. Hear then His message! \"For if they escaped not\nwho refused Him that spake on earth, much more shall not we escape if\nwe refuse Him that speaketh from heaven.\"\n\nFOOTNOTE:\n\n[2] There is difficulty in adjusting all the dates. In chap. ii. 10,\nit is said that Ishbosheth reigned two years. The usual explanation\nis that he reigned two years before war broke out between him and\nDavid. Another supposition is that there was an interregnum in Israel\nof five and a half years, and that Ishbosheth reigned the last two\nyears of David's seven and a half. The accuracy of the text has been\nquestioned, and it has been proposed (on very slender MS. authority)\nto read that Ishbosheth reigned _six_ years in place of two.\n\n\n\n\n                             CHAPTER VII.\n\n                      _THE KINGDOM ESTABLISHED._\n\n                          2 SAMUEL v. 10-25.\n\n\nThe events in David's reign that followed the capture of Mount Zion\nand the appointment of Jerusalem as the capital of the country were\nall of a prosperous kind. \"David,\" we are told, \"waxed greater and\ngreater, for the Lord of hosts was with him.\" \"And David perceived\nthat the Lord had established him to be king over Israel, and that He\nhad exalted his kingdom for His people Israel's sake.\"\n\nIn these words we find two things: a fact and an explanation. The\nfact is, that now the tide fairly turned in David's history, and\nthat, instead of a sad chronicle of hardship and disappointment, the\nrecord of his reign becomes one of unmingled success and prosperity.\nThe fact is far from an unusual one in the history of men's lives.\nHow often, even in the case of men who have become eminent, has the\nfirst stage of life been one of disappointment and sorrow, and the\nlast part one of prosperity so great as to exceed the fondest dreams\nof youth. Effort after effort has been made by a young man to get a\nfooting in the literary world, but his books have proved comparative\nfailures. At last he issues one which catches in a remarkable degree\nthe popular taste, and thereafter fame and fortune attend him, and\nlay their richest offerings at his feet. A similar tale is to be told\nof many an artist and professional man. And even persons of more\nordinary gifts, who have found the battle of life awfully difficult\nin its earlier stages, have gradually, through diligence and\nperseverance, acquired an excellent position, more than fulfilling\nevery reasonable desire for success. No man is indeed exempt from\nthe risk of failure if he chooses a path of life for which he has\nno special fitness, or if he encounters a storm of unfavourable\ncontingencies; but it is an encouraging thing for those who begin\nlife under hard conditions, but with a brave heart and a resolute\npurpose to do their best, that, as a general rule, the sky clears as\nthe day advances, and the troubles and struggles of the morning yield\nto success and enjoyment later in the day.\n\nBut in the present instance we have not merely a statement of the\nfact that the tide turned in the case of David, giving him prosperity\nand enlargement in every quarter, but an explanation of the fact--it\nwas due to the gracious presence and favour of God. This by no\nmeans implies that his adversities were due to an opposite cause.\nGod had been with him in the wilderness, save when he resorted to\ndeceit and other tricks of carnal policy; but He had been with him\nto try him and to train him, not to crown him with prosperity. But\nnow, the purpose of the early training being accomplished, God is\nwith him to \"grant him all his heart's desire and fulfil all his\ncounsel.\" If God, indeed, had not been with him, sanctifying his\nearly trials, He would not have been with him in the end, crowning\nhim with loving-kindness and tender mercies. But in the time of their\ntrials, God is with His people more in secret, hid, at least, from\nthe observation of the world; when the time comes for conspicuous\nblessing and prosperity, He comes more into view in His own gracious\nand bountiful character. In the case of David, God was not only\nwith him, but David \"perceived\" it; he was conscious of the fact.\nHis filial spirit recognized the source of all his prosperity and\nblessing, as it had done when he was enabled in his boyhood to slay\nthe lion and the bear, and in his youth to triumph over Goliath.\nUnlike many successful men, who ascribe their success so largely to\ntheir personal talents and ways of working, he felt that the great\nfactor in his success was God. If he possessed talents and had used\nthem to advantage, it was God who had given them originally, and it\nwas God who had enabled him to employ them well. But in every man's\ncareer, there are many other elements to be considered besides his\nown abilities. There is what the world calls \"luck,\" that is to say\nthose conditions of success which are quite out of our control; as\nfor instance in business the unexpected rise or fall of markets,\nthe occurrence of favourable openings, the honesty or dishonesty\nof partners and connections, the stability or the vicissitudes of\ninvestments. The difference between the successful man of the world\nand the successful godly man in these respects is, that the one\nspeaks only of his luck, the other sees the hand of God in ordering\nall such things for his benefit. This last was David's case. Well\ndid he know that the very best use he could make of his abilities\ncould not ensure success unless God was present to order and direct\nto a prosperous issue the ten thousand incidental influences that\nbore on the outcome of his undertakings. And when he saw that these\ninfluences were all directed to this end, that nothing went wrong,\nthat all conspired steadily and harmoniously to the enlargement and\nestablishment of his kingdom, he perceived that the Lord was with\nhim, and was now visibly fulfilling to him that great principle of\nHis government which He had so solemnly declared to Eli, \"Them that\nhonour Me, I will honour.\"\n\nBut is this way of claiming to be specially favoured and blessed by\nGod not objectionable? Is it not what the world calls \"cant\"? Is it\nnot highly offensive in any man to claim to be a favourite of Heaven?\nIs this not what hypocrites and fanatics are so fond of doing, and is\nit not a course which every good, humble-minded man will be careful\nto avoid?\n\nThis may be a plausible way of reasoning, but one thing is\ncertain--it has not the support of Scripture. If it be an offence\npublicly to recognise the special favour and blessing with which it\nhas pleased God to visit us, David himself was the greatest offender\nin this respect the world has ever known. What is the great burden\nof his psalms of thanksgiving? Is it not an acknowledgment of the\nspecial mercies and favours that God bestowed on him, especially in\nhis times of great necessity? And does not the whole tenor of the\nPsalms and the whole tenor of Scripture prove that good men are to\ntake especial note of all the mercies they receive from God, and\nare not to confine them to their own bosom, but to tell of all His\ngracious acts and bless His name for ever and ever? \"They shall\nabundantly utter the memory of Thy great goodness, and shall sing of\nThy righteousness.\" That God is to be acknowledged in all our ways,\nthat God's mercy in choosing us in Christ Jesus and blessing us with\nall spiritual blessings in Him is to be especially recognized, and\nthat we are not to shrink from extolling God's name for conferring\non us favours infinitely beyond what belong to the men of the world,\nare among the plainest lessons of the word of God.\n\nWhat the world is so ready to believe is, that this cannot be done\nsave in the spirit of the Pharisee who thanked God that he was not\nas other men. And whenever a worldly man falls foul of one who owns\nthe distinguishing spiritual mercies that God has bestowed on him,\nit is this accusation he is sure to hurl at his head. But this just\nshows the recklessness and injustice of the world. Strange indeed if\nGod in His word has imposed on us a duty which cannot be discharged\nbut in company with those who say, \"Stand by thyself; come not nigh;\nI am holier than thou\"! The truth is, the world cannot or will not\ndistinguish between the Pharisee, puffed up with the conceit of his\ngoodness, and for this goodness of his deeming himself the favourite\nof Heaven, and the humble saint, conscious that in him dwelleth no\ngood thing, and filled with adoring wonder at the mercy of God in\nmaking of one so unworthy a monument of His grace. The one is as\nunlike the other as light is to darkness. What good men need to bear\nin mind is, that when they do make mention of the special goodness\nof God to them they should be most careful to do so in no boastful\nmood, but in the spirit of a most real, and not an assumed or formal,\nhumility. And seeing how ready the world is to misunderstand and\nmisrepresent the feeling, and to turn into a reproach what is done\nas a most sincere act of gratitude to God, it becomes them to be\ncautious how they introduce such topics among persons who have no\nsympathy with their view. \"Cast not your pearls before swine,\" said\nour Lord, \"lest they turn again and rend you.\" \"Come near,\" said the\nPsalmist, \"and hear, _all ye that fear God_, and I will declare what\nHe hath done for my soul.\"\n\nMidway between the two statements before us on the greatness and\nprosperity which God conferred on David, mention is made of his\nfriendly relations with the king of Tyre (ver. 11). The Ph\u0153nicians\nwere not included among the seven nations of Palestine whom the\nIsraelites were to extirpate, so that a friendly alliance with them\nwas not forbidden. It appears that Hiram was disposed for such an\nalliance, and David accepted of his friendly overtures. There is\nsomething refreshing in this peaceful episode in a history and in a\ntime when war and violence seem to have been the normal condition of\nthe intercourse of neighbouring nations. Tyre had a great genius for\ncommerce; and the spirit of commerce is alien from the spirit of war.\nThat it is always a nobler spirit cannot be said; for while commerce\n_ought_ to rest on the idea of mutual benefit, and many of its sons\nhonourably fulfil this condition, it often degenerates into the most\natrocious selfishness, and heeds not what havoc it may inflict on\nothers provided it derives personal gain from its undertakings. What\nan untold amount of sin and misery has been wrought by the opium\ntraffic, as well as by the traffic in strong drink, when pressed by\ncruel avarice on barbarous nations that have so often lost all of\nhumanity they possessed through the fire-water of the _Christian_\ntrader! But we have no reason to believe that there was anything\nspecially hurtful in the traffic which Tyre now began with Israel,\nalthough the intercourse of the two countries afterwards led to other\nresults pernicious to the latter--the introduction of Ph\u0153nician\nidolatry and the overthrow of pure worship in the greater part of\nthe tribes of Israel. Meanwhile what Hiram does is to send to David\ncedar trees, and carpenters, and masons, by means of whom a more\ncivilized style of dwelling is introduced; and the new city which\nDavid has commenced to build, and especially the house which is to\nbe his own, present features of skill and beauty hitherto unknown in\nIsrael. For, amid all his zeal for higher things, the young king of\nIsrael does not disdain to advance his kingdom in material comforts.\nOf these, as of other things of the kind, he knows well that they are\ngood if a man use them lawfully; and his effort is at once to promote\nthe welfare of the kingdom in the amenities and comforts of life,\nand to deepen that profound regard for God and that exalted estimate\nof His favour which will prevent His people from relying for their\nprosperity on mere outward conditions, and encourage them ever to\nplace their confidence in their heavenly Protector and King.\n\nWe pass by, as not requiring more comment than we have already\nbestowed on a parallel passage (2 Sam. iii. 2-5), the unsavoury\nstatement that \"David took to him more concubines and wives\" in\nJerusalem. With all his light and grace, he had not overcome the\nprevalent notion that the dignity and resources of a kingdom were to\nbe measured by the number and rank of the king's wives. The moral\nelement involved in the arrangement he does not seem to have at all\napprehended; and consequently, amid all the glory and prosperity that\nGod has given him, he thoughtlessly multiplies the evil that was to\nspread havoc and desolation in his house.\n\nWe proceed, therefore, to what occupies the remainder of this\nchapter--the narrative of his wars with the Philistines. Two\ncampaigns against these inveterate enemies of Israel are recorded,\nand the decisive encounter in both cases took place in the\nneighbourhood of Jerusalem.\n\nThe narrative is so brief that we have difficulty in apprehending all\nthe circumstances. The first invasion of the Philistines took place\nsoon after David was anointed king over all Israel. It is not said\nwhether this occurred before David possessed himself of Mount Zion,\nnor, considering the structure common in Hebrew narrative, does the\ncircumstance that in the history it follows that event prove that it\nwas subsequent to it in the order of time. On the contrary, there is\nan expression that seems hardly consistent with this idea. We read\n(ver. 17) that when David heard of the invasion he \"went _down_ into\nthe hold.\" Now, this expression could not be used of the stronghold\nof Zion, for that hill is on the height of the central plateau, and\ninvariably the Scriptures speak of \"going up to Zion.\" If he had\npossession of Mount Zion, he would surely have gone to it when the\nPhilistines took possession of the plain of Rephaim. The hold to which\nhe went down must have been in a lower position; indeed, \"the hold\"\nis the expression used of the place or places of protection to which\nDavid resorted when he was pursued by Saul (see 1 Sam. xxii. 4).\nFurther, when we turn to the twenty-third chapter of this book, which\nrecords some memorable incidents of the war with the Philistines, we\nfind (vers. 13, 14) that when the Philistines pitched in the valley\nof Rephaim David was in a hold near the cave of Adullam. The valley\nof Rephaim, or \"the giants,\" is an extensive plain to the south-west\nof Jerusalem, forming a great natural entrance to the city. When we\nduly consider the import of these facts, we see that the campaign was\nvery serious, and David's difficulties very great. The Philistines\nwere encamped in force on the summit of the plateau near the natural\nmetropolis of the country. David was encamped in a hold in the low\ncountry in the south-west, making use of that very cave of Adullam\nwhere he had taken refuge in his conflicts with Saul. This was far\nfrom a hopeful state of matters. To the eye of man, his position may\nhave appeared very desperate. Such an emergency was a fit time for a\nsolemn application to God for direction. \"David inquired of the Lord,\nsaying, Shall I go up to the Philistines? Wilt Thou deliver them into\nmine hand? And the Lord said unto David, Go up, for I will doubtless\ndeliver the Philistines into thine hand.\" Up, accordingly, David went,\nattacked the Philistines and smote them at a place called Baal-perazim,\nsomewhere most likely between Adullam and Jerusalem. The expression\n\"The Lord hath broken forth on mine enemies before me, as the breach\nof waters,\" seems to imply that He broke the Philistine host into two,\nlike flooded water breaking an embankment, preventing them from uniting\nand rallying, and sending them in two detachments into flight and\nconfusion. Considering the superior position of the Philistines, and\nthe great advantage they seem to have had over David in numbers also,\nthis was a signal victory, even though it did not reduce the foe to\nhelplessness.\n\nFor when the Philistines had got time to recover, they again came\nup, pitched again in the plain of Rephaim, and appeared to render\nunavailing the signal achievement of David at Baal-perazim. Again\nDavid inquired what he should do. The reply was somewhat different\nfrom before. David was not to go straight up to face the enemy, as\nhe had done before. He was to \"fetch a compass behind them,\" that\nis, as we understand it, to make a circuit, so as to get in the\nenemy's rear over against a grove of mulberry trees. That tree has\nnot yet disappeared from the neighbourhood of Jerusalem; a mulberry\ntree still marks the spot in the valley of Jehoshaphat where,\naccording to tradition, Isaiah was sawn asunder (Stanley's \"Sinai\nand Palestine\"). When he should hear \"the sound of a going\" (Revised\nVersion, \"the sound of a march\") in the tops of the mulberry trees,\nthen he was to bestir himself. It is difficult to conceive any\nnatural cause that should give rise to a sound like that of a march\n\"in the tops of the mulberry trees;\" but if not a natural, it must\nhave been a supernatural indication of some sound that would alarm\nthe Philistines and make the moment favourable for an attack. It is\nprobable that the presence of David and his troop in the rear of the\nPhilistines was not suspected, the mulberry trees forming a screen\nbetween them. When David got his opportunity, he availed himself\nof it to great advantage; he inflicted a thorough defeat on the\nPhilistines, and smiting them from Geba to Gazer, he appears to have\nall but annihilated their force. In this way, he gave the _coup de\ngr\u00e2ce_ to his former allies.\n\nWe have said that it appears to have been during these campaigns\nagainst the Philistines that the incidents took place which are\nrecorded fully in the twenty-third chapter of this book. It does not\nseem possible that these incidents occurred at or about the time when\nDavid was flying from Saul, at which time the cave of Adullam was\none of his resorts. Neither is it likely that they occurred during\nthe early years of David's reign, while he was yet at strife with\nthe house of Saul. At least, it is more natural to refer them to the\ntime when the Philistines, having heard that David had been anointed\nking over Israel, came up to seek David, although we do not consider\nit impossible that they occurred in the earlier period of his reign.\nThe record shows how wonderfully the spirit of David had passed into\nhis men, and what splendid deeds of courage were performed by them,\noften in the face of tremendous odds. We get a fine glimpse here of\none of the great sources of David's popularity--his extraordinary\n_pluck_ as we now call it, and readiness for the most daring\nadventures, often crowned with all but miraculous success. In all\nages, men of this type have been marvellous favourites with their\ncomrades. The annals of the British army, and still more the British\nnavy, contain many such records. And even when we go down to pirates\nand freebooters, we find the odium of their mode of life in many\ncases remarkably softened by the splendour of their valour, by their\nrunning unheard-of risks, and sometimes by sheer daring and bravery\nobtaining signal advantages over the greatest odds. The achievements\nof David's \"three mighties,\" as well as of his \"thirty,\" formed\na splendid instance of this kind of warfare. All that we know of\nthem is comprised within a few lines, but when we call to mind the\nenthusiasm that used to be awakened all over our own country by the\nachievements of Nelson and his officers, or more recently by General\nGordon, of China and Egypt, we can easily understand the thrilling\neffect which these wonderful tales of valour would have throughout\nall the tribes of Israel.\n\nThe personal affection for David and his heroes which would thus\nbe formed must have been very warm, nay, even enthusiastic. In the\ncase of David, whatever may have been true of the others, all the\ninfluence thus acquired was employed for the welfare of the nation\nand the glory of God. The supreme desire of his heart was that the\npeople might give all the glory to Jehovah, and derive from these\nbrilliant successes fresh assurances how faithful God was to His\npromises to Israel. Alike as a man of piety and a man of patriotism,\nhe made this his aim. Knowing as he did what was due to God, and\nanimated by a profound desire to render to God His due, he would have\nbeen horrified had he intercepted in his own person aught of the\nhonour and glory which were His. But for the people's sake also, as a\nman of patriotism, his desire was equally strong that God should have\nall the glory. What were military successes however brilliant to the\nnation, or a reputation however eminent, compared to their enjoying\nthe favour and friendship of God? Success--how ephemeral it was;\nreputation--as transient as the glow of a cloud beside the setting\nsun; but God's favour and gracious presence with the nation was a\nperpetual treasure, enlivening, healing, strengthening, guiding for\nevermore. \"Happy is that people that is in such a case; yea, happy is\nthat people whose God is the Lord.\"\n\n\n\n\n                             CHAPTER VIII.\n\n                  _THE ARK BROUGHT UP TO JERUSALEM._\n\n                             2 SAMUEL vi.\n\n\nThe first care of David when settled on the throne had been to obtain\npossession of the stronghold of Zion, on which and on the city which\nwas to surround it he fixed as the capital of the kingdom and the\ndwelling-place of the God of Israel. This being done, he next set\nabout bringing up the ark of the testimony from Kirjath-jearim, where\nit had been left after being restored by the Philistines in the early\ndays of Samuel. David's first attempt to place the ark on Mount Zion\nfailed through want of due reverence on the part of those who were\ntransporting it; but after an interval of three months the attempt\nwas renewed, and the sacred symbol was duly installed on Mount Zion,\nin the midst of the tabernacle prepared by David for its reception.\n\nIn bringing up the ark to Jerusalem, the king showed a commendable\ndesire to interest the whole nation, as far as possible, in the\nsolemn service. He gathered together the chosen men of Israel, thirty\nthousand, and went with them to bring up the ark from Baale of\nJudah, which must be another name for Kirjath-jearim, distant from\nJerusalem about ten miles. The people, numerous as they were, grudged\nneither the time, the trouble, nor the expense. A handful might have\nsufficed for all the actual labour that was required; but thousands\nof the chief people were summoned to be present, and that on the\nprinciple both of rendering due honour to God, and of conferring a\nbenefit on the people. It is not a handful of professional men only\nthat should be called to take a part in the service of religion;\nChristian people generally should have an interest in the ark of\nGod; and other things being equal, that Church which interests the\ngreatest number of people and attracts them to active work will not\nonly do most for advancing God's kingdom, but will enjoy most of\ninward life and prosperity.\n\nThe joyful spirit in which this service was performed by David\nand his people is another interesting feature of the transaction.\nEvidently it was not looked on as a toilsome service, but as a\nblessed festival, adapted to cheer the heart and raise the spirits.\nWhat was the precise nature of the service? It was to bring into\nthe heart of the nation, into the new capital of the kingdom, the\nark of the covenant, that piece of sacred furniture which had been\nconstructed nearly five hundred years before in the wilderness of\nSinai, the memorial of God's holy covenant with the people, and the\nsymbol of His gracious presence among them. In spirit it was bringing\nGod into the very midst of the nation, and on the choicest and most\nprominent pedestal the country now supplied setting up a constant\nmemento of the presence of the Holy One. Rightly understood, the\nservice could bring joy only to spiritual hearts; it could give\npleasure to none who had reason to dread the presence of God. To\nthose who knew Him as their reconciled Father and the covenant God\nof the nation, it was most attractive. It was as if the sun were\nagain shining on them after a long eclipse, or as if the father of\na loved and loving family had returned after a weary absence. God\nenthroned on Zion, God in the midst of Jerusalem--what happier or\nmore thrilling thought was it possible to cherish? God, the sun and\nshield of the nation, occupying for His residence the one fitting\nplace in all the land, and sending over Jerusalem and over all the\ncountry emanations of love and grace, full of blessing for all that\nfeared His name! The happiness with which this service was entered on\nby David and his people is surely the type of the spirit in which all\nservice to God should be rendered by those whose sins He has blotted\nout, and on whom He has bestowed the privileges of His children.\n\nBut the best of services may be gone about in a faulty way. There may\nbe some criminal neglect of God's will that, like the dead fly in\nthe apothecary's pot of ointment, causes the perfume to send forth a\nstinking savour. And so it was on this occasion. God had expressly\ndirected that when the ark was moved from place to place it should be\nborne on poles on the shoulders of the Levites, and never carried in a\ncart, like a common piece of furniture. But in the removal of the ark\nfrom Kirjath-jearim, this direction was entirely overlooked. Instead of\nfollowing the directions given to Moses, the example of the Philistines\nwas copied when they sent the ark back to Bethshemesh. The Philistines\nhad placed it in a new cart, and the men of Israel now did the same.\nWhat induced them to follow the example of the Philistines rather than\nthe directions of Moses, we do not know, and can hardly conjecture. It\ndoes not appear to have been a mere oversight. It had something of a\ndeliberate plan about it, as if the law given in the wilderness were\nnow obsolete, and in so small a matter any method might be chosen that\nthe people liked. It was substituting a heathen example for a Divine\nrule in the worship of God. We cannot suppose that David was guilty\nof deliberately setting aside the authority of God. On his part, it\nmay have been an error of inadvertence. But that somewhere there was\na serious offence is evident from the punishment with which it was\nvisited (1 Chron. xv. 13). The jagged bridlepaths of those parts are\nnot at all adapted for wheeled conveyances, and when the oxen stumbled,\nand the ark was shaken, Uzzah, who was driving the cart, put forth\nhis hand to steady it. \"The anger of God,\" we are told, \"was kindled\nagainst Uzzah; and God smote him there for his error; and there he\ndied by the ark of God.\" His effort to steady the ark must have been\nmade in a presumptuous way, without reverence for the sacred vessel.\nOnly a Levite was authorized to touch it, and Uzzah was apparently a\nman of Judah. The punishment may seem to us hard for an offence which\nwas ceremonial rather than moral; but in that economy, moral truth\nwas taught through ceremonial observances, and neglect of the one was\ntreated as involving neglect of the other. The punishment was like the\npunishment of Nadab and Abihu, the sons of Aaron, for offering strange\nfire in their censers. It may be that both in their case, and in the\ncase of Uzzah, there were unrecorded circumstances, unknown to us,\nmaking it clear that the ceremonial offence was not a mere accident,\nbut that it was associated with evil personal qualities well fitted to\nprovoke the judgment of God. The great lesson for all time is to beware\nof following our own devices in the worship of God when we have clear\ninstructions in His word how we are to worship Him.\n\nThis lamentable event put a sudden end to the joyful service. It\nwas like the bursting of a thunderstorm on an excursion party that\nrapidly sends every one to flight. And it is doubtful whether the\nspirit shown by David was altogether right. He was displeased\n\"because the Lord had made a breach upon Uzzah, and he called the\nname of the place Perez-uzzah to this day. And David was afraid of\nthe Lord that day and said, How shall the ark of the Lord come to\nme? So David would not remove the ark of the Lord into the city of\nDavid; but David carried it aside into the house of Obed-edom the\nGittite.\" The narrative reads as if David resented the judgment which\nGod had inflicted, and in a somewhat petulant spirit abandoned the\nenterprise because he found God too hard to please. That some such\nfeeling should have fluttered about his heart was not to be wondered\nat; but surely it was a feeling to which he ought not to have given\nentertainment, as it certainly was one on which he ought not to have\nacted. If God was offended, David surely knew that He must have had\ngood ground for being so. It became him and the people, therefore,\nto accept God's judgment, humble themselves before Him, and seek\nforgiveness for the negligent manner in which they had addressed\nthemselves to this very solemn service. Instead of this David throws\nup the matter in a fit of sullen temper, as if it were impossible to\nplease God in it, and the enterprise must therefore be abandoned. He\nleaves the ark in the house of Obed-edom the Gittite, returning to\nJerusalem crestfallen and displeased, altogether in a spirit most\nopposite to that in which he had set out.\n\nIt may happen to you that some Christian undertaking on which you\nhave entered with great zeal and ardour, and without any surmise\nthat you are not doing right, is not blessed, but meets with some\nrough shock, that places you in a very painful position. In the\nmost disinterested spirit, you have tried perhaps to set up in\nsome neglected district a school or a mission, and you expect all\nencouragement and approbation from those who are most interested in\nthe welfare of the district. Instead of receiving approval, you find\nthat you are regarded as an enemy and an intruder. You are attacked\nwith unexampled rudeness, sinister aims are laid to your charge,\nand the purpose of your undertaking is declared to be to hurt and\ndiscourage those whom you were bound to aid. The shock is so violent\nand so rude that for a time you cannot understand it. On the part of\nman it admits of no reasonable justification whatever. But when you\ngo into your closet, and think of the matter as permitted by God,\nyou wonder still more why God should thwart you in your endeavour\nto do good. Rebellious feelings hover about your heart that if God\nis to treat you in this way, it were better to abandon His service\naltogether. But surely no such feeling is ever to find a settled\nplace in your heart. You may be sure that the rebuff which God has\npermitted you to encounter is meant as a trial of your faith and\nhumility; and if you wait on God for further light and humbly ask a\ntrue view of God's will; if, above all, you beware of retiring in\nsullen silence from God's active service, good may come out of the\napparent evil, and you may yet find cause to bless God even for the\nshock that made you so uncomfortable at the time.\n\nThe Lord does not forsake His people, nor leave them for ever under\na cloud. It was not long before the downcast heart of David was\nreassured. When the ark had been left at the house of Obed-edom,\nObed-edom was not afraid to take it in. Its presence in other\nplaces had hitherto been the signal for disaster and death. Among\nthe Philistines, in city after city, at Bethshemesh, and now at\nPerez-uzzah, it had spread death on every side. Obed-edom was no\nsufferer. Probably he was a God-fearing man, conscious of no purpose\nbut that of honouring God. A manifest blessing rested on his house.\n\"The God of heaven,\" says Bishop Hall, \"pays liberally for His\nlodging.\" It is not so much God's ark in our time and country that\nneeds a lodging, but God's servants, God's poor, sometimes persecuted\nfugitives flying from an oppressor, very often pious men in foreign\ncountries labouring under infinite discouragements to serve God. The\nObed-edom who takes them in will not suffer. Even should he be put to\nloss or inconvenience, the day of recompense draweth nigh. \"I was a\nstranger, and ye took Me in.\"\n\nAgain, then, King David, encouraged by the experience of Obed-edom,\ngoes forth in royal state to bring up the ark to Jerusalem. The error\nthat had proved so fatal was now rectified. \"David said, None ought\nto carry the ark of God but the Levites, for them hath the Lord\nchosen to carry the ark of God and to minister unto Him for ever\" (1\nChron. xv. 2). In token of his humility and his conviction that every\nservice that man renders to God is tainted and needs forgiveness,\noxen and fatlings were sacrificed ere the bearers of the ark had\nwell begun to move. The spirit of enthusiastic joy again swayed the\nmultitude, brightened probably by the assurance that no judgment\nneed now be dreaded, but that they might confidently look for the\nsmile of an approving God. The feelings of the king himself were\nwonderfully wrought up, and he gave free expression to the joy of his\nheart. There are occasions of great rejoicing when all ceremony is\nforgotten, and no forms or appearances are suffered to stem the tide\nof enthusiasm as it gushes right from the heart. It was an occasion\nof this kind to David. The check he had sustained three months before\nhad only dammed up his feelings, and they rolled out now with all the\ngreater volume. His soul was stirred by the thought that the symbol\nof Godhead was now to be placed in his own city, close to his own\ndwelling; that it was to find an abiding place of rest in the heart\nof the kingdom, on the heights where Melchizedek had reigned, close\nto where he had blessed Abraham, and which God had destined as His\nown dwelling from the foundations of the world. Glorious memories\nof the past, mingling with bright anticipations of the future,\nrecollections of the grace revealed to the fathers, and visions of\nthe same grace streaming forth to distant ages, as generation after\ngeneration of the faithful came up here to attend the holy festivals,\nmight well excite that tumult of emotion in David's breast before\nwhich the ordinary restraints of royalty were utterly flung aside.\nHe sacrificed, he played, he sang, he leapt and danced before the\nLord, with all his might; he made a display of enthusiasm which the\ncold-hearted Michal, as she could not understand it nor sympathise\nwith it, had the folly to despise and the cruelty to ridicule. The\nordinary temper of the sexes was reversed--the man was enthusiastic;\nthe woman was cold. Little did she know of the springs of true\nenthusiasm in the service of God! To her faithless eye, the ark\nwas little more than a chest of gold, and where it was kept was of\nlittle consequence; her carnal heart could not appreciate the glory\nthat excelleth; her blind eye could see none of the visions that had\noverpowered the soul of her husband.\n\nA few other circumstances are briefly noticed in connection with the\nclose of the service, when the ark had been solemnly enshrined within\nthe tabernacle that David had reared for it on Mount Zion.\n\nThe first is that \"David offered burnt-offerings and peace-offerings\nbefore the Lord.\" The burnt-offering was a fresh memorial of sin, and\ntherefore a fresh confession that even in connection with that very\nholy service there were sins to be confessed, atoned for, and forgiven.\nFor there is this great difference between the service of the formalist\nand the service of the earnest worshipper: that while the one can\nsee nothing faulty in his performance, the other sees a multitude of\nimperfections in his. Clearer light and a clearer eye, even the light\nthrown by the glory of God's purity on the best works of man, reveal\na host of blemishes, unseen in ordinary light and by the carnal eye.\nOur very prayers need to be purged, our tears to be wept over, our\nrepentances repented of. Little could the best services ever done by\nhim avail the spiritual worshipper if it were not for the High-priest\nover the house of God who ever liveth to make intercession for him.\n\nAgain, we find David after the offering of the burnt-offerings and the\npeace-offerings \"blessing the people in the name of the Lord of hosts.\"\nThis was something more than merely expressing a wish or offering a\nprayer for their welfare. It was like the benediction with which we\nclose our public services. The benediction is more than a prayer. The\nservant of the Lord appears in the attitude of dropping on the heads\nof the people the blessing which he invokes. Not that he or any man can\nconvey heavenly blessings to a people that do not by faith appropriate\nthem and rejoice in them. But the act of benediction implies this:\nThese blessings are yours if you will only have them. They are\nprovided, they are made over to you, if you will only accept them. The\nlast act of public worship is a great encouragement to faith. When the\npeace of God that passeth all understanding, or the blessing of God the\nFather, Son and Holy Ghost, or the grace of the Lord Jesus Christ, and\nthe love of God, and the communion of the Holy Ghost are invoked over\nyour heads, it is to assure you that if you will but accept of them\nthrough Jesus Christ, these great blessings are actually yours. True,\nthere is no part of our service more frequently spoiled by formality;\nbut there is none richer with true blessing to faith. So when David\nblessed the people, it was an assurance to them that God's blessing\nwas within their reach; it was theirs if they would only take it. How\nstrange that any hearts should be callous under such an announcement;\nthat any should fail to leap to it, as it were, and rejoice in it, as\nglad tidings of great joy!\n\nThe third thing David did was to deal to every one of Israel, both\nman and woman, a loaf of bread, and a good piece of flesh, and a\nflagon of wine. It was a characteristic act, worthy of a bountiful\nand generous nature like David's. It may be that associating bodily\ngratifications with Divine service is liable to abuse, that the taste\nwhich it gratifies is not a high one, and that it tempts some men\nto attend religious services for the same reason as some followed\nJesus--for the loaves and fishes. Yet Jesus did not abstain on some\nrare occasions from feeding the multitude, though the act was\nliable to abuse. The example both of David and of Jesus may show us\nthat though not habitually, yet occasionally, it is both right and\nfitting that religious service should be associated with a simple\nrepast. There is nothing in Scripture to warrant the practice,\nadopted in some missions in very poor districts, of feeding the\npeople habitually when they come up for religious service, and there\nis much in the argument that such a practice degrades religion and\nobscures the glory of the blessings which Divine service is designed\nto bring to the poor. But occasionally the rigid rule may be somewhat\nrelaxed, and thus a sort of symbolical proof afforded that godliness\nis profitable unto all things, having promise of the life that now is\nand of that which is to come.\n\nThe last thing recorded of David is, that he returned to bless his\nhouse. The cares of the State and the public duties of the day\nwere not allowed to interfere with his domestic duty. Whatever may\nhave been his ordinary practice, on this occasion at least he was\nspecially concerned for his household, and desirous that in a special\nsense they should share the blessing. It is plain from this that,\namid all the imperfections of his motley household, he could not\nallow his children to grow up ignorant of God, thus dealing a rebuke\nto all who, outdoing the very heathen in heathenism, have houses\nwithout an altar and without a God. It is painful to find that the\nspirit of the king was not shared by every member of his family.\nIt was when he was returning to this duty that Michal met him and\naddressed to him these insulting words: \"How glorious was the king\nof Israel to-day, who uncovered himself to-day in the eyes of the\nhandmaids of his servants, as one of the vain fellows shamefully\nuncovers himself.\" On the mind of David himself, this ebullition\nhad no effect but to confirm him in his feeling, and reiterate his\nconviction that his enthusiasm reflected on him not shame but glory.\nBut a woman of Michal's character could not but act like an icicle\non the spiritual life of the household. She belonged to a class\nthat cannot tolerate enthusiasm in religion. In any other cause,\nenthusiasm may be excused, perhaps extolled and admired: in the\npainter, the musician, the traveller, even the child of pleasure;\nthe only persons whose enthusiasm is unbearable are those who are\nenthusiastic in their regard for their Saviour, and in the answer\nthey give to the question, \"What shall I render to the Lord for all\nHis benefits toward me?\" There are, doubtless, times to be calm,\nand times to be enthusiastic; but can it be right to give all our\ncoldness to Christ and all our enthusiasm to the world?\n\n\n\n\n                              CHAPTER IX.\n\n                     _PROPOSAL TO BUILD A TEMPLE._\n\n                             2 SAMUEL vii.\n\n\nThe spirit of David was essentially active and fond of work. He was\none of those who are ever pressing on, not content to keep things as\nthey are, moving personally towards improvement, and urging others\nto do the same. Even in Eastern countries, with their proverbial\nstillness and conservatism, such men are sometimes found, but they\nare far more common elsewhere. Great undertakings do not frighten\nthem; they have spirit enough for a lifetime of effort, they never\nseem weary of pushing on. When they look on the disorders of the\nworld they are not content with the languid utterance, \"Something\nmust be done;\" they consider what it is possible for them to do, and\ngird themselves to the doing of it.\n\nFor some time David seems to have found ample scope for his active\nenergies in subduing the Philistines and other hostile tribes that\nwere yet mingled with the Israelites, and that had long given them\nmuch annoyance. His friendship with Hiram of Tyre probably gave a\nnew impulse to his mind, and led him to project many improvements\nin Jerusalem and elsewhere. When all his enemies were quieted, and\nhe sat in his house, he began to consider to what work of internal\nimprovement he would now give his attention. Having recently removed\nthe Ark, and placed it in a tabernacle on Mount Zion, constructed\nprobably in accordance with the instructions given to Moses in the\nwilderness, he did not at first contemplate the erection of any\nother kind of building for the service of God. It was while he sat\nin his new and elegant house that the idea came into his mind that\nit was not seemly that he should be lodged in so substantial a home,\nwhile the Ark of God dwelt between curtains. Curtains might have\nbeen suitable, nay, necessary, in the wilderness, where the Ark had\nconstantly to be moved about; and even in the land of Israel, while\nthe nation was comparatively unsettled, curtains might still have\nbeen best; but now that a permanent resting-place had been found for\nthe Ark, was it right that there should be such a contrast between\nthe dwelling-place of David and the dwelling-place of God? It was\nthe very argument that was afterwards used by Haggai and Zechariah\nafter the return from captivity, to rouse the languid zeal of their\ncountrymen for the re-erection of the house of God. \"Is it time for\nyou, O ye, to dwell in your ceiled houses and this house lie waste?\"\n\nA generous heart, even though it be a godless one, is uncomfortable\nwhen surrounded by elegance and luxury, while starvation and misery\nprevail in its neighbourhood. We see in our day the working of this\nfeeling in those cases, unhappily too few, where men and women born\nto gold and grandeur feel wretched unless they are doing something\nto equalise the conditions of life by helping those who are born to\nrags and wretchedness. To the feelings of the godly a disreputable\nplace of worship, contrasting meanly with the taste and elegance of\nthe hall, or even the villa, is a pain and a reproach. There is not\nmuch need at the present day for urging the unseemliness of such a\ncontrast, for the tendency of our time is toward handsome church\nbuildings, and in many cases towards extravagance in the way of\nembellishment. What we have more need to look at is the disproportion\nof the sums paid by rich men, and even by men who can hardly be\ncalled rich, in gratifying their own tastes and in extending the\nkingdom of Christ. We are far from blaming those who, having great\nwealth, spend large sums from year to year on yachts, on equipages,\non picture galleries, on jewellery and costly furnishings. Wealth\nwhich remunerates honest and wholesome labour is not all selfishly\nthrown away. But it is somewhat strange that we hear so seldom of\nrich Christian men devoting their superfluous wealth to maintaining\na mission station with a whole staff of labourers, or to the rearing\nof colleges, or hospitals, or Christian institutions, which might\nprovide on a large scale for Christian activity in ways that might\nbe wonderfully useful. It is in this direction that there is most\nneed to press the example of David. When shall this new enlargement\nof Christian activity take place? Or when shall men learn that the\npleasure of spreading the blessings of the Gospel by the equipment\nand maintenance of a foreign missionary or mission station far\nexceeds anything to be derived from refinements and luxuries of which\nthey themselves are the object and the centre?\n\nWhen the thought of building a temple occurred to David, he conferred\non the subject with the prophet Nathan. The Scripture narrative\nis so brief that it gives us no information about Nathan, except\nin connection with two or three events in which he had a share.\nApparently he was a prophet of Jerusalem, on intimate terms with David,\nand perhaps attached to his court. When first consulted on the subject\nby the king, he gave him a most encouraging answer, but without having\ntaken any special steps to ascertain the mind of God. He presumed that\nas the undertaking was itself so good, and as David generally was so\nmanifestly under Divine guidance, nothing was to be said but that he\nshould go on. \"Nathan said to the king, Go, do all that is in thine\nheart, for the Lord is with thee.\" That same night, however, a message\ncame to Nathan that gave a new complexion to the proposal. He was\ninstructed to remind David, first, that God had never complained of\nHis tabernacle-dwelling from the day when He brought up the children\nof Israel to that hour, and had never given a hint that He desired a\nhouse of cedar. Further, he was commissioned to convey to David the\nassurance of God's continued interest and favour towards him--of that\ninterest which began by taking him from the sheepfold to make him king\nover Israel, and which had been shown continuously in the success\nwhich had been given him in all his enterprises, and the great name he\nhad acquired, entitling him to rank with the great men of the earth.\nTowards the nation of Israel, too, God was actuated by the same feeling\nof affectionate interest; they would be planted, set firm in a place\nof their own, delivered from the thraldom of enemies, and allowed to\nprosper and expand in peace and comfort. Still further--and this was a\nvery special blessing--Nathan was to inform David that, unlike Saul, he\nwas not to be the only one of his race to occupy the throne; his son\nwould reign after he was gathered to his fathers, the kingdom would\nbe established in his hands, and the throne of his kingdom would be\nestablished for ever. To this favoured son of his would be entrusted\nthe honour of building the temple, God would be his Father, and he\nwould be God's son. If he should fall into sin, he would be chastised\nfor his sin, but not destroyed. The Divine mercy would not depart from\nhim as it had departed from Saul. The kernel of the message was in\nthese gracious concluding words--\"Thine house and thy kingdom shall be\nestablished for ever before thee; thy throne shall be established for\never.\"\n\nHere, certainly, was a very remarkable message, containing both\nelements of refusal and elements of encouragement. The proposal which\nDavid had made to build a temple was declined. The time for a change,\nthough drawing near, had not yet arrived. The curtain-canopied\ntabernacle had been designed by God to wean His people from those\nsensuous ideas of worship to which the magnificent temples of Egypt\nhad accustomed them, and to give them the true idea of a spiritual\nservice, though not without the visible emblem of a present God.\nThe time had not yet arrived for changing this simple arrangement.\nGod could impart His blessing in the humble tent as well as in the\nstately temple. As long as it was God's pleasure to dwell in the\ntabernacle, so long might David expect that His grace would be\nimparted there. So we may say, that so long as it is manifestly\nGod's pleasure that a body of His worshippers shall occupy a humble\ntabernacle, so long may they expect that He will shine forth there,\nimparting that fulness of grace and blessing which is the true and\nonly glory of any place of worship.\n\nBut the message through Nathan contained also elements of\nencouragement, chiefly with reference to David's offspring, and to the\nstability and permanence of his throne. To appreciate the value of\nthis promise for the future, we must bear in mind the great insecurity\nof new dynasties in Eastern countries, and the fearful tragedies that\nwere often perpetrated to get rid of the old king's family, and prepare\nthe way for some ambitious and unscrupulous usurper.\n\nWe hardly need to recall the tragic end of Saul, the base murder of\nIshbosheth, or the painful deaths of Asahel and Abner. We have but to\nthink of what happened in the sister kingdom of the ten tribes, from\nthe death of the son of its first king, Jeroboam, on to its final\nextinction. What an awful record the history of that kingdom presents\nof conspiracies, murders, and massacres! How miserable a distinction\nit was to be of the seed royal in those days! It only made one the\nmore conspicuous a mark for the poisoned cup or the assassin's\ndagger. It associated with the highest families of the realm horrors\nand butcheries of which the poorest had no cause even to dream. Any\none who had been raised to a throne could not but sicken at the\nthought of the atrocities which his very elevation might one day\nbring upon his children. A new king could hardly enjoy his dignity\nbut by steeling his heart against every feeling of parental love.\n\nAnd, moreover, these constant changes of the royal family were very\nhurtful to the kingdom at large. They divided it into sections that\nraged against each other with terrible fury. For of all wars civil\nwars are the worst for the fierceness of the passions they evoke, and\nthe horrors which they inflict. Scotland and England too have had too\nmuch experience of these conflicts in other days. Many generations\nhave elapsed since they were ended, but we have many memorials\nstill of the desolation which they spread, while our progress and\nprosperity, ever since they passed away, show us clearly of what a\nmultitude of mercies they robbed the land.\n\nTo David, therefore, it was an unspeakable comfort to be assured that\nhis dynasty would be a stable dynasty; that his son would reign after\nhim; that a succession of princes would follow with unquestioned\nright to the throne; and that if his son, or his son's son, should\ncommit sins deserving of chastisement, that chastisement would not\nbe withheld, but it would not be fatal, it would bring the needed\ncorrection, and thus the throne would be secure for ever. A father\nnaturally desires peace and prosperity for his children, and if he\nextends his view down the generations, the desire is strong that it\nmay be well with them and with their seed for ever. But no father,\nin ordinary circumstances, can flatter himself that his posterity\nshall escape their share of the current troubles and calamities of\nlife. David, but for this assurance, must have looked forward to\nhis posterity encountering their share of those nameless horrors to\nwhich royal children were often born. It was an unspeakable privilege\nto learn, as he did now, that his dynasty would be alike permanent\nand secure; that, as a rule, his children would not be exposed to\nthe atrocities of Oriental successions; that they would be under\nthe special care and protection of God; that their faults would be\ncorrected without their being destroyed; and that this state of\nblessing would continue for ages and ages to come.\n\nThe emotions roused in David by this communication were\nalike delightful and exuberant. He takes no notice of the\ndisappointment--of his not being permitted to build the temple.\nAny regret that this might occasion is swallowed up by his delight\nin the store of blessing actually promised. And here we may see\na remarkable instance of God's way of dealing with His people's\nprayers. Virtually, if not formally, David had asked of God to permit\nhim to build a temple to His name. That petition, bearing though it\ndid very directly on God's glory, is not vouchsafed. God does not\naccord that privilege to David. But in refusing him that request,\nHe makes over to him mercies of far higher reach and importance. He\nrefuses his immediate request only to grant to him far above all\nthat he was able to ask or think. And how often does God do so!\nHow often, when His people are worrying and perplexing themselves\nabout their prayers not being answered, is God answering them in a\nfar richer way! Glimpses of this we see occasionally, but the full\nrevelation of it remains for the future. You pray to the degree of\nagony for the preservation of a beloved life; it is not granted;\nGod appears deaf to your cry; a year or two after, things happen\nthat would have broken your friend's heart or driven reason from its\nthrone; you understand now why God did not fulfil your petition. Oh\nfor the spirit of trust that shall never charge God foolishly! Oh\nfor the faith that does not make haste, but waits patiently for the\nLord,--waits for the explanation that shall come in the end, at the\nrevelation of Jesus Christ!\n\nIt is a striking scene that is presented to us when \"David went in,\nand sat before the Lord.\" It is the only instance in Scripture in\nwhich any one is said to have taken the attitude of sitting while\npouring his heart out to God. Yet the nature of the communion was\nin keeping with the attitude. David was like a child sitting down\nbeside his father, to think over some wonderfully kind expression of\nhis intentions to him, and pour out his full heart into his ear. We\nmay observe in the address of David how pervaded it is by the tone\nof wonder. This, indeed, is its great characteristic. He expresses\nwonder at the past, at God's selecting one obscure in family and\nobscure in person; he wonders at the present: How is it Thou hast\nbrought me thus far? and still more he wonders at the future, the\nprovision made for the stability of his house in all time coming.\n\"And is this the manner of man, O Lord God?\"[3] All true religious\nfeeling is pervaded by an element of wonder; it is this element that\nwarms and elevates it. In David's case it kindles intense adoration\nand gratitude, with reference both to God's dealings with himself\nand His dealings with Israel. \"What one nation in the earth is like\nThy people, even like Israel, whom God went to redeem for a people\nto Himself, and to make Him a name, and to do for you great things\nand terrible, for Thy land, before Thy people, which Thou redeemedst\nto Thee from Egypt, from the nations and their gods?\" This wonder\nat past goodness, moreover, begets great confidence for the future.\nAnd David warmly and gratefully expresses this confidence, and looks\nforward with exulting feelings to the blessings reserved for him and\nhis house. And finally he falls into the attitude of supplication,\nand prays that it may all come to pass. Not that he doubts God's\nword; the tone of the whole prayer is the tone of gratitude for the\npast and confidence in the future. But he feels it right to take up\nthe attitude of a suppliant, to show, as we believe, that it must\nall come of God's free and infinite mercy; that not one of all the\ngood things which God had promised could be claimed as a right, for\nthe least and the greatest were due alike to the rich grace of a\nsovereign God. \"Therefore now let it please Thee to bless the house\nof Thy servant, that it may continue for ever before Thee; for Thou,\nO Lord God, hast spoken it, and with Thy blessing let the house of\nThy servant be blessed for ever.\" Appropriate ending for a remarkable\nprayer! appropriate, too, not for David only, but for every Christian\npraying for his country, and for every Christian father praying for\nhis family! \"With Thy blessing,\" bestowed alike in mercy and in\nchastisement, in what Thou givest and in what Thou withholdest, but\nmaking all things work together for eternal good--\"With Thy blessing\nlet the house of Thy servant be blessed for ever.\"\n\nWe seem to see in this prayer the very best of David--much intensity\nof feeling, great humility, wondering gratitude, holy intimacy and\ntrust, and supreme satisfaction in the blessing of God. We see him\nwalking in the very light of God's countenance, and supremely happy.\nWe see Jacob's ladder between earth and heaven, and the angels of\nGod ascending and descending on it. Moreover, we see the infinite\nprivilege which is involved in having God for our Father, and in\nbeing able to realise that He is full of most fatherly feelings\nto us. The joy of David in this act of fellowship with God was\nthe purest of which human beings are capable. It was indeed a joy\nunspeakable and full of glory. Oh that men would but acquaint\nthemselves with God and be at peace! Let it be our aim to cherish as\nwarm sentiments of trust in God, and to look forward to the future\nwith equal satisfaction and delight.\n\nA very important question arises in connection with this chapter,\nto which we have not yet adverted, but which we cannot pass by.\nIn that promise of God respecting the stability of David's throne\nand the perpetual duration of his dynasty, was there any reference\nto the Messiah, any reference to the spiritual kingdom of which\nalone it could be said with truth that it was to last for ever? The\nanswer to this question is very plain, because some of the words\naddressed by God to David are quoted in the New Testament as having\na Messianic reference. \"To which of the angels said He at any time,\nI will be to him a Father, and he shall be to Me a son?\" (Heb. i.\n5). If we consider, too, how David's dynasty really came to an end\nas a reigning family some five hundred years after, we see that the\nlanguage addressed to him was not exhausted by the fortunes of his\nfamily. In the Divine mind the prophecy reached forward to the time\nof Christ, and only in Christ was it fully verified. And it seems\nplain from some words of St. Peter on the day of Pentecost that David\nunderstood this. He knew that \"God had sworn to him that of the fruit\nof his loins, according to the flesh, He would raise up Christ to sit\non His throne\" (Acts ii. 30). From the very exalted emotions which\nthe promise raised in his breast, and the enthusiasm with which he\npoured forth his thanksgivings for it, we infer that David saw in\nit far more than a promise that for generations to come his house\nwould enjoy a royal dignity. He must have concluded that the great\nhope of Israel was to be fulfilled in connection with his race. God's\nwords implied, that it was in His line the promise to Abraham was\nto be fulfilled--\"In thee and in thy seed shall all the nations of\nthe earth be blessed.\" He saw Christ's day afar off and was glad. To\nus who look back on that day the reasons for gladness and gratitude\nare far stronger than they were even to him. Then let us prize the\nglorious fact that the Son of David has come, even the Son of God,\nwho hath given us understanding that we may know Him that is true.\nAnd while we prize the truth, let us embrace the privilege; let us\nbecome one with Him in whom we too become sons of God, and with whom\nwe may cherish the hope of reigning for ever as kings and priests,\nwhen He comes to gather His redeemed that they may sit with Him on\nthe throne of His glory.\n\nFOOTNOTE:\n\n[3] The expression is very obscure, whether we take the affirmative\nform of the Revised Version or the interrogative form of the\nAuthorised Version. \"And this, too, after the manner of men, O Lord\nGod!\" (R.V.) We must choose between these opposite meanings. We\nprefer the interrogative form of the A.V. David's wonder being the\nmore excited that God's ways were here so much above man's.\n\n\n\n\n                              CHAPTER X.\n\n                            _FOREIGN WARS._\n\n                         2 SAMUEL viii. 1-14.\n\n\nThe transitions of the Bible, like those of actual life, are often\nsingularly abrupt; that which now hurries us from the scene of elevated\ncommunion with God to the confused noise and deadly struggles of the\nbattle-field is peculiarly startling. We are called to contemplate\nDavid in a remarkable light, as a professional warrior, a man of the\nsword, a man of blood; wielding the weapons of destruction with all\nthe decision and effect of the most daring commanders. That the sweet\nsinger of Israel, from whose tender heart those blessed words poured\nout to which the troubled soul turns for composure and peace, should\nhave been so familiar with the horrors of the battle-field, is indeed\na surprise. We can only say that he was led to regard all this rough\nwork as indispensable to the very existence of his kingdom, and to\nthe fulfilment of the great ends for which Israel had been called.\nPainful and miserable though it was in itself, it was necessary for\nthe accomplishment of greater good. The bloodthirsty spirit of these\nhostile nations would have swallowed up the kingdom of Israel, and\nleft no trace of it remaining. The promise to Abraham, \"In thee and in\nthy seed shall all the families of the earth be blessed,\" would have\nceased to have any basis for its fulfilment. Painful though it was to\ndeal death and destruction on every side, it would have been worse to\nsee the nation of Israel destroyed, and the foundation of the world's\ngreatest blessings swept for ever away.\n\nThe \"rest from all his enemies round about,\" referred to in the first\nverse of the seventh chapter, seems to refer to the nearer enemies\nof the kingdom, while the wars mentioned in the present chapter were\nmostly with enemies more remote. The most important of the wars now\nto be considered was directed against the occupants of that large\nterritory lying between Palestine and the Euphrates which God had\npromised to Abraham, although no command had been given to dispossess\nthe inhabitants, and therefore it could be held only in tributary\nsubjection. In some respects, David was the successor of Joshua as\nwell as of Moses. He had to continue Joshua's work of conquest, as\nwell as Moses' work of political arrangement and administration. The\nnations against whom he had now to go forth were most of them warlike\nand powerful; some of them were banded together in leagues against\nhim, rendering his enterprise very perilous, and such as could have\nbeen undertaken by no one who had not an immovable trust in God. The\ntwentieth Psalm seems to express the feelings with which the godly\npart of the nation would regard him as he went forth to these distant\nand perilous enterprises:--\n\n          The Lord answer thee in the day of trouble;\n          The name of the God of Jacob set thee up on high;\n          Send thee help from the sanctuary,\n          And strengthen thee out of Zion;\n          Remember all thy offerings,\n          And accept thy burnt-sacrifice;      [Selah\n          Grant thee thy heart's desire,\n          And fulfil all thy counsel.\n          We will triumph in thy salvation,\n          And in the name of our God we will set up our banners:\n          The Lord fulfil all thy petitions.\n          Now know I that the Lord saveth His anointed;\n          He will answer him from His holy heaven\n          With the saving strength of His right hand.\n          Some trust in chariots, and some in horses,\n          But we will make mention of the name of the Lord our God.\n          They are bowed down and fallen;\n          But we are risen, and stand upright.\n          Save, Lord;\n          Let the King answer us when we call.\n\nIt is an instructive fact that the history of these wars is given\nso shortly. A single verse is all that is given to most of the\ncampaigns. This brevity shows very clearly that another spirit than\nthat which moulded ordinary histories guided the composition of\nthis book. It would be beyond human nature to resist the temptation\nto describe great battles, the story of which is usually read with\nsuch breathless interest, and which gratify the pride of the people\nand reflect glory on the nation. It is not the object of Divine\nrevelation to furnish either brief annals or full details of wars\nand other national events, except in so far as they have a spiritual\nbearing--a bearing on the relation between God and the people. From\nfirst to last the purpose of the Bible is simply to unfold the\ndispensation of grace,--God's progress in revelation of His method of\nmaking an end of sin, and bringing in everlasting righteousness.\n\nWe shall briefly notice what is said regarding the different\nundertakings.\n\n1. The first campaign was against the Philistines. Not even their\ndisastrous discomfiture near the plain of Rephaim had taught\nsubmission to that restless people. On this occasion David carried\nthe war into their own country, and took some of their towns,\nestablishing garrisons there, as the Philistines had done formerly\nin the land of Israel. There is some obscurity in the words which\ndescribe one of his conquests. According to the Authorised Version,\n\"He took Metheg-ammah out of the hand of the Philistines.\" The\nRevised Version renders, \"He took the bridle of the mother city out\nof the hand of the Philistines.\" The parallel passage in 1 Chron.\nxviii. 1 has it, \"He took Gath and her towns out of the hand of the\nPhilistines.\" This last rendering is quite plain; the other passage\nmust be explained in its light. Gath, the city of King Achish, to\nwhich David had fled twice for refuge, now fell into his hands. The\nloss of Gath must have been a great humiliation to the Philistines;\nnot even Samson had ever inflicted on them such a blow. And the\npolicy that led David (it could hardly have been without painful\nfeelings) to possess himself of Gath turned out successful; the\naggressive spirit of the Philistines was now fairly subdued, and\nIsrael finally delivered from the attacks of a neighbour that had\nkept them for many generations in constant discomfort.\n\n2. His next campaign was against Moab. As David himself had at\none time taken refuge in Gath, so he had committed his father and\nmother to the custody of the king of Moab (1 Sam. xxii. 3, 4).\nJewish writers have a tradition that after a time the king put his\nparents to death, and that this was the origin of the war which he\ncarried on against them. That David had received from them some\nstrong provocation, and deemed it necessary to inflict a crushing\nblow for the security of that part of his kingdom, it seems hardly\npossible to doubt. Ingratitude was none of his failings, nor would\nhe who was so grateful to the men of Jabesh-gilead for burying Saul\nand his sons have been severe on Moab if Moab had acted the part\nof a true friend in caring for his father and mother. When we read\nof the severity practised on the army of Moab, we are shocked. And\nyet it is recorded rather as a token of forbearance than a mark of\nseverity. How came it that the Moabite army was so completely in\nDavid's power? Usually, as we have seen, when an army was defeated\nit was pursued by the victors, and in the course of the flight\na terrible slaughter ensued. But the Moabite army had come into\nDavid's power comparatively whole. This could only have been through\nsome successful piece of generalship, by which David had shut them\nup in a position where resistance was impossible. Many an Eastern\nconqueror would have put the whole army to the sword; David with a\nmeasuring line measured two-thirds for destruction and a full third\nfor preservation. Thus the Moabites in the south-east were subdued as\nthoroughly as the Philistines in the south-west, and brought tribute\nto the conqueror, in token of their subjection. The explanation of\nsome commentators that it was not the army, but the fortresses,\nof Moab that David dealt with is too strained to be for a moment\nentertained. It proceeds on a desire to make David superior to his\nage, on unwillingness to believe, what, however, lies on the very\nsurface of the story, that in the main features of his warlike policy\nhe fell in with the maxims and spirit of the time.\n\n3. The third of his campaigns was against Hadadezer, the son of\nRehob, king of Zobah. It is said in the chapter before us that\nthe encounter with this prince took place \"as he went to recover\nhis border at the river Euphrates;\" in the parallel passage of 1\nChronicles it is \"as he went to establish his dominion by the river\nEuphrates.\" The natural interpretation is, that David was on his way\nto establish his dominion by the river Euphrates, when this Hadadezer\ncame out to oppose him. The terms of the covenant of God with Abraham\nassigned to him the land \"from the river of Egypt to the great river,\nthe river Euphrates\" (Gen. xv. 18), and when the territory was again\ndefined to Joshua, its boundary was \"from the wilderness and this\nLebanon even unto the great river, the river Euphrates.\" Under the\nprovisions of this covenant, as made by Him whose is the earth and\nthe fulness thereof, David held himself entitled to fix the boundary\nof his dominion by the banks of the river. In what particular form he\ndesigned to do this, we are not informed; but whatever may have been\nhis purpose, Hadadezer set himself to defeat it. The encounter with\nHadadezer could not but have been serious to David, for his enemy had\na great force of military chariots and horsemen against whom he could\noppose no force of the same kind. Nevertheless, David's victory was\ncomplete; and in dealing with that very force in which he himself\nwas utterly deficient, he was quite triumphant; for he took from his\nopponent a thousand and seven hundred horsemen, as well as twenty\nthousand footmen. There must have been some remarkable stroke of\ngenius in this achievement, for nothing is more apt to embarrass and\nbaffle a commonplace general than the presence of an opposing force\nto which his army affords no counterpart.\n\n4. But though David had defeated Hadadezer, not far, as we suppose,\nfrom the base of Mount Hermon, his path to the Euphrates was by no\nmeans clear. Another body of Syrians, the Syrians of Damascus,\nhaving come from that city to help Hadadezer, seem to have been too\nlate for this purpose, and to have encountered David alone. This,\ntoo, was a very serious enterprise for David; for though we are\nnot informed whether, like Hadadezer, they had arms which the king\nof Israel could not match, it is certain that the army of so rich\nand civilized a state as Syria of Damascus would possess all the\nadvantages that wealth and experience could bestow. But in his battle\nwith them, David was again completely victorious. The slaughter\nwas very great--two-and-twenty thousand men. This immense figure\nillustrates our remark a little while ago: that the slaughter of\ndefeated and retreating armies was usually prodigious. So entire was\nthe humiliation of this proud and ancient kingdom, that \"the Syrians\nbecame servants to David, and brought presents,\" thus acknowledging\nhis suzerainty over them. Between the precious things that were thus\noffered to King David and the spoil which he took from captured\ncities, he brought to Jerusalem an untold mass of wealth, which he\nafterwards dedicated for the building of the Temple.\n\n5. In one case, the campaign was a peaceful one. \"When Toi, king of\nHamath, heard that David had smitten all the host of Hadadezer, then\nToi sent Joram his son unto King David to salute him and to bless\nhim, because he had fought against Hadadezer and had smitten him, for\nHadadezer had wars with Toi.\" The kingdom of Toi lay in the valley\nbetween the two parallel ranges of Lebanon and anti-Lebanon, and it\ntoo was within the promised boundary, which extended to \"the entering\nin of Hamath.\" Accordingly, the son of Toi brought with him vessels\nof silver, and vessels of gold, and vessels of brass; these also did\nKing David dedicate to the Lord. The fame of David as a warrior was\nnow such, at least in these northern regions, that further resistance\nseemed out of the question. Submission was the only course when the\nconqueror was evidently supported by the might of Heaven.\n\n6. In the south, however, there seems to have been more of a spirit of\nopposition. No particulars of the campaign against the Edomites are\ngiven; but it is stated that David put garrisons in Edom; \"throughout\nall Edom put he garrisons, and all the Edomites became servants to\nDavid.\" The placing of garrisons through all their country shows how\nobstinate these Edomites were, and how certain to have returned to\nfresh acts of hostility had they not been held in restraint by these\ngarrisons. From the introduction to Psalm lx. it would appear that the\ninsurrection of Edom took place while David was in the north contending\nwith the two bodies of Syrians that opposed him--the Syrians of Zobah\nand those of Damascus. It would appear that Joab was detached from the\narmy in Syria in order that he might deal with the Edomites. In the\nintroduction to the Psalm, twelve thousand of the Edomites are said to\nhave fallen in the Valley of Salt. In the passage now before us, it is\nsaid that eighteen thousand Syrians fell in that valley. The Valley of\nSalt is in the territory of Edom. It may be that a detachment of Syrian\ntroops was sent to aid the Edomites, and that both sustained a terrible\nslaughter. Or it may be that, as in Hebrew the words for Syria and Edom\nare very similar (\u05d0\u05e8\u05dd and \u05d0\u05d3\u05dd), the one word may by accident have been\nsubstituted for the other.\n\n7. Mention is also made of the Ammonites, the Amalekites, and the\nPhilistines as having been subdued by David. Probably in the case of\nthe Philistines and the Amalekites the reference is to the previous\ncampaign already recorded, while the Ammonite campaign may be the one\nof which we have the record afterwards. But the reference to these\ncampaigns is accompanied with no particulars.\n\nTwice in the course of this chapter we read that \"the Lord gave David\nvictory whithersoever he went.\" It does not appear, however, that the\nvictory was always purchased with ease, or the situation of David and\nhis armies free from serious dangers. The sixtieth Psalm, the title\nof which ascribes it to this period, makes very plain allusion to a\ntime of extraordinary trouble and disaster in connection with one of\nthese campaigns. \"O God, Thou hast cast us off; Thou hast scattered\nus; Thou hast been displeased: oh turn Thyself to us again.\" It is\nprobable that when David first encountered the Syrians he was put\nto great straits, his difficulty being aggravated by his distance\nfrom home and the want of suitable supplies. If the Edomites, taking\nadvantage of his difficulty, chose the time to make an attack on\nthe southern border of the kingdom, and if the king was obliged to\ndiminish his own force by sending Joab against Edom, with part of his\nmen, his position must have been trying indeed. But David did not let\ngo his trust in God; courage and confidence came to him by prayer,\nand he was able to say, \"Through God we shall do valiantly; for He it\nis that shall tread down all our enemies.\"\n\nThe effect of these victories must have been very striking. In the\nSong of the Bow, David had celebrated the public services of Saul,\nwho had \"clothed the daughters of Israel in scarlet, with other\ndelights, who had put on ornaments of gold on their apparel\"; but\nall that Saul had done for the kingdom was now thrown into the shade\nby the achievements of David. With all his bravery, Saul had never\nbeen able to subdue his enemies, far less to extend the limits of\nthe kingdom. David accomplished both; and it is the secret of the\ndifference that is expressed in the words, \"The Lord gave victory\nto David whithersoever he went.\" It is one of the great lessons\nof the Old Testament that the godly man can and does perform his\nduty better than any other man, because the Lord is with him: that\nwhether he be steward of a house, or keeper of a prison, or ruler\nof a kingdom, like Joseph; or a judge and lawgiver, like Moses; or\na warrior, like Samson, or Gideon, or Jephthah; or a king, like\nDavid, or Jehoshaphat, or Josiah; or a prime minister, like Daniel,\nhis godliness helps him to do his duty as no other man can do his.\nThis is especially a prominent lesson in the book of Psalms; it is\ninscribed on its very portals; for the godly man, as the very first\nPsalm tells us, \"shall be like a tree planted by the rivers of water,\nthat bringeth forth his fruit in his season; his leaf also shall not\nwither, and whatsoever he doeth shall prosper.\"\n\nIn these warlike expeditions, King David foreshadowed the spiritual\nconquests of the Son of David, who went forth \"conquering and to\nconquer,\" staggered for a moment, as in Gethsemane, by the rude shock\nof confederate enemies, but through prayer regaining his confidence\nin God, and triumphing in the hour and power of darkness. That noble\neffusion of fire and feeling, the sixty-eighth Psalm, seems to have\nbeen written in connection with these wars. The soul of the Psalmist\nis stirred to its depths; the majestic goings of Jehovah, recently\nwitnessed by the nation, have roused his most earnest feelings,\nand he strains every nerve to produce a like feeling in the people.\nThe recent exploits of the king are ranked with His doings when He\nmarched before His people through the wilderness, and Mount Sinai\nshook before Him. Great delight is expressed in God's having taken\nup His abode on His holy hill, in the exaltation of His people in\nconnection with that step, and likewise in looking forward to the\nfuture and anticipating the peaceful triumphs when \"princes should\ncome out of Egypt, and Ethiopia stretch forth her arms to God.\"\nBenevolent and missionary longings mingle with the emotions of the\nconqueror and the feelings of the patriot.\n\n          \"Sing unto the Lord, ye kingdoms of the earth;\n           Oh, sing praises unto the Lord,\n           To Him that rideth upon the heaven of heavens that are of\n               old.\n           Lo, He uttereth His voice, and that a mighty voice.\"\n\nIt is interesting to see how in this extension of his influence among\nheathen nations, the Psalmist began to cherish and express these\nmissionary longings, and to call on the nations to sing praises\nunto the Lord. It has been remarked that, in the ordinary course of\nProvidence, the Bible follows the sword, that the seed of the Gospel\nfalls into furrows that have been prepared by war. Of this missionary\nspirit we find many evidences in the Psalms. It was delightful to\nthe Psalmist to think of the spiritual blessings that were to spread\neven beyond the limits of the great empire that now owned the sway\nof the king of Israel. Mount Zion was to become the birth-place of\nthe nations; from Egypt and Babylonia, from Philistia, Tyre, and\nEthiopia, additions were to be made to her citizens (Ps. lxxxvii.).\n\"The people shall be gathered together, and the nations, to serve\nthe Lord\" (Ps. cii. 22). \"All the ends of the earth shall remember\nand turn to the Lord, and all the kindreds of the nations shall\nworship before Him\" (Ps. xxii. 27). \"All nations whom Thou hast made\nshall come and worship before Thee, O Lord; and they shall glorify\nThy name\" (Ps. lxxxvi. 9). \"Make a joyful noise unto the Lord, all ye\nlands. Enter into His gates with thanksgiving, and into His courts\nwith praise\" (Ps. c. 1, 4).\n\nAlas, the era of wars has not yet passed away. Even Christian nations\nhave been woefully slow to apply the Christian precept, \"Inasmuch\nas lieth in you, live peaceably with all men.\" But let us at least\nmake an earnest endeavour that if there must be war, its course may\nbe followed up by the heralds of mercy, and that wherever there may\noccur \"the battle of the warrior, and garments rolled in blood,\"\nthere also it may speedily be proclaimed, \"Unto us a Child is born,\nunto us a Son is given, and the government is on His shoulders: and\nHis name is called Wonderful, Counsellor, Mighty God, the Everlasting\nFather, Prince of Peace\" (Isa. ix. 6).\n\n\n\n\n                              CHAPTER XI.\n\n                   _ADMINISTRATION OF THE KINGDOM._\n\n                         2 SAMUEL viii. 15-18.\n\n\nIf the records of David's warlike expeditions are brief, still\nmore so are the notices of his work of peace. How he fulfilled his\nroyal functions when there was no war to draw him from home, and to\nengross the attention both of the king and his officers of state, is\ntold us here in the very briefest terms, barely affording even the\noutline of a picture. Yet it is certain that the activity of David's\ncharacter, his profound interest in the welfare of his people, and\nhis remarkable talent for administration, led in this department to\nvery conspicuous and remarkable results. Some of the Psalms afford\nglimpses both of the principles on which he acted, and the results\nat which he aimed, that are fitted to be of much use in filling up\nthe bare skeleton now before us. In this point of view, the subject\nmay become interesting and instructive, as undoubtedly it is highly\nimportant. For we must remember that it was with reference to the\nspirit in which he was to rule that David was called the man after\nGod's heart, and that he formed such a contrast to his predecessor.\nAnd further we are to bear in mind that in respect of the moral and\nspiritual qualities of his reign David had for his Successor the Lord\nJesus Christ. \"The Lord God will give unto Him the throne of His\nservant David,\" said the angel Gabriel to Mary, \"and He shall reign\nover the house of Judah for ever, and of His kingdom there shall be\nno end.\" It becomes us to make the most of what is told us of the\npeaceful administration of David's kingdom, in order to understand\nthe grounds on which our Lord is said to have occupied His throne.\n\nThe first statement in the verses before us is comprehensive and\nsuggestive: \"And David reigned over all Israel; and David executed\njudgment and justice unto all his people.\" The first thing pointed\nout to us here is the catholicity of his kingly government, embracing\n_all_ Israel, _all_ people. He did not bestow his attention on one\nfavoured section of the people, to the neglect or careless oversight\nof the rest. He did not, for example, seek the prosperity of his own\ntribe, Judah, to the neglect of the other eleven. In a word, there was\nno favouritism in his reign. This is not to say that he did not like\nsome of his subjects better than the rest. There is every reason to\nbelieve that he liked the tribe of Judah best. But whatever preferences\nof this kind he may have had--and he would not have been man if he\nhad had none--they did not limit or restrict his royal interest; they\ndid not prevent him from seeking the welfare of every portion of the\nland, of every section of the people. Just as, in the days when he was\na shepherd, there were probably some of his sheep and lambs for which\nhe had a special affection, yet that did not prevent him from studying\nthe welfare of the whole flock and of every animal in it with most\nconscientious care; so was it with his people. The least interesting of\nthem were sacred in his eyes. They were part of his charge, and they\nwere to be studied and cared for in the same manner as the rest. In\nthis he reflected that universality of God's care on which we find the\nPsalmist dwelling with such complacency: \"The Lord is good to all; and\nHis tender mercies are over all His works. The eyes of all wait upon\nThee; and Thou givest them their meat in due season. Thou openest Thine\nhand, and satisfiest the desire of every living thing.\" And may we not\nadd that this quality of David's rule foreshadowed the catholicity of\nChrist's kingdom and His glorious readiness to bestow blessing on every\nside? \"Come unto Me, all ye that labour and are heavy-laden, and I will\ngive you rest.\" \"On the last, that great day of the feast, Jesus stood\nand cried, If any man thirst, let him come unto Me and drink.\" \"Where\nthere is neither Jew nor Greek, circumcision nor uncircumcision, bond\nnor free; but Christ is all and in all.\" \"Ye are all one in Christ\nJesus.\"\n\nIn the next place, we have much to learn from the statement that the\nmost prominent thing that David did was to \"execute judgment and\njustice to the people.\" That was the solid foundation on which all\nhis benefits rested. And these words are not words of form or words\nof course. For it is never said that Saul did anything of the kind.\nThere is nothing to show that Saul was really interested in the\nwelfare of the people, or that he took any pains to secure that just\nand orderly administration on which the prosperity of his kingdom\ndepended. And most certainly they are not words that could have been\nused of the ordinary government of Oriental kings. Tyranny, injustice,\noppression, robbery of the poor by the rich, government by favourites\nmore cruel and unprincipled than their masters, imprisonments, fines,\nconspiracies, and assassinations, were the usual features of Eastern\ngovernment. And to a great extent they are features of the government\nof Syria and other Eastern countries even at the present day. It\nis in vivid contrast to all these things that it is said, \"David\nexecuted judgment and justice.\" Perhaps there is no need for assigning\na separate meaning to each of these words; they may be regarded as\njust a forcible combination to denote the all-pervading justice which\nwas the foundation of the whole government. He was just in the laws\nwhich he laid down, and just in the decisions which he gave. He was\ninaccessible to bribes, proof against the influence of the rich and\npowerful, and deaf in such matters to every plea of expediency; he\nregarded nothing but the scales of justice. What confidence and comfort\nan administration of this kind brought may in some measure be inferred\nfrom the extraordinary satisfaction of many an Eastern people at this\nday when the administration of justice is committed even to foreigners,\nif their one aim will be to deal justly with all. On this foundation,\nas on solid rock, a ruler may go on to devise many things for the\nwelfare of his people. But apart from this any scheme of general\nimprovement which may be devised is sure to be a failure, and all the\nmoney and wisdom and practical ability that may be expended upon it\nwill only share the fate of the numberless cart-loads of solid material\nin the \"Pilgrim's Progress\" that were cast into the Slough of Despond.\n\nThis idea of equal justice to all, and especially to those who had no\nhelper, was a very beautiful one in David's eyes. It gathered round it\nthose bright and happy features which in the seventy-second Psalm are\nassociated with the administration of another King. \"Give the king Thy\njudgments, O God, and Thy righteousness to the king's son. He shall\njudge Thy people with righteousness, and Thy poor with judgment.\" The\nbeauty of a just government is seen most clearly in its treatment of\nthe poor. It is the poor who suffer most from unrighteous rulers. Their\nfeebleness makes them easier victims. Their poverty prevents them from\ndealing in golden bribes. If they have little individually wherewith\nto enrich the oppressor, their numbers make up for the small share of\neach. Very beautiful, therefore, is the government of the king who\n\"shall judge the poor of the people, who shall save the children of the\nneedy, and shall break in pieces the oppressor.\" The thought is one on\nwhich the Psalmist dwells with great delight. \"He shall deliver the\nneedy when he crieth, the poor also, and him that hath no helper. He\nshall spare the poor and needy, and shall save the souls of the needy.\nHe shall redeem their soul from deceit and violence, and precious shall\ntheir blood be in his sight.\" So far from need and poverty repelling\nhim, they rather attract him. His interest and his sympathy are moved\nby the cry of the destitute. He would fain lighten the burdens that\nweigh them down so heavily, and give them a better chance in the\nstruggle of life. He would do something to elevate their life above the\nlevel of mere hewers of wood and drawers of water. He recognises fully\nthe brotherhood of man.\n\nAnd in all this we find the features of that higher government of\nDavid's Son which shows so richly His most gracious nature. The cry\nof sorrow and need, as it rose from this dark world, did not repel,\nbut rather attracted, Him. Though the woes of man sprang from his own\nmisdeeds, He gave Himself to bear them and carry their guilt away.\nAll were in the lowest depths of spiritual poverty, but for that\nreason His hand was the more freely offered for their help. The one\ncondition on which that help was given was, that they should own\ntheir poverty, and acknowledge Him as their Benefactor, and accept\nall as a free gift at His hands.\n\nBut more than that, the condition of the poor in the natural sense\nwas very interesting to Jesus. It was with that class He threw in\nHis lot. It was among them He lived; it was their sorrows and trials\nHe knew by personal experience; it was their welfare for which He\nlaboured most. Always accessible to every class, most respectful\nto the rich, and ever ready to bestow His blessings wherever they\nwere prized, yet it was true of Christ that \"He spared the poor and\nneedy and saved the souls of the needy.\" And in a temporal point\nof view, one of the most striking effects of Christ's religion is,\nthat it has so benefited, and tends still more to benefit, the poor.\nSlavery and tyranny are among its most detested things. Regard for\nman as man is one of its highest principles. It detects the spark of\nDivinity in every human soul, grievously overlaid with the scum and\nfilth of the world; and it seeks to cleanse and brighten it, till\nit shine forth in clear and heavenly lustre. It is a most Christian\nthought that the gems in the kingdom of God are not to be found\nmerely where respectability and culture disguise the true spiritual\ncondition of humanity, but even among those who outwardly are lost\nand disreputable. Not the least honourable of the reproachful terms\napplied to Jesus was--\"the Friend of publicans and sinners.\"\n\nWe are not to think of David, however, as being satisfied if he\nmerely secured justice to the poor and succeeded in lightening their\nyoke. His ulterior aim was to fill his kingdom with active, useful,\nhonourable citizens. This is plain from the beautiful language of\nsome of the Psalms. Both for old and young, he had a beautiful\nideal. \"The righteous shall flourish as the palm tree; he shall\ngrow like a cedar in Lebanon. Those that be planted in the house of\nthe Lord shall flourish in the courts of our God. They shall still\nbring forth fruit in old age; they shall be fat and flourishing\"\n(Ps. xcii. 12-14). And so for the young his desire was--\"That our\nsons may be as plants, grown up in their youth; that our daughters\nmay be as corner-stones, polished after the similitude of a palace.\"\nMoral beauty, and especially the beauty of active and useful lives,\nwas the great object of his desire. Can anything be better or more\nenlightened as a royal policy than that which we thus see to have\nbeen David's--in the first place, a policy of universal justice; in\nthe second place, of special regard for those who on the one hand are\nmost liable to oppression and on the other are most in need of help\nand encouragement; and in the third place, a policy whose aim is to\npromote excellence of character, and to foster in the young those\ngraces and virtues which wear longest, which preserve the freshness\nand enjoyment of life to the end, and which crown their possessors,\neven in old age, with the respect and the affection of all?\n\nThe remaining notices of David's administration in the passage before\nus are simply to the effect that the government consisted of various\ndepartments, and that each department had an officer at its head.\n\n1. There was the military department, at the head of which was Joab,\nor rather he was over \"the host\"--the great muster of the people\nfor military purposes. A more select body, \"the Cherethites and the\nPelethites,\" seems to have formed a bodyguard for the king, or a band\nof household troops, and was under a separate commander. The troops\nforming \"the host\" were divided into twelve courses of twenty-four\nthousand each, regularly officered, and for one month of the year the\nofficers of one of the courses, and probably the people, or some of\nthem, attended on the king at Jerusalem (1 Chron. xxvii. 1). Of the\nmost distinguished of his soldiers who excelled in feats of personal\nvalour, David seems to have formed a legion of honour, conspicuous\namong whom were the thirty honourable, and the three who excelled in\nhonour (2 Sam. xxiii. 28). It is certain that whatever extra power\ncould be given by careful organization to the fighting force of the\ncountry, the army of Israel under David possessed it in the fullest\ndegree.\n\n2. There was the civil department, at the head of which were\nJehoshaphat the recorder and Seraiah the scribe or secretary. While\nthese were in attendance on David at Jerusalem, they did not supersede\nthe ordinary home rule of the tribes of Israel. Each tribe had still\nits prince or ruler, and continued, under a general superintendence\nfrom the king, to conduct its local affairs (1 Chron. xxvii. 16-22).\nThe supreme council of the nation continued to assemble on occasions\nof great national importance (1 Chron. xxviii. 1), and though its\ninfluence could not have been so great as it was before the institution\nof royalty, it continued an integral element of the constitution, and\nin the time of Rehoboam, through its influence and organization (1\nKings xii. 3, 16), the kingdom of the ten tribes was set up, almost\nwithout a struggle (1 Chron. xxiii. 4). This home-rule system, besides\ninteresting the people greatly in the prosperity of the country,\nwas a great check against the abuse of the royal authority; and it\nis a proof that the confidence of Rehoboam in the stability of his\ngovernment, confirmed perhaps by a superstitious view of that promise\nto David, must have been an absolute infatuation, the product of utter\ninexperience on his part, and of the most foolish counsel ever tendered\nby professional advisers.\n\n3. Ecclesiastical administration. The capture of Jerusalem and its\nerection into the capital of the kingdom made a great change in\necclesiastical arrangements. For some time before it would have been\nhard to tell where the ecclesiastical capital was to be found. Shiloh\nhad been stripped of its glory when Ichabod received his name, and\nthe Philistine armies destroyed the place. Nob had shared a similar\nfate at the hands of Saul. The old tabernacle erected by Moses in\nthe wilderness was at Gibeon (1 Chron. xxi. 29), and remained there\neven after the removal of the ark to Zion (1 Kings iii. 4). At\nHebron, too, there must have been a shrine while David reigned there.\nBut from the time when David brought up the ark to Jerusalem, that\ncity became the greatest centre of the national worship. There the\nservices enjoined by the law of Moses were celebrated; it became the\nscene of the great festivals of Passover, Pentecost, and Tabernacles.\n\nWe are told that the heads of the ecclesiastical department were\nZadok the son of Ahitub and Ahimelech the son of Abiathar. These\nrepresented the elder and the younger branches of the priesthood.\nZadok was the lineal descendant of Eleazar, Aaron's son (1 Chron.\nvi. 12), and was therefore the constitutional successor to the\nhigh-priesthood. Ahimelech the son of Abiathar represented the\nfamily of Eli, who seems to have been raised to the high-priesthood\nout of order, perhaps in consequence of the illness or incompetence\nof the legitimate high-priest. It is of some interest to note the\nfact that under David two men were at the head of the priesthood,\nmuch as it was in the days of our Lord, when Annas and Caiaphas are\neach called the high-priest. The ordinary priests were divided into\nfour-and-twenty courses, and each course served in its turn for a\nlimited period, an arrangement which still prevailed in the days of\nZacharias, the father of John the Baptist. A systematic arrangement\nof the Levites was likewise made; some were allocated to the service\nof the Temple, some were porters, some were singers, and some were\nofficers and judges. Of the six thousand who filled the last-named\noffice, \"chief fathers\" as they were called, nearly a half were\nallocated among the tribes east of the Jordan, as being far from the\ncentre, and more in need of oversight. It is probable that this large\nbody of Levites were not limited to strictly judicial duties, but\nthat they performed important functions in other respects, perhaps as\nteachers, physicians, and registrars. It is not said that Samuel's\nschools of the prophets received any special attention, but the deep\ninterest that David must have taken in Samuel's work, and his early\nacquaintance with its effects, leave little room to doubt that these\ninstitutions were carefully fostered, and owed to David some share of\nthe vitality which they continued to exhibit in the days of Elijah\nand Elisha. It is very probable that the prophets Gad and Nathan were\nconnected with these institutions.\n\nIt is scarcely possible to say how far these careful ecclesiastical\narrangements were instrumental in fostering the spirit of genuine\npiety. But there is too much reason to fear that even in David's time\nthat element was very deficient. The bursts of religious enthusiasm\nthat occasionally rolled over the country were no sure indications of\npiety in a people easily roused to temporary gushes of feeling, but\ndeficient in stability. There often breathes in David's psalms a sense\nof loneliness, a feeling of his being a stranger on the earth, that\nseems to show that he wanted congenial company, that the atmosphere was\nnot of the godly quality he must have wished. The bloody Joab was his\nchief general, and at a subsequent period the godless Ahithophel was\nhis chief counsellor. It is even probable that the intense piety of\nDavid brought him many secret enemies. The world has no favour for men,\nbe they kings or priests, that repudiate all compromise in religion,\nand insist on God being regarded with supreme and absolute honour.\nWhere religion interferes with their natural inclinations and lays them\nunder inviolable obligations to have regard to the will of God, they\nrebel in their hearts against it, and they hate those who consistently\nuphold its claims. The nation of Israel appears to have been pervaded\nby an undercurrent of dislike to the eminent holiness of David, which,\nthough kept in check by his distinguished services and successes, at\nlast burst out with terrific violence in the rebellion of Absalom. That\nvillainous movement would not have had the vast support it received,\nespecially in Jerusalem, if even the people of Judah had been saturated\nwith the spirit of genuine piety. We cannot think much of the piety of\na people that rose up against the sweet singer of Israel and the great\nbenefactor of the nation, and that seemed to anticipate the cry, \"Not\nthis man, but Barabbas.\"\n\nThe systematic administration of his kingdom by King David was the\nfruit of a remarkable faculty of orderly arrangement that belonged\nto most of the great men of Israel. We see it in Abraham, in his\nprompt and successful marshalling of his servants to pursue and\nattack the kings of the East when they carried off Lot; we see it in\nJoseph, first collecting and then distributing the stores of food in\nEgypt; in Moses, conducting that marvellous host in order and safety\nthrough the wilderness; and, in later times, in Ezra and Nehemiah,\nreducing the chaos which they found at Jerusalem to a state of order\nand prosperity which seemed to verify the vision of the dry bones.\nWe see it in the Son of David, in the orderly way in which all His\narrangements were made: the sending forth of the twelve Apostles and\nthe seventy disciples, the arranging of the multitude when He fed the\nfive thousand, and the careful gathering up of the fragments \"that\nnothing be lost.\" In the spiritual kingdom, a corresponding order is\ndemanded, and times of peace and rest in the Church are times when this\ndevelopment is specially to be studied. Spiritual order, spiritual\nharmony: God in His own place, and self, with all its powers and\ninterests, as well as our brethren, our neighbours, and the world,\nall in their's--this is the great requisite in the individual heart.\nThe development of this holy order in the _individual_ soul; the\ndevelopment of _family_ graces, the due Christian ordering of homes;\nthe development of _public_ graces--patriotism, freedom, godliness, in\nthe State, and in the Church of the spirit that seeks the instruction\nof the ignorant, the recovery of the erring, the comforting of the\nwretched, and the advancement everywhere of the cause of Christ--in\na word, the increase of spiritual wealth--these very specially are\nobjects to which in all times, but especially in quiet times, all\nhearts and energies should be turned. What can be more honourable,\nwhat can be more blessed, than to help in advancing these? More life,\nmore grace, more prayer, more progress, more missionary ardour, more\nself-denying love, more spiritual beauty--what higher objects can the\nChristian minister aim at? And how better can the Christian king or\nthe Christian statesman fulfil and honour his office than by using his\ninfluence, so far as he legitimately may, in furthering the virtues and\nhabits characteristic of men that fear God while they honour the king?\n\n\n\n\n                             CHAPTER XII.\n\n                       _DAVID AND MEPHIBOSHETH._\n\n                             2 SAMUEL ix.\n\n\nThe busy life which King David was now leading did not prevent memory\nfrom occasionally running back to his early days and bringing before\nhim the friends of his youth. Among these remembrances of the past,\nhis friendship and his covenant with Jonathan were sure to hold a\nconspicuous place. On one of these occasions the thought occurred\nto him that possibly some descendant of Jonathan might still be\nliving. He had been so completely severed from his friend during\nthe last years of his life, and the unfortunate attempt on the part\nof Ishbosheth had made personal intercourse so much more difficult,\nthat he seems not to have been aware of the exact state of Jonathan's\nfamily. It is evident that the survival of any descendant of his\nfriend was not publicly known, and probably the friends of the youth\nwho was discovered had thought it best to keep his existence quiet,\nbeing of those who would give David no credit for higher principles\nthan were current between rival dynasties. Even Michal, Jonathan's\nsister, does not seem to have known that a son of his survived. It\nbecame necessary, therefore, to make a public inquiry of his officers\nand attendants. \"Is there yet any that is left of the house of\nSaul, that I may show him kindness for Jonathan's sake?\" It was not\nessential that he should be a child of Jonathan's; any descendant of\nSaul's would have been taken for Jonathan's sake.\n\nIt is a proof that the bloody wars in which he had been engaged had\nnot destroyed the tenderness of his heart, that the very chapter\nwhich follows the account of his battles opens with a yearning of\naffection--a longing for an outlet to feelings of kindness. It\nis instructive, too, to find the proof of love to his neighbour\nsucceeding the remarkable evidence of supreme regard to the honour of\nGod recently given in the proposal to build a temple. This period of\nDavid's life was its golden era, and it is difficult to understand\nhow the man that was so remarkable at this time for his regard\nfor God and his interest in his neighbour should soon afterwards\nhave been betrayed into a course of conduct that showed him most\ngrievously forgetful of both.\n\nThis proceeding of David's in making inquiry for a fit object of\nbeneficence may afford us a lesson as to the true course of enlightened\nkindness. Doubtless David had numberless persons applying for a share\nof his bounty; yet he makes inquiry for a new channel in which it may\nflow. The most clamorous persons are seldom the most deserving, and if\na bountiful man simply recognises, however generously, even the best of\nthe cases that press themselves on his notice, he will not be satisfied\nwith the result; he will feel that his bounty has rather been frittered\naway on miscellaneous undertakings, than that it has achieved any solid\nand satisfying result. It is easy for a rich man to fling a pittance to\nsome wretched-looking creature that whines out a tale of horror in his\near; but this may be done only to relieve his own feelings, and harm\ninstead of good may be the result. Enlightened benevolence aims at\nsomething higher than the mere relief of passing distress. Benevolent\nmen ought not to lie at the mercy either of the poor who ask their\ncharity, or of the philanthropic Christians who appeal for support to\ntheir schemes. Pains must be taken to find out the deserving, to find\nout those who have the strongest claim. Even the open-handed, whose\npurse is always at hand, and who are ready for every good work, may be\nneglecting some case or class of cases which have far stronger claims\non them than those which are so assiduously pressed on their notice.\n\nAnd hence we may see that it is right and fitting, especially in\nthose to whom Providence has given much, to cast over in their minds,\nfrom time to time, the state of their obligations, and think whether\namong old friends, or poor relations, or faithful but needy servants\nof God, there may not be some who have a claim on their bounty. There\nare other debts besides money debts it becomes you to look after. In\nyouth, perhaps, you received much kindness from friends and relatives\nwhich at the time you could not repay; but now the tables are turned;\nyou are prosperous, they or their families are needy. And these cases\nare apt to slip out of mind. It is not always hard-heartedness that\nmakes the prosperous forget the less fortunate; it is often utter\nthoughtlessness. It is the neglect of that rule which has such a\npowerful though silent effect when it is carried out--Put yourself\nin their place. Imagine how you would feel, strained and worried to\nsleeplessness through narrow means, and seeing old friends rolling\nin wealth, who might, with little or no inconvenience, lighten the\nburden that is crushing you so painfully. It is a strange thing that\nthis counsel should be more needed by the rich than by the poor.\nThoughtlessness regarding his neighbours is not a poor man's vice.\nThe empty house is remembered, even though it costs a sacrifice to\nsend it a little of his own scanty supplies. Few men are so hardened\nas not to feel the obligation to show kindness when that obligation\nis brought before them. What we urge is, that no one should lie at\nthe mercy of others for bringing his obligations before him. Let him\nthink for himself; and especially let him cast his eye round his own\nhorizon, and consider whether there be not some representatives of\nold friends or old relations to whom kindness ought to be shown.\n\nTo return to the narrative. The history of Mephibosheth, Jonathan's\nson, had been a sad one. When Israel was defeated by the Philistines\non Mount Gilboa, and Saul and Jonathan were slain, he was but an\ninfant; and his nurse, terror-stricken at the news of the disaster,\nin her haste to escape had let him fall, and caused an injury which\nmade him lame for life. What the manner of his upbringing was, we\nare not told. When David found him, he was living with Machir, the\nson of Ammiel, of Lo-debar, on the other side of the Jordan, in\nthe same region where his uncle Ishbosheth had tried to set up his\nkingdom. Mephibosheth became known to David through Ziba, a servant\nof Saul's, a man of more substance than principle, as his conduct\nshowed at a later period of his life. Ziba, we are told, had fifteen\nsons and twenty servants. He seems to have contrived to make himself\ncomfortable notwithstanding the wreck of his master's fortunes, more\ncomfortable than Mephibosheth, who was living in another man's house.\n\nThere seems to have been a surmise among David's people that this\nZiba could tell something of Jonathan's family; but evidently he\nwas not very ready to do so; for it was only to David himself that\nwhen sent for he gave the information, and that after David had\nemphatically stated his motive--not to do harm, but to show kindness\nfor Jonathan's sake. The existence of Mephibosheth being thus made\nknown, he is sent for and brought into David's presence. And we\ncannot but be sorry for him when we mark his abject bearing in the\npresence of the king. When he was come unto David, \"he fell on his\nface and did reverence.\" And when David explained his intentions,\n\"he bowed himself and said, What is thy servant, that thou shouldest\nlook on such a dead dog as I am?\" Naturally of a timid nature, and\nweakened in nerve by the accident of his infancy, he must have grown\nup under great disadvantages. His lameness excluded him from sharing\nin any youthful game or manly exercise, and therefore threw him\ninto the company of the women who, like him, tarried at home. What\nhe had heard of David had not come through a friendly channel, had\ncome through the partisans of Saul, and was not likely to be very\nfavourable. He was too young to remember the generous conduct of\nDavid in reference to his father and grandfather; and those who were\nabout him probably did not care to say much about it.\n\nAccustomed to think that his wisest course was to conceal from David\nhis very existence, and looking on him with the dread with which\nthe family of former kings regarded the reigning monarch, he must\nhave come into his presence with a strange mixture of feeling. He\nhad a profound sense of the greatness which David had achieved and\nthe honour implied in his countenance and fellowship. But there was\nno need for his humbling himself so low. There was no need for his\ncalling himself a dog, a dead dog,--the most humiliating image it\nwas possible to find. We should have thought him more worthy of his\nfather if, recognizing the high position which David had attained\nby the grace of God, he had gracefully thanked him for the regard\nshown to his father's memory, and shown more of the self-respect\nwhich was due to Jonathan's son. In his subsequent conduct, in the\ndays of David's calamity, Mephibosheth gave evidence of the same\ndisinterested spirit which had shone so beautifully in Jonathan, but\nhis noble qualities were like a light twinkling among ruins or a\njewel glistening in a wreck.\n\nThis shattered condition both of mind and body, however, commended\nhim all the more to the friendly regard of David. Had he shown\nhimself a high-minded, ambitious youth, David might have been\nembarrassed how to act towards him. Finding him modest and\nrespectful, he had no difficulty in the case. The kindness which he\nshowed him was twofold. In the first place, he restored to him all\nthe land that had belonged to his grandfather; and in the second\nplace, he made him an inmate of his own house, with a place at his\ntable, the same as if he had been one of his own sons. And that\nhe might not be embarrassed with having the land to care for, he\ncommitted the charge of it to Ziba, who was to bring to Mephibosheth\nthe produce or its value.\n\nEvery arrangement was thus made that could conduce to his comfort\nHis being a cripple did not deprive him of the honour of a place\nat the royal table, little though he could contribute to the\nlustre of the palace. For David bestowed his favours not on the\nprinciple of trying to reflect lustre on himself or his house, but\non the principle of doing good to those who had a claim on his\nconsideration. The lameness and consequent awkwardness, that would\nhave made many a king ashamed of such an inmate of his palace only\nrecommended him the more to David. Regard for outward appearances was\nswallowed up by a higher regard--regard for what was right and true.\n\nIt might be thought by some that such an incident as this was hardly\nworthy of a place in the sacred record; but the truth is, that David\nseldom showed more of the true spirit of God than he did on this\noccasion. The feeling that led him to seek out any stray member of the\nhouse in order to show kindness to him was the counterpart of that\nfeeling that has led God from the very beginning to seek the children\nof men, and that led Jesus to seek and to save that which was lost.\nFor that is truly the attitude in which God has ever placed Himself\ntowards our fallen race. The sight to be seen in this world has not\nbeen that of men seeking after God, but that of God seeking after men.\nAll day long He has been stretching forth His hands, and inviting the\nchildren of men to taste and see that He is gracious. If we ask for\nthe principle that unifies all parts of the Bible, it is this gracious\nattitude of God towards those who have forfeited His favour. The Bible\npresents to us the sight of God's Spirit striving with men, persevering\nin the thankless work long after He has been resisted, and ceasing only\nwhen all hope of success through further pleading is gone.\n\nThere were times when this process was prosecuted with more than\ncommon ardour; and at last there came a time when the Divine\npleadings reached a climax, and God, who at sundry times and in\ndivers manners spake to the fathers by the prophets, spake to them\nat last by His own Son. And what was the life of Jesus Christ but\na constant appeal to men, in God's name, to accept the kindness\nwhich God was eager to show them? Was not His invitation to all that\nlaboured and were heavy laden, \"Come unto Me, and I will give you\nrest\"? Did He not represent the Father as a householder, making a\nmarriage feast for his son, sending forth his servants to bid the\nguests to the wedding, and when the natural guests refused, bidding\nthem go to the highways and the hedges, and fetch the lame and the\nblind and any outcast they could find, because he longed to see\nguests of some kind enjoying the good things he had provided? The\ngreat crime of the ancient Jews was rejecting Him who had come in\nthe name of the Lord to bless them. Their crowning condemnation was,\nnot that they had failed to keep the Ten Commandments, though that\nwas true; not that they had spent their lives in pleasing themselves\ninstead of pleasing God, though that also was true; but that they\nhad rejected God's unspeakable gift, and requited the Eternal Son,\nwhen He came from heaven to bless them, with the cursed death of the\ncross. But even after they had committed that act of unprecedented\nwickedness, God's face would not be wholly turned away from them. The\nvery attitude in which Jesus died, with His hands outstretched on the\ntree, would still represent the attitude of the Divine heart towards\nthe very murderers of His Son. \"I, if I be lifted up, will draw all\nmen toward Me.\" \"Unto you first, God, having raised up His Son Jesus,\nhath sent Him to bless you, in turning away every one of you from his\niniquities.\" \"Repent ye, therefore, and be converted, that your sins\nmay be blotted out.\"\n\nHere, my friends, is the most glorious feature of the Christian\nreligion. Happy those of you who have apprehended this attitude of\nyour most gracious Father, who have believed in His love, and who\nhave accepted His grace! For not only has God received you back into\nHis family, and given you a name and a place in His temple better\nthan that of sons and daughters, but He has restored to you your lost\ninheritance. \"If children, then heirs, heirs of God and joint heirs\nwith Jesus Christ.\" Nay, more, He has not only restored to you your\nlost inheritance, but He has conferred on you an inheritance more\nglorious than that of which sin deprived you. \"Blessed be the God and\nFather of our Lord Jesus Christ, who according to His abundant mercy\nhath begotten us again unto a lively hope through the resurrection\nof Jesus Christ from the dead, to an inheritance incorruptible, and\nundefiled, and that fadeth not away, reserved in heaven for you, who\nare kept by the power of God through faith unto salvation, ready to\nbe revealed in the last day.\"\n\nBut if the grace of God in thus stretching out His hands to sinful\nmen and offering them all the blessings of salvation is very\nwonderful, it makes the case of those all the more terrible, all\nthe more hopeless, who treat His invitations with indifference, and\nturn their backs on an inheritance the glory of which they do not\nsee. How men should be so infatuated as to do this it were hard\nto understand, if we had not ample evidence of it in the godless\ntendencies of our natural hearts. Still more mysterious is it to\nunderstand how God should fail to carry His point in the case of\nthose to whom He stretches out His hands. But of all considerations\nthere is none more fitted to astonish and alarm the careless than\nthat they are capable of refusing all the appeals of Divine love,\nand rejecting all the bounty of Divine grace. If this be persevered\nin, what a rude awakening you will have in the world to come, when\nin all the bitterness of remorse you will think on the glories that\nwere once within your reach, but with which you trifled when you\nhad the chance! How foolish would Mephibosheth have been if he had\ndisbelieved in David's kindness and rejected his offer! But David was\nsincere, and Mephibosheth believed in his sincerity. May we not, must\nwe not, believe that God is sincere? If a purpose of kindness could\narise in a human heart, how much more in the Divine heart, how much\nmore in the heart of Him the very essence of whose nature is conveyed\nto us in the words of the beloved disciple--\"God is love\"!\n\nThere is yet another application to be made of this passage in\nDavid's history. We have seen how it exemplifies the duty incumbent\non us all to consider whether kindness is not due from us to the\nfriends or the relatives of those who have been helpful to ourselves.\nThis remark is not applicable merely to temporal obligations, but\nalso, and indeed emphatically, to spiritual. We should consider\nourselves in debt to those who have conferred spiritual benefits upon\nus. Should a descendant of Luther or Calvin, of Latimer or Cranmer\nor Knox, appear among us in need of kindness, what true Protestant\nwould not feel that for what he owed to the fathers it was his duty\nto show kindness to the children? But farther back even than this was\na race of men to whom the Christian world lies under still deeper\nobligations. It was the race of David himself, to which had belonged\n\"Moses and Aaron among His priests, Samuel with them that called\non His name,\" and, in after-times, Isaiah and Jeremiah, Ezekiel\nand Daniel; Peter, and James, and John, and Paul; and, outshining\nthem all, like the sun of heaven, Jesus of Nazareth, the Saviour of\nmen. With what models of lofty piety has that race furnished every\nsucceeding generation! From the study of their holy lives, their\nsoaring faith, their burning zeal, what blessing has been derived in\nthe past, and what an impulse will yet go forth to the very end of\ntime! No wonder though the Apostle had great sorrow and continual\nheaviness in his heart when he thought of the faithless state of\nthe people, \"to whom pertaineth the adoption, and the glory, and\nthe covenants, and the giving of the law, and the service of God\"!\nYet none are more in need of your friendly remembrance at this day\nthan the descendants of these men. It becomes you to ask, \"Is there\nyet any that is left of their house to whom we may show kindness\nfor Jesus' sake?\" For God has not finally cast them off, and Jesus\nhas not ceased to care for those who were His brethren according\nto the flesh. If there were no other motive to induce us to seek\nthe good of the Jews, this consideration should surely prevail.\nIll did the world requite its obligation during the long ages when\nall manner of contumely and injustice was heaped upon the Hebrew\nrace, as if Jesus had never prayed, \"Father, forgive them; they\nknow not what they do.\" Their treatment by the Gentiles has been so\nharsh that, even when better feelings prevail, they are slow, like\nMephibosheth,--to believe that we mean them well. They may have done\nmuch to repel our kindness, and they may appear to be hopelessly\nencrusted with unbelief in Him whom we present as the Saviour. But\ncharity never faileth; and in reference to them as to other objects\nof philanthropic effort, the exhortation holds good, \"Let us not be\nweary in well-doing; for in due season we shall reap if we faint not.\"\n\nSuch kindness to those who are in need is not only a duty of religion,\nbut tends greatly to commend it. Neglect of those who have claims on\nus, while objects more directly religious are eagerly prosecuted, is\nnot pleasing to God, whether the neglect take place in our lives or in\nthe destination of our substance at death. \"Give, and it shall be given\nunto you: good measure, pressed down and shaken together and running\nover, shall men give into your bosom. For with the same measure that ye\nmete withal, it shall be measured to you again.\"\n\n\n\n\n                             CHAPTER XIII.\n\n                          _DAVID AND HANUN._\n\n                              2 SAMUEL x.\n\n\nPowerful though David had proved himself in every direction in the\nart of war, his heart was inclined to peace. A king who had been\nvictorious over so many foes had no occasion to be afraid of a people\nlike the Ammonites. It could not have been from fear therefore that,\nwhen Nahash the king of the Ammonites died, David resolved to send\na friendly message to his son. Not the least doubt can be thrown\non the statement of the history that what moved him to do this was\na grateful remembrance of the kindness which he had at one time\nreceived from the late king. The position which he had gained as a\nwarrior would naturally have made Hanun more afraid of David than\nDavid could be of Hanun. The king of Israel could not have failed\nto know this, and it might naturally occur to him that it would be\na kindly act to the young king of Ammon to send him a message that\nshowed that he might thoroughly rely on his friendly intentions. The\nmessage to Hanun was another emanation of a kindly heart. If there\nwas anything of policy in it, it was the policy of one who felt that\nso many things are continually occurring to set nations against one\nanother as to make it most desirable to improve every opportunity of\ndrawing them closer together.\n\nIt is a happy thing for any country when its rulers and men of\ninfluence are ever on the watch for opportunities to strengthen\nthe spirit of friendship. It is a happy thing in the Church when\nthe leaders of different sections are more disposed to measures\nthat conciliate and heal than to measures that alienate and divide.\nIn family life, and wherever men of different views and different\ntempers meet, this peace-loving spirit is of great price. Men that\nlike fighting, and that are ever disposed to taunt, to irritate,\nto divide, are the nuisances of society. Men that deal in the soft\nanswer, in the message of kindness, and in the prayer of love,\ndeserve the respect and gratitude of all.\n\nIt is a remarkable thing that, of all the nations that were settled\nin the neighbourhood of the Israelites, the only one that seemed\ndesirous to live on friendly terms with them was that of Tyre. Even\nthose who were related to them by blood,--Edomites, Midianites,\nMoabites, Ammonites,--were never cordial, and often at open\nhostility. Though their rights had been carefully respected by the\nIsraelites on their march from Sinai to Palestine, no feeling of\ncordial friendship was established with any of them. None of them\nwere impressed even so much as Balaam had been, when in language so\nbeautiful he blessed the people whom God had blessed. None of them\nthrew in their lot with Israel, in recognition of their exalted\nspiritual privileges, as Hobab and his people had done near Mount\nSinai. Individuals, like Ruth the Moabitess, had learned to recognise\nthe claims of Israel's God and the privileges of the covenant, but no\nentire nation had ever shown even an inclination to such a course.\nThese neighbouring nations continued therefore to be fitting symbols\nof that world-power which has so generally been found in antagonism\nto the people of God. Israel while they continued faithful to God\nwere like the lily among thorns; and Israel's king, like Him whom\nhe typified, was called to rule in the midst of his enemies. The\nfriendship of the surrounding world cannot be the ordinary lot of\nthe faithful servant, otherwise the Apostle would not have struck\nsuch a loud note of warning. \"Ye adulterers and adulteresses, know ye\nnot that the friendship of the world is enmity with God? Whosoever,\ntherefore, would be the friend of the world is the enemy of God.\"\n\nBetween the Ammonites and the Israelites collisions had occurred on two\nformer occasions, on both of which the Ammonites appear to have been\nthe aggressors. The former of these was in the days of Jephthah. The\ndefeat of the Ammonites at that time was very thorough, and probably\nunexpected, and, like other defeats of the same kind, it no doubt left\nfeelings of bitter hatred rankling in the breasts of the defeated\nparty. The second was the collision at Jabesh-gilead at the beginning\nof the reign of Saul. The king of the Ammonites showed great ferocity\nand cruelty on that occasion. When the men of Jabesh, brought to bay,\nbegged terms of peace, the bitter answer was returned that it would\nbe granted only on condition that every man's right eye should be put\nout. It was then that Saul showed such courage and promptitude. In the\nbriefest space he was at Jabesh-gilead in defence of his people, and by\nhis successful tactics inflicted on the Ammonites a terrible defeat,\nkilling a great multitude and scattering the remainder, so that not any\ntwo of them were left together. Men do not like to have a prize plucked\nfrom their hands when they are on the eve of enjoying it. After such\na defeat, Nahash could not have very friendly feelings to Saul. And\nwhen Saul proclaimed David his enemy, Nahash would naturally incline\nto David's side. There is no record of the occasion on which he showed\nkindness to him, but in all likelihood it was at the time when he\nwas in the wilderness, hiding from Saul. If, when David was near the\nhead of the Dead Sea, and therefore not very far from the land of the\nAmmonites, or from places where they had influence, Nahash sent him\nany supplies for his men, the gift would be very opportune, and there\ncould be no reason why David should not accept of it. Anyhow, the act\nof kindness, whatever it was, made a strong impression on his heart. It\nwas long, long ago when it happened, but love has a long memory, and\nthe remembrance of it was still pleasant to David. And now the king of\nIsrael purposes to repay to the son the debt he had incurred to the\nfather. Up to this point it is a pretty picture; and it is a great\ndisappointment when we find the transaction miscarry, and a negotiation\nwhich began in all the warmth and sincerity of friendship terminate in\nthe wild work of war.\n\nThe fault of this miscarriage, however, was glaringly on the other\nside. Hanun was a young king, and it would only have been in accordance\nwith the frank and unsuspecting spirit of youth had he received\nDavid's communication with cordial pleasure, and returned to it an\nanswer in the same spirit in which it was sent. But his counsellors\nwere of another mind. They persuaded their master that the pretext\nof comforting him on the death of his father was a hollow one, and\nthat David desired nothing but to spy out the city and the country,\nwith a view to bring them under his dominion. It is hard to suppose\nthat they really believed this. It was they, not David, that wished\na pretext for going to war. And having got something that by evil\ningenuity might be perverted to this purpose, they determined to treat\nit so that it should be impossible for David to avoid the conflict.\nHanun appears to have been a weak prince, and to have yielded to their\ncounsels. Our difficulty is to understand how sane men could have acted\nin such a way. The determination to provoke war, and the insolence of\ntheir way of doing it, appear so like the freaks of a madman, that we\ncannot comprehend how reasonable men should in cold blood have even\ndreamt of such proceedings. Perhaps at this early period they had an\nunderstanding with those Syrians that afterwards came to their aid, and\nthought that on the strength of this they could afford to be insolent.\nThe combined force which they could bring into the field would be such\nas to make even David tremble.\n\nIt is hardly necessary to say a word to bring out the outrageous\ncharacter of their conduct. First, there was the repulse of David's\nkindness. It was not even declined with civility; it was repelled\nwith scorn. It is always a serious thing to reject overtures of\nkindness. Even the friendly salutations of dumb animals are entitled\nto a friendly return, and the man that returns the caresses of his\ndog with a kick and a curse is a greater brute than the animal that\nhe treats so unworthily. Kindness is too rare a gem to be trampled\nunder foot. Even though it should be mistaken kindness, though the\nform it takes should prove an embarrassment rather than a help, a\ngood man will appreciate the motive that prompted it, and will be\ncareful not to hurt the feelings of those who, though they have\nblundered, meant him well. None are more liable to make mistakes\nthan young children in their little efforts to please; meaning to be\nkind, they sometimes only give trouble. The parent that gives way to\nirritation, and meets this with a volley of scolding, deals cruelly\nwith the best and tenderest part of the child's nature. There are\nfew things more deserving to be attended to through life than the\nhabit not only of appreciating little kindnesses, but showing that\nyou appreciate them. How much more sweetly might the current run in\nsocial life if this were universally attended to!\n\nBut Hanun not only repelled David's kindness, but charged him with\nmeanness, and virtually flung in his face a challenge to war. To\nrepresent his apparent kindness as a mean cover of a hostile purpose\nwas an act which Hanun might think little of, but which was fitted to\nwound David to the quick. Unscrupulous natures have a great advantage\nover others in the charges they may bring. In a street collision\na man in dirty clothing is much more powerful for mischief than\none in clean raiment. Rough, unscrupulous men are restrained by no\ndelicacy from bringing atrocious charges against those to whom these\ncharges are supremely odious. They have little sense of the sin of\nthem, and they toss them about without scruple. Such poisoned arrows\ninflict great pain, not because the charges are just, but because\nit is horrible to refined natures even to hear them. There are two\nthings that make some men very sensitive--the refinement of grace,\nand the refinement of the spirit of courtesy. The refinement of grace\nmakes all sin odious, and makes a charge of gross sin very serious.\nThe refinement of courtesy creates great regard to the feelings of\nothers, and a strong desire not to wound them unnecessarily. In\ncircles where real courtesy prevails, accusations against others\nare commonly couched in very gentle language. Rough natures ridicule\nthis spirit, and pride themselves on their honesty in calling a\nspade a spade. Evidently Hanun belonged to the rough, unscrupulous\nschool. Either he did not know how it would make David writhe to be\naccused of the alleged meanness, or, if he did know, he enjoyed the\nspectacle. It gratified his insolent nature to see the pious king of\nIsrael posing before all the people of Ammon as a sneak and a liar,\nand to hear the laugh of scorn and hatred resounding on every side.\n\nTo these offences Hanun added yet another--scornful treatment of\nDavid's ambassadors. In the eyes of all civilized nations the\npersons of ambassadors were held sacred, and any affront or injury\nto them was counted an odious crime. Very often men of eminent\nposition, venerable age, and unblemished character were chosen for\nthis function, and it is quite likely that David's ambassadors to\nHanun were of this class. When therefore these men were treated with\ncontumely--half their beards, which were in a manner sacred, shorn\naway, their garments mutilated, and their persons exposed--no grosser\ninsult could have been inflicted. When the king and his princes were\nthe authors of this treatment, it must have been greatly enjoyed\nby the mass of the people, whose coarse glee over the dishonoured\nambassadors of the great King David one can easily imagine. It is\na painful moment when true worth and nobility lie at the mercy of\ninsolence and coarseness, and have to bear their bitter revilings.\nSuch things may happen in public controversy in a country where\nthe utmost liberty of speech is allowed, and when men of ruffian\nmould find contumely and insult their handiest weapons. In times of\nreligious persecution the most frightful charges have been hurled at\nthe heads of godly men and women, whose real crime is to have striven\nto the utmost to obey God. Oh, how much need there is of patience to\nbear insult as well as injury! And insult will sometimes rouse the\ntemper that injury does not ruffle. Oh for the spirit of Christ, who,\nwhen He was reviled, reviled not again!\n\nThe Ammonites did not wait for a formal declaration of war by David.\nNor did they flatter themselves, when they came to their senses,\nthat against one who had gained such renown as a warrior they could\nstand alone. Their insult to King David turned out a costly affair.\nTo get assistance they had to give gold. The parallel passage in\nChronicles gives a thousand talents of silver as the cost of the\nfirst bargain with the Syrians. These Syrian mercenaries came from\nvarious districts--Beth-rehob, Zoba, Beth-maacah, and Tob. Some of\nthese had already been subdued by David; in other cases there was\napparently no previous collision. But all of them no doubt smarted\nunder the defeats which David had inflicted either on them or on\ntheir neighbours, and when a large subsidy was allotted to them to\nbegin with, in addition to whatever booty might fall to their share\nif David should be subdued, it is no great wonder that an immense\naddition was made to the forces of the Ammonites. It became in fact\na very formidable opposition; all the more that they were very\nabundantly supplied with chariots and horsemen, of which arm David\nhad scarcely any. He met them first by sending out Joab and \"all\nthe host\" of the mighty men. The whole resources of his army were\nforwarded. And when Joab came to the spot, he found that he had a\ndouble enemy to face. The Ammonite army came out from the city to\nencounter him, while the Syrian army were encamped in the country,\nready to place him between two fires when the battle began. To guard\nagainst this, Joab divided his force into two. The Syrian host was\nthe more formidable body; therefore Joab went in person against\nit, at the head of a select body of troops chosen from the general\narmy. The command of the remainder was given to his brother Abishai,\nwho was left to deal with the Ammonites. If either section found\nits opponent too much for it, aid was to be given by the other. No\nfault can be found either with the arrangements made by Joab for\nthe encounter or the spirit in which he entered on the fight. \"Be\nof good courage,\" he said to his men, \"and let us play the men for\nour people, and for the cities of our God; and the Lord do that\nwhich seemeth to Him good.\" It was just such an exhortation as David\nhimself might have given. Some were trusting in chariots and some in\nhorses, but they were remembering the name of the Lord their God. The\nfirst movement was made by Joab and his part of the army against the\nSyrians; it was completely successful; the Syrians fled before him,\nchariots and horsemen and all. When the Ammonite army saw the fate of\nthe Syrians they did not even hazard a conflict, but wheeled about\nand made for the city. Thus ended their first proud effort to sustain\nand complete the humiliation of King David. The hired troops on which\nthey had leaned so much turned out utterly untrustworthy; and the\nwretched Ammonites found themselves _minus_ their thousand talents,\nwithout victory, and without honour.\n\nBut their allies the Syrians were not disposed to yield without\nanother conflict. Determined to do his utmost, Hadarezer, king of\nthe Syrians of Zobah, sent across the Euphrates, and prevailed on\ntheir neighbours there to join them in the effort to crush the power\nof David. That a very large number of these Mesopotamian Syrians\nresponded to the invitation of Hadarezer is apparent from the number\nof the slain (ver. 18). The matter assumed so serious an aspect that\nDavid himself was now constrained to take the field, at the head\nof \"all Israel.\" The Syrian troops were commanded by Shobach, who\nappears to have been a distinguished general. It must have been a\ndeath-struggle between the Syrian power and the power of David. But\nagain the victory was with the Israelites, and among the slain were\nthe men of seven hundred chariots, and forty thousand horsemen (1\nChron. xix. 18, \"footmen\"), along with Shobach, captain of the Syrian\nhost. It must have been a most decisive victory, for after it took\nplace all the states that had been tributary to Hadarezer transferred\ntheir allegiance to David. The Syrian power was completely broken;\nall help was withdrawn from the Ammonites, who were now left to bear\nthe brunt of their quarrel alone. Single-handed, they had to look\nfor the onset of the army which had so remarkably prevailed against\nall the power of Syria, and to answer to King David for the outrage\nthey had perpetrated on his ambassadors. Very different must their\nfeelings have been now from the time when they began to negotiate\nwith Syria, and when, doubtless, they looked forward so confidently\nto the coming defeat and humiliation of King David.\n\nIt requires but a very little consideration to see that the wars\nwhich are so briefly recorded in this chapter must have been most\nserious and perilous undertakings. The record of them is so short,\nso unimpassioned, so simple, that many readers are disposed to think\nvery little of them. But when we pause to think what it was for the\nking of Israel to meet, on foreign soil, confederates so numerous, so\npowerful, and so familiar with warfare, we cannot but see that these\nwere tremendous wars. They were fitted to try the faith as well as\nthe courage of David and his people to the very utmost. In seeking\ndates for those psalms that picture a multitude of foes closing on\nthe writer, and that record the exercises of his heart, from the\ninsinuations of fear at the beginning to the triumph of trust and\npeace at the end, we commonly think only of two events in David's\nlife,--the persecution of Saul and the insurrection of Absalom. But\nthe Psalmist himself could probably have enumerated a dozen occasions\nwhen his danger and his need were as great as they were then. He must\nhave passed through the same experience on these occasions as on the\nother two; and the language of the Psalms may often have as direct\nreference to the former as to the latter. We may understand, too,\nhow the destruction of enemies became so prominent a petition in his\nprayers. What can a general desire and pray for, when he sees a hostile\narmy, like a great engine of destruction, ready to dash against all\nthat he holds dear, but that the engine may be shivered, deprived of\nall power of doing mischief--in other words, that the army may be\ndestroyed? The imprecations in the Book of Psalms against his enemies\nmust be viewed in this light. The military habit of the Psalmist's\nmind made him think only of the destruction of those who, in opposing\nhim, opposed the cause of God. It ought not to be imputed as a crime\nto David that he did not rise high above a soldier's feelings; that\nhe did not view things from the point of view of Christianity; that\nhe was not a thousand years in advance of his age. The one outlet\nfrom the frightful danger which these Syrian hordes brought to him\nand his people was that they should be destroyed. Our blessed Lord\ngave men another view when He said, \"The Son of man is come not to\ndestroy men's lives, but to save them.\" He familiarised us with other\nmodes of conquest. When He appeared to Saul on the way to Damascus,\nand turned the persecutor into the chief of apostles, He showed that\nthere are other ways than that of destruction for delivering His Church\nfrom its enemies. \"I send thee to open their eyes, and to turn them\nfrom darkness to light, and from the power of Satan unto God.\" This\ncommission to Saul gives us reason for praying, with reference to the\nmost clever and destructive of the enemies of His Church, that by His\nSpirit He would meet them too, and turn them into other men. And not\nuntil this line of petition has been exhausted can we fall back in\nprayer on David's method. Only when their repentance and conversion\nhave become hopeless are we entitled to pray God to destroy the\ngrievous wolves that work such havoc in His flock.\n\n\n\n\n                             CHAPTER XIV.\n\n                          _DAVID AND URIAH._\n\n                             2 SAMUEL xi.\n\n\nHow ardently would most, if not all readers, of the life of David\nhave wished that it had ended before this chapter! Its golden era has\npassed away, and what remains is little else than a chequered tale\nof crime and punishment. On former occasions, under the influence of\nstrong and long-continued temptations, we have seen his faith give\nway and a spirit of dissimulation appear; but these were like spots\non the sun, not greatly obscuring his general radiance. What we now\nencounter is not like a spot, but a horrid eclipse; it is not like\na mere swelling of the face, but a bloated tumour that distorts the\ncountenance and drains the body of its life-blood. To human wisdom\nit would have seemed far better had David's life ended now, so\nthat no cause might have been given for the everlasting current of\njeer and joke with which his fall has supplied the infidel. Often,\nwhen a great and good man is cut off in the midst of his days and\nof his usefulness, we are disposed to question the wisdom of the\ndispensation; but when we find ourselves disposed to wonder whether\nthis might not have been better in the case of David, we may surely\nacquiesce in the ways of God.\n\nIf the composition of the Bible had been in human hands it would\nnever have contained such a chapter as this. There is something\nquite remarkable in the fearless way in which it unveils the guilt\nof David; it is set forth in its nakedness, without the slightest\nattempt either to palliate or to excuse it; and the only statement\nin the whole record designed to characterise it is the quiet but\nterrible words with which the chapter ends--\"But the thing that David\nhad done displeased the Lord.\" In the fearless march of providence we\nsee many a proof of the courage of God. It is God alone that could\nhave the fortitude to place in the Holy Book this foul story of sin\nand shame. He only could deliberately encounter the scorn which it\nhas drawn down from every generation of ungodly men, the only wise\nGod, who sees the end from the beginning, who can rise high above\nall the fears and objections of short-sighted men, and who can quiet\nevery feeling of uneasiness on the part of His children with the\nsublime words, \"Be still, and know that I am God.\"\n\nThe truth is, that though David's reputation would have been brighter\nhad he died at this point of his career, the moral of his life, so to\nspeak, would have been less complete. There was evidently a sensual\nelement in his nature, as there is in so many men of warm, emotional\ntemperament; and he does not appear to have been alive to the danger\ninvolved in it. It led him the more readily to avail himself of\nthe toleration of polygamy, and to increase from time to time the\nnumber of his wives. Thus provision was made for the gratification\nof a disorderly lust, which, if he had lived like Abraham or Isaac,\nwould have been kept back from all lawless excesses. And when evil\ndesire has large scope for its exercise, instead of being satisfied\nit becomes more greedy and more lawless. Now, this painful chapter\nof David's history is designed to show us what the final effect of\nthis was in his case--what came ultimately of this habit of pampering\nthe lust of the flesh. And verily, if any have ever been inclined to\nenvy David's liberty, and think it hard that such a law of restraint\nbinds them while he was permitted to do as he pleased, let them study\nin the latter part of his history the effects of this unhallowed\nindulgence; let them see his home robbed of its peace and joy, his\nheart lacerated by the misconduct of his children, his throne seized\nby his son, while he has to fly from his own Jerusalem; let them\nsee him obliged to take the field against Absalom, and hear the air\nrent by his cries of anguish when Absalom is slain; let them think\nhow even his deathbed was disturbed by the noise of revolt, and how\nlegacies of blood had to be bequeathed to his successor almost with\nhis dying breath,--and surely it will be seen that the license which\nbore such wretched fruits is not to be envied, and that, after all,\nthe way even of royal transgressors is hard.\n\nBut a fall so violent as that of David does not occur all at once. It\nis generally preceded by a period of spiritual declension, and in all\nlikelihood there was such an experience on his part. Nor is it very\ndifficult to find the cause. For many years back David had enjoyed\na most remarkable run of prosperity. His army had been victorious\nin every encounter; his power was recognized by many neighbouring\nstates; immense riches flowed from every quarter to his capital;\nit seemed as if nothing could go wrong with him. When everything\nprospers to a man's hand, it is a short step to the conclusion that\nhe can do nothing wrong. How many great men in the world have been\nspoiled by success, and by unlimited, or even very great power! In\nhow many hearts has the fallacy obtained a footing, that ordinary\nlaws were not made for them, and that they did not need to regard\nthem! David was no exception; he came to think of his will as the\ngreat directing force within his kingdom, the earthly consideration\nthat should regulate all.\n\nThen there was the absence of that very powerful stimulus, the pressure\nof distress around him, which had driven him formerly so close to\nGod. His enemies had been defeated in every quarter, with the single\nexception of the Ammonites, a foe that could give him no anxiety; and\nhe ceased to have a vivid sense of his reliance on God as his Shield.\nThe pressure of trouble and anxiety that had made his prayers so\nearnest was now removed, and probably he had become somewhat remiss and\nformal in prayer. We little know how much influence our surroundings\nhave on our spiritual life till some great change takes place in them;\nand then, perhaps, we come to see that the atmosphere of trial and\ndifficulty which oppressed us so greatly was really the occasion to us\nof our highest strength and our greatest blessings.\n\nAnd further, there was the fact that David was idle, at least without\nactive occupation. Though it was the time for kings to go forth to\nbattle, and though his presence with his army at Rabbah would have\nbeen a great help and encouragement to his soldiers, he was not there.\nHe seems to have thought it not worth his while. Now that the Syrians\nhad been defeated, there could be no difficulty with the Ammonites.\nAt evening-tide he arose from off his bed and walked on the roof of\nhis house. He was in that idle, listless mood in which one is most\nreadily attracted by temptation, and in which the lust of the flesh\nhas its greatest power. And, as it has been remarked, \"oft the sight\nof means to do ill makes ill deeds done.\" If any scruples arose in\nhis conscience they were not regarded. To brush aside objections to\nanything on which he had set his heart was a process to which, in his\ngreat undertakings, he had been well accustomed; unhappily, he applies\nthis rule when it is not applicable, and with the whole force of his\nnature rushes into temptation.\n\nNever was there a case which showed more emphatically the dreadful\nchain of guilt to which a first act, apparently insignificant, may\ngive rise. His first sin was allowing himself to be arrested to\nsinful intents by the beauty of Bathsheba. Had he, like Job, made a\ncovenant with his eyes; had he resolved that when the idea of sin\nsought entrance into the imagination it should be sternly refused\nadmission; had he, in a word, nipped the temptation in the bud,\nhe would have been saved a world of agony and sin. But instead of\nrepelling the idea he cherishes it. He makes inquiry concerning the\nwoman. He brings her to his house. He uses his royal position and\ninfluence to break down the objections which she would have raised.\nHe forgets what is due to the faithful soldier, who, employed in his\nservice, is unable to guard the purity of his home. He forgets the\nsolemn testimony of the law, which denounces death to both parties as\nthe penalty of the sin. This is the first act of the tragedy.\n\nThen follow his vain endeavours to conceal his crime, frustrated\nby the high self-control of Uriah. Yes, though David gets him\nintoxicated he cannot make a tool of him. Strange that this Hittite,\nthis member of one of the seven nations of Canaan, whose inheritance\nwas not a blessing but a curse, shows himself a paragon in that\nself-command, the utter absence of which, in the favoured king of\nIsrael, has plunged him so deeply in the mire. Thus ends the second\nact of the tragedy.\n\nBut the next is far the most awful. Uriah must be got rid of, not,\nhowever, openly, but by a cunning stratagem that shall make it seem\nas if his death were the result of the ordinary fortune of war. And\nto compass this David must take Joab into his confidence. To Joab,\ntherefore, he writes a letter, indicating what is to be done to get\nrid of Uriah. Could David have descended to a lower depth? It was\nbad enough to compass the death of Uriah; it was mean enough to make\nhim the bearer of the letter that gave directions for his death;\nbut surely the climax of meanness and guilt was the writing of that\nletter. Do you remember, David, how shocked you were when Joab slew\nAbner? Do you remember your consternation at the thought that you\nmight be held to approve of the murder? Do you remember how often\nyou have wished that Joab were not so rough a man, that he had more\ngentleness, more piety, more concern for bloodshedding? And here\nare you making this Joab your confidant in sin, and your partner in\nmurder, justifying all the wild work his sword has ever done, and\ncausing him to believe that, in spite of all his holy pretensions\nDavid is just such a man as himself.\n\nSurely it was a horrible sin--aggravated, too, in many ways. It\nwas committed by the head of the nation, who was bound not only to\ndiscountenance sin in every form, but especially to protect the\nfamilies and preserve the rights of the brave men who were exposing\ntheir lives in his service. And that head of the nation had been\nsignally favoured by God, and had been exalted in room of one whose\nselfishness and godlessness had caused him to be deposed from his\ndignity. Then there was the profession made by David of zeal for\nGod's service and His law, his great enthusiasm in bringing up the\nark to Jerusalem, his desire to build a temple, the character he had\ngained as a writer of sacred songs, and indeed as the great champion\nof religion in the nation. Further, there was the mature age at\nwhich he had now arrived, a period of life at which sobriety in the\nindulgence of the appetites is so justly and reasonably expected. And\nfinally, there was the excellent character and the faithful services\nof Uriah, entitling him to the high rewards of his sovereign, rather\nthan the cruel fate which David measured out to him--his home rifled\nand his life taken away.\n\nHow then, it may be asked, can the conduct of David be accounted for?\nThe answer is simple enough--on the ground of original sin. Like\nthe rest of us, he was born with proclivities to evil--to irregular\ndesires craving unlawful indulgence. When divine grace takes\npossession of the heart it does not annihilate sinful tendencies,\nbut overcomes them. It brings considerations to bear on the\nunderstanding, the conscience, and the heart, that incline and enable\none to resist the solicitations of evil, and to yield one's self to\nthe law of God. It turns this into a habit of the life. It gives one\na sense of great peace and happiness in resisting the motions of sin,\nand doing the will of God. It makes it the deliberate purpose and\ndesire of one's heart to be holy; it inspires one with the prayer,\n\"Oh that my ways were directed to keep Thy statutes! Then shall I not\nbe ashamed, when I have respect unto all Thy commandments.\"\n\nBut, meanwhile, the cravings of the old nature are not wholly\ndestroyed. \"The flesh lusteth against the spirit, and the spirit\nlusteth against the flesh.\" It is as if two armies were in collision.\nThe Christian who naturally has a tendency to sensuality may feel\nthe craving for sinful gratification even when the general bent of\nhis nature is in favour of full compliance with the will of God. In\nsome natures, especially strong natures, both the old man and the new\npossess unusual vehemence; the rebellious energisings of the old are\nheld in check by the still more resolute vigour of the new; but if it\nso happen that the opposition of the new man to the old is relaxed\nor abated, then the outbreak of corruption will probably be on a\nfearful scale. Thus it was in David's nature. The sensual craving,\nthe law of sin in his members, was strong; but the law of grace,\ninclining him to give himself up to the will of God, was stronger,\nand usually kept him right. There was an extraordinary activity\nand energy of character about him; he never did things slowly,\ntremblingly, timidly; the wellsprings of life were full, and gushed\nout in copious currents; in whatever direction they might flow, they\nwere sure to flow with power. But at this time the energy of the new\nnature was suffering a sad abatement; the considerations that should\nhave led him to conform to God's law had lost much of their usual\npower. Fellowship with the Fountain of life was interrupted; the\nold nature found itself free from its habitual restraint, and its\nstream came out with the vehemence of a liberated torrent. It would\nbe quite unfair to judge David on this occasion as if he had been one\nof those feeble creatures who, as they seldom rise to the heights of\nexcellence, seldom sink to the depths of daring sin.\n\nWe make these remarks simply to account for a fact, and by no\nmeans to excuse a crime. Men are liable to ask, when they read of\nsuch sins done by good men, Were they really good men? Can that\nbe genuine goodness which leaves a man liable to do such deeds of\nwickedness? If so, wherein are your so-called good men better than\nother men? We reply, They are better than other men in this,--and\nDavid was better than other men in this,--that the deepest and most\ndeliberate desire of their hearts is to do as God requires, and\nto be holy as God is holy. This is their habitual aim and desire;\nand in this they are in the main successful. If this be not one's\nhabitual aim, and if in this he do not habitually succeed, he can\nhave no real claim to be counted a good man. Such is the doctrine of\nthe Apostle in the seventh chapter of the Romans. Any one who reads\nthat chapter in connection with the narrative of David's fall can\nhave little doubt that it is the experience of the new man that the\nApostle is describing. The habitual attitude of the heart is given\nin the striking words, \"I delight in the law of God after the inward\nman.\" I see how good God's law is; how excellent is the stringent\nrestraint it lays on all that is loose and irregular, how beautiful\nthe life which is cast in its mould. But for all that, I feel in me\nthe motions of desire for unlawful gratifications, I feel a craving\nfor the pleasures of sin. \"I see another law in my members, warring\nagainst the law of my mind, and bringing me into captivity to the\nlaw of sin which is in my members.\" But how does the Apostle treat\nthis feeling? Does he say, \"I am a human creature, and, having these\ndesires, I may and I must gratify them\"? Far from it! He deplores the\nfact, and he cries for deliverance. \"O wretched man that I am, who\nshall deliver me from the body of this death?\" And his only hope of\ndeliverance is in Him whom he calls his Saviour. \"I thank God through\nJesus Christ our Lord.\" In the case of David, the law of sin in his\nmembers prevailed for the time over the new law, the law of his mind,\nand it plunged him into a state which might well have led him too to\nsay, \"O wretched man that I am! who shall deliver me?\"\n\nAnd now we begin to understand why this supremely horrible transaction\nshould be given in the Bible, and given at such length. It bears the\ncharacter of a beacon, warning the mariner against some of the most\ndeceitful and perilous rocks that are to be found in all the sea of\nlife. First of all, it shows the danger of interrupting, however\nbriefly, the duty of watching and praying, lest you enter into\ntemptation. It is at your peril to discontinue earnest daily communion\nwith God, especially when the evils are removed that first drove you\nto seek His aid. An hour's sleep may leave Samson at the mercy of\nDelilah, and when he awakes his strength is gone. Further, it affords\na sad proof of the danger of dallying with sin even in thought. Admit\nsin within the precincts of the imagination, and there is the utmost\ndanger of its ultimately mastering the soul. The outposts of the\nspiritual garrison should be so placed as to protect even the thoughts,\nand the moment the enemy is discovered there the alarm should be given\nand the fight begun. It is a serious moment when the young man admits\na polluted thought to his heart, and pursues it even in reverie. The\ndoor is opened to a dangerous brood. And everything that excites\nsensual feeling, be it songs, jests, pictures, books of a lascivious\ncharacter, all tends to enslave and pollute the soul, till at length it\nis saturated with impurity, and cannot escape the wretched thraldom.\nAnd further, this narrative shows us what moral havoc and ruin may be\nwrought by the toleration and gratification of a single sinful desire.\nYou may contend vigorously against ninety-and-nine forms of sin, but\nif you yield to the hundredth the consequences will be deadly. You may\nfling away a whole box of matches, but if you retain one it is quite\nsufficient to set fire to your house. A single soldier finding his way\ninto a garrison may open the gates to the whole besieging army. One sin\nleads on to another and another, especially if the first be a sin which\nit is desirable to conceal. Falsehood and cunning, and even treachery,\nare employed to promote concealment; unprincipled accomplices are\ncalled in; the failure of one contrivance leads to other contrivances\nmore sinful and more desperate. If there is a being on earth more to be\npitied than another it is the man who has got into this labyrinth. What\na contrast his perplexed feverish agitation to the calm peace of the\nstraightforward Christian! \"He that walketh uprightly walketh surely;\nbut he that perverteth his way shall be known.\"\n\nNever let any one read this chapter of 2 Samuel without paying the\nprofoundest regard to its closing words--\"But the thing that David had\ndone displeased the Lord.\" In that \"but\" lies a whole world of meaning.\n\n\n\n\n                              CHAPTER XV.\n\n                          _DAVID AND NATHAN._\n\n                      2 SAMUEL xii. 1-12; 26-31.\n\n\nIt is often the method of the writers of Scripture, when the stream\nof public history has been broken by a private or personal incident,\nto complete at once the incident, and then go back to the principal\nhistory, resuming it at the point at which it was interrupted. In this\nway it sometimes happens (as we have already seen) that earlier events\nare recorded at a later part of the narrative than the natural order\nwould imply. In the course of the narrative of David's war with Ammon,\nthe incident of his sin with Bathsheba presents itself. In accordance\nwith the method referred to, that incident is recorded straight on to\nits very close, including the birth of Bathsheba's second son, which\nmust have occurred at least two years later. That being concluded,\nthe history of the war with Ammon is resumed at the point at which it\nwas broken off. We are not to suppose, as many have done, that the\nevents recorded in the concluding verses of this chapter (vv. 26-31)\nhappened later than those recorded immediately before. This would imply\nthat the siege of Rabbah lasted for two or three years--a supposition\nhardly to be entertained; for Joab was besieging it when David first\nsaw Bathsheba, and there is no reason to suppose that a people like\nthe Ammonites would be able to hold the mere outworks of the city for\ntwo or three whole years against such an army as David's and such a\ncommander as Joab. It seems far more likely that Joab's first success\nagainst Rabbah was gained soon after the death of Uriah, and that his\nmessage to David to come and take the citadel in person was sent not\nlong after the message that announced Uriah's death.\n\nIn that case the order of events would be as follows: After the\ndeath of Uriah, Joab prepares for an assault on Rabbah. Meanwhile,\nat Jerusalem, Bathsheba goes through the form of mourning for her\nhusband, and when the usual days of mourning are over David hastily\nsends for her and makes her his wife. Next comes a message from Joab\nthat he has succeeded in taking the city of waters, and that only\nthe citadel remains to be taken, for which purpose he urges David to\ncome himself with additional forces, and thereby gain the honour of\nconquering the place. It rather surprises one to find Joab declining\nan honour for himself, as it also surprises us to find David going\nto reap what another had sowed. David, however, goes with \"all the\npeople,\" and is successful, and after disposing of the Ammonites he\nreturns to Jerusalem. Soon after Bathsheba's child is born; then\nNathan goes to David and gives him the message that lays him in the\ndust. This is not only the most natural order for the events, but it\nagrees best with the spirit of the narrative. The cruelties practised\nby David on the Ammonites send a thrill of horror through us as we\nread them. No doubt they deserved a severe chastisement; the original\noffence was an outrage on every right feeling, an outrage on the law\nof nations, a gratuitous and contemptuous insult; and in bringing\nthese vast Syrian armies into the field they had subjected even the\nvictorious Israelites to grievous suffering and loss, in toil, in\nmoney, and in lives.\n\nAttempts have been made to explain away the severities inflicted\non the Ammonites, but it is impossible to explain away a plain\nhistorical narrative. It was the manner of victorious warriors in\nthose countries to steel their hearts against all compassion toward\ncaptive foes, and David, kind-hearted though he was, did the same.\nAnd if it be said that surely his religion, if it were religion of\nthe right kind, ought to have made him more compassionate, we reply\nthat at this period his religion was in a state of collapse. When his\nreligion was in a healthy and active state, it showed itself in the\nfirst place by his regard for the honour of God, for whose ark he\nprovided a resting-place, and in whose honour he proposed to build\na temple. Love to God was accompanied by love to man, exhibited in\nhis efforts to show kindness to the house of Saul for the sake of\nJonathan, and to Hanun for the sake of Nahash. But now the picture\nis reversed; he falls into a cold state of heart toward God, and in\nconnection with that declension we mark a more than usually severe\npunishment inflicted on his enemies. Just as the leaves first become\nyellow and finally drop from the tree in autumn, when the juices that\nfed them begin to fail, so the kindly actions that had marked the\nbetter periods of his life first fail, then turn to deeds of cruelty\nwhen that Holy Spirit, who is the fountain of all goodness, being\nresisted and grieved by him, withholds His living power.\n\nIn the whole transaction at Rabbah David shows poorly. It is not\nlike him to be roused to an enterprise by an appeal to his love of\nfame; he might have left Joab to complete the conquest and enjoy the\nhonour which his sword had substantially won. It is not like him to\ngo through the ceremony of being crowned with the crown of the king\nof Ammon, as if it were a great thing to have so precious a diadem\non his head. Above all, it is not like him to show so terrible a\nspirit in disposing of his prisoners of war. But all this is quite\nlikely to have happened if he had not yet come to repentance for his\nsin. When a man's conscience is ill at ease, his temper is commonly\nirritable. Unhappy in his inmost soul, he is in the temper that most\neasily becomes savage when provoked. No one can imagine that David's\nconscience was at rest. He must have had that restless feeling which\nevery good man experiences after doing a wrong act, before coming to\na clear apprehension of it; he must have been eager to escape from\nhimself, and Joab's request to him to come to Rabbah and end the war\nmust have been very opportune. In the excitement of war he would\nescape for a time the pursuit of his conscience; but he would be\nrestless and irritable, and disposed to drive out of his way, in the\nmost unceremonious manner, whoever or whatever should cross his path.\n\nWe now return with him to Jerusalem. He had added another to his long\nlist of illustrious victories, and he had carried to the capital\nanother vast store of spoil. The public attention would be thoroughly\noccupied with these brilliant events; and a king entering his capital\nat the head of his victorious troops, and followed by waggons laden\nwith public treasure, need not fear a harsh construction on his\nprivate actions. The fate of Uriah might excite little notice; the\naffair of Bathsheba would soon blow over. The brilliant victory that\nhad terminated the war seemed at the same time to have extricated the\nking from a personal scandal. David might flatter himself that all\nwould now be peace and quiet, and that the waters of oblivion would\ngather over that ugly business of Uriah.\n\n\"But the thing that David had done displeased the Lord.\"\n\n\"And the Lord sent Nathan unto David.\"\n\nSlowly, sadly, silently the prophet bends his steps to the palace.\nAnxiously and painfully he prepares himself for the most distressing\ntask a prophet of the Lord ever had to go through. He has to\nconvey God's reproof to the king; he has to reprove one from whom,\ndoubtless, he has received many an impulse towards all that is high\nand holy. Very happily he clothes his message in the Eastern garb of\nparable. He puts his parable in such life-like form that the king\nhas no suspicion of its real character. The rich robber that spared\nhis own flocks and herds to feed the traveller, and stole the poor\nman's ewe lamb, is a real flesh-and-blood criminal to him. And the\ndeed is so dastardly, its heartlessness is so atrocious, that it\nis not enough to enforce against such a wretch the ordinary law of\nfourfold restitution; in the exercise of his high prerogative the\nking pronounces a sentence of death upon the ruffian, and confirms\nit with the solemnity of an oath--\"The man that hath done this thing\nshall surely die.\" The flash of indignation is yet in his eye, the\nflush of resentment is still on his brow, when the prophet with calm\nvoice and piercing eye utters the solemn words, \"Thou art the man!\"\nThou, great king of Israel, art the robber, the ruffian, condemned by\nthine own voice to the death of the worst malefactor! \"Thus saith the\nLord God of Israel, I anointed thee king over Israel, and I delivered\nthee out of the hand of Saul; and I gave thee thy master's house, and\nthy master's wives into thy bosom, and gave thee the house of Israel\nand of Judah; and if that had been too little I would moreover have\ngiven thee such and such things. Wherefore hast thou despised the\ncommandment of the Lord, to do evil in His sight? Thou hast killed\nUriah the Hittite with the sword, and hast slain him with the sword\nof the children of Ammon.\"\n\nIt is not difficult to fancy the look of the king as the prophet\ndelivered his message--how at first when he said, \"Thou art the man,\"\nhe would gaze at him eagerly and wistfully, like one at a loss to\ndivine his meaning; and then, as the prophet proceeded to apply his\nparable, how, conscience-stricken, his expression would change to one\nof horror and agony; how the deeds of the last twelve months would\nglare in all their infamous baseness upon him, and outraged Justice,\nwith a hundred glittering swords, would seem all impatient to devour\nhim.\n\nIt is no mere imagination that, in a moment, the mind may be so\nquickened as to embrace the actions of a long period; and that with\nequal suddenness the moral aspect of them may be completely changed.\nThere are moments when the powers of the mind as well as those of the\nbody are so stimulated as to become capable of exertions undreamt\nof before. The dumb prince, in ancient history, who all his life\nhad never spoken a word, but found the power of speech when he saw\na sword raised to cut down his father, showed how danger could\nstimulate the organs of the body. The sudden change in David's\nfeeling now, like the sudden change in Saul's on the way to Damascus,\nshowed what electric rapidity may be communicated to the operations\nof the soul. It showed too what unseen and irresistible agencies of\nconviction and condemnation the great Judge can bring into play when\nit is His will to do so. As the steam hammer may be so adjusted as\neither to break a nutshell without injuring the kernel, or crush a\nblock of quartz to powder, so the Spirit of God can range, in His\neffects on the conscience, between the mildest feeling of uneasiness\nand the bitterest agony of remorse. \"When He is come,\" said our\nblessed Lord, \"He shall reprove the world of sin.\" How helpless men\nare under His operation! How utterly was David prostrated! How were\nthe multitudes brought down on the day of Pentecost! Is there any\npetition we more need to press than that the Spirit be poured out to\nconvince of sin, whether as it regards ourselves or the world? Is it\nnot true that the great want of the Church the want of is a sense of\nsin, so that confession and humiliation are become rare, and our very\ntheology is emasculated, because, where there is little sense of sin,\nthere can be little appreciation of redemption? And is not a sense of\nsin that which would bring a careless world to itself, and make it\ndeal earnestly with God's gracious offers? How striking is the effect\nascribed by the prophet Zechariah to that pouring of the spirit of\ngrace and supplication upon the house of David and the inhabitants of\nJerusalem, when \"they shall look on Him whom they have pierced, and\nshall mourn for Him as one mourneth for an only son, and shall be in\nbitterness for Him as one that is in bitterness for his firstborn.\"\nWould that our whole hearts went out in those invocations of the\nSpirit which we often sing, but alas! so very tamely--\n\n          \"Come, Holy Spirit, come,\n             Let Thy bright beams arise;\n           Dispel the darkness from our minds,\n             And open all our eyes.\n\n          \"Convince us of our sin,\n             Lead us to Jesus' blood,\n           And kindle in our breast the flame\n             Of never-dying love.\"\n\nWe cannot pass from this aspect of David's case without marking the\nterrible power of self-deception. Nothing blinds men so much to the\nreal character of a sin as the fact that it is their own. Let it\nbe presented to them in the light of another man's sin, and they\nare shocked. It is easy for one's self-love to weave a veil of fair\nembroidery, and cast it over those deeds about which one is somewhat\nuncomfortable. It is easy to devise for ourselves this excuse and\nthat, and lay stress on one excuse and another that may lessen the\nappearance of criminality. But nothing is more to be deprecated,\nnothing more to be deplored, than success in that very process.\nHappy for you if a Nathan is sent to you in time to tear to rags\nyour elaborate embroidery, and lay bare the essential vileness of\nyour deed! Happy for you if your conscience is made to assert its\nauthority, and cry to you, with its awful voice, \"Thou art the man!\"\nFor if you live and die in your fool's paradise, excusing every sin,\nand saying peace, peace, when there is no peace, there is nothing\nfor you but the rude awakening of the day of judgment, when the hail\nshall sweep away the refuge of lies!\n\nAfter Nathan had exposed the sin of David he proceeded to declare\nhis sentence. It was not a sentence of death, in the ordinary sense\nof the term, but it was a sentence of death in a sense even more\ndifficult to bear. It consisted of three things--first, the sword\nshould never depart from his house; second, out of his own house\nevil should be raised against him, and a dishonoured harem should\nshow the nature and extent of the humiliation that would come upon\nhim; and thirdly, a public exposure should thus be made of his sin,\nso that he would stand in the pillory of Divine rebuke, and in the\nshame which it entailed, before all Israel, and before the sun. When\nDavid confessed his sin, Nathan told him that the Lord had graciously\nforgiven it, but at the same time a special chastisement was to mark\nhow concerned God was for the fact that by his sin he had caused the\nenemy to blaspheme--the child born of Bathsheba was to die.\n\nReserving this last part of the sentence and David's bearing in\nconnection with it for future consideration, let us give attention\nto the first portion of his retribution. \"The sword shall never\ndepart from thy house.\" Here we find a great principle in the moral\ngovernment of God,--correspondence between an offence and its\nretribution. Of this many instances occur in the Old Testament.\nJacob deceived his father; he was deceived by his own sons. Lot made\na worldly choice; in the world's ruin he was overwhelmed. So David\nhaving slain Uriah with the sword, the sword was never to depart\nfrom him. He had robbed Uriah of his wife; his neighbours would in\nlike manner rob and dishonour him. He had disturbed the purity of\nthe family relation; his own house was to become a den of pollution.\nHe had mingled deceit and treachery with his actions; deceit and\ntreachery would be practised towards him. What a sad and ominous\nprospect! Men naturally look for peace in old age; the evening of\nlife is expected to be calm. But for him there was to be no calm; and\nhis trial was to fall on the tenderest part of his nature. He had a\nstrong affection for his children; in that very feeling he was to be\nwounded, and that, too, all his life long. Oh let not any suppose\nthat, because God's children are saved by His mercy from eternal\npunishment, it is a light thing for them to despise the commandments\nof the Lord! \"Thine own wickedness shall correct thee, and thy\nbackslidings shall reprove thee; know therefore and see that it is an\nevil thing and bitter that thou hast forsaken the Lord thy God, and\nthat thy fear is not in Me, saith the Lord of hosts.\"\n\nPre-eminent in its bitterness was that part of David's retribution\nwhich made his own house the source from which his bitterest trials\nand humiliations should arise. For the most part, it is in extreme\ncases only that parents have to encounter this trial. It is only in\nthe wickedest households, and in households for the most part where\nthe passions are roused to madness by drink, that the hand of the\nchild is raised against his father to wound and dishonour him. It was\na terrible humiliation to the king of Israel to have to bear this\ndoom, and especially to that king of Israel who in many ways bore\nso close a resemblance to the promised Seed, who was indeed to be\nthe progenitor of that Seed, so that when Messiah came He should be\ncalled \"the Son of David.\" Alas! the glory of this distinction was to\nbe sadly tarnished. \"Son of David\" was to be a very equivocal title,\naccording to the character of the individual who should bear it. In\none case it would denote the very climax of honour; in another, the\ndepth of humiliation. Yes, that household of David's would reek with\nfoul lusts and unnatural crimes. From the bosom of that home where,\nunder other circumstances, it would have been so natural to look\nfor model children, pure, affectionate, and dutiful, there would\ncome forth monsters of lust and monsters of ambition, whose deeds of\ninfamy would hardly find a parallel in the annals of the nation!\nIn the breasts of some of these royal children the devil would find\na seat where he might plan and execute the most unnatural crimes.\nAnd that city of Jerusalem, which he had rescued from the Jebusites,\nconsecrated as God's dwelling-place, and built and adorned with the\nspoils which the king had taken in many a well-fought field, would\nturn against him in his old age, and force him to fly wherever a\nrefuge could be found as homeless, and nearly as destitute, as in the\ndays of his youth when he fled from Saul!\n\nAnd lastly, his retribution was to be public. He had done his part\nsecretly, but God would do His part openly. There was not a man or\nwoman in all Israel but would see these judgments coming on a king\nwho had outraged his royal position and his royal prerogatives. How\ncould he ever go in and out happily among them again? How could he\nbe sure, when he met any of them, that they were not thinking of his\ncrime, and condemning him in their hearts? How could he meet the hardly\nsuppressed scowl of every Hittite, that would recall his treatment of\ntheir faithful kinsman? What a burden would he carry ever after, he\nthat used to wear such a frank and honest and kindly look, that was so\naffable to all that sought his counsel, and so tender-hearted to all\nthat were in trouble! And what outlet could he find out of all this\nmisery? There was but one he could think of. If only God would forgive\nhim; if He, whose mercy was in the heavens, would but receive him again\nof His infinite condescension into His fellowship, and vouchsafe to him\nthat grace which was not the fruit of man's deserving, but, as its very\nname implied, of God's unbounded goodness, then might his soul return\nagain to its quiet rest, though life could never be to him what it was\nbefore. And this, as we shall presently see, is what he set himself\nvery earnestly to seek, and what of God's mercy he was permitted to\nfind. O sinner, if thou hast strayed like a lost sheep, and plunged\ninto the very depths of sin, know that all is not lost with thee! There\nis one way yet open to peace, if not to joy. Amid the ten thousand\ntimes ten thousand voices that condemn thee, there is one voice of love\nthat comes from heaven and says, \"Return unto Me, and I will return\nunto you, saith the Lord.\"\n\n\n\n\n                             CHAPTER XVI.\n\n                     _PENITENCE AND CHASTISEMENT._\n\n                         2 SAMUEL xii. 13-25.\n\n\nWhen Nathan ended his message, plainly and strongly though he had\nspoken, David indicated no irritation, made no complaint against the\nprophet, but simply and humbly confessed--\"I have sinned.\" It is so\ncommon for men to be offended when a servant of God remonstrates\nwith them, and to impute their interference to an unworthy motive,\nand to the desire of some one to hurt and humiliate them, that it is\nrefreshing to find a great king receiving the rebuke of the Lord's\nservant in a spirit of profound humility and frank confession. Very\ndifferent was the experience of John the Baptist when he remonstrated\nwith Herod. Very different was the experience of the famous Chrysostom\nwhen he rebuked the emperor and empress for conduct unworthy of\nChristians. Very different has been the experience of many a faithful\nminister in a humbler sphere, when, constrained by a sense of duty, he\nhas gone to some man of influence in his flock, and spoken seriously\nto him of sins which bring a reproach on the name of Christ. Often it\nhas cost the faithful man days and nights of pain; girding himself for\nthe duty has been like preparing for martyrdom; and it has been really\nmartyrdom when he has had to bear the long malignant enmity of the\nman whom he rebuked. However vile the conduct of David may have been,\nit is one thing in his favour that he receives his rebuke with perfect\nhumility and submission; he makes no attempt to palliate his conduct\neither before God or man; but sums up his whole feeling in these\nexpressive words, \"I have sinned against the Lord.\"\n\nTo this frank acknowledgment Nathan replied that the Lord had put\naway his sin, so that he would not undergo the punishment of death.\nIt was his own judgment that the miscreant who had stolen the ewe\nlamb should die, and as that proved to be himself, it indicated\nthe punishment that was due to him. That punishment, however, the\nLord, in the exercise of His clemency, had been pleased to remit.\nBut a palpable proof of His displeasure was to be given in another\nway--the child of Bathsheba was to die. It was to become, as it were,\nthe scapegoat for its father. In those times father and child were\ncounted so much one that the offence of the one was often visited on\nboth. When Achan stole the spoil at Jericho, not only he himself, but\nhis whole family, shared his sentence of death. In this case of David\nthe father was to escape, but the child was to die. It may seem hard,\nand barely just. But death to the child, though in form a punishment,\nmight prove to be great gain. It might mean transference to a higher\nand brighter state of existence. It might mean escape from a life\nfull of sorrows and perils to the world where there is no more pain,\nnor sorrow, nor death, because the former things are passed away.\n\nWe cannot pass from the consideration of David's great penitence\nfor his sin without dwelling a little more on some of its features.\nIt is in the fifty-first Psalm that the working of his soul is\nbest unfolded to us. No doubt it has been strongly urged by certain\nmodern critics that that psalm is not David's at all; that it belongs\nto some other period, as the last verse but one indicates, when\nthe walls of Jerusalem were in ruins;--most likely the period of\nthe Captivity. But even if we should have to say of the last two\nverses that they must have been added at another time, we cannot but\nhold the psalm to be the outpouring of David's soul, and not the\nexpression of the penitence of the nation at large. If ever psalm\nwas the expression of the feelings of an individual it is this one.\nAnd if ever psalm was appropriate to King David it is this one. For\nthe one thing which is uppermost in the soul of the writer is his\npersonal relation to God. The one thing that he values, and for which\nall other things are counted but dung, is friendly intercourse with\nGod. This sin no doubt has had many other atrocious effects, but the\nterrible thing is that it has broken the link that bound him to God,\nit has cut off all the blessed things that come by that channel, it\nhas made him an outcast from Him whose lovingkindness is better than\nlife. Without God's favour life is but misery. He can do no good to\nman; he can do no service to God. It is a rare thing even for good\nmen to have such a profound sense of the blessedness of God's favour.\nDavid was one of those who had it in the profoundest degree; and as\nthe fifty-first Psalm is full of it, as it forms the very soul of its\npleadings, we cannot doubt that it was a psalm of David.\n\nThe humiliation of the Psalmist before God is very profound, very\nthorough. His case is one for simple mercy; he has not the shadow of\na plea in self-defence. His sin is in every aspect atrocious. It is\nthe product of one so vile that he may be said to have been shapen\nin iniquity and conceived in sin. The aspect of it as sin against God\nis so overwhelming that it absorbs the other aspect--the sin against\nman. Not but that he has sinned against man too, but it is the sin\nagainst God that is so awful, so overwhelming.\n\nYet, if his sin abounds, the Psalmist feels that God's grace abounds\nmuch more. He has the highest sense of the excellence and the\nmultitude of God's lovingkindnesses. Man can never make himself so\nodious as to be beyond the Divine compassion. He can never become\nso guilty as to be beyond the Divine forgiveness. \"Blot out my\ntransgressions,\" sobs David, knowing that it can be done. \"Purge me\nwith hyssop,\" he cries, \"and I _shall_ be clean; wash me, and I shall\nbe whiter than the snow. Create in me a clean heart, and renew a\nright spirit within me.\"\n\nBut this is not all; it is far from all. He pleads most plaintively\nfor the restoration of God's friendship. \"Cast me not away from Thy\npresence, and take not Thy Holy Spirit from me,\"--for that would be\nhell; \"Restore unto me the joy of Thy salvation, and uphold me with\nThy free Spirit,\"--for that is heaven. And, with the renewed sense of\nGod's love and grace, there would come a renewed power to serve God\nand be useful to men. \"Then will I teach transgressors Thy ways; and\nsinners shall be converted unto Thee. O Lord, open Thou my lips; and\nmy mouth shall show forth Thy praise.\" Deprive me not for ever of Thy\nfriendship, for then life would be but darkness and anguish; depose\nme not for ever from Thy ministry, continue to me yet the honour and\nthe privilege of converting sinners unto Thee. Of the sacrifices of\nthe law it was needless to think, as if they were adequate to purge\naway so overwhelming a sin. \"Thou desirest not sacrifice, else I\nwould give it: Thou delightest not in burnt-offering. The sacrifices\nof God are a broken spirit: a broken and a contrite heart, O God,\nThou wilt not despise.\"\n\nWith all his consciousness of sin, David has yet a profound faith\nin God's mercy, and he is forgiven. But as we have seen, the Divine\ndispleasure against him is to be openly manifested in another form,\nbecause, in addition to his personal sin, he has given occasion to\nthe enemies of the Lord to blaspheme.\n\nThis is an aggravation of guilt which only God's children can commit.\nAnd it is an aggravation of a most distressing kind, enough surely\nto warn off every Christian from vile self-indulgence. The blasphemy\nto which David had given occasion was that which denies the reality\nof God's work in the souls of His people. It denies that they are\nbetter than others. They only make more pretence, but that pretence\nis hollow, if not hypocritical. There is no such thing as a special\nwork of the Holy Ghost in them, and therefore there is no reason\nwhy any one should seek to be converted, or why he should implore\nthe special grace of the Spirit of God. Alas! how true it is that\nwhen any one who occupies a conspicuous place in the Church of God\nbreaks down, such sneers are sure to be discharged on every side!\nWhat a keen eye the world has for the inconsistencies of Christians!\nWith what remorseless severity does it come down on them when they\nfall into these inconsistencies! Sins that would hardly be thought\nof if committed by others,--what a serious aspect they assume when\ncommitted by them! Had it been Nebuchadnezzar, for example, that\ntreated Uriah as David did, who would have thought of it a second\ntime? What else could you expect of Nebuchadnezzar? Let a Christian\nsociety or any other Christian body be guilty of a scandal, how do\nthe worldly newspapers fasten on it like treasure-trove, and exult\nover their humbled victim, like Red Indians dancing their war dances\nand flourishing their tomahawks over some miserable prisoner. The\nscorn is very bitter, and sometimes it is very unjust; yet perhaps\nit has on the whole a wholesome effect, just because it stimulates\nvigilance and carefulness on the part of the Church. But the worst\nof the case is, that on the part of unbelievers it stimulates that\nblasphemy which is alike dishonouring to God and pernicious to man.\nVirtually this blasphemy denies the whole work of the Holy Spirit in\nthe hearts of men. It denies the reality of any supernatural agency\nof the Spirit in one more than in all. And denying the work of the\nSpirit, it makes men careless about the Spirit; it neutralises the\nsolemn words of Christ, \"Ye must be born again.\" It throws back\nthe kingdom of God, and it turns back many a pilgrim who had been\nthinking seriously of beginning the journey to the heavenly city,\nbecause he is now uncertain whether such a city exists at all.\n\nHardly has Nathan left the king's house when the child begins to\nsicken, and the sickness becomes very great. We should have expected\nthat David would be concerned and distressed, but hardly to the\ndegree which his distress attained. In the intensity of his anxiety\nand grief there is something remarkable. A new-born infant could\nscarcely have taken that mysterious hold on a father's heart which\na little time is commonly required to develop, but which, once it\nis there, makes the loss even of a little child a grievous blow,\nand leaves the heart sick and sore for many a day. But there is\nsomething in an infant's agony which unmans the strongest heart,\nespecially when it comes in convulsive fits that no skill can allay.\nAnd should one, in addition, be tortured with the conviction that\nthe child was suffering on one's own account, one's distress might\nwell be overpowering. And this was David's feeling. His sin was ever\nbefore him. As he saw that suffering infant he must have felt as if\nthe stripes that should have fallen on him were tearing the poor\nbabe's tender frame, and crushing him with undeserved suffering.\nEven in ordinary cases, it is a mysterious thing to see an infant in\nmortal agony. It is solemnizing to think that the one member of the\nfamily who has committed no actual sin should be the first to reap\nthe deadly wages of sin. It leads us to think of mankind as one tree\nof many branches; and when the wintry frost begins to prevail it is\nthe youngest and tenderest branchlets that first droop and die. Oh!\nhow careful should those in mature years be, and especially parents,\nlest by their sins they bring down a retribution which shall fall\nfirst on their children, and perhaps the youngest and most innocent\nof all! Yet how often do we see the children suffering for the sins\nof their parents, and suffering in a way which, in this life at\nleast, admits of no right remedy! In that \"bitter cry of outcast\nLondon,\" which fell some years ago on the ears of the country, by\nfar the most distressing note was the cry of infants abandoned by\ndrunken parents before they could well walk, or living with them in\nhovels where blows and curses came in place of food and clothing\nand kindness--children brought up without aught of the sunshine of\nlove, every tender feeling nipped and shrivelled in the very bud by\nthe frost of bitter, brutal cruelty. And if in ordinary families\nchildren are not made to suffer so palpably for their parents' sins,\nyet suffer they do in many ways sufficiently serious. Wherever there\nis a bad example, wherever there is a laxity of principle, wherever\nGod is dishonoured, the sin reacts upon the children. Their moral\ntexture is relaxed; they learn to trifle with sin, and, trifling with\nsin, to disbelieve in the retribution for sin. And where conscience\nhas not been altogether destroyed in the parent, and remorse for sin\nbegins to prevail, and retribution to come, it is not what he has to\nsuffer in his own person that he feels most deeply, but what has to\nbe borne and suffered by his children. Does any one ask why God has\nconstituted society so that the innocent are thus implicated in the\nsin of the guilty? The answer is, that this arises not from God's\nconstitution, but from man's perversion of it. Why, we may ask, do\nmen subvert God's moral order? Why do they break down His fences and\nembankments, and, contrary to the Divine plan, let ruinous streams\npour their destructive waters into their homes and enclosures? If the\nhuman race had preserved from the beginning the constitution which\nGod gave them, obeyed His law both individually and as a social body,\nsuch things would not have been. But reckless man, in his eagerness\nto have his own way, disregards the Divine arrangement, and plunges\nhimself and his family into the depths of woe.\n\nThere is something even beyond this, however, that arrests our notice\nin the behaviour of David. Though Nathan had said that the child\nwould die, he set himself most earnestly, by prayer and fasting, to\nget God to spare him. Was this not a strange proceeding? It could\nbe justified only on the supposition that the Divine judgment was\nmodified by an unexpressed condition that, if David should humble\nhimself in true repentance, it would not have to be inflicted.\nAnyhow, we see him throwing his whole soul into these exercises:\nengaging in them so earnestly that he took no regular food, and in\nplace of the royal bed he was content to lie upon the earth. His\nearnestness in this was well fitted to show the difference between a\nreligious service gone through with becoming reverence, because it\nis the proper thing to do, and the service of one who has a definite\nend in view, who seeks a definite blessing, and who wrestles with God\nto obtain it. But David had no valid ground for expecting that, even\nif he should repent, God would avert the judgment from the child;\nindeed, the reason assigned for it showed the contrary--because he\nhad given occasion to the enemies of the Lord to blaspheme.\n\nAnd so, after a very weary and dismal week, the child died. But\ninstead of abandoning himself to a tumult of distress when this event\ntook place, he altogether changed his demeanour. His spirit became\ncalm, \"he arose from the earth, and washed, and anointed himself,\nand changed his apparel, and he came into the house of the Lord and\nworshipped; then he came to his own house, and when he required, they\nset bread before him, and he did eat.\" It seemed to his servants\na strange proceeding. The answer of David showed that there was a\nrational purpose in it. So long as he thought it possible that the\nchild's life might be spared, he not only continued to pray to that\neffect, but he did everything to prevent his attention from being\nturned to anything else, he did everything to concentrate his soul\non that one object, and to let it appear to God how thoroughly it\noccupied his mind. The death of the child showed that it was not\nGod's will to grant his petition, notwithstanding his deep repentance\nand earnest prayer and fasting. All suspense was now at an end, and,\ntherefore, all reason for continuing to fast and pray. For David to\nabandon himself to the wailings of aggravated grief at this moment\nwould have been highly wrong. It would have been to quarrel with the\nwill of God. It would have been to challenge God's right to view the\nchild as one with its father, and treat it accordingly.\n\nAnd there was yet another reason. If his heart still yearned on the\nchild, the re-union was not impossible, though it could not take\nplace in this life. \"I shall go to him, but he shall not return unto\nme.\" The glimpse of the future expressed in these words is touching\nand beautiful. The relation between David and that little child is\nnot ended. Though the mortal remains shall soon crumble, father and\nchild are not yet done with one another. But their meeting is not to\nbe in this world. Meet again they certainly shall, but \"I shall go to\nhim, and he shall not return to me.\"\n\nAnd this glimpse of the future relation of parent and child, separated\nhere by the hand of death, has ever proved most comforting to bereaved\nChristian hearts. Very touching and very comforting it is to light on\nthis bright view of the future at so early a period of Old Testament\nhistory. Words cannot express the desolation of heart which such\nbereavements cause. When Rachel is weeping for her children she cannot\nbe comforted if she thinks they are not. But a new light breaks on her\ndesolate heart when she is assured that she may go to them, though\nthey shall not return to her. Blessed, truly, are the dead who die\nin the Lord, and, however painful the stroke that removed them,\nblessed are their surviving friends. Ye shall go to them, though they\nshall not return to you. How you are to recognise them, how you are\nto commune with them, in what place they shall be, in what condition\nof consciousness, you cannot tell; but \"you shall go to them;\" the\nseparation shall be but temporary, and who can conceive the joy of\nre-union, re-union never to be broken by separation for evermore?\n\nOne other fact we must notice ere passing from the record of David's\nconfession and chastisement,--the moral courage which he showed in\ndelivering the fifty-first Psalm to the chief musician, and thus\nhelping to keep alive in his own generation and for all time coming\nthe memory of his trespass. Most men would have thought how the ugly\ntransaction might most effectually be buried, and would have tried to\nput their best face on it before their people. Not so David. He was\nwilling that his people and all posterity should see him the atrocious\ntransgressor he was--let them think of him as they pleased. He saw\nthat this everlasting exposure of his vileness was essential towards\nextracting from the miserable transaction such salutary lessons as it\nmight be capable of yielding. With a wonderful effort of magnanimity,\nhe resolved to place himself in the pillory of public shame, to expose\nhis memory to all the foul treatment which the scoffers and libertines\nof every after-age might think fit to heap on it. It is unjust to\nDavid, when unbelievers rail against him for his sin in the matter\nof Uriah, to overlook the fact that the first public record of the\ntransaction came from his own pen, and was delivered to the chief\nmusician, for public use. Infidels may scoff, but this narrative will\nbe a standing proof that the foolishness of God is wiser than men. The\nview given to God's servants of the weakness and deceitfulness of\ntheir hearts; the warning against dallying with the first movements\nof sin; the sight of the misery which follows in its wake; the\nencouragement which the convicted sinner has to humble himself before\nGod; the impulse given to penitential feeling; the hope of mercy\nawakened in the breasts of the despairing; the softer, humbler, holier\nwalk when pardon has been got and peace restored,--such lessons as\nthese, afforded in every age by this narrative, will render it to\nthoughtful hearts a constant ground for magnifying God. \"O the depth of\nthe riches both of the wisdom and knowledge of God! how unsearchable\nare His judgments, and His ways past finding out!\"\n\n\n\n\n                             CHAPTER XVII.\n\n                         _ABSALOM AND AMNON._\n\n                         2 SAMUEL xiii. 1-37.\n\n\nA living sorrow, says the proverb, is worse than a dead. The dead\nsorrow had been very grievous to David; what the living sorrow, of\nwhich this chapter tells us, must have been, we cannot conceive.\nIt is his own disorderly lusts, reappearing in his sons, that are\nthe source of this new tragedy. It is often useful for parents to\nask whether they would like to see their children doing what they\nallow in themselves; and in many cases the answer is an emphatic\n\"No.\" David is now doomed to see his children following his own evil\nexample, only with added circumstances of atrocity. Adultery and\nmurder had been introduced by him into the palace; when he is done\nwith them they remain to be handled by his sons.\n\nIt is a very repulsive picture of sensuality that this chapter\npresents. One would suppose that Amnon and Absalom had been\naccustomed to the wild orgies of pagan idolatry. Nathan had rebuked\nDavid because he had given occasion to the enemies of the Lord to\nblaspheme. He had afforded them a pretext for denying the work of the\nHoly Spirit in regeneration and sanctification, and for affirming\nthat so-called holy men were just like the rest of mankind. This\nin God's eyes was a grievous offence. Amnon and Absalom are now\nguilty of the same offence in another form, because they afford a\npretext for ungodly men to say that the families of holy men are no\nbetter--perhaps that they are worse--than other families. But as\nDavid himself in the matter of Uriah is an exception to the ordinary\nlives of godly men, so his home is an exception to the ordinary tone\nand spirit of religious households. Happily we are met with a very\ndifferent ideal when we look behind the scenes into the better class\nof Christian homes, whether high or low. It is a beautiful picture of\nthe Christian home, according to the Christian ideal, we find, for\nexample, in Milton's _Comus_--pure brothers, admiring a dear sister's\npurity, and jealous lest, alone in the world, she should fall in\nthe way of any of those bloated monsters that would drag an angel\ninto their filthy sty. Commend us to those homes where brothers and\nsisters, sharing many a game, and with still greater intimacy pouring\ninto each other's ears their inner thoughts and feelings, never utter\na jest, or word, or allusion with the slightest taint of indelicacy,\nand love and honour each other with all the higher affection that\nnone of them has ever been near the haunts of pollution. It is easy\nto ridicule innocence, to scoff at young men who \"flee youthful\nlusts;\" yet who will say that the youth who is steeped in fashionable\nsensuality is worthy to be the brother and companion of pure-minded\nmaidens, or that his breath will not contaminate the atmosphere of\ntheir home? What easy victories Belial gains over many! How easily he\npersuades them that vice is manly, that impurity is grand, that the\npig's sty is a delightful place to lie down in! How easily he induces\nthem to lay snares for female chastity, and put the devil's mask on\nwoman's soul! But \"God is not mocked; whatsoever a man soweth, that\nshall he also reap; for he that soweth to the flesh shall of the\nflesh reap corruption, while he that soweth to the Spirit shall of\nthe Spirit reap life everlasting.\"\n\nIn Scripture some men have very short biographies; Amnon is one of\nthese. And, like Cain, all that is recorded of him has the mark of\ninfamy. We can easily understand that it was a great disaster to him\nto be a king's son. To have his position in life determined and all\nhis wants supplied without an effort on his part; to be surrounded\nby such plenty that the wholesome necessity of denying himself was\nunknown, and whatever he fancied was at once obtained; to be so\naccustomed to indulge his legitimate feelings that when illegitimate\ndesires rose up it seemed but natural that they too should be\ngratified; thus to be led on in the evil ways of sensual pleasure\ntill his appetite became at once bloated and irrepressible; to be\nsurrounded by parasites and flatterers, that would make a point of\nnever crossing him nor uttering a disagreeable word, but constantly\nencouraging his tastes,--all this was extremely dangerous. And when\nhis father had set him the example, it was hardly possible he would\navoid the snare. There is every reason to believe that before he is\npresented to us in this chapter he was already steeped in sensuality.\nIt was his misfortune to have a friend, Jonadab, the son of Shimeah,\nDavid's brother, \"a very subtil man,\" who at heart must have been\nas great a profligate as himself. For if Jonadab had been anything\nbut a profligate, Amnon would never have confided to him his odious\ndesire with reference to his half-sister, and Jonadab would never\nhave given him the advice that he did. What a blessing to Amnon, at\nthis stage of the tragedy, would have been the faithful advice of\nan honest friend--one who would have had the courage to declare the\ninfamy of his proposal, and who would have so placed it in the light\nof truth that it would have shocked and horrified even Amnon himself!\nIn reality, the friend was more guilty than the culprit. The one was\nblinded by passion; the other was self-possessed and cool. The cool\nman encourages the heated; the sober man urges on the intoxicated.\nO ye sons of wealth and profligacy, it is sad enough that you are\noften so tempted by the lusts that rise up in your own bosoms, but\nit is worse to be exposed to the friendship of wretches who never\nstudy your real good, but encourage you to indulge the vilest of your\nappetites, and smooth for you the way to hell!\n\nThe plan which Jonadab proposes for Amnon to obtain the object of\nhis desire is founded on a stratagem which he is to practise on his\nfather. He is to pretend sickness, and under this pretext to get\nmatters arranged by his father as he would like. To practise deceit\non a father was a thing not unknown even among the founders of the\nnation; Jacob and Jacob's sons had resorted to it alike. But it had\nbeen handed down with the mark of disgrace attached to it by God\nHimself. In spite of this it was counted both by Jonadab and Amnon\na suitable weapon for their purpose. And so, as every one knows, it\nis counted not only a suitable, but a smart and laughable, device,\nin stage plays without number, and by the class of persons whose\nmorality is reflected by the popular stage. Who so suitable a person\nto be made a fool of as \"the governor\"? Who so little to be pitied\nwhen he becomes the dupe of his children's cunning? \"Honour thy\nfather and thy mother,\" was once proclaimed in thunder from Sinai,\nand not only men's hearts trembled, but the very earth shook at the\nvoice. But these were old times and old-fashioned people. Treat your\nfather and mother as useful and convenient tools, inasmuch as they\nhave control of the purse, of which you are often in want. But as\nthey are not likely to approve of the objects for which you would\nspend their money; as they are sure, on the other hand, to disapprove\nof them strongly, exercise your ingenuity in hoodwinking them as to\nyour doings, and if your stratagem succeed, enjoy your chuckle at\nthe blindness and simplicity of the poor old fools! If this be the\ncourse that commends itself to any son or daughter, it indicates a\nheart so perverted that it would be most difficult to bring it to\nany sense of sin. All we would say is, See what kind of comrades you\nhave in this policy of deceiving parents. See this royal blackguard,\nAmnon, and his villainous adviser Jonadab, resorting to the very same\nmethod for hoodwinking King David; see them making use of this piece\nof machinery to compass an act of the grossest villainy that ever\nwas heard of; and say whether you hold the device to be commended by\ntheir example, and whether you feel honoured in treading a course\nthat has been marked before you by such footprints.\n\nIf anything more was needed to show the accomplished villainy of Amnon,\nit is his treatment of Tamar after he has violently compassed her ruin.\nIt is the story so often repeated even at this day,--the ruined victim\nflung aside in dishonour, and left unpitied to her shame. There is no\ntrace of any compunction on the part of Amnon at the moral murder he\nhas committed, at the life he has ruined; no pity for the once blithe\nand happy maiden whom he has doomed to humiliation and woe. She has\nserved his purpose, king's daughter though she is; let her crawl into\nthe earth like a poor worm to live or to die, in want or in misery;\nit is nothing to him. The only thing about her that he cares for is,\nthat she may never again trouble him with her existence, or disturb\nthe easy flow of his life. We think of those men of the olden time as\nutter barbarians who confined their foes in dismal dungeons, making\ntheir lives a continual torture, and denying them the slightest\nsolace to the miseries of captivity. But what shall we say of those,\nhigh-born and wealthy men, it may be, who doom their cast-off victims\nto an existence of wretchedness and degradation which has no gleam of\nenjoyment, compared with which the silence and loneliness of a prison\nwould be a luxury? Can the selfishness of sin exhibit itself anywhere\nor anyhow more terribly? What kind of heart can be left to the seducer,\nso hardened as to smother the faintest touch of pity for the woman he\nhas made wretched for ever; so savage as to drive from him with the\nroughest execrations the poor confiding creature without whom he used\nto vow, in the days of her unsuspecting innocence, that he knew not how\nto live!\n\nIn a single word, our attention is now turned to the father of both\nAmnon and Tamar. \"When King David heard of all these things, he was\nvery wroth.\" Little wonder! But was this all? Was no punishment found\nfor Amnon? Was he allowed to remain in the palace, the oldest son\nof the king, with nothing to mark his father's displeasure, nothing\nto neutralise his influence with the other royal children, nothing\nto prevent the repetition of his wickedness? Tamar, of course, was\na woman. Was it for this reason that nothing was done to punish\nher destroyer? It does not appear that his position was in any way\nchanged. We cannot but be indignant at the inactivity of David. Yet\nwhen we think of the past, we need not be surprised. David was too\nmuch implicated in the same sins to be able to inflict suitable\npunishment for them. It is those whose hands are clean that can\nrebuke the offender. Let others try to administer reproof--their own\nhearts condemn them, and they shrink from the task. Even the king of\nIsrael must wink at the offences of his son.\n\nBut if David winked, Absalom did nothing of the kind. Such treatment\nof his full sister, if the king chose to let it alone, could not be\nlet alone by the proud, indignant brother. He nursed his wrath, and\nwatched for his opportunity. Nothing short of the death of Amnon\nwould suffice him. And that death must be compassed not in open fight\nbut by assassination. At last, after two full years, his opportunity\ncame. A sheepshearing at Baal-hazor gave occasion for a feast, to\nwhich the king and all his sons should be asked. His father excused\nhimself on the ground of the expense. Absalom was most unwilling to\nreceive the excuse, reckoning probably that the king's presence would\nmore completely ward off any suspicion of his purpose, and utterly\nheedless of the anguish his father would have felt when he found\nthat, while asked professedly to a feast, it was really to the murder\nof his eldest son. David, however, refuses firmly, but he gives\nAbsalom his blessing. Whether this was meant in the sense in which\nIsaac blessed Jacob, or whether it was merely an ordinary occasion\nof commending Absalom to the grace of God, it was a touching act,\nand it might have arrested the arm that was preparing to deal such a\nfatal blow to Amnon. On the contrary, Absalom only availed himself of\nhis father's expression of kindly feeling to beg that he would allow\nAmnon to be present. And he succeeded so well that permission was\ngiven, not to Amnon only, but to all the king's sons. To Absalom's\nfarm at Baal-hazor accordingly they went, and we may be sure that\nnothing would be spared to make the banquet worthy of a royal family.\nAnd now, while the wine is flowing freely, and the buzz of jovial\ntalk fills the apartment, and all power of action on the part of\nAmnon is arrested by the stupefying influence of wine, the signal is\ngiven for his murder. See how closely Absalom treads in the footsteps\nof his father when he summons intoxicating drink to his aid, as David\ndid to Uriah, when trying to make a screen of him for his own guilt.\nYes, from the beginning, drink, or some other stupefying agent, has\nbeen the ready ally of the worst criminals, either preparing the\nvictim for the slaughter or maddening the murderer for the deed.\nBut wherever it has been present it has only made the tragedy more\nawful and the aspect of the crime more hideous. Give a wide berth,\nye servants of God, to an agent with which the devil has ever placed\nhimself in such close and deadly alliance!\n\nIt is not easy to paint the blackness of the crime of Absalom.\nWe have nothing to say for Amnon, who seems to have been a man\nsingularly vile; but there is something very appalling in his being\nmurdered by the order of his brother, something very cold-blooded\nin Absalom's appeal to the assassins not to flinch from their task,\nsomething very revolting in the flagrant violation of the laws of\nhospitality, and something not less daring in the deed being done\nin the midst of the feast, and in the presence of the guests. When\nShakespeare would paint the murder of a royal guest, the deed is\ndone in the dead of night, with no living eye to witness it, with no\nliving arm at hand capable of arresting the murderous weapon. But\nhere is a murderer of his guest who does not scruple to have the deed\ndone in broad daylight in presence of all his guests, in presence\nof all the brothers of his victim, while the walls resound to the\nvoice of mirth, and each face is radiant with festive excitement. Out\nfrom some place of concealment rush the assassins with their deadly\nweapons; next moment the life-blood of Amnon spurts on the table, and\nhis lifeless body falls heavily to the ground. Before the excitement\nand horror of the assembled guests has subsided Absalom has made his\nescape, and before any step can be taken to pursue him he is beyond\nreach in Geshur in Syria.\n\nMeanwhile an exaggerated report of the tragedy reaches King David's\nears,--Absalom has slain all the king's sons, and there is not one of\nthem left. Evil, at the bottom of his heart, must have been David's\nopinion of him when he believed the story, even in this exaggerated\nform. \"The king arose and rent his clothes, and lay on the earth; and\nall his servants stood round with their clothes rent.\" Nor was it till\nJonadab, his cousin, assured him that only Amnon could be dead, that\nthe terrible impression of a wholesale massacre was removed from his\nmind. But who can fancy what the circumstances must have been, when\nit became a relief to David to know that Absalom had murdered but one\nof his brothers? Jonadab evidently thought that David did not need to\nbe much surprised, inasmuch as this murder was a foregone conclusion\nwith Absalom; it had been determined on ever since the day when Amnon\nforced Tamar. Here is a new light on the character of Jonadab. He knew\nthat Absalom had determined that Amnon should die. It was no surprise\nto him to hear that this purpose was carried out with effect. Why did\nhe not warn Amnon? Could it be that he had been bribed over to the side\nof Absalom? He knew the real state of the case before the king's sons\narrived. For when they did appear he appealed to David whether his\nstatement, previously given, was not correct.\n\nAnd now the first part of the retribution denounced by Nathan begins\nto be fulfilled, and fulfilled very fearfully,--\"the sword shall\nnever depart from thy house.\" Ancient history abounds in frightful\nstories, stories of murder, incest, and revenge, the materials, real\nor fabulous, from which were formed the tragedies of the great Greek\ndramatists. But nothing in their dramas is more tragic than the crime\nof Amnon, the incest of Tamar, and the revenge of Absalom. What David's\nfeelings must have been we can hardly conceive. What must he have felt\nas he thought of the death of Amnon, slain by his brother's command,\nin his brother's house, at his brother's table, and hurried to God's\njudgment while his brain was reeling with intoxication! What a pang\nmust have been shot by the recollection how David had once tried, for\nhis own base ends, to intoxicate Uriah as Absalom had intoxicated\nAmnon! It does not appear that David's grief over Amnon was of the\npassionate kind that he showed afterwards when Absalom was slain; but,\nthough quieter, it must have been very bitter. How could he but be\nfilled with anguish when he thought of his son, hurried, while drunk,\nby his brother's act, into the presence of God, to answer for the\nworse than murder of his sister, and for all the crimes and sins of an\nill-spent life! What hope could he entertain for the welfare of his\nsoul? What balm could he find for such a wound?\n\nAnd it was not Amnon only he had to think of. These three of his\nchildren, Amnon, Tamar, Absalom, in one sense or another, were now\ntotal wrecks. From these three branches of his family tree no fruit\ncould ever come. Nor could the dead now bury its dead. Neither the\nremembrance nor the effect of the past could ever be wiped out. It\nbaffles us to think how David was able to carry such grief. \"David\nmourned for his son every day.\" It was only the lapse of time that\ncould blunt the edge of his distress.\n\nBut surely there must have been terrible faults in David's upbringing\nof his family before such results as these could come. Undoubtedly\nthere were. First of all, there was the number of his wives. This\ncould not fail to be a source of much jealousy and discord among\nthem and their children, especially when he himself was absent, as\nhe must often have been, for long periods at a time. Then there\nwas his own example, so unguarded, so unhallowed, at a point where\nthe utmost care and vigilance had need to be shown. Thirdly, there\nseems to have been an excessive tenderness of feeling towards his\nchildren, and towards some of them in particular. He could not bear\nto disappoint; his feelings got the better of his judgment; when the\nchild insisted the father weakly gave way. He wanted the firmness and\nthe faithfulness of Abraham, of whom God had said, \"I know him that\nhe will _command_ his children and his household after him, and they\nshall keep the way of the Lord to do justice and judgment.\" Perhaps,\ntoo, busy and often much pressed as he was with affairs of state,\noccupied with foreign wars, with internal improvements, and the\ndaily administration of justice, he looked on his house as a place\nof simple relaxation and enjoyment, and forgot that there, too, he\nhad a solemn charge and most important duty. Thus it was that David\nfailed in his domestic management. It is easy to spy out his defects,\nand easy to condemn him. But let each of you who have a family to\nbring up look to himself. You have not all David's difficulties, but\nyou may have some of them. The precept and the promise is, \"Train\nup a child in the way he should go, and when he is old he will not\ndepart from it.\" It is not difficult to know the way he should\ngo--the difficulty lies in the words, \"Train up.\" To train up is\nnot to force, nor is it merely to lay down the law, or to enforce\nthe law. It is to get the whole nature of the child to move freely\nin the direction wished. To do this needs on the part of the parent\na combination of firmness and love, of patience and decision, of\nconsistent example and sympathetic encouragement. But it needs also,\non the part of God, and therefore to be asked in earnest, believing\nprayer, that wondrous power which touches the springs of the heart,\nand draws it to Him and to His ways. Only by this combination of\nparental faithfulness and Divine grace can we look for the blessed\nresult, \"when he is old he will not depart from it.\"\n\n\n\n\n                            CHAPTER XVIII.\n\n                 _ABSALOM BANISHED AND BROUGHT BACK._\n\n                      2 SAMUEL xiii. 38, 39; xiv.\n\n\nGeshur, to which Absalom fled after the murder of Amnon, accompanied\nin all likelihood by the men who had slain him, was a small kingdom\nin Syria, lying between Mount Hermon and Damascus. Maacah, Absalom's\nmother, was the daughter of Talmai, king of Geshur, so that Absalom\nwas there among his own relations. There is no reason to believe\nthat Talmai and his people had renounced the idolatrous worship that\nprevailed in Syria. For David to ally himself in marriage with an\nidolatrous people was not in accordance with the law. In law, Absalom\nmust have been a Hebrew, circumcised the eighth day; but in spirit he\nwould probably have no little sympathy with his mother's religion.\nHis utter alienation in heart from his father; the unconcern with\nwhich he sought to drive from the throne the man who had been so\nsolemnly called to it by God; the vow which he pretended to have\ntaken, when away in Syria, that if he were invited back to Jerusalem\nhe would \"serve the Lord,\" all point to a man infected in no small\ndegree with the spirit, if not addicted to the practice, of idolatry.\nAnd the tenor of his life, so full of cold-blooded wickedness,\nexemplified well the influence of idolatry, which bred neither fear\nof God nor love of man.\n\nWe have seen that Amnon had not that profound hold on David's heart\nwhich Absalom had; and therefore it is little wonder that when time\nhad subdued the keen sensation of horror, the king \"was comforted\nconcerning Amnon, seeing he was dead.\" There was no great blank left\nin his heart, no irrepressible craving of the soul for the return\nof the departed. But it was otherwise in the case of Absalom,--\"the\nking's heart was towards him.\" David was in a painful dilemma,\nplaced between two opposite impulses, the judicial and the paternal;\nthe judicial calling for the punishment of Absalom, the paternal\ncraving his restoration. Absalom in the most flagrant way had broken\na law older even than the Sinai legislation, for it had been given\nto Noah after the flood--\"Whoso sheddeth man's blood, by man shall\nhis blood be shed.\" But the deep affection of David for Absalom not\nonly caused him to shrink from executing that law, but made him most\ndesirous to have him near him again, pardoned, penitent as he no\ndoubt hoped, and enjoying all the rights and privileges of the king's\nson. The first part of the chapter now before us records the manner\nin which David, in great weakness, sacrificed the judicial to the\npaternal, sacrificed his judgment to his feelings, and the welfare\nof the kingdom for the gratification of his affection. For it was\ntoo evident that Absalom was not a fit man to succeed David on the\nthrone. If Saul was unfit to rule over God's people, and as God's\nvicegerent, much more was Absalom. Not only was he not the right kind\nof man, but, as his actions had showed, he was the very opposite. By\nhis own wicked deed he was now an outlaw and an exile; he was out of\nsight and likely to pass out of mind; and it was most undesirable\nthat any step should be taken to bring him back among the people,\nand give him every chance of the succession. Yet in spite of all this\nthe king in his secret heart desired to get Absalom back. And Joab,\nnot studying the welfare of the kingdom, but having regard only to\nthe strong wishes of the king and of the heir-apparent, devised a\nscheme for fulfilling their desire.\n\nThat collision of the paternal and the judicial, which David removed\nby sacrificing the judicial, brings to our mind a discord of the same\nkind on a much greater scale, which received a solution of a very\ndifferent kind. The sin of man created the same difficulty in the\ngovernment of God. The judicial spirit, demanding man's punishment,\ncame into collision with the paternal, desiring his happiness. How\nwere they to be reconciled? This is the great question on which the\npriests of the world, when unacquainted with Divine revelation,\nhave perplexed themselves since the world began. When we study the\nworld's religions, we see very clearly that it has never been held\nsatisfactory to solve the problem as David solved his difficulty,\nby simply sacrificing the judicial. The human conscience refuses to\naccept of such a settlement. It demands that some satisfaction shall\nbe made to that law of which the Divine Judge is the administrator.\nIt cannot bear to see God abandoning His judgment-seat in order that\nHe may show indiscriminate mercy. Fantastic and foolish in the last\ndegree, grim and repulsive too, in many cases, have been the devices\nby which it has been sought to supply the necessary satisfaction.\nThe awful sacrifices of Moloch, the mutilations of Juggernaut, the\npenances of popery, are most repulsive solutions, while they all\ntestify to the intuitive conviction of mankind that something in the\nform of atonement is indispensable. But if these solutions repel\nus, not less satisfactory is the opposite view, now so current,\nthat nothing in the shape of sin-offering is necessary, that no\nconsideration needs to be taken of the judicial, that the infinite\nclemency of God is adequate to deal with the case, and that a true\nbelief in His most loving fatherhood is all that is required for the\nforgiveness and acceptance of His erring children. In reality this\nis no solution at all; it is just David's method of sacrificing the\njudicial; it satisfies no healthy conscience, it brings solid peace\nto no troubled soul. The true and only solution, by which due regard\nis shown both to the judicial and the paternal, is that which is so\nfully unfolded and enforced in the Epistles of St. Paul. \"God was\nin Christ reconciling the world unto Himself, not imputing unto men\ntheir trespasses.... For He hath made Him to be sin for us, who knew\nno sin, that we might be made the righteousness of God in Him.\"\n\nReturning to the narrative, we have next to examine the stratagem of\nJoab, designed to commit the king unwittingly to the recall of Absalom.\nThe idea of the method may quite possibly have been derived from\nNathan's parable of the ewe lamb. The design was to get the king to\ngive judgment in an imaginary case, and thus commit him to a similar\njudgment in the case of Absalom. But there was a world-wide difference\nbetween the purpose of the parable of Nathan and that of the wise woman\nof Tekoah. Nathan's parable was designed to rouse the king's conscience\nas against his feelings; the woman of Tekoah's, as prompted by Joab,\nto rouse his feelings as against his conscience. Joab found a fitting\ntool for his purpose in a wise woman of Tekoah, a small town in the\nsouth of Judah. She was evidently an accommodating and unscrupulous\nperson; but there is no reason to compare her to the woman of Endor,\nwhose services Saul had resorted to. She seems to have been a woman\nof dramatic faculty, clever at personating another, and at acting a\npart. Her skill in this way becoming known to Joab, he arranged with\nher to go to the king with a fictitious story, and induce him now to\nbring back Absalom. Her story bore that she was a widow who had been\nleft with two sons, one of whom in a quarrel killed his brother in\nthe field. All the family were risen against her to constrain her to\ngive up the murderer to death, but if she did so her remaining coal\nwould be quenched, and neither name nor remainder left to her husband\non the face of the earth. On hearing the case, the king seems to have\nbeen impressed in the woman's favour, and promised to give an order\naccordingly. Further conversation obtained clearer assurances from him\nthat he would protect her from the avenger of blood. Then, dropping so\nfar her disguise, she ventured to remonstrate with the king, inasmuch\nas he had not dealt with his own son as he was prepared to deal with\nhers. \"Wherefore then hast thou devised such a thing against the people\nof God? for in speaking this word, the king is as one that is guilty,\nin that the king doth not fetch home again his banished one. For we\nmust needs die, and are as water spilt upon the ground which cannot be\ngathered up again; neither doth God take away life, but deviseth means\nthat he that is banished be not an outcast from Him.\" We cannot but\nbe struck, though not favourably, with the pious tone which the woman\nhere assumed to David. She represents that the continued banishment\nof Absalom is against the people of God,--it is not for the nation's\ninterest that the heir-apparent should be for ever banished. It is\nagainst the example of God, who, in administering His providence, does\nnot launch His arrows at once against the destroyer of life, but rather\nshows him mercy, and allows him to return to his former condition.\nClemency is a divine-like attribute. The king who can disentangle\ndifficulties, and give such prominence to mercy, is like an angel\nof God. It is a divine-like work he undertakes when he recalls his\nbanished. She can pray, when he is about to undertake such a business,\n\"The Lord thy God be with thee\" (R.V.). She knew that any difficulties\nthe king might have in recalling his son would arise from his fears\nthat he would be acting against God's will. The clever woman fills his\neye with considerations on one side--the mercy and forbearance of God,\nthe pathos of human life, the duty of not making things worse than they\nnecessarily are. She knew he would be startled when she named Absalom.\nShe knew that though he had given judgment on the general principle\nas involved in the imaginary case she had put before him, he might\ndemur to the application of that principle to the case of Absalom.\nHer instructions from Joab were to get the king to sanction Absalom's\nreturn. The king has a surmise that the hand of Joab is in the whole\ntransaction, and the woman acknowledges that it is so. After the\ninterview with the woman, David sends for Joab, and gives him leave to\nfetch back Absalom. Joab goes to Geshur and brings Absalom to Jerusalem.\n\nBut David's treatment of Absalom when he returns does not bear out\nthe character for unerring wisdom which the woman had given him. The\nking refuses to see his son, and for two years Absalom lives in his\nown house, without enjoying any of the privileges of the king's son.\nBy this means David took away all the grace of the transaction, and\nirritated Absalom. He was afraid to exercise his royal prerogative in\npardoning him out-and-out. His conscience told him it ought not to\nbe done. To restore at once one who had sinned so flagrantly to all\nhis dignity and power was against the grain. Though therefore he had\ngiven his consent to Absalom returning to Jerusalem, for all practical\npurposes he might as well have been at Geshur. And Absalom was not the\nman to bear this quietly. How would his proud spirit like to hear of\nroyal festivals at which all were present but he? How would he like\nto hear of distinguished visitors to the king from the surrounding\ncountries, and he alone excluded from their society? His spirit would\nbe chafed like that of a wild beast in its cage. Now it was, we\ncannot doubt, that he felt a new estrangement from his father, and\nconceived the project of seizing upon his throne. Now too it probably\nwas that he began to gather around him the party that ultimately gave\nhim his short-lived triumph. There would be sympathy for him in some\nquarters as an ill-used man; while there would rally to him all who\nwere discontented with David's government, whether on personal or on\npublic grounds. The enemies of his godliness, emboldened by his conduct\ntowards Uriah, finding there what Daniel's enemies in a future age\ntried in vain to find in his conduct, would begin to think seriously\nof the possibility of a change. Probably Joab began to apprehend the\ncoming danger when he refused once and again to speak to Absalom. It\nseemed to be the impression both of David and of Joab that there would\nbe danger to the state in his complete restoration.\n\nTwo years of this state of things had passed, and the patience of\nAbsalom was exhausted. He sent for Joab to negotiate for a change of\narrangements. But Joab would not see him. A second time he sent, and\na second time Joab declined. Joab was really in a great difficulty.\nHe seems to have seen that he had made a mistake in bringing Absalom\nto Jerusalem, but it was a mistake out of which he could not\nextricate himself. He was unwilling to go back, and he was afraid to\ngo forward. He had not courage to undo the mistake he had made in\ninviting Absalom to return by banishing him again. If he should meet\nAbsalom he knew he would be unable to meet the arguments by which he\nwould press him to complete what he had begun when he invited him\nback. Therefore he studiously avoided him. But Absalom was not to be\noutdone in this way. He fell on a rude stratagem for bringing Joab to\nhis presence. Their fields being adjacent to each other, Absalom sent\nhis servants to set Joab's barley on fire. The irritation of such an\nunprovoked injury overcame Joab's unwillingness to meet Absalom; he\nwent to him in a rage and demanded why this had been done. The matter\nof the barley would be easy to arrange; but now that he had met\nJoab he showed him that there were just two modes of treatment open\nto David,--either really to pardon, or really to punish him. This\nprobably was just what Joab felt. There was no good, but much harm in\nthe half-and-half policy which the king was pursuing. If Absalom was\npardoned, let him be on friendly terms with the king. If he was not\npardoned, let him be put to death for the crime he had committed.\n\nJoab was unable to refute Absalom's reasoning. And when he went to\nthe king he would press that view on him likewise. And now, after\ntwo years of a half-and-half measure, the king sees no alternative\nbut to yield. \"When he had called for Absalom, he came to the king,\nand bowed himself to his face on the ground before the king; and\nthe king kissed Absalom.\" This was the token of reconciliation and\nfriendship. But it would not be with a clear conscience or an easy\nmind that David saw the murderer of his brother in full possession of\nthe honours of the king's son.\n\nIn all this conduct of King David we can trace only the infatuation\nof one left to the guidance of his own mind. It is blunder after\nblunder. Like many good but mistaken men, he erred both in inflicting\npunishments and in bestowing favours. Much that ought to be punished\nsuch persons pass over; what they do select for punishment is\nprobably something trivial; and when they punish it is in a way\nso injudicious as to defeat its ends. And some, like David, keep\noscillating between punishment and favour so as at once to destroy\nthe effect of the one and the grace of the other. His example may\nwell show all of you who have to do with such things the need\nof great carefulness in this important matter. Penalties, to be\neffectual, should be for marked offences, but when incurred should\nbe firmly maintained. Only when the purpose of the punishment is\nattained ought reconciliation to take place, and when that comes it\nshould be full-hearted and complete, restoring the offender to the\nfull benefit of his place and privilege, both in the home and in the\nhearts of his parents.\n\nSo David lets Absalom loose, as it were, on the people of Jerusalem.\nHe is a young man of fine appearance and fascinating manners. \"In\nall Israel there was none to be so much praised as Absalom for his\nbeauty; from the sole of the foot even to the crown of the head\nthere was no blemish in him. And when he polled his head (for it\nwas at every year's end that he polled it; because his hair was\nheavy on him, therefore he polled it) the weight of the hair of his\nhead was two hundred shekels after the king's weight.\" No doubt this\nhad something to do with David's great liking for him. He could not\nbut look on him with pride, and think with pleasure how much he was\nadmired by others. The affection which owed so much to a cause of\nthis sort was not likely to be of the highest or purest quality. What\nthen are we to say of David's fondness for Absalom? Was it wrong for\na father to be attached to his child? Was it wrong for him to love\neven a wicked child? No one can for a moment think so who remembers\nthat \"God _commended His love towards us_, in that _while we were\nyet sinners_ Christ died for us.\" There is a sense in which loving\nemotions may warrantably be more powerfully excited in the breast of\na godly parent toward an erring child than toward a wise and good\none. The very thought that a child is in the thraldom of sin creates\na feeling of almost infinite pathos with reference to his condition.\nThe loving desire for his good and his happiness becomes more intense\nfrom the very sense of the disorder and misery in which he lies. The\nsheep that has strayed from the fold is the object of a more profound\nemotion than the ninety-and-nine that are safe within it. In this\nsense a parent cannot love his child, even his sinful and erring\nchild, too well. The love that seeks another's highest good can never\nbe too intense, for it is the very counterpart and image of God's\nlove for sinful men.\n\nBut, as far as we can gather, David's love for Absalom was not\nexclusively of this kind. It was a fondness that led him to wink\nat his faults even when they became flagrant, and that desired to\nsee him occupying a place of honour and responsibility for which\nhe certainly was far from qualified. This was more than the love of\nbenevolence. The love of benevolence has, in the Christian bosom, an\nunlimited sphere. It may be given to the most unworthy. But the love of\ncomplacency, of delight in any one, of desire for his company, desire\nfor close relations with him, confidence in him, as one to whom our\nown interests and the interests of others may be safely entrusted, is\na quite different feeling. This kind of love must ever be regulated\nby the degree of true excellence, of genuine worth, possessed by the\nperson loved. The fault in David's love to Absalom was not that he was\ntoo benevolent, not that he wished his son too well. It was that he\nhad too much complacency or delight in him, delight resting on very\nsuperficial ground, and that he was too willing to have him entrusted\nwith the most vital interests of the nation. This fondness for Absalom\nwas a sort of infatuation, to which David never could have yielded if\nhe had remembered the hundred and first Psalm, and if he had thought of\nthe kind of men whom alone when he wrote that psalm he determined to\npromote to influence in the kingdom.\n\nAnd on this we found a general lesson of no small importance. Young\npersons, let us say emphatically young women, and perhaps Christian\nyoung women, are apt to be captivated by superficial qualities,\nqualities like those of Absalom, and in some cases are not only\nready but eager to marry those who possess them. In their blindness\nthey are willing to commit not only their own interests but the\ninterests of their children, if they should have any, to men who\nare not Christians, perhaps barely moral, and who are therefore not\nworthy of their trust. Here it is that affection should be watched\nand restrained. Christians should never allow their affections to be\nengaged by any whom, on Christian grounds, they do not thoroughly\nesteem. All honour to those who, at great sacrifice, have honoured\nthis rule! All honour to Christian parents who bring up their\nchildren to feel that, if they are Christians themselves, they can\nmarry only in the Lord! Alas for those who deem accidental and\nsuperficial qualities sufficient grounds for a union which involves\nthe deepest interests of souls for time and for eternity! In David's\nill-founded complacency in Absalom, and the woeful disasters which\nflowed from it, let them see a beacon to warn them against any\nunion which has not mutual esteem for its foundation, and does not\nrecognise those higher interests in reference to which the memorable\nwords were spoken by our Lord, \"What is a man profited if he gain the\nwhole world and lose his own soul?\"\n\n\n\n\n                             CHAPTER XIX.\n\n                          _ABSALOM'S REVOLT._\n\n                          2 SAMUEL xv. 1-12.\n\n\nWhen Absalom obtained from his father the position he had so eagerly\ndesired at Jerusalem, he did not allow the grass to grow under his\nfeet. The terms on which he was now with the king evidently gave him a\ncommand of money to a very ample degree. By this means he was able to\nset up an equipage such as had not previously been seen at Jerusalem.\n\"He prepared him a chariot and horses, and fifty men to run before\nhim.\" To multiply horses to himself was one of the things forbidden by\nthe law of Moses to the king that should be chosen (Deut. xvii. 16),\nmainly, we suppose, because it was a prominent feature of the royal\nstate of the kings of Egypt, and because it would have indicated a\ntendency to place the glory of the kingdom in magnificent surroundings\nrather than in the protection and blessing of the heavenly King. The\nstyle of David's living appears to have been quiet and unpretending,\nnotwithstanding the vast treasures he had amassed; for the love of\npomp or display was none of his failings. Anything in the shape of\nelaborate arrangement that he devised seems to have been in connection\nwith the public service of God--for instance, his choir of singers and\nplayers (1 Chron. xxiii. 5); his own personal tastes appear to have\nbeen simple and inexpensive. And this style undoubtedly befitted a\nroyalty which rested on a basis so peculiar as that of the nation of\nIsrael, when the king, though he used that title, was only the viceroy\nof the true King of the nation, and where it was the will of God\nthat a different spirit should prevail from that prevalent among the\nsurrounding nations. A modest establishment was evidently suited to one\nwho recognised his true position as a subordinate lieutenant, not an\nabsolute ruler.\n\nBut Absalom's tastes were widely different, and he was not the man\nto be restrained from gratifying them by any considerations of that\nsort. The moment he had the power, though he was not even king,\nhe set up his imposing equipage, and became the observed of all\nobservers in Jerusalem. And no doubt there were many of the people\nwho sympathised with him, and regarded it as right and proper that,\nnow that Israel was so renowned and prosperous a kingdom, its court\nshould shine forth in corresponding splendour. The plain equipage of\nDavid would seem to them paltry and unimposing, in no way fitted to\ngratify the pride or elevate the dignity of the kingdom. Absalom's,\non the other hand, would seem to supply all that David's wanted. The\nprancing steeds, with their gay caparisons, the troop of outrunners\nin glittering uniform, the handsome face and figure of the prince,\nwould create a sensation wherever he went; There, men would say\nemphatically, is the proper state and bearing of a king; had we such\na monarch as that, surrounding nations would everywhere acknowledge\nour superiority, and feel that we were entitled to the first place\namong the kingdoms of the East.\n\nBut Absalom was far too shrewd a man to base his popularity merely\non outward show. For the daring game which he was about to play it\nwas necessary to have much firmer support than that. He understood\nthe remarkable power of personal interest and sympathy in winning the\nhearts of men, and drawing them to one's side. He rose up early, and\nstood beside the way of the gate, where in Eastern cities judgment\nwas usually administered, but where, for some unknown reason, little\nseems to have been done by the king or the king's servants at that\ntime. To all who came to the gate he addressed himself with winsome\naffability, and to those who had \"a suit that should come to the\nking for judgment\" (R.V.) he was especially encouraging. Well did he\nknow that when a man has a lawsuit it usually engrosses his whole\nattention, and that he is very impatient of delays and hindrances\nin the way of his case. Very adroitly did he take advantage of this\nfeeling,--sympathising with the litigant, agreeing with him of course\nthat he had right on his side, but much concerned that there was no\none appointed of the king to attend to his business, and devoutly and\nfervently wishing that he were made judge in the land, that every\none that had any suit or cause might come to him, and he would do\nhim justice. And with regard to others, when they came to do him\nhomage he seemed unwilling to recognise this token of superiority,\nbut, as if they were just brothers, he put forth his hand, took hold\nof them, and kissed them. If it were not for what we know now of the\nhollowness of it, this would be a pretty picture--an ear so ready to\nlisten to the tale of wrong, a heart so full of sympathy, an active\ntemperament that in the early hours of the morning sent him forth\nto meet the people and exchange kindly greetings with them; a form\nand figure that graced the finest procession; a manner that could be\nalike dignified when dignity was becoming, and humility itself when\nit was right to be humble. But alas for the hollow-heartedness of the\npicture! It is like the fabled apples of Sodom, outside all fair and\nattractive, but dust within.\n\nBut hollow though it was, the policy succeeded--he became exceedingly\npopular; he secured the affections of the people. It is a remarkable\nexpression that is used to denote this result--\"He stole the hearts\nof the men of Israel.\" It was not an honest transaction. It was\nswindling in high life. He was appropriating valuable property on\nfalse pretences. To constitute a man a thief or a swindler it is not\nnecessary that he forge a rich man's name, or that he put his hand\ninto the pocket of his neighbour. To gain a heart by hypocritical\nmeans, to secure the confidence of another by lying promises, is\nequally low and wicked; nay, in God's sight is a greater crime. It\nmay be that man's law has difficulty in reaching it, and in many\ncases cannot reach it at all. But it cannot be supposed that those\nwho are guilty of it will in the end escape God's righteous judgment.\nAnd if the punishments of the future life are fitted to indicate\nthe due character of the sins for which they are sent, we can think\nof nothing more appropriate than that those who have stolen hearts\nin this way, high in this world's rank though they have often been,\nshould be made to rank with the thieves and thimbleriggers and\nother knaves who are the _habitu\u00e9s_ of our prisons, and are scorned\nuniversally as the meanest of mankind. With all his fine face and\nfigure and manner, his chariot and horses, his outrunners and other\nattendants, Absalom after all was but a black-hearted thief.\n\nAll this crooked and cunning policy of his Absalom carried on with\nunwearied vigour till his plot was ripe. There is reason to apprehend\nan error of some kind in the text when it is said (ver. 7) that it was\n\"at the end of forty years\" that Absalom struck the final blow. The\nreading of some manuscripts is more likely to be correct,--\"at the end\nof four years,\" that is, four years after he was allowed to assume the\nposition of prince. During that space of time much might be quietly\ndone by one who had such an advantage of manner, and was so resolutely\ndevoted to his work. For he seems to have laboured at his task without\ninterruption all that time. The dissembling which he had to practise,\nto impress the people with the idea of his kindly interest in them,\nmust have required a very considerable strain. But he was sustained\nin it by the belief that in the end he would succeed, and success was\nworth an infinity of labour. What a power of persistence is often\nshown by the children of this world, and how much wiser are they in\ntheir generation than the children of light as to the means that will\nachieve their ends! With what wonderful application and perseverance\ndo many men labour to build up a business, to accumulate a fortune, to\ngain a distinction! I have heard of a young man who, being informed\nthat an advertisement had appeared in a newspaper to the effect that\nif his family would apply to some one they would hear of something to\ntheir advantage, set himself to discover that advertisement, went over\nthe advertisements for several years, column by column, first of one\npaper, then of another and another, till he became so absorbed in the\ntask that he lost first his reason and then his life. Thank God, there\nare instances not a few of very noble application and perseverance in\nthe spiritual field; but is it not true that the mass even of good men\nare sadly remiss in the efforts they make for spiritual ends? Does not\nthe energy of the racer who ran for the corruptible crown often put\nto shame the languor of those who seek for an incorruptible? And does\nnot the manifold secular activity of which we see so much in the world\naround us sound a loud summons in the ears of all who are at ease in\nZion--\"Now it is high time to awake out of sleep\"?\n\nThe copestone which Absalom put on his plot when all was ripe for\nexecution was of a piece with the whole undertaking. It was an act\nof religious hypocrisy amounting to profanity. It shows how well he\nmust have succeeded in deceiving his father when he could venture\non such a finishing stroke. Hypocrite though he was himself, he\nwell knew the depth and sincerity of his father's religion. He knew\ntoo that nothing could gratify him more than to find in his son the\nevidence of a similar state of heart. It is difficult to comprehend\nthe villainy that could frame such a statement as this:--\"I pray\nthee, let me go and pay my vow, which I have vowed unto the Lord,\nin Hebron. For thy servant vowed a vow, while I abode at Geshur in\nSyria, saying, If the Lord shall indeed bring me again to Jerusalem,\nthen I will serve\" (marg. R.V., worship) \"the Lord.\" We have already\nremarked that it is not very clear from this whether up to this time\nAbsalom had been a worshipper of the God of Israel. The purport of\nhis pretended vow (that is, what he wished his father to believe)\nmust have been either that, renouncing the idolatry of Geshur, he\nwould now become a worshipper of Israel's God, or (what seems more\nlikely) that in token of his purpose for the future he would present\na special offering to the God of Israel. This vow he now wished to\nredeem by making his offerings to the Lord, and for this purpose he\ndesired to go to Hebron. But why go to Hebron? Might he not have\nredeemed it at Jerusalem? It was the custom, however, when a vow was\ntaken, to specify the place where it was to be fulfilled, and in\nthis instance Hebron was alleged to be the place. But what are we\nto think of the effrontery and wickedness of this pretence? To drag\nsacred things into a scheme of villainy, to pretend to have a desire\nto do honour to God simply for the purpose of carrying out deception\nand gaining a worldly end, is a frightful prostitution of all that\nought to be held most sacred. It seems to indicate one who had no\nbelief in God or in anything holy, to whom truth and falsehood, right\nand wrong, honour and shame, were all essentially alike, although,\nwhen it suited him, he might pretend to have a profound regard to\nthe honour of God and a cordial purpose to render that honour. We\nare reminded of Charles II. taking the Covenant to please the Scots,\nand get their help towards obtaining the crown. But indeed the same\ngreat sin is involved in every act of religious hypocrisy, in every\ninstance in which pretended reverence is paid to God in order to\nsecure a selfish end.\n\nThe place was cunningly selected. It enjoyed a sanctity which had\nbeen gathering round it for centuries; whereas Jerusalem, as the\ncapital of the nation, was but of yesterday. Hebron was the place\nwhere David himself had begun his reign, and while it was far enough\nfrom Jerusalem to allow Absalom to work unobserved by David, it was\nnear enough to allow him to carry out the schemes which had been set\non foot there. So little suspicion had the old king of what was\nbrewing that, when Absalom asked leave to go to Hebron, he dismissed\nhim with a blessing--\"Go in peace.\"\n\nWhat Joab was thinking of all this we have no means of knowing. That\na man who looked after his own interests so well as Joab did, should\nhave stuck to David when his fortunes appeared to be desperate, is\nsomewhat surprising. But the truth seems to be that Absalom never\nfelt very cordial towards Joab after his refusal to meet him on his\nreturn from Geshur. It does not appear that Joab was much impressed\nby regard to God's will in the matter of the succession; his being\nengaged afterwards in the insurrection in favour of Adonijah when\nSolomon was divinely marked out for the succession shows that he was\nnot. His adherence to David on this occasion was probably the result\nof necessity rather than choice. But what are we to say of his want\nof vigilance in allowing Absalom's conspiracy to advance as it did\neither without suspecting its existence, or at least without making\nprovision for defending the king's cause? Either he was very blind\nor he was very careless. As for the king himself, we have seen what\ncause he had, after his great trespass, for courting solitude and\navoiding contact with the people. That he should be ignorant of all\nthat was going on need not surprise us. And moreover, from allusions\nin some of the Psalms (xxxviii., xxxix., xli.) to a loathsome and\nall but fatal illness of David's, and to treachery practised on him\nwhen ill, some have supposed that this was the time chosen by Absalom\nfor consummating his plot. When Absalom said to the men applying\nfor justice, whom he met at the gate of the city, \"There is no man\ndeputed of the king to hear thee,\" his words implied that there was\nsomething hindering the king from being there in person, and for some\nreason he had not appointed a deputy. A protracted illness, unfitting\nDavid for his personal duties and for superintending the machinery\nof government, might have furnished Absalom with the pretext for his\nlamentation over this want. It gives us a harder impression of his\nvillainy and hardness of heart if he chose a time when his father was\nenfeebled by disease to inflict a crushing blow on his government and\na crowning humiliation on himself.\n\nThree other steps were taken by Absalom before bringing the revolt\nto a crisis. First, he sent spies or secret emissaries to all\nthe tribes, calling them, on hearing the sound of a trumpet, to\nacknowledge him as king at Hebron. Evidently he had all the talent\nfor administration that was so conspicuous in his nation and in his\nhouse,--if only it had been put to a better use. Secondly, he took\nwith him to Hebron a band of two hundred men, of whom it is said\n\"they went in their simplicity, and they knew not anything\"--so\nadmirably was the secret kept. Thirdly, Absalom sent for Ahithophel\nthe Gilonite, David's counsellor, from his city, having reason\nto believe that Ahithophel was on his side, and knowing that his\ncounsel would be valuable to him in the present emergency. And every\narrangement seemed to succeed admirably. The tide ran strongly in\nhis favour--\"the conspiracy was strong, for the people increased\ncontinually with Absalom.\" Everything seemed to fall out precisely\nas he wished; it looked as if the revolt would not only succeed, but\nthat it would succeed without serious opposition. Absalom must have\nbeen full of expectation that in a few days or weeks he would be\nreigning unopposed at Jerusalem.\n\nThis extraordinary success is difficult to understand. For what could\nhave made David so unpopular? In his earliest years he had been\nsingularly popular; his victories brought him unbounded _\u00e9clat_; and\nwhen Ishbosheth died it was the remembrance of these early services\nthat disposed the people to call him to the throne. Since that time\nhe had increased his services in an eminent degree. He had freed\nhis country from all the surrounding tribes that were constantly\nattacking it; he had conquered those distant but powerful enemies\nthe Syrians; and he had brought to the country a great accumulation\nof wealth. Add to this that he was fond of music and a poet, and had\nwritten many of the very finest of their sacred songs. Why should not\nsuch a king be popular? The answer to this question will embrace a\nvariety of reasons. In the first place, a generation was growing up\nwho had not been alive at the time of his early services, and on whom\ntherefore they would make a very slender impression. For service done\nto the public is very soon forgotten unless it be constantly repeated\nin other forms, unless, in fact, there be a perpetual round of it.\nSo it is found by many a minister of the gospel. Though he may have\nbuilt up his congregation from the very beginning, ministered among\nthem with unceasing assiduity, and taken the lead in many important\nand permanent undertakings, yet in a few years after he goes away all\nis forgotten, and his very name comes to be unknown to many. In the\nsecond place, David was turning old, and old men are prone to adhere\nto their old ways; his government had become old-fashioned, and he\nshowed no longer the life and vigour of former days. A new, fresh,\nlively administration was eagerly desired by the younger spirits\nof the nation. Further, there can be no doubt that David's fervent\npiety was disliked by many, and his puritan methods of governing\nthe kingdom. The spirit of the world is sure to be found in every\ncommunity, and it is always offended by the government of holy men.\nFinally, his fall in the matter of Uriah had greatly impaired the\nrespect and affection even of the better part of the community. If\nto all this there was added a period of feeble health, during which\nmany departments of government were neglected, we shall have, beyond\ndoubt, the principal grounds of the king's unpopularity. The ardent\nlovers of godliness were no doubt a minority, and thus even David,\nwho had done so much for Israel, was ready to be sacrificed in the\ntime of old age.\n\nBut had he not something better to fall back on? Was he not promised\nthe protection and the aid of the Most High? Might he not cast\nhimself on Him who had been his refuge and his strength in every time\nof need, and of whom he had sung so serenely that He is near to them\nthat call on Him in sincerity and in truth? Undoubtedly he might,\nand undoubtedly he did. And the final result of Absalom's rebellion,\nthe wonderful way in which its back was broken and David rescued\nand restored, showed that though cast down he was not forsaken. But\nnow, we must remember, the second element of the chastisement of\nwhich Nathan testified, had come upon him. \"Behold, I will raise up\nevil against thee out of thine own house.\" That chastisement was now\nfalling, and while it lasted the joy and comfort of God's gracious\npresence must have been interrupted. But all the same God was still\nwith him, even though He was carrying him through the valley of the\nshadow of death. Like the Apostle Peter, he was brought to the very\nverge of destruction; but at the critical moment an unseen hand was\nstretched out to save him, and in after-years he was able to sing,\n\"He brought me up also out of a fearful pit, and out of the miry\nclay; and He set my feet upon a rock and established my goings; and\nHe hath put a new song in my mouth, even praise unto our God; many\nshall see it and shall fear, and shall trust in the Lord.\"\n\n\n\n\n                              CHAPTER XX.\n\n                   _DAVID'S FLIGHT FROM JERUSALEM._\n\n                           2 SAMUEL xv. 13.\n\n\nThe trumpet which was to be the signal that Absalom reigned in Hebron\nhad been sounded, the flow of people in response to it had begun, when\n\"a messenger came to David saying, The hearts of the men of Israel are\nafter Absalom.\" The narrative is so concise that we can hardly tell\nwhether or not this was the first announcement to David of the real\nintentions of Absalom. But it is very certain that the king was utterly\nunprepared to meet the sudden revolt. The first news of it all but\noverwhelmed him. And little wonder. There came on him three calamities\nin one. First, there was the calamity that the great bulk of the people\nhad revolted against him, and were now hastening to drive him from the\nthrone, and very probably to put him to death. Second, there was the\nappalling discovery of the villainy, hypocrisy, and heartless cruelty\nof his favourite and popular son,--the most crushing thing that can be\nthought of to a tender heart. And third, there was the discovery that\nthe hearts of the people were with Absalom; David had lost what he most\nprized and desired to possess; the intense affection he had for his\npeople now met with no response; their love and confidence were given\nto a usurper. Fancy an old man, perhaps in infirm health, suddenly\nconfronted with this threefold calamity; who can wonder for the time\nthat he is paralysed, and bends before the storm?\n\nFlight from Jerusalem seemed the only feasible course. Both policy\nand humanity seemed to dictate it. He considered himself unable to\ndefend the city with any hope of success against an attack by such\na force as Absalom could muster, and he was unwilling to expose\nthe people to be smitten with the sword. Whether he was really as\nhelpless as he thought we can hardly say. We should be disposed\nto think that his first duty was to stay where he was, and defend\nhis capital. He was there as God's viceroy, and would not God be\nwith him, defending the place where He had set His name, and the\ntabernacle in which He was pleased to dwell? It is not possible for\nus, ignorant as we are of the circumstances, to decide whether the\nflight from Jerusalem was the enlightened result of an overwhelming\nnecessity, or the fruit of sudden panic, of a heart so paralysed that\nit could not gird itself for action. His servants had no other advice\nto offer. Any course that recommended itself to him they were ready\nto take. If this did not help to throw light on his difficulties,\nit must at least have soothed his heart. His friends were not all\nforsaking him. Amid the faithless a few were found faithful. Friends\nin such need were friends indeed. And the sight of their honest\nthough perplexed countenances, and the sound of their friendly though\ntrembling voices, would be most soothing to his feelings, and serve\nto rally the energy that had almost left him. When the world forsakes\nus, the few friends that remain are of priceless value.\n\nOn leaving Jerusalem David at once turned eastward, into the\nwilderness region between Jerusalem and Jericho, with the view, if\npossible, of crossing the Jordan, so as to have that river, with its\ndeep valley, between him and the rebels. The first halt, or rather\nthe rendezvous for his followers, though called in the A.V. \"a place\nthat was far off,\" is more suitably rendered in the R.V. Bethmerhak,\nand the margin \"the far house.\" Probably it was the last house on\nthis side the brook Kidron. Here, outside the walls of the city, some\nhasty arrangements were made before the flight was begun in earnest.\n\nFirst, we read that he was accompanied by all his household, with the\nexception of ten concubines who were left to keep the house. Fain\nwould we have avoided contact at such a moment with that feature of\nhis house from which so much mischief had come; but to the end of the\nday David never deviated in that respect from the barbarous policy of\nall Eastern kings. The mention of his household shows how embarrassed\nhe must have been with so many helpless appendages, and how slow his\nflight. And his household were not the only women and children of the\ncompany; the \"little ones\" of the Gittites are mentioned in ver. 22;\nwe may conceive how the unconcealed terror and excitement of these\nhelpless beings must have distressed him, as their feeble powers of\nwalking must have held back the fighting part of his attendants.\nWhen one thinks of this, one sees more clearly the excellence of the\nadvice afterwards given by Ahithophel to pursue him without loss of\ntime with twelve thousand men, to destroy his person at once; in that\ncase, Absalom must have overtaken him long before he reached the\nJordan, and found him quite unable to withstand his ardent troops.\n\nNext, we find mention of the forces that remained faithful to the king\nin the crisis of his misfortunes. The Pelethites, the Cherethites,\nand the Gittites were the chief of these. The Pelethites and the\nCherethites are supposed to have been the representatives of the\nband of followers that David commanded when hiding from Saul in the\nwilderness; the Gittites appear to have been a body of refugees from\nGath, driven away by the tyranny of the Philistines, who had thrown\nthemselves on the protection of David and had been well treated by\nhim. The interview between David and Ittai was most creditable to the\nfeelings of the fugitive king. Ittai was a stranger who had but lately\ncome to Jerusalem, and as he was not attached to David personally, it\nwould be safer for him to return to the city and offer to the reigning\nking the services which David could no longer reward. But the generous\nproposal of David was rejected with equal nobility on the part of\nIttai. He had probably been received with kindness by David when he\nfirst came to Jerusalem, the king remembering well when he himself\nwas in the like predicament, and thinking, like the African princess\nto \u00c6neas, \"_Haud ignara mali, miseris succurrere disco_\"--\"Having had\nexperience of adversity myself, I know how to succour the miserable.\"\nIttai's heart was won to David then; and he had made up his mind, like\nRuth the Moabitess with reference to Naomi, that wherever David was,\nin life or in death, there also he should be. How affecting must it\nhave been to David to receive such an assurance from a stranger! His\nown son, whom he had loaded with undeserved kindness, was conspiring\nagainst him, while this stranger, who owed him nothing in comparison,\nwas risking everything in his cause. \"There is a friend that sticketh\ncloser than a brother.\"\n\nNext in David's train presented themselves Zadok and Abiathar, the\npriests, carrying the ark of God. The presence of this sacred symbol\nwould have invested the cause of David with a manifestly sacred\ncharacter in the eyes of all good men; its absence from Absalom\nwould have equally suggested the absence of Israel's God. But David\nprobably remembered how ill it had fared with Israel in the days of\nEli and his sons, when the ark was carried into battle. Moreover,\nwhen the ark had been placed on Mount Zion, God had said, \"This is My\nrest; here will I dwell;\" and even in this extraordinary emergency,\nDavid would not disturb that arrangement. He said to Zadok, \"Carry\nback the ark of God into the city: if I shall find favour in the eyes\nof the Lord, He shall bring me again, and show me both it and His\nhabitation: but if He thus say, I have no delight in thee, behold,\nhere am I; let Him do to me what seemeth good unto Him.\" These words\nshow how much God was in David's mind in connection with the events\nof that humiliating day. They show, too, that he did not regard his\ncase as desperate. But everything turned on the will of God. It might\nbe that, in His great mercy, He would bring him back to Jerusalem.\nHis former promises led him to think of this as a possible, perhaps\nprobable, termination of the insurrection. But it might also be that\nthe Lord had no more delight in him. The chastening with which He was\nnow visiting him for his sin might involve the success of Absalom.\nIn that case, all that David would say was that he was at God's\ndisposal, and would offer no resistance to His holy will. If he was\nto be restored, he would be restored without the aid of the ark; if\nhe was to be destroyed, the ark could not save him. Zadok and his\nLevites must carry it back into the city. The distance was a very\nshort one, and they would be able to have everything placed in order\nbefore Absalom could be there.\n\nAnother thought occurred to David, who was now evidently recovering\nhis calmness and power of making arrangements. Zadok was a seer,\nand able to use that method of obtaining light from God which in\ngreat emergencies God was pleased to give when the ruler of the\nnation required it. But the marginal reading of the R.V., \"Seest\nthou?\" instead of \"Thou art a seer,\" makes it doubtful whether David\nreferred to this mystic privilege, which Zadok does not appear to\nhave used; the meaning may be simply, that as he was an observant\nman, he could be of use to David in the city, by noticing how things\nwere going and sending him word. In this way he could be of more\nuse to him in Jerusalem than in the field. Considering how he was\nembarrassed with the women and children, it was better for David not\nto be encumbered with another defenceless body like the Levites. The\nsons of the priests, Ahimaaz and Jonathan, would be of great service\nin bringing him information. Even if he succeeded in reaching the\nplains (or fords, _marg._ R.V.) of the wilderness, they could easily\novertake him, and tell him what plan of operations it would be wisest\nfor him to follow.\n\nThese hasty arrangements being made, and the company placed in some\nsort of order, the march towards the wilderness now began. The first\nthing was to cross the brook Kidron. From its bed, the road led up\nthe slope of Mount Olivet. To the spectators the sight was one of\noverwhelming sadness. \"All the country wept with a loud voice, and\nall the people passed over; the king also himself passed over the\nbrook Kidron, and all the people passed over toward the way of the\nwilderness.\" After all, there was a large number who sympathised with\nthe king, and to whom it was most affecting to see one who was now\n\"old and grey-headed\" driven from his throne and from his home by an\nunprincipled son, aided and abetted by a graceless generation who had\nno consideration for the countless benefits which David had conferred\non the nation. It is when we find \"all the country\" expressing their\nsympathy that we cannot but doubt whether it was really necessary for\nDavid to fly. Perhaps \"the country\" here may be used in contrast to\nthe city. Country people are less accessible to secret conspiracies,\nand besides are less disposed to change their allegiance. The event\nshowed that in the more remote country districts David had still a\nnumerous following. Time to gather these friends together was his\ngreat need. If he had been fallen on that night, weary and desolate\nand almost friendless, as was proposed by Ahithophel, there can be no\nrational doubt what the issue would have been.\n\nAnd the king himself gave way to distress, like the people, though\nfor different reasons. \"David went up by the ascent of Mount Olivet,\nand wept as he went up, and had his head covered; and he went\nbarefoot; and all the people that was with him covered every man\nhis head, and they went up, weeping as they went up.\" The covered\nhead and bare feet were tokens of humiliation. They were a humble\nconfession on the king's part that the affliction which had befallen\nhim was well deserved by him. The whole attitude and bearing of David\nis that of one \"stricken, smitten, and afflicted.\" Lofty looks and\na proud bearing had never been among his weaknesses; but on this\noccasion, he is so meek and lowly that the poorest person in his\nkingdom could not have assumed a more humble bearing. It is the\nfeeling that had so wrung his heart in the fifty-first Psalm come\nback on him again. It is the feeling, Oh, what a sinner I have been!\nhow forgetful of God I have often proved, and how unworthily I have\nacted toward man! No wonder that God rebukes me and visits me with\nthese troubles! And not me only, but my people too. These are my\nchildren, for whom I should have provided a peaceful home, driven\ninto the shelterless wilderness with me! These kind people who are\ncompassionating me have been brought by me into this trouble, which\nperadventure will cost them their lives. \"Have mercy upon me, O God,\naccording to Thy lovingkindness; according unto the multitude of Thy\ntender mercies, blot out my transgressions!\"\n\nIt was at this time that some one brought word to David that\nAhithophel the Gilonite was among the conspirators. He seems to have\nbeen greatly distressed at the news. For \"the counsel of Ahithophel,\nwhich he counselled in those days, was as if a man had inquired of\nthe oracle of God\" (xvi. 23). An ingenious writer has found a reason\nfor this step. By comparing 2 Sam. xi. 3 with 2 Sam. xxiii. 34,\nin the former of which Bathsheba is called the daughter of Eliam,\nand in the latter Eliam is called the son of Ahithophel, it would\nappear--if it be the same Eliam in both--that Ahithophel was the\ngrandfather of Bathsheba. From this it has been inferred that his\nforsaking of David at this time was due to his displeasure at David's\ntreatment of Bathsheba and Uriah. The idea is ingenious, but after\nall it is hardly trustworthy. For if Ahithophel was a man of such\nsingular shrewdness, he would not be likely to let his personal\nfeelings determine his public conduct. There can be no reasonable\ndoubt that, judging calmly from the kind of considerations by which a\nworldly mind like his would be influenced, he came to the deliberate\nconclusion that Absalom was going to win. And when David heard of his\ndefection, it must have given him a double pang; first, because he\nwould lose so valuable a counsellor, and Absalom would gain what he\nwould lose; and second, because Ahithophel's choice showed the side\nthat, to his shrewd judgment, was going to triumph. David could but\nfall back on that higher Counsellor on whose aid and countenance he\nwas still able to rely, and offer a short but expressive prayer, \"O\nLord, I pray Thee, turn the counsel of Ahithophel into foolishness.\"\n\nIt was but a few minutes after this that another distinguished\ncounsellor, Hushai the Archite, came to him, with his clothes rent\nand dust on his head, signifying his sense of the public calamity,\nand his adherence to David. Him too, as well as Ittai and the\npriests, David wished to send back. And the reason assigned showed\nthat his mind was now calm and clear, and able to ponder the\nsituation in all its bearings. Indeed, he concocts quite a little\nscheme with Hushai. First, he is to go to Absalom and pretend to be\non his side. But his main business will be to oppose the counsel of\nAhithophel, try to secure a little time to David, and thus give him\na chance of escape. Moreover, he is to co-operate with the priests\nZadok and Abiathar, and through their sons send word to David of\neverything he hears. Hushai obeys David, and as he returns to the\ncity from the east, Absalom arrives from the south, before David\nis more than three or four miles away. But for the Mount of Olives\nintervening, Absalom might have seen the company that followed his\nfather creeping slowly along the wilderness, a company that could\nhardly be called an army, and that, humanly speaking, might have been\nscattered like a puff of smoke.\n\nThus Absalom gets possession of Jerusalem without a blow. He goes\nto his father's house, and takes possession of all that he finds\nthere. He cannot but feel the joy of gratified ambition, the joy of\nthe successful accomplishment of his elaborate and long-prosecuted\nscheme. Times are changed, he would naturally reflect, since I had to\nask my father's leave for everything I did, since I could not even go\nto Hebron without begging him to allow me. Times are changed since I\nreared that monument in the vale for want of anything else to keep my\nname alive. Now that I am king, my name will live without a monument.\nThe success of the revolution was so remarkable, that if Absalom had\nbelieved in God, he might have imagined, judging from the way in\nwhich everything had fallen out in his favour, that Providence was\non his side. But, surely, there must have been a hard constraint and\npressure upon his feelings somewhere. Conscience could not be utterly\ninactive. Fresh efforts to silence it must have been needed from time\nto time. Amid all the excitement of success, a vague horror must have\nstolen in on his soul. A vision of outraged justice would haunt him.\nHe might scare away the hideous spectre for a time, but he could not\nlay it in the grave. \"There is no peace, saith my God, to the wicked.\"\n\nBut if Absalom might well be haunted by a spectre because he had\ndriven his father from his house, and God's anointed from his throne,\nthere was a still more fearful reckoning standing against him, in\nthat he had enticed such multitudes from their allegiance, and\ndrawn them into the guilt of rebellion. There was not one of the\nmany thousands that were now shouting \"God save the king!\" who had\nnot been induced through him to do a great sin, and bring himself\nunder the special displeasure of God. A rough nature like Absalom's\nwould make light of this result of his movement, as rough natures\nhave done since the world began. But a very different judgment was\npassed by the great Teacher on the effects of leading others into\nsin. \"Whosoever shall break one of these least commandments and teach\nmen so, he shall be called least in the kingdom of God.\" \"Whoso shall\ncause one of these little ones which believe in Me to stumble, it\nwere better for him that a millstone were hanged about his neck and\nhe were cast in the depth of the sea.\" Yet how common a thing this\nhas been in all ages of the world, and how common it is still! To put\npressure on others to do wrong; to urge them to trifle with their\nconsciences, or knowingly to violate them; to press them to give\na vote against their convictions;--all such methods of disturbing\nconscience and drawing men into crooked ways, what sin they involve!\nAnd when a man of great influence employs it with hundreds and\nthousands of people in such ways, twisting consciences, disturbing\nself-respect, bringing down Divine displeasure, how forcibly we are\nreminded of the proverb, \"One sinner destroyeth much good\"!\n\nMost earnestly should every one who has influence over others dread\nbeing guilty of debauching conscience, and discouraging obedience to\nits call. On the other hand, how blessed is it to use one's influence\nin the opposite direction. Think of the blessedness of a life spent\nin enlightening others as to truth and duty, and encouraging loyalty\nto their high but often difficult claims. What a contrast to the\nother! What a noble aim to try to make men's eye single and their\nduty easy; to try to raise them above selfish and carnal motives, and\ninspire them with a sense of the nobility of walking uprightly, and\nworking righteousness, and speaking the truth in their hearts! What\na privilege to be able to induce our fellows to walk in some degree\neven as He walked \"who did no sin, neither was guile found in His\nmouth;\" and who, in ways so high above our ways, was ever influencing\nthe children of men \"to do justly, and to love mercy, and to walk\nhumbly with their God\"!\n\n\n\n\n                             CHAPTER XXI.\n\n                     _FROM JERUSALEM TO MAHANAIM._\n\n              2 SAMUEL xvi. 1-14; xvii. 15-22 and 24-26.\n\n\nAs David proceeds on his painful journey, there flows from his heart\na gentle current of humble, contrite, gracious feeling. If recent\nevents have thrown any doubt on the reality of his goodness, this\nfragrant narrative will restore the balance. Many a man would have\nbeen beside himself with rage at the treatment he had undergone. Many\nanother man would have been restless with terror, looking behind him\nevery other moment to see if the usurper's army was not hastening in\npursuit of him. It is touching to see David, mild, self-possessed,\nthoroughly humble, and most considerate of others. Adversity is\nthe element in which he shines; it is in prosperity he falls; in\nadversity he rises beautifully. After the humbling events in his life\nto which our attention has been lately called, it is a relief to\nwitness the noble bearing of the venerable saint amid the pelting of\nthis most pitiless storm.\n\nIt was when David was a little past the summit of Mount Olivet, and\nsoon after he had sent back Hushai, that Ziba came after him,--that\nservant of Saul that had told him of Mephibosheth the son of Jonathan,\nand whom he had appointed to take charge of the property that had\nbelonged to Saul, now made over to Mephibosheth. The young man\nhimself was to be as one of the king's sons, and was to eat at the\nroyal table. Ziba's account of him was, that when he heard of the\ninsurrection he remained at Jerusalem, in the expectation that on that\nvery day the kingdom of his father would be restored to him. It can\nhardly be imagined that Mephibosheth was so silly as to think or say\nanything of the kind. Either Ziba must have been slandering him now,\nor Mephibosheth must have slandered Ziba when David returned (see 2\nSam. xix. 24-30). With that remarkable impartiality which distinguishes\nthe history, the facts and the statements of the parties are recorded\nas they occurred, but we are left to form our own judgment regarding\nthem. All things considered, it is likely that Ziba was the slanderer\nand Mephibosheth the injured man. Mephibosheth was too feeble a man,\nboth in mind and in body, to be forming bold schemes by which he might\nbenefit from the insurrection. We prefer to believe that the son of\nJonathan had so much of his father's nobility as to cling to David in\nthe hour of his trial, and be desirous of throwing in his lot with him.\nIf, however, Ziba was a slanderer and a liar, the strange thing about\nhim is that he should have taken this opportunity to give effect to\nhis villainy. It is strange that, with a soul full of treachery, he\nshould have taken the trouble to come after David at all, and still\nmore that he should have made a contribution to his scanty stores. We\nshould have expected such a man to remain with Absalom, and look to\nhim for the reward of unrighteousness. He brought with him for David's\nuse a couple of asses saddled, and two hundred loaves of bread, and\nan hundred clusters of raisins, and an hundred of summer fruits, and\na bottle of wine. We get a vivid idea of the extreme haste with which\nDavid and his company must have left Jerusalem, and their destitution\nof the very necessaries of life as they fled, from this catalogue of\nZiba's contributions. Not even were there beasts of burden \"for the\nking's household\"--even Bathsheba and Solomon may have been going on\nfoot. David was evidently impressed by the gift, and his opinion of\nMephibosheth was not so high as to prevent him from believing that he\nwas capable of the course ascribed to him. Yet we cannot but think\nthere was undue haste in his at once transferring to Ziba the whole\nof Mephibosheth's property. We can only say, in vindication of David,\nthat his confidence even in those who had been most indebted to him had\nreceived so rude a shock in the conduct of Absalom, that he was ready\nto say in his haste, \"All men are liars;\" he was ready to suspect every\nman of deserting him, except those that gave palpable evidence that\nthey were on his side. In this number it seemed at the moment that Ziba\nwas, while Mephibosheth was not; and trusting to his first impression,\nand acting with the promptitude necessary in war, he made the transfer.\nIt is true that afterwards he discovered his mistake; and some may\nthink that when he did he did not make a sufficient rectification. He\ndirected Ziba and Mephibosheth to divide the property between them;\nbut in explanation it has been suggested that this was equivalent to\nthe old arrangement, by which Ziba was to cultivate the land, and\nMephibosheth to receive the fruits; and if half the produce went to the\nproprietor, and the other half to the cultivator, the arrangement may\nhave been a just and satisfactory one after all.\n\nBut if Ziba sinned in the way of smooth treachery, Shimei, the\nnext person with whom David came in contact, sinned not less in the\nopposite fashion, by his outrageous insolence and invective. It is\nsaid of this man that he was of the family of the house of Saul, and\nthat fact goes far to account for his atrocious behaviour. We get a\nglimpse of that inveterate jealousy of David which during the long\nperiod of his reign slept in the bosom of the family of Saul, and\nwhich seemed now, like a volcano, to burst out all the more fiercely\nfor its long suppression. When the throne passed from the family of\nSaul, Shimei would of course experience a great social fall. To be no\nlonger connected with the royal family would be a great mortification\nto one who was vain of such distinctions. Outwardly, he was obliged\nto bear his fall with resignation, but inwardly the spirit of\ndisappointment and jealousy raged in his breast. When the opportunity\nof revenge against David came, the rage and venom of his spirit\npoured out in a filthy torrent. There is no mistaking the mean nature\nof the man to take such an opportunity of venting his malignity on\nDavid. To trample on the fallen, to press a man when his back is at\nthe wall, to pierce with fresh wounds the body of a stricken warrior,\nis the mean resource of ungenerous cowardice. But it is too much the\nway of the world. \"If there be any quarrels, any exceptions,\" says\nBishop Hall, \"against a man, let him look to have them laid in his\ndish when he fares the hardest. This practice have wicked men learned\nof their master, to take the utmost advantage of their afflictions.\"\n\nIf Shimei had contented himself with denouncing the policy of David,\nthe forbearance of his victim would not have been so remarkable. But\nShimei was guilty of every form of offensive and provoking assault.\nHe threw stones, he called abusive names, he hurled wicked charges\nagainst David; he declared that God was fighting against him, and\nfighting justly against such a man of blood, such a man of Belial.\nAnd, as if this were not enough, he stung him in the most sensitive\npart of his nature, reproaching him with the fact that it was his\nson that now reigned instead of him, because the Lord had delivered\nthe kingdom into his hand. But even all this accumulation of coarse\nand shameful abuse failed to ruffle David's equanimity. Abishai,\nJoab's brother, was enraged at the presumption of a fellow who had\nno right to take such an attitude, and whose insolence deserved a\nprompt and sharp castigation. But David never thirsted for the blood\nof foes. Even while the rocks were echoing Shimei's charges, David\ngave very remarkable evidence of the spirit of a chastened child of\nGod. He showed the same forbearance that he had shown twice on former\noccasions in sparing the life of Saul. \"Why,\" asked Abishai, \"should\nthis dead dog curse my lord the king? Let me go, I pray thee, and\ntake off his head.\" \"So let him curse,\" was David's answer, \"because\nthe Lord hath said unto him, Curse David.\" It was but partially true\nthat the Lord had told him to do so. The Lord had only permitted him\nto do it; He had only placed David in circumstances which allowed\nShimei to pour out his insolence. This use of the expression, \"The\nLord hath said unto him,\" may be a useful guide to its true meaning\nin some passages of Scripture where it has seemed at first as if\nGod gave very strange directions. The pretext that Providence had\nafforded to Shimei was this, \"Behold, my son, which came out of my\nbowels, seeketh my life; how much more then may this Benjamite do it?\nLet him alone, and let him curse, for the Lord hath bidden him. It\nmay be that the Lord will requite me good for his cursing this day.\"\nIt is touching to remark how keenly David felt this dreadful trial as\ncoming from his own son.\n\n          \"So the struck eagle stretched upon the plain,\n           No more through rolling clouds to soar again,\n           Viewed his own feather on the fatal dart\n           That winged the shaft that quivered in his heart;\n           Keen were his pangs, but keener far to feel\n           He nursed the pinion which impelled the steel;\n           While the same plumage that had warmed his nest\n           Drank the last lifedrop of his bleeding breast.\"\n\nBut even the fact that it was his own son that was the author of\nall his present calamities would not have made David so meek under\nthe outrage of Shimei if he had not felt that God was using such\nmen as instruments to chastise him for his sins. For though God\nhad never said to Shimei, \"Curse David,\" He had let him become an\ninstrument of chastisement and humiliation against him. It was the\nfact of his being such an instrument in God's hands that made the\nKing so unwilling to interfere with him. David's reverence for God's\nappointment was like that which afterwards led our Lord to say, \"The\ncup which My Father hath given Me, shall I not drink of it?\" Unlike\nthough David and Jesus were in the cause of their sufferings, yet\nthere is a remarkable resemblance in their bearing under them. The\nmeek resignation of David as he went out from the holy city had\na strong resemblance to the meek resignation of Jesus as He was\nbeing led from the same city to Calvary. The gentle consideration\nof David for the welfare of his people as he toiled up Mount Olivet\nwas parallel to the same feeling of Jesus expressed to the daughters\nof Jerusalem as He toiled up to Calvary. The forbearance of David\nto Shimei was like the spirit of the prayer--\"Father, forgive\nthem: for they know not what they do.\" The overawing sense that God\nhad ordained their sufferings was similar in both. David owed his\nsufferings solely to himself; Jesus owed His solely to the relation\nin which He had placed Himself to sinners as the Sin-bearer. It is\nbeautiful to see David so meek and lowly under the sense of his\nsins--breathing the spirit of the prophet's words, \"I will stand upon\nmy watch, and set me upon the tower, and will watch to see what he\nwill say unto me, and what I shall answer when I am reproved.\"\n\nThere was another thought in David's mind that helped him to bear\nhis sufferings with meek submission. It is this that is expressed\nin the words, \"It may be that the Lord will requite me good for his\ncursing this day.\" He felt that, as coming from the hand of God, all\nthat he had suffered was just and righteous. He had done wickedly,\nand he deserved to be humbled and chastened by God, and by such\ninstruments as God might appoint. But the particular words and acts\nof these instruments might be highly unjust to him: though Shimei\nwas God's instrument for humiliating him, yet the curses of Shimei\nwere alike unrighteous and outrageous; the charge that he had shed\nthe blood of Saul's house, and seized Saul's kingdom by violence, was\noutrageously false; but it was better to bear the wrong, and leave\nthe rectifying of it in God's hands; for God detests unfair dealing,\nand when His servants receive it He will look to it and redress it\nin His own time and way. And this is a very important and valuable\nconsideration for those servants of God who are exposed to abusive\nlanguage and treatment from scurrilous opponents, or, what is too\ncommon in our day, scurrilous newspapers. If injustice is done them,\nlet them, like David, trust to God to redress the wrong; God is a God\nof justice, and God will not see them treated unjustly. And hence\nthat remarkable statement which forms a sort of appendix to the seven\nbeatitudes--\"Blessed are ye when men shall revile you and persecute\nyou, and speak all manner of evil against you falsely for My name's\nsake. Rejoice and be exceeding glad, for great is your reward in\nheaven; for so persecuted they the prophets that were before you.\"\n\nEre we return to Jerusalem to witness the progress of events\nin Absalom's camp and cabinet, let us accompany David to his\nresting-place beyond the Jordan. Through the counsel of Hushai,\nafterwards to be considered, he had reached the plains of Jordan in\nsafety; had accomplished the passage of the river, and traversed the\npath on the other side as far as Mahanaim, somewhere to the south\nof the Lake of Gennesareth, the place where Ishbosheth had held his\ncourt. It was a singular mercy that he was able to accomplish this\njourney, which in the condition of his followers must have occupied\nseveral days, without opposition in front or molestation in his rear.\nTokens of the Lord's loving care were not wanting to encourage him\non the way. It must have been a great relief to him to learn that\nAhithophel's proposal of an immediate pursuit had been arrested\nthrough the counsel of Hushai. It was a further token for good, that\nthe lives of the priests' sons, Jonathan and Ahimaaz, which had\nbeen endangered as they bore tidings for him, had been mercifully\npreserved. After learning the result of Hushai's counsel, they\nproceeded, incautiously perhaps, to reach David, and were observed\nand pursued. But a friendly woman concealed them in a well, as Rahab\nthe harlot had hid the spies in the roof of her house; and though\nthey ran a great risk, they contrived to reach David's camp in peace.\n\nAnd when David reached Mahanaim, where he halted to await the course\nof events, Shobi, the son of Nahash, king of Ammon, and Machir, the\nson of Ammiel of Lo-debar, and Barzillai the Gileadite of Rogelim,\nbrought beds, and basons, and earthen vessels, and wheat, and barley,\nand flour, and parched corn, and beans, and lentiles, and parched\npulse, and honey, and butter, and sheep, and cheese of kine, for\nDavid and for the people that were with him to eat; for they said,\n\"The people is hungry, and weary, and thirsty in the wilderness.\"\nSome of those who thus befriended him were only requiting former\nfavours. Shobi may be supposed to have been ashamed of his father's\ninsulting conduct when David sent messengers to comfort him on his\nfather's death. Machir, the son of Ammiel of Lo-debar, was the\nfriend who had cared for Mephibosheth, and was doubtless thankful\nfor David's generosity to him. Of Barzillai we know nothing more\nthan is told us here. But David could not have reckoned on the\nfriendship of these men, nor on its taking so useful and practical a\nturn. The Lord's hand was manifest in the turning of the hearts of\nthese people to him. How hard bestead he and his followers were is\nbut too apparent from the fact that these supplies were most welcome\nin their condition. And David must have derived no small measure of\nencouragement even from these trifling matters; they showed that God\nhad not forgotten him, and they raised the expectation that further\ntokens of His love and care would not be withheld.\n\nThe district where David now was, \"the other side of Jordan,\" lay far\napart from Jerusalem and the more frequented places in the country,\nand, in all probability, it was but little affected by the arts of\nAbsalom. The inhabitants lay under strong obligations to David; in\nformer times they had suffered most from their neighbours, Moab,\nAmmon, and especially Syria; and now they enjoyed a very different\nlot, owing to the fact that those powerful nations had been brought\nunder David's rule. It was a fertile district, abounding in all kinds\nof farm and garden produce, and therefore well adapted to support an\narmy that had no regular means of supply. The people of this district\nseem to have been friendly to David's cause. The little force that\nhad followed him from Jerusalem would now be largely recruited; and,\neven to the outward sense, he would be in a far better condition to\nreceive the assault of Absalom than on the day when he left the city.\n\nThe third Psalm, according to the superscription--and in this case\nthere seems no cause to dispute it--was composed \"when David fled\nfrom Absalom his son.\" It is a psalm of wonderful serenity and\nperfect trust. It begins with a touching reference to the multitude\nof the insurgents, and the rapidity with which they increased.\nEverything confirms the statement that \"the conspiracy was strong,\nand that the people increased continually with Absalom.\" We seem\nto understand better why David fled from Jerusalem; even there the\ngreat bulk of the people were with the usurper. We see, too, how\ngodless and unbelieving the conspirators were--\"Many there be which\nsay of my soul, There is no help for him in God.\" God was cast out\nof their reckoning as of no consideration in the case; it was all\nmoonshine, his pretended trust in Him. Material forces were the only\nreal power; the idea of God's favour was only cant, or at best but\n\"a devout imagination.\" But the foundation of his trust was too\nfirm to be shaken either by the multitude of the insurgents or the\nbitterness of their sneers. \"Thou, Lord, art a shield unto me\"--ever\nprotecting me, \"my glory,\"--ever honouring me, \"and the lifter up\nof mine head,\"--ever setting me on high because I have known Thy\nname. No doubt he had felt some tumult of soul when the insurrection\nbegan. But prayer brought him tranquillity. \"I cried unto God with my\nvoice, and He heard me out of His holy hill.\" How real the communion\nmust have been that brought tranquillity to him amid such a sea of\ntrouble! Even in the midst of his agitation he can lie down and\nsleep, and awake refreshed in mind and body. \"I will not be afraid of\nten thousands of the people that have set themselves against me round\nabout.\" Faith already sees his enemies defeated and receiving the\ndoom of ungodly men. \"Arise, O Lord; save me, O my God; for Thou hast\nsmitten all mine enemies upon the cheek bone; Thou hast broken the\nteeth of the ungodly.\" And he closes as confidently and serenely as\nif victory had already come--\"Salvation belongeth unto the Lord; Thy\nblessing is upon Thy people.\"\n\nIf, in this solemn crisis of his history, David is a pattern to us\nof meek submission, not less is he a pattern of perfect trust. He is\nstrong in faith, giving glory to God, and feeling assured that what\nHe has promised He is able also to perform. Deeply conscious of his\nown sin, he at the same time most cordially believes in the word and\npromise of God. He knows that, though chastened, he is not forsaken.\nHe bows his head in meek acknowledgment of the righteousness of the\nchastisement; but he lays hold with unwavering trust on the mercy of\nGod. This union of submission and trust, is one of priceless value,\nand much to be sought by every good man. Under the deepest sense of\nsin and unworthiness, you may rejoice and you ought to rejoice, in the\nprovision of grace. And while rejoicing most cordially in the provision\nof grace, you ought to be contrite and humble for your sin. You are\ngrievously defective if you want either of these elements. If the sense\nof sin weighs on you with unbroken pressure, if it keeps you from\nbelieving in forgiving mercy, if it hinders you from looking to the\ncross, to Him who taketh away the sin of the world, there is a grievous\ndefect. If your joy in forgiving mercy has no element of contrition, no\nchastened sense of unworthiness, there is no less grievous a defect in\nthe opposite direction. Let us try at once to feel our unworthiness,\nand to rejoice in the mercy that freely pardons and accepts. Let us\nlook to the rock whence we are hewn, and to the hole of the pit whence\nwe are digged; feeling that we are great sinners, but that the Lord\nJesus Christ is a great Saviour; and finding our joy in that faithful\nsaying, ever worthy of all acceptation, that \"Jesus Christ came into\nthe world to save sinners,\" even the chief.\n\n\n\n\n                             CHAPTER XXII.\n\n                         _ABSALOM IN COUNCIL._\n\n             2 SAMUEL xvi. 15-23; xvii. 1-14, and ver. 23.\n\n\nWe must now return to Jerusalem, and trace the course of events\nthere on that memorable day when David left it, to flee toward the\nwilderness, just a few hours before Absalom entered it from Hebron.\n\nWhen Absalom came to the city, there was no trace of an enemy to\noppose him. His supporters in Jerusalem would no doubt go out to\nmeet him, and conduct him to the palace with great demonstrations\nof delight. Eastern nations are so easily roused to enthusiasm that\nwe can easily believe that, even for Absalom, there would be an\noverpowering demonstration of loyalty. Once within the palace, he\nwould receive the adherence and congratulations of his friends.\n\nAmong these, Hushai the Archite presents himself, having returned\nto Jerusalem at David's request, and it is to Hushai's honour that\nAbsalom was surprised to see him. He knew him to be too good a\nman, too congenial with David \"his friend,\" to be likely to follow\nsuch a standard as his. There is much to be read between the lines\nhere. Hushai was not only a counsellor, but a friend, of David's.\nThey were probably of kindred feeling in religious matters, earnest\nin serving God. A man of this sort did not seem to be in his own\nplace among the supporters of Absalom. It was a silent confession by\nAbsalom that his supporters were a godless crew, among whom a man of\ngodliness must be out of his element. The sight of Hushai impressed\nAbsalom as the sight of an earnest Christian in a gambling saloon or\non a racecourse would impress the greater part of worldly men. For\neven the world has a certain faith in godliness,--to this extent,\nat least, that it ought to be consistent. You may stretch a point\nhere and there in order to gain favour with worldly men; you may\naccommodate yourselves to their ways, go to this and to that place\nof amusement, adopt their tone of conversation, join with them in\nridiculing the excesses of this or that godly man or woman; but you\nare not to expect that by such approaches you will rise in their\nesteem. On the contrary, you may expect that in their secret hearts\nthey will despise you. A man that acts according to his convictions\nand in the spirit of what he professes they may very cordially\nhate, but they are constrained to respect. A man that does violence\nto the spirit of his religion, in his desire to be on friendly\nterms with the world and further his interests, and that does many\nthings to please them, they may not hate so strongly, but they will\nnot respect. There is a fitness of things to which the world is\nsometimes more alive than Christians themselves. Jehoshaphat is not\nin his own place making a league with Ahab, and going up with him\nagainst Ramoth-gilead; he lays himself open to the rebuke of the\nseer--\"Shouldest thou help the ungodly, and love them that hate the\nLord? therefore is wrath upon thee from before the Lord.\" There is no\nNew Testament precept needing to be more pondered than this--\"Be ye\nnot unequally yoked with unbelievers; for what communion hath light\nwith darkness? or what fellowship hath Christ with Belial? or what\ncommunion hath he that believeth with an infidel?\"\n\nBut Hushai was not content with putting in a silent appearance for\nAbsalom. When his consistency is challenged, he must repudiate the idea\nthat he has any preference for David; he is a loyal man in this sense,\nthat he attaches himself to the reigning monarch, and as Absalom has\nreceived overwhelming tokens in his favour from every quarter, Hushai\nis resolved to stand by him. But can we justify these professions of\nHushai? It is plain enough he went on the principle of fighting Absalom\nwith his own weapons, of paying him with his own coin; Absalom had\ndissembled so profoundly, he had made treachery, so to speak, so much\nthe current coin of the kingdom, that Hushai determined to use it for\nhis own purposes. Yet, even in these circumstances, the deliberate\ndissembling of Hushai grates against every tender conscience, and more\nespecially his introduction of the name of Jehovah--\"Nay, but whom the\nLord, and this people, and all the men of Israel choose, his will I\nbe, and with him will I abide.\" Was not this taking the name of the\nLord his God in vain? The stratagem had been suggested by David; it\nwas not condemned by the voice of the age; and we are not prepared to\nsay that stratagem is always to be condemned; but surely, in our time,\nthe claims of truth and fair dealing would stamp it as a disreputable\ndevice, not sanctified by the end for which it was resorted to, and not\nworthy the followers of Him \"who did no sin, neither was guile found in\nHis mouth.\"\n\nHaving established himself in the confidence of Absalom, Hushai gained\na right to be consulted in the deliberations of the day. He enters\nthe room where the new king's counsellors are met, but he finds it\na godless assemblage. In planning the most awful wickedness, a cool\ndeliberation prevails that shows how familiar the counsellors are with\nthe ways of sin. \"Give counsel among you,\" says the royal president,\n\"what we shall do.\" How different from David's way of opening the\nbusiness--\"Bring hither the ephod, and enquire of the Lord.\" In\nAbsalom's council help of that kind is neither asked nor desired.\n\nThe first to propose a course is Ahithophel, and there is something\nso revolting in the first scheme which he proposed that we wonder\nmuch that such a man should ever have been a counsellor of David. His\nfirst piece of advice, that Absalom should publicly take possession\nof his father's concubines, was designed to put an end to any\nwavering among the people; it was, according to Eastern ideas, the\ngrossest insult that could be offered to a king, and that king a\nfather, and it would prove that the breach between David and Absalom\nwas irreparable, that it was vain to hope for any reconciliation.\nThey must all make up their minds to take a side, and as Absalom's\ncause was so popular, it was far the most likely they would side with\nhim. Without hesitation Absalom complied with the advice. It is a\nproof how hard his heart had become, that he did not hesitate to mock\nhis father by an act which was as disgusting as it was insulting. And\nwhat a picture we get of the position of women even in the court of\nKing David! They were slaves in the worst sense of the term, with no\nright even to guard their virtue, or to protect their persons from\nthe very worst of men; for the custom of the country, when it gave\nhim the throne, gave him likewise the bodies and souls of the women\nof the harem to do with as he pleased!\n\nThe next piece of Ahithophel's counsel was a masterpiece alike of\nsagacity and of wickedness. He proposed to take a select body of twelve\nthousand out of the troops that had already flocked to Absalom's\nstandard, and follow the fugitive king. That very night he would set\nout; and in a few hours they would overtake the king and his handful of\ndefenders; they would destroy no life but the king's only; and thus, by\nan almost bloodless revolution, they would place Absalom peacefully on\nthe throne. The advantages of the plan were obvious. It was prompt, it\nseemed certain of success, and it would avoid an unpopular slaughter.\nSo strongly was Ahithophel impressed with the advantages that it\nseemed impossible that it could be opposed, far less rejected. One\nelement only he left out of his reckoning--that \"as the mountains are\nround about Jerusalem, so the Lord God is round about His people from\nhenceforth even for ever.\" He forgot how many methods of protecting\nDavid God had already employed. From the lion and the bear He had\ndelivered him in his youth, by giving strength to his arm and courage\nto his heart; from the uncircumcised Philistine He had delivered him\nby guiding the stone projected from his sling to the forehead of the\ngiant; from Saul, at one time through Michal letting him down from a\nwindow; at another, through Jonathan taking his side; at a third, by an\ninvasion of the Philistines calling Saul away; and now He was preparing\nto deliver him from Absalom by a still different method: by causing\nthe shallow proposal of Hushai to find more favour than the sagacious\ncounsel of Ahithophel.\n\nIt must have been a moment of great anxiety to Hushai when the\nman whose counsel was as the oracle of God sat down amid universal\napproval, after having propounded the very advice of which he was\nmost afraid. But he shows great coolness and skill in recommending\nhis own course, and in trying to make the worse appear the better\nreason. He opens with an implied compliment to Ahithophel--his\ncounsel is not good _at this time_. It may have been excellent on all\nother occasions, but the present is an exception. Then he dwells on\nthe warlike character of David and his men, and on the exasperated\nstate of mind in which they might be supposed to be; probably they\nwere at that moment in some cave, where no idea of their numbers\ncould be got, and from which they might make a sudden sally on\nAbsalom's troops; and if, on occasion of an encounter between the\ntwo armies, some of Absalom's were to fall, people would take it\nas a defeat; a panic might seize the army, and his followers might\ndisperse as quickly as they had assembled.\n\nBut the concluding stroke was the masterpiece. He knew that vanity\nwas Absalom's besetting sin. The young man that had prepared chariots\nand horses, and fifty men to run before him, that had been accustomed\nto poll his head from year to year and weigh it with so much care,\nand whose praise was throughout all Israel for beauty, must be\nflattered by a picture of the whole host of Israel marshalled around\nhim, and going forth in proud array, with him at its head. \"Therefore\nI counsel that all Israel be generally gathered unto thee, from Dan\neven to Beersheba, as the sand that is by the sea for multitude, and\nthat thou go to battle in thine own person. So shall we come upon him\nin some place where he may be found, and we will light upon him as\nthe dew falleth on the ground; and of him and of all the men that\nare with him there shall not be left so much as one. Moreover, if\nhe be gotten into a city, then shall all Israel bring ropes to that\ncity, and we will draw it into the river until there shall not be one\nsmall stone left there.\"\n\nIt is with counsel as with many other things: what pleases best is\nthought best; solid merit gives way to superficial plausibility. The\ncounsel of Hushai pleased better than that of Ahithophel, and so it\nwas preferred. Satan had outwitted himself. He had nursed in Absalom\nan overweening vanity, intending by its means to overturn the throne\nof David; and now that very vanity becomes the means of defeating\nthe scheme, and laying the foundation of Absalom's ruin. The\nturning-point in Absalom's mind seems to have been the magnificent\nspectacle of the whole of Israel mustered for battle, and Absalom\nat their head. He was fascinated by the brilliant imagination. How\neasily may God, when He pleases, defeat the most able schemes of\nHis enemies! He does not need to create weapons to oppose them;\nHe has only to turn their own weapons against themselves. What an\nencouragement to faith even when the fortunes of the Church are\nat their lowest ebb! \"The kings of the earth set themselves, and\nthe rulers take counsel together against the Lord, and against His\nanointed, saying, Let us break their bonds asunder, and cast away\ntheir cords from us. He that sitteth in the heavens shall laugh; the\nLord shall have them in derision. Then shall He speak to them in\nwrath, and vex them in His sore displeasure. Yet have I set my king\nupon my holy hill of Zion.\"\n\nThe council is over; Hushai, unspeakably relieved, hastens to\ncommunicate with the priests, and through them send messengers to\nDavid; Absalom withdraws to delight himself with the thought of\nthe great military muster that is to flock to his standard; while\nAhithophel, in high dudgeon, retires to his house. The character of\nAhithophel was a singular combination. To deep natural sagacity he\nunited great spiritual blindness and lack of true manliness. He saw\nat once the danger to the cause of Absalom in the plan that had been\npreferred to his own; but it was not that consideration, it was the\ngross affront to himself that preyed on him, and drove him to commit\nsuicide. \"When Ahithophel saw that his counsel was not followed,\nhe saddled his ass and arose and gat him home to his house, to his\ncity, and put his household in order, and hanged himself and died,\nand was buried in the sepulchre of his father.\" In his own way he\nwas as much the victim of vanity as Absalom. The one was vain of\nhis person, the other of his wisdom. In each case it was the man's\nvanity that was the cause of his death. What a contrast Ahithophel\nwas to David in his power of bearing disgrace!--David, though with\nbowed head, bearing up so bravely, and even restraining his followers\nfrom chastising some of those who were so vehemently affronting him;\nAhithophel unable to endure life because for once another man's\ncounsel had been preferred to his. Men of the richest gifts have\noften shown themselves babes in self-control. Ahithophel is the Judas\nof the New Testament, lays plans for the destruction of his master,\nand, like Judas, falls almost immediately, by his own hand. \"What a\nmixture,\" says Bishop Hall, \"do we find here of wisdom and madness!\nAhithophel will needs hang himself, _there_ is madness; he will yet\nset his house in order, _there_ is wisdom. And could it be possible\nthat he that was so wise as to set his house in order was so mad as\nto hang himself? that he should be so careful to order his house who\nhad no care to order his unruly passions? that he should care for his\nhouse who cared not for his body or his soul? How vain is it for man\nto be wise if he is not wise in God. How preposterous are the cares\nof idle worldlings, that prefer all other things to themselves, and\nwhile they look at what they have in their coffers forget what they\nhave in their breasts.\"\n\nThis council-chamber of Absalom is full of material for profitable\nreflection. The manner in which he was turned aside from the way\nof wisdom and safety is a remarkable illustration of our Lord's\nprinciple--\"If thine eye be single, thy whole body shall be full\nof light.\" We are accustomed to view this principle chiefly in its\nrelation to moral and spiritual life; but it is applicable likewise\neven to worldly affairs. Absalom's eye was not single. Success, no\ndoubt, was the chief object at which he aimed, but another object was\nthe gratification of his vanity. This inferior object was allowed to\ncome in and disturb his judgment. If Absalom had had a single eye,\neven in a worldly sense, he would have felt profoundly that the one\nthing to be considered was, how to get rid of David and establish\nhimself firmly on the throne. But instead of studying this one thing\nwith firm and immovable purpose, he allowed the vision of a great\nmuster of troops commanded by himself to come in, and so to distract\nhis judgment that he gave his decision for the latter course. No\ndoubt he thought that his position was so secure that he could afford\nthe few days' delay which this scheme involved. All the same, it was\nthis disturbing element of personal vanity that gave a twist to his\nvision, and led him to the conclusion which lost him everything.\n\nFor even in worldly things, singleness of eye is a great help towards\na sound conclusion. \"To the upright there ariseth light in the\ndarkness.\" And if this rule hold true in the worldly sphere, much\nmore in the moral and spiritual. It is when you have the profoundest\ndesire to do what is right that you are in the best way to know\nwhat is wise. In the service of God you are grievously liable to be\ndistracted by private feelings and interests of your own. It is when\nthese private interests assert themselves that you are most liable\nto lose the clear line of duty and of wisdom. You wish to do God's\nwill, but at the same time you are very unwilling to sacrifice this\ninterest, or expose yourself to that trouble. Thus your own feeling\nbecomes a screen that dims your vision, and prevents you from seeing\nthe path of duty and wisdom alike. You have not a clear sight of the\nright path. You live in an atmosphere of perplexity; whereas men of\nmore single purpose, and more regardless of their own interests,\nsee clearly and act wisely. Was there anything more remarkable in\nthe Apostle Paul than the clearness of his vision, the decisive yet\nadmirable way in which he solved perplexing questions, and the high\npractical wisdom that guided him throughout? And is not this to be\nconnected with his singleness of eye, his utter disregard of personal\ninterests in his public life--his entire devotion to the will and to\nthe service of his Master? From that memorable hour on the way to\nDamascus, when he put the question, \"Lord, what wilt Thou have me to\ndo?\" onward to the day when he laid his head on the block in imperial\nRome, the one interest of his heart, the one thought of his mind, was\nto do the will of Christ. Never was an eye more single, and never was\na body more full of light.\n\nBut again, from that council-chamber of Absalom and its results\nwe learn how all projects founded on godlessness and selfishness\ncarry in their bosom the elements of dissolution. They have no true\nprinciple of coherence, no firm, binding element, to secure them\nagainst disturbing influences arising from further manifestations\nof selfishness on the part of those engaged in them. Men may be\nunited by selfish interest in some undertaking up to a certain\npoint, but, like a rocket in the air, selfishness is liable to burst\nup in a thousand different directions, and then the bond of union\nis destroyed. The only bond of union that can resist distracting\ntendencies is an immovable regard to the will of God, and, in\nsubordination thereto, to the welfare of men. In our fallen world\nit is seldom--rather, it is never--that any great enterprise is\nundertaken and carried forward on grounds where selfishness has no\nplace whatever. But we may say this very confidently, that the more\nan undertaking is based on regard to God's will and the good of men,\nthe more stability and true prosperity will it enjoy; whereas every\nelement of selfishness or self-seeking that may be introduced into it\nis an element of weakness, and tends to its dissolution. The remark\nis true of Churches and religious societies, of religious movements\nand political movements too.\n\nMen that are not overawed, as it were, by a supreme regard to the\nwill of God; men to whom the consideration of that will is not\nstrong enough at once to smite down every selfish feeling that may\narise in their minds, will always be liable to desire some object\nof their own rather than the good of the whole. They will begin to\ncomplain if they are not sufficiently considered and honoured. They\nwill allow jealousies and suspicions towards those who have most\ninfluence to arise in their hearts. They will get into caves to air\ntheir discontent with those like-minded. All this tends to weakness\nand dissolution. Selfishness is the serpent that comes crawling into\nmany a hopeful garden, and brings with it division and desolation.\nIn private life, it should be watched and thwarted as the grievous\nfoe of all that is good and right. The same course should be taken\nwith regard to it in all the associations of Christians. And it is\nChristian men only that are capable of uniting on grounds so high\nand pure as to give some hope that this evil spirit will not succeed\nin disuniting them--that is to say, men who feel and act on the\nobligations under which the Lord Jesus Christ has placed them; men\nthat feel that their own redemption, and every blessing they have or\nhope to have, come through the wonderful self-denial of the Son of\nGod, and that if they have the faintest right to His holy name they\nmust not shrink from the like self-denial. It is a happy thing to be\nable to adopt as our rule--\"None of us liveth to himself; for whether\nwe live, we live unto the Lord, or whether we die, we die unto the\nLord; whether we live therefore or die, we are the Lord's.\" The more\nthis rule prevails in Churches and Christian societies, the more will\nthere be of union and stability too; but with its neglect, all kinds\nof evil and trouble will come in, and very probably, disruption and\ndissolution in the end.\n\n\n\n\n                            CHAPTER XXIII.\n\n                         2 SAMUEL xviii. 1-18.\n\n                     _ABSALOM'S DEFEAT AND DEATH._\n\n\nWhatever fears of defeat and destruction might occasionally flit\nacross David's soul between his flight from Jerusalem and the battle\nin the wood of Ephraim, it is plain both from his actions and from\nhis songs that his habitual frame was one of serenity and trust. The\nnumber of psalms ascribed to this period of his life may be in excess\nof the truth; but that his heart was in near communion with God all\nthe time we cannot doubt. Situated as his present refuge was not far\nfrom Peniel, where Jacob had wrestled with the angel, we may believe\nthat there were wrestlings again in the neighbourhood not unworthy to\nbe classed with that from which Peniel derived its memorable name.\n\nIn the present emergency the answer to prayer consisted, first, in the\nbreathing-time secured by the success of Hushai's counsel; second, in\nthe countenance and support of the friends raised up to David near\nMahanaim; and last, not least, in the spirit of wisdom and harmony with\nwhich all the arrangements were made for the inevitable encounter.\nEvery step was taken with prudence, while every movement of his\nopponents seems to have been a blunder. It was wise in David, as we\nhave already seen, to cross the Jordan and retire into Gilead; it was\nwise in him to make Mahanaim his headquarters; it was wise to divide\nhis army into three parts, for a reason that will presently be seen;\nand it was wise to have a wood in the neighbourhood of the battlefield,\nthough it could not have been foreseen how this was to bear on the\nindividual on whose behalf the insurrection had taken place.\n\nBy this time the followers of David had grown to the dimensions\nof an army. We are furnished with no means of knowing its actual\nnumber. Josephus puts it at four thousand, but, judging from some\ncasual expressions (\"David set captains of hundreds and _captains of\nthousands_ over them,\" ver. 1; \"Now thou art worth _ten thousand_ of\nus,\" ver. 3; \"The people came by thousands,\" ver. 4), we should infer\nthat David's force amounted to a good many thousands. The division\nof the army into three parts, however, reminding us, as it does,\nof Gideon's division of his little force into three, would seem to\nimply that David's force was far inferior in number to Absalom's. The\ninsurrectionary army must have been very large, and stretching over a\ngreat breadth of country, would have presented far too wide a line to\nbe effectually dealt with by a single body of troops, comparatively\nsmall. Gideon had divided his handful into three that he might make\na simultaneous impression on three different parts of the Midianite\nhost, and thus contribute the better to the defeat of the whole. So\nDavid divided his army into three, that, meeting Absalom's at three\ndifferent points, he might prevent a concentration of the enemy that\nwould have swallowed up his whole force. David had the advantage of\nchoosing his ground, and his military instinct and long experience\nwould doubtless enable him to do this with great effect. His three\ngenerals were able and valuable leaders. The aged king was prepared\nto take part in the battle, believing that his presence would be\nhelpful to his men; but the people would not allow him to run the\nrisk. Aged and somewhat infirm as he seems to have been, wearied with\nhis flight, and weakened with the anxieties of so distressing an\noccasion, the excitement of the battle might have proved too much for\nhim, even if he had escaped the enemy's sword. Besides, everything\ndepended on him; if his place were discovered by the enemy, their\nhottest assault would be directed to it; and if he should fall,\nthere would be left no cause to fight for. \"It is better,\" they\nsaid to him, \"that thou succour us out of the city.\" What kind of\nsuccour could he render there? Only the succour that Moses and his\ntwo attendants rendered to Israel in the fight with Amalek in the\nwilderness, when Moses held up his hands, and Aaron and Hur propped\nthem up. He might pray for them; he could do no more.\n\nBy this time Absalom had probably obtained the great object of his\nambition; he had mustered Israel from Dan to Beersheba, and found\nhimself at the head of an array very magnificent in appearance,\nbut, like most Oriental gatherings of the kind, somewhat unwieldy\nand unworkable. This great conglomeration was now in the immediate\nneighbourhood of Mahanaim, and must have seemed as if by sheer weight\nof material it would crush any force that could be brought against\nit. We read that the battle took place \"in the wood of Ephraim.\" This\ncould not be a wood in the tribe of Ephraim, for that was on the other\nside of Jordan, but a wood in Gilead, that for some reason unknown\nto us had been called by that name. The whole region is still richly\nwooded, and among its prominent trees is one called the prickly oak.\nA _dense_ wood would obviously be unsuitable for battle, but a wooded\ndistrict, with clumps here and there, especially on the hill-sides,\nand occasional trees and brushwood scattered over the plains, would\npresent many advantages to a smaller force opposing the onset of a\nlarger. In the American war of 1755 some of the best troops of England\nwere nearly annihilated in a wood near Pittsburg in Pennsylvania,\nthe Indians levelling their rifles unseen from behind the trees, and\ndischarging them with yells that were even more terrible than their\nweapons. We may fancy the three battalions of David making a vigorous\nonslaught on Absalom's troops as they advanced into the wooded country,\nand when they began to retreat through the woods, and got entangled in\nbrushwood, or jammed together by thickset trees, discharging arrows at\nthem, or falling on them with the sword, with most disastrous effect.\n\"There was a great slaughter that day of twenty thousand men. For the\nbattle there was scattered over the face of all the country, and the\nwood devoured more people that day than the sword devoured.\" Many of\nDavid's men were probably natives of the country, and in their many\nencounters with the neighbouring nations had become familiar with the\nwarfare of \"the bush.\" Here was one benefit of the choice of Mahanaim\nby David as his rallying-ground. The people that joined him from that\nquarter knew the ground, and knew how to adapt it to fighting purposes;\nthe most of Absalom's forces had been accustomed to the bare wadies and\nlimestone rocks of Western Palestine, and, when caught in the thickets,\ncould neither use their weapons nor save themselves by flight.\n\nVery touching, if not very business-like, had been David's\ninstructions to his generals about Absalom: \"The king commanded\nJoab and Abishai and Ittai saying, Deal gently for my sake with\nthe young man, even with Absalom. And all the people heard when\nthe king gave all the captains charge concerning Absalom.\" It is\ninteresting to observe that David fully expects to win. There is no\nhint of any alternative, as if Absalom would not fall into their\nhands. David knows that he is going to conquer, as well as he knew\nit when he went against the giant. The confidence which is breathed\nin the third Psalm is apparent here. Faith saw his enemies already\ndefeated. \"Thou hast smitten all mine enemies upon the cheekbone;\nThou hast broken the teeth of the ungodly. Salvation belongeth unto\nthe Lord; Thy blessing is upon Thy people.\" In a pitched battle, God\ncould not give success to a godless crew, whose whole enterprise was\nundertaken to drive God's anointed one from his throne. Temporary and\npartial successes they might have, but final success it was morally\nimpossible for God to accord. It was not the spirit of his own\ntroops, nor the undisciplined condition of the opposing host, that\ninspired this confidence, but the knowledge that there was a God in\nIsrael, who would not suffer His anointed to perish, nor the impious\nusurper to triumph over him.\n\nWe cannot tell whether Absalom was visited with any misgivings as to\nthe result before the battle began. Very probably he was not. Having\nno faith in God, he would make no account whatever of what David\nregarded as the Divine palladium of his cause. But if he entered on\nthe battle confident of success, his anguish is not to be conceived\nwhen he saw his troops yield to panic, and, in wild disorder, try\nto dash through the wood. Dreadful miseries must have overwhelmed\nhim. He does not appear to have made any attempt to rally his troops.\nRiding on a mule, in his haste to escape, he probably plunged into\nsome thick part of the wood, where his head came in contact with a\nmass of prickly oak; struggling to make a way through it, he only\nentangled his hair more hopelessly in the thicket; then, raising\nhimself in the saddle to attack it with his hands, his mule went from\nunder him, and left him hanging between heaven and earth, maddened by\npain, enraged at the absurdity of his plight, and storming against\nhis attendants, none of whom was near him in his time of need. Nor\nwas this the worst of it. Absalom was probably among the foremost of\nthe fugitives, and we can hardly suppose but that many of his own\npeople fled that way after him. Could it be that all of them were so\neager to escape that not one of them would stop to help their king?\nWhat a contrast the condition of Absalom when fortune turned against\nhim to that of his father! Dark though David's trials had been, and\nseemingly desperate his position, he had not been left alone in its\nsudden horrors; the devotion of strangers, as well as the fidelity of\na few attached friends, had cheered him, and had the worst disaster\nbefallen him, had his troops been routed and his cause ruined, there\nwere warm and bold hearts that would not have deserted him in his\nextremity, that would have formed a wall around him, and with their\nlives defended his grey hairs. But when the hour of calamity came\nto Absalom it found him alone. Even Saul had his armour-bearer at\nhis side when he fled over Gilboa; but neither armour-bearer nor\nfriend attended Absalom as he fled from the battle of the wood of\nEphraim. It would have been well for him if he had really gained a\nfew of the many hearts he stole. Much though moralists tell us of\nthe heartlessness of the world in the hour of adversity, we should\nnot have expected to light on so extreme a case of it. We can hardly\nwithhold a tear at the sight of the unhappy youth, an hour ago with\nthousands eager to obey him, and a throne before him, apparently\nsecure from danger; now hanging helpless between earth and heaven,\nwith no companion but an evil conscience, and no prospect but the\njudgment of an offended God.\n\nA recent writer, in his \"History of the English People\" (Green), when\nnarrating the fall of Cardinal Wolsey, powerfully describes the way of\nProvidence in suffering a career of unexampled wickedness and ambition\nto go on from one degree of prosperity to another, till the moment\nof doom arrives, when all is shattered by a single blow. There was\nlong delay, but \"the hour of reckoning at length arrived. Slowly the\nhand had crawled along the dial-plate, slowly as if the event would\nnever come; and wrong was heaped on wrong, and oppression cried, and\nit seemed as if no ear had heard its voice, till the measure of the\nwickedness was at length fulfilled. The finger touched the hour; and\nas the strokes of the great hammer rang out above the nation, in an\ninstant the whole fabric of iniquity was shivered to ruins.\"\n\nThis hour had now come to Absalom. He had often been reproved, but\nhad hardened his heart, and was now to be destroyed, and that without\nremedy. In the person of Joab, God found a fitting instrument for\ncarrying His purpose into effect. The character of Joab is something\nof a riddle. We cannot say that he was altogether a bad man, or\naltogether without the fear of God. Though David bitterly complained\nof him in some things, he must have valued him on the whole, for\nduring the whole of his reign Joab had been his principal general.\nThat he wanted all tenderness of heart seems very plain. That he\nwas subject to vehement and uncontrollable impulses, in the heat\nof which fearful deeds of blood were done by him, but done in what\nseemed to him the interest of the public, is also clear. There is no\nevidence that he was habitually savage or grossly selfish. When David\ncharged him and the other generals to deal tenderly with the young\nman Absalom, it is quite possible that he was minded to do so. But in\nthe excitement of the battle, that uncontrollable impulse seized him\nwhich urged him to the slaughter of Amasa and Abner. The chance of\nexecuting judgment on the arch-rebel who had caused all this misery,\nand been guilty of crimes never before heard of in Israel, and thus\nending for ever an insurrection that might have dragged its slow\nlength along for harassing years to come, was too much for him. \"How\ncould you see Absalom hanging in an oak and not put an end to his\nmischievous life?\" he asks the man that tells him he had seen him in\nthat plight. And he has no patience with the man's elaborate apology.\nSeizing three darts, he rushes to the place, and thrusts them through\nAbsalom's heart. And his ten armour-bearers finish the business with\ntheir swords. We need not suppose that he was altogether indifferent\nto the feelings of David; but he may have been seized by an\noverwhelming conviction that Absalom's death was the only effectual\nway of ending this most guilty and pernicious insurrection, and so\npreserving the country from ruin. Absalom living, whether banished or\nimprisoned, would be a constant and fearful danger. Absalom dead,\ngreat though the king's distress for the time might be, would be the\nvery salvation of the country. Under the influence of this conviction\nhe thrust the three darts through his heart, and he allowed his\nattendants to hew that comely body to pieces, till the fair form that\nall had admired so much became a mere mass of hacked and bleeding\nflesh. But whatever may have been the process by which Joab found\nhimself constrained to disregard the king's order respecting Absalom,\nit is plain that to his dying day David never forgave him.\n\nThe mode of Absalom's death, and also the mode of his burial, were\nvery significant. It had probably never happened to any warrior, or\nto any prince, to die from a similar cause. And but for the vanity\nthat made him think so much of his bodily appearance, and especially\nof his hair, death would never have come to him in such a form.\nVanity of one's personal appearance is indeed a weakness rather than\na crime. It would be somewhat hard to punish it directly, but it is\njust the right way of treating it, to make it punish itself. And so\nit was in the case of Absalom. His bitterest enemy could have desired\nnothing more ludicrously tragical than to see those beautiful locks\nfastening him as with a chain of gold to the arm of the scaffold,\nand leaving him dangling there like the most abject malefactor. And\nwhat of the beautiful face and handsome figure that often, doubtless,\nled his admirers to pronounce him every inch a king? So slashed and\nmutilated under the swords of Joab's ten men, that no one could have\ntold that it was Absalom that lay there. This was God's judgment on\nthe young man's vanity.\n\nThe mode of his burial is particularly specified. \"They took Absalom\nand cast him into a great pit in the wood, and laid a very great\nheap of stones upon him; and all Israel fled every one to his tent.\"\nThe purpose of this seems to have been to show that Absalom was\ndeemed worthy of the punishment of the rebellious son, as appointed\nby Moses; and a more significant expression of opinion could not have\nbeen given. The punishment for the son who remained incorrigibly\nrebellious was to be taken beyond the walls of the city, and stoned\nto death. It is said by Jewish writers that this punishment was never\nactually inflicted, but the mode of Absalom's burial was fitted to\nshow that he at least was counted as deserving of it. The ignominious\ntreatment of that graceful body, which he adorned and set off with\nsuch care, did not cease even after it was gashed by the weapons of\nthe young men; no place was found for it in the venerable cave of\nMachpelah; it was not even laid in the family sepulchre at Jerusalem,\nbut cast ignominiously into a pit in the wood; it was bruised and\npounded by stones, and left to rot there, like the memory of its\npossessor, and entail eternal infamy on the place. What a lesson to\nall who disown the authority of parents! What a warning to all who\ncast away the cords of self-restraint! It is said by Jewish writers\nthat every by-passer was accustomed to throw a stone on the heap that\ncovered the remains of Absalom, and as he threw it to say, \"Cursed be\nthe memory of rebellious Absalom; and cursed for ever be all wicked\nchildren that rise up in rebellion against their parents!\"\n\nAnd here it may be well to say a word to children. You all see the\nlesson that is taught by the doom of Absalom, and you all feel that\nin that doom, terrible though it was, he just reaped what he had\nsowed. You see the seed of his offence, disobedience to parents,\nbringing forth the most hideous fruit, and receiving in God's\nprovidence a most frightful punishment. You see it without excuse and\nwithout palliation; for David had been a kind father, and had treated\nAbsalom better than he deserved. Mark, then, that this is the final\nfruit of that spirit of disobedience to parents which often begins\nwith very little offences. These little offences are big enough to\nshow that you prefer your own will to the will of your parents. If\nyou had a just and true respect for their authority, you would guard\nagainst little transgressions--you would make conscience of obeying\nin all things great and small. Then remember that every evil habit\nmust have a beginning, and very often it is a small beginning. By\nimperceptible stages it may grow and grow, till it becomes a hideous\nvice, like this rebellion of Absalom. Nip it in the bud; if you\ndon't, who can tell whether it may not grow to something terrible,\nand at last brand you with the brand of Absalom?\n\nIf this be the lesson to children from the doom of Absalom, the\nlesson to parents is not less manifest from the case of David. The\nearly battle between the child's will and the parent's is often\nvery difficult and trying; but God is on the parent's side, and\nwill give him the victory if he seeks it aright. It certainly needs\ngreat vigilance, wisdom, patience, firmness, and affection. If you\nare careless and unwatchful, the child's will will speedily assert\nitself. If you are foolish, and carry discipline too far, if you\nthwart the child at every point, instead of insisting on one thing,\nor perhaps a few things, at a time, you will weary him and weary\nyourself without success. If you are fitful, insisting at one time\nand taking no heed at another, you will convey the impression of a\nvery elastic law, not entitled to much respect. If you lose your\ntemper, and speak unadvisedly, instead of mildly and lovingly, you\nwill most effectually set the child's temper up against the very\nthing you wish him to do. If you forget that you are not independent\nagents, but have got the care of your beloved child from God, and\nought to bring him up as in God's stead, and in the most humble and\ncareful dependence on God's grace, you may look for blunder upon\nblunder in sad succession, with results in the end that will greatly\ndisappoint you. How close every Christian needs to lie to God in\nthe exercise of this sacred trust! And how much, when conscious\nof weakness and fearing the consequences, ought he to prize the\npromise--\"My grace is sufficient for thee!\"\n\n\n\n\n                             CHAPTER XXIV.\n\n                     _DAVID'S GRIEF FOR ABSALOM._\n\n                   2 SAMUEL xviii. 19-33; xix. 1-4.\n\n\n\"Next to the calamity of losing a battle,\" a great general used\nto say, \"is that of gaining a victory.\" The battle in the wood of\nEphraim left twenty thousand of King David's subjects dead or dying\non the field. It is remarkable how little is made of this dismal\nfact. Men's lives count for little in time of war, and death, even\nwith its worst horrors, is just the common fate of warriors. Yet\nsurely David and his friends could not think lightly of a calamity\nthat cut down more of the sons of Israel than any battle since the\nfatal day of Mount Gilboa. Nor could they form a light estimate of\nthe guilt of the man whose inordinate vanity and ambition had cost\nthe nation such a fearful loss.\n\nBut all thoughts of this kind were for the moment brushed aside by\nthe crowning fact that Absalom himself was dead. And this fact,\nas well as the tidings of the victory, must at once be carried to\nDavid. Mahanaim, where David was, was probably but a little distance\nfrom the field of battle. A friend offered to Joab to carry the\nnews--Ahimaaz, the son of Zadok the priest. He had formerly been\nengaged in the same way, for he was one of those that had brought\nword to David of the result of Absalom's council, and of other\nthings that were going on in Jerusalem. But Joab did not wish that\nAhimaaz should be the bearer of the news. He would not deprive him of\nthe character of king's messenger, but he would employ him as such\nanother time. Meanwhile the matter was entrusted to another man,\ncalled in the Authorized Version Cushi, but in the Revised Version\nthe Cushite. Whoever this may have been, he was a simple official,\nnot like Ahimaaz, a personal friend of David. And this seems to have\nbeen Joab's reason for employing him. It is evident that physically\nhe was not better adapted to the task than Ahimaaz, for when the\nlatter at last got leave to go he overran the Cushite. But Joab\nappears to have felt that it would be better that David should\nreceive his first news from a mere official than from a personal\nfriend. The personal friend would be likely to enter into details\nthat the other would not give. It is clear that Joab was ill at ease\nin reference to his own share in the death of Absalom. He would fain\nkeep that back from David, at least for a time; it would be enough\nfor him at the first to know that the battle had been gained, and\nthat Absalom was dead.\n\nBut Ahimaaz was persistent, and after the Cushite had been despatched\nhe carried his point, and was allowed to go. Very graphic is the\ndescription of the running of the two men and of their arrival at\nMahanaim. The king had taken his place at the gate of the city, and\nstationed a watchman on the wall above to look out eagerly lest any\none should come bringing news of the battle. In those primitive\ntimes there was no more rapid way of despatching important news than\nby a swift well-trained runner on foot. In the clear atmosphere\nof the East first one man, then another, was seen running alone.\nBy-and-bye, the watchman surmised that the foremost of the two was\nAhimaaz; and when the king heard it, remembering his former message,\nhe concluded that such a man must be the bearer of good tidings. As\nsoon as he came within hearing of the king, he shouted out, \"All\nis well.\" Coming close, he fell on his face and blessed God for\ndelivering the rebels into David's hands. Before thanking him or\nthanking God, the king showed what was uppermost in his heart by\nasking, \"Is the young man Absalom safe?\" And here the moral courage\nof Ahimaaz failed him, and he gave an evasive answer: \"When Joab sent\nthe king's servant, and me thy servant, I saw a great tumult, but I\nknew not what it was.\" When he heard this the king bade him stand\naside, till he should hear what the other messenger had to say. And\nthe official messenger was more frank than the personal friend. For\nwhen the king repeated the question about Absalom, the answer was,\n\"The enemies of my lord the king, and all that rise against thee to\ndo thee hurt, be as that young man is.\" The answer was couched in\nskilful words. It suggested the enormity of Absalom's guilt, and of\nthe danger to the king and the state which he had plotted, and the\nmagnitude of the deliverance, seeing that he was now beyond the power\nof doing further evil.\n\nBut such soothing expressions were lost upon the king. The worst\nfears of his heart were realized--Absalom was dead. Gone from earth\nfor ever, beyond reach of the yearnings of his heart; gone to answer\nfor crimes that were revolting in the sight of God and man. \"The\nking was much moved; and he went up to the chamber over the gate and\nwept; and as he went, thus he said, O my son Absalom! my son, my son\nAbsalom! Would God I had died for thee, O Absalom, my son, my son!\"\n\nHe had been a man of war, a man of the sword; he had been familiar\nwith death, and had seen it once and again in his own family; but\nthe tidings of Absalom's death fell upon him with all the force of a\nfirst bereavement. Not more piercing is the wail of the young widow\nwhen suddenly the corpse of her beloved is borne into the house, not\nmore overwhelming is her sensation, as if the solid earth were giving\nway beneath her, than the emotion that now prostrated King David.\n\nGrief for the dead is always sacred; and however unworthy we may\nregard the object of it, we cannot but respect it in King David.\nViewed simply as an expression of his unquenched affection for\nhis son, and separated from its bearing on the interests of the\nkingdom, and from the air of repining it seemed to carry against the\ndispensation of God, it showed a marvellously tender and forgiving\nheart. In the midst of an odious and disgusting rebellion, and with\nthe one object of seeking out his father and putting him to death,\nthe heartless youth had been arrested and had met his deserved fate.\nYet so far from showing satisfaction that the arm that had been\nraised to crush him was laid low in death, David could express no\nfeelings but those of love and longing. Was it not a very wonderful\nlove, coming very near to the feeling of Him who prayed, \"Father,\nforgive them, for they know not what they do,\" like that \"love\nDivine, all love excelling,\" that follows the sinner through all his\nwanderings, and clings to him amid all his rebellions; the love of\nHim that not merely wished in a moment of excitement that He could\ndie for His guilty children but did die for them, and in dying bore\ntheir guilt and took it away, and of which the brief but matchless\nrecord is that \"having once loved His own that were with Him in the\nworld, He loved them even unto the end?\"\n\nThe elements of David's intense agony, when he heard of Absalom's\ndeath, were mainly three. In the first place, there was the loss of\nhis son, of whom he could say that, with all his faults, he loved him\nstill. A dear object had been plucked from his heart, and left it sick,\nvacant, desolate. A face he had often gazed on with delight lay cold\nin death. He had not been a good son, he had been very wicked; but\naffection has always its visions of a better future, and is ready to\nforgive unto seventy times seven. And then death is so dreadful when it\nfastens on the young. It seems so cruel to fell to the ground a bright\nyoung form; to extinguish by one blow his every joy, every hope, every\ndream; to reduce him to nothingness, so far as this life is concerned.\nAn infinite pathos, in a father's experience, surrounds a young man's\ndeath. The regret, the longing, the conflict with the inevitable, seem\nto drain him of all energy, and leave him helpless in his sorrow.\n\nSecondly, there was the terrible fact that Absalom had died in\nrebellion, without expressing one word of regret, without one request\nfor forgiveness, without one act or word that it would be pleasant\nto recall in time to come, as a foil to the bitterness caused by his\nunnatural rebellion. Oh, if he had had but an hour to think of his\nposition, to realise the lesson of his defeat, to ask his father's\nforgiveness, to curse the infatuation of the last few years! How would\none such word have softened the sting of his rebellion in his father's\nbreast! What a change it would have given to the aspect of his evil\nlife! But not even the faint vestige of such a thing was ever shown;\nthe unmitigated glare of that evil life must haunt his father evermore!\n\nThirdly, there was the fact that in this rebellious condition he had\npassed to the judgment of God. What hope could there be for such a\nman, living and dying as he had done? Where could he be now? Was not\n\"the great pit in the wood,\" into which his unhonoured carcase had\nbeen flung, a type of another pit, the receptacle of his soul? What\nagony to the Christian heart is like that of thinking of the misery\nof dear ones who have died impenitent and unpardoned?\n\nTo these and similar elements of grief David appears to have\nabandoned himself without a struggle. But was this right? Ought he\nnot to have made some acknowledgment of the Divine hand in his trial,\nas he did when Bathsheba's child died? Ought he not to have acted as\nhe did on another occasion, when he said, \"I was dumb with silence,\nI opened not my mouth, because Thou didst it\"? We have seen that in\ndomestic matters he was not accustomed to place himself so thoroughly\nunder the control of the Divine will as in the more public business\nof his life; and now we see that, when his parental feelings are\ncrushed, he is left without the steadying influence of submission to\nthe will of God. And in the agony of his private grief he forgets\nthe public welfare of the nation. Noble and generous though the wish\nbe, \"Would God I had died for thee,\" it was on public grounds out\nof the question. Let us imagine for one moment the wish realized.\nDavid has fallen and Absalom survives. What sort of kingdom would it\nhave been? What would have been the fate of the gallant men who had\ndefended David? What would have been the condition of God's servants\nthroughout the kingdom? What would have been the influence of so\ngodless a monarch upon the interests of truth and the cause of God?\nIt was a rash and unadvised utterance of affection. But for the rough\nfaithfulness of Joab, the consequences would have been disastrous.\n\"The victory that day was turned into mourning, for the people heard\nsay that day how the king was grieved for his son.\" Every one was\ndiscouraged. The man for whom they had risked their lives had not a\nword of thanks to any of them, and could think of no one but that\nvile son of his, who was now dead. In the evening Joab came to him,\nand in his blunt way swore to him that if he was not more affable\nto the people they would not remain a night longer in his service.\nRoused by the reproaches and threatenings of his general, the king\ndid now present himself among them. The people responded and came\nbefore him, and the effort he made to show himself agreeable kept\nthem to their allegiance, and led on to the steps for his restoration\nthat soon took place.\n\nBut it must have been an effort to abstract his attention from\nAbsalom, and fix it on the brighter results of the battle. And\nnot only that night, in the silence of his chamber, but for many\na night, and perhaps many a day, during the rest of his life, the\nthought of that battle and its crowning catastrophe must have haunted\nDavid like an ugly dream. We seem to see him in some still hour\nof reverie recalling early days;--happy scenes rise around him;\nlovely children gambol at his side; he hears again the merry laugh\nof little Tamar, and smiles as he recalls some childish saying of\nAbsalom; he is beginning, as of old, to forecast the future and\nshape out for them careers of honour and happiness; when, horror of\nhorrors! the spell breaks; the bright vision gives way to dismal\nrealities--Tamar's dishonour, Amnon's murder, Absalom's insurrection,\nand, last not least, Absalom's death, glare in the field of memory!\nWho will venture to say that David did not smart for his sins? Who\nthat reflects would be willing to take the cup of sinful indulgence\nfrom his hands, sweet though it was in his mouth, when he sees it so\nbitter in the belly?\n\nTwo remarks may appropriately conclude this chapter, one with\nreference to grief from bereavements in general, the other with\nreference to the grief that may arise to Christians in connection\nwith the spiritual condition of departed children.\n\n1. With reference to grief from bereavements in general, it is to be\nobserved that they will prove either a blessing or an evil according\nto the use to which they are turned. All grief in itself is a\nweakening thing--weakening both to the body and the mind, and it were\na great error to suppose that it _must_ do good in the end. There\nare some who seem to think that to resign themselves to overwhelming\ngrief is a token of regard to the memory of the departed, and they\ntake no pains to counteract the depressing influence. It is a painful\nthing to say, yet it is true, that a long-continued manifestation\nof overwhelming grief, instead of exciting sympathy, is more apt\nto cause annoyance. Not only does it depress the mourner himself,\nand unfit him for his duties to the living, but it depresses those\nthat come in contact with him, and makes them think of him with a\nmeasure of impatience. And this suggests another remark. It is not\nright to obtrude our grief overmuch on others, especially if we are\nin a public position. Let us take example in this respect from our\nblessed Lord. Was any sorrow like unto His sorrow? Yet how little\ndid He obtrude it even on the notice of His disciples! It was\ntowards the end of His ministry before He even began to tell them\nof the dark scenes through which He was to pass; and even when He\ndid tell them how He was to be betrayed and crucified, it was not\nto court their sympathy, but to prepare them for their part of the\ntrial. And when the overwhelming agony of Gethsemane drew on, it was\nonly three of the twelve that were permitted to be with Him. All such\nconsiderations show that it is a more Christian thing to conceal our\ngriefs than to make others uncomfortable by obtruding them upon their\nnotice. David was on the very eve of losing the affections of those\nwho had risked everything for him, by abandoning himself to anguish\nfor his private loss, and letting his distress for the dead interfere\nwith his duty to the living.\n\nAnd how many things are there to a Christian mind fitted to abate\nthe first sharpness even of a great bereavement. Is it not the\ndoing of a Father, infinitely kind? Is it not the doing of Him \"who\nspared not His own Son, but delivered Him up for us all\"? You say\nyou can see no light through it,--it is dark, all dark, fearfully\ndark. Then you ought to fall back on the inscrutability of God. Hear\nHim saying, \"What I do, thou knowest not now, but thou shalt know\nhereafter.\" Resign yourself patiently to His hands, till He make the\nneeded revelation, and rest assured that when it is made it will be\nworthy of God. \"Ye have heard of the patience of Job, and have seen\nthe end of the Lord, that the Lord is very pitiful and of tender\nmercy.\" Meanwhile, be impressed with the vanity of this life, and\nthe infinite need of a higher portion. \"Set your affection on things\nabove, and not on the things on the earth. For ye are dead, and your\nlife is hid with Christ in God. When Christ, who is your Life, shall\nappear, then shall ye also appear with Him in glory.\"\n\n2. The other remark that falls to be made here concerns the grief\nthat may arise to Christians in connection with the spiritual\ncondition of departed children.\n\nWhen the parent is either in doubt as to the happiness of a beloved\none, or has cause to apprehend that the portion of that child is\nwith the unbelievers, the pang which he experiences is one of the\nmost acute which the human heart can know. Now here is a species of\nsuffering which, if not peculiar to believers, falls on them far the\nmost heavily, and is, in many cases, a haunting spectre of misery. The\nquestion naturally arises, Is it not strange that their very beliefs,\nas Christians, subject them to such acute sufferings? If one were a\ncareless, unbelieving man, and one's child died without evidence of\ngrace, one would probably think nothing of it, because the things that\nare unseen and eternal are never in one's thoughts. But just because\none believes the testimony of God on this great subject, one becomes\nliable to a peculiar agony. Is this not strange indeed?\n\nYes, there is a mystery in it which we cannot wholly solve. But we\nmust remember that it is in thorough accordance with a great law\nof Providence, the operation of which, in other matters, we cannot\noverlook. That law is, that the cultivation and refinement of any\norgan or faculty, while it greatly increases your capacity of\nenjoyment, increases at the same time your capacity, and it may be\nyour occasions, of suffering. Let us take, for example, the habit of\ncleanliness. Where this habit prevails, there is much more enjoyment\nin life; but let a person of great cleanliness be surrounded by\nfilth, his suffering is infinitely greater. Or take the cultivation\nof taste, and let us say of musical taste. It adds to life an immense\ncapacity of enjoyment, but also a great capacity and often much\noccasion of suffering, because bad music or tasteless music, such as\none may often have to endure, creates a misery unknown to the man\nof no musical culture. To a man of classical taste, bad writing or\nbad speaking, such as is met with every day, is likewise a source\nof irritation and suffering. If we advance to a moral and spiritual\nregion, we may see that the cultivation of one's ordinary affections,\napart from religion, while on the whole it increases enjoyment, does\nalso increase sorrow. If I lived and felt as a Stoic, I should enjoy\nfamily life much less than if I were tender-hearted and affectionate;\nbut when I suffered a family bereavement I should suffer much less.\nThese are simply illustrations of the great law of Providence that\nculture, while it increases happiness, increases suffering too. It\nis a higher application of the same law, that gracious culture, the\nculture of our spiritual affections under the power of the Spirit of\nGod, in increasing our enjoyment does also increase our capacity of\nsuffering. In reference to that great problem of natural religion,\nWhy should a God of infinite benevolence have created creatures\ncapable of suffering? one answer that has often been given is, that\nif they had not been capable of suffering they might not have been\ncapable of enjoyment. But in pursuing these inquiries we get into an\nobscure region, in reference to which it is surely our duty patiently\nto wait for that increase of light which is promised to us in the\nsecond stage of our existence.\n\nYet still it remains to be asked, What comfort can there possibly\nbe for Christian parents in such a case as David's? What possible\nconsideration can ever reconcile them to the thought that their\nbeloved ones have gone to the world of woe? Are not their children\nparts of themselves, and how is it possible for them to be completely\nsaved if those who are so identified with them are lost? How can they\never be happy in a future life if eternally separated from those who\nwere their nearest and dearest on earth? On such matters it has pleased\nGod to allow a great cloud to rest which our eyes cannot pierce.\nWe cannot solve this problem. We cannot reconcile perfect personal\nhappiness, even in heaven, with the knowledge that beloved ones are\nlost. But God must have some way, worthy of Himself, of solving the\nproblem. And we must just wait for His time of revelation. \"God is His\nown interpreter, and He will make it plain.\" The Judge of all the earth\nmust act justly. And the song which will express the deepest feelings\nof the redeemed, when from the sea of glass, mingled with fire, they\nlook back on the ways of Providence toward them, will be this: \"Great\nand marvellous are Thy works, Lord God Almighty; _just and true are all\nThy ways_, Thou King of saints. Who would not fear Thee and glorify Thy\nname, for Thou only art holy?\"\n\n\n\n\n                             CHAPTER XXV.\n\n                          _THE RESTORATION._\n\n                          2 SAMUEL xix. 5-30.\n\n\nTo rouse one's self from the prostration of grief, and grapple anew\nwith the cares of life, is hard indeed. Among the poorer classes of\nsociety, it is hardly possible to let grief have its swing; amid\nsuppressed and struggling emotions the poor man must return to his\ndaily toil. The warrior, too, in the heat of conflict has hardly\ntime to drop a tear over the tomb of his comrade or his brother.\nBut where leisure is possible, the bereaved heart does crave a time\nof silence and solitude; and it seems reasonable, in order that\nits fever may subside a little, before the burden of daily work is\nresumed. It was somewhat hard upon David, then, that his grief could\nnot get a single evening to flow undisturbed. A rough voice called\nhim to rouse himself, and speak comfortably to his people, otherwise\nthey would disband before morning, and all that he had gained would\nbe lost to him again. In the main, Joab was no doubt right; but in\nhis manner there was a sad lack of consideration for the feelings\nof the king. He might have remembered that, though he had gained\na battle David had lost a son, and that, too, under circumstances\npeculiarly heart-breaking. Faithful in the main and shrewd as Joab\nwas, he was no doubt a useful officer; but his harshness and want\nof feeling went far to neutralise the benefit of his services. It\nought surely to be one of the benefits of civilisation and culture\nthat, where painful duties have to be done, they should be done with\nmuch consideration and tenderness. For the real business of life\nis not so much to get right things done in any way, as to diffuse\na right spirit among men, and get them to do things well. Men of\nenlightened goodness will always aim at purifying the springs of\nconduct, at increasing virtue, and deepening faith and holiness. The\ncall to the royal bridegroom in the forty-fifth Psalm is to \"gird\nhis sword on his thigh, and ride forth prosperously, _because of\ntruth, and meekness, and righteousness_.\" To increase these three\nthings is to increase the true wealth of nations and advance the true\nprosperity of kingdoms. In his eagerness to get a certain thing done,\nJoab showed little or no regard for those higher interests to which\noutward acts should ever be subordinate.\n\nBut David felt the call of duty--\"He arose and sat in the gate. And\nthey told unto all the people saying, Behold, the king doth sit in\nthe gate. And all the people came before the king: for Israel had\nfled every man to his tent.\" And very touching it must have been to\nlook on the sad, pale, wasted face of the king, and mark his humble,\nchastened bearing, and yet to receive from him words of winning\nkindness that showed him still caring for them and loving them, as a\nshepherd among his sheep; in no wise exasperated by the insurrection,\nnot breathing forth threatenings and slaughter on those who had taken\npart against him; but concerned as ever for the welfare of the whole\nkingdom, and praying for Jerusalem, for his brethren and companions'\nsakes, \"Peace be within thee.\"\n\nIt was now open to him to follow either of two courses: either\nto march to Jerusalem at the head of his victorious army, take\nmilitary possession of the capital, and deal with the remains of the\ninsurrection in the stern fashion common among kings; or to wait\ntill he should be invited back to the throne from which he had been\ndriven, and then magnanimously proclaim an amnesty to all the rebels.\nWe are not surprised that he preferred the latter alternative. It is\nmore agreeable to any man to be offered what is justly due to him\nby those who have deprived him of it than to have to claim it as\nhis right. It was far more like him to return in peace than in that\nvengeful spirit that must have hecatombs of rebels slain to satisfy\nit. The people knew that David was in no bloodthirsty mood. And it\nwas natural for him to expect that an advance would be made to him,\nafter the frightful wrong which he had suffered from the people. He\nwas therefore in no haste to leave his quarters at Mahanaim.\n\nThe movement that he looked for did take place, but it did not\noriginate with those who might have been expected to take the lead. It\nwas among the ten tribes of Israel that the proposal to bring him back\nwas first discussed, and his own tribe, the tribe of Judah, held back\nafter the rest were astir. He was much chagrined at this backwardness\non the part of Judah. It was hard that his own tribe should be the last\nto stir, that those who might have been expected to head the movement\nshould lag behind. But in this David was only experiencing the same\nthing as the Son of David a thousand years after, when the people of\nNazareth, His own city, not only refused to listen to Him, but were\nabout to hurl Him over the edge of a precipice, So important, however,\ndid he see it to be for the general welfare that Judah should share the\nmovement, that he sent Zadok and Abiathar the priests to stir them up\nto their duty. He would not have taken this step but for his jealousy\nfor the honour of Judah; it was the fact that the movement was now\ngoing on in some places and not in all that induced him to interfere.\nHe dreaded disunion in any case, especially a disunion between Judah\nand Israel. For the jealousy between these two sections of the people\nthat afterwards broke the kingdom into two under Jeroboam was now\nbeginning to show itself, and, indeed, led soon after to the revolt of\nSheba.\n\nAnother step was taken by David, of very doubtful expediency,\nin order to secure the more cordial support of the rebels. He\nsuperseded Joab, and gave the command of his army to Amasa, who had\nbeen general of the rebels. In more ways than one this was a strong\nmeasure. To supersede Joab was to make for himself a very powerful\nenemy, to rouse a man whose passions, when thoroughly excited, were\ncapable of any crime. But on the other hand, David could not but be\nhighly offended with Joab for his conduct to Absalom, and he must\nhave looked on him as a very unsuitable coadjutor to himself in\nthat policy of clemency that he had determined to pursue. This was\nsignificantly brought out by the appointment of Amasa in room of\nJoab. Both were David's nephews, and both were of the tribe of Judah;\nbut Amasa had been at the head of the insurgents, and therefore in\nclose alliance with the insurgents of Judah. Most probably the reason\nwhy the men of Judah hung back was that they were afraid lest, if\nDavid were restored to Jerusalem, he would make an example of them;\nfor it was at Hebron, in the tribe of Judah, that Absalom had been\nfirst proclaimed; and the people of Jerusalem who had favoured him\nwere mostly of that tribe. But when it became known that the leader\nof the rebel forces was not only not to be punished, but actually\npromoted to the highest office in the king's service, all fears of\nthat sort were completely scattered. It was an act of wonderful\nclemency. It was such a contrast to the usual treatment of rebels!\nBut this king was not like other kings; he gave gifts even to the\nrebellious. There was no limit to his generosity. Where sin abounded\ngrace did much more abound. Accordingly a new sense of the goodness\nand generosity of their ill-treated but noble king took possession\nof the people. \"He bowed the heart of the men of Judah, even as the\nheart of one man, so that they sent this word unto the king, Return\nthou, and all thy servants.\" From the extreme of backwardness they\nstarted to the extreme of forwardness; the last to speak for David,\nthey were the first to act for him; and such was their vehemence in\nhis cause that the evil of national disunion which David dreaded from\ntheir indifference actually sprang from their over-impetuous zeal.\n\nThus at length David bade farewell to Mahanaim, and began his journey\nto Jerusalem. His route in returning was the reverse of that followed\nin his flight. First he descends the eastern bank of the Jordan as far\nas opposite Gilgal; then he strikes up through the wilderness the steep\nascent to Jerusalem. At Gilgal several events of interest took place.\n\nThe first of these was the meeting with the representatives of Judah,\nwho came to conduct the king over Jordan, and to offer him their\ncongratulations and loyal assurances. This step was taken by the\nmen of Judah alone, and without consultation or co-operation with\nthe other tribes. A ferry-boat to convey the king's household over\nthe river, and whatever else might be required to make the passage\ncomfortable, these men of Judah provided. Some have blamed the king\nfor accepting these attentions from Judah, instead of inviting the\nattendance of all the tribes. But surely, as the king had to pass the\nJordan, and found the means of transit provided for him, he was right\nto accept what was offered. Nevertheless, this act of Judah and its\nacceptance by David gave serious offence, as we shall presently see,\nto the other tribes.\n\nNeither Judah nor Israel comes out well in this little incident.\nWe get an instructive glimpse of the hot-headedness of the tribes,\nand the childishness of their quarrels. It is members of the same\nnation a thousand years afterwards that on the very eve of the\nCrucifixion we see disputing among themselves which of them should\nbe the greatest. Men never appear in a dignified attitude when they\nare contending that on some occasion or other they have been treated\nwith too little consideration. And yet how many of the quarrels of\nthe world, both public and private, have arisen from this, that some\none did not receive the attention which he deserved! Pride lies at\nthe bottom of it all. And quarrels of this kind will sometimes, nay\noften, be found even among men calling themselves the followers of\nChrist. If the blessed Lord Himself had acted on this principle,\nwhat a different life He would have led! If He had taken offence\nat every want of etiquette, at every want of the honour due to the\nSon of God, when would our redemption ever have been accomplished?\nWas His mother treated with due consideration when forced into the\nstable, because there was no room for her in the inn? Was Jesus\nHimself treated with due honour when the people of Nazareth took Him\nto the brow of the hill, or when the foxes had holes, and the birds\nof the air had nests, but the Son of Man had not where to lay His\nhead? What if He had resented the denial of Peter, the treachery of\nJudas, and the forsaking of Him by all the apostles? How admirable\nwas the humility that made Himself of no reputation, so that when\nHe was reviled He reviled not again, when He suffered He threatened\nnot, but committed Himself to Him that judgeth righteously! Yet how\nutterly opposite is the bearing of many, who are ever ready to take\noffence if anything is omitted to which they have a claim--standing\nupon their rights, claiming precedence over this one and the other,\nmaintaining that it would never do to allow themselves to be trampled\non, thinking it spirited to contend for their honours! It is because\nthis tendency is so deeply seated in human nature that you need to be\nso watchful against it. It breaks out at the most unseasonable times.\nCould any time have been more unsuitable for it on the part of the\nmen of Israel and Judah than when the king was giving them such a\nmemorable example of humility, pardoning every one, great and small,\nthat had offended him, even though their offence was as deadly as\ncould be conceived? Or could any time have been more unsuitable for\nit on the part of the disciples of our Lord than when He was about\nto surrender His very life, and submit to the most shameful form of\ndeath that could be devised? Why do men not see that the servant is\nnot above his lord, nor the disciple above his master? \"Is not the\nheart deceitful above all things and desperately wicked\"? Let him\nthat thinketh he standeth take heed lest he fall.\n\nThe next incident at Gilgal was the cringing entreaty of Shimei,\nthe Benjamite, to be pardoned the insult which he had offered the\nking when he left Jerusalem. The conduct of Shimei had been such\nan outrage on all decency that we wonder how he could have dared\nto present himself at all before David; even though, as a sort of\nscreen, he was accompanied by a thousand Benjamites. His prostration\nof himself on the ground before David, his confession of his sin and\nabject deprecation of the king's anger, are not fitted to raise him\nin our estimation; they were the fruits of a base nature that can\ninsult the fallen, but lick the dust off the feet of men in power. It\nwas not till David had made it known that his policy was to be one\nof clemency that Shimei took this course; and even then he must have\na thousand Benjamites at his back before he could trust himself to\nhis mercy. Abishai, Joab's brother, would have had him slain; but his\nproposal was rejected by David with warmth and even indignation. He\nknew that his restoration was an accomplished fact, and he would not\nspoil a policy of forgiveness by shedding the blood of this wicked\nman. Not content with passing his word to Shimei, \"he sware unto\nhim.\" But he afterwards found that he had carried clemency too far,\nand in his dying charge to Solomon he had to warn him against this\ndangerous enemy, and instruct him to bring down his hoar head with\nblood. But this needs not to make us undervalue the singular quality\nof heart which led David to show such forbearance to one utterly\nunworthy. It was a strange thing in the annals of Eastern kingdoms,\nwhere all rebellion was usually punished with the most fearful\nseverity. It brings to mind the gentle clemency of the great Son of\nDavid in His dealings, a thousand years after, with another Benjamite\nas he was travelling, on that very route, on the way to Damascus,\nbreathing out threatenings and slaughter against His disciples. Was\nthere ever such clemency as that which met the persecutor with the\nwords, Saul, Saul, why persecutest thou Me? Only in this case the\nclemency accomplished its object; in Shimei's case it did not. In the\none case the persecutor became the chief of Apostles; in the other he\nacted more like the evil spirit in the parable, whose last end was\nworse than the first.\n\nThe next incident in the king's return was his meeting with\nMephibosheth. He came down to meet the king, \"and had neither dressed\nhis feet, nor trimmed his beard, nor washed his clothes from the day\nthe king departed unto the day when he came again in peace.\" Naturally,\nthe king's first question was an inquiry why he had not left Jerusalem\nwith him. And Mephibosheth's reply was simply, that he had wished to\ndo so, but, owing to his lameness, had not been able. And, moreover,\nZiba had slandered him to the king when he said that Mephibosheth hoped\nto receive back the kingdom of his grandfather. The words of this poor\nman had all the appearance of an honest narrative. The ass which he\nintended to saddle for his own use was probably one of those which Ziba\ntook away to present to David, so that Mephibosheth was left helpless\nin Jerusalem. If the narrative commends itself by its transparent\ntruthfulness, it shows also how utterly improbable was the story of\nZiba, that he had expectations of being made king. For he seems to have\nbeen as feeble in mind as he was frail in body, and he undoubtedly\ncarried his compliments to David to a ridiculous pitch when he said,\n\"All my father's house were but dead men before my lord the king.\" Was\nthat a fit way to speak of his father Jonathan?\n\nWe cannot greatly admire one who would depreciate his family to\nsuch a degree because he desired to obtain David's favour. And for\nsome reason David was somewhat sharp to him. No man is perfect,\nand we cannot but wonder that the king who was so gentle to Shimei\nshould have been so sharp to Mephibosheth. \"Why speakest thou any\nmore of thy matters? I have said, Thou and Ziba divide the land.\"\nDavid appears to have been irritated at discovering his mistake in\nbelieving Ziba, and hastily transferring Mephibosheth's property to\nhim. Nothing is more common than such irritation, when men discover\nthat through false information they have made a blunder, and gone\ninto some arrangement that must be undone. But why did not the king\nrestore all his property to Mephibosheth? Why say that he and Ziba\nwere to divide it? Some have supposed (as we remarked before) that\nthis meant simply that the old arrangement was to be continued--Ziba\nto till the ground, and Mephibosheth to receive as his share half\nthe produce. But in that case Mephibosheth would not have added,\n\"Yea, let him take all, forasmuch as my lord the king is come again\nin peace unto his own house.\" Our verdict would have been the very\nopposite,--Let Mephibosheth take all. But David was in a difficulty.\nThe temper of the Benjamites was very irritable; they had never been\nvery cordial to David, and Ziba was an important man among them.\nThere he was, with his fifteen sons and twenty servants, a man not\nto be hastily set aside. For once the king appeared to prefer the\nrule of expediency to that of justice. To make some amends for his\nwrong to Mephibosheth, and at the same time not to turn Ziba into\na foe, he resorted to this rough-and-ready method of dividing\nthe land between them. But surely it was an unworthy arrangement.\nMephibosheth had been loyal, and should never have lost his land. He\nhad been slandered by Ziba, and therefore deserved some solace for\nhis wrong. David restores but half his land, and has no soothing word\nfor the wrong he has done him. Strange that when so keenly sensible\nof the wrong done to himself when he lost his kingdom unrighteously,\nhe should not have seen the wrong he had done to Mephibosheth. And\nstrange that when his whole kingdom had been restored to himself, he\nshould have given back but half to Jonathan's son.\n\nThe incident connected with the meeting with Barzillai we reserve for\nseparate consideration.\n\nAmid the greatest possible diversity of circumstance, we are\nconstantly finding parallels in the life of David to that of Him\nwho was his Son according to the flesh. Our Lord can hardly be said\nto have ever been driven from His kingdom. The hosannahs of to-day\nwere indeed very speedily exchanged into the \"Away with Him! away\nwith Him! Crucify Him! crucify Him!\" of to-morrow. But what we may\nremark of our Lord is rather that He has been kept out of His kingdom\nthan driven from it. He who came to redeem the world, and of whom\nthe Father said, \"Yet have I set My King upon My holy hill of Zion,\"\nhas never been suffered to exercise His sovereignty, at least in a\nconspicuous manner and on a universal scale. Here is a truth that\nought to be a constant source of humiliation and sorrow to every\nChristian. Are you to be content that the rightful Sovereign should\nbe kept in the background, and the great ruling forces of the world\nshould be selfishness, and mammon, and pleasure, the lust of the\nflesh, and the lust of the eye, and the pride of life? Why speak ye\nnot of bringing the King back to His house? You say you can do so\nlittle. But every subject of King David might have said the same. The\nquestion is, not whether you are doing much or little, but whether\nyou are doing what you can. Is the exaltation of Jesus Christ to the\nsupreme rule of the world an object dear to you? Is it matter of\nhumiliation and concern to you that He does not occupy that place?\nDo you humbly try to give it to Him in your own heart and life? Do\nyou try to give it to Him in the Church, in the State, in the world?\nThe supremacy of Jesus Christ must be the great rallying cry of the\nmembers of the Christian Church, whatever their denomination. It is\na point on which surely all ought to be agreed, and agreement there\nmight bring about agreement in other things. Let us give our minds\nand hearts to realise in our spheres that glorious plan of which we\nread in the first chapter of Ephesians: \"That, in the dispensation\nof the fulness of time, God might gather together in one all things\nin Christ, both which are in heaven, and which are on earth,\neven in Him, in whom also we have obtained an inheritance, being\npredestinated according to the purpose of Him who worketh all things\naccording to the counsel of His own will, that we should be to the\npraise of His glory, who first trusted in Christ.\"\n\n\n\n\n                             CHAPTER XXVI.\n\n                        _DAVID AND BARZILLAI._\n\n                         2 SAMUEL xix. 31-40.\n\n\nIt is very refreshing to fall in with a man like Barzillai in a\nrecord which is so full of wickedness, and without many features of\na redeeming character. He is a sample of humanity at its best--one\nof those men who diffuse radiance and happiness wherever their\ninfluence extends. Long before St. Peter wrote his epistle, he had\nbeen taught by the one Master to \"put away all wickedness, and all\nguile, and hypocrisies, and envies, and evil-speakings;\" and he had\nadopted St. Paul's rule for rich men, \"that they do good, that they\nbe rich in good works, that they be ready to distribute, willing to\ncommunicate.\" We cannot well conceive a greater contrast than that\nbetween Barzillai and another rich farmer with whom David came in\ncontact at an earlier period of his life--Nabal of Carmel: the one\nniggardly, beggarly, and bitter, not able even to acknowledge an\nobligation, far less to devise anything liberal, adding insult to\ninjury when David modestly stated his claim, humiliating him before\nhis messengers, and meeting his request with a flat refusal of\neverything great or small; the other hastening from his home when\nhe heard of David's distress, carrying with him whatever he could\ngive for the use of the king and his followers, continuing to send\nsupplies while he was at Mahanaim, and now returning to meet him on\nhis way to Jerusalem, conduct him over Jordan, and show his loyalty\nand goodwill in every available way. While we grieve that there are\nstill so many Nabals let us bless God that there are Barzillais too.\n\nOf Barzillai's previous history we know nothing. We do not even know\nwhere Rogelim, his place of abode, was, except that it was among the\nmountains of Gilead. The facts stated regarding him are few, but\nsuggestive.\n\n1. He was \"a very great man.\" The expression seems to imply that he\nwas both rich and influential. Dwelling among the hills of Gilead,\nhis only occupation, and main way of becoming rich, must have been\nas a farmer. The two and a half tribes that settled on the east of\nthe Jordan, while they had a smaller share of national and spiritual\nprivileges, were probably better provided in a temporal sense. That\npart of the country was richer in pasturage, and therefore better\nadapted for cattle. It is probable, too, that the allotments were\nmuch larger. The kingdoms of Sihon and Og, especially the latter,\nwere of wide extent. If the two and a half tribes had been able\nthoroughly to subdue the original inhabitants, they would have had\npossessions of great extent and value. Barzillai's ancestors had\nprobably received a valuable and extensive allotment, and had been\nstrong enough and courageous enough to keep it for themselves.\nConsequently, when their flocks and herds multiplied, they were\nnot restrained within narrow dimensions, but could spread over the\nmountains round about. But however his riches may have been acquired,\nBarzillai was evidently a man of very large means. He was rich\napparently both in flocks and servants, a kind of chief or sheikh,\nnot only with a large establishment of his own, but enjoying the\nrespect, and in some degree able to command the services, of many of\nthe humble people around him.\n\n2. His generosity was equal to his wealth. The catalogue of the\narticles which he and another friend of David's brought him in his\nextremity (2 Sam. xvii. 28, 29) is instructive from its minuteness\nand its length. Like all men liberal in heart, he devised liberal\nthings. He did not ask to see a subscription list, or inquire what\nother people were giving. He did not consider what was the smallest\namount that he could give without appearing to be shabby. His only\nthought seems to have been, what there was he had to give that could\nbe of use to the king. It is this large inborn generosity manifested\nto David that gives one the assurance that he was a kind, generous\nhelper wherever there was a case deserving and needing his aid. We\nclass him with the patriarch of Uz, with whom no doubt he could have\nsaid, \"When the eye saw me, then it blessed me, and when the ear\nheard me, it bare witness unto me; the blessing of him that was ready\nto perish came upon me, and I made the widow's heart to leap for joy.\"\n\n3. His loyalty was not less thorough than his generosity. When he\nheard of the king's troubles, he seems never to have hesitated one\ninstant as to throwing in his lot with him. It mattered not that\nthe king was in great trouble, and apparently in a desperate case.\nNeighbours, or even members of his own family, might have whispered\nto him that it would be better not to commit himself, seeing the\nrebellion was so strong. He was living in a sequestered part of\nthe country; there was no call on him to declare himself at that\nparticular moment; and if Absalom got the upper hand, he would be\nsure to punish severely those who had been active on his father's\nside. But none of these things moved him. Barzillai was no sunshine\ncourtier, willing to enjoy the good things of the court in days\nof prosperity, but ready in darker days to run off and leave his\nfriends in the midst of danger. He was one of those true men that\nare ready to risk their all in the cause of loyalty when persuaded\nthat it is the cause of truth and right. We cannot but ask, What\ncould have given him a feeling so strong? We are not expressly told\nthat he was a man deeply moved by the fear of God, but we have every\nreason to believe it. If so, the consideration that would move him\nmost forcibly in favour of David must have been that he was God's\nanointed. God had called him to the throne, and had never declared,\nas in the case of Saul, that he had forfeited it; the attempt to\ndrive him from it was of the devil, and therefore to be resisted to\nthe last farthing of his property, and if he had been a younger man,\nto the last drop of his blood. Risk? Can you frighten a man like\nthis by telling him of the risk he runs by supporting David in the\nhour of adversity? Why, he is ready not only to risk all, but to\nlose all, if necessary, in a cause which appears so obviously to be\nDivine, all the more because he sees so well what a blessing David\nhas been to the country. Why, he has actually made the kingdom. Not\nonly has he expelled all its internal foes, but he has cowed those\ntroublesome neighbours that were constantly pouncing upon the tribes,\nand especially the tribes situated in Gilead and Bashan. Moreover,\nhe has given unity and stability to all the internal arrangements\nof the kingdom. See what a grand capital he has made for it at\nJerusalem. Look how he has planted the ark on the strongest citadel\nof the country, safe from every invading foe. Consider how he has\nperfected the arrangements for the service of the Levites, what a\ndelightful service of song he has instituted, and what beautiful\nsongs he has composed for the use of the sanctuary. Doubtless it was\nconsiderations of this kind that roused Barzillai to such a pitch\nof loyalty. And is not a country happy that has such citizens, men\nwho place their personal interest far below the public weal, and\nare ready to make any sacrifice, of person or of property, when the\nhighest interests of their country are concerned? We do not plead\nfor the kind of loyalty that clings to a monarch simply because he\nis king, apart from all considerations, personal and public, bearing\non his worthiness or unworthiness of the office. We plead rather for\nthe spirit that makes duty to country stand first, and personal or\nfamily interest a long way below. We deprecate the spirit that sneers\nat the very idea of putting one's self to loss or trouble of any kind\nfor the sake of public interests. We long for a generation of men and\nwomen that, like many in this country in former days, are willing to\ngive \"all for the Church and a little less for the State.\" And surely\nin these days, when no deadly risk is incurred, the demand is not so\nvery severe. Let Christian men lay it on their consciences to pay\nregard to the claims under which they lie to serve their country.\nWhether it be in the way of serving on some public board, or fighting\nagainst some national vice, or advancing some great public interest,\nlet it be considered even by busy men that their country, and must\nadd, their Church, have true claims upon them. Even heathens and\nunbelievers have said, \"It is sweet and glorious to die for one's\ncountry.\" It is a poor state of things when in a Christian community\nmen are so sunk in indolence and selfishness that they will not stir\na finger on its behalf.\n\n4. Barzillai was evidently a man of attractive personal qualities.\nThe king was so attracted by him, that he wished him to come with\nhim to Jerusalem, and promised to sustain him at court. The heart\nof King David was not too old to form new attachments. And towards\nBarzillai he was evidently drawn. We can hardly suppose but that\nthere were deeper qualities to attract the king than even his\nloyalty and generosity. It looks as if David perceived a spiritual\ncongeniality that would make Barzillai, not only a pleasant inmate,\nbut a profitable friend. For indeed in many ways Barzillai and David\nseem to have been like one another. God had given them both a warm,\nsunny nature. He had prospered them in the world. He had given them\na deep regard for Himself and delight in His fellowship. David must\nhave found in Barzillai a friend whose views on the deepest subjects\nwere similar to his own. At Jerusalem the men who were of his mind\nwere by no means too many. To have Barzillai beside him, refreshing\nhim with his experiences of God's ways and joining with him in songs\nof praise and thanksgiving, would be delightful. \"Behold, how good\nand how pleasant it is for brethren to dwell together in unity!\" But\nhowever pleasant the prospect may have been to David, it was not one\ndestined to be realized.\n\n5. For Barzillai was not dazzled even by the highest offers of the\nking, because he felt that the proposal was unsuitable for his\nyears. He was already eighty, and every day was adding to his burden,\nand bringing him sensibly nearer the grave. Even though he might be\nenjoying a hale old age, he could not be sure that he would not break\ndown suddenly, and thus become an utter burden to the king. David had\nmade the offer as a compliment to Barzillai, although it might also\nbe a favour to himself, and as a compliment the aged Gileadite was\nentitled to view it. And viewing it in that light, he respectfully\ndeclined it. He was a home-loving man, his habits had been formed\nfor a quiet domestic sphere, and it was too late to change them.\nHis faculties were losing their sharpness; his taste had become\ndulled, his ear blunted, so that both savoury dishes and elaborate\nmusic would be comparatively thrown away on him. The substance of\nhis answer was, I am an old man, and it would be unsuitable in me to\nbegin a courtier's life. In a word, he understood what was suitable\nfor old age. Many a man and woman too, perhaps, even of Barzillai's\nyears, would have jumped at King David's offer, and rejoiced to share\nthe dazzling honours of a court, and would have affected youthful\nfeelings and habits in order to enjoy the exhilaration and the\nexcitement of a courtier's life. In Barzillai's choice, we see the\npredominance of a sanctified common sense, alive to the proprieties\nof things, and able to see how the enjoyment most suitable to an\nadvanced period of life might best be had. It was not by aping youth\nor grasping pleasures for which the relish had gone. Some may think\nthis a painful view of old age. Is it so that as years multiply the\ntaste for youthful enjoyments passes away, and one must resign one's\nself to the thought that life itself is near its end? Undoubtedly\nit is. But even a heathen could show that this is by no means an\nevil. The purpose of Cicero's beautiful treatise on old age, written\nwhen he was sixty-two, but regarded as spoken by Cato at the age of\neighty-four, was to show that the objections commonly brought against\nold age were not really valid. These objections were--that old age\nunfits men for active business, that it renders the body feeble, that\nit deprives them of the enjoyment of almost all pleasures, and that\nit heralds the approach of death. Let it be granted, is the substance\nof Cicero's argument; nevertheless, old age brings enjoyments of a\nnew order that compensate for those which it withdraws. If we have\nwisdom to adapt ourselves to our position, and to lay ourselves out\nfor those compensatory pleasures, we shall find old age not a burden,\nbut a joy. Now, if even a heathen could argue in that way, how much\nmore a Christian! If he cannot personally be so lively as before, he\nmay enjoy the young life of his children and grandchildren or other\nyoung friends, and delight to see them enjoying what he cannot now\nengage in. If active pleasures are not to be had, there are passive\nenjoyments--the conversation of friends, reading, meditation, and\nthe like--of which all the more should be made. If one world is\ngliding from him, another is moving towards him. As the outward man\nperisheth, let the inward man be renewed day by day.\n\nThere are few more jarring scenes in English history than the last days\nof Queen Elizabeth. As life was passing away, a historian of England\nsays, \"she clung to it with a fierce tenacity. She hunted, she danced,\nshe jested with her young favourites, she coquetted, and frolicked,\nand scolded at sixty-seven as she had done at thirty.\" \"The Queen,\"\nwrote a courtier, \"a few months before her death was never so gallant\nthese many years, nor so set upon jollity.\" She persisted, in spite of\nopposition, in her gorgeous progresses from country house to country\nhouse. She clung to business as of old, and rated in her usual fashion\none \"who minded not to giving up some matter of account.\" And then a\nstrange melancholy settled on her. Her mind gave way, and food and\nrest became alike distasteful. Clever woman, yet very foolish in not\ndiscerning how vain it was to attempt to carry the brisk habits of\nyouth into old age, and most profoundly foolish in not having taken\npains to provide for old age the enjoyments appropriate to itself! How\ndifferently it has fared with those who have been wise in time and\nmade the best provision for old age! \"I have waited for Thy salvation,\nO my God,\" says the dying Jacob, relieved and happy to think that the\nobject for which he had waited had come at last. \"I am now ready to be\noffered,\" says St. Paul, \"and the time of my departure is at hand. I\nhave fought the good fight; I have finished my course; I have kept the\nfaith: henceforth there is laid up for me a crown of righteousness,\nwhich the Lord, the righteous Judge, will give me at that day, and not\nto me only, but unto all them also that love His appearing.\" Which is\nthe better portion--he whose old age is spent in bitter lamentation\nover the departed joys and brightness of his youth? or he whose sun\ngoes down with the sweetness and serenity of an autumn sunset, but only\nto rise in a brighter world, and shine forth in the glory of immortal\nyouth?\n\n6. Holding such views of old age, it was quite natural and suitable for\nBarzillai to ask for his son Chimham what he respectfully declined for\nhimself. For his declinature was not a rude rejection of an honour\ndeemed essentially false and vain. Barzillai did not tell the king that\nhe had lived to see the folly and the sin of those pleasures which in\nthe days of youth and inexperience men are so greedy to enjoy. That\nwould have been an affront to David, especially as he was now getting\nto be an old man himself. He recognised that a livelier mode of life\nthan befitted the old was suitable for the young. The advantages of\nresidence at the court of David were not to be thought little of by\none beginning life, especially where the head of the court was such a\nman as David, himself so affectionate and attractive, and so deeply\nimbued with the fear and love of God. The narrative is so short that\nnot a word is added as to how it fared with Chimham when he came to\nJerusalem. Only one thing is known of him: it is said that, after the\ndestruction of Jerusalem by Nebuchadnezzar, when Johanan conducted to\nEgypt a remnant of Jews that he had saved from the murderous hand of\nIshmael, \"they departed and dwelt in the habitation of Chimham, which\nis by Bethlehem, to go into Egypt.\" We infer that David bestowed on\nChimham some part of his paternal inheritance at Bethlehem. The vast\nriches which he had amassed would enable him to make ample provision\nfor his sons; but we might naturally have expected that the whole of\nthe paternal inheritance would have remained in the family. For some\nreason unknown to us, Chimham seems to have got a part of it. We cannot\nbut believe that David would desire to have a good man there, and it\nis much in favour of Chimham that he should have got a settlement\nat Bethlehem. And there is another circumstance that tells in his\nfavour: during the five centuries that elapsed between David's time\nand the Captivity, the name of Chimham remained in connection with\nthat property, and even so late as the time of Jeremiah it was called\n\"Chimham's habitation.\" Men do not thus keep alive dishonoured names,\nand the fact that Chimham's was thus preserved would seem to indicate\nthat he was one of those of whom it is said, \"The memory of the just is\nblessed.\"\n\nPlans for life were speedily formed in those countries; and as\nRebekah wished no delay in accompanying Abraham's servant to be the\nwife of Isaac, nor Ruth in going forth with Naomi to the land of\nJudah, so Chimham at once went with the king. The interview between\nDavid and Barzillai was ended in the way that in those countries\nwas the most expressive sign of regard and affection: \"David kissed\nBarzillai,\" but \"Chimham went on with him.\"\n\nThe meeting with Barzillai and the finding of a new son in Chimham must\nhave been looked back on by David with highly pleasant feelings. In\nevery sense of the term, he had lost a son in Absalom; he seems now to\nfind one in Chimham. We dare not say that the one was compensation for\nthe other. Such a blank as the death of Absalom left in the heart of\nDavid could never be filled up from any earthly source whatever. Blanks\nof that nature can be filled only when God gives a larger measure of\nHis own presence and His own love. But besides feeling very keenly\nthe blank of Absalom's death, David must have felt distressed at the\nloss as it seemed, of power, to secure the affections of the younger\ngeneration of his people, many of whom, there is every reason to\nbelieve, had followed Absalom. The ready way in which Chimham accepted\nof the proposal in regard to him would therefore be a pleasant incident\nin his experience; and the remembrance of his father's fast attachment\nand most useful friendship would ever be in David's memory like an\noasis in the desert.\n\nWe return for a moment to the great lesson of this passage. Aged men,\nit is a lesson for you. Titus was instructed to exhort the aged men\nof Crete to be \"sober, grave, temperate, sound in faith, in charity,\nin patience.\" It is a grievous thing to see grey hairs dishonoured.\nIt is a humiliating sight when Noah excites either the shame or the\nderision of his sons. But \"the hoary head is a crown of glory if it\nis found in the way of uprightness.\" And the crown is described in\nthe six particulars of the exhortation to Titus. It is a crown of six\njewels. Jewel the first is \"sobriety,\" meaning here self-command,\nself-control, ability to stand erect before temptation, and calmness\nunder provocation and trial. Jewel the second is \"gravity,\" not\nsternness, nor sullenness, nor censoriousness, but the bearing of one\nwho knows that \"life is real, life is earnest,\" in opposition to the\nfrivolous tone of those who act as if there were no life to come. Jewel\nthe third is \"temperance,\" especially in respect of bodily indulgence,\nkeeping under the body, never letting it be master, but in all respects\na servant. Jewel the fourth, \"soundness in faith,\" holding the true\ndoctrine of eternal life, and looking forward with hope and expectation\nto the inheritance of the future. Jewel the fifth, \"soundness in\ncharity,\" the charity of the thirteenth chapter of 1 Corinthians,\nitself a coruscation of the brightest gem in the Christian cabinet.\nJewel the sixth, \"soundness in patience,\" that grace so needful,\nbut so often neglected, that grace that gives an air of serenity to\none's character, that allies it to heaven, that gives it sublimity,\nthat bears the unbearable, and hopes and rejoices on the very edge of\ndespair. Onward, then, ye aged men, in this glorious path! By God's\ngrace, gather round your head these incorruptible jewels, which shine\nwith the lustre of God's holiness, and which are the priceless gems of\nheaven. Happy are ye, if indeed you have these jewels for your crown;\nand happy is your Church where the aged men are crowned with glory like\nthe four-and-twenty elders before the throne!\n\nBut what of those who dishonour God, and their own grey hairs, and\nthe Church of Christ by stormy tempers, profane tongues, drunken\norgies, and disorderly lives? \"O my soul, come not thou into their\nsecret! To their assembly, mine honour, be not thou united!\"\n\n\n\n\n                            CHAPTER XXVII.\n\n                     _THE INSURRECTION OF SHEBA._\n\n                       2 SAMUEL xix. 41-43; xx.\n\n\nDavid was now virtually restored to his kingdom; but he had not even\nleft Gilgal when fresh troubles began. The jealousy between Judah and\nIsrael broke out in spite of him. The cause of complaint was on the\npart of the ten tribes; they were offended at not having been waited\nfor to take part in escorting the king to Jerusalem. First, the men\nof Israel, in harsh language, accused the men of Judah of having\nstolen the king away, because they had transported him over the\nJordan. To this the men of Judah replied that the king was of their\nkin; therefore they had taken the lead, but they had received no\nspecial reward or honour in consequence. The men of Israel, however,\nhad an argument in reply to this: they were ten tribes, and therefore\nhad so much more right to the king; and Judah had treated them with\ncontempt in not consulting or co-operating with them in bringing him\nback. It is added that the words of the men of Judah were fiercer\nthan the words of the men of Israel.\n\nIt is in a poor and paltry light that both sides appear in this\ninglorious dispute. There was no solid grievance whatever, nothing that\nmight not have been easily settled if the soft answer that turneth\naway wrath had been resorted to instead of fierce and exasperating\nwords. Alas! that miserable tendency of our nature to take offence when\nwe think we have been overlooked,--what mischief and misery has it bred\nin the world! The men of Israel were foolish to take offence; but the\nmen of Judah were neither magnanimous nor forbearing in dealing with\ntheir unreasonable humour. The noble spirit of clemency that David\nhad shown awakened but little permanent response. The men of Judah;\nwho were foremost in Absalom's rebellion, were like the man in the\nparable that had been forgiven ten thousand talents, but had not the\ngenerosity to forgive the trifling offence committed against them,\nas they thought, by their brethren of Israel. So they seized their\nfellow-servant by the throat and demanded that he should pay them the\nuttermost farthing. Judah played false to his national character; for\nhe was not \"he whom his brethren should praise.\"\n\nWhat was the result? Any one acquainted with human nature might have\nforetold it with tolerable certainty. Given on one side a proneness\nto take offence, a readiness to think that one has been overlooked,\nand on the other a want of forbearance, a readiness to retaliate,--it\nis easy to see that the result will be a serious breach. It is just\nwhat we witness so often in children. One is apt to be dissatisfied,\nand complains of ill-treatment; another has no forbearance, and\nretorts angrily: the result is a quarrel, with this difference, that\nwhile the quarrels of children pass quickly away, the quarrels of\nnations or of factions last miserably long.\n\nMuch inflammable material being thus provided, a casual spark\nspeedily set it on fire. Sheba, an artful Benjamite, raised the\nstandard of revolt against David, and the excited ten tribes,\nsmarting with the fierce words of the men of Judah, flocked to his\nstandard. Most miserable proceeding! The quarrel had begun about a\nmere point of etiquette, and now they cast off God's anointed king,\nand that, too, after the most signal token of God's anger had fallen\non Absalom and his rebellious crew. There are many wretched enough\nslaveries in this world, but the slavery of pride is perhaps the most\nmischievous and humiliating of all.\n\nAnd here it cannot be amiss to call attention to the very great\nneglect of the rules and spirit of Christianity that is apt, even\nat the present day, to show itself among professing Christians in\nconnection with their disputes. This is so very apparent that one\nis apt to think that the settlement of quarrels is the very last\nmatter to which Christ's followers learn to apply the example and\ninstructions of their Master. When men begin in earnest to follow\nChrist, they usually pay considerable attention to certain of His\nprecepts; they turn away from scandalous sins, they observe prayer,\nthey show some interest in Christian objects, and they abandon some\nof the more frivolous ways of the world. But alas! when they fall\ninto differences, they are prone in dealing with them to leave all\nChrist's precepts behind them. See in what an unlovely and unloving\nspirit the controversies of Christians have usually been conducted;\nhow much of bitterness and personal animosity they show, how little\nforbearance and generosity; how readily they seem to abandon\nthemselves to the impulses of their own hearts. Controversy rouses\ntemper, and temper creates a tempest through which you cannot see\nclearly. And how many are the quarrels in Churches or congregations\nthat are carried on with all the heat and bitterness of unsanctified\nmen! How much offence is taken at trifling neglects or mistakes!\nWho remembers, even in its spirit, the precept in the Sermon on\nthe Mount, \"If any man smite thee on the right cheek, turn to him\nthe other also\"? Who remembers the beatitude, \"Blessed are the\npeacemakers, for they shall be called the children of God\"? Who bears\nin mind the Apostle's horror at the unseemly spectacle of saints\ncarrying their quarrels to heathen tribunals, instead of settling\nthem as Christians quietly among themselves? Who weighs the earnest\ncounsel, \"Endeavour to keep the unity of the Spirit in the bond of\npeace\"? Who prizes our gracious Lord's most blessed legacy, \"Peace\nI leave with you, My peace I give unto you; not as the world giveth\ngive I unto you\"? Do not all such texts show that it is incumbent\non Christians to be most careful and watchful, when any difference\narises, to guard against carnal feeling of every kind, and strive to\nthe very utmost to manifest the spirit of Christ? Yet is it not at\nsuch times that they are most apt to leave all their Christianity\nbehind them, and engage in unseemly wrangles with one another?\nDoes not the devil very often get it all his own way, whoever may\nbe in the right, and whoever in the wrong? And is not frequent\noccasion given thereby to the enemy to blaspheme, and, in the very\ncircumstances that should bring out in clear and strong light the\ntrue spirit of Christianity, is there not often, in place of that, an\nexhibition of rudeness and bitterness that makes the world ask, What\nbetter are Christians than other men?\n\nBut let us return to King David and his people. The author of the\ninsurrection was \"a man of Belial, whose name was Sheba.\" He is\ncalled \"the son of Bichri, a Benjamite.\" Benjamin had a son whose\nname was Becher, and the adjective formed from that would be\nBichrite; some have thought that Bichri denotes not his father,\nbut his family. Saul appears to have been of the same family (see\n_Speaker's Commentary in loco_). It is thus quite possible that Sheba\nwas a relation of Saul, and that he had always cherished a grudge\nagainst David for taking the throne which he had filled. Here, we may\nremark in passing, would have been a real temptation to Mephibosheth\nto join an insurrection, for if this had succeeded he was the man who\nwould naturally have become king. But there is no reason to believe\nthat Mephibosheth favoured Sheba, and therefore no reason to doubt\nthe truth of the account he gave of himself to David. The war-cry of\nSheba was an artful one--\"We have no part in David, neither have we\ninheritance in the son of Jesse.\" It was a scornful and exaggerated\nmockery of the claim that Judah had asserted as being of the same\ntribe with the king, whereas the other tribes stood in no such\nrelation to him. \"Very well,\" was virtually the cry of Sheba--\"if we\nhave no part in David, neither any inheritance in the son of Jesse,\nlet us get home as fast as possible, and leave his friends, the tribe\nof Judah, to make of him what they can.\" It was not so much a setting\nup of a new rebellion as a scornful repudiation of all interest\nin the existing king. Instead of going with David from Gilgal to\nJerusalem, they went up every man to his tent or to his home. It is\nnot said that they intended actively to oppose David, and from this\npart of the narrative we should suppose that all that they intended\nwas to make a public protest against the unworthy treatment which\nthey held that they had received. It must have greatly disturbed the\npleasure of David's return to Jerusalem that this unseemly secession\noccurred by the way. A chill must have fallen upon his heart just as\nit was beginning to recover its elasticity. And much anxiety must\nhave haunted him as to the issue--whether or not the movement would\ngo on to another insurrection like Absalom's; or whether, having\ndischarged their dissatisfied feeling, the people of Israel would\nreturn sullenly to their allegiance.\n\nNor could the feelings of King David be much soothed when he\nre-entered his home. The greater part of his family had been with\nhim in his exile, and when he returned his house was occupied by the\nten women whom he had left to keep it, and with whom Absalom had\nbehaved dishonourably. And here was another trouble resulting from\nthe rebellion that could not be adjusted in a satisfactory way. The\nonly way of disposing of them was to put them in ward, to shut them\nup in confinement, to wear out the rest of their lives in a dreary,\njoyless widowhood. All joy and brightness was thus taken out of their\nlives, and personal freedom was denied them. They were doomed, for\nno fault of theirs, to the weary lot of captives, cursing the day,\nprobably, when their beauty had brought them to the palace, and\nwishing that they could exchange lots with the humblest of their\nsisters that breathed the air of freedom. Strange that, with all his\nspiritual instincts, David could not see that a system which led to\nsuch miserable results must lie under the curse of God!\n\nAs events proceeded, it appeared that active mischief was likely\nto arise from Sheba's movement. He was accompanied by a body of\nfollowers, and the king was afraid lest he should get into some\nfenced city, and escape the correction which his wickedness deserved.\nHe accordingly sent Amasa to assemble the men of Judah, and return\nwithin three days. This was Amasa's first commission after his\nbeing appointed general of the troops. Whether he found the people\nunwilling to go out again immediately to war, or whether they were\nunwilling to accept him as their general, we are not told, but\ncertainly he tarried longer than the time appointed. Thereupon the\nking, who was evidently alarmed at the serious dimensions which the\ninsurrection of Sheba was assuming, sent for Abishai, Joab's brother,\nand ordered him to take what troops were ready and start immediately\nto punish Sheba. Abishai took \"Joab's men, and the Cherethites and\nthe Pelethites, and all the mighty men.\" With these he went out from\nJerusalem to pursue after Sheba. How Joab conducted himself on this\noccasion is a strange but characteristic chapter of his history. It\ndoes not appear that he had any dealings with David, or that David\nhad any dealings with him. He simply went out with his brother, and,\nbeing a man of the strongest will and greatest daring, he seems to\nhave resolved on some fit occasion to resume his command in spite of\nall the king's arrangements.\n\nThey had not gone farther from Jerusalem than the Pool of Gibeon\nwhen they were overtaken by Amasa, followed doubtless by his troops.\nWhen Joab and Amasa met, Joab, actuated by jealousy towards him as\nhaving superseded him in the command of the army, treacherously slew\nhim, leaving his dead body on the ground, and, along with Abishai,\nprepared to give pursuit after Sheba. An officer of Joab's was\nstationed beside Amasa's dead body, to call on the soldiers, when\nthey saw that their chief was dead, to follow Joab as the friend of\nDavid. But the sight of the dead body of Amasa only made them stand\nstill--horrified, most probably, at the crime of Joab, and unwilling\nto place themselves under one who had been guilty of such a crime.\nThe body of Amasa was accordingly removed from the highway into the\nfield, and his soldiers were then ready enough to follow Joab. Joab\nwas now in undisturbed command of the whole force, having set aside\nall David's arrangements as completely as if they had never been\nmade. Little did David thus gain by superseding Joab and appointing\nAmasa in his room. The son of Zeruiah proved himself again too strong\nfor him. The hideous crime by which he got rid of his rival was\nnothing to him. How he could reconcile all this with his duty to his\nking we are unable to see. No doubt he trusted to the principle that\n\"success succeeds,\" and believed firmly that if he were able entirely\nto suppress Sheba's insurrection and return to Jerusalem with the\nnews that every trace of the movement was obliterated, David would\nsay nothing of the past, and silently restore the general who, with\nall his faults, did so well in the field.\n\nSheba was quite unable to offer opposition to the force that was\nthus led against him. He retreated northwards from station to\nstation, passing in succession through the different tribes, until\nhe came to the extreme northern border of the land. There, in a\ntown called Abel-beth-Maachah, he took refuge, till Joab and his\nforces, accompanied by the Berites, a people of whom we know nothing,\nhaving overtaken him at Abel, besieged the town. Works were raised\nfor the purpose of capturing Abel, and an assault was made on the\nwall for the purpose of throwing it down. Then a woman, gifted\nwith the wisdom for which the place was proverbial, came to Joab to\nremonstrate against the siege. The ground of her remonstrance was\nthat the people of Abel had done nothing on account of which their\ncity should be destroyed. Joab, she said, was trying to destroy\n\"a city and a mother in Israel,\" and thereby to swallow up the\ninheritance of the Lord. In what sense was Joab seeking to destroy a\n_mother_ in Israel? The word seems to be used to denote a mother-city\nor district capital, on which other places were depending. What\nyou are trying to destroy is not a mere city of Israel, but a city\nwhich has its family of dependent villages, all of which must share\nin the ruin if we are destroyed. But Joab assured the woman that he\nhad no such desire. All that he wished was to get at Sheba, who had\ntaken refuge within the city. If that be all, said the woman, I will\nengage to throw his head to thee over the wall. It was the interest\nof the people of the city to get rid of the man who was bringing\nthem into so serious a danger. It was not difficult for them to get\nSheba decapitated, and to throw his head over the wall to Joab. By\nthis means the conspiracy was ended. As in Absalom's case, the death\nof the leader was the ruin of the cause. No further stand was made\nby any one. Indeed, it is probable that the great body of Sheba's\nfollowers had fallen away from him in the course of his northern\nflight, and that only a handful were with him in Abel. So \"Joab blew\na trumpet, and they retired from the city, every man to his tent. And\nJoab returned unto Jerusalem, to the king.\"\n\nThus, once again, the land had rest from war. At the close of\nthe chapter we have a list of the chief officers of the kingdom,\nsimilar to that given in ch. viii. at the close of David's foreign\nwars. It would appear that, peace being again restored, pains were\ntaken by the king to improve and perfect the arrangements for the\nadministration of the kingdom. The changes on the former list are\nnot very numerous. Joab was again at the head of the army; Benaiah,\nas before, commanded the Cherethites and the Pelethites; Jehoshaphat\nwas still recorder; Sheva (same as Seraiah) was scribe; and Zadok and\nAbiathar were priests. In two cases there was a change. A new office\nhad been instituted--\"Adoram was over the tribute;\" the subjugation\nof so many foreign states which had to pay a yearly tribute to David\ncalled for this change. In the earlier list it is said that the\nking's sons were chief rulers. No mention is made of king's sons now;\nthe chief ruler is Ira the Jairite. On the whole, there was little\nchange; at the close of this war the kingdom was administered in the\nsame manner and almost by the same men as before.\n\nThere is nothing to indicate that the kingdom was weakened in its\nexternal relations by the two insurrections that had taken place\nagainst David. It is to be observed that both of them were of very\nshort duration. Between Absalom's proclamation of himself at Hebron\nand his death in the wood of Ephraim there must have been a very short\ninterval, not more than a fortnight. The insurrection of Sheba was\nprobably all over in a week. Foreign powers could scarcely have heard\nof the beginning of the revolts before they heard of the close of\nthem. There would be nothing therefore to give them any encouragement\nto rebel against David, and they do not appear to have made any such\nattempt. But in another and higher sense these revolts left painful\nconsequences behind them. The chastening to which David was exposed in\nconnection with them was very humbling. His glory as king was seriously\nimpaired. It was humiliating that he should have had to fly from before\nhis own son. It was hardly less humiliating that he was seen to lie so\nmuch at the mercy of Joab. He is unable to depose Joab, and when he\ntries to do so, Joab not only kills his successor, but takes possession\nby his own authority of the vacant place. And David can say nothing. In\nthis relation of David to Joab we have a sample of the trials of kings.\nNominally supreme, they are often the servants of their ministers and\nofficers. Certainly David was not always his own master. Joab was\nreally above him; frustrated, doubtless, some excellent plans; did\ngreat service by his rough patriotism and ready valour, but injured the\ngood name of David and the reputation of his government by his daring\ncrimes. The retrospect of this period of his reign could have given\nlittle satisfaction to the king, since he had to trace it, with all its\ncalamities and sorrows, to his own evil conduct. And yet what David\nsuffered, and what the nation suffered, was not, strictly speaking, the\npunishment of his sin. God had forgiven him his sin. David had sung,\n\"Blessed is the man whose iniquity is forgiven, whose sin is covered.\"\nWhat he now suffered was not the visitation of God's wrath, but a\nfatherly chastening, designed to deepen his contrition and quicken his\nvigilance. And surely we may say, If the fatherly chastening was so\nsevere, what would the Divine retribution have been? If these things\nwere done in the green tree, what would have been done in the dry? If\nDavid, even though forgiven, could not but shudder at all the terrible\nresults of that course of sin which began with his allowing himself to\nlust after Bathsheba, what must be the feeling of many a lost soul, in\nthe world of woe, recalling its first step in open rebellion against\nGod, and thinking of all the woes, innumerable and unutterable, that\nhave sprung therefrom? Oh, sin, how terrible a curse thou bringest!\nWhat serpents spring up from the dragon's teeth! And how awful the fate\nof those who awake all too late to a sense of what thou art! Grant, O\nGod, of Thine infinite mercy, that we all may be wise in time; that\nwe may ponder the solemn truth, that \"the wages of sin is death\"; and\nthat, without a day's delay, we may flee for refuge to lay hold of the\nhope set before us, and find peace in believing on Him who came to take\nsin away by the sacrifice of Himself!\n\n\n\n\n                            CHAPTER XXVIII.\n\n                             _THE FAMINE._\n\n                          2 SAMUEL xxi. 1-14.\n\n\nWe now enter on the concluding part of the reign of David. Some\nof the matters in which he was most occupied during this period\nare recorded only in Chronicles. Among these, the chief was his\npreparations for the building of the temple, which great work was\nto be undertaken by his son. In the concluding part of Samuel the\nprincipal things recorded are two national judgments, a famine and\na pestilence, that occurred in David's reign, the one springing\nfrom a transaction in the days of Saul, the other from one in the\ndays of David. Then we have two very remarkable lyrical pieces, one\na general song of thanksgiving, forming a retrospect of his whole\ncareer; the other a prophetic vision of the great Ruler that was to\nspring from him, and the effects of His reign. In addition to these,\nthere is also a notice of certain wars of David's, not previously\nrecorded, and a fuller statement respecting his great men than we\nhave elsewhere. The whole of this section has more the appearance\nof a collection of pieces than a chronological narrative. It is by\nno means certain that they are all recorded in the order of their\noccurrence. The most characteristic of the pieces are the two songs\nor psalms--the one looking back, the other looking forward; the one\ncommemorating the goodness and mercy that had followed him all the\ndays of his life, the other picturing goodness still greater and\nmercy more abundant, yet to be vouchsafed under David's Son.\n\nThe conjunction \"then\" at the beginning of the chapter is replaced\nin the Revised Version by \"and.\" It does not denote that what is\nrecorded here took place immediately after what goes before. On\nthe contrary, the note of time is found in the general expression,\n\"in the days of David,\" that is, some time in David's reign. On\nobvious grounds, most recent commentators are disposed to place\nthis occurrence comparatively early. It is likely to have happened\nwhile the crime of Saul was yet fresh in the public recollection. By\nthe close of David's reign a new generation had come to maturity,\nand the transactions of Saul's reign must have been comparatively\nforgotten. It is clear from David's excepting Mephibosheth, that the\ntransaction occurred after he had been discovered and cared for.\nPossibly the narrative of the discovery of Mephibosheth may also be\nout of chronological order, and that event may have occurred earlier\nthan is commonly thought. It will remove some of the difficulties of\nthis difficult chapter if we are entitled to place the occurrence at\na time not very far remote from the death of Saul.\n\nIt was altogether a singular occurrence, this famine in the land\nof Israel. The calamity was remarkable, the cause was remarkable,\nthe cure most remarkable of all. The whole narrative is painful and\nperplexing; it places David in a strange light,--it seems to place\neven God Himself in a strange light; and the only way in which we\ncan explain it, in consistency with a righteous government, is by\nlaying great stress on a principle accepted without hesitation in\nthose Eastern countries, which made the father and his children \"one\nconcern,\" and held the children liable for the misdeeds of the father.\n\n1. As to the calamity. It was a famine that continued three\nsuccessive years, causing necessarily an increase of misery year\nafter year. There is a presumption that it occurred in the earlier\npart of David's reign, because, if it had been after the great\nenlargement of the kingdom which followed his foreign wars, the\nresources of some parts of it would probably have availed to supply\nthe deficiency. At first it does not appear that the king held that\nthere was any special significance in the famine,--that it came as\na reproof for any particular sin. But when the famine extended to a\nthird year, he was persuaded that it must have a special cause. Did\nhe not in this just act as we all are disposed to do? A little trial\nwe deem to be nothing; it does not seem to have any significance or\nto be connected with any lesson. It is only when the little trial\nswells into a large one, or the brief trouble into a long-continued\naffliction, that we begin to inquire why it was sent. If small trials\nwere more regarded, heavy trials would be less needed. The horse that\nsprings forward at the slightest touch of the whip or prick of the\nspur needs no heavy lash; it is only when the lighter stimulus fails\nthat the heavier has to be applied. Man's tendency, even under God's\nchastenings, has ever been to ignore the source of them,--when God\n\"poured upon him the fury of His anger and the strength of battle,\nand it set him on fire round about, yet he knew not; and it burned\nhim, yet he laid it not to heart\" (Isa. xlii. 25). Trials would\nneither be so long nor so severe if more regard were had to them in\nan earlier stage; if they were accepted more as God's message--\"Thus\nsaith the Lord of hosts, Consider your ways.\"\n\n2. The cause of the calamity was made known when David inquired of\nthe Lord--\"It is for Saul and his bloody house, because he slew the\nGibeonites.\"\n\nThe history of the crime for which this famine was sent can be gathered\nonly from incidental notices. It appears from the narrative before\nus that Saul \"consumed the Gibeonites, and devised against them that\nthey should be destroyed from remaining in any of the coasts of\nIsrael.\" The Gibeonites, as is well known, were a Canaanite people,\nwho, through a cunning stratagem, obtained leave from Joshua to dwell\nin their old settlements, and being protected by a solemn national\noath, were not disturbed even when it was found out that they had been\npractising a fraud. They possessed cities, situated principally in\nthe tribe of Benjamin; the chief of them, Gibeon, \"was a great city,\none of the royal cities, greater than Ai.\" In the time of Saul they\nwere a quiet, inoffensive people; yet he seems to have fallen on them\nwith a determination to sweep them from all the coasts of Israel.\nDeath or banishment was the only alternative he offered. His desire to\nexterminate them evidently failed, otherwise David would have found\nnone of them to consult; but the savage attack which he made on them\naffords an incidental proof that it was no feeling of humanity that led\nhim to spare the Amalekites when he was ordered to destroy them.\n\nWe are not told of any offence that the Gibeonites had committed;\nand perhaps covetousness lay at the root of Saul's policy. There\nis reason to believe that when he saw his popularity declining\nand David's advancing, he had recourse to unscrupulous methods of\nincreasing his own. Addressing his servants, before the slaughter of\nAbimelech and the priests, he asked, \"Hear now, ye Benjamites; will\nthe son of Jesse give you fields and vineyards, that all of you have\nconspired against me?\" Evidently he had rewarded his favourites,\nespecially those of his own tribe, with fields and vineyards. But\nhow had he got these to bestow? Very probably by dispossessing the\nGibeonites. Their cities, as we have seen, were in the tribe of\nBenjamin. But to prevent jealousy, others, both of Judah and of\nIsrael, would get a share of the spoil. For he is said to have sought\nto slay the Gibeonites \"in his zeal for the children of Israel and\nJudah.\" If this was the way in which the slaughter of the Gibeonites\nwas compassed, it was fair that the nation should suffer for it. If\nthe nation profited by the unholy transaction, and was thus induced\nto wink at the violation of the national faith and the massacre of\nan inoffensive people, it shared in Saul's guilt, and became liable\nto chastisement. Even David himself was not free from blame. When he\ncame to the throne he should have seen justice done to this injured\npeople. But probably he was afraid. He felt his own authority not\nvery secure, and probably he shrank from raising up enemies in those\nwhom justice would have required him to dispossess. Prince and\npeople therefore were both at fault, and both were suffering for the\nwrongdoing of the nation. Perhaps Solomon had this case in view when\nhe wrote: \"Rob not the poor because he is poor, neither oppress the\nafflicted in the gate; for the Lord will plead their cause, and spoil\nthe soul of those that spoiled them.\"\n\nBut whatever may have been Saul's motive, it is certain that by his\nattempt to massacre and banish the Gibeonites a great national sin\nwas committed, and that for this sin the nation had never humbled\nitself, and never made reparation.\n\n3. What, then, was now to be done? The king left it to the Gibeonites\nthemselves to prescribe the satisfaction which they claimed for\nthis wrong. This was in accordance with the spirit of the law that\ngave a murdered man's nearest of kin a right to exact justice of\nthe murderer. In their answer the Gibeonites disclaimed all desire\nfor compensation in money; and very probably this was a surprise to\nthe people. To surrender lands might have been much harder than to\ngive up lives. What the Gibeonites asked had a grim look of justice;\nit showed a burning desire to bring home the punishment as near as\npossible to the offender: \"The man that consumed us, and that devised\nagainst us that we should be destroyed from remaining in any of the\ncoasts of Israel, let seven men of his sons be delivered unto us, and\nwe will hang them up unto the Lord in Gibeah of Saul, whom the Lord\ndid choose.\" Seven was a perfect number, and therefore the victims\nshould be seven. Their punishment was, to be hanged or crucified, but\nin inflicting this punishment the Jews were more merciful than the\nRomans; the criminals were first put to death, then their dead bodies\nwere exposed to open shame. They were to be hanged \"unto the Lord,\"\nas a satisfaction to expiate His just displeasure. They were to be\nhanged \"in Gibeah of Saul,\" to bring home the offence visibly to him,\nso that the expiation should be at the same place as the crime. And\nwhen mention is made of Saul, the Gibeonites add, \"Whom the Lord did\nchoose.\" For Jehovah was intimately connected with Saul's call to the\nthrone; He was in some sense publicly identified with him; and unless\nsomething were done to disconnect Him with this crime, the reproach\nof it would, in measure, rest upon Him.\n\nSuch was the demand of the Gibeonites; and David deemed it right to\ncomply with it, stipulating only that the descendants of Jonathan\nshould not be surrendered. The sons or descendants of Saul that were\ngiven up for this execution were the two sons of Rizpah, Saul's\nconcubine, and along with them five sons of Michal, or, as it is in\nthe margin, of Merab, the elder daughter of Saul, whom she bare (R.\nV.--not \"brought up,\" A. V.) to Adriel the Meholathite. These seven\nmen were put to death accordingly, and their bodies exposed in the\nhill near Gibeah.\n\nThe transaction has a very hard look to us, though it had nothing of\nthe kind to the people of those days. Why should these unfortunate\nmen be punished so terribly for the sin of their father? How was it\npossible for David, in cold blood, to give them up to an ignominious\ndeath? How could he steel his heart against the supplications of\ntheir friends? With regard to this latter aspect of the case, it\nis ridiculous to cast reproach on David. As we have remarked again\nand again, if he had acted like other Eastern kings, he would have\nconsigned every son of Saul to destruction when he came to the\nthrone, and left not one remaining, for no other offence than being\nthe children of their father. On the score of clemency to Saul's\nfamily the character of David is abundantly vindicated.\n\nThe question of justice remains. Is it not a law of nature, it may\nbe asked, and a law of the Bible too, that the son shall not bear\nthe iniquity of the father, but that the soul that sinneth it shall\ndie? It is undoubtedly the rule both of nature and the Bible that\nthe son is not to be substituted _for_ the father when the father is\nthere to bear the penalty. But it is neither the rule of the one nor\nof the other that the son is never to suffer _with_ the father for\nthe sins which the father has committed. On the contrary, it is what\nwe see taking place, in many forms, every day. It is an arrangement\nof Providence that almost baffles the philanthropist, who sees that\nchildren often inherit from their parents a physical frame disposing\nthem to their parents' vices, and who sees, moreover, that, when\nbrought up by vicious parents, children are deprived of their natural\nrights, and are initiated into a life of vice. But the law that\nidentified children and parents in Old Testament times was carried\nout to consequences which would not be tolerated now. Not only were\nchildren often punished because of their physical connection with\ntheir fathers, but they were regarded as judicially one with them,\nand so liable to share in their punishment. The Old Testament (as\nCanon Mozley has so powerfully shown[4]) was in some respects an\nimperfect economy; the rights of the individual were not so clearly\nacknowledged as they are under the New; the family was a sort of\nmoral unit, and the father was the responsible agent for the whole.\nWhen Achan sinned, his whole household shared his punishment. The\nsolidarity of the family was such that all were involved in the sin\nof the father. However strange it may seem to us, it did not appear\nat all strange in David's time that this rule should be applied\nin the case of Saul. On the contrary, it would probably be thought\nthat it showed considerable moderation of feeling not to demand the\ndeath of the whole living posterity of Saul, but to limit the demand\nto the number of seven. Doubtless the Gibeonites had suffered to an\nenormous extent. Thousands upon thousands of them had probably been\nslain. People might be sorry for the seven young men that had to die,\nbut that there was anything essentially unjust or even harsh in the\ntransaction is a view of the case that would occur to no one. Justice\nis often hard; executions are always grim; but here was a nation that\nhad already experienced three years of famine for the sin of Saul,\nand that would experience yet far more if no public expiation should\ntake place; and seven men were not very many to die for a nation.\n\nThe grimness of the mode of punishment was softened by an incident\nof great moral beauty, which cannot but touch the heart of every man\nof sensibility. Rizpah, the concubine of Saul, and mother of two of\nthe victims, combining the tenderness of a mother and the courage of\na hero, took her position beside the gibbet; and, undeterred by the\nsight of the rotting bodies and the stench of the air, she suffered\nneither the birds of the air to rest on them by day nor the beasts\nof the field by night. The poor woman must have looked for a very\ndifferent destiny when she became the concubine of Saul. No doubt\nshe expected to share in the glory of his royal state. But her lord\nperished in battle, and the splendour of royalty passed for ever\nfrom him and his house. Then came the famine; its cause was declared\nfrom heaven, its cure was announced by the Gibeonites. Her two sons\nwere among the slain. Probably they were but lads, not yet beyond\nthe age which rouses a mother's sensibilities to the full. (This\nconsideration likewise points to an early date.) We cannot attempt\nto picture her feelings. The last consolation that remained for her\nwas to guard their remains from the vulture and the tiger. Unburied\ncorpses were counted to be disgraced, and this, in some degree,\nbecause they were liable to be devoured by birds and beasts of prey.\nRizpah could not prevent the exposure, but she could try to prevent\nthe wild animals from devouring them. The courage and self-denial\nneeded for this work were great, for the risk of violence from wild\nbeasts was very serious. All honour to this woman and her noble\nheart! David appears to have been deeply impressed by her heroism.\nWhen he heard of it he went and collected the bones of Jonathan and\nhis sons, which had been buried under a tree at Jabesh-gilead, and\nlikewise the bones of the men that had been hanged; and he buried the\nbones of Saul and Jonathan in Zelah, in the sepulchre of Kish, Saul's\nfather. And after that God was entreated for the land.\n\nWe offer a concluding remark, founded on the tone of this narrative.\nIt is marked, as every one must perceive, by a subdued, solemn tone.\nWhatever may be the opinion of our time as to the need of apologizing\nfor it, it is evident that no apology was deemed necessary for the\ntransaction at the time this record was written. The feeling of all\nparties evidently was, that it was indispensable that things should\ntake the course they did. No one expressed wonder when the famine\nwas accounted for by the crime of Saul. No one objected when the\nquestion of expiation was referred to the Gibeonites. The house of\nSaul made no protest when seven of his sons were demanded for death.\nThe men themselves, when they knew what was coming, seem to have been\nrestrained from attempting to save themselves by flight. It seemed as\nif God were speaking, and the part of man was simply to obey. When\nunbelievers object to passages in the Bible like this, or like the\nsacrifice of Isaac, or the death of Achan, they are accustomed to say\nthat they exemplify the worst passions of the human heart consecrated\nunder the name of religion. We affirm that in this chapter there is\nno sign of any outburst of passion whatever; everything is done with\ngravity, with composure and solemnity. And, what is more, the graceful\npiety of Rizpah is recorded, with simplicity, indeed, but in a tone\nthat indicates appreciation of her tender motherly soul. Savages\nthirsting for blood are not in the habit of appreciating such touching\nmarks of affection. And further, we are made to feel that it was a\npleasure to David to pay that mark of respect for Rizpah's feelings in\nhaving the men buried. He did not desire to lacerate the feelings of\nthe unhappy mother; he was glad to soothe them as far as he could. To\nhim, as to his Lord, judgment was a strange work, but he delighted in\nmercy. And he was glad to be able to mingle a slight streak of mercy\nwith the dark colours of a picture of God's judgment on sin.\n\nTo all right minds it is painful to punish, and when punishment\nhas to be inflicted it is felt that it ought to be done with great\nsolemnity and gravity, and with an entire absence of passion and\nexcitement. In a sinful world God too must inflict punishment. And\nthe future punishment of the wicked is the darkest thing in all the\nscheme of God's government. But it must take place. And when it does\ntake place it will be done deliberately, solemnly, sadly. There will\nbe no exasperation, no excitement. There will be no disregard of the\nfeelings of the unhappy victims of the Divine retribution. What they\nare able to bear will be well considered. What condition they shall\nbe placed in when the punishment comes, will be calmly weighed. But\nmay we not see what a distressing thing it will be (if we may use\nsuch an expression with reference to God) to consign His creatures\nto punishment? How different His feelings when He welcomes them to\neternal glory! How different the feelings of His angels when that\nchange takes place by which punishment ceases to hang over men, and\nglory takes its place! \"There is joy in the presence of the angels\nof God over one sinner that repenteth.\" Is it not blessed to think\nthat this is the feeling of God, and of all Godlike spirits? Will you\nnot all believe this,--believe in the mercy of God, and accept the\nprovision of His grace? \"For God so loved the world that He gave His\nonly-begotten Son, that whosoever believeth on Him should not perish,\nbut should have eternal life.\"\n\nFOOTNOTE:\n\n[4] Lectures on the Old Testament. Lecture V.: \"Visitation of Sins of\nFathers on Children.\"\n\n\n\n\n                             CHAPTER XXIX.\n\n                  _LAST BATTLES AND THE MIGHTY MEN._\n\n                   2 SAMUEL xxi. 15-22; xxiii. 8-39.\n\n\nIn entering on the consideration of these two portions of the\nhistory of David, we must first observe that the events recorded\ndo not appear to belong to the concluding portion of his reign. It\nis impossible for us to assign a precise date to them, or at least\nto most of them, but the displays of physical activity and courage\nwhich they record would lead us to ascribe them to a much earlier\nperiod. Originally, they seem to have formed parts of a record of\nDavid's wars, and to have been transferred to the Books of Samuel\nand Chronicles in order to give a measure of completeness to the\nnarrative. The narrative in Chronicles is substantially the same\nas that in Samuel, but the text is purer. From notes of time in\nChronicles it is seen that some at least of the encounters took place\nafter the war with the children of Ammon.\n\nWhy have these passages been inserted in the history of the reign of\nDavid? Apparently for two chief purposes. In the first place, to give\nus some idea of the dangers to which he was exposed in his military\nlife, dangers manifold and sometimes overwhelming, and all but fatal;\nand thus enable us to see how wonderful were the deliverances he\nexperienced, and prepare us for entering into the song of thanksgiving\nwhich forms the twenty-second chapter, and of which these deliverances\nform the burden. In the second place, to enable us to understand the\nhuman instrumentality by which he achieved so brilliant a success, the\nkind of men by whom he was helped, the kind of spirit by which they\nwere animated, and their intense personal devotion to David himself.\nThe former purpose is that which is chiefly in view in the end of the\ntwenty-first chapter, the latter in the twenty-third. The exploits\nthemselves occur in encounters with the Philistines, and may therefore\nbe referred partly to the time after the slaughter of Goliath, when he\nfirst distinguished himself in warfare, and the daughters of Israel\nbegan to sing, \"Saul hath slain his thousands, but David his tens of\nthousands;\" partly to the time in his early reign when he was engaged\ndriving them out of Israel, and putting a bridle on them to restrain\ntheir inroads; and partly to a still later period. It is to be observed\nthat nothing more is sought than to give a sample of David's military\nadventures, and for this purpose his wars with the Philistines alone\nare examined. If the like method had been taken with all his other\ncampaigns,--against Edom, Moab, and Ammon; against the Syrians of\nRehob, and Maacah, and Damascus, and the Syrians beyond the river,--we\nmight borrow the language of the Evangelist, and say that the world\nitself would not have been able to contain the books that should be\nwritten.\n\nFour exploits are recorded in the closing verses of the twenty-first\nchapter, all with \"sons of the giant,\" or, as it is in the margin, of\nRapha. The first was with a man who is called Ishbi-benob, but there\nis reason to suspect that the text is corrupt here, and in Chronicles\nthis incident is not mentioned. The language applied to David, \"David\nand his servants went down,\" would lead us to believe that the incident\nhappened at an early period, when the Philistines were very powerful\nin Israel, and it was a mark of great courage to \"go down\" to their\nplains, and attack them in their own country. To do this implied a long\njourney, over steep and rough roads, and it is no wonder if between the\njourney and the fighting David \"waxed faint.\" Then it was that the son\nof the giant, whose spear or spearhead weighed three hundred shekels\nof brass, or about eight pounds, fell upon him \"with a new sword,\nand thought to have slain him.\" There is no noun in the original for\nsword; all that is said is, that the giant fell on David with something\nnew, and our translators have made it a sword. The Revised Version in\nthe margin gives \"new armour.\" The point is evidently this, that the\nnewness of the thing made it more formidable. This could hardly be said\nof a common sword, which would be really more formidable after it had\nceased to be quite new, since, by having used it, the owner would know\nit better and wield it more perfectly. It seems better to take the\nmarginal reading \"new armour,\" that is, new defensive armour, against\nwhich the weary David would direct his blows in vain. Evidently he was\nin the utmost peril of his life, but was rescued by his nephew Abishai,\nwho killed the giant. The risk to which he was exposed was such that\nhis people vowed they would not let him go out with them to battle any\nmore, lest the light of Israel should be quenched.\n\nDuring the rest of that campaign the vow seems to have been\nrespected, for the other three giants were not slain by David\npersonally, but by others. As to other campaigns, David usually\ntook his old place as leader of the army, until the battle against\nAbsalom, when his people prevailed on him to remain in the city.\n\nThree of the four duels recorded here took place at Gob,--a place not\nnow known, but most probably in the neighbourhood of Gath. In fact,\nall the encounters probably took place near that city. One of the\ngiants slain is said in Samuel, by a manifest error, to have been\nGoliath the Gittite; but the error is corrected in Chronicles, where\nhe is called the brother of Goliath. The very same expression is used\nof his spear as in the case of Goliath: \"the staff of whose spear was\nlike a weaver's beam.\" Of the fourth giant it is said that he defied\nIsrael, as Goliath had done. Of the whole four it is said that \"they\nwere born to the giant in Gath.\" This does not necessarily imply\nthat they were all sons of the same father, \"the giant\" being used\ngenerically to denote the race rather than the individual.\n\nBut the tenor of the narrative and many of its expressions carry us\nback to the early days of David. There seems to have been a nest at\nGath of men of gigantic stature, brothers or near relations of Goliath.\nAgainst these he was sent, perhaps in one of the expeditions when Saul\nsecretly desired that he should fall by the hand of the Philistines.\nIf it was in this way that he came to encounter the first of the four,\nSaul had calculated well, and was very nearly carrying his point.\nBut though man proposes, God disposes. The example of David in his\nencounter with Goliath, even at this early period, had inspired several\nyoung men of the Hebrews, and even when David was interdicted from\ngoing himself into battle, others were raised up to take his place.\nEvery one of the giants found a match either in David or among his men.\nIt was indeed highly perilous work; but David was encompassed by a\nDivine Protector, and being destined for high service in the kingdom of\nGod, he was \"immortal till his work was done.\"\n\nWe have said that these were but samples of David's trials, and that\nthey were probably repeated again and again in the course of the many\nwars in which he was engaged. One can see that the danger was often\nvery imminent, making him feel that his only possible deliverance\nmust come from God. Such dangers, therefore, were wonderfully fitted\nto exercise and discipline the spirit of trust. Not once or twice,\nbut hundreds of times, in his early experience he would find himself\nconstrained to cry to the Lord. And protected as he was, delivered\nas he was, the conviction would become stronger and stronger that\nGod cared for him and would deliver him to the end. We see from all\nthis how unnecessary it is to ascribe all the psalms where David\nis pressed by enemies either to the time of Saul or to the time of\nAbsalom. There were hundreds of other times in his life when he had\nthe same experience, when he was reduced to similar straits, and his\nappeal lay to the God of his life.\n\nAnd this was in truth the healthiest period of his spiritual life.\nIt was amid these perilous but bracing experiences that his soul\nprospered most. The north wind of danger and difficulty braced him\nto spiritual self-denial and endurance; the south wind of prosperity\nand luxurious enjoyment was what nearly destroyed him. Let us not\nbecome impatient when anxieties multiply around us, and we are beset\nby troubles, and labours, and difficulties. Do not be tempted to\ncontrast your miserable lot with that of others, who have health\nwhile you are sick, riches while you are poor, honour while you are\ndespised, ease and enjoyment while you have care and sorrow. By all\nthese things God desires to draw you to Himself, to discipline your\nsoul, to lead you away from the broken cisterns that can hold no\nwater to the fountain of living waters. Guard earnestly against the\nunbelief that at such times would make your hands hang down and your\nheart despond; rally your sinking spirit. \"Why art thou cast down,\nO my soul, and why art thou disquieted within me?\" Remember the\npromise, \"I will never leave you nor forsake you;\" and one day you\nshall have cause to look back on this as the most useful, the most\nprofitable, the most healthful, period of your spiritual life.\n\nWe pass to the twenty-third chapter, which tells us of David's mighty\nmen. The narrative, at some points, is not very clear; but we gather\nfrom it that David had an order of thirty men distinguished for their\nvalour; that besides these there were three of supereminent merit,\nand another three, who were also eminent, but who did not attain to\nthe distinction of the first three. Of the first three, the first was\nJashobeam the Hachmonite (see 1 Chron. xi. 11), the second Eleazar, and\nthe third Shammah. Of the second three, who were not quite equal to the\nfirst, only two are mentioned, Abishai and Benaiah; thereafter we have\nthe names of the thirty. It is remarkable that Joab's name does not\noccur in the list, but as he was captain of the host, he probably held\na higher position than any. Certainly Joab was not wanting in valour,\nand must have held the highest rank in a legion of honour.\n\nOf the three mighties of the first rank, and the two of the\nsecond, characteristic exploits of remarkable courage and success\nare recorded. The first of the first rank, whom the Chronicles\ncall Jashobeam, lifted up his spear against three hundred slain at\none time. (In Samuel the number is eight hundred.) The exploit was\nworthy to be ranked with the famous achievement of Jonathan and his\narmour-bearer at the pass of Michmash. The second, Eleazar, defied\nthe Philistines when they were gathered to battle, and when the men\nof Israel had gone away he smote the Philistines till his hand was\nweary. The third, Shammah, kept the Philistines at bay on a piece of\nground covered with lentils, after the people had fled, and slew the\nPhilistines, gaining a great victory.\n\nNext we have a description of the exploit of three of the mighty men\nwhen the Philistines were in possession of Bethlehem, and David in a\nhold near the cave of Adullam (see 2 Sam. v. 15-21). The occasion of\ntheir exploit was an interesting one. Contemplating the situation,\nand grieved to think that his native town should be in the enemy's\nhands, David gave expression to a wish--\"Oh that some one would give\nme water to drink of the well of Bethlehem which is before the gate!\"\nIt was probably meant for little more than the expression of an\nearnest wish that the enemy were dislodged from their position--that\nthere were no obstruction between him and the well, that access to\nit were as free as in the days of his youth. But the three mighty\nmen took him at his word, and breaking through the host of the\nPhilistines, brought the water to David. It was a singular proof of\nhis great personal influence; he was so loved and honoured that to\ngratify his wish these three men took their lives in their hands to\nobtain the water. Water got at such a cost was sacred in his eyes;\nit was a thing too holy for man to turn to his use, so he poured it\nout before the Lord.\n\nNext we have a statement bearing on two of the second three. Abishai,\nDavid's nephew, who was one of them, lifted up his spear against\nthree hundred and slew them. Benaiah, son of Jehoiada, slew two\nlion-like men of Moab (the two sons of Ariel of Moab, R.V.); also,\nin time of snow, he slew a lion in a pit; and finally he slew an\nEgyptian, a powerful man, attacking him when he had only a staff\nin his hand, wrenching his spear from him, and killing him with\nhis own spear. The third of this trio has not been mentioned; some\nconjecture that he was Amasa (\"chief of the captains\"--\"the thirty,\"\nR.V., 1 Chron. xii. 18), and that his name was not recorded because\nhe deserted David to side with Absalom. Among the other thirty, we\ncannot but be struck with two names--Eliam the son of Ahithophel\nthe Gilonite, and apparently the father of Bathsheba; and Uriah the\nHittite. The sin of David was all the greater if it involved the\ndishonour of men who had served him so bravely as to be enrolled in\nhis legion of honour.\n\nWith regard to the kind of exploits ascribed to some of these men,\na remark is necessary. There is an appearance of exaggeration in\nstatements that ascribe to a single warrior the routing and killing of\nhundreds through his single sword or spear. In the eyes of some such\nstatements give the narrative an unreliable look, as if the object\nof the writer had been more to give _\u00e9clat_ to the warriors than to\nrecord the simple truth. But this impression arises from our tendency\nto ascribe the conditions of modern warfare to the warfare of these\ntimes. In Eastern history, cases of a single warrior putting a large\nnumber to flight, and even killing them, are not uncommon. For though\nthe strength of the whole number was far more than a match for his, the\nstrength of each individual was far inferior; and if the mass of them\nwere scarcely armed, and the few who had arms were far inferior to him,\nthe result would be that after some had fallen the rest would take to\nflight; and the destruction of life in a retreat was always enormous.\nThe incident recorded of Eleazar is very graphic and truth-like. \"He\nsmote the Philistines until his hand was weary, and his hand clave unto\nhis sword.\" A Highland sergeant at Waterloo had done such execution\nwith his basket-handled sword, and so much blood had coagulated round\nhis hand, that it had to be released by a blacksmith, so firmly\nwere they glued together. The style of Eastern warfare was highly\nfavourable to deeds of great courage being done by individuals, and\nin the terrific panic which followed their first successes prodigious\nslaughter often ensued. Under present conditions of fighting such\nthings cannot be done.\n\nThe glimpse which these little notices give us of King David and\nhis knights is extremely interesting. The story of Arthur and his\nKnights of the Round Table bears a resemblance to it. We see the\nremarkable personal influence of David, drawing to himself so many\nmen of spirit and energy, firing them by his own example, securing\ntheir warm personal attachment, and engaging them in enterprises\nequal to his own. How far they shared his devotional spirit we have\nno means of judging. If the historian reflects the general sentiment\nin recording their victories when he says, once and again, \"The Lord\nwrought a great victory that day\" (xxiii. 10, 12), we should say\nthat trust in God must have been the general sentiment. \"If it had\nnot been the Lord that was on our side, ... they had swallowed us up\nquick, when their wrath was kindled against us.\" It is no wonder that\nDavid soon gained a great military renown. Such a king, surrounded by\nsuch a class of lieutenants, might well spread alarm among all his\nenemies. One who, besides having such a body of helpers, could claim\nthe assistance of the Lord of hosts, and could enter battle with the\nshout, \"Let God arise; and let His enemies be scattered; and let them\nalso that hate Him flee before Him,\" might well look for universal\nvictory. Trustworthy generals, we are told, double the value of the\ntroops; and the soldiers that were led by such leaders, trusting in\nthe Lord of hosts, could hardly fail of triumph.\n\nAnd thus, too, we may see how David came to be thoroughly under the\ninfluence of the military spirit, and of some of the less favourable\nfeatures of that spirit. Accustomed to such scenes of bloodshed, he\nwould come to think lightly of the lives of his enemies. A hostile\narmy he would be prone to regard as a kind of infernal machine, an\ninstrument of evil only, and therefore to be destroyed. Hence the\ncomplacency he expresses in the destruction of his enemies. Hence the\njudgment he calls down on those who thwarted and opposed him. If,\nin the songs of David, this feeling sometimes disappears, and the\nexpressed desire of his heart is that the nations may be glad and\nsing for joy, that the people may praise God, that all the people may\npraise Him, this seems to be in the later period of his life, when all\nhis enemies had been subdued, and he had rest on every side. Even in\nearnest and spiritually-minded men, religion is often coloured by their\nworldly calling; and in no case more so, sometimes for better and\nsometimes for worse, than in those who follow the profession of arms.\n\nBut in all this military career and influence of David, may we not\ntrace a type of character which was realised in a far higher sphere,\nand to far grander purpose, in the career of Jesus, David's Son?\nDavid on an earthly level is Jesus on a higher. Every noble quality\nof David, his courage, his activity, his affection, his obedience and\ntrust toward God, his devotion to the welfare of others, reappears\npurer and higher in Jesus. If David is surrounded by his thirty\nmighties and his two threes, so is Jesus by His twelve apostles,\nHis seventy disciples, and pre-eminently the three apostles who\nwent with Him into the innermost scenes. If David's men are roused\nby his example to deeds of daring like his own, so the apostles and\ndisciples go into the world to teach, to fight, to heal, and to\nbless, as Christ had done before them. Looking back from the present\nmoment to David's time, what young man of spirit but feels that it\nwould have been a great joy to belong to his company, much better\nthan to be among those who were always carping and criticising, and\nlaughing at the men who shared his danger and sacrifices? And does\nany one think that, when another cycle of ages has gone past, he\nwill have occasion to congratulate himself that while he lived on\nearth he had nothing to do with Christ and earnest Christians, that\nhe bore no part in any Christian battle, that he kept well away from\nChrist and His staff, that he preferred the service and pleasure of\nthe world? Surely no. Shall any of us, then, deliberately do to-day\nwhat we know we shall repent to-morrow? Is it not certain that Jesus\nChrist is an unrivalled Commander, pure and noble above all His\nfellows, that His life was the most glorious ever led on earth, and\nthat His service is by far the most honourable? We do not dwell at\nthis moment on the great fact that only in His faith and fellowship\ncan any of us escape the wrath to come, or gain the favour of God.\nWe ask you to say in what company you can spend your lives to most\nprofit, under whose influence you may receive the highest impulses,\nand be made to do the best service for God and man? It must have been\ninteresting in David's time to see his people \"willing in the day of\nhis power,\" to see young men flocking to his standard in the beauties\nof holiness, like dewdrops from the womb of the morning. And still\nmore glorious is the sight when young men, even the highest born\nand the highest gifted, having had grace to see who and what Jesus\nChrist is, find no manner of life worthy to be compared in essential\ndignity and usefulness with His service, and, in spite of the world,\ngive themselves to Him. Oh that we could see many such rallying to\nHis standard, contrasting, as St. Paul did, the two services, and\ncounting all things but loss for the excellency of the knowledge of\nChrist Jesus their Lord!\n\n\n\n\n                             CHAPTER XXX.\n\n                      _THE SONG OF THANKSGIVING._\n\n                            2 SAMUEL xxii.\n\n\nSome of David's actions are very characteristic of himself; there\nare other actions quite out of harmony with his character. This\npsalm of thanksgiving belongs to the former order. It is quite like\nDavid, at the conclusion of his military enterprises, to cast his eye\ngratefully over the whole, and acknowledge the goodness and mercy\nthat had followed him all along. Unlike many, he was as careful\nto thank God for mercies past and present as to entreat Him for\nmercies to come. The whole Book of Psalms resounds with halleluiahs,\nespecially the closing part. In the song before us we have something\nlike a grand halleluiah, in which thanks are given for all the\ndeliverances and mercies of the past, and unbounded confidence\nexpressed in God's mercy and goodness for the time to come.\n\nThe date of this song is not to be determined by the place which\nit occupies in the history. We have already seen that the last\nfew chapters of Samuel consist of supplementary narratives, not\nintroduced at their regular places, but needful to give completeness\nto the history. It is likely that this psalm was written considerably\nbefore the end of David's reign. Two considerations make it all\nbut certain that its date is earlier than Absalom's rebellion.\nIn the first place, the mention of the name of Saul in the first\nverse--\"in the day when God delivered him out of the hand of all his\nenemies and out of the hand of Saul\"--would seem to imply that the\ndeliverance from Saul was somewhat recent, certainly not so remote\nas it would have been at the end of David's reign. And secondly,\nwhile the affirmation of David's sincerity and honesty in serving\nGod might doubtless have been made at any period of his life, yet\nsome of his expressions would not have been likely to be used after\nhis deplorable fall. It is not likely that after that, he would have\nspoken, for example, of the cleanness of his hands, stained as they\nhad been by wickedness that could hardly have been surpassed. On the\nwhole, it seems most likely that the psalm was written about the\ntime referred to in 2 Sam. vii. 1--\"when the Lord had given him rest\nfrom all his enemies round about.\" This was the time when it was\nin his heart to build the temple, and we know from that and other\ncircumstances that he was then in a state of overflowing thankfulness.\n\nBesides the introduction, the song consists of three leading parts\nnot very definitely separated from each other, but sufficiently\nmarked to form a convenient division, as follows:--\n\nI. Introduction: the leading thought of the song, an adoring\nacknowledgment of what God had been and was to David (vv. 2-4).\n\nII. A narrative of the Divine interpositions on his behalf, embracing\nhis dangers, his prayers, and the Divine deliverances in reply (vv.\n5-19).\n\nIII. The grounds of his protection and success (vv. 20-30).\n\nIV. References to particular acts of God's goodness in various parts of\nhis life, interspersed with reflections on the Divine character, from\nall which the assurance is drawn that that goodness would be continued\nto him and his successors, and would secure through coming ages the\nwelfare and extension of the kingdom. And here we observe what is so\ncommon in the Psalms: a gradual rising above the idea of a mere earthly\nkingdom; the type passes into the antitype; the kingdom of David melts,\nas in a dissolving view, into the kingdom of the Messiah; thus a more\nelevated tone is given to the song, and the assurance is conveyed to\nevery believer that as God protected David and his kingdom, so shall He\nprotect and glorify the kingdom of His Son for ever.\n\nI. In the burst of adoring gratitude with which the psalm opens as\nits leading thought, we mark David's recognition of Jehovah as the\nsource of all the protection, deliverance, and success he had ever\nenjoyed, along with a special assertion of closest relationship\nto Him, in the frequent use of the word \"my,\" and a very ardent\nacknowledgment of the claim to his gratitude thus arising--\"God, who\nis worthy to be praised.\"\n\nThe feeling that recognised God as the Author of all his deliverances\nwas intensely strong, for every expression that can denote it is\nheaped together: \"My rock, my portion, my deliverer; the God of my\nrock, my shield; the horn of my salvation, my high tower, my refuge,\nmy Saviour.\" He takes no credit to himself; he gives no glory to his\ncaptains; the glory is all the Lord's. He sees God so supremely the\nAuthor of his deliverance that the human instruments that helped him\nare for the moment quite out of view. He who, in the depths of his\npenitence, sees but one supremely injured Being, and says, \"Against\nThee, Thee only, have I sinned,\" at the height of his prosperity sees\nbut one gracious Being, and adores Him, who only is his rock and his\nsalvation. In an age when all the stress is apt to be laid on the\nhuman instruments, and God left out of view, this habit of mind is\ninstructive and refreshing. It was a touching incident in English\nhistory when, after the battle of Agincourt, Henry V. of England\ndirected the hundred and fifteenth Psalm to be sung; prostrating\nhimself on the ground, and causing his whole army to do the same,\nwhen the words were sounded out, \"Not unto us, O Lord, not unto us,\nbut to Thy name give glory.\"\n\nThe emphatic use of the pronoun \"my\" by the Psalmist is very\ninstructive. It is so easy to speak in general terms of what God\nis, and what God does; but it is quite another thing to be able to\nappropriate Him as ours, and rejoice in that relation. Luther said of\nthe twenty-third Psalm that the word \"my\" in the first verse was the\nvery hinge of the whole. There is a whole world of difference between\nthe two expressions, \"The Lord is a Shepherd\" and \"The Lord is my\nShepherd.\" The use of the \"my\" indicates a personal transaction, a\ncovenant relation into which the parties have solemnly entered. No man\nis entitled to use this expression who has merely a reverential feeling\ntowards God, and respect for His will. You must have come to God as\na sinner, owning and feeling your unworthiness, and casting yourself\non His grace. You must have transacted with God in the spirit of His\nexhortation, \"Come out from among them, and be ye separate, and touch\nnot the unclean thing; and I will be a Father unto you; and ye shall\nbe My sons and daughters, saith the Lord Almighty.\"\n\nOne other point has to be noticed in this introduction--when David\ncomes to express his dependence on God, he very specially sets Him\nbefore his mind as \"worthy to be praised.\" He calls to mind the\ngracious character of God,--not an austere God, reaping where He has\nnot sown, and gathering where He has not strawed, but \"the Lord,\nthe Lord God merciful and gracious, long-suffering and abundant in\ngoodness and truth.\" \"This doctrine,\" says Luther, \"is in tribulation\nthe most ennobling and truly golden. One cannot imagine what\nassistance such praise of God is in pressing danger. For as soon\nas you begin to praise God the sense of the evil will also begin\nto abate, the comfort of your heart will grow; and then God will\nbe called on with confidence. There are some who cry to the Lord\nand are not heard. Why is this? Because they do not praise the Lord\nwhen they cry to Him, but go to Him with reluctance; they have not\nrepresented to themselves how sweet the Lord is, but have looked\nonly to their own bitterness. But no one gets deliverance from evil\nby looking simply upon his evil and becoming alarmed at it; he can\nget deliverance only by rising above his evil, hanging it on God,\nand having respect to His goodness. Oh, hard counsel, doubtless, and\na rare thing truly, in the midst of trouble to conceive of God as\nsweet, and worthy to be praised; and when He has removed Himself from\nus and is incomprehensible, even then to regard Him more intensely\nthan we regard our misfortune that keeps us from Him! Only let one\ntry it, and make the endeavour to praise God, though in little heart\nfor it he will soon experience an enlightenment.\"\n\nII. We pass on to the part of the song where the Psalmist describes\nhis trials and God's deliverances in his times of danger (vv. 5-20).\n\nThe description is eminently poetical. First, there is a vivid\npicture of his troubles. \"The waves of death compassed me, and the\nfloods of ungodly men made me afraid; the sorrows of hell compassed\nme; the snares of death prevented me\" (\"The cords of death compassed\nme, and the floods of ungodliness made me afraid; the cords of sheol\nwere round about me; the snares of death came upon me,\" R.V.). It is\nno overcharged picture. With Saul's javelins flying at his head in\nthe palace, or his best troops scouring the wilderness in search of\nhim; with Syrian hosts bearing down on him like the waves of the sea,\nand a confederacy of nations conspiring to swallow him up, he might\nwell speak of the waves of death and the cords of Hades. He evidently\ndesires to describe the extremest peril and distress that can be\nconceived, a situation where the help of man is vain indeed. Then,\nafter a brief account of his calling upon God, comes a most animated\ndescription of God coming to his help. The description is ideal, but\nit gives a vivid view how the Divine energy is roused when any of\nGod's children are in distress. It is in heaven as in an earthly home\nwhen an alarm is given that one of the little children is in danger,\nhas wandered away into a thicket where he has lost his way: every\nservant is summoned, every passer-by is called to the rescue, the\nwhole neighbourhood is roused to the most strenuous efforts; so when\nthe cry reached heaven that David was in trouble, the earthquake and\nthe lightning and all the other messengers of heaven were sent out\nto his aid; nay, these were not enough; God Himself flew, riding on\na cherub, yea, He did fly upon the wings of the wind. Faith saw God\nbestirring Himself for his deliverance, as if every agency of nature\nhad been set in motion on his behalf.\n\nAnd this being done, his deliverance was conspicuous and complete.\nHe saw God's hand stretched out with remarkable distinctness. There\ncould be no more doubt that it was God that rescued him from Saul\nthan that it was He that snatched Israel from Pharaoh when literally\n\"the channels of the sea appeared, the foundations of the world were\ndiscovered, at the rebuking of the Lord, at the blast of the breath\nof His nostrils.\" There could be no more doubt that it was God who\nprotected David when men rose to swallow him up than that it was He\nwho drew Moses from the Nile--\"He sent from above, He took me, He\ndrew me out of many waters.\" No miracles had been wrought on David's\nbehalf; unlike Moses and Joshua before him, and unlike Elijah and\nElisha after him, he had not had the laws of nature suspended for his\nprotection; yet he could see the hand of God stretched out for him\nas clearly as if a miracle had been wrought at every turn. Does this\nnot show that ordinary Christians, if they are but careful to watch,\nand humble enough to watch in a chastened spirit, may find in their\nhistory, however quietly it may have glided by, many a token of the\ninterest and care of their Father in heaven? And what a blessed thing\nto have accumulated through life a store of such providences--to have\nEbenezers reared along the whole line of one's history! What courage\nafter looking over such a past might one feel in looking forward to\nthe future!\n\n\nIII. The next section of the song sets forth the grounds on which\nthe Divine protection was thus enjoyed by David. Substantially these\ngrounds were the uprightness and faithfulness with which he had\nserved God. The expressions are strong, and at first sight they have\na flavour of self-righteousness. \"The Lord rewarded me according to\nmy righteousness; according to the cleanness of my hands hath He\nrecompensed me. For I have kept the ways of the Lord, and have not\nwickedly departed from my God. For all His judgments were before me,\nand I put not away His statutes from me. I was also perfect with Him,\nand I kept myself from mine iniquity.\" But it is impossible to read\nthis Psalm without feeling that it is not pervaded by the spirit\nof the self-righteous man. It is pervaded by a profound sense of\ndependence on God, and of obligation to His mercy and love. Now that\nis the very opposite of the self-righteous spirit. We may surely find\nanother way of accounting for such expressions used by David here. We\nmay surely believe that all that was meant by him was to express the\nunswerving sincerity and earnestness with which he had endeavoured to\nserve God, with which he had resisted every temptation to conscious\nunfaithfulness, with which he had resisted every allurement to\nidolatry on the one hand or to the neglect of the welfare of God's\nnation on the other. What he here celebrates is, not any personal\nrighteousness that might enable him as an individual to claim the\nfavour and reward of God, but the ground on which he, as the public\nchampion of God's cause before the world, enjoyed God's countenance\nand obtained His protection. There would be no self-righteousness in\nan inferior officer of the navy or the army who had been sent on some\nexpedition saying, \"I obeyed your instructions in every particular; I\nnever deviated from the course you prescribed.\" There would have been\nno self-righteousness in such a man as Luther saying, \"I constantly\nmaintained the principles of the Bible; I never once abandoned\nProtestant ground.\" Such affirmations would never be held to imply a\nclaim of personal sinlessness during the whole course of their lives.\nSubstantially all that is asserted is, that in their public capacity\nthey proved faithful to the cause entrusted to them; they never\nconsciously betrayed their public charge. Now it is this precisely\nthat David affirms of himself. Unlike Saul, who abandoned the law of\nthe kingdom, David uniformly endeavoured to carry it into effect. The\nsuccess which followed he does not claim as any credit to himself,\nbut as due to his having followed the instructions of his heavenly\nLord. It is the very opposite of a self-righteous spirit. He would\nhave us understand that if ever he had abandoned the guidance of God,\nif ever he had relied on his own wisdom and followed the counsels of\nhis own heart, everything would have gone wrong with him; the fact\nthat he had been successful was due altogether to the Divine wisdom\nthat guided and the Divine strength that upheld him.\n\nEven with this explanation, some of the expressions may seem too\nstrong. How could he speak of the cleanness of his hands, and of his\nnot having wickedly departed from his God? Granting that the song\nwas written before his sin in the case of Uriah, yet remembering how\nhe had lied at Nob and equivocated at Gath, might he not have used\nless sweeping words? But it is not the way of burning, enthusiastic\nminds to be for ever weighing their words, and guarding against\nmisunderstandings. Enthusiasm sweeps along in a rapid current. And\nDavid correctly describes the prevailing features of his public\nendeavours. His public life was unquestionably marked by a sincere\nand commonly successful endeavour to follow the will of God. In\ncontrast with Saul and Ishbosheth, side by side with Absalom or\nSheba; his career was purity itself, and bore out the rule of\nthe Divine government, \"With the merciful Thou wilt show Thyself\nmerciful, and with the upright man Thou wilt show Thyself upright.\nWith the pure Thou wilt show Thyself pure, and with the froward Thou\nwilt show Thyself unsavoury.\" If God is to prosper us, there must\nbe an inner harmony between us and Him. If the habit of our life be\nopposed to God, the result can only be collision and rebuke. David\nwas conscious of the inner harmony, and therefore he was able to rely\non being supported and blessed.\n\nIV. In the wide survey of his life and of his providential mercies,\nthe eye of the Psalmist is particularly fixed on some of his\ndeliverances, in the remembrance of which he specially praises God.\nOne of the earliest appears to be recalled in the words, \"By my\nGod have I leaped over a wall,\"--the wall, it may be supposed, of\nGibeah, down which Michal let him when Saul sent to take him in his\nhouse. Still further back, perhaps, in his life is the allusion in\nanother expression--\"Thy gentleness hath made me great.\" He seems\nto go back to his shepherd life, and in the gentleness with which\nhe dealt with the feeble lamb that might have perished in rougher\nhands to find an emblem of God's method with himself. If God had not\ndealt gently with him, he never would have become what he was. The\nDivine gentleness had made paths easy that rougher treatment would\nhave made intolerable. And who of us that looks back but must own\nour obligations to the gentleness of God, the tender, forbearing,\nnay loving, treatment He has bestowed on us, even in the midst of\nprovocations that would have justified far harsher treatment?\n\nBut what? Can David praise God's gentleness and in the next words\nutter such terrible words against his foes? How can he extol God's\ngentleness to him and immediately dwell on his tremendous severity\nto them? \"I have consumed them and wounded them that they could not\narise; yea, they are fallen under my feet.... Then did I beat them as\nsmall as the dust of the earth, I did stamp them as the mire of the\nstreet, and did spread them abroad.\" It is the military spirit which\nwe have so often observed, looking on his enemies in one light only,\nas identified with everything evil and enemies of all that was good.\nTo show mercy to them would be like showing mercy to destructive wild\nbeasts, raging bears, venomous serpents, and rapacious vultures.\nMercy to them would be cruelty to all God's servants; it would be\nruin to God's cause. No! for them the only fit doom was destruction,\nand that destruction he had dealt to them with no unsparing hand.\n\nBut while we perceive his spirit, and harmonise it with his general\ncharacter, we cannot but regard it as the spirit of one who was\nimperfectly enlightened. We tremble when we think what fearful\nwickedness persecutors and inquisitors have committed, under the\nidea that the same course was to be followed against those whom they\ndeemed enemies of the cause of God. We rejoice in the Christian\nspirit that teaches us to regard even public enemies as our brothers,\nfor whom individually kindly and brotherly feelings are to be\ncherished. And we remember the new aspect in which our relations to\nsuch have been placed by our Lord: \"Love your enemies, bless them\nthat curse you, do good to them that hate you, and pray for them\nthat despitefully use you and persecute you.\"\n\nIn the closing verses of the Psalm, the views of the Psalmist seem\nto sweep beyond the limits of an earthly kingdom. His eye seems to\nembrace the wide-spreading dominion of Messiah; at all events, he\ndwells on those features of his own kingdom that were typical of the\nall-embracing kingdom of the Gospel: \"Thou hast made me the head of the\nnations; a people whom I have not known shall serve me. As soon as they\nhear of me they shall obey me; the strangers shall submit themselves\nunto me.\" The forty-ninth verse is quoted by St. Paul (Rom. xv. 9) as a\nproof that in the purpose of God the salvation of Christ was designed\nfor Gentiles as well as Jews. \"It is beyond doubt,\" says Luther, \"that\nthe wars and victories of David prefigured the passion and resurrection\nof Christ.\" At the same time, he admits that it is very doubtful\nhow far the Psalm applies to Christ, and how far to David, and he\ndeclines to press the type to particulars. But we may surely apply the\nconcluding words to David's Son: \"He showeth loving-kindness to his\nanointed, to David and to his seed for evermore.\"\n\nIt is interesting to mark the military aspect of the kingdom gliding\ninto the missionary. Other psalms bring out more clearly this\nmissionary element, exhibit David rejoicing in the widening limits of\nhis kingdom, in the wider diffusion of the knowledge of the true God,\nand in the greater happiness and prosperity accruing to men. And yet,\nperhaps, his views on the subject were comparatively dim; he may have\nbeen disposed to identify the conquests of the sword and the conquests\nof the truth instead of regarding the one as but typical of the other.\nThe visions and revelations of his later years seem to have thrown\nnew light on this glorious subject, and though not immediately, yet\nultimately, to have convinced him that truth, righteousness, and\nmeekness were to be the conquering weapons of Messiah's reign.\n\n\n\n\n                             CHAPTER XXXI.\n\n                      _THE LAST WORDS OF DAVID._\n\n       2 SAMUEL xxiii. 1-7. (_See Revised Version and margin._)\n\n\nOf these \"the last words of David,\" we need not understand that they\nwere the last words he ever spoke, but his last song or psalm, his\nlatest vision, and therefore the subject that was most in his mind\nin the last period of his life. The Psalm recorded in the preceding\nchapter was an earlier song, and its main drift was of the past. Of\nthis latest Psalm the main drift is of the future. The colours of\nthis vision are brighter than those of any other. Aged though the\nseer was, there is a glory in this his latest vision unsurpassed in\nany that went before. The setting sun spreads a lustre around as he\nsinks under the horizon unequalled by any he diffused even when he\nrode in the height of the heavens.\n\nThe song falls into four parts. First, there is an elaborate\nintroduction, descriptive of the singer and the inspiration which\ngave birth to his song; secondly, the main subject of the prophecy,\na Ruler among men, of wonderful brightness and glory; thirdly, a\nreference to the Psalmist's own house and the covenant God had made\nwith him; and finally, in the way of contrast to the preceding, a\nprediction of the doom of the ungodly.\n\nI. In the introduction, we cannot but be struck with the formality\nand solemnity of the affirmation respecting the singer and the\ninspiration under which he sang.\n\n          \"David, the son of Jesse, saith,\n           And the man who was raised on high saith,\n           The anointed of the God of Jacob,\n           And the sweet psalmist of Israel:\n           The Spirit of the Lord spake by me,\n           And His word was upon my tongue;\n           The God of Israel said,\n           The Rock of Israel spake to me\" (R.V.).\n\nThe first four clauses represent David as the speaker; the second\nfour represent God's Spirit as inspiring his words. The introduction\nto Balaam's prophecies is the only passage where we find a similar\nstructure, nor is this the only point of resemblance between the two\nsongs.\n\n          \"Balaam, the son of Beor, saith,\n           And the man whose eye was closed saith;\n           He saith which heareth the words of God,\n           And knoweth the knowledge of the Most High;\n           Which seeth the vision of the Almighty,\n           Falling down, and having his eyes open\"\n                                      (Num. xxiv. 15, 16, R.V.).\n\nIn both prophecies, the word translated \"saith\" is peculiar. While\noccurring between two and three hundred times in the formula \"Thus\nsaith the Lord,\" it is used by a human speaker only in these two\nplaces and in Prov. xxx. 1. Both Balaam and David begin by giving\ntheir own name and that of their father, thereby indicating their\nnative insignificance, and disclaiming any right to speak on subjects\nso lofty through any wisdom or insight of their own. Immediately\nafter, they claim to speak the words of God. All the grounds on which\nDavid should be listened to fall under this head. Was he not \"raised\nup on high\"? Was he not the anointed of the God of Jacob? Was he not\nthe sweet Psalmist of Israel? Having been raised up on high, David\nhad established the kingdom of Israel on a firm and lasting basis,\nhe had destroyed all its enemies, and he had established a comely\norder and prosperity throughout all its borders; as the sweet singer\nof Israel, or, as it has been otherwise rendered, \"the lovely one in\nIsrael's songs of praise\"--that is, the man who had been specially\ngifted to compose songs of praise in honour of Israel's God--it was\nfitting that he should be made the organ of this very remarkable\nand glorious communication. It is interesting to observe how David\nmust have been attracted by Balaam's vision. The dark wall of the\nMoabite mountains was a familiar object to him, and must often have\nrecalled the strange but unworthy prophet who spoke of the Star that\nwas to shine so gloriously, and the Sceptre that was to have such\na wonderful rule. Often during his life we may believe that David\ndevoutly desired to know something more of that mysterious Star and\nSceptre; and now that desire is fulfilled; the Star is as the light\nof the morning star; the Sceptre is that of a blessed ruler, \"one\nthat ruleth over men righteously, that ruleth in the fear of God.\"\n\nThe second part of the introduction stamps the prophecy with a\nfourfold mark of inspiration. 1. \"The Spirit of the Lord spake by\nme.\" For \"the prophecy came not of old time by the will of man; but\nholy men of God spake as they were moved by the Holy Ghost.\" 2. \"His\nword was in my tongue.\" For in high visions like this, of which no\nwisdom of man can create even a shadow, it is not enough that the\nSpirit should merely guide the writer; this is one of the utterances\nwhere verbal inspiration must have been enjoyed. 3. \"The God of\nIsrael said,\" He who entered into covenant with Israel, and promised\nhim great and peculiar mercies. 4. \"The Rock of Israel spake to me,\"\nthe faithful One, whose words are stable as a rock, and who provides\nfor Israel a foundation-stone, elect and precious, immovable as the\neverlasting hills.\n\nSo remarkable an introduction must be followed by no ordinary\nprophecy. If the prophecy should bear on nothing more remarkable than\nsome earthly successor of David, all this preliminary glorification\nwould be singularly out of place. It would be like a great procession\nof heralds and flourishing of trumpets in an earthly kingdom to\nannounce some event of the most ordinary kind, the repeal of a tax or\nthe appointment of an officer.\n\nII. We come then to the great subject of the prophecy--a Ruler over\nmen. The rendering of the Authorized Version is somewhat lame and\nobscure, \"He that ruleth over men must be just,\" there being nothing\nwhatever in the original corresponding to \"must be.\" The Revised\nVersion is at once more literal and more expressive:--\n\n          \"One that ruleth over men righteously,\n           Ruling in the fear of God,\n           He shall be as the light of the morning.\"\n\nIt is a vision of a remarkable Ruler, not a Ruler over the kingdom of\nIsrael merely, but a Ruler \"over men.\" The Ruler seen is One whose\ngovernment knows no earthly limits, but prevails wherever there are\nmen. Solomon could not be the ruler seen, for, wide though his empire\nwas, he was king of Israel only, not king of men. It was but a speck\nof the habitable globe, but a morsel of that part of it that was\ninhabited even then, over which Solomon reigned. If the term \"One\nthat ruleth over men\" could have been appropriated by any monarch,\nit would have been Ahasuerus, with his hundred and twenty-seven\nprovinces, or Alexander the Great, or some other universal monarch,\nthat would have had the right to claim it. But every such application\nis out of the question. The \"Ruler over men\" of this vision must have\nbeen identified by David with Him \"in whom all the nations of the\nearth were to be blessed.\"\n\nIt is worthy of very special remark that the first characteristic\nof this Ruler is \"righteousness.\" There is no grander or more\nmajestic word in the language of men. Not even love or mercy can\nbe preferred to righteousness. And this is no casual expression,\nhappening in David's vision, for it is common to the whole class of\nprophecies that predict the Messiah. \"Behold, a King shall reign in\nrighteousness, and princes shall rule in judgment.\" \"There shall\ncome forth a rod out of the stem of Jesse, and the spirit of the\nfear of the Lord ... shall rest on Him, ... and righteousness shall\nbe the girdle of His loins.\" There is no lack in the New Testament\nof passages to magnify the love and mercy of the Lord Jesus, yet\nit is made very plain that righteousness was the foundation of\nall His work. \"Thus it becometh us to fulfil all righteousness,\"\nwere the words with which He removed the objections of John to His\nbaptism, and they were words that described the business of His\nwhole life: to fulfil all righteousness _for_ His people and _in_\nHis people--for them, to satisfy the demands of the righteous law\nand bear the righteous penalty of transgression; in them to infuse\nHis own righteous spirit and mould them into the likeness of His\nrighteous example, to sum up the whole law of righteousness in the\nlaw of love, and by His grace instil that law into their hearts. Such\nessentially was the work of Christ. No man can say of the religious\nlife that Christ expounded that it was a life of loose, feverish\nemotion or sentimental spirituality that left the Decalogue far out\nof view. Nothing could have been further from the mind of Him that\nsaid, \"Except your righteousness shall exceed the righteousness of\nthe scribes and Pharisees, ye shall in no wise enter into the kingdom\nof heaven.\" Nothing could have been more unlike the spirit of Him who\nwas not content with maintaining the letter of the Decalogue, but\nwith His \"again, I say unto you,\" drove its precepts so much further\nas into the very joints and marrow of men's souls.\n\nIt is the grand characteristic of Christ's salvation in theory that\nit is through righteousness; it is not less its effect in practice to\npromote righteousness. To any who would dream, under colour of free\ngrace, of breaking down the law of righteousness, the words of \"the\nHoly One and the Just\" stand out as an eternal rebuke, \"Think not\nthat I am come to destroy the law and the prophets; I am not come to\ndestroy, but to fulfil.\"\n\nAnd as Christ's work was founded on righteousness, so it was\nconstantly done \"in the fear of God,\"--with the highest possible\nregard for His will, and reverence for His law. \"Wist ye not that I\nmust be about My Father's business?\" is the first word we hear from\nChrist's lips; and among the last is, \"Not My will, but Thine, be\ndone.\" No motto could have been more appropriate for His whole life\nthan this: \"I delight to do Thy will, O My God.\"\n\nHaving shown the character of the Ruler, the vision next pictures the\neffects of His rule:--\n\n          \"He shall be as the light of the morning when the sun riseth,\n           A morning without clouds,\n           When the tender grass springeth out of the earth\n           Through clear shining after rain.\"\n\nBut why introduce the future \"shall be\" in the translation when it is\nnot in the original? May we not conceive the Psalmist reading off a\nvision--a scene unfolding itself in all its beauty before his mind's\neye? A beautiful influence seems to come over the earth as the Divine\nRuler makes His appearance, like the rising of the sun on a cloudless\nmorning, like the appearance of the grass when the sun shines out\nclearly after rain. No imagery could be more delightful, or more\nfitly applied to Christ. The image of the morning sun presents\nChrist in His gladdening influences, bringing pardon to the guilty,\nhealth to the diseased, hope to the despairing; He is indeed like\nthe morning sun, lighting up the sky with splendour and the earth\nwith beauty, giving brightness to the languid eye, and colour to the\nfaded cheek, and health and hope to the sorrowing heart. The chief\nidea under the other emblem, the grass shining clearly after rain, is\nthat of renewed beauty and growth. The heavy rain batters the grass,\nas heavy trials batter the soul, but when the morning sun shines out\nclearly, the grass recovers, it sparkles with a fresher lustre, and\ngrows with intenser activity. So when Christ shines on the heart\nafter trial, a new beauty and a new growth and prosperity come to\nit. When this Sun of righteousness shines forth thus, in the case\nof individuals the understanding becomes more clear, the conscience\nmore vigorous, the will more firm, the habits more holy, the temper\nmore serene, the affections more pure, the desires more heavenly.\nIn communities, conversions are multiplied, and souls advanced\nsteadily in holy beauties; intelligence spreads, love triumphs over\nselfishness, and the spirit of Christ modifies the spirit of strife\nand the spirit of mammon. It is with the happiest skill that Solomon,\nappropriating part of his father's imagery, draws the picture of the\nbride, with the radiance of the bridegroom falling on her: \"Who is\nshe that looketh forth as the morning, fair as the moon, clear as the\nsun, and terrible as an army with banners?\"\n\nIII. Next comes David's allusion to his own house. In our\ntranslation, and in the text of the Revised Version, this comes in to\nindicate a sad contrast between the bright vision just described and\nthe Psalmist's own family. It indicates that his house or family did\nnot correspond to the picture of the prophecy, and would not realize\nthe emblems of the rising sun and the growing grass; but as God had\nmade with himself an everlasting covenant, ordered in all things\nand sure, that satisfied him; it was all his salvation and all his\ndesire, although his house was not to grow.\n\nBut in the margin of the Revised Version we have another translation,\nwhich reverses all this:--\n\n          \"For is not my house so with God?\n           For He hath made with me an everlasting covenant,\n           Ordered in all things and sure:\n           For all my salvation and all my desire,\n           Will He not make it to grow?\"\n\nCorresponding as this does with the translation of many scholars\n(_e.g._, Boothroyd, Hengstenberg, Fairbairn), it must be regarded as\nadmissible on the strength of outward evidence. And if so, certainly\nit is very strongly recommended by internal evidence. For what\nreason could David have for introducing his family at all after the\nglorious vision if only to say that they were excluded from it?\nAnd can it be thought that David, whose nature was so intensely\nsympathetic, would be so pleased because he was personally provided\nfor, though not his family? And still further, why should he go on\nin the next verses (6, 7) to describe the doom of the ungodly by way\nof contrast to what precedes if the doom of ungodly persons is the\nmatter already introduced in the fifth verse? The passage becomes\nhighly involved and unnatural in the light of the older translation.\n\nThe key to the passage will be found, if we mistake not, in the\nexpression \"my house.\" We are liable to think of this as the domestic\ncircle, whereas it ought to be thought of as the reigning dynasty.\nWhat is denoted by the house of Hapsburg, the house of Hanover,\nthe house of Savoy, is quite different from the personal family of\nany of the kings. So when David speaks of his house, he means his\ndynasty. In this sense his \"house\" had been made the subject of the\nmost gracious promise. \"Moreover, the Lord telleth thee that He will\nmake thee an house.... And thine house and thy kingdom shall be made\nsure for ever before thee.... Then David said, ... What is my house,\nthat Thou hast brought me thus far?... Thou hast spoken also of Thy\nservant's house for a great while to come.\" The king felt profoundly\non that occasion that his house was even more prominently the subject\nof Divine promise than himself. What roused his gratitude to its\nutmost height was the gracious provision for his house. Surely the\ncovenant referred to in the passage now before us, \"ordered in all\nthings and sure,\" was this very covenant announced to him by the\nprophet Nathan, the covenant that made this provision for his house.\nIt is impossible to think of him recalling this covenant and yet\nsaying, \"Verily my house is not so with God\" (R.V.).\n\nBut take the marginal reading--\"Is not my house so with God?\" Is not\nmy dynasty embraced in the scope of this promise? Hath He not made\nwith me an everlasting covenant, ordered in all things and sure? And\nwill He not make this promise, which is all my salvation and all\nmy desire, to grow, to fructify? It is infinitely more natural to\nrepresent David on this joyous occasion congratulating himself on the\npromise of long continuance and prosperity made to his dynasty, than\ndwelling on the unhappy condition of the members of his family circle.\n\nAnd the facts of the future correspond to this explanation. Was not\nthe government of David's house or dynasty in the main righteous,\nat least for many a reign, conducted in the fear of God, and\nfollowed by great prosperity and blessing? David himself, Solomon,\nAsa, Jehoshaphat, Hezekiah, Josiah--what other nation had ever so\nmany Christlike kings? What a contrast was presented to this in\nthe main by the apostate kingdom of the ten tribes, idolatrous,\nGod-dishonouring, throughout! And as to the growth or continued\nvitality of his house, its \"clear shining after rain,\" had not\nGod promised that He would bless it, and that it would continue\nfor ever before Him? He knew that, spiritually dormant at times,\nhis house would survive, till a living root came from the stem of\nJesse, till the Prince of life should be born from it, and once\nthat plant of renown was raised up, there was no fear but the house\nwould be preserved for ever. From this point it would start on a\nnew career of glory; nay, this was the very Ruler of whom he had\nbeen prophesying, at once David's Son and David's Lord; this was the\nroot and the offspring of David, the bright and the morning star.\nConducted to this stage in the future experience of his house, he\nneeded no further assurance, he cherished no further desire. The\ncovenant that rested on Him and that promised Him was ordered in all\nthings and sure. The glorious prospect exhausted his every wish.\n\"This is all my salvation and all my desire.\"\n\nIV. The last part of the prophecy, in the way of contrast to the\nleading vision, is a prediction of the doom of the ungodly. The\nrevised translation is much the clearer:--\n\n          \"But the ungodly shall be all of them as thorns to be thrust\n               away,\n           For they cannot be taken with the hand,\n           But the man that toucheth them\n           Must be armed with iron and the staff and spear,\n           And they shall be utterly burned with fire in their place.\"\n\nWhile some would fain think of Christ's sceptre as one of mercy only,\nthe uniform representation of the Bible is different. In this, as in\nmost predictions of Christ's kingly office, there is an instructive\ncombination of mercy and judgment. In the bosom of one of Isaiah's\nsweetest predictions, he introduces the Messiah as anointed by the\nSpirit of God to proclaim \"the day of vengeance of our God.\" In a\nsubsequent vision, Messiah appears marching triumphantly \"with dyed\ngarments from Bozrah, after treading the people in His anger and\ntrampling them in His fury.\" Malachi proclaimed Him \"the Sun of\nrighteousness, with healing under His wings,\" while His day was to burn\nas an oven and consume the proud and the wicked like stubble. John the\nBaptist saw Him \"with His fan in His hand, throughly purging His floor,\ngathering the wheat into His garner, while the chaff should be burnt\nwith unquenchable fire.\" In His own words, \"the Son of man shall gather\nout of His kingdom all things that offend, and them that do iniquity,\nand cast them into a furnace of fire; there shall be weeping and\ngnashing of teeth.\" And in the Apocalypse, when the King of kings and\nthe Lord of lords is to be married to His bride, He appears \"clothed\nwith a garment dipped in blood, and out of His mouth goeth a sharp\nsword, that He should smite the nations, and He treadeth the winepress\nof the fierceness and wrath of Almighty God.\"\n\nNor could it be otherwise. The union of mercy and judgment is the\ninevitable result of the righteousness which is the foundation of His\ngovernment. Sin is the abominable thing which He hates. To separate\nmen from sin is the grand purpose of His government. For this end, He\ndraws His people into union with Himself, thereby for ever removing\ntheir guilt, and providing for the ultimate removal of all sin from\ntheir hearts and the complete assimilation of their natures to His\nholy nature. Blessed are they who enter into this relation; but alas\nfor those who, for all that He has done, prefer their sins to Him!\n\"The ungodly shall be all of them as thorns to be thrust away.\"\n\nOh, let us not be satisfied with admiring beautiful images of Christ!\nLet us not deem it enough to think with pleasure of Him as the light\nof the morning, a morning without clouds, brightening the earth, and\nmaking it sparkle with the lustre of the sunshine on the grass after\nrain! Let us not satisfy ourselves with knowing that Jesus Christ\ncame to earth on a beneficent mission, and with thinking that surely\nwe shall one day share in the blessed effects of His work! Nothing\nof that kind can avail us if we are not personally united to Christ.\nWe must come as sinners individually to Him, cast ourselves on His\nfree, unmerited grace, and deliberately accept His righteousness as\nour clothing. Then, but only then, shall we be able to sing: \"I will\ngreatly rejoice in the Lord; my soul shall be joyful in my God; for\nHe hath clothed me with the garments of salvation, He hath covered me\nwith the robe of righteousness, as a bridegroom decketh himself with\nornaments, and as a bride adorneth herself with her jewels.\"\n\n\n\n\n                            CHAPTER XXXII.\n\n                      _THE NUMBERING OF ISRAEL._\n\n                            2 SAMUEL xxiv.\n\n\nThough David's life was now drawing to its close, neither his sins\nnor his chastisements were yet exhausted. One of his chief offences\nwas committed when he was old and grey-headed. There can be little\ndoubt that what is recorded in this chapter took place toward the\nclose of his life; the word \"again\" at the beginning indicates that\nit was later in time than the event which gave rise to the last\nexpression of God's displeasure to the nation. Surely there can be\nlittle ground for the doctrine of perfectionism, otherwise David,\nwhose religion was so earnest and so deep, would have been nearer it\nnow than this chapter shows that he was.\n\nThe offence consisted in taking a census of the people. At first\nit is difficult to see what there was in this that was so sinful;\nyet highly sinful it was in the judgment of God, in the judgment of\nJoab, and at last in the judgment of David too; it will be necessary,\ntherefore, to examine the subject very carefully if we would\nunderstand clearly what constituted the great sin of David.\n\nThe origin of the proceeding was remarkable. It may be said to have\nhad a double, or rather a triple, origin: God, David, and Satan, or,\nas some propose to render in place of Satan, \"_an_ enemy.\"\n\nIn Samuel we read that \"the Lord's anger was again kindled against\nIsrael.\" The nation required a chastisement. It needed a smart stroke\nof the rod to make it pause and think how it was offending God. We do\nnot require to know very specially what it was that displeased God\nin a nation that had been so ready to side with Absalom and drive\nGod's anointed from the throne. They were far from steadfast in their\nallegiance to God, easily drawn from the path of duty; and all that it\nis important for us to know is simply that at this particular time they\nwere farther astray than usual, and more in need of chastisement. The\ncup of sin had filled up so far that God behoved to interpose.\n\nFor this end \"the Lord moved David against them to say, Go, number\nIsrael and Judah.\" The action of God in the matter, like His action in\nsinful matters generally, was, that He permitted it to take place. He\nallowed David's sinful feeling to come as a factor into His scheme with\na view to the chastising of the people. We have seen many times in this\nhistory how God is represented as doing things and saying things which\nHe does not do nor say directly, but which He takes up into His plan,\nwith a view to the working out of some great end in the future. But in\nChronicles it is said that Satan stood up against Israel and provoked\nDavid to number Israel. According to some commentators, the Hebrew word\nis not to be translated \"Satan,\" because it has no article, but \"an\nadversary,\" as in parallel passages: \"The Lord stirred up an adversary\nunto Solomon, Hadad the Edomite\" (1 Kings xi. 14); \"God stirred up\nanother adversary to Israel, Razon, the son of Eliadib\" (1 Kings xi.\n23). Perhaps it was some one in the garb of a friend, but with the\nspirit of an enemy, that moved David in this matter. If we suppose\nSatan to have been the active mover, then Bishop Hall's words will\nindicate the relation between the three parties: \"Both God and Satan\nhad then a hand in the work--God by permission, Satan by suggestion;\nGod as a Judge, Satan as an enemy; God as in a just punishment for sin,\nSatan as in an act of sin; God in a wise ordination of it for good,\nSatan in a malicious intent of confusion. Thus at once God moved and\nSatan moved, neither is it any excuse to Satan or to David that God\nmoved, neither is it any blemish to God that Satan moved. The ruler's\nsin is a punishment to a wicked people; if God were not angry with a\npeople, He would not give up their governors to evils that provoke His\nvengeance; justly are we charged to make prayers and supplications as\nfor all men, so especially for rulers.\"\n\nBut what constituted David's great offence in numbering the people?\nEvery civilised State is now accustomed to number its people\nperiodically, and for many good purposes it is a most useful step.\nJosephus represents that David omitted to levy the atonement money\nwhich was to be raised, according to Exod. xxx. 12, etc., from all who\nwere numbered, but surely, if this had been his offence, it would have\nbeen easy for Joab, when he remonstrated, to remind him of it, instead\nof trying to dissuade him from the scheme altogether. The more common\nview of the transaction has been that it was objectionable, not in\nitself, but in the spirit by which it was dictated. That spirit seems\nto have been a self-glorifying spirit. It seems to have been like the\nspirit which led Hezekiah to show his treasures to the ambassadors\nof the king of Babylon. Perhaps it was designed to show, that in the\nnumber of his forces David was quite a match for the great empires on\nthe banks of the Nile and the Euphrates. If their fighting men could be\ncounted by the hundred thousand or the thousand thousand, so could his.\nIn the fighting resources of his kingdom, he was able to hold his head\nas high as any of them. Surely such a spirit was the very opposite of\nwhat was becoming in such a king as David. Was this not measuring the\nstrength of a spiritual power with the measure of a carnal? Did it not\nleave God most sinfully out of reckoning? Nay, did it not substitute\na carnal for a spiritual defence? Was it not in the very teeth of the\nPsalm, \"There is no king saved by the multitude of an host; a mighty\nman is not delivered by much strength. An horse is a vain thing for\nsafety; neither shall he deliver any by his great strength. Behold,\nthe eye of the Lord is upon them that ear Him, upon them that hope in\nHis mercy, to deliver their soul from death, and to keep them alive in\nfamine\"?\n\nThat David's project was very deeply seated in his heart is evident\nfrom the fact that he was unmoved by the remonstrance of Joab. In\nordinary circumstances it must have startled him to find that even he\nwas strongly opposed to his project. It is indeed strange that Joab\nshould have had scruples where David had none. We have been accustomed\nto find Joab so seldom in the right that it is hard to believe that\nhe was in the right now. But perhaps we do Joab injustice. He was a\nman that could be profoundly stirred when his own interests were at\nstake, or his passions roused, and that seemed equally regardless\nof God and man in what he did on such occasions. But otherwise Joab\ncommonly acted with prudence and moderation. He consulted for the good\nof the nation. He was not habitually reckless or habitually cruel,\nand he seems to have had a certain amount of regard to the will of God\nand the theocratic constitution of the kingdom, for he was loyal to\nDavid from the very beginning, up to the contest between Solomon and\nAdonijah. It is evident that Joab felt strongly that in the step which\nhe proposed to take David would be acting a part unworthy of himself\nand of the constitution of the kingdom, and by displeasing God would\nexpose himself to evils far beyond any advantage he might hope to gain\nby ascertaining the number of the people.\n\nFor once--and this time, unhappily--David was too strong for the son\nof Zeruiah. The enumerators of the people were despatched, no doubt\nwith great regularity, to take the census. The boundaries named were\nnot beyond the territory as divided by Joshua among the Israelites,\nsave that Tyre and Zidon were included; not that they had been annexed\nby David, but probably because there was an understanding that in all\nhis military arrangements they were to be associated with him. Nine\nmonths and twenty days were occupied in the business. At the end of it,\nit was ascertained that the fighting men of Israel were eight hundred\nthousand, and those of Judah five hundred thousand; or, if we take\nthe figures in Chronicles, eleven hundred thousand of Israel and four\nhundred and seventy thousand of Judah. The discrepancy is not easily\naccounted for; but probably in Chronicles in the number for Israel\ncertain bodies of troops were included which were not included in\nSamuel, and _vice vers\u00e2_ in the case of Judah.\n\nJust as in the case of his sin in the matter of Uriah, David was\nlong of coming to a sense of it. How his view came to change we are\nnot told, but when the change did occur, it seems, as in the other\ncase, to have come with extraordinary force. \"David's heart smote\nhim after that he had numbered the people. And David said unto the\nLord, I have sinned greatly in that which I have done; and now, I\nbeseech Thee, O Lord, take away the iniquity of Thy servant, for I\nhave done very foolishly.\" Once alive to his sin, his humiliation is\nvery profound. His confession is frank, hearty, complete. He shows no\nproud desire to remain on good terms with himself, seeks nothing to\nbreak his fall or to make his humiliation less before Joab and before\nthe people. He says, \"I will confess my transgression to the Lord;\"\nand his plea is one with which he is familiar from of old--\"For Thy\nname's sake, O Lord, pardon mine iniquity, for it is great.\" He is\nnever greater than when acknowledging his sin.\n\nNext comes the chastisement. The moment for sending it is very\nseasonable. It did not come while his conscience was yet slumbering,\nbut after he had come to feel his sin. His confessions and relentings\nwere proofs that he was now fit for chastisement; the chastisement,\nas in the other case, was solemnly announced by a prophet; and, as\nin the other case too, it fell on one of the tenderest spots of his\nheart. Then the first blow fell on his infant child; now it falls\nupon his sheep. His affections were divided between his children and\nhis people, and in both cases the blow must have been very severe.\nIt was, as far as we can judge, after a night of very profound\nhumiliation that the prophet Gad was sent to him. Gad had first come\nto him when he was hiding from Saul, and had therefore been his\nfriend all his kingly life. Sad that so old and so good a friend\nshould be the bearer to the aged king of a bitter message! Seven\nyears of famine (in 1 Chron. xxi. 12, three years), three months\nof unsuccessful war, or three days of pestilence,--the choice lies\nbetween these three. All of them were well fitted to rebuke that\npride in human resources which had been the occasion of his sin.\nWell might he say, \"I am in a great strait.\" Oh the bitterness of\nthe harvest when you sow to the flesh! Between these three horrors\neven God's anointed king has to choose. What a delusion it is that\nGod will not be very careful in the case of the wicked to inflict the\ndue retribution of sin! \"If these things were done in the green tree,\nwhat shall be done in the dry?\"\n\nDavid chose the three days of pestilence. It was the shortest, no\ndoubt, but what recommended it, especially above the three months\nof unsuccessful war, was that it would come more directly from the\nhand of God. \"Let me fall now into the hand of the Lord, for His\nmercies are great, and let me not fall into the hand of man.\" What\na frightful time it must have been! Seventy thousand died of the\nplague. From Dan to Beersheba nothing would be heard but a bitter\ncry, like that of the Egyptians when the angel slew the first-born.\nWhat days and nights of agony these must have been to David! How\nslowly would they drag on! What cries in the morning, \"Would God it\nwere evening!\" and in the evening, \"Would God it were morning!\"\n\nThe pestilence, wherever it originated, seems to have advanced from\nevery side like a besieging army, till it was ready to close upon\nJerusalem. The destroying angel hovered over Mount Moriah, and, like\nAbraham on the same spot a thousand years before, was brandishing his\nsword for the work of destruction. It was a spot that had already\nbeen memorable for one display of Divine forbearance, and now it\nbecame the scene of another. Like the hand of Abraham when ready to\nplunge the knife into the bosom of his son, the hand of the angel was\nstayed when about to fall on Jerusalem. For Abraham a ram had been\nprovided to offer in the room of Isaac; and now David is commanded to\noffer a burnt-offering in acknowledgment of his guilt and of his need\nof expiation. Thus the Lord stayed His rough wind in the day of His\neast wind. In sparing Jerusalem, on the very eve of destruction, He\ncaused His mercy to rejoice over judgment.\n\nNo one but must admire the spirit of David when the angel appeared on\nMount Moriah. Owning frankly his own great sin, and especially his\nsin as a shepherd, he bared his own bosom to the sword, and entreated\nGod to let the punishment fall on him and on his father's house. Why\nshould the sheep suffer for the sin of the shepherd? The plea was\nmore beautiful than correct. The sheep had been certainly not less\nguilty than the shepherd, though in a different way. We have seen how\nthe anger of the Lord had been kindled against Israel when David was\ninduced to go and number the people. And as both had been guilty,\nso both had been punished. The sheep had been punished in their own\nbodies, the shepherd in the tenderest feelings of his heart. It is a\nrare sight to find a man prepared to take on himself more than his\nown share of the blame. It was not so in paradise, when the man threw\nthe blame on the woman and the woman on the serpent. We see that,\nwith all his faults, David had another spirit from that of the vulgar\nworld. After all, there is much of the Divine nature in this poor,\nblundering, sinning child of clay.\n\nOn the day when the angel appeared over Jerusalem, Gad was sent back\nto David with a more auspicious message. He is required to build an\naltar to the Lord on the spot where the angel stood. This was the\nfitting counterpart to Abraham's act when, in place of Isaac, he\noffered the ram which Jehovah-jireh had provided for the sacrifice.\nThe circumstances connected with the rearing of the altar and the\noffering of the burnt-offering were very peculiar, and seem to have\nborne a deep typical meaning. The place where the angel's arm was\narrested was by the threshing-floor of Araunah the Jebusite. It\nwas there that David was commanded to rear his altar and offer his\nburnt-offering. When Araunah saw the king approaching, he bowed\nbefore him and respectfully asked the purpose of his visit. It was\nto buy the threshing-floor and build an altar, that the plague might\nbe stayed. But if the threshing-floor was needed for that purpose,\nAraunah would give it freely; and offer it as a free gift he did,\nwith royal munificence, along with the oxen for a burnt-offering and\ntheir implements also as wood for the sacrifice. David, acknowledging\nhis goodness, would not be outdone in generosity, and insisted\non making payment. The floor was bought, the altar was built,\nthe sacrifice was offered, and the plague was stayed. As we read\nin Chronicles, fire from heaven attested God's acceptance of the\noffering. \"And David said, This is the house of the Lord God, and\nthis is the altar of the burnt-offering for Israel.\" That is to say,\nthe threshing-floor was appointed to be the site of the temple which\nSolomon was to build; and the spot where David had hastily reared his\naltar was to be the place where, for hundreds of years, day after\nday, morning and evening, the blood of the burnt-offering was to\nflow, and the fumes of incense to ascend before God.\n\nNo doubt it was to save time in so pressing an emergency that Araunah\ngave for sacrifice the oxen with which he was working, and the\nimplements connected with his labour. But in the purpose of God, a\ngreat truth lay under these symbolical arrangements. The oxen that\nhad been labouring for man were sacrificed for man; both their life\nand their death were given for man, just as afterwards the Lord Jesus\nChrist, after living and labouring for the good of many, at last\ngave His life a ransom. The wood of the altar on which they suffered\nwas, part of it at all events, borne on their own necks, \"the\nthreshing instruments and other instruments of the oxen,\" just as\nIsaac had borne the wood and as Jesus was to bear the cross on which,\nrespectively, they were stretched. The sacrifice was a sacrifice of\nblood, for only blood could remove the guilt that had to be pardoned.\nThe analogy is clear enough. Isaac had escaped; the ram suffered in\nhis room. Jerusalem escaped now; the oxen were sacrificed in its\nroom. Sinners of mankind were to escape; the Lamb of God was to die,\nthe just for the unjust, to bring them to God.\n\nThere were other circumstances, however, not without significance,\nconnected with the purchase of the temple site. The man to whom\nthe ground had belonged, and whose oxen had been slain as the\nburnt-offering, was a Jebusite; and from the way in which he\ndesignated David's Lord, \"the Lord _thy_ God,\" it is not certain\nwhether he was even a proselyte. Some think that he had formerly been\nking of Jerusalem, or rather of the stronghold of Zion, but that when\nZion was taken he had been permitted to retire to Mount Moriah, which\nwas separated from Zion only by a deep ravine. Josephus calls him a\ngreat friend of David's. He could not have shown a more friendly\nspirit of a more princely liberality. The striking way in which the\nheart of this Jebusite was moved to co-operate with King David in\npreparing for the temple was fitted to remind David of the missionary\ncharacter which the temple was to sustain. \"My house shall be called\nan house of prayer for all nations.\" In the words of the sixty-eighth\nPsalm, \"Because of thy temple at Jerusalem shall kings bring presents\nunto thee.\" As Araunah's oxen had been accepted, so the time would\ncome when \"the sons of the stranger that join themselves to the\nLord, to serve Him and to love the name of the Lord, even them will\nI bring to My holy mountain, and make them joyful in My house of\nprayer; their burnt-offerings and their sacrifices shall be accepted\nupon Mine altar.\" What a wonderful thing is sanctified affliction!\nWhile its root lies in the very corruption of our nature, its fruit\nconsists of the best blessings of Heaven. The root of David's\naffliction was carnal pride; but under God's sanctifying grace, it\nwas followed by the erection of a temple associated with heavenly\nblessing, not to one nation only, but to all. When affliction,\nduly sanctified, is thus capable of bringing such blessings, it\nmakes the fact all the more lamentable that affliction is so often\nunsanctified. It is vain to imagine that everything of the nature\nof affliction is sure to turn to good. It can turn to good on one\ncondition only--when your heart is humbled under the rod, and in the\nsame humble, chastened spirit as David you say, and feel as well as\nsay, \"I have sinned.\"\n\nOne other lesson we gather from this chapter of David's history. When\nhe declined to accept the generous offer of Araunah, it was on the\nground that he would not serve the Lord with that which cost him\nnothing. The thought needs only to be put in words to commend itself\nto every conscience. God's service is neither a form nor a sham; it\nis a great reality. If we desire to show our honour for Him, it must\nbe in a way suited to the occasion. The poorest mechanic that would\noffer a gift to his sovereign tries to make it the product of his\nbest labour, the fruit of his highest skill. To pluck a weed from\nthe roadside and present it to one's sovereign would be no better\nthan an insult. Yet how often is God served with that which costs men\nnothing! Men that will lavish hundreds and thousands to gratify their\nown fancy,--what miserable driblets they often give to the cause of\nGod! The smallest of coins is good enough for His treasury. And as\nfor other forms of serving God, what a tendency there is in our time\nto make everything easy and pleasant,--to forget the very meaning of\nself-denial! It is high time that that word of David were brought\nforth and put before every conscience, and made to rebuke ever so\nmany professed worshippers of God, whose rule of worship is to serve\nGod with what does cost them nothing. The very heathen reprove\nyou. Little though there has been to stimulate their love, their\nsacrifices are often most costly--far from sacrifices that have cost\nthem nothing. Oh, let us who call ourselves Christians beware lest we\nbe found the meanest, paltriest, shabbiest of worshippers! Let souls\nthat have been blessed as Christians have devise liberal things. Let\nyour question and the answer be: \"What shall I render to the Lord for\nall His benefits toward me? I will take the cup of salvation and call\non the name of the Lord. I will pay my vows unto the Lord, now in the\npresence of His people.\"\n\n\n\n\n                            CHAPTER XXXIII.\n\n                      _THE TWO BOOKS OF SAMUEL._\n\n\nHaving now surveyed the events of the history of Israel, one by one,\nduring the whole of that memorable period which is embraced in the\nbooks of Samuel, it will be profitable, before we close, to cast\na glance over the way by which we have traveled, and endeavour to\ngather up the leading lessons and impressions of the whole.\n\nLet us bear in mind all along that the great object of these books,\nas of the other historical books of Scripture, is peculiar: it is\nnot to trace the history of a nation, in the ordinary sense, but to\ntrace the course of Divine revelation, to illustrate God's manner\nof dealing with the nation whom He chose that He might instruct\nand train them in His ways, that He might train them to that\nrighteousness which alone exalteth a people, and that He might lay a\nfoundation for the work of Christ in future times, in whom all the\nfamilies of the earth were to be blessed. The history delineated is\nnot that of the kingdom of Israel, but that of the kingdom of God.\n\nThe history falls into four divisions, like the acts of a drama. I. It\nopens with Eli as high-priest, when the state of the nation is far from\nsatisfactory, and God's holy purpose regarding it appears a failure.\nII. With Samuel as the Lord's prophet, we see a remarkable revival of\nthe spirit of God's nation. III. With Saul a king, the fair promise\nunder Samuel is darkened, and an evil spirit is again ascendant. IV.\nBut with David, the conditions are again reversed; God's purpose\nregarding the people is greatly advanced, but in the later part of his\nreign the sky again becomes overcast, through his infirmities and the\npeople's perversity, and the great forces of good and evil are left\nstill contending, though not in the same proportion as before.\n\nI. The opening scene, under the high-priesthood of Eli, is sad and\npainful. It is the sanctuary itself, the priestly establishment at\nShiloh, that which ought to be the very centre and heart of the\nspiritual life of the nation, that is photographed for us; and it is\na deplorable picture. The soul of religion has died out; little but\nthe carcase is left. Formality and superstition are the chief forces\nat work, and a wretched business they make of it. Men still attend\nto religious service, for conscience and the force of habit have a\nwonderful tenacity; but what is the use? Religion does not even help\nmorality. The acting priests are unblushing profligates, defiling\nthe very precincts of God's house with abominable wickedness. And\nwhat better could you expect of the people when their very spiritual\nguides set them such an example? \"Men abhor the offering of the\nLord.\" No wonder! It irritates them in the last degree to have to\ngive their wealth ostensibly for religion, but really to feed the\nlusts of scoundrels. People feel that instead of getting help from\nreligious services for anything good, it strains all that is best\nin them to endure contact with such things. How can belief in a\nliving God prevail when the very priests show themselves practical\natheists? The very idea of a personal God is blotted out of the\npeople's mind, and superstition takes its place. Men come to think\nthat certain words, or things, or places have in some way a power to\ndo them good. The object of religion is not to please God, but to\nget the mysterious good out of the words, or things, or places that\nhave it in them. When they are going to war, they do not think how\nthey may get the living God to be on their side, but they take hold\nof the dead ark, believing that there is some spell in it to frighten\ntheir enemies. Israelites who believe such things are no better than\ntheir pagan neighbours. The whole purpose of God to make them an\nenlightened, orderly, sanctified people seems grievously frustrated.\n\nEven good men become comparatively useless under such a system. The\nvery high-priest is a kind of nonentity. If Eli had asserted God's\nclaims with any vigour, Hophni and Phinehas would not have dared to\nlive as they did. It is a mournful state of things when good men get\nreconciled to the evil that prevails, or content themselves with very\nfeebly protesting against it. No doubt Eli most sincerely bewailed it.\nBut the very atmosphere was drowsy, inviting to rest and quiet. There\nwas no stir, no movement anywhere. Where all death lived, life died.\n\nAnd yet, as in the days of Elijah, God had His faithful ones in the\nland. There were still men and women that believed in a living God,\nand in their closets prayed to their Father that seeth in secret.\nAnd God has wonderful ways of reviving His cause when it seems\nextinct. When all flesh had corrupted their way, there was yet one\nman left who was righteous and godly; and through Noah God peopled\nthe world. When the new generation had become idolatrous, He chose\none man, Abraham, and by him alone He built up a holy Church, and a\nconsecrated nation. And now, when all Israel seems to be hopelessly\ncorrupt, God finds in an obscure cottage a humble woman, through\nwhose seed it is His purpose that His Church be revived, and the\nnation saved. Take heed that ye despise not one of these little\nones. Be thankful for every man and woman, however insignificant, in\nwhose heart there is a living faith in a living God. No one can tell\nwhat use God may not make of the poorest saint. For God's power is\nunlimited. One man, one woman, one child, may be His instrument for\narresting the decline of ages, and introducing a new era of spiritual\nrevival and holy triumph.\n\nII. For it was no less a change than this that was effected through\nSamuel, Hannah's child. From his infancy Samuel was a consecrated\nperson. Brought up as a child to reverence the sanctuary and all\nits worship, he learned betimes the true meaning of it all; and the\nreverence that he had been taught to give to His outward service, he\nlearned to associate with the person of the living God. And Samuel\nhad the courage of his convictions, and told the people of their\nsins, and of God's claims. It was his function to revive belief in\nthe spiritual God, and in His relation to the people of Israel; and\nto summon the nation to honour and serve Him. What Samuel did in this\nway, he did mainly through his high personal character and intense\nconvictions. In office he was neither priest nor king, though he\nhad much of the influence of both. No doubt he judged Israel; but\nthat function came to him not by formal appointment, but rather as\nthe fruit of his high character and commanding influence. The whole\nposition of Samuel and the influence which he wielded were due not\nto temporal but spiritual considerations. He manifestly walked with\nGod; he was conspicuous for his fellowship with Jehovah, Israel's\nLord; and his life, and his character, and his words, all combined to\nexalt Him whose servant he evidently was.\n\nAnd that was the work to which Samuel was appointed. It was to revive\nthe faith of an unbelieving people in the reality of God's existence\nin the first place, and in the second in the reality of His covenant\nrelation to Israel. It was to rivet on their minds the truth that the\nsupreme and only God was the God of their nation, and to get them to\nhave regard to Him and to honour Him as such. He was to impress on\nthem the great principle of national prosperity, to teach them that\nthe one unfailing source of blessing was the active favour of God.\nIt was their sin and their misery alike that they not only did not\ntake the right means to secure God's favour, but, on the contrary,\nprovoked Him to anger by their sins.\n\nNow there were two things about God that Samuel was most earnest\nin pressing. The one was His holiness, the other His spirituality.\nThe righteous Lord loved righteousness. No amount of ritual service\ncould compensate the want of moral obedience. \"Behold, to obey is\nbetter than sacrifice, and to hearken than the fat of rams.\" If they\nwould enjoy His favour, they must search out their sins, and humble\nthemselves for them before this holy God. The other earnest lesson\nwas God's spirituality. Not only was all idolatry and image-worship\nmost obnoxious to Him, but no service was acceptable which did not\ncome from the heart. Hence the great value of prayer. It was Samuel's\nprivilege to show the people what prayer could do. He showed them\nprayer, when it arose from a humble, penitent spirit, moving the\nHand that moved the universe. He endeavoured to inspire them with\nheartfelt regard to God as their King, and with supreme honour for\nHim in all the transactions both of public and private life. That\nwas the groove in which he tried to move the nation, for in that\ncourse alone he was persuaded that their true interest lay. To a\nlarge extent, Samuel was successful in this endeavour. His spirit\nwas very different from the languid timidity of Eli. He spoke with a\nvoice that evoked an echo. He raised the nation to a higher moral and\nspiritual platform, and brought them nearer to their heavenly King.\nSeldom has such proof been given of the almost unbounded moral power\nattainable by one man, if he but be of single eye and immovable will.\n\nBut, as we have said, Samuel was neither priest nor king; his\nconquests were the conquests of character alone. The people clamoured\nfor a king, certainly from inferior motives, and Samuel yielded to\ntheir clamour. It would have been a splendid thing for the nation to\nhave got an ideal king, a king adapted for such a kingdom, as deeply\nimpressed as Samuel was with his obligation to honour God, and ruling\nover them with the same regard for the law and covenant of Israel.\nBut such was not to be their first king. Some correction was due to\nthem for having been impatient of God's arrangements, and so eager\nto have their own wishes complied with. Saul was to be as much an\ninstrument of humiliation as a source of blessing.\n\nIII. And this brings us to the third act of the drama. Saul the son\nof Kish begins well, but he turns aside soon. He has ability, he has\nactivity, he has abundant opportunity to make the necessary external\narrangements for the welfare of the nation; but he has no heart for\nthe primary condition of blessing. At first he feels constrained to\nhonour God; he accepts from Samuel the law of the kingdom and tries\nto govern accordingly. He could not well have done otherwise. He\ncould not decently have accepted the office of king at the hands of\nSamuel without promising and without trying to have regard to the\nmode of ruling which the king-maker so earnestly pressed on him. But\nSaul's efforts to honour God shared the fate of all similar efforts\nwhen the force that impels to them is pressure from without, not\nheartiness within. Like a rower pulling against wind and tide, he\nsoon tired. And when he tired of trying to rule as God would have\nhim, and fell back on his own way of it, he seemed all the more\nwilful for the very fact that he had tried at first to repress his\nown will. Externally he was active and for a time successful, but\ninternally he went from bad to worse. Under Saul, the process of\ntraining Israel to fear and honour God made no progress whatever. The\nwhole force of the governing power was in the opposite direction. One\nthing is to be said in favour of Saul--he was no idolater. He did not\nencourage any outward departure from the worship of God. Neither Baal\nnor Ashtaroth, Moloch nor Chemosh, received any countenance at his\nhands. The Second Commandment was at least outwardly observed.\n\nBut for all that, Saul was the active, inveterate, and bitter\npersecutor of what we may call God's interest in the kingdom. There\nwas no real sympathy between him and Samuel; but as Samuel did\nnot cross his path, he left him comparatively alone. It was very\ndifferent in the case of David. In Saul's relation to David we see\nthe old antagonism--the antagonism of nature and grace, of the seed\nof the serpent and the seed of the woman, of those born after the\nflesh and those born after the Spirit. Here is the most painful\nfeature of Saul's administration. Knowing, as he did, that David\nenjoyed God's favour in a very special degree, he ought to have\nrespected him the more. In reality he hated him the more. Jealousy is\na blind and stupid passion. It mattered nothing to Saul that David\nwas a man after God's own heart, except that it made him more fierce\nagainst him. How could a theocratic kingdom prosper when the head\nof it raged against God's anointed one, and strained every nerve to\ndestroy him? The whole policy of Saul was a fatal blunder. Under\nhim, the nation, instead of being trained to serve God better, and\nrealise the end of their selection more faithfully, were carried in\nthe opposite direction. And Saul lived to see into what confusion and\nmisery he had dragged them by his wilful and godless rule. No man\never led himself into a more humiliating maze, and no man ever died\nin circumstances that proclaimed more clearly that his life had been\nboth a failure and a crime.\n\nIV. The fourth act of the drama is a great contrast to the third. It\nopens at Hebron, that place of venerable memories, where a young king,\ninheriting Abraham's faith, sets himself, heart and soul, to make the\nnation of Israel what God would have it to be. Trained in the school\nof adversity, his feet had sometimes slipped; but on the whole he had\nprofited by his teacher; he had learned a great lesson of trust, and\nknowing something of the treachery of his own heart, he had committed\nhimself to God, and his whole desire and ambition was to be God's\nservant. For a long time he is occupied in getting rid of enemies, and\nsecuring the tranquillity of the kingdom. When that object is gained,\nhe sets himself to the great business of his life. He places the symbol\nof God's presence and covenant in the securest spot in the kingdom, and\nwhere it is at once most central and most conspicuous. He proposes,\nafter his wars are over, and when he has not only become a great king,\nbut amassed great treasure, to employ this treasure in building a\nstately temple for God's worship, although he is not allowed to carry\nout that purpose. He remodels the economy of priests and Levites,\nmaking arrangements for the more orderly and effective celebration of\nall the service in the capital and throughout the kingdom for which\nthey were designed. He places the whole administration of the kingdom\nunder distinct departments, putting at the head of each the officer\nthat is best fitted for the effective discharge of its duties. In all\nthese arrangements, and in other arrangements more directly adapted\nto the end, he sought to promote throughout his kingdom the spirit\nthat fears and honours God. And more especially did he labour for this\nin that most interesting field for which he was so well adapted--the\nwriting of songs fitted for God's public service, and accompanied\nby the instruments of music in which he so greatly delighted. Need\nwe say how his whole soul was thrown into this service? Need we say\nhow wonderfully he succeeded in it, not only in the songs which he\nwrote personally, but in the school of like-minded men which he\noriginated, whose songs were worthy to rank with his own? The whole\ncollection, for well-nigh three thousand years, has been by far the\nbest aid to devotion the Church of God has ever known, and the best\nmeans of promoting that fellowship with God of which his own life and\nexperience furnished the finest sample. No words can tell the effect\nof this step in guiding the nation to a due reverence for God, and\nstimulating them to the faithful discharge of the high ends for which\nthey had been chosen.\n\nBeautiful and most promising was the state of the nation at one\nperiod of his life. Unbounded prosperity had flowed into the country.\nEvery enemy had been subdued. There was no division in the kingdom,\nand no one likely to cause any. The king was greatly honoured by\nhis people, and highly popular. The arrangements which he had made,\nboth for the civil and spiritual administration of the kingdom,\nwere working beautifully, and producing their natural fruits. All\nthings seemed to be advancing the great purpose of God in connection\nwith Israel. Let this state of things but last, and surely the\nconsummation will be reached. The promise to Abraham and Isaac\nand Jacob will be fulfilled, and the promised Seed will come very\nspeedily to diffuse His blessing over all the families of the earth.\n\nBut into this fair paradise the serpent contrived to creep, and the\nconsequence was another fall. Never did the cause of God seem so strong\nas it was in Israel under David, and never did it seem more secure\nfrom harm. David was an absolute king, without an opponent, without a\nrival; his whole soul was on the side of the good cause; his influence\nwas paramount; whence could danger come? Alas, it could come and it did\ncome from David himself. His sin in the matter of Uriah was fraught\nwith the most fatal consequences. It brought down the displeasure of\nGod; it lowered the king in the eyes of his subjects; it caused the\nenemy to blaspheme; it made rebellion less difficult; it made the\nsuccess of rebellion possible. It threw back the cause of God, we\ncannot tell for how long. Disaster followed disaster in the latter part\nof David's reign; and though he bequeathed to his son a splendid and a\npeaceful empire, the seeds of division had been sown in it; the germ\nof disruption was at work; and when the disruption came, in the days\nof David's grandson, no fewer than ten tribes broke away from their\nallegiance, and of the new kingdom which they founded idolatry was the\nestablished religion, and the worship of calves was set up by royal\nwarrant from Bethel even to Dan.\n\nIt is sad indeed to dwell on the reverse which befel the cause of God\nin the latter part of the reign of David. But this event has been\nmatched, over and over again, in the chequered history of religious\nmovements. The story of Sisyphus has often been realized, rolling his\nstone up the hill, but finding it, near the top, slip from his hands\nand go thundering to the bottom. Or rather, to take a more Biblical\nsimilitude, the burden of the watchman of Dumah has time after time\ncome true: \"The morning cometh, and also the night.\" Strange and trying\nis often the order of Providence. The conflict between good and evil\nseems to go on for ever, and just when the good appears to be on the\neve of triumph something occurs to throw it back, and restore the\nbalance. Was it not so after the Reformation? Did not the Catholic\ncause, by diplomacy and cruelty in too many cases, regain much of\nwhat Luther had taken from it? And have we not from time to time had\nrevivals of the Church at home that have speedily been followed by\ncounteracting forces that have thrown us back to where we were? What\nencouragement is there to labour for truth and righteousness when, even\nif we are apparently successful, we are sure to be overtaken by some\ncounter-current that will sweep us back to our former position?\n\nBut let us not be too hasty or too summary in our inferences. When\nwe examine carefully the history of David, we find that the evil\nthat came in the end of his reign did not counteract all the good\nat the beginning. Who does not see that, after all, there was a\nclear balance of gain? The cause of God was stronger in Israel, its\nfoundation firmer, its defences surer, than it had ever been before.\nWhy, even if nothing had remained but those immortal psalms that\never led the struggling Church to her refuge and her strength, the\ngain would have been remarkable. And so it will be found that the\nRomish reaction did not swallow up all the good of the Reformation,\nand that the free-thinking reaction of our day has not neutralized\nthe evangelical revival of the nineteenth century. A decided gain\nremains, and for that gain let us ever be thankful.\n\nAnd if the gain be less decided and less full than once it promised,\nand if Amalek gains upon Israel, and recovers part of the ground he\nhad lost, let us mark well the lesson which God designs to teach\nus. In the first place, let us learn the lesson of vigilance. Let\nus watch against the decline of spiritual strength, and against\nthe decline of that fellowship with God from which all spiritual\nstrength is derived. Let those who are prominent in the Church watch\ntheir personal conduct let them be intensely careful against those\ninconsistencies and indulgences by which, when they take place, such\nirreparable injury is done to the cause. And in the second place,\nlet us learn the lesson of patient waiting and patient working. As\nthe early Church had to wait for the promise of the Father, so let\nthe Church wait in every age. As the early Church continued with one\naccord in prayer and supplication, so let each successive age ply\nwith renewed earnestness its applications to the throne of grace. And\nlet us be encouraged by the assurance that long though the tide has\nebbed and flowed, and flowed and ebbed, it will not be so for ever.\nTo them that look for Him, the great Captain shall appear the second\ntime without sin unto salvation. \"The Redeemer shall come to Zion,\nand unto them that turn from transgression in Jacob, saith the Lord.\nAs for Me, this is My covenant with them, saith the Lord; My spirit\nthat is upon thee, and My words which I have put in thy mouth, shall\nnot depart out of thy mouth, nor out of the mouth of thy seed, nor\nout of the mouth of thy seed's seed, saith the Lord, from henceforth\nand for ever\" (Isa. lix. 20, 21).\n\n\n\n\nTranscriber's Notes\n\n\nObvious punctuation and spelling errors fixed throughout.\n\nInconsistent hyphenation left as in the original text.","title":"The Expositor's Bible: The Second Book of Samuel","tradition":"scripture-revelation","translated_text":null,"word_count":120078}