Week 70: 1&2 Kings Part 5
October 3, 2011
(from Unlocking the Bible by David Pawson)
Divided kingdom
The reigns of the kings of Judah and Israel are recorded differently.
| NORTH | SOUTH |
| Date of accession | Date of accession |
| Length of reign Formally condemned Name of father |
Age at accession Length of reign Name of mother |
| Reference to sources | Summary of character Reference to sources |
| Death | Death and burial |
| Son or usurper | Son as successor |
The kings of the north are all compared to the first northern king, Jeroboam, who was a bad king. So we read repeatedly of subsequent kings: ‘…and he did what was evil in the sight of the Lord, just like Jeroboam.’
In the account of the kings of Judah in the south, the writer uses different records and varies the order and the details. He starts with the date when they began to reign, but follows with the king’s age – Josiah was just eight, for example. The length of the reign is given next, but then comes the name of the mother, not the father, for reasons which are not clear. (Today a person qualifies as a Jew if their mother is a Jew, but in the Bible it was the father who determined nationality.) Then comes the judgement as to whether they were good or evil. Whilst every king in the north was evil, the south had a mixture of good and evil, with David as the benchmark.
The kings
The north had 20 kings and the south had the same number, but the south survived for 140 years longer than the north because, as we noted earlier, good kings reign longer. Some of the bad kings survived only a couple of months before being killed.
As mentioned above, the northern kings were all bad, although some were not as bad as the others.
The south had six good and two very good kings (Hezekiah and Josiah), but also had one who was the worst of all. This is the exception to the rule about bad kings and short reigns, for Manasseh reigned for 55 years.
The south had just one dynasty, whereas the north had nine, with the succession changing hands due to assassination six times.
There was one queen. God had told David there would always be a man on the throne – women were not allowed to rule as monarchs. Athaliah had other ideas. She was Jezebel’s daughter and married the king of Judah in the south. She wanted to be the first queen of Israel, so she systematically killed all the children of David’s royal line, so that the way would be open for her to become queen. However, an aunt took the youngest boy, Joash, and hid him ready to take the throne when Athaliah died, so the royal line was spared.
The two very good kings of Judah were Hezekiah and Josiah. Hezekiah was contemporary with Isaiah and his story is included in Isaiah’s prophecy. Hezekiah was a good king in many ways. It was he who ordered the digging of the tunnel to bring water into Jerusalem and make it safe against enemies. His big mistake occurred when he was taken ill and welcomed to his palace men from the (then) small and unknown city of Babylon. They brought a ‘get well card’ and Hezekiah was flattered that someone so far away knew and cared about his illness. He showed the men round the palace and the temple. It was Isaiah who pointed out the error. He told Hezekiah that the Babylonians would take away everything he showed them. Some years later they did just that.
The other good king came to the throne of Judah at just eight years of age. Josiah was born in the same year as Jeremiah the prophet. While they were cleaning the temple his men found the scroll of Deuteronomy, which had not been read for many years. When King Josiah read the curses God had promised if his people strayed from his laws, he was alarmed and began at once to put things right. He ordered a national reformation, destroying all the high places and calling a halt to the idolatry which had infected the land, in the hope that this would bring renewal. But people’s hearts remained far from God. It is not possible to make people good by passing good laws.
Josiah also made a big mistake: he went to war with Egypt when he did not need to and he was killed at Megiddo. When he died the nation reverted to the evil practices he had stamped out.
Hezekiah was followed by Manasseh, a very bad king who took evil to new depths. He worshipped the god Molech, and this included sacrificing his baby sons in the valley of Hinnon, or ‘Gehenna’. He also executed Isaiah the prophet for his preaching, ordering to him to be bound and put inside a hollow tree trunk, after which two carpenters with a big saw cut the tree in half.
One of the worst kings was Ahab, who married a Phoenician princess from Tia. Her name in Phoenician meant ‘primrose’, but the same name in Hebrew, Jezebel, meant ‘garbage’, and this was how she was known. It was clear that she used Ahab to achieve her own evil ends and that he needed little persuading. It was her scheming, for example, which arranged the death of a neighbor, Naboth, so that Ahab could take possession of his vineyard.
(from Unlocking the Bible by David Pawson)
Week 69: 1&2 Kings Part 4
September 26, 2011
(from Unlocking the Bible by David Pawson)
Content
Solomon
As we look at the book in more detail we begin with the king who dominates the early chapters. Solomon’s name means ‘peace’, which was appropriate since his reign benefited from the peace David had secured when building the empire. He was a good man who began well.
At the start of his reign God appeared to him in a dream and offered to give him anything he asked for. Solomon, knowing that he lacked experience, asked for wisdom. God promised Solomon not just wisdom, but many things he did not ask for besides: wealth, fame and power.
Solomon’s gift of wisdom was demonstrated in the famous story of the two prostitutes who argued about a baby. Both had babies, but during the night one of the babies died, so its mother stole the other’s baby and placed the dead one in its place. Solomon had to adjudicate on this most awkward situation. To whom did the live baby belong? Solomon asked for wisdom from God, and then told the women to cut the baby in half and keep half each. As soon as Solomon said this, the real mother pleaded that the baby be allowed to live and be given to the other woman. Solomon thus knew who was the true mother.
Perhaps Solomon’s most memorable act was his building of the temple with the materials and the plans provided by his father David. God had promised David that he would allow his son to build the first permanent place for centralized worship, predicted in the book of Deuteronomy centuries before. It was a magnificent temple, and took seven years to build (it took 12 years to build Solomon’s own palace, however).
We read that although the temple was built out of cut stone, the sound of hammer and chisel was never heard. This was a mystery for many years until someone discovered a gigantic cave the size of a large theatre at Mount Moriah near Calvary outside Jerusalem. The floor is covered with millions of little chips where the rock has been cut. The rock is so soft that it can be cut with a penknife, but when it is brought out into the open air it oxidizes and goes quite hard. All the stone for the temple came from this cave, where they cut the blocks to the exact shape needed to fit into the temple above ground.
Solomon was also responsible for the dedication of the temple. His dedicatory prayer, based on Leviticus 26 and Deuteronomy 28, is recorded at length in Kings. It mentions God’s promise to bring his people back from exile if they turned back to him, a promise that became especially significant for those in Babylon when the book came out.
His reign brought great prosperity to the people of Israel. The empire stretched from Egypt to the Euphrates and included most of the territory which had been promised to them. Solomon’s fame spread far and wide, even reaching the Queen of Sheba, who paid him a visit and was impressed by the splendor of his palace.
The time of peace meant opportunity for leisure and learning. Solomon collected 3,000 proverbs and wrote 1,005 songs. God chose to publish just six of these songs in the Bible. My theory is that Solomon wrote a song for each of his 700 wives and 300 concubines, but God picked only a few, including the one which appears in the Song of Solomon. Incidentally, it is at this point that we really must question whether Solomon’s wisdom is demonstrated in taking so many wives. That meant 700 mothers-in-law! Like so many people, he had wisdom for everybody else, but not much for himself.
The Song of Solomon is written by a young man, so much in love that God is not mentioned directly. The book of Proverbs is mostly Solomon’s work, written when he was middle-aged. Ecclesiastes was written at the end of his life, and there he shares the philosophy of an old man with the young. In that book we see Solomon’s whole life, with time for philosophy, music, agriculture and architecture. Although he developed many interests, none of them satisfied him and Ecclesiastes is one of the saddest books in the Bible.
BAD
Solomon’s main weakness has already been hinted at – he had too many wives. This was not just for sensual pleasure, but also revealed a lust for power. Many of the marriages were politically motivated, for example his marriage to the daughter of Pharaoh. As an Egyptian she could not live in the holy city of Jerusalem, so Solomon built her a palace just north of the temple, outside the city wall. Recent excavations there have uncovered the only Egyptian artefacts in the whole of Israel.
We are therefore presented with an interesting juxtaposition: on the one hand there is the magnificent temple, built to aid Israel’s worship of the one true God; on the other there is King Solomon with many foreign wives, who all brought their own gods with them and dragged people away from the worship of the God of Israel. Solomon was not the only king to marry foreign women, but no other king could match him in terms of numbers.
The building of the temple also exacted a huge cost. Solomon used forced labor and heavy taxation which enraged the northern tribes, who were resentful at having to finance a southern building, so far from their own territories. In spite of the success of the temple, therefore, Solomon was laying the foundations for national catastrophe. Solomon was a king with a divided heart who left a divided kingdom. Soon the empire would break up. Even in Solomon’s time, Hadad the Edomite rebelled, and more would follow.
(from Unlocking the Bible by David Pawson)
Week 68: 1&2 Kings Part 3
September 19, 2011
(from Unlocking the Bible by David Pawson)
Purpose
We come now to focus on the basic questions that should inform our reading of any book of the Bible: Who wrote the book? How did they write it? When did they write it? Why did they write it?
Who wrote Kings?
The writer of the book cannot be known with any certainty. Most Jews think it was Jeremiah and there are a number of reasons why the case for this is strong.
- Parts of Kings are identical to Jeremiah’s prophecy – even the wording is exactly the same.
- Jeremiah is not mentioned in the book, despite being a contemporary of Josiah and at the heart of many of the events described. It would seem impossible for anyone to cover this period without mentioning Jeremiah, but if Jeremiah is the author it would be in keeping with other writers of the Bible for him to be self-effacing.
- We know that prophets often wrote about kings. Isaiah wrote about Uzziah and Hezekiah, and God specifically instructed Jeremiah in his prophecy to write about Israel.
- Furthermore, there was a time in Jeremiah’s ministry when recalling the history of the nation would have been especially pertinent. His prophecy tells of the time when the people of God rejected his impassioned reminders that they should be obedient to the covenant and he had to pronounce curses on the nation. This would have been the appropriate juncture to write the book of Kings.
The one problem with this hypothesis is that Jeremiah was taken to Egypt in 586 BC, and he died there, yet the last part of 2 Kings exhibits remarkable knowledge of events in Babylon. It is difficult to see how these details could square with him writing the whole book. Perhaps the best solution is that Jeremiah wrote parts of Kings, with someone else finishing it. This might explain his own absence from the narrative.
Some suggest Ezekiel as another candidate. He was known to depend on Jeremiah and has a similar style. However, the date of his last prophecy is 571 BC, which argues against him being the writer. Jeremiah is the strongest candidate, but without further proof, we must leave the question open.
How was Kings written?
The book of Kings includes references to the fact that further information can be found in other sources: the Acts of Solomon, the books of the Chronicles of the King of Israel (mentioned 17 times) and the books of the Chronicles of the King of Judah (mentioned 15 times). These books are not the books of Chronicles included in the Bible. The writer is using national records woven together to communicate a lesson about history.
Parts of Isaiah are identical in wording to Kings, suggesting that either they used a common source or one borrowed from the other at certain points.
The writer covers events in the kingdoms of Judah and Israel simultaneously. It can be confusing to read about the king of Judah, followed immediately by a section on the king of Israel, but the order is deliberate. The writer wants us to understand how each kingdom was progressing in relation to its counterpart. This is vital for the narrative during the times when the two kingdoms were at war, or when intermarriage led to a time of peace.
The writer therefore used the same sort of historical methods employed today, taking material from other sources, gathering information from libraries, and so on. The difference is that his selection was divinely inspired, so that what we have in Kings is not simply history, but the Word of God.
When was Kings written?
A vital clue to the book’s date is given by phrases suggesting the temple in Jerusalem was still standing, ‘and still is to this day’. This suggests a date prior to the exile to Babylon in 586 BC, which was when the temple was destroyed.
However, another part of the book suggests a later date of writing. The Babylonians killed Zedekiah, the last king of Judah, having tied him up in chains and made him watch the execution of his sons before removing his eyes. The previous king, Jehoiachin, had given in to the Babylonians and was kept as a prisoner. The last thing we read in the book of Kings is that Nebuchadnezzar, King of Babylon, released Jehoiachin from prison and invited him to dine at his table. This suggests that the book was completed half way through the exile, especially as there is no mention of the people’s return. It also means that someone from the royal line of David had his meals at the king’s table in Babylon, and so Nebuchadnezzar unwittingly helped to keep the royal line secure.
Taking these two details together, therefore, it seems that the book was mostly written before the fall of Jerusalem, but was actually completed during the exile.
Why was Kings written?
The motivation of the writer follows naturally from the answer to the question of when the book was written.
Here is a nation that has lost its land and its capital, and has been taken away to another land. A whole generation will never see home again. They are slaves once more, their temple lies in ruins, so inevitably they have questions about their relationship with God. Where is he? Why has he allowed all this to happen? What about his promises?
The book of Kings provides the answers to these questions. It explains that the fault for the exile lies squarely with the people. God kept his promises: he promised that if the people misbehaved they would lose the land, but in spite of repeated warnings they did not listen. The history of Kings is thus a profound lesson to these people in exile.
Yet even in this dark book there is hope, because God promises never to break his part of the covenant. God says that although the people may break the covenant, he never will. He promises to bring his children back from exile. The punishment will be for a limited time only.
In fact, the people remained in the land of Babylon for 70 years. The number was not arbitrary. God had told them to let the land rest every seventh year, but they had ignored this law for 500 years, from the time of Solomon onwards. During that time, therefore, the land had missed 70 years of rest, so in one sense the 70-year exile provided the land with a chance to catch up on its holidays!
The book of Kings is saying that the exile was a disastrous time, but it was not hopeless. God had promised to keep the royal line of David going and he would do so.
(from Unlocking the Bible by David Pawson)
Week 67: 1&2 Kings Part 2
September 12, 2011
(from Unlocking the Bible by David Pawson)
The rise and fall of the nation
Kings covers some pivotal events in the history of God’s people which we need to note if we are to grasp the message of the book and understand the books which follow. The book of 2 Samuel and the early part of 1 Kings describe the powerful position of Israel on the world stage, but most of the book of Kings is concerned with the nation’s downfall. Under David and Solomon the nation was eventually united, and the empire stretched from Egypt to the Euphrates. At last the Israelites inhabited most of the land promised to Abraham 1,000 years before, and controlled more besides. But from Solomon’s time onwards they headed downhill, through civil war and a divided kingdom to exile in a foreign land.
The national split meant that the name Israel no longer referred to the whole nation, but only to the 10 tribes of the north. The southern tribes of Judah and Benjamin were known by the name of the larger one, Judah. This distinction continues through the rest of the Old Testament.
The southern tribes of Judah and Benjamin became known as ‘Jews’, derived from the tribal name Judah. Before this point the people were known collectively as ‘Hebrews’ or ‘Israelites’. This is an important distinction to bear in mind. In the New Testament John’s Gospel distinguishes between the Jews in the south and the Galileans in the north. It was the Jews in the south who were largely responsible for the crucifixion of Jesus, not all the people of Israel per se.
A TALE OF TWO NATIONS
Kings covers the histories of these two ‘nations’. The spiritual and moral standards of the 10 tribes in the north steadily deteriorated, until Assyria sent them into exile. In the south the progression downwards is less marked. There were good kings such as Hezekiah and Josiah, but eventually they went the same way as the north and were taken away to Babylon. Their forefather Abraham had been called out of Ur – now they finished up where Abraham had begun, though this time as displaced persons.
It is a salutary lesson about how easy it is to lose what has been gained. Often the duration of the demise is much less than the time it took to reach the pinnacle.
The kingdom of Israel
The kingdom of Israel went through three stages, summarized in the table below.
1. United kingdom
Saul 40 years
David 40 years
Solomon 40 years
2. Divided kingdom
10 tribes in the north – ‘Israel’
2 tribes in the south – ‘Judah’
War 80 years Elijah
Peace 80 years Elisha
War 50 years Israel to Assyria, 721 BC
3. Single kingdom
140 years Judah to Babylon, 587 BC
UNITY
The first stage was the ‘United Kingdom’, when three kings reigned in turn over the whole of Israel. The first king was Saul, who was largely bad; the second was David, who was mainly good; and the third was Solomon, who was both good and bad.
Each reign lasted exactly 40 years. The number 40 is often indicative of the length of time God tests people. Jesus was tempted for 40 days in the wilderness; the children of Israel were in the wilderness for 40 years. It is a trial period in God’s sight, and all three kings failed the test. They started well, but finished badly. David received credit for being ‘a man after God’s own heart’, but even he had a disappointing end.
The book of 1 Samuel covers Saul’s 40 years, 2 Samuel covers David’s 40 years and the first 11 chapters of 1 Kings cover Solomon’s 40 years.
WAR
As soon as Solomon died, the north and the south became locked in a civil war that wrecked the ‘United Kingdom’. The seeds of unrest had been sown when Solomon had taxed the nation heavily and confined the benefits to the south, causing the north to grow discontented. Solomon’s death was the catalyst for this unrest to boil over into armed conflict.
The two southern tribes kept the capital Jerusalem and the royal line of David. The 10 tribes in the north lost both and set up their own centers of worship, at Bethel and Dan, complete with two golden calves as the focus of their worship. Since the royal line was in the south, they also elected their own king, Jeroboam.
Succession in the north proved to be rarely smooth. There were assassinations, coups d’état, takeovers. The kings were often self-elected.
For 80 years after the split, there was war between the north and the south amid increasing animosity, culminating with the tribes in the north making a treaty with Syria and Damascus to try to wipe out the two tribes in the south. Isaiah gives the details in his prophecy.
PEACE
The 80 years of war between the north and the south were followed by 80 years of peace, during which God sent two prophets who play a huge part in the book of Kings. Elijah’s ministry is recorded in 1 Kings and the first two chapters of 2 Kings, and Elisha, who followed him, is a key figure in the early part of 2 Kings.
The respite did not halt the decline, however, and in 721 BC the Assyrians defeated the northern tribes of Israel and deported them from their land. They became the ‘10 lost tribes’, never to return to the land as a nation.
After the exile of the northern kingdom of Israel, the book focuses exclusively on Judah and Benjamin in the south. It was a very small kingdom, with Jerusalem as its capital and a small amount of land surrounding it, but their kings were descended from the royal line and they knew about God’s promise to David that there would always be one of his descendants on the throne.
When the northern tribes were deported, God sent prophetic warnings from Isaiah and Micah that the same would happen to the south, but this had little or no effect. The last event recorded in the book of Kings is that Judah was led into exile by the Babylonians just 140 years later.
(from Unlocking the Bible by David Pawson)
Week 66: 1&2 Kings Part 1
September 5, 2011
(from Unlocking the Bible by David Pawson)
Introduction
My history teacher at school made the subject very dull. It was all about dates, battles, kings and queens and seemed to be complicated and irrelevant. My interest was revived by reading the spoof history book 1066 and All That, which was certainly more amusing than my school history lessons, and where any historical event was summed up as either ‘a good thing’ or ‘a bad thing’ – there was nothing in between.
The book of Kings reads a little like 1066 and All That (though without the humour). It describes the kings of Israel or Judah as either good or bad, depending on how they reigned. Unlike the school history many of us remember, however, biblical history is utterly compelling. It is not about irrelevant dates and battles, but is a record of God’s people told from God’s point of view. It is not for mere academic interest either: it is absolutely vital for the whole of mankind.
Context
The book of Kings focuses on the third of the four phases in the national development of Israel’s leadership. As the Overview of the Old Testament explained (page 5), the first national leaders were patriarchs, from Abraham to Joseph, then came the prophets, from Moses to Samuel. Third came the kings, from Saul to Zedekiah, and finally the priests, from Joshua to Caiaphas.
The period of the kings is covered by four books in our English Bible:
1 Samuel: Samuel to Saul
2 Samuel: David
1 Kings: Solomon to Ahab
2 Kings: Ahab to Zedekiah
In the Hebrew Scriptures this leadership phase is covered by just two books, Samuel and Kings, with the break between Samuel and Kings cutting King Ahab’s reign in two and separating the prophet Elijah’s life and death. When the Old Testament was translated into Greek in 200 BC, the books became too long for one scroll. Hebrew words have only consonants, so the addition of vowels in the Greek made the books twice the length. Thus the breaks into 1 and 2 Samuel and 1 and 2 Kings were determined more by translation than by design.
Kingdoms
In Hebrew the book is called the ‘Kingdoms’ of Israel, not ‘Kings’. The word ‘kingdom’ has a different meaning in Hebrew. In English it refers to a land over which a sovereign rules. Thus England is part of the United Kingdom under the reign of the Queen. In Hebrew, however, the word ‘kingdom’ refers to the reign of a monarch, so is defined in terms of authority not area, rule rather than realm.
Furthermore, the concept of a ‘reign’ in the Bible is very different from in the United Kingdom, where, under a constitutional monarchy, the Queen reigns but does not rule, the power residing in the elected government. The big advantage is that the armed forces and courts of law are not under the government directly, but are responsible to the Queen. The monarchy is valued not so much for the power it wields as for the power it keeps from others.
The kings of Israel, by contrast, had absolute power. They made the rules and commanded the armed forces. There was no parliament, no voting and no opposition parties. The king ruled by decree and not by debate. His influence over his subjects was total, and therefore his character and conduct shaped society during his rule. He stood as a representative of the nation before God, but also as a representative of God before the nation.
This meant a major change in the way the nation was evaluated. During the time described in Joshua, Judges and Ruth, there was a loose federation and the people were judged according to their actions. In Samuel and Kings, however, the king’s character and conduct decided the fate of the nation.
Selected history
Although the book is about the kings of Israel, it is not evenhanded in its allocation of space to each king. For example, Omri was a king in the north whom we know from other historical sources to have had an outstanding reign, creating an extraordinary economic turnaround for the nation. Yet the book of Kings dismisses him in eight verses, because he was deficient in the one area that mattered: he did evil in the sight of the Lord. Similarly, Jereboam II had a mini golden age in the north, yet he is given just seven verses for the same reason. On the other hand, Hezekiah, who was largely a good king, is given three chapters, a single prayer of Solomon covers 38 verses, and the stories of Elijah and Elisha, who were not kings at all, take up a third of the two books of Kings.
This apparently uneven treatment occurs because the writer is not driven by a conventional historical approach. We noted in our study of Joshua that any historian has to select what is important, make connections between the events or people he has selected, and then give an explanation as to why the events led on from each other. The writer of Kings is not interested in focusing on political, economic or military history, though he may mention all these in passing. Rather, he is concerned with two aspects of each king’s rule or kingdom:
- Its spiritual qualities – worship, either of the God of Israel or idols
- Its moral qualities – justice and morality, or their opposites
Prophetic history
Kings is the last of a collection of books known as the ‘former prophets’ in the Hebrew Bible and follows Joshua, Judges and Samuel. This is history from God’s viewpoint. Individuals and events are mentioned because God regards them as important and necessary for future generations. A man may be a brilliant politician or economist, but God is primarily interested in his belief and behavior.
We could rightly term these books ‘holy history’, for they are a record with an abiding message and a story with an eternal moral. They offer us not just a lesson from history, but the lesson of history. Those who do not learn it are condemned to repeat it.
Universal truth
There are patterns in the history of Israel which can be universally applied. Take, for example, the length of the reign of each king mentioned in the book. A good king reigned on average for 33 years and a bad king on average for 11 years. From this we can derive the general principle that good rulers last longer than bad ones, since God is in ultimate control of history and can keep good kings on the throne.
There are exceptions – not every good king had a long reign and not every bad king had a short one – but the principle is generally true and can, indeed, still be seen in the length of time modern leaders rule.
(from Unlocking the Bible by David Pawson)
Week 65: 1&2 Samuel Part 7
August 29, 2011
(from Unlocking the Bible by David Pawson)
4. Historical
(I) LEADERSHIP
A fourth way of considering Samuel is to see it as a study of the history of Israel. Israel developed from a family to a tribe, then to a nation, and finally to an empire. It is this development into an empire that is outlined in the 150 years covered by the books of Samuel.
The request for a king came from the people, jealous of the unified and visible leadership which monarchies provided in other nations around them, and fed up with the federal relationship of 12 independent tribes which pertained at that time.
Samuel warned the people that there would be heavy costs associated with any move towards a centralized government through a king. The people went ahead with their request and the course of history was set. God acceded to their request, but insisted that Israel’s king should not be like kings in other nations. Israel’s king must write out the law and read it daily, and provide spiritual leadership for the people (this provision in Deuteronomy shows that God had anticipated this development). Thereafter the character of the nation would be tied to the king.
(II) STRUCTURE
The move from a federal to a centralized structure for the nation was not painless. We can study the book from this standpoint, noting the struggles David faced and his skill in overcoming them. We can note how his genius as an organizer and his skill as a commander under God led the nation to reach a peak of peace and prosperity under his rule. His selection of Jerusalem as the capital city was one of a number of brilliant master strokes. The city was captured from the Jebusites and so was not regarded as the preserve of any particular tribe.
The empire grew under David, previous enemies became satellite states and all the land which had been promised was conquered for the first and last time. The Philistines no longer bothered them. But centralized government proved to be the Israelites’ downfall as well, for when power is in fewer and fewer hands, the character of those people who own the hands inevitably determines what happens.
5. Critical
(I) ‘LOWER’ CRITICISM
Lower criticism is the study of the Bible by scholars to see if there are any errors in the text. They study and compare manuscripts in the original languages, and note any discrepancies that may have occurred through errors of transmission by the copyists. This work gives us enormous confidence that the manuscripts which translators use are very close to the original and it is believed that the New Testament is 98 per cent accurate.
The earliest of the full Old Testament manuscripts is the Masoretic text dated at AD 900. There is a complete copy of Isaiah, one of the Dead Sea Scrolls, from 100 BC which is 1,000 years older than all the other copies available. This was discovered when the Revised Standard Version was being translated, so they held back the publication until the text had been checked against this older manuscript. In fact, the text they had been working on originally was very accurate and only a few things needed to be changed.
Whilst the Old Testament text does not have the same accuracy as the New Testament, we can still be assured that there is very little which is different from the original text. Furthermore, it is worth noting that any dilemmas regarding translation are on small details and not the central truths of the faith. In Samuel, for example, there are two accounts of the death of Goliath, but only one makes David responsible. If just one letter is adjusted, the discrepancy is solved. Clearly a copyist made an error in transmission.
(II) ‘HIGHER’ CRITICISM
Lower criticism is a necessary and welcome discipline, but higher criticism does a great deal of damage. It came originally from Germany in the nineteenth century and filtered into many theological colleges during the twentieth century.
The basic argument of higher criticism is that even if the original text accurately conveys what the writer meant, we can still be mistaken about what we should believe. The higher critics approach the text with their own presuppositions based on what they regard as reasonable. Those who argue that science has disproved miracles omit any miraculous events from the text, while those who cannot believe in supernatural foreknowledge omit any prophecy that accurately predicts the future.
These scholars work at a purely academic and intellectual level, with little concern for or understanding of personal faith. Their approach unavoidably leaves the text of Scripture in pieces, unrecognizable from the original.
6. Theological
A theological approach to reading the books of the Bible makes every page and every sentence of value. The levels of reading we have considered so far are concerned only with the human side of Bible study, but the Bible is primarily a book about God, with only a secondary interest in God’s people. This type of study asks how we can read the text in order to get to know God.
We have already seen how Samuel is a prophetic book. The history recorded is history from God’s perspective, recording what God believed to be important.
Taking the theological approach, therefore, we can look at a story and ask how this event related to God. How did he feel about it? Why did the event matter so much to God that it was included for us to read as part of Holy Scripture? We start to read the book from God’s point of view and draw conclusions about who he is and what he is like. Confident that God does not change, we can then apply these timeless truths to our own day and generation.
JUSTICE AND MERCY
This is the best and most exciting way to read Samuel. The book describes God’s intervention in the life of Israel, for he is the real actor in these stories, not Saul, David or Samuel. God both initiates historical events and responds to them. We see how Hannah is barren, she prays, and God gives her a son. We see how David, in God’s name, kills Goliath with his first stone. We see how David, with God’s help, escapes the clutches of thousands of men from Saul’s army. God helps some folk and hinders others. He is just in punishing evil and sometimes merciful in not punishing when punishment is deserved.
He gives Israel the land, but when they disobey him he sends oppressors. When they repent he sends deliverers. He allows the people to choose a king, but when the king fails he gives them another, one after his own heart.
We can study the stories of Samuel, learn lessons from the history and compare ourselves with Saul or David, but the real reason to read the book is to learn about the character of God.
God’s activity is seen especially at the heart of the book. He makes a covenant with David, confirming his commitment to Israel which had first been expressed in the covenants with Abraham and Moses centuries before. This is the most vital moment in 1 and 2 Samuel. It arises when David asks God if he can build a house for him. He is embarrassed that he has built such a grand palace for himself and that God is living in a tent next door.
When David tells God he will build him a house, three messages come from the prophet Nathan. The first message is, ‘Do it.’ The second message is, ‘Don’t do it.’ God explains that a tent is good enough for him since he never asked for a palace of stone. The third message is that David must not build the temple because he is ‘a man of blood’, but his son can build it.
In the covenant God tells David how he will treat his son. He will discipline him but will never cease to love him. David’s house and kingdom will endure before him for ever. His throne will be established for ever; there will always be a descendant of David on the throne.
From that moment on, the descendants of David always keep careful records of their family tree, wondering if their son might be the ‘son of David’ mentioned in the covenant. This promise becomes the focus of national hopes for the next 3,000 years as the Jews look for the Messiah.
This covenant is a crucial theme through the rest of the Bible. A thousand years later the promise was kept when Jesus was born to a humble couple who were in the royal line. Jesus was the legal son of David through Joseph his father, but also a physical son of David through his mother Mary. He was twice over the son of David. Throughout his life he was known as the ‘son of David’. The disciples recognized his right to be known as ‘Messiah’ (the anointed one), and this theme continues in the later writings about him and his Church. The books of Acts, Romans, 2 Timothy and Revelation all use this title to refer to Jesus. They proclaim that all authority in heaven and on earth is given to the son of David and will always be in his hands. They rejoice that God has kept that covenant with David in his son Jesus.
In the fulfilment of the covenant we see that God’s promise has wider implications, as the king on David’s throne rules over the Jews and Gentiles who make up his Church.
It is only when we read Samuel from a theological point of view that we can appreciate the richness of the book in terms of its message and the part it plays in the themes developed in the Bible as a whole.
Conclusion
Samuel is a history book with a difference. It is prophetic history full of interesting, bizarre, romantic and cruel stories which, brought together, reveal God’s ongoing purposes for his people. God wanted us to be ruled by one man – not King David I, but King David II. The books of 1 and 2 Samuel are part of Christian history. Jesus was king of the Jews in the past, he is king of the Church today, and he will be king of the world in the future, when he will reign in justice and righteousness, and the kingdom will finally be restored to Israel.
Thus the true significance of the book becomes clear as we understand how God is involved, acting behind the scenes, shaping history and assuring his people that his kingdom will grow and one day his own son, also the son of David, will be king.
(from Unlocking the Bible by David Pawson)
Week 64: 1&2 Samuel Part 6
August 22, 2011
(from Unlocking the Bible by David Pawson)
How should we read Samuel?
Our overview of Samuel has so far omitted any mention of how we should read the book. All readers approach the text with certain expectations, but it is important that we read the Bible as it was intended to be read if we are to understand and interpret it correctly. Samuel is no exception. There are six different levels at which we can read any series of Bible stories and it is important to choose the right one.
1.Anecdotal (interesting stories)
(i) Children
(ii) Adults
2.Existential (personal messages)
(i) Guidance
(ii) Comfort
3.Biographical (character studies)
(i) Individual
(ii) Social
4.Historical (national development)
(i) Leadership
(ii) Structure
5.Critical (possible errors)
(i) ‘Lower’ criticism
(ii) ‘Higher’ criticism
6.Theological (providential over-ruling)
(i) Justice – retribution
(ii) Mercy – redemption
1. Anecdotal
(I) CHILDREN
The simplest way is to focus on the most interesting stories. Sunday school teachers select the events that will communicate best with the children, and the story of David and Goliath, for example, is a particular favorite.
Maria Matilda Penstone expressed it like this:
God has given us a book full of stories
which was made for his people of old.
It begins with a tale of a garden
and finishes with the city of gold.
There are stories for parents and children,
for the old who are ready to rest,
but for all who can read them or listen
the story of Jesus is best.
There is some merit in using the stories in this way, but it is selective. Teachers can easily distort the true meaning of an event in favor of a platitude which they feel is of value and on a level which they think the children will understand.
(II) ADULTS
The stories in Samuel are superbly told, with an economy of words and a beautiful style. Since adults also enjoy a good story, many read the Bible purely for its anecdotal value. Film directors have enjoyed adapting stories such as David and Bathsheba for the silver screen.
While it is good that the stories are at least read, this approach ignores one fundamental point. At the level of anecdote, it does not matter whether stories are true or not. They could be fact, fiction or fable – whatever they are, the stories can still be enjoyed and the moral message can still be discerned. The big problem is, however, that it does matter whether the stories are true or not, because these smaller stories are part of the big story of the book of Samuel, which in turn has a crucial place within the Bible’s overall story of redemption. If we doubt whether men did the things attributed to them here, how can we be sure that God did what is attributed to him in these pages? The human and the divine acts stand or fall together.
2. Existential
(I) GUIDANCE
I am tempted to call reading the stories of the Bible for guidance ‘the horoscope method’, because some people read the Bible each day hoping that something might leap out and fit them! There are rare occasions when people have testified to a particular verse or passage having played a significant role in their lives, but this says more about God’s ability to use any means he chooses to guide us than it does about the legitimacy of the method. The method completely ignores the fact that most of the verses will mean nothing to a person’s particular situation. There is a classic story about a man who was thumbing through his Bible looking for a verse and found, ‘Judas went out and hanged himself.’ Not satisfied, he looked for another and found, ‘Go and do thou likewise’!
If we are reading the Bible for a personal message, what do we make of the verse in 1 Samuel where Samuel says to Eli, ‘In your family line there will never be an old man’? It was appropriate centuries later for one of Eli’s descendants, the prophet Jeremiah, who started his prophetic ministry when he was 17 since he would not live to old age. But there is no application for us. Or take another verse ‘…and Samuel hacked Agag to pieces before the Lord.’ How would this be applied?
I am ridiculing this method because I am sure that this should not be the main reason for reading these stories. The books of Samuel will reveal relatively little if this is how we read them. We need to read the text in the context in which it is written if we are to extract the correct meaning. If we just look for texts relevant to our own situation, we will miss an enormous amount.
(II) COMFORT
In former days ‘Promise Boxes’ were used by the devout in order to find encouragement to face life. Each biblical ‘promise’ was printed on a curled up roll of paper and one was lifted out at random with a pair of tweezers each day. Needless to say, each was also lifted out of its biblical context and therefore often separated from the conditions attached to it. For example, ‘Lo, I am with you always’ is placed in the context of ‘Go and make disciples’, and we should not claim the promise if we are not fulfilling the command. Even without such a box, we can read the Bible in much the same way, looking for a verse we can lift out for ourselves. We shall find few like this in the historical books of the Bible, like Samuel and Kings. They yield up their treasures to those who read them whole, seeking to know just what God is like, how he feels about us rather than how we feel about ourselves, or even about him.
3. Biographical
(I) INDIVIDUAL
The third method is most common among preachers. One of the great features of the Bible is the honest way it records the failures and successes of the main characters. James says in the New Testament that the Bible is like a mirror that can show us what we are like through the people we read about. We can compare ourselves with Bible characters and ask whether we would have behaved in the same way.
With this in mind, we can note how the first two kings of Israel both started well and finished badly, yet Saul was seen as the worst king and David as the best.
We read of the character of Saul, a man who was literally head and shoulders above the rest, with many personal advantages. We read how the Spirit of the Lord came upon him and he turned into a different man. But we read, too, of the fatal flaws in his character, and how his insecurities led to poor relationships and jealousy of the gifted people around him.
We can contrast Saul with David, whom the Bible calls ‘a man after God’s own heart’. When Samuel chooses David we read, ‘The Lord does not look at the things man looks at. Man looks at the outward appearance, but the Lord looks at the heart.’
Scripture describes David as a man of the outdoors, involved in manual labor, handsome and brave. He developed his relationship with God during the lonely days and nights as a shepherd, reading the law, praying and praising God for creation as well as redemption. These years were a preparation for him to become the most important person in the land.
We can note his skills as a leader, asking God’s opinion before taking any decision. Even though he was anointed as king, he refused to take the throne too soon, but waited for God’s timing. He was a magnanimous man even in victory, unhappy when his enemies were killed and furious because one of Saul’s surviving sons was killed, even though Saul had been his enemy. He was a very forgiving man, and a man who could honour brave people – in the book of Samuel we have a list of those whom David honoured.
David was therefore the opposite of Saul: he had a heart for God and he loved honouring other people. Saul did not have a heart for God and did not like to have anyone else who was successful anywhere near him.
There are other comparisons: Samuel and Eli shared an inability to discipline their children. Jonathan and Absalom were both sons of kings but behaved very differently. Jonathan was an unselfish son of a bad king (Saul) who was willing to surrender to David’s leadership. Absalom was the selfish son of a good king (David) who wanted to seize the throne from his father.
The women in Samuel also make a lovely character study. Hannah and Abigail both reveal interesting traits. We read of Hannah’s devotion to God and her excitement when she became pregnant. Abigail courageously averted a crisis by making food for David’s men when her husband had refused them hospitality. She so impressed David that he married her shortly after her husband’s death.
(II) SOCIAL
We can also study the relationships between individuals. Jonathan and David’s friendship is one of the most pure and godly in the pages of the Bible.
The frustrating, even threatening, interaction between Saul and David is a classic example of how difficult personal relationships can be with unreliable temperaments, who alternate between welcoming and rejecting moods, especially when there is the added complication of influence by evil spirits.
The whole saga of David and the various women in his life is full of insights into gender relationships. Nor is his ability to win the affection and devotion of the various men in his life irrelevant to contemporary society.
The people’s insistent choice of their first king and their reasons for it have something to say for the influence of image on contemporary elections.
So these stories have social as well as individual implications, from all of which we can learn valuable lessons. But this still falls short of the intended message of the text.
(from Unlocking the Bible by David Pawson)
Week 63: 1&2 Samuel Part 5
August 15, 2011
(from Unlocking the Bible by David Pawson)
4. Epilogue
The last chapters are arranged using a literary device, with the contents of the epilogue set out according to corresponding themes. The structure can be broken down into six sections, labelled A1, B1, C1, C2, B2, A2, and the sections A1 and A2, B1 and B2, and C1 and C2 cover similar themes.
A1 LEGACY FROM THE PAST
The whole of Israel faces a famine for three years. God tells David that the famine is a punishment on Israel for Saul’s earlier slaughter of the Gibeonites, a group whom the Israelites had vowed not to touch. The Gibeonites request the death of seven of Saul’s descendants as recompense for this outrage and David hands them over.
B1 DAVID’S MEN
There is a short account of David’s ‘giant killers’ – the men who fought alongside him and gave him victory over the Philistines in a series of battles.
C1 DAVID’S PSALM
One of David’s greatest psalms records how God delivered him from all his enemies. He writes of God as his rock, his fortress and his deliverer – the words of a man who can look back on God’s extraordinary provision throughout his life and give thanks for it.
C2 THE LAST WORDS OF DAVID
These sayings read like a psalm as David reflects on God’s Spirit, who inspired his writing of the songs which have been sung down through the ages and are perhaps David’s greatest legacy.
B2 MORE CITATIONS FOR BRAVERY
David recognizes, records and honours the men who fought with him, including the three who crept back to Bethlehem to bring David some water when he was on the run.
A2 DIVINE JUDGEMENT AGAIN FALLS ON ISRAEL
At the end of his life, David is tempted by Satan to conduct a census of the fighting men of Israel. His motivation is pride and God punishes his action. Gad the prophet is sent to convey God’s displeasure and David has three options: three years of famine, three months of fleeing from enemies, or three days of plague. He opts for the third and 70,000 people die of the plague.
David cries out to the Lord to stop the plague and is told to sacrifice at the threshing floor of Araunah the Jebusite, a flat area high above the city of Jerusalem. He offers a sacrifice and the plague stops. David sees the threshing floor as an ideal place to build a temple for God. He is offered the land free, but David says his offering to the Lord would be unworthy if it cost him nothing and insists on buying the land. The books of Kings describe the building of the temple on this very spot.
David was not allowed to build the temple himself because God said he had ‘blood on his hands’. The temple had to be built by a man of peace. So the temple in Jerusalem, which means ‘city of peace’, was built by David’s son Solomon. Although David drew up the plans, arranged the workmen and collected the materials, it was his son Solomon who saw the project through.
(from Unlocking the Bible by David Pawson)
Week 62 1&2 Samuel Part 4
August 8, 2011
(from Unlocking the Bible by David Pawson)
3. David – best king
(I) TRIUMPHANT ASCENT
UP
(a) Single tribe
We see the triumphant ascent of David in the first nine chapters of 2 Samuel. It begins with a lament at the death of Saul and Jonathan, which includes some moving words remembering the warmth of the loving friendship David had known with Jonathan.
There is, however, a war developing between David’s house and Saul’s house, with tales of murder and revenge abounding. Saul’s chief commander Abner changes sides and brings Benjamin with him, but the nation is nonetheless torn apart.
(b) Settled nation
The tribe of Judah crowns David as king in Hebron in the south, where he remains for seven years. He eventually settles the nation as one unit, helped in part by the capture of Jerusalem from the hands of the Jebusites. The Jebusites are convinced that Jerusalem is safe from attack, but David takes the city by entering it via a staircase that runs from inside the city to a spring outside the walls.
It is worth noting that not only did Jerusalem have excellent fortifications for a capital city, with cliffs on three of its four sides, but it was also on ‘neutral’ territory between Judah (the tribe who supported David) and Benjamin (Saul’s tribe). It was thus an appropriate political capital as neither Judah nor Benjamin could claim it was theirs.
(c) Sizeable empire
The book proceeds to chart David’s successful campaigns against the Philistines, the Ammonites and the Edomites, whose lands became part of a vast empire. For the first (and last) time, most of the land God had promised was in Israel’s hands. Israel was at the peak of her history.
Even at such a time of personal success, however, David is keen to remember Saul’s house, and he honours Mephibosheth, the lame son of Jonathan, crippled in both feet.
(II) TRAGIC DESCENT
DOWN
(a) Disgraced man
David’s decline begins one fateful afternoon. The army is away fighting against Ammon and David, who should be leading them, is at home looking out of a palace window. He notices Bathsheba, the wife of his next-door neighbor, bathing on the roof and likes what he sees. He proceeds to break five of the Ten Commandments. He covets his neighbor’s wife, he bears false witness against the husband, he steals the wife, he commits adultery with her, and finally he arranges the murder of the husband. It is a terrible story and from that afternoon the nation goes downhill. Over the next 500 years they lose everything that God gave them.
Bathsheba becomes pregnant, David seeks to cover it up and eventually arranges for Uriah her husband to be killed in battle. The baby dies and David takes Bathsheba into the palace as his wife. She becomes pregnant again, but this baby survives and is called Solomon (meaning ‘peace’). But David has no peace. A year later God sends the prophet Nathan to David to tell him of his sin through a parable and David realizes the gravity of his sin. Psalm 51 is a prayer of confession following this revelation.
(b) Disintegrated family
It seems as if David’s immoral behavior becomes a catalyst for unpleasantness throughout the family. His eldest son Amnon rapes Tamar, one of his sisters. David’s second son Absalom hears what happened and two years later exacts his own revenge.
Absalom gains such popularity with the people that David is obliged to leave Jerusalem. Once again he finds himself in exile.
In accordance with a prophecy made by Nathan, Absalom parades David’s wives on the palace roof and has sex with them in public. A subsequent battle leads to the death of Absalom, but David is distraught, wishing that he had died instead.
(c) Discontented people
The rancor within David’s family affects the people as a whole. Despite the vast empire they now control, they are not happy with David’s leadership. The capital is in the south and the people in the north feel neglected. Concerns are brought to a head by a Benjaminite, Sheba, who refuses to recognize David as king and starts a revolt. David quells the uprising, but the feelings of anger remain.
(from Unlocking the Bible by David Pawson)
Week 61: 1&2 Samuel Part 3
August 1, 2011
(from Unlocking the Bible by David Pawson)
2. Saul – first king
Saul’s selection is unusual. God tells Samuel that the one to be anointed as king will be a man searching for donkeys! So when Saul comes to his home asking for help Samuel knows what to do. Saul is given the gift of prophecy as a sign that he is the heir – though we have few details about what form this took. The people confirm Saul as king, aged 30, and Samuel, the last judge, hands over the leadership.
Saul makes a good start. The people are pleased with his appointment and he experiences early success in defeating the Ammonites. But it is with respect to his relationships that things soon start to go wrong.
(I) JONATHAN – ADVENTUROUS SON
Saul’s son Jonathan is instrumental in defeating the Philistines and Saul is initially very proud of him. Jonathan, however, makes the mistake of going into the next battle without telling his father. He wins, but Saul is jealous of his success and his relationship with Jonathan comes under strain.
In the next story, they are in battle again and Saul makes the rash vow that anyone found eating that day, before he has avenged himself on his enemy, will be put to death. Jonathan, ignorant of the vow, eats some honey. Thus we have the bizarre situation of Saul threatening to kill his own son for disobeying some instructions he did not hear. If the men under his command had not intervened, Jonathan would have lost his life.
(II) SAMUEL – ANGRY PROPHET
Saul’s relationship with Samuel also deteriorates. As prophet, Samuel’s job is to pass on to Saul the words God gives him. On one occasion Saul is instructed to await Samuel’s arrival before offering the post-battle sacrifice. When Samuel is late arriving at the battlefield, Saul conducts the sacrifice himself. Enraged at this arrogant action, Samuel tells him his kingdom is about to be handed to someone else.
Saul’s second major error also concerns disobedience to God’s word. This time he is commanded to wipe out the Amalekites and their livestock, but Saul spares the king, Agag, and the best of the livestock. Once again Samuel arrives on the scene and finds that Saul has failed to obey all that God has said. Samuel becomes very angry, executes Agag before the altar of the Lord, and tells Saul that to obey is better than to sacrifice. Samuel further tells Saul that because he has rejected the word of the Lord, God has rejected him as king. From that day until Samuel’s death, Saul would never hear from Samuel again. The story is a salutary reminder that ritual is no substitute for righteousness. It certainly marked the beginning of the end for the first king of Israel.
Deprived of Samuel’s counsel, Saul has no way of finding out the Lord’s will and so has no idea whether Israel’s battles will be successful or not. Although he pleased God at the beginning of his reign by banning every medium from the land of Israel, at the very end of his reign, some time after Samuel’s death, he manages to find one at Endor who is still in business. Saul goes to her and calls up Samuel’s spirit for a final conversation. He is told that the imminent battle with the Philistines will be his last.
(III) DAVID – APPARENT RIVAL
Saul’s story slips into the background with the arrival of David. The young David enters Saul’s service, and we are told that Saul likes him very much, but after a good start Saul’s relationship with David goes the way of Jonathan’s and Samuel’s.
IN
(a) Simple shepherd
David’s arrival on the scene comes after God’s rejection of Saul as king – although Saul is to remain king for some time. Samuel is sent to David’s family home to anoint one of Jesse’s sons as king, but finds that none receive God’s approval. Only when the eighth and youngest son is called from the field does God indicate that this is the one who will be the next king. David is anointed secretly, pending the time many years later when he will eventually be crowned.
(b) Skilled musician
By this time Saul is deteriorating mentally as well as morally. We read that the Holy Spirit leaves him and an unclean spirit takes over. Saul becomes unpredictable, a man who can fly off the handle without a moment’s notice. His advisors find that the one thing that can calm him down is music, so David, known as a skilled harp player, is brought to court and his music soothes Saul’s spirit.
(c) Superb warrior
The story of David and Goliath is one of the best known in the Bible. It was the mismatch of the century, the sort of story Jews love: Goliath of Gath was 9 foot 6 inches tall, and David was just a little shepherd boy. It was customary for opposing armies to choose a champion each, who would fight each other. Whoever won would win victory for his side, which saved a lot of bloodshed.
By this stage in the story Saul has abdicated his own role as ‘champion’ for the nation and so, after some discussion, he allows David to fight Goliath on behalf of Israel. Despite the odds, David is convinced God will give him victory. He believes the battle is the Lord’s and that his victory will show the whole world his power. He uses a sling, just as he had in his shepherd’s work, and with just one stone from the five he has picked, Goliath is dead and the Philistines routed.
OUT
(a) Suspected courtier
If Saul could be jealous of his own son, what would he make of this new hero? He hears the people singing of how Saul had killed thousands, but David tens of thousands. David becomes a great national hero and Saul comes to hate him. From then on David’s life is in danger. David continues to play music to soothe Saul’s troubled mind, but there are times when Saul is so enraged that he flings a spear in David’s direction.
Later Saul plots to kill him, first by offering him his daughter Merab in marriage in exchange for the defeat of the Philistines. David refuses to accept his daughter and Saul’s plans are foiled when David defeats the Philistines unscathed. Later David does marry Michal, another of Saul’s daughters.
Saul then asks Jonathan to be involved in David’s death, but Jonathan and Michal are on David’s side, and in the course of several plots warn him of Saul’s intentions.
(b) Stalked outlaw
It becomes clear that David has to leave the palace, so he escapes and hides at Samuel’s home in Ramah. Then comes an extraordinary event as Saul and his men try to take David prisoner, but the Spirit of the Lord comes upon them and they prophesy, unable to carry out the plan.
Jonathan continues to help David and they make a covenant whereby Jonathan promises to be David’s subject, despite being Saul’s son. He is a prince abdicating in favor of a shepherd boy. The Bible depicts a remarkable friendship. We are told that there had never been such love between two men as there was between David and Jonathan.
The priest Ahimelech at Nob feeds David with consecrated bread and gives him Goliath’s sword. He flees west to Gath, where he is recognized by the Philistine king as the heir apparent and has to feign insanity in order to escape with his life.
At Adullam some 400 malcontents join with David. He sends his parents into Moab, the home of his great-grandmother for protection, and is told by a prophet to return to Judah.
While he is chasing David in the desert of En-Gedi, Saul enters a cave to relieve himself, unaware that David is inside. David cuts off the bottom of his robe and when Saul leaves he shouts after him. Saul is so shaken when he realizes that David could have killed him in the cave that he repents temporarily. But before long the chase resumes.
In the desert of Maon David meets a woman he later marries. Nabal refuses hospitality to David and his men. His wife Abigail, however, brings food to them and saves her family from David’s retribution. Nabal dies soon after this and David takes Abigail to be his wife.
(c) Soldiering exile
The most extraordinary part of David’s story is one that is not often taught. David becomes fearful that Saul will eventually catch up with him, and so offers himself and his men as mercenaries to the Philistines, Israel’s greatest enemy. Before long they become trusted allies.
(IV) PHILISTINES – AGGRESSIVE FOE
Saul’s end comes when Israel fights the Philistines. Although David and his men are mercenaries with the Philistines, the Philistine leaders leave them out of this particular battle, concerned that David and his men may not remain loyal to them if they are sent into battle against their own people. In the event they are not needed anyway. The Israelites are heavily defeated, and Saul and Jonathan are killed just as Samuel predicted. The injured Saul falls on his own sword when he realizes his life is ebbing away. Thus the book of 1 Samuel finishes with the death of one of the most enigmatic characters in the whole Bible.
